Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New
Vocabulary Using Interactive Digital
Storybooks
Claire Butler
Florida State University, Tallahassee
Jennifer A. Brown
University of Georgia, Athens
Juliann J. Woods
Florida State University
I
t is well documented that vocabulary
knowledge predicts academic success
and that children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds have slower rates
of vocabulary acquisition compared to children from
higher SES backgrounds (e.g., Dollaghan et al., 1999;
Gormley & Ruhl, 2005; Hart & Risley, 1995). The
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (PL 107-110) and
the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (2004), as well as newer initiatives
such as Race to the Top, have increased the focus on
all children meeting specific educational outcomes.
These initiatives highlight the importance of addressing predictive skills for later academic success early
ABSTRACT: Purpose: The purpose of this study
was to examine the effects of extending interactive
shared book reading strategies to digital interactive
books. Specifically, children’s comprehension and
production of new vocabulary words was explored
by incorporating evidence-based teaching strategies
in e-book reading sessions.
Method: A single-case repeated-acquisition design
across 3 e-books with replication across 5 participants was used to evaluate the effects of the
vocabulary intervention. The participants included
5 children between 25 and 36 months of age who
attended an Early Head Start program. The interventionist used a combination of interactive shared
book reading strategies and digital interactive features within e-book reading sessions. Each e-book
was shared 3 times before progressing to the next
e-book.
Results: All 5 children demonstrated increases in
their receptive knowledge of targeted words, and
4 out of 5 children increased their expressive use
of targeted words. For all of the children, the gains
were higher in receptive acquisition than expressive acquisition. Targeted words with and without
digital interactivity were learned at a similar rate.
Conclusion: Results support the use of interactive
shared book reading strategies with toddlers and
show promise for incorporating technology into
vocabulary interventions for young children. Clinical and research implications of using e-books to
support vocabulary development for toddlers who
are at risk for language and academic delays are
discussed.
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
and
KEY WORDS: vocabulary intervention, digital book
reading, at-risk children
Butler
et 41al.:
Teaching
Toddlers
Disorders
• Volume
• 155–168
• FallAt-Risk
2014 © NSSLHA
1092-5171/14/4102-0155
New Vocabulary
155
in childhood. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs)
play a critical role in helping children to develop the
oral and written language skills, including vocabulary acquisition, needed to succeed in the academic
curriculum (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2001). These compounding factors demonstrate the need for effective vocabulary instruction to
provide children who are at risk for language, social,
and academic delays with the necessary school-readiness skills (Coyne, Simmons, Kame’enui, & Stoolmiller, 2004; Lonigan, Burgess, & Anthony, 2000).
to children who participated in only classroom learning. Similarly, in a study by Pollard-Durodola et al.
(2011), at-risk Head Start preschool children exhibited higher vocabulary scores after participating in a
shared storybook intervention compared to children
who participated in typical book reading practices.
Justice et al. (2005) found that kindergarten students
who had lower vocabulary levels before starting
a small-group storybook reading intervention benefited the most from elaboration strategies embedded
in shared book interactions. In a study by Blewitt,
Rump, Shealy, and Cook (2009), preschool children demonstrated deeper word understanding when
embedded questions followed a low- to high-demand
scaffolding procedure. Building on the evidence with
preschool and kindergarten children and the predictive relationship of early vocabulary knowledge, it is
important to examine the effects of interactive shared
storybook reading with younger children.
Interactive Shared Book Reading
Interactive shared book reading is an instructional
practice that has been shown to have positive effects
on young children’s vocabulary development (Coyne
et al., 2004; Goldstein, 2011; Justice, Meier, &
Walpole, 2005). This practice expands on the context
of shared book reading (i.e., adult–child engagement
centered on a book) by embedding specific learning
opportunities. Specifically, interactive shared book
reading focuses on the interaction between the adult
and child during storybook reading as a way to introduce new vocabulary and reinforce language development by engaging the child in dialogue.
Interactive shared book reading strategies include specific before-reading, during-reading, and
after-reading strategies within a shared book reading interaction. These strategies are embedded in the
foundation of a shared interaction (Klesius & Griffith,
1996). Before-reading strategies may include previewing or taking a picture walk through the book (Fountas
& Pinnel, 1996) and making predictions with the child
about what the story will be about (Armbruster, Lehr,
& Osborn, 2003). During-reading strategies can include talking about a targeted word in another context,
having the child repeat the targeted word aloud, imitating the word with an action/sound, asking wh-questions about the story, prompting for elaborations and
expansions, modeling expansions, asking for descriptions, and cloze procedures (Trivette & Dunst, 2007).
After-reading strategies can include asking questions
relating to the story that are both higher level and
open ended (McKeown & Beck, 2003; Stahl, 2004;
Wasik & Bond, 2001) and constructing and revising
any misunderstandings (Pearson & Duke, 2002).
Several studies support the use of targeting vocabulary development through interactive shared book
reading for at-risk preschool and kindergarten students. For example, in a study by Loftus, Coyne, McCoach, Zipoli, and Pullen (2010), at-risk kindergarten
children demonstrated increased vocabulary knowledge subsequent to participation in a supplemental
interactive shared book reading intervention compared
156
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
Child Engagement
Children’s engagement with the adult during shared
storybook reading is crucial for success (Goldstein,
2011). Motivation for and engagement in book reading is impacted by many factors, including the child’s
book sharing experiences, age, developmental level,
and personal interests. Therefore, finding ways to
make book reading a motivating and engaging context for children who are at risk and/or present with
limited interest in books is a necessary prerequisite
for successful shared book instruction (Kaderavek
& Justice, 2002). Books in which the child has an
active role, such as lift-the-flap and slot books, have
been recommended for increased engagement (Justice
& Kaderavek, 2002). These features may encourage
verbal communication and interaction between the
child and adult, which can in turn increase the use
and understanding of new vocabulary words (Goldstein, 2011). Extending the notion of child role and
interactivity to digital formats (i.e., e-books) has
implications for increasing children’s motivation and
engagement and therefore could be a mediating variable to the overall success of the instruction.
E-books. The assistive technology literature on
display design provides valuable information on
developing technology-supported interactive e-books.
Light, Drager, and Wilkinson (2010) demonstrated
that the visual scene display is the easiest type of
display for a child to use, and it increases the child’s
rate of expressive vocabulary. Visual scene displays
consist of a picture that displays an event or concept
holistically as opposed to traditional grid displays
(Light & McNaughton, 2013). Wilkinson, Carlin, and
Thistle (2008) also found that the role of color cues
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014 is important in facilitating children’s attention and
focus in visual scene displays.
E-books can be created by constructing visual
scenes based on age-appropriate storybooks through
commonly used slide presentation software. Similar to
lift-the-flap features in hard-copy books, digital interactivity can be incorporated in e-books by developing
visual scene displays for each page in the storybook
and selecting one (or more) components of the scene
to have a digital interactive feature. For example,
when the selected component (i.e., a specific part of
the visual display) is clicked on, a sound or movement will occur within the visual scene. Adding in
digital interactivity for a specific targeted word may
cause children to be more engaged with learning.
Early Vocabulary Instruction
Providing children with access to varied vocabulary
is important for their academic success. When children enter school with low vocabularies, they are at a
disadvantage academically. The performance discrepancy between children with high and low vocabularies widens in early elementary school (Biemiller &
Slonim, 2001). In children as young as 3 years of
age who participated in an interactive shared book
reading intervention, Blewitt et al. (2009) found that
differential effects of vocabulary growth were attributed to the children’s previous vocabulary knowledge.
Children with less advanced vocabularies at the start
of the intervention learned fewer words than children with more advanced vocabularies (Blewitt et al.,
2009). Stranovich (1986) referred to this phenomenon as the Matthew effect; that is, children who are
rich in vocabulary become richer, and those who are
poor in vocabulary become poorer. The impact of
early vocabulary exposure and learning on children’s
future academic performance underscores the need
to examine approaches designed to increase young
children’s vocabulary acquisition that can be feasibly
implemented.
Interactive shared book reading has several
implementation advantages, including the ability to
be used within a variety of curricula and to allow
children who are at risk for and/or have developmental delays to have access to the same content, interaction, and learning opportunities as typically developing children. Interactive shared book reading can also
be used in whole class, small groups, and individual
contexts and has low program costs (Beauchat,
Blamey, & Walpole, 2009; Gormley & Ruhl, 2005).
Furthermore, adding digital interactive features to
books may increase children’s engagement and word
learning by providing the children with additional
learning opportunities to focus on targeted words.
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of integrated e-book visual scenes with interactive shared book reading strategies on receptive and
expressive vocabulary knowledge in toddlers who are
at risk for language and academic delays. In addition
to exploring vocabulary acquisition during participation in e-book interactive book reading sessions,
we also examined the impact of digital interactive
features.
Method
Participants
Child participants. Participants included five children who attended an Early Head Start program.
The children ranged in age from 25 to 36 months.
Inclusionary criteria included (a) children enrolled in
the Early Head Start program, (b) parents provided
informed consent agreeing for their child to participate in the intervention, (c) children between the ages
of 24 and 36 months at the start of the intervention,
(d) children passed a hearing screening, (e) children
were not identified with a disorder or disability, and
(f) children’s tested language level was within 1 SD
from the mean (standard score of 85–115) on the
Preschool Language Scale, Fifth Edition (PLS–5;
Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2011). Participant demographics are presented in Table 1.
Interventionist. The primary interventionist was
an undergraduate student in communication science
and disorders in collaboration with and supervised by
a licensed and certified SLP. All assessments were
completed by the SLP. A research assistant accompanied the interventionist to sessions in order to videotape the intervention for fidelity measurements.
Setting and Arrangement
The initial evaluation, book reading interactions,
and weekly assessments were conducted in the Early
Head Start center’s classrooms and library. All book
reading interactions were conducted with two children
at a time, although only one child was targeted as
the research participant. The children sat side by side
either on the floor or at a small table so they could
both interact with the assessment materials or the
laptop computer (Dell Inspiron 1545). The interventionist was seated next to the children so as to enable
her to observe their focus of interest and assist with
manipulating the mouse while leading the interaction.
Each e-book reading interaction occurred 3 days a
week for approximately 20 min each day. All sessions
were videotaped for fidelity and monitoring purposes.
Butler et al.: Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New Vocabulary
157
Table 1. Demographic information including age at start of intervention, gender, and Preschool Language Scale, Fifth
Edition (PLS–5; Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2011) auditory comprehension, expressive communication, and total
language standard scores at the start of the intervention.
Child
Age
(in months)
Gender
Jermaine
Asia
Melody
Jacobi
Dwight
36 36 26 25 26 Male
Female
Female
Male
Male
PLS–5 auditory comprehension
89
89
103
98
106
100
95
97
94
110
Materials
Experimental Design and Procedure
A single-case repeated-acquisition design across
three e-books with replication across five participants
was used to evaluate the learning of explicitly
taught embedded vocabulary words during repeated
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
PLS–5
total communication
94
91
100
96
109
interactive shared e-book reading sessions. Repeatedacquisition designs allow for examining equivalent
learning tasks in a minimum of two experimental
conditions (Kennedy, 2005). Repeated demonstrations
of learning across conditions, in this case, e-books,
provide support for the functional relationship between
the treatment and the results (Kratochwill et al., 2010).
For purposes of comparison, each child served as his
or her own control, and trends were examined across
children. The intervention phase was 9 weeks, and the
overall study procedures lasted 16 weeks from initial
standardized testing to the final test. Figure 1 is a
flowchart depiction of the study progression.
Baseline. Before beginning the intervention, we
completed baseline measures of the children’s expressive and receptive vocabulary using standardized and
researcher-developed measures. The PLS–5 was used
to describe each child’s receptive language, expressive language, and total language. The researcherdeveloped measure consisted of a probe measuring
each child’s overall word knowledge of vocabulary
in the three books. This probe included a total of 30
vocabulary picture cards consisting of both targeted
and control words.
Vocabulary words. A predetermined script was
used to teach the children eight targeted words per
e-book. The specific vocabulary strategies that were
used by the interventionist were (a) directly and
indirectly teaching vocabulary words through interactive book reading strategies and technology-supported
interactive features, (b) providing multiple exposures
to words across readings, and (c) repeating the words
within each reading.
Interactivity. Interactivity was included at two
levels: (a) Interactive shared storybook reading
strategies were used throughout each e-book reading
session, and (b) word-level interactivity was accomplished by incorporating technology- and/or actionsupported interactive features specific to a word.
Interactive shared book reading strategies used in
this intervention were categorized as before-, during-,
and after-reading strategies, which are outlined in the
Books. Three e-books appropriate for 2- and 3-yearolds were used as the context for the intervention.
For the purpose of this study, readily accessible
children’s books were converted into e-books by
developing PowerPoint slides for each page of the
story. The authors (primary interventionist and two
certified SLPs and language researchers) and two
certified preschool classroom teachers judged the
books to be age and developmentally appropriate.
The books met the following criteria: (a) followed
story grammar conventions, (b) included words of
different parts of speech, (c) depicted action between two or more communication partners, (d)
included colorful pictures, (e) were geared toward
early toddler and early preschool-age children, (f)
had no more than 30 pages in length, and (g) introduced new vocabulary.
Target words. Before the study began, the authors analyzed each of the books in order to identify
potential vocabulary words to teach the children. The
chosen words met the following criteria: (a) were
developmentally appropriate for young children to understand and produce; (b) were interesting to 2- and
3-year-olds; (c) were included in the chosen text; and
(d) included nouns, verbs, or adjectives. Eight targeted words were selected per book; the targeted words
are listed in Table 2. All targeted words were a focus
of the interactive shared storybook reading strategies,
and four included a word-level digital interactive
feature. Two control words were also identified based
on the same word criteria. The control words differed
from the targeted words in that the control words
were read in the story but were not targeted with
interactive strategies or word-level interactivity.
158
PLS–5 expressive comprehension
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014 Table 2. List of targeted words in each book.
Book Words
Part of speech
Noun
Verb
Adj.
Mouse Was Mad (Urban, 2009)
hopping
x screaming
x puddle
x shaking
x stomping x standing x hedgehog
x bobcat
x We’re Going on a Bear Hunt (Rosen, 2003) forest
x deep
x
shiny
x
stumble
x cave
x narrow x
gloomy x
thick x
The Very Busy Spider (Carle, 2004) spin
x owl
x chase
x catch
x thread
x fencepost
x blew x goat
x Note. Words in bold are words that were taught with interactivity at the word level.
following section. The word-level interactive features
were used for half of the targeted words in order to
explore their potential to increase the children’s participation and learning above and beyond that resulting from the interactive shared book reading strategies. Examples of word-level interactivity include
(a) child clicked on the bunny picture within the
story display when the word hopping was read aloud,
which made the bunny hop up and down; and (b)
interventionist and child stood up and spun around
while saying the word spin.
Book reading. The children interacted with each
e-book three times, as research has indicated that
repeated exposure of a book increases a child’s likelihood to learn new words (Kaderavek & Justice, 2002;
Sénéchal, 1997). The interventionist followed a lesson
plan to incorporate before-, during-, and after-reading
strategies. A lesson plan from one of the e-books is
included in the Appendix.
Before reading. When introducing the story to the
pairs of children each day, the interventionist used the
following strategies to promote comprehension: (a)
previewing or taking a “picture walk” of the cover
of the story (Fountas & Pinnel, 1996), (b) activating
background/prior knowledge (National Reading Panel,
2000), and (c) making predictions (Armbruster et al.,
2003).
During reading. The interventionist used the
eight targeted vocabulary words for each of the three
e-books at least five times in various ways per reading session. For each word, the children were asked
to (a) say the word aloud with the interventionist, (b)
talk about the word by using an additional sentence
containing the word, and (c) produce the word on his
or her own (Trivette & Dunst, 2007). Additional opportunities for the children to engage with the word
through technology- and/or action-supported features
were included for the four targeted words that also
included word-level interactivity. For example, the
target word puddle was taught with word-level interactivity by having the child click the picture of the
puddle and then having a splash sound occur.
After reading. Immediately following the
completion of each storybook reading, the following
Butler et al.: Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New Vocabulary
159
Figure 1. Participant flowchart.
after-reading strategies were used: (a) asking higher
level and open-ended questions related to the story
(McKeown & Beck, 2003; Stahl, 2004; Wasik &
Bond, 2001), (b) constructing and revising misunderstandings (Pearson & Duke, 2002), and (c) making
predictions (Armbruster et al., 2003).
A similar researcher-developed word knowledge
probe that only tested the targeted words was also
given before and after each storybook intervention.
The probes used similar procedures as those used
in the receptive vocabulary items of the PLS–5 and
the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test—Third Edition
(PPVT–III; Dunn & Dunn, 1997).
Comprehensive word probe. A comprehensive
receptive and expressive word knowledge probe was
administered before the first e-book intervention and
after all e-book interventions were completed. This
initial and final probe included 30 words and was
made up of both explicitly targeted words and control
words. To assess expressive word knowledge, each
child was shown a picture of a targeted or control
word and was asked, “What is this?” If the child
answered correctly, the item was marked correct. If
the child answered incorrectly, the item was marked
incorrect and he or she was presented with the next
picture. To assess receptive identification, each child
Measures
Standardized language measure. The PLS–5 was
administered before the intervention began in order to
characterize the children’s overall language. Specifically, auditory comprehension, expressive communication, and total communication standard scores were
reported.
Researcher-developed assessment probes. To
assess the children’s overall word knowledge at
baseline and following all three storybook interventions, we developed a comprehensive initial and final
assessment probe of the control and targeted words.
160
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014 was shown four pictures on a single piece of paper
and was asked to point to the picture of the named
target or control word. The item was scored correct
if the child pointed to the correct picture. If the child
pointed to an incorrect picture, the item was marked
as incorrect and he or she was presented with the
next item. To minimize a learning effect from repeated testing, the children were not provided with the
correct answers for incorrect answers.
Pre and post e-book intervention probe. At the
beginning and end of each individual e-book intervention, a researcher-developed pre and post e-book
probe of the targeted words in that specific book was
given to measure each child’s receptive and expressive word knowledge. Similar to the procedure for
the comprehensive word probe, the children were first
asked to name the pictures of the targeted vocabulary
words to measure expressive knowledge and then
were asked to point to the picture of the target word
out of four pictures to measure receptive knowledge.
Fidelity of Intervention
Before initiation of the study, an undergraduate research assistant was trained on the intervention and
practiced coding videotaped book reading intervention
sessions. To evaluate the fidelity of implementation
of the intervention, the research assistant completed
a 10-item fidelity checklist for 36% of the intervention sessions. The 10-item fidelity checklist addressed
the following categories: environmental arrangement,
before-reading strategies, during-reading strategies,
after-reading strategies, frequency of targeted word,
and specific feedback.
Results
The primary purpose of this study was to examine
the effects of using e-books as the context for interactive shared book reading strategies on receptive and
expressive vocabulary in toddlers who are at risk for
language and academic delays. Throughout the intervention, an independent coder measured fidelity for
36% of the intervention sessions. Compliance to the
established intervention procedures ranged from 90%
to 100% (M = 98%).
Throughout the study, the children’s receptive and
expressive vocabulary growth was measured in two
primary ways: (a) comprehensive vocabulary probes
that included all of the vocabulary words, and (b) pre
and post e-book vocabulary probes that included the
vocabulary words specific to the current book. The
comprehensive probes were given before the intervention began and again after the intervention was
completed. Both targeted and control words from all
three books were measured on the initial and final
comprehensive probes. The pre and post e-book probes
only measured the targeted words for that specific
book. The pre and post e-book probes were given
before the initial reading of the specific book and then
after the third reading of the book before progressing
to the pre book-specific test for the next book.
Results of the initial comprehensive probe demonstrated that the selected word groups for each book
were appropriate for teaching and measuring participants’ vocabulary. Several children demonstrated receptive knowledge of a limited number of words, M =
26% (range of 0%–43%); however, no child correctly
named any of the words in the expressive portion of
the probe. The initial test results, presented in Table
3, were similar for the targeted and control words.
The children’s initial receptive word knowledge, albeit
limited, was not unexpected when selecting words
that are developmentally appropriate for a group of
preschool children. Of several potential books, some
children demonstrated receptive knowledge across the
books. However, the low rate of receptive identification allowed for a basis of comparison if differences
occurred as a result of this intervention.
Targeted Versus Control Words
The results of the individual participants and the
group averages are presented in Table 3. From the
initial to final probe, there was a 50% average increase in targeted words that were correctly identified
receptively compared to a 20% average increase in
control words that were correctly identified receptively. More specifically, the mean correct targeted receptive words increased from 5.4 at baseline to 17.4
at the end of intervention. When the control words
were considered, the initial mean of 2.4 increased to
3.6 after intervention. The more substantial increase
of targeted words in comparison to control words
demonstrated that explicit and repeated instruction
of a word in a story enhanced the participants’ word
learning more than simply being exposed to words
that were read in the story.
Four out of five participants made overall gains
in expressively naming the targeted words. The initial
mean of correctly named targeted words was 0, and
this increased to 3.8 after the intervention compared
to the initial mean of control expressive words of 0
with an increase to a mean of 0.6 after the intervention. Similar to the receptive word increases, the
children correctly named more targeted words than
control words following the intervention. The increases in expressive vocabulary were smaller than those
in receptive vocabulary.
Butler et al.: Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New Vocabulary
161
Table 3. Results from the children’s initial and final comprehensive vocabulary test of targeted and control words.
Targeted words (n = 24)
Child Initial TR
Jermaine
Asia
Melody
Jacobi
Dwight
9
8
3
0
7
Mean
5.4
% Correct
22.5
Increase Final TR
Control words (n = 6)
Initial TE
Final TE
Initial TR
0
0
0
0
0
7
6
3
0
3
2
5
2
1
2
23
20
22
7
15
17.4
0
72.5
0.0
50.0% 3.8
2.4
15.8
40.0
15.8% Final TR
Initial TE
Final TE
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
6
2
4
1
5
3.6
0
60.0
0.0
20.0% 0.6
10.0
10.0%
Note. TR = total receptive, TE = total expressive.
Word-Level Interactive Features
which children demonstrated learning are presented in
Table 5.
The secondary purpose of this study was to examine
the effect of digital interactive features on the toddlers’ vocabulary acquisition. Targeted words with
and without word-level interactivity were learned at
a similar rate. Results from the pre and post bookspecific tests are shown in Table 4. After the Mouse
Was Mad (Urban, 2009) e-book condition, all of the
participants demonstrated receptive gains for the
targeted words with word-level interactivity, and
two demonstrated expressive gains. Similarly, all of
the participants demonstrated receptive gains for the
targeted words without word-level interactivity, and
three demonstrated expressive gains. For the vocabulary in We’re Going on a Bear Hunt (Rosen, 2003),
all five participants demonstrated receptive gains
for the targeted words with word-level interactivity,
and one demonstrated expressive gains. Three out
of five participants demonstrated receptive gains for
the targeted words without word-level interactivity,
and two made expressive gains. Subsequent to The
Very Busy Spider (Carle, 2004) condition, four of the
five participants demonstrated receptive gains for the
targeted words without word-level interactivity, and
three demonstrated expressive gains. All of the participants demonstrated receptive gains for the targeted
words without word-level interactivity, and four made
expressive gains.
Individual Book Vocabulary
It is important to review the results of this study
not only in terms of the comprehensive vocabulary
growth, but also in terms of the individual children’s
vocabulary learning in each of the three books. These
results are visually displayed in Figures 2 and 3. In
all three e-book experimental conditions, the children
demonstrated greater receptive gains than expressive gains. In the Mouse Was Mad condition, all of
the participants receptively learned all eight targeted
words. The mean expressive gains were the highest
after The Very Busy Spider condition, and the mean
expressive gains were the lowest after the We’re Going on a Bear Hunt condition.
Jermaine showed the most word growth in targeted word knowledge. Before intervention for Mouse
Was Mad, Jermaine correctly identified four words
receptively but did not name any words expressively.
At the end of the intervention for Mouse Was Mad,
Jermaine demonstrated knowledge of eight words
receptively and two words expressively. Before intervention for We’re Going on a Bear Hunt, Jermaine
correctly identified two words receptively; he did not
correctly name any of the words. After intervention,
Jermaine demonstrated knowledge of seven words receptively and two words expressively. Jermaine’s preintervention data for The Very Busy Spider showed
that he correctly identified four words receptively and
one word expressively. After intervention, Jermaine
demonstrated knowledge of five words receptively
and four words expressively.
Asia showed substantial word growth in targeted
word knowledge. Before intervention for Mouse Was
Mad, Asia correctly identified six words receptively
and no words expressively. By the end of the Mouse
Parts of Speech
The 24 targeted words that were explicitly taught
across the three storybook interventions consisted of
different parts of speech; nine were nouns, 10 were
verbs, and five were adjectives. There were no consistent word-learning patterns across parts of speech
or specific patterns across word-level interactivity
for the different word forms. The targeted words in
162
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014 Table 4. Results from the pre and post book-specific tests of targeted words.
Interactive words
Receptive
Book
Pre
Noninteractive words
Expressive
Post
Pre
Receptive
Expressive
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Mouse Was Mad (Urban, 2009)
Jermaine 2
4
Asia
3
4
Melody
0
4
Jacobi
0
4
Dwight
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
3
1
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
0
0.2
0.6
1.2
4
0
0.8
We’re Going on a Bear Hunt (Rosen, 2003)
Jermaine 2
3
0
Asia
0
4
0
Melody
0
2
0
Jacobi
0
2
0
Dwight
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0.2
0
1.8
0
0.6
Mean
1
Mean
4
0.4
2.4
The Very Busy
Jermaine
Asia
Melody
Jacobi
Dwight
Spider (Carle, 2004)
3
3
0
4
1
4
0
3
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
2
4
2
3
2
1
0
1
0
0
2
2
1
0
1
0.8
0.2
0.8
0.6
2.6
0.4
1.2
Mean
3.4
Table 5. Percentage of targeted words correct by parts of speech.
Noun (n = 9)
Interactive
(n = 3)
Verb (n = 10)
Noninteractive
(n = 6)
Interactive
(n = 7)
Adjective (n = 5)
Noninteractive
(n = 3)
Interactive
(n = 2)
Noninteractive
(n = 3)
Child
Rec
Exp
Rec
Exp
Rec
Exp
Rec
Exp
Rec
Exp
Rec
Exp
Jermaine
Asia
Melody
Jacobi
Dwight
100
67
100
33
67
33
0
33
0
0
83
67
100
33
67
17
17
17
0
0
100
86
86
29
71
43
14
14
0
0
100
100
67
67
100
67
67
0
0
67
100
100
100
0
100
0
50
0
0
0
100
100
67
0
0
0
33
0
0
33
73
13
70
10
74
14
87
40
80
10
53
13
Mean
Note. Rec = receptive; Exp = expressive.
Was Mad condition, Asia demonstrated knowledge
of eight words receptively and correctly named four
words expressively. Asia did not correctly identify
any words receptively or expressively before intervention of We’re Going on a Bear Hunt; after intervention, she correctly identified six words receptively
and two words expressively. Before intervention for
The Very Busy Spider, Asia demonstrated knowledge
of one word receptively but no words expressively.
After intervention, Asia demonstrated knowledge of
eight words receptively and three words expressively.
Melody, Jacobi, and Dwight demonstrated increased receptive vocabulary knowledge with minimal
expressive vocabulary gains. They presented with low
pre-intervention receptive scores and increased their
receptive identification by two to eight words per ebook condition, showing moderate to substantial gains.
Melody and Dwight each demonstrated learning of one
Butler et al.: Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New Vocabulary
163
Figure 2. Visual depiction of each child’s receptive word growth for each book.
Figure 3. Visual depiction of each child’s expressive word growth for each
book.
word expressively, whereas Jacobi is the only participant who did not increase his expressive scores as a
result of any of the e-book conditions.
on vocabulary acquisition for at-risk toddlers. The
results of this study support previous research on
interactive shared book reading as an effective set
of strategies for teaching new vocabulary (Goldstein, 2011; Justice & Kaderavek, 2002; Klesius &
Griffith, 1996; Trivette & Dunst, 2007). This study
adds to the literature by extending the intervention to
younger children and by showing promise for the use
of e-books in interactive shared book reading interventions, setting the stage for further examination of
digital interactive features.
Discussion
The current study examined the effects of integrating
interactive shared book reading strategies and digital
interactive features within e-book reading sessions
164
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014 Word-Learning Effects
Intervention components. Because the intervention
was provided as a package, it is difficult to make
robust claims on the differential effects of interactive shared book reading strategies, digital interactive features, and e-books as the delivery medium.
However, several procedural elements were included
to provide a rudimentary understanding of the potential effects of layering digital interactive features on
top of interactive shared book reading strategies (i.e.,
target words with digital interactive features plus
interactive shared book reading strategies vs. target
words with interactive shared book reading strategies
only) and explicitly targeted words with interactive
shared book reading strategies (i.e., target words vs.
control words). Children learned the target words
with and without digital interactivity at a similar
rate. Although this finding does not directly support
digital interactive features as an effective intervention
support, its use may have increased the children’s
engagement in the book reading session and therefore
had a mediating effect on their overall word learning. The participants’ small to negligible increases in
learning control words implies that being exposed to
the words of books may not be enough for children
to learn the words’ meaning. This further supports the
practice of explicitly teaching words as a part of storybook reading in order to increase children’s receptive and expressive vocabularies (Loftus et al., 2010).
Receptive and expressive gains. The children’s receptive vocabulary gains were higher than their expressive vocabulary gains. This finding is not surprising as
receptive word knowledge typically precedes expressive word knowledge (Benedict, 1979). Additionally,
the difference may be attributable to the frequency of
opportunities to practice the words. Other interactive
shared book reading studies have increased practice
opportunities by including vocabulary instruction both
within and outside of book reading sessions (Wasik et
al., 2006) and by using longer durations of intervention (Pollard-Durodola et al., 2011). It is possible
that with additional and varied practice opportunities
to produce the words, the children may have demonstrated greater expressive vocabulary gains.
Measuring word knowledge. The children may
have had a difficult time generalizing their knowledge
of the words learned in the intervention to the picture
cards of the words used for the final assessment.
Therefore, the children may have learned more words
than they demonstrated in the assessments. Both the
interventionist and classroom teacher reported hearing the children produce several of the target words
appropriately in classroom interactions; however,
some of those children did not produce the word
when asked during the assessment probes. Decontextualized formal vocabulary testing of toddlers is
inherently limited (Shipley & McAfee, 2009). Assessing vocabulary knowledge through multiple means,
including naturalistic observation, language sampling
with picture prompts, and teacher and parent report,
would provide a more representative picture of the
children’s vocabulary acquisition.
Differences across books. The amount of vocabulary words acquired following intervention fluctuated
depending on the books used in the storybook intervention. For instance, the children learned the fewest
new words during We’re Going on a Bear Hunt. Possible explanations may include the book’s familiarity
to the participants, high frequency of adjectives, and
minimal interaction between characters. In contrast,
children learned the most words during Mouse Was
Mad. This book was the first book used for the
storybook intervention and may have been novel. It
also had a frequency of verbs and included frequent
interactions between the characters. The Very Busy
Spider intervention yielded relatively high numbers
of expressive words among the participants. This may
be because it was the last book used for the storybook intervention; therefore, the children had more
experience with the interactive storybook context and
had increased maturation as a function of time. Additionally, The Very Busy Spider book appeared to be
a favorite among the children. The story was short,
with constant interaction between the characters, most
of which were animals, and the target words were
balanced across verbs and nouns. The participants
play with toy animals in their classrooms, so it may
have been easier for them to engage in the storybook
reading when they had initial familiarity with some
of the characters. Another possible explanation for
the variation of learning across books could be attributed to the primacy/recency effect (Reed, 2007).
This phenomenon provides an explanation for why
the learning and maintenance of specified information is greater in early and late presentations, which
aligns with the largest gains in the first and last book
presentations.
E-book engagement. Observations of the children’s participation across the intervention demonstrated that the children responded favorably to the
e-books. The children regularly sat as close to the
computer as possible, repeatedly asked to click on
the digital interactive features, and requested to go
to storytime. Despite a lack of differential effects
for digital interactive features on word learning, the
children generally appeared to be more attentive to
the pages in which digital interactive features were
included. When the final assessments were conducted,
the children asked where the computer was and if it
Butler et al.: Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New Vocabulary
165
to examine the digital interactive features in a more
controlled manner. Future single-subject research
could examine the difference between digital interactive and noninteractive features using an alternating
treatments design. The potential differences could
also be studied in a group comparison between children participating in e-book readings with digital interactive features versus a control group participating
in readings of the same e-books without interactive
features. Results from studies such as these may yield
different results on the impact of digital interactivity
in vocabulary learning of young children. Additional
examinations on intervention duration and opportunities to practice would provide data to support meaningful implementation. As the use of technology in
classrooms and intervention contexts is increasing,
it is important to study ways to use technology as a
tool to embed evidence-based instructional practices
supporting children’s learning.
was broken, further demonstrating their interest in
the e-books. The largest implementation challenge
was limiting the children’s access to the keyboard
on the laptop computer. In the future, touch screen
technology may be beneficial for this type of book
reading intervention. This study supports the utility of
e-books for flexible adaptation to various intervention
and teaching situations (Beauchat et al., 2009).
Limitations of the Study
Although the results of this study are important for
extending interactive shared book reading strategies
to toddlers and for exploring the use of e-books,
there are several limitations that are important to consider. Due to the small number of participants used,
the results of this study cannot be generalized to the
larger population of toddlers. Additionally, because
multiple evidence-based strategies were used, it cannot be clearly identified which before-, during-, and
after-reading strategies were most effective. Moreover, it cannot be determined from the results if any
of the strategies would generate similar results if they
were used independently or in different combinations.
Finally, as the interactive storybook reading was
conducted individually with pairs of children, large
group application is limited.
References
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2001).
Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists with respect to reading and writing in children and
adolescents [Position statement]. Available from www.
asha.org/policy
Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F. L., & Osborn, J. (2003). A
child becomes a reader: Birth through preschool (2nd
ed.). Washington, DC: National Institute of Literacy.
Implications
Previous research has demonstrated that many children enter preschool with vocabulary delays and that
children from lower SES backgrounds are at higher
risk for having vocabulary delays (Lonigan et al.,
2000; Pollard-Durodola et al., 2011; Wasik et al.,
2006). Examining approaches to ameliorate these
delays before children enter preschool can provide
valuable information, leading to potential increases in
later academic achievement. The results of this study
demonstrate promise for using interactive shared book
strategies within e-book reading sessions for at-risk
toddlers. Although this study supports implementation
feasibility with positive learning outcomes in pairs
of children, more research is needed to determine
how to develop and implement effective vocabulary
interventions for larger groups of toddlers. Lessons
learned from this investigation can be applied in
implementing e-book interactive reading sessions and
planning future research.
It is possible that incorporating digital interactive
features in the e-books provided the context for overall vocabulary learning by increasing the children’s
participation and engagement with the book, despite a
lack of clear trends in the word learning with digital
interactive features. Therefore, it would be interesting
166
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
Beauchat, K. A., Blamey, K. L., & Walpole, S. (2009).
Building preschool children’s language and literacy one
storybook at a time. Reading Teacher, 63(1), 26–39.
Benedict, H. (1979). Early lexical development: Comprehension and production. Journal of Child Language, 6(2),
183–200.
Biemiller, A., & Slonim, N. (2001). Estimating root word
vocabulary growth in normative and advantaged populations: Evidence for a common sequence of vocabulary
acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3),
498–520.
Blewitt, P., Rump, K. M., Shealy, S. E., & Cook, S. A.
(2009). Shared book reading: When and how questions
affect young children’s word learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 294–304.
Coyne, M. D., Simmons, D. C., Kame’enui, E. J., &
Stoolmiller, M. (2004). Teaching vocabulary during
shared storybook readings: An examination of differential effects. Exceptionality, 12(3), 145–162. doi:10.1207/
s15327035ex1203_3
Dollaghan, C. A., Campbell, T. F., Paradise, J. L., Feldman, H. M., Janosky, J. E., Pitcairn, D. N., & KursLasky, M. (1999). Maternal education and measures of
early speech and language. Journal of Speech, Language
and Hearing Research, 42, 1432–1443.
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014 Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Examiners manual
for the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test—Third Edition.
Circle Pines, MN: AGS.
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (1996). Guided reading:
Good first teaching for all children. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Goldstein, H. (2011). Knowing what to teach provides a
roadmap for early literacy intervention. Journal of Early
Intervention, 33(4), 268–280. doi:10.1177/105381511142
9464
Gormley, S., & Ruhl, K. L. (2005). Dialogic shared storybook reading: An instructional technique for use with
young students in inclusive settings. Reading & Writing
Quarterly, 21(3), 307–313. doi:10.1080/10573560591007
353
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences
in the everyday experience of young American children.
Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §
1400 (2004).
Justice, L. M., & Kaderavek, J. (2002). Using shared
storybook reading to promote emergent literacy. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 34(4), 8–13. Justice, L. M., Meier, J., & Walpole, S. (2005). Learning new words from storybooks: An efficacy study with
at-risk kindergartners. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools, 36, 17–32.
Kaderavek, J. N., & Justice, L. M. (2002). Shared
storybook reading as an intervention context: Promises
and potential pitfalls. American Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology, 11, 395–406. doi:10.1044/10580360(2002/043)
Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational
research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Klesius, J. P., & Griffith, P. L. (1996). Interactive storybook reading for at-risk learners. Reading Teacher, 49(7),
552–560. Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H., Levin,
J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & Shadish, W.
R. (2010). Single-case designs technical documentation.
Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/ wwc_scd.
pdf
Light, J., Drager, K., & Wilkinson, K. (2010). Designing effective visual scene displays for young
children [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from
http://aac-rerc.psu.edu/index.php/search/search/
?terms=wilkinson+and+LIght&submit=go
Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000).
Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills
in preschool children: evidence from a latent-variable
longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36(5),
596-613.
McKeown, M. G., & Beck, I. L. (2003). Direct and
rich vocabulary instruction. In J. F. Baumann & E. J.
Kame’enui (Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to
practice (pp. 13–27). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
National Reading Panel. (Ed.). (2000). Teaching children
to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific
research literature on reading and its implications for
reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of
Child Health and Development. Retrieved from http://
www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/report.htm
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No.
107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
Pearson, D., & Duke, N. (2002). Effective practices for
developing reading comprehension. In A. Fartstrup & J.
Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading
instruction (pp. 205–242). New York, NY: International
Reading Association. Pollard-Durodola, S. D., Gonzalez, J. E., Simmons, D.
C., Kwok, O., Taylor, A. B., Davis, M. J., … Simmons,
L. (2011). The effects of an intensive shared bookreading intervention for preschool children at risk for
vocabulary delay. Exceptional Children, 77(2), 161–183.
Reed, S. K. (2007). Cognition: Theory and applications
(7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Sénéchal, M. (1997). The differential effect of storybook
reading on preschoolers’ acquisition of expressive and
receptive vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 24,
123–138.
Shipley, K. G., & McAfee, J. G. (2009). Assessment in
speech-language pathology: A resource manual (4th ed.).
Clifton Park, NY: Delmar/Cengage Learning.
Stahl, K. A. D. (2004). Proof, practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction in the primary grades. The
Reading Teacher, 57(7), 598-609.
Stranovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading:
Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4),
360–407.
Trivette, C. M., & Dunst, C. J. (2007). Relative effectiveness of dialogic, interactive, and shared reading interventions. CELLreviews, 1(2), 1–12. Retrieved from www.earlyliteracylearning.org/cellreviews/cellreviews_v1_n2.pdf
Light, J., & McNaughton, D. (2013). Putting people first:
Re-thinking the role of technology in augmentative and
alternative communication intervention. Augmentative and
Alternative Communication, 29(4), 299–309.
Loftus, S. M., Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., Zipoli, R.,
& Pullen, P. C. (2010). Effects of a supplemental vocabulary intervention on the word knowledge of kindergarten students at risk for language and literacy difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(3),
124–136. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00310.x
Wasik, B. A., & Bond, M. A. (2001). Beyond the pages of
a book: Interactive book reading and language development in preschool classrooms. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93, 243–250.
Wasik, B. A., Bond, M. A., & Hindman, A. (2006). The
effects of a language and literacy intervention on Head
Start children and teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 63–74.
Wilkinson, K., Carlin, M., & Thistle, J. (2008). The role
of color cues in facilitating accurate and rapid location of
Butler et al.: Teaching At-Risk Toddlers New Vocabulary
167
Contact author: Jennifer A. Brown, Department of Communication Sciences and Special Education, University of
Georgia, 536 Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA 30602. E-mail:
[email protected]
aided symbols by children with and without Down syndrome. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology,
17(2), 179–193. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2008/018)
Zimmerman, I., Steiner, V., & Pond, R. (2011). Preschool
Language Scale, Fifth Edition. San Antonio, TX: The
Psychological Corporation.
Appendix. Lesson Plan for Mouse Was Mad
Before-Reading Strategies
•
•
•
Have the child name something they see on the title page.
– What do you see in this picture?
Have the child imitate the interventionist.
– This is a mouse. Say “mouse” with me… “mouse.”
Have the child answer a question pertaining to the book.
– What do you think the story is about?
During-Reading Strategies
With each target vocabulary word, the child will:
• Say the word out loud with the interventionist.
– Word order:
1. Hopping
2. Puddle
3. Stomping
4. Shaking
5. Screaming
6. Bobcat
7. Hedgehog
8. Standing
• Talk about the word with the interventionist.
– One additional sentence about the word
• Imitate the action of the word with the interventionist or produce the new word on their own.
– Let’s do it together!
– Let’s say the word together.
After-Reading Strategies
•
•
•
168
The child will tell the interventionist one thing/word/picture they can remember from the book.
– What is one thing you remember from the book? A picture? A word?
The interventionist will ask the child:
– What is one thing you liked from the book?
The interventionist will repeat the new vocabulary words with the child.
– Let’s say the new words together: hopping, puddle, stomping, shaking, bobcat, screaming, hedgehog, standing
Contemporary Issues
in
Communication Science
and
Disorders • Volume 41 • 155–168 • Fall 2014