Research Design

Abstract and Research Design

Abstract: Emergent literacy focuses on children's language skills as critical to the foundation of reading and subsequent success in school. As reading and print are extensions of language, experiences with books, print and book language are crucial. As adult modeling and sharing of reading is the key to these experiences with print, a variety of adult reading behaviors have been identified and inconclusively explored as to their relationships to fostering language development. This action research attempted to explore the best approach in reading aloud to young children. An alternating treatments design was used to vary two reading approaches; interactive (based on Whitehurst et al,1994, which focuses on questioning and expanding children's language during read alouds) and non interactive read alouds (which involves no teacher lead discussions). Progress was assessed using a teacher made checklist, language samples and teacher observation. After eight weeks of alternating interactive and non interactive reading, no conclusive evidence was found to support either approach.

Question:. Is there one unique read aloud approach that significantly enhances language development? Does the amount and quality of adult talk during shared reading activities have an impact on children's literacy and language development?

Population : The subjects for this research project were 3 four year old children attending an integrated three day afternoon program at the Roland Green Preschool. These children were selected based upon their willingness and ability to take part in the project.

Project Design: An alternating treatment design was used that randomly alternated the interactive reading approach with a non interacting reading approach over an 8 week period. Student's performance for each treatment was measured weekly using a triangulation process; observation, language samples and a teacher made retelling checklist.

Procedures: The two reading approaches were randomly implemented with one of either approach conducted each week. A total of 4 non interactive readings and 4 interactive readings were conducted. Weekly recordings of children's talk during readings were made. After each reading, children were interviewed to assess their ability to retell components of the story. A teacher made checklist was used to judge the content and quality of the retellings, the child's understanding of the story sequence as well as their grasp of new concepts and vocabulary. Points were given for the children's ability to identify or describe characters and vocabulary as well as for the content and quality of the retellings. A total of 10 points could be awarded. Language samples were transcribed from the recordings and tallied by the number of utterances during each story event. Observations of children's engagement and behavior during the readings were recorded anecdotally.

Materials: Ten big books, (selected for content and number of sentences per page), a tape recorder, the teacher made checklist, language samples, and observation notes.

Data Analysis: The checklist results from each child's retelling was graphed weekly to compare changes in performance based upon the two reading approaches. Language samples were tallied and graphed to view any correlation between readings and the number of utterances for each child. Observational notes were reviewed to determine on task behavior, on topic utterances and any significant events that may impact performance.

The interactive reading approach is based upon the dialogic reading intervention program designed by Whitehurst et al., 1994. Specifically, the adult is directed to:

1) Ask 'what' type questions, versus simple yes/no questions.

2)Ask open ended questions i.e.. 'Why do you think he did that ?'. " What happened?', 'What do you think will happen next?' 'Why did he do that?'