Elisabeth Duursma

Reading aloud to children: The evidence

Promoting healthy child development lies at the heart of paediatric practice, yet a major challenge facing the field is applying evidence based standards. However, the evidence is clear as regards reading aloud to children. Ample research demonstrates that reading aloud to young children promotes the development of language and other emergent literacy skills,1–4 which in turn help children prepare for school.3 5 Reading aloud to children or shared bookreading has been linked to young children’s emergent literacy ability, which can be defined as the skills or knowledge that children develop before learning the more conventional skills of reading and writing6–8 which affect children’s later success in reading.9 During shared bookreading, children learn to recognise letters, understand that print represents the spoken word, and learn how to hold a book, turn the page and start at the beginning.10–12 Shared bookreading is also associated with learning print concepts11 and exposing children to the written language register, which is different from spoken language,13 as well as story structures (eg, stories have a beginning, middle and end) and literacy conventions such as syntax and grammar which are essential for understanding texts.14 These emergent literacy skills are important for later success in reading.2 15 Phonological awareness (the ability to manipulate the sounds of spoken language1 16–18) is another important prerequisite for learning to read. To read words, children need to know the rules for translating print into meaningful sounds.8 16 For example, preschoolers’ sensitivity to alliteration and rhyme at age 4–5 contributed to progress in reading and spelling at age 6–7.19 Children’s knowledge of nursery rhymes at age 3–4 is related to detecting alliteration and rhyme at ages 4–7.20 Many parents naturally promote awareness …

Who’s reading to children in low‐income families? The influence of paternal, maternal and child characteristics

Most research on parental bookreading has focused on mothers reading to their children. This study examined bookreading practices among approximately 800 fathers and mothers in low‐income families. We looked at differences and similarities between families where both parents read frequently compared to families where only mothers read frequently. In more than a third of the low‐income families in this study, both parents reported reading to their young children on a regular basis (daily or weekly). Parents who were higher educated, who had girls and who had children with better language and cognitive skills were more likely to read frequently to their children. Intervention efforts to increase reading in the home to toddlers and preschoolers in low‐income families should be targeted at fathers, a relatively under‐tapped resource, and should focus on families in which parents have lower levels of education and those whose children have less advanced cognitive and language skills.

Parental Bookreading Practices among Families in the Netherlands.

Bookreading has proven to be beneficial for children’s language and literacy development (e.g. Bus, Van Ijzendoorn and Pellegrini, 1995; Fletcher and Reese, 2005; Mol and Bus, 2011a). Families in Western countries are often advised to read to their young children, and many parents appear to be aware of the positive effects of bookreading. However, little is known about bookreading patterns among families in the Netherlands. In this study, we analysed the bookreading behaviours of 464 parents with children aged 0–12 residing in the Netherlands, as well as the reading behaviours of 275 children aged 8–12 years. The results demonstrate that 60% of parents read daily to their children. Parental education was significantly related to bookreading frequency but home language was not. Fathers were the primary reader in only 8% of families compared to 65% for mothers. Parents did not read for long periods of time: 40% of parents reported reading between 5 and 10 minutes and another 40% read from 10 to 15 minutes. Almost half of the children in this study reported reading at least once a day and a quarter read between 15 and 20 minutes a day. This study provides more insights into bookreading patterns among Dutch families. Although many families already report reading to their children, there is still room for improvement regarding the length of reading and paternal bookreading.

Who does the reading, who the talking? Low-income fathers and mothers in the US interacting with their young children around a picture book

Bookreading is known to benefit young children’s language and literacy development. However, research has demonstrated that how adults interact around a book with a child is probably even more important than reading the complete text. Dialogic or interactive reading strategies can promote children’s language development more specifically. Little is known about how fathers engage in bookreading with their children. This study examined the differences and similarities in interaction style during bookreading among low-income fathers and mothers in the US at child ages two and three, in particular focusing on immediate and non-immediate talk. Results demonstrated that fathers used more non-immediate talk, or talk not directly related to the book, than mothers did, at both child ages. Fathers also used more engagement strategies than mothers did.

Fostering Effective Early Learning (FEEL) through a professional development programme for early childhood educators to improve professional practice and child outcomes in the year before formal schooling: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

BackgroundA substantial research base documents the benefits of attendance at high-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) for positive behavioural and learning outcomes. Research has also found that the quality of many young children’s experiences and opportunities in ECEC depends on the skills, dispositions and understandings of the early childhood adult educators. Increasingly, research has shown that the quality of children’s interactions with educators and their peers, more than any other programme feature, influence what children learn and how they feel about learning. Hence, we sought to investigate the extent to which evidence-based professional development (PD) – focussed on promoting sustained shared thinking through quality interactions – could improve the quality of ECEC and, as a consequence, child outcomes.Methods/designThe Fostering Effective Early Learning (FEEL) study is a cluster randomised controlled trial for evaluating the benefits of a professional development (PD) programme for early childhood educators, compared with no extra PD. Ninety long-day care and preschool centres in New South Wales, Australia, will be selected to ensure representation across National Quality Standards (NQS) ratings, location, centre type and socioeconomic areas. Participating centres will be randomly allocated to one of two groups, stratified by centre type and NQS rating: (1) an intervention group (45 centres) receiving a PD intervention or (2) a control group (45 centres) that continues engaging in typical classroom practice. Randomisation to these groups will occur after the collection of baseline environmental quality ratings. Primary outcomes, at the child level, will be two measures of language development: verbal comprehension and expressive vocabulary. Secondary outcomes at the child level will be measures of early numeracy, social development and self-regulation. Secondary outcomes at the ECEC room level will be measures of environmental quality derived from full-day observations. In all cases, data collectors will be blinded to group allocation.DiscussionThis is the first randomised controlled trial of a new approach to PD, which is focussed on activities previously found to be influential in children’s early language, numeracy, social and self-regulatory development. Results should inform practitioners, policy-makers and families of the value of specific professional development for early childhood educators.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN) identifier ACTRN12616000536460. Registered on 27 April 2016. This trial was retrospectively registered, given the first participant (centre) had been enrolled at the time of registration.

Measuring interactional quality in pre-school settings: introduction and validation of the Sustained Shared Thinking and Emotional Wellbeing (SSTEW) scale

ABSTRACT Research increasingly acknowledges the importance of high quality interactions that support and extend children’s thinking. Few measurement tools currently exist, however, to capture this specific aspect of process quality. The Sustained Shared Thinking and Emotional Wellbeing (SSTEW) scale was developed to assess interactional quality in early childhood education and care, and it includes dimensions of process quality based on developmental theories and practice in effective settings. This study compared ratings on the SSTEW and Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale – Extension (ECERS-E) to consider the impact of varying levels of curricular and interactional quality on child development in 45 Australian pre-school centres; namely the language, numeracy and socio-behavioural development of 669 children at the end of their pre-school year. Results indicated a level of predictive validity for interactional quality ratings as measured by SSTEW which, while related to curricular quality ratings on ECERS-E, differed in associations across domains of child development.

The Framework for Prevention

Depression is a disease affecting millions of people worldwide, has a high risk of recurrence and carries high health care and other societal costs. Prevention of depression is essential, in particular since depression is more likely to persist when no intervention is provided. In this chapter we discuss the prevention framework developed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) for providing a model to understand the different objectives of interventions. We also discuss risk factors specific for the elderly and identification of the population at risk. Finally we review some best practices in depression interventions and offer some suggestions for future research.