CADRE Capstone 2017
Thinker. Researcher. Teacher.
Self-Assessment
As my students and I finalized this study in our classroom, we completed a silent gallery walk to reflect on the experience and express the growth that took place throughout this project. Around the room I set up seven posters that contained questions I wanted students to reflect on and respond to. Small groups of students began at a designated poster and were given five minutes to silently reflect and record their response on a sticky note before moving on to the next poster. Following the gallery walk, we discussed as a whole group what was meaningful about this action research, how students grew as writers and individuals, and what improvements we would make for this project if we decided to do it again. Below I will break-down this data by separating each question and the common theme or response that was provided by the students.
Writing Dispositions
By observing the infographic below you can see student averages compiled using data from the writing disposition surveys. I was a little surprised when I analyzed the data from students pre-assessment. Responses for questions such as, “Writing is fun for me” and “I would like to write more at school” were more positive than I had anticipated due to what my students expressed to me in class. My belief is that because of the strong relationships I built with my students and their knowledge of my interest in writing, these scores reflected more of what they thought I wanted to hear rather than how they actually felt. You will see this manifesting in the data as students seemed to score themselves lower on the post assessment. My belief for this is that students were more honest with themselves and me the second time around.This is why using multiple data sources was so important while I conducted my action research. Overall, students scored themselves consistently throughout the research period. Upon closer analysis, several students demonstrated more positive dispositions regarding their interest in writing during "free" time and communicated appreciation for choice and voice during writing experiences. For example, the majority of students indicated writing is best when they are able to choose a topic that matters to them.
Pre/Mid/Post Assessment (Writing Samples)
In November of 2016, students completed a baseline writing assessment which allowed me to measure their raw writing ability. I utilized this baseline assessment data to place my students into contrasting groups (below, barely, proficient, and beyond). These writing samples were extremely informative. Seven of my twenty-three students were below achieving grade level standards, six students were barely achieving grade level standards, seven students were proficient, and two students were beyond grade level. One student was absent for the baseline assessment so I have no data for that score. This data also showed that my students struggled with ideas and organization in their writing. Eighteen of my twenty-three students received a 70% or less combination score for the areas of ideas and organization, as scored by the district provided rubric.
Less than a month after this baseline assessment, the hard work by my students was validated when they completed the Analytical Writing Assessment (AWA). When scores were released to the district, the data showed that zero of my students were below meeting grade level standards, three were barely achieving grade level standards, fifteen were proficient, and five were above grade level standards. This data proves that students were reacting well to research based activities and practices that we were utilizing in the classroom. The three students who received a score indicating they were barely achieving grade level standards were part of the below achieving grade level standards group on the baseline assessment completed in the classroom. Overall, all twenty-three of my students represented overall growth from their baseline assessment is November to their AWA assessment in December (with the exception of one student that has no data for the baseline assessment).
Approximately one month following the AWA assessment, students completed a midpoint writing assessment in the classroom. From this data I was able to identify that only eleven of my students had shown growth since the AWA assessment. This data was not extremely alarming because overall, 78% of my students were achieving or beyond achieving grade level standards, only 22% were not. The students who were scored as below or barely achieving grade level standards are students that I may have scored lower unintentionally because my personal bias as their teacher may push me into thinking, “I know they can do better than what they are representing in this midpoint assessment.” This is where the subjective nature of assessing writing gets sticky. As research states, "Assessing students' writing is not an objective task. It involves and inference of the quality of written work, and such inferences may include biases and interpretations that can make the assessment an imperfect reflection of actual writing ability" (Pajares & Valiante, 1997, p. 355).
Finally, In April 2017 my students completed their writing post assessment. When looking at results of the baseline writing assessment and comparing the two, all but one of my students demonstrated growth in their overall writing ability. The one student who did not demonstrate growth is on an IEP for writing and his scores tended to fluctuate throughout the school year. From the post assessment data a grouped my students into the four groups that I previously mentioned; zero students were below achieving grade level standards, three students were barely achieving grade level standards, six students were proficient, and fourteen were above grade level standards. When I looked specifically at the areas of Ideas and Organization and compared baseline assessment results with post assessment results, twenty-two students showed growth in the area of Ideas, one student declined. In the area of Organization, twenty students showed growth, two students stayed the same, and one student declined.
Data Analysis
How were data analyzed, interpreted and used in this study?
Throughout the duration of this study I routinely collected and analyzed data to inform instruction and next steps in my action research. By utilizing quantitative measurements (students writing samples scored using the district rubric and a numerical scale of students writing dispositions) paired with qualitative research (student self reflections and peer feedback) I was able to identify how students were responding to the applied research methods and topics and what support they still required in order to become engaged, authentic, and skilled persuasive writers.
