Using Technology to Measure Reading Comprehension for Students with Special Needs in a Self

Using Technology to Measure Reading Comprehension 1

Using Technology to Measure Reading Comprehension for Students with Special Needs in a

Self-contained Classroom: A Reflective Analysis

Allison Duff

GRDG 690

Saint John Fisher College, Rochester, New York


Table of Contents

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………….. 3

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………… 4

Theoretical Framework …………………………………………………………………. 6

Synthesis of Studies ……………………………………………………………………… 8

Methods ………………………………………………………………………………….. 10

Findings and Analysis ……………………………………………………….….……….. 13

Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………… 18

Appendices ……………………………………………………………………………... 20

References ……………………………………………………………………………… 27


Abstract

This study is a reflective analysis of the role of technology in literacy education,

specifically in an 8:1:1 special education setting. The study group consisted of five classified

students, 1 female student and 4 male students. This research was influenced by the student‟s

emotional reactions to literature lessons dealing with written responses to reading and their

below average assessment scores. The goal was to determine if students would respond better to

literature with the use of technology, and to identify if they were then more motivated to respond

to literature. Data was collected in the form of formal and informal observations, student and

teacher interviews, and artifact collection. Each initial observation identified the student‟s ability

to perform on a written assessment and the emotional reactions to the task. Students were given

choices in how they would like to demonstrate learning using technology. The mode of

technology varied from PowerPoint presentations to creating movies using Windows Movie

Maker software. The results showed an overwhelming positive emotional response to the

utilization of technology in response to literature. The students were motivated to read their

selected pieces of literature, and we expressing interest in literature in their free time. The

students responses were more comprehension and thorough through the use of technology, and

their overall assessment scores improved.


Introduction

The topic in which I am studying is the role of technology in literacy education,

specifically in a special education setting. Literacy is not simply defined as the ability to read

and write. Literacy is not the opposite of being “illiterate” (Lankshear and Knobel, 2003).

Literacy is not a label that is given for the successful completion of a project, assignment or test.

Literacy is a word that can ultimately define a person in their society by how they interact within

it. Literacy is a word that changes in meaning with the changing of times.

Literacy is affected dependent upon the discourse in which it is used. Discourse can best

be described as the way people interact within society. Discourse is a way of being within the

contexts of life and it shapes who we are and what we are as people (Gee, 1990.) One‟s primary

discourse involves interactions within immediate familial groups. One‟s secondary discourse is

influenced by secondary groups such as; schools, churches, community groups, workplaces, etc.

If one builds on their primary discourse and becomes effortlessly adept in secondary discourses,

they are able to have control over how they interact and behave within specific social groups.

Literacy is therefore a secondary discourse as one must develop fluid control of how to adapt

their discourse within different societal groups in order to successfully communicate.

In addition to discourse, ones cultural background contributes largely to how they interact

in and out of societal groups. Sociocultural theory has contributed greatly to the definition of

literacy. Sociocultural theory analyzes everyday life from a culturally focused perspective,

where one‟s cultural background and social interactions influence lives in both formal and

informal settings. Larson and Marsh (2005) state, “Sociocultural-historical learning theory

defines the child as an active member of a constantly changing community of learners in which

knowledge constructs and is constructed by larger cultural systems” (p.100). It is the members


of a specific group such as family, community, organizations that influence the socialization of

its members to act, speak, write and think in ways that are acceptable within a specific group.

Literacies are socially recognized ways of generating, communicating and negotiating

meaningful content through the variety of encoded texts within contexts of participation in

Discourses (Lankshear and Knobel, 2006). Moreover, literacy is the knowledge of how to apply

reading and writing for meaningful, specific purposes in specific contexts, through practice.

Literacy involves interactions with appropriate discourse, within various social and

cultural groups. Technology is a part of today‟s society regardless of sociocultural background.

Due to the increasing need for the use of technology, it has therefore become a part of discourse.

The use of technology involves a level of appropriateness in the discourse that it is used.

Sociocultural theory informs the learning of technology in that the exposure to and level of

preparedness for using technology is greatly affected by ones exposure to it and is influenced by

sociocultural background. “Today, reading, reading instruction, and more broadly conceived

notions of literacy and literacy instruction are being defined by change in even more profound

ways as new technologies require new literacies to effectively exploit their potentials” (Leu et al,

2003). Students in the early 21st century are born into a digitalized culture where life and

communication is largely dependent upon technology. These new literacies change regularly as

technology opens new possibilities for communication and information.

The utilization of technology in literacy instruction, particularly in special education, is

an important topic of study, as it allows students interact and make meaning of the larger world

around them using the tools that allow it to function. Research (Lacina, 2008; Woodward and

Rieth, 1997) indicates that technology is part of the social and academic lives of students today.

Woodward and Rieth (1997) report that student reading skills can be enhanced when students


can actively relate their own experiences to their reading by using technology to create visual

representations of their own meaning. Using technology allows students to use visual images

and multiple graphics to connect important ideas, and synthesize the big ides of the text.

Durando (2008) reports that studies have demonstrated that children with multiple disabilities

can benefit from access to high quality literacy instruction. Technology may be the bridge to

high quality literacy instruction for our most struggling and special learners.

Presently there is very limited research in the areas of expanded assessment tools for

special education students. Current assessment practice is built on the foundation of old

literacies and that all students acquire language the same way. New literacies of the 21st century

offer newer, multiple ways of assessments to support diverse learning.

In this paper, I will look at how technology benefits classified children‟s literacy

acquisition. I will specifically look at the benefits of using Movie Maker technology for students

to respond to literature as an alternative to pencil-paper tasks.

Theoretical Framework

Sociocultural theory has contributed greatly to the definition of literacy. Sociocultural

theory analyzes everyday life from a culturally focused perspective where ones cultural

background and social interactions influence their lives in both formal and informal settings.

Larson and Marsh (2005) stated, “Sociocultural-historical learning theory defines the child as an

active member of a constantly changing community of learners in which knowledge constructs

and is constructed by larger cultural systems” (p.100.) It is the members of a specific group such

as family, community, or organizations that influence the socialization of its members to act,

speak, write and think in ways that are acceptable within a specific group.


Martinez and McGee (2000) use sociocultural theory to explain the shift in theories from

the 1970‟s to today, explaining that reading was described as a cognitive, psycholinguistic

process that only used authentic text. This theory did not investigate how students as readers

interact with authentic literature. It wasn‟t until the shift to the sociocultural perspective, that

students were examined by their engagement and responses to literature.

Saying that literacy is learned simply when someone masters a secondary discourse

would be an understatement of its true meaning. Lankshear and Knobel (2003) clearly outline

that literacies are defined as “socially recognized ways of generating, communicating and

negotiating meaningful content through the medium of encoded texts within contexts of

participation in Discourses (or as members of Discourses) (p.64). They believe that literacy is

the knowledge of how to apply the understanding of reading and writing for specific purposes in

specific contexts, through practice. Students in the early 21st century are being born into a digital

world, and they are learning new technologies and literacies daily.

From the roots of sociocultural theory emerges the New Literacy theory. New literacy is

described as being closely linked to social practices. Larson and Marsh (2005) stated, “New

literacy studies helps us understand that literacy learning does not simply occur in formal or

informal settings, or in or out of school, but also occurs in-between in everyday interaction as

tools for building and maintaining social relations” (p.18). Students today are surrounded by

new literacies and they use these new literacies as a tool for communication.

Sociocultural theory influences how learners transmit new information, as learning is a

social practice. Coiro (2002) used sociocultural theory to explain that in a larger sociocultural

context, it is the text, the activity and the reader that influence how literacy learners interpret and

transmit information. Reading comprehension is seen as a social activity. Coiro (2002) also


described the importance of using technology in the form of new literacies to promote social

interaction, and collaboration with others in order to improve overall comprehension. Hull and

Katz (2006) use the new literacies theory to support the use of digital storytelling to engage

people‟s senses of motivation and purpose. They examine the multimedia literacy of digital

story-telling and its social context for learning. They believe that narrative practice is social

practice, and thus our lives can be “storied” in order to communicate purpose. Jacobs‟ (2008)

work is based on the theory set forth by the New Literacy Studies (NLS) in that literacy is a

social practice contained within the immediate context of its usage. The ability to be literate

means using text for culturally meaningful purposes and activities. The usage of text is for

meaning making within sociocultural, historical and political context (Jacobs, 2008.)

In this paper, I draw on sociocultural theory to understand how learners use technology to

interact with the ever changing world around them. The theory will provide insight into how

students think and process the text around them. I will use this information to frame my research

by looking at the use of digital story telling as an instructional resource for children in a

classified self contained classroom. Digital storytelling will serve as a way to assess

comprehension of authentic text, as well as a means of assessing narrative story writing.

Synthesis of Studies

Literacy, the Internet, the development of technology skills and self-directed student

resources are all hot topics in education today. As such, there is a wealth of research that

analyzes how it is being used in current practice and how it can be used in best practices to

promote literacy development.

Research indicates that the integration of technology into classroom activities to reinforce

skills and strategies maximizes student engagement and outcomes by providing students a new


lens for learning (Assaf, 2007; Hull & Katz, 2008; Teclehaimanot & Lamb, 2005).

Teclehaimanot and Lamb (2005) reported that having a technology-rich environment is what

facilitates the reading experience while meeting challenging state standards. Assaf (2007)

reported that when students can use technology in their learning, they use it to creatively

synthesize important points and details, by visually integrating images and graphics while

incorporating important details from text. Woodward and Rieth (1997) reported that technology-

based instruction in a special education setting will address the intensity and consistency of skill

practice for remedying severe academic deficits. They also reported that students with mild

disabilities benefit from computer assisted instruction, as the research shows the students learn

twice as much as students who receive instruction through traditional methods with textbooks

and worksheets.

Technology in the Classroom

A variety of different technologies have been introduced in schools in order to result in

an increase in student engagement and learning. For instance,” Lacina (2008) reports that iPods

are one of the most popular technologies familiar to today are youth. The development of

podcasting is changing the way students can take in material presented in a classroom. Students

can listen to the material at any time of the day at their convenience. Lacina indicated that many

schools have place a ban on the use of iPods in school as they feel it leads to social isolation and

can also be used as a tool for cheating. However, Lacina (2008) states that in elementary and

middle schools can use iPods as a tool for language acquisition as they can help to improve

vocabulary, comprehension and writing skills. The use of Podcasting provides students the

opportunity to publish and record their writing in a technological format.


Research (Hull & Katz, 2006; Vasudevan, 2006) indicate that technology through digital

story telling provides new sites for inquiry and exploration for students that is motivating. Hull

and Katz (2006) found that digital story telling in combination with supportive social

relationships provides a powerful means and motivation for how digital storytelling can give a

voice to students so that they can better express themselves. Vasudevan (2006) asserts that

digital and visual modalities make it possible for students as authors, to develop “new selves”

that are not only resistant to dominant images but also offer new sites of inquiry and exploration.

Vasudevan (2006) states that students can use their knowledge of storytelling and their

multimodalities to explore their multiple selves through the engagement with various

technologies and the production of visual text.

It is necessary to question the relationship between technology and literacy practice, by

observing students engaged in reading, and responding to reading through the use of technology.

As such, this research asks, how teachers can use multimedia to help students identified as

needing special education support to respond to literature.

Methods

Researcher Stance – I began teaching understanding that all students could learn and that

it was the job of the teacher to find the methods to help them succeed best. I had the

understanding that all reading instruction must be differentiated in order to accommodate

different learning styles and abilities. I was surprised at the amount of differentiation that is

required to teach in a special education setting, to accommodate different reading levels,

interests, motivation and emotional needs.

I believe that teaching students is a reciprocal process that involves constant dialogue

between students and teachers. It is the teachers role to listen to their students, assess their


knowledge of what they learn, what they already bring to the classroom and ways that they are

most interested in learning, even if those ways are considered alternative.

Design - In order to answer the question, how can teachers use multimedia to help special

education students respond to literature, the research conducted involved qualitative methods

including observation of students responding to literature using conventional pencil and paper

tasks, observations of students responding to literature using multimedia, and student interviews.

The students selected to participate in this study are my current classroom students for the 2008-

2009 school year. These students provided a focus for observation to better understand ways in

which students in special education can respond to literature effectively.

Context – This study will take place at the Lakeside Elementary School, in a small city

outside of Rochester, NY. The majority of the school population is comprised of white middle

class and consists of 1,029 students. 92% of the student population is white, and 25% of the

school population receives free and reduced lunch. Lakeside Elementary school is staffed with

49 teaching staff. This school district has strong community ties developed and it has a

reciprocal relationship between the school and the community. The involvement occurs

throughout the year in terms of programs that benefit the community with the aid of the school‟s

resources and vice versa.

Participants – The students in this study are special education students in a blended self

contained 8:1:1 class for students with emotional disabilities. The class consists of 4 male

students and 1 female, ranging in age from eight to ten years old. On a weekly basis, students

receive services from academic intervention services (AIS), school counselors, speech

pathologists, and occupational therapists. The students are fourth and fifth graders who

participate in various degrees of grade level curriculum. Students are presented with 4th

grade


curriculum, and receive differentiated instruction based on their individual strengths and needs in

order to be successful.

Consent - Informed consent was obtained by the parents in the form of a survey. Student

assent was obtained verbally.

Data Collection – There were three major sources of data collection throughout this

research study. The observations were supported with interview data and artifact collection.

Observations – Students were observed during guided reading lessons, three times a

week for a two week time period. I acted as the teacher and the observer, as this study takes

place in the context of my classroom. To document my observations, I composed field notes and

used some audio recordings of student discussions of literature. Observational data was obtained

during student‟s oral reading, student work samples and video responses to literature as well as

the student planning process necessary for power point and video production.

Interviews – Interviews were conducted with teachers regarding their literacy

instructional practice and how (if at all) they utilize technology in their literacy instruction.

Students were interviewed to gain insight to their views and opinions of literature and how they

prefer to respond to literature. All face to face interviews were audio recorded.

Artifacts – The artifacts collected were student work samples of teacher created

worksheets, power point presentations, and student made videos. These work samples validated

information recorded in field notes and provided documentation as to whether the student met

the goals of the literacy instruction.


Data Analysis

Data was analyzed using an interpretative approach. I sought to identify how teaching

and learning can be enriched through the use of technology, involved particularly in the

assessment of reading comprehension.

Throughout my data collection I created charts that documented content taught and

student learning. I created a chart comparing each student studied during guided reading groups

and created organized lists comparing student interviews and teacher interviews. I created a

system of coding to use to aid in identifying student strengths and weaknesses in reading

comprehension as well as to develop my themes across my research. I used the information

gathered in the student charts to compare each child in order to determine the appropriate level of

technology to use for each. With the assessment information and student survey information I

created unique projects utilizing technology for each individual student to demonstrate reading

comprehension proficiency.

Findings and Analysis

Initial Literacy Assessment

During the first week of the study, each student was assessed individually. The initial

assessments given were unique to the students‟ guided reading books, and focused on measuring

reading comprehension of the selected text. The students were provided minimal instructional

support, aside from typical redirecting back to the task at hand. As was expected, students

became frustrated with the task, some did not finish, one tore up their assessment, and many

avoidance behaviors ensued. After multiple redirections back to the task at hand, four out of five

assessments were completed. All of the student‟s assessment scores identified them as below

average in reading comprehension.


Students were given a survey to complete about their opinions and feelings about reading.

When asked if students liked to read at school, two students stated that they did not like it, and

that it is boring, conversely, three students stated that they like reading in school, particularly if

they have a choice in what they can read.

What I found to be powerful information was that special education students dislike

pencil and paper reading comprehension activities and tests. When asked their thoughts about

writing about what they‟ve read, one student admitted to hating it, one student stated that they

liked it, and another student said they like it or dislike it depending on their mood. Two students

in particular remarked that they did not like having to be complete in their thoughts about the

book, due to the fact that they would have to write how their own responses and that it takes too

long. One student admittedly said, “My hand gets tired when I have to write too much, so I just

write a little.” When the students were asked how they would feel about choosing other ways to

be assessed like creating a power point presentation or recording responses to, talking about, or

acting a scene from a story, the students were unanimous in their answers in that they all thought

it would be fun and they would love to try it.

After the screening assessments were complete I spent some time observing my students

in their free time to see what kinds of activities they migrate too. Naturally, each student was

observed selecting the computer as a preference. This observational information was critical to

identifying student interest, to find their “hook” to reading. It was clear to me that special

education students would prefer to utilize technology to “show and tell” what they know about

their reading, as opposed to writing about it. The data obtained directed my research toward the

use of technology as a method to measure reading comprehension.


During the first week of the study, two special education teachers were interviewed

electronically through email, about their current practice and the role of technology in their day

to day instruction. Two very different teachers in practice and in their use of technology both

noted similar responses to comprehension assessments. What I found interesting is that special

education teachers are frustrated with the results of traditional assessments, as they are not a true

measure of student‟s comprehension/reading behaviors, based on observation of classroom

performance. Mrs. Rose stated that her students typically “freeze up when a paper test is given

to them. They become anxious and are not able to think through the test as clearly as that are

able to speak about it. They thoughts must be recorded by a scribe in order to include all of their

thoughts.” Mrs. Black stated that her special education students “require a significant amount of

prompting to arrive at the right answer, which reduces the reliability of their response.” If

Literacies are socially recognized ways of generating, communicating and negotiating

meaningful content through the variety of encoded texts within context of participation in

Discourses (Lankshear and Knobel, 2006), then paper assessments need not be the only form of

assessments accepted by diverse learners.

Students were provided with a variety of guided reading books at their instructional

reading levels, in various genres to self select from. Their instructional needs were targeted

based on the initial assessments and varied from need in sequencing, characterization,

generalization, and text details/features. Students worked 1:1 with me in guided reading groups

three to four times a week. For each student a goal was set for what skill they were to learn from

reading their book, and they were given various options as to how they could present their

learning. Each student selected a different method of demonstration.


Cody is a 5th

grader who is a struggling reader and is currently reading independently at

the middle-end of 2nd

grade, and is reading instructionally at the beginning on 3rd

grade. From

the variety of texts presented at his instructional level of 3rd

grade, he selected the text Hungry,

Hungry Sharks, which is a beginning of 3rd

grade text. Hungry, Hungry Sharks is an expository

text that is informational and is of high interest. This student‟s goal was to identify details within

text. This student decided to create a PowerPoint presentation with all of the factual information

contained within the text. This project evoked more questions that the student had about sharks

and therefore led to more research about the topic which was then included in his presentation.

Fysher is a 4th

grader, who is a struggling reader and is currently reading independently at

the end of 2nd

grade and is reading instructionally at the beginning on 3rd

grade. The

instructional text he chose was The Secrets of Droon: The Sleeping Giant of Goll, which is a

beginning on 3rd

text. This student‟s goal was to identify sequence of events in a story. This

student‟s tendency is to retell initiating events and climax of a story, but fails to include any

other supporting details from a story. The student decided to create a visual representation of

each chapter he read in order to aide in his retelling of the story in proper sequence. This student

is proficient in many areas of technology, so it was decided that his visual representations would

be compiled with Movie Maker software in order to retell the story.

Alexander is a 4th

grader who currently reads independently at the beginning of 5th

grade

level and instructionally at the middle of fifth grade. This student is an extremely fluent reader

who is observed employing multiple cueing systems to attack unknown multisyllabic words

encountered in text. This student‟s reading comprehension suffers as a result of his rapid pace

while reading. At the end of a reading, this student is only able to recall beginning and ending

events in a text and struggled to retell the story with any detail. The text that this student


selected was The Twits, by Roald Dahl, grade level 5.2. Alexander chose to use the Windows

Movie Maker program to present selected scenes from the book. Guided reading was

discontinued with student 3, due to mainstreaming experiences in ELA and conflicting

schedules.

Sal is a 4th

grader who currently reads on grade level but receives AIS support due to low

scores on NYS ELA exams mostly due in part to emotional difficulties and test anxiety. This

student is an excellent word caller who uses multiple cueing systems while reading to identify

unknown words encountered in text. This student struggles with comprehension of text read.

The text selected by this student was The Magic Tree House: Mummies in the Morning, which is

a middle of 3rd

grade text. The text was selected slightly below instructional level to work on

target skills while reading; providing this student with text that is easier to interpret, allows him

to refine his skill work. The student selected to present his story using PowerPoint technology.

Sal‟s guided reading was discontinued with student 4, due to mainstreaming experiences in ELA

and conflicting schedules.

Emmalyn is a 4th

grader who currently reads independently at the end of 4th

grade, and

read instructionally at the beginning of 5th

grade. She struggles to identify character traits and

make generalizations based on evidence in the text. The text she selected is The Twits, by Roald

Dahl, grade level 5.2. The student decided that in order to accomplish her goal of

characterization, she would act out her favorite scenes from the story that demonstrated true

traits of her character of choice. Emmalyn wrote her own scripts from the details and dialogue

present within the text and determined the amount of detail that would go into each scene.

Emmalyn compiled her scenes with Movie Maker in an effort to present her own movie about

the book.


In general, the response to using alternative methods to demonstrate learning was

overwhelmingly positive based on student observations of their enthusiasm and the quality of

their finished products to work on their projects. The students were all thrilled to be able to self

select their own book, and create their own project to demonstrate learning. Student were

observed engrossed in their work and often times asked to work on their projects during their

own free time and recess. Overall the students felt proud of their accomplishments and were

enthusiastic about sharing their learning with their peers, other service providers and

administration.

Conclusion and Implications

Reading comprehension is the end goal in any literacy program. In times where a

student‟s worth is measured by their ability to perform on state assessments, students are

becoming increasingly frustrated with the pressure to perform and are many times falling short.

Teaching students only to the tests provides an incredible disservice to them, and does not allow

them to expand their minds creatively while focusing on the ultimate goal of reading and that is

comprehension.

Offering special education students an opportunity to step outside of the box in their

literacy instruction and choose their preferred way to demonstrate their learning is powerful.

Students developed a level of ownership and responsibility in their education and were eager to

“show and tell” what they learned from their reading. This assessment modification is one that

could easily be implemented at any grade level, with any content area, with any population of

students.

A main finding in this study was that students who were given traditional reading

comprehension assessments admittingly did not perform at their best, and did not elaborate in


their responses because it was „too much writing,” and as a result scored lower on their

assessments indicating a need to higher levels of teacher support. Another finding in this study

was that students who were given the opportunity to alternatively demonstrate their learning, in

the form of technology were eager to perform. Although the time involved in producing a final

project is lengthy, the amount of time spent reinforcing skill work is worth it in the end as the

end result is a stronger foundation built on strong literary knowledge.

Limitations

This study took place in one classroom with five students, whereas two were removed

from the study due to conflicts and mainstreaming experiences, thus these results cannot be

generalized without further studies with a larger selection of students. This study allowed

students to hone in on their target skills; however the time involved in doing so was great, and

would make it difficult to conduct projects of this depth with every unit/book being studied.

However, I wanted to see how children‟s responses to literature changed through the use of

technology.

Implications and Future Research

This study gives a limited picture of how classified special education students respond to

literature through the use of technology in one small classroom. Further research would better

determine the effectiveness in a larger class size, and in a general education setting vs. a special

education setting.

This research study has informed my current practice, as my classroom students are those

impacted by this instruction and they enjoy demonstrating their learning creatively, and are glad

when they are given a choice in their learning. Providing students with a choice develops a level

of ownership in their learning which motivates them to work hard and do their best.


The literature says “Literacies are socially recognized ways of generating,

communicating and negotiating meaningful content through the variety of encoded texts within

context of participation in Discourses” (Lankshear and Knobel, 2006), then we need to be

looking at other forms of assessments to be accepted by diverse learners aside from paper

assessments.

I also feel confident that this study, could be replicated for all learners across content

areas and in the end the teacher and the student will both greatly be benefited.


Appendix A

Student Interviews

Q: How do you feel about reading in class?

1. I think it‟s boring and hard.

2. I don‟t like to read.

3. Sometimes I like it when it‟s my choice or if the book is interesting. I like to read a t

home for homework.

4. I like reading at school and at home.

5. I like reading with a teacher. I don‟t like to read at home. My mom is busy and can‟t

read with me.

Q: How do you feel when you have to write about what you read?

1. I really hate it.

2. It takes too long. I really don‟t like it. I like when the teacher‟s will write what I say.

3. Sometimes I like it and sometimes I don‟t. It depends what kind of mood I‟m in. My

hand always gets tired when I have to write too much, so I just write a little.

4. It‟s ok. I would rather draw a picture or just talk about it. It can be hard because you

have to write every single word. I like to read more than write; because sometimes I

forget everything I want to say.

5. I like it. When I do a good job on my work I earn terrific tickets, so I like to do it.

Q: What other ways than writing about what you read would you like to use to demonstrate what

you learned? (Ie. Presentation, draw a picture, act it out, etc.)

1. I like making slides on PowerPoint. I would be happy if I could do that instead of

writing about it.

2. I am good at drawing pictures. I would much rather do that than write sentences!

3. I would rather act it out. I think it would be more fun than writing about it.

4. I would rather show it in another way like act it out so I could say everything I want

and not forget it.

5. I think that would be cool to do something else other than write about our books. I

think I would be good at acting it out.

Q: Do you like to watch movies about books you read?

1. I would rather just watch the movie.

2. I like movies better than books.

3. Yes, when it is interesting its fun. I like getting more information from a movie. I

liked watching Winn Dixie after we read the book.

4. I like to watch movies about books I‟ve read.

5. I like when they make movies from books, like Harry Potter and Winn Dixie. Accept

Harry Potter is too big of a book for me to read.

Q: If you see a movie and you‟ve already read the book, which do you like better? Why?

1. I don‟t know.

2. I never have done that.


3. The book usually tells you more than a movie does so I would say the book.

Sometimes.

4. I always like the movie better. It‟s more fun than a book.

Q: How would you feel about recording yourself responding to, talking about, or acting a scene

from a story?

1. It sounds like fun.

2. I think I would like to do something like that. Would we get to use a microphone or a

video camera?

3. I think I would probably like it. It would be more fun than boring writing, and my

hand won‟t hurt.

4. I think it would be a lot of fun and easier than writing about it. I could say what I

want to without forgetting what I want to say.

5. I think acting out a scene from a story would be a lot of fun.


Appendix B

Teacher Interviews

Q: How much time do you spend in your classroom per day on literacy related activities?

T1: 2 hours per day

T2: 1.5 hours per day

Q: How do you assess your students' reading comprehension? (ie: Selection tests, orally, written

assessments, alternatives (please specify) or any others?)

T1: Unit tests from Side Walks (modified curriculum), oral discussion and responses to

teacher questions after reading text, teacher observation of increased ability to

read independently in school (stories, directions on worksheets), parent feedback

regarding child's self-motivation and independent reading and completion of homework

at home.

T2: Selections tests, classroom observations, worksheets.

Q: How do your students feel about taking reading tests?

T1: Varies year-to-year, student-to-student, depending upon the degree that emotional

factors are a part of their learning disabilities. This year my group does not seem too

stressed by it since it is based on the skills and strategies that they've just learned in the

unit, but they need a lot of help. (Unlike last year's group that was stressed by just

about anything.) However, the NYS ELA test is totally different. Understandably, most

just give up and randomly fill in circles - the test is beyond their reading ability!

T2: They hate it, but I have to give them! My students require a large amount of teacher

support to complete them. The kids typically will tell you exactly what happened in a

story, but will put ¼ of the details they describe in their answer because they don‟t want

to take the time to write everything down.

Q: Do you feel that your students always perform their absolute best on comprehension tests or

do they simply provide "enough" to answer a question, without any of the elaboration you know

they are capable of (had they answered orally)?

T1: Most of my students have some degree of language disability so they often need

prompts to provide more complete responses - either written or oral.

T2: I would say that my students definitely skim the surface of their written responses

because of the amount of time required to add in additional details. A lot of times they

try to convince an aide or teacher to write down their thoughts.

Q: Have you ever used a form of Readers Theater in your classroom? If so, how do your

students respond to it?

T1: Yes, I often change a story into play form. They absolutely love it!

T2: No. I never have any time to do anything like that. There is so much that my

students need, I just don‟t have the time to introduce anything else.

Q: What forms of technology do you use in your classrooms on a daily basis?


T1: We use Success Maker (SME) reading every day (computer based literacy practice.)

T2: The internet at free time for the kids to play games.

Q: Do you use any forms of technology to assess reading comprehension?

T1: I look at the reports from SME - but I haven't figured out yet how to get reports that

provide scores broken down into specific skills from the new SME program.

T2: I don‟t. I wish I had something to use.

Q: How do you think your students would respond to the use of video cameras to "document"

their responses to literature vs. an assessment test?

T1: I'd love to try it! I think most would find it stimulating and positive but there are

always those few who don't like to have their picture taken.

T2: I think they would probably love it. Kids are such hams when they are being

recorded.


Appendix C

Consent/Permission/Assent form

To the parents of (student):

My name is Allison Duff and I am currently working on my Master‟s degree in the field

of literacy at St. John Fisher College. This semester I am conducting my graduate research on

the use of technology as a method for responding to literature in self-contained classrooms. I am

writing to obtain your permission to include your child as a participant in my research. I will be

interviewing them and video recording them both using technology to respond to literature. This

project will be part of their regular instruction and will not take time away from their learning.

In my research study and final presentation of findings all participants and school name

will be given pseudonyms to assure confidentiality. At the culmination of my research, you will

be provided with a copy of my research study, and how it pertains to your child.

By you and your child signing below, you are consenting to their participation in my

research, and they are agreeing to being a participant.

Thank you in advance for your support in my graduate research.

Sincerely,

Allison Duff

Phone: (585) 396-3700

Email: [email protected]


Appendix D

Interview Questions*

Teacher Interview:

1. How does the special education population you work with react to having to

respond (orally) to literature?

2. How does the special education population you work with react when asked to

write a response to what they read?

3. What additional options do you offer for your students to respond to literature

aside from speaking or writing?

4. How do you use technology in your classroom to reinforce literacy?

5. How do you think this population of students could benefit from the use of

technology to respond to literature?

Student Interview

1. How do you feel about reading in class?

2. How do you feel when you have to write about what you read?

3. What other ways than writing about what you read would you like to use to

demonstrate what you learned? (Ie. Presentation, draw a picture, act it out, etc.)

4. Do you like to watch movies about books you read?

5. If you see a movie and you‟ve already read the book, which do you like better?

Why?

6. How would you feel about recording yourself responding to, talking about, or

acting a scene from a story?


References

Assaf, L., Garza, R. (2007) Making magazine covers that visually count: Learning to summarize

with technology. The Reading Teacher, 60(7), 678-680.

Coiro, J. (2003) Reading Comprehension on the Internet: Expanding out Understanding of

Reading Comprehension to Encompass New Literacies. The Reading Teacher, 56(5),

458-464.

Glynda A Hull, Mira-Lisa Katz. (2006). Crafting an Agentive Self: Case Studies of Digital

Storytelling. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(1), 43-81. Retrieved September 23,

2008, from Wilson Education Abstracts database.

Jacobs, G.E. (2008) IRA. We Learn What We Do: Developing a Repertoire of Writing Practices

in an Instant Messaging World.

Juliebo, M., Durnford, C. (2000) OWL (Onl-line Webstories for Learning): a unique web-based

literacy resource for primary/elementary children. Journal of Educational Media, 25(1),

57-64.

Leu Jr., D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., Cammack, D.W. (2004) Toward a Theory of New

Literacies Emerging From the Internet and Other Information and Communication

Technologies. Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. (5th ed.).

Vasudevan, L. (2006) Making Know Differently: Engaging Visual Modalities as Spaces

to Author New Selves. E-Learning, 3. 207-217.

Woodward, J., Rieth, H. (1997). A Historical Review of Technology Research in Special

Education. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 503-536.

Documents

Using Technology to Measure Reading Comprehension for Students with Special Needs in a Self