The Underachieving Student
White Paper 2
i.
Introduction
Underachieving
students is a large problem in schools.
Teachers are challenged daily by students who don't seem interested in
learning. One of the most persistent questions facing individual teachers is,
"How do I get all the students to achieve to their fullest potential?" The real
problem facing educators is helping all students achieve optimal learning
(conceptual understanding and the ability to apply knowledge to new problems,
learning, and creations) with high quality content (from the students' own
interests, from state and local curricula, and national standards). “If we are
serious about educating every child, we must include every child in meaningful,
engaged learning. That means using teaching techniques that match what we know
about how kids learn.” (Muir) The
research shows that there are a wide variety of reasons why students
underachieve. There are just as
many solution as reasons but all are based on quality teaching. Incorporating technology into the
curriculum is one possible way of increasing students’ motivation to
learn.
ii.
Underachieving students and what can be
done to help.
There is little consensus on how to define underachieving students. Underachievement can be measured in deferent ways using any number of criteria. After reviewing 100 publications on underachievement Ford states that typically schools use teacher expectations, intelligent tests, achievement tests, aptitude test, and/or GPA. Ford views that as problematic because schools have adopted a psychometric definition of underachievement and minority students do not do well on standardized tests (Ford). James R. DeLisle states the definition as “a discrepancy between a child's school performance and some ability index such as an IQ score. “ But neither of these definitions helps teachers or parents help address the underachieving child problems. Underachievement is a behavior and therefore can be modified. So the suggestion would be not to label the student as an underachiever but to label the behavior itself. (e.g., the child is "underachieving in math and language arts" rather than an "underachieving student"). (DeLisle).
The following are some strategies that Delisle and Berger suggest to reverse the underachievement:
All of the above strategies
are based on getting the student motivated. The more the student is motivated to
learn the involvement there will be in the learning process. A student could be intrinsically or
extrinsically motivated.
Intrinsically motivated students tend to employ strategies that demand
more effort and that enable them to process information more deeply. Whereas extrinsically oriented
students gravitate toward tasks that are low in degree of difficulty and put
forth the minimal effort required.(Lumsden)
Teachers can setup
classrooms to encourage this motivation.
The students experience should be caring, supportive and a sense of
belonging. If the student has
experience such as these they will participate in the process of learning. Class goals should be challenging but
obtainable. The material should be
relevance and shown how the skills taught in class can be applied in the real
world. (Lumsden).
iii. Programs that are in place to help underachieving students.
There are many programs that are trying to help the underachieving students. Two of the well know ones are Achievement Via Individual Determination and Pittsburgh Urban Math Project. Both have had documented successes that has improved the learning process for many underachieving students.
Students recruited for AVID
are underserved students who enter the program at the high school and middle
school levels. They are then enrolled in a college preparatory sequence and in
an elective section of AVID where they receive the academic and motivational
support to succeed. During the AVID class, students are coached by college
tutors, typically AVID graduates themselves, and work in collaborative groups
using a curriculum focused on writing and inquiry. Non-tutorial days are devoted
to an across-the-curriculum writing sequence and grade level study skills in
preparation for college entrance and placement exams. Students also receive
college level mini-courses taught by college professors, as well as motivational
presentations by guest speakers. AVID classes also participate in field trips to
colleges, businesses, and cultural places of interest.
National recognition for the
AVID Program includes honors from the National Council of States on In-service
Education, The California School Board's Golden Bell Aware, The President's
Salute: National Conference on School/College Collaboration, the Charles A. Dana
Award for Pioneering Achievement in Education, and the U.S. Department of
Education "A+ Breaking the Mold" for America 2000.
In a study by the Center for Research, Evaluation, And Training in Education they gave some reason why the Avid program was so successful. In the middle grades AVID study, enrollment in middle school algebra continues to be a key factor in AVID students’ later success. The power of algebra as a predictor of success in high school is undeniable. Students in the study who took algebra in middle schools earned significantly higher GPAs in high school, accumulated more college credits, and scored higher on standardized tests than those who did not. The study also stated that those enrolled in AVID in middle school were much more successful than those who started as freshmen in high school. “ The difference in credit accumulation for students with two years of middle school AVID and those with no middle school AVID was once again statistically significant (p = .05). This suggests that enrollment in two years of middle school AVID provides students with the necessary early preparation to place them on track
for gaining admission to
4-year colleges and universities (Guthrie)”
The study of AVID graduates clearly demonstrates that AVID positions students well for life after high school. The vast majority of survey respondents were enrolled in a college or university. More than three-fourths reported attending 4-year colleges, a rate three times the state average.
The research done by create also shows that the AVID program has a positive effect on the whole school not just the AVID students. Schools that have AVID programs can boost higher percentages of AP students. (Guthrie)
The Pittsburgh Urban Mathematics Project (PUMP) main focus is small group processes, the analysis of real world problems, and the use of computational skills such as spreadsheets or graphing programs. Students are required to write reports and present the findings. Alternate assessments such as portfolios, long term project, and journal writing. (Koedinger)
PUMP students use a software called Practical Algebra Tutor (PAT), which is a tutorial program that was specifically designed to be used tin conjunction with PUMP. This software presents students with real life situations. PAT also tracks student achievement in a variety of skills.
Koedinger compared PUMP students’ performance GPA 2.1 against seven comparisons classes. Of the Seven, 5 were “average” GPA 0f 2.4 and two were “exceptional” GPA of 2.6. He found that on standardized tests the pump group averaged significantly higher than the average group but still below the exceptional group. However, in a test assessing problem solving skills the PUMP group scored the same as the exceptional group. (Koedinger).
iv.
Technology in helping underachieving
students.
PAT is a great example of how technology empowers students to be successful. In fact most research shows the educational technology has a large impact on student achievement. The Milken Exchange, provide five studies that gave the positive and negative impact of educational technology. It shows that in all the studies the positive impact by far prevail over the negative impact. When there was a negative impact it was either the wrong approach or the teaching style. All of the studies show an improvement on students’ attitude towards learning which helps motivate underachieving students. The following is summary of the research:
· Kulik’s Meta-Analysis Study
Kulik used more then 500 individual studies of computer-based instruction. He found that on average students who used computer based instruction scored at the 64th percentile compared to the control group at the 50th percentile. He also noted that students learned more in less time. There was also an increase in positive attitudes towards learning. (Kulik)
· Sivin-Kachala’s Review of the research.
Jay Sivin-Kachala reviewed 219 research studies from 1990-1997 in all learning domains and all ages. He notes that students using technology gained in all major areas. This was true for regular and special needs children. This also increased students’ attitude towards learning.
· The Apple Classroom of Tomorrow (ACOT)
ACOT looked at five schools across the nation to encourage instructional innovation and emphasis to teachers on the benefits of technology instruction. Their study showed an increase in teachers using more innovative ways of teaching. They study wanted to and appeared to show higher level reasoning and problem solving increased because of technology but the authors stated it was inconclusive.
· West Virginia’s Basic Skills/Computer Education Statewide Initiative
Dale Mann looked at the BS/CE program and its effect on student achievement and a cost benefit analysis. The studies showed that the more the students participated in the program the higher their scores were. It also showed a correlation between teacher attitude towards the technology and achievement of the students. The Cost benefit analysis showed that the BS/CE was more cost effective then class size reduction from 35 to 20 students, increasing instructional time, and cross age tutoring programs. (Mann)
· Harold Wenglinsky’s National Study of Technology’s Impact on Mathematics Achievement.
Wenglinsky assessed the effects of simulation and higher order thinking technologies on a nation sample of 6,227 fourth graders and 7,146 eighth graders. He found that those who used the technology showed gains of up to 15 weeks above grade level as measured by National Assessment of Education Progress. It also increased academic achievement in mathematics for both grade levels. However the students that used technology to play learning games only performed slightly higher than normal and students that used skill and drill technology performed worse than the students who use no technology.
v.
Summary
Students that underachieve can be helped with simple changes to course content and deliver of material. Student motivation is a large part of a student reaching their highest potential. AVID and PUMP have looked at student motivation and have challenged their students to success. Technology is a great tool to engage and empower students to heighten their attitude towards learning and allow them to succeed.
Bibliography
Guthrie,
Larry F. Ph.D. & Guthrie, Grace Pung Ph.D. The
Magnificent Eight: AVID Best Practices Study: FINAL
REPORT.
February
2002
Guthrie, Larry F. Ph.D. & Guthrie, Grace Pung Ph.D. Longitudinal Research on AVID 1999-2000: Final Report. June 23, 2000
Koedinger, K., Anderson, J., Hadley, W., & Mark, M., (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. Pittsburgh, PA: Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. Retrieved October 23, 2001, from http://act.psy.cmu.edu/awpt/AlgebraPacket/kenPaper/paper.html