Running head: BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
Brief constructed responses and an unknowing reactive audience
Anna B. Hays
University of Maryland University College
1
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
2
Part I: Introduction
Background
Co-researchers participating in the initial stage of a joint program between the
Masters of Arts in Teaching Program (MAT), University of Maryland University College
(UMUC), Adelphi, Maryland, and the Ernest Everett Just Middle School (EEJMS),
Mitchellville, Maryland, were tasked with the creation and implementation of a pilot
action research project. The project was required to involve assessment and be carried out
during a series of weekly hour-long tutoring sessions, originally numbered at 10. One
white 40-year-old female UMUC MAT candidate holding an MA in English was paired
with Girl A and Girl B, two female African-American seventh-grade EEJMS students
performing below grade level in their shared language arts class. Additional coresearchers included the students’ language arts classroom teacher, Teacher X, their
school counselor, Counselor Y, and a member of each girl’s family, Girl A’s
grandmother, a high school graduate, and Girl B’s mother, a college graduate.
UMUC tutors were volunteers from the EDTP 645, Subject Methods and
Measures, class during spring semester 2011. EEJMS students were nominated by their
core subject teachers for inclusion in the program. In addition to the prerequisite of
teacher nomination, students needed a consent form signed by a parent/guardian
(Appendix A) and a behavior and academic contract signed by both the student and a
parent/guardian (Appendix B) in order to participate.
EEJMS was chosen as the partner school because of its proximity to the tutoring
site. Tutoring sessions were held in the cafeteria of the UMUC Largo campus in Upper
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
3
Marlboro, Maryland, just 1.5 miles from EEJMS. EEJMS is a struggling school. While it
managed to attain adequate yearly progress (AYP) during school year 2008–2009; during
school year 2009–2010, overall scores dropped in all categories except for 7th grade
reading. Even in this category, however, the school failed to make AYP in the following
subcategories: African-American, Free/Reduced Meals, Special Education, and All
Students (http://msp.msde.state.md.us/aypintro.aspx?AypPV=14:0:16:1348:3:000000).
Perhaps as a direct consequence of this failure, enrollment in the school decreased from
963 students in 2009–2010 to 800 in 2010–2011, a 17% drop.
The student body is composed of 96% African-American, 2% Hispanic, 1%
Asian, and <0.5% American Indian or White students; 30% qualify for free or reduced
meals, and 10% are labeled special education. One hundred percent of the staff is
certified, with 35% having 10 or more years of teaching experience (Carter, 2010). Of
particular interest to this study, during a school climate survey conducted during school
year 2008–2009 at EEJMS, the characteristic receiving the lowest percentage of positive
perceptions was parent/community involvement, at 55.9%, though this was much higher than
the Prince George’s County, Maryland, county-wide percentage of 44.1%
(http://survey.pgcps.org/2009_School_Climate/SY09EJUST.pdf).
Girls A and B made up part of the 13.3% of EEJMS African-American females
who scored below proficient levels in reading on the 2010 Maryland State Assessment
(http://msp.msde.state.md.us/statDisplay.aspx?PV=2:7:16:1348:3:N:8:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:3).
They both experienced difficulty in their 7th grade language arts class, performing far
below grade level. Each received a D in the grading quarter immediately preceding the
beginning of the tutoring sessions; in addition, both students scored below C in science
and social studies, their other text heavy core courses. Teacher X nominated both Girl A
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
4
and Girl B for inclusion in the UMUC tutoring program and indicated, via Counselor Y,
who attended all tutoring sessions, that both students needed extra work in reading
comprehension. Both students explicitly asked for help with brief constructed responses,
and neither student arrived at tutoring prepared with “questions, concerns, problems” or
“textbooks, notes, and assignments” (see Appendix B, “I will arrive prepared”
bulletpoint).
Problem
Brief constructed responses (BCRs) are written responses to stimulus material,
usually composed in answer to a prompt. They generally consist of one paragraph
comprising three elements: a topic sentence, supporting details from the stimulus text,
and a conclusion. Two common characteristics of weak BCRs, those scoring below 2 on
the Maryland English Rubric: Brief Constructed Response (Appendix C; see also
http://mdk12.org/instruction/curriculum/hsa/language_arts/eng_rubric_template_bcr_is.ht
ml), are (1) a failure to support with textual detail the answer provided in the student’s
topic sentence to the question either stated or implied by the prompt and (2) a failure to
actually provide such an answer to the prompt. The cause of these failures is unknown,
but one hypothesis is that students either consciously or subconsciously assume the
reader/grader to be an expert member of the Discourse in which that student is a flailing
apprentice. Here Discourse with a capital D represents a “wrapping together of the
individual, the cultural, and the social…as [students] interact with others and work to
become members of different communities of practice” (Magnifico, 2010, p. 173; see
also Snowman, McCown, & Biehler, 2009, pp. 46–51). Providing textual details,
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
5
therefore, would seem redundant as the reader already has an intimate knowledge of
them, and providing an explicit answer to the prompt risks confirming the student’s
perceived inability to participate in the Discourse (performance-avoidance goal; see
Snowman et al., 2009, pp. 410–411). Such disaffiliated students are at risk for low selfefficacy in relation to school and its Discourse, in general, and specifically to BCRs.
“Students who do not believe they have the cognitive skills to cope with the demands of a
particular subject are unlikely to do much serious reading or thinking about the subject”
(Snowman et al., 2009, p. 278). It is not known whether or to what extent establishing an
interactive audience, a personification of Vygotsky’s mediation, outside the perceived
Discourse will allow students to be pulled through their zones of proximal development
toward an increased self-efficacy and a strengthening of the BCRs.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to determine whether providing an unknowing
reader, someone unfamiliar with the stimulus text, as an interactive initial audience for
the student’s BCR resulted in improvement in the quality of the BCR. In this case, this
unknowing audience was a student-selected family member. A family member was
chosen because (1) they would represent the student’s primary Vygotskian expert and (2)
they would be most likely to trigger an emotional arousal, one of the four factors believed
to influence self-efficacy (Snowman et al., 2009, pp. 279–280). BCR quality was
evaluated on two forms of each BCR. The first form was the initial attempted BCR, and
the second form was the revised BCR, with revisions done as a result of audience
reaction.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
6
Significance
Brief constructed responses support learning in all the core subject areas by
supporting reading comprehension and exercising higher-order thinking. At a macro
level, such higher-order thinking is a necessity for escaping Dewey’s static society, a
society “which makes the maintenance of established custom their measure of value,”
and moving to a progressive society in which each successive generation advances
beyond the one before (Dewey, 2001, p. 41). On a more micro level, BCRs appear on the
Maryland State Assessment (MSA), a test given in accordance with No Child Left
Behind, which occurs in March of each school year for students in grades 3–8. In
addition, Magnifico (2010) makes a call for more studies of the effect of audience on
writing, especially an interactive audience:
There has, thus far, been little new research in the areas of education or
psychology that focuses specifically on the concept of audience. Although
the identity literature, which focuses on how individual learners see and
understand themselves, is burgeoning, there has been little attention paid
to the other side of identity—how it is enacted for the audience.
Sociocultural research into how teachers might transform their classrooms
into communities of practice with authentic audiences is undoubtedly
relevant here, especially in terms of thinking about the implications of a
participatory audience. (p. 180)
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
7
While Magnifico (2010) is writing within the context of high-tech writing
communities (e.g., blogs), this study presents a low-tech, and therefore
universally accessible, answer to her call.
Research Question
Can utilizing a family member as an unknowing reactive audience improve the
quality of the BCR?
Part II: Literature Review
The National Reading Panel, in its 2000 report, recommended seven reading
strategies supported by research. Among these are comprehension monitoring, question
answering, and use of graphic organizers (Alvermann, Phelps, and Ridgeway Gillis,
2010, p. 198). The first two are inherent components of brief constructed responses, and
are often supported by the third. The BCR prompt is either an explicitly or implicitly
stated prereading question used to guide student’s reading and, therefore, comprehension
of the stimulus text. “Prereading questions in effect tell the readers what to look for and,
by implication, what to ignore” (Alvermann et al., 2010, p. 204). Comprehension is
bolstered through a more efficient targeting of significant information.
While BCRs require the use of textually explicit supporting details, such as those
targeted through prereading strategies, they generally require that students move beyond
mere restatements of fact (Bloom’s taxonomy level 1: knowledge; see Wong & Wong,
2010, pp. 236–237) by generating both textually and scriptally implicit answers, answers
derived using higher-order thought processes from levels 2–6 of Bloom’s taxonomy
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
8
(Alvermann et al., 2010, pp. 204–205; Wong & Wong, 2010, pp. 236–237). Application
of structured metacognitive tasks, such as listing and explaining their revisions (see
Kinsler, 1990; Raphael, 1982, 1984, 986 as cited in Alvermann et al., 2010, p. 208), have
been shown to further reinforce development of higher-order thought processes, one end
goal of education. In addition, writing helps students to “’step back from the text after
reading it—they reconceptualize the content in ways that cut across ideas, focusing on
larger issues or topics. In doing this, they integrate information and engage in more
complex thought’ (p. 406)” (Judith Langer, 1986, in Alvermann et al., 2010, pp. 311–
312).
In fact, Dewey’s entire philosophy of education can be said to revolve around
developing a student’s ability to apply higher-order thought processes. This ability is
what saves a society from stagnation. A static society is one whose educational goals are
merely to recreate the world as it is: to have students merely catch up with adults.
Progressive communities rather “endeavor to shape the experiences of the young so that
instead of reproducing current habits, better habits shall be formed, and thus the future
adult society be an improvement on their own” (Dewey, 2001, p. 41). His exploration of
the interconnectedness of society and education paved the way for future sociocultural
philosophies like Vygotsky’s and sociocognitive philosophies like Bandura’s.
Vygotsky’s view of cognitive development sounds like Dewey’s description of
the static society: “education of the immature fills them with the spirit of the social group
to which they belong…a sort of catching up of the child with the aptitudes and resources
of the adult group” (Dewey, 2001, p. 41). While Vygotsky’s theory does not result in a
static society, Vygotsky does view social interaction as the primary cause of cognitive
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
9
development. Cognitive development takes place through mediation, which occurs when
an expert member of the culture, beginning with a child’s parents, interprets the child’s
behavior and “helps transform it into an internal and symbolic representation that means
the same thing to the child as to the others” (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 48). That is, adults,
or community experts, beginning with the parents, aid children in the use of a culture’s
psychological tools (“the cognitive devices and procedures with which we communicate
and explore the world around us,” Snowman et al., 2009, p. 47). The end goal is to move
the child through a period as a novice member of the community during which they can
use the psychological tools with the aid of an expert and on to a time when they are able
to use the tools alone.
But what if a student inhabits a Discourse that is other? Magnifico (2010)
indicates:
As a prescription for the design of literacy learning environments,
however, sociocultural theory presents challenges because of its focus on
how learning and membership occur, often gradually, in the context of a
community as a whole. These challenges are particularly significant for
educators working within the climate of schools because any school has
already-existing institutional norms and Discourses that are inherent parts
of any in-school design. These existing elements of context can present
roadblocks in the building of a successful literacy community, especially
for teachers who are teaching students who do not share the dominant
Discourse of school. (p. 174)
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
10
That is, such students are novices in a different cultural community from that in which
the teachers are experts. Thus, such students are likely to hold a low self-efficacy in
relation to their ability to use the psychological tools of the teacher’s Discourse.
Bandura’s social cognitive theory recognizes how personal characteristics, such as
self-efficacy, interact with behavioral patterns and Vygotsky’s sociocultural elements to
determine a cognitive result (Snowman et al., 2009, pp.276). In fact, self-efficacy may be
the most influential characteristic:
Students who believe they are capable of successfully performing a task
are more likely than students with low levels of self-efficacy to use such
self-regulating skills as concentrating on the task, creating strategies, using
appropriate tactics, managing time effectively, monitoring their own
performance, and making whatever adjustments are necessary to improve
their future learning efforts. (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 279)
On the other hand, students with low self-efficacy are more likely to avoid
situations where they feel incapable of succeeding. They feel a disincentive to
invest time or effort since the likely result is failure. Failure to try allows blame to
be placed on circumstances rather than on inability (performance-avoidance
goals; Snowman et al., 2009, p. 410). Their low self-efficacy, therefore, leads to
poor self-control and self-regulation.
Because such students are unable to control their own actions, a proxy
regulator or audience may be called for. By affecting the four antecedents of selfefficacy (performance accomplishments, verbal persuasion, emotional arousal,
and vicarious experience; Snowman et al., 2009, pp. 279–280), proxy regulators
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
can transform learning and growth motivational goals. Students with low selfefficacy maintain a goal of safety, which prompts them to avoid failure. However,
a proxy regulator, especially one who shares a common Discourse or cultural
background with the student, who experiences vicarious success in the school’s
Discourse can influence a student to move from Maslow’s goal of safety to a goal
of belongingness or love associated with performance approach learning goals
and possibly on to esteem associated with task mastery learning goals (see
Snowman et al., 2009, pp. 410, 429). The emotions engendered by these goals
outweigh those aroused by fear of failure in the Discourse. The scaffolding thus
results in an increase in performance, leading to an increase in encouragement and
praise (verbal persuasion), a decrease in fear and loathing and an accompanying
increase in desire to please and belong (emotional arousal), and an increased
connection with the proxy who is succeeding in the Discourse (vicarious
experience) as well as with the Discourse itself, all of which results in an increase
in self-efficacy that not only incrementally reinforces this cycle but also leads to
an increase in self-control and self-regulation. Thus the proxy has scaffolded the
student to self-regulation or reached Vygotsky’s goal of use of the psychological
tools without the aid of the adult expert.
This proxy regulator is a reactive audience for the student. In Magnifico’s
(2010) conclusion to her review of the literature surrounding cognitive and
sociocultural conceptions of audience, she supports the introduction of an
interactive audience and suggests that “constructing authentic writing situations in
literacy learning environments can help writers to plan their writing using a
11
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
conceptual referent and to be cognizant of the social, communicative context in
which that writing is situated” (p. 176). She goes on to describe a middle school
writing experiment in which students writing for their teacher wrote much weaker
compositions than those same students did in a more authentic writing situation:
writing to pen pals. The authors of the study suggest that the students’ familiarity
with the teacher, their shared classroom experiences, caused them to take too
much for granted in the writing. They were unable to write to an abstract
audience, nor were they yet experts in the shared classroom Discourse. “When
writing for an authentic audience of overseas pen pals, however, students were
forced to reflect on what the audience needed to know, and this additional thought
and planning aided them in producing clearer, better organized compositions”
(Magnifico, 2010, p. 177).
Wong and Wong’s (2010) call for inviting the parents to participate in
their child’s education indicates a good starting point in the search for an
authentic audience. Dr. Marian White Hood (former principal of EEJMS) issued
such an invitation:
We encourage EVERY parent to speak with their child about their reading
skills, their writing ability, and discuss with their child what they are doing
in school. By simply showing your interest in your child’s school
progress, asking them to show you samples of their school work, a piece
of writing, and their organization, YOU make a major difference in their
progress.” (Retrieved from
http://www.pgcps.org/~eejust/Principal_Message%20update.htm)
12
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
Jones (2008/2009) believes that “most parents today more than welcome ideas to
enrich their children’s educational experiences (and test scores), they often don’t
know where to begin” (p. 37). She thus reiterates the need to invite the parents to
be part of their child’s education. She outlines several easy-to-implement methods
designed to help parents increase students’ scores on the high-stakes assessments,
such as Standards of Learning Tests (or MSAs). She suggest that parents should
encourage students to read the questions first (pre-reading strategy) and to answer
using complete sentences, which forces students to practice including supporting
details in their answers. She also suggested that parents provide a second set of
eyes for students’ assignments. “This method also provides a wonderful
opportunity for discussions as parents share their own ideas and make connections
to what is being read or studied by their child” (Jones, 2008/2009, p. 38). In at
least one study involving reading comprehension, the group that not only received
strategy instruction and had books chosen for them that matched their interests
and reading level but also was required to tell a member of their family about the
book and read to them one small section made the most significant gains in
reading level attained and comprehension. The largest improvements within this
group were seen for black, Hispanic, and low-income students (White and Kim,
2008). Therefore an attempt to invite a family member to act as an unknowing
interactive audience for brief constructed responses in support of their student’s
increased reading comprehension seems warranted.
13
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
14
Part III: Methodology
Gain Access to Site via Organic Means
Access to students was gained through a partnership created between UMUC’s
MAT program and EEJMS. EEJMS English students who fulfilled the requirements of
program participation were divided by grade, and each grade was assigned to one of the
two UMUC MAT volunteer tutors seeking teaching certification in secondary English.
The two seventh grade students were tutored at a round table for four in the back of the
cafeteria on the UMUC Largo Campus on Saturdays from 9:00 AM to 10:00 AM
beginning Saturday, February 12, 2011. The table was located away from all windows
and separated from other distractions, including two other EEJMS-UMUC tutoring
groups, by a flipchart acting as a temporary wall.
Dialogue
UMUC volunteer tutors arrived for the first day of tutoring knowing only the
general subject area in which they would be working. They had no idea how many
students they would have, what grade these students would be in, or what topics would
need to be covered. The tutors were met in the cafeteria by Counselor Y, who acted as a
liaison between the tutors and EEJMS teachers, students, and families. She handed out
the tutoring assignments, copies of the signed parent letters, inclusive of contact
information, and copies of the signed behavioral contracts. Once students arrived, tutors
and tutees adjourned to discuss their mutual needs from the tutoring sessions. Only Girl
A showed up for the first session, walking into the cafeteria alone. When Girl B arrived
during week 2, she was accompanied by both parents, though they are divorced. The tutor
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
15
made a point of talking to both parents, providing them with her contact information, and
indicating that she would be contacting them by telephone shortly to discuss further the
tutoring sessions.
Establish a Community of Co-researchers
Though contact had been made with some family members, at this point, coresearchers included only the tutor, the two tutees, Counselor Y, and to some extent
Teacher X. The final two co-researchers, the two family members, would not come
onboard until just before the implementation stage.
Collective Problem Formation
Girls A and B arrived at the tutoring sessions without specific questions or
homework but with important critical knowledge: the awareness of their need to improve
their BCRs. Counselor Y filled a hole in the tutor’s technical knowledge by defining
these as brief constructed responses and in her critical knowledge by outlining their
significance in relation to the MSAs. She provided a link to the School Improvement in
Maryland Website (http://mdk12.org/assessments/k_8/index.html), which included public
BCR sample stimulus texts and prompts, sample student responses, and sample annotated
assessments of these responses in relation to the state BCR rubric, the link for which was
also provided by Counselor Y
(http://mdk12.org/instruction/curriculum/hsa/language_arts/eng_rubric_template_bcr_is.h
tml). Counselor Y also utilized interactive knowledge by approaching the language arts
teacher in advance to find out in what areas Teacher X felt the students needed the most
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
16
help. Teacher X indicated both Girl A and Girl B needed work in reading comprehension.
Through exploration of the School Improvement in Maryland Website, as well as
additional Websites (e.g.,
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/schools/bealles/bealles/forparents/bcr.html,
http://www.fsk.org/teachers/writing_BCR1.html, and
http://teachers.bcps.org/teachers_sec/kyelito/bcr.html), instrumental knowledge
concerning the BCR’s use as a reading comprehension assessment tool as well as
technical knowledge concerning the elements of a BCR (what the three elements of a
BCR are; how to craft a topic sentence; how to write a conclusion, etc.) were ascertained.
A project incorporating BCRs fulfilled all the co-researchers needs.
Collective Development of a Research Design and Methods
Taking into consideration Teacher X’s concerns, Counselor Y’s
recommendations, and the need to involve family and encompass assessment, and after
discussion with the students and some research concerning the nature of BCRs and
reading comprehension, two plans of action were proposed. The first involved detailed
weekly assessment reports sent to family members concerning a breakdown of student
skills in relation to utilization of various reading strategies, including PQ4R (see
Appendix D; from Allen, 2008) and others appearing on their weekly classroom reading
logs (e.g., asking questions and making predictions). The second concerned weekly
practice writing BCRs utilizing a family member with no previous knowledge of the
stimulus text as a reactive audience. The students both preferred the latter. Calling upon
their interactive knowledge, each student chose a family member whom they believed
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
17
would participate and with whom they would feel comfortable working. Girl A chose her
grandmother, with whom she was living at the time, and Girl B chose her mother. The
family members were contacted by telephone to discuss the project (neither family had
internet access at home). Both agreed to participate. Follow-up letters were sent home
with Girls A and B after the next tutoring session, session 3 (see Appendix E), along with
the students’ first BCR assignment.
Collective engagement in research execution
For each of tutoring sessions 3–6, Girl A and Girl B were provided a stimulus text
and prompt taken from the School Improvement in Maryland Website. Stimulus texts and
prompts from both grades 7 and 8 were used. Outside of the tutoring session, the students
were asked to do the following:

Read the prompt.

Read the stimulus text (utilizing PQ4R graphic organizer for support)

Write the BCR.

Give the BCR (but not the stimulus text) to chosen family member to read.

Ask family member to fill out worksheet (see Appendix F).

Revise the BCR using the information provided on the worksheet.

Return worksheet and both versions of the BCR during the next tutoring session.
After week 4, study week 2, students were also asked to do the following directly after
reading the stimulus text (utilizing PQ4R graphic organizer for support):

Compose topic sentence.

Compose conclusion sentence.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE

18
List three textual details supporting the answer you provided in your topic
sentence.
During each successive session, Girls A and B were asked to fill out the weekly followup survey (Appendices G and H). In addition, Girls A and B were provided direct
instruction and guided practice in the following: the elements of a BCR, how to write a
good topic sentence (i.e., include title of stimulus text, author of stimulus text, and
answer to the prompt), how to outline supporting details, how to craft a good conclusion,
and how to utilize reading strategy PQ4R and its accompanying graphic organizer.
The family worksheet was designed to highlight for the students elements missing
from their BCRs. Items 1–3 concerned the topic sentence. Each item matches an element
that should be present in a topic sentence: item 1, stimulus text title; item 2, stimulus text
author; item 3, answer to prompt. A family member’s inability to provide an answer or
the correct answer should have spurred the student to include the missing element in her
revised BCR. Item 4 concerned supporting details. If a family member indicated
confusion after reading the BCR (e.g., not understanding how the details support the
student’s answer to the prompt), the BCR should have been revised to alleviate this
confusion.
The top portion of the weekly follow-up survey was designed as a multifocus
affective inventory to elicit the student’s perceptions about the BCR and to help indicate
that the BCR score was valid. That is, was the student unable to write a high-quality BCR
because, for example, she did not understand the prompt or because she was unable to
comprehend the text? Future permutations will adhere to the required properties of
multifocus affective inventories as outlined by Popham (2010, pp. 239–242). For
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
19
example, both negative and positive statements relating to each affective variable will be
provided. This will help to ensure student comprehension of the inventory items and
proper interpretation of the student’s answers. Question 5 was designed to assess the
project’s tools. Question 6 was designed to help the student apply higher-order thinking
to her writing.
At the end of the study, the family members were asked to fill out a multifocus
affective inventory concerning their participation in this project. Again, Future
permutations will adhere to the required properties of multifocus affective inventories as
outlined by Popham (2010, pp. 239–242), including assurance of anonymity.
The students were done a disservice during tutoring session 4. In an effort to
make the most efficient use of limited tutoring time, the first round of BCRs they
returned were set aside for later grading. This meant the students received no feedback
before being asked to write another BCR. Because of this mistake, it was decided to
extend the study an additional week. During the following weeks, BCRs were scored and
discussed during the first 15 minutes of the tutoring session. The tutor modeled critiquing
and scoring, the students performed partner critiques, and they all participated in wholegroup discussions.
Part IV: Results and Analysis
Collective Analysis of Data/Results
The project started off well. During the first week of the study, after tutoring
session 3, Girl A wrote two versions of a BCR in response to the prompt: Explain the tone
created by the author's words and phrases in paragraphs 10–12 (see Appendix I for initial and
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
20
revised BCRs, completed family worksheets, and completed student weekly follow-up
surveys; grammatical errors and misspellings are retained as they appeared on the
originals). The first version of the BCR comprised a single sentence, which did not answer the
question implied in the prompt. In addition to turning in a revised BCR, Girl A also turned in
notes outlining the who, what, when, where, and why of the stimulus text, notes created at the
prompting of her family member. The revised BCR was markedly better than the initial BCR, an
improvement not adequately reflected by her scores, which improved from 0 to 1. However, it is
doubtful this improvement was related to use of the family worksheet. Her topic sentence was
still missing the title of the stimulus text, and her details did not adequately address the question
posed by her grandmother on item 4 of the worksheet. In addition, her grandmother read the
stimulus text before filling out the worksheet. Finally, Girl A misunderstood questions 4 and 5 on
the weekly follow-up survey, prompting their revision. While Girl A outlined some good reading
strategies, “go back and circle, underlin, and highlight,” she missed a valuable opportunity to
critique her revisions on a deeper level. In fact, she mentions that she should have included the
author in the topic sentence, but this is something that she actually had done.
Girl B composed an initial BCR but “forgot” to write a second. Her topic sentence does
provide an answer to the prompt, but this answer is incorrect. Moreover, her supporting details do
not corroborate this answer. Despite her mother’s inability to answer questions 1 and 2 on the
worksheet, Girl B failed to revise the BCR to include these elements. Girl B was unable to make a
connection between her mother’s unwillingness to decipher her handwriting and possible
negative effects this handwriting could have on her grades.
During week 2, Girl A again attempted two versions of her BCR. The topic
sentence of the initial BCR contained both the stimulus text title and author’s name;
however, as indicated by her grandmother’s incorrect guess on item 3 on the worksheet, it
did not answer the prompt. Worksheet item 4 focused on grammar rather than content,
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
21
though mention was made about Girl A’s improved ability to summarize. In response,
Girl A’s revision comprised an extended summary retaining the same weaknesses as the
initial BCR. Unfortunately, this version of the BCR was inadvertently retained by the
student after the tutoring session and subsequently misplaced.
Girl B again provided just one version of her BCR, citing her mother’s failure to
provide an answer to worksheet item 4 as having indicated to her that no revisions were
required. However, her mother was unable to provide correct answers to worksheet items
1–3, which should have indicated to Girl B at least the need to revise her topic sentence.
Moreover, during discussion, it was revealed that her mother had orally asked her the
following questions, “What do you think miracle means?” and “How am I supposed to
know the author by reading the BCR?” The latter was an appropriate response to
worksheet item 2, while her actual response to item 2, “The author of the text about
maintain focus on your goal, and put all your energy into achieving it” does not actually
answer the question that was asked. The former should have indicated to Girl B that a
disconnect existed between her and her mother’s concept of miracle, which should have
stimulated her to at least look up the word in the dictionary, an action that should then
have prompted an extensive rewrite of her BCR.
As a result of the students’ failure to fully utilize the family worksheet for their
revisions, during the tutoring session immediately following their turning in of the study
week 2 BCRs, appropriate responses to the worksheet answers were modeled.
Unfortunately, the failure of Girls A and B to participate in the remaining 2 weeks o the
study made determining the effect of this modeling impossible.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
22
During study week 3 the project started to fall apart. While Girl A arrived for
tutoring, she had an incomplete initial BCR. She indicated that her grandmother had
refused to work on it with her because she had waited until the last minute to begin
working on it. Girl B did not show up for tutoring. Girl A offered to take the week 4
stimulus text, prompt, and family post-study survey (see Appendix J) to Girl B at school.
A follow-up telephone call to Girl B’s mother elicited the following information: Girl B
had been sick the day of the tutoring session and had received the packet from Girl A.
The tutoring session the following week was canceled because of illness. For what turned
out to be the final tutoring session, only Girl B arrived. She had done a BCR for neither
the week 3 nor week 4 stimulus texts or prompts and indicated that she had never
received the latter. This meant that she also did not have a family post-study survey.
The family post-study surveys were conducted by telephone. Both family
members indicated a desire to play a more active role in supporting their student’s
education and agreed that the role they were asked to play during this study was an easy
one to fulfill. They perceived that they understood the role they were being asked to play
and that it did not require too much time.
Collective Decision Making As to How to Use Results and Determine Validity
The results of this study were inconclusive. Development, implementation, and
analysis of this study had to be done in less than 9 weeks. The sample size was too small,
and participation, which was at best sporadic, ended abruptly with the cancellation of the
tutoring sessions, which prevented in-depth discussion with Girl A and Girl B about their
end-of-study self-efficacy in relation to BCRs. Neither Girl A nor Girl B improved the
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
23
quality of their BCRs within this study; the high score was a 1. However, they showed
improvement in their in-class BCRs during this time: Girl A’s scores went from 1 and 1
before tutoring to 2 and E (failure to participate) after tutoring began, while Girl B’s inclass BCR scores improved from 2 and E (failure to participate) to 3 and 2.
Unfortunately, the students’ language arts overall grades did not improve for the grading
quarter concurrent with the study: Girl A received the same grade as she had received
before the study began (D), while Girl B’s grade actually dropped to an E. A close
examination of the students’ grading sheets indicates that these grades may be more
reflective of participation (or lack thereof) than actual ability.
There is some indication that Girl A was motivated by the involvement of her
family in her education, as well as by the individualized attention she received from the
tutor. In response to her grandmother’s attention, Girl A took notes (study week 1: who,
what, where, when, and why), made revisions (study week 2: extended her summary after
reading grandmother’s comment that her ability to summarize had improved),
contemplated use of appropriate reading strategies (study week 2 weekly follow-up
survey), and actively participated in the first two weeks of the study and during the
tutoring sessions she attended, something her grandmother indicated she was not known
for (confirmed by grading sheet). She also experienced a complete failure to participate
after another family upheaval (the return of her mother after study week 2). After study
week 1, Girl A also made a point of staying after the tutoring session to let her tutor know
that the reason she had so many books with her that day was that she was going to go
right to the library to study. She was given additional PQ4R graphic organizers to support
her work.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
24
While Girl B seemed to pay little heed to her mother’s worksheet answers, she did
seem motivated to share her successes with her tutor. When her short story was selected
for inclusion in a school-wide contest, she brought in the story for the tutor to read. She
also made a point of relating that she had received a 3 on her in-class BCR. However, she
may have benefited the most from personalized instruction in a wholly unexpected
manner. In addition to making comments about the illegibility of her handwriting
(corroborated by her mother on the study week 1 worksheet), which is cramped both
horizontally and vertically, and indicating in what ways this illegibility could adversely
effect her grades, the tutor noticed some other potentially serious issues in relation to her
handwriting. First, Girl B wrote incredibly slowly. Girl A and the tutor could write three
complete sentences before Girl B could finish three words, thus making adequate notetaking in class an impossibility and leaving Girl A disengaged while Girl B caught up.
Second, part of the reason the writing was so slow was that the creation of each curved
letter seemed to require repeated back and forth writing of the top of the curve before the
rest of the letter could be completed: habit, anxiety, or OCD? This handwriting issue was
brought to the attention of the co-researchers.
Post-study discussion with co-researchers resulted in both students being referred
to EEJMS free peer tutoring sessions, held every Tuesday and Thursday at the school.
These sessions are designed to help students complete their assignments in their math and
language arts classes. In addition, Counselor Y and the family members are exploring
other programs and tutoring options to improve the students’ basic grammar, punctuation,
and spelling. Finally, Counselor Y, together with Girl B’s parents, has started an
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
25
investigation into Girl B’s handwriting issues to see whether, and if so what,
accommodations may be warranted.
Ideas for Further Research
A repetition of this research with a larger sample group, and with better access to
self–control group information (i.e., more intimate knowledge of students’ previous
instruction and performance), which could come from more direct and increased input
from the classroom teacher, and with better attention paid to the issue of self-efficacy is
warranted. During the weeks of active participation, some evidence of improvement
specifically in their BCRs but also in reading comprehension in general was seen for both
students. In addition, both benefited from individualized attention, albeit not necessarily
in the manner expected at the beginning of the study, and both families indicated a desire
for more opportunities to play an active role in their students’ education. They liked
receiving direct guidance on how to fulfill such a role (see Appendix K) and felt the role
they were asked to play in this study was easy to understand and not too time consuming.
An increased sample size would contribute to keeping the post-study survey results
anonymous, which may increase the ability to draw accurate inferences from them (see
Popham, 2010, p. 242). In addition, the increased sample size should lead to more
reliable answers, which should also increase the ability to make valid inferences from the
results. On the other hand, increased sample size and anonymity would make following
up on missing surveys, as was done in this study by telephone, impossible.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
26
Within a classroom, this study could be expanded into a semester-long working
portfolio project. Students would be asked to follow many of the same steps followed by
Girls A and B in this study:
1. Read the prompt.
2. Read the stimulus text (utilizing PQ4R graphic organizer for support)
3. Outline:
a. Compose topic sentence.
b. Compose conclusion sentence.
c. List three textual details supporting the answer you provided in your topic
sentence.
4. Write the BCR.
5. Give the BCR (but not the stimulus text) to chosen family member to read.
6. Ask family member to fill out worksheet.
7. Revise the BCR using the information provided on the worksheet.
8. Return worksheet and both versions of the BCR.
In addition students would be required to outline the revisions made between their initial
and final BCRs, explaining why each was done, and to self-assess their BCRs utilizing
the state BCR rubric. The portfolio would comprise a number of portfolio sets, with each
set consisting of the initial and revised BCRs, the family worksheet, the revision outline,
and the rubric-based scores assessed by both the teacher and student. After the
completion of each portfolio set, conferences would be held between the teacher and
student to discuss differences in rubric scores, BCR strengths and weaknesses, and plans
for future work. At the end of the semester, family members would be invited to view
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
27
their student’s portfolio, to set up a conference with the teacher to discuss the project, and
to complete multifocus affective inventories concerning various aspects of their
participation in the project. Great care would need to be taken in the creation of these
inventories to ensure that they produced the desired information.
The BCR project would be part of a scaffolded macro learning progression
with the final goal of composing a five-paragraph essay.
Macro Learning
Progression
Outline
↓
BCR
↓
Five Paragraph
Essay
The project would be supported in class through direct instruction, modeling, and guided
practice in various aspects of the BCR.
BCR Micro
Learning Strategy
Element Recognition
↓
Topic Sentence
Composition
↓
Conclusion Sentence
Composition
↓
Support Outline
Creation
↓
BCR Composition
In addition, family members would receive training in how to fill out the worksheets and
the implications of their answers to each item.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
28
References
Allen, J. (2008). More tools for teaching content literacy. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Alvermann, D. E., Phelps, S. F., & Ridgeway Gillis, V. (2010). Content area reading and
literacy: Succeeding in today’s diverse classrooms. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Carter, C. (2010). Ernest Everett Just Middle School: School improvement plan executive
summary 2010–2012. Retrieved from
http://schools.pgcps.org/index.asp?Code=13448
Dewey, J. (2001). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of
education. In F. Schultz (Ed.), Notable selections in education (3rd ed., pp. 39–
44). Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill. (Reprinted from Democracy and education: An
introduction to the Philosophy of education, 1916, New York, NY: Macmillan)
Jones, S. M. (2008/2009). Parents can help with the SOLs too. The Virginia English
Bulletin, 58(2), 37–41. Retrieved from http://www.vate.org/veb.htm
Kinsler, K. (1990). Structured peer collaboration: Teaching essay revision to college
students needing writing remediation. Cognition and Instruction, 7(4), 303–321.
Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/HCGI
Magnifico, A. M. (2010). Writing for whom? Cognition, motivation, and a writer’s
audience. Educational Psychologist, 45(3), 167–184.
doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.493470
Snowman, J., McCown, R., & Biehler, R. (2009). Psychology applied to teaching (12th
ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
White, T. G., & Kim, J. S. (2008). Teacher and parent scaffolding of voluntary summer
reading. Reading Teacher, 62(2), 116–125. Retrieved from
http://www.reading.org/General/Publications/Journals/RT.aspx
Wong, H. K., & Wong, R. T. (2009). The first days of school: How to be an effective
teacher. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications, Inc.
29
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
Appendix A: Parent Consent Form
Dr. Ernest E. Just Middle School
Dear Parent,
As you know, the end of our school year is quickly approaching. As a result, many
students are discovering that they may need additional assistance with various
subjects. Ernest E. Just Middle School and University of Maryland, University
College have formed a partnership to help students receive that assistance. Your child
has been selected to participate in a tutoring program being run by the P.R.I.D.E.
program at Ernest Just Middle School and the University of Maryland University
College. The tutoring program partners teachers at UMUC with students here at
Ernest Just to receive free tutoring. All tutoring sessions will be held at UMUC’s
Largo Campus located at 1616 McCormick Drive, Largo, MD. 20774. If you would
like to participate, please read & sign the front & back of the following registration
form and return to_________________ in the guidance office by Tuesday, February
8th. For questions, please call _________.
REGISTRATION FORM
Student Name: ______________
ID#:_________________________
Subject Designated: ___
Teacher: _____________________
__
Letter Grade (designated course): Quarter 1 ______ Quarter 2 ______
Tutoring will be conducted from 9am-10am on the following dates:
Emergency contact Information:
Parent/Guardian Name: _______________ Telephone No. ____________
Parent/Guardian Name: _______________ Telephone No. ____________
30
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
31
Appendix B: Behavior and Academic Contract
BEHAVIOR AND ACADEMIC CONTRACT
P.R.I.D.E. is committed to academic excellence. The board, faculty, staff, parents,
and students are also committed to our mission to prepare each student for success
both academically and personally.
I, ___________________________, agree to the following condition in order
that I may participate in tutoring sessions held by P.R.I.D.E. and the tutors of
UMUC.
TUTORING PROGRAM EXPECTATIONS:

I will behave appropriately. Students are expected to conduct themselves
in an appropriate manner and follow the code of conduct outlined in the
Student Handbook.

I will attend class. A tutor is not a teacher and attending tutor groups
cannot take the place of classroom attendance. Tutor groups are
supplemental to the classroom experience.

I will attend all tutor groups. Emergencies do arise; however after 2
absences without any communication to the tutor or P.R.I.D.E. director,
the tutee will be dropped from the group.

I will arrive prepared. The tutor is not there to repeat lessons or check
homework. The student needs to do as much of the homework as possible
before the meeting, and come with questions, concerns, problems. So the
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
32
tutor can help him/her gain a better understanding of the material. The
student must bring their textbook, notes, and assignments to every session.

I will be on time. The tutor will be on time and it is expected that the
student will be on time as well. If not, the tutor will start the session
without you.

I will communicate. The student must contact the tutor or P.R.I.D.E.
director regarding late arrivals and absences.

I will be respectful. I will treat tutors and students in a respectful manner
and I will follow directives in a cooperative manner at all times.
It is important that the student abide by these expectations; otherwise, the
student will not receive the full benefit of this arrangement.
_____ I have read and confirm that I understand the terms and conditions of
this contract and agree to abide by the expectations set forth. I understand that
failure to do so will result in my removal from the program.
Student Signature _________________________ Date ______________
Parent/Guardiane Signature ________________ Date ______________
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
33
Appendix C: English Rubric—Brief Constructed Response
English Rubric: Brief Constructed Response
Score 3
The response demonstrates an understanding of the complexities of the text.



Addresses the demands of the question
Uses expressed and implied information from the text
Clarifies and extends understanding beyond the literal
Score 2
The response demonstrates a partial or literal understanding of the text.



Addresses the demands of the question, although may not develop all parts equally
Uses some expressed or implied information from the text to demonstrate
understanding
May not fully connect the support to a conclusion or assertion made about the
text(s)
Score 1
The response shows evidence of a minimal understanding of the text.



May show evidence that some meaning has been derived from the text
May indicate a misreading of the text or the question
May lack information or explanation to support an understanding of the text in
relation to the question
Score 0
The response is completely irrelevant or incorrect, or there is no response.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
34
Appendix D: PQ4R
PQ4R (From Allen, 2008)
Preview
Question
Read
Reflect
Recite
Review
SAMPLE:
Preview
Question
Preview the text by looking at the title, visuals, headings,
subheadings. Look at how the material is organized and get a
general idea of the content.
Form some questions you have about the content based on the
information you gained during your preview.
Read the material and try to answer the questions you generated.
Think about what you just read by making connections and
applying the information. How does this information match other
information you have on this topic? How would you use this
information? What are the big ideas? What is the “so what?” from
your reading?
Commit the information to memory by stating the main oints
aloud. You could use the headings, bold words, or visuals to
make statements or generate questions. Add to your statements or
answer your questions to help put the information into your longterm memory.
Review the material by generating and answering questions about
the material you have read. You could use this as a time fo
anticipate questions you might be asked when you are being
assessed (tested) on your understanding of the material.
Key concept is highlighted: Planets orbit the Sun at different
distances. Experiment at beginning. Key vocab on left side.
Heading: Planets have different sizes and distances. Subheadings
under: distances, orbits. Review at the end. Picture (p. 80) shows
solar system and distances in the solar system (astronomical AU).
Why do planets orbit the Sun at different distances? How did
planets form? How far is one AU? Do all planets orbit the Sun?
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
35
Appendix E: Follow-Up Letter
Follow-Up Letter
Dear Ms. ______________,
Thank you very much for taking the time to talk to me today about
_______ and how we can work together to help her improve her brief constructed
responses, a skill she will need not only for the upcoming MSAs but also for her
social studies, science, and language arts classes.
A brief constructed response (BCR) is a tool used to assess reading
comprehension. They usually consist of a one-paragraph answer to a question or
prompt about a text the student has been asked to read. The BCR begins with a
topic sentence that should provide a brief answer to the question. The sentences
that follow should provide supporting details for this answer, including evidence
taken from the text and an explanation of how this evidence links back to the
answer. The final sentence should restate the topic sentence or summarize what
the paragraph has been about.
_________, like many students, has trouble supporting her topic
statement. She tends to assume that the reader/grader knows the same information
that she does, so she does not write it out in her BCR. By asking you to be the
audience of her BCR, we are providing _________with a reader she knows has
not read the text. I’m hoping this will help her to be more careful with her details.
Your answers on the worksheet will also provide valuable feedback that will give
her clues to holes she has left in her response.
Each of the next three Saturdays, I will provide __________ with a text
and a question or prompt. She should write her answer and give it to you to read.
Please read it and fill in the accompanying worksheet. After you have filled in
your answers, please give them back to __________ to read. After reading what
you have written, ________ should rewrite her BCR. She should bring both
versions and the worksheet back to me the next week. I will then grade her BCRs
using the same grading scale/rubric that the state will be using on the MSAs that
_________ will be taking in a few weeks. After the third worksheet, I will ask
you and __________ to fill out surveys about how you felt about this process. I
will then write a paper for my class about the experience. I will not use
_________’s name in my paper. If you would like a copy of the final paper, I
would be happy to provide one to you.
Thank you, and I look forward to working with you.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
36
Appendix F: Family Weekly Worksheet
Family Worksheet
Student’s name _______________________
After reading your student’s brief constructed response (BCR) for this week,
please fill in the following. Your answers should be based only upon the BCR
itself. Afterward, please let your student read your answers. This will provide
them valuable feedback on their response. Your student should then rewrite her
brief constructed response and bring both versions and this worksheet back to me
next week. Thank you!
1. What is the title of the text about which your student is writing?
2. Who is the author of the text about which your students is writing?
3. From the first sentence of the BCR, please guess what question you think the
student is trying to answer:
4. Please list here (and continue on back as needed) any questions or confusion
you have after reading the BCR:
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
37
Appendix G: Weekly Follow-Up Survey
Weekly Follow-Up Survey
Please circle the best answer.
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I understood the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer
on the back if you run out of room.
5. Is there anything you would like to see added to the family worksheet? If so,
why?
6. Please detail the revisions you made to your BCR and why you made these
changes.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
38
Appendix H: Revised Weekly Follow-Up Survey
Revised Weekly Follow-Up Survey
Please circle the best answer.
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I understood the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer
on the back if you run out of room.
5. Can you think of anything that your family or teachers could do to help you
write a better BCR?
6. Please list three changes that you made between your first BCR and your
revised BCR and explain why you made each of these changes:
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
39
Appendix I: Results
Week 1
Assigned: February 26, 2011
Due: March 5, 2011
Text: “Scrambled Eggs” by Martha Hamilton and Mitch Weiss (available at
http://mdk12.org/share/assessment_items/resources/scrambled_eggs.html)
Prompt: Explain the tone created by the author's words and phrases in paragraphs 10–12.
Girl A
Initial BCR:
In the text the farmer is trying to get the lawyer to defend him for him eating ten egg and
not paying for it.
Score: _0_
Revised BCR:
Paragraphs 10–12: I think that the tone created by the author, Martha Hamilton is
sarcastic. This story is about a farmer on his way to sell his cattle. The farmer stops at an inn over
night to rest. The next morning the farmer realized he was running short of money and he asked
the innkeeper if he could pay him later for the scambled eggs he at for beakfast but the farmer
forgot to pay after he sold his cattle. Seveal years later the farmer saw the innkeeper and the
innkeeper wanted to charge the farmer four thousand dollars for the eggs he ate because he felt
that the eegs he ate he would produced 10 chickens but the farmer didn’t pay so go a lawyer the
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
40
next day. The lawyer that he got was late to court because he said that he was boiling too bushels
of corn to boil. I knew that you can’t boil corn to grown. I don’t think that scrambled eggs would
produce chickens either and I think that the innkeeper is crazy for thinking that he could get a
chicken out of a scrambled egg.
Score: _1_
Family Worksheet:
After reading your student’s brief constructed response (BCR) for this week, please fill in
the following. Your answers should be based only upon the BCR itself. Afterward, please
let your student read your answers. This will provide them valuable feedback on their
response. Your student should then rewrite her brief constructed response and bring both
versions and this worksheet back to me next week. Thank you!
1. What is the title of the text about which your student is writing? Scrambled Eggs
2. Who is the author of the text about which your students is writing? Martha Hamilton
3. From the first sentence of the BCR, please guess what question you think the student is
trying to answer: She is trying to answer the tone set forth by the author
4. Please list here (and continue on back as needed) any questions or confusion you have
after reading the BCR: Why did the farmer not have to pay his debt
Weekly Follow-Up Survey:
Please circle the best answer. (Student’s answer is bolded here.)
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I understood the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
41
agree
strongly
agree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer on the
back if you run out of room.
5. Is there anything you would like to see added to the family worksheet? If so, why?
If my grandma didn’t read the text I would say she could give me a question on how
she would feel about the text and what I could do better.
6. Please detail the revisions you made to your BCR and why you made these changes.
I have to go back and circle, underlin, and highlight the text so that I could understand it
and I should show the author in my topic sentence.
Girl B
Initial BCR:
The tone of paragraphes 10-12 is that the farmer feels sad that he probably won’t win the
case aganist innkeeper. Like a example, the lawyer was late and he said when he came into the
courtroom “I lost track time while I was boiling two bushels of corn and planting them in my
field this morning”. And the judge was outraged by the innkeepers greed and deception. The
judged fined the innkeeper one hundred Kroner/American dollars. I think that if you owe
someone money give them every part of the money if you don’t know when you going to return
back with the rest of the money.
Score: _0_
Revised BCR:
Not done.
Score: _0_
Family Worksheet:
After reading your student’s brief constructed response (BCR) for this week, please fill in
the following. Your answers should be based only upon the BCR itself. Afterward, please
let your student read your answers. This will provide them valuable feedback on their
response. Your student should then rewrite her brief constructed response and bring both
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
42
versions and this worksheet back to me next week. Thank you!
1. What is the title of the text about which your student is writing? Case between farmer
and innkeeper
2. Who is the author of the text about which your students is writing? ?
3. From the first sentence of the BCR, please guess what question you think the student is
trying to answer: What’s the tone of the paragraphe.
4. Please list here (and continue on back as needed) any questions or confusion you have
after reading the BCR: I couldn’t understand her writing. She need to work on
putting space in between her words.
Survey:
Please circle the best answer.
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I understood the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer on the
back if you run out of room.
5. Is there anything you would like to see added to the family worksheet? If so, why?
If my grandma didn’t read the text I would say she could give me a question on how
she would feel about the text and what I could do better.
6. Please detail the revisions you made to your BCR and why you made these changes.
Ihave to go back and circle, underlin, and highlight the text so that I could understand it
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
43
and I should show the author in my topic sentence.
Week 2
Assigned: March 5, 2011
Due: March 12, 2011
Text: “Tackling the Trash” by Jill Esbaum (available at
http://mdk12.org/share/assessment_items/resources/tackling_trash.html)
Prompt: The houseboat headquarters for Chad’s team was named The Miracle. Is The Miracle an
appropriate name for the houseboat?
Girl A
Initial BCR:
In the text “tackling the trash” the author Jill Esbaum writes about Chad Pregracke and
how he comes home to see his home town still messy with trash. So he decides to clean it up and
then he raised a lot of money and made it Better, he didn’t Stop until he was done. Then when he
was done he went to other towns in Mississippi and help made them better.
Score: _0_
Revised BCR:
{Student retained and subsequently misplaced.}
Family Worksheet:
After reading your student’s brief constructed response (BCR) for this week, please fill in
the following. Your answers should be based only upon the BCR itself. Afterward, please
let your student read your answers. This will provide them valuable feedback on their
response. Your student should then rewrite her brief constructed response and bring both
versions and this worksheet back to me next week. Thank you!
1. What is the title of the text about which your student is writing? Tackling Trash
2. Who is the author of the text about which your students is writing? Jill Esbaum
3. From the first sentence of the BCR, please guess what question you think the student is
trying to answer: She is telling me about how trashy the Character’s hometown is
and what he does to make it better.
4. Please list here (and continue on back as needed) any questions or confusion you have
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
44
after reading the BCR: This writing is much better in terms of her summary. Her
gramma, punctuation and spelling needs careful attention. She also nees to start
sentences appropriately.
Weekly Follow-Up Survey:
Please circle the best answer.
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I understood the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer on the
back if you run out of room.
5. Can you think of anything that your family or teachers could do to help you write a
better BCR?
I think that I could just get a little more help on my vocabulary and making my
pharaghs make more senes.
6. Please list three changes that you made between your first BCR and your revised BCR
and explain why you made each of these changes:
I wrote a little more on the second one not staying on topic.
Girl B
Initial BCR:
I think the miracle is a approprate name for the houseboat because, Miracle means like,
something you trying to do and keep working at it to go to your goal. Like I discovered in the
text, in the middle it said “He spoke at schools, churches and town halls” At the end it said “In
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
45
2000, Chad began hosting community-wide cleanup days in the cities along the Mississippi. I
think that if you trying to reach any goal in your life, work harder and you will get there.
Revised BCR:
Not done.
Family Worksheet:
After reading your student’s brief constructed response (BCR) for this week, please fill in
the following. Your answers should be based only upon the BCR itself. Afterward, please
let your student read your answers. This will provide them valuable feedback on their
response. Your student should then rewrite her brief constructed response and bring both
versions and this worksheet back to me next week. Thank you!
1. What is the title of the text about which your student is writing? I think the title of the
text is about focusing on your goal.
2. Who is the author of the text about which your students is writing? The author of the
text about maintain focus on your goal, and put all your energy into achieving it.
3. From the first sentence of the BCR, please guess what question you think the student is
trying to answer: How to reach your goal?
4. Please list here (and continue on back as needed) any questions or confusion you have
after reading the BCR:
Survey:
Please circle the best answer.
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I understood the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
46
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer on the
back if you run out of room.
5. Can you think of anything that your family or teachers could do to help you write a
better BCR?
They can give me some question to make my BCR better than it was before.
6. Please list three changes that you made between your first BCR and your revised BCR
and explain why you made each of these changes:
Week 3
Assigned: March 12, 2011
Due: March 19, 2011
Text: “This Tongue Gets a Grip” by Mariana Relós (available at
http://mdk12.org/share/assessment_items/resources/thistonguegetsagrip.html)
Prompt: What other title would help a reader understand an important idea in this article?
Girl A
Initial BCR:
Refused to turn in. Composed only two sentences.
Revised BCR:
Not done.
Family worksheet:
Not done.
Weekly Follow-Up Survey:
Please circle the best answer.
1. I understood the BCR prompt:
strongly
disagree
disagree
2. I understood the BCR text:
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
strongly
disagree
disagree
47
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
agree
strongly
agree
3. I had trouble reading the BCR text:
strongly
disagree
disagree
4. The family worksheet helped me improve my BCR:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer on the
back if you run out of room.
5. Can you think of anything that your family or teachers could do to help you write a
better BCR?
No I think that Ms Hayes had been doing a good job.
6. Please list three changes that you made between your first BCR and your revised BCR
and explain why you made each of these changes:
I didn’t really change but if I did I would put in the text This Tongue get a Grip the
question says what other title would help the reader understand the text a little better I
would say {student interrupted at this point as no revised BCR was created, so no
appropriate answer for this question}.
Girl B
Did not show up for tutoring.
Week 4
Assigned: March 19, 2011
Due: March 26, 2011
Text: passage from O Pioneers! By Willa Cather (available at
http://mdk12.org/share/assessment_items/resources/opioneers.html)
Prompt: Explain whether "The Wild Land" is an effective title for this passage.
March 26: Tutoring session canceled: tutor’s daughter ill.
April 2: Girl A does not show up; Girl B shows up but has not done either the BCR from week 3
or week 4.
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
April 9: Tutoring session canceled: space not available.
48
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
49
Appendix J: Post-Study Family Survey
Student’s Name: _____Girl A______
Family Post-Study Survey
Please circle the best answer (answer indicated by bold here).
1. I understood the questions I was supposed to answer on the worksheet each
week:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I thought reading the BCR and filling in the worksheet took too much time each
week:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
3. I was happy to play an active role in helping my student improve her BCRs:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
4. I would prefer teachers teach and then just report to me about my student’s
progress:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
5. I would like more opportunities to play an active role in my student’s
education:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer
on the back if you run out of room.
6. If you would like to explain any of your answers above, please do so here?
Felt that Girl A benefited from the individualized attention of the project and
tutoring. She was at first motivated to do more of her work and seemed to
want to please [her grandmother]. However, it became harder to prod or
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
50
cajole her into doing her work toward the end because of family issues.
7. Can you think of any way this project could be changed to better help your
student master BCRs?
Felt the project was good. Girl A was in her fifth school in 4 years. She was
living with her grandmother because her mother had left town with a
boyfriend. {The mother had returned just after week 2 of the study.}
Student’s Name: ___Girl B____
Family Post-Study Survey
Please circle the best answer. (Indicated in bold here.)
1. I understood the questions I was supposed to answer on the worksheet each
week:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
2. I thought reading the BCR and filling in the worksheet took too much time each
week:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
3. I was happy to play an active role in helping my student improve her BCRs:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
4. I would prefer teachers teach and then just report to me about my student’s
progress:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
5. I would like more opportunities to play an active role in my student’s
education:
strongly
disagree
disagree
neither agree
nor disagree
agree
strongly
agree
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
Please write your answer in the blank provided. You may continue your answer
on the back if you run out of room.
6. If you would like to explain any of your answers above, please do so here?
No answer
7. Can you think of any way this project could be changed to better help your
student master BCRs?
Thought that the tutoring sessions should have occurred more often each
week and lasted longer.
51
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
52
Appendix K: Family Reaction
Sporadic attendance during the final weeks of the study followed by the
abrupt early ending of tutoring sessions made following up with co-researchers
difficult. The post-study survey of family member co-researchers had to be
conducted over the telephone with each family. No formal post-study survey was
done with the students, though informal discussion with Girl B during what
should have been the penultimate tutoring session revealed her belief that she did
not feel better able to write BCRs. Both families were disinclined to see the final
research paper, though they were interested in hearing the results of the study,
which were discussed during the same telephone call.
Post-session discussions had occurred periodically throughout the study
with both parents of Girl B. Most of these discussions involved Girl B’s need for
remedial work in grammar, punctuation, and spelling (as well as mathematics) to
help ensure that she had an adequate base of knowledge to build upon as she
advanced to high school and concerns about her handwriting. Counselor Y had
been brought into these discussions and was working with the parents on finding
other educational supports for Girl B and investigating the handwriting issue.
During the follow-up phone call to conduct the post-study survey, Girl B’s mother
indicated a desire to participate in these UMUC-EEJMS partnership tutoring
sessions again next year. She also chose strongly agree in answer to the
statements “I was happy to play an active role in helping my student improve her
BCRs” and “I would like more opportunities to play an active role in my student’s
education.” Her only criticism of the program was that she felt the tutoring
BCRS AND AN UNKNOWING REACTIVE AUDIENCE
53
sessions needed to be held more often than once a week and should continue to
the end of the school year.
Girl A arrived at the sessions alone, so speaking in person with her family
was not an option. However, during the post-study survey, her grandmother
indicated strong agreement with the statement “I was happy to play an active role
in helping my student improve her BCRs” and agreement with the statement “I
would like more opportunities to play an active role in my student’s education.”
She also expressed concern about the amount of personal upheaval her
granddaughter had experienced but happiness that her granddaughter seemed to
want to please her by working with her on the BCRs and responding to her
reactions. The family was already working with Counselor Y, who had advised
them to seek family counseling about their family issues, and decided to talk to
her also about finding more resources to help support Girl A’s remedial language
arts needs.