Download total pretest describing score= ___/9 possible total pretest drawing

Improving Peer Communication in Young Children
Shoshana Exler
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Master of Education
Spring 2017
Graduate Programs in Education
Goucher College
Table of Contents
List of Tables
i
Abstract
ii
I. Introduction
1
Overview
1
Statement of Problem
1
Hypothesis
2
Operational Dominion
II. Review of the Literature
Development of Communication in Infancy
Interactive Play and Communication
Communication and Social Skills in Early Childhood Programs
The Roles of Adults and Peers in Supporting Development of Communication in
Early Childhood
Importance of Teaching Communication Skills in Preschool
Rationale for Teaching Social and Communication Skills
Approaches to Teaching Peer Communication Skills
Conclusion
3
3
13
III. Methods
13
Design
13
Instrument
14
Procedure
15
IV. Results
Scores on Communication Games
V. Discussion
18
19
21
Discussion
Implications
Threats to Validity
22
Comparison to Other Research
Implications for Future Research
Conclusions/Summary
References
26
List of Tables
1. Descriptive Statistics for Pre and Post Instruction Communication Scores
19
2. Results of One Sample T- test of Gains in Scores
19
i
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects a brief series of lessons teaching
communication skills would have on preschool children’s ability to communicate with one
another. This study utilized a one-group pre-test, post-test design. Expressive and receptive
communication skills were assessed before and after the lessons using a game in which
participants were required to describe familiar objects and listen to the descriptions to draw and
guess what they were. Participants were twelve Caucasian preschool children between the ages
of four and six years old who attended an orthodox Jewish day school. The null hypothesis was
retained as the results indicated that there was no statistically significant increase in the
children’s ability to communicate with one another after receiving explicit communication
training. Recommendations for future research include using alternative assessments which omit
the drawing aspect of the task used in this study, having a longer time to teach communication
skills, and using a larger and more diverse sample in the experimental design in order to control
for the effect of age and other demographic variables on the outcomes of the lessons.
ii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Overview
Communication is an important component of social interaction. Children begin
communicating as soon as they are born and become more effective communicators as they
develop. Just as children need to be taught academic lessons explicitly, they also need to be
taught communication skills explicitly. Children should be taught communication skills
beginning at a young age so they can build and strengthen these skills as they develop. Effective
communication is key for their future success in school and in their careers, as well as in their
relationships. The researcher chose to study this topic because she found that the preschool
students with whom she worked sometimes had difficulty expressing themselves to their peers.
The researcher desired to learn whether preschooler’s level of communication would improve
after they received explicit communication training.
Statement of Problem
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of implementing a brief series of
lessons on the communication skills of students in a preschool setting.
Hypothesis
The researcher predicted that students’ ability to communicate and describe ideas would
improve after they participated in lessons designed to enhance these skills. The null hypothesis
tested was that implementing a brief series of lessons on communication skills would have no
effect on the effectiveness of preschoolers’ interpersonal communication.
ho: mean gains in language task = 0
1
Operational Definitions
The independent variable in this study was the implementation of a series of
communication skills lessons developed by the researcher based on her literature review of
preschool communication issues. The lessons were implemented for three weeks on three
consecutive days each week. Lessons covered the following topics.
Week 1: How to be a good listener
The children were taught how to listen attentively to what others were saying in order to better
understand the content speaker’s dialogue.
Week 2: Saying what you mean
The children practiced communicating with clarity and directness so that their peers would have
an easier time understanding what they meant to communicate.
Week 3: Thinking about what you heard
The children practiced thinking critically in order to avoid jumping to conclusions which are
often the cause of misunderstandings.
The dependent variable was the preschoolers’ gain score on a language task assessment.
This assessment measured children’s ability to describe pictures to a peer for the peer to draw
and to listen to descriptions and draw and guess what they were.
2
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This literature review discusses research related to the communication of students in preschool
settings and how that communication might be improved. Part one describes the development of
communication in infancy. Part two examines the relationship between interactive play and
communication. Communication and the development of social skills in early childhood
programs is the focus of part three. The role of peers and adults in developing communication in
early childhood is discussed in part four. Part five examines the importance of teaching
communication skills in preschool, and the rationale for teaching social and communication
skills is offered in part six. The review concludes with descriptions of methods for teaching peer
communication skills.
Development of Communication in Infancy
According to Hedenboro (2013) “[t]he human brain is fundamentally adapted to develop within
a social context” (p. 268). Communication is learned through social interaction with caregivers
and peers (Shin, 2012). Infants have the ability to respond to social stimuli in their environments
as soon as they are born. According to Hedenboro (2013), infants can notice and react to voices,
facial expressions, hugs, and physical contact from parents and caregivers. Infants first
communicate by crying to express their needs. At about the age of three months, infants begin to
smile in response to stimuli from the environment. Babies later begin to recognize and react to
the emotions of other people. This response is called social referencing and is an important
component of social competence. At about 24 months of age, children begin to become aware of
other people’s feelings and plans and take this into account when forming their own actions
(Santrock, 2009).
3
Another component of social cognition that relates to developing communication skills is
joint attention which Shin (2012) defines as “the ability to experience shared attention with a
social partner” (p. 309). Before their ability to speak develops, infants are able to experience
joint attention and communicate with a social partner through pointing and gaze following.
Undoubtedly, this facilitates infants’ cognitive development and social skills as well as language
skills, as they become involved in shared perceptual and language experiences with others who
can model language and emotional reactions for them. Parents and caregivers can support joint
attention with babies by playing games such as “peek-a-boo” and “pat a cake” in which there is
an exchange of interactions between parents or caregivers and the babies. These types of games
also reinforce turn-taking which is another important skill ability related to successful social
interactions (Santrock, 2009). “Even from birth, children have a need to communicate, a need to
be part of a social system as they try to make sense of the world” (Kampmann & Bowne, year, p.
84)
Interactive Play and Communication
As language, cognitive, social, and motor skills develop, interactive play with peers
provides infants the opportunity to develop social awareness by communicating with and
imitating one another. For infants and toddlers, gazing and pointing initially are important
aspects of communication during play. Infants point in order to obtain an object from a partner
and follow with gazes to decide what is going on and to understand others’ actions. Imitating a
playmate’s actions reflects a young child’s interest in the social play. Experiences in social
settings allow infants to learn how to interact with others. Although conflict among young
children often is considered negative, negotiating disagreements or misunderstandings can foster
social understanding (Shin, 2012).
4
Communication and Social Skills in Early Childhood Programs
Young children often learn essential communication skills in preschool settings where
they have opportunities to interact with and learn from peers and adult models. “The
development of effective social skills and the promotion of emotional health are essential
elements of the early childhood curriculum” (Henniger, 2009, p. 7).
Children attend preschool between ages of three and five. For some children, this is their
first experience in a structured school-like setting (Henniger, 2009). At age three, children’s
language continues to develop, typically by adding new vocabulary and sentence structure. Three
year olds generally establish and maintain short-term friendships. They are beginning to learn
turn-taking skills, yet they still may find this challenging. At age four, children can begin to
communicate with full sentences and sometimes with advanced vocabulary. Four-year-old
children often are curious and ask many questions of their caregivers. According to Henniger,
play becomes a social activity around the age of five. When children are about five years and six
months old, they typically begin to enjoy spending time and chatting with friends and they not
only focus on play.
The Roles of Adults and Peers in Supporting Development of Communication in Early
Childhood
Conversation becomes part of play as children enter preschool settings. “By using and
breaking the rules for conversation, children learn how to effectively communicate” (Henniger,
2009, p.138). According to Henninger, children use pretend communication statements during
dramatic play to mimic real life roles they have taken on or have observed in school or at home.
Children learn a lot about communication through observing the interactions of the
adults and caregivers in their lives and the way they communicate with one another. They use
5
this as a framework for their own communication (Henniger, 2009). “The quality and quantity
of spoken language that children hear in interactions with caregivers during the early years of life
are important influences on language development” (McDonald & Proctor, 2015, p. 305). Shire
and Goods (2014) explain that children “have numerous interaction partners including, parents,
teachers, and peers who are fundamental to the provision of daily, high-quality learning
opportunities. Whereas teachers and peers may come and go, parents have the unique ability to
influence a child over the course of many decades” (p. 1712). Shire and Goods further contend
that the manner in which parents interact with their children can support development of
communication in both typically and atypically developing children.
Henniger (2009) states that “ relationships with teachers and caregivers help
children develop social skills; interactions with peers are the proving ground for these unfolding
abilities” (p. 369). Additionally, Henniger maintains that in contrast to infants and toddlers, who
spend most of their time interacting with adults, preschool children become more conscious of
their peers and begin to build friendships.
Henniger (2009) explains that according to Piaget, preschoolers have a difficult time
making friends because they are egocentric; they have difficulty recognizing and understanding
the perspectives of others. However, as children mature, they begin to realize that other people
have opinions and needs which are separate from their own. This awareness changes the nature
of their play and relationships. Play is one of the best channels to promote the development of
social skills. Henniger states that “most play sequences include several children and require
effective communication, compromise, leaders and followers in order to be successful” (p. 369).
Importance of Teaching Communication Skills in Preschool
6
Stanstrom and Rawn (2015) reflect that “socializing is one of the most enjoyable
parts of everyday life” and suggest that it is not unreasonable to conclude that the ability to
connect socially in young adulthood is closely related to successful development of early
communication skills (p. #). These researchers found that university students experience a better
sense of well-being when they have had social interactions, even with those to whom they felt
less close, such as acquaintances. Further, they learned that students felt a greater sense of
belonging when engaging with peers. Stanstrom and Rawn concluded that “socialization fosters
a sense of community and belonging which may improve student learning” (p. 228).
Peer socialization begins in early childhood. It is important for preschool teachers to
provide ample opportunities for peer socialization as well as teaching communication skills. This
emphasis likely will help children develop a strong foundation for connecting with other children
and will assist them to interact with adults later in life (Landa, 2005).
Rationale for Teaching Social and Communication Skills
Although academic learning is important teachers of young children find it equally
important to lay a strong foundation for social and emotional development. It is important for
children to learn ways to interact with adults and peers positively, develop a strong sense of self,
and develop strategies to process their emotions (Henniger, 2009). Such development relies in
part on children having language and communication skills to understand and express their
thoughts and feelings in social contexts. Stanton-Chapman and Browne (2014) state that
“Teaching children social communication strategies (e.g. initiations and response) is likely to
improve the quality of social interactions that children have with their peers” (p. 12). Schultz
(2011) contends that “without explicit instruction and coaching in these social and emotional
7
skills, students may not be able to manage their feelings and behaviors successfully” (p. 143).
Schultz further noted that children who experience difficulty with socialization in early
childhood are susceptible to internalizing and externalizing problem behavior in early
adolescence and reported that the use of curricula to teach social skills also resulted in decreasing
levels of depression and increased adaptability in preschoolers.
Shultz (2011) explains that many children are asked to leave school by the age of
six due to problematic behaviors. Therefore, it is important for schools to implement social skills
interventions in preschool and kindergarten settings to prevent and reduce such behavioral
problems. Children who do not receive interventions for social and emotional difficulties are at
risk for peer rejection and delays in social development. In addition, they are at risk for not
reaching academic goals. According to Shultz, augmenting their communication skills appears to
be an important aspect of social skills development to reduce behavior problems and increase
prosocial (verbal) resolution of conflicts. “One method of interrupting problematic behavior in
early childhood is to teach social and emotional skills explicitly…. Children need to be
systematically taught how to interact with others when they display cognitive and behavioral
social skills deficits” (p. 144). Shultzalso recommends that social-emotional curricula be
implemented across the board in order to benefit all children and reduce or prevent inappropriate
behaviors.
Approaches to Teaching Peer Communication Skills
Several approaches used to teach peer communication skills have been described
in the literature related to the development of oral communication skills in young children.
Among these approaches are attention to the fundamental steps of communication, use of sociodramatic play/social integration activities, and focus on specific target skills.
8
Fundamental Steps of Communication
According to Stanton-Chapman and Denning, (2012) focusing on the fundamental steps
of communication improved preschool children’s social communication skills. According to
Garcia-Winner (2007), there are four steps to communication. Step one is to think about the
person with whom one desires or needs to communicate. The second step is to establish a
physical presence to indicate communicative intent. Step three is to shift into directed eye
contact to seal one’s intention to communicate with a person or group of people. Using language
to communicate with those people, while maintaining and expanding upon the first three steps is
emphasized in step four.
Garcia-Winner (2007) cautions that if one of these steps is omitted, the omission
can result in misunderstanding or experiencing a complete breakdown in communication. These
steps can be modified for young children to understand and apply when communicating with
peers or adults. It is important that teachers understand that communication is a generalized skill
that is used to build relationships. Individuals communicate with one another while walking, on
the play-ground, and at lunch. Therefore, it is important to teach all four steps of communication
mentioned above to facilitate positive social interactions in preschool settings
Garcia-Winner (2007) explains that it is important to teach children that language can
make others feel good, or bad, or neutral. For example, asking questions about others may make
them feel that the other person is interested in them. If a person persistently talks only about
himself or herself, he or she may appear self-centered. When preschoolers become familiar with
the steps needed for effective communication, they are able to apply them in a positive and
effective way in their interactions with peers.
Socio-Dramatic Play/Social Integration Activities
9
Stanton-Chapman and Denning (2012) observe that “If preschool teachers are to
understand and improve children’s social competence, they need specific intervention strategies
to address these skills in their classrooms during socio-dramatic play” (p.78).
Naturalistic intervention strategies are ones that are implemented within the framework of the
established classroom routine. According to Stanton-Chapman and Denning these strategies
often are especially effective for children with disabilities. Children with social communication
disorders may need explicit instruction and support when learning to use communication in peer
interactions and relationships.
According to Stanton-Chapman and Denning (2012), offering social integration activities
is a method of providing successful explicit social skills intervention. These are skills that are
integrated into the daily routine such as during free play, snack time, and on the playground.
Children who are competent in their social abilities can serve as models to peers who need social
intervention. This can be done during dramatic play. For example, two children can engage in the
house center while a teacher is nearby to facilitate the interaction. The teacher should avoid
directing the children’s play as this interferes with the children’s peer communication. StantonChapman and Denning note that the social integration method is a useful way to incorporate
focus on building social skills since it can be used fluidly throughout the day in various activities
such as centers, lunch, and free play. This way, children are provided with numerous
opportunities to practice and learn peer communication skills throughout the day and in a variety
of contexts. An added benefit is that preschool teachers often use this strategy in their
classrooms.
Henniger (2009) identifies several toys that can be particularly useful in
promoting communication skills. He notes that puppets are an enjoyable way to encourage
10
children to speak. Even children who are hesitant to interact with others often will pick up a
puppet and initiate a dialogue. Telephones are another toy that can encourage oral
communication since they are used for communication. Children can pick up a “pretend phone”
and initiate a conversation. Children also may enjoy hearing themselves communicating as they
record their conversations on a voice recorder.
Specific Target Skills
Turn Taking
Turn taking is an important component of peer communication. “Turn taking refers to
smooth interchanges between communicative partners” (Stanton-Chapman & Denning, 2012, p.
79). Characteristics of skilled turn taking include smooth verbal exchanges with one speaker at
a time with no interruptions from the other partner. Stanton-Chapman and Denning note that a
display of attentiveness can indicate comprehension or lack thereof. Further, they explain that
successful turn taking requires children to wait their turn during conversation, which often is
more challenging to do when interacting with peers than with adults.
Perspective taking
According to Garcia-Winner (2007), perspective taking is an abstract concept which can
be difficult for children to grasp. Perspective taking requires and individual to realize that other
people have different thoughts, feelings and experiences than oneself. It is important for teachers
and clinicians to make the concept concrete when teaching this skill.
Conclusion
The ability to communicate effectively with peers is an important skill which connects
individuals to one another (Sanstrom & Rawn, 2015) and has long term cognitive, emotional,
and social benefits. Infants begin the first steps of communication through nonverbal means
11
such as crying, gazing, and pointing. When children reach ages four and five, they are capable of
understanding their peers on a deeper level and engaging in verbal exchanges and dialogues.
It is important for preschool teachers to build a foundation for preschoolers that enables
them to develop social skills, which include appropriate communication skills. When preschool
teachers incorporate social skills lessons which include communication skills into their
curriculum and teach them explicitly, there is a greater chance that children will develop
effective communication skills, especially for children with special needs, than if these lessons
are not offered. There is a need for further research and observation regarding how best to
promote and teach peer communication in preschool, especially as trends in communication and
parenting have changed in recent decades.
12
CHAPTER III
METHODS
This study was conducted to determine the effect a brief series of lessons
explicitly teaching communication skills lessons would have on preschoolers’ ability to explain
and understand information with little context.
Design
This study utilized a one-group pre-test, post-test design to assess the significance of
gains in the participating preschoolers’ communication skills after they were taught a sample of
targeted communication skills. In this study, the independent variable was the nine
communication skills lessons which taught the targeted communication skills. The target skills
and brief lesson plans are described in Appendix A. The dependent variable was the gain score
which reflected the degree to which the targeted communication skills taught were used on the
posttest compared to the pretest.
To assess the participants’ use of the skills, participating preschoolers played a game in
which they described three individual pictures one at a time to a partner who was to attempt to
draw the pictured item based only on the verbal description he or she received. The partner
drawing was then asked to guess what the picture was supposed to depict. If the child was unsure
or guessed incorrectly, the researcher verbally gave three choices, one of which was the correct
one, from which to choose the response. The pictures used for both the pre and posttest were
stimulus pictures taken from the game “Back Seat Drawing, Jr.” (Brown, P,2008). All of the
pictures were chosen from the “easy” level and were fairly simple to draw and depicted objects
with which the participants were familiar. A rubric was developed to assess how well the
13
describer communicated during the game and how accurately the partner understood what was
described.
Twelve preschool students were included in this study. All were Caucasian and of the
Jewish Orthodox faith and all attended a Jewish Orthodox day school for Prekindergartners
through eighth graders and all participated in an aftercare program at the school. There were six
boys and six girls who participated and the 12 children were split into three same-gender dyads.
The children in each dyad were matched in terms of academic and social abilities as closely as
possible based on the researchers’ consultation with the children’s teachers.
Instrument
The researcher selected 20 picture cards from the “easy” set of the Back Seat Drawing,
Jr. game from which to select six picture cards each for the posttest and pretest assessments.
Examples are posted in Appendix C. Ten picture cards were used for the pretest and the other 10
cards were used for the posttest. The researcher purposely tried to select pictures which would
not be too complex for preschoolers to describe or draw.
A rubric was developed to score the describing and guessing of each picture. Each dyad
played six games total on both the pretest and on the posttest. Each child got three chances to
describe a card and three chances to draw and guess the picture. The researcher evaluated each
child for each game based on the role he or she was assuming. For the describer, points were
given on a one to three point scale based on the child’s clarity of description and ability to follow
the rules of the game, such as not stating the item. For the drawing partner, points also were
given on a one to three point scale which was based on the child’s ability to draw based on the
description of the child who was describing the picture. After playing six games, each child had
the potential to earn a total of 18 points.
14
Procedure
The discussion below describes components of the procedures followed in the study.
These components include sample selection, pretest, intervention, and posttest aspects of the
study.
Sample Selection and Pretest
Once students were identified for the intervention, they completed a pre-test which
consisted of a scored game to assess their communication skills. These were measured by their
ability to convey instructions to a peer who was to draw what they described.
To complete the pre-test, the researcher separately took each dyad, all of which were
paired based on similar age levels and gender and academic and social ability into the hallway
and told the children that they would be playing a game. The researcher explained the following
directions. One child would get a picture card and have to describe how to draw the picture to the
peer without saying any specific identifying words. For example, if the child was giving
instructions to draw a pencil, the child could not say, “draw an eraser.” The researcher
demonstrated how to describe an item by describing a picture in accord with the rules and having
one of the children draw the picture and guess what the item was. The researcher gave examples
of words the children could use to describe the picture, such as shapes. The child might say,
“draw a circle, square, triangle” The child might offer directions such as “on top of, below, or to
the right/left of.”, The drawing partner was given a whiteboard and dry erase marker to draw the
picture they heard being described. To avoid confusion, the researcher asked each child who was
drawing to tell her privately what each object was on the cards to demonstrate proper
understanding.
15
The child drawing the picture was asked to guess what he or she thought the picture was
after a time limit of 1.5 minutes. The child was only allowed to guess a specific item and not ask
questions to try to figure it out. If the child got the answer correct, they finished their turn. If the
child did not guess correctly or did not have an answer, the researcher verbally presented the
child with three 3 options from which to choose, each of which as similar in shape to the target
drawing.
Each response was recorded on the scoring tool for the guesser after this was completed,
the dyad flipped and the child who had previously drawn then explained a new picture to their
partner who had previously described the picture. The same sequence was implemented
repeatedly so that each child drew three pictures 3 and described three 3 pictures.
Once each child guessed what he or she was to have drawn, the researcher scored the
ratings for the describing and drawing partners on the rubric (see Appendix B) and then the
children switched roles so that the child who had originally described the picture became the
drawing partner and the drawing partner became the describer. Each child described and drew
three pictures each in total.
Intervention
For three weeks, , the researcher taught the group that stayed for after-care the following
targeted communication skills.
Week 1: How to be a good listener
Week 2: Saying what you mean
Week 3: Thinking about what you heard
Posttest
16
At the end of the third week, the researcher repeated the assessment using six different
pictures for each pair and compared the gains in game scores of the children who stayed for
aftercare and received communication training to those children who did not.
17
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
This study was conducted to determine the effect a brief series of lessons
explicitly teaching communication skills lessons would have on preschoolers’ ability to explain
and understand information with little context. The researcher predicted that students’ ability to
communicate and describe ideas would improve after they participated in lessons designed to
enhance these skills. These skills were assessed with a game that required listening and
describing objects and how to draw them. Scores were calculated and totaled on these tasks
before and after the lessons, then pre- and post intervention scores were compared. The null
hypothesis, that implementing a brief series of lessons on communication skills would have no
effect on the effectiveness of preschoolers’ interpersonal communication, was tested by
conducting a one-sample T-test comparing the mean gain scores to zero.
Table 1 contains descriptive statistics of the Describing and Listening scores participants
earned and the Total scores derived from them. Each of the Describing and Listening scores had
a potential range from zero to nine and the Total scores could range from zero to 18.
18
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics for Pre and Post Instruction Communication Scores
Score
N
Mean
Range
Std. Deviation
Pre Describing
Pre Listening
12
5.583
4-9
1.311
12
6.167
4-9
1.193
12
11.750
10-14
1.288
Post Describing
12
5.000
3-8
1.706
Post Listening
12
6.167
5-8
.835
Post TOTAL
12
11.167
8-15
1.899
GAIN SCORES
12
-.5833
-5-3
2.466
Pre TOTAL
(Post total-Pre total scores)
The results in Table 1 indicate that the mean Describing scores decreased from 5.583 on
the pre-test to 5.000 on the post-test and the mean Listening scores remained the same, at 6.167
from the pre- to the posttest. The mean gain for the Total scores was -.5833.
Table 2 presents the results of the one-sample T-test which compared the mean gain score
of -.5833 to zero.
Table 2
Results of One Sample T-test of Gains in Scores
T
df
(test value = 0)
-.819
11
Equal variances assumed
Sig.
(2-tailed)
Mean
Difference
SEM
.430
-.5833
712
95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference
Lower
Upper
-2.150
.984
19
Table 2 shows that the T-test yielded a t value of -.819 which was not large enough to be
determined statistically different from zero (p < .430). Therefore, the null hypothesis, that the
scores would not change significantly, was retained.
20
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this research was to determine whether implementing a brief series of
targeted communication skills lessons would improve peer communication skills in a preschool
setting. The researcher hypothesized that these lessons would render improved results on a task
requiring preschoolers to use receptive and expressive communication skills. The research
hypothesis was not supported, however, and the null hypothesis was retained as there was no
significant improvement on average on the task scores after communication strategies were
taught to participants.
Implications
Despite the failure to reject the null hypotheses, review of literature and the observations
made while conducting this study support the need for further research on this topic. Clearly,
communication skills are important to the academic and social success of preschoolers. Future
research should aim to determine more effective models for teaching and assessing preschoolers’
communication skills. Communication is an abstract concept. The results of this study appeared
to have been affected by the need of such young children to have concrete lessons and materials
when teaching as well as evaluating communication skills.
Threats to Validity
Several issues affected the internal and external validity of this action research study. One
major threat to internal validity was the small sample used in the research. The study involved a
sample of just twelve preschoolers of varied ages which likely affected their ability to benefit
21
from the lessons and understand and follow instructions for the assessments. Additionally, the
group who attended this school were of similar backgrounds and did not represent a diverse
sample of students.
Ages of the children likely affected their performance. The game “Backseat Drawing Jr.”
which was the model for the assessment was designed for children ages seven and up and in
retrospect, even with adult support and modeling, appeared too advanced for some of the
participants who ranged in age from four to six years. In particular, it was noted that a fair
percentage of the participant children could not correctly associate the correct shapes and this
impeded their ability to describe objects as well as draw the intended object.
Designing a study with more participants at varied age levels would allow for better
understanding of how children of different ages can benefit or not from the lessons given.
Another factor that may have diminished the validity of the study’s findings was that the
children in this study were enrolled in an aftercare program from two until four o’clock in the
afternoon. The children were tired by the time they received the communication lessons from the
researcher, as they occurred at the end of the day.
Location of the study also was potentially problematic as the pre and posttests were
conducted in a hallway which was sometimes noisy and thus made it difficult for some of the
children to focus on the task. This less than ideal setting likely affected the assessment results
and the interpretation of them by adding students’ attention as a factor for consideration.
Controlling for these factors might have yielded more accurate results that could be applied to
broader populations of preschoolers.
22
Comparison to Other Research
The researcher’s findings related to those of Henniger (2009) who, in describing
perspective taking, notes that children have difficulty understanding that others may have
different opinions or views than they do. This likely made the task of describing how to draw
from a peer’s (upside down) perspective challenging for children at this age.
Garcia-Winner (2007) also explains that young children have difficulty with perspective
taking. The researcher found that the children had difficulty explaining the stimulus objects in
ways that the listeners could understand and the child drawing often jumped to conclusions and
tried to guess what the object was before hearing the entire description. This tendency to guess
precipitously was similar to Stanton-Chapman-Denning’s (2012) experiences with preschoolers
having difficulty taking turns
Implications for Future Research
The researcher believes that a future study implementing better controls to address the
threats to validity above would yield outcomes that more accurately depict what preschoolers can
learn with such a communications curriculum in place. Having a longer time between the pre
and posttests for the researcher to teach communication skills likely would improve the chances
that ideas would be learned and retained. The researcher also believes that the pre and posttests
could be adapted in the following ways. The listener children could be allowed to ask questions
regarding the objects in order to develop guesses about what they are instead of only being
allowed to listen to the description. This would allow for a dialogue with the drawer which more
closely parallels actual communication styles among persons. In addition, the drawing aspect of
the task might well be omitted as it was too advanced for most of the preschoolers assessed and
23
poor motor skills might have confounded assessment of the communication/listening skills of the
children in the drawing role. Additionally, in retrospect, the rubric could be made more specific
and assess particular expressive and listening skills in addition to the overall success on the task.
For instance, children could score a point for each aspect the researcher would measure, not just
the few points possible on the current rubric.
Conclusions/Summary
Communication is an important life skill which is learned and can be enhanced by
teaching communication skills beginning at a young age. It is an abstract concept and theory and
research suggest that young children benefit from explicit and concrete instruction using
modeling, pictures, and other strategies. Preschool children learn well with repeated lessons that
use every day concrete examples of how to communicate. It is important that assessments as well
as lessons be developmentally appropriate to guide instruction and promote growth versus
frustration.
Overall, the lessons and assessment implemented for this study were received well. Most
of the children agreed to play the game and even were excited to do so. The children found it
difficult to describe objects clearly without gesturing with their hands, pointing to where the
partner should draw on the whiteboard, or giving away other hints. Many children blurted the
answer before the child had a time to guess even though the researcher had explained that they
should not say what the object was. The older children (Kindergarteners) seemed to have gained
more from the instruction since they were more attentive and engaged during the lessons.
24
In summary, the game used for the assessments seemed to be a bit too advanced for
preschoolers. Children at this age are just developing communication skills and comprehension
abilities and it is difficult for them to maintain an abstract image in their minds. It is possible that
this study would have been more effective with elementary school children who are more
developmentally ready for the skills required for this game. Pilot testing might have enabled the
researcher to be sure that the children knew shapes and directions such as right, left, up, and
down,. Additionally, had she practiced sequencing with the children, such as bottom up thinking
(from small to big picture), they might have been able to perform the assessment tasks more
effectively. The researcher would also have added into the pretest and posttest the ability for the
two children to interact with one another. For example, the researcher might have allowed
drawer to ask clarifying questions of the describer and the describer could have responded
accordingly. This interchange would have helped children to communicate clearly and would
have been more comparable to daily communication wherein there is a dialogue.
Despite the confounding variables and threats to validity of this study, further research
into how to teach preschoolers communication skills is warranted. Future designs should strive
to apply developmentally appropriate tasks that closely resemble actual communication demands
and characteristics of communication such as dialogue. Additionally, use of current technology
might mirror modern communication tasks and yield improved data collection for such studies
which strive to assess nuances of communication.
25
References
Brown, P. (2008) Backseat drawing jr. Out of the Box Publishing. Garcia-Winner, M. (2007).
Thinking about you thinking about me. San Jose: Think Social Publishing.
Hedenbro, M. and Rydelius, P.-A. (2014), Early interaction between infants and their parents predicts
social competence at the age of four. Acta Paediatr, 103: 268–274. doi:10.1111/apa.12512
Henniger, M. L. (2009). Teaching young children: an introduction. NY, NY: Pearson.
Kampman, J. A., & Browne, M. T. (2011). "Teacher, there's an elephant in the room!" An
inquiry approach to preschoolers' early language learning. Young Children, 84-89.
Landa, R. J. (2005), Assessment of social communication skills in preschoolers. Ment. Retard.
Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev., 11: 247–252. doi:10.1002/mrdd.20079
Mcdonald, D., Proctor, P., Gill, W., Heaven, S., Marr, J., & Young, J. (2015). Increasing early
childhood educators’ use of communication-facilitating and language-modelling
strategies: Brief speech and language therapy training. Child Language Teaching and
Therapy,31(3), 305-322. doi:10.1177/0265659015588203
Sandstrom, G. M., & Rawn, C. D. (2015). Embrace Chattering Students. Teaching of
Psychology,42(3), 227-233. doi:10.1177/0098628315587620
Santrock, J. W. (2009). Life span development. New York: McGraw Hill.
Schultz, B. L. (2011). A preschool pilot study of connecting with others: lessons for teaching
social and emotional competance. Early Childhood Education, 143-148.
26
Shin, M. (2012). The role of joint attention in social communication and play among
infants. Journal of Early Childhood Research,10(3), 309-317.
doi:10.1177/1476718x12443023
Shire, S. Y., Goods, K., Shih, W., Distefano, C., Kaiser, A., Wright, C. & Kasari, C. (2014).
Parents’ Adoption of Social Communication Intervention Strategies: Families Including
Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder Who are Minimally Verbal. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders,45(6), 1712-1724. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2329-x
Stanton-Chapman, T. L., & Denning, C. B. (2012). Communication skill building in young
children with and without disabilities in a preschool classroom. Journal of Special
Education, 78-93.
Stanton-Chapman, T. L., & Snell, M. E. (2012). Promoting Turn-taking Skills in Children with
Disabilities: The Effects of Peer-Based Social Communicaiton Intervention. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 303-319.
Stanton-Chapman, T. L., & Brown, T. S. (2014). A Strategy to Increase the Social Interactions of
3-Year-Old Children With Disabilities in an Inclusive Classroom. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education,35(1), 4-14. doi:10.1177/0271121414554210
27
Appendix A
Targeted Lesson Plans
Lesson Plan- Week 1- Listening Skills
Day 1:
Estimated time: 20 minutes
Materials: whiteboard and dry erase markers, cell phone
Explain to children the difference between hearing vs. listening. Hearing means that you hear the
words; listening means that you take in what the other person is saying.
Show the children an example: I will pretend to be speaking on the phone but I will use made up
words with intonations. I will ask the children if they understood what I just said. They will say
no. I’ll ask why. The will respond that they do not the meaning of the words. I will explain that
this is what it is like to “hear” what someone is saying- you hear the sounds coming out of the
person’s mouth but you don’t attach any meaning. I will then pretend to have a real conversation
on the phone and ask the children if they understood what I was talking about. I will then ask
what the difference was the second time. The second time they understood the language and
were therefore able to attach meaning.
Ask children to brainstorm ideas of how they think we can be a good listener. Responses might
include examples such as:
 Focus attention- Look at the person’s face
 Be quiet when the other person is speaking
 Don’t interrupt or change topics
 Think before responding
Visualization strategy:
Try to connect what a person is saying to what you already know about the topic. For example, if
your friend is talking about his cat, you can picture a cat in your head.
Exercise: I will say a word- (pizza) and ask children to tell me what this word makes them think
of. I will write and draw pictures of these descriptions on the board. Then I will explain to the
children that this is what happens when they have a conversation. They refer to their knowledge
and experiences to understand what the other person is saying. In a dialogue there is the speaker
and listener who take turns talking.
Ask children what we can do to better understand what your friend is saying: ask questions,
focus on your friend, don’t interrupt
Activity: we will play 20 questions. I will think of an item and the children will take turns asking
yes/no questions to try to figure out what I am thinking of. They will have to practice listening to
understand in order to guess the correct object.
Review with children main concepts:
What is the difference between hearing and listening?
Hearing is just hearing the words- listening is trying to understand what the other person is
saying.
28
How can I be a good listener?
Focus on the person’s face. Don’t interrupt. Take turns talking- don’t change topics. Be patient.
Ask questions to find out more.
Closure: I will ask two children to come up in front of the group and demonstrate how to have a
good conversation based on the concepts we just learned. I will emphasize the points they are
doing correctly and identify the points that need to be clarified as the children are speaking.
Lesson Plan- Week 1- Listening Skills
Day 2:
The researcher reviewed with the children the importance of listening to other people when
having a conversation, and focusing attention in order to understand. The children played a
game. They sat in a circle and each child had a turn to throw a ball to someone across from them
in the circle. They said the child’s name and then asked the child a question such as “what is
your favorite color?” The child had to answer and then throw the ball to someone else. This
activity reinforced the concept that one has to pay attention in order to have a conversation. In
the next game- the children took turns saying a word and the next person had to say a word that
they associated with that word. For example, if one child said the word snow- the next child
might say winter and the next child might say cold. The children had to listen to their peers as
they were not allowed to repeat a word that was already mentioned. The group discussed how it
is important to listen to what other people are saying when you are talking to them and to stay on
topic.
Lesson Plan- Week 1- Listening Skills
Day 3
In this lesson, the children practiced listening to descriptions and drawing images as well as
describing pictures to their peers. Each child got a whiteboard and marker. The researcher
described several pictures and the children had to draw a picture on their whiteboards based on
the descriptions. The researcher then called on children to give their guesses. If no child guessed
the correct answer, the researcher gave the children several options to chose from. The researcher
then called up several children individually to describe pictures and call on children to give their
guesses.
29
Lesson Plan- Week 2- Saying What You Mean
Day 1:
The researcher had a number of cards with colorful pictures. The group discussed the importance
of giving clear descriptions when speaking and communicating and trying to explain things in
relative terms. The researcher modeled to the children how to describe items on the cards and
had the children guess what the item was. The researcher then called up students to describe an
item on a card and call on a child to guess the item.
Lesson plan- Week 2- Saying What You Mean
Day 2
The group discussed the importance of communicating clearly when speaking so that the other
person understands what you are trying to say. If there is misunderstanding, then the person may
interpret something completely differently. To demonstrate this point, the children played a
game. The children were divided into groups of two. Each group was given two sets of matching
blocks. The children used a book as a divider in between so they could not see each other’s
pieces. One child had to arrange the blocks in certain way and then describe it to the other child
who had to try to arrange the blocks based on that description. At the end, the second child
looked to see how close his or her placement of the blocks resembled that of the describer. This
activity demonstrated the importance of clear communication.
Lesson plan- Week 2- Saying What You Mean
Day 3
In this lesson, the children practiced listening to descriptions and drawing images as well as
describing pictures to their peers. Each child got a whiteboard and marker. The researcher
described several pictures and the children had to draw based on the descriptions on their
whiteboards. The researcher then called on children to give their guesses. If no child guessed the
correct answer, the researcher gave the children several choices to choose from. The researcher
then called up several children individually to describe pictures and call on children to give their
guesses. (The researcher also gave the children examples of how to draw basic shapes such as
square, circle, and triangle and reviewed directions such as right, left, up, down, and sideways,
Lesson Plan- Week 3- Thinking about What You Heard
Day 1
The group discussed the importance of listening to what someone is saying and not immediately
jumping to conclusions, since the other person may be saying something different from what the
listener may expect. To demonstrate this point, the researcher showed the children several optical
illusions and asked the children to say what they saw. The researcher explained that different
people saw different things that were both in the same picture. So too, when speaking and
listening, it is important the listener pay attention and understand what the speaker is saying. The
researcher read the children a few riddles and they had to guess what the answer was based on
the descriptions they heard rather than the assumptions they may have thought automatically.
30
Lesson Plan- Week 3- Thinking about What You Heard
Day 2
The researcher read several short stories to the children and asked the group simple questions
that required inferences to show comprehension. The questions included
What did the character do in the story?
What was the role or title of the main character?
How did the main character feel?
Lesson Plan- Week 3- Thinking about What You Heard
Day 3
In this lesson, the children practiced listening to descriptions and drawing images as well as
describing pictures to their peers. Each child got a whiteboard and marker. The researcher
described several pictures and the children had to draw based on the descriptions on their
whiteboards. The researcher then called on children to give their guesses. If no child guessed the
correct answer, the researcher gave the children several options from which to choose. The
researcher then asked several children individually to describe pictures and call on children to
give their guesses. (The researcher also gave the children examples of how to draw basic shapes
such as squares, circles, and triangles, and reviewed directions such as right, left, up, down, and
sideways
31
Appendix B
Directions and Scoring for pre and posttest games
DIRECTIONS:
Initially, the children were taken individually and asked if they could correctly identify the
picture on the card they were to describe to their partner. Then the researcher explained the rules
of the game to both players. The children were told that they would take turns describing a
picture and drawing/guessing the picture. The describer had to tell the drawer how to draw the
picture by telling them where to draw shapes on their whiteboard. When the child finished
describing the object in 1.5 minutes, the child drawing was to guess what the object was. If he or
she guessed incorrectly or did not know, the researcher verbally provided three options for the
child to choose from. Then the children switched roles and the describer became the drawing
partner and the drawing partner became the describer. Guidelines for the game included: the
describer could not show the card to the drawer or use any kind of language related to the object
which would give the item away. For example, if the item was “rain,”, the child could not say,
“draw clouds.”. The children were also told that they were not allowed to point or show the
drawing child exactly where to place the shape. Rather, they had to use verbal directions such as
“above, and below”.
32
SCORE FOR DESCRIBING ROLE
Child Name: _______________
GAME 1 Points
1
Description of How to Draw Stimulus Item
Description was illogical and confusing
Did not describe shapes or where to put them clearly
Named object during description
2
Described main shapes in a somewhat logical way
Was not completely clear about where to place the objects
Named object during description
Described how to execute drawing logically
Described main shapes and where to put them clearly
Did not name object
3
GAME 2 Points
1
Description of How to Draw Stimulus Item
Description was illogical and confusing
Did not describe shapes or where to put them clearly
Named object during description
2
Described main shapes in a somewhat logical way
Was not completely clear about where to place the objects
Named object during description
Described how to execute drawing logically
Described main shapes and where to put them clearly
Did not name object
3
GAME 3 Points
1
2
3
Description of How to Draw Stimulus Item
Description was illogical and confusing
Did not describe shapes or where to put them clearly
Named object during description
Described main shapes in a somewhat logical way
Was not completely clear about where to place the objects
Named object during description
Described how to execute drawing logically
Described main shapes and where to put them clearly
Did not name object
MAX SCORE for Describing role = 9
SCORE= _______
33
SCORE FOR DRAWING ROLE
Child Name: __________________
GAME 1 Points
Accuracy of Guess (max score = 3) :
1
Did not draw shapes as described
Did not guess picture correctly immediately
Did not guess picture correctly after given 3 verbal choices to select from
Somewhat drew picture as described
Did not guess picture correctly immediately
Guessed picture correctly after given 3 verbal choices to select from
Drew shapes as described (even if they did not result in the proper drawing)
Attempted to draw items based on what the describer mentioned and did not
automatically jump to conclusions
Guessed picture correctly without being given options from which to select
2
3
GAME 2 Points
Accuracy of Guess (max score = 3) :
1
Did not draw shapes as described
Did not guess picture correctly immediately
Did not guess picture correctly after given 3 verbal choices to select from
Somewhat drew picture as described
Did not guess picture correctly immediately
Guessed picture correctly after given 3 verbal choices to select from
Drew shapes as described (even if they did not result in the proper drawing)
Attempted to draw items based on what the describer mentioned and did not
automatically jump to conclusions
Guessed picture correctly without being given options from which to select
2
3
GAME 3 Points
Accuracy of Guess (max score = 3) :
1
Did not draw shapes as described
Did not guess picture correctly immediately
Did not guess picture correctly after given 3 verbal choices to select from
2
Somewhat drew picture as described
Did not guess picture correctly immediately
Guessed picture correctly after given 3 verbal choices to select from
3
Drew shapes as described (even if they did not result in the proper drawing)
Attempted to draw items based on what the describer mentioned and did not
automatically jump to conclusions
Guessed picture correctly without being given options from which to select
MAX SCORE for Drawing role = 9
SCORE= _______
TOTAL PRETEST DESCRIBING SCORE=
TOTAL PRETEST DRAWING SCORE=
___/9 POSSIBLE
___/9 POSSIBLE
34
TOTAL PRETEST SCORE=
___/18
TOTAL POSTTEST DESCRIBING SCORE=
TOTAL POSTTEST DRAWING SCORE=
TOTAL POSTTEST SCORE=
___/9 POSSIBLE
___/9 POSSIBLE
___/18
APPENDIX C
Stimulus Pictures and Choices for guessing pictures
Choices for guessing pictures:
Pretest choices:
Sun- pearl – snowball
Watermelon- pizza- candy corn
Dice- ice cubes- slices of cheese
Rain- ants- sprinkles
Baseball- railroad tracks- open zipper
Chair- desk- door
Clock- spinner- doorbell
Ladder- bricks- closet
Eyelash – porcupine- comb
Rainbow- spaghetti- hat
Posttest choices
Grapes- beehive- bubbles
Banana- smile- telephone
Lightbulb- sprinkler- bottle
Butterfly- bee- firefly
Mug- pocketbook- mailbox
Traffic light- flashlight-wand
Envelope- hat- slide
kite- hairclip- snake
building- sharpener- grater
tree- hot air balloon- lollipop
Stimulus Pictures:
35
36