SKILL intervention significantly improves oral narrative comprehension and production immediately after treatment in at-risk Grade 1–4 students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r3 · q4 · i1–i2
Currency · newest study 2022 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i2 SKILL students scored 4.16 points higher on the MISL oral narrative rubric at posttest (g = .61). → Gillam 2022 q4 i1 SKILL students outperformed BAU on TNL-2 oral narrative production (g = .36) and comprehension (g = .20) at posttest. → Gillam 2022 (2)

Evidence¶

Gillam 2022¶

Gillam, S. L., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Capin, P., Fall, A.-M., Israelsen-Augenstein, M., Holbrook, S., Wada, R., Hancock, A., Fox, C., Dille, J., Magimairaj, B. M., & Gillam, R. B. (2022). Improving Oral and Written Narration and Reading Comprehension of Children at-Risk for Language and Literacy Difficulties: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000766

q4 · i2 · causal · r3

Multisite RCT with 357 at-risk students randomized to SKILL or BAU, analyzed with multilevel models nesting students in teachers and schools. The treatment effect on the MISL oral narrative rubric was significant, "Hedges’g = .61".

"Students in the SKILL treatment condition scored 4.16 points higher on the researcher designed MISL oral narrative rubric (total score) at posttest than students in the BAU condition ( c200 = 4.16, p , .01; Hedges’g = .61)."

Gillam 2022 (2)¶

Gillam, S. L., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Capin, P., Fall, A.-M., Israelsen-Augenstein, M., Holbrook, S., Wada, R., Hancock, A., Fox, C., Dille, J., Magimairaj, B. M., & Gillam, R. B. (2022). Improving Oral and Written Narration and Reading Comprehension of Children at-Risk for Language and Literacy Difficulties: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000766

q4 · i1 · causal · r3

Same RCT, norm-referenced TNL-2 outcomes at posttest. Both subtests favored SKILL significantly, with "Hedges’g = .36" for production and "Hedges’g = .20" for comprehension.

"students randomized to receive SKILL intervention significantly outperformed students in the BAU on the oral narration production subtest (c20 = .84, p , .01; Hedges’g = .36) and the oral narrative comprehension subtest (c20 = .48, p = .04; Hedges’g = .20)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Communication Skills — outcome: instruction changes it
• Oral Language — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Grade level moderates the SKILL effect on reading comprehension, benefiting Grades 3–4 but not Grades 1–2, while oral and written language effects do not vary by grade — related
• Oral narrative advantage is maintained five months after intervention on the researcher-designed rubric but not on the norm-referenced TNL-2 — related
• Oral narration gains generalize to written narration at posttest and are maintained at follow-up — related