Ryan Dickison EDU 5491 Data Collection Summary 1 Summary and Analysis To begin my action research project I had

to gather the results of the fall bench mark test that both of my Spanish 2 classes took. The test was taken by 31 students from one class and 34 students from the other class. Students received scores based on the ACTFL proficiency scoring chart with the lowest score being novice low and the highest being supreme. Due to the high number of students who took the test, it became apparent that it would be extremely difficult to monitor the progress of every student. In order to make progress monitoring more efficient I decided to monitor the progress of 4 students. These four students, whose names have been changed, represent 4 different levels of proficiency based on the scores they received on the benchmark test. Taylor Coombs received a novice low score, Sarah Heath received a novice middle score, Allen Parks received a novice high score, and Adalberto Loreno received an intermediate low score. I chose to monitor these students because I believe that they represent the whole student body of my Spanish 2 classes. I have their benchmark scores recorded, and am using their benchmark production as a baseline for which I will be comparing their progress. Figure 1 shows the ACTFL proficiency guidelines for the 3 novice levels to the intermediate high level. Figure 1. NOVICE LOW

Writers at the Novice Low sublevel are able to copy or transcribe familiar words or phrases, form letters in an alphabetic system, and copy and produce isolated, basic strokes in languages that use syllabaries or characters. Given adequate time and familiar cues, they can reproduce from memory a very limited number of isolated words or familiar phrases, but errors are to be expected. NOVICE MID Writers at the Novice Mid sublevel can reproduce from memory a modest number of words and phrases in context. They can supply limited information on simple forms and documents, and other basic biographical information, such as names, numbers, and nationality. Novice Mid writers exhibit a high degree of accuracy when writing on well-practiced, familiar topics using limited formulaic language. With less familiar topics, there is a marked decrease in accuracy. Errors in spelling or in the representation of symbols may be frequent. There is little evidence of functional writing skills. At this level, the writing may be difficult to understand even by those accustomed to non-native writers. NOVICE HIGH Writers at the Novice High sublevel are able to meet limited basic practical writing needs using lists, short messages, postcards, and simple notes. They are able to express themselves within the context in which the language was learned, relying mainly on practiced material. Their writing is focused on common elements of daily life. Novice High writers are able to recombine learned vocabulary and structures to create simple sentences on very familiar topics, but are not able to sustain sentence-level writing all the time. Due to inadequate vocabulary and/or grammar, writing at this level may only partially communicate the intentions of the writer. Novice High

writing is often comprehensible to natives used to the writing of non-natives, but gaps in comprehension may occur. INTERMEDIATE LOW Writers at the Intermediate Low sublevel are able to meet some limited practical writing needs. They can create statements and formulate questions based on familiar material. Most sentences are recombinations of learned vocabulary and structures. These are short and simple conversational-style sentences with basic word order. They are written almost exclusively in present time. Writing tends to consist of a few simple sentences, often with repetitive structure. Topics are tied to highly predictable content areas and personal information. Vocabulary is adequate to express elementary needs. There may be basic errors in grammar, word choice, punctuation, spelling, and in the formation and use of non-alphabetic symbols. Their writing is understood by natives used to the writing of non-natives, although additional effort may be required. When Intermediate Low writers attempt to perform writing tasks at the Advanced level, their writing will deteriorate significantly and their message may be left incomplete. INTERMEDIATE MID Writers at the Intermediate Mid sublevel are able to meet a number of practical writing needs. They can write short, simple communications, compositions, and requests for information in loosely connected texts about personal preferences, daily routines, common events, and other personal topics. Their writing is framed in present time but may contain references to other time frames. The writing style closely resembles oral discourse. Writers at the Intermediate Mid sublevel show evidence of control of basic sentence structure and verb forms. This writing is best defined as a collection of discrete sentences and/or questions loosely strung together. There is

little evidence of deliberate organization. Intermediate Mid writers can be understood readily by natives used to the writing of non-natives. When Intermediate Mid writers attempt Advancedlevel writing tasks, the quality and/or quantity of their writing declines and the message may be unclear. INTERMEDIATE HIGH Writers at the Intermediate High sublevel are able to meet all practical writing needs of the Intermediate level. Additionally, they can write compositions and simple summaries related to work and/or school experiences. They can narrate and describe in different time frames when writing about everyday events and situations. These narrations and descriptions are often, but not always, of paragraph length, and they typically contain some evidence of breakdown in one or more features of the Advanced level. For example, these writers may be inconsistent in the use of appropriate major time markers, resulting in a loss of clarity. The vocabulary, grammar and style of Intermediate High writers essentially correspond to those of the spoken language. Intermediate High writing, even with numerous and perhaps significant errors, is generally comprehensible to natives not used to the writing of non-natives, but there are likely to be gaps in comprehension. (http://www.actfl.org/publications/guidelines-and-manuals/actfl-proficiency-guidelines2012/english/writing) On January 20th I implemented daily reading sessions of the short novel Pobre Ana into these 2 Spanish classes. Each student received a list of vocabulary words for each chapter in order to help them understand what they were reading. On average we read one chapter a day until we finished the book on February 28th. Students read the chapters in a variety of ways,

including reading out loud one by one in front of the class, reading in pairs or small groups, reading alone, and listening to the audio book. After each page I would have students summarize what was read to their partners or to the class. After each chapter students had to complete an assignment or task associated with what we just read. These assignments and tasks include writing letters to the characters, drawing pictures describing the events of a chapter, making timelines to summarize the events of a chapter, creating a Facebook profile for the main character, and completing reading comprehension worksheets. Every task or assignment included a writing element, except for the drawing tasks. I collected 3 specific assignments associated with this book that I used in my analysis. The first set of data was collected during week 1 with an assignment that was a letter the students had to write to Ana telling her how they are similar and different. The second set of data was collected during week 3 with an assignment where the students wrote a postcard to Anas parents while pretending to be Ana in Mexico. The third set of data was collected during week five with an assignment where the girls wrote a letter to Ricardo while pretending to be Ana and the boys wrote a letter to Ana while pretending to be Ricardo after not hearing from each other for 1 year. The following are proficiency ratings I gave my 4 students based on the writing assignments previous mentioned. Taylor Coombs 1. Week 1 assignment: Novice low 2. Week 3 assignment: Novice mid 3. Week 5 assignment: Novice mid Sarah Heath 1. Week 1 assignment: She still has it 2. Week 3 assignment: Novice high 3. Week 5 assignment: Novice high Allen Parks

1. Week 1 assignment: Novice high 2. Week 3 assignment: Novice high 3. Week 5 assignment: Intermediate low Adalberto Loreno 1. Week 1 assignment: He still has it 2. Week 3 assignment: Intermediate mid 3. Week 5 assignment: Intermediate high After we finished the book, the last piece of data I collected was a survey asking students

to rate different aspects of their experience while reading. This survey was given during week 6. The below figure is a copy of that survey. Figure 2.

Pobre Ana Survey

Name: ___________________________________________ Period: ____________

On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being not at all and 4 being a lot, how much did you like reading Pobre Ana 1 2 3 4

Why? ________________________________________________________________________________ On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being not at all and 4 being a lot, how much did reading Pobre Ana help you learn Spanish in general? 1 2 3 4

Why? ________________________________________________________________________________ On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being not at all and 4 being a lot, how much did reading Pobre Ana help you improve speaking Spanish? 1 2 3 4

Why? ________________________________________________________________________________ On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being not at all and 4 being a lot, how much did reading Pobre Ana help you learn Spanish Grammar? 1 2 3 4

Why? ________________________________________________________________________________

On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being not at all and 4 being a lot, how much did reading Pobre Ana help you improve your writing in Spanish? 1 2 3 4

Why? ________________________________________________________________________________ On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being not at all and 4 being a lot, how helpful were the assignments associated with Pobre Ana? 1 2 3 4

Why? ________________________________________________________________________________ If we were to read another short novel, what would you like to keep the same and what would you like to do differently as far as reading and assignments are concerned?

Figure 3 shows 41 students responses to the survey.

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 How much did How much did How much did How much did you like reading reading Pobre reading Pobre reading Pobre Pobre Ana Ana help you Ana help you Ana help you learn Spanish in improve learn Spanish general speaking grammar Spanish How much did reading Pobre Ana help you improve your writing in Spanish How helpful were the assignments associated Pobre Ana 1 2 3 4

The following are the 4 students responses to the survey questions. Taylor Coombs 1. 3 I couldnt get what was happening at first but after a while I got it.

2. 3 I learned some new simple words. 3. 3 It helped with how to pronounce words. 4. 3 The way they had the sentences help me as I read. 5. 2 I dont think it helped me with writing a lot but somewhat. 6. 4 They helped get an idea of what was happening. 7. More of the book being read to us. Sarah Heath 1. 3 It was a pretty good story. I liked it. 2. 3 I think it helped me learn certain words that are used in everyday life. 3. 2 I am still having trouble speaking Spanish. 4. 3 It helped a little bit with how to set up sentences. 5. 2 My writing is Spanish still needs work. I get things backwards or mixed up. 6. 3 They helped to show if we actually understood what we were reading. 7. I think we should summarize at the end of the chapter instead of the pages. Allen Parks 1. 3 It was kind of interesting. 2. 2 I already knew most of the words in it. 3. 3 We read out loud. 4. 3 I saw the grammar written. 5. 3 I could look at an example. 6. 4 It helped me apply what I learned. 7. I would like us to read out loud all the time and never read to ourselves. Adalberto Loreno Absent while survey was administered 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Interpretation of Data and Next Steps With regards to the biweekly assignments, there is an obvious trend of increased proficiency for all students. I found this exciting, but also problematic. It is exciting in that I can see improvement in their language proficiency. It is problematic because that kind of improvement is quite radical for such a short period of time. This makes me question the proficiency grade they received for their fall benchmark test for a number of reasons. My site

teacher and I graded their fall benchmark tests and gave them a proficiency rating based on the information given previously. I recall that the process for giving them a rating was taxing because most of the proficiency levels share common traits and I am not a qualified representative of ACTFL who has training and authority to rate the language proficiency of others. In almost every case I had to use my best judgment. Upon rating the language proficiency of these students in their writing assignments I found it difficult to be consistent with the rating I gave in the fall. There might be a couple of other external factors that have influenced these radical increases in proficiency. The first one is the format of the writing assignments. The bench mark test was very structured. The students were told to write to a pen pal and include an introduction, describe themselves, where they are from, their age and birthday, a little about their personality and physical characteristics, what they like to do in their free time and why, and any other information they wanted to include. I believe that this kind of structure impeded the students written responses because most of them did not venture outside of what was required of them. This meant that no one tried to write in any other tense other than the present. It also meant that they were supposed to use certain vocabulary words from specific units, and not those that they had learned outside of the units. I tried to keep my writing assignments more open ended. I would usually have two requirements and let the rest be up to them. In those assignments students wrote in present and past tense, used words outside of the current unit we were studying, and let them apply the content from the book. I believe that if the students had this kind of freedom, they would have gotten higher scores on the benchmark test. The second factor that influenced the radical increase in proficiency was the content learned since the fall. During the months after the benchmark test, students learned a great deal

more vocabulary and grammar. This gave them the skills needed to produce more proficient written responses. Logically, this means that their language proficiency would increase regardless of my action research project. I believe however, that this factor and the one previously are primarily responsible for such a rapid increase in language proficiency over a short period of time. At the end of the quarter I will give my students my own bench mark test. I am going to pattern it after the bench mark test taken in the fall, in that they will be given a large allotted amount of time to write their response. My benchmark test will be different however, in that I will keep it more open ended. With regards to the survey, we see a pattern that most students responded with either a 2 or 3 in all categories. I found it interesting that the most 3s I got from students came from the category of how much reading the book helped them learn Spanish in general, while that number decreased when asked if reading the book helped them learn Spanish grammar and helped improve their writing in Spanish. The most consistent answers as to why they picked a 2 or lower on those 2 categories was because they were not specifically looking at grammar or we didnt write a lot. While it is true that I did not point out specifics with regards to grammar, we did indeed have a writing component with almost every assignment associated with the book. I am encouraged that there were more 2 and 3 responses because it shows me that the students believe that reading the book helped them, even if it was just a little bit. Taylors responses show me that he believes that the book was beneficial to his learning. Even though he gave the book a 2 on helping him improve his writing, I am encouraged because gave the book a 3 on helping him learn Spanish grammar while saying the way they had the

sentences help me as I read. This shows me that he notices sentence structure and will be able to apply it in his assignments. Sarahs responses were similar to Taylors with mostly 3s and a couple of 2s. Like Taylor she gave the book a 2 on helping her improve her writing in Spanish, but gave it a 3 on helping her learn Spanish grammar. Her response as to why she gave that a 3 was because it helped a little bit with how to set up sentences. I find this encouraging because she is also noticing sentence structure and will be able to apply it in other assignments. Allens responses were mostly threes with one 2 and one 4. The difference with him was that he gave the book a 3 on both helping him learn Spanish grammar and improving his writing in Spanish. His reasons as to why he gave them those ratings were that I saw the grammar written and I could look at an example. His ratings reflect the theory that repeated exposure to correct grammar structures will help you improve your own. Adalberto was absent when the survey was administered. He will be given the survey the next time he is in class. For the next two weeks we are going to read another book called Patricia Va a California. I am going to change how we read the book in class and the assignments that will be associated with the book based on the students responses to the last questions on the survey. I am going to read it out loud to the class more often and have them summarize the chapter to each other instead of summarizing each page. I will have only one assignment due with this book over the next two weeks. The students will pretend to be Patricia and will have to write a letter to Patricias family explaining what is going on in California while she is there. This means that we will mostly be reading the book in class and have a small discussion about it and then move on to

the next thing. The last week of the quarter I will administer my benchmark test and compare the results of the 4 students mentioned in this analysis to their previous work.