Abstract
The purpose of this experimental study was two-fold. The first purpose was to explore the levels of self-efficacy of pre-service teachers regarding their own reading and writing processes and their abilities to be effective literacy leaders. The second purpose was to implement two different interventions in literacy instruction for pre-service teachers: an innovative Reflections Interactive Notebook and a traditional Reader’s Response Journal. The differences between outcomes of the two interventions were analyzed. Pre-service teachers from Florida State University (N =65) were randomly assigned from 3 beginning reading methods courses to receive a 6-week intervention utilizing the Reflections Interactive Notebook or Reader’s Response Journals. Before intervention began, students were given a pre-test in the form of open-ended and Likert scale questions to determine their beliefs, self-efficacy, and knowledge of the content area of literacy. In addition to descriptive statistics for the open-ended portion of the survey, a Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was used to examine the effects of the two interventions. After determining a significant effect in MANOVA, Wilks’s λ= .896, F (3,124)=4.811, p<. 01, η2 = .104. Between subjects and within subjects analysis revealed all the dependent variables were significant between the pre-and post tests: for belief scores: F (3, 126)=29.71, p<.01, η2 = .414, for self-efficacy scores: F(3,126)= 16.62, p<.01, η2 = .284, and for knowledge: F(93,126), p<.01, η2 = .240. Post hoc pairwise analyses for all three dependent variables were completed to determine differences between the two interventions (Reflections Interactive Notebook or Readers Response Journals) on the dependent variables of belief system, self-efficacy, and knowledge of literacy content. Results showed that the Reflections Interactive Notebook Group participants showed a number of positive differences in responding to their future literacy curriculum. It is speculated this could be due, in part, to the nature of the explicit instruction of research-based practice, along with the actual personal writings and practice of strategies that allowed for knowledge of literacy content and a strong belief system in creating and implementing literacy curriculum.
|
