Learning to be literate : parental empowerment in early literacy interventions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Considerable research has focused on the success of early intervention programs for \nchildren. However, minimal research has focused on the effect these programs have on \nthe parents of targeted children. Many current early intervention programs champion \nfamily-focused and inclusive programming, but few have evaluated parent participation \nin early interventions and fewer still have evaluated the impact of these programs on \nbeliefs and attitudes and parenting practices. Since parents will continue to play a key \nrole in their child's developmental course long after early intervention programs end, it is \nvital to examine whether these programs empower parents to take action to make changes \nin the lives of their children. \nThe goal of this study was to understand parental influences on the early development \nof literacy, and in particular how parental attitudes, beliefs and self efficacy impact parent \nand child engagement in early literacy intervention activities. \nA mixed method procedure using quantitative and qualitative strategies was \nemployed. A quasi-experimental research design was used. The research sample, sixty \nparents who were part of naturally occurring community interventions in at- risk \nneighbourhoods in a south-western Ontario city participated in the quantitative phase. \nLargely individuals whose home language was other than English, these participants were \ndivided amongst three early literacy intervention groups, a Prescriptive Interventionist \ntype group, a Participatory Empowering type group and a drop-in parent- child \nneighbourhood Control group. \nMeasures completed pre and post a six session literacy intervention, on all three literacy and evidence of change in parental empowerment. Parents in all three groups, on \naverage, held beliefs about early literacy that were positive and that were compatible with \ncurrent approaches to language development and emergent literacy. No significant \nchange in early literacy beliefs and attitudes for pre to post intervention was found. \nSimilarly, there was no significant difference between groups on empowerment scores, \nbut there was a significant change post intervention in one group's empowerment score. \nThere was a drop in the empowerment score for the Prescriptive Interventionist type \ngroup, suggesting a drop in empowerment level. \nThe qualitative aspect of this study involved six in-depth interviews completed with a \nsub-set of the sixty research participants. Four similar themes emerged across the groups: \nlearning takes place across time and place; participation is key; success is achieved by \ntaking small steps; and learning occurs in multiple ways. \nThe research findings have important implications for practitioners and policy makers \nwho target at risk populations with early intervention programming and wish to sustain \nparental empowerment. Study results show the value parents place on early learning and \npoint to the importance of including parents in the development and delivery of early \nintervention programs. \ngroups, were analyzed for evidence of change in parental attitudes and beliefs about early literacy and evidence of change in parental empowerment. Parents in all three groups, on \naverage, held beliefs about early literacy that were positive and that were compatible with \ncurrent approaches to language development and emergent literacy. No significant \nchange in early literacy beliefs and attitudes for pre to post intervention was found. \nSimilarly, there was no significant difference between groups on empowerment scores, \nbut there was a significant change post intervention in one group's empowerment score. \nThere was a drop in the empowerment score for the Prescriptive Interventionist type \ngroup, suggesting a drop in empowerment level. \nThe qualitative aspect of this study involved six in-depth interviews completed with a \nsub-set of the sixty research participants. Four similar themes emerged across the groups: \nlearning takes place across time and place; participation is key; success is achieved by \ntaking small steps; and learning occurs in multiple ways. \nThe research findings have important implications for practitioners and policy makers \nwho target at risk populations with early intervention programming and wish to sustain \nparental empowerment. Study results show the value parents place on early learning and \npoint to the importance of including parents in the development and delivery of early \nintervention programs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».