1

Effectiveness of Graphic Organizers within Ability Grouping

Erendira Johnson

Haley Kamiya

Chantelle Kimura

Mapuana Mole

Kalena Shaw

EDEE 492/Spring 2022

University of Hawaiʻi - West Oʻahu

 2

Abstract

A wide range of studies have been conducted on effective strategies to help students who

struggle with reading and writing. This research study investigates the effectiveness of graphic

organizers in a third grade reading class to evaluate whether they assist students to formulate,

summarize, and organize what they have read and learned. In addition, students were placed in

ability grouping created to further observe Quality Talk (QT) being produced within small

groups of students.
 3

Henrick Ibsen coined the phrase “A picture is worth a thousand words”. Although Ibsen

was a modern playwright, these words hold true when scaffolding young learners in techniques

of writing and reading. In a modern-day classroom, students are surrounded by visual imagery

through textbooks, notice boards, television, videos, or computers (Praveen 2013). These visual

aids allow the learner to better comprehend the task at hand and generate their own ideas.

According to Lott and Read (2015), all writing begins with ideas. For younger students, they

need visual guides to organize their many ideas before reading and writing. Many teachers use

graphic organizers or thinking maps to get students to visualize any patterns and to arrange their

ideas, due to its benefits (Lott and Read 2015).

Based on the 2011 nationwide writing assessment results, reported by the National Center

for Education Statistics (2012), results have shown that eighth and twelfth grade students (74%

and 73%) did not write at or above proficient level (Price and Jackson 2015). This data illustrates

that these students did not receive the foundational skills required to become experienced writers.

Therefore, it is imperative that teachers must provide learning aids, like graphic organizers,

model how to use them in various examples, to guide and support reading and writing skills early

on and better prepare students to achieve proficient academic performances in later grade levels.

This literature review examines the effectiveness of graphic organizers to assist students in

reading comprehension and writing. Additionally, it explores the dynamics of group

collaboration in ability grouping, both homogeneous and heterogeneous, and observes QT within

those groups.
 4

GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS

Teachers use graphic organizers as a valuable tool to differentiate their instruction

according to the student's learning style. According to Praveen (2013), by understanding which

learning style the student excels in, teachers can present materials appropriate to him/her.

Graphic organizers are very similar to another learning aid, thinking maps, in that they both offer

students a visual representation in order to comprehend text. Graphic organizers have proven to

be a powerful teaching and learning tool that can help students grasp new concepts and save

valuable time for teachers. They provide a strong visual picture for students and support their

ability to learn facts, information, and new terms (McKnight 2013). In addition, they provide a

form of scope and sequence that shows the students the individual steps of their thinking process,

adding value and ownership to their work.

A common graphic organizer that is used to facilitate students with ordering events in a

story is a story sequence organizer, or ordering flow map. Sequencing and ordering flow maps

guide students to understand the steps and patterns in order to explain the events that take place

within a narrative (Lott and Read 2015). Graphic organizers are an effective learning tool that

have been used by teachers to facilitate and enhance writing proficiency. In Barton and Sawyers

(2003) research and observations, Donna M. Sawyer used the strategy of sequencing within her

third-grade classroom. She had her class draw the main character and asked her students to then

organize their drawings based on the order of the events from the story. Students were then able

to explain the comprehension strategy that was being used, when it is appropriate to use the

sequencing strategy, and why it is a useful strategy (Barton and Sawyer 2003). Some of her

students had mentioned that this strategy is useful when there are a lot of events and it helps

them remember what was read (Barton and Sawyer 2003). Praveen (2013) supports the use of
 5

this strategy by stating that these forms of visual aids help students comprehend passages more

effectively than other reading strategies like skimming and note taking.

Graphic organizers are believed to improve students’ research and problem solving skills.

They also help organize a great amount of details and allow information to be composed in one

place. Graphic organizers that target elements of critical and creative thinking help develop

students in their ability to understand the meaning of the text (Kurniaman 2019). Organizing

information using this tool helps students summarize and categorize different pieces of

information and highlight the main points.

STUDENT COMPREHENSION

Gouldthrop, Katsipis, and Mueller (2017) state that 10% of students show age-specific

word decoding skills and have difficulties understanding what they’ve read. In the reading

process, graphic organizers can be used at three levels: Before instruction, during instruction and

after instruction (Praveen 2013). The overall process is lengthy but intentional with the teacher

modeling the use of graphic organizers in order for students to later become independent learners

and gain better comprehension. Praveen (2013) suggests that graphic organizers are used to

understand the level of the student in terms of the content before instruction. They then assist the

student with higher order thinking during the instruction while constructing and applying their

ideas. Finally, they help as a summarizing tool that illustrate improvement to the student

throughout the process. With this model, students are able to go beyond what was read and

allows students to make connections between real life experiences and the provided stories

(Gouldthrop, Katsipis, and Mueller 2017).

 6

WRITING CHALLENGES

Writing can be a challenge for many students, especially for those with oral language

difficulties and English Language Learners (ELL). In 1999, teachers implemented Thinking

Maps into their curriculum in hopes of raising their Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test

(FCAT) of 84%. After one year of implementing Thinking Maps, the writing assessment

percentage had risen to 97%. In another study, researchers found that English Language Learners

who struggled with writing used graphic organizers for their writing assignments and showed

improvement in their organization skills and comprehension (Cooks 2013). Writing is often also

a solitary activity, lacking the interaction, and dialogue with others which social interactionist

theories such as Vygotsky considered crucial for the learning process (William & Burden 2000).

Fauziah (2015) states that educators and researchers have taken this dilemma into consideration

and provide ELL students with training and support by allowing students to make dialogue with

others. This process of collaboration allows students to work together to produce one piece of

writing, with each student taking a responsibility. Collaborative writing can improve students’

interaction in the classroom, lower the anxiety associated with completing tasks, and raise

students’ self-confidence (Fauziah 2015).

ABILITY GROUPING: HOMOGENOUS VS. HETEROGENEOUS

Many of today's classrooms are composed of diverse students. They differ from culture,

socioeconomic backgrounds, learning styles and abilities. The teacher is responsible for

understanding students’ diversity, what they add to the classroom and to be able to group

students accordingly, in order for students to succeed in all academic areas. This task is daunting

for even the seasoned teacher and debate resides on whether to group students in heterogeneous
 7

groups (mixed abilities) or in homogeneous groups (same abilities). Ability grouping, simply

put, is the practice of dividing students for instruction on the basis of their perceived capacities

for learning (Adodo 2011).

The debate over which ability grouping is more effective has and continues to be divided

with no clear winner. Researchers have conducted studies for over 500 years and according to

Adodo (2011), ability grouping is the answer to academic diversity and achievement. However,

Adodo (2011) also suggests that critics equate ability grouping as a form of segregation,

separating students by not only their learning abilities but their socioeconomic background and

race. Daniel (2007) supports this theory by stating that intended gains for students in ability

grouping fail to be seen because students are grouped by their income, social class, and race

being in the forefront. Nonetheless, teachers are continually testing and evaluating which form of

ability grouping is better, which may differ from subject to subject..

Research indicates that higher and lower ability students benefit from heterogeneous

grouping, whereas average ability students benefit from homogeneous grouping. According to

Murphy (2017), homogeneous ability grouping allows the teacher to create and implement

instruction with accommodations that students need. Furthermore, Murphy (2017) suggests that

this type of grouping is often used with students that need extra support in literacy interventions

such as fluency and comprehension. By providing Differentiated Instruction (DI), the teacher is

able to evaluate the specific needs of struggling learners and design both lessons and materials

that connect to students’ learning styles and abilities. As a result, students can meet learning

targets and work on becoming proficient in that activity. However, Bikarian (2009) suggests that

students enjoy and produce better results when working in a heterogeneous group. Struggling

students are able to get the support they need from their high ability peers. In a heterogeneous
 8

group, it is common to see the average student fall into the background, not being challenged

enough. These students are not being challenged as much as they would be in a homogeneous

group. High ability students performed well regardless of the type of grouping they were placed

in. High ability students take on an active role regardless which ability grouping they are placed

in. Michael Briggs (2020) conducted a study on these groupings in an active learning

environment, finding that homogeneous grouping showed a positive outcome from students, not

just academically but also personally. In his study, students preferred homogeneous grouping for

their learning as compared to heterogeneous groupings. With learners who are on the same or

similar academic performance level, students in this grouping were able to freely express their

thinking with their peers, having a discussion among all group members and not only the high

performer (Briggs 2020). This research demonstrates that each student, no matter their abilities,

took on an active role within their homogeneous group.

Regardless of which ability grouping students are placed in, quality talk, in either

grouping, is a key to success in the students’ learning. The social interactions and quality talk

that is involved promotes higher order thinking and reasoning skills. According to Murphy

(2017), social interactions in heterogeneous groups received higher elaborations from a single

student whereas the homogeneous group got more co-construction of elaborations. Concerted

efforts have been devoted to investigating small-group, text-based discussion as an effective

approach to promoting students’ reading comprehension (Murphy 2017). Whether students have

higher achievement in either grouping has been inconclusive in research.

 9

CONCLUSION

Graphic organizers play an important role in representing the text structure from a mere

text to content suitable for discussion in classroom instructions (Praveen 2013). Murphy supports

this by stating that small group, text-based discussions are an effective instructional practice that

scaffolds Quality Talk to occur in both homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping. However,

Johnson (2011) argues that the purpose of grouping needs to be intentional. If the purpose of the

group learning activity is to help struggling students, research shows that heterogeneous groups

may help most (Johnson 2011). Overall, discourse structure and the implementation of graphic

organizers are beneficial to students of any ability, allowing them to construct meaning,

comprehend text, and produce writing through creativity. The observations and findings in

regards to which ability grouping continues to be a topic of discussion, not giving teachers a

formative solution of which is best to use in their classrooms.

METHOD

Collaborative Lesson Research (CLR) is a Japanese model of a teacher-led investigation.

A group of educators actively participate in professional development to better understand and

collaboratively target an identified area for academic development in their students' learning.

The goal in CLR is to involve educators in hypothesizing different practices that will be effective

in student learning and success. Once the teachers have identified the learning target and

objectives, they set out to create a research question. The teachers then plan a lesson, gathering

any and all materials that will be needed to better help the students learn. The live research study

is then conducted which involves observing students while the lesson is being given. Each

member of the group has a role; the teacher, the student observers, and the time keeper. While

one of the teachers is teaching, the other teachers are observing and taking notes of everything
 10

they see and hear. After the lesson has been taught and all teachers have their observational

notes, the teachers regroup to debrief and reflect on their lesson study.

The research question created for this research study was, “How effective is a sequencing

graphic organizer, in guiding students to sequence the order of events in a story within ability

grouping?” The original research question evolved over time and after pinpointing what

expectations were wanted, the group settled on this question. As a group different areas that

students struggled with were discussed. The common area that was brought up again and again

was students' abilities in writing. More specifically, their inability to sequence the events of a

story. Group members decided to implement a graphic organizer into this lesson study in hopes

that it would give a visual guide. In addition, just like Donna M. Sawyer did in her class, group

members wanted to help students understand why and how graphic organizers are needed and

useful.

The Great Race: The Story of the Chinese Zodiac by Dawn Casey was chosen as the

folktale to be used in the research study. Because of the length of the story, the group members

condensed the story, making an adaptation of it. Group members wanted to conduct their own

research as to what ability grouping was best and decided to group six pods as small groups of

desks. Five pods were heterogeneous groups and one pod a homogeneous group.

Furthermore, the research study had two focus students, Ryan and Nikolie, each placed in

a different ability group. Every strategy used within the research study came from the research

done with the literature review with the intention to help students succeed in the activity and to

test the research question.

The learning targets for the lesson were 1) students will be able to summarize and retell

the events in the story, 2) Students will be able to identify important events in the story and 3)
 11

students will be able to communicate and work efficiently with their group members. The

graphic organizer that was created specifically for this lesson study had four parts. Each part was

a half sheet and the half sheets were titled First, Next, Then, and Last. Each student would assign

themselves a section of the graphic organizer. As a group, they were to successfully sequence

the events of the adapted story. Students were to write a few sentences that supported the event

they had chosen and draw a picture that supported their writing. To grade each student's event,

the group created a rubric. In addition, a list of possible answers was created to help determine

what specific answers would be considered correct.

During the lesson planning, it was agreed that the story would be introduced a day before

the actual lesson. This would allow the students to become familiar with the story and allow for

students to have more time to complete the group activity. On the day of the lesson, the students

were able to review the story and highlight what sentences they thought were main events. The

materials needed for this assignment were passed out before the lesson began.

Ms. M provided thirty minutes of direct instruction, giving the students visual

representations of her morning routine and allowing them to make their own real-life

connections to the lesson. She introduced the terms First, Next, Then, and Last; and to clarify the

order even further, had students write numbers one through four on the corresponding half sheet.

Each pod was given their four half sheets and afterwards, were given the rubric. Very briefly, the

explanation of scoring was given to students. Next, students were given thirty minutes to

complete their graphic organizers. Ms. M and the substitute teacher walked around the class and

offered guidance and assistance when needed.

The research study group observed how effective the graphic organizers were in helping

students sequence the events in order and how the different groupings of the students
 12

(homogeneous and heterogeneous) affected the accuracy of the answers. In addition, group

members observed if each pod was able to take part in Quality Talk (QT). Because William and

Borders research describes writing as a solitary task, group members wanted to observe if

Murphy’s theory of QT would bridge the gap of a solitary subject to a more collaborative

subject. The lesson study group observed how each focus student responded in their respective

pod and evaluated if either ability group did better . Refer to Figure 1.

CONTEXT

Daniel K. Inouye Elementary School (DKIES) is a public school located on Schofield

Barracks in Central Oahu District. DKIES predominantly has students who come from military

backgrounds (78%). This background contributes to a constant student turnover with current

students leaving and new student enrollment throughout the school year. The initial enrollment of

students at the beginning of the school year was 512 students and enrollment fluctuates

throughout the school year. The student population of DKIES is diverse with cultural

backgrounds consisting of a high percentage of Caucasions, African Americans, and Hispanics.

Currently, DKIES provides grade levels from Pre-K through fifth grade.

The lesson study was conducted in a third grade classroom that consists of 22 students.

The students come from various cultural backgrounds and require different academic, social, and

behavioral needs. For example, there were students who receive speech services, Response to

Intervention (RTI) for ELL , school based-behavioral health services, and some students take

part in the gifted and talented program.

This research study analyzed students’ reading proficiency. In reading, there are a total

of eight students who Meet with Excellence (ME) and are above grade level, seven students who

Meet Proficiency (MP) and are at grade level, and seven students who are Developing
 13

Proficiency (DP) and below grade level. To differentiate instruction and meet the needs of the

student, students are provided with resources that align with curriculum from Wonders

(Reading), iReady (Reading and Math), and Sora (Reading).

Student seating and grouping has also been created based on their individual behaviors

and academic needs. There are a total of six pods/desk groupings, each consisting of four

students. Student academic abilities range in each pod, following a heterogeneous capability

grouping teaching approach. Each pod contains a ME student to act as a facilitator within the

group. In addition, students that are classified as DPs were intentionally placed in the front of the

classroom so the teacher can provide additional support and guidance when needed.

PARTICIPANTS

There were a total of eighteen out of twenty-two students present on the day of the

research study.. Of the four absent, two of the students are high-ability learners, or MEs. One of

those ME students is the facilitator within their assigned pod. Out of the two remaining absent

students, one is an MP taking the role as the facilitator within their assigned pod. The last student

is a DP. One student from pod 1 and pod 5 exchanged seats to accommodate the heterogeneous

and homogeneous grouping style that was to be observed. This rearrangement required the

movement of one of our focus students, Nikolie, to the homogenous group.

Nikolie is an MP student who was grouped with another MP student for the observation.

Nikolie can become easily distracted, unable to stay seated during a lesson, and often plays with

objects at his seat during the duration of lessons being given. Nonetheless, Nikolie shows social

skills that would allow him to effectively communicate with his pod partner, Gerold. Gerold is

usually quiet and when uninterested in a topic, will show signs of becoming unmotivated to

complete work. Recently, he has been struggling with anxiety, sometimes having outbursts in
 14

class that need immediate attention to defuse and redirect. These outbursts contribute to Gerold

not completing his work in a timely manner.

The second focus student, Ryan, was placed in a heterogeneous pod. Ryan is a DP student

and requires continuous support from the ME student at the same pod, Cayla. Ryan participates

in little social interaction with her peers, rarely participates in class discussions, and is soft

spoken. Ryan is currently reading at a first grade level which crosses over to her low proficiency

in writing. Cayla is able to grasp concepts quickly, work independently, and will ask for

clarification as needed. Cayla enjoys working in a group and tends to take on the role of the

facilitator during classwork activities.

DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS

In order to properly assess and analyze student learning, a rubric was created along with a

list of possible answers for each sequential event from the story. Refer to Figures 2 & 3. The

entire lesson was allotted an hour, giving students approximately 30 minutes to complete the

group activity. Out of the 24 events that were collected, a total of six events received zero out of

four possible points. Refer to Figure 4. Three of those events were incomplete and the other

three did not receive points due to the event and illustration being incorrect. Refer to Figure 5.

Those that were incomplete came from heterogeneous groups where the ME student took on the

role of completing one additional event because of the uneven grouping caused by absences. In

addition, the ME students failed to complete their own events because they were facilitating and

assisting the MPs and DPs in their pod to ensure those individual students completed the activity

correctly.
 15

Five student work samples were graded as DP, receiving two out of four possible points.

Refer to Figure 6. These student work samples consisted of students not fully explaining the

event that occurred and producing an illustration that didn’t support their statement. Six student

work samples received three out of four points, assessing their work as MP. Refer to Figure 7.

These students were successful at producing a statement of the event and illustration but did not

explicitly explain in detail the characters and why the event had occurred. For example, a student

answered that the Emperor held a race on his birthday having 13 animals compete against one

another. This student added an illustration that supported the statement but the student did not

elaborate that the Emperor held the race in order to create a calendar to help him keep track of

time. Refer to Figure 8.

Seven student work samples received full credit, four out of four possible points. These

students were assigned seats in both the heterogeneous pods and the homogeneous pod. These

students successfully explained the event in detail and were able to support their statement with

an illustration. Refer to Figure 9. Overall, the eighteen students present in class were able to

complete eighteen out of the twenty-four events in the allotted time given.

FINDINGS

When the research group members reconvened after the lesson study observation, many

themes were discovered and discussed as a group. These themes directly correlated with the

research that was conducted beforehand; graphic organizers, ability grouping, and QT.

One major research component was the effectiveness of graphic organizers and how well

it could assist students when sequencing events. The research group learned that in a previous
 16

lesson students had difficulty organizing events in the correct order and there was confusion as to

what events qualified as important. In addition, the skill of knowing the importance of why

events need to follow a specific order was lacking among the students. Due to these challenges,

the research group agreed that the implementation of graphic organizers was a potential solution

to assisting students with accomplishing the task. As stated within the research, many teachers

use graphic organizers as a valuable tool to differentiate their instruction according to the

student's learning style. Considering students range in ability from DP to ME and that some

students hold the minimal skills to find text evidence from a passage and compose a sentence,

the creation of a graphic organizer was the most effective task for the group members. The

graphic organizer that was designed not only held the key terms First, Next, Then and Last, but

also included an area that allowed students to draw the event. This allowed for a greater

comprehension amongst DP students to not only write the event but illustrate it as well.

Differentiating the graphic organizer into writing and drawing allowed DP students to earn points

on either section.

Many groups were able to present the correct order of events and some were able to use

the proper language when talking about the events from the story. This proves the research from

Kurniaman (2019), stating that graphic organizers target elements of critical and creative

thinking, developing students ability to understand the meaning of the text. However, when the

graphic organizer sheets were handed out to each group, there was initial confusion among the

students. Our focus student Nikolie, who was placed in the homogeneous group, looked

perplexed and asked his partner for clarification on what they were supposed to do. His partner,

unable to answer the question as well, looked equally confused. It wasn’t until the teacher came

to their pod that they were given clarifications as to what the next steps should be. With this
 17

observation, it was clear that students would have benefited from sequence modeling by the

teacher before they were given the graphic organizers. Salisu (2014) suggests that it is important

that an activity be created around a model for it to provide an interactive engagement experience.

As the research group reflected on the different observations, including hearing student

conversations within the pods, the conclusion was that students would have benefitted from Ms.

M modeling the graphic organizer that students were to use with sequencing her morning routine.

In regards to which events qualified as important, the teacher, Ms. M, opened the lesson

by sharing a real-life example of what her morning consists of before work. The teacher shared

four events in consecutive order using the key terms that students were expected to use; First,

Next, Then, Last, with picture printouts to assist the visual learners. As a result, a student named

Charlie mentioned “Morning routine” when Ms. M was sharing her example. This specific

student was able to connect Ms. M’s example of “Morning routine” with the need for events, or

in this case, steps, to follow a specific order. This also assisted students with understanding

which events were important and to express the importance of not focusing on extra details that

were not needed. Furthermore, while wrapping up the lesson and having the students reflect on

the concept of sequencing events, a student named Alex mentioned that “It doesn’t make sense if

it was backwards”. Alex understood that the sequence of events had to go in the proper order, in

order for it to make sense. This observation aligned with Donna M. Sawyer’s use of the graphic

organizer in her class and why students need to understand the why behind using them.

Another finding from the research study was the QT that took place in each pod. Within

our research, Murphy (2017) suggests that QT is a supportive intervention using small-group

discussion to promote high-level comprehension. QT is a skill that must be modeled, used and

reinforced throughout a student’s educational career in order for them to master the skill. When
 18

students were working within their pods, conversations among them halted shortly after the

students assigned themselves the sequence they were to work on. For example, pod 3 discussed

who would get which part of the graphic organizer and what would be written and drawn for

each event. Only two out of the three students participated in the discussion with the third

student being assigned and told what to draw and write. This student was one of our two focus

students, Ryan.

Another observation was made in Pod 5. Every member in this pod discussed which part

they wanted from the graphic organizer and this group specifically mentioned that they needed to

make sure that no one had the same part or wrote the same thing. Subsequently, this group scored

9/16 possible points, the third highest in the class. The minimal use of QT contributed to groups

not earning maximum points for the activity.

As observed in pod 1, the homogeneous group, focus student Nikolie and his partner

Gerold engaged in a discussion about what was supposed to be done and who was getting which

part of the sequence. Below is the conversation:

● Nikolie is told by the teacher that they each need to complete two parts since they only

have two group members. Nikolie slumps down in his chair.

○ Gerold: “We can do it.” “I think we have to draw a picture.”

○ Nikolie: “So, what do we do in the picture?”

● Substitute teacher returns to pod 1.

○ Teacher: “So, what happened first?”

○ Gerold: “We have to put the parts of the story together and draw a picture.”

● N looks at the teacher, then G, and pieces of paper.

○ Nikolie: “I got next.”

 19

○ Gerold: “I’ll be first and last.”

○ Nikolie: “I’m last.”

○ Gerold: “Okay, I’ll be second.”

○ Nikolie: “Bro.”

○ Gerold: “I can do last.”

○ Nikolie: “No, I want to be last.”

● Gerold hands him the last paper.

○ Nikolie: “We got what we wanted.”

Shortly after this discussion, both students proceeded to do their parts of the sequence

and did not share what they were writing but did share their drawings. The implementation of

QT would have assisted this group considering that Nikolie, who was supposed to complete the

second part of the sequence, actually drew and wrote about the first event of the story. Nikolie

could have benefited from talking through his thoughts with Gerold who seemed to have more

skills in communicating. This observation aligns with Vygotsky’s theory on constructive and

social learning. The use of QT within a small group would have contributed to co-construct

knowledge while sharing control between a more knowledgeable other in the group, which in

this case was the teacher and Gerold.

In addition, group observations concluded that Think, Pair, Share (TPS) could have been

added to assist students with identifying each sequence of events. Including time within the

whole group lesson to allow for students to share their answers of which event should come next

would have helped them when it came time to the small-group activity. TPS would have given

each group member an opportunity to think individually and answer the authentic question as
 20

suggested by Cowling (2021). Not only would this help students feel more safe and relaxed

while talking with their pod but it would have alleviated any fidgeting that was occurring in a

number of pods during the lesson. Each pod in the research study would have benefitted from

holding more communication throughout the lesson and small group activity and found that

incorporating TPS would have helped students become more engaged. Thus, the points earned

reflected their inability to effectively communicate within one another.

Ability grouping continues to be a question that is researched within the educational field.

Researchers such as Micheal Briggs favors homogeneous grouping over heterogeneous grouping

when it comes to reading. However, in regards to other subjects, heterogeneous groups work best

as supported by researcher Murphy. For this research study purposes, close attention was held

with two pods. One that held focus student, Nikolie in a homogeneous group and Ryan in a

heterogenous group. Observations held in each group correlated with the research done on the

subject. In Ryan’s pod, the ME student took on the role as the teacher and facilitated what each

group member should do. Ryan was given explicit instructions by the ME student on what to

draw and write. Because the ME student was preoccupied with having to delegate the work and

monitor their groups’ work, they failed to finish their work and frustration was observed with

this student. In Nikolie’s pod, both students took on the same responsibility but needed assistance

from both the substitute teacher and Ms. M. Like research supports, this type of ability grouping

does need further scaffolding to be successful. When looking at the data collected, Nikolie’s

group earned 10/16 points, more than Ryan’s group which earned 7/16 points. This could bring

up the argument that homogeneous grouping is best but one heterogenous group scored higher

with earning 16/16 points. Overall, heterogeneous groups scored as follows, three earned 7/10

points, one earned 9/10, and one earned 16/16. Findings as to which ability grouping is best are
 21

inconclusive and our research would have benefited if we would have had three ability groups of

each to properly compare data. Refer to Figure 10.

DISCUSSION SECTION

When our group debriefed after the lesson study, we collected the data from the students

and began assessing their work. Each of us took one pod, reviewing their writing, drawing, and

sequencing using the rubric we created. Once we had finished grading each student's work, we

discussed how we graded each student's work and realized we were not in agreement of the

grades given. On a half-sheet that Ms. M shared, with a grading of four out of four, another

group member expressed her disagreement. That group member felt that the student earned a

three out of four instead. This is where the topic of paraphrasing came up. We noticed that

students were not paraphrasing but instead copying passages from the story word for word.

When this was brought to the group members attention, they discussed that although it was not

what they wanted out of the writing portion of this lesson, they also did not tell students if they

could or could not paraphrase, nor was it stated in the rubric. Group members realized they

needed to first reflect what were their expectations of these students, and if they were explicit in

their directions and rubric. Group members came to the conclusion that they did not thoroughly

explain the learning objectives and expectations. If group members had done this and explicitly

modeled it for the students, perhaps students would have had a better understanding of what a

four out of four half-sheet would have consisted of. This led to the realization that although the

same rubric was being utilized, group members were not in agreement of student grading. This

self evaluation led group members in understanding the importance of designing a rubric, and
 22

how as teachers, group members need to come to the same understanding of how they are

assessing student work.

Another point of discussion within the group members was the dynamics between Ryan

and Cayla. Cayla is known to be at Ryan’s side, assisting her in most assignments given. For this

lesson, it was no different. Cayla immediately turned her attention to Ryan, and directed her in

what she needed to do and what to write and draw. The only difference is, on this particular day,

another student in this pod, considered an MP, was absent. This affected the system this pod had

because the absent student shares the role of helping Ryan in her day to day assignments. With

this MP student absent, Cayla had no one to share that responsibility with. After the lesson

observation, group members that observed that specific pod noticed Cayla had become frustrated

after assisting Ryan. Though group members do not know exactly where this frustration

stemmed from, it was apparent Cayla was aware of the little time left to complete her part of the

sequence. Due to spending the majority of the time helping Ryan, Cayla had less time to work on

her part, even giving a thumbs down to Ms. M when she asked the class if they were almost

ready to present. Before this lesson study, the group member that normally teaches in this

classroom did not see this form of frustration from Cayla when working doing other work within

her pod. But taking into account that the other student who plays a similar role to Cayla in this

pod was absent as a helper, showed the original teacher how much pressure Cayla carries on days

where it is just her supporting her pod.

Logan, a quiet student who is typically uninterested in lessons, was engaged and

participating during the lesson. Logan is placed in pod 2, right in front of the whiteboard and

where teachers stand when instructing the class. The placement of his seating is intentional due

to the fact that he needs to be more engaged. In the past, Logan has been known to fall asleep
 23

during instruction. With the lack of interest and motivation in lessons, his learning is being

affected. Group members were surprised on the day of the lesson study. Logan seemed to have

done a whole 180 in regards to his engagement on this particular day. As mentioned before,

Logan is a quiet student, who needs help staying engaged in lessons, but on the day of the lesson

study, Logan needed no help staying engaged. As Ms. M was teaching the lesson, asking

students questions, Logan followed along with Mapuana, particularly in the question portions of

her introduction, eager to share his thoughts and answers. When it came to the presentation part

of the lesson, Logan cheered on his classmates when they finished sharing their sequence

half-sheets. When it was Logan’s pods turn to present, he excitedly walked up to the front of the

class and shared his part. Logan on this day was not the Logan that the original teacher had seen

the day prior. Group members discussed this observation, and the original teacher was able to

talk to Logan about his experience after the lesson study. When asking Logan if he liked the

lesson, he exclaimed he did and enjoyed working in a group on an assignment.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the lesson study was beneficial for not only the students, but for the

research group members as well. The brainstorming, collaboration, research, and observations

offered a lot of insights on the lesson study process. The overall process required all involved to

test their own philosophies and practices in educating young learners. Group members

conducting the lesson study were able to discover and implement different strategies that could

be used to assist and support students to effectively complete their assignments. The strategies

used in the lesson study were an adaptation of story The Great Race: The Story of the Chinese

Zodiac, use of a graphic organizer, a rubric, a list of possible answers, and ability grouping. The

strategies used and the materials developed by research group members were intentional; each
 24

playing a role in making sure that students would succeed. In addition, this lesson study allowed

group members to discuss and reflect on what worked, what didn’t and what can be done to

make the lesson better. The assignment was created in a way that the students had to work

together and discuss with one another in order to accurately complete the assignment. Overall,

the lesson study gave valuable insight into strategies and methods that could be adapted to

differentiate instruction to better accommodate students’ learning styles and their needs.
 25

References

O., Adodo S. and Agbayewa J. O. 2011. “Academic Journals - International Journal of

Psychology and Counseling - Effect of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Ability

Grouping Class Teaching on Student’s Interest, Attitude and Achievement in

Integrated Science.” International Journal of Psychology and Counseling. Retrieved

February 27, 2022

(https://academicjournals.org/journal/IJPC/article-abstract/C5BDC0714356).

Barton, J., & Sawyer, D. M. (2003). Our students are ready for this: Comprehension Instruction

in the Elementary School. Reading Teacher, 57(4), 334–347.

Bikarian, S. (2009). The Effects of Heterogeneous and Homogeneous Grouping on Reading

Achievement. Sierra Nevada College, Incline Village, NV.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.606.1387&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Briggs, Michael. 2019. “Comparing Academically Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Groups in

an Active Learning Physics Class.” Journal of College Science Teaching. Retrieved

February 27, 2022 (https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1263530).

Buckner, J. (2022). www.thinkingfoundation.org. Thinking Foundation. Retrieved April 5, 2022,

from https://www.thinkingfoundation.org/_files/ugd/134369_52e85bc5492b4f1da1f4f6416183e997.pdf

Cooks, J., & Sunseri, A. (2013). Leveling the playing field: The efficacy of thinking ... - ed.
 26

https://eric.ed.gov/. Retrieved February 3, 2022, from

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1111866.pdf

Cowling, T. K. (2021, October 19). How to use the think-pair-share activity in your classroom.

Hey Teach! Retrieved March 9, 2022, from

https://www.wgu.edu/heyteach/article/how-think-pair-share-activity-can-improve-your-classroo

m-discussions1704.html

Daniel, L. (2007). Research summary: Heterogeneous grouping.

https://www.amle.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Heterogeneous_Grouping.pdf

Fauziah, Humairah and Mohammad Latief. 2015. “The Effect of Working in Heterogeneous and

Homogeneous Pairs on the Students’ Writing Skill.” Arab World English Journal

6(2):174–88.

Gouldthorp, B., Katsipis, L., & Mueller, C. (2018). An Investigation of the Role of Sequencing

in Children’s Reading Comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(1), 91–106.

https://doi-org.libproxy.westoahu.hawaii.edu/10.1002/rrq.186

Johnson, Ben. 2014. “Student Learning Groups: Homogeneous or Heterogeneous?” Edutopia.

Retrieved February 27, 2022

(https://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-grouping-homogeneous-heterogeneous-ben-johns

on).

Lott, K., & Read, S. (2015). Map It then Write It! Science and Children, 53(3), 46–52.
 27

http://www.jstor.org/stable/43692229

McKnight, Katherine S. 2013. Why use graphic organizers in the classroom? Wiley.

https://www.academia.edu/39090761/

Murphy, P. Karen et al. 2017. “Exploring the Influence of Homogeneous versus Heterogeneous

Grouping on Students’ Text-Based Discussions and Comprehension.” Contemporary

Educational Psychology 51:336–55.

Price, J. R., Jackson, S. C., Nippold, M., & Ward-Lonergan, J. (2015). Procedures for Obtaining

and Analyzing Writing Samples of School-Age Children and Adolescents. Language,

Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 46(4), 277–293.

https://doi-org.libproxy.westoahu.hawaii.edu/10.1044/2015_LSHSS-14-0057

Salisu, Abdullahi, Emmanuel N. Ransom. (2014). The Role of Modeling Towards Impacting

Quality Education. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences Vol. 32 pp

54-61. researchgate.net

Sam D, Praveen and Premalatha Rajan. 2013. “Using Graphic Organizers to Improve Reading

Comprehension Skills for the Middle School ESL Students.” English Language Teaching

6(2).

William & Burden. (2000). Psychology for Language Teacher: A Social Constructivist

Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

 28

Appendix

Figure 1
 29

Figure 2
 30

Figure 3
 31

Figure 4

Figure 5
 32

Figure 6

Figure 7
 33

Figure 8

Figure 9
 34

Figure 10
 35

PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE

As a teacher, I frequently find myself reflecting on lessons I have either created and

taught. It is an ongoing process, from the time of planning, while teaching the lesson and after

the lesson. When planning, I will spend most of my time thinking about my students that may

have a hard time grasping the concept and trying my best to prepare for any misconceptions.

During instruction, I will try to observe how students are responding to my instruction and ask

questions to gather what they are thinking. After the lesson, I wonder what I could have added to

the lesson to ensure each of my students come away with both knowledge and confidence in their

abilities. A teacher's job is never finished in this respect and this Collaborative Research Lesson

(CRL) allowed me to target specific needs of students and apply different methods to help the

student participants excel in their learning.

The CRL study helped put into perspective the need in creating and improving lessons

that help all learners succeed. Not all children learn the same way and we shouldn’t expect them

to. After discussing each of the group members' student's challenges, it was a refreshing feeling

to know that I was not the only one having a hard time creating and teaching lessons that met the

needs of my students. Being able to focus on specific students, our focus students, that needed

extra support, was the motivation that inspired me to design the materials used within the lesson.

If we wouldn’t have had this discussion about the students' needs in the CRL planning process, I

don’t think my group would have fully taken into account how diverse the students were and

ultimately make the accommodations that students needed.

This project also required me to really hear and listen to what my group members had to

share when it came to teaching the lesson and evaluating students’ work. Not every teacher has

the same teaching style. It is often that each teacher holds different expectations for their
 36

students. Each of my group member’s perspectives were valid and it was a great learning

experience for me to listen to their reasoning and add that to my philosophy of teaching. I feel

like this was a great stepping stone in understanding what is to come in the future when I begin

my teaching career. Having the experience of collaboration and differing opinions was my big

aha moment during this project. Teachers might not always agree but you must have the

willingness to hear and communicate with one another in order to get a task done.

The live lesson study itself was an eye opening experience for me. As a teacher, often

walking around the classroom, I tend to overlook important visual cues from individual students.

Having the opportunity to observe one of our focus students gave me some valuable insight as to

how students may be responding to a lesson without me realizing it. It has taught me that I need

to work on checking in more often with my students when they are completing class work.

Doing temperature checks when walking around can be the factor that determines whether I need

to stop the lesson and see if there are any misconceptions or clarify the objective of the lesson to

students.

If time permitted, I would have liked to see this lesson taught again during the semester

after our group made our observations and made the necessary changes. I think this would have

followed the Japanese method more closely and would have really allowed us to see if all our

work would have paid off. It would have been a good experience for us and students to see how

much they had improved in their understanding of the concept.

All in all, I really enjoyed the research process and learning all I did on graphic

organizers, quality talk, and ability grouping. It was amazing to find so much research there is on

each topic and equally interesting to read all the different perspectives there are. Being able to

test the research made it an authentic learning experience. I plan on teaching this lesson in my
 37

own classroom with all the improvements my group has made. I have all the intention to take

what I have learned in this process to make effective lessons that will motivate and help each of

my students become proficient learners, no matter their abilities.