NORMA WILTWILMINGTON UNIVERSITY

The Connection Between Writing and Reading Comprehension

Need for Study

Inconsistent AR and other reading comprehension test scores, show that lack of comprehension is a common problem

Reading comprehension is the principal reading problem, not the mechanics of learning to read

Without comprehension there is no joy in reading and no motivation to read (Colucci, 2011)

Review of Literature

Tierney & Shanahan (1991): “Writing helps children become better readers and comprehenders of text”

Deford (1994): “The cognitive processes used in reading are identical to those involved in writing”

Carr, Langer & Applebee (1997): “The act of writing, whether in short sentences or long paragraphs, helps students make connections between what they read, what they understand and what they think”

Nagin & National Writing Project (2003): Numerous educators exclude writing because they feel it is the domain of the language arts, while others see writing as non-beneficial time

Research Question

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

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

My hypothesis was that summarizing would produce the highest level of reading comprehension in a second grade gifted class

Theory

Hypothesis

Observation

Confirmation

Quantitative Research Methodology

Action Research Model

Source: Adapted from Mertler, 2012.

Plan: Study the connection between writing and reading comprehension

Act: Collected professional peer review journals

Develop: Reviewed literature and narrowed in on research question

Reflect: Shared ideas with classmates and received feedback

Plan: Developed a quantitative research plan

Act: Carried out research plan Develop: Analyzed data to

determine if it supported hypothesis and developed conclusions

Reflect: Reflected on problems with study

Plan: Action Plan – Continued the cycle

Stage 2:Acting

Stage 3:Developing

Stage 1:Planning

Stage 4:Reflecting

Stage 2:Acting

Stage 3:Developing

Stage 1:Planning

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

Stage 4:Reflecting

Note:

T = Treatment Condition O = Observation or other type of measure EXP = Experimental Group

Group Time

EXP O T O

Research Design

Source: Adapted from Mertler, 2012.

Single Group Pretest-Posttest DesignSTAR Reading for pretest-posttestAccelerated Reader programs to progress

monitor students’ reading scores in comparison to their reading with writing scores.

Sample

Study Sample My class consisted of twenty three students,

thirteen girls and ten boys. Sixteen students (70%) are Caucasian, five (22%) are Asian and two (8%) are African American

Gifted and talented students in a full day self contained gifted program

Limitations

Data Collection Procedures

Students read two AR books each week for six weeks

Each week students: Read one AR book and took an

assessment Read one AR book, completed a writing

activity and took an assessmentAll data was collected in the

reading/writing journal

Results and Findings

Results and FindingsTable 1

Comparison of Student’s Weekly AR Scores With and Without Writing Intervention

Week – Read/Writing Assignment Mean Standard Deviation P-Value

1- Read Only Pretest 83.0 20.02

0.1728291- Read/Summary Post-test 91.0 16.19

2- Read Only Pretest 86.5 15.98

0.1509982- Read/Connection Post-test 93.0 11.74

3- Read Only Pretest 95.5 7.59

0.1325533- Read/Question Post-test 89.5 15.72

4- Read Only Pretest 85.0 23.50

0.3280574- Read/Summary Post-test 91.5 17.55

5- Read Only Pretest 93.5 13.09

1.05- Read/Connection Post-test 93.5 10.40

6- Read Only Pretest 92.0 12.40

1.06- Read/Question Post-test 92.0 11.52

Note: Significant at p<= 0.05

Discussion

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

Conclusion

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

Conclusion

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