Uchikoshi, Yuuko (2005). Developmental Psychology, v41 n3 p464-478. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ684977
Reviewed: September 2006
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 Arthur.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Combined narrative measure |
Arthur vs. Between the Lions |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
4.13 |
2.34 |
No |
-- | |
|
Total number of words |
Arthur vs. Between the Lions |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
20.74 |
10.88 |
No |
-- | |
|
Mean clause length |
Arthur vs. Between the Lions |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
0.54 |
0.76 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
The study was conducted in six schools in a large urban district on the East Coast. Spanish-English classrooms (classrooms providing instruction in both languages) were selected, and all teachers were fluent in both languages. All children came from primarily Spanish-speaking homes and neighborhoods with heavy concentrations of Spanish-speaking people.
The study involved 108 kindergarten students (47 girls and 61 boys). Fifty-one children were assigned to watch Arthur; 57 were assigned to watch Between the Lions. Picture Vocabulary Test scores indicated that, at the beginning of the intervention, participants’ average English vocabulary was at the three-year two-month age level of a monolingual English child. The Spanish version of this measure indicated that their native language vocabulary was at the five-year level; the average age of the children at the beginning of the study was 5 years, 7 months (boys) and 5 years, 6 months (girls). At least 80% of the students in the study qualified for free lunch. The time their families lived in the United States ranged from three months to seven years. According to parent survey responses, only 22% of the children in the sample were born outside of the country. These surveys also indicated that, on average, there were 21 books (in both English and Spanish) in the home, although there was wide variation on this number, ranging from zero to 300.
The intervention group watched a 30-minute episode of Arthur at school, three times a week between October and May of one school year, for a total of 54 episodes. Although follow-up activities are available at the PBS website, teachers were directed only to show the videos.
The comparison group watched the same number of episodes of Between the Lions over the same time period. Between the Lions is an educational television program with a focus on phonics and reading skills. Arthur focuses on narrative structure. As with the intervention group, none of the follow-up activities associated with the show were used. Each program in this show entails a story that a family of lions read together, focusing on phonological skills and the alphabet.
The outcome measure in the study was an instrument used to assess children’s ability to tell a coherent story narrative, total number of words uttered by students, and the average length of the clauses used when describing a story.
Little information about teacher training was provided, other than they were bilingual.
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