kellywolkksu.weebly.com€¦ · Web viewTeachers are turning to technology for extra support, differentiation, and to gain student interest. Schools are beginning to add more computers

Running Head: IPADS TO SUPPORT ELL’S READING1

Technology to Support Reading in the Classroom with English Language Learners

Kelly A. Wolk

Kennesaw State University

IPADS TO SUPPORT ELL’S READING 2

Abstract

The role of technology is quickly transitioning from a communication device in the home

and workplace to an essential tool in many classrooms across the country. Teachers are turning

to technology for extra support, differentiation, and to gain student interest. Schools are

beginning to add more computers to each classroom, as well as iPads, eReaders, and a variety of

other technological tools. While technology has its downfalls, it also can provide many indirect

instructional opportunities to students that teachers cannot. It can be very useful for all students,

but can also provide great opportunities to students that need extra support. Technology,

specifically digital texts and interactive applications, can help support English language learners

acquire vocabulary and become more successful readers. This study will discuss how the

implementation of iPads can have a positive effect on sight word growth and fluency scores for

many English language learners.


Introduction

The number of English language learners (ELL) enrolled in American schools is growing

each year. In some areas the amount of ELL students has doubled in just the past 10 years. Many

of these students are being exposed to English for the first time and they are expected to learn

and meet the same content standards as their peers. Some main areas of concern are reading,

writing, speaking and listening skills, all of which stem from a lack of vocabulary. As

technology becomes more prevalent in day to day life, it is also becoming more popular as an

instructional tool in the classroom. New approaches to helping students gain a larger vocabulary

to help them succeed in literacy is constantly being sought out using technology. Highlighted

here is the importance of vocabulary, the additional needs of ELL students, and the pros and cons

of how different sources of technology can support these needs.

In order to find the effects of technology on English language learners, a study will be

conducted with a small group of ELLs in an elementary school setting. The study will take place

in an elementary school located in Roswell, Georgia. To preserve anonymity throughout this

study the school will be called BES. This school is a very large school with a student enrollment

of 1070 students (The Governor’s Office of Student Achievement, 2011). This school has a very

diverse population of students, 19 percent African American, 70 percent Hispanic, 7 percent

white, and 5 percent multiracial or Asian (GOSA, 2011). BES’ diverse population presents many

extra challenges for the students. Of the total student population, 49 percent are learning English

as a second language and are enrolled and receiving ESOL services (GOSA, 2011). There are

additional students who are learning English as a second language, but may have tested out of

the ESOL program. Of the total student population, 21 percent, are enrolled in the Early

Intervention Program and are receiving special services to ensure they are getting what they need


to learn (GOSA, 2011). While BES has a large student population, they also have a large staff.

The student teacher ratio is 13:1 (GOSA, 2011). In addition to language being an obstacle for

many students at BES, many students also face socioeconomic problems at home. 89 percent of

the students at BES are eligible for Free/Reduced meals (GOSA, 2011). The students and parents

at BES are very committed to attending school; only 5 percent of students are recorded as having

over 15 days absent (Georgia Department of Education, 2011). BES enforces the importance of

attendance through letters and phone calls for obsessive absences, as well as social worker

intervention when necessary. While BES is a very diverse school so is the surrounding

community. The zip code that BES is located in has a population majority different than that of

BES. The community surrounding BES is made up of 78 percent white, 9 percent African

American, 4 percent Asian, and 8 percent other or mixed races (Demographic Characteristics,

2013). Many parents of the students at BES do not speak English. BES has a Bilingual Parent

Liaison and a Title 1 Parent Liaison that work closely together to form programs that help

parents get involved, help support their families, as well as assisting parents to receive more

education in order to benefit their children.

The class in which the study will take place is made up of 14 boys and 10 girls. The

students range from age five to eight. The study will not be completed on all students in the

classroom, but only the English language learners. Of the 24 students, 11 are enrolled in the

ESOL program: six boys and five girls. 10 of the 11 students speak Spanish as the home

language, and one student comes from a Mandarin speaking background. As a second year

teacher, I have noticed the struggles that my ELL students face in reading. These students

struggle making connections with the text, decoding, and face challenges with reading

comprehension. Because of these difficulties, many students become disengaged and


discouraged. In attempts to boost attitude towards reading and overall reading scores, I will show

the positive correlation between regular use of technology tools, specifically the iPad, and

student reading growth.

Literature Review

Reservations about Technology

While technology has been shown to increase student participation, motivation, and

interest, some argue that it is becoming more of a distraction than anything. The presence of

technology in the classroom can allow for “ready access to information and resources, and

unpredictable activity beyond teacher’s control” (Kukulska-Hulme, 2013, p.12). Many school

systems have banned the use of mobile phones because they have become disruptive, not only to

the student, but to the entire learning environment. Teachers and school systems must find a way

to regulate the types of technology students bring into the classroom, and how they are to be used

only for educational purposes.

Throughout studies embracing technology, the barriers of technology have been

categorized into two different sections; internal factors and external factors. Some teachers do

not incorporate technology into their classroom because of external factors which are those

beyond their control. External factors can include lack of resources, training, and administrative

support. However, it seems that the greater challenge is the internal factors stemming from the

teacher. This includes the teacher’s willingness to use technology, confidence with technology,

and pedagogy related to the connection of technology and student learning.

External factors preventing technology use in the classroom have decreased over the last

decade. Since 1994 the percentage of public schools with access to the internet went from 35%

to almost 100% in 2005 (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-LeftWich, Sadik, Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P.,


2012). According to an article in Harvard International Review, over $8 billion is spent each year

on mobile learning, 47,000 iPads were sold to schools in the United States within the first 45

days of their release, 1.5 million iPads are used in schools, and there are over 20,000 educational

apps for the iPad (2013). Although every school may not have access to all of this technology,

the United States as a whole has come a long way in incorporating technology into our school

systems. In addition to technology resources becoming more available, training for teachers is

becoming more accessible. Many teachers are relying on social networking sites to interact and

learn from their peers about technology and ways to use it in their classrooms (Ertmer et. Al,

2012). Ertmer suggests that one way for administration to reduce fear for teachers is giving them

ideas of how their students can assist them with using the technology and having administration

use the same tool for staff development that is incorporated in the classroom (2012). With an

increased understanding, training, and readily available resources, teachers are far more likely to

integrate technology in the classroom in an effective way.

Importance of Vocabulary

Vocabulary is a group of words that a person acquires in a given language. A student’s

ability to learn and use vocabulary in an effective way is crucial to language development

(Lindsey-Glenn & Gentry, 2008). The NRP (2000) states that “vocabulary plays an important

role both in learning to read and in comprehending text: readers cannot understand text without

knowing what most words mean” (p. 1). Not only is this crucial for English speaking students

entering school, but it is especially true for the English language learners. English language

learners have a lot of vocabulary to learn when they enter school in order to catch up with their

peers. August, Carlo, Dressler, & Snow (2006) stated that, “Students reading in their first

language begin school already having acquired between 5,000 and 7,000 words” (p. 51). Not


only do the ELL students need to learn to speak the words, but they must learn to understand the

words’ meaning in context. Many ELLs, who come to school lacking the English language

background, find that vocabulary is their biggest hindrance associated with content related text

(Silverman, 2009). It is important that educators and parents understand that vocabulary

knowledge for all students is essential in becoming a successful reader, writer, and

communicator.

Along with a strong vocabulary, English language learners can use a strong sight word

vocabulary to assist with fluent reading. Lori Helman and Matthew Burns (2008) stated

“becoming proficient readers who not only decode but also understand what they are reading is a

crucial goal for young English-language learner (ELL) students, and a sight word vocabulary that

can be used in fluent reading is an important component of this proficiency” (p. 14). Many

research studies have been completed to find the importance of understanding sight words for

English language learners as well as native speakers. The National Institute of Child Health and

Human Development (2000) detailed that proficient reading involves automatic decoding;

therefore children need a base of sight words so that their mental energy can be used for reading

comprehension (Findings & Determination section, para 14). If English language learners can

establish a large understanding of sight words, they will have an easier time becoming a fluent

reader.

In addition to sight words and vocabulary, many other factors contribute to the

successfulness of reading for ELL students, “although reading is primarily a cognitive act, it is

also influenced by affective domains” (Garrett, 2011, p.51). Garrett also lists the important

focuses of reading, “Focusing upon the affective component of reading instruction of ELLs

yields favorable results in terms of enhancement in the development of personal interests, values,


a positive attitude” (p. 51) Affective domains include how a person deals with a situation

emotionally: feelings, attitude, enthusiasm, and values. It is important that ELL students have a

positive attitude, interest in reading, and motivation to read in order to be successful (Hipsky,

2011). A combination of attitude, interest, and motivation will help an ELL student with their

skills.

Direct vs. Indirect Instruction

Research and literature refers to two different approaches to vocabulary instruction:

direct and indirect teaching (Korat & Shamir, 2012). The indirect instructional approach assumes

that with enough indirect exposure to words and texts, students will pick up understanding of

essential vocabulary words. Direct teaching implies that simply exposing children to words is not

enough, but that children need instructional interventions in order to gain a full of understanding

of vocabulary words (Korat & Shamir, 2012). In a study completed using direct and indirect

approaches to learn vocabulary, the students who received no direct support, even from a

computer, did not show any progress in their vocabulary knowledge. However, children that

received direct instruction followed with indirect instruction through technology showed a gain

(Korat & Shamir, 2012). Direct instruction for reading and vocabulary usually starts in

Kindergarten or a student’s first year in school, but indirect instruction begins at home through

environment, experiences, and interactions. However, ELL students do not have the same

indirect exposure to these texts due to the native language spoken at home differing from

English. While exposure to any types of texts in any language is beneficial, ELL students are at a

vocabulary disadvantage when beginning school.

August (2005) refers to a main challenge of learning vocabulary for ELL students, and

that is the lack of time to reinforce the words learned through direct instruction. Teachers are not


able to offer direct instruction all day and after school to ensure the retention of the information,

and this is where we begin to turn technology and multimedia tools for support. A study

completed by Rice and Woodsmall (1988) with English language learners showed that

educational television can have a positive effect on the growth of vocabulary. In 2006, Uchikoshi

completed a similar study with ELLs, but his results showed that without someone or something

to scaffold the information and television show, the ELL students did not gain as much

vocabulary. In an educational setting, Rebecca Silverman and Sarah Hines (2009) used a

controlled group and a research group to show that educational multimedia can increase content

and vocabulary understanding for ELL students. Introducing and supporting students through

direct instruction and following up with indirect instruction with technology has proven to be an

effective approach.

Multimedia technology

Mao Neo and Ken Neo (2012) claim that multimedia technology is “the combination of

various digital media types, such as text, images, sound, and video, into an integrated

multisensory interactive application or presentation to convey a message or information to an

audience” (p. 3). Multimedia can be used to reach different types of people and learners. Media

technology has been used to integrated into English language learning since the 1950s when

small schools began using movies and tape recorders. Over the course of time, language learning

began incorporating video projectors and slide shows. Now, as technology has become more

advanced, English language teaching incorporates the use of many sources of media technology

such as video, pictures, animation and interactive games, CDs or DVDs, the use of internet, chat

rooms and video chat. Ahmad (2012) states that all of these different technology tools have

“narrowed distance and turned the whole world into a global community providing opportunities


for learners to have authentic experiences” (p. 924). Providing opportunities for authentic

experiences is a necessity for English language learners so they are able to connect to the

information. Making learning meaningful and relatable is a crucial portion of English language

teaching. English language learners need extra support and these technology tools can offer

greater opportunities for learning.

Digital Texts & E Readers

Most children of this generation have grown up accustomed to using technology on a

regular basis. Educators can use this prior knowledge and familiarity to their advantage. Paper

and hardback books are becoming less popular with the rise of demand for digital texts. Other

new forms of literacy include electronic story books on CDs and DVDs, read-alouds on the

internet, the Kindle, the Nook, the iPad, and hundreds of storytelling apps. Major benefits of

eBooks are the tools and features accompanied with the stories. Many eBooks are programmed

with interactive games and questions that follow along with the stories as well as oral reading,

audio, and extended pictures and videos. Many e-readers also provide a virtual dictionary to help

with many unknown words. These features allow students who are unable to read gain exposure

to a variety of texts above their level. Through a study, Omar Korat (2012) found that students

who read with an eReader made significant improvements in reading and vocabulary, than the

controlled group who had no exposure to the digital text and its features.

Not only are children gaining indirect instruction through the use of eReaders, but it is

shown to be almost as helpful as direct instruction in some cases. Korat and Shamir (2007) found

that children receive similar benefits from an eReader than they do when an adult reads them a

book aloud. The eReaders provide something new, but familiar, to children of this generation.

The eReader also provides interactive activities that gain and hold student interest and make text


connections. eReaders also allow students to manipulate font size, record notes, and use an

online dictionary, features that a paperback text cannot offer.

iPads

Apple’s release of the iPad in 2010 introduced a colossal new tool for educational

settings. As stated before, over 1.5 million iPads are being used in school systems today

(Kukulska-Hulme, 2013). The iPad store has several books and Kindle apps that allow students

and adults to read leveled books on a digital device. Students significantly benefit from daily

read-alouds. “Daily exposure to read-alouds presents students with opportunities to hear explicit

modeling of the fluency elements (e.g., accuracy, automaticity, prosody) that proficient readers

exhibit” (Thoermer & Williams, 2012, p.442). Tools such as iPad apps and eBooks can offer

students more opportunities to hear read-alouds. Also, the iPad has many educational apps that

can be differentiated to meet individual student needs. Teachers can use apps to create flashcards

for vocabulary words that contain audio, text, and graphics. The implementation of these three

pieces is beneficial to the learning and understanding of vocabulary words for ELL students.

Technology can offer many things to students that a teacher may not be able to. While a

teacher is pulling small groups, technology can offer students a productive, differentiated center

(Blachowicz, Bates, Berne, Bridgman, Chaney & Perney, 2009). Technology, such as iPads and

computers, allow students to work at their own pace on their own level. This allows for more

personalized instruction as well as an increase in interest. In addition to differentiation and

productivity, technology can offer students to develop independent work habits and help build

their confidence with their content skills and technology skills (Blachowicz, 2009). Students

have found motivation through using technology and interactive apps. These apps and tools

provide learning and collaborative opportunities that tradition classrooms cannot.


Methodology

Context of Investigation

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects technology, specifically iPads, can

have on English language learners reading abilities and attitudes towards reading. As stated in

the literature review, prior research has shown technology can have a positive impact on student

learning and interest. The research question for my study is: How can the use of technology

affect English language learners growth as a reader?

The study will follow a group of 11 students that have been identified by the county as

needing ESOL services. The group is composed of six boys and five girls. The group has a

diverse combination of leveled readers according to the DRA reading scale and Fulton County

Benchmark standards: four of the students are below grade level readers, five students are on

grade level readers, and the remaining two students are above grade level readers. The purpose

of the study is not to bring only below grade level readers up to meet the benchmark, but to show

growth in students of all abilities.

Design

Data will be collected using quantitative and qualitative methods. Over an eight week

period, the study will follow a group of 11 English language learner students in a first grade

classroom. The quantitative design method that will be used is one-group pretest-posttest design.

The data will study the amount of growth in student reading progress in the first four weeks

without the use of technology and compare it to the growth after the implementation of

technology into reading instruction. An observational journal will be kept by the teacher in order

to record and note behaviors observed throughout the research.


Instruments Used

Students will be assessed on their reading fluency score and sight word knowledge every

quarter throughout the 2013-2014 school year. Fluency will be tested by giving students a grade

level text and one minute to read the text (See Appendix A). Sight word knowledge will be tested

on the student’s ability to fluently read the list of Fry sight words (See Appendix B). The study

will compare student growth from the first four weeks of the study to the second four weeks of

the study. Using quantitative measurements, student growth will be compared from the first four

weeks before the addition of technology to the second four weeks data after the addition of

technology.

Research Procedure

To begin the research study, all students that will participate in the study must have a

guardian sign the given permission form (See Appendix C). The students will also give their

assent to participate in the study (See Appendix D). The teacher will give a pre-assessment at

the beginning of the study to track student’s fluency and sight word knowledge. Throughout the

year so far, during the county allotted reading block (50 minutes), students have been working to

improve reading skills through guided reading groups, independent reading activities, books on

CD, and a variety of word building activities. Progress using only these methods will be recorded

during the first four weeks of the study. In the following four weeks, the English language

learners will begin using iPads and specific apps as an additional learning tool to help increase

reading knowledge. The research group will use specified apps on the iPad for a minimum of 20

minutes 3-5 times per week. Students in the research group will be given explicit details and

training on how to use the provided technology. The apps have read aloud texts as well as

interactive sight word games. There are three applications that students will be able to choose


from: Teach Me First Grade, Sight Word Learning, and Explorer-EBook. At the end of the first

four weeks, students will be given the same formal reading assessments to track their progress

which will serve as a post test of their ability without the technology as well as the pretest before

the technology portion begins. The growth from the two sessions of the study will be compared.

Results

The study spanned an eight week period. A pre-test was given to measure growth over

the first four weeks of time. A posttest was given to measure growth as well as to serve as a pre-

test for the remaining for weeks of the study. A final posttest was given in order to determine the

rate of growth with and without technology as a teaching tool.

Quantitative

Although there are many factors that are beyond my control that are important to

recognize, a basic measurement between the two periods of time were used to measure the

growth that occurred. Growth was measured by looking at the amount of sight words learned in

both periods of time as well as words per minute gained or loss on the fluency passage. Of the 11

students in the study, seven mastered more sight words in the second portion of the study with

the use of technology. Four students showed more growth during the first four weeks using

regular methods of reading instruction.


Figure 1

Student Pre Sight WordsPost/Pre Sight

WordsPost sight

Words

Sight Words Learned during

first 4 weeks

Sight words learned using

technology1 79 114 228 35 1142 47 73 116 26 433 500 538 555 38 174 50 68 76 18 85 24 32 48 8 166 24 72 125 48 537 482 501 543 19 428 208 269 324 61 559 87 100 139 13 39

10 551 574 581 23 711 24 54 88 30 34

Averages: 29 38.91

Students were timed on a grade level passage to measure growth of fluency throughout

the study. Seven students showed more growth during the second part of the study with the

implementation of technology as a learning tool. Four students showed more growth during the

first portion of the study. Three students showed a decline in fluency score from the pretest to the

posttest following the first four weeks. All students showed gain from the beginning of the study

to the final posttest. Figure two shows the growth students made on timed reading on the fluency

passage.


Figure 2

Student Pre FluencyPost/Pre Fluency Post Fluency

Fluency words improved

Fluency increase with

technology1 32 63 68 31 52 28 44 58 16 143 69 115 119 46 44 33 35 50 2 155 25 18 28 -7 106 30 42 53 12 117 67 64 79 -3 158 42 52 68 10 169 38 32 57 -6 25

10 82 69 76 -13 711 17 24 32 7 8

Average: 8.64 11.82

In looking at the group as a whole, the average number of sight words mastered during

the first four weeks was 29 words. The average number of sight words mastered after the

implementation of the iPad, was 38.91 words. This data shows on average, more sight words

were mastered with the implementation of technology as a reading tool. The average number of

fluency words per minute gain during the first four weeks was 8.64 words. The average number

of words read per minute during the second portion of the study was 11.82. These numbers show

that as an overall average, students gained more words per minute after the implementation of

technology (See figure 1 & 2).


Figure 3 compares all 3 tests on sight words for each student. This graph shows that all students

grew during each block of time, but at different paces.

Figure 3:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Sight Word Growth

Pre Sight WordsPost/Pre Sight WordsPost sight Words

Student Number

Num

ber o

f Sig

ht W

ords

Figure 4 shows that all students grew from the initial pretest to the final posttest on their fluency

score. Also, all students grew from the second pretest to the posttest. This graph does show that

some students’ scores declined from the pretest to the initial posttest.

Figure 4:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Fluency Growth

Pre FluencyPost/Pre FluencyPost Fluency

Student Number

Wor

ds R

ead

Per M

inut

e


Figure 5 shows the progression of each student’s sight word growth over the eight weeks period

of time. Although students were performing on different levels, the graph and data show that all

11 students made growth.

Figure 5:

Pre Sight Words

Post/Pre Sight

Words

Post sight Words

0100200300400500600700

Sight Word Growth

Student 1 Student 2Student 3 Student 4Student 5 Student 6Student 7 Student 8Student 9 Student 10Student 11

Sght

Wor

ds Le

arne

d

Figure 6 shows the progression of each student’s fluency score over the eight weeks. It shows

that all students made progress over the research study. The graph shows that students are at

different learning levels and reading at different fluency levels, but that in all, every student

made growth.

Figure 6:

Pre Fluency Post/Pre Fluency

Post Fluency

020406080

100120140

Fluency GrowthStudent 1 Student 2Student 3 Student 4Student 5 Student 6Student 7 Student 8Student 9 Student 10Student 11

Wor

ds p

er m

inut

e


All students participate in Daily 5 reading activities every day in first grade. These students

rotate between five different centers on a daily basis. Every day they will go to four of the five

activities for 12-18 minutes. The five choices are work on writing, read to self, word work,

listening to reading, and technology. Up until the study, technology has been computer with a

county wide program called i-ready. Students in the study were surveyed before the research

began on their favorite reading activity. The results are displayed below in figure 7. The survey

showed that students overall did not like one activity more than the other.

Figure 7:

Read to Self27%

Listening18%Technology

18%

Word Work18%

Work on Writing 18%

Favorite Daily 5 ReadingActivity

(pre study)

After the research study, when technology also included iPad usage, students were surveyed

again to recognize their favorite reading activity. Figure 8 shows that when students are able to

use the iPad during reading time as a technology center, overall that was a student’s first choice.


Figure 8:

Read to self18%

Listening9%

Tech-nology

64%

Work on Writing9%

Favorite Daily 5 Reading Activity(post study)

Overall, this information shows that the implementation of the iPad increased student interest in

technology as a reading tool.

Qualitative

A journal was used to make observation and was kept to provide information regarding

student behavior throughout the research. I was able to observe many different things throughout

the study. My notes highlighted increased engagement as well as some off task behavior.

During the time in which students were not using technology, I observed engagement in

different reading activities. Most activities were independent and I found some students really

enjoyed that time to explore literature on their own. There are some that were more engaged than

others, but depending on the center they were currently working on. During the time in which

students would get on the iPads they stayed in one spot and rarely spoke to others unless they

were showing something on the iPad to a classmate. These students were not easily distracted

and showed much interest in the iPad activities. When the time was up, students were reluctant to

come off the iPad. When it was a student’s turn to go on to the iPad I was able to see increased

excitement and enthusiasm for the next rotation of reading centers.


During the portion of the study that did not involve iPad as technology, I found students

that were consistently off task regardless of the center they were at. Some students saw this time

as an excuse to communicate with classmates and play. When changing to a new center, I heard

some students who sighed or grunted when they knew they would have to continue to a new

center that may not have been something they enjoyed. During the iPad portion of the research, I

did find some students who exhibited off task behavior, but within the iPad usage. These

particular students would leave the designated applications and find something else that they

would like to do on the iPad, for example, math applications. These students still showed

engagement in using the iPad, but not in the correct applications that were guided for reading

instruction.

Conclusions

After reviewing my quantitative and qualitative data, I have come to the conclusion that

iPads can be an effective means of instruction for some, but not all students. A generalization

cannot be made stating that all students make more growth with the use of technology than

without. However, since all students made overall growth from the initial pretest to the final

posttest, it can be generalized that all students will make a growth in sight word and fluency

score, but not necessarily at a faster rate.

If this study was completed again with different students, it is possible that a similar

outcome could be reached, but not guaranteed. This study and the results are dependent on the

students and teachers involved. This study had many limitations and weaknesses due to

scheduling conflicts and other teachers/tutors involved. It was difficult to ensure that all students

met the requirements of using the iPad every day. It was also difficult to ensure that all students


were remaining on task, while still meeting the needs of the students not involved in the research

study.

In regards to on task behavior and engagement, students’ attitude toward technology

improved throughout the study. I witnessed more on task behavior and a positive attitude toward

using the iPads during instruction. Students enjoyed the interactive games and read-aloud stories.

While some students may show more engagement and enthusiasm toward reading, I still

witnessed some students exhibiting off task behaviors. Therefore, I would not make the

generalization that with the implementation of iPads all students will show more engagement and

on task behavior.

Implications for Future Research

I have several questions that I have formed throughout the time span of completing this

study. Although I had limited knowledge and research regarding the topic, I am interested in

exploring the relationship between sight word knowledge and fluency growth. I did not witness

any correlation between the two, but would be interested to research into the topic to see if

higher sight word knowledge can result in a better fluency score. In regards to my study and

research question, I would want to further research on why some students grew more with the

use of technology and some did not. In addition to the reason behind it, I am curious to see if

students need more implemented time on technology to show more growth. I would plan to

include parents more in the technology aspect. I would love for students to continue working on

similar applications at home if they were available. There is a lot that can be learned from this

study, but so much more research to be completed to find the answers to why I came to the

conclusion that I have. While I was unable to show that all students made a higher rate of gain

with the implementation of the iPad, I learned a lot about the individual needs of my students. I


plan to continue to use iPad as a teaching and learning tool in the classroom to promote

continuous growth, positive attitude, and improved engagement.


References

Ahmad, J. (2012). English Language Teaching (ELT) and Integration of Media Technology.

Cyprus International Conference on Educational Research, 924-929.

August, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary

development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice,

20, 50-57.

Beaver, J. (2006). Developmental reading assessment. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Biemiller, A., & Boote, C. (2006). An effective method for building meaning vocabulary in

primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98. 44-62.

Blachowicz, C. Z., Bates, A., Berne, J., Bridgman, T., Chaney, J., & Perney, J. (2009).

Technology and At-Risk Young Readers and their Classrooms. Reading Psychology,

30(5), 387-411.

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012).

Teacher Beliefs and Technology Integration Practices: A Critical Relationship.

Computers & Education, 59(2), 423-435.

Garrett, J. E. (2011). Responding to the Reading Needs of English Language Learners:

Implications for Elementary Teachers and Principals. National Social Science Journal,

36(2), 51-54.

Helman, L., & Burns, M. (n.d). What Does Oral Language Have to Do With It? Helping Young

English-Language Learners Acquire a Sight Word Vocabulary. Reading Teacher, 62(1),

14-19.


Hipsky, S. (2011). Differentiated literacy and language arts strategies for the elementary

classroom. Boston: Pearson.

Korat, O. (2012). Direct and Indirect Teaching: Using E-Books for Supporting Vocabulary,

Word Reading, and Story Comprehension for Young Children. Journal Of Educational

Computing Research, 46(1), 135-152.

Korat, O., & Shamir, A. (2007). Electronic books versus adult readers: effects on children's

emergent literacy as a function of social class. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning,

23(3), 248-259.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2013). Limelight on Mobile Learning. Harvard International Review,

34(4), 12-16.

Lindsey-Glenn, P. F., & Gentry, J. E. (2008). Improving Vocabulary Skills through Assistive

Technology: Rick's Story. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 5(2),

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.(2000). Report of the National

Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific

research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH

Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the

scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Nomass, B. (2013). The Impact of Using Technology in Teaching English as a Second

Language. English Language & Literature Studies, 3(1), 111-116.

Rice, M. L., & Woodsmall, L. (1988). Lessons from television: Children’s word learning when

viewing. Child Development, 59, 420-428.


Silverman, R., & Hines, S. (2009). The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the

vocabulary of English-language learners and non-English-language learners in pre-

kindergarten through second grade. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 305-

314.

Thangarajathi, S., & Joel, T. (2012). Impact of Multimedia in Teaching and Learning. Golden

Research Thoughts, 1(11), 1-4.

Thoermer, A., & Williams, L. (2012). Using Digital Texts to Promote Fluent Reading. Reading

Teacher, 65(7), 441-445.

Uchikoshi, Y. (2006). English vocabulary development in bilingual kindergarteners: What are

the best predictors? Biligualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 33-49.

Wright, S., Fugett, A., & Caputa, F. (2013). Using E-readers and Internet Resources to Support

Comprehension. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 367-379.


APPENDICES

Appendix A: Child Assent Form in English and Spanish

Child Assent Form

Study Title: Technology to Support Reading in the Classroom with English Language Learners

Researchers: Kelly Wolk

Mimosa Elementary School

[email protected]

770-552-4540

My name is Ms. Wolk and I am inviting you to be in a research study about how using iPads can help you become a better reader.

Your parent knows we are going to ask you to be in this research study, but you get to make the final choice. It is up to you. If you decide to be in the study, we will ask you to use the iPad apps that I choose for you during Daily 5 reading time 3-5 times per week. I will test your fluency, sight word knowledge, and guided reading level before the study begins and when the study has ended.

If you take part in this study, you might learn how to use technology to help you become a better reader. You also might learn more sight words and improve your fluency.

I don’t think anything bad would happen to you if you decide to take part in this study. You will not be set apart from others and embarrassed. I just want to use this research to see if you are able to learn more by using iPads more often.

If anything in the study worries you or makes you uncomfortable, let me know and you can stop.

Everything you say and do will be private. When I tell other people about what I learned in the study, I won’t tell them your name or the name of anyone else who took part in the research study.

You don’t have to be in this study. It is up to you. You can say no now or you can change your mind later. No one will be upset if you change your mind.

mailto:[email protected]


You can ask me questions at any time and you can talk to your parent any time you want. I will give you a copy of this form that you can keep.

Do you have any questions now that I can answer for you?

IF YOU WANT TO BE IN THE STUDY, SIGN OR PRINT YOUR NAME ON THE LINE BELOW:

_______________________________________ __________________

Child name and signature Date

Check which of the following applies

Child is capable of reading and understanding the assent form and has signed above as documentation of assent to take part in this study.

Child is not capable of reading the assent form, but the information was verbally explained to him/her. The child signed above as documentation of assent to take part in this study.

____________________________________________________________________

Name of parent who gave consent for child to participate

_______________________________________ __________________

Signature of person obtaining assent Date

Appendix B: Signed Consent Form English and Spanish


SIGNED CONSENT FORM

Title of Research Study: Technology to Support Reading in the Classroom with English Language Learners

Researcher's Contact Information: Kelly WolkMimosa Elementary [email protected]

Introduction

Your child is being invited to take part in a research study conducted by Kelly Wolk of Kennesaw State University. Before you decide if you want your child to participate in this study, you should read this form and ask questions about anything that you do not understand.

Description of Project

The purpose of the study is to find if there is a correlation between the use of technology and growth in reading fluency, sight word knowledge, and overall reading scores for English Language Learners.

Explanation of Procedures

All components of this study will take place in the classroom and will require no extra time or commitment from the student or guardian. The study group of students will have an opportunity to use iPads for 20 minutes during our reading time three to five days of the week. The students will be using read aloud texts and interactive reading games to assist in their reading growth. This study will start in January and track student progress over four weeks without the use of technology, and will then track their progress over another four weeks with the use of the iPads.

Risks or Discomforts

There are no known risks associated in this study for you or your child.

Benefits

I hope that your student will benefit from the use of technology throughout this study. I hope that the technology will help your child grow in reading fluency, sight word knowledge, and overall reading scores. I hope your student will acquire more vocabulary in the English language which will assist in their reading ability. As your student takes place in this study, I will be able to learn more about the affects technology can have on reading growth.

mailto:[email protected]


Confidentiality

The results of this participation will be anonymous. I will assign your child a number that will be used in place of their name. All results and data used to find the outcome of this study will use your child’s study number.

Inclusion Criteria for Participation

All of the participants in this study are between the ages of 6-8. The students will need consent from you, their guardian, in order to participate in this research.

Signed Consent

I agree and give my consent for my minor to participate in this research project. I understand that participation is voluntary and that I may withdraw my consent at any time without penalty.

__________________________________________________Signature of Participant or Authorized Representative, Date

___________________________________________________Signature of Investigator, Date

____________________________________________________________________________________

PLEASE SIGN BOTH COPIES OF THIS FORM, KEEP ONE AND RETURN THE OTHER TO THE INVESTIGATOR

Research at Kennesaw State University that involves human participants is carried out under the oversight of an Institutional Review Board. Questions or problems regarding these activities should be addressed to the Institutional Review Board, Kennesaw State University, 1000 Chastain Road, #0112, Kennesaw, GA 30144-5591, (678) 797-2268.

Formulario de consentimiento firmado


Título del Estudio de Investigación: Tecnología de Apoyo a la lectura en el aula con los estudiantes que aprenden inglés

Información de contacto del investigador: Kelly Wolk

Introducción

Se invita a su hijo a participar en un estudio de investigación realizado por Kelly Wolk, de la Universidad Estatal de Kennesaw. Antes de decidir si desea que su hijo participe en este estudio, usted debe leer esta forma y hacer preguntas sobre cualquier cosa que no entienda.

Descripción del proyecto

El objetivo del estudio es conocer si existe una correlación entre el uso de la tecnología y el crecimiento en la lectura, aprendizaje de las palabras y calificaciones de lectura para los estudiantes Inglés como un segundo idioma.

Explicación de los Procedimientos

Todos los componentes de este estudio se llevará a cabo en el salon y no requerirán más tiempo o compromiso por parte del estudiante o los padres. El grupo de estudio de los estudiantes tendrán la oportunidad de usar iPads durante 20 minutos durante nuestro tiempo de lectura tres a cinco días de la semana. Los estudiantes utilizarán libros que leen en voz alta los textos de lectura y juegos interactivos para ayudar en su crecimiento lectura. Este estudio se iniciará en Enero y seguira del progreso del estudiante durante cuatro semanas sin el uso de la tecnología, y luego un seguimiento de su progreso durante otras cuatro semanas con el uso de las iPads.

Riesgos o molestias

No existen riesgos conocidos asociados en este estudio para que usted o su hijo.

Beneficios

Espero que su hijo se beneficiará del uso de la tecnología a lo largo de este estudio. Espero que la tecnología ayudará a su niño a crecer en la lectura, fluidez en leer palabraws, y en general las calificaciones de lectura. Espero que su alumno adquirirá más vocabulario en el idioma Inglés que ayudará a su capacidad de lectura. A medida que el estudiante lleva a cabo en este estudio, voy a ser capaz de aprender más acerca de los afectos tecnología puede tener en la lectura de crecimiento.

Confidencialidad

Los resultados de esta participación serán anónimos. Voy a asignar a su hijo un número que se utiliza en lugar de su nombre. Todos los resultados y los datos utilizados para encontrar el


resultado de este estudio se utilice el número de estudios de su hijo.

Los criterios de inclusión para la participación

Todos los participantes en este estudio son entre las edades de 6-8. Los estudiantes necesitarán el consentimiento de usted, su guardian, con el fin de participar en esta investigación.

Consentimiento firmado

Estoy de acuerdo y doy mi consentimiento para que mi menor para participar en este proyecto de investigación. Entiendo que la participación es voluntaria y que puedo retirar mi consentimiento en cualquier momento sin penalización.

__________________________________________________Firma del participante o representante autorizado Fecha

___________________________________________________Firma del Investigador Fecha

____________________________________________________________________________

Por favor firme ambas copias de este formulario, UNO Y DEVUELVA EL OTRO PARA EL INVESTIGADOR

La investigación en la Universidad Estatal de Kennesaw que involucra participantes humanos se lleva a cabo bajo la supervisión de una Junta de Revisión Institucional. Las preguntas o problemas relacionados con estas actividades deben dirigirse a la Junta de Revisión Institucional de la Universidad Estatal de Kennesaw, 1000 Chastain Road, # 0112, Kennesaw, GA 30144 a 5591, (678) 797 a 2268.

Appendix C: Fluency Pre/Post Test


Appendix D: Sight Word Pre/Post Test




Documents

kellywolkksu.weebly.com€¦ · Web viewTeachers are turning to technology for extra support, differentiation, and to gain student interest. Schools are beginning to add more computers