Analysis, Conclusions, and Implications:

     Based on the scores obtained using the Story Retelling Checklist, the ability of all 3 students to retell stories improved. The peer retelling intervention most likely played a role in the student's overall ability to retell stories; it did not however result in significant increases in scores.

*See Discussion of the Findings for complete results .

     Clarity of expression assessed the student's ability to retell the story coherently using complete sentences in a fluent manner. Two out of the three students (Ann and Melissa) improved in the areas of clarity of expression as assessed on the Story Retelling Checklist. Jonathan maintained his level of competence throughout. Also, the length of student sentences increased within the same story and throughout the course of this study. Additionally, responses during whole group retelling improved over the course of this study. Sentences became more complex as the sessions progressed. These findings indicated that experience retelling stories resulted in more elaborated, comprehensive retellings supporting its implementation in Kindergarten.                                                                                     

     Despite direct instruction during whole group retelling, and reminders to do so before retelling, all 3 participants did not give a setting during the first 3 story retelling sessions. However, by the last session, all participants were able to make some mention of the setting. Additionally, when responding to their favorite part of the story, all three participants were not able to add more details aside from, “I liked it”, “It was my favorite”, and “I don't know” for the first three sessions. (Ann was not able to elaborate until the seventh session.) .  Two out of the three students, Ann and Melissa, had difficulty throughout relating personal experiences to the text. The highest score obtained for each was a 1 indicating only a “somewhat complete response”. 

     This would indicate that for these kindergartners, repeated, systematic, direct instruction is required to develop mastery of the concepts of setting, justifying answers and relating prior knowledge to the text.  

       Story retelling can not be compared to summarizing or synthesizing text. Critics of story retelling warn that it is an artificial task and argue that students are merely memorizing and mimicking what has been read and that retellings can not accurately gauge a student's ability to understand and internalize a story. Familiarity with storybook language, structure, and dialog are skills students can develop before they are able to accurately read and write independently.  Story retelling is a way to involve young children in the reading process before they are able to decode words on their own.  

      Additionally, many researches have cited the importance of socialization in Literacy Development. Meaning is made through transactions between the reader, text, teacher, peers and environment. Cooperative and collaborative group exchanges can offer students the mutual support, knowledge, encouragement, correction and guidance they need to enhance their intellectual performance and enable them to accomplish together more than an individual could alone (Forman & Casden,1994; Halliday, 1994; Hodges 2000; Yopp & Singer, 1994; Harste, 1994; Ruddell, 1994).  Whole Group and peer story retelling are appropriate ways to incorporate this theory into practical classroom application in the Kindergarten.  

     No one assessment method should be used to measure student ability, therefore retellings should be incorporated into a comprehensive Literacy Assessment Program. The value of student retellings must not be underestimated. It is through the process of retelling beginning readers  develop a sense of story structure, explore storybook language and experience success “reading” independently.   

     The results of this study are limited to the performance of these students at this time, at this place and are solely based on the effect the peer-retelling intervention had in conjunction with the established classroom procedure for retelling on these subjects.  Therefore the results can not be generalized to other contexts, but are meant to explore the possibilities of using the techniques of repeated readings and retellings with a peer-intervention component. This study could be replicated in other schools with similar of different populations to further explore the validity of these findings and justify the use of these techniques.

Final Thoughts:

     I was very surprised that the students had difficulty beginning their retelling in a formal way and failed to make any mention to time and place during the first few sessions. When I modeled story retelling, I made a point to explore these concepts in detail asking the children to assist me with good phrases. Based on the results of these assessments, this concept needs to be directly taught often and reviewed further to develop mastery.  

      Teaching with the 5 day process worked well. It was enough time for the students to internalize the story. My class as a whole has shown improvement using dialog from the story, naming the characters accurately, and adding on to other students' responses.  

     However, for research, the 5 day process was more difficult than I anticipated. Student absence resulted in the loss of one participant and delays in some lessons.  The next time I conduct research in this area, it might be more appropriate to read, retell, and assess on the same day to ensure continuity.  

     Although the peer intervention did not indicate significant gains, I still believe it to be a worthwhile component in a Kindergarten Literacy Program. What the quantitative data did not show was the excitement and engagement surrounding the lessons. Students were eager to retell stories with their friends and often chose to retell during activity time. Reading favorite stories again and again is pleasurable to young children; retelling gives them an outlet to participate independently and with peers.