Running head: COLLABORATIVE HYPERMEDIA LEARNING



The Effects of Digital Texts on Engagement for Students with ADHD

Christine Bell

Towson University

ISTC 685

Prof. Scot McNary

May 14, 2014

Introduction

Recently, Baltimore County Public Schools (BCPS) initiated the S.T.A.T. (Students & Teachers Accessing Tomorrow) program in order to gradually transform BCPS into a complete 21st century technology learning environment that prepares globally-competitive graduates (Baltimore County Public Schools, 2014). Within the next three years, all students enrolled in BCPS, throughout grades K-12, will have access to a one-on-one digital learning device, the Hewlett-Packard (HP) EliteBook© Revolve 810 G2. The HP Revolve is an ultra-thin laptop that converts into a multi-touch screen tablet, with a spill-resistant keyboard, scratch-resistant glass, the latest Intel® Core™ processor, a weight of approximately 3 pounds, and is ENERGY STAR® qualified (HP Data Sheet, 2013). These HP devices will be intertwined with traditional teaching methods and eventually, classrooms will be transformed into student-centered, digital learning environments. Individualized, personal instruction will become the main focus in the instructional setting.

Before utilizing one-on-one digital learning devices in every BCPS classroom, knowledge about the devices’ various functions, the optimum digital educational programs to use, and technology best practices is valuable; therefore BCPS has begun a year-long pilot study using ten elementary schools, termed Lighthouse schools. Teachers at these schools will be provided with technology-imbedded curriculums and intensive professional development trainings. Each student will be equipped with a HP Revolve for use during the school day. The purpose of the pilot study is to determine the most practical and beneficial uses of the HP Revolve in the classroom. The experiences at these Lighthouse schools will influence the design and implementation of the digital curriculum for use at every BCPS school.

With new initiatives come a plethora of questions: How is this new way of teaching better than traditional methods? Will one-on-one devices promote student engagement on learning tasks (student engagement in this paper is defined as the amount of time a student is focused and attentive on a learning task)? Will these devices increase student achievement? If one-on-one devices initially increase student engagement and achievement, will students lose interest after prolonged use? Will these devices turn out to be another trend that fades away in five years?

A prime example of an educational trend that has quickly faded away is the Maryland School Assessment (MSA). The MSA was first used to measure student achievement in 2003 (Maryland State Department of Education, 2002). For the past decade, administrators, teachers, and other stakeholders have spent an abundance of time, money, and energy learning about the MSA, its implementation, and its scoring criteria. After only eleven years, the MSA is being phased out due to the recently adopted Common Core Standards. A brand new curriculum means brand new assessments and starting the process, yet again, of attending professional development meetings and other training sessions to learn as much information as possible about these new assessments.

An increasing number of schools are adopting various mobile devices to replace textbooks but there is a paucity of research on the impact of these devices in K-12 education (Chou, Block, & Jesness, 2012). BCPS has clearly outlined their vision for a digital learning environment, but has left out the research that supports their decision to incorporate these devices into the classroom. BCPS has also not indicated whether the pilot study will include an analysis of student engagement, and has not stated if using these devices in the classroom will result in a positive impact on student engagement. These missing pieces are critical to BCPS’ argument as to the importance of implementing a multi-million dollar initiative.

BCPS educators’ approval of this large-scale transformation can be persuaded by the support of research that demonstrates the positive effects digital devices have on academics and engagement. As a classroom teacher, this information is imperative to have and will provide assurance that this initiative will be beneficial to students and not the latest educational fad.

Statement of the Problem

Every year, there are at least three students in my classroom who have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and are frequently off-task and disengaged, especially during independent reading time. During independent reading, students read an assigned paperback book at their reading level for a period of twenty minutes. Students with ADHD are observed to be regularly off-task approximately five to ten minutes after independent reading time begins. According to a few research reports, an advantage of using digital texts is that they can support individual readers’ text comprehension and potentially engage struggling readers (Hutchison, Beschorner, & Schmidt-Crawford, 2012, p. 16). Since paperback books are not effectively keeping my students with ADHD immersed in their reading and recent research suggests using digital texts during reading is motivating, I decided to conduct my own study.

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact digital texts, on one-on-one devices, have on student engagement in the third grade classroom, during the independent reading block. As a fervent mobile device user I am intrigued by the potential of using one-on-one devices in the classroom and how these devices will benefit students who have ADHD.

Review of Related Literature

During the 2012-2013 school year, the University of Nebraska began an iPad initiative, providing iPads to faculty and students to use for educational and personal purposes. College professor Kathryn Zuckweiler was eager to use an iPad in her teaching but she noticed a lack of information from her readings and trainings sessions regarding how iPads delivered gains in students’ engagement and achievement. As a result, she conducted a study on the effects iPads had on student engagement and performance in her graduate Operations Management course. The course lasted sixteen weeks, with students attending class once per week, and students were asked to bring their iPads to class. Students were expected to read the cases, articles, and book excerpts each week prior to class while class time was spent on discussion, demonstrations, analysis, and “doing,” rather than on lecture (Zuckweiler, 2013, p. 12). At the end of the semester, based on anecdotal records and student feedback, the professor found that student engagement and performance seemed to be greater with the iPads compared to her previous classes where students did not use iPads, and students all agreed that the iPads were a positive addition to the course (Zuckweiler, 2013). Zuckweiler’s findings can be added to the narrow, but growing, research on the benefits of using iPads in education to increase student achievement and engagement.

A study conducted by Chou, Block, and Jesness (2012) yielded similar results to the Zuckweiler study. Various high schools, in a major city in the Midwest, were chosen to participate in a four-month long iPad pilot project in 2012. The study examined four 9th grade Geography classrooms and the participants were eight high school teachers and approximately 120 students (Chou, Block, & Jesness, 2012). Each classroom was equipped with 30 iPads to be used for classroom purposes. The goal of the study was to examine how one-on-one devices impacted teaching and learning activities in the classroom. During the study, the eight teachers attended monthly professional development sessions that incorporated Puentendura’s SAMR (2009) and Fang’s (2007) performance-based faculty development models (Chou, Block, & Jesness, 2012). The researchers conducted four classroom observations throughout the study, held one teacher focus group meeting and four student focus group meetings near the end of the study. Results of the study show that with proper professional development for teachers, integrating iPads into teaching and learning had a positive effect on student learning and engagement. These findings can provide insights and best practices of one-to-one learning in K-12 education (Chou, Block, and Jesness, 2012, p. 12).

In another research study (Hoffman, 2013), the central theme was about on-task behavior and engagement during class when using an iPad.  The ninth graders in this study attended a school in which every student was given an iPad to use throughout the year and paper and pencils were no longer used.  The researcher (and teacher of the students), Angela Hoffman, wanted to identify her students’ perceptions of their own on-task behavior and engagement during class when using an iPad. Hoffman conducted classroom observations and also held a discussion with students at the end of the study. The results showed that students were observed to be more on-task when they had a deadline to meet or when they had to work on a collaborative project. “Students generally reported that they liked and supported the school’s 1:1 iPad initiative” (Hoffman, 2013, p. 14). Hoffman’s conclusions suggest that students of other grades may also enjoy using one-on-one devices, such as iPads, to complete classwork and projects, and proper teacher supervision of students while they are working on digital devices is necessary.

Larson (2010) carried out a case study on two second grade students, Amy and Winnie. Amy was reading at a beginning second grade level and Winnie was reading at a fifth-grade level. Larson observed the girls’ reading habits using a Kindle e-book, forty minutes daily for three weeks. On most days, they read independently, but they had a few opportunities to read together. Larson took field notes during her observations and also interviewed Amy and Winnie, the classroom teacher, and the girls' parents. “Students’ digital notes, or markups, were also collected for careful examination and analysis for emerging reader response themes and patterns” (Larson, 2010, p. 17).

While reading, the girls physically interacted with the text by using tools and features unique to the Kindle, such as adjusting the font size, listening to parts of the story by activating the text-to-speech feature, highlighting key passages or vocabulary, using the built-in dictionary, and searching for keywords or phrases within the book (Larson, 2010). Larson’s findings suggest that using digital reading devices promote new literacy practices and extends connections between readers and text as engagement with and manipulation of text is made possible through electronic tools and features; these tools invited Amy and Winnie to engage with the text and put the reader in greater control than when reading printed text (Larson, 2010). This is true because elementary students cannot write in paperback books at school; they can use post-it notes to engage with the text but highlighting is not allowed. Although the results of the Larson study on student engagement are promising, both girls were reading at or above grade level; therefore, further research needs to be conducted on students who have reading difficulties.

Therese M. Cumming and Cathi Draper Rodriguez (2013) analyzed the impact an iPad application (app), Language Builder, had on the academic engagement of four students with language based disabilities. The boys were in a self-contained, special education classroom with a teacher, a paraprofessional, and nine other students, all aged 7-8.

The authors used the single subject withdrawal design to count the number of redirection-prompts the paraprofessional gave to each student, during each stage of the design. These prompts were given to keep students on task while working on their assigned activity. The researchers collected baseline data, using a paper-based sentence construction activity. The intervention was conducted in the same way as the baseline stage, except the iPad was used for the sentence construction activity. After the intervention, the final phase of the project had the students return to the paper-based activity.

The results show the students’ engagement initially increased while using the iPad but then decreased toward the end of the intervention; however, the paraprofessional did not have to use as many redirection-prompts after the intervention as she did prior to the intervention. This research study suggests that using technology in the classroom has the potential to promote student engagement, specifically while using one-on-one devices like the iPad. The study also suggests that iPads positively impact student independence in completing tasks.

One-on-one devices, such as e-readers and iPads offer students new ways to engage in their reading, and motivation appears higher after children interact with multimodal texts (Larson, 2010). “In addition, enhanced features such as multimedia, communication, and collaboration tools have provided new learning opportunities that transcend the confines of formal learning in the classroom” (Chou, Block, and Jesness, 2012, p. 12). The results of these studies are encouraging and they advocate for the use of one-on-one devices in the educational setting to increase student academics and engagement; however, there needs to be more research on the impact technology has on student engagement for students with ADHD. “A report by Chunzhen, Ried, & Steckleberg in 2002 found that there is currently little well controlled experimental research on the effectiveness of technology specifically for children with ADHD” (McClanahan, Williams, Kennedy, & Tate, 2012, p. 20).

Hypothesis

It is hypothesized that using one-on-one devices to read digital books will increase student engagement during independent reading time, in a third grade classroom. As mentioned earlier, student engagement is defined as the amount of time a student is focused and attentive on a learning task. The independent variable in this study is the one-on-one device, the HP Revolve, and the dependent variable is student engagement with their leveled readers.

Method

Participants and Setting

Towson University’s Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Participants (IRB) will review and approve this study before its commencement. The study will be carried out at my current workplace, with the permission of BCPS and the informed consent of the participants’ parents. The study will be conducted in a third grade, general education classroom that serves students of varying abilities, such as students with individual education plans (IEPs), students who speak English as a second language (ESOL), and students who are gifted and talented (GT).

Purposive sampling was used to select the participants because the study is solely about students with ADHD. During the third quarter of the 2013-2014 school year, the second grade teachers at the school were asked to recommend five students with ADHD, who were observed to be disengaged during independent reading time. Only five students were chosen to participate because the focus of this study is on the behavior of individual participants. A large sample group approach places emphasis on group averages rather than individual participants, and ultimately, the behavior reflected by the group average may not represent the individual participant (University of Central Arkansas, 2013, p. 14-5).

The five recommended students will be in the same third grade class during the 2014-2015 school year. There are four boys and one girl participating in the study. The names of the participants have been changed to ensure the confidentiality of their identities. Kevin is an eight year old, African American who qualifies for free lunch. David is a Caucasian eight year old and qualifies for reduced lunch. Donald is a nine year old Caucasian that does not qualify for free or reduced lunch. Braeden is eight years old, Caucasian and qualifies for free lunch; and Anna is nine years old, does not qualify for free or reduced lunch, and is African American. Nineteen other students will be present in the classroom; however, they are not participants in the study.

Research Design

This research study will be a conceptual replication of the Cumming and Draper Rodriquez (2013) study to determine if similar results are found for a different activity and with a different population of students. The A-B-A single-subject withdrawal design method will be used to compare the effects of digital books and paperback books on the students’ engagement (Cumming & Draper Rodriquez, 2013). There will be a baseline phase (A), a treatment phase (B), and a return to the baseline phase (A). The terms intervention phase and treatment phase will be used interchangeably throughout this study.

The A-B-A design was chosen because it provides “two opportunities to assess whether the treatment condition is effective—introducing it and withdrawing it. If behavior shows a systematic change, then your confidence is increased that the treatment, rather than some unknown environmental event, is the reason for the behavioral change” (University of Central Arkansas, 2013, p. 14-14). Five participants will be used in order to ensure the generality of the results, and inter-participant replication will be conducted to show that the effect occurs in more than one student. “In addition to demonstrating that the findings can be generalized to other participants, inter-participant replication also demonstrates that the researcher has identified the controlling factors sufficiently to permit replication to other participants” (University of Central Arkansas, 2013, p. 14-18).

Instruments

Throughout the study, the special educator, Mrs. Watson (pseudonym), and I will be present in the classroom. Mrs. Watson will have the responsibility of working with the students, while I observe and take notes on student behavior and engagement. Participants and Mrs. Watson will be informally interviewed before the first baseline phase in order to get an understanding of their prior knowledge of the HP Revolve and how to access and use the digital leveled readers. Mrs. Watson will give students the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Next Oral Reading Fluency passages (Dynamic Measurement Group, Inc., 2010) to gather data about each student’s reading ability in order to pair students with the appropriate leveled reader.

During the baseline and intervention phases, student engagement will be measured by the number of prompts Mrs. Watson has to give each student to remain on task. Every time Mrs. Watson has to redirect a student to return attention to his or her book, Mrs. Watson will record a tally mark on her data sheet, under the student’s assigned column (Appendix A). Repeated measurements will be taken during the baseline phase in order to control several threats to internal validity. “Specifically, problems of maturation, instrumentation, statistical regression, and testing may be controlled by the repeated measurement because patterns illustrative of these threats to internal validity should appear in the baseline” (Sage Publications, 2008, p. 212).

To ensure Mrs. Watson is using the HP Revolve and leveled readers according to the specified procedures, her execution of the procedures will be measured using a teacher fidelity checklist. (Appendix B). I will be present during every independent reading block, for the entire twenty minutes. Throughout this time, I will use a marble composition book to take daily observation notes about students’ behavior and engagement, and I will complete the teacher fidelity checklist every day. A threat to internal validity in this study is instrumentation.  To control this threat, observation conditions (time of day, length of treatment, use the same location, etc.) will be standardized. The daily independent reading block will be from 11:30 a.m. to 11:50 a.m., and will take place in the students’ classroom.    

Materials

Seven HP Revolves will be used during this study; five for the students so that each student will use the same Revolve throughout, and one for Mrs. Watson and one for myself so that we can use and become familiar with the device. I will have familiarity with the device before the study begins. Students will have individual usernames and passwords in order to gain access to the McGraw Hill’s Reading Wonders’ website and the digital leveled readers. The Wonders’ website, , will be bookmarked onto each Revolve for ease of access.

Students will read assigned paperback and digital leveled readers from McGraw Hill’s Reading Wonder’s program, using third grade materials. The specific leveled readers that will be used during this study will be determined after the DIBELS assessment is given and students’ reading levels are known. In that way, the leveled readers will match their individual reading levels. During the baseline phase, students will read paperback versions of the leveled readers. Students will be allowed to use post-it notes to record their thinking, questions, and comments. Digital versions of the leveled readers will be used during the intervention phase. Students can use any of the digital tools that accompany the digital leveled readers, such as the text-to-speech function, post-it notes, and a highlighter. The digital leveled readers also have a zoom-in and zoom-out capability to make the entire page larger or smaller.

Procedures

During the course of this study, Mrs. Watson will work with the participants, while I observe and take notes. I will complete the teacher fidelity checklist daily and for each phase. After students and Mrs. Watson are informally interviewed about their prior knowledge of the HP Revolve and how to access and use the digital leveled readers, a brief training on the Revolve and the digital leveled readers will be provided if necessary.

From September 10th to the 12th, Mrs. Watson will give students the DIBELS Next Oral Reading Fluency passages to collect data on each student’s reading level. Leveled readers will be paired with students based on the results of the DIBELS assessment. Next, baseline data collection begins. During the first phase, data will be collected over ten 20-minute sessions. One session will take place per day. Students will sit with Mrs. Watson at a small group table that is shaped like a crescent, and I will sit behind the students. This seating arrangement permits me and Mrs. Watson to monitor students and their engagement with their leveled readers. The students’ engagement while reading their paperback leveled readers will be measured by the number of prompts Mrs. Watson has to give to keep the students reading the text (Cumming & Draper Rodrigquez, 2013). I will observe during this time, while taking notes on the types of student reading behaviors exhibited, such as using post-it notes to write down questions. I will also monitor the number of pages read by each student to determine if students are actually reading the story, i.e.; if students are done with their leveled reader in one minute, they are not reading, or if it takes them 20 minutes to read two pages, they are not focused on the story.

After the baseline phase is the intervention phase. Data will be collected over ten 20-minute sessions and the seating arrangement used during the baseline phase will be used during the intervention phase. Student engagement while reading their digital leveled readers will be measured by Mrs. Watson and I will observe and take notes on students’ reading habits and the number of pages read by each student. During the final phase, students will return to the paperback leveled readers for ten 20-minute session. The seating arrangement and data collection procedures will be exactly the same as it was during phase one.

Data Analysis

After the final baseline phase, data on the number of prompts students’ received during each phase of the design will be analyzed using visual analysis. Visual analysis is a standardized method that is used when determining if the frequency of a behavior (the number of redirection prompts needed to keep students engaged on the reading task) changes over time.  The frequency of each student’s prompts are going to be graphed on individual line graphs.  The line graphs will visually represent if the participants’ behavior changed in a meaningful way, and if so, to what extent the change can be credited to the treatment (the digital leveled readers); the variability, level, and trend of my data points will be analyzed (Sage Publishing, 2008, p. 218). The number of prompts a student receives will be related to his engagement on the task: the higher the number of prompts, the less engaged the student is determined to be and if the student receives less than two prompts, he is determined to be engaged in the task.

Observation notes will be analyzed to look for trends in student behavior in relation to their engagement. For example, when students are engaged in their leveled readers, what activities are they participating in? Are they using post-it notes? Are they using the interactive tools of the digital leveled readers? These notes will provide insight into the types of reading behaviors students use to keep themselves engaged in a text. Timeline

The following timeline occurs during the year 2014:

• January-March: second grade teachers recommended five students with ADHD for this study.

• May-August 1st: seek approval from Towson University’s IRB and permission from BCPS.

• August 4th- 15th: secure seven HP Revolves from BCPS for use throughout the study. Create usernames and passwords on the McGraw Hill’s Reading Wonders’ website so students have access to the digital texts. Bookmark the website onto each HP for ease of access.

• August 27th- September 8th: acquire informed consent from participants’ parents.

• September 9th: interview special educator and students about their prior knowledge of using the HP Revolve and the digital books. Provide brief training if necessary.

• September 10th- 12th: Mrs. Watson will administer the DIBELS Next Oral Reading Fluency passages to gather preliminary data about each student’s reading ability.

• September 15th- October 3rd: administer the baseline data collection phase.

• October 6th- 24th: administer the intervention phase.

• October 27th- November 14th: return to the baseline phase.

o *It is important to note that although each phase will consist of ten sessions, three weeks will be allotted for the implementation of each phase to allow for the possibility of school closings or changes in the schedule due to field trips or assembly programs.

• November 15th- 22nd: analyze results and form conclusions.

Anticipated Implications

The results show that using digital leveled readers on one-on-one devices, increases student engagement during independent reading time. Students remained on task more often, and the number of prompts needed decreased when they utilized digital texts. This study suggests that third grade students with ADHD would benefit from using digital texts in the classroom because the tools and functionality of digital leveled readers keep students engaged. This study can be added to the limited research on the effects digital leveled readers have on student engagement, specifically for students with ADHD. Digital readers show promise in supporting disengaged readers through multiple tools and features, including manipulation of font size, text-to-speech options, and note-taking capabilities (Larson, 2010, p. 21).

References

Baltimore County Public Schools. (2014). S.t.a.t. - The move to digital learning. Retrieved from

Chou, C.C., Block, L., & Jesness, R. (2012). A case study of mobile learning pilot project in k-12 schools. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 5(2), 11-26. Retrieved from

Cumming, T. M., & Draper Rodriguez, C. (2013). Integrating the iPad into language arts instruction for students with disabilities: Engagement and perspectives. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(4), 43-52. Retrieved from

©Dynamic Measurement Group, Inc. (2010). Dibels® next technical adequacy supplement. Retrieved from



Fang, B. (2007). A performance-based development model for online faculty. Performance Improvement, 46(5), 17-24. doi: 10.1002/pfi.129

Hoffman, A. A. (2013).  Students’ perceptions of on-task behavior and classroom engagement in a 1:1 iPad school.  English Leadership Quarterly, 36(2), 9-18. Retrieved from



HP Data Sheet. (2013). Hp elitebook revolve 810 g2 tablet pc. Retrieved from



Hutchison, A., Beschorner, B., & Schmidt-Crawford, D. (2012). Exploring the use of the ipad for literacy learning. The Reading Teacher, 66(1), 15–23. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01090

Larson, L. C. (2010). Digital readers: The next chapter in e-book reading and response. The Reading Teacher, 64(1), 15–22. doi:10.1598/RT.64.1.2

Maryland State Department of Education. (2002). Maryland school assessment questions and answers. Retrieved from

McClanahan, B., Williams, K., Kennedy, E., & Tate, S. (2012). A breakthrough for josh:

How use of an ipad facilitated reading improvement. Techtrends, 56(3), 20-28.

doi: 10.1007/s11528-012-0572-6

Puentedura, R. (2009). Transformation, technology, and education. Retrieved from



Sage Publications. (2008). Single subject design. Chapter 7. Retrieved from



University of Central Arkansas. (2013). Experimental designs: Single-subject designs and time-series designs. Chapter 14. Retrieved from



Zuckweiler, K. M. (2013). Down the rabbit hole: Adopting ipads in my classroom. Decision Line, 44(3/4), 11-13. Retrieved from

Appendix A

Data Collection Sheet

| |

|Name: |

| |

|Date: |

| |

|Time Frame: |

| |

|Phase (circle one): baseline treatment baseline |

| |

| |

|Directions: Record a tally every time you need to give a redirection prompt. Place the tally under the appropriate student’s name. |

| |

|Kevin |David |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|Donald |Braeden |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|Anna |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

Appendix B

Teacher Fidelity Checklist

| |

|Name: |

| |

|Date: |

| |

|Time Frame: |

| |

|Phase (circle one): baseline treatment baseline |

| |

| |

|Directions: Answer each question based on teacher observation. Place a check under yes or no. Check under N/A if the step is not |

|applicable. |

| |

| |Yes |No |N/A |

| | | | |

| | | | |

|1. Each student is reading the correct leveled reader. | | | |

| | | | |

|2. Students are using headphones (if using digital leveled readers). | | | |

| | | | |

|3. Teacher takes behavior data. | | | |

| | | | |

|4. Teacher is monitoring student engagement. | | | |

| | | | |

|If any of the above answers are no, please comment on action taken to correct discrepancy: |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|Notes: |

| |

| |

| |

*this checklist is a modified version of the fidelity checklist used in the Cumming and Draper Rodriguez study (2013, p.46).

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download