2 Parents’ Impressions of Readiness Skills in Relation to Assessed Phonological Awareness Francine Giocondo, Judy Flax, Alexandria Reilly, Teresa Realpe-Bonilla, Naseem Choudhury, April A. Benasich Center for Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience Rutgers University Successful Use of Parent Questionnaires Early Language Development " ! MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories (CDI) (Fenson, et al. 1993) " Language Development Survey (Rescorla, 1989) ! Behavior and Attention " Conners’ Parent Rating Scale (Conners, 1997) ! Overall functioning " " Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (Sparrow, Balla,Cicchetti 1981) Autism Diagnostic Inventory (Le Courteur, Lord, Rutter 2003) American Speech, Language, and Hearing Association Miami Beach, November, 2006 1 3 Successful Use of Parent Questionnaires ! 4 Use of Parent Questionnaires ! Pros: " Emergent and Early Literacy " Parents see their child in multiple naturalistic settings. PQ have proven to be very reliable and a useful correlate to clinical and research testing. Help to identify children in need of special services. If there is a problem, parents are empowered to be a part of the solution. Preschool-age, parent report correlated with test scores of children with SLI only (Boudreau 2005) At age 6, parent report correlated with test scores of TD children, but not SLI children (Hauerwas & Stone 2000) Parent Ratings of Everyday Cognitive & Academic Abilities (PRECAA) increase accuracy of clinical diagnosis of RD & ADHD from ages 8-16yrs (Dewey, Crawford, Kaplan 2003) " " " " " 5 6 Use of Parent Questionnaires ! ! Aims To compare parent ratings of early pre-reading skills to assessed performance at 5 years using standardized measures to answer the following questions: 1. Can parents accurately rate early reading skills of their 5-year-olds? If yes, which pre-literacy skills? What might explain discrepancies between parent ratings and standard scores? Cons: " May not fully understand context or construct being assessed • Ex: CDI- Parent said each word to see if child could repeat it. " May overestimate child’s ability May misinterpret findings 2. 3. " 7 8 Methods ! MEASURES ! Phonological Awareness Performance on phonological awareness is a strong predictor of later reading (Scarborough 1989, Juel 1991, Stanovich 1986, Wagner 1994) " Participants " 23 5-year-olds (16 Females, 7 Males) Includes children with a family history of SLI (n=6) and control children (n=17) SES =85% highest social strata " Letter Identification (Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-R) • Identify upper and lower case letters Sound Blending (Comprehensive Test Phonological Processing-(CTOPP) • “What word do these sounds make?” “num-ber” " " " All children completed a comprehensive 5 year neuropsychological battery including measures of phonological awareness. " Sound Matching (CTOPP) • “Which words start with the same sound as: pan: pig, hat, cone” 9 MEASURES Phonological Awareness " Elision/Deletion (CTOPP) • “Say baseball…..” “Now say it again without saying base” 10 Phonological Awareness Range in Performance scores: Identified 5 year olds at risk for early reading delays (i.e.scores in the lowest quartile) ! " Rhyming (Phonological Awareness Test- PAT)” Test Scores Min Max Letter i.d. 78 7 7 7 124 18 14 14 Blending Matching Elision 11 ! Do parents identify the same weaknesses revealed by standardized tests? Parent Ratings 12 Early Reading Constructs and Parent Questionnaire Construct i.d. letters of alphabet Pre-Literacy Question Group of letters forms a word Id’s and names printed letters of alphabet ! Pre-Literacy Rating Scale: CELF-Preschool-2 (Wiig 2004) • “Understands group of letters forms a word” • “Identifies and names 5 or more letters” • “Says the sound that 5 or more letters make” • “Joins 2 letters to make a syllable or word” • “Joins 3 letters to make a syllable or word” ! Sound Matching Id’s and names printed letters of alphabet Says sounds that familiar letters make Spearman’s Rho-Correlation analysis revealed significant relationships between selected items of Emergent Reading Skills Set and early reading constructs. 13 Early Reading Constructs and Parent Questionnaire Construct Sound Blending Pre-Literacy Question Groups of letters form a word Says sounds that 5 familiar letters make Joins 2 letters to make a syllable or word Joins 3 letters to make a syllable or word Groups of letters form a word Says sounds that 5 familiar letters make Joins 2 letters to make a syllable or word Joins 3 letters to make a syllable or word 14 Results of letters form a word Construct Pre-Lit Q Letter-i.d. Understands group Agree Disagree 78% 22% Skill is present 13% of parents report child has skill, but not reflected in test. 9% of children have skill, parent does not recognize. Elision I.D. printed letters of 87% alphabet Skill is present 13% 13% of parents report child has skill, but not reflected in test. 15 Results Pre-Lit Q i.d. printed letters of alphabet 16 Results Agree Disagree 17% 8.5% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score Construct Sound Matching Agree Disagree 83% 17% Skill is present Parent reports child has skill and not reflected in test score. Construct Pre-Lit Q Sound Blending Understands a group 83% of letters forms a word Skill is present Says the sounds that 74% letters make Skill is present 26% 17% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score. 9% had the skill and parents did not recognize 8.5% had skill, but parent did not recognize Says the sounds that letters make 70% Skill is present 30% 22% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score 8% had skill and parent did not recognize. 17 Results Pre-Lit Q Joins 2 letters for syllable or word 18 Results Agree Disagree 70% Skill is present Construct Sound Blending Agree Disagree 56% 52% Skill is present 4% did not have skill Construct Pre-Lit Q Elision (Deletion) Understands group of letters forms a word 44% 4% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score 40% had the skill and parents did not recognize 30% 22% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score 8% of children have skill, parent did not recognize. Joins 3 letters for syllable or word 48% 44% Skill is present 4% did not have skill 52% 4% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score 48% had the skill and parents did not recognize Says the sounds that 70% letters make Skill is present 30% 21% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score 9% of children have skill, parent did not recognize. 19 Results Construct Pre-Lit Q Agree Joins 2 letters for 53% Elision (Deletion) syllable or word 44% Skill is present 9% did not have skill 20 Disagree 47% 13% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score. 34% had skill parent did not recognize. Summary and Insights ! The strongest agreement between testing and parent ratings: " " " Letter Identification task Sound Matching task Range = 74%-87% Joins 3 letters for 61% syllable or word 44% Skill is present 17% did not have skill 39% 4% parents report child has skill and not reflected in test score 35% had skill parent did not recognize. ! Observation: " " Both tasks are transparent in terms of what the question asks and what parents might intuitively observe as reading readiness abilities. Disagreement was primarily the parent over-estimating child’s ability. 21 Summary ! 22 Conclusions ! The least amount of agreement between testing and parent ratings: " " " Sound Blending task Elision/deletion task in relation to : “Joins 2 & 3 letters to make a word.” Range = 48% - 61% Unlike observations of oral language, social skills, & other daily living activities, some observations of early reading skills are not always as transparent in daily activities. Overall parents and caregivers can be reliable informants for a child’s pre-literacy skills but simple “pre-training” of parents in the form of multiple examples of the construct should be available. ! Observation: " " ! " Skills not easily identifiable in everyday caregiver routines. Phonological awareness tasks & parent rated items require “thinking” (metalinguistic) about sounds. Parents greatly underestimated child’s ability. 23 Future Directions ! Continue to collect questionnaire and PA data as children turn five (27 more to test) with examples related to questions Give questionnaire to parents to report at four years and include more questions that address other pre-literacy skills such as print/book knowledge and rhyming Begin to look at group differences (FH+ and FH-) ! !
Pages to are hidden for
"Comparing Parents Evaluations of Readiness Abilities to Assessed Phonological Awareness"Please download to view full document