Research+Draft+Proposal+Updated

Betty Teresa Ray MEDT 8484 Research Proposal

According to // Webster’s New World College Dictionary //  (1997), “literacy is the ability to read and write”. Teaching literacy skills is a challenge for even the most seasoned teachers. Many learning styles are possessed by our students, and each of the styles must be addressed to ensure that the learning potential of each student is tapped. It is often the case in reading classrooms that instructors see that traditional basal readers do not fulfill the needs of some students; other means must be used. Writing skills are lacking in many classrooms due to boredom and lack of interest. To counter this, instructors are seeking ways to motivate students to read and write. Teachers need to review research in order to make informed judgments about what method is needed to meet the needs of students (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). Technology is a very valuable tool in remediating and accelerating students’ literacy skills. Technology holds many of the students’ interest where direct instruction does not. Since many students have access to various kinds of technology at home, students desire the use of technology in the classroom to meet their needs. For this generation of children, the Internet is the medium of literacy in the way that books and periodicals were in previous generations. Omitting technology such as the Internet, would be like leaving out books in the classrooms of previous generations (Zawilinski, 2009). The topic of the research study will be technology integration in the literacy classroom. The purpose of this study is to use a specific technology in the literacy classroom and review the results of achievement compared with a class that does not use technology. The researcher will examine the effects that the use of blogging (sharing ideas and information on a website) has on reading comprehension. Literature Review It is necessary to meet the students’ needs for learning in ways that engage and motivate. Since students experience the use of various kinds of technology in their non-classroom lives, teachers must include technology as a part of the teaching curriculum. It is vital that educators be knowledgeable in the field of technology and willing to use it effectively in the classroom. It is not enough that teachers have the knowledge of using technology but that they know how to incorporate it into their daily teaching. How technology is used in the classroom will vary from teacher to teacher according to the teacher’s own acceptance, understanding, and ability concerning technology (Hofer & Swan, 2006). On the negative side, the misconceptions teachers have can cause technology to be used ineffectively. Just having technology in the classroom does not mean that the particular technology will be used correctly or in the best way to benefit the student. The frontlines of the battle to improve education occur where teachers are thoughtfully integrating technologies into the classroom (Boling, 2006; Labbo, Place & Soares, 2010). Students are very familiar with various types of technology and are friendly and receptive to the use of it in the classroom. Because it more readily engages them in the in the daily effort of study, it should lead to greater achievement academic excellence (Barone & Wright, 2008). There have been promising studies done already to support this suggestion. In one study, a two-year project focusing on multilingualism, multiculturalism, and teacher development, fourth graders used //Comic Creator// and //Blogspot// in reading and writing. There were limitations, such as students’ inability to have their own customized profiles. Also, students responded only to the teacher instead of their peers, and in the same way they would have with pencil and paper. But even then, the teacher found after three years, 80% of her students had their own online spaces and were using Web 2.0 tools outside of the classroom (Handsfield, Dean, & Cielocha, 2009). Reading difficulties are a great concern in all grades, and these must be addressed for students to succeed in other areas of study. Schools seek programs that focus on teaching students to read fluently and with comprehension. There are adolescents who are experiencing reading difficulties, causing a crisis in reading abilities. This is in spite of the fact that technological advances are coming at a pace never seen before (Sternberg, Kaplan & Borck, 2007). Schools may have some of those technologies, but more research is needed to ensure appropriate programs using those technologies are added in schools to improve adolescent reading achievement (Sternberg, Kaplan, & Borck, 2007). There are many technologies that can be used in the literacy classroom. E-books have been used when budgets have not allowed purchasing of books. One program called AR (Accelerated Reader) enhanced the reading skills of students by allowing students to choose and read books on their level and take comprehension quizzes that earn points. The program was very successful in reaching inner-city children (Anderson & Balajthy, 2009). Elementary students have been included in studies that confirm that using technology such as podcasts in the literacy classroom resulted in student engagement. One study described the use of podcasts in fifth-grade reading classrooms as having improved student performance on vocabulary posttests. There were seventeen students and each owned an iPod Nano. The students completed assigned podcasts that included vocabulary words from each section of a novel that was being read in class. The students’ engagement was extensive (Borgia, 2009). Another study described the use of laptops in a fourth-grade classroom. The initial concern that prompted the use of laptops was that reading development using traditional methods had been slowing. This prompted an idea that reading interest could be kindled if students were exposed to non-traditional texts that normally cannot be obtained without technology. The authors concluded that in the areas of literary response and analysis and writing strategies, laptop use may have a slight positive effect (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes & Warschauer, 2010). A case study has been completed and has found that academic achievement has been affected with the use of a program, //Make It-Take It After School//, that was developed for at-risk students who did not have access to computers. The study measured academic and participation levels and found that the technology of the afternoon program increased performance in both academics and participation (Amiri, 2009). Blogging has become popular among young people today because of the need to communicate with peers. Educators are finding the advantages of blogging for learning and sharing among colleagues and friends. The classroom teacher is searching for ways to engage students in learning and developing higher order thinking skills in the classroom. Educators have found that blogging enables students to improve communication skills by enhancing higher order thinking skills as blogging posts are read, and the information is analyzed and synthesized (Zawilinski, 2009). One reason for this may be that students feel that blogging allows them to freely discuss issues and learn about their peers’ ideas that may be different from their own (Wang & Hsua, 2008). Another study described the use of blogging in both a third grade classroom and a fourth grade classroom. The third grade students were asked to respond to a particular topic using blogging. The fourth grade students used blogging for online literature discussion. Both teachers of these students found that blogging was a productive way to increase participation and response (Boling, 2008). One explanation for this is that blogging encourages student participation in reading and responding to others who have opposing positions and ideas. This has the potential to improve analytical and critical thinking skills. Also, the very concept of teaching is changed from that of teacher to student to one of student to student or student to teacher (Ellison & Wu, 2008). Another result enhancing literacy is that students gained confidence and learning as they were better able to communicate with each other. The blogging experience promoted a sense of accomplishment and enjoyment of learning. For their part, teachers described blogging as a low-cost and effective tool to use in the literacy classroom (Huang & Liu, 2007).
 * Introduction **

** Research Problem ** As this researcher reviewed material, the question that came to mind was “Does technology offer significant differences in learning, or are we adding unnecessary expense that does not add enough difference to warrant cost and attention?” To help answer this, the direction for this research project is “Technology Integration in the Literacy Classroom”. In considering the most appropriate technology for use in research, this researcher has chosen blogging to enable students to share ideas and commentary with others and glean from the ideas of their peers and teacher. The research question is, “How does blogging in the literacy classr oom affect students’ reading comprehension?” **Research Methodology ** ** Participants **  Each class has 18 students, including nine EIP (Early Intervention Plan) students in each. There are no students involved in the study that are considered eligible for the gifted program.  ** Design and Procedures **  A mixed research approach will be used. This approach was chosen to assess the effect of blogging on test scores and student engagement. The study will involve two reading instruction classes; one class is the control group, and the other is the experimental group. The researcher will be the instructor for the experimental group which will use blogging during discussion time, and another teacher will lead the control class in vocal discussion. The control group teacher will be given instructions on how to conduct reading and discussion during the experiment to prevent her from giving any unintended help. All students, both experimental and controlled, will read (silently in class) a portion of the chapter book //Number the Stars// by Lois Lowry as the teacher reads the same passages aloud. This should prevent any individual reading difficulties from skewing the statistics. ** Data ** //Edhelper// (a website created by teachers for teachers’ use is found at edhelper.com) will be used to create a set of discussion questions, and pretests and posttests with multiple choice questions each for the students to answer. A checklist will be used to assess student engagement during discussion time. ** Data Collection Strategy ** Both the control group and the experimental group will receive a pretest after the class reading to assess their comprehension before beginning discussion. Both groups of students will receive the same set of discussion questions. The pretest will be given after class reads chapters 1-4 of the book prior to discussion to determine how much they learned from reading. Then discussion questions will be presented for the class to work on collectively to find the answers. The control class will use traditional ways to answer and discuss. The experimental class will receive a set of questions on the blog for students to discuss/blog with one another. In neither class will the teacher give assistance on the discussion. After discussion, each group will be given a posttest, which will be similar to the pretest, to determine how much comprehension improved through each method.The same procedure will be done for chapters 5-9, 10-13, and 14-17. In both classrooms, the researcher will use a checklist (Appendix) to rank the level of engagement of students while they are completing assignments. ** D ata Analysis ** After completing the four sets of pretests, discussions, and posttests, the variation of scores from each set of pretest/posttests will be analyzed and charted to evaluate separate achievements of traditional and technology-based classrooms to determine if there is a statistically significant improvement of blogging over the non-blogging reading classroom. First, the researcher will determine if the data follows the normal curve. As found in Johnson and Christensen (2008), if the data curve is normal, the researcher will conduct a t-test with a significance level of .05 to test the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is that the blogging and non-blogging classrooms on reading comprehension have no apparent difference. If the null hypothesis is rejected, then the researcher will have found that blogging does have an impact on reading comprehension. A statistics analysis software program called //Minitab// will be used to analyze the data. The researcher will also collect checklists and analyze the data to reveal the effect of blogging on student engagement. The t-test will be used to determine if there is a significant difference between the average rankings of student engagement for each class. **Timeline** Research on the use of blogging in the reading classroom will occur during a nine-week period. There will be a time of reading each day for two days. On the third day the students will be given a multiple choice pretest over what has been read, and the students will be given their questions and begin a discussion about the material. This will continue through day four. On the fifth day, the students will receive their posttest over the material read and discussed that week. This procedure will continue each week until the chapter book //Number the Stars// is completed. Three weeks will be taken to analyze the data collected to reveal the effect of technology integration on reading comprehension in the reading classroom.


 * January 3-14 || Preparation. Permission slips will be sent home for parental approval of students’ participation in the study. Instructions for blogging will be given during this time. ||
 * January 17-21 || Teacher will read four chapters. Pretests will be given. Discussions and answering short answer questions will take two days to complete. Posttests will be given. ||
 * January 24-28 || Teacher will read four chapters. Pretests will be given. Discussions and answering short answer questions will take two days to complete. Posttests will be given. ||
 * January 31-February 4 || Teacher will read four chapters. Pretests will be given. Discussions and answering short answer questions will take two days to complete. Posttests will be given. ||
 * February 7-11 || Teacher will read four chapters. Pretests will be given. Discussions and answering short answer questions will take two days to complete. Posttests will be given. ||
 * February 14-March 4 || Analyses will include collecting, entering, and analyzing data, and writing up the results. This will take 3 weeks. ||

**Concluding Summary** Through the research experience, the researcher has learned about the use of technology by other researchers. Limitations and considerations for researching on technology has been noted and observed in this research. Considering the studies that have been reviewed, a particular technology has become very interesting. Before the next phase of research, the researcher will work with blogging to determine the best technique to use in order to have a successful experience in my class. It will be determined how to set up the tool to ensure student privacy and promote confidence in communication. Permission letters requesting parental permission will be created along with all pretest, posttests, and discussion sheets will be created. With all these tasks completed, the next phase of the research should be ready to initiate.

**References** Amiri, S. (2009). The effects of information and communication technology on at risk children of low economic status: Make it take it after-school case study. //International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 5//(3). Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Anderson R. & Balajthy, E. (2009). Stories about struggling readers and technology. //The Reading Teacher, 62//(6), 540-542. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Barone, D. & Wright, T. E. (2008). Literacy instruction with digital and media technologies. //The Reading Teacher, 62//(4), 292-302. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Boling, E., Castek, J. Zawilinski, L. Barton, K., Nierlich, T. (2008). Collaborative literacy: blogs and internet projects. //The Reading Teacher, 61//(6), 504-506//.// Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Boling, E. C. (2008). Learning from teachers’ conceptions of technology integration: what do blogs, instant messages, and 3d chat rooms have to do with it? //Research in the Teaching of English, 43,// 74-99. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Borgia, L. (2009). “Enhanced vocabulary podcasts implementation in fifth-grade classrooms.” //Reading Improvement, 46//(4), 263-272. Retrieved August 24. 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals database. Edhelper. [|http://www.edhelper.com] Ellison, N. & Wu, Y. (2009). Blogging in the classroom: a preliminary exploration of student attitudes and impact on comprehension. //Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, (17//(1), 99-122. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Handsfield, L., Dean, T., & Cielocha, K. (2009). Becoming critical consumers and producers of text: Teaching literacy with web 1.0 and web 2.0. //The Reading Teacher,// //63//(1), 40-50. Doi:10.1598/RT.63.1.4 Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database.  Hofer, M., & Swan, K.. (2008). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in action: A case study of a middle school digital documentary project. //Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41//(2), 179-200. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database.  Huang, D. & Liu. E. H. (2007). Applying the blog in an information literacy program in school library setting: a case study at nan-yang elementary school in taichung. Paper presented at the International Association of School Librarianship Conference. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. (2008). //Educational research: quantiative, qualitative, and mixed approaches //. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Labbo, L. D., Place, K., Soares, L. (2010). Fresh perspectives on new literacies and technology integration. //Voices From the Middle, 17//(3), 9-10. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Neufeldt, V. (Ed). (1997). //Webster’s new world college dictionary//. New York, New York: Macmillan General Reference. Steinberg, B. J., Kaplan, K. A., Borck, J. E. (2007). Enhancing adolescent literacy achievement through integration of technology in the classroom. //Reading Research Quarterly//, 416-420. Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Suhr, K., Hernandez, D., Grimes, D., & Warschauer, M. (2010). Laptops and fourth-grade literacy: Assisting the jump over the fourth//-//grade slump//. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9//(5). Retrieved from ERIC database. Wang, S. & Hsua, H. (2008). Reflections on using blogs to expand in-class discussion. //TechTrends, 52//(3). Retrieved from Proquest Education Journals database. Zawilinski, L. (2009). Hot blogging: a framework for blogging to promote higher order thinking//. The Reading Teacher, 62//(8), 650-61.

Student Engagement Checklist <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt 2in; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">Observations <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">Focus 5 4 3 2 1 <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">Participation 5 4 3 2 1 <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">Quality Work 5 4 3 2 1 <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">Enthusiasm 5 4 3 2 1 <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">Student Engagement_x5=__%__ <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">__5-Very High 4- High 3-Medium 2-Low 1-Very Low__ <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">__Focus-Students remain on task with minimal distractions.__ <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">__Participation-Students are actively discussing subject matter.__ <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">__Quality Work-Students are answering questions completely and thoughtfully.__ <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">__Enthusiasm-Students are interested and excited.__ __Name__Date__Number__ ||||  ||
 * <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">**Appendix**
 * <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">**Appendix**
 * <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">**Appendix**
 * <span style="font-family: Verdana; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: .5in; tabstops: .5in; text-indent: 0in;">**Appendix**