当前位置: X-MOL 学术Educational Research and Evaluation › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Home-based shared book reading interventions and children’s language skills: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Educational Research and Evaluation Pub Date : 2020-10-08 , DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2020.1814820
Carlo Barone 1 , Emilio Chambuleyron 2 , Reka Vonnak 3 , Giulia Assirelli 4
Affiliation  

ABSTRACT Over the past 2 decades, a growing number of randomised controlled trials have assessed the impact on children’s language skills of interventions encouraging parents to read books to their offspring. We present the results of a meta-analysis of the impact of 30 such interventions. Results indicate that they are often ineffective, and that only one specific methodology (dialogic reading) displays systematically positive impacts. Moreover, effective interventions display weaker impacts on low-socioeconomic groups, thus raising equity issues. Our systematic analysis of the research designs of these studies points at three major weaknesses. First, only short-term outcomes are measured, and, even within such a narrow time window, we find indications that treatment impacts fade out. A second limitation concerns the limited range of outcomes measured (receptive or expressive vocabulary). Finally, these studies display low external validity (ad hoc sampling, small sample sizes, lack of multi-site experiments, scant evidence outside Anglo-Saxon countries).

中文翻译:

基于家庭的共享书阅读干预措施和儿童语言能力:对随机对照试验的荟萃分析

摘要在过去的20年中,越来越多的随机对照试验评估了鼓励父母为后代读书的干预措施对儿童语言技能的影响。我们提出了对30种此类干预措施影响的荟萃分析结果。结果表明它们通常是无效的,并且只有一种特定的方法(对话读法)显示出系统的积极影响。此外,有效的干预措施对低社会经济群体的影响较弱,从而引发了公平问题。我们对这些研究的研究设计的系统分析指出了三个主要缺陷。首先,仅测量短期结果,即使在如此狭窄的时间范围内,我们也发现治疗效果逐渐消失的迹象。第二个局限性是所测得的结果范围有限(接受或表达的词汇)。最后,这些研究显示出较低的外部有效性(临时抽样,小样本量,缺乏多站点实验,盎格鲁撒克逊国家以外的证据很少)。
更新日期:2020-10-08
down
wechat
bug