Teachers’ use of directives and non-directives during book reading
Sara Reid Advisors: Nancy Creaghead, Ph.D., CCC-SLP and Linda Sickman, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
University of Cincinnati College of Allied Health Sciences Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders
INTRODUCTION The goal of the Head Start program is to prepare at-risk children to take maximal advantage of their elementary school education. It is well known that there is a positive relationship between preschool skills and future academic success (Snow, Tabors & Dickinson, 2001; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2002). In other words, the better children’s academic skills when they emerge from preschool, the more likely they are to do well in elementary and later school years. Therefore, the role of the Head Start teacher with regard to supporting language and literacy skills is crucial to the children in the classroom. Children learn the required complex language skills by exposure to a variety of language experiences, which may come from verbal interactions, in addition to the rich language examples found in books (Zevenbergen & Whitehurst, 2003). Preliteracy and literacy activities are particularly important in the preschool years because they foster language and reading skills simultaneously. Thus, the quality of teacher-child language and literacy activities are vital to Head Start children. Research suggests that language gains preschoolers obtain from reading is related to the particular way in which they are read to. When children are given opportunities to become active participants in the reading experience by teachers using certain techniques during the reading, they show greater language gains than when teachers simply read the book to the child (McGee & Richgels, 2003). For example, it is helpful when children are asked questions about the story so they become more involved in the reading experience. Research completed on reading intervention with teachers indicates that book reading can positively play a role in affecting children’s language and literacy skills (Hadley et. al, 2000; Sickman & Smith, 2006). Thus, it is important to examine if and how teachers’ language use changes after, in-class modeling and training by a speech language pathologist. Research has shown that teacher-child interactions tend to be dominated by the teacher leaving fewer opportunities for child language production (Girolametto et. al, 2000). Typically book reading is a teacher-directed activity. Examining the teachers’ use of directives and non-directives will help determine whether their style of language has been influenced by the literacy enrichment strategies. . A partnership between a local urban Head Start center and the University of Cincinnati was established to support classroom teachers during language and literacy activities. A book reading program was instituted at this site at the request of the Head Start director (Sickman & Smith, 2006). One literacy enhancement strategy was modeled by the SLP during book reading and then implemented by the teacher each week for 10 weeks. Each week’s collaboration was videotaped to examine the teachers’ implementation of the literacy enhancement strategies. Figure 1
70
PURPOSE The goal of this research was to examine teachers’ use of directives and nondirectives during book reading. RESEARCH QUESTION Is there a change in the total number of directives and non-directives, number of directives, number of non-directives used by teachers during book reading prior to and following a 10 week program of modeling behaviors by an SLP? METHODS This study is part of a larger study, which examined teacher change in use of literacy enhancement strategies following modeling by an SLP during an ongoing, in-classroom book reading program. Participants
There was also significantly greater use of non-directives during the follow-up taping than at baseline. The teachers’ use of directives increased from a mean of 5.33 instances to 18.17 after the book reading program. Overall, each subtype of non-directives increased from baseline to follow-up; comments went from 11 to 44, expansions went from 9 to 34, and imitations went from 12 to 31. See Figure 1 for chart. See Appendix A for detailed results. DISCUSSION The results of the study revealed that overall there was in increase in the use of both directives and non-directives during book reading. Our analysis indicated that there was an increase in the total amount of language used by teachers during book reading at follow-up. The book reading program targeted the use of open-ended questions possibly explaining the large increase in the total number of questions from baseline. There was also a significant increase in the teachers’ use of non-directives; several teachers increased their use of non-directives from zero in baseline; one teacher went from zero comments in baseline to 29 at follow-up. Specific literacy behaviors appeared to influence teachers’ use of directives and non-directives during book reading. APPENDIX A
Three lead and three assistant teachers participated in this study. Procedures Prior to beginning the book reading program, three lead and three assistant teachers were videotaped while reading to their children. The teachers were then videotaped approximately 6 weeks post book reading program. Their use of directives (questions, elicitations, instructions, evaluations) and non-directives (comments, expansions, imitations) were coded and counted from the videotapes. Directives are acts that direct the child to do something or require a response from the child. Directives in this study were coded into four subtypes including (1) questions (i.e., yes/no questions, wh- questions), (2) elicitations (i.e., prompts, fill-ins), (3) instructions (i.e., direction, command) and (4) evaluations (i.e., correction, reward). Non-directives are acts that reproduce, comment on, or expand the child’s actions or statements. Non-directives in this study were coded into three subtypes including (1) comments (i.e., self-talk, parallel talk), (2) expansions (i.e., adding language to the child’s utterance) and (3) imitation (i.e., repeating what the child says). RESULTS The t-test for repeated measures was used to examine the effects of the book reading program on teachers’ use of directives and non-directives during book reading. There was significantly greater use of both directives and non-directives during the follow-up taping than at baseline. The teachers’ use of both increased from a mean of 22.67 instances to 61 after the book reading program. The teachers’ post-intervention total communication, including instances in both directives and non-directives, more than doubled when compared to baseline (136 to 366). There was also significantly greater use of directives during the follow-up taping than at baseline. The teachers’ use of directives increased from a mean of 17.33 instances to 42.83 after the book reading program. Seventy six percent (76%) of teachers’ pre-intervention communication was directives. After the book reading program, seventy percent (70%) of the teachers’ communication was directives. These directives were overwhelmingly found to be in the form of questions; however, all directive types were observed. All lead and assistant teachers used questions during baseline and follow-up.
T1* T2* T3* T4** T5** T6**
Teachers Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-up Baseline 12 28 6 15 7 39 10 16 13 16 2
Directive Types Questions Elicitations 1 0 2 4 5 5 4 17 0 1 6 4 Instructions 8 14 1 1 5 24 5 10 5 2 2 8 Evaluations 4 3 0 0 1 4 3 15 1 4 1 7 0 7 1 0 1 7 0 29 6 1 3 0
Non-directive types Comments Expansions Imitations 3 8 2 3 2 5 2 6 0 1 0 11 7 8 1 6 0 8 4 4 0 1 0 4
Follow-up 20 *Lead teachers **Assistant teachers
REFERENCES DeMaio, L.J. (2005). Altering parents’ communication patterns using the parent-child communication program. Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Association Home Study Course. DeMaio, L.J. (2005) Directive and non-directive communication styles. Retrieved from The Parent-Child Communication Program. Website: http://www.mnstate.edu/pccp/ Directive%20vs%20NonDirective%20Styles.pdf Girolametto, L., Weitzman, E., van Lieshout, R. & Duff, D. (2000). Directiveness in teachers’ language input to toddlers and preschoolers in day care. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 1101-1114. Hadley, P.A., Simmerman, A., Long, M., & Luna, M. (2000). Facilitating language development for inner-city children: experimental evaluation of a collaborative, classroom-based intervention. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 280-295. McGee, L. M. & Richgels, D.J. (2003). Designing early literacy programs: Strategies for at-risk preschool and kindergarten children. New York: The Guilford Press. Paul, R. (2001). Language disorders from infancy through adolescence, 2nd edition. St. Louis: Mosby, Inc. Sickman, L.S. & Smith, A.B. (2006). Building a book reading program in an urban Head Start. Hearsay, Journal of the Ohio Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 18, 38-42. Snow, C. E., Tabors, P. O., and Dickinson, D. K. (2001). Language Development in the Preschool Years. In D. K. Dickinson and P. O. Tabors (Eds.), Beginning Literacy with Language (pp. 1–25). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Vigil, D.C., Hodges, J., & Klee, T. (2005). Quantity and quality of parental language input to late-talking toddlers during play. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 21, 107-122. 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. Zevenbergen, A. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2003). Dialogic reading: A shared picture book reading intervention for preschoolers. In A. van Kleek, S. Stahl & E. Bauer (Eds.), On Reading Books to Children (pp. 177-200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
60
50
40
Baseline Follow-up
30
20
10
0 Directives & NonDirectives Directives Non-Directives