RATIONALE
RATIONALE
RATIONALE
RATIONALE
DATA ANALYSIS
Critically Examining My Data
Pre & Post Writing Assessment
A writing assessment was completed at the beginning and at the end of the action research study. Students were given two 30-minute periods to write a personal narrative about anything of their choosing. To determine if students were scoring a beginning, progressing, proficient, or advanced, I took each writing piece and scored it based on my districts provided rubric.
At the beginning of the study, six students were writing on grade-level (proficiently) and the remaining 10 were not. It is important to note that four out of the 10 who were not on grade-level shut down and provided little or limited writing on the same assessment given at the beginning of the year. After the implementation of my study, the number of students that wrote on or above grade-level increased to 12! Only four students were scoring as writing below grade level at progressing. During the final assessment, pencils were constantly moving. Only one student had a minor meltdown that with the help of a classmate, was able to turn it around, and produce a writing sample.
Throughout the study, students conferenced with me about what they were working on, what they were struggling with, and their feelings about their writing at least once a week. Through our conferences, we determined glows (strengths), grows (areas that could improve), and discussed our feelings. Through analyzing this data, I can see that providing students with strategies to have a growth mindset aided students to improve their writing. The conferences overall could have also impacted student achievement by increasing student confidence and providing more one-on-one instruction, therefore increasing student achievement. The impact on students and their learning was due to the increase in support and influence of their needs. All students received individualized instruction which results in more students writing on grade-level at the conclusion of this study.
​
A paired-samples t-test was also conducted to determine the effect of implementing growth mindset strategies in a writer's workshop model would impact students' ability to persevere in writing tasks and improve achievement for students in the subject of writing. There was a significant difference in the scores prior to implementing summarizing strategies (M= 9.57, SD= 2.61) and after implementing (M= 12.14, SD = 1.64) the summarizing strategies; t(16)= 3.99, p= 0.0007. The observed standardized effect size is large (1.07). That indicates that the magnitude of the difference between the average and u0 is large. These results suggest that the use of growth mindset strategies had a positive effect on students' ability to persevere in writing tasks and improve achievement. Specifically, the results suggest the implementation of growth mindset strategies increased student achievement.
Throughout my action research study, I took a time on task analysis that determined the engagement of my students during their independent writing time. Prior to being released to write, students and I reviewed the purpose of each day’s writing time and what one could do if they felt stuck before being released to write on their own. Students helped brainstorm what they should do to problem-solve and what thoughts they should tell themselves (and each other) if something got hard. The infographic compares the percentage of students on task to the students deemed off task each week of the study. During week one, 63% of students were deemed off task leaving only 37% on task during that five minute writing time. After the implementation of this study, during week six, 82% of students were deemed “on task” while only 18% of students were not on task. The data shows that there was a 45% increase of on task behavior between the beginning and the end of the study!
I believe that the reason for the increase of on task behavior was due to the personalization of the writing block which stemmed from the elements of the study that were implemented. Students were shown how even adults and authors struggle to write. They were given the opportunities to see how to work through challenges, as well as given specific feedback during their one-on-one conferences that were tailored to them. So, they knew exactly what they were working towards. Students were also familiar with the routine of how our writing blocked looked, sounded, and felt like. Toward the end of the study, students were used to the structure of the writing block, they were used to hearing positive reinforcers from myself and classmates and had built writing stamina. I also believe that as students were able to work through their difficulties, they were less of a distraction to their peers. Less distractions lead to more on-task behavior.
Over the course of my research, students were supported a significant amount more than they were before the study. They were given tools to be successful while working. Due to the conferences, mentor texts, and other elements of the research, students were excited to write and able to focus on their writing instead of worrying about when they would get stopped or what they were supposed to write about. The data shows that more students could work on task at the end of the study compared to before, showing that students' ability to have a growth mindset during writing did increase as a result of the action research. The students were able to work through their own struggles, persevere with a growth mindset, and be on task longer.
Time On Task Analysis
Anecdotal Notes From
Surveys and Conferences
I'
A survey was initially completed with students on 2/24/19 and was once again completed by students on 3/6/19. Conferences occurred every day with each student receiving a one-on-one conference at least once a week. Below are some results of differences among the survey and themes scene throughout conferencing.
Students were asked to talk with me during our one-on-one conferences about their thoughts and feelings toward writing, and if they felt like they were unable to do something, why that might be. We would process through difficult tasks together. The quotes displayed here gathered a change in the student’s commentary over the course of the study.
The quotes showed an awareness of skills and knowledge about themselves as writers. Students were impacted because they were asked to reflect on their perspective about writing. You can see the change in their mindsets based upon the quotes collected. The strategies implemented made the students stronger learners because they were able to internalize and change the way they felt toward what might have been a difficult concept or task. These students changed their mindsets and therefore grew in their own confidence. It is this growth in confidence that helped students grow in their writing.
The pre-survey graph and post-survey graph represent how the answers of my students changed during the implementation of the researched growth mindset strategies and after. In the first graph, 31.25% (or five students) responded negatively, 31.25% (or five students) responded positively, and 37.5% (or six students) responded as if they think they are a good writer sometimes. These numbers were not surprising due to the attitudes and mindsets I had previously seen. This graph served as my baseline in reference to students’ mindsets changing toward writing. The second graph represents student mindsets toward writing after the six-week implementation of growth mindset mini lessons, a story based approach, and writing conferences that focused on helping students through challenges. In the graph, 68.75% (or 11 students) responded positively, 6.25% (or 1 student) responded negatively, and 25% (or four students) responded neutrally. Positive responses grew by 37.5% (or six students) which implies that the strategies implemented improved student mindsets and therefore improved the way they thought about writing tasks. I should note that the one student who responded negatively to the post study was the one student who had struggled during the duration of taking the post-test. The data collected made me question how student mindsets would have been different if I had implemented the researched strategies at the beginning of the school year and if it would have allowed for even more student growth in writing achievement.
Triangulating
the Data
The data I collected through my research study helped me regulate instruction through the course of the study. The data points all added value to one another within the study which made instruction more purposeful and targeted for student success.
The data collected from the writing pretest triangulated with the survey as it gave me a starting place to appropriately challenge each student. The results from the pretest enriched my understanding of writing skills each student obtained or lacked at the beginning of the unit. The pretest explained that each writer had areas to grow in and the survey allowed me to see where thoughts and feelings were hurting or aiding students.
A triangulation of data was also found within the connection of time on task and the post-test results. The use of doing a time on task analysis confirmed that the more students were engaged the more likely they were able to work through what they deemed challenging of writing. It confirmed the ongoing growth throughout the six weeks. It helps explain why the students went from a lower beginning score to a more proficient end score.
The results collected from the survey was used to enrich the use of conferences and mini lessons. The results from the survey explained how students felt towards me and towards writing. These results informed me that the strategies selected would be beneficial to confidence students had and their mindsets toward writing.
Questions
Despite everything I learned, three questions, in particular, still remain.
First, where would my students have scored at the end of the third quarter if I had incorporated growth mindset strategies since the beginning of the school year? Though I will never know the answer to this question, I assumed that my students would have done even better, not just in the subject of writing, but in any subject area where they felt it was too difficult or challenging to try their best all year long. My second question was about the survey that I gave students at the beginning of the study, were the students being truthful in the answers they wrote? A discussion was held with the students about answering truthfully, not how they believed they should answer. The results were changed from beginning to end of the study positively. It made me wonder if the students truly believed what they put down or if the answers could have been slightly skewed since they knew we were focusing heavily on being positive. The results I received from my students were used to guide my instruction. If the answers were any different, the instruction might have been planned differently with more accommodations or motivating factors for specific writers. My final question stemmed from the time on task analysis. I had an external educator administer three out of the six, however, I administered the other three. I wonder how the time on task would have changed if an external educator administered all six. It was possible that I showed bias or had different insight that determined whether a child was being on or off task. Although I cannot determine the actual answer, I can infer that there is a chance that some of the on/off task determined were incorrect based on the relationships with each student. I knew exactly how each student worked during writing and the different barriers they had to overcome. Subconsciously, I have to say there might have been a small amount of grace given to a few students.