Laura Justice School of Teaching and Learning The Ohio State University justice.57@osu

1. Programmatic Research on Early Literacy: Several Key FindingsIES 3rd Annual Research ConferenceJune 12, 2008 Laura Justice School of Teaching and Learning The Ohio State University justice.57@osu.edu

2. Acknowledgements • Lori Skibbe, Ryan Bowles, Joan Kaderavek, Xitao Fan, Helen Ezell, Chris Lankford, Khara Pence, Roger Bakeman, Tricia Zucker, Anita McGinty, Sonia Cabell, Amy Sofka, Aileen Hunt • Institute of Education Sciences (Grants R305G050005 and R324A080037) • National Institutes of Health (NIDCD Grant DC04933 and NICHD Grant HD43204)

3. Continuum of Literacy Instruction Emergent Literacy Learning about print and sound Early LiteracyLearning to read: Decoding Conventional Literacy Reading to learn: Comprehension Major Transition Major Transition Reading Development

4. Some emergent literacy indicators • Listening to stories • Producing fictional narratives • Acting out stories • Writing one’s name • Writing letters and words • Pretending writing a story • Pretend reading from favorite books • Identifying major elements of a book (author, title) • Naming words in environment • Knowing the letters in one’s name • Reciting all the letters • Knowing some letter-sound correspondences • Detecting rhymes • Identifying alliteration • Producing nursery rhymes

5. Listening to stories (oral language) • Producing fictional narratives (oral language) • Acting out stories (oral language) • Writing one’s name (emergent writing) • Writing letters and words (emergent writing) • Pretend writing a story (emergent writing) • Pretend reading from favorite books (print concepts) • Identifying major elements of a book (print concepts) • Naming words in environment (print concepts) • Knowing the letters in one’s name (alphabet knowledge) • Reciting all the letters (alphabet knowledge) • Knowing some letter-sound correspondences (alphabet knowledge) • Detecting rhymes (phonological awareness) • Identifying alliteration (phonological awareness) • Producing nursery rhymes (phonological awareness)

6. Focus in This Talk: Print Knowledge • Writing one’s name (emergent writing) • Writing letters and words (emergent writing) • Pretend writing a story (emergent writing) • Pretend reading from favorite books (print knowledge) • Identifying major elements of a book (print knowledge) • Naming words in environment (print knowledge) • Knowing the letters in one’s name (alphabet knowledge) • Reciting all the letters (alphabet knowledge) • Knowing some letter-sound correspondences (alphabet knowledge)

7. Individual Differences in PK (Justice, Bowles, & Skibbe, 2006)

8. Profile 2: 23% Profile 3: 24% Profile 5: 23% alphabet rhyme print concepts name writing grammar grammar vocab vocab (Cabell, Konold, Justice et al, 2008)

9. ProgrammaticFindings Observational Studies Hypothesis Generating Feasibility Studies Hypothesis Confirming Efficacy Studies Effectiveness Studies Fey, 2004

10. Observational Work To identify specific mechanisms through which children learn about print within the shared storybook-reading context (hypothesis generating) Focused on shared storybook-reading context based on rich theoretical descriptions to date

11. Storybooks and Early Literacy Development

12. Sample Studies • Describe mothers ask about print and their relationship to children’s print knowledge(Ezell & Justice, 1998) • Describe the verbal comments children make about print when reading “print-salient” storybooks(Ezell & Justice, 2000) • Describe preschool teachers’ references to print for various genre (Zucker & Justice, 2008) • Describe the visual attention children pay towards various aspects of storybooks(Justice & Lankford, 2003; Justice, Skibbe, Canning, & Lankford, 2005; Justice, Pullen, & Pence, 2008) • Describe children’s verbal responsiveness to maternal questions about print on various topics (Justice, Mattingly, Ezell, & Bakeman, 2002)

13. Some Findings Mothers make virtually no references to print when reading with their 4-year-old children (even for print-salient storybooks) Maternal rate of five types of print references when reading Spot Bakes a Cake; Ezell & Justice (2000)

14. Some Findings PreK teachers use a greater frequency of print references (particularly to letters and words) when reading very print-salient books Rate of print references positively associated with indicators of quality (open questions, r = .63) Raw frequency of print references for three high print salient books versus three low print salient books; Zucker & Justice, 2008

15. Some Findings Children make virtually no verbal references to print when they are read to by parents (even for print-salient storybooks) Proportion of child verbalizations focused on print for Spot Bakes a Cake; Ezell & Justice (2000)

16. Some Findings Children rarely look at print when they are read to, even for print-salient books But – differences in print fixations (17 vs 7) may add up (gap of 4,000 fixations on print in one year of daily reading) Proportion of child fixations on print for The Very Hungry Caterpillar and Spot Bakes a Cake; Justice et al., 2005

17. Some Findings Children look at print much more often when adults nonverbally and verbally reference print Differences in print fixations for print referencing style may add up to 18,000 in a year of daily reading Proportion of child fixations on print for various Spot titles; Justice et al., 2008

18. Main Hypothesis Generated • Children’s contacts with print vary along a continuum • Many children’s experience with print is at “little contact” end of continuum – at home and in classroom little contact much contact

19. Feasibility and Efficacy Work To test potential causal mechanisms under controlled settings Feasibility/early efficacy studies may focus on determining whether hypothesized intervention appears to have desired effects, whether fidelity can be achieved, and what outcome measures are most useful

20. Print Referencing Intervention: The Package • Scope: • print meaning, print organization, words, letters • Goal attack: • horizontal (within session) and cyclical (between sessions) • Materials: • trade storybooks with print-salient features • Intensity: about 2-3 references per minute using: • Comments and questions (verbals) • Balance of evocative and non-evocative techniques • Tracking and pointing (nonverbals)

21. Scope and Sequence

22. Sample Findings: Efficacy Work • Large effects on print concepts and concept of word and moderate effects for PA when parents implement at home for 4 weeks (Justice & Ezell, 2000) • Large effects on print concepts and moderate effects on alphabet knowledge when researcher implements in Head Start for 8 weeks (Justice & Ezell, 2002) • Parents who can implement intervention at home can do so with fidelity and have positive feelings, but many parents attrite(Justice & Ezell, 2002; Justice & Skibbe, 2008)

23. Example of Child Outcomes Study Gain Scores (%correct) on 5 measures Justice & Ezell, 2002

24. Effectiveness Work:Study 1(PreK Targeted) Foci: effectiveness, implementation as moderator, child responsiveness, dosage High dosage regular reading: 30 week business as usual reading program (120 sessions: 4X week) High dosage program: 30 week print referencing program (120 sessions: 4X week) Low dosage program: 30 week print referencing program (60 sessions: 2X week)

25. Preliminary Findings: Cohort 1 Daily reading vs Daily reading with Print Referencing Justice, Kaderavek, Fan, Sofka, & Hunt, in press

26. Effectiveness Work:Study 2 (ECSE) Foci: effectiveness for SLI, peer effects, parent and teacher implementation, child responsiveness Classroom based regular reading, home based regular reading (120 classroom, 60 home) Classroom based print referencing, home based regular reading (120 classroom, 60 home) Classroom based print referencing, home based print referencing (120 classroom, 60 home)

27. Thanks! justice.57@osu.edu