Parents Encourage Pupils (PEP)

1
Parents Encourage Pupils (PEP)

• A Targeted Tier 2 Intervention for Students At
  Risk for Reading Difficulties
• Shuck, Ulsh, Platt (1983)
• See PEP Handout 1
• Summary of PEP

2
PEP Rationale

• Urban children dont achieve in reading at a
  comparable level to suburban children.
• Parents reinforcement of skills taught at school
  have a direct effect on childrens achievement.
• Parents from lower SES do not make as much
  contact with schools as middle or higher SES
  parents maybe lack confidence, communication
  skills, or knowledge about learning processes.
• When school staff assist parents, their
  involvement in academic programs increase
  resulting in increased student achievement.

3
PEP Target Population

• Low SES students from inner city schools
• All students behind at least 2 grade levels in
  reading, of average intelligence or above, and
  served at a reading resource laboratory at school
• Experimental Group
• 75 randomly selected students grades 3-5
• Control Group
• Comparable did not receive PEP

4
Implementation ofParent Encourage Pupils (PEP)

• See PEP Handout 2
• for list of Implementation Procedures

5
PEP Intervention ProceduresSee PEP Handout 2

• Students participate in daily 30-minute reading
  lab over school year.
• The lab provides
• daily homework,
• word lists,
• reading games,
• books for tutoring activities at home
• calendars to track completed activities.
• Children chose one or more of four activities to
  do with their parents each day at home.

6
PEP Intervention Procedures

• The intervention materials are provided to
  parents
• During parent conferences
• Sent home if parents could not attend the
  conferences.
• Self-explanatory calendars given to parents with
  clear directions for how to reward and note the
  completion of the childs selected daily activity
  

7
PEP Directions to Parents

• You can help your child become a better reader by
  listening and helping her to do at least one of
  the following activities available to her in the
  reading lab
• Read a book
• Reading homework
• Read a word list
• Play reading games
• Each activity earns 10 points

8
PEP Directions to Parents(contd) See PEP
Handout 3

• After work is completed
• Circle A, B, C or D on the calendar to show the
  work done by your child.
• If your child does more than one activity, circle
  each letter that applies.
• As a reward for doing at least one of the above
  activities, fill in the Happy Face with a pen
  or pencil.
• Please return this calendar to the lab at the end
  of the month.

9
PEP Example Completed Calendar
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D
A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D
10
PEP Intervention ProceduresSee PEP Handout 4

• After the child completes the daily activity, the
  parent fills in the happy face on the calendar.
• Children return the home activity tracking
  calendar to school each month.
• The reading lab teachers keep a school activity
  tracking calendar at school.
• Points are recorded for completion of reading
  assignments in class and combined with points for
  activities earned at home.

11
PEP Teacher Tracking Calendar
5-50 Prescription Sheet 5-50 Dolch Words
10 Homework 5-25 Written Book Report
5-25 Poems
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Total
Week 1 Homework 20 Book report 15 Homework-10 Prescrp. Sheet-20 Homework-10 Poem-10 Homework-20 Dolch words 15 Homework Fri/Sat -20 Poem-10 150
12
PEP Intervention Procedurescontinued

• Each month students can save points or purchase a
  prize from the class store.
• Two levels of prize values
• 600 points - pencils, jacks, or other small item
  
• 900-1,500 points- baseball hats, footballs,
  kites, books
• Most prizes donated by local stores, civic groups
  and parents.
• Parent and student post-treatment acceptability
  and outcome surveys may be completed.
• Student Survey See PEP Handout 5
• Parent Survey See PEP Handout 6
• For Integrity Checklist see PEP Handout 7

13
About the Parents Encourage Pupils (PEP) Studies

• Shuck, Ulsh, and Platt (1983)

14
PEP Intervention Procedurescontinued

• Parent-teacher conferences held 3 times
  beginning, middle (Jan.), and end of year.
• At the conference the teacher gives parents a
  brief written progress report
• Total number of books read,
• Teacher and parent comments,
• Work completed in the lab,
• Homework completed
• The reports are sent home for comments and
  signatures for parents unable to attend.

15
PEP Study Descriptions

• Across entire school year (180 days), daily
  homework assigned by reading lab done with
  parents at home
• Students participated in reading lab 30 minutes
  daily
• Behavior modification plan reinforced students
  home and school reading assignment completion
• Experimental and Control Groups
• Pre-Post Test

16
PEP Participants

• Experimental Group
• Parents of target students
• 75 randomly selected students grades 3-5 who were
  at least 2 grade levels behind
• Control Group
• 75 Comparable peers did not receive PEP
• All Study Subjects
• Average or above IQs
• Low SES

17
PEP Intervention Procedures

• Students participated in reading lab 30 minutes
  daily
• Lab met with parents at beginning, middle and end
  of school year
• Parents provided with materials and tracking
  calendar for completion of 1 or more of 4 daily
  home activities supporting reading
• Behavior modification plan reinforced students
  home and school reading assignment completion

18
PEP Research Question

• Does Parent Involvement increase students
  reading achievement?

19
PEP Evaluation Measures

• Pre-Post Testing with the Stanford Achievement
  Test Reading Comprehension subtest
• Slosson Intelligence Test used as quick screener
  of intelligence for subject selection

20
PEP Overall Results

• Reading Achievement
• Post-Test reading comprehension scores on the
  Standford Achievement Test for students who
  received parent tutoring were significantly
  higher than those that did not receive parent
  tutoring.

21
PEP Research Limitations

• No cultural information provided
• Limited information on how parents were trained
  or informed.
• Measures too infrequent to inform intervention
  needs.