INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS INQUIRY PROJECT

“MINDSHIFT! RETHINKING EDUCATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY”

FINAL SCHOOL REPORT – April 2012

SCHOOL:

INQUIRY TEAM MEMBERS, GRADE(S) TAUGHT, SUBJECT, FOCUS (please list):

SCHOOL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT FOR THE PROJECT:

1

Quote Administrator

“Maria Montessori believed in a hands on approach to learning. She used concrete materials such that children could visualize the abstractions of their universe. By examining the role that technology plays in the modern world of learning, we hope that we can continue Maria Montessori’s analytical and insightful approach to education.”

Donna BorehamTMS Head of

Kelli Cartwright, Michelle Hutchinson, Carolyn Ventrillon, Felicia Villano, Roger Marles and Blaine Seamone

Upper Elementary Grades 4, 5, 6

Elementary Faculty

TMS School seamlessly combines a flagship Montessori program (18 months to grade 6) with a welcoming International Baccalaureate (IB) Programme from grade 7 to 12. This unique and highly effective approach encompasses the four pillars of a whole child education: Academics, Arts, Athletics and Citizenship. We expect our graduates to work and live successfully in a complex and competitive world that is always changing. With this goal in mind, the TMS educational experience is carefully designed to enable each graduate to define and realize success in university, career and in life.

Our group shared a common interest in building knowledge on the use of technology and its benefits to students in the classroom. We were curious to see if technology truly increases the level of student engagement in the classroom.

TMS School

OUR ESSENTIAL QUESTION:

OUR ACTION RESEARCH STORY:

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH AND HOW IT MAY HAVE CHANGED:

2. FUNDING AND SUPPORT:

2

What are the effects of using eCommons on grade 6 students’ level of engagement (participation) in philosophy questions for Writing Workshops?

We would like to thank TMS administration for being very supportive of this project. We received coverage for our classes for the days we attended the OISE lectures and days we worked on the project. The parents of the students who participated in our focus group gave their permission to be interviewed and to have their thoughts recorded for the purpose of the study. The students who participated were eager, honest and cooperative during the entire process. Finally, thanks to Jim Hewitt for setting up and facilitating the eCommons program for our studies.

Originally we wanted our research to focus on the mechanics of the students’ writing and to determine whether or not there was an improvement when they used eCommons. However, our interests led us in another direction. We decided to see if using eCommons would encourage more discussion and participation among our students.

We also narrowed our target group to grade six students in a specific subject area. We chose to focus on our Writing Workshop study of philosophy.

Originally, we planned to have the students complete one hand written sample of a philosophy question and type a different sample online using eCommons. We later decided to have the students complete one more online sample in order to have more data to evaluate.

Finally, for the handwritten philosophy question, students were given an opportunity to engage in an oral discussion to share opinions. Through eCommons, students were given an opportunity to engage

3. PROJECT PROCESS:

3

Step 1) Introduction to Written/Oral Discussion

As a team we formulated our essential question and purpose.

We chose to focus on a series of philosophy questions using the grade 6 students from all four Upper Elementary classrooms consisting of 32 students.

Each individual classroom teacher led a Writing Workshop lesson introducing the basics of philosophy.

Each student responded to the same philosophy question posed by Immanuel Kant. “Should you ever tell a lie?” The guidelines included responding in written format using a rubric for reference. The rubric focused on conventions, organization and logic of thought. No directions were given regarding the quantity of writing expected.

Upon completion of the written response, each classroom held its own discussion on the topic. Students shared their opinions orally. The teachers monitored the discussions and kept a tally of the number of times a student responded. The students were not given guidelines defining the number of times to respond. The students were unaware the teachers were keeping a tally of their responses.

The students were given a post online survey using Survey Monkey in order for the teachers to receive feedback regarding the process.

Step 2) First Online Response

For the next Writing Workshop lesson, students were introduced to eCommons. Each student was assigned a password and username which allowed them anonymity.

A second philosophy question was introduced: “Can you lie to yourself?” by Jean-Paul Sartre.

A different format was introduced to respond to this question. Students completed their responses under their classroom link through eCommons. The same rubric was given in advance and no directions were given regarding the quantity of writing expected.

A second identical post survey was completed.

Students were encouraged to discuss the philosophy responses by interacting through eCommons. A minimum number of responses were not given to the students.

In this online environment, it should be noted that students could have access to online discussions with students from other classrooms.

Step 3) Second Online Response

• A third philosophy question was posed during a subsequent Writing Workshop. Students were given a third philosophy question titled, “Should you be rewarded for getting good grades?” on eCommons. The same rubric was given in advance and no directions were given regarding the quantity of writing expected.

• A third identical post survey was completed.

• Students discussed the philosophy responses by interacting through eCommons.

Throughout this process, ongoing meetings ensured a continuum of collaboration among the

4. ASSESSMENT STRATEGY:

a). DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA COLLECTION:

a) MAKING SENSE OF THE DATA:

4

First we had approximately 32 grade 6 students create a written response of their opinion to a philosophy question. (Appendix A). The students’ written responses were marked by a teacher using a rubric (provided to the students beforehand). (Appendix B).

Next, the students met within their classroom groups to discuss their opinions. The discussions were observed by the teacher. A tally was kept of each student’s level of participation. The students were unaware teachers were keeping a record. Students were then asked to complete an online survey regarding their experience.

Next, we had the same students type a written response to a philosophy question using eCommons. (Appendix C). Once again, the responses were marked by a teacher using the same rubric as above. Then, the students were encouraged to discuss their opinions by posting replies using the web based options of eCommons. (Appendix C). This process using eCommons was completed twice. Students were asked to complete an online survey. An overall tally was collected at the end of both eCommon's sessions to assess the average participation by each student. (Appendix D).

Lastly, we assembled a focus group of six students of various personalities and academic abilities to gain a deeper insight into how they felt about the process.

The source of data that proved to be most revealing was comparing a sample group of student levels of oral participation to the level of participation through eCommons.

The focus group video also proved to be quite revealing. Students were candid and reflective. These

Quantitative

The discussions of the oral responses were observed by the teachers; noting student levels of participation through tallying their contributions.

Data from eCommons was then studied to compare the level of student participation during oral discussions to the level of student participation during eCommons discussions.

We looked at the online survey (Survey Monkey) results and studied the data that showed: how easy it was for students to share their comments within the group and the level of interest in repeating the activity.

Qualitative

During the eCommons discussions, teachers would observe the number of student comments and responses to see if there was an increase in engagement from the oral discussion.

We then compared the level of student participation online to the oral discussion.

Towards the end of our study, a focus group was chosen to discuss the process. The focus group

Student Quotes: Grade 6

"I learned to communicate well with my friends and think creatively.”

“It was fun using the computer to talk to my friends. Now I like talking about philosophy.”

"I was glad to have a chance to work with my friends from other classes."

b). MAKING SENSE OF THE DATA: Process for analysis and interpretation.

5

c) ARTIFACTS, GRAPHICS, IMAGES:

b) FINDINGS:

d) FINDINGS

6

Appendix A: Sample of written philosophy question response.

Appendix B: Sample of philosophy rubric.

Appendix C: Sample of student online response using eCommons as well as student replies.

Appendix D: Graph of Student Replies to Two Philosophy Questions Using eCommons.

Appendix E: Graph of Levels of Student Participation.

Appendix F: Graph of Ease of Sharing Comments.

Appendix G: Graph of Level of Interest in Repeating the Activity.

Quantitative Findings-

First we compared the number of student replies from the oral discussion to the average number of student replies using eCommons. Appendix D shows the number of student notes written to other students. This allowed us to monitor the student interaction on eCommons. Then we took a random sample group of students from this chart and compared the number of times they participated orally. We found that the level of participation increased dramatically using eCommons for most students (Appendix E).

In Appendix F, the students were asked, using Survey Monkey, how easy it was to share their comments within the group for all three assignments. The quantitative data suggests that they gradually found it easier to share their comments using eCommons over time.

With regards to the students’ level of interest (Appendix G) our data shows that during the oral discussion, 50% of the students were not at all- to somewhat interested in repeating the activity. The other 50% were interested- to very interested. It should be noted that after the students completed the same survey for the first eCommons discussion, the results remained the same.

The final survey of the second eCommons discussion showed that there was a significant change from the first eCommons survey (Appendix G). A significant increase occurred in the students who were interested- to very interested in repeating that activity, from 50% to 77% (27% increase). This suggests that with more use and practice of the eCommons program, students’ comfort levels continued to increase; therefore they were more interested in repeating the activity.

7

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PROJECT: WHAT WERE MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS – YOUR NOTABLE SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES? WHAT WERE KEY RESULTS AND KEY PROFESSIONAL LEARNINGS?

CONCLUSION: HOW DID OUR ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT IMPACT YOUR INSTRUCTIONAL AND/OR ASSESSMENT PRACTICES TO REFLECT EDUCATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY?

8

Quote Team

“This journey has been educationally enlightening. We are excited to see the positive effects of technology on our students’ level of engagement and we look forward to seamlessly blending it with the Montessori environment and philosophy.”

Successes

• Increased interactions between classrooms and between individual students• Use of technology as a reinforcement not as a replacement• High student engagement• Anonymity allowed students to share thoughts “without being judged”• Increased online participation by quieter students• Provided the chance to do something new and differentChallenges

• Students posting vague, disconnected comments• Limited computer access• Rubric was not consistently used as a tool to guide their written answers• Students deleting others’ work• When instructions weren’t followed responses were not sent to the intended recipient• Passwords and user names were disclosed which led to students choosing to respond only

to their friends• Using eCommons, the writing appeared very casual and text like

Our results indicated that there was an increase in student involvement and engagement when using eCommons for online discussion. Students approached this assignment with enthusiasm and maintained this high level throughout the entire process. The students articulated their enjoyment of being able to read and respond to posts and comments from other students outside of their own classroom.

Many students who would not typically participate in our oral discussions felt more at ease and fully participated online.

All team members remarked on the high level of teacher collaboration.

The curriculum stayed the same but was enhanced by using the eCommons format. One aspect of improvement was the teachers’ shift from focusing on the overall structure of the response towards student levels of participation.

Based on these results, we will consider using this format of online sharing in other areas of the curriculum.

Students were enthusiastic about viewing and responding to their peers’ work.

These findings were shared with our Upper Elementary colleagues at weekly level meetings to encourage the use of technology across all areas of the curriculum.

RESOURCES WE RECOMMEND:

For Students:

For Professional Learning Teams:

For Teachers:

9

Philosophy for Kids by David A White

Big Ideas for Little Kids: Teaching Philosophy through Children’s Literature by Thomas E.Wartenberg

The Examined Life: Advanced Philosophy for Kids by David A White

Creating a Recognizing Quality Rubrics by Judith A Arter, Jan Chappuis

The Survey Handbook by Arlene Fink

How to Ask Survey Questions (2nd edition) by Arlene Fink

Appendix A:

10

Appendix B:

11

Appendix C:

12

Appendix D:

13

Appendix E:

14

Appendix F:

15

Appendix G:

16