Blog #14

Student	Total Word Count	Total # Adjectives	Conditional Language	Assertions w/o Evidence	Questioning	Inference/Predictions
Emily	165 /40+	16/3	8/0	4/2	1/0	4/0
Elizabeth	58/20	4/1		3/0
Anna Grace	40/30+	2/0	2/0	3/0
Marlee	27/40+	1/0	1/1	2/ 1
Payton	111/75	6/1	1/1	9/2		2/2
Andrew	20/5	1/0	1/0	3/1
Jamison	67/50	7/2	0/1	2/2
Rayne	15/25	1/1		1/0
Daniel	30+/45	2/1	/2	5/5

 

Pre/Post VTS

I need to start out by saying that not all things were equal between the two assessments. During the pre-test, a smaller number of students were in the class, and two students were suspended. The post test included double the number of students. Also added to the mix was the fact that the students were wound up. About half of our VTS session was spent correcting misbehavior.

I do think that this class still belongs in the Level 1 viewer category. They like to describe and make up narratives.  The changes that I have observed during the post-test as follows:

• Conditional language: I categorized ," I think that..." as conditional language for a kindergartner. The reason I did this is that I really think they were referencing their personal interpretations  in those statements. "I think.." statements were only made by one student during the pre-test. Most statements were, "That is..." During the post assessment there were more ,"I think" statements than, "That is."
• Listing/matching - The pre-test was laden with listing and matching statements. The post- test included much more narrative and three statements about cause and effect. The students seemed to get past understanding the image and started to more comforable make connections that led to narratives.
• Adjectives - no/ VERBS - Yes: I am listing a null change in the use of adjectives.  What I did notice was an increase in the use of verbs. During the pre-test the verbs were the obvious - skating, falling, snowing. During the post-test the students described slipping, running, dancing, spinning, and twisting. These verbs were added to their more developed narratives.
• Accessibilty: The students still have a hard time figuring out overlapping shapes. Instead they find humor in pictures that juxtapose figures.

Interpreting the qualitative data. 

• The advancement I viewed was related to the increase use of verbs when describing the artwork. The gestures and stop action poses really engaged the students and helped them to create narratives that were not evident during the pretest. Overall, the narrative and action in the artworks became expressed more in depth. I reference this development in a previous post comparing the VTS discussions between my four kindergarten classes. Using the same image, the class that consistently used VTS were able to read the image more successfully and become more engaged. They were able to go past describing behaviors in the initial viewing of the artwork, and make up many narratives. 
• Perceived inaccuracies in in the artwork viewed triggers laughter, not disdain. They are not level 2 viewers yet.
• I think that more research needs to be done into how language development of very young students both  is affected by and affects visual literacy. 
• I think the VTS scoring guide needs to be modified to accurately can capture the developments in the kindergartners. I would recommend listing other categories to document the fluency with which students in this age group have in verbally describing art. I feel I need to research the literacy expectations of this grade level to more fully understand the data.
• I would also recommend to future VTS teachers that  Piaget's stages of development need to be researched and incorporated into the findings at each viewing. It would give a general context to what the students are verbalizing.