LIVING ARTS: SOCIAL INNOVATION FUND GRANT FINAL REPORT YEAR 4 (2015-2016)

SUBMITTED BY:Mary Lou Greene, M.F.A. Shlomo Sawilowsky, Ph.D.

Executive Summary: Living Arts’ Detroit Wolf Trap Early Learning Through the Arts program

implemented Wolf Trap Early Learning residencies for 69 classrooms of Head Start students

in 2015-2016 (1269 students and 132 teachers total.) Along with the teacher professional

development embedded in these 16-session residencies, participating Head Start teachers also

attended one 3-hour professional development workshop led by a master Wolf Trap Teaching

Artist.

High Scope COR Advantage pre/post total results as well as its subscales were analyzed for n1

= 719 students whose parents granted permission for their scores to be shared. Comparing their

means with the n2=733 mean scores for students in classes who did not participate in Living

Arts’ Detroit Wolf Trap demonstrated that overall, students in intervention classrooms performed

7.3% better than students in comparison classrooms. The Living Arts students scored statistically

significantly higher than the comparison students for all COR subscales, as well as the COR

Total score. The multivariate effect size (partial eta squared) was 0.08. The average effect size of

the Living Arts intervention, which was very consistent for all subscales, varied from small to

medium. The results demonstrate uniformity of success of the Living Arts Wolf Trap intervention

for all COR subscales and COR total score.

Introduction: Children are born ready to learn and form 85% of their intelligence and personality

by age five. Those first years of life are the most important for lifelong development (NRCIM,

2000) and preschool achievement is a predictor for later school success (Ramey & Ramey, 2004).

Although there are numerous studies on the positive impact Head Start has for low socioeconomic

status preschool children, those same studies also recognize that despite the gains they

1.

2

make, Head Start children enter kindergarten still substantially below national averages on

assessments (USDHHS, 2003). Head Start attendance alone does not eliminate elementary

school achievement gaps (ACYF, 2006). At-risk students often are stressed while in school and

that leads to emotional barriers to learning as well as loss of attention (Willis, 2008).

Much of what young children do as play, including singing, drawing, dancing engages

the senses and helps the brain get ready to learn (Sousa, 2006). They develop thinking tools

needed in early learning, including pattern recognition and development; representations in

multiple cognitive arenas; and observation skills among others (Sousa, 2006). A purpose of this

study it to link with others in the field to show the impact that the arts have on learning in three

key areas:

1) Language Development and emergent literacy: Emergent literacy refers to the early

knowledge about language, reading, and writing and most of that is acquired during preschool

(Phillips, Gorton, Pincotti & Sachdev, 2010). Early literacy is particularly important among

school-readiness skills because instruction and learning in formal schooling is typically

language-reliant (Phillips, Gorton, Pincotti & Sachdev, 2010).

2) Emotional health: Students’ emotional health is strongly related to learning. Although Head

Start aides students in adjusting their behavior and regulating emotions (USDHHS, 2003), many

current studies suggest that the arts particularly help children dealing with poverty create positive

social-emotional outcomes (Menzer, 2015) and promote regulation of emotions and behavior

(Lobo & Winsler, 2006; Grytting, 2000; Gregoire & Lupinetti, 2005).

3) Attention and decoding: Difficulty in distinguishing sounds in noise has been associated with

delayed neural response and decreased encoding of speech (Anderson, Chandrasekaran, Skoe, &

Kraus, 2010; Song, Skoe, & Banai, 2010.) Just as learning is language-reliant, it also often

occurs in noisy environments. Accurate speech perception in noise is a critical component of

early childhood education (Strait, Parbery-Clar, Hittner, Kraus, 2012).

The results of the current study confirm the impact that the arts have on early learning in

these areas and reflect the findings of numerous other studies. In addition, through teacher

anecdotal responses to post-intervention surveys, it is clear that the Living Arts Detroit Wolf

Trap intervention has become systemic.

3

Program Elements:

Wolf Trap: The Wolf Trap Institute for Early Learning Through the Arts™ provides arts-

based teaching strategies and services to early childhood teachers, caregivers, parents, and their

children from ages 3 to 5 through the disciplines of drama, music, and movement. The Wolf

Trap Institute, established over 30 years ago, is a program of the Wolf Trap Foundation for the

Performing Arts located in Vienna, VA.

Living Arts: Living Arts, a non-profit organization located in Southwest Detroit, engages

Detroit youth, teachers and families in transformative experiences in the performing, visual,

literary and media arts. Through artist residencies in schools and early learning centers across

Detroit and robust out-of-school offerings focused in Southwest Detroit, they increase youth’s

academic achievement, develop their leadership and artistic skills, and strengthen schools and

communities.

Living Arts became a regional Affiliate for the Wolf Trap Early Learning Institute after

having undergone a program review and partnership discussions with the National office. Living

Arts’ Detroit Wolf Trap Teaching Artists are trained by Master Teaching Artists from the

National Institute.

Living Arts’ Detroit Wolf Trap brings arts-integration to educational partners serving

students in early head start, pre-k and kindergarten throughout Detroit (as well as children ages 3

months through 6 years and parents at their out-of-school location in southwest Detroit.) All

programming is geared toward ensuring that students enter school ready to learn. The program

includes direct service with students, teacher training, and parent training activities.

Evaluation: As stated in the approved SEP, the following were the overall intentions of this

research:

Implementation Evaluation: The implementation evaluation included measurement of the

number and length of sessions delivered in classrooms, the number of professional development

sessions as well as their length and number of participants, the number of family engagement

sessions as well as their length and number of participants.

4

Impact Evaluation:

Confirmatory:

The intent of the proposed research project was to examine the following hypotheses to

demonstrate the effectiveness of Arts-Infused education:

Does the Living Arts’ Detroit Wolf Trap intervention have an impact on advancing school

readiness in pre-kindergarten children ages 3 & 4 measured by HighScope COR instrument?

Exploratory:

1. Does the teachers’ use of the arts-infused strategies, after the Teaching Artist residency,

indicate systemic change in instructional delivery?

2. Are parents using the arts-infused strategies at home with the children in the programs?

Implementation findings:

In Year 4 the following deliverables were accomplished for this grant: 69 Head Start

residencies, 76 individual teacher trainings, 1 Professional Development workshops for a total of

60 Head Start teachers, 30 hours of Professional Development workshops for four new Teaching

Artists and 9 Family workshops.

Residencies: The residencies consist of sixteen 30-minute sessions, two per week for 8 weeks, in

the classroom. There is one Teaching Artist assigned to each classroom to ensure consistency

over the 8-week period (typical session is shown below in Table 1, in Appendix).

Individual Teacher Trainings: After each session, the Teaching Artist and Classroom Teacher

meet for approximately 20 minutes to deconstruct the lesson, highlight successes and challenges,

and plan for future sessions. Embedded in each residency are two planning sessions consisting

of 1) the Teaching Artist working with the classroom teacher to prepare Wolf Trap lesson plans

and 2) two classroom-teacher-led sessions in the classroom utilizing the arts strategies

demonstrated over the course of the residency. During these sessions, the Teaching Artist

actively coaches and assists with the lessons.

5

Professional Development Trainings for teachers: Professional Development for Classroom

Teachers is a standard component of the Wolf Trap program. In addition to the weekly touch-

base and coaching meetings with Teaching Artists, every early childhood educator with a

residency in their classroom is eligible for a 2-3 hour PD Workshop. Each Head Start delegate

who contracts with Living Arts for subsidized service is offered a 3-hour workshop with a master

teaching artist. In April of 2016, Master Teaching Artist provided 60 Matrix Human Services

teachers a three-hour workshop entitled The Earth Spins and So Can I, empowering classroom

teachers to utilize storytelling and movement to develop students' concepts of cycles, local and

non-local movement, fine and gross motor skills. Teachers received handouts

with descriptions of activities, lists for books and music, etc. as resource materials.

Teaching Artist Trainings: In the Fall of 2015, Living Arts provided a comprehensive, hands-on

30-hour training for four new Teaching Artists with a Wolf Trap National Master Trainer. The

training consisted of a mini-residency where the master teaching artist and trainees were

physically in a classroom with children for three hours each day (the master was leading the class

and trainees observe), followed by debriefing time, breaking down lessons and strategies, and

developing more lessons. From this, trainees were equipped with tools, strategies, and their own

material to take into the classroom. This training is required before a teaching artist is assigned to

a classroom.

Also during school year 2015-16, all Living Arts Teaching Artists participated in three

hours of Professional Development, this year focusing on the role of dramatic play in early

learning.

Family Involvement Workshops: For every five residencies contracted by a delegate, Living Arts

offers a Family Involvement Workshop to engage the families of students. The average

attendance was 12 parents/guardians with their children. The Teaching Artist who participated in

the in-school residency at each site was the lead in these sessions that provided consistency for

students. The workshop was held during a dedicated parent meeting in the morning after child

drop-off, because parents are in the habit of attending them. Parents were invited to bring their

child into the workshop from their classroom. The Teaching Artist then engages the parents and

6

children together in the series of activities that they typically do in the classroom. Parents took

home a worksheet with lists of the activities and songs and were encouraged to continue the

exercises at home.

Due to the fast-evolving world of digital technology, Living Arts decided to forgo

producing an individual DVD to take home after each workshop. Instead, Living Arts created

three videos which can be accessed through their website to reinforce the skills learned at the

workshops. The videos focus on the use of Dance, Drama, and Music as tools for learning, and

model ways for families to utilize them in their daily lives at home. The links to these videos

will be distributed with the handouts at future Family Involvement Workshops. The videos will

be premiered to the community in Fall 2016.

Contact hours totaled over 9,900 hours. They are detailed in Table 2 in the Appendix.

Impact findings:

Descriptives:

As mentioned in project reports, no theoretical support has surfaced in the published

literature that would indicate that Living Arts’ Detroit Wolf Trap competencies and skills are

differentiated based on ethnicity or gender. Hence, given the match in terms of frequencies, there

is no support in using either demographic as a covariate. To do so would unnecessarily diminish

the degrees of freedom without reducing the denominator sum of squares, yielding a less

powerful statistical test.

Instrument and Data Collection

COR Advantage is a tool developed by HighScope Educational Research Foundation, an

independent nonprofit research, development, training, and public outreach organization with

headquarters in Ypsilanti, Michigan. The organization described the tool as follows:

COR Advantage is one of the tools approved by Head Start and state-funded programs

for accountability purposes. Most early education programs enter, analyze, and report

scores electronically, using the online tool.

7

COR Advantage’s 9 Categories:

1. Approaches to Learning

2. Social and Emotional Development

3. Physical Development & Health

4. Language, Literacy, & Communication

5. Mathematics

6. Creative Arts

7. Science and Technology

8. Social Studies

9. English Language Learners (Optional)

Each category is divided into specific areas of development, called Items, and each item

is scored on an eight-level scale ranging from 0 (lowest) to 7 (highest), offering a

detailed developmental profile for each child.

Note that few sites reported COR Advantage scores for the 9th subscale, English Language

Learners, which is an optional component of the instrument, and hence, this subscale was deleted

from the analysis.

In previous years, staff at the various sites were given the option to train on the COR-

Advantage with HighScope foundation in one of two ways: 1) One day face-to-face training with

a two-week online follow-up, or 2) Four week online course. These options were offered at an

additional cost. A detailed scoring guide, provided by HighScope, lists behavioral indicators for

each level of each subscale. The COR protocol assigns teachers with the responsibility for

inputting data into the online system.

Reliability

Cronbach Alpha (CA), a measure of internal consistency reliability, was computed for the

34 item COR, with N = 1,134, comprising of the Living Arts Wolf-Trap and comparison

students. CA for the COR pretest (Time 1 Assessment) Total Score was .953, which was

consistent with the reliability of .968 obtained the previous year. The posttest COR Total Score

reliability was .970, which was also consistent with the previous year’s index of .982. The

subscale reliability estimates for the current year, corrected to full-scale length of N = 34 items

8

with the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, are presented in Table 3 below. Based on

commonly used rules of thumb, all reliability estimates are considered to be extremely high.

Table 3. Cronbach Alpha and Spearman-Brown Estimates of Reliability for the COR-A

COR-A Subscale

AL SED PDH LLC M CA ST SS

#Items 3 5 3 7 5 4 4 3

Pretest

CA .712 .772 .637 .803 .775 .704 .726 .702

SB(34) .966 .958 .952 .952 .959 .953 .957 .964

Posttest

CA .808 .858 .751 .874 .858 .773 .815 .782

SB(34) .979 .976 .972 .971 .976 .967 .974 .976

Notes: AL = Approaches to Learning, SED = Social and Emotional Development, PDH =

Physical Development and Health, LLC = Language, Literacy, and Communication, M =

Mathematics, CA = Creative Arts, ST = Science and Technology, and SS = Social Studies.

Data Analysis

In previous years of this project, it was not possible to randomize students to group, or to

match students to make groups comparable on specified control variables. Therefore, the element

of randomization was based on comparing classroom means of groups randomly assigned to

either treatment or comparison, with the classroom mean used as the unit of analysis. This year,

however, at a late date the comparison sites were changed to another school district.

The disadvantage was information on classroom breakdown per site was not available.

This was mitigated, however, by the large number of students available, making it possible to

match based on age and gender, and ethnicity. Care was taken to choose comparison classrooms

from high-poverty areas of Oakland County that were comparable to the Detroit intervention

9

classrooms. (Note that some students in the Living Arts Wolf Trap group were in ½ day

programs, whereas all students from the comparison group were in full day programs.)

Initially, data were available for n1 = 837 students in the Living Arts program, and n2 =

1,315 in the comparison group. Because 71% of the students in the comparison group were non-

White vs. 99.7% in the Living Arts group, random sampling was invoked among the White

students in the comparison group to match the ethnicity make-up of the Living Arts group.

Additional students who were deleted from the analysis were comparison students with

an age code of 0 – 12 months, 13 – 18 months, and not specified. Also, students who were coded

as IEP/IFSP were deleted from the analysis. Hence, for the purposes of all analyses below, there

were n1 = 719 students in the Living Arts Wolf Trap group, and n2 = 733 students in the

comparison group. Note, however, that due to missing values either on the COR pretest (i.e.,

Time 1 administration) or COR posttest (i.e., Time 3 administration), the sample sizes change

depending on the specific analysis conducted

The demographic breakdown for the Living Arts Wolf Trap and comparison groups are

compiled in Table 4.

Table 4. Demographics of Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap and Comparison Students.

Male Female 3 Year

Old 4 Year

old Kinder-

garten Non-

White English

English/Spanish or

Spanish

LADWT 343

(47.7%) 376

(52.3%) 209

(29.1%) 341

(47.4%) 169

(23.5%) 672 (%)

98.7% 551

(76.6%) 167 (3.2%)

Compa-

rison 369

(50.3%) 364

(49.7%) 118

(16.1%) 388

(52.9%) 227 (31%

721

(98.4%) 608

(82.9%) 125 (17.1%)

Fisher’s exact test based on gender was not statistically significant (p = .319). Due to

matching on ethnicity, there was no statistical difference in proportion of non-White students (p

= .6644). The Chi-squared test on age code was statistically significant (Chi-squared = 36.72, p =

10

0.0), due to a greater number of older kindergarten students in the comparison group. In addition,

the comparison group had a statistically significantly smaller proportion of students who were

bilingual (English & Spanish) or whose primary language was Spanish.

The analysis of the COR data is based on a series of ANCOVAs on the post test score

(data obtained at “Time 3” administration on the academic calendar), with the pretest score

(“Time 1” administration) serving as the covariate. Table 5 contains the results for the COR

Total Score as well as broken down by each COR subscale. As compiled in the Table, the Living

Arts students scored statistically significantly higher than the comparison students for all COR

subscales, as well as the COR Total score. The average effect size (partial eta squared) was

0.038. Although there is no absolute standard for interpreting this measure of effect size, the de

facto interpretation is 0.01 is small and 0.08 is medium. Therefore, the average effect size of the

Living Arts intervention, which was very consistent for all subscales, is about midway between

medium and small.

Table 5. Estimated Marginal Means (Adjusted Post Score)

AL SED PDH LLC M CA ST SS Total

LADWT 13.76 23.12 15.65 30.73 22.61 18.92 18.49 13.97 158.91

Comparison 12.96 21.63 14.56 28.93 21.42 17.92 17.16 13.28 148.11

Sample Size, ANCOVA f, Statistical Significance (p value), and Effect Size (Partial Eta Squared)

n(Comparison) 674 633 688 631 634 653 616 663 543

n(LA) 586 565 586 539 560 569 548 547 494

F 47.69 54.17 63.47 50.67 36.03 45.43 65.74 27.97 89.34

P 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

PES 0.037 0.043 0.048 0.042 0.029 0.036 0.054 0.023 0.080

Notes: LADWT = Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap, PES = Partial Eta Squared. AL = Approaches

to Learning, SED = Social and Emotional Development, PDH = Physical Development and

11

Health, LLC = Language, Literacy, and Communication, M = Mathematics, CA = Creative Arts,

ST = Science and Technology, and SS = Social Studies.

A graph of the COR Subscale scores for the Living Arts and Comparison group, as well

as the Total COR score are presented below.

Figure 1. Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap vs. Comparison Student COR Subscale Means

Figure 2. Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap vs. Comparison Student COR Total Score Means

13.75

23.12

15.65

30.73

22.6118.92 18.49

13.9712.96

21.63

14.56

28.93

21.4217.92 17.15

13.28

0.

8.

16.

24.

32.

40.

ATL SAED PDAH LAC M CA SAT SS

COR Subscales

LA Comparison

0.

40.

80.

120.

160.

LA Comparison

159.91148.11

COR Total Score

12

Another approach is to analyze the subscales via a single MANCOVA. This method has

the advantage of generally being statistically more powerful, and is particularly useful if

theoretically the COR subscales are considered to be intricately intertwined (i.e., “multi-

variate”). The disadvantage is the commonly conducted univariate step-down tests are no longer

theoretically valid, and hence, a statistically significant MANCOVA should only be analyzed

with all subscales taken together. However, as an aid to understanding the subscale comparisons

between Living Arts Wolf Trap and comparison students, estimated marginal means are also

presented.

Box’s M, an underlying test of the assumption of equality of covariance matrices, was

statistically significant (M = 287.12, F = 7.912, df = (36, 3539408.6), p = .000). Although some

caution is warranted in interpreting the MANCOVA, this violation commonly occurs with large

sample sizes, and is somewhat mitigated because Levine’s test of equality of error variances was

not statistically significant (i.e., p > .05) for half of the constituent dependent variables (i.e., AL,

PDH, CA, SS).

Pillai’s Trace (.086; F = 11.989 df = 8, 1020) was statistically significant (p = 0.000).

Partial eta squared, at .086, is moderate, and consistent with the univariate ANCOVAs described

above. The pairwise comparisons of estimated marginal means are compiled in Table 6.

Table 6. Pairwise Comparisons Based on MANCOVA on PostTests with Pretests As Covariates

Dependent Variable (I) Grp (J) Grp

Mean Differ-ence (I-

J) Std.

Error Sig.b

95% Confidence Interval for Differenceb

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

postATL Comparison

Living Arts

-.892* .126 .000 -1.140 -.644

Living Arts

Comparison

.892* .126 .000 .644 1.140

postSAED Comparison

Living Arts

-1.784* .211 .000 -2.199 -1.370

13

Living Arts

Comparison

1.784* .211 .000 1.370 2.199

postPDAH Comparison

Living Arts

-1.054* .144 .000 -1.336 -.772

Living Arts

Comparison

1.054* .144 .000 .772 1.336

postLLAC Comparison

Living Arts

-1.915* .265 .000 -2.434 -1.395

Living Arts

Comparison

1.915* .265 .000 1.395 2.434

postM Comparison

Living Arts

-1.379* .205 .000 -1.782 -.976

Living Arts

Comparison

1.379* .205 .000 .976 1.782

postCA Comparison

Living Arts

-1.197* .158 .000 -1.506 -.887

Living Arts

Comparison

1.197* .158 .000 .887 1.506

postSAT Comparison

Living Arts

-1.478* .177 .000 -1.826 -1.130

Living Arts

Comparison

1.478* .177 .000 1.130 1.826

postSS Comparison

Living Arts

-.752* .136 .000 -1.020 -.485

Living Arts

Comparison

.752* .136 .000 .485 1.020

Based on estimated marginal means

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

b. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.

14

Notes: * = The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. b =Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons. Summary

In contrast with previous years of this project, in 2015-2016 it was possible to obtain a

sufficiently large reservoir of comparison students to match based on primary demographics.

Hence, the unit of analysis is the individual student’s COR score. Statistical testing indicated the

Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap and comparison students were not statistically significantly

different based on gender or ethnicity. Other demographic proportions were of roughly equal

proportion, although numerically favored the comparison group in terms of fewer Bilingual or

Spanish as primary language students, and older students (i.e., kindergarten age), as well as no

known ½ day programs. In contrast, the Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap group contained

numerically fewer English as primary language students, fewer Kindergarten age students, and

some students were in ½ day programs.

Consistent with previous years, the HighScopes COR assessment tool was highly

reliable, both in terms of total score and subscale score. The values for Cronbach’s alpha, or the

Spearman-Brown correction, measures of internal consistency reliability, were in the mid to up

.9s, which is expected for a commercial grade instrument. Internal consistency is a measure of

consistency of scores, which is a necessary condition for the validity of the purpose to which the

instrument is used. For validity information, consult the users’ guide:

http://secure.highscope.org/productcart/pc/catalog/pdf/cor_userguideall_web.pdf

The results demonstrate uniformity of success of the Living Arts Wolf Trap intervention

for all COR subscales and COR total score. Based on the univariate and multivariate approaches,

the magnitude of the effectiveness of the intervention, by conventional standards, is about a

medium effect size. This means the presence and intervention of the Living Arts Detroit Wolf

Trap resident artist successfully increased students’ Approaches to Learning; Social and

Emotional Development; Physical Development and Health; Language, Literacy, and

Communication; Mathematics; Creative Arts; Science and Technology; and Social Studies

scores on the COR as compared with 3-5 year old students who do not have this program in their

schools.

15

Discussion:

Confirmatory Impact Evaluation for indicator “Ready to learn”: Many studies indicate that arts

enrichment may provide important opportunities for children of varied developmental levels to

grow in pre-academic skills (Gregoire & Lupinetti, 2005) showing statistically significant

improvements in areas in intervention Head Start and comparison Head Start groups, as did this

study.

A quasi-experimental study conducted in Pennsylvania showed that at-risk students in an

arts integrated preschool showed statistically significant improvements in Language and

Literacy, Approaches to Learning, Creative Arts and on the Overall Early Learning Standards

Inventory test (Phillips, Gorton, Pincotti & Sachdev, 2010). The current study provides further

evidence of the impact of arts-infused education on three indicators:

Language Development & Emergent literacy: An accurate predictor of school success is the

number of book words a child has in their vocabulary at age five and it is during the early

childhood period when the foundation is laid for language development (Gee, 2008). Although

Head Start does close the gap in letter recognition and other pre-reading skills, students are still

behind the national average upon entering kindergarten (USDHHS, 2003). This study and others

show the impact that the arts have on emergent literacy:

● As shown in the Table 5 above, the Language, Literacy, and Communication subscale of

the COR Advantage testing instrument shows a .042 higher PES rating for intervention

students than comparison. This subscale lists the following as indicators: speaking,

listening and comprehension, phonological awareness, alphabetic knowledge, reading,

book enjoyment and knowledge, writing. These are all key elements of emergent literacy

and are the cornerstones of our language-reliant educational system.

● As indicated by the Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Teacher Surveys (Table 7, Appendix),

students in arts-infused education are visibly increasing their letter recognition,

phonological awareness, and vocabulary acquisition.

● This study echoes others from the field:

o Preliminary results of the Pennsylvania study revealed improvements in young

children’s emergent literacy on a number of measures after attending an arts

immersion preschool (Phillips, Gorton, Pincotti & Sachdev, 2010).

16

o One study conducted with 4- and 5-year old children showed that the more music

skills children had, the greater their phonological awareness and reading

development skills (Sousa, 2006; Tierney & Kraus, 2013; Kraus, 2014).

The arts and emotional learning:

● This study showed a .043 higher PES score (Table 5) for intervention students versus

comparison students on the COR Advantage subscale, Social and Emotional

Development. The scoring elements for that subscale include: emotions, building

relationships with adults, building relationships with other children, community, conflict

resolution. All of these are cornerstones of emotion regulation, a key indicator of future

school success, especially for those living in poverty.

● In addition to the COR statistically significant findings, teacher surveys (Table 7,

Appendix) echo the advantage that the arts integration has to help students who are shy

and for those who need to regulate behavior.

● This study echoes others from the field:

o One study produced an advantage in receptive vocabulary for students involved

with an arts program partly because it provided opportunities for children from

risky environments to regulate emotions and behavior (Brown, 2008).

o One study demonstrated children in dance had a reduction in internalizing (shy,

anxious) and externalizing (aggressive) problems (Lobo & Winsler, 2006).

o Finally, toddlers in another study of an arts integration program, compared with a

matched-control group, showed improvements in teacher-rated positive and

negative emotion regulation (Brown & Sax, 2013).

The arts and attention and decoding:

● The Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap study demonstrated intervention students had a .037

higher PES score on Approaches to Learning and .054 higher on Science and Technology

(Table 5), both statistically significant. The scoring elements for those areas include:

initiative and planning, problem solving with materials, reflection, observing and

classifying, experimenting, predicting, and drawing conclusions. All of these areas

17

require attention and decoding skills. As the indicators show in the introduction, there are

essential skills for future success in learning.

● Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Teacher surveys (Table 7, Appendix) echo these findings

indicating they observe students being more attentive and have increased ability to recall

and retell with details.

● This study echoes others from the field:

o Outcomes of one study showed that musicians’ advantages for processing speech

in noise are present during developmental years (Strait, Parbery-Clar, Hittner,

Kraus, 2012)

o Musically trained children outperform non-musicians on speech-in-noise

perception as well as on memory and attention tasks. (Strait, Parbery-Clar,

Hittner, Kraus, 2012).

Exploratory Impact Evaluation:

Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Teacher Survey Responses indicate that 96% of the teachers

involved in the intervention are already using the teaching methods on a regular basis. This

suggests there is a systemic transformation of their teaching methods (see all survey results in

Table 7, Appendix).

Parents also benefitted from this program, as evidenced by their responses to the survey

they completed after a Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Family-Student Involvement Workshop.

On this survey, 4 questions were asked (listed below in Table 8, Appendix) and 94% of parents

reported that they would continue to use the strategies at home.

Conclusion: The Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap study, in conjunction with previous studies

conducted nationally and within this specific program, provides strong evidence that the arts-

infused education methodology has statistically significant impact on cognition and social-

emotional development in pre-school children. Previous research provided by Living Arts, which

was an aggregated study of moderate strength in a predominately low socio-economic

population, also recorded impact from this program. This would suggest that the methodology is

18

indeed scalable and proves to have impact on preschool children’s preparation for academic

success in kindergarten and beyond: Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap students are more “ready to

learn” than those not in the Living Arts programs. Specific growth is seen in emergent

literacy/language development; emotional regulation; and attention/decoding. The intervention

has been responsible for systemic transformation of teaching methods and is being used by

parents at home.

Future:

There will be one additional year of this study to further document the effect and provide

answers to the level of impact on teacher professional development and parent adoption of the

methodology. Specifically, we will:

● Continue distributing and collecting survey instrument for teacher responses to

professional development workshops

● Continue distributing and collecting survey instrument for parent responses to

parent/child workshops

● Continue the more streamlined and homogenous system of delivery and collection of

COR-A data on a detailed timeline

● The Family Involvement through the Arts "Literacy" Videos will be released in fall

2016. There are 3 including one of each; music, drama, dance ideas for parents to use at

home. These videos will be accessible through Living Arts Website/ Links included on

Family Involvement Handouts/and in Living Arts’ SIF book. These will be accessible to

all families who have a child participating in a Detroit Wolf Trap Residency.

The Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap study, evidence of positive impact of Arts Infused

Education for early learners, will serve the field in expanding and rekindling the interest in

adoption of arts-infused educational methodology and will add to the contemporary research

base in this area.

19

Resources:

Anderson, S., Chandrasekaran, B., Skoe, E. & Kraus, N. 2010. Neural timing is linked to

speech perception in noise. Journal of Neuroscience, 30 14, 4922-4926.

Brown, E.D., Benedett, B., Armistead, M. E. (2008). Arts enrichment and school

readiness for children at risk,. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 112-124

Brown, E.D. & Sax, K.L. 2013. Arts enrichment and preschool emotions for low-income

children at risk., 337-346.

Gee, J.P. (2008). Getting over the slump: Innovation strategies to promote children’s

learning. NY. The Joan Ganz Coonery Center at Sesame Workshop, 5-6.

Gregoire, M.A., & Lupinetti, J. (2005). Supporting diversity through the arts. Kappa

Delta Pi Record, 41, 159-162.

Grytting, C. (2000). The benefits of art education. Arts and Activities, 126, 66.

Lobo, Y.B. & Winsler, A. (2006). The effects of a creative dance and movement program

on the social competence of Head Start preschoolers. Social Development, 15, 501-519.

Kraus, N., 2014, Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Communication

Sciences, Neuroscience Program, and Departments of Neurobiology and Physiology,

Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, and Department of Otolaryngology,

Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois 60611, and J Neuroscience 34:11913-8.

Ludwig, M., Marklein, M. B., & Song, M. (2016). Arts Integration: A Promising

Approach to Improving Early Learning. American Institutes for Research, 16, 1-2.

Menzer, M., 2015, The Arts in Early Childhood: Social and Emotional Benefits of Arts

Participation (A literature review and gap-analysis 2000-2015. National Endowment for

the Arts, 1

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. 2000, From Neurons to

Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, D.C.:

National Academy Press.

20

Papic, M. M., Mulligan, J. T., & Mitchelmore, M. C. (2011). Assessing the development

of preschoolers' mathematical patterning. Journal for Research in Mathematics

Education, 42(3), 237-269.

Phillips, R.D., Gorton, R.L., Pinciotti, P., & Sachdev, A. 2010. Promising Findings on

Preschoolers’ Emergent Literacy and School Readiness in Arts-Integrated Early

Childhood Settings. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38, 111-122

Ramey, C.T., & Ramey, S.L. (2004). Early learning and school readiness: Can early

intervention make a difference? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 471-491

Sawilowsky, J. (2014). The impact of nested testing on experiment-wise Type I error

rate. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University.

Song, J., Skoe, E., Banai, K., Krause,, N. 2010. Auditory brain stem response to complex

sounds: A tutorial. Ear and Hearing, 31(3).

Sousa, D., 2006-10, How the Arts Develop the Young Brain: Neuroscience Research is

Revealing the Impressive Impact of Arts Instruction on Students’ Cognitive, Social and

Emotional Development, retrieved from education.com and AASA (School

Superintendent) website

Strait, D.L., Parbery-Clark, A., Hittner, E., Kraus, N. 2012. Musical training during early

childhood enhances the neural encoding of speech in noise. Brain & Language, 123, 191-

201.

Tierney, A., & Kraus, N. (2013). Music training for the development of reading skills.

Applying Brain Plasticity to Advance and Recover Human Ability Progress in Brain

Research, 207, 209-241.

US Department of Health and Human Services, & US Department of Health and Human

Services. (2003). Head Start FACES 2000: A whole-child perspective on program

performance. Fourth Progress Report. Administration for Children and Families,

Washington, DC., 24-28 and Executive Summary iii.

21

Vitulli, P., Pitts Santoli, S., & Fresne, J. (2013). Arts in education: Professional

development integrating the arts and collaborating with schools and community.

International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 8(1), 45-52.

Willis, MD, J. 2008, The Science Behind Better Learning, How your Child Learns Best:

Brain-Friendly Strategies you Can Use to Ignite your Child’s Learning and Increase

School Success, 3-13

22

Appendix

Table 1. Typical Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Classroom Residency Session

Time Activity Purpose

5 min Welcome Song Consistent for every session.

15-20

mins

Focused Activity:

movement, music, and

literacy

Often inspired by an age-appropriate book (examples include:

“Squirrels Busy Day” by Lucy Barnard and “Boot Weather”

by Judith Vigna), these connect to a focused theme or

curricular focus. (Example: The teacher is focusing on social

emotional learning, especially self regulation/body control,

and the teaching artist leads an activity where the children use

their bodies to dramatize animal characters from a story.)

5 min Ending song To reflect and bring session to close

15-20

mins

Debrief with teacher Discussing the arts strategies modeled, the successes and

challenges of the session, and student needs. This informs the

next session’s goals.

Table 2. Implementation Evaluation Contact Hours

Activity Frequency Duration Participants Contact Hours

Residency 14 (2x per week

for 7 weeks

30 mins 1269 8883

Teacher Planning mtgs

+ debriefings

2 trainings

14 debriefs

30 mins

15 mins

138 621

23

Teacher Professional

Development

1 3 hours 60 180

Teaching Artist

Professional Development

3 3 hours 13 117

Wolf Trap Teaching Artist

training

1 30 hours 4 120

Parent Workshops 10 30 mins 107 (total) 53.50

TOTAL 9974.5 hours

Table 7. Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Teacher Survey Responses

What is music have you

continued to use in your classroom

Top 3 responses: “Steady

Beat”(41%), “Hello Song”

(17%)< Chants (17%)

What is dance experience have you continued to

use

Top 3 responses: Body Part

Isolations (30%), Physical

Expression (29%), Moving Words (22%)

What is drama have you

continued to use

Top 3 responses: “Bear Hunt”,

:Pete, the Cat”, and Regie, the

Rainbow”

Always Mostly Sometimes

24

Was the content developmentally appropriate 90% 5% 5%

Was the delivery of content developmentally appropriate 90% 5% 5%

How often did your student COR notes come from these sessions 87% 13%

Observation of COR element Weekly Monthly Once a year Never

Creative Representation

82% 18%

Initiative 74% 19% 7%

Social Relations 73% 20% 2% 5%

Music & Movement

97% 3%

Language & Literacy

90% 8% 2%

Science & Math 80% 13% 5% 2%

Yes No

Will you use these strategies again? 96% 4%

n=62 (Some did not answer all questions and/or indicated more than one answer)

Examples of Literacy growth:

“This child expanded his language by using the words “back” and “jump” that he learned in

this activity.”

“One child expanded his language using colors that he wasn’t too sure of before.”

“This introduces the children to the alphabet as well as different animals.”

25

“One of our students is speech-delayed. We saw his vocabulary and speech getting better.”

Examples of emotional growth:

“One very shy child never wanted to participate or go in front of the others. After [the

intervention], he volunteered a couple of times to act out a story in front of the class.”

“One child, more reserved, started becoming more interactive by the middle of the program.”

“One of our students is better able to control impulses.”

“One girl, who cannot sit still, sat through an entire lesson and participated with the group.”

Attention:

“My students were able to recall the sounds that letters make.”

“Students recalled details about the stories even 2 weeks later!”

‘The singing helped the students to focus.”

“All of the children seem to be able to recall and re-tell the stories.”

Table 8. Living Arts Detroit Wolf Trap Parent Survey Responses

Question Very Much Somewhat Not at all

Did this workshop demonstrate a clear connection between the arts

and its support of learning? 100%

Did this workshop give you information to support your child’s learning outside a school setting?

94% 6%

Did the leader engage adults and children? 99% 1%

Will you use this again with your child? 94% 6%

n=107