Let's Know!2: Language-focused Intervention for Children at Risk of Comprehension Difficulties

NCT ID: NCT05133479

Last Updated: 2025-12-24

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

241 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-01-01

Study Completion Date

2026-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

In the proposed project, the investigators will conduct a multisite randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the efficacy of Let's Know!2, a small-group, language focused comprehension intervention, on children's lower- and higher-level language skills and comprehension skills in the short- and long-term (Specific Aims 1 and 2). The investigators will also explore whether intervention effects are moderated by dosage, initial language skill, developmental language disorder (DLD) status, word reading skill, nonverbal IQ, and family socioeconomic status (Specific Aim 3).

Children who have low language skills and are thus at risk for reading comprehension difficulties will participate in the study. Children will be randomly assigned to receive Let's Know! in small groups at their respective schools or to a business-as-usual control condition. The investigators will measure children's language and comprehension skills at the beginning and end of Grade 1 as well as in Grade 2 and Grade 3. The investigators hypothesize that children who experience Let's Know! will end Grade 1 with higher language skills than children in the control condition and that this will translate into better listening and reading comprehension skills as these children matriculate through elementary school.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Parents of children enrolled in Grade 1 at partnering schools will receive consent materials and those who provide consent will complete a brief background/demographic survey about their child. For children whose parents provide informed consent, research staff will (a) ask their educator to confirm basic English proficiency and lack of profound disabilities or behavior issues that severely impair classroom functioning, (b) seek the child's assent to project activities, and (c) administer a language screener in a quiet location at their respective school, either in a small group of other consented children or one-on-one. In order to qualify as eligible for the intervention phase of the study, consented children must: (1) be enrolled in Grade 1 (per educator or parent report) (2) score at or below the empirically derived cut-score on the OWL screener (obtained via direct testing), (3) exhibit at least basic skills in speaking and understanding English (per educator report), (4) not exhibit behavioral difficulties sufficiently severe to prevent participation in the intervention (per educator report), (5) not have a severe disability that would prevent participation in the intervention (per educator report), (6) assent to study activities. Children who meet all eligibility criteria, including scoring below our cutoff on the language screener, will be categorized as potentially eligible for enrollment in the intervention phase of the study. In order to enroll children within a particular school, the investigators must identify a minimum of 6 eligible participants in that school. The investigators will cap the child participants per school at a maximum of 20 in cohort 1 and 10 in cohorts 2 \& 3 to allow for later analysis of nested data (children nested within schools; the investigators need 40 schools for appropriate statistical power). Children who are identified as potentially eligible but who attend schools with fewer than 6 total eligible participants, or who consent to the study but have not yet been screened by the time the investigators identify 20 eligible participants in cohort 1 and 10 in cohorts 2 \& 3 will be excluded from further participation. In schools in which the investigators have more than the allotted potentially eligible children, the investigators will randomly select the cohort-specific number to enroll in the intervention phase of the study. Children enrolled in the intervention phase of the study will be randomly assigned to receive the Let's Know! intervention or to a business-as-usual control condition. Random assignment will be conducted by Dr. Flemming at KUMC, who will be uninvolved in recruitment, screening, and pretest activities. Prior to intervention start, all enrolled children will complete pretest assessments to measure the lower-level and higher-level language skills targeted by the Let's Know! intervention, comprehension skills, and other abilities (i.e., covariates and moderators for addressing Aim 3). All direct child assessments are listed in Table 1 above. All child direct assessments (screening, pretest, curriculum-aligned measures, posttest, follow-up) will be administered by trained research staff in quiet locations at children's respective schools; alternative arrangements to conduct assessments in the PIs' research laboratories or community locations (e.g., public library) will be made as necessary (e.g., if a child moves into a new, non-partnering school). All but the language screener and Gates-MacGinitie Tests of Reading will be administered individually, with the two exceptions administered to small groups or 1:1, dependent on scheduling. Screening and assessment sessions may be audio or video recorded to allow for accurate scoring and analysis. Following pretest assessments and assignment to conditions, research staff will provide the Let's Know! intervention to small groups of 3 to 5 children allocated to the intervention condition at their respective schools. The Let's Know! intervention provides instruction in the domains of text structure, integration, word knowledge, and grammar; as such, it targets key lower-level (vocabulary) and higher-level (e.g., story grammar, comprehension monitoring, inferencing) language skills to support listening and reading comprehension. The intervention features manualized, soft-scripted lessons that will be provided in small groups of 3-5 children 4 times a week for 25-30 minutes. The lessons are organized into four instructional units that are delivered over 22 weeks. All four instructional units emphasize repeated readings and explorations of commercial texts, with two units comprising narrative books and two comprising expository books. All intervention lessons will be videotaped for purposes of monitoring implementation and coding fidelity. If an individual child misses a session, this will be documented and the session will not be made up. If an entire group misses a session (e.g., due to a field trip/school assembly), the interventionist will wait and deliver that lesson during the next scheduled session (e.g., one group may miss Animals 12 due to a Tuesday assembly; the interventionist teaches Animals 12 at the regularly scheduled Wednesday session and proceeds from there). Children in the control condition will participate in study assessments as noted above but will not experience the Let's Know! intervention. They will receive business-as-usual classroom instruction and supports within their schools. That is, the child's family and school will provide instruction and support for children in the control condition as they typically would for any child not enrolled in the study. The investigators will document the interventions received by children in both the intervention and control conditions.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Language Disorders in Children

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

language skills reading comprehension intervention specific language impairment dyslexia

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Intervention

Participants receive the Let's Know! intervention in small groups as provided by research staff

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Let's Know! small-group or TierL 2 Intervention

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Let's Know!2 is an 22-week intervention spanning 1 school year. Each week features 4, 20-30 minute lessons targeting lower-level and higher-level language skills. Within units, instructors and children progress through specific types of lessons to meet language-focused learning objectives. LK!2 was adapted from the original Let's Know! curriculum (LARRC, 2016). The adaption from LK! to LK! made lessons appropriate for small groups of Grade 1 students with low language skills. Adaptations focused on (1) simplification of language input, (2) increased scaffolding, (3) attention to distributed practice, (4) materials to support diversity and inclusion, and (5) enhanced interventionist training. LK!2 comprised 76 20-30 min lessons across four units (fiction, animals, earth materials, folktales) as implemented by trained research staff (i.e., interventionists).

Business-As-Usual

Participants continue to receive only their typical classroom instruction (i.e., no small groups)

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Let's Know! small-group or TierL 2 Intervention

Let's Know!2 is an 22-week intervention spanning 1 school year. Each week features 4, 20-30 minute lessons targeting lower-level and higher-level language skills. Within units, instructors and children progress through specific types of lessons to meet language-focused learning objectives. LK!2 was adapted from the original Let's Know! curriculum (LARRC, 2016). The adaption from LK! to LK! made lessons appropriate for small groups of Grade 1 students with low language skills. Adaptations focused on (1) simplification of language input, (2) increased scaffolding, (3) attention to distributed practice, (4) materials to support diversity and inclusion, and (5) enhanced interventionist training. LK!2 comprised 76 20-30 min lessons across four units (fiction, animals, earth materials, folktales) as implemented by trained research staff (i.e., interventionists).

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Let's Know! small-group or Tier 2 Intervention

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Parental consent to participate in the research;
* Enrollment in Grade 1;
* Scores below the 30th percentile on the OWL Language Screener
* Basic English proficiency as reported by parents/teachers

Exclusion Criteria

* Unable to speak or understand English at a basic level, as reported by parents/teachers;
* Profound disability that severely impairs classroom participation, as reported by teachers;
* Serious behavior issue that severely impairs classroom participation, as reported by teachers.
Minimum Eligible Age

5 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

12 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)

NIH

Sponsor Role collaborator

Ohio State University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Kansas

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

MGH Institute of Health Professions

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Tiffany P. Hogan, PhD, CCC-SLP, FASHA

Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Tiffany P Hogan, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

MGH Institute of Health Professions

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

MGH Institute of Health Professions

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

The Ohio State University

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Durlak JA, DuPre EP. Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Community Psychol. 2008 Jun;41(3-4):327-50. doi: 10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18322790 (View on PubMed)

Faggella-Luby, M. N., Drew, S. V., & Schumaker, J. B. (2015). Not such a simple story: Contradictory evidence from a review of story structure research for students at-risk. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30, 61-75.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Nation K, Clarke P, Marshall CM, Durand M. Hidden language impairments in children: parallels between poor reading comprehension and specific language impairment? J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2004 Feb;47(1):199-211. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2004/017).

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15072539 (View on PubMed)

Nation K, Adams JW, Bowyer-Crane CA, Snowling MJ. Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders reflect underlying language impairments. J Exp Child Psychol. 1999 Jun;73(2):139-58. doi: 10.1006/jecp.1999.2498.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10328862 (View on PubMed)

Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., Loftus, S., Zipoli Jr, R., Ruby, M., Crevecoeur, Y. C., & Kapp, S. (2010). Direct and extended vocabulary instruction in kindergarten: Investigating transfer effects. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3, 93-120.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Deniz F, Nunez-Elizalde AO, Huth AG, Gallant JL. The Representation of Semantic Information Across Human Cerebral Cortex During Listening Versus Reading Is Invariant to Stimulus Modality. J Neurosci. 2019 Sep 25;39(39):7722-7736. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0675-19.2019. Epub 2019 Aug 19.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31427396 (View on PubMed)

Connor CM, Morrison FJ. Individualizing Student Instruction in Reading: Implications for Policy and Practice. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2016 Mar;3(1):54-61. doi: 10.1177/2372732215624931. Epub 2016 Jan 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29732399 (View on PubMed)

Dickinson, D. K., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2010). Speaking out for language:Why language is central to reading development. Educational Researcher, 39, 305-310.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Douglas, K., & Albro, E. (2014). The progress and promise of the reading for understanding research initiative. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 341-355.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Goodman WG, Baylink DJ, Sherrard DJ. 24,25(OH)2D3, bone formation, and bone resorption in vitamin D-deficient, azotemic rats. Calcif Tissue Int. 1984 Mar;36(2):206-13. doi: 10.1007/BF02405319.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 6430503 (View on PubMed)

Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 933-958.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Alloway, T. P., & Gathercole, S. E. (2005). The role of sentence recall in reading and language skills of children with learning difficulties. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 271-282. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2005.05.001

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Alonzo, C. N., Yeomans-Maldonado, G., Murphy, K. A., Bevens, B., & Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2016). Predicting second grade listening comprehension using prekindergarten measures. Topics in Language Disorders, 36, 312-333.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Baumann, J. F., Seifert-Kessell, N., & Jones, L. A. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary students' comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 143-172.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Bengtson, E., Bridges, M., Daniels, D., Brandel, J., & Fisher, C. (2015). Improving language and listening skills in pre-kindergarten children during a summer literacy program. Poster session presented at KSHA, October.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Bridges, M.S., Piasta, S., Daniels, D., & Brandel, J. (February, 2016). Small-group intervention to support language and comprehension: Feasibility and Pilot Data. Presented at Pacific Coast Research Conference, San Diego, CA.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Castles A, Rastle K, Nation K. Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2018 Jun;19(1):5-51. doi: 10.1177/1529100618772271.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29890888 (View on PubMed)

Catts HW, Nielsen DC, Bridges MS, Liu YS. Early Identification of Reading Comprehension Difficulties. J Learn Disabil. 2016 Sep;49(5):451-65. doi: 10.1177/0022219414556121. Epub 2014 Oct 24.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25344060 (View on PubMed)

Catts HW, Adlof SM, Ellis Weismer S. Language deficits in poor comprehenders: a case for the simple view of reading. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2006 Apr;49(2):278-93. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2006/023).

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16671844 (View on PubMed)

Chall, J. S. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Chall, J. S., & Jacobs, V. A. (2003). Poor children's fourth-grade slump. American Educator, 27, 14-15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Ciullo S, Lo YL, Wanzek J, Reed DK. A Synthesis of Research on Informational Text Reading Interventions for Elementary Students With Learning Disabilities. J Learn Disabil. 2016 May-Jun;49(3):257-71. doi: 10.1177/0022219414539566. Epub 2014 Jun 23.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24958632 (View on PubMed)

Clements, D. H. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for research-based curricula. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35-70.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Nation, K. (2001). Reading and language in children: Exposing hidden deficits. The Psychologist, 14(5), 238-242.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Fien H, Smith JL, Smolkowski K, Baker SK, Nelson NJ, Chaparro E. An Examination of the Efficacy of a Multitiered Intervention on Early Reading Outcomes for First Grade Students at Risk for Reading Difficulties. J Learn Disabil. 2015 Nov-Dec;48(6):602-21. doi: 10.1177/0022219414521664. Epub 2014 Feb 14.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24532827 (View on PubMed)

Fixsen, D., Naoom, S., Blase, K., Friedman, R., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, National Implementation Research Network.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., ... & Keating, B. (2016). Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten through 3rd Grade. Educator's Practice Guide. NCEE 2016-4008. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Gates, A. I., & MacGinitie, W. H. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Riverside.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D., Coyne, M., Greenwood, C., & Innocenti, M. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 149-164.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Gottfredson DC, Cook TD, Gardner FE, Gorman-Smith D, Howe GW, Sandler IN, Zafft KM. Standards of Evidence for Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Scale-up Research in Prevention Science: Next Generation. Prev Sci. 2015 Oct;16(7):893-926. doi: 10.1007/s11121-015-0555-x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25846268 (View on PubMed)

Hall MS, Burns MK. Meta-analysis of targeted small-group reading interventions. J Sch Psychol. 2018 Feb;66:54-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2017.11.002. Epub 2017 Nov 15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29429496 (View on PubMed)

Harn BA, Linan-Thompson S, Roberts G. Intensifying instruction: Does additional instructional time make a difference for the most at-risk first graders? J Learn Disabil. 2008 Mar-Apr;41(2):115-25. doi: 10.1177/0022219407313586.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18354932 (View on PubMed)

Hebert, M., Bohaty, J. J., Nelson, J. R., & Lambert, M. C. (2018). Identifying and discriminating expository text structures: An experiment with 4th and 5th grade struggling readers. Reading and Writing, 31, 2115-2145.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Hogan, T. P., Bridges, M. S., Justice, L. M., & Cain, K. (2011). Increasing higher level language skills to improve reading comprehension. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44, 1-19.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Hogan TP, Adlof SM, Alonzo CN. On the importance of listening comprehension. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2014 Jun;16(3):199-207. doi: 10.3109/17549507.2014.904441.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24833426 (View on PubMed)

Hulme C, Snowling MJ. Learning to Read: What We Know and What We Need to Understand Better. Child Dev Perspect. 2015 Mar 1;7(1):1-5. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12005.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26290678 (View on PubMed)

Institute of Education Sciences. (2017, October). What Works Clearinghouse standards handbook (version 4.0). Retrieved August 17, 2018 https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwc_standards_handbook_v4.pdf

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Institute of Education Sciences & National Science Foundation. (2013). Common guidelines for education research and development. Washington, DC: Authors.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Joseph, L. M., Alber-Morgan, S., Cullen, J., & Rouse, C. (2016). The effects of self-questioning on reading comprehension: A literature review. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 32, 152-173.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1997). Kaufman brief intelligence test (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, MN: NCS Pearson.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2015). Learning to read: Should we keep things simple? Reading Research Quarterly, 50, 151-169.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2016). Use of the curriculum research framework (CRF) for developing a reading-comprehension curricular supplement for the primary grades. The Elementary School Journal, 116, 459-486.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Language and Reading Research Consortium (LARRC). Oral Language and Listening Comprehension: Same or Different Constructs? J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 May 24;60(5):1273-1284. doi: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-16-0039.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28475679 (View on PubMed)

Language and Reading Research Consortium, & Chiu, Y. D. (2018). The simple view of reading across development: Prediction of grade 3 reading comprehension from prekindergarten skills. Remedial and Special Education, 39, 289-303. d

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Language and Reading Research Consortium (LAARC); Farquharson K, Murphy KA. Ten Steps to Conducting a Large, Multi-Site, Longitudinal Investigation of Language and Reading in Young Children. Front Psychol. 2016 Mar 30;7:419. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00419. eCollection 2016.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27064308 (View on PubMed)

Language and Reading Research Consortium, Jiang, H., & Davis, D. (2017). Let's Know! Proximal impacts on prekindergarten through grade 3 students' comprehension-related skills. The Elementary School Journal, 118, 177-206.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Language and Reading Research Consortium (LARRC); Jiang H, Logan JA, Jia R. Modeling the Nature of Grammar and Vocabulary Trajectories From Prekindergarten to Third Grade. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018 Apr 17;61(4):910-923. doi: 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-17-0090.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29642241 (View on PubMed)

Jiang H, Logan J. Improving Reading Comprehension in the Primary Grades: Mediated Effects of a Language-Focused Classroom Intervention. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Aug 15;62(8):2812-2828. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-L-19-0015. Epub 2019 Aug 7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31390289 (View on PubMed)

Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. S. (2011). Qualitative reading inventory (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Lohr, S., Schochet, P.Z., & Sanders, E (2014). Partially Nested Randomized Controlled Trials in Education Research: A Guide to Design and Analysis. (NCER 2014-2000). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Educational Research.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Schatschneider, C. (2018). Examining the simple view of reading with elementary school children: Still simple after all these years. Remedial and Special Education, 39, 260-273.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

McNeish D, Stapleton LM. Modeling Clustered Data with Very Few Clusters. Multivariate Behav Res. 2016 Jul-Aug;51(4):495-518. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2016.1167008. Epub 2016 Jun 7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27269278 (View on PubMed)

Moir, T. (2018). Why is implementation science important for intervention design and evaluation within educational settings? Frontiers in Education, 3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 22179294 (View on PubMed)

Norbury CF, Gooch D, Wray C, Baird G, Charman T, Simonoff E, Vamvakas G, Pickles A. The impact of nonverbal ability on prevalence and clinical presentation of language disorder: evidence from a population study. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016 Nov;57(11):1247-1257. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.12573. Epub 2016 May 16.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27184709 (View on PubMed)

Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary educational psychology, 8(3), 317-344.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Petscher Y, Justice LM, Hogan T. Modeling the Early Language Trajectory of Language Development When the Measures Change and Its Relation to Poor Reading Comprehension. Child Dev. 2018 Nov;89(6):2136-2156. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12880. Epub 2017 Jul 5.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28677872 (View on PubMed)

Phillips BM, Tabulda G, Ingrole SA, Burris PW, Sedgwick TK, Chen S. Literate Language Intervention With High-Need Prekindergarten Children: A Randomized Trial. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016 Dec 1;59(6):1409-1420. doi: 10.1044/2016_JSLHR-L-15-0155.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27960007 (View on PubMed)

Phillips BM, Zhao Y, Weekley MJ. Teacher language in the preschool classroom: Initial validation of a classroom environment observation tool. Early Educ Dev. 2018;29(3):379-397. doi: 10.1080/10409289.2017.1408371. Epub 2017 Dec 13.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32189955 (View on PubMed)

Piasta, S. B., Farley, K. S., Mauck, S. A., Soto Ramirez, P., Schachter, R. E., O'Connell, A. A., . . . Weber-Mayrer, M. (in press). At-scale, state-sponsored language and literacy professional development: Impacts on early childhood classroom practices and children's outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Piasta, S. B., Logan, J. A. R., Groom, L. J., Zettler-Greeley, C. M., Bailet, L. L., & Lewis, K. (2019). Implementation of a small-group emergent literacy intervention by preschool teachers and community aides. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Quinn, D. M., & Kim, J. S. (2017). Scaffolding fidelity and adaptation in educational program implementation: Experimental evidence from a literacy intervention. American Educational Research Journal, 54, 1187-1220.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

ead-e Set Grow. (2013). Predictive assessment of reading: Pre-k to grade 3 edition. Clemmons, NC: Author.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Redmond SM, Ash AC, Christopulos TT, Pfaff T. Diagnostic Accuracy of Sentence Recall and Past Tense Measures for Identifying Children's Language Impairments. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Jul 15;62(7):2438-2454. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-L-18-0388. Epub 2019 Jun 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31220421 (View on PubMed)

Ritchie SJ, Bates TC. Enduring links from childhood mathematics and reading achievement to adult socioeconomic status. Psychol Sci. 2013 Jul 1;24(7):1301-8. doi: 10.1177/0956797612466268. Epub 2013 May 2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23640065 (View on PubMed)

Rudd, A., & Johnson, R. B. (2008). Lessons learned from the use of randomized and quasiexperimental field designs for the evaluation of educational programs. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34, 180-188.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Sanetti, L. M. H. T. R. (2009). Toward developing a science of treatment integrity: Introduction to the special series. School Psychology Review, 38, 445.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., & Secord, W. A. (2003). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals:4. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Silverman, R., & Crandell, J. D. (2010). Vocabulary practices in prekindergarten and kindergarten classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 318-340.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 55-64.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Kouzekanani, K., Pedrotty Bryant, D., Dickson, S., & Blozis, S.A. (2003). Reading instruction grouping for students with reading difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 301-315.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Wright, T. S., & Cervetti, G. N. (2017). A systematic review of the research on vocabulary instruction that impacts text comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 52, 203-226

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Wright, T. S., & Neuman, S. B. (2013). Vocabulary instruction in commonly used kindergarten core reading curricula. The Elementary School Journal, 113(3), 386-408.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Provided Documents

Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.

Document Type: Study Protocol and Informed Consent Form

View Document

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

1R01DC018823-01

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

2020P002508

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id