Analysis of Researcher Reflection
Throughout Research Porject
As students participated in the research intervention, I recorded observations of students and reflections of my practice. Anecdotes included the most popular and engaging apps, student progress, ideas for future instruction, possible future research areas related to my study, observations of student behavior and engagement, and constraints observed during the study.
While observing my students engage in iPad applications, I came to a realization that technology is changing the face of education. Although my reading centers are introduced for students to be independently successful at practicing subskills, I can not always be present to correct or encourage every student during every task. The iPad was an avenue for students to receive direct instruction with corrections and reinforcement built in, something no teacher could ever provide to every student at the same time in a classroom. Similar to my observations of student choices of my multi-sensory literacy centers, I found that the preference for apps were dependent on the skill level of the student. Students who still needed to practice letter names and sounds continued playing those apps, and students who had already mastered those skills played more word and sentence reading games. With a variety of apps introduced, students were able to differentiate instruction for themselves. Students exceeded my expectations of their ability to quickly and independently learn apps and use them to meet learning objectives with minimal teacher instruction. For students who have challenges in language processing, executive functioning, or following multi-step directions, I found that the iPad promoted increased independent on-task behaviors.
It was frustrating to not be able to download new apps or full versions of successful apps because of constraints from the school district. The headphones that were purchased by the district were low quality and several pairs broke. We were able to find a volume level that was tolerable to all students, and students spread out around the classroom instead of using headphones. I found that the classroom noise level while using the iPads was quieter than other literacy activities. This environment allowed me to work with individuals or small groups on skill development or assessments.
Being the teacher and the researcher remained a challenge throughout this investigation. I would have liked to collect time-on-task data to compare engagement during iPad use as compared to engagement during center activities. Having a control group would have allowed the comparison of the rate and fluency of subskill acquisition against the intervention groups’ results. Conducting this study with a control group may have yielded a more valid and reliable correlation of the iPad as a more highly effective tool for literacy instruction as I had hypothesized.
While observing my students engage in iPad applications, I came to a realization that technology is changing the face of education. Although my reading centers are introduced for students to be independently successful at practicing subskills, I can not always be present to correct or encourage every student during every task. The iPad was an avenue for students to receive direct instruction with corrections and reinforcement built in, something no teacher could ever provide to every student at the same time in a classroom. Similar to my observations of student choices of my multi-sensory literacy centers, I found that the preference for apps were dependent on the skill level of the student. Students who still needed to practice letter names and sounds continued playing those apps, and students who had already mastered those skills played more word and sentence reading games. With a variety of apps introduced, students were able to differentiate instruction for themselves. Students exceeded my expectations of their ability to quickly and independently learn apps and use them to meet learning objectives with minimal teacher instruction. For students who have challenges in language processing, executive functioning, or following multi-step directions, I found that the iPad promoted increased independent on-task behaviors.
It was frustrating to not be able to download new apps or full versions of successful apps because of constraints from the school district. The headphones that were purchased by the district were low quality and several pairs broke. We were able to find a volume level that was tolerable to all students, and students spread out around the classroom instead of using headphones. I found that the classroom noise level while using the iPads was quieter than other literacy activities. This environment allowed me to work with individuals or small groups on skill development or assessments.
Being the teacher and the researcher remained a challenge throughout this investigation. I would have liked to collect time-on-task data to compare engagement during iPad use as compared to engagement during center activities. Having a control group would have allowed the comparison of the rate and fluency of subskill acquisition against the intervention groups’ results. Conducting this study with a control group may have yielded a more valid and reliable correlation of the iPad as a more highly effective tool for literacy instruction as I had hypothesized.