The Importance of Early Intervention in Early Childhood Education

_______________

A Behavior Paper

Presented to

Junior Science, Engineering and Humanities Symposium

University of Missouri

_______________

By

Rajon Scott

Senior

Wentzville Holt High School

600 Campus Drive

Wentzville, MO 63385

Jennifer Mallery

Sponsoring Teacher

600 Campus Drive

Wentzville, MO 63385

1

I’d like to thank the following people for their involvement and support in this project:

Kathy Park

Jennifer Mallery

William Scott

2

Abstract

The Importance of Early Intervention in Early Childhood Education

Rajon Tereze Scott, 2732 Dry River Rd, Wentzville, Missouri 63385

Wentzville Holt High School, Wentzville, MO

Teacher and/or Sponsor: Mrs. Jennifer Mallery

The DIAL-4 is a screening which identifies any potential developmental delays in preschool

aged children. Children who are identified with a potential developmental delay are eligible for

diagnostic testing and interventions. There are some children that do not score low enough on the

initial DIAL-4 screening that are later referred to special education services in elementary school

grades. It is important to identify kids with developmental delays before elementary school in

order to implement early interventions and allow the child to grow in an optimal setting. This

project sought to suggest a more valid range of scores to identify potentially delayed children.

The DIAL-4 is composed of three categories of testing which include language, motor, and

concepts. There are also behavioral observations taken into consideration for the score. This

project suggested that there is a correlation between category scores and risk of being a SOFC,

and the relationship between motor and concept scores was particularly strong.

3

Table of Contents

1. Statement of Problem.……………………………………………………………………4

2. Review of Literature…………………………………………………………………….5

3. Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………………10

4. Presentation of Data…………………………………………………………………….11

5. Discussion of Results …………………………………………………………………....12

6. Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………….13

4

Statement of Problem

Before children enter kindergarten, most are assessed by a screening to determine whether the

child has developed the skills needed for kindergarten, or if the child may have a potential

developmental delay. In some cases, children score in the “OK” range on the screening, but in

later elementary grades the students need special education services. This project sought to

suggest a more valid range of scores for potentially delayed children which would enable these

children to receive interventions sooner. Earlier interventions would allow more time for the

child’s growth and development. Additionally, red flags could be identified by finding

correlations between performance area scores and later academic achievement. Money and

resources dedicated to special education services could be conserved if children with

developmental delays are identified before they enter kindergarten.

5

Review of Literature

The Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning, Fourth Edition (DIAL-4) is a

developmental screening available to identify children ages 2:6 through 5:11 who may need

intervention or diagnostic assessment in the following areas: motor, concepts, language, self-help

and social-emotional skills. Early-education professionals use the DIAL-4 to identify children

who are at risk of failing in academic settings. Each performance area takes 10 to 15 minutes to

complete which allows the entire screening to be completed in 30-45 minutes. During the

completion of each performance area, behavioral observations are noted as well to help the

evaluator interpret the child’s overall performance scores. The DIAL-4 is a revision of the

Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning, Third Edition with 21 new or revised

items. The revisions include simpler administration and scoring instructions, an earlier age to

begin testing children, and updated test items that are subject to predict academic success

(Mardell & Goldenberg, 2011).The assessment is aligned with the five domains specified in the

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which include physical development,

cognitive development, adaptive development and self-help skills. IDEA governs how states and

public agencies provide early intervention, special education, and related services to eligible

infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.

The motor performance area includes the following seven items: (1) Throwing (2) Stand, Hop,

and Skip (3) Building (4) Thumbs and Fingers (5) Cutting (6) Copying (7) Writing Name.

Throwing is used as the first item because it is a fun activity that establishes a good rapport

between the child and the operator. The child simply throws a bean bag at a target five feet away

to complete this item. Stand, Hop, and Skip is used to assess the child’s postural control by

asking them to stand on one leg, hop on one leg, and then skip. Children with learning

6

disabilities and mild to severe motor problems display difficulties within their balance and

postural stability (Westcott, Lowes, & Richardson, 1997). Building assesses the child’s ability to

perform complex task using fine motor movements. The child is asked to build a tower, a bridge,

and a pyramid with blocks. Thumbs and Fingers requires a child to wiggle thumbs, twiddle

thumbs, and touch fingers to thumb in sequence, one hand at a time and then simultaneously.

This test shows the relationship between neurological functioning and verbal fluency (Welsh,

Pennington, & Groisser 1991). Cutting assesses the child’s fine motor skills and ability to use

scissors. The child cuts on a straight and curved line and cuts out a dinosaur figure. Copying

instructs the child to copy seven geometric shapes and two letters. This item predicts reading

readiness, letter identification, and school success (Fowler & Cross, 1986; Snow, Burns, &

Griffin, 1998; Simner 1994). In the Writing Name item the child writes their name or nickname.

This item assesses writing, letter knowledge, and emergent reading skills. It is also predictive of

later academic achievement (Baroody, O’Leary, Carey, Diamond, & Powell, 2010).

The concept performance area includes the following seven items: (1) Body Parts (2) Colors (3)

Rapid Object Naming (4) Rote Counting (5) Meaningful Counting (6) Concepts (7) Shapes.

During the Body Parts item the child points to eight body parts which measures their self-

awareness. Colors requires the child to point, one at a time, at ten blocks of different colors. This

test is used because identifying colors is a basic descriptive concept. In the Rapid Object Naming

item the child names five objects, and then rapidly names twenty-five objects within thirty

seconds if the first five were correct. This item is a predictor of reading fluency (National

Reading Panel, 2000). Rote Counting asks the child to count from one to twenty, backwards

from ten, and identify numbers one through eleven by pointing. Meaningful Counting asks the

child to move blocks to show meaningful knowledge of numbers and answer questions about

7

number relationships. Rote Counting and Meaningful Counting assesses early math knowledge

to predict later academic success (Duncan et al., 2007; VanDerHeyden, Broussard, & Cooley,

2006). The Concepts item instructs the child to select a picture that depicts a certain concept.

Concepts like opposites which are identified as important by state early-learning standards are

assessed. In the Shapes item the child identifies and sorts shapes. This assesses object

categorization and non-verbal classification.

The language performance area includes the following six items: (1) Personal Information (2)

Articulation (3) Objects and Actions (4) Letters and Sounds (5) Rhyming and I Spy (6) Problem

Solving. For the first item Personal Information, the child gives their name, age, sex, and

birthday. Personal Information assesses the child’s self-awareness and cognition. The

Articulation item instructs the child to repeat modeled pronunciation of names of objects. This

test can predict a child’s later reading ability and phonological awareness (Montgomery,

Windsor, & Stark, 1991; Scarborough, 1990; Jenkins & Bowen 1994). Objects and Actions

requires the child to name objects and what they are used for. This task test vocabulary skills,

object identification, name activation, and response generation in order to predict later reading

ability (Rissman, Curtiss, & Tallai, 1990). Letters and Sounds consist of the child singing or

reciting the alphabet, naming letters, and producing sounds of letters shown. This test serves as

predictors of later reading achievement and reading disabilities (Satz, Taylor, Friel, & Fletcher,

1978). The Rhyming and I Spy item requires the child to give rhyming words for stimulus words

and then produce words that begin with a particular sound. This test measures phonological

awareness. In the Problem Solving item the child provides solutions to problems posed by the

operator. Problem Solving measures their logical reasoning while assessing their ability to use

expressive language to solve verbally presented problems.

8

Investing in Early Childhood Education

Creating interventions for developmentally delayed students will require sufficient funding.

Research has shown that investing in early childhood education can be beneficial to individuals

and society. The short term benefits would include helping children who are in need of

intervention. The long term benefits include the return of the dollar amount invested. As shown

by Cameiro and Heckman (2003) [See Figure 1], the investment return on early childhood

education is $8 for every $1 invested. This point emphasizes the importance of early intervention

services, because there are substantially more benefits to investing in early childhood education

as opposed to primary and secondary education.

Figure 1

Importance of Early Intervention

Brain development is at its fastest rate during the prenatal stages of life. Neurons develop and

begin to form neural networks. The postnatal period marks the transformation of the brain

developing into visual, motor, language, and socioemotional emotional connections. From this

point, brain development is tremendously dependent on experiences. External stimulation causes

9

the brain to physically change in structure and function. In the early years (from birth-3), neural

plasticity is extremely sensitive to stimulation. Each part of the brain has a different plasticity.

There are intervals of time where neural plasticity reaches its highest potential; however, after

this interval has passed, development in the brain is less sensitive to stimulation. That being said,

interventions should be directed toward the earliest window of opportunity possible in order to

get the best response from the brain. Figure 2 is a graphical representation of the optimal time

intervals to stimulate development in the brain (Nash 1997; McCain & Mustard 1999; Shonkoff

& Phillips 2000).

Figure 2

10

Data Analysis

The data in this study represented students ranging from first to third grade. The data selection

consisted of 142 students from Prairie View Elementary and Peine Ridge Elementary. Students

that were excluded from the data selection fell under the following categories: scoring 7% or

below on the DIAL-4, having an Individualized Education Plan (IEP), and moving to a different

school. Date of birth was used to identify each student instead of their name to protect privacy.

Data was organized in a spreadsheet using the first row as labels for eight columns. The date of

birth, DIAL-4 results, current status, motor score, concepts score, language score, behavior

observations score, and age of each student was recorded. The current status noted whether the

child was a Student of Concern (SOFC) or not. A SOFC is a child that did not score low enough

for a diagnostic assessment and therefore is not eligible to receive interventions. A SOFC could

score from 8% to 99% on the DIAL-4 screening since the cutoff is set at 7%. These students

may have potential delays that are not evident on the DIAL-4 screening. A two population

proportion test was used to compare the population of students who scored 8%-30% and were

SOFC to the population of students who scored 31%-99% and were SOFC [See Figure 5]. A

correlation test was also ran between the DIAL-4 results and each of the performance area results

[See Figures 3 & 4].

11

Presentation of Data

DIAL-4 Results (%) Motor (%) Concepts (%) Language (%)

DIAL-4 Results (%) 1 Motor (%) 0.353807151253233 1 Concepts (%) 0.379487346728676 0.706857856969083 1 Language (%) 0.627441993143295 0.613664598182817 0.651503020598634 1

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

12

Discussion of Results

There was a total of 11 students who scored 8%-30% on the DIAL-4 and 8 of those students

were SOFC. There was a total of 131 students who scored 31%-99%, and 17 of those students

were SOFC. This means that students scoring 8%-30% are 73% more likely to be a SOFC, which

is supportive data for the initial stated hypothesis. The two population proportion test had a Z-

score of 4.9975 which means the results are statistically significant at p < 0.05. Also, the

confidence interval plot had no overlapping intervals which is another affirmative representation

of the statistical significance. As of now, the overall DIAL-4 score is the only score that makes

the student eligible for diagnostic testing. Diagnostic testing is a vital step in the process of

creating an intervention plan for developmentally delayed students. As seen in the correlation

data [See Figures 3 & 4], there is a prominent overlap with low motor scores and concept scores.

This correlation suggests that low scores in both the motor area and the concept area may be a

predictor of the student needing help in the future and possibly diagnostic testing. Furthermore,

there are factors that affect early childhood education in regards of developmental delays.

Follow-up studies might include demographic and socioeconomic factors to find reliable criteria

indicating the need of educational intervention. Another follow-up study might seek to find the

correlation between socioemotional development and academic performance. Last but not least,

a prospective study intending to find the benefits of universal preschool would be a good

direction for a follow-up study.

13

Bibliography

Mardell, C., PhD, & Goldenberg, S., EdD. (2011). Developmental Indicators for the Assessment

of Learning (Fourth ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.

Welsh,M., Pennington, B., & Groisser, D. (1991). A normative study of executive function: A

window on prefrontal function in children. Developmental Neuropsychology, 7, 131-149.

Baroody, A.E., O’Leary, P.M., Carey, A.J., Diamond, K.E., & Powell, D.R. (2010, June).

Children’s name writing and emergent reading skills: Concurrent and longitudinal

associations. Poster session presented at the meeting of Head Start research conference,

Washington DC.

Westcott, S.L., Lowes, L. P., & Richardson, P.K. (1997). Evaluation of postural stability in

children: Current theories and assessment tools. Physical Therapy, 77(6), 629-645.

Fowler, M., & Cross, A. (1986). Preschool risk factors as predictors of early school performance.

Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 7(4), 237-241.

Snow, C.E., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young

children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Simner, M. L. (1994). Improving the predictive validity of geometric-design copying tasks on

instruments used to evaluate school readiness. In C. Faure, P. Keuss, G. Lorette, & A.

Vinter (Eds.), Advances in handwriting and drawing: A multidisciplinary approach

(pp. 489-499). Paris: Europia

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the

Scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.

Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

14

Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C.J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., Pagani,

L., S., Feinstein, L., Engel, M., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2007). School readiness and later

Achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1428-1447.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., Broussard, C., & Cooley, A. (2006). Further development of measures of

early math performance for preschoolers. Journal of School Psychology, 44(6), 533-553.

Montgomery, J., Windsor, J., & Stark, R. (1991). Specific speech and language disorders. In J.

Obrzut & G. Hynd (Eds.), Neuropsychological foundations of learning disabilities. San

Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Scarborough, H.S. (1900). Very early language deficits in dyslexic children. Child Development,

61,1728-1743.

Jenkins, R., & Bowen, L. (1994). Facilitating development of preliterate children’s phonological

abilities. Topic in Language Disorders, 14(2), 26-39.

Rissman, M., Curtiss, S., & Tallai, P. (1990). School placement outcomes of young language-

impaired children. Journal of School Languages, 14(2), 49-58.

Satz, P., Taylor, G., Friel, J., & Fletcher, J (1978). Some developmental and predictive

precursors of reading disabilities: A six-year follow up. In A. Benton & Dr. Pearl (Eds.),

Dyslexia: An appraisal of current knowledge (pp. 313-347). New York: Oxford

University Press.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2017, February 10). Retrieved February 14, 2017,

from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/osep-idea.html

Cameiro, P. & Heckman, J. (2003). Human capital policy in F. Mustard.

Economic Growth, Social Stability and Early Child Development (2005).

Presentation, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada.

15

Nash, M. (1997). How a child's brain develops. Time (3), 55.

McCain, M. & Mustard, F. (1999). Early years study. Toronto, Ontario: Publications Ontario

Shonkoff, J. P. & Phillips, D. (Eds.).(2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science

of early childhood development. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.