(2008). National Center for Education Research. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502153
Reviewed: March 2013
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 Ladders to Literacy.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Building Blocks Shape Composition Task |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Child Math Assessment- Abbreviated (CMA-A) Composite score |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III): Applied Problems subtest |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Test of Language Development - Primary III (TOLD-PIII): Grammatic Understanding subtest |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
8.38 |
9.45 |
No |
-- | |
|
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III) |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
88.24 |
95.43 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Preschool Comprehensive Test of Phonological and Print Processing (Pre-CTOPPP) Elision subtest |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
8.55 |
9.10 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III): Letter-Spelling subtest |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III): Letter-Word Identification subtest |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Test of Early Reading Ability III (TERA-III) |
Ladders to Literacy vs. None |
Posttest |
Preschool children;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 11% | |
| Other or unknown | 19% | |
| White | 39% |
| Hispanic | 31% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 69% |
The study was conducted in 14 Head Start classrooms in New Hampshire.
This randomized controlled study, conducted during the 2003–04 and 2004–05 school years, included an intervention group that implemented The Creative Curriculum® supplemented by the Ladders to Literacy curriculum and a comparison group that implemented just The Creative Curriculum®. In 2002–03 (the study’s pilot year) the researchers recruited 12 Head Start classrooms to participate in the study, grouped them according to whether their respective Head Start programs are located in a rural or urban area and are full- or half-day programs, and then randomly assigned the classrooms within each group to intervention and comparison groups. In the study’s evaluation year (2003–04), 11 of the pilot-year classrooms and nine of the teachers were retained. One comparison classroom was replaced with another classroom from the same center, and two additional classrooms were randomly assigned to the intervention and comparison groups. This resulted in a sample of 14 classrooms (seven intervention and seven comparison). For most of the classrooms, the intervention condition had been in place for a full year when the evaluation year started. After parental consent was obtained, the sample included 123 children at baseline; 105 children were included in the final sample (54 intervention and 51 comparison). Baseline equivalence between the analytic sample of intervention and comparison children was established from data on baseline outcome measures provided by the study authors. At baseline, children in the study averaged 4.6 years of age, 44% were male, 39% were Caucasian, 31% were Hispanic, and 11% were African American.
Intervention classrooms implemented Ladders to Literacy as a supplementary curriculum to The Creative Curriculum®. Researchers selected 27 of the 60 Ladders to Literacy activities for implementation in the classrooms assigned to the intervention group. Teachers were trained to implement those 27 language and literacy activities across three domains (print/book awareness, metalinguistic awareness, and oral language). In November and December 2003, teachers were expected to implement nine activities (three from each of the three major domains). For the rest of the preschool year (January to May 2004), teachers were expected to continue implementing those nine activities and to implement an additional three to six activities each month so that, by May 2004, teachers had implemented all 27 activities. Fidelity of implementation was assessed by conducting observations from December 2003 through April 2004 in the classrooms assigned to use the Ladders to Literacy curriculum. Researchers used a global fidelity measure to rate the overall fidelity with which the curriculum was implemented. On a four-point scale (0 = “not at all” to 3 = “high”), classrooms implementing the Ladders to Literacy curriculum were rated in the high-medium range (2.71).
The comparison group implemented The Creative Curriculum® without Ladders to Literacy. The Creative Curriculum® is a comprehensive curriculum for 3- to 5-year-old children. It addresses four areas of development: social/emotional, physical, cognitive, and language development. The curriculum required the physical space of the classroom to be structured into 10 interest areas: blocks, dramatic play, toys and games, art, library, discovery, sand and water, music and movement, cooking, and computers. Time was also allotted for outdoor activities. The 10 interest areas were designed to address curriculum content such as literacy, math, science, social studies, the arts, and technology, as well as process skills such as observing, exploring, and problem solving. The Creative Curriculum® included a developmental checklist that teachers were asked to use in ongoing assessments of child progress. Fidelity of implementation was assessed by conducting observations from December 2003 through April 2004 in the classrooms assigned to use The Creative Curriculum®. Researchers used a global fidelity measure to rate the overall fidelity with which the curriculum was implemented. On a four-point scale (0 = “not at all” to 3 = “high”), classrooms implementing The Creative Curriculum® were rated at the medium level (2.0).
The outcome domains of oral language, print knowledge, phonological processing, and math were assessed with standardized measures. Oral language was assessed with the PPVT-III and the Grammatic Understanding subtest from the TOLD-P:3. Print knowledge was assessed with the TERA-III and the WJ-III Letter-Word Identification and Spelling subtests. Phonological processing was assessed with the Elision subtest from the Pre-CTOPPP. Math was assessed with the WJ-III Applied Problems subtest, the composite score from the CMA-A, and the Building Blocks Shape Composition test. Pretesting was done in the fall of the preschool year, and posttesting was done in the spring of the preschool year. Trained research staff administered all assessments, which were conducted in English. For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendix B.
All 14 teachers (both intervention and comparison) received at least one day of training on The Creative Curriculum® from a staff member at Teaching Strategies, Inc. Intervention group teachers received Ladders to Literacy training in September 2003, and ongoing training on a monthly basis throughout the 2003–04 school year. In addition to the September 2003 training, six intervention group teachers received training on Ladders to Literacy activities in September 2002.
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