LANGUAGE AND LITERACY LEARNING: PLACER COUNTY HEAD START
PROGRAM
Annabella Scott Matthews
B.A., California State University, San Diego, 1974
PROJECT
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
EDUCATION
(Language and Literacy)
at
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO
SPRING
2011
© 2011
Annabella Scott Matthews
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
LANGUAGE AND LITERACY LEARNING: PLACER COUNTY HEAD START
PROGRAM
A Project
by
Annabella Scott Matthews
Approved by:
_________________________________, Committee Chair
Terry Underwood, PhD.
______________________
Date
iii
Student: Annabella Scott Matthews
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the
University format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library
and credit is to be awarded for the Project.
, Graduate Coordinator
Deidre Sessoms, PhD.
Date
Department of Teacher Education
iv
Abstract
of
LANGUAGE AND LITERACY LEARNING: PLACER COUNTY HEAD START
PROGRAM
by
Annabella Scott Matthews
Statement of Problem
This study explored the perceived effectiveness of the Head Start State
Preschool Program in California in regards to language and literacy development of
the students who attend the Early Child Development Program. Note that Head Start
programs are in place to address the needs of low-income children who would not
otherwise have a preschool education available to them. To assess the sense of selfefficacy of the program in Placer County, specifically, three school sites were
observed and surveyed as to their literacy practices. The intention was to find out what
the stakeholders perceived about their own effectiveness and of the effectiveness of
the curriculum and instructional practices. The study then explored the claims and
concerns of the stakeholders, and finally provides feedback to the stakeholders to
improve self-understanding.
v
Sources of Data
The sources of data for this study were direct observations of the students and
teachers in the classrooms, focus groups at the school sites, teacher surveys, and
interviews. Analysis was done through comparing findings regarding student learning
in the classrooms and results on standardized testing.
As a foundation in the literature for the study, research was done into the
California Department of Education Learning Foundations for reading and writing.
Research was also completed regarding the High/Scope preschool curriculum in
language and literacy as was the DRDP-R (Desired Results Developmental Profile
Revised), which is the current standardized measurement of preschool achievement
and kindergarten readiness.
Conclusions Reached
Evidence for student learning was compared to the teachers’ perceptions about
literacy practices and effectiveness of those practices in the classroom. The teachers’
concerns and issues with regards to student learning were validated in the following
areas:

Phonemic awareness mastery.

Classroom reading practice.

Parental involvement with children’s reading practice.

Reading materials availability in all home languages.
vi
Areas of concern expressed that were not validated by the evidence gathered in this
study are as follows:

Concern that the children are lacking “kindergarten readiness.”

Behavior difficulties/impulse control in the children.
The study culminated in a list of recommendations and suggested actions that
may be given consideration by school personnel in regards to solutions to their
concerns. These recommendations and suggested actions are by no means exhaustive
in nature, but may be deemed useful to those seeking more guidance or alternative
methods in resolving difficulties and improving results in the classroom.
_____________________, Committee Chair
Terry Underwood, PhD.
_______________
Date
vii
DEDICATION
In loving memory of my nephew,
Gregory Aaron Wright
(1971-2010)
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My deepest appreciation is extended to all the many teachers and mentors who
have offered inspiration and encouragement, as I pursued an education in the
profession of teaching. My many thanks to my professors in the Department of
Education, especially Dr. Underwood and Dr. Lilly, for providing the expertise that
guided my completion of this project, and to all my peers who patiently read my work
and offered valuable suggestions. Your energy and enthusiasm are boundless! I admire
each one of you.
I also would like to express appreciation and love to my family for all their
faithful support through my journey as a life-long learner.
Best of all, I would like to thank all of my students who gave to me the most
important part of my education, reminding me always what it is to be a child and to
experience the world through a never-ending sense of discovery.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication.................................................................................................................. viii
Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................... ix
List of Tables .............................................................................................................. xii
List of Figures............................................................................................................ xiii
Chapter
1.
PLACER COUNTY HEAD START PROGRAM: INTRODUCTION ............... 1
Purpose ............................................................................................................. 1
Background on the Head Start State Preschool Program ................................. 1
Program Review ............................................................................................... 2
A State Portrait of Head Start Programs/Early Childhood Education .............. 4
A County Portrait of Head Start Programs/Early Childhood Education .......... 6
A Portrait of Roseville III State Preschool/Head Start: Overview ................. 12
Stakeholders ................................................................................................... 15
Stakeholders Claims, Concerns, and Issues ................................................... 17
A Portrait of Loomis Head Start Single Session: Overview .......................... 18
Stakeholders ................................................................................................... 21
Stakeholders Claims, Concerns, and Issues ................................................... 22
A Portrait of Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool: Overview ............................ 23
Stakeholders ................................................................................................... 26
Stakeholders Claims, Concerns, and Issues ................................................... 27
Summary......................................................................................................... 29
2.
REVIEW OF RESEARCH ................................................................................. 30
External Assessments ..................................................................................... 34
x
Classroom Assessments.................................................................................. 35
Summary......................................................................................................... 39
3.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: FINDINGS ........................................................ 41
Sources of Data and Findings ......................................................................... 41
Evidence of Student Learning ........................................................................ 42
Relationship to CCIs....................................................................................... 60
Summary......................................................................................................... 64
4.
CONCLUSIONS: RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTED
ACTIONS............................................................................................................ 66
Recommendations and Suggested Actions ..................................................... 69
Other Suggested Recommendations and Actions........................................... 72
Summary......................................................................................................... 75
Appendix A. CSUS Reading Research Project: Language Arts Survey
Questions ........................................................................................... 76
Appendix B. Language and Literacy Standards ....................................................... 78
Appendix C. Desired Results Developmental Profile Revised ................................ 91
Appendix D. Student Summary Report .................................................................... 97
Appendix E. California State Profile ........................................................................ 99
Appendix F. DRDP-R Survey Questions ............................................................... 104
References ................................................................................................................ 106
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1.
Demographics of Roseville III Student Population ........................................ 17
2.
Demographics of Loomis Head Start Student Population .............................. 22
3.
Demographics of Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool Student Population ....... 27
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1.
Gender of Preschool Population in Placer County ........................................... 7
2.
Ethnicity of Preschool Population in Placer County ........................................ 8
3.
Percentage of Children in the Top Two Developmental Levels .................... 37
4.
Head Start Children Achievement Levels ...................................................... 38
5.
Language and Literacy Desired Results Developmental Profile 2010 ........... 46
6.
High/Scope Efficacy Teacher Survey ............................................................ 51
7.
Student Learning Teacher Survey .................................................................. 52
xiii
1
Chapter 1
PLACER COUNTY HEAD START PROGRAM: INTRODUCTION
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to explore the effectiveness of the Head Start
State Preschool Program in regards to language and literacy development of the
students who attend the Early Child Development Program. In order to assess the
efficacy of the program in Placer County, specifically, three school sites were
observed and surveyed as to their literacy practices. The three school sites were:
Roseville III State Preschool/Head Start, Loomis Head Start Single Session, and
Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool/AM-PM Head Start in Lincoln.
The purpose of this study was to find out what the stakeholders perceive about
their effectiveness, to explore those claims and concerns, and then to provide feedback
to improve self-understanding.
The study examined the Head Start Preschool Program to provide a portrait of
each of the three study schools, an overview of the literacy instruction at each of the
three campuses, documentation of student success in language and literacy, and
recommendations based on the results of the study.
Background on the Head Start State Preschool Program
The study of a large educational system of the magnitude of Head Start must
begin with an overview of the program at the National Level. Insights were gleaned
from studying the national context in which the institution of Head Start must
function. The context of the schools under Head Start were explored as to who, what
2
,why, where, and when, as well as how this educational system is administered at the
macro-level before examining the influential context of operating under the California
State Department of Education and other governing bodies such as the Placer
Community Action Council and Policy Committee. The information was derived
about each one from reports and minutes of meetings, as well as written statements
and opinions expressed by officials, representatives, and advocates of Early Childhood
Education at the administrative levels: national, state, and county.
The overview emerges into an examination of the claims, concerns and issues
which are expressed as a consensus by representatives of these governing bodies. This
allows for a comparison to the claims, concerns and issues revealed at the micro-level
of the schools themselves.
A portrait of each of the school sites follows, ending with a summary of the
claims, concerns and issues of the stakeholders involved at each school. Each school
has been observed separately and the stakeholders at each site interviewed and/or
surveyed to determine these results and subsequent recommendations to advance the
cause of literacy through a collaborative effort.
Program Review
A National Portrait of Head Start Programs/ Early Childhood Education
Early Childhood Education is of national public and political concern in that
four decades of research shows that it provides a foundation for building a strong
nation and a strong workforce. Pre-K returns $7 for every dollar invested resulting
3
from savings over time due to less need for social services, less health care expense
and fewer incarcerations (Preschool California, 2010a).
High quality Pre-K education is an opportunity for our nation that it cannot
afford to pass up. Research shows that high-quality Early Childhood Education closes
the achievement gap and helps kids to succeed in school. President Obama supports
allocation of $1 billion dollars per year in grants to states to improve pre-school
education (Chamow, 2010).
Advantages of Preschool Education

According to the study done in 2007 by the Economic Policy Institute and the
results reported in California Fact Sheet, Early Childhood Education saves
money on K-12 education, public assistance, judicial system, as well as
increasing tax revenue from employment. The report indicates that this is
because Early Childhood Education increases social skills, paying attention,
finishing tasks, accepting responsibility, and perseverance (Preschool
California, 2010b).

Employers feel that a good pre-school education promotes less absenteeism on
the job.

Provides a language-rich environment that promotes reading skills such as
recognizing letters as well as vowel and consonant sounds.

Ninety-five percent of kindergarten teachers say that children that attend preschool are better prepared for kindergarten.
4

Children who attend pre-school are less likely to attend special education
classes (Preschool California, 2010a).
Challenges of the Preschool Educational System

The children who could benefit most from preschool are least likely to be
enrolled in a program (Hispanic, Afro-Americans, ELL students).

Only 53% of low-income children attend pre-school.

Less than 30% of the nation’s children are served with early childhood
education programs.

Only 13% of low-income children are in high quality pre-schools.
(Preschool California, 2010a).
Issues That Could be Topics for Further Research

How to fund Early Childhood Education effectively in a difficult economy.

Should children be mandated to complete a Pre-K education?

Higher quality teachers should be recruited for Early Childhood educational
settings (Preschool California, 2010a).
A State Portrait of Head Start Programs/Early Childhood Education
The State of California, according to the California Progress Report,
September 2009, released the STAR test results which revealed that a significant
achievement gap remains even though students continue to make academic progress.
Superintendent Jack O’Connell noted that the reason is partly because many children
start kindergarten without the advantage of a pre-school education:
5
Preschool will help us raise achievement levels for all children in California,
and it offers real hope for closing the achievement gap. I am convinced that
California should and will find a way to expand access to effective prekindergarten. I want all California 4 year olds to be given the foundation that
truly prepares them for school and a lifelong love of learning. (O'Connell,
2005, p. A1)
Advantages of Preschool Education

Children are better prepared for school thanks to California Head Start
programs. A new study released by the California Head Start Association and
Child Care Results indicates significant improvement for Head Start
participants across various development areas, including language and literacy,
math, motor and social skills.

High-quality preschool helps kids become ready to read. Good reading skills
are the foundation for all future learning. It’s best to build this foundation
before kindergarten, in effective preschool programs.

Pre-school education ensures that they will be good citizens and taxpayers, not
prison inmates and live healthier lives needing less public assistance
Californians know high-quality early learning gets children ready to learn and
do their best in school. Momentum to expand access to high-quality preschool
programs continues to grow across the state and the nation (Preschool California,
2010b).
6
Challenges to the Preschool Educational System
There is a concern by educational professionals that preschool become
available to all children, as expressed in the following statement by Pam Brady,
President of the California State Parent Teachers Assocation: “California parents
know how crucial a good preschool experience can be to a child’s social competence
and academic success in school. All California children should have the opportunity to
experience effective, developmentally-appropriate preschool” (Preschool California,
2010b).
Issues That Could be Topics for Further Research

Negotiating more funding for Early Childhood Education Programs

Funding more research on Early Childhood Education Programs

How to serve the growing population of ELL students which make up 45% of
California’s pre-school children.
Pre-school programs address the readiness gap before it becomes the
achievement gap. (Fifty percent of California’s fourth graders cannot read at a basic
level according to the National Center for Educational Research (Preschool California,
2010b).
A County Portrait of Head Start Programs/Early Childhood Education
The County of Placer has a large population of pre-school age children. The
population of birth to five year olds grew from 6,618 to 24,856 in the last forty years
from 1970 to 2010. The following provide the statistics on the ethnicity and gender of
7
the population of birth to five year olds in Placer County for the year 2006. This year
was the latest year available data for this study (see Figure 1 and Figure 2).
Figure 1. Gender of Preschool Population in Placer County.
8
Figure 2. Ethnicity of Preschool Population in Placer County.
Placer County’s Head Start Program is administered by the Placer Community
Action Council also known as “KidZKount” created in 1967 as part of the Economic
Recovery Act in the War on Poverty. Eighty-percent of the budget is from federal
funding, the balance comes from the state and fundraising done within the institutions.
The council oversees 17 Head Start Pre-schools in the county, each school having its
own Site Supervisor.
A Child Development Specialist, who is similar to a Superintendent, is in
charge of supervising the Site Supervisors, who operate the sites. A Site Supervisor is
9
very much like the principal in an elementary school, although the schools are often
very small and may contain only one classroom.
The Placer Community Action Council or “KidZKount” is the governing body
which makes budgeting and program decisions, as well as containing various
committees and members who take care of liaisons with parents and the community.
Their stated mission is “to empower children and their families to maximize their full
potential through opportunities for growth and change” (KidZKount, 2010).
KidZKount is a non-profit organization with a $5,000,000 budget that operates the
following programs:

Head Start

Early Head Start

State Preschool

Private Provider Programs

Before and After Care

Summer Camp
Program Standards Encompass:

Child Development

Family Development

Staff Development

Community-building
10
The State Preschool/Head Start/Wrap-Around programs serve children three to
five years of age with a full-day classroom experience. Alternately, children may
attend a half-day session, as well.
Advantages of Preschool Education

An effective school site literacy program for male involvement called:
“Daddy Read to Me” is nationally recognized.

Fifty-one percent of the Policy Board seats are occupied by parents.

Twenty percent of funding comes from volunteer fundraising and donations.

Summer Camp Program for Kindergarten Readiness.

Celebrating Families is a program for parent education.

Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Plans are in place identifying strengths
and gaps.

Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) identifying actions to be taken to ensure
that children meet national averages academically.

Student performance is at a level very close to the National Averages for Head
Start.

High parent-involvement in program and activities.

Children’s Event fostering the role of storytelling in early childhood settings.
Challenges for the Preschool Educational System

Workshops concerning development of children’s self-control/classroom
management.
11

Focusing on providing healthier food.

Focusing on recycling and reducing waste.

Parent involvement in reading to their children.

Providing parent materials are in both English and Spanish languages.
Issues That Could be Topics for Further Research

Controlling environment toxins, ingesting organic foods as a way to protect
children’s health.

Advocating male involvement and collecting data for research.

Field trips, teachers’ responsibilities, disaster preparedness.

Declining funding for Head Start Programs.

Developing and promoting culturally-appropriate reading materials for young
children.
Testimonial for the desirability of preschool for all young children comes in
the following statement by Sue Burr, Executive Director, California County
Superintendents Educational Services Association
County Superintendents strongly support pre-kindergarten. Our K-12 schools
benefit when children have access to high-quality pre-k. Children have better
social skills and early literacy and math skills, and are less likely to fall behind.
Schools, families, and communities work hard to ensure that all students
succeed in school and in life. Expanding access to high-quality pre-
12
kindergarten will go a long way towards helping us achieve that goal.
(Preschool California, 2010b).
A Portrait of Roseville III State Preschool/Head Start: Overview
Brief History
Placer Community Action Council, Inc. was created in 1969 as part of the
Economic Recovery Act in the War on Poverty. Over the years, it has had many
programs, but when it became a 501 (c) (3) nonprofit corporation, the emphasis was
limited to preschool training for low-income children and their families. In September
2001, PCAC adopted KidZKount as the marketing, advertising, fund development and
community outreach name for the organization.
The Roseville III State Preschool site lies behind the main buildings of the
Cirby Elementary School campus in Roseville. The preschool program is a separate
entity and has been located there for over ten years. The majority of the students come
from diverse backgrounds, and low-income families.
Facility
The preschool program is housed in one portable building with an attached
fenced playground for the children. The playground is safely fenced and has a bark
base under all climbing equipment. There are several play structures and slides, as
well as several tricycles for large motor development. A playhouse is available for the
children and seems a popular structure.
The larger section of the portable contains the classroom; the smaller side of
the portable is dividing into sections containing a comfortable office, a large teacher
13
work-area, storage space and restrooms. The office is furnished with three desks, a
computer, and an adequate bookcase for teacher resources and manuals, as well as
chairs for visiting parents and public.
The classroom is well-organized with separate areas for reading, writing,
science, housekeeping (practical life activity), math, geometric objects and
measurement, as well as large round rug for circle time. There are four large tables
with six chairs at each.
The alphabet and sound-spelling chart are visible from the circle. Music CDs
are used for movement, singing and to engage and direct the children. Children’s art is
displayed in several areas of the room and art is obviously given due notice and
emphasis. Materials for art activities are ample. One computer is available with earphones for student use of educational programs in language and math.
Upon entering the classroom, there are cubbies for the children’s belongings,
and a bulletin board with school information: class attendance, Placer Community
Action Council Meeting Agenda and minutes, parent information, and parent
resources. There are also maps, health and nutritional information, a community
resource guide and a list of reasons why a child should stay home from school. On
another wall is a poster “Steps in Resolving Conflicts”.
The children have a very comfortable reading area with soft cushions which
form a colorful geometric pattern. There is a variety of books: some are expository
(Life cycle, The garden, The park), but the majorities are easy-readers and story books.
14
A Day in the Life of Roseville III: Schedule
8:30
Outdoor Play Time
9:00
Work Time

Children work at tables in small groups or individually.

Children may choose to explore books.

Teachers assist art and writing.
10:00 Clean-Up /Song

Children come to circle and do “Brain Gym” type activities to music.
10:30 Outdoor Recess
10:45 Restroom/ Washing Hands
11:00 Lunch/Nap
The children and staff at Roseville III are friendly and courteous to each other
and with visitors. The day begins with greetings and outside play until time to come
inside. Children are encouraged to come to circle with a song and movement, such as
clapping. The children are tapped with a fairy wand to excuse them to go to their
choice of work area. Work time is busy. The four members of the staff supervise the
four corner areas of the room, while the children settle into an activity.
The children do a very nice job of cleaning up all the materials before heading
outside for recess. After recess, it is time to wash-up for lunch. The lunch is brought in
by volunteers and today consists of chicken nuggets, salad, fruit, and milk. After
lunch, it is quiet time and the children lie down in a dimmed room on thick pads. Rest
time is until noon
15
Stakeholders
District/Administrative Personnel at Placer County Head Start Preschools
A Child Development Specialist is the director for Placer County Head Start
Preschools. The organization which is the policy maker for the preschools is the Placer
Community Action Council. The Council is a Board of Directors which consists of
community volunteers who serve three- year terms, as well as other volunteer
positions in various committees and fundraisers.
The PCAC also hires under the auspices of Placer County Human Services,
teachers who have a degree in Early Childhood Special Education as intervention
specialists for young children with special needs. The program is now in transition
from a full inclusion program to a separate program run by the county, according to a
report by one of the special education teachers.
School Personnel Roseville III
The school site has a Site Supervisor, who is much like a principal. The staff
also includes one Master Teacher and two Assistant Teachers. The teacher-child ratio
is 1/5.
At Roseville III, the Site Supervisor has seven years of teaching experience in
the Bay area, and two years at the Roseville site. The Master Teacher has a B.S.
Degree in Child Development and has been at the site for two years. Another teacher
at the site is bi-lingual with thirty years experience in the district. This teacher’s
language expertise in a classroom of seventy percent Hispanic children is noted. She is
currently attending college part-time and will finish her requirements for Master
16
Teacher in three more classes. One other teacher is Caucasian and bilingual in
Spanish. She currently has been substituting at Roseville III as an Assistant Teacher
for five months, but has ten years previous experience as a classroom teacher.
Other stakeholders at the school level are the many parents who volunteer in
the classroom and support fundraising and educational activities for both children and
parents. Most of the parents speak a language other than English to their children at
home.
Student Population
Roseville III has a population of 20 students, 80% of whom are English
language learners (EL). The following table breaks down the ethnicity and gender of
the children at Roseville III. All students are low-income as that is a requirement to
attend the program. At this school, the parents and volunteers are active on all levels.
They participate in fulfilling student needs for field trip supervision, hot-lunch service,
fund-raisers, classroom helpers, and as communication liaisons between home, school
and school council (see Table 1).
17
Table 1
Demographics of Roseville III Student Population
Gender
Caucasian
Hispanic
Asian
Total
Male
2
8
1
11
Female
2
6
1
9
Total
4
14
2
20
Stakeholders Claims, Concerns, and Issues
The following statements were taken from interviews with the Site Supervisor
and teachers at the Roseville III school site. The teachers were very busy with the
children, but an interview was conducted with each staff member to assess what their
claims, concerns, and issues are in regards to language and literacy instruction for the
young children at their site.
Claims

Teach to children’s developmental level and interest.

The school offers books to the children in all areas of play, housekeeping, and
science (for example: The pizza book, Bug book).

Invest time and materials to create reading a “habit” (Eighty percent of
instructional time is spent on reading activities, individual reading, and reading
as a group).
18

Teaching well the parts of a book, tracking left to right, letter recognition,
writing names and words.

The children see their name in print and are learning pre-reading and writing
skills.

The children are learning to love language and literacy, and are having fun
with it.
Concerns

Not having books in all five classroom languages, as it is important for them to
spell/hear words in their home language.

Limited exposure to reading at home.

The need to increase parent involvement at school.

Increasing time spent reading one to one with the children.
Issues

Developing impulse-control in the children.

Safety issues are always being looked at and debated.
A Portrait of Loomis Head Start Single Session: Overview
Brief History
The Loomis Head Start preschool is nestled in the hills above Sacramento.
Loomis began as a mining town, but soon became centers of a booming fruit-growing
industry, supporting many local packing houses. The area is still rural and community
members are friendly and hospitable.
19
Loomis Head Start is located on church property in the rural area of Loomis.
The school building is a raised platform portable with an attached large play-yard
containing a large number of climbing apparatus and swings.
The school, which operates separately from the Community Church, is one of
two preschools in Loomis which are administered by KidZKount. The school has been
in operation since 2001. KidZKount signs are always on the front of Head Start State
Preschools. KidZKount is the “marketing name” the administrative agency, Placer
Community Action Council acquired for increasing public awareness.
Facility
The Loomis Head Start site looks like the “little red schoolhouse on the hill”.
The area surrounding the site is very rural with grassy fields and farm animals. The
long drive-way winds past the community church sanctuary and classrooms, then ends
by the path to the schoolroom. The feeling is one of safety, security and peacefulness
for all who approach.
The facility is older, but kept in good repair. The building houses the school’s
single classroom, the staff office, restrooms for the children and staff, and windows
for ample light.
The playground contains a swing set, picnic tables, jungle gym, climbing
equipment, and two slides; all covered by large sun-shades for hot weather protection.
There is a bark base on all play areas, cement walks in a circle for riding tricycles, and
a large grass play area. Two large storage sheds are located at the rear of the
playground.
20
The Loomis site classroom is bright and cheery. The children are provided
with several work tables and chairs, a reading area with comfortable furniture and
practical life or “housekeeping area” adjacent. The kitchen has miniature dishes and a
small dining table. A listening area is available with tapes and earphones.
The schoolroom has a small writing area and art materials for painting and
collage. There are ample building blocks, several Frisbees, and a small science table
with cylinders filled with mixtures such as oil and water for observation.
The wall area in front of the circle rug displays the alphabet and the two lettersounds per week being taught. The letters have children’s names and names of objects
having the beginning sound for the corresponding letter displayed.
Upon entering the classroom, the walls contain bulletins regarding the school,
parent information on available services, and opportunities to serve as a volunteer.
Two poems are displayed on another wall: “Hickory, Dickory, Dock” and “Humpty,
Dumpty.”
The children have individual cubbies for personal items and school work. Most
of their work is kept in portfolios on the computer in the form of photographs. The rest
is sent home to the parents. Some student created artwork is displayed on the wall.
21
A Day in the Life of Loomis Head Start: Schedule
8:30
Greeting/Music/Movement/Rules/Respect
9:15
Movement/Stretching/Body Poetry
9:30
Teacher Directed Small Group Activities/Art
10:15 Clean-up /Song
10:30 Circle/Music
10:40 Recess Outdoors
11:00 Lunch
The children were perhaps having an “off” day when observed, as they seemed
overly active, discordant with one another, and a little distracted when working. The
teachers were patient and helpful to guide them to better choices and solutions to their
difficulties. Outdoor activity was greeted with great enthusiasm by all.
Stakeholders
School Personnel at Loomis Head Start
The Site Supervisor for Loomis Head Start has ten years of teaching
experience overall, with the last two years at Head Start. She operates the site with her
Assistant Teacher, and a bilingual aide. The other two staff members are Special
Education Aides. The teacher-child ratio for the special needs students is 1/1. The
teacher-student ratio for the other students is 1/6. There are five Spanish –only
students in the classroom, as well as a sign-language student, one bilingual student of
Mongolian descent, and one bilingual student who is of Egyptian ethnicity.
22
The following table presents the demographic data for Loomis Head Start:
Table 2
Demographics of Loomis Head Start Student Population
Gender
Caucasian
Hispanic
Asian
Other
Total
Male
5
4
2
1
12
Female
2
4
1
1
8
Total
7
8
3
2
20
Stakeholders Claims, Concerns, and Issues
The following list was compiled from conversations with the Site Supervisor
and the teachers at the campus in Loomis. The Special Education aides and a Parent
Advocate were present, as well as the regular classroom teachers.
Claims

The Children are exposed to books in the classroom daily. They are read to as
well as books being "free" to look at during their "work-time".

We have a "word wall" and introduce different letters every week.

We talk about the sound they make and sing a fun "zoo-phonics" song, as well.
23
Concerns

Concerns that the children who already are five years old may not be getting
the "kindergarten readiness" skills they may need since we have quite a few
younger children.
Issues

Getting parents more involved in helping out at school, and in reading to their
children.
A Portrait of Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool: Overview
Brief History
The Lincoln area is very old and has a history dating back to the Gold Rush.
The school site is situated in the front of Carlin C. Coppin Elementary School in
Lincoln. The area is semi-rural, being on the outskirts of the older part of town. The
classroom is adjacent to other rooms of the elementary school; however, the
playground in front of the classroom’s building is strictly for children in the Head
Start Program.
Facility
The facility is older, but well-maintained. The elementary school provides
janitorial service, as well as school sweatshirts with the elementary school logo of
“Carlin C. Coppin Dragons” on front and back of the shirts to identify pupils.
The playground is large and contains climbing equipment, tables for working
on outdoor projects, and a playhouse. The children are protected from injury from falls
24
by the soft bark on the play area. The children have several tricycles to ride upon the
black-topped area.
The classroom is arranged to promote organization and engagement on the
children’s part and facility of instruction for the teachers. The subject areas are welldefined and well-equipped with materials. The walls and furniture are bright and
clean, and the room is full of environmental print.
The reading area is of special note, as it is a cozy, comfortable area for the
children, covered by a circus-top net. The computer for the children is on a table and
chair set next to the reading area. The children’s books are limited, but of high quality.
Across from the reading area is a bookcase with sets of beautifully covered
composition books each one having a “book-mark” name tag. The composition books
are neatly ordered in baskets.
The room is equipped with five work tables and child-sized chairs. A large
space is appropriated for art equipment and supplies. Children’s art-work is
prominently displayed in the room.
The children have pet guinea pigs and a reptile house, which are kept
immaculately clean. The science area is close by, containing books, magnifying
glasses and dinosaur puzzles.
The large circle area for group activity and gathering the children for language
lessons is to one corner by the entry door. Across from this area are the children’s
cubbies for personal items and the wall/shelf area containing parent handbooks,
information on educational events, as well as attendance information. A large display
25
board near-by keeps the record of students’ “apple awards” for reading a book at
home.
The staff office is close to the front door and contains two desks, a computer
and cupboards for teacher supplies. Next to the office are a small, well-equipped
kitchen, staff restroom and children’s restroom. The classroom is bright and airy, and
very eye-catching. The environment at this site rates “exemplary”.
A Day in the Life of Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool: Schedule
8:30
Greeting/Songs/Literacy Exercises
8:45
Outdoor Recess
9:15
Work Time
10:00 Clean-Up
10:15 Circle Time/Songs/Story
10:30 Outdoor Recess
11:00 Lunch
All of the children at this site are engaged in meaningful learning during worktime. The staff and children work on activities as a group most of the time with a good
deal of directed teaching. The teachers talk to the children, engaging them in
conversations which stimulate vocabulary growth and development, as well as critical
thinking. The children seem to love books and spend time sitting with books and
sharing books with the staff and each other. This group of children impresses the
observer as being active learners, who are really enjoying the experiences they are
having in the classroom.
26
Stakeholders
School Personnel at Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool
The Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool’s Site Supervisor is also a mentor
teacher for the Placer County Head Start Preschool programs. The Site Supervisor has
a B.A. in Theater Arts and a minor in Child Development. She is supported by a
bilingual aide, and two Assistant Teachers. The appearance of the classroom and
materials is evidence of very high involvement by the teachers in creating an
exemplary learning environment for the children. There is obviously a great deal of
dedication and commitment on the part of the Site Supervisor and her support staff.
Behavioral difficulties seem to be at a minimum, and you can judge the success of the
program by the number of smiles in the room.
Student Population
The student population at the Lincoln site is extremely engaged in learning.
The children are actively pursuing their language and literacy development and it is a
pleasure to watch them work. The classroom has a population of 15 children with the
following break-down demographically as shown in the following table. Thirteen
students are ELL (see Table 3).
27
Table 3
Demographics of Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool Student Population
Gender
Caucasian
Hispanic
Asian
Total
Male
1
7
1
9
Female
1
5
0
6
Total
2
12
1
15
_____________________________________________________________________
Stakeholders Claims, Concerns, and Issues
The observation time allowed at the Lincoln school site did not allow for a
focus group and the staff was not open to many inquiries while working with the
children, so the following information was derived through e-mailing interview
questions.
Claims

We include books in many of the small group activities we bring out for the
children (Example: read a book about birds before making bird feeders for our
outside area).

We read at various times during the day to the children with both small and the
Big Books.
28

We have a big book center for the children to re-read their favorite stories and
a pointer available for the children to point to familiar words or to "pretend" to
read.

We present two letters during the week and focus on their sound, and learn an
alliteration rhyme.

We do sound sorting with objects.

We play BINGO using BINGO picture cards and saying the onset and rime for
them to figure out the word.

We introduce at least one Nursery Rhyme / month

We have a word wall and the children add words and their names to it.

We ask children if their name contains the letter of the week and chart.

We have the children write the letter of the day/week, word wall words and
their names.
Concerns

The Site Supervisor who is also a mentor teacher says, “I am mostly concerned
about the ELL in my classroom. The studies show that they really need a good
knowledge base in their home language in order to progress in English. We
need more teachers who can speak to these children using excellent Spanish;
(or whatever language they are speaking), in order to build up their grammar
and vocabulary skills in their home language.”
29
Issues

“What is developmentally appropriate and what is not. Our standards are so
high for what the state is expecting these kids to know and it is a challenge to
present things in and still use DAP, i.e. Developmentally Appropriate
Practice,” the school Site Supervisor concludes.
Summary
The introduction to this study gave an overview of the Head Start Preschool
Program from the top-down; the overview at the National, State and County levels
being necessary to give enough background information to support an understanding
of the educational environment at the school level. In Chapter 1, the portraits of the
three schools summarized the claims, concerns and issues voiced by the teachers at
each of the school sites. These claims, concerns and issues are considered individually
and as a whole, and investigated as to the validity of the teachers’ perceptions
regarding the language and literacy instruction in the Head Start Preschool Program.
Chapter 2 of the study gives an overview of the literature in regards to the early
childhood language and literacy development and discusses what the teachers are
teaching the preschoolers at all three sites in this study.
30
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RESEARCH
The main body of this research was designed to explore student learning at the
level of early childhood with the intent of discovering the answer to the following
questions:

Does learning theory and research support the desirability of early childhood
language and literacy education?

Does preschool prepare children to enter kindergarten and increase the chance
of school success?

Does Head Start prepare the more needy children, those from a low socioeconomic status who attend the program, for kindergarten and future school
success?
The answer to the first of these questions can be found in research done by
theorists in the field of early childhood cognitive development. Learning theorists
have proposed that early literacy skills are important. The fact that decoding is learned
early by good readers is established in studies of reading development done by
researchers such as Chall, Cunningham & Stanovich, and Ehri (as cited in Moats,
1998).
Moreover, a series of studies have traced how beginners learn to read and spell
words, (e.g., Ehri, 1994; Treiman, 1993; Wagner & Barker, 1994). The learner
progresses from global to analytic processing, from approximate to specific
linking of sound and symbol, and from context-driven to print-driven reading
31
as proficiency is acquired. The instruction we deliver should be compatible
with the emerging competence of the student…Appropriate activities at the
pre-alphabetic level include phonological awareness tasks (carried out orally)
such as rhyming; counting, adding, and deleting syllables; matching beginning
consonants in words; recognizing odd sounds; substituting sounds and
identifying that a sound exists in selected words (Adams, Treiman, & Pressley,
1997; Brady, Fowler, Stone, & Winbury, 1994; Foorman et al., 1997;
Torgesen, Wagner, & Rashotte, 1997). In addition, the development of print
awareness includes alphabet matching and letter naming, following print with
the finger during read-alouds, and much interactive engagement with appealing
books. All these activities develop awareness of the alphabetic principle: that
letters roughly represent segments of one’s own speech. (Moats, 1998, p. 1)
Federal and state policies highlight the expectation that a primary purpose of
education for at-risk students in preschool is the acquisition of specific knowledge and
skills that are related to later success in school. One important predictor of school
success is children's literacy skills when they enter kindergarten. As a result, early
literacy skills have been a particular focus of preschool programs, such as Head Start,
that are designed for children who are at-risk for success in school (Roskos &
Vukielich, 2006, as cited in Diamond, Gerde, & Powell, 2008, p. 467).
Children's literacy skills at kindergarten entry are associated with reading
achievement beginning in the early elementary grades (Denton, West, &
Walston, 2003) and extending through high school (Cunningham & Stanovich,
32
1997). Knowledge of the alphabet upon entry to kindergarten (Whitehurst &
Lonigan, 2001) and understanding of letters and sounds at the beginning of
first grade (Juel, 1988) are strong predictors of children's early reading
achievement. While explicit instruction is effective in teaching young children
the names and sounds of letters (; Roberts & Neal, 2004), activities that
encourage preschool children to write are also a promising avenue for
supporting young children's learning of letters and sounds. (Aram, 2005;
Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001, pp. 467-468)
One of the large concerns expressed by the teachers in this study is that they
are following Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP). DAP was promulgated
through the creation and dissemination of the Developmentally Appropriate Practices
guidelines in 1987 by the National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC, 1986), together with the revised version that followed 10 years later
(NAEYC, 1996).
Based largely on Piaget's constructivism, the DAP guidelines portray the
young child as an active learner and encourage teachers to facilitate children's
learning through active exploration and age-typical play. The guidelines
endorse the idea that learning activities should be tailored to each child's
individual needs and presented in ways that recognize young children's
concrete stages of mental development and their natural integration of practical
leaning across many domains (Caruso, Dunn, & File, 1992, as cited in Van
Horn & Ramey, 2003, pp. 961-962).
33
However, at least one study done refutes the value of DAP in which DAP was
studied in relation to changes in achievement and receptive language among former
Head Start children and classmates in grade levels one through three (including
between 1,564 and 4,764 children in 869 to 1,537 classrooms). The results indicate
that DAP, as observed in classrooms, accounts for little or no variation in the
children's academic performance (Van Horn & Ramey, 2003).
Writing has been proposed as a complementary approach to other instructional
strategies for teaching young children about letters. One study examined
relations among preschool children's early writing competence, knowledge of
letter names, sensitivity to initial sounds in words and understanding of print
concepts in a sample of low-income children enrolled in Head Start. Data were
collected from the beginning to the end of the school year, which offered the
opportunity to examine concurrent development of these early literacy skills.
Results revealed that children whose writing was more sophisticated knew the
names of more letters, understood more about print concepts and were more
sensitive to initial sounds of words. There was evidence of bidirectional
influences of writing on growth in letter knowledge, and of letter knowledge
on growth in writing competence. (Diamond, Gerde, & Powell, 2008, p. 467)
Researchers in the field of early literacy conclude, “Children's literacy skills
are an important predictor of success in the early elementary grades. Education
programs for at-risk preschool students target children's acquisition of specific literacy
34
skills, including knowledge of letters of the alphabet, in preparing children for early
school success,” (Diamond, Gerde, & Powell, 2008, p. 467).
External Assessments
California Preschool Learning Foundations
The California Head Start State Collaboration Office (CHSSCO) works closely
with the State Department of Education Child Development Division to promote
alignment of curricula used in Head Start programs. The CHSSCO ensures continuity
of services via the Head Start Child Outcomes Framework and California State Early
Learning Standards. The California Preschool Learning Foundations developed and
published by the California Department of Education are the state standards for
preschool children age 45 to 60 months.
The California Preschool Learning Foundations are appropriate for three to
five year old children because they are based on the latest information from research
on how children learn and develop. The Language and Literacy, ELD, and
mathematics foundations are closely aligned to the kindergarten content standards
(Listening and Speaking, Reading and Writing). Due to the importance of language
development for preschool children, the strands have been reordered to begin with
“Listening and Speaking.” (For a copy of the Language and Literacy Standards, see
Appendix B).
The ELD Foundations describe what children should demonstrate at three
different levels of successive English language development. The four stages of
sequential second language acquisition found in the Preschool English Learners
35
Resource Guide are as follows: home language, observational/listening,
telegraphic/formulation, and fluid parallel the three levels in ELD foundations.
The California Department of Education does not approve texts, materials, or
particular curriculum for preschool children. These decisions are made at the local
level (i.e. Placer Community Action Council) guided by the California Preschool
Foundations.
Classroom Assessments
The Desired Results Developmental Profile – Revised (DRDP-R)
The Desired Results Developmental Profile– Revised (DRDP-R) was
developed by the California Department of Education. The DRDP-R assessment for
Preschoolers includes 39 measures within ten indicators. The indicators include
fundamental areas of development (e.g. Math, Literacy, Social and Interpersonal
Skills) and have been aligned to the Head Start outcome framework domains. Each
child is assessed on the measures of child development. Within each measure, children
score one of four developmental levels. The developmental levels range from
“Exploring” to “Developing” to “Building” and finally to “Integrating” at the highest
level. Children are assessed within sixty days of enrollment and either three, and six
months later, or only six months later (California Head Start, 2010). (For a copy of the
DRDP-R See Appendix C; For a copy of a sample Student Summary Report see
Appendix D).
36
California Head Start Child Outcomes Bulletin
The Impact of Preschool. Research on the DRDP-R demonstrates that most
children reach the third developmental level by the end of preschool. While this is not
a research-based indicator of school readiness, it is a useful informal benchmark. The
analysis in the California Head Start Child Outcomes Bulletin uses the level of
development as a benchmark to evaluate the impact of Head Start programs on Child
Development.
According to the California Department of Education, the DRDP-R:

Is a naturalistic observation tool.

Helps in considering individual strengths and needs.

Determines how children are benefiting from programs and acts as a
framework for documenting progress.

Provides information to CDE/SED, providers, and families about the child’s
development.
Throughout the following section, information is taken from the California
Head Start Child Outcomes Bulletin for 2010.
Desired Results Developmental Profile-Revised (DRDP-R) data were gathered
on more than fourteen thousand children from the fifteen participating Head
Start grantees. The primary data analysis focused on 6,600 center based
children. (Children with incomplete data sets, not in center based programs, or
children with identified special needs were not included in the analysis.) The
37
information collected included the assessment scores from the DRDP-R
conducted in the fall of 2008and repeated in the spring of 2009. (p. 3)
An Example of the Developmental Levels Attained through Head Start
Children from all backgrounds are better prepared for school in all areas of
development thanks to Head Start programs. The increase of 7% in number of children
at a higher developmental level for Language and Literacy measures is the estimated
impact of Head Start programs in the areas of Language and Literacy (see Figure 3,
California Head Start, 2010, p. 1).
Figure 3. Percentage of Children in the Top Two Developmental Levels.
38
Children with experience in Head Start achieve higher developmental levels across all
developmental domains. The statistics are based on the percentage of children in the
top two developmental levels controlling for age and other demographic variables (see
Figure 4, California Head Start, 2010, p. 3).
Figure 4. Head Start Children Achievement Levels.
“he findings of this analysis provide evidence that the California Head Start
programs included in this child outcomes bulletin produce positive impacts
similar to other quality programs. Quality preschool programs have been
39
demonstrated to have significant impacts on school readiness and long-term
child outcomes. (California Head Start, 2010, pp. 2, 4).
The RAND study on preschool education in California summarizes what is
known about the impacts of preschool. The results of this study can be found in full in
Rand Corporation (2009).
[A] review of the rigorous evaluations of high-quality preschool programs
demonstrates that well-designed programs that serve children one or two years
before kindergarten entry can improve measures of school readiness, raise
performance on academic achievement tests in the early elementary grades,
generate sustained effects on academic achievement into the middle school
years …[reduce] special-education use and grade repetition and[increase] rates
of high-school graduation…To understand the impact of preschool on children,
take the example of measurement: In this analysis, a child enrolled in a Head
Start program is more than 2.5 times as likely to make the conceptual leap
from comparing objects (“my daddy is bigger than me”) to trying to measure
the size of objects (uses a measuring tape to try to measure daddy). Such
growth may seem small to adults, but are a critical foundation to future
learning. (Karoly, 2009, as cited in California Head Start, 2010, p. 4)
Summary
Chapter 2 of the study gave an overview of the literature in regards to early
childhood language and literacy development and discussed what guidelines the
40
teachers are using to teach the appropriate curriculum and correctly assess
preschoolers at all three sites in this study.
Chapter 3 examines how teachers at the three Head Start Preschools in the
study regard the curriculum and literacy instruction in their own classroom, as
revealed through interviews, a teacher survey and direct observation by the researcher.
This chapter investigates student achievement by gathering information about
assessment, comparing the efficacy of classroom practices in relation to state
standards, and interpreting observable results in the classrooms, as well as obtaining
teacher testimonies regarding student learning. Correlations will be drawn between
classroom practices, instruction and student achievement.
41
Chapter 3
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: FINDINGS
Chapter 3 examines the methods and practices that the teachers are using at
each school site and summarizes the teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about literacy
instruction and learning in their classroom. Each school site is described as one
classroom containing up to 20 students and as many as five teachers.
This chapter begins with an explanation of how the data was collected for this
report. The sources of data are discussed as well as the results of a thorough
examination of instructional practices, and materials used in the classroom at each site.
In addition, information regarding the teachers’ claims, concerns, and issues is
reported and analyzed.
Sources of Data and Findings
Information about the teaching practices in each classroom is taken from
various sources, including, focus group questions, one-on-one interviews, both formal
and informal, classroom observations, and two surveys of the teachers. All the sources
provide important information about the materials being used, the adopted program
that is in place, the teacher created learning environment, and the professional
development of each of the staff, as well as the instructional routines and practices
within each classroom.
42
Evidence of Student Learning
Focus Group
The focus group questions were presented formally or informally at the sites
depending on the circumstances at the moment. Some responses were written down,
and some were given orally in conversation and through formal interviews. Two of the
site supervisors responded to the questions through e-mail after the classroom
observation was completed. The teachers were friendly and seemed careful to frame
responses in a positive tone. The Site Supervisors were more open and comfortable
with providing information and commenting on their program. The experience level of
the staff ranged from two months to 30 years. The experienced personnel were more
contemplative and thorough with answers.
The information gathered gave evidence that the main claims, concerns, and issues
at the school sites centered around the following areas: Developmentally Appropriate
Practice (DAP), ELL literacy development, parent involvement with reading and in
the classroom.

The teachers feel that Developmentally Appropriate Practice is a concern as
they are teachers of the very young. There is a concern that the children who
are already five years old, may not be getting the "kindergarten readiness"
skills they need, since there are quite a few younger children in the classrooms.
The teachers feel that state standards are so high that it is a challenge to present
the curriculum and still use DAP, i.e. Developmentally Appropriate Practice
43
(DAP). This is the overriding “differentiated instruction” issue at the preschool
level.

Not having books in all five of the classroom languages, is an issue for the
teachers. The teachers feel that it is important for them to spell and hear words
in the home language of the children.

Parent involvement is the third most important concern at the school sites. The
teachers feel that the limited exposure to reading at home is a critical problem
and the need to increase parent involvement at school is a major goal.
Encouraging parents to read with their children at home will help children
them to learn to love reading. The teachers believe that it is important to invest
time and materials to create a “reading habit” at both school and home.
Interviews
During interviews, the teachers were given the opportunity to tell about their
own professional development and experience, and to explore their concerns with the
literacy of preschool children in general and their own program at Head Start. Besides
academic concerns, one of the themes gathered from teachers is regarding the degree
to which the children’s behavior in the classroom is being managed. A need for further
professional growth and development in managing the social behavior of children was
expressed with an eye to children developing impulse control. This may be an
underlying reason why the teachers would like more parent involvement in the school
room.
44
Teacher Interviews
The program for language and literacy which has been adopted for the Head
Start State Preschool system in Placer County is the High/Scope curriculum. The
High/Scope approach stresses that teachers and children are active partners in the
learning process. The language and literacy component of the High/Scope Preschool
Curriculum contains the following:

Key experiences linking language and literacy

Growing Readers Early Literacy Curriculum, a set of small-group activities
and other daily learning experiences.

Early Literacy Skills Assessment Preschool Child Observation Record.

Sequenced activities organized around the four components of comprehension,
phonological awareness, alphabetic principle, and concepts about print.

Support for the language and culture of the home.
The teachers expressed some concern about the effectiveness of the
High/Scope curriculum as revealed in the teacher survey. The survey administered to
the teachers reveals that the teachers believe High/Scope to be high in effectiveness in
the area of listening and speaking lessons, as well as in concepts about print. However,
they felt that High/Scope is least effective in teaching phonemic awareness and needed
supplementation with teacher created lessons and materials (see Appendix A).The
teachers make no mention of using any of the assessment tools available in the
45
High/Scope program. During teacher interviews, teachers expressed a complete
confidence in the accuracy and sufficiency of the DRDP-R.
Use of the DRDP-R in the Schools Studied
Teacher survey on the DRDP-R. A specific survey given to the site
supervisors revealed results for student achievement in the areas of language and
literacy development at the school sites (see Appendix F).
Results of the survey indicate that the supervisors have confidence in the
DRDP-R as an authentic guide to assessing a child’s growth and development in the
areas of language and literacy through observation.
However, a concern was expressed as to its use as a measurement tool to
support judgments about the effectiveness of teachers and/or schools programs.
Evidence of student learning is obvious when results of the DRDP-R are quantified
(see Figure 5).
46
Figure 5. Language and Literacy Desired Results Developmental Profile 2010.
The results from student assessment indicate that 68% of the preschoolers are
at the Integrating stage of development in both language and literacy measures, and
that 88% are at or above the Building level of development in all measures. This
would indicate that the majority of the children are demonstrating “kindergarten
readiness” as determined by the state standards and are having a high degree of
success in mastering the components of language and literacy necessary to predict
success in kindergarten and elementary school, as well.
47
Ten percent of the children are performing at the Developing level in
phonological awareness and verbal communication. This may be due to children in the
classroom with special needs in this area due to language processing difficulties.
However, a combined total of 32% of the children are at the
Developing/Building levels in phonological awareness. The percentage of children
scoring the same levels in verbal communication is only 26% indicating that there is
some validity to the concern expressed by the teachers that the High/Scope curriculum
is weak in the instruction of phonemic awareness.
The results of the DRDP-R are based on the best efforts of the teachers to
observe and accurately record the performance of the children in the measures
assessed for language and literacy development. The process is detailed and arduous
and they should be commended for all their diligence.
The teachers at the preschools under study complete the DRDP-R for each
child three times a year and forward the results to the Placer Community Action
Council for review. The teachers report that the children in their classrooms score near
the national average, e.g. at the “Building” level for the most part, especially in the
area of Language and Literacy. However, one Site Supervisor expressed concern that
the children may not be getting all the instructional time needed to prepare them for
kindergarten, because there are more numbers of children age birth to three years old
who absorb more time and attention, necessarily limiting time available to spend with
the five-year olds to ensure they achieve “kindergarten readiness.” The children’s
individual tests were not available for inquiry.
48
Each child has a student summary prepared which is shared with the parents.
The results for the classroom are not kept at the state level for purposes of
accountability, as of yet. However, it will be a short time before preschool will be
joining the K-12 Standards Based Accountability System. The plan for preschool
integration is laid out in the California State Profile. (For a copy of the California State
Profile see Appendix E). The goal is for universal preschool for all children and with
increased standards for achievement, preschool will become the “new kindergarten.
The difficulty this researcher observed with the DRDP-R was with the
subjectivity of the scoring. Teachers may observe and score children differently as to
developmental level on each of the thirty-nine areas. While these results are useful to
report a child’s progress to a parent, using the children’s results overall to evaluate a
program and hold the school and teachers accountable for an expected level of
performance seems misuse of the tool.
There is too much room for individual variation in observation of student
performance for DRDP-R assessment results to be used for the purpose of school
accountability. Assessments like the DRDP-R are better used to drive differentiated
instruction and classroom curriculum development.
Teacher Surveys
Rationale for the surveys. The teacher surveys were created to collect data
about how the teachers view the effectiveness of the curriculum, the efficacy of
instructional practices, and the degree of student learning. The surveys provide
49
information that will illuminate the claims, concerns, and issues expressed by the
teachers and staff at the school sites.
The survey on curriculum gives a portrait of the teachers’ perspective on how
the High/Scope Language Arts curriculum is addressing the areas of Reasoning Skills,
Phonemic Awareness, Concepts About Print, the Alphabetic Principle,
Listening/Speaking Skills, and the attention to Cultural Diversity (see Appendix A for
a copy of the survey.)
The teacher survey on student learning accessed information about the amount
and types of student learning according to teacher reports (See Appendix F for a copy
of the survey). The topics for review and assessment by the teachers are: Child Choice
(or Initiative), Discipline, Speech Development, Phonological Awareness, Vocabulary
Development, Writing Opportunities and Reading Opportunities. The latter were
described as “opportunities” as most children are in the pre-writing and pre-reading
stages; therefore, it is the exposure to these activities that is the critical element.
Other responses were recorded for questions regarding parent involvement
with the school and children’s reading, as well as supplemental reading and writing
materials available in the classroom.
Validity and Reliability of the Findings
The researcher has confidence that the information gathered from the teacher
survey is accurate and unbiased, as the same findings are validated by other means,
such as, interviews and classroom observations.
50
Recommendations for Future Surveys
Future surveys concerning the schools in this study may not be practical as
there is some resistance to professional inquiry about the programs and access is not
readily available. The researcher used a “soft” approach during the study maintaining
awareness that the area of Early Childhood Education is a “hot topic” and currently
under much scrutiny by those who have power and by communities at large. Interest in
the impact of preschool education is at an all-time high as the funding and
administration of preschool programs is under examination at all levels.
The area that might be explored with a survey or perhaps as a focus group
would be the parents. Parental involvement is encouraged, but attendance at meetings
and volunteerism is only moderate at the schools according to the teachers. Attending
a parent-meeting to assess their concerns and issues might yield information
productive in the analysis of the school program.
Teacher Survey Findings
The teachers are currently using the High/Scope Language Arts curriculum at
all the Head Start State Preschools along with teacher-created and supplemental
materials. Figure 6 shows how effective the teachers feel the High/Scope program is in
serving the children’s literacy needs in various areas according to the Language Arts
Teacher Survey.
51
Figure 6. High/Scope Efficacy Teacher Survey.
The teacher survey also reveals teacher perceptions of student learning taking place in
the classroom. The results of the teacher survey on student learning based on DRDP-R
reports reveal a high level of confidence that the students are learning a variety of
skills and competencies at a basic level or above.
The areas surveyed are Child Choice, Discipline, Speech Development,
Phonological Awareness, Vocabulary Development, Writing Opportunities, and
Reading Opportunities. The results are displayed in the following figure (Figure 7):
52
Figure 7. Student Learning Teacher Survey.
The survey correlates positively with the claims and concerns made by the
teachers in chapter one of this study. The following claims are correlated positively:

A high degree of child choice and initiative.

Listening and speaking highly developed in the children due to frequent
extended conversations with the teachers, which is also resulting in a high level
of vocabulary development and reasoning skills.

Teaching well the parts of a book, tracking left to right, letter recognition,
writing names and words.
53
The concerns that are previously discussed in chapter one and are deduced
from the focus groups are supported by the survey results and are listed below as
follows:

The High/Scope program for Language Arts may not give enough importance
to the development of phonemic awareness.

Kindergarten-readiness is a concern due to not enough one on one reading with
students by both teachers and parents. There is a concern that more time and
materials need to be invested in order to create reading a “habit.”

Not having books in all five classroom languages, as it is important for them to
spell/hear words in their home language.

Developing impulse-control in the children is a concern mentioned by teachers,
although overall discipline in the classroom is sufficient.
Observations
A morning of observation was spent at each of the three classrooms for a total
of eight hours. Notes from the observations reveal a great deal of difference in the
efficacy and functioning of each classroom. An observer must note, however, that the
day observed may not be a typical day, and upon further study other conclusions might
be drawn about individual practices. However, generally speaking, observations do
reveal what the plan is for instruction, what materials are available and used, and
whether the literacy instruction seems to be working, overall.
54
Classroom Observations
Roseville III State Preschool. The four teachers work with the children in
centers during work-time and have extended conversations with the children about
various subjects such as family, friends, stories, etc. It is evident that the teachers
focus on language development throughout the day. For example, during lunchtime
there is conversation with the children: “Would you like broccoli?”, “There is your
banana.”, “Does it taste yummy?”, “Is it good?”, “It is delicious!” The discourse
continues into discussion of pets and favorite things.
The language environment in the Roseville III classroom is dual-language in
that both English and Spanish are in use. The EL students are given lessons by the
bilingual teacher and the amount of discourse is extensive. The children are learning
the alphabet in English using music to accompany them, and the climate is warm and
relaxed. Two other teachers in the classroom use dual-language while conversing with
the children over lunch: “un poquito” – “a little,” “Can you have ‘tres’ –‘three’
pieces?” The children are at ease and cheerful, as well as engaged.
Circle-time includes movement activities, music and language usage. There is
attention to vocabulary development as the children practice naming the parts of the
body in both English and Spanish.
Environmental print in the classroom consists of a bulletin board announcing
“Celebrating Families” meetings and events, as well as other school activities. A large
poster, “Steps in Resolving Conflict” is on display, along with a spelling-symbol
chart. Each child’s name is written under its beginning letter. The classroom walls
55
display children’s art work with their names on the front of their creation. The science
area boasts a poster, “What Does a Plant Need to Grow?” Labels of seed, water, dirt,
and sunshine are listed below.
The children in the classroom welcome visitors with a smile and a hug. One
youngster is proud to present their writing/art portfolios which are identified by each
child’s name on the spine. The children are forming some letters, as well as their
names in their own binder. Evidence of early writing is near the reading area where
there are baskets of the children’s work on lined paper.
There are fifteen reading books available in the classroom for the children to
enjoy at leisure and with teacher read-alongs. The books include such titles as, Where
the Wild Things Are, in English and Spanish, Olivia, If You Give a Moose a Muffin,
The Tree in the Ancient Forest, and the Big Book version of In the Small, Small Pond.
The reading area is comfortably furnished with soft, colorful, geometric shaped
cushions.
The amount of teacher to student reading that goes on in this classroom is not
observed in this small space of time. According to the teacher interviews, however,
the children are working on letter sounds and phonological awareness on a daily basis
and are read to frequently. This classroom seems to be a language-rich environment.
Loomis Head Start. This school-site is on church grounds and has a half-day
program. The children at the site are encouraged to be independent and are allowed a
great deal of freedom of choice in learning activities. The classroom is full of activity:
building blocks, art activities, perusing books, daily-life tasks in the housekeeping area
56
where there are cooking dishes, a table and chairs and dress-up clothes. The children
seem to choose physically active tasks and at times seem to intrude on each other’s
space. The classroom has work tables arranged in between the more open play areas.
The reading area is quite small with books attractively arranged on a display
shelf. There are bean bags and a small couch for the children to sit upon and read,
along with a listening center. The available books include the following titles; The
very hungry caterpillar in both English and Spanish versions, All kinds of children,
Does a kangaroo have a mother too? I like me, and two from Dr. Seuss’ collection.
The respect and appreciation for diversity is clear. There are also books on ladybugs,
whales, and shapes for a total of 36 books in all. The county library van comes by
every-other week and the children are allowed to check out books. A teacher reads
these books with the children every Monday.
Evident from observation is that the children are beginning to read and enjoy
reading to each other. Two children are obviously enjoying “buddy-reading.” The
child being read to laughs and claps at the story, Froggy gets dressed. A bilingual
teacher reads to a child at a table and discusses the meanings of unknown words in the
text; thus establishing comprehension.
Environmental print is present in the form of a colorful High/Scope poster on
“preschool key experience” regarding the concept of “space,” i.e., distances, position,
filling and emptying items. An alphabet chart on the wall lists the children’s names
according to the first letter of their name, as well as names of various objects that
begin with the same letter. There is a High/Scope ath poster on one wall describing the
57
concepts “more,” “fewer,” “the same as,” and other comparative expressions
encouraging critical thinking even at this early age.
The “Word Wall” is used to teach two letters per week. Poems “Humpty
Dumpty” and “Hickory-Dickory-Dock” are prominently displayed near the word wall.
A photographic portfolio of student work is kept on the school computer, while
the rest is sent home daily. The evidence for student writing is not readily observable.
The students work on their phonemic awareness while in circle. The “Hip Hop
Food Song” teaches colors of fruits and vegetables and sounds of letters. “Y” is for
yellow and yummy, etc. This type of exercise is important to provide background
knowledge for children who are EL, especially.
In circle, the children discuss rules and safety verbally. They also worked on
counting in their choice of either English or Spanish. The children are asked the
question, “Who are you?” and after their reply, “I am …….,” the teacher then asks,
“Who is sitting next to you?” One at a time the children are asked the questions in
order to get to know each other by name. This is great oral language practice.
One of the work centers is designed to help children obtain background
knowledge about work or jobs, as well as helping to develop their oral language. The
center has a box of cards that have pictures of people doing various jobs. The card’s
pictures reflect diversity and are pictures of a doctor, fireman, postal worker, teacher,
salesperson, etc. Each child selects a card. The children are then called upon to tell
who they are and what their job title is, as well give a description of their job duties.
58
The children are engaged with the activity and seem to be really enjoying the attention
and chance to speak.
Loomis Head Start Preschool is actively producing listeners, speakers, readers
and writers due to the positive environment being created by the teachers and staff. It
is a place where children can learn and grow in their language and literacy
development.
Carlin C. Coppin State Preschool. The language and literacy program for
this school is structured and consistent from the observation made during this study.
The school is well-equipped with reading and writing materials and is well-organized
for instruction and exploration of language and literacy.
The children at this school site are taught in centers which are positioned at the
classroom work tables. Each table is overseen by a teacher and the children are given
lessons or engage in activities which incorporate language and reading along with
content matter. The children may choose to speak English or Spanish and one of the
teachers is fluent in both languages. In addition to the four teachers, volunteer dads
come into the classroom weekly to help with the students.
During this observation time, the learning center for language, specifically, the
teacher is using a word puzzle which helps the children distinguish and match rhyming
sounds: fish-dish, man-can, book-hook, etc. The teachers report that the students are
doing well in phonics.
The reading area is attractively arranged for the comfort of the children. The
area is a lovely, secluded area underneath a “circus tent” covering and houses a wide
59
selection of interesting books. Alongside the reading area, a small table contains the
classroom computer that the children use for language and math activities.
The writing area contains a set of composition books, beautifully bound with
the children’s names and filled with multiple attempts by the children at “writing.”
Most are able to write their own name legibly. About one-third of the students can
write their name and a few words in addition.
A great deal of rich communication goes on in the classroom between teachers
and students. There is a large amount of descriptive language used; words such as,
“spikey.” One teacher and her students study a dinosaur book. The teacher and child
sound out the names together and discuss the characteristics of a specific species in
contrast to another species. This gives the children a wealth of background knowledge
about pre-history. It also teaches the children higher ordered thinking. The children are
wonderfully engaged and full of excitement. This activity would be the perfect
opportunity for the children to begin to draw and write about their favorite dinosaur
and what it can do. The evidence is clear that the teachers are in tune with student
interest and as a result the students seem highly motivated.
There is a large amount of environmental print in the room. The walls display
items such as posters, art work, and the alphabet-sound cards. The children are given
an “apple” award with their name on it, as a form of recognition for reading a book at
home. Their “apple” is displayed on a “tree” and also lists the name of the book the
student read.
60
The students are involved in teacher created curriculum rather than the
High/Scope program at this site. No difficulties with social behaviors are observed and
there seems to be a high degree of cooperation amongst the students. The classroom is
full of beautiful teacher- created materials and the staff can be applauded for the
degree of organization and classroom management of both instruction and learning
outcomes.
Relationship to CCIs
Claims
The claims that were supported by examination of the teacher survey which are
also supported by classroom observation are the following:

A high degree of child choice and initiative.

Listening and speaking highly developed in the children due to frequent
extended conversations with the teachers, which is also resulting in a high level
of vocabulary development and reasoning skills.

Teaching letter recognition, writing names and words.
A claim that was difficult to assess during the classroom observation is that the
teachers are successful in teaching well what is essentially known as “concepts about
print”: the parts of a book and tracking left to right. However, the teachers rate the
High/Scope curriculum as exemplary in efficacy for teaching concepts about print, so
it is safe to say that an assumption might be made that this claim, too, is valid.
61
Concerns
The concerns voiced by the teachers and recorded in chapter one and are
supported by the classroom observation are as follows:

Kindergarten-readiness is a concern due to not enough one on one reading with
students by both teachers and parents. There is a concern that more time and
materials need to be invested in order to create reading a “habit.”

Not having books in all five classroom languages, as it is important for them to
spell/hear words in their home language.

Developing impulse-control in the children is a concern mentioned by teachers,
although overall discipline in the classroom is sufficient.
The classrooms studied are allotting approximately one to one and one half
hours of the morning to work time, during which time one –on-one reading was
observed as happening at a minimal level. The teachers express concern that parents
are not sufficiently involved with their children’s school and are not reading at home
with their children. The assumption would be that more time for small group and
individual instruction in the classroom is necessary for the children to develop reading
as a “habit.” The children are, from all observation, however, enjoying what they do in
their exposure to language and reading and are having positive experiences in the
classroom. They are obviously having fun with literacy, which is critical to interest
level and motivation to learn.
In researching the High/Scope curriculum, the concern that there is not enough
attention given to phonemic awareness may not be the fault of the curriculum, but
62
instead a lack of application. The curriculum addresses phonemic awareness in daily
lessons, so perhaps the teachers need more training in implementation of the
High/Scope program, or in additional ways to give direct instruction and practice in
the area of phonemic awareness. It may just be that there needs to be more class time
allocated to development of phonemic awareness in order to improve performance in
this area.
Issues
One of the issues mentioned by the school personnel is the development of
impulse control in the children. From observation, the children’s behavior seems
active, but not aggressive socially, and most seem to engage with each other and the
teachers cooperatively. Perhaps the issue is restricted to a few children who need work
in this area. The children in the classrooms appear happy and well-behaved overall.
A second concern expressed is that the teachers have difficulty balancing
striving to achieve state standards while maintaining developmentally appropriate
practice. The teachers seem to be doing a great job of respecting children and
addressing their educational needs in a way appropriate to their developmental level.
The children may be expressing resistance to literacy activities at some time, but it
was not observed during the study sessions. The concern may be that the daily worktime is short and the children need more time for relaxed, engaging literacy
experiences during the day.
The final issue that the teachers are having concerns about is getting parents
involved in the school; particularly their children’s reading development. The parents
63
were not present in the classroom, except for a visiting parent-advocate at the Loomis
campus, who left after a few minutes to attend a meeting, and a dad who was
volunteering time at the Lincoln campus. The parents attend field trips and school
picnics, etc., but it is of more concern to the teachers that they do more reading
activities with their children at home. There will be several recommendations in
Chapter 4, as to how to help accomplish this goal.
Staff Development Opportunities
During the focus group discussions and teacher interviews, the teachers
expressed the feeling that staff development is optional, with the teachers selecting a
seminar or offering if they are interested in the topic or training that is being offered
by the county program administration. Some of the programs are reportedly helpful
and interesting, others are not, however, and staff development is pursued on an
individual basis.
Many of the teachers are attending college courses in Early Child Development
in order to apply for the next higher state certificate in Child Development. The
teaching and administrative levels proceed from Associate Teacher to Master Teacher,
Site Supervisor, and then to Director at the highest position.
The survey results indicate that the teachers feel the teacher training for the
High/Scope Language Arts program is only basic and needs improvement to ensure
the teachers expertise in using the approved curriculum.
64
Overall Analysis
The pattern that emerged from the survey is that in the areas where the
approved state curriculum is weak, the teachers use supplemental lessons and
materials to fill in the gaps. The teachers reported spending an hour per week on
lesson planning, which seems adequate for a daily work period per morning of 1½
hours. This amount of planning is the equivalent of eight minutes of planning time for
an hour of lesson. The other activities during the day are of a routine nature and do not
require daily planning.
Summary
Chapter 3 presented evidence to support or refute the CCIs expressed during
the focus groups and within later interviews with the teachers. The teachers’
perceptions about the language and literacy program and student learning outcomes
were compared to data secured from resources discussed and classroom observations;
all of which gave a portrait of student learning and achievement.
The areas most in need of improvement were alphabetic principle and
phonemic awareness. Direct instruction through High/Scope was where the teachers
believe the program needs improvement the most.
The teachers felt more time in one-on-one reading instruction is important to
increasing the children’s reading competencies. The opportunities for the children to
write and the availability of writing materials were rated by the teachers as ranging
from “sufficient” to “exemplary. “ The actual time for language development was
65
reportedly extensive as the teachers feel that they incorporate language activities
throughout the day.
In summary, the surveys revealed that the program at these schools is meeting
the needs of the students at a basic, sufficient or exemplary level in each aspect of
language and literacy. The level of achievement for the children was reportedly
adequate to prepare them for kindergarten entry; however, there is a concern for
improving the children’s performance to a level of proficiency in all areas of language
and literacy to enable a smooth transition to kindergarten and success in elementary
school.
Recommendations are made in Chapter 4 in regards to the language learning
and literacy practices at the three schools under study in this research; the three
schools being a sample of what is the norm in the Placer County Head Start State
Preschool system.
66
Chapter 4
CONCLUSIONS: RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTED ACTIONS
The introduction at the beginning of this study gave an overview of the Head
Start Preschool system from the perspective of each level of administration: national,
state, and county. The organizations administering Head Start at each level were
described, along with the advantages, challenges, and issues administrators and action
groups expressed in regards to Head Start Preschool education.
Chapter 1 presented portraits of three schools in the Placer County Head Start
State preschool system. Each school was observed and described, giving an overview
of the student population, school personnel, school facility, and classroom
environment and practices. Through interviews with the teachers, information was
gathered as to the claims, concerns, and issues the teachers have regarding literacy
practices at their school.
Chapter 2 gave a review of the literature in regards to early childhood language
and literacy development, including data regarding the benefits of preschool
education, as well as an overview of the kinds of tools used to assess the adequacy of
the Head Start Preschool Program.
The advantages of a preschool education for children are that: Early Childhood
Education saves money on K-12 education, public assistance, judicial system, as well
as increasing tax revenue from employment (Lynch, 2007); Early Childhood
Education increases social skills, paying attention, finishing tasks, accepting
responsibility and perseverance; and preschool provides a language-rich environment
67
that promotes reading skills such as recognizing letters, as well as vowel and
consonant sounds. Additionally, children who attend pre-school are less likely to
attend special education classes (Preschool California, 2010a, pp. 1-3).
The conclusion from research is that children are better prepared for school
thanks to California Head Start programs. A new study released by the California
Head Start Association and Child Care Results indicates significant improvement for
Head Start participants across various development areas, including language and
literacy, math, motor and social skills.
The main issue or concern expressed by administration is that all children be
afforded a preschool education universally, and that funding is found to provide that
quality education.
Chapter 3 described the methodology used during the study and investigates
the literacy practices and effectiveness of the language and literacy program at each of
the school sites. Information was gathered from teacher interviews, surveys and
observational notes. The locally mandated curriculum was examined and evaluated, as
well as the teacher created materials and lessons used in the classroom.
Several main concerns emerge from the teachers’ point of view in regards to
the language and literacy program at the three school sites. There was a concern that
the children are not being adequately prepared for kindergarten in light of the rigorous
state standards; a desire for more reading involvement on a one-on-one basis take
place between teacher and student, as well as between parent and student; and a belief
that the phonemic awareness instruction might be increased and/or improved, by and
68
large. The other issue brought up by the teachers was a need for more language
practice and reading materials in the children’s home language based on a belief that
the children need to hear and read words in their primary language at school.
In Chapter 3, the evidence for student learning was examined in contrast to the
teachers’ perceptions about literacy practices and effectiveness of those practices in
the classroom. The concerns and issues in regards to student learning that were
validated by this evidence and which need attention and improvement were in the
following areas:

Phonemic awareness mastery.

Classroom reading practice.

Parental involvement with children’s reading practice.

Reading materials made available in all home languages.
Areas of concern expressed that were not validated by the evidence gathered in this
study were as follows:

Concern that the children are lacking “kindergarten readiness.”

Behavior difficulties/impulse control in the children.
The results of the DRDP-R indicate that 88% of the children are ready for
kindergarten. The areas of phonemic awareness and verbal communication were the
only categories where a few (10%) of the children were at the developing level. When
children have reached the “Building” and “Integrating” stages they are considered
prepared for kindergarten entrance according to state standards.
69
The children were consistently well-behaved and socially appropriate on the
days observed in class. Any concern in this area may be to one or two children who
have issues in this area at time.
Chapter 4 concludes with a list of recommendations and suggested actions that
might be given consideration by school personnel in regards to solutions to their
concerns. These recommendations and suggested actions are by no means exhaustive
in nature, but may be deemed useful to those seeking more guidance or alternative
methods in resolving difficulties and improving results in the classroom.
Recommendations and Suggested Actions
Recommendation: Phonemic Awareness Instruction
Phonemic awareness instruction seems to be a concern at the preschools and
that being the case, one of the recommendations is to review and follow the guidelines
for instruction in phonemic awareness given by the National Reading Panel (2011).
Action. Follow these guidelines that are supported by the Department of
Education: National Reading Panel (2011) conclusions from scientifically-based
research on phonemic awareness instruction:

Phonemic awareness can be taught explicitly.

Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read and spell.

Phonemic awareness instruction is most effective when students use letters of
the alphabet as they are taught to manipulate phonemes.

Phonemic awareness instruction is most effective when it focuses on only one
or two rather than several types of phoneme manipulation.
70

Phonemic awareness instruction produces greater benefits in reading when it
includes blending and segmenting of phonemes in words.

Phonemic awareness instruction is most effective when it makes explicit how
children are to apply phonemic awareness skills in reading and writing tasks.

Phonemic awareness instruction helps all types of children improve their
reading, including normally developing readers, children at risk for future
reading problems, disabled readers, preschoolers, kindergarteners, firstgraders, children in second through sixth grades with reading disabilities, and
children across various socioeconomic levels.

Phonemic awareness instruction should consume no more than 20 hours of
instructional time over the school year.

Phonemic awareness instruction is more effective when delivered to small
groups of students than when delivered to individual students or to the whole
class. (Adapted from the National Reading Panel, 2011, pp. 5-7)
A suggested resource to help the preschool teacher is Fee, fie, phonemic awareness:
130 Pre-reading activities for preschoolers by M. Hohmann (2002). This book is
endorsed by the High /Scope Early Childhood Reading Institute; researchers behind
the adopted curriculum.
The practice of small group lessons, incorporating segmenting and blending
sounds in words, is highly effective and could be one of the “work time” activities at
a table each day, or done with a small group of children sitting on the carpet.
71
Recommendation: Classroom Reading Practice
The benefits of time spent reading with the children in the classroom can be
maximized by use of the proper materials, and by keeping the children motivated and
interested in literacy. The children in this study demonstrated a high interest in literacy
in the classroom according to the teacher survey. In addition to the classroom
materials the following suggested actions and materials will be a valuable addition to
the program.
Action.

Store reading books in baskets and rotate books on shelves every month to
create the affect of “new” and interesting books to explore.

Encourage the children to explore small decodable readers with teacher
assistance.

Practice sight words from the Dolch word lists in small group.
Recommendation: Parental Involvement with Children’s Reading
Educating parents in the need to “bond” children to reading by holding them
while they read to them is important. Children who have been given loving, physical
contact during early literacy experiences have proven to show greater interest and
success in reading and writing later.
Action.

One of the ways to make sure the children are experiencing literacy in the
home is to have a book bag that can be sent home with a different child each
day after school. The small back pack might contain a stuffed or plush
72
“reading mascot” or “buddy” such as Kermit the frog, or Franklin the turtle,
and a set of books to read with the parent. There are many easy reader books
with those characters that are easy to find. A binder containing paper with
which to “write” and draw about the story, may be included, as well as colored
pencils.
Recommendation: Reading Materials in Home Languages
Research demonstrates that “English emersion” for ELL students works as
well as bilingual programs, so an emphasis on having materials in all student home
languages is probably an unnecessary concern at the pre-school level. A recognition of
and appreciation for diversity in the classroom is more valuable to the growth and
development of all the children, and this seems to be widely practiced at the schools.
Action.

In any event, the home language will be most likely taught and developed by
the parents and child’s community more effectively then in the classroom.
However, it would be an asset to have books in other languages or dual
language available for loan to the families of ELL students in order to promote
parent involvement and pleasure in the children’s reading time at home.
Other Suggested Recommendations and Actions
The language and literacy program at Placer County Head Start State
Preschools observed seems to be thriving well. Further development and growth can
be encouraged in many ways. The staff should be commended for all their hard work
and dedication and expertise demonstrated in their field. The following paragraphs
73
contain a few ideas that may provide additional scholarly resources for the teachers;
useful it is hoped for increasing the children’s enjoyment and motivation, as well as
literacy, as they continue their journey into becoming life-long readers and writers:
Recommendation: Pre-reading and Reading
To improve children’s interest in and awareness of the printed word and
sound-symbol relationship, the following are suggested increases in materials.
Action.

More environmental print in the classroom
o

Pictures with captions from science topics, nature, the seasons, etc.
Decodable readers
o www.dltkteach.com/minibooks/index.html
o www.readinga-z.com/newfiles/preview.html
o

www.starfall.com
Word Wall with “Dolch” sight words
o www.fishforwords.com/sight-word-lists.php
Recommendation: Pre-Writing
To increase practice with holding a writing implement and activation of the
brain-hand connection, children will benefit by the use of the certain materials and
activities.
Action.

Obtain composition books that are ½ pages of lines with top ½ blank for
illustrating.
74

Incorporate more tactile work with pre-writing activities: sandpaper letters;
tracing geometric shapes, such as circle, oval, square, triangle, etc. using
objects or cut-out figures.

Wet, Dry, Try: Handwriting activity with slates and chalk
o See: You Tube Handwriting Lesson: Print Letter K

Handwriting Without Tears
o www.hwtears.com/category/prek “Get Set For School Curriculum.”
o See You Tube: Handwriting Without Tears Channel for lessons.
Recommendation: Behavior Management
In addressing the behavior of the children in the classroom, an accentuation of
the positive in human relationships and promoting a peaceful classroom is important.
A cooperative classroom environment can be fostered by spending time in activities
that encourage peaceful interactions and affirm the importance of each individual in
the classroom community.
Action.

Peace Curriculum
o See: You Tube: “Educating for Peace: The Essence of Montessori”
o www.peace.ca/curricula.html

Love and Logic
o www.loveandlogic.com
75
Summary
The data collected in this study from teacher interviews, teacher surveys, and
observations revealed that many effective literacy practices are taking place in the
preschools studied. In essence, the children are being well-prepared to go on to the
next step in their journey through the educational system. The teachers are hardworking, dedicated individuals ready to address each of the children’s needs and open
to teaching others and listening to others when it comes to educational practices. All
are concerned with the future of the preschool setting and how it can be improved to
better serve the children, the families and the community. The schools are a nurturing
and positive learning environment for the children where they can explore their
emerging literacy with gusto. The children are receiving a strong foundation for
growth and development in the area of language and literacy.
76
APPENDIX A
CSUS Reading Research Project: Language Arts Survey Questions
77
CSUS Reading Research Project
Annabella Matthews
Email Contact: mylynx@earthlink.net
Language Arts Survey Questions
Please answer the following questions regarding the Language Arts program at your school
site. These questions will help me to explore how literacy is promoted in the early years of
childhood, what is working well, and to identify what areas need improving. Some of the
questions will also give educators at the site an opportunity to express their opinion on what
may be important issues in Early Childhood Education. Your opinions are valued as
professional educators in the field. Thank you for your time and honesty in answering the
following questions. Please mark your answers with the corresponding numeral as follows:
1 Unacceptable
2 Limited
3 Basic
4 Sufficient 5 Exemplary
1.) The Language Arts program developed by the High/Scope Curriculum is______.
2.) The amount of teacher training in the use of High/Scope is________.
3.) The amount of responsiveness to and reflection of diversity in the curriculum
is______.
4.) The type of supplemental materials for language development in the classroom is __.
5.) The amount of supplemental materials for language development is _____.
6.) The curriculum teaches reasoning skills in a way I find ______.
7.) The degree to which teachers incorporate extended conversations with children
is____.
8.) The level of child choice and initiative in class-work is _______.
9.) The amount of structure and discipline in the classroom is usually _____.
10.) The level of phonological awareness in the children is _________.
11.) The children’s level of vocabulary development overall is _________.
12.) Writing materials and opportunities for the children to write are ______.
13.) The number of books for the children to read in the classroom is _______.
14.) Provision for parents to become involved with their children’s education is _______.
15.) The amount of language modeling in the classroom is _______.
16.) The amount of time spent on language development overall is ________.
17.) The amount of time available to spend on lesson planning is ________.
Questions: How effectively does High/Scope address the children’s Language Arts
development? Please identify the following areas by placing a check under the
appropriate description:
Area
Strength
Weakness
Needs Improvement
Phonemic Awareness
_______
_______
________
Concepts About Print
_______
_______
________
Alphabetic Principle
_______
_______
________
Listening/Speaking
_______
_______
________
78
APPENDIX B
Language and Literacy Standards
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
APPENDIX C
Desired Results Developmental Profile Revised
92
93
94
95
96
97
APPENDIX D
Student Summary Report
98
99
APPENDIX E
California State Profile
100
101
102
103
104
APPENDIX F
DRDP-R Survey Questions
105
CSUS Reading Research Project
Annabella Matthews
Email Contact: mylynx@earthlink.net
DRDP-R Survey Questions
Please answer the following questions regarding the DRDP-R language and literacy
assessment at your school site. These questions will help me to explore how literacy is
promoted in the early years of childhood, what is working well, and to identify what areas
need improving. Some of the questions will also give educators at the site an opportunity to
express their opinion on what may be important issues in Early Childhood Education. Your
opinions are valued as professional educators in the field. Thank you for your time and
honesty in answering the following questions
1.) The DRDP-R is a valid guide to teachers when observing and measuring a child’s early
growth in language and literacy development. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
2.) How long does it take to do the DRDP-R checklist for one student?
3.) How many four and five year olds in your class will attend kindergarten in the fall?
4.) For those children who will attend kindergarten in the fall only, please place a tally
mark where each child stands for these DRDP-R measures of language and literacy
development:
Developing
Building
Integrating
Language Comprehension
Following Instructions
Verbal Communication
Interest in Literacy
Letter and Word Knowledge
Emerging Writing
Concepts About Print
Phonological Awareness
_______
_______
_______
_______
_______
_______
_______
_______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
5.) The DRDP-R can be used appropriately and effectively as a measurement tool to
employ as a way to support judgments about the effectiveness of teachers.
Agree___Disagree___
6.) The DRDP-R can be used appropriately and effectively as a measurement tool to
employ as a way to support judgments about the effectiveness of a school program.
Agree___ Disagree___
106
REFERENCES
Adams, M., Treiman, R., & Pressley, M., (1997), Reading, writing, and literacy.
Handbook of Child Psychology, 5(4), 275-355.
Aram, D., & Biron, S. (2004). Joint storybook reading and joint writing interventions
among low SES preschoolers: Differential contributions to early literacy. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 588–610.
Byrne, R., Fielding-Barnsley, & L. Ashley, (2000), Effects of preschool phoneme
identity training after six years: Outcome level distinguished from rate of
response. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 659–667.
California Head Start. (2010). California Head Start child outcomes bulletin.
Retrieved March 10, 2010, from
http://www.caheadstart.org/ChildOutcomes2010
Chamow, R. (2010, February 4). New funding for early learning President Obama’s
budget proposal. Preschool California. Retrieved February 6, 2010, from
http://www.preschoolcalifornia.org/
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its
relation to reading experience and ability 10 years late. Developmental
Psychology, 33, 934–945.
Diamond, K. E., Gerde, H. K., & Powell, D. R. (2008). Development in early literacy
skills during the pre-kindergarten year in Head Start: Relations between
growth in children's writing and understanding of letters. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 23(4), 467-478.
107
Ehri, L. (1994). Development of the ability to read words: Update. In R. Ruddell, M.
Ruddell & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th
ed., pp. 323-358). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Hohmann, M. (2002). Fee, fie, phonemic awareness: 130 Pre-reading activities for
preschoolers. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation.
Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from
first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437- 447.
Karoly, L. A. (2009). Preschool adequacy and efficiency in California: Issues, policy
options and recommendations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
KidZKount. (2010). Retrieved from KidZKount.org
Lynch, R. (2007). Enriching children, enriching the nation: Public investment in highquality prekindergarten. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Moats, L. C. (1998, Spring/Summer). Teaching decoding, American Educator, 1-12.
Retrieved from
http://www.readinghorizons.com/research/teaching_decoding.aspx
NAEYC. (1986). Position statement on developmentally appropriate practice in
programs for 4 and 5-year-olds. Young Children, 41(6), 20-29.
NAEYC. (1996). Position statement of the National Association for the Education of
Young Children. In S. Bredekamp & C. Copple (Eds.), Developmentally
appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Rev. ed., p. 330).
Washington, DC: Author.
108
National Reading Panel. (2011). NRP report of the subgroups, Chapter 2, Part 1,
Phonemic awareness instruction. Retrieved March 19, 2011, from
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/upload/ch2-I.pdf
O’Connell, J. (2005, February 5). The state gears up for universal preschool, The
Fresno Bee, p. A1.
Preschool California. (2010a). High quality early childhood education: A proven
investment in school success. Retrieved: January 31, 2010, from
http://www.preschoolcalifornia.org/for-policymakers/making-the-case.html
Preschool California. (2010b). Making the case for pre-k. Retrieved January 31, 2010,
from http://www.preschoolcalifornia.org/for-policymakers/making-thecase.html
Preschool Learning Foundations Research Consortium. (2008). California preschool
learning foundations. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education,
Child Development Division.
RAND Corporation. (2009). Preschool adequacy and efficiency in California: issues,
policy options, and recommendations. Study, 4, 1-90, Washington, DC:
Retrieved February 6, 2010, from
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG200/
Roberts, T., & Neal, H. (2004). Relationship among preschool English language
learner's oral proficiency in English, instructional experience and literacy
development, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 283-311.
109
Van Horn, M. L., & Ramey, S. L. (2003, Winter). The effects of developmentally
appropriate practices on academic outcomes among former Head Start students
and classmates, grades 1-3, American Educational Research Journal, 40(4),
961-990.
Wagner, R. & Barker, T. (1994). The development of orthographic processing ability.
In V. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographic knowledge I: Theoretical
and developmental issues (pp. 243-276). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic Press.
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (2001). Emergent literacy: Development from prereaders to readers. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of
early literacy research (pp. 11-29). New York: The Guilford Press.