FIN Commons

 

Los Angeles Trade Technical Community College

In the Utilities and Construction Project at Los Angeles Trade Technical Community College, instructors see a critical gap between students’ motivation to learn and succeed (which begins high) and their ability to sustain that motivation while maintaining or increasing their performance in the learning environment. This is likely influenced by many external factors beyond faculty control – financial pressures, environmental and family stress, health issues, legal challenges, violence, etc. However, the team has a hunch that strong faculty-student relationships and attention to students’ emotional intelligence may help bridge this gap. The inquiry will examine this hunch, and investigate how culturally relevant tools might be used to strengthen student-faculty interactions and increase students emotional intelligence.

Team Leader:
Maryanne Galindo, Adjunct Professor                                                                                         Credit (Community & Economic Development Department) and Noncredit Basic Skills
Tel: 323-988-5721  Fax: 323-988-5655
maryannegalindo@sbcglobal.net

Team Members:
Dr. Allison Tom-Miura: Program Director, Career Advancement Academy & Noncredit Basic Skills Instructor

Jah’Shams Abdul-Mu’min, Adjunct Professor – Credit (Community & Economic Development Department) and Noncredit Basic Skills

Plans for Data Collection and Analysis

 

A.            Zoom-Lens Inquiry: Focusing on Students

 

1)  What data will you gather and analyze on individual students? (e.g. student work, self-reflections, interviews, videotaped think-alouds or problem-solving)

 

Both students and faculty will complete the following self- assessments: (1) Learning Styles Assessment, (2) Leadership Styles Assessment, (3) Motivation to Lead, (4) Emotional Intelligence, (5) Core Values, (6) Thomas-Kilmann Conflict MODE Assessment, (7) High Performance Teams/DISC, (8) Gain-Q, and (9) a Psychosocial Self-Assessment. Faculty will complete one additional assessment known as the Teaching-Styles Inventory.

 

Both students and faculty will complete a 3D Storytelling process that will be videotaped. Students will do their process during one of their basic skills classes. Faculty will do their process during an extended session of a weekly team meeting. We plan to film a third session where students and faculty will go through the process together.

 

Lastly, we plan to have students complete a written evaluation of their experience in the program followed by random exit interviews to examine which learning activities were most meaningful in supporting their success.

 

2) How do you imagine this data will help you understand the problem/issue you’re investigating? In other words, how does the data connect to and inform the overall focus of your inquiry?

 

We anticipate that the various self-assessments will increase student awareness of their strengths and non-strengths, both as an individual and in the context of a team, which may shift their self-perceptions. The more awareness that students have, the more empowered they may become to ask for assistance to sustain their motivation and success.

 

We anticipate that the faculty will gain insights into their teaching-styles as they complete the various assessments. Furthermore, we anticipate that when the faculty learns the results of each the students’ assessments and they are reviewed as a team (much like when we review English and Math Scores) the collective discussion may lead to increased understanding of the gaps between student emotional intelligence, student learning objectives, and teaching-styles.

 

The 3D Storytelling process will provide us with an understanding about how faculty and students describe the relationship with one another and the institution of higher learning, as well as how they connect, build relationships, and how learning spaces can be created to support student success.

 

The more we know about our students, the more the faculty team of the Utilities & Construction Academy will discover how to create supportive learning communities that enhance student success in both educational and career technical pathways.

 

3) When and how will you collect this data? (e.g. Which classes will you target? Where will you conduct interviews or think-alouds?)

 

We will have students complete the assessments, one during their selection orientation, most will take place during the first two weeks of each Academy and the remaining prior to completion. We anticipate having 3 cohorts, of approximately 30 students each, in 2009. Instructors will complete assessments at the beginning of each cohort and plan to have them re-take the assessments at the completion of the third cohort to see if there have been any shifts in awareness. The assessments will be facilitated by Maryanne and Jah’Shams during the Teamwork and Communications components of the Academy. Student interviews will take place at the end of the first cohort and at the beginning and end of the second and third cohorts.

 

4) When will you analyze this data? (e.g. mid-semester team retreat, after lesson-study session, at the end of the semester)

 

Assessment data will be reviewed by the faculty team by the end of week 4 of each cohort. Some video segments will be reviewed by the faculty team during the two-month breaks between each cohort.

 

5) How will you analyze the data? (e.g. analyzing student work with a rubric or analytic frame like Polya’s method for problem-solving or Perry’s scheme for student development; analyzing themes in student self-reflections according to their performance in the class – how did the responses of students who did not pass compare/contrast with students who performed well?)

 

We are currently researching various models and frameworks that may expand our thinking about the intersections between cognitive development, identity formation, environmental effects, campus/civic engagement, the practices of effective learning communities, and progressive/social justice/humane educational frameworks (e.g. Paulo Freire) to enhance our  approach to contextualized career and soft skills education.

 

6) What questions/concerns do you have about this element of your Inquiry? How can your Inquiry Coach support you in this phase of your Inquiry?

 

We would like referrals to additional educational frameworks, theories and literature to support our critical thinking regarding our analytic frame.

 

B.            Mid-Range Shots: Focusing on the Classroom

 

1) Please name ONE specific lesson in a particular course that will give you a good vantage point for observing student learning relevant to your Inquiry.

 

Because the Utilities and Construction Academy offers contextualized learning in several courses, we have an incredible opportunity to use the Lesson Study tool in a different course during each cohort. At this time, it is our intention to do the following:

a)     First Cohort: Construction Lecture course, lesson in basic math for construction in which students work together in small teams to reach answers.

b)    Second Cohort: Fundamentals of Workplace Success: Teamwork course, lesson plan on teambuilding that integrates components of communication and leadership.

c)     Third Cohort: Basic English course, lesson plan on reading for comprehension in which students will critically think through and analyze a literary piece to problem solve.

 

2) How do you imagine the Lesson Study will help you understand the problem/issue you’re investigating about students and their learning? In other words, how does it connect to and inform the overall focus of your inquiry?

 

Each of the above Lesson Study sessions will provide us with information about how to continue to deconstruct our inquiries and our process. In particular, we want to look at learning activities that are cooperative (not competitive in nature) that create, support, and enhance the spirit of teams/teamwork. We will be looking for whether or not student relationships with each other, and with the instructors, inspire a sense of individual and communal accountability and commitment to complete the Academy despite the various environmental factors that may arise.

 

Many students come our institution with limited K-12 educational success (many do not have a high school diploma or GED and those that do, have significant gaps in their basic reading, writing and math skills); have experienced significant physical and emotional trauma;  have limited to no formal employment; were previously incarcerated; and have limited, or no higher education experience. It is our assumption that a cooperative learning community will support student motivation, performance, retention and success. Hence, we are looking at existing data and making inquiry with our faculty team about their assumptions, attitudes, and teaching-styles to discover which methods, spaces, tools and cooperative learning activities enhance student success within a framework of contextualized learning environment. We believe that this will be the work of the next phase of our inquiry, possibly as early as year two of this grant.

 

3) When and how will your team conduct this Lesson Study? Please detail the timeframes and participants for the three parts of the Lesson Study process (collaboratively planning the lesson, teaching/observing the lesson, and debriefing/analyzing videotapes & student work from the lesson).

 

Because no prior assessments on motivation and learning styles have been conducted, the assessments at the beginning of the cohort will give us an important measure of student motivation. We plan to implement the Lesson Study tool midway through the program (approximately week 6) to explore the content and analyze our program strategies, and examine student learning and thinking. 

 

a)     First Cohort, Construction Lecture:

                                 i.         Collaboratively planning the lesson: Allison & Wally

                                ii.         Teaching: Wally / Observing the Lesson: Maryanne, Jah’Shams, and Allison

                              iii.         Debriefing/analyzing videotapes & student work from the lesson: Maryanne, Jah’Shams and Allison will analyze the video/work and Maryanne will facilitate a debriefing with the entire Faculty team of 8 instructors during a weekly team meeting.

 

b)    Second Cohort, Fundamentals of Workplace Success: Teamwork:

                                 i.         Collaboratively planning the lesson: Maryanne, Jah’Shams and Allison

                                ii.         Teaching: Maryanne and Jah’Shams / Observing the Lesson: Allison, Kelly & Angela

                              iii.         Debriefing/analyzing videotapes & student work from the lesson: Maryanne, Jah’Shams and Allison will analyze the video/work and Maryanne will facilitate a debriefing with the entire Faculty team of 8 instructors during a weekly team meeting.

c)     Third Cohort, Basic English:

                                 i.         Collaboratively planning the lesson: Allison & Kelly

                                ii.         Teaching: Kelly / Observing the Lesson: Maryanne, Jah’Shams, and Allison

                              iii.         Debriefing/analyzing videotapes & student work from the lesson: Maryanne, Jah’Shams and Allison will analyze the video/work and Maryanne will facilitate a debriefing with the entire Faculty team of 8 instructors during a weekly team meeting.

 

4) What kinds of things will the observers be looking/listening for during the lesson? What artifacts of student learning and student experience will the team collect during the lesson? Will you videotape any portion of this process (pre-planning, lesson, debrief)?

 

Are students actively engaged in the learning process? What is keeping them actively engaged? When one or more students are stuck or discouraged, are other students exhibiting leadership and cooperation by supporting their peers to learn the material? If so, how are they “teaching” each other; for example, how are they “translating” information, using “street” language, experiences, etc?  If there was a struggle with the course material, are students exhibiting a positive perception about sticking with it because they see the need/value of understanding the material in order to apply it to the context of construction trades?

 

As it relates to artifacts of student learning in that particular session, we plan to have the class complete a 5-10 minute, written critical thinking process at the end of the session using the ORID tool which will comprise of 4 questions, one for each stage – an Observational, Reflective, Interpretive, and Decisional question. Another artifact we plan to collect will be a written opinion paper in which students respond to a focus question regarding the particular lesson/activity that required working in teams.

 

5) What questions/concerns do you have about this element of your Inquiry? How can your Inquiry Coach support you in this phase of your Inquiry?

 

We are exploring the idea of a complimentary Lesson Study during the first cohort in the Applied Construction course which is the “part b” to the Construction Lecture course. In the Construction Lecture course students learn the basic math for construction; while in the Applied Construction course they then use that math to complete a project. In both, the instructor uses team activities, but we are curious if there are differences in how students engage and stay motivated in lecture-style courses versus laboratory-style (hands on) courses. As additional options/backup plans, we may consider the opportunity to implement Lesson Study in the Academy’s Employment Readiness course, on a lesson plan on interviewing for a job in which students role play and provide feedback to each other. We would appreciate your recommendation on these options.

 

C.            Wide-Angle Lens: Focusing on Larger Trends in Institutional Data

 

1) What data from your Institutional Research Office will you integrate into your Inquiry? For example, will you look at patterns of student success, defined as grades of CR, A,B C? Retention rates (completion of semester without withdrawal)? Persistence from one semester to the next, or from one course to the next in a sequence? Comparisons of student outcomes disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender, age? Data from surveys on student engagement? For a sample Inquiry using this kind of data, go to http://facultyinquiry.net and look for the category “Using Institutional Research,” then see the Learning Community Impact study posted there.)

 

We will compare the 3 Academy cohorts in 2008 with the 3 Academy cohorts in 2009 to identify patterns in demographic data, retention rates, continued education as evidence by enrollment in the next level of vocational and/or academic courses post-Academy completion, and career benchmarks, such as placement in internships, apprenticeships and employment.

 

2) How do you imagine this data will help you understand the problem/issue you’re investigating? In other words, how does the data connect to and inform the overall focus of your inquiry?

 

Student retention, continued education and employment are all benchmarks of our success in creating a learning environment that positively increases students’ emotional intelligence to sustain their motivation, focus, and success during and after the Academy. These benchmarks will provide feedback on our capacity to build the basic skills required for student success in the academic and workplace environments. This data will also support our efforts to engage in deeper inquiry about how we as faculty members can make shifts or improvements in how we create learning communities for student success. If students continue to engage in the educational process, then we have supported a shift in their perception about their own capacity to be self-regulated, successful learners in school, work and in life. We anticipate that there will be fewer dropouts, strategically planned and continued enrollment in college courses, and at a minimum clarity on their profession of choice and a plan on how to create/build that career, if not, actual employment.

 

3) What questions/concerns do you have about this element of your Inquiry? How can your Inquiry Coach support you in this phase of your Inquiry?

 

We would like to obtain and learn more about the student engagement survey tool that the district uses to determine if what it measures might fit with our inquiry. We also would like to see the models that others use to follow up with students post program completion to track their on-going success – i.e tools, staff time or volunteers, systems, etc.

 

On another note, after our first call with our coach, we were really excited about another layer of inquiry that was more about the instructors within the institution. Since the instructional staff meets weekly for an hour and a half during each cohort sessions, we decided that during each team meeting we will have a 5-minute writing session on a focus question to gather qualitative information about the perceptions of teachers. We will need assistance on how to frame and analyze the patterns that we see. To date, instructors have written impromptu statements on topics such as: What does emotional literacy mean? What does student success look like? Students enter Los Angeles Trade Technical Community College with                    that handicaps them in achieving success.

 

D.            Video Footage

We are asking each team to collect at least 10 hours of video footage in the Spring semester.

 

We anticipate approximately 30 hours – 15 hours of students in the 3 cohorts engaged in individual and team 3D Storytelling and student interviews; 6 hours of faculty engaged in three levels of 3D Storytelling, including one joint session with students; 9 hours of lesson study – one course per cohort, plus the debriefing session.

 

1) Beyond plans detailed above, please describe any additional footage you intend to gather.

 

      We plan to interview the faculty at least twice and plan to have students as the interviewers. We are also exploring the possibility of one-time interviews with a few LATTC instructors outside of the Academy faculty team to discover their perceptions and attitudes about student success.

 

2) How will this footage inform the central questions of your Inquiry?

 

The faculty interviews will document faculty perceptions about how emotional intelligence and creating learning communities impact student learning and explore their assumptions about student success and what facilitates or impedes that success. We believe that allowing the instructors to view themselves on tape (and not just re-read their writings) might provide powerful insight and understanding to our teaching-styles and how we work together as a faculty team to create a positive learning community.

 

3) What questions/concerns do you have about this element of your Inquiry? Is there any support you’d like from the FIN Leadership Team in this area?

 

At this time, our only concern is our capacity to analyze the data is limited.

 

E.            Inclusion of Student Voices

 

As noted during the Kick-Off Convening, an additional $1,000 will be made available to each team to support making student voices a central part of each Inquiry. We encourage you to be creative and draw upon students as co-inquirers who can provide expertise in helping you understand the problem/issue you are investigating. Please describe how you plan to include student voices in your Inquiry (e.g. hiring students to capture video footage, interview other students, review data from your inquiry and tell you what they see).

 

Students who completed the last cohort have experienced and utilized the ORID critical thinking tool. We plan to invite 2 graduates from that cohort to learn how to facilitate that tool and work with us to co-facilitate a community conversation (a.k.a. focus group) where we invite as many graduates of the Academy as possible to discuss emotional intelligence, methods of sustaining student motivation and how student success looks like. We envision hosting a local gathering of local FIN colleges where our student graduate co-inquirers will present the findings from the community conversation, share their experiences, and present some of the video footage that they supported in filming/editing.

 

Timeline/Calendar

So that we can visualize how the work will proceed over the next several months, please give a timeline for when the above components will occur. It can be in either calendar or outline format.

 

Cohort One: February 23^rd – May 22^nd (12 weeks)

 

Cohort Two: Summer (12 weeks/Dates TBD)

 

Cohort Three: Fall (12 weeks/Dates TBD)

 

Activities:

Ø  Student Assessments: Weeks 1 & 2 of each cohort

Ø  Student 3D Storytelling: Part one (individual process) will take place during week one of each cohort, part two (team process) will take place during week 6.

Ø  Student Interviews: Last week of Academy

Ø  Faculty Assessments: Right now, only at the beginning of the first cohort. Possibly re-taken at the end of the year, post all three cohorts to see if their have been any shifts.

Ø  Faculty 3D Storytelling: Part one (individual process) will take place will during cohort one. Part two (team process) will take place during cohort two. Part three (student & faculty joint process) will take place during cohort three.

Ø  Lesson Study: Week 7 of each cohort

Ø  Faculty Focus Questions: One per week, during team meetings, during each cohort

Ø  Faculty Interviews: At the end of the third cohort

Ø  Local FIN Gathering: We plan to invite our FIN colleagues to an Academy site visit at LATTC and community conversation about the lessons of our work during the Fall – date to be determined.