Lead poisoning is a major health hazard and can have severe effects on Pre-kindergarten children’s health. Almost a million preschool-aged children in the United States have elevated blood lead levels. Toxicity rises with increased lead concentration in the blood. Biochemical and subclinical abnormalities occurs when the concentration reaches 10micro grams/dl to coma and death at levels over 100micrograms/dl (Markowitz, 2000). Lead poisoning is as a result of accumulation of lead metal in the blood caused by inhalation or ingestion of lead over a period of time. Children mostly affected are those between the ages of 1 and 4 years. The risk of lead poisoning increases in pre-kindergarten children because of the increased frequencies of hand to mouth activities (Wemp et al., 2007). In 2008, 5000 children were found to have lead poisoning. National surveys show that more than 3 million children of six years and below have lead poisoning (Illinois, 2009).
Lead poisoning is a public health issue which requires attention of the state, local and individual contributions. An analysis of lead poisoning reveals that Lead poisoning is a major health hazard to pre-kindergarten children.
Causes of Lead Poisoning in Kindergarten children
Lead poisoning in pre-kindergarten children mostly occurs from lead paints. The risk is higher at this stage because the child’s nervous system is at its rapid growth and development. This means the brain and the general development are likely to be negatively affected. When the brain of a child is affected, the effects may become irreversible. Unfortunately, lead effects are not felt at once and a parent may not be aware that the child is suffering from high lead amounts. Lead poisoning is a slow process of accumulation of lead in child’s body (Lead, 2011).
Lead poisoning is caused by various exposures of lead containing materials to pre-kindergarten children. Major causes of lead poisoning are lead based paints and lead contaminated dust. Other sources of lead poisoning include soil, water, home remedies and toy jewellery. Most of it is ingested by hand to mouth action. Because of their adverse effects, lead-based paints were banned from use in 1978; this was a good measure but not good enough as an approximate number of 38 million housing units still contained lead based paints. When paints on walls last for a long time they start to wear out. The risk of poisoning increases with chipping, peeling or flaking of the paint from the walls (Gaitens et al., 2011).
Lead in soils is also a risk factor for pre-kindergarten children especially where lead arsenate had been used as pesticide between 1905 and 1947. Dust is also a potential risk because it may contain soil, paint, and automotives emissions (Gaitens et al., 2011).
Some foodstuffs are also a potential source of lead poisoning to pre-kindergarten children. Contamination of food with lead metal can occur at any food processing stage. Cooking and serving utensils may expose food to lead as well as lead contaminated water or dust. Maternal exposure to lead can be transferred to the pre-kindergarten child through breast milk. Lead stored in mother’s bones presents a higher risk of exposure of lead poisoning. Lead in breast milk has a significant effect on the child because the child starts breast feeding from birth; a stage of rapid growth of the nervous sytem. Some medical drugs have been identified to have high concentration of lead and therefore are risk factors for lead poisoning (Levins et al., 2008).
Water can also cause lead poisoning to pre-kindergarten children. Water hardly contain lead but equipnment used in water distribution increases the riskof lead poisoning. Rusting and wearing out of the taps and pipes had a high risk factor in the past. Corrossion of metallic fixtures containing lead caused lead poisoning (Levins et al., 2008). Drinking water contributes about 10-20% of all the lead exposed people (Levins et al., 2008).
Chocolate and its products such as chocolate milk and chocolate bars were found to have high levels of lead. The process of their production exposed them to lead and a substantial percentage increase was seen with every progressive process of production. Canned foods were also found to contain some amounts of lead posing a risk of lead poisoning to pre-kindergarten children (Levins et al., 2008). Some spices such as Hungarian paprika and food colorings were also potential souces of lead poisoning to the pre-kindergarten children. Beverages such as Pepsi were found to have bottle labels with high lead amounts (Levins et al., 2008).
Some dietary supplements were also found to have lead content from a research of 84 dietary supplements. Out of these only 11 were found to be lead free (Levins et al., 2008). They offer a great risk to pre-kindergarten children who are given dietary supplements.
Some of the leaded crystal glass and dishes contained lead oxide. They were capable of releasing a lot of lead in a short period of time. Pottery, vinyl lunch boxes and painted glassware have been found to contain lead which is risky to the health of the children. Polyethene bags used to carry foodstuffs and which can be easily licked by pre-kindergarten children were found to contain some paint with some amount of lead. Even bread paperbags were found to have small amounts of lead. Reusing the paperbags causes the paint to come out of the paper and thus ingested by action of hands to mouth (Levins et al., 2008).
Synthetic turf in playgrounds of children put children at risk of lead poisoning because it was found to contain some lead (Levins et al., 2008).
Other risk factors include , “battery manufacturing and recycling,remodelling, renovation projects, demolition work, ammunation manufacturing, automotive/radiator repair, soldering, paiting plumbing and welding” (Khan et al., 2010, p. 501); this lead is exposed to children who live near industrial places by inhalation or brought home by their parents on their shoes, hands and clothes. Lack of healthy diet to pre-kindergarten children puts them at a risk of lead poisoning because exposure of lead causes a higher gastrointestinal absorption (Khan et al., 2010).
Effects of Lead poisoning in Pre-kindergarten Children
Small body size of pre-kindergarten children causes higher absorption and concentration of lead in children (Wemp et al., 2007). This causes lead to have severe effects in children than in adults. Neurotoxicity in children has a great impact because it can easily lead to permanent neurological damage and behavioural disorders.
Pre-kindergarten children are highly affected by lead in their bodies. Nervous, renal, haemopoietic, hepatic and reproductive systems of pre-kindergarten children are affected by lead. In the past, 10µg/dL of blood was known to be safe, but current research has revealed that this has chronic health effects. Children’s intelligence is impaired leading to lower Intelligence Quotient. Neural system development is negatively affected (Khan et al., 2010). Mental retardation may become irreversible depending on the level of severity of lead effect on a pre-kindergarten child.
Hematological system is highly affected by lead poisoning in pre-kindergarten children. It causes a drastic drop of haemoglobin and blood levels. Children who are lead poisoned may suffer from anaemia, because lead in the blood of children inhibits synthesis of heme (Khan et al., 2010).
Kidneys are affected by lead. Lead may impairs the renal functioning in pre-kindergarten children. Excessive exposure of lead may cause acute or chronic toxicity to the nephrons making them to malfunction. Chronic nephropathy comes after a long time exposure. Lead can cause proximal tubular damage, glomerular sclerosis, intestinal fibrosis and lowered glomerular filtration rate (Khan et al., 2010).
Liver is also affected by lead exposure. Most of the lead that gets into the body of pre-kindergarten child accumulates in the liver; about 33%, while the rest is stored up in soft tissues. This affects functioning of the liver causing depletion of protein and higher production of liver enzymes (Khan et al., 2010).
High lead levels causes stunted growth in pre-kindergarten children. This causes them to have a delayed sexual maturation as they grow up. In addition lead may cause impairment of physical fitness to the child (Little, 2009). Lead poisoning destructs language fluency causing inability to communicate. The pre-kindergarten child fails to pay attention and easily looses concentration. Pre-kindergarten children also suffer from memory loss. As they grow up they are not able to plan and organize their activities which leads to failure in school. Lead poisoned pre-kindergarten children have been found to have poor cognitive abilities meaning that they will find it hard to do something for the first time (Lead, 2009).
Epidemiology
From research done by the U.S Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, about 320,000(1.6%) children aged between 1 and 6 years had high lead blood levels above 10 micrograms per decilitre (Gaitens et al., 2011). In a research carried out in 1999-2002 by Centres for Disease Control, 1.4 million children were found to have blood lead levels of 5-9 micrograms per decilitre.
The research showed a difference in the number of children who were lead poisoned. Year of construction of houses was significant in lead poisoning. Those houses which were constructed before 1978 had shown a higher number of children being lead poisoned. Renovation works which failed to follow lead safe work increased the risk of lead in the houses. Rental units also had a higher number of children being lead poisoned than those who owned a house because of enough space the owners had. Homes of non Hispanic whites and African Americans had higher lead levels than those of whites (Gaitens et al., 2011).
A research was done by CDC in the United States from 1997 to 2007. The results showed a decline in the number of children who were lead poisoned. In 1997 children with high blood lead levels was 7.61% of 23, 345,397 children. After three years, the number of lead poisoning decreased to 3.96% of 23, 612, 242 children. Lead poisoning in children had gone as low as 1% 0f 24, 761,587 children in 2007. However, this was a great health hazard because, though the percentage was low, many children were at risk because of the high population (CDC 1). From the above research the ratio of boys to girls who were lead poisoned was seen to be higher in boys than in girls. Lead poisoned pre-kindergarten children had lower weights and heights than those who were not lead poisoned (Khan et al., 2010).
A research from Uganda in Africa examined blood lead levels. The result was a mean of 7.15 micrograms per decilitre. 20.5% of children aged 4-8 years had elevated blood lead levels. This was after Tetraethyl lead was banned from use in the country in 2005. Children were therefore seen to be at risk of lead poisoning (Graber et al., 2010).
Remedies for Lead Poisoning in Children
First priority in control of lead poisoning is reducing exposure of pre-kindergarten children to lead. Timing is an important factor when it comes to control of lead. Community health workers should ensure timely tackling of the problem before it has severe effects on the pre-kindergarten children. This will reduce the cost of remediation. Recommending people to repaint walls with latex paint reduces the risk of lead exposure to children because it prevents flaking and chipping of degraded lead paints from the walls. This duty can be effectively done by housing organizations (Levins et al., 2008).
Intensive testing of the dust and soil should be carried out make the environment lead free. Public health workers should ensure monitoring of lead in air, water and food (Levins et al., 2008). Thorough research should be done so as to help in progressive improvement on the measures taken from time to time. Community Public health nurses should work with health local authorities so as to exonerate lead poisoning source
Since the highest risk of lead poisoning is in paints, community public health nurses should work towards alleviating the risk to the community. Firstly, they should gather information from other health organizations on lead related issues in pre-kindergarten children. This would lead them to clear identification of all sources of lead exposure which poses risk to the children (Levins et al., 2008).
Government institutions which include, local, state and federal should work together to maximize effectiveness of the work towards control of lead poisoning in children. They should work with housing organizations to regulate requirements for lead safe housing. They should also work with the government to help in enforcement of the laws which promote elimination of lead hazard from the environment. Implementation of Wisconsin Act 113 in 1999 showed a great improvement in elimination of lead from the environment. The law required lead free property registry. This helped in maintaining housing which met the standards and also catering for lead poisoned children in case one’s child was found to be Lead poisoned (Zierold, Havlena & Anderson, 2007). Environmental agencies should help in monitoring, regulating, licensing and enforcement of laws put to prevent lead poisoning in pre-kindergarten children (CDC, 2011).
Public and private investments can lower the risk of pre-kindergarten children to lead poisoning (Levins et al., 2008). It can be initiated by community public health nurses who can create awareness and teach on the need of lead poisoning prevention. Funding helps in initiation of research projects and carrying out of investigations where lead poisoning cases has been reported.
Education is an important sector where public health workers should intensify their efforts in elimination of lead poisoning (Levins et al., 2008). Family education is effective as it creates awareness to the parents about health hazards related to ingestion of paints to the children. Parents become aware of the sources of lead and so protect their children from contacting areas with lead. Community Public Health workers should also play an advisory role to parents. Parents should work to ensure that children get a diet rich in calcium and iron. This would protect children by inhibition of lead absorption from the intestines and also in removal of ingested lead (Lead, 2011).
The state should also provide contact information of state and local health departments to those renting houses to report incidences of landlords who refuse to comply with laws set to eliminate lead from the environment (Zierold, Havlena & Anderson, 2007).
Community health workers have a duty of testing homes where a child is known to have elevated lead blood levels. Local health departments should take responsibility to inspect the pre-kindergarten children’s home or any other place of a child’s dwelling. This is recommended to be timely. Centres for Disease control and prevention requires that public health officials to start a detection process in the whole environment where blood lead levels are 20 micrograms/dL or above. Home is the major target of detection because pre-kindergarten children spend most of their time at home.
In U.S., Lead poisoning prevention programs such as Wisconsin Childhood Lead Poisoning prevention program had been useful in the past in a research which was used to determine the time required to get a lead free home. The results were that it required 6 days to1963 days. Wisconsin Childhood Lead Poisoning prevention program researched and maintained all the records of the children tested of lead and housing interventions (Zierold, Havlena & Anderson, 2007). Other than this, they have kept a good record of description of these children. This was a remedy process for determining the most appropriate method that should be applied to eliminate lead from residential environment. Laboratories which carried out blood tests to determine lead levels in blood are also an important part of the creating a lead free environment (Zierold, Havlena & Anderson, 2007).
Funding of local health departments can also be useful in lead control. State funding has in the past encouraged investigations in homes by providing lead poisoning prevention funds (Zierold, Havlena & Anderson, 2007). This made investigations to be a must which was an improvement from the year 2004 which only 42% cases had been investigated. Later on, 90% of reported cases were investigated within 14 days (Zierold, Havlena & Anderson, 2007). Screening of children’s blood should be done by using lead tests.
The prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in pre-kindergarten children has decreased sharply in the United States. However this decrease is mainly in some communities and populations. Pre-kindergarten children who are from low-social economic places and who live in houses built before 1950 are at a higher risk of lead poisoning (Rischitellietal, 2006). This means the programs which have been put up to reduce lead poisoning should intensify their services to these populations. This will help in elimination of Lead poisoning from all communities and populations.
Conclusion
Lead poisoning is still a great health hazard to children. Effective efforts need to be made so as to lower this risk. This can be done by contribution from the government, health agencies, environmental agencies and programs that work towards elimination of lead from the environment which may bring contact of lead to pre-kindergarten children. Those children who are already lead poisoned should be provided with medication and screening of all children should be done. These would eliminate the effects of lead poisoning as well as economic burden to the health departments.
Works Cited
CDC. (2011). Childhood lead poisoning Data, Statistics and Surveillance. Web.
Gaitens et al. (2011). Exposure of U.S Children to Residential Dust Lead. Environmental Health Perspectives 117.3 , 461-466.
Graber et al. (2010). Childhood lead exposure after phaseout of Leaded Gasoline. Environmental Health Perspectives: 118.6 , 884.
Illinois. (2009). Health Bent. Web.
Khan et al. (2010). Lead exposure and its adverse health effects among occupational workers’s children. Toxicology and Industrial Health , 497-502.
Lead. (2011). CDC. Web.
Levins et al. (2008). Lead exxposure in U.S Children: Implications for prevention. Environmental Health Perspectives.116.10 , 1285-1292.
Little, B. (2009). Blood lead levelsand growth status among African-American and Hispanic Children in Dallas, Texas-1980 and 2002:Dallas Lead Project II. Annals of Human Biology:1.1 , 1-10.
Little et al, B. (2009). Blood lead levels and groth status among African-American and Hispanic Children in Dallas. Annals of Human Biology: 1.1 , 1-10.
Markowitz. (2000). Lead Poisoning. Web.
Rischitellietal. (2006). Screening for elevated lead. Web.
Wempetal. (2007). Elevated Blood Lead conccentrations and Vitamin D Deficiencyin Winter and Summer in Young Urban Children. Environmental Health Perspectives 115.4 , 630-634.
Zierold, K. M., Havlena, J., & Anderson, H. (2007). Exposure to Lead and Length of Time Neede to Make Homes Lead Safe for Young Children. American Journal of Public Health: 97.2 , 267-270.
This unit plan is designed for students of Kindergarten aged between 5 and 6. The lesson plan delineates the English course for Kindergarten, which would predominantly concentrate on the development of reading skills. The class includes 17 students. There are nine boys and eight girls in the class. The class has ten ESL learners and a boy with special needs. The students come from diverse cultural but similar socio-economic backgrounds. I have not identified any behavioral issues that can undermine the development of the children.
Stage 1
The aim of the lesson plan is to teach the students to read and write by the end of the course. For this purpose, I will follow the grade-specific standards specified by CCSS (Common Core State Standards, 2010). The three main objectives that I have identified are improving the general reading fluency of the students, strategy used for the instructions, and response during instructions (Richards, Leafstedt, & Gerber, 2006). The lesson plan aims to improve the reading skills of the students. For this purpose, teaching phonological English is essential, as this will help the students to read (Giambo, 2004). Further, the lesson plan will also present the technology and other innovative measures that will be incorporated to enhance learning (Hsieh & Lee, 2008).
The aim of the unit plan is to provide phonemic awareness. Activities for the students will help them to recognize sounds in different words. The lesson plan will help students to identify the phonemes with the written letters.
Stage 2
This stage will also assess the learning of the students through continuous class evaluations through games, activities, worksheets, and oral assessments. No formal tests will be conducted, but as the class teacher, I will assess the amount of learning of the class, groups, and teams.
Stage 3
The final stage will assess the learning of the students with the help of worksheets and interactive games. This will evaluate the student’s learning outcome, the ability to apply the knowledge acquired, and improvement in reading skills.
Day 1
The learning objective of day 1 will be to learn to orally blend words and identify rhyming words. This will cover 40 percent of the total lesson plan. The first class will introduce phonological awareness and sound-spelling. This will begin with the vowels and then move on to the consonants. The activities within the class will be segregated according to the following:
The first task will be blending of the syllables and phonemes (example, c-at or car-pet). This task will help students to enhance their reading skills.
Identification of the rhyming words is a task that enhances vocabulary and reading skills. This task will help students to rhyme words with given pictures, finding rhyming words, or identifying the odd rhyming word.
I believe students in kindergarten need to chant the sounds and see the words that the sounds make. For this purpose, I will provide objects and models along with pictures in charts that will help the students identify the objects, the words, and their sounds.
One activity might be telling a word aloud and asking the students which sound or letter, it begins and ends with.
Day 2
The desired learning outcome of day 2 will be to teach the students to orally blend words. This will cover 30 percent of the total lesson plan. The aim of the class will be to orally understand the syllables, onset/rime, and phonemes.
For this class, I will initially gather the students in a circle and play a game. I will provide the students with previously prepared index cards with the beginning or the end sounds of words. I will ask a student to identify the students with the other pair of sounds that make the word.
By the end of the class, I will provide worksheets to the students that will gauge their understanding of the phonemes and syllables with bright colored pictures and match the following worksheets. I will not use any technology for this class.
Day 3
The learning outcome of this lesson will be to orally segment the words and do phonemic manipulations. This covers 30 percent of the lesson plan. For this purpose, I will first give a word to the students and they have to identify the word at the beginning and the end of the word. Then in order to make the task a bit more challenging, I will ask the students to substitute the beginning and/or end word to form a new word (all these tasks will be done with simple three or four-letter words).
The third task will be to ask them to change the vowel and form a new word. For instance, for the word tap, the students have to substitute ‘a’ with ‘i’ or ‘o’ to for another word. This will help me to introduce sound spelling to the students. Throughout the task, I will informally monitor the students and select those who require intervention. At the end of the lesson, I will give the students worksheet to understand their learning outcome.
References
Common Core State Standards. (2010). Web.
Giambo, D. A. (2004). The Effects of a Phonological Awareness Intervention on the Oral English Proficiency of Spanish‐Speaking Kindergarten Children. TESOL Quarterly 38(1) , 95-117.
Hsieh, M.-C., & Lee, J.-S. (2008). AR Marker Capacity Increasing for Kindergarten English Learning. Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2008 Vol I (pp. 19-21). Hong Kong: IMECS.
Richards, C., Leafstedt, J. M., & Gerber, M. M. (2006). Qualitative and Quantitative Examination of Four Low-Performing Kindergarten English Learners Characteristics of Responsive and Nonresponsive Students. Remedial and Special Education 27(4) , 218-234.
Location: Helen Keller Kids Museum (American Foundation for the blind; New York, NY)
Standards: Virginia Standards of Learning for Kindergarten (Health):
“K.1 The student will explain that the body is a living and growing organism. Key concepts/ skills include […] the five senses (sight, sound, smell, taste, touch) and major body parts (e.g., head, trunk, arms, legs, hands, feet)” (Board of Education Commonwealth of Virginia, 2008, p. iii).
Objective: By the end of the lesson, the students will be able to define the key five sense and explain, which body organ is responsible for sensing a corresponding signal, as well as define the compensation methods for disabled people (e.g., tactile experience as a substitute for sight, etc.).
Materials
Procedures
Technology Use
Since modern technology has opened a plethora of opportunities for teachers and students, it will be most reasonable to integrate them into the field trip experience. However, as the museum already offers a range of exciting experiences, it will be reasonable to use technology as the means to share experiences after the field trip by exchanging posts in a social network or carrying out a complimentary interactive online assignment.
Instructional Set
The students will work in pairs (visual experiences), individually (tactile experiences), and groups (aural experiences).
QAIT Model
Quality
The students will be tricked into paying attention by the discovery that something as simple as seeing is, in fact, a result of a very tricky process. Hence, it will be reasonable to include such an exercise as naming the colors of the words, which will be discussed later, at the beginning of the lesson.
Appropriateness
The assignment is completely aged appropriately; being kindergarteners, students only learn to explore the world and, therefore, have not yet learned to differentiate between various experiences (e.g., visual, aural, etc.) (Davis, 2013). Therefore, it is crucial for them at present to learn to analyze their sensations and make the corresponding conclusions.
Incentive
Students will be able to name their five senses and their functions, as well as use these senses appropriately to make logical conclusions.
Time
The entire lesson will take 60 minutes. During this period, it will be possible to keep the students’ attention and maintaining their enthusiasm without letting them get tired or bored. The explanations will take five minutes. Afterward, the observation of every exhibit (5 minutes) will be followed by a corresponding activity (5 minutes). The final five minutes will be used for students to share their impressions about the field trip and for the teacher to give the students a home assignment.
Developmental Activities
Instruction
Students will compare the tastes, sounds, tactile experiences, smells, and look of different objects.
Guided Practice
The students will attempt at reading one or two simple words in Braille. Afterward, the students will be provided with activity, in which they will have to name the color of the words on sheets of paper without reading the words. The activity will look in the following way:
Green(correct answer: blue)
Yellow(correct answer: black)
Black(correct answer: red)
Red(correct answer: orange)
Blue(correct answer: green)
Orange(correct answer: yellow)
The next exercise will concern tactile functions. The students will be asked to close their eyes and will be given several objects (a LEGO block, a tennis ball, etc.). Their task will be to name the objects by the sense of touch. The next activity will concern hearing; the teacher will ask the students to close their eyes and will make different sounds (e.g., keys dropped on the floor, water being poured into the glass, etc.). The students will have to define the object by the sound that it makes. To train the students’ perception of taste they will be given a sip from cups of salted water, sugary water, water with lemon juice, and a sip of onion juice, with their eyes closed. Finally, the sense of smell will be explored by comparing the smells of perfume, flavored gum, a green apple, etc.
Independent Practice
Students will do the exercises related to matching objects with their tastes, color, smell, shape, and the sounds that they make when colliding with other objects.
Closure
The teacher will ask the students about their experiences. The students will share their ideas and impressions.
Since the lesson revolves around the concept of five senses, all learners, including visual, aural, and kinesthetic ones, will have an opportunity to participate.
Gifted
While the lesson does provide a rather basic explanation of how the five senses work, it may also speak to those students, who would like to take their exploration of the five senses to a greater territory, for example, a study of how exactly the signal is received by the human brain.
LEP
Seeing that a range of activities is self-informing due to the obvious link with the five senses, even the students with limited English speaking skills will be able to understand most of the material intuitively (Parker, 2006).
LD, ED, ADD
For students with learning disabilities to get the learning material, it will be reasonable to split the class into pairs.
Multicultural Connections
The information about different perceptions of visual, aural, and tactile signals by representatives of different cultures should also be introduced into the course of the lesson, not as a separate activity, but as an additional piece of information to the five minutes introduction before each of the activities.
It should be noted that the issue of the five senses is readable for students of any culture. However, certain activities, such as the recognition of color (Activity 1) can be followed by the explanation of the difference in the color meanings in different cultures (e.g., black is related tonight in the American culture and to snow in the Japanese one).
Evaluation
It is expected that the students will be able to learn the material rather easily since they will relate to the concept of the five senses easily. Therefore, the level of engagement can be used as the key measure of students’ understanding of the subject matter. Also, the timely completion of the in-class activities will be considered a major criterion.
Reference List
Board of Education Commonwealth of Virginia (2008). Health education standards for learning for Virginia public schools. Richmond, VA: Board of Education Commonwealth of Virginia.
Davis, L. (2013). Common core literacy lesson plans (K-5): Ready-to-use resources, K-5. New York, NY: Routledge.
Parker, C. E. (2006). 30 graphic organizers for writing grades 5-8. Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Education.
What are the key outcome variable that you are attending to?
The key outcome variable of the proposed changes in learning is the increased ability of kindergarten children in ADEC to express their thoughts, feelings, and innovative ideas using the skills of emergent writing and communicate this during enhanced writing experiences supported by their teachers and parents. This major variable will be achieved through a sequential implementation of various interactive writing strategies with an emphasis on play-based learning and an active learning approach. Thus, other outcome variables will include building professional learning communities to deepen teachers’ instructional knowledge, reduce tension, and share professional development with others.
Our improvement plan will be achieved through teacher implementation of interactive writing strategies that stress play-based learning and active learning approach, such as:
read aloud to support young writers;
writing workshops with a focus on making picture books;
message boards: that includes;
thinking aloud to compose the message;
sharing the pen.
What would it “look like” if the proposed improvements in learning were successful?
If the proposed improvement in learning is successful, it will be proven by the following evidence of student learning:
Students will be able to express their thoughts and ideas using emergent writing.
Student’s writing samples portfolio will show progress in children’s writing.
All children will move from one stage of emergent writing to at least the next.
KG children will show progress in their emergent writing skills already by the end of the year.
As far as the school system learning is concerned, the evidence would be:
The climate and culture of the KG schools in ADEC, which feature bilingual settings using Arabic and English to teach subject matters and approaches to learning skills.
Moreover, professional learning will also be addressed by the improvement program, which is supposed to give the following results:
Teachers’ knowledge about writing skills is going to be deepened, which will solve the problem of the lack of professional knowledge about the problem and its negative effects on children’s emergent writing.
The focus will be established on the importance of emergent writing on overall literacy development.
Teachers will learn to implement writing strategies successfully.
Teachers will be provided awareness in order to create a focus on learning and teaching.
Professional learning communities will be organized.
Training and professional development sessions on how to implement interactive writing strategies will take place on a regular basis.
Teachers will be taught to use portfolios to record the progress of their learners.
Year-level meetings will be scheduled to discuss implementations in order to overcome any difficulties.
All the required information linked with budgeting, motivations, and rewards is going to be provided to all the parties concerned while getting everyone in school on board.
Regular feedback will be ensured from teachers after a few implementations of the strategy.
Teachers will organize visits to other schools that are doing well in writing strategies.
What data (or methods of data collection) would you use to answer the previous question?
The following data can be used in order to collect evidence of the successful implementation of the program:
PD attendance sheet;
PD agenda;
PD supportive documents;
PD feedback forms;
walkthrough forms showing the materials used;
samples of student’s work in their portfolios;
samples of shared and individual writing;
walkthrough sheets;
StAR data completed;
StAR data analysis sheets.
All these types of data will help teachers shape the holistic picture of the results obtained. The child’s emergent writing can be assessed also applying the following rating:
Language level – recording the highest level of language organization that the child uses:
alphabetical;
word (counting every word that can be recognized);
word-group (starting from a phrase consisting of two words);
sentence;
punctuated short story (one theme);
paragraphed story (two or more themes).
Quality of the message:
a child has an idea of signs and can use letters and punctuation;
a child know that he/she conveys a message;
a child can copy a message;
a child tries to use his own ideas;
a child can compose a message successfully.
Directional principles:
a child has no directional knowledge;
a child knows only some parts of writing directions (e.g. start top left, move left to right, etc.);
a child can correct the wrong pattern when he/she is told;
a child can compose a text without having any difficulties connected with text arrangement.
What is the sequence of evaluation steps you would take in order to have the data you need to assess your success?
The sequence of steps that are going to be taken in order to have all the required data is the following:
determine the assessment tools to measure the students’ progress in writing;
brainstorm the teaching strategies with all teachers;
provide PD sessions on interactive writing strategies;
provide PD sessions on using portfolio record progress;
SLT support through modeling – peer observation – visits to other schools – walkthroughs;
analyze the date of benchmark and StAR per term;
provide PD for parents;
share success and challenges during year-level meetings and SLT meetings with year-level leaders;
The challenge that is addressed within the framework of this paper relates to universal pre-K education. It is currently known that numerous states are investing in this program to expand the pre-kindergarten initiative and structure it appropriately. In some cases, separate cities invested more than a state in supporting their pre-K program. The latter has to be taken into account when we are talking about education because the prevalence of such programs is rather unstable.
Even though pre-K initiatives are well-regarded, they do not receive enough attention to be taken seriously enough. What is even more important, the initiatives are not tailored to the unique needs of preschoolers, and this imposes several limitations of the initiative (Karch, 2014).
Therefore, the problem consists in dedicating more resources to expand the existing pre-K program. The organization that is inextricably linked to the development of pre-K education is the National Institute for Early Education Research. This organization claimed that there is a necessity to prioritize the tasks related to pre-K and increase the interest of all 50 states concerning the concept of early education (Rappaport, n.d.). The executives of the organization also emphasize the fact that despite the Great Recession, the majority of the states were able to invest funds in their pre-K initiatives throughout the last two decades.
The most important thing about the pre-K programs is that these initiatives successfully resonate with the community. The key upside to the development of pre-K educational programs is the ability to help children with different cultural backgrounds to attend kindergarten on an equal basis and provide them with identical rights and responsibilities (Kieff, 2009). One of the questions that are recurrently reviewed by the policymakers is the success of the initiative on a long-term scale. The question of pre-K initiatives makes us wonder who is going to pay for it, but the answer is not there yet.
The initiative that is proposed within the framework of this paper relates to making preschool education an affordable option for every family. The policy expects to apply an approach that is similar to what Oklahoma, Florida, and Georgia already did a couple of years ago – the administrations of these states came up with a solution that allowed them to develop universal pre-K programs that do not depend on parental income (Palley & Shdaimah, 2017).
Even though some of the policymakers advocate for a less universal initiative, their targeted educational programs are not as efficient. The first goal that is expected to be met within the framework of the current proposal is the decrease in parental expenditures in terms of education. The second goal relates to the universalization of the approach to pre-K programs. It reflects the gradual process that will take place to help the states apply an identical pre-K initiative ubiquitously (Kroll & Meier, 2015). To make the initiative go viral, it is critical to adjust it in a way that will ensure that the program can be applied at a state-wide level.
Also, it will be necessary to contact the stakeholders and communicate the required investments. The timeline for the implementation of the project is not expected to exceed 90 days. The biggest roadblock that is going to impact the implementation of the initiative adversely is the budget strategy of every given state. This means that the investments are not going to be equal. The stakeholder of interest is the National Institute for Early Education Research. This organization is viewed as one of the biggest potential contributors to the success of the universal pre-K policy.
E-mail
The challenge that is proposed to be reviewed within the framework of the current letter is the universalization of pre-K education. This initiative is based on the supposition that the educational system has to address the younger population and provide all types of families (low income, average income, and high income) with equal possibilities when it comes to education. The rationale behind this is that currently, education is not affordable.
This can be mitigated by investing money into the equalization of the educational environment and passing legislation that validates a certain budget that has to be spent on the pre-K educational programs in each state. It is not surprising that the evidence that was identified throughout the research showed that children from families where the level of income is below average habitually begin kindergarten way later than their peers from families with a higher level of income.
The program that is proposed is expected to eradicate this gap using the universalized pre-K initiative. The achievements in the area are expected to help the families that previously struggled with kindergarten education and its pre-K counterpart. By means of the proposed initiative, it is expected to decrease the risk to which the kids from low- and average-income families are exposed. This all-around improvement is beneficial for everyone, and the importance of an extensive pre-K initiative cannot be ignored. Especially this becomes pivotal when we realize that such a program would positively influence child development, literacy, and other critical skills. We would like to ask you to support this initiative and contact us as soon as possible if you approve of this proposal or wish to incorporate any amendments. Please, share your ideas with us if you have any. Your response is highly anticipated!
Summary
The communication with the stakeholder went very well, and we have reached a consensus regarding the implementation of the initiative. The policymakers were courteous and professional and approached the issue in a multifaceted way. Also, they responded within the next five hours, and this is very important in terms of the quickness of decision-making in the National Institute for Early Education Research.
The information was presented in a comprehensible format so that the stakeholders would understand the key idea behind the initiative and its core objectives on both short- and long-term scales. In terms of advocacy, the ideas were stated in a knowledgeable manner, and a sufficient amount of supporting evidence was provided. The message can be characterized as eliciting. It was rather accurate in terms of the factual data that was presented to the stakeholder. The latter, in turn, agreed that there is a need to come up with a universal pre-K program because it will positively affect both the economy and well-being of all the actors involved.
From the stakeholder’s response, it can be understood that they fully support the proposed initiative and are willing to help to implement it on the nationwide level. The National Institute for Early Education Research approved the information concerning the fact that several challenges have to be addressed and explained that such advocacy initiatives should not be ignored as they directly influence the quality of life of any given individual in the United States of America.
The stakeholder provided us with several action steps that are expected to positively impact the development of the pre-K program and revise the existing educational system (Alliance for Childhood, n.d.). The very first step is targeting not the budget but geography. On a bigger scale, this means that the family income should be inferior to the locality in which the family resides, and the pre-K initiative is implemented. The universal obtainability of the pre-K program will help to concentrate on the benefits of this initiative while taking care of the communities where poverty is rather prevalent.
By doing this, the stakeholders will help the most underprivileged children in the community. Second, it is critical to address the existing evidence concerning the risk factors that are inherent in the process of shaping the child’s educational, behavioral, and psychological outcomes (Selmi, Gallagher, & Mora-Flores, 2015). Here, a lot depends on both the family and the child. This particular action step can be perceived as a possibility to close the gap between the achievements of children coming from low-income families and their richer counterparts. This strategy is also expected to be beneficial because there is real-life evidence that proves the high quality of a universal pre-K program.
The model that is currently used only in a couple of schools should be adjusted to the realities of any given educational facility and implemented as soon as possible. The third action step relates to building an effective partnership between the community and the stakeholder. There is a tax base to fund the pre-K initiative, so it is critical to realize the importance of a healthy relationship between these two actors. Only within a healthy educational environment can progress be achievable. If combined, these three action steps are expected to lead to the deployment of a universal program that will equalize the society and provide everyone with balanced possibilities when it comes to the education of their children.
References
Alliance for Childhood. (n.d.). Critical issues affecting childhood. Web.
Karch, A. (2014). Early start: Preschool politics in the United States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Web.
Kieff, J. E. (2009). Informed advocacy in early childhood care and education: Making a difference for young children and families. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Web.
Kroll, L. R., & Meier, D. R. (2015). Educational change in international early childhood contexts: Crossing borders of reflection. New York, NY: Routledge. Web.
Palley, E., & Shdaimah, C. S. (2017). In our hands: The struggle for U.S. child care policy. New York, NY: New York University Press. Web.
Rappaport, D. M. (n.d.). Framing early childhood development: Recommendations for infant-toddler professionals and advocates. Web.
Selmi, A. M., Gallagher, R. J., & Mora-Flores, E. (2015). Early childhood curriculum for all learners: Integrating play and literacy activities. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Web.
The Superkids is a systematic and comprehensive reading program that was developed for educating students who study in the kindergarten, as well as in the first and second grades. The first principles of the program were formulated in the 1980s, and then, the Superkids were modified by the Rowland Reading Foundation (“Superkids Overview” par. 1). The purpose of this paper is to overview the program components, evaluate it in terms of advantages and disadvantages, and discuss the details of the program implementation in the classroom setting with the focus on the kindergarten level.
Overview of the Program
The Superkids was developed as a complex phonics-based reading program to be used in the elementary school. This literacy curriculum allows for teaching the principles of reading, the basics of spelling and grammar, as well as handwriting, in the context of one program because the integration is one of the curriculum’s cores (Borman and Dowling 208).
Thus, the purpose of the program is to develop students’ reading skills regarding the broad context of developing their literacy (Jordan and Foster par. 3). Students are taught to read and work with different levels of the text systematically and with the focus on all elements of literacy. From this point, another core of the program is the systematic approach.
The oral language development of students is one of the main goals of this curriculum, and it can be completed regarding the integration of activities and vocabulary development (“Superkids Overview” par. 3). From this point, the students’ vocabulary is developed during each lesson with the help of numerous reading, speaking, and comprehension activities. The teacher’s task is to help students learn how to decode texts and support this skill with training in writing and handwriting.
Program’s Advantages and Disadvantages
The main advantage of the program is the provision of systematic literacy education associated with the development of reading and writing skills. The rigorous and step-by-step instruction allows for developing students’ skills appropriate for a certain level. One more advantage is the focus on motivating students to learn (Rowland 5).
Students are provided with colorful reading materials that represent interesting characters and tasks that are correlated with children’s interests. As a result, students are encouraged to develop their fluency and accuracy in reading and the use of vocabulary (Dale, Jenkins, and Mills 302). It is possible to identify such a program’s disadvantage as the dependence on the active approach to developing reading skills, and there is a risk that teachers can avoid implementing the integration concept completely (Rowland 6). Such a situation can decrease the potential benefits of the program.
Program’s Implementation in Kindergarten
At the first stage of developing reading skills, the focus is on phonics instruction. Students learn the alphabet letters and associated sounds to apply the skill while blending sounds and reading whole words (“Superkids in Kindergarten” par. 2). Teachers discuss all sound-letter combinations and motivate students to read aloud. Other skills related to writing are developed simultaneously, including the writing of uppercase and lowercase letters, short words and phrases (Borman and Dowling 209). Therefore, at the beginning of the first grade, students can read and write short words.
The Superkids can be discussed as an effective program to develop students’ skills in reading while using an integrated approach. This principle guarantees the systematic development of students’ literacy skills. Children are interested in the learning activities because of the teachers’ focus on motivating students with the help of a variety of tasks and materials.
Works Cited
Borman, Geoffrey, and Maritza Dowling. “Student and Teacher Outcomes of the Superkids: Quasi-Experimental Study.” Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 14.3 (2009): 207-225. Print.
Dale, Philip, Joseph Jenkins, and Paulette Mills. “Follow-Up of Children from Academic and Cognitive Preschool Curricula at 12 and 16.” Exceptional Children 71.3 (2005): 301-317. Print.
Jordan, Jerry, and Sarah Foster. Case Study: Evaluation of Superkids Reading Program. 2015.
Rowland, Pleasant. “The Science of Reading, the Art of Teaching.” Illinois Reading Council Journal 42.4 (2014): 4-10. Print.
Grouping for teaching and learning purposes or cooperative learning is rapidly evolving as the new instructional approach in classrooms. Education does not simply mean the acquiring of information but using that learning in daily actions and behaviors (Dewey, 1938). Opponents of Collaborative learning argue that it enables students and learners to work in teams and facilitates the crucial exchange interchange of ideas, which will have positive impacts on their future social and professional relationships. This paper aims to conduct a review of the literature and explore whether the approach of grouping students is leaving any children behind with regard to their educational outcomes.
Researchers have established that group or cooperative learning improves the academic grades of students and helps in building high self-esteem, good social skills, and enhanced the comprehensive ability of their content and skills of the curriculum and syllabus (Johnson et al., 1993; Slavin, 1991; Stahl and VanSickle, 1992). The reason for its promotion in kindergarten schools through the elementary levels is the extremely diverse school settings which have resulted due to the high rates of immigration in the United States.
Cooperative learning is additionally gaining importance due to the preference of students working as “cooperative learning academic teams” rather than as “academic loners” in a classroom (Stahl and VanSickle, 1992). Group learning or Collaborative learning, are all approaches which relate to group work in classrooms undertaken through the process of differentiation by the teacher or instructor.
Johnson & Johnson (1992) label group learning as ‘cooperative learning’ while ‘collaborative learning’ is the term given by Barnes et al. (1986). Slavin (1996) labels group learning as ‘student team learning’, and Sharan & Sharan (1992) term it as ‘group investigation’. The primary reason for encouraging collaborative learning environments in school settings is to facilitate dialogic exchange and spontaneity among the students through the active interchange of ideas and viewpoints, which would enable students to reflect upon their ideas and develop critical thinking skills (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996).
According to Slavin (1987), group or cooperative learning plays a crucial role in improving the behavior and academic accomplishments of students, especially children in lower grades and facilitates a liking for school; in them. Johnson et al. (1976) have confirmed that students and learners who work in collaborative group settings have a greater ability to respond pro-socially in philanthropic tasks as compared to students who work individually. Ryan & Wheeler (1977) also affirm these findings and assert that students who have been educated in collaborative environments displayed abilities to make cooperative and helpful choices and decisions in contrast to students who had studied in individualistic school settings.
The implementation of group learning at the elementary levels is believed to increase the level of student mot6ivation which takes place through effective peer support (Glasser, 1986). The low-achieving students can make contributions to their respective groups and experience the emotions of success, which will obviously have a positive impact on their self-esteem and overall development (Featherstone, 1986). Johnson et al. (1984) assert that group learning facilitates positive interdependence among children and masters their interpersonal skills. There is also evidence that group learning improves the relationships among students from diverse cultures and communities as cooperative learning methods “embody the requirements of cooperative, equal status interaction between students of different ethnic backgrounds…” (Slavin, 1980).
However, in order to group students effectively, certain standardized tests are used to label children and place them in specially designed programs, and accordingly retain the underperforming children in a particular grade level. Therefore the Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI / Perrone, 1991) called for the suspension of the use of such tests to grade children according to their potential (Perrone, 1991) as these standardized tests have negative impacts and effects on the learning and motivation levels to learn.
Research by the opponents of grouping students through standardized testing methods, assert that the approach of testing “obstructs students” from becoming self-directed learners (Sheldon and Biddle, 1998). This view has also been endorsed by the National Commission on Testing and Public Policy, the National Council of Teachers of English, and the International Reading Association. As such, expert researchers in the field of education and organizations are of the view that standardized, group-administered tests should not be practiced with young children, especially children below the third grade (Meisels, 2005).
References
ACEI/Perrone, V. (1991). On standardized testing. Olney, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.
Barnes, D., Britton, J., & Torbe, M. (1986). Language, the learner and the school (2nd edition). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton-Cook.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Duffy, T. M. & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. J. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 170-198). New York: Macmillan Library Reference.
Featherstone, Helen (editor) (1986). “Cooperative Learning.” Harvard Education Letter: 4-6.
Glasser, William. Control Theory In The Classroom. New York: Harper and Row, 1986.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1992). Implementing cooperative learning. Contemporary Education, 63 (3), 173-180.
Johnson, D. W., R. T. Johnson, and E. J. Holubec. Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the Classroom, 4th edition. Edina, MN: Interaction Book, 1993.
Johnson, D., R. Johnson, J. Johnson, and D. Anderson (1976). “Effects of Cooperative Versus Individualized Instruction on Student Prosocial Behavior, Attitudes Toward Learning and Achievement.” JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 68: 446-452.
Johnson, David W., Roger T. Johnson, Edythe Holubec Johnson, and Patricia Roy (1984). Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Meisels, S.J. (2005). Testing culture invades the lives of young children. FairTest Examiner. Web.
Sharan, Y. & Sharan S. (1992). Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation. New York: Teachers College Press. [ED 367 509].
Sheldon K. and Biddle, B. (1998). Standards, accountability and school reform: Perils and pitfalls. Teachers’ College Record 100 (1): 164-180.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Cooperative learning in middle and secondary schools. Clearinghouse, 69 (4), 200-204. [EJ 530 442].
Slavin, Robert E. (1991). “Synthesis of Research on Cooperative Learning.” Educational Leadership 48: 71-82. EJ 421 354.
Stahl, Robert J., and R. L. VanSickle, (1992) eds. Cooperative Learning in the Social Studies Classroom: An Invitation to Social Study. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
Ryan, F., & Wheeler R., (1977). “The Effects of Cooperative and Competitive Background Experience of Students on the Play of a Simulation Game.” Journal Of Educational Research 70: 295-299.
Slavin, Robert. (1987)”Cooperative Learning: Can Students Help Students Learn?” INSTRUCTOR: 74-78.
Slavin, Robert, (1980). Cooperative Learning: What Research Says To The Teacher. Baltimore, MD: Center for Social Organization of Schools.
Over the past three decades, enrollment in full-day kindergarten has considerably grown from roughly one-tenth to just over half of U.S. kindergartners today. This educational program is also known as all-day kindergarten or extended-day kindergarten program. Full-day kindergarten reappeared first in the 1960s as an intervention designed to help disadvantaged children “catch up” to their peers through additional schooling. Since the 1970s, the number of children who have been enrolled in the full-day kindergarten programs has tripled (Miller, 2002). More recently, full-day kindergarten has gained popularity among non-poor parents and schools; children presently enrolled in full-day programs are, on average, very similar to their half-day counterparts in baseline test scores as well as other child, parent, and school characteristics. Longitudinal data findings from existing literature to investigate the impact of full-day kindergarten – such as standardized test scores in mathematics and reading, as children progress from kindergarten to first grade –suggest that full-day kindergarten has sizeable impacts on academic achievement, but these estimated gains are short-lived, particularly for minority children. Given the additional expense of full-day kindergarten, information regarding the size and duration of gains should be of great interest to policymakers.
Increase in the number of one-parent and working-parents families and the issue that most young children spend a larger portion of their day away from their homes show important changes in the American household life in comparison to an age group in the past. These changes in the American culture and in schooling over the past 2 decades have had their impact on the reputation of full-day, all-day-a-week kindergarten education in a number of communities. Empirical research shows that parents are in favor of an all-school-day educational session which lessons the number of changes students in kindergarten go through in a general day. Studies also suggest that a lot of students have an academic advantage and social benefit during their primary educational years from contribution made by an all-day kindergarten program, in comparison to a half-day kindergarten program (Saam, Nowak, 2005).
Results of Full-School-day Kindergarten on Academic Success
How does length of school day affect kindergartners’ achievement? Full-school-day kindergarten is now being established and put under investigation in school districts throughout the US. There are a lot of arguments in favor of full-day kindergarten; initially, all students of kindergarten age have need of a secure and inspiring atmosphere for more than two hours each day. After that, those children who are belated in mental or physical growth, visibly or psychologically, gain by spending more time in a full-day kindergarten for better nourishment and for attaining expertise in the areas in which they show a delay. Moreover, full-school-day kindergarten may assist to even the playing ground for those children who could not afford highly-expensive kindergarten education. In addition, teachers are more likely to give to children better individualized attention if they are allowed half as many children for twice as much as the normal time. Finally, our culture requires its young students to acquire important skills in advance in their school life. A lot of preschool instructors support full-school-day kindergarten because they find it hard to stabilize mental actions and emotional/social practices in the small kindergarten session. Working fathers and mothers value the advantages of the full-school-day kindergarten schedule to their employment schedule, because it decreases the number of transitions that the students go through in everyday life.
Some kindergartners attend half-day sessions while some attend full-day sessions. A typical half-day session offers 2 ½ to 3 hours of instruction in either morning or afternoon periods. Some schools offer at-risk kindergartners a repeat half-day session. In this program, the children attend a regular half-day session in the morning, and then attend a repeated session in the afternoon. While these students are at school all day, this is not the same as a full-day program. A full-day kindergarten program uses curriculum which is developed for kindergarten-aged children and plans for 5-6 hours of instruction per day. Morning activities are not repeated in the afternoon session. Instead, more time is devoted to social and other enrichment activities. This type of program is usually offered to all kindergarten students.
The attempt of setting up pre-school children for just a half day has become more a purpose of finances (less costly to schedule two clusters of students for half-day per) than of early education (Fusaro, 1997). Numerous pre-school students who do not go to full-school-day kindergarten go to a playgroup course or are left in daycare centers for the rest of their daytime; henceforth full-school-day kindergarten is not highly demanding for them. In 1988, about 23 percent of children attended full-day kindergarten. In 1993, 55 percent of kindergartners were in full-day programs (Wolgemuth, Cobb, Winokur, Leech, & Ellerby, 2003). Children were more on the point of being in full-school-day sessions if they were in high-poverty and/or marginal educational programs. Federal funding for at-risk children frequently finances or increases the support of full-school-day kindergarten. Policy makers are continually investigating if full-day kindergarten is the best use of school resources and if some programs are more effective than others.
Although many school systems still provide only half-day kindergarten programs, the trend in the United States has shown a tendency toward the implementation of all-day kindergarten. In the early 1980s, only about 30 percent of U.S. kindergarten children attended all-day kindergarten (Holmes & McConnell, 1990); by the early 1990s, the number rose to nearly 50 percent (Karweit, 1992). By 1993, however, 54 percent of U.S. full-school-day instructors were providing services in full-school-day programs.
This trend has grown as a result of both social changes and educational concerns (Holmes & McConnell, 1990; Karweit, 1992; Cryan, Sheehan, Wiechel, & Bandy, 1992). With greater numbers of single parent and dual income families in the workforce, parents increasingly need full-day education programs for their young children. Researchers (e.g., Hough & Bryde, 1996) have found that most teachers also prefer all-day kindergarten programs.
Initial studies conducted to gauge the significance of full-school-day kindergarten found varied outcomes. Most of the previous research observed poor analysis standards which produced serious issues in terms of validity threats of both internal and external types; as a result, the consequences were contradictory and open to doubt. A number of studies of all-day kindergarten were conducted in the 1990s. While they also provided complicated results, some noteworthy trends appeared.
The pre-school progress has experienced various changes as the weight of educational, collective, and emotional hypotheses have developed. At this time, what instructors are discussing in this area might be a revival of something which had been put into practice earlier than the end of the last century.
Pre-school has a history of 176 years. The beginning of pre-school was initiated in 1837 by Frederick Froebel, a German theorist and teacher. He was of the view that students after the age of 3 should be given in the custody of an appropriately qualified educator for a part of the day. Froebel viewed teaching as supportive element in growth of young children and highlighted self-aimed practices which promoted the young child’s innate interest and developed an insight of social duty. He established the system of resources centering on motor abilities of young children that he planned for his school. Froebel concentrated little on the per-day duration of the pre-school day.
In 1856, Froebel’s student, Margaret Schurz, started the first pre-school for German-speaking children in Wisconsin, US. From Wisconsin, the pre-school trend extended to Boston in 1860 where Elizabeth Peabody started the first program, English-language play schools. By 1873, the first community kindergarten was initiated in St. Louis by Susan Blow. By the 1880’s a number of kindergarten programs had emerged in the community educational settings throughout the US. In US, therefore, the trend of kindergarten education began as a full-school-day program and went on unless World War II broke out. Due to the lack of capable teachers, physical space, the rising rates of birth, and a collective opinion that 5-year-old children were not old enough for a full-school-day program, the half-day play school trend once again became popular. A number of techniques and theories have come and gone from the scene; yet most have been acknowledged for the weight about the full-school-day kindergarten instruction. Scholars at this time propose that more time is required for exceptional learning in the initial years.
Cognitive skills are acquired during social interactions in which mature people work as scaffold for young students when necessary, moving back at the appropriate time and allowing children to learn those skills, imitate performances, and integrate them into accessible arrangements of knowledge. This kind of procedure for child education needs more time for better learning, something that can bring about various types of experiences. This is not likely to be promising in the half-day educational programs due to lack of time.
Associating these views to educational growth in early childhood is significant. Developmental definitions should emerge from opinions which have long-reaching attainment likelihood for the learning of small children. A number of research studies have shown positive result of intervention has played an important role in children’s speech progress, and a number of cognitive skills. This age is also a point in time when young children start to acquire self-reliance and expand their self-esteem, social skills, and peer communications. Strong emphasis on the growth of these personality traits in the first year of education, develop important educational and social skills in children. This paper will review relevant literature on full-school-day kindergarten and the outcomes of the time of school day on the achievement of kindergartners. Primarily, some statistical considerations will be examined, and then in terms of all possible aspects a number of studies will be reviewed.
Results of Full-School-Day Kindergarten on Educational Achievement
Kauerz and Denver (2005). It should be noted that few early childhood educators inquire of the worth of full-day kindergarten in the social, affective, and cognitive growth of the young student. Practical research on the influence of full-day kindergartens demonstrate that, in spite of the rhetoric of critics, there are no harmful effects of full-day kindergarten education on children and students in full-day programs exhibit considerably stronger educational achievements than those who attend half-day programs. An extensive review of research (www.nces.ed.gov, 2008) reveals that in the 1998-99 school year, 61 percent of schools in the US that offered a kindergarten course had at least one full-day kindergarten group.
A larger percentage of Catholic schools had full-day kindergarten (78 percent) as compared to other schools of private sector (63 percent) or public schools (57 percent). A larger proportion of public schools in the South had full-day kindergarten (84 percent) as compared to public schools in other areas of the country (38 percent in the West, 57 percent in the Midwest, and 37 percent in the Northeast). Full-day kindergarten was also more common in the public schools in cities (64 percent) and in small towns or rural areas (63 percent) as compared to expensive areas (46 percent). Generally, 56 percent of children went to a full-school-day kindergarten programs (www.nces.ed.gov, 2008). Martinez and Snider (2001) reviewed three extensive studies and found that all the three studies showed that full-day kindergarten programs suitable for kindergarten age student offer cognitive, social, physical, and emotional advantages for students.
Burress at el. (2004) conducted a report to address the issues of finances and establishment of full-day kindergarten in Minnesota. They looked into a number of issues in kindergarten research and also beyond. They expanded their analysis to a number of neighboring cities and other areas. Their findings, in terms of academic achievement, were consistent with the past research that full-day kindergarten students scored higher academically. However, they point out that tendency to score higher in kindergarten lasts until the first grade. They mention a study conducted in Ohio that showed that the effects of full-day kindergarten were present in the students’ progress in first grade. However, it is important to critically examine the limitations of the study to evaluate the challenges that are present in full-day kindergarten research. The authors note that whereas a large number of researchers are the proponents of full-day kindergarten program; it is equally note-worthy that many researchers oppose this view. For example, in one study, the differences that were found in full-day and half-day kindergarten schools in the areas of recognition, vocabulary, comprehension, and mathematics were later attributed to gender. They mention “Other studies have similarly found no significant difference” (Burress, at el., p. 12, 2004).
However, in some of the studies, researcher methodology was questioned for small sample size, and such technical issues. This area is still challenging because a large volume of literature shows that full-day kindergarten seems to have positive academic outcomes; however, a few studies also suggest that full-day kindergarten fails to meet better academic outcomes. A review of extensive literature on full-day kindergarten informs of the obvious gaps found in the present research. One of the most significant gaps is the lack of research on long-term results. There is a necessity for more longitudinal studies which have an experimental research plan that would permit more solid conclusions about results in the long-term. Additionally, there are serious methodological issues regarding internal and external validity. Much of the investigation is abstract, lacks details of the underlying processes; as a result, it is complicated to determine how results were acquired, calling into question the statistical techniques that was made use of in the studies. Burress at el. (2004) quote Da Costa, who suggested that future research should engage larger sample sizes and longer data compilation time.
On the whole, Burress et al. (2004) mention three major problems in current research on full-day kindergarten. First, few research investigations give explicit consideration to the effects that racial or ethnic identity issues or poverty might have on theoretical foundations of the investigation. Second, studies hardly register how time is assigned in half-day or full-day kindergarten programs. Third, the issues of methodological concerns is perhaps more serious. Current research tends to have failed to apply adequate scientific tools of control to make an analysis for confusing factors to break up the effects of kindergarten from other early childhood issues like educational support at home, daycare or attendance of pre-school time. Therefore, full-day kindergarten has its own challenging areas that still need grave attention even though research clearly demonstrates short-term positive benefits of such programs Burress at el. (2004).
Valerie at el. (2005) also conducted a study to address the major policy issues in early childhood education, i.e., whether full-day kindergarten students learn more than those children who are in half-day kindergarten; the issue of social equity was also taken into consideration. The data of the study were drawn from a two-year cohort (1998-99) which were aimed to document the status of educational achievement and progress on the nation-wide schools from kindergarten to fifth grade. The design and structure of data collection were arranged level-wise; 1277 public and private schools were selected nationally and a random sample of approximately 24 children from each school was drawn. Children were tested at fall and spring sessions; parents were interviewed by telephone; teachers of each kindergarten child were presented with a survey questionnaire.
A school administrator was also surveyed in the fall session. As such, this study design presents a triangulation of data focusing to increase internal research validity which correlates to external validity issues as well. Private schools were over-sampled due to different community groups. The data were analyzed in three stages. Three types of students were selected: those students who were somehow important; those who had highest cognitive score on tests; these students also had a non-omitted weight of value. In the second stage, school samples were refined by selecting the schools filed in ECLS-K; in the second the ones that, offered full- or half-day schooling (not both, though); and the last type had at least five children from initial sampling. Some other measures were also taken in the sampling stage which was mainly central on this major design scheme. In the analysis phase, individual children were measured on literacy, numeracy, and general knowledge skills, at the end of kindergarten year. Multilevel questions and methods were used. A multilevel strategy for analysis was also used which was hierarchical linear modeling or HLM. Results were both descriptive and quantitative (Valerie at el., 2005).
Results show that English-speaking children are more likely to attend the full-day kindergarten schools than those from non-English speaking background. There are other subdivisions of this analysis. They also found that half-day kindergartners have slightly higher scores of mathematics and literacy skills though the difference is small. However, by the end, the half-day kindergartners’ math advantage shrunk considerably. Social and academic backgrounds were interrelated; whereas, poverty status and SES were also moderately related. There are other benefits that the full-day kindergartners have over the half-day children (Valerie at el., 2005).
The issues and critical areas of concerns according to Valerie et al. are of significant worth to mention at this point in the paper. The researchers make notice of the fact that present research on kindergarten has a number of shortcomings. In general, present research is weak in terms of scientific thoroughness, small-size samples; population which is unique; range of control which are limited; “a paucity of longitudinal designs, and inappropriate analysis methods”. Moreover, most studies pay attention to students’ academic results and fewer look into the issues of behavioral and social outcomes of the students, or attitudes of teachers and parents (Valerie at el., p. 07, 2005). Therefore, there is a need to encompass these issues with regard to the effectiveness of full-day kindergarten so that policy making process can become more effective satisfactory for all the parties.
Elicker (2000) notes that today, a number of the benefits associated with full-day kindergarten programs still remain as either anecdotal or are merely based on a single-district studies of a number of related issues. These studies, according to Elicker, have failed to control for such variables as to what the family income level is; the mobility issue, what the parents’ level of education is; and other factors that might have an effect on students’ performance examined in any studies with no regard to the kindergarten schedule. It has also been proved challenging, according to Elicker, how to isolate the effects of extra class time from such factors as class size, teaching methodology, experiences of the teachers, and involvement of parents. It is note-worthy that Elicker points to the critical area of curriculum. According to this researcher, it is possible that change in curriculum alone when shifting from half-day to full-day kindergarten schedule might also be responsible for notable differences in children’s academic achievement.
The author also brings forward the challenging fact that there is another problem with the existing body of research on full-day kindergarten with regard to the sampling assignment of students. Elicker points out that few studies assigned students to the full-day and half-day classrooms which were being studied. What is instead found in relevant studies, specifically in pilot studies, is that students show a tendency to voluntarily enroll in full-day kindergarten programs. Far from supplying a random sample of the population of students, this practice might tilt research in favor of the full-day kindergarten programs merely because of the fact that higher more academically superior children were recruited. Elicker (1997) further notes that due to these limitations, research findings on full-day kindergarten usually show a mixed state which is all the more confusing for clear policy-making and implementation of full-day kindergarten programs.
However, Elicker notes similar virtues and ambiguities of full-day kindergarten by saying that research suggests that full-day kindergarten programs show that students progress better academically in a kindergarten year when assessed by achievement tests than those students enrolled in either half-day or alternate-day programs. He further notes that tentative evidence is found with regard to the evidence that full-day kindergarten has longer-lasting, stronger educational advantages for children who come from low-income families or others with fewer academic resources available to them prior to kindergarten. However, Elicker notes that there is no evidence detrimental for a full-day kindergarten. And if the curriculum is appropriately developed, it does not seem to overstress or burden the students who are five and six years old. The author points out that both parents and kindergarten teachers regard full-day kindergarten as being effective in terms of increased flexibility and opportunities for individualized instructions offered in a full-day kindergarten program (Elicker, pp. 8-9, 2000).
Full-school-day kindergarten sessions also have gains for parents. These programs can lower possible childcare costs and can provide superior quality education to children lower-income families, which might only be possible to acquire in a private market. They are also likely to face less difficulty in scheduling childcare and costs of transportation. The parents may also find ample opportunities to communicate with the teachers and get involved with the classroom progress of their child or children (Brewster, & Railsback, p. 13, 2002).
For teachers, the authors points to a number of benefits of full-day kindergarten as well. They note that a in full-day kindergarten educational program teachers can have more time; moreover, they can find more time to spend with individual students as well as in small groups. They also have more time to get to know and interact with the parents of their students. They are more likely to have possibilities of individualized instructions for their students with more opportunities to evaluate them and address their individual needs. The kindergarten teachers will find fewer students in a full-day program (20 to 25 students) as compared to half-day programs where there may be 40 to 50 students (Brewster, & Railsback, p. 13, 2002).
When it comes to full-day kindergarten and students’ higher academic achievement, it is important to analyze some studies that go beyond kindergarten. One study was conducted by Neuharth (2005) to examine the time effect kindergarten session and its result on achievement as well as which category of program is beneficial for students whose families have low to modest incomes. The researchers collected statistical data for children previously enrolled in either half-day or full-day kindergarten sessions, along with uniform test scores at the end of the third-grade year. Furthermore, the researcher carried out 14 interviews with kindergarten teachers in three different school districts in the mid-western part of the United States (p. 57).
Results from the analysis of children’s data brought forward some challenges because no differences in third-grade achievement in mathematics were found for children who were in the two types of kindergarten educational programs. In fact, students who went to full-day kindergarten achieved considerably lower on the language arts segment of the state-organized test. Students who went to morning kindergarten programs scored notably better than the children who were enrolled in all-day kindergarten on standardized assessments tests in language arts and math at the close of third grade. These results were did not include students who went to afternoon kindergarten programs when examined opposite of full-day kindergarten children, i.e., at the close of 3rd grade. These findings suggest a great controversy is still present in either the support or opposition of either full-day and half-day kindergarten programs and need to be extensively explored before any clear policy is proposed (Neuharth, p. 57, 2005).
Boardman, M. (2002) conducted a study that undertook the Tasmanian teachers’ concerns regarding the rewards and shortcomings of both full-day or half-day kindergarten programs. This study is significant in relation to the present paper because of its in depth discussion of related issues. The population for the research was kindergarten teachers who were from three of the six Tasmanian school districts. All state primary and high schools district (n=92) were taken into consideration, with each kindergarten teacher in these as a contributor in the study (n=104). This size ensured sufficient representation of the general kindergarten school students in Tasmania. Survey responses were received by mail from 86 kindergarten teachers (83 percent reply rate), consisting 53 full-day and 46 half-day teachers, with 13 teaching full-day as well as half-day kindergarten programs respectively. Interviews which were follow-up and semi-structured, were carried out with small groups of 8 to 10 self-chosen teachers who were from every school districts, to judge aspects arising from the study (Boardman, p. 6, 2002).
The results show that as shown in the study graphs, respondents held two main benefits of full-day kindergarten attendance. First of all, all-day programs of kindergarten offered a shift to full-time schooling in the following Prep programs. Second, teachers were capable of offering time for in-depth experiences and curriculum-related matters. Full-day teachers firmly believe that these are beneficial areas. Half-day teachers also believed in the advantages of their programs. Amusingly, no half-day teachers made mention of social skill benefits for the children, though full-day instructors supplied 12 percent of the general responses to this advantage (Boardman, p. 6, 2002).
According to Brewster and Railsback (2002), it is not easy to reach to conclusions from the existing body of research on full-day kindergarten. It is partly because of the fact that from school to school, students’ populations and kindergarten practices vary in nature and outlook. The authors mention the following benefits of full-day kindergarten for different parties and support their claims by citing substantial references from empirical findings. For students, they have more time to play language games and more opportunities to explore other subjects in an in-depth approach. Additionally, students in full-day kindergarten can benefit from a learning environment which is more flexible and individualized. The full-day kindergartners can have interactions with each other which are more individual and small-group interactions with their teachers and peers, something which is not possible in most half-day programs (Boardman, p. 6, 2002).
The graph in the study shows that teachers believed it to be the key benefit of half-day programs of kindergarten to be child-related. They made reference to children being all set to study, and showing high-class attentiveness skills. The next feature of half-day attendance was stability within the education program, proved by the order and consistent nature of learning, with routines being identified and practiced (Boardman, p. 6, 2002).
The study, overall found that shortage of program permanence in full-day school was affecting little children’s education, particularly those with serious learning needs. Teachers in full-day kindergarten felt that they were no more teachers but child-minders in the afternoons. Additionally, half-day kindergarten teachers, particularly those taught in full-day programs, showed that they were involved discussions with, and took suggestions of classroom help from, parents. Social skill learning for children was seen to be positive from both modes of attendance (Boardman, p. 6, 2002).
Saam and Nowak (2005) conducted a complete comparative research of full-day kindergarten versus half-day kindergarten for three mid-western school districts in the United States. Quantitative data were collected in the form of scores on a state achievement test (ISTEP+) and qualitative data by semi-structured interviews with Title I full day kindergarten teachers. A range of data were gathered and examined, and cross-referencing full-day against half-day data with statistical information. (p. 27).
ISTEP+ Scores Statistical analysis was finished for the school where the third-grade (ISTEP+) scores were acquired. 3rd grade was the first year after kindergarten that the a consistent test was held being state-funded. Researchers gathered and evaluated ISTEP+ scores for 3rd-grade children earlier registered in either a full day kindergarten or a half day kindergarten in that district. Contrasts centered on the outcomes of the ISTEP+ in language arts and mathematics. Language arts ISTEP+ scores were recorded for 1,963 3rd-grade children. Mathematics ISTEP+ scores record was obtained for 1,978 third-grade children. Student demographic data, with sex, background, and food codes (socioeconomic status), were used to arrange the analogous data. Researchers implemented statistical tests to analyze the comparison between full day kindergarten and half day kindergarten (Saam, & Nowak, p. 27, 2005).
On semi-structured interviews the order was as follows. First students were taken together, out of the total 3,032 children, 34.5 percent were registered in the full-day kindergarten program and 65.5 percent were enrolled in the half-day kindergarten program (either in morning or afternoon). All full day kindergarten school were Title I schools. According to the Mann-Whitney nonparametric test, those 3rd-grade children earlier enrolled in the full-day kindergarten sessions scored considerably (p <0.001) lower on the language arts segment than children earlier enrolled in the half-day session. No important variation was seen in the mathematics segment of the test (Saam, & Nowak, p. 27, 2005).
Boardman, in another study, (2005) presents considerable number of references to show that there is some likelihood that full-day kindergarten places higher stress on students; and that full-day programs are developmentally inappropriate for young students. To investigate how parents react to this issue, Boardman conducted a study to identify parents’ perceptions.
Boardman (2005) conducted an investigation to examine parents’ response about full-school-day against half-school-day kindergarten. It is a very technical study and worth mentioning here. The quantitative data were acquired from parents’ for a form of kindergarten attendance was entered into an Excel worksheet. The outcomes were analyzed for the occurrence and percentage of answers that showed parents’ interest for full-day, half-day or both programs.
Results from the second phase of the study’s survey comprised qualitative data acquired from staff when they were requested to supply motives for their interest. Parents were given the choice of more than one motive for their inclination. To allow comparative scrutiny of this qualitative data, information given was coded into issues, topics and concepts with quantitative opinions being prepared by evaluation of the statistical outlines of the coded data. Reflection on percentages made comparison of the two groups of parents possible (half-day and full-day), balancing for possible issues connected with the different statistical volume of the half-day and full-day groups. Results showed that 62.7 percent of parents favored full-day kindergarten for their child, whereas 34.3 percent parents considered that half-day programs were exceptional for their child. Just four parents pointed that they would be satisfied with either kind of kindergarten (Boardman, p. 36, 2005).
A study conducted by doctoral students (Cannon at el., 2005) is important to mention here because of its nature of longitudinal research design conducted to weight the effectiveness of full-day kindergarten attendance with regard to achievement. In the span of 1998-9, Cannon, at el. conducted this study to “evaluate the efficiency of” full-day kindergarten and higher achievement. The researchers undertook this study on a nationwide level selecting data of 22,000 students including Asians and children from private schools as well. The second sample was the schools under PSUs; furthermore, the children in schools were also selected as final samples. Information was collected from a triangulation technique, i.e., from parents, administrative databases, parents, children, and teachers of kindergarten. Analysis sample was examined on students’ achievements in the areas of the six outcomes examined: math achievement scores, reading achievement scores, internal behavior problems, external behavior problems, grade retention, and maternal full-time employment status. This study is significant not only with regard to its time span but also of it scope of sampling. The data were examined through the OLS and Probit Regression Models. Dependent and independent variables were also dealt in a effectively, that they include outside variables that took place in a child’s household to ensure better validity claims.
To effectively deal with selection bias, the researchers divided the samples into various subgroups such as poor, non-poor, boys and girls. Data analysis shows a consistency with the past research. Higher social status, higher age, living in a two-parent house, and having better educational environment leads to higher educational achievement than those with disabilities or those who are African-Americans. Furthermore, the students who scored higher in the fall tended to score higher in the spring as well. Reading score, for instance, was reported to increase by.145 standard deviation in a full-day kindergarten environment. However, the link between working parents and full-day kindergarten is still a challenging area. In this study it was expected that full-day kindergarten would lead to mothers full-day work. However, this does not seem to be an empirically tested ground because much research was not done in this area. Nonetheless, the increasing scores in full-day kindergarten show the effectiveness of full-day kindergarten. However, the limitation or a critical area of this study was that it estimated a small model of outcomes whereas there are a lot of instruments to, for instance estimate the correlational values that this research conducted. Likewise, as is possible in a longitudinal study, the direction of the research was also ambiguous. As such much is needed to bring out more solid evidence whether full-day kindergarten, showing higher achievement at the same time, is beneficial in other areas as well (Cannon at el., 2005).
And there are many documents that list a number of benefits that full-day kindergarten carries. These documents rely on empirical research. A document is Extended Kindergarten Feasibility Study (n. a., 2006). This paper makes reference of Valerie at el. (2002) to state that full-day kindergarten students’ reading and mathematics skills are reported to be better than those students not in the full-day kindergarten programs. This paper also cites Cryan at el. (1992) to state that social behavior of kindergarten students also becomes enhanced. They are expected not to demonstrate much anger, removal, timidity, or accusing behavior; they are expected, also, to come up to the teacher.
When it comes to full-day kindergarten research, it is hard to overlook the huge volume of research found with ERIC. Clark (2001) states similar finding with regard to the students’ high scores on achievement tests such as reading and mathematics. Clark also refers to the positive evidence that full-day kindergarten students showed higher fondness toward learning social skills. Furthermore, the responses from the parents and the teachers are also positive with regard to the all-day kindergarten programs. Clark cites Hough (1996) who states that parents feel positive for full-day kindergarten programs because they found that teachers gave suggestions, feedback, and help for home-based activities which carries considerable weight for the parents. Likewise, teachers report that they feel more relaxed, and have more time to make more activities which are creative.
The critical area of curriculum research and full-day kindergarten is important to examine. Clark refers to such findings as the full-day kindergarten teachers use more group activities than those in half-day kindergarten. The instructions were also individualized. However, according to Clark, this area, the link and type of curriculum to full-day kindergarten is to be explored further. This is a challenging area due to the fact that as the time passes, it is important to note how teachers work in more time available to them in terms of designing activities as well as allocating individualized time to the students, more importantly when they are up to their second year of school. This area of research is challenging in another respect that effective planning and implementation of a curriculum is much more complex in almost all the areas from working out activities to conducting those activities. Likewise, curriculum may be didactic and this may not be very suitable for the full-day kindergarten students, and which must be resisted both by parents and teachers (Olsen, & Zigler, cited in Clark, 2001).
Additionally, there are a number of websites which assert that full-day kindergarten is the only best option for young students; www.thestar.com is one example; there are other pages that critically evaluate both programs, www.kidsource.com is a good example.
Conclusion
The majority of the studies on full-school-day kindergarten point to positive benefits for young students in relation to educational achievement. Parents and teachers seem to prefer all-day kindergarten over half-day kindergarten for a variety of reasons. However, Gullo (1990) cautions that the most important aspect of the full-day kindergarten may not be the length of the kindergarten day, but rather what happened during that day. He states that “all day kindergarten has the potential being either a blessing or a bane for young children. This will depend on which types of pressures prevail in influencing the development of the all-day kindergarten program” (p. 38). Gullo and others (Olsen & Zigler,1989; Rothenberg, 1995) warn educators and parents to resist the pressure to include increasingly more didactic academic instructional programs for all day kindergarten, which they argue, would be inappropriate for young children. More research may help to decide whether educators are able to reorganize what courses are conventional and which can be implemented to maintain the standards of educational development in full-school-day kindergarten.
Educators, parents, and policymakers must remember that what children do in kindergarten may be more important than how long they stay in the classroom each day. Findings from latest research suggest that a more extended day may provide young students the chance to use more time, child-centered activities. In these classes, teachers seem to go through less pressure of time limitations and might be better capable of working with their students. They report that they are able to work on themes in greater depth and can allow children more opportunities to choose activities and develop their own interests (Elicker & Mathur, 1997). Based on recent research, it appears that all-day kindergarten can offer to children a developmentally appropriate curriculum, while at the same time providing academic benefits.
The brain of a five-year-old child is ready to learn, and is able to be exposed to a wider range of curriculum that can be taught in a full-school-day kindergarten. Latest investigation in early childhood growth suggests that at this age a child’s mind is most open to knowledge. It is very important that the a five-year old child be exposed to learning that is progressively suitable, something which will be rewarding, and something that will facilitate to construct good basis which would ensure their future learning being stable and productive. Inspiring activities facilitate a young mind to construct the brain cells which carry education and self-governing considerations. Going through these stages, the child would be capable of developing the whole physical, intellectual, social and affective balance desirable at present and in the future. The early period of a young student’s life is vital for the reinforcement of the after school education, both in the social-affective growth of a child, and in the development of important cognitive skills are required for comprehension and writing. It is a common observation that the young students are able to learn to an adequate understanding when they are given suitable education that can be rightly obtained at their level. The analysis and critical evaluation of the education-learning approach is likely to assist the teacher to identify stages of a child’s learning and to supply appropriate learning experience for all pre-school students, apart from the time span of the day they spend in schools.
This idea has appeared in the choices of public school kindergarten plans. The significance of early child-centered teaching for real-life has been understood. A point on all-day or full-day kindergarten that stretches the span of time young students spend in school every day and that is different from the time span of four to eight hours, is being re-examined. Some investigators believe that extensive time in instruction permits more time for the advance of school related skills that have high benefits for parents and teachers. Others state anxiety that full-day school has altered the hopes of what young students ought to know when they enter first grade and also that an advance suitable for full-day pre-school ought to be a semi-day of practical exercises at the start of the day and a sleep/rest time in the day or an in-school daycare situation that does not usually take place in a full-school-day kindergarten course. A lot of researchers opine that chair work, spreadsheets, and near the beginning teaching in interpretation or other educational topics are mainly unsuitable in kindergarten. Child-focused full-school-day kindergarten programs (Cannon, Jacknowitz, Painter, 2006) can play very important role in other aspects as noted above in details. Now young students show signs of unwillingness, and look like unintentional victim of irresistible pressure – the pressure caused by rapid, confusing adjustment and continually increasing hopes.
Recommendations
Full day kindergarten is associated with a wide range of positive results, including improved student achievement and social and behavioural development.
Full day format allowed time to address state standards more effectively and address the diverse learning needs of students of differing abilities. This effect cannot be assessed for a few years, but the impact on ISTEP+ scores could be substantial if teacher perceptions are precise.
Any state-funded full day kindergarten program should include an evaluation component to promote accountability. Although evaluation is critical to the success of any educational program, evaluation is especially important in situations where programs should result in new expenses and new savings – a system should be put in place to ensure that savings related to reduced special education referrals are being realized.
The positive outcomes associated with full day kindergarten appear to be larger for disadvantaged students.
Full day kindergarten appears to be effective in reducing achievement gaps. If funding for universal full day kindergarten is not available in the current economic climate, funding could be focused on providing full day kindergarten to schools with low achieving subgroups of students. National research suggests that minority students and students of lower socio-economic status are more likely to benefit from full day programs if the class size is fewer than 25 and an assistant is available in the classroom.
Full day kindergarten, regardless of its organization and funding system, is expensive relative to half day programs. Costs include additional teachers, instructional aides, and classroom space.
Schools use a range of strategies to pay for full day kindergarten programs. The most common sources of funding are the state general fund, existing Title I funds, and parent fees (often calculated on a sliding scale relative to family income).
Savings resulting from full day kindergarten are difficult to determine. Significant savings should be realized over the long-term due to reduced special education referrals and the need for less remediation, reduced need for midday transportation and crossing guards, and reduced need for half day childcare programs. However, childcare costs will not be entirely eliminated, as many families may still rely on childcare both before and after students attend full day programs each day.
A number of existing “full day” programs may actually be extended day programs, which are often staffed with aides. Any anticipated savings based on the existence of current programs may prove to be smaller than anticipated.
Alternate day full day programs are appealing due to the potential for reduced costs, but this type of program is generally not associated with positive results relative to every day full day or every day half day programs.
A better perspective is that the added time in a full day program fundamentally changes the nature of activities that occur in that program. Not only do teachers tend to do more in full day programs, they tend to do more of the instructional strategies that researchers recommend to promote young children’s learning.
Although a few studies suggest that small class sizes are more effective than full day kindergarten in raising student achievement, other studies provide evidence that full day classes of moderate size (e.g., fewer than 25 students) are optimal. Full-school-day kindergarten does not necessarily relieve the negative results of big class directions on scholar achievement.
Latest empirical findings favor the efficiency of full-school-day kindergarten courses which are appropriate regarding development, informs of the fact that they have educational and affective advantages for students of young age. In a full-day kindergarten, less anxious education established for student requirements and fitting assessment of children’s growth adds to the efficiency of the curriculum. Whereas these may be distinctiveness of half-day courses, a lot of young students appear to have advantage, from full-day kindergarten. Certainly, the time-span of a school day is merely one single facet of the kindergarten understanding. Other significant matters comprise the characteristic of the kindergarten syllabus and the worth of education.
Parents of a child that see child daycare plan being better than kindergarten are particularly paying attention to all-day programs. All-day programs are also well-liked with schools since it washes out the requirement to give means of transportation at midday time. In a lot of areas, public as well as private kindergarten programs offer full-school-day kindergarten. Yet, a few educators, representatives, and parents favor half-day, each-day preschool. They believe that half-day preschools are less expensive and thus provide a sufficient teaching and shared social experience for young students when they get to know schools life; this is more productive if they have been in kindergarten. A number of areas therefore present not only half-day but also full-day pre-school courses whenever possible; however, the rising trend is in the way of full-school-day programs (Wolgemuth, Cobb, Winokur, Leech, Ellerby, 2003).
References
Boardman, M. (2002). Full-day or half-day kindergarten? Kindergarten teachers’ voices in the debate. Australian Journal of Early Childhood 27 (4), 6+.
Boardman, M. (2005). Half-days or full days of kindergarten? How and why parents decide. Australian Journal of Early Childhood 30 (1), 36+.
Brewster, C., & Railsback, J. (2002). Full-Day kindergarten: Exploring an option for extended learning. Web.
Burress, M., Dawson, K., Haines, J., Helgason, S., Maddy, A, Mohning, M. (2004). Full-Day kindergarten: research findings, financing, and strategy development. Web.
Cannon, J. S., Jacknowitz, A., & Painter, P. (2005). Is full better than half? Examining the longitudinal effects of full-day kindergarten attendance. Web.
Cannon, J.S., Jacknowitz, A.J., & Painter, G. (2006). Is full better than half? Examining the longitudinal effects of full-day kindergarten attendance. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25 (2), 299-321.
Carter, J., Creswell, S., & deAlba, M.(2004). The Effect of full-day and half-day kindergarten programs on first grade academic reading achievement between the genders. Web.
Clark (2001). Clearinghouse on elementary and early childhood education. University of Illinois; 51 Gerty Drive; Champaign, IL 61820-7469 ERIC DIGEST (217) 333-1386; (800) 583-4135 (voice/TTY). Web.
Cryan, J., Sheehan, R., Wiechel, J., & Bandy Hedden, I. G. (1992). Success outcomes of full-day kindergarten: More positive behavior and increased achievement in the years after. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7 (2), 187-203
Elicker, J. (2000). Full-day kindergarten: Exploring the research. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa International.
Elicker, J., & Mathur, S. (1997). What do they do all day? Comprehensive evaluation of a full-day kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12 (4), 459-480.
Extended Kindergarten Feasibility Study (n. a., 2006). Web.
Fusaro, J.A. (1997). The effect of full day kindergarten on student achievement: A meta-analysis. Child Study Journal, 27, 269-280.
Holmes, C. T., & McConnell, B. M. (1990, April). Full-day versus half day kindergarten: An experimental study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
Hough, D., & Bryde, S. (1996). The effects of full day kindergarten on student achievement and affect. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 395 691).
Karweit, N. (1992). The kindergarten experience. Educational Leadership, 49 (6), 82-86.
Kauerz, K. Denver, CO. (2005). Full-day kindergarten: A study of state policies in the United States. Childhood Education 82 (2), 121.
Kidsource.com – Full-Day or Half-Day Kindergarten? Web.
Martinez, S., & Snider, L. A. (2001).Recent research on all-day kindergarten. Web.
Miller, A. (2002). Frequently requested information: Full-day kindergarten. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. Web.
Nces.ed.gov – (2008). Full-day and half-day kindergarten in the United States: Findings from the early childhood longitudinal study, kindergarten class of 1998-99. Web.
Neuharth, S. (2005). Research into practice. Journal of Research in Childhood Education 20, (1), 57+.
Saam, J., & Nowak, J. A. (2005). The effects of full-day versus half-day kindergarten on the achievement of students with low/moderate income status. Journal of Research in Childhood Education 20 (1) 27+.
Thestar.com – Full-day kindergarten gets top marks. Web.
Valerie E. Lee, V. E., Burkam, D. T., Ready, D., Honigman, J., & Meisels, S. J. (2005). Full-day vs. half-day kindergarten: In which program do children learn more? Web.
Wolgemuth, J.R., Cobb, R.B., Winokur, M.A., Leech, N., & Ellerby, D. (2003). Comparing longitudinal academic achievement of dull-day and half-day kindergarten students. Journal of Educational Research, 99 (5), 260-269.
Literacy ability of learners is a major concern for educators. It is commonly agreed that the literacy ability of an individual is highly influenced by early childhood learning. Kindergarten is the first educational institution where formal education is introduced and where education foundation of an individual is formed. Due to the importance of early childhood education, there have been a lot of researches aimed at improving this education. Reading and understanding the meaning of words is a major concern for education. As it is discovered in various researches, early failure in literacy leads to long term literacy problems. These observations suggest that building a good literacy foundation in children is the most important step toward ensuring literacy (Foorman, Chen, Carlson, Moats, Francis & Fletcher, 2003, p. 291). Research studies in the recent past have shown correlation between phonemic awareness and literacy. This research study wants to use quantitative method to find the relationship between phonic awareness and early word recognition in kindergarten children.
There is agreement that phonemic awareness plays a major role in success in reading. Phonemic awareness has also been associated with certain reading disability. Phonemic awareness is used synonymously with phonological awareness, phonetic awareness, acoustic awareness, phonemic categorization, auditory analysis, and phonemic segmentation (Al Otaiba & Fuchs, 2002, 302). These synonyms suggest the meaning of the term; however, some authors try to differentiate phonemic awareness from the other terms. Bryant and Goswami claim that phonemic awareness is the ability to recognize individual phonemes while phonological awareness constitute broad awareness including awareness of rhyme and syllables. Various scholars have differing definitions of phonemic awareness. Blachman and Ball define phonemic awareness as the awareness that spoken words are made up of individual sounds; the ability to identify the individual phonemes of a word (Ball & Blachman, 1991, p. 46). Stanovich prefers to use phonological awareness but emphasizes on the level or sensitivity of phonological awareness.
The role of phonics in learning how to read had drawn various opinions in the past. However, various researches in the recent past have supported the importance of phonics instructions in reading (Foorman, Chen, Carlson, Moats, Francis & Fletcher, 2003, p. 302). Inspired by the conclusive findings, there have been calls for phonic instructions to be included in educational policy and practice. In past twenty years there has been agreement on various aspects of reading success and failure. Mann and Hurford have observed that level of phonemic awareness determine whether an individual will be a good or a bad reader in the future (Hurford, Schauf, Bunce, Blaich & Moore, 1994, p. 378). They also suggest that phonemic awareness differentiates good reader from challenged readers. Stanovich claims that phonic instructions help to increase sensitivity to rhyme and alliteration (Ball & Blachman, 1991, p. 52). He see phonological awareness as a process that increases sensitivity from a word to syllables and then to individual phonemes. Besides, there have been various longitudinal studies that have shown correlation between phonemic awareness and reading progress.
Phonemic knowledge is more concerned with word structure rather than its meaning. In phonemic instruction, the sound of individual phonemes is emphasized rather than the meaning of words. The instructions try to make a reader aware of the correspondence between spelling and sound. Instead of viewing words as a compact sound stream, readers are made aware of individual sounds that make up the sound of a word. Many scholars agree that phonemic awareness is a process that starts from shallow to deep awareness.
Phonemic awareness is different from the ability to differentiate the sounds of two different words. Although they are different, the ability to differentiate the sounds of two words shows a level of phonemic awareness (Hurford, Schauf, Bunce, Blaich & Moore, 1994, p. 379). Audio discrimination constitutes the ability to hear the difference in the sounds of different words. On the other hands, phonemic awareness constitutes analysis of individual sounds that make up the sound of a word. In most reading instructions, the meaning on words is emphasized other than analysis of individuals sounds that make up the words.
Phonemic awareness can be very useful to reading and literacy. Phonemic awareness has been ignored in young children despite of the fact that ability to differentiate individuals sound can help in pronouncement and reading. Before children differentiate the different sound of sentences, they should be able to appreciate that sentence are made up of discrete word sounds (Al Otaiba & Fuchs, 2002, p. 311). In addition, they should be able to appreciate discrete sounds that constitute a word. Blachman warns that word awareness should not be assumed even in older children (Ball & Blachman, 1991, p.49). However, he feels that word consciousness could be taught easily at early age.
Research Questions
This research will try to answer the following questions:
What is phonemic awareness?
Why is phonemic awareness important to kindergarten children?
How can phonemic awareness instructions on kindergarten children influence their reading?
Aims and Objectives
The aim of this research is to assess phonemic awareness in kindergarten children and how it influences their reading ability. The aim will be achieved by the following objectives:
To find out the influence of individual child’s background to phonemic awareness.
To find out the influence of phonemic instruction to phonemic awareness in kindergarten children.
To Obtain the relationship between phonemic awareness and reading progress.
Purpose of the study
Many research studies show correlation between phonemic awareness and reading awareness. Some research studies have also showed a correlation between early phonemic awareness to future reading progress of an individual. Besides, there have been calls for phonemic awareness instructions to be included in educational policy and a practice. Despite of many research on phonemic awareness, there are limited research on phonemic awareness in kindergarten children. The current research attempts to contribute to this field by looking at phonemic awareness in kindergarten children.
As Blachman and Ball note, majority of early reading problems are contributed by low phonemic awareness. It is hoped that understanding relationship between phonemic awareness and early childhood education will help to maximize the importance of phonemic awareness in reading. Kindergarten education forms the foundation for further education, ability to establish good reading foundation at this level can help to overcome many reading challenges in the future. The findings of this research will provide useful data that can help in improving education policy. The findings will also be a good foundation for further research on phonemic awareness and other related issues.
Definition of terms
Phonemic awareness: In this research phonemic awareness refers to the ability of an individual to identify and control the smallest unit of sound in a word.
Kindergarten: In the paper, kindergarten refers to the first educational institution for young children before they join primary school.
Word recognition: Refers to the ability of an individual to correctly distinguish a written word.
Reading: A cognitive process where an individual identify and obtain the meaning of a word, sentence or paragraph.
Methodology
Participants
All participants will be kindergarten children with age between 4 and 6. Two hundred participants picked from various kindergartens in the country will be chosen. The participants will be divided into two groups: experimental group and control group. Phonemic awareness training will be provided to experimental groups while no training will be provided to control group. Pre-test and post-test will be conducted on participants from both groups at around the same time. Pre-test will be conducted at the beginning of the academic year while post-test will be conducted at the end of the same academic year. A one-on-one test will be used for every participant.
Data collection and analysis
All the data for the study will be picked from the 200 kindergarten children. Data will be recorded depending on the level of phonemic awareness of a participant. The test will include word reading, picture naming, syllable identification, rhyme detection and phoneme identification. The data collected will indicate how well a participant read a word, identify phoneme and other tests. T-test and ANOVA analysis will be conducted on the collected data in order to show the correlation between research variables.
Procedure
All participants will be assessed twice, at the beginnings and at the end of the academic year. Trained assessors will conduct a one-on-one test on the participants at their respective kindergarten. The assessors will record data from every participant.
Summary
There have been various research studies that show correlation between phonemic awareness and reading ability. As phonemic awareness influences reading ability, phonemic training can help to improve reading. Phonemic awareness in kindergarten children has limited studies. By understanding the level of phonemic awareness in kindergarten children and the effect of phonemic awareness training, useful conclusions can be made.
Reference
Al Otaiba, S. & Fuchs, D. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300-316.
Ball, E. & Blachman, B. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 49-66.
Foorman, B., Chen, D., Carlson, C., Moats, L., Francis, D., & Fletcher, M., (2003). The necessity of the alphabetic principle to phonemic awareness instruction. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 289-324.
Hurford, D. Schauf, J., Bunce, L., Blaich, T., & Moore, K. (1994). Early identification of children at risk for reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 371-382.
Kindergarten English Language Proficiency Standard 1 is the primary standard that lays the foundation for the future students’ learning. As to the listening and speaking domain, the first level is limited to a small number of skills and strategies a student can use during learning (CCSSO, 2014). Therefore, the range of needs of English learners increases in accordance with the increase in their proficiency. After the learners’ proficiency in the level reaches the ‘proficient’ mark, then learners transfer to the next level (TESOL International Association, 2016).
Addressing the needs of students at various levels in the classroom is important for helping every learner reach and exceed the expected standards. However, one of the key implications is the fact that each English learner enters the classroom with a wide range of abilities, personalities, as well as learning styles. Thus, it is the duty of educators to make sure that all students are successful in meeting the standards, mandated by their programs. By using a differentiated set of instruction and education strategies, teachers will be able to help their students reach the standards and transfer to a higher level (Levy, 2008). It is important to develop an appropriate set of ELP standards for English learners at the kindergarten level in order to create a solid background for basic learning and the linguistic demands that will be expected from students in the future. The systemic implications for addressing the needs of students at various levels in a classroom are widespread; however, they are crucial for making sure that every language learner is able to fully realize his or her potential in acquiring English language.
An ELP kindergarten teacher should possess deep knowledge about the language students will learn, and help them grow and expand their knowledge. The domain of listening and speaking is very important at this stage since it encompasses a range of key skills and competencies students will use in other domains such as writing and reading. Furthermore, it is crucial to account for the changes in the number of skills and strategies English learners employ for identifying key themes and words or answer questions about the information they learned from oral presentations. This means that there is a large number of variables that educators should take into consideration in order to help kindergarten students develop key English learning skills.
References
CCSSO. (2014). English language proficiency (ELP) standards. Web.
Levy, H. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House, 81(4), 161-164.
TESOL International Association. (2016). PreK-12 English language proficiency standards framework. Web.
