connecting engagement with student performance by tania s. pryor winter 2014 at seattle pacific...

22
Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Upload: laurence-randall

Post on 19-Jan-2018

219 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Review of Literature  Cleary & Zimmerman- propose a lack of motivation may be linked to the lack of self-efficacy in students. Students believe that they no longer posses the ability to learn an academic task which will undermine the tasks and may cause breakdowns in self-regulation (2004).  Self-efficacy- the belief in ones self to complete tasks and reach goals.  Academic breakdowns may consist of lack of attention in class, failure to prepare for examinations, and even failure to attend school (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004).

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Connecting Engagement with Student Performance

By Tania S. PryorWinter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Page 2: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Where it all began: My A team students that has caused a

group of teachers to scratch their heads for over four years.

How does a teacher extrinsically motivate a student or a group of students that lack intrinsic motivation?

How can I create an environment that facilitates learning for all?

Page 3: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Cleary & Zimmerman- propose a lack of

motivation may be linked to the lack of self-efficacy in students. Students believe that they no longer posses the ability to learn an academic task which will undermine the tasks and may cause breakdowns in self-regulation (2004).

Self-efficacy- the belief in ones self to complete tasks and reach goals.

Academic breakdowns may consist of lack of attention in class, failure to prepare for examinations, and even failure to attend school (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004).

Page 4: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Continued Developmental motivation researchers state that

the lack of motivation is developmental. Researchers have proven that when students

transition to middle school their self-esteem, task values, and intrinsic interest in academic tasks decline (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004)

As students move up in years they are expected to do more on their own and they don’t have the skills to accomplish the tasks (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004; Walsh, 2006)

Page 5: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Continued

A prevalent thought that undermines many different theories is the belief that a strong student/teacher relationship will increase motivation.

“Rapport between teachers and students relates to valuable student outcomes, such as enjoyment of the material, class attendance, and time spent studying” (Wilson, 2013, p 130)

“In addition, student reports of rapport related with paying more attention in class” (Wilson, 2013, p 130)

Page 6: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Continued Factors that promote or determine lack o motivation seem to cross

all socio-economic, racial, and cultural barriers. In Wilkins’ and Kupermince’s (2010) study of 143 Latino adolescents

he states, “The finding that academic climate was just as strong a predictor of academic achievement, as achievement motivation, points to the importance of attending to the learning environment when developing strategies to increase academic success among Latinos” (p 267).

A study on at-risk African American children conducted by Fenzel and Domingues confirms Wilkins’ findings by stating, “that students in effective urban schools reported more positive learning environments, perceived their teachers as more supportive, and reported more order and organization in their classrooms than did students in ineffective urban schools” (2009, p 32).

Page 7: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Continued The difficulty is none of the researchers define

what a good student/teacher relationship consists of.

Danielson Framework, second domain states a strong student/teacher relationship consists of; (a) respectful talk, active listening, and turn-taking; (b) acknowledgement of students’ backgrounds and lives outside their classroom; (c) body language indicative of warmth and caring shown by teacher and students” (d) physical proximity; (e) politeness and encouragement; and (f) fairness.

Page 8: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Continued What is a teacher to do when they have strong

student/teacher relationships with their students and yet still are unable to motivate a small group of students?

Article, “Self-Regulation Empowerment Program: A school-based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning” (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004).

Self-regulation is a process where students use their mental abilities to influence their academic outcome (Zimmerman, 2002).

Our struggling students do not see that their actions affect their academic achievement but believe their academic achievement is a reaction to the teaching they receive.

Page 9: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Continued “A key goal in this approach is to provide effective

intervention services early in the academic referral process in order to reduce the number of students who develop clinically significant academic or behavioral problems” (Cleary, Patten, & Nelson, 2008, p. 70).

A teacher instructs a struggling learner in vetted learning strategies coupled with teaching the student how to critically analyze his/her behavior before and after engagement in a task (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004).

Page 10: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Review of Literature Contined Phase 1: Forethought-consists of looking at the

students current standings and graphing their current academic outcomes.

Phase 2: Learning Strategies- the teacher administers a series of at least 8 lessons to help a student develop time management, goal setting, how to ask questions, and ways to prepare for assessments.

Phase 3: Self-Reflection- the teacher teaches students how to reflect on the actions they took. Did what they did to prepare reach the outcomes they desired?

Page 11: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Research Design Phase 1: Taught Forethought by graphing the

students’ grades after term one grades were complete and had students explain what they were doing or not doing in their classes.

Page 12: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Research DesignTeaching Forethought:

Page 13: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Research DesignExample Student Responses:

Science: I study for my test, I read over my notes, and take notes. I do my conclusion paragraphs.

Math Improvement: I shout out loud. Do good on the computer game “ST. Math”. Participate 100%. Finish handouts given.

Read 180: Do what I’m told, finish what is suppose to be accomplished, asked questions when needed. Answered questions when needed.

Geography: Shout out loud, try to take notes, do not do my current events (because I don’t know how too). My friends.

Language Arts: Study for my test. Read over my notes, raise my hand. Don’t turn things in on time.

Math: Do not do my homework, I do my classwork. Participate 100%. Fail my tests. Study my test (by doing all packets).

Page 14: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Research DesignMy Students

Zero Ds and Es

One D or E Two Ds or Es

Three and more Ds and Es

01234567

Student Grades

6th Grade7th Grade8th Grade

Page 15: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Forethought continued:

Completing Class-work/Homework

Asking Questions/raise hands/ asking for help

Study for tests Takes notes0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Currently Used Learning Strategies

6th Grade7th Grade8th Grade

Page 16: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Research DesignStudy Skills Lessons Phase 2: Teaching lessons within my workshop

classes. The first week I taught the classes following the workshop model. The second week my 7th and 8th grade students were at Nature Bridge and so I taught all lessons in a direct instruction model.

Time management: Rearranged to teach the second time management lesson at the end.

Goal Setting: SMART Goals Study Habits

Page 17: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Research DesignS.M.A.R.T. Goals

Specific Measureable Attainable Rewarding Timely

Page 18: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Analysis of Data Difficulties: Standard base grading, time frame,

school science trip. Ah-ha moments- “O.k. Miss Pryor, I get it.” Engagement- Shaking of head, etc.

Page 19: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Action Plan Completing the lessons and teaching Self-

Reflection. Presenting to colleague and principal. Developing a study skills class.

Page 20: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

Action PlanRecommendations Have all student participate. A SREP could not be implemented any sooner

then the end of 1st quarter. Couple this program with another outcome that

needs to be accomplished during the year. (i.e., flash, typing class, etc.)

Page 21: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

References Cleary, T.J., Platten, P., & Nelson, A., (2008). Effectiveness of the Self-Regulation

Empowerment Program with Urban High School Students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 70-107.

Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school-based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 537–550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.10177

Danielson, C., (2013). The Framework For Teaching Evaluation Instrument. Retrieved from http://www.danielsongroup.org/userfiles/files/downloads/2013EvaluationInstrument.pdf

Falco, L. D., (2007). “Skill-Builders” Lesson Plans. Retrieved from http://www.mpsaz.org/guidance/secondary_counseling/lessons/employees_only/files/skill_builders_lesson_plans.pdf

Fenzel, L. M., & Domingues, J. (2009). Educating Urban African American Children Placed At Risk: A Comparison of Two Types of Catholic Middle Schools. Catholic Education a Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 13(1), 30–52.

Page 22: Connecting Engagement with Student Performance By Tania S. Pryor Winter 2014 at Seattle Pacific University

References Walsh, F. (2006). A Middle School Dilemma; Dealing with “I

Don't Care.” American Secondary Education, 35(1), 5–15. Wilkins, N. J., & Kuperminc, G. P. (2010). Why Try? Achievement

Motivation and Perceived Academic Climate Among Latino Youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(2), 246–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431609333303

Wilkins, N. J., & Kuperminc, G. P. (2010). Why Try? Achievement Motivation and Perceived Academic Climate Among Latino Youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(2), 246–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431609333303

Zimmerman, B. J., (2002). Becoming a Self Regulated Learner: An Overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.