Bonifacio G. Gabales Jr., Ph.D.University of Southeastern

Philippines

THE EFFECT OF COGNITIVE READINESS IN LANGUAGE AND LITERACY ON LATER

SCHOOL PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYTIC REVIEW

Rationale

Gredler (1992) associates the rationale for educational screening of young children with that of medical screening. In medical screening, educational screening may detect indications of problems that can be ameliorated with early intervention. In this case, there may be present indications of learning or behavioral problems that can develop later in school, enabling school personnel to design strategies that may prevent or mitigate more pervasive future difficulties.

Developmental and educational research, especially in the area of literacy, indicates that one can predict later school success from children’s acquisition of specific academic skills such as alphabet knowledge before they enter kindergarten or grade one (Barnett, 1998).

Also, Kagan (1992) argued that students’ good or poor performance can be attributed to how they perform in the early years. Similarly, Kupersmidt et al. (1990) posited that preschoolers who do well academically tend to perform better in the later years.

The accumulated findings of many studies demand more sophisticated techniques of measurement and statistical analysis. Data from different studies should be regarded as complex data points, no more comprehensible without the full use of statistical analysis than hundreds of data points in a single study (Glass et al., 1981).

Statement of the ProblemIs students’ later language

performance affected by their readiness in language and literacy acquired at kindergarten level?

Does significant between-study variance in effect size exist for language and literacy performance?

If significant between-study variance in effect size exists, can study characteristics explain this between-study variance in effect size including sample characteristics (sex, SES), school characteristics (type and location of school), and study characteristics (assessment tests used, type and purpose of the assessment tool used, type of publication and year published, and outcome measure (language and literacy component)?

Scope and LimitationLimited to synthesize existing literature

and studies, which investigate the influence of school readiness in the area of language and literacy acquired at kindergarten age on the child’s later school performance in language area

It only covers studies chosen that meets the inclusion criteria

the outcome measure considered in the meta-analysis is only limited to the language performance of the study-participants in the first to third grade in elementary level.

the researcher assumed that the measures used in the study to assess language and literacy competence at the kindergarten and primary level are measuring similar underlying constructs.

this meta-analysis also assumes that all effect sizes generated are independent and non-related measures. Since multiple measures or effect sizes were taken from some studies included in the analysis, it may not be reasonable to assume independence of measures.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the study

Later School Performance Reading Comprehension Language Phonological Awareness

Cognitive readiness in Language and Literacy at

Kindergarten Level

Sample Characteristics

Sex Grouping Socio-Economic Status (SES)

School Characteristics Location of school Type of School

Study Characteristics Publication Status Year of Publication Outcome Measure Follow-up Assessment grade level Type of Assessment Tool

MethodWith the aim of synthesizing the bulk

of studies related to readiness in language and literacy and later school performance, meta-analysis was used

As a statistical procedure by itself, it is designed to accumulate experimental/quasi-experimental and correlation results across independent studies that address a related set of research questions.

A key assumption of this analysis is that each study provides a differing estimate of the underlying relationship within the population. By accumulating results across studies, one can gain a more accurate representation of the population relationship than is provided by the individual study estimators.

Sources of Data

Existing literature and studies that discussed about school readiness in language and literacy at kindergarten and later school performance was considered in this study. As of this time, the hundreds of studies initially identified in the past two decades are funneled based on the selection criteria that were set

The literature obtained were longitudinal experimental, quasi-experimental and correlational studies published in English-language journals with cross-time relations between language and literacy readiness at kindergarten and school performance in grade one, grade two, or grade three.

The databases include published studies, which were located through EBSCOhost, Educational Research Complete, Psychology and Behavioral Science collection, PsychINFO, and Education abstracts. The researcher used the keywords such as school readiness, preschool, kindergarten, grade one, grade two, grade three, language and literacy, and school performance.

Coding Guide:

Location of schoolType of SchoolPublication StatusYear of PublicationOutcome Measure Follow-up Assessment grade levelType of Assessment ToolSex GroupingSocio-Economic Status (SES)

123

APPENDIX A

META-ANALYSIS DATA CODING SHEET

Authors: ____________________________________________________________

Year: ____________________________________________________________

Title of Study: ____________________________________________________________

1. Initial Assessment Grade or Age _____________________ 2. Follow-up Assessment Grade or Age ___ Gr 1 ___ Gr2 ___ G3 3. Sex Grouping ____More than 50% girls

____More than 50% boys 4. Sample Characteristics:

a. SES ____ Low ____ Middle 5. Type of School (Private/Public)

a. Preschool ____ Private ____Public b. Elementary School ____ Private ____Public

6. Location of School (Urban /Rural) a. Preschool ____ Urban ____ Rural b. Primary School ____ Urban ____ Rural

7. Instrument Utilized a. Initial Assessment _____________________ b. Follow-up Assessment _____________________

8. Research Design _____________________ 9. Intervention (yes/no) _____________________ 10. Publication ___ Published ___ Unpublished

Data:

Language and Literacy First

Assessment Follow-up

Assessment Mean Standard Deviation Sample Size r-value t-value F-value Effect Size

Other Comments:

Statistical Treatment

Inter-Rater Reliability Computation (Cohen’s Kappa)

Common metric used (r)Hierarchical Linear Modeling was used in testing all the hypotheses (Raudenbush, 1994)

Analyzed using SPSS and HLM software

Summary of ResultsOut of 40 research articles or

dissertations, 94 correlation effect sizes were obtained.

IRR = an overall level of agreement of 96% was obtained

Observed effect sizes varied from .03 to .85 with a mean of .46 and standard deviation of .19

After computing for sampling error, a mean effect size across studies of .43 with a standard deviation of .11 is revealed

On the average, this figure indicates that kindergarten competence in language and literacy has medium effect on later language performance.

After the adjustment, the effect sizes varied from .03 to 1 with a mean of .52 and standard deviation of .24 (SE=.11) implying a larger effect size.

HLM – Unconditional Model

Problem 1: Is students’ later language performance affected by their readiness in language and literacy acquired at kindergarten level?

The level-1 analysis included 94 effect sizes from 40 studies. The results indicated a mean effect size of .529 across all studies. This is statistically significant, t (27) = 11.796, p<.001, indicating that the effect of language and literacy performance of the students’ later performance is significant.

Table 8. Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) result for Level-1 Unconditional Model Parameter γ SE γ t df p

Language and literacy Effect Size

0.529

0.045

11.796

27

0.000

Sigma Squared = 0.033997

Tau (τ2) = 0.03702

Chi-square (χ2) = 81.19 (27) p<0.001

Deviance = 6.72

The first research question of this study addressed the overall effect of kindergarten readiness in language and literacy on later school performance. The results indicated an overall large effect size, which is found significant.

Problem 2: Does significant between-study variance in effect size exist for language and literacy performance?

The estimated variance of the effect parameter was also significant, τ2 = 0.037, χ2 (27) = 81.19, p < 0.001, indicating that considerable variability remained to be explained in the effect sizes.

The intra class correlation (ICC) also suggests that approximately 52% (ICC=.037 / (.034+.037=.52) of the total variability is attributable to the differences in the explanatory variables.

Table 9. Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) results for Level-2

Conditional Model Parameter

(Conditional Model) γ

SE γ

t

p

Intercept

0.457

0.345

1.322

0.205

Follow-up Assessment (Time 2)

0.276

0.069

3.995

0.001

Sex Grouping

0.049

0.095

0.522

0.608

SES

0.116

0.127

0.913

0.375

Type and Location of Preschool

0.141

0.094

1.502

0.152

Type and Location of Elementary School

-0.027

0.103

-0.257

0.801

Initial Assessment Tool

-0.052

0.092

-0.561

0.582

Follow-up Assessment Tool

-0.010

0.141

-0.070

0.946

Type of Publication

-0.156

0.178

-0.879

0.393

Outcome Measure

-0.060

0.032

-1.884

0.077

Follow-up Assessment Type -0.006

0.104

-0.059

0.954

Year Published

0.036

0.045

0.812

0.429

Note: χ2 (16) = 53.35, p<.001, tau = .0423, sigma squared = .0402

The second research question is on determining if between-study variance in effect size exists for language and literacy. This question tells whether a follow-up analysis that will determine the sources of variation is to be conducted. The result of the level-1 HLM analysis without predictor variable revealed that there is a significant variation between studies in effect sizes for language and literacy. The differences across effect sizes were statistically significant, indicating the need for further exploration of study and determine the source of the variation.

Hierarchical Linear Modeling Results: Conditional Model

Problem 3: If significant between-study variance in effect size exists, can study characteristics explain this between-study variance in effect size including sample characteristics (sex, SES), school characteristics (type and location of school), and study characteristics (assessment tests used, type and purpose of the assessment tool used, type of publication and year published, and outcome measure (language and literacy component)?

the overall conditional model exhibited a statistically significant reduction in the variance of the effect sizes over the unconditional model, χ2 (16) = 53.35, p<.001.

Follow-up assessment grade level exhibited a significant mean effect size (γ=.276, p <.001) implying that significant variability can be observed among the three grade levels. Overall, the combination of the level-2 predictor variables in the model accounted for 51.33% of the variance in the effect sizes. Generally, this finding suggests that additional variables may exist that can further explain the differences between studies in observed effect sizes.

outcome measure for language and literacy competence, phonological awareness showed a significant effect (t = -2.352, p<.05). For this model (X = phonological awareness), approximately 51.49% (ICC=.5149) of the variation on the effect sizes between studies is explained by phonological awareness. Phonological awareness exhibited a mean effect size .159 standard deviations smaller than the other criterion measures such as reading, comprehension, and language.

Table 12. Individual Level 2 Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) results for Study Characteristics

Parameter (Conditional Model)

γ

SE γ

t

p

Initial Assessment Tool

Intercept 0.562 0.093 6.038 .000

Note: Degrees of Freedom = 26

Table 12. Individual Level 2 Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) results for Study Characteristics

Outcome Measure

Phonological Awareness

Intercept 0.540 0.047 11.414 0.000

Coefficient -0.159 0.068 -2.352 0.027

Type of Follow-up Assessment Test

Readiness

Intercept 0.550 0.059 9.376 0.000

Coefficient -0.059 0.089 -0.654 0.518

Achievement

Intercept 0.532 0.071 7.522 0.000

Coefficient -0.005 0.091 -0.054 0.958

Developmental

Screening

Intercept 0.514 0.045 11.419 0.000

Coefficient 0.369 0.220 1.677 0.105

Follow-up Assessment (Time 2)

Grade 1

Intercept 0.367 0.058 6.349 0.000

Coefficient 0.207 0.077 2.688 0.013

Grade 2

Intercept 0.558 0.050 11.220 0.000

Coefficient -0.176 0.076 -2.306 0.029

Grade 3

Intercept 0.541 0.046 11.814 0.000

Coefficient -0.216 0.159 -1.361 0.185

Note: Degrees of Freedom = 26

The third research question involved determining if sample and characteristics could help in explaining some of the variation in effect sizes between studies. The results indicated that several study characteristics could explain some of the variance in effect sizes between studies.

The second level-2 HLM run with one characteristic in each model revealed phonological awareness a significant factor in addition to grade level 1 and 2 in the follow-up assessment.

Conclusion:language performance of the students in the first

three primary years is significantly affected by their kindergarten readiness in language and literacy

students’ later performance is affected to a moderate extent

the higher is the competence of the child in language and literacy at kindergarten age, the higher they can perform in the similar domain in the first three primary years.

there is a significant difference between the effect sizes reported by the selected studies in this meta-analysis. This means that the reported findings of selected studies are heterogeneous that is affected by some inherent factors or characteristics.

the amount of effect of kindergarten readiness in language and literacy on later school performance across all studies varies according to the grade level when follow-up assessment was conducted and the outcome measure used. Diminishing effect size is shown wherein the amount of influence of kindergarten readiness is significantly higher in grade one level. Also, the variations of the effect size for all studies can be explained by phonological awareness

Recommendations:

the implementation of kindergarten programs should be strengthened. Specifically, the teaching of language and literacy in the kindergarten must be reinforced. Considering the fact that concept of prints, reading and writing skills are among the basic competencies necessary for understanding the academic subjects in the elementary years, a “Developmentally Appropriate” curriculum should be introduced

Government policies should encourage and support early childhood program implementation including the provision of material resources and facilities necessary for effective cognitive development of the learners.

Government policies should also encourage authentic assessment of student learning from the diagnostic to the summative level. An active screening and assessment process should be implemented early in the preschool or kindergarten level. Assessment of language abilities and phonological awareness in the child’s first language, as well as in English must be properly done to monitor the child’s progress in language development from kindergarten to elementary grade.

the conduct of Kindergarten Readiness Assessment in Language and Literacy must be properly implemented. A valid and reliable assessment procedure should be followed in the assessment of student learning and monitoring in the kindergarten level.

Parents and educators should promote the development of phonemic awareness in young children. This can be done by incorporating into the children’s daily routines such as reading children’s books and playing word games that emphasize the structure of the language. There is evidence that introducing the alphabet can also help children understand that words are made of individual sounds (Adams et al., 1998).

The institutionalization and implementation of mother-tongue-based multilingual education (MLE) must be strengthened to accelerate the acquisition of language and literacy competence. Acquiring the appropriate language skills would be easier in this approach under the assumptions that learners learn to read more quickly when in their first language (L1), and that students who have learned to read and write in their first language will learn to speak, read, and write in a second language (L2) and third language (L3) more quickly than those who are taught in a second or third language first.

For interested researchers in kindergarten cognitive readiness, this meta-analysis may be replicated using more research articles and will address the limitation inherited by this research attempt. Effect of language and literacy at kindergarten age on later performance in other academic subjects like mathematics and science may also be explored. The interplay of other factors such as school environment, home environment, and teachers/parents involvement in the learning process may be considered in the analysis. Such studies may be expanded to the other competencies such as social, emotional, physical, and other cognitive aspects of the child. Prediction of effect sizes to the higher primary and secondary level is also recommended.

End of Presentation