Issuu

Journal of Education Action Research in the UAE

Reimagining Learning Engagement, Inclusion, and the Future of the Classroom

ISSUE 3 Volume 1 September 2026

This issue explores how contemporary classrooms are evolving through innovation in pedagogy, literacy, inclusion, multilingual learning, and student engagement.

The featured studies examine how educators are redesigning learning experiences to foster deeper thinking, motivation, participation, and belonging across diverse educational contexts.

A Message from the CEAR Director The idea that learning is a journey with a final destination never sat well with me. Therefore, the ideal school, or organisation, from my perspective, has always been one where the learning never stops. For busy school teachers, however, learning can be seen as simply attending sessions in August, filing away the handouts and, often, lamenting how disconnected the learning was from day-to-day practice. This is certainly not the learning that can ensure our relevance and success as educators. In the teaching profession, lifelong learning is not an aspiration written into vision statements but a behavioural staple. It is the one professional quality that cannot be delegated, outsourced or bought in.

Dr Farah Sarraj Chief Corporate Officer Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Quest is simultaneously a celebration of and an opportunity for learning. Within the pages of Quest, we showcase the work of the Centre for Education Action Research (CEAR) researchers in 2025–2026 and offer those colleagues who did not produce papers themselves an opportunity to learn from, and be inspired by, the different action research projects contained herein. This third issue of Quest, produced through the Research School Alliance of the Al-Futtaim Education Foundation, takes as its theme “Reimagining Learning: Engagement, Inclusion, and the Future of the Classroom.” It brings together nineteen action research studies from teacher-researchers and student researchers across the UAE, in schools as varied as Hartland International, Deira International, Safa British School, Kings’ School Dubai, Universal American School, International School of Creative Science Nad Al Sheba, The Arbor School, Al Salam Community School, Victory Heights Primary and Ministry of Education schools. The studies are organised into three sections: Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design; Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning; and AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies. What distinguishes this collection are the circumstances in which it was produced. The studies were researched, written, revised and pulled together over a period in which our region lived through considerable tensions. The range in this year’s issue is equally noteworthy. In Arabic classrooms at Deira International School, structured idea generation and scaffolding lifted Grade 9–10 writing scores by 37 per cent, with a very large effect size, a serious contribution to how we teach our language learners. At The Arbor School, a low-cost outdoor intervention meaningfully improved information retention among students who learnt outdoors compared with the control group that stayed indoors. In a Ministry of Education study co-authored with a student researcher, 146 students used an AI chatbot that offered rubric-aligned feedback. Their performance rose from 58 to 81 per cent and their confidence climbed from 49 to 85 per cent, with the researchers emphasising throughout that AI was designed to extend teacher judgement, not replace it. At Safa British School, every single pupil studied made more reading errors on an iPad than with a physical book. I hope that the collection of action research papers in this year’s Quest will give everyone who reads it something to take away and ponder.

The Research School Alliance

Our Partners

Table of Contents Section I — Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design 8

From Follow-the-Manual to Design-theInvestigation: Exploring How Reflective Teaching Strategies Support Students’ Adaptation to Inquiry-Based Laboratory Learning Aasia Malik, Ministry of Education Reducing Cognitive Load In Extended Writing Task for KS4 Physics Naomi Leverett, Hartland International School Passive to Powerful: Enhancing Engagement through Scenario-Based Learning in Science Yasroon Elmi, International School of Creative Science - Nad Al Sheba

Exploring the Effectiveness of Multimodal Pedagogy for Native and Non-Native Spanish Learners in a Multilingual Primary School Adhalessa Vargas, Victory Heights Primary School Sports City

Making Math Talk Matter: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in Language Objectives Research Hussein Fares, Universal American School

The Role of Intervention Reading Groups in Enhancing Creative Writing Skills Among Year 6 Students Lamis Al Khatib, Safa British School

Explicitly Teaching Reciprocal Reading’s Questioner Role to Improve Year 5 Inference Accuracy Laura Parker, Kings’ School Dubai

The Impact of Kinaesthetic, Outdoor Learning on the Retention of Recently Acquired Information Grant Hewitt, The Arbor School Dubai

Section III — AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

The Impact of Adaptive Teaching on Mathematical Understanding and Confidence in Year 3 Enya Szokalska, Deira International School

AI as a Shadow Teacher: Supporting Grade 10 and 11 Students to Improve Writing Through Rubric-Aligned Chatbot Feedback Kamran Lateef, Ministry of Education

Strengthening Metacognitive Skills to Showcase Academic Depth of BTEC Business Learning Ambreen Khan & Aysha Asad, International School of Creative Science - Nad Al Sheba

Interest-Based AI-Generated Decodable Texts and Reading Fluency Outcomes in Year 2 Students: An Action Research Study Angela Mutinda, Hartland International School

The Impact of Empowering Teachers to Employ Metacognitive Strategies on Improving Grade 10 Students’ Academic Achievement and Deep Understanding in Islamic Education: A Classroom-Based Experience Mohamed Al-Kalou, Deira International School

AI-Generated Rubric-Based Feedback to Support Arabic Writing Development Niveen Hassan, Hartland International School

Artificial Intelligence Tools and English Language Learner’s Literacy Development: An Action Research Study Rabia Zia, Hartland International School

Section II — Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

Bridging the Gap Between Reading and Writing in Arabic Classrooms: The Impact of Structured Idea Generation, Scaffolding, and Self-Regulation on Secondary Students’ Writing Development Hatem Ahmad, Deira International School

Does AI Personalization Help Readers? Measuring an AI Reading Coach Against Grade 7 MAP Growth Daniela Yela, Universal American School

Do Children Read More Effectively from a Physical Book or from a Screen? Grace Desmond, Safa British School

The Impact of Multisensory Teaching Strategies on Vocabulary and Sentence Development in Year 2 EAL Learners Namita Janardhanan, Al Salam Community School

Section I Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

From Follow-the-Manual to Design-the-Investigation: Exploring How Reflective Teaching Strategies Support Students’ Adaptation to Inquiry-Based Laboratory Learning Aasia Kamran Malik Al Dhaid Secondary School for Boys, Cycle 3, Ministry of Education, UAE Muhammed Bin Kamran Malik Student Science Contributor

When students remain dependent on fixed instructions, practical science can become an exercise in compliance rather than a process of scientific reasoning.

Abstract This action research investigated how reflective teaching strategies supported Cycle 3 science students’ adaptation from traditional, teacherdirected laboratory practicals to inquiry-based investigation. The study was conducted in an Emirati-majority boys’ secondary school context in the UAE Ministry of Education. The demographic dataset included 251 students: 207 Emirati students and 44 non-Emirati Arab students. Stream data were available for 250 students, including 68 Advanced stream students and 182 General stream students. During the inquiry cycle, 77 inquiry-based projects were submitted, including 60 from Advanced stream students and 17 from General stream students. Among the 77 submissions, 57 projects (74%) were judged as independent or mostly adapted, while 20 projects (26%) were inspired, copied, or modified from peer examples. Data sources included project submissions, originality checks, teacher observations, reflection notes, and studentfacing prompts. Findings suggest that reflective

teaching supported students’ movement from procedural compliance to more independent inquiry by improving objective-setting, variable control, methodological justification, and evidence-based explanation, However, the contrast between Advanced and General stream participation, and the presence of copied/modified work, indicate that inquirybased learning requires differentiated scaffolding, explicit academic integrity teaching, and repeated opportunities for reflection and revision. This research also includes a co-author student perspective from Muhammed Bin Kamran Malik, an AS Level Triple Science student, to strengthen the learner-facing interpretation of inquiry challenges and student motivation by reviewing the inquiry process from a learner perspective, strengthening the student-facing explanation of variables and originality, and suggesting clearer reflective prompts that help students move from copying a method to defending their own investigation choices.

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Introduction and Background

The study also considered three sub-questions:

Science practical work is often introduced through a follow-the-manual model in which the teacher provides the aim, apparatus, method, safety guidance, and expected observations. This approach can develop procedural fluency, safe laboratory habits, and accuracy. However, when students remain dependent on fixed instructions, practical science can become an exercise in compliance rather than a process of scientific reasoning.

How successfully do students complete inquiry-style projects?

What evidence shows independent planning, adaptation, or copied/modified ideas?

Which reflective strategies help students improve objectives, variables, methods, and explanations?

Inquiry-based laboratory learning changes the role of the learner. Students are expected to ask investigable questions, define variables, plan a fair test, justify the method, interpret evidence, and reflect on the reliability and originality of their work. For students who are used to teacher-provided manuals, this shift can be demanding because it requires confidence, decision-making, and tolerance of uncertainty. This shift is consistent with Crawford’s (2000) view that inquiry changes the teacher’s role from transmitter of procedures to facilitator of scientific reasoning, and with Minner, Levy, and Century’s (2010) synthesis showing that inquirybased science instruction can support stronger conceptual understanding when students actively engage with evidence. This action research explored how reflective teaching strategies could support students’ transition from manual-led experiments to inquiry-based investigations in an Emiratimajority school context. Particular attention was given to students’ ability to design objectives, make methodological decisions, and distinguish between using examples ethically and copying ideas without sufficient ownership.

Research Focus and Questions The main research question was: How do reflective teaching strategies support students’ adaptation to inquiry-based laboratory learning?

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Context and Participants The research was situated in Al Dhaid Secondary School for Boys, Cycle 3, within the UAE Ministry of Education context. The school context is significant because the study focused on supporting boys’ transition from procedural practical work to greater ownership in science investigation. The demographic sample consisted of 251 students, including 207 Emirati students and 44 non-Emirati Arab students. This means that 82.5% of the sample were Emirati students, making the findings especially relevant for improving engagement, scientific reasoning, and independent inquiry among Emirati learners. Stream data was available for 250 students: 68 Advanced stream students and 182 General stream students. Inquiry project participation totaled 77 projects, including 60 Advanced stream participants and 17 General stream participants (see Table 1). Table 1: Demographic Data of Students (n=251) Category

Number

Interpretation

Emirati students

207

82.5% of demographic sample

Non-Emirati Arab students

17.5% of demographic sample

Total demographic sample

251

One student did not have stream classification recorded

Advanced stream students

Stream-classified dataset

General stream students

182

Stream-classified dataset

Inquiry projects submitted

Evidence base for the action research cycle

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Literature Review Reflective teaching is grounded in the idea that teachers and learners improve practice by examining experience, questioning assumptions, and revising action. Dewey (1933) described reflective thought as purposeful inquiry that helps learners move beyond routine action. Schön (1983) later developed the distinction between reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action, both of which are relevant to laboratory learning: students think during the investigation and then analyse their decisions after evidence has been collected. Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning cycle also supports this rationale because laboratory learning becomes more meaningful when students move through experience, reflection, conceptual understanding, and revised action. Inquiry-based science education also requires careful scaffolding. Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, and Chinn (2007) argued that inquiry and problem-based learning are most effective when learners receive guidance, prompts, and structures that support reasoning. In this study, reflection was therefore not used as an isolated writing task; it was embedded in modelling, teacher questioning, miniconferences, planning logs, and post-task evaluation. Bell, Smetana, and Binns (2005) similarly emphasised that inquiry instruction can be simplified through structured guidance, allowing students to progress gradually from teacher-led tasks to more independent investigation. Internationally, high-quality inquiry learning expects students to demonstrate conceptual understanding, control of variables, methodological validity, ethical use of sources, and evidence-based explanation. These expectations align with the skills required for more advanced science study and for independent investigation formats such as internal-assessment-style laboratory work.

Methodology

classroom observations and reflective notes, supporting a more complete understanding of the intervention (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). The reflective teaching strategies included modelling inquiry questions and objectives, teacher questioning and think-alouds, miniconferences and checkpoints, project logs and reflective prompts, and post-task reflection on originality, validity, and improvement. These strategies were selected because they make the thinking process visible and help students justify why their investigation is scientifically valid (see Table 2). Data sources included student project submissions, originality checks, teacher observations, and reflection notes. The ethical approach treated copied or modified work as a learning signal rather than only as a label. Students’ data were anonymised for reporting, and the analysis focused on patterns across groups rather than naming individual students. Qualitative evidence from observations and reflection notes was reviewed for repeated patterns in students’ challenges, confidence, originality, and planning decisions, following the logic of thematic analysis described by Braun and Clarke (2006). Table 2: Reflective Teaching Strategies Expected student behaviour

Purpose in inquiry learning

Reflective strategy

Students write clearer objectives

Shows how broad interests become investigable questions

Modelling inquiry questions

Students explain why a variable is controlled

Makes expert decision-making visible

Teacher thinkalouds

Students revise weak plans before submission

Provides timely formative feedback

Mini-conferences/ checkpoints

Students justify modifications

Documents change in thinking

Project logs

Students explain what their own contribution is

Separates inspiration from imitation

Originality reflection

The study used practitioner action research because the purpose was to investigate and improve a real classroom issue. The inquiry followed a plan-act-observe-reflect cycle. The intervention was not designed as a controlled experimental trial; rather, it was a professional learning cycle aimed at improving teaching practice and student outcomes within the teacher’s actual school context. The design also drew on mixed-methods thinking because numerical participation/ originality data were interpreted alongside

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Student Co-author Input Muhammed Bin Kamran Malik, an AS Level Triple Science student, contributed a studentscience perspective to the interpretation of the findings. His role was not to collect school data; rather, he helped translate the inquiry process into clearer learner-facing language and offered insight into why students may struggle when they move from a provided method to designing their own investigation. From his perspective, the most important challenge is that many students believe science practical work is about finding the correct answer quickly. Inquiry-based learning asks a different question: Can the student explain why the investigation is fair, valid, and original? This distinction is central to the article because it shows that reflection is not an additional task; it is part of scientific thinking (see Table 3).

clearer guidance on originality and ethical adaptation. Participation patterns also reveal an important stream difference. Advanced stream students submitted 60 projects from a stream cohort of 68, representing a participation rate of 88.2%. General stream students submitted 17 projects from a stream cohort of 182, representing a participation rate of 9.3% (see Figure 3). This does not mean General students are unable to engage with inquiry; rather, it highlights the need for differentiated scaffolds, smaller checkpoints, more explicit models, and gradual movement from structured inquiry to open inquiry (see Table 4). Figure 1: Inquiry Project Participation by Stream Inquiry project participation (N = 77) 60

Table 3: Student Input Muhammed's learner-facing contribution As a Triple Science student, I think students need to see that an investigation is not only a set of steps. A good investigation starts with a clear question, a changed variable, measured evidence, and a reason for every decision. When a student copies a project idea, the problem may be that he does not yet know how to change the question or make the method his own. A reflection log can help because it asks: What did I change? Why did I change it? How does my evidence support my conclusion?

Student difficulty observed

Muhammed's suggested student-friendly prompt

How this supports reflection

Choosing an objective

What exactly am I trying to find out?

Turns a topic into a testable question

Identifying variables

What will I change, measure, and keep the same?

Supports fair-test reasoning

Avoiding copying

How is my idea different from the example?

Builds originality and ownership

Explaining results

What evidence proves my conclusion?

Promotes claim-evidencereasoning

Improving the method

What would I change if I repeated the investigation?

Encourages evaluation and reliability

Projects submitted

Advanced participants

General participants

Figure 2: Project Originality and Adaptation Inquiry project quality/originality (N = 77)

26% Inspired/copied but modified

74% Independently/ mostly adapted

Results and Data Highlights The data show that 77 inquiry-based projects were submitted (see Figure 1). Of these, 57 projects, or 74%, were independent or mostly adapted, while 20 projects, or 26%, were inspired, copied, or modified (see Figure 2). This indicates meaningful progress toward student-led inquiry, but it also suggests that a substantial minority of students required

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Project category

Number of submitted projects

Percentage

Independently/ mostly adapted

74%

Inspired/copied but modified

26%

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Figure 3: Participation Rate Within Each Stream Participation rate within each stream 100 88.2% 80

20 9.3% 0

Advanced stream

General stream

Table 4: Need for Differentiated Scaffolds Interpretation

Value

Indicator

Findings are especially relevant to Emirati boys' science learning and inquiry ownership

207 / 251 = 82.5%

Emirati student representation

Evidence of practical inquiry participation during one action research cycle

Projects submitted

Most submitted projects showed movement toward ownership

57 / 77 = 74%

Independent or mostly adapted projects

A learning signal that originality and academic integrity need explicit scaffolding

20 / 77 = 26%

Inspired/copied but modified projects

High engagement and readiness for inquiry-style work

60 / 68 = 88.2%

Advanced participation

Requires more guided inquiry stages and structured checkpoints

17 / 182 = 9.3%

General participation

should not be interpreted only as failure. It can indicate that students need more explicit modelling of how to transform an example into a different investigation by changing a variable, context, method, or research question. The strongest projects were more personally relevant, better structured, and showed clearer explanation of why the chosen method was valid. This suggests that inquiry quality improves when students understand the purpose of their investigation and can connect the method to evidence. The participation difference between streams also indicates that inquiry teaching must be responsive: Advanced students may be ready for greater independence, while General students may need more structured inquiry ladders, sentence starters, group planning, and frequent miniconferences.

Impact on Emirati Students and UAE School Context Because Emirati students represented 82.5% of the demographic sample, the research has direct relevance for supporting Emirati boys to move from compliance to ownership in science practical work. Reflective prompts, teacher modelling, and structured planning supported stronger participation, clearer reasoning, and growing independence. In the UAE school context, inquiry-based laboratory learning can support national priorities related to innovation, problemsolving, scientific literacy, and student agency. When students learn to ask questions, test ideas, and justify evidence, practical science becomes more than completion of a worksheet; it becomes preparation for advanced study, STEM pathways, and future research thinking.

Limitations Analysis and Discussion The findings indicate that reflective teaching helped students understand that inquiry is not simply doing their own experiment. Effective inquiry requires justified choices, valid methods, controlled variables, ethical adaptation, and clear explanation of evidence. Reflection was important because it made these invisible decisions visible. The 20 inspired or modified projects suggest that students were beginning to adapt ideas, but some needed further support around originality, academic integrity, and authentic adaptation. In an inquiry classroom, copying

The study was conducted during one action research cycle, so the findings should be interpreted as classroom-based evidence rather than generalizable proof. The demographic dataset and stream dataset differed because one student had no stream classification recorded. The classification of project originality depended on teacher judgment and would be strengthened in a future cycle by moderation with another science teacher. Student voice data should also be expanded through interviews, reflection journals, or short surveys.

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Recommendations and Next Cycle The next cycle should introduce a one-page inquiry lab planner that includes objective, variables, method, risk assessment, data table, reflection, and originality check. Students should also use an originality log with prompts such as: I saw; I changed; my investigation is different because. This turns academic integrity into a teachable process rather than only a rule. Teacher mini-conferences and peer review checkpoints should be scheduled before final submission so that students can revise their objectives, variables, and method before completing the project. Future outcomes should be tracked by stream, ability, language need, and project quality to identify which scaffolds help each group most effectively.

Conclusion This action research suggests that reflective teaching strategies can support students’ transition from manual-led practical work to inquiry-based laboratory learning. The evidence indicates that many students began to take greater ownership of objectives, methods, and explanations, with 74% of submitted projects judged as independent or mostly adapted. However, the presence of copied or modified projects and the low General stream participation rate show that inquiry requires explicit, differentiated scaffolding. The addition of a student co-author perspective strengthens the article by highlighting how inquiry is experienced by learners. Muhammed’s input reinforces that students need clear reflective questions, not only instructions. When students reflect, they move from following procedures to owning their investigations.

References Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937. https://doi. org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. D. C. Heath. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https:// doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368 Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction: What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20347 Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

When students learn to ask questions, test ideas, and justify evidence, practical science becomes more than completion of a worksheet; it becomes preparation for advanced study, STEM pathways, and future research thinking.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Reducing Cognitive Load In Extended Writing Task for KS4 Physics Naomi Leverett Hartland International School

In subjects like English, History, and Business Studies, exam answers are approached as teachable genres. In contrast, science often treats writing as incidental to knowledge, which increases cognitive demand unnecessarily.

Abstract

Background/Context

Physics is difficult, and writing is difficult; extended writing tasks in Physics therefore present a compounded challenge. Drawing on Sweller’s (2019) Cognitive Load Theory, which suggests high-intrinsic-load activities require explicit instruction, this mixedmethods action research evaluated the impact of structured writing templates and worked examples on students’ cognitive load and academic performance in Physics. Methods combined a CLT literature review with lesson design, student surveys, teacher engagement logs, and pre- and post-intervention topic test analysis. Findings revealed that explicitly teaching writing structure reduced cognitive load, though students grew frustrated by slow improvement in raw scores and needed alternative indicators of progress. Strategies that simplified and automated the writing process, templates and worked examples, showed the greatest success, suggesting explicit, CLT-informed design can support students managing both scientific reasoning and written expression.

I am a Physics teacher in an international combined primary and secondary school in Dubai which follows the national curriculum for England. Students take the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) AQA (Assessment and Qualifications Alliance) science course, where around 15% of the marks are for extended responses and yet only 5% of the around 400,000 students who take a GCSE are able to get full marks for these types of questions (AQA, 2025). In subjects like English, History, and Business Studies, exam answers are approached as teachable genres. In contrast, science often treats writing as incidental to knowledge, which increases cognitive demand unnecessarily. Clearly if we want to improve our results at GCSE, we need to find strategies which improves student’s responses to extended questions.

Literature Review Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) provides a useful framework for understanding the challenges students face when constructing extended written responses in GCSE Physics. Sweller’s theory proposes that learning is constrained by the limited capacity of working memory, while long-term memory creates mental frameworks known as schemas which acts like a vast storage system that support expertise development (Sweller et al., 2019). Lovell’s (2020) summary of CLT (see Figure 1) illustrates that effective learning depends on managing three forms of cognitive load: intrinsic load, arising from the inherent complexity of the content; extraneous load, resulting from inefficient task design that imposes

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

unnecessary mental effort; and germane load, tasks need to be at the right level of difficulty for each student so that the cognitive effort devoted to it is productive. Lovell further argues that because working memory can process only a limited number of elements simultaneously, instructional design should minimise extraneous load to facilitate the transfer of information into long-term memory. In GCSE Physics extended-response tasks, intrinsic load is heightened by the need to coordinate multiple interacting elements simultaneously, including conceptual understanding of physics principles, translation between diagrams, equations and verbal explanations, causal reasoning, and the formulation of coherent scientific prose (Sweller et al., 2019). Wexler (2019) contends that explicit instruction in sentence and paragraph structures can reduce the cognitive demands associated with writing. From a CLT perspective, these scaffolds promote schema development through chunking information, providing linguistic frameworks, and automating writing processes, thereby freeing working memory resources for conceptual reasoning. Figure 1: Lovell’s Illustration of Cognitive Load Theory (2020)

Figure 2: Because, But, So Sentence Structure Example

Figure 3: Task Design EMMA Template for Describing a Method

Figure 4: Task Design Worksheet Developed to Use Worked Examples and Similar Questions Using Single Paragraph Outlines, Topic Sentences and Concluding Sentences

Methods This action research provides an opportunity to investigate how to reduce the cognitive load for students in writing extended response questions for GCSE Physics. 1. 2. 3.

How do I teach extended writing in Physics? What types of tasks reduce the cognitive load? How can I measure reduction of cognitive load?

Methodology 1. 2.

Review Literature - identified CLT principles, particularly focusing on the worked example effect (Didau, 2026). Design of lesson activities integrating structural writing templates and worked examples (see Figures 2, 3, and 4).

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Teacher log of student engagement.

Student surveys - completed in class for qualitative feedback on thinking load.

End topic test analysis: 4 tests were analysed across the course of the project. Test 1 and 2 were pre intervention base line data and Tests 3 and 4 were post intervention. Topic tests consisted of a range of different types of extended writing tasks, as reflected by the nature of a GCSE Physics paper (see Figure 5). Raw scores and coding of language (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was used to compare cognitive load before and after intervention (see Table 1).

Participants Two Year 10 Physics classes, including 3 ELL students and one SEN student Class 1: n=10 Class 2: n=20 Consent gained from school principal and students’ responses were anonymous. Figure 5: Evaluation Tool for Student and Teacher to Qualitatively Compare Extended Responses Over 4 Topic Tests

Results Figure 6: Analysis Raw Scores Pre and Post Intervention (n=30)

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Discussion and Reflections

Table 1: Coding Student Writing Samples Responses (n=30) Class 2, n=20

Task 1

Task 2

Task 3a

Task 4

Mean Raw Score %

Use cause/ effect terms like "because"

0.5

Blank Response %

0.5

Use comparative terms "most/ least"" Use of EMMA framework Structured response using question stems to make topic sentence

Said "automated phrase" Linked terms to structure response

Task 5

KS4 extended writing questions in Physics have high elemental interactivity which requires various frameworks to be applied for students to get credit in exam situations. Students need regular explicit practice different strategies to automate writing templates.The task design needs to focus on the exam verb which in turn dictates the structure of the response. Reviewing how writing can be coded revealed different themes which in turn informs practice. Teachers need to model and highlight writing processes so that they “worked the worked example”. Standardized approaches across departments, such as using single paragraph outline templates, would assist reducing cognitive load as responses would become more automated. For educators conducting action research – CLT is relatively new, so understanding how to reduce the thinking load for different disciplines is where the next challenge lies.

Raw marks for extended writing tasks showed some improvement post intervention (see Figure 6). The end-of-topic tests featured varying types of writing tasks (see Figure 4), it is difficult to compare them directly and measure the intervention’s precise impact. The literature review suggested that a worked example would give good success, however a lot more practice and consistency across school is required to automate self-generation of single paragraph outlines. Qualitative coded indicators of reduced cognitive load found fewer blank responses post intervention, higher frequency of connecting statements and more structured student responses (see Table 1). Although this didn’t translate directly into higher marks, the students were attempting to use the writing schema, which with further practice, would translate into higher marks. Student surveys and writing samples found pupils most frequently recalled simple scaffolds and implemented them in exam situations. Some students reported feeling less overwhelmed when encountering extended response questions but these surveys were limited in scope due to time constraints.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Conclusion Explicitly teaching writing reduces student cognitive overload. This study concludes that when educators implement strategies that simplify and automate complex writing processes, students achieve the highest success. Furthermore, because students easily become frustrated by slow improvement in extended writing, teachers should utilize alternative indicators—rather than relying solely on raw scores—to effectively highlight, measure, and celebrate continuous student progress.

References AQA. (2025). Examiners report: 8463/1H paper 1 higher tier. https://filestore.aqa.org.uk/ Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Didau, D. (2026, April 26). Five principles of effective modelling. The Learning Spy. https:// daviddidau.substack.com/p/five-principles-ofeffective-modelling Hochman, J. C., & Wexler, N. (2017). The writing revolution: A guide to advancing thinking through writing in all subjects and grades. Jossey-Bass. Lovell, O. (2020). Cognitive load theory in action. John Catt Educational. Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 37–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-3876911.00002-8 Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2019). Cognitive load theory (2nd ed.). Springer. 17

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Passive to Powerful Enhancing Engagement through Scenario Based Learning in Science Yasroon Yasin Elmi

International School of Creative Science Nad Al Sheba

Scenario Based Learning increases engagement, because students can experiment, make choices, and see the consequences of their decisions in a safe environment, learning becomes more meaningful, memorable, and empowering (Penuel et al, 2022).

Abstract

Introduction

This action research examined the impact of scenario-based learning (SBL) on engagement, critical thinking, and real-world problem solving in secondary science. Over six months, 70 students aged 11–18 and their teachers participated in mixed-methods research using questionnaires and thematic analysis. Results showed improved engagement, confidence, and participation: over three-quarters found SBL activities engaging, 56% felt more involved, and 86% reported confident decision-making. Teachers noted increased engagement (63%) and deeper discussions (75%). While effectiveness varied, SBL supported active learning and meaningful application of scientific concepts across diverse classrooms in secondary education contexts broadly overall.

Science is often taught as isolated facts and procedures, but students are more likely to learn deeply when they apply ideas in realistic contexts (Fensham, 2009). Scenario-based learning (SBL) is important because it moves students from memorising content to using scientific knowledge to analyse situations, solve problems, and make decisions. When students work through scenarios, they are not just receiving information; they are actively using prior knowledge and applying concepts to situations that resemble real life.

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Background/Context

Methodolody

This study took place at the International School of Creative Science (ISCS), Nad Al Sheba, Dubai, a private multicultural school that serves a diverse student body across the primary and secondary phases. The present study addresses the gap by exploring the role of scenario-based learning in secondary science education within the school context.

Data for this research was collected from secondary science students aged 11–17 during a 6-month period. A mixed methods approach was used, with the primary source of quantitative data gathered through structured questionnaires given to both students and teaching staff.

Literature Review Research reports that SBL can significantly improve academic achievement in science. One study found that SBL activities increased students’ science achievement, with a large effect size reported for post-test scores (Agyei and Gyamfi, 2026). SBL increases engagement, because students can experiment, make choices, and see the consequences of their decisions in a safe environment, learning becomes more meaningful, memorable, and empowering (Penuel et al, 2022). Beyond skill development, scenario‑based learning also supports inclusion and engagement. A 2024 study from the IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education highlights that scenario‑based learning creates participatory, narrative‑driven environments that are especially effective for diverse learners, including students with disabilities (Della Volpe, 2024). By grounding instruction in meaningful contexts, it promotes active participation, differentiated learning, and equitable access to complex content. Studies with early secondary students (around age 13–14) show that working through structured scenarios helps them develop more positive and nuanced views of scientific work (Mamakli et al, 2023).

Methods The objective of the study is to investigate the role of scenario-based learning in enhancing student engagement, critical thinking, and real-world problem-solving in secondary science.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

These questionnaires captured perceptions of SBL, levels of engagement, and views on how effectively scenarios supported understanding of scientific concepts. Staff responses provided insight into instructional practices and observed changes in student participation, while student responses offered direct evidence of their experiences and attitudes.

Participants The participants in this study consisted of 70 secondary school students from Years 7 to 12. The sample included a diverse mix of male and female students from different nationalities and language backgrounds, reflecting the multicultural profile of the school community. Participants were selected from secondary science classes and took part in the scenariobased learning intervention during regular lessons. Participation was voluntary, and confidentiality was maintained throughout the study.

Data Collection Data was collected using Microsoft Forms. While both forms shared a common focus, the teacher questionnaire included additional items assessing their familiarity with the approach and their willingness to continue using it in the future. The questionnaires included a mixture of Likert-scale and open-ended questions. For students, questions focused on their level of engagement, their confidence in making decisions.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Data Analysis Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics to identify overall patterns in student and teacher responses. Qualitative data from the open-ended questions were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis, which identified recurring themes related to engagement, confidence, instructional effectiveness, and perceptions of scenario-based learning.

Figure 1: Pie Chart Demonstrating Student Participation During SBL (n=8 teachers) Strongly agree 13%

Agree

25% 25%

Neutral Disagree

38%

Strongly disagree

Results Teacher’s Feedback Scenario-based learning was viewed positively by teachers, with clear benefits for engagement and discussion, though perceptions of overall effectiveness were more mixed. Classroom discussion was a strong success area, with 75% of respondents agreeing that scenario-based learning encouraged deeper discussion. Increased participation was also recorded as a success (see Figure 1)

Figure 2: Pie Chart Demonstrating Teachers Responses To Scenario Based Activities Much more engaged 13% 25% 25% 38%

About the same Much less engaged

Student engagement improved for most classes, with 63% of teachers reporting higher engagement, while 25% saw no change (see Figure 2). Overall effectiveness was viewed positively by 63% of teachers, but a notable 38% remained neutral, suggesting that while the approach works well in some contexts, its impact may not yet be consistent across all classrooms.

More engaged

Less engaged

Figure 3: Thematic Responses From Students On Scenario Based Activities

Student Feedback Findings showed that over three-quarters of students reported at least a moderate level of engagement. More than half of the respondents (56%) reported feeling more involved during the scenario activity, while the remaining 44% felt their level of involvement was about the same as in a traditional lesson. Thematic responses on SBL from students higlighted that opportunites for problem solving, critical thinking and deeper understanding (see Figure 3). The majority of respondents (58%) reported feeling somewhat confident when making decisions during the scenario, while a further 28% felt extremely confident. Only 13% remained neutral. Students reported that SBL was effective (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: Student Feedback On Impact Of Scenario Based Learning 4%

Very effective Somewhat effective

49%

45%

Neither effective nor ineffective Somewhat ineffective Very ineffective

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Discussion and Reflections

References

This research has led me to adapt my teaching practice, moving away from relying solely on traditional instruction and now place greater emphasis on discussion, real-world application, and student-led thinking.

Agyei, C. A., & Gyamfi, M. (2026). Contextualizing Genetics: A Meta-Analysis of Academic Achievement through ContextBased Teaching. Journal of Research in Education and Pedagogy, 3(1), 110-119.

Through this process, I have developed practical strategies for implementing scenario-based learning, including designing meaningful scenarios, structuring engagement and participation in their own classrooms.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Finally, I learned that action research is an ongoing, reflective process rather than a one-time evaluation. The presence of neutral responses showed me the importance of refining and adapting strategies over time, rather than expecting immediate, uniform impact across all learners.

Conclusion To conclude, scenario-based learning improves engagement across both teachers and students. It promotes deeper thinking through discussion. With 75% of teachers noting increased classroom discussion, the approach supports critical thinking and more active participation in learning. A proportion of neutral responses suggests that the impact of scenario-based learning may vary depending on how it is implemented or the learners involved.

Directions for Further Research 1.

Inclusion and diverse learners: Investigate how scenario-based learning supports students with disabilities, English learners, and other diverse groups, including which scaffolds are most effective.

Comparative studies across approaches: Compare scenario-based learning with other active approaches (e.g. problembased learning, project-based learning) on achievement, engagement, and 21stcentury skills.

Della Volpe, V. (2024). Scenario-Based Learning: An Inclusive Methodology. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 14(6), 1-5.‫‏‬ Fensham, P. J. (2009). Real world contexts in PISA science: Implications for context-based science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 884–896. https://doi. org/10.1002/tea.20334 Mamakli, S., Alimoğlu, M. K., & Daloğlu, M. (2023). Scenario-based learning: preliminary evaluation of the method in terms of students’ academic achievement, in-class engagement, and learner/teacher satisfaction. Advances in physiology education, 47(1), 144-157. https://doi. org/10.1152/advan.00135.2022 Penuel, W. R., Reiser, B. J., McGill, T. A., Novak, M., Van Horne, K., & Orwig, A. (2022). Connecting student interests and questions with science learning goals through project-based storylines. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 4(1), 1.‫‏‬https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-02100048-z

With 75% of teachers noting increased classroom discussion, the approach supports critical thinking and more active participation in learning.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

The Impact of Kinaesthetic, Outdoor Learning on the Retention of Recently Acquired Information Grant Hewitt The Arbor School

The process of learning new information in a lesson is meaningful only if the lesson is sufficiently memorable to ensure that the information is stored in long-term memory. Therefore, regardless of their age, the retention of new information is essential for students’ academic progress throughout their time at school.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research study investigates whether outdoor, kinaesthetic learning improves pupils’ retention of new information compared with conventional indoor instruction. Primary pupils learned to identify correct graphemes for the /ay/ sound through either a seated indoor lesson or an outdoor lesson incorporating movement, interactive activities, and discussion. Both groups completed identical assessments immediately after the lesson and again one week later. While initial scores were comparable, the outdoor group retained significantly more information, declining by only 5.06% compared to 23.37% in the indoor group. Observations also showed higher engagement outdoors. Despite the small scale limiting generalisability, findings suggest movement and varied environments can meaningfully support long-term retention using minimal resources.

As educators, our primary objective is to ensure that our lessons facilitate the acquisition of both skills and knowledge by students during their time in school. Once students have acquired new knowledge, it is paramount that this information is retained in their long-term memory, enabling future recall. ‘By “learning” we mean a change in long term memory’ (Kirschner, Sweller & Clark, 2006). This retention is critical for building upon prior learning in subsequent lessons and is particularly important for achieving high performance in examinations. The process of learning new information in a lesson is meaningful only if the lesson is sufficiently memorable to ensure that the information is stored in long-term memory. Therefore, regardless of their age, the retention of new information is essential for students’ academic progress throughout their time at school.

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Teachers frequently employ rewards to motivate and engage pupils in learning. In the primary classroom, rewards can take the form of house points, stickers, marbles jars, raffle tickets and many other creative and inventive ways to reward children for the effort they put into their learning. The idea being that the more we motivate learners, the better they’ll learn. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. Whilst motivation is an important tool to encourage children to initially engage with learning, motivation will fade if success does not quickly follow. ‘What we know from research is this: there’s neither a causal relationship (motivation does not lead to better learning and performance) nor a reciprocal relationship (in the sense that motivation leads to learning and learning leads to motivation) between motivation and learning. It’s learning that leads to motivation’ (Kirschner & Hendrick, 2020). Therefore, it is crucial that teachers rely not on rewards, but on effective, brain-based teaching that leads to success for pupils. When pupils experience success, no matter how small that success, it feeds their motivation to continue. This consideration has prompted the initiation of this study. The objective of this research is to investigate the effects of altering the learning environment on students’ academic performance and, more critically, on the retention of newly acquired knowledge in their long-term memory. Reflecting on one’s own educational experiences, it is likely that the most memorable lessons were those involving active participation or trips beyond the conventional classroom setting. Such lessons, which engage multiple senses and provide immersive learning experiences, are often more effectively retained in memory. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, ‘Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.’ It is plausible that lessons incorporating increased movement and excursions beyond the classroom are more memorable, thereby enhancing the retention of learned material. This observation prompts the inquiry: “How do the learning environment and teaching style impact information retention?

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Hypothesis Lessons that incorporate increased movement and diverse learning environments will lead to improved retention of new learning.

Method To test this hypothesis, I selected a specific learning objective for my students: to accurately identify the correct grapheme when spelling words containing the /ay/ sound (e.g., ay, ai, and a-e). I then designed and implemented two contrasting lessons aimed at teaching this objective. Efforts were made to ensure that both lessons included comparable activities and followed a similar progression. However, one lesson was conducted indoors with students seated at desks, while the other took place outside the classroom, incorporating more physical movement and interactive discussion among the group. The control group received a lesson that used a more conventional instructional approach, with students seated at desks and the teacher using an interactive whiteboard. The lesson began with an introduction to the /ay/ sound, during which the teacher demonstrated the three different graphemes (ay, ai, and a-e) to be used. Students then read words containing the /ay/ sound from the board and selected the correct grapheme by holding up corresponding cards. Following this, students practiced sounding out and writing these words on their individual whiteboards, receiving guidance from the teacher regarding the correct grapheme for each word. Mistakes were addressed through corrective feedback and reteaching of the correct spellings. The lesson concluded with a ten-question test, assessing the students’ ability to spell a selection of the words studied during the lesson. The variable group received a lesson conducted entirely outside the classroom and incorporating significantly more physical movement. The lesson began similarly to that of the control group, with an introduction to the /ay/ sound and an explanation of the three graphemes. Students initially read words containing the /ay/ sound from large cards held by the teacher. However, after this the lesson differed significantly from that of the

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

control group. Students were presented with three boxes distributed around the school’s biodome, each labelled with a different sound. The teacher handed out small cards, each containing a picture and a word featuring one of the focus graphemes. Students were then required to move to the appropriate box and place the card inside. Following this activity, students practiced sounding out and writing the words, again, receiving guidance from the teacher regarding the correct grapheme for each word. Students then wrote their words in large letters on a window using special glass pencils. Like the control group, mistakes were addressed through corrective feedback and reteaching of the correct spellings. The lesson concluded with the same ten-question test assessing the students’ ability to spell the words independently.

Figure 2: Control Group and Variable Group (outdoor)

Exactly one week later, the students were assessed using the same list of ten words to evaluate the retention of information from the lesson. This length of time should be sufficient to test if they knew knowledge has been effectively stored in long term memory. Ebbinghuas’ forgetting curve (see Figure 1) is a graphical representation of the rate at which human memory deteriorates over times. According to EbbingHaus (1885/1913), a week after learning, people only tend to retain about 25% of what they have learned. To ensure the reliability and fairness of the experiment, students were randomly assigned to the two groups by alternately selecting them from a register organised in alphabetical order by surname.

Retention %

Figure 1: EbbingHaus’ Forgetting Curve (1885/1913)

Time

Results Observations It was noteworthy to observe the level of student engagement and behaviour during both lessons. In the outdoor lesson, students were fully engaged in the activities and required no prompting from the teacher to maintain focus. They actively discussed the tasks among themselves, which enhanced their learning experience. During activities such as the sound sorting task, students eagerly participated, racing back to the teacher to collect additional cards to place in the sorting boxes. (See Figure 2). There was a sense of excitement amongst the group, with students making enthusiastic comments such as, “This is great!”, “This is the best spelling lesson ever!” and “We can write on the windows!” Conversely, during the indoor lesson, some students appeared more disengaged. The teacher frequently had to use praise to maintain the group’s focus by highlighting students who were demonstrating good concentration. From observation, it appeared that students working indoors made more frequent errors, which seemed to be attributed to a lack of focus compared to their peers who were writing outside.

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Analysis An analysis of the data reveals that the variable group, which participated in outdoor activities, exhibited slightly higher initial scores compared to the indoor control group (see Table 1). This minor difference could potentially be attributed to the teaching methodology and the level of pupil engagement during the lesson. However, the disparity between the two scores is minimal. When examining the results of Test 2, administered one week later, a significant contrast emerges. The variable group experienced only a 5.06% decline in knowledge retention, whereas the control group showed a substantial loss of 23.37%. This suggests that the variable group, engaged in outdoor activities, retained a significantly greater portion of the knowledge acquired during the lesson. Table 1: Test Scores of Control Group and Variable Group Control Group (Indoor) Pupil

Test 1

Test 2

6/10

5/10

9/10

6/10

4/10

10/10

9/10

7/10

8/10

6/10

10/10

8/10

9/10

7/10

8/10

5/10

10/10

9/10

Total:

95/110

77/110

86.36%

70%

% Change

18.9%

Variable Group (Outdoor) Pupil

Test 1

Test 2

8/10

10/10

9/10

8/10

10/10

9/10

6/10

10/10

6/10

4/10

10/10

9/10

Total:

99/110

94/110

90%

85.45%

% Change

5.06%

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

While the results of this study suggest that incorporating more movement and variations in the learning environment can enhance the retention of newly acquired knowledge, it is important to note that this investigation was limited in scale and conducted only with a small sample of children. Nevertheless, from the reading I have conducted as part of this investigation, these findings are consistent with broader research. Larger-scale studies have similarly concluded that ‘a multisensory approach produced better attitudes, higher achievement test scores, as well as a longer lasting memory of the content when compared to a traditional approach’ (Roberts, 2001 cited in Coppola, 2006).

Conclusions The data collected from this investigation indicates that, compared to conventional classroom teaching where pupils remain seated throughout the lesson, learning conducted outdoors with increased physical activity positively impacts knowledge retention. Research suggests that although people can learn by sitting, it might not be the best way to learn. ‘Over the past 400,000 years, humans have been primarily walking, sleeping, doing, running, leaning, or squatting. Sitting in chairs is an innovation in history, which has only existed for the past 500 generations. Students who sit for longer than 10-minute intervals are likely to become fatigued, restless, and have a reduced level of concentration and awareness’ (Jensen, 2000). Conversely, including movement in learning can have significantly positive effects. ‘Thinking and learning does not take place only in our head; people need to become more aware of the body’s role in learning. Many educators and researchers agree that the brain is activated during physical activity and that movement is essential to learning’ (Blakemore, 2013). While the results indicate that the variable group demonstrated improved memory retention, the data also revealed that both groups experienced knowledge loss over the course of the week. This demonstrates the necessity of regularly revisiting new material to ensure its consolidation into long-term memory (see Figure 3). As Jones (2019) says, “We [teachers] must prepare for forgetting and accept this as part of the learning process” As much as possible, it is essential for educators to incorporate movement into lessons to maximise knowledge retention. According ‘According to the Learning Pyramid (see Figure 4), pupils only remember 5% of a classroom lesson (what a teacher says)’, compared with ‘75% of what they do themselves’ (Kirschner, & Hendrick, 2020). 25

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Memory Retention (%)

Figure 3: Memory Retention When Learning is Reviewed

•

Instead of conducting a “cut and stick” sorting activity at desks, have students place or stick cards in different locations around the classroom or playground.

•

Stand up answers- true or false, multiplechoice answers or opinions lines.

•

Peer-to-peer discussion is often used to help pupils share ideas and reinforce new knowledge. To incorporate movement, these discussions can take place while walking around the playground or along a corridor.

•

Hop, skip or jump on transitions between the tables and carpet.

•

Scavenger hunts where children have to search for questions/answers around the room/school.

•

In Math lessons, when practicing new skills, traditional worksheets can be uninspiring. Instead, teachers can place giant dice around the room for pupils to roll and create their own sums or use a random number generator on tablets at the front of the room, allowing students to walk over and create their own sums.

•

Sticking up extension challenges around the room for when children have finished their work.

•

As demonstrated in this study, taking writing activities outside and writing on windows instead of paper or a whiteboard in the classroom is a simple way to change the environment and engage students physically while they learn.

Figure 4: The Learning Pyramid

In addition to the main findings of this research, it has become evident that incorporating movement into learning offers numerous additional benefits. Beyond enhanced memory retention, moderate physical activities, such as walking, contribute positively to overall health and fitness. These activities strengthen children’s bones, muscles, and cardiovascular health, while also aiding in the prevention of excessive weight gain and reducing the risk of serious conditions such as diabetes and cancer. Furthermore, physical activity is significantly beneficial for mental health, improving self-esteem, social skills, and emotional well-being. Given the increasingly sedentary lifestyle of students, these additional benefits should not be overlooked.

Recommendations While planning an educational trip can require significant effort from a teacher and may not be feasible for every lesson, simply moving a class outside or incorporating more movement into activities can be accomplished with minimal effort. There are numerous creative ways to integrate movement into lessons. Here are a few examples:

By implementing these strategies, teachers can foster a more dynamic and engaging learning experience that exploits the benefits of physical movement. After participating in this project and learning about the benefits, I am now committed to incorporating more movement into my lessons.

Further Thoughts The improved memory retention of these lessons may be attributed to their deviation from conventional classroom activities. It is not merely the outdoor and active components that enhance fact retention, but rather the departure from the norm that proves effective. If all lessons were conducted outdoors and involved physical activity, the positive effects on memory retention might diminish. Oberparleiter (2004) developed 12 braincompatible principles, one of which suggests that the brain is particularly responsive to

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

novelty. To investigate this hypothesis further, a counter-experiment could be designed. This experiment would involve providing students with long-term outdoor active lessons followed by a traditional indoor lesson that would then contain novelty value. However, such a study would require a prolonged timeframe or a different cohort of students who experience regular outdoor learning to yield meaningful results.

References Blakemore, C. L. (2003). Movement is essential to learning. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 74(9), 22–25. Coppola, A. R. (2006). Effects of implementing kinesthetic activities in the classroom (Master’s thesis, Rowan University). Rowan Digital Works. https://rdw.rowan.edu/ etd/870 Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1913). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). Teachers College, Columbia University. (Original work published 1885)

Jones, K. (2019). Retrieval practice: Research and resources for every classroom. John Catt Educational. Kirschner, P. A., & Hendrick, C. (2020). How learning happens: Seminal works in educational psychology and what they mean in practice. Routledge. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problembased, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 Oberparleiter, L. (2004). Brain-based teaching and learning. Department of Education, Gratz College, Center for Lifelong Learning. Roberts, P. (2001). Challenging curriculum and multisensory resources: A winning curriculum. The art of significantly increasing science achievement test scores: Research and practical applications, 67-88.

Jensen, E. (2000). Moving with the brain in mind. Educational Leadership, 58(3), 34–37.

It is not merely the outdoor and active components that enhance fact retention, but rather the departure from the norm that proves effective. If all lessons were conducted outdoors and involved physical activity, the positive effects on memory retention might diminish.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

The Impact of Adaptive Teaching on Mathematical Understanding and Confidence in Year 3 Enya Szokalska Deira International School

Whilst significant research exists around differentiation and adaptive teaching, fewer classroom-based studies have explored the direct impact of replacing differentiated tasks with a high-expectations scaffolded model within primary Mathematics.

Abstract This action research study explored the impact of adaptive teaching on Year 3 pupils’ mathematical understanding and confidence. Traditional differentiated approaches often involve providing different tasks to different groups of learners. Whilst intended to support attainment, this can unintentionally limit access to deeper mathematical thinking for some pupils. This study investigated whether replacing differentiated tasks with a high-expectations, scaffolded approach would improve pupils’ understanding, engagement and confidence in Mathematics. The intervention was conducted over a four-

week period during a fractions unit. Data was collected through pre- and post-assessments, pupil confidence surveys, lesson observations and pupil voice. The findings indicated improvements in conceptual understanding, problem-solving ability and mathematical confidence. Pupils demonstrated greater willingness to engage with challenging tasks and reported feeling more capable when tackling reasoning questions. The study suggests that adaptive teaching can provide an effective alternative to traditional differentiation, promoting equity and maintaining high expectations for all learners.

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Introduction Mathematics remains a subject in which many pupils develop negative perceptions of their own ability. It is not uncommon to hear children describe themselves as “bad at maths” or believe that success is reserved for those who are naturally gifted. Traditional differentiated approaches can sometimes reinforce these perceptions by assigning pupils to different tasks based on prior attainment, potentially limiting access to rich mathematical thinking. The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF, 2021a) advocates adaptive teaching approaches that allow all pupils to work towards the same ambitious learning goals whilst receiving appropriate support. Similarly, Rosenshine (2012) emphasises the importance of scaffolded instruction, guided practice and responsive teaching. This research sought to explore whether a shift from differentiated tasks towards a highexpectations scaffolded model could improve mathematical understanding and confidence amongst Year 3 pupils.

Background/Context The study took place in a Year 3 classroom within an international primary school in Dubai. The class consisted of pupils with varying levels of mathematical attainment and confidence. Historically, Mathematics lessons often involved differentiated worksheets that provided different levels of challenge to different groups of pupils. Whilst intended to support learning, this approach occasionally resulted in pupils being restricted to tasks that reflected perceived ability rather than potential. Fractions was selected as the focus unit due to its conceptual complexity and the misconceptions commonly associated with the topic. Previous assessments indicated that pupils struggled with recognising fractions, comparing fractions and applying fraction knowledge within reasoning contexts. Without intervention, there was a risk that lower-attaining pupils would continue to experience reduced access to challenging

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

mathematical thinking, potentially affecting confidence and long-term achievement.

Literature Review Research increasingly supports adaptive teaching as an alternative to traditional differentiation. Adaptive teaching involves maintaining high expectations for all learners whilst adjusting instruction, support and scaffolds according to individual need (EEF, 2021b). Rosenshine (2012) highlights the importance of guided practice, modelling and scaffolding in helping pupils access challenging content. Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of the Zone of Proximal Development similarly suggests that learning is maximised when support enables pupils to achieve beyond what they could accomplish independently. Sherrington (2019) further developed Rosenshine’s principles for classroom practice, emphasising the importance of carefully sequenced instruction and scaffolded support to help pupils access challenging learning. Similarly, Wiliam (2018) argues that schools should focus on improving classroom practice through evidenceinformed approaches that maximise learning opportunities for all pupils. Sweller’s (1988) Cognitive Load Theory also suggests that reducing unnecessary cognitive demands through effective scaffolding enables pupils to focus their working memory on new learning. This is particularly relevant when introducing complex mathematical concepts such as fractions. Boaler (2016) argues that fixed ability grouping can negatively influence pupil self-perception and limit opportunities for deeper mathematical engagement. Instead, mixed-attainment approaches combined with effective scaffolding can improve both achievement and learner confidence. Whilst significant research exists around differentiation and adaptive teaching, fewer classroom-based studies have explored the direct impact of replacing differentiated tasks with a high-expectations scaffolded model within primary mathematics. This study contributes to that growing body of evidence.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Methods Research Design Action research was selected because it enables teachers to investigate and improve their own practice through systematic inquiry. The cyclical nature of action research supports ongoing reflection, adaptation and improvement within authentic classroom contexts.

Research Questions 1.

To what extent does an adaptive teaching approach using a high-expectations scaffolded task model improve Year 3 pupils’ mathematical understanding?

How does this approach affect pupil confidence in Mathematics?

What impact does adaptive teaching have on pupil engagement during Mathematics lessons?

Data Collection Data was collected through: • • • •

Pre- and post-assessments Pupil confidence surveys Lesson observations Pupil voice interviews

Data Analysis Quantitative data from assessments and surveys were compared before and after the intervention.

Methodolody

Qualitative data from observations and pupil voice were analysed thematically to identify recurring patterns relating to confidence, engagement and mathematical understanding.

Over a four-week period, traditional differentiated tasks were replaced with a universal task model.

Results

Support was provided through: • Teacher modelling • Manipulatives • Visual representations • Sentence stems • Guided questioning • Peer discussion Lessons followed a gradual release structure involving modelling, guided practice and independent application.

Participants The study involved one Year 3 class consisting of 24 pupils aged between seven and eight years old. As the research was conducted within the context of pupils’ everyday classroom learning and involved adaptations to normal teaching practice rather than experimental interventions, formal parental consent was not required. No additional activities were undertaken beyond those typically experienced as part of the Mathematics curriculum.

The intervention resulted in improvements across all measured areas. Assessment data indicated increased understanding of fractions concepts, including recognising fractions, comparing fractions and applying knowledge within reasoning tasks (see Table 1). Table 1: Pupil Outcomes in Fractions

% of pupils

All pupils accessed the same learning objectives, the same reasoning and problemsolving tasks, and shared classroom discussions.

Pupil data was anonymised, and findings were reported in a manner that protected individual identities. The research adhered to the school’s ethical guidelines and professional expectations regarding confidentiality and pupil welfare.

Pupil confidence surveys demonstrated significant gains. Prior to the intervention, many pupils reported feeling uncertain when

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

faced with reasoning questions. Following the intervention, pupils reported greater confidence and willingness to attempt challenging problems. Observation data revealed: •

Increased participation during discussions

•

Improved use of mathematical vocabulary

•

Greater resilience when solving problems

•

More pupils attempting reasoning tasks independently

Pupil voice data highlighted positive perceptions of the approach. One pupil commented: “I used to find Maths really hard, but now I understand it and I can try the harder questions.” Another pupil stated: “I like that we all do the same work because I can learn from other people’s ideas.”

Discussion and Reflections The findings suggest that adaptive teaching supported both mathematical understanding and learner confidence. A key observation was that removing differentiated tasks reduced perceived barriers to participation. Pupils no longer viewed certain tasks as being reserved for particular groups, creating a more inclusive classroom culture. The use of scaffolds enabled pupils to access challenging content whilst maintaining high expectations. This aligns with research from Rosenshine (2012) and the EEF (2021), which emphasises the role of responsive support in successful learning. Professionally, this research has significantly influenced my own practice. Rather than asking how tasks can be simplified for particular pupils, I now focus on identifying the scaffolds required to help pupils access ambitious learning. The study also reinforced the importance of pupil self-belief. Improvements in confidence were often accompanied by improvements in attainment, suggesting that confidence and achievement are closely interconnected. One limitation of the study is its small sample size and short duration. Future research could explore the long-term impact of adaptive teaching across multiple classes and year groups.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Conclusion This action research study found that replacing differentiated tasks with a high-expectations scaffolded approach positively impacted Year 3 pupils’ mathematical understanding, confidence and engagement. The findings suggest that adaptive teaching provides a practical and effective alternative to traditional differentiation. By maintaining ambitious expectations whilst providing responsive support, teachers can create learning environments where all pupils have the opportunity to succeed. Future research should continue exploring how adaptive teaching can support equitable access to high-quality learning experiences across different subjects and educational contexts. Ultimately, this study highlights a simple but powerful message: all pupils can engage with ambitious mathematics when the right scaffolds are in place.

References Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students’ potential through creative mathematics, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass. Education Endowment Foundation. (2021a). Special educational needs in mainstream schools: Guidance report. Education Endowment Foundation. Education Endowment Foundation. (2021b). Teacher feedback to improve pupil learning. Education Endowment Foundation. Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36(1), 12–39. Sherrington, T. (2019). Rosenshine’s principles in action. John Catt Educational. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Wiliam, D. (2018). Creating the schools our children need: Why what we’re doing now won’t help much (and what we can do instead). Learning Sciences International.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Strengthening Metacognitive Skills to Showcase Academic Depth of BTEC Business Learning Aysha Asad & Ambreen Khan International School of Creative Science Nad Al Sheba

Vivas promoted metacognitive engagement by requiring students to explain, justify, and evaluate their thinking, potentially supporting progression towards analysis and evaluation in Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research explored the impact of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) on metacognition and independent learning among 12 post-16 Business and Technology Education Council (BTEC) Business students, evaluating reduced AI days, AI critique, questioning techniques, handwritten notes, and viva assessments. Findings revealed a mismatch between assignment grades and viva performance, suggesting AI dependence and a tendency for students to remain at the lower levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy rather than demonstrating higher-order thinking. Reduced AI use, AI critique, and vivas provided a more authentic measure of understanding, although further research is needed.

Business and Technology Education Council (BTEC) qualifications provide industry-aligned, skills-based learning through coursework and practical assessment, enabling learners with diverse strengths to demonstrate achievement beyond traditional examinations (Pearson, 2026). Classroom observations in a post-16 Level 3 BTEC Business setting revealed increasing reliance on generative AI to complete coursework. Despite personalised support, many learners used AI to overcome language and academic writing barriers, often reproducing responses rather than constructing understanding, creating discrepancies between assignment outcomes and demonstrated knowledge during discussions and questioning (Gerlich, 2025). In assignment-based BTEC programmes, AI dependency may undermine metacognitive development, independent learning, academic integrity, and assessment validity, with implications for students, teachers, higher education, and awarding bodies (Ofqual, 2024).

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Literature Review

Methodology

Although generative AI has the potential to enhance learning and efficiency (Weller, 2020), concerns have emerged regarding students’ increasing dependence on AI for academic tasks (Stojanov, Liu, & Koh, 2024). Existing research has largely focused on higher education (Bhullar, Joshi, & Chugh, 2024) with limited evidence on AI use among BTEC learners. Studies suggest that excessive AI reliance may compromise academic integrity, authentic assessment, independent learning, and problem-solving skills (Wang & Wang, 2024), concerns that are particularly significant in assignment-based BTEC programmes.

A single-cycle action research design incorporated surveys (12 teachers; 8 students), student focus groups, three AI-free learning days, AI critique activities, handwritten notetaking, and 30-minute viva assessments. Interventions aimed to strengthen metacognition, independent learning, and assessment authenticity.

Researchers have therefore advocated authentic assessment approaches, including oral questioning and viva voce examinations, to verify authorship and evaluate the depth and application of student understanding (Ward et al., 2024). However, little research has examined the effectiveness of viva assessments within BTEC contexts or their role in addressing AI dependency. This study addresses this gap by investigating whether viva assessments provide a more authentic measure of understanding and support metacognitive development in an increasingly AI-mediated learning environment.

Participants Participants were 12 post-16 BTEC Business students (7 in Year 12; 5 in Year 13), including learners with varying English proficiency levels and Emirati students. Informed consent and confidentiality procedures were established.

Data Collection Data was collected through surveys, focus groups, classroom observations, coursework, and viva assessments. Observations monitored engagement and independence, while coursework and viva outcomes were compared to evaluate the authenticity of demonstrated understanding.

Data Analysis Research Design Action research was adopted because its iterative cycles enable practitioners to investigate and improve issues within their own contexts, producing findings directly applicable to assessment authenticity and independent learning

Qualitative data were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis. Quantitative data from surveys, assignments, and vivas were analysed descriptively to identify discrepancies between written performance and demonstrated understanding.

The study addressed the following questions:

Results

How does increasing reliance on AI affect students’ critical and independent thinking?

Which strategies strengthen academic thinking and reduce AI dependency?

To what extent can metacognitive development support students’ critical engagement with AI-enhanced learning tools?

The focus group revealed a clear divide in AI usage (see Figure 1). While 50% of students demonstrated critical engagement through source verification and independent research, the remaining 50% relied primarily on AIgenerated responses, suggesting a potential reduction in independent thinking and critical evaluation.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Figure 1: Student Focus Group: Student verification of AI-Generated Information

Do not cross-check AI-generated information 50%

Cross-check AI-generated information 50%

Strategies to Strengthen Academic Thinking Classroom observations during AI-free days recorded increased participation, questioning, discussion, and independent problem-solving. Student focus groups reported greater reliance on their own thinking when completing tasks without AI support. Viva assessments required students to explain, justify, and elaborate on their responses verbally.

Evidence of Metacognitive Skills Viva assessments received unanimous support from both teachers and students (100%). Written tasks were supported by 67% of teachers and 38% of students. In contrast, AI-free learning days were supported by all teachers (100%) but received no support from students (0%). These findings suggest that while educators strongly value reducing AI reliance, students favour strategies that allow AI use alongside measures that verify authentic understanding (see Figure 2).

During viva assessments, students articulated their reasoning, reflected on decisions, and justified responses. Classroom observations also recorded students verbalising thought processes and evaluating alternative approaches during discussions (see Figure 3). Figure 3: Comparison of Assignment and Viva Assessment Outcomes (N = 14 students). Inquiry project participation (N = 77) 10

Figure 2: Teacher and Student Support for Authentic Learning Strategies Number of Students

AI Use and Student Independence Student focus groups reported frequent use of generative AI for research, assignment planning, content generation, and reviewing work. Teacher focus groups reported limited evidence of analysis, evaluation, and justified judgement during classroom activities. Comparisons between coursework and 30-minute viva assessments identified discrepancies between assignment grades and students demonstrated understanding.

Lower in viva

Higher in viva

No difference

Five of the fourteen students (35.7%) demonstrated differences between assignment and viva outcomes. Four students (28.6%) achieved lower outcomes in the viva, while one student (7.1%) achieved a higher outcome. Nine students (64.3%) showed no difference in performance.

Discussion and Reflections Viva assessments provided a more authentic measure of understanding than coursework, with several students achieving lower Viva outcomes despite high assignment grades. Consistent with previous research (Joughin, 2010) Vivas promoted metacognitive engagement by requiring students to explain,

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

justify, and evaluate their thinking, potentially supporting progression towards analysis and evaluation in Bloom’s Taxonomy. Reduced AI days and AI critique activities increased participation and independent problemsolving, whereas handwritten notetaking showed limited impact on higher-order thinking.

Conclusion Viva assessments, discussion-based learning, and structured critiques of AI outputs strengthened metacognitive development and supported more authentic assessment. Regular use of viva questioning may improve students’ ability to analyse, evaluate, and justify their understanding, promoting progression within Bloom’s Taxonomy. Findings also highlight the need to explicitly teach responsible AI use, prompt evaluation, and self-regulation alongside assessment reform strategies. However, the small sample size and short duration limit generalisability, indicating a need for further research with larger cohorts.

Stojanov, A., Liu, Q., & Koh, J. H. L. (2024). University students’ self-reported reliance on ChatGPT for learning: A latent profile analysis. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. caeai.2024.100243 Wang, N., & Wang, X. S. (2024). Critical analysis of the technological affordances, challenges and future directions of generative AI in education: A systematic review. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. Ward, M., O’Riordan, F., Logan-Fleming, D., Cooke, D., Concannon-Gibney, T., Efthymiou, M., & Watkins, N. (2024). Interactive oral assessment case studies: An innovative, academically rigorous, authentic assessment approach. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(5), 930–947. https://doi.org/10.1 080/14703297.2024.2312345 Weller, M. (2020). 25 years of ed tech. Athabasca University Press.

References Bhullar, P. S., Joshi, M., & Chugh, R. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: A synthesis of the literature and a future research agenda. Education and Information Technologies, 29(16), 21501–21522. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10639-024-12723-x Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Gerlich, M. (2025). AI tools in society: Impacts on cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking. Societies, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/ soc15010006 Joughin, G. (2010). A short guide to oral assessment. Routledge. Ofqual. (2024, April 24). Ofqual’s approach to regulating the use of artificial intelligence in the qualifications sector. https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/ofquals-approach-toregulating-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-inthe-qualifications-sector

Viva assessments, discussion-based learning, and structured critiques of AI outputs strengthened metacognitive development and supported more authentic assessment.

Pearson. (2026, June 6). Our qualifications explained. https://qualifications.pearson.com/ en/support/support-topics/understanding-ourqualifications/our-qualifications-explained/ about-btecs.html

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

The Impact of Empowering Teachers to Employ Metacognitive Strategies on Improving Grade 10 Students’ Academic Achievement and Deep Understanding in Islamic Education: A ClassroomBased Experience Mohammed Al-Kalou Deira International School

In Islamic Education, the aim extends beyond acquiring religious knowledge and understanding legal rulings; it also involves nurturing balanced individuals who are capable of reflection, inference, and making value-based decisions grounded in Islamic principles.

Abstract

Introduction

This article aims to present a classroom-based experience involving the implementation of metacognitive strategies in teaching Islamic Education to Grade 10 students and to examine their impact on improving academic achievement and promoting deep understanding of the subject matter. A range of metacognitive strategies was implemented with a sample of twelve students over a threeweek period. These strategies included thinkaloud techniques, self-reflection journals, self-assessment practices, concept mapping, and self-monitoring questions. Classroom observations and formative assessment outcomes revealed noticeable improvements in students’ participation and engagement, enhanced critical thinking skills, and better performance in assessments. These findings highlight the importance of empowering teachers to employ metacognitive strategies as an effective approach to fostering deep learning in Islamic Education.

Educational institutions are increasingly adopting teaching practices that emphasise the development of higher-order thinking skills and encourage a shift from rote memorisation to meaningful understanding and reflection. Within this context, metacognitive strategies have emerged as effective instructional approaches that enable learners to become aware of, regulate, and evaluate their own thinking processes. As Flavell (1979) first articulated, metacognition constitutes a distinct domain of cognitive monitoring in which individuals become conscious observers and regulators of their own mental operations. In Islamic Education, the aim extends beyond acquiring religious knowledge and understanding legal rulings; it also involves nurturing balanced individuals who are capable of reflection, inference, and making value-based decisions grounded in Islamic principles. The capacity for self-regulation

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

emphasised by Zimmerman (2002) is particularly aligned with the reflective and analytical demands of Islamic Education. This classroom-based experience was therefore designed to address the following research question:

provides teachers with an evidence-based mechanism for reflecting on and improving their own classroom practice.

What is the impact of empowering teachers to employ metacognitive strategies on improving Grade 10 students’ academic achievement and deep understanding in Islamic Education?

The study involved a sample of 12 Year 10 students.

Theoretical Framework Flavell (1979) introduced the concept of metacognition as a form of cognitive monitoring, defining it as an individual’s awareness of and ability to regulate their own thinking processes. Building on this foundation, metacognition encompasses three key components: planning, self-monitoring, and evaluation. Schraw and Dennison (1994) further developed tools for assessing metacognitive awareness, confirming that learners with strong metacognitive skills are better equipped to organise their learning, identify their strengths and areas for improvement, and select appropriate strategies to achieve their learning objectives. Educational research has also demonstrated that integrating metacognitive strategies into classroom practice contributes to higher academic achievement, deeper understanding, enhanced critical thinking, and increased student motivation. In the context of selfregulated learning, Zimmerman (2002) argued that becoming a self-regulated learner — someone who monitors, controls, and reflects on their own learning — is central to academic success. This theoretical perspective is further supported by Abu Jado and Nawfal (2018), whose work on teaching thinking underscores the practical application of metacognitive frameworks in Arab educational settings.

Methodology This study adopted an action research approach through the implementation of a variety of metacognitive strategies during Islamic Education lessons. Action research, as recommended by Abu Jado and Nawfal (2018),

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

Participants

Duration of Implementation The intervention was conducted over a period of three consecutive weeks.

Strategies Employed •

Think-Aloud Strategy: The teacher modelled the cognitive processes involved in analysing Islamic texts and deriving key lessons and values. This approach reflects the metacognitive monitoring dimension identified by Flavell (1979), in which making thinking visible supports learners’ own regulatory processes.

•

Self-Reflection Journals: Students were encouraged to document what they had learned, the challenges they encountered, and the strategies that supported their understanding. This strategy directly operationalises the self-monitoring dimension of metacognition described by Schraw and Dennison (1994).

•

Self-Assessment: Students evaluated their own level of understanding and identified areas requiring further development. Such self-assessment practices are a hallmark of the self-regulated learner described by Zimmerman (2002).

•

Concept Mapping: Concept maps were used to organise ideas and illustrate relationships among various Islamic concepts.

•

Self-Monitoring Questions: Students engaged with reflective prompts such as: What do I already know about this topic? How did I arrive at this answer? Which steps helped me understand the concept more effectively? These prompts are consistent with the metacognitive awareness inventory framework proposed by Schraw and Dennison (1994). 37

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

The implementation process yielded several positive outcomes, as evidenced through classroom observations and ongoing formative assessments. Collectively, these findings resonate with the literature on metacognition: when students are empowered to monitor and evaluate their own thinking — as described by Flavell (1979) and Zimmerman (2002) — engagement and performance improve measurably.

Figure 2: Comparison of Student Engagement Indicators (%) Across Four Dimensions Before and After the Intervention Before 100

Firstly, there was a noticeable increase in students’ classroom participation compared with their engagement prior to the intervention. Students became more willing to ask questions, express their opinions, and contribute to discussions. As illustrated in Figure 1 below, participation rates rose from 60% before the intervention to 90% after implementation. Figure 1: Student Participation Rate Following the Implementation of Metacognitive Strategies 100

90%

Participation Rate (%)

Before Intervention

85%

80%

78%

75%

40% 35%

30%

25%

Asking Questions

Expressing Opinions

Real-life Connections

Analysis Depth

Thirdly, the strategies employed appeared to foster students’ critical thinking skills. Students became more capable of interpreting Islamic rulings, providing logical justifications for their responses, and considering issues from multiple perspectives — outcomes consistent with the higher-order thinking framework described by Abu Jado and Nawfal (2018). Finally, these improvements translated into enhanced academic performance. As shown in Figure 3, formative assessments indicated that all twelve students achieved higher scores after the intervention. The mean score rose from 59.3% to 82.1%, representing an overall improvement of approximately 23 percentage points.

60%

After

Score (%)

Findings and Observations

After Intervention

Figure 3: Individual Student Assessment Scores (%) Before and After the Intervention (n=12) Inquiry project participation (N = 77) 100

Before

Mean 82.5%

Score (%)

Secondly, students demonstrated higher levels of engagement during learning activities across multiple dimensions, as shown in Figure 2. They showed greater interest in analysing situations and connecting Islamic concepts to real-life contexts rather than relying solely on information recall. This shift from surface to deep learning aligns with the principles of selfregulated learning outlined by Zimmerman (2002).

After

Mean 59.3%

S9 S10 S11 S12

Section |

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Discussion The findings of this classroom experience align with existing educational literature, which emphasises the significant role of metacognitive strategies in improving learning outcomes. When students become aware of their learning processes and are able to monitor and evaluate their understanding, they engage more actively and effectively in the learning experience. This observation directly echoes Flavell’s (1979) foundational claim that metacognitive monitoring enhances cognitive performance, and the empirical work of Schraw and Dennison (1994), who demonstrated that metacognitive awareness correlates positively with academic outcomes. Furthermore, the nature of Islamic Education makes it particularly suitable for the application of such strategies, as the subject requires reflection, analysis, and the ability to connect theoretical knowledge with behaviour and everyday life. Abu Jado and Nawfal (2018) similarly argue that thinkingoriented pedagogies are well-suited to subjects that demand value judgement and moral reasoning. This experience demonstrated that providing students with opportunities to think about their own thinking — the essence of metacognition as defined by Flavell (1979) — facilitated a transition from surface learning to deeper understanding. The students’ growing capacity for self-regulation, as evidenced in their journals and self-assessments, is consistent with the profile of the self-regulated learner described by Zimmerman (2002).

Recommendations Based on the outcomes of this experience, the following recommendations are proposed: •

•

Provide professional development programmes that equip teachers with the knowledge and skills necessary to implement metacognitive strategies effectively. Encourage Islamic Education teachers to integrate self-reflection and selfassessment activities into their daily instructional practices. Develop assessment tools that measure deep understanding and higher-order thinking skills rather than focusing exclusively on memorisation.

Teaching, Learning, and Cognitive Design

•

Promote a culture of action research among teachers to facilitate the sharing of evidence-based successful practices, in line with the recommendations of Abu Jado and Nawfal (2018).

•

Conduct future studies involving larger samples and longer intervention periods to further investigate the impact of metacognitive strategies across different educational settings, building on the measurement frameworks established by Schraw and Dennison (1994).

Conclusion This classroom-based experience demonstrated that empowering teachers to employ metacognitive strategies can significantly contribute to improving Grade 10 students’ academic achievement and fostering a deeper understanding of Islamic Education. The use of these strategies positively influenced students’ participation, engagement, critical thinking abilities, and academic performance. These outcomes confirm the theoretical frameworks proposed by Flavell (1979), Schraw and Dennison (1994), Zimmerman (2002), and Abu Jado and Nawfal (2018), all of whom highlight metacognition as a powerful lever for meaningful learning. Consequently, investing in instructional practices grounded in metacognitive principles represents an important step towards creating more effective and meaningful learning environments that prepare students to become reflective, independent, and thoughtful learners capable of applying their knowledge in everyday life.

References Abu Jado, S., & Nawfal, M. (2018). Teaching thinking: Theory and practice. Dar Al-Masirah Publishing House. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.34.10.906 Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. https:// doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033 Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a selfregulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15430421tip4102_2

Section II Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

In international Arabic classrooms, these challenges are intensified because students often operate across multiple languages and have fewer opportunities to practice academic writing in Modern Standard Arabic.

Abstract

Background & Problem

This action research study investigates how structured idea generation, scaffolding, and self-regulation strategies improve Arabic writing among secondary multilingual students who read well but struggle to organise written ideas. Twenty-two Grade 9–10 students in a Dubai international school completed a four-week intervention grounded in Cognitive Load Theory, Scaffolding Theory, and Self-Regulated Learning Theory, separating idea generation from grammatical accuracy while building planning and self-monitoring skills. Writing was assessed using a rubric covering idea development, organisation, cohesion, and confidence. Mean scores rose from 52.45 to 71.82, a 36.93% improvement, statistically significant with a very large effect size (d = 1.46). Organisation and structure improved most (+79.53%). Findings support explicit, process-oriented writing instruction for multilingual learners.

This study investigates the impact of structured instructional strategies on improving Arabic writing skills among secondary school students in international school settings, focusing on bridging the gap between reading comprehension and writing performance. Many students in multilingual educational environments demonstrate strong reading abilities but struggle to express ideas effectively through writing. The study addresses this challenge by examining how structured idea generation, scaffolding, and self-regulation strategies can improve writing performance. The research involved 22 Grade 9 and Grade 10 students in an international secondary school in Dubai and used an action research design implemented over four weeks. Writing is considered one of the most cognitively demanding literacy activities because it requires learners to generate ideas,

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

organize information, select vocabulary, construct sentences, and monitor their communication simultaneously. In international Arabic classrooms, these challenges are intensified because students often operate across multiple languages and have fewer opportunities to practice academic writing in Modern Standard Arabic. Consequently, many learners develop stronger receptive skills than productive writing abilities. The study argues that writing difficulties are not solely linguistic but are also influenced by instructional design and cognitive demands (Graham & Perin, 2007).

Research Problem & Questions The research problem emerged from classroom observations indicating that students could understand Arabic texts and participate in discussions but struggled to organize and communicate ideas effectively through extended writing (Al-Mansour, 2010; Taha, 2016). The study sought to answer the main research question: How can structured idea-generation and self-regulation strategies improve students’ writing skills in Arabic? Additional sub-questions explored: (1) How scaffolding supports text structure, (2) The influence of self-assessment on content quality, and (3) The impact on student confidence.

The Reading-Writing Gap Many secondary Arabic learners can understand texts successfully but struggle to express ideas through coherent written communication. Weak writing limits students’ ability to demonstrate understanding, as international school learners often show stronger receptive than productive literacy skills.

Theoretical Framework & Foundations The study is grounded in three major theoretical perspectives: Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988), Scaffolding Theory (Vygotsky, 1978), and Self-Regulated Learning Theory (Zimmerman, 2000). Together, these theories formed an integrated framework that guided the intervention. Cognitive Load Theory suggests that writing overloads working memory because students must manage multiple cognitive tasks simultaneously (Sweller, 1988). The study therefore proposes reducing unnecessary cognitive demands by separating idea generation from grammatical accuracy during early writing stages. Scaffolding Theory emphasizes providing temporary instructional support such as templates, frameworks, and guided structures to help students perform tasks beyond their independent capabilities (Vygotsky, 1978). Self-Regulated Learning Theory highlights the importance of metacognitive processes such as planning, monitoring, selfassessment, and reflection in improving learning outcomes (Zimmerman, 2000).

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

Methodology The methodology employed an action research approach because it allows educators to investigate practical classroom challenges while implementing interventions in authentic educational settings. Twenty-two students participated in the study using convenience sampling. Student writing was assessed using an analytical rubric measuring four domains: idea development and content richness, organization and structure, cohesion and linking, and confidence and engagement. Each domain contributed 25 points to a total score of 100.

Four-Week Intervention The intervention lasted four weeks and followed a highly structured sequence designed (see Figure 1) to move students gradually from explicit cognitive support to independent competence (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983):

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Figure 1: Four-Week Intervention

Figure 2: Overall Writing Scores

Findings & Results The findings revealed substantial improvements. Mean scores increased significantly from 52.45 points (SD = 10.12) before the intervention to 71.82 points (SD = 9.45) afterward, marking an overall mean difference of 19.37 points (95% CI: 14.55, 24.19) and a 36.93% performance jump. Pairedsamples t-test metrics confirmed that these gains were robust and significant, with t (21) = 6.84 and p < .001. The calculated Cohen’s d of 1.46 indicated a very large practical effect size, establishing meaningful educational impact (see Figure 2).

The single largest relative improvement was achieved in organization and structure (+79.53%), confirming that explicit paragraph frameworks played an exceptionally critical role in helping students construct logical and coherent texts.

Discussion & Interpretation Cognitive Load Theory explains that reducing unnecessary demands allowed students to focus on rich content development without being paralyzed by syntax constraints. Scaffolding Theory clarifies extensive improvements in organization because students received explicit instruction in

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

structuring paragraph layers. Finally, SelfRegulated Learning Theory accounts for the marked increase in active classroom engagement; as students evaluated their own writing via objective checklists, they grew independent and highly confident.

Implications for Practice Writing proficiency does not automatically develop through reading exposure alone; it requires explicit, process-oriented instruction (Graham & Perin, 2007). Teachers should isolate content generation from surface mechanics during early drafting and build systematic metacognitive reflection checklists (Harris & Graham, 1999). School leaders are encouraged to adopt whole-school cross-disciplinary literacy approaches, providing shared resources and specialized professional development focused on explicit scaffolding (Education Endowment Fund, 2019).

Limitations & Conclusion Design limitations include a small convenience sample (N=22) from a single Dubai school and a brief 4-week timeline without a comparative control group. Future iterations should incorporate longitudinal tracks and technology-enhanced tools. In conclusion, structured idea generation, scaffolding, and self-regulation strategies significantly bridge the reading-writing gap in multilingual settings, cultivating capable, autonomous, and highly confident student writers.

References Al-Mansour, N. (2010). The effects of process-oriented writing instruction on Arabic composition skills. Journal of Educational Research, 44(2), 112–129. Education Endowment Foundation. (2019). Improving literacy in secondary schools. https:// educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Alliance for Excellent Education. https://all4ed. org Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1999). Programmatic intervention research on strategy instruction for writing. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1207/HDLE1401_1 Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361476X(83)90004-X Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15516709cog1202_4 Taha, H. (2016). Reading and writing in Arabic: A cognitive perspective. Journal of Arabic Literacy Education, 19(1), 45–62. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining selfregulation: A social cognitive commentary. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978012109890-2/50031-7

School leaders are encouraged to adopt whole-school cross-disciplinary literacy approaches, providing shared resources and specialized professional development focused on explicit scaffolding. Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

The Impact of Multisensory Teaching Strategies on Vocabulary and Sentence Development in Year 2 EAL Learners Namita Janardhanan Al Salam Community School

Researchers state that the more senses students activate while learning something, the better they remember new information. Multisensory techniques use such senses as vision, hearing, touching and movement.

Abstract

Introduction

English as an Additional Language (EAL) students encounter difficulties in developing their vocabulary and constructing sentences because of a lack of exposure to English outside the classroom environment. In this study, the effects of multisensory approaches on improving vocabulary skills and constructing sentences was investigated among three EAL Year 2 students at Al Salam Community School in Dubai. The research took place across three terms and involved a variety of multisensory activities during weekly lessons on English language learning. The study suggests that multisensory teaching strategies provide an effective framework for supporting language acquisition and communication skills in young EAL learners.

Language acquisition is challenging for children who are becoming proficient in English and learning new material at the same time. English as an Additional Language (EAL) students commonly experience difficulties when trying to understand new concepts, remember them and apply the learned vocabulary. This, in turn, can prevent them from effectively communicating with teachers and peers, participating actively in discussions and forming sentences. Traditional language teaching usually consists of using worksheets, repeating tasks, and studying textbooks. Although these techniques might be helpful to some extent, they might not fully cover all possible needs of multicultural students. Researchers state that the more senses students activate while learning something, the better they remember new information. Multisensory techniques use such senses as vision, hearing, touching and movement.

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

This action research study explored whether multisensory teaching strategies could improve vocabulary acquisition and sentence development among Year 2 EAL learners. The study aimed to determine how engaging multiple senses during language instruction influences vocabulary retention, sentence construction, confidence, and classroom participation.

The intervention was implemented over Terms 1–3 and consisted of weekly multisensory language-learning activities integrated into classroom instruction (see Figure 1). These included: •

Visual Learning: Picture cards, Graphic organizers, Visual prompts, and Interactive displays

•

Auditory Learning: Storytelling, Songs and chants, Guided discussions, and Repetition and oral practice

The theoretical foundation for multisensory learning can be linked to Vygotsky’s (1978) social constructivist theory. Social interaction and active involvement in learning are essential. Students should be involved in meaningful activities and receive proper support within their Zone of Proximal Development.

•

Kinesthetic Learning: Role-play activities, Movement-based vocabulary games, Drama and acting tasks

•

Tactile Learning: Word-building activities, Manipulatives, Matching games, and Hands-on sorting activities

Hattie (2009) found out that three important aspects affecting student success were active learning, feedback, and engagement. Multisensory learning fits all these criteria as it requires active involvement of students and deep cognitive activity.

Figure 1: Multisensory Language-Learning Activities

Literature Review

According to Tokuhama-Espinosa (2014), it is crucial to use brain-based teaching strategies that involve several neural circuits simultaneously. Seeing, hearing, touching, and manipulating the learning content create strong brain connections that enhance retention. Finally, research shows that vocabulary is directly associated with comprehension, communication skills, and academic achievements. Thus, teaching methods that facilitate vocabulary acquisition can contribute to successful language learning in general.

Methodology This study employed a qualitative action research design. The participants were three Year 2 EAL learners from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Initial assessments and classroom observations identified common challenges including limited vocabulary retention, incomplete sentence construction, low confidence in speaking activities, and reluctance to participate in discussions.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Data Collection

Figure 2: Sentence Development Evidence

Multiple sources of evidence were used: • • • • • •

Teacher observations Vocabulary assessments Oral language recordings Writing samples Student reflections Classroom work sample

Findings and Analysis Vocabulary Development Students demonstrated greater retention of vocabulary when words were introduced through multiple sensory experiences. Vocabulary assessments indicated steady improvement throughout the intervention period (see Table 1). Table 1: Vocabulary Development Assessment Stage

Average Vocabulary Retention

Baseline

45%

Midpoint

68%

Final Assessment

88%

The combination of visuals, movement, and hands-on activities appeared to strengthen students’ ability to recall and apply new vocabulary in different contexts.

Sentence Development As vocabulary knowledge increased, students demonstrated improvements in sentence construction. Early writing samples consisted of short phrases such as:

Student Engagement Teacher observations indicated significantly higher engagement during multisensory lessons compared to traditional worksheetbased activities (see Figure 3). Figure 3 Student Engagement in Multisensory Activities

“Cat run.” By the end of the intervention, students were producing more detailed sentences such as: “The small brown cat runs quickly across the playground.” Students began using Descriptive adjectives, Expanded noun phrases, Topic-specific vocabulary, and Improved sentence structure (see Figure 2).

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Student reflections provided valuable insights into learner experiences. “The pictures help me remember words faster.” - Student A “I like acting because I can understand the meaning better.” - Student B “The games make learning English fun.” Student C These comments suggest that students perceived multisensory learning as enjoyable and beneficial.

Teacher Survey Findings The teacher reported increased student confidence, greater willingness to participate (see Table 2), and more independent use of vocabulary during classroom activities (see Figure 4). Table 2: Teacher Reflections Observation Area

Positive Response

Student Engagement

95%

Vocabulary Retention

90%

Oral Participation

88%

Writing Improvement

85%

Figure 4: Vocabulary Development Over Time

Discussion The findings support existing research suggesting that multisensory instruction positively influences language acquisition. Students appeared to develop stronger connections with vocabulary when they experienced language through multiple sensory channels. Improved vocabulary retention contributed to better sentence construction and greater confidence in communication. The study also highlighted the motivational benefits of multisensory learning. Students were more willing to participate in classroom discussions, ask questions, and attempt independent writing tasks. These outcomes align with previous research emphasizing the importance of active engagement in learning.

Conclusion This action research study demonstrated that multisensory teaching strategies can significantly enhance vocabulary acquisition and sentence development among young EAL learners. By engaging visual, auditory, tactile, and kinaesthetic senses, students developed stronger language skills, increased confidence, and greater participation in classroom learning. The findings suggest that multisensory approaches provide valuable support for learners from diverse linguistic backgrounds and can contribute to more inclusive and effective language instruction. Future research should explore larger sample sizes, long-term retention of learning gains, and the integration of digital technologies to further enhance multisensory language learning.

References Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2014). Making classrooms better: 50 practical applications of mind, brain, and education science. W. W. Norton & Company. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Exploring the Effectiveness of Multimodal Pedagogy for Native and Non-Native Spanish Learners in a Multilingual Primary School Adhalessa Vargas Victory Heights Primary School Sports City

Multimodal strategies enhance comprehension, encouraged collaboration, and reduced learning barriers, while the data demonstrated that scaffolding lowers anxiety and builds oral confidence in non-native speakers’ learners while up levelling skills on Spanish speakers.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research study investigates the effectiveness of multimodal pedagogy in supporting Spanish acquisition among native and non-native speakers in a UAE multilingual primary school, where 91% of students don’t speak Spanish at home. Across roughly 200 students (Years 3–6), a five-week intervention integrated songs, gestures, role-play, videos, and collaborative games alongside traditional instruction. Enjoyment of Spanish lessons rose from 59.4% to 75%, with 77.4% overall reporting positive feelings toward the language. Most students (60.3%) found varied strategies eased vocabulary recall, while collaboration fostered peer mentoring across proficiency levels. Drawing on Kress (2009), Krashen (1982), Mayer (2009), and Hattie (2009), the study concludes multimodal pedagogy strengthens vocabulary retention, confidence, and inclusive differentiation for diverse learners.

Nowadays, multilingual classrooms have become the norm, particularly in the Middle East, where students from a diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds learn together. As a Spanish teacher in a multilingual primary school in the United Arab of Emirates, I work with students who bring a wide range of linguistic backgrounds and varying levels of proficiency in Spanish and other languages as well; within the same classroom, there are both native speakers and non-native learners encountering the language for the first time. This diversity creates both opportunities and challenges for educators, who are expected to meet the needs of all learners while also fulfilling parents’ expectations. Within a classroom, teachers work with native and non-native speakers, multilingual learners, and students who are acquiring a language for the first time or haven’t been exposed to a different language.

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Through my practice, I have observed that many students, especially non-native learners, find it difficult to retain new vocabulary when traditional teaching approaches are used. Of these, 91% do not speak Spanish at home, meaning that their only opportunity to learn the language is at school. Around 9% are Spanish speakers, whether both parents are native speakers or only one; however, in both cases they are familiar with the use of the language. Traditional teaching strategies are usually use but how effective is multimodal pedagogy in supporting acquisition of languages among primary Spanish learners? Moreover, the growing emphasis on inclusive education requires teachers to address a wide range of learning needs and abilities. As a result, teaching in multilingual classrooms demands effective strategies but more important flexibility to support language development and academic success for all students.

Methodology This study is based on mixed-methods approach to investigate teaching practices to secure a much effective approach for both native and non-native speakers of the target language and focusing on the multicultural diversity of our community in the UAE. Whilst the research is based on primary students aged 7 to 11 years old, with around 200 students considered, from Year 3 to Year 6 in a mixed primary setting. The data collected thorough a survey administrated to students twice, focusing on the full participation of the classroom before a lesson, instruction strategies, language development. Classroom observations were conducted to analyse the implementation of communicative, collaborative and differentiated teaching approaches. The quantitative survey data was analysed using statistics such as outcomes on vocabulary recall and task scores, while the qualitative observation notes were coded thematically and periodically, pupils voice, feedback, observations, and classroom engagement. The combination of the survey responses and classroom evidence enabled

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

a comprehensive evaluation of how current teaching methodologies support diverse linguistic backgrounds.

Action Research Intervention This paper adopts action research framework, a systematic and reflective methodology that supports educators to improve teaching practices within their own classroom. Action Research is particularly suitable for multilingual educations settings because it promotes continues cycles of planning, implementation, observation, adjustment based on skills, native or non-native speakers and reflection, allowing teaching strategies to adapt according with the evolving needs of learners. In the context of this study, the framework was used to explore the effectiveness of multimodal pedagogy in supporting both native and non-native Spanish speakers in the students in a multilingual primary school environment. The first stage was planned to identify learners’ linguistics needs, learning gaps, barriers, skills and participation in the Spanish class. My classroom informal observations and discussions with students were used to determinate areas where learners required additional support on students from Year 4 to Year 6 with particular attention on differences between native and non-native Spanish speakers in terms of vocabulary development, reading comprehension, oral participation and confidence using the language in general. Consequently, the observation stage involved systematically collecting data on students’ engagement, classroom interactions and learning outcome. The evidence was gathered through classroom observations and notes, student work samples and comparison, survey responses. Particular attention was paid on how students responded to multimodal activities, and how native and non-native learners interacted with one another.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Multimodal Pedagogy and Language Learning Piaget’s (1970) stages of cognitive development suggest that, during the preoperational stage (2 to 7 years old), children do not use logical rules to learn. Instead, their thinking is influenced by how things look and appear to them. This is when multimodal pedagogy can be more effective, and student engagement can be higher (Creed et al, 2024). Learning a foreign language is one of the most underutilised tools in early childhood settings, nonetheless very important to help enhance memory retention, feed curiosity, shaping children thinking and reflection. Early research shows that students learn through multiple modes, handling objects, actions, gestures, object exploration to communicate and develop language but there is still little research in the area (García Mayo, 2017). Capirci (2025) mentioned rich multimodal experiences in the classroom have helped shape social interactions and support language growth; reinforcing our understanding of how language emerges and connects directly to the core principles of teaching and learning. For instance, Kress (2009) argues that communication is inherently multimodal, meaning that is shaped through images, gestures, writing and speech rather than a language alone. Specifically, in the classroom he suggested a designed learning environment where students use multiple modes: drawing, mapping, speaking, writing and digital media to represent understanding. As a result, these multimodal teaching strategies recognise that learners gain learning and meaning through varied resources, not just text and encourage teachers to use a variety of resources and create tasks that led students choose the most effective mode to express their ideas; what counts as knowledge and supports a more inclusive flexible learning. Significantly, Krashen’s (1982) work has shaped the second language education, focusing particularly on comprehensive input. He stated that students’ progress when they receive language they can understand, slightly above their current level “i+1” formula. His framework has funded classroom strategies that prioritise meaningful content and scaffolded language to support language development. Krashen also highlights the role of affective factors, showing how motivation, confidence and engagement improve language acquisition and learning outcomes. According to Hattie (2009), when learners are emotionally and cognitively invested, they are more receptive to comprehend and willing

to take risk in communication, in our case learning a foreign language is a key condition for language development, reinforcing the idea that engagement is not an add-on but a core driver of language learning success, growth depends on both appropriate challenge and active learner development that encourage students to go above and beyond their level. The connection between student engagement and language acquisition becomes clearer with Krashen’s “i+1” principle along with Hattie’s emphasis on active, passionate participation and Krashen’s idea of learner’s progress beyond their current level, Hattie reminds us that such a progress only occurs when students are genuinely engaged and support by a responsive teaching (Krashen, 1982). In classroom with non-native speakers Krashen’s formula supports multimodal planning lessons that offer language just beyond students’ current ability, ensuring challenge without overwhelming students, and this can also be apply with the native speakers where the challenge and expectations can he higher in similar task with visuals, modelling, scaffold task, levelled tasks, teachers creating conditions to help learners naturally progress.

Results and Data Analysis The research on year 3 students was particularly significant, as they were experiencing for first formal exposure to Spanish as a subject. This transitional stage provided an opportunity to examine how multimodal pedagogy supports early learning acquisition among students with diverse background. Within the Action Research cycle the initial observations during the first 3 months of learning Spanish, student survey data showed a positive increase in engagement. Initially, 59.4% of pupils reported enjoying language learning, while a second survey conducted five weeks later showed that 75% of them enjoyed learning Spanish in the classroom. Between the two surveys lessons incorporated a variety of multimodal strategies, including, Padlet activities, quizzes, writing task, listening exercises, charades, video resources, recordings, and role-play activities. The variety in lesson structure contributed to the increased levels of student engagement therefore enjoyment. I have incorporated elements of multimodal pedagogy into my teaching, integrating visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic strategies such as songs, images, gestures, and interactive activities. These approaches aim to enhance engagement and support deeper vocabulary

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

retention by providing multiple pathways for learning. This study explores the effectiveness of these multimodal strategies for both native and non-native Spanish learners within my primary classroom context. Using an action research framework, it examines their impact on vocabulary acquisition and student engagement, with the aim of informing more inclusive and effective language teaching practices in multilingual primary settings.

Key Findings The initial classroom observations informed the design of multimodal interventions aimed at facilitating comprehension, increasing engagement and building confidence in the target language Spanish. This approach is considered especially important in supporting both native and non-native Spanish speakers as they adapted to a new language learning environment, some for the first time like Year 3 students. The survey findings indicate a generally positive attitude towards learning Spanish among students. 77.4% of the students reported feeling happy about learning Spanish, while only a small proportion expressed mixed feelings. This suggests that students were engaged with the language-learning experience and viewed Spanish lessons positively. Such findings are particularly significant in a multilingual school context, where the majority of learners (91.3%) do not speak Spanish at home. The data also highlights the value of multimodal strategies in supporting student engagement (see Figure 1). When asked whether they enjoyed learning Spanish through pictures, actions, and sounds, the majority of students responded positively or indicated that these approaches helped their learning and as a consequence the recall vocabulary process. Similarly, over half of the respondents agreed that pictures, videos, and gestures supported their understanding of new vocabulary. These findings suggest that multimodal approaches make language learning more accessible and engaging for young learners.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

Figure 1: Student’s survey - I find vocabulary recall easier when using different strategies including technology in the class

9.8%

29.9%

60.3%

Note: 60.3% find vocabulary recall easier when using different strategies including technology in the class, 29.9 mentioned it helps and 9.8% of the students say presents no difference with the standard teaching strategies. Language acquisition examined whether multimodal resources support comprehension, encourage collaboration and reduce barriers to learning. The collected data gave insights to the effectiveness of the interventions and patterns of student’s engagement and achievement. Survey outcome was a close work collaboration between native and non-native speakers, I’ve also found that native speakers develop mentoring and modelling skills when they work along non-native speakers, facilitating a collaborative framework. As a result, multimodal interventions were designed in small groups to incorporate a range of learning strategies; visual materials, audio resources, digital technologies, scaffolds, collaborative activities and games with the purpose of making learning more accessible and engaging for all students (see Figure 2). Student responses further demonstrate the importance of active participation in language acquisition. A substantial proportion of learners reported remembering Spanish words more effectively when movement, gestures, and roleplay activities were incorporated into lessons. Open-ended responses frequently referred to games, actions, songs, videos, and interactive activities as the most helpful aspects of learning Spanish. This indicates that students benefited from a variety of learning experiences that extended beyond traditional reading and writing tasks.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Figure 2: Multimodal Learning Strategies used in the classroom

helped them understand and remember better new vocabulary and more effectively. Songs with lyrics in Spanish have demonstrated an effective learning strategy to recall vocabulary and understand grammar rules on topics like greetings and routines, in addition to better pronunciation with sounds that are not presented in english such as ñ. These findings align with Kress (2009), who argues that learning is enhanced when information is presented through multiple modes of communication, allowing learners to construct meaning in different ways. Similarly, Mayer’s (2009) Cognitive Theory of Multimedia learning suggests that combining visual and auditory elements helps to improve understanding and more important retention. The frequent references to songs, games, actions and videos in the feedback from students indicates that multimodal pedagogy creates a more inclusive, engaging and accessible learning environment for all.

Conclusion

The pupil voice responses reinforced the positive impact of varied teaching approaches on engagement and motivation. Results suggest that a diverse range of multimodal activities encouraged participation and maintained students’ interest in Spanish lessons. As a result, multimodal pedagogy appears to have contributed positively to both learner engagement and confidence within the language classroom. In general, the survey has shown that multimodal strategies in classroom have a positive impact and influence in students’ engagement and participation in Spanish lessons. Many students reported that pictures, videos, gestures and interactive activities

In summary, the use of multimodal teaching strategies in primary classrooms for both native and non-native speakers showed increased student engagement and highlighted how prior language exposure can accelerate foreign language acquisition. Multimodal strategies enhance comprehension, encouraged collaboration, and reduced learning barriers, while the data demonstrated that scaffolding lowers anxiety and builds oral confidence in non-native speakers’ learners while up levelling skills on Spanish speakers. Overall, younger students particularly benefit from word searches, cross words, and vocabulary memory games which supported spellings, recognition and the automatization of Spanish vocabulary. The study also confirmed that multimodal approaches promote more equitable learning opportunities, offering accessible pathways for all learners. These findings provide a strong foundation for refining future interactive and inclusive Spanish strategies practices in multilingual primary classrooms.

Section ||

References Capirci, O. (2025). The multimodal nature of development makes language multimodal: A commentary on Karadöller, Sümer and Özyürek. Volume 45(6). https://doi. org/10.1177/01427237251325631 Creed, E., et al. (2024). Teaching bilingually: Unlocking the academic and cognitive potential – Teachers’ insights. Education Sciences, 14(406), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci14040406 García Mayo, M. del P. (2017). Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights. In Second language acquisition (pp. 49–66). Multilingual Matters. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement (pp. 220–222). Routledge. Kress, G. (2009). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication (pp. 79–93). Routledge. https:// doi.org/10.4324/9780203970034 Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition (p. 21). Pergamon Press. Krashen, S. (2020). Explorations in language acquisition. http://www.sdkrashen.com Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Making Math Talk Matter: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in Language Objectives Research

Hussein Fares Universal American School

The decrease in teacher confidence is best understood as an indicator of professional growth rather than regression.

Abstract

Introduction

This mixed-methods study examines the impact of adding explicit language objectives alongside lesson objectives to lesson planning in secondary Mathematics classrooms. Using a pre–post survey design combined with qualitative observations and teacher reflections; the study identifies measurable gains in precise mathematical language and checks-for-understanding (CFU) alignment. While teacher confidence decreased, qualitative findings suggest this reflects increased awareness of instructional complexity rather than diminished instructional effectiveness. The integration of quantitative and qualitative data provides a nuanced understanding of instructional change and highlights the importance of triangulation in educational research. Findings support the role of structured language supports in improving student discourse and instructional clarity.

Mathematics instruction requires both conceptual understanding and the ability to communicate reasoning using precise academic language (Schleppegrell, 2007; Moschkovich, 2010). However, in many classrooms, language demands remain implicit (Cummins, 2000; Zwiers, 2014), limiting students’ ability to engage in meaningful discourse. This challenge is particularly evident among multilingual learners, who may possess conceptual understanding but lack the linguistic tools to express their thinking. As a result, improving mathematical communication has become a priority within educational research and instructional practice. Research has consistently emphasized the importance of integrating language and content instruction (Echevarría et al., 2017; Gibbons, 2002). Frameworks such as the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

(SIOP) model advocate for the use of explicit language objectives to support student discourse and comprehension. Similarly, sociocultural theories of learning emphasize the role of language as a mediating tool in knowledge construction (Vygotsky, 1978; Halliday, 1978). Despite this theoretical foundation, there remains a need for empirical studies that examine how language objectives influence both instructional practices and student outcomes. This study addresses this gap by investigating the impact of explicit language objectives in secondary Mathematics classrooms using a mixed-methods approach. By combining quantitative and qualitative data, the study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of instructional change and contribute to the growing body of research on academic language development in mathematics education.

Method This study employed a mixed-methods pre– post design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011) involving 10 secondary Mathematics teachers. The research design combined quantitative survey data with qualitative observations and teacher reflections to provide a comprehensive analysis of instructional practices and outcomes. Quantitative data were collected using Likert-scale surveys that measured teacher confidence, identification of language demands, student discourse, and instructional alignment. Participants completed surveys before and after the implementation of explicit language objectives. The survey instrument used a 4-point scale to assess changes across multiple instructional dimensions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze pre–post differences (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011) and identify trends in instructional practices. Qualitative data were collected through classroom observations (Mercer, 2000) and written teacher reflections. These data were analyzed using thematic coding procedures to identify recurring patterns related to instructional shifts and student discourse. To ensure reliability, consistent coding structures

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

were applied across data sources, and findings were cross-checked for alignment. Validity was strengthened through triangulation, allowing quantitative trends to be interpreted alongside qualitative insights. This mixed-methods design allowed for both measurement of instructional change and exploration of underlying processes, providing a more complete understanding of the effects of language objectives on teaching and learning.

Results As shown in Table 1, quantitative findings revealed notable improvements in several instructional measures. Precise mathematical language increased from 2.8 to 3.1, consistent with prior research on academic language development (Zwiers, 2014; Lemke, 1990), and CFU alignment improved from 2.9 to 3.2. Student talk showed a modest increase from 2.9 to 3.0, indicating gradual growth in discourse participation. In contrast, teacher confidence decreased from 3.4 to 3.0, suggesting a shift in teacher perception during implementation. While the decrease in confidence may initially appear negative, qualitative data provided important context for interpreting this finding. Teacher reflections indicated that educators became more aware of the complexity involved in implementing language objectives effectively. This increased awareness often led to more critical self-assessment, which explains the decline in reported confidence. Qualitative findings also highlighted improvements in student discourse practices. Teachers reported that students began using complete mathematical sentences, reflecting improved discourse practices (Mercer, 2000; Moschkovich, 2010) rather than fragmented responses. Additionally, students demonstrated greater independence, relying less on teacher prompting and more on structured language supports such as sentence frames (Gibbons, 2002; Cummins, 2000). The alignment between quantitative and qualitative findings strengthens the validity of the results. While numerical data indicated modest gains, qualitative insights

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

revealed deeper instructional changes. This convergence of data suggests that explicit language objectives contribute to both improved instructional clarity and enhanced student communication, even when teacher perceptions reflect increased awareness of instructional challenges.

The findings also align with sociocultural theory, which emphasizes the role of language in learning. By providing structured opportunities for students to articulate their reasoning, language objectives function as scaffolds that support cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978; Gibbons, 2002). Additionally, the results are consistent with the SIOP framework, which highlights the importance of integrating language and content instruction to promote equitable access to learning.

Table 1: Pre–Post Survey Means by Measure Measure

Pre

Post

Confidence

3.4

3.0

Lang Demands

3.1

3.3

Student Talk

2.9

3.0

Precise Lang

2.8

3.1

CFU

2.9

3.2

Figure 1: Pre-Post Survey Means by Measure Pre Post

3.5

growth rather than regression. As teachers engaged with explicit language objectives, they developed a deeper understanding of instructional complexity. This aligns with research on teacher development, which suggests that increased awareness often precedes improved practice (Heritage, 2010; Black & Wiliam, 1998).

3.0 2.5 2.0

The study further underscores the importance of triangulation in research. By combining quantitative trends with qualitative insights, researchers can avoid misinterpretation and develop a more comprehensive understanding of instructional interventions. This approach is particularly valuable in complex educational settings where multiple variables influence outcomes.

1.5

Conclusion

1.0 0.5 0.0 Confidence

Lang Demands

Lang Obj

Co-Plan

Student Talk

Precise Lang

CFU

As shown in Table 1 and Figure 1, pre–post comparison of instructional measures. Increases in precise language and CFU alignment are evident, while decreases in confidence reflect increased awareness of instructional complexity.

Discussion The integration of quantitative and qualitative findings demonstrates the value of mixedmethods research in educational contexts (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Quantitative data alone might suggest limited improvement given modest gains and decrease in teacher confidence. However, qualitative findings provide explanatory depth, revealing that instructional practices and student discourse improved in meaningful ways. The decrease in teacher confidence is best understood as an indicator of professional

This study demonstrates that integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches provides a comprehensive framework (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011) for understanding instructional change in Mathematics education. The findings indicate that explicit language objectives improve mathematical discourse, instructional alignment, and student independence, even when teachers perceive increased complexity in implementation. The results highlight the importance of sustained professional development and structured language supports in promoting effective instructional practices (Echevarría et al., 2017; Zwiers, 2014). Moreover, the study reinforces the value of mixed-methods research in capturing both measurable outcomes and instructional nuance. Future research should expand the sample size and include direct measures of student achievement to further validate these findings. Nonetheless, this study contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting the integration of language and content instruction as a means of improving educational equity and student learning outcomes.

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

References Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi. org/10.1080/0969595980050102 Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). SAGE. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters. Echevarría, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Pearson. Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning. Heinemann. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. Edward Arnold.

Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. Routledge. Moschkovich, J. (2010). Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research. In J. Moschkovich (Ed.), Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research (pp. 1–28). Information Age Publishing. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2007). The linguistic challenges of mathematics teaching and learning. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(2), 139–159. https://doi. org/10.1080/10573560701331361 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Zwiers, J. (2014). Building academic language: Meeting Common Core standards across disciplines. Jossey-Bass.

Heritage, M. (2010). Formative assessment: Making it happen in the classroom. Corwin. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing.

The findings indicate that explicit language objectives improve mathematical discourse, instructional alignment, and student independence, even when teachers perceive increased complexity in implementation.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

The Role of Intervention Reading Groups in Enhancing Creative Writing Skills Among Year 6 Students Lamis Al Khatib Safa British School

Creative writing is an important component of teaching, learning, and assessment at the level of primary education, despite this fact a writing task is most of the time a heavy and challenging task for the students.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research study explores whether intervention reading groups enhance Year 6 creative writing, focusing on vocabulary development and text structure. Five students, selected by reading and writing levels, attended twice-weekly guided sessions across two terms, combining vocabulary annotation with structured writing tasks using fiction, adventure, and comedy texts. Pre- and postintervention assessments, observations, and surveys showed improvements in narrative depth, sentence variety, and paragraph organisation, alongside increased confidence, exemplified by one pupil’s independent diary-style writing. Structure and planning proved more influential than vocabulary alone. Despite a small sample and pandemic-related disruptions limiting genre coverage, findings support pressure-free, small-group reading interventions as an effective way to develop creative writing skills.

Creative writing plays a significant role in developing students’ language, imagination, and self-expression. Wang (2019) defines creative writing as “an original form of expression that involves use of an author’s imagination to engage a reader”. Through creative writing, students are encouraged not only to communicate ideas, but also to experiment with language, structure, and style in meaningful and imaginative ways. According to Sălcudean and Stănescu (2014), creative writing encourages and develops writing skills by exploring genres and stimulates creativity at different levels: creative reading, creative interpretation / analysis, and creative writing. Teachers in the primary phase often lack sufficient time to develop students’ creative writing abilities alongside curriculum requirements and creative text production in primary schools is frequently constrained by limited instructional time and the pressure

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

to cover curricular content. As a result, many students have fewer opportunities to experiment with vocabulary, sentence construction, and personal expression through writing. This action research project responds to this issue by exploring the role of intervention reading groups in enhancing the creative writing skills of Year 6 students, with a specific focus on vocabulary development and text structure. The project is based on the idea that exposure to rich and varied reading experiences can support students in transferring vocabulary, sentence patterns, and organisational features from reading into their own writing. Through twice-weekly guided reading sessions using fiction, adventure, and comedy texts, students are encouraged to analyse language choices, identify structural techniques, and apply these features within their own written work.

Background/Context Creative writing is an important component of teaching, learning, and assessment at the level of primary education, despite this fact a writing task is most of the time a heavy and challenging task for the students. The challenge is due to the lack of variety of vocabulary or how to start the writing or to the limitation of time to finish the task. According to Santosa et al.(2019), creative writing activities need ongoing guidance. Teachers should support students to develop creative writing skills both in school and outside the classroom (Nasir et al., 2021) which creates the need for these sessions because the teachers don’t have the time to develop the writing skills of the pupils due to the pressure of the curriculum. And what will make these sessions beneficial is the fact that they are pressure-free: no score, no test, no marks and the texts that the students read are not related to the curriculum.

Literature Review International research on the teaching of writing has found a loss of innovative or creative pedagogical practices due to pressure on teachers to teach prescribed writing skills that are assessed in tests (Göçen, 2019; Stock &

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

Molloy, 2020). Research by Bražienė (2019) suggests that shows that in the primary cycle, teachers do not have enough time to practice students’ creative writing skills, which is closely related to the curricular content of the school curriculum. As a language activity, creative writing involves a systematic process starting from determining ideas, developing an outline, making a complete piece of writing, and making improvements (Hayes & Flower, 1980). This process helps students learn to write and be motivated to write, especially for primary school-age students (Miftah, 2015). Furthermore, exposure to high-quality texts can support students in developing vocabulary, sentence structues, and organisational features that may be transferred into their own creative writing.

Methods This action research aimed to investigate the challenges Year 6 students face in creative writing. The research focused on the following questions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

What writing skills do students need to improve the most? What is the best way to plan intervention reading sessions? How can writing tasks be planned in a way that supports the aim of the intervention? Should the sessions be organised based on gender? To what extent do intervention reading groups improve Year 6 pupils’ creative writing outcomes, particularly in vocabulary use, text structure, and narrative development? Should participation be optional or teacher-selected?

This project aimed to highlight the growing need to support writing skills outside normal classroom lessons but still within the school environment. During the intervention sessions, students completed their writing tasks at school rather than at home. The main objective of this action research was to provide students who need support in writing with enough time and guidance through pressure-free writing tasks and shorter reading texts that could be explored and annotated carefully.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Methodology The action research was conducted through intervention reading sessions linked to writing tasks.

The Start A discussion took place with the class teacher whose students participated in the action research. The discussion focused on the need for these sessions, the possible benefits for students, and the main focus areas, which were vocabulary and structure. Updates about the selected texts and the progress of the sessions were regularly shared with the teacher. The first session was an introduction in which I explained to the students that they had been selected to participate in this action research project. I explained the purpose of the sessions and what we hoped to achieve by the end of the intervention. I started with a pre-intervention baseline writing task. Students were shown a picture and asked to describe what they could see. I recorded comments and observations about their writing. The same writing task was later used as a post-intervention assessment to compare and evaluate the development of students’ writing skills. The intervention sessions included different genres: fiction, adventure, and comedy.

students were given support and guidance without pressure to finish quickly. The sessions focused on: • • • •

Using new and precise vocabulary, Improving paragraph structure, Oorganising ideas clearly, Giving students enough time to write carefully.

After each writing task, I reviewed the students’ work, added comments, and discussed the writing with them individually. I also recorded observations after every session to collect data for the research. Halfway through the intervention, students completed another descriptive writing task where they were asked to use the vocabulary they had learned and apply the feedback from previous tasks. The intervention sessions then continued following the same process. At the end of the intervention, students completed the same picture description task used during the baseline assessment. They were also given the vocabulary list and a writing checklist (see Figure 1) created from the observations collected during the sessions. The final evaluation was completed by the class teacher, who compared the pre-intervention and post-intervention writing tasks. The teacher’s feedback was important because he was able to identify the progress students had made and the areas that still needed improvement.

Structure of the Intervention Reading Sessions The intervention consisted of two sessions per week during Terms 2 and 3. During the first session, students completed an interactive reading activity using a selected text. Students highlighted new vocabulary while reading. We discussed the meaning of each word and annotated it together. The aim was to connect the author’s vocabulary choices to the genre and purpose of the text. Five vocabulary words were selected during each session and added to a vocabulary log with definitions and annotations. Over time, students created a vocabulary bank that helped guide them on how and when to use these words in their own writing. The second focus area was text structure. This was an important part of the intervention because students needed support with organising their ideas and understanding how structure changes depending on the purpose and genre of the text. After the reading and annotation activities, students completed a writing task. They used the new vocabulary to create sentences or short paragraphs. During the writing tasks, 62

Figure 1: Example Of The Vocabulary List Provided To Students After Each Reading Session Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Vocabulary list

Vocabulary

Definition

Annotation

Seized

take an opportunity eagerly and decisively

What purpose does it serve?

Shriek

high-pitched piercing cry or sound; a scream.

What sense is being used?

Downtrodden

oppressed or treated badly by people in power.

What kind of relationship did Harry have with his uncle? What emotion does it give?

Rooted

cause someone to stand immobile through fear or amazement.

Can you picture Harry in this scene? How does he feel?

Crept/creep

move slowly and carefully in order to avoid being heard or noticed.

A strong verb, what atmosphere is this verb creating? How does it serve the text?

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Participants After discussions with the class teacher, five students were selected to participate in the intervention. The following criteria were considered: •

A small group was easier to manage and allowed enough time and guidance for each student. It also made measuring progress more effective.

•

Both boys and girls were included to explore whether there were differences in outcomes or areas of improvement.

•

Students were selected based on Reading Plus data and writing levels. Their levels ranged from working towards Year 6 expectations to expected and expected+.

•

A limitation of this study was that participant selection was constrained by timetable availability. Future studies should seek to involve a wider sample of students to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of intervention reading groups.

Figure 2: Reading & Writing Survey – Pre Sessions

Data Collection Before the intervention began, students completed a survey about their reading preferences, writing confidence, preferred genres, and the areas they found most difficult in writing (see Figure 2). Students also completed a baseline writing assessment before the intervention started. This assessment helped identify the skills students needed to improve and provided a comparison point for the final assessment (see Table 1). During the intervention sessions, I recorded observations about each student after every session, focusing on: 1.

How much students enjoyed the reading text,

Which areas students found difficult during the writing task,

Which writing skills students needed to improve,

And, how students used the new vocabulary in their writing.

At the end of the intervention, students completed another survey to provide feedback about the sessions. Feedback was also collected from the class teacher after reviewing the students’ pre- and post-intervention writing assessments.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Table 1: Pre Vs Post Sessions Assessment

Pupil A

Pupil B

Pupil C

Pre-Sessions writing assessment

Post sessions writing assessment

Areas to work on

No real narrative

Applied narrative into description

More varied conjunctions and more precise verbs

No real narrative, lack of connevtives and no challenging vocabulary

Verbs precision

Give more time to plan the text espacially the conclusion or the ending

No structure

Writing as an author considering the reader

Less narrative

Detailed sentences using conjuctions Greater narrative depth

This helped make the sessions more focused and the final evaluation more effective and manageable. Figure 3: Pre-Session Vs Post-Session Writing Samples Pre-sessions

More precise verbs

More purposeful More narrative

Pupil D

Lack of connevtives and no challenging vocabulary No structure

Pupil E

No structure No varied conjuctions

Huge improvement in structure, paragraphs, narrative, variaty and flow

Varied conjunctions, Precise verbs and Vocabulary

Gained confidence and she pushed her limits to challenge herself to use a different approch “dear diary” as a narration rather than just a descriptive

Precise verbs Challenging vocabulary

Post- sessions

More use of conjuctions

Data Analysis The analysis was based on: 1.

The results of the pre-intervention survey, which identified students’ interests and writing challenges (see Figure 2),

The comparison between the preintervention and post-intervention writing assessments (see Figure 3),

Teacher observations collected during the sessions and feedback on each writing task,

The comparison between the baseline and final writing assessments completed by the class teacher,

And, the teacher’s evaluation of students’ writing development.

Since the intervention aimed to improve creative writing skills, it was important to identify clear target skills from the beginning.

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Results At the end of the intervention sessions, the research questions were explored through student feedback (see Figure 5), teacher observations, and writing assessments (see Figure 4).

Figure 5: End Of Interventions Reading Sessions Survey

The findings showed that students particularly needed support in the following areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Planning their writing by understanding the purpose of the text, what they wanted to say, and how to organise their ideas. Using conjunctions and varied sentence openers. Choosing language that suits the purpose and context. Avoiding repetition such as “the boy,” “the girl,” or “the man,” and instead creating characters with names and details. Developing narration skills.

One important finding was that the midway writing assessment was not necessary. Similar observations and progress could already be identified through the regular writing tasks completed during the sessions. The research also showed that more time should have been spent focusing on text structure rather than only on vocabulary. Structure, planning, and conjunctions appeared to have a strong influence on the quality of students’ writing. I also believe that future intervention sessions could be organised into groups based on students’ reading and writing levels. Participation could also be optional, allowing students to choose to join because the sessions are designed to be supportive and pressure-free. One noticeable outcome was that students began to improve their organisation and paragraph structure by the second writing task Figure 4: Sample Of The Class Teacher’s Evaluation Of The Post-Sessions Writing Assessment

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Discussion and Reflections After discussions with the class teacher, the outcomes of the intervention were considered very positive, especially regarding students’ confidence during writing tasks.

A particularly impressive outcome was the progress of one student (Student T) during the post-intervention assessment. The student showed increased confidence and attempted a more advanced narrative style by presenting the descriptive task as a diary entry (“Dear Diary”) (see Figure 6). This showed creativity and willingness to experiment with narration. The class teacher suggested continuing the intervention reading sessions after the completion of the action research, especially focusing on paragraph structure and planning skills, which can also help students develop critical thinking skills. It is important to mention that due to periods of distance learning and interruptions during the academic year, only three genres were fully covered during the intervention: fiction, adventure, and comedy. This affected some aspects of the research and data collection process. Figure 6: Student T’s Pre vs Post Sessions Writing Assessment

The intervention highlighted the importance of pressure-free writing tasks. Students benefited from having enough time to complete their work and receive individual guidance, which is often difficult during regular curriculum lessons because of time limitations. The project also raised important questions for future research: 1.

Would writing development improve further if students were not assessed using traditional school assessments?

If intervention sessions were implemented in schools, should they become part of the school timetable instead of an after-school activity?

What would be the most effective structure and organisation for these sessions?

Would a longer intervention period, with fewer interruptions, produce different outcomes, particularly as the influence of the Hawthorne effect may decrease over time?

Considering the positive outcomes of this study, several implications for future practice can be identified. Schools may consider introducing intervention reading groups across upper primary year groups to provide targeted support for writing development. Establishing vocabulary transfer routines could help students apply newly learned vocabulary more consistently in their own writing. In addition, termly writing conferences could provide opportunities for students to discuss their progress, reflect on their writing, and set personal targets. Finally, embedding regular pressure-free writing opportunities within the school environment may encourage greater creativity, confidence, and willingness to take risks in writing. Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Conclusion This action research highlighted the value of intervention reading groups in supporting the development of creative writing skills among Year 6 students. The findings showed that students benefit from additional opportunities to explore vocabulary, paragraph structure, and planning in a supportive and pressure-free environment. The sessions also showed that teachers often do not have enough time during normal curriculum lessons to provide the level of guidance students may need in writing. The study suggests that intervention sessions should be planned carefully around specific writing skills and should include engaging texts from different genres that are not necessarily linked to the school curriculum. Finally, the research supports the idea that creative writing activities should remain pressure-free, with the focus placed on improvement, creativity, confidence, and enjoyment rather than grades or testing.

References Bražienė, N. (2019). Writing (text creation) development of primary students at their mother tongue lessons: Teachers’ attitude. Innovative Technologies in Research and Education, 351–363. Göçen, G. (2019). The effect of creative writing activities on elementary school students’ creative writing achievement, writing attitude and motivation. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(3), 1032–1044. https://doi.org/10.17263/ jlls.631547

Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 3–30). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Miftah, M. Z. (2015). Enhancing writing skill through writing process approach. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 5(1), 9–24. https:// doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v5i1.89 Nasir, B., Sarwat, S., & Imran, M. (2021). Effect of English creative writing on students’ academic progress at graduation level. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(8), 3347– 3357. Sălcudean, I. N., & Stănescu, E. T. (2014). Manual de scriere creativă [Creative writing manual]. Cluj University Press. Santosa, A. B., Basuki, Y., & Puspita, A. M. I. (2019). The effectiveness of local wisdom-based teaching materials in enhancing creative writing skills of elementary school students. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 4(3), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v4i3.326 Stock, C., & Molloy, K. (2020). Where are the students? Creative writing in a high-stakes world. Idiom, 56, 19. Wang, L. (2019). Rethinking the significance of creative writing: A neglected art form behind the language learning curriculum. Cambridge OpenReview Educational Research e-Journal, 6, 110–122.

Students benefit from additional opportunities to explore vocabulary, paragraph structure, and planning in a supportive and pressure-free environment.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Explicitly Teaching Reciprocal Reading’s Questioner Role to Improve Year 5 Inference Accuracy Laura Parker Kings’ School Dubai

As confidence developed, responsibility gradually shifted from teacher-led input to pupil collaboration. Activities became increasingly group-based, with pupils working in pairs and small groups to read sections of text, discuss vocabulary, explore characters’ motivations and authors’ language choices.

Abstract Reading comprehension, particularly the ability to make inferences, is a persistent challenge for many primary pupils and remains a central component of Key Stage 2 statutory assessments. This action research project examined whether explicitly teaching the ‘questioner’ role within Reciprocal Reading could improve Year 5 pupils’ accuracy in answering written inference questions. Two Year 5 classes participated in the study. A previous Key Stage 2 SATs reading paper (Department for Education, 2016) was used as a pre-assessment to establish baseline performance, while a different SATs paper (Department for Education, 2017) was used as the post-assessment. Over a series of weekly sessions, the intervention class engaged with AI-generated texts and SATs-style inference questions through collaborative reading, 68

vocabulary discussion, summarisation and structured questioning activities designed to develop questioning skills and deeper comprehension. Assessment data and pupil responses were analysed to evaluate the impact of the intervention. The intervention group showed a mean improvement of 26.88%, compared with 11% in the comparison group The findings suggest that explicit instruction in Reciprocal Reading’s questioner role can strengthen inferential thinking and improve reading comprehension outcomes. The study highlights the value of structured questioning strategies within guided reading and offers practical implications for future primary classroom practice.

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Background/Context This action research study was conducted in a six-form entry primary school in The United Arab Emirates and focused on Year 5 pupils as they prepared for the increasing reading demands of Upper Key Stage 2 and the statutory Key Stage 2 (KS2) assessments. The study emerged from classroom observations and assessment data which indicated that, while pupils were often successful in retrievalbased reading questions, many experienced difficulties when answering inference questions. Pupils frequently struggled to justify their ideas using textual evidence and to explain the reasoning behind their answers. The problem was identified as an ongoing challenge rather than an immediate or newly emerging issue. Throughout guided reading sessions, pupils often required substantial teacher support to answer inferential questions and were less confident when discussing implied meanings within texts. Without intervention, pupils may continue to struggle with higher-order comprehension skills, potentially reducing their ability to engage critically with increasingly complex texts across the curriculum. Furthermore, missed opportunities to develop inferential thinking may affect pupils’ confidence as readers and their readiness for secondary education. The primary stakeholders were the Year 5 pupils involved in the study. However, the findings may also benefit classroom teachers and literacy practitioners seeking effective strategies to develop higher-order reading skills. By exploring the impact of explicitly teaching the questioner role within Reciprocal Reading, the study aimed to identify an approach that could be embedded within future guided reading practice to support pupils’ inferential comprehension.

Literature Review Reading comprehension involves making sense of a text by combining what is written with prior knowledge, vocabulary knowledge and thinking skills. One area that many pupils find particularly difficult is inference. Unlike retrieval questions, inference requires readers to work out information that is suggested rather than directly stated. The Education Endowment

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

Foundation (2021) explains that effective readers make connections between ideas, draw conclusions and check that they understand what they are reading. However, many primary-aged pupils struggle to do this and often focus only on information that is explicitly stated in the text. Research suggests that teaching comprehension strategies explicitly can help pupils develop a deeper understanding of what they read. One well-established approach is Reciprocal Teaching, developed by Palincsar and Brown (1984). This approach uses structured discussion to support comprehension through four key strategies: predicting, clarifying, questioning and summarising. By using these strategies, pupils are encouraged to think more actively about the text and reflect on their understanding. Palincsar and Brown (1984) found that Reciprocal Teaching was particularly effective when teachers first modelled the strategies before gradually encouraging pupils to use them independently. Of the four strategies, questioning appears especially relevant to inference. The Education Endowment Fund (2021) identifies questioning as an effective way of supporting comprehension because it encourages pupils to think carefully about meaning, identify important information and explain their ideas using evidence from the text. When acting as the questioner, pupils must look beyond what is directly stated and consider what the author is implying, making this strategy particularly useful for developing inferential understanding.

Methods The study was guided by the following research question:To What Extent Does the Explicit Teaching of the Questioner Role Within Reciprocal Reading Improve Year 5 Pupils’ Accuracy on Written Inference Questions? To support pupils’ reading comprehension, the questioner role within Reciprocal Reading was introduced as an intervention. The intention was to encourage pupils to think more deeply about texts, justify their responses using evidence and improve their accuracy when answering written inference questions. An action research approach was selected because it allowed the intervention to 69

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

be implemented and evaluated within the classroom setting. This provided an opportunity to investigate the impact of the strategy on pupils’ learning while also reflecting on and improving guided reading practice. The findings from the study were intended to inform future teaching decisions and contribute to ongoing professional development in the teaching of reading comprehension. The findings will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention, inform future guided reading practice and support ongoing professional development in the teaching of reading comprehension.

Methodology The intervention was delivered over six onehour sessions, two of which took place during online learning due to timetable constraints. Sessions were held during a dedicated ‘Love of Reading’ slot, alongside pupils’ regular weekly Guided Reading lessons. This ensured the study focused specifically on the impact of the Reciprocal Reading intervention without replacing existing curriculum provision. Two Year 5 classes participated, an intervention group and a comparison group. Although both classes contained more pupils, only data from 11 pupils in each class were included in the final analysis. Pupils were excluded where complete pre- and post-intervention data were unavailable due to absences and inconsistent attendance, including disruption linked to previous periods of online learning. Both groups completed a baseline assessment using part of a 2016 Key Stage 2 SATs reading paper (Department for Education, 2016) and a part of a 2017 paper (Department for Education, 2017) was used post-intervention to measure progress in inference-based questions. Within the intervention group, pupils engaged with AI-generated reading comprehension texts in a Key Stage 2 SATs format, with a focus on developing inference skills. At the start, texts were read aloud as a whole class to ensure access and allow pupils to focus on comprehension. Attention was given to unfamiliar vocabulary, discussing meanings as a class, exploring synonyms and using vocabulary in different contexts. Discussion centred on how authors’ word choices shaped meaning and supported inference about characters, settings and events. Pupils were prompted with questions such as: “What does this suggest about the character’s personality?” and “What does the author’s choice of word tell us about the setting?” The teacher explicitly modelled how to approach inference questions by highlighting common SATs-style stems, including “What

does this suggest?”, “What can we infer?” and “How do you know?”. Pupils practised identifying textual evidence and justifying responses using inference and supporting detail, reinforcing the importance of evidence over assumption or prior knowledge. As confidence developed, responsibility gradually shifted from teacher-led input to pupil collaboration. Activities became increasingly group-based, with pupils working in pairs and small groups to read sections of text, discuss vocabulary, explore characters’ motivations and authors’ language choices. By the end of the intervention, pupils were independently applying questioning strategies and demonstrating greater confidence in discussing texts and justifying inferences. The intervention concluded with an independent post-assessment to measure changes in performance on inference-based questions.

Ethics Pupil data were fully anonymised using codes. This research project was delivered within normal classroom practice alongside existing guided reading lessons. Both groups received equal learning opportunities, and participation did not affect access to the curriculum. Data were securely stored and used solely for research purposes.

Results Analysis of the pre- and post-reading comprehension assessments showed that both classes improved over the course of the intervention period; however, one group demonstrated substantially greater growth than the other. The intervention group’s score increased from a mean pre-test score of 30.14% to a mean post-test score of 57.03%, representing an average gain of 26.88% and an 89.2% relative improvement (see Table 1). In contrast, the control group’s score improved from a mean pre-test score of 51.43% to a mean post-test score of 62.54%, representing an average gain of 11.10% and a 21.6% relative improvement (see Table 2). The median gain for the intervention group was 20.17 percentage points compared with 11.41 percentage points for the control group. The intervention group also demonstrated a higher normalised gain (0.427) than the control group (0.217), indicating that students achieved a greater proportion of their potential improvement. Statistical analysis of the gain scores revealed a significant difference between the groups (p ≈ .004) with a large effect size (Cohen’s d ≈ 1.40), suggesting that the instructional approach used with the intervention group

Section ||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

was associated with substantially greater improvements in reading comprehension. Table 1: Group 1 Intervention group

Overall, the findings indicate that explicit instruction in questioning strategies, supported by scaffolding, can improve pupils’ confidence and accuracy in inference-based questions. In terms of professional practice, the findings reinforce the importance of explicitly teaching comprehension strategies rather than assuming pupils will develop inferential skills independently. The improvement in the intervention group suggests that structured scaffolding through the questioner role can enhance both confidence and accuracy in responding to higher-order reading questions. This has encouraged a shift towards making questioning strategies more explicit and consistent within guided reading practice.

Pre

Post

Difference

28.95%

42.42%

13.47%

18.42%

60.60%

42.18%

47.37%

81.82%

34.45%

34.21%

51.56%

17.35%

13.16%

33.33%

20.17%

5.26%

21.21%

15.95%

31.58%

63.64%

32.06%

10.53%

27.27%

16.74%

44.74%

87.88%

43.14%

Conclusion

71.05%

90.91%

19.86%

26.32%

66.67%

40.35%

This study suggests that explicitly modelling and scaffolding the questioner role within Reciprocal Reading may support improvements in Year 5 pupils’ ability to answer inference-based reading questions. Structured questioning, supported by sentence stems and teacher modelling, appears to be a promising approach for developing higherorder reading skills. While both groups improved, the intervention group demonstrated significantly greater gains in comprehension performance. However, due to methodological limitations, these findings should be interpreted as indicative rather than definitive evidence of causation. It is recommended that teachers continue to embed structured questioning strategies within guided reading practice. Further research with larger, randomised samples and longer intervention periods would help establish the longer-term impact of explicitly teaching the questioner role within Reciprocal Reading.

Table 2: Group 2 Control group Pre

Post

Difference

55.26%

66.67%

11.41%

39.47%

51.52%

12.05%

52.63%

57.56%

4.93%

42.11%

42.42%

0.31%

28.95%

51.52%

22.57%

73.68%

84.85%

11.17%

31.58%

60.61%

29.03%

73.68%

69.70%

-3.98%

73.68%

87.88%

14.20%

63.16%

60.61%

-2.55%

31.58%

54.55%

22.97%

Discussion and Reflections The findings suggest that explicitly teaching the ‘questioner’ role within Reciprocal Reading had a positive impact on Year 5 pupils’ inference skills. While both groups improved between the pre- and post-assessments, these results indicate that the intervention was associated with stronger improvements in reading comprehension. These results are consistent with research by Palincsar and Brown (1984), which emphasises the effectiveness of Reciprocal Teaching when strategies are explicitly modelled before being gradually released to pupils. They also align with the Education Endowment Foundation (2021), which highlights structured questioning as a key approach to improving comprehension by encouraging pupils to justify answers using textual evidence.

Language, Literacy, and Multilingual Learning

References Education Endowment Foundation. (2021). Improving literacy in Key Stage 2. https:// educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk Department for Education. (2016). Key Stage 2 English reading SATs. https://www.gov.uk/ government/organisations/department-foreducation Department for Education. (2017). Key Stage 2 English reading SATs. https://www.gov.uk/ government/organisations/department-foreducation Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehensionfostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1

Section III AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

AI as a Shadow Teacher: Supporting Grade 10 and 11 Students to Improve Writing Through Rubric-Aligned Chatbot Feedback Kamran Lateef Ministry of Education, UAE Ayesha Kamran Student Researcher

The chatbot was introduced as a writing assistant linked to the teacher’s rubric, so students could receive feedback that matched their writing level and the expectations of the task. The purpose was not to make writing easier by giving answers, but to make the process clearer by helping students understand what to improve and why.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research study investigated an AI chatbot functioning as a “shadow teacher,” providing rubric-aligned writing feedback to 146 Grade 10–11 students over six weeks, designed to complement rather than replace teacher assessment. Students completed baseline writing, chatbot-supported drafting and revision, and post-intervention assessment, receiving guidance on idea development, organisation, vocabulary, and grammar. Results showed substantial gains across all rubric domains: overall performance rose from 58% to 81%, and confidence improved most, from 49% to 85%. Most students reported improved writing (84%), confidence (86%), and independent revision (79%). Findings suggest AI can meaningfully extend teacher capacity when anchored to clear rubrics and paired with guidance on critically evaluating AIgenerated feedback.

This classroom-based action research explored how an Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbot could function as a writing shadow teacher for Grade 10 and 11 General students. The intervention was designed to provide immediate, level-appropriate support while keeping the teacher’s rubric at the centre of the writing process. Over six weeks, 146 students completed a baseline writing task, participated in chatbot-supported drafting and revision cycles, and produced postintervention writing samples. Findings indicate improvement across all rubric domains, particularly student confidence, organisation and idea development. The study suggests that AI can extend teacher reach when it is used as a scaffold for feedback, independence and revision rather than as a replacement for teacher judgement.

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Context and Rationale In my classroom, I have often observed that many students have ideas, opinions and personal experiences, but they struggle when they are asked to organise these ideas into clear written paragraphs. Some students begin confidently but lose focus in the middle of the writing task. Others wait for the teacher to correct every sentence before they feel ready to continue. This made me reflect on one important question: how can I give each student timely support without removing their ownership of writing? This action research grew from that classroom challenge. I wanted to explore whether artificial intelligence could work as a “shadow teacher” during the writing process. By shadow teacher, I do not mean a tool that writes for the student or replaces the teacher. I mean a quiet support system that stays beside the learner, asks guiding questions, gives rubric-based feedback, and helps the student improve step by step. The teacher remains responsible for planning, monitoring, assessing and guiding the learning, while AI provides an additional layer of immediate support. This approach is consistent with Luckin’s (2018) view that artificial intelligence should augment human teaching rather than remove the professional role of the teacher. It also reflects Miao and Holmes’s (2023) guidance that generative AI in education should be used with clear human oversight, transparency and ethical safeguards. The focus of the research was Grade 10 and Grade 11 General students. Many of these students needed help with vocabulary, sentence structure, paragraph organisation, idea development and confidence. The chatbot was introduced as a writing assistant linked to the teacher’s rubric, so students could receive feedback that matched their writing level and the expectations of the task. The purpose was not to make writing easier by giving answers, but to make the process clearer by helping students understand what to improve and why. Through this action research, I wanted to see whether AI could support students to revise more independently, use feedback more effectively, and become more confident writers. I also wanted to understand how students felt when they received instant feedback from

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

a chatbot compared with waiting only for teacher correction. The study therefore became both a teaching experiment and a reflective journey about how technology can be used responsibly in the classroom. In this action research study, the lead practitioner-researcher identified the writing challenge, designed the intervention, prepared the rubric, guided students in using the chatbot responsibly, observed their progress, and analysed the impact on their writing confidence and performance. A co-researcher, an AS Level student studying Economics and Computer Science, contributed to an important learner-facing perspective to the research. As a student who studies both economics and computing, she helped me think about AI not only as a technology tool, but also as a system that can influence learning behaviour, decision-making and independence. The student researcher’s role was not to assess school students or collect confidential data, but to review the chatbot prompts, discuss how students might respond to AI feedback, and help to make the language of the shadow teacher more student friendly. She also helped me reflect on an important issue: students should not become dependent on AI. They should learn how to question feedback, make their own decisions, and keep their writing in their own voice. From the student’s perspective, AI is most useful when it gives students confidence to try again. She observed that many students do not always need the full answer; sometimes they need a small hint, a clearer instruction, or a question that helps them think. This student perspective strengthened the research because it reminded me that successful AI use in education is not only about the tool itself. It is about how students understand the tool, how teachers guide its use, and how both human and digital support can work together to improve learning.

Research Context and Questions The research took place in a boys’ secondary school in Cycle 3, Ministry of Education, UAE. Participants were 146 Grade 10 and 11 General students, including 140 Emirati national

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

students and 6 non-Emirati Arab students. Many students were able to produce ideas orally but struggled to organise paragraphs, use precise vocabulary and revise independently. The study was guided by three questions: How does a chatbot shadow teacher affect students’ writing quality? How does rubric-aligned AI feedback support students at different writing levels? How do students perceive the usefulness of the chatbot during the writing process?

Intervention Design: How the Shadow Teacher Worked The intervention followed a clear five-step cycle. First, the teacher provided a writing task and a rubric written in student-friendly language. Second, the chatbot identified each student’s approximate writing level and writing needs from the draft. Third, it offered targeted suggestions on sentence structure, vocabulary, idea development, paragraph organisation and grammar. Fourth, students revised their drafts independently using the feedback. Finally, the teacher reviewed the final writing using the original rubric. This workflow was important because the chatbot was not allowed to replace teacher assessment; it only supported rehearsal, revision and metacognitive reflection before the teacher’s final judgement. The writing feedback prompts were aligned with the Ministry of Education English writing rubric (see Appendix A), and the overall inquiry process followed the Centre for Educational Action Research cycle of planning, acting, observing and reflecting (see Appendix B).

Findings and Progress The strongest gains were seen in confidence, organisation and idea development. Overall writing performance increased from 58% to 81%, showing a 23-percentage-point gain (see Table 1). Idea development rose from 55% to 80%, while organisation increased from 57% to 83%. Vocabulary use improved from 59% to 82%, and grammar accuracy increased from 61% to 79%. The largest improvement was student confidence in writing, which rose from 49% to 85%. In addition, 84% of students said the chatbot helped them improve their writing, 86% reported higher confidence, and 79% revised more independently after using the chatbot. These outcomes suggest that immediate, rubric-connected feedback helped students see what successful writing looked like and how to move towards it. Table 1: Writing Performance Before and After the AI Shadow Teacher Intervention Rubric domain

Before

After

Improvement

Overall writing performance

58%

81%

+23

Idea development

55%

80%

+25

Organisation

57%

83%

+26

Vocabulary use

59%

82%

+23

Grammar accuracy

61%

79%

+18

Student confidence in writing

49%

85%

+36

Methodology

Student Voice

A mixed-methods action research design was used across six weeks. Quantitative evidence was collected through pre- and post-writing samples marked against the same rubric domains: overall performance, idea development, organisation, vocabulary use, grammar accuracy and confidence in writing. Qualitative evidence was gathered through classroom observation, student reflection and short feedback comments before and after the intervention. Students were repeatedly reminded to use the chatbot as a learning scaffold, not a shortcut. They were asked to question suggestions, accept only useful feedback and keep the final writing in their own voice. This ethical framing helped maintain academic integrity and positioned AI as a supportive dialogue partner rather than an answer generator.

Student comments showed a clear change in attitude. Before the intervention, one student wrote, “I did not know how to start my paragraph and I was not sure how to organise my ideas.” After using the chatbot, a student commented, “I could improve my ideas, vocabulary and structure because the feedback matched my level and helped me rewrite more confidently.” These comments were important because they showed that the value of AI was not only in correcting errors, but also in reducing the fear of starting and revising. Students appeared more willing to attempt improvement when feedback was immediate, private and linked to clear rubric.

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Reflection and Discussion The action research showed that AI can support differentiated learning when the teacher designs the learning sequence carefully. The chatbot was most useful when prompts were aligned closely with the rubric and when students knew that final assessment belonged to the teacher. It helped weaker writers break tasks into manageable steps, while more confident writers used it to refine vocabulary, sentence variety and paragraph flow. However, the study also highlighted the need for teacher guidance. Students needed reminders to evaluate AI suggestions critically, avoid copying, and maintain their own ideas. This confirms that AI literacy is now part of writing pedagogy: students must learn not only how to use AI, but how to use it responsibly.

Conclusion and Recommendations The chatbot functioned effectively as a writing shadow teacher. It increased engagement, supported differentiated feedback and improved writing outcomes when anchored in teacher-designed rubrics. The intervention extended the teacher’s reach by providing immediate support, but it did not remove the teacher’s professional role. For future practice, I recommend aligning chatbot prompts closely with curriculum rubrics, teaching students to evaluate AI suggestions critically, combining AI feedback with teacher conferencing, and extending the model to narrative, argumentative and report writing. Used in this way, AI becomes purposeful, personalised and powerful: not a shortcut, but a scaffold for independence.

Appendix A: Ministry of Education English Writing Rubric Adapted to Guide chatbot feedback Rubric area

What the student checks

How the AI shadow teacher supports revision

Idea development

Are my ideas clear, relevant and supported?

Asks guiding questions and suggests where examples or explanation can be added.

Organisation

Is my writing arranged in a logical paragraph structure?

Suggests topic sentences, linking words and paragraph order.

Vocabulary

Have I used precise words for the task and audience?

Offers levelappropriate word choices while reminding students to keep their own voice.

Grammar and sentence accuracy

Are my sentences clear and mostly accurate?

Identifies patterns of errors and asks students to correct them, rather than simply rewriting the whole text.

Confidence and independence

Can I improve my draft before teacher marking?

Provides immediate, private feedback that helps students revise and try again.

Appendix B: The Centre for Education Action Research (CEAR) Action Research framework Adapted for the Study Stage

Action in this research

Evidence collected

Identify

Recognised that students needed more timely writing feedback and confidence in revision.

Baseline writing samples, teacher observations and student comments.

Plan

Designed rubricaligned chatbot prompts and student guidance for responsible AI use.

Writing rubric, prompt structure and intervention sequence.

Act

Students drafted, received chatbot feedback and revised their writing independently.

Student drafts, revisions and classroom observation notes.

Observe

Compared pre- and postintervention writing performance and confidence.

Rubric scores, percentage gains and student voice.

Reflect

Reviewed impact, limitations and next steps for ethical AIsupported writing.

Reflection notes and recommendations for the next cycle.

References Luckin, R. (2018). Machine learning and human intelligence: The future of education for the 21st century. UCL IOE Press. Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Interest-Based AI-Generated Decodable Texts and Reading Fluency Outcomes in Year 2 Students: An Action Research Study Angela Mutinda Hartland International School

Abstract

Introduction and Background

This action research study compared interestbased AI-generated decodable texts with traditional reading schemes among 19 Year 2 students reading below age-related expectations. One group (n=9) received personalised AI storybooks matched to individual interests and decoding level; the other (n=10) used standard levelled books. Tracked across five points over the year, both groups showed comparable decoding gains, but the AI group’s fluency consistently outpaced decoding, nearly closing the gap to chronological age by year-end. One student with phonological processing difficulties showed limited decoding progress despite fluency gains. Findings suggest interestmatched AI texts can meaningfully support fluency development, functioning as a complement to, rather than a replacement for, structured phonics instruction.

Children who read below grade level frequently experience a mismatch between their intellectual maturity and their reading level. Traditional decodable books, while phonically appropriate, can often be rejected as babyish, yet books that engage their interests remain challenging to read. This problem is not just a materials problem; it is also an engagement, affect and motivation problem. Students who are already reluctant to read due to existing barriers become even less likely to practise, the very practice they need to accelerate their progress. This dynamic is referred to as the Matthew Effect in reading (Stanovich, 1986): children who read more improve more, while those who avoid reading fall progressively further behind. Lowering the affective barrier (Krashen, 1982) and raising intrinsic motivation through interest-based texts offers a practical means

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

of disrupting this cycle. Cognitive load theory further contextualises the problem: LaBerge and Samuels (1974) established that fluent reading requires decoding to be fully automated so that working memory can be redirected toward comprehension. Until that automaticity is achieved, children expend significant effort on word recognition, leaving little cognitive resource for comprehension. To build the automaticity described by Pikulski and Chard (2005) as the fluency bridge, children require substantially increased volumes of reading practice. This study, carried out at Hartland International School, a British curriculum school, responds to a recurring start of the year pattern. A cohort of Year 2 students on the Inclusion register demonstrated low reading fluency scores despite possessing adequate phonics knowledge. These students were identified prior to the study and were receiving small-group reading intervention using the traditional reading schemes. They were split into two groups: and for the purpose of the study, one group continued using traditional levelled books (T) and the other used bespoke AI-generated decodable books (AI). The study investigates whether interestbased, AI-generated decodable texts can improve reading fluency outcomes more than traditional scheme books in Year 2 students reading below age-related expectations. (The expected reading age in Year 2 is between 6 and 7 years.) Reading age incorporates decoding, fluency and comprehension. This study only investigates the first two.

Research Question Does the use of interest-based, AI-generated decodable texts improve reading fluency outcomes more than standard decodable scheme books in Year 2 students identified as reading below age-related expectations?

Methods 19 Year 2 students on the Inclusion register including English Language Learners (ELL) participated in this study. 10 students (Group T: 5 boys, 5 girls) used the traditional levelled

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

reading scheme and 9 students (Group AI: 6 boys, 3 girls) used AI-generated books. The groups were not randomly assigned as they had been split prior to the study based on their class and timetable. Group T was on average approximately eight months older (mean age 7 years 9 months vs. 7 years 1 month), and Group AI presented with a larger initial decoding deficit relative to their chronological age (−1.47 years vs. −0.80 years). Group T also included ELL students while Group AI did not. All participants were already part of a reading intervention group and parental consent had been obtained. The FFT Reading Test, an adaptive standardised assessment measuring decoding reading age (DRA) and fluency reading age (FRA) was administered at 5 points across the academic year: August, October, December, February and May. The AI books were generated using Gemini Storybook following individual interviews that identified each student’s interests, hobbies, games, sports and food preferences. Aspects of the interview, used to create a variety of books for each child, were included in the prompt together with the child’s FFT decoding age to ensure the decodability of the books. A 10-page story book was generated with corresponding pictures. The interest profiles were revisited periodically to update the book content. A 5-question student reading survey, using emoji responses, was periodically used to assess enjoyment, challenge and format preference. Finally, a Reading Power-Up Log that served as a self-assessment tool, capturing four strategyfocused questions rated on an animated dial scale was also used periodically. The data from the FFT assessments compared age-adjusted DRA and FRA gap changes across groups at each time point. The reading of the AI-generated books, the completion of the reading survey and the Power up log were all done on screen. The children using the traditional levelled books read print on paper books.

Results Both groups made measurable progress. The AI group’s average DRA rose from 4.62 to 5.76 (net gain: +1.06 years) (see Table 1)., while the traditional group’s rose from 5.20 to 6.56 (net

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

gain: +1.36 years) (see Table 2). Age-adjusted analysis indicates broadly comparable decoding growth across both groups

Table 2: Traditional Group: Individual DRA scores (decimal years) at the 5 assessment points and the net change

Fluency gains show a more differentiated trend. The AI group’s average FRA grew from 5.41 to 6.71 (net gain: +1.25 years) (see Table 3), and the AI group consistently showed FRA outpacing DRA throughout the year, a gap that widened across the intervention period. By May 2026, the AI group’s average FRA was −0.07 years relative to their chronological age, representing near-full closure of the fluency gap within a single academic year.

Name

Gender

Aug 25

Oct 25

Dec 25

Feb 26

May 26

DRA Net Change

5.20

5.10

—

6.50

6.17

+0.97

5.25

5.10

5.83

5.58

6.42

+1.17

5.83

7.40

7.00

6.75

+0.92

5.25

—

5.58

6.08

+0.83

5.33

5.75

7.50

6.75

6.08

+0.75

5.33

5.17

—

5.92

6.92

+1.59

All the AI-group students with complete data improved their FRA. The traditional group showed an average FRA gain of +1.03 years (see Table 4), with FRA and DRA converging to similar levels by May (a gap of 0.02 years). Individual standouts include LRC (AI group: DRA +3.35 years) and LR (T group: DRA +3.75 years). A notable exception was OH (AI group) who made minimal DRA progress (4.0 to 4.17) despite consistent FRA improvement, suggesting the AI-book intervention may not address persistent underlying phonological processing difficulties.

5.42

5.58

6.75

6.08

6.17

+0.75

4.75

5.58

6.42

6.58

6.08

+1.33

5.17

6.08

5.83

6.75

+1.58

4.42

4.83

6.25

6.75

8.17

+3.75

5.20

5.49

6.55

6.26

6.56

+1.36

Table 1: AI Group: Individual DRA scores (decimal years) at all 5 assessment points and the net change Name

Gender

Group avg

Table 3: AI Group: Individual FRA scores (decimal years) at the 5 assessment points and the net change Name

Gender

Aug 25

Oct 25

Dec 25

Feb 26

May 26

FRA Net Change

7.00

7.20

8.00

8.20

8.30

+1.30

4.50

4.40

—

5.00

5.80

+1.30

5.30

5.80

6.50

6.20

6.50

+1.20

4.40

5.40

6.20

6.09

6.08

+1.68

4.40

5.50

5.60

5.75

+1.35

4.40

4.90

5.40

+1.00

4.40

4.10

5.20

—

6.20

6.60

8.40

7.92

+1.72

LRC

7.50

5.92

6.60

6.08

7.92

+0.42

5.41

5.36

6.35

6.19

6.71

+1.25

Aug 25

Oct 25

Dec 25

Feb 26

May 26

DRA Net Change

5.60

5.50

6.20

6.90

6.70

+1.10

5.10

4.40

—

5.00

4.80

−0.30

5.80

5.60

6.00

7.00

5.80

0.00

4.00

4.50

4.70

5.50

+1.50

4.00

4.20

4.92

6.40

5.08

+1.08

4.00

4.40

4.30

4.17

+0.17

4.00

4.10

4.50

4.92

—

4.70

5.83

5.58

6.08

6.25

+1.55

Table 4: Traditional Group: Individual FRA scores (decimal years) at the 5 assessment points and the net change.

LRC

4.40

4.92

5.80

6.90

7.75

+3.35

Name

Gender

4.62

4.79

5.26

5.70

5.76

+1.06

Aug 25

Oct 25

Dec 25

Feb 26

May 26

FRA Net Change

4.80

5.50

—

6.40

6.25

+1.45

5.50

5.10

6.20

7.40

6.08

+0.58

6.25

5.10

6.40

6.60

6.17

−0.08

5.17

5.40

—

6.70

5.83

+0.66

5.92

6.92

7.00

8.40

7.50

+1.58

5.42

6.40

—

7.08

7.92

+2.50

6.00

6.80

6.70

7.80

7.25

+1.25

5.08

5.50

5.92

6.08

6.00

+0.92

5.58

5.75

5.58

6.80

5.83

+0.25

5.75

5.92

6.40

7.50

6.92

+1.17

5.55

5.84

6.37

7.08

6.58

+1.03

Group avg

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Discussion

Conclusion

The AI books intervention produced fluency gains at least equivalent to and in several respects stronger than the traditional approach. The persistent FRA–DRA gap in the AI group, with fluency outpacing decoding throughout, is consistent with Wigfield and Guthrie’s (1997) finding that motivated reading directly predicts fluency gains independent of decoding skill. Kuhn and Stahl’s (2003) review of fluency interventions similarly identifies wide reading of motivating, level-appropriate texts as among the most effective approaches. The AI-generated books applied precisely this principle: syntax complexity was controlled to match the student’s phonetic baseline while narrative content matched their individual interests, reflecting Hidi and Renninger’s (2006) conclusion that ‘situational interest’ sustains reading motivation.

Interest-matched AI-generated decodable texts produced fluency outcomes comparable to and sometimes stronger than traditional levelled readers, even for students beginning the year with significantly larger decoding deficits. The close to full closure of the fluency gap in the AI group within a single academic year represents a meaningful outcome. Students’ FRA scores could be recommended as the primary short term monitoring measure for early-stage reading interventions. A similar future study could incorporate a few modifications to include:

The data challenges the assumption that students must consolidate decoding before fluency work is prioritised. Evidence here points toward a model where the students read for engagement while decoding catches up. It is worth noting, however, that the case of OH illustrates that where persistent phonological processing difficulties exist, reading practice, however engaging, does not substitute for targeted phonics-level intervention. AIgenerated books can best be understood as a complement to structured phonics instruction, not a replacement. Limitations that have been considered that may impact the generalisation and reliability of the results: •

The small, non-randomly allocated samples

•

The impact of ELL students and that they were only in one group

•

Missing data due to absences, distance learning and school withdrawal and the absence of a no-intervention control.

The study cannot isolate the effect of AIgeneration specifically from the effect of other high-interest, appropriately levelled text. Another consideration is how reading on screen versus printed books impact focus and comprehension

• • • • •

A control group (that receives the intervention later) Triangulation of FFT data with PIRA and PM Benchmark assessments Gender differences with a larger sample The impact of interest-based AI-generated texts on reading comprehension Comparing the effects of reading print vs screen reading

References Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https:// doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4 Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press. Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/00220663.95.1.3 LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2 Pikulski, J. J., & Chard, D. J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510–519. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.6.2 Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1 Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.420

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

AI-Generated Rubric-Based Feedback to Support Arabic Writing Development Niveen Hassan Hartland International School

Research specifically on AI in Arabic language learning is still developing, though advances in OCR and large language models have made automated analysis of handwritten Arabic increasingly workable.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research looks at how an AIpowered Writing Assessor affected the Arabic writing skills of 18 Year 8 non-native learners at Hartland International School over the 2025–2026 academic year. The tool used Gemini Vision OCR and Groq LLaMA to produce personalised, rubric-aligned feedback through a What Went Well (WWW), Even Better If (EBI), and Next Steps structure. By the end of the year, students’ mean writing score had risen from 16.3 to 20.1 out of 25—a 23% gain. Students rated feedback clarity at 4.5 out of 5, and teachers reported saving between one and more than four hours of marking time per writing task. These results suggest that AI-generated feedback, when tied to rubric criteria and used alongside teacher judgement, can serve as a scalable and effective formative assessment approach in language classrooms.

Good written feedback can transform a student’s understanding of their own writing— but for language teachers, producing it consistently is genuinely hard work. When the subject is Arabic as a second language, the challenge deepens: learners must grapple with an unfamiliar script, a rich grammatical system, and cultural layers that sit beneath the surface of every text. The result is that students often receive far less feedback than they need. This action research grew out of that tension. Over the 2025–2026 academic year, I developed and trialled an AI-powered Writing Assessor at Hartland International School that analyses student writing and returns personalised, rubric-aligned feedback structured around three prompts: What Went Well, Even Better If, and Next Steps. As illustrated in Figure 1, student writing samples pass through AI analysis, feedback generation, teacher review,

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

and student application stages—each designed to move learners forward. The central question was: To what extent does AI-generated rubricbased feedback improve Arabic writing skills and reduce teacher workload? Figure 1: The AI feedback process: from student writing samples to improved Arabic writing skills

Methodology The study used a mixed-methods action research design (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988), drawing on writing score data, student and teacher surveys, and classroom observation notes across the full academic year. Eighteen Year 8 non-native Arabic learners took part, with oral proficiency ranging from basic to intermediate. Classroom teachers also contributed as evaluators of the tool. The AI Writing Assessor processed each student’s handwritten work through Gemini Vision OCR, then used Groq LLaMA to generate an individualised PDF feedback report mapped to rubric descriptors. The research moved through five phases: baseline assessment, AI intervention across all writing tasks, student feedback application, post-assessment, and cross-source evaluation. Table 1 summarises the data sources used across these phases.

Literature Review The case for timely, specific feedback in writing development is well established. Hattie and Timperley (2007) showed that feedback has one of the strongest effect sizes of any educational intervention, provided it addresses what students should do next—not just how they have performed. More recent research has begun exploring whether AI can fulfil this function at scale. Zubaidi et al. (2025) found that developing Arabic writers made stronger gains when working with AI-supported feedback, partly because immediacy allowed them to engage with errors while tasks were still fresh. Qomariah et al. (2025) reported that students described personalised AI feedback as motivating and easy to act on. From a teacher workload perspective, Alnemrat et al. (2025) found that AI feedback was rated comparably to teacher feedback in quality on targeted error types, while requiring considerably less time to produce. Research specifically on AI in Arabic language learning is still developing, though advances in OCR and large language models have made automated analysis of handwritten Arabic increasingly workable (Zubaidi et al., 2025).

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

Table 1: Summary of Data Sources and their Purpose within the Action Research Design

Results Writing Score Improvement

Every student improved from Term 1 to Term 3. The mean score moved from 16.3 to 20.1 out of 25—a gain of 3.8 points, or 23% (see Figure 2). That improvement was consistent across the cohort rather than driven by a handful of high performers, suggesting the feedback was working broadly. This pattern aligns with Zubaidi et al. (2025), who found similar breadth of gains among developing Arabic writers using AI-supported feedback.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Figure 2: Mean Arabic writing scores across three terms (N = 18)

Figure 4: Student Ratings of AI Feedback Clarity — Post-Intervention Survey

Figure 3 shows the distribution of individual score gains, confirming that improvement was spread across the cohort, with the majority of students gaining between two and five points over the year.

Teacher Workload

Figure 3: Individual student score gains from Figure 3. Individual Student Score Gains term 1 to term 18) 3 (N = 18) from Term31(N to =Term

Points gained (T1 T3)

High 6 7

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Strong 4 5

Moderate 2 3

Mean +3.8

Teachers reported saving between one and more than four hours per writing task—time redirected toward planning, dialogic feedback, and individual support. As Figure 5 shows, half of respondents saved one to two hours per task, while a third saved more than four hours. All agreed the tool maintained rubric alignment and consistency across student reports. These findings are consistent with Alnemrat et al. (2025), who found AI feedback to be both timeefficient and quality-comparable on targeted criteria. Figure 5: Teacher-Reported Time Saved Per Writing Task Using the AI Writing Assessor

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9S10S11S12S13S14S15S16S17S18 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18

Student Perceptions Students rated feedback clarity at 4.5 out of 5, and next-steps quality at 4.36 out of 5. As shown in Figure 4, the majority of students rated the feedback as either clear or very clear, with 79% falling in those two categories. What came through most clearly in qualitative responses was how much students valued getting feedback quickly and having guidance that told them specifically what to do. These responses echo Qomariah et al. (2025), who found similar themes around immediacy and motivation.

Discussion The picture that emerges is encouraging but also instructive about why the intervention worked. Score gains and high satisfaction ratings tell one part of the story; the qualitative data fills in the reasoning. Students who received feedback quickly showed more deliberate engagement with revision, and the rubric-aligned structure meant they knew exactly which area of their writing to address— precisely what Hattie and Timperley (2007) argued makes feedback powerful.

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

There is also something worth noting about the teacher side. Saving one to more than four hours per marking cycle is a substantial gain. In my own experience, those reclaimed hours went into richer whole-class discussions, more targeted one-to-one conversations, and better lesson planning. The tool did not replace teacher expertise; it created more space for it.

achievable at a scale that would otherwise be unrealistic. As AI capabilities continue to develop, the opportunity is to use these tools to ensure that every student receives the specific, timely guidance they need to grow as a writer.

Limitations include the single-school context, which constrains generalisability. OCR accuracy was occasionally inconsistent with difficult handwriting, and system performance requires further optimisation. Future research should extend implementation across year groups and explore whether writing gains translate into stronger self-regulation and metacognitive habits over time.

Alnemrat, A., Aldamen, H., Almashour, M., Al-Deaibes, M., & AlSharefeen, R. (2025). AI vs. teacher feedback on EFL argumentative writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 16(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.17507/ jltr.1602.12

Conclusion

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Deakin University Press.

This study set out to answer a practical question—can AI-generated, rubric-based feedback make a real difference to Arabic writing development while easing teacher workload? — and the evidence gathered across the year suggests the answer is yes. A 23% mean score improvement across all students, high satisfaction with feedback quality, and strong agreement among teachers on efficiency gains all point in the same direction. What this experience has reinforced for me as a teacher-researcher is that the value of a tool like this lies not in replacing the teacher, but in making consistent, high-quality feedback

References

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi. org/10.3102/003465430298487

Qomariah, S., Hidayatullah, M. F., & Arifin, Z. (2025). The role of ChatGPT in enhancing academic Arabic writing skills. Arab World English Journal, 16(1), 45–60. https://doi. org/10.24093/awej/vol16no1.3 Zubaidi, A., Al-Ameedi, R. T. K., & Salman, A. H. (2025). Enhancing Arabic writing skills using ChatGPT-based AI learning models. Language Learning & Technology, 29(1), 1–22. https://doi. org/10.125/llt.2025.001

What this experience has reinforced for me as a teacher-researcher is that the value of a tool like this lies not in replacing the teacher, but in making consistent, high-quality feedback achievable at a scale that would otherwise be unrealistic.

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Artificial Intelligence Tools and English Language Learner’s Literacy Development: An Action Research Study Rabia Zia Hartland International School

A central reflection from this study concerns the relationship between engagement and proficiency. While all students demonstrated increased motivation and active participation in AI-supported activities, this engagement did not automatically translate into uniform language gains.

Abstract English Language Learners (ELL) in international and multilingual classrooms frequently face challenges in developing reading and writing skills, which are foundational to academic achievement. This action research study examines the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital tools on the reading and writing development of a Year 3 English Language Learner (ELL) cohort in an international school setting. Using a blended learning framework, three digital platforms—Nessy, Lightning Squad (FFT), and Quill—were integrated into structured teaching to support phonics, decoding, vocabulary, grammar, and writing development. Data was collected through pre- and post-assessment

results from each platform, FFT reading age data, and reflective practitioner observations. Findings indicate that AI-supported tools produced measurable improvements in reading age and writing proficiency across the cohort, particularly when embedded within teacher-mediated instructional cycles. The study identifies a critical distinction between increased student engagement and sustained language proficiency, emphasising that teacher scaffolding remains essential to maximising the impact of AI tools. Recommendations are offered for practitioners, school leaders, and policymakers regarding the strategic integration of AI tools within ELL contexts.

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

AI Tools and ELL Literacy Development English Language Learners (ELL) represent one of the fastest-growing student populations in international and multilingual classrooms worldwide. These learners frequently experience disparities in academic progress due to language barriers, limited access to differentiated instruction, and varying levels of prior literacy experience (Vygotsky, 1978). Reading and writing, as foundational academic skills, are particularly challenging for ELL students who must develop language proficiency alongside curriculum content knowledge. The gap between ELL students and their English-proficient peers in literacy outcomes remains a persistent concern for educators and policymakers. In response to these challenges, educational institutions are increasingly turning to AI and digital tools to personalise instruction and provide targeted, immediate support. Platforms offering adaptive reading pathways, automated grammar feedback, and gamified phonics practice have grown considerably in availability, offering potential solutions to the individual and varied needs of ELL learners. However, while adoption of these tools has grown substantially, the evidence regarding their impact on sustained reading and writing development remains inconsistent (Holmes et al., 2019; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019). As a classroom practitioner working directly with a Year 3 ELL cohort, I observed that while digital tools appeared to increase student engagement and participation, the relationship between engagement and measurable literacy progress was not straightforward. This observation, combined with a gap in the literature regarding long-term, classroombased evidence, prompted this action research study. The study investigates how three specific AI and digital tools—Nessy, Lightning Squad (FFT), and Quill—influence reading and writing development when integrated within a structured, teacher-mediated learning environment. The four research questions guiding this study are: 1. 2. 3.

How do AI tools support reading skills among ELL learners? How do AI tools influence writing development in ELL contexts? Does engagement through AI lead to

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

measurable improvement in reading and writing? What is the role of teachers in mediating AI use?

Background/Context This study was conducted in an international school setting Hartland International School serving a multilingual student population. The participants were drawn from a Year 3 ELL support group, comprising students identified as requiring additional language intervention based on school-wide assessments. The school serves a multilingual and multicultural community, with students speaking a range of home languages including Russian, Arabic, and Polish, among others. The ELL cohort demonstrated significant variation in reading and writing abilities at the start of the academic year. Many students presented with foundational gaps in phonics, decoding, and sentence-level writing accuracy, which limited their access to the wider curriculum. Existing provision consisted primarily of withdrawal ELL support sessions, which offered limited opportunity for individualised instruction given the range of needs within the group. The introduction of AI and digital tools was motivated by the need for a more responsive and scalable approach to supporting reading and writing development. These tools were identified through the school’s safeguarding review process, in which a designated AI safeguarding officer evaluated and approved applications prior to installation on school devices. The IT team monitored device usage throughout the intervention period to ensure appropriate and safe use. The problem addressed in this study is not simply one of resource availability but of effective implementation. Prior to this intervention, digital tools were used inconsistently and without structured alignment to learning objectives. This study sought to examine whether a more systematic, teacher-mediated approach could produce measurable improvements in ELL literacy outcomes. The key stakeholders in this study include ELL students, ELL teachers, school leaders, parents, and wider classroom teachers who rely on students’ literacy development to support access to the curriculum.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Literature Review

Methods

The use of AI and digital tools in language education has attracted considerable scholarly attention in recent years. Research has explored the potential of adaptive platforms to provide personalised, responsive support for ELL learners across a range of language skills.

This study adopts an action research methodology, which is particularly wellsuited to practitioner inquiry in educational contexts. Action research enables teachers to systematically investigate problems within their own practice, implement evidenceinformed interventions, and critically evaluate the outcomes (Vygotsky, 1978). As the classroom teacher responsible for ELL support, I served as both the researcher and a participant in the intervention, which enabled close, contextualised observation of student responses and progress.

Regarding reading development, studies have found that adaptive reading platforms can support phonics, decoding, and vocabulary acquisition by adjusting content to the learner’s level and providing immediate corrective feedback (Alam, 2022). These features address a central challenge in ELL instruction: the difficulty of providing individualised support within a whole-class or group context. Xiaofan and Annamalai (2025) found that ELL students using AI-supported reading tools demonstrated increased confidence and vocabulary retention, though gains in higherorder comprehension were less consistent. In the area of writing development, tools that provide automated grammar and sentencelevel feedback have been shown to support independent writing practice and revision (Eragamreddy & Joseph, 2025). Graham and Perin (2007) identified regular, structured feedback as one of the most effective strategies for improving adolescent writing, a principle that AI tools may operationalise at scale. However, research also highlights the risk of surface-level dependency, in which students respond mechanically to automated corrections without internalising underlying language rules (Zhang, 2025).

The action research cycle followed in this study comprised seven stages: (1) initial assessment of student reading and writing levels; (2) assignment of appropriate digital tools based on assessment data; (3) structured student practice using the assigned tools; (4) AIgenerated feedback on student performance; (5) teacher review of progress data and student work; (6) targeted intervention based on identified needs; and (7) continued progress monitoring through follow-up assessments.

The role of the teacher in mediating AI use emerges as a consistent theme across literature. Saleem et al. (2025) found that teachers who integrated AI tools within structured instructional frameworks achieved stronger student outcomes than those who used tools in isolation. Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of the zone of proximal development provides a theoretical basis for this finding, as teacher scaffolding enables learners to engage with tasks slightly beyond their independent capability. CAST’s Universal Design for Learning guidelines (2018) further support the use of flexible, teacher-guided digital tools to create inclusive learning environments. A key gap in the existing literature is the limited availability of longitudinal, classroom-based evidence examining the sustained impact of AI tools on ELL reading and writing development. Much of the existing research is short-term or conducted in higher education contexts, leaving a need for practitioner-based evidence from primary and international school settings. This study contributes to addressing that gap.

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

analysis of fluency and accuracy. Quill is an AI-powered writing tool that provides immediate, structured feedback on grammar, sentence structure, and writing coherence. Activity packs were assigned in students’ home languages where available, significantly improving accessibility and understanding of learning objectives. Students were encouraged to draft, revise, and reflect on their writing before receiving teacher input. Quill was introduced into the intervention in January 2026. Collaboration with the ELL lead, AI safeguarding officer, and IT team supported the implementation of the intervention by ensuring that tools were pedagogically appropriate, safe for student use, and aligned with school expectations for digital learning. Figure 1: Blended Learning Model: Integrating AI Tools with Traditional Instruction for ELL Development

Methodology Three AI and digital tools were selected for this study based on their alignment with the reading and writing needs of the ELL cohort and their approval through the school’s safeguarding process (see Figure 1). Nessy is a structured literacy programme designed to develop phonics, spelling, reading, and decoding skills. Students were assigned specific learning targets based on initial assessment results and worked through these collaboratively during guided sessions. Progress reports generated by Nessy were reviewed regularly to monitor individual development and adjust interventions as needed. Lightning Squad (FFT) is an adaptive reading and fluency programme. Students were assessed by reading assigned words aloud, with pronunciation, blending, decoding, and syllable recognition marked by the teacher. Based on their performance, students were assigned specific books and spelling activities to reinforce vocabulary development. Students also recorded their reading to allow for ongoing

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

Participants The participants were seven Year 3 students identified as requiring ELL support within an international school setting. All participants were learning English as an additional language, with home languages including Russian and other community languages.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Participants ranged in age from seven to eight years. Informed consent was obtained from the school administration and parents or guardians prior to the commencement of the study. All student data presented in this article have been anonymised to protect participant confidentiality.

Figure 2: Teacher-Mediated AI Integration Cycle

Data Collection Data was collected from three primary sources. First, platform-generated assessment data from Nessy, Lightning Squad, and Quill provided quantitative measures of reading and writing progress at baseline and at subsequent assessment points across the academic year. Second, FFT reading age data provided standardised measures of reading development from the start to the end of the academic year. Third, the researcher maintained reflective observation notes documenting student engagement, language use, and responses to feedback throughout the intervention period. These data sources were selected because they captured both measurable literacy progress and practitioner observations of engagement, confidence, and response to feedback, enabling a comprehensive picture of the intervention’s impact.

Data Analysis Data analysis involved the comparison of preand post-intervention assessment scores across all three platforms, alongside FFT reading age data collected at the start of the year, end of Term 1, and end of Term 3. Quill data were analysed using the platform’s built-in proficiency categories: no proficiency, partially proficient, and proficient. FFT reading ages were recorded in year and month format and compared across assessment points to identify growth. Reflective practitioner notes were reviewed for recurring patterns related to student engagement, confidence, independent language use, response to feedback, and the need for teacher intervention, in order to contextualise and complement the quantitative platform data (see Figure 2).

Results

Assessment data from all three platforms indicated measurable progress across the ELL cohort over the course of the academic year. The results are presented by research questions below. How Do AI Tools Support Reading Skills Among ELL Learners?

FFT reading age data demonstrated improvement across all students from the start of the year to the end of Term 3 (see Table 1). Gains ranged from one to more than 12 months of reading age growth, with Student 1 and Student 5 recording the highest levels of progress. Nessy assessment data (see Figure 3) showed upward trends in reading and spelling year levels over time across the cohort. Students were able to identify and correctly decode an increasing number of words, and fluency recordings captured improvements in blending, pronunciation, and reading pace across the assessment period. Figure 3: Reading Progress Evidence from Nessy: Assessment Results Graph

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

year, including NGRT and phonics screening, recorded significant improvement within the ELL cohort, consistent with the Quill data. Does Engagement Through AI Lead to Measurable Improvement?

Student engagement with all three platforms was consistently high throughout the intervention period. Students demonstrated increased motivation and active participation, particularly in activities with gamified elements such as Lightning Squad. Vocabulary practised during platform sessions was observed to reappear in students’ oral responses and written sentences during guided reading and classroom writing activities. Variation in outcomes across the cohort was present despite consistent levels of participation, as shown in the FFT and Quill data across Tables 1 and 2. Table 1: FFT Reading Progress Across the Academic Year Student

Start FFT

End T1 FFT

End T3 FFT

Student 1

04:04

05:01

06:03

Student 2

04:09

05:03

06:07

Student 3

04:11

—

06:10

Student 4

04:06

06:03

11:03

Student 5

06:03

08:05

11:03

Student 6

05:01

06:04

07:09

Student 7

04:11

—

06:01

Note: Reading ages are recorded in years: months format. Dashes indicate mid-year data not available at that assessment point.

Table 2: Quill Pre and Post Assessment Comparison

How Do AI Tools Influence Writing Development in ELL Contexts?

Quill pre- and post-assessment data demonstrated improvement in writing proficiency across all seven students (see Table 2). Five students progressed from no proficiency to partial proficiency between the pre- and post-assessment points. Two students—Student 4 and Student 5—moved to full proficiency. All students showed improvement from their baseline position. Other assessments conducted during the

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

Student

Quill Pre

Quill Post

Student 1

No proficiency

Partially proficient

Student 2

No proficiency

Partially proficient

Student 3

No proficiency

Partially proficient

Student 4

Partially proficient

Gained proficiency

Student 5

No proficiency

Gained proficiency

Student 6

No proficiency

Partially proficient

Student 7

No proficiency

Partially proficient

Note: Post-assessment data reflect results available at the time of writing. Quill was introduced in January 2026; the full post-growth assessment was ongoing at submission.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

What Is the Role of Teachers in Mediating AI Use?

Teacher involvement was continuous throughout all seven stages of the action research cycle. Progress data from each platform was reviewed regularly and used to assign follow-up tasks, adjust interventions, and guide reading and writing sessions. Students who received targeted teacher followup alongside their platform-based practice demonstrated the strongest gains. Where AI-generated feedback was discussed and explained in context by the teacher, students demonstrated greater understanding and were more able to apply corrections independently. Table 3 summarises the key findings across all four research questions. Table 3: Summary of Key Findings on AI Tools in ELL Contexts Research Area

Consensus

Contradictions

Gaps

Reading Skills

AI supports phonics and comprehension

Limited higher-order comprehension

Need for teacherguided reading strategies

Writing Skills

AI improves grammar and structure

Over-reliance on automated feedback

Need for deeper writing development

Engagement

Increased motivation and participation

Engagement does not equal proficiency

Lack of measurable long-term outcome data

Teacher Role

Essential for effective implementation

Varies across studies and contexts

Need for structured integration models

Note: This table summarises the principal findings from the literature review and practitioner data. The most consistent finding across all areas is that AI tools are most effective when combined with structured teacher support.

Discussion and Reflections The results of this study align broadly with findings in the existing literature while also providing important practitioner-based insights into the conditions under which AI tools produce meaningful literacy gains. The reading progress observed across the cohort supports research by Alam (2022) and Xiaofan and Annamalai (2025), which identifies adaptive digital tools as effective in developing foundational reading skills including phonics, decoding, and fluency. The substantial gains made by some students, particularly Student 4 and Student 5, suggest that when AI tools are carefully matched to student needs and embedded within structured instructional

cycles, they can produce significant and measurable progress. The variation in outcomes across the cohort highlights the importance of teacher monitoring and targeted intervention, reinforcing the view that AI tools function as supportive resources rather than autonomous instructional agents. The writing development data reflect the broader literature’s finding that AI-powered feedback tools can support grammar, sentence structure, and writing accuracy (Eragamreddy & Joseph, 2025; Graham & Perin, 2007). The home-language support feature within Quill was particularly significant for students whose developing English comprehension might otherwise have limited engagement with automated feedback. This observation aligns with Universal Design for Learning principles (CAST, 2018), which emphasise multiple means of representation to support diverse learners. A central reflection from this study concerns the relationship between engagement and proficiency. While all students demonstrated increased motivation and active participation in AI-supported activities, this engagement did not automatically translate into uniform language gains. This finding is consistent with Fredricks et al.’s (2004) distinction between behavioural and cognitive engagement and serves as an important caution for practitioners who may equate enthusiastic participation with deep learning. Teacher scaffolding, guided discussion, and opportunities to transfer skills to independent contexts were essential in bridging this gap. The seven-stage teacher-mediated action research cycle developed and applied in this study proved an effective framework for maximising the impact of digital tools. This structured approach directly addresses the concern raised by Saleem et al. (2025) that AI tools used in isolation produce limited gains. Conducting this study as a teacher-researcher reinforced the view that AI tools are most powerful when they serve as one component within a broader, purposefully designed instructional system. Key lessons learned from this action research process include the importance of aligning tool selection to assessed student needs, the value of regular data review cycles, and the need for explicit teacher follow-up on automated feedback. Several limitations of this study warrant acknowledgement. The participant group was small, comprising seven students, which limits the generalisability of the findings. The introduction of Quill partway through the

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

academic year meant that post-assessment data were not yet fully complete at the time of writing. Additionally, the single-school context means findings may not reflect the full range of ELL settings internationally. Future research should examine larger cohorts over longer periods and explore how different blended learning models influence specific language skills across diverse ELL populations.

Conclusion This action research study provides practitioner-based evidence that AI and digital tools—specifically Nessy, Lightning Squad (FFT), and Quill—can support measurable improvements in reading and writing development among ELL learners when integrated within a structured, teachermediated framework. The findings reinforce the importance of blended learning approaches that combine the personalisation and immediate feedback capabilities of AI tools with the instructional expertise and relational support of the classroom teacher. For school practitioners, the key recommendation is to adopt AI tools not as standalone resources but as components of a systematic instructional cycle that includes assessment, targeted assignment, active monitoring, and teacher-led follow-up. For school leaders and policymakers, investment in teacher training, equitable technology access, and robust safeguarding protocols is essential to realising the potential of AI in ELL instruction. For researchers, there is a compelling need for longitudinal, classroombased studies examining the sustained impact of AI tools on ELL literacy development across a range of contexts and learner groups. Ultimately, this study affirms that AI tools, when used thoughtfully and purposefully, have genuine potential to support ELL learners in developing the reading and writing skills they need to access the curriculum and achieve academic success. However, technology is a means, not an end: the teacher remains the most critical variable in determining whether these tools translate into meaningful and lasting learning.

References Alam, A. (2022). Employing adaptive learning and intelligent tutoring robots for virtual classrooms and smart campuses: Reforming education in the age of artificial

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

intelligence. In R. A. Malik, T. K. Ahmad, & A. Al-Sharafi (Eds.), Advanced computing and intelligent technologies: Proceedings of ICACIT 2022 (pp. 395–406). Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-19-2980-9_32 CAST. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast. org Eragamreddy, N., & Joseph, R. (2025). Digital tools and writing education: A thematic analysis of technology’s role in writing skills development. Arab World English Journal, 16(3), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol16no3.1 Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi. org/10.3102/00346543074001059 Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Alliance for Excellent Education. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign. Saleem, T., Sajjad, S., Rashid, K., Habib, S., & Shoaib, M. (2025). Integrating AI in Pakistani ESL classrooms: Teachers’ practices, perspectives, and impact on student performance. PLOS ONE, 20(10), Article e0333352. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0333352 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Xiaofan, W., & Annamalai, N. (2025). Investigating the use of AI tools in English language learning: A phenomenological approach. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(2), Article ep578. https://doi. org/10.30935/cedtech/16188 Zawacki-Richter, O., Marin, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 Zhang, J. (2025). Integrating chatbot technology into English language learning to enhance student engagement and interactive communication skills. Language and Intercultural Communication, 25(3). https://doi. org/10.1177/14727978241312992

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Does AI Personalization Help Readers? Measuring an AI Reading Coach Against Grade 7 MAP Growth Daniela Yela Universal American School

For any leadership team grappling with differentiation at scale, a purpose-built AI reading coach is a low-cost, practical option that appears to work. It will not replace what a skilled teacher does in a guided reading session.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research study tested whether a personalised AI reading chatbot could support differentiated reading growth across a Grade 7 cohort (n=61) in Dubai. The tool converted students’ MAP Rasch Unit (RIT) scores into Lexile levels and generated individualised articles on self-selected topics with comprehension feedback. Over one academic year, average achievement percentile rose from the 59th to 66th, with typical growth exceeding national norms (median conditional growth: 60th percentile) and top-band representation increasing from 47% to 57%. Engagement remained strong, with 84% of students active across 126 days. Without a control group, causal claims are limited, but findings support AI reading coaches as a scalable, low-cost complement to teacher-led instruction.

Every teacher who has stood in front of a mixed-ability reading class knows the problem. You have twenty students. Each one reads at a different level. Ideally, each one would be reading a text that challenges them just enough, hard enough to grow, not so hard they give up. As Grade 7 Level Leader at Universal American School Dubai, I saw this play out not just in my own classroom, but across the entire year group. Differentiation was the conversation we kept coming back to in team meetings, and no one had a fully satisfying answer. Across the Grade 7 cohort of 61 students, each reader sits in a different Lexile band, the measure of reading difficulty at which a student comprehends about 75% of a text, an idea rooted in Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Proximal Development. There was no realistic way for any of us to hand-match a uniquely levelled, high-interest text to every student every lesson. So, I started asking a different question: could an Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool do that job at scale, across the whole year group? Research on intelligent tutoring systems suggested the potential was real. Kulik and Fletcher (2016) found average achievement gains of approximately +0.66 standard deviations when students received individualized, adaptive instruction, an effect size comparable to one-to-one tutoring. This study set out to explore whether a personalized AI reading chatbot could produce something similar across an entire grade level, measured against Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Growth reading scores over one academic year.

who started at the same level - a fairer and more meaningful measure than raw score gains alone. It was this metric, alongside achievement percentile, that I used to evaluate the impact of the AI coach across the year group.

Methodology Design and Sample This was a pre-post action research study conducted across one academic year, comparing MAP Growth reading scores from Spring 2024 - 2025 to Spring 2025 - 2026. The full Grade 7 cohort involved at Universal American School Dubai comprised 61 students. As Grade 7 Level Leader, I coordinated the rollout of the tool across the year group and monitored both usage and outcomes. Data was anonymized and reported in aggregate only.

Literature Review The argument for individualized reading practice is not new. Hattie’s (2009) landmark synthesis of educational research placed feedback and personalized instruction among the highest-leverage interventions available to teachers. The difficulty has always been delivery: meaningful differentiation at scale is extremely hard to achieve without technology, and even harder to sustain consistently across a whole year group.

The AI Reading Coach

•

ASK: The student enters their most recent MAP RIT (Rasch Unit) score.

Intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) have offered one route forward. Kulik and Fletcher’s (2016) meta-analysis of over 50 studies found that ITS consistently outperformed conventional instruction, with effect sizes averaging +0.66 SD. What made these systems effective was not their complexity but their personalization: the ability to match content to the individual learner’s current level and adjust in response to their performance. That is precisely what is so difficult to achieve when one teacher is responsible for a diverse cohort.

•

CONVERT: The tool converts that score to a Lexile level using the NWEA MetaMetrics linking study (MetaMetrics, n.d.).

•

GENERATE: The chatbot writes a reading article at that Lexile level on a topic the student chooses, then provides comprehension feedback.

Measuring that growth accurately matters too. NWEA’s (Northwest Evaluation Association) MAP Growth assessment uses a conditional growth percentile norm (Thum & Kuhfeld, 2020), which adjusts for each student’s starting point. This means a student who begins the year below average is compared against peers

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

I built a custom chatbot called “Reading Articles” using MagicSchool and introduced it across the grade level. The design was intentionally simple, so that any student could use it independently: every session, the tool runs the same three-step loop.

The idea was that every student across the year group would get something genuinely matched to them, not a pre-written text assigned to a reading group, but a fresh article at their exact level on something they actually wanted to read about. Whether that was football, fashion, video games, or marine biology was entirely up to them. This also meant the tool could run independently, freeing up teacher time for more targeted small-group work.

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Measures

Conclusion and Reflections

Achievement was tracked through two MAP Growth metrics: achievement percentile (relative standing compared to national peers) and conditional growth percentile (whether each student’s growth exceeded what was expected for someone starting at their level). I also tracked band distribution shifts across the year group and, through MagicSchool Insights, overall engagement, logins, articles generated, and active days.

When I introduced this project, I was looking for a practical, scalable solution to a problem I was seeing across the whole of Grade 7: how do you give 61 students meaningfully differentiated reading practice when your team has finite time and energy? The results suggest the AI coach made a genuine contribution at a year group level. Achievement rose, growth exceeded national norms, and the majority of students stayed engaged across a full academic year.

Results and Analysis Across the Grade 7 cohort, average achievement percentile rose from the 59th to the 66th, a gain of seven percentile points over the year. More significantly, the median student’s conditional growth percentile came in at 60, meaning the typical Grade 7 reader grew faster than the national norm. Forty nine percent of students exceeded the 60th growth percentile (see Table 1). Table 1: Summary of Key Results and Engagement Data - Grade 7 Cohort Metric

Result

Engagement

Growth

Achievement percentile

59th -> 66th (+7 pts)

84% of students active

Conditional growth: 60th percentile

AI articles generated

8,674

1,021 logins

126 active days

The distribution shift tells the same story at a year-group level. The proportion of Grade 7 students in the top two achievement bands rose from 47% to 57%, while the lower bands contracted. This pattern is consistent with what Kulik and Fletcher (2016) described in their ITS meta-analysis, though I am cautious about drawing a direct line between controlled trials and what happened across one year group in one school. What also stood out was the engagement data. Eighty-four percent of students logged in across 126 active days, generating 8,674 AI articles over the year (see Table 1). From a leadership perspective, this mattered as much as the scores. Sustaining student engagement with an independent reading tool across a full academic year, without it becoming just another forgotten platform, is genuinely difficult. I think the choice element made the difference: students were reading about things they cared about, at a level where they could access the text.

But I want to be careful about overclaiming. The chatbot ran alongside regular classroom teaching, and there was no control group, so I cannot isolate its effect from everything else the Grade 7 team did that year. MAP scores were also self-reported by students to the chatbot, which introduces some uncertainty about how precisely each article was Lexile matched. These are the things I want to investigate in the next cycle: a dosage-response analysis to explore whether students who used the tool more showed greater gains, and, if the timetable allows, a matched comparison group at another year level. What I can say with confidence is that this approach is worth pursuing, and worth sharing with colleagues. For any leadership team grappling with differentiation at scale, a purpose-built AI reading coach is a low-cost, practical option that appears to work. It will not replace what a skilled teacher does in a guided reading session. But it can extend the reach of levelled, personalized reading practice into the independent time that no team can fully staff. From where I stand as Grade 7 Level Leader, that is exactly the kind of gap worth closing.

References Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (2016). Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 42–78. https://doi. org/10.3102/0034654315581420 MetaMetrics. (n.d.). The Lexile framework for reading. MetaMetrics, Inc. https://www.lexile. com Thum, Y. M., & Kuhfeld, M. (2020). NWEA 2020 MAP Growth achievement status and growth norms. NWEA. https://www.nwea.org Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Section |||

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Do Children Read More Effectively from a Physical Book or from a Screen? Grace Desmond Safa British School

Screen-based format may have increased cognitive demands or reduced pupils’ attention to the text, leading to a higher frequency of reading inaccuracies.

Abstract

Introduction

This action research study compared reading accuracy between physical books and iPads among six Year 3 pupils over six weeks, each reading matched, unfamiliar texts in both formats weekly. Running records and comprehension questions revealed a consistent pattern: every pupil made more errors, omissions, insertions, and substitutions, when reading from an iPad than from a physical book, suggesting screens may increase cognitive load or reduce sustained attention among developing readers. Pupil surveys captured preferences and confidence across formats. Given the small sample, short sixweek timeframe, and concurrent daily reading instruction, findings cannot be generalised broadly, but suggest physical books may better support reading accuracy and focus in early primary literacy development.

Reading is a key skill in primary school, supporting learning across all subjects. However, the way children read is changing, with many now using devices such as iPads alongside traditional books. This raises an important question: do children read more effectively from a physical book or from a screen? Research shows both benefits and challenges with each approach. Digital reading can increase engagement and motivation, and features such as adjustable text size or audio support can help children access texts more easily (Biancarosa & Griffiths, 2012; Singer & Alexander, 2017). However, other studies suggest that reading from screens can negatively impact comprehension, as children are more likely to be distracted or experience increased cognitive load (Delgado et al., 2018). In contrast, physical books are often linked to

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

better focus and deeper understanding, as the tactile experience of reading can support memory and comprehension (Mangen et al., 2013).

independently (Biancarosa & Griffiths, 2012). This can be particularly useful for younger or less confident readers, as it may increase motivation and participation in reading tasks.

For younger pupils, such as those in Year 3, these differences may be particularly important as they are still developing fluency and comprehension skills. While technology is becoming more common in classrooms, it is important to understand whether it truly supports reading development or creates additional challenges.

However, research also highlights some limitations of reading from screens. Studies suggest that comprehension can be weaker when reading digitally, particularly when pupils need to read in depth rather than quickly (Singer & Alexander, 2017; Delgado et al., 2018). Distractions such as notifications or interruptions can also impact focus and reading flow. In contrast, physical books are often linked to better concentration and deeper understanding, as the tactile experience of reading can support memory and help pupils stay engaged with the text (Mangen et al., 2013; Furenes et al., 2021). Overall, the research suggests that both approaches have strengths and challenges.

This action research study investigates whether pupils read more accurately and with better understanding from physical books or from a screen. The aim is to explore how the reading medium impacts children’s reading performance and whether technology is beneficial for developing early reading skills.

Background of the Problem This study was conducted with six Year 3 pupils at Safa British School over a six-week period, with the aim of exploring how reading medium impacts pupils’ reading behaviours and development. Each pupil read an unfamiliar text from both a physical book and an iPad, allowing for direct comparison across the two approaches. The group included a range of abilities, with all pupils working within the Emerging to Emerging+ levels at the start of the academic year, and two pupils identified as reluctant readers who required frequent reassurance and support. As all pupils are still developing their reading skills, this provided an opportunity to closely observe their reading accuracy, fluency, comprehension and engagement in different contexts. The study sought to identify whether one medium better supports reading confidence and overall progress, particularly for those who may already experience challenges with reading.

Literature Review Reading from both print and screens is now a normal part of primary classrooms, which has led to increasing research into how each impacts children’s reading. Digital reading can support engagement and accessibility, with features such as adjustable text size and audio helping pupils access texts more AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

Method The study was conducted over six weeks with six Year 3 pupils. Each week, pupils read an unfamiliar text from both a physical book and an iPad, where their reading behaviours, including accuracy, errors, fluency and pauses, were recorded through running records, followed by comprehension questions to assess understanding. All texts were approximately 200 words in length, with a new text selected for each assessment.

Research Design This study used an action research approach, allowing me to explore reading behaviours within my own classroom and reflect on my teaching practice. Action research was suitable as it focuses on improving learning through small-scale, practical enquiry.

Participants The study involved six Year 3 pupils at Safa British School. All pupils were working within Emerging and Emerging+ reading levels at the start of the academic year. The group included a range of learners, including two reluctant readers who needed regular reassurance. All pupils are still developing key reading skills such as fluency, accuracy, and comprehension. 99

CEAR | Al-Futtaim Education Foundation

Procedure The study took place over six weeks. Each week, pupils read two unfamiliar texts: one from a physical book and one from an iPad. The texts were matched as closely as possible in terms of difficulty and word count to ensure a fair comparison. All texts were at standard Year 3 level.

Data Collection Data was collected using running records during each reading session. I recorded accuracy, substitutions, omissions, insertions, repetitions, self-corrections, and pauses. I also noted when I needed to support pupils and any behaviours such as hesitation or loss of focus. After each read, pupils answered five comprehension questions. I also recorded any issues with technology, such as pop-ups or low battery, as these affected reading. In addition, I gathered pupil voice through simple student surveys to understand their preferences and confidence when reading from a book or a screen. I also analysed summative reading data to support my findings and identify any wider progress over time.

errors occurred regardless of reading ability and were evident in all participants. In contrast, when reading from physical books, pupils demonstrated greater accuracy and were less likely to miss or alter words (see Figure 3 and 4). This suggests that the screen-based format may have increased cognitive demands or reduced pupils’ attention to the text, leading to a higher frequency of reading inaccuracies. These findings support observations made during the study that pupils appeared to track the text more effectively and maintain greater reading accuracy when using physical books. Figure 1: Internal Reading Data for Year 3 (Baseline and End of Term 2)

Data Analysis The data was analysed by comparing how pupils performed when reading from a book and from an iPad. I looked at accuracy, types of errors, fluency, and comprehension to identify patterns and differences. I also compared pupils’ reading data from the start of the academic year to the end of Term 2 to see whether there had been any overall progress in their reading development. It is important to note that all pupils continued to receive daily reading instruction during this time, which may have also contributed to their progress.

Ethical Considerations Pupils remained anonymous, and no names were recorded. The study was carried out as part of normal classroom practice, and all pupils were willing to participate in the reading activities.

Results Analysis of the running records revealed a consistent pattern across all six pupils when reading from an iPad (see Figure 1). Every pupil made more reading errors compared to when reading from a physical book (see Figures 2 and 3). The most common errors included omissions (skipping words), insertions (adding words that were not written in the text) and substitutions (reading words incorrectly). These

100

Section |||

QUEST | Issue 3 - Volume 1

Figure 2: Errors Made by Six Children Reading on iPads

Figure 3: Errors Made by Six Children Reading from Physical Books

Conclusion While the findings suggest that pupils read more accurately from physical books than from iPads, it is important to interpret these results with caution. The study took place over a relatively short six-week period and involved only six pupils, limiting the extent to which the findings can be generalised. Furthermore, all pupils continued to participate in daily reading lessons, guided reading sessions, and wider literacy activities throughout the study. As a result, any improvements in reading fluency, accuracy, or comprehension cannot be attributed solely to the reading medium. The ongoing teaching of reading strategies, vocabulary development and comprehension skills may have contributed significantly to pupils’ progress. In addition, the novelty of reading from an iPad, combined with occasional technological distractions such as battery issues and notifications, may have influenced pupil performance.

Limitations This study was limited by the small number of pupils and the short six-week timeframe. Technology issues and distractions may also have affected the results. Therefore, while the results indicate that physical books may better support reading accuracy and focus, further research involving a larger sample size and a longer intervention period would be needed to establish a stronger causal relationship between reading medium and reading outcomes. Figure 4: Comparison of Total Reading Errors: iPads vs Physical Books

AI, Digital Learning, and Emerging Literacies

References Biancarosa, G., & Griffiths, G. G. (2012). Technology tools to support reading in the digital age. The Future of Children, 22(2), 139–160. Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., Salmerón, L., & Ibáñez, A. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23–38. Furenes, M. I., Kucirkova, N., & Bus, A. G. (2021). A comparison of children’s reading on paper versus screen: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 91(4), 483–517. Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68. Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Reading on paper and digitally: What the past decades of empirical research reveal. Review of Educational Research, 87(6), 1007–1041. 101

Acknowledgements Quest is published by the Centre for Education Action Research (CEAR), part of the Al-Futtaim Education Foundation (AFEF).

Editorial & Coordination Samantha Fernandes, CEAR Administrator

Design Chahd Nadaf, Senior Illustrator

Contributors We would like to thank all the teacher researchers, school representatives, research mentors, partners and contributors who have supported and contributed to this issue.

Contact cear@disdubai.ae

Website www.alfuttaimeducationfoundation.com/our-projects/cear