Robinson Primary


Comprehending Blending

Primary Researchers

Lizzie Beggs, Intern, Baylor University

Katie Burleson, BS Ed, Robinson Primary, Robinson ISD

Michelle Schlappe, MS Ed, Intern Supervisor, Baylor University

 

Rationale/Introduction

When helping my mentor assess students, I noticed that several students had difficulty blending words. The students were able to tap out each sound of the word correctly but said a totally different word when they blended the sounds together. This indicated successful segmentation of sounds, but failure to blend them together to form a word. I researched strategies to help practice this skill and found that “Elkonin sound boxes can help students develop phoneme awareness by focusing on segmenting and blending the sounds in words” (DiMauro, 2021). This seemed to be an appropriate practice because I have noticed my students struggling with this during phonics instruction, independent reading, guided reading and writing time. For that reason, and since, “blending is a crucial skill that every child needs to start reading unknown words,” I decided to dedicate my action research project to helping my students' in their blending abilities (Greene, 2021).

Question/Wondering

How might daily practice with magnetic letters and Elkonin boxes affect students’ ability to blend words?

Methodology/Results

For my project, I collected data over four first grade students who struggled to blend phonemes together. I started by analyzing data from a TPRI assessment and formed my own baseline assessment to gauge each student's current level of understanding. The following week, I began daily targeted instruction for the four individual students who had the lowest scores on the assessments. Student #1 is a 6-year-old African American male with a low SES background. He has no special needs and is at the remedial level. Student #2 is a 7-year-old White male with a middle SES background. He has special needs, including a developmental impairment, emotional disability, and learning disability, and is at the intervention level. Student #3 is a 7-year-old white male with a low SES background. He has no special needs and is at the remedial level. Student #4 is a 7-year-old Hispanic ELL male with a low SES background. He has no special needs and is at the remedial level. To record each students’ progress, I used 3 different tools: magnetic letters and Elkonin boxes, percentages, and anecdotal notes. On the first day I collected data, my students’ scores were: 0%, 0%, 10%, and 10%. Over the course of two weeks, I pulled each student individually to practice blending with magnetic letters and Elkonin boxes. For the first part of the intervention, I spelled 5 words with magnetic letters and placed them in front of the students. They had to slide the letters upwards and say the corresponding sounds. Then, they would run their finger under each word and read it aloud. When they were finished, I would record the number of words they blended correctly on a data table. For the second part of the intervention, I provided students with Elkonin boxes and asked them to model 5 specific words. For example, if I said, “Show me the word mint,” students would individually slide a box upwards for each phoneme. When they were finished, I would record the number of words they blended correctly on a second data table. Then, I added both numbers from the tables together to create a total percentage for my third data table. On the last day I collected data, my students’ scores were: 60%, 20%, 60% and 60%. For most of the students, this showed significant growth, given the amount of time implementing this intervention was only two weeks long. Student #2 showed significantly less growth than the other 3 students, but this was expected due to his lower achievement level and special needs. The special education specialist had warned me at the beginning of my research that there may not be any growth at all, but that it was still extremely beneficial for him to receive this practice daily. I also noticed that behavior played a large role in each students’ success, as they all had at least one day where they were distracted by the classroom environment, issues happening at home, or lack of focus. These were all factors that I was able to record in my anecdotal notes, which helped me better understand their percentages each day.

Implications/Recommendations

In conclusion, this implementation helped all four of my students grow in their blending abilities. As DiMauro stated, magnetic letters can be “that “light bulb moment” for a child where blending starts to make sense” (2021). I was able to watch this skill start to click for each of my students as they used this visual representation to help segment each phoneme. With the Elkonin boxes, I specifically noticed my ELL student benefitting from this task because they provided “repeated practice with hearing unfamiliar sounds” (Greene, 2021). This is one of the many reasons that Greene listed when explaining how this strategy helps students develop phonemic awareness, because they “[focus] on segmenting and blending the sounds in words” (2021). Now that I have seen the potential impact these strategies can have, my goal is to continue monitoring my students’ phonemic awareness as they practice blending sounds together. This is a skill we practice every day during Foundations, so I will be able to frequently monitor students as they progress. In the classroom, students tap out individual phonemes to form words with their fingers, use magnetic letters to spell words that are read aloud orally, and practice marking up words based on the specific characteristics of each phoneme. That being said, I will continue collecting anecdotal notes and making observations over each student to monitor their progress. One of my strengths in this study was the preparation that went into planning my instruction before executing it. I worked to intentionally select words that included initial blends, final blends, glued sounds, vowel pairs, and digraphs for each day. By having set lists of words that were intentionally planned, I could collect specific data over each students’ strengths and weaknesses. This impacted my instructional practices because I was able to figure out what targeted practice each individual needed to progress. I would say one of the weaknesses of my project was that my data only reflected two weeks of records. If I were to conduct this type of action research in the future, I would consider collecting data over a larger amount of time, but spreading out the time that I pull individuals. This project took 40+ minutes each day, which was only feasible because my mentor was in the classroom to pull other students. If I were by myself, I would like to pull each individual twice a week instead of daily. This would allow each student to be pulled consistently, but it would make it much more manageable for a longer period of time. This would also address my additional wondering/inquiry, which was, “How might ____ weeks of practice with magnetic letters and Elkonin boxes affect students’ ability to blend words?” By asking this, I would be able to test this practice for more than two weeks.

Reference(s)

DiMauro, S. (2021, November 3). Helping the Blending Penny Drop! PhonicsHero. https://phonicshero.com/blending/

Greene, K. (2021, April 9). Elkonin sound boxes: An evidence-based literacy strategy. Understood. Retrieved November 19, 2021, from https://www.understood.org/articles/en/evidence-based-literacy-strategy-elkonin-sound-boxes

 

 


Is Ignorance Really Bliss? The Impacts of Students’ Awareness of Appropriate Noise Level in the Classroom

Primary Researchers

Kate Cone, Intern, Baylor University

Tammy Freedman, B.S. Ed, Mentor Teacher, Robinson Primary, Robinson ISD

Michelle Schlappe, M.S. Ed, Intern Supervisor, Baylor University

 

Rationale/Introduction

In my first few weeks of being an Intern in a first-grade classroom, I noticed that students had trouble transitioning from their ELAR classroom to homeroom without being disruptive and distracted. In a study on “The effects of environmental and classroom noise on the academic attainments of primary school children,” Bridget Shield and Julie Dockrell noted that noise can affect students’ performance at school. Considering this study and its implications in my first-grade classroom, I found it necessary to brainstorm ways to make students aware of their noise level in the attempt to keep the noise level at a learnable level. I will do this through the “Too Noisy” app. The “Too Noisy” app contains a meter that ranges from green to red. The colors allow students to see what level their noise is at. I will record students' noise level over a period of two weeks, noting how the visual aids in keeping the volume at a learnable level.

Question/Wondering

How does students’ awareness of noise level when switching classes affect their ability to readjust to the new classroom setting?

Methodology/Results

Implementing a solution to the ideas observed in the classroom and outlined in the study, I used the “Too Noisy” app as both a visual aid and a motivation to keep the transition volume at a learnable level. Every day as students moved from ELAR to homeroom, The app’s noise meter was set up on the large screen for all students to see. Shades of red, yellow, and green showed students a reflection of their noise level. Over the course of two weeks, I observed the level presented on the meter and noted how it affected students’ learning behaviors. The study was conducted in a general education first-grade classroom within a low socioeconomic district. The class of six- and seven-year-old learners contains seventeen students: eight girls and nine boys. Of these students, 65% identify as white, 24% as Hispanic, and 11% as Asian, African American, and other. One week prior to implementing my research, I observed the class as they transitioned across the hallway from one class to the next. I took anecdotal notes on their communication, ability to unpack properly, time taken to settle down, and routines that were currently in place. The expectation set by the mentor teacher was to enter quietly, unpack belongings and begin playing the “quiet game.” After observing the time it took for students to accomplish these tasks, I researched ways in which I could motivate students to follow these procedures. I found the “Too Noisy” application which displays a meter that ranges from red to green based on the noise input it receives. Before introducing this to students, I tested the features without their knowledge and found that students remained in the red section of the meter throughout the transition. The next day I modeled the expectations for transitioning and introduced our new learning tool. Students were excited to test out the features and even named the smiley face on the screen “Jeff.” For two weeks, I set up “Jeff” during the transition period. As they entered the classroom, I took anecdotal notes on how they met noise level expectations and how the meter reflected that noise level. There was a noticeable difference in the transition within the first week. Students followed directions and remained quiet during the transition. At the end of the two weeks, I had students complete a smiley face survey on how they felt about the meter. This collection of data led me to reflect on the question, “How does students’ awareness of noise level when switching classes affect their ability to readjust to the new classroom setting?” While the app did make students aware of their noise level, the act of motivation varied from day to day and student to student. Eight days the meter was highly effective; students settled down quickly and efficiently. Six days, students disregarded the meter entirely or made it a game to see how they could create noise to make the meter red. My anecdotal notes show evidence of fluctuation of noise level and behavior throughout the entire study. I conclude from my results that the use of the “Too Noisy” meter when switching classes does affect students’ ability to readjust to a new classroom setting. With a longer implementation period and tweaking to the methods, this method would prove successful in the future.

Implications/Recommendations

The use of a visual aid in this first-grade classroom led to a 50% decrease in noise level and a shorter transition time. I would recommend its’ implementation to other classrooms. As described by Bridget Shield and Julie Dockrell, noise has an inimical effect on students’ academic performance in terms of memory, focus, motivation, and reading abilities. The weaknesses of this study: finicky and overly sensitive noise app, short-time period, and lack of differentiation consideration, did not keep this study from being effective in combatting the negative effects of a high noise level. In fact, these weaknesses allowed me to see how finding a more accurate noise meter, creating a longer implementation period, and considering that not every student will benefit from visual aids, would make me more successful in creating a solution to the noise problems affecting students’ ability to adjust to the new classroom setting. The strength of this study is that it can be adapted to fit the needs of all classrooms. This is a method that should be changed, altered, and molded to shape the established classroom environment.

Reference(s)

Shield, B. M., & Dockrell, J. E. (2008). The effects of environmental and classroom noise on the academic attainments of primary school children. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(1), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2812596

 

 


Counting With Kinesthetics

Primary Researchers

Kylie Fulp, Intern, Baylor University

Katherine Midgett, MS Ed, Mentor Teacher, Robinson Primary, Robinson ISD

Michelle Schlappe, MS Ed, Intern Supervisor, Baylor University

 

Rationale/Introduction

In my kindergarten classroom, I noticed two students struggling with counting. At this point in the year, most of the kids are able to count to 100 independently or with assistance. The two boys I focused on are currently struggling to count past 10, which is hindering them in all areas of math. Counting is an essential skill in kindergarten that will create a solid foundation for all future math learning. To attempt to get them on track, I decided to work on counting with them daily in a way that will get them moving and practicing.

Question/Wondering

How might implementing daily kinesthetic counting practice affect counting abilities in two students?

Methodology/Results

This study was conducted in a kindergarten classroom with two students struggling with meeting current on-level expectations with counting. Student A is a 5-year-old African American boy, who qualifies for free and reduced lunch and Student B is a 5-year-old Caucasian boy with language delays who also qualifies for free and reduced lunch. The week before I began my study, I took engagement data, counting data and anecdotal notes to gather information. This allowed me to pinpoint what might have caused this struggle within these students, and also where they were at with their counting abilities. This data showed me that Student A consistently had 0% engagement while we did daily whole group counting, but Student B consistently had 100% engagement during this time. Despite their differences in engagement, they still had around the same ability to count. When I pre-tested them with counting, Student A was able to count to 6 and Student B was able to count to 10. I created a hundreds chart to check-in weekly with the students, so they could see their progress. Each week, we put a sticker on the number that they could count to, to hopefully see the sticker move higher as we practiced. I also took anecdotal notes during whole group math lessons to see if and when students were engaged and participating and to note any observations. My study occurred over a three-week period. Each day, I pulled the students together or separately to practice counting with a kinesthetic game or activity. With student A, we focused on counting to 10. With Student B, I moved beyond 10 and we practiced counting to 15. We started with a warm up of counting using our bodies or manipulatives and then moved onto the activity. These small group lessons took about 5-10 minutes, but allowed the students to get more exposure to counting. Throughout this study, I remained consistent in pulling them daily and pulled them every day they were present. My research revealed that daily practice did affect counting abilities within these two students. After three weeks of practicing, both students were able to count four numbers higher than they could when the study began. They were both excited to see their sticker move higher and higher each week as their learning grew. My anecdotal notes revealed that the use of kinesthetic activities increased engagement drastically, especially in Student A. He really enjoyed the activities I had planned and happily participated in them.

Implications/Recommendations

The 2014 study of Kirin Sinha proved the effectiveness of kinesthetic learning, saying “movement allows a student an alternative approach to the information, it can help put students in the receptive state required for learning.” Based on the data I collected, daily kinesthetic counting practice did affect the students' counting abilities. They were able to get their bodies moving and learn in a way that worked for them. Because the students enjoyed these activities greatly, I will continue working with them in a small group to see how far they can come. In the future, I want to focus some of my efforts into increasing engagement with Student A in the whole group math lessons.

Reference(s)

Sinha, Kirin. “Kinesthetic Learning: Moving toward a New Model for Education.” Edutopia, George Lucas Educational Foundation, 24 July 2014, https://www.edutopia.org/blog/kinesthetic-learning-new-model-education-kirin-sinh.

 

 


I’d Rather Be Reading

Primary Researchers

Emily Kassing, Intern, Baylor University

Raven Hopkins, BS Ed, Mentor Teacher, Robinson Primary School, Robinson ISD

Michelle Schlappe, MS Ed, Intern Supervisor, Baylor University

 

Rationale/Introduction

Lucy Calkins, a highly decorated reading specialist and author, once said, “If we want children to feel passionate about reading, we need to help all of them believe they are supremely suited to it” (Calkins, 1997). This quote is exactly what my action research project intends to test. During reading to self-time, my mentor teacher and I struggle to keep three, first grade boys focused, excited, and confident enough in their ability to dive into a story. I want these students to not only believe in themselves, but I desire for them to fall in love with reading - and this will only happen if they can focus and engage with books and realize that they are “extremely suited to it.” Therefore, I decided to implement three different reward systems to see which one motivates my students to actively read for the designated amount of time.

Question/Wondering

In what ways might individualized reward systems affect the engagement of three students during reading to self-time?

Methodology/Results

For my research study, I selected three, first grade students who struggled to focus during reading to self-time. Student one is a six year-old Hispanic male from a middle class family, student two is a seven year-old African American male from a low income family, and student three is a six year-old Caucasian male from a middle class family. Before I began my study, I took an entire week to collect baseline data on the three selected students. Each day during read to self-time (Monday-Thursday), I conducted an engagement sample which allowed me to tally their focus. I averaged my students' engagement to determine the baseline data. Student One was engaged during read to self 54% of the time. Student Two was engaged during read to self 45% of the time. Student Three was engaged during read to self 42% of the time.

I decided to pick three different rewards. The first reward was a toy from the treasure chest, the second reward was a “no shoes” pass, and the third reward was teacher helper. I tested out each reward for an entire week, so that I would have enough data to make an informed decision. Every Monday during the study, I gathered the boys and told them that if they were focused and on track during read to self-time each day, I would give them a check mark. If they had four check marks by Friday, they earned their reward. Each day, I would sit and watch the three boys. I took engagement samples and documented when they were focused or when they were distracted. I also called each student to my desk after reading time was over and asked them to tell me how they thought they did (self-evaluation). Lastly, I collected anecdotal notes to track data and progress.

After the three weeks were over, I began analyzing the data. I took notice of when percentages were higher in engagement samples, when and where students were reading, what students were reading, what notes I made, and even what they told me during their interviews. It became obvious that the rewards were impacting their engagement, that giving students choice in what they read positively affected their engagement, and that different rewards worked for different students. Student one’s engagement improved to 83%, student two’s engagement improved to 79%, and student three’s engagement improved to 85%. I also noticed that these three boys would ask deeper questions during reading, they would immediately begin reading their books when it was time, their confidence and excitement for reading grew, and they inspired other students to follow suit. Their focus increased exponentially, as well as their desire to read.

According to the research I conducted, it has been said that “Students with higher motivation levels read three times more frequently and more engaged than those with lower motivation levels” (Wigfield and Guthrie, 1997). Because of this study and the data I collected, I can confidently say that I agree.

Implications/Recommendations

Overall, this study proved to increase engagement in my three readers and confirmed that higher motivation levels can positively impact reading participation. However, there are a few areas that could be improved upon. A better system for awarding check marks could be created. I think requiring students to “hit” a certain engaged percentage would clear up confusion for both the teacher and the student. Additionally, I can foresee consistent rewards becoming an issue. I do not want these boys to read just because they are earning a prize; I want them to read because they truly love reading. However, I realize that they are just first graders, and if this is the extra boost they need in order to love to read, then I think it is a risk that I am willing to take. Lastly, all of this research has led me to wonder if playing calming music during read to self-time would impact student engagement.

Reference(s)

Calkins. (1997). Five ways to nurture a lasting love of reading.(Motivating Readers). Instructor (1990), 106(5), 32–.

Wigfield, A., and Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. J. Educ. Psychol. 89, 420–432. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.420

 

 


Stems for Growth

Primary Researchers

Vivian Le, Intern, Baylor University

Stephanie Bailey, B.S.Ed, Mentor Teacher, Robinson Primary School, Robinson ISD

Michelle Schlappe, M.S. Ed, Intern Supervisor, Baylor University

 

Rationale/Introduction

In my Kindergarten class at Robinson Primary School, I have a student who has a language delay and receives speech therapy outside of school to help him strengthen his language skills. Although I have seen some improvement from the beginning of the year, I still notice during the times of conversation, that the student gives a one-word answer when asked about what he has learned in class. I wonder what will happen if I provide sentence stems following each question I ask, and how will this idea affect the student’s quality of response.

Question/Wondering

How does providing sentence stems after asking a student a question affect the student's quality of response?

Methodology/Results

For this study, I selected one student from my kindergarten class who has a language delay and receives speech therapy outside of school. The student is a Caucasian 5-year-old male. He is qualified for free and reduced lunch. I began my research by collecting baseline data asking the student one question each day for a week. I asked the student questions based on what he learned in science and social studies without providing sentence stems. During my collection of baseline data, I used a performance rubric to measure the student’s quality of responses based on the questions I asked. I recorded his quality of responses based on if he responded to the question, the response was on topic, the response was a complete sentence/thought, and if he needed assistance with answering the question. The student could have received up to 3 points for each component. I added all the points from the baseline data and created an average score based on the points he received. I also took anecdotal notes on his quality of responses and what I observed during the lessons. My baseline data showed that the student’s quality of responses averaged out to 68%. The area of the student’s strength was he was able to respond to the question and that it was on somewhat on topic the majority of the time. The area of the student’s weaknesses was his response was not a complete sentence or thought and he needed assistance to answer the question given to him. In the following two weeks, I included two new factors. I included a student survey that displayed 3 emoticons which represented if he understood that day’s lesson. The three options the student had were he understood the lesson fully, somewhat, and not at all. Then I proceeded to ask him the question regarding what he learned in science or social studies while providing a sentence stem. The student survey I collected showed me that the student understood every lesson that was taught which helped with the student’s confidence in responding to the questions asked. Collecting the student surveys allowed me to correlate if the student understood the lesson after I had asked him the question of the day. Some surveys showed me he understood the lesson that day but he was not able to answer the question of the day. I did notice the student was able to gain more confidence in answering questions when provided a survey and a sentence stem because he did not need assistance or prompting when asked a question. The data showed the student’s quality responses averaged out to 84%. The areas of the student’s strengths and weaknesses changed after implementation of strategies. The student was able to answer questions in a complete sentence/thought and he did not need assistance compared to when he was not provided a sentence stem. The results of my sentence stem study showed that providing sentence stems does affect the student’s quality of response.

Implications/Recommendations

Overall, this study has shown that providing sentence stems affects the student’s quality of response. My research has shown that implementing oral sentence stems after asking a student a question does increase the student’s quality of response. According to research, oral sentence stems have also increased student’s vocabulary which increases a student’s quality of response (Halstead, 2013). A strength I saw from this study was how it affected the student’s confidence in answering questions. A weakness I saw from this study was how the student did not use the sentence stem provided in his responses. If I were to repeat this study again, I would want to have the student try to use the sentence stem in their responses. I would also want to include more subjects such as reading and math to observe how sentence stems would affect a student’s response. Moving forward, I will continue to provide sentence stems for students who need additional help with answering open-ended questions.

Reference(s)

Clark, F. (2017, August 1). Using Sentence Starter Strips In Speech Therapy. thedabblingspeechie. Retrieved from https://thedabblingspeechie.com/2016/07/using-sentence-starter-strips-in-speech-therapy.

Halstead, M. (2013). The effect of structured oral sentence frames on receptive and productive vocabulary development (thesis).

 

 


No Man Left Behind

Primary Researchers

Ashley Solar, Intern, Baylor University

Terri Senior, BS Ed, Mentor Teacher, Robinson Primary, Robinson ISD

Michelle Schlappe, MS Ed, Intern Supervisor, Baylor University

Rationale/Introduction

Inside my first-grade classroom, my students have adapted to an everyday morning routine leading to developed levels of independence and autonomy. Though, I have one student who has continued to struggle with completing these morning tasks. I have noticed that while most of my students confidently complete their tasks without reminders, this student still struggles even when aided by multiple verbal reminders which often lead to frustration in the form of outbursts, being late to class, forgetting necessary items, and even talking back to the teachers. Wolpert-Gawron (2014) noted ideas of students managing time and goals with the use of self-monitoring charts. I have developed two charts, one for me and one for the student, gauged towards monitoring his readiness and tracking his progress in hopes of improving the efficiency of the morning routine.

Question/Wondering

How might a morning routine chart impact my student’s readiness in completing expected tasks each morning?

Methodology/Results

This study was conducted inside a first-grade classroom with a six-year-old boy, who has a higher academic achievement level and comes from a family with a middle-class socioeconomic status. This student has experienced difficulty in completing tasks that have been asked of him each morning, beginning in the first week of the school year. I created a chart for this student to use as a self-monitoring method for each morning as a reminder of what he was expected to complete as he came into the classroom. For a week prior to implementing the chart, I collected data on whether my student had packed up all of his items, his verbal responses to teachers, the total time the student needed each morning, and the number of reminders given by teachers to complete his morning tasks. That week before I implemented his chart, I found that my student was completing these tasks in an efficient and orderly manner, with no talking back, and was entirely packed up before our morning meetings began. This achievement was drastically different from that which I had seen in the months prior to beginning my research. I saw this student late for class on multiple occasions due to not packing up on time, missing items, and talking back to teachers consistently; this was an interesting week of collecting baseline data due to this switch. In addition, I kept anecdotal notes on if there were any remarks made and his demeanor in the morning. Over the course of those four days, my student had packed up in between seven to nine minutes, needed an average of four reminders each day, did not talk back to teachers on any of the mornings, and had every item he needed each day. The week after collecting that data, I introduced the student to the chart he would be using to keep track of his own progress in whether he worked in a timely manner, and he completed these tasks independently without disturbing others, or if these standards were not met and he needed to try harder the next day. If he gave it his best and got all packed before our morning meetings began, he earned a sticker on the chart. The student was primarily in charge of deciding whether he earned the sticker for the day. Over the course of two weeks, I continued to collect data of my own on this student’s use of the chart for improving the methods to which he prepared each morning. Contrary to the baseline data I collected, my student did not have a full week where he earned a sticker every day for his productivity in the morning. There were three days the student did not earn a sticker due to not fully packing his items or he was prioritizing other activity rather than completing his morning tasks. While these days were thrown into the data collection of the two weeks, the student did experience an overall growth in the amount of time and reminders needed to come in and have his tasks completed. He went from needing upwards of six reminders and taking nine minutes each morning to now needing only one or two reminders and packing up in under five minutes. This student’s verbal and emotional responses still have room for improvement, but his overall efficiency in completing morning tasks was positively impacted which led to results of prepared mornings and composed transitions throughout the duration of the two weeks. My observations and these results of my study, No Man Left Behind, supported my research findings on setting and meeting goals as well as developing time management skills (Wolpert-Gawron, 2014).

Implications/Recommendations

This study helped me provide my student with a motivation for coming in and showing levels of productivity in the mornings. He went from having elongated and unproductive mornings to coming in and showing his teachers newly gained levels of autonomy by completing his tasks in a more independent state. That is a strength that I found within the course of completing my research. The most prominent weakness seen within this study is the time constraint. If I was to conduct this study again, I would like to introduce it sooner in the school year once I noticed the student(s) struggling. The overall implications of this study led to improved self-efficiency in collecting his items in a timely manner and gave the student an extrinsic motivation to come in each morning and productively prepare for the day. Moving forward, I will be using this chart as a method for my student to continue working on autonomy in the classroom and hope to land at a point where the chart is no longer needed for completing morning tasks.

Reference(s)

Wolpert-Gawron, Heather. “Common Core in Action: The Power of a Checklist.” Edutopia, George Lucas Educational Foundation, 7 Feb. 2014, https://www.edutopia.org/blog/the-power-of-a-checklist-heather-wolpert-gawron.