CHAPTER I DESIGN OF THE PROJECT AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ______________________________________________________________________ Part I: Design of the Project The Research

h Question: In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in a diversified classroom?

Rationale for Selecting the Research Question The general idea that I want to focus on relates to improving my ability to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all my students within an inclusive learning environment. As a new educator, I find differentiation for students in my classroom to be particularly challenging and often the results are characterized by the creation of scaffolds for my students with exceptional needs but do not necessarily address the needs of my students with exceptional ability. It is my opinion that this question is focused on a topic that is a challenge that I want to change within my instructional practice; is a need that I am both passionate and actively concerned about.

Definition of Key Terms Classroom Culture- Classroom routines and structures for learning; language and conversational patterns; implicit and explicit expectations; modeling by teachers and other shareholders; the physical environment; relationships and patterns of interaction and the creation of opportunities.

Compass Points- a thinking routine using the directions of a compass rose to help students explore various facets of an idea before taking a stand on it. (Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D., p 59 2008)

Connect-Extend-Challenge-a thinking routine that uses a set of three questions to help students identify connections between seemingly disparate pieces of challenging information. (Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D., p 59 2008)

Cooperative

Learning-

an

approach

to

learning

that

hinges

on

individual

accountability, while students collaborate with each other to achieve a common goal. (Mills, p. 98)

Design Challenge: a specific undertaking focused on the production of a product (Meyer et. al. p.41, 2006)

Differentiation- multiple delivery systems of the content within a curriculum as well as the variety of work products and processes used to assess mastery of this content (Tomlinson, 2012)

Diversity- a wide range of students with a variety of backgrounds, learning styles and abilities (Mills, p 216)

Headlines A thinking routine using the format of newspaper headlines to summarize the key points of a topic or an event. (Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D., p 59 2008)

Habits of Mind- Seeking Significance: Why is this idea or topic important?; Using Evidence: How do we know what we know?; Considering Viewpoints: What is

perspective?; Asking What if: What other alternatives should be considered?; Making Connections: How is this idea or topic related to other ideas or topics?

Habits of Work- Organization: We have what we need, know where it is and know what we have to do; Focus: We participate, listen actively, and ask questions; Punctuality: We arrive on time.; Cooperation: We help ourselves and others to learn; Revision: We see our work as a process whereby we review, correct, share with peers and finalize.

Innovation-New ways to deliver information to students

Instructional Strategies-The outcomes of studies related to teacher practices like cooperative learning, and increase in wait time that can be used to create a set of best practices within a classroom setting.

Linking Knowledge-activation of knowledge learned prior to current lessons to form new connections in understanding (Mills, p. 9)

Modeling: A construction task centered on creating a functioning model of natural phenomena (Meyer et. al. p.43, 2006)

Organizing/giving instructions- a set instructions that account for all procedural interactions within a lesson (Berry & Kim, p. 368, 2008)

Performance based Assessment- The use of technology to leverage resources to communicate the results of a time intensive real world problem.

Project Based Learning- The use of complex real world projects that align with standards that require critical thinking, the ability to combine information from multiple sources, work in teams and result in both written and oral communication of results.

Protocols: a precise practice for collecting data that can be applied to an assortment of settings (Meyer et. al, p.41, 2006)

Questioning/eliciting- a set of straightforward, closed ended questions that direct students toward a final answer (Berry & Kim, p. 367, 2008)

Shareholders- Teachers, students, administrators and parents

Sociating- a set of strategies designed to pull students into lesson dialogue while maintaining the social relations of the lesson. (Berry & Kim, p. 368, 2008)

See-Think-Wonder - A thinking routine that uses inquiry and curiosity to help students make observations about a complex image or event. (Ritchhart, & Perkins, p 59 2008)

Wait time- Period of silence that allows students to respond to questions posed during instruction (Mills, p.80)

Participants The setting for this study was an urban high school located on the Upper Eastside of Manhattan populated by a diverse student body of 432 students 80% of whom receive free or reduced fare school lunch. The subjects of the initial phase of this study were 15 high school teachers (all assigned participant identification letters). Data on teacher views that related to the research question were collected using a Likert-style survey created by the teacher-researcher.

The breakdown of the participants in this study was as follows: Number Position 7 2 6 Classroom Teacher Student Teacher Classroom Teacher Work Environment Inclusion Inclusion Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 10th 9th -12th

Participant ID A B C D E F G H

Work Environment

Position(s) Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Teacher

Grade(s) 10th, 11th,12th 10th 10th 10th 11th, 12th 9th, 11th 9th-12th 9th , 12th

Living Environment Inclusion Living Environment Inclusion Living Environment Inclusion Math Special Education

Physics Inclusion/Technology Inclusion Teacher Humanities Special Education Humanities Special Education Math Inclusion Teacher Teacher Teacher

I J K

Math Inclusion Math Inclusion Science Special Education, Biopsychology Inclusion

Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher

11th, 12th 9th 9th 11th 9th-12th 9th-12th 9th-12th 9th 10th 9th-12th

ELA Inclusion Spanish Inclusion

M N

Humanities Special Education Science Special Education Humanities Special Education

Chemistry Inclusion

Part II A Review of the Literature Source #1: Edutopia: (Aguilar blog 2013) Within this blog, Elena Aguilar (2013) enumerates structural supports necessary for teachers to cultivate pedagogical skills that can result in more weighty learning experiences for both teachers and students. The author looks at an

educational community in a systematic manner that investigates concepts of equity, shared pedagogical vision and professional development. One of the major concepts that stood out is Aguilars working definition of deeper learning as a major driver for educationally equitable classrooms. To reiterate Aguilars words, an equitable classroom is one where every child receives the support necessary to succeed in both college and their chosen careers. From my perspective, the authors call for a rich collection of creative delivery systems for content including collaboration and inquiry aligns well with my research question.

Source #2: Teachers Network: (Clinkscales article, 1997) Within this article, Gwen Clinkscales (1997) describes a policy practice called shared leadership as an alternative to the top-down governance commonly prescribed by policy makers on the lets improve test scores bandwagon. The author uses the challenges faced by the W. Haywood Burns School, a member of the Core of Essential Schools as a case study on the pros and cons for shared leadership within a successful school system. As my school is also a member of a similar consortium, this article seemed to present an appropriate lens to study my research question. The author highlights shared leadership as a paradigm shift that allows schools to become communities of learners with an equal share in the academic success of all of its members. One of the major concepts that stood out is Clinkscales idea that schools should put practices in place to allow all members of the learning community to be held accountable for the success of all students by leveraging multiple student centered alternatives to high stakes testing. To put a fine point on it, Clinskscales suggests that schools should be given the freedom to develop multiple measures of accountability that exhibit student mastery of content which are given equal weight to high-stakes test scores. Source #3: (Mills Text, pp: 198-200) Mills illuminates the work of Penny Junemann (2004) whose theoretical framework included cooperative learning. This particular source uses the work of (Trempy, 2002) to suggest that students learn best when they are able to leverage strengths and perspectives garnered within diverse groups within a school or classroom

setting. Junemann discusses a host of changes to her instructional practice including but not limited to 1. 2. Increasing the number of discussion opportunities within the classroom setting Increasing the number of high-order questions (using Blooms taxonomy as a lens) 3. Added guided inquiry as a tool for scientific laboratory assignments.

The author uses the data collected by Junemann to emphasize that action allows for improving pedagogical practice by not simply collecting data, but using the outcomes to help improve the learning environment for both teachers and students. The importance of this particular source to my research question was that it describes the pitfalls associated with one of the instructional practices which were of interest to my research topic, cooperative learning. Source #4 : Ebscohost Database: (Pearlman article, 2006) Within this article, Bob Pearlman (2006) makes a case for twenty first century learning marked by project-based learning. The author uses the challenges faced by the New Technology High School, as a case study on the benefits for project based learning within a school system charged with educating students for the needs of a 21st century society. Pearlman suggests that the key design issues for developing successful strategies for 21st century schools involves identifying the knowledge and skills students need, along with curricula, assessments, facilities and technology required to obtain said knowledge. As my research question is related to identifying the

central strategies required for student mastery over content, this article seemed to be well aligned with my research question. The author highlights project-based learning as a methodology that allows schools to provide opportunities for students to successfully tackle complex problems while leveraging both collaboration and critical thinking. One of the key concepts that stood out is the idea that schools should put practices in place to allow students to present work to multiple experts at several time intervals throughout the project. More precisely, Pearlman recommends that schools should be given the choice to utilize a panel of experts drawn from the community to as sess student understanding of content. These experts would be tasked with monitoring student progress within a complex assignment at several time stamped benchmarks of critical thinking as an alternative to students writing solely for their teacher to assess their mastery. Source #5 : Ebscohost Database: (Ritchhart and Perkins article, 2008) Within this article, Ron Richhart and David Perkins (2008) elucidate the idea of making thinking visible. The writers characterize successful educational

communities as those where thinking is king, because from their perspectives learning is a consequence of thinking marked by open-minded, intellectually curious teams of collaborators who use evidence, skepticism and imagination to take stance on complex issues. One of the six anchors emphasized by Ritchhart and Perkins is that the tone of learning is set by the culture of a classroom that governs the rhythm of thoughtful learning. In particular, the authors describe the thinking routines like headlines, connect-extend-challenge, see-think-wonder and compass points to summarize, make connections, record observations and take stances on topics based on

information gathered either prior to or within a class period. From my perspective, the authors call for promoting open mindedness and intellectual curiosity while using tools like thinking routines and to build on students prior knowledge align well with my research question. Source #6 : Ebscohost Database: (Clymer and William article, 2006) Jacqueline B. Clymer and Dylan William (2006) reassert research by Black and William (1998) and William, et.al (2004) that suggest that standards based grading can not only improve our expectations to students, but can improve the manner in which students learn and measure how much science they have learned. The author points out that according to William and Thompson (in press) using assessment for learning or formative assessment can double the rate of student learning and it makes the case for integrating these types of assessments into the architecture used to assess National systems of Learning within the United States of America. The author highlights Terry Crooks (1998) review that indicated how assessment for grading had far outpaced the use of assessment to support student learning. This stood out to me because my school has switched to a web based application that leverages a standards based grading system called JUMPROPE. JUMPROPE allows users to give students and their parents a color coded overview of their mastery levels on a scale of 1 (No evidence of mastery, colored red) to 5 (Highly proficient, colored green) for individual skills, outcomes, and standards. Standards based grading is certainly directly related my research question because it represents a methodology focused on transforming a superficial and numerical interest in grades into a deeper understanding of complex material. In particular, having a tool that can show student growth over time

10

as they are provided greater access to information is both informative and revolutionary (well to my instructional practice in any event). Similarly, having a database that aligns each work product, every content area and each process to standards like JUMPROPE, gives clarity and transparency into the strengths and weaknesses of each student. Source #7 : Ebscohost Database: (Myer et. al. article, 2012) A group of authors lead by Daniel Z. Meyer noted that creating meaningful opportunities for students to internalize complex content is deeply challenging. The writers recommend a series of eight strategies to implement inquiry as an instructional strategy after studying hundreds of inquiry based activities across multiple curricula. Three of the approaches stood out to me for the broad range applicability that these strategies: A) Protocols B) Design Challenge C) Modeling With regards to Protocols, the authors suggest that students can be taught to integrate existing an new technical skills so that they can address broader, more complex problems instead of focusing on traditional cookbook recipe problems with discrete solutions. Similarly, regarding Design Challenge, the authors highlight the flexibility of this technique to positively impact student understanding of challenging content by emphasizing individual responsibility within the construct of teamwork. The authors describe the design challenge method of inquiry as a system where students form

11

smaller specialty groups to become experts on individual parts of a problem, then research a topic. After the topic has been researched in specialty groups, the students then from groups that have a representative from each of the specialty groups. The final type of inquiry the authors suggested was called modeling, which is of particular interest to my instruction, since many of the phenomena within the Physics curriculum are to complex to directly investigate, but can be modeled. This is directly related to my research topic, because I can investigate the effectiveness of using protocols, design challenges and modeling as a methods of inquiry during the course of my study. Source #8 : Ebscohost Database: (Moorehead and Grillo article, 2013) Within this article, Tanya Moorehead and Kelly Grillo (2013) describe a coteaching model called station teaching as an alternative to the traditional classroom configuration of rows where educators float from student to student. The authors focus on effective co-teaching practices with a science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) inclusive classroom, but note the applicability of this method to any classroom setting. The writers use an example of an inclusive science classroom of 32 students to show the effectiveness of well-planned stations to teaching complex content. Moorehead and Grillo describe the benefits and challenges of traditional classroom settings in comparison to station teaching in STEM classrooms. The author suggests that station teaching, which may increase classroom noise decreases studentto-teacher ratios and allow for multiple opportunities for guided inquiry within a single classroom. The physical layout of the classroom and its effect on student engagement and understanding within an inclusive setting is directly related to my research question.

12

As my content area is in a mathematics driven physical science, this article seemed to present an appropriate lens to study my research question. Source #9 : Ebscohost Database: (Berry and Kim article, 2008) Within this paper, Ruth A. Wiebe Berry and Namsook Kim (2008) analyze a set of four lessons to determine patterns of successful instructional strategies for the benefit of students with exceptional needs within a mathematics inclusion classroom. The authors investigate the effect of teacher utterances on student mastery of the content contained in a two-week unit of mathematics instruction. Three of the categories of utterances stood out to me: 1) Questioning/eliciting 2) Organizing/giving instructions 3) Sociating According to the work of Berry and Kim(2008) questions accounted for 45% of all teacher utterances and there was a markedly significant use of incremental questioning/eliciting for the more experienced teachers in the study. The category of organizing/giving instructions is related to my research question, because this category focuses on techniques on how to adequately control transitions so that all of the students understand the expectations and requirements of each task. The category of sociating talk is of particular interest to my research question, because a significant set of students with exceptional needs have trouble communicating well with others in an academic setting.

13

CHAPTER II DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES Part I Design of the Questionnaires Research Question In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in a diversified classroom?

Participants The setting for this study was an urban high school located on the Upper Eastside of Manhattan populated by a diverse student body of 432 students 80% of whom receive free or reduced fare school lunch. The subjects of the initial phase of this study were 15 high school teachers (all assigned participant identification letters). The instruments used to collect data on teacher views that related to the research question included, a Likert-style survey, and a direct observation and follow up questions and created by the teacher-researcher.

The breakdown of the participants in this study was as follows: Number Position 7 2 6 Classroom Teacher Student Teacher Classroom Teacher Work Environment Inclusion Inclusion Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 10th 9th -12th

14

Participant ID A B C D E F G H I J K

Work Environment

Position(s) Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Teacher

Grade(s) 10th, 11th,12th 10th 10th 10th 11th, 12th 9th, 11th 9th-12th 9th , 12th 11th, 12th 9th 9th 11th 9th-12th 9th-12th 9th-12th

Living Environment Inclusion Living Environment Inclusion Living Environment Inclusion Math Special Education

Physics Inclusion/Technology Inclusion Teacher Humanities Special Education Humanities Special Education Math Inclusion Math Inclusion Math Inclusion Science Special Education, Biopsychology Inclusion Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher 9th

ELA Inclusion Spanish Inclusion

M N

Humanities Special Education Science Special Education Humanities Special Education

10th 9th-12th

Chemistry Inclusion

15

Questions to be included in Questionnaire Question #1: I think that test preparation requirements tend to interfere with my ability to conduct lessons effectively in diversified classrooms.

Question #2: I think that the manner in which the furniture in my classroom is situated interferes with my ability to provide individualized and group instruction.

Question #3: I think that my access to the Internet and other electronic devices interferes with my ability to provide effective instruction for my students.

Question #4: I think that a cooperative learning method is an effective teaching strategy for my students.

Question #5: I think that problem solving in the content areas can be an effective way of assessing students ability to analyze issues.

Question #6: I think that the Habits of Mind (Making Connections, Using Evidence, Considering Viewpoints, Being Metacognitive, Seeking Significance, Asking what if?) is an effective teaching technique to help students make academic progress.

Question #7: I think that the Habits of Work (Punctuality, Organization, Focus, Cooperation, Revision) is an effective teaching technique to help students make academic progress.

16

Question #8: I think that students progress in attaining literacy skills in accordance with required grade levels requirements, enable teachers to plan lessons effectively for diversified classrooms. Question #9: I think that the scheduling of pullout programs affects my ability to conduct lessons effectively.

Question #10: I think that performance-based assessment is an effective way to measure student mastery and achievement.

Questionnaire Sample: see addenda for full questionnaire. ACTION RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE FORMAT (Adult Personnel) Participant ID: Position: Grade(s):

Research Question: In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in diversified classes? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Question/Statement: I think that test preparation requirements tend to interfere with my ability to conduct lessons effectively in diversified classrooms. Strongly Agree ( ) Agree ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly Disagree ( ) Not Applicable ( )

17

Part II Questionnaire Follow-Up Interviews The setting for this study was an urban high school located on the Upper Eastside of Manhattan populated by a diverse student body of 432 students 80% of whom receive free or reduced fare school lunch. The subjects of the secondary phase of this study were 6 high school teachers (3 inclusion teachers, 3 special education teachers). The instruments used to collect data on teacher views that related to the research question included, a Likert-style survey, and a direct observation and follow up questions and created by the teacher-researcher. The breakdown of the participants in this study was as follows: Number 3 3 Position Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Work Environment Inclusion Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 9th -12th

Participant ID D E F J N

Work Environment

Position(s) Teacher

Grade(s) 10th 11th, 12th 9th, 11th 9th 9th 10th 9th-12th

Math Special Education

Physics Inclusion/Technology Inclusion Teacher Humanities Special Education Math Inclusion Science Special Education Humanities Special Education Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher

Chemistry Inclusion

18

Questionnaire Follow-up: Informal Interview Questions Question #1: What instructional strategies do we currently implement that have positive impact on student understanding of content? Question #2 : What instructional strategy is most effective for teaching your students content? Why do think this is the case? Question #3 : How do you know that your students are learning the content using this instructional strategy? What data do you have to suggest that this method is the most effective for delivering content in your classroom?

Part III - Additional Research Instruments Direct Observations

Research Question In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in a diversified classroom?

Observation: Purpose and Setting The purpose of the direct observation tool was to determine if the instructional strategies of modeling, cooperative learning and protocols are effective tools for improving student understanding within an inclusive high school classroom setting. Teacher N and Teacher O co-teach a high school science lesson in classroom where the furniture layout is in four student member stations. The setting for this observation
19

was an inclusion classroom at an urban high school located on the Upper Eastside of Manhattan with a total of 27 students five of whom have exceptional needs. Each observation was for 30 minutes during the main portion of the lesson (15 minutes into a 90 minute block) during Block 2 on March 5th, 2013. The observed behaviors using this research instrument include: 1) Teachers: Organizing/giving instructions; Questioning/eliciting 2) Students: On task/ Off task

Running Record The 10th grade chemistry students that I observed understood showed adequate to proficient understanding of the material being presented to them. Teacher O

presented a clearly defined learning intention followed by clear instructions on a time constrained initial task to begin the lesson. Within the classroom structure there was a clearly defined self-assessment tool that the students had to follow during the main portion of the lesson. There were three versions of the material to account for student tardiness, learning level and previous performance that fit into to three student defined categories. The protocol being observed involved a students verbal poll which commenced after reading the initial assignment regarding a choice of category they wanted to begin the lesson at: 1) Plateau (for those students not sure of the focus of the question); 2) Uphill (I can accept this challenge) and 3) Mountain Top (This is easy give me more). The laid-back attitude of teacher N effectively neutralized tardiness, outbursts and
20

inappropriate behavior. Teacher O took note of the student responses to the poll on the Promethean board. Teacher N adjusted the station materials according to the student oral response to the poll. Teacher O then circulated through the top half of the room, while Teacher N circulated through the bottom checking for accuracy and understanding giving students a stamped number to correspond to a rubric that was prominently displayed in the classroom. (1- Novice, 2-Advanced Beginner 3-Competent 4-Proficient 5-Highly Proficient) As the teachers circulated, each took time to address comments that were not correct answers, but introduced broader information to the class. Teacher N employed the instructional strategy of questioning/eliciting to determine which category students self identified with as they cycled through each station. The teachers body language suggested a laid-back attitude and at first glance they appeared to not have control over the classroom. However, they kept the students on task, checked for understanding, re-directed incorrect verbal answers to add depth to the subject matter. For example a student introduced the term mechanical energy,

which was not applicable to the question asked, but was related to larger topic of conservation of energy in chemistry. The teacher asked the student to describe the vocabulary words discussed in the Warm-Up used cues to help guide the class to a place where they understood what the word meant, and why it was an inappropriate answer to the topic being discussed, which was balancing chemical equations. One

thing that stood out with this lesson was that there were multiple versions of the WarmUp that each related to the learning intention to account for student tardiness. I asked teacher N about it after the lesson and was shown a breakdown of student understanding on a set of proficiencies, students were given a version of the

21

assignment based on student understanding along with their category of choice. The proficiency for this lesson was: Interpret balanced chemical equations in terms of conservation of matter and energy For example, students who were had shown a novice or advanced beginner level of mastery on the proficiency and chose the Plateau category for this lesson were placed at a station with scale models that corresponded to an equation to be balanced. Students who had shown a competent level of mastery and had chosen the Uphill category were placed at station with computer models of a set of equations to be balanced. Students who had shown a proficient or highly proficient level of mastery and chose the mountain top category for this lesson were placed at a station with chemical reactants and were tasked with creating the required product, and calculating the amount of moles of product produced during their experiment. Once students had completed the work at their stations, teacher O tasked students with forming small groups with one representative from each station per group. The students complied within the 5 minutes they were allotted. Teacher N prompted the whole class to remember to use all of the information gathered using the stations to create a lab report proposal to be approved before the end of the lesson.

CHAPTER III: ORGANIZINATION, ANALYSIS, INTEPRETATION GUIDELINES Participants Data: Questionnaire A Number 9 2 4 Position Classroom Teacher Student Teacher Classroom Teacher Work Environment Inclusion Inclusion Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 10th 9th -12th

22

The Research Question: In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in a diversified classroom?

Quantitative Data Results:

Question #1: I think that test preparation requirements tend to interfere with my ability to conduct lessons effectively in diversified classrooms. Responses: (1) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (2) Inclusion Teachers - Disagreed (3) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Disagreed; (1) Inclusion Teacher had no opinion; (1) Student Teacher Disagreed; (1) Student Teacher- Strongly Disagreed; (1) Special Education Teacher- Strongly Agreed; (3) Special Education Teachers Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher- Disagreed; (1) Special Education- Strongly Disagreed

Question #2: I think that the manner in which the furniture in my classroom is situated interferes with my ability to provide individualized and group instruction. Responses: (2) Inclusion Teachers - Agreed; (3) Inclusion Teachers - Disagreed (2) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Disagreed; (1) Student Teacher Disagreed; (1) Student Teacher Strongly Disagreed; (1) Special Education Teacher- Strongly Agreed; (3) Special Education Teachers Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher- Disagreed; (1) Special Education Teacher- Strongly Disagreed

23

Question #3: I think that my access to the Internet and other electronic devices interferes with my ability to provide effective instruction for my students. Responses: (1) Inclusion Teacher Strongly Agreed; (3) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (1) Inclusion Teachers - Disagreed (2) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Disagreed; (2) Student Teachers Strongly Disagreed; (2) Special Education Teachers- Strongly Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher Agreed; (3) Special Education TeachersStrongly Disagreed

Question #4: I think that a cooperative learning method is an effective teaching strategy for my students. Responses: (4) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Agreed; (1) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (2) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Disagreed; (1) Student Teacher Strongly Agreed; (1) Student Teacher Agreed; (2) Special Education Teachers - Strongly Agreed; (4) Special Education Teachers Agreed

Question #5: I think that problem solving in the content areas can be an effective way of assessing students ability to analyze issues. Responses: (2) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Agreed; (5) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (2) Student Teachers Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher - Strongly Agreed; (5) Special Education Teachers Agreed

24

Question #6: I think that the Habits of Mind (Making Connections, Using Evidence, Considering Viewpoints, Being Metacognitive, Seeking Significance, Asking what if?) is an effective teaching technique to help students make academic progress. Responses: (4) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Agreed; (2) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (2) Student Teacher Strongly Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher Strongly Agreed; (4) Special Education Teachers Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher Strongly Disagreed

Question #7: I think that the Habits of Work (Punctuality, Organization, Focus, Cooperation, Revision) is an effective teaching technique to help students make academic progress. Responses: (4) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Agreed; (2) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (2) Student Teacher Strongly Agreed; (2) Special Education Teachers Strongly Agreed; (3) Special Education Teachers Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher Strongly Disagreed

Question #8: I think that students progress in attaining literacy skills in accordance with required grade levels requirements, enable teachers to plan lessons effectively for diversified classrooms. Responses: (4) Inclusion Teachers Strongly Agreed; (2) Inclusion Teacher - Agreed; (2) Student Teacher Strongly Agreed; (4) Special Education Teachers Strongly Agreed; (2) Special Education Teachers Agreed;

25

Question #9: I think that the scheduling of pullout programs affects my ability to conduct lessons effectively. Responses: (3) Inclusion Teachers Agreed; (2) Inclusion Teacher Strongly Disagreed; (2) Inclusion Teachers had no opinion; (2) Student Teacher Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher Strongly Agreed; (3) Special Education Teachers Agreed; (2) Special Education Teacher Strongly Disagreed

Question #10: I think that performance-based assessment is an effective way to measure student mastery and achievement. Responses: (3) Inclusion Teachers Agreed; (3) Inclusion Teacher Strongly Disagreed; (1) Inclusion Teacher had no opinion; (1) Student Teacher Strongly Agreed; (1) Student Teacher Agreed; (5) Special Education Teachers Strongly Agreed; (1) Special Education Teacher Agreed;

26

Consensus Analysis (ISS teachers)

6 5 Number of Responses 4 3 2 1 0 q1 q2 q3 q4 q5 q6 q7 Question Number q8 q9 q10 Strong Dis Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

Figure 1. Questionnaire A Responses for Special Education Teachers

Consensus Analysis(Student Teachers)

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 q1 q2 q3 q4 q5 q6 q7 Question Number q8 q9 q10

Number of Responses

Strong Dis Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

Figure 2. Questionnaire A Responses for Student Teachers

27

Consensus Analysis (Inclusion Teachers)

6 5 Number of Responses 4 Strong Dis 3 2 1 0 q1 q2 q3 q4 q5 q6 q7 Question number q8 q9 q10 Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A

Figure 3. Questionnaire A Responses for Inclusion Teachers

Analysis and Interpretation of the Data: With respect to the questions about the amount of interference caused by test preparation requirements, it appears that the majority of the inclusion classroom teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable interference to curriculum scope and sequence, while a few indicated that the amount of interference was minimally significant. However, the majority of the special

education and student teachers interviewed had a appreciably different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given liberal quantities of test preparation were less meaningful than were the actual disruptions to the required curriculum scope and sequence.

28

In the writers view, the incongruity between the outlooks of the personnel involved in test preparation programs needs to be investigated further in order to resolve the problems inherent in implementing them.

With respect to the questions about the amount of interference caused by furniture arrangement in classrooms, it appears that the majority of the inclusion classroom teachers and student teachers interviewed felt that there was minimal interference to curriculum scope and sequence, while a few indicated that the amount of interference was appreciably noteworthy. However, the majority of the special education and student teachers interviewed had a substantially different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given instruction in classrooms with flexible furniture arrangements were more meaningful than those with rigid furniture arrangements.

In the writers view, the incongruity between the outlo oks of the personnel involved on the effect of furniture arrangement on student engagement and learning within a classroom setting test needs to be investigated further in order to resolve the problems inherent in implementing them.

With respect to the questions about the amount of interference caused by lack of access to the internet and other electronic equipment in classrooms, it appears that the majority of the inclusion classroom teachers and special

29

education teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable interference to the effectiveness of instruction, while a few indicated that the amount of interference was negligible. However, the majority of the student teachers interviewed had a substantially different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given instruction in classrooms without internet access was trivial compared those who had wide access to internet and electronic resources.

In the writers view, the incongruity between the outlo oks of the personnel involved on the effect of internet access and electronic resources on student performance within a classroom setting test needs to be investigated further in order to resolve the problems inherent in incorporating them into a curriculum.

With respect to the questions about the amount of effectiveness of cooperative learning as an instructional strategy, it appears that a consensus of the student teachers and special education teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable evidence as to the effectiveness of cooperative learning during instruction. However, a vocal minority of the inclusion teachers interviewed had a distinctly different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given instruction in classrooms using cooperative learning was

inconsequential compared those who had material delivered to them using direct instruction.

In the writers view, the driving force behind the consensus among the outlooks of

30

the majority of personnel involved on the effect of the cooperative learning method on student performance within a classroom setting test needs to be investigated further in order to generalize the implementation of this strategy across the schoolwide curriculum.

With respect to the questions about the amount of effectiveness of alternative assessments as valuable instructional strategies, it appears that a consensus of the all of the teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable evidence as to the efficacy of alternative assessments of understanding both during and post instruction.

In the writers view, the motivation behind the consensus among the outlooks of the majority of personnel involved on the effect of the alternative assessments on student performance within a classroom setting test needs to be investigated further in order to generalize the implementation of this strategy across the schoolwide curriculum.

Connections to Review of the Literature findings: Clymer, Jacqueline B. and William, Dylan (2006) in their study found that three fourths of students surveyed prepared for assessments once teachers switched to an alternative assessment system, which was a 50 % increase from the prior year. A critical mass (40 %) of the pupils at New Tech High School who were given alternative assessments using project based learning were found to go into STEM fields compared to 7% of the students nationwide. (Pearlman, 2006)

31

Participants Data: Questionnaire A Number 7 2 6 Position Classroom Teacher Student Teacher Classroom Teacher Work Environment Inclusion Inclusion Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 10th 9th -12th

Results of the Questionnaire Follow-Up Interviews Participants Data: Informal Interview Questions Number 3 3 Position Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Work Environment Inclusion Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 9th -12th Position(s) Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Grade(s) 10th 11th, 12th 9th, 11th 9th 9th 10th 9th-12th

Participant ID D E F J N

Work Environment

Math Special Education Physics Inclusion/Technology Inclusion Humanities Special Education Math Inclusion Science Special Education Humanities Special Education

Chemistry Inclusion

The question I posed was: What instructional strategies do we currently implement that have positive impact on student understanding of content? Participants D, E, F, J, N, O responded.

32

Participant D stated that the Habits of mind, the Habits of Work and cooperative learning are the instructional strategies that work within our school community. Participant E stated that the Habits of mind and Questioning/eliciting are the instructional strategies that work within our school community. Participant F stated that the Habits of mind and effectively using wait time are the instructional strategies that work within our school community help students extend their understanding of classroom content. Participant J stated that using protocols, the Habits of mind and linking knowledge across disciplines are the instructional strategies that work within our school community. Participant N stated that the instructional strategies of cooperative learning, Habits of Mind and defined student roles within the classroom help students understand classroom content. Participant O stated that using models helps improve student understanding of content.

All six teachers felt that our community of learners has a variety of instructional strategies that work, but spoke about a lack of continuity of instructional strategies between subject area classrooms.

33

The question I posed was: What instructional strategy is most effective for teaching your students content? Why do think this is the case? Participants D, E, F, J, N, O responded Participant D stated using the thinking routine See-Think-Wonder help students activate prior knowledge and master complex course material because it can be used with interactive videos as an effective hook to begin the lesson. Participant E stated that asking students to Prove it as a habit of mind helps students understand classroom content because this strategy requires students to keep searching for supporting evidence for their current solutions. Participant F stated that asking students What if as a habit of mind helps students extend their understanding of classroom content because this strategy requires students to consider multiple viewpoints of complex scenarios. Participant J stated that using protocols, like having students write take out notebooks and write the agenda down during the first five minutes of every class session or summarize information using Cornell style notes, help students master material. Participant N - stated that using the instructional strategy of cooperative learning helps students understand classroom content because it allows students to leverage each others strengths when tackling complex problems. Participant O - stated that using models helps improve student understanding of content because modeling allows students tactile understanding of complicated ideas. The majority of the teachers felt that our community of learners has instructional strategies that work, but spoke about a lack of cohesion between classroom teachers on implementation of these strategies across disciplines.

34

The question I posed was: How do you know that your students are learning the content using this instructional strategy? What data do you have to suggest that this method is the most effective for delivering content in your classroom? Participants D, E, F, J, N, O responded. Participant D stated that student performance on exit tickets that correspond to the thinking routine See-Think-Wonder show that students have internalized the knowledge introduced during the lesson with this instructional strategy. Participant E stated that student performance on weekly understanding checks that have challenge questions that ask students to prove or disprove a hypothesis show that students have mastered content introduced during the lesson with this instructional strategy. Participant F stated that the quality of student draft writing each weeks that require students to consider multiple viewpoints show that student have garnered content mastery using this instructional strategy. Participant J stated that the quality of student presentations at the end of the unit that require the students to create protocols to teach their classmates a real world application of a topic from the unit show that students are mastering content with this instructional strategy. Participant N - stated that the student performance on daily challenge problems which required synthesis of ideas from each classroom role within a cooperative team show that students are mastering content using this instructional strategy.

35

Participant O - stated that student performance on biweekly exhibitions where students have to create their own model of a complex system within the current unit show that students are mastering content using this instructional strategy.

The majority of the teachers felt that our community of learners has a great tool for gathering data on each of these instructional strategies called JUMPROPE, but spoke about a lack of technical expertise on using this tool effectively.

Reporting the Results of the Direct Observations Data Participant Data: Number 1 1 3 Position Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Pupils Work Environment Inclusion Special Education Special Education Grade(s) 9th-12th 10th 10th 14-16 Ages

Setting Information: The setting for this observation was two inclusion classrooms at an urban high school located on the Upper Eastside of Manhattan with a total of 56 students six of whom have exceptional needs.

Observations: The purpose of the direct observation tool was to determine if the instructional strategies of modeling, cooperative learning and protocols are effective tools for

36

improving student understanding within an inclusive high school classroom setting. Teacher N and Teacher O co-teach a high school science lesson in classroom where the furniture layout is in four student member stations. Each observation was for 20 minutes during the main portion of the lesson (15 minutes into a 90 minute block) during Block 2 and Block 3 on March 5th, 2013. The observed behaviors using this research instrument include: 1) Teachers: Organizing/giving instructions; Questioning/eliciting 2) Students: On task/ Off task Observation Notes: Block 2 (1) Inclusion Teacher Questioning/eliciting (8 minutes) (22 questions) (Do Now- 3 questions) (Activity- 15 questions) (Transition to lab stations 4 questions); (1) Special Education Teacher Organizing/Giving Instructions (5 minutes) (10 instructions) (Do Now-2 instructions) (Activity- 3 follow-up assignment of student roles) (Transition to lab stations- 7 instructions) (3) Special Education Teachers Off task (2 minutes) (Transition to lab stations-2 minutes)

Observation Notes: Block 3 (1) Inclusion Teacher Questioning/eliciting (2 minutes) (5 questions) (Activity- 3 questions) (Transition to lab stations 2 questions); (1) Special Education Teacher Organizing/Giving Instructions (2 minutes) (3 instructions) (Activity- 2 instructions related to follow-up assignment of student roles) (Transition to lab stations- 1 instruction) (3) Special Education Teachers Off task (4 minutes) (Activity- 1 minute) (Transition to lab stations-3 minutes)

37

Analysis and Interpretation of Results The observations that were made fulfilled the purpose in that they allowed me to look at the interactions between all of the shareholders within a classroom while an instructional strategy was being implemented. Next time, I would look at the same 20minute span for a set of students with exceptional needs during their entire instructional day. Basically, I would follow the students schedules with them and monitor both on task and off task behavior across disciplines for the same instructional strategy. This would involve the cooperation of grade level teams, the administration, parents and students within our community. The writer identified (3) students in each of (2) 10th grade chemistry classrooms to observe with respect to on-task and off-task behavior. Each of the observations

lasted for 20 minutes and notes were recorded regarding these behaviors. The writer identified (1) inclusion teacher and (1) special education teacher to observe with respect to organizing/giving instructions as well as questioning/eliciting The analysis and interpretation of the results showed that in all (6) observed situations (teacher-student interactions during Do Now, Activity and transition to lab stations), the children were off-task for only (6) minutes of the (20) observed minutes the majority of which happened during the Block 3 observation, which seems to indicate that the cooperative learning method positively affects the level of concentration among students performing tasks as a member of a team while maintaining individual responsibility for work. The analysis and interpretation of the results showed that in the first (3) observed situations the inclusion teacher spent (8) minutes questioning/eliciting and in the second (3) observed situations the inclusion teacher spent (2) minutes

38

questioning/eliciting which seemed to indicate that questioning and eliciting improved the amount of on task behavior for students during a cooperative learning exercise within a lesson. The analysis and interpretation of the results showed that in the first (3) observed situations, the special education teacher spent (5) minutes organizing/giving instructions and in the second (3) observed situations, the special education teacher spent (2) minutes organizing/giving instructions which seemed to indicate that organizing/ giving instructions increased the amount on task behavior for the observed students during a cooperative learning exercise within a lesson.

Following up on these observations within the same grade level and different types of settings for the same group of students would shed light as to whether or not this situation is an outlier or an actual statistically significant indicator of the effectiveness of cooperative learning in other classroom settings; and, to present these observations to the administration and department chairs to assist them to make necessary changes within our school community.

The Writers Viewpoint The data collected by the teacher-researcher addressed the problem as she conceived it. The responses on the questionnaire gave discrete information on teacher perspectives on the effectiveness of different instructional strategies including but not limited to cooperative learning, alternative assessments, habits of mind and habits of work. All of which were directly related to the research question, which was: In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in a diversified classroom?
39

During the follow-up interviews the participants appeared to be candidly responding to the issue and not simply repeating the talking points covered in our administration approved shared vision for curriculum development. For example,

some of the respondents spoke about instructional strategies like Prove it and thinking routines like See-Think-Wonder which are not a part of the consortium approved Habits of Mind or Habits of Work that the administration requires all teachers to implement within our learning community. Also, the respondent spoke candidly about the lack of professional development on using JUMPROPE to obtain data to support the use of specific instructional strategies across multiple disciplines. The Direct Observations gave me a glimpse of the total information about what was actually occurring in the classroom. For example, the direct observations seemed to indicate that increasing the quality of questions and instructions during transitions would help to decrease off task behavior by students at lab stations. However, I do think that more direct observations, possibly with a video recording of teacher-student interactions that can be reviewed and cross referenced with my running record to ensure less information about what is actually occurring in the classroom is captured during the direct observation. Similarly, it is my belief that a larger number of direct observations where I followed a set of students into multiple classroom settings and across disciplines, would give broader insight into whether the observed behavior represents a trend or a singular event. In summary, from the questionnaire there is a consensus of the student teachers and special education teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable evidence as to the effectiveness of cooperative learning during instruction. While from the follow-up

40

interviews a list of successful instructional strategies that were outside of the scope of the questionnaire emerged including but not limited to Thinking routines, Wait time, and modeling instruction. These instructional strategies could be followed up on with a set of formal interviews as an additional research instrument. On the other hand, when scrutinizing the direct observations used in this research project it became clear that increasing the frequency of organizing/ giving instructions and questioning/eliciting increased the amount on task behavior for the observed students during a cooperative learning exercise within a lesson. Some of the queries that were formulated as a result of the data collected in the course of this research project include: 1. What is the driving force behind the consensus among the outlooks of the majority of personnel involved on the effect of the cooperative learning method on student performance within a classroom? 2. Why is their incongruity between the outlooks of the personnel involved on the effect of Internet access and electronic resources on student performance within a classroom setting? 3. What is the motivation behind the consensus among the outlooks of the majority of personnel involved on the effect of the alternative assessments on student performance within a classroom setting?

41

CHAPTER IV: THE ACTION PLAN Procedures: What did we learn? The research question for this study was: In your view, which techniques, strategies and methodologies are needed in order to meet the needs of children in a diversified classroom. The general idea that I want to focus on relates to improving my ability to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all my students within an inclusive learning environment. As a new educator, I find differentiation for students in my classroom to be particularly challenging and often the results are characterized by the creation of scaffolds for my students with exceptional needs but do not necessarily address the needs of my students with exceptional ability. It is my opinion that this question is focused on a topic that is a challenge that I want to change within my instructional practice; is a need that I am both passionate and actively concerned about. With respect to the questions about the amount of interference caused by test preparation requirements, the majority of the inclusion classroom teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable interference to curriculum scope and sequence, while a few indicated that the amount of interference was minimally significant. While, the majority of the special education and student teachers

interviewed had an appreciably different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given liberal quantities of test preparation were less meaningful than were the actual disruptions to the required curriculum scope and sequence.

42

With respect to the questions about the amount of interference caused by furniture arrangement in classrooms, a majority of the inclusion classroom teachers and student teachers interviewed felt that there was minimal interference to curriculum scope and sequence, while a few indicated that the amount of interference was appreciably noteworthy. However, the majority of the special education and student teachers interviewed had a substantially different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given instruction in classrooms with flexible furniture arrangements were more meaningful than those with rigid furniture arrangements. With respect to the questions about the amount of interference caused by lack of access to the internet and other electronic equipment in classrooms, a larger population of the inclusion classroom teachers and special education teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable interference to the effectiveness of instruction, while a few indicated that the amount of interference was negligible. With respect to the questions about the amount of effectiveness of cooperative learning as an instructional strategy, it appears that a consensus of the student teachers and special education teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable evidence as to the effectiveness of cooperative learning during instruction. However, a vocal minority of the inclusion teachers interviewed had a distinctly different position, suggesting that the benefits gained for the pupils who were given instruction in classrooms using cooperative learning was

inconsequential compared those who had material delivered to them using direct

43

instruction. With respect to the questions about the amount of effectiveness of alternative assessments as valuable instructional strategies, it appears that a consensus of the all of the teachers interviewed felt that there was considerable evidence as to the efficacy of alternative assessments of understanding both during and post instruction. The data gathered from the follow-up interviews suggests that: The community of learners studied has a variety of instructional strategies that work, but there exists a lack of school-wide quantitative data to support this premise. The community of learners studied has a variety of instructional strategies that work, but there is a lack of continuity of instructional strategies between subject area classrooms. The data gathered from the direct observations suggests that: Increasing the quality of questions and instructions during transitions would help to decrease off task behavior by students at lab stations.

Suggestions for Change: What do we do about the problems? 1. The Recommendations from the participants include: a. Incorporating thinking routines like See-Think-Wonder to make thinking visible and strengthen student understanding b. Ask students to Prove their stances on topics using their current level of understanding to support their ideas.

44

2. Recommendations from authoritative sources. a. Pearlman, Bob (2006) suggests improving the learning community by shifting technical resources, assessments and teacher preparedness to a problem-based paradigm to help prepare students for the demands of the 21st century. b. Clymer and William (2006) suggest shifting from standardized numerical scoring to an alternative proficiency based assessment to inform all shareholders in the learning community of what student know and the level of their current mastery on each proficiency 3. Recommendation based on study finding include: a. Allow for shared planning time within grade level teams to create a set of instructional strategies that are to consistently implemented regardless of discipline b. Create a protocol for low inference note taking that all teachers will follow during a monthly observation of other teachers within their grade level and/or department to observe the implementation of an instructional strategy known to positively impact student understanding of content

Presentations: The authorities to whom one would appeal to make these changes include classroom teacher in grade level and departmental teams, the schools principal and assistant principal, the instructional services team, along with department chairs and the teacher leadership team.

45

This presentation would be best made using a power point presentation, which should include graphs and charts as well as the data from the research instruments used during this study. An electronic copy of this written report along with a cover letter with the recommendations of this study should also accompany the presentation. The presentation can occur during a weekly whole school professional development session whose time and location would be determined by the teacher leadership team.

46

Bibliography Aguilar, E. (2013, January 28). Deeper-learning-educational-equity-urban-school. Retrieved February 13, 2013, from Edutopia: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/deeper-learning-educational-equity-urban-schoolelena-aguilar Clinkscales, G. (1997, August). Teacher Leadership in School Change. Retrieved February 13, 2013, from Teacher's network: http://teachersnetwork.org/tnli/research/change/clink.htm Clymer, J. B., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Improving the Way We Grade Science. Educational Leadership, 64(4), 36-42. Meyer, D. Z., Kubarek-Sandor, J., Kedvesh, J., Heitzman, C., Pan, Y., & Faik, S. (2012). Eight Ways to Do Inquiry. Science Teacher, 79(6), 40-44. Mills, G. E. (2011). Action Research. In G. E. Mills, Action Research 4th edition (pp. 197-207). South Oregon University: Pearson. Moorehead, T., & Grillo, K. (2013). Celebrating the Reality of Inclusive STEM Education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(4), 50-57. Pearlman, B. (2006). Twenty-first century learning in schools: A case study of New Technology High School in Napa, California. New Directions For Youth Development, 2006(110), 101-112. Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D. (2008). Making Thinking Visible. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 57-61.

47