Action Research
I had heard much about the 20% time movement in education the last few years, but I didn’t really grasp why we as educators were doing it? Was it because 20% had worked in the business world with corporations and we should try to replicate that with the next generation of workers? Was it because 20% time was a new trend in education, and latching onto new trends shows progress? Was it because we educators love to throw around the latest buzzwords (agency, voice, choice, personalized, etc) and this would be a good opportunity to walk our latest talk?
I'm sure there were many reasons teachers and schools around the world were adopting 20% time, but I didn’t seem to have a good reason at the beginning of the year. I only had questions. I didn’t really know why I should try it, other than it sounded cool. I had an intuitive hunch why it could be beneficial, but nothing more than logical prediction. So, I decided to embark on a year-long journey to see if I could find my reason for 20% time. Over the 2015-16 academic year at NIST International School, I conducted some low-brow, action-research on 20% time with my class of Year 5 students.
I'm sure there were many reasons teachers and schools around the world were adopting 20% time, but I didn’t seem to have a good reason at the beginning of the year. I only had questions. I didn’t really know why I should try it, other than it sounded cool. I had an intuitive hunch why it could be beneficial, but nothing more than logical prediction. So, I decided to embark on a year-long journey to see if I could find my reason for 20% time. Over the 2015-16 academic year at NIST International School, I conducted some low-brow, action-research on 20% time with my class of Year 5 students.
I began the year, and the action-research, with a question:
How does self-directed learning affect student attitudes and dispositions?
How does self-directed learning affect student attitudes and dispositions?
I wondered how self-directed learning affected the internal dispositions of students--those that are often left unmeasured in education, but highly valued because they are the driving force behind realizing one’s potential in life. For this action research, I chose to focus on the following attitudes and dispositions: agency, collaboration, communication, confidence, creativity, curiosity, dependency, empowerment, engagement, enthusiasm, goal-orientation, growth-mindset, independence, innovation, motivation, organization, problem-solving, reflectiveness, resilience, resourcefulness and self-image.
Although there are many names for 20% time in education, I entitled this iteration "self-directed learning" because that was what I hoped it would achieve--to create more self-directed learners. In order to measure to what degree there was a correlative effect in the research, I divided the data into two sets: quantitative and qualitative.
Quantitative:
At three different points in the year (September, January and May), I had students complete a survey to answer statements about the attitudes and dispositions I was collecting data on. The statements remained the same throughout the year and were collected using a scale of 1-10, where students agreed or disagreed about a particular statement. This allowed me to see both individual and whole-class change over time.
Qualitative:
Also at three different points in the year, I asked students a few questions about their feelings towards self-directed learning and how it may be affecting them as learners. The questions, in order to not bore the students, were slightly different each time. However, their aim was to get at the heart of their beliefs around personalized learning and to justify why it should or should not be part of their education. These data points happened in November, February and May.
Although there are many names for 20% time in education, I entitled this iteration "self-directed learning" because that was what I hoped it would achieve--to create more self-directed learners. In order to measure to what degree there was a correlative effect in the research, I divided the data into two sets: quantitative and qualitative.
Quantitative:
At three different points in the year (September, January and May), I had students complete a survey to answer statements about the attitudes and dispositions I was collecting data on. The statements remained the same throughout the year and were collected using a scale of 1-10, where students agreed or disagreed about a particular statement. This allowed me to see both individual and whole-class change over time.
Qualitative:
Also at three different points in the year, I asked students a few questions about their feelings towards self-directed learning and how it may be affecting them as learners. The questions, in order to not bore the students, were slightly different each time. However, their aim was to get at the heart of their beliefs around personalized learning and to justify why it should or should not be part of their education. These data points happened in November, February and May.
