Topic 4.1.6: How Do I Determine Instructional Implications?

Nancy Fichtman Dana

As teachers engage in the process of action research, the systematic, intentional study of one's practice becomes a natural, never-ending part of teaching (Dana & Yendol-Silva, 2003). Teachers formulate a question, collect data to gain insights into that question, and make changes in their instructional practice based on insights gained from the data. These changes to instructional practice necessitate that more data be collected through progress monitoring and subsequently analyzed to determine the effectiveness of the implemented instructional changes. Insights gained from progress monitoring data inevitably lead to new questions, and the process of data collection and data analysis begins again.

While the process of action research is cyclical and never-ending, at times, it is critical to step outside of the process and reflect on what has been learned within one cycle. Momentarily stepping outside of the cycle to reflect on the process as a whole enables teachers to determine the instructional implications of their research.

One way to step outside of the cycle to think about the instructional implications of the research is by writing. In fact, noted educational ethnographer, Harry Wolcott (1990) goes so far as to state that writing and thinking are synonymous:

The conventional wisdom is that writing reflects thinking. I am drawn to a different position: Writing is thinking (p. 21).

Referring specifically to the process of teacher inquiry, Mills (2003) further states that there is great value in writing up research because:

. . .the very process of writing requires the writer to clarify meaning – choose words carefully, thoughtfully describe that which is experienced or seen, reflect on experiences, and refine phrasing when putting words on a page. You may learn something very important about your students and their learning – something you may have missed had you not considered your words on the page – as you formally write about your research (p. 164).

For this reason, it is recommend that every teacher researcher write as an extension of data analysis and as a wonderful way to extend learning.

Unfortunately, while writing is a terrific mechanism for clarifying thinking as one summarizes what has been learned and gives learning a form that is able to shared with others, writing is not a part of a teacher's daily work, and it takes a great deal of time. Mills (2003) suggests challenging the time constraint by making writing a part of one's professional life and a responsibility through capturing the minutes and hours where they fall – before school, after school, preparation periods, cancelled faculty meetings, failed parent conferences, professional development days, and sometimes, when all else fails, personal time to get writing done.

If one can get past the time constraint and the resistance to engage in an activity that Wolcott describes at its best as "always challenging and sometimes satisfying" (p. 12), the times that it is satisfying will outweigh all the difficulty and frustration inherent in writing. The writing process will take an individual's inquiry to a new level. Mills (2003) suggests sound reasons for writing. Here are his four most compelling reasons to write:

1. 
   Clarification – Writing your research requires clarity and accuracy of expression. Writing about your research activities encourages thought and reflection, and perhaps creates new questions that are resolved, which shape and complete your research.
   
2. 
   Empowerment – Reflecting on your practices through writing will empower you to continue to challenge the status quo and be an advocate for your students.
   
3. 
   Generative – Writing is a generative activity that culminates in a product, something tangible that you can share with colleagues, supervisors, and parents.
   
4. 
   Accomplishment – Writing up your research will provide you with a sense of accomplishment. It is both humbling and exciting when colleagues read your work and compliment you on your accomplishments! (p. 164 – 165).
   

Inquiry write-ups come in all sorts of flavors and a variety of sizes. Some teacher researchers write up their work to be published in a book, monograph, or journal. Some teacher researchers write up their work to inform district administration. Some teacher researchers write up their work for policy-makers. Some teacher researchers write up their work in order to be able to share it with other colleagues at their school. Whatever the "flavor" or "size" of the inquiry write-up, it should be detailed enough to be meaningful and useful to other teachers so others can benefit from the work. A good recipe for an inquiry write-up contains the following five ingredients:

1. 
   Including or providing Background Information/Purpose of Inquiry
   
2. 
   Sharing the Design of Your Inquiry
   
3. 
   Stating What has been Learned and Supporting Your Statements with Data
   
4. 
   Concluding with Thoughts
   
5. 
   Citing References
   

A strong way to begin writing is to provide background information. Sharing the context, motivating factor(s) for this particular study, connection(s) to other's thinking about the topic of the inquiry, and process(es) utilized to gain insights into a particular wondering provide a foundation for the audience to understand the work and to make judgments as to its transferability to their own teaching situation. Note how Steve accomplished this in his writing below:

A key feature that sets inquiry apart from the daily reflection that teachers engage in is that it is conducted in a systematic, intentional way. Hence, sharing the system (what was done), as well as the intentions (how was it done – data collection and analysis) is important. In the next excerpt, notice how Steve discusses his instructional plan for this inquiry and the ways he collected data.

With detailed knowledge of the "how" of the inquiry, the audience is now ready to understand Steve's findings, which he presents as "claims." As Steve engaged in the process of writing this report of his inquiry, he clarified his thinking as he chose words and phrases to carefully reflect and represent his findings in this form. In the absence of the process of writing it up, Steve would not have taken his work to this organizational level and not realized the extent of his own learning, and the many instructional implications of his work.

A number of claims can be made from this study. The first is that there appeared to be no correlation between the use of teacher demonstrations and achievement in my chemistry class. This was observed when grades before and after the demonstration unit were compared.



Figure 1: Quiz Grades before and after the Demonstration Unit

After careful examination of these graphs, it is apparent that no significant changes were observed in the achievement on my tests or quizzes in my class. While the average quiz grade increased, the test grades actually slightly decreased. This indicates to me that a number of factors need to be taken into consideration when assessing my students. First, I do not think that these grades can be directly attributed to the use of the demonstrations every day. They may be due to the amount of laboratory experiences in this unit, or to a more complex nature of the topics that were addressed in this unit. Second, perhaps students were not performing to their full potential due to a lack of motivation that often accompanies the start of the third quarter of the school year. Regardless of the causes, future research would need to be done to make claims about the use of demonstrations and the achievement in chemistry class.

My second claim from this inquiry is that students believe that both the Demo-A-Day unit and the demonstration show actually increased their understanding of chemistry. Regardless of the lack of significant improvement in test and quiz scores, students do feel like they learned something. I think that this could lead to better attitudes in my class. In turn, this might potentially challenge the self-fulfilling prophecy that "chemistry is impossible" that so many of my students seem to carry into class. The Likert attitude assessment, in particular, revealed this dimension of increased student efficacy.



Figure 3: Likert Attitude Assessment of Demo-A-Day Unit

Videotape evidence and examinations of student reflections revealed that students truly enjoyed the Demo-A-Day unit and the demonstration show. This leads to my third claim. The process used in this inquiry was enjoyable to both the high school students and to the elementary students who observed the demonstration show. High school students were heard in the videotapes enthusiastically expressing comments such as, "That's amazing," "I loved that," and "That's what I am talking about!" In addition to these statements, the amount of engagement that I observed in the videotapes leads me to believe that the students were truly enjoying the demonstrations as a welcome change from a traditional lecture style. The elementary students also expressed their excitement. They, too, made statements following the demonstration show, such as, "Cool!" "Awesome!" and "That's neat." One elementary student even said, "I'm going to be a chemical scientist one day." Another asked, "Will I get to do that in high school?" One elementary teacher wrote, "I just wanted to take a minute to thank you, on behalf of the third grade team, for the awesome chemistry demonstration show last week. Our third graders really enjoyed the show and learned 'and saw' real life chemical reactions." Based on these findings, claims can be made that student attitudes towards this unit and culminating show were very positive.

When reading a good mystery, one expects that the conclusion of the book will provide answers to solve the mystery. Similarly, when nearing the end of writing up the work to share it, it may be conceived that the concluding thoughts are answers to the initial questions posed by the inquiry study. This might be the case sometimes. However, just as often, concluding thoughts do not answer the initial research question, but generate additional questions and further areas for inquiry.

The work of a teacher researcher is never quite finished as teacher research is not a linear project that is completed at one point in time and is over. Rather, teacher inquiry is a continual cycle that all educators spiral through during their professional lifetimes -- a professional positioning or stance, owned by the teacher where questioning, systematically studying, and subsequently improving one's own practice becomes a necessary and natural part of a teacher's work.

Therefore, it is difficult to conceive of how to finish a piece of writing when the work of a teacher researcher is never done. Many teacher inquirers finish their work by reflecting in general on the specific inquiry just completed, generating directions for the future, stating further wonderings, and listing references that were important to their work. A listing of the most valuable references they came across as they engaged in their research is important so that other teachers may refer to these references as they think about their own practice in relationship to a particular inquiry. This article ends with the concluding passage from Steven's paper. Upon reading it, it is important to note how he utilized these four techniques (reflecting in general on the specific inquiry just completed, generating directions for the future, stating further wonderings, and listing important references) to bring closure to his written work ( ):

Although no significant claims could be made regarding the achievement of my students being a result of daily teacher demonstrations, I feel confident concluding that the Demo-A-Day unit, coupled with the student-facilitated demonstration show, positively impacted student feelings in regard to the subject of chemistry, in general. As a teacher researcher, this led me to recognize the profound significance of demonstrations in the high school chemistry classroom. It was revealed that demonstrations should not be the sole method of teaching chemistry, but should be supplemented with other hands-on experiences, such as laboratory investigations. I agree with Beall when he says, "Demonstrations are only one of many teaching techniques and should not be used for their own sake." (Beall, 1996, p.641) However, demonstrations do lead to lasting memories and positive attitudes about the subject. Therefore, demonstrations should be encouraged at the high school level. Additionally, elementary students are impacted when high school students perform demonstrations for them. They learn beginning chemistry concepts while the high school students learn how to explain complex concepts in a simplified way. Both younger and older students are positively impacted. Based on my findings here, I plan to make the chemistry demonstration show an annual event.

Two important questions arose as a result of this study that I plan to examine in the future. First, what impact did student performances of the "exocharmic" demonstrations have on their own learning? At the time of this writing, students had not yet been tested following their show for the elementary students. Perhaps direct student planning and facilitation of demonstrations played a more significant role in their conceptual development and understanding than would have been possible by merely observing teacher-executed demonstrations. Another question to look into is whether or not the elementary students will truly remember the demonstrations in future years. If they do, will they enter my high school classroom with a better outlook on the subject of chemistry? Will they be better rooted in the fundamental concepts of chemistry than students who didn't witness demonstrations like these when they were in elementary school?

In closing I am going to list some of my favorite quotes from the student reflection assignment. They truly reveal the change in attitudes that occurred during my inquiry:

• 
  "In the beginning I really didn't understand the reason behind the demonstration of the 'chemistry' of it. But when we actually had to mix our own chemicals and make the reaction happen, it made me understand everything a lot better."
  
• 
  "The Demo-A-Day was a great and fun learning experience."
  
• 
  "At that very moment, I wanted to be a chemistry teacher."
  
• 
  "I think you should do this next year with the upcoming chemistry class. The demos were the most exciting thing we've done all year."
  
• 
  "Things like this make Chemistry fun."
  

Beall, H. (1996). Demonstrations as a Teaching Tool in Chemistry: Pro and Con. Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 73, No.7, 641.

Bodner, G.M. (2001). Why Lecture Demonstrations are 'Exocharmic' For Both Students And Their Instructors. U. Chem. Ed., 2001, 5, 31-35.

Dana, N.F., & Yendol-Silva, D. (2003). The Reflective Educator's Guide to Classroom Research: Learning to Teach and Teaching to Learn Through Practitioner Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.

Louters, L.L., & Huisman, R.D. (1999). Promoting Chemistry at the Elementary Level: A Low-Maintenance Program of Chemical Demonstrations. Journal of Chemical Education, 76 (2), 196-198.

Meyer, L.S., Schmidt, S., Nozawa, F., Panee, D., & Kisler, M. (2003). Using Demonstrations to Promote Student Comprehension in Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 80 (4), 431-435.

Thompson, J., & Soyibo, K. (2002) Effects of Lecture, Teacher Demonstrations, Discussion and Practical Work on 10th Graders' Attitudes to Chemistry and Understanding of Electrolysis. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20 (1), 25-37.