SCHOOL VISION:
Race to Recognized: To close the achievement gap of all learners to obtain recognized/exemplary status.
GOAL:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency for students and teachers at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of
shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
Note:
Triangulation of Assessment Methods:
1) Assessment Data, 2) Survey/Interviews, 3) Field Observations
OUTCOMES: (1 of 3)
1. New Vertical Math Team
ACTIVITIES:
1.
*Extend PLC’s to include recommended
(K-5) Math representatives for vertical teaming
*Define Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
Use Delphi method to introduce Goal inquiries.
(See pg. 95 Examining What We Do To Improve Our Schools)
*Facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and use of academic math language during MATH SHARE SESSIONS
*Self-Reflection: Identify road blocks to desired growth and plan for problem resolution; seek support or guidance
* Did I describe the context in enough detail so that I can understand the context in which my wonderings emerged and the decisions I made throughout my research (Dana, p.179)?
* Did I explain all procedures associated with my inquiry, including a timeline for my work and how I analyzed data?
* Did I adjust my data collection strategies along the way if I found such adjustments we important in my learning (or in the learning of others)?
* Did I spend too much or too little time collecting data)?
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
1.
*District Curriculum
*Scope and Sequence (vertical alignment)
*Grade level specific data
*Access to Math Specialist
*Academic Math Language (K-5)
*Shared strategy or vocabulary activity, Lesson Activity
*Laptop computers-note-taking/Keep minutes for each meeting for analysis.
*Flash drives per Math Liaison for any shared ppts, resources
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
1.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level (Math Liaisons)
Support Staff: Math Specialist
TIMELINE
1.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
Begin the week of January 3, 2011
2. Pre-survey begin the week of January 3, 2011
3. Vertical Team Meeting January 10, 2011
8. Minutes of meeting (weekly)
1. Begin Assessment Data review from week 15—week of Dec. 6, 2010 followed by week 18 week of Jan. 24, 2011 and every three weeks until June 31, 2011
4, 5, 7
Share Sessions (Weekly)
6. Snapshot observation per admin. approval
9. Post-survey End of Year May 2011
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENT:
Outcome 1.
1. Assessment Data
2. Pre-survey questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need.
3. Discuss specific areas of concern per grade level
4. On-going interviews with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
5. On-going shared Lesson Planning—looking for academic vocabulary
6. On-going snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic language and depth of instruction
7. On-going field observations of student journals before and after
8. Keep minutes for each meeting for analysis.
9. Post- survey to identify growth or change in culture and climate to monitor culture and climate from vertical team math liaisons and all other K-5 math teachers.
Revisions to SIP/PIP based on monitoring and assessments
Areas for possible revision will include:
1. extending the time or frequency of the meetings
2. altering discussion based on priority issues
3. using interview feedback to validate the need for re-direction of focus based on need
4. using observations to evaluate degree of teacher implementation and possible methods for continued motivation
5. review student journals to evaluate the application of new vocabulary and/or strategies
OUTCOMES: (2 of 3)
2. Increased "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for
conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers
ACTIVITIES:
2.
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
Self-Reflection:
Am I confident that my findings, as well as my selection of a strategy to illustrate my findings, emerged from my data and my learning and that I did not force my data to fit the opinions and values I had in place before beginning the inquiry?
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
2.
Survey Monkey
Support:
Ms. Barrett
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
2.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
All K-5 Math Teachers
TIMELINE:
2.
Before and After
(prior to first meeting week of Jan. 3, 2011 and after last meeting May 2011)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
Outcome 2.
2. Pre-survey (Same As Above) using questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need.
4. On-going interviews (Same As Above) with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
5. On-going shared Lesson Planning (Same As Above)—looking for academic vocabulary
6. On-going snapshot (Same As Above) observations to listen for verbal use of academic language and depth of instruction
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
8. Post-survey (Same as Above) using questions to
evaluate the impact of progress and the degree of implementation
Revisions to SIP/PIP based on monitoring and assessments
3. using interview feedback to validate the need for re-direction of focus based on need
4. using observations to evaluate degree of teacher implementation and possible methods for
continued motivation
5. review student journals to evaluate the application of new vocabulary and/or strategies
OUTCOMES: (3 of 3)
3. Improved Student Academic Performance
ACTIVITIES:
3.
Assessments
Student Journals
Teacher and Student Interview
Self-Reflection:
Am I confident that my findings, as well as my selection of a strategy to illustrate my findings, emerged from my data and my learning and that I did not force my data to fit the opinions and values I had in place before beginning the inquiry?
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
3.
Math Specialist
Ms. Rachal, AP
Ms. Barrett, AP
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
3.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
Math Liaisons
TIMELINE:
3.
Monitor Data—every three weeks
(Team Analysis)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
Outcome 3.
1. Assessment Data: Benchmarks, Common Assessments
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
9. Math failure rates on report cards.
Revisions to SIP/PIP based on monitoring and assessments
1. Assessment Data: Benchmarks, Common Assessments to drive decision-making
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
Action Research Plan Approved December 10, 2010 by site supervisor: Ms. Rachal, Assistant Principal
Terri,
I can tell that you've put a lot of thought and consideration into your plan. It provides a lot of detail and you set some lofty goals. While we have had periodic vertical team meetings at Nitsch, we have not had weekly meetings committed to Math Vertical Team collaboration. I anticipate that with your specific plans and commitment we will see positive results. Your plan is approved.
Great job!
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Week 4: Revised Action Research Plan
SCHOOL VISION:
Race to Recognized: To close the achievement gap of all learners to obtain recognized/exemplary status.
GOAL:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency for students and teachers at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of
shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
Note:
Triangulation of Assessment Methods:
1) Assessment Data, 2) Survey/Interviews, 3) Field Observations
OUTCOMES: (1 of 3)
1. New Vertical Math Team
ACTIVITIES:
1.
*Extend PLC’s to include recommended
(K-5) Math representatives for vertical teaming
*Define Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
*Facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and use of academic math language during MATH SHARE SESSIONS
*Self-Reflection: Identify road blocks to desired growth and plan for problem resolution; seek support or guidance
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
1.
*District Curriculum
*Scope and Sequence (vertical alignment)
*Grade level specific data
*Access to Math Specialist
*Academic Math Language (K-5)
*Shared strategy or vocabulary activity, Lesson Activity
*Laptop computers-note-taking/Keep minutes for each meeting for analysis.
*Flash drives per Math Liaison for any shared ppts, resources
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
1.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level (Math Liaisons)
Support Staff: Math Specialist
TIMELINE
1.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
Begin the week of January 3, 2011
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENT:
Outcome 1.
1. Assessment Data
2. Pre-survey questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need.
3. Discuss specific areas of concern per grade level
4. On-going interviews with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
5. On-going shared Lesson Planning—looking for academic vocabulary
6. On-going snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic language and depth of instruction
7. On-going field observations of student journals before and after
8. Keep minutes for each meeting for analysis.
9. Post- survey to identify growth or change in culture and climate to monitor culture and climate from vertical team math liaisons and all other K-5 math teachers.
OUTCOMES: (2 of 3)
2. Increased "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for
conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers
ACTIVITIES:
2.
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
2.
Survey Monkey
Support:
Ms. Barrett
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
2.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
All K-5 Math Teachers
TIMELINE:
2.
Before and After
(prior to first meeting and after last meeting)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
Outcome 2.
2. Pre-survey (Same As Above) using questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need.
4. On-going interviews (Same As Above) with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
5. On-going shared Lesson Planning (Same As Above)—looking for academic vocabulary
6. On-going snapshot (Same As Above) observations to listen for verbal use of academic language and depth of instruction
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
8. Post-survey (Same as Above) using questions to
evaluate the impact of progress and the degree of implementation
OUTCOMES: (3 of 3)
3. Improved Student Academic Performance
ACTIVITIES:
3.
Assessments
Student Journals
Teacher and Student Interview
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
3.
Math Specialist
Ms. Rachal, AP
Ms. Barrett, AP
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
3.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
Math Liaisons
TIMELINE:
3.
Monitor Data—every three weeks
(Team Analysis)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
Outcome 3.
1. Assessment Data: Benchmarks, Common Assessments
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
9. Math failure rates on report cards.
Action Research Plan Approved December 10, 2010 by site supervisor: Ms. Rachal, Assistant Principal
Terri,
I can tell that you've put a lot of thought and consideration into your plan. It provides a lot of detail and you set some lofty goals. While we have had periodic vertical team meetings at Nitsch, we have not had weekly meetings committed to Math Vertical Team collaboration. I anticipate that with your specific plans and commitment we will see positive results. Your plan is approved.
Great job!
Race to Recognized: To close the achievement gap of all learners to obtain recognized/exemplary status.
GOAL:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency for students and teachers at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of
shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
Note:
Triangulation of Assessment Methods:
1) Assessment Data, 2) Survey/Interviews, 3) Field Observations
OUTCOMES: (1 of 3)
1. New Vertical Math Team
ACTIVITIES:
1.
*Extend PLC’s to include recommended
(K-5) Math representatives for vertical teaming
*Define Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
*Facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and use of academic math language during MATH SHARE SESSIONS
*Self-Reflection: Identify road blocks to desired growth and plan for problem resolution; seek support or guidance
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
1.
*District Curriculum
*Scope and Sequence (vertical alignment)
*Grade level specific data
*Access to Math Specialist
*Academic Math Language (K-5)
*Shared strategy or vocabulary activity, Lesson Activity
*Laptop computers-note-taking/Keep minutes for each meeting for analysis.
*Flash drives per Math Liaison for any shared ppts, resources
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
1.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level (Math Liaisons)
Support Staff: Math Specialist
TIMELINE
1.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
Begin the week of January 3, 2011
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENT:
Outcome 1.
1. Assessment Data
2. Pre-survey questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need.
3. Discuss specific areas of concern per grade level
4. On-going interviews with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
5. On-going shared Lesson Planning—looking for academic vocabulary
6. On-going snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic language and depth of instruction
7. On-going field observations of student journals before and after
8. Keep minutes for each meeting for analysis.
9. Post- survey to identify growth or change in culture and climate to monitor culture and climate from vertical team math liaisons and all other K-5 math teachers.
OUTCOMES: (2 of 3)
2. Increased "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for
conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers
ACTIVITIES:
2.
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
2.
Survey Monkey
Support:
Ms. Barrett
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
2.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
All K-5 Math Teachers
TIMELINE:
2.
Before and After
(prior to first meeting and after last meeting)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
Outcome 2.
2. Pre-survey (Same As Above) using questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need.
4. On-going interviews (Same As Above) with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
5. On-going shared Lesson Planning (Same As Above)—looking for academic vocabulary
6. On-going snapshot (Same As Above) observations to listen for verbal use of academic language and depth of instruction
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
8. Post-survey (Same as Above) using questions to
evaluate the impact of progress and the degree of implementation
OUTCOMES: (3 of 3)
3. Improved Student Academic Performance
ACTIVITIES:
3.
Assessments
Student Journals
Teacher and Student Interview
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
3.
Math Specialist
Ms. Rachal, AP
Ms. Barrett, AP
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
3.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
Math Liaisons
TIMELINE:
3.
Monitor Data—every three weeks
(Team Analysis)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
Outcome 3.
1. Assessment Data: Benchmarks, Common Assessments
7. On-going field observations (Same as above) of student journals before and after
9. Math failure rates on report cards.
Action Research Plan Approved December 10, 2010 by site supervisor: Ms. Rachal, Assistant Principal
Terri,
I can tell that you've put a lot of thought and consideration into your plan. It provides a lot of detail and you set some lofty goals. While we have had periodic vertical team meetings at Nitsch, we have not had weekly meetings committed to Math Vertical Team collaboration. I anticipate that with your specific plans and commitment we will see positive results. Your plan is approved.
Great job!
Friday, December 3, 2010
EDLD 5301- Week 3 Assignment: Part 3 Action Research Plan
This format seems a bit more pleasing to the blog reading eye than the intial post of the SIP below. Thank you for your time and feedback.
Part 3: Action Research Plan
Based on the Part 2: SIP and Examining what we do to improve our schools: 8 steps from analysis to action by Sandra Harris, Stacey Edmonson, and Julie Combs, (Eye on Education, 2010)
1. Examining the Work: Setting the Foundation
Our common vision this year is "Race to Recognized." As a campus, we have received an Acceptable Rating for the past three years. We service a population that is 54% African-American, 38% Hispanic, 7% Asian and 1% White. We are 84% economically disadvantaged and 56% At-Risk. Where our campus is in the fourth year of Professional Learning Communities, we have yet to evolve past grade level specific challenges. Our campus data indicates that there are several mathematical concept deficiencies in grade three and identifiable math misconceptions happening by fifth grade. As one of the fifth grade team members, I have brought to the table for discussion the wide variety of Math "tricks," code words, and other inconsistent strategies that are being presented to students, at the lower grade levels, in the place of instruction that should allow for conceptual development. We have fifth graders that are just now recognizing that fractions, decimals, and whole numbers share the same numberline and that "in all" does not always mean add. We are spending a great deal of time analyzing student work to determine where to begin and often having to re-teach concepts completely.
Based on the review of campus data and discussion with my Supervisor, Ms. Rachal, my Principal, Ms. James, and my Assistant Principal, Ms. Barrett, we recognized that if we wanted to achieve Recognized status and continue to Exemplary, we had to improve the consistency of instructional practices and technical math language used at all grade levels. I had read a chapter in Failure Is Not an Option: 6 Principles for Making Student Success the Only Option by Alan M. Blankstein about the benefits of collaborative teaming. “In a collaborative school culture, professional are fully committed to and focused on helping students learn by becoming active learners themselves. They work continuously with their colleagues to improve their teaching strategies and better manage their classrooms. They recognize their crucial role in the educational process and know they can meet the challenges confronting them only by solving problems in concert with their professional colleagues” (Blankstein, 2010, p. 143). I shared with my administrative team my desire to focus on the vertical alignment of Math instruction practices through vertical teaming, as my action research project priority.
Therefore, I would like to pose the following questions:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
2. Analyzing Data 3. Developing Deeper Understanding 5. Exploring Programmatic Patterns 6. Determining Direction
Outcome #1- My plan will identify a new Vertical Math Team which will be an extension to our current grade-level specific Professional Learning Communities. Administration will recommend one Math representative from each grade-level (K-5) to serve as Math Liaisons for vertical teaming--Math Share Sessions. I will be using the following resources/research tools: district curriculum, scope and sequence (vertical alignment), academic math language grade-level vocabulary lists, and grade level specific benchmark data from the past three years (2008-2011). I will be taking lead, along with the collaborating Math Liaisons, and will seek the support of our campus Math Specialist. As a vertical team, we will review assessment data every three weeks. During our thirty minute sessions each week, we will discuss specific areas of concern per grade level, identifying areas of weakness, strength, and possible short-term and long-term solutions. I will conduct a pre-survey using SurveyMonkey to establish a baseline for the culture and climate of each grade level. I will interview each Math Liaison to gain insights as to our need, purpose, and direction.
Outcome #2- As a vertical team of grade level Math Liaisons, we will define our role, and initial and weekly responsibilities. Ultimately, the responsibilities will be to facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and the encouraged use of academic math language. Resources/research tools will include sharing Math strategies, lesson activities, or vocabulary action techniques of interest or importance, the use of laptop computers for note-taking, the use of a flashdrive per Math Liaison for any shared digital assets, the use of a campus blogsite to solicit on-going feedback which will be advocated and monitored by all Math Liaisons. I will use a combination of the following assessment methods to monitor progress and identify need: review shared lesson planning on Eduphoria-Forethought (with the help of administration), looking for academic vocabulary and essential understandings; conduct snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic math language (with the support of the Math Liaisons); conduct field observations of student journals and/or problem solving strategies before the implementation of Math Share Sessions and after; Post open-ended questions to stimulate inquiry (further action research) on created blogsite to monitor culture and climate.
Outcome #3- The purpose of the Vertical Math Team is to increase the ownership of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers. Based on classroom benchmark scores, I will conduct a pre-survey using open-ended questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise to identify the depth of need. I will conduct a post-survey using open-ended questions to evaluate progress and degree of implementation.
Outcome #4- The most important outcome is improved student academic performance. As a vertical team of Math Liaisons, we will review actual student assessment booklets and journals. I will conduct student and teachers interviews to determine impact on overall student performance and perceptions. I will share insights with administration, specialists, math liaisons, classroom teachers, the professional/staff development department and the math coordinator.
4. Engaging in Self-Reflection
At this point in our planning phase, even after reading the required material and looking online for more support, I still do not have a clear understanding of what this action research plan should look like during this developmental stage. Everything I have read said that this is the most important stage of a successful action plan, but there does not seem to be examples other than the finished products. My self-reflection questions are as follows: Where can I find sample plans to use as comparisons? What additional research needs to take place in order to speak knowledgeably about my findings? In what (innovative) way will I present my findings? How will I asses my effectiveness? What kinds of survey questions are considered qualitative and quantitative? How can I modify and minimize my choice assessment methods? How can I triangulate my assessment methods? When will be the best time to begin this action research project? Is January too late?
7. Taking action for school improvement
See SIP or PIP Plan in Part 2 which will go through a revision process next week.
8. Sustaining improvement
I am optimistic that this action research project will evolve over time through the collaborative efforts of our grade level Math Liaisons. I can already predict mini-workshops concerning Higher-Order questioning strategies, Academic Math Vocabulary, and teaching with Depth and Complexity.
Part 3: Action Research Plan
Based on the Part 2: SIP and Examining what we do to improve our schools: 8 steps from analysis to action by Sandra Harris, Stacey Edmonson, and Julie Combs, (Eye on Education, 2010)
1. Examining the Work: Setting the Foundation
Our common vision this year is "Race to Recognized." As a campus, we have received an Acceptable Rating for the past three years. We service a population that is 54% African-American, 38% Hispanic, 7% Asian and 1% White. We are 84% economically disadvantaged and 56% At-Risk. Where our campus is in the fourth year of Professional Learning Communities, we have yet to evolve past grade level specific challenges. Our campus data indicates that there are several mathematical concept deficiencies in grade three and identifiable math misconceptions happening by fifth grade. As one of the fifth grade team members, I have brought to the table for discussion the wide variety of Math "tricks," code words, and other inconsistent strategies that are being presented to students, at the lower grade levels, in the place of instruction that should allow for conceptual development. We have fifth graders that are just now recognizing that fractions, decimals, and whole numbers share the same numberline and that "in all" does not always mean add. We are spending a great deal of time analyzing student work to determine where to begin and often having to re-teach concepts completely.
Based on the review of campus data and discussion with my Supervisor, Ms. Rachal, my Principal, Ms. James, and my Assistant Principal, Ms. Barrett, we recognized that if we wanted to achieve Recognized status and continue to Exemplary, we had to improve the consistency of instructional practices and technical math language used at all grade levels. I had read a chapter in Failure Is Not an Option: 6 Principles for Making Student Success the Only Option by Alan M. Blankstein about the benefits of collaborative teaming. “In a collaborative school culture, professional are fully committed to and focused on helping students learn by becoming active learners themselves. They work continuously with their colleagues to improve their teaching strategies and better manage their classrooms. They recognize their crucial role in the educational process and know they can meet the challenges confronting them only by solving problems in concert with their professional colleagues” (Blankstein, 2010, p. 143). I shared with my administrative team my desire to focus on the vertical alignment of Math instruction practices through vertical teaming, as my action research project priority.
Therefore, I would like to pose the following questions:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
2. Analyzing Data 3. Developing Deeper Understanding 5. Exploring Programmatic Patterns 6. Determining Direction
Outcome #1- My plan will identify a new Vertical Math Team which will be an extension to our current grade-level specific Professional Learning Communities. Administration will recommend one Math representative from each grade-level (K-5) to serve as Math Liaisons for vertical teaming--Math Share Sessions. I will be using the following resources/research tools: district curriculum, scope and sequence (vertical alignment), academic math language grade-level vocabulary lists, and grade level specific benchmark data from the past three years (2008-2011). I will be taking lead, along with the collaborating Math Liaisons, and will seek the support of our campus Math Specialist. As a vertical team, we will review assessment data every three weeks. During our thirty minute sessions each week, we will discuss specific areas of concern per grade level, identifying areas of weakness, strength, and possible short-term and long-term solutions. I will conduct a pre-survey using SurveyMonkey to establish a baseline for the culture and climate of each grade level. I will interview each Math Liaison to gain insights as to our need, purpose, and direction.
Outcome #2- As a vertical team of grade level Math Liaisons, we will define our role, and initial and weekly responsibilities. Ultimately, the responsibilities will be to facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and the encouraged use of academic math language. Resources/research tools will include sharing Math strategies, lesson activities, or vocabulary action techniques of interest or importance, the use of laptop computers for note-taking, the use of a flashdrive per Math Liaison for any shared digital assets, the use of a campus blogsite to solicit on-going feedback which will be advocated and monitored by all Math Liaisons. I will use a combination of the following assessment methods to monitor progress and identify need: review shared lesson planning on Eduphoria-Forethought (with the help of administration), looking for academic vocabulary and essential understandings; conduct snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic math language (with the support of the Math Liaisons); conduct field observations of student journals and/or problem solving strategies before the implementation of Math Share Sessions and after; Post open-ended questions to stimulate inquiry (further action research) on created blogsite to monitor culture and climate.
Outcome #3- The purpose of the Vertical Math Team is to increase the ownership of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers. Based on classroom benchmark scores, I will conduct a pre-survey using open-ended questions to determine current culture, climate, instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise to identify the depth of need. I will conduct a post-survey using open-ended questions to evaluate progress and degree of implementation.
Outcome #4- The most important outcome is improved student academic performance. As a vertical team of Math Liaisons, we will review actual student assessment booklets and journals. I will conduct student and teachers interviews to determine impact on overall student performance and perceptions. I will share insights with administration, specialists, math liaisons, classroom teachers, the professional/staff development department and the math coordinator.
4. Engaging in Self-Reflection
At this point in our planning phase, even after reading the required material and looking online for more support, I still do not have a clear understanding of what this action research plan should look like during this developmental stage. Everything I have read said that this is the most important stage of a successful action plan, but there does not seem to be examples other than the finished products. My self-reflection questions are as follows: Where can I find sample plans to use as comparisons? What additional research needs to take place in order to speak knowledgeably about my findings? In what (innovative) way will I present my findings? How will I asses my effectiveness? What kinds of survey questions are considered qualitative and quantitative? How can I modify and minimize my choice assessment methods? How can I triangulate my assessment methods? When will be the best time to begin this action research project? Is January too late?
7. Taking action for school improvement
See SIP or PIP Plan in Part 2 which will go through a revision process next week.
8. Sustaining improvement
I am optimistic that this action research project will evolve over time through the collaborative efforts of our grade level Math Liaisons. I can already predict mini-workshops concerning Higher-Order questioning strategies, Academic Math Vocabulary, and teaching with Depth and Complexity.
EDLD 5301: Week 3 Assignment--Part 2 SIP
Part 2: SIP
SCHOOL VISION:
Race to Recognized: To close the achievement gap of all learners to obtain recognized/exemplary status.
GOAL:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency for students and teachers at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of
shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
OUTCOMES: (1 of 4)
1. New Vertical Math Team: Extend PLC’s to include recommended (K-5) Math
representatives for vertical teaming.
ACTIVITIES:
1. Vertical teaming: Math Share Sessions
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
1.
*District Curriculum
*Scope and Sequence (vertical alignment)
*Grade level specific data
*Access to Math Specialist
*Academic Math Language (K-5)
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
1.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level (Math Liaisons)
Support Staff: Math Specialist
TIMELINE
1.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
(Beginning in January)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENT:
1.
*Review Data
*Discuss specific areas of concern per grade level
*Pre-survey to establish culture and climate
*Post- survey to identify growth or change in culture and climate
*Interviews with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
OUTCOMES: (2 of 4)
2. Grade Level Math Liaisons Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
To facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and use of academic math language
ACTIVITIES:
2. Math Share Sessions-
Define Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
2.
*Strategy, Lesson Activity, and/or Action Vocabulary of interest or importance to
share
*Laptop computers-note-taking
*blog posts to share with grade level member during PLC’s
*Flashdrives per Math Liaison for any shared ppts, resources.
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
2.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level
(Math Liaisons)
TIMELINE:
2.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
2.
*Shared Lesson Planning—looking for academic vocabulary
*Snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic language
*Field Observation of student journals before and after
*Post open-ended questions to stimulate inquiry (action research) on created blog
site to monitor culture and climate from vertical team math liaisons and all other
K-5 math teachers.
OUTCOMES: (3 of 4)
3. Increased "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for
conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers
ACTIVITIES:
3. (TBD)
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
3.
Survey Monkey
Support:
Ms. Barrett
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
3.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
All K-5 Math Teachers
TIMELINE:
3. (TBD)
Before and After
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
3.
*Pre-survey using open-ended questions to determine current culture, climate,
instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need...
*Post-survey using open-ended questions to evaluate progress and degree of
implementation
OUTCOMES: (4 of 4)
4. Improved Student Academic Performance
ACTIVITIES:
4.
Assessments
Student Journals
Teacher and Student Interview
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
4.
Math Specialist
Ms. Rachal, AP
Ms. Barrett, AP
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
4.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
Math Liaisons
TIMELINE:
4.
Monitor Data—every three weeks
(Team Analysis)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
4.
*Benchmarks
*Common Assessments
*Journals
*Interviews
SCHOOL VISION:
Race to Recognized: To close the achievement gap of all learners to obtain recognized/exemplary status.
GOAL:
As an extension to our campus grade level Professional Learning Communities, will vertical teaming K-5 Math improve instructional practices for conceptual understanding and improve overall student assessment performance?
Will vertical teaming encourage the use of academic math language with more
consistency and frequency for students and teachers at all grade levels?
Will vertical teaming increase the "ownership" of responsibility and degree of
shared accountability for conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers?
OUTCOMES: (1 of 4)
1. New Vertical Math Team: Extend PLC’s to include recommended (K-5) Math
representatives for vertical teaming.
ACTIVITIES:
1. Vertical teaming: Math Share Sessions
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
1.
*District Curriculum
*Scope and Sequence (vertical alignment)
*Grade level specific data
*Access to Math Specialist
*Academic Math Language (K-5)
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
1.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level (Math Liaisons)
Support Staff: Math Specialist
TIMELINE
1.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
(Beginning in January)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENT:
1.
*Review Data
*Discuss specific areas of concern per grade level
*Pre-survey to establish culture and climate
*Post- survey to identify growth or change in culture and climate
*Interviews with Math Liaisons to gain insights into need, purpose, and direction.
OUTCOMES: (2 of 4)
2. Grade Level Math Liaisons Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
To facilitate the dissemination of information and implementation of best teaching practices and use of academic math language
ACTIVITIES:
2. Math Share Sessions-
Define Role and Responsibilities: Initial and Weekly
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
2.
*Strategy, Lesson Activity, and/or Action Vocabulary of interest or importance to
share
*Laptop computers-note-taking
*blog posts to share with grade level member during PLC’s
*Flashdrives per Math Liaison for any shared ppts, resources.
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
2.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
One teacher from each grade level
(Math Liaisons)
TIMELINE:
2.
Once a week
(30 minutes)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
2.
*Shared Lesson Planning—looking for academic vocabulary
*Snapshot observations to listen for verbal use of academic language
*Field Observation of student journals before and after
*Post open-ended questions to stimulate inquiry (action research) on created blog
site to monitor culture and climate from vertical team math liaisons and all other
K-5 math teachers.
OUTCOMES: (3 of 4)
3. Increased "ownership" of responsibility and degree of shared accountability for
conceptual, foundational TEKS instruction for all K-5 Math teachers
ACTIVITIES:
3. (TBD)
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
3.
Survey Monkey
Support:
Ms. Barrett
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
3.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
All K-5 Math Teachers
TIMELINE:
3. (TBD)
Before and After
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
3.
*Pre-survey using open-ended questions to determine current culture, climate,
instructional practices, perceptions, comfort, expertise, depth of need...
*Post-survey using open-ended questions to evaluate progress and degree of
implementation
OUTCOMES: (4 of 4)
4. Improved Student Academic Performance
ACTIVITIES:
4.
Assessments
Student Journals
Teacher and Student Interview
RESOURCES/RESEARCH TOOLS NEEDED:
4.
Math Specialist
Ms. Rachal, AP
Ms. Barrett, AP
RESPONSIBILITY TO ADDRESS ACTIVITIES:
4.
Lead: Terri Ferrell
Collaborators:
Math Liaisons
TIMELINE:
4.
Monitor Data—every three weeks
(Team Analysis)
BENCHMARKS/ASSESSMENTS:
4.
*Benchmarks
*Common Assessments
*Journals
*Interviews
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)