Contribution to My Learning and the Learning Community

EDLD 5315 – Action Research

Self-Assessment Score: 96

As I reflect on my contributions to my learning and to our learning community in EDLD 5315, I believe a score of 96 accurately represents my level of engagement, leadership, and growth throughout this course. This class required me to move from being a practitioner implementing innovation to becoming a practitioner-researcher systematically studying my own practice. I fully embraced that shift. I consistently collaborated with my base group, completed all required readings and course resources, revised my assignments based on feedback, and applied action research principles directly to my campus context at Hillcrest in Midland, Texas.

While there is always room to grow, particularly in expanding dialogue beyond my immediate collaboration circle during heavy weeks, the depth, consistency, and authenticity of my contributions support this score.

Base Group Collaboration

Throughout this course, I consistently collaborated with:

Jennifer Haden
Guadalupe Marin

Our collaboration was steady and meaningful. We exchanged drafts of our Action Research Design Outlines, refined research questions together, and discussed how to narrow topics into measurable, manageable studies. My peers helped me tighten the focus of my research from a broad technology-monitoring concept to a clearly defined study examining structured digital monitoring through GoGuardian and its impact on engagement and task completion in 11th-grade U.S. History.

I also provided feedback to my group members by asking clarifying questions about their data collection plans, measurement strategies, and alignment between research questions and instruments. These conversations strengthened not only my peers’ projects but my own thinking about validity, feasibility, and alignment.

Contributions to the Learning Community

I actively contributed in course forums with substantive responses rather than minimal agreement posts. My goal was always to extend conversation. I shared real examples from Hillcrest, including the complexity of digital monitoring, teacher buy in challenges, and balancing instructional freedom with accountability. By sharing authentic campus experiences, I contributed practical context to theoretical discussions.

I also took informal leadership responsibility by modeling transparency. I openly discussed where I felt overwhelmed by data analysis and how I planned to seek collaboration when needed. That vulnerability aligns with Mertler’s assertion that practitioner-researchers are not expected to operate in isolation.

For the majority of the course, I posted early enough for others to respond and build on my ideas. I recognize that near the end of the term, overlapping professional responsibilities occasionally pushed my participation later in the week. While I still met all deadlines, posting even earlier would have allowed for deeper dialogue beyond my base group.

What Is Working

The strongest aspect of my contribution was the authentic integration of course concepts into my real-world innovation plan. I did not treat assignments as isolated academic tasks. Instead, I aligned my Action Research Design Outline, literature review, and measurement plan directly to my ongoing campus initiative involving GoGuardian and broadband infrastructure upgrades.

Specifically:

I narrowed my research question using the Why Process.
I aligned my study explicitly to TEKS for 11th-grade U.S. History.
I selected a mixed-methods design and justified that choice using Mertler (2024).
I grounded my measurement tools in peer-reviewed literature on digital distraction and engagement.
I revised my outline after peer and instructor feedback to clarify data sources and procedures.

I completed all assigned readings and integrated them into my thinking, particularly Mertler’s framework for action research cycles and practitioner empowerment. My discussion posts consistently referenced course texts and research in APA format, demonstrating both breadth and depth of engagement.

Another area that worked well was revision. I revised every major assignment before submission. In particular, I strengthened my Research Design section after recognizing that I initially described the design but did not clearly justify why I chose it. That revision improved both clarity and rigor.

What I Can Do Better

The primary area for growth is expanding engagement beyond my consistent collaboration circle during high-demand weeks. While I maintained strong communication with Jennifer, Guadalupe, and Angela, I could have been more intentional about initiating dialogue with a wider range of classmates throughout the entire term.

Additionally, as my action research evolves, I want to continue strengthening my confidence in data analysis. Designing the study came naturally; anticipating the analysis stage stretched me. That stretch, however, represents growth rather than deficiency.

Reflection on Growth as a Self-Directed Learner

This course solidified my identity as a self-directed learner. Rather than waiting for direction, I consistently connected assignments to my innovation plan and campus leadership goals. I revised, refined, and clarified my work until it aligned with both research standards and practical application.

As Fink (2013) notes, powerful learners must learn to assess the quality of their own work. Through this process, I moved beyond compliance toward ownership. My action research is not simply a course requirement — it is a professional commitment to improving engagement and instructional focus at Hillcrest.

Conclusion

EDLD 5315 refined my approach to professional growth and inquiry. It required me to slow down, narrow my focus, and move from being a teacher with ideas about improvement to a practitioner-researcher committed to studying those ideas with intentionality and rigor. While there were moments near the end of the term when competing responsibilities limited how early I could engage in broader discussions, I never disengaged from the learning process. I completed every reading, participated in every required activity, revised my work thoughtfully, and remained deeply connected to my base group. More importantly, I did not approach this course as a requirement to finish, but as a framework to strengthen my leadership and instructional practice.

This course has strengthened my confidence in designing meaningful research that serves my students and my campus. It has reinforced my belief that improvement must be intentional, measurable, and reflective. For these reasons, I believe a self-assessment score of 96 accurately reflects both the consistency of my effort and the depth of my contribution to our learning community.

References

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. Jossey-Bass.

Harapnuik, D. (2017). The COVA learning approach. https://www.harapnuik.org/?p=6410

Mertler, C. A. (2024). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.