Top Banner
Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth Kaminski Dynamic Measurement Group, Center for RTI in Early Childhood Kate Horst PreK Minnesota Reading Corps Coordinator and Trainer Scott McConnell Univ. of Minnesota, Center for RTI in Early Childhood
25

Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Mar 27, 2015

Download

Documents

Robert Ross
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool

NASP, 2011• Lisa H. Stewart

– Minnesota State University Moorhead

• Ruth Kaminski– Dynamic Measurement Group, Center for RTI in Early Childhood

• Kate Horst– PreK Minnesota Reading Corps Coordinator and Trainer

• Scott McConnell– Univ. of Minnesota, Center for RTI in Early Childhood

Page 2: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Increasing Vocabulary Knowledge in Preschoolers

through Repeated Read AloudsDr. Lisa H. Stewart, Sara Heimdahl, Tara

Hanson, Jessica Remhoff, & Lyndsey RoyMinnesota State University Moorhead

[email protected], February 2011

Page 3: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Why study repeated read alouds?• Vocabulary is important! Even before Kindergarten children’s

vocabulary growth varies greatly by SES and exposure (Hart & Risely, 1995).

• Repeated Reading of the same book across multiple days using dialogic reading techniques may be an effective way of teaching new vocabulary to preschoolers (McGee & Schickedanz, 2007)

• Existing research on repeated read-alouds and vocabulary has been done primarily with school-aged children and the type and amount of vocabulary enrichment has not been systematically examined, especially in preschool.

Page 4: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Hypotheses

– Repeated read-alouds will lead to gains in story-specific vocabulary in at-risk preschoolers, including ESL children.

– Children will benefit more from repeated read-alouds with added vocabulary enrichment compared to typical repeated read alouds.

– Vocabulary gains made will be retained over time

Page 5: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Setting & Participants• ½ day Head Start Classrooms • Already used repeated read alouds in small

groups in Tier 1 four days a week (M-H)– 69 preschoolers ages ages 3-5 (40 boys, 29 girls,

n=18 ESL), low SES families– 5 classrooms, 10 Read Aloud Groups, 9 teachers

• 5 lead teachers , 3 asst teachers, 1 Minn. Reading Corps community members

• All had SEEDS training and used a (modified 4-day) MRC repeated read aloud checklist

Page 6: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Repeated Read Aloud “lesson plan”

Note: Minnesota Reading Corps 2009-10 version, modified to 4 day lesson plan for setting in this study

Page 7: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Materials• 3 Children’s picture books chosen with the help of the

Head Start teachers: – Sheep in a Shop, We’re Going on a Bear Hunt, Dragon Dance– One per week, read Monday-Thursday– ALL teachers were told which 8 words to target

• Examiner-made vocabulary tests – Clip art pictures of 15 words per book (n=45 total words)– Words typically unknown by preschoolers, but not too difficult– Standardized directions, prompting and scoring

• Similar to the IGDIs Picture Naming Fluency task but with some prompts and no time cut off

Page 8: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Procedure• Two repeated read aloud (RRA) groups

– 5 Typical (Moderately Enriched) RRA groups– 5 Highly Enriched RRA groups with training and

focus on extra vocabulary enrichment• Training= One 60-90 minute session with examples,

role playing, discussion• Enrichment= Increased intentionality and emphasis on

the 8 target words across all 4 days of read aloud• Goal = 4 “enrichment” activities per word per day

Page 9: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Vocabulary Enrichment TrainingTeacher-Led Modeling

– Point to it in Illustrations/Picture/Objects– Use a Synonym – Elaborate on Meaning: Explanations/Definitions- can “embed”

these just like they are part of the story– Use it in a Sentence; Connect to everyday life with examples – Talk about things that are similar but aren’t the target word

and how they are the same and different– Gestures/ “acting” it out– Pausing/emphasizing/repeating– Preview before starting story– Review after story is over

Page 10: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Vocabulary Enrichment Training, Cont’d

More Interactive with Kids… – Discussions, Questions, ThinkPairShare – Illustration challenge/ Use of Props– Interactive Word play/comparing word meanings, sounds,

etc – Chime in/choral story telling/pronunciation practice– Kids act out words/Draw/Write the pictures and/or words– Preview (What is it? bag, how many words can you

remember, show picture/act out, write/say)– Review (Tell me about, story vocab retell, etc)

Page 11: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Procedure, Cont’d

• Vocabulary pre-test (approx 45 terms)• 8 target vocabulary terms from each of the three books

(lowest number of correct responses on pre-test)

• Three weeks of repeated read-aloud • Small groups (approx 6-9 kids)• Typical or with extra vocabulary enrichment

– ALL teachers given the 8 target words each week, difference was training and intentional emphasis on increasing vocab enrichment

• Each teacher was videotaped once per week

• Vocabulary post-test (same as pre-test)• Delayed test at end of the year (4 weeks later)

Page 12: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Target VocabularyTarget Vocabulary Terms by Book

Week One: Sheep in a Shop

by Nancy Shaw illustrated by Margot Apple

Week Two: We’re Going on a Bear

Hunt by Michael Rosen,

illustrated by Helen Oxenbury

Week Three: Dragon Dance

by Joan Holub, illustrated by Benrei Huang

1) Ribbon 2) Racket 3) Piggy Bank 4) Bag 5) Penny 6) Rocket 7) Hopping 8) Sheep

1) Forest 2) Covers 3) Tiptoe 4) River 5) Splashing 6) Under 7) Storm 8) Cave

1) Blossoms 2) Envelope 3) Feast 4) Chinese 5) Parade 6) Chopsticks 7) Juggler 8) Fireworks

Page 13: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Results: All RRA Combined• Overall M=49.6 target word enrichment activities per book, range

= 30-74. Good level of enrichment even in the “typical” groups.• Significant pre-post gains in target vocabulary, t (68)=9.924,

p<.001). Average gain was 3.61 target words. • Book by book analysis indicated statistically significant gains in

target vocabulary for each of the three books, showing the results were more likely due to the technique used and were not book or vocabulary specific.

• Gains were maintained on delayed post-test.• Overall these results indicate repeated read alouds can have a

positive impact on children’s vocabulary. • Limited, pre-post, no-control group design

Page 14: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.
Page 15: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Example Classroom Pre Post by Kid (Note: 1 Typical and 1 Enriched in this Room)

Page 16: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

ESL Results

• ESL students made significant gains on target vocabulary from pre (M=4.89, range 0-13) to post (M=7.78, range=0-17) testing, t (17)=4.312, p <.001. Average gain =2.89 words.

• Although the ESL children did have lower pre and post test scores compared to non-ESL peers, they benefited from the repeated read alouds.

• Reinforces earlier research indicating even children with limited English skills can benefit from a high quality read aloud and there does not appear to be a certain level of English needed before the children can pick up information about the words in the books.

Page 17: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Pre Post Target Vocabulary Gains by ESL Status

Page 18: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Did extra vocabulary enrichment make a difference?

• Originally 5 groups in each condition (typical, enriched)

• Video data indicated 1 teacher in the enriched condition was substantially lower on enrichment activities than the others and 1 teacher in the typical condition was substantially higher than the others in that condition

• Removed these 2 from the analysis for a more clear test of the hypothesis, leaving 4 groups in each condition

Page 19: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Note: T1 taught both AM and PM read aloud

Page 20: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Results by Group

* Total represents all 10 Repeated Read Aloud Groups and 69 participants. Group results represent the 4 Highest Enriched Groups compared to the lowest 4 Typical (Moderately Enriched) Groups

PreTest- Target Words

(24 possible)

PostTest- Target Words (24 possible)

Typical Group n=27

M=6.44 SD=3.97

Range= 1-18

M= 9.52 SD= 5.50

Range= 1-23

Enriched Group n=28

M= 6.79 SD= 3.96

Range= 0-15

M= 11.57 SD= 4.89

Range=0-21

Total* n=69

M=6.67 SD= 3.86

Range= 0-18

M= 10.28 SD= 5.13

Range= 0-23

Page 21: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Typical vs. Enriched Group Results

• Using an ANCOVA with pre-test scores as the covariate, the main effect for extra vocabulary enrichment was significant F(1,54)=4.522, p=.038– Typical=3.1 words gained – Enriched= 4.8 words gained

Page 22: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.
Page 23: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Bottom Line 1

We don’t know if repeated read alouds are better or worse than other ways to teach vocabulary

BUT

Good repeated read alouds meant good things for at-risk preschool kid vocabulary growth in Tier 1!

Page 24: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Bottom Line 2Providing a small amount of additional training and emphasis on vocabulary enrichment increased vocabulary gains even more

Note: 1 Teacher out of 5 did not show as high of a level of Enrichment after Training

Page 25: Explicit and Intentional Vocabulary and Early Literacy Interventions in Preschool NASP, 2011 Lisa H. Stewart – Minnesota State University Moorhead Ruth.

Some thoughts…• RRA could also be used in Tier 2 to teach and reinforce early

literacy skills including vocab– doing this in PreK and K right now in PreK Minn Rdg Corps

• How typical was the typical repeated read aloud?– All teachers were provided the target words and knew this

was a vocabulary study– All teachers had had SEEDS early literacy training

• Did not script or manipulate specific types of vocab enrichment (e.g., embedded vs. extended, Text Talk)- Pro and con?

• Did not use RRA as part of a classroom theme• Did the extra vocab enrichment come at the expense of other

early literacy activities?