1 / 19

Interest in Self Sustained Reading

Interest in Self Sustained Reading. Jody Jarrell Second Grade Cedar Ridge Elementary School. Background. When I looked around my classroom during Self Sustained Reading I noticed my students did not seem that interested while they read. Their attentions were elsewhere in the room.

Audrey
Download Presentation

Interest in Self Sustained Reading

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interest in Self Sustained Reading Jody Jarrell Second Grade Cedar Ridge Elementary School

  2. Background • When I looked around my classroom during Self Sustained Reading I noticed my students did not seem that interested while they read. Their attentions were elsewhere in the room. • I wanted to find a way to change student’s motivation while having to read for a period of thirty minutes each day in my classroom.

  3. Background Continued… • Research suggests that a child will pick a book based on interest regardless of his/her reading level (Hunt 96/97) • If the book that a child chooses is above their level and it can retain their interest then they will retain information from the text regardless of level. (Krashen 2003)

  4. Research Question • Will students when given a wide thoughtful choice of books based on interest, become more motivated to read?

  5. Methods • Cedar Ridge Elementary • Title 1 School • 475 Students • 57% have Free/Reduced Lunch

  6. Methods • Participants • 10 Second Grade Students • 5 Boys & 5 Girls • 2 Hispanic (placed out of ESL) & 8 Caucasian • Reading Levels • 4 - 25/26 and above • 4 – between 21/22 & 25/26 • 2 – Below 21/22

  7. Intervention • Students read in their groups each day for 30 minutes. • I observed them and took anecdotal notes. • On Mondays, students filled out a book critique form about one book they read during SSR.

  8. Data Collection • Interest Survey • 2 groups formed • Control Group (Animal Books) • Non Control Group (Range of Genres) • Garfield Reading Survey (Pre & Post) • Daily Anecdotal Notes • Monitored Students’ Reading Patterns and Behaviors for 30 minutes each day from 1:50pm – 2:20pm • Book Critique Form

  9. Kid Pics. Red Group

  10. Kid Pics. Blue Group

  11. Garfield Results Pre & Post • Both groups I felt were not truly honest on the pre test. As the students filled out the post test, they took more time and really thought about their choices. • Blue Group • Red Group

  12. Book Critique Results • Smiley face responses for 4 weeks from each group. • Blue Group • Red (Control) Group

  13. Discussion • I learned through my notes that students respond better to books that are about topics that interest them. • Students are better focused while reading and can recall more information about the text they read. • I understand that I need to offer books that are of greater interest to each of my students in order for them to be interested and to actually read for the duration of the self selected block.

  14. References • Dreher, Mariam Jean. (Dec 98/Jan99). Motivating children to read more nonfiction. Reading Teacher, 52 (4), p. 414-418. • Hunt, Jr. Lyman. (96/97). The effect of self-selection, interest, and motivation upon independent, instructional, and frustrational levels. Reading Teacher, 50 (12), p. 278-282. • Krashen, S. (2003). Rewriting History: A Closer Look at Some SSR Studies. Knowledge Quest, 31 (5), p. 48-49. • Krashen, Stephen. (2005). Is in-school free reading good for children? Why the national reading panel report is (still) wrong. Phi Delta Kappan, 86 (6), p. 444- 447.

More Related