Reflection for 12/6

Happy Snow Day!

I am so grateful for the winter weather. After spending Friday and Saturday at an awesome conference on Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), I just need a couple of days off to rest my brain and get caught up on my work. Let it snow!

About the conference, it was put on by the Northeast affiliate of the ASCD and was titled “Leading and Learning: Sustaining Learning Communities”. It was really very eye-opening. We learned a great deal about PLCs and how to make them successful and useful in our school environment. This conference was very timely, as we just implemented a district-wide initiative committed to each educator taking part in a community that is focused on achieving one of our district-improvement goals.

Some of the biggest learning I picked up:

1. (Although, I’m not exactly sure how this connects to PLCs…) We should do away with threatening to and giving kids zeros for incomplete work. There has a been a great deal of research on this topic, and it is proven that the threat of failing an assignment does not work as a motivator for students to complete the work to the best of their ability. I have done some incidental research on this in my own class. I have found the exact same conclusion. Recording zeros, in effect, excuses students from the assignment. And, although I would have been mortified by the impact of a zero in my 6th grade teacher’s grade book, many kids are defeated by the idea of a zero and/or are more willing to avoid work than consider the impact of a zero of their “academic record”. I think my new philosophy will be that all students must complete all work. It will be recommended that students do the work when it is most valuable (when it is assigned and pertinent to the following day’s lesson). However, work that is not done will not be a zero – but will be done by every student at a time that is less convenient to students (recess, after school, etc.). I am going to try this for the duration of this year and see if this policy has an impact on how kids approach their assignments, scores on assessments, and their overall comprehension of materials. I think this policy may give more value to the work that students are expected to do.

2. Another eye-opener, PLC topics need to be selected by teachers for the betterment of students’ education and teacher’s ability to teach and learn. This year, my PLCs topic is RTI. This is a topic I was interested in studying; however, our direction and focus has been assigned to us. Thus, members of my group are frustrated with the process and direction that we are currently moving in. We were also assigned to groups, and I think this limited our ability to select group of colleagues that make sense to us on a practical level. For example, working with teachers at my grade level or those who teach the same curriculum would have been a more comfortable and productive fit.

3. Although not implicitly stated, I think there is a logical connection between PLCs and UD. Planning units and lessons with others who have an understanding or interest in UD would make for a very interesting PLC group. I think it is sometimes overwhelming to consider all of the elements of a unit, along with the opportunities to integrate Universal Design. Working with others would give an individual teacher the chance to collaborate and consider elements of lessons that they may not have thought of on their own. I think units created by teams of teachers are ultimately more thoughtful and creative. I believe a PLC that focuses on integrating UD into their units would find that the unit is more universally accessible.

Overall, it was a very enlightening conference. I think that we will be able to improve our PLCs as a result of what we learning. I think that I also have some new strategies to employ with my unit development group – which is a highly functioning PLC in my opinion.

Cynthia – Will you please let me know if there are objectives on your check-off list that I have neglected to write about on the blog. I would love to complete those reflection pieces in the next couple of weeks. Thanks so much!

See you Thursday!

Article: Learning in a hypertext environment

Article 3: Reading with digital text – is it about more than access?

Gosse, H., Gunn, H., & Swinkels, L. (2002, March). Learning in a hypertext environment. Web site constructed by Holly Gunn of Halifax Regional School Board. Retrieved September 17, 2007, from
http://www.accesswave.ca/~hgunn/special/papers/hypertxt/index.html

Hypertext is “interlinked pieces of text or other objects stored electronically”. Each piece of information is called a node, module, or topic. Each node is connected to links and this leads to an association of ideas.  Hypertext, in essence, is what we use when we surf the World Wide Web.

Some benefits of teaching uses hypertext are:

1. “Association of ideas through links”

2.  “Choice of paths for readers”

3.  “Immediate access for reference documents”

4. “Movement through browsing”

5. “Focus of thought” is able to shift

6. Constructivism

Most students browse the web. They are familiar with the flow of information and the purpose of embedded links on a web page. An advantage to using hypertext in information delivery is that learning can occur at a student’s own pace. Students can click links to gather more information about a topic or enrich their understanding of a concept.

A drawback to using hyperlink format is the need to read from the computer screen. This type of reading is quite different from traditional reading of a book or written work. Another disadvantage is that students are often overwhelmed with information and do not know where to start when working on the web. I think a teacher could overcome this issue by providing elicit instruction on how to use the web to gather information.

I have had some limited success with Webquests in the past. These activities are high-interest. It is also, in my opinion, easier to find and gather information about concepts by using a series of links on the WWW. The authors also point to an interesting online platform – Storyspace. I want to follow up on this program and see if it has an application in my language arts classes.

Article: Reading comprehension of freshman students: Comparing printed and digital texts

Article 2: Reading with digital text — is it about more than access?

Joly, M.C.R.A., Capovilla, A.S.C.G., Bighetti, C. Neri, M.L, & Nicolau, A.F. (2007, June/July). Reading comprehension of freshman students: Comparing printed and digital texts. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Multimedia and Information & Communication Technologies in Education. Retrieved September 17, 2007, from http://www.formatex.org/micte2005/12.pdf

Joly and colleagues studied the differences in comprehension levels of students who were presented and tested on information in either digital or hard copy formats. The participants in this study were college freshman enrolled in a psychology course. They varied in age from 17 to 56 years old. The authors describe a model of four levels of comprehension:

Level 1: Literal understanding of text

Level 2: Inferential understanding of text (making deductions)

Level 3: Critical understanding of text (analyzing text)

Level 4: Creative understanding of text (elaboration/application of text material)

Obviously, teachers strive to provide learning experiences that push students toward the higher levels of comprehension. The authors of they study propose that providing information in an electronic format may lead students to better comprehend the material. In electronic, as opposed to static paper, format, students are able to “use space in dynamic, virtual, fluid, and temporary” ways. In essence, students as able to differentiate their own text materials for their level of comprehension.

The findings of the article were that students (particularly under the age of 25) performed better on assessments after using digital text formats. The authors propose that this may be due to their familiarity with this type of text delivery. The authors also found that text takers were more frustrated with the printed text than the digital text. The authors close by commenting that the younger generation would probably benefit from their educational information being presented in the digital format that they use in their personal lives.

Article: Applying principles of UD to test delivery

Article 1: Reading with digital text: is it about more than access?

Dolan, R.P., Hall, T.E., Banerjee, M., Chun, E. & Strangman, N. (2005, February). Applying principles of universal design to test delivery: The effect of computer-based read-aloud on test performance of high school students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3(7). Retrieved September 19, 2007, from http://www.jtla.org

Dolan et al begin their article by pointing to the need for accurate assessment of all learners. They also mention the need for individualized accommodations for learners, especially those with disabilities. It is proposed that text-to-speech technology be employed by test creators to provide a consistent accommodation for students.

The authors write about “construct irrelevance”. This is the idea that many assessments measure unintended skills and knowledge along with the intended content of the test. For example, math tests that are language-based measure the students’ math ability – along with their reading and writing abilities. This can be a particularly difficult problem for students with disabilities (such as sight or hearing impairment, the inability to hold a pencil, etc.).

Dolan et al also write about the traditional accommodations used for struggling readers – having tests read aloud by a teacher or aide on a individual or small group setting. They site three problems with this accommodation:

1. Read alouds vary in quality of delivery.

2. Students are reluctant to ask human readers for clarification or repetition of a questions/passage.

3. Intonation of human reader can be an issue for test takers.

To create an even playing field for learners, Dolan et al suggest using text-to-speech technology (CBT-TTS) in test-taking. This technology involves a computerized voice reading material to test takers. The authors found that this accommodation led to slightly better overall scores on the test. They also found that TTS technology led to significantly better scores when the question involved reading a long passage. Dolan et al also found that over 90% of test-takers accessed the TTS technology when it was available to them during the test.

At our school, we have difficulty finding staff to deliver small-group test accommodations to students. Having the TTS available during standardized testing would solve our test staffing dilemma – and more importantly, make sure that all students are being given the same accommodations and opportunity to succeed.