Cycle One
Actions:
Before any of my cycles, I surveyed my social studies students on which technologies they would like to use. 87 percent of my students stated that they were interested or very interested in creating a website. Due to the high level of interest and since students had created a Google page before, I decided that the students would create a webpage for their social studies assessment.
The students had just finished their unit on Ancient India. During this unit, they watched a documentary, read their textbook, and read articles to learn about Ancient India. They had sufficient background information and input on India’s religion, culture, and demographics.
To introduce their project on Google sites, I gave them options for what they could write about. Each option was a standard followed by a brief description of the standard. The choices were as follows:
-Understands how religion influences a society’s culture and development (What did they believe? What happened because of Hinduism/Buddhism/other religions in India?)
-Understands the culture achievement and contributions of societies (Inventions? Advancements? Discoveries? Things that still exist today or helped today?)
-Understands how physical geography plays a role in society’s development (What geographical features are there? How did that help or hurt India’s development?)
-Understands the socio-economic structures of societies (What social classes are there? What are the levels? What jobs do they have? Why?)
The students recalled information on their own and wrote a rough draft in their notebooks. The expectation was that each student needed at least five sentences and one picture about their topic. Before students created their India page, I projected my computer screen to show students the basics about editing a Google page, like adding a picture. Then, they had free range with their iPads to continue their site.
Research Question:
“How will creating a webpage with an iPad affect student engagement and achievement?”
Predicted Outcome:
I expected that students would be engaged and care about their webpage since most students voted to create one. I thought that they would have improved achievement on their website compared to their test since they chose their topic of their website content.
Evidence:
I scored each of the students’ websites based on the content and the standard addressed. I compared that score to the score of their test, which was a written assessment on India’s caste system structure and effects. I also surveyed students on their engagement and recorded my observations about their engagement.
I graded students’ websites and tests based on a five-point scale since my school utilizes a five-point system. A five represents having reached advanced proficiency, a four means reached proficiency, a three means having attained basic proficiency, a two means approaching proficiency, and a one represents not proficient.
The average score on the student website content was a 3.75. The average score on the test score was a 4.05. Therefore, the students’ achievement score dropped .3 points on average when using the Google site for assessment.
On the student survey, in terms of being engaged while completing the Google site page, 11% of students reported being very engaged, 27% reported being engaged, 46% reported being somewhat engaged, 8% reported being barely engaged, and 8% reported not being engaged.
While monitoring my students, I noticed several trends. Most students were anxious to start their website instead of writing rough draft in their journal first. One student who typically struggles to start work, Justin, told me that he could not remember anything about Ancient India. After finishing his rough draft and receiving an iPad, he then spent the first thirty minutes looking at pictures on Google that he might want to use. Another student, Elijah, also spend more time than necessary looking through pictures and started looking up pictures irrelevant to India. Other students sped through their project, found one picture, uploaded the picture, and wrote the minimum of five sentences. The majority of students seemed eager to be done and unenthused about the project.
Since many students found the iPad's version of Google sites difficult to maneuver, many students had the same questions. The majority of students struggled to find how to add a new page to the sidebar and how to add more than one picture. Several students created pages, but then thought they were lost since they did not show up in the sidebar.
Reflection:
Although my prediction about student achievement was incorrect, I was not surprised at the results of cycle one. During cycle one, I noticed that my students did not care as much I had expected about their site. Several factors could account for this lack of engagement. First of all, constructing a webpage on Google sites was not intuitive on an iPad. Functions were difficult to find, so students became easily frustrated. Students had also created their homepage on Google sites earlier in the year, so the novelty of creating a website had diminished. I did not see many students taking ownership of their India page. Most students seemed to want to do the minimum. Finally, I hadn’t created an example project for my students, so my expectations of the quality of the product may not have been clear. Expectations for tests are very clear since students are used to them.
Through the student survey data, I can see that most students were only somewhat engaged. In my literature review, I found that student engagement and ownership is tied to student achievement. Since most students were not engaged or very engaged, I should not expect a very high level of achievement from them.
Overall, I was a little disappointed during the project. I did not anticipate so many road bumps with Google sites. I tried to remedy the problems by teaching a few students how to add pictures and edit the sidebar, then assigning them a teacher role to walk around and help other students. I also expected students to be a little more excited about the project. It was difficult to work with students like Justin and Elijah because they were unmotivated and wasted their time. Normally, I would take away the technology from students who do not stay on task, but they all needed the technology to complete the project, so I was stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I did notice that a handful of students worked hard on their project. One student tried to make a video for a portion of the webpage, but then was unable to upload it to the site via the iPad. Other students did their best, but it was not the same quality work that they had on their test. I think this could be because the students are used to tests and the written test format. We also prepared for the test as a whole class and created outlines. Students received more feedback from other students and from me while preparing for their test. I wanted this cycle to be a little less structured and involve more choice, but the students or myself probably should have checked the rough drafts before moving onto the websites.
Although these results were not ideal or predicted, there was good news from cycle one. Each student did complete their Google page by including a picture and text and published work using technology. Overall, most students showed proficiency on their topic through their site since the average score was 3.75. Also, over a third of the students also reported being engaged or very engaged. As a first cycle, I’m satisfied with these results, but I think that they could be improved in my next cycle.
Due to my observations and the results of my students’ grades and engagement survey, there are several things I will do differently in my next cycle. I will create an example project so that the students know what I expect in terms of quality of content. I will also provide some sort of graphic organizer for the students to organize their ideas clearly before planning their product. The next technology will also be one that we have not used in class yet.
Before any of my cycles, I surveyed my social studies students on which technologies they would like to use. 87 percent of my students stated that they were interested or very interested in creating a website. Due to the high level of interest and since students had created a Google page before, I decided that the students would create a webpage for their social studies assessment.
The students had just finished their unit on Ancient India. During this unit, they watched a documentary, read their textbook, and read articles to learn about Ancient India. They had sufficient background information and input on India’s religion, culture, and demographics.
To introduce their project on Google sites, I gave them options for what they could write about. Each option was a standard followed by a brief description of the standard. The choices were as follows:
-Understands how religion influences a society’s culture and development (What did they believe? What happened because of Hinduism/Buddhism/other religions in India?)
-Understands the culture achievement and contributions of societies (Inventions? Advancements? Discoveries? Things that still exist today or helped today?)
-Understands how physical geography plays a role in society’s development (What geographical features are there? How did that help or hurt India’s development?)
-Understands the socio-economic structures of societies (What social classes are there? What are the levels? What jobs do they have? Why?)
The students recalled information on their own and wrote a rough draft in their notebooks. The expectation was that each student needed at least five sentences and one picture about their topic. Before students created their India page, I projected my computer screen to show students the basics about editing a Google page, like adding a picture. Then, they had free range with their iPads to continue their site.
Research Question:
“How will creating a webpage with an iPad affect student engagement and achievement?”
Predicted Outcome:
I expected that students would be engaged and care about their webpage since most students voted to create one. I thought that they would have improved achievement on their website compared to their test since they chose their topic of their website content.
Evidence:
I scored each of the students’ websites based on the content and the standard addressed. I compared that score to the score of their test, which was a written assessment on India’s caste system structure and effects. I also surveyed students on their engagement and recorded my observations about their engagement.
I graded students’ websites and tests based on a five-point scale since my school utilizes a five-point system. A five represents having reached advanced proficiency, a four means reached proficiency, a three means having attained basic proficiency, a two means approaching proficiency, and a one represents not proficient.
The average score on the student website content was a 3.75. The average score on the test score was a 4.05. Therefore, the students’ achievement score dropped .3 points on average when using the Google site for assessment.
On the student survey, in terms of being engaged while completing the Google site page, 11% of students reported being very engaged, 27% reported being engaged, 46% reported being somewhat engaged, 8% reported being barely engaged, and 8% reported not being engaged.
While monitoring my students, I noticed several trends. Most students were anxious to start their website instead of writing rough draft in their journal first. One student who typically struggles to start work, Justin, told me that he could not remember anything about Ancient India. After finishing his rough draft and receiving an iPad, he then spent the first thirty minutes looking at pictures on Google that he might want to use. Another student, Elijah, also spend more time than necessary looking through pictures and started looking up pictures irrelevant to India. Other students sped through their project, found one picture, uploaded the picture, and wrote the minimum of five sentences. The majority of students seemed eager to be done and unenthused about the project.
Since many students found the iPad's version of Google sites difficult to maneuver, many students had the same questions. The majority of students struggled to find how to add a new page to the sidebar and how to add more than one picture. Several students created pages, but then thought they were lost since they did not show up in the sidebar.
Reflection:
Although my prediction about student achievement was incorrect, I was not surprised at the results of cycle one. During cycle one, I noticed that my students did not care as much I had expected about their site. Several factors could account for this lack of engagement. First of all, constructing a webpage on Google sites was not intuitive on an iPad. Functions were difficult to find, so students became easily frustrated. Students had also created their homepage on Google sites earlier in the year, so the novelty of creating a website had diminished. I did not see many students taking ownership of their India page. Most students seemed to want to do the minimum. Finally, I hadn’t created an example project for my students, so my expectations of the quality of the product may not have been clear. Expectations for tests are very clear since students are used to them.
Through the student survey data, I can see that most students were only somewhat engaged. In my literature review, I found that student engagement and ownership is tied to student achievement. Since most students were not engaged or very engaged, I should not expect a very high level of achievement from them.
Overall, I was a little disappointed during the project. I did not anticipate so many road bumps with Google sites. I tried to remedy the problems by teaching a few students how to add pictures and edit the sidebar, then assigning them a teacher role to walk around and help other students. I also expected students to be a little more excited about the project. It was difficult to work with students like Justin and Elijah because they were unmotivated and wasted their time. Normally, I would take away the technology from students who do not stay on task, but they all needed the technology to complete the project, so I was stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I did notice that a handful of students worked hard on their project. One student tried to make a video for a portion of the webpage, but then was unable to upload it to the site via the iPad. Other students did their best, but it was not the same quality work that they had on their test. I think this could be because the students are used to tests and the written test format. We also prepared for the test as a whole class and created outlines. Students received more feedback from other students and from me while preparing for their test. I wanted this cycle to be a little less structured and involve more choice, but the students or myself probably should have checked the rough drafts before moving onto the websites.
Although these results were not ideal or predicted, there was good news from cycle one. Each student did complete their Google page by including a picture and text and published work using technology. Overall, most students showed proficiency on their topic through their site since the average score was 3.75. Also, over a third of the students also reported being engaged or very engaged. As a first cycle, I’m satisfied with these results, but I think that they could be improved in my next cycle.
Due to my observations and the results of my students’ grades and engagement survey, there are several things I will do differently in my next cycle. I will create an example project so that the students know what I expect in terms of quality of content. I will also provide some sort of graphic organizer for the students to organize their ideas clearly before planning their product. The next technology will also be one that we have not used in class yet.
Cycle Two
Actions:
My second cycle revolved around the creation of iMovie trailers. From my survey before starting my action research, I learned that 93% of my students were interested or very interested in making an iMovie. After finishing a unit on China in social studies, I started cycle two, in which students were to create an iMovie to demonstrate their knowledge on a topic from Ancient China.
Based on my reflection from cycle one, I knew that I should create an example iMovie for my students. I created an iMovie about how China’s geography affected China’s development. After watching it with the class, I asked about their observations for what I did well and what I could have done better. The intent was to have students notice and internalize that they need to show the logic of cause and effect, not just state facts in their iMovie. I also showed students how I planned my iMovie with a graphic organizer to plan when to show images and what text to include.
After students watched the example, I gave them broad choices based on state standards for their iMovie topics. They could choose from the following topics that were written on the board:
-How religion affected China’s culture
-How achievements affected China
-How government affected the people
-How socio-economic structures (classes) affected people
-How economic interaction changed China
To help struggling peers, students wrote page numbers on the board where the information could be found and several ideas under each topic. This helped avoid the barrier of students resisting to do work and helped them become engaged more easily.
Since students did not perform as well as I wanted during cycle one, I provided more structure for them in the beginning of this cycle. First, students created a cause and effect diagram for the topic they chose. This was to promote critical thinking and quality work. The students received teacher approval before moving on. Next, I showed students four trailers that they could chose from on iMovies. I chose the trailers that had enough text options for them to communicate their ideas. Then, students filled out their own graphic organizer based on the sequence of text and images in the trailer using their cause and effect chart ideas. Finally, they created their iMovie trailer.
Research Question:
“How will creating an iMovie with an iPad affect student engagement and achievement?”
Predicted Outcome:
My assumption is that student engagement will be higher than in cycle one since there was more initial interest in iMovies and we have yet to create an iMovie this year. I also think that student achievement will increase due to the added preparation and support for project content.
Evidence:
I scored each of the students’ iMovies based on the content and the standard addressed. Once again, I compared that score to the score of their test, which was a written assessment on the effects of China’s geography. I also surveyed students on their engagement during the project.
Based on a five-point grading scale, the average grade for the student iMovie was a 4.22. The average score on the student test was a 3.94. The achievement score for students was .28 points higher for the iMovie trailer than the test. The technology achievement score is also .47 points higher in this cycle than it was in cycle one.
In the student engagement survey for cycle two, 27% of students reported being very engaged, 42% reported being engaged, 19% reported being somewhat engaged, 8% reported being barely engaged, and 4% reported not being engaged. Therefore, engagement rose from cycle one to cycle two.
During this cycle, I recorded that the students were less resistant to doing the work necessary to prepare for the iMovie than in cycle one. When students first previewed the trailers they could choose from, many students exclaimed excited remarks like, "That one is cool!" and "I'm going to use that one!" One student said, "That one is so girly," but other students stated that they liked it.
Most students started working quickly, and when they asked for help, I referred them to the board where other students had written page numbers and ideas. Justin, a student who struggled during cycle one, started when I prompted him to use the board. I did need to sit down with him while planning out his iMovie because he resisted converting his cause and effect chart into his graphic organizer. I told him when he needed text or a picture, and he told me what to write down on the organizer for him.
At the end of the project, over half of the class voted to share their videos. One student, Liam, continued to ask me everyday when he could show his video to the class. Another student, Kate, asked how she could send the video to her parents.
Reflection:
I’m very satisfied with the results of this cycle. During the cycle, I saw all of my students engaged. Based on my observations, they wanted to do well and tried their best. Almost three-fourths of my class reported being very engaged or engaged, which is rare for a project to satisfy that many students. Even students who typically struggle to complete projects finished their video in the time given.
Their achievement score was also higher than in my last cycle and higher than the score on the China test. On this project, 11 students received a perfect score of a 5 and four students received a 4.5. This shows that the students were very capable of expressing their knowledge through technology. They could show their proficiency better through technology than through a written test.
Due to the support and scaffolding in the beginning of the project, students could take ownership easily and be proud of their content. The iMovie trailer is also easy to maneuver and manipulate, so students could embrace their independence and feel confident. My literature review showed that ownership and independence through technology contribute towards engagement. I think this trend is clearly reflected in my evidence as well.
During this project, I saw very little resistance from students, and at the same time, students maintained quality work. I attribute this to the scaffolding they had in the beginning. Students collaborated with one another, gave each other ideas, and had a familiar format to follow. The students were also excited from the beginning about creating a trailer, which gave them motivation.
Differentiation was also easy during this project. All students could choose their own trailer and the topic. Then, they could choose how to show their work in the iMovie. Some just included pictures, but some students created small video segments of themselves. One student asked to create an iMovie outside of the selected trailers due to his previous experience with the application, so he created a longer one without the constraints of pre-made trailer times.
The fact that students wanted to show work to their peers and their parents shows that they were proud of their work. They knew that they did well and wanted to show off their accomplishments. To me, their pride and sense of achievement means more than their actual achievement score that they received. It's also a sign that they were engaged during the project and cared about the quality of their work.
Based on the success of this cycle, I know that I should create an example project for cycle three. I should also provide some sort of support or graphic organizer for the students to plan their work.
My second cycle revolved around the creation of iMovie trailers. From my survey before starting my action research, I learned that 93% of my students were interested or very interested in making an iMovie. After finishing a unit on China in social studies, I started cycle two, in which students were to create an iMovie to demonstrate their knowledge on a topic from Ancient China.
Based on my reflection from cycle one, I knew that I should create an example iMovie for my students. I created an iMovie about how China’s geography affected China’s development. After watching it with the class, I asked about their observations for what I did well and what I could have done better. The intent was to have students notice and internalize that they need to show the logic of cause and effect, not just state facts in their iMovie. I also showed students how I planned my iMovie with a graphic organizer to plan when to show images and what text to include.
After students watched the example, I gave them broad choices based on state standards for their iMovie topics. They could choose from the following topics that were written on the board:
-How religion affected China’s culture
-How achievements affected China
-How government affected the people
-How socio-economic structures (classes) affected people
-How economic interaction changed China
To help struggling peers, students wrote page numbers on the board where the information could be found and several ideas under each topic. This helped avoid the barrier of students resisting to do work and helped them become engaged more easily.
Since students did not perform as well as I wanted during cycle one, I provided more structure for them in the beginning of this cycle. First, students created a cause and effect diagram for the topic they chose. This was to promote critical thinking and quality work. The students received teacher approval before moving on. Next, I showed students four trailers that they could chose from on iMovies. I chose the trailers that had enough text options for them to communicate their ideas. Then, students filled out their own graphic organizer based on the sequence of text and images in the trailer using their cause and effect chart ideas. Finally, they created their iMovie trailer.
Research Question:
“How will creating an iMovie with an iPad affect student engagement and achievement?”
Predicted Outcome:
My assumption is that student engagement will be higher than in cycle one since there was more initial interest in iMovies and we have yet to create an iMovie this year. I also think that student achievement will increase due to the added preparation and support for project content.
Evidence:
I scored each of the students’ iMovies based on the content and the standard addressed. Once again, I compared that score to the score of their test, which was a written assessment on the effects of China’s geography. I also surveyed students on their engagement during the project.
Based on a five-point grading scale, the average grade for the student iMovie was a 4.22. The average score on the student test was a 3.94. The achievement score for students was .28 points higher for the iMovie trailer than the test. The technology achievement score is also .47 points higher in this cycle than it was in cycle one.
In the student engagement survey for cycle two, 27% of students reported being very engaged, 42% reported being engaged, 19% reported being somewhat engaged, 8% reported being barely engaged, and 4% reported not being engaged. Therefore, engagement rose from cycle one to cycle two.
During this cycle, I recorded that the students were less resistant to doing the work necessary to prepare for the iMovie than in cycle one. When students first previewed the trailers they could choose from, many students exclaimed excited remarks like, "That one is cool!" and "I'm going to use that one!" One student said, "That one is so girly," but other students stated that they liked it.
Most students started working quickly, and when they asked for help, I referred them to the board where other students had written page numbers and ideas. Justin, a student who struggled during cycle one, started when I prompted him to use the board. I did need to sit down with him while planning out his iMovie because he resisted converting his cause and effect chart into his graphic organizer. I told him when he needed text or a picture, and he told me what to write down on the organizer for him.
At the end of the project, over half of the class voted to share their videos. One student, Liam, continued to ask me everyday when he could show his video to the class. Another student, Kate, asked how she could send the video to her parents.
Reflection:
I’m very satisfied with the results of this cycle. During the cycle, I saw all of my students engaged. Based on my observations, they wanted to do well and tried their best. Almost three-fourths of my class reported being very engaged or engaged, which is rare for a project to satisfy that many students. Even students who typically struggle to complete projects finished their video in the time given.
Their achievement score was also higher than in my last cycle and higher than the score on the China test. On this project, 11 students received a perfect score of a 5 and four students received a 4.5. This shows that the students were very capable of expressing their knowledge through technology. They could show their proficiency better through technology than through a written test.
Due to the support and scaffolding in the beginning of the project, students could take ownership easily and be proud of their content. The iMovie trailer is also easy to maneuver and manipulate, so students could embrace their independence and feel confident. My literature review showed that ownership and independence through technology contribute towards engagement. I think this trend is clearly reflected in my evidence as well.
During this project, I saw very little resistance from students, and at the same time, students maintained quality work. I attribute this to the scaffolding they had in the beginning. Students collaborated with one another, gave each other ideas, and had a familiar format to follow. The students were also excited from the beginning about creating a trailer, which gave them motivation.
Differentiation was also easy during this project. All students could choose their own trailer and the topic. Then, they could choose how to show their work in the iMovie. Some just included pictures, but some students created small video segments of themselves. One student asked to create an iMovie outside of the selected trailers due to his previous experience with the application, so he created a longer one without the constraints of pre-made trailer times.
The fact that students wanted to show work to their peers and their parents shows that they were proud of their work. They knew that they did well and wanted to show off their accomplishments. To me, their pride and sense of achievement means more than their actual achievement score that they received. It's also a sign that they were engaged during the project and cared about the quality of their work.
Based on the success of this cycle, I know that I should create an example project for cycle three. I should also provide some sort of support or graphic organizer for the students to plan their work.
Cycle Three
Actions:
My third cycle involved the creation of projects on Scratch, an online student-friendly coding program. From my survey data, I knew that 84% of my students were interested or very interested in coding. After finishing their next social studies unit on Ancient Greece, I started cycle three, in which students created a Scratch project to show their knowledge about Ancient Greece.
Since I viewed cycle two as a successful cycle, I wanted to duplicate the results from it in cycle three. Based on this, I knew that I should create an example project on Scratch. To become more familiar with Scratch, I met with my district’s technology coach because he had used the program in his fourth grade classroom. He showed me the basic functions on scratch. He and I also came up with the following minimum requirements for the scratch project:
-Your sprite (character) must move at least three times
-You need at least three different backgrounds
-Your sprite must say at least three statements about the background
To introduce the project to my students, I showed them my example of how government affected Greece’s daily life. I then showed the students how I had planned the project. Students were required to write down the backgrounds they wanted with three statements that the sprite would say.
Similar to cycle two, I wrote the different choices of topics on the board. Students could then write their main ideas under the topics to help struggling peers. The topics were as follows:
-How religion affected Greece’s culture
-How government affected the people of Greece
-How socio-economic structures (classes) affected the people of Greece
-How geography affected Greece’s culture
After students were done, they showed me their notes from their notebook for accountability and for the approval to move onto using Scratch. When students started finishing, I showed them a screencast I had made to introduce the basic aspects of Scratch. The screencast showed how to add a background, move the sprite, and add a speech bubble. After watching the screencast, students began creating their project.
Research Question:
“How will creating a project on Scratch affect student engagement and achievement?”
Predicted Outcome:
My prediction is that student engagement and achievement will mirror that of cycle two since many of my actions during cycle three were similar to cycle two.
Evidence:
I scored the students’ projects based on the relevance and accuracy of the content with regard to the standard addressed. I then compared that score to the score of their written test, an assessment on the achievements of Ancient Greece.
Based on the five-point scale, the average achievement grade for the Scratch project was 4.24. This was .02 points greater than the achievement scores from cycle two and .49 points greater than cycle one. It was also .61 points higher than the average grade from the written assessment on Greece.
My third cycle involved the creation of projects on Scratch, an online student-friendly coding program. From my survey data, I knew that 84% of my students were interested or very interested in coding. After finishing their next social studies unit on Ancient Greece, I started cycle three, in which students created a Scratch project to show their knowledge about Ancient Greece.
Since I viewed cycle two as a successful cycle, I wanted to duplicate the results from it in cycle three. Based on this, I knew that I should create an example project on Scratch. To become more familiar with Scratch, I met with my district’s technology coach because he had used the program in his fourth grade classroom. He showed me the basic functions on scratch. He and I also came up with the following minimum requirements for the scratch project:
-Your sprite (character) must move at least three times
-You need at least three different backgrounds
-Your sprite must say at least three statements about the background
To introduce the project to my students, I showed them my example of how government affected Greece’s daily life. I then showed the students how I had planned the project. Students were required to write down the backgrounds they wanted with three statements that the sprite would say.
Similar to cycle two, I wrote the different choices of topics on the board. Students could then write their main ideas under the topics to help struggling peers. The topics were as follows:
-How religion affected Greece’s culture
-How government affected the people of Greece
-How socio-economic structures (classes) affected the people of Greece
-How geography affected Greece’s culture
After students were done, they showed me their notes from their notebook for accountability and for the approval to move onto using Scratch. When students started finishing, I showed them a screencast I had made to introduce the basic aspects of Scratch. The screencast showed how to add a background, move the sprite, and add a speech bubble. After watching the screencast, students began creating their project.
Research Question:
“How will creating a project on Scratch affect student engagement and achievement?”
Predicted Outcome:
My prediction is that student engagement and achievement will mirror that of cycle two since many of my actions during cycle three were similar to cycle two.
Evidence:
I scored the students’ projects based on the relevance and accuracy of the content with regard to the standard addressed. I then compared that score to the score of their written test, an assessment on the achievements of Ancient Greece.
Based on the five-point scale, the average achievement grade for the Scratch project was 4.24. This was .02 points greater than the achievement scores from cycle two and .49 points greater than cycle one. It was also .61 points higher than the average grade from the written assessment on Greece.
During this cycle, 27% of students reported being very engaged, 34% reported being engaged, 27% reported being somewhat engaged, 4% reported being barely engaged, and 8% were not engaged. To compare the engagement in each cycle, I gave each response a number. Very engaged translated to a 5, engaged to a 4, somewhat engaged to a 3, and so on. I then averaged all the engagement scores so that I could compare results. The graph can be seen below. These results in cycle three were similar to that of cycle two, with engagement being lower by an average of .12 points for cycle three. Cycle three's engagement score remained greater than that of cycle one by an average of .42 points.
In cycle three, I noted that students started their project quickly, but did not seem to enjoy the planning process. Justin complained that he had to write down his plan before starting on Scratch. Justin spent so much time stalling the planning process that he did not finish his Scratch project in class. Another student, Eddie, was anxious to start and seemed discouraged that he needed to write out sentences to plan.
In cycle three, I noted that students started their project quickly, but did not seem to enjoy the planning process. Justin complained that he had to write down his plan before starting on Scratch. Justin spent so much time stalling the planning process that he did not finish his Scratch project in class. Another student, Eddie, was anxious to start and seemed discouraged that he needed to write out sentences to plan.
After students started their project online, students became more motivated, but many focused more on their character and animations than the academic content. Ruby spent a class period changing the colors of her sprite and designing how it looked. When I noticed this trend, I told students that they needed their content before editing their character and character movement.
While watching the students’ projects, I noticed that almost all of them had content, but some had made technical errors that affected their project. Sophia forgot to input a start button to allow the viewer to start the animation. Steven similarly forgot to connect all of his events, so his presentation only showed half of his content.
Reflection:
I’m content with the results of this cycle. The results were similar to my predicted results. The achievement score was actually higher than that of cycle two, while the engagement was slightly lower. Still, I saw most students engaged and trying their best on the project.
Since the average achievement score was 4.24, between proficient and advanced proficiency, students were able to demonstrate their learning through the Scratch project. I think that the scaffolding of an example, peer assistance, and a screencast allowed students to be successful during this cycle.
I was discouraged at some points due to my students’ lack of engagement in the planning process. It took more prodding and encouragement to motivate my students to start their project than in cycle two. I would associate this lack of motivation with the amount of writing necessary in the planning process. For the iMovie, students only needed to write down bullet points, while I required at least 18 sentences for cycle two.
After students’ finished their plans and were able to start their project on the program, I saw independence and motivation rise. Students seemed to intuitively pick up the program. Very few students asked for help. This could be due to the screencast I created. I also saw several students looking at their peers’ projects and asking how they did certain steps.
It was fun to see how students took ownership of their projects. Several students did only want to finish, but many challenged themselves to create a unique project. Two students challenged each other to have their sprites do a face palm. Others downloaded and edited new sprites to have as their characters. One student who had used Scratch before made a game with his project. This ownership did come with a minor disadvantage- students wanted to perfect their animations and sprites before inputting content in their project. This forced students to work on their projects at home because many did not finish their work during class time.
I did also notice that many students (sixteen out of twenty-eight) chose the same standard for their project as my example Scratch project. This was initially odd to me because I had intentionally chosen the hardest topic because I did not think many students would choose it. I suppose that because students saw it as an example, they may have felt more confident that they could do their project on it as well. It was a little discouraging because I was expecting students to be more creative. In the future, I will need to find ways to inspire creativity.
In the end, I was proud of my students for exploring the program on their own and truly conveying good observations about Ancient Greece. Students enjoyed watching one another’s’ projects and wanted to show them off to their peers. As a teacher, those are the moments that really stand out to me because students are proud of their learning and achievements.
While watching the students’ projects, I noticed that almost all of them had content, but some had made technical errors that affected their project. Sophia forgot to input a start button to allow the viewer to start the animation. Steven similarly forgot to connect all of his events, so his presentation only showed half of his content.
Reflection:
I’m content with the results of this cycle. The results were similar to my predicted results. The achievement score was actually higher than that of cycle two, while the engagement was slightly lower. Still, I saw most students engaged and trying their best on the project.
Since the average achievement score was 4.24, between proficient and advanced proficiency, students were able to demonstrate their learning through the Scratch project. I think that the scaffolding of an example, peer assistance, and a screencast allowed students to be successful during this cycle.
I was discouraged at some points due to my students’ lack of engagement in the planning process. It took more prodding and encouragement to motivate my students to start their project than in cycle two. I would associate this lack of motivation with the amount of writing necessary in the planning process. For the iMovie, students only needed to write down bullet points, while I required at least 18 sentences for cycle two.
After students’ finished their plans and were able to start their project on the program, I saw independence and motivation rise. Students seemed to intuitively pick up the program. Very few students asked for help. This could be due to the screencast I created. I also saw several students looking at their peers’ projects and asking how they did certain steps.
It was fun to see how students took ownership of their projects. Several students did only want to finish, but many challenged themselves to create a unique project. Two students challenged each other to have their sprites do a face palm. Others downloaded and edited new sprites to have as their characters. One student who had used Scratch before made a game with his project. This ownership did come with a minor disadvantage- students wanted to perfect their animations and sprites before inputting content in their project. This forced students to work on their projects at home because many did not finish their work during class time.
I did also notice that many students (sixteen out of twenty-eight) chose the same standard for their project as my example Scratch project. This was initially odd to me because I had intentionally chosen the hardest topic because I did not think many students would choose it. I suppose that because students saw it as an example, they may have felt more confident that they could do their project on it as well. It was a little discouraging because I was expecting students to be more creative. In the future, I will need to find ways to inspire creativity.
In the end, I was proud of my students for exploring the program on their own and truly conveying good observations about Ancient Greece. Students enjoyed watching one another’s’ projects and wanted to show them off to their peers. As a teacher, those are the moments that really stand out to me because students are proud of their learning and achievements.