Action Research Proposal Outline

I. Introduction

A. Problem Statement: Students who are identified as Academically At-

Risk (AAR, for the purposes of this Outline) are placed in a track that leads to less
exposure to high-quality instruction, limited access to non-academic courses that
reflect their interests and talents, and higher dropout rates in high school.

B. Context
1. I believe there is a relationship between exposure to engaging, enriching
content and improvement in academic performance for students who are low
achievers. I believe there is a relationship between effective early intervention
and later success across the curriculum. I believe these relationships will be
clearly seen through the implementation of content-based foreign language
instruction that directly supports, supplements, and enriches learning in the
disciplines of mathematics, science, social studies, and language arts.
2. I believe there is a relationship between the absence of this kind of instruction
and the kind of teaching that has typified FL instruction in this country in past
decades. Individuals who make decisions about whether FL should be
included in an elementary school (FLES) are often acting on a set of
assumptions informed by observations and conclusions that may be out of
date. When FL is taught in a Standards-based, multi-modal, highly repetitive,
visual, and engaging program, anybody can learn.
3. In light of this conflict, I now understand that lobbying for FL instruction for
AAR students may require just as much effort as actually carrying out the
instruction. There is a great deal of mediation to be done between the fields of
FL and LD instruction. I believe that when LD specialists see content-
enriched, student-focused, standards-based FL instruction in action, they will
gain a new perspective on foreign language education for AAR students.
And there is a lot of history to this: too many decision-makers (principals, curriculum
supervisors,school board members, some parents and some FLteachers still believe
that the critical factor in successful FL learning is English language achievement –
the old gatekeeper was an A or B in Engligh). As you state in your context
statements above, that should not be the case, but these folks continue to operate
under they myth and under the assumptions that FL classes are essentially
grammatical in focus. None of that is erased in schools where unfortunately that may
still be the case.
C. Research Question: Can Content-Based Foreign Language Instruction
that reviews, reinforces, enriches and expands learning across the curriculum
improve overall academic achievement in academically at-risk students?

D. Summary description of intervention and research method

1. Students benefit in a myriad of ways when FL (or any other
discipline) is taught in a learning environment that seeks to strengthen students
through direct instruction in learning strategies, learning styles, organizational
skills, participation techniques, learning behaviors (showing the teacher
through your appearance and demeanor that you are focused on the task), and

1
 even emphases on areas like nutrition, exercise, and family relationships that
influence academic performance. Furthermore, they will be more successful in
their other classes, from which content is drawn to review, reinforce, enrich,
and expand knowledge and skills.

2. I propose to teach fourth and fifth graders a 50-minute daily

French lesson based on content they are currently learning or have recently
learned in Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies, with occasional activities
relating to Music, Art, and Physical Education. Lessons will reflect the
following instructional objectives:
1. Review and Reinforce
2. Enrich and Expand
3. Active Learning Objectives
4. Foreign Language Objectives
And if you want an acronym make # 4 Language 2 Objectives and you have get REAL!
Your intervention is focused and local which makes it an ideal Classroom Action
Research project.
II. Literature Review (references cited at end)
As I began to plan and to read about Learning Disabilities and FL where the two
appear together, I quickly realized that I would need to become more familiar with
several topics :
A. Cognitive, psychological, social, etc. benefits of FLES
B. Understanding the nature and meeting the needs of
AAR learners
C. How best to inform professionals who require
convincing that FLES can meet the needs of AAR students
1. identify doubts, consider their sources, and know
the research and standards that provide an answer for each perceived
obstacle
2. impart a vision to forge a partnership between FL
and LD educators that will magnify the best that both have to offer
students in need
3. know what has worked / has not worked in past
FLES programs

A. The case for FLES. I would advise even calling this “content-based (or enriched)
FLES to distinguish it from more generalized “learn some songs” FLES that some of
the educators and public may have had experience with (and sometimes that
experience was not one that showed much gain.
Children between the ages of 4 and 12 are at an ideal developmental stage for
introduction to foreign language (FL) study because of their “psychological readiness,
oral flexibility, aural memory capacity, and natural curiosity abut other cultures”
(Medlin, 1979). This implies that for learners who are struggling, there will be no
better time to begin FL instruction.

Many parents and educators feel that devoting time and resources to FL instruction in
elementary school will cause an instructional deficit in the disciplines fondly referred

2
to as “the basics” (Language Arts, Science, Social Studies, and Mathematics). The
abundance of research shows, to the contrary, that FL instruction enhances student
learning and performance across the curriculum and leads to measurably higher
achievement in a wide array of assessments, as well as improved abilities, accelerated
cognitive development, and higher self-esteem. Absolutely – while there are a lot of
areas in which we don’t have adequate research, this is one in which there are
sufficient longitudinal studies to confirm there is not content deficit.

“Piaget … said that the major thrust of cognitive development is realized when one
comes into contact with ideas or experiences that are in conflict with one’s existing
ideas.” (Carpenter & Tomey, 1973) According to Piaget’s Intelligence Model,
learning is not achieved upon the plane of sameness: rather, it is on the obstacle
course of conflict and differences that new neurological and cognitive pathways are
forged in the minds of learners. (Likewise, it is on the sheer cliffs of diversity,
exemplified in FL instruction, that sociocultural intelligence is gained, one toe-hold at
a time.) Foreign language, being foreign, presents a consistent barrage of hurdles that
force the mind to fit itself into ever-new molds and apply itself to ever-new tasks. In
this way, the mind applied to FL study is in a state of greater pliability than it would
be otherwise, so that learning in all disciplines is achieved with greater ease; or, in the
case of struggling students, with less distress and frustration, and a welcome decrease
in the negative behaviors they incite.

Perhaps Fuchsen’s best rationale for FLES is her description of the FL class taught
within a communicative framework, based upon comprehensible input rather than
linguistic analysis. In this classroom, students perform simple science labs, solve
mathematical problems, and examine literature and the arts. These familiar classroom
activities are outstanding in one way: they are all conducted in the foreign language.
Students progress from hearing the language to using it themselves to respond, and
then to initiate meaningful interactions around the engaging, relevant content that
gives them an authentic reason to use the language. The result? Improved basic skills
through reinforcement; enhanced instruction across the curriculum through
professional collaboration; and last, but certainly not least – second language
acquisition. Like a courtly gentleman, L2 takes a backseat to everyone else’s
priorities, and through serving their purposes, ends up a winner in his own right.

Fuchsen refers to the “voluminous accumulation of research” that establishes the

cognitive and psychological benefits of FL study at the elementary school level.
Researchers have made frequent comparisons between the standardized test scores of
young children who study foreign language and those who do not. These test results
demonstrate that FL learners show “significant gains in basic skills as well as in
higher order thinking skills,” and that “regardless of their race, sex, or academic level,
students in foreign language classes outperformed those who were not taking foreign
language on the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade language arts sections” (Rafferty, 1986).
Additional research has provided evidence of improved reading comprehension in the
native language (Masciantonio, 1977; Rafferty, 1986); improved listening skills and
memory (Rattle, 1968); greater mental flexibility, creativity, divergent thinking and
higher-order thinking skills (Foster and Reeves, 1989; Landry, 1973; Rafferty, 1986;
Ginsburg and McCoy, 1981). “[S]econd language students advance more rapidly than

3
 monolingual students in cognitive abilities, independent of IQ” (Ginsburg and
McCoy, 1981). Perhaps most importantly, “Children studying a foreign language
have an improved self-concept and sense of achievement in school” (Genesee;
Holobow et al.; Masciantonio). Self-esteem is possibly one of the greatest areas of
need for struggling students.

B. Learner Needs and Professional Conflict

Despite the abundance of research that supports an early start in FL study and its
cognitive, social, psychological, and cross-curricular benefits, a survey of LD-
perspective articles reveals some deep-seated doubts that FL instruction can be
anything but an added burden to students who struggle to be successful in school.

LD advocates view problems with LD participation in FL instruction in two

categories: Instructional elements that are lacking in FL instruction, and skills and
abilities required in FL instruction. While I found much to disagree with in these
writings, they did provide me with an expert introduction to several specific
instructional strategies that meet the unique needs of AAR learners.

Many are skeptical that FL instruction can meet the needs of LD students through
multi-sensory, repetitive, structured, sequential, cumulative, alphabetic/phonetic,
meta-cognitive, and analytic/synthetic tasks. However, many of these strategies and
more have been strongly emphasized within the body of FL research and the
Standards for Foreign Language Learning 2006 (SFLL). As a FL educator familiar
with SFLL and versed in FL research, I found this skepticism surprising; however, I
understand that the prevailing thoughts and attitudes of LD specialists towards FL
learning have been informed by long exposure to teacher-centered FL instruction that
is not standards-based, ignores affective needs, and results in a knowledge of bits and
pieces of language without communicative competence.

The specific examples of elements of FL instruction that are cited as problematic for
LD students overwhelmingly reflect the language-centered instruction that these
(now) adults probably experienced as students in middle or high school:

• at-risk students who have problems with oral and/or written language may
have difficulty learning to pronounce, read, and spell words in a FL.
• Students who struggle with syntax may have difficulty with verb
conjugations, pronoun assignment, gender/number, and word order.
• FL teachers are generally prepared to teach highly capable students using
whole-language techniques, where students are expected to “just pick up” the
skills and content without direct instruction. Many LD students will not
become proficient in all four modes of communication through mere exposure
and practice. (Ganschow and Schneider, 2006)

I was unable to find a single reference to the cognitive benefits of FL instruction. The
combination of complaints and concerns that reflect outdated FL instructional
practice and the complete lack of reference to FL research revealed an enormous gap
in understanding, as well as a reminder of the damage done to the cause of FL
instruction when teachers do not apply the best findings of research to their

4
 instructional practice. The Standards provide teachers easy access to those informed
practices. As you cite, a lot of the research that sees FL study as problematic was
done on programs within the old grammatical paradigm, for example, Ganschow and
Sparks seminal work; even that into this century was not predicated upon content-
focused instruction
Your chart is a succinct way of showing the contrast of pros/cons.

Some examples of the viral FL avoidance complex:

“Many professionals question the foreign language requirement for students with
learning disabilities because of the difficulties these students have in processing
language. Schools and colleges face a dilemma when it comes to foreign language
requirements for these students. Some schools waive the foreign language
requirements and offer course substitutions. Others use various alternative teaching
and assessment methods for teaching the language.” (Council for Exceptional
Children, 2003)

In an article written with post-graduate-level English, Scott and Manglitz (1997)

address LD high school seniors who are preparing to enter college. They begin by
describing why FL study is unrealistic for LD students:

5
Scott & Manglitz: FL educator:
Many individuals with learning disabilities experience This article throws an immediate
difficulty in learning a foreign language. Is it any wonder? negative light on FL learning. The
Learning disabilities (LD) often affect language-based tasks reader is threatened with the cer-
such as reading, spelling, writing, or listening. Problems in tainty of failure, and the inference
the native language will still be present, if not magnified, in that their FL speech or writing
the process of learning a second language system. Research will be an embarrassment to them.
since the 1980's has supported the logical conclusion that Try this: The language learning
there is indeed a link between native and foreign language link also means that the 90% of L1
learning. that you do right is likely to
transfer to L2. And even more
likely when the FL teacher
facilitates that transfer through the
strategy training that we now
embrace.
At the same time that research has been No research is cited in this article. Not a single
affirming the difficulties in foreign lan-guage name or date. The authors set an example for LD
learning of many students with learning students that the word “research” can be used to
disabilities, an increasing number of arouse an emotional response.
individuals with LD are attending college.
…phonological… and HS senior: Should I know what “phonological and
orthographic difficulties… have orthographic difficulties” are? I guess I will face immediate
the most immediate and severe and severe consequences if I take a FL. Is learning the Hebrew
impact on foreign language alphabet …fundamental? What happens when beginners spell
learning. These types of abilities things wrong in French? I can’t learn the beginning words of
are called on for such fundamen- ANY new language?
tal tasks as learning a new alpha-
bet (e.g., Hebrew), a new sound- KR: While FL educators are being trained to focus on what
symbol system (e.g., spelling the students CAN do, LD specialists seem to be focused on what
nasal sounds in French) or the they cannot do – even to the extent of planting nightmarish
beginning vocabulary words of fears in the minds of LD students who might be interested in
any new language. FL.

A few additional classics from Scott and Manglitz:

• What can I do in high school to prepare for and anticipate problems related to
learning a foreign language in college? KR: expectations steer outcomes.
• If your listening/speaking skills are strong, you may want to try Spanish since the
regularity of the sound system in Spanish sometimes helps. If you are stronger at
reading, you may want to try Latin, which typically does not involve as much oral
communication and often helps build vocabulary in English. KR: unless you want
to actually communicate, which is much more engaging. And no mention of the
fact that LD students DO communicate orally in L1.
• Though a waiver does prevent the frustration and hardship of trying to learn a
foreign language in high school, not all college admissions offices are familiar
with this policy and you may be considered "deficient" in meeting admission
requirements. KR: frustration and hardship of trying to learn a foreign language.
I’d like to see these ladies walk down my FL hallway at school.

6
C. Convincing Professionals
In summary, I can see that I may face an uphill battle in seeking clearance to
implement my Action Research in the elementary setting. Yes – you may but you
have prepared yourself with the arguments against you and may well find parents
in your corner. Remember today many of them are activist about having their
students having equal access to instruction. However, I am not without hope,
because I know that people who devote their careers to LD instruction have their
hearts in the right places. This will inform my attitude as I approach them as
potential partners in the quest to give LD students the very best quality education
my state has to offer. When they see on paper the very strategies they feared a FL
program could not offer, later combined with student engagement and enjoyment,
I believe FLES will have a chance in my school system.

History has a lot to teach those of us who would seek to introduce or reinstate
FLES in our communities. In the 1950s and 1960s, FLES programs enjoyed great
popularity; however, several inadequacies resulted in their demise. These
included: Good summary – and why as I mention earlier, put some adjectives or
qualifiers with FLES as you advocate for the program you are designing.

inadequacies
lack of highly-qualified teachers
Part of this was because schools
often hired native speakers w/ no
understanding of how to teach or
the US school system or they took
high school FL teachers and moved
them into age groups they were not
prepared to teach – So FR I got
moved down w/ no content
adapatation.
poor design and funding
unrealistic goals
A failure to cultivate productive
professional relationships among
teachers
my comments
I can’t control this, except to keep growing.
I can design and lobby. I have personal
contacts in Annapolis.
I have lofty goals that I will measure
quantitatively through rubrics (in class) and
other assessment tools; my school will track
student progress and achievement across
the curriculum and handle comparisons in a
confidential manner. This is a place where
you could also use the Annenberg tapes to
show administrators / parents what a
successful elementary program looks like
(e.g., Appel tape on planets, German tape
on holidays and one on sports.
My success will depend heavily on
collaboration with content area teachers. I
have questionnaires that will streamline this
process and allow focus to maximize team

7

instructional methods inappropriate
for elementary-aged students
poor materials
the lack of high-quality
assessments
professional evaluation
program feedback
(Heining-Boynton, 1990; Lipton 1992)
planning time. Great resource here since
what you need is the layperson’s knowledge
of the discipline and advice from good
teachers of it.
I will enroll in graduate courses in
Elementary Education.
I will not need a textbook, so I hope to
allocate those funds for a mélange of props,
costumes, lab materials, ink cartridges,
overheads, globes, clay, gummi crocs…
I am a highly-trained designer of top-notch
assessments that reflect the best research in
FL assessment and acquisition.
I will be evaluated 8 times in the first 2
years, then twice yearly thereafter.
Faculty, student, parent, administrators… a
questionnaire for everyone; but I think the
custodian is going to find me a challenge.

III. Method

A. I will teach fourth- or fifth-grade students identified as Academically At-Risk

in a classroom setting. Students will be chosen by faculty and staff after viewing a
presentation of my background, my plan, and my methods and techniques.
B. Research Questions
1. Teacher surveys, Student surveys, student journal entries, oral
interviews, and reading comprehension; MSA scores % change
2. See chart, attached (who and when, how often)
C. Describe the intervention in detail, i.e., how will you manipulate the dependent and
independent variables
• I will re-teach, reinforce, enrich and expand content from the 4 subject
areas in daily 50-minute French lessons, with an added emphasis on developing
productive learner behaviors.
D. Data Collection: Chart provides who, what, when, and how often: Excellent
thoughtful planning document.

Data Sources
1 MSA previous MSA % change End of Year
- Math
- Language Arts
- Science
2 Student: FL expectations reflection
3 Student Daily Journals Oct. Feb. May
4 Student Surveys Survey 1 - Nov. Survey 2 - Feb. Survey 3 - May
- Math
- Language Arts

8
- Science
- Social Studies
- French
5 Student Listening Comp. Assessment Nov. Mar. May
6 Student Reading Comp. Assessment Nov. Mar. May
7 Student Oral Interview Assessment Nov. Mar. May
8 Individual Proficiency Assessment End of Year
Beginning Middle End of Year
9 Teacher surveys expectations progress progress reflection
10 Classroom Teacher Questionnaire: Student Performance in the Content Areas Oct. Feb. May
11 Parent surveys expectations progress reflection
12 Administrator expectations reflection
13 Counselor expectations reflection
14 FL Teacher Journals Oct. Feb. May
pink items still in design process.

I. Standardized Assessments: Maryland School Assessment (MSA)

Administration / Guidance will supply a list of % changes in Mathematics, Language
Arts, and Science MSA scores for the year preceding and the current year. Testing
administered in March-April. Scores reported will distinguish between FL and non-
FL students on the same grade level with no additional student information.

II. Students’ Perceptions:

• [ Beginning of Year: Expectations and End of Year: Reflections
Surveys ]
• Daily Journals: Students will write a brief daily journal entry after FL lesson
formatted as shown. Journal entries for beginning, middle, and end of year will be
used as data.:

One French thing I learned today:

Were you successful?

not so sort of super

successful successful successful

Write an example of the new thing you can do in French:

• Student Surveys: Beginning, middle, and end-of-year surveys as shown:

9
 Student Survey: Beginning Middle End of Year

One thing I liked learning this week was: ___________________________

One thing that was hard this week was: ____________________________

I think I am getting better at __________________________________.

In this class, this week, I feel like a _______________________ student.

(adjective)
This week, I taught my parent /sibling / other close relative or friend
________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________ in French.

Very well designed, age appropriate surveys for data collection.

III. Student Work Samples will be collected at beginning, middle and end of year. Content
will reflect current proficiency level in French in the four communicative modes:
A. Listening Comprehension:
1. Beginning of year: physical response to a spoken command;
selecting an image or word in response to a question or command; copying a
series of numbers from dictation
2. Middle of year: Student will hear a description or a brief story.
They will respond to questions they hear by selecting from multiple-choice
responses provided in writing.
3. End of year: See (e.) below.
B. Reading Comprehension
4. Beginning of year: students will read a post card introducing a
French student of their age, describing appearance, interests, and other simple
identifying information. They will then see a display of 3 pictures of French
students, and they will identify the one described in the post card. They will
tell three things that helped them make their choice, referring as needed to the
post card. (The rest of the assessment, which measures other modes, will
require student to describe, respond to oral questions, and compare and
contrast themselves to the French Student through a Venn Diagram, which
will serve as a supporting mechanism for creating with the FL.)
5. Middle of year:
• Students will read an individual progress report in French
that describes their current grades for participation, homework, classwork,
tests, and attendance. They will read at least three things the teacher
appreciates about them, and two goals the teacher would like them to
pursue in French class.
• They will answer questions about their progress report on a
form designed to assess their comprehension, and hand in both.

10
 • Teacher will assess responses for reading comprehension
primarily, while informally assessing writing and marking only content-
related items of concern.
• Students will apply teacher feedback to improve their
understanding and written responses.
• When teacher is satisfied with student comprehension, she
will give students a new form for a parent to fill out (with explicit
instructions and information).
• Students will take their progress reports home and explain
them to a parent or guardian, who will provide interpretive-mode
assessment information for the teacher by expressing his or her
understanding of student progress through completing the form strictly
according to how the student explained the progress report to them. They
will sign both forms and student will return them to the teacher.
6. End of year: See (e.) below.
C. Oral Interview The video model is a helpful feature so that students see the
interaction.
7. Beginning of year (November): Students will view a short video
of a student of their age responding to questions designed to help them choose
clubs and activities. Following development of video content through
classroom activities that build vocabulary and provide practice asking and
answering information questions, teacher will conduct an individual personal
interview based on the format of the video to evaluate student progress in oral
proficiency.
8. Middle of year (Feb.) Classroom teachers will guide students to
select a topic of interest from science or social studies to report on in French
class. Classroom teacher may encourage students to review, develop, or enrich
their understanding of a topic, depending upon their need and
teacher judgment. When drafting process is complete, teacher will conduct an
individual oral interview with students to make final
recommendations, answer questions, and provide feedback. Student responses
will provide a snapshot of current state of oral proficiency.
9. End of year: See (e.) below.

D. Writing Sample
10. Beginning of year
11. Middle of year
12. End of year: See (e.) below.
E. End-of-year Integrated Proficiency Assessment:
13. Students will view a short video presentation of material relating
to recent content-area study. This may be a story or a documentary.
14. Students will respond to listening-viewing comprehension
questions in a written assessment with multiple choice and word-bank
“selection” responses, sequencing exercises, and items designed to assess
ability to hypothesize meanings for unfamiliar vocabulary from the video.
15. Work will be assessed and returned. Video will be viewed again,
discussed, and corrections made.

11
 16. Students will interact with the teacher in small groups of 3 in an
oral interview assessment centered on video content. While awaiting their turn
at interviews, students will fill out questionnaires regarding a group
assignment to construct a written product for presentation: a brochure, a story
map, a script for a skit, or a set of instructions that relates to video content. In
the interview, teacher will discuss this questionnaire with students and lead
them to share their ideas, consider an audience, choose a context, and assign
responsibilities so that they may begin work right away. Students will be
expected to ask questions in this small group setting before beginning work,
and will be assessed on their participation in this information-sharing segment
of the interview as well as the video content segment. Class time will be
provided daily for specific tasks in group product development.
Questionnaires will provide reading comprehension assessment, and final
product will provide assessment of presentational mode of communication,
both oral and written.

IV. Teacher Observations: Table (attached, D. above) outlines what, who, and when, with
sample surveys and questionnaire items. Excellent job in identifying people to survey
from classroom content teachers to parents.
A. Classroom Teacher Survey/Fall

Teacher Survey/Fall: Please indicate your expectations for this year’s 4th and 5th Grade
Content-Based French Program.
high
o impact
o o some o impact
o o low oimpact
o
1. Student achievement in content areas: o o o o o o o o
2. Student self-esteem and morale: o o o o o o o o
3. Student development as a learner: o o o o o o o o
4. Effect on your instructional program:

Please comment on your expectations regarding:

1. Academic progress
2. Learning behaviors
3. Social behaviors

B. [ MID-YEAR PROGRESS SURVEY (TCHR) HERE ]

C. End of Year Classroom Teacher Survey:

12
 Classroom Teacher
End-of-Year Survey Lang. Scienc Social Frenc
1-3: check 1 per subject you teach Math Arts e St. h
…
Improvemen

1. Failed to meet your expectations

Academic

2. Met your expectations

3. Exceeded your expectations
…
t

1. Failed to meet your expectations

2. Met your expectations
Behavior
Social

3. Exceeded your expectations

s

1. Failed to meet your expectations

2. Met your expectations
NO Esteem
InstructionalSelf-

3. Exceeded your expectations

Collaboration

1. Failed to meet your expectations

2. Met your expectations
3. Exceeded your expectations
OR

4. Do you feel the time investment

YES

of collaborating with the FL Lang. Social

teacher… Math Arts Science St. French
a. yielded results that justified the
time and effort spent?
b. yielded results that did not justify
the time and effort spent?
Comment: (on any or all)

D. Classroom Teacher Questionnaire: Student Performance in the Content Areas. When

employed, I will collaborate with classroom teachers to form questions that reflect
appropriate criteria for these learners.
• Sample Questionnaire Items:
Please rate on a scale of 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree)
— Student applied productive learning behaviors in written work.
— Student applied productive learning behaviors in class participation.
— Student demonstrated organizational skills through ordering their
steps in approaching a multi-step task.
— Student knowledge of content was reflected in improved
summative assessment scores.
— Student actively expressed background knowledge that reflected
additional thought and exposure to content.

13
V. Parent Observations
1. Expectations: [ Parent Expectations Survey ] October
2. Progress: [ Parent Progress Survey ] February
3. Reflection: May

Parent End- of- Year Survey Foreign

Language Program, Grades 4, 5

at agree
Please indicate your observations in

disagree

disagree
strongly

strongly
somewh
somewh
terms of how strongly you agree or

agree
disagree with each statement as it

agree
relates to your child’s participation in

at
French over the past school year.
1. My child sees foreign language as
something he/she “gets” to do, rather
than something he/she “has” to do.
2. My child has become reluctant to go
to school each day since beginning
foreign language.
3. My child’s enjoyment of reading (books,
magazines, etc.) has increased since last
year.
4. My child has developed a greater
expectation of success in school this
year.
5. My child’s report card grades are lower
this year than last year.

6. My child’s classroom teacher(s) have

described to me some improvements in
my child’s academic performance.
7. This year my child has often been
frustrated because of schoolwork.
8. This year my child has demonstrated
new or improved learning skills and
strategies (e.g. organizing, reviewing,
checking homework with parent).
9. My child’s classroom teacher(s) have
expressed a concern about his or her
behavior in class.
10. My child has demonstrated a sense of
accomplishment in learning a foreign
language.

14
 VI. Administrator and Counselor Surveys
1. [ Administrator Survey Expectations ]
2. [ Administrator Survey Reflections ]
3. [ Counselor Survey Expectations ]
4. [ Counselor Survey Reflections ]
VII. Foreign Language Teacher Journals
1. In a monthly journal, FL teacher will record her observations of three
students, recommended by the previous classroom teacher, guidance counselor or
other educator who is familiar with the students’ abilities, disabilities, strengths
and weaknesses, and history.
2. Selection criteria used by “advisor”:
a. All students must be either performing below potential, chronic
low achievers or academically at-risk.
b. A student who suffers low self-esteem that may be caused by poor
academic performance.
c. A student who needs daily emphasis on learning behaviors and
strategies.
d. A student whose greatest challenge is reading comprehension.
3. This “advisor” will compose a profile of each student at the beginning of
the year, which the FL teacher will not see until it is added to the journal at the
end of the school year, to provide a baseline of comparison.
4. Journal entries will include observations related to:
a. Participation in class
b. Enthusiasm or reluctance in FL usage
c. Engagement with content
d. Progress in communicative proficiency – 4 modes
e. Evidence of application of learning strategies
f. Evidence of new learning behaviors
g. General observations and anecdotes regarding participation,
behavior, attitude, attendance, and more.

E. Data Analysis – explain how and why (with APA style references) you will analyze and
present each type of data that you collect.
I. Maryland School Assessment (MSA):
http://mdk12.org/ “The Maryland School Assessment (MSA) is a test of reading,
math, and science achievement.” MSA scores measure Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP), the national accountability standard for measuring and tracking student
proficiency. In our school system, the MSA plays an important (if sometimes
controversial) role in the placement of students into educational programs that ensure
a steady progression toward proficiency across the curriculum. A low AYP threatens
state and federal funding to a local school, which makes the MSA high-stakes both in
the sense of academic placement and the budget that pays for important educational
programs.

Improved MSA scores have become the benchmark of effective instructional

strategies; therefore I will ask my administration or guidance office to provide a list
of +/- __% changes in Mathematics, Language Arts, and Science MSA scores for the
year preceding and the current year. Testing is conducted in March-April. Scores

15
reported will distinguish between FL and non-FL students on the same grade level
with no additional student information.

II. Student Surveys:

a) Expectations: Beginning of Year.
b) Daily Journal: I will take entries from October, February
and May. This tool includes two subjective responses and one quantitative
response (fill in the circle on a continuum). I will assign point values to the
continuum from 1-8 to express student perception of successful participation
in class. For the two questions:
1. One French thing I learned today: This item will be scored
as follows: 3 – item described did indeed appear in lesson; 2 – item was in
lesson but not “new” – very familiar; 1 – item was not mentioned in lesson
but is at least French; 0 – student left question unanswered.
2. Write an example of the new thing you can do in French.
This item will be scored: 3 if the example matches the first response and
gives a fairly correct example; 2 if it matches, but contains mistakes
related to the skill named by the student; 1, if it does not match, with or
without errors; and 0, if student left item unanswered.
This will result in two separate scores: one for perceived success, and one
for evidence of acquisition.
c) Student Surveys in the 4 content areas + French. November, February, and
May. Four short-answer and one subjective response. Students will read the
form on an overhead, where it will remain on display to encourage them to be
conscious of these 5 things throughout the class, and be ready to write about
them briefly at the close in place of the daily journal entry. Following the
same procedure, classroom teachers will conduct the same survey with a very
slight change in the last question (explained below.)

I will begin by compiling all the answers in a table and looking for patterns or
like responses. This survey will give me insights into what students like to do,
and what is hard for them. This is invaluable to me as a planning tool, since I
will be able to better target the weaknesses that lead to student apprehension
when that apprehension is named and confirmed by a number of students. It
will also help me to interpret either good or poor student participation in the
past week.

Student self-assessment is an important learning skill that this survey

introduces with the third item, “I think I am getting better at…” Students can
have a clear idea of what is easy or hard for them if only someone gives them
the opportunity to consciously examine their performance. I will also look for
patterns of related skills in these responses and use the information to give
students who need participation points an opportunity to be successful in an
area where they feel competent, which will eventually enable them to become
bolder risk-takers.

Item 4 allows students to qualify their own assessment of their performance in

the class with an adjective: “In class this week, I feel like a

16
 ________________ student.” Many students find this a difficult task, so there
will be an emotions poster, such as the Alphabet of Emotions Poster by Jayne
Devencenzi & Susan Pendergast, 2008, www.speechmark.net. This will be a
very interesting list of 19 adjectives that allow me to evaluate my instruction
in terms of engaging students, meeting affective needs, and choosing materials
and methods that are appropriate for their ages and needs.

The final item requires a longer response: This week, I taught my parent
/sibling / other close relative or friend _________________
________________________________ in French. The classroom teacher will
use this question: This week, I talked to my parent /sibling / other close
relative or friend about ___________________________
________________________________ , which we have been working on in
_______________ class. The purpose of this item is to follow up on one goal
of the program, which is greater parent involvement in review, application,
and fostering interest in the topics presented in the curriculum. This will also
appear on a parent survey, which will motivate students to make it a priority at
home. Measuring parent involvement is not easy, and the more data points a
school can get, the better.

III. Student Work Samples.

1. Listening Comprehension 1 and 2. Simple numeric score.
2. Reading Comprehension
a. Beginning: 1 point for selecting the correct picture, and 1 point
each for identifying supporting details. Student proficiency will be
assessed as follows: for each supporting detail, 3 points are awarded for
responding with a complete sentence, good structure and pronunciation; 2
points for responding with an incomplete sentence; 1 point for a short
answer that identifies a correct detail.
b. Middle: Have not designed activities; will assess written work
(very short answer) that reflects reading comprehension; parent responses
will be assessed for accuracy and detail, a direct reflection of student
interpretive proficiency.
3. Oral Interview
a. Beginning: Student responses to interview questions will be marked as
follows: [ rubric ]
b. Middle: Content Area Report.
• Written component:
• Presentational component:
4. Integrated Proficiency Assessment
a. Listening-viewing comprehension questions. Total Score/Total
Items; Per-Section breakdown scores giving data relating to specific
linguistic skills.
b. Small Group Interview. Measure oral proficiency in a group
conversational setting according to [ rubric ], in two parts: video
discussion and Project Questionnaire conversation. Skills: understand and
respond to questions requiring comprehension and recall of
listening/viewing content; ability to generate a question about a video

17
 presentation; ability to comprehend and ask for more information about an
assigned project.
c. Questionnaires: Evaluated for reading comprehension,
completeness, and appropriate responses (content only).
d. Group Product Development and Presentation: Assess
presentational communication, oral and written. [ rubric ]
IV. Teacher Observations.
1. Classroom Teacher Survey/Expectations Oct.
2. Teacher Survey – Progress (Oct., Feb.)
3. Classroom Teacher End of Year Survey/Reflections
(May)
4. Classroom Teacher Questionnaire: Student
Performance in the Content Areas – strongly agree to strongly disagree (1
to 5)
V. Parent Observations
1. [ Parent Expectations Survey ] October
2. [ Parent Progress Survey ] February
3. Reflection: May (above, p. 12) 10 items; 6 framed “positive” and 4
“negative”; responses are continuum: strongly agree to strongly disagree
(1 to 5). Questions will be separated according to their orientation and
scale will be reversed to allow a composite score to be expressed in terms
of “net positive” and “net negative”.

Kristen,
You have done a superb job with the first sections of the ACTION RESEARCH
project. Your paper demonstrates how critical the literature review, the posing of
a succinct question, the plan of action and in particular the data-gathering
instruments are. They have to be devised in advance as you have done; shifting
course mid-stream tarnishes the process and results in missing information.
Given all the work you have done with this, I really hope that you have a chance to
conduct this research. And if you do, you will also have important information to
share at professional meetings and conferences such as the Northeast Conference.
Eventually you would also have publishable work if that is of interest to you.

One additional avenue worth pursuing is to see if your district has some teacher
research funds; while not common, more schools are supporting this often with
federal or state funding tied to school improvement efforts. It could help with
materials acquisition or even summer work to do the data analysis.

In any case, good luck – let me know if you have the opportunity. I will also say that
your work by far is the best AR plan I have seen in many semesters.

SCORE: 50 / 50

18