The document summarizes an educator's action research on implementing intensive phonemic awareness instruction to increase students' reading levels. Through assessments and observations, the educator found students struggled with blending sounds to read words. To address this, the educator provided additional phonics instruction to an intervention group and collected data through assessments, teacher interviews, and lesson observations. Analysis showed the intervention helped most students' phonics skills but more support is still needed. The educator plans to continue the research with further instructional strategies and professional development.

1. Running head: ACTION RESEARCH
Action Research
Hollie Parrish
American College of Education

2. ACTION RESEARCH 2
Introduction
Action research is an effective way for educators to address concerns of their classroom
by collecting data and implementing strategies and techniques to see if it supports student
achievement. Airasian (as cited in Ross-Fisher, 2008) shared the essential goal of action
research by stating, “Teachers and administrators must be able to identify clearly what
techniques are effective at improving student learning, which ones are not, and how to develop a
set of successful instructional practices based on the knowledge.” On a daily basis, an educator
continually modifies their instruction to meet the needs of their students. When something is not
working and students are struggling, educators use that knowledge and data to investigate
strategies and programs to help students. In this action research, I will outline the problem,
research questions, and literature reviews that will be significant in conducting my action
research.
Purpose
Over the past 12 years of teaching, my experience has been in the first grade classroom at
a Title 1 school. The majority of my students come from low socioeconomic homes with limited
educational exposure prior to entering Kindergarten. I also teach a high population of English
Language Learners (ELL) who are new to the English language, which had an impact on their
learning. Phillips, Menchetti, and Lonigan (2008) explained, “Phonological awareness is the
ability to detect and manipulate the sound structure of words independent of their meaning.” For
students to be successful readers it is important for them to know how blending sounds together
build words. Year after year, my students struggle with their phonemic awareness. The purpose
of my research is to determine if intensive phonemic awareness instruction increases students

3. ACTION RESEARCH 3
reading level. Through research on the successfulness of phonemic awareness instruction, I
believe that it will have a positive impact on student success in reading.
Problem Statement
Through data collection of my student’s ability to successfully segment and decode
words, the data collected indicates a deficit of phonemic awareness in my first grade classroom.
This deficit is affecting their ability to read grade level text. The purpose of my research is to
determine the effectiveness intense phonemic instruction in the classroom as on student’s ability
to read successfully.
Research Questions
To better understand the potential impact an intensive phonemic awareness instruction
can have on student learning I have the following questions I will use to guide my research.
1. Why are students having a difficult time decoding and blending words in their reading?
2. What interventions have been used to help students with phonemic awareness?
3. How does having a strong phonemic awareness influence a student’s reading level?
Literature Review
When starting my literature review, my goal was to investigate ways other educators have
researched effective instructional practices to increase phonemic awareness with students.
Edwards and Taub’s (2016) research study covered the relationship between sound blending,
sound segmentation, and reading comprehension. This study conducted had a different goal than
previous phonemic awareness studies. Specifically this study wanted to address whether
blending or segmentation interventions had a greater impact on reading comprehension. Prior
research methods had them as unified concept, studying them jointly. This study conducted
qualitative research with an empirical perspective.

4. ACTION RESEARCH 4
In addition, the study also focused on the relationship between blending, segmentation on
reading comprehension of African American students. The study involved 86 students, 98%
African American, who were in the first through fourth grade from a Title 1 school. Students
were individually administered the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP,
Wagner, Torgesen, & Rashotte, 1999) and the Woodcock-Johnson III: Tests of Achievement
(WJ III ACH: Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001). The CTOPP is as assessment that
measures their phonological awareness, whereas the Woodcock-Johnson III asses reading
comprehension.
The results from the study showed blending had a moderate to large effect of students
reading comprehension, while segmenting on reading comprehension was lesser (Edwards and
Taub’s, 2016). The study noted that the younger age (first and second grade) participants had a
more difficult time with the segmentation. “The study supports this differentiated predictive
ability of phonemic awareness skills, specifically blending and segmenting” (Edwards and
Taub’s, 2016).
Many people have researched the connection of strong phonological awareness and
reading success. Kardaleska and Karovska-Ristovska (2018) research studied the assumption that
phonological and phonemic awareness are critical indicators on potential reading difficulties.
The article began with research that supported the importance of a strong phonetic foundation.
Their initial suggestion was, “abilities related to phonological awareness are developed in
continuum from rhyming through blending, manipulation and segmentation” (p.25). This study
used test based on the Macedonian phonological system and focused on: initial sounds, rhyming,
blending, segmentation, and manipulation.

5. ACTION RESEARCH 5
Sixteen participants in the study were divided into two groups of eight. The studies
purpose was control research. Over the course of a year, one group received typical reading
instruction. In contrast, the second group was exposed to specific interventions to support
phonological awareness. Students were tested initial before the study began and again at the
conclusion of the year. Data indicated a strong relationship, 76%, between students segmenting
and manipulation. It was also noted that students who had additional interventions performed
more successfully in first grade than the other group. The study suggest that early exposure to
activities that support phonemic awareness with critical. Kardaleska and Karovska-Ristovska
findings aligned with Edwards and Taub’s study that student’s ability to segment is critical for
reading success.
Oh, Haager, and Windmeuller, (2007) conducted a longitudinal study of predictors of
reading success. Specifically, the purpose of the study was to examine how the implementation
of key foundational skills for English Language Learners (ELL) learning to read English. As in
previous studies, the key to avoiding reading difficulties is to implement interventions that
emphasize foundational reading skills. Kindergarten and first grade students from four schools
that represented a large population for ELL students were utilized in this study. The Dynamic
Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) was the assessment tool used to collect data.
The study was conducted over a two-year period with six data points being collected, beginning,
middle, and end of both the kindergarten and first grade school year.
Through the study over the course of time, key predictive findings were determined. It
was determined that rapid letter naming proved to be a better predictive factor over phonemic

6. ACTION RESEARCH 6
awareness in the kindergarten year for ELL students. This is finding is in contrast to native
English speaking students. Later in first grade, it was shown that intense phonemic awareness
instruction proved to be more beneficial for the ELL student. The study shows the resemblances
of development for both ELL and native English speakers, but indicates that ELL students
benefit from a stronger foundation in rapid letter naming prior to moving on to further phonetic
instruction.
The common finding between all three studies is the importance of students learning to
read to have daily instruction of phonics. All studies show positive reading growth in students
who received interventions for letter naming, segmenting, and blending sounds. These key
findings will assist me in my action research as I work to answer research questions.
Interventions utilized, along with research for teaching populations of ELL, will assist me in
determining factors that affect students learning to read. The variety of data collection choices
between the studies diversifies the options for creating my own research methodology and
design.
Research Methodology/Design
When conducting my formative action research, the methodology I utilized is the control
method. Dr. Metcalf (2018) explained that this method requires the use of two separate groups
when conducting the research. In the study, I had a control group that received increased
phonetic awareness intervention, while the other group received general classroom instruction.

7. ACTION RESEARCH 7
Increased phonetic awareness interventions included, using letters tiles to build, blend, and
segment words as well as multisensory activities to support phonics.
I used several methods in order to help answer my research questions. Data collected
through beginning of the year formative phonics assessments indicated a deficit in student’s
ability to decode, blend, and segment in order to successfully read words. Ongoing phonics
assessments throughout the study allowed me to gather qualitative data to investigate the
effectiveness of the intervention. Reading assessments were conducted for students to give a
baseline reading level; this data will assist in monitoring reading level progress based on intense
phonics instruction.
Data Collection
Over the course of the study, I collected both qualitative and quantitative data from three
different areas: 1) an interview with an ELL teacher who works with my students 2) obtained
data via formative assessments 3) created and analyzed a video of a phonics lesson.
Table 1: Teacher Interview
1. What do you feel is the most
important skill a child needs
who is learning to read?
Students need to know their letter sounds and how they
can put them together by blending to make words.
Blending and breaking words apart to read is very
important.
2. What do students learning to
read struggle with the most?
Many students I work with struggle with blending
sounds together. They can say individual sounds like
f/l/o/p, but when they go to blend, they leave our
sounds or say something completely different.
3. What interventions have you
used successfully with
students when building
phonemic awareness?
I work with students building words with letter tiles or
magnetic tiles. We practice saying sounds sound by
sound and push them together quickly.

8. ACTION RESEARCH 8
4. Is there a specific strategy
you use with students who
are struggling?
For my students repetition is so important. They need
to see the words and practice blending and segmenting
every day.
5. What do you recommend
classroom teachers do to
help support students, in
particular, ELL learners who
have a deficit in phonemic
awareness?
Make sure students have opportunities daily to read and
manipulate words and their sounds. Using multisensory
approach to learning is very beneficial.
The qualitative data collected through my interview with the ELL teacher helped me
answer my question of why students have difficult time with decoding. This teacher works with
the students daily in the classroom and her professional observations, judgement, and experience
assisted in answering this question. Once I interviewed the teacher, I analyzed her interview
answers in order to draw conclusions.
Quantitative data collected through formative data assessments given to the students four
times over the course of a semester for five total data points including the baseline. The data
collected assisted in answering the question of how an intense phonemic awareness instruction
benefits student learning. Data collected from assessments are displayed on a table that
communicates student’s progress through the study.
Chart 1: Phonics Assessment
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5
Phonics Assessment
Baseline Assessment 1 Assessment 2 Assessment 3 Assessment 4

9. ACTION RESEARCH 9
Chart 2: Reading Level
Beginning of the Year
Level
(Baseline)
Mid- Year Level End of the Year Level
Student1 Pre – A
Student 2 A
Student 3 Pre-A
Student 4 B
Student 5 A
Finally, I collected qualitative and quantitative data via a recorded video of a phonics
lesson with students. Through observation of student learning and response to phonics activities,
I was able to analyze what barriers and difficulties students have with decoding and segmenting
in order to answer my research question of why it is difficult for students.
Phonics Lesson Video Recording
Student response to questions during lesson on blending:
Blend Sled Blend Frog Blend Crab Blend Flag
Student 1 s/l/e/d sed
incorrect
Student 2 fr/o/g frog
correct
Student 3 (absent)
Student 4 cr/a/b crab
correct
Student 5 f/l/a/g fog
incorrect

10. ACTION RESEARCH 10
Data Analysis
The data I collected was very helpful and informative in assisting me with understanding
my concerns with students regarding their phonemic awareness. I was able to collect both
quantitative and qualitative data, which allowed me to observe my concern with students in
different avenues.
Teacher Interview
I was able to gain valuable insight and qualitative data via the interview with a colleague
who works with the students in my class. The information that was shared with me was very
comparable to the data I collected from the phonics assessments. The teacher noted that students
have a difficult time blending the sounds together. She shared the importance of students having
a firm foundation in decoding, segmenting, and blending in order to be successful readers. I was
also provided with some very good interventions and strategies, which will be very helpful in
future action steps with working with the students.
Phonics Assessment/Reading Level
The beginning of the year phonics assessment was very important quantitative data to
collect and monitor over the course of the study. The first assessment gave me a baseline of
where the students were performing, but also gave me specific areas in which students struggle.
After analyzing student results, specifically the deficits, it was apparent that my students knew
their sounds, but had difficulty blending them together in order to orally produce the correct
word. This information assist me in making instructional decisions and creating appropriate
interventions that will help in building this skill. In addition, having baseline reading levels
assist me in determining if the increased phonemic awareness instruction affects their reading
level.

11. ACTION RESEARCH 11
As you can see in the data collection of the phonics assessment, there was improvement
with four of the five students in my intervention group. It is also important to note that one of my
students did not make any growth between the two data collections. This student was absent
from school quite a few days, therefor was not in class receiving the additional phonics
instruction.
Phonics Lesson Video Observation
The video of a phonics less was very informative for me. I was able to gather both
quantitative and qualitative data. During the lesson students, we answering questions and
practicing blending. I was able to collect data on my focus students on if they were successful.
As noted in my above data collection of the lesson two of the students correctly blended, two of
them incorrectly, and one student was absent. I was able to not with the two students who
blended incorrectly, specifically where they had difficulties. Student 1 segmented each sound
correctly, but when they blended them, they left out part of the blend. Student 5 also correctly
segmented the given word but was unable to blend. The students were looking at these words
given to them on the board. Therefore, students are able to decode and segment each sound, but
still struggle to blend.
Through observation of the lesson, I received qualitative data through questioning of
students. I was able to observe my students in action as they work to segment, blend, and read
words. I noted strategies that students used successfully. Tapping out each sound with their
fingers as the produced the individual sounds prior to blending appeared effective. In addition,
some student were successful if they could tap each sound and go back follow the word across as
the read the word. This data assists me with strategies to use with my students who are
unsuccessful with blending.

12. ACTION RESEARCH 12
Future Action Plan
Through the data collection of the three sources mentioned above, it is apparent of the
need for further study on the deficit of phonemic awareness in many students. The concern is
that students who struggle with phonemic awareness are not able to successfully able to read on
grade level text. Through the formative assessments, teacher interview, and classroom
observation I have found that students who are not successfully reading do not have the
fundamental skills of reading. Since students are lacking some skills it is important that
interventions and strategies be put in place to help bridge the gap.
Further observation of student learning is also very important as I strive to understand
what strategies are useful. Student observation allows me to see student learning in action and
see potential difficulties for students. Further interviews with colleagues and other educators
would allow me to gain information on what they have observed as hindrances in student
learning.
Force Field Analysis
The research conducted along with the data collection process has allowed me to help
answer my key research questions I established to guide my research. When beginning my
research my objective was to understand why students had such a difficult time decoding and
blending resulting in unsuccessful reading. Below you will find the force field analysis that
addresses the problem and goals of the plan, as well as potential obstacles that may arise because
of the implementation.
Goals of Action Plan
The primary goal of this action research plan is to improve student’s ability to decode,
segment, and read words successfully.
Objectives

13. ACTION RESEARCH 13
The major objectives are as follows:
1. Create and implement effective interventions specifically working on decoding and
blending words.
2. Implement daily phonics instruction where students are working on their phonetic
awareness.
Driving Forces Restraining Forces
Professional Development
for Teachers, specifically in
phonics.
- Time – when will professional development be
provided?
- Cost of Training – who is paying for it?
- Who will teach trainings?
Curriculum To Support
Phonics Instruction
- Cost
- Support of Administration/District
- Training to support implementation
- Push-Back from teachers on implementation
Resources to Support
Instruction (letter tiles, white
boards, blending mats, etc.)
- Cost – who will pay for resources?
- Training on how to use in interventions.
-
Use of Digital Resources to
Support Instruction
- Is there enough technology for implementation?
- Student training of how to use digital resources.
Daily Phonics Instruction
with Quarterly Assessing
- Time each day
- Curriculum - who will create, teachers, coaches,
district?
- What about students who are absent a lot?
- What assessment tools will be used, teacher created,
curriculum based, etc.?
The main objectives are to create and implement daily instruction and interventions that
will support students in their phonetic awareness. The major driving forces that have the
potential to impede the action research is cost and training. Implementing new curriculum
involves a financial commitment from the school or district. In addition, with new curriculum or
interventions will involve proper professional development for teachers. The goal for daily
phonics instruction would be for the teachers to see the value in the implementation and the
impact if has on student success in reading. Another barrier that has the potential to affect the
implementation is finding the time in the daily schedule to provide 20-25 minutes of phonics
instruction in an already tight instructional schedule.

14. ACTION RESEARCH 14
Potential Evaluation Data Sources for Future Action Plan
Data collection throughout the integration of the phonics instruction initiative will
provide quantitative data to measure the effectiveness of the implementation. Collaboration
among teachers on observation of student learning will be beneficial for all and provide
qualitative data. Through reading assessments administered throughout the school year and as a
final summative assessment, students reading levels will provide data on the effectiveness of the
intervention. Teacher observation will be key in determining the impact the additional intensive
phonics instruction had on student learning.
Conclusion
Conducting action reaction is an effective way to make positive instructional and
operational changes in the classroom. In my action research, I sat out to answer key research
questions: Why are students having a difficult time decoding and blending words in reading?
What interventions have been used to help? Finally, how does having a strong phonemic
awareness influence a student’s reading level? As a first grade teacher, whose primary goal in a
student’s first grade year is to learn to successfully read I am always working with students who
struggle to make the goal. As shared in the article, “Learning to Read and Write:
Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children. (1998), “Children’s facility in
phonemic awareness has been shown to be strongly related to later reading achievement.”
In beginning the research process, I began but reading several literature reviews related to
my action research. These studies provide valuable information, research, and strategies that I
found beneficial as I worked to answer by key questions. All studies revealed the importance of
daily phonics instruction for students as well as the importance of having a strong phonetic
awareness to be successful in reading. Next, I designed my methodology for completing my

15. ACTION RESEARCH 15
research that set up my plan for data collection. The data collection process was important as it
made me aware of key deficits and obstacles that are making students unsuccessful. Key findings
were discovered in my interview with a colleague as well as the observation of a classroom
lesson.
I also began to implement an intense daily phonics instruction with a focus group of
students. Through data analysis, it is apparent that the interventions implementation with
students are showing positive gains and results. I have shared my findings with colleagues and
many are eager to begin taking action in their classrooms. This has been an exceptional learning
experience and I have gained so much knowledge though this action research project. I am
excited to continue to implement what I have learned and to see the success of my students now,
as well as in the future.

16. ACTION RESEARCH 16
References
Edwards, O. W., & Taub, G.E. (2016). The influence of specific phonemic awareness processes
on reading comprehension of African American students. Journal of Research in
Childhood Education, 30(1), 74-84.
Kardalesha, L., & Karovska-Ristovska, A. (2018). Revisiting the view of phonological and
phonemic and phonetic awareness as early predictors in reading difficulties. Vizone, (29),
23-30.
Learning to Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children.
(1998). The Reading Teacher, (2), 193.
Metcalf, Kim. (Course Lecturer). (2018). Research Methods: Module 2 [Video]. American
College of Education. Retrieved from http://ace.edu
Phillips, B. M., Menchetti, J. C., & Lonigan, C. J. (2008). Successful phonological awareness
instruction with preschool children: Lessons from the classroom. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education, 28(1), 3–17. http://doi.org/10.1177/0271121407313813
Ross-Fisher, R. (2008). Action research to improve teaching and learning. Kappa Delta Pi
Record, 44(4), 160-164. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.ace.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/232057326?accou
ntid=31683
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological
processing. Austin, TX: Pre-Ed.
Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III. Itasca, II:
Riverside Publishing.