1 UNDERSTANDING AND ENACTING SELF REGULATED LEARNING WITH STUDENTS RECEIVING TIER 3 INST R UCTION IN READING : A PRACTITIONER INQUIRY APPROACH By ASHLEY PENNYPACKER HILL A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DE GREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2013
2 2013 Ashley Pennypacker Hill
3 To The A Team
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to begin by thanking every mem ber of my doctoral committee. I admire each one of them and value their guidance, perspective, and expertise. I met zel traveled with us as a chaperone on our fifth grade Washington D.C. trip. As time went on I have come to know her professionally as well and have loved seeing her passion for reaching all learners. are met and that both pre service and in service teachers are supported and prepared in attainting this endeavor. Rose Pringle was one of my favorite professors in my PROTEACH program. After teaching for a few years and realizing that I did not know ho w to teach inquiry based ability to ask the right questions, guide learning, and constantly be reflective is masterful. Nancy Waldron is our school psychologist at P.K. Yonge and I have had the pleasure of working with her for several years. Her dedication to systems of support for all learners, helping teachers shift their paradigms of special education, and developing plans to help students and families is unparalleled She is a forward thinker on how schools should be organized to differentiate instruction and I am honored to get to learn from her. Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my committee chair, Nancy Dana. Nancy is one of the most bril liant people I know. Her passion for inquiry has changed teachers all across this world, including me. I conducted my first inquiry with
5 grade classroom. From that moment I realized that practitioner research can be a powerful influence on teacher practice and student learning. It was then that I knew a stance of inquiry needed to become the backbone of my practice. Nancy ignited a light in me that will never go out. Sh e taught me that practitioner research and inquiring into is a way of being. She taught me that when one firmly asks ques tions, they are accepting that in addition to the answers more questions will come. Nancy put in countless hours s upporting me on my doctoral journey, believing in me, echoing back my own words, and helping me tell my story. Without her coaching, this story would not have been told. Nancy is someone that meets people where they are at, allows them to be themselves, and helps them find their voice. I thank Nancy for not only helping me become aware of my role as a practitioner researcher, but also teaching me how to embrace it. I will forever be thankful that she guided me through this process. I would like to th ank all the students that I have been blessed to teach. Without each one of them, I would not be the teacher that I am today. Particularly, I would like to thank the students that I had the pleasure of working with every day throughout this study. Spend ing time with them was the highlight of my workday and I will miss their smiling faces and their ability to turn anything into a competition. I hope this study comes close to portraying these students as the brilliant minds that they are. Their zest for life is contagious and I thank them for allowing me to learn right alongside of them. I am deeply appreciative of Marisa Stukey, my co worker and my dear friend. She paved the way for me and coached me every step of this process. Her belief that I could tackle this helped me believe that this was actually something I could accomplish.
6 She would listen to my babblings about my data, my fears and my self doubt, my confusion about my next steps, and would help me connect all the dots. Without her support a nd friendship throughout my entire doctoral program, I would not be where I am today. I am also thankful for Lynda Hayes, the director of my school and my friend. Her ability to see the big picture astounds me. She is one of the most thoughtful leaders I know and I am in awe of her everyday. She would read my work, provide thorough feedback, check in on me, and remind me to trust the process. She also consistently opened her beautiful home to me as my writing haven and I spent many hours at the and guidance. I am so grateful for my family. My dad, mom, and sister were the first people to believe in me and each one of them has taught me so much. I thank them for being ex emplars of people who go above and beyond in all they do with impeccable work long way from sitting at the dining room table fighting over the completion of my homework in middle school to now completing a dissertation. My sister is one of the hardest workers I know and when she puts her mind to something, she goes after it with tenacity. Her ability to think about the big picture and be pragmatic are qualities that I hope to emulate one day. My grandpa, Poppy, is another person in my family that I looked to throughout this process of completing a dissertation. He is a retired professor and has tremendous experience coaching graduate students, conducting research, and
7 writ ing. I hope I made him proud. I am blessed to have been raised in this family and I am deeply grateful for their love and encouragement. I would also like to thank my husband, Adam Hill, for being an amazingly supportive partner. He is my sounding b oard, my second set of eyes, my cheerleader, and most importantly, the love of my life. Without his never ending support, there is no way I could have made it. He is the voice of reason. He always believed I could truly finish this degree. For all the hours that I was not able to be present for our family because I was working on this degree, I thank him for being a tremendous daddy to our son and for loving me through this entire process. He is my rock and I love him with all of my heart. Finally, I thank my son, Avery for being the sweetest boy I have ever known and for helping me follow my dream of continuing my learning as an educator. I know this meant I was away writing and reading sometimes, but I thought of him every moment I was not with hi m. Completing this degree was a way to open more doors for him and his future. I hope having a Dr. for a mama makes him proud one day. As he grows up I wish for him to know that women are strong forces in this world that can accomplish great things. I hope that Avery will come to know the story of how his mama earned a doctorate while working full time and that it illustrates for him that he can attain any goal he sets out to reach.
8 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGME NTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 10 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 11 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ................................ ................................ 14 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 14 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ .............................. 19 Method ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 20 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 21 Summary and Conclusions ................................ ................................ ..................... 22 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................ ................................ ............ 23 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 23 Self Regulated Learn ing Defined ................................ ................................ ............ 23 Forethought ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 25 Performance ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 25 Self Reflection ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 26 Research Studies on Self Regulated Learning ................................ ....................... 26 Competence ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 27 Relatedne ss ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 28 Autonomy ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 31 Summary and Conclusions ................................ ................................ ..................... 35 3 METHOD ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 37 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 37 Practitioner Research ................................ ................................ ............................. 37 Researcher Assumptions and Sources o f Potential Bias ................................ 40 Trustworthiness ................................ ................................ ................................ 40 Researcher Background ................................ ................................ ......................... 44 Dat a Collection Methods ................................ ................................ ......................... 47 Data Analysis and Interpretation ................................ ................................ ............. 49 Summary and Conclusions ................................ ................................ ..................... 52 4 ACTUALIZING SELF REGULATED LEARNING IN PRACTICE ............................ 54 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 54
9 Contextualizing Tier 3 ................................ ................................ ............................. 54 P.K. Yonge Developmental Research School ................................ .................. 54 4 th and 5 th Grade Learning Community Reading Block ................................ .... 59 Overall structure ................................ ................................ ......................... 59 Student success team meetings, tier 2, and tier 3 instruction .................... 63 Actualizing Self Regulation During Tier 3 ................................ ............................... 67 Teaching Strategies for Comprehending Text ................................ .................. 67 Introducing Self Regulated Learning: The Beginnings ................................ .... 69 Enacting the Self Regulated Learning Cycle ................................ .................... 71 Forethought phase ................................ ................................ ..................... 72 Performance phase ................................ ................................ .................... 74 Self Reflection phase ................................ ................................ ................. 79 Self Regulated Learning For Students Receiving Tier 3 Intensive Reading Intervention Lessons Learned ................................ ................................ .......... 81 Routine ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 82 Individualizing Learning ................................ ................................ .................... 86 Forethought phase ................................ ................................ ..................... 87 Performance phase ................................ ................................ .................... 91 Self reflection phase ................................ ................................ .................. 93 Collaboration ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 95 Summary and Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................... 101 5 TRANSFERRING SELF REGULATED LEARNING TO OTHER CONTEXTS ..... 103 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 103 Transferring Self Regulated Learning Beyond Tier 3 ................................ ............ 104 Readiness ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 104 Transfer ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 109 Forethought phase ................................ ................................ ................... 110 Performance phase ................................ ................................ .................. 112 Self Reflection phase ................................ ................................ ............... 114 Summary and Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................... 119 6 IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH ................................ ........................ 121 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 121 Summary and Overview of the Dissertation ................................ .......................... 121 Implication s ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 123 Tier 3 Instruction ................................ ................................ ............................. 124 Self Regulated Learning ................................ ................................ ................. 125 Practition er Research ................................ ................................ ..................... 128 Recommendations for Future Research ................................ ............................... 129 Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 130 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 132 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 136
10 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 4 th an d 5 th Grade Learning Community Daily Schedule ................................ ...... 59 4 2 4 th and 5 th Grade Learning Community Reading Block Schedule ....................... 63 4 3 Sample Stu dent Schedule During Reading Block ................................ ............... 66 4 4 Daily Self Regulation Cycle ................................ ................................ ................ 81 5 1 List of Student Goals for Autonomous Time ................................ ..................... 111 5 2 Self Reflection Protocol for Transferring Self Regulated Learning to Autonomous Time ................................ ................................ ............................ 117
11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3 1 Photograph of Field Notes ................................ ................................ .................. 48 3 2 Sample Entry From My Journal ................................ ................................ .......... 49 3 3 Example of How I Recorded My Thinking During the First Phase of Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 50 3 4 Example of a Theme and Codes ................................ ................................ ........ 52 4 1 Small Group Space in a Learning Commu nity ................................ .................... 57 4 2 Whole Group Space in a Learning Community ................................ ................... 57 4 3 Versatile Furniture and Transparent Walls in the Learning Community .............. 58 4 4 Student Goal Tracking Sheet ................................ ................................ .............. 61 4 5 Photograph of Room Where Tier 3 Occurred ................................ ..................... 65 4 6 Self Reflection Rubric for Tier 3 ................................ ................................ .......... 70 4 7 Student Goal With a Photograph Background on The ShowMe App ............... 73 4 8 Student Goal With a Picture Background on The ShowMe App ...................... 74 4 9 Student Work on The Pdf notes App Indicating Student Dashes at End of Each Sentence ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 77 4 10 Student Work on The Pdf notes App Indicating Student Post it Notes .......... 78 4 11 Student in Self Reflection Phase ................................ ................................ ........ 80 5 1 Tracking of Learning Goals Whiteboard ................................ ........................... 116
12 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for th e Degree of Doctor of Education UNDERSTANDING AND ENACTING SELF REGULATED LEARNING WITH STUDENTS RECEIVING TIER 3 INSTRUCTION IN READING: A PRACTITIONER INQUIRY APPROACH By Ashley Pennypacker Hill August 2013 Chair: Nancy Fichtman Dana Major: Curriculum and Instr uction The purpose of this study was to understand self regu lated learning as it developed in 4 th and 5 th grade learners that received intensive instructional supports in reading within a newly designed 21 st century learning space The study was conduct ed in an elementary school building that utilizes innovative architecture to support 21 st century teaching and learning Specifically, the study inquired into ways to support the self regulation of learners who received Tier 3 intensive instruction within a 21 st century learning space and how these learners experienced and used the self regulation strategies that were taught. The method employed was practitioner research, the study ner took on dual roles throughout the research process practitioner and researcher. An established routine played a critical role in the actualization of self regulated learning for students receiving Tier 3 intensive instructional supports in reading. Also, individualizing and collaborating within the self regulated learning cycle supported student motivation. Additionally, students cannot be expected to transfer the s trategies of self regulated learning until they are ingrained in their approach to learning. This
13 process takes time and patience on the part of the teacher along with continuous, relentless reflection on when and how to help learners transfer their self regulated learning strategies to other contexts. Furthermore, when the time is right, the cycle of self regulated learning can be repurposed and used as the mechanism to guide students in their application of self regulation to other contexts.
14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BAC KGROUND Introduction In 1983, The National Commission on Excellence i n Education proclaimed that our 2004). The dominant schooling paradigm of the 20 th c entury was designed to produce students for the industrial age, factory work, and agrarian life. Learning was more teacher centered, the focus was on memorization of facts, and learning mainly happened in isolation. 20 th century education desperately need ed to move away from a factory model approach of teaching and learning (Dewey, 1968). Once the standardized instruction movement and federal intervention became a staple of 20 th century education, a back to basics approach emerged along with the control o f the Franzen, 2000). The world changed drastically in the 20 th century but education seemed to stay stagnant. While K 12 education was being kept in the box, educational technology not only c limbed out of the box it reinvented its own box during the 20 th century. Hand held calculators, computers, databases, and the Internet found their way into most schools but did not always have a clear purpose for enhancing learning ( Wenglinsky, 2005). In the 21 st century we now have the capability to be connected to everyone and anything at any second of the day. Textbooks and curriculum are becoming digital, virtual learning and blended curriculums are becoming common, and computers are providing the ability to provide differentiated instruction like never before. The Internet and the World Wide Web have changed society such that in seconds, the information we seek is at our fingertips. With information so easily accessible, the concept of teaching a nd
15 learning must be refurbished (Collins & Halverson, 2009; Draves & Coates, 2004; Trilling & Fadel, 2009; Wagner, 2008). If not, we are doing a disservice to our students. Our world is changing at such a rapid pace, challenging schools to change at an eq ually rapid pace. Hence, a 20 th century education is not going to give students the best chance at being prepared for college or to be prepared to successfully enter our global workforce. Many of the careers that exist today, or will exist in the future, require a different set of skills than those that are being taught in our current schools. (Wagn er, 2008; Wagner & Compton, 2012). Students need to be able to critical ly think, problem solve, collaborate, adapt, show initiative, communicate effectively through written and oral language, access and analyze information, and use their imagination and c uriosity (Wagner, 2008). In order to be productive citizens today, students must learn to do more than surface level thinking, take a standardized test, and answer fill in the blank questions at the end of the chapter. Inherently we know that our world i s changing, which means schools should be changing, but it seems the main alteration being made in schools is the amount of standardized testing that is occurring (Cochran Smith, 2005). School funding, student promotions, and teacher pay are tied to stude teachers feeling an inordinate amount of pressure to have students prepared to be test takers above anything else ( Mertler, 2011 ; Harriman, 2005). Because of high stakes testing, curriculum must be steeped with test p reparation. Schools and teachers are
16 feeling like they are left no other choice while s tudents are not being given the opportunity to think for themselves (Chorzempa & Lapidus, 2009). Schools have transformed since the 20 th century, but not in the right direction. Student directed learning does not seem to have a place in curriculum because teachers and administrators believe that would equate to students not being able to pass the standardized test (Brantlinger, 2003). Because of these pressures, many classrooms have teachers that are merely the giver of knowledge while students are only required to passively learn (Corbett, Wilson, & Williams, 2002). In addition, most b etween widely acknowledged best practice principles and the actual design of a Our nation is in desperate need for a redesign of the methods and space within which K 12 learning takes place. School needs to become a place that students want to come to because their learning is meaningful to them. Teachers are helping students make connections to what and how they are learning and how that can help them in the future. Students need to work c ollaboratively with their peers, use 21 st century tools to engage in their learning, and be provided individualized instruction as they grow to know themselves as learners. K 12 learning spaces must facilitate flexible grouping spaces, provide room for va rious tasks, have ubiquitous technology, and c hange the paradigm of schools (Nair & Fielding, 2005 ). Answering the call for a redesign of method and space for K 12 education, P.K. Yonge Developmental Research School, the laboratory school for the Unive rsity of Florida, designed and built an elementary school that opened for the 2012 2013 school
17 year. This elementary school building utilizes innovative architecture to support 21 st century teaching and learning. The learning co mmunity design and layout of the school pays great attention to the spatial, psychological, physiological, and behavioral experiences of learning (Fielding & Nair, 2005). This includes patterns of daylight, indoor and outdoor connections, homelike spaces with soft seating, ergonom ically correct furniture, transparency, learning studios, teacher collaborative workspace, and a da Vinci studio. This educational space supports students in knowing where their interests lie, knowing how they learn best and what their preferences are, a nd helps teachers guide students to know themselves as learners (Brooks, 2007). In this space, t eachers support students in discovering their personal learning styles and in turn, allow students to have choice in how they learn. Students analyze academic tasks, develop personal goals, observe and assess their performance of the tasks, reflect upon the learning process, and synthesize this information to be utilized in their next endeavor, all of which are necessary characteristics of self reg ulated learni ng. Teachers feel like their role is to coach learners by starting with the student, their motivation, and their preferred learning methods (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletie r & Ryan, 1991). Teachers create opportunities for students to learn information in a va riety of ways, both individually and collaboratively. An environment of acceptance for all learning styles is fostered while accommodations for learning are naturally provided. The design of the new school provides more flexible and innovative approaches t o learning in the 21 st century, allowing students to become more self regulated learners.
18 Hence, the concept of self regulated learnin g becomes a key component in the new school. Self regulated learning refers to the cycle of self generated feelings, thou ghts, and behaviors to strategically achieve personal goals (Paris & Paris, 2001; Perry, 1998; Zimmerman, 2000). When students are given the educational freedom to become self days where they can go through the cycle of self regulation with their learning. Students cycle through the forethought, performance, and self reflection phases in order to experience autonomy with learning (Zimmerman, 2000; Zimmerman, 2002) Many students a re naturally self regulated or they will independently develop their skills while relishing in the experience of learning in an innovative learning space (Nair & Fielding, 2005) On the other hand, some students struggle becoming self regulated. This will especially be challenging for our students receiving intensive learning supports Students who are consistently not meeting grade level benchmarks receive the highest level of interventions in a multi tiered system of support in Tier 3 Many students r eceiving Tier 3 instruction are students with learning differences. Typically, many of these students struggle with self regulation because it requires them to be metacognitive, actively engage in the process of making meaning, and alter their actions in order to direct their learning (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005). These are skills that do not come easy to these learners. Students in this subgroup have experienced academic failure, stigmatization, decreased motivation, and have lower self regulatory behavior s than other students (Borkowski, Weyhing & Carr, 1999). Becoming self regulated is a difficult task for students who have repeatedly not met benchmarks and have not experienced a lot of educational success. In turn, t hese students require
19 explicit instruc tion in how to navigate the forethought, performance, and self reflection phases of self regulation. Purpose of the Study An important component of how teaching and learning will function in this new space is based on the concept of self regulation. The purpose of my dissertation is to understand self regu lated learning as it develops in learners receiving intensive instructional supports within a newly designed 21 st century learning space. Although many students are negatively affected by the curr ent state of education, those with learning differences are most clearly being left behind (Zimmerman, 2002). Students with learning differences are being shipped out of the classroom because teachers do not feel like they have the means to instruct them (Irvine, 2003). Most students receiving intervention are receiving instruction in areas that do not match their needs ( Noddings, 2007). t he majority of interventions given past third grade are content reinforcement based, when they need to focus on negative mindsets about themselves and about their learning (Brooks, 2007). Based on the cyclical phase perspective of self regulated learning students that struggle are not effective in the forethought and performance phases of learning. In turn, these students may use reactive behaviors that lack in strategic pla nning, adequate self monitoring, and failure to set specific goals. Such students begin to lose self efficacy and experience a loss of intrinsic motivation, leaving them prone to even greater difficulties in self regulation (Zimmerman, 2002).
20 As the 4 th and 5 th grade Curriculum Coordinator, my primary role is to design ongoing professional learning activities for teachers collaborate in the development of multi tiered systems of support for students, and individually coach teachers in order for curricul um and instructional practice to transform and adapt to the new architectur e of the building. In addition, I provide instruction for a group of students receiving Tier 3 intensive instruction during the 4 th and 5 th grade reading block. In a multi tiered system of s upport (MTSS) Tier 3 intensive instruction is the highest level of support that a student can receive at P.K.Yonge (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2009; Fuchs & Deschler, 2007) The decision to provide Tier 3 intensive instruction is based on studen t data and stakeholder input. Students receive Tier 1 instruction from th eir classroom teacher with the whole class, Tier 2 instruction from their classroom teacher in a small group of students, and Tier 3 instruction from a support /intervention teacher in an even smaller group of students. This multi tiered system of support is in place to ensure that each learner is provided with an appropriate level of support based o n need (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006). Tier 3 instruction is provide d as daily, intensive inst ruction to the lowest performing learners through a 4 th grade reading group and a 5 th grade reading group. The purpose of this study was to understand how to teach self regulated learning to students receiving Tier 3 intensive supports in relation to readi ng and to help these learners transfer their self regulation strategies to other contexts. Method To gain insights into the self regulation of my students receiving Tier 3 instruction within the new building space that I teach, I employ ed the methodology of practitioner hran Smith & Lytle, 2009; Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009). This selected research method
21 suited my study because I was an insider in my study, asking a specifi c question about my own instruction, and studying the students I instruct. This methodology allowed me to study my own setting and reflect on my own practice. T he research questions that guide d my study were : In what ways do I support the self regula tion of learners receiving Tier 3 intensive instruction within a 21 st century learning space? How do learners receiving Tier 3 intensive instruction experience and use the self regulation strategies I teach ? Significance of the S tudy During this study, I focus ed on understanding how to teach self regulated learning to students receiving Tier 3 intensive supports in reading and helped these learners transfer their self regulation strategies to other contexts. This study provides a myriad of insights abou t students receiving Tier 3 instruction and the function of space within where they learn ed their self regulatory skills. Because I formally inquired into my practice in a focused area, systematically collected and analyzed data, and communicated the enti re process through writing, my instruction was positively impacted. In turn, when my instruction was positively impacted, student learning was positively impacted. By s tudying how I support ed the self regulation of students receiving Tier 3 intensive int ervention and how they transferred their skills beyond Tier 3, I was able to strengthen what happens during Tier 3 in order for students to generalize their strategies. T he results of this his study have the potential to impact other teachers and how the y can plan to meet the needs of students receiving Tier 3 This study provide s teachers with tangible strategies to help their Tier 3 students. In turn, if teachers try the approaches used in this study, other ideas for helping students who struggle could be
22 generated, adding to the research on ways to support students who are not meeting benchmarks. Teachers could alter their practice to a more explicit approach for teac hing self regulation to students who receive Tier 3 possibly enhancing teacher self confidence about how they reach students who struggle. This study answers the call for additional research on how self regulated learning occurs in naturalistic settings and in classrooms with students (Perry, 1998; Zimmerman, 2002; Boekaerts & Corno, 2005). This will add to the research and understanding of self regulated learning, how to teach self regulation to students receiving Tier 3 intensive supports in relation to reading and how to help learners transfer their self regulation strategies to ot her contexts. Self regulation is most commonly researched with older students and adults. In turn, this research can help fill a gap because it focus ed on self regulation with younger students. Summary and Conclusions In this chapter, I described the current state of education, why there is a need to redesign the methods and space for K 12 education, how the setting in which I teach is attempting to answer the call for a transformation in how we educate, and the role self regulation plays. I also discu ssed the significance of this study. In the next chapter, I review the literature of self regulated learning.
23 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERA TURE Introduction This chapter defines self regulated learning, reviews the literature in self regulated lea rning, explores reasons that self regulated learning is a significant component of the current educational landscape, and provides a rationale for the present study In order to review the literature, studies were surveyed that encompassed a wide range of related topics such as: metacognition, motivation, reading strategy instruction, learning disabilities, classroom contexts, and social influence. Self regulation influences a broad range of research because educators are constantly in search of ways to un derstand how students can become more independent in their learning (Paris & Paris, 2001). Self Regulated Learning Defined In an ideal educational setting students would know where their interests lie, how they learn best and what their preferences are, and grow to know themselves as learners (Brooks, 2007). Students would be conscious of what they attribute their successes and failures to. Teachers would support students in discovering their personal learning styles and in turn allow them to have choi ce in how they learn. Students would analyze academic tasks, develop personal goals, observe and assess their performance of the tasks, reflect upon the learning process, and synthesize this information to be utilized in their next endeavor. Teachers wou ld feel like their role is to coach learners by starting with the student, their motivation, and their preferred learning methods (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan, 1991). Teachers would create opportunities for students to learn information in a variety of ways, both individually and collaboratively. An environment of acceptance for all learning styles would be fostered
24 while accommodations for learning naturally were provided. The products of this setting would be students who are self regulated and mo tivated. Students must be taught that they possess the power to tap into all that resides inside them (Brooks 2007). Once that is achieved, the landscape for learning ta kes on a completely new form. It has been postulated that s tudents who feel this form of motivation have a higher likelihood of staying in school than students who do not (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan, 1991). Empowered with this mindset, students begin to work towards self regulation. Self regulated learning is the process one enga ges in to perform tasks and attain goals. Self regulated learning is a cyclical process that involves personal, behavioral, and environmental factors (Zimmerman, 2000). These three forms of self regulation are always changing during the learning process and are constantly being observed by the person taking part in learning. When engaging in environmental self regulation, one is monitoring the conditions of the environment. Behavioral self regulation refers to one observing their learning processes and methods. Personal self regulation, also known as covert self regulation, implies one is observing their cognitive state (Zimmerman, 2000). According to Zimmerman (2002; 2000) i n order to adjust and complete this triadic form of self regulation sense of self efficacy and self beliefs play an important r capability and actions affect their process of self regulation. This explains motivation, performance, and ways they give feedback to themselves about the th ree forms of self regulation. Within this triadic model of self regulation, there are three phases that impact learning. Forethought, performance or
25 volitional control, and self reflection form a cyclical loop that guide the self regulatory process (Zimm erman, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). Forethought The forethought phase of the self regulation process is comprised of task analysis and self motivational beliefs. Types of task analysis are goal setting and strategic planning. Students shift and organize th eir goals while they cho o se and adjust strategies in order to complete tasks. Forms of self motivational beliefs are self efficacy, outcome expectations, intrinsic value, and goal orientation. Self efficacy is the personal belief that one has the ability t o accomplish the particular task. In turn, outcome expectations are the beliefs about the positive and negative products because of the behavior put forth towards the activity. Intrinsic value and goal orientations are closely related. Intrinsic value i s the internal worth felt about the activity while goal orientation is the overall motive for the specific behavior (Zimmerman, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). Performance In addition, when a student moves along in the process of self regulation one reaches the performance or volitional control phase of the self regulat ion process. Self control and s elf observation are the two processes that form the performance phase. Self instruction, imagery, attention focusing, and task strategies are types of self control (Zimmerman, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). During the task, students may self instruct, or self verbalize scaffolding in order to support themselves. They also might create images or mind movies in their head. Focusing their attention is one of the hardest porti ons of self regulation, especially with all the distractions this 21 st century world has to offer. Task strategies are the last form of self control. This refers to breaking apart and organizing tasks in order to have the strongest performance. Self re cording and self
26 experimentation ar e the types of self observation which help students monitor themselves and give themselves feedback during particular tasks. Self Reflection A fter a student has completed the performance phase, one moves in the self re gulation process to the self reflection phase. This phase contains self judgment and self reactions (Zimmerman, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). Self reactions are comprised of self satisfactions, or how one feels about his/her performance, and adaptive or defens ive inferences, which is how one reacts to his/her performance. Adaptive inferences yield increased self efficacy while defensive inferences about personal behavior block personal development and progress (Zimmerman, 2002; Zimmerman, 200 0). In turn, self judgments occur when students self evaluate and make causal attributions about their performance. Self evaluation takes place when students revisit their goals made in the forethought phase and check in on their progress. Causal attributions are student may attribute their performance to ability or effort. In order for a particular skill to reach self regulation it must develop through four levels: observation, emulation, self control, and then self regulation (Zimmerman, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). A student must observe the specific skill by watching a capable model, emulate the skill while receiving scaffolding from the model, use the skill independently with or without the model present, a nd then apply the skill in variou s settings with personal circumstances consequently reaching self regulation. Research Studies on Self Regulated Learning A review of the literature on self regulated learning revealed three components that must be in place for students to achieve self regulation. In order for students to
27 adequately take part in the self regulated learning cycle, students must be competent, be given opportunities to relate to others while learning, and be coached on being autonomous du ring their learning ( Deci & Ryan, 2000 ; Paris & Paris, 2001 ) In this section, I define each component and share relevant research related to actualizing each component of self regulated learning in the classroom. Competence Competence is achieved when a person is skilled enough to successfully participate in a task (Katz & Assor, 2007). When students are competent in their academic tasks they becom e more proficient during the performance phase of self regulation Students must be explicitly taught st rategies that are available to them during the various academic tasks they will encounter. Then, when students become aware of how, when, and why they need to apply specific strategies in various academic rting their cycle of self regulated learning. comprehension (p. 1239). The ISL curriculum focus ed on declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge of strategy use supporting the competence of the student. Specifically, the curriculum focused on what strategy needed to be used, how the strategy was going to be used, and when to use the strategy in order for students to become more self regulated in their learning (Paris, Cross & Lipson, 1984). Two third grade classrooms and two fifth grade classrooms received the Informed Strategies Learning curriculum while the other classes received regular in struction and were considered the control groups. Each classroom was given pretests and posttests
28 on reading comprehension assessments in order to measure the effect of the ISL curriculum. The curriculum lessons were delivered over a four month period of time and had three distinct components of instruction. The first component was explicit modeling of strategies, helping students understand what strategies are available, and providing opportunities for students to practice the strategies in high interes t texts. The second component of instruction was a visual metaphor displayed on a bulletin board that connected to each strategy taught. The bulletin boards included questions to prompt the students to think about how, why, and when to use the strategies The third component of instruction was providing the classroom teachers with materials to continue the ISL curriculum even after the lessons were complete. The results of this study show that when students were taught with the Informed Strategies for Learning curriculum, they demonstrated more knowledge about specific reading strategies and scored significantly higher on cloze and error detection tasks than students who were in the control classrooms (Paris, Cross & Lipson, 1984). This indicates that when students are explicitly taught how to be competent in the strategies required for academic tasks, they are then able to be more successful in their self regulated learning of applying their newly learned strategies Relatedness Relatedness ca n be described as a connectedness to others (Ryan & Deci, 2000). When one feels like they belong and are valued by people, one begins to feel safe, important, and in turn more self regulated Students will learn with more ease from people they trust and have respect for (Benard, 2004). An increasing body of research is showing that a sense of belonging can enhance relatedness and self regulated learning (Harris, Graham, Mason, 2006; Pressley, El Dinary, Gaskins, Schuder,
29 Begrgman, Almasi & Brown, 1992) In turn, when a person is denied relatedness with the people they desire, they lose intrinsic m otivation (Deci, et al., 1991). The power of the relatedness a student feels with a teacher or peers directly affects how motivated and self regulated a studen t will be (Benard, 2004). Pressley et al. (1992) write that students need to be explicitly taught strategies that they can apply to their academic tasks in a manner directly enhanced by the relatedness between teachers and students. Specifically, teachers need to model the use of specific strategies, explain why they are valuable, and then collaborate with students in order to provide extensive practice and flexible use of strategies. Pressley, et al. (1992) characterize this specific type of instruction the teacher. Teachers and students are jointl y using strategies and constructing knowledge side by side. There is a collaborative nature to teaching and learning in transaction strategy instruction. Once students are familiar with the strategies that are available, students and teachers decide toge ther which strategies to apply, how to apply them, and why they are the best strategy for that instance. Students and teachers are relating to each other throughout this entire process with the goal of helping students become self regulated learners (Pres sley et al., 1992). Long term participation in transactional strategy instruction supports students in their independent use of strategies because decisions that were once made collaboratively are made by students themselves (Pressley et al., 1992).
30 Tra nsactional strategy instruction was explored through a case study on the SAIL (students achieving independent learning) program (Pressley et al., 1992). The study focused on a co taught class of twelve 10 year old underachievers learning text analysis str ategies over the course of the semester. Teachers used transactional strategy instruction with students, collaboratively using text analysis strategies across the curriculum. By the end of the semester, instruction transitioned from being teacher led to student self regulated (Pressley et al., 1992). Because students were taught in a manner where teachers related to them, worked side by side with them, and jointly applied text analysis strategies, students were able to become self regulated in their lear ning. In 2001, Harris, Graham, & Mason (2006) studied writing development, the use of peer support, and how self regulated learning was impacted with 63 struggling second graders in urban schools. Students were randomly assigned to three different groups : self regulated strategy instruction only, self regulated strategy instruction plus peer support, or a comparison group. In the peer supported group, students were given partners to work together outside of the strategy instruction time. Partners period ically met with the teacher, and were encouraged to support each other on an as needed transferred my strategies/I helped my regulat ed strategy development plus peer support group wrote longer and better quality posttest stories, included more basic elements in their writing, included more story elements in their writing, and generalized their writing strategies to other classrooms mor e than
31 students from the other groups. This study supports the conclusion that relatedness, students being able to connect with others, enhances self regulated learning. Autonomy lf regulating (Deci et al., 1991). When a student is freed to be autonomous, they are in control of their own actions. W hen engaged in a specific task, students are autonomous when there is a strong relevance to their identity or their goals, or their int erests are clearly present (Katz & Assor, 2007). Students must be given the autonomy to practice their strategies in authentic situations and then scaffolded in self assessing how they performed during their autonomous learning time (Kirby & Downs, 2007). The backbone of self regulated learning is providing structured autonomous learning for students. Perry (1998) studied the writing blocks of 2 nd and 3 rd grade middle to high socioeconomic classrooms in a suburban school in British Columbia. There w ere an average of 22 s tudents per classroom. Data were comprised of teacher and student questionnaires, observa tions, and interviews. Data were collected over a 6 month period of time. The multiple and embedded case study design had three distinct phase s. During the first phase 19 2 nd and 3 rd grade teachers were surveyed about writing and portfolio activities occurring in their classrooms. Classrooms were then ranked based on activities that encouraged self regulated learning. Three high self regulat ed learning classrooms and 2 low self regulated classrooms were chosen for further observations. During phase two, students were surveyed from five of the classrooms about their perceptions of control and support in reference to writing. Students were ra nked based on their writing achievement by the teachers. Five high
32 achieving and five low achieving writers were chosen for in depth observations. Then observations and interviews were conducted during the third phase of the study. Perry (1998) found tea activities in reference to self regulated learning generally matched classroom observations. The three teachers whose self ratings aligned with self regulated learning had observations that consisted of student choice, student reflection, peer and teacher support, and student control over challenge which equate to student autonomy These teachers were consciously setting up classroom environments that fostered student choice for managing their own t ime, allowed for students to pace themselves through completion of projects, included time for self, peer, and teacher evaluations, held classroom meetings, and constantly adjusted for individualized instruction. In contrast, the two teachers whose self r atings on the questionnaire that did not represent self regulated learning had observations that consisted of short activities, instruction that was centered around skill practice, limited student choice, had the teacher as the sole evaluator, and most int eractions between teacher and student centered around answer correction, direction giving, or materials. Students in the high self regulated learning classrooms rated themselves as having more control over their learning than the students in the low self regulated learning classrooms. Specifically they rated higher on choosing what items went into their portfolio, what topics they could write about, where they could work, how many drafts they could write, and the level of support they receive from their p eers and their teacher. Interestingly, students in both the high and low self regulated learning classrooms had similar ratings on incremental views of ability, mastery goals, and self
33 efficacy. The students in the low self regulated learning classrooms were more focused on what their teacher thought of their writing and how many things they would get right, versus the students in the high self regulated learning classrooms being more focused on seeking a challenge, teaming up with classmates, and viewed their teacher as a collaborator. Low achieving writers in both the low and high self regulated learning classrooms reported struggling with mechanical portions of writing. But the students in the high self regulated learning classrooms were not dishearte ned by their difficulties while the students in the low self regulated learning classrooms were. Perry (1998) attributed this to the fact that students in the high self regulated learning classrooms reported feeling supported by their teacher (relatedness ) and perceived their individual needs being fostered (autonomy) Kirby and Downs (2007) discussed the importance of autonomy, self assessment and encouraging students to reflect on their learning experiences. In their 2007 study, students were not able to accurately self assess in comparison to the standards set by their instructors. In 2002, 171 students wrote an essay for their college science course and completed a self assessment. Similarly, in 2003, 164 students wrote an essay for their college sc ience course and completed a self assessment. The concept of self assessment was introduced to students, so they had some background on its advantages and were somewhat familiar with what was being asked of them when they reflected on their learning. Stud ents completed a self assessment once they were finished with their essays and were asked to give themselves a grade on the that the students gave themselves were very diff erent than the marks the staff members
34 assessments were higher than the staff ability to accurately self assess revealed stud assignment and the content they were engaged in. Self assessment needs to be explicitly taught in order to draw students into the assigned task and to give students more ownership and autonomy of their learning ( Kirby & Downs, 2007). This did not happen in this case. In order to enhance the self assessments process in this particular study, students could have been provided scaffolded practice in the self assessment process, which may have enhanced the accuracy of their self assessments. Students needed to be given clear standards in which they were self assessing or a marking guide/checklist. When students fully understand what the expectations are, are coached on how to self assess in relation to those expect ations, and are given the autonomy to complete the task, then students can take part in self regulated learning (Marzano, 2007; Stiggins, Arter, Chappuis, & Chappuis, 2006) In sum, competence, relatedness, and autonomy were three components that emerg ed when conducting a review of the literature on self regulated learning. These three components are necessary for students to engage in the self regulated learning cycle (Paris & Paris, 2001; Deci, et al., 1991). For students to become competent during the performance phase of self regulated learning, students must be taught strategies that will support their performance on particular assignments and/or areas of study. In turn, students must become aware of how, when, and why they will apply the specifi c strategies in order to make these strategies observable. To support a sense of
35 relatedness throughout the performance phase, students mus t use these strategies in a variety of learning situations with their teachers and peers, helping them feel connecte d to others. Students must be provided opportunities to practice self regulated learning in authentic situations and environments, giving them autonomy. Once students have engaged in a strong performance phase of the self regulated learning process, the student self reflects on their performance. Self reflection provides a sense of autonomy because it deeply involves the student in the self regulated learning process (Kirby & Downs, 2007). In order to continue the self regulated learning cycle of foreth ought, performance, and self reflection, competence, relatedness, and autonomy need to be present as students engage in subsequent academic tasks. Summary and Conclusions In sum, the literature on self regulated learning reveals that s tudents need compe tence, relatedness, and autonomy in place for self regulated learning to occur in attitudes affect self regulated learning, what tools can support embedded instruction to sup port self regulated learning, how environmental cues trigger emotional shifts in regulated learning, and how teachers and peers can support self regulation (Paris et al., 1984; Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Pressley & Ghatala, 1990; Pressley et a l., 1992). Specifically, this study support ed an understanding on how to teach self regulated learning to students receiving Tier 3 intensive supports in relation to reading and help these learners transfer their self regulation strategies to other contex ts within a 21 st century l earning space. This study inquire d into self regulation in relation to st century learning space that
36 support students receiving Tier 3 intervention, their relatedness, and how t heir reflections and autonomy affect ed their self regulated learning. This chapter reviewed the literature on self regulated learning to provide a foundation for this study. Chapter 3 will define the method s employed during the study, including a descrip tion of my background as the researcher, as well as the data collection and analysis process
37 CHAPTER 3 METHOD Introduction T o rev iew, the purpose of this study wa s to understand how to teach self regulation to students receiving Tier 3 int ensive supports in relation to reading and to help these learners transfer their self regulation strategies to other contexts. In order to gain insi ghts into this question, I engage d in practitioner research. This chapter will define practitioner researc h as the method used to conduct the study provide a description of my background as the researcher and explain the data collection and data analysis methods Practitioner Research Some of the current conditions in education include standardized testing, teacher pay tied to student achievement, and an increase in government interjection in decision making (Wagner, 2008). Because of this educational climate, the focus in classrooms centers on student performance on standardized tests with teachers fearing how use of performance on standardized tests. This leaves entire schools feeling pressure to have a standardized test in order for t heir funding to not be stripped they are clamoring for change (Cochran Smith and Lytle, 2009). Practitioner research has the potential to provide some refuge. This resea rch methodology gives practitioners the power to reform their schools, transform their classrooms, increase student learning, and enhance their professional development (Cochran Smith & Lytle, 2009; Dana & Yendol Hopey, 2009, Caro Bruce, Flessner,
38 Klehr & Zeichner, 2007; Herr & Anderson, 2005). Practitioner research places power practice in order to enact change. They can collaborate with their peers, inquire into best p ractices, find solutions to barriers that exist in their classrooms, and unite as practitioners who want to ensure that all students have an equal opportunity to learn. Practitioner research is grounded in the reality of schools but supported with theory This allows teachers to move beyond being the subjects in university studies to being treated like professionals, working side by side as collaborators in the research. Taking gainst constraining policies and mandated practices and opens up spaces for practitioners to (Cochran Smith & Lytle, 2009, p. 6). There are several features of practitioner res earch. Through this method the practitioner takes on dual roles throughout the research process practitioner and researcher. Taking on these dual roles supports the practitioner in researching from the inside instead of researching from the outsid e. The goal is not to sit back and watch The goal is for insiders to generate knowledge. The environment in which the practitioner researcher is conducting the study is a critical com ponent of practitioner research. The environment provides the context for where the practitioner researcher studies. Practitioners plan the study, gather relevant information, interpret data, inquire into questions, and in turn, take action in schools. T here is not a prolonged amount of time spent waiting for findings or for suggestions on
39 the nex t steps from distant outsiders. Research findings and implications become immediately visible s type of resear ch has the potential to positively affect practice in a quick time frame compared to a more traditional methodology. This immediate sharing of knowledge makes practitioner research powerful for purposes of school improvement and change. Practitioner resea own environment more in depth. It is a focused, in depth, inquiry that is not necessarily conducted to make a broad impact on others. Herr and Anderson (2005) state that practitioner research is not aimed at generalizability, rather its aims are researchers hope their findings have potential impact beyond their settings, but the main pu rpose for the practitioner researcher is to enact change in their own environments. Grogan, Donaldson, and Simmons (2007) argue that practitioner researchers of their own or s Furthermore, these authors state, Grogan et al. 2007, p. 4). Practitioner re search challenges the traditional notions of a methodology. As I complete d my study on how I support self regulation skills for students receiving Tier 3 intervention I hope d to increase the knowledge base for my school, my students, and the teachers I c oach and collaborate with. Cochran Smith and Lytle (1993) describe this type of knowledge that exists in a particular setting. Because of my insider status, I need ed to
40 be conscious of my personal assumpti ons and biases throughout the study (Herr & Anderson, 2005). My relationships with the participants, my position at the school, and my personal beliefs all need ed to be articulated and taken into consideration during every step of the study in order to en sure trustworthiness of the study Researcher Assumptions and Sources of Potential Bias When the environment that the practitioner teaches in simultaneously is the site where the research is conducted, the boundaries between research and practice blu r. This is another feature of practitioner research. When researchers immerse themselves in the environment they are studying and do not assume the traditional outsider research role, the researcher has the potential of bringing their personal biases and assumptions into the study. Assumptions and potential sources of bias need to be explicitly addressed in practitioner research (Herr & Anderson, 2005; Cochran Smith & Lytle, 2009). I will outline my background and discuss potential biases in the research Researchers must be aware of possible biases that may exist and be very conscious of how those biases potentially play a role in the study. Trustworthiness In addition, criteria for assessing trustworthiness, is c hallenged in practitioner research because the researcher takes on dual roles in the study. This aspect of research is judged differently than in traditional methodologies because the intention of practitioner research is to directly impact practice, not necessarily to generalize findings. Smith & Lytle, 2009, p. 43). In this study several techniques to ensure trustworthiness were used.
41 First, I employed the process of source triangulation Source triangulation refers to check ing the consistency of findings through the use of different sources of data to enhance accuracy of evidence to support themes ( Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In this study the three different sources of data I used were my teacher journal, field notes, a nd student work artifacts Second, I conducted peer debriefing. Peer debriefing refers to discuss ing the research process with a trusted colleague ( Lincoln & Guba, 1985) In this study, I debriefed with a close peer who recently graduated with her doctorate and the process of conducting dissertation research was fresh in her head. During the study, we were both elementary curriculum coordinators at the school where the study was conducted. Engaging in peer debriefing with this colleague allowed me to step outside of the study advocate The third technique I used to enhance trustwort hiness was to provide thick descriptions of my data. Thick descriptions are when the researcher writes there ( Lincoln & Guba, 1985) In this study, I provided thick descriptions of my fi ndings in Chapters 4 and 5. The final technique I used to enhance trustworthiness was leaving an audit trail. An audit trail is when the researcher makes it possible for an external check to be conducted on the process of inquiry and data can be easily tracked to its sources ( Lincoln & Guba, 1985) In this study, I labeled all of my data with the source and the date the data were gathered easily track that the data came from the teacher journal. The
42 the date of the specific journal entry. Student artifacts were labeled with the firs t letter The techniques practitioner researc hers use to collect and analyze data are further components specific to practitioner research. This methodology includes more traditional data sources such as collecting student work samples and artifacts, taking field notes, conducting interviews, and do ing observations. In addition, many practitioner researchers also include their interpretations, their reflections, and how their thinking evolved th r oughout the study as sources of data. Data collection continuously cycles and sometimes even produces n ew knowledge that can impact subsequent action in the study. The inclusion of the practitioner as the researcher, as the insider, lays a foundation for data collection that can be very personal, collaborative, and intentional. conducting practitioner research (Montalbano, 2001; Francis, 2011). During the look phase, researchers collaborate with participants to define the problem(s), observe, plan, and ob tain a clear picture of the study. During the think phase, questions are asked and data are analyzed and interpreted. Throughout the third phase, action takes place and plans are implemented. Each phase twists and turns upon each other. Practitioner research may not go in a linear fashion or in the order of look, think, and then act. It may be necessary to loop back to specific phases to be able to move forward. This ( Grogan et al., 2007, p. 3).
43 practitioner research does not exist. This method of conducting a dissertation req uires constant scrutiny, discussion, and awareness in order to know how to proceed through the research. Practitioner research is even shifting university culture in research practice. Recently, doctoral students are choosing to engage in practitioner re search and completing action research dissertations instead of more conventional dissertations. Most of the time when a doctoral student is completing an action research dissertation they are working on a professional practice doctorate rather than a doc torate of philosophy. Grogan et al. (2007) describe the difference between the two types of own sake or for translation and/or application by persons other than the res earcher(s); the other on the co Faculty advisors, dissertation committees, and The Institutional Review Board are all having to make shifts to accommodate this type of dissertation becaus e it requires different sets of skills, knowledge, and structures for its completion. Action research dissertations challenge the longstanding beliefs on what research should look like. This Smith & Lytle, 2009, p. 106). In Creating Equitable Classrooms ( Caro Bruce et al., 2007) and Inquiry as Stance ( Cochran Smith & Lytle, 2009), practitioner research is described as practitioners taking control of their learning, contributing to the growth in knowledge of their classrooms and schools, and expressing their learning through the written word. Practitioner researchers
44 use a theoretical background and create a framework for their studies while still including the voice of the researcher. This research methodology is critical to the educational landscape today and puts the power back into the hands of those who spend their lives in schools with students. Practitioner research has the power to produce change for teachers a nd students, allows for researchers and participants to authentically engage, and provides space for teachers to collaborate in order to enhance their own professional learning and explore practice so they can reach more students. Researcher Background Si nce practitioner research calls for the researcher to be conscious of possible sources of biases, it is important to clearly state my background and the personal and professional assumptions along with biases that could possibly be present (Herr & Anderson 2005). I have a bachelor of arts in Elementary Education and a m asters in Special Education from the University of Florida. I chose to pursue a degree in special education because my younger sister is a student who h as a learning difference and had an individualized education plan (IEP) throughout her schooling experience. I grew up observing my parents struggle to find ways to support her. I witnessed her pain and her battle with herself, her peers, and her teachers as she journeyed through school. Most nights my heart would break when my family would finish dinner and it was time to do homework because I knew this meant a time of frustration would begin for my sister. I wanted to learn how to help students like my sister and my passion became ensur ing that all students receive an education that is just right for them.
45 I believe it is the and to do everything in their power to help each student reach their potential, no matter the circumstance. I also believe their educational experience. Being a struggling learner in school is difficult and it is necessary for the adults to surround students with acceptance and support while contin uing to help students find ways to be independent. This is my ninth year in education and I have done a myriad of things along my journey. I have taught third grade, fifth grade, second grade, special education for third through fifth grade, been an inst ructional coach for kindergarten through fifth grade, been a teacher on special assignment doing the administrative duties for the elementary school, and I am currently the curriculum coordinator for fourth and fifth grade. No matter the role I am in at s chool, my goal is always to help all students be the best they can be, particularly those students with learning differences, and those that are not meeting benchmarks. I believe there are many reasons why students are in need of intensive Tier 3 interve ntions. It bothers me to my core when I feel like teachers do not believe these students are capable, act as if these students are choosing to be in need of inte nsive support, or are unwilling to make accommodations or differentiate instruction in order t o there are endless reasons why a student could be in ne ed of intensive support. T hey could have skill and strategy deficits, do not connect with their teacher or their peers, are not being asked to produce products in ways that meet their learning style, may need assignment s broken down in more manageable parts, are not supported at home, feel given up on, or other numerous
46 combinations of factors I d o not believe it is student s fault s that they are in need of ins tructional support. I do not has a learning difference. attention. E very student deserves a teacher that is wiling to differentiate instr uc tion in order to meet individual student needs. I believe that student self regulated learning should be the backbone to teaching and learning. Having students take time to set goals prior to accomplishing a task, being conscious of those go als during the performance of the task, and then self reflecting on how they did in relation to their goals is a cycle that should happen several times a day, every day in every classroom. These skills can span across any subject area and any grade level. I believ e that when students become profici ent in the strategies and thinking processes that are associated with self regulated learning, they will feel more competent, will want to relate to their teachers and their peers more, and will feel a sense of pride beca use they are able to be autonomous learners. When I have taught students that are in need of support, I cannot help but think of all the ways we inadvertently send these students veiled messages. The space where we teach them, the curriculum and m aterials we use with them, and the pedagogical techniques we employ to teach them all have the potential to make these students in need of support feel like they are not capabl e of being self regulated This study gave me an opportunity to inquire into ho w to reach these students more effectively and make sure the messages and instruction they receive help them actualize their potential.
47 Data Collection Methods An important aspect of engaging in practitioner research is articulating the ways data will b e collected while the practitioner continues to engage in everyday teaching practices. Data collection should not make the practitioner deviate from their daily teaching. Instead, data collection becomes a natural and integral part of the daily teaching ( Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009). For the purpose of this study, three different forms of data were collected: field nal, and student work artifacts These collection method s were chosen because this data help ed me gain insight into how I support ed Tier 3 learners within a 21 st century learning space and because these are practical methods that easily fold ed into the fabric of my current instructional practices. While I was teaching, I wrote down field notes. Field notes are a way to doc ument the action that is occurring in the classroom (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010; Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009; Glesne, 2006). I had a notebook next to me at all times while I was teaching so I could capture student dialogue, student behavior, patterns or any other observations or thoughts (Glesne, 2006). Figure 3 1 illustrates a sample page from my field notes. I reflected on my teaching practice, student learning, student behavior, and field he journal daily: What did I learn about self regulation in reading today? What did I learn about how my students might transfer self regulation strategies to other contexts? journal allowed me to capture my own thinking (Dana & Y endol Hoppey, 2009). I established a time that I wrote in my journal daily, which was for ten minutes directly after teaching. Establishing this time ensured that I had dedicated time to methodically
48 reflect on my teaching. This supported me through the successes, a reas of growth, and provide d me a structured outlet in deciding the next steps that need ed to be taken in the study. Figure 3 2 illustrates a sample entry from my journal. Figure 3 1. Photograph of Field Notes (Photo courtesy of author)
49 Figure 3 2. Sample Entry From My Journal I collect ed student work artifacts throughout the study including student goal statements produced during the forethought phase of self regulation, all student work generated during the performance phase of self reflections. Collecting all of these pieces of student work artifacts allow ed me to systematically analyze if Tier 3 interventions were supporting students or how I might have need ed to restructure my teaching in order t o reach the students in different ways. Examples of student work samples will appear throughout the findings chapters of the dissertation. Data Analysis and Interpretation Merriam (2009) states that the goal of data analysis is to make sense of th e data. and the student work
50 artifacts, I analyze d the data using a four step process of description, sense making, interpretation, and implication drawing (Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009). Du ring the first phase of the analysis process, I look ed over my entire data set to gain a descriptive sense of what I had collected (Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009). Throughout this phase I attempted to obtain initial and overall insights into the data. This phase is also referred to as a preliminary exploratory analysis because I acquired a general sense of the data (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010). As I examined the data, I memo ed, wrot e notes to myself, record ed my thinking about hunches I was getting and jo t ted down themes I was beginning to see. For example, Figure 3 3 illustrates a page of my notes from when I examined the data. Figure 3 3. Example of How I Recorded My Thinking During the First Phase of Data Analysis (Photo courtesy of author)
51 Once I explored the data set, I began to make sense of the dat a. Throughout this phase I read and re read my entire data set looking for categories, themes, and groups (Merriam, 2009; Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009). I began a coding process of the data. A code is a label that is used to describe a piece of data (Glesne, 2006; Merriam, 2009; Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010). Throughout the coding process, I scrutinize d the data, assign ed codes, look ed for overlaps in codes, combine d codes, delete d codes, and rename d codes (Merriam, 2009; Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010). This method of constant comparing of codes happen ed several times. Plano Clark and Creswell (2010) building up from had categories that were comprised of similar codes, I label ed th o se as the big t hemes I found in the data set. For example, Figure 3 4 illustrates similar codes that I organized into a big theme. During the next phase of the data analysis process, I interpreted the themes of the data set, while attempting to answer the major research questions I set out to answer (Glesne, 2006; Merriam, 2009; Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009; Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010). I provided rich descriptions and detailed information to support the themes. This process displayed that I developed an in depth understanding of the central phenomenon occurring throughout my study. My rich descriptions and themes ser ved as the basis for the writing of chapters 4 and 5 of this dissertation. The final step in the data analysis process was discussing the implications of the data (Merriam, 2009; Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009). Through the implications, I interpreted what I learned from the study and discussed actions that could occur in the
52 future. I discussed how this study affected my teaching practice and how it could affect other teachers and students beyond the study. This phase of the data analysis process served as the basis for the writing of the final chapter of the dissertation. Figure 3 4. Example of a Theme and Codes Summary and Conclusions In this chapter, I described the method I employed to gain insights into the research questions that drove this s tudy:
53 In what ways do I support the self regulation of learners receiving Tier 3 intensive instruction within a 21 st century learning space? How do learners receiving Tier 3 intensive instruction experience and use the self regulation strategies I teac h ? In Chapter 4, I report the ways I actualized self regulated learning in practice, using the data I collected and analyzed throughout this study to describe my practice as well as what I learned as a result of teaching self regulated learning strategies to students receiving Tier 3 instruction in reading.
54 CHAPTER 4 ACTUALIZING SELF REGULATED LEARNING I N PRACTICE Introduction Thi s chapter will focus on describing and analyzing the approach I took to teaching self regulation to students receiving Tier 3 instructional supports in reading. To contextualize my teaching of self regulation, I will first describe the circumstance within which Tier 3 instruction took place by providing additional ba ckground on my school and the ways instruction is organized w ithin our new building space, sharing details about the context of the reading block within which my Tier 3 instruction occurred, and describing the ways students are selected for participation in Tier 3 instruction. Following the contextualization of my teaching of self regulation in Tier 3, I describe the ways I actualized the self regulation cycle first by teaching my students strategies for comprehending text and introducing the concept of self regulation, and finally enacting a full cycle of the three phases of self regulation each day I worked with my students: Forethought, Performance, and Self Reflection. This description of my teaching was carefully constructed using my field notes journal entries, and student artifacts as a guide. I conclude t his chapter with three lessons learned from analyzing the data I collected during my teaching of self regulation to students receiving Tier 3 instruction. Contextualizing Tier 3 P.K. Yonge Developmental Research School P.K. Yonge is a developmental resea rch school in Gainesville, Florida that is a department with in The College of Education of The University of Florida. P.K. Yonge is a kindergarten through twelfth grade school, serving around 1150 students. Students are admitted by lottery and student de mographics must represent
55 demographics. 48% of students that attend P.K. Yonge are white, 52% are minority, 20% are on free and reduced lunch, 12% have an individualized ed ucation plan or a 504 plan, and s tudents travel from over 37 different cities to attend P.K Yonge everyday P.K. Yonge operates as its own school district and is charged with being an innovator in education in the state The elementary division opened a new school building during the 2012 2013 school year. For several years prior, the faculty and school leadership collaborated with educational architects and cutting edge designers to build a progressive school organized in small learning communities (Wolkenhauer, in press) A learning community is a group o f teachers that discuss their teaching practices, actively engage and collaborate with each other, share norms, and look at student data in order to ensure that students are learning (DuFour, 2004 ). The elementary school is organized by learning communiti es: kindergarten/first grade learning community, second/third grade learning community, and fourth/fifth grade learning communi ty. Each learning community has its own section of the elementary school building and has seven teachers with at least one tha t is special education certified. The K/1 an d 2/3 learning communities each house 108 students while the 4/5 learning community has 132 students. Teachers in these learning communities work closely with each other every day and systematically openly disc uss their practice in order to reach all learners In addition, in contrast to traditional elementary classroom structure where a teacher is responsible for 18 25 students in his/her individual classroom space, all seven teachers in a learning community s hare responsibility for all K/1, 2/3 and 4/5 students respectively, meaning students work with different teachers
56 throughout the school day in different configurations for different purposes. When teacher pract ice is openly discussed and teachers share re sponsibility for an entire grade level of students, the potential exists to maximize instruction in ways one individual teacher working with 18 25 students cannot. The space that is occupied by each learning community is different tha n traditional classr ooms. Separate, equal, classroom spaces do not exist. In each learning community there are small, medium, and large learning studios. Some learning studios have doors while some simply have an open space in the doorway The learning co mmunity space do es not contain hallways in an attempt to use every inch of space for teaching and learning. Furniture was chosen and placed within the learning communities based on learning styles, comfort, and flexibility for different student groupings. These different t ypes of spaces allow for various group sizes and a myriad of ways to structure learning all dependent on student need and student interest. S pace within the building is scheduled based on learning goals, and student and teacher need instead of teacher s s In a traditional setting, it would be rare for one teacher to teach his/her class in anot O ne teacher typically teaches his/her class in his/her classroom all day, never seeing other teachers or studen community model, the entire learning community space is shared T hrough lesson planning and collaboration teachers agree upon learning space usage and t eachers and students learn in a variety of spaces throughout the learni ng community depending on need. Figures 4 1, 4 2, and 4 3 are photographs of learning communities.
57 Figure 4 1. Small Group Space in a Learning Community (Photograph courtesy of fieldingnair.com) Figure 4 2. Whole Gr oup Space in a Learning Community (Photograph courtesy of fieldingnair.com)
58 Figure 4 3. Versatile Furniture and Transparent Walls in the Learning Community (Photograph courtesy of fieldinnair.com) The K/1, 2/3 and 4/5 learning communities each organiz e their days into different blocks of time. All l earning communities are required to have a morning meeting, a ninety minute reading block, at least sixty minutes for a math block, dedicated time for a writing block, and time for science and social studie s. Throughout each block of time, teachers are committed to providing differen tiated instruction to students. Some learning communities focus on differentiating the teaching of students within specific grade levels while other learning communities differ entiate their instruction across the two grade levels that are housed within the learning community. This study was conducted with in t he 4 /5 grade learning community during reading block time where students were taught in mixed grade level groups. In ad dition to teaching in mixed
59 grade level groups, the 4/5 learning community also chose to integrate the teaching of social studies content into the reading block. Table 4 1 summarizes the 4/5 learning community schedule. Table 4 1 4 th and 5 th Grade Learning Community Daily Schedule 4th grade 5th grade 8:05 8:30 Morning Routine Morning Meeting 8:05 8:30 Morning Routine Morning Meeting 8:30 9:30 Writing 8:30 9:30 Specials Music, Art, or P.E. 9:30 10:45 Math 9:30 10:45 Math 10:50 11:35 Lunch/Re cess 10:50 11:35 Lunch/Recess 11:40 1:10 Reading/Social Studies 11:40 1:10 Reading/Social Studies 1:10 1:50 Science 1:10 1:50 Writing 1:50 2:30 Specials Music, Art, or P.E. 1:50 2:30 Science 4 th and 5 th Grade Learning Community Reading Block Overa ll structure minutes. Students are broken up into six heterogeneous groups made up of twenty two students, consisting of eleven fourth graders and eleven fifth graders. Groups are le d by one o f the 4/5 learning community teachers. Daily, during the beginning of the 90 minute reading block, grou ps meet for a 30 minute reading/social studie s mini lesson. As previously stated, the 4/5 learning
60 community integrates their teaching of social studie s content into reading instruction. Because the students are in mixed grade level groups for reading instruction, the 4/5 learning community built a two year social studies curriculum that the students cycle through during the reading block. During one y ear, focus on Native Americans, Exploration, and American colonies while the next year the focus is on the American Revolution, the Civil War, Westward Expansion, and Government. For each unit of study, students read content about the social stu dies topic under exploration during the reading block and after learning and discussing sufficient content take part in project based learning in order to communicate their new learning about the social studies content just covered to others. During the year in which my study took place, the 4/5 learning community was engaged in the study of Native Americans, Exploration, and American Colonies. Teachers collaborate to ensure that the same social studies content is delivered during the reading block min i lesson s by agreeing on the l earning goals for the unit. In addition to the social studies content, the learning goals for these mini lessons focus on learning and applying specific reading strategies. Hence, during these mini lessons and throughout the rest of the reading block, reading strategies are being applied to social studies text. Learning about reading strategies and learning about social studies content are simultaneously occurring during the mini lessons. For example, students may be gettin g introduced to a reading learning goal about merging background knowledge with text clues in order to make an inference and draw conclusions. In order to fully understand this learning goal, students must be aware of their background knowledge and specif ic types of text clues. In order for this to occur,
61 social studies text is used during the mini lesson time for teachers to model, provide guided practice, and help students become independent in noticing their background knowledge about the social studie s topic and to point out text clues that are present in the text. T here are times when mini lesson s are more focused on reading strategy instruction while other times it is important to spend more time on understanding the social studies content. Since e very student in the learning community is taught the same mini lesson, this is considered Tier 1 instruction. Throughout this mini lesson time, students are tracking their learning toward their reading goals. Teachers have students use a rubric to rate t heir knowledge about their reading goals at the beginning and end of each mini lesson (Figure 4 4) Figure 4 4 Student Goal Tracking Sheet
62 At the end of a mini lesson teachers remind students of the goal(s) they should be working on, which text the y should be focusing on for their reading strategies, and the expectation that they will provide evidence of their work at the end of the reading block. Next students transition to 50 minu tes of autonomous work time. During a utonom ous time students app ly the strategies they learned during their mini lesson independently by choosing where they work best, who they work best with, and the pace at which they work Since autonomous time is occurring for their entire learning community, all fourth and fifth graders and all teachers are spread out amongst the entire learning community space. When one observes autonomous time some students are in chair s while some are on the floor. T here is a buzz across the learning community because students are collaborati ng with their peers and teachers are coaching students, some students are reading text online while others are reading on a piece of paper, classical music is being played and some students are listening to their iPods because they choose to listen to a d ifferent type of music in order to enhance their learning. Once the 50 min utes of autonomous time is over students move back to where they had their mini lesson s for a ten minute share time. During this time, teachers invite students to sit in a circle on the floor to share their work from autonomous time. Teachers briefly remind the student s about what was discussed during the mini lesson and the evidence they should have of their learning goals. Some teachers have students turn to partners and share what they worked on in autonomous time while other teachers randomly call on students to share their work with the entire group. Each teacher facilitates share time differently but the goals are always the same to hold
63 students accountable from autonomo continue to discuss the specific social studies content. Once share time is concluded, the reading block is finished and 4 th graders transition to science while 5 th graders transition to writing. Table 4 2 summ arizes the reading block schedule. Table 4 2 4 th and 5 th Grade Learning Community Reading Block Schedule Time Activity 11:45 a.m. 12:15 p.m. Mini lesson taught in 4/5 mixed grade level groups 12:15 p.m. 1:00 p.m. Autonomous time 1:00 p.m. 1:10 p.m. Share time in original 4/5 mixed grade level groups Student success team m eetings tier 2, and tier 3 instruction The 4/5 learning community teachers collaboratively reflect on student achievemen t during the reading block and make decis ion s about which students need additional differentiated instruction. Teachers attend Student Success Team (SST) meetings every six weeks where student data is discussed and decisions ab o ut tiered instruction are made At the beginning of each school yea r, SSTs are held to make decisions about initial support for students. In order to make these decisions, data is used from the previous year s. Learning community teachers, the guidance counselor, the school psychologist, the director of special programs, an administrator, and the curriculum coordinator each attend Student Success Team meetings. At this meeting, Tier 1 effectiveness is calculated based on the percentage of students scoring on grade level on curriculum based measurements. Academic, social, and emotional factors are considered when students are discussed at SST meetings Student s who are not reaching benchmarks with just Tier 1 instruction and have data that show they are in need of supplementar y instruction are moved into Tier 2. Decision s about which
64 students are moved into Tier 2, what their Tier 2 instruction should be, and how often Tier 2 needs to be delivered are all agreed on at the SST table. Tier 2 instruction for reading in the 4 th and 5 th grade learning community is provided d uring autonomous time. Teachers confer with students in need of Tier 2 in a small group, with a pair of students, or individually. These conferences happen within the learning community space, where all the other 4 th and 5 th graders are working during au tonomous time. Some teachers meet with students for Tier 2 at tables while others like to meet while sitting on the floor along with their personality. During Tier 2 conferences, teachers provide social s tudies text that match the students reading level and teachers are explicitly coachin g students on how to apply the reading strategies they learned during their mini lesson. These conferences typically last for around ten minutes. Students who continue to not meet benchmarks after they are provided with Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction for a significant period of time (usually between nine and twenty seven weeks) a re moved into Tier 3. Similar to Tier 2, decisions about which students are moved into Tier 3, what their Tier 3 instruction should look like and how often Tier 3 needs to be delivered are all agreed on at SST. A student in need of instruction in reading in addition to Tier 1 and Tier 2 is provided Tier 3 instruction during autonomous time as w ell. Tier 3 is typically a smaller group of students, taught by a teacher certified in exceptional student education. Tier 3 is provided within the learning community, right along side every other 4 th and 5 th grader working during autonomous time. In ord er to ensure attention and provide the best environment for students to focus, Tier 3 does meet in a room with a door that closes.
65 The walls for this room have big windows so the room continues to feel like a part of the learning community (Figure 4 5) Figure 4 5. Photograph of Room Where Tier 3 Occurred (Photo courtesy of author) Tier 3 focuses on explicit re teaching of reading comprehension strategies that are being taught during mini lessons. Students in Tier 3 may or may not have an individ ualized education plan or 504 plan. In turn, this is not a group just for students
66 staffed in special education. This is a group of students who need Tier 1, Tier 2, and intensive instructional supports in Tier 3. If a student continues to not meet benc hmarks while they are in Tier 3, then a decision is made at SST to possibly move to a formal evaluation to inquire into whether an individual education plan (IEP) is necessary. Since SST happens frequently, student placement into tiered instruction can b e fluid. The goal is to find out where the student can be most successful but also allowing them to be as independent of a learner as possible. This system allows for students to receive the appropriate level of instruction throu ghout the entire year, wi th data and teacher observations being the deciding factors. Table 4 3 is a sample schedule for a student receiving Tier 3 intensive reading intervention in the 4/5 reading block. Table 4 3 Sample Student Schedule During Reading Block 4 th G rade Student 5 th Grade Student 11:45 12:10 Tier 1 11:45 12:10 Tier 1 12:15 12:35 Tier 3 12:15 12:35 Tier 2 12:35 12:55 Tier 2 12:35 12:55 Tier 3 1:00 1:15 Share Time 1:00 1:15 Share Time As the teacher in charge of working with students receiving Tie r 3 intensive reading intervention during autonomous time, I recognized that utilizing our instructional time for the re teaching of reading comprehension strategies would not be sufficient to help these learners be successful. In order to become successf ul, students receiving Tier 3 instruction in reading would need to develop the skills to become self regulated learners. Because of the way the 4 th and 5 th grade reading block was organized with
67 the new learning community space, autonomous time would be u seless to these students in the absence of self regulation. Actualizing Self Regulation During Tier 3 With the goal of helping my s tudents who receive Tier 3 intensive reading intervention develop the skills of self regulated learning, I began the school year with the basics. Before even t ack l ing their self regulation, students needed to learn and be able to flexibly use strategies for comprehending text. Without these strategies, there is nothing to self regulate. Teaching Strategies for Comprehending Text From the beginning of school in August 2012 through early December 2012, a typical lesson in Tier 3 began by students getting out their pencil and a packet of social studies text that I put together for them. Students would collaboratively tac kle on e sentence at a time to ensure that they comprehended what they were reading In order to accomplish this within the Tier 3 small group setting, o ne student at a time was selected to be the lead reader, through a rock, paper, scissors contest between the students The winner was the lead reader for the entire paragraph which meant they would read sentence by sentence of one paragraph out loud to the group After reading each sentence out loud, the reader would stop and ask the group tence this question would be asked after every se ntence required each student to be attentive while the sentence was being read out loud Having this question asked after each sentence required each student to also know if the sentence mad e sense to the m or not. Sometimes students would say the sentence made sense to them simply because they were not aware that they did not comprehend it On the
68 other hand, s ometimes students would say the sentence made sense because they did not want to put the work in to comprehend the sentence. D uring the performance phase, I am still having to push on the students to be hone st about the sentence making sense. (TJ 2 5 13) It became clear that I needed to help the students become metacognitive, or t hink about their thinking, if they were going to successfully comprehend what they were reading To support comprehension, there needed to be ways to make the invisible task of ence students needed to have a few options for action to ascertain if they comprehended the sentence just read Hence, I taught the students to mark each sentence they read. If students understood the sentence immediately, they would dra w a dash a fter the period of the sentence. Drawing the dash indicated that the sentence made sense and provided a visual reminder or cue that students interacted with and comprehended that piece of text Then the reader c ontinued to the next sentence. If th e sentence did not make sense to everyone in the group, students needed to figure out where the comprehension broke down Depending on where or why the comprehension broke down, students would apply a number of strategi es I taught them in order to fix the comprehension. In general, these strategies co nsisted of but were not limited to: Re reading the sentence or parts of the sentence a dash where it makes sense. Circling or underlining words we did not know. Breaking up words we did not know in order to figure out their meaning. Substituting other words for words we did not know.
69 Searching our schemas to see if we know anything about s pecific words, phrases, or topics Drawing pictures or making an illustration Making a prediction Making an inference Making a connection Visualizing what we just read in our minds After students applied one or several of these strategies to the portion of the sentence that was not be ing comprehended, the lead reader would ask the group again, so then each student would draw a dash at the end of the sentence indicating that the sentence was comprehended. If not, the n students would apply more strategies until it did make sense and everyone could draw the das h at the end of the sentence. This process continued until an entire paragraph was read Then another rock, paper, scissors contest was held to see who would be come the next lead reader. Introducing Self Regulated Learning: The Beginnings As I was teaching reading comprehension strategies and my students practiced applying them during our Tier 3 instructional time, I also simultaneously introduced them to th e concept of self regulation, the process one engages in to perform tasks and attain goals. While my students were not quite ready to engage in the entire self regulated learning cycle during Tier 3 instructional time at the beginning of the year, I laid the foundation to enact all three phases of self regulation later in the school year by introducing them to self reflection at the end of our time together. To facilitate their self reflection on their performance during the time we spent together working on
70 comprehending text, I created and introduced them to a rubric the could use at the end of our session to think about and assess their reading performance. Figure 4 6 is a copy of the rubric students completed daily that laid the foundation for engagin g in the entire self regulated learning cycle I would read each box from the rubric out loud and students would give themselves a check if they used that strategy or they would leave it blank if they did not use the specific strategy. Taking time eve ryday at the end of Tier 3 to self reflect with this rubric helped students become more aware of the specific strategies they had available to them in order comprehend text. Figure 4 6. Self Reflection Rubric for Tier 3
71 Once self regulation was introdu ced and experienced in Tier 3 from Au gust 2012 through December 2012 by practicing the basics of reading comprehension strategies and self reflection using the rubric I created for my students it was time to take the next step and have students engage in the entire self regulated learning cycle. Enacting the Self Regulated Learning Cycle Enacting the complete self regulation learning cycle with the students receiving Tier 3 intensive instructional supports in reading began with the introduction of new mat erials that would add novelty to our Tier 3 instructional time as we worked together to comprehend text using our lead reader and sentence by sentence comprehension check approach to reading. In January 2013 I was awarded a mini grant from P.K. Yonge for differentiating instruction with the use of iPads The features of the iPad provided a myriad of ways for students to engage in reading text, continue what they had been practicing in Tier 3 since August 2012 and develop their self regulated learning s trategies A lso, having the students who receive d Tier 3 intensive intervention get to be the only students i n the learning community that had the privilege of work ing on the iPad s flipped the traditional notion of which students get to take part in the engaging tasks Typically, students who receive inten sive intervention learn with materials that are very basic looking and plain and students who are deemed more capable get to learn with the more engaging materials Instead, students in Tier 3 would us e an iPad which created a potential scenario for students receiving intervention to be looked up to by their peers. When students receiving intensive intervention are admired by their peers, there is potential for the students receiving the intervention to feel proud to come to Tier 3, which can enhance motivation and engagement in the self regulated learning strategies that are being learned.
72 Starting in January 2013, I replaced my paper and pencil approach to Tier 3 instruction with the iPad using t wo apps that were conducive to continuing our lead reader approach to comprehending text Pdf notes and ShowMe Pdf notes is an app that allows students to read and interact w ith P df documents on the iPad On I synced my dropbo x account to the Pdf notes app. This way I was able to find texts online from any computer, upload it into my dropbox, and the students could have access to it from their iPad This provided me with many options of relevant social studies text for our group to read. After completing our reading on the iPad each day, the ShowMe app allowed students to t urn their iPad into a whiteboar d and also have the ability to record student voices with a playback option. The ShowMe app was used for students to record their reflections on the day, replacing the paper and pencil self reflection rubric previously us ed. Once the iPads were introduc ed and student became proficient in us ing this technology to enact our lead reader approach to comprehending text, I b egan structuring our Tier 3 instructional time using the three phases of self regulation. Forethought phase Starting in January 2013, d aily, upon entering the Tier 3 intensive reading intervention group students would get their iPad and begin the foret hought phase of self regulation. The forethoug ht phase is the process of task analysis, which contains goal setting and strategic planning (Zimmerman, 2002) I actualized this particular phase of self regulation with my students receiving Tier 3 interven tion by asking them to revisit their work from the previous day and subsequently create a new personal The forethought phase is the first of three phases of self regulation but it also occurs in
73 response to previous self regulated learning cycles. Hence, i n preparatio n for setting a daily goal the students would revisit work they had completed during the final phase of self regulation (self reflection) from the previous day. D uring this final phase (to be described late r in this chapter), student s would use the ShowMe app to record reflection about their goal and performance each day. The Forethought phase of self regulation entailed my s tudents each taking a turn playing the ir self reflections from the previous day for the entire group to hear. Listening to their self reflection about their goal from the previous day intentionally continued and connected the self regulation cycle from day to day. S tudents then would write t heir learning goal for the current day on the ShowMe app. After writing their goal, students would personalize the background of the whiteboard where their goal was written with the ShowMe app. Students would choose a wide variety of things to personal ize their backgrounds. Typically they would choose pictures of sports teams, food, ani mals, or take picture s of themselves or their friends in the group. Figures 4 7 and 4 8 are examples of students goals and their personalized backgrounds on the ShowMe app. Figure 4 7. Student Goal With a Photograph Background on The ShowMe App
74 Figure 4 8. Student Goal With a Picture Background on The ShowMe App Personalizing the background of their whiteboard to highlight the goal they had created for them selves was an enjoyable activity for the students afforded by the iPad technology and provided a motivational component as we moved into the second phase of the self regulation cycle: Performance. The entire Forethought phase took approximately 5 minute s. Performance phase After the students listened to their goals from the previous day and wrote their goals for the current day during the forethought phase the students moved into the performance phase of the self regulation cycle for approximately ten minutes. The
75 performance phase is characterized by efforts that occur to maintain attention and action during the upcoming lesson (Zimmerman, 200 2). I actualized this particular phase of self regulation with my students receiving Tier 3 intervention by repeating the same lead reader strategy we had used since the beginning of the school year using the iPad to read and interact with text, rather than a paper and pencil. To begin the performance phase, students opene d the Pdf notes app, where I housed r elevant and appropriate social studies text on Colonial Times. The students would navigate to the text they were reading from the previous day to find where they left off. Then, students held a rock, paper, scissors contest around the table to see who wo uld be the first lead reader similar to how we started group from August to December when we did not have the iPads This contest provided a smooth transition from the forethought phase to the performance phase of the self regulation cycle The s tuden t who won the contest was the lead reader for the paragraph. That student read each sentence out loud while the other stude nts in the group read along. After reading each sentence out loud, the lead reader would stop and ask the group, Students were familiar with this routine and they knew this question woul d be asked after every sentence because this is the routine we had used since August H aving this question asked after each sentence require d each student to decide if the y comprehended the sent ence. Since student s wer e familiar with this routine, by January they were not say ing the sentence made sense b ecause they were not aware they did not comprehended it They had reached a level of awareness, honesty, and safety which allowed them to say if they did not comprehend the
76 sentence. They were even beginning to ask themselves if they understood what they were reading. nderstanding. (TJ 2 25 13) We continued to support comprehension by making the invisible task o f compreh ending become visible. If then each s tudent drew a dash after the period of the sentence by having their finger act as a pencil on the iPad a feature afforded by the use of the Pdf notes app. Drawing the dash indicated that the sentence made sense and provided a visual reminder or cue tha t students interacted with and comprehended that piece of the text. Then the lead reader continued to read the next sentence out loud If the sentence did not make sense to everyone in the group, students stop ped and engaged in a discussion to figure out where the ir comprehension broke down. Depending on where or why their comprehension broke down, students would apply the same strategies they had been practicing since August to fix up the comprehension (s ee Figure 4 6 ) After students applied one or se veral strategies to the portion of the sentence that was not be ing comprehended, the lead so, then each student would draw a dash at the end of the sentence indicating that the sente nce was comprehended. If not, then students would apply more strategies until it did make sense and they could draw the dash at the end of the sentence. This process continued until an entire paragraph was read At the end of a paragraph, I prompted th The metaphor I used for the students to think about a
77 summary was that it was like a sifter. Put all the words from the paragraph in the sifter and only the most important words and ideas a re going to s t ay in. All the other words will fall through. Using this sifter metaphor, the students and I engaged in a small discussion about the who, what, where, why, and how of the paragraph. Once students seemed to have a solid summary for the para graph, they would write their summary do wn on a n electronic sticky note on the iPad Electronic sticky notes are another feature afforded by the Pdf notes app that even allowed student to choose a color for each sticky note. Students would typically wr ite their sticky note, choose their color, and then place the sticky note beside the paragraph we just read. After students wrote their sticky note, they would read it out loud to the gro up. Figures 4 9 and 4 10 are examples of student work from the Pdf notes app. Figure 4 9 Student Work on The Pdf notes App Indicating Student Dashes at End of Each Sentence
78 Figure 4 10 Student Work on The Pdf notes App Indicating Student Post it Notes
79 Once the students read the entire paragraph and com pleted their summary sticky note we would hold another rock, paper, scissors contest to see who would become the next lead reader and the performance phase routine would begin again This routine was repeated as many times as possible during the 10 minut es allotted for the performance phase of self regulation. After approximately 10 minutes had elapsed, we moved on to the third and final phase of self regulation: Self reflection. Self Reflection p hase Once students completed their forethought and perf ormance phases, they transitioned to the final phase, which is self reflection. The self reflection phase of the self regulated learning cycle is defined as the processing of how the forethought and performance phases went. I actualized this particular p hase of self regulation with my students receiving Tier 3 intervention by having students close the Pdf notes app and return to the ShowMe app where they had written their goal for that day during the forethought phase of instruction S tudents would re ad their goal and then reflect on how they did. As previously stated, t he ShowMe app has a feature where students are able to record and playback their voice while simultaneously viewing the electronic whiteboard which is where their goal was written A fter thinking about their goal and how they performed in reference to that goal students would take turns pressing the record button on their whiteboards where their goal was written and speak into the iPad Most students would start their self reflecti Figure 4 11 is a photograph of a student recording his self reflection.
80 Figure 4 11 Student in Self Reflection Phase (Photo courtesy of author) When studen ts were done recording their self reflection they pressed the record button again to stop recording. S tudents saved their whiteboard with their goal, personalized background, and recorded self reflection on the ShowMe app. Students walked back to the s pace where they had their mini lesson so they can end their rea ding block with share time. During this portion of the reading block all students shared what they completed during autonomous time. I allowed the students who were with me in Tier 3 to brin g their iPads to their share time so they could show their self regulated learning work on the iPad to their peers. Finally, when share time was over, the students who received Tier 3 walked back to the room where we meet for Tier 3, plugged their iPad into the cha rger inside the metal iPad case, and headed to their next part of their day bringing closure to the cycle of self regulation Table 4 4 summarizes the daily Tier 3 se lf regulated learning cycle
81 Table 4 4 Daily Self Regulation Cycle P hase Activity Forethought Phase Process of task analysis (goal setting and strategic planning) Listen to self reflection on goal from previous day Write down goal for current day Performance Phase Efforts that occur to maintain attention and acti on during the upcoming lesson Rock, paper, scissors to decide on lead reader for the paragraph After reading each sentence out loud, lead If the sentence made sense Every student puts a dash at the end of the sentence, in dicating that they comprehended. If the sentence did not make sense Lead reader re reads the sentence, stopping Collaboratively students flexibly use strategies to fix up their comprehension. Each student puts a dash after each smaller portion of the sentence that is comprehended Process is repeated for every sentence until an entire paragraph is read. Each student writes an electronic summary sticky note about the para graph. Rock, paper, scissors is conducted to see who will be the next lead reader for the next paragraph and entire process is repeated. Self reflection Phase The processing of how the forethought and performance phases went Read goal that was written for current day Record a self reflection on the goal and performance for the current day Self Regulated Learning F or Students Receiving Tier 3 Intensive Reading Intervention Lessons Learned As I enacted the self regulated learning cycle with the students I was teaching Tier 3 interventions to from January 2013 through March 2013, I engaged in data coll ection to carefully examine and critically reflect on how these learners were experiencing my
82 teaching of self regulated learning. In particular, m self reflections on their forethought and performance each day reveal important considerations for the teaching of self regulated learning. I present these consideration s ns with relevant data from my study. The lessons learned fall into three categories routine, individualizing learning, and collaboration. Routine Lesson #1: An established routine plays a critical role in the actualization of self regulated learnin g for students receiving Tier 3 intensive instructional supports in reading As I read and reread my entire data set, one of the most prevalent themes that emerged was routine and the important role it played during my Tier 3 instruction. Recall that eve ryday students entered Tier 3 instructional time and followed the same procedure. First during the forethought phase, students would listen to their self reflection from the previous day and write down their goal for the current day using the ShowMe a pp Second, students would transition to the performance phase by working in the Pdf notes app. Students would collaboratively read a sentence at a time and draw a dash after the period if the sentence was comprehended If the sentence did not make sense to everyone in the group, students engaged in a discussion to decide where their comprehension broke down and would flexibly apply a myriad of comprehension strategies. This routine continued for each sentence until an entire paragraph was read. To fini sh comprehending the paragraph, each student would write an electronic sticky note with a summary of the paragraph. Finally students would move to the self reflection phase the t hird phase of the self regulated learning
83 cycle routine. During this phase, students would return to the ShowMe app where they recorded their goal at the beginning of the Tier 3 instructional time. Stu dents would read their goal, think about how they perfo rmed in reference to that goal and record themselves saying their self ref lection about their goal. The established r outine allowed the students to be clear on what wa s expected of them at all times during Tier 3 instruction I did not realize how critical the routine was until one day in January when I slightly altered the da ily routine in an effort to make the forethought phase more meaningful. Normally, s tudents would listen to their reflection from yesterday and then move directly into their performance phase. On that day in January, after they listened to their reflectio n from the previous day I added in a new step I asked the students to write their goal for the current day. After this step students would then transition into their performance phase Straying away from our routine proved difficult for the students. Today I added in a piece to forethought. Students come in and listen to their reflection from yesterday, then they write what they want to work on today (new piece), perform (read), then self reflect based on their forethought (new piece) and their per formance. That was really hard for because it was a shift in routine. Doug W he began crying. Also, Albert just put his head down and Justin had to help him get it done correctly. (TJ 1 8 13) A change in routine is hard when students are trying to do self regulated learning Both Doug and Albert put their heads down when they got to their self reflections and could not understand what/how they needed to reflect on today. (TJ 1 8 13) Doug was so comfortable in our previous routine, that when I added in a new portion to forethought, he was brought to tears. He felt like his work was imperfect because it did not match what he did during the previous routine. Even though the routine was only
84 changed during the forethought phase, when the time came to transition to the self reflection phase, Albert and Doug shut down and could not take part in the task at hand. Be cause the routine changed students felt uncomfortable and this affected their ability to take part in the Tier 3 group. The way the students reacted to the change in routine drew my attention towards the power routine holds. The routine is comforting and provides support to the students. The routine was something they could count on and exp ect. When the routine was slightly altered students were made to feel unsure of the entire self regulation cycle. T here was a second break in routine that occurred which continued to reveal the critical role routine plays in the actualization of self regulated learning This alteration of the routine occurred because of the technology, not because I decided to ch ange our instructional pattern. The Pdf notes app t hat the students were using during their performance phase had an update which changed the sticky notes feature on the app I was not aware of the update so when the students began using the app in the Tier 3 group that day, the sticky notes option had d isappeared. This harkened back to when I altered the forethought routine and the students were almost paralyzed in their ability to continue to track their thinking. The routine to not use a traditional paper and pencil was so ingrained in the students th at they did not know what to do when they lost their ability to write an electronic sticky note. To not let this break in our routine become a roadblock, we simply use d a paper form of a sticky note and continue d with our everyday routine. This incident w as another e xample of the vital role routine played in supporting student self regulated learning. The sticky note portion of our app changed because of an update, which made us lose one of our tools for a portion of group. This made me realize
85 that havi ng tools that the students are familiar with is a key component to self regulated learning. Without our sticky notes, we broke down in the performance phase. It has become such a part of the self regulated cycle breaks down. Familiarity with the process and the tools throughout the process is critical. If the students are expected to spend time figuring out which tools they need to use to be self regulated, the process is not as efficient, not allowing them to reach their goals. (TJ 3 4 13) Observing the negative responses students had to the changes in their routine helped me realize how powerful routine can be for student learning. Becoming comfortable in the routine freed students brains to concentrat e on the tasks at hand making goals, comprehension strategy use, and accurate reflections. The routine helped students not be concerned with unexpected tasks that could possibly be asked of them. Hence, students felt confident in their learning. The ro utine of forethought, performance, and self reflection became such habit; space was made for deeper learning to occur. For example, I reflected in my journal one day by comparing the routine we had established to riding a bicycle and the ways an establis hed routine began to reveal where students needed to go deeper with their learning. s like they are learning that there is a bike there, and they can even get on ating to watch. Today, they kne w we had finished a paragraph, opened a sticky note, and wrote, 23 13) Students were capable of following the routine, but wh en it was time to actually do the tasks required within the routine, they were at a loss Having the routine in place allowed the tougher work to come to the forefront. The real work was not hidden behind the minutiae now This allowed c omprehension str ategy instruction to beco me a true focus during the performance phase
86 Routines, routines, routines are key. Routines help them free up space to wonder if they would be able to think bet ter or worse?? (TJ 1 28 13) Because students had clarity of what was expected during each phase of leaning, there was space for student thinking to transform. Students were not being expected to concentrate on adapting to new tasks every time they attende d the Tier 3 group. Hence, t heir energy could be spent on going deeper into their learning. Today, Doug was on fire! Confidence in the routine frees up brain space to self regulate. (TJ 2 11 13) In sum, establishing a r outine was a critical compon ent in the actualization of the self regulated learning cycle for students receiving Tier 3 instructional supports in reading A break in the routine prompted me to notice how powerful the routine was to the students. Becoming proficient in the routine an d not needing to focus their attention on it allowed the students to concentrate on other strategies needed to comprehend text and be self regulated Al though routine was significant for the students, it is possible that engaging in the same instructional routines every day could become monotonous. In order for this to not become an issue for the students, I built in time for students to individualize and personalize their self regulated learning cycles. Individualizing Learning Lesson # 2: Individ ualizing the self regulated learning c ycle supports students feel ings of ownership of lear ning personalizes instruction, and enhances student motivation. As I read and reread my entire data set, the second theme that emerged was the importance of individ ualizing learning within the self regulated learning cycle. E veryday during Tier 3 instruction, students were given opportunities to individualize their learning in many different ways and this played an important role in each phase of the self
87 regulated learning cycle: forethought, pe rformance, and self reflection. In the next section of this chapter, I summarize the ways learning was individualized within each phase and describe what happened as a result of this personalization. Forethought phase Dai ly, students were able to write a n individualized goal during the forethought phase. Allowing students to each have individual goals gave them the power to decide what they preferred to focus on for each day. I did not have the group copy down goals that I created or have pre selected goals that our entire group would focus on for the day. Each goal was student created and each student had the freedom to focus on whatever he/she chos e. Having the freedom to craft their own goal revealed a gap in student Students did not know what to write for their goal s Since goals were directly connected to what students wanted to do during their performance phase, the struggle to write a goal revealed that students did not fully understand what they ne eded to do to comprehend text during the ir performance phase. e the behaviors make them/help them be good readers. ( TJ 1 28 13) Students were not proficient in writing their goal s because they had not fully internalized the comprehension strategies we had worked on since August. Students were not truly aware of the strategies good readers use to comprehend text and thi s was impacting their self regulated learning. Really prompting them to think about what they want to do to be the best readers they can be proved to be interesting. They are still not aware/conscious of what good readers do. I think this plays in to their ability (or lack of) self regulated learning self
88 regulated then how can they complete this cycle to comprehend the text? (TJ 1 22 13) Students had not reached a level of awareness of knowing which strategies were most useful for comprehension, which made it difficult for them to articulate a daily goal. Students were writing goals that were very broad. him be more specific about what work he needs to do. (TJ 1 28 13) strategies they could use during their performance phase even though they had applied com prehension strategies to comprehend text since August Being able to devise a goal about strategy use was different than simply applying the strategy within text. Observing the students struggle writing the ir individual goals helped me also realize the i mportance of metacognition of strategy use Students ected! The strategies have to become part of their routine and part of their default. (TJ 1 22 13) I needed to continue to help students be come aware of the st rategies they were applying while they were comprehending text during the performance phase in order for them to be proficient in making goals during the forethought phase. I needed to focus on individually coaching students more during the forethought phase to ensure that each student goal was able to be clearly conne cted to their performance ph ase So, this leads me to think that we need to spend more time in coaching on forethought and helping them then become conscious of their performance and how that relates to their forethought. (TJ 1 28 13) As time went on and students became more comf ortabl e writing their individualized goals while simultaneously becoming aware of their strategy use, their
89 goals started to typically fa ll into two categories. They would write a goal focused on behavior. I will be good today. When some one is talking I will be quiet. (D SWG 2 21 13) Katherine or John. I met my goal for getting three sticky notes. So today I was awesome. Peace out. (D SWR 3 4 13) Or they would write a goal focused on a learnin g strategy. I will be a good reader by rea ding carefully and slow ( D SWG 1 14 13) The fact that goals started to focus on learning strategies was feedback to me that students were learning how to be more metacognitive while comprehending text. Students were becoming aware of the strategies good readers use d when their comprehension broke down. In turn, students began writing explicit goals about strategy use Without giving students the freedom to individualize their goals, I may not have been able to watch their awareness of comprehension strategies transform or know that students were not as metacognitive as I had previously thought S elf regulated learning was personalized in another way during the forethought phase during students goal setting Daily s tudents wrote their goal s on a whiteboard on the ShowMe app. I allowed each student to personalize the background of their whiteboard and also write their goal with different colors Students would choose pictures from the Internet or take a pic ture with the iPad camera to personalize their backgrounds I became concerned with the amount of time students were taking to personalize the ir backgrounds and the possible distraction it was causing
90 I thi nk letting them make their ShowMe personal wi th a picture is motivating but it may be taking their attention away from the real purpose, which is to write a meaningful goal. (TJ 2 14 13) I did not want Tier 3 instructional time to be wasted on looking for pictures on an iPad or deciding which color to write with instead of focusing on flexibly applying comprehension strategies or self regulated learning. B ut I did see how allowing the students to personalize their backgrounds motivated them and how excited they were to display their personality I n stead of removing this aspect of personalization because it began taking up time during the forethought phase, I decided to capitalize on this opportunity of engagement Hence, I bega n timing the forethought phase, providing a boundary on how long student s could spend personalizing their backgrounds Directly after listening to their self reflection from the previous day, I would put two minutes on a timer and students would then personalize their backgrounds and write their goal for the day. These two m inutes gave the students time to choose a background for their ShowMe enjoy writing their goal with whatever color they chose and have the freedom to person alize their forethought phase. Although I was concerned with these two minutes at first, it soon became clear that this was an effective way to begin group because it was a motivating task and allow ed the students to truly make the goals thei r ow n and feel ownership over their learning Having the students write individualized goals and personalize the whiteboard background where their goal was written enhanced student motivation and helped students have freedom in their learning This level of engagement laid the foundation for a smooth transition to the next phase of the self regulated learning cy cle.
91 Performance phase As s tudents shifted from the forethought phase to the performance phase, individualization of learning continued During the p erformance phase after the lead reader read each sentence out loud while the other students f ol lowed alon g on their iPads the lead reader each student answer this question provided an opportunity for comprehension instruction to be individualized S tudent s had to decide if t he sentence made sense to them which put each student in control of his/her own learni ng. Students could check in with themselves on if they understood the text and decide what action they needed to take if they did not comprehend. It became imperative that a safe climate exist ed in Tier 3 in order for students to be able to honestly admit when they did not comprehend the text that was j ust read. about if the sentence makes sense. (TJ 2 5 13) A t this p articular moment during the performance phase individualized learning was critical. Students needed to be honest if the sentence made sense and i n order to do th is, they needed to be aware of whether the y comprehend the sentence. In addition, t hey also needed to be honest and not try to simply avoid doing work. It would be then students would not need to do any follow up wo rk to comprehend the sentence. This particular individualized learning moment forced students to decide if they wanted to truly learn how to comprehend text or just dodge the work. Once students understood every sentence in the paragraph, they wrote a summary of the paragraph on an electronic sticky note. Students were giv en the
92 freedom to chose a color for each electronic sticky not e that was written I coached each student during the writing of his or her sticky note. I asked probing questions that focused on the who, what, where, when, and why of the paragraph. Asking these questions seemed to narrow their focus and help students systematically digest what they read in order to turn their thinking into the writing of a summary sticky note. The w riting of the sticky note was another moment where student learning was in dividualized W hen students had to change their perspective from comprehending each sentence to think ing abo ut the paragraph as a whole, had to shift. They had to take a broader look at what they just read rather than just lo oking at each sentence This shift in thinking was diffic ult for the students and it became clear that they wer e not proficient in writing a summary. Realizing that I need to be more direct with their summaries. Shocked that ake a summary. (TJ 1 15 13) Because the stud ents struggled so much with shifting their thinking in order to write a summary, consistent individual coaching and questioning became essential They are still struggling with their summary sticky note at t he end of every through it every time. (TJ 2 5 13) The shifting of student thinking from applying comprehension strategies in order to understand a sentence to producing words on wh at was just comprehend ed proved to be a challenging task. Providing this opportunity for each student to individually write a sticky not e that summarized the paragraph was a critical time for students to rec eive individualized instruction and for me to unco ver the places each learner receiving Tier 3 instruction needed additional support
93 Self reflection phase The final way students individualized occurred during the self reflection phase of the daily self regulation cycle. Students would re turn to the ShowMe app where they had written their goal at the beginning of group during the forethought phase. The ShowMe app has a feature where students are able to record and playback their voice while simultaneously viewing the whiteboard where th e goal was written. In turn, students would take turns recording their reflections about their goals by speaking into their iPad Each self reflection was an opportunity for studen ts to have ownership over their learning, individualizing each students daily self regulation cycle. Unlike student goals, student self reflections began as specific statements about strategy use. It seemed that students were more proficient with self reflecting on the strategies they applied than they were with setting a goa l about strategy use. Early on, student self reflections displayed student conscious ness of the strategies t hey applied to comprehend text. splitted it up and it made more sense and it r eally did. And today I had like five sticky notes and mostly I read slowly. (D SWR 1 14 13) Students were able to be quite specific about what they did to support their comprehension without having me coach them on how to self reflect Ok, I was a goo d reader today because I met my goal because I searched ( D SWR 1 23 13) I think students were able to be more proficient with in the self reflection phase rather than their forethought and performance phases. In the forethought and performance phases students had to become conscious of the strategies they could
94 apply, decipher which strategies they were going to apply and then apply t hose strategies to comp rehend text. B y the time students reached the self reflection phase they simply needed to be able to state what had occurred. This seemed to be straightforward for the students and their individual self reflections started to become multifaceted Stu dents reflections began going beyond simply stating what strategies they used that day The ir self reflections mentioned surpassing their goals and also referencing being role model students. Today I was a good reader because I made two sticky notes goal. I hope this inspires some people to do their best, making sticky notes, SWR 1 24 13) Students were reaching a level of awareness where they were able to notice when they exceeded their goals. They were also starting to show pride in their work because they were thinking of themselves as inspiring other students to do their best work. Allowing students to individualize their self reflections revealed the power and de pth behind self regulated learning. Even when students did not meet their goal they were still able to describe what occurred during group and notice that success can still be attained when a goal is not met. SWR 1 22 13) In a typical situation where a student did not meet his/her goal, they would not have the space to be able to art iculate what they actually did do. They would simply just have to report that a goal was not met. P roviding an opportunity for individualized self
95 reflection, students are able to find achievement even when they did not meet their goal s Individualized s elf reflections also provided a space for students to articulate their level of motivation. And I had like six sticky notes today. I want some more reading. Like feed me more r eading. (D SWR 3 5 13) Observing students self reflect on their performance towards their goal and watching them become so engaged confirmed for me that the individualization of the self regulated learning motivation. In s um, individualizing portions of the phase s of the self regulated learning cycle gs of ownership of learning, personalizes instruction, and enriches student motivation. Students feel control of the individual daily goals they write and are motivated by how they personalize their whiteboard backgroun ds during the forethought phase. Students receive individualized instruction throughout their comprehension strategy us e during the performance phase. Finally, s tudents feel ownership ov er their individual self reflections. Although self regulated learning cycles are personalized and they are working as individual s, collaboration is an essential component for students as they engage in self regulated learning as well Colla boration Lesson # 3: Self regulated learning can be enhanced through collaboration. As I read and reread my entire data set, the third theme that emerged was collaboration and the important role it play ed intensive i nstructional supports in reading ability to become self regulated learners. Recall that daily during the performance phase each student was working within the
96 same routine and reading the same text while the lead reader read each sentence or portions of t sentence made sense to them. Collaborative work occurred when a member of the group did not comprehend t he sentence because t he enti re group would collaboratively apply strategies to aid the comprehension. One day during the performance phase, when a student realized that he did not comprehend a word in the social studies text we were reading, the student used a strategy to support his individual comprehension. The use of this strategy prompted the other students to use the same strategy to support their individual comprehension. This helped me begi n to realize that collaboration could play a role in self regulated learning. Self regulation can be collaborative (or supported through collaboration). When we came to the word Algonquin what it mean t (yay for being metacognitive enough to notice that th know w hat it meant), Jacob wrote the word down on a whiteboard in the middle of the table so he could look it up in Google This prompted everyone to look up the word and use Jacob Jacob basically prompted everyone to clarify a word. (TJ 1 13 13) Because students were each reading the same text, learning in the same routine, and working collaboratively in a small group when a student chose a strategy to support his/her ic e. Collaborative work during the performance phase in order for students to enhance their comprehension was evident in student self reflections. Students were even referencing the specific strategies they used while collaborating with their peers in t heir self reflection recordings. Today John and me John to tell you wh at (D SWR 1 7 13)
97 Because I started to see the p ower of student collaboration within self regulated learning, I decided to host a in February. The students receiving Tier 3 cho se one friend in the 4 /5 learning community to come to our Tier 3 group for the day. I spoke with the other teachers in the learning community prior to this day to ensure that is was acceptable for these other students to be with our group. My goal for having the students receiving Tier 3 bring other students to group was to enhance the student m otivation for the students receiving Tier 3. I saw how much they enjoyed working with their peers and I wanted them to feel reinforcement from peers beyond the Tier 3 group. The students receiving Tier 3 shared their work on the iPad with their peer the y had brought. Today I let the students bring a friend to group. They showed their partners what we do in our r eading group with the iPad They showed them some of their ShowMe s, showed them ho w they track their thinking in Pdf notes and then ma de a ShowMe with their partner. (TJ 2 8 13) collaboration was solidified in my thoughts now. The students receiving Tier 3 were proud to share their work with their peers and I realized that type of praise and attention was not something that I could give the students. Only their peers had the power to provide them with that reinforcement and I needed to be come more aware of the role collaboration played in self regulated learning It was fascinating seeing the students talk about what we do and how they respond to their peers. I think this day was huge. They felt proud of their work and their group. They felt special. They felt like they truly had something to share and show off. Wondering about this sharing/public natu re of self regulation making T ier 3 something that kids can feel ed by their Doug asked me at 8:00 this morning if he could bring his friend and then he came ready for group 20
98 minutes early. This was a big deal to them. How can I leverage this peer piece more? (TJ 2 8 13) Collaborative interactions became part of my observations on how students were experiencing self regulated learning in Tier 3. In the middle of February, a powerful collaborative moment happened between the students. During the performance phase, a student recognized that he was meeting his goal when he was writing an electronic sticky note. The student verbalized this to the group. Such an awesome day for Doug He made a goal of two sticky notes. Then when he wrote his second sticky, he sa actually noticed when he met it! (TJ 2 19 13) Because the student shared this realization with the group, this prompted another student to want to also meet his goal during this performance phase. Then, when he said that John sa what his goal was and he said to be focused so I asked him if he felt like he met it. He said yes. (TJ 2 19 13) Student collaboration and the individual endeavor of self regulated learning overlapped in this si tuation. Because one student reached a level of awareness of how their goals connected to his performance, another student gained that level of awareness as well. Collaboration was the reason students became more conscious of the self regulated learning cycle. It was so huge that Doug was operating during his performance phases with his forethought and self reflection phases in his mind! Huge! So, I possibly learned that it takes time for them to reach that level of metacognition where they can be cons cious of their self (TJ 2 19 13) Once students reached t his new level of awareness there was no turning back. The next day, students continued to be aware of their go als during their performance phase.
99 John their goals in the forefront of their minds during performance and then during reflection. If they are able to keep their goals in their heads during performance, then their performance is affected positively. (TJ 2 20 13) When the students were able to notice that they were capable of meeting their goal during the performance phase a powerful message was sent to each individual student. They are proving to themselves that they each have the ability to make a goal, which they can achieve. Having this belief in yourself as a learner has the potential to change the w ay you learn. This level of awareness continued and it became a permanent part regulation. One minute after John wrote level of awareness of the goals that is new and fantastic. (TJ 2 25 13) It seemed like the group had entered new territory. We had been working on self regulated learnin g for seven months and after the collaborative moment when one stud ent recognized he was meeting his goal during the performance phase, which prompted other students to also reach that level of awareness, the group began operating on a different level. Self regulation is happening. The kids are aware of their goals dur ing their performance phase and in turn, during their self reflection phase. Both 4 th and 5 th grade are mentioning their goals during performance (reading). Both John and Katherine wanted to write an extra sticky toda y so she could meet her goal. The cy cle is working because they are being productive during performance. (TJ 2 26 13) Because students were now conscious of their goal during their performance phase, they began wanting to go beyond their goal. During performance, Doug wrote one sticky and really cool to see them become conscious/metacognitive. (TJ 2 25 13)
100 Collaboration enhanced self regulated learning through one student and the way his peers emulated his behavior. One student had the ability to spark positive learning gains for the entire group. With this new level of awareness and ability to engage with in the self regulated learning cycle, students began collaborating in new ways. A student was not having a strong day in Tier 3. Instead of me, as the teacher, having to be the primary person to help this student make it through group that day, one of the other students became a peer coach to support him. John was really strugglin g keeping up. He was pretty much just wanting the group to tell him what to write and instead, Katherine John I can help y iPad with her, and went to sit next to him. Then she read him the paragraph again and coached him into writing a summary sticky. It was so cool to watch. (TJ 3 5 13) Students were feeling so confident with their skills that they were able to collaborate with their peers that needed support. I chose to not be silent while this peer coaching oc curred. I praised Katherine (TJ 3 5 13) I felt that providing specific praise during the impromptu coaching session could not only positively impact the coaching but also draw attention to the fact that the coaching was occurring in hoping that the other students may possibly want to replicate this situation in the future. The peer coach ended up not meeting her goal for the day but she did reference her coaching in her self reflection. goal for the day but she did do some amazing work. (TJ 3 5 13)
101 As I reflected on this peer coaching incident, I realized again the important role collaboration plays in support ing self regulated learning. So today, I learned that self regulated learning can have a peer coaching piece during the performance phase. John was very open to Katherine help and Katherine o rg him. This was more powerful than me coaching him because this was his peer. (TJ 3 5 13) Students were able to peer coach because they understood the self regulated learning cycle deep enough to where t hey could rea ch out to a peer and help In sum, collaboration played an important role in the students who received Tier 3 intensive instructional supports ability to become self regulated learners. Collaboration supported their performance phase through the ways they choose their strategies to suppo power of student collaboration became evident. Because of student collaboration, students were able to reach a higher level of awareness of meeting their goals during their performance phase. Finally, when peer coaching occurred between students, it was evident that collaboration was enhancing self regulated learning. Summary and Conclusions In sum, students began self regula ted learning in August 2012 with pencils and paper as their materials in Tier 3. From August 2012 through December of 2013, stu dents focused on becoming proficient with comprehensio n strategies and self reflection on the specific strategies that were used In January 2013, students focused on completing the cycle of self regulated learning daily on iPads The routine of the cycle, the fact that many aspects of the cycle were personalized, and the collaboration that occurred between peers were fundamenta l components of student self regulated learning.
102 As students cycled through the forethought, performance, and self reflection phases, their skills grew to a level where they were confident enough to transfer what they learned outside of the Tier 3 group. The next chapter will focus on how I worked with my students to transfe r their self regulat ed learning to o ther context
103 CHAPTER 5 TRANSFERRING SELF REGULATED LEARNING T O OTHER CONTEXTS Introduction While the previous chapter focused on the context of the study and actualizing self regulated learning for students who received Tier 3 intensive instructional supports in reading t his chapter will focus on how self regulated learning transferred beyond Tier 3 instructional time to autonomous time Recall that autonomous time during the 4/5 reading block is when students apply the strategies they learned from their comprehension strategy mini lesson, guide their own learning, choose where they work best, who they work best with, and work at their own pace. This portion of time requires students to be independent learner s. Hence, there was a focus during Tier 3 instructional time on self regulated learning strategies to support students in becoming independent learners and to help them transfer these strategies to autonomous time. As previously stated as I enacted th e self regulated learning cycle with in Tier 3 from January through March 2013, I engaged in data collection to carefully examine and critically reflect on how these learners were experiencing my te aching of self regulated learning and also how I could support students in transferring their self regulated learning strategies to autonomous time. As I read and re read my journal entries, it became evident that there are important considerations for tr ansferring self regulated learning beyond Tier 3 Following the same format as Chapter 5, in this chapter, I with relevant data from my study. The lessons learned fall into two categories readiness and transfer.
104 Transfer ring Self Regulated Learning Beyond Tier 3 Readiness Lesson #1: Students cannot be expected to transfer the strategies of self regulated learning until they are ingrained in their approach to learning. T his process tak es time and requires persistent and consistent intensive instruction on the part of the teacher along with continuous, relentless reflection on when and how to help learners transfer their self regulated learning strategies to other contexts In order to develop a plan for transferring self regulated learning a fter each Tier 3 instructional time I a nswered two guiding prompts in my journal : What did I learn about self regulation in reading today? What did I learn about how my students might transfer self regulation strategies to other contexts? Through this consistent reflection, I attempted to formulate a plan for transferring self regulated learning outside of Tier 3 to autonomous time. Without writing in my journal, a systematic pl an for transferring self regulated learning would have not occurred I would have focused on the instruction that was provided with in Tier 3 and would not have focus ed on how to help students apply their skills to other contexts. Through my early journal entries it became evident tha t I intuitively knew that I needed to find a way for students to apply what they were learning in Tier 3 to their autonomous t ime but I did not know what steps needed to be taken in order to make this happen. It needs t o go on the radar there. (TJ 1 22 13) Everyday in my journal I wrote regulated learning during autonomous time. I questioned if there was a way students
105 cou ld track their self regulated learning when they were not in Tier 3 and then share their results when they came to Tier 3. I wonder if I had them bring evidence of what they were workin g on during autonomous time to T ier 3, if that could help self regula ted learnin g transfer out of T ier 3. (TJ 1 11 13) I figured having d iscussion s centered on self regulated learning that was occurring ability to transfer self regulated learning strategies t o any context This led me to begin thinking about possibly assigning a specific task to students for them to complet e during their autonomous time. This could help them focus on specific strategy application Wondering if I can give them a specific ta sk to work o n during autonomous time from Ti er 3? (TJ 1 15 13) I n my journal I continued to debate with myself about the best ways to help the students transfer their self r egulated learning strategies and started to even wonder about the role of Tier 3 and if students should even be transferring their strategies to other contexts. I questioned if Tier 3 should stay separate from autonomous time. Can I send them out with something when they go to autonomous time? Should they bring something to T ier said that when they come into T ier 3 the only things that follow them are the content M aybe I just a way to connect things enough. (TJ 1 8 13) Because I was not abl e to quickly develop a plan for transferring self regulated learning I began thinking that Tier 3 should be isolated from Tier 1 and Tier 2. These thoughts were fleeting because I knew that Tier 3 needed to be closely connected to the other tiers. I was simply not able to devise a realistic plan to make this occur yet. T hrough my journal, I also began to question student motivation and if students would be able to transfer their strategies beyond Tier 3 during autonomous time. This
106 led me to the idea o f having the students earn iPad time for transferring their strategies which would provide an extrinsic reinforce r for self regulated learning Wondering if I should let the students earn iPad time if they bring me back evidence of self regulation fro m autonomous time? This could begin the transfer to other contexts? (TJ 2 5 13) I want ed to ensure student success with the transfer of their strategies and I felt like the presentation of a strong reinforcer would increase the chances of students applyin g their strategies during autonomous t ime. But, t he more I thought about that scen ario, the more I steered away from the iPad being an extrinsic reinforcer I wanted the transfer of strategies from Tier 3 to autonomous time to occur because students wer e able to be independent with the applications of their strategies, not because they wanted to earn iPad time. I was willing to wait and see how students did when they transferred their strategies before turning to the plan of the iPad as the reinforcer I continued to grapple with how to help students transfer their strategies to autonomous time and I finally realized why I was not able to devise a plan I did not feel comfortable having students practice their self regulated learning skills outs ide of Tier 3 because they were not able to use their skills independently during Tier 3 time 8 13) I dec ided I needed to focus on strengthening self regulated learning strategies during Tier 3 so when the time came, stude nts would be ready for the ir transfer to autonomous time I continued to reflect daily in my journal about self regulated learning in read ing and how my students might transfer self regulati o n strategies to other contexts and I realized the transfer was not going to be a simple thing This was going to take time
107 Through my journal reflections, I considered the idea that when students are provided time and space to develop their strategies, they are able to reach a new level of indepe ndence in their self regulated learning. So, I possibly learned that it takes time for students to reach a level of metacognition where they can be conscious o f their self taken until Feb. for someone to show this level of self regulated 19 13) Self regulated learning takes time to refine. Students need to be coached on the phases in the cycle before they are ex pected to be able to perform the strategies independently. The students had been working on self regulated learning strategies for reading in Tier 3 since August 2012 and by the end of February 2013, students were starting to show independence and displa y signs that they were possibly ready to transfer their strategies to autonomous time. Specifically, during the performance phase of self regulated learning, students were beginning to become aware of when they met their goal s Such an awesome day for Doug! He made a goal of two sticky notes. a ctually noticed when he met it! It was so huge that Doug was operating during his performance phases with his forethought and self reflection phases in his mind! (TJ 2 19 13) Students had been engaged in self regulated learning for six months before they were independently and consistently able to be conscious of their goal s during their performance phase. But, b ecause students were beginning to operate on more of an independent level transferring their self regulated learning strategies from Tier 3 to autonomous time was becoming more of a reality. Self regulation is happening. The kids are aware of their goals during their performance phase and in turn, during their self reflection phase. Both 4 th
108 and 5 th grade are mentioning their goals during performance (reading). Both John and Katherine wanted to write an extra sticky today so they could meet their goal. The cycle is working bec ause they are being productive during performance. (TJ 2 26 13) Transferring strategies from the Tier 3 group to autonomous time was truly not an option prior to this level of realization within the students. Since students were consistently able to ind ependently apply their self regulated learning strategies within Tier 3, during my journal writing I was able to begin a plan for generalization with concrete steps for students to apply their self regulated learning strategies beyond Tier 3. Initially, I thought about having students show their work from autonomous time during Tier 3. As for transferring your autonomous time work into T self regulated learning (TJ 2 19 13) However, I abandoned this initial idea when I realized that having students bring their work from autonomous time daily would transform Tier 3 into merely becoming a check up on autonomous time. Instead, Tier 3 needed t o maintain its focus of being dedica ted instructional time where students continue to deepen their practice of self regulated learning strategies. I refined and solidified the plan through my journal entries for ways students could transfer their self regulated lea rning to other contexts o ver time I finally decided students needed to bring their work from autonomous time into Tier 3 once a week. Still not helping them transfer this to other contexts. What if I have them bring in their work from autonomous time on Fridays and we look at it to see if there are tracks? (TJ 2 26 13)
109 Using my journal to continually reflect on the transfer of self regulation skills to autonomous time and figure out a plan to do so, I realized that I could use the routine my students were familiar with to he lp make the transfer. I could develop an expanded self regulated learning cycle focused on transferring what they learned within Tier 3 instructional time to autonomous time. Transfer Lesson #2: When students are using self regulated learning strategie s independently and do not require a significant amount of cognitive modeling from the teacher the cycle of self regulated learning can be repurposed and used as the mechanism to guide students in their application of self regulated learning to other cont exts. As stated in the previous lesson, I needed to allow time for the process and provide persistent and consistent intensive instruction to the s tudents until they reached a point where they were i ndependent ly self regulating within our Tier 3 instructio nal time before I began to extend their self re gulated learning strategies beyond Tier 3 to autonomous time Journaling daily helped me realize the importance of time and readiness and also kept the ultimate goal of helping the students transfer what they were learning with me within Tier 3 instruction to other learning situation s where I was not sitting next to them. To achieve this goal, I applied the self regulated learning cycle my students had become so familiar and successful at using within Tier 3 instruction. The following sections of this chapter describe each phase of this new, expanded self regulation cycle, beginning with a reminder of the definition of that phase and how that phase was actualized within Tier 3 instruction itself, followed by the ways I repurposed the phase
110 for this new, expanded version of the self regulation process designed to help my students transfer their ability to self regulate to other contexts. Finally, each section ends with a description of what occurred for my lea rners when we enacted this new application of the self regulated learning cycle. Forethought p hase Recall from Chapter 4 that the forethought phase of self regulation is defined as the process of task analysis, which contains goal setting and strategic pl anning (Zimmerman, 2002). I actualized this particular phase of self regulation with my students receiving Tier 3 instructional supports during Tier 3 instructional time by asking students to revisit their work from the previous day and subsequently creat e a new Students would each take a turn playing their self reflections from the previous day for the entire group to hear. Listening to their self reflection about th eir goal from the previous day intentionally continued and connected the self regulation cycle from day to day. Students then would write their learning goal for the current day on the iPad After writing their goal, students would personalize the backg round of the whiteboard where their goal was written. To repurpose and apply this phase of self regulation to the goal of transferring regulation skills outside of Tier 3 instructional time, students would engage in a foret hought phase at the beginning of the week where they These goals would stay posted on a whiteboard in the room where Tier 3 occurred daily.
111 To begin enacting this new application of the self regulated learning cycle, students engaged in a brainstorming session about the strategies they could use during autonomous time. We collaboratively figured out what strong autonomous time work should look like and made a list. (T J 3 8 13) I created a list on the board capturing what the students said during their brainstorm. Table 5 1 is the list of strategies students generated as their goals for their work for autonomous time. Table 5 1. List of Student Goals for Autonomous Time Student Goals Meaningful Tracks Dashes Evidence of Deep Thinking Pictures Charts and Diagrams Underlining Splitting Words in Parts Students were able to say what strategies they should be applying and what their work from au t onomous time sho uld look like. Watching the students articulate their strategies assured me that they were actually prepared to transfer their strategies. The strategy list served as the goals for student performance during autonomous time and an explicit plan for gener alization Unlike the daily forethought phase that occurred during Tier 3, these goals were established for the entire group, not individuals. Every student would work towards providing evidence of these strategies during autonomous time throughout the w eek. Once students developed the clear list of goals they were energized and ready to take on the challenge of applying their self regulated learning strategies during autonomous time throughout the week T he goals were explicit and the students knew
112 exa ctly how to accomplish them because they had practiced them daily in our Tier 3 group since August Further students felt confident in their strategies and they were motivated to go apply them beyond our group They displayed this confidence by immediat ely starting to prepare for the attainment of their goals. Today the kids took off with how they transfer red self regulation to other contexts! Katherine got a piece of paper and wrote down the things that need ed to be in her autonomous work. I asked he r why she was writing was floored. She was actually ready to transfer to autonomous time! (TJ 3 14 13) This take charge attitude was unchar acteristic of the students. I believe this motivation to apply their strategies indicated that students were truly ready to extend their self regulated learning beyond the Tier 3 group. Students were prepared to transition to th eir performance phase of a week long autono mous time. Performance p hase Recall from Chapter 4 that the performa nce phase of self regulation is characterized by efforts that occur to maintain attention and action during the upcoming lesson (Zimmerman, 2002). I actualized this particular phase of self regulation with my students receiving Tier 3 instructional supports during Tier 3 instructional time by repeating the same lead reader strategy we had used since the beginning of the school year and used the iPad to read and interact with text, rathe r than a paper and pencil. To repurpose and apply this phase of self regulation to the goal of transferring regulation skills outside of Tier 3 instructional time, throughout the week, students would work during autonomous ti me to wards the goals that were set. Throughout the week when students enacted this new application of the self regulated learning cycle, our Tier 3 group continued to meet daily and engage in
113 our normal self regulation cycle routine. In addition, w hen t he students were in autonomous time, the y were engaged in the p erformance phase of their expanded self regulation cycle During autonomous time, students were focusing on the ir performance of the established goals they had created in Tier 3 in the beginni ng of the week. The performance phase of the self regulation cycle that took place during autonomous time was an opportunity for students to highlight the myriad of ways they were able to transfer their strategies beyond Tier 3. The s tudents became really engaged in the performance phase that occurred outside of the Tier 3 group They knew what they were doing was meaningful work because they were conscious they were mee ting their goals. This feeling of being productive was not a feeling the students wer e necessarily accustomed to. The students were thoroughly involved in their self regulated learning and during autonomous time they began consistently interrupting groups I was teaching so they could show me their work. While I was teaching the 5 th grad e group, Doug came in to show me his work from autonomous time because he was so proud of how much he had done. (TJ 3 14 13) Students were aware that they were meeting their goals during autonomous time. They were bursting with pride I wanted to continue to draw attention to the fact that students were meeting their goals so I allowed the mild interruptions to occur. When students would excitedly show me their work I would respond by asking if they felt like they were addressing the goals that were agre ed on. I wanted to praise the students while also reminding them that they needed to have evidence of the goals that were created. Students were so confident in their self regulated learning that they began betting each other on how well they were going to do on Friday when they brought their work
114 back to group. On Fridays students had an opportunity to provide evidence of each goal through their work from autonomous time. Depending on the strength of their evidence, students would receive a smiley fac e, a straight mouth face, or a frown face for each goal. One student made a bet with another student about receiving more smileys. When this bet occurred another student wanted to participate, so the bet expanded to three students. Doug looked at Dante a Dante I want to make a wager. Whoever Dante to shake his hand. When he did that, Albert bet Albert too. (TJ 3 14 13) I was slightly concerned about this competition because I did not want things to get too intense between students B ut when I took time to reflect on my hesitation I realized that having a healthy form of competition emerg e between three of the students over how they were transferring their self regulated learning strategies was actually a positive thing. In turn, I let the bet stand and I became excited to see how things would turn out during the last phase of the expanded self regulated cycle The las t phase was the self reflection phase, which was going to reveal which students met their goals during autonomous time Self Reflection p hase Recall from Chapter 4 that the self reflection phase of self regulation is defined as the processing of how the forethought and performance phases went. I actualized this particular phase of self regulation with my students receiving Tier 3 instructional supports durin g Tier 3 instructional time by having students read their goal and then reflect on how they di d. Students would then take turns pressing the record button on
115 their digital whiteboards where their goal was written and speak their reflection into the iPad To repurpose and apply this phase of self regulation to the goal of transferring newly developed self regulation skills outside of Tier 3 instructional time, at the end of the week, students would bring their work from autonomous back to Tier 3 Students would self reflect on their performance towards each goal that was set at the begi nning of the week by engaging in a protocol where the strength of their evidence was determined collaboratively. Since students had been working all week on transferring their self regulated learning strategies to autonomous time, students were anxious to attend group before its normal start time because they were eager to follow up on their work. Doug and John came to get me 15 minutes before group to see if it was time to begin group yet. Dante even wanted to combine the groups so everyone could see how everyone did. (TJ 3 15 13) Some students even wanted to combine the 4 th and 5 th grade Tier 3 groups to have a bigger audience see their work. This excitement surprised me but also seem to make sense. The students were clear on the strategies they we re generalizing to autonomous time because they had spent a significant amount of time perfecting them in Tier 3. In addition, they knew they were succeeding and they wanted to continue to get reinforcement for their actions. During the self reflect ion phase s tudents engaged in a protocol where each student took turns placing their work from autonomous time in the middle of the table for the rest of the members of the group to observe. There was a chart on the board with each students name and a l ist of the learning goals that were agreed on during the forethought phase during the beginning of the week (Figure 5 1) Each student would
116 take turns being the recorder at t he whiteboard. One student would put their work on the table to display their evidence towards all of the goal s The other students in the group would decide if the evidence was strong evidence, decent evidence, or weak evidence. Once the students in the group agreed on the strength of the evidence, the recorder at the whiteboard would represent the strength of the evidence with a smiley face, a straight mouth face, or a frown face This would be recorded under the name of the student and in the column for the specific goal Figure 5 1 is a photograph of the whiteboard where stu dents track ed the strength of their evid ence towards the learning goals and Table 5 2 summarizes the protocol students engaged in to self reflect on the transfer of their strategies. Figure 5 1. Tracking of Learning Goals Whiteboard (Pho to courtesy of author)
117 Table 5 2. Self Reflection Protocol for Transferring Self Regulated Learning to Autonomous Time Protocol Step Student Behavior Step 1 work from autonomous time in the middle of the table to displa y evidence towards his/her goals. One student is the recorder at the whiteboard. Step 2 The student who put his/her work in the middle of the table ex plains his/her evidence in relation to one of the goal s Step 3 The other students discuss the evide nce that is presented and decide if the evidence is strong evidence, decent evidence, or weak evidence. Step 4 Once a decision about the evidence is reached, the student at the whiteboard represents the strength of the evidence with a smiley face, a str aight face, or a frown face This is written on the whiteboard next to the name of the student who has their work on the table and the specific goal being discussed. Step 5 Steps 2 4 are repeated for each goal. Doug was the first student to put hi s work from autonomous time in the middle of the table. He talked us through his work. We went down the list of goals and asked if he had strong evidence or not. (TJ 3 8 13) The students talk ed each other through their evidence and how it addressed t he goals This meticulous way of self reflecting on each goal supported the students in know ing exactly what they needed to work on during next week autonomous time. xt week so I (TJ 3 8 13) During the self reflections, s ome students tried to add evidence to their work once they started seeing how the protocol was working. Both Justin and Albert tried to add underlining onto their text until I said, 8 13)
118 Students saw that if they did not have evidence of a goal, they would not receive a smiley face. They attempted to boost their evi dence in order to have a stronger self reflection. This made me think it was going to be uncomfort able for some of the students when they did not receive a smiley face for each goal but overall they handled themselves very ca lmly. Although students would reflection when they did not have sufficient evidence, they did not get upse t. I think this is because students fully understood why they got a straight face or a frown face and they felt like they were being treated fairly As t he weeks passed, students continued to engage in the expanded self regulated learning cycle and respond ed positively during the self reflection phase of the expanded self regulated learning cycle Whoa what a day! Students were buzzing! They were so ex cited to share their evidence of autonomous time with the group and see how they did in reference to their goals. (TJ 3 15 13) Students supported each other when it was their turn to share their evidence of their goals. The students cheered each other on 15 13) In addition, when student evidence was on the table, the students even began conversing about the goals themselves. There was a long discuss ion during the protocol about s (TJ 3 15 13) Students reached a point where they were able t o dissect the goals and truly discuss how their evidence needed to reflect the goals. They started wondering if the g oals
119 needed to be altered. Students were attempting to bring work that was not completed order to provide evidence of a goal. Even though this was not acceptable evidence, it showed that students were beginning to understand the goals at a different level since they were able to truly recognize evidence of goals. Justin Katherine, and Doug each ran to go get more evidence. They were trying to share work from a long time ago but it needed to be from this week (which was a good lesson). (TJ 3 15 13) The week would conclude with students completing the self reflection phase of the expanded sel f r egulated learning cycle. On Monday s students would engage in the forethought phase for the expanded self regulated learni ng cycle and collaboratively mak e a new mous time. The cycle would continue and studen ts would actively be transferring their self regulated learning strategies to autonomous time, a context that was beyond Tier 3. Summary and Conclusions In sum, as student s engaged in the self regulated learning cycle within Tier 3, I reflected daily in my journal about the ways students could transfer their strategies to autonomous time. This process took time along with persistent and consistent intensive instruction on the part of the teacher but o nce the strat egies of self regulation became ingraine d regulation cycle was able to be repurposed for students to use as the mechanism to guide them in transferring self regulated learning to autonomous time. S tudents engaged in an expanded version of th e self re gulated learning cycle including a forethought, performance, and self reflection phase while simultaneously continuing to engage in a full cycle of self
120 regulation daily in Tier 3. The next chapter will focus on implications and possible future research.
121 CHAPTER 6 IMPLICATIONS AND FUT URE RESEARCH Introduction The purpose of this study was to understand self regu lated learning as it develops in learners receiving intensive instructional supports within a newly designed 21 st century learning space In t he final chapter of this dissertation a summary of the study is presented including an overview of each chapter in the dissertation and five lessons learned from an analysis of my data Following this summary there is a discussion of the implications f or Tier 3 instructional supports that emerged from looking across all five lessons learned as well as implications for the method of practitioner research. T he chapter concludes with recommendations for future research. Summary and Overview of the Diss ertation Chapter 1 described the current state of education and why there is a call for the redesign of the method s and space for K 12 education. Answering that call is P.K. the 2012 2013 school year. Chapter 1 provided a description of the elementary building because that was the setting within which the study occurred. This chapter also included a discussion on how this particular setting supports a transformation in how students learn an d the role of self regulated learning In addition, Chapter 1 concluded by articulating the significance of this study and the two research questions that guided the study: In what ways do I support the self regulation of learners recei ving Tier 3 intensive instruction within a 21 st century learning space? How do learners receiving Tier 3 intensive instruction experience and use the self regulation strategies I teach ?
122 Chapter 2 focus ed on self regulated learning. A definition of s elf regulated learning was presented and was followed by a review of the literature by surveying studies that encompassed a wide range of related topics such as: metacognition, motivation, reading strategy instruction, learning disabilities, classroom context s, and social influence. In addition, a rationale for the study was provided Overall, Chapter 2 focused on exploring the reasons why self regulated learning is a significant component of the current educational landscape. Chapter 3 centered on the chos en method for the study, which was practitioner research. An in depth discussion on the components of p ractitioner research was provided along with a section on the b ackground of the researcher who conducted the study Chapter 3 concluded with the detail s of data collection and data analysis methods Chapter 4 began with a contextualization of my teaching of self regulated learning by describing the circumstance within which Tier 3 instruction took place Additional background on the s chool and the ways instruction was organized within the new buildin g was shared. To continue to contextualize my teaching, details about the context of th e reading block within which the Tier 3 instruction occurred was included and the ways students are selected for partici pation in Tier 3 instruction was described Following the contextualization o f my teaching of self regulated learning in Tier 3, I describe d the ways I actualized the self regulation cycle The chapter conclude d with three lessons learn ed from analyzing the data that were collected. Chapter 5 described how students engaged in an expanded version of the self regulated learning cycle in order to transfer self regulated learning from Tier 3 to
123 autonomous time, the portion of the reading block where students work independently within the 21 st century learning space by choosing w here they work best, who they work best with, and the pace at which they work. Once students were able to independently use the self regulation strategies during Tier 3, they applied th e familiar phases of self regulated learning to generalize their strategies beyond Tier 3. Students collaboratively set goals for a goals during autonomous time, and finally at the end of each week, st udents brought their work from autonomous time to Tier 3 in order to provide evidence toward s the goals that were agreed on. Chapter 5 concluded with two lessons learned from analyzing the data that were collected. Implications T here were fi ve lessons lea rned across the presentation of my findings in Chapter s 4 and 5 of this study : An established routine plays a critical role in the actualization of self regulated learning for students receiving Tier 3 intensive instructional supports in reading. Individ ualizing the self ownership of learning, personalizes instruction, and enhances student motivation. Self regulated learning can be enhanced through collaboration. Students cannot be expected to transf er the strategies of self regulated learning until they are ingrained in their approach to learning. This process takes time and requires persistent and consistent intensive instruction on the part of the teacher along with continuous, relentless reflecti on on when and how to help learners transfer their self regulated learning strategies to other contexts. When students are using self regulated learning strategies independently and do not require a significant amount of cognitive modeling from the teac her, the cycle of self regulated learning can be repurposed and used as the mechanism to guide students in their application of self regulated learning to other contexts.
124 While each of these lessons serve as important findings in this study, there are seve ral implications of my research that have emerged from looking across these five lessons and the entire data set as a whole. Specifically, as a result of engaging in this study, I offer suggestions for other educators interested in the topic of this study in three areas: Tier 3 instruction, self regulated learning, and practitioner research. Tier 3 Instruction This study focused on Tier 3 instruction, the teaching of self regulated learning as self regulation in other parts of their school day beyond the Tier 3 time that they spent with me. I believe that my students were able to learn and transfer the process of self regulation because I drew their attention to the ways Tier 1, Tier 2, and Ti er 3 instruction were all connecte d. Hoover and Patton (2008) assert that a n effective multi tiered instructional model connects Tier 3 to Tier s 1 and 2 in a seamless and fluid manner When this occurs and teacher s make these links explicit to students learning is enhanced While the literature frequently discusses the importance of connecting multi tiered instruction conceptually, what is much less frequently di scussed in the literature is how to actualize this in practice This study can serve as an example for teachers as they seek to understand the nuances of connecting multi tiered systems of support along with explicitly making connections between their own multi tiered instructional programs Often, teachers may find that they spend time draw in g connections between tiers and discussing instructional supports with each other while plannin g for instruction but then the same explicit connections are never shared with the students. In this study, Tier 3 was connected to Tiers 1 and 2 through the so cial studies content. Students were reading text about colonial times in Tier s 1, 2, and 3. In addition, the t iers were
125 connected through the teaching of the same r eading comprehension strategies. The strategies that were being taught and applied in Tie rs 1 and 2 were the same strategies that were taught and applied in Tier 3. All of these connections were clearly understood by the teachers only. T he only time these connections were explicitly discussed with the students was when Tier 3 was connected t o Tiers 1 and 2 through the repurposing of the expande d self regulated learning cycle. S tudents receiving Tier 3 instruction engaged in the same process of self regulated learning that they experienced in Tier 3 in order to transfer their strategies beyon d Tier 3 to autonomous time a period of the day scheduled at my school where students work independently Teachers might consider continuing to plan for connections between tiers with their co teachers while also deliberately making these connecti ons mor e explicit to students. This will support on why they are engaging in specific task s throughout their instructional block s of time. Furthermore, this study can serve as an example for teachers who are interested in the teaching of self regulated learning strategies to their students. Self Regulated Learning For teachers intere sted in teaching self regulated learning strategies to their students, the literature is clear that p racticing self regulated learning in structured settings independently apply strategies learned in a variety of contexts ( Zimmerman, 2002). This study affirms the importance of structure when first introducing self regulation to students, and addit ionally provides insights into what it takes to put effective structure into place. As a result of this study, we learn that effective structure encompasses routine, individualization, and collaboration. In the present study students enacted and
126 actuali zed the self regulation cycle in a structured setting in Tier 3 through established routines, individualized learning opportunities, and collaboration with one another prior to transferring their strategies to the autonomous time portion of the reading blo ck, which was an unstructured setting. Students had coaching and support in self regulated learning in their structured setting with the goal of being able to use self regulated learning independently in an unstructured setting. Based on the results of th is study when teaching self regulation skills, teachers may wish to heighten their awareness of the necessity of structure through routine, individualization, and collaboration prior to any attempts to transfer self regulation skills to unstructured learn ing time. In this study an important component of my teaching of self regulation that allowed routine, individualization and collaboration to coalesce during structured time and transfer to unstructured time was self reflection. A related finding that em erged from this study is that it can take a significant amount of time for students to establish independent self regulated learning skills. I began teaching self regulation to my students in August, and they were not ready to transfer their self regulati on skills to autonomous time until February. Tier 3 instructional time lasted for fifteen minutes a day. The relatively short during of Tier 3 instructional time likely played a factor in the length of time it took for my students to become self regulate d learners. Recall that I was teaching in a unique school building designed to support individualization of instruction and a large component of the school day was devoted to autonomous time, a place where self regulation would be critical for my student s
127 dependent on their ability to self regulate. Hence, if my students had been able to develop and transfer self regulation skills to other contexts sooner, autonomous time would have become more valuable for their learning. This had led me to question the time spent devoted to Tier 3 instruction in relationship to the time the learners in this study were spending in autonomous time as well as in Tier 1 and Tier 2 instructi on. At certain times in this study, particularly at the beginning of the school year, my students may have benefited from spending additional time with me, learning the skills of self regulation, so they would have been able to internalize and transfer the se skills sooner. Zimmerman (2002) states that: Although schools are organized on the assumption that students will develop increased self regulation of their academic functioning, there is extensive evidence that many students fail to make this vital tra nsition (p. 21). Schools need to organize their instructional blocks so there is ample time and space for students to become proficient and independent in their self regulated learning skills as efficiently as possible. In my school, t eachers might consider looking at the multi tiered system as a whole, the amount of time spent focusing on self regulated learning, and the areas with in the learning community where students can practice their self regulation skil ls. Because of the 21 st century learning design, time and instructional space could possibly become more malleable, focusing mor e on the teaching and learning of self regulation. This is the direction we are headed in the future and I will use the proces s of practitioner inquiry to continually enact and understand changes we make to the ways instructional time is distributed.
128 Practitioner Research As defined in Chapter 3, p practice (Coc hran Smit h & Lytle, 2009; Dana & Yendol Hoppey, 2009) Duri ng this study, I engaged in the method of practitioner research I studied my own practice of teaching self regulated learning to students receiving Tier 3 instruction in reading. In the absence of engag ing in systematic study of my own practice, I do not believe I would have been as effective. Through practitioner inquiry, I came to know my students, as well as myself, much more deeply. One particular data collection strategy that helped me to get to k now my students and myself much more deeply was keeping a journal. Teacher journaling is a popular method of data collection for p ractitioner research ers ( Coc hran Smith & Lytle, 2009), and the process of journaling is suggested in many texts about the pra ctitioner inquiry process. For example, Dana and Yendol Hoppey (2009) write: researcher captures the thinking that occurs in the school and classroom and within his or her own min d is through journaling. Journals provide p. 8 9 ). While many texts about the process of practitioner research (such as the quote above) suggest journaling as one method of data collection, what texts about the practitioner research process often do not do, however, is suggest that teacher researchers highly structure their journaling process. In this study, I established a time that I would write in m y journal daily, which was for ten min utes directly after teaching. Establishing this time ensured that I had dedicated time to methodically reflect on my teaching If I would not have established this time, I would have engaged in writing a journal haphazardly and I would not have collected systematic data. In addition, in my
129 journal I responded to the same two prompts everyday: What did I learn about self regulation in reading today? What did I learn about how my students might transfer self regulation strategies to other contexts? These two prompts directly connected to my research questions and provided focus to my daily reflections. Without these prompts, my journal would have been a tool for reflection but the data within it would have likely been much broader and less helpfu l to me as I analyzed my data over time. Ther efore, practitioner researchers, at the onset of their studies, might consider highly structuring the use of the journal by committing to a regularly scheduled time to write in it and by using consistent prompts that directly connect to their research questions in their reflective journals for data collection. Recommendations for Future Research There are several possible directions for future research based on the findings of this particular study. Future research might consi der other ways to study self regulated learning because it is a concept that can enhance student independence in learning Research might focus on self regulated learning in a variety of subjects and within various grade leve ls. This study focused on 4 th and 5 th graders but i t is possible for younger or older than 4 th and 5 th grade students to engage in self regulated learning Researchers might consider comparing ways different students, within the same grade level, enact the self r egulated learning cycle. This study described self regulated learning within reading but future research could focus on self regulated learning situated within any content area. Based on this study, supporting students in their ability to make accurate g oals prior to completing a task and in turn articulating a self reflection that accurately depicts the performance towards the specific goals are skills that have the potential to transform student learning and require more research.
130 In addition as the us e of the iPad was introduced as a tool used during the self regulation teaching routine, future research might explore the ways technology can serve to support self regulation There is a need for continued research on the role of technology in providing inst ructional supports to learners an d how motivati on and engagement are impacted. As we move more into the 21 st century, it is important to explore how technology reveals new dimensions of learning. Continued research on how the method of practitioner research impacts teacher practice and student learning is needed. This could potentially make the method of practitioner research more visible for teachers, supporting teachers to look within themselves and their students for answers Conclusions In c onclusion, this study sought to understand the enactment of self regulated learning with students receiving Tier 3 instructional supports in reading. This study demonstrated that continuous and systematic teacher self reflection supported an in depth unde rstanding of self regulated learning as a complex cycle with a myriad of facets. In addition, when teachers establish a routine, provide time and space for students to collaborate while enacting individualized self regulated learning cycles, this approach to learning can become engrained in students. When self regulation is to other contexts. Finally, this study showed that students receiving Tier 3 instruction have the potential t o become self regulated learners when provided systematic support. C haracteristic of practitioner research, as this study concludes I feel as though I can answer my research questions but I am also left with more questions. I wonder more about transfe rring self regulated learning strategies outside of Tier 3. I also
131 wonder about the interplay between the three phases in self regulated learning: forethought, performance, and self reflection. I wonder how each phase affects the other phase s and if one phase is more crucial than the others. These wonderings, as well as h elping students become proficient in goal setting and self reflection are areas I plan to delve more into in the future
132 LIST OF REFERENCES Allington, R. & McGill Franzen, A. (2000 ). Looking back, looking forward: A conversation about teaching reading in the 21st century. Reading Research Quarterly, 35 (1), 136 153. Benard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What have we learned San Francisco: WestEd. Chp. 6. Boekaerts M. & Corno L. (20 05). Self regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 54 ( 2), 199 231. Borkowsk i, J., Weyhing, R., & Carr, M. (1988). Effects of attributional retraining on strategy based reading comprehension i n learning disabled students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80 (1), 46 53. Brantlinger, E. (2003). Dividing classes: How the middle class negotiates and rationalizes school advantage. New York: Routledge/Falmer (Ch. 1) Brooks, R. (2007). Underst Creating sustainable, resilient schools. John Wiley & Sons. Buffum, A., Mattos, M., & Weber, C. (2009). Pyramid response to intervention: RTI, professional learning communities, and how to respond wh Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Caro Bruce, C., Flessner, R., Klehr, M., & Zeichner, K.M. (2007). Creating equitable classrooms through action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Collins, A. & Halverson, R. (2009). Reth inking education in the age of technology. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Chorzempa, B. & Lapidus, L. (2009). To find yourself, think for yourself. Teaching exceptional children, 41( 3 ), 54 59. Cochran Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1993). I nside Outside: Teacher research and knowledge New York: Teachers College Press. Cochran Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2009). Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Cochran Smith, M, (2005). No child left behind: 3 years and counting. Journal of Teacher Eduation, 56 (2), 99 103. Corbett, D., Wilson, B., & Williams, B. (2002). Effort and excellence in urban classrooms: Expecting and getting success with all students New York, NY: Tea chers College Press.
133 Dana, N. F. & Yendol Hoppey, D. (2009) research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry, 2 nd Edition Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (2000). Self determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well being. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68 78. doi: 10.1037//0003 066X.55.1.68 Deci, E., Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L. & Ryan, R. (1991). Motivatio n and education: The self determination perspective. Educational Psychologist 26(3&4), 325 346. Dewey, J. (1968). The school and society Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Draves, W. & Coates, J. (2004). Nine shift: Work, life and education in the 21 st century. River Falls, WI: LERN books. Educational Leadership, 61 (8), 6 11. Fielding, R. & Nair, P. (2005 ). The language of school design: Design patterns for 21 st cent ury schools. USA: DesignShare. Francis, D. (2011). Improving a professional learn ing community at one elementary school: An action research study. (Doctoral dissertation). Washington State University, WA Fuchs, D. & Deschler, D., (2007). What we need to know about responsiveness to Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 22, 129 136. Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it. Readin g Research Quarterly, 41 (1), 93 99. Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Grogran, M., Donaldson, J., & Simmons, J. (2007, May 19). Disrupting the status quo: The action research dissertation as a transformative strategy. Retrieved from Connexions website: http://cnx.org/content/m14529/latest/ Guthrie, J. & Springer, M. (2004) A nation at risk revis i ted: Did wrong reasoning result in right results? At what cost? Peabody Journal of Educa tion, (79) 1, 7 35. Harris, K., Graham, S., & Mason, L. (2006). Improving the writing, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: Effects of self regulated strategy development with and without peer support. American Educational Research Journal, 43 (2), 295 340.
13 4 Harriman, N. (2005). Perceptions of students and educators on the impacts of no child Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24 (1), 64 69. Herr, K. & Anderson, G. (2005). The action res earch dissertation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Hoover, J. & Patton, J. (2008). The role of special educators in a multitiered instructional system. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43 (4), 195 202. Irvine, J. (2003). Educating tea chers for diversity. NY: TC Press. (pp. 1 14). Katz, I. & Assor, A. (2007). When choice motivates and when it does not. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 429 442. doi: 10.1007/s106648 006 9027y Lincoln, YS. & Guba, EG. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Marzano, R. (2007). The art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A guide to design and implementation San Fransisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Montalbano, J. (2001). Utilizing ac tion research to enhance self efficacy beliefs of elementary school students. (Doctoral dissertation). Hofstra University, NY. Noddings, N. (2007). When School Reform Goes Wrong New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Paris, S., Cross, D. & Lipson, M. ( 1984). Informed strategies for learning: A program to Journal of Educational Psychology, 76 (6), 1239 1252. Paris, G. & Paris, A. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self regulated lea rning. Educational Psychologist, 36 (2), 89 101. Plano Clark, J & Creswell, V. (2010). Understanding Research. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. regulated learning and contexts that support it. Jour nal of Educational Psychology, 90 (4), 715 729.
135 Pogrow, S. "Systematically using powerful learning environments to accelerate the learning of disadvantaged students in grades 4 8." In instructional design theories and models Vol. II: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Charles Reigluth (ed) Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999, pp. 319 340. Pressley, M., El Dinary, P., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92 (5), 513 555. Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. (1990). Self regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educational Psychologist, 25 (1), 19 33. Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2006). Classroo m assessment for student learning: Doing it right using it well. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service. Stiggins, R. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87 (4), 324 328. Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. ( 2009). 21 st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap. New York, NY: Basic Books. Wagner, T., Compton, R. A. (2012). Creating innovators: the making of young pe ople who will change the world. 1st Scribner hardcover ed. New York: Scribner. Wenglinsky, H. (2005). Using Technology Wisely: The Keys To Success In Schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Wolkenhauer, R. (2013).Creating space for teacher learning: Inquiring into professional development in a newly designed 21st century community learning center. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self regulation: A soci al cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Ziedner (Eds.), Handbook of s elf regulation (pp. 13 39). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Achieving self regulation: The trial and triumph of adolescence. In F. Rajares, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motivation of adolescents (Vol. 2, pp. 1 27). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
136 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Ashley Pennypacker Hill graduated from the University of Fl orida in 2003 with her s in e leme ntary e ducation an d with pecial e ducation. Ashley began her teaching career at P.K. Yonge Developmental Research School as a third grade teacher. She continued learning from her students by teaching fifth grade, second grade, special education for third through fifth grade and many summers of summer school Ashley then took a year to be a teacher on special assignment and conducted the administrative duties for the elementary d ivision of her school. After having her first baby, Ashley returned as an el ementary curriculum coordinator, which is her current position at P.K. Yonge. Her research interests are personalized learning for students and teachers inclusion, and differentiated instruction. Ashley resides in her hometown, Gainesville, Florida, wit h her husband and their son Avery.