Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Let's Pretend: An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners

994

Published on

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
994
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Does not meet expectations (ie , <50%ile)
  • P=.004 Effect size =.015 Power=.83
  • P=.00 Effect size=.06 Power=.98
  • P=.00 Effect size=.05 Power=.96
  • Scored as present or absent . Nonparametric based on number of students who improved from pretest to posttest
  • P=.01 Effect size=.03 Power=.78
  • 800-849 = meets expectations P=.04 Effect size=.015 Power=.55
  • P=.00 Effect size=.06 Power=.80
  • Does not meet expectations (ie , <50%ile)
  • P=.03 Effect size=.17 Power=.61
  • P=.01 Effect size=.06 Power=.71
  • P=.00 Effect size=.08 Power=.86
  • P=.00 Effect size=.08 Power=.86
  • Transcript

    • 1. Let's Pretend An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners Ann Cale Kruger Educational Psychology and Special Education
    • 2.
      • The Georgia Wolf Trap Project
      • A collaboration of the Alliance Theatre, Fulton County Schools, and Georgia State University
      • Funded for three years (2005-2008) by the U.S. Department of Education, Arts Education Model Development and Dissemination Program
    • 3.
      • Acknowledgements
      • Students, Classroom Teachers, Teaching Artists, Administrators
      • Jackie Gray, Carol Jones, Michele Mummert, Denise Jennings
      • Audrey Ambrosino, Lynda Kapsch, Heather Smith, Nicole Lorenzetti, Carol Ashong, Brook Bays, Josephine Lindsley, Callie Reeves, Daniel Medina, Kareema Spells, Peter Samuelson, Elizabeth McGarragh, Macy Strickland, Lisa Quick
      • Educational Psychology and Special Education
    • 4. Context of the Intervention
      • The “achievement gap” begins before the child’s first day of school.
      • Language development in early childhood predicts school performance
      • Low-income children begin Kindergarten with less than half the vocabulary of high-income students, leading to challenges in literacy development
      • In high-stakes, underachieving schools, Kindergarten often does not resemble child-centered early education
    • 5. Nature of the Intervention
      • Theoretical orientation: shared understanding and intentions are sociocognitive processes underlying cultural learning
      • Social and communicative experiences that support the development of symbolic functioning are essential in early childhood
      • Pretend play, the developmental foundation of drama, is the child’s “first language.”
      • Joint pretense and story sharing can unpack language. Drama engages children’s emotions and intellect, transcending culture and class.
    • 6. Design and Implementation
      • Random assignment of low-income schools to conditions (with waiting controls); pre-intervention/post-intervention
      • Kindergarten classrooms - see DVD
      • Professional learning opportunities for teachers in the summer and fall; artists and teachers collaboratively infuse drama into 13 language arts lessons in January and February
      • Three years, almost 70 residencies, over 1200 students, approximately 16,000 contact hours of instruction
      • Anticipated multiplicative benefit
    • 7. Sample Characteristics
      • Years 1, 2, & 3 combined
      • N= 545 (control=217, intervention=328); 51% males
      • 36% special needs (remedial ed, special ed or both)
      • 71% qualified for free (  130% poverty level) or reduced-cost lunch (130-185%)
        • 2008 federal poverty level for a family of 4 is $21,200
      • 94% African American
        • Only significant group difference: Control = 90% AA; Intervention=96%
    • 8. Starting Point for the Sample
    • 9. Data Sources (services) (services) (services) Sb intervention intervention X control intervention Year 2 2006-7 intervention intervention S (services) intervention B control X T X X H intervention control G Year 3 2007-8 Year 1 2005-6 School
    • 10. Data Collected (Pre and Post) X Kindergarten Language Development (PPVT, TOLD) Emotion Understanding GKAP& Grades Writing 1st Grade CRCT Scores (ELA, Reading, Math) Grades Year 2 (06-07) Kindergarten Language Development (PPVT, TOLD) Emotion Understanding GKAP & Grades Writing X Cohort 3 1st Grade CRCT Scores (ELA, Reading, Math) Grades X Cohort 2 2nd Grade CRCT Scores (ELA, Reading, Math) Grades Kindergarten Language Development (PPVT, TOLD) Emotion Understanding GKAP & Grades Cohort 1 Year 3 (07-08) Year 1(05-06)
    • 11. Hypotheses
      • Intervention students will show more improvement than control students in
        • Language Development
        • Writing (near transfer)
        • Academic Achievement (far transfer)
      • Each child serves as own control using analyses of covariance
    • 12. Language Development
      • Over the Kindergarten Year
        • PPVT (receptive vocabulary)
        • TOLD-P:3 subtests
          • Oral Vocabulary (semantics)
          • Grammatic Understanding (syntax)
          • Sentence Imitation (syntax)
      • Most challenging to describe when 3 years combined
    • 13. Grammatic Understanding TOLD Percentiles
    • 14. Writing
      • Story starters
        • “ On my way to school today I saw a magic bird…..”
        • “ On my way to school today I saw a singing tree….”
      • Administered in small groups by a researcher during Years 2 and 3
        • Drawing with dictation or writing (with invented spelling) or some combination. A meaningful activity for the students.
      • Grounded inquiry led to coding categories. Excellent reliability. (condition was obscured.)
      • Quantitative Codes: words, word types, sentences, characters, voicing, perspectives
    • 15. Vocabulary Mean Number Per Story
    • 16. Sentences Mean Number Per Story
    • 17. Qualitative Coding Categories
      • Character Continuity
        • The child mentions or implies the main character.
      • Schema
        • The child writes about a typical routine during their day. “The magic bird got on the school bus.”
      • Theme
        • The child writes about a reciprocal relationship, a conflict, or a goal. “The magical bird followed me home. I shared my snack with her.”
      • Structure
        • The story starter is the beginning; the child supplies a middle and an end. For example, “It was ignoring me.” is an action. “It was ignoring me. It flew away.” has an ending.
      • Resolution
        • The child creates an ending that completes the story theme. For example, “The magic bird flew away.” might be a story ending. However, “The magic bird flew away. I felt sad.” represents a conclusion to the theme.
    • 18. Pretest On my way to school today, I saw a magic bird…
        • I came to play with Spiderman .
        • The brat doll had braces.
        • The magic bird was green . (Character Continuity)
        • The magic bird went to go to the gas station. (Schema )
        • I am trying to get my wand back from the magic bird. (Theme)
        • The bird was magic. Those are birdies looking for food. The magic bird gave them food. (Theme and Structure).
    • 19. Posttest On my way to school today, I saw a singing tree…
        • The pig is in the mud.
        • When I came out of my house, I saw a singing tree. My dog came out, too, and we all danced . (Theme)
        • I don’t like singing trees. They always hurt my ears. The squirrel doesn’t like the tree singing. The squirrel threw an acorn in his mouth and was shaking his tail at him. Then the tree went in the water. He didn’t know that there was a shark beneath him. The shark ate him up. (Theme and Structure and Resolution)
        • I am walking in the woods. The sad tree is singing a sad song. I am going to see him crying. He is sad because he has no friends. All his friends moved. He is sad while it is morning. (Theme and Structure and Resolution)
    • 20. Writing Quality Percentage of Students with Improvement over Time
    • 21. Academic Achievement
      • Kindergarten - GKAP and grades-NS
      • All analyses of follow-up in 1st grade and 2nd grade were conducted controlling for Pretest Kindergarten PPVT
      • These analyses test for an effect one to two years later WITHOUT further intervention
    • 22. Report Card Grades First Grade (Cohorts 1 & 2)
    • 23. Language Arts CRCT First Grade (Cohorts 1 & 2)
    • 24. Report Card Grades Second Grade (Cohort 1 only)
    • 25. Special Needs Sample
    • 26. Report Card Grades First Grade (Cohorts 1& 2) Special Needs Only
    • 27. CRCT Language Arts First Grade (Cohorts 1& 2) Special Needs Only
    • 28. CRCT Reading First Grade (Cohort 1& 2) Special Needs Only
    • 29. CRCT Mathematics First Grade (Cohort 1& 2) Special Needs Only
    • 30. Recap
      • Intervention Effect on Language Development
          • Significant improvement in syntax
      • Intervention Effect on Writing
          • Significant improvement in vocabulary and style
      • Intervention Effects on Academic Achievement
          • First Grade: Language Arts CRCT and Grades
          • Second Grade: Grades
          • Special Needs First Grade: Grades and all three CRCT measures
    • 31. Contributions
      • Not a revolution, but a reminder:
        • Developmental appropriateness
        • Encouraging children to find their voice- child-centered education supports symbolic development
        • Authentic, meaningful activity in a language-rich and emotionally engaging context
        • Usefulness of this approach for development and learning
    • 32. What’s Next?
      • Analyses of contributions of development (syntax) and learning (writing) to language arts achievement over time
      • Analysis of teacher experience in the program on changes in student development and learning
      • GWTELL (US DOE 2008-2012)

    ×