Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

NORTHCENTRAL UNIVERSITY

ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

Student: Daniel Alan Coffin

THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETELY FILLED IN

Follow these procedures: If requested by your instructor, please include an assignment cover
sheet. This will become the first page of your assignment. In addition, your assignment header
should include your last name, first initial, course code, dash, and assignment number. This
should be left justified, with the page number right justified. For example:

DoeJXXX0000-1 1

Save a copy of your assignments: You may need to re-submit an assignment at your instructors
request. Make sure you save your files in accessible location.

Academic integrity: All work submitted in each course must be your own original work. This
includes all assignments, exams, term papers, and other projects required by your instructor.
Knowingly submitting another persons work as your own, without properly citing the source of
the work, is considered plagiarism. This will result in an unsatisfactory grade for the work
submitted or for the entire course. It may also result in academic dismissal from the University.

EDU7001 Dr. Leggett

Advanced Scholarly Writing Identify Research Elements

<Add student comments here>

Faculty Use Only


<Faculty comments here>

<Faculty Name> <Grade Earned> <Date Graded>

Comparing RefWorks and Zotero

Daniel Coffin

Northcentral University
CoffinDEDU7001-4 2
CoffinDEDU7001-4 3

Comparing RefWorks and Zotero

The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the two bibliography management

services, RefWorks and Zotero. Both offer a number of features to assist researchers in organizing and

making use of research references, but some slight differences in the way each goes about doing so will

make all the difference in which is more useful, as I discovered in making my determination to use

RefWorks.

Examining RefWorks

RefWorks is a web-based bibliography management service which only requires an active

internet connection. Users may use the site to create their own personalized database of references used

in research, and then link these entries to full-text versions of the articles cited in a research database

like EBSCOhost. RefWorks can also automatically assemble from the references in the user database a

bibliography and in-text citations formatted to a number of different styles, including APA, MLA, and

Chicago Style.

Examining Zotero

Zotero is a bibliography management service which can either be used within the Firefox web

browser, or a standalone application which interfaces with the Chrome or Safari browsers. Zotero can

be used to upload articles, images, media files, and screenshots to a searchable database, which can

then be synced with the cloud and shared across multiple devices. Zotero can generate footnotes, in-

text citations, and bibliographies in a number of different styles. Finally, there is a social component

which enables collaboration and sharing of research data.

In Conclusion

Zotero is undoubtedly the more robust of the two services, with a number of appealing features

that RefWorks doesnt offer at this time. The requirement to download and install software to use
CoffinDEDU7001-4 4

Zotero, however, might be an impediment to other users who dont have or wish to use Firefox or are

using computers on which they do not have administrative privileges. Conversely, the requirement to

be connected to the internet in order to access the database is a strike against RefWorks. If I used the

Firefox browser, I would probably prefer Zotero. However, due to the fact I use a Chromebook, I am a

dedicated Chrome browser user. Furthermore, having to be connected to the internet also isnt a

problem, as I have to anyway to make use of the Chromebook. As such, it appears that RefWorks is the

right choice for me.


CoffinDEDU7001-4 5

Effects of tier 1 Reading fluency A synthesis of A meta- The impact of


differentiation interventions for middle interventions analysis of the a precision
and reading school students with for improving long-term teaching
intervention on academic and behavioral oral reading effects of intervention
reading fluency, disabilities fluency of phonemic on the reading
comprehension, elementary awareness, fluency of
and high stakes Hilsmier, Wehby, & Falk students with phonics, typically
measures learning fluency, and developing
disabilities reading children
Jefferson, comprehension
Grant & Kim, Bryant, interventions Lambe,
Sander Bryant, & Murphy, &
Park Suggate Kelly
CoffinDEDU7001-4 6

Type and Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative


purpose
of study

Hypothesis Would How effective is a repeated What types of What are the How effective
or Research implementing a reading and oral previewing intervention effect sizes for is precision
Questions differentiated fluency intervention on the studies have normal, at-risk, teaching as an
instructional reading rate and accuracy of taken place to low readers and intervention
model result in middle school students with improve oral reading disabled targeting
gains on oral academic and behavioral reading fluency readers from reading fluency
reading fluency, disabilities? of elementary posttest to for typically
standardized Will the inclusion of students with follow up? developing
reading contingent reinforcement LD? To what degree children?
achievement and performance feedback How effective do phonemic
scores, and increase the efficacy of the are awareness,
scores on high- aforementioned interventions in phonics,
stakes intervention? increasing oral fluency,
assessments for reading fluency comprehension,
general for elementary and mixed
education students with interventions
students? LD? result in
different effect
sizes on
different
outcome
measures?
To what extent
do sample
characteristics,
including grade,
gender, and
intervention
language, relate
to follow-up
effect size?
How do the
methodological
quality
indicators of
sample attrition,
experimental
design,
treatment
fidelity, and
sample size
with respect to
publication
bias, influence
effect size?
How do the
intervention
characteristics
CoffinDEDU7001-4 7

of intervention
length and
administrator,
instructor-
student ratio,
months to
follow up, and
the presence of
a booster
intervention
relate to effect
size?
Population 83 3rd grade Four middle school students, 12 peer 71 peer Four girls and
and students, divided two boys, two girls, from reviewed reviewed and three boys
Sample into four grades 6-8, all diagnosed education published between the
intervention and with a specific learning journals which studies which ages of 7 and 8
two control disability or attention deficit focused on the denoted the in a regular 2nd
classrooms hyperactivity disorder; all implementation type of reading grade
were receiving regular of an oral assessment, classroom
instruction in a self-contained reading fluency included a
classroom for students with intervention follow-up, and
academic and behavior specifically for included a
difficulties. primary age control or
students with comparison
LD. group.
Methodolog Quasi- Single-subject multiple Meta-analysis; Meta-analysis; Single-subject
y experimental baseline design. study data were study data were multiple
design. All Intervention was conducted analyzed and analyzed and baseline
participants by research assistants; coded by study coded by experimental
were assessed during the baseline, the author, intervention design.
prior to research assistant read aloud participant age, outcome, pre-
intervention and to the student with no grade, gender, reading
once instruction; during the and ethnicity; measures,
intervention was Read- Model-Read (RMR) treatment reading
ended; condition, the student first description, measures,
examiners did read the passage silently and measure sample risk
not know the independently before information, status,
intervention reading it again while the and findings. intervention
condition. research assistant modeled a Effect size of type, and study
Participants slow-rate fluent reading of treatment was methodology.
were assessed the passage. The student calculated as Effect sizes of
with Fountas & would then read the passage the mean interventions
Pinnell oral again independently. During outcome of were calculated
reading fluency, the Read-Model- treatment group for measures
Wechsler Read+Contingent and control taken before
Individual Reinforcement/Performance group divided and after
Achievement Feedback (RMR+CR/PF) by the pooled intervention and
Test II, and the phase, students continued to within-group at follow-up.
IREAD-3 and receive the aforementioned standard Effect sizes
ISTEP+ RMR treatment with the deviation. The were then
standardized test addition of a reinforcer. four types of categorized into
CoffinDEDU7001-4 8

measures to Students were ab le to interventions in prereading,


establish choose a reinforcer of the these studies reading, reading
baselines and day before reading and were repeated comprehension,
measure would receive the reinforcer reading with a and spelling.
improvements in at the end of the lesson if model,
all aspects of the target words correct per repeated
reading minute (WCPM) was reading without
achievement. achieved by the student in a model, video
Intervention that session. modeling only
classrooms (no
received in instruction),
addition to and
regular reading word/phrase
instruction 100 based practice.
minutes weekly
of repeated
reading and
differentiated
targeted
strategies
instruction.

Findings Results Results indicated that the Results Results Results


indicated repeated reading indicated that indicated that indicated that
targeted Tier I intervention improved repeated effect sizes the precision
intervention did fluency from baseline reading without were significant teaching
not result in measures; a further near- a model was no at post-test but intervention
statistically transfer measure indicated less effective declined on improved speed
significant gain that gains in reading rate than repeated average by 11- and accuracy of
in fluency as and accuracy were reading with a month follow- reading Dolch
measured by transferred to overall model; most up. Effect size sight word lists
Fountas & reading performance on studies show at follow-up as well as
Pinnell scale or nonrelated text. That said, positive tended to be Dolch stories.
comprehension the oral reading rates outcomes for lower when
(as measured by remained below grade-level repeated studies had
WIAT III) over norms, and accuracy from reading nonrandomized
the control day to day was highly interventions; designs, had an
group. There variable. There was no rereading of even gender
was, however, appreciable difference in passages balance, were
data suggesting comprehension scores with already tread is not carried out
that intervention the addition of the more effective by the members
students reinforcer. than repeated of the research
improved in readings of team, were
measures of new passages; targeting
prosody over outcomes may younger
control students. be improved children, and
Teachers liked through when booster
the additional inclusion of interventions
instruction and video modeling were offered.
anecdotally and/or Comprehension
CoffinDEDU7001-4 9

reported that preteaching, and phonemic


participating error awareness
students correction, and based
demonstrated rereading with interventions
increased corrections. tended to have
confidence in larger effect
other aspects of size at follow
reading skills. up, while those
targeting
phonics and
fluency tended
not to. Effect
sizes were
lower for low
readers than for
those
categorized as
reading
disabled.
Evaluation The measures Small sample size; While the Author The study
notes used to assess behavioral issues of studies highlights the design did not
reading students might have included in this importance of include a
improvements adversely effected results analysis all random control group,
might not have through interruption of focused on assignment, which makes
been sensitive regular reading instruction students with treatment direct
enough to and influence on reading LD, the fidelity, and comparisons
accurately performance; authors had specific larger sample between the
reflect improved trouble differentiating diagnoses of sizes to more precision
performance; the transfer effect of reinforcer the students accurately teaching
students on reading measures. were not estimate effect intervention
participating in Suggestions for future included in the sizes of and normal
the study might research include measures study data. treatment; meta- instruction
have already of frequency and integrity None of the analysis impossible.
been performing of reading instruction in study data indicates that Changing the
well enough to order to better discern the focused on the intervention times at which
not improve effect of supplementary prosody effect is better baseline data is
based on the reading interventions and dimension of retained for at- gathered will
intervention; studies to determine the oral reading risk, low, and enable deeper
results may not transferability of fluency fluency. disabled readers analysis of the
be generalizable interventions on nonrelated Different than for readers relationship
as teachers and text. studies have at grade-level; between
students both different no indicate that mastery of
knew they were definitions for one-to-one Dolch sight
participating in a what degree of intervention words and
research project, reading was associated overall fluency
which might accuracy with greater and
have affected qualified as effect size than comprehension
motivation and instructional whole class. of grade-level
fidelity; level, and some Some appropriate
intervention studies did not suggestions for text.
students note what level future research
CoffinDEDU7001-4 10

received more of texts were include This study


instruction time provided to examining the applies
overall and it is students. Some interaction research-based
possible that this suggestions for between teacher intervention
is responsible future research qualification strategies in a
for results. include and treatment mainstream
Suggestions for comparing the fidelity to test student
future research choice of whether less population. The
include instructional qualified small sample
measures of level of text teachers need to size and
teacher training with repeated adhere more aforementioned
in literacy readings and closely to design choices
education and student oral treatment would make
measures of reading fluency protocol to this a valuable
student outcomes. exact the same study to refine
engagement. effect. and conduct.
Sterns (2015) Note Taking Table
CoffinDEDU7001-4 11

References

Hilsmier, A. S., Wehby, J.H., & Falk, K.B. (2016). Reading fluency interventions for middle school
students with academic and behavioral disabilities. Reading Improvement, 53(2), 53-64.

Jefferson, R.E, Grant, C.E., & Sander, J.B. (2017). Effects of Tier I differentiation and reading
intervention on reading fluency, comprehension, and high stakes measures. Reading
Psychology, 38(1), 97-124.

Kim, M.K., Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Park, Y. (2017). A synthesis of interventions for improving
oral reading fluency of elementary students with learning disabilities. Preventing School
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(2), 116-125.

Lambe, D., Murphy, C., & Kelly, M.E. (2015). The impact of a precision teaching intervention on the
reading fluency of typically developing children. Behavioral Interventions, 30, 364-377.

Suggate, S.P. (2016). A meta-analysis of the long-term effects of phonemic awareness, phonics,
fluency, and reading comprehension interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(1), 77-
96.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen