Using Repeated Reading and Explicit Instruction to Teach Vocabulary to Preschoolers with Hearing Loss
Bobzien, Jonna L.; Richels, Corrin; Schwartz, Kathryn; Raver, Sharon A.; Hester, Peggy; Morin, Lisa (2015). Infants and Young Children, v28 n3 p262-280. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1065255
-
examining4Students, gradePK
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2026
- Practice Guide (findings for Repeated storybook reading paired with explicit teacher instruction - Bobzien et al. (2015) )
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please download findings data here.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 25%
Male: 75% -
Race Black 25% Two or more races 25% White 50% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in a public preschool classroom during a full-day preschool program that used an oral communication approach and no sign language. The authors did not report the geographic location of the preschool.
Study sample
Participants included four students from one preschool classroom, all of whom had congenital hearing loss, received speech language services, and either used hearing aids or had cochlear implants. The sample included a 4-year-old African American boy, a 3-year-old Chinese Caucasian girl, a 5-year-old Caucasian boy, and a 3-year-old Caucasian boy. The study did not report other demographic information.
Intervention Group
Researchers implemented a supplemental vocabulary intervention for preschoolers which combined repeated storybook reading with four explicit instructional strategies: verbal expansions, word definitions and elaborations, cloze procedures, and individual/choral responding. For verbal expansions, the teacher expanded on students' words or utterances to elicit a response. For word definitions and elaborations, the teacher defined words and showed how they are used. Cloze procedures involved giving students an incomplete sentence and asking them to finish it with an instructional word. For individual/choral responding, the teacher asked questions or provided directions that gave students the opportunity to say words out loud. Over the course of each student's intervention phase, the teacher read the same Fly Guy book daily, embedding these strategies to teach six target vocabulary words per book. Instruction continued until each child reached mastery (100% correct responses across two consecutive sessions). During each session, the teacher sat on the carpet with students in front of her in a semicircle as she read an intervention storybook using the four explicit teaching strategies to teach six instructional vocabulary words and phrases. Immediately following story-book reading, which took approximately 15–30 min, the focal participant was probed individually using randomly identified pages from the selected storybook.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group in single-case designs. In the baseline phase, a teacher or paraeducator read a non-intervention storybook aloud to the group without providing any instruction or elaboration. Baseline storybooks were read for only 1 day. In the initial baseline sessions for each student, the teacher sat on the carpet with students in front of her in a semicircle as she read the book. The teacher then conducted one-on-one vocabulary probes with each child, asking open-ended questions to elicit responses related to the target words. After Child 1 started receiving the intervention, baseline sessions were conducted by a paraeducator in a separate area of the classroom, with visual and auditory barriers in place to minimize distraction and prevent exposure to the intervention. Baseline data collection continued until each child’s responses were stable, indicating no therapeutic trend, before transitioning into the intervention phase.
Support for implementation
A teacher with a master's degree in Deaf Education and a "Listening and Spoken Language Auditory Verbal Educator" certification administered the intervention. The teacher and two paraprofessionals checked the hearing devices or cochlear implants of all students each day to ensure proper functionality.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).