Concerns and challenges involving my proposed Action Research Project

My biggest concern as far as implementing my action plan lies in the position I currently have this coming year. The last three years I taught in Resource and if I needed to meet with a teacher, I had a small degree of flexibility to do so during the day. However, this coming year I am moving into a general ed. teaching spot so will have a set schedule every day. This will have some benefits, but it will also add a challenge in being able to meet with administrators and other teachers. Meetings will have to be during my conference period or after school, and asking someone to stay after school can be a challenge in itself. Additionally, since I will be teaching a TAKS grade level and a tested content, I will be asked to hold after school tutorials. So my after school schedule will have time constraints once the tutorials begin.

Another challenge that I believe I will face will be during the feedback gathering stage in which feedback from teachers, students and parents on reading interventions is solicited. Effective communication and ensuring good, reliable information is given will be a must.

My best opportunity for addressing these challenges will be in working closely with my Site Supervisor. She is also the Assistant Principal and I will be able to seek her assistance on many of the issues I mentioned above.

Action Research Project Planning Template

Below is my first draft of the Action Research Plan using a Planning Template. This assignment is for my Lamar class titled "Action Research and Inquiry." I welcome comments and suggestions on the subject.

Tool 7.1 Action Planning Template

Goal:	In what ways do interventions impact struggling readers in the Resource program? How can direct instruction be used even more to help students struggling to achieve/maintain grade level performance? What effects would implementing a full inclusion/collaborative teaching setting have on struggling students, as well as those who are on grade level?
Action Step(s)	Person(s) Responsible	Timeline: Start/End	Needed Resources	Evaluation
1. Analyze baseline reading levels and assessment scores for students in Resource	Principal, testing coordinator, LA Resource teacher	Mid-September 2010 / October 2010	Data from AIMSweb benchmark after school startup; AWARE scores from baseline reading benchmark, AWARE scores from previous year	Scores obtained, reading levels and scores are determined for current year, data compared to previous year as appropriate
2. Interview reading teachers on each grade level to discuss specific students and interventions being used in class	Principal, A/P, LA Resource Teacher	October 2010 / November 2010	Access to teachers during conference period or other designated time	Notes and comments from interviews.
3. Consult with teachers participating in collaborative teaching strategies this year	Principal, A/P, Reading/LA Gen. Ed. Teachers, LA Resource teacher	Late August 2010 / September 2010	Time for discussion with teachers either individually or in a group	Field notes obtained from discussion
4. Research and gather information on best practices and intervention methods	Principal, Diagnostician, Coordinator for Sp. Ed./Admin.	October 2010 / December 2010	Internet sites, journal articles, personal interviews, consultation with “sister” campuses within district	Bank of information obtained from research and collaboration and brainstorming on ways to implement appropriate portions for our campus
5.Research and gather information on the successful implementation of collaborative teaching strategies	Principal, LA Resource teacher, Coordinator for Sp. Ed.	August 2010 / October 2010	Interviews with campuses in our district currently using such strategies, journal articles, documentation on proper strategies for collaborative teaching, interviews with administration staff	Information obtained to begin comparing and analyzing NSE’s efforts for co-teaching implementation and determine focus for continued improvement
6. Gather mid-year data for comparison to baseline data	Principal, Testing coordinator, LA Resource teacher	December 2010 / January 2011	Mid-year benchmark data and AIMSweb Winter benchmark data	Data compared to initial benchmarks and determination of progress or lack of made
7. Interview teachers participating in collaborative teaching classrooms for mid-year feedback	Principal, A/P, LA Resource teacher, participating teachers	November 2010 / December 2010 to early January 2011	Time and availability of teachers for interviewing	Field notes on teacher feedback on progress, success, concerns of collaborative teaching
8. Interview select students (Resource and those on grade level) for their perspective on interventions and/or collaborative teaching setting, and their individual progress	Principal, LA Resource teacher, A/P, Gen. Ed. Teachers, target students	November 2010 / January 2011	Recommendation for which students to interview, access to students for interviews, is permission from parents needed?	Field notes recording student feedback on interventions and/or collaborative teaching
9. Interview parents of resource students receiving interventions and/or gen ed. assigned to collaborative teaching classroom	Principal, A/P, Gen. Ed. and Resource teachers, parents of target students	November 2010 / February 2011	Parents willing to be interviewed either individually or in a panel to discuss what is working and what is not, and brainstorm future efforts	Field notes from interviews on parents feedback on interventions and co-teach classroom
10. Gather post-TAKS assessment data and compare to last year (if appropriate) and to baseline benchmarks this year, as well as AIMSweb Spring benchmarks	Principal, A/P, testing coordinator, LA Resource teacher	April 2011 / May 2011 (June if 2nd assessment is needed for 5th gr.)	Scores from TAKS, and end of year benchmark assessment, AIMSweb Spring benchmark scores,	TAKS Scores obtained for target students, as well as benchmark and AIMSweb results for comparison to prior testing data
11. Reflect on results of data comparison and feedback from stakeholders, and determine what the next step in the process will be, including who should be involved in the initial planning stages moving forward	Principal, A/P, Testing coordinator, diagnostician, LA Resource teacher, Gen. Ed. Reading and LA teachers, Reading specialist, Coordinator for Spec. Ed. / Admin.	End of May 2011	Findings from this action plan	Results of committee brainstorming efforts to target the next phase of action for ensuring campus and student improvement.

Action Research - Topics of interest for possible project

This week in our Action Research class, we are assigned to begin the selection process for our research project. The goal is to brainstorm three possible topics and work with our site supervisor to narrow it down to one. The following are my three proposed topics for feedback from my site supervisor: 1) Staff Development - emphasis on Professional Learning Communities: We have been scheduling monthly meetings during the last two school years and calling them PLC's. However, my observation is that the members of these teams are not really sure what the purpose is, what the discussion should entail, and what the outcome should be. Offering training on the possible uses and allowing members to be part of the brainstorming for customizing PLC's for our campus will help members be more effective and have a positive experience on their teams; 2) Parental/Central Admin. Involvement: how can our campus encourage more involvement in the educational process from parents and central admin.? How can we encourage parents to be more than chaperones and party helpers? How can we involve central admin on a deeper level than just hall monitors during TAKS week?; 3) Students - emphasis on struggling readers and students in Resource: how can our campus ensure that interventions are meeting the needs of struggling readers and students in reading Resource? How would inclusion vs co-teaching affect all students in the general education classroom?

The ideal goal and desired outcome for any one of these topics of research is to improve student achievement.

The use of blogs in education leadership

There seems to be a blog today for anything you desire to read about. At one point in my life I was intimidated and reluctant in putting blogs to use. However, with technological advancements and the more user friendly avenues for electronic communication, I find it easier to "blog" today.

With that said, why shouldn't principals be using blogs as a form of communication? Not only is one writing out information, but it is an easy and far reaching way to solicit feedback and responses. Blogs would be beneficial in ways such as communicating with staff during summer months, while on long holiday breaks, or in case of school closures due to natural disasters (such as Houston experienced during Hurricane Ike). Additionally, a blog could be set up specifically for communications with students. Many teachers today maintain a blog for posting homework assignments and other items. Similarly, principals could communicate positive feedback to students, as well as solicit their concerns and input into the school improvement process. Parents would benefit from being able to provide feedback via use of a blog site. This would facilitate communication with parents who may not be able to travel to the campus for face-to-face meetings. Finally, a blog would provide access to information by, and a way of providing feedback from community members. Blogs could literally open the electronic door for all shareholders to gain access to the school improvement process, while providing valuable information through two-way communication.

Action Research - Note #1

The current class I am entering is leading me into yet another realm that I did not know existed. The typical approach to making change in the schools has been the process-product approach as discussed by Nancy Dana in the first chapter of her book (Dana, 2009). However, the action research approach make much more sense. It allows the principal to make a self-examen of sorts by researching into issues that need improving, or change, from the inside out. Rather than seeking outside eyes to take a look and make recommendations of the latest method, the principal and their staff collaborate from the participants' perspectives. From industrial manufacturing plants to any number of other professions, it has been proven time and again that the best people to ask about an issue that needs improving or change is the person who is doing the work surrounding that issue. For example, if an assembly line is not meeting its anticipated output, the best person to ask is not the Operations Manager; rather it is the line worker who uses the machinery, inspects the product, observes daily how the line works.

This research method would be an ideal tool for the school principal and their staff. It lends itself to the idea of continuous improvement --- one doesn't simply research an issue for current ways that are being developed, but taking the research of others a step further and "customizing" solutions for your school. Additionally, once the issue has been resolved, the process does not stop there. You move on to the next item for research. This research is not for merely putting together a report on the subject. It is to induce positive change in the school (whether it be the climate, culture or instruction process), which in turn should lead to improvement in student achievement. This form of problem solving goes hand-in-hand with other collaboration efforts such as use of PLC and developing diverse teams.
------------------------------
Dana, N.F. (2009), Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action researcher.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.