Month 9 – GSM – The first Cycle

Methods of collection:

Data was collected through surveys.  It was a mixture of quantitative, using a LIkert scale, and qualitative with volunteers reporting their perceptions of each of form of feedback.   Students responded based on both methods on each of the feedback formats (text, audio, video).  Both the qualitative data (anecdotal) and the quantitative (Likert scale) was analyzed and compared both to each other and in retrospect to each other.

Data comparison:

In the first cycle, generally most students responded well to most of the feedback formats.   However when one compares their perceived preference for learning and the feedback format they preferred in the post survey, three participants out of the final group actually chose their perceived preference matching their choice for the one they responded to the best.   Interesting enough, it was an almost even split between the three feedback formats on which one was the preferred method.  That supports the concept of personalized learning plans.   I also looked at the grades project to project for the students, but many of the participants were ones that started out as high achievers, so it did not leave much room for improvement.

Second cycle initial interest is coming in stronger than the first cycle so I do feel that I will be a better sampling.   The tweaking of some of the wording will also help focus the students so that they are more sure of which formats they are responding about.

GSM Thoughts:

Going back to month 3, I was fascinated with some of the learning games and sites that I encountered such a Duology.  So I am very interested in the concepts as I find that games have gotten very good at engaging players interest.   This techniques applied to feedback might well make students more willing to put forward the effort to read the feedback.  Sadly I did have one student that in the final survey stated he hadn’t known where to find his feedback all month even though I presented material showing them how to find it, as well as providing them additional materials for the entire class.  A gaming mentality might improve student participants efforts in not only engaging in the feedback but in using it.

Month 7 – MTA

Developing an Action Research project is definitely an eye opener!  This month I started the roll out of the actual research portion of my project.   There’s a curious mix of dread and anticipation as you want it to go perfectly. However that is why we get a second phase so we can fine tune the process further.

Are you still on target to complete both implementation activities? If not, why? Analyze any potential hurdles, how do you plan to address these conflicts that may postpone your implementation?

Status:

Currently my initial survey is open and its a bit nerve racking as I only have 12 participants.   I did send out a reminder email today though so am hoping that I get a few more to give me some cushion in case of drop outs.  Implementation is on target for Month 7 as I had planned.  First activities will be turned in on Sunday and I start the process of feedback with those students that have volunteered.

Hurdles:

Some hurdles that I am concerned about is that several students do drop out and that would leave me with less than a 10 person sample for the project.  One of the sections I have is a ‘repeater’ section, so that adds the additional consideration that a certain percentage of those students will not participate in the class let alone in my project.  I am also weighing the final feedback and trying to determine if the video feedback should have more than just visuals.

Implementation Timeframe:

The actual implementation of the project will take 4 weeks, if we consider the starting point as the first activity submitted for feedback as the first step in the process and the final survey response from students as the final step.  Depending on the situation with each step, I have considered that I might need to shorten the time frame and drop one of the feedback formats, but that will have to wait until the responses for this initial month.

End of Implementation Process:

After evaluation of phase 1, the second phase will begin in Month 9, so will complete at the end of that four week cycle and be ready for evaluation at the end of Month 9.

Timeline:

I am a month off on my timeline.  I had expected to do the first phase of the project in Month 6 but I was not yet ready to roll out. The Literature Review was completed on time, assets were created in Months 5 and 6.  Formal language for Proposal of AR Project was set in Month 5.  With consideration for the assets, and the events in my life (the wedding I noted in my Month 4 blog post), it seemed more advantageous to start Phase 1 in July/Month 7.   The rest of the timeline should proceed appropriately from here.