Sunday, July 6, 2014
Monday, June 30, 2014
Monday, March 31, 2014
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Last week I did a webinar in which I shared the results of the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP), which reviewed research on literacy development and instruction with preschoolers and kindergarten (there is a link to the report in the right hand margin of my site).
I was asked if I would answer questions mailed in by the audience. I agreed, and below have included my answers. Thought they might be interesting to a larger audience, so here they are:
1. In our preschool classrooms, what are the top 5 techniques we should being using?
Staying very close to the findings I would say: (a) definitely teach the alphabetic code; that means working with phonological awareness, letter names, and letter sounds (such teaching was found to be beneficial with kids in this age group and the teaching seemed to have long-lasting value); (b) also, it is a good idea to read books to children daily and to talk to them about what you are reading (ask them questions about it, explain the vocabulary, listen to their ideas, make connections to what they know)--reading to children in this way helps build their language; (c) involve children in writing (pretend writing, writing their names, dictating words/stories/ideas to you); (d) build the children’s language (use interesting and complex language yourself, engage children in activities that raise ideas and that give the opportunity for using language (e.g., cooking, measuring, science activities, arts and crafts), don’t accept vague or weak language from the children, but elaborate on it and get them to speak in complete thoughts, using the right words; and (e) get moms and dads helping in the process, they can help with many of the items above.
2. Is there a literacy readiness test that is highly correlated with actual readiness that you can recommend?
Get Ready to Read! which is made available by the National Center for Learning Disabilities is a good predictor and its design is consistent with the research findings on early literacy.
3. Did the survey find any longitudinal studies of very early decoding? What I have in mind is children who learn to decode at age two, say--how do they do later on?
No, and there are very few studies of younger children (none of 2 year olds, and only a handful with 3 year olds). Generally, we found that the children younger than 5 (meaning the 3s and 4s) who did well with decoding, also did well with later reading (both decoding and comprehension). It is clearly valuable to get them started early, but no info on the 2s.
4. Does RAN (rapid naming) correlate to the use of flash cards? Are you recommending flash cards, and if so, at what age levels? What is your opinion about using flash cards with very young children?
I know of no studies connecting RAN to flash card use, and I do not believe that the evidence in any way suggests that you should even try to teach RAN. (Flash cards with words or pictures or letters are okay to use with young children at any age, BUT if you spend a couple of hours a day engaged in the types of activities noted in item 1 above, proportionally it would make sense to work with flashcards only for a few minutes of that time (in other words, it wouldn’t even get 5% of your literacy time). Flashcards can be a useful tool for memorization (I use them myself when I am trying to learn this kind of information), but their use has to be lively, quick, and brief to have much value.
5. What are the most important early childhood teaching implications for this research?
That you can provide young children with supports for their literacy learning from the very beginning. I vividly remember when “experts” (without data) were claiming that either young children would not be ready to benefit from such teaching or that such teaching would do harm. What the research overwhelmingly shows is that young children clearly benefit from such teaching and the benefits can be long lasting (if the schools build on these children’s early learning). A second important idea is that there is not one thing that has to be done (different activities had different outcomes and young readers need support in various literacy-related outcomes to be successful).
6. What are the teaching implications for older students who may not have these pre-requisite skills to be able to use reading for learning? grades 4-8?
There were no implications for those kids at all from this analysis. However, the National Reading Panel (NRP) looked at such issues (there is a link to that report on the right as well) and they found that teaching phonemic awareness, phonics, and oral reading fluency to struggling readers in those age ranges resulted in improvement. However, in all cases, the NRP concluded that such learning was slower and more difficult (so definitely try to accomplish it early) and some of this teaching (such as phonics) didn’t have the same impact on other aspects of reading that it did when children were younger (again, it is critical that these skills get accomplished as early as possible, but when that has not happened it is important to try to build that foundation later on--though that effort will likely be difficult).
Monday, October 18, 2010
How can parents and teachers increase their young children's knowledge of the world, as such knowledge propels reading comprehension? Certainly, it is a good idea to talk to your child a lot, pointing things out, defining them, and explaining them.
It is a terrific idea to read to your children, too. That is a great way to get them beyond their experience and to help them develop language for what they are learning. Similarly, watching (some) television shows together and talking about it as you would personal experience can increase what children know.
Now there is a new resource that my friends at the National Center for Family Literacy have been engaged in. It is a website called Wonderopolis, and every day there is a new short video aimed at preschoolers and early schoolers that exposes them to information about the world in cute and engaging ways. If you've every had to explain to a 4-year-old why jello wiggles or why grandpa has old hair, you'll appreciate these child-friendly explorations and explanations. Check it out at:
Monday, February 22, 2010
Becky Schaller recently sent the following note to this blog:
I am struck by how different literacy instruction for preschoolers is by your description here than it was ten years ago. Back then, we also included teaching literacy by encouraging pretend writing in the different areas of the room. In the dramatic play area, children might pretend to write out a grocery list. In the block area, they might make a sign. Does literacy during play time count any more? Or is the focus more teacher directed now?
Her question as to "what counts as literacy instruction?" is a fair one. It is easy enough to block out time for activities like writing, but what can be in that space and what can't?
Teaching includes teacher telling and teacher explanation. Indeed, when a teacher stands before a group and shows the children a letter and tells them the letter name is an "R" that is obviously teaching. However, it is also teaching when a teacher leads students in some kind of guided doing (such as when the teacher and students do choral reading with a chart while the teacher points at the words). And so are more independent practice activities, such as the idea of students trying to write grocery lists in the dramatic play area.
However, practice requires that something taught is being explored. Ten years ago a preschool teacher may have had writing opportunities arranged across the classroom, but there would be little direct teaching (the kids would practice writing based on what they learned elsewhere). Now the teacher introduces letters, sounds, words, and shows students how to write. The knowledge from such lessons is secured as children try to use that input within their play.
Practice is part of teaching. Practice needs to be articulated in ways that it leads to more learning, including providing kids with guidance from a more knowledgeable person (some of the time), collaborative practice opportunities, and eventually independent practice). It should include opportunities for feedback and review, too.
Many activities themselves don't differentiate teaching now from teaching 10 years ago: pretend reading, pretend writing, dramatic play, teacher book sharing were all part of the landscape then and they can be now. How connected these practice opportunities are to intended learning outcomes has changed, however.
Ten years ago, many preschool and kindergarten teachers were afraid to tell students stuff or to show them how to do things. Now, perhaps, the fear has shifted, and teachers may be afraid to have kids play with what has been presented. Good teaching includes both didactic lessons and opportunities to practice and play.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
I just received this request for information from a friend:
The question being posed is, "how many minutes of literacy instruction is
recommended for early childhood, ages such as preschool and kindergarten?"
The amount recommended in our district for grades 1-8 is 120 minutes, so we obviously need to rethink our message to the early childhood program. I'm not sure if you are familiar with or if this is relevant, but the early childhood program (preschool - kindergarten) uses Creative Curriculum, which incorporates center choices with whole group reading and writing instruction.
Thank you in advance for your advice!
There are no data that I am aware of on that issue, so anything I can tell you will be conjecture.
When I answer this question (and I do with some regularity), my first response to is ask a question back: “how long are the preschoolers and kindergartners there?” The answer to that usually varies from half day to full day. Because literacy and language aren’t the only issues that need to be addressed in instruction, it is important that literacy be a good curricular neighbor (not crowding everyone else unnecessarily).
If it is a whole day situation, then I would argue for the full 2 hours that you are spending in grades 1-8, and if it is half day, then about 1 hour will have to do it.
What should go into that 1-2 hours? Your curriculum does a good job of supporting teachers in some of these categories, and you might consider supplementing where it does not. We don’t provide children with much oral language stimulation in grades 1-8 (except incidentally across the day), but with young children some direct attention to oral language instruction and stimulation is appropriate as part of the literacy time.
In 2 hours, I would expect some code work (with letters and sounds), some fluency work (like pretend reading, choral reading, fingerpoint reading), some listening comprehension (or reading comprehension if the kids have started reading), some language work (including vocabulary), and some writing time. For a smaller amount of time, I would teach the same things (just not as much of them, but I wouldn’t leave any of them out).
Your curriculum presents letters and sounds whole group, and that is iffy. While juggling times with small groups can be tricky, the studies of code instruction have only been done with small groups at these age levels. This means it will take more than two hours to deliver two real hours of instruction and experience.
Finally, 2 hours does not necessarily mean a block of time. This does not have to be done from 9-11AM; with young kids, short time spans for activities is necessary and these various activities can be interspersed through the day. A little harder to keep track of whether you have hit the time goal, but a lot more sensible to deliver.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
It's kind of neat: you can submit questions or comments that get posted, but then throughout next week, Laura, Tori, and I will be posting our responses, etc. It is a nice opportunity. Here is the address for subscribing to that discussion, hope I see you there:
And here is more information about it:
The Impact of the Findings of the National Early Literacy Panel March 9 - 13, 2009
The Family Literacy Discussion List will facilitate a panel discussion about the recommendations of the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) and their impact on educators, parents and other children's caregivers. Three members of the NELP will participate in the discussion. The discussion will take place March 9-13, 2009. Please read the details below, think about the questions, raise questions of your own, and prepare for an exciting look at the findings of the National Early Literacy Panel.
The National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) was convened in 2002 to conduct a synthesis of the scientific research on the development of early literacy skills in children ages zero to five. The objective for convening the NELP was to identify interventions and practices that promote positive outcomes in literacy for preschool children.
The National Institute for Literacy (Institute) acted as the lead agency in this project, in consultation with cooperating agencies from the Partnership for Reading. The National Center for Family Literacy, working closely with the Institute, coordinated NELP's work in the completion of the synthesis.
The panel's report, Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel, was released on January 8, 2009. Developing Early Literacy serves as the basis for several, research-based recommendations for parents and the early childhood community, including educators, caregivers, and Head Start providers on promoting the foundational skills of life-long literacy.
Laura Westberg is Director of Special Projects/Research at the National Center for Family Literacy. In this capacity, she oversees research and evaluation across the organization for determining the effectiveness of products and services that contribute to the literacy development of young children through adults. Her responsibilities include project management and supervision, project design, product development, research and evaluation, and proposal and grant writing. Ms. Westberg directed the work of the National Early Literacy Panel and coordinated a meta-analysis on parent involvement in children's reading acquisition for the National Institute for Literacy.
Victoria Molfese is the Ashland/Nystrand Chair in Early Childhood Education at the University of Louisville and Director of the Center for Research in Early Childhood. She received her PhD in Developmental Psychology from the Pennsylvania State University and has published journal articles, books, and book chapters in the area of cognitive development in infants, children and adults. She has received grants in support of research activities, including an NIH funded longitudinal research grant on brain and behavioral predictors of language, reading and cognitive development in children from birth through age 13 years. She currently is conducting research on early predictors of reading and mathematics abilities in infants and preschool children, efficacy of mathematics intervention in preschoolers on improving skills of children at risk at kindergarten entry and the development of interventions for infants and preschoolers to mitigate development of learning disabilities. Dr. Molfese served as a member of the National Early Literacy Panel.
Timothy Shanahan is the chair of the National Early Literacy Panel. Dr. Shanahan is also a Professor of Urban Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago and Director of the UIC Center for Literacy. He has served as Director of Reading for the Chicago Public Schools, and is a former first grade teacher. His research focuses on the relationship of reading and writing, the assessment of reading ability, family literacy, and school improvement. He has published more than 100 articles, chapters, and books on these topics.
1. What were the questions that the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) answered?
2. What types of interventions did the NELP look at?
3. What are the implications of the NELP findings for the instruction and assessment of young children?
4. What do the findings of the NELP mean to adult/parent educators?
5. How can parents best utilize the findings of the NELP to bolster the learning of their children?
Read the Executive Summary of the NELP Report, Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel, to enrich your participation in the discussion. It may be downloaded from http://nifl.gov/nifl/publications/pdf/NELPSummary.pdf
A copy of the full report can be downloaded from http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/publications/pdf/NELPReport09.pdf
Free print copies are available from EDPubs at http://edpubs.ed.gov/
A powerpoint presentation of NELP:
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Today at the National Press Club, the National Early Literacy Panel Report was released. All of us on the panel were relieved to have this work completed and that it is now available to everybody. If you would like a copy, click here:
This report focuses on what works in improving the literacy skills of preschoolers and kindergarten children. It got a lot of attention from the press and various policy people (including someone from the Obama Transition Team). This is important work and it is sure to be a widely cited and used work in early literacy. More details on this later, but for now, read the report!