Action Plan

AR Focus Statement

Within the English classroom at Crenshaw School, students struggle to create relevant discourse regarding author’s purpose in assigned readings. Implementing the Reflect, Inquire, Suggest, Elevate (RISE) model of critical feedback as a requirement for students to follow when evaluating peer responses to discussion posts should enhance student analysis of an author’s purpose in assigned readings.

Inquiry Questions

Will my sixth and seventh grade target students be able to create explanations that reflect a deeper understanding of an author’s universal message when providing peer critiques?

Will my sixth and seventh grade target students’ responses during discussions become elevated when discussions are conducted independent of the teacher?

Will my 6th and 7th grade target students utilization of the RISE model of discourse increase the level of questioning among themselves during peer critiques and evaluations?

Action Research Forecast

Target Audience

The target audience addressed in the Capstone project is 25 sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students at Crenshaw School in Galveston Independent School District. Sixteen are female students and nine are male students. Sixteen students are 12 years old. Nine students are 13 years old. Ninety-two percent of students are considered Low Socio Economic, and forty percent of students reside in households where Spanish is the primary language spoken. The students are in a combined Pre-Advanced Placement class. The environment of implementation was my classroom during scheduled class time. Cycle 1 consists of a group of 12 sixth and seventh graders.  Cycle 2 consists of a group of 13 seventh and eighth graders.

Implementation Process

The instructional goal of the AR Capstone project is to establish a method of critical discourse that elevates student critiques of peer responses about universal messages within various texts. This goal supports my proposed solution by raising the rigor of responses through requiring students to stop and evaluate peer responses and their own responses and critiques.

Cycle 1 will be from January 28th to February 28th of 2013.  Cycle 1 target audience is twelve learners at Crenshaw Middle School.  Seven girls and five boys will participate in Cycle 1.  Cycle 2 will be from March 1st to April 8th of 2013. Cycle 2 target audience is thirteen learners at Crenshaw Middle School.  Nine girls and Four boys will participate in Cycle 2. The technology students will utilize are the classroom computers, laptops, and ipads to access Schoology.  Students will also utilize Prezi and view instructional video tutorials.   Students will access google forms via pre-assessments and post-assessments.

My expectation is that students should be able to generate relevant and insightful critical feedback.  Students should be able to interact in conversations on a higher level of critical conversation and analysis compared to prior conversations, projects, and discussion posts.

During cycle 1, twelve students from the target audience will begin by taking a Pre-Assessment evaluating responses based on the three levels of reading and the Reflect, Inquire, Suggest, and Elevate (RISE) feedback process. Students will read Comic Life instructions. In Reader Response journals, students will summarize the RISE process. Learners will review the graphic organizer that demonstrates the RISE process and a RISE response. Students will then view two Prezi presentations:  “Creating Rise Feedback” and “Creating Rise Responses.” Students will view the “How to Create a Simple Prezi” presentation; students will create a Prezi Presentation deconstructing a sample RISE response. Next, students will view the “How to Enroll in Schoology,” and then students will enroll in the Schoology course. Once students enroll, students will participate in the Schoology tutorial. Students will then view the video tutorial explaining where to locate the discussion forum, discussion posts, and how to create responses to discussion posts.

Students will respond to discussion post one in the class Schoology discussion forum. Students will also respond to at least two posts created by peers in the class Schoology discussion forum. Students will then respond to discussion post two and respond to at least two posts by peers. Next, students will generate their own discussion topic and respond to peer responses to this prompt. Students will complete the standardized post assessment.

In cycle 2, another thirteen students will follow this same process; however, depending on observations and feedback, small minor adjustments may be implemented.

Assessment and Evaluation Tools

The pre and post assessments are designed to evaluate students’ ability to effectively respond and evaluate responses and ideas in regards to discussion posts and projects. The pre assessment will provide a base line of data regarding the initial level of student responses prior to implementing the RISE feedback process. The post assessment will provide data regarding the level of student feedback and responses after implementing the RISE feedback process. These assessments will provide discreet quantitative data through numerical scores generated from rubric evaluation and qualitative data through observations and participant interviews.

Rubrics will also be utilized to evaluate the level of responses in relation to the three levels of reading: literal, inferential, and universal. RISE rubrics will be utilized to provide students with guidelines and expectations regarding the RISE feedback process.  In addition, RISE rubrics will be utilized to assess student skill and knowledge regarding the utilization of insightful analysis via responses in discussion forums. Evaluation can be done through comparative analysis of rubric levels and scores.

There will also be extensive comparisons made between the pre assessments and the post assessments to determine the students’ self-evaluation of success in association with increased relevance and enhanced analysis via reflections, inquiries, suggestions, and elevations provided to peers. Evaluation can be done comparing the level of responses in the pre assessments and post assessments through aggregating the responses.