Send an Annotation from the Connection Collection by E-mail

This page opened in a new window. Use the form below to send this citation by e-mail or close this window if you wish to return to the Connections Collection.

Send Citation and Annotation by E-mail Enter the e-mail address to which you would like to send this citation/annotation, and click the "send e-mail" button.

Citation:

Huebner, C. E. (2000). Promoting toddlers' language development: A randomized-controlled trial of a community-based intervention. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 513-535.

Annotation:
This study reports on an intervention in which staff working in several Seattle public libraries trained parents of two-year-old children in the use of a dialogic reading technique. The author used a dialogic reading program described by Whitehurst et al. (1988). Training was conducted in two one-hour sessions; training procedures were modified to accommodate small groups of up to 12 parents. Participating families were recruited through the neighborhood library system; of 184 who initially signed up for the study, 129 families were included in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to a treatment group (88 families) or a comparison group (41 families). Researchers collected a variety of background and pre- and post-test child assessment data, using the same standardized assessments of child language ability used in WhitehurstÕs previous studies. These included the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT), Expressive One Word Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT-R) and the verbal expression subtest of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA). Post-test data were collected for 93 percent of the dialogic reading group and 93 percent of the control group families. In addition, 50 of the intervention group families participated in a follow-up evaluation three months after initial post-testing. However, there had been ÒinadvertentÓ mixing of the treatment and control groups in the 3-month period after post-testing and before the follow-up: ÒAs soon as the formal intervention period ended, librarians and parents relaxed their allegiance to group secrecy and information about the two conditions was shared casuallyÓ (p. 528). As a result of this contamination, child outcome findings from the follow-up were fatally compromised. The study found that parents in the intervention group adapted their reading style to use the dialogic technique, and that they continued to do so as much as three months after the training. The study also found significant effects on childrenÕs expressive language, with results of the ITPA post-test indicating a medium effect size for children in the treatment group. However, no other post-test outcomes reached statistical significance. The author noted that childrenÕs initial vocabulary skill levels were relatively high, and speculated that Òit is likely this level of proficiency limited the ability to document increases in vocabulary as measured by a brief standardized testÓ (p. 530).