the effect of classroom organization on student …

THE EFFECT OF CLASSROOM ORGANIZATION ON STUDENT SUCCESS

by

Destiny Nicole Politte

A professional paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

of

Master of Science

in

Science Education

MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana

July 2019

©COPYRIGHT

by

Destiny Nicole Politte

2019

All Rights Reserved

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................................1

2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................2

3. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................8

4. DATA AND ANALYSIS ............................................................................................11

5. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION ...............................................................18

6. VALUE ........................................................................................................................22

REFERENCES CITED ......................................................................................................25

APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................27

APPENDIX A Organization Survey ......................................................................28 APPENDIX B Unit Binder ....................................................................................32 APPENDIX C Unit Binder Completion Table ......................................................45 APPENDIX D Unit Formative 1 ...........................................................................47 APPENDIX E Unit Formative 2 ............................................................................54 APPENDIX F Unit Formative 3 ............................................................................58 APPENDIX G Unit Summative.............................................................................63 APPENDIX H Student Interviews .........................................................................75 APPENDIX I IRB Form ........................................................................................77

iii

LIST OF TABLES

1. Triangulation Matrix ....................................................................................................11

2. Average Summative Scores .........................................................................................12

3. T-test Results ...............................................................................................................12

4. Formative Assessment Scores......................................................................................15

5. Classwork Completion .................................................................................................16

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Likert-Type Survey Question 9 ...................................................................................13

2. Normalized Gains Pre-Treatment ................................................................................13

3. Normalized Gains Post-Treatment 1 ............................................................................14

4. Normalized Gains Post-Treatment 2 ............................................................................14

5. Likert-type Survey Question 8 .....................................................................................15

6. Likert-type Survey Question 1 .....................................................................................16

7. Likert-type Survey Questions 4 ...................................................................................17

v

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to see how student organization affected success in the classroom and can the student take over their own education through organization. Students were provided with a unit binder organized by the teacher. This binder was not only be used for daily classwork but was also allowed to be used on formative assessments. To see if the organized unit binder was helping students actually learn, the formative assessment scores were compared to the scores of a summative assessment where the student were not allowed to use the unit binder. The results from this study showed no significant difference in the scores between the formative and summative assessments and that students completed more work during the treatment unit. This concludes that students did benefit from the use of the classroom organization.

1

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Emil E. Holt High School is the first of three high schools located in the

Wentzville School District. The district is the fastest growing in the state of Missouri,

with an approximate total of 16,000 students enrolled. Wentzville is made up of 83%

white, 7% black and other minority populations which are too small to account for. Holt

has the largest student population of the three high schools with 1,693 total students

enrolled. There are 19.3% on free and reduced lunch. With growth happening at such an

accelerated rate, the boundaries for the high schools have changed several times within

the last four years and may be changing again with the addition of a fourth high school.

With all of the changes that are occurring and the influx of students from other

districts, it is vitally important that teachers set up a solid foundation of expectations and

routines for students to follow. This is a common practice for all teachers but it needs to

be designed with careful planning so it can help students who transfer into a new district

acclimate efficiently. Many teachers at Holt have noticed students coming into high

school; either from our own feeder schools or from other districts, with completely

different skill sets in the area of study and organization. It is not yet clear if students’

struggles are due to transfers from other districts or the necessary changing in boundary

lines that causes many students to change schools from year to year.

With students lacking in a solid foundation in the area of organization, many

students could feel lost in how to keep track of homework, how to use organizational

skills, how to study or how classwork is important to succeed within the classroom. Our

district requires teachers to have learning goals up on the board or posted somewhere that

2

the students can see them in an effort to address students understanding the daily agenda.

Even though the learning goals are clearly stated, many students still have confusion.

Therefore, a different approach may be useful.

Another reason to teach students organization is to save them time in the long run.

Time management skills is another weak point with incoming high school students.

Helping students to learn how to organize should help them focus their time on the

content rather than feeling lost and overwhelmed.

I decided to mold my research from the two ideas discussed previously,

organization and time-management. I focused my research on answering the question,

“How does student organization affect success in the classroom and can the student take

over their own education through organization?”

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Ben Franklin once said, “For every minute spent organizing, an hour is earned.”

With the pressures of time constraints that are put not only on teachers, but on students as

well, time is our greatest enemy in the classroom. Being able to manage instructional

time to achieve learning goals and objectives may be one of the most challenging tasks

against the overwhelming feeling of falling behind that is experienced by many teachers

and students. Organization could be a possible remedy for these feelings plaguing

teachers and students alike. A well-organized classroom, in combination with well-

organized students, could create an environment that translates to higher student

achievement but also gives students a skill that they can apply long after their educational

years.

3

In the high school classroom, content is the focus of many teachers, but students

also need to learn valuable lessons that will help the students succeed long after

graduation. Dedication, perseverance, and individual accountability are traits that

translate into daily life. One of the traditional ways a teacher promotes and evaluates

these traits is by assigning homework. This common practice aids in students’

understanding of content but also addresses the crunch for time in completing the

learning goals and objectives by deadlines. This practice of assigning homework may

save time for the teacher within the classroom and keep the content on schedule, but how

effective is this common practice?

According to Jenkins (2015), students “do not need to be assigned graded

homework in order to be proficient on chapter tests or pass the class with an above

average grade” (p.38). Jenkins (2015) then goes on to discuss some factors that lead to

lower homework grades. These factors include “failure to finish the assignment, failure to

even return the assignment, or losing points for incorrectly answering questions or

solving problems” (Jenkins, 2015, p.39). Organization may play a key role in a student’s

ability to complete assigned independent work which impacts their performance within

the classroom. There are many factors that come into play in regards to student

organization; willingness, past experiences, and value of the importance are just a few.

These lifelong lessons in regards to organization are extremely valuable to students and

need to be addressed within a high school classroom.

There are a couple ways to streamline how students begin the process of

becoming organized. The main goal of Hatcher (1998) was to look at organization and

4

study skills from a school wide point of view. The use of three ring binders and

assignment planners were the first tools used. The assignment planners were used to

show both students and parents the weekly schedule and to keep a running calendar of

work completed within the classroom and outside the classroom. Providing this

information aimed to help students know what work was expected of them for that week

and what assignments should be kept in the binder. Teachers may agree that these

practices in organization would help students who are absent or missing class but still in

school; for example, in school suspension, field trips, or in general to stay on top of their

assignments. Hatcher (1998) also says, “Effective time management becomes ever more

critical as students advance through higher education and enter the work force” (p.716).

With the use of both the binder and the assignment planner, students will learn valuable

lessons with organization and learn time management skills (Hatcher 1998). Harmann

(2000) work talked about techniques one needs to take back their life and schedule.

According to Harmann (2000), individuals should keep a detailed calendar for projects,

assignments, test, quizzes and personal information.

Students all work at different paces. Some students like to finish work as quickly

as possible to relieve the required work on their proverbially full plates and others may

work slower due to educational difficulties or distractions. Some students may understand

one subject topic much easier than another, which can also influence how much time they

want to spend on their assigned classwork. This leads into the final note from Hatcher’s

work dealing with students not being able to connect the purpose of the class assignments

to the learning goals of the course. In Hatcher’s study (1998), all students had to write the

5

learning goals, also known as a learning objective, into their assignment planner. He

describes that students could be more focused on what they were supposed to be learning

from the assignment that particular day. This modification may also help a student align

the classwork they completed during the class period with the daily learning objective or

goal. The idea of learning goals goes further in depth by McCardle (2017), this study

talks about several types of learning goals for college level students and how important

they are for self-learning. McCardle (2017) states, “Clear content guides learners to

concentrate on relevant material as well as in choosing what actions are needed for

learning” (p.2156).

Learning goals are crucial in aiding all stakeholders within the classroom.

Teachers use these learning goals to help guide their teaching and keep their pacing

throughout each unit. In Marzano’s book he states, “Establishing and communicating

learning goals are the starting place” (2010, p.9). Students subsequently become more

aware that their classwork and their assessments are built upon these learning goals.

Students may incorporate organizational strategies outlined by Hatcher, to help stay

focused on the goals set and the importance of their classwork. With careful planning and

direction from the teacher, students may begin to see the importance of organization

which will benefit them long after their years in education. Marzano also goes on to say,

“For learning to be effective, clear targets in terms of information and skill must be

established” ( 2010, p.9). If students are more aware, with efficient access to learning

goals, students will know what is expected; thus, this modification may cut back on how

much time is lost due to confusion. He goes on to say, “Assessment does not occur at the

6

end of the unit only but throughout the unit” (Marzano, 2010, p.9). Students may be more

focused with their learning due to the incorporation of learning goals which may lead to

an increase in student performance on formative and summative assessments. Marzano

also adds another step to the learning goals which consists of tracking student progress.

With organization set in place by incorporating individual student binders that

clearly defines each lesson’s learning goals and objectives, students may have a more

focused toolset to prepare for formative and summative assessments. There are some

contradictions although, on which practice is the best way to assess student performance.

Broyles’s (2005) study stated “Students using the open-book approach showed a

statistically significant change in mean score compared with those who took a closed-

book exam” (p. 460). This study concluded that a student’s performance was based on

their ability to find the information they need and to do so in an efficient manner. This

particular study was referring to medical students, who not only needed to know a wealth

of content, but also needed to be able to apply the content to a variety of different

situations. Assessments need to have a balance between requiring students to rely on rote

recollection of information and requiring students to apply said information.

Johann and Heijne’s studies concluded that teachers should utilize open book

assessments and the more traditional style of testing, a closed-book exam (2012, 2017).

Johann and Heijne both claimed the multi-assessment style would help students see

differences in these types of assessments. They claim understanding the differences

within assessments would be beneficial to students because this forces students to learn

different skill sets in taking assessments. This in turn will further the skill sets of the

7

students for what the future may hold. The difference between Johann’s and Heijne’s

studies are slight. Johann’s study found that students developed strong critical thinking

skills when using a collaboration of open and closed book assessments. While Heijne’s

study also supports this, they looked at student retention over long periods of time.

Heijne’s study found students who learned through problem-based curriculum performed

better than students under the traditional curriculum in the long term. Problem-based

learning has shown success under Heijne’s study, but is by no means the only way

assessment should be conducted

Larwin’s (2013) research looked at the use of testing aides and the impact it had

on student success. Larwin’s (2013) study concluded with, “Unlike open-textbook

testing, the use of student prepared testing aids may enable and encourage students to

prepare for examinations with higher levels of engagement” (p. 441). When students

begin to develop ownership of their own education, they will begin to believe the power

that education holds for their future. They may feel empowered to put in the desired

effort when they are provided more structured freedom to learn. Broyles (2005), study

eluded to this as well when the students had to prepare for their open book assessments.

Broyles stated students had to know what resources they had available in order to be

efficient on their assessment. Teaching students how and why their resources are

important may just be as crucial as teaching the students how the learning goals and

objectives relates to their assignments and ultimately to their assessments. The idea that

teachers are to teach more life skills in the classroom is seen in Lankard’s work about

what employers’ expectations are for teachers in the vocational studies. According to

8

Lankard (1994), Teacher should allow for more student directed education and less

teacher directed education, which would allow students to take responsibility for their

own learning.

It is safe to say that teachers want their students to take ownership of their own

education, but teaching them how to take control of a multi-facetted task of organization

is also vitally important. As Rimm states, “Disorganization is a frequent symptom of

underachievement syndrome” (Rimm, 1995, p.141). She then concludes, “Students who

lack organization skills, homework and study habits should be structured” (Rimm, 1995,

p.145). Students need this critical guidance and structure to be provided initially to

accomplish this goal in the classroom. This structure could be left up to the students if a

basic foundation is laid properly. However, would initially need to be modeled by the

teacher. By combining a classroom binder for daily and weekly classroom assignments

with clearly defined and accessible daily learning goals and objectives, the daunting task

of organization could be simplified

METHODOLOGY

In order to answer my focus statement, 39 biology students were administered a

pre and post treatment survey. These biology students were sophomores who either took

physical science as a freshman or transferred into the district. Two of the classes was a

co-taught class and the other was not, however they were still the same bunch of students

who came from physical science as freshmen. This means that the three biology classes I

used in this study were lower level classes with an odd mix of transfer students who seem

to be at a higher level. I had a wide range of students both academically and behaviorally.

9

The Likert style Organization Survey was given using Google Forms before the

treatment and after the treatment (Appendix A). The Organization Survey measured how

students perceived the Unit Binder and how it aided student organization and student

driven pacing. In addition, this measuring tool measured the student attitudes towards

classwork, organization, and confidence with the content (Appendix B). The data was

analyzed using a two-sample t-test to find any significant differences between the pre and

post treatment survey results.

A Unit Binder was provided for the students and the binder was kept in the

classroom to keep students from inadvertently losing required materials (Appendix B).

The Unit Binder had an index page where the name of each assignment was listed in

order as the assignments needed to be completed. Students had to fill out the index page

as they completed their assignments in the Unit Binder. Students accessed the page with

the matching assignment name and were required to record the assignment’s page

numbers and learning goal on the provided index page. Before the Unit Summative

Assessment took place, binder checks were completed with no assigned grade. Students

were measured on how many pages were completed and a completion percentage was

calculated based on the total number of pages in the Unit Binder. This data was recorded

in the Unit Binder Completion Table (Appendix C). The percentage of completion was

compared to the percentages the students receive on both their Unit Formative

Assessments (Appendices D & E) and their Unit Summative Assessment (Appendix F).

Binder checks occurred to measure the completeness of the learning goals in the binder

with the goal of measuring students’ performance on assessments.

10

Students were allowed to use the Unit Binder on the Unit Formative Assessments.

Students’ performance on the Unit Formative Assessments were tracked and compared to

the percent completion of the Unit Binder. The Summative Assessment consisted of a

combination of the Unit Formative Assessments (Appendix F). Students were not

allowed to use the Unit Binder on their Summative Assessment (Appendix G). The

Summative Assessment was compared to the Unit Formative Assessments using a two-

sample t-test for each comparison.

Student interviews were used to analyze students’ thoughts on self-organization,

teacher-organization, and importance of classwork (Appendix H). Student interviews

were crucial for providing additional information that was not otherwise addressed by the

parameters of the Organization Survey (Appendix A). Five students were randomly

selected from each of the participating biology classes resulting in a total of ten students.

The interviews were conducted before and after the treatment process. The Triangulation

Matrix (Table 1) was used to help organize what tools were used in order to answer the

research questions.

11

Table 1 Triangulation Matrix Research Questions Binder

Completion Rate

Formative Assessment Scores

Summative Assessment Scores

Likert Style Survey

Student Interviews

I. How student organization affects success in the classroom and can the student take over their own education through organization?

X

X

X

X

X

II. How does classwork completion rate affect student success in the classroom?

X

X

X

III. How does classwork completion rate affect student success on formative assessments?

X

X

X

X

IV. How does classwork completion rate affect student success on summative assessments?

X

X

X

X

DATA AND ANALYSIS

Students’ overall success was measured by comparing average pre and post

treatment summative assessment scores. The sample size for this study was 39

sophomore biology students (N=39). Analysis of the summative assessments scores

displayed in Table 2 shows students’ assessment averages decreased by seven percent

after the treatment was applied. It should be noted that the units covered in biology get

progressively more complex as the year goes on. The pre-treatment score is determined

from the pre-treatment unit summative assessment. The post-treatment score is

determined from the average summative assessment scores from the two treatment units.

This is a quick comparison but was also evaluated by using a t-test and looking at

normalized gains.

12

Table 2 Average Summative Scores Summative Assessment Average Scores Pre-treatment 74.7% Post- treatment 67.6% Difference (post-pre) -7.1%

To further the analysis on the overall success of the students, a two sample t-test

and normalized gains analysis were used to determine if there was student growth from

the formative to the summative assessment. The t-test was used to see if there was any

significant difference between the average formative assessment scores during each unit

and the summative scores of the same unit. Table 3 below shows that the pre-treatment

unit did have a significant difference between the assessment scores and when the

treatment was applied it showed no significant difference between the assessment scores.

Table 3 T-Test Results

T-Test Results T-stat Critical Value Significance Pre-treatment -2.31 2.02 Yes Post-treatment 1 1.93 2.02 No Post treatment 2 0.92 2.02 No

The importance of understanding the data from the student’s perspective is crucial

to action research. Student surveys were given both pre and post treatment to obtain this

insight on several aspects of this action research project. Figure 1 is a visual of student’s

responses to the Likert-type survey for the summative assessment sub question; what is

the impact of student organization on summative assessments. There was an eight percent

increase in the positive answer “strongly agree” and an overall increase in positive

answers (strongly agree and agree) of five percent when comparing results from pre-

treatment to post-treatment.

13

Figure 1- Likert-type survey question 9, (N=39).

Figure 2- Normalized gains pre-treatment, (N=39).

Further analysis of the growth between formative and summative assessment

normalized gains were also calculated. The results are shown in Figure 2, 5 and 6 below.

Pre-treatment analysis indicates an approximate positive three percent increase in mean

average from the formative to the summative assessment. After the treatment was applied

60.83333333 63.5

10 14.57.57

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2

Pre treatment

Series1 Series2 Series3

15%

23%

59%

56%

23%

18%

0%

3%

3%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

PRE TREATMENT

POST TREATMENT

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

14

there was an average of a negative five and a half percent decrease from the formative to

the summative assessment.

Figure 3- Normalized gains post-treatment 1, (N=39

Figure 4- Normalized gains oost-treatment 2, (N=39).

65.55555556 60

12.037037049

6.666666667 17.5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2

Treatment 2


54.13105413 49

14.672364679

10.8262108317

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2

Treatment 1


15

Formative assessments were analyzed by comparing the average formative scores

from the pre-treatment to the post-treatment. In Table 4 the data showed an approximate

positive increase of three percent after the treatment was put in place.

Table 4 Formative Assessment Scores Formative Assessment Scores Average Formative Scores Pre-treatment 68.05 Post- treatment 70.83 The Difference (post-pre) +2.78

Students were asked in the Likert-type survery if they believed classwork helps

them on their quizzes (formative assessments). Figure 5 outlines the analysis of student

responses. This survey question had the largest outcome of a 21% postive increase after

the treatment was applied.

Figure 5-Likert-type question 8, (N=39).

Student organization was analyzed by comparing completion of classwork pre to

post treatment. These results are found below in Table 5. Students completed eight

18%

31%

51%

59%

28%

7%

0%

3%

3%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

PRE TREATMENT

POST TREATMENT


16

percent more classwork after the treatment was applied. This increase in student

completion was the largest positive increase on student performance.

Table 5 Classwork Completion Classwork Completion Average Completion Scores Pre-treatment 75.5 Post- treatment 83.86 The Difference (post-pre) +8.36

The Likert-type student survey contained questions that pertained to student

completion Figure 6 represents how students did not have a significant difference in how

they felt about being organized. However, the importance of this will be brought up

during the interpretation with student interviews. Figure 7 outlines that students reported

having a 13% postive increase in believing that organizing their school work helped them

understand class content. This will be discussed further in the interpretation.


10%

21%

56%

49%

21%

23%

10%

0%

3%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

PRE TREATMENT

POST TREATMENT

Question 1: I am organized in school


17


In addition to this data, student interviews were used to look further into the

results. Six interviews were conducted both before and after treatment, two from each

class. Student interview questions can be found in Appendix H. The interview questions

focused on student completion, formative, and summative assessments. Overall, students

agreed classwork was important however, most found it to be busy work. All students

stated in pre and post treatment interviews that homework was not fair and did not help

them because they did not have a teacher to help them as they do when they are in the

classroom. Overall, most students agreed that their classwork would help them on their

formative assessments because that is where they learn the content. Students were also in

aggreement that completing your classwork and doing well on your formative

assessments would help them with their summative assessments. Student quotes will be

found in the interpretation and conclusion section due to furthering the explanation of the

results.

13%

10%

46%

62%

31%

23%

7%

5%

3%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

PRE TREATMENT

POST TREATMENT

Question 4: I think organizing my school work helps me understand the content in all of my

classes


18

INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION

The main focus question was: How does student organization affect success in the

classroom and can the student take over their own education through organization? To be

able to answer this question to the fullest extent it must be broken down further. The

impact of student organization on classwork was a major focus of this action research.

The data in Table 5 showed that classwork completion rates went up by eight and a half

percent after the treatment was applied. Figure 7 supports the eight and a half percent

increase in classwork completion rates. The survey question, I think organizing my

schoolwork helps me understand the content in all of my classes, showed an increase of

13%. This shows that students believed that the provided organizational structure of the

unit binders had a positive impact on the rate at which they completed their required

work.

This analysis was confirmed by a student during the student interviews. One student

stated, “If you are unorganized you lose “stuff” and can’t turn it in which causes your grade

to go down; even if you did the work.” This same student went on to state, “the unit binder

helped me say organized because I got the unit all at once and I was able to work at my

own pace.” Another student during the interviews stated, “With the binder I don’t lose my

assignments. I always use to lose my assignments.” Another interesting student response

was, “I really liked the calendar because I could write out the entire week and if I missed a

day I could work ahead or catch up easier and the page numbers are more helpful when

trying to figure out what assignment you want us to work on.”

19

These statements along with the increase in completion rates is sufficient

evidence that teaching students how to become organized by providing them

organizational tools, such as a unit binder with page numbers, an index page with

assignment titles, and blank calendar for them to fill in each day, is successful. This was

further evident after multiple students stated, “Before the binder I thought I was

organized but now I am starting to realize I was not.” This where Figure 6 comes into

play, students responded to a survey question stating that they were organized in school.

Although, glancing at the results it appears there is some shifting of answers from

pre to post, when tested with the two sampled t-test, the result came out to be

insignificant. This may be due to students originally thinking that they were organized

but after being “forced” to use organizational tools, they may have changed their mind.

The last factor that plays a role in increased completion rates would be the incentive to

use the completed unit binders on their formative assessments. Proof of this statement

was found during student interviews. Students were asked does classwork help you on

your quizzes. One student replied, “Yes, because as you do the class work you know

what will be on the quizzes.”

Another driving force behind this action research was determining the impact that

student organization had on formative assessment performance. When comparing the

average pre to post treatment formative assessment scores, there was an approximate

average of three percent increase to student performance after the treatment was applied.

This was not only backed up by the student interview mentioned previously, but it can

also be seen in Figure 5, which is the student survey. The survey asked the same

20

question, does classwork help me on my quizzes. This was by far the largest positive gain

of a positive 21% that agreed or strongly agreed. If students are organized their classwork

and are completing more of their classwork, this in turn benefits them on their formative

assessments. However, this may not translate to actual content knowledge since students

were able to use their unit binders on their quizzes. This is why summative assessments

also had to be considered.

The final piece to the puzzle is the impact that student organization has on

summative assessment scores. According to Table 2 there was a seven percent decrease

in student performance when comparing the average pre to average post summative

scores. There was also a five and a half decrease in the average mean score of student

growth from the post formative to post summative scores which can be seen in Figure 2,

3 and 4. However, when using a two-tiered t-test there was no significant difference in

the post-treatment summative assessment scores displayed in Table 3. This was

interesting because if the post treatment were truly a negative for the summative scores

then the t-test would read significant. We would then be able to use the normalized gains

to support that it was significant in a negative fashion. Since the t-test result was not

significant then we cannot claim that the difference was large enough to cause a

detrimental impact to student success.

We also cannot say that the treatment helped increase summative scores. Other

outside factors may have played a role in student success between the formative and the

summative assessment and those became evident during student interviews. When

students were asked why it seemed test scores were lower now than before, many

21

responded with a few items. Many students stated, “it was third quarter and their grades

in all of their classes were suffering.” Others brought up that, “these last two units were

so much harder than the first unit of the semester.” One statement that stood out the most

was when one student stated, “I was doing so good on my quizzes and I felt really

confident, so I stopped studying for the tests like I used to. If I would have studied, I felt

like I could have gotten a better grade even though I didn’t do bad.” These student

interviews provide insight that sheds light on just some of the factors that contribute to

student performance on assessments.

Now that the sub questions have been thoroughly explained, the main objective of

this study was to find out the impact of student organization, how this affects success in

the classroom, and can the student take over their own education through organization.

Two out of the three sub questions had positive results. Students completed more work

and did better on their formative assessments. The third sub question dealing with

summative assessments had an unclear outcome in regards to what happened to student

success between the formative and summative assessments.

Some may say that this unclear determination is because students were able to use

their binder on their formative assessments. Students may not have entirely learned the

material. However, there is the data of the completion rates going up. If students were

doing more work this should have translated to a greater understanding of the content

discussed in class. It would be interesting to further this study of student organization and

the link it has to teaching students how to organize study guides and study tools to see if

the learning gap could be closed between the formative and summative assessment. Due

22

to the use of open note formative assessments it is not clear if student organization

translated to success on the summative assessments. Student organization did help

students improve on completing more classwork and on the formative assessments.

VALUE

This capstone research project has greatly impacted not only the way I approach

organizing my classwork, but has emphasized great change in how my students utilize the

organizational tools I put forth for them. I will continue to use unit binders with an index

page and a calendar going forward. Not only did this help students keep track of when

assignments were due, but it also helped keep assignments and classwork in one place. It

was easy for me to open a binder to an index page and get a quick diagnostic on a

student’s understanding. This helped tremendously with managing the amount of transfer

students and absences that I have in my lower level classes. This also helped me be a

better prepared teacher. An entire unit is planned and handed out at the beginning of the

unit. I was then able to make it flow from one assignment to the next. I will continue to

allow students to use the binder on their formative assessments since this was a great

incentive for students to complete more class work than before.

To combat the observed issues of students studying less for summative

assessments, I would like to incorporate review pages that force students to go back into

their formative assessments and have students write down what questions they got wrong

and then have to find the correct answer. I also believe that students saw more of a

purpose for what they were learning because of the learning goals they had to write

down. In order for the students to get the completion points, they had to have filled out

23

the learning goal on the index page. This opened up a discussion with the student and I on

why they were doing what they were doing that day. When a student had completed their

assignment and came up to get my signature for completion, often times their learning

goal was blank. I could then ask them what they thought the purpose of that day’s

assignment was and they often answered correctly. If a student was confused and said “I

don’t really know”, we would then look back at their assignment and discuss it.

This was a very nice way to be able to check for basic understanding. I was able

to see what assignments were left blank or had wrong answers. Instead of taking each

assignment for a grade or discussing the topic as a class, I was able to talk to each

individual student about their individual journey through the content. This often opened

up my eyes to different hang-ups students were having and strengthened my own “tool

box” for that assignment. I would like to try to find a way to continue this project by

adding in a way for students to be better prepared for their summative assessments. I

believe this was a great framework on which to build and the missing piece to tie it all

together seems to be teaching students how to use their class work to study for their

summative assessments and utilizing their teacher as a tool not as the main source of

knowledge.

My biology department wants to move forward using my unit binders and

organization tools to set a standard within our department. Our goal for next year is to

work on the organizational skills that will benefit students in the area of studying for

assessments. This could include things such as making unit outlines and making

flashcards and/or flowcharts. I foresee myself focusing more on student centered learning

24

than I have in the past. I think students need to be able to learn how to learn just as much

as they need to know the content. Students seemed more excited about utilizing me as a

check point then submitting assignments for a grade. Many students said it was easier to

get one-on-one time with me because it was required that I signed off on their work.

Students also began to discuss more content with other students I observed multiple

students that enjoyed getting their work completed and then communicating with others.

They would not only willingly help other students, but structure their help not by

just giving the other student the answer but by using the same dialogue we had. Seeing

students communicate about the science content with the correct vocabulary and being

able to have discussion to support someone who is confused is a great skill to have and

sold me on making the jump to student centered learning. I now have a solid foundation

to move my teaching career to a new level and foresee this being a career long project.

25

REFERENCES CITED

26

Broyles, I. L., Cyr, P. R., & Korsen, N. (2005). Open book tests: assessment of academic learning in clerkships. Medical Teacher,27(5), 456-462.

Harman, C.N. (2000, October). Lighten up: Techniques for taking charge of yourself,

your schedule, and your life. Association Management, 82-88. Hatcher, R. R., & Pond, B. N. (1998). Standardizing organizational skills for student

success. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(9), 715. Heijne-Penninga, M., Kuks, J. B., Hofman, W. H., Muijtjens, A. M., & Cohen-Schotanus,

J. (2012). Influence of PBL with open-book tests on knowledge retention measured with progress tests. Advances in Health Sciences Education,18(3), 485-495.

Jenkins, Angela E., & Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Peggy Taylor. (2015). The

Effects on Individual Grades and Test Scores When Assigning and Grading Homework in a Ninth Grade Physical Science Classroom.

Johanns, B., Dinkens, A., & Moore, J. (2017). A systematic review comparing open-book

and closed-book examinations: Evaluating effects on development of critical thinking skills. Nurse Education in Practice,27, 89-94.

Lankard, B. (1994). Employers' expectations of vocational education. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED376273) Larwin, K. H., Gorman, J., & Larwin, D. A. (2013). Assessing the Impact of Testing Aids

on Post-Secondary Student Performance: A Meta-Analytic Investigation. Educational Psychology Review,25(3), 429-443.

Marzano, R. J. (2010). The art and science of teaching: a comprehensive framework for

effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McCardle, L., Webster, E. A., Haffey, A., & Hadwin, A. F. (2017). Examining Students’

Self-Set Goals for Self-Regulated Learning: Goal Properties and Patterns. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2153–2169. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxybz.lib.montana.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1158907&site=ehost-live

Rimm, S. B. (1995). Why Bright Kids Get Poor Grades And What You Can Do About It.

Crown Publishers, New York, NY.

27

APPENDICES

28

APPENDIX A

ORGANIZATION SURVEY

32

APPENDIX B

UNIT BINDER

45

APPENDIX C

UNIT BINDER COMPLETION TABLE

46

Student name Percentage of Binder Complete Before Summative Assessment

____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____% ____/34 pages = _____%

47

APPENDIX D

UNIT FORMATIVE 1

54

APPENDIX E

UNIT FORMATIVE 2

58

APPENDIX F

UNIT FORMATIVE 3

63

APPENDIX G

UNIT SUMMATIVE

75

APPENDIX H

STUDENT INTERVIEWS

76

1. How are you organized in school? Do you prefer getting assignments individually or

getting the entire unit up front? Explain.

2. Do you think your organizational skills has an impact on your performance in the class?

Why or why not?

3. How do you think teachers organize/structure their classes? What are some examples that

work and do not work for you?

4. Do you think classwork is important? Explain why or why not.

5. Do you think your classwork aligns with your quizzes and tests? Explain.

6. What environment do you learn the best in and why? Give some examples.

77

APPENDIX I

IRB FORM

the effect of classroom organization on student …

Documents