Authentic Learning Usedin Readingand Contextualized Psychologyedited

AUTHENTIC LEARNING 1
AUTHENTIC LEARNING USED IN READING AND CONTEXTUALIZED PSYCHOLOGY
by
Rhonda Heiney-Young
SCOTT E. DOERR, PhD, Faculty Mentor
KATHY TAYLOR, PhD, Faculty Advisor
Mark Lamb, Ed.D, Dean, School of Education
An Action Research Project Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Art in Curriculum and Instruction
Greenville University
December, 2014
Abstract
The purpose of this study that took place at a two-year college in Illinois was two-fold: 1) to test
if the authentic learning strategies used in the developmental, contextualized Reading 125-47
section had an impact on students’ attitudes toward reading and reading comprehension, and 2)
to test if the students’ grades in the general education Psychology 131 cohort had an impact due
to those authentic learning strategies. Quantitative data was collected and analyzed for all
purposes. A total of four methods were used to analyze students; one reading survey with a pre
and post assessment, two pre and post reading comprehension assessments, and then an
assessment that compared the final grade averages of the cohort Psychology 131 students. The
survey measured READ 125-47 students’ attitudes toward reading at the beginning of the
semester and then again at the end. The two reading comprehension assessments were also given
at the beginning and end of the semester. The final assessment that compared the previous
semester’s PSYC 131 grades to this semester’s PSYC 131 grades was completed at the end of
the fall, 2014, semester. As a result, the data from all four assessments showed grades were
positively impacted in the READ 125-47 section and also in the cohort PSYC 131-47 section by
using authentic learning strategies.

Table of Contents
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………2
Chapter 1…………………..………………………………………………………………………5
Introduction…..……………………………………………………………………………5
Background Information…………………………………………………………………..9
Baseline Data....………...………………………………………………………………..14
Analysis of Causes……………………………………………………………………….22
Action Plan, Force Field Analysis, and Revised Action Plan……………………………27
Data Collection Methods………………………………………………………………...31
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….33
Chapter 2…………………………………………………………………………………………34
Implementation…………………………………………………………………………..34
Results……………………………………………………………………………………38
Chapter 3…………………………………………………………………………………………54
Conclusions……………………………………….……………………………………...54
Recommendations………………………………………………………………………..54
Action Plan II…………………………………………………………………………….55
Limitations……………………………………………………………………………….56
Reflection………………………………………………………………………………...57
References..………………………………………………………………………………………58
Appendices….……………………………………………………………………………………62
Appendix A - Reading Inventory Survey……………………………………….………..62
Appendix B - Reading Comprehension Pre and Post-test #2…………………………….64
Appendix C - IRB Consent Form from Greenville College.……………………………..67
Appendix D - Informed Consent Form for Students.…………………………………….68
Appendix E - Letter of Consent from Lewis and Clark…………………………………..69
Appendix F - “It’s All About You” student assignment.…………………………………70
Appendix G - Summary Grading Rubric.…………….…………………………………..71
Appendix H - Speech Rubric………………………………………………….………….72

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Lewis and Clark Community College is the two-year higher learning institution used for
the focus of this study. It is located in Godfrey, Illinois, in the St. Louis metro area and has
multiple campuses. It has a diverse student populace that enrolls more than 8,400 students for
credit courses annually and has an average class size of 12.6 students (“At a Glance,” 2014).
Students entering the college have their American College Test (ACT) and Computer-Adaptive
Placement, Assessment, and Support System (COMPASS) test scores evaluated before enrolling.
The COMPASS test is a computerized assessment tool that measures students’ reading, writing,
and math skill levels. This test helps determine what classes students should be placed in when
entering college. If ACT scores and past grade point averages are unavailable, then placing
students in classes is determined on the COMPASS test alone. For students to be placed in
developmental courses, their COMPASS test score needs to be between 66—77 (K. Haberer,
personal communication, August 29, 2014). When students are registered in developmental
classes they remain there until they pass these classes; therefore, building the skills they need to
thrive in general education courses. Scores allowing, developmental students have a choice to
enroll in College Reading (READ 125), Basic Writing (ENGL 125) and Psychology (PSYC 131)
at the same time or individually. Since some general education courses are traditionally harder
to pass than others, such as PSYC 131, qualifying students can choose the contextualized 47
section to receive the reading and writing support they need while taking the general education
course. Due to the rigorous PSYC 131 course, the intent was to add support for students with
additional study skills, reading, and writing strategies taught in these developmental classes. The
combination of cohorts READ 125-47, ENGL 125-47, and PSYC 131-47 was strategically
designed to help students prosper and also accelerate graduation since the combining of courses
could condense time while students still earn the same amount of credits. Starting in 2010, the
READ 125-47 section was piloted three semesters by the author, reviewed by the Student
Success Team who monitors and approves pilots, and then institutionalized in 2011. This is due
to the piloted contextualized learning group in READ 125-47 meeting the primary goal to
measure success, which is having a better pass rate compared to the non-contextualized
populous. A passing grade is only defined as an A, B, or C (See Table 1).
Table 1
2011 Pass Rates for Contextualized Cohorts at Lewis and Clark Community College
_________________________________________________________________
Course Contextualized Learning Group General Population

_________________________________________________________________
ENGL 125 78% pass rate 65% pass rate (641 students)
READ 125 81% pass rate 65% pass rate (490 students)
PSYC 131 78% pass rate 64% pass rate (1314 students)
Note: Adapted from “Early Signs of Success: Rethinking Placement, Curriculum, and Resources,”
by E. Corby, 2011, Lewis and Clark Community College.
Since then, the READ 125-47 course has remained institutionalized keeping the same
cohorts PSYC 131-47 and ENG 125-47, and also keeping above average pass rates for READ
125-47. In addition to the primary goal, there is also a secondary goal for this contextualized
section, and that is for students to do as well as the general education population of PSYC 131,
not enrolled in the contextualized section. These success rates have fluctuated over the last
couple years and as of spring 2014, have not been successful. The fluctuation may be due to the
lack of consistency with teaching methods and Psychology 131 instructors, changing the
instructor of this section three times over the last three years. Regardless of the professor,
however, teaching methods in READ 125-47 need to be addressed to potentially bring the
passing rate back to the original success.
The team involved in this action research project is comprised of the author, Shannon
Shepard, Psychology Professor and Coordinator of Social Sciences; Justin Bernaix, English
Instructor; Kathy Haberer, the Director of Student Development and Counseling; and Jon Tysse,
Institutional Research analyst. The author is currently teaching two sections of READ 125, with
one section being the contextualized 47 section, combined with the aforementioned Psychology
professor and English instructor. Teaching cohorts communicate regularly throughout the
semester in regards to the students and content of the 47 section, always trying to augment
learning. Finding ways to integrate these three subjects is ongoing.
Furthermore, an essential aspect to understand is that READ 125 students need
improvement in reading comprehension and often have a poor or apathetic attitude toward
reading. Developmental students often fail to see the value and benefits of reading. Courses
such as PSYC 131 require continuous reading and understanding of detailed theories. Due to the
complexity of the psychology text and PSYC 131 concepts, many students need guidance for
procuring a passing grade. Throughout the term of this project, numerous authentic learning
strategies will be implemented in order to improve student reading comprehension and overall
attitude toward reading. A 20 question Likert survey will be administered at the beginning and
end of the study and those changes will be compared. Two pre and post-tests that evaluate
reading comprehension will be administered at the beginning and end of the project, as well.
Also, as a secondary purpose for this paper, the authentic learning strategies will be used in the
READ 125-47 class to see if there is a difference in grades in PSYC 131, comparing this
semester to the previous semester. There are eleven students currently enrolled in all three
cohort classes. The class is comprised of seven White students and four African American
students with the age range of 18—40.
As reported by Dr. Linda Moats (2002), a teacher and leading researcher on the teaching
of reading, poor adult readers missed essential skills when they were young. Poor reading
comprehension is due to slow word recognition, limited vocabulary, unfamiliarity with sentence
structure, and unfamiliarity with how texts are organized (Moats, 2002). When reading is
laborious and ungratifying, students will avoid reading, and that is the exact opposite of what
needs to happen; the more students read, the better they get. When pupils do not read, young and
old, comprehension skills decline which also leads to poor spelling and poor writing. However,
when students are taught text organization, how to interpret literary devices, and are exposed to
thought-provoking, interesting literature, comprehension will expand. Probing and using open-
ended questions about compelling issues are most likely to stimulate language (Moats, 2002).
Constant opportunities to discuss meaningful material, having students practice different genres
of reading, and having relevant class activities will bolster student engagement. All of these
authentic learning strategies and more will be explored and utilized in this project in order to
help students with reading comprehension and boost their attitudes toward reading.
The purpose of this project will be two-fold: 1) to determine the impact on student
comprehension and attitudes toward reading if authentic learning strategies based on Psychology
131 topics and concepts are implemented in the READ 125-47 course, and 2) to determine if the
authentic learning strategies used will, in turn, further increase student success (defined as a
grade of A, B or C) in PSYC 131-47. The research question for this project is:
1) To what extent does using authentic learning strategies based on psychology topics and
concepts impact student attitude, reading comprehension, and overall achievement in
READ 125-47 and Psychology 131-47.
Background Information
As of 2009 in the United States, there are 7.5 million students enrolled in two-year
colleges, but the degree completion rate for community colleges is only 28% (Snyder & Dillow,
2011). This rate leaves almost three-quarters of all two-year college students failing to earn a
certificate or degree within the expected average time to completion (Snyder & Dillow, 2011).
As of fall, 2013, approximately 3% of enrolled credits are developmental Communications
students at Lewis and Clark (Haberer & Chapman, 2013). Professional development teams from
the Communications and Student Development and Counseling Department at Lewis and Clark
have focused attention on finding ways to retain students and become successful in courses (K.
Haberer, personal communication, August 29, 2014). There are three ways now being
implemented: 1) by enforcing intrusive advising; 2) by offering extra academic support for
students, and 3) by creating learning communities in contextualized courses. Advisors and
instructors work overtime to develop trust with students and also the Student Success Center was
developed to provide tutoring for students. The third and most beneficial way to help students is
by creating contextualized courses that combine developmental and general education courses,
ergo creating the reading-writing-psychology cohort. When these cohort classes have the
students together, creating a learning community, they are taught with block scheduling, having
the courses back-to-back. If students are successful, it will also condense the amount of time it
takes to graduate. Three courses can be taken in one semester as opposed to taking the classes
over two or three semesters. Also, allowing developmental students to take a general education
course encourages retention.
According to the Community College Research Center (Mangan, 2012), 70% of students
entering a community college have to take a remedial course and these students taking remedial
courses are discouraged by that fact and lose interest. Less than one-half of all students expected
to complete remedial classes before entering general education classes actually complete the
sequence (Bailey & Cho, 2010). There needs to be some incentive and encouragement for
remedial students. Condensing the time it takes for graduation and also allowing students to take
a general education course are proper incentives. The best option is to create a learning
community with student cohorts in order to build strong relationships and connections among
fellow students, faculty, and support services (Bailey & Cho, 2010). When personal and
academic support networks are implemented correctly, students flourish. An integrated
curriculum, such as those in contextualized courses, can help students understand how the
different disciplines are connected, engaging students more deeply with learning and enhancing
their cognitive skills (Visher, Wathington, Schneider, & Collado, 2010). When supportive
services are provided, then the teaching strategies need to be adequately addressed.
Teaching strategies that are used to teach student material in contextualized classes have
two themes in common. First, the faculty involved in the cohort encouraged active learning
through group work and discussions. Secondly, focusing on teaching strategies for succeeding in
college was the other (Visher, Wathington, Schneider, & Collado, 2010). Contextualized
learning and authentic learning have very similar themes and require the focus of instruction to
be on connecting the material being taught to the students’ lives, hence making it relevant to the
student. In a contextualized course, the goal is to keep the attention of students “by illustrating
the relevance of the learning experience” (Baker, Hope, & Karandjeff, 2009, p.8). Likewise, the
goal of authentic learning is “to connect what students are taught in school to real-world issues,
problems, and applications” (Abbott, 2014, p.1). These congruent teaching strategies are
implemented in the contextualized psychology course (READ 125-47) along with study skills.
By using these very similar strategies in the READ 125 lesson plans, students have many
opportunities to reap the benefits of both types of correlative learning.
According to a study expounded upon in the Journal of Authentic Learning, authentic
learning has four major components (Rule, 2006). First, activities need to include real-world
problems that students can relate to for the rest of their lives. An emotional connection needs to
exist for the learner to fully appreciate the importance of an assignment or activity (Rule, 2006).
Students need to be stakeholders in the activity that they undertake because they will then care
about the outcome. Any material that is read in class like short stories, magazine articles, even
poetry, needs to be about issues that the students are capable of relating to and understanding.
The second component that authentic learning needs is metacognition, thinking about
one’s thinking. Students should be instructed and guided on how to monitor their own thinking
process. Being able to use prior knowledge to activate a connection to the reading material helps
students understand it and organize it in their own thinking process. Developing strategic and
critical thinking, monitoring their reading comprehension, and questioning the purpose of all
reading material is a part of metacognition (Rule, 2006). Activities such as think-alouds can
increase vocabulary development, fluency, and decoding the author’s purpose and style.
Guiding students through self-assessment to make them aware of their own personal
responsibilities, attitudes, and shortcomings, helps students become an active learner. Studies of
authentic learning summarized by Audrey Rule, a researcher and writer for the Journal for
Authentic Learning, have shown that students of any age who are exposed to cooperative
learning with metacognitive instruction outperform those students not exposed to the same
methods (Rule, 2006). Metacognition is not only an essential aspect for authentic learning
strategies but also pivotal for any strategy used for developmental learning.
The third aspect of authentic learning is utilizing a community of learners. When
students discuss issues with other students, it broadens their social and cultural cognizance (Rule,
2006). When students discuss ideas and interact with peers it gives them a greater awareness of
their local community and also of the world. Letting students communicate in a structured, safe
environment with guidelines, gives the students a framework in which to practice the much
needed social skills that they will need in a future work setting. This is reinforcement for the use
of cohort classes that are utilized in a contextualized setting. Students are together for all three
cohort classes which help develop a connection and trust among students as opposed to a typical
college classroom setting that has limited interaction with other students. Students are more apt
to practice social interaction when there is some kind of bond between the students, knowing
they are all there for the same purpose. The collaboration of students and teacher learning
together, with instructional conversation coming from the instructor, provides a shared
experience in which all benefit (Rule, 2006). Students retain knowledge better in a secure
learning community, and that also helps set the tone for their classroom environment.
The last component of authentic learning is that the teaching must allow the class
environment to be student-centered (Rule, 2006). Student-centered learning does not have the
learning environment centered on instructor control where only the instructor facilitates the
academic content or concepts to be taught. In a traditional college setting, the professor
professes, and students listen. The professor represents the all-knowing authoritarian of what the
student should and should not consider important and therefore remember. In a student-centered
environment, the students are allowed to be in more control of their learning and help decide for
themselves what topic might be of interest (Just Write! Guide, 2011). A student-centered
environment puts more responsibility on the learner and has students actively involved in the
daily activities of the class (Just Write! Guide, 2011). Students need creative activities that
connect the content material in such a way that is best for the individual student to understand.
This type of learning may be harder for the college setting because it requires the instructor to
abdicate control of the classroom. Relinquishing a superlative position may be disconcerting for
professors who are used to teaching in a conventional setting.
Extensive studies in Florida, Texas, and Ohio explored developmental education in
higher learning and the impact on students’ future (Bailey & Cho, 2010). The results were
mixed, showing that under-prepared students in Florida and Texas who enrolled in
developmental courses did not have better outcomes compared to students enrolled directly in
college-level courses (Bailey & Cho, 2010). The larger 2003 study conducted in Ohio, however,
showed positive results, concluding that students who were placed in developmental courses are
more likely to continue college through graduation (Bettinger & Long, 2005). The 28,000
students who were tracked in Ohio showed developmental students were more likely to continue
college and graduate within five years as compared to the students who did not take
developmental courses having the same test scores and backgrounds (Bettinger & Long, 2005).
The study in Texas did not have proper support services or teaching methods, yet the college in
Ohio had support services that accompanied the proper teaching methods. With these promising
results from the Ohio study in mind, finding ways to address the needs of underprepared
developmental students, such as using authentic learning, will remain at the forefront of the
author’s objective as an educator and in this action research paper.
Baseline Data
In this project, students were given three types of assessments. The first assessment was
to evaluate the changes in attitudes toward reading. A Reading Inventory Survey using the
Likert scale format with ratings from 1 to 6 was given with the following scale: 1 = Strongly
Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Slightly Disagree, 4 = Slightly Agree, 5 = Agree, and 6 = Strongly
Agree. This assessment was administered at the beginning of the project in the first week of
September and then again at the end of November, 2014. The results of the first Reading
Inventory Survey are noted in Figure 1 where it shows the distribution of the students’ answers.
This survey data will be compared to data of the second Reading Inventory Survey administered
at the end of November, 2014.

Reading Inventory results - September
Strongly Disagree PDisagree

e o p l e w h o rSlightly
e a d a lDisagree
o t a r e v e r y Slightly
i n t e r e Agree
s ti n g . Agree22% Strongly
22% 55%Agree
W h en I am r ead i n g sc h o o l m at er i al , I h i g h l i gh t o r t ak e n o t es. 33% 11% 44% 11%

W h e n I r u n i n t o t r o u b l e r e a d i n g , I k e e p r e a d i n g i n a n a tt e m p t t o u n d e r s t a n d . 22% 11% 44% 22%
I t el l m y fr i en d s ab o u t g o o d b o o k s I h av e r ead . 44% 11% 33% 11%
I a m a b l e t o u s e i n f o r m a ti o n o r q u o t e s f r o m m y r e a d i n g t o s u p p o r t m y p o i n t o f v i e w . 33% 11% 22% 22% 11%
I u n d er s t a n d w h a t I r e a d . 11% 22% 44% 22%
I t h i n k l i b r a r i e s a r e i n t e r es ti n g p l a c e s t o s p e n d ti m e. 44% 22% 33%
W h e n a s k e d a q u e s ti o n a b o u t w h a t I h a v e r e a d , I c a n t h i n k o f a n a n s w e r . 11% 55% 11%11%11%
W h e n I a m h a v i n g d i ffi c u l t y , I r e r e a d i n o r d e r t o t r y t o u n d e r s t a n d . 11%11% 22% 55%
Question
K n o w i n g h o w t o r ead w el l i s i m p o r t an t . 100%
W h e n I r e a d , I c a n s t a t e t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t i d e a s . 11%11% 22% 33% 22%
I r e a d a s w e l l a s m y f r i e n d s r e a d . 11% 22% 11% 22% 33%
I c a n i d e n ti f y m y s t r e n g t h s i n r e a d i n g . 22% 33% 33% 11%
My b est fr i en d s en j o y r ead i n g. 44% 11%11%11% 22%
I r e a c t t o w h a t I r e a d b a s e d o n m y p e r s o n a l l i f e e x p e r i e n c e . 22% 11% 22% 44% 0%
I a m h a p p y w h en s o m e o n e g i v e s m e a b o o k f o r a p r es e n t . 22% 22% 11% 44% 0%
I t h i n k b e y o n d t h e f a c t u a l l e v e l a b o u t m a t e r i a l I h a v e r e a d . 0%
22% 33% 33% 11%
0%
I q u e s ti o n w h a t I d o n ' t u n d e r s t a n d w h i l e r ea d i n g . 33% 66%
I f o r m o p i n i o n s a b o u t w h a t I a m r e a d i n g . 11%
0%11% 22% 44% 11%
R e a d i n g i s e a s y f o r m e . 0%33% 22% 11% 33%
Percentage of students
Figure 1. Reading Inventory Survey results from September.
There were eleven students who completed the survey and it had interesting results.
Those results were transformed into percentages and mean scores. Students scoring on the first
question, “People who read a lot are very interesting,” showed 55% chose Agree, 22% chose
Slightly Agree, and 22% chose Slightly Disagree. In addition, the mean score for Question 1
was M=4.4, which represented that students slightly agree that people who read a lot are very
interesting. The second question was “When I am reading school material, I highlight or take
notes,” and 11% chose Strongly Agree, 44% chose Slightly Agree, 11% chose Slightly Disagree,
and 33% chose Strongly Disagree. The mean score for Question 2 was M=4.3, which
represented students slightly agree that they highlight or take notes from their reading. For the
third question, “When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to understand,”
22% chose Strongly Agree, 44% chose Agree, 11% chose Slightly Agree, and 22% chose
Slightly Disagree. The mean score for the third question was M=5, which represented students
agree that they keep reading when they have trouble understanding in order to attempt to
comprehend the material. The fourth question “I tell my friends about good books I have read,”
showed 11% chose Agree, 33% Slightly Agree, 11% Slightly Disagree, and 44% chose Strongly
Disagree. The mean score was M=3.3, which represented students slightly disagree that they tell
their friends about the good books they have read. The fifth question “I am able to use
information or quotes from my reading to support my point of view,” had the results of 11%
choosing Strongly Agree, 22% choosing Agree, 22% choosing Slightly Agree, 11% choosing
Slightly Disagree, and 33% choosing Disagree. The mean score for Question 5 was M=2.7,
which represented students disagree that they are able to use information or quotes from a
reading to support their point of view. The sixth question “I understand what I read,” showed
22% Agree, 44% Slightly Agree, 22% Slightly Disagree, and 11% circled Disagree. The mean
score for Question 6 was M=3.2, which represented that students slightly disagree that they
understand what they read. The seventh question of “I think libraries are interesting places to
spend time,” showed 33% chose Strongly Agree, 22% chose Slightly Agree, and 44% chose
Strongly Disagree. The mean score for Question 7 was M=1.9, which represented that students
strongly disagree that they think libraries are interesting places to spend time. The eighth
question “When asked a question about what I have read, I can think of an answer,” showed 11%
choosing Strongly Agree, 11% choosing Agree, 11% choosing Slightly Agree, 55% choosing
Slightly Disagree, and 11% choosing Disagree. The mean score for Question 8 was M=3.7,
which represented students slightly disagree that when they are asked a question about what they
have read, they can think of an answer. The ninth question was “When I am having difficulty, I
reread in order to understand,” and the results showed 55% chose Strongly Agree, 22% chose
Agree, 11% chose Slightly Agree, and 11% chose Disagree. The mean score for Question 9 was
M=4.3, which represented students slightly agree that they reread in order to understand. The
tenth question of “Knowing how to read well is important,” showed all choosing Strongly Agree.
The mean score for Question 10 was M=6, which represented all students strongly agree that
knowing how to read well is important. See each pretest mean score in Table 2.
Table 2
Survey questions and mean score for each question on Reading Inventory Survey Pretest
Survey Question Mean

1. People who read a lot are very interesting. 4.4
2. When I am reading school material, I highlight or take notes. 4.3
3. When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to 5
understand.
4. I tell my friends about the good books I have read. 3.3
5. I am able to use information or quotes from my reading to support 2.7
my point of view.
6. I understand what I read. 3.2
7. I think libraries are interesting places to spend time. 1.9
8. When asked a question about what I have read, I can think of an 3.7
answer.
9. When I am having difficulty, I reread in order to try to 4.3
understand.
10. Knowing how to read well is important. 6
11. When I read, I can state the most important ideas. 5.5
12. I read as well as my friends read. 3.5
13. I can identify my strengths in reading. 3.2

14. My best friends enjoy reading. 3.7
15. I react to what I read based on my personal life experience. 3.6
16. I am happy when someone gives me a book for a present. 2.6
17. I think beyond the factual level about material I have read (I read 4.6
between the lines).
18. I question what I don’t understand while reading. 4.6
19. I form opinions about what I am reading. 3.1
20. Reading is easy for me. 4.8
Note: Values are mean scores on a 6-point scale (1=Strongly Disagree and 6=Strongly Agree); N = 11.
To continue, the eleventh question of “When I read, I can state the most important ideas,”
showed that 22% chose Strongly Agree, 33% chose Agree, 22% chose Slightly Agree, 11%
chose Slightly Disagree, and 11% answered Disagree. The mean score for Question 11 was
M=5.5, which represented students agree that they can state the most important ideas when they
read. The twelfth question was “I read as well as my friends read,” and the results were 33%
choosing Strongly Agree, 22% Agree, 11% Slightly Agree, 22% Slightly Disagree, and 11%
slightly disagree that they can read as well as their friends. Question 13 was “I can identify my
strengths in reading,” and showed 11% choosing Strongly Agree, 33% choosing Agree, 33%
choosing Slightly Disagree, and 22% choosing Disagree. The mean score for Question 13 was
M=3.2, which represented that students slightly disagree that they can identify what their
strengths when are when reading. The fourteenth question of “My best friends enjoy reading,”
showed 22% chose Strongly Agree, 11% chose Agree, 11% chose Slightly Agree, 11% chose
Slightly Disagree, and 44% chose Strongly Disagree. The means score for Question 14 was
M=3.7, which represented that students slightly disagree that their best friends enjoy reading.
The fifteenth question of “I react to what I read based on my personal life experience,” had the
results of 44% choosing Agree, 22% Slightly Agree, 11% Slightly Disagree, and 22% choosing
slightly disagree that they react to what they read based on their own personal life experience.
The sixteenth question was “I am happy when someone gives me a book as a present,” and
showed 44% choosing Slightly Agree, 11% choosing Slightly Disagree, 22% choosing Disagree,
and 22% choosing Strongly Disagree. The mean score for Question 16 was M=2.6, which
represented that students disagree that they are happy when someone gives them a book as a
present. The seventeenth question of “I think beyond the factual level about material I have read
(I read between the lines),” showed 11% choosing Agree, 33% choosing Slightly Agree, 33%
choosing Slightly Disagree, and 22% choosing Disagree. The mean score for Question 17 was
M=4.6, which represented that students slightly agree that they think beyond the factual level
about material they have read. The eighteenth question “I question what I don’t understand
while reading,” had the results as 66% for Strongly Agree, and 33% for Slightly Disagree. The
mean score for Question 18 was M=4.6, which represented students slightly agree that they
question what they don’t understand while reading. The nineteenth question of “I form opinions
about what I am reading,” showed 11% choosing Strongly Agree, 44% choosing Agree, 22%
choosing Slightly Agree, 11% choosing Slightly Disagree, and 11% choosing Disagree. The
mean score for Question 19 was M=3.1, which represented that students slightly disagree that
they form their own opinions about what they read. The last question “Reading is easy for me,”
had the results of 33% Strongly Agree, 11% Agree, 22% Slightly Agree, and 33% choosing
Slightly Disagree. The mean score for Question 20 was M=4.8, which represented that students
slightly agree that reading is easy for them.

Secondly, the Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Brown, Fishco, & Hanna, 1993) was given to
evaluate the grade level of each student’s reading comprehension. This pretest was given on
September 5, 2014. Data from the pretest of the Nelson-Denny was then organized to show the
results of frequency/distribution (See Table 3). In Table 3, the “Reading Levels by Grade”
column was designed to show the grade level ranges for reading and the “Count of Students”
column represented the number of students scoring at each grade level. One student scored at
the 3rd grade reading level, zero students scored at the 4th grade reading level, three students
scored at the 5th grade reading level, zero students scored at the 6th grade reading level, one
student scored at the 7th grade reading level, one student scored at the 8th grade reading level,
three students scored at the 9th grade reading level, one student scored at the 10th grade reading
level, zero students scored at the 11th grade reading level, and one student scored at the 12th grade
reading level. The lowest reading level scored was 3rd grade and the highest reading level scored
was at the 12th grade level. Twenty minutes was given for the pretest. A more in-depth look on
pre and post-test assessments will be revealed later in this paper.

Table 3
Summary of Nelson-Denny Reading Pretest
Frequency Table
Reading Levels by Grade Count of Students
3-3.9 (3 = beginning of 3rd grade and 3.9 = 3rd grade in the 9th
1
month)
4-4.9 0
5-5.9 3
6-6.9 0
7-7.9 1
8-8.9 2
9-9.9 3
10-10.9 1
11-11.9 0
12-12.9 1
Histogram
Lowest Score 3
Highest Score 12.9
Total Number of Scores 11
Number of Distinct Scores 9
Lowest Class Value 3
Highest Class Value 12.9
Number of Classes 10
Class Range 1
Frequency table showing results of the first reading comprehension pretest taken in
September.
The first column shows the reading levels ranging from 3rd grade to 12th. The second column
displays how many students scored in each range.
Next, students took the second reading comprehension pretest on September 5, 2014.
This pretest was at the 12th grade reading level and taken from the Discovering Psychology
(Hockenbury, 2011) textbook used in PSYC 131, and is displayed in Table 4. There were 11
students who took this reading comprehension pretest. The lowest score obtained was a 30% and
the highest score was 100%. Two students scored between 30-39%, two students scored
between 40-49%, one student scored between 50 and 59%, two students scored between 60 and
69%, no students scored between 70 and 79%, two students scored between 80 and 89%, one
student scored between 90 and 99%, and one student scored a 100%. This data from the 12th
grade reading level comprehension pretest will be compared to the 12th grade reading level
comprehension post-test later in this paper.
Table 4
Summary of Reading Comprehension Test 2
Frequency Table
Range of Scores by % Count of Students
30-39 2
40-49 2
50-59 1
60-69 2
70-79 0
80-89 2
90-99 1
100-109 1
Histogram
Lowest Score 30
Highest Score 100
Highest Class Value 100
Number of Classes 8
Class Range 10
Frequency table displaying the results from the reading comprehension pretest comprised of
12th grade reading level content. The first column shows the percentage ranges that were
possible and the second column displays how many students scored in each range.
Analysis of Causes
There are many reasons why college students have poor attitudes about reading and score
low on reading comprehension assessments. The four main reasons will be discussed. The
National Endowments for the Arts and the U.S. Department of Education (2013) have concluded
three unsettling reasons: a historical decline in voluntary reading among teenagers and young
adults; reading comprehension skills are deteriorating among older teens, and adults have a
declining proficiency in reading. In addition and more importantly, the students’ learning
environment and participation make a significant difference.
First of all, reading has declined in America for children, teenagers, adults, and even
college graduates (Sullivan, Nickols, Bradshaw, Rogowski, & Bauerlein, 2007). When children
read less, they read less well. Because students read less well, their academic achievement
suffers. According to research from the National Endowments for the Arts, nearly one-third of
American teenagers drop out of school due to the decline in literacy and reading comprehension
issues (Sullivan et al. 2007). Between 1984 and 2012, the amount of 13 year-olds who read
weekly has declined from 70% to 53%. For 17 year-olds who were once weekly readers, they
have gone down from 64% to 40%. The percentage of 17 year-olds who reported they never or
hardly read has increased from 9% to 27%, therefore tripling the number of teenagers not reading
(Harrison Group, 2013). When the amount of time people read is continually declining, there are
going to be ramifications throughout education. It makes sense why developmental students
need support with reading and writing while taking general education courses, especially since
many of those courses require a high amount of reading. If the majority of information to be
learned is in the text, then students have even less of a chance to pass the course.
Secondly, if the reading comprehension skills of children and teenagers are eroding as
well, it makes sense why so many developmental college students fail a class or drop out of
school. Further, there are gaps between low income, minority students, and White students who
influence retention in higher education. The National Center for Educational Statistics (Sparks
& Malkus, 2013) offers data for American 8th graders in 2012 that shows White students have a
46% reading proficiency, African American students have a 17% proficiency, and Hispanic
students have a 22% reading proficiency. There is definitely a reading proficiency gap between
Figure 2. Fishbone diagram showing causes of poor attitude, low reading comprehension, and
low graduation rates.
ethnicities before students even reach college (See Table 5). According to a study by a
nonprofit group, The Education Trust, data revealed American minority students entering as
freshmen to a two-year college have a 24% completion rate compared to a 38% completion rate
for the non-minority populous (DeVise, 2009). This is significant because the percentages of
minority students in developmental courses are higher than White students, hence comprising
more of the enrollment. In the overall 2007-2008 school year, 30.2% of enrolled freshmen were
African American, 29% were Hispanic, and 22.5% were Pacific Islander/Asian compared to
19.9% White enrollment (Sparks & Malkus, 2013) (See Table 6). These results give insight as to
where the gaps need to be closed. If reading comprehension gaps are addressed and decreased
before students reach the college level then the percentages of developmental students in college
would obviously decrease as well.
Table 5
Reading proficiency rates for American 8th graders, listed by race/ethnicity for 1992-2012
Race/Ethnicity 1992 2012

White 35% 46%
Black 9% 17%
Hispanic 13% 22%
Note: Adapted from “First-Year Undergraduate Remedial Coursetaking: 1999–2000, 2003–04, 2007–08,” by
D. Sparks and N. Malkus, 2013, National Center for Educational Statistics.
Table 6
First year undergraduate students in the United States enrolled in developmental courses in
public institutions
Race/Ethnicity Year: 1999-2000 Year: 2003-2004 Year: 2007-2008

White 24.3 19.7 19.9
Black 37.7 27.4 30.2
Hispanic 37.8 26.8 29.0
Asian/Pacific Islander 34.9 20.1 22.5
Other or Two or more races 34.4 24.0 27.5
Note: Adapted from “First-Year Undergraduate Remedial Coursetaking: 1999–2000, 2003–04, 2007–08,” by D.
Sparks and N. Malkus, 2013, National Center for Educational Statistics.
In addition, adults have lower proficiencies in reading compared to twenty years ago. If
parents do not read, have poor attitudes about reading, and do not model the behavior, then their
children tend not to read as much, lessening the chances of students becoming proficient in
reading. There are strong correlations between parental actions and the frequency to which
children read (Harrison Group, 2013). For children who are frequent readers, 57% of parents set
aside time each day for their child to read, compared to 16% of parents of children who are
infrequent readers (Shapiro, 2013). According to studies by Scholastic (Harrison Group, 2013),
parents who have a large book collection at home have more of an impact on students’ reading,
encouraging it, than compared to those families without books. The type of media used to read
does not affect the outcome; the modeling of reading is more of an influence (Shapiro, 2013).
There are actually more ways that text appears in 2014 than ever before. For example,
communication tools such as emails, text messages, Twitter, Facebook, tablets, E-readers, and
laptops are just a few ways that have made reading more possible and accessible. If adults do
not regard reading as important, then it models insufficient positive academic behavior which
young readers need to have in order to succeed in the world of academia.
Lastly, the student’s learning environment and participation in school make a noticeable
difference. The pedagogical approach that teachers use with students makes a significant impact
on learning. According to Astin (1984), the Subject-Matter Theory is the least effective. This
theory is where students are lectured by the teacher or professor, retain that information, and then
take a test showing how much was retained. This is the least effective for developmental
students because it is geared for students who are highly motivated, good listeners, and have
good reading comprehension from reading avidly (Astin, 1984). The best way to teach
developmental students is by using authentic learning, an individualized and collective approach,
even though it is sometimes difficult to adhere to this approach when learners are reluctant. It is
a more demanding method of teaching and many teachers may not have the drive or knowledge
to implement. The objectives of the class are still put forth by the instructor but the instructor
allows each student to find ways to self-evaluate in order to discover how each best learns in his
or her own unique way. Additionally, authentic learning incorporates student-centered activities
that make students interact with each other and participate in their own learning. Having open-
ended questions provided by the instructor makes each student think for him or herself and
search for meaning in a way that makes sense to the individual. If students are taught in a
manner that is boring, consistently proven to be ineffective, and depends mainly on memory
retention, then pupils will obviously not have adequate assessment results. Students need to be
taught in a way that is beneficial for them, requiring an abundance of class interaction, and this
should be from the first day of school. Unfortunately, this is often not the case whether it be in a
K-12 setting or a college setting.
Action Plan, Force Field Analysis, and Revised Action Plan
The following section contains the first six weeks action plan, force field analysis, and
revised action plan showing the remaining weeks of class. Lesson plans and activities were
implemented every day in class Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for 50 minutes. The second
week of class, the instructor administered pretests for all assessments being used in the study,
graded them, and started charting them for easy reading of results. Lesson plans for the first six
weeks included authentic learning strategies which consisted of activities such as reading articles
and short stories individually with inner voice sheets, reading as a class with discussion,
practicing summarization, learning how to conduct research in a library, practicing
metacognition, and practicing study skills such as time management, note-taking and test-taking.
First, the pretests were given before little content of the class was covered so it would
display students’ true knowledge before the strategical aspects of the project was started. After
the pretests were given, lesson plans included authentic learning strategies. Inner voice sheets
were used with silent reading which helped the reader stay focused on the story and react to what
is happening in the story. The inner voice sheet assignment asked students to write on the sheet
as they read, listing any reaction, question, opinion, prediction, or connection they had to the
reading. It kept the student an active participant in the reading process. Also, several
assignments asked students to summarize articles after a reading and discussion of the articles
were conducted in class. They had two weeks to complete every assigned summary article.
Students also spent a week in the library learning how to conduct research by finding four
sources while in the library. Students had to locate a book on the shelf, find two periodical
articles in the library database, and evaluate credible websites. With this library assignment,
they also had to summarize every source they found and cite it properly in MLA (Modern
Language Association) format. With the library assignment, students worked collaboratively
with each other, with library staff, and with the instructor. In the regular classroom, students
were also engaged in previewing, predicting, vocabulary building, and using context as a way to
figure out unknown words.
Table 7
Action Plan
Modify READ 125 course Author 9/1 – 9/5 Copier 0

outline to include pretests
Collect data from pretest Author/Team 9/5 – 9/13 Pretests/Keys to 0
results and transform into 9/13 – 9/20 tests
quality tools Computer equipped
with Microsoft
Word and Excel
Teach authentic learning Author 9/13 – 9/20 Copier 0
strategies as lesson plans, Textbooks, rubrics
discussion, inner voice sheets
Teach authentic learning Author/Liz 9/20 – 9/27 Copier Textbooks 0
strategies as lesson plans, Burns Reid Library
Students attend Reid
Memorial Library orientation
Students also answered and used chapter guides that were given in the READ 125-47
class to use in the PSYC 131 class. These chapter guides were given so students could practice
reading comprehension from the psychology text and then convert the reading comprehension
guides into study guides which could then be used to study for pending exams in PSYC 131. All
the study guides that were developed by the author were evaluated and approved by Shannon
Shepard, the PSYC 131 professor, in order to guarantee content correlation and accuracy. The
study guides also encouraged note-taking in the PSYC 131 course so any information gained
during that lecture could be used as a reference in the study guides.
Next, a force field analysis was drafted to discuss possible forces supporting and also
opposing the implementation of the action plan (See Table 8). Students may not want to
complete assignments in the READ 125 and PSYC 131 courses. Sometimes students do not
complete assignments that are long or challenging. When the instructor guides group activities,
students complete most assignments, but when left to complete assignments or make-up work on
their own, chances decrease for completion, especially if students are absent when the initial
assignment was given. If students choose to carry out the assigned work, there is an improved
chance of higher grades being achieved in both courses. When students enjoy and are interested
in the assigned work, there is a better chance of completion and that, in turn, will encourage
students to stay in class until the end of the semester, thus increasing overall retention of
students. When students drop out of PSYC 131, there is also a lesser chance of the students
completing the READ 125 and ENGL 125 class.

Table 8
Force Field Analysis of Suggested Action Plan
Forces Supporting Change Forces Opposing Change

(Those which currently exist & support (Forces that may inhibit the
or drive the desired change.) implementation of the desired change.)
Administrative and faculty support Students resist assignments

Higher grades for students in
READ 125-47 Students drop READ 125 courses
before completion
PSYC 131-47 Students drop PSYC 131 course
before completion
Increase retention of students
Increase reading comprehension and Make-up work is not completed
better attitude toward reading
More work for author/instructor
Increase in student success rate for
contextualized classes Rigorous work in PSYC 131-47
A revised action plan was then created as an outline for the rest of the semester (See
Table 9). Authentic learning strategies were implemented for the remainder of the course with
activities that practiced aspects such as finding topics, main ideas, and inferences in reading
material. A movie, Hidalgo (Johnston, director, 2004), was also watched and critiqued by the
class in order to compare the fictional elements of a story in relation to a movie. Movies contain
all the elements of a story and students evaluated the usefulness of the elements and how they
intertwined in the movie. Students always respond positively to media, especially visual media.
More summary writing, more vocabulary building, the practice of reading fiction and non-
fiction, evaluating propaganda and fallacies, figurative language, and learning how to compose
and present speeches were also covered in the remaining weeks. Students were responsible for
writing and presenting two speeches in which one was informative and the other a persuasive
speech based on a psychology-related topic or concept that was covered in PSYC 131. The
speeches needed to be three to ten minutes apiece, required at least two references, and must use
a visual aid using technology to help explain the topic.
Table 9
Strategies Persons Timeline Materials Needed Budget

Responsible
Teach authentic learning Author 9/27-- Psychology text, 0

strategies in lesson plans, assess 11/24 copier, handouts,
student work Mercury Reader
text, rubrics
Teach authentic learning using Author 10/6 -- Copier, handouts, 0

Hidalgo movie, assess student 10/13 Hidalgo DVD,
work projector
Teach authentic learning in Author 10/13-- Psychology text, 0

lesson plans, assess student 10/27 copier, handouts,
work Mercury Reader
text, rubrics
Teach authentic learning in Author 10/27 -- Psychology text, 0

lesson plans, presentations, 11/7 copier, handouts,
assess student work Mercury Reader
text, rubrics,
projector
Presentations, propaganda, Author/Team 11/7 -- Rubrics, Computer 0

authentic learning in lesson 11/21 with Excel
plans
Presentations, figurative Author/Team 11/21-- Rubrics, computer 0

language, Data analysis 11/28 with Excel
Revised Action Plan

Data Collection Methods
This project collected quantitative data in several ways. Before proceeding with pretests,
informed consent forms were signed by all involved students and approval from the Lewis and
Clark administration was obtained. First, to gather data, a twenty question Reading Inventory
Survey using the Likert scale format was administered in September and then given again in late
November, 2014. The Reading Inventory Survey pretest attained students’ attitudes toward
reading, and those results were compared with the students’ attitudes towards reading after the
implementation stage of the project was completed by using the same Reading Inventory
Questionnaire as a post-test. All the pre and post-test data for the survey collected is presented in
Chapter 2. All pretests and post-tests were given during the regular 50 minute class period.
There were no time restrictions placed on the survey. Students finished the survey, both times,
between five and ten minutes.
Secondly, two pretests and post-tests of students’ reading comprehension was
administered during class in September and then again in early December. The first reading
comprehension evaluation, the Nelson-Denny, tested the reading levels of students. This test had
a time restriction of 20 minutes to answer thirty questions. The answers that were left blank
were considered wrong and counted against the student. The third pretest/post-test given also
assessed students’ reading comprehension; however, this one used 12th-grade reading level
content. This pre and post-test had ten questions and did not have a time restriction. Material for
the second reading comprehension assessment was taken from the Discovering Psychology
(Hockenbury, 2011) text used in PSYC 131 and then adapted by the author by adding ten
multiple choice questions based on the reading. The data for both reading comprehension tests
are available in Chapter 2.
Lastly, data from Psychology 131 was obtained from the professor, Shannon Shepard.
The grades of last semester’s PSYC 131 students in spring, 2014, were compared to this
semester’s PSYC 131 students. These results are also available in Chapter 2.
Data Collection Analysis
In order to analyze the quantitative data, the author devised tables and figures to first
display all pretest information. After the post-test of the Reading Inventory Survey and both
reading comprehension tests were completed in December, more tables and graphs were created
to show results. These tables and figures show a comparison of the pretest and post-test survey
results displaying each mean and then the comparison. Likewise, the grades for spring semester
PSYC 131 students and the fall semester PSYC 131 students were exhibited in a table,
comparing the differences. This table showed the comparison of grades that were earned using a
few authentic learning strategies taught in spring, 2014, to several more, designated authentic
learning strategies used in fall, 2014. The authentic learning strategies used in READ 125-47 in
the fall were more focused on integrating content from PSYC 131, reinforcing the PSYC 131
content. Passing grades are defined as an A, B, or C for both READ 125-47 and PSYC 131-47.
Again, this information is analyzed in Chapter 2.

Chapter 2
Implementation
During the implementation stage of the project, many authentic learning strategies were
used with the READ 125-47 class. After the approval to conduct research from Lewis and Clark
and Greenville College was obtained, the instructor of READ 125 proceeded with the study.
Moreover, the instructor consciously kept track of strategies, goals, and objectives used with the
students. Authentic learning was used steadily throughout the semester and since all examples
used would be too lengthy to display, four examples were chosen to be illustrated in this paper.
First of all, students were shown and then guided through how to write a one paragraph
summary from a non-fiction article that was selected by the instructor. Before the article was
chosen, information was gathered from the students about their interests by using the “It’s All
About You!” questionnaire (See Appendix F) and also by informally conversing before and after
class. Based on that information, four articles were chosen by the instructor to use as a focus for
summary writing. The first article was called “The Handicap of Definition,” by Raspberry
(1982). The second article was “Supreme Court Puts the Innocent to Death,” by Nugent (2011).
The third and fourth articles were called “College Drug Use, Binge Drinking Rise,” by Leinwand
(2007), and “What Do Dreams Do for Us?” by Simons (2009). Each article was chosen because
of the unique issues described in the articles and also because the articles have drastic differences
in the way in which they were written, exposing students to diverse writing. The first two
articles were more experience and opinion driven and then the second two articles were more
fact driven. The last summary article about dreams was handpicked from the Psychology Today
(2014) website so it would correlate with the material being covered in PSYC 131. All four
article topics were tied in with the personal lives of the students, hence keeping it authentic.
Discussion was used to blend the personal lives of students to the topics and issues of the
articles. These summaries were assigned to students giving a two week completion time and
were started week 2 and concluded week 13 of the 17 week semester. Students responded
positively to the articles being discussed and also responded positively to the writing of the
summaries.
All topics of the articles were first brainstormed and then discussed in class. Every
student who had an opinion had the opportunity to share openly, and all did respond at some
point during discussions. The article was read aloud by the instructor and deliberated upon so
the main idea of the article was understood. For the first two summary articles, the topic
sentence was given by the instructor but for the second two articles, students constructed them on
their own. A rubric was distributed for every summary article assigned (See Appendix G) and
students were instructed to staple and turn in the rubric with the typed summary paragraph. The
rubric was discussed in length, directing students on how to not voice their opinion in the
summary (which is sometimes the hardest part for students), how to use the MLA format, what
to include in the topic sentence, common grammatical errors that could be avoided, how to pick
out and include main points, how to reword the article in their own words, and how to use and
include signal phrases. Students were also required to visit the Writing Desk in the Reid
Memorial Library in order to obtain the final 3 points out of the 40 points possible on the rubric.
Students were asked to use one of these free Writing Desk tutors provided by the Lewis and
Clark’s Student Success Team in order to boost summary scores. For those who followed the
directions and used the tutors, grades were higher, respectively.
The second assignment that utilized authentic learning strategies was based on the PG-13
movie called Hidalgo (Johnston, director, 2004). This assignment covered many aspects covered
in reading class such as all the fictional elements used in a story, practicing reading fluency by
reading subtitles, and then also the psychology related concepts that were covered in Chapters 4
and 5 of the PSYC 131 text. This assignment intentionally covered both READ 125 and PSYC
131 course objectives, utilizing and tying information together to integrate the cohort classes.
Concepts such as operant conditioning from PSYC 131 are repeated and expanded upon in a
different way in READ 125-47, thus reinforcing the material. For example, one of the main
characters in the movie, the horse named Hidalgo, was discussed for his role in the movie as
being a protagonist hero along with his best friend, the human protagonist, Frank Hopkins.
However, to include the psychological aspects and correlation from PSYC 131, students were
asked to apply their knowledge about operant conditioning, shaping, and rewarding to the
behavior of the horse, Hidalgo. A horse in real life would actually be trained by the concepts
discussed in psychology, therefore making the whole movie event a meaningful learning
experience students can relate to. Frank Hopkins, the co-protagonist, was specifically examined
by students because he showed the characteristics of an alcoholic and someone in a state of
depression. Again, these problems are also studied in PSYC 131, so further discussion
reinforcing the topics are beneficial for students. By envisaging the abstract ideas learned in
READ 125 and PSYC 131 and applying them in the context of the movie and real-world setting,
students discovered for themselves how these concepts are used in many ways. Students had a
correlating assignment that evaluated the role and necessity of characters, the kinds of themes,
conflicts, why setting, tone, and style is important, the rising action, climax, and resolution of the
plot, and so much more, in an attempt to understand how elements transfuse together to create a
substantial piece of written work and also an intelligible film.

The last couple of ways in which the movie was used was by having students practice
reading fluency by reading subtitles and discussing culture. There were three major cultures and
languages spoken in the film, so students had the opportunity to read translations in English.
Since part of the setting was in the Middle East, Arabic was spoken fluently and students also got
to see how the Muslim culture lived and still does, in some parts of the world. The main
character, Frank, was a member of the Sioux Indian tribe in North America and so that language
and culture were examined as well. This movie had rich details about history, religion, and
language and exposed students to all of them. Students had a very positive reaction to this media
and it provoked lively discussions.
In another endeavor to contextualize READ 125 and PSYC 131, propaganda techniques
and fallacies were examined to make the learning authentic. John Watson, a behaviorist who
was studied in PSYC 131, was one of the first psychologists to start making money through
advertising (Kreshel, 1990). He was first studied in PSYC 131 and then studied again in READ
125 to expand students’ knowledge about him and his historical contributions to psychology and
also to advertising. Advertising is analyzed in READ 125-47 so students can understand the
potential deceptions used locally and internationally, not only by using pictures but by also using
misleading written information. Aspects such as false advertising, half-truths, deceptive
propaganda, and inferences are all examined to reveal their true purpose. Students studied
several fallacies including the bandwagon, testimonials, and plain folk techniques that are used
to mislead the public and to sell products to people who may not even benefit from them.
Students are now aware of how psychology is used in advertising to market ideas and products.
Inferences that are used in the written form and visual form were studied in all types of media.
Again, students reacted positively to the media aspects.

The fourth authentic learning example that was applied throughout the semester was the
writing and orating of two speeches. The first speech was informative and the second speech
was persuasive, and both allowed students the freedom to choose their own topic. The goal was
to have the students pick topics that were important to them. When students are concerned about
the topic, it encourages them to act, making it easier for them to assimilate the new and
unfamiliar information being taught (Lombardi, 2007). The first speech topic could be on almost
anything, but the second speech topic was a bit more restrictive, requiring it to be selected from
the topics covered in PSYC 131, which is still extensive. All three cohort instructors agreed on
the topics that were selected for students. This assignment fused the three reading-writing-
psychology cohort classes together remarkably. Students wrote a cause and effect paper for
ENGL 125-47 and then based on that paper, created a persuasive speech for READ 125-47.
Students were given a rubric for this assignment as well so all the criteria needed for a speech
was understood before the actual writing process began (See Appendix H). Several examples of
good speeches were shown and discussed so the expectations were clear and made sense to the
students. The students worked very hard and exceptionally presented the speeches that satisfied
the requirements of the rubric and also the official READ 125 course objective of “presenting
orally in a clear and logical manner” ("Lewis and Clark Community College," 2014). As
previously mentioned, there were countless opportunities for students to reap the benefits of
authentic learning throughout the semester, but these were the biggest assignments utilizing the
strategy.
Results
There were three post-tests to assess and compare with the pretests. There were also the
PSYC 131 grades for spring, 2014, to compare to the PSYC 131 fall, 2014, grades and those are
displayed last. The first results are from the Post-test Reading Inventory Survey (Questionnaire)
that was given November 21, 2014. There were eight students who took the post-test and the
mean averages are displayed in Table 10. The post survey still employed the six point scale with
ratings from 1 to 6: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Slightly Disagree, 4 = Slightly
Agree, 5 = Agree, and 6 = Strongly Agree.
Table 10
Survey questions and mean score for each question on Reading Inventory Survey Post-test

3. When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to 5.4
understand.
my point of view.
answer.
understand.
12. I read as well as my friends read. 4
between the lines).
Note: Values are mean scores on a 6-point scale (1=Strongly Disagree and 6=Strongly Agree); N = 8.
The mean score for the post-test was 4.56 but for all data, the scores have been rounded
off; therefore, the score was actually M=4.6. The individual score for each question for the
second Reading Inventory Survey are as follows. For the first question, “People who read a lot
are very interesting,” showed the mean score as M=4.8, which represented that students slightly
agree that people who read a lot are very interesting. The second question of “When I am
reading school material, I highlight or take notes,” showed the mean score of M=4.4, which
represented students slightly agree that they highlight or take notes from their reading. For the
third question, “When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to understand,” had
the results of M=5.4, which represented students agree that they keep reading when they have
trouble understanding in order to attempt to comprehend the material. The fourth question “I tell
my friends about good books I have read,” showed the mean score of M=4.5, which represented
students slightly disagree that they tell their friends about the good books they have read. The
fifth question “I am able to use information or quotes from my reading to support my point of
view,” had the mean results of M= 4.8, which represented students slightly agree that they are
able to use information or quotes from a reading to support their point of view. The sixth
question “I understand what I read,” showed the mean score of M=4.1, which represented that
students slightly agree that they understand what they read. The seventh question of “I think
libraries are interesting places to spend time,” showed the mean score M=5.3, which represented
that students agree that they think libraries are interesting places to spend time. The eighth
question “When asked a question about what I have read, I can think of an answer,” revealed the
mean score for Question 8 as M=4.9, which represented students slightly agree that when they
are asked a question about what they have read, they can think of an answer. The ninth question
was “When I am having difficulty, I reread in order to understand,” and showed the mean score
M=5.8, which represented students agree that they reread in order to understand. The tenth
question of “Knowing how to read well is important,” showed all choosing Strongly Agree. The
mean score for Question 10 was M=6, which represented all students still strongly agree that
knowing how to read well is important.
To continue, the eleventh question of “When I read, I can state the most important ideas,”
showed the mean score for Question 11 was M=4.9, which represented students slightly agree
that they can state the most important ideas when they read. The twelfth question was “I read as
well as my friends read,” and the results for the mean score was M=4, which represented that
students slightly agree that they can read as well as their friends. Question 13 was “I can identify
my strengths in reading,” and showed the mean score for Question 13 as M=3.9, which
represented that students slightly disagree that they can identify what their strengths are when
reading. The fourteenth question of “My best friends enjoy reading,” showed the means score as
M=2.8, which represented that students disagree that their best friends enjoy reading. The
fifteenth question of “I react to what I read based on my personal life experience,” had the results
of the mean score for Question 15 as M=4.3, which represented that students slightly agree that
they react to what they read based on their own personal life experience. The sixteenth question
was “I am happy when someone gives me a book as a present,” and showed the mean score for
Question 16 as M=3.4, which represented that students slightly disagree that they are happy
when someone gives them a book as a present. The seventeenth question of “I think beyond the
factual level about material I have read (I read between the lines),” and showed the mean score
of M=4.1, which represented that students slightly agree that they think beyond the factual level
about material they have read. The eighteenth question “I question what I don’t understand
while reading,” had the results of M=4.9, which represented students slightly agree that they
question what they don’t understand while reading. The nineteenth question of “I form opinions
about what I am reading,” showed the mean score for Question 19 as M=4.8, which represented
that students slightly agree that they form their own opinions about what they read. The last
question “Reading is easy for me,” had the mean results of M=4.5, which represented that
students slightly agree that reading is easy for them.
Next, a paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare mean scores of the Reading
Survey’s pretest and post-test. There was a significant difference in the scores for the pretest
(M=3.9, SD=0.863) and the post-test (M=4.6, SD=0.783) conditions; t(18)=4.0866, p = 0.0007.
These results suggest that there was a significant increase in students’ attitudes toward reading.
Specifically, results suggest that when students are taught with authentic learning strategies, their
attitude toward reading becomes better.
Table 11
Pretest and Post-test Class Results for the Reading Inventory Survey
Test Mean Standard Standard N

Deviation Error
Pretest M =3.9 0.863 0.193 11
Post-test M =4.6 0.783 0.180 8
The Confidence interval results showed the mean of Group One (pretest) minus Group
Two (post-test) equals -0.616 and had a 95% confidence interval of this difference: from -0.932
to -0.299. The intermediate values used in calculations were: t = 4.0866, the df = 18
and standard error of difference = 0.151. Since the overall mean average of students’ attitudes
increased, it showed that students have a better understanding of their capabilities and feel better
about the reading process, itself. Students’ attitudes about reading started from the “Slightly
Disagree” category and boosted to the “Slightly Agree” category. The mean scores for every
question on the pretest and post-test can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3. The mean score for every question on the survey was measured and charted to easily
compare the changes.
To further analyze the survey, there were fifteen questions where answers increased, four
that slightly went down, and one stayed the same. It is important to look at the individual
question and see the comparison. One question does not pertain exactly to the students’
development or attitude toward reading. For example, Question 14 was “My best friends enjoy
reading,” and does not reveal how the students’ attitude changed over the time of the project. If
that question was taken out then the mean average for the pretest would still be 3.9 but the mean
average for the post-test would be higher, a 4.7. One could extrapolate that this is the true mean
score for the Reading Inventory Survey Post-test. There was an overall increase of M=0.68;
however, with Question 14 intentionally deleted, the increase was M=0.77 (See Figure 4). The
other three questions that marginally decreased were “When I read, I can state the most
important ideas,” and it went from M=5.5 to M=4.9, going from the “Agree” category to the
“Slightly Agree” category. Both are still positive results. The second question of “I think
beyond the factual level about material I have read,” went from M=4.6 to M=4.1. The third
question “Reading is easy for me,” went from M=4.8 to M=4.5. Even though there was a slight
decrease in score for these last two questions, the overall answer category of “Slightly Agree” is
still the answer and stayed the same. More importantly, students’ answers increased for the other
15 questions.
Figure 4. The Reading Inventory Survey had one question that did not serve as a question that
evaluated the reading attitudes of students, Question 14. The pretest score including Question
14 is M=3.9. The pretest score not including Question 14 was also M=3.9. The post-test score
including Question 14 is M=4.6 and the post-test score without Question 14 was M=4.7.
The question that had the biggest change in the Reading Inventory Survey was Question
7, and that question was “I think libraries are interesting places to spend time.” This score
escalated from M=1.9 to the post-survey of M=5.3. Before students visited the campus library,
many had never known all the information that was obtainable from a library. After learning of
and also learning how to properly utilize all the resources of the library (by conducting research
and applying that information), students now have a more rounded view of how the library can
be useful. Students first “Strongly Disagreed” that libraries were interesting places to spend time
but after the project, students “Agreed” that libraries were interesting places to spend time. This
attitude difference escalated from the lowest category possible to almost the highest category
possible. The second biggest change was Question 5 which was “I am able to use information or
quotes from my reading to support my point of view.” Question 5 went from M=2.7 to M=4.8
which represented students learned how to support their point of view better and also developed
a better attitude, going from the “Disagree” category to the “Slightly Agree” category. The third
biggest change was Question 19 which was “I form opinions about what I am reading.” This
score went from M=3.1 to M=4.8 which represented students’ understood more about what they
read by the end of the semester, and so this advanced from the “Slightly Disagree” category to
the “Slightly Agree” category. The details and content of what the questions ask are definitely
important and reveal that students’ overall attitudes toward reading increased.
Next, the reading comprehension pre and post-test results were charted. For the first
reading comprehension assessment, the Nelson-Denny Reading Test, which assesses the reading
level of students, six out of eight students improved and increased several grade levels. There
were eight students present the day the post-test was given, which was December 5, 2014. The
raw scores for the pre and post-test and also the reading grade level changes can be seen in Table
12. Each student was tracked and recorded. Out of the 11 students who started the cohort
section, 8 remained in the READ 125 section at the end of the semester. Six out of eight
students increased levels, one stayed the same at the 12th-grade reading level, and one slightly
decreased, missing one more question on the post-test. This latter student, Student Eight who
slightly went down on her score, was seven months pregnant and not feeling well the day of the
post-test (See Table 12 and Figure 5).
Table 12
Nelson-Denny Pre and Post-test Results showing Raw Score Comparison and Grade Level
Changes
Nelson-Denny Pre and Post-test Results
Student Pretest Raw Post-test Grade level Grade Level

Score Raw Score Pre-test Post-test
Student One 48 46 12.9 12.1
Student Two 34 44 9.3 11.5
Student Three 38 44 9.8 10.1
Student Four 32 38 8.9 9.8
Student Five 20 30 5.1 8.3
Student Six 26 42 7.1 10.9
Student Seven 20 34 5.1 9.3
Student Eight 34 32 9.3 8.9
Total Mean Average 31.5 38.75
Note: Raw scores for the Nelson-Denny are multiplied by 2 and converted into grade levels.
To sum up the Nelson-Denny, Student One started at the 12-grade reading level in the
ninth month and went to a 12th-grade level in the first month. Student Two started at the 9th
grade level in the third month and increased to an 11th grade level in the fifth month. Student
Three started with a 9th grade in the eighth-month level and increased to a 10th grade in the first-
month level. Student Four started on an 8th grade in the ninth month reading level and increased
to a 9th grade in the eighth-month level. Student Five started with a 5th grade at the first-month
level and went to an 8th grade in the third-month level. Student Six started on a 7th grade in the
first-month level and increased to a 10th grade in the ninth month level. Student Seven started at
a 5th grade in the first-month level and went to a 9th grade in the third-month level. Student
Eight started at the 9th grade at the third-month level and slightly decreased to an 8th grade at the
ninth month level. Again, Student Eight was the pregnant student who did not feel well for the
post-tests. The overall class comparison for the Nelson-Denny can be seen in Figure 5.
Fi
gure 5. Figure 5 first displays the grade level results for the eleven students who took the
Nelson-Denny pretest. Then, just the remaining eight students’ mean average was charted and
compared to their overall post-test reading level average.
Each of the eight students were examined and then charted to show the pretest and post-test
comparison. These results can be seen in Figure 6. A line graph was chosen to display each
student’s change in reading levels over the semester.
Figure 6. Each student had a change in score. Six out of eight students improved while two
students did not.
Next, the second reading comprehension pre and post-test results were analyzed. The pre
and post-test scores showed changes for five out of ten students. The second reading
comprehension assessment was taken from Chapter 9 in the Discovering Psychology textbook
(Hockenbury, 2011). Ten questions were added to the selection (by the instructor) to assess
reading comprehension and the pretest was identical to the post-test (See Appendix B). This
selection was chosen because it was on the 12th-grade reading level and the post-test results can
be seen in Table 13. Eleven students were available for the pretest and nine students were
available to take the post-test. The class average is displayed in Figure 7 whereas the individual
student is compared in Figure 8.
Table 13
Reading Comprehension Post-test II Results
Frequency Table
30-39 0
40-49 0
50-59 2
60-69 1
70-79 1
80-89 3
90-99 1
100 1
Histogram
Lowest Score 50
Highest Score 100
Number of Classes 6
Class Range 10
Frequency table displaying the results from the second reading comprehension post-
test comprised of 12th grade reading level content. The first column shows the
percentage ranges that were possible and the second column displays how many
students scored in each range.
Figure 7. This chart displays the mean scores for the whole class for the second reading
comprehension pre and post-test.
Each student is named a number and is carried over from Table 12 to Figure 6 and 8. For
example, Student One, who scored 12.1 on the Nelson-Denny post-test in Table 12 is the same
Student One for Figure 6 and Figure 8. There were nine students who took the pre and post-test
for the second reading comprehension assessment. The individual results are displayed in Figure
8.
Fi
gure 8. This bar chart displays every student that was present for the second reading
comprehension pre and post-test and his or her pre and post-test score.
The results for Reading Comprehension Assessment Number II were as follows. Student
One scored a 9 on the pretest and scored a 9 on the post-test. Student Two scored a 4 on the
pretest and a 5 on the post-test. Student Three scored a 5 on the pretest and a 5 on the post-test.
Student Four scored a 4 on the pretest and an 8 on the post-test, doubling the score. Student Five
scored a 3 on the pretest and a 6 on the post-test, also doubling the score. Student Six scored an
8 on the pretest and an 8 on the post-test. Student Seven scored a 3 on the pretest and a 7 on the
post-test, more than doubling the score. Student Eight scored an 8 on the pretest and scored a 6
on the post-test. Student Eight was previously mentioned as being pregnant and not feeling well
when taking the post-tests. Student Nine scored a 10 on the pretest and also a 10 on the post-test.
For the final assessment of the project, the PSYC 131 grades for spring, 2014, were
compared to the PSYC 131 grades for fall, 2014. The results can be seen in Table 14. For the
spring semester, the score was M=62 and for the fall semester it was M=65, increasing 3 points.
The same instructors taught the same courses and the number of students who were still enrolled
at the end of the semesters was 9 for the spring semester and 4 for the fall semester.
Table 14
Final Grade Average Comparison for PSYC 131
PSYC 131 Mean Standard Standard N

Deviation Error
Spring 2014 M =62.11 17.55 5.85 9
Fall 2014 M =65.25 29.42 14.71 4
Note: P = 0.8121.
The Confidence interval results showed the mean of Group One (PSYC 131, Spring 2014) minus
Group Two (PSYC 131, Fall 2014) equals -3.14 and had a 95% confidence interval of this
difference: from -31.51 to 25.23. The intermediate values used in calculations were: t = 0.2435,
the df = 11 and standard error of difference = 12.890.

Chapter 3
Conclusions
In conclusion, there were many components to examine for this project and overall, the
study showed positive and promising results. There were three assessments used in class to
evaluate whether or not authentic learning used in READ 125-47 had an impact on students’
grades in that class. After the three pre and post-test assessments were analyzed, then the fourth
and final assessment comparing grades from last semester’s PSYC 131 course to this semester’s
PSYC 131 course was evaluated. This was done to see if there was an impact on the same PSYC
131 student cohorts by using authentic learning taught in the reading class. The first assessment
used a reading survey before and after the implementation of authentic learning strategies and
according to the scores, it showed that students’ attitude about reading definitely improved. The
two reading comprehension assessments that used pre and post-test data showed an overall
improvement as well. The last assessment which compared PSYC 131 students’ grades to last
semester’s grades showed that grades in PSYC 131 also improved, accordingly. A conclusion
can be made, therefore, that authentic learning strategies used in READ 125-47 had a positive
impact on students in READ 125-47 and PSYC 131-47. By creating a learning environment that
was enriched with discussion, freedom to express an opinion, and making material meaningful to
their lives, students were encouraged to better their academic behavior and also gain a better
appreciation of reading.
Recommendations
If authentic learning strategies can be honed and applied in all three cohort courses, then
student retention and grade averages should both increase. It should be noted that four students
remained at the end of the semester in the PSYC 131 cohort, yet double that, eight students,
remained in the READ 125 class. Just by conducting this experiment for one semester shows
that there is an improvement for the READ 125-47 course; therefore, using similar authentic
learning strategies in the cohort classes should be effective as well. By using attributes of
authentic learning such as cooperative learning, combining more assignments, and having all
three instructors use the same or similar teaching method, the cohort courses should be enriched
threefold. As it stands now, the students only get the authentic learning benefit from one class.
Educators are still searching for ways to retain developmental college students and also ways to
improve their learning and success. Proper implementation of contextualization is a way that has
been proven to work and as of spring, 2013, there are already 97 colleges in the United States
offering similar accelerated learning program with contextualized courses (“Models of
Accelerated Developmental Education,” 2013). There is genuine potential for the reading-
writing-psychology contextualized section at Lewis and Clark, but it will be wasted if not fully
and properly implemented.
A new action plan was designed to start the process of implementing authentic learning
strategies for the next semester at Lewis and Clark Community College (See Table 15). A new
instructor was chosen for the PSYC 131-47 section by the Dean of Liberal Arts and Business, Jill
Lane (J. Lane, personal communication, November 24, 2014). The new instructor will attempt
to apply cooperative learning by integrating more assignments and kinesthetic activities in the
PSYC 131 cohort. Meetings have already started this semester to discuss possible assignments
and strategies. During the in-service week of the new semester, more meetings will convene to
perpetuate a better outcome for PSYC 131 students. Meetings will be held throughout the
spring, 2015, semester to discuss and correlate student activities and topics. Cohort instructors
have a very positive outlook about authentic learning and the new semester.
Table 15
Action Plan II
Meeting with new PSYC 131 Author/Team 12/17/14 Course Outlines, 0

instructor and same English course materials
instructor
Meeting with new PSYC 131 Author/Team 1/13-1/15 Psychology and all 0
cohort and old cohort to Textbooks, Rubrics,
combine student assignments Course outlines
and discuss class structure
Meeting with full team and Author/Team 1/13-1/16 Project results 0

administration to discuss
project
Teach authentic learning Author/Team 1/20-5/15 Textbooks, Rubrics, 0
strategies in lesson plans as Copier
discussed in meetings
Limitations
There were a few limitations encountered during the implementation stage of the project.
Lack of time and consistency with implementing more authentic teaching strategies with students
in the cohort classes were a couple limitations. Some plans that the instructor wanted to teach to
the students did not happen because of time-restraint. At least another week was needed to fulfill
all plans in READ 125-47. Also, students were behind in material for the PSYC 131 course as
well due to time-restraint. In addition, students being absent from class caused the postponement
of taking the second reading comprehension assessment and the final exam for PSYC 131.
Students being absent also did not give the needed attention that students require in order to reap
the full benefits of authentic learning. For example, group projects and discussion sometimes
suffered because of students not attending or coming in late to class. If all students remained in
all the classes, it would have given an even clearer analysis as to the potential and legitimacy of
authentic learning. As noted in the Force Field Analysis (Table 8) in Chapter 1, the author
understood it could hamper better results. There were only four students left in PSYC 131,
which does reveal where the most work needs to be focused. Regardless, the results were still
very positive.
Reflection
This Action Research Study has been a beneficial and genuine learning experience for the
author. The learning that has been acquired over the last two years could be demonstrated. By
recalling and applying the material learned during the MAE program, it gave insight as to what
could be added to a curriculum in higher education in order to make it successful. The author
had the opportunity to practice the learned knowledge by creating a legitimate study and then
applying it to a real-life scenario, which actually implemented authentic learning. This is quite
ironic and delightful. While completing all the research and applying new tools that could be
used for quantitative data, it sparked ideas to the possibilities of future studies. It made the idea
of new, substantial studies seem possible. This action research process showed, first-hand, how
this information can be applied to evaluate programs for colleges, so it has expanded the author’s
knowledge and repertoire. The author can now help colleges and universities decide what
courses are best for their students and community. Not only did the research process reinforce
the author’s knowledge of authentic learning, but it also added to it. More confidence and
knowledge was definitely gained from the MAE program and this final project.
References
Astin, A.W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Development. Retrieved October 1, 2014, from
http://kvccdocs.com/KVCC/2013-Spring/FY125-OLA/content/L17/Student%
20Involvement% 20Article.pdf
At a Glance. (2014). Lewis and Clark Community College. Retrieved October 1, 2014, from
http://www.lc.edu/uploadedFiles/Pages/About/lcfactsheet.pdf
Bailey, T., & Cho, S. (2010). Issue Brief: Developmental Education in Community
Colleges. Issue Brief: Developmental Education in Community Colleges Prepared For:
The White House Summit on Community College Thomas Bailey and Sung-Woo Cho,
CCRC September 2010. Retrieved September 25, 2014, from:
ttp://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments developmental-education-community-
colleges.pdf
Baker, E., Hope, L., & Karandjeff, K. (2009). Contextualized teaching and learning: A faculty
primer. Retrieved October 1, 2014, from:
http://basicskills.publishpath.com/websites/basicskills/ctl.pdf
Bettinger, E., & Long, B. (2009). Addressing the needs of under-prepared students in higher
education: Does college remediation work? Journal of Human Resources, 44(3). doi:
10.3386/w11325
Brown, J., Ph.D., Fishco, V., M.S., & Hanna, G., Ed.D. (1993). Nelson-Denny Reading Test
[Vocabulary, comprehension, reading rate test]. The Riverside Publishing Company,
Itasca, IL.
Corby, E. (2011). Early signs of success: Rethinking placement, curriculum, and resources.
Lewis and Clark Community College. Godfrey, IL.
DeVise, D. (2009, December 4). Report shows wide disparity in college achievement. The
Washington Post. Retrieved October 3, 2014, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2009/12/03/AR2009120302569.html
Haberer, K., & Chapman, C. (2013). Program Review: Developmental Communications.
Lewis and Clark Community College.
Harrison Group. (2013). Kids & Family Reading Report: 4th Edition. Retrieved October 25,
2014, from http://mediaroom.scholastic.com/files/kfrr2013-noappendix.pdf
Hidden curriculum (2014). In S. Abbott (Ed.), The glossary of education reform.
Retrieved October 3, 2014, from http://edglossary.org/hidden-curriculum
Hockenbury, D. (2011). Lifespan development. In D. Hockenbury (Author), Discovering
psychology (pp.366-415). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
Johnston, J. (Director). (2004). Hidalgo [Motion picture on DVD]. Wembley: WDHV
Technicolor Distribution Services.
Kreshel, P. (1990). John B. Watson at J. Walter Thompson: The legitimation of “Science” in
advertising. Journal of Advertising, 19(2). Retrieved November 18, 2014, from
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4188763?
uid=3739744&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104989705727
Leinwand, D. (2007, March 15). College drug use, binge drinking rise - USATODAY.com.
Retrieved December 10, 2014, from http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-
03-15-college-drug-use_N.htm
Lewis and Clark Community College. (2014). Retrieved November 1, 2014, from
catalog.lc.edu/search_advanced.php?
cur_cat_oid=5&search_database=Search&search_db=Search&cpage=1&ecpage=1&ppag
e=1&spage=1&tpage=1&location=33&filter%5Bkeyword
%5D=read+125+objectives&filter%5Bexact_match%5D=1
Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause
Learning Initiative. Retrieved October 3, 2014, from
https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf
Mangan, K. (2012). National Groups Call for Big Changes in Remedial Education.
Retrieved October 3, 2014, from http://chronicle.com/article/National-Groups-Call-for-
Big/136285/
Moats, L. PhD. (2002). When older students can’t read. LD Online. Retrieved October 3, 2014,
from http://www.ldonline.org/article/8025/
Models of Accelerated Developmental Education. (2013). Tarrant County College. Retrieved
November 12, 2014, from http://www.tccd.edu/documents/About%20TCC/Institutional
%20Research/TCCD_Models_of_Accelerated_Developmental_Education_Oct2013.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The Nation’s Report Card: Trends in Academic
Progress 2012 (NCES 2013–456). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of
Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. Retrieved October
4, 2014, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/
Psychology Today: Health, Help, Happiness + Find a Therapist. (2014). Retrieved November 15,
2014, from http://www.psychologytoday.com/
Raspberry, W. (1982). The Handicap of Definition. Washington Post.
Rule, A. (2006). The components of authentic learning. Journal of Authentic Learning, 3(1), 1-
10. Retrieved September 18, 2014, from http://www.alxp.org/uploads/Overview.pdf
Shapiro, J. (2014). Kids don't read books because parents don't read books. Forbes.
Retrieved September 18, 2014, from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2014/05/13/kids-dont-read-books-because-
parents-dont-read-books/
Simons, I., PhD. (2009). What do Dreams do for Us? Retrieved November 18, 2014, from
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-literary-mind/200911/what-do-dreams-do-us
Snyder, T.D., and Dillow, S.A. (2011). Digest of Education Statistics, 2010. National Center for
Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education:
Washington, DC.
Sparks, D., & Malkus, N. (2013). First-Year Undergraduate Remedial Coursetaking: 1999–
2000, 2003–04, 2007–08 (United States, U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Educational Statistics). National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved October
3, 2014, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013013.pdf
Sullivan, S., Nickols, B., Bradshaw, T., Rogowski, K., & Bauerlein, M. (2007). To Read or Not
To Read: A Question of National Consequence (Research Report #47). Washington,
D.C.: National Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved October 3, 2014, from
http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/ToRead.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education. (2011). Just Write!
Guide. Washington, D.C. Retrieved November 18, 2014, from
https://teal.ed.gov/tealGuide/toc
Appendix A
Questionnaire on Reading Attitudes
Strongly disagree =1
Disagree =2
Slightly disagree =3
Slightly agree =4
Agree =5
Strongly agree =6
PRE/POST TEST READING QUESTIONNAIRE

Name: ______________________________ Date:_______________________________
Course and Section #: ______________ Instructor_____________________________
Directions: Read each statement and circle the number that best indicates how much you agree
or disagree with the statement. Circle only one number for each statement.
The scale is at the top of each page.
1. Reading is easy for me.

1 2 3 4 5 6
2. I form opinions about what I am reading.
1 2 3 4 5 6
3. I question what I don’t understand while reading.
1 2 3 4 5 6
4. I think beyond the factual level about material I have read (I read between the lines).
1 2 3 4 5 6
5. I am happy when someone gives me a book for a present.
1 2 3 4 5 6
6. I react to what I read based on my personal life experience.

1 2 3 4 5 6
7. My best friends enjoy reading.
1 2 3 4 5 6
8. I can identify my strengths in reading.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Strongly disagree =1
Disagree =2
Slightly disagree =3
Slightly agree =4
Agree =5
Strongly agree =6
9. I read as well as my friends read.

1 2 3 4 5 6
10. When I read, I can state the most important ideas.
1 2 3 4 5 6
11. Knowing how to read well is important.
1 2 3 4 5 6
12. When I am having difficulty, I reread in order to try to understand.
1 2 3 4 5 6
13. When asked a question about what I have read, I can think of an answer.
1 2 3 4 5 6
14. I think libraries are interesting places to spend time.
1 2 3 4 5 6
15. I understand what I read.
1 2 3 4 5 6
16. I am able to use information or quotes from my reading to support my point of view.
1 2 3 4 5 6
17. I tell my friends about good books I have read.
1 2 3 4 5 6
18. When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to understand.
1 2 3 4 5 6
19. When I am reading school material, I highlight or take notes.
1 2 3 4 5 6
20. People who read a lot are very interesting.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Appendix B
Reading Comprehension Pre and Post-test #2 (12th grade reading level)
Name___________________________________________
Social and Personality Development Chapter 9 Discovering Psychology Hockenbury, 2013
From birth, forming close social and emotional relationships with caregivers is essential
to the infant’s physical and psychological well-being. Although physically helpless, the young
infant does not play a passive role in forming these relationships. As you’ll see in this selection,
the infant’s individual traits play an important role in the development of the relationship
between infant and caregiver.
Temperamental Qualities: Babies Are Different!
Infants come into the world with very distinct and consistent behavioral styles. Some
babies are consistently calm and easy to soothe. Other babies are fussy, irritable, and hard to
comfort. Some babies are active and outgoing; others seem shy and wary of new experiences.
Psychologists refer to these inborn predispositions to consistently behave and react in a certain
way as an infant’s temperament.
Interest in infant temperament was triggered by a classic longitudinal study launched in

the 1950s by psychiatrists Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess. The focus of the study was on
how temperamental qualities influence adjustment throughout life. Chess and Thomas rated
young infants on a variety of characteristics, such as activity level, mood, regularity in sleeping
and eating, and attention span. They found that about two-thirds of the babies could be classified
into one of three broad temperamental patterns: easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm-up. The
remaining third of the infants were characterized as average babies because they did not fit
neatly into one of these three categories.
Easy babies readily adapt to new experiences, generally display positive moods and
emotions, and have regular sleeping and eating patterns. Difficult babies tend to be intensely
emotional, are irritable and fussy, and cry a lot. They also tend to have irregular sleeping and
eating patterns. Slow-to-warm-up babies have a low activity level, withdraw from new situations
and people, and adapt to new experiences very gradually. After studying the same children from
infancy through childhood, Thomas and Chess (1986) found that these broad patterns of
temperamental qualities are remarkably stable.
Other temperamental patterns have been identified. For example, after decades of
research, Jerome Kagan (2010) classified temperament in terms of reactivity. High-reactive
infants react intensely to new experiences, strangers, and novel objects. They tend to be tense,
fearful, and inhibited. At the opposite pole are low-reactive infants, who tend to be calmer,
uninhibited, and bolder. Sociable rather than shy, low-reactive infants are more likely to show
interest than fear when exposed to new people, experiences, and objects.
Virtually all temperament researchers agree that individual differences in temperament

have a genetic and biological bases. However, researchers also agree that environmental
experiences can modify a child’s basic temperament. As Kagan (2004) points out,
“Temperament is not destiny. Many experiences will affect high and low reactive infants as they
grow up. Parents who encourage a more sociable, bold persona and discourage timidity will help
their high reactive children develop a less-inhibited profile.”
Because cultural attitudes affect child-rearing practices, infant temperament can also be
affected by cultural beliefs. For example, cross-cultural studies of temperament have found that
infants in the United States generally displayed more positive emotion than Russian or Asian
infants. Why? U.S. parents tend to value and encourage expressions of positive emotions, such as
smiling and laughing, in their babies. In contrast, parents in other cultures, including those of
Russia and many Asian countries, place less emphasis on the importance of positive emotional
expression. Thus, the development of temperamental qualities is yet another example of the
complex interaction among genetic and environmental factors. Chapter 9 Discovering Psychology Hockenbury
2013.
Circle the best answer to each questions.

1.) What is the Stated Main Idea in the third paragraph?
a.) Interest in infant temperament was triggered by a classic longitudinal study launched in the
1950s by psychiatrists Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess.
b.) The focus of the study was on how temperamental qualities influence adjustment throughout
life.
c.) They found that about two-thirds of the babies could be classified into one of three broad
temperamental patterns: easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm-up.
d.) The remaining third of the infants were characterized as average babies because they did not
fit neatly into one of these three categories.
2.) In the second paragraph, what is the closest definition to predisposition?

a.) Something fussy c.) Pre-formed color
b.) Pre-set behaviors d.) Something fixable
3.) According the article, who performed a classic longitudinal study about an infant’s temperament
in the 1950s?
a.) Jerome Kagan c.) psychologists Alexander Thomas and Stella

Chess
b.) Jerome Kagan and Alexander Thomas d.) psychiatrists Alexander Thomas and Stella
Chess
4.) This study decided about two-thirds of the babies could be classified into one of three broad
temperamental patterns. They are:
a.) easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm-up. c.) difficult, slow-to-warm-up, and
average.
b.) easy, hard to manage, and difficult. d.) fussy, irritable, and hard to
comfort.
5.) What happened to the other babies who did not fit into the above patterns?
a.) They were not counted in the statistics. c.) They were added later in the study.
b.) They were considered average. d.) They included them in the easy
pattern anyway.
6.) Jerome Kagan studied infant temperaments and he classified his terms as:
a.) easy, difficult, hard to comfort c.) easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm-up
b.) high-reactive and low-reactive d.) all of the above
7.) According to the reading, how are easy babies different than difficult babies?
a.) Difficult babies cry a lot while easy babies usually have positive moods.
b.) Easy babies cry a lot and so do difficult babies.
c.) Easy babies have a low activity level but difficult babies are irritable and fussy.
d.) Difficult babies and easy babies both have irregular sleeping patterns so they are really
not different.
8.) After reading the entire article, we can conclude that most temperament researchers agree that an
infant has individual differences based on:
a.) genetic and biological bases
b.) genetic and biological bases, environmental factors, and cultural
c.) inborn predispositions
d.) the infant’s individual traits
9.) In paragraph six, Kagan is quoted, “Temperament is not destiny. Many experiences will affect
high and low reactive infants as they grow up. Parents who encourage a more sociable, bold
persona and discourage timidity will help their high reactive children develop a less-inhibited
profile.” What does he mean by this?
a.) When parents encourage their children to be more sociable, the children will probably be
more sociable.
b.) Parents will shape their children’s temperament through their genetics.
c.) Children are born bold or timid so they do not need influence from parents.
d.) Children who are encouraged to be more sociable will actually be more timid.
10.)The last paragraph talks about culture. What can we infer about American culture compared to
Russian or Asian culture?
a.) It is too cold in Russia and northern Asia to smile, so they don’t.
b.) People in Russia and Asia teach their children not to smile.
c.) American’s smile too much.
d.) American culture values smiling and laughing more than Russian and Asian culture.
Appendix C
IRB Form from Greenville College

Appendix D
Informed Consent Form for Students
Informed Consent for Print Questionnaire or In-Person Interview
You are being invited to participate in a survey research study. Your participation is voluntary which means you can
choose whether or not you want to participate. You may withdraw any time without penalty.
The purpose of this survey is to assist Lewis & Clark Community College in evaluating students’ attitude toward
reading. This survey will take approximately five minutes to complete.
Possible Risks: It is expected that participation in this study will provide you with no more than minimal risk or
discomfort which means that you should not experience it as any more troubling than your normal daily life. While
there are no direct benefits to participating, your response will help us to better understand the research topic.
Confidentiality: Lewis & Clark Community College will not be collecting any personal information for the study. All
responses to this survey are anonymous and confidential. Your name or identity will not be linked in any way to
the research data. Concerning your rights or treatment as a research subject, you may contact the Lewis & Clark
Community College Institutional Review Board at 618-468-4310.
Consent: I understand that my participation in this study is entirely voluntary and that I may refuse to participate
or may withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. I have read this entire form and I understand it
completely. By signing below I am giving my consent to participate in this study.
____________________________________________________ _________________
Signature Date
Appendix E
Letter of Consent from Lewis and Clark
Dr. Doerr,
Please accept this message, along with the approved L&C proposal to conduct research, as proof that
Authentic Learning Used in Contextualizing Psychology has been approved by Lewis and Clark’s IRB.
Included in the notification of approval was an approved informed consent document to be edited and
used in conjunction with the completion of said research project.
Feel free to contact me if you have further questions or concerns.
Jon Tysse
Analyst
Institutional Research
Lewis and Clark Community College
jtysse@lc.edu
Office of Institutional Research Reid

Hall, Room 2211 - (618) 468-434
Appendix F
It’s All About You! Name___________________________________________
1. In a word, describe school. _____________________________
2. Write one word that describes you as a person. ________________________________
3. Who was the best teacher you ever had? Why?
4. If you could have lunch with a famous person, who would it be? Why?
5. What grade do you expect to get in this class? ________ Name 2 things you think you
need to do in order to succeed in college.
6. What are your favorite things to do when you’re not in school? Hobbies, interests?
7. Do you think you are smart? __________ Why or why not?

8. What do you want to do when you graduate college?
9. I really don’t like it when teachers…
10. What is the most important thing I need to do as a teacher to help you succeed in our
class?
Appendix G
Summary Grading Rubric
READ 125
Name: ________________________________ Section #______ Summary #______
Summary part Points Points Comments

possible earned
Format: contains title, one (1) paragraph,

double spaced, 12 font, correctly uses 4
MLA format
Topic sentence: Contains author(s), title
of article 2
Topic Sentence: Contains the main idea
in a complete sentence 3
Grammar: spelling, word usage,

sentence structure, accurate punctuation, 5
3rd person
Main points: all points of the article are 5
summarized
Opinion not included 2
In own words: written in student’s own
words, uses quotation marks if more than 5
a few words from the original are used
Follows logic of original article 3
Supporting details: relevant, not too 4

much/too little
Flow: Doesn’t repeat words or points,
uses signal words/phrases, well-linked 4
beginning, middle, end
Writing Desk (obtain signature)
3
X___________________________________
Total Points 40
Grade
Appendix H
READ Presentation Rubric
Student’s Name: ______________________________________________ Date_____________
Topic:_________________________________________________________________________
Element Examples Suggestions and Points Points

Strengths possible earned
Delivery
Eye contact * Looks at members of audience throughout speech 2
Posture *Shows energy and interest in the way student stands
 Student is not holding hands behind back/pockets 3
 No hats, leaning on lectern, chewing gum, etc.
Tone, Voice *Voice is appropriate to setting
level *Voice is loud enough for all to hear without straining 3
*Voice is enthusiastic and formal
Knows topic  Student can pronounce words/names 3
 Knows what is coming next
Hand gestures *Hands looks natural 2
*Hands used to emphasize points
Not reading *Student is not reading notes 5
*Student is interacting with the audience
Organization
Introduction  Hook used to get audience involved
 Introduction makes clear how the speech will be laid
5
out
 Topic and main idea introduced (all subtopics
introduced)
Main section  Each subtopic covered in enough detail (more than
one source evident)
 Research is evident 12
 Speech moves in a logical sequence
 Information is broken down into 3 sections
 Information presented makes sense.
Conclusion * Speaker goes over again the topic, main idea and subtopics 5
* Ending has a sense of finality to it (not- “OK that’s it”)
Transitions  Transition words are used to move speech forward

(1st,2nd,3rd, finally, in conclusion, next, after that, then, 5
etc.)
 There is a clear division between subsections
Visual aid * Visual helps the listener better understand the topic 5
* Visual uses some kind of technology
Miscellaneous
Total 50
Additional comments:
9/3/2014
Rhonda Heiney-Young
Progress Log
Week 1
I contacted team members, scheduled appointments via email, discussed the project via email,
and met with two members. The members are Shannon Shepard, Coordinator of Social Sciences,
Psychology Instructor, and cohort; Jon Tysse, Analyst in Research and Development; Kathy
Haberer, Director of Student Development and Counseling and site supervisor; Justin Bernaix,
Writing Instructor and cohort; and Jill Lane, Dean of Liberal Arts and Business.
I communicated via email with Shannon discussing the syllabus and the coming semester all
week. The first email started Monday, August 25th. Next, I contacted Justin, Jon, and Kathy via
email and discussed the project. I met with Kathy on Friday, August 29th, to discuss the
assessments and gather more background information for the project. I also submitted the
required IRB to Dennis Krieb, the Director of Institutional Research, however he was on
vacation until September 3rd. I also visited Jon Tysse on Friday, August 29th, to show him the
third assessment, the Nelson-Denny, being used in the project. I wanted to make sure I was
getting the proper approval and everything was being processed accordingly. I’m still waiting on
Dennis Krieb to approve my IRB so I can get the approval letter. I am conducting a quantitative
study using four methods of assessment.
I have begun gathering sources for the literature review.
Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of
evidence. Community College Review, 39(3), 268-295. doi:10.1177/0091552111416227
Baker, E., Hope, L., & Karandjeff, K. (2009). Contextualized teaching and learning: A faculty
primer. Retrieved from http://basicskills.publishpath.com/websites/basicskills/
images/ctl.pdf
Engstrom, M. C. & Tinto, V. (2008). Learning better together: The impact of learning
communities on the persistence of low-income students. Opportunity Matters, 1.
Retrieved from http://www.sdbor.edu/services/studentaffairs/documents/
LearningBetterTogether_Engstrom-Tinto-2008.pdf
Week 2
I met with my two cohorts, Shannon and Justin, on Wednesday, September 3, and
discussed what, how, and when we are to combine assignments throughout the semester.
I collected more data and started analysis.
Student Success Initiatives Dashboard

PSYC 131 contextualized with
READ 125 and ENGL 125 Spring 2013 Fall 2013
Note: This initiative was
institutionalized in Fall 2011
Spring 2013 Contextualized PSYC 131 (47) PSYC 56% 65% -9% 50% 61% -11%
131 (18) (750) (14) (194)
Spring 2013 READ 125 (47) READ 88% 68% +2 83% 65% +1
125 (17) (306) 0% (12) (174) 8%
Spring 2013 ENGL 125 (47) ENGL 88% 66% +2 67% 61% +6%
125 (17) (436) 2% (12) (194)
Spring 2014
33% 65% -32%

(12) (750)
78% 68% +10%
(9) (306)
67% 66% +1%
(9) (436)
I gave the reading attitude questionnaire (Reading Inventory) and then pretests for the 12th grade
reading comprehension and the Nelson-Denny. I graded and started to convert the raw scores
into quality tools, deciding which ones to use. I met with Shannon on Friday, September 5, and
Wednesday, September 10, to discuss the students, assignments, and correlation study to be done
near the end of the semester. Shannon and I met again on September 17 to discuss student grades
and attendance. Countless emails have been sent discussing it, too.
Week 3
I also started writing Chapter 1 of the project and would like feedback on my purpose statement
below.
The purpose of this project was two-fold: 1.) to determine if making students in the READ 125-
47 course use authentic learning strategies based on Psychology 131 topics and concepts will
improve their reading comprehension and attitudes toward reading and 2.) to determine if the
authentic learning strategies used will further increase student success in PSYC 131, defined as a
grade A, B, or C. The research question for this project is:
1. To what extent does using authentic learning strategies based on psychology topics
and concepts have on student achievement in READ 125-47 and PSYC 131-47.
Revised purpose statement:
The purpose of this project will be two-fold: 1.) to determine the impact on student
comprehension and attitudes toward reading if authentic learning strategies based on Psychology
131 topics and concepts are implemented in the READ 125-47 course, and 2.) to determine if the
authentic learning strategies used will, in turn, further increase student success (defined as a
grade of A, B or C) in PSYC 131-47. The research question for this project is:
1. To what extent does using authentic learning strategies based on psychology topics and
concepts impact student attitude, reading comprehension, and overall achievement in
READ 125-47 and Psychology 131-47.
I have added references to my literature review:
Astin, A.W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Development. Retrieved from http://kvccdocs.com/KVCC/2013-
Spring/FY125-OLA/content/L-17/Student%20Involvement%20Article.pdf
Blount, C. & Haberer, L.,K. (2013). Program review: Developmental communications. Godfrey,
IL. LCCC.
Snyder, T.D., and Dillow, S.A. (2011). Digest of Education Statistics, 2010. National Center for
Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education:
Washington, DC.
Bell, Nathan (2012). Data sources: the role of community colleges on the pathway to graduate
degree attainment. Council of Graduate Schools. Retrieved from
https://www.cgsnet.org/data-sources-role-community-colleges-pathway-graduate-degree-
attainment-0
Haberer, Kathy (2014). Personal Interview. Lewis and Clark Community College.
Keller, J. (2008). Community colleges get new instructions on teaching basic skills. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved September 9, 2014, from
http://chronicle.com/article/Community-Colleges-Get-New/1408/
At a Glance (2014). Lewis and Clark Community College. Retrieved on September 13, 2014
from http://www.lc.edu/uploadedFiles/Pages/About/lcfactsheet.pdf
Action Plan
Strategies Persons Timeline Materials Budget
Responsible Needed
Modify READ 125 course Author 9/1 – 9/5 Copier 0
outline to include pretests
Collect data from pretest Author/Team 9/5 – 9/13 Pretests/Keys to 0
results and transform into 9/13 – 9/20 tests
quality tools Computer
equipped with
Microsoft Word
and Excel
Teach authentic learning Author 9/13 – 9/20 Copier 0
strategies as lesson plans Textbooks
Teach authentic learning Author/Liz 9/20 – 9/27 Copier 0
strategies as lesson plans, Burns Textbooks
Students attend Reid Memorial Reid Library
Library orientation
Week 5 and 6
I met with Shannon September 24 and then again September 30, 2014. I have converted
the raw data from the survey and pretests into histograms and charts. I have worked on finding
the facts I want to use for my project, which includes discovering and evaluating more
references. A lot of time has gone into researching statistics and facts that support claims. The
biggest time consumer was the fish bone diagram and the revised action plan showing all the
causes of the problem and planning for the rest of the project. In addition, I worked on the rest
of chapter 1, completing the Data Collection Methods and Data Collection Analysis. I realized
that one more reason needed to be added to the Analysis of Causes. I have been researching the
support I need to finish the fourth analysis listed in the Analysis of Causes.
Table 2. Proficient Reading in 8th grade – by Race/Ethnicity 1992 – 2012
1992 2012
White 35% 46%
Black 9% 17%
Hispanic 13% 22%
Cause and Effect Fishbone Diagram
Decline in voluntary
Reading reading
has declined overall in
among teenagers
America for children, teenagers, When children read less,
adults, and college graduates they read less well
Gaps between minority

students and White
students
exist Poor attitudes toward
reading.
Adults have declining proficiency
in reading
Low reading
American teenagers drop out comprehension scores.
of school due to the decline
in literacy and reading Low graduation rates.
comprehension
Students having to
Little incentive for
take a remedial course
students to do better
are discouraged by
that fact and lose
interest Learning
environment is not
Reading comprehension the most appropriate
skills are disintegrating
among older teens
Figure 4. Cause and Effect Diagram

Reading Inventory - September

Questions Percentages
People who read a lot are very interesting.
When I am reading school material, I highlight or take notes.
When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to understand.
I tell my friends about good books I have read.
I am able to use information or quotes from my reading to support my point of view.
I understand what I read.
I think libraries are interesting places to spend time.
When asked a question about what I have read, I can think of an answer.
When I am having difficulty, I reread in order to try to understand.
Knowing how to read well is important.
When I read, I can state the most important ideas.
I read as well as my friends read.
I can identify my strengths in reading.
My best friends enjoy reading.
I react to what I read based on my personal life experience.
I am happy when someone gives me a book for a present.
I think beyond the factual level about material I have read.
I question what I don't understand while reading.
I form opinions about what I am reading.
Reading is easy for me.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Slightly Disagree

Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree
Figure 1. Reading Inventory Pretest
Revised Action Plan
Strategies Persons Timeline Materials Needed Budget

Responsible
Teach authentic learning Author 9/27-- Psychology text, 0
strategies in lesson plans, assess 11/24 copier, handouts,
student work Mercury Reader
text, rubrics
Teach authentic learning using Author 10/6 -- Copier, handouts, 0
Hidalgo movie, assess student 10/13 Hidalgo DVD
work
Teach authentic learning in Author 10/13-- Psychology text, 0
lesson plans, assess student 10/27 copier, handouts,
work Mercury Reader
text, rubrics
Teach authentic learning in Author 10/27 -- Psychology text, 0

lesson plans, presentations, copier, handouts,
assess student work 11/7 Mercury Reader
text, rubrics,
projector
Presentations, Data analysis Author/Team 11/7 -- Rubrics, 0

11/21 Computer with
Excel
Presentations, Data analysis Author/Team 11/21-- Rubrics, computer 0

11/28 with Excel
Summary of Reading Comprehension Test 2
Frequency Table

30-39 2
40-49 2
50-59 1
60-69 2
70-79 0
80-89 2
90-99 1
100-109 1
Your Histogram
Lowest Score 30
Highest Score 100
Number of Classes 8
Class Range 10
Frequency table displaying the results from the reading

comprehension pretest comprised of 12th grade reading
level content. The first column shows the percentage ranges
that were possible and the second column displays how
many students scored in each range.
Table 3
Summary of Nelson-Denny Reading Test
Frequency Table
30-39 2
40-49 2
50-59 1
60-69 2
70-79 0
80-89 2
90-99 1
100-109 1
Your Histogram
Lowest Score 30
Highest Score 100
Number of Classes 8
Class Range 10
Frequency table showing
results of the first reading
comprehension pretest taken in September. The first column
shows the reading levels ranging from 3rd grade to 12th. The
second column displays how many students scored in each range.
Weeks 7 and 8
I have been working on Chapter 1 fixing tables and figures so they are easier to read and reflect
more accurate results. I have added more tables and figures that coincide with data. I have added
more references since my research provoked ideas that needed support. I have finished Chapter 1
and turned it in. I met with Shannon, Kathy, and Justin October 3. I have also started
implementing lessons that use authentic learning strategies.
Bailey, T., & Cho, S. (2010). Issue Brief: Developmental Education in Community
Colleges. Issue Brief: Developmental Education in Community Colleges Prepared For:
The White House Summit on Community College Thomas Bailey and Sung-Woo Cho,
CCRC September 2010. Retrieved from:http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments
developmental-education-community-colleges.pdf
Corby, E. (2011). Early signs of success: Rethinking placement, curriculum, and resources.
Lewis and Clark Community College. Godfrey, IL.
Rule, A. (2006). The components of authentic learning. Journal of Authentic Learning, 3(1), 1-
10. Retrieved from http://www.alxp.org/uploads/Overview.pdf
Scholastic. (2013). Kids and Family Reading Report: 4th Edition. Retrieved from
http://mediaroom.scholastic.com/kfrr.
Shapiro, J. (2014, May 13). Kids don't read books because parents don't read books. Forbes.
Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2014/05/13/kids-dont-read-
books-because-parents-dont-read-books/
Sparks, D., & Malkus, N. (2013). First-Year Undergraduate Remedial Coursetaking: 1999–
2000, 2003–04, 2007–08 (United States, U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Educational Statistics). National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013013.pdf
Sullivan, S., Nickols, B., Bradshaw, T., Rogowski, K., & Bauerlein, M. (2007). To Read or Not
To Read: A Question of National Consequence (Research Report #47). Washington,
D.C.: National Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved from
http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/ToRead.pdf
United States, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education.
(2011). Just Write! Guide. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from
https://teal.ed.gov/sites/default/files/Fact-Sheets/6%20_TEAL_Student-Centered.pdf.
Visa, D. D. (2009, December 4). Report shows wide disparity in college
achievement. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2009/12/03/AR2009120302569.html?hpid=moreheadlines
Table 5. Force Field Analysis of Suggested Action Plan
Table 4
Reading proficiency rates for American 8th graders, listed by race/ethnicity for 1992-2012
Race/Ethnicity 1992 2012

White 35% 46%
Black 9% 17%
Hispanic 13% 22%
Note: Adapted from “First-Year Undergraduate Remedial Coursetaking: 1999–2000, 2003–04,

2007–08,” by D. Sparks and N. Malkus, 2013, National Center for Educational Statistics.
Forces Supporting Change Forces Opposing Change

(Those which currently exist & support or (Forces that may inhibit the
drive the desired change) implementation of the desired change.)
Administrative and faculty support Students resist assignments

READ 125-47 Students drop courses before
completion
PSYC 131-47
More work for author/instructor
Increase retention of students
Increase reading comprehension and Rigorous work in PSYC 131-47
better attitude toward reading
Increase in student success rate for

contextualized classes
Table 5
First year undergraduate students in the United States enrolled in developmental courses in
public institutions
Race/Ethnicity Year: 1999-2000 Year: 2003-2004 Year: 2007-2008

White 24.3 19.7 19.9
Black 37.7 27.4 30.2
Hispanic 37.8 26.8 29.0
Asian/Pacific Islander 34.9 20.1 22.5
Other or Two or more races 34.4 24.0 27.5
Note: Adapted from “First-Year Undergraduate Remedial Coursetaking: 1999–2000, 2003–04, 2007–08,”
by D. Sparks and N. Malkus, 2013, National Center for Educational Statistics.
More references:
Mangan, K. (2012, December 13). National Groups Call for Big Changes in Remedial
Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/National-Groups-Call-for-
Big/136285/
Visher, M., Wathington, M., Schneider, E. & Collado, H. (2010). Scaling up learning
communities: The experience of six community colleges. National Center for
Postsecondary Research. Retrieved from
http://www.postsecondaryresearch.org/i/a/document/12887_LCfullreport.pdf
Weeks 9 and 10
I have corrected all the tables and figures for Chapter 1, adding notes to them and adjusting
margins. I had to make corrections on the Chapter 1 I got back from Dr. Doerr and resubmit it. I
added the mean in addition to the percentages for the first Reading Inventory Survey so now
there is a way to compare the second one that will be administered in November. I added my
appendixes to Chapter 1 as well. I did finally receive approval on Chapter 1 last week. I have
been talking via email with members of the team and met with Shannon on October 27th. Also, I
have begun writing Chapter 2. I am deciding which authentic learning lesson plan examples to
include in the chapter. There is no way I can include them all, so I’m not decided yet on which to
explain and display.
Table 2

3. When I run into trouble reading, I keep reading in an attempt to 5
understand.
my point of view.
answer.
understand.
12. I read as well as my friends read. 3.5
between the lines).
Note: Values are mean scores on a 6-point scale (1=Strongly Disagree and 6=Strongly Agree);
N = 11.
Week 11 and 12
I have been working on writing Chapter 2 for the project. I am giving examples of how authentic
learning is being implemented into my READ 125-47 class. I am going to compare those grades
to the grades of the past semester in my class and then also in the PSYC 131 course. I had a
meeting today, November 14, with Justin, the English Instructor who is a part of my team, to
create the topics for the second speech in our classes. The second speech was assigned today.
Students will turn in the paper to him and then based on that paper, will give me the speech on
December 8 and 10. The second speech is a psychology-related topic so all three cohort classes
tie together. No new quality tools have been created yet, not until I receive the data to compare
courses. I did add additional Appendixes showing what rubrics and questionnaires were used,
and then also the IRB approval letter and the signed consent forms that were given to students at
Lewis and Clark before the project began. I have been very busy!

Authentic Learning Usedin Readingand Contextualized Psychologyedited

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Authentic Learning Usedin Readingand Contextualized Psychologyedited

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AUTHENTIC LEARNING 1

AUTHENTIC LEARNING USED IN READING AND CONTEXTUALIZED PSYCHOLOGY

SCOTT E. DOERR, PhD, Faculty Mentor

KATHY TAYLOR, PhD, Faculty Advisor

Mark Lamb, Ed.D, Dean, School of Education

An Action Research Project Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Art in Curriculum and Instruction

using authentic learning strategies.

Action Plan, Force Field Analysis, and Revised Action Plan……………………………27

Data Collection Methods………………………………………………………………...31

Action Plan II…………………………………………………………………………….55

Appendix A - Reading Inventory Survey……………………………………….………..62

Appendix B - Reading Comprehension Pre and Post-test #2…………………………….64

Appendix C - IRB Consent Form from Greenville College.……………………………..67

Appendix D - Informed Consent Form for Students.…………………………………….68

Appendix E - Letter of Consent from Lewis and Clark…………………………………..69

Appendix F - “It’s All About You” student assignment.…………………………………70

Appendix G - Summary Grading Rubric.…………….…………………………………..71

Appendix H - Speech Rubric………………………………………………….………….72

populous. A passing grade is only defined as an A, B, or C (See Table 1).

Course Contextualized Learning Group General Population

passing rate back to the original success.

learning. Finding ways to integrate these three subjects is ongoing.

Furthermore, an essential aspect to understand is that READ 125 students need

students with the age range of 18—40.

concepts impact student attitude, reading comprehension, and overall achievement in

READ 125-47 and Psychology 131-47.

As of fall, 2013, approximately 3% of enrolled credits are developmental Communications

implemented: 1) by enforcing intrusive advising; 2) by offering extra academic support for

students, and 3) by creating learning communities in contextualized courses. Advisors and

course encourages retention.

academic support networks are implemented correctly, students flourish. An integrated

opportunities to reap the benefits of both types of correlative learning.

According to a study expounded upon in the Journal of Authentic Learning, authentic

The third aspect of authentic learning is utilizing a community of learners. When

academic content or concepts to be taught. In a traditional college setting, the professor

professors who are used to teaching in a conventional setting.

Extensive studies in Florida, Texas, and Ohio explored developmental education in

author’s objective as an educator and in this action research paper.

Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Slightly Disagree, 4 = Slightly Agree, 5 = Agree, and 6 = Strongly

at the end of November, 2014.

Reading Inventory results - September

Strongly Disagree PDisagree

W h en I am r ead i n g sc h o o l m at er i al , I h i g h l i gh t o r t ak e n o t es. 33% 11% 44% 11%

Figure 1. Reading Inventory Survey results from September.

Survey Question Mean

13. I can identify my strengths in reading. 3.2

slightly agree that reading is easy for them.

pre and post-test assessments will be revealed later in this paper.

Summary of Nelson-Denny Reading Pretest

comprehension post-test later in this paper.

environment and participation make a significant difference.

going to be ramifications throughout education. It makes sense why developmental students

would obviously decrease as well.

Race/Ethnicity 1992 2012

Race/Ethnicity Year: 1999-2000 Year: 2003-2004 Year: 2007-2008

young readers need to have in order to succeed in the world of academia.

developmental students is by using authentic learning, an individualized and collective approach,

K-12 setting or a college setting.

Action Plan, Force Field Analysis, and Revised Action Plan

practicing summarization, learning how to conduct research in a library, practicing

figure out unknown words.