Data Analysis

Data Collection #1

Student #1

From the pre-test to the post-test student #1 showed growth in recognizing sight words, using the pictures and the letter sounds to help decode the names of animals, and with accuracy. On the pre-test the student was at the beginning stages of reading. The student was able to look at the words and recognize patterns, yet was not looking at the letters to decode the animal names. For example, the student said “bunny” for “rabbit” on the pre-test. Then, on the post test the student was able to decode the word, partnered with picture clues, and say, “rabbit.”

The data shows that the study was effective in improving the student’s reading ability. The student went from a 51% to 91% accuracy on the running record, a 40% increase from the pre-test. The student is only 5%, about one error, away from being at an instructional for reading level A. At the time of the pre-test the student was showing strengths in using the pictures or photographs to help read the text, recognizing a few sight words, and noticing a repeating pattern. Books at a level A commonly use a repeated pattern in writing, for example, “I like dogs, I like cats, I like rabbits.” On the post-test the student was able to recognize all the sight words in the story and use letter recognition paired with sound knowledge to decode animal names. Following the conclusion of the research study, the student continued to show an instructional need in the area of blending the letter sounds to read words.

Student #2

From the pre-test to the post-test student #2 showed growth in attending to the words, recognizing sight words, and noticing patterns in the reading. On the first test, the student did not look at the words, only pictures were used for statements such as “a cat.” It was obvious that the student was not ready to read and that no part of the printed words were being used to put together thoughts or recite text. The student went from reading zero out of thirty three words to reading fifteen out of thirty three words. On the post-test the student was able to point to each individual word, recognize the picture, and also recognize how the letters form into words.

This data shows that the study was effective in improving the student’s reading ability. The student went from a 0% to a 45.5% accuracy on the running record, a 45.5% increase from the pre-test. In seven weeks, the student was able to go from not reading the printed words at all, to attending to the words (using beginning sounds, picture clues, or context) and reading multiple words. The student still needed improvement in various areas, including recognition of sight words. On each page, the student did not read the first word in the sentence, showing that skills are still needed to recognize how to read the text in sequential order. For a student who showed slow growth, due to epilepsy and a disability in reading, the study suggested that the intervention worked to raise reading achievement.

Student #3

From the pre-test to the post-test student #3 showed growth in recognizing sight words, noticing patterns in texts, and using pictures to help read the text. On the pre-test this student was not able to attend to the words; but simply looked at the picture and then turned the page. On the post-test the student was pointing to the words, attempting to sound out the letters, and recognizing sight words. The student went from stating one word per page to being able to recognize that there was a sentence to be read.

The data shows that the study was effective in improving the student’s reading ability. The student went from 0% to 69% accuracy on the running record, a 69% increase from the pre-test. This student had a diagnosis of epilepsy, and had, at times, shown signs of regression and forgetfulness. The frequency of seizures had a noticeable impact on general student achievement and content retention. A 69% accuracy increase in 7 weeks is an indicator that focusing on alphabet knowledge improved the student’s reading achievement.

Data Collection #2

The Climate Survey showed that my students had a positive experience working in the pull-out setting of the Special Education classroom. The climate survey I conducted with my students was limited to three responses. This decision was made for two reasons. The first is that a short interview session supported my students’ limited attention to the task, secondly, the three questions I asked were the most important in determining the social-emotional impact of student attitudes on achievement. Initially, the survey was going to be given on a four-point scale with answer options of strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. Before giving the assessment to my students I made the decision to simplify the language to better meet the levels of my students. My students were asked the survey questions orally and one-on-one with two answer choices: agree or disagree. The responses represented are only agree or disagree, this is why. I chose to give the survey orally to remove any academic barriers to student success with answering. The results were 100% agree on ten questions and 66% agree on two questions. The two questions that were not 100% agree as shown to the left. Since there was only three students in our classroom, I assert the student did not think that two other students would constitute “lots of friends.”

The data from the Climate Survey suggests that students felt safe, cared for, enjoyed the intervention, thought the teaching was good, and that they were overall happy with the climate during the study. With the belief that relationships drive instruction, the data suggested that student-teacher relationships were perceived as positive. The students in this study had multiple areas of struggle including behavior, academic, and social interactions. Yet, the students did not let those areas affect their learning environment during the study.

Data Collection #3

From the results shown in the data for Student #1, the intervention showed growth in letter sounds and sight words. The student was able to meet his goals of 26 letters, he grew from 22 letter sounds to 26 letter sounds, and 10 sight words to 32 sight words. For this student, it is shown that week six and seven has a large jump in achievement. This growth is due to the adaptation and expansion of sight words being assessed. An area of change that was made during the study was recognizing that the student knew more sight words than only words from the Wonders ™ curriculum. The student was able to recognize 16 more sight words than on the Wonders ™ curriculum list.

The data suggests that the study was successful in showing growth in letter sound recognition and sight words. At the student’s winter benchmark, they were able to recognize 16 sight words. By the end of the study, the student was able to recognize 32 sight words. The student showed a 16 word growth in sight words during the seven week intervention. This is the same number of sight words the student was able to learn in the entire first semester. This student benefited from the instruction in letter sounds and sight words.

The data from Student #2’s graph shows growth in the areas of letter identification, letter sounds, and sight words. The student’s letter identification grew from 8 letters to 11 letters, 2 letter sounds to 5 letter sounds, and 2 sight words to 5 sight words. In each area of the study, this student was able to show growth. The student may have had slow growth, compared to regular education peers, yet according to the IEP goals the student is on track to meet their goals. As shown on the graph there were moments when the student did regress, yet with the consistent data it also showed that the student demonstrated sustained growth, despite regression.

Student's IEP goal:

By November 2019, Hayley will be able to increase her reading skills for the following objectives with 80% accuracy or higher:

1. Given 26 letters, Hayley will be able to give the short vowel sound and hard consonant sound of 10/26 letters. 50% to goal

2. Given 52 upper and lower case letters, Hayley will be able to recognize 20/52 letters, including the five letters in her name. 55% to goal

3. Given Kindergarten Fry Sight Word Assessment, Hayley will be able to recognize 10/53 sight words. 50% to goal

4. Given a Fountas & Pinnell Running Record, Hayley will be able to achieve an approaching proficiency Level A score.

The data suggests that the study was a success based on the growth of this student on letter identification, sound recognition, and sight words. In 7 weeks the student was able to show growth of 3 letters or sight words in each of the three areas. For sight words and sound recognition, the student grew at a higher rate than they knew coming into the study, by the end of the study the student had improved by 133%. For example, the student started at two sight words, and then ended up growing three sights words. This example shows that in the first quarter they were able to learn two sight words and in the seven week study they were able to grow by three sight words.

The data from Student #3’s graph show areas of growth in letter identification, letter sounds recognition, and sight words. The student went from 14 letters to 22 letters, 10 letters sounds to 22 letter sounds, and 1 sight word to 7 sight words. The student was able to show growth in all three areas on the graph.

The data suggests that the study was a success due to the growth of the student in the areas of letter identification, letter sound recognition, and sight words. Throughout the study, the student showed slow growth in weeks one through three. This student was new to the group starting in January, so the first three weeks of the study were also the first three weeks of the student’s experience in the group. After those three weeks, the student was able to show steady growth.

Triangulation

The three data collections methods confirm that the study was a success. Academic growth comes from positive relationships with students, which was confirmed during the Climate Survey. The positive relationships gave the students a foundation to learn. The purpose of the study was to see if explicit instruction in alphabet knowledge would increase reading achievement. With data collection #3, the formative data on letter identification, letter sounds, and sight words,all students showed growth. The growth in the areas of letter identification, letter sounds, and sight words all led to growth in reading achievement as enriched by the running record post test. All students showed growth in their reading achievement in the 7 weeks of action research.

Questions that arose

The first question that come to mind was: Was there a way that I could have better helped Student #3, who had already met the letter identification goal? During the study after a few weeks of instruction, I noticed that the student was working at a higher level than his peers. I did alter his instruction with sight words starting at week 5. Even though the student may have known all of his letter names and sounds, he was still benefiting by learning how to apply and use the letters in his writing and reading.

The second question that came to mind was: What steps do I take next to make sure that they retain and generalize this information? While reflecting on the study, the students were using their letters and letter sounds in writing, kinesthetics, reading, and more. So, I believe with continued instruction with the same action plan the students will be getting opportunities to generalize their learning. The classroom teachers will also continue to reinforce alphabetic knowledge in the classroom.

The third question that came to mind was: Would the data be different if I took the data in a different location? The general education classroom? The hallways? Etc. In reflection, yes I do believe that the data would be different. Yet, not in a positive way. The students in the study all struggle to attend to a task during whole group instruction or in an area with a lot of distractions. For the capstone study, the students were able to get explicit instruction in a pull out environment with close proximity and limited distractions.