# data[].attributes.body
Bullet point some key points to help with discussions

# data[].attributes.body
-Matched pair design: comparing two treatments by using same or similar groups
-Groups were chosen at random (22 students- 18 with LDs; two groups)
-Strategies were taught with fidelity; Teachers followed a checklist that contained critical instructional steps.
-Teaching scripts were piloted prior to employing.
-Quasi-experimental design (attempts to establish a cause-and-effect relationship)
-Conducted a two-step analysis process
1. Analyzed data with all students
2. Analyzed data of students with LD

# data[].attributes.body
-The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two problem-solving instructional approaches when teaching multiplication and division word problems to middle school students with learning disabilities.
-Group 1: Schema based instruction
Group 2: General strategy instruction
-The participants were 22 students with learning problems split into two groups
-Teachers were two doctoral students in special education and two experienced special education teachers
-Teachers were randomly assigned and switched treatment groups midway
-Took place in a field setting

# data[].attributes.body
-Two groups receiving each strategy
-Each group received instruction three to four times a week; each session lasting an hour
-12 sessions of instruction
-Teachers provided teacher-guided practice, independent work,
-Pre-test, Post Test and Maintenance tests were given (16 one step multiplication and division word problems)

# data[].attributes.body
Bullet point some key points to help with discussions

# data[].attributes.body
Purpose of this study was to determine if a sampling of teachers felt that they had adequate access to instructional materials and felt that their school districts and state provided opportunities for them to attend professional developments.

They took a sampling from a large population of various school districts in the south. Used random selection to select 10 schools to participate in the study.

The used mail-in surveys using the likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree

They determined the response rate of return (40%)

analyze the data

# data[].attributes.body
-Survey was given to the principals and then principals distributed them by mail
-They chose the 4 point likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree
-Distributed the surveys and analyzed the data
-Principals randomly contacted 10 teachers who teach reading to participate in the survey

# data[].attributes.body
-Identify question and purpose. “Examine teacher’s expressed perceptions regarding their state’s provisions for instructional materials and professional development opportunities related to state literacy initiatives for K-6 classroom teachers.”
-Select a population. The population is selected by  randomly assigned numbers to school districts within each southern state. The principals from each school selected randomly contacted 10 teachers who teach reading in their schools to participate in the surveys.
- Select instruments to complete the study. The survey was distributed from the principals.
-Select a scale for results. They selected the Likerts scale.

# data[].attributes.body
Bullet point some key points to help with discussions

# data[].attributes.body
-The purpose of this study was to determine the relationships between reading achievement and parental involvement for sixth grade middle school students
-Non experimental research, the researcher measures 2 variables and assesses the statistical relationship between them
-Research question: “ Does parental involvement affect the reading achievement of sixth grade students”
- Identification of participants- sixth-grade students Parents/guardians selected based on the fact that their child was apart of the study
-Identified null hypothesis of There is no relationship between parental involvement and the reading comprehension and achievement of sixth grade students
-Data was collected through the use of survey
-Used descriptive statistics to compare the independent (parent involvement) variable and dependant (reading achievement) variable
-Data collected was analyzed through the use of the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation

# data[].attributes.body
Non experimental research method

Identifications of independent and dependent variables( independent-parent involvement and dependent- reading achievement)

Slightly positive relationship

Use of survey method- 6 questions with 4 choices of never, almost never, sometimes and frequently

analyzed data through the use of the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation

Used descriptive statistics

# data[].attributes.body
Bullet point some key points to help with discussions

# data[].attributes.body
identified purpose of study (relationships to study)

Identified null hypothesis

Identified use of survey method

Identified questions/questions types in survey

Determined who will participate in the survey

Determine how to give a survey. (students in classroom, parents sent home from school and phone calls home to increase return rate)

Scored surveys (point system out of 24)

Gave the Mcleod Reading Comprehension to measure reading level

Analyzed data through the use of the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation

Identified that there was a slight positive correlation (r= 0.129)

Used descriptive statistics

Identified no determination of a  relationship between independent and dependent variables

# data[].attributes.body
- students were enrolled in full day kindergarten compared to a matched sample of students enrolled in half-day on math & reading achievement in Grade 2, 3, 4
- length of school day (independent)
reading and math achievement data (dependent) was collected throughout the school years (assessed in beginning and end of each grade)

# data[].attributes.body
Researchers attempt to determine impact of school day in K (half or full day) on math and reading student achievement, then chose participants, and data collection methods to be analyzed (tables). They also clarified what was available for curriculum and then discussed results as well as the students development overall - differentiated instruction for students,

# data[].attributes.body
participants were chosen randomly based on their enrollment in the particular city, excluding students who switched from one to the other program.

looked for moderately sized middle-to-upper class city, used one in Colorado

208 girls, 265 boys

~assessments in math and reading were conducted for the same students over the course of  4 years (dependent variables)

independent variables- half day v. full day

other variables controlled for- age

# data[].attributes.body
We found this article very interesting. Through our discussion we decided that survey research would be the most popular to use in classrooms.
Ex. GoogleForms, Rate this Book Survey, Course Evaluation

We thought it was odd that the research was looking into PDs and reading materials in the same study. This lead us to wonder about the results, since the responses seem to vary greatly.
PD Results- 66% did not believe PD opportunities were provided. 34% agreed they had opportunities.
Reading Materials- 87% agreed that they have reading materials that go with the reading curriculum. Of the remaining 13% , 40% expressed they were not aware materials were available.

# data[].attributes.body
Recommendation: There must be more research done on parent involvement in the middle school

Limitations: Convenience method - only one 6th grade class was examined

# data[].attributes.body
comparing the abilities of students at two different schools to address the idea of FK v. HDK does not take into affect other variables other than age, that is surprising.
Results coincided with previous research in showing that the benefit gain in FDK diminished to a great extent. The value of retained skillls in two measures of reading and one measure of mathematics had little practical value.

# data[].attributes.body
-Results showed that students in the SBI group performed better than students in the GSI group on all measures of acquisition, maintenance, and generalization