THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIESFACULTY OF HUMANITIES AND EDUCATIONSCHOOL OF EDUCATIONST. AUGUSTINEPOSTGRADUATE UNITPOSTGRADUATE DIPLOMA IN EDUCATION PROGRAMME (In-Service)YEAR: 2014/2015

Curriculum Study

TOPIC: Getting to the point: Using GIST and Magnet Summary in teaching summary writing at the CSEC level.

SUBMITTED BY:HASSAN BASARALLY 806007430(Name & ID#)

TUTOR: MS. S. PHILLIP

This Paper is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Postgraduate Diploma in Education Programme, School of Education, The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

DATE: Friday 10th April, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTIONSPAGEAbstract2Introduction3Literature Review8Methodology13Findings24Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations36Works Cited 40Appendices 42

Running Head: GIST AND MAGNET SUMMARY

Getting to the point: Using GIST and Magnet Summary in teaching summary writing at the CSEC levelHassan BasarallyUniversity of the West Indies, St. AugustineSchool of EducationEDLA 5240: Teaching of English

AbstractStudents at the CSEC level in the researchers school have had difficulty in summary writing, particularly in identifying the main idea, and combining it with supporting details. Two alternative teaching strategies to the existing practice were implemented: Generating Interaction between Schemata and Text (GIST) and Magnet Summary. Through these strategies, the researcher aims to provide students with more effective methods of identifying the main ideas and supporting details. The effectiveness of the strategies will also develop student self-efficacy in the topic, making the task less daunting and encouraging more students to attempt it. The success of the strategies will provide the researcher a proven effective best practice to implement in the future. A mixed method approach was used, utilising qualitative and quantitative data. A Pre-test and Post-test, and questionnaire with open ended and fixed responses was administered at the end of instruction in both strategies. A student journal at the end of the intervention was also collected. A self-efficacy test was also administered before and after the intervention. The data showed an improvement in performance in both GIST and Magnet Summary and an improvement in student self-efficacy regarding skills in summary writing.Key words: GIST, Magnet Summary, Summary Writing, Self-efficacy

Chapter 1IntroductionBackgroundThe target school is a former Junior Secondary School in the Caroni Education District of Trinidad that was deshifted with its highest level being Form Five. The school is struggling to rid itself of the stigma of a low performing academic institution. It was a pilot school for the Same Sex Schools Programme, receiving an all-girls cohort which resulted it its perception being improved; as the female students generally scored higher in the Secondary Entrance Assessment (SEA) and are believed to be more disciplined. When the programme was discontinued, a mixed intake was sent, however, many students in these batches were classified as remedial students by the Ministry of Education.Generally, English language and literature is perceived as difficult subjects by the students. Other departments have yet to engage in the practice of English across the Curriculum. The pass rate in the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) English A examination in 2014 is 31%, up from 15% in 2013. The school runs on a six day timetable of forty two periods, six periods are allocated to English per cycle. The CSEC level classes are streamed based on academic performance in school exams, as such there may be additional periods allocated to classes which are deemed weak in English. The English department consists of a Head of Department (HOD), an acting Dean and five teachers. Department meetings are held every cycle and teachers are given the autonomy to use varied strategies in the classroom. The CSEC English syllabus is given preference in the Form Four and Five levels as opposed to the national curriculum, which is more adhered to in the lower forms. Textbooks are provided via the Textbook Rental Programme and texts are vetted by teachers before being requested. In addition, there is ample material available to supplement the textbooks used at the school. An analysis of the CSEC results over the past five years showed that students were consistently scoring poorly in the Expression profile of the exam, in most cases attaining a C or below. Also, it suggests that improvement is needed in the expository writing components of the examination. Generally, summary writing is taught in the first term of Form Five in the hope that students would transfer some of the writing and comprehension skills from short story writing. However, experience has shown two consistent complaints from the students: a difficulty in understanding the texts and inability to combine the main ideas in the text to create a summary. The students generally do not read outside of the classroom and are uninformed about current events. This results in difficulty comprehending the passages, which are informative, expository and seem abstract. When the main ideas are identified, students have difficulty in linking the ideas cohesively to form a new paragraph and in many cases string together key fragments of the passage without rephrasing. These issues align with some other shortfalls in summary writing which include writing too much or too little and writing back the passage given (Jones, 2012). The way summary writing is taught at the school is through a formal process called the Rule-Based Strategy in which students are to follow a set rules or step to identify the important information in a passage and then produce a summary (Marzano et.al., 2001). It appears that the students are not grasping the skills of summary writing through the use of the Rule-based Strategy. Current research offer many new strategies to teaching the topic. The two methods to be tested will be Generating Interaction between Schemata and Text (GIST) and Magnet Summary. GIST makes students divide the text into manageable sections and interrogate it through the use of the questions: Who, What, When, Why, and How (Fey et. al., 2003). Magnet Summary, on the other hand, involves students condensing reading to key words and phrases which are then combined to produce sentences to be incorporated into a summary (Urquhart and McIver, 2005). The skill of summary writing is not limited to the English classroom. It is a tool for developing comprehension across the curriculum. Summary writing encourages the readers active involvement with the text (Zygouris-Coe et. al. 2005). This involvement includes, asking questions and drawing inferences from the text, a skill which allows easy understanding of content areas in the curriculum and texts read for information and pleasure. Problem Statement Students currently have difficulty applying the Rule Based Strategy to produce summaries. The students are unable to accurately identify all the main ideas in a passage and synthesise the information to produce a coherent summary. Though the strategy has been used for a long period of time, in textbooks and in the school, there are alternative methods of teaching summary writing based on sound academic research. As an intervention, two alternative methods will be used to determine the effectiveness on the different strategies. The alternatives to be used are Generating Interaction between Schemata and Text (GIST) and Magnet Summary. GIST involves students and/or the teacher discussing the material as they read through it, asking themselves questions as to what are the main concepts of the passage studied. Magnet Summary involves selecting a central idea from each paragraph or section and attach to it supporting details.

Purpose StatementThis study will evaluate the effectiveness of GIST and Magnet Summary as alternative methods of direct instruction to the Rule-based Strategy. In addition, it will determine the effect of these new techniques on student self-efficacy regarding summary writing. Research questions1. Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary aid students in accurately identifying the main ideas and supporting details in a passage, and combining them to produce a summary?2. Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary improve student self-efficacy at summary writing?Significance of StudyThe study will allow the researcher to meet a critical need of the students. It will allow the evaluation of current practices in teaching summary writing and test new strategies in instruction with the aim of arriving at the best approach for the particular sample. Hence, the researcher finds a best practice to use in the classroom. The researcher, in addition to colleagues at the institution, has observed students struggling with summary writing across the CSEC level. If the intervention is successful, the task will become easier; student scores will increase and eventually result in a greater performance in exam. With greater competency in skills associated with summary writing, the students self-efficacy can improve and the task will be seen as something more manageable. The research will expand on the current knowledge in effective teaching strategies in summary writing. It hopes to address the problem of low student performance in the writing component at the CSEC level at the school, as the skills are transferable to other parts of the syllabus and curriculum. Organisation of the paperThis paper will consist of five chapters:1. Introduction2. Literature review of academic articles on the topics of summary writing, methods of teaching summary writing and the link between student self-efficacy and writing3. Research methodology outlining the sample, instruments to be used to collect data and how the data will be analysed4. Presentation of findings as it relates to the research questions5. Discussion, conclusions, and recommendations based on the data collected and its relationship to previous studies and theory.

Chapter 2Literature ReviewSummary writing is a skill that embodies the concept of English across the Curriculum, as it is a tool in comprehension as well as a writing skill. This section will look at the cognitive skills involved in summary writing, the difficulties students face in the task, academic literature on GIST and Magnet Summary, and the link between student self-efficacy and performance in writing. Students who become skilled at summary writing are able to comprehend, interact and manipulate expository texts across the curriculum (Casazza, 1993). Any discourse into the topic must take into consideration the following areas: the cognitive skills that are required by summary writing, the problems that students meet in the task, how the topic has been traditionally taught, and new strategies that could be employed.Summary writing produces certain linguistic and cognitive challenges, as there exists the microstructure that represents the relationships in the sentence of the text, and macrostructure which represents the relationship between blocks of sentences or paragraphs, and the organisation of the text (Hutchins, 1987). Semantic cohesion is the major part of the microstructure that students are required to understand. These are the semantic links between sentences or clauses that provide cohesion achieved mainly through subordinators, conjunctions and lexical items that denote compatibility, contrast, consequence, cause etc. At the macrostructure, students are expected to understand the schemata of the text. The schema is the sequence of episodes or points in the text, or simply the plot or script, readers infer the schemata through the initial sentences of the text. On analysis of the relationships within the text, Hutchins (1987) derived four components of summarisation: comprehension of microstructure, identification of schemata, generalising and condensing of the macrostructure, and expressing it in a coherent text.More recently Marzano et al. have described three aspects of effective summary writing: deleting, substituting and keeping information, analysis of the text at a deep level, and awareness of the structure of the text (2001). Other researchers have highlighted that effective summarisation involves recall and planning. Brown et al. describe summary writing as not just a measure or automatic retention, the ability to work recursively on the information to render it as succinctly as possible requires judgement and effort, knowledge and strategies (1983, p. 25). The research found that the younger students copied verbatim, while older students restated information. Though the findings were derived from comparing different age groups as opposed to different abilities on the same level, it can be assumed that the strategies displayed by the older students could be found in the components of summarisation observed by Hutchins (1987). Kirkland and Saunders (1991) explain that summary writing has internal and external constraints to the student. External constraints include familiarity with the schema, length of the text, abstractness etc. The internal constraints are the cognitive load placed on students which include analysis, super-ordination, reconceptualisation, evaluation and selection.It is clear that summary writing involves many higher level cognitive skills that require development in students. The Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) English A examination includes a compulsory summary writing question. Over the years, the examinations governing body, the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC), has published reports on candidates performance. One problem identified in the most recent report is the limited use of transitional words, the inability to interpret or express relationships and lifting of phrases and sentences directly from the passage (CXC, 2014). Any strategy to be used in teaching summary writing must focus on synthesis of information.Summary writing is difficult for many students, explicit instruction demonstrates processes to struggling writers, and simultaneously it moves more competent students to higher levels or proficiency as they benefit from exposure to models (Urquhart and McIver, 2005). It is recommended that students be taught through explicit instruction, but via an embedded approach. This allows the skills taught to be transferred to other areas as there is no concern for memorising content-related material and allows practice of the skill (Rhoder, 2002). A traditional method of teaching summary writing is through the Rule-based Strategy. This method requires students to adhere to a set of rules in its exact order: deleting trivial material, deleting redundant material, substituting subordinate terms for lists, and selecting or inventing a topic sentence. According to Brown and Day (1983), students started with just copying from the text and deleting trivial information, but only the advanced students were able to manipulate the structure of the sentences already provided to them. Therefore, the rules were not placed only in order of difficulty, but followed the developmental progression in terms of degree of cognitive intervention needed to apply each rule (Brown et al., 1980, p. 18). This strategy, like the alternatives to be used, demonstrates the need for explicit instruction in writing in general. Generating Interaction between Schemata and Text (GIST) is a collaborative approach involving the teacher and student posing and answering questions while reading the text (Frey et al., 2003). The text is divided into sections or stopping points. At the end of each stopping point the teacher and students discuss the meaning of what was read and explain any vocabulary met. Following that, a single summary sentence is created. This process is repeated until the end of the text. The different summary sentences come together to form a prcis, the sentences are combined through transitional words, dependent clauses etc. to form a summary. According to Cunningham, the strategys developer, the students analyse ways to delete non-essential information and use their own words to summarize the main idea or the gist of the selection (1982). Frey et al.s study involving adolescents with little stamina for sustained writing yielded two main benefits for the students: the creation of complex sentences to convey more information and self-editing (2003).Another of the strategies to be implemented in the teaching of summary writing is Magnet Summary. The strategy identifies the key term or concept or magnet word, from which the students organise important information around. The first step is identifying the magnet word, after which important details connected to this word are drawn to it. This process is repeated with each section or paragraph of the text. Sentences are constructed from each detail associated with each magnet word and combined to create a summary. The major advantages of using magnet summaries is that it encourages students to write concepts from the text into their own words, construct meaningful synthesis of what was read and easily identify main ideas (Buehl, 2001). Buehl, the methods developer, used the strategy with ninth-grade students and found that the strategy develops the ability to separate main ideas from supporting details, an understanding of any jargon used is achieved and students become able to reduce texts the most essential elements (2014). In addition, because magnet summaries condense reading about specific topics into several key words or phrases it allows incorporation of all the relevant information (Urquhart and McIver, 2005). Despite a small number of studies focussing on summary writing in general and GIST or Magnet Summary in particular, the research shows that both strategies place great emphasis on developing an understanding of the content matter of the text before embarking on writing the summary itself. However, a potential drawback of both is that students may have difficulty when a paragraph or section contains more than one main idea, as is the case with most expository pieces that have information interwoven in it. With practice and, understanding and implementation of the teaching strategies, students will develop a greater proficiency in identifying all the main ideas in a passage and navigate the expository techniques and complexities of the author.Much focus has been given to the link between student self-efficacy and performance in writing. Self-efficacy refers to the beliefs a person has about individual ability. It is defined as people's beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance (Bandura, 1994, p. 71). Students with a low self-efficacy towards a task will avoid it and one way of developing it is through performance accomplishments (Schunk, 1991). Performance accomplishments are dependent of the effectiveness of teaching strategies and the students cognitive abilities relating to task. Even though self-efficacy is not the only determinant of self-regulating behaviour, it is still a contributor. Pajares (2003) listed the three most popular ways of measuring writing self-efficacy: possession of specific writing skills, ability to display those skills and confidence in completing a writing task. Therefore instruction geared towards developing self-efficacy must focus on both the skills for the task and the final piece of writing where those skills are employed. Students who possess any of the measures of self-efficacy will possess a high level of motivation which is a vital force in success or failure at school (Graham & Weiner, 1996). In the simplest terms, an elevated level of confidence results in students willing to attempt writing tasks that are perceived as difficult, hence the chance of scoring a higher grade is increased.

Chapter 3Research MethodologyPurpose of the Study As the Rule-based Strategy of teaching summary writing has not produced student competence in the area, the study evaluated the effectiveness of the use of GIST and Magnet Summary as alternative methods of direct instruction. In addition, it determined if the different methods have positively affected student self-efficacy in the area.Research Questions1. Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary aid students in accurately identifying the main ideas and supporting details in a passage, and combining them to produce a summary?2. Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary improve student performance and self-efficacy at summary writing?This chapter describes the design of the research and describes the target group of students and classroom setting. It explains the instruments used to collect data and the method of data analysis. A unit map and unit objectives for the planned intervention are also stated.DesignThe purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of GIST and Magnet Summary in aiding students to better elicit information from texts and synthesise the information into a coherent summary. It also aimed to determine if the strategies developed student self-efficacy in summary writing. The research type used was action research, which identifies a dilemma in a specific context facing the researcher while systematically collecting data and developing an intervention. The main point of action research is to find out more about what is going on in your own local context in order to change or improve current practice in that situation (Burns, in Heigham & Croker, 2009, pp. 115). The research aimed to see the effect of the intervention on both student scores in assessments and attitudes towards the task. As such, a mixed methods approach was used, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative methods. The benefit of this approach is that it allows the researcher to collect both numeric information and text to answer the research questions (Ivankova & Creswell in Heigham & Croker, 2009).The most suitable type of mixed method design to the research is Triangulation Design. Data was not collected in a sequential order; instead, qualitative and quantitative data was collected simultaneously, even concerning the same research question. This method allowed the collection of both types of data on a single phenomenon so that it can be compared (Ivankova & Creswell in Heigham & Croker, 2009). This was most suited for the research, as it sought to investigate the effects of two different methods of teaching summary writing on student performance, competence and self-efficacy. Though the method was not time consuming, it required equal careful analysis of the qualitative and quantitative data to produce accurate and valid findings.The quantitative data was derived from a pre-test and post-test. A pre-test was administered before each strategy was taught to provide a base score for comparison when the method of instruction is implemented. The pre-test and post-test was assessed using a rubric allocating marks for length, form, content, process and meaning (See Appendix 1). In addition, qualitative and quantitative data was obtained from a questionnaire with both set and open-ended questions (See Appendix 2). The questionnaires were distributed and collected at the end of direct instruction in GIST and Magnet Summary. The use of questionnaires allows the students sufficient time to complete the feedback and enables them to respond in their own words (Kothari, 2004). However, a potential drawback is that all questionnaires would be returned; to address this researcher assigned a forty minute teaching period for completion of the questionnaires and clarified the meaning of any question if asked during this period. These way only students absent on the day would not have completed the questionnaire. However, it was noticed that respondents did not elaborate responses in the open ended questions and student journals.Non-numerical data was also collected through open-ended questions on the student questionnaire and student journals. Student journals gauged their understanding and response to the intervention used (See Appendix 3). The journals were administered at the end of the intervention and provided insight from the participants viewpoint and also showed the progression of learning over the study (Mills, 2007). A self-efficacy test was administered before and after the intervention to measure changes to attitudes of proficiency in different skill areas in summary writing (See Appendix 4). The self-efficacy test designed by the researcher was based on Chen et al.s (2001) New General Self-Efficacy Scale. It consisted of eight items that were rated on a five-point scales with the anchors strongly disagree and strongly agree. Students notebooks acted as a portfolio to track their growth through the study.The study did not entail the students giving any personal information; therefore, the publication of student feedback does not invade privacy. In addition, any student work displayed will be done anonymously. Some limitations of the study are the relative small number of the sample. This cannot be avoided as it is the actual class size. The study is short, and may only provide information on student performance in summary writing for a specific period, not competence over a period of time. In addition, the students repeating CSEC English A examinations may have been exposed to the methods to be taught in their previous school or class. Due to this and the size of the sample, the results of the study may not be applicable to a wider group.

Target Group and SettingThe sample selected was from the Form Five level: Five Language (5L). The teacher conducting the study had the role of Form Teacher, English A and English B teacher. From the class register, report book and registration information; the class consists of mixed ability students between the ages of sixteen (16) to eighteen (18) years old. Students were streamed according to academic ability in Form Three and then placed into classes in Form Four based on subject choices. There were nineteen (19) students in total; seventeen (17) formed the original cohort since Form Four and three (3) students were repeating CSEC examinations, commonly termed Repeaters. The class comprised of eighteen (18) girls and one (1) boy. Based on observations by the teacher, the students displayed an aversion to summary writing exercises in English A class, evidenced by an unwillingness to complete summary writing exercises without the direct supervision and guidance of the teacher. The complaints given include the exercise being too difficult, problems in identifying the main ideas, problems paraphrasing information and the content being abstract. This was the same for the students repeating CSEC examinations despite having received instruction in summary writing before.The intervention aimed to improve attitudes to summary writing by developing skills that can be employed to produce better summaries, thereby making the task easier and less intimidating to the students. Such skills would result in improved grades which will enhance self-efficacy and results in school and CSEC examinations.Generally, summary writing was taught in the first term of Form Five, but teachers have the latitude to introduce the topic towards the end of Form Four. The students were very willing to cooperate with the teacher in class and are motivated to participate in the study as they realise summary writing is an area that they need to focus on. Instruments and MaterialsDuring the project, the teacher used graphic organisers, practice exercises, modelling exercises, student questionnaires/journals and multimedia presentations. The students were instructed as a whole class over a period of three to four (3-4) cycles. The students were given direct instruction in summary writing using GIST and Magnet Summary. The first research question sought to determine whether the use of GIST or Magnet Summary aided students in accurately identifying the main ideas and supporting details in a passage, and combining them to produce a summary. This information was collected through the administration of a Pre-test and Post-test for each strategy. Student performance in summary writing was compared through the use of a Z-score. Questionnaires were also used at the end of each period of direct instruction to ascertain student response to each strategy.The second research question sought to determine whether the use of GIST or Magnet Summary improved student self-efficacy at summary writing. The open ended questions in the questionnaires would provide information about student self-efficacy in the topic. A self-efficacy test was also administered before and after the intervention. Below is an action research triangulation matrix for the study:

Research QuestionData Collection MethodTools/Instruments

1AssessingObservingSurveyingPre-test and Post-testFrequency of completion of tasksQuestionnaires

2SurveyingObservingAssessingQuestionnaire, Student JournalFrequency of completion of tasksSelf-efficacy Tests, Student journal

Figure1. Action Research Triangulation MatrixGIST and Magnet Summary

23

The Pre-test and Post test scores will be compared and the mean, median and mode calculated. The Z-score will also be calculated to see whether the score was of a significant difference from the base score. This statistical operation was used because the conversion of each test score to a sigma score makes them equally weighted and comparable (Best & Kahn, 1998, p. 353). By subtracting the mean from the raw score and dividing it by the standard deviation the Z-score is achieved. If the score is equivalent or near to a past assessment, it would mean that the performance was typical, showing no great impact of the alternative strategies used. This will be done for both the GIST and Magnet Summary. At the end of each strategy a questionnaire containing both open ended and fixed responses will be given. The fixed responses will be collated and the open ended questions will be coded to determine recurring themes in the student responses. Coding for recurring themes will also be done for a student journal that students will complete at the end of the intervention. The scores on the Likert Scale of the self-efficacy test will be tabulated and the mean, median and mode calculated. The scores before and after the intervention will be compared to see if there were any changes in student beliefs about their ability to complete the performance tasks mentioned in the questions.Unit of Lessons(See Appendix 5. All audio-visual material for lessons can be found in the accompanying disk)Unit Objectives1.Identify the main ideas of a text using GIST and Magnet Summary.2.Modify similar main ideas into a single coherent sentence.3.Arrange the main ideas in a logical sequence.4.Identify the appropriate transitional device to be used in given sentences or paragraphs5.Write paraphrased sentences, keeping the original meaning.6.Rephrase sentences to reflect the main idea, without supporting examples.7.Select redundancies to be omitted in a summary8.Select appropriate quantifiers to use in replacing statistics.9.Understand how the authors purpose affects the content of the text.

Lesson numberFocus/Topicand durationTeaching Point

Objectives(Students will be able to)AssessmentTeaching & Learning StrategiesResources

1Introducing GIST 2 Periods-80 minutesThe GIST method involves breaking up the text into chunks and asking the 5 Ws and How. This allows the main ideas in the passage to be identified.1. Separate text into smaller meaningful segments.2. Identify the main idea by asking the 5 Ws and How.3. Select key words to create the jist of the passage.4. Present a plan of main ideas to be used in creating a summary.Students will complete and present a graphic organiser entailing a topic sentence for each segment of the passage and a list of words that will comprise the jist of the passage.Listening and respondingQuestioningWritingGroup workSpeakinghttp://www.englishdaily626.com/summary.php?036

2Applying GIST1 Period- 40 minutesThe GIST method involves breaking up the text into chunks and asking the 5 Ws and How. This allows the main ideas in the passage to be identified.1. Separate text into smaller meaningful segments.2. Identify the main idea by asking the 5 Ws and How.3. Select key words to create the jist of the passage.4. Formulate complete sentences to be used in a summary.Students will write complete sentences of the main idea of a given passage to produce a plan for writing a summary.Listening and respondingQuestioningWritingGroup work

CSEC English A Past Papers: P02 Section A-May 2007

3Introducing Magnet Summaries2 Periods-80 minutesMagnet Summaries involves choosing a key word that attracts supporting details.

This combines to form the main ideas of a passage.1. Identify the main ideas or Magnet Words in a passage.2. Select supporting details for a Magnet Word.

3. Arrange the supporting details in order to create a complete sentence from the Magnet Word and supporting details.4. Orally present a plan of main ideas to be used in creating a summary.Student will complete a set of graphic organiser flash cards consisting of a Magnet Word and its supporting details.Listening and respondingQuestioningWritingGroup workSpeakingA passage adapted from: http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20140319/health/health1.html

4Applying Magnet Summaries1 Period-40 minutesA Magnet Summary is identifying the key term or concept from the passage and attracting the supporting details of the term or concept to create a complete sentence or sentences.1. Identify the main ideas or Magnet Words in a passage.2. Select supporting details for a Magnet Word.3. Uses the Magnet Word and supporting details to create complete sentences for use in a summary. Students will write complete sentences of the main idea of a given passage to produce a plan for writing a summary.Listening and respondingQuestioningWritingGroup workSpeakingCSEC English A Past Papers: P02 Section A-May 2004

5Combining main ideas2 Periods- 80 minutesThe main ideas can be linked together when referring to the same idea in the passage.1. Identify the main ideas the passage. 2. Select supporting details for the main ideas chosen. 3. Select main ideas with similar themes to create a summary of the passage.4. Arrange the main ideas in a logical sequence. Students will identify the main ideas of the short story Shabine and create a summary with a fixed word limit. Students will assume the role of the teacher and present the summary while the class listens to determine if any of the main ideas were omitted.Listening and respondingQuestioningWritingGroup workSpeakingRole PlayShabine by Hazel Simmons-McDonald

6Transitional Devices1 Period- 40 minutesA transitional device joins different sentence in a paragraph. It indicates an upcoming event, supporting details or introduces a contrasting idea.1. Identify the different transitional devices.2. Select an appropriate transitional device to be used in given sentences or paragraphs.3. Write a paragraph using appropriate transitional devices. Students will complete a worksheet combining a series or related sentences using transitional devices learnt.WritingTeacher modellingPair work

http://faithpasilan.blogspot.com/2006/09/transitional-device.html

7Paraphrasing2 Periods-80 minutesParaphrasing is rewriting a sentence but keeping the same meaning.1. Select appropriate synonyms to use in sentences.2. Write paraphrased sentences, keeping the original meaning.3. Create shorter equivalent sentences. 4. Appreciate the use of paraphrasing as a tool in summarising and note taking.Game: Tell me again-Students will be divided into groups and given a series of sentences on the board. Each group is given 1.5 minutes to orally paraphrase the sentence. The group with the most sentences correctly paraphrased will be the winner.Peer editingWritingGroup workSpeakingGamesWord listshttps://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/owlprint/930/English for All: Examination Level (CSEC) by Roy Narinesingh and Bhadase Seetahal-Maraj

8Omitting Repetition1 Period-40 minutesRepetition is when the author restates main ideas throughout the passage. In summary writing, repetition is removed, leaving only the main idea.

1. Identify redundancies in a passage. 2. Select redundancies to be omitted in a summary 3. Rephrase sentences to reflect the main idea, without repetition. Students will be given sample sentences which include the use of examples from the text. Students will work in pairs to rewrite the sentences keeping the main idea only. Pair workWritingEditing

A Comprehensive English Course by Uriel Narinesingh and Clifford Narinesinghhttp://www.englishdaily626.com/summary.php?024

9Omitting Statistical Data and Examples2 Periods-80 minutesStatistics and examples are used to persuade the reader of the authors point of view. In summary writing, statistics and examples are omitted or paraphrased.1. Identify examples used in expository writing. 2. Select examples to be omitted in summary writing. 3. Identify the use of statistics in a passage. 4. Select appropriate quantifiers to use in replacing statistics. A slide of a passage will be displayed from the projector. Class will be divided in to two groups: one will identify the redundancies and the other statistical data. Students will individually rewrite the passage omitting statistical data and repetition. Group workEditingWriting

A Comprehensive English Course by Uriel Narinesingh and Clifford NarinesinghCSEC English A Past Papers: P02 Section A- Jan 2010

10Determining the Writers Intention1 Period-40 minutesThe writers intention is the purpose is the reason why the text was written. There are four main purposes to an authors passage: to persuade, to inform, to entertain and to explain.1. Identify the authors purpose in text (to persuade, to inform, to entertain and to explain).2. Differentiate the authors purpose from persuasive techniques used in the text.3. Understand how the authors purpose affects the content of the text.

Teacher will place questions on the writers intention on the board. Students will read the passage aloud and orally respond to the questions given, explaining their answers. Answers will be noted in their books.Think aloudQuestioning and respondingGroup work

CSEC English A Past Papers: P02 Section A-Jan. 2013

Figure 2. Curriculum Study Unit Map

Chapter 4FindingsThe study investigated the use of GIST and Magnet Summary in aiding students in identifying main ideas and supporting details, and combining them to produce a summary. It also investigated the effect of the teaching strategies chosen on student self-efficacy. This chapter presents the findings from the intervention and relates them to the research questions set out at the beginning of the study.Research question 1:Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary aid students in accurately identifying the main ideas and supporting details in a passage, and combining them to produce a summary?Pre-test and Post testA Pre-test and Post-test was administered before and after instruction of each of the teaching strategies. The results are presented below and the mean, median, mode and standard deviation were calculated. (See Appendix 6 for samples of Pre-tests and Post-tests)GIST MethodMagnet Summary

Student Pre-Test(30 marks)Post-Test(30 marks)StudentPre-Test(30 marks)Post-Test(30 marks)

AC1213AC1516

AF1313AF1414

CC1718CC1919

CA1616CA1717

CJ1315CJ1922

DM1213DM1920

DT-J1818DT-J2123

JB1415JB1719

JN1717JN2225

KM1917KM2024

KT1213KT1516

LR1313LR1616

ME128ME1413

TL1515TL1818

TN1112TN1415

TJ1213TJ1415

YC1818YC1818

Mean14.3529414.5294117.1764718.23529

Median13131717

Mode12131416

Standard Deviation0.755410.764680.904020.95975

Pre-Test(30 marks)Post-Test(30 marks)Pre-Test(30 marks)Post-Test(30 marks)

GIST Method Magnet Summary

Figure 3. Table showing the Pre-test and Post-test scores on the sample for the teaching strategies employed.The mean score after the instruction in both GIST and Magnet Summary increased. The mean score for GIST increased by 0.17647, on the other hand, after instruction in Magnet Summary, the mean increased by a larger amount: 1.05882. The modal score also increased after instruction in both strategies. The GIST modal score increased by 1, from 12 to 13, while the Magnet Summary modal score increased by 2, from 14 to 16. The increase in assessment scores indicate that the students were able to slightly improve their ability to identify the main ideas and supporting details and combine to write a summary in both strategies. However, in light of the maximum score being 30 marks, it is evident that the students need more practice in summary writing to build on the improvements in performance noted.Z-ScoreThe Z-Score indicates if the students performance in an assessment was typical or whether there was an improvement or decline. The table below shows the scores for the Pre-tests and Post-tests:GIST Method (30 marks)Magnet Summary (30 marks)

Student Pre-TestZ-ScorePost-TestZ-ScorePre-TestZ-ScorePost-TestZ-Score

AC12-3.1113-1.7915-2.4116-2.33

AF13-1.7913-1.7914-3.5114-4.41

CC173.50184.54192.0219.80

CA162.18161.9217-0.2017-1.29

CJ13-1.79150.62192.02223.92

DM12-3.1113-1.79192.02201.84

DT-J184.83184.54214.23234.96

JB14-0.47150.6217-0.2019.80

JN173.50173.23225.34257.05

KM196.15173.23203.12246.01

KT12-3.1113-1.7915-2.4116-2.33

LR13-1.7913-1.7916-1.3016-2.33

ME12-3.118-8.6414-3.5113-5.45

TL150.86150.62180.9118-0.25

TN11-4.4412-3.3114-3.5115-3.37

TJ12-3.1113-1.7914-3.5115-3.37

YC184.83184.54180.9118-0.25

Figure 4. Table showing Z-Sores of the Pre-test and Post-test of GIST and Magnet SummaryBy using a difference of +1 or -1 as the minimum range of positive or negative change respectively, the Z-scores showed how the students performed in the Post-test when compared to the Pre-test. In GIST, 47% of the students showed an increase of 1 or more in the Z-scores, while 35% showed an increase of less than 1. This indicates that for nearly half of the sample, the performance in the Post-test can be considered an improvement. It seems that most of the students were able to achieve greater competency in the skill levels indicated in Research Question1. The Post-test Z-Scores in Magnet Summary showed that 12 % of students increased their Z-Scores by 1 or more, while the majority showed little or no difference. Despite the mean score in the Magnet Summary tests being higher, the scores in the Post-test and Pre-test had close Z-scores. This indicates that the performance was typical for the students and a small segment of the sample were able to improve on the performance standards investigated using that strategy.

Research Question 2Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary improve student performance and self-efficacy at summary writing?QuestionnairesQuestionnaires were distributed after the completion of lessons on each strategy. The data consisted of closed and open ended questions. The fixed response question responses are tabulated below and the open ended responses were coded to determine recurring themes. (See Appendix 7 for sample questionnaires).

Figure 5. Column graph showing students self-perceived ability to identify the main idea in a summary.In the first question, students were asked whether they understood how to identify the main idea after undergoing direct instruction in each strategy. In GIST, 53 % of the students rated their ability as Acceptable, 32 % as Need more work and 15% as Do not understand. Regarding GIST, it seems that the majority of students were able to attain the performance standard of identifying the main idea; however a segment of the sample still did not believe they grasped the concept. The Magnet Summary also had 53% of students indicating that their ability to identify the main idea was Acceptable. However, no students indicated that they did not understand and 32% considered their competence to be Very Well. The data indicates that the majority of students met the performance standard for the topic after the second strategy was taught. The majority of the students felt capable of identifying the main idea in a passage. Another question asked about the students understanding of the methods of instruction used. The results are presented below:

Figure 6. Bar graph showing student perception of understanding teaching strategies53% of the respondents to the questionnaires distributed after direct instruction in GIST stated that they understood the strategy. However, an almost equal amount of 47% were not completely clear in understanding and classified their level as Somewhat. As no students stated that they did not understand GIST, it seems that the students had a good grasp of how to utilise the strategy. The results are different for Magnet Summary as 16 % stated that they understood the method. The vast majority of 84 % did not completely grasp the idea of Magnet Summary despite having an improved average performance in the Post-test. A possible explanation for this may be that students utilised skills in summary writing learnt in earlier lessons when trying to apply the Magnet Summary strategy, hence the performance in the assessments would show an improvement.The open ended questions in the questionnaires were coded and the themes two main themes were identified: view of teaching strategy and its helpfulness and views of summary writing. The table below summarises the findings:ThemeGIST Magnet Summary

View of teaching strategy and its helpfulnessMost students liked the method because it broke the passage into smaller parts. They were able to find the main idea quickly, however they found difficulty in expanding the 5Ws and How into complete sentences. One wrote There is a limited amount of words so you must extend the sentence using your own words. Students identified the main benefit of the strategy as identifying the main idea through a step by step approach. A response was My teacher gets me to understand because he teaches step by step. Most indicated the method made summary writing easier and they were able to attain the performance criteria for the task as a student mentioned It also helps stay in the word limit and another I like how it splits in up into every part to get the gist of it There were mixed responses to the intervention. As it was the second strategy employed students made comparisons to GIST. There were mixed reviews with some preferring this method while others preferring GIST. The step by step approach was again identified as a main factor is students positive feelings towards the method, as one wrote Its most effective. Its like a step by step process. Another responded Using these steps is like putting a puzzle together

Views on summary writingThere were mixed views on summary writing. While some said the strategy made them now like the topic, others maintained their dislike despite admitting that the strategy was useful. A student wrote It is kind of hard for me sometimes to write a summary maybe because it has too many words. While another responded I now like writing summaries using this method because its less stressful.The majority of students indicated that they like writing summaries. The main reason given was that the strategy made writing easier.

Figure 7.Table showing major themes from student feedback from questionnairesMost students indicated in the questionnaires that they benefitted from both teaching strategies in the following ways, division of the text into smaller parts, easier identification of main ideas, and step by step approach allowing the writing of a summary that both has the relevant information and is within the word limit. Self-efficacy TestsThe same self-efficacy test was administered before and after the intervention. The questions focussed on student self-efficacy regarding competencies in summary writing. (See Appendix 8 for sample self-efficacy tests). The results are tabulated below:Question Score on Likert Scale

1 Strongly Disagree2 Disagree3 Neutral or Maybe4Agree5Strongly Agree

PrePostPrePostPrePostPrePostPrePost

1. I find it easy to identify the main ideas in the passage and combine them into complete sentences.000011661320

2. It is hard for me to decide what goes first, second, third, and so on.1089366410

3. I can take sentences from the passage and rewrite them in my own words.00211092455

4. I can identify and omit examples, repetition and statistical date when writing a summary.00221063744

5. I can easily identify the purpose of the passage and intention of the writer.0020898713

6. I am able to manage my time effectively to finish the question in the given time.11301065903

7. I am able to stay within the word limit of a summary.00009107732

8. I can write a good summary10201096802

Figure 8. Table showing student responses to a self-efficacy test administered before and after the intervention. The results showed a movement from the lower end of the Likert Scale, which represented an inhibited feeling of self-efficacy by the student, to the higher end of the scale in all questions. A significant improvement was seen when students were asked about the ease in identifying the main ideas and combining them into complete sentences, 32 % indicated a score of 4 or Agree before the intervention which more than doubled to 68 % after. Initially, 32 % of the sample felt that it was difficult to determine the order of ideas in the passage, this dropped to 21 %. Before the intervention, 11 % agreed that they could paraphrase sentences compared to 21 % after. At first 16 % agreed that they could identify and omit examples, statistics and repetition, this more than doubled to 37 %. The self-efficacy rate did not decline for any question; however it remained fairly constant when students were asked about identifying the writers intention, time management and their feeling about being able to write a good summary. Therefore, additional lessons on these skills may be needed. Generally, the data shows an increase in student self-efficacy in most performance standards in summary writing.

JournalsStudents were encouraged to write a single journal at the end of the intervention about their learning experience (See Appendix 9 for sample student journals). The responses were coded for recurring themes and two were found: ability to write a summary and attitudes to the teaching strategies. The results are summarised below:ThemeFeedback

Ability to write a summaryMajority of students indicated that they felt better able to write a summary. One student stated it was easier to understand the points of the summary. While another said, I feel better about writing summaries and even look forward to doing them. Some still believed it was tricky and there was too much main ideas to pull out

Attitudes to the teaching strategiesThe strategies were seen as helpful, with many indicating a preference for a particular strategy. A student wrote, I also think the new methods of summary writing helped me to write a summary better than before. Students mentioned that the ability to handle smaller pieces of text allowed for an easier ordering of the main ideas.

Figure 9. Table showing major themes from student feedback from student journalStudents were of a consensus that the strategies taught did assist in improving their competence in summary writing. Despite, some students still harbouring negative feelings to the task, the vast majority believed the teaching strategies were helpful.

Chapter 5Discussion, Conclusions, and RecommendationsDiscussionResearch Question 1: Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary aid students in accurately identifying the main ideas and supporting details in a passage, and combining them to produce a summary?

From the increase in mean scores in the Post-tests of both GIST and Magnet Summary, there is a good indication that students were able to identify the main ideas and supporting details in and passage, and combine them to produce a summary. This was also indicated by the Z-scores. It should be noted a greater amount of students showed an increase in their Z-score in GIST than in Magnet Summary. In addition, the responses from the questionnaire show that for both strategies, the majority of students considered their ability to identify the main idea in a summary passage as Acceptable.The improvement seen agrees with Urquhart and McIvers (2005) view that exposure to models of summary writing will improve student competency and performance. The use of graphic organisers in GIST and Magnet Summary enabled students to both self-edit and link the main ideas to supporting details. The self-editing occurs when the students use the graphic organisers to formulate sentences to use in the summary. The linking of main ideas to supporting details occur when students ask the Five Ws and How in GIST and attract the supporting details to the Magnet Word or Magnet Phrase in Magnet Summary. These skills were mentioned by Frey et al. (2003) and Buehl (2014) as skills necessary for summary writing. The results show that the methods used by Cunningham (1982) and Buehl (2001 & 2014) are still relevant, effective and applicable to the contemporary classroom

Research Question 2: Will the use of GIST or Magnet Summary improve student self-efficacy at summary writing?

The open ended questions in the questionnaires showed that the students responded positively to the teaching strategies. Students found that the procedural approach in GIST and Magnet Summary aided them in identifying the main ideas as the text could now be approached as manageable pieces instead of an entire body. The journals echoed the same sentiments and students indicated that they developed a preference for a one strategy over the other. In addition they felt better able to write summaries after the intervention. Student self-efficacy increased in the skill area of identifying main ideas, ordering ideas, omitting repetition, example as statistics, and paraphrasing sentences. However, the self-efficacy levels remained fairly the same regarding identifying the writers intention, time management and their feeling about being able to write a good summary. Even though some admitted that their skill levels in some competencies in summary writing improved, that still did not make any significant change in attitude to summary writing.The students being able to rate specific writing skills in the self-efficacy tests agrees with Pajares (2003) that it is an accurate way to determine self-efficacy in writing. The data form the self-efficacy test showed that students felt that they were more competent in restating or paraphrasing text. This is of importance as it is a main indicator of competence in summary writing. It is a feature of more competent writers according to Brown et al. (1983). Cunningham (1982) considers it one of the main benefits of GIST. In addition, the Caribbean Examinations Council (2014) lists it as one of the critical areas in need of development at the CSEC level.ConclusionThis curriculum study indicates that the use of GIST and Magnet Summary as modes of direct instruction of summary writing does enable students to easily identify the main ideas and supporting details in a passage, and combine them to produce a summary. In addition, using GIST and Magnet Summary in the classroom has resulted in an increase in student self-efficacy about summary writing and most of its specific competencies.ConstraintsDue to an electrical fire at the school, there was significant class time lost due to early dismissal and student absenteeism due to the problems with the water and electricity supply. Before the disruptions began, six of the lessons were completed, the researcher sent notes to parents to send the students out on specified days after final examinations and during the vacation. The parents were supportive of the attempt to compensate for the lost class time and the majority of students attended. The remaining lesson was taught during these days. However, as there was not full attendance less student journals were completed. In addition, it was observed that students were reluctant to elaborate written responses in the open ended questions in the questionnaires and in the journal.ImplicationsThe experience of conducting this curriculum study has enabled the researcher to constantly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of classroom pedagogy. The researcher has developed an appreciation of regular student feedback, which is analysed to generate evidence for the success of a classroom practice or the need to alter it. As an English teacher, the use of journals and open ended questions were of particular interest as it involves students writing their candid opinions when done anonymously or in a non-judgmental environment. The study enabled the researcher to positively affect the sample both in increased performance and self-efficacy relating to summary writing. The lessons provided some new best practices for other teachers to utilise in the school and evaluate its appropriateness for their specific classes. Though the study is small, it has made a small contribution to the body of data on teaching summary writing. It is hoped that it serves as a catalyst for the researcher or other to conduct a larger study over a longer period of time to ascertain more solid data.RecommendationsAfter conducting the study, the following recommendations can be made:1. Teachers should be encouraged to utilise other strategies in teaching summary writing besides the Rule-Based Strategy, especially strategies that encourage students to analyse the text in a methodological way.2. After instruction is a chosen strategy, gather student feedback to ascertain the effectiveness of instruction. This will guide the lessons to come as weaknesses can be addressed.3. The teaching of summary writing should be done form an earlier time in the CSEC level. Many lesson taught would have been more effective more time was allocated to practice exercises. It was evident to the researcher that the students required more practice in some lessons, towards the end of the study. 4. The teacher must select passages that would interest the students in the beginning of instruction and then move on to the abstract texts used in the CSEC level. This makes the task of summary writing less intimidating.Works CitedBandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of human behaviour (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.

Best, J.W., & Kahn J. V. (1998). Research in Education (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C. & Day, J. D. (1980). Learning to learn: on training students to learn texts (Technical Report No. 189). Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois.

Brown, A. L. & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: the development of expertise (Technical Report No. 270). Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois.

Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing texts (Technical Report No. 268). Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois.

Buehl, D. (2001). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (2nd. Ed.). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Buehl, D. (2014). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (4th. Ed.). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Burns, A. (2009). Action research. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 112-134). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Caribbean Examinations Council. (2014). Report On Candidates Work Done In The Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate Examination January 2014: English A General Proficiency Examination. St. Michael, Barbados: Caribbean Examinations Council.

Casazza, M. E. (1993).Using a model of direct instruction to teach summary writing in a college reading class. Journal of Reading, 37(3), 202-208.

Chen, G. ,Gully, S.M., &Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new General Self-Efficacy Scale.Organizational Research Methods, 4, 62-83.

Cunningham, J. W. (1982). Generating interactions between schemata and text. In J. Niles & L. Harris (Eds.), New inquiries in reading: Research and instruction, thirty-first yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 42-47). Washington, D.C.: National Reading Conference. Frey, N., Fisher, D. & Hernandez, T. (2003). Whats the Gist? Summary writing for struggling adolescent writers. Voices from the Middle, 11(2), 43-49.

Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Theories and principles of motivation. In D. C. Berliner &R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 63-84). New York: Simon& Schuster Macmillan.

Hutchins, J. (1987). Summarization: Some Problems and Methods. In K. P. Jones (Ed.). Meaning: the frontier of informatics: Proceedings of Informatics 9, March 26-27, 1987, Kings College, London (pp. 151-173). London: Aslib.

Ivankova, N. V. & Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mixed Methods. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 135-161). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Jones, Raymond. (2012 Aug. 26). Summarizing. ReadingQuest.org: Making Sense in Social Studies. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2014, from http://curry.edschool.virginia.edu/go/readquest/strat/summarize.html.

Kirkland, M. R. & Saunders, M. P. (1991). Student performance in summary writing: Managing cognitive load. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 105-121.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques (2nd Ed.). New Delhi, India: New Age International (P) Limited.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J. & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom Instruction that works: Research- based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Mills, G. E. (2007) Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.

Pajares, F. (2003). Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Motivation, and Achievement in Writing: A Reviewof the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 139-158.

Schunk, D. A. (1991). Self Efficacy and Academic Motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3 & 4), 207-231.

Rhoder, C. (2002). Mindful reading: Strategy training that facilitates transfer. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 498-512.

Urquhart, V. & McIver, M. (2005). Teaching writing in the content areas. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Zygouris-Coe, V., Wiggins, M. B. & Smith, L. H. (2005). Engaging students with text: The 3-2-1 strategy. The Reading Teacher, 58(4), 381-384. doi: 10.1598/RT.58.4.8

Appendix 1Pre-test and Post-test RubricSkill levels

Summary criteria25-30: Superior19-24: Competent13-18: Approaching competence7-12: Poor0-6: Unable to summarise text

Length5 marksThe summary is within the stated word limit. (5 marks)The summary is a bit longer or shorter than the stated word limit. (4 marks)The summary is somewhat longer or shorter than the stated word limit. (3-2 marks)The summary is much longer or shorter than the stated word limit. (0-1 mark)The summary is as long as the original passage or too short. (0 marks)

Form5 marksThe summary is written in paragraph form There are few mistakes in grammar and punctuation. (5 marks)The summary is written in paragraph form There are several mistakes in grammar and punctuation. (4 marks)

The summary is written in paragraph form There are many mistakes in grammar and punctuation. (3 marks)The summary is written in note/bulletform There are severalmistakes in grammar and punctuation. (2 marks) The summary is written in note/bullet form There many mistakes in grammar and punctuation. (0-1 mark)

Content10 marksMain idea of the passage is stated in the first sentence or sentences. The writer uses only essential information from the passage to support the main idea of the summary. (8-10 marks)Main idea of the passage is stated in the middle of the summary. The writer uses mainly essential information and some minor details from the passage to support the main idea of the summary (6-7 marks)Main idea of the passage is stated at the end of the summary The writer uses minor details and non-essential information from the passage to support the main idea of the summary. (4-5 marks)Main idea of the passage is not stated at all, it is suggested or implied. The writer uses personal knowledge and non-essential details from the passage to support the main idea of the summary. (2-3 marks)The main idea of the passage is not stated, suggested or implied in the summary. The writer uses mainly personal information to support the main idea of the summary. (0-1 mark)

Process5 marksThe writer uses his own words to write the summary. There is no repetition, examples or statistical data from the passage. (5 marks)The writer uses some words from the passage to write the summary. There is few repetition, examples or statistical data from the passage. (4 marks)The writer uses some sentences from the passage to write the summary. There is some repetition, examples or statistical data from the passage. (3 marks)The writer uses sections (chunks) from the passage to write the summary. There is repetition, examples or statistical data from the passage. (2 marks)The writer copies the whole passage for the summary. There is much repetition, examples or statistical data from the passage. (0-1 mark)

Meaning5 marksThe writer uses words in the summary which have the same logical sequence as the passage. (5 marks)The writer uses some words in the summary which have the same logical sequence as the passage. (4 marks)The writer uses words in the summary which have a similar sequence as the passage. (3 marks)The writer uses words in the summary which do not have a sequence similar to the passage. (2 marks)The writer uses words in the summary which do not show any logical sequence. (0-1 mark)

Appendix 2Student QuestionnaireStudent Feedback on Learning Summary Writing: GISTInstructions: The purpose of this questionnaire is to receive feedback on your experiences doing summary writing this term. Please answer the following questions honestly. Thank you for your feedback.1. Do you understand how to identify the main idea in a summary?Very WellAcceptable Need More Work Do Not Understand 2. Do you understand how to find the main ideas using the GIST Method? YesNoSomewhatExplain you answer.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________3. What do you like and dislike about the GIST Method of summary writing?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________4. Do you like or now like writing summaries using this method? Please explain reasons for your answer.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Student Feedback on Learning Summary Writing: Magnet SummaryInstructions: The purpose of this questionnaire is to receive feedback on your experiences doing summary writing this term. Please answer the following questions honestly. Thank you for your feedback.1. Do you understand how to identify the main idea in a summary?Very WellAcceptable Need More Work Do Not Understand 2. Do you understand how to find the main ideas using Magnet Summary? YesNoSomewhatExplain you answer.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________3. What do you like and dislike about the Magnet Summary method of summary writing?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________4. Do you like or now like writing summaries using this method? Please explain reasons for your answer.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 3Student JournalName: _____________________JournalWrite a short journal on your feelings about what we did in summary writing. Use the following guides to help in your response: Do you prefer GIST or Magnet Summary? Why? Have the new methods of summary writing helped you in any way? Do you now feel better able to write a summary? Why? Was your teacher helpful in learning about these new methods? How? Anything else about summary writing this term that you want to say.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 4Student Self-Efficacy TestSummary Writing

Directions: Answer the following questions based on how you feel about your writing on this topic.Strongly disagreeDisagreeNeutral or MaybeAgreeStrongly agree

1. I find it easy to identify the main ideas in the passage and combine them into complete sentences.

12345

2. It is hard for me to decide what goes first, second, third, and so on.

12345

3. I can take sentences from the passage and rewrite them in my own words.

12345

4. I can identify and omit examples, repetition and statistical date when writing a summary.

12345

5. I can easily identify the purpose of the passage and intention of the writer.

12345

6. I am able to manage my time effectively to finish the question in the given time.12345

7. I am able to stay within the word limit of a summary

12345

8. I can write a good summary12345

Appendix 5Unit of LessonsTHE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES, ST. AUGUSTINESCHOOL OF EDUCATION

ENGLISH LESSON PLANTEACHER: Hassan Basarally

CLASS: 5L

ESTIMATED DURATION: 2 periods- 80 minutes

DATE: 21/01/2015

THEME/TOPIC: Summary Writing- Introducing Generating Interactions between Schemata and Text (GIST)

CURRICULUM STANDARD: Identify main and subordinate ideas and trace their development

TEACHING POINT: The GIST method involves breaking up the text into chunks and asking the 5 Ws and How. This allows the main ideas in the passage to be identified.

PURPOSE / RATIONALE: Summary writing is a skill that is not only tested on the curriculum but has many real world applications. Many students will have to utilise this skill in report writing in the world of work. Many students have difficulty approaching a passage because its content is something they may not be familiar with. Therefore, it is very important to teach students effective ways to elicit the main ideas in a passage, as this is the first step in writing a summary.

PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE / PERFORMANCE: Reading comprehension, main ideas

ANTICIPATED DIFFICULTY: Difficulty in the technical jargon used in the passage

TECHNOLOGIES AND RESEARCH RESOURCES:

White board, markers, Copies of 20 word GIST Template Passage adapted from: http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,204772.html http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lesson-plans/gist-summarizing-strategy-content-290.html

INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVES (CLASSIFICATION)ASSESSMENT

Students will / should be able to:5. Separate text into smaller meaningful segments. (cognitive)6. Identify the main idea by asking the 5 Ws and How. (cognitive)7. Select key words to create the Gist of the passage. (cognitive)8. Presents a plan of main ideas to be used in creating a summary. (affective)Formative: Students will divide the passage into smaller parts by drawing lines separating the text. Students will complete the 20 word GIST Template.Summative:Students will orally present the main ideas of the text in complete sentences.

PROCEDURESET INDUCTION: The teacher will write the sentence After talking to Shania, I found out the gist of what went on the class I missed. Students will be asked what they think the work gist means. When the correct meaning is arrived at, the teacher will tell them that there is a way to identifying the main ideas in summary writing called the GIST Method.

TEACHING STRATEGIES/METHODS/ACTIVITIES LEARNING STRATEGIES/ACTIVITIES

1. Teacher will list the steps of the GIST Method.2. Students will be given a passage entitled Alcohol: The Most Common Date Rape Drug which they will read individually.3. Students will be asked to give some information from the passage that they found interesting.4. Students will read the passage aloud 5. Students will be asked the divide the text into sections that have similar information.6. Students will be asked to formulate questions that they would ask to determine if someone understood the passage if they were giving a presentation on the topic. The teacher will point out that these questions entail the 5 Ws and How.7. Students will be given a copy of the 20 word GIST Template for each of the sections made earlier in the lesson. 8. Students will be grouped, one each section identified.9. The teacher will model how to complete the graphic organiser given.10. Each group will present their 20 word GIST Template to the class, providing a sentence of no more than 20 words summarising the section assigned to them.11. Teacher writes each groups sentence to make a summary plan of the passage for all students write in their notebooks.ListeningIndividual reading

Questioning/Responding

ReadingResponding

Role play/Responding

Group work

Modelling

Speaking/ Peer evaluation

Drafting/ Note taking

CLOSURE: The teacher will ask students to remind the class of how to use the GIST Method and how to complete the graphic.

LESSON EVALUATION: Students will be given graphic organisers to complete for the sections that they were not assigned. The students will keep the graphic organisers and submit their individual summary plans for the teacher to assess.

CONTINGENCY PLAN: Graphic organiser can be drawn on the board if copies are unavailable.

TEACHERS EVALUATION OF THE LESSON: The students grasped quickly the 5 Ws and Who to be used in GIST. They required assistance in dividing the passage into smaller segments for analysis. The graphic organiser helped in formulating complete sentences to be used in a summary.

SUPERVISORS COMMENTS:

20 Word GIST Template

1. Fill out the 5Ws and H. Who:What:Where:When:Why:How:

2. Write a 20-word GIST. ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________

____________ ____________ ____________ ____________

____________ ____________ ____________ ____________

____________ ____________ ____________ ____________

____________ ____________ ____________ ____________

Alcohol: The Most Common Date Rape DrugBy CAROL MATROO , adapted from Newsday Saturday, December 27 2014

Recently, as he piloted legislation to enable the State to regulate the use of certain classes of chemicals, Attorney General Anand Ramlogan noted a trend of chemicals being used to drug young victims. It is something that is done in the prestigious areas and communities, in high society parties and so on, where you have all manner of drugs being laid out and the age of children that are using it keeps getting lower and lower, the Attorney General had said.

But, according to secretary of the Association of Psychiatrists of Trinidad and Tobago, Dr Varma Deyalsingh, alcohol was the most common date rape drug. Now, my perspective from the Psychiatric Association is yes, you have the Rohypnol (roofie) and Ketadine, but these are only responsible for about two to four percent of the date rapes. Sixty to 70 per cent of date rapes is due to alcohol. If you want to look at the whole idea of date rape we should not be focusing on that minority, Deyalsingh said. Rohypnol is the trade name for the medication flunitrazepam. It is a benzodiazepine with similar effects to Valium, however it is 10 times more potent. Rohypinol is a central nervous system depressant that is prescribed outside the United States for the short term treatment of severe sleep disorders. It is manufactured by Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc. and widely available in Europe, Mexico, and Colombia. The manufacture and sale of Rohypnol is illegal in the United States.As a society we need to go behind the bigger picture, the one that is causing the greater damage which is alcohol. We have to look at the alcohol use among these girls and educate them, he said. He said many people would choose to use alcohol to drug a girl because next day they could always lay the blame on her saying she was drunk and she asked for sex. Or, she may blame herself and admitting she had too much to drink so I looked for it.

Deyalsingh noted that most date rapes occurred not with strangers, but with someone the victim knew. There was a cousin who would rape his cousin after she came over after spiking her drink. Or, it may not be the person you are with, but sometimes friends may carry you to a party and other people there may commit the act.

Now, we may ask why would someone want to commit such an act. They want to have something with somebody they dont think they will get through with, or have sex with somebody and they dont want her to know. They may want to have sex with someone, but society would not agree, so they drug them. It is taboo sex, he said.

It is not just about somebody wanting to have sex with a family member or a boy on a kicks scene where they get a girl drunk and they have sex with her. This is like a crime of opportunity, she is there for the taking, he said.

Deyalsingh said there was a risk in administering these drugs to unsuspecting people, especially if mixed with alcohol. This could cause the central nervous system to seize up and the person could have respiratory arrest and die.

He warned that a woman must have someone who she can trust to look out for her when she goes out. She must also be able to call a central rape line and get to a doctor since these drugs are flushed out of the system within 12 to 72 hours

Women are advised against accepting drinks from others and not sharing drinks. They must be vigilant in watching their drink, and having a non-drinking friend with them to make sure nothing happens.

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES, ST. AUGUSTINESCHOOL OF EDUCATION

ENGLISH LESSON PLANTEACHER: Hassan Basarally

CLASS: 5L

ESTIMATED DURATION: 1 period- 40 minutes

DATE: 22/01/2015

THEME/TOPIC: Summary Writing- Applying Generating Interactions between Schemata and Text (GIST)

CURRICULUM STANDARD: Identify main and subordinate ideas and trace their development

TEACHING POINT: The GIST method involves breaking up the text into chunks and asking the 5 Ws and How. This allows the main ideas in the passage to be identified.

PURPOSE / RATIONALE: Summary writing is a skill that is not only tested on the curriculum but has many real world applications. Many students will have to utilise this skill in report writing in the world of work. Many students have difficulty approaching a passage because its content is something they may not be familiar with. Therefore, it is very important to teach students effective ways to elicit the main ideas in a passage, as this is the first step in writing a summary. The GIST method involves breaking up the text into chunks and asking the 5 Ws and How. This allows the main ideas in the passage to be identified.

PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE / PERFORMANCE: Reading comprehension, main ideas

ANTICIPATED DIFFICULTY: Difficulty in the technical jargon used in the passage

TECHNOLOGIES AND RESEARCH RESOURCES:

White board, markers, Copies of Combined GIST Template Passage adapted from http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/AP--Skin-bleaching-a-growing-problem-in-Jamaica

http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lesson-plans/gist-summarizing-strategy-content-290.htmlINSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVES (CLASSIFICATION)ASSESSMENT

Students will / should be able to:9. Separate text into smaller meaningful segments. (cognitive)10. Identify the main idea by asking the 5 Ws and How. (cognitive)11. Select key words to create the Gist of the passage. (cognitive)12. Formulate complete sentences to be used in a summary. (cognitive)Formative: Students will divide the passage into smaller parts by drawing lines separating the text. Students will complete the Combined GIST Template.Summative:Students will formulate the main ideas of the text in complete sentences. Students will then write a complete summary to be marked with a prepared rubric.

PROCEDURESET INDUCTION: The teacher writes the 5 Ws and How on the board and asks students to explain how these words help in summary writing.

TEACHING STRATEGIES/METHODS/ACTIVITIES LEARNING STRATEGIES/ACTIVITIES

12. Teacher will list the steps of the GIST Method and draw their attention to the chart prepared for the class13. Students will be given a passage entitled Cassava which they will read individually.14. The teacher will draw the Combined GIST Template on the board15. Students will be asked fill in the template as a class.16. Teacher will use responses to formulate some sentences to be used in a summary. 17. Students will be asked to work in pairs to create the other sentences needed to complete a skeleton of the summary.18. Some students will be asked to present their sentences and the class asked whether they missed out any supporting details of the main idea. 19. Students will be asked to individually complete the Combined GIST Template and draft topic sentences for a summary.20. Teacher reviews students notebooksListening

Questioning/Responding

Modelling

Pair work/Writing/Responding

Peer evaluation/Responding

Drafting/Editing

CLOSURE: The teacher will complete the Combined GIST Template on the board and ask students to volunteer to write the steps of the GIST method on the board

LESSON EVALUATION: Students will use the Combined GIST Template to write a complete summary of the passage at home. This will be returned to the teacher and scored based on a prepared rubric.

CONTINGENCY PLAN: Graphic organiser can be drawn on the board if copies are not available.

TEACHERS EVALUATION OF THE LESSON: The students are fond of the 20 word GIST Template and had initial difficulty in understanding the Combined GIST Template. Students found the choice of passage a motivator in attempting the exercises.

SUPERVISORS COMMENTS:

GIST and Magnet Summary

147

QuestionSection 1:Section2: Section 3:

Who

What

When

Where

Why

How

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES, ST. AUGUSTINESCHOOL OF EDUCATION

ENGLISH LESSON PLANTEACHER: Hassan Basarally

CLASS: 5L

ESTIMATED DURATION: 2 Periods-80 minutes

DATE: 03/02/2015

THEME/TOPIC: Summary Writing-Introducing Magnet Summaries

CURRICULUM STANDARD: Identify main and subordinate ideas and trace their development.TEACHING POINT: A Magnet Summary is identifying the key term or concept from the passage and attracting the supporting details of the term or concept to create a complete sentence or sentences.

PURPOSE / RATIONALE: Summary writing is a skill that is not only tested on the curriculum but has many real world applications. Many students will have to utilise this skill in report writing in the world of work. Many students have difficulty approaching a passage because its content is something they may not be familiar with. Therefore, it is very important to teach students effective ways to elicit the main ideas in a passage, as this is the first step in writing a summary.

PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE / PERFORMANCE: Reading comprehension, main ideas

ANTICIPATED DIFFICULTY: Identification of Magnet Words, vocabulary of technical jargon used in the passage

TECHNOLOGIES AND RESEARCH RESOURCES:

White board, markers, Copies of Magnet Summary Template Passage adapted from: http://www.raisesmartkid.com/10-to-16-years-old/6-articles/43-facebook-myspace-twitter-good-or-bad-for-kids-brain http://northiowareading.wikispaces.com/Magnet+Summaries https://manleyliteracy.wikispaces.com/Comprehension+Strategies

INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVES (CLASSIFICATION)ASSESSMENT

Students will / should be able to:13. Identify the main ideas or Magnet Words in a passage. (cognitive)14. Select supporting details for a Magnet Word. (cognitive)15. Arrange the supporting details in order to create a complete sentence from the Magnet Word and supporting details. (cognitive)16. Orally present a plan of main ideas to be used in creating a summary. (affective)Formative: Students identify the Magnet Words in a passage and its supporting details Students will complete the Magnet Summary Template.Summative:Students will orally present the main ideas of the text in complete sentences.

PROCEDURESET INDUCTION: Teacher writes the word Magnet Summary on the board and asks for five volunteers. Five magnets are placed on a desk. One student is given a magnet labelled Magnet Word and told to attract any of the other magnets from the desk and read the label of the magnet (Supporting Detail). Each of the other volunteers is told to do the same.

TEACHING STRATEGIES/METHODS/ACTIVITIES LEARNING STRATEGIES/ACTIVITIES

1. The teacher asks the students to formulate a definition for Magnet Summary based on what they saw in the set induction.2. The teacher writes the definition on the board, editing where necessary.3. Students are asked to think back to the set induction and work in pairs to list what they think will be the steps to be taken in the method of Magnet Summaries.4. Pairs are to orally present their steps.5. Teacher lists the steps given by the students on the board and highlights to most suitable ones.6. Students read the passage individually.7. Students are placed into groups to identify the Magnet Words in the passage. Stude