Actionresearchfinaldraft

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.
TONE READING STRATEGY
Of Primary Concern: The Impact of the S.O.A.P.S.Tone Reading Strategy on 9th Graders
Understanding Primary Source History Documents.
Dane L.Hilmer
May 1st, 2015
An Action Research Masters Thesis

presented in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Teaching
School of Education
College of Education and Leadership
Cardinal Stritch University
Milwaukee, WI
2015
Dedication and Acknowledgments
OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY
I would like to thank Chris McBride for executing my vision, my parents who have
always supported my education and aspirations, my wife, Ann Marie, who embodies
characteristics I strive to obtain daily, and my friends who keep me sane when things happen,
like life.
Abstract
Primary source document use in social studies classrooms is becoming trend most teachers cant
ignore. But is there a tool out there that allows for easier comprehension of these documents? In
an examination of two groups of freshman level readers, a teacher and researcher implemented a
study assessing reading comprehension of primary source documents after being exposed to the
S.O.A.P.S.Tone (Speaker, Occasion, Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone) reading strategy. The
researcher asks: What is the effectiveness of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy on ninth grade high
school students comprehension when analyzing primary source texts? The metacognitive
questioning strategy was used to see if a treatment classroom receiving the intervention made
more significant gains than the control group who did not receive the treatment in a quantitative
group comparison. Even though the data showed that both classrooms saw improvement,
S.O.A.P.S.Tone statistically was not a successful intervention strategy to find significant
improvement in reading comprehension of primary source documents. The results reflected that
the exposure of primary source documents allowed for improved comprehension scores with
difficult texts, however, the S.O.A.P.S.Tone graphic organizer and reading process did not help
develop gains in comprehension that were made in the control classroom.
Keywords: Reading Comprehension, S.O.A.P.S.Tone, Primary Sources, Metacognition
Table of Contents
Page
Dedication and Acknowledgments
Abstract
Table of Contents
List of Tables and Figures
5-6
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Introduction
Background of Study
Overview of the Study and Timeline
Summary Conclusion
Definitions
7-9
9-10
10-12
12
13
CHAPTER TWO: Literature Review

Introduction that explains the organization of the review
Literature Review
Summary Conclusion
13-14
14-26
26-27
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

Introduction that summarize the action research study
Description of Site and Sample
Description of Procedure
Description of Data Collection and Assessment Instruments
Summary of Methodology
27
28
28-33
33-34
34-35
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS

Introduction
Presentation and Summary of Data
Summary Conclusion of Results
35
35-38
38-39
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

Introduction and Overview of Results
Explanation of Results
Discussion of the Connections between the Literature Review
and Results
Strengths and Limitations of the Study
Recommendations for Future Research
Conclusion: Implications for Personal Practice
39-40
40-42
42
42-44
44-46
46-47
Lists of Tables
Number
Page
Table 1: Timeline of Action Research Procedure
29-30
Table 2: S.O.A.P.S.Tone Questions
30
Table 3: Pretest and Posttest Statistics on the S.O.A.P.S.Tone Reading Strategy
37
Table 4: Pretest and Posttest Outcomes for DBQ Assessments
38
List of Figures
Number
Page
Figure 1.1: Introduction to Document Questioning in Classroom A
31
Figure 1.2: Introduction and Examples of Point of View/Bias
32
Figure 2: DBQ Assessments: Central Tendencies
36
Figure 3: Well Developed Posttest Response
40
Chapter 1: Introduction
Introduction
As a history major at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee I took a number of history
classes that were insightful, yet, one gave me a skill set that I am forever grateful having learned.
The class was A History of Greek Civilization: The Age of Alexander the Great. My professor,
Mrs. Beall, not only had us examining ancient primary and secondary sources like Quintus
Curtius Rufus The History of Alexander and Plutarchs Parallel Lives, additionally, she
randomly called on anyone in class for interpretation and refused to move on until that specific
person answered her question correctly. Suffice it to say, I made sure I was prepared for any
questions on the readings for each and every class. When starting her class I had no formal
training on how to analyze a first century Roman authors point of view or how to detect the tone
coming from a first century Greek historians descriptions. I would literally just reread the text
over and over until I got a semblance of an idea on how to discern what the author meant.
According to Malkmus (2010), [university] faculty unequivocally consider primary sources an
essential part of teaching history. [However], faculty concurred that students tend to take
documents at face value. ...They have a tendency to think of history only as a narrative, not as
something they have to piece together, not as something that is tentative (p. 420). Malkmus
research was intended to discuss a collegiate understanding of primary source document use, but
if students are still taking documents at face value in college, how can high school educators
guide students to acquire historical understanding skills? It wasnt until I became a teacher that I
discovered a reading strategy that couldve helped speed the development of my analytical skill
set when it came to reading primary source documents.
The reading strategy I am referring to is called S.O.A.P.S.Tone (Speaker, Occasion,
Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone). S.O.A.P.S.Tone is an acronym for a series of questions
that readers must ask themselves when reading primary source documents. These series of
questions are formatted in the form of a graphic organizer (see Appendix A) to give the reader a
comfortable device to work with. The questioning process also provides the reader a framework
to annotate, further question, and analyze any given text. Its goal is to get students comfortable
with metacognitive practices when reading any difficult text. I first came across this strategy
when observing an Advanced Placement U.S. History class. During my observations I noticed
the progression of insight in the students comments when working with primary texts as the
weeks went on. Advanced Placement courses do things at a pace to prepare students for college
courses, however, when I teach my regular World History courses I too create learning objectives
that focus on acquiring skills for future academic need. It made me think, Would
S.O.A.P.S.Tone be an effective tool to use with my ninth grade students? I regularly incorporate
primary sources into unit plans, but there is consistently a range of comprehension. For example,
I had my students do a think pair share reading excerpts from King Leopolds Ghost by Adam
Hochschild (1998). I know the lesson gave some students an idea of the atrocities of imperialism,
but would they more students have benefited from and comprehended the text easier if I had
incorporated S.O.A.P.S.Tone?
Saldana (2008) contends S.O.A.P.S.Tone is, one of the best known and common devices
for analyzing documents Students and teachers both like this device because there is a high
level of familiarity because most students have used a version of this tool to analyze a poem,
sermon, or other work in an English class (p. 25). By incorporating this strategy I hope to give
my students a new skill and process that will improve their reading comprehension for any class
in the future high school or college.
Background of the Study
Social Studies and history classrooms are seen, justifiably, as information-laden textbook
heavy courses. Dull and Garderen (2005) assert, efforts to make U.S. textbooks more
objective and to prepare children for high-stakes tests have robbed many books of the elements
that make [historical] stories interesting: different perspectives and opinions, mystery and
intrigue, and characters to which readers can relate (p. 28). As a reader of history, it is the
intriguing storylines, the enthralling characters, and the juxtaposition of perspectives that capture
my interest on a daily basis. As an educator of history, I make it my duty to teach beyond
textbooks to obtain interest and aid in content comprehension for my students. Powerful learning
occurs when social studies activities elicit motivation for inquiry and research. Skilled reading is
fundamental to those higher learning processes (Fordham et al., 2002, p. 149). I believe high
school social studies teachers are just as much teachers of reading and writing as they are
teachers of content. Readings in social studies can embrace various forms of text. These texts
will provide students with multiple perspectives and offer students the opportunity to capitalize
on developing historical understanding skills (Massey & Heafner, 2004, p. 28). However,
students routinely lack the reading skills necessary to gain insights from the past, and engage in
critical thinking (Graves & Avery, 1997, p. 134). It is for these reasons I incorporate the use of
primary and secondary source documents like excerpts from King Leopolds Ghost. It is for these
reasons I feel the need to find a proper strategy that will promote significant gains in reading,
higher-order thinking, and content comprehension.
As I have previously mentioned, Saldana (2008) contends S.O.A.P.S.Tone is, one of the
best known and common devices for analyzing documents (p. 25). S.O.A.P.S.Tone utilizes a
graphic organizer to identify the type of text, organize facts into patterns and interpret those
facts; all facets Massey and Heafner (2004) deem necessary for comprehending challenging
social studies reading (pgs. 32-33). S.O.A.P.S.Tones further use of annotating, questioning and
analyzing lead me to believe its implementation when incorporating primary source texts in the
classroom will show significant gains in the students test scores and learning objectives. My
10
action research correlates with three main learning objectives both governing bodies and I
deemed necessary for my students: (1) Common Core English Language Arts Standards for
Grade 9: Determine an authors point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how an author
uses rhetoric to advance that point of view or purpose (Common Core, 2014); (2) Wisconsin
State Social Studies Standard: B.12.1 Explain different points of view on the same historical
event, using data gathered from various sources, such as letters, journals, diaries, newspapers,
government documents, and speeches (Wisconsin Department, 2014); (3) Wisconsin State Social
Studies Standard: B.12.2 Analyze primary and secondary sources related to a historical question
to evaluate their relevance, make comparisons, integrate new information with prior knowledge,
and come to a reasoned conclusion (Wisconsin Department, 2014). Since college instructors
expect their students to be able to read and interpret the documents (Saldana, 2008, p.2); I will
attempt to give my students the proper tool and process to accomplish this task.
Overview of the Study and Timeline
The purpose of this action research was to study the effects of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading
strategy on high school freshmans comprehension of primary source documents in a world
history classroom. The researchers question was What is the effectiveness of S.O.A.P.S.Tone
reading strategy on ninth grade high school students comprehension when analyzing primary
source texts? The S.O.A.P.S.Tone intervention as explained before is a graphic organizer that
asks students a series of questions when reading a text.
The goal was to determine if adding the S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy, the independent
variable, would increase students reading comprehension while reading primary source
documents. The researcher implemented a quantitative research methodology that consisted of a
pretest and posttest and incorporated two world history classrooms in a group comparison. One
11
world history classroom (Classroom B) received the S.O.A.P.S.Tone intervention and the other
world history classroom (Classroom A) did not receive the intervention. These tests were used to
assess the students level of reading content knowledge, the dependent variable, through the use
of a document-based question (DBQ) before and after the intervention. Furthermore, as a part of
the districts social studies department student learning objectives (SLO) agenda, this data was
acquired with an emphasis of determining students understanding of point of view and bias.
Mercado & Young (2007) from College Board contend, Without a doubt, the analysis of point
of view (POV), or bias, is the most frequently missed basic core point by students on the DBQ,
and it is also the hardest concept for students to master. Understanding POV and bias requires a
certain amount of knowledge about the context of the source and/or time period. As with any
skill, students need a lot of practice to be able to analyze POV/bias properly (p.23). First,
students were pre-assessed evaluating a primary source from Niccolo Machiavelli The Prince
and a secondary source describing Machiavelli called Inventor of Political Science (see
Appendix B). This pretest was a teacher-made DBQ (DBQ 1) derived from Dennis Shermans
(2006) book, Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations. Secondly, over the
period of six weeks, the teacher integrated a lesson once a week that incorporated primary source
documents. Each lesson would be the same for both world history classrooms, however, there
was one distinct difference, the S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy. The classroom (Classroom B)
receiving the intervention was introduced, taught, and modeled how to use the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
graphic organizer. For all six lessons, S.O.A.P.S.Tone was a tool only used for the treatment
group. Lastly, students were assessed with a posttest using primary source documents from The
National Convention (see Appendix C). The post-test assessment was a teacher-made DBQ
12
(DBQ 2) assessment derived from College Boards 2008 Advance Placement Exam. Each
classroom would receive the same assessments and scored with the same rubric (Appendix D).
After the data was scored and recorded, descriptive and inferential statistics including ttests were used to analyze the data. The data was given a group comparison to find if the p-value
was significant at p<0.05.
Summary Conclusion
Teaching social studies provides teachers a powerful opportunity to teach more than just
content knowledge. Such an opportunity allows teachers to teach reading comprehension, critical
thinking, skill acquisition, and a number of other imperative attributes necessary for future
success. The intention of my study was to get definitive data involving an educational tool that
allows students to comprehend reading, critically think, and metacognitively question how they
think. Throught the use of S.O.A.P.S.Tone the hope was to find significant progress in these
learning traits.
Definitions
Document Based Question (DBQ): A question that requires a student to answer a
prompt followed by a short historical background paragraph, which puts the prompt into context.
The historical background paragraph is followed by anywhere from five to ten documents, with a
typical limit of approximately 1200 words of total text. These documents can be primary or
secondary sources, which may include diary entries, letter, sermons, graphs, charts, pictures, etc.
(Saldana, 2008).
Historical Understanding Skills: The ability to evaluate, analyze, and synthesize
historical evidence surrounding problems or issues that have no right or wrong answers (Massey
& Heafner, 2004, p. 28).
13
SOAPSTone: (Speaker, Occasion, Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone) is an acronym

for a series of questions that a student must first ask themselves, and then answer (Morse, 2014).
Student Learning Objectives (SLO): is a participatory method of setting measurable
goals, or objectives, based on the specific assignment or class, such as the students taught, the
subject matter taught, the baseline performance of the students, and the measurable gain in
student performance during the course of instruction (Race to the Top Technical Assistance
Network, 2010, 1).
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Introduction
The purpose of this action research was to study the effects of S.O.A.P.S.Tone (Speaker,
Occasion, Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone) reading strategy on high school freshmans
comprehension of primary source documents in a world history classroom. The researchers
question was: What is the effectiveness of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy on ninth grade high
school students comprehension when analyzing primary source texts? The research was
designed as a quantitative group comparison. The group comparison was between two ninth
grade world history classrooms; one classroom (Classroom B) acting as the treatment group
receiving the S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy and one classroom (Classroom A) acting as the
control group receiving no reading strategy. The independent variable was a reading intervention
strategy called S.O.A.P.S.Tone (see Appendix A). S.O.A.P.S.Tone is a graphic organizer that asks
students a series of questions when reading a text. SOAPSTone (Speaker, Occasion, Audience,
Purpose, Subject and Tone) is an acronym for a series of questions that a student must first ask
themselves, and then answer when analyzing documents (Morse, 2014). The dependent
variables were a pretest and posttest assessing the reading comprehension of primary source
14
documents. The assessments were identical for each classroom and were scored by teacher-made
rubrics. The research was conducted over a six week time period.
The literature reviewed for this research was divided into two main categories: (1)
Teaching Literacy Skills in Social Studies Classrooms, and (2) Primary Source Use and HigherOrder Thinking in Social Studies Classrooms.
Teaching Literacy Skills in Social Studies Classrooms
The first category of literature used for this study includes articles that discuss teaching
literacy skills and implementing literacy strategies in social studies classrooms. This specific
section discusses Common Core State Standards, what teachers may have learned in their preservice university programs about literacy, how teachers implement different methodologies for
literacy strategies, and application of best practices of literacy skills in the classroom. These
studies displayed persuasive arguments for utilizing literacy skills in the social studies classroom.
The first study by Gilles, Wang, Smith, and Johnson (2013) investigated the difficulties
and strategies of implementing Common Core State Standards (CCSS) literacy skills in social
studies classrooms (p. 34). Gilles et al. (2013) created a professional development experience
that probed three middle school teachers for their methodologies when employing literacy skills
in their disciplines (p. 36). Furthermore, they looked at the the strategies each teacher used to
read and support meaning in their disciplines text. These three teachers each taught in different
school settings (rural, suburban, urban) and subsequently different size classrooms. The
researchers asked the question: What strategies do these teachers use when reading text in their
disciplines and how might those strategies be employed to students? The researchers used a
qualitative method, collecting and analyzing a multitude of data (field notes, student work
samples, student/teacher interviews). The three teachers were observed in their classrooms
15
regularly throughout the year with field notes and had to write up self reports. Student work
samples were collected regularly. Both student and teacher interviews were done during and at
the end of the year. All of this data was analyzed during an end of the year professional
development experience with the researchers. The results showed all three teachers self reported
frequent use of questions, made connections between current and historical events, looked for
bias, marked up texts, and had a version of role play. Even though similar strategies were used by
all three teachers, the researchers found in their observations that when it came to literacy
strategies there was no one single way to implement them successfully. Two important themes
emerged from the results: (1) self-knowledge was the first step to their professional development
and (2) teachers connecting to their own reading strategies allowed for authenticity that connect
CCSS and infused literacy strategies that were manageable to grasp for the everyday middle
school student. Student interviews divulged that all of these different methodologies and
strategies allowed them to be successful in different ways.
Another research on teaching literacy skills in social studies classrooms looked at preservice teachers and their use of literacy strategies during their student teaching experience.
Linski and Thieman (2013) looked at the preparation programs for teachers incorporating
literacy into their curriculum. The research questions they ask are: (1) Do secondary social
studies pre-service teachers incorporate literacy strategies in their work samples during student
teaching? (2) To what extent and under what conditions do secondary social studies pre-service
teachers use higher levels of literacy strategies in their work samples (pgs. 63-64)? The
researcher's design used qualitative document analysis, analyzing the social studies student
teachers work samples. When doing the qualitative document analysis, the researchers coded all
the work samples in a constant comparative method. The researchers read the work samples
16
individually and coded literacy strategies. Then they developed a list of literacy terms, literacy
modalities, literacy strategies seen within the work samples, and the Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
for each literacy activity. The DOK ranged from Level 1 (recall) to Level 4 (extended thinking)
coinciding with Blooms taxonomy levels (p. 68). The sample population was sixteen student
teachers that gave 32 work samples to be analyzed. The teachers did their student teaching in
both the winter and spring terms and were in both Student Teaching 1 and Student Teaching 2
courses. Both the researchers and the student teachers came from the same large urban university
in the Pacific Northwest. Each teacher was required to take content area reading courses and
have preservice methods courses that focus on unit planning, lesson design, differentiation, and
literacy strategies. Most importantly, they took a second social studies methods course that
emphasized discipline-based reading strategies, interpreting primary source documents, and
applying historical investigation. 11 of the 16 classrooms were in high poverty schools with
ethnic and linguistic diversity. The researcher's analysis indicated that the level of literacy
strategies varied based on ethnic diversity and poverty level of their students. Most teachers used
higher level literacy strategies in their Student Teaching 2 work sample. The researchers noticed
that the pre-service teachers embedded literacy strategies in their work samples much more
authentically than what was taught to them in class. The theme of authenticity when embedding
literacy strategies is seen throughout these studies.
A third study focused on the implementation of Content Enhancement Routines (CER)
for content literacy in secondary social studies classrooms. Little and Hahs-Vaughn (2007)
examined social studies teachers perceptions, knowledge, and implementation of CERs during a
large scale implementation within inclusive secondary classrooms. CERs, are instructional
methods that rely on using powerful teaching devices to organize and explicitly present
17
curriculum content using a standard set of instructional procedures that have been validated
through intensive classroom research (p. 264). The three research questions were: (1) Are there
average differences in teachers knowledge and perceptions of CER for teachers identified as
implementing versus not implementing CER? (2) Are there average differences in American
history performance in classroom where the teacher attended all CER professional development
as compared to classrooms where the teacher did not attend all CER professional development?
(3) What is the relationship between student characteristics and students gain reading
performance and how is the relationship mediated by the nature of being nested within
classrooms where teachers were trained in CER (p. 263)? Little and Hahs-Vaughn (2007) used a
descriptive qualitative study to examine this specific districts CERs that were designed to
increase student achievement by implementing better literacy skills and social studies content
knowledge routines. The study was done at a large school district in south Florida with 163
schools. The sample was approximately 177,000 students and 11,600 teachers. An average of 8%
of the students in social studies classrooms were identified with learning disabilities. At the time,
the school district was in the process of including students with disabilities into general
education classrooms with the goal of having 75% of these students with access to general
education curriculum over the next few years. Data was collected in different manners for three
main research question areas of research: (1) teachers were given 3 questionnaires: CER
Questionnaire, Level of Implementation Questionnaire, and an assessment of their knowledge of
the CER. Furthermore, they were observed by an administrator using an Observation Checklist.
Teacher data was collected from 61 teachers who attended all CER training. (2) Data was
collected from students using a 50 multiple choice question American History exam to assess
student performance. (3) For the third research question, the Florida Comprehensive Assessment
18
Test (FCAT) was used to measure reading performance of students. It is a standardized test
comprised of criterion-referenced and norm-referenced tests. The data collected was from 566
students who were instructed by CER trained teachers. A significant mean difference (p<0.05)
was seen between implementers and non-implementers on belief in CER, application of CER,
and implementation of CER. There were no statistically significant mean differences in percent
correct on the American history exams for the classes instructed by teachers who attended all
CER training compared to teachers who did not. When assessing the FCAT, although the average
student reading gain per teacher was 51.15, there was no significant p-value (p<.001). The
research supports that teachers should teach strategies as they teach content. Furthermore, the
research supports the need for instructional framework and can be implemented with accuracy.
Overall, teachers who are trained in instructional methods have a greater possibility of improved
student performance because of those methods. For this reason, I considered a pedagogical
routine in implementing primary sources for each lesson.
The final study in this group discusses the use an immersion model of professional
development on a school staff to incorporate literacy in teacher lesson planning. Socol (2006)
examined a staffs professional development of literacy learning. The researcher argued
educators must be given the opportunity to experience an immersion of literacy strategies first
hand through modeling, discussion, and implementation to be successful at incorporating literacy
instruction in their classrooms. The study was designed using a qualitative study to find out: (1)
In what ways does professional development using an immersion model change teachers
understanding of literacy concepts?; (2) What are the key factors that support or inhibit changes
in the teachers literacy instruction? The site of the study was a large intermediate school with
730 fourth and fifth grade students in a suburban district. The median family income was
19
$33,000 with 20% of students qualifying for free/reduced lunch. 14 members of the staff
participated in the study. Their experience ranged from 3 years to 31 years of teaching
experience. The researcher used descriptive data from a number of sources: Open coding, a
qualitative data analysis software package, as well as identify and triangulate emerging themes
from the literacy group. Specifically the data that was collected, analyzed, and coded in the
following ways: (1) The Big Ideas charted at each meeting were analyzed, displayed and
disseminated for the teachers, (2) Follow-up charts of teacher responses were created and
dispersed to teachers, (3) Teacher lesson plans were analyzed for literacy concepts in the plans,
(4) Field Notes were made for informal conversations about implementation and made for
evidence of implementation during classroom visits, (5) Three focus group interviews were also
conducted about the study experience. The researchers procedure had the teachers immersed in
professional development for an entire school year. They began a sequence of reading
assignments and weekly meetings that started in August and ended in March. The professional
development was designed using Routmans literature conversations in which the teachers had to
read assigned chapters, and then meet to discuss the readings and implementation of the
concepts. During this time teachers read Conversations (Routman, 2000), Mosaic of Thought
(Keene & Zimmerman, 1997) and In the Middle (Atwell, 2000). For each weekly reading
assignment the teachers had to select two Big Ideas. These Big Ideas were ideas that held the
most interest or were most intriguing for each individual teacher and would help initiate
conversation during the meetings. After each meeting, teachers were then encouraged to use a
newly learned strategy or concept in their instruction. The results were promising. Socol (2006)
found immersion worked for many teachers at the school (p. 205). Teachers felt they could
model reading programs for their classrooms based on the professional development structure.
20
Teachers also came to the understanding that they needed to meet student needs by reading,
discussing, modeling strategies, and giving explicit instruction with comprehension strategies.
Although six of the teachers expressed hesitation due to lack of confidence, open dialogue with
their colleagues helped creating practical application in developing their literacy practice. Two
main factors were also found to incite change in their instruction. The first factor that provoked
change in their instruction was immersion. With immersion teachers were asked to read, select
Big Ideas, watch modeling of the process and talk with their colleagues. This gave a blueprint
to the teachers for what to do in their own classrooms. The second factor was approximation,
where teachers took the findings from their meetings and tried the new concepts out in their
classrooms.
Primary Source Use and Higher-Order Thinking in Social Studies Classrooms
The second category of literature contains articles that discuss the use of primary sources
and how to incorporate them in social studies classrooms. Within it I will discusses the
perception, the reasons for use, the skills sought, and the methodologies considered for use of
primary sources in social studies classrooms. These studies give a number of reasons for
authentic use of primary sources in social studies classrooms to build higher-order thinking skills
in students today.
Drinnon (2005) investigated the perception of using primary source documents in the
classroom. In doing so he tried to answer six research questions to help formulate a
conclusion on peoples attitudes towards document use: 1. What is the demographic nature of the
respondents in this study? 2. Are there associations among gender, level of education, amount of
time spent in the profession, the level of students taught, the type of degree or teacher
certification, and the perceptions of the participants in the value of using primary source
21
documents? 3. Are there associations among these demographic factors and the reported amount
of time spent using primary source documents in the classroom? 4. Are there associations
between the perceived amount of time spent in using primary sources in the classroom and the
respondents perceived experience or training? 5. Is there a relationship between the respondents
comfort in using technology and the amount of time dedicated to the use of primary sources? 6.
Are there associations among any of the perceived barriers to the implementation of a program
using primary source documents, such as the perceived ability level of the students, access to
materials, or training in the use of primary source analysis? Drinnon (2005) used a population
sample of 114 history teachers in grades 5-12 in the Lakeway Area of East Tennessee. Drinnon
(2005) used a descriptive research design. He used a survey with 44 statements, a demographic
section, and four open-response questions. Drinnon (2005) concluded from his surveys that these
teachers perceived three obstacles of execution of primary source documents in the classroom:
lack of training on implementation, perceived lack of access to materials/primary sources, and
lack of time to dedicate to the use of primary sources. All of these factors were noted and
addressed when preparing the action research process. Lack of training on implementation may
commonly be a deterrent for most educators, however, finding access to materials and dedicating
a substantial amount of instruction time to primary source document use were a not an issue.
In another study, Brown and Dotson (2007) investigated the use of digital literacy skills
when using primary source documents for a high school research project. The research question
they tried to answer was: Are digital primary source documents useful for teaching Information
and Communications Technology (ICT) literacy skills in K-12. Brown and Dotson (2007) argue
by giving students ICT literacy skills and providing them access to primary source documents,
students may benefit when creating research projects by providing more than just textbook facts.
22
They believed ICT skills will give them information search skills to acquire seven core skills:
defining, accessing, managing, integrating, evaluating, creating and communicating information.
The nature of primary sources will allow students to integrate, evaluate, and create by engaging
in higher-order thinking processes like determining bias, point of view, perspective, comparing
and contrasting, synthesizing, and summarizing information. The researchers argue these
processes are not done when merely given general information websites and google searches.
The site was an eleventh grade social studies classroom in eastern North Carolina. During the
process the students were provided a framework of instruction as the teachers modeled four steps
to complete a well developed research project using ICT literacy skills and online primary
sources. The teacher modeled: (1) how to use skills to generate a research question. (2) how to
use search strategies to evaluate useful primary sources, (3) how to evaluate information for bias
and engage in perspective-taking thinking processes, and (4) how to apply technology literacy
skills for use of reporting conclusions to a peer audience. The students were then assessed by a
rubric that evaluated the seven ICT core skills. The results varied based on each core skill and
task, however, overall the use of digital primary sources brought student gains in interpreting the
sources, understanding point of view and bias, generating research questions, and promoted
higher-order thinking skills.
Another study focused on better understanding primary source use and the choices
teachers make for the overall purpose of history education and skill acquisition. Gradwell (2010)
used an interpretive case study to examine one teachers goals for developing and implementing
primary sources in two American history units. The researcher asked: What are the reasons why
one teacher (Mrs. Cooper) chooses to use the raw materials of history and how does it relate to
her overall purpose of teaching history. The interpretive case study follows an eighth grade
23
teacher in a predominantly white suburban school district outside New York City. The sample
contained 19 mostly white students who were identified as 33% gifted, 33% regular education,
and 33% special education. The data collected during two American history units (1920s and
Great Depression) included a biographical questionnaire, five interviews, six weeks of
observation using field notes, and classroom artifacts. The teacher was interviewed before,
during, and after each unit with the goal of gaining an understanding her experiences, pedagogy,
unit plans, and impressions of the results. Each interview was taped, transcribed, and coded
based on themes and patterns. As a result, Gradwell (2010) was able to make a correlation
between the teachers stated goals for primary source use in her classroom and Barton and
Levstiks (2004) work, Teaching History for the Common Good. In this work, Barton and Levstik
(2004) argue that teachers must make instructional choices that prepare students for participation
in a pluralistic democracy, and discuss four main approaches or stances (Identification,
Analytic, Moral Response, Exhibition) these teachers can take in their classroom for the
common good (p. 60). In the results, Gradwell (2010) discusses Mrs. Cooper executing all four
approaches while using 120 sources during the two units Gradwell (2010) exemplifies her
purposeful use of sources for each approach: (1) Cooper exemplified the Identification Stance by
using sources about individuals that came from underrepresented groups in American history
textbooks with the goal of relating to common people in history. (2) Cooper personified the
Analytic Stance by creating activities that showed different view points from the Sacco and
Vanzetti trial in attempts to teach bias, perspective, and evidence-based arguments. (3) Cooper
also used the Sacco and Vanzetti trial to embody the Moral Response Stance by using the trial
transcript to evoke a moral response from her students while discussing America's fear of
immigration and race. (4) Cooper illustrated the Exhibition Stance by having her students
24
interpret a photo from the Great Depression and share their interpretations for the sake of
contributing to a shared set of ideas and learning from one another. The researcher concluded,
teachers need to have a guided purpose for using and implementing primary sources in the
classroom (p. 71). Gradwell (2010) postulates that if teachers perhaps focused on primary source
use as a way for students to participate in a pluralistic democracy then students may receive
benefits that extend beyond basic learning objectives (p. 73). Consideration from this study was
made in the development of lesson planning for the six-week integration of primary sources.
Because it was a world history classroom each lesson including primary sources and
S.O.A.P.S.Tone was meant to connect to student participation authentically through linking to
prior knowledge, personal experience connections, investigating alternative viewpoints, and
responding to issues of morality.
The final study in this group aimed to measure the effect of problem-based learning
(PBL) on higher-order thinking development. Weshah (2012) believed PBL is one of the most
effective strategies to develop cognitive and meta-cognitive thinking skills in students (p. 262).
The research question asked was: What is the effect of using problem based learning program in
reflective thinking development at tenth grade students? With PBL, teachers design purposeful
content related problems and offer up a general process for students to achieve solutions.
Students can work individually or in small groups utilizing content, skills, and resources offered
to them to identify the nature of the problem, different strategies to solve the problem, and
evaluate which strategies are most effective. PBL is a methodology meant to frame learning in
authentic ways so students can problem solve and prompt key metacognitive skills (p. 263). The
student population assessed were tenth grade students affiliated with the Ministry of Education in
Jordan. The study was a quantitative comparative design with the sample containing 70 total
25
students; 36 in an experimental group and 34 in a control group. The experimental group was
taught using PBL methods and the control group taught using traditional methods during a
second semester (26 total periods of class). A pretest and posttest were administered to both
groups using a 20 question Reflective Thinking Test (RTT). The data was then analyzed using
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) calculating One-Way ANCOVA, standard
deviations, and means to determine significance. The results showed significance between the
experimental and control group in favor of the experimental group. The F value was 108.65 at
P<0.05. The results reveal that the PBL program developed reflective thinking in the tenth grade
students.
Summary Conclusion
The first set of research articles spoke of a number of themes like authenticity, routines,
and scaffolding when embedding literacy strategies into content specific lessons. These articles
lead me to incorporate literacy skills and strategies in my lesson planning in deliberate,
progressive, and authentic ways. Brown and Dotson (2007) delved into research similar to my
own. These researchers much like myself look to research the best way to implement primary
sources in social studies lessons to provide students opportunities to engage in higher-order
thinking processes like determining bias, point of view, perspective, synthesizing, and
summarizing information. The researchers see the importance in effective questioning and
modeling a meaningful strategy for students to develop this necessary 21st-century skill in social
studies classrooms. However, according to Weshah (2012), minimal research has been conducted
on the development of higher-order thinking in practice (p. 264). For this reason I selected
research that would provide insight into a method that contributes to developing higher-order
thinking. Much like Gradwells (2007) case study, my goal was to authentically implement
26
primary sources in the classroom and test a methodology with proven positive outcomes. At the
root of my research I looked to find and model a meaningful strategy to guide students through
primary sources so students can start their development of higher-order thinking and 21stcentury skills at a fledgeling age.
Chapter 3: Methodology
Introduction
The purpose of this action research was to study the effects of the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
(Speaker, Occasion, Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone) reading strategy on high school
freshmans comprehension of primary source documents in a world history classroom. The
researchers question was: What is the effectiveness of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy on ninth
grade high school students comprehension when analyzing primary source texts? The research
was designed as a quantitative group comparison. The group comparison was between two ninth
grade world history classrooms; one classroom (Classroom B) acting as the treatment group
receiving the S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy and one classroom (Classroom A) acting as the
control group receiving no reading strategy. The independent variable was a reading intervention
strategy called S.O.A.P.S.Tone (see Appendix A). The dependent variables were a pretest
(Appendix B) and posttest (Appendix C) assessing the reading comprehension of primary source
documents using document-based questioning. The assessments were identical for each
classroom and were scored by teacher-made rubrics (Appendix D).
Description of Site and Sample
27
The site was a high school located in a suburb outside of Milwaukee. The sample
population was between two world history 90-minute block classrooms. Demographically the
student population was predominantly white at 79.3%, with 10.6% of their students have
disabilities and only 1.4% English Language Learners (ELL) status. The grade level consisted of
9th grade students with the mean age of 14. The schools most recent Wisconsin Student
Assessment System (WSAS) Reading scores for their 10th grade students saw 11.4% of their
students advanced at reading and 48.5% proficient. The other 39% were either basic or
minimally performing. The schools most recent WSAS Social Studies scores for their 10th grade
students saw 72.7% of their students advanced at social studies and 17.5% proficient. The other
8.7% were either basic or minimally performing. Classroom A consisted of 30 students and every
student participated in the study; Classroom B also had 30 students and every student
participated in the study. Out of the total 60 students who participated in the study, 2 from
Classroom A and 1 from Classroom B for a total of 3 students had Individual Education Plans
(IEPs). Furthermore, Classroom A had a reading specialist every day for 45 minutes of the 90
minute classroom period.
Description of Procedure
Before the researcher administered the intervention every ninth grade student who
participated in the study was given a pretest DBQ 1: Niccolo Machiavelli: The Prince (DBQ
1). The researcher had the students complete DBQ 1 to assess the students initial level of
primary source reading comprehension and understanding of higher-order thinking. After
administering DBQ 1 the researcher collected and scored the results for each student using the
DBQ rubric (Appendix D). Over the next six weeks the researcher administered a series of six
lessons, one lesson per week (see Table1). Each lesson was implemented the same way with the
28
same primary source activities and materials, however, the treatment group received the
S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading intervention and the control group did not. The S.O.A.P.S.Tone process
is a metacognitive questioning strategy that asks readers of any document to read, annotate and
answer a series of questions about the text. These series of questions are formatted in the form of
a graphic organizer (see Appendix A) to give the reader a comfortable device to work with.
S.O.A.P.S.Tone utilizes this graphic organizer to identify the type of text, develop their insight of
the information into patterns, and interpret those facts. The questioning process also provides the
reader a framework to experience questioning methods and frame analytical responses to
(S.O.A.P.S.Tone) questions. By having the reader answer questions about the Speaker, Occasion,
Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone, they are able to analyze any given document; especially
challenging social studies texts.
Table 1: Timeline of Action Research Procedure
W
eek #
Teaching Plans
(Both Classrooms)
Teacher will assess
students Primary Source
comprehension with DBQ #1
DBQ/POV Sentence
Frames Lesson
Documents of the
Enlightenment DBQ Lesson
Fishbowl Peter the

Great lesson
Compare and
Contrast validity of Louis
XIV & Duke de Saint Simon
Social Commentary
Personal Point of View
lesson
What is the Third

Estate lesson
Teacher will assess

students Primary Source
comprehension with DBQ #2
Treatment
Classroom
(Classroom B)
No
intervention
Control
Classroom
(Classroom
A)
No
Intervention
Introduce
and apply
SOAPSTone reading
strategy
Primary
source document use
with SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
with SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
with SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
with SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
with SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
without SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
with SOAPSTone
No
intervention
Primary
source document use
without SOAPSTone
No
Intervention
29
Assessm
ents Used (Both
Classrooms)
DBQ
#1- Machiavellis
The Prince
Primary
source document use
without SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
without SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
without SOAPSTone
Primary
source document use
without SOAPSTone
DBQ
#2- French
Revolution: The
National
Convention
S.O.A.P.S.Tone can be seen as a tool that guides readers by providing, a specific

structure for the text, and helps writers, especially novice writers, to clarify and organize their
thoughts prior to writing (Morse, 2014). Below is a graphic representation (see Table 2) of the
graphic organizer and questions that were used to teach students the S.O.A.P.S.Tone technique
during the first lesson.
Table 2: S.O.A.P.S.Tone Questions
Subject
What is this document about? What is the issue it is addressing?
Occasion
Audience
Purpose
Speaker
Tone
30
Under what circumstances was this document written?

To whom was this document originally submitted?
What message does this document intent to convey?
What can we infer about the speaker and his attitudes toward the subject to which
he is referring?
Is there a detectable tone in the document? If so, does this tone shift? Is there any
language the author used that would point to his or her feelings regarding the
subject at hand
The teacher began the first lesson with Classroom B introducing to the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
reading strategy. The teacher explained how to annotate, question, and modeled its use. The
teacher then gave the students a document to read, analyze, and attempt to answer questions in
the graphic organizer using the S.O.A.P.S.Tone technique as a class. According to Saldana
(2008), Teachers should hand out a document or set of documents and slowly walk through the
steps, modeling the proper way to breakdown a document. After showing the students the
method in which to use S.O.A.P.S.Tone, allow them to do some group and independent practice.
Then reconvene as class and discuss the rest of the document sets (p. 26).
To the contrary, Classroom A was not given an introduction on the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
reading strategy or the graphic organizer. They were introduced to aspects of document
questioning skills utilizing a DBQ POV Sentence Frames Activity (Figure 1.1) on the
Smartboard.
Figure 1.1: Introduction of Document Questioning for Classroom A
31
Once students from both classes were familiar with the use of S.O.A.P.S.Tone strategy
and questioning a document, the teacher then moved on to introducing point of view and bias in
both classrooms. Both classes were taught how to frame analytical responses about primary
source documents. Introduction and exemplification of point of view and bias on the Smartboard
to students was meant to correlate the more difficult aspects of S.O.A.P.S.Tone method (Figure
1.2). The teacher used prior knowledge by exemplifying documents from previous lessons during
the Renaissance and Scientific Revolution units.
Figure 1.2: Introduction and Examples of Point of View/Bias
32
Despite students from both classes receiving the same primary source activity, only the
treatment group was able to utilize a physical copy of the S.O.A.P.S.Tone graphic organizer
while working on their activity. Furthermore, for the following five weeks, even though both
classrooms received the same activities, Classroom B would be the only classroom to use the
S.O.A.P.S.Tone graphic organizer when doing primary source document work. After the six
week period of lessons were completed, the researcher then assessed both classrooms with the
33
posttest DBQ 2: Letters to the National Convention (DBQ 2). The researcher used DBQ 2 to
assess the students final level of primary source reading comprehension.
Description of Data Collection and Assessment Instruments
All ninth grade students who participate in the study were given pretest DBQ 1 (see
Appendix B) to score an initial level of primary source reading comprehension. To administer the
DBQ pretest the researcher did not inform the students that the pretest is not a test that will be
graded for the grade books, because the researcher needed to determine a baseline understanding
of their individual level of primary source reading comprehension by scoring an assessment done
in a high-stakes manner. After administering DBQ 1 the researcher collected and scored the
pretest results for each student. The students were graded from a teacher made rubric based on
S.O.A.P.S.Tone and SLO outcomes. The DBQ Rubric (see Appendix D) assigned 1 point for
each S.O.A.P.S.Tone part they were asked to discuss in Part A for a total of 6 points.
Furthermore, the rubric assigned 4 points for addressing an organized response to point of view
and bias in Part B. In total, students could receive 10 points. Immediately following the sixweek intervention, all ninth grade students were then given DBQ 2 (see Appendix C) to score
their final level of primary source reading comprehension and understanding of higher order
thinking. The students were then graded using the same DBQ Rubric as the pretest (see
Appendix D). The researcher collected and scored following the same procedures as the pretest.
This information allowed the researcher to assess the effects of the S.O.A.P.S.Tone intervention
by a quantitative group comparison between the two classrooms scores on both tests, as well as,
progress or lack there of determined between the pretest and posttest.
Data Analysis Plan
34
The data was analyzed using both descriptive and inferential data. The researcher created
measures of central tendency for both classroom tests on both DBQ 1 and DBQ 2 scores. The
measures of central tendency the researcher calculated were mean, median, and standard
deviation. The researcher used these measures to indicate the changes occurring between the
pretest and posttest. In addition, the researcher used the mean scores from DBQ 1 and DBQ 2 to
calculate an independent-measure t-test to determine significance. This allowed the researcher to
determine the effectiveness of the intervention through the significance of the p-value.
Summary of Methodology
In summary, the purpose of this action research study was to see if the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
reading strategy was effective in progressing ninth grade high school students reading
comprehension of primary source texts. Prior to the intervention, the researcher administered
DBQ 1. The DBQ was scored for each student and documented. During a six-week period the
researcher then introduced and implemented the S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading intervention with six
lessons involving primary source activities. During that same time, the control classroom
received the same primary source activities, however, did not receive the S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading
intervention. After the conclusion of the six lessons the researcher administered DBQ 2. The
DBQs were scored for each student and the data was analyzed by finding the measures of central
tendency for both DBQ 1 and 2. Lastly the p-value was determined through a non-directional
independent t-test for significance.
Chapter 4: Results
Introduction
This action research was intended to study the effects of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy
on high school freshmans comprehension of primary source documents in a world history
35
classroom. The researchers question was: What is the effectiveness of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading
strategy on ninth grade high school students comprehension when analyzing primary source
texts? The research was designed as a quantitative group comparison between two ninth grade
world history classrooms. The independent variable was a reading intervention strategy called
S.O.A.P.S.Tone (see Appendix A). The dependent variables were a pretest (Appendix B) and
posttest (Appendix C) assessing the reading comprehension of primary source documents. The
assessments were identical for each classroom and were scored by using a teacher-made rubric
(Appendix D). The data was presented introducing the mean, median, and standard deviation of
both classrooms pretest and posttest. Furthermore, a t-test was calculated for the p-value and
discussed in regards to the its significance at p<.05 and if the intervention resulted in meaningful
gains in the assessment scores.
Presentation and Summary of Data
Figure 2: DBQ Assessments: Central Tendencies
36
Figure 2 displays the mean, median, and standard deviation for the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
pretests and posttests for both classrooms. Each test had a maximum point total of 10 points. The
pretest mean in Classroom A (M=4.83) was 1.17 points lower than the posttest mean (M=6). The
pretest mean in Classroom B (M=4.57) was .56 points lower than the posttest mean (M=5.13).
The pretest median of Classroom A (Md=4.5) was 2 points lower than the posttest median
(Md=6.5). The pretest median of Classroom B (Md=5) was a point lower than the posttest
median (Md=6). The mean and median showed that posttest outcomes for both classes saw a
gain with Classroom A seeing more substantial gains. The standard deviation of Classroom A
(SDpre=2.87; SDpost=2.7) decreased in the posttest. The standard deviation of Classroom B
(SDpre=2.13; SDpost=1.85) decreased in the posttest as well. This result showed that the average
distance from the mean reduced in both posttests with a majority of the scores reverting to the
mean in Classroom B . Overall, these numbers show us that both classes as a whole improved as
the mean increased and the standard deviation decreased.
Table 3: Pretest and Posttest Statistics on the S.O.A.P.S.Tone Reading Strategy
PRETEST
POSTTEST
p value for
t-Test
Mean
Median
StDev
Mean
Median
StDev
Control Group
(Classroom A)
4.83
4.5
2.87
6.5
2.70
.025077*
Treatment
Group
(Classroom B)
4.57
2.13
5.13
1.85
.216948
* Significant at p < 0.05

** Significant at p < 0.01
Comprehensively, the mean, median, and standard deviation do not tell the whole story.
T-Tests for both classrooms needed to be calculated to see if the intervention or lack there of
37
resulted in significant gains in either classroom. The t-test results in Table 3 divulge the students
made significantly greater gains in Classroom A (p=.025) than Classroom B (p=.217). Even
though the data in Table 3 and 4 suggests that both classrooms saw improvement, it tells us
definitively the S.O.A.P.S.Tone intervention was not a successful strategy in regard to
significance. The significance seen in Classroom A was most likely a result of an unforeseen
extraneous variable, a classroom reading specialist, that will be discussed in Chapter 5. Overall,
the results reflect that the exposure to lessons that have students analyze difficult texts can
develop improved reading comprehension scores, however, the S.O.A.P.S.Tone graphic organizer
process does not significantly help students construct advanced comprehension of these
documents.
Table 4: Pretest and Posttest Outcomes for DBQ Assessments

Classroom A
Assessments
Student Code
Pre
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
6A
7A
8A
9A
10A
11A
12A
13A
14A
15A
16A
17A
18A
19A
20A
21A
22A
1
7
3
5
7
4
6
1
1
7
2
2
3
8
2
4
8
6
3
7
1
9
Classroom B
Assessments
Post
Student Code
Pre
Post
5
5
6
7
8
2
8
1
4
7
7
2
4
7
4
10
6
8
8
4
1
3
1B
2B
3B
4B
5B
6B
7B
8B
9B
10B
11B
12B
13B
14B
15B
16B
17B
18B
19B
20B
21B
22B
7
5
5
6
5
2
3
7
4
5
2
7
5
4
7
2
4
6
1
2
6
2
6
7
5
7
6
4
3
6
7
3
4
6
3
3
3
6
6
6
3
2
3
7
23A
24A
25A
26A
27A
28A
29A
30A
4
5
9
7
10
9
1
3
5
8
9
10
10
10
7
4
23B
24B
25B
26B
27B
28B
29B
30B
2
1
6
4
4
7
8
8
38
6
3
7
9
7
3
7
6
Summary Conclusion of Results

Based on the data in both Figure 2 and Table 3, the teacher should be pleased with the
results of the study as their was an observed improvement in both classrooms assessments. Table
3 and 4 showed that each classrooms scores, means, and medians improved from pretest to
posttest. Furthermore, the answers in the posttest showed that high-order thinking skills were
more developed which will be discussed more in depth in Chapter 5. Classroom A saw nine
scores make substantial increases of 3 or more points from pretest to posttest and four scores
with a maximum total of ten points which resulted in a mean score raising significantly by 2
points. Classroom B only saw nine scores make substantial increases of 3 or more points and
zero scores with a maximum total of ten points which resulted in a mean score only raising by .
56 points. Improvement was also seen in the consistency of both classrooms with the standard
deviation. Implementing the same primary source activities with future classrooms could be
recommended due to the significant progress that was made in Classroom A. Consequently,
despite Classroom B making progress between the assessments, the use of S.O.A.P.S.Tone can
not be recommended due to lack of significant gains being found.
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Discussion
Introduction and Overview of Results
In an examination of two groups of freshman level readers, a teacher and researcher
implemented a study assessing the reading comprehension of primary source documents after
39
being exposed various primary source activities. The researchers question was: What is the
effectiveness of S.O.A.P.S.Tone reading strategy on ninth grade high school students
comprehension when analyzing primary source texts? The research was designed as a
quantitative group comparison between two ninth grade world history classrooms. The
independent variable was a reading strategy intervention called S.O.A.P.S.Tone (see Appendix
A). The dependent variables were a pretest and posttest assessing the reading comprehension of
primary source documents using document-based questioning. The assessments were identical
for each classroom and were scored by teacher-made rubrics. Even though the data showed that
both classrooms saw improvement, S.O.A.P.S.Tone statistically was not a successful intervention
strategy to notably improve reading comprehension of primary source documents. The results
reflected that the exposure of primary source documents improved comprehension scores with
difficult texts, however, the S.O.A.P.S.Tone graphic organizer process did not help develop
significant gains in comprehension that were made in the control classroom.
Explanation of Results
As previously mentioned, the data confirms that both classrooms saw improvement
despite the S.O.A.P.S.Tone intervention not creating statistically significant improvement at
p<.05. The results reveal that the exposure to lessons that have students analyze difficult texts
can develop improved reading comprehension scores with or without the the S.O.A.P.S.Tone
reading and questioning process. Figure 3 shows the kind of developed response that resulted in
higher class means on the posttest and exhibited a greater understanding of how to look at
documents more analytically. After reading many documents about the proposed calendar change
by the new revolutionary French government during the National Convention Figure 3 is a
sample of high level response:
40
Figure 3: Well Developed Posttest Response
The annotations were made for grading purposes and show where all aspects of
S.O.A.P.S.Tone and point of view were addressed. Regardless of being pleased by more
advanced responses, the overall results were undoubtedly influenced by a single unanticipated
extraneous variable.
The aforementioned extraneous variable was the existence of a reading specialist in
Classroom A (Control Group) and not in Classroom B (Treatment Group). Riley and Jensen
(2007) state, We must acknowledge the important contributions that reading specialists can
make (p. 48). Unbeknownst to me, a reading specialist, was assigned to Classroom A due to a
couple of the IEPs in the classroom. The reading specialists contributions should not be seen as
trivial and could have very easily lead to a more substantial outcome with the designed control
group. The introduction of literacy initiatives in schools and school districts that integrate
coaches [specialists] as a key component of their programming has proven successful across the
country (Sturtevant, 2003, p. 2). Such success was seen in Classroom A as they significantly
improved from their pretest results to posttest results. Riley and Jensen (2007) further assert,
reading specialist can collaborate with preservice and inservice teachers to facilitate their
attempts to interpret, synthesize, and integrate relevant research and to appropriately apply
41
research based strategies (p. 48). Given that the intervention in Classroom B was meant to
facilitate a research-based reading comprehension strategy and get the students to interpret,
synthesize, and analyze primary source documents, I can suppose that a reading strategist was
able to influence outcomes and understanding in the control classroom.
No matter the lack of an ideal outcome, prior research on the use of S.O.A.P.S.Tone as a
metacognitive strategy for students to use on primary source documents was close to non
existent. Therefore, I deemed it necessary to take an extensive look at a tool that I believed could
aid my students with arduous reading comprehension tasks after reading other academics
thoughts on the matter.
Discussion of the Connections between the Literature Review and Results
The focus of my action research was to teach literacy skills while utilizing primary source
documents and stimulating higher-order thinking all within a social studies classroom. Taking a
cue from Gilles et al. (2013) study, I attempted to examine personal reading strategies and
authentically connect one of them (S.O.A.P.S.Tone) to Common Core State Standards, district
Student Learning Objectives (SLO), all while making it manageable to conceive for ninth grade
students. Furthermore, I attempted to emulate a way to develop and assess higher-order thinking
skills much like Weshahs (2013) design. Instead of creating a quantitative comparative design
that used Problem Based Learning (PBL) to promote metacognitive skills, I wanted to use a
document based questioning tool that could lead to acquiring those same skills. Unlike Weshah
(2013), I was unable to reveal significant findings in favor of the experimental group over the
control group. Nevertheless, it was encouraging to find both groups improved in their analytical
skills and to observe higher-order thinking habits form throughout the process. I was able to
witness a score of 14 year old students in each classroom manage a myriad of difficult tasks
42
normally only asked of Advanced Placement students and pupils far older than themselves.
Strengths and Limitations of the Study
One of the greatest strengths of this study was exposing young learners higher-order
thinking processes commonly directed at older students. Through this exposure these students
participated in a metacognitive process in S.O.A.P.S.Tone and investigatively devised lessons
that hopefully conditioned them to ask pertinent questions when dealing with difficult texts.
Another strength that was immeasurable was the teachers experience and comfort level with
incorporating primary source documents into activities, lesson plans, and assessments. Unlike
Drinnons (2005) perceived deterrents for administering primary sources, the teacher used his
experience and access to sources to promote higher-order thinking practice. This became
invaluable when you consider the amount of class time he dedicated to scaffolding units to
integrate the questioning skills needed, authentically connecting content, and diversifying the
lessons to maintain student interest. Another strength was the districts SLO alignment with my
action research proposal. The districts SLO for their social studies department was to find a way
to cultivate and assess student progress when students are analyzing point of view and bias in
readings. An integral part of S.O.A.P.S.Tone and higher-order thinking involves analyzing the
point of view or Speaker and bias or Purpose/Tone. This correlation made my action
research possible and brought purpose to its execution.
This research was not without its limitations though. As I previously mentioned, the
presence of a reading specialist in the control group classroom was an unexpected variable that
limited the group comparison design. Outside of that, the actual implementation was most likely
limited due to the researcher (myself) not being the teacher, the difficulty of tasks for ninth grade
students, and the assessment validity. The relationship between the teacher and myself was one
43
that involved pre-planning, forecasting issues, fluid communication, and consistent

collaboration. Even so, the design of the research, the intervention strategy, and assessment tools
were predominantly done by the researcher. Insight from the teacher obviously helped a more
seamless transition of the process, yet, much like a snowflake, no two educators are exactly the
same. As a result, i did not know these students learning styles, reading levels, and interests so
any accommodations and changes I couldve made in my own classroom to aid reading
comprehension could not be made. Another limitation of the study was the use of teacher
modified assessments. Modifying primary sources assessments from Dennis Shermans (2006)
Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations and College Boards (2008) Advance
Placement Exam allowed for both the researcher and teacher to assess the proper learning
objectives associated to the intervention and the SLO for the school. Be that as it may, a certain
level of validity is lost when not incorporating research-proven assessment tools. Lastly, creating
a study with higher-order thinking and point of view/ bias learning objectives for ninth grade
students made it hard to expect significant gains due to difficulty. My study was designed to see
if a metacognitive process could aid with the more strenuous Blooms Taxonomy (1956) tiers,
however, the tasks I asked of these students are more commonly asked of their peers at the
eleventh and twelfth grade level.
Recommendations for Future Research
Benjamin Bloom (Bloom, et al. 1956) tells educators to strive in molding behaviors in
our students that promote them to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate. Despite his taxonomy on
advising educators to get students to do, there is a lack of research provided telling social studies
teachers on how to get there. Research on the use of primary sources, resources to aid student
comprehension of these sources, and tools to assess higher-order thinking with these documents
44
is minimal. Specifically, in my research I wanted to assess a resource that could aid student
comprehension of primary source documents, however, there are a number of methodologies,
resources, and tools that could be observed to provide educators data on what significantly
produces results. A methodology that interested me during my readings was Ensminger and Frys
(2012) A Conceptual Framework for Primary Source Practices. In it they provide educators
with the framework for instructional use of primary source documents in the classroom. Using a
descriptive design Ensminger and Fry (2012) discuss primary source-based instructional
practices (PSBIP) that can be used in any main content area (Language Arts, Mathematics,
Science, and Social Studies) grade five or higher and are reflective of Blooms Taxonomy (p.
121-122). All six instructional practices suggested are associated with a progressively higher
level of Blooms Taxonomy. I would be interested in using this framework methodology to
scaffold my lessons and units as I incorporate primary sources in the classroom. Another avenue
I could take is using a suggested resource of a professional like Jacquelyn Reeses (2015),
Interacting with History: Teaching with Primary Resources, in which she provides practical
classroom application using primary sources. I could create a descriptive qualitative study of its
many resources, lesson plans, and online features to assess if it develops and refines cognitive,
investigative, and deductive reasoning skills.
A tool for assessment I never considered for researching primary source document use
was interviews and surveys. Using interviews and surveys as an assessment tool in future
research could allow me to evaluate perception of my lesson plans or have students self-assess
their overall progress of developing historical thinking skills. This could give a greater depth to
my overall outcomes instead of just relying on quantitative data.
Despite using a published primary source book and advanced placement examination, I
45
would attempt to find more research supported assessments for the lower high school grades.
DBQs are used regularly for tenth, eleventh and twelfth grade Advanced Placement students to
assess their historical thinking skills. Furthermore, a majority of the documents in DBQs have a
lexile score of 12th grade reading to college level reading. Instead of using document based
questioning I would be interested in assessing reading comprehension and writing skills with a
Change and Continuity Over Time (CCOT) Essay. The major benefit of these essays have
students explain how different civilizations over different periods of time have similar
experiences. Furthermore, CCOTs require students to use primary source documents and relevant
world historical context effectively to explain both change and consistency over many eras of
time. Higher-order thinking skills like synthesizing, analyzing, and evaluating are still required to
efficiently score all nine points on a CCOT rubric. Additionally, I would make sure I preassessed the readability of each document that is used for both lessons and assessments with
lexile scoring and weigh it against the reading levels of my classrooms.
If these changes were made for future research it would be easier for me to provide
accommodation for my students by knowing reading levels of my students and the documents.
These changes would also ensure greater validity of the results. CCOTs have a standard
Advanced Placement rubric and set of outcomes that could ensure the reliability of the
assessment. My previously voiced desire to incorporate literacy skills in lessons and solicit 21st
century skill methodologies for student benefit will always drive me to find research-based
approaches to essential learning objectives. Ultimately, as a social studies teacher and history
major, all future action research would involve ways for students to acquire higher-order thinking
skills and ways for me to assess their attainment and comprehension.
Conclusion: Implications for Personal Practice
46
As I reflect on my growth through the action research process I realize I now possess
many insights that it takes veteran teachers years to master. Action research has allowed me to
view preparation and execution of curriculum in an entirely different way. My preparation for
unit building will now make me curiously look at an abundance of research-based strategies in
order to meet a myriad of learning objectives. The process has also exemplified how cooperation
between two teachers with shared ideas can create results driven toward student welfare and
professional growth. This process forces educators to reflect on our practice and assess the
refinement of the tools we use everyday.
Completion of this masters thesis has allowed me to reflect on future implications of my
teaching practice. I found that I thoroughly enjoy researching the tools I use everyday in the
classroom. Action Research allows teachers to measure their practice quantifiably and revel in
the experience of trying to create a better classroom for student prosperity. Although
S.O.A.P.S.Tone did not create the significant gains I sought after, the experience taught me how I
can construct an environment that delivers both student progress and personal scholarly growth.
References
47
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy
of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David
McKay Co Inc.
Brown, C.A. & Dotson, K. (2007). Writing your own history: A case study using digital primary
source documents. Tech Trends, 51(3), 30-37.
Common Core State Standards Initiative (2014). Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RI/9-10/6/
Drinnon, M.E. (2005). The perception of the value of the use of primary source documents
among east tennessee lakeway area history teachers in grades 5-12. Retrieved from
Proquest Digital Dissertations. (1038)
Dull, L.J., & Garderen, D.V. (2005). Bringing the story back into history: Teaching social studies
to children with learning disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 49(3), 27-31.
Ensminger, D. C., & Fry, M. L. (2012). A conceptual framework for primary source practices.
The Educational Forum, 76(1), 118-128.
Fordham, N.W., Wellman, D. & Sandmann, A. (2002). Taming the text: engaging and
supporting students in social studies reading. The Social Studies, 93(4), 149-158.
Giles, C., Wang, Y., Smith, J., & Johnson, D. (2013). Im no longer just teaching history.
professional development for teaching common core state standards for literacy in social
studies. Middle School Journal, 44(3), 34-43.
Gradwell, J.M. (2010). Using sources to teach history for the common good: a case of one
teachers purpose. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 34(1), 59-76.
Graves, M.F., & Avery, P.G. (1997). Scaffolding students reading of history. Social
Studies, 88, 134-139.
Liniski, S.J., & Thieman, G.Y. (2013). What work samples reveal about secondary pre-service
social studies teachers use of literacy strategies. Teacher Education Quarterly, 40(1), 6379.
Little, M.E. & Hahs-Vaughn, D.L. (2007). The implementation of content enhancement routines
for improved content literacy for middle and secondary social studies students. Journal
of Personal Evaluation in Education, 20(3/4), 261-280.
Malkmus, D. (2010). Old stuff for new teaching methods: outreach to history faculty teaching
with primary sources. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 10 (4), 413-435.
Massey, D. D., & Heafner, T. L. (2004). Promoting reading comprehension in social
48
studies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(1), 26-40.

Mercado, S. & Young, J. (2007). AP european history: teachers guide. The College Board.
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/members/repository/ap07_eurohist_teachersguide.
pdf
Mertler, C. A., (2014). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (4ndEd.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Morse, O. (2014). SOAPSTone: a strategy for reading and writing. Retrieved from
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/preap/teachers_corner/45200.htm
Quatroche, D.J., Bean, R.M., Hamilton, R.L. (2001). The role of the reading specialist: A review
of the research. The Reading Teacher, 55(3), 282-294.
Race to the Top Technical Assistance Network. (2010). Measuring student growth for teaching
non-tested grades and subjects: A primer. Washington, DC: ICF International. Retrieved
September 09, 2014. http://nassauboces.org/cms/lib5/NY18000988/
Centricity/Domain/156/NTS__PRIMER_FINAL.pdf
Riley, J.T. & Jensen, R. (2007). Every teacher a teacher of reading: The rhetoric, the research,
and the reality. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 35(3), 44-48.
Sherman, D. (2006). Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations. (7th ed., Vol.
2). McGraw-Hill Companies.
Socol, T.T. (2006). Immersed in literacy learning: one staff shifts its thinking and lives to tell
about it. Reading Research and Instruction, 45(3), 179-208.
Sturtevant, E. (2003). The literacy coach: A key to improving teaching and learning in secondary
schools. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Susan, J.L., & Gayle, Y.T. (2013). What work samples reveal about secondary pre-service social
studies teachers use of literacy strategies. Teacher Education Quarterly, 40(1), 63-79.
Weshah, H.A. (2012). Measuring the effect of problem-based learning instructional program on
reflective thinking development. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 39(3/4), 262-271.
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (2014). Retrieved from
http://standards.dpi.wi.gov/stn_ssb12
49
Appendix A
Name:_________________________
SOAPSTone: A method for document reading

As a method for close reading, you must annotate your text(s) before using the SOAPSTone
organizer. Annotation: written observations and comments about what you are reading AS you
are reading.
Steps: 1) Read and annotate, 2) Fill out SOAPSTone Graphic Organizer to best of your ability.
Here is an introduction to the SOAPSTone acronym:
Subject: The subjects of texts are often abstractthe right to die, racism, poverty,
conformity, etc. The subject is the issue at hand, not the character or specific situation.
50
Occasion: Remember that naming the occasion is not simply identifying the time/place.
Is the text a memory? Speech? Letter? Critique? Argument? About what event? Where?
When?
Audience: Who is the intended audience? Whose attention does the speaker seek to gain?
Who is the writer speaking to? In MLKs I Have a Dream, he is not speaking to African
Americans but to readers who may harbor racial prejudicesperhaps to policy makers. Is it a
general audience? Specific audience?
Purpose: Think about the modes of writing and the purposes behind those modes. Authors
write to entertain, to inform, to persuade, to critique, to complain, to explain, to reflect, to
describe, sometimes to simply express a truth. Often, writers have a dual purpose. It is not
enough to say to informto inform about what? To complain about what? To explain what?
Speaker: Remember that the speaker cannot simply be the author/writer.
In whose shoes is the speaker or writer walking in? Is there an identifiable speaker? What
other clues are there as to the speaker? Age? Gender? Social class? Emotional state?
Occupation?
Tone: Tone is the attitude of the speaker towards his subject and audience. Who is the
speaker? What is the subject? What is the speakers attitude towards his subject?
After you have read and annotated the assigned text, deconstruct it using the guide on the back.
SOAPSTone Graphic Organizer

Title of Reading:_____________________________________
Subject
Briefly state the

main idea(s)
You should be able to

state the subject and main
ideas in a few words or a
very short phrase.
Your Answer:
Occasion
What is the
time, place,
current situation,
context in which
the author is
writing?
Be certain to discuss and

record both the larger
occasion, that is, those
issues or ideas that must
have made the speaker
think about this issue, as
well as the immediate
occasion.
Your Answer:
Audience
Who is the
intended
audience for the
piece?
At whom is this text

directed? Its not enough
to say Anyone who read
it. You will want to
Your Answer:
identify a certain audience

by describing some of its
characteristics. Was it
written privately, written
to be heard,
commissioned, or an
official document?
Purpose
Why is the
author writing?
The purpose could be a

purely personal one or
motivation to encourage
action. But it could also be
directed at the audience;
you will have to decide
what the message is and
how the author wants the
audience to respond.
Your Answer:
Speaker
Whose voice is
telling the story?
Remember that it is not

enough simply to name the
speaker. What can you say
about the speaker based on
references to the text? I.E:
Gender, Ethnicity, Age,
Religion, Social Status.
Your Answer:
Tone
What is the
feeling or
manner of
expression used
by the author?
Try to choose a
description of the tone that
fits the piece as a whole.
Include specific words or
phrases from the text and
explain how they support
your statement.
Your Answer:
Appendix B
Page 1:
51
Page 2:
52
Page 3:
53
Appendix C
Page 1:
54
Page 2:
55
Page 3:
56
Appendix D
Rubric for DBQ
Name:____________________
57
SOAPSTone Addressed
Subject
Occasion
Audience
Purpose
Speaker/Source
Tone
Points for Part A:
Points
4
Points Awarded
___/1
___/1
___/1
___/1
___/1
___/1
___/6
Criteria for Part B

Student shows higher level understanding of authors POV/Bias
Is more analytical than descriptive (analyzes, evaluates, and/or creates information)
Recognizes impact of authors background (age, country, religion, profession, gender, status)
Explores degree of reliability and recognizes different documents serve different purposes
Richly supports the theme with many relevant facts, examples, and details
Student shows proficient understanding of authors POV/BIAS
Is both descriptive and analytical
Offers appropriate evidence in support of opinion
Incorporates relevant outside information
Supports the theme with relevant facts, examples, and details
Student shows little (or incomplete) understanding of authors POV/BIAS
Is primarily descriptive; may include faulty, weak, or isolated application or analysis
Incorporates limited relevant information from the documents or consists primarily or relevant
information copied from the documents
Presents little or no relevant outside information
Includes few relevant facts, examples, and details; may include some inaccuracies
Student lacks understanding of authors POV/BIAS
Is not descriptive; may lack understanding, application, or analysis
Makes vague, unclear references to the documents or consists primarily of relevant and
irrelevant information copied from the documents
Shows limited understanding of the task with vague, unclear references to the documents
Presents no relevant outside information
Includes few relevant facts, examples, or details; may include inaccuracies
Part B Total Points Awarded: ____/4

DBQ Final Grade:
____/10
58

Actionresearchfinaldraft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Actionresearchfinaldraft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.

TONE READING STRATEGY

An Action Research Masters Thesis

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

List of Tables and Figures

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER TWO: Literature Review

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

Table 1: Timeline of Action Research Procedure

Table 2: S.O.A.P.S.Tone Questions

Table 3: Pretest and Posttest Statistics on the S.O.A.P.S.Tone Reading Strategy

Table 4: Pretest and Posttest Outcomes for DBQ Assessments

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

Figure 1.1: Introduction to Document Questioning in Classroom A

Figure 1.2: Introduction and Examples of Point of View/Bias

Figure 2: DBQ Assessments: Central Tendencies

Figure 3: Well Developed Posttest Response

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

SOAPSTone: (Speaker, Occasion, Audience, Purpose, Subject and Tone) is an acronym

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

Fishbowl Peter the

What is the Third

Teacher will assess

S.O.A.P.S.Tone can be seen as a tool that guides readers by providing, a specific

What is this document about? What is the issue it is addressing?

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

Under what circumstances was this document written?

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

* Significant at p < 0.05

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY

Table 4: Pretest and Posttest Outcomes for DBQ Assessments

OF PRIMARY CONCERN: THE IMPACT OF S.O.A.P.S.TONE READING STRATEGY