Examination of the Predictive Validity of Preschool Early Literacy Skills

Missall, Kristen N.; Reschly, Amy L.; Betts, Joseph; McConnell, Scott R.; Heistad, David; Pickart, Mary; Sheran, Christina; Marston, Doug

doi:10.1080/02796015.2007.12087932

Cited by 61 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such studies accounted for most of the decade's reading fluency research focused on younger children. These studies investigated the predictive validity of a range of preschoolers' and kindergarteners' early literacy skills for oral reading fluency, finding that early literacy skills “indicators” were “significantly predictive of later outcomes in oral reading fluency” (Missall et al., 2007). Similar studies have focused on young bilingual students, noting that the predictive relationships were different between English and Spanish measures of early literacy and later English oral fluency.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early literacy research, 2006–2015: A decade of measured progress

Teale

Whittingham

Hoffman

2018

Journal of Early Childhood Literacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review examines patterns found in early (preschool-grade 3) literacy research appearing in English-language publications during the period from 2006 through 2015. It focuses on studies related to early literacy learning and teaching in home and school/school-like environments. The review sought to answer two questions: (1) What has early literacy research focused on over the past decade? and (2) What has that body of research contributed to our enhanced understanding of early literacy development, teaching, and learning? The results report on patterns of publishing early literacy research found in scholarly journals, topics researched, ages of children researched, characteristics of the populations researched, and designs used in early literacy research. In addition, qualitative analyses report on the content and trends of the research for a sample of studies for each of seven facets of early literacy research: phonics, phonological awareness, reading fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, writing, and digital literacies, as well as for the umbrella terms emergent literacy/early literacy/beginning reading. The results found from these analyses are discussed through an historical lens which identified four patterns characterizing early literacy research of 2006–2015: accretion, the influence of "scientifically valid" research, limited response to increasingly diverse student populations, and increased research focus on younger children.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early literacy research, 2006–2015: A decade of measured progress

Teale

Whittingham

Hoffman

2018

Journal of Early Childhood Literacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, we have growing evidence that interventions promoting language and early literacy competencies in early childhood produce better short- and long-term literacy outcomes over time (Diamond, Justice, Siegler, & Snyder, 2013; Lonigan, Farver, Phillips, & Clancy-Menchetti, 2011; Noe et al, 2014). Third, we have evidence (although still largely correlational) of relations between assessed performance of language and early literacy in preschool and reading in early elementary school (Missall et al, 2007; Walker et al, 1994), suggesting functional intervention targets that promote later academic achievement. Finally, assessment systems, including those designed for MTSS, are being deployed to assist teachers and early childhood programs in data-based decision making (Buysse & Peisner-Feinberg, 2013; Carta et al, 2015; Carta et al, 2016)…”

mentioning

confidence: 79%

Assessing Early Literacy Growth in Preschoolers Using Individual Growth and Development Indicators

Kincaid

McConnell

Wackerle-Hollman

2018

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence of longitudinal relations between language and early literacy skills in early childhood and later reading (and other) achievement is growing, along with an expanding array of early education programs designed to improve later academic outcomes and prevent, reduce, or close later academic achievement gaps across groups. Assessment systems to support this intervention have been developed, but to date we have little evidence of these systems’ outcomes when used at a broad scale in community-based preschool programs. For this broad purpose, two research questions were addressed: (a) How much progress do children make on language and early literacy skills over the course of one school year? and (b) What is the relationship between child characteristics, baseline performance, and growth on language and early literacy skills? Results indicated growth over time for all measures and relations between child age, gender, and free-or-reduced-price status and students’ performance at the beginning of the school year, but (with one exception) no relation between these covariates and growth over time. Discussion centers on current status of language and early literacy assessment in early childhood education as well as needs and issues to be addressed in future research and program development.

show abstract

“…The moderate predictive correlations compare favorably with those for other very brief screening tools, such as the original Get Ready to Read! (e.g., r s = .28–.43 with phonological awareness and letter-knowledge measures at 16–37 month intervals; Phillips, Lonigan, & Wyatt, 2009) and IGDIs (e.g., r s = .15–.45 with similar measures at 18-month interval; Missall et al, 2007), albeit across a shorter time interval. Further research is needed to determine the LSSFs’ accuracy in classifying children truly at risk for decoding difficulties (e.g., Wilson & Lonigan, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Young Children’s Letter-Sound Knowledge: Initial Validity Evidence for Letter-Sound Short Forms

Piasta

Farley

Phillips

et al. 2017

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Converging evidence shows that children's knowledge of letter forms, names, and corresponding sounds, collectively termed alphabet knowledge, are critically important emergent literacy skills that uniquely predict children's later reading success (Lonigan, Schatschneider, Westberg, & The National Early Literacy Panel, 2008; Schatschneider, Fletcher, Francis, Carlson, & Foorman, 2004). Due to differing experiences with and exposure to print, young children exhibit highly variable levels of alphabet knowledge (McBride-Chang, 1999; Piasta, 2014; Schatschneider et al., 2004). Early childhood educators therefore need to accurately measure and monitor children's alphabet knowledge to ensure they are making adequate progress in these foundational skills. The newly developed Letter-Sound Short Forms (LSSFs; Piasta, Phillips, Williams, Bowles, & Anthony, 2016) show promise as an ongoing assessment of children's alphabet knowledge. In the current study, we provide further evidence concerning the validity of this measure. Alphabet Assessment to Inform Instruction With increased awareness of the importance of alphabet knowledge for success in kindergarten and beyond, many early childhood educators administer some form of assessment to evaluate children's alphabet knowledge. To maximize the relevance of such assessments, educators need instruments that assist them in connecting children's scores to their instructional decision-making to facilitate explicit and systematic differentiated alphabet instruction (Phillips & Piasta, 2013; Piasta, 2014; Piasta & Wagner, 2010a). Such instruction requires ongoing progress monitoring of individual children's learning. Effective progress monitoring tools exhibit strong psychometrics, utilize multiple equivalent forms, show sensitivity to changes over time, and are brief and easy to administer and score (Kelley, Hosp, & Howell, 2008). Research has shown that educators who use the results of progress monitoring to inform their instruction have children who make greater gains (Ketterlin-Geller, Gifford, & Perry, 2015) and may be better able to identify children in need of supplemental instruction. Although many different alphabet knowledge assessments are available, existing tools are not ideal. Commercially available measures are typically valid and reliable but sometimes costly and may not be feasible for schools to purchase 737514A EIXXX10.

show abstract

Examination of the Predictive Validity of Preschool Early Literacy Skills

Cited by 61 publications

References 47 publications

Early literacy research, 2006–2015: A decade of measured progress

Early literacy research, 2006–2015: A decade of measured progress

Assessing Early Literacy Growth in Preschoolers Using Individual Growth and Development Indicators

Assessment of Young Children’s Letter-Sound Knowledge: Initial Validity Evidence for Letter-Sound Short Forms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About