Abstract/Notes: Reprint of an article that originally appeared in Child Development, v. 54 (1983), p. 727-741.

Language: English

Published: Lexington, Massachusetts: Ginn Custom Pub., 1983

Edition: 2nd ed.

ISBN: 0-536-04367-1

Abstract/Notes: This article is reproduced from the American Montessori Society Bulletin, v. 13, no. 3 (1975), p 1-15. This article was originally published in International Review of Education, v. 20, no. 1 (1974), p. 3–16. DOI: 10.1007/BF00599526

Language: English

Published: Lexington, Massachusetts: Ginn Custom Pub., 1981

Edition: 1st ed.

ISBN: 0-536-03647-0

Abstract/Notes: This article is reproduced from the American Montessori Society Bulletin, v. 13, no. 3 (1975), p 1-15. This article was originally published in International Review of Education, v. 20, no. 1 (1974), p. 3–16. DOI: 10.1007/BF00599526

Language: English

Published: Lexington, Massachusetts: Ginn Custom Pub., 1983

Edition: 2nd ed.

ISBN: 0-536-04367-1

Language: English

Published: New York: American Montessori Society, 1977

Language: German

Published: [Salzburg, Austria]: [s.n.], 1990

Abstract/Notes: Includes a photograph.

Language: English

Language: English

Published: Salt Lake City, Utah, 1975

Language: English

Published: Honolulu, Hawaii, 1978

Abstract/Notes: Understanding young children’s spelling abilities may provide unique insight into their overall linguistic development as well as assist in identifying children at risk for reading difficulties in ways that typical reading assessments cannot (Chua, Rickard Liow, & Yeong, 2016; Clemens, Oslund, Simmons, & Simmons, 2014; Hofslundsengen, Hagtvet, & Gustafsson, 2016; McBride-Chang, 1998; Ouellette & Sénéchal, 2017). Yet, spelling assessments are not commonly conducted before Kindergarten (age 5) and no normed instrument exists for 3- to 4-year-olds. When spelling assessments designed for 5-year-olds are administered to younger children, young children get lower scores (Clemens, et al., 2014; Puranik & Apel, 2010). These lower scores may reflect their less developed spelling ability (typical development) but they may also be influenced by aspects of development unrelated to spelling: lack of motor ability to write letters, working memory limitations, poor word choice of items to be spelled, and/or insensitive scoring systems (Apel, Wolter, & Masterson, 2006; Clemens, et al., 2014; Diamond, 2013; Puranik & Apel, 2010). These latter possibilities raise the question of what would happen if we controlled these factors. Would a preschool spelling assessment that did not require handwriting and that minimized working memory demands result in higher spelling scores than a handwritten assessment? Specifically, is a movable alphabet spelling assessment a more reliable, valid, and sensitive way of measuring spelling abilities in children younger than 5 than is a handwritten assessment? The present study employed a within-subjects quasi-experimental design in which the spelling of 3- to 4-year-old children was assessed using a movable alphabet and handwriting. Results indicated that (1) preschoolers scored higher on a movable alphabet spelling assessment than on a handwritten assessment, (2) word choice did influence results, (3) movable alphabet spelling scores were a significantly stronger predictor of phonemic awareness and letter knowledge scores than handwritten spelling scores, (4) children were more willing to attempt to spell words with the movable alphabet than with handwriting, and (5) assessment scores were not closely tied to age or measures of behavior. To date, few if any other studies have specifically evaluated the influence of different tools on capturing the spelling abilities of preschoolers. This study expands current knowledge about the influence of motor and working memory scaffolds on the word-building capacities of 3- to 4-year-olds.

Language: English

Published: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2017

Abstract/Notes: A Head Start Program operating in Kansas City since 1965 was viewed as inadequate because enrollment was limited to about 600 children per year. The Model Cities Agency determined to provide a program for the remainder of the children in the Model Cities neighborhoods. The programs developed were differentiated administratively for the purposes of this evaluation and the program considered a single entity and referred to as Early Childhood Education. These questions were developed as evaluation goals: What specific educational approaches were provided?; To what degree do the children grow to the stated objectives?; Do these programs meet the emotional, social, physical, and intellectual needs of the program's four-year-old children?; Do these children grow differentially?; Are specified goals reached as anticipated by staff?; What program differences account for student growth differences?; Do parents in the parent education component change relevant to their children's development?; Are these programs complementary with kindergarten programs of urban schools?; What are the effects of staff development activities?; Is program administration effective?; Are children with special problems provided assistance in achievement of program objectives?; And what program changes should be made? Each question is treated in succession and is detailed. Summaries giving the main thrust are provided after each section. (RC)

Language: English

Published: Kansas City, Missouri, Sep 1971