BOYS AT-RISK AND TEACHING STRATEGIES TO HELP THEM SUCCEED
Approved: ____Karen Stinon_____ Date: ____May 16, 2014_____________
Paper/Project Advisor
BOYS AT-RISK AND TEACHING STRATEGIES TO HELP THEM SUCCEED
An Educational Project
Presented to
The Graduate Faculty
University of Wisconsin-Platteville
________________________________
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirement for the Degree
Master of Science in Education
Cross-Categorical
_______________________________
By
Debi Marty Kramer
2014
ABSTRACT
BOYS AT-RISK AND TEACHING STRATEGIES TO HELP THEM SUCCEED
Debi Marty Kramer
Under the Supervision of Dr. Karen Stinson
This study involved a group of 6-12th grade boys in special education who were
considered “at-risk” academically, socially, emotionally or behaviorally. An eight-week study
was conducted to teach three specific study strategies to see if it would make a difference in the
students earning higher scores on tests if they applied the study strategies.
Students filled out a Study Skill Intelligence Type questionnaire to determine the most
beneficial study skills for their intelligence types (See Appendix A). Results were discussed
with each student and ideas were given on study strategies that could be tailored to the way they
learn best according to their specific top three intelligence types. The top three study skills for
the students’ intelligence types were: People Smart, Number Smart, and Self-Smart. A Study
Strategies Pre-test (Appendix B) given to students indicated that the majority of them did not
have specific strategies that they used for remembering and organizing information, test taking,
and note taking. Students stated that they usually just look over notes, handouts, and the text for
a short time, if at all.
A Study Strategies Post-test (Appendix C) revealed that the majority of the students did
not remember any of the study strategies that were taught during the study, and therefore they
did not apply
iii
them. A couple of the students did try one or two of the study skills, but reported that the study
skills
did not significantly help. In conclusion, there was no significant difference in student test
results due to the fact that either the students: a) chose not to apply any of the study strategies
taught, b) did not like the study strategies that were taught, c) continued to use the methods they
were used to, or d) did not use any study strategies at all.
In summary, students were reluctant to learn the new study strategies, stated that they
were more comfortable using their own study strategies (regardless of effectiveness or not), or
just chose not to study at all. The research study showed that teaching specific study strategies
may not be helpful for
boys at-risk in middle and secondary school.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL PAGE……………………………………………………………………………..i
TITLE PAGE……………………………………………………………………………………ii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………….iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………………….....v
SECTIONS
I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………….……1
● Statement of the Problem
● Purpose of the Study
● Significance of the Study
● Delimitations of the Study
● Methods and Procedures
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………………………….6
● Research Questions:
● Contribution of Growing Proportion of At-risk Boys
● Strategies to Implement
● Long-term Effects for Boys at-risk
● Do Study Strategies Increase Success
III. SURVEY METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………24
● Classroom Strategies to Implement
● Specific Teaching Techniques
o Mind-Mapping
o Five-Day Test Preparation/DETER
o SQRW-Survey, Question, Read, Write note taking
IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA…………………………………………………………………...33
● Pre-Test Summary
● Post-Test Results
● Summary of Research Questions
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS………………………..43
VI. REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………….48
VII. APPENDICES.……………………………………………………………………………51
v
INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
According to Bill Page (2010), educational consultant and author of the article “Insights
and Strategies for Teaching At-Risk Kids”, the term ‘at-risk’ refers to “being at risk of failure,
but for schools it has come to mean ‘at certain’ of not being taught. At-risk students are defined
as students that one cannot motivate, interest, control or teach using traditional techniques.
Students are “expected” to fail because teachers cannot motivate, control, teach or interest them
using traditional teaching methods and pre-determined, grade-level curriculum. In turn, teachers
also lack specific training to know how to handle these students more effectively.
Students with a history of struggling and failing academically accept the inevitability of
continued struggle and of ultimate failure. Although teachers and adults are well-meaning in
helping these students succeed, they have not had proper teaching techniques to effectively
handle the at-risk population. Engaging adolescents, particularly those who have become
disengaged and alienated from school, is not an easy task. Existing policy and practice have not
effectively dealt with this ongoing dilemma. Student engagement and disengagement are poorly
addressed in most efforts to improve schools and schooling. Although well-meaning, current
practices often work against increasing engagement with students at-risk, and results in their
continual disconnection from traditional classroom instruction
(http:\\smhp.psych.ucla.edu/pdfdocs/schooleng.pdf, 2004).
Most school staff have been taught to think primarily in terms of extrinsic motivation,
and have had little exposure to intrinsic motivation. It is essential to avoid practices that limit
options, make
1
students feel controlled and coerced, and focus mainly on “remedying” problems. Conventional
rewards, punishments, threats, and grades can produce avoidance reactions in the classroom,
which can reduce opportunities for positive learning and for the development of positive
attitudes (UCLA, 2004).
Teachers lack of understanding prevents the acknowledgement of the underlying cause
and effect of why these students are at-risk, and ultimately increases the defensive behavior of
the students and teachers working with them. For students at-risk, their misbehavior, disruption,
and lack of cooperation are a constant and daily challenge for everyone – even
themselves. Teachers need to think out of the traditional “box” to find ways to employ academic
and social methods that will assist this group in experiencing success.
Purpose of the Study
Research has indicated that boys are less ambitious and less resilient than they were in
the past, starting as early as kindergarten. Parents, teachers, and mental health professionals are
continuing to research why this epidemic is occurring and how they can be an integral part of
helping boys who are at-risk find success (Sax, 2007). Effective teaching strategies need to be
implemented in working with these boys. The purpose of this research paper is to identify
reasons why boys are unmotivated and underachieving, and identify teaching strategies that can
be used to assist these boys in finding academic success.
Hypothesis: Students at-risk who are taught specific study strategies will experience
higher scores on their classroom tests. The research questions that are generated include:
2
(1) What is contributing to the growing proportion of boys disengaging from
school?
(2) What are some strategies that can be used to help this growing number of boys
re-engage in school and life?
(3) What are the long-term negative consequences if boys at-risk are not helped?
(4) Will teaching specific study strategies increase the success of middle and high
school boys with special needs?
Research facts are provided to help answer these questions, along with the results of an
action research study conducted by the researcher with 6-12th grade boys at-risk in a small, rural
school in southern Wisconsin. The boys were taught specific study strategies, and results were
documented using information from teacher observations, informal student interviews, and a
post-test questionnaire.
Significance of the Study
Studies show that the number of boys disengaging from school is continuing to grow
(Sax, 2007). According to the National Academy of Science’s Research Council (2004),
academic motivation decreases steadily from the early grades of elementary school into high
school. Adolescents are too old and too independent to follow teachers’ demands out of
obedience, and many are too young, inexperienced, or uninformed to fully appreciate the value
of succeeding in school.
Most administrators and policy makers know that by itself, good instruction delivered by
3
highly qualified teachers is not enough to ensure that all students have an equal opportunity to
succeed at school. Schools continue to suffer from high dropout rates of students and staff, an
achievement gap that closes at a small rate, and a high incidence of schools designated as low
performing, with the tendency for achievement test score averages to plateau after a few years of
gains (http:\\smhp.psych.ucla.edu/pdfdocs/schooleng.pdf, 2004).
Educators interact with all students for the majority of their day during a critical time in
their lives when their values, opinions, and career decisions are made. Therefore, specific
actions need to be taken to develop strategies that will assist in helping these students find
success in their at-risk world. Boys at-risk do not need specific grades, pity or a “dumb-downed
curriculum”. They need to be given understanding and specific guidance (Sax, 2007). Even in a
system controlled by curricula, standardized testing, and grades, schools can still work on
tapping into students’ intrinsic drive by focusing on relationships, ownership, choices, and
relevancy (Younger, Warrington, 2008).
The significance of this study is to find out what is contributing to the increasing
epidemic of boys that are not motivated, failing, and struggling. Strategies will be discussed and
and results shared to assist teachers, parents, and other individuals that are involved with boys atrisk.
Study Delimitations
●
For practical reasons, this study was limited to students enrolled in a rural southern
Wisconsin school during the 2012-2013 school year.
●
The population from which the study sample was drawn was limited to 6 to 12th grade
4
●
male special education students.
● The study strategies were completed one to two times per week during the student’s
individual study hall, which was inconsistent due to students’ other priorities.
●
Two students were not included in the final study outcome due to personal issues and
decisions.
●
Data collection was planned for late Spring 2013 to allow students to complete the
desired
●
number of classroom tests in order to have adequate study results.
Methods and Procedures
The strategies that were implemented with the selected group of boys at-risk were: Mind
Mapping, Five-day Test Preparation, and the Survey, Question, Read and Write Note-taking
Method (SQWR). The strategies were taught for a seven week period, a minimum of one time
per week, during a 30-minute time period. The Mind Mapping Strategy (Buzan, 2012) is used
for note-taking, brainstorming ideas, problem solving, studying, memorization, project planning
or presenting information. The Five-day Test Preparation Strategy (Mangrum & Strichart, 2002)
can help students properly prepare for tests ahead of time, as well as using the DETER
(Directions, Examine, Time, Easiest, Review) strategy (Mangrum & Strichart, 2002) on the day
of the test to assist them in completing the test more efficiently.
The third strategy is the SQRW Notetaking Method (Mangrum & Strichart, 2002) that
5
can assist students in taking complete, accurate notes during class. In the Survey step,
students read to learn what a textbook chapter is about (title, introduction, headings,
summary/conclusion). For the Question step, students form questions that help them understand
what to look for as they read. This entails using the 5 W’s to change headings into questions,
and writing the questions on a Question/Answer Note taking Form. The third step is the Read
step, where students read to find the answers to the questions they just wrote. The final step is
the Write step, where students write the answers on the Question-Answer Note taking Form.
The hypothesis will be tested by seeing if students’ scores increase on tests using the
strategies, as compared to taking tests without applying the strategies. A pre-test was given to
students to determine what they already know about study strategies, if they currently use any
particular methods, and what study skills they would like to be taught. A post-test was also
given to determine if students specifically remembered any of the strategies they were taught, if
they used any of the strategies, and if they plan to use any of the strategies in the future.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
What is contributing to the growing proportion of boys disengaging from school?
Research has indicated that there are a growing number of at-risk adolescent students, with a
larger number of them being boys. Nationwide, boys are nearly twice as likely as girls to be
suspended, and more likely to drop out of high school than girls (65% of boys complete high
school in four years as compared to 72% of girls). The United States has the largest school
dropout rate and the greatest prison population of any developed country (Elias, 2009). In
addition, boys make up two-thirds of special education students and are 1.5 times more likely
6
be held back a grade and 2.5 times more likely to be given diagnoses of ADHD (Weil, 2008).
One of the reasons that there is a growing number of at-risk boys is social maturity.
Research has identified that one of the reasons that there are a greater number of at-risk boys
than girls is because boys are not socially mature enough to handle school starting at age four or
five. In his book, Boys Adrift, Leonard Sax (2007) suggested that if boys are having difficulties
in kindergarten, they will tend to struggle throughout the rest of their school lives. As a result of
this, boys are unmotivated and resigned to failure.
Academic maturity and preparedness are another contributing factor. On average, boys
are a year and a half behind girls in reading and writing. As early as kindergarten, there is an
overemphasis on reading and math, and boys are not developmentally ready to handle this (Sax,
2007). Recent investigations have shown a dramatic drop over the past twenty five years in boys’
academic performance in American schools. The average eleventh grade boy now writes at the
same level as the average eighth-grade girl.
According to Sax (2007), school – not alcohol or drugs – is the “new” problem for boys.
Today’s boys are much more likely to be struggling in school now then when their fathers
attended school. Additional odds against boys include that they are more likely than girls to be
incarcerated, violent, commit homicide, and be victims of serious violent crime. Boys are also
more likely to have chronic conditions such as asthma, to be diagnosed with learning disabilities,
and to drop out of school.
Other factors that affect at-risk boys are: poverty, low parental educational levels,
nutrition and health risks, low social support, and lack of community resources. Social skills
acquired at home and the expectations of the school are not balanced, along with disadvantages
7
at home that multiply academic learning loss over the summer.
Gender cultural/emotional differences are additional contributing factors. According to
Sax, a mixture of biological and social factors is creating an environment that is literally toxic to
boys. Boys are less willing than girls to admit their hurt, fear, and embarrassment because this is
viewed as a failure. As a result, boys are less likely than girls to volunteer and be spiritually
grounded. Instead, boys cover their feelings with bravery, and live in fear of rejection, judgment,
having their lack of ability exposed, and especially a fear of being labeled “dumb” or “stupid”
(Fortune, 2001). Often boys who are considered at-risk tend to be students in special education
who are troubled academically, socially, behaviorally, or emotionally. Compounding the issue
for these students is the difficulty of also dealing with a label that stigmatizes them.
The current education system also tends to create environments that favor girls rather
than boys. According to the article “Teaching to the Minds of Boys” (Gurian & King, 2006), the
“boy-crisis argument” suggests that schools are shaped by females to match the abilities of girls.
Classrooms are generally a better fit for “verbal, sit-still, take-notes, listen-carefully, multitasking girls”. Teachers tend to view the natural assets that boys bring to learning as problems,
including: impulsivity, single-task focus, kinesthetic learning, and physical aggression. If
teachers can make classrooms more accommodating for the characteristics of boys, they will
tend to be more engaged in learning. As a benefit to making accommodations for boys, girls will
also be re-energized from adapting to different ways of learning.
An additional risk factor is that education is geared primarily for left-brain learning, which
includes
8
repetitive, routine, and linear learning. Many students use their intuition and proceed through
school without learning the basics of math and reading. Teachers have to meet the demands of
many students, with the at-risk students usually left behind and lagging in basic skills. By the
time they reach middle and high school, they feel so behind that they often give up (Ricks, 2006;
Sax, 2007).
Research has shown that the best education for all children should focus on teaching to
both sides of the brain. Right-brain learning should include movement, but most classrooms
follow a more traditional approach focused on left brain learning. The traditional left-brain
teaching approach means that children become bored very quickly and lose interest. These
students, primarily boys, are not engaged and tend to disengage. As a result, they feel that
something is wrong with them. If this continues without recognition and proper intervention, it
may lead to abusive behaviors, drugs, alcohol, dropping out of school, eating disorders, etc. as
they try to distract themselves from feeling like a failure (Sax, 2005).
The increase in boys disengaging from school is also due to the fact that teachers are not
specifically trained to work effectively with at-risk boys. According to the International Center
for Leadership in Education (2008), today’s students, more than any time in our history, are more
thoroughly engaged in activities that appeal to their creativity, competitiveness, and need to
socialize. With the endless, ever-changing technology available to them, they are continually
expanding their understanding and engaging in the world around them.
Although technology is a positive addition to the education world, students at-risk tend to
be very distracted when using this technology because they would rather “surf” the abundant
amount of
9
other information available versus focusing on the academic task at hand. Teachers now have
the challenge of how to use the very elements that engage the students with technology, while
also encouraging them to be mentally present and academically focused in the classroom. Since
students learn differently, schools must find effective ways to tap into students’ instinct to want
to know and be able to do. Educators are also challenged with the fact that today boys spend an
increased amount of time playing video games, which has added to the over-reliance on
medication for an array of attention deficit disorders (Sax, 2007).
In general, students are usually required to learn in ways that are convenient for the
institution and teacher rather than in ways that are brain-compatible, natural, and consistent with
their “other” learning - learning that has taken place since birth outside of school, without
teachers, textbooks, or worksheets (Kovalik, 2008).
According to Fortune (2001), teachers also make the mistake of reacting to the symptoms
that boys at-risk have instead of responding to the underlying causes of their defensiveness. In
turn, boys increase their negative behavior in the classroom. To complicate matters, boys have a
select few male role models that they can look up to due to a large percent of educators being
female (Ricks, 2011).
An added component is that administrators are not trained to work effectively with boys
at-risk. Most school administrators have three responses when dealing with at-risk students: (1)
Remove the student from class. Removal may help the teacher and classmates short-term, but
research indicates that it is disheartening to the student as well as an ineffective remedial
procedure; or (2) If the disruptive behavior continues, increase the level of punishment - in or
out-of-school suspension and expulsion; or
10
(3) Change the failure-punishment procedures that condemn, stigmatize and marginalize the atrisk students, who are guilty of only defending themselves (Page, 2010).
Finally, many children considered at risk are also identified as having special needs. In
the article by Mastropieri & Scruggs (1996), 10,560 teachers were surveyed about their attitudes
toward mainstreaming/inclusion of students with disabilities. The responses were highly
consistent, with the majority of teachers agreeing with the general concept of
mainstreaming/inclusion, but only a slight majority that were willing to implement these
practices in their own classes.
The survey also showed that a majority of teachers believed that students with disabilities
would be disruptive to their classes or demand too much attention. The good news for boys
who are at-risk is that teachers agree to have these students included classrooms. Unfortunately,
teachers in this survey also stated that their support and willingness was tied directly to the
intensity of the inclusion and the severity of the disability. Current teacher education programs
may be no more effective at preparing teachers for mainstreaming/inclusion now than they were
more than two decades ago (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1996). Although “differentiated learning” is
the term used in education today, teachers are at a loss on how to properly implement these
methods in their classrooms with little time for preparation and specific ways to use methods that
will help at-risk students.
The Mastropieri & Scruggs article survey also reported that secondary level teachers
overall were less positive about mainstreaming/inclusion than elementary teachers. Since boys
at-risk tend to manifest a lot of their disruption, anger, frustration, academic failure and the
desire to drop out of school during their secondary years, this becomes even more of a
11
concern. Furthermore, classroom teachers typically display the most pessimistic attitudes
because of this, with the most optimistic attitudes held by school administrators and college
faculty who may work less directly with this group.
Successful mainstreaming efforts are associated with administrative support, proper
material and personnel resources, adequate planning time, and disability/at-risk teaching
skills. Given the fact that schools are facing ongoing personnel and resource cuts, teacher
attitudes may show an even further decline in supporting at-risk and disability populations.
What are some strategies that can be used to help the growing number of boys at-risk reengage in school and life?
Although there is a greater number of at-risk boys, both boys and girls need specific skills
taught to assist them in developing a strong identity, to be able to achieve fully in the world, and
to develop and maintain healthy relationships in and out of school (Fortune, 2001). What can
schools do differently in handling the challenges of these students?
First, teachers can start by feeling empathy for students’ pain, accept their circumstances,
and understand why they are defensive. It is critical that teachers develop trusting relationships
with at-risk students. This is apparent especially in secondary school because although teachers
and adults may be caring, relationships built on trust are not easy to sustain because the boys
have already built defense barriers. Boys that are at-risk need relationships that will be both
stable and caring. They need to build a sense of trust and have the proper time to communicate
their frustrations and successes inside and outside of school. Most of all, they need to be
understood.
12
Once a relationship of trust is established, they will have an adult that is a source of
continuing and valuable advice. Students will not trust an adult based on their role as a
counselor, psychologist or social worker – it has to be earned by building a relationship. From
the base of a caring relationship, teachers can help students form realistic and reachable career,
personal and educational goals. Their goals need to be challenging yet within their reach if they
exert some effort. The student needs help creating a path and knowing how to follow it. Only
someone that knows the student well and cares about his/her well-being will be able to help that
student develop reachable goals (Elias, 2009).
The second thing teachers should do is change the classroom environment. According to
Susan Kovalik, the founder of The Center for Effective Learning (2008), students are expected
to learn in ways that are inconsistent and frequently opposite to how learning happens. Instead,
they are required to learn in ways that are convenient for the institution and teacher rather than in
ways that are brain-compatible, natural, and consistent with their “other” learning - learning that
has taken place since birth outside of school, without teaching professionals, textbooks, or
worksheets.
Research over the past 30 years in neuroscience has contributed largely to our
understanding of how learning occurs. The following elements provide a brain-compatible guide
for classroom instruction: absence of threat, meaningful content, choices, enriched environment,
using movement to enhance learning, adequate time, immediate feedback, collaboration, and
showing mastery of the subject (Kovalik, 2008). The advantage that teachers have today is that
emerging technology is providing a wide range of opportunities to engage students using their
13
acquired experience.
According to the Rennie Center for Education Research and Policy (2006), there are
recommendations that can be taken to ensure that boys and girls are both receiving equitable
educational opportunities. These recommendations include:
1) Permit experimentation. Schools can begin to experiment with single-sex instruction
in extended day programs or enrichment activities. For example, a school might offer two
parallel sections of an after-school remediation course – one designed for girls and a second
designed for boys.
2) Incorporate information about gender differences into teacher training. Research
shows that males and females learn and mature in different ways and at differing rates. Aspiring
teachers need to be trained to understand these differences and incorporate methods for engaging
both genders equally into their classroom teaching.
3) Pay particular attention to certain sub-groups of boys. The effects of the gender gap
intensify existing achievement gaps, especially between students of different racial and ethnic
backgrounds. These subgroups of boys are typically at the lowest end of the achievement
spectrum. Minorities would benefit from stronger recruitment of minority male teachers and
mentors. Dropout prevention and remediation efforts must focus strongly on these groups.
Schools can build a classroom community where all learners are engaged and
accepted. For at-risk students to see themselves as capable, teachers need to consider changes
such as overall classroom grading and marking procedures. If a student fails a spelling test by
scoring 3 out of 20, why would they study harder to only get 6 out of 20? If students at-risk feel
like they are going to continue
14
to fail, they often give up or act out, leading to accumulated trouble each year in school. This
can eventually lead to future trouble with relationships and life outside of school (Page, 2010).
Many methods for specific gender learning have been used by teachers, but they may not
have been used in an organized way. One method is to support literacy through spatial-visual
representation. Boys have difficulty transferring what they are thinking to paper. One way to
assist with this is to have them draw storyboards on the information they are reading/studying,
and then have them write what they drew, adding details as they go. The pictures prompt their
brain to remember relevant words, and serves as a first-stage in brainstorming (King & Gurian,
2006).
Another method to employ is letting boys choose topics that appeal to them. Most boys do
not like to read books for pleasure, but will read and write on topics about action and
heroism. Letting boys write on these topics will improve the quality of their papers, along with
providing an opportunity for the teacher to teach lessons on character, nonviolence, civility and
more.
Third, teachers can offer single-gender learning environments within the classroom. Boys
can choose their reading materials while girls choose their own, along with group work on how
they would like to discuss or present the material that they read. Reading and writing should also
be more purposeful. Teachers should establish authentic purpose and meaningful, real-life
connections so that boys become engaged and feel like there is a real purpose behind what they
are learning. There are no differences in what boys and girls can learn, but there are major
differences in the best way to teach them (King & Gurian, 2006).
This raises the question, should boys and girls be taught separately? Private and parochial
15
schools have been separating boys and girls for years, but there are still endless debates as to
whether single-sex classes are effective or not. As part of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law
(2001), the Department of Education passed new regulations making it easier for districts to
create single-sex classrooms and schools (www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.html, 2001; Weil, 2008).
As a result, single-sex public schools and classrooms are expanding at an accelerating pace. The
pro views of single-sex education include (Weil 2008):
•
boys with ADHD that are failing on Ritalin and other related drugs in coeducational
settings are pulling themselves together in single-sex schools
•
test scores show improvement for low-achieving and minority boys
•
parents have more choices for their children and provide more support
•
biological reasons (boys need to move freely, do not hear as well as girls, visually
benefit from seeing action, cooler rooms, cool white lights, etc.)
•
produces fewer discipline problems
•
teachers and staff only need 14 hours of training to prepare to switch from
coeducation to single-sex education
The anti-views of single-sex education include:
•
discriminates on the basis of sex
•
the highest performing teachers and most-motivated students choose single-sex
education
•
mixed grade classrooms (K-1,1-2, 2-3, etc) are a better way to deal with the
developmental differences among school-age children
•
does not teach commonality or tolerance
•
scheduling is too difficult for some schools
16
•
single-sex programs do not work in some schools
Fourth, parent involvement can be a critical part of helping boys at risk cope in and out of
school. Parental involvement is consistent with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA), which requires that parents be active participants in assessment and instructional
planning. According to Dr. Ernestine Riggs, a professor at Loyola University in Illinois and
teacher of at-risk youth for over 30 years, part of the reason youth are considered at-risk is
because they receive so little attention. Some kids only have 30 seconds of conversation with
their parents a day. Riggs states that every eight seconds of the school day a child drops out of
school, every 26 seconds a child runs away from home, and every 67 seconds a teenager has a
baby. “Education is life - we are not teaching kids to read and write to pass a test. This is the
foundation that gets built upon to have productive youth.”
According to the article, Teaching Parents to Teach Their Children to be Prosocial
(Elksnin, Nick and Linda K., 2000), teachers need to have parents as partners in the instructional
process to help students better adopt pro-social skills in all situations and settings.
Students who are at-risk, along with having disabilities (75% of at-risk boys), are likely
to have difficulties with social skills in school, as well as most likely throughout their adult lives.
Parents are generally motivated to improve their child’s social skills because poor social skills
leads to peer rejection. This is even more devastating to children and their parents than poor
academic skills.
Fifth, teach social skills and competence. Social competence is crucial for peer
acceptance, academic achievement and employment success, with lack of social skills becoming
17
more of a problem over time. Research has shown that social skills can successfully be taught,
but the challenge is ensuring that students use these skills when and where they count.
Teachers can try the following strategies to promote implementation of social skills
across settings, situations and individuals (Elksnin, Nick and Linda K., 2000):
1.
Teach social skills in actual settings where the skills will be used. If not possible,
then use role playing to reflect different settings or teach students to self-monitor
their use of skills across settings.
2. Teach social skills that are valued in the natural setting. Select skills valued by
peers, teachers and parents to increase the odds that the skills will be reinforced.
“Real life” enforcement is critical if the training efforts are to last over time.
3. Teach social skills “loosely”. Teach several social skills numerous times a day,
using natural language and reinforcing the skills across a variety of settings and
situations.
Capitalize on “teachable moments”.
4. Use reinforcement sparingly. After skills are acquired, implement reinforcements
similar to those in natural settings. Students may need to be taught selfreinforcement skills so that they will continue to use their new social skills in
environments where there is little outside reinforcement.
5. Teach students to generalize. Teach methods such as self-talk, self-monitoring,
self-recording, and self-reinforcement. Teaching students problem-solving
18
6. Strategies also enables them to select and use skills in actual social situations
7. Conduct “social skill autopsies”. Discuss outcomes after you have used a social
skill. Include what the student did, what happened when he/she did it, the
direction of the outcome (positive, negative, neutral), and what the student will do
next time.
Sixth, a national focus is needed. Educators need assistance on how to provide specific
strategies to help students increase engagement in high school, reduce dropout rates, and increase
preparation for postsecondary education careers. This should be done by helping educators set
higher expectations, greater instructional personalization, self-advocacy, ongoing counseling and
mentoring, parental involvement, and connections to the community and postsecondary learning
options.
What are the long term effects if boys who are at risk are not helped?
Drop Outs. According to the National Dropout Prevention Center Network
(www.dropoutprevention.org/statistics 2014), while advocates for increasing graduation rates
tend to focus on the moral argument that “all children deserve a quality education”, they could
just as easily look at realistic bottom lines in terms of costs to the individuals and society.
According to a 2012 Gallup Student Poll, more boys than girls become “psychological
dropouts”, students who lose involvement in and enthusiasm for school, starting as early as fifth
grade. More than one in four boys are not engaged or actively disengaged in fifth grade
compared with one in five girls. The number of psychological dropouts grows as students climb
19
the K-12 ladder. Student engagement drives student outcomes, which means that psychological
dropouts then become physical dropouts (Lopez & Calderon, 2013).
Between October 2011 and October 2012, 370,000 young people dropped out of high
school. The labor force participation rate for recent dropouts (47.2 percent) was lower than for
recent high school graduates not enrolled in college (69.6 percent). The jobless rate for recent
high school drop-outs was 49.6 percent, compared with 34.4 percent for recent high school
graduates not enrolled in college. The unemployment rate for high school students at 23 percent
in October 2012, was more than twice the rate for college students (10.5 percent). The current
high school dropout rate in the United States is around 30%, with the majority being boys.
More and more boys feel defeated by years of failure in elementary, middle and high
school, and are not interested in experiencing any more. Poor attendance best predicts whether
students will drop out. Students who have been held back and are “over-age for grade” are most
likely to be truant, as well as students who are misplaced in special education or enrolled in
lower level classes. In addition, family income serves as a good indicator for the other social and
economic factors that are likely to be related to a young adult’s decision to stay in school
(www.dropoutprevention.org/statistics 2014).
The National Dropout Prevention Center (NDPC) indicates that there are additional
reasons why students drop out, including the following:
· Lack of academic achievement
· School’s failure to meet students’ learning needs
· School attendance and discipline policies
· Mental health issues
20
· Health problems and nutrition
· Abusive/disruptive home life
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013), high school dropouts are about
three times as likely as those who have finished high school to slip into poverty from one year to
the next. For example, five years after obtaining a GED with a score on the exam that was just
passing, the average earnings of a 21-26 year old white adult was about $11,000 in 1995, less
than the poverty level for a family of three that year.
High School Graduates. Another long term effect for boys at-risk is successfully
graduating from high school. All over the world, boys are struggling in school with lower
grades, more discipline problems, more learning disabilities, and more behavior disorders than
girls (Gurian & Stevens, 2005). As a result, a smaller proportion of boys are going on to college.
In the article, Understanding Gender Differences: Strategies to Support Girls and Boys
(Fortune, 2001), some of the things that a boy graduating from high school in the next few years
will face are:
•
encountering situations in which being competitive and aggressive are damaging
•
strong probability of divorce
•
strong probability of conflict between career and family obligations
•
being married to a woman who works for pay outside the home during most of their
married life
•
increasing probability of having a wife who earns more than he does
Since at-risk kids feel no responsibility for what happens to them – feeling like hopeless victims
with circumstances outside their control – their future may not look so bright.
21
Lower Male Educational Goals. Boys have been historically trained to think that they do
not need to obey rules or work hard because in the past, males used to be able to drop out of high
school and still earn wages comparable to better-educated women, mainly due to jobs in fields
like manufacturing, construction and travel (Holmes, 2011) . But that is not the case anymore,
and boys need to work harder to stay engaged in school in order to be properly prepared for
postsecondary pursuits.
Even today, young men are overly optimistic about their ability to earn a livable salary,
even though they are less educated than women. This may cause them to “under-invest” in
school work, and as a result lower their academic performance and probability of completing
college. Given that boys do not actually have an idea of how much work they have to do in
order to succeed at whatever their level of educational expectations, it is difficult for them to
blend their efforts (Holmes, 2011).
Low Male College Enrollment. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013),
in October 2012, 66.2 percent of 2012 high school graduates were enrolled in colleges or
universities. Today, a smaller and smaller proportion of boys are going on to college. Currently,
the student body at the average university in the United States is 58 percent female and 42
percent male. Going to college does not guarantee any positive result, particularly for boys. In
fact, college is where the gender gap in motivation especially shows up. Most girls will
eventually earn a four-year degree, but most boys won’t (Sax, 2007).
Women are more likely than men to go to college, perform better academically, and
major in fields other than science, technology, engineering and mathematics. These facts are
mostly attributable to factors affecting students, particularly boys, sometimes long before they
22
enter the academic environment. Starting with people born around 1950, the rate of men’s
bachelor’s degree completion stopped growing, and it stayed stagnant for years. In 1970, 20
percent of men and 14 percent of women finished college. By 2010, women’s graduation rates
skyrocketed to 36 percent, while the rate among men grew to only 27 percent (bls.gov/news).
Today, women outpace men in college enrollment by a ratio of 1.4 to 1. Since girls have
better average social and behavioral skills than boys beginning as early as kindergarten, this
relates to girls’ higher average grades at each stage of school, and one of the reasons why girls
are more likely than boys to earn a degree. The grade gap is not about ability, it is more about
effort and engagement in school. Boys’ lower engagement in school leads to weaker
preparation, and then reduces their chances of getting through college. Researchers have
found that schools with strong academic climates can make a big difference for boys in their
success beyond high school (Sax, 2007).
Will teaching study strategies increase boys with special needs success in middle and
high school?
Numerous studies have been conducted regarding intervention strategies to try with boys
who are at-risk and are defined and discussed in terms of school failure (Center for Mental
Health in Schools, 2004; Elias, 2009; Gurian & King, 2006; Holmes, 2011; Intervention
Strategies Guide, (2012); Norfleet, 2008; Page, 2010; Price, 2011; Ryan, Reid &
Epstein, 2004; Fay (n.d.); Williams, 2004; Younger & Warrington, 2008). Particular teaching
and behavior strategies can be used to assist this group of boys in making better choices,
experiencing success, and contributing as responsible and productive members of society.
According to Price (2011), one thing teachers can do is apologize for letting these kids
23
struggle, and then help them back up to a point of understanding. They may need to re-establish
a sequence of meaning and necessary background information. Also, by dividing academic tasks
into smaller parts, each part will have more meaning to the student. Boys at-risk have an
inactive method of studying, and their impulsivity makes it difficult for them to pay
attention. Teachers can differentiate assignments, empathize with students’ struggles,
understand the cause of their misbehavior, and recognize the defense mechanisms that they use
to hide their problems, embarrassment, and pain. (Ryan, Reid, & Epstein, 2004).
Helping boys with homework is another method that can be utilized. According to the
Gurian and King article (2006), one of the primary reasons that some boys get D’s and F’s in
school is their lack of attention to homework. Teachers can help keep students accountable by
asking parents to sign homework assignments, and then require an explanation if a parent did not
sign. The parents can get involved by supervising homework, helping to limit distractions at
home, and encouraging the completion of quality homework.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Classroom Strategies to Implement
What does a boy that is at-risk do when asked to study? He glances at the textbook,
underlines the material, and answers questions under the pressure of a teacher or parent. The
problem with this
technique is that reading all of the assigned material takes too long, a lot of time is wasted not
24
Reading the correct material, it is an inactive technique for an impulsive student that only pays
attention for a short period of time, and it does not provide any organization or an effective plan
for review (James, 2008).
As a group, boys are noisy, rowdy, and hard to manage. Many are messy, disorganized
and have difficulty sitting still. According to a recent study, the rambunctiousness of boys leads
teachers to underestimate their intellectual and academic abilities. Compared with girls, boys
earn lower grades, win fewer honors, and are less likely to go to college. In today’s knowledgebased economy, success in the classroom has never been more crucial in a young person’s life.
The problem is that females are adapting, but males are not. If boys are restless, unfocused, and
having difficulty learning, we must look for ways to help them perform better (Hoff Sommers,
2013).
What gets in the way of studying is that boys at-risk think that ability, not effort, is what
gets the best grades. Boys learn best when they are stimulated, not quiet. Peer activities need to
center on recreation and activity, not just reading because boys will tune it out. In order to help
boys study effectively, teachers can do the following: 1) use energy bursts – impulsivity is
beneficial if a student studies in short segments; 2) use visual cues to focus on pictures in the text
to retrieve information and enhance memory; and 3) develop memory skills early – use lyrics to
memorize and link information to areas of interest (Norfleet, 2008).
Boys who are at-risk need a mixture of methods that will be engaging, study skills that
help them study proactively, the use of well-supervised cooperative groups for long term
projects, and classes structured so that there is room for movement and action. Students should
be taught specific strategies
25
to aid their academic success, as well as how to use and apply these strategies on a regular
basis. The use of consistent strategy instruction has been shown to be effective in promoting
skills such as reading and listening comprehension, note taking, memory for content, essay
writing and effective test taking (Norfleet, 2008).
For strategy instruction to be successful, students must be clearly informed of the strategy
when it is being taught, when it is to be used, and how the strategy will help them learn and be
successful in school, as well as in future postsecondary and workforce pursuits. A strategy needs
to be modeled and practiced routinely so that students can apply it independently. The strategy
must also be taught in combination with content so that students can see the relationship between
the information and the learning process (Mangrum & Strichart, 2002).
Although numerous strategies can be implemented with boys at-risk to help them succeed,
often their behavior and attitude will get in the way of them even trying or attempting to continue
use of the strategies. Teachers need to be willing to persistently work with the behavior, along
with teaching the strategies so that the students will push through to success. The benefits will
pay off when students learn to apply the strategies when no one is there to help them work out
their behavior issues and persist despite their feelings.
Specific teaching techniques
1. Mind Mapping – The concept of Mind Mapping was developed by Tony Buzan over 40 years
ago in order to unlock the potential of the brain. This tool is advantageous for boys at-risk
because it teaches visual skills to use with words, images, numbers, logic, rhythm, color and
spatial awareness. Mind Mapping is a visual thinking tool that can be used for note taking,
26
brainstorming (individually or in groups), problem solving, general studying, memorization,
project planning or presenting information. Since most boys are not fans of taking notes in class
due to boredom, lack of interest in the topic, or not being able to keep up with the teacher, this
technique provides them with alternative structuring, analyzing, comprehending and recalling
information (tonybuzan.com).
Students need to start in the middle of a blank page and draw the main concept of the
subject being taught. Using an image or picture helps students use their imagination and is more
interesting. By starting in the center of the page, it gives their brain freedom to spread out in all
directions and to express themselves more freely and naturally. Subtopics are developed around
the main concept using “branches” (lines) to connect the ideas to the main concept, as well as
adding branches to subtopics. Students use one key word per line to describe the topic, and
arrange the information in the order that they want. Students should use colored pencils or pens
to create their mind maps. The physical act of exchanging utensils and using color stimulates the
right hemisphere of the brain, makes learning memorable, simple, effective and enjoyable. The
more images the student uses, the more effective the mind map is. If they have 10 images, it is
the equivalent of 10,000 words of notes (tonybuzan.com).
During note taking in class, students can also use colored pencils or pens to write down
difficult words to seek assistance with later, write important facts, names, and dates, draw
pictures around concepts (i.e., draw a ship around the word “Armada”), and also use with math
to write denominators or hard to remember facts or formulas in color. This mind mapping
method uses anticipatory set, tactile/kinesthetic, visual, and auditory senses, along with multineuron input and ways to commit the task to memory (tonybuzan.com).
27
2. SQRW Note taking Method
The Survey, Question, Read and Write (SQRW) method has been used by students for
over 50 years. Many students read assigned textbook material passively just before a test, which
they consider “studying”. For students at-risk, this is an ineffective method because they try to
memorize main ideas and details and then try to give the facts back verbatim on tests, often
failing.
The SQRW method works for many types of learners. It. is a daily systematic strategy
for reading and taking notes from textbooks and in classroom lectures. Students are taught to use
this rhyme to remember the steps: “Survey, Question, Read, and Write – That will make your
notes just right!” If this method is followed carefully and persistently, the routine becomes
habitual and easy for students. As their skills increase, students develop more complex mental
processes of learners because they are now using a system for reading textbooks (www.wpi.edu).
The SQRW steps include:
1. Survey – The purpose of Surveying is to gain a quick overview of a chapter as
a whole, and the relationship of main ideas to each other, before reading. To
survey properly, students spend 1 to 2 minutes Surveying using the following
steps:
a) Fix the name of the chapter in your mind, it is the main idea you are
trying to get from the chapter.
b) Quickly read the introduction, outline, and objectives of a chapter.
This is the background needed to recognize the purpose of the chapter.
This also stimulates faster reading speed and greater understanding of how
28
ideas fit together.
c) Pay attention to the headings and sub-headings. Well-written
textbooks are
divided into sections, each headed by large, bold print. The title names the
major topic to be presented and indicates that the author thinks this idea is
very important. There may be several sub-headings under main headings.
Sub-headings signal the important details in the chapter.
d) Look at other clues to important ideas. This will help students at-risk
who get confused as to what the main points are or what information is
important. Students should look at information with the following: bold
print, italics, numbered items, color coded passages, marginal notes,
glossaries, outlines, questions, lists, charts, etc.
e) Read the summary to see which ideas the author restates for special
emphasis or what conclusions are drawn. A summary contains only the
main ideas in a chapter.
f) Look over the words in the list of important terms at the beginning or
end of chapters. These are key ideas that the student must understand in
order to learn the material in the chapter.
2. Questions – Form questions out of headings and subheadings that help to
understand specifically what to look for as material is read. Use the words who,
29
what, where, when, why, or how to change headings into questions. Sometimes
more than one question needs to be created for a heading. Write the questions on a
piece of paper, which can then be asked in class or on a test.
3. Read – While holding the questions clearly in mind, read the details in order to
answer the questions. Doing this creates a clearly defined purpose for reading.
Positive results are greater concentration and reducing the “blank mind
syndrome”, where students cannot recall what they have learned.
4. Write – Write answers to the questions that were formulated. A good strategy
for students at-risk is to also recite the answers to the questions aloud without
looking. When writing the answers down, write them in the form of an outline,
short paragraph, chart, diagram, formula, etc. As mentioned previously, using
colored pens and pencils are helpful. Answers should be checked by referring
back to notes or the textbook (Strichart & Mangrum, 2010).
Without using the SQRW steps, students just assume that an answer has been learned.
Many students are satisfied with the feeling of understanding an answer, but never get around to
testing the accuracy of their actual learning. Therefore, many students go into tests feeling that
they know the material, but not knowing for certain if the material has really been learned until
they get the test back. The SQRW method divides chapters into sections that can be learned
separately at a pace that is best for individual student learning.
A natural objection to the SQRW method is that it is slow. It is slower than simply
30
reading, but it is a solution to the problem particularly characterized by the complaints from boys
at-risk of “I can’t remember what I just read” or after a poor grade is returned on a test
(www.wpi.edu).
Boys who are at-risk need to have more stimulation than other students, and would
benefit further from using assistive technology to take notes such as a smart pen, Ipad or Ipod to
record their questions and answers. If technology is not available, students can use individual
whiteboards, markers, colored pens or pencils to formulate their questions and answers.
According to Page (2010), there are other specific things boys at-risk could do to succeed
in class. When they take notes in class, they need to complete some things before they arrive to
class, during class, and after class. Before class, students should review their notes from the last
class, have note taking materials ready, and have any reading assignments completed. During
note taking students need to:
`• Listen for signal words (first, second, next, and finally) and write those points down
• Listen for statements (i.e., here is something you should know, this is important, etc.)
• Write using abbreviations and symbols (i.e., vocabulary/vocab, medicine/med,
> < ,%, #)
• Write using the fewest words possible
• Copy information presented visually
• Circle unknown words
• Underline anything written but not understood
• Save space for missing information
After class, students need to have someone explain the notes they wrote but did not
31
understand, look up meanings of unknown words, compare notes with other students, and rewrite
notes as necessary.
3. Five-day Test Preparation – More than any other technique, the key to performing well
on tests is starting early and using short, frequent study sessions. The Five-day Test Preparation
method has been around for years, and works effectively for high school and college students.
The human brain learns academic material faster and better on exams if done in brief blocks of
time spread out over longer periods rather than in a few longer sessions (smu.edu/alec).
For students at risk, it is helpful for them to not cram, but if they do, they should try to
not learn new information. Instead, they should try to focus on remembering the information
they already know. This is particularly challenging for boys at-risk because they do not spend a
lot of time studying. If they do, it is primarily done the night before or morning of the test when
they try to cram last minute information into their memory.
These students will need much assistance and prompting in implementing the Five-day
Test Preparation Plan. Students are taught what will/will not be covered on a test, along with
what type of test will be given – multiple choice, true/false, matching, short answer, essay, etc.
Students will need to gather the information needed to study from textbooks, notes, and teacher
handouts, and ask their teacher to explain material they do not understand (smu.edu/alec).
Students at-risk will need extra guidance in order to follow this plan because they
generally lack self-motivation and the ability to stick to the task at hand. Once they try this
method and see positive results on their test grades, this will hopefully give them the motivation
to continue using the method. If teachers help students plan ahead, many students have found
this plan to be beneficial. The Five-Day Test-Taking Plan entails spacing out learning over a
32
period of five days, preparing a new chapter or chunk of information, reviewing previous
material, dividing material so it can be worked on in manageable chunks, using active learning
strategies (writing and reciting) to study the material, and using self-testing techniques to
monitor learning. The steps include:
●
Day 5: Read the textbook notes and class notes. Look at any handouts the teacher has
given. Highlight the information in the notes and handouts that must be remembered for
the test.
●
Day 3: Rewrite the information in a brief form using the fewest words possible. Use
abbreviations and symbols wherever possible. Use selected strategies to review the
rewritten notes at least twice on this day.
●
Day 2: Think of the questions the teacher might ask on the test. Write each question and
its answer. This may be best accomplished by reviewing orally or using flash cards,
smart board review, smart pens, etc.
●
Day 1: This is the day the test is taken. Students need to review written notes from Day
3, as well as the questions and answers that were prepared on Day 2. Encourage students
to do this while eating breakfast, commuting to school or whenever there are small
pockets of time. Just before the test, go over any information that is difficult to
remember by self-review or aloud with someone else (smu.edu/alec).
On the day of the test students can also use the DETER (Directions, Examine,
Time, Easiest, Review) strategy to help them succeed in obtaining higher test scores:
D – Directions- Read the test directions carefully. Ask the teacher to explain any part of
the directions that are not understood.
33
E – Examine – Look over the entire test to see how much there is to complete. This
should be done right after reading and understanding the directions.
T – Time – Decide how much time should be spent answering each item on the test. See
how many items are on the test and how many points each item is worth. Spend the most
time answering the questions that are worth the most points.
E – Easiest – Begin by answering the items that are the easiest. Answer as many of the
remaining items possible. Answer all of the items because there is no penalty for wrong
answers.
R – Review – If the test is finished before the time is up, review to make sure answers are
accurate and complete.
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Pre-Test Summary
In order to help boys at risk understand how they best learn, students completed a
questionnaire to determine their Study Skill Intelligence Type (Appendix A). Based on Howard
Gardner’s Theory of Intelligence there are seven intelligence types: Body Smart, Word Smart,
People Smart, Music Smart, Self Smart, Number Smart and Picture Smart. Once the students
completed the questionnaire, their top three intelligence types were tallied and discussed
individually in order to assist them in tailoring their learning based on their intelligence type.
The top three intelligence types chosen by the students were:
1. Self Smart – Intrapersonal Intelligence – Self-smart people are comfortable with
themselves. They enjoy being alone to think and reflect. Study tips: Students should
keep a personal journal about what they are learning, find a place to study without
interruptions, and keep themselves involved in assignments by individualizing each
project.
34
2. Body Smart – Kinesthetic Intelligence – Body smart people work well with their
hands. They enjoy physical activity such as exercise, sports, and outdoor work. These
study strategies can help body smart people be successful: act out or imagine the
concepts that need to be remembered, look for real-life examples that demonstrate what
was learned about, search for hands-on manipulatives and computer programs that can
help master material easier.
3. Music Smart – Musical Intelligence – Music smart people are good with rhythms and
beats. They enjoy listening to CD’s, attending concerts, and creating songs. Activities to
help study: Create a song or rhyme that will help remember a concept, listen to classical
music while studying, remember vocabulary words by linking them to similar-sounding
words in their mind.
Students also completed a Study Strategies Pre-test (Appendix B) to gauge what they already
knew about test strategies, whether they currently used specific strategies, and the effectiveness
of those strategies. Results showed that the majority of the students either did not study for tests
at all, or studied in the following ways: spending limited amounts of time looking over past
worksheets, study guides, or chapters in textbooks, asking peers for notes, paying attention in
class without taking notes, going over the information with someone else, or using a smart
pen. Some of the students commented that they just rely on study review games given the day
before the test in class to serve as their study time.
Although the majority of the students did not use the specific selected strategies that were
taught to them, they did state that study skills would help them if they learned techniques that
they were interested in. Students stated that if they learned specific study techniques they liked it
35
would help them:
o
know the material better
o
learn how to study properly for tests
o
be more successful in school
o
get better grades and not fail tests
o
pay attention better
o
take better notes for tests
o
remember what they need to know
An additional question on the pre-test addressed what specific study skills students
would like to learn to help them be more successful in school. The results were:
o
how to highlight notes
o
specific techniques to help remember what they need to know
o
how to study in class
o
be given notes that will actually be on the test
o
how to look over notes and actually take them
o
be quizzed on the material
o
how to study for tests better
Other students were not sure what techniques they would like to learn. The pre-test also
addressed questions to determine if the students liked school overall, with the results being that
half of the students said no. Some students had no comment as to why they did not like school,
but others stated facts such as: they did not like tests, school is annoying and nothing would
make it better, they would rather be working, there is too
36
much drama, it is hard to remember what they need to know and what they do not need to know,
and feelings of failure. Students were also asked what specific things would make school
better. Some changes they would like to see include: being able to have more free time, more
time to spend with friends, stop bullying, learn something new that is interesting, and get better
grades.
Students were also asked what they liked about school. Some statements were: they care
about getting good grades for their future, they like coming to school to see their friends, they
like sports, school excels them with knowledge, they care about getting good grades because
they want to make their family happy, they want to do good in their classes, it helps them prepare
them for future jobs, and they get to learn new things.
Post-test Results
A Post-test survey was given at the end of the study (Appendix C). Results showed that
none of the students could remember the name of any of the strategies that were taught. Two
students remembered a strategy where pictures were drawn, but they could not recall what the
strategy was. As far as students using the new study strategies in class, only one student used the
Mind Mapping technique to help with an essay question, and he stated that it helped. Another
student studied more from his notes before a test than he usually does, which he felt was due to
the study strategies.
When questioned whether the participating students liked or disliked the strategies that
were taught, all of them stated that they did not like them, and they liked their own way of
studying better. Since the strategies were not utilized consistently in the classroom, students
37
stated that they did not feel any more successful in their classes than they did prior to the
study. One student stated that if he would have liked the study strategies, he may have continued
to use them, but he chose to just stick to what he already knows.
In order to gain additional background information, a question on the Post-test survey
asked when students first started to notice that they were struggling in school. Some students did
not remember, one student stated that he has always felt left behind, two students stated that it
was in first grade, one student said fifth grade, and another student said sixth grade when other
students started bullying him, which made him struggle and not like school. When asked if their
disability affects them in school, most stated that it really does not affect them. Other students
said that they sometimes forget directions but just ask their classmates, one would do a little bit
better in school if he didn’t have a sensory processing disorder, and others stated that they get
distracted easily due to their disability.
Summary of Research Questions
Research Question #1: What is contributing to the growing proportion of boys disengaging
from school?
Many researchers have contributed their reasons as to why there is a growing number of
boys disengaging from school. A leader in this research is family physician and research
psychologist Leonard Sax (2007), who states that there are five main reasons why there is a
growing number of boys that are disengaging from school.
One reason is a combination of social and biological factors that is literally toxic to boys.
Secondly, there is also a misguided overemphasis on reading and math as early as kindergarten
38
when boys are not developmentally or socially ready. Third, today more than ever, boys are
spending too much time playing video games, which is causing them to lose focus in school
because it is a boring, unrelatable world to them. Fourth, there is an ever-increasing diagnosis of
ADHD and over-prescribed corresponding medication, and finally, overlooked endocrine
disturbances which are actually causing damage to boys’ brains.
Other researchers have suggested possible causes of the increase of at-risk boys to
include the feminization of school and employment, boys’ active natures, television, and lack of
male role models, and minimal active engagement. In schools, the way information is taught is
overlooking the way boys need to be taught. Boys and girls have distinct biological and
developmental differences, and the style of teachers is generally geared toward meeting the
needs of girls. For example, there is not enough emphasis on non-fiction texts and too much
emphasis on personal writing. In reading, boys need phonics more than girls do, but many
classrooms focus on reading stories (Center for Mental Health in Schools, 2004; Kovalik, 2008;
Ricks, 2011; Roehlkepartain, 2001)
Children’s ability to read and do math at the end of first grade are strong predictors of
their performance as teenagers and adults. Students who do not master basic concepts rarely
catch up with their more successful peers. According to a 2012 Gallup student poll, two in 10
elementary school students are not engaged or are actively disengaged in school. By middle
school, it increases to about four in 10 and by high school, nearly six in 10 students are less than
engaged. Unable to successfully complete the work, boys at-risk become disengaged in school,
develop behavior problems, and eventually drop out of school. The reading, writing, and oral
language skills of boys lag far behind girls throughout their school careers, starting even before
39
first grade (Holmes, 2011; Page, 2010; Lopez & Calderon, 2013).
Research Question #2: What are some strategies that can be used to help the growing
number of boys at-risk re-engage in school and life?
Numerous researchers have suggested strategies to help decrease the number of at-risk
boys that have disengaged in school and life. Research psychologist Leonard Sax (2007) said
changes can start as early as kindergarten. The emphasis on literacy and numeracy should begin
in first or second grade, giving children in kindergarten, especially boys, the chance to develop
social skills and experience “real life” learning in the outdoors coupled with an increase in hands
on activities.
Boys at-risk tend to have an addiction to video games, further disconnecting them from
social face-to-face interactions. In order to have any intervention be effective, an alternative
outlet needs to be in place that is more exciting and real than anything video games can offer.
An example of an option would be to take a boy from a computer racing game to an actual race
where he can experience the excitement of a race firsthand (Sax, 2007).
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is diagnosed four to nine times more
often in boys than girls, along with up to one-third of all children also having additional
behavioral and academic labels. Changes in education over the past three decades have
contributed to a sizable increase in prescribing medications for ADHD alone. Rather than
question the curriculum being used that requires five-year old boys to sit still and be quiet, it’s a
quick fix in our society to prescribe medication instead to help at-risk boys cope in school and
life.
Researchers argue that boys should not be put on medication just to keep them still.
40
Instead, the school should recognize that expecting all young boys to sit still and keep quiet is
not compatible with what is known about child development. Teachers need to pay particular
attention to boys that have difficulty sitting still in class or paying attention and engage these
students in a new developmentally appropriate way to see if that makes a difference.
Another concern affecting boys is plastics and the dangers of endocrine disruptors. Clear
plastic bottles made with plasticizers (phthalates), as well as bisphenol A (BPA), have been
shown to disrupt and accelerate girls endocrine development, causing them to go through puberty
earlier. Instead of American endocrinologists calling a ban on clear plastic bottles for beverages
served to adolescent children or further studying the problem, they instead decided to redefine
what is “normal”.
Although the effect on boys is more subtle, the main effect appears to be a slowing and/or
“warping” of boys’ sexual development. There is now substantial evidence that the very same
endocrine disrupting chemicals that accelerate puberty in girls may delay or disrupt the process
of puberty in boys. In addition, common pesticides are adding to this growing problem, along
with blocking the action of testosterone and other androgens. Despite this discovery, there has
been no change in the use of these pesticides in the United States, and we are consuming it to
date. The soaring rates of ADHD among North American boys in the last twenty years have
only recently been linked to these chemicals.
Teachers and adults are well-meaning in helping at-risk students succeed, but they are
failing because they have given up on these students, or are not utilizing proper teaching
techniques for this population. Teachers need to properly implement the Response-toIntervention system to adapt to these students’ needs and re-engage them versus expecting at-risk
41
students to follow traditional classroom management strategies, rewards, punishments, threats,
and grades. Teachers should use energy breaks, visual cues, cooperative groups and engaging
methods that teach boys how to study. Structuring classes so that there is room for movement
and action, and establishing reading with real-life connections not only benefits boys, but girls as
well (ed.gov 2008; Elias 2009; Elksnin 2000; James 2008; Sax 2007).
Research question #3: What are the negative long term effects if boys who are at risk are
not helped?
By the time boys at-risk are in middle and high school, it is challenging to teach new
study habits and change years of attitudes that have turned to bitterness and hopelessness.
ADHD is a highly persistent disorder from childhood into adolescence. Short-term studies have
shown fairly consistently that children diagnosed with ADHD continue to experience significant
academic, cognitive, and behavioral difficulties into their early to mid-teens (13-15). Between
30 to 50 percent may continue to have the full disorder into late adolescence (16-19). In one ten
year follow-up study, researchers found that at age 19, ADHD subjects “completed less formal
schooling, achieved lower grades, failed more courses, and were more often expelled” than
control subjects. Only fourteen percent of students with ADHD compared to 52% of those
without the disorder were less likely to have graduated college or attained a graduate degree.
Boys at-risk, particularly those diagnosed with ADHD or a similar disorder, may also be
at greater risk for developing other mental disorders later in life. They are also more likely to
develop Conduct Disorder (CD) and develop Substance Abuse Disorder (SUD), which can lead
to a higher risk of criminal behavior. Researchers found that arrest and conviction rates among
42
boys at-risk with ADHD were higher only for those who had also developed CD and SUD later
in life.
Another long-term consequence if at-risk boys are not helped is a continued decrease in
the number of boys attending and successfully completing college. Over half of college students
are women, and the trend toward increased college enrollment of women will continue growth in
the education of women in the labor force compared to that of men. This also affects the gender
gap in earnings, a gap that has already narrowed greatly since the 1970’s. Since the education of
younger women is exceeding that of men, the gender earnings may also begin to reverse, with
women earning more than men.
If the at-risk pattern of boys in high school continues, it is most likely a predictor of the
“success” of boys in college - including dropping out of school, having failing grades, minimal
studying, disciplinary problems, etc. The difference in imbalance between males and females is
mainly attributed to interactions between genetic and environmental factors. In addition, boys
are more affected than girls by the absence of fathers and male role models in their lives,
negative peer pressure that is more harmful to boys, and drug selling and other crimes which is
often more appealing to boys when compared to school (bls.gov, 2013; Bridgeland, DiIulio &
Morison, 2006; Holmes, 2011; pbs.org, 2014; Sax, 2007; thegallupblog.gallup.com, 2013).
Research question #4 Will teaching study strategies increase high school boys with
special needs success in school?
Because at-risk youth are more likely to experience failure in school or drop out, school
psychologists, educators, counselors, and parents continue to look for effective interventions for
43
school-related problems affecting at-risk youth. Dropping out of school is not a singular event,
but rather the height of a long process of disengagement.
Children between ages 9 and 15 are commonly at important turning points in their lives.
It is during this time that they may permanently turn off from serious engagement in school life
and turn to a variety of risky behaviors that can limit their chances of reaching productive
adulthood. On the positive side, this is also the age range during which preventative
interventions are most successful and youth are most capable of envisioning a positive future and
planning the steps they need to take to reach their goals.
Although specific study strategies can be implemented with boys at risk to help them
succeed, often their behavior or feelings of defeat get in the way, which limits them from finding
success from learning strategies. Teaching strategies need to be taught at a younger age and for a
longer period of time. Teachers need to be persistent and patient in consistently teaching the
strategies as well as helping students apply them daily. To be successful in educating at risk
boys, teachers should use a three-pronged approach - identify the unique needs of the child,
evaluate their individual needs and strengths, and select appropriate instructional practices.
Once the student experiences success consistently applying the strategies, he is more likely to
continue the strategies on his own (Center for Mental Health in Schools, 2004; Intervention
Strategies Guide, (2012) Page, 2010; thoughtfulclassroom.com, 2011)
SUMMARY
The results of this study were shown to be unsuccessful. The students involved in the
study did not consistently utilize the study strategies that were taught, and as a result did not see
44
an increase in their test grades. Additional post-test information gathered showed that the
students did not remember the names of any of the strategies, but some of them could remember
parts of the strategies such as drawing a picture to help them remember words. It is critical for
students at the middle and high school level to develop and use successful study strategies, but
this study has revealed that students at this point are already set in the ways that they study, even
if their methods are not effective.
Several of the students stated that it does not matter if they study or not because they
always get the same low scores on their tests because they are poor test takers or cannot
remember the material even if they do study. They are not interested in changing the way they
study unless something directly beneficial comes along. It is difficult to change the study habits
of middle and high school students because they are already set in their pattern of study habits,
including not studying at all.
This study has shown what has typically been known – although not impossible, it is
challenging to change the habits of students as they get older. Since middle school students are
halfway to graduation, and high school students are even closer, it becomes more difficult to
break the patterns that they have, which includes poor study habits. In addition, this study was
challenging with at-risk special education male students because they have difficulty sticking to
routines, with some having behavior issues that also get in the way of their success.
When students were asked weekly to review the study strategies, they often argued that
they had homework to do that was more important. They were not motivated to study for tests at
all, and several of them have ADHD and other disabilities that added to the challenge. The
students were also very inconsistent in reporting when upcoming tests were so that the teacher or
45
parent had a proper amount of time to assist them in studying. Finally, because of their learning
difficulties and past failures, they already have low expectations of themselves and give up
easily.
CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
This study could have had a positive outcome if several areas were modified. One idea is
that the strategies could be taught at a younger age when students are more flexible in changing
their study habits or at learning new ones. There were some limitations that also affected the
study including:
●
Three students opted out due to personal choice and a physical injury.
●
Most of the students had difficulty focusing on the strategies due to other priorities and
the end of the year approaching.
●
Students had trouble remembering information in general, and the study strategies fell
into that same category.
●
Students already had low expectations of themselves and their grades and as a result were
less willing to try.
If this study were conducted again, a time frame would have been selected near the
beginning or mid-year to avoid increased lack of motivation and focus due to the school year end
approaching. A more focused emphasis on the results of the students’ Study Skill Intelligence
Type could have been used to help the students study more effectively depending on their type
(ie. Musical Intelligence - help students create a song or rhyme to help remember a concept,
listen to classical music while studying, and remember vocabulary words by linking them to
similar-sounding words in their mind.
46
Extra measures could have been taken so that each student took the proper amount of
time to learn each strategy, along with teaching students the habit of reinforcing the study
strategies on their own. Since students were reluctant to work on the study strategies during their
study hall time if they had homework, they could have been pulled from Response-toIntervention time (RtI) to work on the study strategies as well.
A weekly schedule could have been set up where students recorded daily when they
worked on study strategies, along with any gains in test scores. A reward system could have
been created with students to assist with motivation. If students chose to use the strategies, their
efforts and success could have been reinforced with rewards. Future studies could involve
students researching and selecting types of study strategies that interest them so they have a
vested interest in learning and applying them.
For the Mind Mapping strategy, students could have posted on the reward chart when
they used the technique, and parents could have emphasized the technique at home. The SQWR
and Five- Day Test Prep methods seemed too detailed and lengthy of a process for boys to
commit to, so they could have been shortened to meet their needs. As mentioned previously,
these methods needed to be practiced routinely so that students could apply them independently.
As mentioned, they were often distracted by having homework to complete during their resource
time, and therefore were not willing to practice the strategies daily. Students were very
impatient in learning the techniques and did not want to take the time to learn the strategies while
they were completing homework.
With the introduction of new technology, boys at risk, particularly those with disabilities,
are hesitant to use new technology (ie. smart pens) in the classroom because they think it makes
47
them stand out from other students. Technology tools that can be used for effective studying are
very advantageous, but students will only use them if it directly benefits them.
Teachers need to be creative when teaching study strategies, so using short bursts of
teaching, lots of visual cues to help students focus, and continual motivation to keep them
interested. In addition, parental involvement could have been increased so that the strategies
were utilized at home and reinforced again at school.
It is clear from this study and other research that more studies need to be done in the area
of the effectiveness and methods of teaching strategies to help boys at-risk succeed.
REFERENCES
49
References
Altshuler Learning Enhancement Center. Retrieved from www.smu.edu/alec
Bridgeland J.M., DiIulio, J.J., & Morison, K.B. Interviews of High School Dropouts. 2006.
Buzan, Tony. (2011). Tony Buzan. Inventor or Mind Mapping. Retrieved from
http//www.tonybuzan.com.
School Engagement, Disengagement, Learning Supports and School Climate. Center for Mental
Health in Schools. Dept. of Psychology, UCLA. (2004). Retrieved from
http:\\smhp.psych.ucla.edu/pdfdocs/schooleng.pdf
Elias, Maurice. (2009). The keys to helping at-risk kids. Retrieved from
http//www.edutopia.org/strategies-help-at-risk-students
Elksnin, Nick & Linda K. (2000). Teaching Parents to teach their children to be prosocial.
Retrieved from http://www.ldonline.org/article/6036/?theme=print
Fortune, Aileen M. (2001). Understanding gender differences: strategies to support boys and
girls. Family Issues 5 Dec. 2001: Volume 9 (2,3)
Fay, Meghan. (n.d.) Suggestions for Teaching At-Risk Youth. Retrieved from
http://www.time2act.org
Gurian, Michael & King, Kelley. (2006). Teaching to the minds of boys. Educational
Leadership. 64(1), 56-61. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educationalleadership
Hoff Sommers, Christina. (2013). What Schools Can do to Help Boys Succeed. Retrieved from
http://www.TIME.com.
Holmes, Mark. (2011). Why Boys are Struggling in School and What Parents and Teachers Can
do to Help Them. Retrieved from The Society for Quality Education.
http://www.boyseducation.ca
Intervention Strategies Guide. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.mentoringminds.com/research/intervention-strategies-guide.
Kaufman, P. National Center for Education Statistics. (1992). Characteristics of at-risk students.
Learning Styles, Rti, and the Struggling Student: A Thoughtful Approach to Designing More
Powerful Interventions. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.thoughtfulclassroom.com.
50
Kovalik, Susan. The Center for Effective Learning (2008). Gender Differences and Student
Engagement. Rexford, NY.
Mangrum, Charles T. III & Strichart, Stephen S. (2002). Teaching learning strategies and study
skills to students with learning disabilities, attention deficit disorders or special
needs. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Mastropieri, Margo & Scruggs, Thomas. (1996). Teacher Perceptions of
Mainstreaming/Inclusion. Council for Exceptional Children, volume v63, (n1), 1-5. Retrieved
from https:\\www.cec.sped.org/Home/Publications/CEC-Journals
The Bottom Line - School Dropout Information. National Dropout Prevention Center/Network.
(2014). Retrieved from www.dropoutprevention.org/statistics
Norfleet James, J. (2008). Inquiring boys: Using brain based strategies to develop learning skills.
IBSC.
Page, Bill. (2010). “Insights and Strategies for Teaching At-Risk Kids.”
Pellegrini, A. D. (2011). “In the Eye of the Beholder” Sex Bias in Observations and Ratings of
Children’s Aggression. Educational Researcher, 40(6), 281-286. Retrieved from
http://www.edr.sagepub.com/content
Price, C. D. (2011). Boys only: One co-educational primary school’s experience of a classroom
for boys. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(9), 72-73. Retrieved from
http://ro.ecu.au/ajte/vol36/iss9/6.
Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy (2006). Are boys making the grade? Gender
gaps in achievement and attainment. Cambridge, MA. Gurian, Michael & King, Kelley. (2006).
Ricks, Dionna. (2011). Educating Boys for Success - Are Today’s Classrooms Biased Against
Boys? NEA Educating Boys for Success. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/home/44609.htm.
Roehlkepartain, E. (2001). Connecting with Boys – Closing the asset gap. Connecting with
Boys, Assets: The Magazine of Ideas for Healthy Communities & Healthy Youth, 1-3.
Ryan, J. B., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2004). Peer-mediated Intervention Studies on Academic
Achievement for Students with EBD: A Review. Remedial and Special Education, 25(6), 330341.
Sax, L. (2007). Boys adrift. Doubleday Publishing.
Sax, L. (2012). Learning style differences. NASSPE’s Eighth International Conference,
Retrieved from http//www.singlesexschools.org/research-learning.htm.
51
Sax, L. (2005). Why Gender Matters. Doubleday Publishing.
Teaching Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Instructional Strategies &
Practices. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/products.html.
The Gallup Blog (2013). How America’s Boys Become Psychological Dropouts. Lopez, Shane
& Calderon, Valerie.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. College Enrollment and Work Activity of 2012 High School
Graduates. 17 April 2013. <bls.gov/news.release/hsgec.nr0.htm>
Weil, Elizabeth. (2008). Teaching boys and girls separately. The New York Times.
Williams, J. P. (2004). Strategic processing of text: Improving reading comprehension of
students with learning disabilities. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 174-180.
Younger, Mike & Warrington, Molly. (2008). Raising Boys’ Achievement. University of
Cambridge, Faculty of Education.
APPENDIX A
STUDY SKILLS FOR INTELLIGENCE TYPES
53
Smart Study Strategies
Study Skills for 7 Intelligence Types
People are smart in different ways. Some people can create a catchy song at the drop of a hat.
Others can memorize everything in a book, paint a masterpiece, or be the center of attention.
When you realize what you’re good at, you can figure out the best way to study. Based on
Howard Gardner’s theory of intelligence, these study tips can help you tailor your learning for
your intelligence type.
Directions: Number the intelligence types that describe you from 1 (most like me) to 7 (least
like me)
________ Word Smart (Linguistic intelligence) – Word smart people are good with words,
letters, and phrases. They enjoy activities such as reading, playing scrabble or other word games,
and having discussions. If you’re word smart, these study strategies can help:
• make flashcards
• take detailed notes
• keep a journal of what you learn
_________ Number Smart (logical-mathematical intelligence) - Number smart people are
good with numbers, equations, and logic. They enjoy coming up with solutions to logical
problems and figuring things out. If you’re number smart, give these strategies a try:
• make your notes into numeric charts and graphs
• use the roman numeral style of outlining (I, II, III, IV, etc.)
• put information you receive into categories and classifications that you create
__________ Picture Smart (spatial intelligence) – Picture smart people are good with art and
design. They enjoy being creative, watching movies, and visiting art museums. Picture smart
people can benefit from these study tips:
• sketch pictures that go along with your notes or in the margins of your textbooks
• draw a picture on a flashcard for each concept or vocabulary word you study
• use charts and graphic organizers to keep track of what you learn
__________ Body Smart (Kinesthetic intelligence) – Body smart people work well with their
hands. They enjoy physical activity such as exercise, sports, and outdoor work. These study
strategies can help body smart people be successful:
• act out or imagine the concepts you need to remember
54
• look for real-life examples that demonstrate what you’re learning about
• search for manipulatives, such as computer programs, that can help you master material
__________ Music Smart (Musical intelligence) – Music smart people are good with rhythms
and beats. They enjoy listening to cd’s, attending concerts, and creating songs. If you’re music
smart, these activities can help you study:
• create a song or rhyme that will help you remember a concept
• listen to classical music while you study
• remember vocabulary words by linking them to similar-sounding words in your mind
__________ People Smart (Interpersonal intelligence) – Those who are people smart are good
with relating to people. They enjoy going to parties, visiting with friends, and sharing what they
learn. People smart students should give these strategies a try:
• discuss what you learn with a friend or family member
• have someone quiz you before a test
• create or join a study group
__________ Self Smart (Intrapersonal intelligence) – Self smart people are comfortable with
themselves. They enjoy being alone to think and reflect. If you’re self smart, try these tips:
• keep a personal journal about what you’re learning
• find a place to study where you won’t be interrupted
• keep yourself involved in assignments by individualizing each project
APPENDIX B
STUDY STRATEGIES PRE-TEST
56
Study Strategies Pre-test
1. What study strategies do you currently know about?
2. What study strategies do you currently use to study or help you in class?
3. How would using study skills help you if you learned some specific techniques?
4. What study skills would you like to be taught that could help you be more successful in
school?
5. Do you care about getting good grades? Why or why not?
6. Do you like school in general? Why or why not?
7. If you currently struggle in school or do not like it, in what grade did you first start noticing
this?
8. If you do not like school, what specifically would make you like it better?
9. Does having disability affect you in school? How?
APPENDIX C
STUDY STRATEGIES POST-TEST
58
Study Strategies Post-test
1. What were the names of the study strategies that you were taught and have been using?
2. What specifically do you remember about the strategies you were taught?
3. What strategies have specifically been helping you in class and with studying?
4. What are some things that you do or do not like about the strategies you have been taught?
5. Did these strategies help you feel more successful in your classes? Please explain.
6. Will you use any of these study strategies again? Is so, which ones?
7. Will any of these strategies be useful to you if you are attending college after high school?