Summaries

__From Bob__

When staff were invited in 2007 to join an action research team to work in partnership with the University of Canterbury, I took up the opportunity because I was interested in this kind of research and because I wanted to work with Professor Greenwood, knowing something of her expertise as a facilitator and practitioner of process drama.

We initially considered the umbrella question of how to raise student achievement and were invited to undertake our own action research with a class of our choice. I began with looking at my year 13 English class and entered into discussion with them as to the extent to which they cared about achievement and what were some of the barriers and incentives to this achievement. After some interesting debate and collation of surveys we realised that achieving was fairly high on our wish lists but that the main barrier was to much procrastination and not enough 'flow'. In the manner of action research cycles we then reframed our inquiry to consider how to deal with these issues and as a result developed some mantras such as 'just do it' and 'don't get it right just right it'. We supported our efforts with readings on procrastination and flow, generally found under such topics as 'time management' ( a misnoma) eg http://www.mindtools.com/pages/main/newMN_HTE.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_management. In the process I realised that the research applies to me as much as to them.

This year I shifted my focus to the 'problem' of engagement in year 10 classes, and the possible use of process drama and discussion to enhance literacy and underpin writing by providing real contexts for learning and encouraging reflective practice. I have concurrently been working on a paper in drama in the curriculum towards an MTchLn also with Janinka Greenwood at Chch university. This has not always been successful as discussion is not something these students have ever been trained in. However, daily perseverance has led to a new atmosphere of mutual respect with most students, and I believe we have made some breakthroughs in terms of a sense of learning together, developing metacognitive skills and reflecting on what we are learning and why. In short we have started learning about learning. We focused to some extent on sharing the key competencies of the revised NZ curriculum, especially that of self management. We have recognised that such matters as bringing gear to class and completing homework while positive are still teacher controlled and that a real shift lies in a 'can-do' attitude to learningand the development of a disposition to learn. Research readings of relevance have included: qualitative research and critical theory; NZCER (Himpkin et al); process drama readings: BES on Teacher Development.

Jims PPTA talk summary

With the goal of lifting student engagement levels, my exploration has been to try and get more insight on what makes my year 10’s tick and what turns them on. I have surveyed and regularly discussed with my students now about my music programmes, and their curriculum in general. This has confirmed my understanding of their attitudes to music theory, and the relevance of other aspects of curriculum //in their eyes.// My dilemma was this then: “how can I balance my degree of desired acceptance by these students (so I maintain the optimum working relationship) AGAINST the grating effect of expecting them to perform tasks they think they can’t do.” After pertinent literature investigation, Duffy, G.G. (1999). Teaching and the balancing of Round stones. In //Education Horizons//, Vol 5, No 2. has really got me thinking. After deeper thought regarding what it is that really counts for me as an educator, I find myself aligning //this// more with daily decisions over my dilemmas such as the one stated. Duffy states in his research that some teachers are noticeably better than their peers who received exactly the same training and used exactly the same techniques. I am realising more (thanks to this project) about the value of our own personal elements as resources within our teaching – I’m applying the practical and critical Action research models to my selection of NCEA standards utilising the freedom within the new curriculum, to find the best suited material for my particular unique co-hort based on my awareness //of their// intellectual capital. Further aligning my individual values (especially as a professional musician) with my professional intentions towards education and my students. I want to enable the ‘Flow’ to happen more freely whereby the students and I all sense who we are, where were going, and are confident of our function within our world. Action research models differ in terms of purpose, terminology, and the knowledge that is sought. The influential work by Carr and kemmis (1986) described three models following Habermas’ account of knowledge interests. 1) The technical model based on testing pre-existing theory in practice addresses questions of effectiveness and what works. Evaluation is by objectives. We found out quickly that this form of action research using quantitative data looked like adding to the already oppressive assessment juggernaut we’re dealing with day to day.  2) The practical model, (developing practice more congruent with our own individual thinking) COMBINED with the third model - the critical model (which Carr and Kemmis argue is the most preferable since they see professional development as transformative), are more appealing. The research is around qualitative data eg interviews and observations, and the purpose is the emancipation from oppression and the elimination of unjust practices.
 * Wanted to explore ‘the big picture’ question of how music education, technology and the kids’ own ideology relate **
 * Next step: continue to A-R and modify programmes ** ,

Joined the group late after another member opted out. Initially focused on motivation of students - had used extrinsic rewards for several years in the classroom (as well as positive reinforcements). Readings and research suggested varying stances re motivation and motivating factors. Initiated student led rewards, praise for each other instead of them relying on me to do this. Used for one term and found to be very successful with the YR 8 students - they came up with criteria, name of the initiative and were very fair in who was praised and specific about what for eg. Daisy was helpful in Maths today, she explained what we had to do until I understood it. (transcript from PPTA conference follows) End of term 1, a time for critical reflection for us all. We consider the big questions - what was successful, what needs changing, where to next, how can i be a more effective practitioner? In terms of my research focus - changes have been made - moved away form motivation for success to 'engaging students actively in their own learning' and success for us as a whanau class. (Yr 9 cohort for 4 subjects and whanau) Studies have found that students become more disengaged from school as they progress from primary to middle and high school. Klem and Connell (2004) identify three forms of engagement linked to academic success - cognitive, emotional and behavioural examples of which are - paying attention, interest/enthusiasm and trying hard/work completion. My aim with my students is to have them actively processing information, making connections, analysing their own learning. To be aler and ontask and to be excited in what they are experiencing at school. One of the most robust predictors of student achievement and behaviour in school is engagement, regardless of socio-economic factors. How then do i create an environment where engagement is high, students are motivated, and we are enjoying ourselves? Kem & Connell assert that the relationship between student's school experiences an their level of engagement is mediated by three sets of psychological variables - Beliefs about competence and control (what they believe about how good they are), Values and goals (motivating factors), and Connectedness (the feelings of being respected, valued and cared about). This term therefore was spent building relationships - working on our connectedness, assessing learning styles, as well as stardardised ability testing. As a whanau class we also worked on how we could take ownership of our learning. As a whanau teacher and teaching this group of students in 4 key learning areas I base all of my teaching around building relationships with my students. This aligned with findings from the Linwood project - encouraging openness, creating a mutually safe environment where we all are both learners and teachers (I call this our power //less, but// power full model). Also altered reflective model, and we share this and reflect regularly on how we are doing. The introduction of the revised curriculum and key competencies fit well with how I have realigned my practice. Why I found this research empowering - because it gave me an opportunity and focus to read more extensively, include my students in work outside of school (though they knew it was premised on their learning and success). Has given me an appetite to take the time to focus on myself as a learner and given me an area of study to continue with. This sums up why this experience was important for me and I hope the group as a whole: //Empowering teachers to conduct research and to connect that research to the implementation of new teaching approaches can ultimately equip them with strategies that promote improved teaching and learning practices. Action Research has the potential to promote teacher effectiveness, professionalism, and empowerment. Teachers need to actively study the practice of teaching in order to meet the demands of a swiftly changing society (Beth Lynne Browne, 2002, Dr of Philosophy - Educational Leadership and Policy Studies). Kia kaha, ako ako ako.//
 * Michele's PPTA summary.**