Action Research Paper

Master of Science in Education, Walden University

EDUC 6733: Action Research for Educators

August 15, 2020

Part A: The Context of the Classroom Setting

Classroom diversity is increasing. Becoming an educator taught me diversity is not limited to race and ethnicity. It includes student’s language and linguistic skills, and academic capabilities. My current Kindergarten class roster has 23 students. Eight of the twenty-three students are fluent English Speakers; however, English is not their first language. Majority of my students do not speak English at home due to their parent’s lack of English proficiency. In fact, most English language learners are encouraged to not speak English by their parents while at home (Niehaus & Adelson, 2014). This has a negative impact on English Language Learner’s English proficiency. Often, students pose as translators for their parents and relatives during school visits. Student languages vary. The languages of my students are Farsi, Burmese, Tigrinya, Amharic and Nepali.

To increase student English proficiency and understanding of print, I use a variety of resources and strategies. Demonstrating how to articulate letters, sounds and words, in addition to using picture clues and labeling classroom objects are the most commonly used. I implement strategies such as using call and repeats, songs and poems, which are rooted in repetition and rhyme. Reading and literacy instruction begins with phonological and phonemic awareness instruction, which transcends to explicit phonics instruction. Once students have developed phoneme knowledge, a solid understanding of sound-spelling relationships, and print concepts; the learner is prepared to begin their reading journey as a beginning reader.

Linguistically diverse students can present unusual challenges for teachers. Students have difficulty understanding English and as a result often struggle to understand and follow instruction. To support both students and teachers, administration purchased Saxon Phonics, a scripted phonics curriculum to supports student’s ability to develop phonics and spelling foundational skills. The explicit instruction and curriculum include lessons on phonemic awareness, phonics, decoding, spelling and fluency. However, students lack the cognitive academic language proficiency and English language skills required to ensure academic success with this program. Due to cultural and linguistic differences, students do not understand common and reoccurring American concepts such as zoo animals, birthday parties, parades, carnivals, and many staple food items such as popcorn, which are prevalent themes within the curriculum. Because of this, the teacher must build and provide students with background knowledge on these subjects prior to literacy and guided reading instruction. Not only are students struggling to understand the context of words while learning to read, but also lack understanding of terms such as “same”, “different” and “select”, which make teaching literacy skills such as rhyming and decoding difficult. Despite the challenges, some students develop into fluent readers by the end of the year. However, student test scores reveal deficits in comprehension and word meaning.

The students can read the words but lack full contextual understanding of the text.

There are numerous factors that contribute to English Language Learner’s academic lack of success. Parent’s who are uneducated in their native languages are often intimidated by school settings. Often parents of English Language Learners want to become active participants in their child’s schooling, but their level of education, lack of English proficiency, and socioeconomic status often prove to be a barrier to student achievement (Abedi & Dietel, 2004). Due to numerous hardships, administrators and teachers have found it difficult to increase parental involvement and promote academic success among parents (Lopez, Scribner, &

Mahitivanichcha, 2001). Teaching students whose second language is English, is viewed as a burden by many educators. Strategies and classroom practices are steadily evolving. Some teachers lack an understanding of the strategies and resources required to adequately support English language Learners literacy and language instruction. Despite the numerous challenges, and systematical challenges, legislators expect ELL’s (English Language Learners) to become proficient learners, face twice as many challenges as their English-speaking peers, and perform at the same achievement level on state assessments as their counterparts (Hopkins, Thompson, Linquanti, Hakuta, & August, 2013).

According to Li (2013), ELL’s have significantly fallen behind their English-speaking peers and experience academic gaps in national and state assessments. During President Obama’s administration, the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) was signed; requiring high standards to be taught to all students in America, including English Language Learners. This was implemented to prepare all learners to succeed in college and their careers. The implementation of the Common Core State Standards in curriculum and assessment changed educational requirements for ELL’s, as well. The implementation of high standards and rigorous curriculum has not increased academic achievement and success for all learners. Despite high expectations from state and federal governments, ELL’s continue to fall below our district and state standards.

In my district, Kindergarten students are administered the MAP (Measure of Academic Progress) assessment to determine their growth and achievement in reading, language usage and mathematics. According to the most recent scores, the norm reading score for the state is 155, and the district’s norm reading score is 149 (NWEA, 2020). The mean reading score of my students on the MAP assessment is 131. 4 (NWEA, 2020). This means my students are performing about 20% below their peers. 54% of my students are considered either “Lo” or “Lo Avg” in reading and only 9 students have valid growth test scores (NWEA, 2020). The students show growth; however, they are not achieving and meeting their goals. According to my school’s 2019 College and Career Ready Performance Index Reports (CCRPI), only 43% of our student body achieved their ELA target goals (gaDOE, 2020). Educators in my building are growing increasingly concerned with the lack of academic achievement demonstrated by our ELL’s.

English Language Learners have unique cultural and linguistic needs. In order to develop ways to support English language learners, administrators recently introduced Imagine Learning, a computer-based reading program, in hopes of improving English language learner academic achievement. The program emphasizes reading fluency, oral language and text comprehension. SEG Measurement, an independent research firm, who provides research services to educational publishers, conducted a study of the Effectiveness of Imagine Learning on Student Reaching Achievement, in one of California’s largest School Districts. The result of the study revealed students in grade 2 using Imagine Learning showed 36% greater gains in reading than students who did not use the program (SEG Measurement, 2013). In 2018, a study conducted by a doctoral candidate from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, examined the impact of using the digital learning resource Imagine Learning for supplemental Language and Literacy instruction (Prybil, 2018). His study revealed Imagine Learning added value to the students’ learning, allowing students to reach their projected performance levels (Prybil, 2018). However, there were no differences in demographics in his study, as there is mine.

Generally, it is believed that to a large extent, e-resources enhance teaching, learning and research activities of most higher learning institutions in both developing and developed countries (Henderson, Selwyn, & Aston, 2017). Digital learning resources are transforming classrooms across the nation and increasing student academic achievements. Digital learning resources such as Imagine Learning provide students with audio and video making learning visual for ELL’s (Alphonce & Mwantimwa, 2019). The purpose of this study is to determine if the implementation of Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program will improve my Kindergarten English Language Learner’s reading and language proficiency.

Part B: Literature Review

English Language Learners have notably performed at lower academic levels than their native English-speaking counterparts. Research shows ELL’s often have difficulty developing reading and literacy skills, which yields overall poorer academic outcomes for English Language Learners due to these difficulties. The achievement gap between these two subgroups keeps growing with the years (Mendez, Slate, & Martinez-Garcia, 2017). The differences in reading achievement between native English speakers and English Language learners varies based on the grade level in which English proficiency is obtained (Halle, Hair, Wander, McNamara, & Chien, 2012). ELL’s who are proficient in English entering Kindergarten are more likely to be able to keep pace with Kindergarten native English speakers in reading, and ELLs who are not proficient by first grade have the largest gaps in reading achievement compared to native speakers (Halle et al., 2012). A significant feature of the ESSA act was the requirement of the effective use of technology to improve student educational outcomes and digital literacy knowledge and skills. This literature review will explore using digital literacy practices for English Language Learners, to support my research on the effectiveness of Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program to improve reading and language proficiency of Kindergarten English Language Learners.

Educational technology and using computers to advance the knowledge of learners is not a new classroom strategy. In fact, contrary to the beliefs of many, using computers in language learning dates back to the early 1960’s (Davies, Rendall, Walker, & Hewer, 2012). As classrooms across the nation become more diverse, the demands for ELL’s to develop digital literacy and to quickly acquire the English language has increased; requiring schools to provide explicit language learning instruction. With computer technology becoming more advance, schools have begun to lean on language instruction and support through computer-based programs and software that reinforce reading and oral language concepts. Each activity administered to students via the Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program is intentionally instructional and provides the learner with a clear lesson and language objective. Requiring the learner to actively engage with academic content as well as speaking and language practice. The rapid development of digital technologies is increasing the educational ability and outcomes of computer assisted language learning (Son, Park, & Park, 2017).

Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program provides learners with a systematic approach and explicit instruction in English phonemes, vocabulary, grammar, and language conventions. Through the use of various multimedia options such as videos and ebooks, Imagine Language & Literacy explicitly teaches students the skills that are critical to reading comprehension and language proficiency. Using visual aids are an essential teaching technique for ELL’s as it aids in deepening their understanding of academic content. Visual learning is a teaching and learning style that presents concepts and information as images and other techniques. Researchers Bajrami and Ismali (2016), claim all audio-visual materials have positive contributions to language learning (p.55). The use of visual aids are useful for language learners because they help focus the learner’s attention on the true meaning of concepts and objects, making the academic concepts and language in the class more real and alive (Bajrami & Ismaili,2016). While some studies show that visuals can improve learners’ academic performances, there are instances where visuals do not provide learner’s with sufficient support. Researchers Gokturk and Altay (2015), conducted an investigation on the effects of using audio and video supports to instruct and test ELL’s. Research concluded while there was a difference in test scores of students who received video over audio instruction in their L2, the difference in test scores was not significant enough to argue which method yields the greatest outcome (Gokturk & Altay, 2015). It is possible the researchers achieved this outcome based on the type of visuals provided. It is important for teachers to know when to provide students with context visuals and when to provide students with content visuals to increase their comprehension.

Diverse linguistic and academic capabilities include the learner’s literacy levels in their first language, and levels of English proficiency across the four language modes: reading, writing, speaking, and listening. It is not uncommon for students to be fluent in English oral language skills, however, lack the academic capabilities to read and write in English. For example, I currently have 2 students who are unable to identify letters and their corresponding sounds; however, these students can identify 10 or more high frequency sight words. Because of this, language educators are forced to rethink the language curriculum and develop pedagogies that cater to all language learners’ digital literacies needs (Christoph A. Hafner, Alice Chik, & Rodney H. Jones, 2015). The 4 modes of language should not be taught in isolation. To maximize student potential, it is vital for language teachers to provide reading and language instruction in parallel with digital skills.

My search for literature relevant to my action research topic required the use of Walden

University’s Library and Google Scholar databases for academic journals and articles.

Unfortunately, I was unable to find any current (within 5 years) studies on the effectiveness of Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program. I was able to locate a doctoral candidate’s dissertation, which explored the reading growth of student’s grades K-5 using

Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program (Prybil, 2018). According to this study, usage of the program added value to the students’ learning; however, there was no significant difference in students’ growth using the digital learning resource compared to their growth with traditional instruction (Prybil, 2018). Another significant discovery from this investigation is the amount of time spent using the program did not correlate with student growth (Prybil, 2018). This is significant to my research as I plan to implement use of the program 3 times a week for 20-minute sessions. Due to lack of research on the Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program, I focused on finding literature and studies focused on digital tools for English Language Learner instruction, and digital literacy practices for language learning.

My literature review confirmed the benefits and importance of incorporating multimodal learning such as computer-based reading and language programs to support the academic growth of English Language Learners. Prior to researching digital literacy tools for ELL’s, I anticipated finding studies where teachers saw a significant increase in student reading and language proficiency through the use of computer-based language and literacy programs. While research shows these programs can increase student academic levels, the effects of the programs do not seem significant. My validated research question is “To what extent can small group instruction, 3 times a week, for 20 minutes using Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program improve and accelerate student reading and language proficiency for English Language

Learners?”

I will use quantitative methods and procedures to conduct my research. Quantitative data may be analyzed using either descriptive statistics or inferential statistics (Mertler, 2020). Student achievement scores are quantitative data. I will analyze students MAP scores to determine which students are in most need of supplemental reading and language support. Once these students are identified, I will administer a basic reading/literacy assessment as well as an oral language pre-assessment to determine students baseline scores. After receiving instruction from Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program 3 times a week in 20-minute increments, students will be re-assessed using the previous reading/literacy and oral language assessment. The student’s will be assessed weekly. Their scores will be monitored and charted for comparison.

Reading and language proficiency paves the way for all academic learning to take place. It is vital for students to acquire these skills to ensure overall academic success. Lack of English proficiency hinders student’s ability to learn and grow. It also effects their day to day operations and negatively impact and influence their abilities, as well as their non-English speaking parent’s ability to be productive citizens in society. Lack of English proficiency and reading skills result in limited interactions and interferes with the student’s and their parent’s ability to access and obtain community resources. By becoming fluent in reading and speaking English, learners will improve their way of life.

Part C: Making a Plan

Research shows ELL’s struggle to develop and achieve academically due to lack of English proficiency. Searching to find ways to academically and linguistically support the English

Language Learners in our building; administration researched and purchased Imagine Language & Literacy Program. The rapid development of digital technologies is widely changing the scenes of computer assisted language learning (Son, Park, & Park, 2017). I will implement the adaptive learning program, with hopes of increasing the reading and language proficiency of my Kindergarten English Language Learners. A small group of 6 learners will receive instruction from the computer-based program, 3 days a week, in 20-minute increments. The program is designed to provide supplemental core literacy instruction in reading, writing, speaking and listening. I will monitor student’s progress using quantitative measures such as pre and post assessments. In addition to quantitative measures, I will use field notes to observe student usage of newly learned literacy and language skills acquired from using the program and establish a critical friend group to discuss and analyze student data.

The 6 participants will be chosen after my critical friend group and I analyze the NWEA MAP scores of my students. In addition to the learner’s test scores, we will discuss the student’s foundational skills such as phonological awareness, language and writing capabilities, reading literary and informational skills and student vocabulary acquisition and use. Once the 6 learners have been chosen, students will receive a reading foundation literacy assessment and oral language assessment to determine their baseline score. Students will be tested weekly using the same reoccurring assessments to ensure reliability. It is important for me to provide the learners with opportunities to apply their newly learned literacy and language skills. Students will have the opportunity to engage in cooperative learning activities so I can observe their growth and usage of skills. After 3 weeks of implementation and assessments, my critical friend group and I will meet to discuss student data.

Part D: Collaboration

My teammates have been a critical component of my study. Prior to analyzing student NWEA MAP data and choosing participants; my teammates and I held a meeting to discuss our students’ most common deficits. This conversation helped me focus on a specific area of study. Their ideas, insights and various experiences helped me determine various solution strategies and to determine what works, what can be modified and then reimplemented. The strong collaborative climate at my school is beneficial for the action research process. The responsibility for teaching and assessing students should not fall upon one teacher, as we are all experts who can determine instructional tools to help students learn (Battaglia & Brooks, 2019). My critical friends’ group is composed of my fellow Kindergarten teammates. Together we will assess, monitor and analyze student data.

There are 8 members currently on my team. There are some members who struggle with technology implementation in the classroom and tailoring learning to meet needs of the students. If I can determine Imagine Learning Language and Literacy has a positive impact on learners and increases their reading and language proficiency, this research will be beneficial and support the learning of all the Kindergarten students currently enrolled and improve the teaching practices of my colleagues. Sharing knowledge gained from my study will help other individuals within my learning community better support their learners and create positive and effective change in our school.

Part E: Create a Timeline

July 20

th

Week 1

Pre assessments

Analyze the students MAP Test scores,

choose 6 students, administer Pre-Test,

determine base line assessment scores.

July 27

th

Week 2

Implementation of

Imagine Learning’s digital

language and literacy program

, 3x per week,

20-

minute increments.

Teacher will observe student’s language

usage and reading proficiency informally

throughout the week, as they participate in

various cooperative learning activities.

Students will test on Friday (Reading

Foundational/Oral Language).

August 3

rd

Week 3

Students will continue to receive instruction

from

Imagine Learning’s digital language

and literacy program

, 3x per week, 20-minute

increments.

Teacher will observe student’s language usage

and reading proficiency informally

throughout the week, as they participate in

various cooperative learning activities.

Students will test on Friday (Reading

Foundational/Oral Language).

August 6

th

Week 4

Final week of implementation

Final week of implementation of

Imagine

Learning’s digital language and literacy

program

, 3x per week, 20-minute increments.

Teacher will observe student’s language usage

and reading proficiency informally

throughout the week, as they participate in

various cooperative learning activities.

August 9

th

Week 5

Students will receive the reading foundational

and oral language assessment for the final

The first week will focus on identifying and assessing the participants to determine their reading foundation and oral language baseline scores. Implementation of the digital learning tool will begin week 2. The students will receive language and literacy instruction from the computerbased program for 3 consecutive weeks. During this time, students will be given opportunities to display the knowledge and skills learned by participating in various cooperative learning activities such as puzzles and flashcard games, while the teacher observes and jot anecdotal notes. The fifth and final week will consist of students’ being administered post assessments.

Post assessments

time. Final data analyzation will take place

with critical friend group.

Following post assessments, data analyzation will take place with my critical friend group.

Part F: Methodology: Collecting Data

Action research is a systematic inquiry into one’s own practice that allows teachers to study their own classrooms and instructional methods (Mertler, 2020). By using various data collection methods, I was able to expand and strengthen the validity and conclusion of my study. Research shows, data-driven pedagogical decisions have a positive impact on their students’ learning outcomes (Clark, Galstaun, Reimann, & Handal, 2020). For this study I chose to use quantitative measures, a critical friend group, as well as field notes as data collection tools.

The use of quantitative measures was a vital aspect of this study. The use of student’s NWEA MAP scores, and their scores from their pre/post reading foundational and oral language assessments provided me with statistical data to evaluate; providing clear and objective results. NWEA MAP scores were used to determine which students were eligible for the study. With the help of my colleagues, I decided it would be best to choose students whose scores placed them in the LoAvg category. I originally planned to use students who scored significantly lower than their peers because they need immediate remediation and support. My colleagues and I arrived at the new decision after discussing who would benefit more from remedial instruction, and which students possesses enough skills and English proficiency to properly navigate the Imagine Learning platform. While my colleagues and I did not all agree with this decision, it was important to produce valid and reliable data. One change we did all agree on was the decision to decrease the number of participants from 6 to 4 due to the amount of time it takes to assess students. Using students who lack basic English proficiency and early literacy skills such as phonological awareness, letter identification, matching letters to sounds, and concepts of print; would significantly skew my data and results. After choosing participants, the nest step was to determine their reading and oral language abilities. The student’s received pre assessments to determine their baseline scores. These assessments acted as formative assessments to determine the student’s reading and language capabilities prior to using the Imagine Learning Language and Literacy program. Post assessments were administered to students as summative assessments to determine the amount of student growth and achievement following the intervention.

In addition to quantitative measures, I also used field notes and a critical friend group throughout this study. These two data tools worked together. The members of my critical friend group are a few of my grade level teammates. Because we team teach, my colleagues were able to observe student’s growth in language and reading across various subjects, and jot down observed behaviors. We collaborated weekly to compare our findings and student data. The participants received instruction from the Imagine Learning platform 3 days a week, the remainder 2 days, the students engaged in hands on cooperative learning activities. To maximize student potential and the validity of my data, I placed students in a small group and assigned cooperative learning activities such as matching games and puzzles that required the participants to use both language and reading foundational skills. These activities provided me with opportunities to observe students and take field notes.

Collaborating with my colleagues has been the highlight of this process for me. One member of my critical friend group is a 2nd grade teacher. As a past 2nd grade teacher, I recall having students enter the classroom with no alphabet knowledge and phonics skills due to language barriers. The deficits my students have are not limited to this small group. It is an issue across many classrooms in my school. In our diverse school, students enter the classroom in all grades with little English proficiency and no knowledge of basic reading foundational skills such as phonemic awareness. I am not the only teacher faced with these issues, so it is extremely beneficial to include and collaborate with my colleagues throughout this process. The timeline I created was a critical component of my action plan. Without the use of a timeline, the relationship between the data cannot be observed. The timeline helped me stay organized and acted as a timetable for keeping me on schedule with assessments and data analyzation. It made my weekly objectives concise, clear and achievable.

Part G: Methodology: Analyzing and Graphing Data Using Triangulation

Comparing quantitative and qualitative data results is important to determine if the data tools have yielded similar results and to determine any patterns in data measures. When comparing the three sets of data, my colleagues and I focused on and discussed the data sets individually first. We wanted to analyze each data set independently before comparing them to one another. Next, we compared the data sets, and looked for any similarities, differences and patterns. Lastly, we used the information from our data analyzes to determine if the action research question has been answered and what other lingering questions we still have. By comparing data sets, we were able to determine to what effect computer assisted language programs effect Kindergarten English Language Learners. The data sets yielded similar results.

Students showed growth, however, it was not consistent nor significant.

RF= Reading Foundational OL= Oral Language

July 20th July 27th August 3^rd August 6th

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4

Pre assessments

Student 1:RF-45/100 Student 1:RF-40/100 Student 1:RF-45/100 Student 1:RF-50/100

OL- 6/10 OL- 6/10 OL- 8/10 OL- 8/10

Student 2:RF- 30/100 Student 2:RF- 30/100 Student 2:RF- 25/100 Student 2:RF- 30/100

OL-5/10 OL-5/10 OL-6/10 OL-6/10

Student 3:RF-65/100 Student 3:RF-65/100 Student 3:RF-80/100 Student 3:RF-80/100

OL-7/10 OL-7/10 OL-8/10 OL-8/10

Student 4:RF-50/100 Student 4:RF-55/100 Student 4:RF-55/100 Student 4:RF-55/100

OL-4/10 OL-4/10 OL-6/10 OL-6/10

This is a chart showing student’s Reading Foundational and Oral Language assessment scores.

I used a gradebook to keep track of student weekly scores and then added those scores to a chart weekly. I decided to create a chart because using charts and graphs to visualize complex data is easier than looking at spreadsheets or reports (Ifenthaler & Erlandson, 2016). I created a chart to provide a visualization of how we monitored student progress over the course of the study. The chart displays students Reading Foundational assessment scores and their Oral Language assessment score following a picture naming test. These scores fluctuated over the course of 4 weeks. With the exception of one student, majority of the students Reading

Foundational scores remained the same, or either decreased and increased by 5. This means that after receiving literacy and language instruction via the Imagine Learning program, the students were only able to answer 1 or more questions correctly on same assessment consistently for 3 weeks. Student #3 began the study with the highest scores and showed the most growth throughout the process. However, the student did not score in the 90th range on either assessment. Like most students, this student showed growth but no achievement. When comparing field notes, the results were similar. During cooperative learning activities and independent work time, students were observed using more language skills; however, it was common for students to be too specific, and to name an objects function versus its name. While completing an activity for community helpers, I observed and described in my field notes how student #2 constantly referred to the grocery store as Wal-Mart, versus acknowledging it was simply a store or market. During week three’s analyzation meeting, one colleague argued that it appears student’s confidence grew, resulting in them becoming more verbal but the students did not acquire any new languages skills per se.

“To what extent can small group instruction, 3 times a week, for 20 minutes using Imagine Learning’s digital language and literacy program improve and accelerate student reading and language proficiency?”. I do believe my data answered my question. The data revealed that digital literacy tools can have a positive effect on student learning. I was surprised by the results of my data. I entered this process believing Imagine Learning is a great resource and its instruction would significantly improve the language and reading skills of my young learners. Majority of the students did show growth in their scores, as well as increased their overall language usage. Unfortunately, the growth observed was not very measurable. Because students responded well to the intervention, in the future I plan to increase the number of days the students use the platform, as well as increase the amount of time spent on the platform, in hopes of yielding more positive results.

My data analysis and results are similar to the findings in my literature review. My literature review helped me understand that digital literacy tools are beneficial for language learners due to support from narration, pictures, and audio. My literature review also revealed students in grades K-5 using the Imagine Language and Literacy during the 2016-2017 school year, maintained their reading and language growth after a full year of instruction the program (Prybil, 2018). My results were consistent with this study. The students enjoyed using the Imagine Learning platform. In addition to boosting student engagement, the system appears to have a positive effect on students in reading and language skills, despite lack of overall student achievement. The results from my research are important for me to share with other colleagues to determine ways to maximize the Imagine Learning Language and Literacy program to better support student growth and achievement.

Part H: Implications for Practice, Dissemination of Results, and Contributions to the Field

of Education

Accomplished teachers are teachers who understand the importance of being a lifelong learner, teachers who are committed to students and their learning and teachers who reflect on their practices and learn from experience (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, 2019). This experience and data findings provided me with the opportunity to create a classroom environment that is more conducive for Kindergarten English Language Learners. In the early twentieth century, Dewey linked reflection with action, making reflective practice a means for enhancing student learning (Slade, Burnham, Catalana, & Waters, 2019). Action research required me to examine my classroom practices, perspectives and actions to make the best instructional decisions for my students.

Upon discovering the benefits of digital learning tools, I plan to continue to implement the use of digital literacy learning tools, as well as implement digital literacy learning tools into other various thematic subjects such as Science and Social Studies to increase student comprehension of academic content. I have developed two S.M.A.R.T goals to act as a guide as I implement these changes. My first SMART goal for the 2020-2021 school year is to research and implement 2 new digital literacy tools to support the growth of students reading and language proficiency. I will implement the tools October 2020, after fall break. This will ensure students have developed basic computer navigation skills. I will monitor student progress and introduce a new digital tool every 9 weeks. I will use a data notebook, student work samples and anecdotal notes to monitor student progress. During our ELA block, students will rotate to the technology center, where students can interact with a platform of their choice to build upon their reading and language skills. It is my goal to increase the percentage of students who met or exceeded their expected RIT score on the NWEA MAP assessment from 57% to 75%. My 2^nd S.M.A.R.T. goal is to implement the use of eBooks into thematic studies. I will use online eBook databases such as RAZ kids and PebbleGo, an online children’s encyclopedia. These digital literacy tools provide students with visuals images, realistic photos and narration to support student comprehension of academic content. I will begin using these resources during whole group lessons in September 2020 to demonstrate and model how to use the platforms. Students will begin to use the platforms independently in October 2020. I will monitor student progress using data from district mandated content assessments and group projects. Students will use the resources to reinforce concepts, and as resources to complete group projects on plants and animals. It is my goal for 75% of my students to achieve a score of 80% or higher on unit post assessments.

As a Walden University student, I have learned the importance of enact social change. As an educator committed to being a driving force of change, I collaborated with colleagues throughout the Action Research process and plan to share my findings with other educators within my field. Early on in the process I discovered student deficits in reading and language was not an issue limited to my class, and grade level. I currently have two plans to disseminate my findings. My first plan is to share my research and findings during our next collaborative planning meeting. It is my hope to create dialogue on using digital tools to support language learners. In addition to the collaborative planning meeting, I will share my findings with the school’s technology teacher during the “Teacher feature” segment of the school’s morning announcements. Presenting my findings on the morning announcements allows me to share my research and findings with teachers in other grade levels and parents on a digital platform. Sharing my findings will support teachers, students and parents. It is important for parents to be made privy of my findings to ensure student academic support outside of the classroom. I am glad to have been afforded the opportunity to bring about change and support my colleagues with their teaching and learning practices. The process reminded me that it is important for teachers to work together and contribute to the professional growth and development of one another to maximize student success.

When I think of all the various components of education and who encompasses the educational system, without-a-doubt educators are the greatest asset of them all. We are the sole vessel for transmitting knowledge, values and skills. Consistent professional development sessions are no match for the metacognitive tool, which provide the most important source of personal professional development and improvement: Reflective practice. To ensure the success of students, teachers must reflect on their practices and ask themselves after examination, what did I do to contribute to the problem and what can I do to change it. As educators, we cannot evolve without self-inquiry and the commitment to growth and change. Teacher inquiry drives positive change in my day-to-day professional life by allowing me to take ownership of the skills and knowledge I acquire and providing me with justification of my teaching practices.

My findings have encouraged me to a force of social change. This process has showed me the importance and great need to bridge the gap and fight against the digital divide. Most 21^st century classrooms are equipped with an abundance of technology resources and students are provided with enough devices to implement the 1:1 ratio. Due to inequality in access to technology because of demographics, socio-economic status and region, the children who attend school in our community have limited access to technology in schools and homes. To enact social change and increase the technological skills and knowledge of students, I plan to partner with businesses in the community to sponsor devices for students to use both in school and home. I also will share information with parents on free and low-cost internet programs to further extend student access to resources. This will increase student’s access to academic content and help reinforce skills and concepts outside of the classroom. The ability to effectively use technological devices is necessary to become a productive member of society in the 21^st century.

As an educator, you must be vested into changing the lives of other. Using systematic inquiry such as Action Research, allows teachers to investigate educational processes and practices in order to develop more innovative and efficient instructional practices. Action research is by teachers and for teachers. It focuses on the unique characteristics of the population with whom a practice is employed (Mertler,2020). Being able to study an ongoing issue within my classroom, developing a plan of action to fix the problem, and reviewing and analyzing data to determine the effectiveness of my solution has been a rewarding experience. I look forward to continuing to search for viable solutions to meet the needs of English Language Learners on their language and literacy journey

References

Abedi, J., & Dietel, R. (2004). Challenges in the No Child Left Behind Act for English language learners. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(10), 782-785. doi:10.1177/003172170408501015

Alphonce, S. & Mwantimwa, K. (2019). Students’ use of digital learning resources: diversity, motivations and challenges. Information and Learning Sciences, 120(11/12), 758–772. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1108/ILS-06-2019-0048

Bajrami, L., & Ismaili, M. (2016). The Role of Video Materials in EFL Classrooms. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 502–506. https://doiorg.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.068

Battaglia, E., & Brooks, K. (2019). Strategies for co-teaching and teacher collaborations. Science

Scope, 43(2), 80–83.

Davies, G., Rendall, H., Walker, R., & Hewer, S. (2012). ICT4LT Module 1.4: Introduction to computer assisted language learning (CALL). http://www.ict4lt.org/en/en_mod1-4.html

Georgia Department of Education (gaDOE). (2020). 2019 College and Career Ready

Performance Index Reports. http://ccrpi.gadoe.org/Reports/Views/Shared/\_Layout.html

Gokturn, N., & Altay A. (2015). The Relationship between Efl Learners’ Learning Styles and Their Scores in Audio and Video-Mediated L2 Listening Tests. Journal of Theory & Practice in Education (JTPE), 11(3), 971–988.

Hafner, C. A., Chik, A., & Jones, R. H. (2015). Digital literacies and language learning.

Language Learning & Technology, 19(3), 1–7. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2015/commentary.pdf

Halle, T., Hair, E., Wandner, L., McNamara, M., & Chien, N. (2012). Predictors and Outcomes of Early vs. Later English Language Proficiency Among English Language Learners. Early childhood research quarterly, 27(1) , 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq . 2011.07.004

Henderson, M., Selwyn, N. and Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning, Studies in Higher Education, 42:8, 1567-1579, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946.

Hopkins, M., Thompson, K. D., Linquanti, R., Hakuta, K., & August, D. (2013). Fully accounting for English learner performance: A key issue in ESEA reauthorization.

Educational Researcher, 42, 101-108. doi:10.3102/0013189X12471426.

Ifenthaler, D., & Erlandson, B. E. (2016). Learning with data: Visualization to support teaching,

learning, and assessment. Technology, Knowledge And Learning: Learning

Mathematics, Science And The Arts In The Context Of Digital Technologies, 21(1), 1-3.

doi:10.1007/s10758-015-9273-5

Kennedy-Clark, S., Galstaun, V., Reimann, P., & Handal, B. (2020). Using Action Research to Develop Data Literacy in Initial Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Action Research, 6(2) , 4–25.

Li, N. (2013). Seeking best practices and meeting the needs of the English language learners:

Using second language theories and integrating technology in teaching. Journal of International Education Research, 9, 217-222. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/131719/

López, G. R., Scribner, J. D., & Mahitivanichcha, K. (2001). Redefining Parental Involvement: Lessons from High-Performing Migrant-Impacted Schools. _American Educational Research Journa_l, 38(2), 253 288. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038002253 .

Mendez, T.D.J., Slate, R.S., & Martinez-Garcia, C. (2017). Reading and Mathematics

Differences for English Language Learners Enrolled in Dual Language or Exit Programs. Athens Journal of Education, 4(2), 102–122. https://doiorg.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.30958/aje.4-2-1

Mertler, C. A. (2020). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (6th ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

NWEA. (2020). MAP Growth Class Report. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from https://teach.mapnwea.org/report/download/rpt/111219858 .

Niehaus, K., & Adelson, J. L. (2014). School support, parental involvement, and academic and social-emotional outcomes for English language learners. American Educational Research Journal, 51, 810-844. doi:10.3102 /0002831214531323.

Prybil, B. D. (2018). Measuring reading growth of elementary students using a digital learning resource (Order No. 10812311) [Doctoral Dissertation, Southern Illinois University].

ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

SEG Measurement (2013). Imagine Learning Evidence of Effectiveness: Summary of Studies.

http://ildc.cdn.imaginelearning.com/Company/US/MA/Imagine_Learning_Evidence_of _

Effectiveness.pdf

Slade, M. L., Burnham, T. J., Catalana, S. M., & Waters, T. (2019). The Impact of Reflective Practice on Teacher Candidates’ Learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(2). (Slade, Burnham, Catalana, & Waters, 2019).

Son, J.B., Park, S.S., & Park, M. (2017). Digital literacy of language learners in two different contexts. JALT CALL Journal. 13. 77-96. 10.29140/jaltcall.v13n2.213.