Introduction
A complex and pervasive goal of education
in elementary school is reading
comprehension for all students (Sporer,
Brunstein, Kieschke, 2009) because reading
comprehension provides the foundation for a
substantial amount of academic learning
required as children progress through their
K-12 schooling (Alvermann & Earle, 2003;
Kirsch, de Jong, LaFontaine, McQueen,
Mendelovits & Monseur, 2002). The report
of the National Reading Panel (2000) states
a major goal of reading comprehension
research, has been to identify effective
reading strategies that increase children’s
comprehension (National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development, 2000).
Guthrie, Wigfield, Barbosa, Perencevich,
Taboada, Davis, Scafiddi & Tonks (2004)
posit reading comprehension to be a
complex process resting primarily on
instructional research which includes
explicit cognitive strategy instruction.
Strategies such as using schema, making
connections, visualizing, inferring with text,
and the question answer relationships
(QAR) strategy are often associated with the
instruction of older children (Stahl, 2004);
however, it is important to note that these
are all very relevant strategies for younger
(even Kindergarten) students too (Gregory
& Cahill, 2010). This study reports an action
project intervention of an adapted exposure
of QAR comprehension skills development
among Kindergarten students.
Review of Literature
Comprehension Learning Through the Use
of Explicit Strategy
Raphael, Highfield & Au’s (2006) research
notes that students lack the fundamental skill
to apply the sources for finding information
to answers in school settings, “despite the
fact that students ask and answer questions
from a very young age” (Raphael, et al.,
2006, p. 13). The scholars designed QAR as
a method for a deliberate and a common
way of thinking and talking about effective
sources of information when answering
questions. QAR strategy incorporates
Anderson & Pearson’s (1984) schema
theory, Brown, Campione & Day’s (1981)
metacognition, and Schank & Abelson’s
(1977) script theory. The QAR language
conveys the idea that answers can be found
in text sources or in our background
knowledge and experiences (“In the Book”
and “In My Head”) (Raphael, et al., 2006).
Research shows how important it is for
students to understand the distinction
between these two primary sources of
information to improve reading
comprehension (Taylor, 2008).
QAR draws from the advocacy of
Vygotsky’s (1986) psycho-social
interactions where children gain incremental
cognitive and holistic development through
cooperative learning, small-group centers,
and social activities with the “more capable
other
” (Raphael, et al., 2006, p. 37) as
opposed to competitive, large-group,
teacher-dominated learning. These forms of
social learning are of great importance to the
child, both socially and academically.
Joining thinking and doing as two
seamlessly congruent halves of the learning
process is at the core of allowing students to
actively participate in the learning process,
and strengthen their knowledge base by
tapping into prior knowledge and effectively
implementing scaffolding strategies (Taylor,
Pearson, Peterson & Rodriguez, 2005). If
teachers are going to be successful
instructors of comprehension, they must be
involved in reading with an awareness of
how the strategies are successfully used in
actual reading (Dobler, 2009).
Comprehension Through Read-Aloud
One successful strategy used in actual
reading is the “read-aloud” approach,
especially useful for beginning learners with
rudimentary reading skills. Trelease (2006)
recommends reading to young children for
the very same reasons we talk to young
children. He says
“we read to young children …….to
reassure, to entertain, to bond; to
inform or explain, to arouse
curiosity, and to inspire. But in
reading aloud, you also condition the
child’s brain to associate reading
with pleasure; create background
knowledge; build vocabulary; and
provide a reading model” (Chapter
1).
Reading to a child may be deemed an easy
task, but it can become a powerful, yet
subtle, learning tool when placed within a
structured setting (Beck & McKeown,
2001), where comprehension skills are
honed in by providing children the
opportunities to preview a text, to generate
words, and organize thoughts to make oral
responses before, during and after reading of
a text (Yopp & Yopp, 2004). Dickinson and
Tabors (2001) suggest that teachers and
parents should involve children in both
immediate and non-immediate talk.
Immediate talk concentrates on answering
factual details and labeling pictures. Non-immediate talk extends beyond the text. It
includes word meanings, making predictions
and inferences, and relating the text to
personal experiences. It is important that
individual children have numerous
opportunities to engage in non-immediate
talk before and during read-aloud. A cross-age read-aloud program of high-school
student volunteers reading to pre-K children
showed tangible and noteworthy gains for
the afore-mentioned advocacies
in promoting textual comprehension and
critical thinking among both student-readers
and their pre-K learners (Furtado, 2010).
Leadership and Action Research
Intervention
In schools, effective teacher intervention …
“has become a defining characteristic of
recent efforts to professionalize teaching
and reform school” (Smylie, 1996, p. 3).
Teacher leadership is often embedded in the
research-based instructional improvement
efforts undertaken by teachers to enhance
student learning (York-Barr & Duke, 2004).
It is true that teachers are extremely busy
and are constantly faced with “doing more
with less”. Danielson (2006) delineates
teacher dispositions and required models for
leadership in the profession where teachers
just don’t do things differently but do them
better (italics, authors) as a professional
exploration of practice. While, Fullan (1994)
advocates that teacher leaders should
develop and exhibit: 1) knowledge of
teaching and learning pedagogy; 2)
collegiality; 3) engagement in life-long
learning and growth; 4) awareness of change
processes within the educational context and
the larger community; and, 5) a moral
perspective towards the profession.
Deciding to do more; and, making a
difference are personal endeavors a teacher
can or may strive towards. Recently, an
elementary public school in southern
California adopted the “The Leader in Me”
program, by highlighting the seven qualities
of highly effective people (Covey, 2004) to
be addressed and adopted by the teachers of
the leadership committee for this new
program
Reflective Inquiry for the Action Research
Intervention
Reflection or inquiry is especially of great
importance for a teacher-leader and its
origin can be traced back to Dewey’s (1993)
philosophy of progressive education. He
viewed inquiry as a process of pragmatic
problem-solving and the nurturing of
reflective skills as an essential ingredient to
improve the practice of teaching (Emerling,
2010). For the teacher, reflection strengthens
instructional pedagogy, ensures that
methodology is grounded in empirical
research and personal teaching philosophies,
promotes creativity, builds schemata for
future lessons, and supports academic,
social, and emotional desired student
outcomes (Henderson, 2009). Schon (1987)
recommends teachers to reflect and think
spontaneously during classroom interactions
and also engage in recall and reflection on
one’s actions and thoughts after an
instructional process by self or with peers to
reveal the wisdom embedded in the
experience.
Reflective inquiry and its importance in an
action research intervention are explicitly
considered, and especially well highlighted
by the following researchers:
Wellington (1991) states, “reflection
practice calls for personal and
professional transformation intended
to raise consciousness, to challenge
complacency, and to engender a
higher order of professional
practice” (p. 5).
Canning (1991) states, that reflection
can lead the teacher to explore
alternatives that eventually lead to
“Aha!” (p. 20) moments associated
with participating in systematic
reflection and action research.
Schon (1987) describes two types of
reflections to help develop a
reflective thought process. They are:
“Reflection-in-Action”, leading to
one’s spontaneous ways of thinking
and acting in the midst of the action
and “Reflection-on-Action,” to
reflect after the process is completed.
Killion & Todnem (1991) beckon
teachers as professionals to treat
reflection as “a gift we give
ourselves, not passive thought…….
but an effort we approach with rigor,
some purpose… and in a formal
way…to reveal the wisdom
embedded in our experience” (p. 14).
The teacher’s initial reflection “My initial
reaction was to think back to my years in the
BTSA
program and recall the vast amount
of reflection that was required” is further
expanded in her own words.
Teacher’s Initial Thoughts
Back then, amongst all the stress and chaos of
becoming a new teacher, reflection seemed to be
“one more thing to do.” … As years go by …; I find
myself reflecting more frequently than before.
As a fellow colleague pointed out this evening in
class: “In the beginning, you are just taking
materials and strategies that you can get and trying
them out to see what works”.
Likewise, reflection for the student makes
learning more meaningful, connects to
strengths and needs, helps develop self-efficacy and esteem, solidifies content, and
allows for students to find their academic
niche. Time should be allotted to allow
students to really think about their work,
effort, achievements, and needs. Even at a
young age such as Kindergarten, students
are capable and excited to review special
pieces of work and verbally describe how
they created it, and why they chose a
particular method to accomplish a task
(Gregory & Cahill, 2010).
The Study
This predicative study explicates instruction
of the QAR strategy over a four week (18
day intervention) period to enhance
comprehension skills among Kindergarten
students. The research also presents
simultaneous teacher reflections that
underscore the critical challenges to
implement theoretical constructs (ITC) and
the spontaneous adjustments required during
intervention to maximize student learning.
Preparing for a QAR Intervention
Empirical studies call for a more formal
preparation and support of teacher leaders to
collaborate, create community, foster
ownership, empower self and others, and
most importantly, learn to lead by
researching and improving one’s
instructional expertise in the classroom
(Fullan, 1994; Lieberman & Miller, 2005).
Dick (2007) describes action research to be
an extension of a natural approach to
problem-solving entailing “review plan
act review…and so on” (p. 150). The
iterative cycle of action and research leads
teachers to fulfill the “dual aims of action
(or change) and research (or theory, or
understanding)” (Dick, 2007, p. 150) “that
incorporates questioning, assessing,
investigating, collaborating, analyzing, and
refining” (Schoen, 2007, p. 211) the
problem.
The teacher’s personal philosophy and
reflections exhibit an eagerness to
experiment with an intervention project like
QAR in the classroom. Several related steps
were taken before the project began, and
external activities continued during the
project as well as after the project ended.
These actions helped prepare a teacher’s
first attempt at a research-based intervention
in the classroom; and contribute to the
objective of enhancing reading
comprehension with a QAR strategy. The
explicit teacher preparatory attributes for the
study are:
The teacher is a five-year veteran in
elementary schools, and has two
years in the current classroom.
The teacher is enrolled in a MA in
education capstone course that
teaches and nurtures in-service
teachers on classroom interventions
over 13 weeks (Covey, 2004; York-Barr & Duke, 2004).
The teacher attended instructional
sessions for exposure to the various
stages of research, data analysis and
a review of Action Research Project
modules completed by prior students
in the program.
In this setting, 5 peer teachers chose
QAR
6
as their intervention project,
and peer-collaboration was
encouraged throughout 13 week
semester (Henderson, 2009).
Mentoring by a professional
educator, peer-consultations, and
weekly reflection journals are tools
used to “review plan act
review…” (Dick, 2007, p.150)
QAR to specific classroom needs.
School Profile
The elementary school in southern
California has an Academic Performance
Index (API) score of 965 (scores range from
200-1000) for 2009-10; has a split-day and a
full-day Kindergarten; and, uses a Response
to Intervention (RTI) program to target and
assist struggling readers. Twenty-three
students, (twelve boys and eleven girls) ages
five and six participated in the study. There
are eighteen Caucasian, two Japanese, one
Chinese, one Iranian, and one Korean
student in the class. For most of the year,
students focus on letter recognition,
phonemic awareness, and decoding. Reading
comprehension and text analysis are
imbedded in the daily Language Arts
instruction, with a focus on RTI small group
instruction on comprehension skills. This
helps prepare kindergarten readers for the
transition to first grade. Through the use of
small group instruction, targeted skills, and
the Headsprout
computer program, students
were exposed to a modified QAR
intervention.
Adapting the Research for Kindergarteners
The purpose of the study was to see how
explicit instruction of the QAR strategy over
a four week (18 day intervention) period can
enhance reading comprehension among
Kindergarten students. It was crucial to
adapt various QAR lessons, alter time
periods, and modify specific strategies so
that the content was both accessible and
appropriate for young learners.
Because many students cannot read
independently and write answers to
questions, there are parent volunteers, who
also help orally ask the questions. Students’
exact answers are then recorded on their
tests, and graded. Over fifty percent of
students’ parents volunteer on a weekly
basis within the classroom. All students are
proficient in the English language, and are
able to communicate their thoughts and
ideas very well.
The stories used for intervention are both
Aesop’s fables. The teacher selected The
Tortoise and the Hare and The Jay and the
Peacock from a reading list for kindergarten
children to allow comprehension beyond the
literal level with admirable animal
characters that children of all backgrounds
can relate to (O’Sullivan, 2004). The
selected stories helped focus on student
characteristics such as: perseverance;
completion of a task, self-image and accept
your true identity. A pre- and post-test
consisted of the same thirteen questions. Six
of the thirteen questions are “In the Book”
questions, while the remaining seven are “In
My Head” questions.
Staying within the same genre for testing,
and using the same questions allows for the
results of the pre- and post-tests to reflect
accuracy, consistency, and the ability to
measure the effectiveness of the
intervention.
DAY 1: QAR- A New Adventure in
Reading!!!
Students were introduced to the QAR
strategy through their core Language Arts
story of the week, Aesop’s The Tortoise and
the Hare. The lesson began with reading the
fable aloud and asking comprehension
questions along the way. These questions
Question answer relationship strategy 8
lay the groundwork for a whole group
discussion that explained how different
types of questions can help to understand the
text in various ways. Students engaged in a
discussion which highlighted the difference
between “In the Book” questions, and “In
My Head” questions. The class also briefly
discussed the story’s elements (characters,
setting, problem, solution, etc.). Students
were told that they would be called over
either by the teacher or a parent volunteer to
answer a series of questions about the story.
End of DAY 1: Initial Assessment
After the discussion, the look of confusion
was evident on students’ faces. There was an
immediate need to delve deeper into the
QAR strategy. The difference between “In
the Book” and “In My Head” questions
required descriptive examples of questions
from the fable that was just read. As
students thought about each question, they
began to understand the difference between
finding the answer in the story, and finding
the answer in their heads. This took a long
time and a plethora of examples, but slowly
students began to grasp the main concept.
After day one’s introduction of the QAR
strategy, it became clear that explicit, step-by-step instruction and descriptions were
necessary in order to maintain student focus,
engagement, and excitement. Day 2 began
by reviewing day 1’s experiences. Students
engaged in a whole group discussion on The
Tortoise and the Hare, highlighting key
elements of the story, and reviewing the
comprehension questions that had been
discussed on day 1. Students found it easy
responding to “In the Book” questions such
as: Who are the main characters? Where
does the story take place? Why are the
animals running in a race?
However, when it came to “In My Head”
types of questions, students struggled a bit.
It is not surprising at all that students
initially struggle with these types of
questions, After all, implementation of QAR
has just started, and developmentally
speaking, students will need extra time to be
exposed to the skill, as well as practice it.
Days 2 - 5: Realignment of QAR based on
Initial Pre-Test Results
Five students were given the first pre-test,
while the rest of the class worked
independently on a worksheet related to the
fable. Upon initial review of the five pre-tests, it appeared that students continue to do
very well with the “In the Book” questions,
and remain slightly unclear or confused with
the “In My Head” questions. Since gathering
data and analyzing students’ strengths and
needs should guide instruction, the teacher
used the rest of the week to highlight the “In
My Head” questions. Students were given
ample time to practice this skill, both in
whole and small groups (ITC: Schon’s
(1987) classroom interactions implemented
here).
Students began eagerly grasping their “new”
way of looking at text. They began asking
“When are we going to learn more QAR?”
Slowly implementing the strategy was
important so as to allow all students to
progress equally without being
overwhelmed by any “quick” learners.
Teacher Thoughts
The scope and sequence of activities and discussions
related to QAR need to be monitored …. . Because I
am witnessing looks of confusion when discussing the
“In My Head” portion of the QAR strategy whole
group, I decided … to supplement … with smaller
group activities to focus on the confusing topics.
Days 6 - 10: Understanding QAR and
Working in Groups
With the help of parent volunteers, three
groups of six students each and one group of
five students formed around the classroom.
With the parent volunteers and the teacher
acting as facilitators, both “In the Book” and
“In My Head” questions were asked orally
within each group. If students were
unsuccessful answering their particular
question, the discussion was opened up to
the rest of the group, and students were able
to support each other and contribute to the
answer. Small group leaders emerged to
assist those that might have difficulty (Here,
the teacher is implementing social and peer
interactions discussed in Beck & McKeown,
2001; Trelease, 2006; Vygotsky, 1986).
After the literature circles finished their
discussions, all students returned to the
common rug to share ideas and reflect on
how QAR was working for them (student
reflection is something this class does on a
daily basis)
. It was reassuring to hear
The teacher reflects on Schon’s (1987)
recommendation to reflect and think spontaneously
during classroom interactions. The teacher is fully
implementing Dick’s (2007) iterative cycle with her
actions to supplement her initial intervention-plans.
These students possess two different sets of
portfolios for their work. One set is for the parents to
take home and admire their important work. The
other set stays in the classroom for students to add to,
students reflect on their literature circles and
share ideas on what they think about their
own learning.
Throughout week two, it was my priority to explicitly
explain the QAR strategy, model how it works every
day, allow students to engage in guided practice after
each mini-lesson, enable students to coach each other
in small groups, independently apply the strategy to
smaller passages read aloud, as well as self-assess
their work and achievements at the end of each
lesson through a meaningful class discussion.
These group lessons were groundbreaking in
the sense that students who previously
struggled with the comprehension question
(either both types, or just one), were
beginning to understand the difference
between the two types of questions, and
slowly becoming more comfortable
expressing their thoughts and opinions
within their small group (Raphael, et al.,
2006).
Week two was devoted to teaching, developing, and
building upon the QAR strategy …… Students worked
in both large and small groups to practice answering
the two types of questions, as well as deciphering
which type of question was being asked …… This …
thinking is quite abstract for many young learners, …
we spent an extended period of time honing this skill.
Days 11 – 15: Students Read New Stories
Selected by Their Own Leaders
These five days had students take the
knowledge that they gained in their small
literature circles during days 6 – 10, and
apply it to different stories. Students were
again placed in groups of five or six, and a
group leader was chosen. The leader then
had the opportunity to go to the classroom
library and choose one story that he or she
believed the group would enjoy (Raphael, et
al., 2006). Each group chose a different
story to focus on and such stories included:
Biscuit, Danny and the Dinosaur, The
Giving Tree, and Dogzilla!
The teacher chose the group leaders ahead of
time, based on the better performers in the
pre-test, as well as students who
demonstrated an understanding of the two
types of QAR questions (using ideas
generated in Covey, 2004; Emerling, 2010;
Henderson, 2009). The small groups now
only had parent volunteers asking questions
while the teacher moved across groups
listening and observing students’ awareness
in understanding and answering with
increased confidence (important attributes
for transfer of skills extensively noted in
Gregory & Cahill, 2010; Trelease, 2006;
Yopp & Yopp, 2004). More students were
able to identify the two types of questions
with increasing accuracy.
Teacher Thoughts
Although I am extremely pleased with my students’
progress and deeper understanding of the QAR
strategy, I know that this is only the tip of the iceberg.
……. I will continue to have students practice the
QAR strategy, and perhaps develop their own
questions to ask each other before administering the
study’s post-test.
Days 16 – 18: The Jay and the Peacock;
and the Post-Test
For the final days, students continued
practicing the strategy and orally created
their own “In the Book” or “In My Head”
questions to ask their classmates. On day 16,
the second fable The Jay and the Peacock
was read aloud, and individual testing
continued through day 18. While giving the
post-test orally to students, and recording
their answers verbatim, many exuded more
confidence and exhibited a greater level of
understanding the text. The post-test scores
increased, as well as their breadth of
knowledge pertaining to comprehension
questions and strategies. Whether these
young learners realize it or not, they are now
equipped with a very powerful tool to take
with them throughout their academic careers
(Alvermann & Earle, 2003; Kirsch et al.,
2002).
Teacher Thoughts
At the end of our QAR journey, I began to realize that
it is not the end of a research project, but rather, the
beginning of my students’ exposure and engagement
in a wide array of useful comprehension strategies.
his is one small stepping stone in the path of
reading. …. In the future, I hope to have students …
understand how strategies work together, … that
there can be multiple strategies … appropriate at
different times in their reading, and realize that they
need to develop … … applying strategies to
Results
Twenty out of twenty-three students scored
considerably higher on the post-test than
they did on the pre-test. The three students
who did not score higher had scores that
remained the same on both tests. The class’s
average score for the pre-test was 9.15, and
climbed post-test to 11.02 (on a 13 point
scale). This shows a 14.39% improvement,
but more significant is that the class reaches
84.77% accuracy in scores with the
intervention. Reading comprehension has
benefited from the QAR strategy. What is
noteworthy is that the mode score for the
pre-test was 9.5, around the 9.15 average
score. The mode score for the post-test was
13, a perfect score. Seven out of twenty-three students scored a perfect 13 on the
post-test. This is reflected in the range
moving from 5.50-12.50 to 8.00-13.00.
While the lowest score in the pre-test is 5.50
(42.31% of total points), the post-test low of
8.00 is 61.54% of total points: a 19.23%
improvement.
A deeper understanding of performance
improvement is possible when analyzing
separately the “In the Book” and “In my
Head” scores. The “In the Book” post
average at a 74.67% level of achievement is
surprisingly low when compared to a
93.43% achievement level for “In my Head”
responses (see below). Very early in the
intervention, the teacher saw confusion and
difficulty in students grasping “In my Head”
queries; even reflecting to spend more time
in this category. The scores reveal that
students were already aware of responses
appropriate to this category. The pre-test
level of 78.86% achievement is superior to
the 60.51% achievement level for pre-“In
the Book” questions. Perhaps spending an
equal amount of teaching and practice time
would have shown a relatively equal balance
of achievement in both categories. It is
likely the teacher predicted that cognitive
skills (as required for “In the Head”
responses) would be more difficult to grasp.
Overall, the levels reached in both categories
show a successful transfer of QAR in
reading comprehension for these 23 young
learners.
Finally, individual scores for each student
are shown in Table 1 (Appendix). This
provides a deeper growth-description for
each student’s individual progress. Some
students grow through the intervention while
many stay at a high achievement level as
seen with seven perfect scores and an
average of 11.02 in the post-test.
Verbatim Responses (Tables 2 and 3-
Appendix)
Six verbatim answers from six different
students (the three in the pre-test are
different from the three in the post-test) are
presented after rating scores as low, middle
and high; with Table 2 covering responses to
“In the Book” and Table 3 showing
responses to “In My Head” questions. Both
pre- and post-test responses are shown
beside each other to view changes in reading
comprehension experienced by the young
learners. The journals document an increase
in word-count, and exhibit a high
performance level for responding to these
questions.
All three examples show an increase of
word usage in answers. The low student in
the pre-test with 25 total words has another
student jumping to 59 total words in the
post-test answers; even though both score at
the same 50% level. Similar large increases
are seen at the medium (post-test use of 78
words to a pre-test usage of 44 words, and a
smaller increase for the high students.
Another sign of increased confidence and
eagerness is the large quantity of words used
by weaker students. In both tests, the high
students scored a perfect 100%; with a
smaller count of words. Weaker students
seem to believe lots of words will somehow
arrive at the answer the teacher is scoring.
Similar outcomes exist in the “In my Head”
responses shown below, although this time
the high student with a 100% score uses 96
words in the post-test as compared to only
38 (a 153% increase) in the pre-test with a
93% correct response level. That is
definitely a change from the “In the Book”
high-student response. While the middle
student in both pre- (78 words used) and
post-test (116 words used) follows the “In
the Book” trend of using lots of words
hoping to score well. Using more total
words in the post-tests for both categories of
questions shows an overall increase in
confidence in comprehending the texts.
Discussion
This Action Research project allowed the
teacher an opportunity to explore and
implement a new instructional strategy in
the classroom. Success depended on
knowledge of the strategy, guidance from a
professional educator, social peer-collaborative sessions in research design,
and, an intervention subject to reflective
revisions and adaptations to meet classroom
challenges faced by students experiencing a
new learning tool. At the end of the four
weeks, after careful planning and execution
of explicit lessons, students felt at ease when
completing the post-test, and they actually
exhibited an air of confidence and pride. The
intervention benefit showed an overall 14.39
% increase in comprehensions skills.
Not only were students more capable and
successful in comprehending and responding
to text, but the teacher gained insight into a
new skill and teaching method. It would be
greatly beneficial to teach QAR throughout
the school year to all three Kindergarten
classes at the elementary school. QAR
learning would allow ongoing assessment of
students on a regular basis to monitor their
strengths and needs in reading
comprehension. Although the study was
carried out systematically with a clear and
organized goal, there may arise one
limitation that can occur with kindergarten
learners. Due to the teacher’s excitement and
Question answer relationship strategy 04
enthusiasm for the QAR strategy and
implementing an intervention for the first
time, the presence of teacher-intimidation
(as perceived by 5 and 6 year olds) may
have been present
. This may also have
steered students towards learning to the
post-test where scores increase. Still, the
high total achievement levels are a benefit of
the intervention project.
Final Thoughts
As a five year veteran, this teacher exhibited
the incentive to grow and lead within the
school, an intervention with proven
strategies using internal as well as external
resources. One-on-teaching and numerous
practice-sessions were made possible with
the presence and support from parents. This
freed the teacher to observe large segments
of the intervention and also mentor parents
in comprehension skills. Teacher
observations and reflective diaries coupled
with peer interaction on research design,
enrolment in a MA capstone course and
mentorship with a professional educator also
helped in facing and overcoming challenges
any teacher may encounter when attempting
action research intervention. The study’s
improved reading comprehension is a
positive incentive to continue interventions
of QAR within the reading curriculum as
early as kindergarten.
