Introduction
Aim of the study
-
Improve the students’ cognition, linguistic awareness and social competence.
-
Lay foundations for good reading and writing skills.
-
Create a positive attitude towards learning and a good collaboration with other students and teachers, in order for each student to be integrated/included in the social community of the class and share the class´ common level of knowledge and be part of the “knowledge community” in the class to avoid exclusion.
-
Result in better school achievements for all school children through the end of senior high.
Theoretical and empirical background
-
Children with specific learning difficulties i.e. dyslexia, dyscalculia.
-
Children with MR, IQ < 70.
-
Slow learners, i.e. children with IQ 70–90.
-
Children with slow maturation.
-
Talented children.
-
“Original” children (including some children with high functioning autism spectrum disorders).
-
Children with behavior disturbances of other reasons.
Methods
The design of the study
School setting and randomization
Subjects
Principles of the educational intervention
-
There was a high level of educational stimulation in the pre-school class, in order to prepare all students for the first school year. A work plan was drawn up with the topics “Ethics and Morals”, “Mathematics”, “Music”, “Nature Orientation “, “Moving and Sport”, “Social Science “, “Creative Subjects” and “Swedish”;
-
A log book was set up for preschool year I to be used to ensure that each pupil, individual or in groups, was every day stimulated according to the work plan. See Appendix.
-
There was a great emphasis on linguistic awareness, reading and writing. A language test was performed at the start of the preschool class to screen for language skills and deficits. The topic “Swedish” in the work plan was divided into the following steps: language games, books, speech, writing, and drama and computer management. “Language games” meant dealing with rhymes, chants, sentences, syllables, synthesis/segmentation, compound words, classification, articulation, comparison of word length and absurdities/riddles.
-
There was a great emphasis on socio-emotional aspects in preschool in order to lay the foundations for a positive attitude towards learning and collaboration with other students and teachers. This part of the work plan was subtitled “Ethics and Morals”, which was designed to teach students to show respect and understanding for others, be honest and tell the truth, treat others as you want to be treated, emphasize the equal value of individuals, understand what is right and wrong and distinguish between mine and yours.
-
The planning of learning activities was made with awareness of each student’s maturity level in order to avoid experiences of stress and/or failure by the student. For a long time, the concept of “global” maturity has been used in Sweden in relation to child development to indicate the difference between mental age and chronological age as measured by IQ-tests with respect to children’s normal growth and their school achievements. Swedish parents are familiar with this concept of “maturity”. To measure maturity the parents assessed their children on two items [25] as follows: In the first question, parents compared their child’s level of maturity to an average child of the same age on a 5-point likert scale (1 = very mature, 2 = somewhat mature, 3 = average, 4 = somewhat immature and 5 = very immature). In the second item, parents estimated their child’s perceived age, independently of chronological age. From grade 1, the learning process was to be monitored by observation and periodic testing. The results were to be used for groupings in classes and those who were found weakest at the last measurement were to receive the most attention.
-
From school start, the functional assessments of the students’ development in the areas of behavior and cognition were to be followed by IQ-tests, the monitoring of reading and mathematical skills using standardized tests, and questionnaires to parents, the teacher and students.
-
The overlapping of teachers in the pre-school class and in school was planned: one pre-school class teacher should follow the students during their three school years, and the schoolteachers (who received the pupils in grade 1) should do part of the pre-school class teaching. This meant a slightly increased staffing ratio.
-
Increased didactic continuity between pre-school class and school class was planned.
-
It was decided that enhanced teacher resources should exist, as the experimental classes together had three coordinators sharing two full-time positions.
-
The teaching of mathematic content was planned to be postponed until the students had reached a certain linguistic and conceptual maturity.
-
It was determined that teachers should have access to child psychiatric counseling, which meant confirmations of teachers’ observations and assessments, but also a greater understanding and changing perspectives on student behavior.
Training of teachers and classroom work
The teaching principles of the project
To support
To accept
To introduce alternative curricula for
To introduce special training for teachers
To use screening and monitoring of skills
The measures
Statistical analysis
Ethical vetting and permissions
Results
Language competence and phonological awareness at school-start (age 7 years)
SPIQ | Umesol | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Score | Stanine | Score | Stanine | |||||
M (SD) | Min–max (n) | M (SD) | Min–max (n) | M (SD) | Min–max (n) | M (SD) | Min–max (n) | |
Experimental group | ||||||||
Boys | 19.5 (2.7) | 12–25 (43) | 3.6 (1.6) | 1–6 (43) | 20.6 (4.9) | 10–25 (44) | 6.0 (2.0) | 2–8 (44) |
Girls | 19.8 (2.6) | 13–25 (48) | 3.8 (1.7) | 1–6 (48) | 23.1 (3.4) | 4–25 (47) | 6.7 (1.4) | 1–8 (47) |
Total | 19.6 (2.7) | 12–25 (91) | 3.7(1.6) | 1–6 (91) | 21.9 (4.4) | 4–25 (91) | 6.4 (1.7) | 1–8 (91) |
Comparison group | ||||||||
Boys | 21.2 (2.8) | 13–28 (33) | 4.5 (1.4) | 1–6 (33) | 21.3 (4.7) | 4–25 (32) | 5.7 (1.8) | 1–8 (32) |
Girls | 20.7 (3.7) | 8–27 (44) | 4.3 (1.6) | 1–6 (44) | 21.3 (4.5) | 9–25 (44) | 6.0 (1.7) | 2–8 (44) |
Total | 20.9 (3.3) | 8–28 (77) | 4.4 (1.6) | 1–6 (77) | 21.0 (4.6) | 4–25 (76) | 5.9 (1.7) | 1–8 (76) |
Capacity to read at the end of grade 1 and at end of grade 3
Test used | Age | Group | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Experimental | Comparison | p-value | ||||||
M (SD) | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | n | ||
Läskedjor (school start grade 2) | ||||||||
Word chains (stanine) | 8.3 | 5.2 | 2.1 | 84 | 4.4 | 1.9 | 74 | 0.004 |
Letter chains (stanine) | 4.5 | 1.7 | 84 | 5.0 | 1.8 | 74 | ns | |
Spelling (stanine) | 4.5 | 1.6 | 84 | 5.1 | 2.0 | 74 | 0.04 | |
Läskedjor (school start grade 3) | ||||||||
Word chains (stanine) | 9.3 | 3.7 | 1.6 | 26 | 4.5 | 1.9 | 29 | ns |
Letter chains (stanine) | 4.8 | 1.8 | 26 | 5.3 | 1.9 | 24 | ns | |
Spelling (stanine) | 5.0 | 1.7 | 83 | 4.8 | 1.7 | 73 | ns | |
Lindahls högläsningsprov (correct no of words/min) | ||||||||
End of grade 1 | 7.9 | 46.4 | 19.2 | 89 | 41.5 | 18.4 | 78 | 0.02 |
School start grade 2 | 8.3 | 55.8 | 20.8 | 64 | 49.1 | 18.6 | 67 | 0.04 |
End of grade 2 | 8.9 | 76.8 | 17.6 | 62 | 65.1 | 19.9 | 60 | 0.000 |
School start grade 3 | 9.3 | 83.6 | 19.9 | 59 | 71.5 | 20.7 | 60 | 0.001 |
End of grade 3 | 9.9 | 91.4 | 18.7 | 84 | 82.5 | 19.5 | 74 | 0.002 |
DLS-test (end grade 3) | ||||||||
Correct sound | 9.9 | 37.9 | 2.7 | 84 | 37.7 | 2.1 | 74 | ns |
Correct spelling | 16.6 | 2.7 | 84 | 16.7 | 3.2 | 74 | ns | |
Vocabulary | 13.3 | 3.2 | 84 | 13.5 | 2.8 | 74 | ns | |
Reading comprehension | 14.5 | 3.0 | 84 | 14.4 | 2.2 | 74 | 0.03 | |
Maths (end grade 3) | 9.9 | 72.8 | 12.5 | 83 | 71.8 | 12.5 | 74 | ns |
Self-evaluation of skills and adjustment at the end of grade 3
Item answered | Experimental group (%) | Comparison group (%) | p-value |
---|---|---|---|
Reading goes very well | 57.1 | 38.9 | 0.02 |
To write goes very well | 50.0 | 26.4 | 0.007 |
To do mathematics goes very well | 56.0 | 34.7 | 0.003 |
Seldom/never being teased | 66.7 | 80.6 | 0.02 |
Behavioral problems according to the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL)
CBCL | 7 years of age | 10 years of age | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Experimental group (n = 70) | Comparison group (n = 61) | p* | Experimental group (n = 72) | Comparison group (n = 58) | p* | |
Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |||
Syndromes of problems | ||||||
Withdrawn | 1.06 (1.09) | 1.49 (1.15) | ns | 1.32 (1.77) | 1.02 (1.24) | ns |
Somatic complaints | 0.66 (1.15) | 0.74 (1.05) | ns | 0.96 (1.49) | 0.81 (1.07) | ns |
Anxious and depressed | 1.49 (1.77) | 2.71 (1.63) | 0.031 | 1.97 (2.43) | 1.88 (2.46) | ns |
Social problems | 0.74 (1.13) | 0.82 (1.49) | ns | 0.82 (1.47) | 0.64 (1.39) | ns |
Thought problems | 0.07 (0.31) | 0.07 (0.25) | ns | 0.11 (0.46) | 0.07 (0.26) | ns |
Attention problems | 1.16 (1.47) | 1.57 (2.03) | ns | 1.44 (1.93) | 1.28 (2.09) | ns |
Delinquent behaviour | 1.00 (1.33) | 1.07 (1.33) | ns | 0.92 (1.34) | 0.57 (0.82) | ns |
Aggressive behaviour | 5.07 (4.61) | 4.95 (4.12) | ns | 4.63 (4.74) | 3.62 (3.86) | ns |
Grouping of syndromes | ||||||
Internalising | 3.20 (3.27) | 4.52 (4.48) | 0.049 | 4.21 (4.56) | 3.67 (3.70) | ns |
Externalising | 6.07 (5.56) | 6.01 (5.02) | ns | 5.54 (5.67) | 4.19 (4.33) | ns |
Total behaviour problem score | 16.1 (10.87) | 17.90 (12.04) | ns | 15.89 (12.33) | 13.59 (10.36) | ns |
The intervention effect on reading capacity from grade 1 to grade 3
Score grade 1 | Score grade 3 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
M (SD) | Min–max (n) | M (SD) | Min–max (n) | |
Experimental group | ||||
Boys | 43.6 (20.7) | 6–102 (42) | 88.6 (19.9) | 47–121 (39) |
Girls | 48.9 (17.7) | 17–86 (47) | 93.9 (17.3) | 50–127 (45) |
Total | 46.4 (19.2) | 6–102 (89) | 91.4 (18.7) | 47–127 (84) |
Comparison group | ||||
Boys | 40.9 (18.9) | 12–100 (33) | 79.4 (21.0) | 46–153 (31) |
Girls | 41.9 (18.2) | 10–108 (45) | 84.8 (18.2) | 50–135 (43) |
Total | 41.5 (18.4) | 10–108 (78) | 82.5 (19.5) | 46–153 (74) |