And the insights continue

Oh my gosh – what a revelation! This morning I completed the research project writing activity, and boy did I learn volumes! First I know I need to collect data on how long students write. My “hunch” is that less time will be spent doing the pre-assessment writing than the final writing. I was surprized at how much writing I wanted to do. Most of the time it seems students are at a loss for information to include (at least the junior high kiddos). But I had soooo much information that it was a real struggle to condense everything into the 60 minutes I allotted for the activity.

When I do this with my students I will make note of how much time each of them spend writing both the pre-assessment and final. I found I could have gone many different directions with what I had to say, so the organization may suffer at the expense of details and inference (I’ll get to this in a minute). I’d REALLY appreciate if you have time to do a quick read on the critical analysis I completed and let me know if it seems organized, you can find it on my blog (it is rather lengthy, sorry).

What excites me about the process is the way it made me THINK ABOUT THE ART WORK! Wow. There were numerous ideas that I was able to infer from my pre-writing. Things about the artist and artwork that I’m intrigued with and wanted to address more fully. Ways in which the artist “might” have been going that I hadn’t thought of before. My hope now is that my students will come to the same conclusion. Because if they do, then this writing activity is about MORE THAN JUST WRITING. It will be about the process of looking at art. Hmmmm, it’s been a busy morning at my desk and in my brain.

hello from the nwp conference in massachusetts!

Hi, all,
Just a quick message to say that I just showed our Advanced Institute blog (and many of your individual blogs) to the participants here at the "Inside Inquiry" conference in Wellesley, Massachusetts, and they think your blogs--as well as the overall concept of our AI--are way cool!

Craig Moyer and Megan Baker are here with me, and they're cramming every resource about teacher research that they can into their heads, and I'm co-facilitating the conference with other members of the NWP Teacher Inquiry Communities Network leadership team. It's been a terrific, but very intense, experience, and we'll have lots of knowledge to share when we get back home.

- Cindy

Inquiry heats up under the summer sun

Summer days are drawing too quickly to a close at my house and I’m working to focus my research question. Cooler mornings have even spurred me to work in the studio. I must admit I included an image here only to try and entice you into reading this entry, and perhaps lure you to my blog where I’ve posted my questions and included the responses I came up with when I completed the activity. Rebecca has already found a few chinks that I completely overlooked (thanks for that!) and I’d be very grateful to have another set of professional eyes looking things over.

As far as the image, it’s the “rough draft” of a visual narrative. Each figure a paragraph expressing one idea, the narrative not complete until all seven figures are finished and in place. The work is very much like the formal critique I want my students to complete – there is a purpose for each component and they all work together. Like good writing each separate sculpture needs to be a strong statement that can stand alone (like a good paragraph), but together the idea coalesces into an idea larger than the sum of the parts.

Just some “food for thought.”

Steph's research 7/17/07

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

I keep getting stuck on this quote for my research. I want to find out more about what it is that I'm doing in my classes in the research I have or why what I'm doing here and there works in my classroom. I have ordered the Gallas books recommended to me by Cindy, but haven't received them yet. But, I am somewhat hesitant about my project focusing on information I already know. But then again I don't really know where to go from where I am now---reading research. I am currently reading (skipping around) the book Natalie loaned me about abstract thinking and the arts. It spends some time on philosophy (Plato, Aristotle) and their opposing views of abstract thinking's value, or lack thereof. It's so fascinating to me.

But I can't disregard the great and insightful comments made by the AI about an interest in my writing something about what I do in my classes, either. I am still just stuck on the idea of retelling what happens---it makes it sound like my classes are all full of genius children and they are that way all because of me---which is TOTALLY not the case! Ha!

I need to find a happy medium among all of these things and see what comes out of it, maybe. I will keep researching as I prepare to go back to school sooner than later (sorry to bring that up!!!) and reflect on my poetry unit and classroom setting for a reader/conference attendee who doesn't know me or my school...more later as I reread my research schedule! I am both intimidated and excited about it: it's a lot, but it gives me a definite focus for the upcoming year!!!

Fun's over now comes the hard part

Well the fun is over, it was a great two weeks with ya’ll but I guess now we have to get down to the nitty-gritty of our research. At least I feel infinitely better equipped to handle the rigors of the process. Must be these dog-days of summer, but in the short time since the end of the CSUWPAI I’ve already forgotten exactly how we’re supposed to be posting. Is it just to the main blog? Just to our own blog? Or should we do both. So, in an effort to make sure I’ve got all my bases covered (because Renee, like you, I’m a rule follower!) I’ve got two separate (yet equal) posts, here and on my own blog.

I’ve been trying to develop that elusive baseline rubric, the evaluative rubric NOT for grading purposes. My intent is to use this to garner enough information to establish whether or not my students’ writing has improved at the conclusion of my research project. Thanks in advance for taking a look – and I apologize for the length of this blog! Remember that I’m looking for an anticipated improvement in organization and details so that’s what I’m trying to quantify at this point. Students will be looking at art postcards. So, does the following outline what I’m looking for:

Organization
- Introductory paragraph addresses all major components of thesis that follows in the body of the paper (i.e. formal elements, content of the piece, factual and/or inferential information)
- Thesis paragraphs are in the same order as outlined in intro paragraph
- At least one paragraph addresses the formal elements
- At least one paragraph addresses the content of the piece
- At least one paragraph addresses the factual and/or inferential information about the piece
- Thesis paragraphs introduce a concept and build on the concept
- Each paragraph addresses a cohesive, complete component
- Closing paragraph re-addresses all major components of thesis and makes connections that pull them together

Details
- The analysis includes details about the artist, title of the piece, media, subject matter and additional information that could be found on the postcard (size, collection, etc.)
- The paragraph(s) addressing the formal elements include references to both the elements and principles of art
- The paragraph(s) addressing the formal elements relate the elements and principles to one another
- The paragraph relating to content relates at least one idea to a formal element of art
- The paragraph relating to content relates at least one idea to either factual or inferential information about the piece

Outline of Article for a Research Journal

One last part of my notes from the daily log that may be helpful for future reference.

RQs
Review of Secondary Research

• Not a summary
• Argument that synthesizes prior secondary research in a way the demonstrates a gap
• Cindy usually follows the pattern: 1. Here's the relevant stuff we know 2. Here's what we don't know 3. Here's what we need to know 4. Here's what I found out to help fill the gap

Context
Research Methods
Results: Discussion (Analysis of Key Pieces of Data--often reorganized by themes)
Implications/Questions for Further Research (answer so what? and what now?)

Cindy will send out over e-mail 2 articles as samples.

The Last Daily Log

We have arrived at the end of our time together on campus, but the plans have already been made to reconvene soon.

Here's a recap of our final day:

Morning Pages: Jason’s prompt asked us to reflect on the AI experience. What worked? What didn’t work? What needs to be revised/tweaked/omitted?

Overall the group discussed the need for more direction in some aspects (goals, final products, researcher's chair, open activity), yet praised the individual focus that the schedule allowed through independent study, researcher's chair, blogging, and inquiry groups.

Some of the highlights of our discussion:

Renee accurately assessed that we rock. I believe her words were, "We're the coolest!"

Natalie compared the pre-institute meeting to whole life insurance. “Whole life insurance makes sense when you’re talking to the insurance guy, but when you walk out of his office you wonder why you need it.”

Researcher’s Chair: Natalie

Natalie, as always, began with a handout of her time line for next year to focus our attention. She then went on to ask for our feedback concerning her study of pre-service art teachers completing a writing assignment focusing on the critique of a piece of art.

One can only wonder how many times were we answering the wrong question for Natalie.

Natalie has taught the group two important lessons.

1. It is what it is.

2. You don’t know, what you don’t know because you don’t know.


BROWN BAG LUNCH:

During our working lunch we covered several important topics.

1. Staying Connected
A. Blogging:

We will blog a minimum of 2 times a month by posting on our blog and commenting on others’ blogs. (see deadline draft questions below for ideas for posts)

Blog schedule: July 16, July 30, Aug. 13, Aug. 27, Sept. 10
On Sept. 10 post demo outline + 50 word session description

Blogging Buddies will be Inquiry Groups.
(Steph, Stacey, Jason M., Jason C.)
(Renee, Natalie, Rebecca, Cindy)
* Remember you aren’t limited to your blogging buddies! *

B. Inquiry Groups
Meeting face to face is optional, but Cindy’s suggestion is to meet at least once before Sept. 15.

2. Post-Institute Meeting: Saturday, September 15 from 9am-2:30pm at Mugs
Remember to bring:
A. a deadline draft that answers these questions: (bring 8 copies for others to read)
DEADLINE DRAFT ?s
- here’s where I am now
- this is what I think now
- these are the questions I still have
B. outline of demo + session description (8 copies--you posted these on your blog Sept. 10)
(Remember that your demo is a slice of your research. Focus on best practices or strategies for the attendees to take to their classroom. Remember Natalie’s frazzled, fast-talking, canvas bag toting performance).

3. CSUWP Conference
We brainstormed ideas for a focus and title for the conference and discussed the plan for the day. The conference is planned for Saturday, January 26.

Penultimate Daily Log

It is so hot in our room that we changed the schedule so that researcher's chair can be over by 12:30. No air conditioning in our room makes for a warm day.

Morning Pages: Renee; Wisdom from the I Ching
Write from a point of view you've never tried before. Focus on the demo--what will it be like for the person sitting in the audience, what do they want? What will they get from it? Pretend you're an audience member at your own demo.


Renee: I've realized that I'm negative (or paranoid, I don't know which). Renee wrote about the perceptions of audience members and how they might respond. Conclusion: If things aren't going well, just keep going and don't make a face.


Stacey: I went a totally different direction. I figure there is always going to be someone who has more experience, and someone who has less experience than I do.

Natalie: I liked this activity. Made me think of some things I wouldn't have thought of. I guess I would have htem go through the activity. Smiling face. Something on the chairs. Sheet of paper, 3x5 card, art people always expect free stuff.
(All teachers like free stuff, added Steph)

Steph: I wonder if someone in special ed would think "we've known that for years." Other teachers would say, "no way am I teachingpoetry, I hate it and the kids do too. Who does she think she is? But ideally they'll think: Wow, this is interesting to think about the way kids think. If she were up for Miss America I would vote for her.

Malone: I immediately started thinking about what I would do. Creating the documents, thinking about waht I have to rework for my kids. Started going back and thinking about it from the a different perspective. Looks great to me, but I need to back off and think, how does this look to kids. How does this look to parents?

Cindy: Wrote about the Administrator's conference. Very preliminary. Wound up writing about the disappointments. If admin. do decide to come, they may be expecting one thing, and that's not what we do. It needs to be interactive, to get the administrators writing. They are conditioned to think in terms of boxes and binders, and we just don't do that. Professional development like the WP is complex, more than just handouts and worksheets. We want them to write and share their writing so that they can see from the inside out how WP feels and looks. We want admin. to see that WP is not about one person standing in front of the room going through a binder of curriculum materials, it's a more professional life-span approach.

We also talked about the impact of the WP on people, and how to communicate that feeling to administrators. Perhaps a Q&A panel? Cindy also mentioned that we can perhaps co-opt the terminology of the "look for" as in, these are the some of the things that you can look for in a good writing teacher's class.

Rebecca: Good idea for morning pages Renee! I wrote from three different points of view.
First pov: Anti-touchy-feely anti-groupwork teacher might think that it sounds like a "more work for the teacher idea," they hate those.
Second pov: Questioner: How do you actually pull it off? Lots of questions, how do yo make it work? Money? Choices? Groups? How do you set it up?
Third pov: I've tried book clubs, but didn't find it succesful. It seems like a lot more work than just having everyone read one book.

Jason Clarke: I wrote questions for the quick write at the beginning of the session, what would get people writing and thinking:
What is technologies' place in the classroom?
Is technology a revolution for teaching, or just another tool, basically a glorified overhead projector?
Should teachers be on MySpace?
Is the internet making kids smarter and more knowledgable or is it just causing more ADD and creating students who can't and don't think critically?
Which is worse for education, the invention of the television or the invention of the computer?

As we talked, the group pointed out that because my focus is class blog discussions, these discussions should be on a blog as well, which is a great idea--thank you everyone!!!

Inquiry Groups:


Steph: I finished that endless article!
Also found some more articles, but haven't read them yet.
I've also been Gathering information from colleagues over email. My question is more in-depth than I thought. Not caught up with my question yet.
How can I frame questions so that sped kids can get a better sense of what they are able to do?
Survey/questions about reading and writing.
Past experiences with poetry?

Stacey: I think I want permission slips to record the discussions? Other permission slips?

Jason: Blog log, way to track participation in the blog. Each week one student hosts the blog, and then responds to what happened that week. They have to post a question and then answer some questions: I expect them to connect the "four ways of knowing" to the blog; how was it discussed on the blog?

Hopefully they'll use the skills from the class in the process. The blog log will help to track data. It will help to show the connection between the blog activity to grades on papers and grades in the class. It's pretty obvious to me that people who participate in the blog have written better papers. Then we talked for a while about the four ways of knowing and how they work in Malone's "Theory of Knowledge" class.

Open Activity: (Natalie and Stacey)

They started off wearing "WTF necklaces", which concealed the "Hidden agenda".

Asked us to look at three audiences--how would you adress your research to this audience?
1. Define your audience.
2. Identify the data that would be of interest to this audience.
3. Secondary components that would be of interest.
4. Where might you present this information to this audience?

Audience 1: Frazzled, wants everything handed to him/her,wants to be shown, not told, lot's of preconceptions about what is and is not good.
This audience Needs:
Examples
Variety/Handouts
Student Samples
Mini Paradigm-shift
Your Credentials
Secondary Components:
Videotape/Pictures (Visuals)
Related books,
Annotated Bibliography
A disclaimer? What I'm not doing.

The T is removed from the necklaces so we can see "inat."

Audience 2: Super-organized, logical-sequential thinker, who hates touchy-feely stuff and wants data and an explanantion of how that data influences your teaching.

This audience Needs:
Facts
Bibliographies
Statistical data
Quantitative data
Prove that your data is triangulated
Confidence/Attitude is important for the presenter
Show it's tested and "proven" to work
Credentials are important
Want a copy of your paper, including a citation list
Power Point must look like a research report
Context, lit review, research methods, analyze data, findings and implications slide.
CSAP data--numbers on achievement (be careful, they will grill you)

The F is removed so we can see "ion"

Audience 3: Magazines/Journals (Trade Magazines vs. Academic Journals)

The W is removed so we can see the whole word "dissemination"
The "hidden agenda" question is, how do we disseminate our research?

Then they presented us with guidelines for submission from a number of different journals, Steven Church's "Submitting your work," and a "Prospectus Planning Guide."

Researcher's Chair: Steph

After researcher's chair a few of us met at the Pickle Barrel for sandwiches.

Happy fourth of July, see you Thursday everyone!

A firecracker start to July

Hmmm, interesting karma in the room today…
Triple digit heat and low energy makes us thankful for cool grass and deep shade.
Double-morning snacks and peanut butter M&Ms kick the diet out the window.
Hamburger buns masquerading as bagels signal a fuzzy brain.
Earth shoes and new hair set the style scene.

Welcome to CSUWPAI July2nd, 2007

Morning Pages Rebecca taught us the meaning of “punt” when she mixed up her snack and morning page assignment. Looking at personal reflection and asking for group input the following ‘themes’ emerged.

• Timelines are important
  Defining terms for a common vocabulary
  Checking out search engines for research
  Time, time, time – get more done, can’t sleep, too much to do
  Revisit and re-analyze data
  What would we write in the margins
  Resources are elusive for many
  Designing the data collection
  Resetting the research, rebuilding the blog
  What DO expectations look like
  Proposals for presentations, publications, grants, oh my
  Feedback and book selection
  Primary data looks good, is it time for that secondary research
  

Public Writing Planning & Research Review
Referred to the Sarah Capitelli web page. Look at the AERA paper on her website. Products = 1) public writing and 2) demo to be presented at CSUWP conference. Be realistic and manageable in setting your goals.

Public writing is about making sense of your work and can show just a slice of your work. Documentation is needed for the NWP. Demo to be presented at the CSUWP Conference – which now has a date and a format (more later)!

What happens after the SI?
CSUWPAI participants need to prepare a school-year timeline for their research before this Thursday (eek, 3 days away!), submit via email to Cindy. Can be as informal as a list.
Post institute “work in progress” meeting will be 9/15/07 at MUGS from 9-2:30. Planning for the writing conference and working on your demo - come with an idea and an outline.

CSUWP Writing Conference. 1/26/08, half-day at CSU (Eddy?). Plan for two sessions of 5 – 75 minute workshops. Open to all teachers, some CSUWP Fellows will be invited to present alongside the CSUWPAI participants. Remember the research connection and organize the demo around FAQs related to your practice. Your research question may be the FAQ and the meat of the demo would be workable strategies that include student samples (better know as data). An administrator session is a great idea – can it be accommodated?

Tentative outline
8:00-8:30 - registration
8:30-9:00 opening remarks
9-10:30 – session 1
10:30-10:45 – break
10:45-12:15 – session 2 and summer program recruiting

Ten presenters will be paid a $150 stipend, and $250 is estimated for office expenses (mailing & stuff). 42 conference participants paying $50 each would be needed to break even (breaking even is making expenses + 20% to be recycled into future programs) –

Open Activity with E. Jason & Steph
How to write a research paper … pre-writing based on assumption that if you just write about the subject and then see what you think after you’ve done this – sometimes the free-writing helps if you’re not sure of the process.
research questions
primary data (first pass)
*secondary data
design experiment
What do I need to know/show?
Order of operations (preliminary data?)

The process was useful causing some of us to question our research question again; review the logistics of what is needed for baseline data; verbalized concerns over finding secondary research data; and a re-evaluation of the cognitive connections.

Researcher’s Chair – Renee’s turn in the hot seat. Here comprehensive list of questions provided fertile ground for commentary. Volumes of discussion seemed doomed to semantics – as the issue of a common vocabulary was revisited. Efficient or streamlined – the question isn’t so much the correct word as defining what you want from the kids.

In an effort to keep us all on track Cindy encouraged us to metaphorically “write your side questions in the margins – so you can keep them in mind but not lose the focus.”

A monumental effort to keep the focus today – well done!

June 28 Log

We have re-clarified the schedule and had ‘mood announcements” :)

Morning Pages Prompt – by Steph J
How does the teacher’s investment in their research question and the students’ background about the teacher’s topic affect the research?

Much conversation about the prompt

Natalie questioned her students’ backgrounds in writing. Is it the demand to write outside of a writing class?

Steph questioned her enthusiasm. Does it force her kids to be enthusiastic about poetry?

Jason also questioned his enthusiasm and wondered if it caused blind spots in his teaching with technology.

Cindy said – “Teacher research is just too intensive (again, think positively) to take on if you aren’t invested in the topic. And while this goes against the traditional notions of the Researcher in the white coat with the pocket protector and his (and, yes, the image has historically been male) supposed objectivity, there’s got to be some passion back there somewhere.”


Rebecca pondered perameters. There have been enough “Cindy groupies” in the district that the students know about book clubs.

Jason C. discussed the assumption that students are comfortable with tech to begin with – the setup is a yearlong process. He discussed his vision of how to do this next year. He does not want to wait to do all the setup at the end of the year. How do I set up the groups?

Renee was contemplating her bias. Is she becoming anti content writing because she wants students to love writing? Are her expectations fair?

Now we contemplate assumptions and agendas that are created by research

Comments worth noting:

Steph - “we do not have to worry about the administrations’ agenda, cause that is just silly” and “I am nothing if not professional”

Natalie – “We need to agree to agree even if we disagree about what we agreed upon”

Natalie – “Maybe they don’t know what they know, ya know?”

Steph – “Would it kill ya to give a word bank for 2 weeks?”


Jason Clarke’s researcher chair continued – see Steph’s notes J


Natalie placed our pictures and quotes on our boards – very creative. We will have to post pictures of our bulletin board.

Data Analysis – Cindy’s Presentation.
Living With the Questions: A Guide for Teacher-Researcher

Primary Data Collection All research findings are provisional

Constant Comparison:
RQs being compared to your data / The thing we are trying to learn is …. Then check data
Pieces of data to one another (ex. Surveys to student work)


Triangulation
Deliberately collect 3 different kinds of data
Example: Field notes, student work, video tape, blogs, etc.


Open Coding – focused coding
What do you do? I have 3 different types of data…now what?
Open coding is what happens you are using your research questions as a filter to understand your data (it is your first pass through your data)
When you do this – themes and patterns begin to emerge
Make list of themes and patterns
Come up with a method to track the themes and patterns
· Highlighting
· Sticky notes
· Reference to data type/date (ex. blog entry)
· Table of contents
· Etc.
The responsible thing to do with your themes is to go back and focus code. This is where sub-themes begin to emerge.
Sub-themes = nuanced analysis

Good places to start for first pass analysis
Sarah Capitelli’s webstie: Inquiry Context, Teacher Reflection, Student work
Inquiry – where is came from
Teacher reflections – this is like her open coding or first pass
Student work – the triangulation piece in action, usually student produced work

Create a sheet for Analysis with these text boxes: Context, First thoughts (what strikes me is…), Emerging themes, Data to cross reference (make list), New questions or hunches/ Things to think about later.


We went into inquiry groups, lunch, and independent study, and then Stacey's topic was discussed in Reseacher's chair.