As I'm reading the descriptions of the different kinds of data analysis, I am realizing that I don't have a good grasp of the different kinds of analyses. I haven't taken a math course since high school (embarrassing to admit) and never had a statistics class. I know that I will perform two different quantitative analyses and one qualitative analysis. It's possible that there will be more than than. From my understanding of having triangulated data, a study is stronger with both categories of data (mixed method).
The tool I found most understandable and helpful was socsciestatistics.com. I think I will first create two basic, Excel tables to tables. The first table will record each student's weekly minutes read and take an overall average. The second table will be each student's beginning RI score and ending RI score and calculate the increase from pretest to posttest. Each amount will be entered as an interval/ratio into a OneWay ANOVA calculator. I could also try a TwoWay ANOVA if I also enter attitude toward reading as another variable. (I think. ) Another possible calculator is the T Test. I also came up with the possibility of using Pearson's R Calculator or Pearson Correlation Coefficient calculator. I can't tell which of these four to use ( or all). I think that the choice of which test to run will become more clear to me after I finish collecting my data and begin organizing it, constructing tables, and piecing it all together. That's all I got, folks!
0 Comments
Nationally and in California, reading scores are below proficient. National and state statistics show that the majority of students are performing below proficiency in reading.The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) results for reading in 2015 showed that thirty-six percent of fourth-grade and 34 percent of eighth-grade students perform at or above the Proficient level in NAEP reading tests (https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading). NAEP also reports that California 4th grade students performed lower than the national averages in all years from 1992-2015. Some researchers and educators claim that one influencing factor for these low scores is an overall decrease in students’ personal reading time. These educators and researchers claim that an increase in independent, self-chosen, voluntary reading, or pleasure reading, would result in a rise of reading proficiency. One of the men doing extensive research on reading Stephen Krashen. He claims that “numerous research studies prove that wide reading improves children’s comprehension, background knowledge, vocabulary, fluency, and writing” (Krashen, 2004). Krashen’s studies date back to the 1980’s and 1990’s, when research on the correlation between pleasure reading and reading competency seems to have hit its apex. Another major contributor to information on America’s reading habits is The National Endowment for the Arts. The NEA conducts a national survey and report on literacy about every four years.Their 2004 report, Reading at Risk, alarmed our nation with its statistics on a widespread drop in reading rates. The latest report from 2015, Reading on the Rise, shows a mild increase in adult and child reading rates, especially when digital readers are involved. Linda Gambrell, professor of education at Clemson University, another frequently quoted researcher, summed up the NEA’s overall message, “Among the many findings reported by NEA is that reading for pleasure correlates strongly with academic achievement. Individuals who engage in reading for pleasure are better readers and writers than nonreaders. Children and teenagers who read for pleasure on a daily or weekly basis score better on reading tests than infrequent readers” (Gambrell, L.B. 2008). Anecdotally, of course, most teachers and parents will affirm this assertion. We know that the kids who tote around books and read every chance they get are the ones with the highest scores on standardized reading tests and they’re often better writers, too. Research also supports this conclusion.Researchers Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988), studied the relation between the amount of student reading outside school and reading achievement for 155 fifth-grade students, and found that the reading of books was the best predictor of reading achievement. Researchers at the University of Connecticut designed a study to examine their hypothesis that increasing the amount of time spent independently reading student-chosen, appropriately leveled books in grades 3–5 would positively affect student achievement . Although they did not find a significant rise in reading comprehension over fourteen weeks, they did conclude that there was “evidence that enriched independent reading may be a promising way to increase reading fluency” (Reis, Eckert, et al, 2008). They also noted that they did not find recent research on the connection between extensive, independent reading and reading fluency and comprehension scores. Generally speaking, in conducting a search for literature and research on this topic, I found that the majority of widespread studies available on the correlation between students’ reading choices and their overall reading proficiency were done in the 1980’s, 1990’s. There seems to be a temporary increase around 2006 to 2008, perhaps due to the NEto a rising level of research about the effects of extensive reading on second language acquisition. Even Stephen Krashen’s most recent publications are in the field of second language learners. “In recent years, there has been phenomenal growth in the interest in ER (extensive reading) amongst L2 researchers and educators” (Yamashita, 2015). The lack of a current research-based connection between independent, or free, or pleasure reading in a first language has been noted by the National Reading Panel. They concluded that “based on the existing evidence, the NRP can only indicate that while encouraging students to read might be beneficial, research has not yet demonstrated this in a clear and convincing manner.” The panel called for research on the effectiveness of encouraging students to engage in independent reading and emphasized the need for rigorous experimental studies that measure a range of reading outcomes, including reading fluency and comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000). Some more recent statistics do support the supposition that reading for pleasure is connected to higher reading scores. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 4th graders and 8th graders who report reading for fun almost every day scored higher than 4th and 8th grade students who report never or hardly ever reading for fun. (https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/report.aspx) Many of the publications surrounding reading for pleasure and overall reading proficiency focus on a student’s affect toward reading - their overall attitude toward reading on their own that drives their decisions to read or not to read. Originally, I had not intended to include this in my study, but reading the literature, I changed my mind and decided to include a brief questionnaire with open-ended questions aimed at ferreting out my students’ thoughts on their enjoyment (or lack of it) in reading. In this way I can not only find information on the “what” and “how” of the correlation between pleasure reading and reading proficiency, but a little bit of the “why”. According to The Nation’s Report Card on the NAEP website, nationally in 2015, “thirty-six percent of fourth-grade and thirty-four percent of eighth-grade students perform at or above the Proficient level in NAEP reading.” Surely this is an alarming national rate of reading proficiency. My driving question is to seek a correlation between independent, free reading, sometimes called recreational or pleasure reading, and reading proficiency. I believe the scope of the question has implications at all levels: international, national, state, district, and my own school and classroom level.
I have some comfort in knowing that I’m not the only one thinking that there must be a correlation, and by my hypothesis, a positive one. “Among the many findings reported by NEA is that reading for pleasure correlates strongly with academic achievement. Individuals who engage in reading for pleasure are better readers and writers than nonreaders. Children and teenagers who read for pleasure on a daily or weekly basis score better on reading tests than infrequent readers. Frequent readers also score better on writing tests than infrequent readers”(Gambrell, L. B. 2008). As I set out to find peer-reviewed articles and research articles to gain some insight into the international, national, or state findings, I keep running across one gentleman in particular, Stephen Krashen. Here’s my favorite quote so far - reasons to be divulged later. “IF THERE WERE A SUREFIRE WAY TO HELP KIDS BECOME MORE LITERATE, WOULD YOU IGNORE IT? Of course not. But that's exactly what's happening across much of our nation. Try searching the literacy information that's available from your state’s department of education, and you will be lucky to find a single mention of this method. Or peruse the National Reading Panel's 2000 report, a federally funded study of research-based reading practices, and you'll discover that this approach is scarcely mentioned. What technique am I talking about? It's called free voluntary reading, and it may be the only way to help children become better readers, writers, and spellers” (Krashen, S. 2006). I thought, surely it can’t be THAT ignored. Yet here I am, literally hours and hours later of searching educational research databases and I have found only a few relevant studies done within the past 10 years that are supported by detailed research. Here and there over the last 40 years you'll find a comprehensive study or survey, but nothing seems to have been recently. Even when you find a recent study, much of their background information dates back to the 1980's and 1990's. Mostly I find articles and blogs about teachers’ and parents’ own experiences. Yes, most of these articles are by experienced teachers and professors, and yes, their observations support my hypothesis, but there seems to be a scarcity of statewide or nationwide correlational research between reading for pleasure and academic outcomes on standardized testing for reading achievement. The greatest amount of recent research seems to revolve around language development in pre-reading children before entering school and the correlation of oral language acquisition to reading skills. There is little research on middle school and high school age students that connects reading outside of school to performance on reading tests. Perhaps I've stumbled on an area of research that needs to be more heavily examined. Certainly the lack of information on a greater scale only makes me more curious to see what my very localized research will find! 790 Blog #2 - Having reviewed the IRB, what do you need to know to address your DQ? Why? How would you measure your “need to knows”?
Loosely following Falk’s and Mertler’s outlines of how to formulate and refine a driving question for action research, here’s draft 2 of my driving question. (At the time of writing this blog, I haven’t been able to access the IRB site.) Framing the Question What impact does time spent reading have on reading competency? Subquestions:
Clarifying the Context and Background In my current teaching context at Independent Studies, my students spend far more time at home than they do in the classroom. I have perhaps an hour of instruction time per week. Predominantly their reading skills will be acquired independently. Creating strong readers has long been a passion of mine as a teacher. I am trying to find a way to increase overall reading fluency and reading comprehension in my students without the benefit of direct or guided instruction and time spent reading in the classroom. When I examine my own perceptions and biases around this topic, I admit that I probably already have a hypothesis that I want to test. I perceive and hypothesize that children who spend more time reading have stronger reading fluency and comprehension. I further believe that increasing reading time will result in stronger reading competency, perhaps within a relatively short amount of time such as a few months. Scrutinizing my own biases, I find that I’ve formulated an anecdotal and perhaps incorrect assumption that kids spend less time reading now than they did two or three decades ago. Further, I have attributed this perceived decrease in reading to increased technology and screen time. My observation is that easy access to television and video games has largely replaced recreational reading. I’m curious to see what the research on this topic shows and what my own action research will reveal about my own students. Need to Knows
Plan to Do (beginning thoughts)
Greetings, Cohort 12!
I've done the reading and watched the videos, but I have to admit I'm stumped in formulating a driving question. Partly, I feel challenged by my teaching context. Let me give you some background and perhaps someone has a suggestion. I teach at Independent Studies, which is a non-traditional setting. As the name implies, students predominantly do their studies at home. I teach in the K-8 setting. Conceivably, I could have students in any or all of these grades. Enrollment is voluntary; students are not here due to suspension/expulsion. Typically our enrollment is light in the lower grades and increases in middle school. For example, I have no K, 1 or 4th grade students. I have one 2nd grade student, two 3rd grade students, 1 fifth grade student, four 6th grade students, seven 7th grade students, and seventeen 8th grade students. The elementary students come to our classroom 3 times a week for an hour each session. The middle school students come twice a week: once for their core period (2 or 3 hours) and once for a math lab (1 hour). Other than that, they work at home. There is very little instruction time. During their core session, they basically get 1/2 hour to 45 minutes per subject. In that time we have to go over the work they've done the previous week and frontload the next week's work. I's a blur of time! Basically, as far as academics are concerned, we're akin to curriculum mappers or homeschool proctors. Much of the importance of what we do is in the social and emotional realm. We provide a very safe environment with a small student-teacher ratio. We typically see our students in groups of 4 to 6 students at time. Many of our students come to us after having faced difficult or even traumatic situations in their lives or at their previous schools. A few have been in and out of the hospital, many have anxiety/depression, some have been victims of bullying, several are on the spectrum, and about 40% of my students have IEPs or 504s. Some of the problems I see or ponderings I have, put in the form of a question, might be...
|
Nancy JaminetArchives
December 2017
Categories |