NORMA WILT WILMINGTON UNIVERSITY The Connection Between Writing and Reading Comprehension

Need for Study Inconsistent AR and other reading comprehension test scores, show that lack of comprehension is a common problem Reading comprehension is the principal reading problem, not the mechanics of learning to read Without comprehension there is no joy in reading and no motivation to read (Colucci, 2011)

Review of Literature Tierney & Shanahan (1991): “Writing helps children become better readers and comprehenders of text” Deford (1994): “The cognitive processes used in reading are identical to those involved in writing” Carr, Langer & Applebee (1997): “The act of writing, whether in short sentences or long paragraphs, helps students make connections between what they read, what they understand and what they think” Nagin & National Writing Project (2003): Numerous educators exclude writing because they feel it is the domain of the language arts, while others see writing as non-beneficial time

Research Question Which of the following writing activities will produce the highest level of reading comprehension in a second grade gifted class: summarizing, questioning or text-connections?

My initial theory was that all three writing activities, individually, would show higher levels of reading comprehension as research shows that writing is not limited for use by Language Arts teachers but is a useful tool for critical thinking as it leads students to the highest level of Bloom’s taxonomy, evaluation My hypothesis was that summarizing would produce the highest level of reading comprehension in a second grade gifted class Quantitative Research Methodology

Action Research Model Source: Adapted from Mertler, Plan: Study the connection between writing and reading comprehension Act: Collected professional peer review journals Develop: Reviewed literature and narrowed in on research question Reflect: Shared ideas with classmates and received feedback Plan: Developed a quantitative research plan Act: Carried out research plan Develop: Analyzed data to determine if it supported hypothesis and developed conclusions Reflect: Reflected on problems with study Plan: Action Plan – Continued the cycle Stage 2: Acting Stage 3: Developing Stage 1: Planning Stage 4: Reflecting Stage 2: Acting Stage 3: Developing Stage 1: Planning Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Stage 4: Reflecting

Note:  T = Treatment Condition  O = Observation or other type of measure  EXP = Experimental Group Group Time EXPOTO Research Design Source: Adapted from Mertler, Single Group Pretest-Posttest Design STAR Reading for pretest-posttest Accelerated Reader programs to progress monitor students’ reading scores in comparison to their reading with writing scores.

Sample Study Sample My class consisted of twenty three students, thirteen girls and ten boys. Sixteen students (70%) are Caucasian, five (22%) are Asian and two (8%) are African American Gifted and talented students in a full day self contained gifted program Limitations

Instruments STAR Reading Program Accelerated Reader Program Limitations  Estimates of a student’s true ability level  Scores were not absolute or exact measures of performance Reading/Writing Log

Data Collection Procedures Students read two AR books each week for six weeks Each week students:  Read one AR book and took an assessment  Read one AR book, completed a writing activity and took an assessment All data was collected in the reading/writing journal

Feasibility of Study Approval from school principal was granted Librarian worked with my students to make sure they had two AR books a week and that the books were within their range The IT technician made sure my students were in the system and that the AR systems were functional

Responsiveness of Design Adjust the AR books to create a gap until the lack of variability is removed and a positive or negative correlation can be seen.  For example: If all of the students score very high or very low I can adjust the AR level to create the gap to see a correlation that is neither perfect positive or perfect negative. I look forward to analyzing the data from this research study to help students use writing as a strategy to improve reading comprehension.

Results and Findings

Table 1 Comparison of Student’s Weekly AR Scores With and Without Writing Intervention Week – Read/Writing AssignmentMeanStandard DeviationP-Value 1- Read OnlyPretest Read/SummaryPost-test Read OnlyPretest Read/ConnectionPost-test Read OnlyPretest Read/QuestionPost-test Read OnlyPretest Read/SummaryPost-test Read OnlyPretest Read/ConnectionPost-test Read OnlyPretest Read/QuestionPost-test Note: Significant at p<= 0.05

Discussion This lack of change I attribute to students reading comprehension skills improving to the point where the writing didn’t show and improvement over read only. Had I moved their book level up for the second round of testing I could have possibly created a wider gap between pretest post test scores but did not do this as I didn’t think it would be a valid comparison if reading levels changed.

Conclusion This action research study has allowed me to look closely and gain knowledge about the AR program we use to assess student comprehension. This has become increasingly important as AR is tied in with the Common Core State Standards by which our student are being assessed. Based on my findings I will continue to use writing to improve reading comprehension as I believe that although the gains were not statistically significant, summarizing and connecting to text did show small gains over a short time period.

Conclusion I plan on sharing this research with my colleagues and continue research of these and other writing activities that we use during Literature Circles. My hope is that this is going to help me help students become better comprehenders of text which will ultimately bring joy in reading and a motivation to read more.