Parental and Community Involvement in Early Grade Reading Yvonne - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Parental and Community Involvement in Early Grade Reading Yvonne Cao Aparna Ramesh NORC at the University of Chicago December 2014

Welcome and Introductions Yvonne Cao and Aparna Ramesh USAID Reading and Access Evaluation Contract

Quick Audience Poll • Who has worked on a parental and/ or community involvement intervention for early grade reading? • Who has researched parental and/ or community involvement for early grade reading? • Who is a parent? • Of those, who have kids in the primary grades or below? • Of those who are not parents, who has tutored or done some other volunteering to help children learn to read?

By the end of this webinar, you should be able to:  Articulate the importance of parental and community involvement research  Define parental/community involvement interventions in the literature  Identify which interventions seem promising based on the literature  Articulate good monitoring and evaluation practices and lessons learned around parental/community involvement  Articulate implementation considerations to keep in mind

Roadmap What‘s Behavior Why research Definitions So what effective change • Part 1: Why research: Why is parental and community involvement research important? • Part 2: Definitions: What do we actually mean by parental and community involvement? • Part 3: What’s effective: What parental and community involvement interventions are effective? • Part 4: Behavior change: What interventions are effective at bringing about behavior change and adoption? • Part 5: So What?

Part 1: Why is parental and community involvement research important? What‘s Behavior Why research Definitions So what effective change Key Take-Away: Home literacy environment is highly predictive of later literacy skills but is there a causal relationship?

The 30-million Word gap Hart & Risley, 1995

Where do children read? Use of Reading Skills by Grade 3 children in Malawi (n=600) 100% 6% 2% 90% 6% 24% 5% 80% 10% other 3% 4% 70% herding animals 60% hospital 22% 50% in the kitchen market 12% 40% 71% church/mosque 30% do not use 20% 35% 10% 0% Baseline Midline Save the Children, Literacy Boost Data

Contradictory Evidence? “[There is ] little empirical support for the widespread claim that parent involvement programs are an effective means of improving student achievement or changing parent, teacher and student behavior.” - Mattingly et al, 2002 “The combined results for the 16 intervention studies, representing 1,340 families, were clear: Parent involvement has a positive effect on children’s reading acquisition.” - Senechal & Young, 2008

Interventions work in two steps If we see improved literacy skills, Improved Improved we assume that the intervention Behavioral Behavioral Intervention Literacy Skills Intervention Literacy Skills led to an adoption of new Outcome Outcome behavior, which led to improved (Overall goal) (Overall goal) literacy. ? ? What if we do not see a change in No Change in literary skills? We could attribute Behavioral Intervention Literacy Skills this to either 1) no behavior Outcome change or 2) the behavior not (Overall goal) being effective Many studies do not systematically measure behavioral outcomes. When an intervention yields no change in literacy skills, it is difficult to understand why there was no change.

Part 2: What do we actually mean by parental and community involvement? What‘s Behavior Why research Definitions So what effective change Key Take-Away: parental and community involvement encompasses a wide variety of activities

Our focus: Out-of-School Learning Parents/ Community Teachers/ Students Schools “Family Literacy” “Home Literacy”

Family Literacy Programs generally aim to impact the Home Literacy Environment Value placed on literacy Opportunities Encouraging for verbal reading interaction Home Literacy Environment Family members Availability reading of print with material children Hess & Holloway, 1984

There is a wide variety of out-of-school interventions Parents / Other caregivers Peers Community Encouraging Tutoring/help Tutoring by parents to from peers volunteers Hom e read with their Reading Peer/ Com m unity Reading Educational children Program s Tutoring buddies TV Teaching Fam ily Reading Educational parents how Literacy camps radio to read with Program s their children Com m unity- Community Based libraries Teaching I nterventions parents Distribution of how to read print

4 types of interventions reviewed Home Reading Programs (HRP) Family Literacy Programs (FLP) Peer/Community Tutoring Programs Other Community-based Interventions Annex A: Typology of interventions

Question to Participants What out-of-school learning interventions have you implemented or do you know about? Handout 2 – Page 1 (Part 1) 1. Think of a parental/community involvement intervention 2. As a table, complete a theory of change diagram using one intervention. We will use this as a case study throughout the webinar.

Part 3: What’s effective: What parental and community involvement interventions are effective? What‘s Behavior Why research Definitions So what effective change Key Take-Away: The evidence is mixed although some interventions seem to show more promise: (a)interventions that teach specific skills to parents (b)interventions that are more structured (c) community tutors

Methodology We reviewed a total of 47 studies Design Experimental Quasi-experimental Countries Low/Middle-Income High Income Intervention type Aimed at changing parental involvement through direction action with child Community-based interventions Target age of Pre-K children P1-P3 Outcome Emergent Literacy Skills Literacy Skills Annex B: List of select references

4 types of interventions Home Reading Programs (HRP) Family Literacy Programs (FLP) Peer/Community Tutoring Programs Other Community-based Interventions

Types of Home Reading Programs • Take turns or • Reads aloud read chorally to child / style of interactive reading Read Aloud/ Paired / Dialogic Shared Reading Reading Direct Instruction / Hearing Structured Reading tutoring • Use of structured • Listens to activities and child read lessons

Quick Audience Poll Which of these HRPs do you think may be more effective?  Hearing Reading  Paired Reading  Dialogic Reading  Direct Instruction

Home Reading Programs Some Examples (Handout 1: Page 2, Part 3)

What is Paired Reading? http://youtu.be/H5RJyUnAkWM

What is Dialogic Reading? http://youtu.be/q30BdJm3Eeg?t=2s

Think-Pair-Share What did you notice in the videos? Do you think this would be implementable in your country? Why or why not?

Engaging in Paired Reading 1. Choral reading at child’s pace 2. Independent reading: nudge 3. If error, parents correct and child repeats the word 4. Choral reading until new nudge 5. Praise

Engaging in Dialogic Reading PEER Dialogue Structure P – Prompt the child to say something about the book. E – Evaluate the response. E – Extend the response. R – Repeat.

Engaging in Hearing Reading 1. Listen to the child read 2. Provide feedback – telling the child whether they have read accurately 3. Provide assistance – words or phrases that child cannot read

Home Reading Programs Dialogic Reading  Evidence mostly positive: Literature review of DR interventions found overall positive effect (Mol et al, 2008)  Landmark study by Whitehurst et al, 1988 (US)  Other studies found positive effects in other contexts  Sim et al, 2013: Australia  Chow & Mc-Bride Chang, 2003: Hong Kong  Opel et al, 2007: Bangladesh (daycare setting)  Valdez-Menchaca & Whitehurst, 1992: Mexico (daycare setting)  However, long-term effects are unclear  Whitehurst et al, 1988; Whitehurst et al, 1999; Sim et al 2013

Home Reading Programs Hearing Reading/Paired Reading Mixed Impact  Hearing Reading  Positive: Tizard et al 1982 (UK), with positive follow-up 3 years later  Mixed/No impact: Hannon, 1987 (UK); Wilks & Clarke, 1988 (Australia)  Paired Reading  Positive: Leach & Siddall, 1990 (Australia)  Mixed/No impact:  Miller et al (1986) (UK); Miller & Narrett, 1995 (US)  One study in India found both PR and HR to be equally effective (Shah-Wundenberg et al, 2012)  Case-Study 1

Home Reading Programs Direct Instruction / Parent Tutoring  Positive impact  Vinograd-Bausell & Bausell, 1987 (US)  Kraft et al, 2001 (US)  Buyuktaskapu, 2012 (Turkey)  Mixed/no impact  Searls et al, 1982 (US): effect in 1 st grade but not in 2 nd grade  Mehran & White, 1988 (US): after 3 months positive but not at follow-up  Powell-Smith et al, 2000 (US): children’s books vs school curriculum  Comparison of DI vs other HRPs  Meta-analyses showed that DI bigger effect sizes than other HRPs (Senechal & Young, 2008; Nye, 2006)  Leach & Siddall, 1990 (Australia)