FIN Commons

Summary of Inquiry

The Cerritos College inquiry project will combine two complementary collaborations to develop a deeper understanding about how developmental learners acquire the academic habits of mind needed to succeed in college. Too often, students at risk remain on the margins of the academic community and this project will investigate ways of moving them to the center. The Cerritos College team has a hunch that by improving meta-cognitive functioning and by understanding identity development, students can be helped to adopt a “learner identity,” acquire academic habits of mind, and improve their learning.

Team Leader:
Dr. Jan Connal / Counselor, Developmental Education Chair
562-860-2451 x 2143
jconnal@cerritos.edu

Team Members:
Cheryl Shimazu / Chemistry – Delete
Frank Mixson / English
Lydia Alvarez / English
Mojdeh Nikdel / Math
Marvelina Barcelo/ Counseling

Plans for Data Collection and Analysis

A.  Zoom-Lens Data: Focusing on Students

Spring 2009

Instructional faculty will assess students’ metacognition, using a self-reported inventory of actions (included in our previous proposal), at both the beginning and end of the term for their sections of Math 40 (Pre-algebra), ENGL 20 (Basic Writing – two levels below Freshman Composition), and ENGL 52 (Intro to College Composition – one level below Freshman Composition). Likewise, they will also assess students’ Academic Habits of Mind, using a self-reported inventory of actions (included in our previous proposal).

Sustained, embedded metacognition skills-building classroom activities will be focused on increasing the following self-reported behavors:

MATH

1. When I do not understand something I ask for the help of others.

2. When I am solving a problem I ask myself questions in order to concentrate my attention on the problem.

ENGLISH:

1. While I am writing I wonder if I am communicating what I intend to communicate to my audience.

2. After I finish my work I know how well I performed on it even before it is evaluated.

Faculty will deliberately engage students in thinking and writing about the above behaviors; these reflections will be the basis of the FIG’s discussions at its biweekly meetings in March and April. Faculty will be using the reflections and discussions to better understand the development of metacognitive skills and construct a rubric to capture levels of functioning.

At the 6^th week of the term faculty will identify students at risk for dropping out or failing; these students will be invited to participate in a Counselor led focus group.

Counseling faculty will also examine the students’ self-reported actions from the initial administration of the two inventories (surveys) in the above classes and identify a cohort of “at risk” students for a videotaped focus group about their academic self-perceptions, attitudes, goals and behaviors (focus group protocol to be developed).

Student Co-investigators will conduct an in-class activity in other sections of MATH 40, ENGL 20 and ENGL 52 to capture student responses on video as they respond to prompts about their identity (prompts currently in development).

Fall 2009

Instructional faculty will again assess students’ metacognition, using a self-reported inventory of actions (included in our previous proposal), at both the beginning and end of the term for their sections of Math 60 (Pre-algebra), ENGL 20 (Basic Writing – two levels below Freshman Composition), and ENGL 52 (Intro to College Composition – one level below Freshman Composition). Likewise, they will also assess students’ Academic Habits of Mind, using a self-reported inventory of actions (included in our previous proposal).

Faculty will continue the sustained, embedded metacognition skills-building activities and reflections in class. Faculty will also incorporate the Student Focus Group video and the Identity video, developed from the Spring 09 investigation, into classroom instructional activities (i.e., using metacognition to understand identity issues around math) to generate student work products which the FIG will use to examine the relationship between metacognition and identity at its biweekly meetings.

At the 6^th week of the term faculty will use the metacognition rubric, developed Spring 09, to identify students who demonstrate minimal metacognitive skills; these students will be invited to participate in a Counselor led focus group. Counseling faculty will again examine the students’ self-reported actions from the initial administration of the two inventories (surveys) in the above classes and identify a cohort of “limited metacognition” students for a videotaped focus group about their academic identity, self-perceptions, attitudes, goals and behaviors (focus group protocol to be developed). This video will contribute to development of a “learner identity” rubric in Spring 10.

Student Co-investigators will again conduct an in-class activity in other sections of MATH 60, ENGL 20 and ENGL 52. This time, however, they will capture student responses on video as they respond to prompts about their Academic Habits of Mind (to be developed). This video will be used Spring 10 for instructional activities and also contribute to the development of the “learner identity” rubric.

B. Mid-Range Shots: Focusing on the Classroom

We will conduct a Lesson Study on a lesson given by Lydia Alvarez in ENGL 52 about the importance of “considering your audience” in communication. The classroom activity will basically engage students in writing to evoke a particular response attached to an opportunity for them to see if the intended response occurred. This lesson is directly related to our inquiry because of the metacognitive processes involved in thinking about what one intends, checking the response against what one intended and identifying improvements needed for achieving what on intends. This lesson study provides a unique opportunity to observe metacogniton in action and will inform our development of a metacognition rubric.

We will plan the lesson and identify each observer’s task at our April 14th FIG meeting. The in class lesson will be observed by Jan Connal, Frank Mixson, Mojdeh Nikdel and Marvelina Barcelo on April 22nd. The FIG will debrief and analyze data captured during the lesson on April 28th.

During the lesson observation, we will initially be looking for signs of student engagement and identifying the types and numbers of questions/comments exchanged between the instructor and students and between students. During the student activity portion of the class period, observers will be assigned a particular quadrant of the class to observe and will be noting students’ “metacognitive” statements (i.e., “I don’t think I did this right.”). Although we do not plan to video tape any portion of the Lesson Study, we will be using our observation notes and the students’ post-activity reflections for our debriefing and rubric building activities.

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

The Institutional Research Office will supply Jan Connal the college Spring 09 MIS data in August, 2009. Jan will then compare the FIG sections with comparable sections (according to section duration and time of day offered) for initial enrollment, 1st census enrollment, retention and grade. Determining student persistence into Fall 09 can be determined in February 2010 once the Fall 09 MIS data has been supplied. Perhaps the institutional data will reveal a difference between the FIG sections and their comparison groups, but we do not believe valid conclusions could be drawn. Not only are our “interventions” in the formative stages (it would be too early in the implementation process), our inquiry is of a “thin slice” of learning and not course grade.

We could use coaching to find better ways of using institutional research, given the fact that we would be limited to using existing data (the IR office is seriously under-staffed and backlogged with other institutional priorities).

D. Additional Video Footage

Our student Co-investigators will be collecting video footage in three classes in Spring 09 and Fall 09. The Counseling faculty will be collecting video footage from two, possibly four, focus groups. Both of these activities will generate footage that is integral to our inquiry by providing direct student evidence for building our understanding of student metacognition, identity and academic habits of mind.

We are depending on FIN leadership for equipment and training to developed “finished” video to be used by instructional faculty in their classrooms and by the FIG in developing rubrics.

E.  Inclusion of Student Voices

Students have been hired to conduct the in-class video activities. They will also play a role with the FIG faculty in identifying promising instructional and counseling activities for improving students’ Academic Habits of Mind.

Team Timeline/Calendar – Spring 09 & Summer 09

Feb 09 – Instructional faculty assess students metacognitive functioning and Academic Habits of Mind using the self-assessment inventories.

Feb – April 09 – FIG meets biweekly to examine student work and videotapes, collaborate on lesson plan, and develop a metacognition rubric.

March 09 – Student Co-investigators conduct classroom video activity in three classrooms.

March 09 – Student Co-investigators videotape Counselor led focus groups.

April 09 – FIG conducts Lesson Study in ENGL 52.

May 09 – Instructional faculty assess students metacognitive functioning and Academic Habits of Mind using the self-assessment inventories.

May 09 – End of the Semester Retreat to bring faculty and student investigators together for dialog and celebration.

June 09 – FIN Summer Institute

June – Aug 09 – Final editing of videos

Aug 09 – Analysis of the institutional research student performance data