Action Research Design Critique Report

One scenario in which Experimental design can be used to conduct a research study is to determine if there is a difference in student performance on revising/editing questions for those completing practice-tests with partners versus those completing practice-tests without a partner before taking the final test (individually). This type of experiment would be done with a quasi-experimental design because of the lack of both total randomization and controlled-testing. The experiment could be done in one teacher’s classroom for certain class periods, or divided amongst several classes with different teachers (this division would require team collaboration). Once a week, students will take practice tests; the experimental classrooms will take the quizzes with a partner, and the control classrooms will take the quizzes individually.

The following measures would be taken to address the potential threats to internal validity as defined by Mills and Gay (2015, p. 291). To prevent the threat of instrumentation, practice-test and final test questions will be pulled from previously released state standardized exams. To prevent the threat of testing, the pre-test will be given two months before the final test. To prevent the potential threat of maturation, all course instruction related to the content tested will be distributed similarly across all classrooms. To account for potential statistical regression, any extremely high or low scorers will be considered as potential outliers in the results. To prevent differential selection of participants as well as potential differences with mortality, partner assignments within the experimental group will change for each practice test t-testing will be conducted to account for differences. Historical threats cannot be factored in, but the testing can be extended and scores monitored to account for any variances. The different characteristics of the students will be accounted for as potential variables when analyzing the results in order to address the selection participants and selection-maturation interaction.

Researchers implement a mixed-methods approach to collect data for a study because it allows them to get ‘the best of both worlds.’ Not only will they record the opinions and feedback of the participants, but they will have the numerical statistics to back up (or refute) the qualitative data. The three forms of mixed methods designs are: explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential, and convergent sequential. The biggest differences between these three is the order in which quantitative and qualitative data are received and weighed. Explanatory sequential gathers quantitative data first and weighs it most heavily, exploratory sequential places more emphasis on qualitative data, and convergent parallel is a balanced approach to gathering and weighing the two types of data (Mills & Gay, 2015, p. 445-447).

One of the biggest differences between action research and formal research is the person conducting the research. Typically, action research is “conducted by teachers, principals, school counselors, or other stakeholders in the teaching-learning environment” and it is looking at a specific aspect of the classroom to improve (Mills & Gay, 2015, p. 475). A teacher’s action research is conducted in the classroom (typically without randomization); there is more room to be flexible and change the delivery as needed. Formal research, on the other hand, does not have to directly involve the teacher, the structure is more rigid and controlled, and the participants are randomized. Because action research has more practical applications and implications, teachers are able to conduct it on their own to improve their own classroom teaching and learning environment. Researchers are able to see results in a ‘real’ classroom rather than a carefully controlled environment.

Article Summary

Action Research Design

Diane L. Waldron (2014) conducted an action research study in her high school English classroom to explore the impact of blended learning for a literature unit. She wanted to see if students could use an online learning management system and if those from impoverished homes would access the online course from home. She also wanted to see if online forums would encourage less vocal students to participate in discussions. Her primary purpose, though, was to determine whether the incorporation of technology (through a blended learning environment) would enhance students’ motivation and impact their learning experience.

Summation of Research Literature

Internet technology allows learning to happen both in school and at home, effectively creating more learning time. Even though there aren’t any specific rules about how time should be divided between the two platforms, content instruction and student discussion should take place virtually and face to face. There are several models on how to incorporate blended learning in the classrooms including: a flex model where instruction is online and teachers support; a self-blend model where the computer is used to access a self-chosen online course; the enriched virtual model where the school experience is divided between online content and attendance on campus; and the rotation model where students rotate between online and classroom learning (via stations, labs, or “flipped classrooms”).

Some of the benefits for blended instruction include: being able to target different learning styles, allowing students to create deeper meanings, opportunities for better discussions and reflections, and ease of access to content. In order to reap the benefits of blended learning, teachers must carefully plan and design to optimize instruction and learning. The internet must be integral to the lesson and it must also engage students with online discussions to improve student learning. Because of the student-centered nature and opportunities to access online content at their own convenience, students are more likely to be engaged and motivated. Despite the extensive research on blended learning at the post-secondary level, there is relatively little on its impact in high school classrooms.

Method for Collecting and Analyzing Data

The participants were the twenty students (of various ethnic backgrounds) in her eleventh grade AP class at a Title I regional technical high school in New England. Of the 20 students, only 15 used their smart phones for the unit, 1 used an iPod, 1 used an iPad, and 3 did not own smart phones. All of them had internet access at home.

The unit was designed for the students to access the internet and course materials during class time in the library media center, as well as outside of the classroom on their personal devices or at-home computers. However, the library media center was unavailable so she supplemented 9 student computers with student smart phones, which were too small for readings or forum posts. Therefore, for the first two weeks, she divided the class into two groups with half of the time spent in online instruction and the other half of the time for traditional instruction. For the last two weeks of the unit, student smart phones were exchanged for school netbooks and then 100% of in-class time was spent accessing online instruction.

At the end of each of the nine chapters, students were expected to complete discussion forum prompts, vocabulary quizzes, and content quizzes, which were all given a numerical scoring (0-100). Coursesites.com tracked student time on the platform, quizzes taken, quiz grades, student participation in forums, and forum post grades. Students’ responses to blended learning were collected at the end of each chapter when students took an anonymous post-unit reflection survey: 14 statements measuring their (dis)agreement about their experiences and a 15th open-ended question.

Results and Conclusions

Some enjoyed the online environment, but others did not. Overall, student engagement increased from weeks one to four, and everyone contributed to the forum discussions at least once. However, out of twenty students, only six completed at least 80% of the online quizzes, only five completed at least 60% of the discussion posts, and only one finished the unit during the allotted 4-weeks of the study. These results reflect the classroom transition from smart phones to netbooks, but also alludes to the fact that students did not engage with the online course outside of the classroom.

Her results indicate that a digital divide is still evident especially because she teaches the majority of her students come from economically-disadvantaged homes, and they may not have had access to personal computers at home-even if they have internet access with smart phones. In answer to the questions she sought out: students can learn how to use an online classroom and she thinks some students took ownership of their learning, but the results are unclear on the impact of the online environment on student learning.

Potential further study would be to examine why students did not use the online classroom outside of school: if it were motivation, not having firm deadlines, or lack of access (especially since smart phones were discovered to be unsuitable for quizzes and forum posts). Future blended instruction units could possibly be improved with a wider variety of activities (especially for those students that do not like blended learning), better/more consistent access to the online course, adequate pacing, set deadlines, and closer in-class monitoring.

References

Mills, G.E., & Gay, L.R. (2015). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Waldron, D. L. (2014). Blended instruction: The roaring twenties meets Coursesites.com. Current Issues in Education, 17(3). Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1235/582