Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Jesse W. Franzen
Presented to
Abstract
This action research study seeks to discover if increased checks for understanding, a universal
an urban middle school in a rural state with four sections of one English teacher’s regular 8th
grade classes. The researcher applied checks for understanding in two classes, periods three and
seven (treatment group), but none with the other two classes, periods one and four (no-treatment
group), during a poetry unit. A pre/post test survey was administered to measure student self-
perception of poetic terms and poetry in general. Results showed an overall improvement for all
groups in regards to self-perception of knowledge with a smaller increase for the treatment
group. Reading comprehension was measured using a multiple-choice and short-answer test,
which signified an important difference, 12%, between the groups. Vocabulary was dually
responses, measuring memorization, signified an important difference between the groups, 24%.
The vocabulary application, measuring critical thinking, signified no important difference, 2%,
between the treatment and no-treatment groups. The universal RTI intervention of checking for
understanding does yield increased results in the area of reading comprehension and vocabulary
memorization and does not decrease student performance, thus making it a beneficial
intervention tool.
Problem Statement
In current education, teachers are asked to do more with the same or less amount of time
with increased societal pressures and constraints. The impose for teachers is to help students
learn quickly, learn more, and help those not at grade level rapidly advance. Assisting in this
charge, a myriad of organizational responses all claim positive results. One answer currently and
increasingly being adopted is Response to Intervention [RTI], which consists of systemic school
changes in instruction and assessment to create effective prevention. A pivotal RTI instruction
component is intervention, which has three levels: ―Universal, secondary, and tertiary‖
(National Center on Response to Intervention [NCRTI], n.d., About the NCRTI section, ¶ 2),
where at each level strategies become more individual and intense. A major component of
writing, projects, performances, and tests. With more frequent checks for understanding,
proposed benefits include that students will be more engaged in school, more willing to do class
work, learn more during direct instruction, and be better critical thinkers. What this study seeks
Introduction
Many schools across the nation, including rural areas, are adopting Response to
Intervention [RTI] as their guiding model for student achievement, mine included. This year, my
school began the initial process of adopting an RTI model. The principles of RTI seem logically
sound, for example, educators systematically monitoring ―students’ academic and behavior
a noble goal for all schools (National Center on Response to Intervention [NCRTI], n.d.,
Definition of RTI section, ¶ 1). There are four essential components of RTI: A school-wide,
multi-level system of intervention, which includes: ―Screening, progress monitoring, and data-
based decision making for instruction‖ (NCRTI, n.d., About Us section, ¶ 1). RTI is an all-
encompassing school system, which takes resources and staff approbation to be effective.
Education is always looking for the best teaching practices, which can then be improved
upon, but the ultimate goal is to educate children to be life-long learners with the measure being
standardized testing and progress monitoring as part of RTI. Many years ago, before RTI,
Madeline Hunter delineated elements of effective instruction and as Barlow (2003) states: ―Her
contribution was not the invention of an instructional practice. She observed effective teachers to
see what practices they had in common and deduced a general model for instruction‖ (p. 68). If
one desires to be a good teacher, one models her own practices to that of the effective teacher.
Thus generalized: Good teaching is just good teaching and if one is looking for improvement
from a good teacher and her strategies, it will be incremental, unless the environment around her
focuses on how students learn. One specific quality important to this study was that, as Hunter
deduced: ―The teacher needs to determine whether the students understand what they are
supposed to have learned before moving on‖ (as cited in Barlow, 2003, p. 68). This effective
practice has now become core to behavior prevention systems; RTI labels these interventions.
After many meetings, trainings, and observations in my district, I decided to test the RTI
discover if there was a significant increase in student comprehension and perception of learning.
Being coupled with a best practice among educators, part of Madline Hunter’s model for
effective instruction, and part of RTI, it would seem logical that checking for understanding
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 5
would be well accepted by educators. And taken on its own merit, it is accepted. For
administration and educators, RTI methods have a wow factor that seems to create a buzz and
becomes readily acceptable for building a RTI model. Although Fisher, Frey, and Lapp (2009)
showed an increase in student performance (Process 6, ¶ 3-4), there is no data showing which
increase.
The intervention methods here being study are intensely and directly teacher driven being
―done continually during every period, the whole period‖ (Hintze, 2007, slide 5), which is in
contrast to other well researched methods like constructivism and project-based learning, which
is intensely student driven where the teacher takes the role of facilitator. There is a middle
ground, where a teacher can be both teach some subjects and skills in a direct manner and have
students construct their own knowledge through project-based learning. This study focuses on
intervention – how those enhancements add to student learning, and does not represent either
an RTI systemic change, the staff needs to be persuaded that this is what is best for student
learning and is deserving of the change and time commitment. If local data were presented on the
positive benefits of universal intervention techniques, more staff would have better information
Literature Review
This study focuses on one teacher and four of his 8th grade English sections. The goal of
the English subject is for students to become better readers, writers, listeners, speakers, and
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 6
thinkers. The charge of the teacher is to ultimately know ―what the enduring understandings of a
lesson should be and what knowledge, skills, and strategies are needed to progress to that level‖
(Fisher & Frey, 2007, p. 137). To achieve this end, there are many different means. The current
and widely adopted teaching philosophy among educators is constructivism, which places the
student in control of her learning and the teacher as facilitator. Although, a constructivist teacher
may use some checks for understanding, the philosophy is in contrast with the behaviorist
method, which has the same educational goal, but instead puts the teacher in control of student
learning, where she directly instructs all of the students, utilizing many more checks for
understanding and expending more time on these tasks than a constructivist. Many of the
checking for understanding methods fit neatly with much of the direct instruction methodology,
which is the nature of intervention. Yet, effective checks for understanding do not come naturally
and are a learned skill for any teacher. Any learned skill takes time and practice and any
teacher’s time is already heavily taxed. Therefore, in order to learn a new skill, it must be
effective for student learning and thus, worthy of teacher scholarship. Although Response to
like interventions, have not been broadly studied to show their effectiveness within the system.
This study looks at the effects of the universal intervention, checking for understanding, in the
standardized tests and formative assessments. Once the four-tiered system is in place
(intervention, screening, progress monitoring, and data-based instructional decisions) and given
enough time, there is student achievement. Fisher, Frey, and Lapp (2009) assisted implementing
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 7
a systemic RTI transition for one school, Western, over the course of two years and their
―observation and interview data had shown a significant trend in the use of content literacy
interventions‖ (Process 6, ¶ 2). From that treatment, Western had moved from a 12% literacy
rate, unchanged for five years, to a rate of 56% in three years with an increased graduation rate
from 67% to 73% (Fisher et al., 2009, Process 6, ¶ 3-4). Guthals (2009) study of school-wide
positive behavior systems [PBS], an RTI intervention system, found ―a consistent pattern of low
administrative stress levels associated with higher rates of PBS components present‖ (Abstract, ¶
4) and there is a known correlation of higher student achievement when administrative stress
levels are low. What is not as well known is what specific intervention treatments, like checking
for understanding, are actually working to improve student learning in the RTI model.
tenant in the intervention strand of Response to Intervention and is the focus of this study.
Students, even if they wish, are not ―always self-regulated learners‖ and ―may not be aware of
what they do or do not understand‖ (Fisher & Frey, 2007, p. 1). When this occurs, which is in
every class in every school, they need an intervention to help them succeed in learning; besides
checking for understanding, other interventions are: increasing task structure, increasing task
relevance and practice, increasing engaging academic responses, mini-lessons on specific skills,
and decreasing group size (McCook, n.d., slides 51-54). These are all substantial interventions
individually. Not as well studied is the systematic approach to formative assessment, checking
for understanding. Fisher and Frey (2007) state that checking for understanding ―completes the
circle of assessment, planning, and instruction by providing teachers and students with evidence
of learning‖ (p. 14). The methods of checking for understanding are many and nebulous, but it
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 8
does require teachers to ―move beyond asking questions and giving tests to determine whether
learning has occurred‖ (Fisher & Frey, 2007, p. 135), but specific direct instruction treatment
methods utilized within the classroom have not been studied for effectiveness.
Method
Participants
Participants in this study are 8th grade, 13-15 year old male and female students in a
public middle school. The school qualifies as Title I, having a free and reduced lunch rate at
nearly 50% and a total school population, grades 6-8, of 620 students with 53 educators on staff.
The community’s largest employers are government or government related positions, so poverty
fluctuation is relatively flat. There were four total groups (four periods of mainstream English
classes) used in this study, two each were used as treatment and no-treatment groups. Each
period was held daily, five days per week, for a length of 53 minutes each, except period three,
which had an extra four minutes for announcements, which had no effect on the results. There
were a total of 22 instruction days over the course of a month and a half, from the middle of
March to the end of April, during which there was also a six-school-day break. The teacher of
Research Design
and Frey (2007) and measured the amount of specified checks applied in both treatment and no-
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 9
treatment groups. The treatments were divided into four categories: Oral language, questioning,
writing, and tests. The specified treatments in Oral Language are Retellings (p. 26), Think Pair
Share (p. 30), and Whip Around (p. 34); in Questioning, they are Thumbs Up/Down (p. 49); in
Writing, they are Read Pair Share (p. 64), Summary (p. 66), RAFT (p. 67), and Graphic
Organizers (pp. 87-89); in Tests, they are Multiple Choice, Short Answer, and Performance (p.
98). These treatments were applied in an 8th grade English, poetry unit. Specific understanding
revolved around seven poetic terms and reading comprehension of the poem, ―The Rime of the
Data Collection
Independent variable.
The difference between the number of checks for understanding given to the treatment
group compared to the no-treatment group is the independent variable. A chart of checks for
understanding was created for each group, for each day, and was measured by the administrator.
Dependant variables.
Student perception.
Participants were given a pre and post-test, measuring their attitude toward reading
poetry and how well they felt they understood the seven poetic terms. These were measured by
Vocabulary.
Participants were given a pre- and post-test, seven multiple-choice questions, on the
Vocabulary application.
Participants were given a post-test with two poetry passages, one they have read, and the
other they have not. The students were given a bank of the seven terms without definitions and
then marked each passage with the codes matching the terms. Each term was worth two points
for each of the given poems, for a total of 28 points with two points as free-bees. This was a
performance test, measuring how well each student could apply the knowledge of the terms
learned.
Reading comprehension.
Students read ―The Rime of the Ancient Mariner‖ (Coleridge, 2004, p. 5) in class and
were tested on key plot and character points within the story. The reading comprehension test
consisted of 11 multiple-choice questions and four short answer questions. Each question was
worth one point, except for the moral-of-the-story question being worth five points.
The validity of instrumentation was well protected from external forces. Multiple
treatments, if there were any, were buffered because of the number of subjects and the length of
the experiment. The internal validity of the instruments is quite high. There was no threat of
maturation within the group, the pretest had a negligible effect, there was no unnecessary
instrumentation fatigue, and there was no regression within the participants. The only potential
threat would be the isolated selection of participants. For this particular experiment, where
results are shared locally, it is the best selection, but if results are carried into academia, they
Independent variable.
The number of checks for understanding given to the treatment group compared to the
no-treatment group was 86% greater overall (see Figure 2). By analyzing each type of check for
understanding and comparing the set as a whole, the weakest applications were minute in
number and should have little to no effect on the end-results. Because the number of checks for
Period 1 4 3 7
# GREATER % GREATER
NO THAN NO THAN NO
TREAMENT TOTAL TREATMENT TOTAL TREATMENT TREATMENT
Oral Language 0 1 1 19 9 28 27 96.43%
Retellings (p 26) 0 0 0 8 5 13 13 100.00%
Think Pair Share (p 30) 0 1 1 11 4 15 14 93.33%
Questioning 0 0 0 53 44 97 97 100.00%
Thumbs Up/Down (p 49) 0 0 0 53 44 97 97 100.00%
Writing 5 7 12 18 13 31 19 61.29%
Read Pair Share (p 64) 1 1 2 1 3 4 2 50.00%
Summary (p 66) 0 1 1 3 1 4 3 75.00%
RAFT (p 67) 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 100.00%
Graphic Organizers (p 87&89) 4 5 9 13 8 21 12 57.14%
Tests 5 6 11 5 5 10 -1 -10.00%
Multiple Choice 3 3 6 3 3 6 0 0.00%
Short Answer 1 2 3 1 1 2 -1 -50.00%
Performance 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 0.00%
TOTALS 10 14 24 95 71 166 142 85.54%
Figure 1. Total Checks for Understanding Applied to Treatment and No-Treatment Groups by
Dependant variables.
Student perception.
The data collected from the 15 question pre-test survey establishes that the treatment and
no-treatment groups are not correlated (p = .71), which is expected. The same survey delivered
after the treatment, resulted in a similar correlation (p = .79), which was unexpected. The
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 12
significance between applying checks for understanding and students’ self-perception of poetic
Comparing treatment to no-treatment groups based on the percent of change from pre-test
to post-test, the no-treatment group, in general, view themselves as better at identifying the seven
poetic terms and improved their personal view toward poetry, which is opposite of the
expectation. Either way, by using checks for understanding or not, by the end of the treatment
period, most students had a more positive view about reading poetry and their understanding of
poetic terms as well. One interesting change is that while the participants who replied ―Disagree
Strongly‖ to ―I like poetry‖, their perception became more positive, but the participants who
replied ―Agree Strongly‖ or ―Agree‖ decreased, and so, the middle became larger. The same is
Don’t
Disagree agree or Agree
Strongly Disagree disagree Agree Strongly
1 I like poetry. -11.80% 10.10% 7.20% -1.40% -4.00%
2 I understand poetry. 0.00% -0.90% 5.00% 4.60% -8.90%
3 I read poems for fun, not necessarily for a grade. -5.70% 6.30% 0.20% 0.40% -1.10%
4 Poetry mirrors people’s emotions. -3.60% -2.70% -1.10% 3.90% 3.60%
5 Poetry mirrors how people think or reason. -5.60% 2.90% -1.20% 1.80% 2.20%
6 Poetic terms are useful. -6.70% -3.60% 6.80% 6.60% -3.10%
7 I understand and can find assonance in a poem. -10.00% -5.10% -10.40% 22.00% 3.50%
8 I understand and can find consonance in a poem. -6.80% -10.10% -21.90% 35.40% 3.40%
9 I understand and can find alliteration in a poem. -3.80% -12.20% -6.30% 22.20% 0.20%
10 I understand and can find rhyme scheme in a poem. -3.90% 0.90% 2.10% -9.30% 10.10%
11 I understand and can find internal rhyme in a poem. -6.10% 0.90% -13.70% 11.00% 7.90%
12 I understand, can find, and name the meter of a poem. -5.50% -7.10% -1.00% 9.20% 4.30%
13 I understand and can find onomatopoeia in a poem. -8.90% -0.60% -13.50% 11.80% 11.20%
14 Poetry has no importance for people. 1.50% 11.70% -4.70% -6.50% -1.80%
15 I would like to read more poetry. -6.60% 4.60% -7.10% 11.10% -2.10%
Figure 2. Percent Change of Student Perception from Pre/Post Survey Results. Highlighted
areas indicate a negative change, where un-highlighted areas are positive increases.
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 13
Vocabulary.
Participants answered seven multiple-choice questions, one for each of the seven poetic
terms studied. The pre-test returned a treatment to no-treatment result of 2%. The post-test
Pre-test Post-test
Mean % Mean %
TREATMENT 3.64 52% 4.85 69%
NO TREATMENT 3.48 50% 3.15 45%
With confidence, the application of checks for understanding does yield a positive effect on
Vocabulary application.
Participants individually identified poetic terms within two given poems. The percent
difference between the treatment and no-treatment groups was 6% with a coefficient rate well
outside the level of acceptance (p = -.33). Applying checks for understand does not yield a
Reading comprehension.
After participants read the poem, ―The Rime of the Ancient Mariner‖ (Coleridge, 2004,
p. 5), they applied their understanding to a multiple-choice and short answer reading
comprehension test. The difference between the percent of total scores of treatment and no-
treatment groups was 12% with a high coefficient (p = -.08) (See Figure 5).
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 14
Answers
With confidence, the application of checks for understanding does yield a positive effect on
reading comprehension.
Limitations.
This study was conducted in English courses at a middle school, so generalizing to other
middle school aged students with a similar demographics in studies of reading or vocabulary
would be applicable. Rural demographics will perhaps limit generalizability. In the area of this
study, the population is mostly Caucasians of middle and lower socio-economic status. Culture
of the western United States tends to differ from the eastern and southern states on family values,
religious beliefs, and political views. Our subgroup populations on standardized testing are
special education and poverty, while nearing the qualifying percentage of American Indians. All
of these factors have potential to affect the generalizability of results from the sample to the
population.
Communication
This information was compiled into a simple but deeply informative website, using
information to my building’s staff. First, this information was shared with our building’s reading
coach and principal, and together we decided how to proceed communicating with the rest of the
staff. We decided I present only highlighted findings where the staff are then directed to the
website for the full details. This allows people at their own desire to go deep into the information
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 15
if interested or just skim if they have little desire. Via the website, the information will always
Participants in the treatment group responded 12% better in reading comprehension and
24% better on the memorized vocabulary knowledge because of the application of checks for
understanding. Although not correlated to the treatment, the students perceive themselves not
understanding and not enjoying poetry as well compared to those in the no-treatment group, but
at the same time, they increased both their understanding and enjoyment of poetry from the
beginning of the treatment period. It should be remembered as Thomas (2009) states: ―The oft-
forgotten real purpose of assessment is to maintain a dialogue around quality that nurtures
important component of learning because it affects confidence, which can effect performance
multiple-choice test, measuring memorization. Yet, the results do not correspond to vocabulary
application, measuring critical thinking, where both groups performed equally. Treatment
participants knew the poetic definitions, but struggled equally with the no-treatment participants
when it came to finding and labeling those same terms in a poem. It may be that applying checks
for understanding will increase standardized test scores in the area of vocabulary, but when it
knowledge using checks for understanding. Because testing should reflect understanding,
teachers should look for another intervention method for students to increase their knowledge of
vocabulary application.
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 16
Applying checks for understanding, like teacher led discussions with increased student
Because reading comprehension is cross-curricular, where students are reading for understanding
in nearly every subject, it would be beneficial for all teachers who have students reading for
Although, the results of applying checks for understanding were not as dramatic as
anticipated, there are positive results. Because the checks for understanding allow the students to
repeat and practice the given skill in multiple formats, students become better memorized in
terminology and reading comprehension. For the expense of retraining and changing teaching
technique, it does pay in student learning. The bottom line is that it does not decrease student
understanding, it can only help. Self-perception may be the exception. Even though self-
perception was not correlated with checks for understanding, something did make the treatment
group’s self-perception lower than the no-treatment group. I suggest there be future testing done
on why when one increases direct instruction techniques, standardized test scores increase, while
student perception and morale decreases. I want students to learn more and more quickly, but
more importantly, I want students to enjoy learning, because curiosity and research are life-long
skills.
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 17
Bibliography
Barlow, D. (2003). The Teachers' lounge. Education Digest, 68(6), Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9088210&s
ite=ehost-live
Bryant, D.P., & Roberts, G. (2010, March 5). Validating a response to intervention
Coleridge, S.T. (2004). The Rime of the ancient mariner and other poems . Mineola,
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2007). Checking for understanding. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2009). Meeting AYP in a high-need school: a
www.interventioncentral.org
www.rti4success.org
www.ecu.edu/
Scott, V.G. (2007). A New trick for the trade: a strategy for keeping an agenda book
10.1177/10534512070420050301
Steckel, B. (2009). Fulfilling the promise of literacy coaches in urban schools: what
does it take to make an impact? in this article, the author uses a case study to
Thomas, L. (2009). Experience to meaning: the critical skills program. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(2),
93-96.
Running head: ACTION RESEARCH ON CHECKS FOR UNDERSTANDING 19