Download
1 / 47
540 likes | 790 Vues
A framework to bridge theory and practice in work with parents. Peter Hannon School of Education University of Sheffield, England. Why work with parents?. children spend more time at home than in ECE settings parents can offer more one-to-one interaction
E N D
A frameworkto bridge theory and practicein work with parents Peter Hannon School of Education University of Sheffield, England
Why work with parents? • children spend more time at home than in ECE settings • parents can offer more one-to-one interaction • home activities often more meaningful • parents have flexibility to exploit learning opportunities • parents highly committed to children’s development How can Early Childhood Educators support and enhance parents’ role?
Take ideas from Vygotskyan theory . . . • Development is about acquiring cultural tools • Learning is social - in dyads and groups • ZPD learning facilitated by those more expert Relevance to work with parents • Families transmit culture • Family is a key social context for young child • In families, parents are the more expert • Parents can recognise child’s unique ZPD
Some related concepts …….. • Scaffolding (Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976) • Informal learning (Rogoff & Lave, 1984) • Successive approximation (Newman, Griffin & Cole, 1989) • Modelling, managing contingencies, feedback (Tharp & Gillmore, 1991) ALL ADDS UP TO SOCIO-CULTURAL VIEW
Working with parents I suggest that a socio-cultural view highlights 4 ways parents help development • Opportunities for children’s learning • Recognition of their progress • Interaction – various forms • Model of an expert practitioner O-R-I-M ORIM framework
The ORIM framework Relates concepts of Opportunities, Recognition, Interaction and Model to strands of development.
Research questions – two studies • Do early childhood educators find ORIM comprehensible and useful? • Can ORIM be used to generate a parent involvement programme and, if so, does it affect children’s development? Research carried in collaboration with Cathy Nutbrown, also at Sheffield.
Study 1: Educators’ use of ORIM • Qualitative study of 24 early childhood education settings using ORIM • Staff from settings attended six 2-hour professional development sessions • Developed work with parents over a 10-month period • Data: range of written self reports Hannon, P. & Nutbrown, C. (1997) Teachers’ use of a conceptual framework for early literacy education involving parents. Teacher Development, 1 (3), 405-420
Study 1: Findings • Educators find ORIM comprehensible “It helps to get thoughts and ideas clearer” • Educators find ORIM useful “It has focused my mind on exactly how parents can work with their children” “It lends value to what parents already do and invites them into a partnership”
Study 2: An intervention Preschool family literacy programme. Low intensity, long-duration (12-18 months) Offered to parents in disadvantaged areas. Some families bilingual (9%) Parents of 3-year-olds invited to join programme before school entry Nutbrown, C.E, Hannon, P., & Morgan, A (2005) Early literacy education with families. London: SAGE Publications
Programme, based on ORIM framework, consisted of • Home visits by programme teachers • Provision of literacy resources • Centre-based group activities • Special events (e.g. group library visit) • Postal communication • Optional, literacy-related adult education for parents Teachers given half a day per week to work with a group of 8 families
Programme evaluation • Qualitative and quantitative • Practitioner reflections and peer interviews • Analysis of activity records • Post-programme interviews of parents • Post-programme interviews of children • Randomised control trial to determine effects on children’s literacy (N=176)
Measures of children’s development • Pre-programme:Sheffield Early Literacy Development Profile (SELDP) – Nutbrown (1997); British Picture Vocabulary Scale – Revised (BPVS – II); Letter Recognition – Clay (1985) • End-of-programme: As for pre-programme • School follow-up: Aggregate score of national assessments in literacy
Implementation of programme • High take-up • Low drop-out • Generally high participation profile (92% of families participated ‘regularly’; 45% at highest possible level)
Parents views of programme • Overwhelmingly positive views • ‘Sad’ about programme ending • Difficult to elicit any negative views • Reported ‘global’ and specific literacy benefits for children • Would recommend it to other parents
Children’s experience • According to parent and teacher reports, children enjoyed programme • Children in programme group reported greater range of literacy experiences than those in control group
Teachers’ views • Strongly welcomed the opportunity to work with families • Cautiously positive view about benefits to children and parents
Effects on parents • Parents reported more confidence, particularly in helping children, but few reports of gains in own literacy. • In 10% of families, parents (all mothers) took accredited course based on ORIM.
Impact on children’s literacy, measured in ‘effect size’ A way of expressing the difference between the programme group and control group mean scores in terms of the standard deviation of control group scores. A way of judging the educational, rather than the statistical, significance of difference. Seeking effect size ≥ 0.3
Study 2: Findings • ORIM helps generate preschool literacy programme • Socio-cultural view of development can be shared with parents • Parents welcome programme • Children’s development can be affected (Note that impact is indirect) • Most impact is for families with poorly educated mothers
Overall conclusion ORIM could be a useful conceptual framework to bridge theory and practice in work with parents.
