Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress International Special Education Conference Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity? 1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland

home about the conference programme registration accommodation contact

Supporting Emergent Literacy:
A Collaborative, On-Site Teacher Education Approach

Mary Louise Hemmeter and Jeanette McCollum
jmccollu@uiuc.edu

Rationale . The process of becoming literate, of being able to understand and employ the written symbols of our culture, begins very early, well before a child starts formal schooling (Lyon, 2002). Recently, more attention has been given to emergent literacy, to how literacy develops over time as young children acquire language, learn about their world, come to understand the functions of print, and develop a love of books. Much is now known about emergent literacy, including the skills that children must develop and the environments and strategies that support development of these skills (IRA/NAEYC, 1998).

The process of acquiring these skills starts very early, well before a child begins formal schooling (Lyon, 2002), within the context of the environments in which young children spend their time (e.g., home, child care). Recent research has demonstrated that reading ability during the school years can be predicted even before a child enters kindergarten (Lyon, 2002). As young as age three, children can be differentiated on the basis of literacy acquisition (De Temple & Tabors, 1995), and scores are remarkably table. For example, 1st grade reading scores can be predicted by scores in kindergarten, and 4th grade scores by scores can be predicted in 1st grade (Juel, 1996). Consequences accumulate over time in attitudes toward reading, and in opportunities to learn from reading. (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001). The majority of children in special education are referred based on lack of progress in reading, and this is also the primary reason for referral to remedial services and for retention. In the U.S., half of the children in special education are diagnosed with learning disabilities; of these children, the majority are there because they have not learned to read. Ultimately, poor reading can limit children's access to many economic and social opportunities.

A number of factors place children at risk for difficulty in learning to read, the most powerful of which is family income. For example, young children who are from low income families are at greater risk of having poor skills in emergent literacy and are less likely to begin school prepared to learn to read (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998). Lower family income also limits opportunity such that having a lower income influences types of child care, with lower income children being cared for in lower quality centers, with less trained staff. Lower income children are also more likely to have parents who are poor readers, or who do not understand their own roles in supporting emergent literacy.

Child as well as environmental factors predict later reading; thus, having a disability may also place children at risk of not developing skills in emergent literacy. Lyon (2002) noted that 25% of children who are not from low income families also enter school without the necessary foundations. Among these are children with disabilities. In the U.S., most preschoolers served under Part B of the IDEA quality for services because of a speech and language delay, and in young children with other disabilities, a speech and language delay is almost always present as well. Having a disability may also mean less opportunity to learn incidentally and to profit from literacy-related materials. For example, even though print materials may be available in the home, children with disabilities often have fewer opportunities to participate in print activities (Marvin & Wright, 1997).

Based on this information, attention has been focused on early, emergent literacy, and on the importance of establishing programs that promote emergent literacy skills in young children even prior to kindergarten. The National Reading Panel (2000) and the National Reading Council (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998) have both called for early identification and intervention for all children at risk for reading failure.

Because research on how literacy develops from birth until school entry is relatively recent, many current preschool teachers have not been adequately prepared to support and promote emergent literacy development in young children. As professional development is designed to assist preschool teachers to gain this knowledge, close attention needs to be given to the professional development approaches that will be used. In the U.S., despite the fact that much is known about the characteristics of training that are most likely to influence teachers' behavior in the classroom, professional development often takes the form of short-term inservice training workshops provided by outside experts. While various strategies can be built into inservice training workshops to facilitate transfer of training, longer term technical assistance that is responsive to each teacher's own skill level and that makes sense within the context of his/her classroom is more likely to be implemented in the classroom (Wolfe & Snyder, 1997). Effective adult learning is based on elements such as positive climate, mutual planning, diagnosis of learning needs, translation of needs into objectives, management of learning experience, and evaluation of outcomes. When adults engage in the process of decision making or activity planning, they tend to feel committed to the decision or activity and motivated to address and complete it. Adult learning theory assumes that a climate of collaboration and support accelerates adults’ learning. The sense of control over their own participation reinforces the learners' willingness to apply new knowledge to their own practice. Research is needed on training strategies that will help early childhood teachers learn and use teaching strategies that support young children's learning of knowledge and skills related to emergent literacy.

The purpose of the current study was to assess the effects of a collaborative, individualized training model on promoting early childhood teachers' competence across three clusters of teaching skills that promote emergent literacy. The primary research question was: "To what extent will the training package (comprised of introductory information, collaborative curriculum development, and ongoing observation and feedback) impact teachers' use of emergent literacy teaching strategies?" While not controlled by the experimental design, we were also interested in assessing children's skills before and after the intervention.

Method . The five participants in this single-subject multiple-baseline study included 3 teachers in child care centers and 2 in public school preschool programs for young children at risk based on family income or on the presence of a disability. All but one classroom served primarily low income children, and two of the classrooms had children with identified disabilities. All teachers were female and had a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a field related to early childhood education. All teachers had previously taken courses that included a focus on literacy, and all had participated in previous inservice training related to early literacy. Two teachers were certified public school teachers. Experience ranged from 2-26 years. One teacher was Asian and the rest Caucasian. Fifty-eight children participated in the study, with a participation rate across the 5 classrooms ranging from 38% to 100%. Children ranged in age from 3.25 to 5.42 years (mean=4.49 years).

Emergent literacy skills have been categorized and/or described in a number of ways (Neuman, Copple & Bredekamp, 2000; Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998; USDOE, 2001). However, there is general agreement that at least the following are important: (a) excitement and love of language and print materials; (b) ability to comprehend and gain meaning from print materials (which includes vocabulary and conceptual knowledge; comprehension and use of narrative forms such as description and explanation; schemas for participating in literacy events, including listening, talking, explaining, and questioning); and (c) phonological awareness, or the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate the sound structure of early language (which includes phonemic awareness, phonics, and understanding that particular letters are used to represent specific sounds).

For the purposes of this study, teaching skills related to emergent literacy were grouped into three logically related clusters:

• Cluster A - Comprehension/Vocabulary/Narration
• Cluster B - Phonological Awareness/Alphabetic Principle
• Cluster C - Print Concepts/Written Language

The design of the study was a single-subject, multiple baseline across clusters, replicated across 5 teachers. Checklists of sub-skills were developed for each cluster and were used for data collection, with percent of skills observed comprising the data. Skill Cluster A focused on strategies that teachers would use during book reading. These included (a) introducing the content of a book, (b) talking about the physical features of the book, (c) sustaining interest, (d) asking thought questions, (e) making comments that expand the child’s information, (f) involving children in reviewing/closing the story, and (g) relating the story concept/vocabulary to play center(s) that are available or to other future activities/experiences. Skill Cluster B addressed development of sound awareness and the alphabetic principle, and included (a) emphasizing characteristics of letters and sounds using age-appropriate activities, (b) demonstrating/emphasizing the characteristics of sounds/words, such as rhyme, beginning, middle, or ending sounds, (c) asking children to identify characteristics of sounds/words, such as segmentation of word into syllables or blending of sounds into a word, (d) asking children to demonstrate responses such as producing rhyming words, and (e) talking about letters in age appropriate ways. Skill Cluster C, addressing development of print concepts and written language, included (a) using print to represent ideas, (b) pointing out relationships between pictures/objects and the associated print, (c) encouraging use of writing in play, (d) pointing out print conventions, (e) modeling how to use writing tools, and (f) using words related to writing/reading.

Three phases were included for each teacher - baseline, intervention, and maintenance. The order of intervention on the three clusters of skills was counterbalanced across teachers. Each teacher selected the segment of her schedule in which she wanted to practice each cluster; this also became the setting in which the particular cluster was observed. Baseline data collection for each of the 3 skill clusters began at the same time. For each teacher, baseline data were collected until the teacher had 3 days in a row of a non-ascending baseline on the first skill cluster, after which intervention was applied. A similar process was followed for each of the other two skill clusters once criterion was reached on the cluster being trained. Data were collected 2-3 times per week on each of the 5 teachers over an approximately 4 month period, across the three phases of the study. During the intervention phase, one of two trainers initially met with the teacher to introduce and discuss the skill cluster and associated potential child outcomes and to review examples of the skills using observations from the teacher's own baseline data. The trainer and teacher also discussed other ideas for how the skills in the cluster might be used. This initial training, repeated for each skill cluster, lasted approximately 20-30 minutes for each teacher. This same procedure was followed after each observation in a briefer feedback session; during these sessions, teachers were also shown graphs of their data; these sessions lasted approximately 10-15 minutes. Intervention was continued until the teacher successfully used at least 80% of the skills for a minimum of 3 out of   5 sessions. If no progress was seen for 3 observations, teachers were provided with a more intensive "booster" training session of approximately 30 minutes. During the maintenance phase for each skill cluster, data were collected at least once out of every 3 sessions. The total study lasted approximately 4 months, with intervention time lasting approximately 2 months.

Reliability was established at over 80% before initiation of the study. Reliability checks were then conducted on a minimum of 20% of the observations of each teacher, with an overage reliability of over 90%. Fidelity of intervention observations were conducted by a 3rd researcher on over 50% of the sessions; fidelity was 100% for all training sessions observed.

Child performance was measured pre and post intervention using a variety of individually administered measures related to the child outcomes associated with the targeted teacher behaviors. These included: (a) Individual Growth Development Indicators (IGDIs) - expressive vocabulary; beginning sounds; rhyming (total number of correct responses within specific period of time); and (b) book handling knowledge (Clay).

Results . Individual graphs were used to track acquisition of the 3 teaching skill clusters for each of the 5 teachers. All 5 teachers were able to attain criterion on each skill cluster. In addition, the single-subject design clearly demonstrated that the intervention influenced attainment of each cluster. A summary of the average percent use of each skill cluster across the 5 teachers is shown in Table 1 for each phase. As a group, these 5 teachers demonstrated clear gains from baseline to intervention as well as from baseline to maintenance, for each skill cluster.

Table 1 - Average Use of Literacy Skills Across Three Phases of the Design (All Teachers)

In addition, paired t-tests for each child measured yielded significant differences from pre-test to post-test on each of the dependent variables (picture naming, beginning sounds, rhyming, book handling). While this can not be attributed directly to the intervention because of the use of a pre-post design with respect to children's data, we feel relatively confident that it was the intervention that led to these changes because (a) the pre-test was conducted in February, after the children had already been in school for since September, and (b) the period between pre and post-test was brief. A more direct measure of the effects of this intervention on children's learning is currently being conducted via a randomized group intervention across 13 classrooms.

Discussion . There are several important implications from this study. First, it made sense to focus on one skill cluster at a time, rather than addressing all skills at the same time. It took each teacher some time to learn each cluster, and this was dependent on repeated, focused feedback and collaborative planning. This finding is congruent with training literature indicating that short-term inservice training is unlikely to lead to acquisition of complex skills. Second, ongoing support appeared to be critical for acquisition of the skills, particularly for the less experienced teachers. The researchers/trainers engaged in ongoing problem solving with teachers with respect to how the skills could be embedded within their ongoing classroom routines and activities. Further, it was necessary to individualize this process to match each teacher's level of understanding and skill. Third, it was very helpful to teachers to see examples from their own data of what they were already doing in relation to each skill. This provided exemplars of the particular skill set, as well as letting teachers know that the project was building on their strengths. Fourth, we also learned that some skills are easier to learn than others. For example, skills embedded into shared book reading were fairly easy because all teachers already regularly read books to children, whereas print concepts were more difficult because none of the teachers initially provided opportunities for children to learn about print. Fifth, using the teacher's own data for immediate feedback was a great motivator for the teachers. Looking at graphs of their data provided the impetus to focus more intensely on some particularly difficult skill, and to think consciously about integrating it into their interactions with children. Finally, systematic planning was necessary in order for teachers to be able to embed some of the skills into their repertoires. For example, teachers who had not previously provided learning opportunities related to print concepts had to set aside time in their schedules for such activities and think about what they would do and say during those activities to provide children with practice with print concepts.

Six months after her participation in this study a child care teacher e-mailed us the following: "I have been using the information learned from the project with my new group of children and they have taken off. Several children from last year are even beginning to read on their own. The project has made a huge difference in the way I run my class and train my team."

References

Burns, S., Griffin, P., & Snow, C. (1999). Starting out right: A guide to promoting children's reading success. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

De Temple, J.M., & Tabors, P.O. (1995). Styles of interaction during a book reading task: Implications for literacy intervention with low-income families. In K.Q. Hinchman, D.J. Leu, & C.K. Kinzer (Eds.), Perspectives on literacy research and practice, 44 th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 265-271).   Chicago, IL: The National Reading Conference

International Reading Association (IRA) and National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) (May, 1998). Overview of Learning to Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children. Position Statement. Washington, DC: Author.

Lyon, G.R. (April, 2002). Summary comments. A Summit on Early Childhood Cognitive Development. Washington, DC: USDOE. (http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/earlychildhood/summit/lyon.html).

Marvin, C.A., & Wright, D. (1997). Literacy socialization in the homes of preschool children. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in the Schools, 28, 154-163.

National Reading Panel (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm).

Neuman, S.B., Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. Washington: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Snow, C.E., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Committee on Learning Research and Practice, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

U.S. Department of Education (USDOE)(2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Washington, DC: Author.

Whitehurst, G.J., & Lonigan, C.J. (2001). Emergent literacy: Development from pre-readers to readers. In Neuman, S., & Dickinson, D. (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy development. (pp. 11-29) New York: Guilford.

Wolfe, B. L., & Snyder, P. (1997). Follow-up strategies: Ensuring that instruction makes a difference. In P. J. Winton, J. A. McCollum, & C. Catlett (Eds.), Reforming personnel preparation in early intervention: Issues, models, and practical strategies (pp. 173-190). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact