Student Learning Objective on Techniques in Technology Collaboration in

Standards Based Evolutionary Biology Coursework

Alex Trice
University of Maryland University College
Graduate MAT Capstone
Spring 2015
http://prezi.com/j476esmqiv82/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy
(weblink to Prezi Presentation Platform)

Introduction:
According to a report by State Impact(NPR) in 2012, Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Math (STEM) related programs are undergoing transition from FCAT localized state
standards assessments to EOC(End of Course) Standard Assessment that is aimed at
measuring achievement of the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards (NGSSS)
(Jordan, 2012). This transition is due to the Common Core State Standard Initiative that
has been implemented through the work of state governors, and education
commissioners, and developed by teachers, experts, parents, and school administrators
to be goal oriented to achieving higher levels in statewide assessed Common Core
material. Further Organizations that have been integral in developing these new
structures have been the National Education Association (NEA), American Federation of
Teachers (AFT), National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) etc. Developments in
curriculum requirements are orientated for students to be prepared to compete with
students from the most technologically and educationally advanced countries of the
world (Foundation for Floridas Future, www.afloridapromise.org). Teachers Unions
across the United States of America are meeting implementations with mixed reviews
as reported from the recent article from the winter edition of Education Next entitled,
Teachers Unions and the Common Core: Standards Inspire Collaboration and Dissent
(Russo, 2015).
As new modes of lesson creation based on new standards/goals are currently
developed, Action Research data acquisition and analysis are continually needed to be
evaluated for the benefit of National, State, and Local organizations in order to further
effective development.
The goal of this Student Learning Objective Project is to accumulate data through
carrying out a developed lesson that incorporates these Common Core State Standards
in a planned unit in Honors Biology. Factors taken into account in this project are
related benchmarks, time limitations, and the diverse needs of students whom begin
units with varying levels of skills, background knowledge and preparedness in regard to
content and technology usage.
Considering the modern technological landscape of continually progressive
applications, communication tools, research database tools, and globally integrated
networks, students have a world of resources at their fingertips that needs to be utilized
to its maximum potential. The majority of students in todays classroom utilize
technology with developing skills in integrating this technology for educational purposes
within the classroom. Evaluating the effectiveness of technology immersion,
collaboration, and motivation in the progression toward standards based content will be
focused on in this SLO project.

Literature Review:
Various studies show support for projects/activities that are technology based and
collaboration based among students. School Administrator Dennis Peters, of Minnesota
School Districts, has written extensively on the subject and is known as a leader and
advocate of technology education and integration among teachers and students alike.
Peterson points out that technology immersion allows teachers and students to gain
deeper and quicker grasps of concepts in limited classroom environments. This is
why implementation of over 350 teachers in Minnesota School Districts receive 3600+
hours of technology training/classroom technological integration training yearly. The
value that Daniel Peterson places on technology is stated in that, technology brings
immediacy to knowledge acquisition and puts a higher value on critical thinking and
evaluation (Peterson, 2005).
Support also has been evaluated from a study about technology immersion in Saudi
Arabia in regard to Wiki based collaborative learning amongst students in regard to
communication tools and publically critiqued content. This study concluded from
interviews that even though students may be inexperienced in Wiki modern technology,
motivation and preference to this technology existed among the majority of students
(Alzahrani/Woolard,2012).
Further, in a study of West Coast Urban Schools, Cynthia Ching found that students
who apprentice others through collaborative learning will increase to higher levels of
understanding content just as those apprenticing (Ching/Kafia,2008).This demonstrates
a type of learning where students teach and learn through collaboration thus allowing
the teacher to take supportive roles in managing the classroom.
Collaboration with Mentor Teacher and Departmental Team:
This project is designed in order to gather data in reference to motivation, collaboration,
and use of technology in achieving higher levels of comprehension as measured by
data from pretesting, observation, and post testing. After collaboration with the mentor
teacher and colleague teachers, I considered time limitations due to upcoming
standardized testing and curriculum needs. With a 2 week block, this SLO project is
designed with focus on immersion, collaboration, technology integration, and product
creation in Evolutionary Biology, Comparative Vertebrate Anatomy, and Hominid
Evolution. This 2 week production was designed to be carried out in order for students
to be immersed in content, research, and production for a common goal.
Other issues discussed for the development of the SLO involve maintaining goal
oriented structure with a rubric that allows for creativity and limited constraints with

students orientating themselves toward the goals of this project which revolve around a
final quality product.
Instructional Goals:
The foremost goal of instruction is to maximize the opportunities for students to conduct
independent research, collaborate with peers, as well as refine creative production skills
in order to achieve at higher levels at questions presented on Standardized EOC
Assessment as measured by Pre and Post Testing. (Assessment in Appendix B)
During the 2 week period between the dates of February 16 th 27th, 2015 students will
create a rubric based and group collaborative Power Point presentation on a specific
area of vertebrate evolution. In each class students will be grouped randomly in a
group of 4-5 students with one of the following areas of focus- fish to tetrapod,
dinosaurs to birds, first mammals to Old World Monkeys,or Apes to Humans. (Rubric in
Appendix A). This project will be goal orientated for all students to collaborate
simultaneously while differentiating group tasks for a quality final presentation.
Lessons during this unit include starting each class with a Departmental Review Starter
Question that reviews standard based content that was previously covered for support
and retention on EOC based material. This is a routine that was implemented
department wide throughout the school year to refresh students daily. To maximize
opportunities for support, students will have an opportunity for questions, comments and
concerns before transitioning to project creation for the majority of the class period.
This instructional goal is needed as students in this unit will have a limited time in the
classroom and outside of the classroom to be immersed in content collaboration to
create the final presentation. As time allotment for various concerns and questions at
times might be extended, the goal for this SLO Project is to devote 25+ minutes per day
to collaboration and construction in students groups.
Students are encouraged but not required to take part in online communication sessions
via collaboration platforms such as googledocs.com. On the other hand, as access to
at home technology is not universal this mode of collaboration is not a requirement for
this project
The unit that is carried out entails the subject matter of Diversity and Evolution of Living
Organisms that corresponds with the Florida CPALMS Standards:

Standard 15 SC.912.L.15.1 Explain how the scientific theory of evolution is

supported by the fossil record, comparative anatomy/embryology, biogeography,
molecular biology, and observed evolutionary change.

Standard 15 SC.921.L.15.4 Describe how and why organisms are hierarchically

classified based on evolutionary relationships
Standard 15 SC.912.L.15.3 Describe how biological diversity is increased by the
origin of new species and decreased by the natural process of extinction
Standard 15 SC.912.L.15.10 Identify basic trends in hominid evolution from early
ancestors six million years ago to modern humans, including brain size, jaw size,
language, and manufacture of tools
(CPALMS.org, 2014)
Student Population:
The students chosen to be the focus of this project were 9 th and 10th grade students in 4
periods of Honors Biology within a 7 period day. The total amount of students taking
part are 72 students. These students taking part in this project are currently standing
with averages in the A to C ranges in the 3rd quarter a year long course that meets 45
minutes per day 7 days per week. In regard to the limited IEP needs of students, all
differentiation recommendations will be implemented on a case by case basis through
the research and creation process.
Instructional Methods:
After conducting a 10 question non-graded Pretest, students in each Honors Biology
class will be grouped randomly by not being paired with students sitting directly next to
them. This is because students are not regularly assigned seats and usually sit next to
others who they are familiar with. By assigning students partners on separate sides of
the classroom the goal of real world situation is strived for in grouping.
On the first of 9 days of research the Instructor will review the rubric after grouping
students randomly into 4 groups. The goal of the project will be pointed out which is to
produce a quality final product that entails rubric criteria that displays content and
examples. It will also be emphasized for students to rotate stations each day from
methods of textbook based literature, online research, PPT slide creation, and Project
Coordinator. The Project Coordinator position includes communicating material from
researchers to the PPT Creator. While these positions are structural for task
orientation, the goal oriented nature of a finished product will be consulted with students
throughout the PPT creation period.
In each class in which online research is conducted the Instructor will monitor progress
and consult students who are having questions or difficulties. The Instructor will also
review progress while consulting groups to coach students on quality, content, and
adherence to time restraints.

Per the rubric (Appendix A), content that will be evaluated will entail defining evolution,
natural selection, and fitness along with evidence and examples in each groups area of
study. Other elements of this project that will be evaluated on are homologous
structures, common ancestry, fossils, cladograms, extinction, and survival. Other
Standards based inquiry that is needed to be addressed is how these terms display
evidence of evolution and how vertebrate organisms survive and go extinct during
geologic time periods.
Collaboration is encouraged daily during the start of class discussions in regard to app
based methods such as Google Docs and other electronic collaboration techniques in
order to meet timelines established in class.
The final day (Day 9) will entail presenting this project to student peers who will discuss
the focused elements of each slide in a 8-10 minute presentation. After the weekend
students will take a second test that will be graded to the same weight as the PPT
Creation Project. This test will entail 10 EOC Example Questions that were on the
Pretest but have not been reviewed for correct answers after the Pretest. The reason
for this is to maintain validity in the SLO Project in student progression in these
examples that were derived from the Escambia County, FL School District website at
excambiaschools.org. Also, the post test in this unit will include 10 questions derived
from USA Test Prep selected for assessment of Florida Standards.
Expectations of Growth:
Through observing, analyzing data, and working with these students for 6 weeks prior to
conducting this SLO project, I have come to expect that students will demonstrate a
wide range in regard to comprehension by succeeding in a variety of standards based
multiple choice questions. I expect that the majority(50%+) of students will achieve
between 50-60% success on EOC based questions during pretests while 25% will
achieve 70%+ and 25% will achieve less than 50% such as a standard distribution bell
curve.
After the intervention of a student created and presented project, I expect student
growth to show the highest difference in pretest and posttest scores with students
initially scoring below 50%. I expect this because these students will have the
increased margin for possible display of growth compared to lower scoring pretest
students. I expect that data will reflect this further as students scoring higher on initial
tests will show tapered growth in posttests, again due to the decreased margin for
growth display after success on pretests. (Pre/Post Test in Appendix B)
Another expectation that will be analyzed by data is the expectation that increased
activity during the power point creation will reflect in increased achievement in the

posttest results. This will be reviewed by comparing less active students (as reviewed
by the teacher and peers) to higher active students in posttest results.

Actions Taken:
Throughout the creative process among the researching groups the instructor played an
active role in circulating the group and guiding students on effective display of content
standards per the rubric criteria. Various groups in times of need signaled the Instructor
and were consulted on a group by group basis. In order to keep in line with time
restraints and saving created material the Instructor signals students time warnings
before bells dismiss students to the next period.
Data Analysis:
After reviewing the results of Pre and Posttesting after the 2 week block of activity and
assessment, I found that half of the 72 total students (36) scored above 80% and half of
the students scored below 80% on Pretesting.
I used this result to further analyze data in these 2 groups. I found that students scoring
highest on Pretests scored least difference in improvement in the Posttest. 50% of
students in this group scored the same on the Posttest and the Pretest EOC Sample
Questions. Further, 36 percent of the highest scorers improved from 80% Pretest to
90%-100% in Posttest. On the other hand, only 14 percent of students in this data
group (5 students) decreased in Posttesting with EOC question scores of either 10-20%
decrease (1-2pts). (Data Chart A).

Pre and Post Test Score Analysis of 80%+ Scorers on EOC Questions
Scores Same
36%

Scores Decreased by 1 pt

50%
Scores Decreased by 2 pts

Increased

3%
11%

(Data Chart A)

The other half of students were grouped for analysis in their respective achievement on
Pretesting. The chart below shows the distribution of scores on Pretests among 36
students. This chart displays that the highest average achievement difference is among
students who initially scored 40% on Pretesting followed by a descending data trend in
50% PT, 60%PT, and 70% PT groups. (Data Chart B)

Student Improvement from Base Level Pretest Scores between 30% and 70%

Average
Improvement
%

6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Student Grouped by Pretest Scores

(Data Chart B)
Data was also analyzed in reference to focusing on students in groups that were rated
as under 50% active in regard to production/collaboration/research. This data was
considered valid as certain students were observed by the Instructor and encouraged
throughout the project to capitalize on production time as oppose to need multiple
redirection to task orientation. Data shows that no students in this Analysis Group
experienced a decline in scores when compared to Pretests. 80% of students that
lacked participation also did improve on Posttests. (Data Chart C)

Pre and Post Test Grade Distribution of Students Rated as 25%-50% of Daily Participation by Peers
100
90
80
70
60
50

Grades and 50
% Participation
40

50

Peer Rating

50 50

Pretest
Posttest

30 25 25

25 25

25

25

20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Student Scores (red and greed bars) Compared to Contribution Rating by Peers (Blue)

(Data Chart C)

Findings:
Overall, data evidence supports technology collaboration in the classroom. With limited
lecture and traditional classroom methodologies students showed to increase levels of
performance and comprehension in post testing after being immersed in a computer
utilized presentation project. Data shows that the majority of students whom performed
at lower levels initially were able to display the most improvement on post testing
assessment.
Further, improvement showed not to be directly correlated to the amount of student
activity as students who were observed and rated by peers as being less active were
still able to perform at increased levels.

Another observational finding was that at least 25 percent (one out of four groups) of
students taking part in this study engaged themselves voluntarily in collaboration
platforms such as GoogleDocs to meet group needs for quality final product.
Conclusion:
Overall data does display that students benefit from the usage of technology integration
in the classroom in regard utilizing app based resources for research and
communication and Microsoft Software for PPT creation. The majority of students were
able to increase core base knowledge through group work where apprentice/mentor
relationships and social interactions developed. Further, students were motivated by
independent group research and the use of technology in the production of resource
material
Another conclusion that was not quantitative in this study was the ability of students to
adapt group dynamics in regard to choosing, organizing, and accessing their own out of
classroom communication platforms in order to meet timelines and project standards.
Given objectives, project timelines, and classroom management structures put in place,
a significant portion of students were able to supplement group project needs by
becoming proactive in technology communication for collaboration outside of classroom
time.

Works Cited

Alzahrani, Ibraheem, Woollard James (2012) The Potential of WIKI Technology as an

E-Learning Tool in Schience and Education Perspectives of Undergraduate
Students in Al- Baha University Saudi Arabia. 2nd International Conference on ELearning and Knowledge Management Technology. April 2012 Malaysia.
Retrieved Mar. 20, 2015 from eric.ed.gov/?id=ED531146
Ching, Cynthia C, Kafia, Yasmin B. (2008) Peer Pedagogy: Student Collaboration and
Reflectoion in a Learning Through Design Project. Teachers College Record
v110(12),pp 2601-2632. Issn 1467 9620
CPALMS Standards (2014) Florida State University. Retrieved on Mar. 20, 2015 from

www.cpalms.org/Public/search/Standards
Foundation for Floridas Future . Florida Formula for Students Achievement: Common
Core Standards. Retrieved on Mar. 20,2015 from www.afloridapromise.org
Jordan, Gina (2012) :State Setting Standards for New Biology, Geometry, and Science
Assessments. State Impact Florida, NPR Affiliate. Retrieved on Mar. 20, 2015
from: stateimpact.npr.org/florida/2012/10/15/state-setting-standards-for-newbiology-geometry-and science assessments/
Peterson, Dennis L. (2005) Technology Immersion: New tools in the hands of well
trained staff transform teaching and learning. School Administrator v62 i7 pp 16.
American Association of School Administrators Retrieved Mar. 20, 2015 from:
eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ72660
Russo, Alexander (2015) Teachers Union and the Common Core: Standards Inspire
Collaboration and Dissent. Education Next. Winter Issue v15 I 1 pp36-42
Retrieved Mar. 20,2015 from: educationnext.org/teachers-unions-common-core/
Sample Questions.(2015) Escambia County School District: Escambia County Florida
Website. Retrieved March 20 2015 from www.ecsd-fl.schoolloop.com

Appendix A

(End of Course Standards Sample Questions retrieved from the Escambia County
School District, FL website at ecsd-fl.schoolloop.com)

(End of Course Standards Sample Questions retrieved from the Escambia County
School District, FL website at ecsd-fl.schoolloop.com)

(End of Course Standards Sample Questions retrieved from the Escambia County
School District, FL website at ecsd-fl.schoolloop.com)

APPENDIX B
Structure of PPT Creation:
TITLE PAGE WITH 2 EXTINCT SPECIES AND 2 NON EXTINCT SPECIES IN YOUR
ASSIGNED AREA OF STUDY (5PTS)
(2 SLIDES) EVOLUTION- DEFINITION, EXAMPLES OF EVIDENCE; NATURAL
SELECTION DEFINITION;
FITNESS DEFINITION/IMAGRY/ EXAMPLES OF FITNESS (10 PTS)
(2 SLIDES) HOMOLOGOUS STRUCTURES 3 EXAMPLES RELATING TO AREA
OF CONTENT STUDY; HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO COMMON ANCESTRY (10
PTS)
( 3 SLIDES) MODERN AND EXTINCT SPECIES EXAMPLES: SIMILARITIES AND
DIFFERENCES

TIME PERIODS-WHAT WERE THE PERIODS CALLED THAT THESE

ORGANISMS LIVED, WHEN WERE THE MODERN SPECIES EVOLVED AS THEY
LIVE TODAY (10 PTS)
FOSSILS: DEFINITION; DISPLAY 3 EXAMPLES OF FOSSILS/EXTINCT
SPECIES AND HOW THEY DISPLAY ANCESTRY. HOW DO THEY SUPPORT
THE DEFINITIOON OF EVOLUTION?(2 SLIDES) (10 PTS)

(2SLIDES) TREE OF LIFE/CLADOGRAM: INCLUDE A GRAPHIC

REPRESENTATION OF ALL VERTEBRATE ORGANISMS INCLUDING YOUR TOPIC
AREA ( BE ABLE TO POINT OUT WHERE YOUR TOPIC FALLS-WHAT BRANCH) (1
SLIDE)
YOUR AREA OF STUDY-DISPLAY AND PRESENT A CLOSER MORE DETAILED VIEW
OF A PARTICULAR CLADE (10 PTS)
EXTINCTION/SURVIVAL/ANCESTRY THEORIES- HOW DID CERTAIN
SPECIES GO EXTINCT IN YOUR TOPIC AND HOW OR WHY DID CERTAIN
SPECIES SURVIVED?
-GIVE EXAMPLES OF NEW SPECIES THAT DECENDED WITH
MODIFICATION (10 PTS)

65 TOTAL POINTS

(Rubric given to student in order for group collaboration and creation of

Presentation using Electronic Research and App based communication
methods)