Action Research Proposal
Spelling has always been a difficult area for me to teach and has been a difficult area for my students to learn; it is an area where I have found few resources or recommendations leaning one way or another toward a specific form of best practice. Because I currently teach students with special needs, this lack of preparation becomes even more problematic. Not only do my students struggle with spelling, but I also need to adapt my instruction to meet their learning needs. My problem is determining the best way to use a center-based approach to teach spelling. Center-based instruction in spelling involves the use of various hands-on activities through which students practice their spelling words using multiple modalities. I am currently using a variety of centers as part of my spelling instruction, but I am not sure I am using them in the most effective way. Students are given their words, and then each day they can choose which center to visit, as long as they do not visit the same center two days in a row. Students may choose to practice their words using play-doh (by writing the words in the play-doh or rolling out the play-doh to make the letters), using letter stamps, using magnetic letters, or by writing their words twice on either a white board, chalk board, or paper. I am not sure whether this is an effective practice, so I would like to know what is the most effective way to use centers as a means to improve spelling proficiency with special education elementary age students?
Researching the most effective way to use centers as a means to improve spelling instruction is based on both cognitivist theory and multiple intelligence theory. Cognitivist theory focuses on memory development and how the brain functions while creating memories (Trumbull & Pacheco, 2005). This is relevant because learning how to spell relies heavily on the memorization of rules and patterns. In addition, many words do not follow spelling rules and their spelling must be memorized independently from other words. It is important to understand how the brain forms memories in order to build the strongest pathways to solidify learning. Multiple intelligence theory focuses on the different ways that students learn and emphasizes building upon individual strengths when creating lessons so that students can perform in ways they are most comfortable (Trumbull & Pacheco, 2005). Since this study is looking at using multiple modalities at the different centers, considering the multiple intelligences is important. Students need to have the option to choose a center that best fits their learning needs in order to have the greatest possibility for improvement.
This research study will be conducted in a resource room setting at a K-7 elementary school. Ten fourth and fifth grade students will be participating in the study. Of the 10 students, two are fourth graders and eight are fifth graders; one student is female and nine students are male. The majority of the students are minorities; two are African American, five are Hispanic, and three are Caucasian. The students qualify for special education under various categories; they are either emotionally impaired or learning disabled. During the study, students will be identified using a letter of the alphabet (example: Student A). No student names, or any other identifying information, will be used while reporting to ensure student confidentiality.
I will be conducting a quantitative research study, using the group comparison design with the one group pretest-posttest method. Students will be given a pretest, the intervention will be provided, and a posttest will be given. Pretest and posttest data will be compared to see if students’ skills increased, decreased, or remained the same. This method was chosen because I want to determine which method of using centers is a more effective way for students to practice spelling. In order to show progress, data must be collected prior to and after changes have been made (Mertler, 2009). Data will be collected using pre and posttests, evaluating spelling in student journals, and weekly spelling tests. I may also use a VAKT (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile) survey along with an observational checklist to track which centers students most prefer. The researcher can ensure the data is reliable it will be collected over an extended period, rather than once or twice. Data will also be taken from multiple sources- spelling tests and writing journals, to see if students are learning and applying lessons, or simply memorizing for a test. Consistency in performance across various tasks will ensure reliable data (Mertler, 2009).
Data will be analyzed using the repeated-measures t test. I will be comparing my students’ scores on both their pretests and posttests to determine growth on their spelling skills. Because I have a small number of students, I will be using inferential statistics. My results should help me compare the effects of using one center for the entirety of the study against the effects of using multiple centers throughout the study. This study and its data are limited by the small sample size and the lack of generalizability because there are only 10 students in the study and I am only studying students in special education. While the results may be applicable to students in other special education classrooms, there is no guarantee that they will be applicable to larger classrooms, or to general education classrooms. My sample is also limited in that I am only sampling two grade levels out of the typical K-5 elementary school setting.
Expected Timeline:
Pretest: Week of March 14
Implementation of Centers/Data Collection: Weeks of March -19 April 9th
Posttest: Week of April 16
Data Analysis: Week of April 23
References:
Mertler, C.A. (2009). Action research: Teachers as researchers in the classroom (2nd
Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Trumbull, E. & Pacheco, M. (2005). The teacher's guide to diversity: Building a
knowledge base (Vol. 1). Providence, RI: Brown University.
Spelling has always been a difficult area for me to teach and has been a difficult area for my students to learn; it is an area where I have found few resources or recommendations leaning one way or another toward a specific form of best practice. Because I currently teach students with special needs, this lack of preparation becomes even more problematic. Not only do my students struggle with spelling, but I also need to adapt my instruction to meet their learning needs. My problem is determining the best way to use a center-based approach to teach spelling. Center-based instruction in spelling involves the use of various hands-on activities through which students practice their spelling words using multiple modalities. I am currently using a variety of centers as part of my spelling instruction, but I am not sure I am using them in the most effective way. Students are given their words, and then each day they can choose which center to visit, as long as they do not visit the same center two days in a row. Students may choose to practice their words using play-doh (by writing the words in the play-doh or rolling out the play-doh to make the letters), using letter stamps, using magnetic letters, or by writing their words twice on either a white board, chalk board, or paper. I am not sure whether this is an effective practice, so I would like to know what is the most effective way to use centers as a means to improve spelling proficiency with special education elementary age students?
Researching the most effective way to use centers as a means to improve spelling instruction is based on both cognitivist theory and multiple intelligence theory. Cognitivist theory focuses on memory development and how the brain functions while creating memories (Trumbull & Pacheco, 2005). This is relevant because learning how to spell relies heavily on the memorization of rules and patterns. In addition, many words do not follow spelling rules and their spelling must be memorized independently from other words. It is important to understand how the brain forms memories in order to build the strongest pathways to solidify learning. Multiple intelligence theory focuses on the different ways that students learn and emphasizes building upon individual strengths when creating lessons so that students can perform in ways they are most comfortable (Trumbull & Pacheco, 2005). Since this study is looking at using multiple modalities at the different centers, considering the multiple intelligences is important. Students need to have the option to choose a center that best fits their learning needs in order to have the greatest possibility for improvement.
This research study will be conducted in a resource room setting at a K-7 elementary school. Ten fourth and fifth grade students will be participating in the study. Of the 10 students, two are fourth graders and eight are fifth graders; one student is female and nine students are male. The majority of the students are minorities; two are African American, five are Hispanic, and three are Caucasian. The students qualify for special education under various categories; they are either emotionally impaired or learning disabled. During the study, students will be identified using a letter of the alphabet (example: Student A). No student names, or any other identifying information, will be used while reporting to ensure student confidentiality.
I will be conducting a quantitative research study, using the group comparison design with the one group pretest-posttest method. Students will be given a pretest, the intervention will be provided, and a posttest will be given. Pretest and posttest data will be compared to see if students’ skills increased, decreased, or remained the same. This method was chosen because I want to determine which method of using centers is a more effective way for students to practice spelling. In order to show progress, data must be collected prior to and after changes have been made (Mertler, 2009). Data will be collected using pre and posttests, evaluating spelling in student journals, and weekly spelling tests. I may also use a VAKT (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile) survey along with an observational checklist to track which centers students most prefer. The researcher can ensure the data is reliable it will be collected over an extended period, rather than once or twice. Data will also be taken from multiple sources- spelling tests and writing journals, to see if students are learning and applying lessons, or simply memorizing for a test. Consistency in performance across various tasks will ensure reliable data (Mertler, 2009).
Data will be analyzed using the repeated-measures t test. I will be comparing my students’ scores on both their pretests and posttests to determine growth on their spelling skills. Because I have a small number of students, I will be using inferential statistics. My results should help me compare the effects of using one center for the entirety of the study against the effects of using multiple centers throughout the study. This study and its data are limited by the small sample size and the lack of generalizability because there are only 10 students in the study and I am only studying students in special education. While the results may be applicable to students in other special education classrooms, there is no guarantee that they will be applicable to larger classrooms, or to general education classrooms. My sample is also limited in that I am only sampling two grade levels out of the typical K-5 elementary school setting.
Expected Timeline:
Pretest: Week of March 14
Implementation of Centers/Data Collection: Weeks of March -19 April 9th
Posttest: Week of April 16
Data Analysis: Week of April 23
References:
Mertler, C.A. (2009). Action research: Teachers as researchers in the classroom (2nd
Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Trumbull, E. & Pacheco, M. (2005). The teacher's guide to diversity: Building a
knowledge base (Vol. 1). Providence, RI: Brown University.
RSS Feed