Description
Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography |
To begin the action research process, a researcher selects a focus and clarifies the vision and targets of the research. A close review of current scholarly sources about a research topic helps to clarify vision and targets of the research and builds support for a research investigation.
In Topic 1 you selected two areas of research for your action research study. From these two areas, select one area to further develop as an action research project throughout this course. Based on the area of research selected, identify a specific topic or focus to apply the action research process.
For this assignment, develop an action research proposal, create an annotated bibliography of current research (within the last five years), and develop research questions.
Write a 50-100 word research proposal explaining the vision and target of the action research, including your theory of action.
Examine five recent, peer-reviewed research studies related to the topic selected and write a 100-150 word annotation for each study.
Each annotation must include the following:
- Assumption of the limits of the research
- Type of research (qualitative or quantitative).
- Methodology – participants, instrumentation, design, and procedure
- Results (1-2 sentence summary)
- Gaps in the research
Based on the research reviewed, develop 3-5 research questions based on the identified gaps in the research. These research questions will serve as the foundation for collecting data in the next topic.
Support your work with 5-7 scholarly resources.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required
Here is the outline your provided for week 1
Research Outline
Research Topics:
1.What are the effects on student achievement in ELA Middle Grades for the collection of assessment data?
2. How is student achievement impacted in the Extended Learning Beyond the Classroom Virtual Setting?
- Reasons for selecting the research areas
- The best research approach
- Impact of the research on students and educators
- Stages of action research process
-
- Planning Phase,
- Action Phase,
- Analysis,
- Conclusion
Assigned REading Material for the week✔ Analysis,
1.
Read “Understanding Educational Research (For Teachers,
Decision-Makers and Parents),” located on the Parents Teachers website (2016). URL: http://parents-teachers.com/articles/research/research1.shtml
2.
Read “Research 101: Understanding Research Studies,” by Grohol,
located on the PsychCentral website (2018).
URL: https://psychcentral.com/lib/research-101-understanding-research-studies/
3.
Read “Narrowing a Topic and Developing a Research Question,”
located on the Indiana University website.URL:
https://libraries.indiana.edu/sites/default/files/Develop_a_Research_Question.pdf
4.
Read Chapters 4, 5, and 6 URL:
https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/sage/2016/the-action-research-guidebook_a-process-for-pursuing-equity-and-excellence-in-education_3e.php
Course Code
TCH-539
Class Code
TCH-539-O500
Criteria
Criteria
Percentage
100.0%
Research Proposal
25.0%
Research Studies
25.0%
Research Questions
25.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
10.0%
Organization
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
10.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography
No Submission (0.00%)
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Total Points
125.0
Insufficient (69.00%)
Topic selected is irrelevant to the field of education or the
research proposal is inadequate and does not include a
theory of action.
Research studies selected do not relate to the topic.
Annotations do not include research assumptions, research
type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions are inappropriate for the topic selected.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the
sequence is indiscernible. The ideas presented are
compartmentalized and may not relate to each other.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
Approaching (74.00%)
Topic selected is somewhat relevant to the field of education
or the research proposal is overly simplistic and includes an
ambiguous theory of action.
Research studies selected minimally relate to the topic.
Annotations include inexplicit research assumptions, research
type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions superficially address the topic selected.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not
varied.
The content is adequately organized, generally providing the
audience with a sense of the main idea.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Acceptable (87.00%)
Topic selected is relevant to the field of education and the
research proposal is clear and concise and contains an apt
theory of action.
Research studies selected correctly relate to the topic.
Annotations clearly include research assumptions, research
type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions are appropriate for the topic selected.
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not
hinder comprehension. A variety of effective sentence
structures are used, as well as some practice and contentrelated language.
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate
to each other. The content provides the audience with a clear
sense of the main idea.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
Target (100.00%)
Topic is expertly selected and the research proposal is
compelling and sophisticated and includes an innovative
theory of action.
Research studies selected specifically relate to the topic.
Annotations include comprehensive research assumptions,
research type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions for the topic selected demonstrate out-ofthe-box thinking.
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice
reflects well-developed use of practice and content-related
language. Sentence structures are varied and engaging.
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a
sequential progression of ideas that relate to each other. The
content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides the
audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Comments
Points Earned
Running head: RESEARCH PROPOSAL
1
Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography
Breanna Mitchell
Grand Canyon University: TCH 539
02/26/20
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
2
Research Proposal
Comprehension is a vital skill in improving general reading skills. Strong comprehension
skills lead to success in other subject areas, as well as further down one’s societal career
(Importance of Comprehension, n.d.). This research study will focus on enhancing students’
comprehension skills through utilizing effective reading strategies. The researcher will use the
five-finger retell strategy during guided reading groups in addition to the scheduled reading
block. This will allow students to visualize how to interpret and make meaning of the text.
Success will be determined by increasing their reading level through accurately comprehending
texts.
Annotated Bibliography
Elleman, A. M., Olinghouse, N. G., Gilbert, J. K., Spencer, J. L., & Compton, D. L. (2017).
Developing content knowledge in struggling readers: Differential effects of strategy
instruction for younger and older elementary students. Elementary School Journal,
118(2), 232–256.
This is a summary of a study examining the effectiveness of strategy vs. nonstrategic instruction
on reading comprehension, vocabulary, and content knowledge. This is a quantitative study
involving 121 struggling readers from second through sixth grade on one of three conditions:
knowledge-focused instruction, vocabulary instruction, or traditional instruction. Instruction was
administered two times per week for 90 minutes lasting a course of 24 lessons. Students were
administered the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests before and after the interventions. The results
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
3
showed that strategy instruction had a higher impact than traditional instruction. One gap in the
research is that it did not test struggling readers below or higher than the grades selected.
Gnaedinger, E. K., Hund, A. M., & Hesson, M. M. S. (2016). Reading-specific flexibility
moderates the relation between reading strategy use and reading comprehension during
the elementary years. Mind, Brain & Education, 10(4), 233–246. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/mbe.12125
This is a summary of a study examining the relation cognitive flexibility has with utilizing
reading strategies and reading comprehension. This is a quantitative study involving 75 children
from second through fifth grade. Students were given a think aloud task and a metacognitive
questionnaire to measure reading strategies, two card-sorting tasks to measure cognitive
flexibility, a standardized reading comprehension measure, and various fluency and vocabulary
measures. This was conducted in one session that lasted 75-90 minutes at a children’s university
research laboratory. The results showed that there was a positive correlation of high cognitive
flexibility with strategy and comprehension, while associating a negative relation with weak
cognitive flexibility. One gap in the research is the sample size was not diverse. Most of the
students came from highly educated backgrounds. Another gap is the reading passage was one
level, which could have limited their use of strategies to improve comprehension.
Mohammad Mehdi Yazdani, & Mojtaba Mohammadi. (2015). The explicit instruction of reading
strategies: Directed reading thinking activity vs. guided reading strategies. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(3), 53. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.3p.53
This is a summary of a study examining the effects of directed reading thinking activities
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
4
(DRTA) and guided reading on reading comprehension. This is a quantitative study involving 63
high school students. Students received interventions two days a week for 60 minutes, over a
span of ten weeks. The students were placed among three groups: one control group, which did
not receive explicit instruction, and two experimental groups which received the DRTAs and
guided reading. Pre- and post- tests were utilized to measure reading comprehension from the
book Active Skills for Reading: Intro by Neil J. Anderson. The results showed that utilizing
DRTAs had a higher impact on reading comprehension than guided reading. Nevertheless, they
are both beneficial for improving comprehension. One gap was story passages were solely used.
DRTAs are more effective with fiction texts, whereas guided reading strategies can be used with
both kinds of texts.
Okkinga, M., van Steensel, R., van Gelderen, A. J. S., van Schooten, E., Sleegers, P. J. C., &
Arends, L. R. (2018). Effectiveness of reading-strategy interventions in whole
classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 1215.
This is a summary of a study examining how utilizing whole group reading strategy interventions
effects reading comprehension and strategic ability. This is a quantitative study involving typical
and low-achieving readers in third through twelfth grade. Students were randomly placed into
either the experimental group, which received the targeted intervention, or the control group. The
study used a random effects model for the number of sessions, number of hours and weeks. The
results showed that standardized tests had a small effect, whereas the researcher-based tests had a
more significant impact on reading comprehension. One gap in the research is that they found the
strategies required for each test were different, meaning that students may need to be taught a
system of skills for standardized tests versus others.
Ulu, M. (2017). The effect of reading comprehension and problem-solving strategies on
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
5
classifying elementary 4th grade students with high and low problem-solving success.
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(6), 44–63.
This is a summary of a study examining the effect of fluency, comprehension, and problemsolving strategies to classify students with high and low problem-solving success. This is a
quantitative study involving 279 fourth grade students from 26 schools. Students were placed
into study groups using the proportional sampling method. Five scales were used to measure to
the three areas: reading text scale, prosodic reading scale, literal comprehension scale, inferential
comprehension scale and problem-solving scale. The results of the research showed that fluency
was not effective in classifying students with high or low problem-solving success; however,
comprehension had a 77% effect and problem-solving strategies had an 88% effect. One gap in
the research is the effect of fluency was not directly tested on problem-solving skills. This could
provide a further explanation of how fluency, comprehension, and strategies are correlated in
determining problem-solving success.
Research Questions
1. Does fluency affect a student’s ability to successfully comprehend?
2. How does a students’ cultural background contribute to their problem-solving success
with reading and reading comprehension?
3. What types of reading strategies can be taught to differentiate for struggling and higher
readers to aid their reading comprehension?
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
6
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
7
References
Elleman, A. M., Olinghouse, N. G., Gilbert, J. K., Spencer, J. L., & Compton, D. L. (2017).
Developing content knowledge in struggling readers: Differential effects of strategy
instruction for younger and older elementary students. Elementary School Journal,
118(2), 232–256.
Gnaedinger, E. K., Hund, A. M., & Hesson, M. M. S. (2016). Reading-specific flexibility
moderates the relation between reading strategy use and reading comprehension during
the elementary years. Mind, Brain & Education, 10(4), 233–246. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/mbe.12125
Importance of Comprehension. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://performancepyramid.miamioh.edu/node/385
Mohammad Mehdi Yazdani, & Mojtaba Mohammadi. (2015). The explicit instruction of reading
strategies: Directed reading thinking activity vs. guided reading strategies. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(3), 53. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.3p.53
Okkinga, M., van Steensel, R., van Gelderen, A. J. S., van Schooten, E., Sleegers, P. J. C., &
Arends, L. R. (2018). Effectiveness of reading-strategy interventions in whole
classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 1215.
Ulu, M. (2017). The effect of reading comprehension and problem solving strategies on
classifying elementary 4th grade students with high and low problem solving success.
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(6), 44–63.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
TCH-539
Class Code
TCH-539-O500
Criteria
Criteria
Percentage
100.0%
Research Proposal
25.0%
Research Studies
25.0%
Research Questions
25.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
10.0%
Organization
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
10.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography
No Submission (0.00%)
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Not addressed.
Total Points
125.0
Insufficient (69.00%)
Topic selected is irrelevant to the field of education or the
research proposal is inadequate and does not include a
theory of action.
Research studies selected do not relate to the topic.
Annotations do not include research assumptions, research
type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions are inappropriate for the topic selected.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the
sequence is indiscernible. The ideas presented are
compartmentalized and may not relate to each other.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
Approaching (74.00%)
Topic selected is somewhat relevant to the field of education
or the research proposal is overly simplistic and includes an
ambiguous theory of action.
Research studies selected minimally relate to the topic.
Annotations include inexplicit research assumptions, research
type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions superficially address the topic selected.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not
varied.
The content is adequately organized, generally providing the
audience with a sense of the main idea.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Acceptable (87.00%)
Topic selected is relevant to the field of education and the
research proposal is clear and concise and contains an apt
theory of action.
Research studies selected correctly relate to the topic.
Annotations clearly include research assumptions, research
type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions are appropriate for the topic selected.
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not
hinder comprehension. A variety of effective sentence
structures are used, as well as some practice and contentrelated language.
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate
to each other. The content provides the audience with a clear
sense of the main idea.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
Target (100.00%)
Topic is expertly selected and the research proposal is
compelling and sophisticated and includes an innovative
theory of action.
Research studies selected specifically relate to the topic.
Annotations include comprehensive research assumptions,
research type, methodology, results, and gaps in research.
Research questions for the topic selected demonstrate out-ofthe-box thinking.
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice
reflects well-developed use of practice and content-related
language. Sentence structures are varied and engaging.
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a
sequential progression of ideas that relate to each other. The
content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides the
audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Comments
Points Earned
Running head: RESEARCH PROPOSAL
1
Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography
Breanna Mitchell
Grand Canyon University: TCH 539
02/26/20
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
2
Research Proposal
Comprehension is a vital skill in improving general reading skills. Strong comprehension
skills lead to success in other subject areas, as well as further down one’s societal career
(Importance of Comprehension, n.d.). This research study will focus on enhancing students’
comprehension skills through utilizing effective reading strategies. The researcher will use the
five-finger retell strategy during guided reading groups in addition to the scheduled reading
block. This will allow students to visualize how to interpret and make meaning of the text.
Success will be determined by increasing their reading level through accurately comprehending
texts.
Annotated Bibliography
Elleman, A. M., Olinghouse, N. G., Gilbert, J. K., Spencer, J. L., & Compton, D. L. (2017).
Developing content knowledge in struggling readers: Differential effects of strategy
instruction for younger and older elementary students. Elementary School Journal,
118(2), 232–256.
This is a summary of a study examining the effectiveness of strategy vs. nonstrategic instruction
on reading comprehension, vocabulary, and content knowledge. This is a quantitative study
involving 121 struggling readers from second through sixth grade on one of three conditions:
knowledge-focused instruction, vocabulary instruction, or traditional instruction. Instruction was
administered two times per week for 90 minutes lasting a course of 24 lessons. Students were
administered the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests before and after the interventions. The results
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
3
showed that strategy instruction had a higher impact than traditional instruction. One gap in the
research is that it did not test struggling readers below or higher than the grades selected.
Gnaedinger, E. K., Hund, A. M., & Hesson, M. M. S. (2016). Reading-specific flexibility
moderates the relation between reading strategy use and reading comprehension during
the elementary years. Mind, Brain & Education, 10(4), 233–246. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/mbe.12125
This is a summary of a study examining the relation cognitive flexibility has with utilizing
reading strategies and reading comprehension. This is a quantitative study involving 75 children
from second through fifth grade. Students were given a think aloud task and a metacognitive
questionnaire to measure reading strategies, two card-sorting tasks to measure cognitive
flexibility, a standardized reading comprehension measure, and various fluency and vocabulary
measures. This was conducted in one session that lasted 75-90 minutes at a children’s university
research laboratory. The results showed that there was a positive correlation of high cognitive
flexibility with strategy and comprehension, while associating a negative relation with weak
cognitive flexibility. One gap in the research is the sample size was not diverse. Most of the
students came from highly educated backgrounds. Another gap is the reading passage was one
level, which could have limited their use of strategies to improve comprehension.
Mohammad Mehdi Yazdani, & Mojtaba Mohammadi. (2015). The explicit instruction of reading
strategies: Directed reading thinking activity vs. guided reading strategies. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(3), 53. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.3p.53
This is a summary of a study examining the effects of directed reading thinking activities
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
4
(DRTA) and guided reading on reading comprehension. This is a quantitative study involving 63
high school students. Students received interventions two days a week for 60 minutes, over a
span of ten weeks. The students were placed among three groups: one control group, which did
not receive explicit instruction, and two experimental groups which received the DRTAs and
guided reading. Pre- and post- tests were utilized to measure reading comprehension from the
book Active Skills for Reading: Intro by Neil J. Anderson. The results showed that utilizing
DRTAs had a higher impact on reading comprehension than guided reading. Nevertheless, they
are both beneficial for improving comprehension. One gap was story passages were solely used.
DRTAs are more effective with fiction texts, whereas guided reading strategies can be used with
both kinds of texts.
Okkinga, M., van Steensel, R., van Gelderen, A. J. S., van Schooten, E., Sleegers, P. J. C., &
Arends, L. R. (2018). Effectiveness of reading-strategy interventions in whole
classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 1215.
This is a summary of a study examining how utilizing whole group reading strategy interventions
effects reading comprehension and strategic ability. This is a quantitative study involving typical
and low-achieving readers in third through twelfth grade. Students were randomly placed into
either the experimental group, which received the targeted intervention, or the control group. The
study used a random effects model for the number of sessions, number of hours and weeks. The
results showed that standardized tests had a small effect, whereas the researcher-based tests had a
more significant impact on reading comprehension. One gap in the research is that they found the
strategies required for each test were different, meaning that students may need to be taught a
system of skills for standardized tests versus others.
Ulu, M. (2017). The effect of reading comprehension and problem-solving strategies on
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
5
classifying elementary 4th grade students with high and low problem-solving success.
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(6), 44–63.
This is a summary of a study examining the effect of fluency, comprehension, and problemsolving strategies to classify students with high and low problem-solving success. This is a
quantitative study involving 279 fourth grade students from 26 schools. Students were placed
into study groups using the proportional sampling method. Five scales were used to measure to
the three areas: reading text scale, prosodic reading scale, literal comprehension scale, inferential
comprehension scale and problem-solving scale. The results of the research showed that fluency
was not effective in classifying students with high or low problem-solving success; however,
comprehension had a 77% effect and problem-solving strategies had an 88% effect. One gap in
the research is the effect of fluency was not directly tested on problem-solving skills. This could
provide a further explanation of how fluency, comprehension, and strategies are correlated in
determining problem-solving success.
Research Questions
1. Does fluency affect a student’s ability to successfully comprehend?
2. How does a students’ cultural background contribute to their problem-solving success
with reading and reading comprehension?
3. What types of reading strategies can be taught to differentiate for struggling and higher
readers to aid their reading comprehension?
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
6
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
7
References
Elleman, A. M., Olinghouse, N. G., Gilbert, J. K., Spencer, J. L., & Compton, D. L. (2017).
Developing content knowledge in struggling readers: Differential effects of strategy
instruction for younger and older elementary students. Elementary School Journal,
118(2), 232–256.
Gnaedinger, E. K., Hund, A. M., & Hesson, M. M. S. (2016). Reading-specific flexibility
moderates the relation between reading strategy use and reading comprehension during
the elementary years. Mind, Brain & Education, 10(4), 233–246. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/mbe.12125
Importance of Comprehension. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://performancepyramid.miamioh.edu/node/385
Mohammad Mehdi Yazdani, & Mojtaba Mohammadi. (2015). The explicit instruction of reading
strategies: Directed reading thinking activity vs. guided reading strategies. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(3), 53. https://doiorg.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.3p.53
Okkinga, M., van Steensel, R., van Gelderen, A. J. S., van Schooten, E., Sleegers, P. J. C., &
Arends, L. R. (2018). Effectiveness of reading-strategy interventions in whole
classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 1215.
Ulu, M. (2017). The effect of reading comprehension and problem solving strategies on
classifying elementary 4th grade students with high and low problem solving success.
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(6), 44–63.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Categories: