Data Analysis of Cycle 2

Cycle 2 is now complete. However, I cannot post my research data in totality until after I have administered the final end of the year reading comprehension test. I will be doing that last step next week. I do have intermittent data of reading comprehension weekly tests as well as the final Avatar story test data.

I was very pleased with the results of the data for the avatar project as well as all of my students have shown a significant increase in reading comprehension and understanding of main idea. The real test will be when we receive the FCAT results which will be the week of May 19th. Then, I will have a better idea if my strategy has had any real impact on my students.

Action Research Project References

Develop and Implement a Strategy to Assist Struggling Readers

to Comprehend Main Idea in a Reading Selection

Literature Review by Patricia Marcino

References

Alvarez, M. (1990). Knowledge activation and schema construction. Paper presented at

the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association: Boston, MA

April 16-20, 1990.

Bates, E. (1999). Language and the infant brain. Journal of Communication Disorders,

32 (July-August), 195-205

Benton, D., & Roberts, G. (1998). Effect of vitamin and mineral supplementation on

intelligence of a sample of school children. Lancet, 1 (8578), 140143.

Bloom, B. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw Hill.

Brantmeir, C. (2003). Does gender make a difference? Passage and comprehension in

second language readers. Reading in a Foreign Language. Vol 15, No.1, 2003.

Brown, N., & Evans, R. (1998). Socioeconomic status and education: Living in a social

world. Psy 324 Advanced Social Psychology.

Burns, P., Row, B., & Smith, S. (2002). Teaching reading in today’s elementary schools.

New York, NY: Houghton-Mifflin Company.

Buzzell, K. (1998). The children of Cyclops: The influence of television viewing on the

developing brain. San Francisco: Association of Waldorf Schools of North America.

Carrell, P., (1983). Three components of background knowledge in reading

comprehension. Language Learning, 33, 2, 183-207.

Coleman, J., (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office.

Crnic, K., Lamberty, G. (1994). Reconsidering school readiness: Conceptual and

applied perspective. Early Education and Development, 5 (2), 9-105.

Deutsche, N. (2003). The brain-based learning theory. Retrieved March 29, 2010,

from: http://www.nellemuller.com/Brain-Based_Learning_Theory.htm.

Duncan, G., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1991). Consequences of growing up poor. New York:

Sage.

Fussell, P. (1983). Class: A guide through the American status system. New York:

Touchstone.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York, NY: Basic.

Grasser, A., Golding, J., & Long, D. (1991). Narrative representation and comprehension.

In R.Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading

Research. Vol. 2, pp 171-204. White Plains, NY: Longman

Graves, M., & Cook, C. (1980). Effects of previewing difficult short stories for high

school students. Research on Reading in Secondary Schools, 6, 38-54.

Graves, M., et al. (1983). Effects of previewing difficult short stores on low ability

junior high school students’ comprehension recall and attitudes. Reading Research

Quarterly 18 (3) Spring 183, 262-76. EJ 279 344

Gurney, D., Gersten, R., Dimino, J., & Carnine, D. (1990). Story of grammar. Effective

literature instruction for high school students with disabilities. Journal of Learning

Disabilities. 23, 335-342, 348.

Hayes, D., Tierney, R. (1982). Developing readers’ knowledge through analogy.

Reading Research Quarterly 17 (2), 1982, 256-80. EJ 257 814.

Ingoldsby, B., Smith, S., & Miller, J. (2004). Exploring family theories. Los Angeles:

Roxbury.

Jencks, C., Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M., Cohen, D., Gintis, H., Heyns, B., &

Michelson, S. (1972). Inequality: A reassessment of the effect of family and

schooling in America. New York: Basic.

Jenson, E. (2008). Brain-based learning: The new paradigm of teaching.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Kameenui, E., Simmons, D. (2009). What reading research tells us about children

with diverse learning needs: Bases and basics (The Lea series on special

education and disability). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Associates.

Karmel, P. (chair) (1985) Quality of education in Australia. Report of the Review

Committee. Canberra: AGPS.

Knapp, M., et al., (1993). Academic challenge for the children of poverty: Study of

academic instruction for disadvantaged students. Findings and conclusions.

Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.

Kinder, D., & Bursuck, W. (1991). The search for a unified social studies curriculum:

Does history repeat itself? Journal of Learning Disabilities. 24, 270-275.

Krashen, S.(1992). Fundamentals of language education. Chicago, IL: SRA/McGraw Hill.

Mills, C. (1956). The power elite. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ming-Yueh, S., & Kuey, H. (2007). Collaborative action research for reading strategy

instructions. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language and Teaching. 4 (1), 108-121.

Centre for Language Studies: National University of Singapore.

National Institutes of Health. (2010). A lesson on PET scans developed for scientists

studying color indicators in the frontal lobe of language development. Retrieved

April 15, 2010 from: http://science.education.nih.gov.

Owens, R. (2009). Cultural socioeconomic and gender differences. Retrieved

March 28, 2010 from online journal-Pearson-Allyn Bacon Prentice-Hall:

http://www.education.com.

Payne, R. (1996). A framework for understanding poverty. Highland, TX: aha! Process,

Incorporated.

Ramey, S., & Ramey, C. (2004). Early learning and school readiness: Can early

intervention make a difference? Merrill Palmer Quarterly, Vol. 50, 4, October, 2004,

pp 471-491.

Ranchler, R. (1993). The transition to school: Why the first few years matter for a

lifetime. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (30), 194-198.

Rothman, S. (2003). The changing influence of socioeconomic status on student

achievement: recent evidence from Australia: Australian Council for

Educational Research, Melbourne, Australia.

Rumelhart, D.. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In Rand J. Spiro,

et al., EDS. Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension (33-58). Hillsdale, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Salataci, R., & Akyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2

reading. Reading in a Foreign Language. Vol 14, No. 1

Sennett, R., & Cobb, J. (1993). The hidden injuries of class. London/Boston: Faber &

Faber.

Shaw, M. (1932). A comparison of individuals and small groups in the rational

solution of complex problems. American Journal of Psychology, 44, 491-504.

Sylwester, R. (1996). Celebrating Neurons, ASCD. Retrieved February 29, 2010 from

http://members.aol.com/Rss51540/brain2.htm

Society for Neurosciences. (2002). Brain facts: A primer on the brain and nervous system.

Washington, DC: Everbest.

Sousa, D. (2001). How the brain learns 2^nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Tierney, R., & Pearson, P. (1985). Learning to learn from texts: A framework for

improving classroom practice. In H.S. Singer and R.B. Ruddell, Eds. Theoretical

Models and Processing of Reading (860-78). Newark, DE: International Reading

Association, ED 262 389.

University of Alabama at Birmingham. (2010). UAB Magazine. Plasticity. Retrieved

April 23, 2010 from: http://www.uab.edu.uabmagazine.edu.

Viadero, D. (1996). Brain trust. Education Week. September 18, 1996.

Weaver, C., Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil,

P. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. 2,

pp171-204. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Zastrow, C. (1999). Introduction to social work and social welfare. New York:

Wadsworth Publishing

Zill, N., Collins, M. & Hausken, E. (1995). School readiness and children’s

developmental status. ERIC Digest.

Cycle 2 Progress

Just prior to Spring Break, all students have completed the writing of their avatar stories. Thirteen students have completed Cycle 1 and 2 inasmuch as creating the story, painting the avatar, publishing their story to a DVD and testing on the story. As soon as school resumes on April 12th, the remaining nine students will publish their avatar stories to DVD and take a comprehensive test on the story that they created. The picture to the left is one of my students who is creating a digital story from her written story.

My goal in the creation of my action research project was to create a strategy that would help students to identify the main idea in a story. The strategy I used was that my students would first create an avatar, then write a story about the avatar. I tested each student on their own story for comprehension, fluency and main idea. The thirteen students who have completed all phases of the Cycles, passed each section of the assessment, thereby demonstrating to me they understood main idea.

In further assessments of main idea, these thirteen students have all succeeded in identifying main idea. Next week, I will assess the remaining nine students.

My literature review research demonstrated that there has been very little research conducted in the area of Title 1 students, reading comprehension and specifically targeting main idea. However, some of the research which targeted struggling readers overall, was of benefit to my study.

The information in each of the courses I have completed at Full Sail University has contributed to the validity of my research. My course this month, Learning Management Systems and Organizations has enlightened me in the arena of e-learning. Students do respond better to digital stories. I have set up a few e-learning sites for my students to access for the remainder of the school year. Already, I am seeing improvement in reading comprehension and fluency.

Some of the games I have scheduled my students to play as a part of their core studies has enriched their vocabulary and math skills. I would say that the skill building that is embedded into the games is subliminal. Students do not realize that they are building skills.

One reason students have all agreed upon in their interviews about digital stories is that they are fun and interesting. A student stated that the digital stories seem to be alive whereas the stories in their textbooks are difficult to follow.

Those of us who are visual learners would probably agree that watching the movie is more entertaining than reading the book. It may be a toss up for some, however, whether one would retain more information from viewing the movie or reading the book. In either case, my strategy seems to be working.

After the final DVD's have been created, I will pull together all the data from Cycle 2 and compare it to Cycle 1.

Update on Cycle 2

I am in awe of the talent of my students. I wish I could share all of their videos with you to view. We are coming along right on schedule to complete Cycle 2 in mid-April. Were it not for Spring Break, we could complete it next week.

My students have created their videos (digital stories) themselves. I gave them instructions once, assisted two of my students with the first two videos and they have become editors and producers themselves. They are helping their classmates to finish their stories on time.

We do not have the capabilities to burn CD's at school, so I will burn all of them next week, hopefully. The students have worked hard and been very creative in their stories.

Hopefully, next post, I will be able to share a little something with you.

All of my students have learning gains in reading comprehension since the assessment prior to FCAT. I am anxiously waiting for the FCAT results.