What's the difference? Interaction during shared reading with at-risk and not-at-risk 1st and 2nd graders.

What's the difference? Interaction during shared reading with at-risk and not-at-risk 1st and 2nd graders.

First Author: Silke Vanparys -- Ghent University
Additional authors/chairs: 
Hilde Van Keer
Keywords: Interactive storybook reading, Shared Book Reading, Primary education, Language Development, At Risk Students
Abstract / Summary: 

Shared book reading has been proven to be one of the most enduring and effective methods to foster children’s overall language development. Both the frequency and the quality of children’s contributions during reading activities are strongly related to broader literacy and more specific vocabulary acquisition (e.g. Dickinson & Tabors, 2001; Mol et al., 2008). Previous studies pointed at different gains from shared reading for children at risk for language and literacy impairments due to their socio-economic, ethnic or minority background or due to their home language (Barnes et al., 2017; Mol et al., 2009).

Therefore, this research aimed at providing an integrated view on input and interaction patterns during shared reading with two different groups of 1st and 2nd graders: a group of children with an at-risk background and a group of mainly not-at-risk children. Trained research assistants were videotaped during small group reading sessions (n=30) (i.e. 16h, 41m 51s of shared reading). Videos were transcribed verbatim, divided in 18 969 single units of language and coded with a good interrater agreement (κ=.84, p <.00).

A literature-based comprehensive coding scheme including child input and peer interaction was used. The instrument focuses on form (i.e. question, answer, remark, ignorance, cue or reinforcement), focus (i.e. vocabulary, content, images, print knowledge, book conventions, or personal input) and abstraction level (i.e. contextualized or decontextualized) of the utterance (e.g. Van Kleeck et al., 1997).

ANOVA analyses showed significant differences in child input during reading comparing the at-risk and the not-at-risk group and remarkable differences in form, focus and abstraction level of the language utterances. Results and implications will be discussed in detail.