 They told one group to just read as they normally did and the other...
MCGINTY: We would give weekly cards that said, when you read the book we gave you, use this card.
SPIEGEL: On the card were instructions with questions that the teacher could ask. Really, just small phrases that might momentarily draw a child's attention to the print on the page. For example...
MCGINTY: Who can find the first word on this page?
GOLDSTEIN: Do you see these words?
MCGINTY: Who can find the last word on this page?
GOLDSTEIN: Who can find another letter B?
MCGINTY: Who can find the word, giraffe? The word, bus? The word, snake, pigeon, lion, bat, hippopotamus.
SPIEGEL: Now, altogether, these small phrases hardly added any extra time, maybe like 90 seconds a book. The teachers were asked to read the books four times a week and point at the print just a handful of times.
MCGINTY: Somewhere between four to eight times.
SPIEGEL: It is hard to imagine that such a small adjustment would make any difference. It was a series of moments, questions, gestures. How much could that do? Well, so far, these kids have been followed for two years. They are now in first grade and two years later...
PIASTA: These children who focused their attention on print - they had better literacy outcomes than children who did not.
SPIEGEL: How much better? Well, one way to think about this is in terms of the achievement gap. There is an achievement gap in this country between rich kids and poor kids. Poor kids do worse. But, according to McGinty, if the poor kids in this study are able to maintain their gains 'til fourth grade - and that is a pretty big if - but if they can...
MCGINTY: If the effects last to fourth grade, it would be essentially taking the gap and narrowing it by a third.
SPIEGEL: So, according to McGinty, the gains are real and, if they can be maintained, potentially significant. But how much should you trust that? Positive results from interventions like this often fade out over time. They are overwhelmed by the reality of bad schools and poor support at home and this was, after all, such a modest adjustment.
So this kind of raises a philosophical question for me. How much do small things count in determining a life?
SPIEGEL: Can small things make big differences?
PIASTA: I mean, I think that's the big question that we don't have a hold on.
SPIEGEL: The truth is this study is part of a broader effort that's been developing over the last 15 to 20 years. Education researchers who are breaking down in these minute ways how teachers should interact on a moment-to-moment basis with children in order to promote their learning. It's one focus in the field right now and there have been some encouraging findings, but it's still not clear whether interventions like this have any real staying power.
Scott McConnell is a professor of educational psychology at the University of Minnesota who's been following this research.
SCOTT MCCONNELL: The answer is that findings like this are at very high risk for fading out, but let's talk about why they might fade out. There is no reason to believe that an intervention like this provided to four-year-olds is all these kids will ever need. They're going to need sustained intervention that takes advantage of the growth that they have achieved here.
SPIEGEL: Without other programs, gains are easy to lose. McConnell also says that it's hard to implement preschool programs like this broadly because, at the preschool level, there's a very wide variety in teachers' skills. Still, he thinks that programs like this are important. He says it's very simple.
MCCONNELL: As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.
SPIEGEL: The earlier you start, the more impact you can potentially see.
GOLDSTEIN: I'm back. You didn't let the pigeon drive the bus, did you?
UNIDENTIFIED CHILD: No.
GOLDSTEIN: Thanks a lot. Bye.
UNIDENTIFIED CHILD: That was a cute story.
SPIEGEL: Alix Spiegel, NPR News, Washington.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process develop