The effects of a well-designed literacy program on young children’s language and literacy development.
Christie, J., Roskos, K., Vukelich, C., & Han, M. (2003). In F. Lamb-Parker, J. Hagen, R. Robinson, & H. Rhee (Eds.), The first eight years. Pathways to the future: Implications for research, policy, and practice. Proceedings of the Head Start National Research Conference (pp. 447–448). New York: Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University.
-
examining37Students, gradePK
Doors to Discovery Intervention Report - Early Childhood Education
Review Details
Reviewed: June 2013
- Randomized controlled trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
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 Doors to Discovery.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III) |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
35.98 |
30.25 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Developing Skills Checklist-Concepts of Print subtest |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
4.48 |
2.82 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Get Ready to Read! (GRTR) |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
8.62 |
7.06 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
South
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted with children from five Head Start classrooms in a large metropolitan area in the southwest United States.
Study sample
In this study, four Head Start classrooms—two serving English-speaking children and two serving Spanish-speaking children—were blocked on primary language of the children and randomly assigned to implement either Doors to Discovery™ or The Creative Curriculum®. One additional classroom served a mixed-language group and was assigned to implement Doors to Discovery™. Since this classroom was not assigned at random, it was omitted from WWC analyses. At baseline, the four-classroom study included 35 children in the Doors to Discovery™ group and 28 children in the comparison group. The four-classroom analysis sample included 21 children in the Doors to Discovery™ group and 16 children in the comparison group.
Intervention Group
Teachers in the intervention classrooms used three units from the Doors to Discovery™ curriculum: Vroom! Vroom!; Build It Big!; and Tabby Tiger’s Diner. Each unit was taught for 4 weeks.
Comparison Group
The comparison classrooms used the existing curriculum, which the study authors described as loosely based on The Creative Curriculum®.
Outcome descriptions
The outcomes assessed were children’s oral language and print knowledge. Oral language was assessed with the PPVT-III. Print knowledge was assessed with Get Ready to Read! and the Developing Skills Checklist—Concepts of Print subtest. All assessments were conducted in English (J. Christie, personal communication, January 23, 2009). For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendix B.
Support for implementation
A professional development specialist employed by the distributer conducted a 5-hour training session on Doors to Discovery™ for teachers in the intervention group. During the training, teachers were provided with specific guidance on how to implement the first unit. Research assistants provided teachers with suggestions about how to implement the second and third units before teachers introduced these units in the classroom.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Han, M., Roskos, K., Christie, J., Mandzuk, S., & Vukelich, C. (2005). Learning words: Large group time as a vocabulary development opportunity. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 19(4), 333–345.
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).