Children’s Responses to Teacher’s Use of Literacy Enhancement Strategies During Book Reading
Sarah Cowen, B.S.
Advisors: Nancy Creaghead, Ph.D., CCC-SLP and Linda Sickman, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
University of Cincinnati
College of Allied Health Sciences
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders
INTRODUCTION
The goal of the Head Start Program is to prepare at-risk children to take maximal advantage of their
elementary school education. The better children’s academic skills when they emerge from preschool, the
more likely they are to do well in school. Thus, the role of the Head Start teacher is crucial in students’ lives.
The quality of teacher-child language and pre-literacy interactions is vital to Head Start children because an
effective preschool teacher can significantly raise students’ chances of academic success.
DISCUSSION
RESEARCH QUESTION
How do children respond when the teacher uses literacy enhancement strategies during book
reading?
METHODS
Children learn the required complex language skills by exposure to a variety of language experiences,
which may come from spoken interactions, in addition to the rich language examples found in books
(Zevenbergen & Whitehurst, 2002). Preliteracy and literacy activities are particularly important in the
preschool years because they foster language and reading skills simultaneously. Thus, the quality of
teacher-child language and literacy activities are vital to Head Start children.
This study is part of a larger study, which examined teacher change in use of literacy enhancement
strategies following modeling by an SLP during an ongoing, in-classroom book reading program. This
videotaping was one portion of the follow-up data.
A language-rich classroom can support teachers and the children to engage in the curriculum. The
environment of the classroom can be planned in such a way that allows the teacher to target specific
language throughout the classroom. For example, Justice (2004) developed an evidence-based plan using
five building blocks to achieve a language-rich preschool classroom. One of these blocks was rich adultchild language interactions. Justice (2004) stated that language should be experienced in various contexts
and with frequent opportunity and intentionally used during children’s activities so as to expose the children
to new skills. In addition, language should be repeatedly used so that children engage in many
opportunities to use the language skills. Furthermore, language in the classroom involves many different
words and word types (e.g. nouns, adjectives); is combined in many different ways, such as in declarative
sentences or wh-questions; and is implemented in a variety of situations and classroom activities.
One lead and one assistant teacher from the same urban Head Start classroom and up to 7 children
were participants for this study. The lead teacher had 2 students in the reading group and the assistant
teacher had 5 students in the reading group. Ages of the children participants ranged from 42 months to
58 months.
Children’s responses to teacher’s use of questions was examined in the de Rivera, Girolametto, Greenberg
and Weitzman (2005) study. Preschool and toddler teacher-child groups were observed during a 15 minute
play dough activity. The use of open-ended versus closed-ended and topic continuing versus topic initiating
questions were the focus of the study. Children’s responses to the teacher’s use of each type of question
used were analyzed. Results indicated teachers used more closed-ended questions than open-ended
during the activity, and that 50% of the teacher’s utterances were questions. Preschoolers were noted to
respond using longer utterances to topic continuing questions.
A partnership between a local urban Head Start center and the University of Cincinnati was established to
support classroom teachers during language and literacy activities. A book reading program was instituted
at this site at the request of the Head Start director (Sickman & Smith, 2006). One literacy enhancement
strategy was modeled by the SLP during book reading and then implemented by the teacher each week for
10 weeks. Each week’s collaboration was videotaped to examine the teachers’ implementation of the
literacy enhancement strategies.
PURPOSE
The goal of this research was to examine children’s use of language in their responses to their
teacher’s use of literacy enhancement strategies following modeling by a SLP during book reading.
SICKMAN BOOK READING PROGRAM
Modified from the Smith & Sickman Book Reading Program (Sickman & Smith, 2006)
Interactive Book Reading (Adapted from Zevenbergen & Whitehurst, 2003)
•Ask open-ended questions
•Expand on what the child says
•Ask text-to-life questions
Vocabulary (Adapted from McGee & Richgels, 2003)
•Pick 8-10 vocabulary words and define during book reading
Concept of Story (Adapted from McGee & Richgels, 2003)
•Label the beginning, middle, and end of the story
•Bring children’s attention to the characters
•Describe the setting of the story
•Talk about prediction of story events
•Draw conclusions about story events
Print Awareness (Adapted from Justice & Ezell, 2002)
•General comments about book
•Ask questions about the print
Phonological Awareness (Adapted from McGee & Richgels, 2003)
•Highlight rhyming
Participants
Procedures
This study was conducted one year post-implementation of the book reading program. Each teacher
was videotaped with a small group of children, whose parents had given permission to participate. The
teacher’s use of literacy enhancement strategies was coded and counted. The children’s responses to
their teacher’s use of these strategies was transcribed, coded, and counted.
RESULTS
During the book reading session the lead teacher employed a total of 11 literacy enhancement strategies
while reading “What Makes Me Happy?” By Catherine and Laurence Anholt (1995). The assistant teacher
read “The Runaway Bunny” by Margret Wise Brown and the illustrations by Clemet Herd (1942). The
assistant teachers’ book reading session had a total of 8 literacy enhancement strategies applied. Even
though different types of strategies were observed between the lead and assistant teacher, the children’s
MLU was higher with the lead teacher. A possible reason for the discrepancy could be the book chosen by
each teacher. The difference could be due to classroom experience. The lead teacher possessed more than
10 years teaching experience with preschool children. The assistant teacher had 1-5 years of teaching
experience. In addition, the difference in the MLU could also be due to the age range. The younger children
were in the assistant teacher’s reading group.
Our analysis revealed the more strategies used during book reading, the more opportunities the children had
to respond using their own words. Justice and Ezell (2002) also established that children’s participation
improved during reading sessions when a teacher implemented a print awareness strategy. In addition,
Whitehurst, et al. (1998) observed that after training parents to implement specific book reading strategies
children’s oral language use did improve and demonstrated a larger MLU (2.55) than those children in the
control group (MLU= 2.04). The children participants ranged in age from 21 months to 35 months.
This study was a small, pilot study to determine how children verbally respond to the use of teacher literacy
enhancement behaviors. There was no pre-book reading data to compare these results. Thus, it is difficult to
know the exact impact the literacy enhancement strategies had on the children’s language use. Future
research in children’s language outcomes as a result of the teacher’s implementation of book reading
strategies would be beneficial to support the use of the strategies as well as to observe if children’s language
use improves as a result of the strategy use.
The lead teacher carried out the following literacy enhancement strategies learned in the previous year:
demonstrated general comments about the print, asked text-to-life questions, asked a prediction
question, expanded on the what the child said, asked an open ended question, and asked a question
about the beginning, middle, and end of the book.
The assistant teacher carried out the following literacy enhancement strategies learned in the previous
year: asked general questions about the book, asked prediction questions, asked an open ended
question, asked the children to draw a conclusion, and asked a question regarding the beginning,
middle, and end of the book.
Retherford’s (1993) modified version of the Type-Token Ratio (TTR), as cited in Shipley and McAfee
(2004) was used to analyze the semantic skills the children demonstrated with the lead and assistant
teacher. In the modified TTR, different types of words are counted rather than the different words used
(Shipley & McAfee 2004). The lead and assistant teacher’s group had a TTR of .62. Considering the
short length of the same and the small sample size, the results revealed that the children used a diverse
vocabulary.
The mean length of utterance (MLU) was also determined by analyzing the same groups. A small
sample size was also used to in determining the MLU. The lead teachers’ group had an MLU of 3.21.
The assistant teachers’ group had an MLU of 2.43.
Picture 1: Lead Teacher reading
“What Makes Me Happy?”
Picture 2: Assistant Teacher reading
“The Runaway Bunny”
Lead and Assistant Teacher Use of Book Reading Strategies
REFERENCES
Anholt,C., & Anholt, L. (1995). What makes me happy? Cambridge, MA: Candlewick.
Brown, M.W., & Herd, C. (1972). The runaway bunny (Rev. ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
deRivera, C., Girolametto, L., Greenberg, J., & Weitzman, E. (2005). Children’s responses to educators’
questions in day care play groups. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14, 14-26.
Justice, L.M. (2004). Creating language-rich preschool classroom environments. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37, 36-44.
Justice, L. M., & Ezell, H.K. (2002). Use of storybook reading to increase print awareness in at-risk
children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11,17-29.
McGee, L. M. & Richgels, D.J. (2003). Designing early literacy programs: Strategies for at-risk preschool
and kindergarten children. New York: The Guilford Press.
Retherford, K. (1993). Guide to analysis of language transcripts (2 nd ed.). Eau Claire, WI: Thinking
Publications.
Shipley, K. G., & McAfee, J.G. (2004). Assessment in speech-language pathology: A resource manual
(3rd ed). New York: Delmar Learning.
Sickman, L.S. & Smith, A.B. (2006). Building a book reading program in an urban Head Start. Hearsay, Journal of the Ohio
Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 18, 38-42.
Zevenbergen, A. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2003). Dialogic reading: A shared picture book reading
intervention for preschoolers. In A. van Kleek, S. Stahl & E. Bauer (Eds.), On Reading Books to
Children (pp. 177-200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.