Analysis of Students' Change:

            The student's scores improved with the first intervention, dialoguing during the read-alouds and with the second intervention, using a story glove as compared to their baseline scores. (click here to link to the scores graph.)

Nicholas's scores rose with each intervention.  His average scores were raised 4.02 points between the baseline and the first intervention and 4.41 points between the baseline and the second intervention. (click here to see Nicholas's scores)  When the data was analyzed each story structure category also saw a rise in scores between the baseline and the two interventions.  His most significant area that showed improvement was in the setting category and in sequence.  His scores rose 1.97 points between the baseline and the second intervention and 1.8 points between the baseline and the first intervention. (click here to see Nicholas's scores for setting)  During his retelling Nicholas could remember the characters, time and place much better than without the interventions.  In the sequence category, Nicholas's score rose 1.33 points from the baseline to the second intervention and 1.0 points from the baseline to the first intervention. (click here to see Nicholas's scores for the sequence)  The interventions helped him to focus on the sequence of the story while retelling it.  He did not skip around the story as he did with his retellings during the baseline weeks.  The other areas that showed improvement were in plot episodes where his scores rose 0.05 of a point between the baseline and the first intervention and 0.15 of a point from the baseline and the second intervention. (click here to see his plot episode scores)  His resolution scores also went up 0.83 of a point from the baseline to the first intervention and 0.83 of a point from the baseline to the second intervention. (click here to see his scores)  Through both these interventions he was able to remember the problem and solution and to end the story.  In the theme category his scores raised from the baseline to the first intervention 0.33 of a point and 0.16 of a point from the baseline to the second intervention. (click here to see the theme scores)  Being able to explain the theme was difficult but talking about it as a whole class helped Nicholas to remember the theme and then have an understanding of the theme when he was asked about it during the story glove retellings.

          Brendan also showed improvements with his scores with both interventions but not as significant as Nicholas and Lisa.  His average scores were raised 2.27 points from the baseline scores to the first intervention and 1.79 between the baseline and the second intervention. (click here to see Brendan's scores).  Although Brendan lost 0.68 of a point between the first and the second intervention, both interventions helped Brendan to retell the story better. The area that showed the most improvement was in the story structure category of setting.  Brendan's scores rose 1.63 points from the baseline to the first intervention and 1.40 from the baseline to the second intervention. (click here to see Brendan's setting scores).  Both these interventions helped Brendan remember the characters, the time and place.  In the resolution category, Brendan's scores rose 0.34 of a point from the baseline to the first intervention and 0.17 of a point from the baseline to the second intervention. (click here for resolution graph)  Through these interventions Brendan was able to retell the problem and the solution of the story and remember to end the story.  In the plot episodes category his scores either stayed the same as seen with his baseline and first intervention scores or had a loss of 0.11 of a point between these two scores and the second intervention. (click here of plot episodes graph)  Brendan did well in retelling the events in the story even before the interventions and some stories had many more events than others and this could lead to his loss of 0.17 of a point.  The category of theme was difficult for Brendan but with dialoguing throughout the read-aloud he was able to raise his scores but not with the story glove. (click here for theme graph)

            Lisa's scores improved with each intervention.  Her score rose 2.70 points from her baseline average to the first intervention and 3.69 points from the baseline to the second intervention. (click here to see Lisa's graph)  When analyzing her story structure categories, setting showed the most improvement.  Her scores rose 2.50 points from her baseline score to the second intervention and it rose 1.83 points from the baseline scores to the first intervention. (click here to see her setting scores)  When we were establishing her baseline scores she could not remember the characters, time or place.  Her responses would be silence.  Using these two interventions she was able to remember the characters, time and place.  Her other area that showed growth was in the resolution.  Her scores rose 0.50 of a point from her baseline score to her second intervention and 0.16 of a point from the baseline to the first intervention. (click here to see her resolution scores).  Both these interventions helped her to recall the problem and the solution and to end the story.  In the plot episodes her scores rose 0.19 of a point from the baseline to the first intervention and 0.50 of a point from the baseline to the second intervention. (click here to see the plot episodes scores)  She could recall more events in the story with the interventions than without them.  In the area of sequence, her scores rose 0.67 of a point from the baseline to the second intervention and 0.33 of a point from the baseline to the first intervention. (click here to see the sequence scores)  The interventions helped Lisa to remember more of the story in the retellings than without them.  The theme category again was difficult for Lisa as it was for the rest of the students.  She did raise her scores 0.33 of a point from her baseline scores to the first intervention but during the second intervention she did not receive any points as in her baseline scores. (click here to see the theme scores)  The theme of the story was a difficult concept for her and talking about the theme with the whole class helped her but she could not do it independently.  I think Lisa's scores are interesting because she scored the lowest the first week each intervention was introduced.  As each week went on her scores increased.  Lisa is the type of student who will need a lot of repetition in order to understand the concepts that are introduced.  She will also benefit from modeling and peer interaction such as talking to a group or a partner about different concepts that were introduced.

 

Limitations of this action research:

            The results of this study are limited to the performance of the students at this time and at this place.  There is a test-retest phenomenon where maturity is a factor because the students mature throughout the school year.   This research is also limited because it looks at one class at one time and the small population that was included in the study.

 

Teacher Reflections:

            Since I was going into someone else's classroom scheduling and student absences were thrown into extenuating circumstances that a researcher can not control.  It would have been easier to do this research as a regular classroom teacher because the researcher could collect data everyday and work with the students about story structure throughout the teacher's daily instruction.  I liked going into another classroom especially at the primary level to try out some research or a new lesson.  The teacher was very accommodating and we worked well together.  She had concerns about one of her students and his ability to process auditory information so I looked at his retelling and his strengths and weaknesses during this project but did not use him in my results.  The teacher was very interested in this research and the results.

            When I was designing my research project I was not sure what the results would be.  I was not sure if there would be any positive results.  After the first three weeks of the first intervention I was elated to see what a difference dialoguing during the read-aloud had made.  It was an easy intervention that any classroom teacher could implement at any time.  I was also surprised about how quickly the scores rose.  I was excited to implement the use of the story glove because I thought that the visual manipulative would be friendly enough for the kindergarten students to wear.  They really loved the story glove and looked forward to using it.  I had a model of the story glove on my desk when a group of my fifth grade students came in for class.  They saw the glove and they were very interested in it and I started to explain the glove and how to use it.  They were disappointed that the glove was for the Kindergarten students and not for themselves.  Some of the students commented on how they would have liked to use the glove when they had to retell a story.  I had many teachers interested in learning about the glove and whether I could show them.  I thought the story glove would yield higher scores than the dialogue and I was surprised that it did not make a huge impact with each student.  The story glove was successful when comparing those scores to the baseline scores but the dialoguing showed a stronger positive intervention.  When I asked the students which one they preferred, they liked the story glove but they said they remembered more of the story with the dialoguing.

            I enjoyed the process of the action research and seeing the results having a positive impact on each of the students.  The classroom teacher and I discussed the results after the research was completed and she was so happy that the student's confidence level in class had risen.  She commented that they were more likely to take risks than they were before.  They “attack” problems in a different way and that they are more engaged in their own learning.  She has asked to use the story gloves in the classroom as part of her reading groups and the children were excited when I had dropped them off.

 

Implications for Future Instruction:

            After seeing the scores improve with the retelling I think that more teachers should use dialogue throughout the read-alouds.  At times, it seems like a distraction to the students but they comprehend the story more with listening to and participating in the conversations.  Student and teacher talk is so important in the reading process and this research demonstrates the growth of the students in their story comprehension because of the conversations we had during the read-alouds.

            The story glove can be used throughout the classroom routine after the story glove has been modeled and practiced with the students.  The classroom teacher really liked the story glove and could see how it could play an important role in her small guided reading groups.  She was planning on using it to practice story structure with her students after they read the book in her group.  The story glove could also be put in a literacy center and the students could use it as a center activity.  The students could go to the center and retell a story to a buddy or a big book to a buddy wearing the story glove to and then switch roles.  If the teacher wanted an assessment piece about a student's story comprehension or retelling, the teacher could put the glove in a center with a book and have the student retell the story into a tape recorder.  The teacher could use this type of assessment twice a year to see what kind of progress the student had made.  The story glove could also be put into a center and the students could write the parts of the story structure on a piece of paper that had the glove already drawn on it.  This activity could be changed if the teacher decided only to focus on one area, for example the setting.  The students could also write all parts of the story glove.  It would be a convenient center for the teacher to develop because the activity could change depending on the teacher's goals.

            I think future research could be done to see the effect of using both intervention, dialoguing throughout the read-aloud and using the story glove to retell the story.  I think both interventions help two different types of learners, the visual and the auditory learners.  

 

 

 

Home	Table of Contents	Researcher's Background	Literature Review	Field Research
Design	Findings	Conclusions	References and Resources	WorkSamples and Activities