The main focus of TE808 has been our action research project. This project is very closely aligned with nearly every MATC standard.
Standard 2 - Understanding of subject matter, how to teach It, and how to design curriculum, instruction, and assessment to foster students’ understanding.
This project requires us to try something new in our classrooms. For many of us, this has involved an adaptation of existing curriculum or trying out a new instructional approach. The literature review helped reinforce how a subject should be taught. For example, my literature review reinforced the need for differentiated small-group instruction for word study that is developmentally appropriate for each child. By changing the way word study is taught in my classroom, I have been designing a word study curriculum by taking components from three different published series, implementing it, and assessing students to not only see what they have learned but to determine the effectiveness of the curriculum.
Standard 3 - Understanding and use of theoretical perspectives and conceptual frameworks to situate and analyze issues and problems of practice and policy.
The literature review helped to root our project within a theoretical perspective and helped to determine whether what we were trying is “best practice.”
Standard 4 - Reflective, systematic inquiry and study/refinement of one’s practice
The entire action research project is an attempt to refine our teaching practice in order to provide more effective instruction for our students. This required reflecting on our classroom’s to determine a problem and then find a potential solution to implement and study its effects.
Standard 5: Communication skills and information literacy
The literature review required us to access professional information and use it to make decisions about our action research projects. Furthermore, by publishing our action research via a blog or website it reflects our technological-literacy.
Standard 6: Proactive participation in collaborative initiatives, professional learning communities, professional organizations, and teacher leadership beyond the classroom
The peer feedback and interaction on the FAQ boards are step towards this standard. Tis standard is not quite fulfilled however, because, for the most part, the interaction is not proactive. Rather it is a requirement of the course. However, the exercise of doing it may help some people see its benefits and prompt them to do it proactively on their own.
This course also fits within Goal 1 of the MATC program - Critical Inquiry. Action research is even given as one of the examples of critical inquiry and TE808 is where many students (those who were not former MSU interns since a more mild form of this was done in TE802) are introduced to action research for the first time.
Standard 2 - Understanding of subject matter, how to teach It, and how to design curriculum, instruction, and assessment to foster students’ understanding.
This project requires us to try something new in our classrooms. For many of us, this has involved an adaptation of existing curriculum or trying out a new instructional approach. The literature review helped reinforce how a subject should be taught. For example, my literature review reinforced the need for differentiated small-group instruction for word study that is developmentally appropriate for each child. By changing the way word study is taught in my classroom, I have been designing a word study curriculum by taking components from three different published series, implementing it, and assessing students to not only see what they have learned but to determine the effectiveness of the curriculum.
Standard 3 - Understanding and use of theoretical perspectives and conceptual frameworks to situate and analyze issues and problems of practice and policy.
The literature review helped to root our project within a theoretical perspective and helped to determine whether what we were trying is “best practice.”
Standard 4 - Reflective, systematic inquiry and study/refinement of one’s practice
The entire action research project is an attempt to refine our teaching practice in order to provide more effective instruction for our students. This required reflecting on our classroom’s to determine a problem and then find a potential solution to implement and study its effects.
Standard 5: Communication skills and information literacy
The literature review required us to access professional information and use it to make decisions about our action research projects. Furthermore, by publishing our action research via a blog or website it reflects our technological-literacy.
Standard 6: Proactive participation in collaborative initiatives, professional learning communities, professional organizations, and teacher leadership beyond the classroom
The peer feedback and interaction on the FAQ boards are step towards this standard. Tis standard is not quite fulfilled however, because, for the most part, the interaction is not proactive. Rather it is a requirement of the course. However, the exercise of doing it may help some people see its benefits and prompt them to do it proactively on their own.
This course also fits within Goal 1 of the MATC program - Critical Inquiry. Action research is even given as one of the examples of critical inquiry and TE808 is where many students (those who were not former MSU interns since a more mild form of this was done in TE802) are introduced to action research for the first time.
No comments:
Post a Comment