Justice, L. M., Meier, J., & Walpole, S. (2005). Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(1), 17–32. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ741266
Reviewed: February 2023
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Word learning of target elaborated words |
Storybook reading—Justice et al. (2005) vs. Business as usual |
0 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
5.84 |
3.75 |
No |
-- | |
|
Word learning of target non-elaborated words |
Storybook reading—Justice et al. (2005) vs. Business as usual |
0 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
6.05 |
5.10 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
This study was conducted in two elementary schools located in a small urban community within a Mid-Atlantic U.S. state. Storybook reading sessions were conducted with groups of three to six children in a private setting within the school.
This intervention complements the normal reading curriculum used in the kindergarten class. The children in the storybook reading condition were read 10 books during 20 storybook reading sessions over the course of 10 weeks. One to three storybook reading sessions were held each week, and during each session, two books were read (thus, all books were read 4 times). Sessions lasted about 20 minutes. Sessions were held with groups of three to six children. There was no home component to this intervention. The intervention was implemented by three "readers" who were graduate students in education. For the intervention, the researchers chose 10 storybooks that contained colorful illustrations, contained approximately six vocabulary words that would be novel to kindergarteners, were neither too long or too short, did not use too much text to tell the story, were of narrative genre, and were developmentally appropriate. Within these 10 books, 60 "tier 2" vocabulary words were selected. The researchers categorized the 60 words into nouns, adjectives and verbs. Within each category 1/2 of the words were randomly assigned to be elaborated upon by the three interventionists/readers (graduate students in education) while the other 1/2 of the words would receive no elaboration/explanation. Each book contained three non-elaboration vocabulary words and three non-elaboration vocabulary words. Elaboration words were highlighted in the books that interventionists/readers read. When the readers came to these words, they provided to the students a specific explanation/elaboration that was printed on a note card outside the view of the children. First they provided a definition of the word, then they used the word in a supportive context (created a novel sentence using the word).
The control group followed business as usual. These children participated in no additional storybook reading sessions, other than those that are part of the normal kindergarten curriculum.
Little is mentioned regarding the training of the interventionists/storybook readers
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, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, 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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube