Big Idea: I have my students revise their initial autonomy assessment so that I can perform a direct before-and-after analysis on their autonomy growth. When I connect their written comments to the literature, I find that I am able to attribute that growth to my differentiation and access supports.
Roadmap:
-
Background
-
Data Analysis
-
Connection to Literature
-
Reflection and Next Steps
References: Betts (2004), Bender (2012), Government of New South Wales (2021)
Background
Key Idea: To better gauge my students' improvement in their intellectual autonomy objectively, I had them revise the initial autonomy assessment that I had given them at the start of my research so that I could directly compare their responses before and after.
​
After analyzing Artifact 7, I was ready to dive into the post-phase, where I wrap up my classroom research by gathering some final data that lets me see if and how my students have improved over the course of my work. I decided that I wanted to somehow gauge if my students had actually increased their intellectual autonomy since the start of my inquiry. To do so, I would have to gather some kind of new data that parallels previous data, such that I could compare the two. Looking back through my artifacts, I came across Artifact 3, the autonomy assessment. As a refresher, in this artifact I asked my students to answer several questions that would reveal their thoughts on their ability to autonomously learn, apply, and create math knowledge. This seemed like the perfect artifact to parallel for my first post-phase artifact.
I decided to return my students’ responses back to them during class, then have them revise their answers, if necessary, based on how they currently felt about their intellectual autonomy. This way, I could directly see how they have or have not grown throughout the past couple months. Without giving them any other feedback or directions, I had them look through their responses and change any of them that were no longer completely reflective of their mindsets. At the end, I also gave them an opportunity to leave a comment on their paper explaining why (or why not) they felt like they were able to achieve intellectual autonomy.
Although I collected responses from everyone in my class, I decided to do a focused analysis on just five students so that I could spend more time reflecting on their responses. I chose five students (2, 5, 7, 11, 15) who, on the initial assessment, demonstrated that they did not feel very comfortable with working autonomously. After all, those are the students who I wanted to help transition to intellectual autonomy.
​
Data Analysis
Key Idea: By directly comparing my students' responses to my autonomy assessment before and after my applied research, I find that my students have progressed significantly in their ability to autonomously learn, apply, and especially create math knowledge.
On the first question regarding autonomous learning, all five students added more pathways through which they could independently discover more information about a topic of interest. Student 11’s revision is especially notable, since they initially wrote that they would do nothing to learn more about math. On the second question regarding autonomous application, four students (2, 7, 11, 15) added additional ways that they could apply math topics that they learn in class. Student 15’s revision is significant because it shows that they came a long way in their understanding of the importance of mathematics and how it can be used in real life.
​
On the third question regarding autonomous creation, all five students actually revised their responses heavily. Initially, they all answered that they could not contribute to the creation of math knowledge, either because they did not feel capable, or because they did not feel like they had anything meaningful to contribute. However, now they all feel like they are able to advance the field of mathematics, either by working with others to better understand mathematics, or by applying existing math concepts to novel situations.
​
Finally, four students added a comment on why they felt like they were able to move towards intellectual autonomy. Student 2 wrote that they felt like I did a good job teaching. Student 5 attributed their success to the emotional support I provided during their learning. Student 11 said that I made mathematics more engaging and fun by linking it to real-world applications that mattered to them. Student 15 wrote that I was able to help them by spending time making sure that they fully understood the material.
​
I am ecstatic to see that all five of these students now feel more comfortable being intellectually autonomous in their learning, application, and creation of mathematical knowledge. In particular, they all moved from feeling unable to contribute to the field of mathematics, to finding specific ways that they could do so. This is especially notable because math often seems daunting to students. They might see themselves as pure learners who are just trying to master the material. But when students are given adequate support in terms of differentiation and resource access, they are able to move beyond that mindset and become active contributors to the math community.
This artifact shows that my students have indeed progressed significantly in their journey towards becoming intellectually autonomous individuals. It shows that teaching does not have to be about dispensing knowledge, but rather providing the appropriate kinds of support so that students can gather and explore knowledge on their own. In the same vein, learning is not just about absorbing information, but also about utilizing that information by applying it to novel circumstances that end up contributing to the knowledge base itself.
Connection to Literature
Key Idea: Drawing on Betts (2004), Bender (2012), and the Government of New South Wales (2021), I connect my students' written comments back to the specific differentiation and access supports that I provided over the course of my inquiry research.
​
I find my students’ final comments especially compelling because they point towards specific types of differentiation and access support that resulted in increased intellectual autonomy. Student 5 attributed their success to emotional support, which Betts (2004) shows us is an important component to differentiation. According to Betts, emotional support is crucial during knowledge exploration, investigation, and production because it helps students learn how to productively struggle with their learning on their own. By giving my students the differentiated support they need, I was able to help them feel more capable and comfortable with pursuing their own education autonomously.
​
Student 11 attributed their success to my ability to connect topics to real-world situations of interest. This connects directly to Bender’s book (2012), which advocates differentiation by engaging student attention. Bender articulates how students can only be motivated to pursue their learning if they feel like the material is actually relevant to them in a real way. By guiding my students towards understanding how they can use math to further their own lives and the lives around them, I was able to leverage their natural curiosities to learn and explore knowledge autonomously.
Finally, Student 15’s comment points towards my access support. By helping this student gain access to a variety of resources, I was able to ensure that they had a full understanding of the material, which provided a foundation for autonomous application and creation. The Government of New South Wales (2021) outlines how important resource availability and access can be for student learning. If students do not feel like they have comprehensive access to the learning materials they need, they will not feel comfortable pursuing their learning on their own. Thus, my access supports were an important factor in my students’ ability to transition to intellectual autonomy.
​
Reflection and Next Steps
Key Idea: This artifact has solidified the relationships between differentiation, access, and intellectual autonomy, and the next step is to gather my students' feedback on their own perceptions of this entire process.
​
This artifact was meaningful to analyze because it gave me deeper insights into my students’ improvement in autonomy and, more significantly, the reasons for that improvement. Through the process of writing, I was able to more deeply explore those reasons, connecting them to the specific supports I provided as well as grounding them in the literature. By doing so, I can be more confident that my differentiation and access supports did indeed aid my students in their transition to intellectual autonomy.
I have now arrived at a solid place in my research. I have applied all of my pedagogical modifications and seen how they have impacted my students’ ability to be autonomous learners. However, before I wrap up my inquiry, I would like to collect one more piece of data. In particular, I want to get my students’ feedback on what they thought of this entire process. Although I have seen their objective improvement through their work in my class, I want to make sure that they subjectively feel the same way. After all, my students are the focus of my classroom, and their opinions matter greatly.