1. MethodMethod References Introduction Kindergarten predictors of reading skills Papadimitriou Artemis, Vlachos Filippos, University of Thessaly email: fvlachos@uth.gr, arpapadim@uth.gr Kindergarten predictors of reading skills Papadimitriou Artemis, Vlachos Filippos, University of Thessaly email: fvlachos@uth.gr, arpapadim@uth.gr The question of what variables prior to the onset of formal instruction predict reading outcomes is an old problem for educational and psychological researchers. As acquiring the proper reading skills is very important to a child’s immediate and future success, it is imperative to identify and monitor at an early age children who may be at risk for learning to read,. Because reading is a critical academic skill and it takes so long to acquire, we seek to understand the longitudinal predictors of reading in order to be able to predict reading difficulties before they occur and act to prevent them as best we can. Cestnick, L., & Jerger, J. (2000). Auditory temporal processing and lexical/nonlexical reading in developmental dyslexics. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 501–517. Fawcett, A.J, Nicolson, R.I, Dean, P. (1996). Impaired performance of children with dyslexia on a range of cerebellar tasks. Annals of Dyslexia, 40, 259–283. Georgiou, G., Parrila, R., & Kirby, J. R. (2006). Rapid automatized naming components and early reading acquisition. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 199–220. Kassotakis, A. (1998). Short term memory of phonological information and reading achievement: an attempt to investigate their relationship. (1998). Psychologia,5, (1), 44-52. Padeliadu, S., & Sideridis, G. D. (2000). Discriminant validation of the Test of Reading Performance (TORP) for identification of children with reading difficulties. Euro-pean Journal of Psychological Assessment, 16, 139-146. Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., & Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 265–282. Manolitsis, G. (2000) Metrisi kai axiologisi metaglossikon ikanotiton paidion ilikias 5–6 eton (Measurement and Evaluation of Metalinguistic Abilities of Children Aged 5–6 Years). Athens: Grigoris. Participants The initial sample of the study consisted of 300 (154 boys and 146 girls) monolingual Greek speaking children aged 5.1 – 6. 7 years old who did not read. The average child age was 5.6 years (S.D.=0.36). Design and procedure A longitudinal study following children from kindergarten to Grade 1 and 2 was designed. During the first year of the study we assessed children on prereading skills. The reading achievement measures were administered individually during the final six weeks of Grade 1 and Grade 2 by standardized Greek reading tests. Measures Measures obtained in kindergarten The phonological awareness test adapted from Manolitsis, (2000). The Rapid naming test adapted from Dyslexia Early Screening Test –DEST (Nicolson & Fawcett, 1996). Phonological short term memory tests. The phonological short term memory was assessed using two tasks. The first was the Digit span task adapted from DEST (Nicolson & Fawcett, 1996). The other test was Pseudowords repetition task, adapted from Kassotaki- Maridaki (1998) Auditory discrimination test adapted from DEST (Nicolson & Fawcett, 1996). Motor skills test. The motor skills was assessed using three subtests adapted from DEST (Nicolson και Fawcett, 1996). The bead threading subtest. The shape copying. The Postural stability task Oral language. The oral language skills was assessed using receptive and expressive vocabulary tasks. The receptive vocabulary task adapted from Okalidou) The eexpressive vocabulary task adapted from Renfrew, 1995). Reading Measures  Reading accuracy. Subtests 5 and 6, of the Test of Reading Performance (TORP, Padeliadou & Sideridis, 2000)  Reading fluency. Reading fluency were assessed by measuring sight word and pseudo word reading efficiency (Mouzaki, Sideridis, Protopapas & Simos, 2007).  Reading comprehension. Subtest 13 of the Test of Reading Performance (TORP, Padeliadou & Sideridis, 2000) ResultsResults In order to examine of the predicting force of the measurements in the kindergarten we performed stepwise linear regression analyses having as an independent variables the measurements in the kindergarten and as dependent both the total reading score, and its components: accuracy, fluency and comprehension in Grade 1 and Grade 2. Table 1 shows the results of the analysis of independent variables to total reading score and its components in Grade 1. The model in Table 1 accounted for 28% of the total variance (R 2 =.28) in reading performance, for 26% (R 2 =.26) in accuracy, for 23% (R 2 =.23) in fluency and for 32% (R 2 =.32) in text comprehension. Table 2 shows the results of the analysis of independent variables (phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming (RAN), phonological short-term memory, auditory processing, motor skills and vocabulary) to total reading score and its components in Grade 2. As can be seen from the results the model (see Table 2) accounted for 19% of the total variance (R 2 =.19) in reading performance, for 24% (R 2 =.24) in accuracy, for 34% (R 2 =.36) in fluency and for 32% (R 2 =.32) in text comprehension. The aim of present study was to examine longitudinally if specific skills that are developed during preschool years could predict reading performance of Geek students in the first and second grade of primary school. Aim of the study Table 1. Results of a linear regression analysis with Grade 1 reading performance (accuracy, fluency and text comprehension) as criterion and the measurements in the kindergarten as predictors. First Grade Total reading performance (R=0.53, R 2 =0.28 p<0.001) Accuracy (R=0.51, R 2 =0.26 p<0.001) Fluency (R=0.48, R 2 =0.23, p<0.001) Text comprehension (R=0.56, R 2 =0.32, p<0.001) Early predictors Ββ(sr i 2) Ββ Ββ Ββ Phonological awareness 1.860.326.3%0.660.264.4%1.160.327.8%0.040.253.6% Rapid automatized naming (sec) -.027-0.01—0.02 —-0.05-0.02— — Digit span 1.230.06—0.830.09—0.480.04— -0.07-0.11 — Pseudowords repetition 1.250.161.7%0.650.192.9%0.550.121.7% 0.040.15 1.4% Sound order-0.09-0.05—0.420.06—-0.52-0.05— 0.060.01 — Bead threading -1.36-0.01—0.340.03—-0.98-0.05— -0.04— Shape copying 1.170.07—0.600.09—0.160.06— 0.020.05 — Postural stability -0.15-0.09—-0.300.04—0.160.02— -0.01 — Oral language0.370.10—0.040.03—0.280.13— 0.040.32 5.8% Table 2. Results of a linear and stepwise regression analysis with Grade 2 reading performance (accuracy, fluency and text comprehension) as criterion and the measurements in the kindergarten as predictors. Second Grade Total reading performance (R=0.44, R 2 =0.19, p<0.001) Reading Accuracy (R=0.49, R 2 =0.24, p<0.001) Reading Fluency (R=0.36, R 2 =0.13, p<0.001) Reading comprehension (R =0.51, R 2 =0.32, p<0.001) Early predictorsΒβ(sr i 2) Ββ Ββ Ββ Phonological awareness 1.010.192.3% 0.250.151.4% 0.740.192.4%0.020.07— RAN (sec) -0.03-0.01— -0.04-0.05— 0.010.05—-0.01-0.03— Digit span0.880.05 — 0.490.08 —0.340.02—0.040.03— Pseudowords repetition 1.070.151.4% 0.430.192.6% 0.590.111.3%0.050.121.1%1.1% Sound order 0.310.02 — 0.330.07 —-0.12-0.01—0.090.100.8% Bead threading -1.76-0.06 — -0.68-0.07— -1.07-0.05—-0.02 — Shape copying1.470.10 — 0.850.192.9% 0.600.05—0.020.03— Postural stability -0.12-0.01 — -0.03-0.01 —-0.06-0.05— — Oral language 0.370.11 — 0.03 — 0.280.111.3%0.060.31 5.3% B= Unstandardized Coefficients β= Standardized Coefficients (sr i 2 )= partial correlation In conclusion, this study showed that not only the total reading performance, but the accuracy and the fluency of reading as well, are predicted in the first grade of primary school by the phonological awareness and the phonological memory scores during kindergarten. The oral language plays the most important role in the text comprehension and the phonological awareness and the phonological memory come after. The total reading performance and the fluency of reading in the second grade were predicted by the phonological awareness and the phonological memory scores. In this grade the phonological awareness, the phonological memory and the copy of shapes seem to be important for the accuracy of reading, while the oral language, the repetition of nonwords and the auditory possessing play an important role for the text comprehension. ConclusionConclusion B= Unstandardized Coefficients β= Standardized Coefficients (sr i 2 )= partial correlation