CARP Project

13
Animation Technology as Animation Technology as a Supplement to Reading a Supplement to Reading Instruction Instruction Leonardtown Elementary Leonardtown Elementary Emily Davis & Jessica Morgan Emily Davis & Jessica Morgan

Transcript of CARP Project

Page 1: CARP Project

Animation Technology as

Animation Technology as

a Supplement to Reading

a Supplement to Reading

InstructionInstruction

Leonardtown ElementaryLeonardtown Elementary

Emily Davis & Jessica MorganEmily Davis & Jessica Morgan

Page 2: CARP Project

JustificationJustification• Leonardtown did not make AYP last year

o As a result, SIP is almost singularly focused on improving amount of students reading at proficient or advanced by county benchmark and by DIEBELS

o Students in 3rd grade received lower than proficient scores in identifying and defining:

o Setting and mood (38%)o Words, lines, and stanzas(56%)o Main ideas and themes (57%)

Page 3: CARP Project

JustificationJustification• Professional Development Goal:Professional Development Goal:““Teachers will use these best practices to Teachers will use these best practices to

change instruction if necessary after reviewing student work sampleschange instruction if necessary after reviewing student work samples””o DifferentiationDifferentiationo Learning stylesLearning styles

• Animation TechnologyAnimation Technologyo Technology allows students to experience different types of writings Technology allows students to experience different types of writings

while still remaining in their digital comfort zoneswhile still remaining in their digital comfort zoneso Supplements culturally relevant teachingSupplements culturally relevant teachingo Incorporation of these tools and applications is merely a natural Incorporation of these tools and applications is merely a natural

extension of the way these students are currently living and extension of the way these students are currently living and learning outside of that classroom.learning outside of that classroom.

• Bakhoum (2008) explained that students test scores made a significant Bakhoum (2008) explained that students test scores made a significant improvement as a result of introducing animations to traditional improvement as a result of introducing animations to traditional classroom instruction. classroom instruction.

Page 4: CARP Project

StrategyStrategy• Choose two appropriately leveled texts of similar level

and type o First Text  

Will be taught using typical classroom strategies  Pre- and post-test for content comprehension

o Second Text  Will again use typical classroom strategies Review of the text will be done using

animation/cartoons constructed by the intern that will ask students to sequence main events 

Pre- and post-test for content comprehension

Page 5: CARP Project

Research questions Research questions • Does sequencing of cartoon technology increase

student content comprehension?

• Is cartoon technology more effective than discussion in increasing students’ reading comprehension?

Page 6: CARP Project

Data collection planData collection planData Source 1 Data source 2

Does sequencing of cartoon technology increase student content comprehension?

Pre-test and Post-test with cartoon images

Is cartoon technology more effective than discussion in increasing students’ reading comprehension?

Pre-test and Post-test without cartoon images

Pre-test and Post-test with cartoon images

Page 7: CARP Project

Pre-post assessment itemsPre-post assessment items• Grandma’s Records

o Text-specific questions assessing vocabulary, story sequencing, and overall content comprehension

o Ex. “How does Grandma use this tradition to connect with her culture?”

•  The Talking Cloth• Text-specific questions similar

to those for the previous text• Sequencing question included

pictures from cartoon supplement used in review

Page 8: CARP Project

Pre-post findingsPre-post findings• Our findings!

o There was a significant increase in reading comprehension for both Grandma’s Records (p = .00000001) and Talking Cloth (p = .000006).

o However, there was not a significantly higher increase in reading comprehension when using cartoon technology rather than traditional classroom strategies. (p = .38)

Page 9: CARP Project

Answers to research Answers to research questionsquestions

• Does cartoon technology increase student reading comprehension more then discussion?o There was a greater increase in

reading comprehension when using animations vs. discussion (39 points vs. 42 points)

o However, this difference in reading comprehension scores was not significant.

Page 10: CARP Project

LimitationsLimitations

• Timingo The cartoon handout was done the Thursday

before the Halloween weekend, so the school as a whole was off task.

• Curriculum Demandso Due to passing guides and test schedules,

activities such as these are difficult to work into the classes tight schedule.

• Small sample size/less data due to unforseeable events

Page 11: CARP Project

Next steps?Next steps?• Yes, this strategy would be

recommended for future application.• Next time, we would like to have

the students create their own cartoon strip of the story. This gives each student responsibility for their own instruction and comprehension.  

o Also, due to lack of resources the cartoon had to be printed out in black and white, rather than color. Color would appeal to a larger variety of learning styles.

Page 12: CARP Project

The Big Picture!The Big Picture!• Animation and cartoon technology has been

proven by various research to be not only useful as an instrument of instruction, but also as a way to connect with students in a digital age.

 • Even though our experiment did not prove that

animation technology significantly improved reading comprehension over traditional teaching methods, including the arts in instruction appeals to multiple learning styles and student skill and ability.

Page 13: CARP Project

ReferencesReferences• Bakhoum, E. G. (2008). Animating an Equation: a

Guide to using Flash in Mathematics Education. International Journal of   Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 39(5), 637-655.