Neuman, Susan B.; Pinkham, Ashley; Kaefer, Tanya (2015). Early Education and Development, v26 n7 p988-1011 2015. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1070888
Reviewed: February 2023
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for World of Words (WOW).
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Comprehension composite measure (Neuman et al., 2015) |
World of Words (WOW) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.35 |
0.27 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test IV (PPVT-IV) |
World of Words (WOW) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
101.47 |
99.96 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 1% | |
| Black | 31% | |
| Other or unknown | 14% | |
| White | 54% |
| Hispanic | 7% | |
| Other or unknown | 93% |
| Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) | 66% | |
| Other or unknown | 34% |
This study took place in ten state-sponsored pre-K classrooms in five elementary schools located in a “severely economically depressed urban fringe area in the rustbelt region.” Teachers participated in a full day of professional development (PD).
The authors note that the groups were comparable in age and receptive language, as measured by the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. However, there were significantly more boys than girls in the intervention group and significantly more African American children in the intervention group than in the comparison group. All children spoke English as their primary language. About 62% of the intervention group and 69% of the comparison group received free or reduced-price lunch. Each participating teacher was a White female with a bachelor's degree, a specialist certificate in early childhood, and more than five years of preschool teaching experience.
The intervention classrooms participated in the World of Words (WOW) embedded multimedia supplemental intervention, which was designed to support vocabulary and conceptual development. The curriculum is organized by topics with category-specific properties identified for each topic. An example of a category-specific property for the topic of plants is that they need water, sunlight, and air. Teachers first introduced vocabulary words through video clips and through information books and picture cards, and children engage in using the words. The intervention comprised an eight-day instructional sequence designed to help teachers scaffold children’s learning, moving toward increasing cognitive demand. The intervention began in September and continued for 12 weeks. Daily sessions took between 12 and 15 minutes and replaced a portion of whole-group instructional time.
The comparison classrooms were business-as-usual. Teachers used High/Scope as their curriculum framework and did not participate in the PD session.
Intervention teachers participated in a full day of PD focused on educative curriculum materials, which are designed to promote student and teacher learning. During the PD session, teachers learned about the rationale, materials, and procedures for the intervention. They also learned how each of the materials could be used in teaching the curriculum.
Reviewed: January 2022
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Comprehension composite measure (Neuman et al., 2015) |
World of Words (WOW) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.35 |
0.27 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test IV (PPVT-IV) |
World of Words (WOW) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
101.47 |
99.96 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 1% | |
| Black | 31% | |
| Other or unknown | 14% | |
| White | 54% |
| Hispanic | 7% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 93% |
This study took place in ten state-sponsored pre-K classrooms in five elementary schools located in a “severely economically depressed urban fringe area in the rustbelt region.” Teachers participated in a full day of professional development (PD).
The authors note that the groups were comparable in age and receptive language, as measured by the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. However, there were significantly more boys than girls in the intervention group and significantly more African American children in the intervention group than in the comparison group. All children spoke English as their primary language. About 62% of the intervention group and 69% of the comparison group received free or reduced-price lunch. Each participating teacher was a White female with a bachelor's degree, a specialist certificate in early childhood, and more than five years of preschool teaching experience.
The intervention classrooms participated in the World of Words (WOW) embedded multimedia supplemental intervention, which was designed to support vocabulary and conceptual development. The curriculum is organized by topics with category-specific properties identified for each topic. An example of a category-specific property for the topic of plants is that they need water, sunlight, and air. Teachers first introduced vocabulary words through video clips and through information books and picture cards, and children engage in using the words. The intervention comprised an eight-day instructional sequence designed to help teachers scaffold children’s learning, moving toward increasing cognitive demand. The intervention began in September and continued for 12 weeks. Daily sessions took between 12 and 15 minutes and replaced a portion of whole-group instructional time.
The comparison classrooms were business-as-usual. Teachers used High/Scope as their curriculum framework and did not participate in the PD session.
Intervention teachers participated in a full day of PD focused on educative curriculum materials, which are designed to promote student and teacher learning. During the PD session, teachers learned about the rationale, materials, and procedures for the intervention. They also learned how each of the materials could be used in teaching the curriculum.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube