Potential Next Steps:
1. A broader audience to increase motivation.
Creating a broader context for students to showcase their work isn’t a new concept. School science fairs are a prime example of this. In the case of both implementations, the goal was to present for both the class and the teacher. During our second phase however, some of my students presented their process of work to visiting middle school students and because they had been planning to do this as a group during the week they increased their engagement and attention to creating something worth showing in public. Their group, which included two of my most struggling students, presented a wonderful final project and were very proud they had brought what they were doing to an audience. In the next phase, I would like to try and offer a forum outside of the class, possibly parents, other history classes, or even other school’s history classes to help increase motivation.
2. Out of classroom experiences of collaborative (local history) work to bring context to the history and process they are learning. .
One of the things that I have noticed is that whenever possible students have tried to highlight a connection for what they are studying to something that they know. During the process of phase one and two, students would often discuss, or included in work, a connection they had to the time we were studying. During a class on World War I, a student volunteered a story of her family having served and come back with ‘souvenirs’ that they had displayed. This took us into a discussion of our local history. I believe that students would benefit from our using as many local histories as possible when learning about our U.S. history. Connecting the past to the present in a contextual way leads to very rich and varied understanding of not only the history itself but also how to study history in general.
3. Changing roles as a way of avoiding student specialization in ability.
I specifically gave the role of editor to individuals of the class that I knew to work at a higher and more productive level. These were students that, when in a group, would often try to take on the burden of brining the group's work up to an acceptable standard by sheer ability and work ethic. For the group projects in phase two, students were allowed to discuss and agree to their various positions. This amounted to students taking on the positions they felt more comfortable with. The implementation I envisioned had been based on this, and I was counting on students working on the whole, as a group, thereby shoring up their weaknesses and demonstrating their strengths. While I felt like this went well, I believe that a next step would be in pushing the students to begin to take on roles and skills they don’t feel as strong in with others, who demonstrate ability, being their structured support. Specifically positioning students to take on a new role, for a project would allow them to begin to test their new skills while still having peer support
1. A broader audience to increase motivation.
Creating a broader context for students to showcase their work isn’t a new concept. School science fairs are a prime example of this. In the case of both implementations, the goal was to present for both the class and the teacher. During our second phase however, some of my students presented their process of work to visiting middle school students and because they had been planning to do this as a group during the week they increased their engagement and attention to creating something worth showing in public. Their group, which included two of my most struggling students, presented a wonderful final project and were very proud they had brought what they were doing to an audience. In the next phase, I would like to try and offer a forum outside of the class, possibly parents, other history classes, or even other school’s history classes to help increase motivation.
2. Out of classroom experiences of collaborative (local history) work to bring context to the history and process they are learning. .
One of the things that I have noticed is that whenever possible students have tried to highlight a connection for what they are studying to something that they know. During the process of phase one and two, students would often discuss, or included in work, a connection they had to the time we were studying. During a class on World War I, a student volunteered a story of her family having served and come back with ‘souvenirs’ that they had displayed. This took us into a discussion of our local history. I believe that students would benefit from our using as many local histories as possible when learning about our U.S. history. Connecting the past to the present in a contextual way leads to very rich and varied understanding of not only the history itself but also how to study history in general.
3. Changing roles as a way of avoiding student specialization in ability.
I specifically gave the role of editor to individuals of the class that I knew to work at a higher and more productive level. These were students that, when in a group, would often try to take on the burden of brining the group's work up to an acceptable standard by sheer ability and work ethic. For the group projects in phase two, students were allowed to discuss and agree to their various positions. This amounted to students taking on the positions they felt more comfortable with. The implementation I envisioned had been based on this, and I was counting on students working on the whole, as a group, thereby shoring up their weaknesses and demonstrating their strengths. While I felt like this went well, I believe that a next step would be in pushing the students to begin to take on roles and skills they don’t feel as strong in with others, who demonstrate ability, being their structured support. Specifically positioning students to take on a new role, for a project would allow them to begin to test their new skills while still having peer support