Jeff Quisenberry's Action Research Blog
Friday, August 26, 2011
1st week back to School and 1st week of School and Comunity Relations Class
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Time to Reflect
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Consensus, Challenges and Sustaining Improvement
Thursday, July 28, 2011
My First Action Research Plan
Action Research Plan | ||||
Goal: We, the math teachers of White Deer High School, will adapt our classroom practices to raise the levels of student engagement to facilitate deeper understanding and learning in order to improve our 9th grade students' achievement on the Algebra I End Of Course Exam / State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) | ||||
Action Steps(s): | Person(s) Responsible: | Timeline: Start/End | Needed Resources | Evaluation |
Create a highly engaging classroom through specific steps addressed in The Highly Engaged Classroom by Robert J. Marzano and participatory activities in the Region 16 Collaborative for Excellence in Mathematics Teaching (R16CEMT). | Jeff Quisenberry and Jessica Selman (math teachers of White Deer High School). | August 23, 2011 through May 29, 2012 | The Highly Engaged Classroom. Membership in R16CEMT, which allows access to both a network of educators and shared resource material. | Administrative walk through and evaluations, student interviews, videos of classroom daily activities and teacher reflective journal. |
We will pursue continuation of our professional development and improvement of our knowledge and skills.
| Jeff Quisenberry and Jessica Selman | August 23, 2011 through May 29, 2012. | Internet capability to research "what are other schools doing or have they done when facing similar challenges?" Selected trainings at our regional service center designed to address how we as teachers can impact our students to meet the standards by the State of Texas. Share and learn through our professional network of teachers developed in R16CEMT. | We will collaborate to share both successes and struggles as well as to create a mutually agreed upon plan on what we can do to positively impact our students. The ultimate success of all of these activities will be seen through our students' performance on the End Of Course Exams. |
Four benchmark tests will be given, one at conclusion of each of the first four 6 weeks, which will address the Supporting and Readiness Standards in a format that will be similar to what is expected on the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness Test.
| Jeff Quisenberry, Jessica Selman and Darla Forney (principal of White Deer High School). | September 28, 2011. November 2, 2011. January 4, 2012. February 29, 2012. | Materials taken from Algebra I EOC Preparedness Training provided by the Region 16 Education Service Center. Materials taken from R16CEMT. Test generator through Data Management software for Assessment and Curriculum (DMAC) in Texas schools. | A score of 70% or higher will be deemed to "meet the standard." The goal is to have 100% of all students meet the standard. Individual results will allow us to differentiate and address student individual needs. Objectives with a low rate of student success Demonstrate an area for class remediation. |
We will compare qualitative data from our evaluation of our success in creating highly engaging classrooms to the quantitative data on our students' success on our benchmark tests | Jeff Quisenberry, Jessica Selman and Darla Forney. | September 29, 2011 through March 7, 2012. | Complete collection of administrative evaluative material as well as student interviews, classroom videos and teacher journals and completed lesson plans. | Objectives on which our students performed: do the instructional periods that we taught these knowledge and skills correspond to time periods where we feel that we created highly engaging classrooms and learning experiences? Is the inverse true as well? Does the time periods when we taught objectives our students did not perform well on coincide with times when we struggled with creating engagement? |
After we return from Spring Break we want to look for a deeper understanding of how are we affecting our students? Are we, through our instruction creating or not addressing achievement gaps. We want to create a plan that will answer "In the next 6 Weeks what are we, as the teachers, going to do address these issues?" | Jeff Quisenberry, Jessica Selman and Darla Forney. | March 19, 2012 – March 23, 2012. | DMAC report from our previous 4 benchmarks with disaggregated data by student vs. objective, AEIS groups vs. objective and entire class vs. objective. Completed lesson plans. List of "What do We Think We Have Done Best." | We will identify what knowledge and skills our students have struggled to master. We will look at data concerning individuals, sub- populations groups and whole group. We will create a six weeks plan of not only what we will teach but how will we teach it. We will use for templates the lessons that were most successful in engaging our students in the learning and have produced the highest achievement on our benchmark tests. |
Our students will take the Algebra I, End of Course Exam. This will be the ultimate indicator of the success of this plan. The goal is not to teach to the test but to best prepare our students to attain high achievement on the test by creating high levels of learning through engaging classrooms.
| Jeff Quisenberry, Jessica Selman and Darla Forney. | May 7, 2012 through May 25, 2012. | 2011 – 2012 9th grade students' performance results on the Algebra I End Of Course Exam / State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness. These same students performance on their 8th grade TAKS Test. The 10th – 12th grade students of White Deer High School results on their 9th grade TAKS Test. | We will use our students' STAAR results to identify if we were successful throughout the school year. Did we positively impact our students' achievement on the state mandated test? Also, how did our students' mastery of their 9th grade, Algebra I, objectives compare to their mastery of their 8th grade objectives the previous year? Finally, how did this group of students perform compared to the previous three classes of students on their 9th grade state test? Are we preparing our students for success for the remainder of their high school career? |
In this final step we want to collaboratively answer the question: "So now what? Where do we go from here?" In this stage we are preparing ourselves for future inquiries. As this process is cyclical and will continue, we want to, as the 2011 – 2012 school year ends, set the foundation for the 2012 – 2013 school year. | Jeff Quisenberry, Jessica Selman and Darla Forney. | May 28, 2012 through June 1, 2012. | A short, yet comprehensive list of what we did in Algebra I class during the 2011 – 2012 school year and the "class report" of how did our freshman class perform on the EOC test. | We want to answer: "In what areas did we positively impact our students' achievement?" "In what areas did we not positively impact our students' achievement?" "What did we do well that we will continue doing next year?" "What did we do that didn't work out well?" "How will we improve upon these practices next year?" |
Format based on Tool 7.1 from Examining What We Do to Improve Our Schools
(Harris, Edmonson, and Combs, 2010)
My action research project proposal
Resources