Overview of

Chapter III
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
AND REFLECTION
 Objectives:
At the end of the lecture, everyone is expected
to

Attain notions regarding

https://www.google.com how to make write-ups on
Division Roll-Out Training on Action
Chapter III;
Research

Jens
Martensson
 Gantt Chart,
and Plans for
Dissemination
and Advocacy
Division Roll-Out Training on Action
Research

https://www.google.com
Jens
Martensson
WHAT IS A GANTT
CHART?
(Nathan Gilmore; May 9, 2012)

►A gantt chart is simply a timeline

view of your research. It’s a tool
that helps you manage all of the
different resources, people and
tasks along the way to
accomplishing the goal of your
research.

Jens
Martensson
Gantt Chart

https://www.google.com/search?q=simple+gantt+chart&hl=en-
US&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjD7pn8qcHeAhVEEXA
KHcKKB8oQ_AUIDigB&biw=1280&bih=610#imgrc=ER4VonGnl_zj5M:

Jens
Martensson
Gantt Chart
Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
Procurement of
Materials
Dissemination of
Letter of Intent to the
School Heads
Administering the
Intervention
Analyzing the Findings
and Results
Dissemination of the
Results to concerned
colleagues

Jens
Martensson
WHAT IS A
DISSEMINATION PLAN
(https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/pubs/docs/cb_oct2015.pdf)

A dissemination plan is a plan for

disseminating research findings or
products to those who will use the
information in practice and is
something that you should be
thinking about early on. It is what will
help you get the message out
whether it is results of research or a
successful intervention.

Jens
Martensson
HOW TO DEVELOP A
DISSEMINATION PLAN
Adapted from the Yale Center for Interdisciplinary Research on AIDS (CIRA)

In creating a dissemination plan, researchers should

consider several key questions:

► Goal: What are the goals and objectives of the

dissemination effort? What impact do you hope to
have?
► Audience: Who is affected most by this research?
Who would be interested in learning about the study
findings? Is this of interest to a broader community?
► Medium: What is the most effective way to reach
each audience? What resources does each group
typically access?
► Execution: When should each aspect of the
dissemination plan occur (e.g. at which points during
the study and afterwards)? Who will be responsible
for dissemination activities? Jens
Martensson
Plans for Dissemination and Advocacy

Jens
https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/pubs/docs/cb_oct2015.pdf
Martensson
Plans for Dissemination and Advocacy

Dizon, 2018 Jens

Martensson
Research Dissemination Plan for community engaged project:

The Community Voice: A Photovoice Project Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Health and Health Care Patricia Carcaise-Edinboro, PhD
VCU Health Administration

Background:

The Community Voice is an interdisciplinary photovoice project involving students and faculty from the VCU Departments of Health
Administration, Art Education, and Social and Behavioral Health, VCUHS administrators from the Virginia Coordinated Care program, and
Hands Up Ministries, a nonprofit focused on addressing poverty in the city and providing affordable housing. In our project, members of a
community on the Northside of Richmond provided their time and talents to express via photography the challenges they encounter in living a
healthy life and accessing health care services in their community.

Dissemination plan of project findings:

The first a sharing of the iterative photovoice process which was accomplished by sharing the active phase of gathering and sharing
photographs with the academic and community collaborative.

The second was at the project’s completion and included a series of 3 photo exhibits in public venues (library, church and university space),
round table discussions (academic and community venues), and academic presentations and workshops both within and outside of the
community.

The end users and stakeholders are the academic, clinical, community, and local policy advocates who can take findings and initiate action to
address the issues identified in the community. Academic, community and clinical educators can also utilize the project presentation to
educate clinicians, students and policy advocates about disparate health care access. The project continues to inform through presentations
and social media outlets. The project can be viewed at: www.photovoicerva.org We initially evaluated the project by a post project survey of
academic and community collaborative researchers. We continue to evaluate the dissemination and utilization of the research by the number
Jens
of views on the internet project site and requests for academic and community presentation. Martensson
What
comprises
Chapter III?
Division Roll-Out Training on Action
Research

Jens
Martensson
FINDINGS
(https://www.coe.arizona.edu/sites/coe/files/research_report_format.pdf)

► What happened? What did you find?

Describe in detail.
► You can use narrative, quotes from the
data sources, samples of student work,
tables, and/or charts to display your
data and provide evidence for your
findings.
► You should relate these findings back to
your research questions.

Jens
Martensson
CONCLUSIONS
AND REFLECTIONS
(https://www.coe.arizona.edu/sites/coe/files/research_report_format.pdf)

► What were the outcomes of your study?

► Discuss your own interpretation of what
happened and why.
► What successes or difficulties did you
have in carrying out this action
research? –
► Address what you have learned from this
study.

Jens
Martensson
IMPLICATIONS
(https://www.coe.arizona.edu/sites/coe/files/research_report_format.pdf)

► Summarize the question studied and

the major issues involved.
► Address the twists and turns
experienced between original identified
question and results that were
produced.
► Identify the limitations of the study.
► Discuss implications for other teachers’
practice and educational policy.
► Describe recommendations for your
future study.

Jens
Martensson
Example of
Chapter III
Utilizing the
Regional
Format
Division Roll-Out Training on Action
Research

Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research

Comparative Analysis Between Strategic Intervention Material-

Based Instruction and Basic Teaching Process in Simplifying

Action research
Numerical Expressions Among J a y sGrade
o n D . B a l7

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND

REFLECTION
i l aStudents
, October 2017

Table 1 presents the Mean Scores of the Grade 7 –

Orchids students of B’laan National High School on the least – learned
competency (Simplifying Numerical Expressions) using the Basic
Teaching Process approach in both pre – test and posttest. The result
posted that the mean score of the students during pre – test is low
which is 5. However, the mean score of the posttest registered
increased to 6.4, which is 0.8
higher than the pre – test.
Based on these findings, Basic Teaching Process
increased the learners’ understanding and performance in simplifying
numerical expressions but not totally effective since the increase is
minimal. This implies that Basic Teaching Process is not enough to
implement the manifestation of learning the key concepts and
understanding of the least – learned competency – simplifying
numerical expressions. Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research

Action Table 2 presents the Mean Scores of the Grade 7 – Orchids

students of B’laan National High School on the least – learned
competency as identified in both pre – test and posttest using the
Strategic Intervention Material – Based Instruction (SIM – BI) namely
“Make Me Simple!”. According to the data, the mean score registered

Research
on the posttest which is 8.14, has significantly increased by 2.54 over
the mean score of the students in their pre – test.

Form these findings, I can conclude that the Instructional

Material (IM) that I provided, was really effective in intervening the
students’ performance about the least – mastered competency which
is simplifying numerical expressions, wherein they were able to acquire
the necessary knowledge and concepts with regards to the said
competency. Hence, the SIM provided will be urge to be adopted to
enhance the students’ capabilities and understanding in solving
problems related to Simplifying Numerical Expressions making
students’ endeavor in Mathematics convenient and lively.

Furthermore, findings of this study conform the findings of

Togonon (2011) that SIM enhances students ‘achievement.

Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research
Action
Research
Figure 1 shows the number of correct answers of the Grade
7 – Orchids students of B’laan National High School per item in Pre –
Test and Posttest using Basic Teaching Process and Strategic
Intervention Material – Based Instruction. This reveals which particular
learning approach is more effective in increasing students’ performance
in the least – mastered competency studied which is simplifying
numerical expressions.
Based on the figure, when we are going to focus on the
Basic Teaching Process approach, the mode or the peak of the graph
of the posttest falls under the score of 6, which is one step higher than
the mode or peak of the graph of its pretest which falls under the
score of 5. When we are going to look at their skewness, they are both
positively skewed, however, the positive skewness of the posttest is
longer than the pretest. Moreover, the increase of the skewness from
the pretest to posttest is minimal. Thus, the basic teaching process is
not totally effective in improving students’ performance in Simplifying
Numerical Expressions.
Focusing on the Strategic Intervention Material – Based
Instruction (SIM-BI) approach, the mode or the peak of the graph of
the posttest falls under the score of 8 which is significantly higher
than the pretest which is 5. Moreover, the growth of the skewness
from pretest to posttest was notably significant as well. Furthermore, it
can easily discern from the figure that all the students’ scores in the
posttest were above half of the test items given. Thus, the IM used is
significantly effective in improving the students’ performance on the
least – mastered competency which is simplifying numerical
expressions.
Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research

COMPARISON ON THE POSTTEST OF BASIC TEACHING PROCESS AND

Games and activities should be integrated in mathematics

Action
STRATEGIC INTERVENTION MATERIAL – BASED INSTRUCTION
lessons to understand concepts and to master certain computational skills.
With the integration of activity-based teaching into the mathematics
The posttest of Basic Teaching Process and SIM – BI both had
classroom, more of the students will be able to experience the positive
positive result. However, SIM – BI had increased significantly while the basic
results indicated in this study. Teachers should be resourceful and creative
teaching process increased minimally. The mean score of the posttest of the
to select models on how to teach certain concepts. Environment rich in
basic teaching process increased by 0.8 from the pretest while the mean
models which embody many facets of mathematical operations promotes
score of the posttest of the SIM – BI increased by 2.54. The difference
student’s ability to understand the mathematical concept of simplifying
between their mean scores is 1.74. Hence, SIM – BI is more effective in
numerical expressions.
implementing the key concepts of the least – mastered lesson to the Grade 7

Research
– Orchids students of B’laan National High School.
Furthermore, with careful planning, teachers can make
mathematics come alive and make it more concrete and tangible for the
CONCLUSION
learners. The result of this study may suggest teachers to design
Strategic Intervention Material – Based Instruction (SIM – BI)
appropriate teaching strategies that will effectively deal with students’
namely “Make Me Simple!” is significantly effective than Basic Teaching
performance in simplifying numerical expressions. Discussions of rules and
Process in improving the academic performance of the Grade – 7 Orchids
steps in simplifying numerical expressions are not enough. What they need
students of B’laan National High School. All point toward to the effective use
is to be exposed to various activities that will enhance their conceptions,
of various activity-based models in students’ learning of the least – mastered
skills and understanding on simplifying numerical expressions. If students
competency which is about Simplifying Numerical Expressions. Students
have limited use of visual and hands-on representations, then it can be
performed better when they are engaged in activity-based teaching. Moreover,
difficult to say whether they understand a mathematical idea or are just
due to this IM, positive learning experiences takes place and students achieve
going through the motions without attending to meaning.
a better understanding of the concept. These results are consistent with that
of Muñoz (2010) showing the importance of the use of games and strategies
Mathematics should not be hated and feared by learners but
in improving academic achievement in mathematics.
to be enjoyed by doing some mathematical activities that foster
understanding of concepts, mastering procedural skills, and develop oral
Students like to work in groups for sharing and collaborating of
communication and written skills as well (Mortel et al., 2014).
ideas. The use of activity-based teaching shape the way students think and
build connections toward conceptual understanding thus fostering increase in
student retention (Rubin et al., 2014). Students eventually can extend their Jens
concepts of Simplifying Numerical Expression. Martensson
The Effect of
Teacher-Mediated
Vocabulary
Discussions During
Read Alouds
Leanne R. Radabaugh, Elizabeth A.
Swaggerty (East Carolina
University), December 2015

Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research

The Effect of Teacher-Mediated Vocabulary Discussions During

Leanne R. Radabaugh, Elizabeth A. Swaggerty (East Carolina University), December 2015
Read Alouds

Action researchDISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND

At the close of thisREFLECTION
study, the results from the multiple choice pre-and
post-vocabulary assessment were compared. The experimental group (n = 14)
demonstrated a mean gain of nine words. The comparison group (n = 15)
demonstrated a mean gain of 3.93 words (See Figure 3).
An independent-samples t-test revealed a significant
difference in the mean change scores for teacher-mediated vocabulary
discussions (M = 9, SD = 2) and the incidental exposure (M = 3.93, SD
= 3.06) conditions; t = 5.24, p = .00001. Because the p value is less
than .05, the gains can be attributed to the intervention (teacher-
mediated vocabulary instruction). These results suggest that teacher-
mediated vocabulary discussions positively impact vocabulary
acquisition more than incidental acquisition (see Table 2).

Figure 3: Pre and Post Assessment Mean Scores

Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research
Action The open-ended vocabulary assessment components were
computed separately for each task. All mean scores increased from pre
to post test (see Figure 4). For the task of producing a definition,
students in the experimental group had a mean score (M = 2.92) on the
pre-assessment and a mean score (M= 8.08) on the post-assessment.
For the task of producing an example, students in the experimental group
Research
had a mean score (M = 0.92) on the pre-assessment and a mean score
(M = 4) on the post-assessment. For the task of producing a non-
example, students in the experimental group had a mean score (M =
0.23) on the pre-assessment and a mean score (M = 2.92) on the
postassessment. For the task of assigning a confidence rating, students
in the experimental group had a mean score (M = 18.85) on this pre-
assessment and a mean score (M = 23.23) (see Table 3) on the post-
assessment.
Of the 226 correct responses given by the experimental
group, 110 (49 %) were correctly identified words from the first three
weeks of the intervention, and 116 (51%) were correctly identified words
from the second three weeks. Scores from the open ended definition
task were analyzed in the same fashion. Of the 117 correct responses
produced for the definition task on the open ended vocabulary test, 58
(49.6 %) were correctly defined words from the first three weeks of the
intervention, and 59 (50.6%) were correctly defined words from the
second three weeks. These results suggest that new vocabulary
knowledge was evenly retained over the course of the six week
intervention.
Pre-assessment and post-assessment gain scores on the
multiple choice assessment were computed separately from students in
the following TRC (Total Reading Comprehension) groups: Above
Proficient, Proficient, Below Proficient and Far Below Proficient. These
scores were grouped and a mean gain for each group was computed (see
Figure 5). Students in the Above Proficient group showed a mean gain (M
= 10); students in the Proficient group showed a mean gain (M = 10);
students in the Below Proficient group showed a mean gain (M = 8), and
students in the Far Below Proficient group showed a mean gain (M = 9).
This data suggests that the intervention proved effective for students
across all ability levels.
Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research
Action
Research
The researcher log was analyzed and coded for themes
related to the research question. The most widely coded theme centered
on student engagement during all phases of the intervention. Of the 18
entries that were made during the course of the instructional
intervention, the words “engaged,” “enjoyed,” “enthusiasm,” and
“eager” appeared at least once in 15 of the entries. Entries made on the
first day of the intervention each week all included language indicative
of engagement. For example, it was noted that “students were very
engaged in the reading” or that “students have a natural curiosity about
words.” Even though the second day of the intervention each week was
the second reading of the same book, students expressed their love for
the books and their excitement about participating in the read aloud. For
example, “students gasped and raised their hands” in anticipation of
the targeted word’s appearance in the text. Day three of the intervention
was characterized by discussions of the words that generated examples,
non-examples and synonyms of the words.
Although engagement was only coded on three of the six days, on the
days that it was coded, engagement was high: “students were very
eager to participate, and get a little miffed at me because I can’t call on
everyone every time”.
The next theme is related to the researcher’s realization of
the value of repeated readings. For example, on the first reading of
Watch Your Tongue, Cecily Beasley, it was noted that students were so
engaged with the story that they were “not as in tune to the targeted
words.” This prompted the notation that “two readings of the book are
certainly necessary.” It was also noted during the last week of the
intervention that on the second reading of the book, students were
“more in tune for the words…because they are familiar with the story,
and they know how and when the words are going to be used. They are
anticipating their mention.”
Another less frequently coded theme was related to
discussion serving as a source of clarification for students. Harris et al.
(2010) cite that discussions of new words that include questioning and
prompting lead to increased understanding. During the fifth week of the
intervention it was noted that the researcher did not understand an
example that a student was sharing, and so the student was asked to
further clarify her example. Once the student had to explain her
thoughts, it became clear that the student did understand the meaning
of the word being discussed. During the second week of the
intervention, it was noted “talking about the words out of the context of
the book really demonstrates whether or not they have a firm grasp on
the meaning” and that “applying the word outside the book lends to a
deeper understanding.” Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research
The last theme was related to students’ difficulties with
producing non-examples of the targeted vocabulary words. This
Action
frustration was noted in six out of the six entries that were made on the
third day of the intervention. Students would often offer up ideas that
were unrelated instead of non-examples. For example, “soap” and
“couch” were volunteered as non-examples of tenacious because they
were all items that could be stopped. It was noted though, that the
students could more easily identify non-examples of words if definitions
were more concrete.
Research
Discussion and Conclusions
This action research study investigated the research
question: “What is the effect of Teacher-mediated vocabulary discussion
during classroom read aloud activities on the vocabulary acquisition of
second grade students?” In addition to the statistically significant gains
the intervention group made in terms of vocabulary achievement,
students exposed to the intervention were also able to retain the words
from the first week of the six week intervention equally as well as the
words that were targeted in the last week of the intervention. Moreover,
there was very little difference in the mean gains of students across
assessed reading levels.
Beck and McKeown (2007) and Kindle (2014) established
that read aloud activities are appropriate opportunities for teaching Tier
Two vocabulary to primary school students because of the quality of the
language that is used in trade books. Each picture book used in this
action research study was found in the children’s section of a bookstore,
chosen purposefully because the quality of language that was presented
in these books afforded second graders the opportunity to learn words
such as tenacious, gleaming, and dreadful. These words would be less
likely to occur in the books these students are reading independently as
researchers have concluded.
Biemiller and Boote (2006), as well as Blacowicz and
Fisher (2011) found that repeated exposures to the same texts help
students gain a more in depth knowledge of new vocabulary. This action
research utilized two readings of the same text to stimulate discussion
of the words and how they were used in the text, and how those same
words could be used in contexts outside of the texts. Students involved
in this study demonstrated not only retention of these new vocabulary
words, but also, through discussion, an ability to apply these new words
to contexts outside of the reading.
This action research study design utilized two consecutive
readings of the same text as recommended by Biemiller and Boote
(2006). Qualitative data demonstrated that students still experienced a
high level of engagement on the second reading of the text, and
quantitative data analysis supported the fact that this study had a
positive impact on the vocabulary acquisition of the students included in
the intervention.
Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research

Action
Limitations
Kindle (2014), Beck and McKeown (2007), and Harris et al.
(2010) demonstrated the effectiveness of direct teaching of vocabulary
One limitation of teacher action research is generalizability.
through teacher and student discussions borne out of targeted
Findings are not generalizable and should be considered in light of
vocabulary encountered during read aloud activities. Furthermore,
individual teaching contexts. Further limitations include the small
research supports that students need multiple exposures to new words
sample size, the six-week duration of the intervention, and the fact that
in varying contexts (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2011; Kucan, 2012; Mixan,
the researcher was not the teacher of record for the class, and,
2013) so that they may construct a deeper understanding of the words.
therefore, had limited access to the research subjects outside of the
This action research study built upon these findings. Both the
intervention time.

Research
experimental group and the comparison group were introduced to the
words on day one of the read aloud. Students in the experimental group
Implications for Educators
participated in three days of discussions centered on those targeted
words in and out of the context of the book. Students in the comparison
The results of this action research study demonstrate that
group, who were to acquire this new vocabulary incidentally, were not
effective vocabulary study can be successfully integrated into the read
permitted to discuss the words with the teacher or each other during or
aloud portion of the daily literacy block in the early elementary grades.
after the read aloud activity. The data collected in this study
This study illuminates the importance of thoughtful selection of tier-2
demonstrates that student teacher discussions contribute to vocabulary
words for study. These are the words that students are likely to
growth. Students in the experimental group showed almost twice as
encounter throughout their schooling years and are typically more
much gain in vocabulary knowledge as the students in the comparison
sophisticated words for concepts that students already know. Targeting
group, and the gains were consistent regardless of student ability level,
this tier of words for discussion will be beneficial to students as they
and regardless of whether the words were targeted in the early or late
learn to become better readers, writers and communicators.
weeks of the study.
Additionally, making strategic book choices could maximize vocabulary
learning.

Jens
Martensson
Division Roll-Out Training on Action Research

Action Most importantly, primary readers benefit from repeated exposure to words and
discussions about words before, during, and after read alouds. Teachers should be supported in
how to incorporate vocabulary discussions into their read alouds. Supported by current
research, the intervention design utilized in this study is a relatively simple addition to the
already present read aloud portion of the balanced literacy blocks most teachers facilitate and

Research
requires as little as 20 minutes a day for three days a week. With proper training and support,
even novice teachers could successfully execute this method to optimize vocabulary knowledge.

Jens
Martensson
Thank
You