While I am very new to research so I don’t have a strong opinion on my “preferred research tradition” quite yet, but I am fairly certain that I will be using the mixed-methods approach for my TIP project. As of now, I think I have narrowed down my research question to be, “How does frontloading Tier 2 vocabulary before interactive read-alouds impact kindergarten students’ understanding and use of new words in oral language?” or something along those lines. I plan to measure my data by the use of Pre/post vocabulary assessments,word use checklists and by taking notes of observations that I make of students showing understanding of use of the vocabulary taught.
My preferred research tradition is action research. I’m drawn to it because it allows me to study and improve my own teaching practice in real time. It gives me the opportunity to investigate challenges, test solutions, and reflect—all while staying grounded in my daily work as a teacher.
My research question is: How can intentionally scaffolded and redesigned science fair structures increase student participation, equity, and authentic engagement in scientific inquiry?
To triangulate my data, I plan to use three key measures. I will gather feedback from students about their experience with the science fair process, including their level of interest, perceived fairness, and sense of belonging. I’ll track changes in the number and diversity of students who submit science fair projects before and after implementing scaffolded supports. Finally, I’ll analyze students’ project planning documents, research progress logs, and final reflections to evaluate growth in inquiry skills and confidence in presenting their work.
How does incorporating high autonomy supportive teaching strategies into my running unit improve motivation, engagement and student lap running time?
Research Tradition
My action research will follow a more traditional action research design. I plan to work with my existing P.E. classes. I hope to incorporate high autonomy supportive teaching strategies into my running unit with the incentive of improving student engagement, motivation and running times. This should include strategies like allowing students more choices (running individually, running partners, or running groups, pacing strategies or allowing students to set their own time goals). I plan to use both a quantitative (lap times) and qualitative (student survey) research design.
Triangulation
To help triangulate my action research I am considering using several classes from one grade level, perhaps all of my 6th grade classes. Since the personalities of students within one class can vary a great deal, I hope to test both pre and post intervention on the same group of students within each class. I will use 3-4 classes. Example: (a) The first half of the trimester I will use my usual teaching strategies. I will include a pre and post lap time and post engagement survey questionnaire. (b) The second half of the trimester I will incorporate my intervention strategies into my classes. I will again include a pre and post lap time and post engagement survey questionnaire. By using the same class, variables within the student population will be reduced. By including several classes, a larger sampling will be provided. Since classes are offered at different times of day, the time of day (first class in morning, class after lunch, etc.) can be considered. By using both quantitative and qualitative data, I hope to increase the validity of the research.
I am still in the process of refining my specific research question but I am interested in exploring how aspects of visual processing relate to reading performance in school-aged children. More specifically, I am considering examining either how visual perception time influences reading speed or comprehension, or how visual sequential memory impacts these same reading outcomes.
Ex. “How does visual perception speed relate to reading speed and/or comprehension in elementary-aged children?”
“How does visual sequential memory ability influence reading speed and/or comprehension in early readers?”
I plan to use a mixed-methods approach with quantitative data for visual perception or visual sequential memory. Reading speed/comprehension would also be quantitative. Along with noting those quantitative measures, I could also record any relevant qualitative notes such such as student engagement or frustration levels, visible signs of confusion or fatigue or any behaviour that may affect performance (e.g., skipping lines, losing place).
In terms of research methods, I usually have more quantitative research methods but am thinking of trying more of a mixed method where I get quantitative data and also observe my subjects.
My research question is “How does saccadic eye movement training affect reading fluency?”
To get my data, I could do the Developmental Eye Movement Test on my participants to see if they have trouble tracking before any training. I can also get an idea of their reading fluency by having them read a passage at their grade’s reading level and counting the average number of words read per minute. Then, I could set up a number of saccadic eye movement training sessions where the Michigan tracking activity can be used to help them practice and get more efficient at their saccades. After that, I could redo the DEM Test and check their reading fluency again to see if there was a change.
I could graph the before and after results from the DEM test and reading fluency to see whether there was an improvement in reading fluency (number of words read per minute) and a lower ratio of adjusted horizontal time vs vertical time.
I will administer a pre- and post-assessment that measures students’ understanding of the target Tier 2 words. This may include matching words to pictures, identifying definitions, or orally using the word in a sentence. This will provide measurable data on the taught vocabulary over time.
Second, I will use an observational checklist to document student use of vocabulary during read-aloud discussions and follow-up activities. I’ll take anecdotal notes on whether students use the target words correctly independently, with prompting, or don’t use them at all. This will help me track how students are applying the words in real-life classroom conversations.
Third, I will incorporate a nonverbal signal system during read-alouds—students will tap their heads when they hear a previously taught Tier 2 word. I will track their responses using a tally sheet to measure real-time word recognition and engagement. This developmentally appropriate method adds another layer of data and allows all students to participate, including those who may struggle with verbal language.
What is your preferred research tradition?
What is your research question?
What measures will you use to triangulate your data?
While I am very new to research so I don’t have a strong opinion on my “preferred research tradition” quite yet, but I am fairly certain that I will be using the mixed-methods approach for my TIP project. As of now, I think I have narrowed down my research question to be, “How does frontloading Tier 2 vocabulary before interactive read-alouds impact kindergarten students’ understanding and use of new words in oral language?” or something along those lines. I plan to measure my data by the use of Pre/post vocabulary assessments,word use checklists and by taking notes of observations that I make of students showing understanding of use of the vocabulary taught.
My preferred research tradition is action research. I’m drawn to it because it allows me to study and improve my own teaching practice in real time. It gives me the opportunity to investigate challenges, test solutions, and reflect—all while staying grounded in my daily work as a teacher.
My research question is: How can intentionally scaffolded and redesigned science fair structures increase student participation, equity, and authentic engagement in scientific inquiry?
To triangulate my data, I plan to use three key measures. I will gather feedback from students about their experience with the science fair process, including their level of interest, perceived fairness, and sense of belonging. I’ll track changes in the number and diversity of students who submit science fair projects before and after implementing scaffolded supports. Finally, I’ll analyze students’ project planning documents, research progress logs, and final reflections to evaluate growth in inquiry skills and confidence in presenting their work.
Research Question
How does incorporating high autonomy supportive teaching strategies into my running unit improve motivation, engagement and student lap running time?
Research Tradition
My action research will follow a more traditional action research design. I plan to work with my existing P.E. classes. I hope to incorporate high autonomy supportive teaching strategies into my running unit with the incentive of improving student engagement, motivation and running times. This should include strategies like allowing students more choices (running individually, running partners, or running groups, pacing strategies or allowing students to set their own time goals). I plan to use both a quantitative (lap times) and qualitative (student survey) research design.
Triangulation
To help triangulate my action research I am considering using several classes from one grade level, perhaps all of my 6th grade classes. Since the personalities of students within one class can vary a great deal, I hope to test both pre and post intervention on the same group of students within each class. I will use 3-4 classes. Example: (a) The first half of the trimester I will use my usual teaching strategies. I will include a pre and post lap time and post engagement survey questionnaire. (b) The second half of the trimester I will incorporate my intervention strategies into my classes. I will again include a pre and post lap time and post engagement survey questionnaire. By using the same class, variables within the student population will be reduced. By including several classes, a larger sampling will be provided. Since classes are offered at different times of day, the time of day (first class in morning, class after lunch, etc.) can be considered. By using both quantitative and qualitative data, I hope to increase the validity of the research.
I am still in the process of refining my specific research question but I am interested in exploring how aspects of visual processing relate to reading performance in school-aged children. More specifically, I am considering examining either how visual perception time influences reading speed or comprehension, or how visual sequential memory impacts these same reading outcomes.
Ex. “How does visual perception speed relate to reading speed and/or comprehension in elementary-aged children?”
“How does visual sequential memory ability influence reading speed and/or comprehension in early readers?”
I plan to use a mixed-methods approach with quantitative data for visual perception or visual sequential memory. Reading speed/comprehension would also be quantitative. Along with noting those quantitative measures, I could also record any relevant qualitative notes such such as student engagement or frustration levels, visible signs of confusion or fatigue or any behaviour that may affect performance (e.g., skipping lines, losing place).
In terms of research methods, I usually have more quantitative research methods but am thinking of trying more of a mixed method where I get quantitative data and also observe my subjects.
My research question is “How does saccadic eye movement training affect reading fluency?”
To get my data, I could do the Developmental Eye Movement Test on my participants to see if they have trouble tracking before any training. I can also get an idea of their reading fluency by having them read a passage at their grade’s reading level and counting the average number of words read per minute. Then, I could set up a number of saccadic eye movement training sessions where the Michigan tracking activity can be used to help them practice and get more efficient at their saccades. After that, I could redo the DEM Test and check their reading fluency again to see if there was a change.
I could graph the before and after results from the DEM test and reading fluency to see whether there was an improvement in reading fluency (number of words read per minute) and a lower ratio of adjusted horizontal time vs vertical time.
To Triangulate Data:
I will administer a pre- and post-assessment that measures students’ understanding of the target Tier 2 words. This may include matching words to pictures, identifying definitions, or orally using the word in a sentence. This will provide measurable data on the taught vocabulary over time.
Second, I will use an observational checklist to document student use of vocabulary during read-aloud discussions and follow-up activities. I’ll take anecdotal notes on whether students use the target words correctly independently, with prompting, or don’t use them at all. This will help me track how students are applying the words in real-life classroom conversations.
Third, I will incorporate a nonverbal signal system during read-alouds—students will tap their heads when they hear a previously taught Tier 2 word. I will track their responses using a tally sheet to measure real-time word recognition and engagement. This developmentally appropriate method adds another layer of data and allows all students to participate, including those who may struggle with verbal language.