Synthesis & Reflection

After analyzing all my collected artifacts, I am now ready to look across them to find implications for ongoing inquiry, ponder future questions, plan for changes in my practice and beliefs, and consider the next steps for my professional growth.

Big Idea: Overall, I am very satisfied with the design and direction of my inquiry research, as well as the results I obtained. There are three big takeaways on teaching and learning that will continue to shape my beliefs and practice, as I start thinking about my future students and next steps for my own growth as an educator.

Roadmap:

Reflection on Artifacts
Synthesis of Phases
Teaching and Learning
Changes in Beliefs and Practice
Future Questions and Next Steps

Reflection on Artifacts

Key Idea: Because I collected a wide variety of different kinds of artifacts, I feel confident in the comprehensiveness of my data collection and the validity of my results.

During my inquiry research journey, I have collected and analyzed a total of 9 artifacts. When I think about collecting data, I often consider how I might be able to find data regarding my topic in a variety of ways. After all, my students are multidimensional; if I only collect a few kinds of data, I am likely to miss out on important moments and characteristics of my students that may manifest themselves in unique ways.

Therefore, the 9 artifacts I have collected have all been of different types. If I were to classify each artifact on the surface, I would likely use three descriptors – what kind of data the artifact is, what topic the artifact addresses, and whether it informs me about the teaching process (me and my pedagogy) or the learning process (my students and their interactions). Below is a chart showing all of these characteristics:

I believe I am satisfied with my data collection. I have pulled from a wide range of potential data sources in order to capture as full a view of my students as possible. The progression of topics shows that I have been steadily advancing in my view of my inquiry. Finally, I have been able to reflect not only on my own teaching, but also on my students’ reception and application of that teaching.

Synthesis of Phases

Key Idea: Not only was every phase of my research plan crucial to my inquiry, but every individual artifact provided important information that contributed directly to both the phase it resided in and the overall progression of my thesis.

As outlined in my artifact collection plan, my research has been split into several phases. In the pre-phase, I wanted to gather initial data that would help me to analyze my students’ needs. Artifact 1 is part of the pre-phase, since the hard data from the school helped me to get an initial look into my students’ various characteristics and potential needs. The pre-phase served to ground my inquiry, since I needed to first analyze my students in some way before I could figure out how I wanted to design the rest of my research.

In Phase 1, I wanted to see what it would look like for me to create autonomy supports in the classroom without regard to differentiation. Artifacts 2 and 3 reside in this phase. Artifact 2 shows me students’ own opinions regarding their ability to be autonomous learners, appliers, and creators of knowledge, after experiencing a couple weeks of autonomy supports in the classroom. Artifact 3 collected data on the same topic, but instead evaluated my students’ autonomy directly via an informal assessment. Phase 1 of my research was crucial because it served as a baseline to show me the results of autonomy supports without differentiated measures. Without Phase 1, I would be unable to gauge the effects of implementing differentiation in the following phases. Although they collected data on the same topic, Artifacts 2 and 3 were both necessary because I needed to check if there was a large gap between my students’ perceptions of their own autonomy and their actual ability. Such a gap did not appear to exist.

In Phase 2, I began to integrate differentiated supports into my classroom, alongside the autonomy supports. I was specifically looking to see whether those differentiated supports were able to more effectively transition my students to intellectual autonomy. Artifacts 4 and 5 comprise Phase 2. Artifact 4, collected at the start of the phase, helped me get a better sense of what kinds of differentiation my students actually need. After all, my students are unique individuals with their own backgrounds, strengths, and areas of growth, so I needed to find out what kinds of specific supports would help them the most. Artifact 5, collected at the end of the phase, served to show me how that differentiation actually appeared to affect my students’ intellectual autonomy. Phase 2 was crucial because it directly addressed my inquiry question: how differentiation strategies affect student autonomy. Artifact 4 was necessary in deciding on those differentiation strategies, and Artifact 5 helped to answer the question. Artifact 5 was important in another significant way as well. During my analysis of Artifact 5, I realized that differentiation might not be the only important factor in my students’ developing autonomy. There seemed to be another barrier – access. I had initially wanted to use Phase 3 as a way to test out individual-level differentiation. However, Artifact 5 convinced me to pivot my research and instead focus Phase 3 on the concept of access.

In Phase 3, then, I altered my inquiry to focus instead on access. Artifacts 6 and 7 both reside in Phase 3. Artifact 6 helped me to see how incorporating access into my lesson plans could help move my students toward their intellectual autonomy by providing them with the learning resources and materials they need. Artifact 7 used a sample of student work to showcase the combined effect of differentiation and access on student autonomy. Phase 3 was an unanticipated area of research for me, but it was very valuable in helping me to learn about a pathway to autonomy that I had not considered before. Artifact 6 showed me how important it is for my students to have access if they want to become intellectually autonomous, and Artifact 7 showed me that both my autonomy pathways – differentiation and access – could be interwoven to create strong, student-centered supports.

Finally, in my post-phase, I gathered data on my students that summed up my inquiry research by gauging their improvement in and feedback on their intellectual autonomy. Artifacts 8 and 9 were both part of this post-phase. In Artifact 8, I reassessed the level of my students' intellectual autonomy, finding that they vastly improved in all three areas of autonomous learning, application, and creation due to my differentiation and access supports. In Artifact 9, my students showed me that they themselves feel like their intellectual autonomy benefited from the increased differentiation and access they received. The post-phase was a crucial part of my research because it signals that my work seems to have had a very positive effect on my students. It inspires me to continue down this path of student support as I look towards my next years of teaching, and it demonstrates that intellectual autonomy is indeed within reach for high school students. Artifact 8 shows that students are capable of being intellectually autonomous given the right supports, and Artifact 9 shows that they are able to acquire the confidence and comfort they need to pursue such autonomy.

Teaching and Learning

Key Idea: Together, my artifacts point towards three separate themes in teaching and learning; it is important to view your students from multiple angles, it is helpful to weave together multiple strategies to create the strongest support for your students, and it is crucial to be flexible as both a teacher and a learner.

Looking across my artifacts, several themes emerge. The first of these themes is that although there are different ways of gathering data on the same topic, they ultimately result in different kinds of information collected. Artifacts 1 and 4, for example, both focus on the differentiated needs of my students. While Artifact 1 gathers formalized hard data provided by the school and district, Artifact 4 goes straight to the source by directly asking my students. Neither of these artifacts is redundant. Hard data is beneficial because it is objectively unbiased, but it falls short because it fails to include student context and opinions. Soft data, on the other hand, is the opposite. By looking at both kinds of data, I can have a much more complete picture of my students. Similarly, Artifacts 2 and 3 both observed my students’ autonomy level in response to autonomy supports. While Artifact 2 collected the opinions of my students, Artifact 3 actually gauged their ability. Again, neither was redundant. Only by analyzing them both could I see the relationship between my students’ perceptions of themselves and reality. This theme is incredibly valuable for me as a practical researcher. Knowing that I can view the same topic through different lenses and different data helps me to form a more complete picture of my research topic.

The second theme is that there can be multiple pathways to a desired end goal, and they do not have to be mutually exclusive. Artifact 5 shows me that differentiation supports (specifically, differentiation by process) are able to help transition my students to intellectual autonomy because they become more motivated when they have more control over their learning topics and process. However, it also shows me that differentiation may not be sufficient. Artifact 6 looks specifically at access as another potential pathway for achieving student autonomy. Finally, Artifact 7 analyzes my students’ increased level of autonomy through both the differentiation and access lenses to show me that the two pathways are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they work together to provide my students with both the motivation and the ability to be autonomous. This theme is very important in the field of education, as well as in my own growth as a teacher. It shows me that while I might try one method at first to achieve a certain goal (in this case, differentiation), I need to be on the lookout for other potential pathways that also achieve the same goal, so that I can interweave those methods to create an overall stronger pathway. In this case, I reinforced my autonomy supports with both differentiation and access supports, which ultimately resulted in observable increases in my students' intellectual autonomy.

The third and final theme I saw looking across my artifacts was that the process of practitioner research is necessarily fluid. At several points in my inquiry, I needed to shift my research process to accommodate the learnings I had gathered from my already completed artifacts. In most cases, these shifts were relatively small and only affected the details regarding what artifacts I collected and how I analyzed them. For example, Artifact 1 showed me the shortcomings of hard data collection, which inspired me to collect Artifact 4. Artifact 2 showed me the downside of relying solely on student opinions, which led to the gathering of Artifact 3. Artifact 4 gave me insights into my students’ needs that directly shaped the way that I enacted Artifact 5. Other shifts in my inquiry process were more drastic and affected my inquiry question as a whole. For example, Artifact 5 showed me that my topic was missing a key component - access - that I would later explore in Artifact 6. Artifact 7 pulled together my initial and new ideas to form a more cohesive view of my inquiry topic. By using my past research to inform my future research, I am able to adapt to new discoveries regarding my students. My flexibility and adaptability has allowed me to shift my inquiry in a way that is ultimately beneficial to my students; instead of sticking to my own idea of what my students need, I have been able to incorporate my findings to discover what they actually need.

Changes in Beliefs and Practice

Key Idea: My inquiry has given me specific new insights that have changed the way I think about teaching and learning, as well as opportunities to enact different strategies in my practice that have helped me to learn more about my students' abilities and needs.

I feel like I have learned so much throughout this entire process. For one, my beliefs about teaching and learning have definitely advanced. The three themes described above all point towards ways in which I can improve my ability to both teach and grow as a teacher. By observing my students in multiple ways, combining different approaches to figure out the best way to support them, and continuing to evolve my own views on teaching, I can ultimately serve my students in the ways they need most. Although these are not entirely new ideas to me, my inquiry has enabled me to understand just how important they are, which inspires me to put these beliefs into practice moving forward.

Speaking of my teaching practice, my inquiry thesis has given me ample opportunities to try different strategies in the classroom. From autonomy supports to differentiation to access supports, I have been able to try a multitude of methods through which I can support my students. I had heard of many of these methods before, but my inquiry gave me the impetus to put them into action and try them out for myself. I am a better teacher for it, because I have now seen how they interact with my teaching style, my classroom culture, and, most importantly, my students. In the future, I hope to continue exploring a variety of strategies. After all, only by enacting them for each specific group of students can I really figure out what works best for them. It also provides substrate for reflection; by seeing how my students respond to each pedagogical technique or methodology, I can learn more about their own thoughts on knowledge acquisition, application, and creation.

Future Questions and Next Steps

Key Idea: I am excited to continue an ongoing inquiry into my future students' intellectual autonomy, and I hope to work with other educators in the field to collaboratively discover the best possible supports for each individual student.

My thesis has clearly shown me that transitioning students to autonomy is greatly aided by providing them with appropriate differentiation and access, such that they have both the motivation and the resources available to embark on their own intellectual journeys. However, this conclusion does pose additional questions for ongoing inquiry in the future. For example, how can I modify these supports for future classes of students who inevitably differ from my current students? If I end up teaching at another school, how will the culture and resources of that school additionally impact what I enact in the classroom? Furthermore, are differentiation and access sufficient to transition students to intellectual autonomy, or are there other potential factors or pathways that I should also consider? Although it may seem somewhat daunting to have produced several questions after a reasonable attempt to pursue the answer to one, I actually feel quite energized. It's exciting to think that there are so many more ways for me to help my future students grow as independent learners, thinkers, and contributors to society. Simultaneously, I am eager to pursue my own journey of learning as I continue to grow as a teacher and educator.

The natural next step is to think about how I can pursue that personal and professional growth. First and foremost, I want to make sure that I take away the key ideas from my inquiry thesis as I move into the role of a full-time teacher. I am sure that differentiation, access, and most of all, intellectual autonomy will stay at the front of my mind. However, I also want to remember the three themes discussed in depth above, since they are crucial in my journey to improve myself and my pedagogy. In terms of professional growth, I am looking forward to learning about what other educators have to say about both intellectual autonomy and the process of teaching. I plan to begin by speaking with my colleagues at my future school. Hopefully, I will also be able to branch out to other schools, or even professional conferences. Teaching is an ever-evolving practice, and I firmly believe that by pooling our minds and efforts together, we can come up with our best ideas for supporting our students' personal, socioemotional, and intellectual growth.

As a teacher, I am an educator. But I am also a learner. My thesis has shown me how crucial it is to be simultaneously both, and for that I will be eternally grateful.