The Workshop Model: Optimizing the Mini-lesson - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – The Workshop Model: Optimizing the Mini-lesson PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 3c4ccc-MzBhN



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

The Workshop Model: Optimizing the Mini-lesson

Description:

The Workshop Model: Optimizing the Mini-lesson By: Lori Grabel & Klarisa Konstantinovsky Education 703.22 Spring 2009 Dr. O Connor- Petruso Table of Contents ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:158
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: actionrese
Learn more at: http://actionresearchprojects.wikispaces.com
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The Workshop Model: Optimizing the Mini-lesson


1
The Workshop ModelOptimizing the Mini-lesson
  • By
  • Lori Grabel
  • Klarisa Konstantinovsky
  • Education 703.22 Spring 2009
  • Dr. OConnor- Petruso

2
Table of Contents
  • Introduction
  • Statement of the Problem
  • Review of Related Literature
  • Statement of the Hypothesis
  • Methods
  • Participants
  • Instruments
  • Experimental Design
  • Procedure
  • Graphs
  • Discussion
  • Implications
  • Threats to Internal and External Validity

3
Statement of the Problem
  •    Due to grades falling and illiteracy rising,
    this research is based primarily on the Workshop
    Model more exact the reading and writing
    workshop as described in www.tqnyc.org The
    workshop model intends for the students to learn
    reading and writing skills through much
    participation amongst themselves and their
    peers, which follows whole-word learning and is
    in direct opposition of the phonics methodology.

4
Review of Related Literature
  • Pros of the Workshop Model
  • Gives teachers the opportunity to model skill or
    strategy (Adriana, 2006) (Robb, L)
  • Instructional mini-lesson allows teachers and
    students to succeed (Popham, 1972)
  • Students taught using the Workshop Model are more
    likely to read for pleasure (Lause, 2004)
  • Personalizes the class for each student
    (Carmichael)
  • Allows for conferences with students (Furr, 2003)

5
Review of Related Literature
  • Cons of the Workshop Model
  • As per a teachers contract, they cannot be
    excessively micromanaged (Callaci, 2005)
  • Teacher should decide how to teach his/her own
    students (Krasner, 1976)
  • Teachers need to have the freedom to modify
    lessons and activities as needed (Lieberman,
    2000)

6
Statement of the Hypothesis (HR1)
  • The Workshop Models rigorous time schedule will
    enhance the discipline to provide the optimum
    opportunity for third and fifth grade readers and
    writers (students) in a Title 1 school to gain
    knowledge and higher test scores.

7
Participants
  • Thirty-six third and fifth grade students in a
    Title 1 public school in Brooklyn, New York.

8
Instruments
  • Consent form to the principal of the Title 1
    public school where the research will be
    conducted
  • Consent form to the parents/guardians of the
    student of interest
  • Surveys to other 3rd and 5th grade teachers
    regarding their opinion of the effectiveness of
    the Workshop Model
  • Surveys to students about their opinion of the
    Workshop Model
  • ELA Predictive Exam (Pre-test)
  • ELA Exam (Post-test)

9
Experimental Design
  • Quasi Experimental Two groups
  • Individuals are not randomly assigned.
  • Two-Groups Designated treatment group (X1)
    control group (X2)
  • Nonequivalent control group design
  • O X1 O
  • O X2 O

10
Procedure
  • Research conducted between September 2008 and May
    2009.
  • Students independent reading levels assessed in
    September 2008, November 2008, January 2009, and
    March 2009.
  • ELA predictive exam given in October 2008.
  • New York State ELA exam given in January 2009.
  • Parent consent forms given out in April 2009,
    followed by student and colleague surveys.
  • Between October 2008 and May 2009 the workshop
    model was manipulated in the fifth-grade ELL
    classroom while the third-grade classroom adhered
    to the Teachers College guidelines.

11
Survey Results According to the line of best
fit there is a strong correlation rxy0.83
between reading levels and books read weekly,
which would shows that more books read weekly
increases a students reading level.
12
Correlation coefficient is rxy0.17, which means
that there is no significant relationship between
September reading levels and September ELA
predictive percentage of points obtained.
13
Test Results3rd Grade ELA Pre and Post Test
Scores
14
5th Grade ELA Pre and Post Test Scores
15
Discussion
  • There is no significant difference between
    classrooms that adhere to the time constraints of
    the workshop model and those that do not
  • No direct research to prove or disprove our
    findings
  • Benefits to the workshop model

16
Implications
  • Academic and social differences
  • ELL vs. Non-ELL Students
  • Larger sample size
  • Long-term study
  • Further research is needed

17
Threats to Internal Validity
  • History Students can lose focus at the drop of
    a pencil anything beyond the control of the
    teacher and administration might occur on the day
    of the test, as well as to parents and peers
    while filing out the questionnaires.
  • Instrumentation One group of students (ELL) is
    given time and a half while the other is not.
    Both groups are administered the practice exam
    and exam in exactly the same way.
  • Selection The groups are fifth and third
    graders in which a few of the students have been
    left-back, therefore varying the maturity level.

18
Threats to External Validity
  • Pretest-Treatment Some students react
    differently to practice exams but the score of
    the real exam does tend to go up.
  • Selection-Treatment Interaction The students
    are not random. All the ELL fifth graders are in
    one group and the second group is randomly
    picked. The students came from a majority (85)
    of African-American households.
  • Multiple Treatment Though the teaching for both
    groups are based on teaching/learning standards,
    students with IEPs receive extra help, and ESL
    students receive extra differentiated
    instruction.
  • Treatment Diffusion Classmates and schoolmates
    communicate with each other.
  • Experimenter Effects Personal bias may occur
    within our research without our knowledge.

19
References
  • OConnor-Petruso, S. (2008). Threats to Internal
    and External Validity Powerpoint. Brooklyn
    College, Graduate Department of Education.

20
  • To TC or not to TC?
  • The question still remains!
About PowerShow.com