University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Implementation of literature circles in a rural high school English class: One teacher's journey of changing student attitudes toward reading

(USC Thesis Other)

Implementation of literature circles in a rural high school English class: One teacher's journey of changing student attitudes toward reading

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content IMPLEMENTATION OF LITERATURE CIRCLES IN A RURAL HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH CLASS: ONE TEACHER’S JOURNEY OF CHANGING STUDENT ATTITUDES TOWARD READING by Mary Anne Hillier A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAL In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION December 2004 Copyright 2004 Mary Anne Hillier Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3155420 Copyright 2004 by Hillier, Mary Anne All rights reserved. INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ® UMI UMI Microform 3155420 Copyright 2005 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. This dissertation written by Mary Anne Hillier Has been approved by The Rossier School of Education In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Doctor of Education David Yaden, Ph.D., Committee Chair Linda Serra Hagedom, Ph.D., Committee Member Robert Rueda, Ph.D., Committee Member Karen Symms Gallagher, Ph.D., Dean Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation could not have been possible without the support and assistance of the following individuals: I. Professors > Dr. David Yaden - Dissertation Chairperson and Advisor > Dr. Linda S. Hagedom - Dissertation Committee Member > Dr. Robert Rueda — Dissertation Committee Member > Dr. Laurie MacGillivray - Professor II. Spanish Fork High School > Timothy Braithwaite, Principal > Ann Dart, English Department Chair > Betty Wyman, Secretary III. Family The loving support of my husband, Richard Hillier, and children, Heather and Ryan, Mike, and Brett The unconditional love of my parents, Ralph and Ruth Andrus Dedicated to the memory of Siti Wisnuwardhni, a dear and caring friend. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table of Contents Acknowledgements........................................................................................ii List of Tables and Figures.............................................................................. v Abstract.........................................................................................................vi Chapter 1 :The Problem and Its Underlying Framework................................1 Introduction..................................................................................................... 1 Background of the Problem.......................................................................... 2 Purpose of the Study.....................................................................................6 Research Question........................................................................................... 7 Significance of the Study................................................................................. 7 Definition of Terms.........................................................................................8 Organization of the Study............................................................................. 9 Chapter 2: Review of the Literature................................................................11 Reader-Response............................................................................................1 1 Concerns..................................................................................................13 Studies Using Reader Response..............................................................15 Conclusion.............................................................................................20 Literature Circles...........................................................................................21 Collaboration.........................................................................................22 Group Size.............................................................................................25 Individual Abilities................................................................................25 Gender...................................................................................................29 Book Choice..........................................................................................30 Conclusion.............................................................................................32 Chapter 3: Methodology.............................................................................. 34 Research Design............................................................................................34 Research Questions.......................................................................................37 Participants....................................................................................................37 Data Gathering..............................................................................................37 Delimitations.................................................................................................39 Time Frame...................................................................................................40 Analysis........................................................................................................ 41 iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 4: Findings....................................................................................... 45 The Findings................................................................................................... 45 Investigated Elements..................................................................................... 46 Book Choice............................................................................................ 46 Group Size............................................................................................... 48 Individual Abilities.................................................................................. 49 Gender...................................................................................................... 50 Collaboration............................................................................................ 50 Implementation Method................................................................................. 51 Preparation for Collaboration................................................................... 51 Introduction of Implementation with New Books.................................... 53 Modified Instruction for Improved Collaboration.................................... 55 Surveys.......................................................................................................... 62 Classroom Activities...................................................................................... 68 Chapter 5: Analysis and Discussion............................................................. 70 Analysis and Discussion................................................................................ 70 Student Ability......................................................................................... 70 Book Choice............................................................................................ 71 Group Size............................................................................................... 72 Gender...................................................................................................... 73 Collaboration................................................................................................. 73 Significance of Study..................................................................................... 80 Implications for Practice................................................................................ 82 Recommendations.......................................................................................... 84 References...................................................................................................... 88 Appendix A Survey and Classroom Activities List.................................. 98 Appendix B Assent Forms....................................................................... 101 Appendix C...Book Preference List..............................................................107 Appendix D... Degree of Reading Power Test Scores..................................109 Appendix E...Reading Attitude Survey Results........................................... 110 Appendix F...Gates/MacGinitie Reading Comprehension Test Results 113 Appendix G...Questionnaire with Answers..................................................114 Appendix H.. .Samples of Student Journals................................................ 120 b iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. List of Tables and Figures Table 1 Preferred Reading Groupings for Students 28 Table 2 Time Frame 40 Figure 1 Literature Circles within the Regular Curriculum 62 Figure 2 Do You Enjoy Listening to Stories That Are Read to You? 63 Figure 3 Do You Enjoy Reading Books That You Have Read Before? 63 Figure 4 Do You Expect To Take an Active Part in Your Reading to Understand And Add Your Own Meaning to the Author’s Message? 64 Figure 5 Do You Expect Reading to Be Challenging But You’re Confident That You Can Overcome the Challenges? 65 Figure 6 Are You Eager to Choose Books on Your Own, Perhaps Choosing Books on New Subjects or By New Authors? 65 Figure 7 Do You Expect Books to Be Part of Your Daily Life? 66 Figure 8 Do You Try to Find Time Or Make Time to Read? 67 Figure 9 Would You Like to Participate in Literature Circles Again? 67 Figure 10 Classroom Activities List 68 v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT This study utilizes teacher research to investigate how to implement literature circles in a rural, middle income, high school English classroom. Through collaboration, the elements of book choice, student ability, gender, and group size were analyzed. It was found that book choice controlled the factors of student ability, gender, and group size within the classroom setting. With the introduction of a new intervention, students needed structure and practice using collaboration. What kind and how much is examined in a detailed account of the daily routine of the class using literature circles. The effect of literature circles as an intervention was investigated through preferred reading activities list and reading attitude survey given before and after the intervention. The effect of literature circles on reading attitudes in a four week period is analyzed. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 1 Introduction th Justin saunters into my 11 Grade English class on the first day of school with a crowd of friends. The group inventories the room and without breaking stride, they begin a beeline for the back comer desks. I block their path to notify them there is a seating chart. They anxiously await my signal of where they each sit as they eyeball who is enrolled in the class. Justin quivers a little as I indicate a front row seat for him as he notices his buddies are scattered everywhere but near him. He is a quiet, well-behaved teenager who goes to school to play baseball and hang out with his friends. He writes on his “Get Acquainted” card that he hates English and never wants to be called on to read aloud. He never reads for enjoyment and says he doesn’t write unless he has to. Justin’s standardized test scores place him in the below average category in reading and writing. He is a “B” student in most other subjects, but receives “C-“ and “D+” in English. He appears to be well-liked and enjoys sports. I want to know what I can do for him during the 65 minutes that I have him each day that will penetrate his perceived abilities and allow him to increase his skills before he leaves high school. Well-meaning teachers before me have tried and have not been successful. What can I do differently that will create a spark for him in the world of language arts that will be meaningful and accessible? Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I begin my journey here. Students in high school continue to struggle with reading. Many have learned sophisticated methods to function within the classroom without increasing their skills. They will not be prepared for the workplace or higher education goals. Membership in structured groups is very important in society. Because an adolescent's values and position on education may be strongly influenced by his or her peer social group, the values of the group can be key to a student's development (Vygostky, 1978). Literature circles are an intervention that can capitalize on students’ social structures and incorporates literacy skills. Background of the Problem Many students are not at their grade level in reading ability. Forty- two percent of the students are below grade level according to the Stanford 9 Reading Test in 11th grade in the State of Utah (USOE, 2003). The Degrees of Reading Power test indicate that 55% of the students in 11th grade in Nebo School District in Spanish Fork, Utah, are below their grade level in reading ability (Nebo School District, 2003) (see Appendix D for individual class scores). Students in high school have perfected ways to “fake read” in order to pass their classes (Tivoni, 2000). The time and effort expended to avoid reading is time and effort that could be used to learn the skills. Students are going to need to be able to read at a higher level than ever in order to be successful in the future job market and to function in their community (Alvermann, 2001). Teachers are struggling to meet student needs and are looking for interventions that can encourage engagement. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Literature circles could be a method to meet both student and teacher needs as society demands higher literacy skills. By the time students have reached high school, they have been labeled in academic categories. No matter what the stereotype, many students have found ways to adapt successfully to maintain that position with as little effort as possible. What can be done in the classroom environment that can increase the reading skills for all students regardless of their ability or the cultural expectations of their group? Oldfather & Dahl (1994) “assert that intrinsic motivation for literacy learning is defined by and originates in the sociocognitive and affect processes that learners experience as they engage in the social construction of meaning” (p. 140). The learning centered perspective includes both the individual and social construction of learning with the added dimension of individual development levels. McCombs (1996) “skill, will, and social support” theory evolves around the individual learner’s perspective. Students need ability, desire, and interaction with others for learning to be meaningful. Studying how to implement literature circles will focus on the social support needed for constructing meaning for students. With active participation while reading, students’ comprehension is higher (Gerla, 1996). Gerla found six factors that contributed to reading engagement for junior high English students: 1) immersion in reading and writing, 2) social interaction, 3) response, 4) ownership and control, 5) time, and 6) risk-free environment. Gerla’s experience with three at-risk boys using these six factors had 3 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. positive affects as recorded through the boys’ written responses. Their previously held expectation of being non-readers was beginning to change. Studies on cognition and learning include the individual social and environmental factors (Greeno, Collins, & Resnick, 1996). These factors that are theorized need to be used in practice to become useful to the student. Both researchers and practitioners agree that the discussions between teachers and students and students and students may be central to reading success (McCarthey, 1994). Utilizing the social and environmental factors to enhance classroom learning using literature circles is the purpose of this research. Several studies (Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997; Baker & Wigfield, 1999; Hynd, Holschuh & Nist, 2000) found that social support was not statistically significant indicating that use of interventions such as literature circles might not be as useful as they had hoped they would be. The social aspect of motivation was not acknowledged in Hynds et al. (2000) study. The authors explained this phenomenon could be due to the lack of group work and lack of emphasis on social learning by the classroom teachers in their school experiences. Social aspects of learning have not been a part of the traditional school culture. Wigfield & Guthrie (1997) explained the outcome as a result of the relatively new concept of social motivation and suggested more research was needed. This study of literature circles is meant to further the understanding of social interventions. It will give insight into the roles of the varied elements necessary in implementing literature circles. Chang-Wells & Gordon Wells (1993) said “a great deal of learning that occurs in these classrooms takes place as students work together collaboratively. It is at points of negotiation of meaning in 4 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. conversation that learning and development occur, as each learner’s individual psychological processes mediate (and at the same time are mediated by) the constitutive intermental processes of the group. Furthermore, the group’s constitutive processes are organic, as the locus of control shifts according to differential expertise as well as the ongoing change in participants’ understanding as the conversation unfolds. In sum, we have treated complete, contextualized episodes of conversation as the minimal units for cultural-cognitive analysis” (p. 84-86). This study of literature circles in a regular English classroom will allow for a larger, continued conversation on how to implement collaborative learning environments. Guthrie et al. (2000) found that the important variable to influence increased reading performance is engagement. Included in successful engagement is social interaction by collaborating with peers. Through peer interaction students can increase achievement, higher-level cognition, and intrinsic motivation (Gambrell & Morrow, 1996). Damon (1984) suggested five reasons that peer collaboration would be successful for learning: 1) peers speak at the same level, 2) peers are more likely to question a peer than an adult, 3) they take each other’s suggestions seriously, 4) they want to understand the meaning behind the conflict, 5) peers are less threatening than adults. These reasons give evidence to the importance of developing successful peer groups for enhanced understanding. Literature circles create an environment where peer collaboration can be experienced. In a survey by McKenna et al. (1995), they found that reading motivation decreased beginning in 2n d grade. Kindergarten children enter school excited to learn and curious about the academic environment. By first grade this enthusiasm begins 5 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to taper off and interest wanes as the school years continue. There are many factors that need to be acknowledged as part of the reading success for students such as reading development (Chall, 1996), motivation (Pintrunk & Schunk, 2002), family expectations (Brause & Meyher, 2003), and cultural expectations (Lewis, 2000). This paper will explore an intervention that involves the classroom environment through investigating the roles of group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice using collaboration. Purpose of the Study Alvemmann noted the importance of classroom instruction using multiple forms of texts used for a variety of purposes in different contexts (2001). Teachers need procedures that will meet the needs of students in diverse ways. Rosenblatt’s Reader-response theory gives a student an identity, a position in the reading formula that listens to her voice as she reads. This theory recognizes the reality of the reader bringing her background, feelings, and purposes to the text as the words are read in the material. Reader-response is a theory that gives authority to the reader and personal meaning to text that is recognized and accepted. Learning is social (Vygotsky, 1978). By allowing students to discuss their reading in an organized, outlined manner where students can express their opinions openly and learn from other’s perspectives, they can gain confidence and purpose in their own reading where interests and skills will increase. One intervention to engage students is literature circles. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The purpose of this study is to examine how to implement literature circles with high school juniors. Through investigating the aspects of group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice in literature circles, implementation can become a viable intervention. This study will give teachers wanting to incorporate literature circles in the classrooms at the high school level background information in which to base their decisions. With this purpose in mind, the following question has been developed to create a study for more in depth understanding of elements of implementing literature circles. Research Questions 1. What issues are pivotal to the implementation of literature circles such as group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice with collaboration using reader-response for the first time in a high school English class? 2. What is the impact of literature circles on student attitudes toward reading? Significance of the Study Much research in the elementary and middle school level has shown that literature circles increases reading comprehension (Daniels, 2002b). There has been little research done on the high school level of the effect of literature circles. This study will indicate the effect of the elements of group size, individual abilities, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. gender, and book choice using collaboration on the implementation of literature circles at the high school level. The attitude that students have about reading when they leave high school stays with them through adulthood (McKenna et al., 1995). It is important to find a method to reach more students in a significant and meaningful way. Knowing how to implement literature circles can be a resource for high school teachers across the country. Definition of Terms Implementation: This term will be used to mean to carry out or put in to practice an intervention. Intervention: This term will be used to mean to place into a classroom curriculum to modify the current practices. Literature Circles: This term will be used to indicate a small group of students gathered to discuss a piece of literature in depth. Reader-response: This term will be used to indicate the meaning that a reader creates from “the transaction between the text and the reader within specific context” (Rosenblatt, 2003). Teacher/Research: This term will used to mean systematic and intentional inquiry how to improve practice for increased learning in a teacher’s classroom setting (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993). 8 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Organization of the Study Chapter 1 of the study has presented the introduction, the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the question to be answered, the significance of the study, and the definitions of terms. Chapter 2 is a review of relevant literature. It addresses the following topics: Reader-Response, concerns, studies, and conclusion; Literature Circles as an intervention using collaboration, and investigation of group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice, and conclusion. It includes a theoretical framework to explain the overview of the implementation of literature circles in a high school classroom. Chapter 3 presents the methodology used in the study, including the research design; participants; and data gathering, delimitations and time frame; conclusion. The chapter goes on to describe the procedures for data collection and the plan for data analysis. Chapter 4 explains the findings for implementing literature circles including the impact of book choice, group size, gender, and individual abilities. Collaboration will be viewed within the introduction, preparation, and modified instruction of placing literature circles in a regular English classroom curriculum. The surveys and questionnaires given before and after the intervention will be examined along with a classroom activity preference sheet for further investigation of students’ reactions to literature circles. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 5 analyzes and discusses the findings and explains the significance of the study. It will give specific implications for practice and recommendations for further study concerning implementation of literature circles in a high school classroom. 10 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 2 Reader-response Reader-response is a theory that incorporates student’s needs with participation in literature circles. Louise Rosenblatt’s transactional theory creates meaning from a text that “derives from a transaction between the text and reader within a specific context” (Beach, 1993 p. 165). “The reader approaches the text with a certain purpose, certain expectations or hypotheses that guide her choices from the residue of past experiences. Meaning emerges as the reader carries on a give-and- take with the signs of the page” (Rosenblatt, 1995, p. 26). The reader finds meaning from her background, her emotional state, her expectations of the text, and the circumstances under which she is reading. The text has different meanings depending on the time and circumstances that a reader engages in the reading. Through teacher challenges and group discussions, students are stimulated to search for varied meanings and new understandings. New interests are sparked and more research is undertaken as students become involved in the reading (Rosenblatt, 1995). Rosenblatt feels that “teachers of language and literature have a crucial role to play as educators and citizens. We phrase our goals as fostering the growth of the capacity for personally meaningful, self-critical literary experience. The educational process that achieves this aim most effectively will serve a broader purpose the nurturing of men and women capable of building a fully democratic society. The prospect is invigorating!” (p. 297). Literature circles are one intervention that serves this purpose. 11 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Depending on the type of text and the purpose of the text, the outcome will fall on a continuum of an aesthetic or efferent experience. The type of text has little effect on the type of experience the reader has. Any text can be read for different outcomes (Rosenblatt, 1995). Rosenblatt explains the constructive nature of reading as opposed to the interaction where the text gives the meaning to the reader. She theorizes that both text and the reader have social origins and social effects. She suggests “ultimately any literary work gains its significance from the way in which the minds and emotions of particular readers respond to the linguistic stimuli offered by the text” (p. 28). What the reader brings to the text from previous experiences, personality traits, expectations, current feelings, and emotions, create a different read and understanding from the same text. The variety in literary works mingling with the variety among the readers suggests the individual nature of the process of reading. This transaction that creates a dynamic field for both the reader and the text has to be recognized by those involved in the task of assisting people in reading comprehension at all levels. With this individualized approach to reading comprehension, how do teachers guide students into meaningful, legitimate understanding of text? The authoritative, omnipresent, one-answer text is gone and an instructor needs to reevaluate the ready-made answers and the ready-made judgments. The student needs to become aware of her response to the text with a critical eye to the influence of the culture, the time period, and the societal issues such as religion have on her ultimate reaction to the text. But the transaction equally involves the text. 12 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Rosenblatt acknowledges that students need to be aware of the text and the preconceptions and prejudices they bring to their interpretations. They need to understand their own biases as well as the author’s to create a valid and defensible interpretation. Readers are given the luxury of determining the meaning of the text in a personalized, affective manner with equal emphasis on the text where the words and concepts are placed for a specific purpose. Concerns One of the challenges of Rosenablatt’s reader-response theory is the recognition of the varied responses depending on the specific social, historical, or cultural contexts. Beach (1993) has divided these different perspectives in to five categories to represent the different angles that highlight particular aspects: textual, experiential, psychological, social, and cultural. All of these perspectives focus on meaning making on a personal level. A teacher could illicit questions for students to examine from the different perspectives to create a more diverse spectrum for students to consider as they struggle with the transaction between the text and themselves. These categories create a complex view of assimilating reader response theory. The complexity could discourage the high school reader. Lewis (2000) is concerned that Rosenblatt did not acknowledge the social and political influences as critical areas that cannot be defined within the individual. She also argues that the text is also forming readers as much as readers are forming text. She contends that the aesthetic stance can work against the reader if she relies totally on personal experience. There is danger of focusing on the emotional 13 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. reaction, which steers the reader away from the text. Peer collaboration could assist in bringing readers back to the text. Seib (1995) also has reservations about reader-response. He fears that some theorists take the idea of the reader being the soul finder of meaning too far. The attitude that the “text is simply a conglomeration of meaningless codes which can be encoded any way an individual reader sees fit” (pg. 274) gives too much power to the reader. The concept that a text can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean does not fit with Rosenblatt who stresses the transaction of both reader and text. Seib argues that reader-response which encourages independent thinking also discourages the discovery of the path of truth. It emphasizes self-evaluation, not agreement with fact or reality. It places the teacher in a nonauthoritative role so he can no longer expose the knowledge he has in understanding text but is lowered to a position of mediator. Seib states that reader-response rewards the ignorant and punishes the gifted by placing critical statements on equal footing making every statement valuable or valueless depending on how the reader chooses to view them. Not to guide students into correct understanding of the meaning of the text is doing everyone a disservice. Lewis and Seib are critics who appear to have failed to read the reader- response theory in detail enough to see the importance of text in the creation of meaning. Perhaps their negative leanings are toward the more student-centered theories where an individual is the one-sided partner who does give meaning to the text (Wilhelm et al., 2001). This subjective textuality does empower the reader to 14 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. render an interpretation that is based on her own understanding and ideas without reference to the text. Literature circles could be one intervention that could give students a variety of input in which to challenge the thinking of each student in the group if the literature circle is implemented correctly. Tompkins (1997) discusses the recursiveness of reader-response theory. Through discussion with all types of readers including the teacher, new ideas are explored that assist readers to see several perspectives of the same text. It is dialogue and explanations that allow the reader to rethink and reevaluate her own reading response. The text becomes a living work of art to allow a student to see, think, and feel (Probst, 1994) and reevaluate. Robert Scholes feels “we do well to read our lives with the same intensity we develop from learning to read our texts (1989, p. 19). Studies Using Reader-Response Ron Luce (1992) uses Rosenblatt’s reader-response theory after observing the fact that it addresses both the value of a reader and the value of the text. With his technical college students in a writing course, he read Robert Frost’s “Mending Wall.” Students responded in writing their impressions as he read the poem to them from an overhead line by line. The students wrote papers concluding with a summary and a comment on a personal mending wall. Some comments were very literal while others were personal and self-reflective. “The top of the wall faces the sun” was a literal comment made by Student A, while Student C wrote, “There are things that don’t like barriers.” After students were grouped together to discuss their notes, one 15 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. grouped synthesized the meaning by indicating that the “neighbor can’t break the wall down because he is locked in by tradition. He won’t change, or see the light” (p.71). An example of a marriage relationship was given to show that the husband after much explanation was finally able to see the light and change. Rosenablatt assures that “such an effort to consider texts always in relation to specific readers and in specific cultural situations, and to honor the role of literacy experience in the context of individual lives has powerful educational implications” (Karolides, 73). Luce moved the students from a literal restatement of the text’s lines to concrete examples from their own lives. Then he moved to a revision of their examples when tested against the actual text. This arbitration between acceptable interpretation based on personal experiences and text authority creates a divide that is almost impossible to close. Rabinowitz (1988) addresses this issue when he states, “There will always be a gap between the actual and the authorial audience. There will always be references we do not understand, expectations we do not meet, attitudes we do not share, experiences we have missed. Any reading will therefore, of necessity, be imperfect. In part because we are interested in different kinds of interpretive communities, Michael (co-author) and I often differ on where to draw the line between the imperfect and the unacceptable”( p. 6). In a classroom setting, literature circles could be a means of closing the gap. Soles (1995) set out to illustrate the benefits of reader-response with 60 first year literature students in a two-year community college. They read Emily Dickenson’s poem “I Like To See It Lap the Miles.” Students were asked to explain 16 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. what the pronoun “it” meant using evidence from the text. Twenty-two students identified the pronoun as a horse, ten thought it was a river, ten others thought it was a car, five described it as the wind, three thought it was the sky, and two the sun. These varied answers were thought to have evidence from the text to support their answers. All these answers could not be acceptable according to Rabinowitz. That would create too loose of acceptable interpretations and place meaning in a free for all. Soles feels justified in accepting all answers that have some justifiable evidence in the text even if the answer is far from the critical standard. He feels justified and even wants to encourage and reward other readings. He uses the widespread accepted form of reader-response as his #1 reason for rationalizing these interpretations. His second line of reasoning is that students don’t feel their interpretations are valued, so he must validate many answers to empower students to make their own judgments on meaning of texts. His third reason is it champions creative and independent thinking (Soles, 1995). The dangers posited by Rabinowitz are realized in this study. Students need to recognize the limitations of their understanding and find the transactional meaning through both the text and their own understanding. The need for an intervention becomes apparent when a text interpretation veers too far off. A comparative study was made in a traditional 7th grade English class and a reader-response oriented class of the same age using Emily Dickensen’s poem “A Bird Came Down the Walk” (Karolide, 1992). Ms. Johnson prepared her lesson on this poem by visiting the library to find critical articles to help her students better 17 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. understand the work. She created quizzes that students would take after a close reading of the material. She would furnish a study guide to assist the students to the accurate analysis. Mrs. Graham, the instructor in the reader-response classroom, felt that asking teenagers to listen to a teacher about literature was the worst way for students to learn to interact with text. She felt that students would learn more if they were looking for answers to their own questions instead of answering someone else’s questions. Ms. Johnson’s class discussion developed into an oral quiz with students answering Ms. Johnson’s questions with what they felt Ms. Johnson wanted to hear. “So does the poet look down on the bird because it ate the worm instead of admiring it?” Dana questioned in Ms. Johnson’s class. “No, of course not. Because the poet is sensitive to nature, she knows that the bird is what it is. Notice how she compares the bird’s flight to butterflies.” The class is quiet. Sam speaks up, “Well, the beetle may have been watching the bird. Maybe even the poet.” “But we don’t know that, do we Sam? The poet doesn’t tell us.” “No,” Sam says sullenly. “We have to be careful to stick with what the poet actually says. So did we miss anything?” “No,” several students call out.“But we did,” Ms. Johnson says. “We forgot that the poet was watching herself.” 18 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. In Mrs. Graham’s class, students are also discussing bird watching. “Anyone else watching anyone else?” Mrs. Graham asks. The class is silent. “Well, I’m going to make a list of everyone in the poem who watched anyone else. Anyone else who wants to, can.” “Okay, who will share with us?” One student reads his exhaustive list. Anne says, “Can you watch yourself, Mrs. Graham?” Sally says, “We all watch ourselves.” Mike says, “Who in the poem was watching itself? The worm? Nah. The beetle? Nah. The bird? Nah. So who else is there?” Several students shout out, “Emily.” The merger of Mrs. Graham’s class with both reader and text creates a more meaningful experience for students and ends with the critical reading of Ms. Johnson’s class. The difference in the two discussions of the poem is the types of questions and the control of the answers. Traditional classrooms are filled with eager students trying to find the questions the teacher wants. Reader-response classrooms find students answering their own questions or their peer’s questions. Teacher’s roles are to guide and direct but do not directly answer questions to arrive at a certain answer. To allow students to be active creators of questions and answers is difficult for teachers taught with the new critical theory. Rosenblatt compares it to 19 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. a musical score. Two violinists never play the same piece in the same way, yet they are true to the score. Being true to a literary work is as essential as it is to music. Conclusion Reader response theory is emerging as a viable alternative to New Criticism (Rosenblatt, 2003). As literacy teachers become familiar with this theory, they will need to give up the time-honored authority, tight-control mentality. They will need to give more responsibility to students. According the Information Processing Model (Bruning et al., 1999), this will take concerted effort on the part of teachers to conscientiously change their teaching style. It is interesting to note that the current McDougal Littell English anthology for high school seniors (1994) has “Special Features” for each reading selection. “Respect for Your Experiences” is one feature in the section. It is based on students’ previous experiences with the subject. It is presented to aid the students in thinking about what they already know, so they can relate to the reading. There is also a “Personal Response” section that begins with “Unlike literature texts that ask you unimportant questions about minor details in a piece of literature, Literature and Language focuses on your unique personal response to what you have read... It is important to understand that there are never “right” or “wrong” answers to these questions. Any thoughtful response is acceptable as long as it can be supported by examples or evidence from the text” (p. 6). Reader-response theory is finding its way in to the English curriculum across the United States as textbooks respond to the current, accepted theory. 20 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. To create an environment for students to flourish as independent thinkers, to function in a democratic society, and feel confident in their reading abilities, reader- response theory is the most viable. It can be utilized in literature circles as teachers learn how to implement this intervention. Teachers need to be well versed in the philosophy behind the theory in order to implement it effectively. Caution needs to be used in allowing any interpretation offered, as well as continuing the too narrow focus of only one correct interpretation. As teachers become aware of the power of this theory, its effectiveness will spread for the benefit of students across the United States in secondary English classrooms. Literature Circles Teacher research that will be used in this study gives a clear vision of how to implement literature circles as it focuses on the collaborative process of reader- response for increased learning for students (Daniels, 2002b). Teachers need to be reflective and use varied forms of evaluation to reach the needs of the class during group learning. Reading achievement is increased with the use of peer-group work (Slavin,1989). Literature circles include several dimensions that research needs to study. These dimensions are sheltered under the umbrella of engagement that is fostered through collaboration. Group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice are the four elements that will be studied to implement literature circles in a high school classroom. The National Standards for the English Language Arts sponsored by the National Council of Teachers of English and International Reading Association in 21 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1996 endorsed literature circles through encouragement of collaborative, literature- based classrooms. They endorsed choice of reading, time for reading, and discussion of books and other texts (Daniels, 2002a). Collaboration Literature circles or book groups are based on collaborative group work that increases comprehension and student involvement (Daniels, 2002). Brabham and Villaume (2000) explain student engagement is increased with the use of literature circles. Through ownership of the reading material and creating meaningful understanding of it, literature circles show students how to inquire for themselves what is happening in the text and their own interpretation of that action. In Gary Paulsen’s The Winter Room (1991) he states, “If books could have more, give more, be more, show more, they would still need readers, who bring to them sound and smell and light and all the rest that can’t be in books. The book needs you” (p. 3). Through literature circles, readers together add sound, smell, and lights. Readers reflect on their feelings and attitudes entwined with those of their peers (Faman, 1996). Faman continues with the idea that when literature becomes an experience, it creates a lasting impression. These lasting impressions allow students to make connections with new ideas and information that develops into competent, critical readers. These connections are developed through conversations with others about the reading (Faman, 1996). Gambrell and Morrow (1996) defined the engaged reader as one who is motivated, knowledgeable, strategic, and socially interactive. They also 22 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. found that motivation was connected with interactions with others about books. With active participation while reading, a student’s comprehension is higher (Gerla, 1996). Students are able to share their own interests and become experts in their own right. This automatically increases motivation and engagement. Wigfield and Guthrie (1997) found that the important variable to influence increased reading performance is engagement. Included in successful engagement is social interaction by collaborating with peers. Through peer interaction students can increase achievement, higher-level cognition, and intrinsic motivation (Gambrell & Morrow, 1996). This study will examine how to implement literature circles to foster collaboration. Literature circles offer the ingredients most prevalent in successful reading programs found by various researchers. Alvermann et al., (1996) found that action by the teacher creates an environment that allows for successful literature circles where students can respond with their own personal outlook and learn from the students in the group. Social interaction creates an opportunity for students to exchange ideas and hear other’s ideas that take them beyond what they thought possible. The whole becomes larger than the sum of the parts (Spiegel, 1998). In an 8th grade Language Arts class, Dera, the teacher, found students preferred working in small groups early in the year. “As John put it, ‘I kind of like those small groups because you don’t have to fight over, you don’t have to wait and wait and wait and wait before you have a chance to talk. You only have like five 23 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. people in the group and everybody is close enough to hear you, so you just kind of say your thing when you feel like it’” (Alvermann, 1996, p. 254). In a sophomore global studies class where the teacher led discussion groups were more frequent, the students also preferred small groups with the exception of two students who wanted the teacher answers. Wilhelm et al. (2001) emphasizes the need for the classroom to be a “public space for growing through collaborative participation” (p. 103). Oldfather & McClaughlin (1993) found that a key condition that related to student decline in engagement when they entered junior high was the diminishing relationships that occurred from moving from self-contained responsive classrooms to a teacher-centered environment where there were fewer opportunities for self- expression or interaction with teachers or peers. The new culture was not as responsive as the old culture to their changing, adolescent needs. It becomes apparent that secondary teachers need to reevaluate the classroom environment and establish a more sensitive climate for student success. The following list suggests the importance of collaboration in adolescent learning: 1. Understand student’s needs, interests and goals 2. Provide opportunities for students to be self-directed in learning activities, expressing themselves, and mastering skills they feel are important 3. Provide learning environments that are rich in text and ideas 4. Celebrate accomplishments 24 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 5. Provide collaboration with peers, community, and others in meaningful literate activities (McCombs, 1996; Oldfather & Wigfield, 1996; Gambrell & Morrow, 1996) Learning how to implement literature circles can address these needs. Group Size Group size has an overall impact on the success of the group. Webb & Palinscar (1996) indicate that using four-person groups is the most productive. It was found that in groups of three, students often ignored each other’s questions; but in groups of four, this seldom happened. Larger groups made it easier for students to opt out of their responsibilities, and other group members would fill in to make up the difference. Hill et al., (2003) found that four or five students worked well in groupings. Noll (1994) had students meet in groups of two to six members. Students finding other students interested in the same topic or book formed the groups. Hill et al., (2003) was hesitant in allowing students to create their own groups for not only group size, but also to avoid popularity contests and peer judgment issues. Individual Abilities Webb and Palinscar (1996) found “the research on the effect of group composition on group processes and learning outcomes shows that the make up of a collaborative group has profound implications for the experiences of students in it” (p. 860). As groups are formed, teachers need to be aware of as many aspects of the students as possible. “A sociocultural approach to mind begins with the assumption 25 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. that action is mediated and that it cannot be separated from the milieu in which it is carried out” (Wertsch, 1991, p. 18). With the culture of the students in mind, group dynamics can be focused on to create a meaningful learning environment. Au & Kawakawi (2002) acknowledge the importance of teachers altering the classroom organization to improve student chances of success through recognition of cultural norms. Peer relationships and peer group norms need to be analyzed to meet the needs of the students from their cultural perspective. Through collaboration students can learn from each other’s cultures and meanings that give more depth to the reading. By teaching students to rely on each other instead of the teacher for answers, they will gain confidence in themselves and in their peers. Collaborative learning research has shown benefits in increased scores on reading comprehension achievement tests, increased self-esteem, greater acceptance of others, and decrease in dependence on the teacher (Wood et al., 1997). Cultural norms for individuals within the classroom need to be acknowledged and acted upon. Lou et al., (1996) found that within-class groups does increase student learning, but the type of learning is impacted by the size of group, the tasks involved, and individual members of the groups. Cohen (1984) found that the status of students in the groups affects the interaction within the group. A student perceived as having more academic ability will become more active and influential even if the task doesn’t rely on academic ability to be successful. Students of low academic ability will take a passive role adding little to the group outcomes if interventions or training is not included in the preparation for the group assignment. 26 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Group dynamics is critical to literature circles success. Research differs on what type of grouping is the most successful. Lou et. al., (1996) found homogenous groups were more successful in the middle-achieving students. Heterogeneous groups were more effective when using high achieving students with low achieving students. More academically capable students found themselves in a more authoritative roll with the less capable students. The lower achieving students felt confidence in the other students and together they were able to improve the learning for each other. Bums (1998) reported that middle school students preferred working in mixed-ability groups. Slavin found no research that compared small ability groups with total class instruction in non-ability grouped classrooms (Barr, 1995). Barr attributes this to traditional style of reading instruction where the class is divided into three groups: high, middle, and low. Research shows a marked difference in the reading instruction between the three leveled groups with the low group receiving noticeably less reading time, more attention on worksheets with skill emphasis and decoding, not comprehension, focused on. These lower ability groups lost confidence and motivation to read. Juel’s (1988) study had one low-level fourth grader report his attitude toward reading in an ability grouped setting this way: “I would rather clean the mold around the bathtub than read” (p. 442). Schafer and Olega (Barr, 1995) had a junior high student who had experienced being in a pullout, low-level reading group report her feelings: “I felt good when I was in my class, but when they went and separated us—that changed us. That changed our ideas, our thinking, our way 27 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. we thought about each other, and turned us into enemies toward each other—because they said I was dumb and they were smart” (p. 62). Elbaum et al., (1997) surveyed 549 3rd -5th grade students to find their preferences in reading groupings. They found that students preferred mix-ability grouping to ability grouping, classroom discussion, or individual seatwork. On a scale of 1 to 4 with 4 being the highest, mixed ability groups received a 4, same ability groups received a 1, whole class received a 3 and working alone received a 2. This report also responded to how the students perceived the frequency their teachers used different groupings. Whole class instruction received a 4, students working alone received a 4, group work received a 2, and pairs received a 1. It is interesting to note that students perceived they learned more from each other in mixed-ability groups than same ability groups. They understood the reading about the same, but they enjoyed being in a mixed-ability group and felt they learned more. Barr (1995) says, “If we are serious about our goal to have all students love reading, ability groups would seem to be counter productive” (p. 19). Table 1 -Reading Groupings of Students Mixed-Ability Group Ability Group (Pair Group) Whole Class Alone Reading Instruction Grouping 4 1 3 2 Frequency o f Use of Instruction Grouping 2 (1) 4 4 (Elbaum et al., 1997) 28 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. For implementation of literature circles, individual abilities need to be seriously considered for each student. Gender To create the most effective groupings, teachers need to be aware of the effects of status, not only in ability but involving race, gender, or ethnicity. Webb and Palinscar (1996) found that to intentionally form groups with equal numbers of male and females or any other criteria was not productive. Awareness of the dynamics of the individuals in the group and their ability to be successful needs to be the focus. MacGillivray et. al., (1995) indicates the complexity of understanding peer relationships. Lucy, one of the authors and a literature circle participant, said, “.. .gender make-up of the group makes a big difference in my willingness to share personal reactions and experiences. Certainly it isn’t the only factor, but it’s a big one along with many other perceived similarities with other group members that make communication easier” (p. 38). Other concerns voiced by the authors were second language problems and familiarity with other group members. The need to feel comfortable in a literature circle with all group members is critical to the success of the discussion which leads to more engaged readers and increased comprehension. Alvermann et al., (1996) found in an 11th grade US history class, the teacher allowed students to discuss assignments in small groups, but the students opted to work alone or in pairs. When asked why he thought students chose not to participate in groups, Rico, a student in the class, attributed it to ethnic and racial biases. Students don’t want to discuss things with others who are different. When personal 29 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. responses are encouraged, students do not always respond. This reinforces MacGillivray’s research that groupings need to include individuals who are compatible, not just anyone in the class. Wilkinson (1998) found the magnitude of the gender gap for comprehension varied across schools. He found the distinguishing factor was the teacher’s ability to handle diversity. He found the teachers with more education, who had rich literacy environments, and frequently assessed students’ progress to address needs were closing the gender gap. In a study by Anderman (2001), 570 3rd , 4th , and 6th graders of 95% European American descent from lower to middle class socioeconomic backgrounds found gender was unrelated to changes in the reported valuing of reading and math. The authors felt that classroom variations could play a role in determining changes in tV i th students’ achievement values more than gender differences during 4 -7 grade. This study indicates that gender differences can be nullified through the use of interventions such as literature circles. Book Choice Schraw et al., (1998) noted that most people feel that book choice plays an important role in reading comprehension. Calloway’s study in 1981 asked college students to reflect on what classroom practice was most motivating for them in elementary school. The most common answer was choice of reading material. One student wrote, “In fourth grade my teacher allowed us to go to the reading comer after we finished our work and pick out a book and read.” Another student 30 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. mentioned, “The librarian ‘turned me on’ by letting me readjust about anything I wanted” (p. 216). Several articles have been written to justify this position, but there is little empirical evidence. Similarly, Cone (1994) stated that in her high school English class, the majority of the students found book choice selection an important element in creating interest in reading. This allowed for students to investigate an interest with a specific author or genre. It also built confidence. Kandi, a student in Cone’s class, wrote, “After I finish a book, I feel as if I’m whole different person. I don’t know how to explain it, but I feel powerful, like I’m getting smarter or something” (p. 471). In the 2002 NAEP Reading Report Card, it showed that fourth grade students who had choice of reading material in school scored higher on reading achievement tests than those without choice (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2003). Students in the eighth and twelfth grades did not show this result. In contrast, Schraw et al. (1998) study of the effect of choice on cognitive and affective engagement during reading with that of 164 college undergraduates found there was a positive effect on the affective perceptions when given choice compared to the group that was denied choice. But there was no effect on the control group. Their conclusion was that it seems prudent to temper claims about the positive impact of choice on engagement until more research can be done. In a survey of middle school students conducted by Ivey and Broaddus (2001) the question “What makes you want to read in this class?”, 42% responded having a choice in selection of reading material was what made them want to read in 31 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. class. Over half the class did not find book choice the most motivating factor to engage them in reading. Elbaum et al., (1997) found that students ranked reading the same book in mixed-ability groups higher than different groups reading different books. Book choice might not be a definitive element of literature circles that it has previously been considered to be. Through the awareness of these elements in literature circles, a study can be conducted to increase the effectiveness of literacy learning in groups. Conclusion Training students in group work is necessary for positive outcomes to empower all within the group (Koskinen & O’Flahavan, 1994/1995). The training needs to reflect the cultural norms that students understand and adhere to. This kind of training validates their position and confidence in their ability to contribute to a group. By examining the role of group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice, literature circles can become a powerful intervention. Meeting the needs of all learners will create an environment that will increase the success of the implementation. Using reader-response theory to foster individual thinking and increase metacognition to use in collaboration with peers could meet the needs for the high school reader. A new theoretical framework has emerged that explains the relationship of combining collaborative elements of group size, ability, gender, and book choice with teacher responsibility to the student learning groups for successful implementation of literature circles. 32 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Research Questions: 1. What issues are pivotal to the implementation of literature circles such group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice with collaboration using reader-response for the first time in a high school English class? 2. What is the impact of literature circles on student attitudes toward reading? Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 3 Methodology Research Design Quantitative and qualitative research methods are often unable to find the nuances and subtleties that can affect the outcomes of educational research. In his article “Can Educational Research Inform Educational Practice,” Eisner (1984) found that in two years of American Education Research Journal with quantitative research the medium treatment per student in experiments was 45 minutes in one year and 72 minutes in another year. His conclusion was “We conduct educational commando raids to get the data and to get out... How can we hope to achieve educationally significant results when the models of inquiry we employ virtually preclude achieving them?” This illustrates the critical place that teacher research has in education and the necessity of it to understand and improve practice. A frozen moment in time for data gathering does not answer all of the necessary questions involved in educational practices. Schaefer (1967) stated that we can no longer afford to conceive of schools simply as instruction centers for dispensing cultural orientations, information and knowledge developed by other social units. The complexities of teaching and learning in formal classrooms have become so formidable and the intellectual demands upon the system so enormous that the school must be much more than a place of instruction. It must also be a center of inquiry-producer as well as transmitter of knowledge. Teachers can step up to the challenges and responsibilities that teacher research affords to create meaningful and lasting research to impact not only their classrooms but also education in general. 34 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Cochran-Smith & Lytle (1993) noted, “Essentially, teachers and students negotiate what counts as knowledge in the classroom, who can have knowledge, and how knowledge can be generated, challenged, and evaluated” (p. 45). The critical issue is that teachers be aware of the negotiations and create the environment through the negotiation that facilitates best teaching practices for learning. This is the power behind teacher research. Teacher research involves the professional and the students where a problem is defined, relevant research is examined, a plan is created, results are calculated, analyzed, and the process is continued (Greenwood & Levin, 1998). Rigorous research of this kind requires a disciplined, energetic, well- organized plan that will objectively inform a teacher of what is happening in the classroom. The teacher/researcher systematically and intentionally inquires about her own teaching to improve practice for increased learning. By articulating the underlying dynamics brings to the surface knowledge that can explain theory and improve practice. Through a thorough understanding of group dynamics and systematic organized action plan, implementing literature circles can be done effectively in the classroom. Teachers need to be informed and flexible (Spiegel, 1998). The decision of when to conduct direct instruction, when to supply prompts for reader-response in literature circles, or how to form effective groups needs to be made. Teacher research can provide understanding of literature circles and discover what elements are necessary to implement the intervention. Teacher research has 35 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. been used as part of the action research that is defined by Lewin as “comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action” (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993, p. 8). Lawrence Stenhouse said, “It is teachers who, in the end, will change the world of the school by understanding it” (cited in Johnson, 1993). Teacher research will force the re-evaluation of given theories and will significantly influence what is known about teaching, learning, and schooling. The rewards will far exceed the difficulties that will be faced as teachers begin this journey of action research for themselves. This highly situated position can significantly influence what is known about teaching, learning, and schooling (Stenhouse, 1993). Reading is a skill that takes time, effort, and persistence. For English teachers, teacher research is a method of research that allows for time, effort, and persistence to work together to examine an intervention such as literature circles. The researcher needs to know and understand the dynamics of the classroom with each student’s individual needs being monitored within the learning context. It is through daily contact with the students and discovering their abilities that can lead to successful intervention. This project will be aimed at discovering the roles of group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice using collaboration. This approach to inquiry provides more detail and description to better understand the purposes and outcomes of the intervention (Stringer, 1999). 36 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Research Questions 1. What issues are pivotal to the implementation of literature circles such as group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice with collaboration using reader-response for the first time in a high school English class? 2. What is the impact of literature circles on student attitudes toward reading? Participants The participants in this study are an intact class of 11th grade students in a 3rd trimester Junior English class. They live in a small town in an outlying area of Utah drawing from a population of around 30,000 people. The high school has a population of 1,736 students. Sixteen percent of the student body is on free or reduced lunch and about 1.2% is nonwhite (Nebo School District, 2003). Data Gathering This study used Hopkins (2002) guide to classroom research. Data was gathered from one 11 grade English class through field notes, audiotapes, journal entries, interviews, and surveys during the third trimester of the 2003-2004 school year. Field notes were used to record observations, reflections, and reactions as literature circles were implemented in the classroom focusing on group size, individual abilities, gender, and book choice. There were two types of field notes: teacher reflection and student responses. The teacher reflection notes were written as soon after the class period as possible to increase the accuracy and immediate impressions of the development of the process. These notes explored the teacher’s ideas on reading and collaboration in her own learning experiences. She continued 37 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to write/reflect during the data collecting process with reference to what she saw happening with students in literature circles. These notes were used as a source for monitoring and adjusting the elements to make the literature circles work more effectively. The student-response field notes were written by the teacher on sticky notes. She jotted down notes during the class period that focused on specific incidences that occurred during the literature circle activity. These notes contained specific responses and behaviors of students at the moment it happened. These notes were compiled for later analysis and reflection as well as immediate adjustments, if necessary. Field notes provided an on-going record and explored emerging trends (Hopkins, 2002). This allowed for reflection and conscious adjustments to be made in a formative type evaluation. Audiotape recording was also used to tape record individual groups throughout the study. The purpose for utilizing it was to better understand how the students were responding to the intervention of literature circles and show how the different elements were being used in the intervention. Transcribing can be difficult and time consuming (Hopkins, 2002), so it was used in a limited fashion as determined by groups that were engaged or groups that had little participation or dominated by one or two students. Journal entries from students were used to capture student perceptions of the process of the intervention throughout the study. These entries indicated individual 38 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. student’s concerns and problems that needed to be solved as the research was ongoing and adjustments needed to be made. Interviews were utilized. Students that appeared to be varied in their responses to the intervention were selected to be interviewed throughout the course. The same questions were used for all students. This allowed the teacher to find out information directly. The teacher needed to be neutral, an attentive listener, and at ease with the student (Hopkins, 2002). Surveys were given to the students at the beginning and end of the study. Tomal (2003) explains, “Although surveys have many uses, they can be especially helpful in conducting longitudinal and trend studies. These types of studies collect information at different points in time and when assessing difficult samples from populations whose participants have changed and the researcher wants to make a comparison” (p. 50). The survey for this study assessed the comparison of how students in the class felt about reading before and after using literature circles in an English class. The structure of the surveys used either a N (never), S (sometimes), and A(always) scale or a Liechert Scale to question students about their feelings toward reading activities. This type of data collecting was a quick and simple way of finding rich information from students (Hopkins, 2002). Delimitations This study was conducted in a rural, public high school. It included a regular 11th grade high school English class where students were randomly placed at the beginning of the school year. The high school was on a trimester schedule where the course ran for twelve weeks. The study was conducted during the last four weeks of 39 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the third trimester. This was a short time frame in which to gather information for 32 students. Table 2 Time Frame Date Activity April 27, 2004 Students were introduced to the study and the disclosure statements were reviewed explaining the purpose of the study. Students were given reading journals to write their first journal entry, they described their feelings as readers through reflection on their past, present, and future. After they had time to contemplate on reading specifically, they were given a survey of literacy activities in the classroom and a survey for reading attitudes. The results were used at the end of the study to compare and contrast their experiences throughout the time period on their feelings about reading in literature circles. April 28, 2004 Students brought their own reading material to class. In self-selected groups, they discussed their choice of reading material. They created a list of criteria for good materials on a chart for the class to review. April 29, 2004 Students worked through a read-aloud as a model for reader response with the picture book Oh! The Places You 7/ Go.. They were given another picture book and instructed to do their reader response in literature circles formed from those who were sitting close to them. April 30, 2004 Students were modeled a read aloud demonstrating reader response with a short story using the fish bowl. Students practiced using reader response in literature circles with those who sat close to them. May 3, 2004 Students met in groups created by same choice of reading material with no more than five in a group. They were to decide on a schedule for reading to be finished by May 12. May 4-12, 2004 Students met in groups to discuss reader response ideas for individual reading choice. They discussed journal entries for reflection and learning input. May 10-12, 2004 Students met in literature circles to discuss their reading progress, concerns, and questions. On May 10-11, students created a presentation on material they had read in their groups. They presented on May 12. 40 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 2 Date (continued from Time Frame) Table 2 Activity (continued from Time Frame) May 12-21 ,2004 Students met in groups to discuss reader response ideas for individual reading choice for a new book. They discussed journal entries for reflection and learning input. May 19-21, 2004 Students met in literature circles to discuss their reading progress, concerns, and questions. On May 19-20, students created a presentation on material they had read in their groups. They presented on May 21. May 24, 2004 Students took the same survey of literacy activities in the classroom and reading attitudes given at the beginning of the study for comparison and contrast of feelings after the study. April 27-May 21, 2004 Students were interviewed, journals were collected, and adjustments were made as deemed necessary to fine-tune the implementation of literature circles. Analysis The teacher/researcher analyzed the field notes, both personal and student notations, transcribed audiotapes and student interviews, coded student journals and evaluated surveys. The teacher/researcher determined patterns related to group size, individual differences, gender, and book choice with collaboration that might have emerged that would give insight and understanding as to the effectiveness of the intervention. Thirty pages of field notes were analyzed to find repeated issues that needed to be addressed such as student discussion length, student journal concerns, on task behaviors, and student perceived involvement in literature circles. Over 300 journal entries were collected and reviewed to discover what students found impressionable in their reading as well as evaluation of their group discussions (see Appendix H). Using reading strategies as mini-lesson topics, it showed impact in both journal 41 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. entries and literature circle summaries. A questionnaire given at the end of the study was analyzed (see Appendix G) to compare daily evaluations of literature circles with an overview of feelings and insights as a culmination of the implementation. Audio tape transcriptions took over 10 hours with the results similar to the journal entries and summaries noting the conversations emphasized the reading strategies used while reading their books. Five student interviews were conducted with students who appeared extremely satisfied with the intervention or extremely dissatisfied. Their concerns reflected their position. Attitude surveys were compared and contrasted with before and after results charted (see Appendix E). A mean was calculated to give direct comparison of how students felt about reading. A 0-1-2 analysis was also created to give a more accessible understanding of never, sometimes, and always as qualifiers. The coding of each type of data was compared to find similarities and differences in each type of data gathering device. Teacher research is a methodology that allowed for the recursive nature of literature circles where modifications were a part of the natural process of teaching all types of students acquiring literacy skills. The teacher’s ability to monitor and adjust as students adapted to a more social, interactive environment was integral to the success of the study. Research studies give a foundation and guide to success, but it is through the sensitivity of the teacher that progress is achieved and interventions are utilized. 42 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. This research assumes that literature circles have a significant place in a classroom to increase literacy skills for students. Samway et al., (1991) found that it was “clear that literature circles had a profound impact on students” (p. 199). Students understand each other better and define themselves as readers. It creates a form of engagement that motivates students to read. This study will show evidence of the impact of group size, individual differences, gender, and choice of reading material in literature circles. Collaboration is not the answer for all students in an English classroom. But researchers have verified the impact is powerful for students who become engaged in the collaboration. Grouping for ability and size could depend on the make-up of the class and reading material being used. The examples at the elementary and middle school level might need to be modified at the junior and senior level of high school. Book choice needs further investigation to determine its impact on literature circles at the high school level. Other pivotal issues included collaboration techniques that students found uncomfortable. Structure was a necessary part of the success of group work when discussing literature without an authority figure. With the strength of New Criticism alive and well in the American classrooms (Rosenblatt, 2003), assisting students to regain confidence in their opinions necessary for successful literature circles was a challenge. Social interaction in the way of literature circles was new and confusing to many students. 43 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Teacher research is a vehicle that could guide teachers systematically to help implement literature circles in their classrooms. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 4 The Findings A regular, English classroom of 32,16-18 year olds, 18 boys and 14 girls, began the 3rd trimester of the school year with great anticipation of ending the school year as quickly as possible. The students had reading scores that ranged on the Degrees of Reading Power (DRP) test stanines of 1-9 with the average of 5.4 (see Appendix D). Along with the DRP scores, the Gates/MacGinitie Reading Test was administered to identify reading ability with a 64% class average (see Appendix E). Some students loved to read and others hated it. Standardized reading scores did not give the entire profile of the student reader. So a survey was given to assess the students’ attitudes toward reading. A classroom activities list was also given for students to identify which reading exercises they enjoyed participating in during English (see Appendix A). These instruments were used to assess the needs and abilities of individual students. Implementing literature circles in a high school classroom focused on the overall picture of regulating book choice, group size, student ability, and gender. The actuality of the implementation concerned itself more with student understanding of expectations of literature circles. Rethinking the traditional teacher-led discussion to relying on metacognition and peer expertise was the hurdle most difficult to jump over for teenagers in this 11 grade English class. Reading attitude surveys before and after the intervention indicated a change in outlook in ways that were not anticipated. 45 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. This chapter will explore how the research questions “What issues are pivotal to the implementation of literature circles such as group size, individual abilities, gender and book choice with collaboration using reader response for the first time in a high school English class and what is the impact of literature circles on student attitudes toward reading?” were answered with detailed description of how the implementation affected the classroom culture beyond recognition. Book choice will be discussed first as it encompasses the other three elements of group size, individual abilities, and gender. Literature circles will be examined from student responses from the teacher’s observations, student journals and audiotapes as well as student surveys and questionnaires. It will be analyzed in a chronological deliberation of the implementation. Investigated Elements It was found that the investigated elements were not as essential to the implementation of literature circles as previous research might have indicated with collaboration success in other educational settings. They will be discussed here in a brief form to recognize their place in literature circle implementation. Book Choice Students carefully perused the list of books on ranking sheets. They could choose two books to read during a four week period (see Appendix C). They had to identify a 1st, 2n d , and 3 rd book preference on each of 2 separate sheets of 9 listed books. They were more intent on this assignment than they had been during the rest of the trimester. “Do we really get these books?” How do we know if we’d like 46 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. them?” “When can we read them?” Students had a title, author, and one sentence description of the book. Word quickly spread of who had read the book, had seen the movie, or knew of someone who had either read the book or had seen the movie. Despite an effort to keep the selection a personal choice to avoid popularity of people instead of book, students from the across the room were able to communicate preferences. This later turned detrimental for some students when popularity superseded interest. The excitement for reading was contagious, but it was short lived. After the selections were finished, students went about the class period as usual. Little discussion was heard about the literature circle books. With school culture well engrained, routine droned on with little anticipation of change. Students would discover later the impact book choice would have when literature circles were introduced as an intervention that would require time and effort on their part. Book choice was the highest valued literary activity chosen by students at the beginning of the trimester with small groups being second in a survey given before and after the intervention was given. Silent reading was ranked third as an activity students enjoyed before and after literature circles. With this particular intervention necessitating book choice, small group activity, and silent reading, it was a good match for student preferences. Student choice of reading material was the highest ranked classroom activity. Students were given a list of nine books to choose from. They all received their 1st book choice. Books were ordered strictly from book preference. Two students who 47 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. were absent were assigned books that the teacher felt would be in their interest area. They both appeared satisfied with the end result. The problem later developed when students found their book choice unsatisfactory and wanted to change their book. James realized his book contained situations involving cannibalism. He mentioned, “I don’t want read about that (cannibalism) if I don’t have to.” Efforts were made to find copies of other book choices from the school library, the public library, and other school libraries. One student found himself the only reader of his book but wanted to be a part of a group. To overcome his obstacle, he met with other students who were missing a partner due to an absence or were ahead of their own group in the reading, so felt they couldn’t discuss what was ahead of them. These maneuvers were made without the formal consent of the teacher. The need to be a part of a group was important to the student. He problem solved in a way that kept collaboration a part of his reading. Group Size The number of students in a group was established by the number of students who chose to read the same book. Sizes ranged from one student to ten students. Students self-selected where to sit within the group. Research showed that groups of four or five were best for collaboration (Hill et al, 2003). Noll (1994) found that size was not an area needed to be emphasized when implementing literature circles. This study confirmed this research. The two groups larger than four, consisting of members of seven and ten, were automatically divided in to groups of five or less. Groups of four or five had discussions that lasted longer and used higher level 48 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. thinking skills, and students wrote longer journal entries. A conversation with one group indicated that the enthusiasm for the book as well as the comfort level of the group members made the difference for group discussion. “It’s amazing to see the difference in our literature circle group now that Tammy and Erin like the book we’re reading. They actually want to be a part of the conversation.” Individual Abilities Students from all ability levels as determined by DRP scores were in the same groups. Book choice was the determining factor for groups, and students sat closest to those they felt comfortable with within those parameters. The larger groups, five to ten members, found the highest and lowest test score recipients sitting next to each other with the middle group sitting together. Some of the larger groups tried to keep all students together during discussion while other large groups allowed the group to naturally divide into two smaller groups. These smaller groups had the highest reading ability and lowest reading ability students working together while the middle group worked together. Lou, et al.’s (1996) research confirms this mixed ability grouping. Students with fewer than five in a group worked well together regardless of ability level. Enthusiasm for the book marked the difference in quality discussion and journal writing. Students immersed in their chosen book wrote more detailed journal writings, added more to group discussions and came prepared or read ahead of the assigned group deadline despite ability in the majority of the situations. 49 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Gender Gender was not an obvious issue in literature circles. It was through the book choice activity that gender showed its evidence. In the first literature circle experience, there were six groups. Four of those six groups were all boys. Three boys read Tuesdays with Morrie, two boys read Wolf Rider, three boys read Jackie’ s Nine, and four boys read Into Thin Air. And Then There Were None had two boys and six girls. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’ s Stone had 10 students with three boys a part of the group. Adaptation of group members was seemingly smooth and calm. Webb and Palinscar (1996) noted that other criteria would have more effect. Previous group activities, age, personalities, and classroom setting could attribute to these acquiescent attitudes. Students understand and accept the limitations of the classroom setting where boundaries are set by the structure of the school system, not by choice of students or teachers. Collaboration The ability to address individual learning needs is increased in an environment that allows for choice. Students should be able to adjust their environment to make it more ideal for their ability to increase comprehension. To empower students with the ability to monitor their own learning gives them skills to continue learning after their formal education is over. Giving students blocks of time in which to read silently, discuss with groups members, or write in journals provides students the ability to optimize their learning environment for a more enjoyable and comprehensive outcome and become aware of their own learning needs. When the 50 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. choices are available, students react instinctively in a way that will work for them. For students who are individual learners, they can read silently and write in their journal. For students who like to discuss with only one person, they can connect with a student next to them. For students who like larger group discussions, they can gather three or four students around them who like to discuss with more input and ideas. Students can meet their needs continually during this time frame. Within a few days, it was obvious how students felt the most comfortable. They found their comfort level within the options available. The closer the match was between the reader and the book, the more enthusiasm in the group. Students really absorbed in their books wanted to discuss it with others. Students less enthused could benefit from those who were interested in the reading and created background for the others to have a better chance of becoming engaged in the reading of the novel. There were no students who read totally by themselves. Even the student with only himself reading a book found students in which to collaborate. Implementation Method Preparation for Collaboration Several preparation activities were practiced to model for students what would be expected as the new intervention was being implemented. The first activity was at the class level where the teacher read Oh, the Places You 1 1 Go by Dr. Seuss as a think aloud. Background knowledge was addressed, what stood out was explored, and questions and confusing parts were examined. Students responded on paper to what the teacher was responding to verbally. Students then responded in 51 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. groups using their notes taken during the reading. The group discussions were short and shallow. Within 3-5 minutes, students were off topic. So the teacher modeled a class discussion that could be used in small groups asking students to utilize their notes from the teacher think-aloud. The class discussion had superior student participation. By the end of the modeling, all 28 students that attended that day had contributed to the discussion. Could this kind of discussion be done by students in their own discussion groups? The next day the teacher handed out children’s books randomly. Each group was assigned to read the book together, respond on paper, and discuss as a group using the previous day class discussion on Oh, The Places You ’ 1 1 Go as a reminder of what to do. Groups were formed by students sitting in the same locale. It took them several minutes to begin the activity and only a few minutes to finish the activity. Very little discussion occurred. A group of mostly verbal students was asked to present their discussion after the other student groups had completed their own literature circles. This activity was offered to show what a literature discussion group would look like to use as an example to evaluate their own individual group discussion. The groups definitely needed some guidance as students veered in every direction but the right direction in their collaborative discussions. Rosenblatt’s (2003) guidance of relating ideas back to text was being left out. Students were discussing any idea that came to their minds without substantiation from the text. These ideas came to dead-ends quickly, and discussion soon diminished. 52 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Not allowing defeat to enter into the picture, the previously chosen group went to the front of the room to model an effective literature circle discussion. The group fell apart even before the start of their modeling. Picking out some critical elements of literature circles, the teacher requested connections, questions, and predictions and other reading strategies that were used during the reading, writing, or discussion of the book. They looked at each other, laughed, and said very little. The insecurities of the group members shone as they tried to be a part of this new activity. Perhaps a rubric or written questions would have given more stability. But the goal was for the students to discuss their own ideas, not just respond verbally to a worksheet. The hope had been that students would relish the opportunity to think and discuss their own ideas. Choice in the children’s book selection might have also given more enthusiasm to the reading and discussion. Crestfallen and doubtful, the teacher/researcher dismissed the class when the bell rang, and everyone was put out of their misery. Introduction o f Implementation with New Books Student enthusiasm was high when new books were given to them that they had chosen after they had practiced collaborative discussion groups the previous days as described. A seating chart was loosely assigned where students could choose a seat wherever they wanted but within a section with students who had chosen the same book. Students were given a few minutes to get settled and discuss with each other what they knew about the book, why they had chosen the book, or even about themselves as readers. A calendar was given to each student to coordinate with their 53 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. group deadlines for group-determined reading assignments, meeting times for literature circles, and any other concerns. Students were not interested in schedules, meeting times or deadlines. They wanted to get into their books. Some comments were “I picked this because Jane picked it,” or “I really liked the movie,” or “I’ve heard this is pretty good” to “”It’s got to be good if it’s about baseball.” Even with choice there is a variety of rationale to pick a book. Creating seating charts where students can sit by friends is breaking an unwritten cardinal rule of teaching. It is traditional to sit students who are good friends as far a part as possible in the classroom. It is assumed that students will not focus and/or learn if they are sitting by people they like to talk to. The risk was great as students were given autonomy to act at will. At the beginning, the novelty of the activity kept students on task: they talked together about their books. Would the behavior change as the routine settled in? The bell rang and students dispersed with new book in hand and a new enthusiasm in their walk as they departed class with their friends. The next day, students returned: some had books, some did not, some had read a lot, some had read none. Being allowed to sit in friendly territory kept the interest going as students talked to each other at the beginning of class. A friendly reminder of the purpose of the new seating chart was to discuss common reading material, not the devastating baseball score from the night before. Students would not be deterred. Socialization was going to take place and an amazing amount of it was about the books they were reading. 54 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Modified Instruction for Improved Collaboration After the dubious initial exposure to literature circles with assigned material, it was obvious students were in need of more direction, understanding, or a class schedule change. Theory was not working here. Brainstorming by the teacher provided a more structured approach to literature circles. Mini-lessons would be taught with direct instruction, specific steps would be followed during reading, and group discussions would be evaluated through journal writing. There needed to be structure and accountability. Students were not ready to take on an informal literary conversation in a traditional classroom setting. Students responded favorably to the tighter control as they read a short story and responded to it using questioning from a mini-lesson as the focus of the reading and discussion. The structure of school is almost set in cement as students reach the upper secondary grades, and the teacher learned to acknowledge this structure and to work within its frame. Freedom to discuss without direction was chaos. Collaborative learning using peers to interact using the reading strategies demonstrated in mini-lessons promoted more in depth discussions and understanding. It gave students control over their learning (National Reading Panel, 2003). Students needed guidelines in which to interact with each other. Not wanting to be too rigid in the rules so students could develop the skills of an autonomous learner, the teacher never gave out worksheets or required specific answers to be written to pre-assigned questions. Reader-response theory was functioning. 55 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The most often utilized reading strategy practiced by students was connecting with background knowledge. Students could keep conversations going when they were using their own experiences to blend with the characters in the book using the strategy of connection. Tom wrote while reading Jackie’ s Nine, “My life to a certain extent has been like Jackie Robinson’s. I have been the person no one likes. The difference is I have some rights unlike Jackie did. My life has been hard at times like Jackie’s. I have been the odd one out.” Also written about Jackie’ s Nine, Matt said, “There have been times when I have felt left out. It makes you feel bad. You must want to do something about it. But you can’t because of the consequences that follow.” John wrote, “When Harry (Potter) was lying on the ground with the storm in the background, I remembered a time when I went camping and there was this huge thunderstorm.” Into Thin Air made this connection for a student: “I can sort of connect by when we rode our horses to the top of Spanish Fork Canyon and looked over the valley. You kind of get the feeling they do.” In And Then There Were None, Betty wrote, “The part where they all pile evidence together reminds me of “Clue.” It also reminds me of how easily we can accuse each other without thinking. It has even happened to me a few times. My mom quickly accused me of something I definitely didn’t do. I feel like I’m lying down evidence like these people do to prove it wasn’t me.” In Tuesdays with Morrie, Scott said, “This is like when you finally see someone that you haven’t seen for a long time. It makes you happy. But it’s kind of awkward to finally see them again.” He also mentioned, “I like this book so far. It is interesting. My grandpa died, and I saw him get sick and stuff like that.” 56 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Connecting also led students off topic. A section of audio tape showed how one group spent several minutes discussing the letter Harry Potter received in the mail. They talked about what they get in the mail such as credit card applications and applications for colleges. One student mentioned getting a letter from the National Honor Roll. Several concurred that they had also received such mailings. Sam mentioned, “I went and looked on the internet and everyone said Nation Honor Roll is such a scam; this and this and this and they gave all the reasons. I heard this kid talking to his friend, and he’s like ‘I got on the National Honor Roll.’ I was like, ‘Come on...’ The conversation drifted to grade point averages, and Sam brought everyone back to Harry Potter with “I got a 4.0 my first year then I’m down to a 3.6. Kind of like Harry—starts out kind of bad, and gets really good. He gets a 4.0. He’s like me...” With students responding in groups that were very compatible, they appeared to find responses very similar. Often a summary of group discussion would be “We all said the same thing.” These discussions were important to students who were less confident in their reading. This reinforced that their thoughts as a reader were the same as others. Questioning was a strategy the teacher stressed and students did well on in journal writing. Scott asked, “Why does Mitch feel jealousy?” Jared wanted to know, “What does Morrie think when he is by himself: the times when you are all alone and your mind is free?” Ben wanted to know, “Why was Jackie Robinson 57 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. able to succeed in the Majors?” Bill wanted to know what it was like to be kicked off of planes and buses because he was black and not be able to do anything about it. Sam asked about Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’ s Stone, “How do they get the letters in the house? What did Harry’s parents leave for Harry?” Kimberly was wondering, “Does Harry suspect that his parents may have died in a different way? Why weren’t there photographs of the Potters? Why did the author create Piers?” Carrie asked, “Why did the Dursley’s lie to Harry?” Questioning in group discussion focused on plot, characters, and vocabulary. Paul brought up the word bias. “I have read this word a couple of times. I know what the words means, but it looks funny written.” Jeremy in Jackie’ s Nine wanted to know about peculiar. In Into Thin Air were words Matt was concerned about such as stem, lapping, hull, peered, acquitted, surmounts, and haggle. Higher level questioning techniques were practiced in class; but during literature circles, they were not often used. Students appeared to feel comfortable with lower level thinking questions. With more practice, different group members, or more interest in the book might be factors that affected the type of questions used. Two groups were able to break the barrier into higher level thinking questions as they went into character reactions. In And Then There Were None, comments such as “Who would you trust knowing that everyone you were with had killed someone even through they felt innocent or vindicated for the murder?” showed this increased ability to go beyond the literal plot line. 58 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Students learned to rely on each other as the teacher had little input in discussion as she went from group to group checking on group dynamics and participation. Conversation usually let up when she came by. Audio tapes were also unnatural. Some students would not say anything when the tape recorder was going. Others said more than they usually would in group discussion. One group put the recorder on fast speed so they were not understandable. One student asked after several minutes if they could turn off the tape. The best situation was experienced when students communicated unsolicited with each other. When the schedule was flexible enough to allow reading, discussing, and writing when it was appropriate for each group, the conversations were more active. During assigned silent reading time, students would ask the teacher for the hall pass more frequently then during group discussion. Students turned their desks to face the group, sat on their desks to be closer, leaned inward to hear more accurately or to talk louder during literature circles. The discussion summaries revealed information about the group dynamics and individual’s responses to it. Clay reading Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’ s Stone wrote in his journal, “I didn’t pay attention to the group because l A of them are more interested in their personal lives, !4 of them doesn’t pay attention, only two of us read.” Craig summed up his groups discussion, “We talked about how Hagrid came in the middle of the night and took Harry to Gringotts. We talked about how he got his inheritance and wand. That would be awesome to get his inheritance. We also talked about how his parents are very rude and disciplined him for doing magic.” 59 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Mike said when reading Tuesdays with Morrie that the “group thinks that Morrie’s life is being prolonged for the sake of Mitch. We also think that Mitch has a lesson to learn and Morrie is there to teach him that life lesson. Also Morrie has a lesson for all of us. We just have to find out which one fits us.” Carrie, in the same group, mentioned, “We all talked about a lot of the same stuff, but a little bit different, too. No one knew the definitions to my vocabulary words and I didn’t know theirs either. All of the pictures were different but all fit in really well with the setting of the book. Everybody knew what each other was talking about, but some people got more outta it than others!” In Into Thin Air, Mark’s summary mentioned, “We talked about how long they were on the mountain and how bad it would be if you ran out of oxygen and sat there knowing you were going to die.” And Then There Were None, Karen wrote, “Today our group didn’t do much talking. We are all so interested in reading the book that that’s all we mainly did. The talking and discussing we did was about the murdered and how and in which order everyone died. We were just confused with some things, so we got it all straightened out.” Students found writing in journals tedious and time summing. Comments like “Can we just talk about it and not write it down?” were often heard. But the teacher often observed students referring to their journals for literature circle discussions. Students were not accustomed to having time to discuss their ideas and needed references to keep the discussion going. 60 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Mini-lessons continued to be a grounding for students to know what to discuss in groups. Visualizing was used at the beginning of the book, near the end of the book, and as a review of the book. At the beginning of the book, students were asked to draw a picture of the setting and characters. The literature circle discussion was to be formed around the similarities and differences in the pictures as well as the importance of the similarities and differences. In the middle of the book, visual pictures gave students ideas as to what had happened and what was going to happen as the plot thickened. The review allowed students to capitalize on what other students thought was important in comparison to their own thinking. Students questioned when the final test would be and how the teacher would evaluate the class when there were so many different books being read. After several comments, the teacher, who did not plan on having a final test, decided to give the students a short essay exam to give the students closure and peace of mind. Several articles, DeLaie (2001), Johnson (1993), Webb and Palinscar (1996), indicated the importance of creating jobs for students to focus on while reading in literature circles. The teacher in this situation was less anxious for students to continue the assignment driven curriculum, but she wanted student thinking to drive the reading. With needed structure, reading strategies were reviewed for all students to work on as they read. But the emphasis continued to be with under-used reading strategies to assist increase reading comprehension. Emphasis continued to be with individual thinking of what was important in the reading. With mini-lessons guiding 61 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the reading and students reading, writing, and discussing on appointed days, the routine was established. Figure 1. Literature Circles within the Regular Curriculum Book Choice Regular Group discussions Mini lessons Literature C ircles Curriculum Silent reading and journal writing Surveys The surveys are part of the summative evaluation (Patton, 1987) to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. These are the results of how students felt about reading before and after participating in literature circles (see Appendix A). 62 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 2. Do you enjoy listening to stories or poems that are read to you □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always Before After Literature circles could include oral reading if the group had so desired. At some point during the intervention 70% of groups had spent some time reading sections of the book together. For example, in And Then There Were None, a poem quoted in the book was often referred to. Students reread this poem to validate understanding as new clues were discovered in this mystery. Figure 3. Do you enjoy reading books that you have read before? □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always Before Several students chose books that they were familiar with. It was not the best idea for some readers to reread a book with a group. One student commented, “I already know everything. There is nothing more I can learn.’ 63 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. But other felt that they learned more from listening to other students’ ideas and insights. It gave new perspective and more understanding to an already familiar plot. Figure 4. Do you expect to take an active part in your reading by trying to understand and add your own meaning to the author’s message? □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always Before After Literature circles create an environment that necessitates involvement. In group discussion, students take an active part in the reading. The average number for both “sometimes” and “always” increased, as “never” decreased. Students were leaving the passive learning environment that is often the norm in traditional classrooms and entering the active environment where their voices were heard. 64 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 5. Do you expect reading to be challenging but you are confident that you can overcome the challenges? 50- r j ---------------------------- Before After Empowering the student to read and build up a confidence level is a desired outcome of literature circles. Positive feelings of overcoming the challenges of reading over the course of the trimester showed improvement in the survey responses with “never” decreasing and “sometimes” increasing. This confidence needs to continue to build for students to become independent learners (Daniels, 2002a) Figure 6. Are you eager to choose books on your own, perhaps choosing books on new subjects or by new authors? □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always Before After DU-) 50 40 30 20 10 □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always 65 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Choice appears to be such an important part of learning that it was interesting to note that 12% of the students preferred “never” to have choice in their reading selection before the intervention. After literature circles, students showed an increase in “always” from 40% to 52%. Confidence in ability and opportunity to choose a book could be factors that influenced the answer to this question signaling the need for educators to foster independent learning opportunities for students. Figure 7 Do you expect books to be part of your daily life? □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always Before After As a literacy advocate, it was disturbing to the teacher to note how high the percentage was for students who felt books would never be part of their daily life. Even after literature circles when the percentage decreased, it was still too high. Creating an environment where students find success in reading becomes of paramount importance when it is recognized how some students resist reading at all costs. Students need to make reading a part of their lives in order to be successful in their futures (Alvermann, 2001). 66 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 8 Do you try to find time or make time to read? 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Before After The literature circle intervention appeared to have some effect on independent reading with both “sometimes” and “always” increasing while “never” decreased. In a short time period, students were able to find an activity that gave them a more positive feeling about reading. Becoming confident in independent reading could change a student’s attitude in a more positive light which would lead to life long reading (McKenna et al., 1995). Figure 9 Would you like to participate in literature circles again? 80-r 70 ' 60 50' 40' 30 ' 20 ' 1 0 ' 0+ □ Never ■ Sometimes □ Always 67 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Students perceived literature circles as a viable intervention that they were willing to participate in. 79% of the students were willing to use the intervention again, while 21% were not interested. Reading material of their choice in a less formal setting where they controlled the environment allowed most students a place to grow as learners. Classroom Activities As in the survey questions, students were asked to check which activity they preferred to participate in while in a classroom (see Appendix A). 40% of the activities increased in importance after the implementation of literature circles: Silent reading, reading orally, having someone read to you, working alone, doing vocabulary and dictionary work, choosing your own book, and reading one book with the class were all activities that could be accomplished in literature circles except reading a book with the class. These are the results of responses from favorite reading classroom activities before and after the intervention. Figure 10 Classroom Activities List Before Activity After 57% Silent Reading 71% 13% Reading Orally 21% 53% Having Someone Read to You 58% 20% Writing in Journals 17% 60% Listening to Cassettes 54% 70% Working as a Whole Class 42% 40% Working Alone 42% 80% Working in Small Groups 75% 20% Completing Worksheets 13% 6% Doing Vocabulary, Dictionary Work 8% 57% Class Discussions 54% 33% Writing 21% 77% Choosing Your Own Book 88% 23% Reading the Same as the Class 29% 68 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Journal writing, listening to cassettes, working as a whole class, working in small groups, completing worksheets, and class discussion decreased in interest. The activities were ones that were used consistently such as journal writing and working in small groups or they were never used at all. Over use or extinction could be partial explanations of these activities were found less desirable after the intervention. Literature circles did have impact as an intervention according to student responses. The implementation was rough in the beginning as students adjusted to a different way of reading in the classroom. As students became accustomed to the process, the routine became stronger and more effective. Change is difficult in most situations as this research discovered. Most students found a comfort level where they could place themselves as readers with their peers. Book choice was the most pivotal element as students learned to control their own reading outcomes through collaboration. 69 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 5 Analysis and Discussion Literature circles is one intervention that can meet the literary needs of adolescents. Moje et al. (2000) quotes from the International Reading Association’s Commission on Adolescent Literacy: Adolescents entering the adult world in the 21s t center will read and write more than at any other time in human history. They will need advanced level of literacy to perform their jobs, run their households, act as citizens, and conduct their personal lives. They will need literacy to cope with the flood of information they will find everywhere they turn. They will need literacy to feed their imaginations so they can create the world of the future. In a complex and sometimes even dangerous world, their ability to read will be crucial. Continual instruction beyond the early grades is needed (p. 400). Implementing literature circles in a high school English classroom encompasses several strategic teaching issues stated in this paper including collaboration and investigation of the effect of group size, book choice, student ability, and gender. Through the element of book choice, group size, student ability and gender issues are addressed collectively. (Because of their limited effect on the implementation of literature circle, these elements are discussed briefly here.) Student Ability Student ability is absorbed into the student’s desire to read a particular book. As noted by Cone (1994), interest can overcome reading problems that otherwise thwart a student’s ability to comprehend what she is reading. Interest is the heart of book choice. Background knowledge also plays a large part in successful reading comprehension. If a student has interest in and knowledge about a certain book, her 70 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ability does not have to play as large a part in the student’s skill to comprehend the material (Cone, 1994). The problem encountered with literature circles in the study became noticeable if the selection of a book was not a book of interest. Five students included in their questionnaire for suggestions for improvement of literature circles to have “better book choices.” The reality of having enough literature circle book choices to entice every student would be difficult. To overcome this obstacle, building more interest and background in the books offered would bridge that gap. Three students wanted to change books after they had started reading their book of choice. “It wasn’t what I thought it would be like,” said one student. “I thought this book would be more realistic, not science fiction.” Another book was written as a screen play, and the boys in the group reading it indicated they were disappointed in the format but kept reading it because it was about football. They also liked the members of their group. More preparation is needed to be done in assisting students in making book choices. Sebesta and Monson (2003) indicate that students often don’t know how to choose a book (2003). Spending time with students discussing various methods of selection of appropriate books including difficulty, interest, length, genre, etc. could build student’s confidence for not only the short term, but also life-long reading choices. Book Choice It was noted by Schraw et al., (1998) that book choice might not have the positive effect on reading that has previously been advocated. Students will read what is expected of them whether by choice or mandate. If students do not expect to 71 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. have choice, they accept mandate without question. The activities list given to the 11 grade high school students in this study indicated an increase in interest in reading a book as a whole class after working in literature circles where book choice was given. The percentage went up from 23% to 29% in favor of reading a book as a whole class. Some students might have felt more comfortable with a mandate since there are limited resources to offer students choice in public schools and seldom are students given choice. But choice remained the number one activity listed both before and after the intervention. In this situation, book choice did have an impact. Book choice is felt throughout the implementation of literature circles as it is included in collaboration success discussed later in this chapter. Group Size Group size was also considered when implementing literature circles. Within large group settings, ability grouping naturally occurred. Low level readers sat by high level readers while middle level readers sat closer together. Students migrate to where they feel the most comfortable (Lou et al., 1996). This is important for maximum student learning. One high-level reader stated “I would like to help those don’t understand their reading.” The group size as indicated by Noll (1994) could be formed with any number of members. Hill et al.’s (2003) concern over allowing students to group together by popularity never evolved into a problem in this study. It could be attributed to the fact that students automatically went where they felt most accepted within the parameters in which they had to work with the classroom. The group sizes were formed by students themselves and the make-up of the 72 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. personalities of those involved. The teacher cautioned having groups larger than four or five, explained the rationale for this size, then allowed students to self-select within the group with the same book title. Gender Gender was also swallowed up in book choice. Four of the seven groups in the first literature circle groups were all boys. The titles included Tuesdays with Morrie, Into Thin Air, Jackie’ s Nine, and Brian’ s Song. No one mentioned any problems with the choices made concerning gender. The students responded to each other in both mixed group and male exclusive groups. Students did mention some group members “goofed off’ too much, but that complaint came from both types of groups. This study confirms the results of previous research that gender does not have to play a part of collaboration in reading (Wilkinson, 1998). Collaboration Learning how to respond to each other with a new task takes time and practice. Rosenblatt’s concern was for students to be allowed to express their understanding of a text culminating from their background knowledge, their expectations, and the classroom setting. Faman (1996) continued this concern with the need for students to feel connected by providing them with time to read, participating with other students in conversation, and helping students feel ownership. Greeno, et al (1996) mentions “the social and personal mental elaboration necessary for successful learning takes time-much more time than is typically allowed in the school curriculum” (p. 35). Literature circles meet the 73 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. criteria espoused by these researchers in as much as it is under the control of individual teachers. For students to be successful in collaborative discussion, they need to have something to say. Without pre-established topics assigned by the teacher such as worksheets, assigned questions, etc. students would be lost. Webb and Palinscar (1996) discuss the importance of creating concrete purposes for students in small group activities. This study focused on students’ ability to be metacognitive in their reading through use of the reading strategies. This creates a forum for students to reflect on their own thinking and confirm these reflections with peers to aid in confidence and enjoyment of reading. Students who have never been taught about metacognition need some explicit instructions. It was found that monitoring comprehension increases with age (Applegate, et. al., 1994). Grade 9 is the time that most students can begin to use metacognitive strategies independently (Chan, 1996). There is evidence that students at a younger age have more difficulty with metacogntive skills than older students (Hacker, 1998). Piaget’s formal operations gives some explanation why younger students have a difficult time with metacognitive skills. Students have to be able to think in a more abstract fashion to be able to infer, monitor, and connect concepts effectively. Teachers need to be aware of the maturity of the students before metacognition is taught in a formal way. Vygotskys’ Zone of Proximal Development tells of the importance of teaching students concepts that are just a little beyond their capacity to learn, but with the teacher scaffolding, the student can 74 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. learn the concepts until he/she arrives naturally to the stage of learning (Wertsch, 1991). Younger students or older students with out experience of this kind can be exposed to the concepts in an explicit fashion that would allow for those who were capable to internalize metacognition into a self-regulatory skill. Through mini lessons students were taught the skills that could assist them in being metacognitive about their reading. This type of assignment was new and difficult for some students. Their final comments indicated that it paid off as students realized that what they were thinking was of interest to others in the group as well as a similar kind of thinking. Students need this kind of confirmation in their insecure worlds. Their journal writing was longer, and more abstract thinking was occurring as they became more familiar with the process. Knowing students’ reading levels is critical in implementing literature circles. Reading levels are assigned to students determined by their individual zone of development. The independent or zone of actual development is where a student can comprehend the reading unassisted. The instructional or zone of proximal development is where a student needs some support from a teacher or peer to fully understand the reading. Beyond that point is the frustrational reading level where the reading comprehension is beyond the student’s ability to understand even with assistance (Wilhelm et al., 2001). Students and teachers need to be cognizant of the developmental reading levels to be successful in literature circles. “Schools have failed to choose literature that enables students to become emotionally and cognitively involved in what they read. If students are asked to read literature that is 75 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. not consistent with their development levels, they will not be able to interact fully with that literature” (Bushman, 1997, p. 38). To engage in metacognitive activity, students need to be reading material at the correct developmental level. Independent reading level is the best level for literature circles. Instructional reading level will work if there is enough support from group and high interest reading material along with adequate background knowledge. A student, Diane, was reading a book at her ffustrational reading level; she appeared to rely totally on group members when reading And Then There Were None. She tried to participate without letting anyone know she was not reading by discussing names of characters after they were introduced by other group members. It worked well for group discussion to review and solidify what happened in the book, but it was Diane’s life line. She brought her book with her every day and had it opened. When the rest of her group was half way through the book, she claimed to be finished and worked on other assignments. But she continued to participate in literature circle discussions. Her reading needs were not met, and her well-practiced coping skill of using verbal discussion to get through the reading was utilized. Reading books that were “easy” and chosen because they were on the majority of the students’ independent or instructional reading level appeared to give students a more lax attitude with the feeling of lowering the expectations, thus the academic level, for learning. This training of students to feel that learning depends on authority and rote responses on worksheets using frustrational reading level material leave students feeling that they cannot control their own learning or learn 76 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. from any other source than a teacher. That is what “New Criticism” reveled in. This “one-knows-all” elitism and status seeking position does little to promote self- learning (Rosenblatt, 2003). Students need to be taught the dynamics of collaborative learning and the power of autonomous learning. Literature circles made them feel vulnerable and insecure in the learning at the beginning. Constant training helped students become familiar with the nuances of the intervention. Learning to gain confidence and articulate their own thinking in a peer situation begins a process of life long learning that serves all students well. It begins the release of responsibility (Wilhelm et al., 2001) that students and teachers find difficult. In implementing literature circles, group compatibility is critical for success. The crucial elements are not student ability, group size, or gender specifically, but the more elusive elements of enthusiasm for the reading, understanding their own thinking, and perhaps shared group expectations. These elements came from choosing books that fit the correct developmental level of the student. Finding reading material that was at the right ability and interest level allowed students to utilize the metacognitive skills taught through the use of reading strategies. Through analysis of student journals and surveys, students who enjoyed the group they were in and the novel chosen found little fault in literature circles. Students who were skeptical of group members and/or of the book chosen found literature circles marginally successful. Writing in journals became laborious for students. It forced them to be metacognitive that was a new skill they were developing. They vocally expressed 77 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. desire to just read and talk. Group discussions were difficult for students without some kind of guideline. This could be explained from a strong school culture where students have been taught to do exactly what they have been told or that is a natural phenomenon of not knowing how to respond in a new situation. DaLie (2001) explains that students are set up for failure if they are not given specific, prescriptive methods in which to proceed in literature circles. This study found that students needed scaffolding, but not to the degree of handing out worksheets with job titles and descriptions. Using the reading strategies as a guide, students were able to discuss with each other how they were able to comprehend using the same strategy discussed in mini-lessons. Suggestions for journal writing content such summaries, connections, questions, vocabulary words, and interesting information emphasized the reading strategies. This gave time for all students to think through their own ideas without peer pressure. Journals then gave cohesiveness to the discussion as well as direction for the reading. Learning to rely on each other was not an immediate reaction. Students would look for the teacher when discussions had all but ended and the bell had not rung. Students needed time to discover that their group could function independently. This took time and perseverance. If students were interested in the book, the group discussions worked well, but if students lost connectedness through absences, not reading, or incompatibility, the group was less effective. Students interested in the book persevered out of desire to hear from others and share their own ideas. 78 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The questionnaire at the end of the intervention asked students to list the best part of literature circles. The most repeated answer was “hearing what others had to say.” The awkwardness of having students in a group that they had never conversed with left some students less than enthused. “You don’t who you’re with” and “literature circles are good but only in an English class” indicated that students were uncomfortable with the new way of learning. Students have little previous knowledge on how to act with peers that they don’t know or seldom speak to. At a self-conscious age of 16 and 17, students cling to familiar activities that expose them the least. This intervention demanded more than sitting in a classroom taking notes. The novelty was exciting, but the actuality required effort and engagement which was accepted with mixed emotions. The importance of students gaining confidence in their own reading and being able to discuss without a teacher encourages more independent thinking and reading. Students were not accustomed to setting criteria with other students. Nor were they comfortable with using their writing as discussion guides. Despite the tediousness of the journal writing, it gave students a concrete reference in which to rely on to keep the group on topic. It began the difficult task of being metacognitive which was also new to most students. The teacher/researcher was looking for the least restrictive format for successful discussion. Allowing students to create their own topics and concerns was too open at the beginning of the implementation. With understanding of the intervention and practice, students were able to proceed without directives for specific job descriptors. This reflective, metagcognitive thinking prepares 11th grade students for the larger 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. world they will soon be entering. They need to be aware of their own thinking and be able to express it in an appropriate way. Literature circles implemented as suggested in this study practices skills that will be used for a lifetime. Teachers are reluctant to give up power as the all-knowing expert. One perk of teaching is feeling like students look to teachers as fountains of wisdom. To relinquish some of the power back to the students is threatening (DaLie, 2001). This study found that students were just as responsive if not more so to the teacher during the intervention. Students responded quickly to transitions making it easier to plan a variety of activities during the class period. Significance of the Study This study gives insight into how teachers, administrators, parents, and publishers can look at literature circles at the high school level. Previous studies have focused on elementary and middle school curriculums with very few studies in grades 10-12. This qualitative, action-research based paper gives authentic data with purposeful changes made through out the time of the study to improve the intervention for a more positive outcome for students. This formative evaluative process enhanced the understanding of the implementation to have a greater impact on student learning. Through various research tools, data was collected to give an in depth, detailed description of how to conduct literature circles. Students responded positively to choice and collaborative discussions of their reading, ft was anything but smooth. This study gives those interested in a balanced look at what happens in an English classroom implementing the intervention. The responses from both 80 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. teacher/researcher and students show the benefits and pitfalls for various types of learners using literature circles. In the classroom setting, it was found that group size, student ability, and gender were not the pivotal elements that would regulate the workings of the literature circles. The crucial element was book choice. Extensive planning needs to occur as educators order books that meet the reading levels and interests of students. Sebesta and Monson (2003) indicate that popular genres at the high school level include preferences for movies, adventure, horror, mysteries, sports, murder, crime, humor, love, and fantasy. Both boys and girls show increased interest in nonfiction, romantic fiction, and books dealing with adolescence. Teachers need to let go of the necessity to control student reading for all aspects of the curriculum. Students need to have some independence and know what it is like to control their own learning environment. If necessary, as was done in this study, parent permission can be obtained to secure adult confirmation for reading material. Principals need to recognize the importance of emphasis on independent reading for students in the secondary setting. They also need to provide staff development for teacher training and money for books. Publishers need to provide a wide range of types of genre focusing more on nonfiction and lower ability with high interest material for the struggling high school reader. Money spent on literature circle books that are leveled and provide a wide variety of genres will create an environment that students will respond to. Flexibility in allowing changes needs to be available. Students responding to each other instead 81 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. of the teacher is a skill that students need as they leave their formal schooling as 18 year olds. This is not an automatic skill that comes with the high school diploma. Everyone interested in improving literacy education can learn from this study. Literature circles is one intervention that can positively affect independent reading for high school students. Implications for Practice DaLie (2001) says, For too long we veteran teachers have clung to the archaic notions that we hold all of the correct answers, that we are founts of all interpretive wisdom and literary understanding, and that it is our mission to impact all that we know and love of literature to the uniformed and unenlightened. In clinging to these misbeliefs, we have not allowed our students to genuinely make meaning in their reading, nor to discover for themselves the simple joy of reading a good book and talking about with others (p. 84). Students can be taught how to be independent learners through choice and peer collaboration. Enough guidance and support has to be given to students to help them understand the expectations and still develop their own ability to articulate ideas and concerns as they read (Wilhelm et al., 2001). This active learning intervention of literature circles increases engagement and motivation as students learn to become metacognitive in the process. Morrow (2003) explains, “We are aware that systematic and explicit skill development is important and necessary. By itself, it is simply incomplete. Systematically integrating direct instruction with the promotion of voluntary, recreational reading endows skill development with a reason for being and points the reader toward lifetime fulfillment and continued growth” (p. 865). Teachers need to create an environment where students can learn effectively, not only from authority but also from each other. Implementing literature circles is 82 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. one intervention where students can begin a life long process of learning from peers. Teachers need to begin by showing students how to choose appropriate reading material. Through confidence in book choice, students can begin their own journey into reading under their own control. When book choices are made for literature circles, students need guidance in what to expect of themselves and others. Through mini-lessons on reading strategies, all students practiced together metacognitive skills that would enhance their reading with reinforcement from each other. Discussions are the natural next step as students respond to each other. Marshall et al. (1995) did a large scale study of whole-class discussions in secondary schools. He found that teachers “took longer turns, student responses reflected teacher’s questions and primarily took the form of informative statements, and teachers carried the interpretive agenda” (p. 115). As collaboration is relied on for learning, students negotiate meaning for themselves and others. It is inferred that the more comfortable students become in this setting, the easier the collaboration will be and the more beneficial the discussions Daniels, 2002b). This intervention is not meant to replace reading curriculum for any content area. It is an important piece to add dimension and critical learning for students. All subject areas from science to math could implement literature circles as a portion of the curriculum where students choose to read articles, novels, texts, etc. together in groups to enrich the curriculum in a more individual approach. Regular content 83 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. teaching occurs as usual with literature circles focused on at least once a week to keep continuity and excitement for the reading constant. Recommendations It is recommended that administrators, parents, and publishers support teachers in an effort to implement literature circles with financial resources, a variety of appropriate book titles both fiction and nonfiction, and encouragement from home. Staff development needs to be provided to give instructions and support to this intervention. As more teachers implement literature circles, students will become more adept at utilizing their peers and become more independent learners within an environment where support and direction is available. This will serve students well as they graduate from high school to continue their education or go into the workplace to have had the experience of collaborating with others with different ideas and concerns. Teachers need to have time to become effective teachers of implementing literature circles. Principals need to realize the quiet, uniform behavior of students and teachers in the classroom is no longer indicative of learning. More study needs to be done to find ways to help students make appropriate book choice. This will increase the power of the intervention. Students need to know how to find an appropriate level of reading material for their individual abilities, know what areas of interest they have, and types of genre that they find enjoyable. Langer (1992) suggests that students are seldom asked in schools to share their own understanding of their reading or learn how to explore different possibilities. There are few opportunities to become metacognitive. Literature circles promote a more 84 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. meaningful understanding as students learn from each other. LaDie (2001) purports that “When we put students in the center of their own learning process, provide them with support and encouragement, and trust in their ability to rise to our expectations, we can step back and watch true learning in action” ( p. 99). Several areas of study need to be explored such as content area use of literature circles. More study also needs to be done to find the optimal amount of time for use of literature circles. Literature circles is one critical aspect of reading, but how much is enough? The most effective use of mini-lessons should also be studied for high school level use. Some studies suggested using collaborative skills, writing techniques, classroom issues (Daniels, 2002b). No study has been done to show the comparison or contrast of the different types of topics used for literature circle implementation. Introducing literature circles at the beginning of the year would allow more time for students to adjust to this type of intervention and feel comfortable with the expectations. This would give students time to read more so they could stay together in the reading material as well as have the opportunity to practice collaborative skills. Students need time to acquire confidence and skills in a different type of learning where they can learn about their learning as they become responsible for the outcome. Implementing literature circles in a high school setting creates a new framework in which to look at collaboration for students to become autonomous, independent learners before they leave the mandatory educational setting. It was 85 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. found that book choice absorbed other elements that could be pivotal to other collaborative settings but were less impactful in literature circles. Group size, ability, and gender are factors that influence the effectiveness of collaboration, but book choice usurps each of these factors in determining the composition of the group when using literature circles as the intervention. Students adapt to their group dynamics through the common thread of book choice. This study revealed the necessity of teachers to prepare students to become effective members of a collaborative group to maximize the learning potential for students. Creating an environment where collaboration with a variety of students is a necessity. Questions, ideas, and concerns of all group members need to be accepted by students in the group. Through training and practice, students become skilled at group dynamics where every member is valued and feels comfortable to participate. Book choice selection is also an important skill that needs to be taught by the teacher. Students have not had ample opportunities to select books for themselves in classroom settings. They feel inadequate and insecure in choosing books that are traditionally selected by the teacher. Teaching students how to successfully select books for themselves needs to be studied. This study found that using metacognitive skills as mini-lesson topics to guide students in reading their group books was an affirming activity for both individual reading and collaborative discussion. The teacher needs to rethink the authority position and allow students to gain confidence in their own thinking, 86 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. control of their own learning, and clarity of text meaning. Literature circles have the capacity to motivate reluctant readers and create more interest for the avid readers. 87 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. References Albom, Mitch. (1997). Tuesdays with morrie. New York, New York: Random House, Inc. Alvermann, Donna E. (2001). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Executive summary and paper commissioned by the National Reading Conference. Chicago, Illinois: National Reading Conference. Alvermann, Donna E, Young, Josephine Peyton, Weaver, Dera, Moore, David W., Phelps, Stephen F., Thrash, Esther C., Zalewski, Patricia. (1996). Middle and highschool students’ perceptions of how they experience text-based discussions: A multicase study. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, (3), 244- 267. Alvermann, Donna E. (1995/1996). Peer-led discussions: Whose interests are served? Journal o f Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(4), 282-289. Anderman, Eric M., Eccles, Jacquelynne S., Yoon, Kwang, S., Roeser, Robert, Wigfield, Allan, & Blumenfeld, Phyllis (2001). Learning to value mathematics and reading: Relations to mastery and performance-oriented instructional practice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 76-95. Applegate, Mary DeKonty, Quinn, Kathleen Benson, & Applegate, Anthony J. (1994). Using metacognitive strategies to enhance achievement for at-risk liberal arts college students. Journal o f Reading, 38, 32-41. Au, Kathryn & Kawakami, Alice J. Cultural congruence in instruction. In R. Rueda (ed). Language and Cultural Diversity in Learning, Required Readings EDPT 570 (Fall 2002), University of Southern California: University Bookstore Custom Publishing. Baker, Linda, & Wigfield, Allan (1999). Dimensions of children’s motivation for reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 4, 452-477. Barr, Rebecca (1995). What research says about grouping in the past and present and what it suggests about the future. In Marguerite Radenrich & Lyn J. McKay, Flexible Grouping for Literacy in the Elementary Grades, p. 1-24. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. Beach, Richard. (1993). A teacher’ s introduction to reader-response theories. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers. Blinn, William. (1972). Brian’ s song. New York, New York: Banton Books. 88 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Brabham, Edna Greene & Villaume, Susan Kidd (2000). Continuing conversations about literature circles. The Reading Teacher, 50, 3,278-280. Brause, Rita S. & Mayher, John S. (2003). Who really goes to school? Teaching and learning for the student we really have. In James Flood, Diane Lapp, James R. Squire, Julie M. Jensen (2n d ed.). Handbook o f Research on Teaching the English Language Arts, 67-73. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bruning, Roger H., Schraw, Gregory J. & Ronning, Royce R. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction, (3rd ed.).Upper Saddle, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. Bums, Bonnie. (1998). Changing the classroom climate with literature circles. Journal o f Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42, (2), 124-129. Bushman, John. (1997). Young adult literature in the classroom—or is it? English Journal, 3, 35-40. Calloway, Byron. (1981). What turns children “on” or “off’ in reading. Reading Improvement, 18, 3, 214-217. Card, Orson Scott. (1994). Ender’ s game. New York, New York: Tom Doherty Associates, LLC. Chall, Jeanne S. (1996). Stages of reading development, 2n d Ed. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Chan, Loma K. S. (1996). Motivational orientations and metacognitive abilities of intellectually gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, (4), 184-194. Chang-Wells, Gen & Wells, Gordon (1993) Dynamics of discourse: Literacy and the construction of knowledge. In Ellice A. Foman., Norris Minick, & C. AddisonStone, Addison (Eds.). Contexts for Learning: Sociocultural Dynamics in Children’ s Development, 58-90. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. Christie, Agatha. (2001). And then there were none. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn & Lytle, Susan L. (1993/ Inside/Outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. 89 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Cohen, E. (1984). Talking and working together: Status interaction and learning. In P. Peterson, L. C. Wilkinson, & M Hallinan (Eds.), Instructional groups in the classroom: Organization and processes, 171-188. Orlando: Academic. Cohen, Elizabeth G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review o f Educational Research, 64, 1, 1-35. Cone, Joan. (1994). Appearing acts: Creating readers in a high school English class. Harvard Educational Review, 64, 4, 450-473. Creech, Sharon. (1994). Walk two moons. New York, New York: HarperCollins Publisher Inc. Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped potential. Journal o f Applied Development Psychology, 5, 331-343. Daniels, Harvey. (2002a). Expository test in literature circles. Voices from the Middle, 9, 4, 7-14. Daniels, Harvey. (2002b). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book clubs & reading groups. 2n d Ed. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers. Dunn, Rita, Giannitti, Mary Cecilia, Murray, John B., Rossi, Ino, Geisert, Gene, & Quinn, Peter (1990). Group students for instruction: Effects of learning style on achievement and attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 4, 485- 494. Eisner, Elliot (1984). Can educational research inform educational practice? Phi Delta Kappan 65, 7, 447-452. Elbaum, Batya E., Schumm, Jeanne Shay, Vaughn, Sharon. (1997). Urban middle- elementary students’ perceptions of grouping formats for reading instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 97, 5 ,475-500. Faman, Nancy. (1996). Connecting adolescents and reading: Goals at the middle level. Journal o f Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 6, 436-445. Gambrell, Linda B. & Morrow, Lesley Mandell. (1996). Creating motivating contexts for literacy learning. In Linda Baker, Peter Afflerback, & David Reinking (ed). Developing Engaged Readers in School and Home Communities, 115-136. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 90 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test (3rd ed). (1989). Form K. Itasca, Illinois: Riverside Publishing Company. Gerla, Jacqueline. (1996). Response-based instructions: At-risk students engaging In literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 12, 149-169. Goldman, William. (1998). The princess bride. New York, New York: The Random House Publishing Group. Goswami, D. & Stillman, P. (1987). Reclaiming the classroom: Teacher research as an agency for change. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook. Greeno, James G., Collins, Allan M., & Resnick, Lauren B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. Berliner and R. Calfee (Eds.). Handbook o f Educational Psychology, 15-46. New York: MacMillan. Greenwood, Davydd J. & Levin, Morten. (1998). Introduction to action research: Socialresearch for social change. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc. Guthrie, John, Wigfield, Allan, VonSecker, Clare (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 2, 331-341. Hacker, D. J. (1998). Metacognition: Definition and empirical founds. In D. J. Hacker,J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hill, Bonnie Campbell, Schlick Noe, Katherine L., & King Janine A. (2003). Literature circles in middle school: One teacher’ s journey. Norwood, Massachusetts: Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc. Hopkins, David. (2002). A teacher’ s guide to classroom research. Philadeophia: Open University Press. Hynd, Cynthia, Holschuh, Jodi, & Nist, Sherrie. (2000). Learning complex scientific Information: Motivation theory and its relation to student perceptions. Readingdt Writing Quarterly, 16, 23-57. Ivey, Gay & Broaddus, Karen. (2001). “Just plain reading”: A survey of what makes students want to read in middle school classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly,36, 4, 350-377. 91 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Johnson, Beverly. (1993). Teacher-as-researcher. Washington, D.C.: Eric Clearinghouse on teacher education. (ERIC document reproducing service No. ED355205). Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal o f Education Psychology, 69, 24-32. Karolides, Nicholas (Ed.). (1992). Reader-response in the classroom: Evoking and interpreting meaning in literature. White Plains, New York: Longman Publishing Group. Koskinen, Patricia & O’Flahavan, John F. (1994/1995). Teacher role options in peer literature. The Reading Teacher, 48, 4, 354-356. Krakauer, Jon. (1999). Into thin air. New York, New York: Rand House Inc. LaDie, Sandra Okura. (2001). Students becoming real readers: Literature circles in high school English classes. In Teaching reading in high school English classes. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English. Langer, J. A. (1992). Rethinking literature instruction. In J. A. Langer (Ed.), Literature instruction: A focus on student response. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English Language o f literature American literature anthology. (1994). Boston, Mass.: MacDougal Littell Publishing Company. Lewis, Cynthia. (2000). Critical issues: Limits of identification: The personal, pleasurable, and critical in reader response. Journal o f Literacy Research, 32 (4), 253-266. (1999). Teaching literature to adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 1, 114-127. Lou, Y., Abrami, Philip C., Spence, John C., Poulsen, Catherine, Chambers, Bette, d’Apollonia, Sylvia. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review o f Educational Research, 66, 4, 423-458. Lowry, Lois. (1993). The giver. New York, New York: Random House, Inc. Luce, Ron (1992). Mending walls: Using a reader-response approach to teach poetry. In Nicholas Karolides (ed.). Reader-response in the classroom: Evoking and interpreting meaning in literature, (pp. 61-74). White Plains, New York: Longman Publishing Group. 92 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. MacGillivray, Laurie. (1995). Teacher research. In Johanna Lemlech (Ed). Becoming a Professional Leader. New York, New York: Scholastic Inc. MacGillivray, Laurie, Tse, Lucy, McQuillan, Jeff (1995). Second language and literacy teachers considering literature circles: A play. Journal o f Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 1, 36-44. Marshall, J. D., Smagorinsky, P., & Smith, M. (1995). The Language of Interpretation: Patterns of Discourse in Discussions of Literature. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English Research Monograph. Mazer, Harry. (1975). Snow bound. New York, New York: Random House, Inc. McCarthey, Sarah J. (1994). Authors, text, and talk: The internalization of dialogue from social interaction during writing. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 3, 201-230. McCombs, Barbara L. (1996). Alternative perspectives for motivation. In Linda Baker, Peter Afflerback, & David Reinking(Eds). Developing engaged readers in school and home communities, 67-88. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. McKenna, Michael C., Kear, Dennis J., & Ellsworth, Randolph A. (1995). Children’s attitudes towards reading: A national survey. Reading ResearchQuarterly, 30, 4, 934-955. Meloth, M. S. & Deering, P. D. (1992). Effects of two cooperative conditions on peer-group discussions, reading comprehension, and metacognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 175-193. Moje, Elizabeth Birr, Young, Josephone Peyton, Readence, John E., Moore, David W. (2000). Reinventing adolescent literacy for new times: Perennial and millennial issues. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 5, 400-410. Morrow, L. M. (2003). Motivating lifelong voluntary readers. Handbook o f research on teaching the english language arts, 2n d £< 7.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. National Assessment of Educational Progress (2003). NAEP 2002 reading report cardfor the nation. Available: http://www.ed.gov/NCES/NAEP. National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. (2000). Department of Health and Human Services. National institute of child health and human development. NIH Pub. No. 00-04754. 93 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Nebo School District. (2003). District report card. Available: http://www.nebo.edu. Noll, Elizabeth. (1994). Social issues and literature circles with adolescents. Journal o f Reading, 38, 2, 88-93. Oldfather, Penny & Dahl, Karin. (1994). Toward a social constructivist reconceptualization of intrinsic motivation for literacy learning. Journal o f Reading Behavior, 26, 2, 139-157. Oldfather, Penny & McClaughlin, J. (1993). Gaining and losing voice: A longitudinal study of students’ continuing impulse to learn across elementary and middle school contexts. Research in Middle Level Education, 17, 1-15. Oldfather, Penny & Wigfield, Allan. (1996). Children’s motivations for literacy learning. In Linda Baker, Peter Afflerback, & David Reinking(ed). Developing engaged readers in school and home communities, 89-114. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Patton, Michael Quin. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, Inc. Paulsen, Gary. (1991). The winter room. New York, New York: Doubleday Publishing. Pintrich, Paul R. & Schunk, Dale H. (2002). Motivation in education: theory, research, and application, 2n d Ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Probst, Robert E. (1988). Response and analysis: Teaching literature in junior and senior high school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books, Inc. Rabinowitz, Peter J. & Smith, Michael W. (1998). Authorizing readers: Resistance and respect in the teaching o f literature. New York: Teachers College Press. Rosenblatt, Louise M. (2003). Literary theory. In ' James Flood, Diane Lapp, James R. Squire, & Julie M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook o f research on teaching the English language arts, (2n d ed.). (pp.67-73). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Radencich, Marguerite C. & McKay, Lyn J. (1995). Flexible grouping for literacy in the elementary grades. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. Robinson, Sharon. (2001). Jackie’ s nine. New York, New York: Scholastic Inc. 94 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Rogoff, B. (1991). Guidance and participation in spatial planning. In L. Resnick, J. Levine, & S. Teasley (ed.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 349- 383. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Rosenblatt, Louise. (2003). Literary theory. In James Flood, Diane Lapp, James R. Squire, Julie M. Jensen (2n d ed.). Handbook o f research on teaching the English language arts, 67-73. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Rosenblatt, Lousie, M. (1995). Literature as exploration. New York: The Modem Language Association of America. Rowling, J. K. (1997). Harry potter and the sorcerer’ s stone. New York, New York: Scholastic Inc. Samway, Katherine Davies, Whang, Gail, Cade, Carl, Gamil, Melindevic, Lubandina, Phommachanh, Kansome. (1991). Reading the skeleton, the heart, and the brain of a book: Students’ perspectives on literature study circles. The Reading Teacher, 45, 3, 196-205. Schaefer, R. J. (1967). The school as a center o f inquiry. New York: Harper and Row. Scholes, Robert. (1989). Protocols o f reading. Binghamton, New York: Vail-Ballou Press. Schraw, Greogry, Flowerday, Teni, & Reisetter, Marcy F. (1998). The role of choice in reader engagement. Journal o f Education Psychology, 90, 4, 705-714. Sebesta, Sam & Monson, Dianne. (2003). Reading preferences. Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts. James Flood, Diane Lapp, James R. Squire, Julie Jensen. Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Slavin, Robert. (1989). School and classroom organization. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Seib, Kenneth. (1995). What is that lapping the miles?: Responding to reader response. Teaching education in a two year community college, Dec. 173- 176. Sherrill, Anne. (1992). Through a glass darkly: Seeing ourselves in Chekhov’s “the lament.” In Nicholas Karolide (ed.). Reader-response in the classroom: Evoking and intersecting meaning in literature, 74-83. White Plains, New York: Longman Publishing Group. 95 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Soles, Derek. (1995). Using reader-response in a college literature class. Teaching Education in a Two Year Community College ,May, 136-140. Spiegel, Dixie Lee. (1998). Silver bullets, babies, and bath water: Literature response groups in a balanced literacy program. The Reading Teacher, 52, 2, 114-124. Stenhouse, Lawrence (1993). In Beverly Johnson, Teacher-As-Researcher. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education Washington DC. 1993- 03-00. ED355205. Stringer, Ernest T. (1999). Action research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Tomal, Daniel R. (2003). Action research for educators. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc. Tompkins, Jane P. (1980). Reader-response criticism: From formalism to post structuralism. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. Tovani, Chris. (2000). I read it, but I don’ t get it. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse. Utah State Office of Education. (2003). Evaluation and assessment. Available: http://usoe.kl2.ut.us. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development o f high psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Webb, Noreen M. & Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (ed.) Handbook o f Educational Psychology, 841-873. New York: MacMillan. Wertz, James. (1991). Voices o f the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Whitin, Phyllis. (2002). Leading into literature circles through the stretch-to-sketch strategy. The Reading Teacher, 55, 5, 445-450. Wigfield, Allan & Guthrie, John T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 89,3, 420-432. Wilhelm, Jeff, Baker, Tanya N., & Dube, Julie. (2001). Strategic reading: Guiding students to lifelong literacy, 6-12. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. 96 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Wilkinson, Ian A. G. (1998). Dealing with diversity: Achievement gaps in reading literacy among New Zealand students. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 144- 162. Wood, Karen D., McCormack, Rachel L., Lapp, Diane, & Flood, James. (1997). Improving young adolescent literacy through collaborative learning. Middle School Journal, 1,26-34. Wortis, Avi. (1993). Wolf rider. New York, New York: Simon & Schuster. 97 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix A Surveys and Interviews Semi-structured Interview Questions with a specific book title in mind: 1. When someone assigns a book for me to read, I 2. When I’m asked to write in a journal, I 3. When I think of school, I think if , and 4. The way I choose a book for independent reading is 5. If I were asked to summarize my past reading experiences, I would say 6. The things I think I do well as a reader are 7. The biggest problem for me when I try to read is 8. The hardest type of reading for me is 9. Given my future plans, I feel that reading and writing 10. I think that what would make me a better reader is Classroom Activities Please rate how you feel about each of the following activities on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being the least liked and 5 being the most liked: Reading silently 1 5 do not like really like Reading orally 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like Having someone read to you 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like Writing in journals 1 _________________________________________________5 do not like really like Listening to cassettes (stories, poems) 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like Working as a whole class 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like Working alone 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like 98 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Working in small groups 1 do not like really like Completing worksheets, workbooks 1 _________________________________________________5 do not like really like Doing vocabulary, dictionary work 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like Class discussions 1_________________________________________________5 do not like really like Writing in general 1 _________________________________________________5 do not like really like Choosing your own book to read 1 _________________________________________________5 do not like really like Reading the same book as the class 1 _________________________________________________5 do not like really like Reading Attitude Survey Thinking about the last book that you read, circle the letter that best describes how you feel about reading. N= No, almost never S=Sometimes A=Almost Always 1. Do you enjoy listening to stories or poems that are read to you? N S A 2. When you start to read a book, do you expect the book to be fun and/or exciting? N S A 3. Do you enjoy reading books that you have read before? N S A 4. Do you expect reading to make sense to you? N s A 5. Do you see yourself as a reader? N s A 6. Do you enjoy responding in some way to your reading? N s A 99 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 7. Does it bother you to receive feedback from other people about the way you read? N S A 8.D0 you see reading as more than just being able to say the words printed on the page? N S A 9.Do you expect to take an active part in your reading by trying to understand and add your own meaning to the author’s message? N S A 10. Do you expect to get something new out of a book each time you read it? N S A 11. Do you expect reading to be challenging but you’re confident that you can overcome the challenges? N S A 12. Are you eager to choose books on your own, perhaps choosing books on new subjects or by new authors? N S A 13. Do you respond to books either by writing or talking about the books without someone making you do so? 15. Do you expect to agree with everything you read? 16. Do you expect books to be part of your daily life? 17. Do you try to find time or make time to read? (Allen, 1995) N S A N S A N s A N s A 100 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix B University of Southern California Rossier School of Education ASSENT FORM FOR RESEARCH Page 1 o f 2 ASSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH The Effectiveness o f Social Interaction with High School Students on Reading Comprehension: Using Reader Response Theory with Literature Circles 1. My name is Mrs. Hillier. 2. I am asking you to take part in a research study because we are trying to learn more about using Literature Circles with high school students to improve literacy skills. Literature Circles are small groups of students gathered together to discuss a piece of literature in depth. 3. If you agree to be in this study you will participate in literature circles in the classroom and will select reading material of your choice to discuss with your peers. You will be audio taped in your groups. 4. This type of reading discussion group might be different from those in your other English classes. 5. You might find literature circles more interesting to discuss your ideas and concerns about the reading material than the traditional reading assignments. Please talk this over with your parents before you decide whether or not to participate. We will also ask your parents to give their permission for you to take part in this study. But even if your parents say “yes” you can still decide not to do this. 6. If you don’t want to be in this study, you don’t have to participate. Remember, being in this study is up to you, and no one will be upset if you don’t want to participate or even if you change your mind later and want 101 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to stop. There will be no change in your grade or class standing if decide not to be in the study. 7. You can ask any questions that you have about the study. If you have a question later that you didn’t think of now, you can call me at 798-4060 or ask me next time. 8. Signing your name at the bottom means that you agree to be in this study, and your parents will be given a copy of this form after you have signed it. Name o f Subject Date Subject’s Signature Name of Investigator Investigator’s Signature Date (must be same as Subject’s) 102 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. University of Southern California Rossier School of Education INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH The Effectiveness o f Social Interaction with High School Students on Reading Comprehension: Using Reader Response Theory with Literature Circles Your child has been asked to participate in a research study conducted by Mary Anne Hillier, M. Ed. And Laurie MacGillivray, Ph. D. from the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. The results of this study will be used in a dissertation in fulfillment for a doctorate degree in education. Your child was selected as a possible participant in this study because he/she is enrolled in 11th Grade English at Spanish Fork High School. A total of 31 subjects will be selected from this age group to participate. Participation is voluntary. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study is to examine how to implement literature circles with high school juniors. Through investigating the aspects of group size, individual differences, gender, and book choice in literature circles, implementation can become a viable intervention. This will give teachers wanting to incorporate literature circles in the classrooms at the high school level background information in which to base their decisions. PROCEDURES Students will choose a piece of literature from a variety of reading materials that they think they will enjoy reading. They will be placed in groups to read and discuss this reading with other students who also chose the same material. They will be asked to write in journals, take reading surveys, and perhaps be interviewed or audio taped to better evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention. If you agree for your child to volunteer to participate in this study, we would ask you to do the following things: 103 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1. Encourage your child to read his/her reading assignments for literature circles. 2. Consent for your child to take a reading interest survey and participate in interviews if asked throughout the trimester. 3. Consent for your child to be audio-taped during literature circles to better understand the dynamics of group discussion. The study will be conducted during the 3 rd trimester. Your child will be asked to participate throughout the time period during the regular class period. A letter of consent of reading material chosen by your child will be sent home for approval. POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS Your child might find that literature circles are different from the traditional style of teaching English and thus cause discomfort. POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY The potential benefits will be increased reading comprehension as students respond to the intervention. With increased reading skills, confidence in literacy abilities will show higher scores, more reading and writing, and higher self-esteem. PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION There will be no financial compensation for participants CONFIDENTIALITY Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with your child will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. All the material gathered for this research study will be kept at the home of the researcher. All names will be deleted and pseudo names will replace all student names. Parents and/or students are welcome to listen to the audio-tapes throughout the trimester. The audio-tapes will be erased in two year. When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no information will be included that would reveal your child’s identity. If photographs, videos, or audio-tape recordings of you will be used for educational purposes, your identity will be protected or disguised 104 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL You can choose whether your child should be in this study or not. If you give consent for your child to volunteer to be in this study, you may have your child withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the study. Choosing not to participate will not affect the your child’s grade or class standing. The investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances arise which warrant doing so. IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Mary Anne Hillier at Spanish Fork High School, 99 North 300 West, Spanish Fork, Utah, 801-798-4060 or Dr. Laurie MacGillivray at University of Southern California, WPH 1003C, 213-740-3922 RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS You may withdraw your consent for your child at any time and discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your child’s participation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your rights as a research subject, contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research, Grace Ford Salvatori Building, Room 226, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1695, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu. EXPERIMENTAL SUBJECT’S BILL OF RIGHTS FOR PSYCHOSOCIAL STUDIES Any person who is requested to consent to participate as a subject in a research study involving a psychosocial study, or who is requested to consent on behalf of another, has the right to: 1. Be informed of the nature and purpose of the study. 2. Be given an explanation of the procedures to be followed in the study. 3. Be given a description of any attendant discomforts and risks reasonably to be expected from your/your child’s participation in the study. 4. Be given an explanation of any benefits reasonably to be expected from your/your child’s participation in the study. 5. Be given a disclosure of any appropriate alternatives that might be advantageous to you/your child, and their relative risks and benefits. 6. Be informed of avenues of resources, if any, available to you/your child after the study procedure if complications should arise. 7. Be given an opportunity to ask any questions concerning the study or the procedures involved. 8. Be instructed that consent to participate in the study may be withdrawn at any 105 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. time, and that you/your child may discontinue participation in the study without prejudice. 9. Be given a copy of this form and the signed and dated written study consent form. 10. Be given the opportunity to decide to consent or not to consent to participate in the study without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on your decision. SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT, PARENT OR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE. I understand the procedures described above, have carefully read the information contained in the Experimental Subject’s Bill of Rights for Psychosocial Studies, and I understand fully the rights of a potential subject in a research study involving people as subjects. My questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have been given a copy of this form. Name of Subject Name of Parent or Legal Representative (if applicable) Signature of Subject, Parent or Legal Representative Date SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR I have explained the research to the subject or his/her legal representative, and answered all of his/her questions. I believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely consents to participate. Name of Investigator Signature of Investigator Date (must be the same as subject’s) 106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix C Book Preference List Name_______________________________________ Date Period_____ Directions: Write done your first 3 book preferences numbers 1, 2, and 3 with 1 being your first choice. Into Thin Air, Krakauer-The tragedy that took the lives of experienced mountain guides and novice climbers in a raging blizzard atop Mt. Everest in 1996 is chronicled with clarity, poignancy, and brutal honesty by one who witnessed the event first-hand. Snow Bound, Mayer- Two emotionally immature teenagers whose basic needs for food and shelter have always been taken care of are forced to come to grips with raw survival. Alive, Read- Spellbinding, inspirational account of a 1972 plane crash high in the snowbound Andes and the young Uruguayans who survived it. Guts, Paulsen- Paulsen tells the real stories behind the Brian books, the stories of the adventures that inspired him to write Brian Robeson’s story in Hatchet, The River, Brian’ s Winter and Brian’ s Return. Jackie’s Nine, Robinson- Jackie Robinson’s daughter guides readers through the nine values that helped the baseball hero and civil rights leader achieve his goals. Tuesday’s with Morrie, Albom- Writer Mitch Albom chronicles his visits with his very special, dying, seventy-eight year-old college professor, Morrie Schwartz, whose final lessons shed light on how to live. Harry Potter, Rawling- Orphan Harry Potter’s life changes when destiny calls and he is enrolled at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. And Then There Were None, Christie- A pathological killer systematically murders ten strangers entrapped on an island. Wolf Rider, Avi- Andy places himself in great danger when he tries to prove that the supposed crank caller, claiming to have committed murder, is telling the truth. 107 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Name Date Period Directions: Write down your first 3 book preferences number 1, 2, and 3 with 1 being your first choice. Brian’s Song, Blinn- Two football players conquer the differences of race, personality, and place of birth to support each other in this screenplay based on the story of Brian Piccolo’s courageous battle with cancer. Walk Two Moons, Creech- Thirteen-year-old Salmanca travels from Ohio to Idaho with her eccentric grandparents. A richly layered novel that is in turn funny, mysterious, and touching. Freak, The Mighty, Philbirck- A brilliant, poignant novel about friendship so strong, it shatters the walls a boy has built around himself. The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle, Avi- Set in 1832, this is the compelling adventure of a young girl’s sailing trip from England to Providence, Rhode Island. A Year Down Yonder, Peck- Fifteen-year-old Mary Alice leaves Chicago to live with her good-hearted, eccentric grandmother in a rural Midwestern tow in the sequel to Newberry Award winning A Long Way from Chicago. Across Five Aprils, Hunt- The unforgettable story of young Jethro Creighton, who comes of age during the turbulent years of the Civil War. The Giver, Lowry- Jonas, an exceptional boy, is given a huge task by the Elders of the Committee. He is to be responsible for receiving and keeping all the memories of the past. Ender’s Game, Card- Ender Wiggins is the result of a genetic breeding program and years of harsh, unforgiving training. Thinking he is only playing computer- simulated war games, Ender is really commanding the last great fleet on Earth. The Princess Bride, Goldman- Goldman’s timeless tale of high adventure that pits country against country, good against evil, and love against hate. 108 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Student Number Stanine Score 24675 9 36333 9 33639 9 21319 9 25315 8 25235 8 24624 8 25386 7 24666 7 25094 6 24921 6 24893 6 25085 6 41802 6 24721 5 41372 5 24834 5 25017 4 24683 4 24699 3 24054 1 36341 1 Class Average: 5.6 Appendix D Spanish Fork High School Degrees of Reading Power Test Scores Test Period Fall 2003- 2004 109 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix E Reading Attitude Survey Results Before Literature Circles N= No S=Sometimes A=Almost Always Questions N S A Do you enjoy listening to stories or poems that are read to you. 3 24 3 When you start to read a book, do you expect the book to be fun and/or exciting? 2 18 10 Do you expect reading to make sense to you? 2 9 19 Do you enjoy reading books that you have read before? 8 14 8 Do you see yourself as a reader? 9 15 8 Do you enjoy responding in some way to your reading? 9 18 3 Does it bother you to receive feedback from other people about the way you read? 11 18 1 Do you see reading as more than just being able to say the words printed on the page? 1 19 10 Do you expect to take an active part in your reading by trying to understand and add your own meaning to the other’s message? 8 15 7 Do you expect reading to be challenging but you’re confident that you can overcome the challenges? 7 11 11 Are you eager to choose books on your own, perhaps choosing books on new subjects or by new authors? 4 14 12 Do you respond to books either by writing or talking about the books without someone making you do so? 10 16 5 Do you expect to agree with everything you read? 12 19 0 Do you expect books to be part of your daily life? 13 12 4 Do you try to find time or make time to read? 7 17 5 Do you expect to get something new out of a book each time you read it? 4 14 12 110 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reading Attitude Survey Attitude Survey After Literature Circles N= No S= Sometimes A= Almost Always Questions N S A Do you enjoy listening to stories or poems that are read to you. 2 21 6 When you start to read a book, do you expect the book to be fun and/or exciting? 3 15 10 Do you expect reading to make sense to you? 1 13 14 Do you enjoy reading books that you have read before? 7 15 6 Do you see yourself as a reader? 9 9 10 Do you enjoy responding in some way to your reading? 7 15 5 Does it bother you to receive feedback from other people about the way you read? 9 15 3 Do you see reading as more than just being able to say the words printed on the page? 17 11 Do you expect to take an active part in your reading by trying to understand and add your own meaning to the other’s message? 4 16 8 Do you expect reading to be challenging but you’re confident that you can overcome the challenges? 5 13 10 Are you eager to choose books on your own, perhaps choosing books on new subjects or by new authors? 1 11 15 Do you respond to books either by writing or talking about the books without someone making you do so? 12 12 5 Do you expect to agree with everything you read? 17 10 Do you expect books to be part of your daily life? 8 14 6 Do you try to find time or make time to read? 4 17 7 Do you expect to get something new out of a book each time you read it? 4 14 10 111 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Using a 0-1-2 value system, with 0=No, l=Sometimes, 2=Almost Always, the following chart was created to compare how students felt about reading before and after the intervention of literature circles. Attitude Survey Before Intervention Almost Always No taNo ■ Sometimes □ Almost Always Sometimes 62% A ttitude S u rv e y A fter Intervention A lm ost No Always 15% 29% S om etim es 56% E 3 No ■ S om etim es □ A lm ost Always 112 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix F Gates/MacGinity Reading Comprehension Test Grades 7-9, 2001 Edition Student Number Before Intervention Test After Intervention Test 24594 70 74 24624 91 89 24666 74 82 24675 85 89 24699 54 52 24721 72 67 33639 92 87 24921 36 84 24893 64 87 24820 61 62 25298 46 55 25315 78 81 25836 68 71 25489 66 54 36333 91 92 41372 60 60 65% Average 74% Average Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix G Literature Circle Questionnaire The following questions concern how you feel about reading novels in literature circles. 1. On a scale of 1 -5, with 5 being the best, where do you rate your experience of reading books with other students? 1 Don’t Like 2 Not too Bad 3 Okay Kind of Like Really Like 4 5 2. What did you like most about using literature circles? 3. What did you like the least about literature circles? 4. Did reading with others encourage you to read more? yes Explain. no 5. Did you understand the book better through group discussion? yes no Explain. 6. Would you like to participate in literature circles again? yes Explain. no 7. What would you suggest to make literature circles better for you? 114 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Literature Circle Questionnaire Results The following questions concern how you feel about reading novels in literature circles. 1. On a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the best, where do you rate your experience of reading books with other students? 1 2 3 4 5 Don’t Like Not too Bad Okay Kind of Like Really Like (7%) (14%) (25% ) (4 3 % ) (11%) 2. What did you like most about using literature circles? I like talking with other people who want to read the book as well. You could get better understanding. It was fun to discuss my feelings about the book andfind out that others felt the same way. It was also enjoyable to hear the different opinions that others had. That you get to talk it over and understand. You can see what others got out o f the book and understand it more. I could see the book from different angles. I heard different interpretations o f the same story. Different opinions and views, interesting ideas. We get to discuss, so if you don’ t get it we can all talk together about it. I could hear other people’ s points o f view. I could get my questions answered. Group discussions, I like hearing about everyone else and how they are connecting to the book. Get to get opinions o f others. That I wasn’ t the only person reading the book. Was with people I liked. I loved the discussions and what the other students thought. Hearing others opinions on the same parts o f the book. Yeah, I liked it, kind o f it was okay. The fact that it was easy. Nothing. I liked when I could see what others thought about the book I f you didn ’ t understand something then you could ask someone else in your group. The discussions. There were many different opinions. I liked knowing what other people thought and what the pictures were in their heads. You got to discuss the book and get other people’ s opinions. 115 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. You can find out what other certain people read about the book instead o f keeping up with the whole class. Well other people can help you figure out other parts o f the book. You can talk to others and here what they read. You could hear different opinions. 3. What did you like the least about literature circles? I didn ’ t like it when people didn ’ t participate in the discussion. Some o f the people in your group. That the people I read with didn’ t read as fast as I did. I wanted to discuss the ending when people were still discussing the beginning. You don’ t know who you ’ re with. When you aren ’ t in the same spot in the book Writing ideas and discussions down on paper I f someone read ahead, it gave away parts I would rather have found out myself. I want to talk on different subjects and not our book It was hard to stay together in the book. I would rather read by myself. We had them so often and sometimes we didn’ t talk about the book. Those who don’ t work. The journals. Not enough time to read. But I wasn’ t crazy on the journals and constant evaluation. If you were in an interesting part o f the book it wasn’ t fun to stop and talk. I just didn’ t think it was fun. Everything. When I had to try to keep up with others. Some time you get off the subject. Journal writing. It didn’ t give us a lot o f reading time. Most o f the time it was boring. They were kind o f boring and pointless. We didn’ t get that much time to read together. Nothing really, it is fun to talk about your book. Conflicts about what others read and interpreted. I think it wasted reading time. 4. Did reading with others encourage you to read more? 50%- yes 43% -no Explain. I f you didn 7 read, you didn 7 know what everyone was talking about. Not really, I have to be willing to read. No, I ’ m already a major reader. It didn 7 stop my normal pattern. Give me something to try to beat others to do. When people were further I wanted to get up with them. I read best on my own. I enjoy it more. 116 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Ifelt more o f an obligation and a responsibility towards the group, rather than on my own. It did and didn’ t. It did so that we would all be together, but it also didn’ t. Ifelt like I didn’ t want to read because they were ahead o f me and told me what was going on. I already loved to read and I like having my own opinion about the books I ’ m reading. I had to stay with the group or pretend to, but just because I didn’ t read as much doesn 7 mean I didn 7 enjoy it as much. You don 7 want to get behind. So you stay on the same pace as those around you. Knowing I had to get something from the book turned me off to it, and I didn 7 enjoy reading any more. I tried to stay as far as them. Because I would want to know what they would talk about in the circle. I read if I want to when I want. It made me motivated to get where they were. No, because I wanted to read it. I got done what needed to be done. There was no motivation. Yes, because I know that I needed to read to keep up. Well, you wanted to stay caught up so you could be involved. Some people didn 7 read at all or else slower. 5. Did you understand the book better through group discussion? 74%-yes 26% - no Explain. Other people have different views. Yes, because people see things differently then I do. Better views and understanding. Yes, I got some views on the book talking with other people that I would never have even thought of. We all had our opinions. Everyone has different points o f view. In that I heard new ways to look at one topic. I f would get confused, I could ask someone and they explained it. Because if you didn 7 get something, you could discuss and get a better understanding. We could discuss what everyone else thought o f the book and it helped me understand better. I was always farther ahead than everyone else. I also interpret things my own way, and I like it, too. Sometimes it confused me. Yes, because I got more views but no because then there’ s so many. Sometimes I was fully understanding the book and someone would say something and confuse me. 117 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. No one in my group seemed too worried about understanding the book, and even if they had, I still wouldn ’ t have enjoyed it. I got to see others thoughts and opinions. Because you could get help in understanding the book. I got different insights. We talked about different points. Yes, a lot of different opinions. Not really, Ifigured most everything out on my own. No, I just read. I think it wouldn’ t have mattered much. Well, the parts I didn ’ t get others did so it helped me out. Most o f what they talked about wouldn’ t pertain to the story. 6. Would you like to participate in literature circles again? 63%- yes 27% -no Explain. If people want to read the book Yes, it’ s fun and you get more involved. Just in English class. As I said, I enjoy discussing with other people. I really like hearing other people’ s opinions on books. So lean get more involved with the book. I prefer to read on my own. When too much is analyzed, it becomes all I can think about while reading. It’ s harder to enjoy the book. It helped me understand the book more. Because you can whenever you want to and gain a better understanding. I would rather just read my own book and progress on my own. I like hearing about other people’ s experiences about the book and hearing what they got out o f it. You can get others excited about reading. Although they were helpful at times, I get frustrated if I had to do it with more than 2 books a year. I hated them with a passion. I would rather read alone. Because it helps me with the story. I hate reading. I think it’ s great to describe many different points. No, I ’ m too old for that. It was easier just to talk about it as a class or by yourself. Yes, I thought they were fun and I enjoyed them. Because it helped me make it through the book. I would rather read the book and finish it. I like, however, we were able to choose our book 1. What would you suggest to make literature circles better for you? Have a book that EVERYONE REALLY wants to read. Having people who didn’ t goof off all the time. 118 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I wouldn7 change it. Just have a little more to work with. Not having to write about what you talk about, just being able to talk. I would rather read the whole book through without discussion. Then go back through it and talk with the group. Less writing and more time to discuss. Nothing. It is good right now at how it is. I like it quite a bit. It is fun, and I also learn at the same time. So everything is wonderful. That we don 7 to it! Just concentrate more on listening to what everyone has to say, and not to do them so often. Be in a group with people that will work. No journals. We need more time for reading the books. Cut out the journals. Give outlined worksheets o f what should be accomplished to keep on track. I honestly don 7 think anything could make them better. Have more time to read. Staying on subject. Less journal writes, more discussion. To have more reading time and less journal time. Better books. Have more exciting books that make conversations more exciting. More reading time and a chance to pick new books if we didn 7 really like the other ones. Nothing really, they went really well. Make a little more time to read book. Some kids don 7 have the time others do due to jobs, chores, or family emergencies. I wouldn 7 suggest anything because lama person who likes to do things more independently rather than in groups because some people don 7 do anything. 119 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The Giver Appendix H Samples of Student Journals 1 (A C. { 2- L d k u i o . £ ...i T m , \ ^ i - A __________ Qii i C / J . i , \ \ c i £ ~ t e ( Y H \V C r V f l t U _____ a.irrtY i^iu b u ild , u A tfcir li j a , »i,ki J h f t v y o x o j i d - i -1 i iv -> ; - L / M 1 l \ , . : _ » ■ ) ^ ' S L V \ : O J I '-I p a l C u d - Q i d f J r U {\J Z ~ X £ .C Jl APfina<-ij i c ^■sd UJli ' :T -G n J i i . W jJcXLtr^a-ff ~ S [ K P ( il l lP U J < M v O p 3 )S.<LCMS£\Ci'i- m o y a f o T f a k o j d t A U .,a A d &r -tfvfl- V /M ~- V uVaJ- Wy np> nCcf - f o Jryt vC H U ' d h a . i \ \ c O > a t & v o K T K f l- ~ K i i L i D d s . c i _ r j - y j _ W -. JCUl LL ~ jg £ .... -V j-'. Lgi * & X ? ± L £ r \ Q ¥ i € JX M . u j O S ^ J ^ D : \ r c ^ C y z x i b j i . c f ^ - o^::hjok (C p ,^ k > C L „ .c M ^ e | S 4 - , j y p ^ ^ ^ - X ^ u a J r V 3 l u i X f c _ b ^ ____________ S lA . A U . . . __________ t g s ^ J ^ a J L l lU M s } K fl. 112 ^>*20 ^ ^ p L 5 5 a H ^ r . 120 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’ s Stone 121 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The Giver 'pjAoJf Vvktfpen<z$ <\'GTer Jov&e> (®Q- GD/wmuyiiiy dfr dh< - evict? U c j - Y a ^ 'S d cxfc&wT /v 2 ^ /" V ^ /viyviui'i /4y f^C i'G J fi/ j i"W ^ - K H 'C (4 jo i^ r-t? iC , (hyv’ t eAriG cy 'iigh^‘ v c L v'-'l'^h 4"tl€ OOKWun/fy r iVe (Xi'XjjGb&J \ K ouj -V V ve^ ^f&lxxbly f4-ci€o€ol j~h^ wei/n^ne^ . avd A hr G\J&t \p & ly > < e d Ahfy^ d>vtf, vJe I jd\aA - J b r m o m d 6 m b e wlghi'v't • Circled &WiAV\d a<e\J b a c G bo ; 'fW. CQ/nmvwr4y* UJf atl (Kgr-eed ^b^ cts a v id G abe prdbqUy //V g A 122 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Tuesdays with Morrie 123 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. B ria n ’ s Song \ I * I H r' 3 | i \ X t a i f e d cibovf t i n m\ (X ■\V\c V)cof- uoVien B r ia n d n k from j f a x t r . S ro cten mri S c o H brouojflf | Op bovo maw o fh k fs die diinrX | \ h t i f W -ecf. X tefp u ab f Up fh € ' P o in t w hev w ould X Ix b b e t o Wv~e a X oyV iK i n w \b o r d i n f ire boof vwa-b qood b n d f b o f f , X vvjSV V w teJ f-eadiwx Wy d i s c u s ^ no\vJ v ftft fff O o c X U T H $wf V \ o v jj ^o(d if M U . (XO lOatclieu X nV m j i f # id t k v j o n -fk X vw e k eav y i. Tk v ) (om f* ttd {or -/M kutY iX f o u X O il \\U > w fk[f Xr-i<?ih di-ed (pale k?(| t<y $jye 124 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Achievement and retention of first-semester nursing students: The effects of a study skills course

PDF

Early reading predictors of literacy achievement for English learners: A longitudinal study from first through third grade

PDF

An investigation of early literacy achievement with an emphasis on urban public schools

PDF

Implementing and assessing problem -based learning in non -traditional post -secondary aviation safety curricula: A case study

PDF

A literacy space for children: Creating curriculum in a domestic violence shelter

PDF

Faculty characteristics: What are their relationships with academic outcomes of community college students?

PDF

Associate degree nursing students' perceptions of caring ability, parental care and nursing school climate: A quantitative and qualitative study of caring links among first semester nursing stud...

PDF

Alumni student -athletes' attitudes towards educational philanthropy

PDF

Assessment of Taiwanese business students' learning styles using the Myers -Briggs Type Indicator

PDF

Coordinating the reading and writing competencies during the early literacy development of 5--6 year -old Spanish -English emergent bilinguals

PDF

An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement

PDF

A "stacked for success" sustained silent reading program for high school English language development (ELD) students: its impact on reading comprehension, attitudes toward reading, frequency of o...

PDF

Fulfilling the mission to serve the underserved: A case study of a private, Catholic, urban college's two -year program

PDF

Districtwide instructional improvement: A case study of a high school in the media unified school district

PDF

Correlation of factors related to writing behaviors and student -developed rubrics on writing performance and pedagogy in ninth-grade students

PDF

Higher education's responses to economic development: Vietnam

PDF

Connecting districts and schools to improve teaching and learning: A case study of district efforts in Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

Effective practices of a Spanish -bilingual and -bicultural principal vs. a non -Spanish -bilingual and -bicultural principal and the effects of their language proficiency and cultural knowledge ...

PDF

How has the requirement to implement content standards affected the instructional program in schools and classrooms?

PDF

A case study of Long Beach Unified School District: How elements of effective reading strategies can be implemented at the secondary level

Asset Metadata

Creator Hillier, Mary Anne (author)

Core Title Implementation of literature circles in a rural high school English class: One teacher's journey of changing student attitudes toward reading

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, curriculum and instruction,education, reading,Education, Secondary,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Yaden, David B. (committee chair), Hagedorn, Linda Serra (committee member), Rueda, Robert (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-571232

Unique identifier UC11340405

Identifier 3155420.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-571232 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3155420.pdf

Dmrecord 571232

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Hillier, Mary Anne

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA