C227 Task 1 - Passed Task PDF

Preview

Summary

Passed Task...

Description

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

1

    

BGP2 Task 1: Research Proposal  Whitney L. Wilson  Western Governors University, Master of Curriculum and Instruction

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

2

Table of Contents  Chapter 1: Introduction …………………………………………………………. 3 Education Related Research Topic……………………………………………….3 Education Related Research Problem Statement…………………………………3 Purpose Statement ……………………………………………………………….3 Open Ended Research Question…………………………………………………..4 Limitations of the Study…………………………………………………………..4 Chapter 2: Review of Literature…………………………………………………...4 Chapter 3: Method………………………………………………………………...13 Proposed Research Design………………………………………………………..13 Participants………………………………………………………………………..13 Data Collection Methods………………………………………………………....14 Instruments……………………………………………………………………….14 Procedures………………………………………………………………………..15 Ethical Treatment Strategies……………………………………………………..18 Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………….18 References………………………………………………………………………...20

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

3

Chapter 1: Introduction Education- Related Research Topic

The research topic I chose is developing alphabet knowledge in Kindergarten children. This topic interests me because it is relevant to my educational setting. I teach Kindergarten, and some students come in with little to no knowledge about the alphabet. Identifying all letters of the alphabet, producing and identifying letter sounds, and reproducing letters of the alphabet are important Kindergarten skills.   Research Problem The research problem I have chosen for my study is teaching Kindergarten students letter sounds, reproduction of letters, and letter recognition in a developmentally appropriate and efficient way. The research problem relates to my setting because My current curriculum includes a letter of the week, handwriting for the letter, songs related to the letter and one or two sounds that the letter represents. Very often at the end of the week about a fourth of the class is not able to identify the letter, write the letter, or produce the sound the letter represents. More research needs to be done on effective and efficient ways to teach alphabet knowledge. Purpose Statement of the Research Study: The purpose of this research study is to evaluate the use of Enhanced Alphabet Knowledge (EAK) to improve Alphabet knowledge in a diverse group of kindergarten students.

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

4

Open Ended Research Questions 1. What is the impact of using EAK as a strategy for teaching alphabet knowledge to a diverse group of kindergarten students?

Limitations of the Study: Students will not be randomly selected for the study and there will not be a control group for the study. Students will all be part of a virtual tutor group. The study will only focus on the letter identification portion of AK. The fact that students will not meet with the researcher in person is another limitation of the study.

Ch. 2 Review of Literature

Literature Review Introduction: Alphabet knowledge is consistently recognized as the strongest and most reliable predictor of later literacy achievement (Blaiklock, 2004; Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012; Piasta, Purpura, and Wagner, 2009; Walton,2014).  Alphabet knowledge is identifying uppercase and lowercase letters, identifying letter sounds and producing letters in written form (Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012; Piasta, Purpura, & Wagner 2009). These skills begin as early as the preschool years, but students usually master alphabet knowledge in kindergarten. A firm foundation in alphabet knowledge is critical for children learning to read. Under new literacy standards, letter name knowledge in preschool and kindergarten can function as a gatekeeper to the rest of the curriculum (Torterelli, Bowles, & Skibbe, 2017). In this time of outcome- based and high stakes

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

5

assessments it is important to use the most efficient teaching approaches in the classroom (Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010). After an in depth analysis of the research, I have come across multiple articles that claim to outline the best way to teach alphabet knowledge. It is unclear if Alphabet knowledge is best taught by focusing on one letter per week, including all letters of the alphabet,or if a new letter should be taught every day. However it is evident that students need ongoing assessment and individualized instruction in order to reach their individual goals (Strang & Piasta 2016). It is also important to teach to the various learning styles of students (Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010).

Strategies for teaching Alphabet knowledge Research over the last few years has consistently found students' knowledge of the alphabet to be the most important factor in students' success in reading (Blaiklock, 2004; J ones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012; Piasta, Purpura, and Wagner, 2009; Walton,2014). Walton, (2014) suggested that students are more likely to learn phonological skills, letter sounds, rhymin, and word recognition through music. He tested this theory through an experiment where he placed students in two groups. In the first group students learned through the current curriculum. In the second group students learned alphabet knowledge through song, dance and movement. The study began with pretests on the student’s knowledge in the areas being taught. The study ended with post tests. At the end of the study it was found that Students who participated in the music group performed better than the control group on letter skill knowledge. Results were comparable amongst the two groups in the areas of rhyming and initial sound, medial sound, and ending sound identification (Walton, 2014).

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

6

Another method for teaching alphabet knowledge is Enhanced Alphabet Knowledge (EAK). EAK includes teaching letter sound, letter identification, and reproducing the letter. Unlike most strategies for teaching alphabet knowledge, EAK also includes recognizing letters in text (Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012). This strategy teaches a letter a day rather than teaching a letter a week. Using this method allows for multiple instructional cycles on each letter (Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012). EAK does not treat all letters as equals. According to this study letters like A and Z, and letters in a student’s name are easier for students to learn because the students have background knowledge on these letters. Therefore less instructional time can be spent on these letters(Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012). Another important component of EAK is teaching lowercase and uppercase letters together (Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012). Students usually have some background knowledge of uppercase letters making it easier for students to learn the lowercase form of the letter (Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012; Walton. 2014).  Like EAK, the next strategy emphasizes teaching the uppercase and lowercase form of letters simultaneously. Features for Identification of Uppercase and Lowercase Letters  states that comparing the lowercase letters to uppercase can aid in identifying lowercase letters because of the student's prior knowledge of uppercase letters ( Fiset, Blais, E´thier-Majcher,Arguin, Bub, and Gosselin 2008) . The study was performed on graduate students using the bubbles method. Parts of letters were blurred out and students were asked to identify the letters ( Fiset, Blais, E´thier-Majcher, Arguin, Bub, and Gosselin 2008). Results showed that certain parts of the letters were needed to identify letters that had similarities with other letters. The strategy derived from the study is pointing out similarities and differences in letters to students. This strategy

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

7

prevents students from confusing letters like C and G, or p and q ( Fiset, Blais, E´thier-Majcher, Arguin, Bub, and Gosselin 2008). The article points out that teachers may choose to teach letters that are confused together while pointing out the similarities. Other educators may give students time to master a letter before introducing a new letter that looks similar to it. Either way it is imperative for educators to point out the differences and similarities between letters that are easily confused by students ( Fiset, Blais, E´thier-Majcher, Arguin, Bub, and Gosselin 2008). While searching for the right strategy for a student or class it is important to consider the various learning styles of students (Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010). If a child is not grasping the content being taught it may not mean that the child is incapable of learning the content. The problem may be that the strategies being used to teach the content are ineffective (Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010). A learning style is the preferred method of learning for an individual. It is his or her preferred way of thinking, processing, and understanding information ( Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010). Teaching to various learning styles can be very challenging for educators. In order to reach a diverse group of learners it is important to build relationships with students and to have a deep understanding of learning styles (Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010). The book Understanding Learning Styles: Making a Difference for Diverse Learners  gives multiple examples of learning styles and ways to identify them. For example, Gregorc’s work has helped educators identify personality types and Howard Garner’s multiple intelligences theories which identifies individual talents and aptitudes (Allen, Sheve, & Nieter, 2010).

Strategies for correcting misconceptions in alphabet knowledge

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

8

The strategies provided in Letter names can confuse students g ive educators ways to address confusion or misconceptions that may occur while young students are acquiring alphabet knowledge. The article discusses how different sounds can be represented by the same letter in different words (Block & Duke, 2015). The authors suggest exposing students to a list of words that follow a certain pattern or rule instead of teaching students rules for certain letters (Block & Duke, 2015). Another common misconception is encountered when writing. Students may write the wrong letter to represent a sound when trying to sound out words. A way to address this misconception is to explain what sound is actually represented by the letter they used and to tell them the correct letter to represent the sound they are trying to represent (Block & Duke, 2015). Another strategy outlined in this article suggested teaching the morphological nature of words in the English language, this skill can be useful when coming across words that are unfamiliar to the student (Block & Duke, 2015). For example, if a child is unfamiliar with the word magician but knows the word magic the child can use that clue to make meaning of the word magician (Block & Duke, 2015). Letter and Letter Sound Acquisition This strategy for teaching alphabet knowledge comes from Piasta, Purpura, & Wagner’s, (2009) study that compared two strategies to determine which strategy was better for teaching letter sounds. One strategy is combined letter name and sound instruction and the other strategy is letter sound instruction. Although it seems that letter sound knowledge is more important to reading than letter identification This study pointed out the importance of letter identification in combination with letter sound knowledge. A learner must have letter identification knowledge in order to acquire letter sound knowledge. Some letters provide a clue for the sound while other

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

9

letters like H do not provide clues for the sound they represent. B  ased on the results, students benefit from combined letter name and letter sound instruction for letter sound acquisition. The results of the study did not generalize to other emergent reader skills (Piasta, Purpura, & Wagner, 2009). The next strategy gives teachers ways to give feedback to students during alphabet knowledge intervention (Olszewski,  Soto, & Goldstein, 2017). Progressive time delay was used to increase alphabet knowledge and phonological awareness skills. Students were given time to practice the letter names and sounds during the lesson (Olszewski,  Soto, & Goldstein, 2017). Using progressive time delay the interventionist chose a letter from a field of four. This was done to model a discrimination task for the students (Olszewski,  Soto, & Goldstein, 2017). During initial modeling there was no time delay given. However, as time progressed the pause time was increased to shift stimulus control to the child with near errorless learning. If the student identified the letter incorrectly the interventionist corrected the student and moved on with the lesson (Olszewski,  Soto, & Goldstein, 2017).

Assessing literacy skills and school readiness Sussa, (2007) suggested that school readiness should be assessed before students enter school. H  is article, THE EVALUATION OF SCHOOL READINESS FOR 5-8 YEARS OLD

CHILDREN - COGNITIVE, SOCIAL – EMOTIONAL, AND MOTOR COORDINATION AND PHYSICAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, details a study about school readiness in young children. Readiness is evaluated in three areas: cognitive, social emotional, and motor and physical health. It is suggested that if students are well prepared for their education in the early years they are

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

10

more likely to continue their education in the future. According to the results of the study these three areas mentioned before can be used to analyze school readiness in students and their families. Sussa says the transition from Kindergarten to Elementary school is a very important one. He says that students must go through specific stages of development he calls tasks. Sussa suggests that students must complete these developmental tasks in order to be prepared for school. These tasks include learning a social system, learning to read, and taking on some civic duty (Sussa, 2007). It is worth mentioning that students born to parents of lower socioeconomic status have lower scores on measures of literacy than students born to parents of high socioeconomic status (Farkus & Beron, 2004; Lee & Burkham, 2002). According to Sussa, (2007) to improve educational outcomes one must enhance children’s preparation for school from the early years. This has dramatic ramifications for child and youth development as indicated by the range of long term follow-up studies of early educational experiences he argues that students who would normally start school less prepared than their peers would greatly benefit from programs like Head start or Early Intervention even a year before they start school ( Sussa, 2007). Teachers need data about their students' alphabet knowledge early and often to plan differentiated instruction that moves all students forward in their literacy development (Jones & Reutzel, 2012; Piasta, 2014) . The article Easy as AcHGzrjq: The Quick Letter Name Knowledge Assessment d escribes the Quick Letter Name Assessment (Q-LNK) ( Olszewski, Soto, & Goldstein, 2017). The assessment can be given to students in less than one minute. It can be used as an initial screening or as a benchmark test ( Torterelli, Bowles, & Skibbe, 2017).

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

11

The Assessment is made up of six different forms. Each form has eight strategically chosen letters ( Olszewski, Soto, & Goldstein, 2017). Teachers should begin with the form that has letters not found in the student’s name. Students are generally familiar with these letters and it is not indicative of their overall letter knowledge ( Torterelli, Bowles, & Skibbe, 2017). If  a student identifies all eight letters on the assessment it is safe to assume the student knows 48 to 52 letters of the alphabet ( Olszewski, Soto, & Goldstein, 2017). A table is provided that gives an estimate of how many letters a student knows based on their score ( Torterelli, Bowles & Skibbe, 2017) . On average students score is multiplied by six to get the total number of letters they actually know. According to Kaye and Lose, (2018) there is a need for " (a) assessment that monitors evolving letter knowledge, (b) instruction that is focused and brief and capitalizes on students' unique strengths and ways of knowing, and (c) isolated letter work that is balanced with the use of authentic texts. "(Kaye and Lose, 2018) Kaye and Lose suggest that far less is known about which particular teaching strategies are most effective in building students’ letter knowledge, but we do know that contrived scripts and fixed instructional sequences inhibit letter- learning efficiency. The results of the study show that letter knowledge is very complex and different for each student. In order to effectively teach a child, their current level of letter knowledge must be assessed and instruction must be tailored to meet the children where they are (Kaye & Lose, 2018). Like Kaye and Lose, Lonigan (2006) suggests that monitoring and assessing students is important to students' success in school. His article Development, Assessment, and Promoting Pre Literacy skills focuses on summarizing what is known about the development of skilled

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

12

readers in the early literacy stage of development. Knowing what habits and characteristics of successful young readers, provides insight on proper ways to promote and develop pre literacy skills in young children. The article also discusses ways to identify and make predictions about students who are at risk for difficulties in early literacy. By identifying at risk students earlier on, students are more likely to receive proper interventions to help them become successful. The results of this study indicate that struggling readers who are identified through assessments are more likely to succeed than students who are not identified. One weakness of this article is that it points out that assessments are very expensive and that there are alternative assessments, but it is not clear if these assessments are valid and comparable to the more expensive ones commonly used in schools (Lonigan, 2006).

Conclusion There is an increased pressure for preschool and Kindergarten teachers to have students ready to read.  “Under new early childhood and elementary standards, students are expected to master foundational literacy skills early and start reading and writing in a variety of genres by the end of the kindergarten year ( Torterelli, Bowles, & Skibbe, 2017)”. Although there are many strategies for teaching alphabet knowledge, Most of the sources agree that alphabet knowledge is the greatest predictor of later literacy success  (Blaiklock,  2004; Jones, Clark, and Rutzel, 2012; Piasta, Purpura, and Wagner, 2009; Walton,2014). It is imperative that teachers use best practices for instruction, intervention and assessment. Jones, Reutzel, and Piasta agree that Letter Name Knowledge indicates where instruction should begin for individual students (Jones & Reutzel, 2012; Piasta, Purpura, and Wagner, 2009). Assessments are important to know where

W. Wilson, BGBP, Task 1: Research Proposal

13

to begin with students, but they are also necessary to track student progress ( Torterelli, Bowles, & Skibbe, 2017).

Chapter 3: Method Research Design The method used in this research study will be the action research model. This method will be used because the purpose of the study is to improve Alphabet knowledge in a particular group of Kindergarten students. The study will use quantitativ...