Design+Project+3


 * __PROJECT TITLE:__ Text Analysis with the Rhetorical Triangle**


 * __REVISIONS SINCE REPORT 2:__**

No revisions since Report 2.


 * __GOALS, OBJECTIVES, and TASK ANALYSIS:__**

There have been no major revisions to goals, objectives, and task analysis since Report 2. The following section has been added as rationale for the stated objectives.

The objectives for this unit align consistently with the Common Core State Standards. See below:
 * College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Speaking and Listening
 * Standard 3: Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric.
 * Reading Standards for Informational Text 6-12
 * Grades 9-10; Standard 6: Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how an author uses rhetoric to advance that point or view or purpose.
 * Grades 11-12; Standard 6: Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text in which rhetoric is particularly effective, analyzing how style and content contribute to the power, persuasiveness, or beauty of the text.
 * Grades 11-12; Standard 9: Analyze seventeenth-, eighteenth-, and nineteenth-century foundational U.S. Documents of historical and literary significance (including The Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address) for their themes, purpose, and rhetorical features.


 * __DESIGN REPORT 2:__**

Project Report 2 is located on my wiki. Click here.


 * __STEPS IN PLANNING FORMATIVE EVALUATION:__**


 * Purpose:**

To improve instruction with special consideration for the example materials* and pacing of the instruction from the facilitators’ perspectives.


 * NOTE: “//Example Materials”// refers to the choice of video clips, political cartoons, advertisements, and other examples of rhetoric that are referred to as “teacher-supplied examples” in Design Project 2. This entails any example or resource the teacher has not created him or herself but has found and supplied as an example for the class. Unit Materials are a current work in progress and can be located on this wiki by clicking the Unit Materials link.


 * Audience:**

Ninth-grade English Teachers (9th Grade Team), Tenth Grade Team Leader, Language Arts Department Chairperson/Advanced Placement English Language and Composition Teacher (currently the same person), Administrators over 9th Grade, Language Arts, and Reading, Common Core State Standards Implementation Team


 * Issues:**

q Are the example materials and activities supporting instruction and learning by engaging the majority of students? q Do students demonstrate an understanding of analysis? q Is the timeline for instruction appropriately flexible and manageable within the constraints of the current curriculum map? q Do students express confusion over any specific aspect of the unit? q After instruction is completed, are students able to apply rhetorical analysis to text?


 * Resources:**

q Time – teachers will need time to work with individual students and small-groups. q Unit Materials – teachers will need a copy of the instructional materials in order to evaluate their effectiveness. q Tech Equipment – teachers will need audio/visual equipment in order to assess the value of many of the examples such as video clips.


 * Evidence:**

q //Are the example materials* and activities supporting instruction and learning by engaging the majority of students?// q //Do students demonstrate an understanding of analysis?// q //Is the timeline for instruction appropriately flexible and manageable within the constraints of the current curriculum map?// q //Do students express confusion over any specific aspect of the unit?// q //After instruction is completed, are students able to apply rhetorical analysis to text?//
 * __Acceptable Evidence:__ teacher observations regarding student responses to example materials and student level of enthusiasm and motivation; percentage of students participating at a satisfactory or above satisfactory level on assignments (i.e. 75% of students brought in examples when requested, 90% of group members performed adequately, etc.); student feedback through surveys and interviews
 * __Acceptable Evidence:__ teacher observation on students’ responses during group work; students’ grades on the written assessment for Objective 1.3: Create a summary and analysis
 * __Acceptable Evidence:__ teacher feedback through email/conference correspondence and questionnaire and follow-up interviews
 * __Acceptable Evidence:__ student feedback through survey; teacher observations
 * __Acceptable Evidence:__ students’ scores on the final assessment and subsequent assessments after the conclusion of the instructional unit

q Teacher observations of students throughout the unit q Teacher reports on student participation broken down by percentages of students participating at various levels on specific assignments and activities q Student scores on specific assessments (creating a summary and analysis, writing a rhetorical analysis) q Student survey q Teacher questionnaires and correspondence throughout the unit with follow-up informal interviews
 * Data-Gathering Techniques:**

q //Teacher observations of students throughout the unit// q //Teacher reports on student participation broken down by percentages of students participating at various levels on specific assignments and activities// q //Student scores on specific assessments (creating a summary and analysis, writing a rhetorical analysis)// q //Student survey// q //Teacher questionnaires and correspondence throughout the unit with follow-up informal interviews//
 * Analysis:**
 * __How will this evidence be analyzed?__ Teachers will be asked to describe student behaviors regarding several aspects: student enthusiasm in response to example materials, students’ perceived or expressed confusion during any portion of the instruction. The instructional unit materials and content will be revised based on the teacher observations and student responses to the survey (see below) in order maximize student participation and motivation and lesson clarity.
 * __How will this evidence be analyzed?__ Assignments and activities with low participation rates will be reviewed and revised. //__Further data will be gathered to determine the cause of the low participation__// (i.e. Was low participation a lack of student motivation? Were the instructions unclear? Was the assignment too difficult? Was the pace of instruction too quick?)
 * __How will this evidence be analyzed?__ (1) CREATING A SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS: After the instruction for Objective 1, students are to turn in a written analysis and summary for teachers to evaluate student learning at this point. Further instruction should not continue unless most students have working understanding of and the ability to apply analysis. Therefore, students’ scores on this assignment essential to determining the success of the remainder of the instructional unit. 80% of students should earn 70% or higher on this assignment. (2) WRITING A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS: After the instruction for the entire instructional unit, students should be able to write a rhetorical analysis. Student scores on this assignment will determine the overall success of the unit. 70% of students should earn 75% or higher on this assignment.
 * __How will this evidence be analyzed?__ Survey results will be analyzed to determine student attitudes, to solicit suggestions for improvements, to evaluate students’ perception of the usefulness of the instruction, and to assess the effectiveness of the example materials (specifically videos, cartoons, etc.). We will compile student responses using QUIA and make revisions based on the issues that present themselves through the results. //__Follow-up interviews__// may be conducted to gain further information from students.
 * __How will this evidence be analyzed?__ We will send out a questionnaire to all teachers via email. The participating teachers have a close working rapport with the team leader, so it is expected that teachers will also be corresponding throughout the unit. At the end of the unit, the information from the informal correspondences will be combined with information from the questionnaire. //__Follow-up interview questions__// will be created and conducted informally during a group meeting or common planning periods.

The report will be made in a group meeting with the majority of the audience members (see above) present. A brief summary of the group meeting will be typed and distributed to any members who are not present and shared via an email conference with the entire English Language Arts Department. Revisions will be made accordingly.
 * Reporting:**


 * __PLAN FOR ONE-TO-ON FORMATIVE EVALUATION:__**


 * Learner(s):** We will select three individual students for one-to-one formative evaluations. Learners will represent a range of reading levels as measured by the state standardized test (FCAT): a level 3, level 4, and level 5 reader will each be selected. We will first ask for volunteers and select our students from our volunteer pool while taking into consideration diversity of our students.

//Rationale:// Students in the intended classes present a wide range of reading abilities. Reading scores have a high correlation with writing scores; therefore, by choosing students from the range of reading levels, we will obtain a clearer picture of the appropriateness of our materials and content for our students. This unit is centered on reading and writing skills.

q The instructional unit content and materials. All materials are either available this wiki or will be photocopied and distributed in person.
 * Materials:**


 * Procedures:**
 * 1) Determine which aspects of the instructional unit require one-on-one formative evaluation. Not all unit components can be evaluated in this manner. //Rationale:// Time is an issue. Students and teachers are limited in the amount of one-on-one time that can be allotted; therefore, specific portions of the unit will be reserved for one-on-one formative evaluations based on need.
 * 2) Determine which aspects of the content can be shared electronically and which aspects must be demonstrated in person.
 * 3) Choose three volunteer students, one each from reading levels 3, 4, and 5.
 * 4) Arrange time slots for face-to-face demonstrations and follow-up discussion on email.
 * 5) Send electronic information to volunteer students with deadline.
 * 6) Teachers record student responses.
 * 7) Revisions to the choice of example materials can be made at this time based on student responses to example materials.


 * __RESULTS OF ONE-TO-ONE FORMATIVE EVALUATION:__**

One-to-one evaluations will be conducted in part face-to-face and in part through email. Those resources that can be shared electronically will be shared with the volunteer students who will then provide feedback through discussions with the teachers. Those portions that cannot be shared electronically will be demonstrated during a pre-arranged meeting and discussed on the spot.

__Anticipated Revisions__: **//Unfortunately, I do not currently have access to my population due to maternity leave.//** I have anticipated the following potential issues. It is anticipated that students may express a lack of interest in the political speeches and commentary due to technical jargon and students' lack of prior knowledge. It is also anticipated that many of the political cartoons will be eliminated because students will struggle to comprehend the basic references being made or because the material may be inappropriate. It is also anticipated that students will want to see more pop-culture related examples.


 * __MATERIALS AND ASSESSMENTS FOR SMALL-GROUP EVALUATION:__**

The unit materials are available here on the unit materials page. For a consolidated page of links to all of the instruments used for evaluating the unit, click here.


 * __CHARACTERISTICS OF SMALL-GROUP LEARNERS:__**

__ Description of Learners: __
 * Learners:** One class will be selected for the small-group evaluation. The class should be a ninth-grade English honors class with as few students as possible. Because our classes all contain 25 students or fewer, the target number of students is approximately 20. These learners will share all the characteristics of the learners described in Design Project 1:
 * __ Attitudes __ : The majority of students approach new units with optimism and interest. The majority of students express an interest in learning.
 * __ Motivation __ : Student motivation is improved when students recognize the relevance of the instructional unit to their future academic needs. Motivation is also strongly tied to grades.
 * __ Background __ : Students are culturally diverse with an average of 3 students per class having been born outside the United States and more than 10% of students speaking more than one language at home.
 * __ Abilities __ : Student abilities vary. Student reading levels range from grade level 7.5 to 12+ within each class sampled. Students’ skills at analysis of nonfiction text is consistently the lowest scoring component of the FCAT Assessment for all classes sampled with an average of 57% of students’ scores indicating analysis of informational text being their lowest performing area out of four areas tested.
 * __ Learning Styles __ : For the group as a whole, with a wide range of students, no one learning style is preferred over others. Students will benefit from a variety of activities.
 * __ Group Characteristics __ : As a group, ninth grade students have shorter attention spans and less experience with long-term assignments than older secondary students. Peers are an important component of the group dynamic for young adolescents, so attitudes towards learning can be strongly influenced by one or two strong personalities in a classroom.


 * __INSTRUMENTS FOR SMALL-GROUP EVALUATION:__**

q **Teacher Observations:** teacher observations and record-keeping during instruction q **Student Survey:** at the end of each portion of the instructional unit (i.e. at the conclusion of the lessons for Objective 1, etc.), students will participate in a short survey covering the content of that portion of the unit; at the conclusion of the entire instructional unit, students will participate in another survey covering the entire unit q **Student Assignments:** Throughout the unit, students submit multiple assignments as individuals and with their assigned groups. Teachers will use those assignments at evaluations to determine the success of instruction and weaknesses in instruction. Important benchmark assignments are the “Create a Summary and Analysis” writing assignment and the final writing assignment. q **Teacher Questionnaires and Correspondence:** During the unit, it is expected that the teacher will be taking notes and corresponding with unit creators. Additionally, a questionnaire is prepared through email to address the unit as a whole. q **Follow-up Interviews with Teachers and Students:** Based upon student survey results and teacher responses to the questionnaire, follow-up interview questions may be written and interviews conducted in order to more fully understand concerns.
 * //Rationale:// It is anticipated that this instructional unit will be broken up into smaller segments and chunks for teachers to maintain flexibility and meet other requirements. Therefore, it is important to get immediate feedback from students at the conclusion of smaller portions of the lessons so that important elements are not missed.


 * __PROCEDURES FOR SMALL-GROUP EVALUATION:__**
 * 1) Choose a class as the small group.
 * 2) Review the outline for the unit with the teacher.
 * 3) Teacher creates a timeline for completing the components of the instructional unit.
 * 4) Teacher continuously maintains records on student participation and takes notes on the successes and weaknesses of the unit.
 * 5) Teacher continuously collects and assesses student assignments.
 * 6) At the conclusion of each component of the unit, students complete a survey online.
 * 7) At the conclusion of the entire instructional unit, students complete a final survey online.
 * 8) Teacher assesses student work output for overall success of the unit (i.e. Did students reach mastery as measured by 70% of students achieving 75% or higher on the final writing assignment?).
 * 9) Teacher completes questionnaire.
 * 10) Evaluate student responses and teacher responses for any issues that require more feedback.
 * 11) Create questions for obtaining more feedback.
 * 12) Interview teacher and select students.
 * 13) Make revisions based upon collected data.


 * __SUMMARY OF SMALL-GROUP EVALUATION:__**


 * //Unfortunately, due to my maternity leave, I do not have access to my student population.//**

As outlined above, I will gather data from a variety of sources. Use of the QUIA system, will allow me to easily compile data and analyze that date due to the extensive options available for making reports on data through QUIA. I hope to use the questions in the survey to assess aspects of each of the five portions of the unit as well as the overall unit. The following issues are addressed through the student surveys: q students’ predictions of their own grades q students’ assessment of their understanding of the materials q students’ determination of the value of the lessons with regard to their future academic careers q students’ opinion on the pacing of the lesson (too fast, too slow, etc.) q students’ rankings of the success of various activities q students’ determination of the value of examples in supporting their understanding and learning q students’ favorite and least favorite activities q students’ free response to make suggestions and provide feedback

I have compiled a questionnaire to distribute to teachers prior to beginning the unit. (I will be the teacher conducting the first small-group evaluation, but I intend on using the same questionnaire with my colleagues when they use this unit at the end of the semester.) In addition to distributing the questionnaire, I will open up email communications through our school’s email system so that informal feedback can continue through correspondence throughout. The questionnaire will guide the correspondence by highlighting specific aspects of the instructional unit that are anticipated issues: example materials, student engagement and participation, pacing, foundation in analysis vs. summary, and specific weaknesses.


 * __DISCUSSIONS OF SMALL GROUP DATA:__**


 * 1) Once I have collected all of the data from the student surveys, the teacher questionnaires, and the teacher correspondences from during the unit, I will review the contents for the following purposes:
 * 2) I will print reports from QUIA and analyze the data looking for significant trends. Do an overwhelming number of students predict low grades for different lessons? What is the general consensus on the example materials? How did students feel the pacing of the lessons worked for them? Was any one specific component rated poorly compared with the others? Are students recognizing the relevance of this instruction? Is there a lack of consensus on any issues where there should be a consensus? Etc.
 * 3) I will review the teachers’ responses to the questionnaires to look for similar trends and significant concerns just as with the student survey results.
 * 4) I will consider if I need to gather more data on any specific issue. If we do need more data, I will compose follow-up questions and conduct informal interviews with a few students and/or teachers.
 * 5) Finally, I will prepare a final report to share at our group meeting during the next common planning time.
 * 6) During the meeting, the other teachers and I will discuss the issues and concerns presented in the final report. Hopefully, as requested in the questionnaire, the other teachers will have suggestions for possible solutions and together we will formulate revisions to any aspects of the unit that require revising.


 * __REVISIONS FOR INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT:__**

__Changes to the choices and focus for summary versus analysis component of the unit:__ I am having a difficult time finding instructionally appropriate video clips of political speeches with commentary for the summary and analysis portion of our lesson. Although the ninth grade students who participated in the initial survey (click here) expressed a surprising interest in politics, it is challenging to find a speech with commentary that will be easy for them to understand. The speeches and commentary that are easy to follow and understand are either not current enough (circa 2008 presidential election when they were 11 years old) or laden with complex political and economic jargon that would distract from the purpose: determining analysis from summary. It is essential for their motivation that we open with content that will engage them and give them confidence. Instead, I am looking for movie reviews.

__No other //specific// revisions are planned for the next version of unit instruction at this time:__ Because I do not have access to my student population, I have no specific plans for revisions. I anticipate that revisions will be necessary and hope to make revisions based upon the analysis of data gathered from the evaluations of the one-to-one evaluations and small-group evaluations that are planned for January and February.


 * __RELEVANT CURRENT REFERENCES:__**

Beckelimer, L. (2010). From Hitler to Hurricanes, Vietnam to Virginia Tech: Using Historical Nonfiction to Teach Rhetorical Context. //English Journal//,//99(4)//, 55-60. Cuff, S. & Statz, H. (2010). The Story of Stuff: Reading Advertisements through Critical Eyes. //English Journal, 99(3),// 27-32. Franklin, K. (2010). Thank You for Sharing: Developing Students’ Social Skills to Improve Peer Writing Conferences. //English Journal, 99(5),// 79-84. Frey, N. & Fisher, D. (2010). Motivation Requires a Meaningful Task. //English Journal, 100(1),// 30-36. Goebel, B. (2009). Comic Relief: Engaging Students through Humor Writing. //English Journal, 98(6),// 38-43. Joliffe, D. A. (2011a). Introduction: Analysis as "Undoing". In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically// (pp. 1-4). The College Board. Joliffe, D. A. (2011b). On Reading and Writing Analytically: Theory, Method, Crisis, Action Plan. In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically// (pp. 5-18)//.// The College Board. Keller, J. (2000, February). How to integrate learner motivation planning into lesson planning: The ARCS model approach. //John Keller's Academic Website//. Retrieved from [|http://mailer.fsu.edu/~jkeller/Articles/Keller] 2000 ARCS Lesson Planning.pdf Kendrick, M (2010). Using Student Collaboration to Foster Progressive Discourse. //English Journal, 99(5),// 85-90. Lamb, M. R. (2010). Teaching Nonfiction through Rhetorical Reading. //English Journal, 99(4)//, 43-49. McDonald, K. (2011). Asking Students to "Play" with a Text: Teaching Analysis of Audience and Purpose. In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically// (pp. 69-78). The College Board. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K. & Kemp J. E. (2009). //Designing Effective Instruction//. United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Mulvaney, M. K. (2011). Analytic Writing in College: Forms, Sites, and Strategies. In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically//(pp.19.42). The College Board. Patterson, J. P. & Duer, D. (2006). High School Teaching and College Expectations in Writing and Reading. //English Journal, 95(3),// 81-87. Phelan, B. (2011). Teaching Analysis of Nonfiction Prose as Language Landscape. In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically// (pp. 57-68). The College Board. Rice, J. (2011). The Appeals and the Audience: The Rhetoric of Dramatic Literature. In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically// (pp. 79-98). The College Board. Roskelly, H. (2005). What Do Students Need to Know About Rhetoric? In //Workshop Materials for AP English Language and Composition// (pp. 25-31). The College Board. Roskelly, H. (2011). New Worlds in Old Texts. In //AP English Language: Reading and Writing Analytically// (pp. 43-56). The College Board. Simmons, A. M. & Page, M. (2010) Motivating Students through Power and Choice. //English Journal, 100(1)//. 65-69. Swain, S. S., Graves, R. L. & Morse, D. T. (2010). Prominent Feature Analysis: What It Means for the Classroom. //English Journal, 99(4),// 84-89. Taum, A. W. (2010). Adolescents and Texts: Raw Writing: A Critical Support for Adolescents. //English Journal, 99(4)//, 90-93. VanDeWeghe, R. (2006) Research Matters: What Is Engaged Learning? //English Journal, 95(3),// 88-91. Willingham, D. (2005). Do Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners Need Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Instruction? //American Educator//. Retrieved from []