The Best Time of Day for Literacy Instruction

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract: 3 Introduction: 4

Statement of the Problem: 5Review of the Literature: 6-14Hypothesis: 15

Method: 16Participants: 17 Instruments: 18

References: 19-21

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

American education has shifted its directions to include literacy as a major focus as students continue to perform poorly on tests that gauge their abilities to read with comprehension.

Schools in New York City now devote the first 90 minutes of the day to reading instruction.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

At a private urban school in Brooklyn, reading and writing is taught earlier in the morning at 9’o clock, but students there continue to struggle with word decoding and content comprehension.

If the time of literacy instruction were moved to later in the day, specifically afternoon, would reading comprehension and decoding skills improve?

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Learning Styles: Time-of-Day Preference

Pros “Many studies confirm that people do have peak times of day…There is no

one time when all people are most alert. (Ammons, Booker, & Killmon, 1995) “…Students have major learning styles and hemispheric processing

preferences…instruction and learning improve when teachers use multiple teaching strategies in a systematic framework to address these preferences. (Beck, 2001)

School schedule pilot program in Plymouth England allows students to choose time to start the school day. (Bloom, 2007)

“Is one parent an early-bird and the other a night owl? Chances are the child may share a time-of-day preference with a parent and have a best time for learning.” – (Borchetta & Dunn, 2010)

“Students were grouped for reading according to their … highest energy levels--early morning, late morning, or afternoon. Students' standardized achievement reading and mathematics test scores between 1986 and 1989 increased from the 30th to the 83rd percentile under State Education Department observation.” – (Braio, Beasley, Dunn, Quinn & Buchanan, 1997)

“Reading instruction should use students‘ reading style strengths and preferences.” – (Carbo, 2009)

Learning Styles: Time-of-Day Preference

Pros Study finds learning style inventories are accurate. (Cropper, 1994) Educators are obliged to provide a variety of learning. (Doolan &

Honigsfeld, 2000) “Studies at many grade levels revealed that students who studied

for, or took tests at their "best" time of day, earned statistically higher standardized achievement and attitude test scores than when they studied for, or took tests at other times.(FN3) Researchers citing these results have urged administrators to consider school schedules based on students' and teachers' learning-style time preferences.” – (Dunn, 1998)

 ”As student populations have become more diverse, the ability to teach to the needs of different learners has become increasingly important. “ (Haar, Hall, Schoepp, & Smith, 2002)

Learning Styles: Time-of-Day Preference

Pros “…we have chosen to base our classroom instruction on the 21 elements of

the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model…We saw dramatic improvements during the next two years as we implemented the reading styles strategies and inclusion practices.” – (Hodgin & Wooliscroft, 1997)

Teach students to use individualized learning-style homework and study strategies, so that they can own their learning and differentiate for themselves. (Lauria, 2010)

When instruction matches learning styles, students improve in academic achievement. (Lovelace, 2005)

An elementary school in Aberdeen, South Dakota successfully implements learning styles model in their classrooms. (Neely & Alm, 1992)

“There are several other benefits for teachers using the LSPI besides identifying students as analytical or global learners. Teachers can get a better idea of how to group students compatibly.” (Pitts, 2009)

Learning Styles: Time-of-Day Preference

Cons Many educational psychologists believe that there is little evidence for the

efficacy of most learning style models, and furthermore, that the models often rest on dubious theoretical grounds. (Curry, 1990)

“…learning style instruments have not been shown to be valid and reliable, there is no benefit to matching instruction to preferred learning style, and there is no evidence that understanding one's learning style improves learning and its related outcomes. This conclusion is based on the lack of well-designed investigations by researchers who are not committed to any particular framework, and replicated in numerous educational settings.” – (Dembo & Howard, 2007

“What is a learning style? No one seems to know for sure. The language used by learning style theorists is filled with ambiguities. “ (Ivie, 2009)

“The reason researchers roll their eyes at learning styles is the utter failure to find that assessing children’s learning styles and matching to instructional methods has any effect on their learning.” – (Stahl, 1999)

Learning Styles: Time-of-Day Preference

Cons “Kavale and Forness (1987)…found little

empirical support for learning-style instruction and concluded that “learning appears to be really a matter of substance over style.” (Kavale & LeFever, 2007)

Morning

Pros “Individual instructional structures were more frequently observed in

the morning (14.2% AM; 10.4% PM), and entire group instructional structures were more frequent in the afternoon (68.0% AM; 78.4% PM). Considering these structures, it is not surprising that academic responding time was higher in the morning (78.1% AM; 71.5% PM), and inappropriate behaviors were more frequently observed in the afternoon (16.9% AM; 19.3% PM).” – (Muyskens & Ysseldyke, 1998)

Cons “We often operate under the mistaken assumption that reading should be

taught in the morning when, supposedly, most children are alert; the Lynch (1981) and Virostko (1983) investigations demonstrate the fallaciousness of that belief. Normal school hours restrict the achievement of approximately 25- 30 percent of secondary youngsters; no matter when instruction is being offered, it is the wrong time of day for almost one of every three students.” – (Dunn, 1984)

AfternoonPros

Study finds students who received instruction in the afternoon did better than students who received instruction in the morning. (Barron, Henderson, & Spurgeon, 1994)

“The results of this study support the research hypothesis that beginning readers who receive instruction in the afternoon benefit more in terms of reading achievement gains than beginning readers who receive instruction in the morning.” – (Davis, 2001)

Afternoon

Cons The findings of study done at a school in

Great Britain contradicts the findings of other studies that suggest students learn better in the afternoon than in the morning. (Robinson, 2004)

HYPOTHESIS

If reading instruction in a fifth-grade class is moved to the afternoon, students at a private urban school in Brooklyn, New York, will show gains in reading comprehension and decoding skills.

METHOD

PARTICIPANTS

INSTRUMENTS

REFERENCES  Ammons, T., Booker, J., & Killmon, C. (1995). The effects of time of day on student

attention and achievement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 384 592) 

Barron, B., Henderson, M., & Spurgeon, R. (1994). Effects of time of day instruction on reading achievement of below grade readers. Reading Improvement, 31, 59-60. 

Beck,C. (2001). Matching teaching strategies to learning style preferences. The Teacher Educator, 37, 1-15. 

Bloom, A. (2007). Pupils choose their shift. The Times Educational Supplement, 4743, 14. 

Borchetta, J., & Dunn, R. (2010). Helping parents understand how children learn. Momentum, 41, 40-43. 

Braio, A., Beasley, T. M., Dunn, R., Quinn, P., & Buchanan, K. (1997). Incremental implementation of learning style strategies among urban low achievers. The Journal of Educational Research, 91, 15-25. 

Carbo, M. (2009). Match the style of instruction to the style of reading. Phi Delta Kappan, 90, 373-378.

Cropper, C. (1994). Teaching for different learning styles. The Gifted Child Today, 17, 36-39.

REFERENCES Curry, L. (1990). A critique of the research on learning styles. Educational

Leadership, 48, 50-56.  Davis, Z. (2001). Effects of time-of-day of instruction on beginning reading

achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 138-140 Dembo , M. H., & Howard, K. (2007). Advice about the use of learning

styles: a major myth in education. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 37, 101-109.

Doolan, L.S., & Honigsfeld, A. (2000). Illuminating the new standards with learning style: striking a perfect match. The Clearing House, 73(5), 274-278.

Dunn, R. (1984). Learning style: state of the science. Theory into Practice, 23, 10-19.

 Dunn, R. (1998). Timing is everything. Momentum, 29, 23-25.  Haar, J., Hall, G., Schoepp, P., & Smith, D. H. (2002). How teachers teach

to students with different learning styles. Clearing House, 75(3), 142-145.  Hodgin, J., & Wooliscroft, C. (1997). Eric learns to read: learning styles at

work. Educational Leadership, 54, 43-45.

REFERENCES  Ivie, S. (2009). Learning styles: humpty dumpty revisited. McGill Journal of

Education, 44, 177-192.  Kavale, K. & LeFever, G. (2007). Dunn and Dunn Model of Learning-Style

Preferences: Critique of Lovelace Meta-Analysis. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(2), 94-97.

 Lauria, J. (2010). Differentiation through learning-style responsive strategies. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(1), 24-29. 

Lovelace, M. K. (2005). Meta-Analysis of Experimental Research Based on the Dunn and Dunn Model. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 176-183. 

Muyskens, P., & Ysseldyke, J. (1998). Student Academic responding time as a function of classroom ecology and time of day. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 411-424. 

Neely, R.O., & Alm, D. (1992). Meeting individual needs: a learning styles success story. The Clearing House, 66(2), 109-113. 

Pitts, J. (2009). Identifying and using a teacher-friendly learning-styles instrument. The Clearing House, 82, 225-231.

Robinson, S. (2004). Time is of the essence. The Times Educational Supplement, 4565, 25. 

Stahl, S. (1999). Different strokes for different folks? A critique of learning styles. American Educator, 27-31