Download
1 / 32
320 likes | 440 Views
Let's Pretend An Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income Kindergartners Ann Cale Kruger Educational Psychology and Special Education. The Georgia Wolf Trap Project A collaboration of the Alliance Theatre, Fulton County Schools, and Georgia State University
E N D
Let's PretendAn Intervention to Enhance Language Development in Low-Income KindergartnersAnn Cale KrugerEducational Psychology and Special Education
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
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
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
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.
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
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%
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
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
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
Vocabulary Mean Number Per Story
Sentences Mean Number Per Story
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.
PretestOn 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).
PosttestOn 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)
Writing Quality Percentage of Students with Improvement over Time
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
Report Card GradesFirst Grade (Cohorts 1& 2)Special Needs Only
CRCT Language ArtsFirst Grade (Cohorts 1& 2)Special Needs Only
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
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
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)
