Conclusions
SIGNIFICANCE
Through this experience, I have learned about being more reflective about my own practice. I have learned to think more deeply about the way I am presenting my material, not just the material itself. Thoroughly considering how my audience will receive and interpret the information I am presenting is integral to this process. Through examining my data from phase 1 and triangulating it, I realized that my students tended toward visual learning, so I changed my pedagogy to reflect this. I started digging deeper into the material I needed to teach and finding ways to convey it beyond surface level explanations. I spent a lot of time thinking about my wording and my energy as I present; how those subtle things can affect the way I come across to my students. One big thing I am taking forward from the whole AR process is the repeated examination and adaptation of my own practice to improve it. Maybe it won’t be as formal as this AR process, but I will keep collecting data, triangulating it, analyzing it and using the findings to make myself a better teacher. Also, I have found that having a mutual trust with one’s students is key to successfully implementing any changes or implementations one wishes to effect. If your students trust you, they are more likely to buy into what you are asking of them. My students at the continuation school trusted me, and it shows in the results. Their confidence increased measurably from the first test I gave that was aof my own design to the last test I gave. I know this because the first test was quite easy, and 77% of the students got at least a B. The last test was the most difficult they had taken, and 87.5% of the students got at least a B. On the last feedback form I gave, I asked the students whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement that the tests, worksheets, and such had been at the right level. 100% of the students agreed, with one student even saying they might have been too easy! This showed me that I had increased my ability to read my audience and find their ZPD, which gives me confidence for my future in teaching. However, one area I know that I struggle is with engagement. One supposition I have is that the last test’s scores were higher partially as a result of the problems being real world problems. The students were able to invest in the problems because they saw their lives in the problems and so there was more motivation to learn and apply the math skills. I feel like if I had done that throughout our unit on area, all of the students would have done better. Going forward into my future teaching, I will be more sensitive to the community in which I am teaching and to the lives of my students with regards to how I incorporate their experiences into my teaching. In terms of academic vocabulary, I learned that it is important to ascertain and consider what kind of learners you are teaching; I was working with more visual learners so I started using pictures and diagrams with my explanations, putting them on tests, and encouraging my students to use them in their problem solving.
LIMITATIONS
The first and most obvious limitation of this study, and of AR in general is that I am both observer and practitioner. This is a problem because I am biased toward myself, so in writing up my research I may not always be as objective in my analysis as I need to be. I worked to counter this bias in conducting my research by not being the only set of eyes to look at my data. In concert with my content expert, I analyzed the data. However, the coding process was done by me alone. I went through my data and teased out the trends and patterns important to my questions. Another limitation that was my own was engagement. As I said above, I should have made more effort to relate everything to the real world, not just selective bits where it was easier. If you try hard enough, you can do it with most anything in math. I needed to remember that. Also, the results of this study are most relevant to and meaningful for the group of students who participated in the study. Taken as one piece of the mosaic with other similar studies, larger conclusions can be made. But, I had to be very cautious in making my conclusions so as not to fall into unwarranted generalities. A further weakness of this study, somewhat necessitated by the structure of the program, is the briefness of the phases and the sample size. Because the phases were so short, it was hard to chart realistic effects or get a statistically robust progression; also, the small sample size means that it is difficult to come up with tests of statistical significance. Ahh, but this is not strictly a scientific study! All the better to counter this weakness. Because many of my codes for my data are categorical in nature, statistical significance is not necessarily the gold standard. Lurking variables are a big factor in this study because I cannot necessarily draw a straight line from cause to effect in terms of my lessons and student performance. There are things such as student motivation and their lives outside of my classroom to consider. I was able to isolate my variables as much as possible by testing each student against themselves on the same piece of assessment. For instance, the final test of the year had half of the problems with pictures and half without in order to measure the effect of the picture on student performance. In doing my analysis I looked at each problem and examined the trends in picture use and evidence of academic vocabulary.
REFLECTION
At the beginning of this research project, there was a divide between the students’ comprehension and my explanations. I wasn’t explaining things in a way conducive to students’ retention of concepts and information. Through gaining experience working with the students and the self reflection necessitated by this process, I figured out better ways to explain and the students started trusting me more. I found that the iterative nature of this process helped me grow as a teacher because it prevented me from falling into a sense of complacency. Because I was regularly analyzing and adjusting, I didn’t habituate to a faulty way of teaching. I was able to find a way to make it work. As the project wore on, the students accepted me more and wanted to do well for me. Toward the end of my time there, one of my students said to me “I hope you do become a teacher.” The same student on the last day encouraged his fellows to give me a good last day. I really appreciate the AR process because it actually feels pretty organic to the overall process of teaching. I feel like this is what I had been doing all along, but less formally so, in my fall student teaching placement and other experiences I have had. I also feel that I have seen other teachers engaging in the same recursive reflection process and make improvements because of it. I saw personal growth in my students as well. They were very proud of themselves when they did well and were motivated to repeat the experience; I also gave them praise. I saw more confidence in them too.
Through this experience, I have learned about being more reflective about my own practice. I have learned to think more deeply about the way I am presenting my material, not just the material itself. Thoroughly considering how my audience will receive and interpret the information I am presenting is integral to this process. Through examining my data from phase 1 and triangulating it, I realized that my students tended toward visual learning, so I changed my pedagogy to reflect this. I started digging deeper into the material I needed to teach and finding ways to convey it beyond surface level explanations. I spent a lot of time thinking about my wording and my energy as I present; how those subtle things can affect the way I come across to my students. One big thing I am taking forward from the whole AR process is the repeated examination and adaptation of my own practice to improve it. Maybe it won’t be as formal as this AR process, but I will keep collecting data, triangulating it, analyzing it and using the findings to make myself a better teacher. Also, I have found that having a mutual trust with one’s students is key to successfully implementing any changes or implementations one wishes to effect. If your students trust you, they are more likely to buy into what you are asking of them. My students at the continuation school trusted me, and it shows in the results. Their confidence increased measurably from the first test I gave that was aof my own design to the last test I gave. I know this because the first test was quite easy, and 77% of the students got at least a B. The last test was the most difficult they had taken, and 87.5% of the students got at least a B. On the last feedback form I gave, I asked the students whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement that the tests, worksheets, and such had been at the right level. 100% of the students agreed, with one student even saying they might have been too easy! This showed me that I had increased my ability to read my audience and find their ZPD, which gives me confidence for my future in teaching. However, one area I know that I struggle is with engagement. One supposition I have is that the last test’s scores were higher partially as a result of the problems being real world problems. The students were able to invest in the problems because they saw their lives in the problems and so there was more motivation to learn and apply the math skills. I feel like if I had done that throughout our unit on area, all of the students would have done better. Going forward into my future teaching, I will be more sensitive to the community in which I am teaching and to the lives of my students with regards to how I incorporate their experiences into my teaching. In terms of academic vocabulary, I learned that it is important to ascertain and consider what kind of learners you are teaching; I was working with more visual learners so I started using pictures and diagrams with my explanations, putting them on tests, and encouraging my students to use them in their problem solving.
LIMITATIONS
The first and most obvious limitation of this study, and of AR in general is that I am both observer and practitioner. This is a problem because I am biased toward myself, so in writing up my research I may not always be as objective in my analysis as I need to be. I worked to counter this bias in conducting my research by not being the only set of eyes to look at my data. In concert with my content expert, I analyzed the data. However, the coding process was done by me alone. I went through my data and teased out the trends and patterns important to my questions. Another limitation that was my own was engagement. As I said above, I should have made more effort to relate everything to the real world, not just selective bits where it was easier. If you try hard enough, you can do it with most anything in math. I needed to remember that. Also, the results of this study are most relevant to and meaningful for the group of students who participated in the study. Taken as one piece of the mosaic with other similar studies, larger conclusions can be made. But, I had to be very cautious in making my conclusions so as not to fall into unwarranted generalities. A further weakness of this study, somewhat necessitated by the structure of the program, is the briefness of the phases and the sample size. Because the phases were so short, it was hard to chart realistic effects or get a statistically robust progression; also, the small sample size means that it is difficult to come up with tests of statistical significance. Ahh, but this is not strictly a scientific study! All the better to counter this weakness. Because many of my codes for my data are categorical in nature, statistical significance is not necessarily the gold standard. Lurking variables are a big factor in this study because I cannot necessarily draw a straight line from cause to effect in terms of my lessons and student performance. There are things such as student motivation and their lives outside of my classroom to consider. I was able to isolate my variables as much as possible by testing each student against themselves on the same piece of assessment. For instance, the final test of the year had half of the problems with pictures and half without in order to measure the effect of the picture on student performance. In doing my analysis I looked at each problem and examined the trends in picture use and evidence of academic vocabulary.
REFLECTION
At the beginning of this research project, there was a divide between the students’ comprehension and my explanations. I wasn’t explaining things in a way conducive to students’ retention of concepts and information. Through gaining experience working with the students and the self reflection necessitated by this process, I figured out better ways to explain and the students started trusting me more. I found that the iterative nature of this process helped me grow as a teacher because it prevented me from falling into a sense of complacency. Because I was regularly analyzing and adjusting, I didn’t habituate to a faulty way of teaching. I was able to find a way to make it work. As the project wore on, the students accepted me more and wanted to do well for me. Toward the end of my time there, one of my students said to me “I hope you do become a teacher.” The same student on the last day encouraged his fellows to give me a good last day. I really appreciate the AR process because it actually feels pretty organic to the overall process of teaching. I feel like this is what I had been doing all along, but less formally so, in my fall student teaching placement and other experiences I have had. I also feel that I have seen other teachers engaging in the same recursive reflection process and make improvements because of it. I saw personal growth in my students as well. They were very proud of themselves when they did well and were motivated to repeat the experience; I also gave them praise. I saw more confidence in them too.