EDD/581 Action Research Proposal Denise Matsuno March 9, 2015 Alain Dupiton

1. Action Research Proposal EDD/581 Action Research ProposalDenise MatsunoMarch 9, 2015Alain Dupiton

2. Problem Statement Problem Statement • The problem is instructors do not engage employees during online learning. Employee dissatisfaction is a result of the instructor’s inability to identify and apply different learning strategies appropriately during online education. Upon narrowing the types of instructional strategies to implement during online learning, an intervention to provide differential instructional learning education will be executed to develop online instructors professionally. Action Research Proposal PowerPoint. (2010)

3. Problem Description Problem Description • This study will target why instructors must use multiple instructional strategies to increase student motivation and engagement during online education. • Employees are not engaged during online education because instructors do not know how to implement differential instruction online to meet the various student needs. • Students who are not motivated by the instructor will not commit to learning, and not be on the job training ready if they do not have a desire to learn the topic. • Students do not know how to discover their autonomy, or other students autonomy when working in collaborative team work. • Students are reluctant to initiate communication because they need and want quick responses and meaningful feedback. • Students Level 1 surveys indicate that they do not feel engaged by the program. Action Research Proposal

4. Purpose of the Project Purpose of the Project • The purpose of this project is to educate instructors with skills to identify learning needs, how to apply differential instructional strategies, and successfully engage new hire students when attending the New Hire Mortgage Servicing Certification online program. • Creating awareness to discover learning needs. • Apply Differential Learning Strategies. • Increase student job knowledge, skills, and OJT readiness. PowerPoint. (2010) • Increasing instructor-student engagement will increase employee knowledge and satisfaction of the learning experience. Action Research Proposal

5. Writer’s Role PowerPoint. (2010) Writer’s Role • My rationale for selecting action research is to address the problem that instructors are not proficient in differential instructional strategy. Also, I am an instructor, and a stakeholder who wishes to grow my professional career. • My organization reduces training dollars by delivering over 80% of all training programs online. Differential Instruction Learning (DIL) education is not an area of focus today, because of the tremendous cost savings and quick turn around time that online training benefits. My goal is to bring attention to the need to build an instructor development program to effectively identify and engage students learning needs. • As an AVP, Instructor II at Bank of America, improving the learner’s experience is the number one learning objective for the 2015 Global Learning Organization commitments.. Action Research Proposal

6. Section Two: Problem Documentation • Problem Documentation • Literature Review Action Research Proposal

7. Problem Documentation Problem Documentation • The problem is instructors must practice differential learning methods because it affects student engagement and desire to learn. • Instructors must build social constructs, apply differential learning techniques, and provide effective feedback during online instruction to motivate students to learn. • Two 10-item surveys will collect instructional feedback from the students and instructors to determine the effectiveness of the differential strategies. • The survey data will track trends for differential learning approaches that correlate with learning satisfaction. • Students will be sent a 10 question survey immediately after completion of the five-week online learning program. • Instructors will be requested to complete a 10 question survey to provide supportive feedback regarding what type of instructional strategies were implemented. Also, instructors must specify if the strategies results were effective or ineffective. Action Research Proposal

8. Instructor and Student Surveys Action Research Proposal

9. Literature Review Concentration Action Research Proposal

10. Action Research Proposal

11. Action Research Proposal

12. Action Research Proposal

13. Action Research Proposal

14. Section 3: Solution Strategy • Action Goal • Selected Solutions • Calendar Plan PowerPoint. (2010) Action Research Proposal

15. Student-Instructor Influence Action Research Proposal

16. Action Goal Action Goal • The goal is to provide professional development to online instructors. • The goal of the intervention is to increase the instructors differential learning effectiveness of online teaching by implementing engagement strategies. A three-prong intervention will be applied to meet the goal, which includes student-instructor influence awareness training, differential instruction lesson planning, and presentation practice. • Learning Managers will observe and meet with the instructor weekly to provide support and progress feedback. Action Research Proposal

17. Selected Solutions Selected Solutions • Instructors will attend courses to build business acumen of the subject matter, methods of differential learning, lesson planning, collaboration, and technology techniques. • Instructors will attend four; four-hour VILT professional development classes beginning in July. • Instructors will take the New Hire Certification Assessment at the initial introduction meeting (Appendix – F) to measure business acumen. PowerPoint. (2010) Action Research Proposal

18. Selected Solutions (Continued) Selected Solutions Sessions: • Session 1 - Build business acumen from the incorrect answers from the assessment (Appendix-F) and retest instructors (Appendix F). Provide a high overview of what differential learning is and how it will increase student engagement and motivation. • Session 2 – Student-Instructor Awareness Training • Instructors will develop how to identify warning signs of learning needs in the online classroom , and create an Excel reporting tool to observe and evaluate each student progress. • Session 3 - Differential Instructional Leaning (DIL) Activity Planning • Instructors will learn how to apply and create the appropriate instructional activities based on educational needs. • Session 4 – Differential Learning Presentation, Observation, and Feedback • The instructor will apply knowledge gained from session three to develop one collaborative DIL activity to present and receive feedback. • The Instructor will practice presentation with colleagues to model DIL collaborative activities, gain hands-on practice and experience student-instructor awareness. • Instructors will provide and receive observation evaluations from peers. Action Research Proposal

19. Selected Solutions (Continued) Selected Solutions • Instructors will Continued to design and execute (2) collaborative DIL activities for all new hire certification sessions. • Instructors will update the Excel reporting tool to keep weekly record of benchmark test scores, journal of student progress, and collaborative works. • Continued instructor professional development. • Learning Managers (LM) will meet with the instructor two-hours per week. LM is required to review a live performance or WebEx recording of the instructor DIL facilitation. • Learning Managers (LM) will complete the weekly Instructor Observation Review form (Appendix I). The LM will present the evaluation during the instructor one-on-one professional development meeting. • The LM will present positive and constructive feedback regarding the review of the following: • Creation of the lesson plan. • Execution and delivery of the DIL activity. • Provide additional resources, guidance, and support to revise. Action Research Proposal

20. DIL Collaboration Elements in Learning Teams Action Research Proposal

21. Selected Solutions (Continued) Selected Solutions • Benchmark test employees in September, October, and November to obtain learning gap data. • Use benchmark testing data to reveal opportunity to set up tutoring with students showing learning gaps and modification of DIL. Action Research Proposal

22. Selected Solutions (Continued) Selected Solutions • Administer New Hire Certification Final to all new hire employees at end of program. • Pull employee transcripts for final grades. • Analyze scores for student mortgage fundamental proficiency, and improvement opportunities to modify DIL techniques. • Send out employee Level 1 training surveys and instructor reflective surveys. • Instructor and LM will conclude an end of training review commence for two-hours during Week Five of the new hire certification program. • Instructor and LM will report the review of L1 results, instructor survey feedback, benchmark assessments, New Hire Certification Final scores, observation review forms, employee artifacts, and instructor DIL lesson plans. Integrate collaboration and technology to drive DIL activities. • Provide frequent feedback, knowledge checks, and technology engagement to assist students who disengage online. Action Research Proposal

23. Calendar Plan Calendar Plan The operational calendar plan will organize how the action research will originate, measure, and monitor the instructor differential professional development and facilitation. The calendar will detail the selected solutions covering a timespan of six months. The calendar will allow collection of data on a weekly, and end of program results. The timeframe will collect research for three Mortgage New Hire Certification classes to commence in August, October, and November. Action Research Proposal

24. Action Research Proposal

25. Calendar Plan Action Research Proposal

26. Calendar Plan Action Research Proposal

27. Calendar Plan Action Research Proposal

28. Section 4: Outcomes and Evaluation Action Research Proposal

29. Expected Outcomes Expected Outcomes • New Hire mortgage employees will demonstrate knowledge of basic mortgage fundamentals to build skills for On the Job Training (OJT) readiness. Specifically, the employee will be knowledgeable in five critical areas of mortgage servicing to prove proficiency in mortgage terminology, loan types, loan documents, customer loan characteristics, mortgage wheel, and origination process. • Instructors will attend professional development training to learn how to apply differential learning instruction (DIL) strategies. Upon completion, the instructor will increase DIL strategy awareness and knowledge to increase online learning engagement. • Instructors will demonstrate competence to detect employee learning needs to execute DIL strategies appropriately. Action Research Proposal

30. Measurement of Outcomes Measurement of Outcomes • The Reporting Tool will monitor, collect data, and house artifacts to support qualitative and quantitative data of instructors and students. • Indirect measuring methods (qualitative). • Collection of Instructor DIL lesson plans • Appendix A – DIL Learning Plan • Appendix B – DIL Checklist • Appendix C – KuDo’s Template • Collection of Instructor DIL Activity Method Design • Appendix D – Choice Board - General Reading • Appendix E – Tic Tac Toe Menu • Student and Instructor Survey data coding collection • Appendix G – Survey Codes • Student and Instructor observations, reviews, evaluations, and field notes • Appendix H – Reporting Tool (Instructor tab, Appendix I - Instructor Observation Review Form, and Week 1-5 tabs) Action Research Proposal

31. Measurement of Outcomes – (Continued) Measurement of Outcomes • The Reporting Tool will monitor, collect data, and house artifacts to support qualitative and quantitative data of instructors and students. • Direct measuring methods (quantitative). • Benchmark testing and final exam will measure DIL engagement effectiveness • Appendix H – Reporting Tool will monitor action research data to include: spreadsheet tabs, charts, graphs, artifacts, and field notes. • Attendance tab – Coding and line graph • Assessment tab – Collection of benchmark/final test scores, class average, bar chart, and scatterplot graph • Instructor Tab – Instructor artifacts Appendix A-E, Learning Manager review evaluation, instructor feedback. Action Research Proposal

32. Measurement of Outcomes –(Continued) Measurement of Outcomes • The Reporting Tool will monitor student and instructor progress, collect assessment scores, and save artifacts to establish qualitative and quantitative research. • Qualitative • Appendix H – reporting tool spreadsheet tabs, graphs, charts, and artifacts • Attendance tab • Assessments tab • Appendix F – Final Exam • Measure knowledge readiness for OJT • 80% or higher passing score Action Research Proposal

33. Analysis of Results Analysis Findings: • Reporting Tool Observation, Evaluation Records, and Artifacts • Student and Instructor Surveys • Benchmark Assessments and Final Certification Targeted Audience: • Learning Managers • Instructors • Employees PowerPoint. (2010) Action Research Proposal

34. Analysis of Results Analysis of Results • The Reporting Tool will act as a weekly progress report, to house student artifacts, observations and evaluations. • The reporting tool will track and monitor the progress of the students. • Assessment tab reports weekly assessments and Final Examination scores. • Assessment tracking will increase engagement and permit instructor awareness for any learning need to modify the DIL strategy. • The Week 1 – Week 5 tabs will keep track of the instructors awareness to monitor the individual learning needs of each student. The tool will special code specifically the students learning style, strengths, weakness, instructor strategies tried, participation, allow for comments for providing extra care for the student. • A separate Attendance tab will monitor and special code for absences, approved vacation, and tardiness. • Artifacts to support student learning success and challenges are save in the instructor tab to be discussed during the instructor weekly development. Action Research Proposal

35. Analysis of Results- (Continued) Analysis of Results • The Reporting Tool will act as a weekly progress report, to house instructor artifacts, observations and evaluations. • Week 1-5 tabs must be complete prior to the instructor two-hour development meeting with the Learning Manager (LM). • The Instructor tab must also be complete to have attach DIL lesson supporting artifacts, student progress work, classroom observation checklist, instructor and student surveys. • The instructor must complete the LM Observation immediately after receiving feedback. Action Research Proposal

36. Analysis of Results – (Continued) Sharing Reporting Data • Reporting Information and Sharing • The instructor will email the reporting tool to the researcher after the completion of the LM observation data is complete. • A weekly copy of the reporting tool is sent to LM for monitoring of future development of the instructor. • The Weekly 1-5 tab information will update weekly classroom performance to the LM and researcher. • The researcher will determine the fidelity of the instructor from the data in the reporting tool. • Action Research Presentation • Research presentation and findings will be shared with stakeholders . • Learning Management will sign off recommendation to approve research project and share with Global Learning Organization Leadership. Action Research Proposal

37. Conclusion Action Research - Differential Instruction Learning (DIL) • Action research will support instructor DIL professional development increases student online engagement by practice of DIL awareness, methods, and monitoring, to create positive educational experiences for employees. • Students will become proficient in their knowledge of mortgage fundamentals and will successfully pass the Mortgage New Hire Certification program with an 80% or higher score. • Knowledgeable employees result in on-the-job training readiness creating higher customer satisfaction. • The instructor will increase DIL knowledge and awareness to identify individual learning needs. • Instructors will gain the competence to successfully execute DIL strategy correctly. Action Research Proposal

38. References • Bridge Mohan, C. (2012). Interactional challenges of online community college learners (Order No. 3548932). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1282649069). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1282649069?accountid=458 • Chen, C. C., Wu, J., Yang, S. C., & Hsin-Yi Tsou. (2008). Importance of diversified leadership roles in improving team effectiveness in a virtual collaboration learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(1) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1287035518?accountid=35812 • Center for Public Education. (2014). Teacher Quality and Student Achievement. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/Ref_Research_Q_consider/ • Edwards, M., Perry, B., & Janzen, K. (2011). The making of an exemplary online educator. Distance Education, 32(1), 101-118. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/873031887?accountid=458 • Eneau, J., & Develotte, C. (2012). Working together online to enhance learner autonomy: Analysis of learners' perceptions of their online learning experience. ReCALL : The Journal of EUROCALL, 24(1), 3-19. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0958344011000267 • Grinnell, L., Sauers, A., Appunn, F., & Mack, L. (2012). Virtual teams in higher education: The light and dark side. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (Online), 9(1), 65. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1418716105?accountid=35812 •  Goldsmith, L. (2014). Digital feedback: An integral part of the online classroom. Distance Learning, 11(2), 33-40. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1549917627?accountid=458 Action Research Proposal

39. References (Continued) • Hsiung, C. (2010). Identification of dysfunctional cooperative learning teams based on students' academic achievement. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 45-54. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/217950480?accountid=35812 • Jacobs, P. (2014). Engaging students in online courses. Research in Higher Education Journal, 26, 1-9. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1637636685?accountid=458 • Liu, Y. C., & Burn, J. M. (2007). Improving the performance of online learning teams - A discourse analysis. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(3), 369-379. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/200164469?accountid=35812 • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Action Research clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Change Ahead sign clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Comic Strip clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Got Purpose? clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [LEARN Sign clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Online Learner clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Positive Results Figure clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Reporting clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Solutions clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Strategy Button clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft • PowerPoint (Office 2010) [Writer clip art image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Action Research Proposal

40. References (Continued) • Staddon, E., & Standish, P. (n.d.). Improving the student experience. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46(4), 631-650. • The New Teacher Project. (2015, March 1). Teacher tool box. Retrieved from TNTP: http://tntp.org/teacher-talent-toolbox/view/observation-and-feedback • Waight, C. L., & Stewart, B. L. (2005). Valuing the adult learner in e-learning: Part one - a conceptual model for corporate settings. Journal of Workplace Learning, 17(5), 337-345. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/198423992?accountid=35812 • Walker, A. J. (1996). Cooperative learning in the college classroom. Family Relations, 45(3), 327. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213935608?accountid=35812 • Walker, A., Recker, M., Ye, L., Robertshaw, M. B., Sellers, L., & Leary, H. (2012). Comparing technology-related teacher professional development designs: A multilevel study of teacher and student impacts. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 60(3), 421-444. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9243-8 • Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2007). Predictors for student success in an online course. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,10(2) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1287035946?accountid=458 Action Research Proposal

41. Appendix Glossary Appendix A Differential Learning Plan Template District, S. A. (2014, September 29). Differential Instruction Templates. Retrieved from James Madison Elementary School: http://www.sheboygan.k12.wi.us/madison/DIDocuments.htm Appendix B Differential Learning Lesson Plan Checklist Template District, S. A. (2014, September 29). Differential Instruction Templates. Retrieved from James Madison Elementary School: http://www.sheboygan.k12.wi.us/madison/DIDocuments.htm Action Research Proposal

42. Appendix Glossary Appendix C Differential Learning KuDo’s Template District, S. A. (2014, September 29). Differential Instruction Templates. Retrieved from James Madison Elementary School: http://www.sheboygan.k12.wi.us/madison/DIDocuments.htm Appendix D Differential Learning Choice Board – General Reading Template District, S. A. (2014, September 29). Differential Instruction Templates. Retrieved from James Madison Elementary School: http://www.sheboygan.k12.wi.us/madison/DIDocuments.htm Action Research Proposal

43. Appendix Glossary Appendix E Differential Learning Tic-Tac-Toe Menu Template District, S. A. (2014, September 29). Differential Instruction Templates. Retrieved from James Madison Elementary School: http://www.sheboygan.k12.wi.us/madison/DIDocuments.htm Action Research Proposal

44. Appendix Glossary Appendix F Mortgage New Hire Certification Final and Answer Key Matsuno, D. K. (2015, March 1). Mortgage New Hire Certification Final and Answer Key. Retrieved from original author artifact. Action Research Proposal

45. Appendix Glossary Appendix G Student and Instructor Survey Coding Matsuno, D. K. (2015, March 1). Student and instructor survey coding. Retrieved from original author artifact. Action Research Proposal

46. Appendix Glossary Appendix H Reporting Tool Matsuno, D. K. (2015, March 1). Reporting tool. Retrieved from original author artifact. Action Research Proposal

47. Appendix Glossary Appendix I Instructor Observation Review Form The New Teacher Project. (2015, March 1). Teacher tool box. Retrieved from TNTP: http://tntp.org/teacher-talent- toolbox/view/observation-and-feedback Action Research Proposal

48. Appendix A Action Research Proposal

49. Appendix B Action Research Proposal

50. Appendix C KuDo’s Template What do you want your students to KNOW, UNDERSTAND, BE ABLE TO DO? Action Research Proposal