Examining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Colby Hall, Eunsoo Cho, Philip Capin, Garrett J. Roberts, Karen F. Kehoe, Christa Haring, Delanie Peacott, Alisha Demchak
{"title":"Examining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Colby Hall, Eunsoo Cho, Philip Capin, Garrett J. Roberts, Karen F. Kehoe, Christa Haring, Delanie Peacott, Alisha Demchak","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09985-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is considerable research evaluating the effects of family members implementing shared book reading interventions, especially during early childhood. However, less is known about the effects of family members providing instruction to help their school-aged children develop literacy skills, including both code-focused and meaning-focused skills that facilitate reading comprehension. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to describe and evaluate recent research examining the effects of at-home, family-implemented literacy interventions for school-aged children. A total of 25 interventions across 22 studies (12 with group designs and 10 with single-case experimental designs) were analyzed. The average effect on combined literacy outcomes was estimated as <i>g</i> = 0.36 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01; <i>Q</i> = 191.83; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 36.17) for group design studies and <i>g</i> = 1.50 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01; <i>Q</i> = 114.58; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 38.58) for single-case experimental design studies. Notably, for group design studies, effects varied by literacy outcome type. The mean effect for code-focused outcomes (i.e., PA, decoding/word reading, spelling, text reading) was <i>g</i> = 0.28 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01) and the mean effect for meaning-focused outcomes (i.e., vocabulary, listening comprehension, reading comprehension) was <i>g</i> = 0.41 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01). Overall, these findings support the implementation of family-delivered literacy interventions to improve literacy outcomes for school-aged children. At the same time, this meta-analysis revealed the paucity of research examining the effects of family-implemented literacy interventions, especially for older children, indicating a need for more research on this topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09985-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is considerable research evaluating the effects of family members implementing shared book reading interventions, especially during early childhood. However, less is known about the effects of family members providing instruction to help their school-aged children develop literacy skills, including both code-focused and meaning-focused skills that facilitate reading comprehension. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to describe and evaluate recent research examining the effects of at-home, family-implemented literacy interventions for school-aged children. A total of 25 interventions across 22 studies (12 with group designs and 10 with single-case experimental designs) were analyzed. The average effect on combined literacy outcomes was estimated as g = 0.36 (p < .01; Q = 191.83; I2 = 36.17) for group design studies and g = 1.50 (p < .01; Q = 114.58; I2 = 38.58) for single-case experimental design studies. Notably, for group design studies, effects varied by literacy outcome type. The mean effect for code-focused outcomes (i.e., PA, decoding/word reading, spelling, text reading) was g = 0.28 (p < .01) and the mean effect for meaning-focused outcomes (i.e., vocabulary, listening comprehension, reading comprehension) was g = 0.41 (p < .01). Overall, these findings support the implementation of family-delivered literacy interventions to improve literacy outcomes for school-aged children. At the same time, this meta-analysis revealed the paucity of research examining the effects of family-implemented literacy interventions, especially for older children, indicating a need for more research on this topic.

检视家庭实施的学龄儿童识字干预的效果:一项元分析
有相当多的研究评估了家庭成员实施共同读书干预的效果,特别是在儿童早期。然而,对于家庭成员提供指导以帮助学龄儿童发展识字技能的影响,包括促进阅读理解的以代码为中心和以意义为中心的技能,人们所知甚少。本荟萃分析的目的是描述和评估最近的研究,研究家庭实施的识字干预对学龄儿童的影响。共分析了22项研究中的25项干预措施(12项采用组设计,10项采用单例实验设计)。对综合识字结果的平均影响估计为g = 0.36 (p < 0.01;q = 191.83;组设计研究I2 = 36.17), g = 1.50 (p < .01;q = 114.58;I2 = 38.58)为单例实验设计研究。值得注意的是,在群体设计研究中,效果因读写能力结果类型而异。以编码为中心的结果(即PA、解码/单词阅读、拼写、文本阅读)的平均效应为g = 0.28 (p < 0.01),以意义为中心的结果(即词汇、听力理解、阅读理解)的平均效应为g = 0.41 (p < 0.01)。总体而言,这些发现支持实施家庭提供的扫盲干预措施,以改善学龄儿童的扫盲结果。与此同时,本荟萃分析显示,对家庭实施的扫盲干预措施的影响进行研究的缺乏,特别是对年龄较大的儿童,这表明需要对这一主题进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信