The STUFF in our Classrooms

1
The STUFF!! in our Classrooms

• By Jill S. Boisvenue
• MSU-Fall 2005

2
Table of Contents

• What is Stuff?
• The Background of Stuff
• The Research
• The Findings
• Conclusion

3
What is Stuff?

• Arts and Crafts
• Word Searches
• Crossword Puzzles
• Color Sheets

4
What Happened to the Stuff?

• As you know, our school has recently put a HUGE
  emphasis on writing, and with that came the
  abolition of Stuff. While the initial emphasis
  shift was supported by the staff, the elimination
  of stuff, or anything that doesnt incorporate
  reading, math, or especially writing, was not and
  as you are aware, many of our staff members have
  had a difficult time adapting.
• At first, I was a proponent of this school wide
  modification, and I couldnt understand why my
  colleagues were being so close minded. I kept
  thinking to myself, why on earth would you want
  to waste your time doing something in class that
  isnt valuable?

5
Do We Need Stuff?

• Perhaps I was the close minded one. Once I
  considered what was truly valuable, I began to
  realize that when I was in school, there were
  many reasons why I enjoyed my time there. It
  wasnt because I was stuck in my chair all day
  drilling and working hard. It was the variety
  and balance between fun school work, and
  regular, old fun. I loved doing holiday
  crafts, playing four-square on the playground,
  and enjoying one of the many games within our
  classroom collection.
• At that point I began to wonder, with our
  elimination of this fun stuff, are we really
  doing more harm than good? Evaluating and
  comparing my students writing productivity
  during the inclusion of stuff and during the
  elimination of stuff became my focus.

6
Fueling the Investigation

• My inquiries were based on my
• Research Question
• How do my students respond during their writing
  assignments when they are given the opportunity
  to do something non-educational prior to the
  lesson?

7
Research Overview

• Each day, at about the same time in the morning,
  I teach writing for approximately one hour.
  During this time I give a direct lesson, or a
  scheduled list of expectations, depending on the
  day. I alternated the Stuff days, and the
  non-Stuff days.
• Stuff days incorporated playing a game,
  completing a word search, or doing a craft before
  our writing lesson.
• Non-Stuff days were ordinary down to business
  days where we did not do anything different
  before our writing lesson.
• This gave me an opportunity to research my
  students writing productivity and the effects of
  Stuff on their productivity.

8
Research Overview

• I used each of my students in my research since
  my overall concern is the entire group as opposed
  to select individuals or needs.
• Each day I focused on five, randomly selected
  students. This rotated with each passing day
  until I evaluated the writing productivity of
  each student in my class of 19.

9
Data Collection Using Student Artifacts

• Student Artifacts
• Each day I used writing samples as data in my
  research. (i.e Student 1 I compared his
  writing production from a stuff day with his
  writing production from a non-stuff day.)

10
Data Collection Using Note Taking

• Note Taking
• After each writing lesson while the students were
  working on the assignment, I took notes on that
  days group of five students.
• I made note of their willingness/ability to stay
  focused on the task, how long they were able to
  focus, and their ability to finish the assignment
  during the allotted time.

11
Data Collection Using Journaling

• Journaling
• At the end of each day, I reviewed and solidified
  my notes in a journal.
• Each student had his/her own page within this
  journal, and I kept it organized this way along
  with my other findings.

12
Research Overview
The table displays the layout of the research
over the course of ten days. Each group is color
coded for clarity and distinction.
13
Group Demographics

• Group 1
• Consists of one boy and three girls
• One learning disabled/special education student
• One high student, and the other two are
  medium in ability and writing performance

• Group 3
• Consists of one boy and three girls
• One learning disabled/special education student
• Two high students, and the other one is
  medium-low in ability and writing performance

• Group 2
• Consists of three boys and one girl
• One learning disabled/special education student
• One undiagnosed/untreated ADHD student who is
  medium in ability but low in performance.
  The other two are medium-low in ability and
  writing performance

• Group 4
• Consists of two boys and two girls
• Two high students, and one is low and another
  is medium in ability and writing performance.

• Group 5
• Consists of one boy and two girls
• One learning disabled/special education student
• One high student and the other is medium in
  ability and writing performance.

14
The Variety of Students Resulted in a Variety of
Results

• I found that the group demographics had little
  impact on the writing productivity, however, the
  variety of students resulted in a variety of
  results.
• Individual student ability was more of a factor
  than make up of the groups.

15
Stuff Days Were Less Productive for Special
Education Students
16
Stuff Days Were Slightly More Productive for
ADD/ADHD Students
17
Stuff Days Were Slightly More Productive for
Lower Achieving Regular Ed Students
18
Stuff Days had little impact on the
productivity of the Higher Achieving Students
19
WellDo We Need Stuff?

• NO!!

• There is no place for Stuff in the writing
  classroom.

20
ConclusionGet Rid of the Stuff!

• As defined, Stuff should not be used in the
  classroom.
• Stuff days did not have a positive impact on my
  students writing productivity. In fact, these
  days were more of a distraction.
• Special Ed students were less productive, Higher
  Achieving students were not impacted, while the
  productivity of ADD/ADHD and Lower Achieving
  Regular Ed students was not significant enough to
  indicate a positive result.
• While keeping Stuff in the classroom seems like
  a kid friendly thing to do, the results show
  that Stuff does not have a positive effect on
  students writing productivity.