INQUIRING MINDS: Faculty Inquiry in Basic Skills Contexts
This 15 minute film offers an introduction to the iterative steps that underlie effective Faculty Inquiry. The film lays out four steps:
1. What Do We See?
2. How Can We See It Better?
3. How Can We Share It With Others?
4. Now That We See It, What Can We Do About It?
INQUIRING MINDS is designed as a resource for those who are engaged in Faculty Inquiry, and for those who would like to gain a better understanding of its promise.
The creation of INQUIRING MINDS was generously supported by:
SPECC (Strengthening Pre-collegiate Education in Community Colleges), a joint project of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
LA Trade Revised Inquiry Plan
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 23rd – May 22nd (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.
East LA Revised Inquiry Plan
Summary
East Los Angeles College’s English department is searching for sound strategies to accelerate student progress and minimize the time students spend in layers of on-ramp remedial courses. A team of reading instructors will conduct an in-depth analysis into a developmental reading course four levels below transfer. Their inquiry plan includes analysis of diagnostic data for individual students, videotaped class sessions, lesson plans, classroom assessment results, pass/fail distributions, student reading logs, and such curriculum variables as use of stories vs. textbook reading samples, voluntary or assigned reading, and tutor-supported vs. self-contained classrooms. Their central question: How can reading progress be accelerated in ways that are both efficient and cost-effective?
Team Leader:
Dr. John C. Rude / Associate Dean of Resource Development
323-267-3724 Fax: 323-260-8197
Rudejc@elac.edu
Team Members:
- Rhonda Wiley / Reading
- Gannon Daniels / English
- Gia Barilari / Reading
- Nathan Warner / ESL
- Marina Rodriguez / Reading
- Sharon Allerson
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)
In Spring term 2009 we will focus on two Reading 20 classes-the very lowest rung on the developmental “ladder,” roughly 4 levels before Freshman English. In a “discovery” process, we’re collecting various kinds of data: two standardized pre-and-post reading tests (to determine grade-level reading ability), a WestED student reading survey (to determine reading behaviors and backgrounds), unit tests from the textbook used in both classes, student journals, video of a key lesson, and video of student interviews.
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?
Reading is a complex internal process that engages intellectual capacities in different ways. We can measure progress in some dimensions-but they may not be the most important measures, especially at the “semi-literate” stage of Reading 20 students (4th to 8th grade reading skill). What factors caused them to arrive, as adults, with an impoverished vocabulary, little exposure to literature, and few opportunities or stimuli for reading? We may have “hunches” and assumptions about low-level readers, but we must begin our inquiry by asking the students to tell us what has impeded their progress, and then reality-test these assumptions and findings with more refined questions.
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 target two Reading 20 classes because only three sections are being taught by team members in the current term-involving only two teachers. The classes are large (40-50 students each, with a broad range of abilities). Collecting information across numerous variables from individual students will enable us to focus our inquiry, before examining a greater number of classes, or looking at reading dynamics in other courses. We will conduct and videotape interviews during breaks (or after) each class; students’ work and academic schedules preclude any other arrangement.
4) When will you analyze this data? (e.g. mid-semester team retreat, after lesson-study session, at the end of the semester; )
We have not scheduled a mid-semester retreat, but will wait until the end of Spring term (June 8, 2009) after pre- and post data have been collected. Because the task of assembling data may take several weeks, we will be unable to meet and analyze our data until just before the FIN summer retreat (June 26-28).
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?)
Questions about reading instruction from the original proposal offer a framework for analysis: “Will the most effective method prove to be repetitive assignments, or increasing the amount of time reading? Will the best teaching approaches include de-construction of reading tasks, and increased awareness of meta-cognitive processes (building enthusiasm, promoting inquiry, developing discipline)? Does the cultural relevance of assigned texts matter? Can students be organized into groups that provide feedback and model effective reading? Does the scaffolding built into the current course outline help or hinder learning?” At this point, we are deliberately avoiding a quasi-experimental approach which contrasts “subject” students with “non-subject” students. We need to tease out the variables to focus on our central question: How can reading progress be accelerated in ways that are both efficient and cost-effective? Part of our inquiry focuses on effective practices at other institutions; from this, we expect a suitable research model to emerge.
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?
So far, we have coalesced around the logistics of testing and videotaping: i.e. which tests to use, which interview questions to ask, when and where to videotape, how to solicit student views, etc. We need to develop a more coherent rationale for our inquiry, and could use coaching on the research paradigm.
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.
“Finding the Main Idea” – a lesson taught about one-third through the 16-week term. Components of the lesson include distinguishing between main topics and sub-topics, understanding the general-to-specific continuum, and locating specific summary sentences that express the main idea.
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?
Progress in reading is seldom continuous; it is a series of ascents and descents which integrate the reader’s experience with text on a page. Students gradually acquire analytical habits that allow them to see “big picture” patterns, then assemble details beneath a broad concept. They must repeat this skill at various levels of text (paragraph, section, chapter, story) and retain a sequence of “main ideas” in their memories in order to comprehend the author’s primary point. Introducing the “main idea” as a habit or skill can liberate students from textual constraints, and allows them to concentrate on meaning and critical thought. Understanding Main Ideas is a crucial step in acquiring academic literacy.
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).
Two members of the team collaboratively developed a lesson plan for Main Ideas, and all five shared and discussed the lesson matrix. Two team members have consented to be observed on video during the presentation (which may take 2-3 hour-long sessions). All team members will view and comment on the lesson, then debrief the analysis as a group.
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)?
Student understanding will be measured in pre-and-post administration of a textbook “mastery test” that asks students to identify Main Ideas of several paragraphs. A sample of students will also be interviewed (and recorded) to present their views on the lesson. Finally, we will compare lesson-specific scores with individual progress in comprehension (standardized test), reading behaviors (survey) and course outcomes (final grades).
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?
At the moment we’re absorbed with logistics of test selection, scheduling videotaping sessions, selecting students for interviews, etc. We don’t know whether both classes will be taught in roughly the same way, with similar content and outcomes. Two classes is a too-small sample for drawing general conclusions; therefore, we need a specific rubric or theory to decide what the significance of similarities or differences might be.
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 withdrawl)? 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 request longitudinal data from our IR office addressing all the above variables (grades, demographics, retention and persistence) covering ALL sections of Reading 20 over the past 4 full-length semesters. (Winter and Summer terms are compressed into 5 weeks, offered in a format not relevant for analysis of accelerated progress.) This provides baseline data for the more intensive analysis of two Reading 20 sections during the current term.
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?
Grades are relatively easy to analyze, because Reading 20 is offered as a Credit/No-Credit (Pass/Fail) course. Variations in the percent of No-Credit scores among teachers might be of interest, although we won’t have time to correlate this data with differences in teaching styles. We want to know the subsequent decisions of No-Credit students-do they repeat Reading 20? Do they circumvent pre-requisites and advance to the next level? Do they disappear from college rolls, or do they stay in school, avoiding English courses? Ethnicity and gender are also relevant at East LA, as well as language background (native English, native Spanish, native Chinese). Somehow, data should inform us whether our curriculum is part of the problem: i.e. too many levels, not enough integration between reading and writing, or more robust reading interventions at earlier (lower) reading levels.
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?
To be honest, we want to postpone the macro-level questions until we have a grip on the student and classroom variables. Some data-gathering is essential, but we may have to defer analysis until later in the summer. Is this wise?
D. Video Footage
We are asking each team to collect at least 10 hours of video footage in the Spring semester.
1) Beyond plans detailed above, please describe any additional footage you intend to gather.
No plans yet, but some ideas are likely to emerge. We’re also open to suggestions.
2) How will this footage inform the central questions of your Inquiry?
Three “streams” of video footage will help us understand the dynamics of reading progress: long and varied clips of classroom instruction, interviews with students, and interviews with instructors. We feel sure we will discover counter-intuitive information, challenging our assumptions about all three groups. We don’t know whether “clues” about how to accelerate reading will emerge from this large body of evidence. A fourth focus of our videotaping might include visits to other colleges, to gain an understanding of their effective practices in reading instruction. The “storyline” for this evidence-gathering is likely to become clearer when we edit the footage.
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?
We look forward to more resources and receiving instructions for video editing.
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).
Our efforts to hire student cameramen have been unsuccessful. One of our team members recruited three upper-level students who had completed Reading 20 to serve as tutors. They have not been deployed yet, due to lack of clarity about the tutoring situation in each class. We will use instructors for camerawork, and we’ll work as a team to complete the editing. The bulk of “student voice” data will come from the 8-10 students we’re planning to interview. Later in the project, it’s possible that several students may be identified who will help the project, both as workers and informants.
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.
Milestones in East LA College Inquiry (Spring, 2009):
Feb. 12 – Team planning meeting
Feb. 17-24 Pre-Tests: DRP, RFU and student surveys
Mar. 11-16 Begin videotaping of Main Idea lessons
Mar. 19 Videographers meet, fine-tune interview process
Mar 23-28 Distribute prompts for metacognitive writing
Apr. 13 Complete videotaping & first student interviews
Apr. 14 Collect college data on all Reading 20 classes
Apr. 16 Team meeting – review of progress to date
May 4-22 Second round of student interviews
June 1-10 Compile raw footage & story-board for video editing
June 1-7 Post-Tests: DRP, RFU
June 8-10 Compile, analyze data from pre- and post-tests
June 10 Half-day retreat: analyze data, write video story-line
June 11-25 Prepare Final-Cut of video, burn DVDs
June 26-28 FIN conference
College of Siskiyous Revised Inquiry Plan
revised inquiry plan 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)
Student interviews, self-reflections, and videotaped problem-solving; students participating in classroom activities or other activities, such as sports, possibly dramatizations of classroom activities.
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?
It will help the instructor of the Leadership Training class define what he needs to know about his students, and what information and resources will help the students become more engaged in the class and more aware of decision-making and goal-setting processes.
In March, students will be interviewed during or after three different classes, in 1) Social Psychology, 2) Intermediate Algebra, and 3) Leadership Training. Interviews may also include other locations such as residence halls, and the campus at large; data will also be collected in the form of surveys, interviews, discussions, and written assignments.
4) When will you analyze this data? (e.g. mid-semester team retreat, after lesson-study session, at the end of the semester;)
A mid-semester team retreat will analyze footage with issues debated by students from three classes, helping the instructor of the Leadership Training class define what changes he wants to make to his instructional practice, i.e. what additional information, methods, and resources need to be presented so students become more engaged and articulate better what helps them succeed.
5) How will you analyze the data? (e.g. analyzing student work with a rubric or analytic
rame 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?)
Define levels of engagement and motivation as demonstrated by students in the Leadership Training class and correlate survey responses with grades and attendance records.
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?
What would help Les understand better what his students need to become more engaged and motivated?
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.
A Leadership Training lesson will focus on ways to overcome obstacles to college success in which students will dialog with data on intrinsic motivation presented by students from a Social Psychology class and with testimonials by students from an Intermediate Algebra class.
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?
After the lecture/discussion, students will write down what they observed about intrinsic/extrinsic motivation in the Math students, along with any new discoveries they have made on their own motivation levels.
It will inform and guide the inquiry into what helps students become more intrinsically motivated.
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).
The team will decide on a timeline and protocol in March that will allow the videographer to tape a presentation by Social Psychology students in which they discuss their findings on intrinsic motivation, and student videographers to interview and tape students from an Intermediate Algebra class on their experiences and discoveries in their current and previous Math classes.
The team will also work with the instructor of the Leadership Training class who is preparing to teach a unit on decision-making processes and intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, Students will reflect on what they have viewed, both during class and following class, with a written assignment; members of the FIN team will observe students during the lesson and analyze footage and student work during the debrief.
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)?
The observers will focus on questions asked, issues brought up, general group dynamics, and how students understood the lesson, as reported in their follow-up assignment.
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?
Specific methods to elicit student reactions and define student learning on intrinsic
vs. extrinsic motivation.
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.)
The focus will be on certain questions asked in the CCSSE and/or SENSE, possibly followed by a future iteration of the CCSSE that could correlate the GUID 10 class on Leadership Training with survey responses.
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?
How do findings by the instructor of the Leadership Training class add to the debate on how to help students become more intrinsically motivated? What other factors, including the rural culture, need to be examined? Do faculty and student support services need to include a different perspective on students? Does the mission of the college need to reflect the students’ perspectives more?
Who else to engage on campus, including the new president’s visioning committee and Student Services.
D. Video Footage
We are asking each team to collect at least 10 hours of video footage in the Spring semester.
1) Beyond plans detailed above, please describe any additional footage you intend to gather.
Students who will be videotaped while presenting findings, dialoguing with footage, and reflecting on their own experiences, may be followed into other classes or captured during extra-curricular activities. Given the fact that the video has been a key element from the inception of the COS project, there may be close to 50 hours of video filmed.
2) How will this footage inform the central questions of your Inquiry?
It will answer questions on how the college give students a voice and support their developing identity, and how instructors can improve their ability to reach students in the classroom and beyond.
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?
What additional components should be included in the COS inquiry, as suggested by other colleges?
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).
Student videographers will tape and review data and be given an opportunity to interpret and expand upon the data.
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.
Early March:
Defining a protocol for/videotaping of Social Psychology class presentation and interviews with Math students, and possibly student athletes.
Spring Break mid March:
Brainstorming with Les Courtemanche on what to include in Leadership Training lesson, including a written assignment.
Early April:
Taping Leadership Training lesson and debrief.
Mid/End April:
Presenting footage to all other team members and the FIN coach; brainstorming on research data needed and which students to showcase in other activities.
End April/early May:
Mark, Les, Renata, and other FIN team members view footage and help Mark define focus of initial video and/or guide subsequent research and inquiry activities.
About FIN
The Faculty Inquiry Network’s (FIN) purpose is to support professional development which includes: conducting faculty inquiry; revisiting basic skills assumptions; interpreting and integrating data; accessing student voices; developing students as co-inquirers; making visible; using technology for teaching and learning; creating and supporting new initiatives, curriculum and program development; constructing educational tools using digital media; and hosting dialogue around student and faculty learning.
Recent Post
-
FIN Conference Celebration March 4-5, 2011
by Monique Williams with No Comments
Registration for the conference is open, please register asap http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CQ2NQTQ. Conference registration cost is $50.00 for no... -
Student Run Conference Supported by FIN
by Monique Williams with No Comments
I hope that all of you can attend the Umoja VI student run conference that is being assisted by FIN. The students have come up with many creative appr... -
Parachutes and Ladders X: Celebrating Student Engagement Save the Date for Spring 2011
by Jamie Chandler with No Comments
-
FIN goes to Student Success 2010
by Jamie Chandler with No Comments
Click here to view:
FIN Leadership's Pre Conference Session, Exploring Inquiry: Ideas and Innovations from the Faculty Inquiry Network
Click here ... -
Exploring Routines for Instruction
by Jan Connal with No Comments
Exploring Routines for Instruction
-
Train-the-trainer: Industry2Classroom Teacher Preperation Pipeline
by Jamie Chandler with No Comments
One thing great teachers have in common, no matter what they teach, is skill. They make accommodating 30 or more different learning styles and mul...