Findings
During phase two I was able to build upon and uncover some new emerging themes about my students.
Theme One: Students struggled to transfer their knowledge when they did not have access to peer support, and, they tend to learn differently based on content.
Data analysis of the individual assessment scores and recordings in my personal journal showed that students struggled to transfer their knowledge from a collaborative to individual setting during the unit on experimental design. As I mentioned, students worked collaboratively on a series of quick writes and then turned in their individual work. The results of the quick writes and assessment scores contradict each other because the majority students performed well on the quick writes but struggled on the individual assessment. One reason for this disparity could be students simply copying each others experiments verbatim. When students were working collaboratively in their small groups they were allowed to discuss and write their ideas together and when I was grading these quick writes there were several groups whose members had the exact same experiment. This type of collaboration could have led to students misunderstanding the concepts and lacking the skills necessary to write experiments individually. In addition, observations in my journal showed that during the quick writes students were disengaged and struggled to remain on task possibly leading to the difficulty of transferring their knowledge from a collaborative to individual setting.
I believe another factor contributing to my students struggling during the individual assessment when they did not have access to peer support was the switch in curriculum. Students that had been successful with the algebra curriculum struggled with the analytical aspects of statistics. For example, one of my students who had not scored below 90 on any one of his algebra assessments scored a 60 on the individual assessment (his score is featured in the student work pdf.) He struggled to properly implement the three principles of experimental design, and in a personal conversation told me that he prefers calculations because he did not enjoy the reading and writing elements of experimental design. However, several students that struggled with algebra performed well on the experimental design assessment. One student who had an average score of 60 on her algebra assessments scored a 100 on this individual assessment (her work is featured in the student work pdf.) Therefore, the results of the individual assessment showed that content may have played a part in the students struggling when they did not have access to peer support.
Theme Two: Students were engaged and participating when a collaborative project required them to produce a finished product.
During phase one, I created a collaborative project (Hot Dogs Sweetened by the Sun) in order to evaluate students collaborative abilities. I observed that student participation and positive attitudes during the hot dog project was greater than when we did the collaborative assessment (Pick A Car). After implementing phase one, I wanted to design a collaborative project that had an end product, similar to the hot dot project, in order to see if that type of a collaborative activity would increase student participation and positive attitudes. I decided that I would have students design and build casino games and found that student participation was high and the majority of the students had positive attitudes while creating, building, and playing their games. The first two days when the students were designing the concepts behind their games; i.e. creating their probability distributions and overall concept, I observed and recorded in my journal that their was disengagement among some of the students. Primarily among the students that said on their feedback forms they prefer working alone and do not like doing projects and those students that typically struggled with the math concepts of the class. However, on the last two days when students built and played their games student participation and engagement among all students was high. During these last two days I was primarily able to observe the students because their game concepts had been finalized. Those students that were disengaged the first two days were building and participating with their group members. One student, that had struggled throughout the semester with the math concepts helped his group build the majority of their project. In addition, another student who had been shy and quiet all semester and showed disengagement during collaborative activities was the most energetic host and really put effort into getting other students to play their game. I believe this finding was similar to an aspect I discovered in them one; students learn differently based on content because the participation and engagement of students varied depending on the task. Furthermore, the use of a finished product appeared to increase student engagement during a collaborative project.
Theme Three: Students have varying attitudes toward collaborative activities and these attitudes were not changed as a result of my action research.
The data analysis from the student responses to the feedback form implemented during phase two showed that students have varying attitudes toward collaboration. For example, my journal observations reveal that students that seem to struggle with assessments and in-class activities enjoy working in collaborative groups. On the contrary, several students that perform relatively well on exams do not enjoy collaborative assessments or group projects. Below are some sample student responses for both questions highlighting the variation among the students:
Question 1- Which method of assessment do you prefer: Why?
Possible Next Steps
If there was more time to investigate my primary action research question, what happens to student learning when students are allowed to seek peer support and classroom resources during learning activities and assessments, I believe the following would allow me to further develop my research:
During phase two I was able to build upon and uncover some new emerging themes about my students.
Theme One: Students struggled to transfer their knowledge when they did not have access to peer support, and, they tend to learn differently based on content.
Data analysis of the individual assessment scores and recordings in my personal journal showed that students struggled to transfer their knowledge from a collaborative to individual setting during the unit on experimental design. As I mentioned, students worked collaboratively on a series of quick writes and then turned in their individual work. The results of the quick writes and assessment scores contradict each other because the majority students performed well on the quick writes but struggled on the individual assessment. One reason for this disparity could be students simply copying each others experiments verbatim. When students were working collaboratively in their small groups they were allowed to discuss and write their ideas together and when I was grading these quick writes there were several groups whose members had the exact same experiment. This type of collaboration could have led to students misunderstanding the concepts and lacking the skills necessary to write experiments individually. In addition, observations in my journal showed that during the quick writes students were disengaged and struggled to remain on task possibly leading to the difficulty of transferring their knowledge from a collaborative to individual setting.
I believe another factor contributing to my students struggling during the individual assessment when they did not have access to peer support was the switch in curriculum. Students that had been successful with the algebra curriculum struggled with the analytical aspects of statistics. For example, one of my students who had not scored below 90 on any one of his algebra assessments scored a 60 on the individual assessment (his score is featured in the student work pdf.) He struggled to properly implement the three principles of experimental design, and in a personal conversation told me that he prefers calculations because he did not enjoy the reading and writing elements of experimental design. However, several students that struggled with algebra performed well on the experimental design assessment. One student who had an average score of 60 on her algebra assessments scored a 100 on this individual assessment (her work is featured in the student work pdf.) Therefore, the results of the individual assessment showed that content may have played a part in the students struggling when they did not have access to peer support.
Theme Two: Students were engaged and participating when a collaborative project required them to produce a finished product.
During phase one, I created a collaborative project (Hot Dogs Sweetened by the Sun) in order to evaluate students collaborative abilities. I observed that student participation and positive attitudes during the hot dog project was greater than when we did the collaborative assessment (Pick A Car). After implementing phase one, I wanted to design a collaborative project that had an end product, similar to the hot dot project, in order to see if that type of a collaborative activity would increase student participation and positive attitudes. I decided that I would have students design and build casino games and found that student participation was high and the majority of the students had positive attitudes while creating, building, and playing their games. The first two days when the students were designing the concepts behind their games; i.e. creating their probability distributions and overall concept, I observed and recorded in my journal that their was disengagement among some of the students. Primarily among the students that said on their feedback forms they prefer working alone and do not like doing projects and those students that typically struggled with the math concepts of the class. However, on the last two days when students built and played their games student participation and engagement among all students was high. During these last two days I was primarily able to observe the students because their game concepts had been finalized. Those students that were disengaged the first two days were building and participating with their group members. One student, that had struggled throughout the semester with the math concepts helped his group build the majority of their project. In addition, another student who had been shy and quiet all semester and showed disengagement during collaborative activities was the most energetic host and really put effort into getting other students to play their game. I believe this finding was similar to an aspect I discovered in them one; students learn differently based on content because the participation and engagement of students varied depending on the task. Furthermore, the use of a finished product appeared to increase student engagement during a collaborative project.
Theme Three: Students have varying attitudes toward collaborative activities and these attitudes were not changed as a result of my action research.
The data analysis from the student responses to the feedback form implemented during phase two showed that students have varying attitudes toward collaboration. For example, my journal observations reveal that students that seem to struggle with assessments and in-class activities enjoy working in collaborative groups. On the contrary, several students that perform relatively well on exams do not enjoy collaborative assessments or group projects. Below are some sample student responses for both questions highlighting the variation among the students:
Question 1- Which method of assessment do you prefer: Why?
- Individual. I like it better because your on your own and no ones telling you what to do.
- Individual. I get my work done faster and I get to think clearer. I also like working in a group it's just I prefer working alone.
- Collaborative. Because the other people can help you if you dont understand and you can help them too.
- Individual. Because it is easier to get more work done and there is some students that dont do much work at all.
- Collaborative. Because we all work together to get answer and you learn different ways to solve problems.
- I think working on projects and assessments with people isnt for me, I like to work alone. Most people will just copy off the "smart" one in the group.
- I like them but I dont like group projects when there is a students that doesnt do anything.
- I very much enjoy working on group projects & assessments. I find it to be rather fun to do
- I liked working on group projects and assessments everyone got to share their opinions and help each other out.
Possible Next Steps
If there was more time to investigate my primary action research question, what happens to student learning when students are allowed to seek peer support and classroom resources during learning activities and assessments, I believe the following would allow me to further develop my research:
- create a collaborative and individual assessment using the same curriculum,
- develop another collaborative project with an end product.