Week 3 Assignment, Part 3
Draft Action Research Project Progress Report
Project-Based
Learning: How the Implementation of a 21st Century Skill-Based
Approach Affects Achievement
In 2012, my district embarked on a mission to
determine the best practices and methods in order to prepare students for
college, careers, and state tests. In the
elementary levels from kindergarten through fifth grade, a cohort was
constructed of one teacher per grade level per elementary school (5 total
elementary campuses). These teachers received
three days of training for the Buck Institute (BIE) in order to prepare them
for the methods they would implement in the following school year. The expectation set forth was for this cohort
to implement the theory and practices of Project-Based Learning in their
classrooms for an entire school year in order to test whether or not full-blown
implementation throughout the district would be necessary in order to improve
test scores and college preparedness. According to the AYP reports from
previous school years, my elementary campus continued to show minimal growth in
student achievement across all areas keeping us farther away from our goal of
becoming an exemplary campus. The AYP
targets for Reading and Math for the 2012 tests were 87% and 83% passing,
respectively. Figure 1 and 2 show the
campus percentage of met expectations for Math and Reading, while also
indicating the upcoming federal expectations for each subject(TEA, 2012). The resources being put into the piloting of
the PBL method ignited this question: Will
implementation of the Project-Based Learning approach affect the academic
achievement of the 3rd and 4th graders on my campus?
Figure 1: AYP - Reading
| All | AA | Eco. Dis. | SpEd | |
| Reading - Campus | 94 | 86 | 93 | 80 |
| Reading Target 2013 | 87 | 87 | 87 | 87 |
| Reading Target 2015 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| All | AA | Eco. Dis. | SpEd | |
| Reading - Campus | 94 | 86 | 93 | 80 |
| Reading Target 2013 | 87 | 87 | 87 | 87 |
| Reading Target 2015 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
The objective of this inquiry is to determine
the relationship between the Project-Based Learning approach and the student
academic achievement of 3rd and 4th graders at my
campus. The vision planned for this
project is to document student achievement of 3rd and 4th
grade PCL students throughout an entire school year and compare their
achievement and academic growth, as measured by Curriculum Based Assessments
(CBA), Benchmarks, and the STAAR test, to the achievement of students of
similar demographic make-up in the same grades who are not participating in a
PBL class environment. As the district
flirts with the idea of implementing the PBL teaching method across the
elementary schools based on the results of this pilot year, I would like to
conduct my own research to show the affect(s).
While the achievement gap expands, the window
of opportunity to produce students ready for the real world decreases. Schools (including my own) must find a way to
instruct students in a way which prepares them for the post-secondary world
they will enter. Project-based learning
offers an approach to teaching and learning that requires students to learn the
content through a series of 21stcentury skills and practices. The amount of research, problem-solving, communication,
collaboration, and presentation prepares students for the next grade, college,
and the technologically savvy world in which they will enter a workforce
(Larmer, 2010). According to Buck
Institute, schools that use project (or problem) based learning techniques and methods
report higher proficiency rates in Reading and Math than other schools within
the same district that do not use these methods. In fact, the ELS performance report for
2007-2008 suggests reading proficiency is an average of 9% higher (in some
cases 40%) and in Math, an average of 3-4% higher (ELS, 2009).
Therefore, when I was chosen to participate
in the cohort of the pilot year in my district, my principal and I determined
that there was a need to determine the impact these methods would have on our
students. If the school or district
plans to implement this practice through every teacher, they will need data that
shows the affect on our 3rd and 4th graders. 3rd and 4th graders
were chosen simply due to the availability of data, including CBAs, benchmarks,
and STAAR.
Since the only personnel involved in the project
is myself, administration and the 4th grade teacher, communication of
the vision has been very positive and efficient. The fourth grade teacher is eager to see the
results. Administration would like for
the findings to be presented to the Assistance Superintendent (Director of
Curriculum) and Board, if possible. All
who are involved are on board and aiding in the completion of the project,
which will finish after preliminary results of the 2013 STAAR tests are
released. Ideally, the findings will be
communicated to the campus, district administration, the board, and the global
community via a blog. Fortunately,
finances and personnel resources are not a direct concern for this research
project. The research plan was developed
in conjunction with the district and state testing schedules. Curriculum was not adjusted or altered in any
way, other than within the nature of the teaching model of PBL. Student learning was and is able to continue
as planned based on the district scope and sequence of the curriculum and the
needs of the PBL cohort.
The initial needs assessment aided in
determining the importance of researching the inquiry regarding the
implementation of PBL in the district.
Previous testing data and the district graduation rates indicate that
we, as a district, need to implement changes to better meet the needs of our
students. Implementing the pilot cohort
of Project-Based Learning is one way our district is aiming for
improvement. At the elementary level, it
was determined that teaching methods were inconsistent and ill-fitting for the
world in which our students will enter as adults. Therefore, my principal and I decided to
determine what, if any, changes would occur on our campus if we taught our
students the same curriculum, just with a different approach. To date, there has been no conflict to resolve
regarding the action research.
The sample population classes
participating in PBL in this study include a G/T inclusion class and a SpEd
inclusion class. Therefore, the data
will indicate implications for general education students as well as students
with special or exceptional needs. Also
included in the population sample is a wide array of all special interest groups
and sub-populations. Therefore, the data
will also indicate affects for those students as well. Once achieved, the data will be disaggregated
for each sub-population, much like the develiery of AYP reports. The plan is to indicate differences in
achievement in PBL and non-PBL students.
Hopefully, the research will show that this method is a probable
approach to exceptional learning for all students.
References
Dana, Nancy F. Leading with Passion and Knowledge: The
Principal as Action Researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2009.
Expeditionary Learning Schools (2009). SY 2007-2008 ELS System Wide Performance Data. New York, NY: ELS, 2009.
Larmer, John & Mergendoller, John (2010). The Main Course, Not Dessert. In A. Solis, J.
Larmer, & D. Ross, PBL 101 Workbook
(pp. 49-52).
Larmer, John & Mergendoller, John (September
2010). 8 Essentials for Project-Based
Learning. In A. Solis, J. Larmer, & D. Ross, PBL 101 Workbook (pp. 53-56).
Texas
Education Agency. 2012. Adequate Yearly
Progress Campus Data Table. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker.
