1. The Effects of Classroom Seating Arrangement On On-Task Behavior and Academic Performance An Action Research Project By Danielle Steger EDUC 702.22 Spring 2010

2. Table of Contents Research Design Research Design Threats to Internal Validity Threats to Internal Validity Threats to External Validity Threats to External Validity Proposed Data Proposed Data Proposed Data Analysis Proposed Data Analysis Proposed Data Proposed Data Proposed Data Analysis Proposed Data Analysis References References

3. Research Design Quasi Experimental: Nonequivalent Control Group Design. Quasi Experimental: Nonequivalent Control Group Design. Two groups: Designated treatment group (X1) and control group (X2) are pretested, exposed to a treatment (X), and posttested (O). Two groups: Designated treatment group (X1) and control group (X2) are pretested, exposed to a treatment (X), and posttested (O). Symbolic Design: Symbolic Design: O X1 O O X1 O O X2 O O X2 O

4. Threats to Internal Validity History – Student lateness, illness, absences, weather conditions, behavioral outbursts, other disturbances (i.e. phone calls, announcements). History – Student lateness, illness, absences, weather conditions, behavioral outbursts, other disturbances (i.e. phone calls, announcements). Maturation – Increased focus due to age and maturity. Maturation – Increased focus due to age and maturity. Testing – Test format does not vary, familiarity could improve scores. Testing – Test format does not vary, familiarity could improve scores. Instrumentation – Researcher created student surveys presented by two different teachers. Instrumentation – Researcher created student surveys presented by two different teachers. Selection – Two groups of students. Selection – Two groups of students. Mortality – Student dropouts and transfers. Mortality – Student dropouts and transfers. Selection-Maturation Interaction - Students vary in age and gender. Selection-Maturation Interaction - Students vary in age and gender.

5. Threats to External Validity Ecological Validity – Personal issues. Ecological Validity – Personal issues. Generalizable Conditions – Teaching style, or learning style. Generalizable Conditions – Teaching style, or learning style. Pre-Test Treatment - P re-testing prior to the treatment may affect test scores. Pre-Test Treatment - P re-testing prior to the treatment may affect test scores. Selection-Treatment Interaction – Participants were not randomly selected from the population. Selection-Treatment Interaction – Participants were not randomly selected from the population. Specificity of Variables - Both teachers will use a scripted math program but teaching styles may vary. Specificity of Variables - Both teachers will use a scripted math program but teaching styles may vary. Multiple Treatments - Seating model over time could reduce effectiveness Multiple Treatments - Seating model over time could reduce effectiveness

6. Pretest and Posttest Two Classes. Two Classes. Six enVision Math Unit Tests: Six enVision Math Unit Tests: Three Unit Tests prior to Class A seating change. Three Unit Tests prior to Class A seating change. Three Unit Tests during Class A seating change. Three Unit Tests during Class A seating change.

7. Proposed Data of Pretest and Posttest Prior to Seating Change During Seating Change Class A Class B Unit 9 Test 80%83% Unit 10 Test 80%81% Unit 11 Test 90%91% Class A Class B Unit 12 Test 83%80% Unit 13 Test 81%79% Unit 14 Test 75%72%

8. Correlation Correlation between the students who feel distracted in cluster grouping and test scores. Survey Question 7: I get distracted by the people near me during math class. No correlation was found between students feeling distracted during math class and low test scores prior to the seating change. * Low positive correlation of 0.42

9. Proposed Data Analysis The bar graph comparing Class A and Class B prior to the seating change shows that Class B outperforms class A when both rooms are arranged with cluster seating. The bar graph comparing Class A and Class B prior to the seating change shows that Class B outperforms class A when both rooms are arranged with cluster seating. The bar graph comparing Class A and Class B during Class A’s seating change shows that Class A outperforms class B. The bar graph comparing Class A and Class B during Class A’s seating change shows that Class A outperforms class B. There is no correlation between a student feeling distracted due to cluster seating and academic performance. There is no correlation between a student feeling distracted due to cluster seating and academic performance.Conclusion: Regardless of how a student perceives his/her ability to concentrate, sitting in paired columns increases math test scores which is likely attributed to a greater ability to focus.

10. References O’Connor – Petruso, S.,(2008) Stat.scales.analyses.threats.design.ppt.