The Ontario Action Researcher
 

ACTION RESEARCH: An Interim Report

Anne Cooper

Personal Profile

I am currently a teacher in Special Education at the secondary level. I am teaching Geography, History and Mathematics to Grade 9 students. I also have a group of senior Co-op students on work placements. My grade nine students have all been identified as learning disabled (LD). Diagnoses of my students include Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Language Processing Disorders, and Behavior Disorders. I have chosen to do action research on my own instructional practice, which I will undertake during the normal course of my daily teaching duties.

Model Of Teaching Currently In Use

Joyce and Weil (1996) express that the core of the teaching process is the arrangement of environments within which the students can interact and study how to learn. A model of teaching is therefore a description of a learning environment. The models studied by Joyce and Weil (1996) constitute a basic repertoire for schooling, and share in common the major philosophical and psychological orientations toward teaching and learning. Joyce and Weil (1996) have grouped their models of teaching into four families that share orientations toward human beings and how they learn. These are the social family, the information-processing family, the personal family, and the behavioral systems family. In a very real sense, increasing aptitude to learn is one of the fundamental purposes of these models.

The model that I am currently using belongs to the Information Processing Family. Advanced Organizers have been to date the key reason for my success in certain areas of my practice. The Orientation to this particular model as explained by Joyce and Weil (1996) includes the following:

  1. To address the goal of learning subject matter.
  2. To address the organization of the subject matter.
  3. To address how the mind processes new information.
  4. To address how teachers apply these ideas about curriculum and learning.

Given the kinds of learning disabilities experienced by my students, I felt that the Advanced Organizer was a very effective approach to teaching these students because acquisition, organization and retention of knowledge could only be accomplished if a very structured format was in place. Further to the Orientation of this model, the Assumptions on which the model is based support incremental learning and include the following:

  1. The presentation of concepts and principles.
  2. The active construction of knowledge by students.
  3. The strengthening of the students’ cognitive structures.
  4. Existing cognitive structure on which new material is acquired and retained.
    The actual Syntax or the process of the advanced organizer model, which is currently used in my classroom, is as follows:

Phase One:

  1. Present organizer.
  2. Identify defining attributes.
  3. Give examples or illustrations where appropriate.
  4. Provide context for material.
  5. Repeat prompt awareness of learners’ relevant knowledge and experience.

Phase Two:

  1. Present material.
  2. Make logical order of learning material explicit.
  3. Link material to advanced organizer.

Phase Three:

  1. Use the principles of integrative reconciliation, which build on what they already know.
  2. Elicit critical approach to subject matter.
  3. Clarify ideas.
  4. Apply ideas actively, (such as by testing them).

It is clearly evident how this syntax, with a very deliberate and incremental approach to teaching would benefit the learning disabled. These students experience only short-term retention, and lessons taught a day earlier must necessarily be revisited on a daily basis. The concepts and principles serve as an anchor for the new learning, and reinforce the knowledge and skills acquired. With careful planning and implementation, special needs students are better able to assimilate knowledge, and better able to cope.

The Social System of this model then can be described as follows:

  1. Highly structured.
  2. Requires active collaboration between teachers and learners.

The relationship that exists between my students and myself within such a model is one that is prompted by the students’ need for clarification. Discussions around the main principles and concepts of the lesson, which I presented in the Advanced Organizer, always serve to consolidate the learning, linking the old knowledge with the new. It is not just an inventory of subject matter by any means. My students gain new insights into general aspects of life and society, because the overview of the lessons are anchored in “real” life connections which the students are encouraged to make by linking the material back to the organizer.

The principles of reaction are therefore based on the following:

  1. Negotiation of meaning.
  2. Responsively connecting organizer and material.

In special education, as in any other area of teaching, having a good Support System within which to operate is crucial to successful implementation of a program. This model is structured in such a way that the level of support is based on two elements as follows:

  1. Data-rich learning environment.
  2. Conceptually well organized materials.

Now that I have outlined my current model of teaching, I would like to highlight the reasons for attempting change in my classroom, and subsequently, the model that I have chosen to best support the desired effects. Based on some of the andragogical principles of Knowles (1978), I would like to address the learning climate in my classroom to enhance the self-concept of my students as independent learners. Students in special education appreciate that they are in constant need of “extra help” that regular students do not need. As such the psychological climate should be one that encourages these students to feel accepted, respected, and supported. There should exist a spirit of mutuality between my students and myself as joint inquirers, in which there is freedom of expression, especially in regards to the learning difficulties encountered on a daily basis.

In order to help my special needs students improve their self-concept, and build self-esteem in an environment where success is incremental and short-term, I have decided to use a model that belongs to the personal family. The Non-Directive model will be implemented one day a week (Friday) for the balance of the school year. I will be able to track the same students. The students who are presently with me for geography, will be back with me next semester for history, and those who are with me for math, will be back for Geography (23 students: 8 female/ 15 male).

Subject matter will not be the focus of my action research, but will be the vehicle through which I implement the new model of teaching. This is a conscious decision on my part, because I am going to have each student create what Knowles (1978) calls a “diagnosis of need”. These students are well aware of their learning disability, however the problem they have is handling themselves in learning situations. I recognize that the self-concept of self-directivity is in direct conflict with the traditional practice of the teacher telling the students what they need to do. However, having the students go through the process of constructing a profile of characteristics required to achieve a given ideal model of performance will be the building blocks of self-management. It is in this area that these students feel the most frustration in their learning environment. If they are able to identify why they are off-task, then they can take responsibility for managing their behavior, thus enhancing self-esteem and self-concept.

Taking the andragogical approach to this action research, I have decided to view this in the light of treating the learning-teaching transaction as the mutual responsibility of learner and teacher. I will assist the students in a new role as “procedural technician and resource person” (Knowles, 1978). The students will track occurrences of off-task behaviors, and strategize solutions they feel are appropriate to ameliorate the situation. If they identify the program as part of the problem, then we will assess it in terms of educational strengths and weaknesses, as it facilitates or inhibits the learning experiences. The students will at the end of every month conduct a “re-diagnosis of needs”, which may result in further modification of proposed strategies.

Research Methodology

Because of the fluidity and possible unpredictability of the non-directive model, the syntax will be implemented as follows:

Phase One:

  1. Encourage free expression of feelings in initial conference.

Phase Two:

  1. Encourage students to define the problem they are having.
  2. Teacher accepts and clarifies the feelings expressed.

Phase Three:

  1. Student discusses the problem in given situations.
  2. Teacher supports the student.

Phase Four:

  1. Student plans initial decision-making.
  2. Teacher clarifies possible decisions.

Phase Five:

  1. Student gains further insight and develops more positive actions.
  2. Student initiates positive actions.
  3. Teacher is supportive.

This model is structured in such a way as to facilitate the identification of the students’ inability to self-manage, explore problems, develop insight, plan and implement decision-making. This model requires that I assume a new teaching role. The social system that promotes this model requires that I become a facilitator and reflective practitioner. The student is primarily responsible for maintaining the interaction process or control (Joyce & Weil, 1996). The rewards in this non-directive approach are more subtle and intrinsic, which according to Joyce & Weil (1996) include acceptance, understanding and empathy from the teacher. In terms of the students’ personal growth, I am hoping that they will gain a new self-knowledge, and self-reliance not often experienced in special education.

The principles of reaction, unlike and in contrast to the advanced organizer, are based on non-directive responses. Helping the students take responsibility for their action in my classroom, while facilitating clear objectives for achieving success, is the greatest challenge in implementing this model. It is probably apparent at this point why I planned to use this strategy only once a week, until the students and I are comfortable in our new roles.

The support system for this model is dependent upon the feelings expressed at the initial conference. The arrangements that may follow will call for privacy, removal from certain activities to give the students sufficient time to adequately explore the problems they are having in class, either with learning or behaving or both. If the need arises, resources outside the classroom will be sought to facilitate completion of the desired outcomes.

Tentative Findings

The most challenging aspect of this action research is changing currently held philosophy, to reflect the notion that special education students can understand and cope with their own lives. Belief in the students’ ability to self-direct, and personally identifying with the students’ thoughts and feelings, will be crucial to effectiveness in this new role. Relinquishing classroom control, a key to success to date, will be challenging. However, the expectation is that these students will be better able to manage their own learning experiences.

It is interesting to note that this model is thought of as being entirely nurturant in character, dependent for effects on experiencing the non-directive environment rather than carrying content and skills through specifically designed activity (Joyce & Weil, 1996). As it was further noted by Joyce and Weil (1996), the student activities are not prescribed, but are determined by the learners as they interact with other learners and me. “the non-directive environment depends largely on its nurturant effects, with the instructional effects dependent on its success in nuturing more effective self-development”. (Joyce and Weil, 1996)

Since I have started using this non-directive model, life in my classroom has not been easy. My students are having some trouble adjusting to a new role. They have always been “led” through an organized set of outcomes. The lack of self-control has on some occasions led to their removal from our classroom at my request. Usually the student has time to re-group, and having spent one or two periods in the “special room” with the vice principal, returns to class with some type of resolve to enhance behavior and performance.

In this new model the students will decide how best to deal with the problem. So far, not one student has suggested the usual visit to the department head or vice principal. Students have a unique way of dealing with their immediate problem. Some choose to stay in class and not work in partners or a group. Removing themselves from the group activities seems to work. Some students have taken a walk to the library or cafeteria for a self-imposed “time-out”. The process of having the students record their incidences of off-task behavior, is having a good effect on curbing repeat occurrences. They also record the solution that they used in the given situation, and therefore are able to track which solution worked and which ones did not.

I really want to stick it out because above all, I do believe that learning is an internal process controlled by the learner and engages their whole being. Knowles (1978) noted that included in this process, are intellectual, emotional and psychological functions. He was further recorded as saying “individuals are motivated to learning to the extent that they feel a need to learn and perceive a personal goal that learning will help to achieve”. In this action research, I am hoping that this non-directive model will facilitate the students learning how to self-manage, but more importantly, that they perceive that self-managing will result in successful learning.

Personal experiences with the implementation process of this new model will be recorded in a journal. I have been tempted on one occasion to just resort to the advanced organizer, but the students are really keen on this new challenge. They have shared a few personal details with me that they would not have under more structured circumstances. This in itself is the beginning of a different type of relationship between us. Like many adults my students have expressed the perspective of immediacy of application toward their learning. They have at times engaged in learning in response to some pressures of their current life circumstances given their individual disabilities.

Having the support of my department head and the parents of my students will serve to strengthen the support system of this model. Parents want to help their learning disabled children become independent and self-sufficient. They want them to become productive citizens. By offering them a learning environment that fosters these qualities, we reconfirm our commitment as educators. In summation I will outline the process in place to date, and will update you on the results at the end of the school year. The process has been outlined in Joyce and Weil (1996) as the non-directive model of teaching, and supported by Knowles (1978) as the andragogical process as follows:

  1. The establishment of a climate conducive to free expression of feelings.
  2. The creation of an organizational structure for participative planning.
  3. The diagnosis of needs for learning how to self-manage.
  4. Defining the problem in a given situation and clarifying initial feelings.
  5. Develop insight into problems with teacher non-judgmental support.
  6. Formulating decisions to be exercised.
  7. Application of the remedial actions.
  8. The re-diagnosis of needs.

Joyce and Weil (1996) conclude the objectives in the non-directive model as including “affective development, growth of student self-concept, and student determination of learning needs”. The method of instruction is directed toward student flexibility in learning, and self-management. I am looking forward to making a contribution to my students’ success, and in general to special education. Through the use of practices inherent in the andragogical model, students will have many opportunities to become increasingly self-directed, and motivated by internal incentives. When not dependent on external incentives, learning becomes a rewarding life-long experience that enriches our very existence.