Potential Action Research Challenges and Their Solutions

Specific challenges I foresee in implementing my action research study:

• Administrator support 
• Perceived time constraints 
• “I would, but last time...” or “I would but, the students...” or “I would but, the network...” or “I would, but...” General negativity from a vocal few. 
• Digital “tourists” 
• “Back in my day...” types 
• People not knowing my role 
• People being unaware of the initiative 
• Not enough technology available to support initiative 

I intend to address these challenges by following Malcolm Gladwell’s suggestions for fostering epidemic behavior in “The Tipping Point.”

“Three characteristics--one, contagiousness; two, the fact that little causes can have big effects; and three, that change happens not gradually but at one dramatic moment--are the same principles that define how measles moves through a grade school classroom or the flu attacks every winter” (Gladwell, 2002).

Social epidemics are “driven by the efforts of a handful of exceptional people... It’s things like how sociable they are, or how energetic or knowledgeable or influential among their peers” that empower these people to start an epidemic.(Gladwell (2002).

Gladwell identifies three critical types of influential people. “In a social epidemic, Mavens are data banks. They provide the message. Connectors are social glue: they spread it. But there is also a select group of people--Salesman--with the skills to persuade us when we are unconvinced of what we are hearing” (Gladwell, 2002).

It will be my job to make sure that my message (I am here to help you integrate technology, and this is for real. You can trust me.) is “sticky” by getting it to the “mavens,” “connectors,” and “salesmen” on campus.

For now I do not intend to put much direct effort into converting the technophobes and obstreperous. Ideally, they will get caught up in the epidemic I create.

As for the availability of technology, the final challenge on my list, I believe that teacher demand as a result of my technology epidemic will take care of it.

References

Gladwell, M. (2002). The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a BIg Difference (Kindle Edition). New York: Little, Brown and Company.

Action Plan

Goal 
NBHS will be rated “Target” in all key areas of the Texas Campus STaR Chart by May 2015.

Objective/Topic 
Help teachers at NBHS meet “advanced” in the key areas of “Teaching and Learning” and “Educator Preparation and Development” on the 2010-2011 Texas Campus STaR Chart.

Action One 
Monthly professional development centered around one aspect of 21st Century Instruction in the STaR Chart with follow-up classroom visits to support implementation.

Persons responsible
Laura Hearnsberger
Teachers

Timeline
Throughout year 
Monthly, based on participants’ schedules

Resources 
Computer lab

Action Two 
Volunteer inquiry-oriented teacher learning communities, with goal of producing future technology mentors

Persons responsible
Laura Hearnsberger
Teachers

Timeline
Throughout year
August during teacher in-service
First Tuesday of each month thereafter
Classroom visits throughout month

Resources
Computer lab 
Promotion

Action Three 
Robust technology Web site with FAQ, anytime access to help, discussion board, STaR Chart breakdown, tips, forms for input, how-to’s, information from monthly professional development

Persons responsible
Laura Hearnsberger
Other Technology Curriculum Integration Specialists

Timeline
Content updated at least weekly throughout year 
Discussion board changes constantly with new teacher posts

Resources
Computer lab 
Promotion
NCTE Ning, as example

Evaluation 
*Level I, participants’ reactions: Interviews/discussion board
*Level II, participants’ learning: discussion/board/surveys
*Level III, organizational support and change: surveys
*Level IV, participants’ use of new knowledge and skills: lesson plans/discussion board/surveys/classroom visits
*Level V, student learning outcomes: artifacts/classroom visits/pictures/videos/benchmarks
Summative: 2011 STaR Chart Results (“District and Campus,” 2003).

*“Critical levels of professional development evaluation” are formative assessments to guide activities (Guskey, 1998).

References 
Dana, N.F. (2009). Leading with Passion and Knowledge: The Principal as Action Researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Education Service Center, Region XV. (2003). District and campus planning and decision making (PowerPoint).

Guskey, T.R. (1998). “The age of our accountability.” Journal of Staff Development, 19(4).

Harris, S., Edmonson, S., & Combs, J. (2010). Examining What We Do to Improve Our Schools: 8 Steps from Analysis to Action. Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education, Inc.

Hearnsberger, L.M. (2009, September). On blogging well [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://onbloggingwell.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html

Pitler, H. (2005). McREL technology initiative: The development of a technology intervention program final report (Contract Number ED-01-CO-0006). Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning. (ERIC Document Reporduction Service No. ED486685) Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED486685.pdf

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E.R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. Denver, CO: McREL.

Schlecty, P.C. (2001). Inventing Better Schools: An Action Plan for Educational Reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Texas Education Agency, Instructional Materials and Educational Technology Division. (2009). School technology and readiness: a teacher tool for planning and self-assessing aligned with the long-range plan for technology, 2006-2010.Austin, TX: Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/starchart

Action Research Topic

As a teacher with daily access to a computer lab and former grade school student who thrived during challenge-based activities, and current graduate student in educational technology, I have made my class a model of constructivism and 21st century instruction. I encourage students to explore new ideas, provide them with technology that they often know better than I do (firewire, digital video cameras, Photoshop), and let them explore a topic with my help. Since I am the yearbook advisor, these practices come with the territory, but I have expanded them into my English I and Journalism I classes.

I have also seen student technology use encouraged by some of my colleagues teaching core courses: a physics teacher maintains a database of student-created problem solving videos; a government teacher uses PowerPoint to create flashcards that are viewable on a smart-phone; English teachers often require a multi-media presentation of research findings by their students. But these “pockets of innovation” (Henderson, personal conversation) don’t become an instructional habit for all lessons or for all teachers. When I researched NBHS performance on the Texas Campus STaR Chart for EDLD5306, I discovered that no teacher at New Braunfels High School operates at the target level. Our rating in the “Teaching and Learning” subcategory went from “acceptable” to “developing” during school year 2008-2009 and we only rate as “advanced” in one category: Infrastructure. (The other two categories are “Educator Preparation” and “Administration & Support” (Hearnsberger, 2009).

These reasons had led me to the topic I posted on July 24: "How can I alter the culture and practice of NBHS technology staff development to make initiatives 'sticky'?" But as I looked for resources and reviewed lectures, notes, and readings from previous classes, I realized that I wasn't asking the right question. Technology is already "sticky." There has even already been a plan put in place by the State of Texas. So I changed my topic again, and it fits this time. I practically haven't stopped working since it came to me yesterday afternoon.

How can I Help teachers at NBHS meet “advanced” in the key areas of “Teaching and Learning” and “Educator Preparation and Development” on the 2010-2011 Texas Campus STaR Chart.

Finalized Research Topic (as of now)

How can I alter the culture and practice of NBHS technology staff development to make initiatives "sticky"?

Three Possible Action Research Topics

I have narrowed it down to three possible topics, but I am open to change:

• investigate the culture and practice of staff development and its relationship to the "stickiness" of technology initiatives at NBHS (link to similar study: http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED486685.pdf)
• find the best mode for implementing inquiry-oriented teacher learning communities centered around 21st century instruction at NBHS (related *articles attached)
• make collaborating on instruction, via an online discussion board, a "habit of mind" for NBHS teachers (link to example: http://ncte2008.ning.com/forum/topic/list)

Let me know what you think.

*attached articles:
McTighe, J. "Making the most of professional learning communities." Learning Principal. 3.8 (2008): Print.

Wiliam, D. "Changing classroom practice." Educational Leadership. (2008): Print.

Potential Action Research Topics

The purpose of my proposed action research is to identify how best to implement a shift to 21st century instruction at New Braunfels High School. Specifically, I will investigate the culture and practice of staff development and its relationship to the “stickiness” of technology initiatives.

With the results, I hope to create and implement a “comprehensive, research-based model of professional development that helps teachers integrate technology into their classroom instruction, and ultimately, helps students achieve challenging content standards” (Pitler, 2005).

References

Pitler, H. (2005). McREL technology initiative: The development of a technology intervention program final report (Contract Number ED-01-CO-0006). Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning. (ERIC Document Reporduction Service No. ED486685) Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED486685.pdf.

Inquiry-Oriented Learning Communities

What I Have Learned About Action Research

I became interested in action research projects, specifically ones implemented as part of a teacher learning community, during EDLD5333: Leadership for Accountability. The concept, a sidebar to an article by Jay McTighe, was only briefly mentioned, but it seemed like a great way to get everyone at school invested in meaningful reform. I even incorporated it into the professional development I created for my next class, EDLD5368: Instructional Design. It can be seen here (e-mail: nbisdtech@gmail.com, password: unicorn).

Until reading the first chapter of the Dana text, I had not considered that action research can "slow down the harried pace" in a workday (2009). This means that it is a time utilizer, not waster. This is an important benefit, since I intend to recruit teachers into learning communities this fall as part of my new position as Technology Curriculum Integration Specialist, and anticipate hesitance for fear of wasting time.

How I Will Be Able to Use It

My primary goal in my new position is to facilitate a shift toward 21st century instruction distrcit-wide, not just creating small "pockets of innovation" (Maria Henderson, Apple Education Development Executive, personal communication) that go away when a teacher switches schools or lacks support.

To that end, I will will implement inquiry-oriented learning communities this fall, with teachers pondering, researching, and meeting the 21st century needs of our students. I am basing my communities on the model discussed by Dylan Wiliam in "Changing Classroom Practice." He suggests planning "for the teacher learning community to run for at least two years," "start[ing] with volunteers," meeting "monthly for at least 75 minutes," aiming "for a group size of 8-10," trying "to group teachers with similar assignments," establishing "building-based groups," requiring participants "to make detailed, modest, individual action plans," and having "a facilitator, but not a guru" (2009).

Wiliam's model will work perfectly with inquiry-oriented learning communities. Since there is no guru in the room, teachers will work together to generate ideas, conduct research, and make plans. I also intend to have teachers share their progress on the district technology Web site, so others' can learn from their successes and failures.

Technology implementation has been stagnant at the high school for years (see "Teaching and Learning" post), and I hope that action research and my continuous support will help teachers embrace the possibilities of the constructivism and challenge-based learning that comprises 21st century instruction.

How Educational Leaders Might Use It

Education leaders should use action research to foster a culture of continuous learning at their schools.

Whether principals are instituting this model in their own buildings or replicating this model with groups of other principals to serve as role models for their teachers back in their own buildings, the success of inquiry-oriented learning community work within a school is directly tied to how aware and connected principals are to the PLC work unfolding in their buildings (Dana, 2009).

References
Dana, N.F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

McTighe, J. (2008). Making the most of professional learning communities. The Learning Principal, 3(8), 7.

Wiliam, D. (2008). Changing classroom practice. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 36-42.