Evidence-Based Language Teaching Practices in Head Start Preschools: A Professional Development Model

M. Jeanne Wilcox, Kathleen M. Murphy, Shereen Thomas, &

Catherine K. Bacon

Infant Child Research ProgramsArizona State University,Tempe, Arizona

Contact: kmurphy@asu.edu or mjwilcox@asu.edu

Promising Trends & Current Needs

Scientific inquiries have yielded a broad base of effective language facilitation strategies

The early childhood classroom can be an optimal setting for promoting first and second language acquisition

Profiles of early childhood classrooms, including Head Start, indicate limited teaching behavior that supports language development

Substantial gaps between existing and emerging scientific knowledge and the realities of the preschool classroom language environment

Purpose

Develop and implement action research methods to promote evidence-based language teaching practices in Head Start preschool classrooms

Evaluate outcomes in terms of changes in teacher and child behavior

Educational Practice

Applied Research

Formal & Experiential Knowledge

Formal & Experiential Knowledge

OptimalAssessment

andIntervention

Practices

Science-Practice Model

Specific Research Questions

To what extent does an action research model promote the use of validated language facilitation practices by Head Start classroom personnel?

Relative to questions #1 to what extent can changes in the children’s language behavior be documented?

What is the perceived value and feasibility of participation research methods? In particular, does action research facilitate a sense of commitment and ownership? Does it actually allow for adjustments to accommodate practice needs? Does it result in interpretable and useful findings?

Experimental Design

6 experimental and 6 control classrooms participated Random assignment by program Typical child subjects were selected by lottery across the participating

class (pool of 206 children) All child subjects with language disorders were included in the research A total of 23 teachers and teaching assistants (TA) were videotaped

during free play. There was one Spanish and one English speaking adult model per room. Intervention provided to experimental classes during the school year Control classes were provided with a placebo (i.e., the experimenters

spent the same amount of time with control teachers as they did with experimental teachers)

Child Participants(Sample Sizes and Ages)

ExperimentalN CA (mos)

ControlN CA (mos)

Native English Sp.

Typical

Atypical

Native Spanish Sp

Typical

Atypical

17

1

23

9

54.82

48.00

54.70

55.22

15

6

17

4

52.60

50.50

52.88

53.75

Procedures: Experimental Classes

Biweekly team meetings were held for all classroom personnel (teachers, aides, special educators, other support personnel) and the university researchers

The team discussions focused on language teaching practices, language development, and sharing of ideas to implement in the curriculum.

The classroom observation tool emerged from these discussions at the biweekly team meetings, researcher observations of the classrooms, and established principles of language development.

Each teacher & TA was observed monthly by an SLP Researcher, using the developed classroom observation tool (Biweekly observations of each class)

Following each observation, the teachers received feedback from the SLP on use of targeted strategies. The feedback emphasized use of effective strategies, and collaborative “brainstorming”

Procedures: Control Classes

Control participants were also provided with biweekly meetings. Those in attendance were the same categories of personnel as described for the experimental classes. The teachers were encouraged to use the biweekly meeting time as desired. Personnel were told that the University researcher participants were experts in language and promoting language development and would be available as a resource as needed. The University personnel answered any questions that were directly addressed to them but did not initiate any topics.

Classroom observations were conducted biweekly. However, no feedback sessions were held.

Child Language Goals For Experimental Classes

Developing personal storytelling skills

Increasing complex reasoning

Talking beyond the “here and now”

Increasing peer interactions

Learning new words and concepts

Second language acquisition

Language Teaching Strategies to Achieve Goals

Creating opportunities for communication Teacher responses to increase child

discourse Facilitating peer interactions Teaching new vocabulary Supporting second language acquisition Overall interaction style

Developing Personal Storytelling Skills

• What? • Relate events with a beginning-middle-

end.• Relate events with a specific sequence

of events related by time or causal action.

• Include the story elements.

• Why?• Important to be able to communicate a

personal event with details to another person who is unfamiliar with the event and was not there to witness the event for himself/ herself.

• Link to later writing stories and essays.• Increases general length and

complexity of language.

• When?• One-on-one; during meal time,

sharing opportunities during circle

• How?• Being an interested conversational

partner.

• Model personal stories.

• Provide opportunities to practice.

• Support children’s efforts: expand, probe/ prompt, scaffold attempts, make comments, ask questions.

• Practice retelling familiar stories.

Increasing Complex Reasoning

• What?• Be able to provide

explanations,• make best guesses or

predictions, • make interpretations and

judgements, relate and compare experiences with remote events to increase understanding .

• Why?• Basis of analytical thinking

and the scientific method.

• When? • Facilitated discussions in small

group activities, hands on demonstrations to teach concepts in science and math.

• How?• Ask open-ended questions.• Comment on problems and

problem solving opportunities.• Describe actions as performed.• Add written language and

numeracy.• Tie current classroom experience/

observation to remote events and experiences.

Talking Beyond The “Here and Now”

• What?• Talking beyond here and

now; extending beyond concrete thought.

• Why?• Facilitates abstract thought

and perspective-taking.

• When?• In the dramatic play area

during free choice (best); add pretend dimension to concrete play.

• How?• Become the ultimate

playmate—have fun!• Adopt pretend role with

script during play.• Create interesting

environments for play by periodically changing/ adding props to centers.

Facilitating Peer Interactions

• What?• Peers talking to each other,

sharing and requesting information.

• Why?• Peers provide great language

learning practice opportunity• Strong communication skills

are critical for later school success.

• When?• During mealtime and free

play.

• How?• Be sensitive to children’s

nonverbal attempts to join an interaction.

• Invite children to join group.• Prompt a child to ask another

for help or an object instead of fulfilling a child’s request.

• Encourage group discussion by making comments, asking for opinions and questions.

• Don’t be afraid to assign roles during pretend play to make it easy for someone to join ongoing play.

Learning New Vocabulary Words and Concepts

• What?• Increase vocabulary

and general concept knowledge.

• Why?• Important foundation

for learning.

• When?• New concepts and

core words during group/circle settings; spontaneously when opportunity arises.

• How?• Define words verbally; Provide

examples or comparisons.• Demonstrate concepts/words with prop

use• Incorporate gestures.• Use synonyms or vary word use to

expand word choice.• Label to novel actions and objects.• Identify opportunities for children to

expand relational and categorical concepts;introduce appropriate words to assist children in making these relationships and in organizing thoughts.

Second Language Acquisition

• What?• Improve understanding and

use of English• Learn social dialogue and

routines to improve success in basic social scenarios.

• Why?• Increased proficiency in

English is fundamental for later academic success.

• When?• Throughout daily routine;

adopt English-only use in selected activities.

• How?• COMPREHENSION: • Use English and reduce rate of

speech.• Rephrase to simplify message.• Incorporate redundancy in key

phrases and words to improve message clarity.

• Translate when several other attempts fail.

• EXPRESSION:• Encourage use of English• Praise attempts.• Repeat, expand and/or correctly

restate children’s utterances.

Pre-Post Child Measures: Standard Tests

Preschool Language Scale –3 All children given the PLS-Receptive pre/post PLS-Expressive given to children in their respective native

languages at pre/post PLS-Expressive given to Native Spanish speakers in English and

Spanish at post-intervention PPVT-III Expressive Vocabulary Test (English) (given to all

children who established a basal with no more than one error on the PPVT)

Expressive One Word Picture Vocabulary Test – Spanish\

Pre-Post Child Measures: Language Samples

Pre-Post experimenter-child language samples (audio-taped)Experimenter had native fluency in each

child’s native languageStandard set of toys were providedFor the Spanish speakers, pre-test

language samples were obtained only in Spanish, post-test samples were obtained in Spanish and English

Measures Derived from Language Samples (based on 100 utterances per child)

MLU (words) Total number of words in sample Number of different words Type-Token Ratio

Pre-Post Measures: Teachers

Pre-and post-test videotaped samples were collected of the teachers to evaluate use of strategies to promote language development

The videotaped samples were independently analyzed by research assistants trained to identify teacher use of language teaching strategies. 20-min segments were selected from pre and post-intervention videotapes.

Inter-coder reliability of 90% was achieved.

Results

Teachers in the experimental classrooms demonstrated greater use of specific language enhancement strategies

The children in the experimental classrooms showed significantly greater gains in their language scores as measured on the Preschool Language Scale-3 and the EVT. No differences were noted on the other standard measures or on any of the measures derived from the language samples.

There were no effects for disability. Children with and without language disorders benefited equally in the experimental classrooms, and made similar gains in the maturational control classes.

Both first and second language gains were observed in both groups; however, the experimental group demonstrated greater change over time.

Changes in Teacher Behavior(Mean Frequency per 20-min)

Behavior Pre-Intervention Post-Intervention

Exp Control Exp Control

Creating Opp. 14.16 11.04 28.66* 14.07

Teacher Resp. 87.08 69.09 108.16* 67.72

Peer Interaction 15.08 8.36 27.25* 11.09

Teach Vocab. 36.75 28.27 46.33* 23.72

2ndLang. Acq. 11.41 9.81 16.25* 10.72

Total Enhancing 164.50* 123.18 226.66* 121.54

Negative 5.75* 1.63 0.83 3.09*

*p<.05

Pre-Post Child Test Data

Test/Group Pre-Intervention Post-Intervention

Exp Control Exp Control

PLS-3 Rec.

PLS-3 Exp. ENG

English Speakers

Spanish Speakers

67.18

96.39

NA

68.86

79.95

NA

79.12*

114.56*

56.72

71.76

85.71

54.10

PLS-3 Exp. SPA

Spanish Speakers

83.34 90.43 97.06* 94.48

PPVT 66.16 69.17 74.50 73.43

EVT 93.60 88.76 108.10* 96.43

EOWVT SPA

Spanish Speakers 85.09 83.48 91.41 87.62

Note: *=p<.05

Teachers’ Subjective Impressions of Benefit

Teachers reported that they learned: More about language development How all the different areas in the classroom can be used for

language learning To increase their expectations of language and literacy skills for

preschoolers Activities that teachers felt were beneficial

Regular meetings to plan and share ideas for language learning in their classrooms

Feedback from the classroom observation tool as to how to increase their use of language facilitation practices

Changing small group activities to center around one book for an entire week

Adding opportunities for children to tell personal stories during lunch

The action research procedures were highly successful in modifying language teaching behavior in the experimental classrooms.

Changes in teaching behavior were accompanied by children’s language gains as measured by standard tests.

Language gains were not apparent (beyond maturation) for measures derived from the language samples. This may mean: We need to rethink ways to measure change when analyzing

children’s language samples, especially for bilingual speakers. Perhaps the biggest change was in more global aspects of

language (reception and expression) and would not be expected to captured in specific language sample measures.

Conclusions

Conclusions (continued)

Children with typical and atypical language development (Spanish and English speakers) benefited equally from the enhanced language teaching: It would seem that SLPs served as a resource for teachers to

address the language needs of all the children in the classroom (including those with typical language development)

For the Spanish speaking children identified as language-impaired, it is possible that they may have been more typical than not, given widely acknowledged difficulties with accurate identification and the fact that they were learning a second language. This possibility would account for the fact that their language gains were comparable to their typical peers.

For further information, please visit our web site.

http://icrp.asu.eduInfant Child Research Programs

Arizona State UniversityP.O. Box 871908

Tempe, Arizona 85287-1908PHONE (480) 965-9396

FAX (480) 965-0965