Capstone Report Nguyen

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
MONTEREY BAY
Reading Strategies for First Graders
CAPSTONE REPORT
Submitted in partial satisfaction of requirements of the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE in
Instructional Science and Technology
Nuong Nguyen
December 7, 2018
Capstone Approvals: (At least one advisor and capstone instructor should approve)
Jeanne Farrington
___________________________ _____________
Advisor Name Signature Date
Donald Fischer
___________________________ _____________
Capstone Instructor Name Signature Date
READING STRATEGIES FOR FIRST GRADER 2
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................4
BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................5
Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................................5
Learner Analysis ..........................................................................................................................7
Context Analysis ..........................................................................................................................8
Literature Review .........................................................................................................................8
SOLUTION......................................................................................................................................9
Goals ............................................................................................................................................9
Learning Objectives ...................................................................................................................10
Proposed Solution ......................................................................................................................11
Content Overview ......................................................................................................................11
Learning Theories ......................................................................................................................12
Instructional Principles ...............................................................................................................13
Media and Delivery System .......................................................................................................13
Risk and Challenges ...................................................................................................................13
METHODS AND PROCEDURES................................................................................................13
List of Major Deliverables .........................................................................................................14
RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................14
TIMELINE .....................................................................................................................................14
EVALUATION..............................................................................................................................15
Formative Evaluation .................................................................................................................15
Summative Evaluation ...............................................................................................................17
Survey ................................................................................................................................17
Pre-Test and Post-Test Results ..........................................................................................18
Learning Modules ..............................................................................................................19
Questionnaire Results ........................................................................................................19
FUTURE PLANS ..........................................................................................................................19
CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................20
REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................21
APPENDIX A: SURVEY RESULTS ...........................................................................................24
APPENDIX B: OBSERVATION CHECKLIST ...........................................................................25
APPENDIX C: READING SURVEY RESULTS .........................................................................26
APPENDIX D: PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST ............................................................................27
APPENDIX E: QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS ............................................................................34

Executive Summary
This capstone project stems from a current need for explicit instruction of 22 first graders
at John E. Steinbeck School on reading strategies that will help them improve their reading
fluency and decoding skills. At the beginning of the year, first-grade students took the
Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) that assessed their reading abilities. The majority of
the students only knew one or two reading strategies while decoding words and thus were
struggling to progress to a harder DRA Level. The goals of the learning modules are to teach
first graders reading strategies to help them with word recognition, word patterns, and to build
automaticity while reading.
My solution is to design learning modules to teach them Karen Jones’s (2016) seven
reading strategies: Learn to look at pictures, make each phoneme sound, stretch out the word,
change the vowel sound, reread the sentences, break up the words into word families, and use
context clues to figure out the unknown word. If students are able to read fluently, this will, in
turn, help them with their reading comprehension. From the formative evaluation, I decided to
change the instruction to teacher-led mainly because the students had trouble with their fine
motor skills on the touchpad. After the usability test, I made minor changes to the drag-and-drop
and fill-in-the-blank activities.
Before teaching each module, the students took a pre-test. Then, the teacher introduced
two new reading strategy each week. The teacher used direct instruction with the interactive
learning modules, which include videos, graphics, and animation. The instruction was delivered
in Smart Notebook. The learning modules used Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction and
Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) theory. Each strategy was paired with an animal to help
students remember and connect the information (Jones, 2016). The students participated in the
learning activities by sorting objects, matching, and dragging objects with the interactive pen. At
the end of each module, the students took a post-test to assess what they have learned.
The summative assessment included a reading survey, pre-test, questionnaire, and post-
test. The reading survey showed the majority of the students had at least one person that read
with them at home. Most students enjoy reading books with a lot of pictures. The pre-test and
post-test showed the instruction was effective in teaching the students how to decode words. The
questionnaire showed the students had positive responses with learning the reading strategies and
felt confident about applying what they have learned.
Background
John E. Steinbeck is a Title 1 school with a high percentage of low-income students in
Salinas, California. The majority of the students at John E. Steinbeck are Hispanic, and about
48% of the first graders are English learners. However, according to the DRA scores, only 14%
of the English learners are struggling to read. The majority of the students can understand and
speak English. In order to meet the needs of all the students, the reading strategies will be paired
with pictures, and there will be lots of visuals in the learning modules. In addition, the teacher
can assist students by translating less common English words into Spanish, if needed.
Needs Analysis
The performance gap shows students who are struggling to read ranges from a DRA level
3 to 10; however, the goal is to read at a DRA level 18 by the end of first grade. The majority of
the students only know one or two reading strategies when encountering a difficult word. As a
result, they cannot progress beyond reading short and long vowel words. It is worth fixing now
since the performance gap will only widen each year if students fall short of acquiring these
reading foundational skills. Furthermore, younger children have an easier time learning how to
read, since their brains build more connection per brain cell (Graham, & Forstadt, 2011). It
would be challenging to learn how to read after third-grade.
The performance gap is caused by a lack of skills and knowledge. At the beginning of
the school year, students lack the skills to blend sounds into word correctly. The words become
more challenging as students are introduced to words with digraphs, blends, inflectional endings,
and two syllables. Students need multiple strategies when decoding words, since sounding out
each letter will not always produce the words. The learning modules will provide the students
practice with decoding the words correctly. Other causes of students’ lack of reading skills and
knowledge may also be due to the lack of reading support and reinforcement at home. Some
parents speak a limited amount of English and are unable to help their child.
Several methods were used when conducting the needs assessment, including students’
test scores from the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), informal discussions, and a
staff survey to show students are reading below grade level and that there is a need for explicit
instruction on reading strategies. Through informal discussions with the second-grade teachers
in the teachers’ lounge, I learned the same students who were struggling with reading in first
grade are still struggling this year in second grade. In second-grade, the text is more complex
and less instruction time is devoted to learning how to read. Therefore, it is crucial that students
receive the foundational reading skills in first-grade in order to improve their reading fluency and
meet the DRA level target. From my observation of 21 students, about one-third only knew one
or two reading strategies while decoding words and were struggling to progress to a harder DRA
level.
To get a more thorough needs assessment, ten staff members were surveyed. A paper
survey was also created in Microsoft Word and handed out for teachers to fill out. The survey
consisted of nine questions: Four questions about teaching background and instruction, four
questions using a rating scale on reading strategies and level of satisfaction, and one open-ended
question on ways to improve students’ reading skills. The participants’ occupations range from
teaching kindergarten to 5th grade, a special day class, and a reading intervention class. The
participants’ level of experience with teaching varies from 4 years to 37 years (see Appendix A
for survey results).
Based on the survey, 60% of the teachers did not feel like their students were reading at
grade level. 40% were dissatisfied with their students’ reading ability, 30% were neither
satisfied nor dissatisfied, and 30% were satisfied. The results show that most of the teachers felt
students were not reading at grade level when they entered their class. Also, more teachers were
dissatisfied with their students’ reading ability.
When the teachers were asked how much time they spent on teaching phonics, the lower
grades (kindergarten-2nd) spent over an hour teaching phonics, whereas the upper grades (3rd-5th)
dedicated less time. When asked about how much time was spent teaching reading strategies in
a day, half of the teachers spent less than 35 minutes. However, 100% of the participants felt
there is a need to teach students reading strategies explicitly to help students improve their
decoding skills.
When the teachers were asked if they thought the students were capable of improving
their reading skills, there was a positive response. Four teachers mentioned instruction is needed
to help improve the students’ reading skills. Three teachers wrote the students need more
practice. Two teachers mentioned home support and proper foundation. One teacher mentioned
students need motivation.
From the DRA results and survey, students are struggling to read due to a lack of
knowledge and not all teachers are satisfied with the students’ reading level. Interactive learning
modules would be a better solution to help students learn the different reading strategies in an
engaging way. The teacher can use the modules to teach the reading strategies and as a review
before a reading test.
Learner Analysis
The target audience is first-grade students ranging from age six to eight. From the Basic
Phonics Skills Test (BPST), students show a range of reading skills from knowing some alphabet
sounds to being able to read words with shorts and long vowels. It is typical at this age to have
trouble recognizing the letters b, d, q, and p. From the DRA test, the majority of the students can
typically apply one to two reading strategies while reading. In addition, the Concepts of Print
Assessment results show some students having trouble with reading left to right and
understanding sounds make up words. This is the reason why teachers review concepts of print
and the alphabet names and sounds at the start of the year. Also, incoming first graders are
expected to read at a level 4 on the DRA, which includes short vowels, common high-frequency
words, and some long vowels; however, over one-third of the students are reading at level 1
which contains words like “no” and “yes.”
The methods used to complete the learner analysis was through the school’s database,
school assessments, observation in the classroom, and informal conversations with the students’
parents and teachers. At the beginning of the year, the assistant principal sends out a report with
a list of all the English learners and their California English Language Development Test’s
scores. This helps the teacher differentiate their instruction according to the students’ level. The
Concept of Prints, BPST, and DRA tests help evaluate the students understanding of reading and
determines their reading level. Through observation in the classroom and conversations with
parents and teachers, the teacher can understand the students’ abilities and typical behavior
patterns.
Learners’ attitudes towards reading vary from enjoyment to dreading the task. Most
students enjoy being read to. In my experience as a teacher of seven years, students whose
parents read to them at home tend to enjoy reading and have a better understanding of concepts
of print. Most students enjoy being on the computer. Students have some experience with
learning on the computer through websites like Starfall, Lexia Core5, and Symphony Math.
Students at this age have short attention spans; therefore it is important to use
instructional time wisely. Teachers should activate students’ prior knowledge and help them
make connections. Since students like animals, each learning strategy in the learning modules
will be paired with an animal to help students remember and connect the information. For
example, “Chunky Monkey” will help students to remember to look for a chunk or word family
like –at or –it to help them decode the words (Jones, 2016). The animal is not only a good
memory aid, but will also make learning fun and grab the students’ attention.
Some prerequisite skills the students need to complete the learning modules are basic
knowledge of the alphabet letters and sounds. Also, the students have to be able to use the
interactive pen to participate in the drag-and-drop activities. Lastly, the students have to know
how to take multiple choice tests.
Context Analysis
The context analysis shows that the best learning environment for the students is in the
classroom. The direct instruction will be in the classroom where it is quiet, and students can
focus better. Also, the equipment like the projector and interactive whiteboard can be easily
accessed in the classroom. The disadvantage of having learning modules is that all the
equipment (laptop, projector, interactive whiteboard) has to be working properly in order for the
teacher to do the presentation and for the students to participate in the activities.
Literature Review
The studies focus on various types of reading instruction such as phonics, whole
language, authentic literature, peer mediation, and station teaching, which will help the students’
reading achievement.
In Foorman, Liberman, Francis, and Novy’s (1991) research, the results showed that
classrooms with more letter-sound instruction helped students improved their reading and
spelling. This shows that it is important for teachers to dedicate time to teaching phonics in the
classroom. In another study, Beverly, Giles, and Bucks (2009) support the position for teaching
phonics with the addition of decodable texts for struggling readers and authentic text for average
readers. Decodable text allows students to sound out each letter as well as have a repetition of
common sight words, like “see” and “have.” In first grade, students are starting to learn how to
read and need to make the connection between sounds (phonemes) and letters.
In contrast, Reutzel and Cooter (1990) point out teaching students the whole language
approach yields greater results in reading, vocabulary, and comprehension. The whole language
approach focuses on context and meaning. Students read the word in authentic literature and not
in isolation as a way to learn how to read. The students are only looking at the first and last letter
of the word along with the context to help decode the word. For my capstone project, the
students will use strategies from both approaches where they can sound out the word and look at
context clues and meaning.
In another study, Fuchs et al. (2001) showed students build fluency through peer
scaffolding and repeated reading. The “peer-assisted learning strategies” or PALS with the
fluency component had statistically significant results on the reading fluency and comprehension
assessment. This shows that it is beneficial for peers to work together and that reading the text
multiple times can not only help build fluency but also help with reading comprehension. One of
the reading strategies for my capstone project is to have the students reread the section. Also,
students are encouraged to talk with their partners.
In Suprabha and Subramonian (2014) article, station or rotation teaching in small groups
can benefit the students immensely. In rotation teaching, students rotate in small groups to
different learning areas. The benefit is that it targets student needs, and teachers can differentiate
instruction in reading or any other subjects. Therefore, for my capstone project, if students are
having trouble grasping the new reading strategies, the teacher will have the students work with a
partner or in a small group.
When teaching students how to read, the teacher has to consider the type of instruction as
well as effective grouping arrangements. Struggling readers would benefit from decodable texts
and phonics instructions whereas average readers would benefit more from whole language
instruction with authentic literature. Furthermore, students would benefit from peer scaffolding
with repeating reading, as well as small flexible group that targets learning. In order to meet the
literacy needs of the students, the teacher has to be flexible and differentiate instruction.
Solutions
Goals
The goal of John E. Steinbeck School is to ensure students meet the Common Core State
Standards for reading at each grade level. If students are reading at grade level and building their
foundational reading skills now, this will help reduce the number of students that will later need
reading interventions programs, like Read 180 and System 44. Also, if students are able to read
fluently, this will, in turn, help them with their reading comprehension. According to the
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) test results, 47% of third graders are not
meeting the standards for language arts and literacy. This shows that it is crucial for students to
develop literacy skills at an early age.
The main goals for the first graders are to build fluency and automaticity while reading.
Students should:
 meet the first-grade Common Core State Standards for reading,
 be able to read short and long vowels, digraphs, words with inflectional endings, and
two-syllable words,
 pass the DRA test at level 18,
 and utilize multiple strategies to help them improve their decoding skills and fluency.
Learning Objectives
All the objectives for the learning modules are categorized under the cognitive domain.
 Terminal Objective: Given an example or reading selection first-grade students will be
able to apply one to two reading strategies while reading with 100% accuracy. This
applies to all of the learning modules. (Applying)
o Enabling Objective: Given an example or reading selection, first-grade students
will be able to apply the reading strategy “Eagle Eyes,” and use the pictures to
help them read the words. (Applying)
will be able to apply the reading strategy “Lips the Fish,” and make the first sound
of each word. (Applying)
will be able to apply the reading strategy “Stretchy Snake,” and sound out the
word. (Applying)
will be able to apply the reading strategy “Flippy Dolphin” and change the vowel
sounds from a short to a long vowel. (Applying)
will be able to apply the reading strategy “Chunky Monkey” and break up the
words into smaller parts. (Applying)

will be able to apply the reading strategy “Skippy Frog,” and use context clues to
help them decode the words. (Applying)
will be able to apply the reading strategy “Trying Lion,” and reread the selection
multiple times and apply the other reading strategies if necessary. (Applying)
Proposed Solution
The project will provide practice of multiple reading strategies through the learning
modules to help students accurately decode words. There will be seven learning modules. Each
module will present one strategy. The reading strategies will include: looking at pictures,
making each phoneme sound, stretching out the sound, changing the vowel sound, breaking up
the words into syllables or word families, rereading, and using context clues to figure out the
word. The reading strategies with unique animal names are from Karen Jones’s guided reading
packet. Some of the strategies were modified to include using context clues and breaking apart
the words into syllables to meet the needs of the first graders. Also, the teacher will present two
strategies per week.
Content Overview
(synchronous in-class instruction)
I. Pretest
Take a pretest that requires the students to read and apply various reading strategies
II. Learning Modules
A. Introduction
B. State the objectives (what students will be learning, why students need to learn it, and
how will the students know they have mastered the objective)
C. Activate prior knowledge
D. Present one reading strategy and model how to use it.
E. Provide examples
F. Class discussion of the reading strategy
G. Guided practice with several examples
H. Students will practice one of seven reading strategies.
I. The last module the students will apply multiple reading strategies.
J. Students will match and answer multiple choice questions
III. Informal Assessment
Students will utilize the strategy during reading time.
IV. Media
Videos, graphics, and animation in each module
V. Visual Aid
A. Posters displayed around the room (from Brenda Tejeda’s guided reading packet)
B. Bookmarkers with the reading strategies and animal
VI. Formative Assessment
The teacher will take note if the students are using the reading strategies when struggling
to read a word.
VII. Closure
A. Restate the objective
B. Class discussion of what the students learned
C. The teacher provides feedback from observation of the students during the lesson and
during reading time
D. Review the previous strategies
VIII. Summative assessment
Students will take a post-test, which is the same as the pretest to compare results.
Learning Theory
Cognitive information processing theory (CIP) is appropriate and applicable to first
graders. It involves reducing cognitive load through reading strategies and informs instruction
on how learners process information. The first graders have a short attention span, so it is
important to activate prior knowledge and help the students make connections (Craik & Tulving,
1975). The working memory is limited, and one should only present a few new concepts at a
time. Therefore, each learning module will only focus on one reading strategy. Also, each
strategy will have a unique name and animal associated with it to help students recall the
information. For instance, if the students are having trouble with decoding a word, one of the
reading strategies is to break up the words into syllables or word families. The strategy will be
called “Chunky Monkey” and will have a picture of a monkey (Jones, 2016). By associating the
reading strategy with the picture and name, this will help the student with recall. Furthermore,
by chunking, grouping, and finding patterns in the words, this will help the students process the
word quicker (Bruning et al., 1995).
Instructional Principles
The instructional design will be based on Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction. For the
synchronous in-class instruction, the teacher will gain the students’ attention by displaying
different leveled books. The class will then choral read the objectives. The teacher will activate
prior knowledge by showing some common strategies some students are already using. Then the
teacher will present the reading strategies and provide examples of how to use the strategy from
the different fiction and non-fiction books. The students will be given an example, and the
teacher will guide the student through the process of decoding the word.
For the “elicit performance” portion of Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction, the students
will practice the strategy from the interactive learning modules. The modules will have built-in
feedback as the students complete the activity as a whole class. Afterward, the students will be
given a book and have to apply what they learned.
Media and Delivery System
The instruction was delivered using Smart Notebook on the teacher’s MacBook. Each
learning module contains videos, graphics, and animation—created using Smart Notebook—to
show examples of reading strategies. The students interact with the modules using an interactive
pen. The Smart Notebook was chosen since it is user-friendly, easy-to-use, and able to store all
the necessary components of the modules.
Risk and Challenges
The main challenge is making the modules engaging and interactive. There is a risk that
the students may not like the learning modules. As a result, the students may lose motivation
and interest. To minimize the risk, I will test the modules on a couple of students to get their
input. Another potential risk is the new principal, Mr. Soriano, might not support the project.
Also, as soon as the learning modules are complete, I will get input from the principal before
delivering it to the class.
Method and Procedures

The teacher-led instruction approach will be used with the learning modules. The teacher
can model the reading strategies and assist the students with questions. The teacher can assess
the students during the lessons and modify the instruction as needed. Also, since first graders are
easily distracted, the teacher can redirect the students’ attention to the lesson and what is
important. The in-class instruction allows the teacher to introduce the reading strategy to the
whole class with visual aids. Then the students will be given some example to practice.
Afterward, the students will apply what they have learned during reading time. The teacher will
also work with students in small groups if they need additional instruction and practice. The
small group allows the teacher to provide support. The teacher will check their understanding
throughout the lesson and asks questions to engage the students. When students are engaged in
the learning process, this improves outcomes (Freeman et al., 2014).
List of Major Deliverables
 Presentation of strategies with examples
 7 Learning Modules using Smart Notebook
 Basic teacher’s guide
 1 video per module (taken from Youtube or recorded by me)
 1 matching activity per module
 multiple choice questions for each module
 pretest and post-test
Resources
Listed are the necessary resources for this project.
 Smart Notebook
 Adobe Camtasia
 iPhone (record videos)
 Microsoft Word (storyboarding)
 Adobe Photoshop (draw images)
 Pixabay and Google images
 Email (communication with advisors)
Timeline
Complete Storyboard September 25, 2018

Meet with Dr. Farrington to discuss progress September 2018-December 2018
Make Learning Modules 1-7 September 2018-October 2018
Submit the final project proposal October 16, 2018
Collaborate with the instructional coach October 2018-November 2018
Usability Test October 2018
Pretest and Implement Modules 1 October 19, 2018
Implement Modules 2-3 October 22, 2018 & October 24, 2018
Implement Modules 4-5 October 29, 2018 & November 1, 2018
Implement Modules 6-7 November 5, 2018 & November 7, 2018
Post-test November 9, 2018
Formative Evaluation Write-up November 13, 2018
Final Report December 11, 2018
Presentation December 11, 2018
Evaluation
Formative Evaluation
The formative evaluation involves evaluating the modules in its developmental stages. I
did a process evaluation and a usability test. The process evaluation was to assess the students’
learning experience. The usability testing helped to make sure the modules were working
correctly, like the buttons and sounds.
Process Evaluation.
For the process evaluation, I had five first graders from John Steinbeck School complete
the first eModule in a quiet room. There were three main problems I discovered. The first
problem was their lack of fine motor skills. The students had trouble dragging the objects using
the touchpad. The second problem was their attention span. After two to three seconds, they
were not paying attention to the lesson and started to look around the room. The third problem
was it took the students too long to complete the module. My solution was to keep the content,
but change the instruction method to teacher-led. This allows me to help the students navigate
the content, assess their learning, redirect their attention to the important information, and guide
the students through the module in a timely manner. I also added a teacher’s manual to show the
basic outline of each module.
Usability Testing
For the first usability test, I had five first graders complete the module. The students
were unable to play the videos on their new Chromebook because of the school’s firewall
settings. Also, some interactions were not working, like the drag-and-drop and fill-in-the-blank
activities.
The second usability test, I decided to change it to teacher-led instruction and use the
Smart Notebook Software instead of Adobe Captivate. The students are more familiar with
Smart Notebook, and there are more interactive options, like drawing, writing, and inserting
objects. I tested five first graders. I asked the students to complete the tasks:
1. Listen to the introduction
2. Press the back and forth arrows
3. Complete the activities (fill-in-the-blank, drag and drop, move the objects)
4. Read the words
5. Draw lines to match the words and objects
6. Take the quiz and bubble in the answer
7. Click on the link
8. Play the video
The learners did not have trouble navigating the module. All the buttons and activities
worked. The video was able to be played on my MacBook, since there is a different security
level for teachers. The learners were able to use the interactive pen with ease to complete the
drag-and-drop and fill-in-the-blank activities. The font size was legible, and the audio can be
heard (see Appendix B for the observation checklist).
I also asked three teachers, who are my subject matter experts, and two teachers’ aides to
complete module one and give me any suggestions on the content as well as navigation. The
teachers found similar mistakes, like the drag-and-drop activities and fill-in-the-blank questions
were not working correctly (see Appendix B for the observation checklist). One teacher
suggested adding audio for the directions for all the slides in case the learners wanted to hear the
directions multiple times. Another teacher suggested taking the pre-test and post-test on paper.
Based on the teachers’ and students’ feedback I made some changes. Here are the teachers’
comments:
-I like the review section because a lot of times teachers forget to review at the end of the
lesson.
-The illustrations, games, and videos were not distracting.
-The color and font were not too busy.
-I learned about the double vowel rules.
-I like how it [the module] integrated reading, listening, speaking, and practice.
Summative Evaluation
The teacher and the students used the learning modules. The teacher used the modules to
teach the content, and the students participated in the activities and test portion of the module.
Twenty-two students ranging from age six and seven completed the 1) survey, 2) pre-test, 3)
learning modules, 4) post-test, and 5) questionnaire. Throughout the process, the teacher
documented the usability and learning process.
1. Survey: The survey consisted mainly of the students’ reading experiences. This
allows the evaluator to determine the students’ reading abilities. The evaluator asked the
questions in person.
2. Pre-Test: Next, the students took the pre-test. The pre-test assessed the students’ use
of reading strategies. The teacher read the directions, and then the students filled in or
circled the multiple choice answer.
3. Learning Modules: The students completed the activities by clicking on the
animation, sorting, and matching exercises.
4. Post-Test: After the teacher taught the module, the learners took the post-test. The
post-test was the same as the pre-test. The teacher conducted a t-test on both the pre-test
and post-test results to see if the instruction had a significant impact.
5. Questionnaire: The students will be asked about their learning experiences with the
learning modules and their confidence level to apply what they have learned.
Survey Results. From the reading survey, 73% of the students had at least one person
that read to them at home. 27% of the students did not have anyone that read to them at home.
When asked if they liked to listen, read a story, or both, most students prefer to read. When
asked about their favorite book, 68% of students chose a book with lots of pictures, 32% chose
none or had no response, and 0% of students chose chapter books. The survey shows that most
students have a desire to read. While most of the students have someone that read to them, not
all are exposed to books at home. Also, from the survey, most students picked picture books,
which are typically short and easy to understand. From my teaching experience, the students that
are reading at a second or third-grade level tend to choose chapter books, which require a longer
attention span and greater comprehension. Most who read chapter books are also independent
readers. The students in my class are still dependent on others to help them read. Thus, it is
important the students learn reading strategies to help them become independent readers (see
Appendix C for reading survey results).
Pre-Test and Post-Test Results. The students took a pre-test with paper and pencil
before learning the reading strategies. The teacher read the directions, and the students filled in
their answers (see Appendix D for pre-test and post-test).
My hypothesis was that my reading strategy instruction would improve the students’
reading ability. The dependent sample t-test was used to analyze the pre-test and post-test for the
same group of first graders. Since the hypothesis is directional, I used the one-tailed t-test. The
absolute value of the t-stat result is greater than the critical value (11.03>1.72). So, we reject the
null hypothesis and support the research hypothesis that the learning modules improved the
students’ reading ability. Students met the learning objectives and were able to apply the reading
strategies. The results show that the reading strategies instruction was effective in teaching the
students how to decode words. Also, from my observation, after the instruction part, I noticed
the students would continue to use the reading strategies. I did not have to help the students read
as much as before.
Table 1:
t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means
Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean 17.30681818 25.21590909
Variance 27.67816558 9.614853896
Observations 22 22
Pearson Correlation 0.796476207
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0

df 21
t Stat -11.03234167
P(T<=t) one-tail 1.68827E-10
t Critical one-tail 1.720742903
P(T<=t) two-tail 3.37653E-10
t Critical two-tail 2.079613845
Learning Modules. During the instruction, the majority of the students were engaged in
the lesson. All the students raised their hands to participate in the activities. Before each lesson,
the teacher would have students talk to their partners to review all the previous reading
strategies. The students learned the strategies with ease, except for module five. For module
five “Chunky Monkey,” the students had to break up the words into syllables, onset and rime,
and suffixes. Since the concept was harder, the teacher had to slow down when teaching this
module. By the end of the modules, the students understood the basic gist of the lesson that one
can break up the words into parts to help them read the word. After taking the post-test, the
teacher had to reteach the lesson to a few students that struggled with the reading strategy.
Questionnaire Results. From the questionnaire, 17 students thought the instructions
were easy to follow, two students were neutral, and three students thought they were difficult.
The layouts of the modules were the same to decrease cognitive load. When asked about the
students understanding of the reading strategies by the end of the instruction, 90% of the students
said they knew a lot, 10% knew very little, and 0% did not learn anything. This shows that most
of the students gained a lot of knowledge of the different reading strategies from the instruction.
For the confidence level, 20 students felt confident about using the reading strategies while
reading, and two students felt unconfident. Twenty-one students felt the topic was important.
Nineteen students did not feel frustrated from the instruction. As for the level of difficulty of the
post-tests, 12 students thought the tests were difficult, and ten thought they were easy. Lastly,
the students seem excited about the instructions and different students liked different parts of the
modules, like the activities, videos, animals, pictures and more. Overall, the students had
positive responses with learning the reading strategies and felt confident about applying what
they have learned (see Appendix E for questionnaire results).
Future Plans
In six weeks, I plan to have the students take the diagnostic reading assessment. I will
then evaluate if the students are using the reading strategies while reading the leveled texts. If
students are applying the reading strategies, then they should increase three to four reading
levels. I will also observe the students informally during reading time to see how they are
applying the reading strategies.
However, I will not be able to see how the reading results affect the organization once the
school year is over. The students will be in different classes; therefore, it will be hard to keep
track of the students’ data and reading levels.
Conclusion
Reading is a very challenging skill for beginner readers. The reading strategies help
students to rely on themselves to overcome decoding problems. After the instruction, the
students felt more confident about reading and needed less help from the teacher decoding
difficult words. The interactive modules along with the direct instruction were effective in
teaching the students the reading strategies and meeting the objectives. In the future
implementation, I might introduce only one new reading strategies a week instead of two. This
will allow the students more time to practice the reading skills and absorb what they have
learned.
References
Beverly, B.L., Giles, R.M., & Buck, K.L. (2009). First grade reading gains following
enrichment: Phonics plus decodable texts compared to authentic literature read aloud.
Reading Improvement, 46(4), 191-205. Retrieved from
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.library2.csumb.edu:2048/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&s
id=039835ea-e62d-4a8d-ae15-fb04a7e8b4c5%40sessionmgr4007
Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. S., % Ronning, R. R. (1995). Cognitive psychology and instruction.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress. (2017). Test results for English
language arts/literacy and mathematics. Retrieved from
http://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/ViewReport?ps=true&lstTestYear=2017&lstTestType=
B&lstGroup=1&lstCounty=27&lstDistrict=65961-000&lstSchool=6109466
Craik, F.I.M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of Processing and the retention of words in episodic
memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 268-294
Foorman, B. R., Novy, D. M., Francis, D. J., & Liberman, D. (1991). How letter-sound
instruction mediates progress in first-grade reading and spelling. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 83(4), 456. Retrieved from
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.library2.csumb.edu:2048/ehost/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=5ab8
66f5-8ad9-4460-bd2a-daa7e1f3147a%40pdc-v-
sessmgr01&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=10420293&db=aph
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., &
Wenderoth, M. P. (2013). Active learning increases student performance in science,
engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 111 (23), pp. 8410-15 . Retrieved from
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/23/8410.full.pdf
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., Yen, L., McMaster, K., Svenson, E., Yang, N., &…King, S. (2001).
Developing first-grade reading fluency through peer mediation. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 34(2), 90. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/openview/fc6ef5c23feea55b5f4a9e1406c7ac15/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=7737
Gagne R. M., Wager, W., & Rojas, A. (1981). Planning and authoring computer assisted
instruction lessons. Educational Technology, 21 (9), p 17-21.
Graham, J., & Forstadt, L. (2011). Children and brain development: What we know about how
children learn. Retrieved from https://extension.umaine.edu/publications/4356e/
Great Schools. (2017). John e. steinbeck elementary school. Retrieved from
https://www.greatschools.org/california/salinas/3235-John-E.-Steinbeck-Elementary-
School/
Gredler, M.E. (2009). Learning and instruction: Theory into Practice (6th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, N.J.: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=planning+and+authoring+computer+assisted+instruction&id=EJ25
5193
Jones, K (n.d.). Guided reading. Retrieved from
https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Guided-Reading-1st-GRADE-BUNDLE-
Levels-F-J-2416868
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). State education reforms. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/tab5_3.asp
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School
Officers. (2017). Common core state standards for English language arts reading:
Foundational skills, first grade. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-
Literacy/RF/1/
Nguyen, N. (2017). Literature Review. Paper from IST 511. CSUMB, Monterey Bay.
Reutzel, D. R., & Cooter, R. B. (1990). Whole language: Comparative effects on first-grade
reading achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 83(5). Retrieved from
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.library2.csumb.edu:2048/ehost/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=eb929
f9a-e414-4e76-930a-
a6e27aa5a915%40sessionmgr4006&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN
=5005186&db=aph
Suprabha, K., & Subramonian, G. (2014). How does station teaching effect language learning?
Journal on English Language Teaching, 4(3), 21-25. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068439
Tejeda, B (2016). Reading strategies posters and guided reading cards. Retrieved from
https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/READING-STRATEGIES-Posters-and-
Guided-Reading-Cards-2501689
Appendix A
Survey Questions Results
1. What is your job title? (10 teachers)
(8 multiple subject teachers, 1 special day class teacher, 1 reading specialist)
2. How many years have you been teaching?

0-9 years (4) 10-19 (2) 20-29 (1) 30-39 (3)
3. Do you feel like your students are reading at grade level?

Strongly disagree (2) disagree (4) neither agree nor agree (2) strongly agree
disagree (2)
4. How satisfied are you with your students’ reading ability?

Very dissatisfied (1) dissatisfied (3) neither satisfied satisfied (3) very satisfied
nor dissatisfied
(3)
5. How much time do you spend a teaching phonics in a day?
0-35 mins (4) 36-71 mins (4) 71-106 mins (2)
6. How much time do you spend teaching reading strategies explicitly in a day?
0-35 mins (5) 36-71 mins (3) 71-106 mins (2)
7. Do you feel there is a need to teach students reading strategies explicitly?
strongly disagree disagree neither agree nor agree (1) strongly agree
disagree (9)
8. Do you think teaching students reading strategies explicitly will improve their decoding
skills?
strongly disagree disagree neither agree nor agree (4) strongly agree
disagree (6)
9. Do you feel like students are capable of improving their reading skills? If yes, how?
-Yes, with instruction and practice with comprehensible input.
-With more motivation, parent support and with me teaching reading strategies more explicitly.
-Yes, through explicit direct instruction.
-Yes, explicit direct instructions, small group instructions, guided reading groups, intervention.
-Yes, however slower than the typical child without disabilities.
-Yes, with the proper foundation they will flourish.
-Home support.
-Practice, presentation
-Yes, need more practice in small groups.
-Yes! Repeat, practice, practice, practice
Appendix B
Observation Checklist
Observation Checklist Yes No Comments
Accessibility
1. Is the font size large enough for the 10
user to read?
2. Is the learner able to read the text on 10
the contrasting background color?
3. Are you able to hear the audio? 9 1
4. Can you play the video? 9 1 One learner had trouble

opening the video because he
had too many windows open.
5. Does the learner understand the 9 1 One learner forgot to press the
directions? audio button on the slide to
listen to the directions.
Navigation
6. Does the learner know how to navigate 8 2 Two learners needed help
in the toolbar? navigating the toolbar.
7. Is the learner able to go back and forth 10 Sometimes the drag-and-drop
between slides? activities would not work
correctly.
Is the learner able to drag and drop the 2 8
words and pictures?
Appendix C
Reading Survey Results
1. Who reads with you at home?
no one (6) one person (10) two people (4) three or more people
(2)
2. Do you like to listen, read a story, or both?
none (0) listen (5) read (12) both read and listen
(5)
3. What is your favorite book?
none or no response chooses a book with chapter book (0)
(7) lots of pictures (15)

Appendix D
Pre-Test and Post-Test
Multiple Choice
Answers: 1D, 2B, 3C, 4B

Answers: (1) frog, (2) cake, (3), letter t, (4) letter f

Answers: (1) pumpkin picture, (2) girl in the swimsuit, (3) boy in the tent, (4) girl jumps rope
Answers: (1) picture of meat, (2) picture of tub, (3) picture of kite, (4) feast, seeds, plane, hat
Answers: (1) Fr og, (2) b oy, (3) dancing, (4) 2

Answers: (1) clean, (2) cannot, (3) tree, (4) weather

Answers: (1) popcorn, (2) ears, (3) tie, (4) caught

Appendix E
Questionnaire Results
1. Were the instructions easy to follow?
Easy (17) Neutral (2) Difficult (3)
2. How much do you know about the reading strategies?
A lot (20) Very Little (2) Nothing Very Unfamiliar
3. How confident do you feel about using the reading strategies while reading?
Confident (20) Undecided Unconfident (2)
4. Did you find the strategies important to reading?
Important (21) Undecided Unimportant (1)
5. Did you experience any frustration during the instruction?
Frustration (2) Unsure (1) No Frustration (19)

6. How would you describe the level of difficulty of the quizzes?
Very Easy Easy (10) Undecided Difficult (12)
7. What did you like about the instruction? Please type your answer.
I can learn to read.
I like the animals.
The games are fun!
I like the pictures.
Watching the videos on Youtube.
The quiz was easy.
There are many activities.
I like learning to read.

Capstone Report Nguyen

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

Capstone Report Nguyen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Reading Strategies for First Graders

Submitted in partial satisfaction of requirements of the degree of

Instructional Science and Technology

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................4

Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................................5

Learner Analysis ..........................................................................................................................7

Context Analysis ..........................................................................................................................8

Literature Review .........................................................................................................................8

Learning Objectives ...................................................................................................................10

Proposed Solution ......................................................................................................................11

Content Overview ......................................................................................................................11

Learning Theories ......................................................................................................................12

Instructional Principles ...............................................................................................................13

Media and Delivery System .......................................................................................................13

Risk and Challenges ...................................................................................................................13

METHODS AND PROCEDURES................................................................................................13

List of Major Deliverables .........................................................................................................14

Formative Evaluation .................................................................................................................15

Summative Evaluation ...............................................................................................................17

Pre-Test and Post-Test Results ..........................................................................................18

Learning Modules ..............................................................................................................19

Questionnaire Results ........................................................................................................19

FUTURE PLANS ..........................................................................................................................19

APPENDIX A: SURVEY RESULTS ...........................................................................................24

APPENDIX B: OBSERVATION CHECKLIST ...........................................................................25

APPENDIX C: READING SURVEY RESULTS .........................................................................26

APPENDIX D: PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST ............................................................................27

APPENDIX E: QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS ............................................................................34

o Enabling Objective: Given an example or reading selection, first-grade students

Method and Procedures

Complete Storyboard September 25, 2018

-The illustrations, games, and videos were not distracting.

-The color and font were not too busy.

-I learned about the double vowel rules.

Hypothesized Mean Difference 0

2. How many years have you been teaching?

3. Do you feel like your students are reading at grade level?

4. How satisfied are you with your students’ reading ability?

5. How much time do you spend a teaching phonics in a day?

0-35 mins (4) 36-71 mins (4) 71-106 mins (2)

7. Do you feel there is a need to teach students reading strategies explicitly?

1. Is the font size large enough for the 10

2. Is the learner able to read the text on 10

the contrasting background color?

3. Are you able to hear the audio? 9 1

4. Can you play the video? 9 1 One learner had trouble

directions? audio button on the slide to

listen to the directions.

in the toolbar? navigating the toolbar.

7. Is the learner able to go back and forth 10 Sometimes the drag-and-drop

between slides? activities would not work

Is the learner able to drag and drop the 2 8

words and pictures?

2. Do you like to listen, read a story, or both?

3. What is your favorite book?

none or no response chooses a book with chapter book (0)

(7) lots of pictures (15)

Answers: 1D, 2B, 3C, 4B

Answers: (1) frog, (2) cake, (3), letter t, (4) letter f

Answers: (1) Fr og, (2) b oy, (3) dancing, (4) 2

Answers: (1) clean, (2) cannot, (3) tree, (4) weather

Answers: (1) popcorn, (2) ears, (3) tie, (4) caught