Recent Posts
- Group 2 – Article 8: Fostering Inclusivity Through Teaching and Learning Action Research
- Group 1 – Article 8: Fostering Inclusivity Through Teaching and Learning Action Research
- Group 1 – Article 7: The Cyclical Process of Action Research
- Group 2 – Article 7: The Cyclical Process of Action Research
- Group 2 – Article 6: Critical Literacy for School Improvement: An Action Research Project
In the article Critical Literacy for school improvement: an action research project; researchers are working alongside educators in an urban Canadian elementary school to improve literacy for those students at risk. The first part of the article requires the researchers to define exactly what and who they are researching. They begin be defining the school as ‘urban’, which refers to an inner city school that shows a relationship between poverty and a lack of literacy skills. The next work that they define is ‘Critical’, for this word they enlist the help of teachers. The article describes ‘critical’ as questioning and skeptically regarding common ‘truths’, once these words have been decided upon the researchers work with the teachers to find ways to improve critical reading in the school. They are utilizing three main initiatives or strategies to improve literacy; a reading recovery teacher was hired, to obtain baseline scores the Development Reading Assessment was used by administration, and an early literacy program was begun with the inclusion of a school-wide, daily, two-hour time block for reading. The researchers wanted to insure that the Critical Literacy component didn’t just have implications for practice but rather as an instructional methodology for all teachers in the building. Action research is more relatable for teachers because it is completed by teachers, the researchers worked with the teachers in the school to gather input for how to complete the research. The teachers and researchers used K-W-L and implemented strategies for teaching Critical Literacy (text-to-self, text-to-text, and text-to-world), including dialog with students and teachers. The article articulates that while educational funding is important, having a direct link to the text being taught is extremely important. Allowing the teachers to have input of the design gave them accountability for what is being questioned and the purpose of the study, the administration gave input as to what the initial objectives were, and finally collaboration allowed the researchers to develop a three year plan with commitment and collaboration as a focus.
The article was explicit on its desire to create phase 1 of an action plan to combat literacy needs in the community. Time constraints were the biggest hurdle that was observed, due to the professional development of all involved and the time collaborating and planning. One large take away that was noticed was the definition of what ‘critical’ meant to certain educators. Depending on the belief system changed how ‘Critical Literacy’ was interpreted, which was an important part of this because if teachers believed differently, the focus would change from class to class. With a change of beliefs or focus students would then have a confused version of identity, success, and the student’s chance for success in the future. Would it be possible to implement this over multiple areas, with the time requirements? So many educators, more the educators that have been teaching for a long period of time, don’t want to spend the extra time at the school working on professional development that they believe won’t be effective.
Professionally, I have seen how different definitions of a word can affect students. The schools, at the high school level, are sometimes more focused on graduation rates and not on having the student succeed after high school. Teachers can become so focused on passing the SOL, which they forget that students need to understand the material not just repeat it back. With so much emphasis on the wrong things, teachers need to remember to communicate and collaborate, not just with coworkers but also with their own students. With collaboration, effort must be put in to guarantee the best possible outcomes. It is true that the best change comes when the work is done from the inside out, but with current policies, and the specific requirements of students and teachers, can change happen at a rate that is acceptable?
Kim,
I feel that you provided a detailed summary of the article. This article provided an interesting look at a critical literacy project for the school. The portion of the article that stood out to me was were the different teachers explained their beliefs on critical literacy and the importance on ownership. When I was a substitute teacher for upper elementary, many of my schools had a two-hour literacy block which included remediation. These were often school wide and sometimes displaced recess. These blocks were for schools that accredited with warning or missing accreditation. I noticed that many of staffers were not happy with this period because it did not have staff input. It makes wonder would it have been more effective if the teachers had greater amount of input. Could the study in the article have been implemented within some of these inner-city schools?
As an elementary teacher, I believe this was relevant and well explained example of action research. Reading abilities of students is definitely an issue I face each year at my school. I was intrigued by the fact that this was implemented school-wide versus having just a class or two pilot the program first, and that fact that non supportive teachers were let go. The fact that only teachers who supported this program and received extensive hours of professional development mad a difference. Another significant part of this, as Kim discussed was having the teachers collaborate and have discussion about terms used, which I do not feel is something that happens enough in schools and education. Also autonomy is another thing we struggle with in schools. The next step, I would hope is to let teachers take charge of their own classroom and use their own ethical and professional judgement to change, reflective, and continue this action research based on their students.
Kim,
The way your summary and the article itself described the school environment in the action plan, I immediately thought about the school I teach in. It is often described as urban, critical, at risk, and diverse. We also implement the same three initiatives and strategies to improve literacy. Unlike the article, at my school there are 4 reading teachers but we do have a two hour block of time for reading. I agree with you and Darrel that teacher input and teacher attitudes play a role in the “success” of what is implemented during the reading block. I would like to hope that teachers are making their decisions based on what is best for the students, but I have also seen teachers who like to take the easy or lazy way out, specifically during literacy blocks. I do not believe every minute of this 2 hour block should be planned out, teachers and students should have choice, but I do think their needs to be school wide parameters and expectations set in place. In my classroom during this time, it is not just small groups and implicit reading instruction. PBL’s, choice boards, novel studies, etc. are simultaneously happening in all of the 4th grade classrooms at the same time. This is also an awesome time to do cross-curricular activities to help dig deeper into SOL topics and understanding. I am a believer in the initiatives and strategies discussed in the article because I have seen firsthand how it can positively impact the type of student in my classroom. This is a time in the day when you can meet each student’s needs, differentiate instruction, and provide multiple layers of support that are necessary.