Reach Out and Read Assessment: The Final Report
March 2007
Findings
The parent survey and child assessment quantitative findings follow. Key findings about differences between the ROR and control groups were tested using an ANOVA of gain scores between 6 and 12 months. Because of the small sample sizes, all tests were evaluated against an alpha level of .10.
Data Analysis: The Parent Survey
A research concern was revealed during the follow-up visits at the control
site. As the parents were reporting that a physician had talked to
them about reading to their child, the nursing staff was questioned.
The surprising answer was that the control site families were routinely
advised to read to their children. During the 6 month well-child check-up,
it was suggested that parents read books for a few minutes everyday.
The control site was less than ideal for the complete three-part ROR
model. The points not directly influenced in the RORA survey
were those concerning receiving books and observing reading volunteers.
The three initial questions attempted to elicit responses containing the words “reading” or “book.” If, after prompts to get three responses for each question, the parent used one of the words, a “yes” was recorded.
D
Figure 3: Reading is a Favorite Thing To Do
Between 6 and 12 months, the number of ROR parents who mentioned reading as one of three favorite things they did with their child jumped from 14.3 % to 35.7 %. The control group remained unchanged at 22.2%. See Figure 3. Although this difference in gain was statistically insignificant (F = .63, df = 1,21, p = .44), the trend is positive. The sample could have been influenced because least three of the control site parents were students being enrolled in child development classes at local high schools.
Neither group read to their children at bedtime at 6 months. At 12 months, both study groups showed almost identical increases, 35.7% for ROR parents and 33.3% for control parents. This says more about the parent perceptions about child development. By 12 months, more parents may be more inclined to feel that their child is ready for a story in the bedtime routine than they are at six months of age.
D.
Figure 4: Reads For Kindergarten Success
The question about what the parents do now for success at kindergarten found the ROR group gaining from 21.4% at 6 months to 64.3% at 12 months by mentioning reading. See Figure 4 for a look at a somewhat positive trend. The control group changed less, from 44.4% to 66.7%. This was insignificant at p= .10.
D.
Figure 5: Reads to Child (significant change)
The next questions look at book reading. “Do you ever read children’s books to [name]” reflects the ROR group gaining more. An ANOVA of the gain scores showed a significantly greater change in the ROR group than in the control group parents reading to their children (F = 2.69, df = 1,21, p = .10). At 6 months, 50% of ROR parents said they read children’s books to their infants. By 12 months this increased to 93% of ROR parents reading. By comparison, 78% of control parents read to their children at 6 months, increasing to 89% at 12 months. See Figure 5. In other words, at 6 months more parents in the control group were reading to their infants, but by 12 months this pattern had reversed: a greater proportion of ROR parents read to their children.
When the parent replied that they did not read to their child, “is he/she too young for that” was asked. Five parents responded that their child “was too young for that” in the ROR group, at 6 months. In the control group two parents replied the same way at 6 months. At 12 months, only one parent in the whole sample replied that they did not read to the child because they thought they were too young. This participant was at the ROR site and had only been at the clinic once. Parent perceptions are critical when educating about why it is important to read to the very young child.
D.
Figure 6: Books for Child at Home
The question, “how many books altogether do you have at home that you read to [name],” was asked of the parents. The ROR site reported a mean of 4.1 books at 6 months and 8.3 books at 12 months. Control group parents reported a mean of 5 books at 6 months and 6.9 at 12 months. See Figure 6. Two ROR families reported less books at 12 months, which may contribute to the insignificant results (F = .59, df = 1,21, p= .45). The number of ROR families reporting having books at home increased from a total of 7 families at 6 months to a total of 13 families at 12 months.
Another question, “How many days each week do you read children’s books to [name],” was asked of the parents. The ROR site reported a mean of 1.6 days/week at 6 months and a mean of 2.6 days/week at 12 months. The control site mean was 3.1 days/week at 6 months, increasing to 3.8 days/week at 12 months. The largest gain between 6 and 12 months occurred at the ROR site, however it was statistically insignificant (F = .09, df = 1,21, p = .77).
The Follow-up Visit
Five additional questions were asked during the follow-up interview at
the 12-month check-up. Their purpose was to validate part of the ROR
model.
At the ROR site, 64.3% of parents said that their doctor talked to them about reading to their child. At the control site, the corresponding percentage was 66.7%, a statistically insignificant difference (chi-square = .01, df = 1, p = .91). As previously mentioned, the control site physicians did talk to families about reading to their children.
More ROR parents said doctors gave them good ideas about how to read to their children (64.3%) than did control parents (44.4%). However, this difference was again statistically insignificant (chi-square = .88, df = 1, p = .35).
As expected, ROR parents received significantly more children’s books from a doctor (mean = 2.4) than did parents at the control site (mean = 0; F = 18.15, df = 1, 21, p < .001).
D.
Figure 7: Has Seen Volunteers Reading to Children
When asked if they had ever seen volunteers reading to children in the waiting room, 57.1% of ROR parents indicated they had, compared to none of the control-site parents (chi-square = 7.89, df = 1, p = .005). See Figure 7.
Finally, ROR parents were significantly more likely to say their children had listened to volunteers reading (35.7%) than was the case with control-site parents (0%; chi-square = 4.12, df = 1, p = .043). Given that 12 months is young enough to often be sleeping or easily distracted, this number may be regarded positively.
Data Analysis: The Child Assessment
The PLS-4 instrument (Zimmerman, 2002) assesses children for an auditory
comprehension score, an expressive communication score, and a total
language score. All of the child assessment scores were insignificant.
As the control site was less than ideal, this is not surprising. In
addition, the final sample size was very small. Also, the very young
age being assessed might be too young to show a difference at such
a short interval. A summary of the assessment scores follows.
D.
Figure 8: Child Assessment Scores
The total sample mean scores for auditory comprehension were 90.2% for the 6 month-olds, increasing to 92% at the age of 12 months. At 6 months of age, the expressive communication means were 86.1%, and a very close score of 85.9% at 12 months of age. All of the twenty-three subjects had a total language score of 87% at 6 months of age, and an 88% at 12 months of age. See Figure 8.
Looking at just the ROR site, the mean score for the auditory comprehension assessment for the 6 month-olds was 89.2%, increasing to 92.8% at 12 months. For the expressive communication assessment at 6 months, the mean was 85.4%, and a similar 84.6% at 12 months. The total language score means at the ROR site for the 6 month-olds was 85.9%, and 87.6% for the 12 month-olds.
The control site means were as follows. The auditory comprehension assessment mean score at 6 months was 91.7%, and 90.9% at 12 months. Expressive communication score means were 87.3% at 6 months, and almost no change with 87.9% at 12 months. The control site total language score means for the 6-month age were 88.7%, and a nearly identical 88.4% for the 12-month age group.
In calculating the age equivalents for two assessment visits, using the PLS-4, the total sample of children were 5.5 months and 11.7 months, respectively. The children were on target developmentally as the children had just reached the 6-8 month and 12-17 month assessment age ranges. This may be viewed as a positive result. Further research question: what happens between 12 months of age and entering kindergarten?
