Improving Reading and Writing through Visual Literacy

Grant Proposal

Jacqueline McGhee

Jacqueline.mcghee@hcbe.net

Vanessa Bundrage

Vanessa.bundrage@hcbe.net
 Abstract

It is imperative for educators to foster students visual appetite and teach them to be

visually literate. This grant proposal seeks to improve the reading and writing skills of students

in grades 6-8 by providing teachers with skills and strategies in visual literacy through a high-

quality professional development program.

This professional development proposal involves a 5-day workshop during the summer

followed by 3 follow-up days during the fall and spring for 20 participants. Along with 15

middle grade teachers, there will be two literacy coaches, an instructional coach, and an assistant

principal of instruction. This program will provide application activities that align with the

Georgia Common Core Standards and utilize technologies as instructional tools to teach visual

literacy. The goal of this professional development program is for teachers to develop their

visual literacy skills and incorporate visual literacy practices in classroom instruction to facilitate

learning in reading and writing to improve students ELA Georgia Milestones test scores.

2
 Teaching Visual Literacy to Improve Reading and Writing

Introduction

Literacy is a fundamental skill that individuals must possess to be successful in

academics as well as in life. The abilities to read and write are crucial communication skills to

function in the 21st century. As the digital world evolves, it is imperative that individuals are

visually literate to succeed in this visual media saturated world. The 21st century learner must

master the interconnectedness of images text in order to understand and function in this digital

age (Frey & Fisher, 2008). Preparing digital learners to be effective communicators requires

teaching them to be visually literate.

Professional development in visual literacy aims to support teacher learning and practices

with the ultimate goal of improving student achievement. Since teachers are considered the most

valuable element in student achievement, school reform is based largely on providing educators

professional development. Professional development is an important component for improving

teachers content knowledge and improving instructional practices (Opfer & Pedder, 2011).

While many schools and districts may not provide effective professional training for teachers,

research suggests that there is a link between high-quality professional development and

improvement in teacher content knowledge and teaching practices (Levin & Schrum, 2012).

The professional development program outlined in this proposal provides an abundance

of research that supports the idea that teaching students to be visually literate is preparing them

to be literate in the 21st century. This proposal also provides data that shows the need for the

program. The details of the program goals and objectives, plan of operations, evaluation plan,

partnerships, budget, capacity and data collection instruments are also included in this proposal.

Demonstrated Need Overview

3
 There may be many factors that may have contributed to students low achievement in

ELA on the Georgia Milestones over the last couple of years. These factors may be physical,

emotional, or environmental or may consist of a combination. Although some causes of low

student performance are out of the schools control, there are factors within the schools control.

Therefore, it is imperative that schools hone in on what they can control and work to improve the

literacy rate among students.

Supporting Data

There is cause for alarm when over 60% students statewide scored below proficient in

grades 6-8 on the Georgia Milestone for two consecutive years (see Figure 1 and Figure 2).

2015 GA Milestone
English Language Arts
(% of students who scored below proficient)
80
70
60
50
6th
40
7th
30
8th
20
10
0
GA Houston Co Northside MS

Figure 1. Comparison of percentages of students at the state, county, and school levels who

scored below proficient in 2015 and 2016

4
 2016 GA Milestone
English Language Arts
(% of students who scored below proficient)
90
80
70
60
50 6th

40 7th

30 8th

20
10
0
GA Houston CO Nothside MS

Figure 2. Comparison of percentages of students at the state, county, and school levels who

scored below proficient in 2016

Figures 1 and 2 also show that Northside Middle School (NMS) has a highest percentage of

students who scored below proficient for 2015 and 2016 when compared to the county and state.

Even more troubling is the fact that the percentages of students in 7th and 8th grades at NMS who

scored below proficient increased from 2015 to 2016. Seventh graders went from 75.7% to

77.6%, and eighth graders jumped from 69.4% to 76.5%. Further reports of the National

Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP, 2015) show that 8th grade students continue to

struggle with reading. The average score for students in Georgia in 2015 was not significantly

different from their average score in 2013. The percentage of students in Georgia who performed

at or above the NAEP proficient level was 30 % in 2015, and 32% in 2013. Although the average

eighth-grade students in Georgia of 262 was not significantly different from the average score of

264 for public school students in the nation, Georgia scored lower than 28 states in 2015(NAEP,

2015). According to the PISA Reading Scale (2015), The United States average score of 497

5
places the average literacy rate below 14 other countries. A more concerning fact is that the

United States average score dropped from 500 in 2009 to 497 in 2015. The growing concern for

students low literacy rate has caused many schools to use teacher professional development

programs as a mechanism to address the problem.

Literature Review

The influence of visuals in modern culture is redefining what it means to be literate in the

21st century. Todays society is bombarded with visuals which makes visual imagery a focal

point in this information age (ACRL, 2011). Although 21st century students are living in a

visually saturated world does not mean that youth are visually literate (Pantaleo, 2015).

Therefore, to be visually literate requires explicit instruction of this critical skill.

There is a plethora of research that supports the idea of integrating images with reading

instruction. Pictures are easier to recall and process than words. According to Paivios dual-

coding theory, the brain stores words in long-term memory as a single code, but pictures involve

two codesone visual and the other verbal with each stored in different places. Therefore, dual-

coding allows for two different ways of accessing visual memories, which increases the odds of

remembering one of them (Dewan, 2015). Because visual literacy involves decoding,

comprehending, and analyzing the various elements communicated by images (Baker, 2015), it

is vital for educators to take advantage of the visual medium and incorporate images into the

classroom instruction.

The goal of this professional development program is for teachers to develop their visual

literacy skills and strategies and incorporate visual literacy practices in classroom instruction to

facilitate learning in reading and writing to improve students ELA Georgia Milestones test

scores. Because of the reality that twenty-first century learners are interacting in a visual world

6
on a daily bases through magazines, billboards, the internet, television, and video games, it is

imperative that teachers learn how to incorporate visual media in the classroom in a way that

fosters learning.

Goals and Objectives

This professional development program seeks to educate teachers with of visual literacy

pedagogy and help them incorporate these technology-enhanced practices into the classroom

instruction to facilitate learning that impacts student achievement. The instructional materials

provided in this workshop align with the English Language Arts Georgia Standards of

Excellence (ELAGSE). The following goals and objections guided the plan of operations for

professional development program.

Goal #1 Increase in Knowledge: All ELA teachers in grades 6-8 will develop skills and

strategies and incorporate visual literacy practices in instruction to facilitate learning in reading

and writing throughout the 2017-2018 school year.

Objective 1- Content Knowledge: Teachers will demonstrate visual literacy by

understanding the main idea of a message in visual media.

Objective 2- Content Knowledge: Teachers will understand how symbols, images,

sound, and other conventions are used in visual media.

Objective 3- Pedagogical Skills: Teaches will produce visual representations for a

particular purpose based on information provided in other forms of knowledge

representation (words and/or numbers).

Objective 4- Technology Skills: Teachers will use multimedia (audio, graphic,

animation, and video) in conjunction with visual literacy.

7
Goal #2 Technology Integration: All ELA teachers in grades 6-8 will create a visually enhanced

classroom with technology integration throughout the 2017-2018 school year.

Objective 1- Content Knowledge: Teachers will explore, identify, and integrate

multimedia visuals to enhance activities to achieve learning objectives in reading and

writing.

Objective 2- Technology Skills: Teachers will create a writing lesson with visual

literacy and integrated technology.

Objective 3-Technology Skills: Teachers will create a reading lesson with visual

literacy and integrated technology.

Objective 4- Pedagogical Skills: Teachers will share visual literacy practices with

colleagues via email and electronic bulletin boards.

Plan of Operation

This professional development program will provide opportunities for educators to

develop technology-rich learning activities. Participants will implement visual strategies using

technological resources to create digital-age instructional experiences that promote student

learning, creativity, and higher-order thinking. Participants will attend a five-day professional

development session that will be held in the schools media center. The program will also consist

of three follow-up sessions to be held in the fall and spring. Effective professional development

requires considerable time along with significant follow-up after the main professional

development activities (Guskey & Yoon, 2009).

The summer workshop days will follow an instructional framework that allows for

involved active-learning experiences and provide educators with opportunities to adapt the

practices to their specific content. The activities designed for this visual literacy workshop

8
includes visual thinking strategies and skills as well as pedagogical approaches that promote

creativity, reading, writing, and critical thinking skills. Participants will also engage in

collaborative discussions to help develop ways to implement visual literacy into classroom

instruction. The activities outlined in this workshop align with the English Language Arts

Georgia Standards of Excellence (ELAGSE), and participants will be given the opportunity to

create lessons. According to research, effective professional development includes creating

classroom content (Davis, 2015). The workshop daily schedule is outlined in Table 1.

Table 1. Workshop Schedule for Summer 2017

Time Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

8:00 Welcome Welcome back? Welcome back! Welcome back! Welcome back!
AM Introductions Opening Discussions Opening Discussions Opening Discussions Opening Discussions
9:30 Program objectives Objectives/Standards
Content Pre-
Assessment
9:30 Opening Video Opening Video Objectives/Standards Objectives/Standards Objectives/Standards
- Presentation Visual Presentations What
10:00 Literacy in the is Literacy? How does
Classroom Visual Literacy Connect
Discussion to the GSE? Discussion

10:00 Model Model Model Model Model

Lesson/Technique/We Lesson/Technique/We Lesson/Technique/Web2. Lesson/Technique - Lesson/Technique
10:30 b 2.0 tool (Lino) b 2.0 tools (YouTube & 0 tools (Picstitch) Visual Teaching Reading with /Website Teaching
Whats Going On In Nearpod) What are Story Telling Visual Literacy and with Graphic Novels
This Picture? New York you selling? Technology Integration
Times Advertisements/
Commercials
10:30 Work Session Work Session- Using Work Session- Use digital Work Session- create Work Session-
Reading Image activity visual media to analyze images to tell a story. reading lesson using Choose graphic novels
12:00 using/collaborative message. Collaborative visual literacy and with purpose to teach
discussion using Lino discussion using technology integration literary skills
Nearpod
12:00 Working Lunch Working Lunch Working Lunch Working Lunch Working Lunch

12:30
12:30 Model Model Model Model Content Post-
Lesson/Technique/We Lesson/Technique/We Lesson/Technique/Web Lesson/Technique/We assessment
1:00 b 2.0 b 2.0 tool(Piktochart) - 2.0 tool (Pic-Lits) Writing b 2.0 tool Teaching Explore other Web 2.0
tool(Symphonical) creating an infographic from Pictures -creative Writing with Visual tools.
Collaborative Concept visual representation writing Literacy and
Attainment Technology Integration
1:00 Work Session- Work Session- Visual Work Session- Creative Work Session- create Model
Illustrating a concept representations using writing from digital images writing lesson using Lesson/Technique/We
2:30 (Symphonical) (Piktochart) using Pic-Lits visual literacy and b 2.0 tool (Voki)
technology integration Animated Reflection
2:30 Explore other Web 2.0 Explore other Web 2.0 Explore other Web 2.0 Explore other Web 2.0 Work Session create
tools. tools. tools. tools. an animated reflection
3:30 Collaborate and share Collaborate and share Collaborate and share Collaborate and share of professional
ideas and lesson ideas and lesson ideas and lesson activities ideas and lesson development Take
activities on Sharepoint activities on Sharepoint on Sharepoint (district activities on Sharepoint Aways
(district network) (district network) network) (district network)

9
3:30 Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Plan for fall follow-up

4:00

Session Description

Day 1: The morning session will open with a welcome and introductions followed by an

overview of the programs goals, objectives, and agenda. Participants will complete a pre-

assessment based on the ELA content. A video presentation entitled Visual Literacy in the

Classroom will be shown that was created for teachers and depicts students frustration with the

lack of visuals in the classroom. It also highlights the importance of how visual literacy can

enhance learning. The working lunch will allow participants to reflect on the video. The

afternoon session will consist of two activities: 1. Whats Going On in this Picture?(Abud, 2013)

- participants will be shown an interesting image from the New York Times and will be asked to

use claim, evidence, and reasoning to speculate whats happening in the picture. Participants will

use Web 2.0 tool Lino to post their responses. 2. Collaborative Concept Attainment (Abud,

2013)- participants will post pictures on Symphonical wall that has three columns labeled: What

It Is, What It Is Not, and Overall. After posting pictures in each column, participants will

collaborate on to determine a definition for the concept.

Day 2. The second session will begin with the viewing of two short videos published on the

GaDOE website entitled, What is Visual Literacy? And How does Visual Literacy Connect with

the GSE? Participants will have discussion about videos. The morning session will continue

with participants analyze the messages in advertisements and commercials and have a

collaborative discussion using Nearpod. The afternoon session will involve creating a visual

representation from textual information. Participants will use Piktochart to create an infographic

that teaches ELA content.

10
Day 3. This session will begin with an opening discussion; after which the objectives, standards,

and agenda are given. The morning activity will have participants engage in Visual Story Telling

(Abud, 2013). Participants will use the Web 2.0 tool Picstitch to select digital images and create

a story. The afternoon session activity, Writing from Pictures, require participant to write

creatively. Participants will use Web 2.0 Pic-Lits to select digital images and write their creative

stories and share them via the web.

Day 4. Following the morning routine, the first activity will allow participants to view an

example of a visual literacy sample lesson plan that aligns with several ELA reading standards.

After which, participants will create a reading lesson that integrates visual literacy and

technology. For the afternoon session, participants will be given an example of a visual literacy

sample lesson plan that aligns with an ELA writing standard. Participants will engage in a

discussion and create a writing lesson that integrates visual literacy and technology. Lessons will

be shared on Sharepoint.

Day 5. The final session will begin with the regular morning routine and move into the activity,

Teaching with Graphic Novels. Participants will be presented with several websites that provides

a collection of graphic novel titles and teaching strategies. Participants will choose graphic

novel titles with purpose to teach literary skills (e.g. literary terms, literary techniques, dialogue,

etc). After lunch, participants will complete a post-assessment based on ELA content.

Participants will then use Web 2.0 tool Voki and create an animated reflection about their

professional development Take Aways. After they have animations, they will present them to

fellow participants and workshop facilitators. The session will conclude with plan for follow-up

sessions.

Follow-up Sessions

11
 It is vital to the effectiveness of professional development to include follow-up sessions

to support teachers during the implementation of visual literacy within the curriculum. These

sessions will give teachers opportunity to share their successes and challenges with

implementing their new found practices (Guskey, 2014). Teachers are encouraged to bring

artifacts from their classroom lessons for feedback and revision. Each session will give teachers

guidance and reassurance with their implementation progress. Data will be collected to gauge

the effectiveness of the program.

Evaluation Plan

Evaluation is a key element in determining the effectiveness of the professional

development program (Guskey, 2012). The question that the program evaluation will answer is,

How well did the professional development program meet its goals and objectives? The

evaluation of this professional development program will be conducted by an external evaluator.

External Evaluator

The external evaluator for this project will be The Evaluation Group (TEG). TEG has

more than twenty-five years of experience evaluating various grant programs, with a majority of

their clients in education. TEG responsibilities will in include collecting and analyzing data

throughout the course of the program. TEG will work closely with project personnel when

developing the evaluation process. They will provide process and outcome evaluationsat the

end of the summer session and after the third follow-up session.

Data Collection and Schedule

The data collection criteria will be driven by the projects goals and objectives. The data

collection for this program will result from participants daily engagement in the workshop.

Participants will complete surveys, questionnaires, pre- and post-content assessments, daily

12
reflections. Other data collection will include observations, interviews, lesson plans, and student

work. Table 2 outlines the data collection schedule.

Table 2- Data Collection Schedule

Goal Objectives Data & Data Timeline

Collection Tool

All ELA teachers in Objective 1. Teaches Surveys will be Surveys will be

grades 6-8 will develop will produce visual administered to administered on days
skills and strategies for representations for a participants to 1 & 5.
visual thinking and particular purpose monitor their
incorporate visual based on information knowledge and
literacy practices in provided in other forms comfort level of
instruction to facilitate of knowledge visual literacy
learning in reading and representation (words). pedagogy. Data will
writing throughout the be collected from
2017-2018 school year. Objective 2. Teachers open-ended and
will use multimedia selected rated
(audio, graphic, responses. Data
animation, and/or collection will also
video) in conjunction include participants
with visual literacy.
daily reflections and
workshop products.
.All ELA teachers in Objective 1. Teachers Classroom Teachers will receive
grades 6-8 will create a will explore, identify, observations will be two observations
visually enhanced and integrate conducted to gauge during the fall and
classroom with multimedia visuals to the integration of results will be
technology integration enhance activities to visual literacy in the analyzed for follow-
throughout the 2017- achieve learning classroom instruction up meeting in the
2018 school year. objectives in reading and its impact on spring.
and writing. student engagement.
Data collection will
Objective 2. Teachers also include student
will create reading and artifacts to measure
writing lessons with the extent of student
visual literacy and knowledge of skill.
integrated technology. Lesson plans will be
used to survey
teachers planning of
visual literacy
activities.

13
Process Evaluation

The program will collect qualitative and quantitative data to help determine whether the

program activities have been implemented as intended. Surveys will be used to monitor

participants understanding and comfort level while implementing visual literacy practices in

their classroom. Gathering data after enough time has passed following the program activities

will provide adequate feedback as to the implantation progress (Guskey, 2016). The quantitative

data will include students classroom assessments before and during implementation of visual

literacy instruction. A comparison will be made between students pre- and post-assessments.

Analyzing data from assessments of student learning to drive professional development is best

derived from common formative assessments (Guskey, 2017). Effective formative assessments

should provide meaningful feedback that is used to improve teaching practices and student

achievement (Reeves, 2009).

Outcome Evaluation

The outcome evaluation will consist of qualitative data from classroom observations.

The observation tool will assess teachers knowledge and pedagogical practices as well as

students engagement. Both classroom observations will occur during the fall with interviews to

follow with predetermined questions to further assess teachers use of knowledge and skills and

implementation concerns. Knowing what most concerns participants will inform follow-up

sessions.

Effective assessment of the professional development program and its impact on teaching

practices is critical in understanding how to better support students in ELA classes. The

partnership of the Houston County School District, NMS staff, and the community is vital to the

success of the project. The collaborative structure will enhance the project and is essential in

14
building a teacher need-based professional development program. The partnerships will provide

necessary resources and expertise to ensure a high-quality program.

Partnerships

Visual literacy and the technology integration component of this program require

dedication and the expertise of school leaders, teachers, the community, and other support

personnel. The collaborative efforts of these participants will ensure an effective professional

development program.

Partners

The personnel in charge of planning and operations include the persons at the county and

school levels along with outside partners from the community. The external evaluator will work

with project team to plan the evaluation process and data collection tools. The schools

administration has secured the schools media center for the professional development training.

The district level and schools technologist specialists will ensure the infrastructure is adequate

for the technology component of the program. By partnering with Chick-fil-a, box lunches will

be provided. The collaborative attention by all partners will ensure the success of this project.

Recruitment

The target population of this project is the 6-8 grade ELA teachers at Northside Middle

School (NMS). These teachers consist of regular education, interrelated, and gifted teachers; all

share a concern regarding students low performance on the 2016 Georgia Milestone Test. There

are a total of 15 teachers projected to attend the professional development training. Other

participants in training include two district level literacy coachers, the schools ELA instructional

coach, and the assistant principal of instruction. These persons will beneficial in supporting

teachers during the implementation process.

15
 The assistant project director will be in charge of recruiting participants for professional

development program. Potential participants for the visual literacy professional development

program will receive an invitation letter via email three months prior to the schedule summer

session. The letter will give and overview of the programs goals and objectives, curriculum,

timeline, stipend amount, and PLUs. Persons invited will include all 6-8 language arts teachers,

ELA instructional coach, district level literacy coaches, and assistant principal of instruction.

Once potential participants commit to attending, a follow-up confirmation letter will be sent out

to complete the recruitment status.

Conclusion

School reform is based largely on providing teachers professional development since

teachers are the most valuable element in student achievement. There is abundance research that

supports the idea that teaching students to be visually literate is preparing them to be literate in

the 21st century. The students at NSM have shown low achievement on the Georgia Milestone

Test over the past two years. Offering this professional development training to dedicated

teachers during the summer and throughout the academic year will help develop their teaching

practices and learn new pedagogy to facilitate learning and impact student achievement.

Appendix A: Budget Summary

Submitted as a separate file.

16
Appendix B: Budget Narrative

Personnel and Fringe $13,900

The total cost requested for personnel is $13,100. Jacqueline McGhee will be the project

director where she will oversee the project from start to finish including planning, organizing,

and budgeting. Vanessa Bundrage will work as assistant project manager, and she will work

closely with Mrs. McGhee helping to manage the program from start to finish. She will also be

in charge of recruiting participants to ensure the right people are selected for the professional

development program. The salaries for these two positions total $ 8000Mrs. McGhee will

receive $5000.00 and Mrs. Bundrage will receive $3000. Other personnel include Mrs. Tambra

Singletary, facilitator, who is responsible for creating activities and delivering training sessions

will receive $2700. This salaried amount includes eight workshop sessions paid at $300 per day

and one planning and preparation day at $300. Finally, Mrs. Jennifer Hobbs will work as

technology specialist and assist with facilitating the workshop sessions. She will be

compensated a total of $2400, which includes $300 per day for eight sessions. The total amount

allocated for fringe benefits is $800. Fringe benefits are calculated at 10% of the project director

and assistant project directors salaries. Mrs. Jacqueline McGhee will receive $500 (.10 x

$5000) and Vanessa Bundrage will receive $300 (.10 x $3000) in fringe benefits.

Participant Cost: $10,000

The participants receiving stipends include 9 regular education teachers, 3 gifted

teachers, 4 interrelated teachers, an ELA instructional coach, district literacy coach (6-12),

assistant principal of instruction, and ELA district coordinator (6-12). Each participant will

receive a $500 stipend. The participants are required to attend all program sessions and

participate in workshop activities.

17
Travel: $3,845

Five workshop participants will present at the Georgia Educational Technology

Consortium (GaETC) in Atlanta, Georgia. The total travel expense is $3845, which includes

registration ($950), mileage ($515), lodging ($1,630), & meals ($750). Itemized budget has

breakdown of expenses.

Additional Costs: $1,728

Additional cost includes lunch for eight workshop sessions. Lunch will be catered at $9

per person for eight sessions. Because of the tight scheduled sessions and rigorous activities,

time does for lunch off campus.

Evaluation Cost: $3,500

The Evaluation Group will conduct evaluations and provide two evaluation reports. The

reports will be submitted at the end of the 5-day summer workshop sessions and after the final

follow-up meeting in the spring. The external evaluator will coordinate with the project team on

the evaluation process to include process and outcome evaluations, which will include collecting

and analyzing program data.

Supplies: $789

Twenty workshop participants (teachers, ELA coaches, ELA coordinator, and assistant

principal of instruction) will receive a professional book entitled Close Reading the Media:

Literacy Lessons and Activities for Every Month of the Year by Frank Baker ($34.95 x 20

copies). All workshop participants will receive binders ($3.75 x 24) to organize workshop

materials.

Total Budget $33,762

18
Appendix C: Project Team and Facilities

Project Team

Persons hired to ensure a well implemented professional development program will

include a program director, assistant project director, facilitator, technology specialist, and an

external evaluator. These persons will coordinate several meetings prior to the start of the

professional development training sessions and are required to attend all training sessions. The

name, title, and job responsibilities are listed below.

Program Director Jacqueline McGhee

Mrs. McGhee has been in education for 15 years, and currently serves as a school

counselor at Northside Middle School in Houston County. She received her Bachelors and

Masters degree in Middle Grades Education from Fort Valley University. She completed her

Educational Specialist Degree in School Guidance and Psychology from Argosy University in

2006. She taught 6th grade math in Houston County and has been a counselor at Northside

Middle School since 2005. Mrs. McGhee serves as a leader on a nonprofit organization called

Holiday Star where she organizes and solicits assistance for needy families. She was also

instrumental with Northside Middle School receiving two grants including funding for a summer

academy program that ran for 5 years, as well as being awarded an outdoor classroom in 2016.

Mrs. McGhee will be responsible for coordinating the logistical aspects of the program including

planning, organizing, and budgeting.

Assistant Program Director Vanessa Bundrage

Mrs. Bundrage has taught language arts in middle school for the last 19 years, and

currently teaches 8th grade ELA at Northside Middle School in Houston County. She received

her Bachelors degree from Clark Atlanta University in Accounting and her middle grades

19
teaching certification from Mercer University. She recently completed her Masters in School

Counseling at Fort Valley State University. Mrs. Bundrage is in her third semester working

towards her Specialist in Instructional Technology. Throughout her career she has served as

team leader, ELA Co-department Chair, and has redelivered professional development training

in technology. Mrs. Bundrage will work closely with the program director with planning

organizing, and budgeting, as well as recruiting participants. She will also work with the

facilitator to assist in creating lessons and activities and assist with training at all sessions.

Facilitator Tambra Singletary

Mrs. Singletary has been in education for 17 years, and currently serves as the Media

Specialist at Northside Middle School in Houston County. She received her Bachelors and

Masters degree at Georgia Southern and her Educational Specialist Degree in Media at

Kennesaw State University. She taught middle grades SS/ELA for 15 years. She has also served

as team leader, language arts department chair and has facilitated several technology-integration

training sessions at Northside Middle School. Mrs. Singletary will create lessons and activities

and deliver training at all sessions.

Technologist Specialist Jennifer Hobbs

Mrs. Hobbs has worked as technologist specialist at Northside Middle School for 6 years.

She provides services for software and hardware, installation and management, and maintenance.

External Evaluator The Evaluation Group (TEG)

TEG has more than twenty-five years of experience evaluating various grant programs,

with majority of their clients in education. Their evaluation practices include collecting and

analyzing data throughout the course of the program. They are known for their participatory

approach by which program stakeholders provides input in the evaluation processmethods,

20
design instruments, data collection protocol, and reporting format. This collaborative evaluation

process gives ownership the clients and which may increase the likelihood of that the results will

be used to improve the program and yield positive results.

Facilities

The location for the professional development summer session, project team meetings,

and fall and spring follow-up sessions will be held at Northside Middle School in the media

center. There is adequate space and technology to accommodate projected participants. The

media center is complete with Smartboard projector, desktops/laptops, ipads, and plenty of

electrical receptacles for charging other devices.

21
Appendix D: Data Collection Instruments

Summer Session Evaluation Survey

This survey will provide feedback as to the participants professional development experience.
This survey will obtain information in regards to content and process. The input is crucial to the
formative evaluation of the project.

Please rate each of the following five questions on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being the least and 5
being the most. Then, please provide a brief example that supports the rating you selected.

1. Overall, this professional development activity was of high quality i.e., well designed and implemented.

For example: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

2. This activity provided new information about, or practice with, technology that will improve my own
teaching of ELA.

For example: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

3. This activity helped me learn to use technology that will improve students performance in ELA.

For example: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

4. This session helped increase my ability to teach ELA to students of all ability levels.

For example: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

5. The facilitator(s) for this session added value to the session by bringing with them new knowledge, skills,
or expertise

For example: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________
6. If you have any additional comments on this session, please feel free to enter this information in the space
below:

For example: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

22
Post-Observation Interview Questions

1. Which ELA GSE was the focus of your lesson?

2. How did you integrate visual literacy and technology into the lesson, and what was your thought

process?

3. How did you prepare students for technology integration?

4. How has this lesson been taught in the past without incorporating visual literacy and technology?

5. How has the use of visual literacy and technology impacted students engagement?

6. How would you describe your comfort level with integrating visual literacy and technology into your

classroom instruction? How have your teaching practices strengthen? What areas with this new

pedagogy are you still not comfortable?

7. What plans do you have to continue developing your teaching practices to increase student

engagement?

23
 References
Abud, G. (2013). Digital activities for visual literacy. Retrieved from
http://abud.me/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Visual-Literacy.pdf
Association of College & Research Libraries (2011). ACRL Visual Literacy Competency

Standards for Higher Education. Retrieved from

http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/visualliteracy

Baker, L. (2015). How many words is a picture worth? Integrating visual literacy in language

learning with photographs. English Teaching Forum, 53(4), 2-13.

Davis, V. D. (2015). 8 top tips for highly effective pd. Retrieved from

https://www.edutopia.org/blog/top-tips-highly-effective-pd-vicki-davis

Dewan, P. (2015). Words verses pictures: Leveraging the research on visual communication.

Partnership:The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and

Research,10(1), 1-10.

Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2008). Teaching visual literacy: Using comic books, graphic novels,

anime, cartoons, and more to develop comprehension and thinking skills. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Corwin Press.

Georgia Department of Education. (2016). Georgia Milestone Assessment System. Retrieved

from http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-

Assessment/Assessment/Pages/Georgia-Milestones-Assessment-System.aspx

Guskey, T. R. (2017). Where do you want to get to? The Learning Professional, 38(2), 32-37.

Guskey, T. R. (2016). Gauge impact with 5 levels of data. JSD,37(1), 32-37.

Guskey, T. R. (2014). Planning professional learning. Educational Leadership, 71(8), 10-16.

Guskey, T.R. (2012). The rules of evidence. JSD, 33(4), 40-43.

Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development. Phi Delta

24
 Kappan, 90(7), 495-500.

Levin, B. B., & Schrum, L. (2012). Leading technology-rich schools: Award-winning models for

success. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). The lost promise of teacher professional development in

England. European Journal of Teacher Education,34(1), 3-24.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Program for International

Student Assessment (PISA). (2015). Reading literacy: Average scores. Retrieved from

https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2015/pisa2015highlights_4.asp

Pantaleo, S. (2015). Language, literacy, and visual text. English in Education 49(2), 113-129.

Reeves, D. B. (2009). Leading change in your school: How to conquer myths, build commitment,

and get results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

U. S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2015). The nations report

card: Reading state snapshot report. Retrieved from

https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2015/pdf/2016008GA8.pdf

25