Level of implementation moderates Dialogic Reading's effects on children's oral language¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2007 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In Lonigan and Whitehurst (1998), effects on oral language differed between high and low compliance centers, suggesting implementation frequency influences child outcomes. → WWC Intervention Report: Dialogic Reading 2007

Evidence¶

WWC Intervention Report: Dialogic Reading 2007¶

WWC Intervention Report: Dialogic Reading. (2007). What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education, Revised February 8, 2007. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

q2 · i? · associational · r?

Secondary analysis within the Lonigan and Whitehurst (1998) RCT (75 children analyzed), where study authors divided centers into high and low compliance based on frequency of Dialogic Reading sessions. The review reports that "level of implementation of Dialogic Reading has an impact on child outcomes".

"These analyses suggest that level of implementation of Dialogic Reading has an impact on child out- comes in the oral language domain."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Oral Language — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• Dialogic Reading combined with Sound Foundations shows potentially positive effects on print knowledge and early reading/writing but not oral language — related
• Dialogic Reading Improves Language Outcomes — related
• Intervention dosage moderates child language outcomes: brief interventions under 60 minutes show no significant effect — a broader claim this one bears on
• Child age, caregiver education and country income level do not moderate book-sharing intervention effects on child language — related