Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:50:21.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

20 - Interventions to Promote Language Development in Typical and Atypical Populations

from Part Three - Impact, Intervention and Equity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2022

By
James Law  and
Jenna Charlton
Edited by
James Law ,
Sheena Reilly  and
Cristina McKean
James Law
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
Sheena Reilly
Affiliation:
Griffith University, Queensland
Cristina McKean
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
Get access

Summary

Although language development in children follows a predictable pattern and rate, it is common for interventions to be proposed to increase language skills especially when children are seen to be functioning behind their peers. The key argument is that environmental modifications have the potential to change language trajectories. These can be delivered at a universal level (for everyone) at a targeted-selected level (for groups perceived to be in need,) at a targeted-indicated level for those with an identified need, and at a specialist level (for those with the most pronounced difficulties). In this chapter we focus on two recent overviews of randomised controlled trials, one on parent–child book reading and a second on interventions delivered by professionals to promote language development. It focuses on the collective outcomes of these interventions rather than the details of the interventions themselves. The results suggest that, in the short term at least, there are reasonably consistent positive findings across a range of different interventions, although the effects vary considerably by outcome. It is not yet clear whether the downstream effects of such interventions are sustained or indeed whether children are able to catch up with their peers.

Keywords

language interventionrandomised controlled trialsystematic reviewmeta-analysisparent/child book readingtargeted selectivetargeted indicated
Type
Chapter
Information
Language Development
Individual Differences in a Social Context
 , pp. 470 - 494
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, C., Lockton, E., Freed, J., Gaile, J., Earl, G., McBean, K., … Law, J. (2012). The Social Communication Intervention Project: A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of speech and language therapy for school‐age children who have pragmatic and social communication problems with or without autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 47(3), 233–244.Google Scholar
Aram, D. M., & Nation, J. E. (1980). Preschool language disorders and subsequent language and academic difficulties. Journal of Communication Disorders, 13(2), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asmussen, K., Feinstein, L., Martin, J., & Chowdry, H. (2016). Foundations for life: What works to support parent child interaction in the early years. London: Early Intervention Foundation.Google Scholar
Bishop, D. V. M. (1997). Cognitive neuropsychology and developmental disorders: Uncomfortable bedfellows. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A, 50(4), 899–923.Google Scholar
Bishop, D. V. M. (2006). What causes specific language impairment in children? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 217–221.Google Scholar
Bishop, D. V. M. (2014). Pragmatic language impairment: A correlate of SLI, a distinct subgroup, or part of the autistic continuum? In Bishop, D. V. M. & Leonard, L. (Eds.), Speech and language impairments in children (pp. 113–128). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Bishop, D. V. M., & McArthur, G. M. (2005). Individual differences in auditory processing in specific language impairment: A follow-up study using event-related potentials and behavioral thresholds. Cortex, 41(3), 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, J., Gillham, B., & Smith, N. (1996). Screening for early language delay in the 18-36 month age-range: The predictive validity of tests of production, and implications for practice. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 12(2), 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradbury, B., Corak, M., Washbrook, E., & Waldfogel, J. (2015). Too many children left behind: The US achievement gap in comparative perspective. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Bookstart. (2017). Current Bookstart international affiliates. www.bookstart.org.uk/about/international/current-affiliates/Google Scholar
Bus, A. G., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: Meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65, 1–21.Google Scholar
Campbell Collaboration. (2018). Writing a systematic review. www.campbellcollaboration.org/research-resources/writing-a-campbell-systematic-review.htmlGoogle Scholar
Childers, J. B., & Tomasello, M. (2002). Two-year-olds learn novel nouns, verbs, and conventional actions from massed or distributed exposures. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 967–978.Google Scholar
Close, R. (2001). Parental involvement and literacy achievement. The research evidence and the way forward. London: National Literacy Trust. www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0000/0423/Parental_involvement_2001Google Scholar
Coe, R., Kime, S. Neville, C., & Coleman, R. (2013). The DIY evaluation guide London: Education Endowment Foundation.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power for the behavioural sciences. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal, 337(7676), 979–983.Google ScholarPubMed
De Graaf, N. D., De Graaf, P. M., & Kraaykamp, G. (2000). Parental cultural capital and educational attainment in the Netherlands: A refinement of the cultural capital perspective Sociology of Education, 73, 92–111. doi:10.2307/2673239Google Scholar
Dickinson, D. K., Griffith, J. A., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2012). How reading books fosters language development around the world. Child Development Research, 2012, 602807. doi:10.1155/2012/602807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowdall, N., Murray, L., Hartford, L., Melendez-Torres, G. J., Gardner, F., & Cooper, P. J. (2019). Shared picture book reading interventions for child language development: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Child Development, 91(2), 1–17.Google Scholar
Gascoigne, M. (2006). Supporting children with speech, language and communication needs within integrated children’s services. RCSLT Position Paper. London: RCSLT.Google Scholar
Glass, G. V., McGraw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Goldfield, S., Napiza, N., Quach, J., Reilly, S., Ukoumunne, O. C., & Wake, M. (2011). Outcomes of a universal infant-toddler shared reading intervention by 2 years of age: The Let’s Read Trial. Pediatrics, 27, 444–455.Google Scholar
Gorard, S., & Huat See, B. (2013). Do parental involvement interventions increase attainment. A review of the evidence. Nuffield Foundation. www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Do_parental_involvement_interventions_increase_attainment1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Harbord, R. M., & Higgins, J. P. T.. (2008). Meta-regression in Stata. Stata Journal, 8(4), 493–519.Google Scholar
Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds). (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0. London: The Cochrane Collaboration. http://handbook.cochrane.orgGoogle Scholar
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2001). Presenting random effects meta-analyses: Where are we going wrong? Paper presented at 9th International Cochrane Colloquium, Lyon, 9–13 October.Google Scholar
Hill, E. L. (2001). Non‐specific nature of specific language impairment: A review of the literature with regard to concomitant motor impairments. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 36(2), 149–171.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Adamson, L. B., Bakeman, R., Owen, M. T., Golinkoff, R. M., Pace, A., … Suma, K. (2015). The contribution of early communication quality to low-income children’s language success Psychological Science, 26, 1071–1083. doi:10.1177/0956797615581493Google Scholar
Jerrim, J. (2013). The reading gap: The socio-economic gap in children’s reading skills: A cross national comparison using PISA 2009. London: Sutton Trust.Google Scholar
Kovas, Y., Hayiou‐Thomas, M. E., Oliver, B., Dale, P. S., Bishop, D. V., & Plomin, R. (2005). Genetic influences in different aspects of language development: The etiology of language skills in 4.5‐year‐old twins. Child Development, 76(3), 632–651.Google Scholar
Law, J., Boyle, J., Harris, F., Harkness, A., & Nye, C. (1998). Screening for primary speech and language delay: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 33(S1), 21–23.Google Scholar
Law, J., Charlton, J., & Asmussen, K. (2017). Child language as a wellbeing indicator. London: Early Intervention Foundation. www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0000/0423/Parental_involvement_2001Google Scholar
Law, J., Charlton, J., Dockrell, J., Gascoigne, M., McKean, C. & Theakston, A. (2017). Early language development: Needs, provision and intervention for preschool children from socio-economically disadvantage backgrounds. London: Education Endowment Foundation. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Law_et_al_Early_Language_Development_final.pdfGoogle Scholar
Law, J., Charlton, J., McKean, C., Beyer, F. Fernandez-Garcia, C., Mashayekhi, A., & Rush, R. (2018). Parent–child reading to improve language development and school readiness: A systematic review and meta-analysis FINAL REPORT to the Nuffield Foundation. https://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/file_store/production/246226/B804D16A-F0A4–43C0–920F-4A274A131AAF.pdfGoogle Scholar
Law, J., Clegg, J., Rush, R., Roulstone, S., Clegg, J., & Peters, T. (2019). The association of distal and proximal elements of social disadvantage with children’s language development at 2 years: An analysis of data from the Children in Focus (CiF) sample from the ALSPAC birth cohort. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 54(3), 362–376.Google Scholar
Law, J., Dennis, J. A., & Charlton, J. V. (2017). Speech and language therapy interventions for children with primary speech and/or language disorders. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(1), CD012490.Google Scholar
Law, J., Garrett, Z., & Nye, C. (2003). Speech and language therapy interventions for children with primary speech and language delay or disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2003(3), CD004110.Google Scholar
Law, J., King, T., & Rush, R. (2014). Newcastle University evidence paper for the Read On, Get On coalition: An analysis of early years and primary school age language and literacy data from the Millennium Cohort Study. London: Save the Children.Google Scholar
Law, J., Rush, R., King, T., Westrupp, L., & Reilly, S. (2017). The association between early home activities and oral language skills in middle childhood: A quantile analysis. Child Development, 89(1), 295–309. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cdev.12727/epdGoogle Scholar
Law, J., Rush, R., Parsons, S., & Schoon, I. (2009). Modelling developmental language difficulties from school entry into adulthood: Literacy, mental health and employment outcomes. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 52, 1401–1416.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B. (2014). Children with specific language impairment, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Let’s Read. (2012). www.letsread.com.au/About-UsGoogle Scholar
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Bronnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension, International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68.Google Scholar
Marulis, L. M., & Neuman, S. B. (2010). The effects of vocabulary intervention on young children’s word learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 300–335.Google Scholar
McKean, C., Mensah, F., Eadie, P., Bavin, E., Bretherton, L., Cini, E., & Reilly, S. (2015). Levers for language growth: Characteristics and predictors of language trajectories between 4 and 7 years. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0134251.Google Scholar
McKean, C., Wraith, D., Eadie, P., Cook, F., Mensah, F., & Reilly, S. (2017). Subgroups in language trajectories from 4 to 11 years: The nature and predictors of stable, improving and decreasing language trajectory groups. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(10), 1081–1091.Google Scholar
Mol, S. E., & Bus, A. G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 267–296.Google Scholar
Mol, S, E., Bus, A, G., & de Jong, M. T. (2009). Interactive book reading in early education: A tool to stimulate print knowledge as well as oral language. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 979–1007.Google Scholar
Mol, S. E., Bus, A. G., de Jong, M. T., & Smeets, D. J. H. (2008). Added value of dialogic parent–child book readings: A meta-analysis, Early Education and Development, 19(1), 7–26.Google Scholar
NELP (National Early Literacy Panel). (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy. http://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/NELPReport09.pdfGoogle Scholar
Petticrew, M, & Roberts, H. (2008). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Plante, E. (1998). Introduction to feedback and executive control in human communication. Journal of Communication Disorders, 31(6), 459–460.Google Scholar
Puglisi, M. L., Hulme, C., Hamilton, L. G., & Snowling, M. J. (2017). The home literacy environment is a correlate, but perhaps not a cause, of variations in children’s language and literacy development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(6), 498–514. doi:10.1080/10888438.2017.1346660Google Scholar
Ramey, C. T., & Ramey, S. L. (2004). Early learning and school readiness: Can early intervention make a difference? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 471–491. doi:10.1353/mpq.2004.0034Google Scholar
Reach Out and Read. (2014). www.reachoutandread.org/Google Scholar
Reilly, S., Bishop, D. V. M., & Tomblin, B. (2014). Terminological debate over language impairment in children: Forward movement and sticking points. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 49(4), 452–462.Google Scholar
Riches, N. G. (2013). Treating the passive in children with specific language impairment: A usage-based approach. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 29(2), 155–169.Google Scholar
Save the Children. (2015). Ready to read: Closing the gap in early language skills so that every child in England can read well. London: Save the Children.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J., & Phillips, D. (Eds.) (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early child development. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
SLI Consortium. (2004). Highly significant linkage to the SLI1 locus in an expanded sample of individuals affected by specific language impairment. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 74(6), 1225–1238.Google Scholar
Sloat, E. A., Letourneau, N. L., Joschko, J. R., Schryer, E. A., & Colpitts, J. E. (2015). Parent-mediated reading interventions with children up to four years old: A systematic review. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 38(1), 39–56.Google Scholar
Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission. (2015). State of the nation 2015: Social mobility and child poverty in Great Britain. London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Stark, R. E., & Tallal, P. (1981). Selection of children with specific language deficits. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 46(2), 114–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, C. L., Zubrick, S. R., & Christensen, D. (2016). Barriers to parent–child book reading in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 48, 295–309. doi:10.1007/s13158–016-0172-2Google Scholar
Tomblin, J. B. (1997). Epidemiology of specific language impairment. In Gopnik, M. (Ed.), The inheritance and innateness of grammars (pp. 91–110). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomblin, J. B., Zhang, X., Weiss, A., Catts, H., & Weismer, S. E. (2004). Dimensions of individual differences in communication skills among primary grade children. In Rice, M. L. & Warren, S. F. (Eds.), Developmental language disorders: From phenotypes to etiologies (pp. 53–76). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. (2015). Early childhood education intervention report: Shared book reading. http://whatworks.ed.govGoogle Scholar
van Bergen, E., Bishop, D., van Zuijen, T., & de Jong, P. F. (2015). How does parental reading influence children’s reading? A study of cognitive mediation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(5), 325–339. doi:10.1080/10888438.2015.1050103Google Scholar
Wade, B., & Moore, M. (1998). An early start with books: Literacy and mathematical evidence from a longitudinal study. Educational Review, 50(2), 135–145.Google Scholar
Wade, B., & Moore, M. (2000). A sure start with books. Early Years, 20, 39–46.Google Scholar
Warren, S. F., Fey, M., & Yoder, P. J. (2007). Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 70–77.Google Scholar
Wasik, B. A., Hindmann, A. H., & Snell, A. K. (2016). Book reading and vocabulary development: A systematic review. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 37, 39–57.Google Scholar
Wastlund, E., Norlander, T., & Archer, T. (2008). The effect of page layout on mental workload: A dual-task experiment, Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1229–1245.Google Scholar
What Works Clearing House. (2015). http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Google Scholar
Zeng, B., Law, J., & Lindsay, G. (2012). Characterising optimal intervention intensity: The relationship between dosage and effect size in interventions for children with developmental speech and language difficulties International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14(5), 471–477.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×