2.6: Instructional Design:
|
Artifact
Capstone Research Proposal Reflection My capstone report, “Fumbling toward Improving Student Desire to Attend Public School: A Quantitative Study on the Impact of Technological Difficulties on Students’ Attitudes and Performance in Two Ninth Grade English Classes”, demonstrates my ability to model and facilitate the use of research-based best practices. The study, completed over the course of two semesters, argues for collaborative technology integration in high school English classes to improve both student learning and desire to attend public school. The research basis provides ample evidence supporting the potential learning benefits for students, particularly at-risk students, and the relevance of traditional pedagogy on parents’ and at-risk students’ desires to seek alternate forms of education. The research-based best practices described in the Literature Review section relate to social constructivist learning, which provides social support and aids in self-regulation of learning (Atherton, 2013; Fernandez & Valverde, 2014; Kolikant, 2009; Laferrière, Hamel, & Searson, 2013), two elements critical to reducing the stigma and isolation of struggling academically. The implementation of technology-enhanced learning experiences based on the social constructivist theory of learning is modeled in the delineated unit plan I designed for the two teacher collaborators to implement. The unit plan was designed as a technology-enhanced version of the internal & Eternal Monsters Unit co-written by the two teacher collaborators. The technology incorporated in the unit uses digital tools and resources providing socially constructivist learning experiences at three levels: small group, whole class, and two-class. The facilitation of this unit plan and research project is demonstrated in the thoroughness of the technology-enhanced unit model as well as in my regular meetings with the teacher collaborators. Still, the technology infrastructure created a burden that culminated in leaving much of the collaborative learning unattempted. Despite the inability to accomplish the unit’s goals and the instructional time lost due to infrastructure problems, the student performance and attitude data were no different in the control group than in the treatment group. From completing this artifact, I learned that teachers work best within units they have some hand in developing themselves. Despite much assent of understanding and initial energy during our multiple training sessions, the teachers were unable to effectively implement the technology at first attempts and eventually gave up the attempts entirely. The difficulties with the infrastructure gave them plenty of reason not to continue with the technology-enhanced unit as written, and their lack of ownership of the technology-enhanced unit plan negatively impacted their resolve. If I could start over, I would be in the classroom alongside the teachers as they began implementation. This knowledge will be relevant to my future collaboration meetings and future research goals. The impact on students learning and attitudes was assessed after the fumbled attempt at collaborative technology integration based on the tenets of social constructivist learning. The students who lost instructional time and experienced frustration during battles with the technology infrastructure did not outperform their peers on the common summative assessment. They did not perform worse either, though. Likewise, the frustrations did not positively or negatively impact their attitudes about the course. This combination of initially puzzling findings suggests an interesting phenomenon that became the crux of my data analysis discussion: even fumbled attempts at technology integration do no harm. The loss of instructional time to technology problems actually indicates that the same amount of learning was accomplished in less time in the technology-integrated course. These findings can impact school improvement by encouraging teachers to step out of their comfort zones by implementing collaborative technology-integrated units they have a hand in creating. Implemented well, it can only improve teacher pedagogy and student learning and enjoyment of school. References Atherton, J. S. (2013) Learning and teaching: Constructivism in learning [On-line: UK] Retrieved 5 December 2014 from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning /constructivism.htm Fernández, M., & Valverde, J. (2014). A community of practice: An intervention model based on computer supported collaborative learning. Comunicar, 21(42), 97-105. doi:10.3916/C42-2014-09 Kolikant, Y. B. (2009). Students' Perceptions of the Appropriateness and Usefulness of the Internet for Schoolwork and the Value of School. Journal Of Educational Computing Research, 41(4), 407-429 Laferrière, T., Hamel, C., & Searson, M. (2013). Barriers to successful implementation of technology integration in educational settings: a case study. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 463-473. doi:10.1111/jcal.12034 |