the journal of teacher action research 40...teacher leah moorefield noted that “reluctant readers...

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 40

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume3,Issue3,2017,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

IMPROVINGREADINGWITHTARGETEDSTRATEGIESFORARELUCTANTELEMENTARYREADERAmandaBright

IndianaStateUniversity

AbstractWhenelementaryschoolchildrenstrugglewithreadingskills,teachersandparentsworry.Whenyoungchildrenarereluctanttoevenengageintheactofreading,thesituationbecomesadire.Thisactionresearchprojectfocusedonasinglefirst-grademalestudentwho,despitesupportinthehomeandintheclassroom,wasaversetoparticipatinginanytypeofreading.Usingamixedmethodsapproach,threeresearch-basedreadingstrategieswereintroducedtothislearnertoengagehissenseofself-efficacyforthetask,andbothhisresponses,aswellasthereactionsofhisparent,wereanalyzed.Theactionresearchfoundthatthroughchoice-based,interactivemethodsofreadinginstruction,theperceptionofabilityregardingreadingimprovedslightlyforboththelearnerandtheparent.Althoughlimitedinscopeandsample,thisactionresearchprovidessupportforboththeusefulnessofindividual,responsivereadinginterventionsaswellastheapplicationofself-efficaciousstrategiesmeanttohelpmotivateareluctantelementaryreader.

Keywords:reading,strategies,reluctantlearner,self-efficacy

Introduction

Thewordsandphrasescanbefoundthroughouteducationalliterature:reluctant,disengaged,unmotivated,fallingbehind,at-risk.Morestudentsarewearingtheselabelsinschoolsandfeelingboththestigmaandeffectsoftheirmeaning.Theresearchisparticularlypointedsurroundingbeginningreaders.Fromkindergartentofirst-grade,thefoundationofbasicliteracyissupposedtobelaidasalargeraccessskillfornearlyeveryareatofollow.“Readingdifficultyisaparticularlysalientmarkerforachievementinyoungchildrenbecauseitisaprimaryfocusofearlyeducationandaprincipalpredictorofcurrentandlaterachievement”(Grills-Taquechel,Fletcher,Vaughn,&Stuebing,2012,p.36).Butoften,youngstudentsarefailingtoengagewiththeprintedwordatthisearlystage,whichputstheirfutureinperil.



Accordingtoseveralresearchers,thereluctantelementaryreaderoccursinspecificvarieties.TeacherLeahMoorefieldnotedthat“reluctantreadersmaybedivided‘intothreecategories:thosewhocan’tread,don’tread,andwon’tread’”(ascitedinEarl&Maynard,2006,p.163).Bysayingthis,Moorefieldhastappedintooneofthemostfrustratingaspectsofunderachievingreaders–theirreasonforstrugglingisunpredictablymulti-faceted.Somechildrenhaveaspecificlearningproblemthatpreventstheirabilitytoread,othershavenointerestandthereforedonotgainthecrucialpracticetheyneedtodevelop,whilestillothersaresmartenoughtoreadwellbutsimplychoosenotto(AhmadAl-Saleem,2012).Inordertounderstandwhatisattheheartofareluctant–andthereforestruggling–reader,research,observation,andanalysisneedstobecomepersonal.Acknowledgingthatunengagedreadersarecommonplaceisagoodfirststep,butwilltheanalysisofanindividualelementaryreaderinordertouncoverandcombathisstatus–cannot,willnot,ordonot–beapplicabletootherstudentsinhissituation?Itstandstoreasonthatitwill,simplybecauseeventhoughtherearethreetypesofreluctantorunengagedlearners,thereisonecommonunderlyingcause:alackofintrinsicmotivation.

AlthoughIamacollegeinstructor,Ihavehadmanyinformalconversationswiththemotherofanincomingsecond-graderwheretheseideasareclearlyechoed.Heisacapablelearnerandreader,butheisuninterestedanddisengaged.Healsomakesnumerouscommentsabouthislackofability.Althoughheseesthefaultinhimself,itsurelydoesnotresttherealone.Somewherealongtheway,perhapsduringhisrockykindergartenyear,hedeeplyinternalizedtheideathathewasbelowaverageinabilityasareader–andhascontinuedtoactonit.Althoughresearchspeakstotheeducationalenvironmentandlearningopportunitiesthathereceivedasthemainculprit,thepurviewofthisstudywastofocusonthisstudentasanindividualinordertoascertainifhisinternalperspectiveasareadercouldbebolsteredatthisjuncture.Thepurposeofthisactionresearchprojectwastolookathowself-efficacyelementsinteractinageneraleducationfirst-graderinordertofindoutwhatwouldmotivatehimtobothengageinreadingactivitiesandthenperhapsreadmoreonhisown.Althoughonlyafewreadingactivitiesandtechniqueswereused,itwasthecommonalityoftheself-efficaciousaspectsofeachthatweremeasuredandevaluatedforeffectivenessatthisstudent’sabilitytogainself-confidenceandthereforebewillingtoengageinreading.

LiteratureReview

Thisaction-basedresearchforKyleisnot,ofcourse,auniqueendeavor.Strugglinglearnershaveexistedsincethebeginningofeducation,andparticularlyintheyearsfollowingthe1980sanditsemphasisonfailingschoolsandfallingscores,teachersandparentshaveworried.Historically,schoolwasnotforeveryone,sothereaderswholikelywouldhavebeenmostreluctantsimplywerenotaskedtoreadorengageintheprocessfarbeyondabasiclevel.However,today’ssocietyandeducationalneedsaredramaticallydifferent,and“compoundingthechallengeistherealitythattoday'sclassroomsarefilledwithstudentswithincreasinglydiverseneeds,stemmingfromdifferencesintheirhomelanguages,learningabilities,andliteracyexperiences”(Ganske,Monroe,&Strickland,2003,p.118).Theliteraturetendstofallononesideor



theotheroftheparadigm:eitherauthorstalkabouttheoreticalabstractionsorspecificlessonplansregardingmotivationforreaders.Itseemslikefewerstudiesworktomarrythegeneralbehaviorordispositionofthestudentwithaprecisemethodology.IntrinsicMotivationandSelf-Efficacy.ItistheideasofJeanPiagetthatfirsttookthedesireformotivationinwardfromtheprimarilyextrinsicnotionofmotivationuntilthen.“[W]eoftenseemtostiflethechild’snaturalcuriosity.Inschool,childrenbecomedisinterested,lazy,rebellious,andfrightenedoffailure.Themajortaskofeducation,itwouldseem,wouldbetoliberatetheboldcuriositywithwhichchildrenenterlife”(Crain,2011,p.150).AlbertBandura,inthe1960sand1970s,alteredthenaturalcuriosityconceptbyapplyingamoresocialandobservationalcontext,notingthatwhenstudents“seevalue”inlearning,intrinsicmotivationandthereforeengagementwillfollow(Daniels,2010).

Otherresearchersstartfromthestudentinsteadoftheteacheraswell,whenanalyzingintrinsicmotivation.JosephSanacore(2008)builthisargumentforcreatingmotivatedandself-ledreadersaroundpersonalrelevance.Throughanextensivesetofsurveys,Sanacoreprescribedstrategiesaboutfosteringadesiretoreadfortherestofstudents’livesbecauseofapersonalinvestmentandthereforepersonalchoice.Thisoverarchingtheory,however,begsthequestionofwhatstudentswillfindpersonallyrelevant.Individualassociationsareoftendifficultforteacherstomanagewithmanystudents,sosomeeducatorsaremovingtowardtextchoiceinordertospurengagementandindependence.IditKatzandAviAssor(2007)notedthatself-determinationwasacrucialfactorinmovingreluctantreaderstobecomeself-sufficientreadersbecauseofself-efficacy.Personalrelevanceisevenmorepunctuatedwhengoal-settingisinvolved,andresearchpublishedinTheReadingTeachernotedthepowerofinvitingstrugglingreaderstonamewhattheywillachieve(Cabral-Marquez,2015).Howeverthestudents’ownviewsandperspectivesareinvolved,anumberofresearchersassertthatself-efficacy,andtherefore,intrinsicmotivation,comesfromarelationshiptothepersonal.AddressingofInternalPsychologicalNeeds.Whetheritisthroughtheestablishmentofrelevance,choice,orgoals,therearestillrealchallengestogettingtothecoreofastudentandhisorherstruggletoread.Theissuesofself-confidenceandanxietycometomind,andforeducatorErikaDaniels(2010),studentscannotbemadetowanttolearn.Daniels(2010)asserted,“another,evensimpler,strategyforincreasingmotivationisacknowledgingstudents'fears,worries,andanxieties.Byhonoringtheirfeelingsandlisteningtowhattheyaregoingthrough,motivatingteachersindicatethatthefeelingsarelegitimate”(p.28).Oncestudentsknowthatstrugglingisacceptable,theyarelessreluctantandmorewillingtoengageoftheirownvolitiontoimprove,Daniels(2010)claimed.Asanextstepaftertheproactiveaddressofthepsychologicalcomponentsandpersonalrelevance,anumberofeducatorshavealsooutlinedmethodsbothinsideandoutsidetheclassroomtopropelintrinsicmotivationforstrugglingreaders.



APathTowardBecomingaMotivatedReader.Thetheoristsandthepragmatistsrarelymeetinthemiddle,insteadprescribingasingleconceptoractivitytosolvetheproblemofthereluctantreader.Whenmultiplemethodsareemployed,intheformofreadingprograms,theypullfromsomanyideologiesandincorporatesomanyvariablesthatitischallengingtotellwhatisworkingandwhatisnot.However,manystudies,whetherimplicitlyorexplicitly,camebacktooneideaechoedintheworkofAnnetteEarl&SallyMaynard(2006).EarlandMaynardsurveyed14readersatlengthandsawitwasalackofconfidenceintheirabilitythatdrovethereticence.Theauthorsfoundthatwhenchildrenweregivenresponsibilityfortheirownprogressasreaders(andthereforevaluedtheprocess)theyimprovedandsucceeded.Theyalsoaddedthecomponentofenjoymenttoself-efficacy:“Ifreadingisassociatedwithbeingfun,itisautomaticallygrantedapurposeandrequiresnofurtherjustification;itisgivenstatusandbecomessomethingthechildwantstodo”(Earl&Maynard,2006,p.178).Therefore,threestrategiesselectedforthisactionresearchprojectwerepulledfromliteratureandfocusedonfacilitatingintrinsicmotivationinstudentsthroughbuildingtheirself-confidence.

Methodology

Researchhasillustratedthatself-efficacyandself-confidencearecrucialtobecomingasuccessfulreader,andthispositiveself-perceptioncanthenmeana“lifetimezestforlearning”(Sanacore,2008,p.43).However,havinginfluenceoverintrinsicmotivationforanotherindividualisatallorder.Thisactionresearchprojectcombinedseveralresearch-basedstrategiesthataimedtocreateaninwardsenseofcompetence.Thedirectionalhypothesiswasthatasevenyearold,andhismother,wouldseeanincreaseinreadingengagementduetoanintentionalfocusonstrategiesmeanttobuildself-efficacyinreading.

Thetargetforthisactionresearchprojectwasaseven-year-oldCaucasianmalenamedKyle,apseudonyminthisactionresearchstudy.Hewasfromamiddle-classfamilywitheducatedparents,bothwithadvanceddegrees,andhelivedinamid-sizedtownintheMidwest.Thedatafromthisresearchcouldbemorewidelyapplicabletootherfirst-gradestudentsinasimilarenvironment,particularlythosewhodonotseethemselvesasgoodreaders.Themotherinthisactionprojectwasalsoacomponentoftheresearchforherknowledgeofbothhisstrugglesandsuccessesasareader,bothintheclassroomandinthehome.

Sincethegoalwastomeasureanddemonstrateself-efficacy,amixedmethodsapproachwasused.Itisachallengetoillustrateamorepositivesenseofself-confidenceforareaderwithonlydata,sothroughtriangulation,ageneralandvalidtrendappearedregardingKyle’sfeelingsabouthisabilityandenjoymentforreadingfromthebeginningtotheendofthestudy.



ProceduresforDataCollection.Theframeworkoftheresearchhappenedinthreestages:apre-assessment,followedbythreespecificlearningtasks,andfinallyapost-assessment.Pre-Assessment.Theactionresearchprojectbeganwithapre-assessmenttoestablishquantitativedatathatassessedbothKyleandhismother’sdispositionandattitudetowardKyle’sreading.FourquestionswereassessedonaLikert-typescaleratingfrom5=excellentto1=notgoodatall.Thequestionswereaskedinordertounderstandfeelingsaboutreading,howgoodhebelievedhewasatreading(self-efficacy),andthequantifiablefuturepredictionoftheabilitytoimprovereadingindependently.Also,Kyle’smotherwasgivenanadditionalqualitativequestionnaireforthepurposesofprovidingbackgroundknowledgeandartifact-styledetailsaboutKyle’sreadingperceptions.Thatquestionnaireaskedforcommentsorcharacterizationsfromformerteachersandthemother’shopesforKyle’sfeelingstowardreadinginthefuture.LearningTasks.Forthesecondstageofresearch,Kylewasaskedtoengageinthreeseparatelearningactivities,afewdaysapart,inwhichhereadandeithertalkedaboutorwroteaboutwhatheread.Duringthelearningtasks,observationalfieldnoteswerebecollected,alongwithsomeaudiorecordings.Aftertheconclusionofeachofthoseactivities,Kylewasaskedtocompleteaqualitativequestionnaireregardinghisexperiencewiththereadingtaskthatincludedquestionsregardingenjoymentofthereadingtask,howitdifferedfrompreviousreadingexperiencesorassignments,andaself-perceptioncomponentthatascertainedhowwellKylebelievedhedidontheassignment.ReadingTaskNo.1.Kyleexploredthepicturebookstrategythatallowedforbothcreativityandchoiceonthepartofthestudent.Thistechniquewasbasedontheideathattoenhancenarrativereadingskillsstudentsshouldbe“providedwithdiverseandcomplexnarrativesthatdemandparticularcognitiveskillsforengagement,suchaskeepingtrackofnumerouspossibilities,andunderstandingthatitisn’talways‘necessarytothinkinastraightlinetomakesense’”(Pantaleo,2009,p.205).Thechildren’sbookDoesaKangaroohaveaMother,Too?byEricCarlewasthebasisforthetask.Kylelookedatanumberofimagesfromthebook,fourofhischoice,andthendevelopedatwo-tothree-sentencenarrativeinwritingofhisowncreation.Hereadhiswritingaloudforothers.Then,afinalillustrationfromthebookwaschosen,andafullydevelopednarrativewasverballydictatedandrecordedaboutthepicture.Kyle,again,readthefullnarrative(afullpageinlength),andaprintedcopywascreatedforhimtokeepasfurtherencouragementofachievement.Asanextensionoftheactivity,hewasaskedtoreadthefullnarrativefromthelastillustrationaloudforanotherfamilymemberatalatertime.ReadingTaskNo.2.Kyleparticipatedin“ReadersTheater,”whereheandafriendchosefromaselectionofone-pagescriptsthatwereatasecond-gradereadinglevel(Clementi,2010).Onceascriptwaschosen,theychoserolesandreadthroughthescriptonetime



aloudtogether.Onceunsurewordswereclarified,thetwowenttoaseparateroomtopracticereadingthroughthescriptsatleastfivetimestogainfluency.Theperformanceaspectofthestrategyforastrugglingreaderiskey:“Theactivityculminatesinaperformance,whereeventhemostreluctantreadersarestars”(Clementi,2010,p.85).Whentheyfeltprepared,Kyleandhisfriendperformedthescriptastheaterinfrontofasmallaudiencetwotothreetimestoworkthroughstaging.Thescriptshadhumorousaspects,andalthoughmovementwasuptotheperformers,theyhadtostaywithinthescriptandwereencouragedtoreadstraightfromit.Asanextensionoftheactivity,Kylewasgiventwocopieseachofthescriptusedandtwoothersscriptsthatwerenotselectedtoactoutwithfamilyandfriendsatalatertime.ReadingTaskNo.3.KyleparticipatedintheImagine,Elaborate,Predict,andConfirm(IEPC)strategy(Wood&Endres,2005).Thisstrategysparkedintrinsicmotivationbecause“byclosingtheireyesandusingtheirsensestoimagineascene,character,event,orobject,studentshavethepotentialtobecomeactive,eager,andengagedparticipantsinareadinglesson”(Wood&Endres,2005,p.346).Asheetthathadacategoryforeachletterofthestrategydrovetheactivity:IEPC.ThefirststageoftheactivityinvolvedKyleseeingthemultiplepiecesofartworkinthefirstchapterofthefirstbookofTheDragonMastersseries.Hewasaskedtousesensorydetailsandclosed-eyesimaginationtoassociate,predict,andguesswhatcouldbeinvolvedinthatchapter.Questionprobeswerealsoused,alongwithafewkeywordsfromthetexttospuranswers,whichwererecordedintheIcolumn.Theelaborationphasewasnext,whereKyletookhisinitialsensoryperceptionsandaddedtothemwithasmuchdetailaspossiblefromtheartworkandhisownthoughts.Again,extra-texutalquestionswereusedaspromptsatthisstageforassistance,althoughcreativityandopen-endednesswasencouraged;findingswerethenrecordedintheEcolumn(Wood&Endres,2005,p.349).Thethirdstagewasprediction,inwhichKylecreatedafewpredictionsbasedontheimaginingandelaboratingregardingthetext,notingthatproofofhispredictionswouldbetracked.Wethendoveintothetexttoseeifthoseimaginative,elaborateduponpredictionswereaccurate,circlingtheonesthatwerecorrectfromthesheet,oramendingotherpredictionsasneeded.Thepurposeoftheactivitywasnotto“getitright”asmuchasitwastoexplore–incorrectpredictionsendedupasusefulfordiscussionascorrectones.Asanextensionoftheactivity,theentirebook,andtheothersintheseries,wereleftwithKyleandhismothertocontinuethepattern.Post-Assessment.Afterthethreelearningtasksandqualitativeresponseswerecomplete,Kyleandhismothercompletedthepost-assessment,whichwasamirrorofthepre-assessment,usingtheLikert-typescaleandthesamequestions.BothKyleandhismotherwerealsoaskedtoprovideanecdotaldetailinasemi-structuredinterviewformoneachquestionthatwasrecordedthroughfieldnotesoronthepost-assessmentitself.



ResultsandDiscussion

Theactionresearchprojectprocedurewasimplementedinthreesessions.AllsessionstookplaceinKyle’shome,withaseven-year-oldfriendalsoparticipatingintheactivities,asneededbythestrategy.Pre-AssessmentData.Kyle’smotherwasgivenanartifactcollectiondocumentinordertogainnarrative-styleinformationforbackgroundandcontextregardingKyle’sreading.Also,bothKyleandhismotherweregiventhequantitativepre-assessmentusingtheLikert-typescaletocreateabaselineforbothperspectivesanddispositionsregardingreading. Qualitative.InthequalitativequestionnairecompletedbyKyle’smother,sheidentifiedadualnaturetoKyle’sideasaboutreading.Shenotedthathe“lovestobereadtoeverynight”andexhibitsa“fun,happy,andimaginative”demeanorwhensomeonereadstohim.However,shesaidhedoesnotliketoreadonhisown,andshelistedtheadjectives“difficult,”“forced,”and“mad”todescribehisreactiontobeingaskedtoreadindependently.Regardinghisformerteachers’responses,again,hismotheracknowledgedaduality.Inkindergarten,“hestartedoffveryslowlyandafterreceivingextrahelpimprovedverymuch.Theconfidencehegainedwasnoticeable.”Infirstgrade,histeacher“alwayssaidhedidwell,but[he]struggledwith[letter]blends.Hedidn’ttaketimetosoundoutwords,justguessed.”Asanoutpouringofthesefacts,hismothernotedthatKylehasnot,underanycircumstances,“pursuedreadingonhisown.”However,herhopeisthatKylecan“enjoyreadingasahobby.Hehasagreatimagination,andIthinkhecangrowthatevenmorebyreading.But,hecurrentlyseesreadingaspunishment/work.”

Quantitative.FortheLikert-stylescalepre-assessment,bothKyleandKyle’smotherwereaskedtorate,ona1-5scale,andtheirresponsestofourquestionsareshowninTable1andTable2.Table1:StudentPre-AssessmentonPerceptionofReadingSkills

Scale:1=notgoodatall;2=onlyalittlegood;3=good;4=verygood;5=excellent

Kyle’sresponses

1.Howdoyoufeelaboutyourreadingability? 1

2.Howgoodareyouatreading? 4

3.Whatarethechancesthatyouwillgetbetteratreading? 5

4.Whatarethechancesthatyouwillstartreadingmoreonyourown? 1



Table2:ParentPre-AssessmentonPerceptionofStudentReadingSkills


Kyle’smother’sresponses

1.HowdoyoufeelaboutKyle’sreadingability? 3

2.HowgoodisKyleasaself-motivatedreader? 1

3.WhatarethechancesthatKylewillimprovegreatlywithhisreadingcapability?

3

4.WhatarethechancesthatKylewillstartreadingmoreonhisown? 2

LearningTasksData.Allofthedatacollectedduringallthreereadingtaskswasqualitativeinnature,includingobservationalfieldnotes,audiorecordings,andanopen-endedquestionnaireaftereachactivity.DuringReadingTaskNo.1.Forthistask,Kylelistenedtothedirectionsofthepicturebook-drivenactivitydevisedbyPantaleo(2009)andasked:“CanIanswerwhateverIwant?”Heshouted“yay”whentheanswerwasyes,andhespecificallychosethefourimagesfromthepicturebookthatthewritingwouldbefocusedupon.Asheworked,KylegiggledashelookedattheEricCarle(2000)bookregardinghisownsentenceconstruction.Hewasfocusedforatleastfiveminutesforeachimageanditscorrespondingwriting.Aftereachsetoftwotothreewords,Kylere-readhissentence,butdidn’tmakeanychanges.Helaughedthroughoutandcompletedthetaskbywritingbothlegiblyandinsidethelines.Whenaskedtosharehissentencesforeachpicturefromthebook,hecomplied,butdidstumbleoversomeofhisownwritingasheread.Theactualwrittenexpressionwasunclear.Onereproductionstatedthefollowing:“bigkanwroohavegoogoobabe.Bigthigehavebabs.Doyouwereshad.PenqawinhavefligrsevneIknowthat.”Asthetaskwenton,hestartedtoaskfewerquestionsaboutthetask(fromfourforthefirstphoto,tonoquestionsforthelastone).Forthesecondhalfoftheassignment,Kylechoseanelephantpicturefromthebook,andheverballyconstructedanarrativeentitled“TheDiaryofMr.ElephantGuyWhoGetsHurtVeryBadly.”Duringthewritingofthestory,anincorrectsetofverbalgrammarwasemployed,soleadingquestionswereaskedastothecorrectformofverbtenseswhentheywentawry:“Doyoumean‘land’or‘landed’here;whichsoundsright?”Eachtime,Kyleself-correctedhimself.ThefullstorywasthentypedupandbothemailedandprintedoutforKyle,whowasaskedtoshareitwithhisfatherbyreadingthefulltextofthestorytohimaloud.



AfterReadingTaskNo.1.Directlyafterthefirstreadingactivitywascomplete,Kylefilledoutaquestionnaire(althoughpartbecamesemi-structuredinterview)regardingthetask.Hisanswerstothreeofthequestions(whatheenjoyedmost,whatwasdifferentthanotherreadingassignments,andwhyhewouldliketodotheactivityagain)wereall“beingsilly.”Whenaskedhowwellhethoughthedidonthereadingassignment,Kyleanswered“grat”(great).HismotherreportedthatKyledidindeedreadthefullstorytohisfatherthatnightfromtheprintedcopy,andhesaidhewantedtotaketheelectronicversionoftheelephantnarrativeandmakeafullbookoutofitwithpictures.Inherafter-readingtaskquestionnaire,Kyle’smothernotedhehad“alotoffun”doingthetask,whichwasinjuxtapositiontohisnormaldispositionwithreadingbecausehe“usuallydespiseswritinganddoingany‘work.’”Hismotheralsonotedthatduringthecourseoftheactivity,whichsheobserved,shefeltthatKyle“hadconfidenceinhimself”andthatshethoughthewouldliketoengageinthistypeofactivityagain.

DuringReadingTaskNo.2.ThesecondactivityemployedthetechniqueofReader’sTheater(Clementi,2010).Outofthreesecond-gradelevelscripts,KylechoseTVRepairPerson(2016),whichisashort,two-personplayaboutatelevisionrepairmanwhocomestoanotherman’shousetofixhisset,onlytopulleverythingoutofthesetbeforerealizingitwasnotpluggedin–andcharging$87forthehousecall.Duringtheactivity,Kylesaidhewas“excited”tostart.Whenhefullyunderstoodthenatureofthetask,hemaintainedhisfocusforapproximatelytenminutes.Onceheandhispeerselectedroles,theyreadthescriptoutloud.Kylehadafewstumbleswhenreading,buthecontinuedthescriptfrombeginningtoend.Theboysthenwentintoanotherroomtopractice,wheretheyreadthescriptthroughatleastfivetimes.Fortheperformance,Kylerequestedalargeraudienceandtodotheentirereadingtwice.Thefirstread-throughhadtwoinaccuratelines,butKylenoticedandcorrectedtheerrorsonthesecondread-through.Then,thethirdthroughfifthread-throughs,nowincorporatingstaging,werecompletelyaccurate.Kylewaswillingtoreadaloudinfrontofothersforthisactivity,andhewasgiventhescriptshepracticedalongwithtwoothersetsofscripts,whichhewasencouragedtodowithotherfamilymembers.

AfterReadingTaskNo.2.Inhisafter-readingtaskquestionnaireandsemi-structuredinterview,Kyleagainreportedthat“beingsilly”washisfavoriteaspect,althoughthistime,heaskedforspecificdirectiononhowtospellsillyandthencorrecteditintwoplacesonhisquestionnaire.Thedifferenceinthisreadingactivity,inhismind,wastheabilityto“walkaround,”andhenotedthevalueofmovementandindependencewhenafollow-upquestionwasaskedastowhythatwasimportanttohim.Again,Kylenotedthathewouldbewillingtoengageinthistypeofreadingactivityagain,andhedescribedtheactivityitselfas“great”–usingcorrectspellingthistimebecauseheaskedforguidance.Followingthisactivity,hismothernotedthatKyleenjoyedhimselfandthatactingoutplaysandscriptsissomethinghehasalwayslikedtodo,sohewasinvolvedintheactivity.However,Kyledidnotdothescriptslaterintheweekwithfamilymembers.Hereadafewlinesononeofthescripts,deemedittoodifficultforhim,andstopped,accordingtoqualitativeresponsesfromhismother.



DuringReadingTaskNo.3.WithaseriesbyTracyWest(2014)calledTheDragonMasters,theImagine,Elaborate,Predict,andConfirm(IEPC)readingstrategywasusedtoengageKyleinindependentreading(Wood&Endres,2005).Atthebeginningofthesession,Kylewasremindedthathewasagoodreader(asevidencedbythetwopreviousactivities).Usingthefirstchapterinbookone,Kylelookedateachofthefivedrawingsinthechapterclosely.Foreachdrawing,hewasaskedtodoeachofthefirstthreestagesofthestrategy.Forimagine,hewasaskedtotalkabouthowthesceneinthebooksmelled,felt,sounded,tasted,etc.,usingsensorydetailtoexplainwhatitwouldbeliketobeinthatdrawing.Forelaborate,hewasaskedtodivedeeperintoexplanationordescriptionaboutthatinitialdetail.Then,inpredict,hewasaskedtopostulatewhatwashappeninginthestorybasedonthatimage.Kylespentapproximately15minutesonthetaskintotal,withoutanybreaks.Inthefirstimageinthetext,hesawaboyholdingawormandsmiling.Intheimaginephase,hesaidtheboywasfeelingtheworminhishands.Intheelaboratephase,hesaidthewormfelt“disgustingandslimy,”butthattheboylikedit.Inthepredictionphase,Kylesaidtheboyprobably“feltgood”athomewithhisfriendtheworm“guy”.ThequalitativecollectionofIEPthencontinuedwiththefourotherimagesuntiltheultimatepredictionsweremade.Afterthefirstthreesectionsofthechartwerecomplete,Kylereadthefirstchaptertoconfirmordenyhispredictions.Hisfriendreadthefirstparagraph,butthenKylereadthenexttwoparagraphsoftextoutloudonhisown.Therewerefourplaceswherehedidn’tknowthewordsohejustguessed,buthereadtheentireassignedsection.Hethencontinuedtoalternatereadingseveralparagraphsatatimewithhisfrienduntilthechapterwascomplete.Throughout,heusedthecharttoconfirmpredictions,notingwithasmilewhenoneofhisideashappenedjustthewayhethoughtitwouldinthebook,asseeninTable3.



Table3:QualitativeDataforReadingTaskNo.3

Imagine Elaborate Predict Confirm

“Feelingworm” “Disgustingandslimy”

“Boyfeelsgoodathome”

“BoyIShappyathome”

“Feelingonion” “Infield” “Boypoorandlivesincountry”

“Boyisfromonionfarminsmallvillage”

“Feelshotoutside “Hemightfaint “Hetrytofindwater”

Smellofhorsesandmanure,barn”

Yuckysmell” “Mommydoesn’twantboytoleavebutboyleaves(withman)”

“Soldierdidarriveonahorse;motherdidpleadforhersontostay”

“Travelinginamaze”

“Feelslostanscared;couldfallintheriver”

“Goingtocastleattheendordeathinasnowyplace”

“Triptocastlewaslong”

“Feeldoormadeofwood”

“Scaredandmanrunningupthestairs”

“Heisscaredandalone”

“Boywasveryaloneandscaredbehindthedoor(downthestairs)”

“Breakingglassofawindow”

“Burningoffireandsmokethere”

“Dragonbrokeoutoftheplace;magicdoor?”

“Reddragonbrokethrough(usingmagic!)andbreathedfire”

AfterReadingTaskNo.3.Inhisafter-readingtaskquestionnaire,Kylehadsimilaranswersaboutthisactivityastheprevioustwo,buthealsonotedthatthisassignmentwasdifferentbecauseithad“reading”–atraditionalbookconceptinsteadofothertools.Hismotheraskedhimifhewouldcontinuetoreadthebooks,withboththestrategyandonhisown,andtheresponsewasnoncommittal.Thefourbooksintheserieswereleftwithhim,andboththestrategysheets,aswellasmodelsfortheparents.



Post-AssessmentData-Qualitative.Aftertheself-efficacystrategiesemployed,Kylenotedthatheenjoyedtheactivities.Althoughduringthenextfewweekshedidnotpickupabookonhisowntoread,hedidasktotrythereadingactivitiesagain,accordingtohismother.Hedescribedthereadingtasksas“fun”andwaswillingtodomorebecausetheyallowedhimto“besilly.”Forhismother,shehasnotseensubstantialchangeinhisdesiretobeindependentduetoagrowingself-efficacy.Shenotedhe“neveronhisown[reads];Ihavetobewithhim.”Inmuchthesamevein,shebelievesattheendoftheprojectthat“ifKylefindssomethingthatfascinateshim,Ithinkhewillfindthathelovesreading.Butheisn’tpatientenoughyetnorinterestedinsittingdownto‘relax’withabook.”

Post-AssessmentData-Quantitative.UsingthesameLikert-typescaleattheendofthelearningtasks,Kyleandhismotherproducedthefollowingresponses,asnotedinTable4andTable5.Table4:StudentPost-AssessmentonPerceptionofReadingSkills


Kyle’sresponses

1.Howdoyoufeelaboutyourreadingability? 5

2.Howgoodareyouatreading? 5

3.Whatarethechancesthatyouwillgetbetteratreading? 5

4.Whatarethechancesthatyouwillstartreadingmoreonyourown? 2

Table5:ParentPost-AssessmentonPerceptionofStudent’sReadingSkills



1.HowdoyoufeelaboutKyle’sreadingability? 3

2.HowgoodisKyleasaself-motivatedreader? 1


4

4.WhatarethechancesthatKylewillstartreadingmoreonhisown? 3



Lookingatthequalitativeandquantitativedatatogether,usingtriangulation,itseemsclearthatthetechniquesmayhaveslightlyimprovedKyle’sreadingcomprehensionabilitiesandmotivationtoengageinreadingactivities.

MixedMethodsDataDiscussion.Foraseven-year-oldboywhowasreluctanttoreadandlackedapparentintrinsicmotivationtodoso,Kylewaswillingtoengageinreading-centeredactivitiesthroughtheprocessofthisresearch.Hedemonstratedhisincreasedself-motivationthroughbothhisfocusedengagementinactivities(increasingtimeontaskwitheachactivity)anddesiretocontinuelearningusingtheresearch-basedstrategies,inourassessmentsessionsandafterward.

Qualitative.Asevidencedthroughhisquestionnaireanswers,Kyleislookingforfuntobeacomponentinreading;however,heisalsointerestedinopenboundariesandcreativity.Hisfavoriteaspectsofthelearningtaskswerethechancestoexpresshimself,havechoice,andseereactionstohisthoughtsandtheories.Hewasincreasinglywillingtoengageinthereading.Hismotherdidnotseearealchangeinhiswillingnesstoreadindependently,butshedidnotethataftereachreadingtask,hewasengagedandhappytobeparticipatingandreading.Particularlyinthesecondandthirdreadingtasks,Kylewasmoreconfidentinhisabilitytoread–enoughtoperforminfrontofothersandreadfromanovelaloud,aswellasthroughhismorecarefulconsiderationandeffortduringreflectiononqualitativeresponses.Thisexposuretostrategiesmeanttopromoteself-efficacyforKyledidprovidesomeprogresstowardmotivationtocontinuereading–therewerenoexternalrewardsfordoingso.Ultimately,however,thegoalofpickingupatexthimself–becausehebelieveshecanjustsitandreadit–wasnotreachedwithinafewweeksoftheconclusionoftheresearch.

Quantitative.Forthepre-andpost-assessments,thegoalwastoseeanumericalchangefromthebeginningtotheendwhenmeasuringKyle’sself-efficacyandperceptionofhimselfasareader.ThequantitativechangeinKyleisseeninTable6.



Table6:KyleDatafromPre-toPost-Assessment


Kyle’sresponses

(Pre-Assessment)

Kyle’sresponses

(Post-Assessment)

1.Howdoyoufeelaboutyourreadingability? 1 5

2.Howgoodareyouatreading? 4 5

3.Whatarethechancesthatyouwillgetbetteratreading? 5 5

4.Whatarethechancesthatyouwillstartreadingmoreonyourown?

1 2(1atfirst)

ThedataaboveillustratesachangeforKyle.Althoughhisday-to-daybehaviorofindependentreadinghasnotdeveloped,hehas–atsomelevel–gainedamorepositiveviewofhisownreadingabilitythroughthereadingtasks.Hestillseemsdubiousaboutreadingonhisown(eventotheextentofchanginghisself-rankingmid-answer),butotherwise,allofthenumbersthatrepresentthepossibilityofreadingindependenceandself-efficacydemonstrategrowth.Thiswasafteronlythreereadingtasks,buthisenjoymentforthesetypesstrategieswereawinonsomepersonallevel.ForKyle’smother,thedataisabitmorerealistic,assheisviewingexternalbehaviorratherthanjustinternaldispositionregardingreadinginalearningenvironment,notedinTable7.



Table7:Kyle’sMother’sDatafromPre-toPost-Assessment



(Pre-Assessment)


(Post-Assessment)

1.HowdoyoufeelaboutKyle’sreadingability? 3 3

2.HowgoodisKyleasaself-motivatedreader? 1 1


3 4

4.WhatarethechancesthatKylewillstartreadingmoreonhisown?

2 3

Therewaseitheraslightincreaseorastatusquofindingforeacharea,whichintheshorttimeframethatthisprojectwascompleted,isunderstandable.ItisparticularlynotablethatalthoughherviewonKyle’scurrentabilityisunchanged,herprospectsforhisreadingfuturehaveimprovedthroughtheobservationofthereadingtasks.

Limitations

Modernresearchonreluctantreaderscomesfromavarietyofperspectivesandphilosophies,butmostacknowledgethatforlong-terminvestmentandsuccess–inadditiontotheroleofahighqualityschoolreadingenvironment–intrinsicmotivationthroughself-efficacyisimportant.AlthoughalongitudinalstudywouldbethemostappropriateforKyletotrulyjudgethis,thestrategiesthatemphasizedtheintrinsicelementsthroughthesereadingstrategies,suchasautonomy,creativity,andchoice,didinterestKyle–tothepointwherehewasaskingforanotherreadingtask.Therefore,thefindingsofthisactionresearch,howeverlimited,areevidenceforthegreaterbodyofworkonparticularstrategiesandhowtheycanpromotemotivationandperhapslatermoreself-efficacyforreluctantreaders.

Conclusion

Althoughthisresearchprojectwasbasedonasinglefirst-gradereaderwhostruggledwiththemotivationtopickupabook,hisreluctanceisindicativeofalargertrend.“Expertsinthefieldofreadingmotivationidentifythelackofstudentengagementwith



literacyasoneofthemostseverecrisesofourschools.Thatmakesfindingwaystoincreasereadingmotivationatoppriority”(Cabral-Márquez,2015,p.471).Thegoalofthisprojectwasthesame–tohelpKylechoosetoreadofhisownvolitionbecausehefeltcapabletodoso.Yet,althoughthedatasuggestedthatKyle’sgeneraldispositiontowardreadinghadimproved–particularlyregardinghisself-perceptionandwillingnesstoengage,theresearchprojectwasnotacompletesuccess.Intheweeksfollowingtheimplementationofthestrategies,hismotherdidnotseealargechangeinhisreluctanceorhisfeelingsabouthimselfasareader.However,duringthereadingcomprehensionactivitiesthemselves,andinthepost-assessment,hedidimproveinwillingnesstopractice,sothereishopeforforwardmovement.Itwasabreakthrough,particularlyfromhismother’sperspective,whenheaskedtodomorereading,orworkwithatextlonger,becausetherequestwascountertohisnormallearningdispositionregardingreading.

EducationalImplications.Evenwithanumberofcomplicatingfactors,thefindingshavesomeapplicationsandimplicationsfortheeducationalcommunity.Itiscleartoresearchersthatreluctantreadersvexteachers.AccordingtoGanske,Monroe,&Strickland(2003)inalarge-scalestudyofeducators,bothnewteachersandveteranssaidstrugglingreaderswereoneoftheirbiggestconcerns.“Theirquestionsfocusedoverwhelminglyontheirneedtolearninstructionalstrategiesandskillstoimprovestudents’literacy”(Ganske,Monroe,&Strickland,2003,p.471).Asaneducator,Iknowthatitismucheasiertorelyonextrinsicstrategiesforengagingreluctantreaders,ratherthanstrategiesthataresimplyaboutreadingitself.Itshouldbenotedthat,inthisspecificstudy,thereliabilityandvalidityofthequestionnairesusedarenotscientificinnature,butasaneducator,thequalitativedatadoessupportthenotionthatbothreadingabilityandconfidencewereimprovedforthisstudentthroughthesereadingcomprehensionactivities.Thisprojectthendidbreathemorelifeintothepremisethatbyprovidingself-efficaciousstrategies,motivationtoreadcanbeimprovedforareluctantreader.Ofparticularnotearetheactivitiesthatwereusedinthisactionresearchandtheirsuccesswiththislearnerinthisenvironment,especiallywhenpairedwithindividualintervention.Indeed,withthislearner,itwasthepersonalattention,creativity,anddirectionthatcreatedamotivationtoread,whichisnotable.Thecomplicatingfactoris,ofcourse,timeandtheabilitytoworkwithindividuallearners,butitisagoaltowhichbotheducatorsandparentsshouldstrive.



AbouttheAuthor

AmandaBrightisaformerprofessionaljournalistwholaterspentadecadeasascholasticjournalismadviserandEnglishteacherinIllinois.Currently,BrightisajournalisminstructoratEasternIllinoisUniversityandadoctoralstudentinCurriculum,Instruction,andMediaTechnologyatIndianaStateUniversity,whereshealsoservesastheMediaContentCoordinatorforIndianaStateOnline.BrightservesastheSocialMediaDirectorandWebCo-AdministratorfortheIllinoisJournalismEducationAssociationandisonitsBoardofDirectors.Email:[email protected]



ReferenceList

AhmadAl-Saleem,B.I.(2012).Encouragingreluctantreaderstoread.EuropeanScientificJournal,8(21), 1-8.Retrievedfromhttp://ezproxy.indstate.edu:2048/login?url= http://search.proquest.com/docview/1316918736?accountid=11592Brown,K.J.(2000,January).Whatkindoftext:Forwhomandwhen?Textualscaffoldingforbeginning readers.TheReadingTeacher,53(4),292-307.Retrievedfrom http://www.jstor.org/stable/20204794Cabral-Márquez,C.(2015,March).Motivatingreaders:Helpingstudentssetandattainpersonalreading goals.TheReadingTeacher,68(6),464-472.doi:10.1002/trtr.1332Carle,Eric.(2000).Doesakangaroohaveamother,too?NewYork,NY:HarperCollins,Inc.Clementi,L.B.(2010,February).Readerstheater:Amotivatingmethodtoimprovereadingfluency.Phi DeltaKappan,91(5),85-88.Retrievedfromhttp://www.pdkintl.orgCrain,W.(2011).Theoriesofdevelopment:Conceptsandapplications.UpperSaddleHall,NJ:PrenticeHall.Daniels,E.(2010,September).Creatingmotivatinglearningenvironments:Whatwecanlearnfrom researchersandstudents.TheEnglishJournal,100(1),25-29.Retrievedfrom http://www.jstor.org/stable/20787687Earl,A.,&Maynard,S.(2006).Whatmakesachildareluctantreader?NewReviewofChildren’sLiterature andLibrarianship,12(2),163-181.doi:10.1080/13614540600982959Ganske,K.,Monroe,J.K.,&Strickland,D.S.(2003,October).Questionsteachersaskaboutstruggling readersandwriters.TheReadingTeacher,57(2),118-128.Retrievedfrom http://www.jstor.org/stable/20205331Grills-Taquechel,A.E.,Fletcher,J.M.,Vaughn,S.R.,Stuebing,K.K.(2012).Anxietyandreadingdifficulties inearlyelementaryschool:Evidenceforunidirectional-orbi-directionalrelations?Child PsychiatryandHumanDevelopment,43,35-47.doi:10.1007/s10578-011-0246-1Irausquin,R.S.,Drent,J.,&Verhoeven,L.(2005,December).Benefitsofcomputer-presentedspeedt rainingforpoorreaders.AnnalsofDyslexia,55(2),246-265.Retrievedfrom http://www.jstor.org/stable/23765316Katz,I.,&Assor,A.(2007).Whenchoicemotivatesandwhenitdoesnot.EducationalPsychologyReview, 19(4),429-442.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/23363842Pantaleo,S.(2009).Theinfluenceofpostmodernpicturebooksonthreeboys’narrativecompetence. AustralianJournalofLanguageandLiteracy,32(3),191-210.doi:10.1177/1086296X10397870Sanacore,J.(2008).Turningreluctantlearnersintoinspiredlearners.TheClearingHouse,82(1),40-44. Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/30182002TVrepairperson.(2016).Retrievedfromhttp://www.timelessteacherstuff.com/ readerstheater/TVRepairPerson.pdfWest,T.(2014).Dragonmasters:Riseoftheearthdragon.NewYork,NY:ScholasticPress.



Wood,K.D.,&Endres,C.(2005,January).MotivatingstudentinterestwiththeImagine,Elaborate, Predict,andConfirm(IEPC)strategy.TheReadingTeacher,58(4),346-357.Retrievedfrom http://www.jstor.org/stable/20205488Zucker,T.A.,Ward,A.E.,&Justice,L.M.(2009,September).Printreferencingduringread-alouds:A techniqueforincreasingemergentreaders'printknowledge.TheReadingTeacher,63(1),62-72. Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40347652

the journal of teacher action research 40...teacher leah moorefield noted that “reluctant readers...

Documents