R+Boudreau

//__Key Questions to Check Your Readiness to Develop a Research Plan Document__//

I. What am I trying to do?

a. I want to create a research project in order to find out if there is a correlation between teaching environments and learning styles. This study’s focus is to determine if a hands-on meaningful learning environment fosters appropriate behavior from students in the classroom who display chronic problematic behaviors.

II. Why am I doing this?

a. I believe that students, who are involved in classes that foster hands-on, meaningful learning, demonstrate fewer behavioral issues because they are actively engaged in the classroom environment. This active engagement results in a student who is highly involved and focused in the subject matter, which results in minimal opportunities for the student to take part in problematic behavior.

III. What are the key factors, issues (variables?) about which I will need to collect information; measure a possible change; determine a possible relationship?

a. Is there a high or a low instruction model taking place when the problematic behavior occurs? b. Does the students behavior in the classroom result in a positive or negative behavior when there is a meaningful hands-on learning experience. c. What are the motives for the student’s negative behavior?

IV. Do I need to provide a clear definition of these factors and variables to clarify how they are being applied in my study? (if so what are those operational definitions?)

a. Operational Definitions

i. Lower Structured-the instructional models are more flexible and require the learner to take a more active and responsible role. The instructor/teacher assumes the role of designer, monitor, moderator, facilitator, etc. ii. Higher Structured- instruction models establish stricter, more defined procedures for the learners. The instructor retains ownership and control of most of the key components and pre-determines the methods that will be acceptable in the learning process. iii. Negative student behaviors/outcome are high frequency/low intensity behaviors such as off task behavior, out of seat behavior, inappropriate vocalizations, touching or disturbing others, playing with objects, and non-compliance. (Evertson and Weinstein, 788) iv. Positive student behaviors/outcome are on task behavior, staying in seat behavior, appropriate vocalizations, not touching or disturbing others, not playing with objects, and compliance. v. The learning/task structure is what was expected of the student by the teacher and the required task. vi. Key variables

1. High structure verses low structure instructional models 2. Positive or negative student behavior in the classroom. 3. The motives for the student’s behavior.

V. What 'tools' / procedures will I use to collect the information?

a. To get the student’s, teacher’s and the assistant principal’s perspectives of the events, an interview and/or questionnaire will be performed to determine what was the classroom environment before the event and what led up to an incident. b. A review of any discipline report that is related to the incident.

VI. What steps will I take to do the observing / measuring?

a. Interview the selected students to get their perspective on their behavior and the classroom structure at the time of the incident. b. Interview the selected teachers to get their perspective on the student’s behavior and the classroom structure at the time of the incident. c. Interview the assigned administrator to get their perspective on the student’s behavior and the classroom structure. d. Questionnaire related to the structure of the learning environment and the task. It also will include the motives of the student’s behavior.

VII. Who will be involved?

a. Four students will be chosen that frequently exhibit sporadic negative behaviors in classrooms with various degrees of structure. b. Students that always exhibit positive behavior in the classroom will be excluded from this study. c. Students that always constantly and consistently display negative behavior in all classrooms will be excluded from this study. d. Teachers of the four chosen students that have varied teaching styles and classroom structure. e. The assistant principal of the four chosen students for this study. VIII. Are there any legal, ethical issues that need to be addressed and cleared?

a. All approval has been granted by the principal for this study regarding interviewing the students, teachers, and administrators involved. b. All information found will be kept confidential and will be used only for this study.

IX. When I am completed: WHAT QUESTION(S) WILL HAVE BEEN EXPLORED/ANSWERED?

a. Do at-risk students demonstrate problem behavior equally in all school settings/situations? b. Is there a relationship between classroom structure or problematic/non-problematic behavior with target students?

Review of Related Literature:

The literature demonstrates there is a relation between behavior and student learning styles. Classroom discipline is extremely important to ensure that the transfer of knowledge takes place and that some students exhibit behaviors that can become problematic for the teaching and learning for other students. Walton and Power’s article defines behavior and strategies for correcting or curtailing it. They state there are four common goals for students to exhibit misbehavior. The students are seeking attention, craving power, seeking revenge or have a feeling of inadequacy (6). In the article their opinion is that behavior is contributing to the student’s difficulties and there will be no change in behavior unless the students can see how their behavior is affecting themselves personally (7).

In the classroom setting, teachers are faced with the challenge of ensuring that every child meets academic excellence with learning. Every student strives to learn in various ways, all needing various approaches to be successful in the classroom setting. “The most common and widely used categories of learning styles are Fleming’s VARK model which includes visual learners; auditory learners; reading/writing-preference learners; and kinesthetic learners or tactile learners. Visual learners learn through seeing things such as pictures, visual aids, diagrams, handouts, etc. Auditory learners learn through listening such as lectures, discussions, tapes, etc. Tactile/kinesthetic learners learn through experience such as moving, touching, and doing things including active exploration of the world, science projects, experiments, etc.”(Wikipedia).

Traditional teaching styles (lecture) have been the norm for many years and may work for a percentage of students and better techniques have not replaced old tradition (Dunn 80). Each student has “ unique sensory strengths and limitations, many students are able to learn more and learn it better through visual, tactual or kinesthetic resources rather than through an auditory approach – which is what lecture and discussion is” (Dunn 81). A small percentage of high achieving students learn by listening in class and reading; however, Dunn’s research points out that the lower achieving students are usually kinesthetic or tactual learners (317). When a student who is taught through methods that do not meet their learning styles, they are in fact have become handicapped (Dunn 317). Learning styles can vary depending on the teaching method that is being used, but also can vary depending on the concept or lesson (Gilbert and Swanier 29). “Effective teachers have a wide array of instructional strategies at their disposal. They are skilled in the use of cooperative learning and graphic organizers; they know how best to use homework and how to use questions and advance organizers, and so on. Additionally, they know when these strategies should be used with specific students and specific content” (R. Marzano 3). Gilbert and Swanier discovered that “people have different approaches to learning and studying” and “that students need repetitive instruction while varying the instructional method before mastering each concept” (37). If student’s individual needs are not met from lesson to lesson then Gilbert and Swanier believe “Students often become uninterested and restless during class when there is no correlation between the way students learn and the way instructors teach. Students also become bored and inattentive in class, do poorly on test, get discouraged about the courses, the curriculum and themselves, and in some cases change to other curricula or drop out of school” (30).

Philip Cardon believes that “hands-on learning plays an important role in technology education curriculum” (4). The hands-on learning approach for at-risk students is linked to two other learning styles, construction of knowledge and problem solving (Cardon 3). For example, the construction of knowledge and problem solving theories are linked in the Technology Education classroom when students work through problems. The problem solving and hands-on theory are linked when students work interactively with tools, planning, materials, and processes to solve problems (Cardon 6). In Cardon’s study, he found that it was through the hands-on learning style that students learned best (5). He also found that “five of the eight students mentioned they would not be in school if it were not for successful experiences and hands-on learning activities they experienced in the technology education program (7). Hands-on learning gives all students a sense of instant gratification in that they created a tangible item. For at-risk students, this instant gratification gives them a sense of success and therefore belonging, as well as an incentive to continue learning.

Welton, Smith, Owens, and Adrian concur with Cardon that hands-on learning is beneficial for at-risk behavior students in the science content area classroom. Their study demonstrated that “a hands-on science activity can be very motivating and thereby can increase the effectiveness of behavioral consequence and facilitate classroom control” (2). “The efficiency of hands-on science activities has been recognized in the regular education classroom for some time. Science activities have also been found to be beneficial for students demonstrating behavioral problems. Allen (1976) found that children identified as demonstrating frequent disruptive behavior remained on task 90% of the time during a science activity. Data collection completed by the Whaley Elementary principal revealed that time on-task in a hands-on science program was approximately 90%. Data collected the previous Year at Whaley Elementary with a different teacher and content/style presentation revealed on task behavior for approximately 25% of the observation intervals” (Welton, Smith, Owens, Adrian 2) “Immersing the students with behavioral problems in hands-on science” (Welton, Smith, Owens, Adrian 2), or any other hands-on activities keeps all students actively engaged in learning. In turn, they are less likely to misbehave because their minds are so connected with the curriculum (Welton, Smith, Owens, Adrian 2). This connection is spurred by incorporating hands-on learning in the classroom.

 References

Cardon, Phillip (2000) //At-Risk Students and Technology Education: A Qualitative Study Journal of Technology Studies//: Volume XXVI, Number 1, Winter/Spring 2000.

Cheek, D. (2000) //At-Risk Students and Technology Education: A Qualitative Study//. The Journal of Technology Studies, 1-13.

Dunn, K. &Dunn R. (1978) //Teaching students through their individual learning styles: A practical approach.// Reston, VA: Reston Publishing.

Evertson, Caroline M & Weinstein, Carol S (2006) __Handbook of Classroom Management Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues__. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Gilbert, J. & Swanier, C. (2008) //Learning Styles: How Do They Fluctuate?// Institute for Learning Styles Journal. Volume 1, Fall 2008, 29-39.

“Learning Styles”. (2008). Wikipedia. Retrieved November 8, 2008, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: http://eb,wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles

Marzano, Robert J. (2003) //Classroom Management that Works Research-Based Strategies for Every Teacher//, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Walton, F. & Powers, R. (1974) //Winning Children Over: A Manual For Teachers, Counselors, Principals, and Parents//. Chicago; Practical Psychology Associates.

Welton, E., Smith, W., Owens K., & Adrian, M. (2000, September). //Hands-on Science as a Motivator for Children with Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities.// Journal of Elementary Science Education, 1-5.

Learning Styles and Behavior in the Classroom The purpose of this study is to examine student’s behavior in the classroom setting in relation to their individual learning style. This research study is designed to determine if teaching style in the classroom that addresses each students individual learning style decreases the amount of behavior exhibited by students with chronic behavior problems in the school setting. Teachers who adapt their teaching styles to the learning styles of their behavior students achieve higher learning quality with less disruptive behavior in the classroom than do teachers who only employ one teaching style to all learners. **Review of Related Literature:** The literature demonstrates there is a relation between behavior and students learning styles. Classroom discipline is extremely important to ensure that the transfer of knowledge takes place and that some students exhibit behaviors that can become problematic for the teaching and learning for other students. Walton and Powers article defines behavior and strategies for correcting or curtailing it. They state there are four common goals for students to exhibit misbehavior. The students are seeking attention, craving power, seeking revenge or have a feeling of inadequacy (6). In the article their opinion is that behavior is contributing to the students difficulties and there will be no change in behavior unless the student can see how their behavior is affecting themselves personally (7). In the classroom setting, teachers are faced with the challenge of ensuring that every child meets academic excellence with learning. Every student strives to learn in various ways, all needing various approaches to be successful in the classroom setting. “The most common and widely used categories of learning styles are Fleming’s VARK model which includes visual learners; auditory learners; reading/writing-preference learners; and kinesthetic learners or tactile learners. Visual learners learn through seeing things such as pictures, visual aids, diagrams, handouts, etc. Auditory learners learn through listening such as lectures, discussions, tapes, etc. Tactile/kinesthetic learners learn through experience such as moving, touching, and doing things including active exploration of the world, science projects, experiments, etc.”(Wikipedia) Traditional teaching styles ( lecture) have been the norm for many years and may work for a percentage of students and better techniques have not replaced old tradition(Dunn,80). Each student has “ unique sensory strengths and limitations, many students are able to learn more and learn it better through visual, tactual or kinesthetic resources rather than through an auditory approach – which is what lecture and discussion is” (Dunn,81). The small percentage of high achieving students learn by listening in class and reading, however Dunn’s research points out that the lower achieving students are usually kinesthetic or tactual learners (317). When a student who is taught through methods that do not meet their learning styles, they are in fact have become handicapped. (Dunn, 317) Learning styles can vary depending on the teaching method that is being used, but also can vary depending on the concept or lesson. (Gilbert J, Swanier C, 29). “Effective teachers have a wide array of instructional strategies at their disposal. They are skilled in the use of cooperative learning and graphic organizers; they know how best to use homework and how to use questions and advance organizers, and so on. Additionally, they know when these strategies should be used with specific students and specific content.” (R. Marzano, 3) Gilbert and Swanier discovered that “people have different approaches to learning and studying” and “that students need repetitive instruction while varying the instructional method before mastering each concept” (37). If students individual needs are not met from lesson to lesson then Gilbert and Swanier believe “Students often become uninterested and restless during class when there is no correlation between the way students learn and the way instructors teach. Students also become bored and inattentive in class, do poorly on test, get discouraged about the courses, the curriculum and themselves, and in some cases change to other curricula or drop out of school”(30) Philip Cardon believes that “hands-on learning plays an important role in technology education curriculum” (Cardon 4). The hands-on learning approach for at-risk students is linked to two other learning styles, construction of knowledge and problem solving. (Cardon, 3). For example, the construction of knowledge and problem solving theory are linked in the Technology Education classroom when students work through problems. The problem solving and hands-on theory are linked when students interactively with tools, planning, materials, and processes to solve problems (Cardon, 6). In Cardon’s study, he found that it was through the hands-on learning style that students learned best. (Cardon, 5). He also found that “five of the eight students mentioned they would not be in school if it were not for successful experiences and hands-on learning activities they experienced in the technology education program. (Cardon, 7). Hands-on learning gives all students a sense of instant gratification in that they created a tangible item. For at-risk students, this instant gratification gives them a sense of success and therefore belonging, as well as an incentive to continue learning. [note: tie this together with the idea that unless students are behaving properly they cant use the tools] Welton, Smith, Owens, and Adrian concur with Cardon that hands-on learning is beneficial for at-risk behavior students in the science content area classroom. Their study demonstrated that “a hands-on science activity can be very motivating and thereby can increase the effectiveness of behavioral consequence and facilitate classroom control” (2) “The efficiency of hands-on science activities has been recognized in the regular education classroom for some time. Science activities have also been found to be beneficial for students demonstrating behavioral problems. Allen (1976) found that children identified as demonstrating frequent disruptive behavior remained on task 90% of the time during a science activity. Data collection completed by the Whaley Elementary principal revealed that time on-task in a hands-on science program was approximately 90%. Data collected the previous Year at Whaley Elementary with a different teacher and content/style presentation revealed on task behavior for approximately 25% of the observation intervals” (Welton, Smith, Owens, Adrian, 2) “Immersing the students with behavioral problems in hands-on science”, or any other hands-on activities keeps all students actively engaged in learning. In turn, they are less likely to misbehave because their minds are so connected with the curriculum. This connection is spurred by incorporating hands-on learning in the classroom.  Cardon, Phillip (2000) At-Risk Students and Technology Education: A Qualitative Study Journal of Technology Studies: Volume XXVI, Number 1, Winter/Spring 2000. Cheek, D. (2000) At-Risk Students and Technology Education: A Qualitative Study. The Journal of Technology Studies, 1-13. Dunn, K. &Dunn R. (1978) //Teaching students through their individual learning styles: A practical approach.// Reston, VA: Reston Publishing. Gilbert, J. & Swanier, C. (2008) //Learning Styles: How Do They Fluctuate?// Institute for Learning Styles Journal. Volume 1, Fall 2008, 29-39. Learning Styles. (2008). Wikipedia. Retrieved November 8, 2008, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: http://eb,wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles Marzano, Robert J. (2003) //Classroom Management that Works Research-Based Strategies for Every Teacher//, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Walton, F. & Powers, R. (1974) Winning Children Over: A Manual For Teachers, Counselors, Principals, and Parents. Chicago; Practical Psychology Associates. Welton, E., Smith, W., Owens K., & Adrian, M. (2000, September). “Hands-on Science as a Motivator for Children with Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 1-5.
 * Abstract: **
 * Purpose of the Study: **
 * Research Questions: **
 * Do at-risk students demonstrate problem behavior equally in all school settings/situations?
 * Are there characteristics that differentiate the school settings where their behavior is problematic?
 * Is there a relationship between classroom structure or problematic/non-problematic behavior with target students?
 * Hypothesis: **
 * Summary and Conclusions: **
 * Methods and Procedure: **
 * References: **