Embedded Files
Pre and Post Test Collection
Pre and Post Test Collection
The class was given a pre and post test taken from the Wonders curriculum assessments. The pre test was given the first week of the action research in January. It was assessing their knowledge of finding author's point of view, being able to inference as readers, and using the strategy of ask and answer questions. They were asked to read one passage and answer nine questions to assess their ability to comprehend the text. I wanted to use the test from Unit 5 Week 3 to ensure that the sixth week of data would fall on the same test to gather results.
The results below show an increase in student ability to use an appropriate reading strategy to help them with the skill that week. I think students' averages grew dramatically because they were more confident with themselves as readers the second time taking it. Students were setting individual goals for themselves to get a higher score and it caused my students' motivation to increase. I saw a positive outcome in the text evidence questions and summarizing questions which was the overall goal of helping students' understanding of text increase.
Pre-Test
Pre-Test
Prior to strategies being implemented
Post-Test
Post-Test
After the strategies were implemented
T-test Results/Statement: Triangulation of Data
T-test Results/Statement: Triangulation of Data
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine the effect if the use of explicit instruction of reading strategies will increase students overall reading comprehension of text. There was not a significant difference in the scores prior to implementing summarizing strategies (M=65, SD=12.04) and after implementing (M=73, SD=18.73) the summarizing strategies; t(20)= 1.632993, p = 0.0594664. The observed standardized effect size is medium (0.37). That indicates that the magnitude of the difference between the average and μ0 is medium. These results suggest that the use of summarizing strategies did not have a significant effect on students’ ability to identify the main idea while reading.
Weekly Growth
Weekly Growth
Even though my pre/post tests showed little to no growth, my weekly data told a different story. Each week, I collected data from the comprehension selection tests that they took on Thursday's and I pulled data from the end of the week Friday assessment where they had to apply the focused strategy/skill. Below, I analyze the connections I made to from the selection tests to the end of the week tests. As you can see, the weekly average percentages maintained around a 85% weekly for both tests.
In the first graph, I have listed each reading strategy with the class average percentage. I started to see a increase in reading scores during the third week, using schema. Based off of my data, I also had 100% of my students be able to meet the learning target during small groups that week practicing schema. Students enjoyed being able to understand the text better by relating it back to their own personal experiences. I used sentence starters that week for students to write down connection they had while reading.
In the second graph, this data is from each weekly test where students were expected to apply the specific reading strategy to the skill. Their class average was not as strong as the selection comprehension tests. I noticed these tests were more difficult than the selection tests because students were given harder questions such as grammar, inference questions, and analyzing text evidence. It was interesting to see that the biggest increase of test score was during the schema strategy week, just like the selection test week. This was because students grasped this strategy a lot better when applying it to their reading based off of the sentence starter exit tickets.
Use of small group reading strategy for the highest and lowest class average score:
Use of small group reading strategy for the highest and lowest class average score:
Highest Average: Schema
Highest Average: Schema
Selection Test Class Average: 91%
Weekly Average Test Average: 80%
Lowest Average: Metacogntion
Lowest Average: Metacogntion
Selection Test Class Average: 79%
Weekly Average Test Average: 68%
To further analyze my data, I decided to focus in on three students who made growth, maintained growth, and did not make any growth when we practiced using the strategies in small groups. I looked into the each week's strategies that we practiced together through explicit instruction and wanted to compare it to their weekly test score. I decided to pull data from week 1 and compare it to week 6 to ensure a wide range of growth. As you can see below, Student A, Student B, and Student C all had different outcomes throughout this data research.
To further analyze my data, I decided to focus in on three students who made growth, maintained growth, and did not make any growth when we practiced using the strategies in small groups. I looked into the each week's strategies that we practiced together through explicit instruction and wanted to compare it to their weekly test score. I decided to pull data from week 1 and compare it to week 6 to ensure a wide range of growth. As you can see below, Student A, Student B, and Student C all had different outcomes throughout this data research.
Strategy Applied Column: Students were given an exit ticket on Wednesday/Thursdays to show off their knowledge of the strategy and how they applied it to understand the story better. I scored these out of 5 points each week; their percentage in the graph is based off of how well they were able to use the strategy.
Strategy Applied Column: Students were given an exit ticket on Wednesday/Thursdays to show off their knowledge of the strategy and how they applied it to understand the story better. I scored these out of 5 points each week; their percentage in the graph is based off of how well they were able to use the strategy.
Test Score: Represents what their weekly test score was on Fridays over the strategy/skill.
Test Score: Represents what their weekly test score was on Fridays over the strategy/skill.
Student A who utilized the strategy and made growth each week
Student A who utilized the strategy and made growth each week
Each week, Student A was eager to learn new strategies at my back table. This student originally struggled every week on the reading tests before data started in January. As you can see from their data, they were able to use that week's strategy each week and understood how to apply it to reading. I saw more confidence in reading with this student as the weeks progressed, they were able to find text evidence for their answers, and they improved their reading test scores by 22%.
Student B who utilized the strategy and maintained their progress weekly
Student B who utilized the strategy and maintained their progress weekly
Student B maintained consistency with using the strategy while reading the leveled readers in small groups and scored well each week on their tests. This was a student who had already maintained a high percentage on the weekly reading tests but I wanted to challenge them to try new reading strategies that they had not used before. Although this student did not make much growth in their scores, they maintained a high percentage and still participated in small groups each week. They consistently pushed them self to apply each strategy while reading to find one that worked well for them.
Student C who did not utilize the strategy and their scores decreased
Student C who did not utilize the strategy and their scores decreased
Student C struggled to participate in group discussions during small groups. Each week, they did not utilize that week's comprehension strategy during small groups and were disengaged during the lessons due to who they were in a group with. After prompting them several times to use the strategy while they read, I did not see motivation from the student to understand the story better. Due to the lack of value that they saw in the reading strategy, they chose not to participate daily. I think this is because they already saw themselves as a "good reader" and did not want to try reading a different way that they were not comfortable with.
Results from Student Survey and Reading Strategy Anticipatory Guide
Results from Student Survey and Reading Strategy Anticipatory Guide
This was taken one week before reading strategies were implemented in small groups.
This was taken one week after reading strategies were implemented in small groups.
Overall, you see a 35% increase in students being able to know what reading strategies are due to my explicit instruction during small groups and helping them become experts using them. I think the use of small group instruction and being able to teach students in that environment supported my instruction and helped their knowledge of reading strategies.
Overall, you see a 35% increase in students being able to know what reading strategies are due to my explicit instruction during small groups and helping them become experts using them. I think the use of small group instruction and being able to teach students in that environment supported my instruction and helped their knowledge of reading strategies.
Another huge increase I had was a 25% increase in the student's value of small group instruction. I think this is a result of intentional planning and using the appropriate leveled readers for each group. Through explicit instruction during small groups, I was able to answer more questions for each reader, students felt more comfortable contributing to conversation, and they were getting the support they needed. I saw an increase in attitudes every day when groups were asked to come back.
Another huge increase I had was a 25% increase in the student's value of small group instruction. I think this is a result of intentional planning and using the appropriate leveled readers for each group. Through explicit instruction during small groups, I was able to answer more questions for each reader, students felt more comfortable contributing to conversation, and they were getting the support they needed. I saw an increase in attitudes every day when groups were asked to come back.
True and False statements asked on the reading anticipatory guide:
True and False statements asked on the reading anticipatory guide:
1. The answers to "Author and Me" questions can be found in the text
2. As a reader, you can reread to break down the text
3. There are different types of questions that can be asked in the before, during, and after reading
4. An example of visualizing is when the reader can make sounds in their head while reading the story
5. Schema is when you dig deeper in the text
6. Summarizing does not help us understand the sequence of a story
7. Rereading is not important when I am going back to find understanding
8. Schema is making connections while reading it is based off of personal experiences
The results from the Anticipatory Guide pre/post test were the most encouraging for me after this study. My CADRE mentor and I came up with these true/false statements to challenge my students as much as we could. We wanted to see which students grasped the meaning of each reading strategy. Overall, I think my results for this survey were successful to do the repetition during small groups of what each reading strategy was and how it can be utilized while reading. I saw an increase of students using these reading strategies in their vocabulary and referring to them during reading whole group. This allowed other students to engage more and collaborate with their peers about reading strategies.
The results from the Anticipatory Guide pre/post test were the most encouraging for me after this study. My CADRE mentor and I came up with these true/false statements to challenge my students as much as we could. We wanted to see which students grasped the meaning of each reading strategy. Overall, I think my results for this survey were successful to do the repetition during small groups of what each reading strategy was and how it can be utilized while reading. I saw an increase of students using these reading strategies in their vocabulary and referring to them during reading whole group. This allowed other students to engage more and collaborate with their peers about reading strategies.
Page updated
Report abuse