graphic organizer draft of final -...

Running head: GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TO BUILD COMPREHENSION 1

Teachers’ Perceptions of Using Graphic Organizers to Build Comprehension of

Struggling Readers

Jason L. Cotto

LIU Post

GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TO BUILD COMPREHENSION 2

Abstract

Teachers across the country are experiencing various challenges as they strive to meet the

needs of all students within their classrooms. The use of graphic organizers is one

method of remediating the reading deficiencies of varying subgroups, specifically

students with special needs, English Language Learners (ELL), and struggling readers.

This study explores various researchers definitions of graphic organizers and summarizes

studies that include the use of graphic organizers to build reading comprehension. Two

studies included explored using graphic organizers to better understand cause and effect

and compare and contrast text structures with second and third grade students. Two

global studies are also included and explored the use of graphic organizers with middle

school students with learning disabilities in Ankara, Turkey and adult English as a

Foreign Learners (EFL) in Tehran, Iran. Seven New York City teachers were also

interviewed to gain insight into their experiences with graphic organizers while attending

Kindergarten through high school, completing their teacher education program, and after

entering the Department of Education. After interviewing teachers, I discovered the

participants had very little exposure to graphic organizers when completing their teacher

education program and some didn’t effectively use graphic organizers until their fifth

year teaching. Also, teachers’ perceive English Language Learners (ELL), special needs

students, elementary school students, and readers performing at the lower extremity of

the class as the groups of children who would most benefit from extensive instruction

with graphic organization to build comprehension.

Keywords: graphic organizers, visual displays, graphic displays, text structure,

teachers’ perceptions


Statement of Problem

In the 2013-2014 school year, The New York City Department of Education

(NYCDOE) implemented a new citywide reading curriculum created by Pearson entitled,

ReadyGen. This program was introduced as a comprehensive K-5 core curriculum of

topically related text sets and routines based instruction with the goal of equipping all

NYC teachers and students with the tools and practices necessary to meet the new

expectations of the Common Core Learning Standards. The lessons are designed with the

goal of building independent readers and aim to promote student thinking and

understanding through citation of text-based evidence (Pearson, 2013). However, some

educators might question if ReadyGen meets the needs of the diverse student population

of the NYCDOE.

Department of Education’s Student Population by Subgroup

According to the Office of English Language Learner 2013 Demographic Report,

English Language Learners (ELL’s) make up 14.4% of the entire NYCDOE student

population, as there are about 159, 162 ELL’s enrolled in the school system. The system

has slightly more male than female ELL’s, as 88,567 or 55.6% of ELL’s are male. In

addition, the largest portion of ELL’s move to the United States from: Dominican

Republic (30.8%, or 22,804 students), China (16.4%, or 12, 137 students), Mexico (6.8%,

or 5,041 students), Bangladesh (5.0%, or 3,719 students), Ecuador (4.7%, or 3, 471

students), and Haiti (4.7%, or 3,463 student).

The NYCDOE statistical summary for the 2014-2015 year also indicate that total

number of students enrolled in NYC public school is 985, 695. Of that number, 143, 931

students receive special education services. The services could be provided in a self-


contained classroom, integrative collaborative teaching (ICT) classroom, resource room

(SETTS), general education with related services, speech and language services,

occupational therapy, physical therapy, or counseling.

Given that nearly one third of the NYCDOE students receive ELL and/or IEP

services, a curriculum promoting that all children will be equipped with the tools needed

to tackle the CCLS seems a bit premature. Therefore, these subgroups might benefit

from a skilled teacher modifying the existing curriculum to better meet some of their

needs. One way to begin this process is to recognize and plan instruction aligned with

the different learning styles represented within a given classroom.

Multiple Intelligences Theory

Howard Gardner (1983), a professor at Harvard University, created the Multiple

Intelligences (MI) Theory, which stresses the importance of identifying each student’s

intelligences so teachers can accommodate different learners more successfully according

to their orientation to learning. The intelligences include: Visual/Spatial,

Verbal/Linguistic, Mathematical/Logical, Bodily/Kinesthetic, Musical/Rhythmic,

Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, Naturalist, and Existentialist (Gardner, 1983). For the

purpose of this study, the focus will be on Visual/Spatial learning, which incorporates

charts, diagrams, graphic organizers, and/or illustrations that aid students organize data in

some sort of visual representation that allows them to construct meaning.

The major problem of the present study is that the citywide curriculum does not

meet the needs of all children, thus causing teachers to constantly modify lessons

included in the existing curriculum to meet the needs of struggling readers. One tool


teachers can heavily emphasize is the use of graphic organizers to build comprehension

of complex texts.

Defining graphic organizers. As with most reading topics, such as using graphic

organizers, researchers have varying ways to define it. For example, graphic organizers

are defined as visual or graphic displays that show visual interrelationships of

superordinate and subordinate ideas using spatial relationships, geometric shapes, lines,

and arrows to portray the content structure and demonstrate key relationships between

concepts (Darch, C., Carnine, D., & Kameenui, E. J. et al., 1986). This appears to be a

detailed description of a graphic organizer and easily can be applied to many graphic

organizers used in classrooms such as: Semantic webs, Venn diagrams, sequence charts,

story maps, and tree diagrams.

However, a broader way to define a graphic organizer is that GO’s are “visual

representations of information in the text” (Jiang & Garbe, 2007, p. 34). This lends the

meaning and usage to be open for interpretation by researchers.

Regardless of the definition, the ultimate goal of using graphic organizers remains

consistent. Researchers intend to improve the comprehension and retention of concepts

for struggling learners readers by using a visual approach. This is supported by the

research in pedagogy and psychology demonstrating that visual learning is among the

most effective methods for teaching comprehension skills to students of all ages and

helping students organize the content helps them better comprehend texts for information

(Slavin, 2011).

Research question. The following question will be explored: What are the

effects of using graphic organizers to build comprehension of struggling readers? As a


result of this study, it is expected to gain an understanding of teacher’s perspectives on

using graphic organizers to help struggling readers. Results could be shared with various

constituencies of a school community and utilized to improve the instruction of all

children. It could also serve as a baseline to plan future professional development on

effectively using graphic organizers, modifying existing curriculum to include richer use

of graphic organizers, and creating graphic organizers in teacher teams.

Literature Review

The purpose of this literature review was to give an overview of current research

about using graphic organizers in classrooms around the world and shed light on the use

of graphic organizers to build comprehension at varying levels of education such as:

Elementary school students, middle school students, children with special needs, and

English Language Learners (ELLs) at all levels (Mahmoud, Nikko, & Bonyadi, 2013;

Fealy, 2012; Sam & Rajan, 2013; Snyder, 2012). The usefulness of graphic organizers

will also be discussed beyond education in professions like accounting and psychology

(Phillips & Nagy, 2014; Rieber & Noah, 2008).

Defining Graphic Organizers

Graphic organizers (GO’s) are defined as visual or graphic displays that show

visual interrelationships of superordinate and subordinate ideas using spatial

relationships, geometric shapes, lines, and arrows to portray the content structure and

demonstrate key relationships between concepts (Darch, C., Carnine, D., & Kameenui, E.

J., 1986). However, researchers have defined graphic organizers slightly differently in

recent years. Some of these variations include: (a) a powerful tool for visually

representing one’s understanding of information and content (Lapp, Wolsey, & Wood,


2015); (b) Graphic organizers are visual representations of overall related concepts and

can be used as one of the reading strategies in pre-reading, while reading, and post-

reading activities (Mahmood, Nikoo, & Bonyadi, 2013); (c) A graphic organizer is a

visual representation of knowledge. It is a way of structuring information, or arranging

important aspects of a concept of topic into a pattern using labels (Sam & Rajan, 2013);

and (d) A visual representation of information in the text (Jiang & Grabe, 2007).

For the purpose of this study, graphic organizers are defined as a visual tool to help

readers organize ideas from a text to build comprehension.

Importance of Graphic Organizers

According to Lapp, Wolsey, & Wood (2015), graphic organizers help learners

improve thinking processes such as: comparing and contrasting, predicting and planning,

organizing, and identifying important attributes. These are just some of the important

skills readers must utilize to navigate the complexity of texts embedded into Common

Core aligned curriculums.

Therefore, it is important to emphasize the use of graphic organizers when

reading expository texts. Some of the more common examples of expository texts are:

Sequence, compare and contrast, description, listing, problem solving, and cause and

effect (Özmen, 2011). This is commonly referred to as the text structure awareness

theory in which graphic organizers contain information in a text is presented sequentially

in a visual display before reading (Alvermann, 1981).

Schema theory. Another theory of relative importance to the use of graphic

organizers is the schema theory, which allows people to mold memories to fit information


that already exists in their minds. This process is guided by schemas, which are mental

frameworks that organize concepts and information. Santrock (2007) stated:

Schemas influence the way we encode, make inferences about, and retrieve

information. We reconstruct the past rather than take an exact photograph of it,

and the mind can distort an event as it encodes and stores impressions of it. Often

when we retrieve information, we fill in the gaps with fragmented memories. (pp.

203-204)

According to Dye (2000), the use of graphic organizers as a learning tool has

roots in schema theory and provide a link for the learner to create a connection between

new concepts and existing knowledge. This provides multiple avenues for learners to

organize important information and model relationships between concepts and more

specifically skills. The use of graphic organizers will serve as a scaffold for readers to

process and comprehend newly acquired content from varying texts. A reader will

demonstrate comprehension of texts and concepts when he or she has found a “mental

home” for this information in the text or has altered an existing one in order to

accommodate the new knowledge (Manoli & Papadopoulou, 2012).

Students who benefit from using graphic organizers. It is important that

teachers understand the different learning styles evident within their classroom because

all children do not learn using the same strategies. Most children are visual, auditory, or

kinesthetic learners (Willingham, 2008). Children who are visual learners process

information by looking, auditory learners retain information by listening, and kinesthetic

learners learn by touching and exploring things.


Graphic organizers are more beneficial to readers who are visual learners.

According to Slavin (2011), “Visual learning is among the most effective methods for

teaching comprehension skills to students of all ages. Helping students organize the

content helps them better comprehend texts for information such as main ideas, facts,

opinion, comparisons, and contradictions.” The use of multiple graphic organizers could

potentially be an entry point to begin working with children who struggle with

comprehension problems. This would begin to help readers comprehend chunks of

information or organize various ideas into visual organizers connected to a specific skill.

Using Graphic Organizers With Second Grade Students

Snyder (2012) explored the effects of graphic organizers on text structure

sensitivity and expository reading comprehension with second grade students.

Specifically, cause and effect text structure was explored and comprehension and recall

performance at two levels of cause and effect complexity structures: one cause directly

followed by one effect and one cause followed by multiple effects (Snyder, 2012).

The overall purpose of the study was to offer teachers and publishers information

about effectively using graphic organizers and to improve young readers’ comprehension

and structure awareness of cause and effect texts. Snyder (2012) also wanted to explore

content familiarity in conjunction with text structure. Text structure should be taught

with familiar texts to improve their comprehension because as children progress through

grades they will need to demonstrate understanding of these structures with unfamiliar

content, specifically on the New York State Common Core exam.

Participants of Second Grade Study


The participants were 80 second grade students from two middle-income schools

in a public school district in New Jersey. Participants were involved in the study for two

consecutive years during the second part of the academic school year. The school

enrollment included 90.5% Caucasian, 5.5% Asian, 2.5% Hispanic, and 1% African

American students. The students were randomly placed into one of the following groups:

(a) GO present, one cause-one effect level of cause/effect complexity; (b) GO absent, one

cause-one effect level; (c) GO present, one cause-multiple effects level; or (d) GO absent,

one cause-multiple effects level. The graphic organizer used throughout the study

horizontal flow chart, which was not embedded in the schools’ curriculum. Students in

all groups read four passages in one session and four in another to avoid restlessness.

Findings of using graphic organizers with second grade students. According

to Snyder (2012), there were some key findings to support the use of graphic organizers

between second graders in order to better comprehend cause and effect text structure.

Students who read the GO after each passage (M= 0.79, SD= 0.18) correctly answered a

greater number of structure questions than students who re-read each passage (M= 0.34,

SD= 0.20).

Students who read the one cause-one effect texts (M= 0.61, SD= 0.24) correctly

answered a greater proportion of structure questions than those who read the one cause-

multiple effects texts (M= 0.52, SD= 0.34).

Students who read texts with familiar material (M= 0.59, SD= 0.29) correctly

answered a greater number of structure questions than when reading unfamiliar material

(M= 0.54, SD= 0.33).

Using Graphic Organizers With Third Grade Students


Another study that explored the use of graphic organizers was a mixed methods study

conducted by Fealy (2010) at the elementary level just outside of the Metropolitan area.

The study focused on explicit instruction of graphic organizers as an informational text

reading comprehension strategy for third grade students and was a combination of a

qualitative and a case study. Two purposes of this study were to explore students’

perceptions and strategies of explicit instruction of graphic organizers to support

comprehension of informational text and to explore student’s perceptions of using

graphic organizers as a comprehension strategy.

Participants and assessment tools used. The researcher hand selected six students for

this study using pre-determined criteria. Participants were chosen based on assessments

that were administered and showed they were part of the average to high achievement

groups. In addition, students were assessed throughout the intervention period using

multiple assessment tools such as: The Woodcock John III Passage Comprehension (WJ

III), student interviews, rubrics, think-alouds, think-aloud checklists, student reflective

journals, and graphic organizer work centering around comparing and contrasting (Fealy,

2010).

Findings of qualitative case study. After the duration of the intervention, the

qualitative data tools, specifically reflective journals and interviews, were analyzed to

present the findings. One key finding was all of the participants perceived the compare

and contrast graphic organizer as a helpful reading comprehension tool as reflected in

their journals. Another important finding was participant’s experienced common barriers

such as: (a) understanding vocabulary, (b) confusion with comprehending tasks, and (c)

problems arising from using the compare and contrast graphic organizer (Fealy, 2010).


However, after analyzing the rubrics and student work, the researcher concluded

that all participants showed progression from the beginning, middle, and end of the

intervention. For instance, the beginning mean score for identifying characteristics of

comparison from a text was 1.65 out of four, the mean at the middle was 2.33 out of four,

and the final mean as 3.0 out of four. Furthermore, the beginning mean for identifying

similarities and difference between two or more concepts was 1.54 out of four, the mean

at the middle was 2.25 out of four, and the final mean was 2.95 out of four.

Finally, the beginning mean for selecting information appropriate for compare

and contrast graphic organizers was 1.79 out of four, followed by a middle mean of 2.45

out of four, and a final mean of 3.08 out of four (Fealy, 2010). Despite the challenges

children reflected on in their journal and shared during interviews, all children improved

their comprehension of informational texts by using compare and contrast graphic

organizers.

Limitations of study. Fealy (2010) noted a few obvious limitations to her case

study. First, the sample size was relatively low and included children performing at

average to high levels. Next, was the duration of the study, which was approximately six

weeks of 45 minutes session at the end of the school year, thus, affecting the reliability

and validity of the findings.

In addition to the limitations stated by the researcher, there are other limitations

that should be of particular interest to readers. One is that all of the participants came

from a two-parent household with a solid family structure. Secondly, four out of six

participants came from households with middle class to upper middle class incomes.

Lastly, the study was conducted in a suburban community with all Caucasian


participants. One could wonder what the findings would reveal if conducted with six

African American or Hispanic students from an urban school, a low-income household,

and a single parent home.

Using Graphic Organizers With Middle School ESL Students

Graphic organizers are particularly useful in teaching English Language Learners

(ELLs). Sam and Rajan (2013) explored the use of graphic organizers to improve

reading comprehension skills for middle school English as a Second Language (ESL)

students. The participants consisted of 70 students who attended a school in the western

part of Tamil Nadu, India where students are taught reading skills to improve their

reading alongside ESL instruction. Participants were placed in two groups of 35 and

intervention was applied for about two weeks.

The experimental group consisted of children who were trained in using graphic

organizers with reading materials from a reader published by the Tamil Nadu Textbook

Corporation. The researchers introduced learners to different types of graphic organizers,

how to use them effectively, and which organizers could best be used with different types

of reading passages. Graphic organizers were also used before, during, and after reading

instruction. However, the control group received the same materials, but did not have

any instruction on how to use graphic organizers as a tool to understand reading material.

Students in this group continued to use traditional methods such as reading the passage

multiple times to build comprehension (Sam & Rajan, 2013).

Pre-test and post-test administration and findings. A pre-test and post-test was

administered to both groups to assess the level of comprehension before and after the

intervention was applied. It included two passages consisting of 20 questions that


focused on the following reading skills: main idea, supporting details, vocabulary, fact

and opinion, and making inferences.

The pre-test showed similar comprehension levels of both groups of learners. The

average pre-test score for the control group was 38%, but the post-test scores were

39.2%, thus indicating there weren’t significant gains for this group of students.

However, the experimental group showed significant gains in comprehension after

receiving intervention in the form of using graphic organizers. The average pre-test for

the experimental group was 39.43%, but the post-test results were 56.23%, which shows

an improvement of +17% (Sam & Rajan, 2013).

Schema and Activation of Background Knowledge With Graphic Organizers

Another global study was conducted in Tehran, Iran with intermediate English as

a Foreign Language (EFL) students. The purpose of this study was to “Use graphic

organizers and schema or background activation knowledge to determine its effectiveness

on increasing Iranian EFL learners reading comprehension” (Mahmood, Nikko, &

Bonyadi, 2013). The researchers specifically wanted to expose students to different

genres other than an essay, improve vocabulary, and activate prior knowledge in the

target culture.

Participants of EFL Study and Methodology

The participants consisted of 63 female students studying English ranging from

ages 18 to 24 who were randomly divided into three groups: control, graphic organizer,

and schema. The control group did not receive any treatment, the graphic organizer

group was taught using graphic organizers, and the schema group was taught by focusing

on activating their prior knowledge (Mahmood, Nikko, & Bonyadi, 2013).


All participants were given a reading comprehension pre-test and post-test assess

gains in reading comprehension. Students were also administered the Nelson Proficiency

test to assess their level of English Proficiency. In addition, the graphic organizers used

during seven subtasks were evaluated to measure growth in effectively using visuals to

comprehend texts at a better level. Finally, students received short passages connected to

main ides of texts included in the study as a support to build background knowledge on

the topic.

Findings of EFL study. Mahmood, Nikko, & Bonyadi (2013) reported graphic

organizers played an important part in improving reading comprehension. This was

determined by comparing the mean score on the pre-test (11.89) and the mean score on

the post-test (15.37). Students exhibited greater comprehension when they were given

activities designed to build their prior knowledge on the post-test (M=13.00). However,

they were not exposed to these activities during the pre-test (M-1.11).

There is also a significant difference with the graphic organizer, schema, and

control groups. The Post hoc Scheffe Test found that students in the graphic organizer

group (N=19) outperformed the other groups and the schemata group (N=18) performed

better than the control group (N=17).

Graphic Organizers With Special Needs Students

Özmen (2011) compared the effectiveness of two different compare and contrast

graphic organizers using expository texts with children classified as intellectually

disabled in Ankara, Turkey. The researcher had participants fill out the first graphic

organizer before reading a text and the second one upon completion of the text.


The participants included in this study had to meet a specific criterion. Students

had to be diagnosed with mild intellectual disabilities, be able to read without syllabicate,

be in the 6th, 7th, or 8th grade, and able to recall maximum one similarity and difference

after reading a compare/contrast text (Özmen, 2011). Five male participants were

selected and all of their native language was Turkish. The researcher used a Turkish

textbook at the students’ level to better understand their reading levels.

Methodology Used With Special Needs Children

Students were exposed to 13 content area texts at different parts of the study that

lasted over a period of four weeks. Three texts were used during the baseline, five were

used before lessons and required the use of a graphic organizer, and five were used after

reading the texts and also required to use of a graphic organizer. The concepts for the

compare and contrast graphic organizers were identified after previewing expository texts

and had a similar text structure which consisted of an introduction, comparison

paragraph, contrast paragraph, and a conclusion. All of the texts provided multiple

opportunities for participants to show how concepts were similar and different because

there were at least four to six examples in each of the passages. As a support, the

researcher provided a scaffolded graphic organizer with a picture of a comparison topic,

one box to write a similarity, and two boxes to show differences.

In addition, students received prompting in the form of questioning if they were

unable to identify a similarity and difference between two concepts. After receiving

intervention for four weeks, a post-assessment was administered to measure the

effectiveness of using the compare and contrast graphic organizer.


Findings for using graphic organizers with special needs students. According

to Özmen (2011), there were a few findings that helped evaluate the success of his study.

One is four out of five participants completed the comparison portion of graphic

organizers more effectively after reading the texts as opposed to before reading the texts.

Another is four participants completed the contrasting portion of graphic organizers more

effectively after reading the texts as opposed to before reading the texts and one

participant completed the comparison and contrasting portions of the graphic organizer

more effectively before reading the texts.

Graphic Organizers in the Field of Accounting

Although educators in classrooms around the world use graphic organizers, there

are also other fields that utilize them for varying purposes. Phillips and Nagy (2014)

conducted a study with accounting students focusing on the effectiveness of reading case

studies using graphic organizers. The researchers intended to discover if using graphic

organizers will enhance students case analysis skills, specifically their ability to identify

arguments and counterarguments of financial policy choices.

Participants and Purpose. This study was conducted in Canada and included 77

undergraduate students, 63.6 percent being female, that were selected based on a criteria

determined by the researchers. Participants had completed a course introducing them to

accounting concepts and completed a case analysis without receiving any formal training

on how to structure case analyses (Phillips & Nagy, 2014). The purpose of this criterion

was because their limited experiences with writing case study analyses will most likely

improve participant’s ability to evaluate case studies.


Accounting experiments. Each student was randomly assigned into the case

response condition, control condition, and graphic organizer condition. “The case study

condition read a revenue recognition issue and a proposed, a summary of applicable

revenue recognition standards followed by a one-page exemplar response that provided a

balance of supporting arguments and opposing counterarguments for the issue” (Phillips

& Nagy, 2014). The graphic organizer condition read the same case study, but did not

receive an exemplar response. Instead, they received complete V-shaped graphic

organizers with the following labels: Arguments, counterarguments, relevant discussion

criteria, weight, conclude, and explain. Participants in the control group did not receive

the case study, proposal, or graphic organizer. However, they were asked open-ended

filler questions about their experiences with previous accounting cases such as: “Have

cases enhanced your technical knowledge?”; “Do you believe video cases enhance your

learning?”; and “Are cases more helpful in accounting courses of other areas?” (Phillips

& Nagy, 2014).

After being exposed to the initial case study, all participants were required to read

and prepare their own analysis case using a different study involving costs of a

professional sports team to contract with an athlete. Participants were given two blank

pages after the case study and were not given any direction on how to organize their

thoughts or how to write their final analyses.

Findings of using graphic organizers with accounting students. The

researchers discovered that participants who studied an exemplar case response did a

better job of supporting arguments in their analysis as opposed to the graphic organizer

and control groups. However, the participants who utilized the graphic organizers to


visualize the case response were better able to identify the absence of counterarguments,

which provide support for alternative accounting choices, in a subsequent case analysis

(Phillips & Nagy, 2014).

Graphic Organizers and Gaming

Rieber and Noah (2008) explored the use of graphic organizers and visual

metaphors infused into a computer based simulation to potentially improve adult

learning. The quantitative part of the study consisted of 70 undergraduate students

enrolled in an introductory computer course. Participants were given one of four visual

metaphors as graphic organizers to complete one of four versions of a computerized

simulation about the science concepts acceleration and velocity. Prior to beginning the

tasks, all participants were administered a 12 question test to measure their understanding

of acceleration and velocity.

Gaming Tasks and Assessment

Participants were administered one of four tasks by computer and had to rate their

frustration level after completing each. This was done because the researchers felt many

participants are often unfamiliar with the demands placed on them during open-ended

learning environments (Rieber & Noah, 2008). The four tasks are outlined below:

• Version one: Participants did not have any instructional or organizational

elements;

• Version two: Participants simulation was embedded in the game with the goal of

changing the ball’s direction inside an area indicated on a number line;


• Version three: Participants received a visual metaphor to understand the

relationship between acceleration and velocity and had to tilt a table to and

manipulate the ball’s acceleration; and

• Version four: Participants received both the game context and visual metaphor.

In addition to the four tasks, participants were administered a post-test and required to

rate their confidence level after each question and predict their overall score. This was

followed by a tacit learning game that required them to move a ball to a certain segment

of a number line and keep it there for ten seconds. In order to determine the tacit score,

the total time taken for each participant to complete the task five times was considered.

Last, the qualitative part of the study was carried out by interviewing four participants

with the intent of understanding their thoughts and feelings as they interacted with the

simulation.

Results of gaming tasks. Rieber and Noah (2008) concluded the following results

from their study of visual metaphors as graphic organizers: (a) A significant effect was

found for Game (p<.01) and participants were less confident in their post-test answers

(mean=4.98) than participants that were not given the game context (mean=6.92); (b)

Participants’ predictions of their post-test scores were lower when given the game

(mean=46.6%) than when not (mean=56.6%); (c) There was significant interaction

between Game and Metaphor (p<.5). These participants scored better than all other

participants; and (d) No significant effects were found in terms of frustration while

completing the tasks.

Summary of Research


The use of graphic organizers is extremely beneficial to students of different

reading abilities (Sam & Rajan, 2013). Children as early as second grade are being

exposed to using graphic organizers to build comprehension of various text structures

(Synder, 2012). Teachers are also making informed decisions about which subgroups

might benefit from receiving graphic organizers as a scaffold to build reading

comprehension, specifically students with special needs and ESL/EFL learners (Fealy,

2010; Sam & Rajan, 2013; Bonyadi, Nikko, & Mohmood, 2013).

The use of graphic organizers has been proven to be beneficial to fields other than

education. Graphic organizers have been used in computerized gaming simulation to

improve the comprehension of adult learners (Reiber & Noah, 2008). In addition,

graphic organizers have been used to improve accounting students ability to analyze case

studies and generate strong analyses of the data (Phillips & Nagy, 2014).

Methodology

This section includes information about the research site and how the participants

were selected and detailed information about each participant’s education, certification,

and teaching experience will also be organized into a table. It will also include questions

that will be carried out during the interview process, how responses will be coded, and

how data will be analyzed and reported.

Site

The participants in this study work in an urban NYC public school located in the

Bushwick section of Brooklyn and services approximately 350 students from Pre-

Kindergarten through Grade 5. The school population consists of 52% African American

and 48% Hispanic students. The student body includes 16% English Language Learners


and 26% Special Education students. Boys make up 48% off the student body and girls

account for 52%. In addition, about 10% of the student population are homeless and

travel from various shelters throughout New York City.

Demographics

This study includes seven teachers in an urban NYC public school. The

participants are classroom teachers of grades two to five.

Gender. In this study there were six females and one male.

Ethnicity. In this study there were three Hispanics and four Blacks.

Teaching experience. In this study five teachers had 13 to 16 years of teaching

experience at the current school and two teachers had over 20 years of teaching

experience at the current school.

Teaching Credentials. In this study three teachers have a second master’s degree

and certification in literacy. Four teachers also have a master’s degree and certification

in childhood education and a second master’s in another area of education.

Research Design

This is a qualitative study exploring teachers’ perceptions of using graphic

organizers to build comprehension of struggling readers. According to Creswell (2010):

Qualitative research begins with assumption and the use of interpretive/theoretical

frameworks that inform the study of research problems addressing the meaning of

individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. To study this

problem, qualitative researchers use an emerging qualitative approach to inquiry,

the collection of data in a natural setting sensitive to the people and places under


the study, and data analysis that is both inductive and deductive and establishes

patterns or themes. (p. 44)

This is of particular relevance to the study at hand because the interviews will be

carried out in the school setting of the researcher. Also, the findings will be reported in

themes and used to draw conclusions and suggest implications for teachers, teacher

education programs, and administrators. In addition, the data will be used to identify

areas of future research.

Instrument

Some of the questions include:

1. What was your experience with the use of graphic organizers when completing

your teacher education program?

• Were the emphasized in every methods course?

• Which course(s) emphasized them most?

• Which course(s) didn’t include them?

2. When do you recall first learning about effectively using graphic organizers in

your daily instruction?

• What subject was it in?

• What was most rewarding about it?

• What year were you in your teaching career?

3. Think of a time when you used graphic organizers during a reading lesson?. Tell

me about that experience.

• Do you think it was effective?

• What challenges did the children face?

• What were the results?

Analysis


In addition to the interview questions, a Likert scale will be included to gain an

understanding of what subgroups teachers perceive using graphic organizers is best. The

following in an example of the Likert scale:

• Think about the use of graphic organizers within the classroom. On a 1-6 scale (1

being least suited; 6 being best suited), what is your opinion as to which is best

suited for graphic organizers? Circle the number that best represents your opinion:


Table 1

Likert Scale for Teachers’ Perceptions of Groups Using Graphic Organizers

ELL ? (Beginner, Intermediate,

Advanced)

1 2 3 4 5 6

IEP? (SETTS, self-contained, ICT) 1 2 3 4 5 6

Bottom Third? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Boys? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Girls? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Advanced/Gifted? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Elementary Grades? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Middle School? 1 2 3 4 5 6

High School? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Data collection. Data will be collected by conducting interviews with participants and

having them answer a question using a Likert scale (see Appendix A). Data will also be

analyzed and reported using multiple methods outlined below. The overall goal is to

report the findings of teachers’ perceptions about the use of graphic organizers and if they

think graphic organizers benefits different subgroups of students.

In order to gain an understanding of teacher’s perspectives on the topic being

studied, interviews will be conducted on a one to one basis. Interviews will take place in

the researcher’s classroom and last for approximately 20 minutes. Prior to using the

questionnaire, participants will be given a pseudo name and information about the

number years teaching and teaching credentials will be discussed.


The researcher will read questions from a questionnaire and document the

responses of each participant. Upon completion of the interview, the researcher will

transcribe the interview so important information is not omitted (see Appendix B).

Data analysis. Upon completion of the interviews, the questions will be evaluated and

collapsed into categories, so patterns are potentially reported. Responses that do not fit a

category will be reported individually. If possible, the data will also be reported based on

number of years teaching and teaching credentials. Results of the Likert scale will be

reviewed and reported in a figure.

Responses to the qualitative questions will also be coded by question. This will

further allow the data to be organized into categories so themes could be identified

quicker. Creswell (2010) states, “Here researchers build detailed descriptions, develop

themes or dimensions, and provide an interpretation in light of their own views or view of

perspectives in literature” (p. 184).

Reliability and Credibility. The use of transcribed interviews and coding participant’s

responses adds to the reliability of the data.

The inclusiveness of multiple educators who were highly qualified and

experienced added to the validity of this study. By choosing participants with more than

ten years of teaching experience, multiple degrees in education, and multiple teaching

certifications, the responses during interviews will be more credible than a participants

with one to three years of experience and working on their teaching credentials.

According to Glaser and Strauss (1967):

When using the term credibility, it is meant to be “believable”, rather than

“valid”. The first is that there be sufficient detail and description so readers feel


they were vicariously in the field (thus able to judge for themselves). Second,

there should be sufficient evidence on how the data were gathered and how the

analysis was conducted (so that readers can assess how the researcher came to his

or her findings or conclusions). Third, there should be multiple comparison

groups, as this makes the credibility greater. Finally, the researcher should

specify the kinds of data upon which his or her interpretation rests. (pp. 223-235)

The responses offered by participants will be able to help summarize teacher’s

perceptions of using graphic organizers at the elementary level. However, the study at

end can easily be replicated at the middle and high school levels, thus making it

transferable. The interviews will also be used to identify specific groups of children who

could benefit from using graphic organizers.

Limitations of study. One limitation of the study is the time constraints. This study

should be conducted and completed in approximately a month and is a study of

convenience. Therefore, the sample size was very low and consisted of participants from

the researchers school, primarily due to easy accessibility. However, if there were more

time, the questionnaire could possibly be extended to a larger sample.

Another limitation is the researcher works in close proximity with all of the

participants, which might cause others to question the reliability and validity of the

questionnaires. If more time were permitted, it might be beneficial to conduct this study

with participants from another school.

The next limitation is the gender and experience levels of the participants. Six of

the subjects were female with 12 or more years of teaching experience and one was male.

In this particular school, there is limited mobility of teachers, thus limiting the


perspective of inexperienced teachers. If the study were conducted in one or more other

schools, data could be collected from teachers with less than five years of teaching

experience. Also, it might be possible to obtain additional data from the male teacher’s

perspective.

Findings This section presents the findings of interviews conducted with seven teachers of

grades two through five. It includes data about teacher’s experiences with graphic

organizers prior to entering college, while in college pursuing a teacher education

program approved by the state of New York, and throughout their teaching career.

Emphasis will also be placed on teacher’s perceptions about which subgroups of children

will most likely benefit from the use of graphic organizers to improve the comprehension

of struggling readers, which was measured by analyzing data compiled using a Likert

Scale.

Early Experiences With Using Graphic Organizers

The first question focused on obtaining information about participant’s

experiences while completing elementary, middle, and high school. Five participants

stated they did not have any memory of ever using graphic organizers at these levels,

whereas two shared varying memories.

Lana (P5) pondered for a few minutes and recalled using graphic organizers when

she was a third grader attending primary school in Jamaica. Lana stated, “I remember

writing my own lists and copied my teacher’s versions of graphic organizers. It was

particularly emphasized in my English class.” As Lana shared her recollection, her facial

expressions were difficult to interpret and she sort of rolled her eyes at one point.


When the same question was posed to Carlos (P7), he cut me off before

completing it and said:

Eighth grade and we hated them! Many of the students made fun of the science

teacher who used cluster or bubble maps. We were exposed to what graphic

organizers were, but not taught about their importance so we didn’t care. We

didn’t even understand some of them.

As Carlos shared this experience, his tone changed from passive to somewhat aggressive

and he reiterated how much he hated completing bubble maps a few times.

Table 2 Coding for Earliest Memory Using Graphic Organizer Participant

Case Number

Pseudo Name

Question 1: Think about a time when you were in elementary, middle, or high school. What was your earliest memory of using a graphic organizer?

001 (IE) Rebecca • Never 002 (DC) Penny • No memory 003 (MV) Sue • No recollection 004 (YR) Danielle • No memory 005 (LB) Lana Light • 3rd grade in Jamaica for essay writing

• Wrote lists or copied teacher’s graphic organizers

006 (SH) Chiggy • No recollection 007 (BC) Carlos • 8th grade science class

• Copying and creating cluster or bubble maps

• Everyone hated it because we didn’t understand the purpose

• No modeling was done, but teacher showed a completed sample


Graphic Organizers and Teacher Preparation Programs.

One commonality is four participants recalled being exposed to graphic

organizers in one graduate methods course. Of these four, two attended CUNY schools

and two attended private schools with two teachers completing a literacy master’s degree.

Rebecca’s (P1) experience was described as being inspirational primarily because

of the influence of her professor. She responded by sharing, “My professor inspired me

to use graphic organizers. He was an author of a newly published book on graphic

organizers and incorporated them into an author study.”

Sue (P3) described an experience with the use of graphic organizers while

engaged in her master’s degree in literacy at Long Island University. The course required

students to conduct fieldwork with struggling readers registered in a neighboring after

school program. Sue added:

My student was a struggling reader with excellent verbal capabilities. However,

his primary deficiency was a breakdown in comprehension. I was required to

plan lessons to improve his comprehension. I chose to use beginning, middle, and

end graphic organizers and main idea graphic organizers. By the end of the

semester, assessments showed an upward movement in reading level.

Carlos was also able to recall being exposed to using graphic organizers

when he was enrolled in a literacy course while completing his master’s

degree in childhood education at the City College of New York. He stated, “It was

presented as a model to organize thoughts, little did they know. It might be interesting for

you to interview a recent graduate. With changes over the years, I’m sure they’re used

more in teacher education programs.”


However, two participants did not have any recollection of learning about the use

of graphic organizers. Penny (P2) a 35-year veteran special teacher who graduated from

Hunter College in 1981 chuckled and stated, “I went to school in the dinosaur era. We

didn’t learn about using graphic organizers.” Similarly, Chiggy a 15-year veteran reading

specialist who graduated from Adelphi University in 2003 also indicated she wasn’t

exposed to graphic organizers while completing her master’s degree in literacy.

Table 3 Coding for Graphic Organizers in Teacher Education Programs

Case Number

Pseudo Name

College(s) Attended

Question 2: What was your experience with the use of graphic organizers when completing your teacher education program?

001 (IE) Rebecca Brooklyn College

• Methods course in grad school • Professor inspired me • Created and used graphic organizers in class

and incorporated into author study 002 (DC) Penny Hunter College • No recollection 003 (MV) Sue Long Island

University (Brooklyn)

• Methods course required us to work with kids in after school program. Lessons were planned using graphic organizers for one to one instruction. Assessment showed children improved reading levels

004 (YR) Danielle Touro College • Literacy Masters, emphasized in most courses • Focus was on using GO’s for children with

special needs 005 (LB) Lana

Light Touro College • Emphasized in 1 course (MS)

• I don’t think college prepared me to use graphic organizers, yet alone to teach. I felt very unprepared my 1st year.

006 (SH) Chiggy

Williams Smith College and

Adelphi

• Don’t recall being taught about GO’s

007 (BC) Carlos City College • Grad course. Presented as a model to organize thoughts.

• It might be different if you interview recent graduates.


First experiences with graphic organizers in the classroom. In order to gain an

understanding of when participants felt they first learned about effectively using graphic

organizers in their daily instruction, they were asked to reflect on their practice during

their interview. Three participants felt they learned how to effectively use graphic

organizers during their first year of teaching and two participants felt they learned how to

effectively use graphic organizers around their fifth or sixth year teaching. Also, one

participant expressed she did not effectively use graphic organizers until her tenth year

teaching.

Another finding is five participants referred to effectively learning how to use

graphic organizers that were embedded into various curriculums experienced while

teaching. Rebecca (P1) recalled using many graphic organizers that were part of the

Reading First Program and Penny shared the inclusiveness of GO’s in the Scotts

Foresman curriculum, specifically semantic webs and t-charts. Additionally, Carlos (P7)

and Sue (P3) recalled effectively using various graphic organizers that were included or

supplemented when their school utilized the Teacher’s College Reading and Writing

Program (Calkins, 2000).

Danielle (P5) expressed a more reflective approach that led to her effectively

using graphic organizers with her second graders after nine years of teaching. During the

summer of 2009, she took home the portfolios of her students and spent some time

analyzing their weaknesses and brainstormed ways to improve the outcomes of children

who performed at the lower extremity of her class. Danielle offered the following:

The student work really did not meet my expectations and I spent a lot of time

revisiting my pedagogical approaches. I questioned my practice and what could


be done to enhance my teaching. This led me to researching various ways to

better incorporate graphic organizers during the 2010-2011 school year.

Graphic organizers during reading lessons. When asked to describe a specific

experience using graphic organizers during a reading lesson, five participants noted the

use of GO’s with their Tier Three readers. At this particular school, readers are placed

into tiered groups based on their reading level, fluency benchmarks, review of portfolios

at the completion of each module, and performance on benchmark assessments

administered by the New York City Department of Education. Tier One students are

typically on or above grade level; Tier Two students are approaching grade level and

sometimes on grade level; and Tier Three students are struggling readers that require

intensive instruction provided by the classroom teacher, special education teacher, and

ESL teacher.

Teachers also shared a common pedagogical approach when using graphic

organizers during mini-lessons, which is intense modeling of how to use close reading

strategies to locate textual evidence required to show mastery of the task presented. Five

of the participants expressed the importance of modeling during the mini-lesson or while

working with Tier Two or Tier Three students.

Targeting reading skills. Graphic organizers were also used to target and

remediate certain reading skills, whether during a reading lesson or reading in the content

areas. Two participants used a Venn diagram to compare and contrast two topics. One

required readers to compare and contrast two different text structures, whereas the other

required readers to compare and contrast two concepts within a text. Two participants

reflected on the use of a three-column graphic organizer from the ReadyGen reading


curriculum. Both visual aids included headings, but did not indicate any directions or

offer any supports for readers.

Two participants also shared the use of semantic webs, but the tasks and text

structures were different. One task required readers to recall details connected to an idea

from an expository text, whereas the other required readers to locate specific details to

describe a character’s actions using a narrative text.

Aside from teaching specific reading skills, three participants recalled students of

varying tiers struggling to comprehend the directions and headings included on the

graphic organizers, even after introducing the tasks prior to or during the lesson.

Another essential point shared during Carlos’ (Participant 7) interview is the need to

further differentiate graphic organizers and provide additional supports such as directions

indicating the close reading page or sections to focus, specific focus questions to establish

a clear purpose for reading, and a concrete example of how to effectively use the graphic

organizer. Carlos reflected on recently using tiered graphic organizers while remediating

the skill of making inferences during a guided reading lesson.

After conducting the mini-lesson and explicitly modeling how to use sections of a

text, he provided different students with variations of the graphic organizer presented

during instruction. Carlos stated:

One graphic organizer was designed for readers to work independently to read

portions of their text and make an inference using prior knowledge and text

evidence, whereas another graphic organizer included two examples of text

evidence and required readers to make a valid inference and locate additional

supporting details independently with the option of seeking teacher support if


needed. A third graphic organizer was used by the teacher with a couple of

readers and included two inferences. Students had to use close reading strategies

to locate text evidence to support the inferences included in the graphic organizer.

Table 4 Coding for Using Graphic Organizers in the Classroom

Case Number

Question 4: Think of a time when you used graphic organizers during a reading lesson? Tell me about that experience.

001 (IE) • Tiered groups • Two groups used GO’s (Web and Venn diagram) with modeling • Tier one didn’t require the use of a GO

002 (DC) • Third grade SETTS • Web for character’s actions. Modeled before independent work. • Had difficulty comprehending the directions of task

003 (MV) • Three- column chart part of ReadyGen curriculum • Headings and subheadings were abstract for kids to understand • Teacher modeling needed • A lot of prompting needed

004 (YR) • Tiered compare and contrast activities • Similarity and difference with text structures (Venn diagram, locate

evidence to support compare and contrast statement) 005 (LB) • Three column chart- locate evidence about Africa’s resources

• Tier Three- web outlining the resources. Extensive modeling needed • Six out of nice Tier Three kids mastered the task

006 (SH) • GO to locate evidence to support thoughts. Modeled during mini-lesson.

• Challenge- some kids included evidence not required of the task • Two out of 20 did not master task

007 (BC) • Guided reading lesson- inference- differentiated GO’s • 1- inference, details (independently); 2- 2 details from text provided

for child to determine inference and find more details; 3- two inferences provided for children to locate evidence.

• Challenges- no lines in GO, limited spacing in GO, fully understanding what supporting evidence to include in the GO.

Perceptions of students benefitting from graphic organizers. The use of a

Likert Scale was also used to gain an understanding of teachers’ perceptions of which

groups of children will most benefit from the use of graphic organizers. All participant’s

felt that English Language Learners (ELLs), students with Individualized Incentive Plans


(IEPs), and children performing at the lower extremity of a class or grade classified as the

bottom third would most benefit from using these visual aids.

Teachers’ perceptions of boys and girls benefiting from graphic organizers ranged

from somewhat likely (three to four) to most likely (five to six). Teachers also expressed

mixed opinions about whether or not they think gifted students would benefit from the

use of graphic organizers. Four participants felt they would less likely benefit, one

participant thought they would somewhat benefit, and two felt they could benefit.

Figure 1. Subgroups benefiting from the use of graphic organizers Summary There were several themes that emerged after analyzing the responses offered by

participants. First, most of the teachers interviewed did not have any recollection of

being exposed to the use of graphic organizers as they attended K to 12 schools. This

data spans over a few generations since the participants ranged from 35 to 57 in age.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1 2 3 4 5 6

ELL

IEP

Bottom Third

Boys

Girls

Gifted Num

ber of Participants


Next, most teachers recall learning about the importance and effectiveness of

using graphic organizers while completing their teacher education program at the

graduate level. More specifically, the teachers recalled them being emphasized in a

methods or literacy course. Another finding is two participants completed undergraduate

and graduate degrees in education yet could not recall being taught about graphic

organizers.

Teachers also had varying recollections about the point in their career where they

effectively knew how to utilize graphic organizers in their instruction. Responses ranged

from the first year teaching until the tenth year.

Last, the teachers in this study share some common thoughts and pedagogical

approaches when using graphic organizers. Some of these include: (a) Using graphic

organizers alongside close reading strategies to build comprehension, (b) providing

graphic organizers as a support for struggling tier three readers, (c) explicitly modeling

how to use multiple strategies to locate relevant text evidence in support of tasks given,

and (d) emphasizing the use of multiple graphic organizers when teaching comprehension

skills such main idea, compare and contrast, and cause and effect.

Discussion

The purpose of this section is to summarize the research in support of using graphic

organizers to improve the comprehension of struggling readers. It will also explore perceptions’

teachers have about using graphic organizers and which subgroups of children might benefit from

this form of support.

Implications for Practice Graphic organizers are essential tools that could potentially improve the

comprehension of struggling readers. After speaking with seven teachers with 12 to 35


years of teaching experience, they believe ESL, children with special needs, and readers

performing at the lower extremity of the class most benefit from using graphic

organizers. However, when sharing their first experience with effectively using graphic

organizers in their daily instruction, one participant mentioned using this scaffold with

IEP children. Five teachers also shared using graphic organizers during a reading lesson

with Tier Three readers and SETTS students.

These findings are consistent with Sam and Rajan’s (2013) study on using graphic

organizers with ESL students in which middle school students showed significant gains

in comprehension. This is contributed to the extensive training on using graphic

organizers as a form of intervention to improve students understanding of various texts in

a basal reader.

Furthermore, Özmen (2011) concluded middle school students with special needs

demonstrated an improvement in the comprehension of expository texts. Readers also

showed significant gains using compare and contrast graphic organizers with passages of

a similar text structure.

The topic of graphic organizers could be a potential focus for teacher teams.

Teachers could engage in research and locate articles and studies that conclude graphic

organizers are an effective scaffold for various subgroups of children. Teams could

identify trends such as using graphic organizers to help readers navigate through complex

text structures in order to build comprehension (Snyder, 2012; Fealy, 2010). Once they

have identified research-based practices, teachers could engage in action research and

begin trying out different strategies, approaches, and explore the use of newly acquired


graphic organizers. Ultimately, teachers will be able to expand teaching and hopefully

meet the needs of more students through this process.

Teachers should focus on previewing tasks and activities and focus on evaluating

the directions. Also, educators should focus on stating the directions of task in language

that is comprehendible to the children on that grade. This emerged after coding the

interviews and discovering that three teachers recalled children having difficulty with

comprehending the task assigned.

Revisiting Teacher Education Programs

One of the more startling findings is the lack of emphasis placed on using graphic

organizers when the participants completed their teacher education programs. Four

teachers recalled learning about graphic organizers in one graduate course, two teachers

had no memory of learning about them, and one participant stated they were included in

most of her graduate courses. Additionally, two out of three teachers who earned a

second master’s degree and obtained permanent certification in literacy recall being

exposed to graphic organizer during one methods course.

It is imperative that teacher education programs begin to re-evaluate their course

requirements at the undergraduate and graduate levels to identify ways to better prepare

future graduates to provide effective reading instruction. Therefore, college students

should be exposed to many research based reading strategies and approaches at the

undergraduate level. According to the New York State Education, teachers can obtain

initial certification to teach in New York State if they hold a bachelor’s degree in an area

of education and demonstrate proficiency on the New York State Teaching Exams. This


further supports the need for colleges to begin exposing undergraduate students to

stronger reading instruction and remediation.

Hunter College’s teacher education requirements. During my interview with

Penny, she stated, “I have no memory of being exposed to graphic organizers at Hunter

College. I went to school in the dinosaur era.” When asked about using graphic

organizers during a reading lesson she recalled using a web with third graders to better

understand a character’s actions. She also recalled effectively using a semantic web and

t-chart with fourth and fifth grade students to build comprehension of a complex text

included in a previous basal reading program. Penny acquired her knowledge of graphic

organizers when entering the DOE and implementing a school based reading program.

However, her exposure to graphic organizers should have been obtained while studying

to be an educator in 1981.

According to the 2014-2015 bulletin at Hunter College, students completing a

master’s degree in childhood education are required to complete between 36 and 49

credits. The amount of credits varies based on the undergraduate degree and previous

coursework. Of the 36 credits, students are required to complete three “literacy” courses

totaling five credits. However, the course descriptions describe the integration of literacy

across the curriculum with a focus on social studies and technology. The course catalog

states:

Major attention is given to our common heritage of democracy and human rights;

an appreciation of the diverse tapestry that characterizes the nation; the study of

history within social studies; the use of literature and the arts to illuminate and

enrich understandings; the application of critical and analytical skills to interpret


primary documents and data; the integration of technology to acquire, process,

and organize knowledge.

While these skills are equally important, potential educators also need to have knowledge

of additional aspects of reading that could easily be integrated with content area subjects.

Potential areas of focus for teacher education programs. Harvey and Goudvis

(2000) state, “Reading encompasses both decoding and the making of meaning. It

involves cracking the alphabetic code to determine the words and thinking about those

words to construct meaning” (p. 5). Therefore, it is essential to prepare teachers how to

teach letters, sounds, diagraphs, blends, spelling patterns, word relationships, vocabulary,

and a variety of comprehension skills.

Caldwell (2002) stresses reading assessment and describes it as a four-step

process. Reading teachers must: (a) identify what to asses, (b) collect evidence, (c)

analyze the evidence, and (d) make decisions about the analysis (p.13). It is imperative

that teacher education programs teach students about various forms of assessment, their

purposes, and how to make adjustments to instruction based on the data, which is

somewhat different from assessments in social studies.

Another major part of reading instruction is differentiating instruction to meet the

needs of all readers. Robb (2008) suggests teachers consider a variety of practices to

differentiate reading instruction. Some of these include: (a) making read alouds a

common teaching text, (b) teaching with diverse materials, (c) organizing instruction to

meet all reading levels, (d) value the independent reading block, (e) tiering assignments

to match the needs of all reading levels, (f) modeling how to construct meaning while


reading, and (g) using ongoing assessment to support each students reading growth (pp.

18-19).

As a former graduate of City College of New York with a master’s degree in

childhood education, I cannot recall an emphasis ever being placed on differentiated

reading instruction. Therefore, colleges should also look at ways to infuse the idea of

differentiation into their undergraduate and graduate courses if they have not already

revised the course of study since 2002.

Recommendations for Future Research. The topics of using graphic organizers to

improve the comprehension of struggling readers and teacher’s perceptions of using

graphic organizers have the potential to be explored in other capacities. When asked

about using graphic organizers during his master’s degree, one of Carlos’ remarks was,

“One graduate course and it was presented as model to organize ideas. It might be

different if you interview recent grads.” This statement could spark a new study that

would examine recent graduates exposure to graphic organizers and first year teacher’s

perceptions of using graphic organizers to improve comprehension of struggling readers

and varying subgroups.

There is also a need to explore differentiating graphic organizers. Five

participants recalled some sort of differentiation when using graphic organizers during a

reading lesson, with one sharing differentiation with all three groups of readers. It is

important for teachers to understand that all children may not need to use graphic

organizers in order to comprehend texts. Lapp et al. (2015) describe varying graphic

organizers and how they could be utilized. Some include: (a) advance organizers that help

readers make connections before engaging in a new topic or text; (b) partially filled-out


organizers in which the teacher has provided some information for students; (c) blank

graphic organizers requiring students to do most of the work of making sense of material;

(d) student-created or modified organizers which promote choice based on readers

previous work with graphic organizers; or (d) no organizer at all. Although differentiating

graphic organizers is a relatively new concept, it could potentially be an effective way to

meet the needs of all readers.

Implications for Practice As previously stated, teachers are entering the

teaching force lacking the skills to effectively deliver quality reading instruction. Three

participants could not even recall effectively using graphic organizers until their fifth

through tenth year of teaching. Therefore, the requirements for teachers existing teachers

should also be re-evaluated.

Currently the New York State Department of Education offers Gifted and

Talented, Special Education, and ESL extension licenses for teachers in possession of a

Permanent or Professional Certificate in Common Branches or Childhood Education.

The NYSED should also offer an Extension Certificate in Literacy and Mathematics.

This will enable many teachers to acquire 12 additional graduate credits and deepen their

understanding of teaching reading or math and better remediate reading and math

deficiencies.

The Department of Education could even require certain teachers to obtain an

Extension Certificate. Perhaps teachers rated Ineffective or Developing could receive

this option as part of their Teacher Improvement Plan. Also, this option might be offered

to teachers in consistently failing schools with full compensation.


In conclusion, graphic organizers are essential tools for teachers,

paraprofessionals, and parents to help build reading comprehension. It is important that

teachers entering the teaching profession receive greater exposure to the different types of

graphic organizers, the research behind effectively using them, and how to differentiate

them to meet the needs of diverse learners.


References

Alvermann, D. E. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on descriptive

text. Journal of Educational Research, 75, 44-48.

Caldwell, J. (2002). Overview of Reading Process. In Reading Assessment: A Primer for

Teachers and Tutors (pp. 12-14). New York City, NY: The Guildford Press.

Calkins, L., & FirstHand (Firm). (2003). Units of study for primary writing: A yearlong

curriculum. Portsmouth. Portsmouth, NH: FirstHand.

Creswell, J. W. (2010). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Darch, C., Carnine, D., & Kameenui, E. J. (1986). The role of graphic organizers and

social structure in content area instruction. Journal of Reading Behavior, 18, 275-

294.

Dexter, D. (2010). Using graphic organizers to teach content area material to students

with learning disabilities. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest

(Order No. 3436062).

Dexter, D. & Hughes, C. (2011). Graphic organizers and students with learning

disabilities: A meta-analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(1), 51-72.

Dye, G. (2000). Graphic organizers to the rescue! Teaching Exceptional Children, 32, 1-

5.

Fealy, E. (2010). Explicit instruction of graphic organizers as informational text reading

comprehension strategy: Third-grade students’ strategies and perceptions.

(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (Order No. 3420969).


Glasser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for

qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategic Thinking. In Strategies that work: Teaching

comprehension to enhance understanding (p. 5). York, Me.: Stenhouse.

Hunter College of New York Childhood Education Requirements. Retrieved March 2,

2015, from

http://catalog.hunter.cuny.edu/preview_program.php?catoid=22&poid=3555&ret

urnto=2877

Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in Reading Instruction: Research

Findings and Issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1), 34-35.

Lapp, D., Devere Wolsey, T., & Wood, K. (2015). Mining Complex Text: Using and

Creating GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS to Grasp Content and Share New

Understandings (pp. 3-40). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin: A Sage

Company.

Mahmood, M., Nikoo, F., & Bonyadi, A. (2013). The role of schema or background

knowledge activation and graphic organizer on increasing Iranian EFL learners’

reading comprehension, European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences,

2(2).

Manoli, P. & Papadopoulou, M. (2012). Graphic organizers as a ready strategy: Research

findings and issues. Creative Education, 3(3), 348-356.

New York City Statistical Summaries. (2014, October 31). Retrieved February 13, 2015,

from http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/schools/data/stats/default.htm


Office of Language Learners: 2013 Demographic Report. (2014, September 1).

Retrieved February 13, 2015, from

http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/FD5EB945-5C27-44F8-BE4B-

E4C65D7176F8/0/2013DemographicReport_june2013_revised.pdf

Özmen, R. (2011). Comparison of two different presentations of graphic organizers in

recalling information in expository texts with intellectually disabled students.

Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(2), 785-793.

Philips, F. & Nagy, A. (2014). Does reading case responses and using graphic organizers

enhance accounting students’ case analyses? Issues in Accounting Education,

29(1), 149-168.

Rieber, L. & Noah, A. (2008). Games, simulations, and visual metaphors in education:

antagonism between enjoyment and reading. Educational Media International,

45 (2), 77-92.

Robb, L. (2008). Differentiating Reading Instruction. In Differentiating reading

instruction: How to teach reading to meet the needs of each student (pp. 18-19).

New York: Scholastic.

Sam, D. & Rajan, P. (2013). Using graphic organizers to improve reading

comprehension skills for middle school ESL students. English Language

Teaching, 6(2).

Santrock, J. (2014). Information Processing. In Child Development (14th ed., pp. 202-

204). New York City, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Slavin, R.E. (2011). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice. NY: Pearson.


Snyder, E.A. (2012). The effects of graphic organizers and content familiarity on second

graders’ comprehension of cause and effect text (Doctoral dissertation).

Retrieved from ProQuest (Order No. 3494209).

Willingham, D.T. (2008). What will improve a student’s memory? American

Psychology, Winter, 17-25, 44.


Appendix A

Interview on Using Graphic Organizers

Pseudo Name: _____________________________________ Date of Interview: _________________

Number of years teaching: ________________________________________

Credentials (Degrees and licenses): ____________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Graphic organizers are defined as visual or graphic displays that show visual interrelationships of superordinate and subordinate ideas using spatial relationships, geometric shapes, lines, and arrows to portray the content structure and demonstrate key relationships between concepts. They are commonly used to help various learners improve their comprehension by visually seeing concepts and make connections. 1. What was your experience with the use of graphic organizers when completing your teacher education program?

• Were they emphasized in every methods course? • Which course(s) emphasized them most? • Which course(s) didn’t include them?


2. When do you recall first learning about effectively using graphic organizers in your daily instruction?

• What subject was it in? • What was most rewarding about it? • What year were you in your teaching career?


3. Think of a time when you used graphic organizers during a reading lesson?. Tell me about that experience.

• Do you think it was effective? • What challenges did the children face? • What were the results?


4. Think about when you were in elementary, middle, or high school. What was your earliest memory of using a graphic organizer? Describe that experience.

• What subject was it used in? • Was it useful? If so, explain.


5. Think about the use of graphic organizers within the classroom. On a 1-6 scale (1 being least suited; 6 being best suited), what is your opinion as to which is best suited for graphic organizers? Circle the number that best represents your opinion:


Advanced)

1 2 3 4 5 6

IEP? (SETTS, self-‐contained, ICT) 1 2 3 4 5 6


Boys? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Girls? 1 2 3 4 5 6






Appendix B

Interview on Using Graphic Organizers

Pseudo Name: Carlos (BC) Date of Interview: 2/28/15

Number of years teaching: 14 in DOE

Credentials:

Degree(s): BS Childhood Education; MS in Childhood Education; MS Admin Certification(s): Common Branch; Admin Graphic organizers are defined as visual or graphic displays that show visual interrelationships of superordinate and subordinate ideas using spatial relationships, geometric shapes, lines, and arrows to portray the content structure and demonstrate key relationships between concepts. They are commonly used to help various learners improve their comprehension by visually seeing concepts and make connections. 1. What was your experience with the use of graphic organizers when completing your teacher education program?

• Were the emphasized in every methods course? • Which course(s) emphasized them most? • Which course(s) didn’t include them?

-‐ While attending City College, I recall learning about using graphic organizers during my literacy courses.

-‐ It was presented as a model to organize thoughts. -‐ Wasn’t emphasized in the content areas. -‐ It might be different if you interview a recent grad.

With the changes in education over the years, I’m sure they’re used more in teacher education programs.

-‐


2. When do you recall first learning about effectively using graphic organizers in your daily instruction?

• What subject was it in? • What was most rewarding about it? • What year were you in your teaching career?

-‐ When I came to this school, I felt like I learned about effectively using graphic organizers. This was my 6th year teaching. I came from a school where curriculum and instruction was not focused on current practices, which is why I applied to other schools through the open market hiring system.

-‐ This school was using Lucy Calkins Teacher’s College Reading and Writing curriculum. Teachers here worked with me and together we learned about best ways to teach ALL of our children.

-‐ We also had ongoing literacy professional development and graphic organizers were used daily throughout lessons to gather ideas, specifically during writing.

-‐ The use of GO’s helped students who couldn’t write produce work that was relevant to what was being taught.

3. Think of a time when you used graphic organizers during a reading lesson?. Tell me about that experience.

• Do you think it was effective? • What challenges did the children face? • What were the results?

-‐ During a guided reading lesson. -‐ Graphic organizer was differentiated. -‐ The reading skill was inference. -‐ Tier One: Received a graphic organizer with the

subheadings: Inference and Supporting Details. They were required to complete the task independently.

-‐ Tier Two: Their graphic organizer received 2 details from the text. They had to create an inference and then use close reading strategies to locate additional supporting evidence.

-‐ Tier Three: Had a graphic organizer with two inferences. Children had to use close reading


strategies to locate evidence in support of the inferences.

-‐ Some challenges were: Limited spacing in the boxes provided, no lines on the graphic organizer, and fully understanding what supporting evidence to include in the graphic organizer.

-‐ Results: Most kids were able to give at least two solid inferences with relevant evidence from the text.

4. Think about when you were in elementary, middle, or high school. What was your earliest memory of using a graphic organizer? Describe that experience.

• What subject was it used in? • Was it useful? If so, explain.

-‐ 8th grade -‐ During a science class -‐ Clusters or bubble maps were used often -‐ We hated them and many of the students made fun of

the teacher who used them. -‐ We were exposed to what graphic organizers were

and were not taught about their importance, so we didn’t care.

-‐ We did not understand some of them. -‐ I don’t recall ever seeing the teacher model how to

complete this type of graphic organizer, but we were shown “samples” of what they looked like that were completed by other students.


5. Think about the use of graphic organizers within the classroom. On a 1-6 scale (1 being least suited; 6 being best suited), what is your opinion as to which is best suited for graphic organizers? Circle the number that best represents your opinion:


Advanced)

1 2 3 4 5 6

IEP? (SETTS, self-‐contained, ICT) 1 2 3 4 5 6


Boys? 1 2 3 4 5 6

Girls? 1 2 3 4 5 6





graphic organizer draft of final -...

Documents