chapter 1: introductionhome.lagrange.edu/educate/advanced programs/eds pro… · web viewpage 127...

Reading Comprehension and the Power of Language and Vocabulary 1

READING COMPREHENSION AND THE POWER OF LANGUAGE AND VOCABULARY: AILING ASPECTS OF LITERACY

Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this project is my own or was done in collaboration with my Advisor. This project does not include proprietary or

classified information.

______________________________________________________________________________Misty Jo Williams

Certificate of Approval:

___________________________________Donald R. Livingston, Ed. D.Associate Professor and Project AdvisorEducation Department

, 12/22/10,

Add dr. Sharon as Project Advisor


READING COMPREHENSION AND THE POWER OF LANGUAGE AND VOCABULARY:

AILING ASPECTS OF LITERACY

A project submitted

by

Misty Jo Williams

To LaGrange College

in partial fulfillment of

the requirement for the

degree of

SPECIALIST IN EDUCATION

in

Curriculum and Instruction

LaGrange, Georgia

July 1, 2010


Abstract

This research study focuses on literacy rates of U.S. students compared to international

students. The problem remains that students do not have the reading comprehension skills to

understand language on a higher level utilizing cognitive abilities necessary to achieve success in

all subject areas. Vocabulary and language are the essence of reading comprehension, yet

research shows that students continue to fail or are incomparable to international competitors.

Reading comprehension with a focus on the power of language and vocabulary will enable

students to succeed academically in all subject areas.


Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………ii

Table of Contents……………………………………………………….iii

List of Tables……………………………………………………………iv

Chapter 1: Introduction…………………...………………………….…1 Statement of the Problem…………………………………….1

Significance of the Problem………………………………….3Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks…………………….4

Focus Questions……………………………………………...6 Overview of Methodology………………………….………..6 Human as Researcher……………………….………………..7

Data Shell………………………………………………………….……8

Chapter 2: Review of Literature………………………………………..#

Chapter 3: Methodology………………………………………………..# Research Design………………………………………………..#Setting………………………………………………………….#Sample / Subjects / Participants………………………………..#Procedures and Data Collection Methods………….…………..#Validity and Reliability Measures………………….…………..#Analysis of Data………………………………….…………….#

Chapter 4: Results……………………………………….……………..#

Chapter 5: Analysis and Discussion of Results……….…………….….#Analysis……………………………………….…………….….#Discussion…………………………………….……….…….….#Implications…………………………………….…….…….…..#

Impact on Student Learning…………………………….………#Recommendations for Future Research………………….……..#

References…………………………………………………….……..….9

Appendicesxes……………………………………………………………..#


List of Tables

Table: Data Shell

Table: Surveys, Interviews, Dependent and Independent t-tests


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

The National Endowment for the Arts announces in a 2007 reading study that

“Americans are reading less well – reading scores continue to worsen, especially among

teenagers and young males” (NEA, 2007 need page number). Students lack reading

comprehension skills due to a minimal command of vocabulary and attainment of vocabulary. As

Sternberg, Kaplan, & Borck (2007), “Adolescent literacy achievement across the United States is

in crisis” (2007, p. 416). The literacy rates among high students in the United States have

declined over the years. In the article, Enhancing Adolescent Literacy Achievement through

Integration of Technology in the Classroom, the authors emphasize that “more than eight million

students in grades 4 to 12 are identified as struggling readers. These students, who perform

below grade level in reading and writing, are at high risk for failure in all content subjects and

ultimately for dropping out of school” (Sternberg et al., 2007, p. 416). The basis for reading

comprehension is thinking—students analyzing and evaluating the material they read. Deshler

and Hock (2007) find that “[large] numbers of students enter secondary schools ill prepared to

respond to the heightened curricular demands of these settings” (p. 99). Students are unable to

think for themselves which causes the plummet of reading scores on high stakes tests and failure

of subject area classes; however other countries are placing a greater emphasis on brain research

and teaching the apt skill of thinking. In Travel Notes from the New Literacy Studies: Instances

of Practice, the writers ascertain that “‘the teaching of thinking is rapidly being incorporated into

governments’ accountability demands on schools, with an accompanying burgeoning of

evaluation practices. In the UK, five thinking skill areas have been added to the National

, 12/22/10,

Spell out all authors first time used


Curriculum: information processing, reasoning, enquiry, creative thinking and evaluation’ (Gold,

2002). Similar moves are afoot around the world” (Pahl & Roswell, 2006, p. 174).

Even though schools and county and state administrations develop literacy programs

thatand make strides to improve literacy among high school students, students continue to lack

the reading comprehension skills required to achieve success in the classroom, on high-stakes

testing, and beyond the classroom. Consequently, educators must continue research regarding the

integration of technology to ensure the implementation of competent programs to help students

improve their reading comprehension skills (Sternberg et al., 2007). Educators can also learn

from other countries; reading comprehension is a global issue yet some countries continue to

outscore the United States. Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) reports the

following:

In both 2000 and 2003, Finland was the highest scoring country in reading, with

Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, Korea, the United Kingdom, Japan, and

Sweden also doing well. In both years, students in the United States achieved

overall average scores that placed them in the middle of the distributions of

participating countries. (as cited Brozo, Shiel, & Topping, 2007, p. 306)

The National Center for Education Statistics 2009 report identifies which countries outperformed

the United States, in terms of students' average scores and percentage of students reaching

internationally benchmarked performance levels, and which countries have done so consistently

(as cited in Brozo et al., 2007, abstract). As a result of such reports, educators in the United

States should monitor literacy programs, address the literacy problems students face, and take

action to improve students’ reading comprehension skills in order to achieve success comparable

to peers and countries that are prevailing in literacy performance. The comparative education

, 12/22/10,

Spell out all authors first time used

, 12/22/10,

Check APA for quote within a quote format


component of research is pertinent in aiding better preparation of youth for the new global

economy and “it would be prudent to learn from one another about how best to prepare youth for

these new global challenges” (Brozo et al., 2007, p. 305). How can American educators,

specifically teachers in our local schools, constructively benefit from those high performing

countries, effectively teach the power of literacy, and adequately improve reading comprehension

skills of students?

Significance of the Problem

Students may have the ability to read, but do they understand what they read? Too often

students simply regurgitate the information teachers feed them. They are given a plethora of

information and then do nothing with that information. An even greater emphasis for evaluation

needs to be placed on vocabulary acquisition. Students tend to avoid difficult words or read over

them without understanding the words’ meanings. Thus, the problem with reading

comprehension begins and students and teachers alike tend to ignore the offense. Perhaps these

issues begin early on and teachers do not detect it until the student actually enters his secondary

education. Deshler and Hock (2007) find that “[large] numbers of students enter secondary

schools ill prepared to respond to the heightened curricular demands of these settings” (p. 99).

When students apply analytical skills and those higher order thinking skills to what they read,

they then begin the learning process. Learning cannot take place if students cannot grasp the

power of language; they are unable to make those life connections and those connections to the

world in which they live. Obiakor and Smith (2005) espouse, “Just as words are connected to

languages, languages are connected to cultures, cultures are connected to people, and people are

connected to their race. They all matter!” (p. 89). Emphasizing the concrete differences between

powerful literacy and functional literacy initiates the true significance of the reading


comprehension issues many students face. Powerful literacy must be established before

functional literacy. The lack of functional literacy, the ability to read, write, speak, and listen, is a

serious problem. Students are entering high school without these very basic skills. These basic

skills are the very foundation that gives students the ability to learn (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2005).

However, it is powerful literacy that will lead students to positions of power and authority

nationally and internationally (Finn, 1999, p. ix). Finn (1999) asserts that “powerful literacy

involves creativity and reason—the ability to evaluate, analyze, and synthesize what is read” (p.

124). Reading comprehension is essential in all subject areas; in order for students to acquire

new information, retain it, and then apply it, they must be able to understand those concepts from

the beginning, nevertheless, educators and students alike must initially understand the objectives

of powerful literacy and where that power can lead.

Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks

This project aligns to the following primary tenets and knowledge clusters of LaGrange

College Conceptual Framework: Tenet 1: Enthusiastic Engagement in Learning: My

undergirding knowledge base is one of constructivism and progressivism; I apply real-world

experiences and applications in every day learning practices. It is important to create positive,

enjoyable, yet challenging learning environments. According to Larochelle, Bednarz, and

Garrison (1998), constructivism is an “umbrella term covering theorizations which are primarily

centered on either the cognitive subject; the situated subject (or social actor); or the locus of

knowledge” (p. vii). The constructivist view of learning focuses on a variety of different teaching

practices. A constructivist teacher encourages students to use personal experiences to learn more

and then to reflect on how their understanding changes. Students use questioning to become

"expert learners." Ultimately, the students learn how to think for themselves. Competency


clusters 1.1 and 1.3 of the Conceptual Framework are vital in engaging students and promote

positive learning experiences for them. Each cluster emphasizes the basic understanding of

concepts to not only teach students, but also to allow students to learn and develop.

Teachers must recognize a student’s learning will be influenced by inner and outer

factors of his life, which leads to Tenet 3: Caring and Supportive Classrooms and Learning

Communities. Tenet 3 is the foundation for this research project. Understanding why students are

unable to develop strong comprehension, language, and vocabulary skills directly relate to a

child’s development as a self-thinker. As cited in the LaGrange College Education Department’s

(2008) Conceptual Framework , “In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire (2002) asks

teacher educators to take actions that will overcome injustice and inequities that hinder the

development of children” (p. 8). Freire recommends that teachers “promote cooperation, rather

than competition, liberty for all, unity among working people, genuinely democratic

organizations, and a harmonious blending of cultures” (Freire as cited in LaGrange College

Education Department, 2008, p. 8). How do students slip through the cracks with barely

functioning literacy much less powerful literacy skills? The teacher’s responsibility is to ensure

that all students learn to think on higher order thinking levels and then to hold students

accountable for their learning. Educators cannot allow students to “move on” without the

reinforcement of critical thinking skills. Competency clusters 3.1 and 3.2 aligns to this research

in that both reflection and connections will help educators team together and conquer the

problems of students lacking higher level reading comprehension skills. In regards to reflection,

the Conceptual Framework describes that “[the] process is also important when it comes to

thinking about how to modify teaching to improve students’ work and increase their

achievement” (p. 9). Teachers, perhaps, have grown somewhat apathetic in striving for


excellence and upholding their goals and expectations for their students; the injustice is unfair to

students. Teachers must reflect on what works and what does work in order to achieve learning in

their classrooms; real, solid, profound learning—not a skimming of material to simply reiterate

the very basics—learning must include critical thinking and comprehension skills that students

will take with them on their educational journeys.

Finally, collaboration is fundamental for all levels of education. In order for students to

be successful, teachers must share with one another and encourage one another to challenge our

students with rigorous subject matter and lessons. Vertical alignment will ensure students getting

the most out of their educational experiences and teachers working together will overcome issues

such a low reading comprehension skills, language skills, and vocabulary acquisition skills.

Focus Questions

Questions that drive this research study revolve around concepts of reading

comprehension with focus on language and vocabulary. Students are required to absorb a great

deal of information yet leave elementary, middle, and high school with no real understanding of

what they read. The focus of this study is school change through teacher leadership. In order to

do this, a pilot study will be conducted in my classroom and the results will be shared with the

school principal. Teachers will find strategies that will sharpen those skills necessary for

reading, language, and vocabulary and determine the efficacy of those strategies by focusing on

powerful literacy rather than functional literacy.

1. Will improving reading comprehension, power of language, and vocabulary acquisition

increase student achievement in high school and how do relationships among reading

comprehension, power of language, and vocabulary acquisition combine to affect student

achievement?


2. What are the students’ attitudes toward reading, language, and vocabulary and what are

the teachers’ attitudes toward teaching the power of literacy and not solely on the

function of literacy?

3. How effective were the interviews of colleagues and administration, student surveys, pre

and post tests, and initial meetings and surveys with teachers in implementing effective

reading comprehension / powerful literacy strategies?

Overview of Methodology

This study will be completed through descriptive and action research. High school

participants selected randomly will be the chief concentration of this research study, but it is

imperative to analyze younger age groups in order to compile viable comparative research. Both

quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed to determine the effectiveness of incorporating

powerful literacy skills in language arts classes and the outcome these skills had on students’

understanding. Pre and post surveys and tests regarding comprehension skills using powerful

literacy will be used to examine students’ ability levels and students’ attitudes toward powerful

literacy. The scores will be analyzed using independent and dependent t-tests to determine

differences between survey results and test scores. A survey of teachers describing reading

comprehension, language, and vocabulary acquisition levels will be conducted to supply

quantitative data. Qualitative data will be gathered using in-depth interviews of students,

teachers, principals, and academic coaches conducted using specific and consistent set of

questions. The instructional plan will include using writing to win and differentiation strategies

to increase reading comprehension skills with vocabulary focus. The control group and

experimental group will be same level 9th grade English classes. I will use a regression analysis

using data collected from scores from 9th grade classes. After gathering this data, I will meet with


Michelle Nation, the system data specialist. I will use the following methods in gathering data

for the research process: pre-tests (Midterm)/post-tests (final), EOCT Results (after plan is in

place)—reading comprehension strand, CRCT 8th grade reading results, student and teacher

surveys, teacher interviews, and focus group with students.

Table 3.1 Data Shell

Literature and Sources

Focus Questions Method Used and Data Analysis

Why these data provide valid data

Rationale Strengths/ Weaknesses

Plaut, S. (Ed.). (2009).Sternberg, B.J., Kaplan, K.A., &Borck, J.E. (2007)Gregory, G.H. & Kuzmich, L. (2005)Alfassi, M. (2004).

Will improving reading comprehension, power of language, and vocabulary acquisition increase student achievement in high school and how do relationships among reading comprehension, power of language, and vocabulary acquisition affect student achievement?

QualitativeSurvey Interview Focus Group themes and frequencies Affective data constructs Quantitative Assessment CRCT EOCT Regression Analysis descriptive and inferential statistics

Content Quantitative: are there significant differences?

Qualitative:Is there categorical and repeating data?

Validity Reliability DependabilityBiasDid I assess what was taught?

, 12/22/10,

Delete now that its found in chapter 3 part 4.


Provasnik, S., Gonzales, P., Miller, D., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2009)Finn, P.J. (1999).Brozo, W., Shiel, G., & Topping, K. (Dec 2007).

What are the students’ attitudes toward reading, language, and vocabulary and what are the teachers’ attitudes toward teaching the power of literacy and not solely on the function of literacy?


Content Construct Predictive

Quantitative: are there significant differences?


Validity Reliability DependabilityBias

How did students’ and teachers’ attitudes change?How did students’ skills change?

Pahl, K. & Roswell, J. (Eds). (2006)Irvin, J.L, Buehl, D.R., & Radcliffe, B.J. (2007)Deshler, D.D. & Hock, M.F. (2007

How effective were the interviews of colleagues and administration, student surveys, pre and post-tests, and initial meetings and surveys with teachers in implementing effective reading comprehension / powerful literacy strategies?


Predictive Content Construct

Quantitative: are there significant differences?


Validity ReliabilityDependabilityBias

Criterion-related validity: compare the performance on another test

Human as Researcher

I received my Bachelors of Science degree in Secondary Education Language Arts from

Athens State University in Athens, Alabama in May 2001. I later received my Masters of English

Education degree from the University of West Georgia in Carrolton, Georgia in July 2007. Both

of these degrees prepared me to work with high school students in language arts classes where I

am able to evaluate their reading comprehension skills and ability levels in vocabulary and

language acquisition. I also received my gifted endorsement in 2009. I have been teaching high


school language arts, 9-12 grades English and public speaking for eight years. Along with

differentiated instruction and a variety of teaching strategies, I have utilized the Georgia

Performance Standards maintaining success in my classroom. It is my goal to teach students the

value of elevated reading comprehension focusing on the power of our language and the

importance of vocabulary using higher order cognitive and metacognitive abilities.


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

Focus Questions

Will improvement in reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition increase student

achievement in high school and how do relationships among reading comprehension, power of

language, and vocabulary acquisition combine to affect student achievement?

What are the students’ attitudes toward reading, language, and vocabulary and what are the

teachers’ attitudes toward teaching the power of literacy and not solely on the function of

literacy?

How effective were the interviews of colleagues and administration, student surveys, pre and

post tests, and initial meetings and surveys with teachers in implementing effective reading

comprehension / powerful literacy strategies?

In “Reading to Learn: Effects of Combined Strategy Instruction on High School

Students,” Alfassi states, “Reading is a complex cognitive activity that is indispensable for

adequate functioning in society.”(need page number) Students must learn from their reading.

Students should be able to understand what they read, evaluate critically, remember, and then

apply what they have learned (pg. 171). In reciprocal teaching, reading comprehension is

problem-solving (pg. 172).

Brozo, Shiel, & Topping (need date) in their article “Engagement in Reading: Lessons

Learned from Three PISA Countries” from the Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, reiterates

that the “The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a global effort to assess

reading literacy” (need page number). The authors of this article focus on the variable of

engagement--the student characteristic on PISA that had the largest correlation with achievement

, 12/22/10,

Is this a quote?

, 12/22/10,

Is this a quote?

, 12/22/10,

Seven pages too short. Need minimum 8 ( around 10 is target)

, 12/22/10,

What you have submitted is not a literature review. This is an annotated bibliography or your notes from your working references. You need to write a literature review that aligns and weaves multiple sources to each focus question.


in reading. Next, salient findings related to engagement from three English-speaking PISA

countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, and Ireland) are presented. The authors

conclude with a discussion of lessons about reading engagement derived from findings common

to the authors' three nations with implications for policy and practice.” (from abstract) Page 304

This article focuses on three questions: What are the main characteristics of educational systems

that produce uniformly high achievement? Which variables have the most significant impact on

reading performance?

Deshler and Hock (need date) maintain that research plays a critical role in determining

“how and what literary experiences happen in the classroom (ix). The article “Adolescent

literacy: Where we are, where we need to go” focuses on struggling readers in secondary

schools. “Large numbers of students enter secondary schools ill prepared to respond to the

heightened curricular demands of these settings” (page 99).Older students need intervention

strategies (1/4 of all 8th and 12th graders score at the “below basic” level in reading (NAEP)

according to National Center for Educational Statistics, 2005). “Reading initiatives must address

the complex nature of literacy as content demands increase, vocabulary knowledge becomes

essential to understanding various disciplines, and materials become more difficult to read” (pg.

101). Reciprocal teaching focuses on cognitive reading comprehension skills: predicting,

clarifying, summarizing, and questioning in the context of authentic text” (pg. 103). Reciprocal

teaching increases reading comprehension. “Comprehension is built on the foundation of words”

(Stahl & Herbert, 2004, pg. 182).

In “Linguistic and cultural heterogeneity in the classroom,” Edwards focuses on Canada’s

policy regarding diversity in the classroom. The comparative nature of this source will provide

information to help compare schools in the United States to those in Canada. Canada’s reading

, 12/22/10,

I STOPPED HERE

, 12/22/10,

Check APA

, 12/22/10,

Check APA

, 12/22/10,

What article? Be explicit.

, 12/22/10,

Check APA


comprehension rate is steadily growing higher than the reading rate in America. Canada’s school

system and teachers’ strategies, along with other countries, may provide some insight as to why

American schools are falling academically in the area of reading comprehension.

Literacy with an attitude: Educating working-class children in their own self-interest

represents helping the have-nots—empowering education and powerful literacy are key (xiii).

Finn defines the various forms of literacy. For instance, emergent literacy learning language

before school-age; usually learn more from mothers. Conversations between mother and baby;

language then at such an early age “takes on a particular meaning” (pg. 96). Paulo Friere-

developed methods for teaching powerful literacy.

Deeper reading: Comprehending challenging texts by K. Gallagher focuses on strategies

in teaching reading more challenging texts. Students are in need of those analytical skills in order

to understand what they read. This book gives examples and strategies to help students acquire

those skills. Furthermore, Gilmore & Smith’s (2005) “Seizing academic power: Indigenous

subaltern voices, metaliteracy, and counternarratives in higher education” focuses on

relationships between race and literacy. Perhaps the more impactful problem lies within our

culture and race discrepancies within education. Students facing problems in reading

comprehension and vocabulary acquisition also relies on the student’s background and education

of mothers and fathers.

Functional literacy (read, write, speak, and listen): This is perhaps the most serious

problem according to Differentiated literacy strategies for student growth and achievement in

grades 7-12 (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2005). Students are entering high school without these very

basic skills. This is the very foundation that gives students the ability to learn (pg. 61). (Gender


gap is an issue, pg. 73). This book focuses on differentiating literacy instruction for secondary

students. It also covers brain research.

Irvin, Buehl, & Radcliffe, (2007) initially focus on the neglect of adolescent literacy in

their book Strategies to enhance literacy and learning in middle school content area classrooms;

this is the basis of my entire research project. Too many students are promoted to the next grade

without reading comprehension skills to think on higher levels. Pages 1-13 are most useful. The

importance of vertical alignment is stressed in the first chapter. Larochelle, Bednarz, &

Garrison’s book (1998) Constructivism and education describes educators’ roles in constructivist

theory.

In “Understanding the power of words in multicultural education and interaction,”

Obiakor & Smith (2005) exclaim “words are powerful” (p. 77). “There are students who enter

school without having any explicit teaching of the alphabet by song or any other method” (pg.

81). This entire chapter is interesting and related to the overarching topic of reading

comprehension and the value of language in the classroom. Pg. 88-Using words to advance

multicultural education and interactions relates to the comparative education concept. “Just as

words are connected to languages, languages are connected to cultures, cultures are connected to

people, and people are connected to their race. They all matter!” (pg. 89).

Pahl & Roswell (2006) in Travel notes from the new literacy studies: Instances of on

page one describes countries in the “forefront of research in literacy education.” The authors are

“working across theoretical perspectives, and have a common understanding of literacy as a

social practice with an eye to the impact of new communicational systems on how we make

meaning.” To progress, “we need to mediate social practice with communicational networks to

have an informed perspective on contemporary literacy education.” What one might call


‘thinking literacies’ are currently high on the agenda for schools which are now charged with the

responsibility of producing new kinds of thinking subjects, able to produce ideas at need,

responding quickly to whatever contingencies the vicissitudes of the marketplace and the

generation of new technologies may throw up (Hartley, 2003). Crossings in literacy practices:

Page 174 “The teaching of thinking is rapidly being incorporated into governments’

accountability demands on schools, with an accompanying burgeoning of evaluation practices. In

the UK, five thinking skill areas have been added to the National Curriculum: information

processing, reasoning, enquiry, creative thinking and evaluation (Gold, 2002). Similar moves are

afoot around the world.”

Plaut’s book The right to literacy in secondary schools: Creating a culture of thinking.

challenges teachers to view student literacy as a “civil right” that helps the student understand

material and become independent learners. Thinking is at the forefront; students must leave high

school with the ability to think for themselves. Thinking about thinking: students have no grasp

on the concept of metacognition. To take charge of their own learning, students must learn how

to think (pp. 25-31). Schools must create a culture of literacy in order for students to meet and

exceed academic expectations.

The "Condition of Education" provides a summary of educational developments. The

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) looks closely at U.S. student performance on

international assessments (Provasnik, S., Gonzales, P., Miller, D., & National Center for

Education Statistics, 2009). Focus is on performance in reading, mathematics, and science

compared with the performance of their peers in other countries who took part in the Progress in

International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), the Program for International Student Assessment

(PISA), and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). “It identifies


which of these countries have outperformed the United States, in terms of students' average

scores and then percentage of students reaching internationally benchmarked performance levels,

and which countries have done so consistently. Major findings for reading include: (1) In PIRLS

2006, the average U.S. 4th-graders' reading literacy score (540) was above the PIRLS scale

average of 500, but below that of 4th-graders in 10 of the 45 participating countries, including 3

Canadian provinces; and (2) Among the 28 countries that participated in both the 2001 and 2006

PIRLS assessments, the average reading literacy score increased in 8 countries and decreased in

6 countries; in the rest of these countries, including the United States, there was no measurable

change in the average reading literacy score between 2001 and 2006; the number of these

countries that outperformed the United States increased from 3 in 2001 to 7 in 2006.”

“Adolescent literacy achievement across the United States is in crisis” is due to the lack

of technology used in American classrooms today (Sternberg, Kaplan, & Borck, (2007). From

“Enhancing Adolescent Literacy Achievement through Integration of Technology in the

Classroom,” educators need to focus on technology to enhance achievement. Students are

risking failure in all subjects if not identified early as a struggling reader. This article focuses on

research on technological advancements and integrating that technology to help students achieve

success in all areas. “Empirical research in these areas can be used to inform future practice in

Connecticut and across the nation: (1) state-offered virtual courses and delivery systems, (2)

communication tools, (3) artificial intelligence, (4) word processors, (5) new literacies practices,

(6) professional development, and (7) technology for parents.”

George Bush “Decade of the Brain” is the focus of Willis’ Teaching the brain to read.

How the brain responds to the written word (pg. viii) FOCUS: Vocabulary building and keeping

and Successful reading comprehension. Page 80 “Children who enter school with limited


vocabulary knowledge fall even further behind over time in reading fluency and comprehension”

(Baker, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 1997). Page 127 “Without the ability to connect each new

word, sentence, or page with those that came before, children cannot build a comprehensive

understanding of the words they read” (Long & Chong, 2001). Pp. 127-128 “As comprehension

increases, so does appreciation of reading for both knowledge and pleasure. Constructing

meaning from text or spoken language is not a separate literacy skill, but a merging of all

acquired prior knowledge, personal experience, and vocabulary with the strategies of deductive

and inductive reasoning and making connections. To be successful at reading comprehension,

students need to actively process what they read. That processing skill requires that students have

automatic reading skills and fluency, necessary vocabulary, and text-appropriate background

knowledge. To comprehend text, the reader must be able to decode words or recognize words

and access text integration processes to construct meaning and retain the content of the words

long enough for it to stimulate their stores of related information in their long term memories”

(Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998).


CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

Research Design

“Action research is more concerned with improvement within the context of the study”

(8). Richard Sagor (1992), in his book How to conduct Collaborative Action Research, states

“As action researchers, you don’t need to worry about the generalizability of your data because

you are not seeking to define the ultimate truth of learning theory. You goal is to understand

what is happening in your school or classroom and to determine what might improve things in

that context” (Sagor, p. 8) from Daniel Tomal’s Action Research for Educators.

Setting

Troup County is divided into three school zones which have one high school per zone:

Callaway High School, LaGrange High School, and Troup High School. A focus group of

teachers will be selected, student surveys will be administered to students in 9th grade English

classes, and the records used for the archival review will be from the same students surveyed.

The teachers who participate in the focus group, the students who are surveyed, and the archival

records that will be examined are all from the same school.

Permissions are in the process of being secured.

Sample, Subjects and /or Participants

Participants/Data Collection/Data Analysis

Procedures and Methods

High school participants selected randomly will be the chief concentration of this

, 12/22/10,

Introduction to chapter subsection where data shell is referenced Embed data shell here! Describe innovation used to improve pedagogy Describe procedures for gathering evidence about student outcomes Refer to FQ1 instruments found in appendices Describe procedures for gathering evidence about affective-reflective outcomes Refer to FQ2 instruments found in appendices Describe procedures for gathering evidence about the change process Refer to FQ3 instruments found in appendices

, 12/22/10,

Choose correct subheading (Sample, Subjects and/or Participants) used for study Characteristics of sample, subjects and / or participants Explain why sample, subjects and/or participants were selected Explain how sample, subjects and/or participants were selected If relevant, explain how sample, subjects and/or participants were divided into subgroups

, 12/22/10,

Not the setting

, 12/22/10,

Details about location (s) and population demographics Why location (s) was chosen How access to location (s) was obtained Discuss what permissions were secured to conduct study

, 12/22/10,

Your?

, 12/22/10,

Explain the overarching action research and program evaluation research design Cite at least two references that corroborate the choice of research design Describe study’s structure for gathering data Overview of data gathering methods and their analyses


research study, but it is imperative to analyze younger age groups in order to compile viable

comparative research. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed to determine the

effectiveness of incorporating powerful literacy skills in language arts classes and the outcome

these skills had on students’ understanding. Pre and post surveys and tests regarding

comprehension skills using powerful literacy will be used to examine students’ ability levels and

students’ attitudes toward powerful literacy. The scores will be analyzed using independent and

dependent t-tests to determine differences between survey results and test scores. A survey of

teachers describing reading comprehension, language, and vocabulary acquisition levels will be

conducted to supply quantitative data. Qualitative data will be gathered using in-depth interviews

of students, teachers, principals, and academic coaches conducted using specific and consistent

set of questions. The instructional plan will include using writing to win and differentiation

strategies to increase reading comprehension skills with vocabulary focus. The control group and

experimental group will be same level 9th grade English classes. I will use a regression analysis

using data collected from scores from 9th grade classes. After gathering this data, I will meet with

Michelle Nation, the system data specialist. I will use the following methods in gathering data

for the research process: pre-tests (Midterm)/post-tests (final), EOCT Results (after plan is in

place)—reading comprehension strand, CRCT 8th grade reading results, student and teacher

surveys, teacher interviews, and focus group with students.


References

Brozo, W., Shiel, G., & Topping, K. (Dec 2007). Engagement in reading: Lessons learned

from three PISA countries. [Abstract]. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, (51)4,

304-315. doi:10.1598/JAAL.51.4.2

Deshler, D.D., & Hock, M.F. (2007). Adolescent literacy: Where we are, where we need to go.

In M. Pressley, A. Billman, K.H. Perry, K.E. Reffitt, & J. Moorhead (Eds.).Shaping

Literacy achievement: Research we have, research we need (pp. 98-123).New York, NY:

The Guilford Press.

Finn, P.J. (1999). Literacy with an attitude: Educating working-class children in their own self-

interest. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Gregory, G.H., & Kuzmich, L. (2005).Differentiated literacy strategies for student growth and

achievement in grades 7-12. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Larochelle, M., Bednarz, N., & Garrison, J. (Eds.). (1998). Constructivism and education.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com

Obiakor, F.E., & Smith, D.J. (2005). Understanding the power of words in multicultural

education and interaction. In R. Hoosain, & F. Salili, (Eds.), Language in multicultural

education (pp. 77-92). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Pahl, K. & Roswell, J. (Eds.). (2006). Travel notes from the new literacy studies: Instances of

practice. [Ebrary Reader Version]. Retrieved from


http://site.ebrary.com.relay.lagrange.edu/lib/lagrange/docDetail.action?docID=10120628

National Endowment of the Arts (2007). New Reading Study. Washington, DC. Retrieved from

http://www.nea.gov/news/news07/TRNR.html

Sternberg, B.J., Kaplan, K.A., & Borck, J.E. (2007). Enhancing adolescent literacy

achievement through integration of technology in the classroom. Reading Research

Quarterly, (42)3, 416-420. doi:10.1598/RRQ.42.3.6

Tomal, D.R. (2003). Action research for educators. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc.

http://site.ebrary.com.relay.lagrange.edu/lib/lagrange/docDetail.action?docID=10120628

chapter 1: introductionhome.lagrange.edu/educate/advanced programs/eds pro… · web viewpage 127...

Documents