Phase One Action and Assessment Plan
Intervention and Rationale
After the completion of the needs assessment, classroom observation, and delving into the research literature on student engagement and choice, I developed a project that included these elements. It became apparent to me that I wanted to focus my action research on these aspects but the practice and approach in which I wanted to begin my study were not as obvious. After being introduced to the concept of 20 Percent Time, which involves learning around choice and passion, I thought perhaps providing my students a choice in their learning might increase student engagement.
The concept of 20 Percent Time was developed by Google at a time when Google allowed its employees “one workday a week to work on whatever projects fan their passions” (Pouge, 2009). The idea was simple; allow a person to work on something that interests them and, consequently productivity will increase. As I explored more about 20 Percent Time, I was thrilled to learn that this same concept was being utilized in the education world. Similar to Google’s 20 Percent Time, Genius Hour is a time when educators allow student’s choice to explore their own passions and interests and take learning into their own hands. I began to understand and perceive Genius Hour as a perfect opportunity not only to provide students with choice, but also a wonderful way to incorporate student inquiry. Consequently, I decided I would implement Genius Hour as in-class intervention while providing choice and student inquiry with the hopes of thereby increasing student engagement and achievement.
20 Percent Time in education is better known as Genius Hour. It is a time when students are permitted to inquire about whatever it is they want to explore, learn, or create; a time when they learn about what interests them, their passions, and take control of their own learning. Genius Hour projects can vary from a student inquiring about how write a book to a student investigating learning how to code a video game. During Genius Hour, my goal was that with the implementation of student inquiry and choice, students would become more actively engaged within their learning in the classroom.
As I designed my plan of action, I originally sought to measure three elements of engagement. After reviewing the literature on student engagement, I now understood it to be a meta-construct consisting of three distinct but interrelated elements: cognitive engagement, behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement. Within my study, I measured all three modes of engagement through the use of a teacher reflective journal, a self-made goal and student self-assessment sheet, and student blogs. Furthermore, prior to starting phase one I asked students to complete a pre-survey. I utilized the School Engagement Measure survey, which measured students own perceptions of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement within the classroom. At the end of my study, I distributed students the survey again to show a comparison of students’ engagement after the implementation of Genius Hour, choice and student inquiry.
Choice was also provided for my students with the goal of building their sense of independence and autonomy (Kohn, 1993; Pink, 2011) while positively impacting student achievement. Students were given choice in two areas: choosing their service learning and also allowing students to choose their group for the project. While providing students with choice and allowing them to “own” their projects, based on the need of my students, I found it necessary to provide structure and guidance for them. Therefore, the decision to focus our first Genius Hour on community service was made. In other words, I reminded the students in their previous interest of completing a community service project as an option for their Genius Hour focus. This still allowed them choice in deciding which community need they wanted to study and support through a service project. Furthermore, many of the students expressed interest in the same project topics, which resulted in allowing students the choice of working individually or in groups with their peers who had similar interests. While I believe that providing students with a simple choice of choosing whom they can work with can increase their engagement, studies show that allowing students to choose a peer or group of peers for assignments, projects, or study is both motivating and may improve work and study performance (Kern and State, 2009). All of my students chose to work in groups rather than individually, which came as no surprise because more than half of the students had previously conveyed peer interaction as one of their favorite aspects of school.
The concept of 20 Percent Time was developed by Google at a time when Google allowed its employees “one workday a week to work on whatever projects fan their passions” (Pouge, 2009). The idea was simple; allow a person to work on something that interests them and, consequently productivity will increase. As I explored more about 20 Percent Time, I was thrilled to learn that this same concept was being utilized in the education world. Similar to Google’s 20 Percent Time, Genius Hour is a time when educators allow student’s choice to explore their own passions and interests and take learning into their own hands. I began to understand and perceive Genius Hour as a perfect opportunity not only to provide students with choice, but also a wonderful way to incorporate student inquiry. Consequently, I decided I would implement Genius Hour as in-class intervention while providing choice and student inquiry with the hopes of thereby increasing student engagement and achievement.
20 Percent Time in education is better known as Genius Hour. It is a time when students are permitted to inquire about whatever it is they want to explore, learn, or create; a time when they learn about what interests them, their passions, and take control of their own learning. Genius Hour projects can vary from a student inquiring about how write a book to a student investigating learning how to code a video game. During Genius Hour, my goal was that with the implementation of student inquiry and choice, students would become more actively engaged within their learning in the classroom.
As I designed my plan of action, I originally sought to measure three elements of engagement. After reviewing the literature on student engagement, I now understood it to be a meta-construct consisting of three distinct but interrelated elements: cognitive engagement, behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement. Within my study, I measured all three modes of engagement through the use of a teacher reflective journal, a self-made goal and student self-assessment sheet, and student blogs. Furthermore, prior to starting phase one I asked students to complete a pre-survey. I utilized the School Engagement Measure survey, which measured students own perceptions of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement within the classroom. At the end of my study, I distributed students the survey again to show a comparison of students’ engagement after the implementation of Genius Hour, choice and student inquiry.
Choice was also provided for my students with the goal of building their sense of independence and autonomy (Kohn, 1993; Pink, 2011) while positively impacting student achievement. Students were given choice in two areas: choosing their service learning and also allowing students to choose their group for the project. While providing students with choice and allowing them to “own” their projects, based on the need of my students, I found it necessary to provide structure and guidance for them. Therefore, the decision to focus our first Genius Hour on community service was made. In other words, I reminded the students in their previous interest of completing a community service project as an option for their Genius Hour focus. This still allowed them choice in deciding which community need they wanted to study and support through a service project. Furthermore, many of the students expressed interest in the same project topics, which resulted in allowing students the choice of working individually or in groups with their peers who had similar interests. While I believe that providing students with a simple choice of choosing whom they can work with can increase their engagement, studies show that allowing students to choose a peer or group of peers for assignments, projects, or study is both motivating and may improve work and study performance (Kern and State, 2009). All of my students chose to work in groups rather than individually, which came as no surprise because more than half of the students had previously conveyed peer interaction as one of their favorite aspects of school.
Project Overview
Genius Hour projects consisted of four main components: (1) Construct an Inquiry Question, (2) Research, (3) “Create” and (4) Present. Students were to develop an inquiry question that revolved around their service interest, complete research about community service and investigate ways they could provide service, “create” or in this particular project, employ their acts of service, and lastly present their project and findings to the class. Please note, “Create” is used in a non-specific manner because the construct of “creating” within Genius Hour generally differs depending on the student’s inquiry. For example, while one student may be able to create something physical for their project, another student may only be able to explore and learn, which is still an adequate way to demonstrate their learning. While I did have to work more closely with some students to ensure their projects could be completed within the realms of the class, luckily, all my students were able to employ the services they choose.
Again, because this particular Genius Hour concentration and overall student inquiry focused on finding ways to assist their community, as a class we created an overarching class inquiry question which was “What can we do in our classroom to help our community?” Thus, my students then created their own individual group inquiry question. As you can see in Figure 4, the group projects and inquiry questions are as followed:
|
Estimated TimeLine
Planning the timeline of this study was a challenge due to the limited amount of time available. Generally, educators employ Genius Hour within their classrooms one day each week for an hour. For the purposes of this study and to ensure that students had an adequate amount of time to complete their projects, Genius Hour in our classroom was much faster paced. It took place Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, and Fridays for about 4 weeks, totaling 17 hours of Genius Hour time. Phase One of my action research took place during a three-week period, February 24 through March 14. Phase Two was conducted for only 6 days, March 17 thorough March 26. As you can see to the right in Figure 5, the estimated timeline is a followed:
|
Phase one data collection and assessment tools
Four methods for gathering data were used to measure student behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement: a teacher reflective journal, a self-made goal and student self-assessment sheet, and student blogs. Additionally, prior to starting Phase One students to completed a pre-survey that measured all three modes of engagement as well. Based upon the research evaluated in my literature review, it was determined that students inquiring about a class project of their choice, engagement will increase.
Student blogs
Student Blogs were written at the end of each week and utilized in lieu of a student journal. Student blogs were used as a reflective process for the students and also served as feedback for myself. At the end of every week, students will create a blog post answering different questions for reflective purposes. This also served as a tool for student to express their concerns and ask any questions they developed throughout the week. Lastly, student blogs were used to help gauge if they feel they have more freedom with their project in comparison to previous assignments. Although blog posts were only required once a week, students were encouraged more frequently if they preferred. Through student blog posts I was able to measure the three main constructs of engagement.
Goal/3-2-1 Sheet
In order to measure students’ cognitive and behavioral engagement, a self-made goal-setting and student self-assessment sheet was implemented. Recognizing the off-task behaviors within my needs assessment, I created this sheet for my students to write down their goals and thus use a liker scale of 4-3-2-1 to measure their personal perceptions on task-behavior. Shown in Figure 6 is an example of the Goal/3-2-1 Sheet.
As cited in the literature, when students collaborate in assessment, they develop in the habit of self-reflection (Reif, 1990; Wolf, 1989). They learn qualities of good work, how to judge their work using these qualities, and to step back from their work to assess their own efforts and feelings of accomplishment. The goal of this sheet was that it would help me gather data on my students’ own reflective process, which would result in the students becoming more cognitively engaged in their learning. |
Teacher Reflective Journal
Student observations were made daily and recorded through out the three weeks of Phase One. I kept an anecdotal journal recording any observations of signs of increased behavioral, cognitive, and/or emotional engagement throughout Genius Hour. I also recorded narrative observations within individual group discussions as well.
Student Survey
During the first week of the project, students were given an engagement survey that met and inquired about all three aspects of student engagement. To measure these three elements of engagement, I utilized the School Engagement Measure (SEM). I discovered this survey while searching the literature on student engagement. Some of the wording was adjusted and not all of the questions were included, as I felt they did not apply directly to this study. Upon completion of the students’ projects, I reissued the same survey, but the questions pertain to Genius Hour more specifically. This survey helped me to gain quantitative data on student engagement and determine whether students’ views changed during the duration of the project. An example of this survey is included in my appendices.
Tying it all together
These triangulations of data collection methods were used throughout my action research to plan and help my answer research question, which was, "How can I support my students to become more engaged in academic learning in my classroom?" and my sub-question "How can incorporating student choice and inquiry into the classroom help increase student engagement? " Figure 7 displays the matrix I created to show the relationship between my assessment data and the question addressed through the data.
|
Phase One Implementation
Week One
During week one, students were introduced to Genius Hour. I also conducted various mini-lessons on goal setting, introducing inquiry, researching, and blogging to help guide and facilitate learning. The goal of these lessons was to familiarize students with all aspects of their projects before taking complete control of their projects. Students selected their in-class community project proposals at the end of the week. Project Proposals were implemented to ensure that student project choices could be completed within the classroom in the amount of time we had available.
Day One: Introduction to Genius Hour
On day one, I walked into the classroom both excited and anxious about introducing my students to Genius Hour. I was eager to discover how students would react to these new ideas and the overall project. Genius Hour was introduced through the use of a YouTube video, “A Pep Talk from Kid President to You,” which was followed by a class discussion. This is an inspirational video given by a 9-year-old who commands others to “create something that will make the world awesome!” This video was used to allow students to recognize the inspirational messages given and consequently, feel excited to create a project that would help them feel awesome. After the video and discussion, I transitioned into telling my students about their project and how it pertained to them being “awesome” individuals as well. I explained to the students that Genius Hour was a time where “ you can learn about what interests you,” “a time to find your passions,” and “a time for you to take control of your learning.” I then communicated to the students our Genius Hour focus would be fostered around community service because the students had previously expressed interest in participating in some type of service work in their community. Furthermore, we discussed what an in-class community service project looked like such as time and ability to complete it within the classroom and on school grounds. Finally, I had the class complete a gallery walk where the students discussed and answered the following questions regarding their prior knowledge on community service:
The gallery walk was a useful informal assessment for myself not only to gage students’ prior knowledge of community service but also to become aware of the various ways students were interested in helping.
Day Two: Goal Setting and Introduction to Blogs
On day two, multiple elements were covered within the hour; we spent a great amount of the hour focusing on goal setting and discussing why it would be an important part of our projects. As I previously mentioned within my data collection, goal setting was utilized in hopes of gathering data on students’ own reflective process resulting in students becoming more cognitively engaged in their learning. Also, I hoped setting goals would ensure that the students stay on task within their projects, as time was a great limitation of my study. After completing this mini-lesson, students were introduced to their blogging pages. Most of my students were unfamiliar with blogging. I explained that it was to be utilized much like a journal, only online. The students were excited to use this new educational tool and wanted to start using it right away. I allowed the students to write their first blog post that day and asked them to reflect on Genius Hour thus far and/or what they learned about goal setting. Some of the student responses were (add). After observing students excitement for blogging, as well as students demonstrating a high level of on-task behaviors, I began to wonder if perhaps providing students with the choice of using technology in the classroom might have also positively affected their engagement.
Day THree: Mini-lesson on Inquiry and Research
Day three was dedicated to the both student inquiry and research. Students utilized this time and created inquiry questions about community service while also completing research. As many students were not familiar with the term “inquiry” I explained it as “something they are wondering” and asked them to create their inquiry questions based off their wonderings. After students created their inquiry question(s), they were to utilize the rest of their hour researching and expanding their knowledge on community service. Shown in Figure 9 is an example of a students research worksheet.
On this particular day I noted in my Teacher Observation Journal “Students need more practice in using the Internet as a research tool.” During this hour, it appeared to me that many of my students were struggling with using the internet as a research tool and were asking questions such as “Miss Marina, where do we look” “Is this an acceptable website?” “What do I type in the search bar?” I quickly realized that students needed more instruction and guidance in researching. |
I naively assumed students would easily utilize the Internet as a research tool because they are generally very handy with technology but I was evidently mistaken. I recognized this as not only a opportunity to provide more guidance and structure for my students, but also a moment where I could reflect on my own teaching.
Day Four: student Project Proposals
Day four was the end of the first week and I was starting to observe students getting anxious. They were ready to start employing their service projects and some students were even brought necessary materials needed for their project and I was continuously asked questions such as “When can we actually start our projects?” I communicated to the students that after their proposals were submitted and approved, they could start their service project the following week. By this time, many of the students knew exactly what they wanted to focus their projects on and who they were interested in working with. Some students even expressed their ideas for their final presentation as well, which determined a sense of engagement in their projects. Through my observations, I observed much excitement and a great amount of the students working hard to complete their proposals. I had a few students who articulated confusion regarding how they could perform community service within the classroom so I offered some ideas in attempt to alleviate their confusion. Although I noticed it did became clearer to the students, I mentioned again that this project was their own and they should ultimately choose their topic based off their own personal interests. Lastly, the hour ended with my students sharing their project ideas with the entire class. At this moment, I was really excited take home and read through the student’s proposals.
Weeks Two and Three
During both Weeks 2 and 3, students used their time to complete their in-class community service projects. As I mentioned previously, students worked within their groups of choice and their productivity within the hour varied based on the service they had chosen. As a reminder, based on the students interests, four main community service topics were selected: Creating Awareness to Reduce Littering, Book Buddies, Helping the Homeless, and Giving to the Children’s Hospital. Also, on the first day of week two, students were introduced to their self-assessment and reflections sheets, which were required to fill out at the beginning and end of Genius Hour each day.
Additionally, early in my pre-week of mini lessons, I quickly realized I was spending too much time on emphasizing goal setting and the students were getting rather overwhelmed with the concept. Consequently, I decided I would implement the “3-2-1” method when filling out these sheets, as it would lessen the amount of time I spent lecturing the students on filling in their goals and assessing themselves. The “3-2-1” method originated from a reading strategy where students would write down three things they learned, two things they found interesting, and one question. I decide to use this same concept, only I would use it as a method for time. At the beginning of Genius Hour I gave students one minute to move into their groups, two minutes to discuss with their group their tasks and goals for the day, and three minutes to finish write their ideas on their papers and finish their discussions. At the end of Genius Hour, students would use this same concept for their self-assessments for the hour. Students had one minute to think about what they would rate themselves for the hour (4-3-2-1), two minutes to write down why they chose to give themselves this score, and finally three minutes to write down if they were successful in reaching their goals for the hour, why or why not? Again, the goal was of using this sheet was to help students become more cognitively engaged.
Students also completed weekly blog posts within these next two weeks. As a reminder, student blogs were used as a form of student reflection and replaced the standard student journals. Students were required to write a blog post at the end of every week and the questions varied depending on my observations of the students’ weekly progress and what I determined the focus of the reflection should be.
Students also completed weekly blog posts within these next two weeks. As a reminder, student blogs were used as a form of student reflection and replaced the standard student journals. Students were required to write a blog post at the end of every week and the questions varied depending on my observations of the students’ weekly progress and what I determined the focus of the reflection should be.
Phase One data analysis
During Phase One, I found several themes emerge as I collected and analyzed the data.
Pre-Student Engagement Survey
When analyzing the student pre-engagement survey and as found in Figure, I found 13 out of the 27 students stated they worked very hard in class; 21 of the 27 students stated it was “sort of true” that completed their schoolwork because they liked it; 16 of the 27 students felt their school work was interesting; 12 of the 27 students claimed they could do almost all their work if they did not give up; 15 of the students claimed they did their classwork because they wanted to understand the subject; and 17 of the 27 students claimed it was "sort of true" they paid attention in class.
|
With the use of this survey, I established that my students found schoolwork to be important and they claimed that they wanted to understand the subjects, but again lack of engagement was apparent when a great amount of students stated their classwork was not interesting to them. With the implementation of student choice, I anticipate the post-survey will show an increase in students’ engagement.
Phase one Findings
Students recognized and appeared to be more self-directed
Through my own observations and student reflections, I found that students were making adequate progress in becoming more self-directed. First, students were starting to recognize responsibility and the actions of not being responsible. For example, one group in particular, when analyzing their 3-2-1 sheets, I had found that the entire group rated themselves in the 2’s and 1’s. In their explanations, they had stated that because they were late to their Book Buddies meeting, they were sent back to class and further stated, “I will make sure that I am on time for Book Buddies from now on.” The students became cognitively aware of their actions and were able to positively make changes.
Furthermore, through student feedback and observations, I noticed the students were commenting on the aspects they needed to improve within their projects as well as recognizing slight failures in their choices and where they could change and improve aspects of their progress. For example, one student stated within their blog post, "My groups idea in making bracelets is taking a lot longer and we might not have time do that much, so I will ask if I can take some home to work on it." Although some students’ initial attempts in providing services did not work, I was okay with that. I saw it as a learning process for the students and a great opportunity for self-reflection. As I saw this happening and my students were expressing their failures, I indicated that mistakes were okay and they should view them as a stepping-stone to learning. I shared with my students that many attempts in life are not always going to go as planned and failure will occur. I communicated to them that this was a learning process and part of learning was making mistakes.
Furthermore, through student feedback and observations, I noticed the students were commenting on the aspects they needed to improve within their projects as well as recognizing slight failures in their choices and where they could change and improve aspects of their progress. For example, one student stated within their blog post, "My groups idea in making bracelets is taking a lot longer and we might not have time do that much, so I will ask if I can take some home to work on it." Although some students’ initial attempts in providing services did not work, I was okay with that. I saw it as a learning process for the students and a great opportunity for self-reflection. As I saw this happening and my students were expressing their failures, I indicated that mistakes were okay and they should view them as a stepping-stone to learning. I shared with my students that many attempts in life are not always going to go as planned and failure will occur. I communicated to them that this was a learning process and part of learning was making mistakes.
Choice demonstrated a positive correlation within the classroom
The data analysis from Phase One showed various positive correlations with the implementations of student choice. For one, an excessive amount of students expressed enjoying having choice within their work. As I read through the students’ blog posts, the theme of choice appeared over and over again. Students shared in their blog posts statements such as, “It's awesome! I feel like we have a say in something for once and aren't always being told what to do.” I also found that with the implementation of choice, students exhibited more curiosity and creativity. I discovered that students stated they choose their topics based on something they never explored. Again, in reading my students blog posts, I also learned that students enjoyed having the chance to express their creativity. Students made statements such as "I like this project because it let's me be creative and have some fun." In students exposing their curiosity and creativity, I was also to learn more about my students and their interests, which is always an advantage.
Students showed an increase within their cognitive abilities
Through my classroom observations, I found a vast increase within student thoroughness and attentiveness within their projects. Within Weeks 2 and 3, I observed the students taking part of much more on-task behaviors within the hour. In my journal I noted, “Students seem to be more attentive within their work.” Looking into this type of engagement, I most related it to various aspects of cognitive engagement. Cognitive engagement as defined by Fredericks et al., 2004 is the extent to which students are willing and able to take on the learning task at hand. This includes the amount of effort students are willing to invest in working on the task and how long they persist (Richardson and Newby 2006; Walker 2006). I observed numerous students not only increasing in on-task behaviors but also in being more thoughtful and meticulous while completing their service projects. I was more particularly astounded that the students showing the more attentive work, tended to frequently be the students who participated in the most off-task behaviors within the classroom. Although this was an in-class project, I even had student express to me that they would take parts home to work on as well as have students ask to stay in for recess to continue working.
Next steps
After reflecting on the results of my phase one intervention, I was happy to observe signs of increased in on-task behavior, cognitive abilities, and to see implementing choice showed a positive correlation, as students were expressing they enjoyed having choice in their schoolwork. I looked to my students’ performance and learning to guide my next steps in Phase Two. Almost all of my student groups were working well and students showed greatest interest in their topics and were intrigued by what they were learning. Focusing on our purpose, I decided that students needed a product to show their learning. The students started the project identifying an inquiry of service learning of their interest, completed research to enhance their background knowledge of their topic, completed their service learning, and now they needed to teach and share what they learned from their projects. This also provided me the opportunity to assess students learning. Due to the high amount of positive responses and behaviors I observed from implementing student choice, I thought it was necessary to continue to provide choice throughout the remainder of the project. In providing choice, I would allow the students to continue to work in their groups to present their learning in a format they desired. Research shows that cooperative learning strategies and collaborative learning strategies are also popular student choices for learning preference. Prince (2004) defines cooperative learning as working or participating with others toward a common goal versus competing against others toward a common goal and collaborative learning as working with others as opposed to working independently. According to Jenson (2005), these strategies are also part of active learning, which encourages active thinking to engage students learning process through discussions and problem solving while also allowing or interaction among peers.
As I moved forward into Phase Two, not only was it important to reflect on my students work throughout their projects, but it was also necessary to deeply reflect and re-assess my overall study and focus of this project. Within phase one, I had hoped to measure students’ engagement within the three areas: cognitive, emotional, and behavioral. As I was able to complete this task, advancing to the second phase of my research, bearing in mind the lesser amount of time I had to complete this study, I came to realize and more so, accept the fact that I was trying to measure much more than I was capable of doing in the time allotted. Therefore, I reflected on how I could alter my research question while still focusing on my student’s needs, which was to feel engaged in school.
Looking back to phase one’s data and findings, I started to recognize that a great amount of my findings streamed more towards behavioral engagement rather than that of cognitive and emotional engagement. Because of this and to make my study more manageable with the given time frame, I decided I would focus the remainder of my study on understanding student’s behavioral engagement more deeply within the classroom. In future phases, I will again consider cognitive and emotional engagement respectively.
As I moved forward into Phase Two, not only was it important to reflect on my students work throughout their projects, but it was also necessary to deeply reflect and re-assess my overall study and focus of this project. Within phase one, I had hoped to measure students’ engagement within the three areas: cognitive, emotional, and behavioral. As I was able to complete this task, advancing to the second phase of my research, bearing in mind the lesser amount of time I had to complete this study, I came to realize and more so, accept the fact that I was trying to measure much more than I was capable of doing in the time allotted. Therefore, I reflected on how I could alter my research question while still focusing on my student’s needs, which was to feel engaged in school.
Looking back to phase one’s data and findings, I started to recognize that a great amount of my findings streamed more towards behavioral engagement rather than that of cognitive and emotional engagement. Because of this and to make my study more manageable with the given time frame, I decided I would focus the remainder of my study on understanding student’s behavioral engagement more deeply within the classroom. In future phases, I will again consider cognitive and emotional engagement respectively.