robert flynn, marie-pierre paquet, robyn marquis, & tim aubry school of psychology & centre...
TRANSCRIPT
Robert Flynn, Marie-Pierre Paquet,Robyn Marquis, & Tim Aubry
School of Psychology & Centre for Research on Educational and Community Services
University of Ottawa
Does tutoring by foster parents help foster children in primary school make
gains in reading and math? First-year results from the RESPs for Kids in Care
randomized field trial.
The RESP for Kids in Care Project is funded in part by the Government of Canada, Canada Education Savings Program, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada.
Outline● Purpose of randomized field trial (RFT)● Research on low educational achievement of children in
foster care ● Methodology:
► Participants ► Interventions ► Design ► Outcome measures
● Results in year 1: ► Pre-intervention assessment (October, 2008) ► Post-intervention assessment (June, 2009)
● Conclusion:► Lessons learned► Improving the foster-parent tutoring intervention
Purpose of randomized field trial (RFT)
Educational achievement of many children in out-of-home care lags behind that of age peers in general population
Goal of RFT: Evaluate whether tutoring by foster parents can help foster children in primary school "catch up" in reading and math
Funding
Project funded (2007-2010) in part by Canada Education Savings Program (CESP), HRSDC
One of 17 CESP-funded projects to make RESPs more accessible to disadvantaged young people
Problem of low educational achievement of young people in care: US research
Excellent review of academic status of young people in care (Trout et al., 2008): 3X more likely to be in special education Up to 80% said by teachers to be at risk
academically & performing below grade level Most in low/low-average range on measures of
academic achievement Many require intensive academic assistance
Problem of low educational achievement: UK research
Jackson (2007): As in US, widespread educational under-
performance Little research being conducted on basic reasons for
"huge and persistent gap in attainment between care leavers and others"
Much more attention needed on pivotal role of foster parents in improving educational performance
Failure of care system in UK to put sufficient emphasis on education also seen in other English-speaking countries, including Canada, US, Australia
Problem of low educational achievement: Canadian research
Few Canadian studies, but results similar to US and UK
Flynn & Biro (1998): young people in foster care in Ontario had much higher rates of suspension and grade retention than age peers in general population
Flynn et al. (2004): In OnLAC sample of young people in care: 10-15 years of age: 80% scored in same range as
lowest third of general Canadian population on parental ratings of reading, spelling, math, and overall
5-9 years of age: 78% scored in same range of lowest third of Canadian population, on same criteria
Towards a (partial) solution?
Given size of problem, surprisingly few evaluated interventions exist: Barth and Ferguson (2004) found only 12
intervention studies Trout et al. (2008) uncovered only 9 others
Tutoring by foster parents may be a partial solution
Focus is on home rather than school, but both are needed
Methodology of RESPs for Kids in Care Project
Participants (N = 77 foster children): Young people in care (grades 2-7, ages 6-13) and their foster
parents or kinship caregivers (tutors) Randomly assigned to control and intervention groups
Year 1 (2008-2009): Control group (n = 35): RESP only Intervention group (n = 42): RESP + tutoring by foster parent,
(with Maloney’s direct-instruction educational model) Year 2 (2009-2010):
Year 1 control group: RESP + foster-parent tutoring intervention
Year 1 intervention group: RESP + a second year of foster-parent tutoring (with Maloney model)
Maloney’s Direct-InstructionEducational Model
Michael Maloney,Quinte Learning CentreBelleville
Methodology of RESPs for Kids in Care Project (continued):
Control group:Registered Education
Savings Plan
Intervention group:
(with Maloney model)
2008-2009school year
2009-2010school year
(30 weeks) (30 weeks)
Pre-test Post-test Follow-up test
RESP (withorientation)
RESP (with orientation)+ foster parent tutoring
in reading and math(Levels 1 & 2 of Teach Your
Children To Read Well & math software)
RESP (with orientation)+ foster parent tutoring
in reading and math(Levels 1 & 2 of Teach Your
Children To Read Well & math software)
RESP (with orientation)+ foster parent tutoring
in reading and math(Levels 3 & 4 of Teach Your
Children To Read Well)
Registered EducationSavings Plan
Foster parent tutoring
2008-2009school year
2009-2010school year
(30 weeks) (30 weeks)
Pre-test Post-test Follow-up test
RESP (with orientation)+ foster parent tutoring
in reading and math
RESP (with orientation)+ foster parent tutoring
in reading and math
RESP (with orientation)+ foster parent tutoring
in reading and math
(RESP)
RESP ( orientation)with
Methodology of RESPs for Kids in Care Project (continued)
Main outcome measures: Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT4):
Word reading, reading comprehension, spelling, & math
Conners’ short form (CADS-P):
Attention and hyperactivityChild Behavior Checklist (CBCL):
Internalizing and externalizing behaviours
Only 1/35 pre-intervention comparisons between control and intervention groups was statistically significant
This was within chance levels Thus, randomization "worked", in
creating equivalent pre-intervention groups
Pre-intervention equivalence of intervention & control groups
75
80
85
90
95
100
Word
Rea
ding
Sente
nce
Compre
hensi
on
Spelli
ng
Mat
h Cal
cula
tion
Control(n=35)
Intervention(n=42)
ME
AN
ST
AN
DA
RD
SC
OR
E
WRAT4
Pre-intervention results (Sept.- Oct., 2008) on Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT4)
Year 1 post-intervention results(June, 2009):
September-October, 2008: we assessed & randomly assigned: 42 children to tutoring intervention 35 children to wait-list control
June, 2009: we re-assessed and compared results of: 30 children who had actually received the
tutoring intervention, and 34 children who remained in control group
No differential attrition: 0/35 differences in June, 2009, between the groups on the pre-intervention measures were statistically significant
Word Reading results at end of year 1.(Effect size at post-test: Cohen’s d = .19, p = .19 (1-tailed), ns.Post-test scores were adjusted for pre-test scores and age.)
9596979899
100101102103104105
Sept.-Oct., 2008 June, 2009
Assessment Occasion
Mea
n S
tandar
d S
core
Tutoring (n = 30) Control (N = 34)
Sentence Comprehension results at end of year 1.(Effect size at post-test: Cohen’s d = .39, p = .035 (1-tailed).Post-test scores were adjusted for pre-test scores and age.)
9596979899
100101102103104105
Sept.-Oct., 2008 June, 2009
Assessment Occasion
Mea
n S
tandar
d S
core
Tutoring (n = 30) Control (n = 34)
Spelling results at end of year 1.(Effect size at post-test: Cohen’s d = -.04, p = .882 (2-tailed), ns.Post-test scores were adjusted for pre-test scores and age.)
9596979899
100101102103104105
Sept.-Oct., 2008 June, 2009
Assessment Occasion
Mea
n S
tandar
d S
core
Tutoring (n = 30) Control (n = 34)
Math Calculation results at end of year 1.(Effect size at post-test: Cohen’s d = .46, p = .009 (1-tailed).Post-test scores were adjusted for pre-test scores and age.)
83848586878889909192939495
October, 2008 June, 2009
Assessment Occasion
Mea
n S
tandar
d S
core
Tutoring (n = 30) Control (n = 34)
Conclusion:Lessons learned during Year 1
Tutoring by their foster parents enabled foster children to make statistically significant and practically important gains in two areas: Reading: Sentence Comprehension Math: Math Calculation
In light of different criteria for magnitude of effect sizes: Cohen (1992): d of .20 = small, .50 = medium, .8 =
large Math Calculation: d of .46 is close to medium Sentence Comprehension: d = .39 is closest to medium
Ferguson (2009): d of .41 = practically significant Math Calculation: d of .46 = practically significant Sentence Comprehension: d of .39 = practically significant
Conclusion (continued):Improving the foster-parent tutoring intervention Improving implementation of model: e.g.,
Increase intensity of training of foster parents Increase low year-1 rate of participation by foster
parents in monthly coaching teleseminars Increase foster parents’ use of child reward system
Evaluate group tutoring as alternative mode of delivering Michael Maloney’s educational model: Tutor groups of 4-5 children in care Train CAS staff or others (e.g., university students)
as tutors Train tutors intensively (e.g., during summer)
For further information, please contact:
Lisa Peeke, Coordinator,RESPs for Kids in Care Project:
(613)562-5800 ext. 8860