DATA ANALYSIS

MEMO
Round 2

Kathryn Alvarez

April 12th, 2020

 Research Question

How do the research based narrative input chart and joint construction strategies from WestEd
and GLAD programs support the academic English language development of my first grade
English Language Learners?

 Intervention/Innovation What was the innovation/intervention that you designed and the
rationale?

For round 2, the intervention that I put in place was a WestEd research-based strategy called
joint construction. Joint construction is where the students do the talking and the teacher holds
the pen providing some prompting and guidance. The teacher writes on an anchor chart. This
strategy models for the students how to write a paragraph. The students are expected to use a
topic sentence, transition words, explicitly taught vocabulary words and in this case, state the
three problems from the story. I chose this strategy because I have a significant amount of EL
students in addition to native English speaking students who are not on grade level. This is a
successful strategy that supports students with their independent writing. This strategy also fits in
the I do, We do, You do gradual release of responsibility model. This strategy would fall in the
We do stage of said model.

 Data Collected What data/artifacts did you collect? (e.g., student work, notes from observations,
interviews, videos, etc.)

For round 2, data that was collected was in the form of student surveys. In addition, I collected
the students independent writing, as well as observation notes on how many times the students
referred to the narrative input chart and joint construction to support the independent writing. I
also took observation notes on student turn and talks.

 Data Analysis
o Describe your data analysis strategies for qualitative data (e.g., coding strategies)

- For qualitative data, I took the students responses from their turn and talks and
coded them. The codes I came up with were: brain, chart, parrot, and no
comment.
- I took notes during each turn and talk on a different set of partners for each time
they participated in at turn and talk.

o Describe your data analysis strategies for quantitative data (e.g., what numbers did you
crunch to arrive at descriptive statistics?)

For quantitative data, I took the students English level Proficiency scores (if they were Els), oral
language, writing score based on a rubric, use of academic vocabulary words, recall of events,
on-task behaviors score during lessons, use of sentence stems, motivation level, turn and talk
engagement, and use of transition words.

Another form of quantitative data I chose to implement was an oral student survey. This survey
was based on the strategies used and how they helped the students with their writing in addition
 to how engaged the students felt they were during these activities. The questions for the oral
survey were written on the white board as well as a visual showing a hand holding up a 1, 2, or 3.
I asked the students to hold up a 1, 2, or 3 to represent their answers for the question. In the
visual of the hand there was an explanation for what each number meant. Holding up one finger
represented not at all, two fingers represented a little bit or most of the time, and three fingers
represented a lot or the whole time.

 Findings
o What do the qualitative data tell you? (attach visual data display such as tables, graphs,
etc.
The qualitative data tells me whether the students accessed their resources to support their turn
and talks, used their memory to recall information and prior knowledge, mimicked their partners,
or had no comments. Depending on the strategy they used, it informed me of where they are at
with their acquisition of academic vocabulary and their level at which they use oral language.
Partner A is the first student listed under partners and partner B is the second student listed under
partners. Example: Student 1 = Partner A and Student 2 = Partner B. Codes: Chart = referred to
chart, Brain = used recall and memory of prior/knew learning, Parrot = mimicked what their
partner said, and N/C = no comment at just listening to the oral language being spoken to them. I
feel that all of these codes represent where the students are in their speaking and listening skills.
Just because a student has no comment does not mean they are not learning. Also, the students
who are mimicking are at that stage, which supports their oral language development.

Partners: Dialogue: Partner A Dialogue: Code:

Partner B
Student 1 & Student No comment. “Technology A: N/C
2 Breaking.” B: Brain
Student 3 & Student “First, the printer is “First, the printer A: Chart
4 breaking.” break.” B :Parrot
Student 5 & Student “The next problem is “Next computer too A: Chart
6 the computer is full.” much.” B: Parrot
Student 7 & Student “Last the computer “Last problem is A: Chart
8 was could not see.” computer blurry.” B: Chart
Student 9 & Student “Technology “technology A: Chart
10 breakdown problem.” B: Parrot
problems.”

o What do the quantitative data tell you (attach a Descriptive Statistics excel document)

The quantitative data shows how the students were able to use oral language and then
take that to their independent writing. The second table reflects their oral language use during the
narrative input chart. The students were able to use the narrative input chart, vocabulary wall and
sentence frames for support due to the first grade standard stating that students will be able to
write a 5 sentence paragraph with support. Students with an English Level proficiency were able
to copy from the joint construction although this was still a challenge as far as keeping up with
where they were in their writing.

Variable 1 Variable 2 Variable 3 Variable 4 Variable 5 Variable 6 Variable 7 Variable 8 Variable 9 Variable 10
English language prof. level Oral language Writing Academic vocab. Recall of events On-task behaviors Use of sentence stems MotivationTurn and talk Use of Transition Words
Score 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 3 2 2
Score 2 N/A 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 2
Score 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2
Score 4 N/A 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
Score 5 N/A 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 1 2
Score 6 N/A 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 3
Score 7 N/A 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2
Score 8 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 2 2
Score 9 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 3
Score 10 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2

Total 9 23 19 22 22 24 26
Mean 1.8 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.6
Median 2 3 2 2 2.5 2 3
Mode 1 3 2 2 3 2 3
Highest 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Lowest 1 1 1 1 1 2 2
Range 2 2 2 2 2 1 1
Std Deviation 0.836660026534076 0.948683298051 0.737865 0.788810637747 0.9189365835 0.516397779494 0.516397779494323
Variance 0.7 0.9 0.544444 0.622222222222 0.8444444444 0.266666666667 0.266666666666667
0

Err:504

Variable 1 Variable 2 Variable 3 Variable 4 Variable 5 Variable 6 Variable 7

English language prof. level Oral language Writing Academic vocab. Recall of events On-task behaviors Use of sentence st
Score 1 1 1 1 2 1 2
Score 2 N/A 3 2 2 2 3
Score 3 2 3 2 3 3 2
Score 4 N/A 3 3 3 3 3
Score 5 N/A 3 2 2 3 2
Score 6 N/A 2 2 2 2 3
Score 7 N/A 3 3 3 3 2
Score 8 1 1 1 1 1 3
Score 9 2 1 1 1 1 2
Score 10 3 3 2 3 3 2

Total 9 23 19 22 22 24
Mean 1.8 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.4
Median 2 3 2 2 2.5 2
Mode 1 3 2 2 3 2
Highest 3 3 3 3 3 3
Lowest 1 1 1 1 1 2
Range 2 2 2 2 2 1
Std Deviation 0.836660026534076 0.948683298051 0.737865 0.788810637747 0.9189365835 0.516397779494 0.51639777949
Variance 0.7 0.9 0.544444 0.622222222222 0.8444444444 0.266666666667 0.26666666666
0
 The student survey quantitative data shows how the students felt about the strategies. This
informed me on their level of engagement with each strategy as well as if they felt the strategies
and charts supported their independent writing. The students enjoy being able to share out their
ideas and especially enjoy being chosen to put the pictures and vocab words on the narrative
input chart.

Oral Student Survey

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Did the narrative chart Did the join construction How engaged were you How engaged were you
help you with your help you with your with the narrative input with the joint
writing? writing? chart? construction?

Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5

Student 6 Student 7 Student 8 Student 10

 Planning Next Round How has your analysis of these data informed your next steps?

Due to school closures, my strategy for round 3, which is the same strategy from round 1, has
been adapted for distance learning in an asynchronous format. Data collection for round 3 will be
different from round 1. The only data that I will be collecting is student work.

 Literature Connections: Cite any sources here and briefly describe how the literature was
leveraged to inform your intervention and findings in this round.

 Torres, M., Carpenter, Andrew N., & Shaw, Melanie. (2015). The Effects of
Explicit Vocabulary Instruction on the Vocabulary Development of English
Language Learners in Kindergarten, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
 This particular source will help validate the need to explicitly teach vocabulary to English
Language Learners. This will be done prior to the narrative or informational input chart
intervention. Also, this supports the multiple interactions needed in order for students to be able
to use the words orally before using the words in their writing.
 Stage, T., Blanton, A., & Pieretti, R. (2013). Oral narrative and culturally relevant
literacy instruction for Hmong-speaking English language learners.
 Pieretti's study also included a specific culturally-relevant component, it was concluded that
cultural relevance may be more efficiently promoted by encouraging students' engagement with
the text, the instructor, and each other through oral narrative activities (Stage, Blanton, &
Pierretti 2013).

 Round 3 Plan- Please submit the graphic organizer: Round 3 Plan in addition to your memo
 ROUND 3 PLAN
Round 3
Dyer Kelly Elementary
Context ELA with integrated ELD
First Grade
School, subject, 26 students
grade, class, 14 ELS
students
4 Newcomers
4 Emerging
4 Expanding
2 Bridging
 12 Eos
 Languages:
Dari, Pashto, Farsi, Ukrainian, Spanish, and Arabic

Focus Group:
-5 EOs
-5 ELs (2 Farsi, 1 Ukranian, 2 Spanish)
How do the research based narrative input chart and joint construction strategies
Research from WestEd and GLAD programs support the academic English language
Question development of my first grade English Language Learners?

How did your Due to school closures, my strategy for round 3, which is the same strategy from round 1,
analysis of has been adapted for distance learning in an asynchronous format.
Round 2 Data
inform your
planning for this
round?
 Round 3
The strategy from round one, narrative input chart, is meant to be done with direct
Round 3 instruction. This strategy involves myself holding up and image from the mentor
Instructional/ text with the text glued on the back. After each reading of the images the students
Assessment are called upon to place them on the narrative input chart. The narrative input
Methods chart has a background that resembles the story. Students then place the previously
explicitly taught vocabulary where they would go on the images. To adapt this, I
created a google slide that has the four images from the story set as the
How will you organize background. The students then have to drag and drop the vocabulary words onto
learning experiences the images. This will be an assessment of how they comprehended the vocabulary
for students that
address your long-term
that will be taught in a lesson prior to this.
goal?

Cite sources as
needed

Round 3 Data to be collected in round 3 will be in the form of student work. Due to school closures
Data to be I had to adapt my chosen strategy to be given in an asynchronous format. Generally, this
collected strategy is to be done with direct instruction. Due to having to adapt the strategy and
teaching in an asynchronous format, there will be no turn and talks to collect data from.
What are the
data/artifacts that you
will collect?

e.g.: Student work?

Notes from
observations?
Interviews? Video?
 Round 3
Rationale for
collecting these My rationale for the data that will be collected is because this can be done in an
data asynchronous format. Also, I chose to have a drag and drop feature because this is an
important computer skill for students to master. My students are first grader, so for most
What are you
looking for in the data?
of them this is a new skill for them to learn.

Anything that is not on

the rubric?

Evidence that students

have…

Cite sources as
needed

Literature Torres, M., Carpenter, Andrew N., & Shaw, Melanie. (2015). The Effects
Source(s) of Explicit Vocabulary Instruction on the Vocabulary Development of
Connection to
English Language Learners in Kindergarten, ProQuest Dissertations and
Teaching Methods Theses.
and/or intended This particular source will help validate the need to explicitly teach vocabulary to English
Student Learning
Outcomes Language Learners. This will be done prior to the narrative or informational input chart
intervention. Also, this supports the multiple interactions needed in order for students to
APA Citation (at least be able to use the words orally before using the words in their writing.
1)

Cite any sources here Stage, T., Blanton, A., & Pieretti, R. (2013). Oral narrative and culturally
that you listed relevant literacy instruction for Hmong-speaking English language
throughout- this is your learners.
References List
Pieretti's study also included a specific culturally-relevant component, it was concluded
that cultural relevance may be more efficiently promoted by encouraging students'
engagement with the text, the instructor, and each other through oral narrative activities
(Stage, Blanton, & Pierretti 2013).

Notes or Additional Materials (lesson plans, rubrics, materials you plan to use in teaching, etc.