Running Head: BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE

How does Blended Learning and Student Choice affect Student Learning and
Engagement?

Danielle Aguilar
CURR 650- Improving Instruction through Inquiry and Assessment

Table Of Contents
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
2

Chapter 1: Introduction 3

Chapter 2: Literature Review 6

Chapter 3: Methodology 10

Chapter 4: Findings 14

Chapter 5: Discussion 21

Chapter 6: Reflection 24

References 27

Appendix 28

A: Menu Activity 28

B: Egg Drop Project 29

C: Student Attitude Survey Questions 37

D: Focus Student Notes 39

E: Focus Student Work Samples 40 (See supplemental file)

F: Teacher- Researcher Field Notes 40 (See supplemental file)

G: Photos 41
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
3

Chapter 1: Introduction

I am in my sixth year of teaching, and fourth year at my current school in

Redford, MI. The first 2.5 years of my career were spent teaching at a charter school on

the East Side of Detroit, where I taught Biology, Chemistry, and ACT preparatory

courses. Currently, I teach Physical Science to ninth grade students and Psychology to

upperclassmen, while running the district’s SAT preparatory program. I hold a

Bachelor’s of Science from the University of Michigan in Biology and Music, with

teaching endorsements in Science (6-12) and Psychology (6-12). I am currently working

towards my Master’s of Arts in Curriculum and Instructional Leadership at Eastern

Michigan University.

In 2016, I applied and interviewed to become one of the district’s pilot “Next

Generation Classrooms”. When I was selected, I was able to research and order new

furniture to foster collaborative groups, as well as seven Chromebooks to help bring

technology into the classroom. I would like to utilize these new additions to my

classroom room in a way that facilitates student engagement and inquiry.

The high school in this study is bordered by the cities of Detroit, Livonia,

Dearborn Heights, and Farmington. The student body is 66% African American, 1%

Asian, 4% Hispanic/ Latino, 26% White and 3% other, as shown in Figure 1.1. 57% of

the students receive free or reduced lunch. I work primarily in the Freshmen Academy, a

learning community designed to promote academic success and study skills. I teach two

hours of honors Physical Science, one hour of general education Physical Science, and

one hour of co-taught Physical Science, where 10 out of the 22 students on my roster
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
4
have IEPs. This study will focus on the one section of general education Physical Science

students.

Student Demographic
Information
African Amerian
Asian
Hispanic/ Latino
White
Other

Figure 1.1

In the surrounding community, 47% of adults have earned a high school diploma,

31% have earned a college degree, and 22% have not completed high school (as shown in

Figure 1.2). The median income for the city is $46, 383.

Figure 1.2
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
5
Problem Statement

I am noticing that students are apathetic towards science content in ninth grade.

Students are also demonstrating a fear for taking risks in class, and consistently look for

answer confirmation from the teacher. I am interested in investigating how blended

learning and incorporating student choice in assignments will impact student attitude

towards science content, as well as student performance on summative assessments.

Research Question

What effects will blended learning and student choice in assignments have on

student learning and engagement in Physical Science?

Statement of Hypothesis

The prediction of this research is that blended learning and student choice will

have a positive impact on student learning and engagement in Physical Science, as

evidenced in student growth on summative assessments, student survey results, and

teacher observations.
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
6

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Eilks’ (2002) research on using stations for learning provides a strong background

on the impact that station rotations can have in a secondary science classroom. In this

study, stations are organized to allow students to move between them within a given time

frame. Eilks advocates for stations because they allow for student choice and provide the

necessary variety that science classrooms are lacking. Science classes are

characteristically content- heavy and station rotations can facilitate student collaboration

and foster responsibility for learning. A limitation of the article is that it only addresses

Chemistry. My research question will aim to address the effects of cooperative learning

and station rotations on ninth grade Physical Science.

Hicks Pries and Hughes (2012) also investigated the station rotation model for

learning. Eighth grade Physical Science students were used in their study on scientific

vocabulary. Researchers recognized that students need prior knowledge and multiple

forms of representation to learn and retain new vocabulary terms, and many traditional

methods of learning vocabulary are passive and not long- lasting. In their study, students

rotated on a fixed time schedule through a number of stations designed to allow them

time to discover content and vocabulary words. Following the station rotation, a whole-

class discussion was held to determine misconceptions and come to consensus on

vocabulary definitions. For my research question, I will be expanding on this idea to

investigate how stations and student choice will impact student understanding of

Newton’s third law, in comparison to their understanding of Newton’s first and second

law, which were both taught in a traditional manner that utilized direct instruction.
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
7
Jacobs’ (2014) article discusses a district in California that is finding success with

blended learning. Blended learning is the incorporation of online and face- to- face

learning to help personalize instruction for students. Jacobs discusses how station

rotation, when coupled with blended learning, can help students achieve at higher levels.

One thing that the article points out is that implementation of blended learning can be

slow, as it is a learning process for both the teacher and the students. My research

question will aim to determine the effect that an initial implementation of a blended

learning unit will have on student success in ninth grade Physical Science, while keeping

in mind that it will be a learning process for all.

A popular method for implementing blended learning in the classroom is flipped

instruction. Flipped instruction was investigated by Clark (2015), where two Algebra 1

classes were used as test groups. The control group was taught with a traditional method

of instruction, with teacher- led instruction in class and practice problems done outside of

class. The experimental group’s learning was flipped, with instruction occurring online

outside of school, and practice problems completed in class with the teacher present.

This study found that flipped instruction encouraged more active engagement and

increased participation in class. Flipped instruction increased student collaboration and

was observed to have a positive impact on classroom culture. A limitation of the research

is that it focused on math education. My research question will aim to assess the impact

that online notes will have on science education. The notes will not be in video format,

but in an animated presentation format, Prezi.

Hansen and Gonzalez (2014) completed a longitudinal study using data from all

North Carolina public and charter schools’ end of grade tests for grades 5-8. Researchers
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
8
looked specifically at the student survey responses in the tests to see how the integration

of technology in the math classroom affected student achievement on the assessment.

The survey results showed that the incorporation of technology into a math classroom

had a positive correlation with math achievement on the state end of grade tests. My

research question investigates the effect that technology has on student summative

assessment scores, specifically in regards to their posttest and final project.

Akgunduz and Akinoglu (2016) looked at the effect that blended learning and

social media can have on student attitude and self- directed learning skills in a science

classroom. Their study focused on seventh grade science students, of which they divided

into three groups. The first group, the control, was taught only using face- to- face

instruction. The second group was taught using a blended model of instruction, and the

third group was taught with face- to- face instruction, but with social media support.

Blended learning was found to improve the attitude of students toward science courses

and improve students’ self- directed learning skills. Social media did not have a

statistically meaningful impact on student learning, but was observed to have a positive

impact on student attitude and self- guided learning skills. My research questions will

look at how blended learning opportunities and student choice in assignments will impact

student learning and engagement in science ninth grade, rather than seventh grade,

students.

STEM instruction was investigated in a qualitative study done by Denson, Austin,

Stallworth, Hailey and Householder (2015). Their study focused on underrepresented

student populations and sought to determine which elements of a STEM learning

environment were beneficial to students. Through focus group interviews, researchers

BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
9
determined eight themes of STEM education that students identified as beneficial:

informal mentoring, making learning fun, time management, application of math and

science, feelings of accomplishment, building confidence, camaraderie, and exposure to

new opportunities. Through my research, I hope to investigate how to make science

more relevant to students by allowing them choices, while teaching time management

and providing new opportunities to apply what they have learned. I am looking forward

to the impact that learning through a Menu may have on student’s summative assessment

scores at the end of the unit.

BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
10

Chapter 3: Methodology

Participants

31 ninth grade general education students were selected for this study. 20 of the

students are female, and 11 of the students are male. 8 students identify as white, 20

students identify as African American, and 3 identify as other. Students were identified as

high, medium, or low in terms of academic achievement prior to this study. Two high,

two medium, and two low students were chosen as focus students. These focus students

were observed throughout the course of this study to analyze how different ability levels

responded to a new learning style.

Method

Students have been learning content for six weeks in a traditional manner of

instruction that utilized the format, “I Do, We Do, You Do.” Students have learned the

concepts and mathematical skills involved in Newton’s first and second laws and are

ready to begin Newton’s third law. The final three weeks of the marking period will shift

to a student- centered approach to learning. The first week and a half will allow for

students to make choices based on a Menu (Appendix A) to explore and master the

concepts and skills involved in Newton’s third law. The Menu is composed of four

colors: Yellow, Orange, Red, and Blue.

Each color choice is worth 20 points. Students must complete one activity

correctly in each color category to earn full credit on their Menu. Yellow requires

students to write down the notes on Newton’s third law by viewing a Prezi, posted on

Google Classroom. Orange provides students with a choice of either a cubing activity or

a RAFT writing activity, both of which will be available on paper in class and
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
11
electronically on Google Classroom. The cubing activity has choices for online learning,

as well as tasks that can be completed on paper. Red provides students a choice of

completing a webquest, posted on Google Classroom, or a balloon rocket lab with 1-2

peers in the class. The Blue color of the Menu represents Anchor Activities. These are a

variety of activities, some requiring technology, that students can complete while they are

waiting for materials or outside of class. Assignments may be submitted on paper as a

packet upon completion of the Menu, or electronically through Google Classroom or

Google Drive.

The remainder of the second week will be devoted to student- driven review and

the Unit Post Test on Newton’s laws. In the third week of the experimental period,

students will be working in groups to build an Egg Drop project (Appendix B). The

teacher- researcher will take student group requests into account in order to assign

groups. Students will receive a group and an individual grade for the project. The

project packet is included in Appendix B for reference.

Classroom Environment

For the Menu activities, students will have flexible seating. This is where

students may choose seats that best support their learning. If they cannot choose wisely,

they will receive a warning, and upon a second warning, they will have a seat of the

teacher’s choosing. There is a technology station on the side of the room equipped with

seven Chromebooks. Students may choose to work at the stools there, or at a

collaborative table. All work is organized into colors and will be available for student

access.
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
12
For the testing portion of the three weeks, students will return to their original

assigned seats. Following the test, students will submit requests for their Egg Drop group

assignments. They will sit with their assigned groups for the third week of the

experimental period.

Data Collection: Student Attitude

Student attitudes will be assessed using a teacher- generated questionnaire

through Google Forms (Appendix C). Students will be given the questionnaire at the end

of the traditional method of instruction, and then again at the end of the three week

experimental period. The teacher- researcher will keep field notes throughout the

duration of the three-week period to record whole class observations, observations of

focus students, as well as conversations with students. The teacher- researcher will also

note student focus, attitude, and teamwork.

Data Collection: Student Achievement

Student achievement will be assessed using a teacher- generated pre-test/ post-

test to assess student growth over the course of the entire unit. The tests will be analyzed

to see the specific growth of students throughout the unit. The teacher- researcher has

taught this unit in previous years in the same environment, and pre-test/ post-test scores

from 2015 will be compared to the 2016 scores to provide student achievement data over

time. For the Egg Drop project, students will receive a group grade and an individual

grade, according to the project rubric. These scores will also be compared to scores from

2015 to determine if there have been any noticeable differences in student achievement

over time as a result of this research study. The teacher- research will carry around a
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
13
clipboard throughout the duration of the three weeks to record grades, comments, and

complete field notes.

BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
14

Chapter 4: Findings
Overall Student Attitude

Students were asked to complete the teacher- generated attitude survey on either a

Chromebook or their cell phone during class in October, prior to the experimental period,

and again in November, at the end of the experimental period. The link to the survey was

posted in Google Classroom for students to access. Of the 31 students in the class, 27

took the survey in October and 25 took the survey in November. The survey was

administered anonymously, therefore it cannot be determine which students did not

respond, or for what reasons (absences, tardies, technical difficulties, etc.) The survey

results have been divided into three separate tables. Table 4.1 shows a breakdown of the

six questions in the survey that showed the largest difference between October and

November.

October 18, 2016 (27 responses) November 7, 2016 (25 responses)

Question Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly
Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
The ways that we learned
information in the last two 14.8% 40.75% 40.75% 3.7% 12% 76% 12% 0%
weeks were helpful to me.
This class is helping me learn
information that is useful to 7.4% 33.3% 40.7% 18.5% 8% 60% 24% 8%
my life.
I am interested in what I am
14.8% 37% 44.4% 3.7% 20% 56% 20% 4%
learning in this class.
Assignments in this class are
11.1% 44.4% 40.7% 3.7% 16% 56% 24% 4%
not too difficult for me.

I prefer to study alone. 3.7% 59.3% 29.6% 7.4% 8% 48% 40% 4%

I feel like I can earn an A or a

37% 29.6% 25.9% 7.4% 36% 52% 12% 0%
B in this class.

Table 4.1
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
15
The data suggest that, following the three-week period, students found more

relevance in the science content covered and found the new learning opportunities useful.

Additionally, student interest increased and students perceived assignments as less

difficult. More students stated in November that they felt like they could earn an A or a

B, as opposed to October. One finding that was particularly interesting was that more

students (63%) preferred to study alone in October, as opposed to 56% of students

preferring to study alone in November.

Table 4.2 shows the responses for 12 questions that did not have a large difference

between responses in October and November.

October November
(27 responses) (25 responses)
Question Strongly Disagree/ Strongly Disagree
Agree/ Strongly Agree/ Strongly
Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
I am generally interested in science. 59.3% 40.7% 60% 40%
This class is too time- consuming. 55.6% 44.4% 40% 60%
I can apply information from this class to my everyday life. 40.7% 59.2% 52% 48%
I often study or do homework with other people. 40.7% 59.2% 48% 52%
I feel comfortable to ask questions to my teacher in this class. 77.8% 22.2% 84% 16%
There are people in this class that I work well with. 96.3% 3.7% 96% 4%
I try my best every day in this class. 96.3% 3.7% 96% 4%
Students in this class treat me with kindness and respect. 96.3% 3.7% 92% 8%
I feel comfortable to ask questions to my peers in this class. 81.5% 18.5% 88% 12%
The workload in this class is manageable. 85.2% 14.8% 92% 8%
I do not know many people in this class. 14.8% 85.1% 16% 84%
I can learn in this environment. 88.9% 11.1% 92% 8%
I have good friends in this class. 88.9% 11.1% 80% 20%
Table 4.2

The questions represented in Table 4.2 show subtle variations in responses from

October to November, but not enough variation to suggest a shift in student attitude as a

result of the independent variable.

BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
16
Table 4.3 shows a summary of the three most frequent responses to the two open-

ended questions in the survey. Question one shows the shift in classroom activities that

took place between the survey dates, while the responses for question two show

suggestions and comments from students. The variables tested in this study addressed

these suggestions by allowing students to work at their own pace and obtain more

practice without direct instruction.

October 18, 2016 (27 responses) November 7, 2016 (25 responses)

Activities that have
Responses (categorized) Frequency Responses (categorized) Frequenc
helped me learn are:

#1 Whiteboards 10 Egg Drop project 5

#2 Guided notes/ Note taking 8 Menus 2

#3 Study guides/ Review questions 2 Guided notes/ Note taking 2

One thing that I would

Responses (paraphrased)* Frequency Responses (paraphrased)* Frequenc
like for you to know is:

#1 We need things to go slower 4 We like learning from activities 4

#2 We need more explanation 3 Videos are helpful 2

#3 We take too many notes 2 We should start using packets 1

Table 4.3
*Many of the responses for question two said, “IDK” or “nothing”

The teacher- researcher noted in her field notes (Appendix F) that student choice

improved morale, self- sufficiency, and an increased motivation to complete work during

the Menu activities. The teacher- researcher also noted that, following the Menu

activities, the collaborative whiteboard review for the test and the class collaborative

Google Slide review went smoothly and without problems. She also observed that

student complaints regarding group assignments for the Egg Drop project were lower and

students were more focused on their projects than in previous years. Throughout the Egg
 BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
17
Drop project, students were observed to be on task and transitioning between set up, build

time, and clean up smoothly.

Focus Student Attitude

Six students were selected as focus students for this research study: two high-

achieving students, with mostly A’s and B’s, two struggling (low) students, with mostly

D’s and E’s, and two students with mostly C’s (middle). For each ability level, one male

and one female student were selected. Table 4.4 shows the teacher- researcher

observations for each student, which can also be found in Appendix D.

Focus Student Attitude Observations

(From Teacher- Researcher notes)
During Menu, student was a very hard worker and came to Advisory for additional assistance.
Student had many questions regarding the assignment and asked for verbal feedback on completing
Low #1 (M)
each part of the menu. The storybook submitted (see Appendix E) had some spelling errors, but
conceptually it was well written and correct.
During Menu, student continuously moved seat to work with friends, but got her work done. Student
Low #2 (F) needed refocusing a few times, but would begin working again after. Student is certified (LD) and is
a hard worker. Student tests in an alternate location.
This normally distracted student was exceptionally focused for Menu activities. Student normally
requires many redirections, but did not require any during Menu or Egg Drop activities. The
Middle #1 (M)
storybook created by this student (see Appendix E) is exceptional! I had no idea how artistic this
student was! This student struggles in math.
Student is generally quiet in class, but was chatty while completing Menu. Student was never
Middle #2 (F) disruptive to the classroom environment, but was significantly more chatty than normal. Graphic
organizer (see Appendix E) was well done and designed as a grid, rather than a Venn Diagram.
During Menu, student stayed on task and required few redirections. Student’s work is well organized.
High #1 (M) Venn Diagram (see Appendix E) is neat and thorough. This student could benefit from higher levels
of questioning to deepen understanding.
During Menu, student worked independently on all assignments and finished early. Student was
High #2 (F) consistently on task and did not require any redirections. Student would have benefitted from more
challenging assignments and extra tasks upon completion.
Table 4.4

The data in Table 4.4 suggests that the biggest behavior change during the Menu

was noticed in the middle students, regardless of gender. Both students were focused in

class, with the previously- talkative male student being on task during both the Menu and
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
18
Egg Drop activities. The previously- quiet female student required many redirections for

talking during the Menu activities, but was easily redirected each time.

The low students were hard workers, with the female being more social than the

male. The high students were on task, with the female student finishing early. They were

noted to possibly benefit from higher- level questioning and more challenging tasks.

Overall Student Achievement

Student achievement was measured using the Menu data for the class as a whole,

as well as the unit test and project data. Achievement was also compared using pre test,

post test, and project data from both 2015 and 2016 to show trends between years. Table

4.5 shows the average Menu data for the entire class.

Menu Data (28 submitted*)

Yellow Blue Orange Red Total Menu
(Notes) (Anchor) (Cube/ RAFT) (Webquest/ Lab)
Raw
17.4/20 14.06/20 12.4/20 14.03/20 57.89/80
Score
Percent 87% 70.3% 62% 70.15% 72.36%
Table 4.5
*3 Menus were not submitted

This table shows that the highest average score was Yellow at 87%. Blue and Red

were fairly equal with average scores near 70%, and Orange was the lowest with a 62%

average score.

Table 4.6 shows the unit test data for 2015 and 2016. The short answer portion of

the test is not given as a pre test, so only post test data is available. The 2015 test data is

provided as an overall average, as multiple choice and short answer data from previous

years are not available separately in the district data system. Test averages, for both pre

and post assessments, are similar for 2015 and 2016, showing that student achievement
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
19
and growth is approximately equal between years and groups of students, independent

of teaching strategies.

Unit Test Data

2015 2016
Pre Test Post Test Pre Test Post Test
Raw Raw Raw Raw
Percent Percent Percent Percent
Score Score Score Score
Multiple Not
7.4/24 31% 7.7/24 32% 18.1/24 75%
Choice Available
66%*
Short Not Not Not Not Not
17.8/30 59%
Answer Given Given Available Given Given
Overall
31% 66% 32% 66.4%
Average
Table 4.6
*Only the overall test average was available

Table 4.7 shows the average Egg Drop project data, for both group and individual

projects, for 2015 and 2016. The project packet, individual analysis, rubric, and

expectations have not changed between the school years.

Egg Drop Project Data

2015 2016
Raw Score Percent Raw Score Percent
Group Average 51.9/60 86.5% 57.6/60 96%
Individual
Analysis 16/40 40% 35.7/40 89.25%
Average
Table 4.7

Student performance on the group project increased from 2015 to 2016, with

average scores rising from 86.5% to 96%. Average student performance on the individual

analysis more than doubled from 2015 to 2016, with scores rising from 40% to 89.25%.

Focus Student Achievement

Table 4.8 details the individual scores for each focus student in this research

study. Comparing the data across and within ability levels shows that student
 BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
20
performance on the multiple choice portion ranges from 66% to 91%, with students at

each ability level earning both low and high scores. Middle student #1 is a male student

who struggles in math. The short answer portion of the test did require math, and he

scored the lowest of the focus group students on this portion. Low student #2 is certified

and tests in an alternative location. She also scored low on her short answer portion of

the test. Both of these students were encouraged to retake their tests.

The low and high focus students performed best on the Menu and the group grade

for the Egg Drop project. The middle students performed best on the individual portion

of the Egg Drop project.

Focus Student Data

Egg Drop
Egg Drop
Menu Score MC Test Score SA Test Score Individual
Group Grade
Grade
Low #1 (M) 80/80 20/24 20/30 58/60 34/40

Low #2 (F) 78/80 18/24 18/30 59/60 32/40

Middle #1 (M) 73/80 16/24 2/30 54/60 40/40

Middle #2 (F) 76/80 22/24 29/30 54/60 38/40

High #1 (M) 80/80 18/24 23/30 58/60 32/40

High #2 (F) 80/80 22/24 22/30 59/60 38/40

Table 4.8

Chapter 5: Discussion
Discussion

The prediction of this research was that incorporating blended learning and

student choice in assignments would have a positive impact on student learning and

engagement in Physical Science. The three- week experimental period incorporated

student choice through a Menu, collaborative review sessions, and a group Egg Drop
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
21
project. Student evidence was collected through student survey questions, teacher

observations, and in growth on summative assessments between school years.

Student Attitude

Data from the student attitude survey suggest that student interest in science did

not change from October to November (Table 4.2), but students’ perceived difficulty of

the course as a whole decreased and their self- efficacy increased (Table 4.1) as a result of

blended learning and student choice. Student transitions in class were smooth between

the Menu activities, review activities, and Egg Drop project, as well as within each

project. During the Egg Drop project, students were observed to be more focused than in

previous years by the teacher- researcher.

Blended learning and student choice affected high and low level students equally,

with both groups working hard to accomplish assigned tasks. High-level students were

observed to need more challenging tasks for the future. The middle students experienced

the biggest behavior shift as a result of this study. Both the male and female focus

students were noticed to have opposite behavior patterns from what was normally

observed in class- with the male student being on task and the female student requiring

multiple redirections during the Menu activities.

Student Achievement

The lowest average on a Menu section was Orange. The Orange section asked

students to choose between a cubing activity or a RAFT activity to demonstrate their

knowledge and understanding of Newton’s third law, as well as the connections between

Newton’s three laws. Both of these assignment styles were new to students, and also
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
22
generated the highest frequency of clarifying questions from students, as noted by the

teacher- researched. The averages for the other Menu sections are appropriate for a

normal curve, with averages for Blue and Red near 70% (C-). The average for Yellow

would fall higher on a normal curve, with an average of 87% (B+). Yellow was expected

to have a higher percentage, as the notes were useful for students in completing the tasks

in Blue, Red and Orange.

Unit test data did not show significant changes between 2015 and 2016, both in

overall achievement and student growth. However, the Egg Drop project data did show

significant growth between 2015 and 2016, with average group grades increasing by

9.5% and individual analysis grades increasing by 49.25%. Of the focus students

selected for this study, the low and high students earned their best scores on the Menu

activity, as well as on the group grade for the project, while the middle students earned

their highest scores on the individual analysis portion of the project.

Conclusions

Student attitude and morale improved most significantly as a result of blended

learning and student choice. Although student achievement also saw growth, significant

change was not noticed in all areas assessed. The Egg Drop project showed the most

growth and change in student attitude, achievement, and in overall scores between years.

Limitations

This study was planned and carried out with 31 participants. The teacher-

researcher has a total of 129 Physical Science students overall. Although the students

selected for this study represent a good cross- section of students, averages on
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
23
assignments and assessments could shift if the data if all four classes were included, or if

the entire population was studied.

This study also had a limited time frame of three weeks, in which three different

learning activities were carried out. Carrying out the study for a longer period of time,

such as a marking period or a semester, could provide more insight into student attitude

and achievement over time. Some students may not show significant change in a short

amount of time, but if given a longer experimental period, they could show significant

growth.

Implications for Future Research

Future studies to better understand the impact that blended learning and student

choice can have on student achievement should be done to incorporate honors students,

as well as the certified students in cotaught classes. Modifications will need to be made

for both groups in order to provide the necessary rigor for honors students and the

necessary accommodations for certified students. Additionally, the teacher- researcher is

interested in experimenting with tiered lessons and modified Menus to better implement

and incorporate differentiated instruction to reach all learners.

Chapter 6: Reflection

This research has taught me a lot about myself as a teacher. Although I have

always prided myself on being a reflective educator, planning and executing an action

research project has taken my practice to an entirely new level. Taking field notes and
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
24
annotating them has opened my eyes to so many things that I miss or forget on a daily

basis. Intentionally taking notes and analyzing them helped me to recognize the

significance of small questions, and small changes in student behavior that signify their

growth as learners.

This project has also taught me a lot about the learners in my classroom. As I

began planning this project, I was at a place in the school year where my frustrations and

exhaustion were building. My third hour was by far my most challenging group, as I was

daily combatting teenage apathy and negative attitudes. This study allowed me to see my

students in a new light and build relationships with some students that I was struggling to

get to know in a traditional classroom environment. I have always believed that students

are capable of more than we can fathom, but I was able to see that belief play out before

my eyes as I let students take initiative to make choices that best fit their interests and

learning style.

Schools and society are changing. Social media is woven throughout our culture,

and rather than making students trade in their technology for a pencil and paper, we need

to begin to embrace the possibilities that technology has to offer in our classrooms.

Students today are learning differently than students learned ten, twenty, or thirty years

ago. In order to truly help our students to become college and career ready, we need to

adapt to our changing culture and stop teaching in a way that works for us, simply

because it is familiar.

My teaching has changed as a result of this research, and I look forward to the

growth and possibilities ahead of me! I cannot go back to the way that I was teaching

prior to this school year. I made that commitment when I became on of my district’s pilot
BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
25
“Next Generation Classrooms” and I am now better able to see the results that blended

learning and student choice can have on student learning and engagement. I am already

thinking of next semester- planning what Menus I want to use and how I can incorporate

student choice in the fabric of my classroom culture. I would like to begin trying flipped

instruction, and our technology coaches have cameras and equipment to help us. I am

planning on working with our coaches in January to begin recording videos of class notes

and demonstrations to reduce the need for traditional direct instruction and lecture in the

classroom.

I have so many new wonderings as a result of this research, and many that I

cannot narrow down yet. The biggest one in my mind currently is how can I help to

deepen student understanding of content to help them improve their post test scores. As

the standardized test prep coordinator for my district, I am curious to know how to best

prepare students to be critical thinkers who can explain their thinking clearly in both

verbal and written format. So much of learning is done outside of a standardized test, but

I also want to better prepare my students for the tests that they must take in eleventh

grade.

Being able to implement my learning from one class to another was incredibly

significant for me. Dr. Harmon’s course on differentiated instruction was one of my

favorite courses to date at EMU. Action research has afforded me the opportunity to try

out what we learned and collect meaningful data to show student achievement and

attitude changes. These two classes combined have proven to be the best learning

opportunity that I have had in my Master’s program to date. I have truly enjoyed working

on this project. I feel as though I have a deeper understanding of my students, a deeper

BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
26
understanding of myself as an educator, and I cannot wait to begin trying new things and

sharing my findings with my colleagues as the school year progresses!

References

Akgunduz, D., & Akinoglu, O. (2016). The effect of blended learning and social media-

supported learning on the students' attitude and self-directed learning skills in

science education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology -

TOJET, 15(2), 106-115.

BLENDED LEARNING AND STUDENT CHOICE
27
Clark (2015). The effects of the flipped model of instruction on student engagement and

performance in the secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Educators

Online, 12(1), 91-115.

Denson, C. D., Hailey, C., Stallworth, C. A., & Householder, D. L. (2015). Benefits of

informal learning environments: A focused examination of STEM-based program

environments. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 16(1), 11-

15.

Eilks, I. (2002). "Learning at stations" in secondary level chemistry lessons.

Hansen, M., & Gonzalez, T. (2014). Investigating the relationship between STEM

learning principles and student achievement in math and science. American Journal

of Education, 120(2), 139-171.

Hicks Pries, C., & Hughes, J. (2012). Inquiring into familiar objects: An inquiry-based

approach to introduce scientific vocabulary. Science Activities: Classroom

Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 49(2), 64-69.

Jacobs, J. (2014). Beyond the factory model: Oakland teachers learn how to blend.

Education Next, 14(4), 34-41.

Ward, C. R. (1984). A hands-on introduction to science for middle school children.

Journal of College Science Teaching, 13(5), 362-364.