Data Anaylsis

Remaining questions:

How long will the effects of student progress last?
Would students make more progress if the activities were implemented with a small group each time?
Would students make more progress if only one of the features of the alphabet was focused on based on their specific need?

Remaining questions:

How long will the effects of student progress last?
Would students make more progress if the activities were implemented with a small group each time?
Would students make more progress if only one of the features of the alphabet was focused on based on their specific need?

Adjustment of data collection methods:

After reviewing the mid-check test and my daily anecdotal notes, I decided that instead of continuing to try and teach two of my target students all of the letters, I would instead focus on teaching them the letters in their name. The students are familiar with the letters in their name, however, they do not generalize the letters in different settings. To help with this, I used weeks 6, 7 and 8 to focus strictly on the letters in their name while the other two students continued on with learning the rest of the letters in the alphabet.

PRE/MID/POST

Based on my pre, mid and post test data, all students made progress in their alphabetic knowledge. All students participating in this study were chosen for individual reasons, however, they were all chosen with the same end goal: to increase their alphabetic knowledge. Based on all of my data collected, all of my students made progress in their uppercase and lowercase letter recognition, as well as their letter sound recognition. All students met the goal I set for them as well. This tells me that multi-sensory learning methods are effective for helping students gain better alphabetic knowledge. I believe all students were able to make progress because the students were exposed to 24 alphabet activities over the 8 weeks. With repeated exposure to the letters, in a fun and engaging way, the students were able to take part in their learning and show progress in their alphabetic recognition.

Remaining questions:

How long will the effects of student progress last?
Would students make more progress if the activities were implemented with a small group each time?
Would students make more progress if only one feature of the alphabet was focused on?

T-TEST:

A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine the effect of multisensory learning methods on students’ alphabetic knowledge abilities. There was a significant difference in the scores prior to implementing multi-sensory strategies (M=3.5, SD= 4.43) and after implementing (M=7.58 SD=6.96) the multi-sensory strategies; t(12)= 4.58, p = 0.0003951. The observed standardized effect size is large (1.32). That indicates that the magnitude of the difference between the average and μ0 is large. These results suggest that the use of multisensory learning methods had a positive effect on students’ alphabetic knowledge abilities. Specifically, the results suggest that the use of multisensory learning methods increased students’ alphabetic knowledge.

Weekly Quizzes

Weekly Quiz Data:

Based on the weekly quiz data, I was able to see what letters the students learned throughout the week. This was helpful as I was able to see that after a week of learning the same letters, student A and C were able to identify some of the letters learned but students B and D were hardly able to recognize any. From this data, I was able to change my instruction to focus on the letters in students B and D's names to help make the learning more accessible to them. During weeks six and seven, I saw an increase in the letters known for students B and D and think this is due to the students having consistent practice with the same letters that had meaning to them. Altogether, the weekly quiz data was beneficial as I was able to see how the students were progressing in their alphabet knowledge and was able to provide differentiated support to the students to help tailor the learning to them more adequately.

Favorite Activity of the Week Data:

Based on the favorite activity of the week data, I was able to gain knowledge about the activities the students liked best. Using student interest was important to me if I wanted my students to participate in the activities for longer periods of time. To ensure the students would want to participate, I took the activities the students said into consideration and planned additional lessons with them moving forward. When these activities were incorporated the second time around, the students were better able to participate in the lesson, and only needed minimal adult support. The students were also excited because they made comments such as, "I love the shaving cream", when the shaving cream activity was incorporated for the second time. While looking at my notes, I noticed the students participated in the repeated lessons longer than the lessons that were only incorporated once, showing me that the repeated, interest-driven lessons were the ones that helped the students spend more time with the features of the alphabet.

Remaining questions:

Would student B and D make more progress if the letters taught only focused on the letters in their name starting at the beginning of the study?
How else could I have tracked the letters learned throughout the week?
Would using only four different multi-sensory activities provide the students with greater progress?

Antecedol Notes

While taking antecedol notes, I was able to tell the level of support the student needed and how engaged they were based off the rubric I made. Scoring a level 1 meant students did not participate in the activity, even with adult support. Level 2 meant students needed heavy adult support such as hand over hand. Level 3 meant students needed little adult support, such as gestures like pointing and verbal prompts. Level 4 meant students completed the activity on their own. By week 7, after doing various alphabet activities that included writing and finding/identifying letters all students only needed gestures to help them engage in the activities. This tells me the students needed less support as the lesson went on.

While collecting antecedol notes during the lessons, I was able to tell how long my students were engaged in the lesson as I did not keep them participating for a certain amount of time. This allowed the kids to participate at their own pace and allowed them to partake in the activity for as long as they saw fit. From this, I was able to tell the activities that the students participated the longest in. This was helpful for me when creating activities for the rest of the study.

Remaining questions:

Would students make more progress if they had to participate in the activity for at least 10 minutes?
Would students make more progress if these activities were incorporated during a different time than centers?
How else could I have tracked student engagement?

Antecedol Notes

While collecting anecdotal notes throughout the lessons, I was able to tell how long my students were participating in the lesson as I did not keep them participating for a certain amount of time. For this, I marked the time the student began participating and the time they stopped. At the end of the study, I added up each kids minutes and put it into the graph to the right. Throughout the whole project, each student received at least a hour long additional practice with their alphabet knowledge. This extra practiced also allowed them to make gains in their alphabet knowledge.

A Look Into the Kids' Comments:

While writing comments on the anecdotal notes, I noticed the students were enjoying the activities by the comments they made and the way they performed the activity. Some of the students said things like "I like this letter", "This letter is in my name" or "Will you build the letter T with me?" which showed me they were engaged and the letters had meaning to them. The comments were especially beneficial to me because I was able to see what the students were taking away from the lesson. Not only is it important that the students learn their alphabet knowledge, but it is also important that the students were having fun in their learning. With the lessons ahead, I planned activities to ensure student interest would be peaked and to allow them to truly have fun in their learning! Overall, the comments showed me that the students were taking part in their learning, that they were participating in the lessons and that they were enjoying the activities I planned.

Remaining questions:

Would students make more progress if they had to participate in the activity for at least 10 minutes?
Would students make more progress if these activities were incorporated during a different time than centers?
How else could I have tracked student engagement?

Triangulation of Data:

All three of my data collection methods allowed me to help my students make progress in their alphabetic knowledge. From the pretest, I was able to see where my students were at in their alphabetic knowledge, which helped me to create student goals that were individual, achievable, and age-appropriate. The mid-check test and the anecdotal notes allowed me to see the progress my students were making from the pretest. After week 5, I learned that two of my students were not making the progress I expected. After reviewing the anecdotal notes, I was able to see that the students were not able to recognize the letters in their name consistently. This helped me change up my plan from teaching all of the letters in the alphabet to just focusing in on the ones in their name. Lastly, the use of weekly quizzes + the favorite activity of the week allowed me to see if the students were able to learn any letters throughout the week. I was also able to use their favorite activity they mentioned again in the study to help ensure student interest was met and to ensure all students would want to continue participating in the lessons moving forward.