The Effect of Authentic Literacy Experiences as Book Buddies with Hispanic Fourth Graders on Preservice Teachers’ Literacy Content Knowledge and Reading Maturity

From a sociocultural perspective, individuals learn best from contextualized experiences. In preservice teacher education, contextualized experiences include authentic literacy experiences, which include a real reader and writer and replicate real life communication. To be prepared to teach well, preservice teachers need to gain literacy content knowledge and possess reading maturity. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of authentic literacy experiences as Book Buddies with Hispanic fourth graders on preservice teachers’ literacy content knowledge and reading maturity. The study was a pretest/posttest design conducted over 12 weeks. Preservice teacher participants, the focus of the study, were elementary education majors taking the third of four required reading courses in non-probabilistic convenience groups, 43 (n = 33 experimental, n = 10 comparison) Elementary Education majors. The Survey of Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge of Teaching and Technology (SPTKTT), specifically designed for preservice teachers majoring in elementary or early childhood education and the Reading Maturity Survey (RMS) were used in this study. Preservice teachers chose either the experimental or comparison group based on the opportunity to earn extra credit points (experimental = 30 points, comparison = 15). After exchanging introductory letters preservice teachers and Hispanic fourth graders each read four books. After reading each book preservice teachers wrote letters to their student asking higher order thinking questions. Preservice teachers received scanned copies of their student’s unedited letters via email which enabled them to see their student’s authentic answers and writing levels. A series of analyses of covariance were used to determine whether there were significant differences in the dependent variables between the experimental and comparison groups. This quasi-experimental study tested two hypotheses. Using the appropriate pretest scores as covariates for adjusting the posttest means of the subcategory Literacy Content Knowledge (LCK), of the SPTKTT and the RMS, the mean adjusted posttest scores from the experimental group and comparison group were compared. No significant differences were found on the LCK dependent variable using the .05 level of significance, which may be due to Type II error caused by the small sample size. Significant differences were found on RMS using the .05 level of significance.

The knowledge and use of critical thinking teaching strategies of faculty in associate degree nursing education programs

The purpose of this study was to determine the knowledge and use of critical thinking teaching strategies by full-time and part-time faculty in Associate Degree Nursing (ADN) programs. ^ Sanders CTI (1992) instrument was adapted for this study and pilot-tested prior to the general administration to ADN faculty in Southeast Florida. This modified instrument, now termed the Burroughs Teaching Strategy Inventory (BTSI), returned reliability estimates (Cronbach alphas of .71, .74, and .82 for the three constructs) comparable to the original instrument. The BTSI was administered to 113 full-time and part-time nursing faculty in three community college nursing programs. The response rate was 92% for full-time faculty (n = 58) and 61% for part-time faculty (n = 55). ^ The majority of participants supported a combined definition of critical thinking in nursing which represented a composite of thinking skills that included reflective thinking, assessing alternative viewpoints, and the use of problem-solving. Full-time and part-time faculty used different teaching strategies. Full-time faculty most often used multiple-choice exams and lecture while part-time faculty most frequently used discussion within their classes. One possible explanation for specific strategy choices and differences might be that full-time faculty taught predominately in theory classes where certain strategies would be more appropriate and part-time faculty taught predominately clinical classes. Both faculty types selected written nursing care plans as the second most effective critical thinking strategy. ^ Faculty identified several strategies as being effective in teaching critical thinking. These strategies included discussion, case studies, higher order questioning, and concept analysis. These however, were not always the strategies that were used in either the classroom or clinical setting. ^ Based on this study, the author recommends that if the profession continues to stress critical thinking as a vital component of practice, nursing faculty should receive education in appropriate critical teaching strategies. Both in-service seminars and workshops could be used to further the knowledge and use of critical thinking strategies by faculty. Qualitative research should be done to determine why nursing faculty use self-selected teaching strategies. ^

The knowledge and use of critical thinking teaching strategies of faculty in associate degree nursing education programs

The purpose of this study was to determine the knowledge and use of critical thinking teaching strategies by full-time and part-time faculty in Associate Degree Nursing (ADN) programs. Sander's CTI (1992) instrument was adapted for this study and pilottested prior to the general administration to ADN faculty in Southeast Florida. This modified instrument, now termed the Burroughs Teaching Strategy Inventory (BTSI), returned reliability estimates (Cronbach alphas of .71, .74, and .82 for the three constructs) comparable to the original instrument. The BTSI was administered to 113 full-time and part-time nursing faculty in three community college nursing programs. The response rate was 92% for full-time faculty (n = 58) and 61 % for part-time faculty (n = 55). The majority of participants supported a combined definition of critical thinking in nursing which represented a composite of thinking skills that included reflective thinking, assessing alternative viewpoints, and the use of problem-solving. Full-time and part-time faculty used different teaching strategies. Fulltime faculty most often used multiple-choice exams and lecture while part-time faculty most frequently used discussion within their classes. One possible explanation for specific strategy choices and differences might be that full-time faculty taught predominately in theory classes where certain strategies would be more appropriate and part-time faculty taught predominately clinical classes. Both faculty types selected written nursing care plans as the second most effective critical thinking strategy. Faculty identified several strategies as being effective in teaching critical thinking. These strategies included discussion, case studies, higher order questioning, and concept analysis. These however, were not always the strategies that were used in either the classroom or clinical setting. Based on this study, the author recommends that if the profession continues to stress critical thinking as a vital component of practice, nursing faculty should receive education in appropriate critical teaching strategies. Both in-service seminars and workshops could be used to further the knowledge and use of critical thinking strategies by faculty. Qualitative research should be done to determine why nursing faculty use self-selected teaching strategies.

The effects on students' self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature when aesthetic reading and reader response strategy are implemented

High-stakes testing and accountability have infiltrated the education system in the United States; the top priority for all teachers must be student progress on standardized tests. This has resulted in the predominance of reading for test-taking, (efferent reading), in the English, language arts, and reading classrooms. Authentic uses of print activities, like aesthetic reading, that encourage students to engage individually with a text, have been pushed aside. ^ During a 3-week time period, regular level, English 3/American literature students in a Title I magnet high school, participated in this quasi-experimental study (N = 62). It measured the effects of an intervention of reading American literature texts aesthetically and writing aesthetically-evoked reader responses on students' self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature. One trained teacher and the researcher participated in the study: student participants were pre- and post- tested using the Confidence in Reading American Literature Survey which examined their self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature. Several statistical analyses were performed. The results of the linear regression analyses partially supported a positive relationship between aesthetically-evoked reader responses and students' self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature. Additionally, the results of the 2 (sex) x 2 (treatment) ANCOVAs conducted to test group differences in self-efficacy beliefs regarding the comprehension of American literature between treatment and control groups indicated a main effect for treatment (but not sex; nor was there a significant sex x treatment interaction), suggesting the treatment was partially effective in increasing students' self-efficacy beliefs. Seven of the twelve ANCOVAs indicated a statistically significant increase in the treatment group's adjusted group mean self-efficacy belief scores as a result of being exposed to the intervention. In six of these seven analyses, increases in self-efficacy beliefs occurred in tasks that required three or more higher-order levels of thinking/learning. The results are discussed in terms of theoretical, empirical and practical significance. Future research is recommended to extend the intervention beyond the narrow confines of a Title I magnet school to settings where the intervention could be tested longitudinally, e. g., honors and gifted students, elementary and middle schools.^

The Effects on Students' Self-Efficacy Beliefs Regarding Their Comprehension of American Literature When Aesthetic Reading and Reader Response Strategy are Implemented

High-stakes testing and accountability have infiltrated the education system in the United States; the top priority for all teachers must be student progress on standardized tests. This has resulted in the predominance of reading for test-taking, (efferent reading), in the English, language arts, and reading classrooms. Authentic uses of print activities, like aesthetic reading, that encourage students to engage individually with a text, have been pushed aside. During a 3-week time period, regular level, English 3/American literature students in a Title I magnet high school, participated in this quasi-experimental study (N = 62). It measured the effects of an intervention of reading American literature texts aesthetically and writing aesthetically-evoked reader responses on students’ self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature. One trained teacher and the researcher participated in the study: student participants were pre- and post- tested using the Confidence in Reading American Literature Survey which examined their self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature. Several statistical analyses were performed. The results of the linear regression analyses partially supported a positive relationship between aesthetically-evoked reader responses and students’ self-efficacy beliefs regarding their comprehension of American literature. Additionally, the results of the 2 (sex) x 2 (treatment) ANCOVAs conducted to test group differences in self-efficacy beliefs regarding the comprehension of American literature between treatment and control groups indicated a main effect for treatment (but not sex; nor was there a significant sex x treatment interaction), suggesting the treatment was partially effective in increasing students’ self-efficacy beliefs. Seven of the twelve ANCOVAs indicated a statistically significant increase in the treatment group’s adjusted group mean self-efficacy belief scores as a result of being exposed to the intervention. In six of these seven analyses, increases in self-efficacy beliefs occurred in tasks that required three or more higher-order levels of thinking/learning. The results are discussed in terms of theoretical, empirical and practical significance. Future research is recommended to extend the intervention beyond the narrow confines of a Title I magnet school to settings where the intervention could be tested longitudinally, e. g., honors and gifted students, elementary and middle schools.