Dionisia Rigby CBSE 7202T Seminar in Applied Research II Fall 2013 Action Research Final BEST PRACTICES TO KEEP KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS ENGAGED
Feb 22, 2016
Dionisia RigbyCBSE 7202T
Seminar in Applied Research IIFall 2013
Action Research Final Presentation
BEST PRACTICES TO KEEP KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS
ENGAGED
Problem Statement – Slide 3Literature Review- Slide 4
Hypothesis- Slide 5Participants and Instruments – Slide 6
Experimental Design – Slide 7Threats to Internal Validity – Slide 8Threats to External Validity – Slide 9
Procedure–Slide 10Data Analysis- Slide 11-12Correlations- Slide 13-14
Discussion and Implications- Slide 15Survey Questions – Slide 16
Intervention Tracker – Slide 17References – Slide 18
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The purpose of this research is to find the best practices to keep kindergarteners engaged and energetic in an all day program. It has been noticed that many students fall asleep throughout the day. Numerous kinesthetic
activities will be used as a form of intervention to see what keeps students
engaged the most. A pre-survey will be given, intervention will be implemented and post-
survey will be given
PROBLEM STATEMENT
“Gains in knowledge are often accompanied by increased interest and appreciation of the subject, both important
indexes of engagement, which are related to actual activity choice and participation” (Mantizicopoulos & Patrick,
2011). “Physical activity promotes biological changes in the brain that enhance adaptability and connections between brain
cells; this brain activity is necessary for learning as well as for the growth of new brain cells (Ratey 2008)” (Reilly et
al., 2012). “Evidence supports that theory that problems with
attention predate learning problems and that longitudinal investigations of the relationship between attention and
literacy are critical for understanding how literacy develops” (Dice & Schwanenflugel, 2012).
LITERATURE REVIEW
Developing a system, where students do a series of kinesthetic activities when they
seem tired or fall asleep during instruction, for 28 students in a charter school in Brooklyn, NY, for 2 weeks during the
afternoon subjects, will keep them engaged in their learning and stay on task. This will also
improve their attitude towards kinesthetic activities and their engagement in school.
HYPOTHESIS – HR1
Participants
28 females in researcher’s classroom from Brooklyn,
New York
Between ages 4-6
26 African American, 2 Hispanic
Instruments
10 Question Student Pre and Post Survey
Teacher Survey
Intervention Tracker
Video Camera
Journal
PARTICIPANTS AND INSTRUMENTS
One Group Pre-Test Post-Test Design • One group, 29 girls (School X in Brooklyn, NY) will
receive a pretest (O)• Group will be exposed to a treatment (X)• Group will be post-tested (O)Symbolic Design Representation • OXOPre-Test (O) and Post-Test (O) = Pre and Post SurveyTreatment (X) will consist of before and after videos of scholars during math and core instruction over the period of 2 weeks
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
• History – events outside of the experiment are likely to occur such staying up late the night before or on a regular basis
• Maturation- overtime students may become accustomed to kinesthetic movements causing them to no have an effect
• Mortality – students may have long absences or may transfer schools
• Statistical Regression – a low number of students my bring forth results, causing data to be insignificant
THREATS TO INTERNAL VALIDITY
• Pre-Test Treatment – students may act differently since they were pre-tested
• Multiple Treatment – Students may receive more than one treatment in succession
• Experimenter Effects – Researcher actively presents potential threats; due to person bias researcher may effect results due to previous knowledge of students
THREATS TO EXTERNAL VALIDITY
Pre-test – All students were given a survey measuring their initial attitude towards kinesthetic activities and
their engagement in school
Treatment –Treatment were given introduced to all participants. All students were observed during Math and
Core. When students fell asleep, researcher asked students to participate in different kinesthetic activities.
Post-test – All students were given a survey identical to the pre-survey measuring their final attitude towards kinesthetic
activities and their engagement in school
PROCEDURES
DATA ANALYSIS
Above is the proposed data for the activity students prefer to stay engaged during instruction. Pre-survey most students prefer to try to stay engaged on their own with no intervention. Post-survey most students prefer to do jumping jacks to stay engaged.
Preferred Activity to Stay Engaged Pre-Survey
# of StudentsPost-Survey# of Students
Stretching 0 8
Jumping Jacks 2 12
Walking for Water 17 5
Standing Up 3 1
No Intervention 7 2
24%
10%
31%
28%
7%
Most Preferred InterventionPre-Survey
No Intervention Standing Splash WaterDrink Water Stretching Jumping Jacks
7%4%
11%
7%
29%
43%
Most Preferred Intervention Post-Survey
No Intervention StandingSplash Water Drink WaterStretching Jumping Jacks
DATA ANALYSIS
Likes J
umping Jack
s
Likes S
tretch
ing
Jumping Jack
Keeps Engage
d
Stretch
ing Keeps E
ngaged
0123
Atttitudes Towards JJ and Stretching and the Engagement of Both
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
Kinesthetic ActivityAtti
tude
Rati
ng
Average Attitude Rating Towards Activity and Engagement Pre-Survey Post- SurveyLikes Jumping Jacks
1.68 2.93
Likes Stretching
1.68 2.86
Jumping Jacks Keeps Engaged
1.64 3.32
Stretching Keeps Engaged
1.43 3
This data shows the results based on the questions, “Do you like jumping jacks?” and “Do you like stretching?”. The answer choices were 1-Stongly Dislike, 2- Dislike, 3-Like, and 4- Strongly Like.” This data also shows results for the questions, “Do jumping jacks keep you awake?”, “Does stretching keep you awake?”. Answer choices included, 1- Very Sleepy, 2- A little Sleepy, 3-A little Awake, 4- Very Awake. All areas showed great improvement after the intervention.
DATA ANALYSIS
Pre-Survey Post- Survey0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Mean Attitude Towards Engagement All Day
Like
rt sc
ale
Ratin
g
Pre-Survey Post-Survey0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Percentage of Scholars that feel Engaged All Day
Enga
gem
ent P
erce
ntag
e
Both graphs apply to the question, “Do you feel engaged in school all day?” The first graph shows that the average rating pre-intervention was 1.8 showing that most students felt very sleepy or a little sleepy all day. The average rating post-intervention was 2.9 showing that most students felt a little awake all day.
The second graph shows that before the intervention only 18% of students felt either a little awake or very awake all day. After the intervention, 71% of the students felt either a little awake or very awake all day, a 53% increase.
DATA ANALYSIS
This graph shows the data based on the intervention. Each activity received a rating based on if they kept a student on task after falling asleep. The ratings were as follows 1- Never (0 times kept student engaged), 2- Rarely (1 to 7 times kept student engaged), 3 – Often (8 to 15 times kept student awake), and 4 – Always (16 times kept student engaged).
No intervention never kept the student awake and on task. Standing kept the students engaged 5 times. Going for a walk to splash water kept students engaged 7 times. Going for a walk to get a drink of water kept students engaged 9 times. Stretching kept students awake 14 times and jumping jacks kept students engaged all 16 times.
No Intervention Standing Splash Water Drink Water Stretching Jumping Jacks0
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
Intervention Frequencies
Mean Engagment
Kinesthetic Activity
Freq
uenc
y Ra
ting
DATA ANALYSISData Set Scatter Plot and Line Best Fit - Attitude Towards Subject and Engagement During Subject X-Axis Y- Axis
3 3
4 4 X-Axis = Do you like Core?3 4 1- Strongly Dislike 4 3 2 - Dislike3 4 3 - Like2 1 4 - Strongly Like 2 1
2 1 Y- Axis = Do you feel sleepy during Core?2 2 1- Very Sleepy1 2 2 - A Little Sleepy3 4 3 - A Little Awake4 4 4 - Very Awake3 4
4 43 43 4
3 3
2 3
1 1
1 2
2 13 24 34 34 33 34 34 3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
0 1 2 3 4 5
Attitu
de To
war
ds E
ngag
emen
t
Attitude Towards Core
Series1
Linear (Series1)
Correlation Coefficient:0.66505315 rxy=.66
The data represents the correlation between pre-survey question, "Do you like Core?" and pre-survey question, "Do you feel sleepy during Core?". This data shows a strong positive correlation between students' attitude towards the subject and their attitude towards their engagement during the subject. If they really liked the subject they thought they felt awake during the subject. If they didn't like the subject they thought they felt more tired during the subject.
DATA ANALYSISData Set Scatter Plot and Line Best Fit - Number of Times Used Activities and Attitude Towards Engagment All DayX-Axis Y- Axis
5 2
12 3 X-Axis = Number of Times Activities Used7 2 0-16
14 3
4 2 Y-Axis =Attitude Towards Engagement All Day13 3 1- Very Sleepy11 4 2- A Little Sleepy12 4 3 - A Little Awake 14 4 4 - Very Awake
8 2
10 3
6 2
11 3
10 312 312 3
12 3
15 310 3
3 29 35 25 2
16 414 413 315 411 3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
0 5 10 15 20
Attitu
de T
owar
ds En
gage
men
t All
Day
Number of Time used Activities
Series1
Linear (Series1)
Correlation Coefficient0.84198246 rxy= .84
This data shows the correlation between the number of times a students needed activities to stay awake and the post-survey question, “Do you feel engaged all day?”. This data shows a strong positive correlation. The more students needed to do kinesthetic activities to stay awake, the more they felt engaged throughout the day.
DiscussionThe implementation of kinesthetic activities proves to a
best practice to keep students engaged in a full-day Kindergarten program. The implementation of kinesthetic
activities also proves to improve students’ attitudes towards the activities and their attitudes towards their
engagement all day. Jumping Jacks seem to keep students engaged the most.
ImplicationsTeacher surveys came be used to do further research on teacher attitudes towards to student engagement. This
information can be used to determine when students are the most engaged which would further distinguish the best
times to teach the most important subjects.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
SAMPLE SURVEY QUESTIONS
Name: _____________________ Date:______________________ Age: ________ Gender: ________ Demographic: ________________ Prior Schooling: ______________
1. Do you like Core? 1-Stongly Dislike 2- Dislike 3- Like 4 – Strongly Like
2. Do you feel sleepy during Core?
1 -Very Sleepy 2- A little Sleepy 3- Awake 4 – Very Awake
3. Do you like jumping jacks? 1-Stongly Dislike 2- Dislike 3- Like 4 – Strongly Like
INTERVENTION TRACKER
November 11th Math Core Intervention Effectiveness Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Student 6 Student 7 Student 8 Student 9 Student 10 Student 11 Student 12 Student 13 Student 14 Student 15
• Ahtola A., Silinskas G., Poikonen P.L., Kontoniemi M., Niemi P., & Nurmi J.E. (2011) Transition to formal schooling: Do transition practices matter for academic performance? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26, 295 – 302. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.12.002
• Block C.C., Paris S.R., & Whiteley C.S. (2008). CPMs: A kinesthetic comprehension strategy. The Reading Teacher, 61(6), 460-470. DOI:10.1598/RT.61.6.3
• Braniff C. (2011). Perceptions of an active classroom: Exploration of movement and collaboration with fourth grade students. Networks, 13 (1-6). Retrieved from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournals.library.wisc.edu%2Findex.php%2Fnetworks%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F282%2F461&ei=zyaUbHsFtCO0QG9uIH4Aw&usg=AFQjCNFCIdIWzyThAHhYFq7S3jSAFGPA&sig2=u_W7LX3dfmttVlaZcUs3Vw&bvm=bv.46751780,d.dmQ
• Burg, K. (2010). Justifying physical education based on neuroscience evidence. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 81 (3), 24-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2010.10598445
• Chien N. C., Howes C., Pianta R. C., Burchinal M., Ritchie S., Bryant D.M., Clifford R.M., Early D.M., & Barbain O.A. (2010). Children’s classroom engagement and school readiness gains in prekindergarten. Child Development, 81 (5), 1534-1549) DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01490.x
REFERENCES
• Dice J.L. & Schwanenflugel P. (2012). A structural model of the effects of preschool attention on kindergarten literacy. Read Writ, 25, (2205 – 2222). DOI 10.1007/s11145-011-9354-3
• Harcourt D. and Keen D. (2012). Learner engagement: Has the child been lost in translation?. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 37 (3), 71-78. http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=736103771294540;res=IELHSS
• Hill L., Williams J.H.G., Aucott L., Milne J., Thomson J., Greig J., Munro V., & Mon- Williams M. (2010). Exercising attention within the classroom. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 52, 929 -934. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2010.03661.x
• Kemp C., Kishida Y., Carte M., & Sweller N. (2013). The effect of activity type on the engagement and interaction of young children with disabilities in inclusive childcare settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 28, 134-143. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2012.03.003
• Kubesh S., Walk L., Spitzer M., Kammer T., Lainburg A., Heim R., and Hille K. (2009). A 30-minute physical education program improves students’ executive attention. Mind, Brain , and Education, 3 (4),235-242. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751- 228X.2009.01076.x
REFERENCES
• Janvier B. and Testu Francois. (2007) Age-related differences in daily attention patterns in preschool, kindergarten, first grade and fifth grade pupils. Chronobiology International, 24(2), 327-343. DOI: 10.1080/07420520601139839
• Lan X., Ponitz C.C., Miller K.F., Li S., Cortina K., Perry M., & Fang G. (2009). Keeping their
attention: Classroom practices associated with behavioral engagement in first grade mathematics classes in China and in the United States. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24, 198 – 211. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.03.002• Lerkkanen M.K., Kiuru N., Pakarinen E., Viljaranta J., Poikkeus A.M., Rasku-
Puttunen H., Siekkinen M., & Nurmi J.E. (2012). The role of teaching practices in the development in c hildren’s interest in reading and mathematics in kindergarten. Comtemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 266-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.03.004
• Mantizicopoulos P. and Patrick H. (2011). Reading Picture Books and Learning Science: Engaging young children with informational text. Theory Into Practice, 50, 269-276. DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.607372
• Moschovaki E., Meadows S., & Pellegrini A. (2007). Teacher’s affective presentation of children’s books and young children’s display of affective engagement during classroom book reading. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22 (4), 405-420. DOI: 10.1007/BF03173463
REFERENCES
• O’Connor, Petruso S. (2013). Descriptive Statistics Threats to Validity. Powerpoint Slides. Retreived from Blackboard Course Documents
• Pagani L.S., Fitzpatrick C., & Parent S. (2012). Relating kindergarten attention to subsequent
developmental pathways of classroom engagement in elementary school. J Abnorm Child Psychology, 40, 715-725. DOI 10.1007/s10802-011-9605-4 • Ponitz C.C. and Rimm-Kaufman S.E. (2011). Contexts of reading instruction: Implications for
literacy skills and kindergarteners’ behavioral engagement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26, 157-168. DOI:10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.10.002
• Ray K. and Smith M.C. (2010). The Kindergarten Child: What teachers and administrators need
to know to promote academic success in all children. Early Childhood Educ J, 38, 5-18. DOI 10.1007/s10643-010-0383-3 • Ravid S., Afek I., Suraiya S., Shahar E., & Pillar G. (2009) Sleep disturbances are associated
with reduced school achievements in first grade pupils. Developmental Neuropsychology,
34 (5), 574 -587. DOI: 10.1080/87565640903133533
• Reilly E., Buskist C., & Gross M.K. (2012). Movement in the classroom: Boosting brain power,
fighting obesity. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48, 62-66. DOI 10.1080/00228958.2012.680365
REFERENCES
• Rhoades B.L., Warren H.K., Domitrovich C.E., & Greenberg M.T. (2011). Examining the link between preschool social emotional competence and first grade academic achievement: The role of attention skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26, 182-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.07.003
• Smythe-Leistico K.J., Young C.P., Mulvey L.A., McCall R.B., Petruska M., Barone-Martin C., Capozzoli R., Best T., and Coffee B.A. (2012). Blending theory with practice:
Implenting kindergarten transition using the interactive systems framework. Am J Community Psychol, 5 0, 357-369. DOI 10.1007/s10464-012-9505-y • Stewart R.A., Rule A.C., & Giordano D.A. (2007). The effect of fine motor skill activities on
kindergarten student attention. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 103-109. DOI: 10.1007/s10643-007-0169-4
• Wildenger L.K., McIntyre L.L., Fiese B.H., and Eckert T.L. (2008). Children’s daily routines
during kindergarten transition. Early Childhood Educ J, 36, 69-74. DOI 10.1007/s10643-008-0255-2
• Yu M., Ziviani J., Baxter J., & Haynes M. (2012). Time use differences in activity
participation among children 4-5 years old with and without the risk of developing conduct problems. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33, 490-498 doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.10.013
REFERENCES