The Georgia Wolf Trap Project 2005-2008 & Georgia Wolf Trap for English Language Learners

1. The Georgia Wolf Trap Project 2005-2008 & Georgia Wolf Trap for English Language Learners 2008-2012

2. A collaboration of Alliance Theatre, Fulton County Schools, and Georgia State University Funded (2005-2012) by the U.S. Department of Education Arts Education Model Development and Dissemination Program (AEMDD)

3. AEMDD Criteria Discipline-specific arts instruction and Enhancement of academic achievement Low-income children

4. Context of the Intervention Language development in early childhood predicts school performance. The “achievement gap” begins before the child’s first day of school. Low-income children begin Kindergarten with less than half the vocabulary of high-income students, challenging literacy development.

5. Premises of the Intervention 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. 1st Project – 2005-8 All Kindergarten classes in 6 schools Random assignment of low-income schools to conditions; pre-intervention/post-intervention Professional learning opportunities for Kindergarten teachers in summer and fall; artists and teachers collaboratively infuse drama into language lessons in January and February

7. Sample Characteristics • N= 545 students • 36% special needs • 71% qualified for free or reduced lunch • 94% African American

8. Sample Starting Point

9. Hypotheses • Intervention students will show more improvement than control students in • Language Development • Writing (near transfer) • Academic Achievement (far transfer)

10. Language Development:Syntax

11. Writing: Quantity Vocabulary Sentences

12. Writing: Quality Percentage of Students with Improvement over Time

13. Report Card GradesFirst Grade (Cohorts 1& 2)Special Needs

14. CRCT ScoresFirst Grade (Cohorts 1& 2)Special Needs

15. Contributions • Drama = Developmental Appropriateness • Helping children 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

16. Next? Georgia Wolf Trap for English Language Learners

17. Context • In 2008 Latino students were the largest minority in American schools - 11 Million or 22% • Facing an educational crisis: • Less likely to be enrolled in pre-K programs • Twice as likely to be retained • Highest dropout rates—18.3 % in 2008 (compared to the total rate of 8%).

18. White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics October 19, 2010

19. White House Initiative advocates enhanced pre-K preparation and K-12 educational reforms for Latino students • Fulton County was the third most populous Latino community in GA; over 20% living in poverty; many students with limited English proficiency • FC schools are English only • Pull out/push in services in K=45 minutes/day

20. Achievement gap in 2008 • 70% of Fulton County ELL K students finished the year with low English proficiency • 33%were below academic expectations after 1st grade • only 39% passed all areas of GA high school graduation test • Language minority and low income status = double risk for academic failure

21. Background: Quantity of exposure to English in class does not predict acquisition; quality of engagement with English does (Snow et al., 1998). • Hypothesis: an emphasis on meaningful communication experiences will support acquisition. • Professional development for teachers as before —teaching artists as coaches, November-March • Drama activities—“improvised guided enactment”—can disambiguate language

22. Story sharing; analyzing and enacting; re-telling and reflecting • Elements in common with ESOL strategies • language embedded in meaningful contexts • using the senses, props, facial expressions • physicalization, repetition • incorporating students’ ideas

23. Design • Paired Cluster/random assignment of schools to conditions (6 schools; all K classrooms) • Random selection of research participants (all ELL) • Schools range from 39-68% ELL

24. Participants • 514 Kindergartners over three years 2009-12 • All qualified as ELL, all speak Spanish at home • 97% qualified for free or reduced lunch • All regular education students

25. Measures • District ESOL Screening Measures - English • WAPT-L/S - at registration • Kindergarten ACCESS for ELLs - January/February • WMLS-R - two languages - pre (Sept & Oct) and post (April & May) • Story Writing - English only - pre and post • G-KIDS - first grade readiness test - English only

26. Significance Testing: Treatment Received • All three years of professional learning (N=12 teachers) • Control group (N=31 teachers)

27. Total Oral English

28. Story Writing - Fluency

29. Story Writing - Quality

30. Academic Achievement GKIDS

31. Academic Achievement GKIDS

32. What We Learned • Drama = links among emotion, meaning, words • Brief intervention —> noteworthy effects in language and mathematics • Enhanced language engagement (versus exposure or drill)

33. What is driving all this?Professional Learning

34. Professional Learning Key to Positive student outcomes and true reform

35. PL Process • PL is most effective when teachers are taught as they would teach • Workshops employed Wolf Trap strategies • PL takes time • Summer study • Opportunities throughout year to observe, co-teach • Three years duration

36. Evaluation Sources • Teachers’ evaluations • Teaching artists’ evaluations • Focus groups • Classroom observations • Teachers’ self-assessment surveys

37. Performance Measures • 100% developed lessons integrating dramaduring the residencies • 95% employed drama management techniques • 95% used Best Practices in Drama during the residencies • 90% indicated they would develop lessons using Best Practices in Drama after the residencies ended

38. What Did You Learn? • “I learned to put down my guard and try new things ‘dramatically’ with the students.” • “I learned how to effectively use my body and my voice to tell a story.” • “I learned how to build drama into my literacy instruction.” • “I learned how to incorporate Wolf Trap ideas in other areas of teaching.”

39. PL Conclusions • Teachers recognize the learning taking place in their students – socially, emotionally, linguistically, and cognitively. • Teachers applaud the PL model used, especially the Teaching Artist as coach in the classroom. • Over time, teachers increasingly used the strategies throughout their teaching.

40. It Makes a Difference Oral Language Story Writing: Fluency Story Writing: Quality

41. Acknowledgements Fulton County Schools Alliance Theatre Education Department Jackie Gray, Carol Jones, Michele Mummert, Denise Jennings, Jes Booth GSU: Audrey Ambrosino, Brooke Bays, Judy Orton, Lynda Kapsch, Heather Smith, Nicole Lorenzetti, Carol Ashong, Josephine Lindsley, Callie Reeves, Daniel Medina, Kareema Spells, Peter Samuelson, Elizabeth McGarragh, Macy Strickland, Lisa Quick, Joanna Sherwood, Beatrice Moreno, Araceli Santa Cruz, Inez McDaniel, Renzo Gobea, Brandi Harper, Kathryn Taylor, Meghann Griffin, Rachael Kaplan, Emily White, Billy Thompson

42. Thank you!