This meta-analysis, published in Educational Research Review, explores whether shared reading interventions are equally effective across a range of study designs, across a range of different outcome variables, and for children from different socioeconomic status (SES) groups.
Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they met the
Must contain a universal and/or targeted shared
book reading intervention.
Must include at least one control group.
Participants must be typically developing
children ages seven years or younger.
Must not target multilingual populations and/or
the acquisition of an additional language.
Must isolate the variable of interest (shared
Must report on objective quantitative measure of
Must provide sufficient data to calculate the
The results suggest that shared reading had an overall effect size of +0.19 on children’s language development. They also show that this effect was moderated by the type of control group used and was near zero in studies with active control groups (ES = +0.03). The meta-analysis also shows no differences across outcome variables or for SES.
impact of shared book reading on children’s language skills: A meta-analysis (September
2019), Educational Research Review, Volume
The findings from a randomised controlled trial of Let’s
Talk – an interactive intervention to support young children’s language
development – suggest that the intervention has a positive effect on narrative
and vocabulary development.
The trial, conducted by Gillian Lake and Maria Evangelou, and published in European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, involved 94 three- to four-year-old children in early education settings in Oxfordshire. The children were randomly assigned to control or intervention groups and tested pre- and post-intervention on standardised vocabulary and narrative assessments. Children in the intervention group attended twice-weekly sessions over ten weeks, in groups of three to five children. The first session of the week was a group shared storybook reading session with a puppet, while the second weekly session consisted of a planned pretend play session based on the storybook read in the first session that week. Children in the control group completed age-appropriate early numeracy activities and games – also in groups of three to five children.
The results suggest that the intervention had a positive
effect on the vocabulary of the children in the intervention group, with medium
to large effect sizes, and also on their narrative ability.
Source:Let’s Talk! An interactive intervention to support children’s language development (February 2019). European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 27:2
A research report published in the International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders investigates the effectiveness of teaching assistant (TA)-delivered narrative and vocabulary interventions to secondary school children with language difficulties.
Researchers at City University of London and University of
Oxford conducted a randomised controlled trial in two outer London boroughs.
Across 21 schools, 358 Year 7 underperforming pupils (mean age = 12.8 years)
were recruited, and randomised to four groups within each school: vocabulary
intervention, narrative intervention, combined narrative and vocabulary
intervention, and delayed waiting control group. The narrative programme
focused on the understanding and telling of stories, using a story structure to
support story generation. Pupils were introduced to different types of stories
(fictional, non‐fictional, scripts) and narrative genres. The vocabulary
programme focused on developing key concepts and vocabulary items relevant to
the curriculum (eg, nutrition) and age-appropriate (eg, careers). A variety of
tasks including word associations, categorisation, mind‐mapping and
word‐building were used to reinforce word learning.
The language and communication programmes (narrative,
vocabulary, and combined narrative and vocabulary) were delivered by TAs in the
classroom, three times per week, for 45–60 min each, over six weeks, totalling
18 sessions. Assessments were conducted pre- and post-intervention.
Overall, pupils in the intervention groups made greater
improvements on standardised measures of narrative (effect size = +0.296), but
not vocabulary skills, compared with control group children.
storytelling and vocabulary in secondary school students with language
disorder: a randomized controlled trial (March 2019), International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 54:4
In the field of education, professional development (PD) is intended to improve both classroom teaching and children’s learning. A new study, published in Journal of Educational Psychology, looks at what effect PD has when used at scale with large numbers of educators.
In this large-scale randomised controlled trial, Shayne B
Piasta and colleagues examined the effectiveness of a language and literacy PD
programme on both teacher and child outcomes in early childhood education. More
than 500 teachers across one US state took part in the trial and were randomly
assigned to one of three groups: professional development with coaching,
professional development without coaching, or a comparison group. Teachers in
the PD groups received 30 hours of state-sponsored language and literacy
professional development, with those assigned to the coaching groups also
receiving ongoing individualised coaching throughout the academic year.
Teachers in the comparison group also received state-sponsored PD, but in other
The results of the trial suggest that PD affected only a few
aspects of classroom language and literacy teaching practices relative to the
comparison group, and did not affect children’s literacy learning. PD with coaching
showed a small positive impact on the quantity of phonological awareness, while
both PD with and without coaching had a small positive impact on the quality of
teaching in phonological awareness and writing.
state-sponsored language and literacy professional development: Impacts on early
childhood classroom practices and children’s outcomes (June 2019), Journal of Educational Psychology
Research published in AERA Open examines the features needed for effective teacher professional development (PD) aimed at preparing teachers to support their pupils in mastering language expectations across the curriculum.
Eva Kalinowski and
colleagues conducted a systematic review of studies of PD programmes, published
between 2002 and 2015, which aimed to support teachers to improve their pupils’
academic language ability in different subject areas. Of the 38 studies they reviewed,
all but one were carried out in the US. Eighteen studies used quantitative data
only, three used a mainly qualitative approach, and 17 used mixed methods.
Although the researchers
were unable to conclude which elements actually influenced the effectiveness of
the programmes analysed, they found that all of the studies were effective to
some extent, and shared many characteristics considered to be important in
successful teacher PD across different subject areas. The forms of PD likely to
show some effect for teachers and pupils in this area:
were long-term intensive programmes that included multiple learning opportunities aimed at elaborating and practising newly learned knowledge and strategies
provided practical assistance
enabled and encouraged teachers to work together
considered teachers’ needs as well as pupils’ learning processes and languages spoken at home.
Source: Effective professional development
for teachers to foster students’ academic language proficiency across the curriculum:
A systematic review (February 2-19), AERA
A meta-analysis conducted by Claire Noble and colleagues explores the impact of shared reading interventions (where an adult reads with a child) on children’s language skills, and whether they are equally effective across a range of different outcome variables, for children from different socioeconomic backgrounds, and across a range of study designs.
The analysis included 54 studies conducted between 1989 and 2017.
These studies included 316 effect sizes and 5,569 participants. Nine of the studies
reported follow-up effects. Children in the studies were typically age 7 years
findings suggest that, while there is an effect of shared reading on language
development, the effect size is smaller than suggested in previous meta-analyses
(+0.23). They also found that the effect size is moderated by the type of
control groups, and when compared to active control groups, is closer to zero
(+0.04). In addition, the meta-analysis indicates only modest differences
between types of language outcome, no effect for socioeconomic background, and
a near-zero effect at follow-up.
given the low dosage of many of the studies included in the meta-analysis, the
authors caution against the conclusion that shared reading interventions have no
real effect on children’s language development.
Source: The impact
of shared book reading on children’s language skills: A meta-analysis (October