This article presents preliminary outcome data collected as Project SEEL (Systematic and Engaging Early Literacy Instruction) was implemented in a dual-language kindergarten classroom. Information regarding the children's progress, participation in instructional activities, and performance on trained versus untrained targets was obtained, along with parent and child satisfaction data. The authors transcribed and analyzed videotaped segments of interactions, collected samples of the children's reading and writing, interviewed the children and their parents, and monitored the children's progress. The children made gains in skills, demonstrated high interest in the activities, and made relevant contributions to the coconstruction of texts in the story enactments. No differences between reading and writing of trained versus untrained targets were found, however, most likely because the children had acquired generalized phonics skills by the time the comparisons were made.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andrade, A.M., Escamilla, K., Basurto, A.G.M., Ruiz, Q.A., & Clay, M. (1996). Instrumento de observacion de los logros de la lecto-escritura Inicial [An observation survey of beginning reading and writing achievement]. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann .
2.
Ashcraft, M. (1994). Human memory and cognition (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins .
3.
Brinton, B., & Fujiki, M. (2003). Blending quantitative and qualitative methods in language research and intervention. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 12(2), 165—171.
4.
Culatta, B., Aslett, R., Fife, M., & Setzer, L.A. (2004). Project SEEL: Part I. Systematic and engaging early literacy instruction. Communication Disorders Quarterly , 25, 79—88.
5.
dePaola, T. (1973). Charlie needs a cloak. New York: Simon & Schuster.
6.
Gallego, M.A., & Hollingsworth, S. (2000). What counts as literacy: Challenging the school standard. New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
Guthrie, J., & Knowles, K. (2001). Promoting reading motivation. In L. Verhoeven & C. Snow (Eds.), Literacy and motivation: Reading engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 159—176). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
Gutierrez-Clellen, V. (1999). Mediating literacy skills in Spanish-speaking children with special needs. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 30, 285—292.
9.
Herman, G. (2001). Hay una ciudad. New York: Random House.
10.
Hiebert, E.H., & Martin, L.A. (2001). The texts of beginning reading instruction. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 361—376). New York: Guilford Press.
11.
Higginbotham, J., & Kovarsky, D. (2002, November). Ways of knowing: Linking qualitative and quantitative data. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Atlanta, GA.
12.
Kovarsky, D., Culatta, B., & Franklin, A. (2001). “Communicative participation” as a way of facilitating and ascertaining communicative outcomes. Topics in Language Disorders, 21(4), 1—20.
13.
Mastergeorge, A. (2002, November). Quantitative and qualitative path analyses: Indicators of paradigm shifts in classroom cultures. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Atlanta, GA.
14.
Mayer, M. (1974). Frog goes to dinner. New York : Puffin/Pied Piper Books.
15.
McKenna, M. (2001). Development of reading attitudes. In L. Verhoeven & C. Snow (Eds.), Literacy and motivation: Reading engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 135—158). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
National Institutes of Health. (2000). National Reading Panel report on effective reading instruction [News release] . Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health & Human Development.
17.
Neuman, S., Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to read and write. Washington, DC: National Association for the education of Young Children.
18.
Nord, C.W., Lennon, J., Liu, B., & Chandler, K. (1999). Home literacy activities and signs of children's emerging literacy, 1993 and 1999. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Phillips, S. U. (Ed.). (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence. New York: Teachers College Press.
21.
Riley, L. (1997). Mouse Mess. New York: Scholastic.
22.
Romaine, S. (1989). Bilingualism. Oxford, England: Basel Blackwell.
23.
Serpell, R. (2001). Cultural dimensions of literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
Shugar, G.W., & Kmita, G. (1990). The pragmatics of collaboration: Participant structure and the structures of participation. In G. Conti-Ramsden & C. Snow (Eds.), Children's language (pp. 273—303). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25.
Stanovich, K. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360—406.
26.
Torgesen, J. (2003, November). Reading fluency: How does it develop and how can we improve it in children with reading disabilities?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Chicago, IL.
27.
Verhoeven, L., & Snow, C. (2001). Literacy and motivation: Bridging cognitive and sociocultural viewpoints. In L. Verhoeven & C. Snow (Eds.), Literacy and motivation: Reading engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 1—20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28.
Watson, R. (2001). Literacy and oral language: Implications for early literacy acquisition. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 43—53). New York : Guilford Press.
29.
Whitehurst, G., & Fischel, J. (2001). Enhancing emergent literacy among children in Head Start: A review of research and examination of the promise of computer-based interventions. Stony Brook: State University of New York. Retrieved April 24, 2001, from www.read+lang.sbs.sunysb.edu/ubs/hscomputer.html
30.
Yolen, J., & Teague, M. (2001). ¿Cómo dan las buenas noches los dinosaurios? [How do dinosaurs say good night?]. [P. Alvarez-Salas, Trans.). New York: Scholastic.
