1 / 14

Research Proposal

Research Proposal. Alex Reynolds, Catherine Hill & Laura Guilfoyle. What are the effects of traditional versus tactual-kinaesthetic instruction on short term knowledge acquisition and attitude in middle years students?. Sub-question.

jaxon
Télécharger la présentation

Research Proposal

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. Research Proposal Alex Reynolds, Catherine Hill & Laura Guilfoyle

  2. What are the effects of traditional versus tactual-kinaesthetic instruction on short term knowledge acquisition and attitude in middle years students?

  3. Sub-question • Do students of all learning styles respond positively to tactual-kinaesthetic instruction?

  4. Key Terms • Traditional Instruction – techniques such as ‘chalk and talk’, lectures, assigned readings, end-of-chapter tests • Tactual-kinaesthetic instruction – teaching techniques requiring students to physically move, handle manipulatives, and participate in concrete, real-life experiences

  5. Why this question? • The middle years of schooling are associated with a high level of disengagement • Most instruction in the middle years is verbal and visual • Students with other learning styles may be reached better by using different teaching styles • There is a current focus on using kinaesthetic teaching techniques for students with ADHD

  6. Why action research? • This research project can be implemented within our own classrooms • The results of this will be used to inform our own teaching

  7. What does the literature say? • Farkas (2003). Urban sample of 105 7th grade students. Taught using a multisensory approach. Tested on the Holocaust - tested achievement, attitudes, empathic tendencies. Test group showed a significant increase in performance, empathy and attitude • Rule, Dockstader & Stewart (2006). US study of 34 students at risk of failure in reading. Used a before-school program to implement tactile and kinaesthetic activities to teach phonological awareness. Utilised a control group. Found that experimental groups made larger gains than control group. • Peacock (2001). Hong Kong study of EFL (English as a foreign language) students and teachers. Found a high number of students felt a mismatch between teaching and learning styles seriously affected their learning.

  8. Literature continued • Honigsfeld & Dunn (2009). Recommends practical techniques and resources for teaching at-risk secondary students, who are often non-traditional learners. “The best strategies for engaging tactual and kinaesthetic learners’ minds are to engage their hands and bodies with manipulative instructional resources or to allow them to learn on their feet” (p.221). • Stanford (2003). Overview of multiple intelligence theory and applications in the classroom. “New assessments should not focus on whether or not students can acquire knowledge but on whether or not they can acquire the disposition to use skills and strategies appropriately” (p.84).

  9. Research approach • Action research • Tactile-kinaesthetic activities will be implemented in the classroom in around half of all lessons, both to teach new content and reinforce prior knowledge and understanding • Student achievement and engagement will be monitored throughout both traditional and tactual kinaesthetic lessons

  10. Data Collection/Instruments • Previous reports/marks/results • Time-on-task (every 15 minutes) • Teacher log/journal • Student work samples • Face scales or likert-type scale to assess attitudes towards subject as a whole and individual lessons • Learning styles assessment • Summative assessment of learning such as oral or dramatic presentation, posters, etc.

  11. Data analysis Quantitative Qualitative Student work samples Teacher notes/log/journal Learning style inventory Inferential statistics • Previous marks vs. Current • Likert scale/face scale • Time-on-task data • Descriptive statistics

  12. Potential use of the findings • The results of this research project will be used to determine whether – in our own teaching – tactile-kinaesthetic teaching techniques will be used for all students or only those that show a preference for learning kinaesthetically • If shown to be a successful teaching method in terms of engaging, motivating and challenging students and also is shown to help with the retention of content - it would confirm that kinaesthetic teaching models should be used regularly rather than occasionally or as a 'treat' in the classroom

  13. References • Farkas. R. D (2003) The Effects of Traditional versus Learning-Styles Instructional Methods in Middle Years. The Journal of Educational Research. 97(1) 42-54. • Honigsfeld, A. & Dunn, R. (2009). Learning-style responsive approaches for teaching typically performing and at-risk adolescents. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(5) 220-224. • Peacock, M. (2006). Match or mismatch? Learning styles and teaching styles in EFL. International journal of applied linguistics, 11(1) 1-20. • Rule, A., Dockstader, C. J. & Stewart, R.A. (2006). Hands-on and kinaesthetic activities for teaching phonological awareness. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(3) 195-201. • Stanford, S. (2003). Multiple Intelligence for every classroom. Intervention in school and clinic, 39(2) 80-85.

  14. References (cont.) • For further references and information please see related word document

More Related