A Comparison of Dialogic Reading, Modeling, and Dialogic Reading Plus Modeling

Coogle, Christan Grygas; Parsons, Allison Ward; Croix, Leslie La; Ottley, Jennifer R.

doi:10.1097/iyc.0000000000000162

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within the group design studies implementing DR, all six were described as strictly DR without major modifications, with three of the SCED studies reporting this. The remaining four studies in which DR was either modified or added to occur only in SCED and was described in the following ways are as follows: compared DR to both modeling and DR with modeling (Coogle et al, 2020), modified DR for children with ASD (Fleury & Schwartz, 2017;Whalon et al, 2015), and implemented DR using aided augmentative and alternative communication modeling (Quinn et al, 2020). Similarly, within the studies where researchers used SIBR, three group design and two SCED studies described SIBR without significant modifications.…”

Section: Strategies Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For eight studies (i.e., four group studies and four SCED studies, 35% total) in which parents implemented the intervention, researchers were noted to provide systematic coaching in three SCED studies (Akemoglu & Meadan, 2019;Crowe et al, 2000Crowe et al, , 2004 as well as training using verbal/video instruction and modeling in four group design studies (Colmar, 2011(Colmar, , 2014Dale et al, 1996; and one SCED study (Hockenberger et al, 1999). Within three studies (i.e., two group studies and one SCED study, 13% total) that teachers implemented the intervention, researchers provided instruction on the intervention techniques using training in one SCED study (Coogle et al, 2020) as well as training with coaching in additional SCED studies (Fleury & Schwartz, 2017) and one group design study (Wilcox et al, 2020). In one group design study where both parents and teachers implemented the SIBR strategies, training was used to provide instruction (Hargrave & Sénéchal, 2000).…”

Section: Training and Coachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within group studies, one did not report data related to adult behavior (Desmarais et al, 2013), one collected fidelity of implementation (Wilcox et al, 2020), and one collected social validity data only . Across the three SCED studies, two did not collect data related to adult behavior (Crowe et al, 2004;Rahn et al, 2016), and one tracked fidelity of implementation (Coogle et al, 2020).…”

Section: Interventionist Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Shared Interactive Book Reading Interventions for Young Children With Disabilities: A Systematic Review

Towson

Akemoğlu

Watkins

et al. 2021

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Shared interactive book reading (SIBR) is an evidence-based practice for young children who are typically developing and those with developmental disabilities or considered at risk for developmental delays. The purpose of this review was to provide a comprehensive examination of the evidence of using SIBR to facilitate growth in language skills for young children with developmental disabilities and/or delays. Specifically, authors examined the descriptive characteristics, study rigor, and effect sizes for language and literacy outcomes. Method We extracted data from studies meeting specified criteria ( n = 23) published in peer-reviewed journals on a wide range of variables, including participant characteristics, setting, training/coaching, defined independent and dependent variables, study rigor, and overall outcomes. Descriptive and study rigor data were aggregated using descriptive statistics. Effect-size estimates were calculated for all child outcomes related to language. Results Descriptive data were variable across studies. Three single-case experimental design and three group design studies met design standards without reservations. Single-case experimental design studies overall showed positive effects on child language and communication. Within group design studies, expressive language outcomes showed the largest effect sizes. Conclusion A review of SIBR studies indicates this as a viable intervention to positively impact the language skills of young children with developmental disabilities and/or delays. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16674355

show abstract

Section: Strategies Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Training and Coachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Interventionist Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shared Interactive Book Reading Interventions for Young Children With Disabilities: A Systematic Review

Towson

Akemoğlu

Watkins

et al. 2021

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the later development of dialogic reading, the use of these particular strategies has been extensively researched concerning effectiveness in the US and European contexts. The findings of the empirical studies have thus far indicated that dialogic book reading brought about desirable effects on children's language development, more specifically in terms of enhancing children's early literacy outcomes, e.g., vocabulary and appropriate responses to questions (Coogle et al, 2020). These studies have also concluded that the interactional aspects of dialogic reading could create a potential context for young learners' language acquisition and learning (Ping, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dialogic Reading to Promote the Underprivileged Pre-School Children's Expressive Language Ability

Asrifan

Setiawan²,

Ping³

et al. 2022

scr. j. j. linguist. engl. teach.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds in Indonesia have been facing challenges in terms of their literacy and language development. One of the possible reasons is that they are not used to receiving meaningful early reading interventions such as shared reading during their pre-school attendance. This phenomenon has brought to light the urgency of having an early intervention, which can accommodate the very diverse linguistic and cultural context of Indonesia- a multilingual and multicultural country. Methodology: This study employed an explanatory sequential mixed-method research design. The first phase was conducted in a quantitative one-group pre-experiment with pre-and post-test design. The second phase of this research was carried out in a qualitative case study through classroom observation and informal interviews with the teacher and the children. Findings: The findings of MLU calculation showed that for the pre-test, the mean score was 2.35, the median was 2.20 and the standard deviation was 0.53. Meanwhile, for the post-test, the mean score was 3.72, the median was 3.18 and the standard deviation was 1.38. The qualitative phase explored two main aspects, namely the implementation of dialogic reading activity by the teacher and the teacher as well as children’s opinions regarding the dialogic reading activity. Conclusion: This current study has offered an insight that dialogic reading activity could be well implemented by the teacher in a typical Indonesian pre-school setting. The dialogic reading activity was also found to contribute significantly to the development of children’s expressive language ability. Originality: The findings of this study have indicated dialogic reading potentials in terms of promoting children’s language development and just as importantly, sparking children’s joy of reading since their early years of formal education. Therefore, it is suggested that early childhood educators and parents work hand in hand to incorporate dialogic reading activity into their daily literacy practices at schools as well as at home.

show abstract

“…The National Reading Panel (2000) has listed the five essential components of reading as phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. A number of researchers have found that shared reading, when used as part of a package, has been effective in teaching vocabulary skills, in particular (Brady et al, 2015; Coogle et al, 2018, 2020; Fleury & Schwartz, 2017; Yorke et al, 2018). Sight words are those that students can read without effort through memorization, whereas vocabulary knowledge is when students understand the meaning of a word.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Vocabulary Acquisition by Multilingual Students With Extensive Support Needs During Shared Reading

Frates

Spooner

Collins

et al. 2022

Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study examined the effects of a shared reading instructional package on the receptive identification of English sight vocabulary in multilingual learner students with extensive support needs. Two participants received the intervention, one in a face-to-face format and one in a videoconferencing format (due to the COVID-19 pandemic). To establish experimental control, the researchers used a multiple probe design with conditions across word sets and replicated across participants. Results showed both students met criterion on word sets as a result of the intervention. Considerations in interpreting the results for classroom implementation and future research are discussed.

show abstract

A Comparison of Dialogic Reading, Modeling, and Dialogic Reading Plus Modeling

Cited by 6 publications

References 35 publications

Shared Interactive Book Reading Interventions for Young Children With Disabilities: A Systematic Review

Shared Interactive Book Reading Interventions for Young Children With Disabilities: A Systematic Review

Dialogic Reading to Promote the Underprivileged Pre-School Children's Expressive Language Ability

Vocabulary Acquisition by Multilingual Students With Extensive Support Needs During Shared Reading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About