May benefited in her collaboration, in that, they broadened her mind to the inquiry where she saw it from different angles, and guided her to choose the best approach, and they also assisted her in areas she felt tired. Collaboration in the research process gives time for one to come up with the best service because shortcomings are outweighed (Herreid, 2006).
Mays’ plan of data collection is good from my general perspective if looked at a glance. The most meaningful part of her plan is tier 3 intervention. This is because the section targets the challenging students individually and tends to empower him or her, and this leaves a clear result for May. If compared to other parts, this one focus on each student at a time until the areas of improvement are identified, it shows how practical the area is, where students also build on previous knowledge from classroom routines and became responsible and answerable if they do not meet the set standards.
The most impractical area comes in when a teacher decides to rely on another who collects data on their behalf. The data may be biased or in accurate, also, the idea of adding adults to class may distract some students, to the teacher, they may be forced to reset the goals, and also give more time for all students to familiarize themselves so as to be ready to learn. It will reduce the morale and authority May had on her students.
Conducting an individual interview among students exhibiting worse behaviors in class would be another good form to put into consideration. This will allow her capture external triggers to such behaviors like problems from home between parents or sibling rivalry or social wise among others. Taking one by one for interrogation will allow May understand them better and deal with each differently. To the students, they will have a picture in mind of a caring teacher (Shagoury & Power, ...Show more