Multi-media intervention: effects on early literacy

1
Multi-media intervention effects on early
literacy
Presenters Iris Levin and Michal
Schleifer Development and Research Team M.
Schleifer, R. Levin, H. Shilton, T. Freund, I.
Levin CET (Center for Educational Technology)
And Tel Aviv University
2
Early Literacy?

• Early literacy Skills related to recognition and
  use of written notation and written language that
  pave the way to later reading and writing
  acquisition.
• Alphabetic skills (letter knowledge, sound and
  letter retrieval of spoken words) are fundamental
  to acquiring word reading and spelling.
• Linguistic skills (vocabulary, morphology,
  discourse) facilitate mastering reading
  comprehension and written text production.

3
Contribution of early literacy

• Level of early literacy predicts reading and
  spelling acquisition in primary grades.
• Prediction higher than IQ.
• Level of early literacy in kindergarten predicts
  also reading comprehension for at least 6 years
  later.
• Interventions promoting early literacy through
  storybook reading or training of alphabetic
  skills are effective.

4
The mechanism underlying the contribution

• Cognitive, social and emotional factors in school
  lead to Mathew Effect The rich gets richer and
  the poor gets poorer (Stanovich, 1986).
• Students who enter G1 with advanced early
  literacy acquire easily reading and spelling
  enjoy reading and writing are successful in
  school.
• Students with poor early literacy find reading
  and writing acquisition frustrating are required
  to read texts that are too hard for them refrain
  from literate activities are failing in school.

5
The effect of literacy-related programs on public
media (TV)

• A distinction noted (1) the effect of amount of
  exposure to TV (2) the effect of viewing
  instructional programs.
• Amount of exposure to TV mixed results depending
  on age, programs, etc.
• Viewing instructional programs Between the
  Lions - a series instructing literacy to K and
  G1. Viewers outperformed non-viewers on letter
  knowledge, phonemic awareness and reading.
  (Linebarger, Kosanic, Greenwood, Doku (2004).
• Interactive public TV is a new paradigm of using
  TV for educational purposes. While theoretically
  it seems engaging and productive we found no
  study in the domain of literacy on its effect.

6
The general aim of our study
To examine whether a pedagogical project in
kindergartens can enhance the effects of
instructional programs on public TV accessible
at home.

• Two institutions collaborated in this study Hop!
  and CET
• Hop! is the major nursery-preschool channel in
  Israel. Hop! is ranked as the 4th most viewed
  channel among 120 cable channels in Israel.
• CET - The Center for Educational Technology is a
  leading Israeli non-profit, non-governmental
  organization, dedicated to improving Israel's
  educational system. The organization's mission is
  the introduction of innovation, change and
  large-scale implementation of general educational
  initiatives and specifically of educational
  technology.

7
The general design of the study
Hop! screened programs on language and literacy,
and interactive TV short riddles, targeted to
kindergartners in Israel.
CET implemented a pedagogical project in 15
kindergartens. The project was aimed to enhance
the effects of the above public TV programs.
8
Design of assessment

• Assessment of the effects of CET project as a
  venue enhancing the public program, was carried
  out in the beginning and the end of the school
  year (7 months apart).
• Language and literacy tests were given to
  children in the 15 intervention kindergartens,
  and to children in 14 control kindergartens
  (matched on SES, city, educational policy,
  curriculum and level of literacy at the beginning
  of the school year).

9
Intervention (15 K) vs. control groups (14 K) (N
449)

• Children in the two groups had access to TV
  programs on literacy at home (Hop!).
• Only the children in the intervention group were
  involved in a pedagogical project delivered by
  the teachers in the kindergartens (CET).
• The two groups were recruited from low SES
  populations.

10
The cognitive constituents

• Alphabetic skills letter knowledge, rhyming,
  sound and letter retrieval of spoken words,
  invented spelling, emergent word reading.
• Linguistic skills Written language features in
  lexicon (literary words synonyms, antonyms),
  morphology (e.g., passive voice) and discourse.

11
The Programs on literacy screened on Public TV
(Hop!)

• 40 programs, 15 minutes each, 5 times a week, in
  primetime (6 pm).
• 100 animated riddles, 1 minute each, 6-10 times a
  day as passages, Interactive TV technology.

12
The project in 15 kindergartners Teachers
training (CET)

• Seven sessions of advanced studies, 4 hours each,
  in small groups of teachers (7-8 teachers).
• Content The development of emergent literacy in
  3-6 year olds mastering the use of the
  intervention materials guidance of parents in
  promoting literacy using different genres as
  reading materials in kindergarten.
• Training in use of technology use of email, of
  internet, of chat websites.

13
The project in 15 kindergartens Internet and TV

• TV programs (40) viewed in Kindergarten, guided
  by the teacher (Hop!).
• An internet website with pedagogical games (CET).

14
The project in 15 kindergartens traditional
devices (CET)

• Pictures of the Hebrew Alphabet.
• Games training alphabetic skills.

15
The project in 15 kindergartens traditional
devices (CET)

• Posters training alphabetic and linguistic
  skills, and especially used to promote elaborated
  discourse.

16
The project in 15 kindergartens Books (CET)

• Dictionary for young children.
• Activity books (e.g., for learning letter shapes,
  phonological awareness).
• Books with short stories (events in kindergarten
  folk stories).

17
The project in 15 kindergartens Material for
the home (CET)

• A workbook with activities for children and
  guidance for parents.

18
Major questions of research

• Can pedagogical project (in 15 kindergartens)
  delivered in school enhance the effects of
  instructional programs on public TV accessible at
  home?
• Note The project was adapted to the public
  programs in terms of materials, graphic designs,
  and content of instruction.
• Does the effect of project vary by domain?
  alphabetic vs. linguistic skills.
• Is the effect of the project depending on
  childrens demographic characteristics?
  mainstream vs. academically at risk and
  immigrants.
• What are the reactions of teachers and parents to
  the program (advantages, disadvantages,
  hardships).

19
Assessment

• Alphabetic skills letter naming retrieval of
  initial sound of final sound of initial letter
  of final letter.
• Linguistic skills Vocabulary (antonyms)
  Morphology (pluralization).
• The tests were delivered on pretest and posttest
  (7 months apart) to children in the intervention
  and control kindergartens (N 449).
• Parental questionnaire on (1) use of different
  venues at home (2) evaluation of the contribution
  of different venues to their childs literacy (N
  95).
• Teachers open interviews Evaluation of program.

20
Progress from pretest to posttestintervention
vs. control group Alphabetic skills
Mean Score
21
Progress from pretest to posttestintervention
vs. control group Linguistic skills
Mean Score
22
Progress from pretest to posttestin intervention
vs. control groupsdifferent populations
Mean Score
23
Parental interviewsReported use of different
venues (N 95)

• Parent-child jointly using workbook - 97
• Watching programs on public TV - 87
• Watching programs on a daily basis - 40
• Playing in the interactive website - 84
• Playing in the interactive website on a daily
  basis - 21

24
Parental interviewsEstimated contribution to
childslanguage and literacy (N 95)

• The entire intervention 94 of parents reported
  it had a big or a very big contribution.
• Parent-child joint working in workbook 94 of
  parents reported it had a big or a very big
  contribution.
• Playing in the interactive website 89 reported
  it had a big or a very big contribution.
• Watching literacy programs on public TV 80
  reported it had a big or a very big
  contribution.

25
Parental interviewsIn their own voice (N 95)
Since this project started my child is
progressing fast, identifies letters and almost
reads. We are very satisfied. The project is a
success
This is a good program. It helped my boy.
Thanks to the program he knows to spell words
orallyand is well prepared to grade 1. I am
sorry that we did not have such a program in the
previous years
It is good to have a program that involves the
parents too
26
Teachers interviewsin their own voice (N 14)
We promoted childrens literacy to an advanced
level earlier this year. The ideas in the
guidebook for teachers made me invent new
materials. The program increased the motivation
to work harder and get higher achievements. It
increased my responsibility concerning childrens
achievements
Though I worked on literacy in kindergarten for
many years the program upgraded me and made me
demand more from the kids. Now I am
computer-literate and can use the internet
The contents were delivered in a game-like
atmosphere. It was a delight for the entire
class
27
Conclusions

• Focused intervention in kindergartens enhances
  the effects of instructional programs screened on
  public TV. This applies to alphabetic skills but
  not to linguistic skills.
• The effects are similar for low SES mainstream
  children, immigrants and children at academic
  risk.
• Low SES parents can become partners in promoting
  their childrens early literacy.
• Teachers and parents express high satisfaction.

28
Multi-media intervention effects on early
literacy

Dank u wel