(2008). National Center for Education Research. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502153
Reviewed: June 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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Test of Language Development: Grammatical Understanding Subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
9.89 |
9.33 |
No |
-- | ||
|
PPVT-III |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
92.27 |
91.33 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
PPVT-III |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
95.23 |
94.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Test of Language Development: Grammatical Understanding Subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
9.99 |
10.08 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated Composite Score |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.69 |
0.65 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) Applied Problems Subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
98.54 |
99.28 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated Composite Score |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
0.71 |
0.72 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) Applied Problems Subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
101.42 |
102.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (W-J III) Spelling subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
100.53 |
97.37 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) Letter-Word Identification Subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
107.81 |
106.04 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Test of Early Reading Ability - 3rd Edition (TERA-3) |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
93.27 |
92.76 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Preschool Comprehensive Test of Phonological and Print Processing (P–CTOPPP) Elision subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
9.76 |
10.11 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Test of Early Reading Ability - 3rd Edition (TERA-3) |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
94.76 |
93.96 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (W-J III) Spelling subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
103.61 |
103.46 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) Letter-Word Identification Subtest |
Let's Begin with the Letter People® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
108.13 |
109.53 |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 13% | |
| Other or unknown | 58% | |
| White | 29% |
| Hispanic | 45% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 55% |
Let’s Begin with the Letter People and the comparison were implemented in full-day Head Start and public pre-K (Title I and non-Title I) programs in Houston, Texas.
For the Let’s Begin with the Letter People group, 7% of the children were Black, 33% were White, and the remaining 60% were multiple races/other/unspecified. Forty-nine percent were Hispanic (race unspecified). For the comparison group, 19% of the children were Black, 24% were White, 7% were Asian or Pacific Islander, and the remaining 50% were multiple races/other/unspecified. Forty percent of the comparison group were Hispanic (race unspecified).
Let’s Begin with the Letter People (LBLP) is a prekindergarten curriculum in which literacy learning is integrated across topic areas including science, health and safety, art, mathematics, spatial concepts, and music, as well as development of large and small motor skills. This curriculum focuses on supporting development of literacy and language skills such as oral language, phonological and phonemic awareness, and letter knowledge. The curriculum lessons are provided in multiple contexts (such as circle time, small groups, and large groups) and activities (like center activities and story times). Classroom practices include teacher directed activities, application of skills, and independent practice on curriculum activities. The LBLP classroom includes clearly defined interest centers (for example, Paint Corner, Drama Center, and Mathematics). The curriculum materials include Letter People (huggables). Each Letter Person represents a letter of the alphabet and has distinguishing characteristics that are associated with the sound represented by the letter.
Teachers in the comparison condition used teacher-developed, nonspecific curricula.
Teachers received curriculum implementation training prior to the start of the 2003-2004 school year. The teacher sample included 45 teachers who participated in the pilot year of the study (2002-2003), and seven new teachers who started in 2003-2004. A total of 44 (37 returning) teachers participated in the study during the second year of implementation. The new teachers received 12 hours and returning teachers received 6 hours of curriculum implementation training.
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