Cycle One Report: Part Two
RESEARCH QUESTION: My possible research question is “How do I motivate my students to become more successful learners?”
Description of Action:
MY ACTIONS (Cycle 2) : The research question is “If I give my students no deadlines except for at the end each six week grading period, will the students…
· redo the assignment over and over until they demonstrate their understanding
· seek extra assistance to turn in their best work
· start redoing assignments less because they do it correctly the first time
· be more motivated to be successful
· become better writers with multiple revisions of their work
To start this cycle (part two) as an iteration of the No D policy, I met with my principal, sent a parent letter home explaining what I am hoping to accomplish in my classroom, , and explained the project to my students the first week of school, as well as to parents at back to school night, and finally, developed a common rubric for grading with the students. When I introduced the idea of No D policy to my students at the beginning of the school year, we discussed how they might be successful in the class with taking away the barely passing grade. One aspect the students, my principal, and my self agreed upon was the students need to be able to redo work multiple times in order to show their learning and understanding. If there was the No D policy, then kids needed a way to learn from their mistakes. This led to the discussion and implementation of the multiple revision policy. The students had as many times as necessary up to the six week grading periods (6 , 12, and 18 weeks) to revise their work using feedback that had been provided on each revision.
Additionally, at the end of every grading period (six, twelve, eighteen), I asked my students to reflect on their learning, their grades as a reflection of their learning, the No D policy, and multiple revision policy as well as other learning factors. At the beginning of second semester, the students asked for the multiple revision policy to continue in this class. Additionally, at end of 6 week period in second semester, the students completed a survey in class reflecting their overall feelings of the multiple revision policy. The results of their survey were followed by interviews with students who wanted to further discuss their answers given in the online survey. Students were also reminded throughout the semester of the approaching due date indicating the end of six week periods.
To build off of the No D policy, the students needed multiple opportunities to demonstrate their learning and understanding so, in case they did not understand the assignment the first time, they would not be defeated or fail. Instead, in order to help the students become successful learners, the possibility of a D grade was eliminated and the students received multiple opportunities to redo their work in order to fully demonstrate their learning and understanding achieving an A, B, or C quality grade.
With a multiple revision policy, I have been providing copious amounts of feedback to help my students become more successful as well as arranging times for students to come in for individualized instruction on their off hours or before or after school.
ARTIFACTS COLLECTED: I will be collecting the following:
Blog entries evaluating the use of a student created rubric
Student evaluations at the end of the 6, 12, and 18 week grading periods.
Student survey at end of first six weeks of second semester.
Personal interviews with students at the end of the 18 week period with students with the greatest challenges overcome and students who are still challenged.
Data Source:
Student Feedback:
I have the kids complete reality checks also called “What’s Up” to help me understand what is going on in their lives, what challenges they are facing, and what good things they are encountering so that I can help if they desire. This has been an excellent communication tool for enhancing the teacher to student connection so that I am often aware of aspects of their lives other teachers might not see.
With this first six week reflection, I also had the students respond to questions about our classes’ first major assignment, to reflect on the No D policy, the class rubric, and the multiple revision policy as well as other learning factors. The students completed their answers to these questions in class and submitted their responses to me. I find this direct communication from student to teacher builds a trust relationship where students are more connected with me because they know I am reading what they have to say and will respond in kind with what I am able to do in assisting them with their challenges. Adding the aspect of reflection on the No D policy and multiple revision policy, established a basis for my research illustrating that they are part of the research as well. I let them know before they completed the survey how important it was for them to be honest and reflective so that we could make changes to what we were doing if necessary.
After the 12 week grading period, I asked the class to reflect once again on what is going on in their lives as well as focusing on the No D policy, multiple revisions, and how they see their progress regarding their learning. I encouraged them again to complete the survey as honestly and openly as they could because their answers are driving this research project. I also expanded the questions on this survey that addressed the multiple revision policy seeking out the impact of this policy upon their learning thus far in the semester. I wanted to see if the policy was beneficial or had become a crutch for them to rely upon. Additionally, I also asked for them to look ahead and establish goals for the remainder of the semester. The students submitted their responses to me when they had finished completing their answers in class.
At the end of the semester, the 18 week grading period, the students reflected one last time regarding the No D policy, the multiple revision work, and an overall reflection on their learning. There were also questions about technologies role in their learning since this class meets in a 1-1 learning environment where each student has his/her own computer to use. I was interested to see if the use of the laptop and USB made revisions and feedback an easier process which would directly support the multiple revision policy. I also asked the kids to do some reflection on their grade as well as suggestions for improvement for me, No D policy, multiple revision policy, and for the class. This time the reflection was to be posted on the class blog. Not all students completed the final semester reflection. Class time was given to complete the reflection and I emphasized again how important it was for students to give honest and reflective feedback.
At the end of the first six weeks of second semester, students completed an in-class survey which was posted on our class blog. The survey was an online survey using Google Spreadsheets which asked questions directly focused to the multiple revision policy and its connection to their learning.
Data Revealed:
First Six Weeks:
Six week reflection questions: 6 weeks responses
How is it going?
What is one thing that is going well for you?
What is one thing that is challenging you?
How can I help?
How is the no “D” working for you?
Do you think your grade is an accurate reflection of your learning?
How is the opportunity to redo assignments working for you?
Any suggestions?
From the first six week reflection, the students overwhelming approved the multiple revision policy. Out of 27 responses, 19 indicated a positive response. The students emphasized the connection between the No D Policy and multiple revision policy. They saw a growth within their learning and themselves as a result of the policy. Many indicated the value in being able to learn from their mistakes, the ability to submit their best work over time, being able to reach a grade they desired. One student who indicated a negative response indicated that he felt the multiple revision policy defeated the purpose of homework. However, this student also took advantage of the multiple redo policy throughout the first six weeks. Seven respondents chose not to answer the reflection question.
Giving students the opportunity to redo assignments supported the No D policy. This change enabled students to turn in products of understanding that measured their learning over successive efforts to develop their learning. Students commented about the effectiveness of being able to learn from their mistakes by turning in better quality work time and again. The combination of the No D policy with the option to hand in revised copies of their work, seemed to affect the students’ personal beliefs about their learning and achievement. Students commented on their desire to do more and redo assignments because they felt better about their learning. Additionally, it is important to emphasize that students also indicated a change in themselves personally feeling more successful as learners. This is valuable to note that for some students the revision policy became more about improving themselves as learners rather than simply seeking a better grade. Also, this was just a reflection of their growth within the first six week grading period.
Additionally, as previously stated in the first part of the cycle one report, students felt much more empowered in determining their grades because the emphasis was placed on them doing their best work for as many times as it was necessary. The students’ grades seemed much more in their control versus the teacher control. Students commented upon this factor saying that it really helped them feel much more successful about learning and in control of the learning. The ownership over the grade and learning resided with the student. Students reflected that this was a big change in their education. Some students even commented on the change of the role of the teacher assisting them in the learning process but not being in charge of the learning process.
Second Six Weeks:
Twelve week reflection questions: 12 week responses
What do you think about their only be six weeks left of the semester and our No D policy?
Reflect on grade- is it an accurate measurement of your learning?
Are you doing everything possible to achieve the grade you want?
How is the No D policy working for you? Be specific with examples.
How is multiple redo policy working for you? Are you having to redo assignment more often or less? Is it helpful or a hindrance? Do you procrastinate because of it? Or is it helpful because you can keep working until you do your best work?
Have you made progress since the first six week period? If so, how? If not, why not?
What goals or strategies are you going to set up for yourself for the final six weeks?
The second six weeks reflection mimics the information from the first six weeks with further emphasis on their growth in learning as a result of the multiple revision policy. Students appeared to see connections between reworking assignments multiple times, the No D policy, and their degree of increased control over their grades.
Out of 29 respondents, 28 students responded positively regarding the multiple revision policy during the second six week grading period. There were no negative reponses although a couple of students indicated that the policy led to some procrastination on their part as learners. One student chose not to answer the question, but indicated that the all the new policies (No D policy, multiple revision policy, student generated rubric) had “the class working as a whole, and working together to achieve greatness.”
As indicated previously on part one of the cycle report, students noticed they were not making the same mistakes they had previously because of the opportunity to redo assignments over and over again. Many students talked about the change and growth in their reading and writing abilities as a result of the multiple revision policy. Some students said that that they needed less revisions because they were not making the same mistakes. They consistently commented on the power of learning from their mistakes. Many students acknowledged what a tremendous change the revisions allowed in them personally so that they recognized in themselves growth as learners, positive changes in their writing skills, and less procrastination on their work. Interestingly, many students indicated such positive changes in their writing skills by being able to learn from their mistakes. They indicated how important it was to redo their work right away so that they would not have multiple assignments to rework all at the same time.
Furthermore, some students realized that they have to do all their work because failure is not an option so no matter if they procrastinate, do it correctly the first time, or need multiple revisions, the assignments must be completed. Throughout their responses to the revision policy, students seemed split on redoing work as a result of learning and as a result of wanting a better grade. This is an interesting point because it could be showing a shift in the student’s thinking moving from initially wanting a better grade to wanting to learn. 14 respondents commented on the value of learning from their mistakes, and seven commented on the growth in their writing skills. The survey question did not specifically ask for either of these responses and so to see the students’ willingness to comment on the impact of the multiple revisions is noteworthy. One important point to note was that in this 12 week reflection piece, students were aware that only 6 weeks remained in the semester to change their grade.
Student Refection --18 weeks
18 week semester reflection questions: 18 week responses
What changes have you seen this semester in regards to your education?
What role did technology play in that change?
Are you more or less motivated to learn?
Do you feel that your grade is an accurate measurement of your learning?
What role did the constructivist philosophy play in that change? (constructivist-students becoming producers of information, students in charge of their own learning.
What suggestions for improvement do you have for me next year?
Do you want to continue with the No D policy?
What are some of the things you would suggest I do again?
Did you finish the semester where you wanted to in terms of your learning or grade?
For those of you that finished the semester with a D or F what are you going to do differently next semester?
Make sure to include specific examples and expand on each other's ideas. Your feedback- honest and reflective- is important!
The final semester reflection indicated a continuation of all the previously mentioned comments. Students still wanted to continue the policies of No D, multiple revisions, and the A, B, C quality rubric into second semester. Many students are seeing the connection now between the multiple redo policy and No D policy as something they are in charge of regarding their learning.
At the end of the semester survey, 23 students responded to the final survey. 13 students mentioned the impact of the multiple revision policy on their learning without a question specifically asking them about the policy. Additionally, although nine students did not mention the policy in their reflection, they did mention the change in their writing they had seen over the course of the semester. 14 out of the 23 total respondents indicated a positive change in their writing. These students noticed significant changes in their writing being better, more understandable, clearer, and focused. Students also commented that the understood the writing structure much better and could effectively write better paragraphs. There was a connection noted between learning from the mistakes made in writing and the ability to learn from those mistakes. This lead to the acknowledgment that mistakes and learning work together in creating a more motivated student and learner. Students commented that they wanted to continue all these policies into next year and felt successful about how their first semester finished.
Reflecting on this survey, it would have been better to ask a specific question relating to the multiple revision policy, although, there was already a plan to have the students complete a survey during the first six weeks of their second semester. Having a specific question would have enabled the students to reflect specifically about the effect of the multiple revision policy. By not having a specific question, one is able to see the effect of the policy on the students if they commented about it or not.
Student survey: Second Semester- First six weeks and results
1. Has the ability to redo assignments multiple times been beneficial to you?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
2. Has the ability to redo assignments had a positive change to your thinking about learning and being a successful learner?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
3. On average, do you do an assignment correctly the first time the assignment is assigned?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
4. If you need to redo assignments, how many times does it take you to redo the assignment in order to get the grade you desire?
1, 2, 3, 4+
5. At your best guess, how many assignments have you redone in order to improve your grade?
None- , 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10+
6. Thinking about the feedback you receive on assignments, did it help you succeed as a learner?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
Do you take the multiple redo policy for granted?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
If I required homework to be turned in immediately, how often would you have turned it in on time?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
Knowing that you have multiple opportunities to redo your work, has your effort declined on those assignments?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
Throughout the semester, do you try to perform harder at first so not to have to redo it?
Not at all, Sometimes, Most of the time, Always
On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the greatest improvement, how have you improved as a student as a result of the multiple redo policy?
1-2: little to no change, 3-4, 5-6: good improvement, 7-8, 9-10: greatest improvement
On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the greatest improvement, how have you improved as a student as a result of the No D policy?
1-2: little to no change, 3-4: some improvement, 5-6: good improvement, 7-8: good but not great improvement, 9-10: greatest improvement
Should I continue offering our redo policy next year to freshmen when you become sophomores?
Yes or No
On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being greatest improvement, how would you rank the redo policy vs. a non-redo policy in terms of it actually improving writing?
1-2: little to no change, 3-4: some improvement, 5-6: good improvement, 7-8: good but not great improvement, 9-10: greatest improvement
In the future would you hold yourself to a self imposed redo policy even if your teacher at that time did not require it?
Yes or No
Thinking back over this entire second cycle as well as its connection within cycle one- part one’s No D Policy and their connection to my overall goal of having my students be more successful with learning, the two have worked in unison and completely supportive of one another.
The second semester began with a student teacher assuming the role of teacher in the ninth grade class. Also, the class dropped from 30 students in first semester to 23 in second semester. The ratio of boys to girls in this class is 13 males and 10 females. The class did not receive any new students. Because of the work and attitudes that resulted from the No D and the multiple revision policies, the students indicated a great desire to maintain these two policies in place throughout second semester. The student teacher, Randon Ruggles, reviewed these policies with the students to ensure the students all understood the continuation of their work into second semester. The students indicated to him their need to continue with this work.
During the first six weeks, the students were completing an extensive writing assignment called “Project: Change the World.” The multiple revision policy was instrumental in their success in this large writing endeavor. The students were to select a topic that they were passionate about, research the topic, and write a persuasive paper including research to support their stance, about changing the world through their topic. For example, a student selected the topic of child soldiers in Sudan and Darfur. The student wanted the use of child soldiers to stop, found research to support his stance, and wrote a five paragraph, thesis driven paper including documentation of research indicating the change he wanted to see in the world as a result of his stance. Finally, he also ended his paper with an action plan as to what he was going to do to stop of the use of child soldiers.
The reason the multiple revision policy was instrumental in student’s success with this paper assignment is that throughout the paper, the students were receiving feedback from both the student teacher and teacher in order to improve their writing on each draft and section of the writing process. The survey that the student’s completed about the multiple revision policy was completed during their writing of the paper.
20 students completed the survey that was given in class and submitted anonymously. The students who did not complete the survey were not in class on the day the rest of the students completed it. Out of the 20 students, 16 indicated that the policy was beneficial to them and 16 additionally indicated an overall positive change to their thinking about learning. One aspect that was interesting to examine more closely was how the policy has effected how many times they needed to revise their work and their effort exhibited towards each assignment. 19 of the students indicted that it took them 1-2 times to revise their work in order to achieve the grade they desired. 18 indicated that they either do not take the policy for granted or that they only sometimes take it for granted. In connection with the effort put forth towards assignment completion, 18 indicated that it does not decline at all or only sometimes.
The students were also asked about the change they see in themselves as students and as writers as a result of the policy. Out of a scale of one through ten with ten being the greatest improvement in themselves as students, 16 ranked themselves a six or better. Specifically, six out of the 20 students ranked themselves as a nine. Looking at the change they saw in themselves as writers, a resounding 18 indicated a seven or better in terms of the greatest improvement in themselves as writers with 13 out of the 18 indicating a ten on the scale of one through ten with ten being the greatest improvement. Finally, 14 out of 20 students said that they would hold themselves accountable to revise their work even if a teacher did not require it.
Reflection:
Reflecting on the entire first cycle (No D policy, multiple revision policy, and student generated rubric) as well as its connection their connection to my overall goal of having my students be more successful with learning, I feel very excited regarding their comments/ feedback and am eager to go forward. I think one of the things I took away the most from their comments is how important it is for students to be able to redo/ revise/ rework their work in order to learn. From the first time I discussed this policy with my principal, my learning circle, my thesis supervisor, and my students, they all commented about what a change it has been for my students in their view towards their learning, and the change in me as a teacher who has never allowed redos before in her class.
My students overwhelming value the chance to redo their work, and see it not as an expectation placed by me, but an expectation they place on themselves. They value the opportunity to learn from their mistakes and to grow as learners. Whether it is through feedback I have given them as their teacher, the peer feedback or student teacher feedback, they have taken all of this in mind to change their work. Resoundingly, I think the final survey indicates what a dramatic change this has been in my classroom. Many of the students see themselves as better writers and learners. They see a connection between learning from their mistakes, and applying that learning to new situations and assignments hopefully carrying forth into their other classes. This shows clear transference of information which is when learning occurs; there are not experiencing mere regurgitation.
The students see now writing as a process not a one time only turn it in piece of work. They see the value in continuing to work on an assignment until it is their best work. Many of the students indicated the challenge in assignments in other classes being a one time only piece of work, and how do they learn from something if there is no opportunity to revise and grow. This indicates a meta-cognitive approach to their learning where they are becoming reflective about the learning process understanding what methodologies and practices are instrumental to them as learners.
With the interviews that I conducted at the end of this cycle, I was greatly interested in hearing the students elaborate on their answers to the questions. One aspect all those who were interviewed indicated was that the feedback from the teacher was really important to the ability to redo their work. With feedback, the students were able to see what they needed to work on and change. Thinking ahead to the next cycle, and the focus being specifically on feedback, this is good information and valuable. It makes me think about training the student teacher and students as becoming reflective practitioners of their own work so that they learn from their mistakes and I do not have to give as much feedback in the end is as needed in the beginning.
The amount of grading that this undertook and more specifically feedback that it took was overwhelming at times. I am not sure I would be capable of giving the quantity of feedback in all of my classes that was necessary to assist these students. Therefore, I can see a real need to train the students to become self reflective and adept at giving feedback to other’s work. This would make them become more reflective on their own pieces as well as assist others in the class with their learning.
The feedback from the students on the multiple revision policy has definitely changed me as a teacher. Before this policy and this year at Pepperdine in the OMET program, I never considered giving kids chances to redo their work- I had the no redo policy in place for 10 years. My belief was that the students needed to do their best work the first time and that if I gave them multiple chances to redo their work, they would not learn to be responsible, put forth their best work, and achieve. Instead, by giving myself the permission to try something new, I realized how valuable redoing your work is. The students learned over time and did not take advantage of the policy because they simply realized that having too many assignments to redo is incredibly stressful. Also, they learned that they could grow from their mistakes and would make far less errors because they applied their learning to each new assignment.
I learned that it is more important to learn from my students. If they need me to work harder by providing them with more feedback so that they can be successful learners than that is my job. If only given one chance to succeed on an assignment, they do not learn, they simply feel defeated and give up. Giving multiple opportunities improves their writing, their work ethic, and their personal feeling about themselves as learners. It also improves the student teacher dynamic because they see all of us working together to achieve the same thing: success as learners. I am learning from them, they are learning from me, and they are learning from one another.
As I reflected about at the end of part one of the first cycle, I continue the same thoughts:
By having them (the students) be a part of this whole action research process, I feel I have turned over much of the control of the classroom to my students. The students from day one determined if they wanted to be part of this research project, we discussed together what it would be like to not have a D (what are the consequences, possible successes, issues with a policy like this), and then generated a class rubric to assess the learning and understanding. They drove this research process. And thinking ahead, I think they will continue to drive the research.
When students feel in control and empowered, as we all want to feel in our lives, change is possible. Students realized that by determining the rubric, there were going to be no surprises in the grade. And, if students did not achieve to the best of their ability in round one of an assignment, they had the opportunity to keep redoing it as many times as necessary up till the six week period in order to truly demonstrate their learning and understanding. They seemed to really embrace the idea as a class that failure wasn’t an option. With the support of Dr. Riel, my principal and the parents, I think this aspect was really hit home for them. The periodic reflection kept reminding them of the policy so that the focus was on learning and achieving. I wanted the students to walk away from this semester successful in their learning through their growth in writing, reading, comprehension, and hopefully, achieve more in a class than they had previously; I think their reflections are a testament to that.
I also think their reflections are a testament to the power of students having a say in their education. By students being in charge of their grade through the multiple redo policy, the students generating the rubric to assess their learning, and failure not being an option, students achieved more in this class than in many of my previous years teaching this same class. I feel that through their comments, this was the best many of the kids had ever achieved in a Language Arts class. I think students really took advantage of all the opportunities before them to succeed. And, I do not think that this success would have been possible without the mutual pairing of the No D policy with the multiple redos. I think the class wouldn’t have been as successful if only one element would have been implemented at a time.
Looking forward, I think there are some things I need to spend some time contemplating. Will having a student teacher who is implementing these policies with the students shift the power of these policies in a different direction? Will they be as successful? Maybe my role can change to more of a mentorship role with the really struggling students enabling a 1-1 learning environment for them. Could I work one on one with students (possibly just D and F students) while the other students work with the student teacher? Will my students benefit from having two sources of feedback? How can I help my students give each other feedback and train them as “experts” in this area?
Overall, I see a dramatic connection in students feeling successful in their learning by redoing their work and setting high expectations for themselves, their teacher and their class. Through the creation of the A, B, C quality rubric, the No D policy, and the ability to redo multiple assignments, the role of the teacher and student changed; the teacher shifted to more of a facilitator towards student learning, and the students embraced their own learning and understanding which was ultimately reflected in their grade and success as a student.