1. Research Question: In preschool settings does Animated Literacy™ promote early literacy skills attainment significantly than an unstructured curriculum? Participants in this study were 4 yr. old children at-risk for early school problems. These children were enrolled in Head Start, state PreK and private preschool classrooms in two states (Kansas and Maryland). A total of 200 children participated in the study. These intact classrooms were self-identified as implementing or not implementing the Animated Literacy ™ curriculum. The data set were obtained from a larger randomized experimental research project.* In 2001, President Bush prescribed a new direction for early learning with No Child Left Behind legislature. The emphasis on ready to learn skills and increased accountability for early primary grades is unparalleled. Unfortunately, evidence of success for specific curriculum use is limited. Through the “Animated Alphabet™ students: 1) Learn to access prior knowledge to predict and comprehend events to predict and comprehend events in a story. in a story. 2) Develop an intuitive knowledge of story structure and sequence. story structure and sequence. 3) Develop listening and participation skills. skills. 4) Learn to recognize, isolate, and produce the sounds of English. produce the sounds of English. 5) Develop print awareness by tracking words to songs tracking words to songs 6) Develop the ability to recognize, manipulate, and blend sounds manipulate, and blend sounds and letters (Stone,J.,2005) and letters (Stone,J.,2005) Animated Literacy™ while extremely popular, offers little rigorous evidence for effectiveness. The research reported here aims to add to the literature of effective evidence based programs What is known about literacy skill attainment is that what is learned in preschool provides a significant foundation for reading and writing skills (Sulzby & Teale, 1986; Whitehrust & Lonigan, 1998) Additionally, young children need a rich variety of experiences and exposure to stories, learning from adults, active participation in book discussion, and a basic understanding that print has meaning (Hart & Risley, 1999; Neuman & Celano, 2001; Purcell & Gatea, 1996; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998) Diane M Plunkett, MS.ed., Eva Horn, Ph.D., Dr. Susan Palmer, Ph.D., Kandace Fleming, Ph.D. 2007 CEC Conference, Louisville, KY *Data subset of larger research project. http://css.crlt.indiana.edu/index.html White (Non-Hispanic BlackAsianOther 14235121 MaleFemaleUnreported 109865 9 Classrooms used the Animated Literacy™ curriculum -Implementation 9 Classrooms did not use Animated Literacy ™ curriculum - Control Methods A random coefficients regression analysis of covariance was conducted us SAS Proc mixed to account for nesting of children within classrooms. Post-test child performances were the criterion variable and pre-test child performance to control for child differences.. Criterion Variable: Research staff collected child performance data on children at the beginning of the year and again at the end of the year. Dependent Variable Picture Peabody Vocabulary Test Woodcock Johnson Subtests 1 & 13 Individual Growth and Development Indicator (Rhyming and Alliteration) Predictor Variable Pre-test child performance: The assessment of child performance in the fall was used as a pre-test “co-variate”. Measure Significant WJ 13 ªF(1,168) =11.17, p=0.0010** F(1,168) =12.65, p=0.0005* Yes AlliterationF(1,21.4)= 8.41,p=0.0085** F(1,85.2)= 8.66,p=0.0042* Yes Rhyming F(1,106) =5.25,p=0.0239*Yes a = multiplied by 10 p<0.05 There is evidence to suggest the classroom use of Animated Alphabet ™ increases a child’s acquisition of literacy skills. *The most significant gain in acquisition is for children who enter the classroom scoring lower than the central mean. **The specific skills that show a marked increase are those that are measured by the Woodcock-Johnson (subset 13), the Indicators for Growth and Development (Alliteration and Rhyming) Children that scored at the central mean and those that scored at one standard deviation above the mean at pretest showed no difference in literacy acquisition skills than the control group. Results Animated Alphabet ™ : Evidence for Effectiveness? Results