Action Research

Improving Comprehension in Low Socioeconomic Students An Action Research Report Presented to The Faculty of the College of Graduate Studies Lamar University By Brandi Murrey December 2013 Introduction Improving Comprehension in Low Socioeconomic Students By Brandi Murrey Passion is the word I use when others ask why I teach. Educating all children no matter status is my passion. This research project focused on improving comprehension in First Grade students with a low socioeconomic status. Interventions consisted of traditional as well as focusing on technology based interventions. The research was conducted at Davis Elementary in Royse City Independent School District. Royse City school district is located in a rural area that embraces the education of their children. Although Royse City is highly populated Hispanic, we also serve many Low SES students throughout our district. Research was conducted with my 2012-2013 First Graders. This is currently my sixth year in the educational setting of First Grade. Challenges that were faced focused on technology and the limited use that these students have when at home. In beginning this research many people on campus will play important roles in gathering background knowledge. Our PEIMS clerk will be important in providing information as to which students fall under the umbrella of Low SES. Gathering information from my Kindergarten co-workers was very helpful in guiding me to where these students struggle. All previous data based assessments were also retained to show struggle areas and whether the child made any growth their kinder year. Assessments attained for research included the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) and Enterprise testing. DRA is a reading assessment given each six weeks by the classroom teacher; the assessment is used to determine a student’s reading level. Enterprise testing is given in the fall, winter and spring. This assessment looks at phonemic awareness in the beginning and ends with fluency. If a child is not successful interventions are put in place and they are progress monitored weekly by the classroom teacher. This information was gathered throughout my research so that I could monitor the growth of the project students. During this research I focused on many areas in helping these students with comprehension. There were many questions I had to ask myself throughout this project. What defines Low SES? Who are my Low SES students? What have been their struggle areas in Kinder? Do they have access to technology at home? Are their parents well educated? Do the parents offer support? Can they offer support? What has been done to help them so far? What new interventions can I put in place? How can technology play a role in this child’s education? Does my school have the available resources? If the child shows success how will I keep this strategy going as they move on to other grade levels. Although the terminology throughout the research is explanatory sometimes in education we use many acronyms. DRA- Developmental Reading Assessment given each six weeks to see assess a child’s reading level. Enterprise assesses phonological awareness and reading fluency. Low Socioeconomic Status (Low SES) students of lower income families that may not have resources available like those from a higher status. Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS Clerk) has access to all records for the students on their campus. This should help in understanding the project as the information is presented. Literature Review There are many available articles about reading comprehension and Low SE Students. In one article they discussed the importance of reading during the summer for Low SE Students to be successful. Research has revealed specific interventions that bolster reading during summer vacation and that have clear positive effects on reading development of children of low-socioeconomic status, a group whose reading skills often decline over the summer months. (Duke, N., Block, M.) We must develop strategies for our students that make reading engaging so they will want to continue to read. In one article they discuss motivation and engagement in students; these two go hand in hand when working with students in any academic area. Motivation to read can impact a reader’s persistence in reading.Students with higher amounts of motivation is more likely to apply the use of comprehension strategies while reading (Pardo, 2004). Although there are many motivational factors that are not within the teachers’ control, teachers are able to motivate students to read by providing interesting texts, allowing choices to be made as levels of engagement increase, so does comprehension (Grimes, 2003). As I searched for strategies to help children read and comprehend several articles pertaining to vocabulary kept appearing. Vocabulary is very important when teaching children to read the broader the vocabulary the more interesting reading will become to a child. If they have a large vocabulary they will be able to understand more of what they are reading in return comprehending what they have read. Only a rich and multifaceted vocabulary program is likely to help students accomplish these tasks. (Baumann, Kameenui, 2004, Blachowicz, Fisher, Ogle & Watts Taffe 2006, Graves 2006 Stahl & Nagy, 2006) Focusing on comprehension is important in the traditional sense but during this research I wanted to look at strategies using technology. If we look back to the Bush administration we will find technology implementation in his No Child Left Behind law. Title II, Part D of NCLB, also known as Enhancing Education through Technology, correlates improved student achievement to proper and effective uses of technology in classrooms (Buckenmeyer & Freitas, n.d.). In current times of education 21st century teaching is all around us. Schools are purchasing more technology and students have optimal opportunities to experience learning using technology. Although some argue that technology may not increase reading comprehension, it does offer students engagement when reading or learning vocabulary. In my last article Andrew Marcinek speaks about taking learning outside the walls. (Marcinek, A., 2010) The world is full of people with technological devices to connect them with others and a plethora of information. Did we ever stop to think that students being engaged with the world through technology could increase vocabulary and motivation? Today's student has the ability to reach out to millions on a daily basis and simply ask, "Is this good?" (Marcinek, A. 2010) Action Research Design This research project took place within my first grade classroom. Economic status was the basis for choosing the students of study. There were two boys and three girls that participated in this research. These were not my only Low SE Students but they were chosen due to lack of growth in Kinder. Through research I along with our intervention teachers developed many new strategies to help the student begin working on comprehension. We created several games to focus on vocabulary and comprehension. We began using these interventions in September which fell during the end of the first six weeks. This gave us time to do the fall assessments for incoming first graders so that we would have that data. Each day we had small group time and these interventions were presented to the students during this time. Friday was used to assess on previous skills being taught that week. As we moved in to the second six weeks of school we began to incorporate technology during the small group time. Students were able to use Ipad apps to work on vocabulary, create stories of their own any activity that was engaging in the area of reading. They would use desktop computers for vocabulary games and reading assessments. We are also fortunate enough to have Mimios on our campus so students could play games on comprehension and vocabulary; this was a very engaging activity for students. At the Mimio they played these games with other peers in the classroom to encourage interaction and peer buddies. All strategies continued throughout the year with new ones added as we want along. It is very important to change and rotate strategies so students will stay engaged and continue to grow. Students were assessed every Friday, winter and again in the spring. This allowed plenty of data to compare. Data Collection Collecting my data consisted of using classroom observations, work samples and testing data. Along with this data I had to get data from our PEIMS clerk to show me which students are Low SES. Using classroom observations allowed me to observe their comfort zones in the activities they were working on. This also allowed me to observe their use of the technology and was it helping in any way. It allowed me to see who was familiar with technology and who might need more guidance. Writing is where I focused on work samples, but not just paper pencil writing. Work samples included oral reading, vocabulary, story sequencing and being able to retell the story orally. Testing data gave me a more formal way to look at the growth of the students during this research process. Through DRA I could assess their reading levels, were they where they needed to be at the right time or were they still behind. Enterprise testing would place their growth on a chart so that we could see the actual growth and where it was at. It also offered suggestions as to where the child still struggled and what interventions might meet their needs. Compiling all of the above data allowed us to adjust throughout the research to better meet a student’s needs. Findings Findings in my research led me to the conclusion that technology in the classroom partnered with strategies that immerse the students reading can increase comprehension. The data I used cannot be presented due to privacy laws but there was significant growth in all students. Some students progressed further than others but those that did not make as much growth were tested at the end of the year for Dyslexia. When making learning engaging for students they are more eager to do task they might not normally want to complete. The research I conducted before beginning my project was very beneficial in helping me develop new strategies to offer my students. Although articles from the web were very helpful, I also pulled ideas from resources on Twitter. This is where I would go to get the countless apps to build vocabulary and comprehension. All strategies that were used in this research can be carried with the students throughout their educational journey. The hands on strategies were just as beneficial as the technology strategies so those without computers at home still have strategies they can use. Conclusion and Recommendations In conclusion I feel that this research project was very beneficial. The research prior to beginning my project really guided in my success. It is very important that you gather as much background knowledge that you can to help you understand your students and their needs. Recruiting someone from my campus to help me create interventions for my students was pertinent to the time I had allotted. As educators time is very limited so unfortunately we cannot always think much less create new interventions for students. My enlisted intervention teacher was great at researching and creating the activities needed for the skill we worked on. Although technology may not have been the major growth factor it played a huge part in engaging our students. Schools should look into ways to make technology more available to our students. In making these more available to our students it opens up avenues for them to connect with other students and learn from one another. This in return will offer up unlimited opportunities for new learning experiences and growth. Students will be able to grow on their educational journey while reaching out to others through the World Wide Web. As I found and many others will find no matter what their economic status all children have some sort of degree of intelligence with technology. It is important that the students guide you in your research, you set up the tools and they will use them. The focus of my research was Low Se Students but at no time was they singled out and other students used the strategies as well. It is important that even though we are focusing on Low Se Students they need to remain a part of the whole group. They have many battles ahead of them and labeling them in school should not be one. These students are now in grade 2 and I am going to be keeping up with them to see how they are doing. References 1.) Duke,N. , Block,M. (2012). Improving Reading in the Primary Grades. Journal of The Future Children. 22(2), 39-69. 2.) Closs, E. (2000). Teaching Reading Comprehension to Struggling and At-Risk Readers: Strategies That Work. 1-8. 3.) Kaiser,K., Dickinson,D.,Goldstein,H. (2008). Vocabulary for Low SES Children Approaches, Outcomes, and Methodological Challenges. 4.) Rooney, S. (2011). A study of the effects of integrating instructional technology on Student achievement in low socioeconomic status elementary schools 5.) Edutopia. (2010). Ten Simple Strategies for Reengaging Students. http://www.edutopia.org/blog/reengaging-students-andrew-marcinek