You do not have JavaScript Enabled on this browser. Please enable it in order to use the full functionality of our website.

EBP Compendium: Summary of Systematic Review

Institute of Education Sciences
Interactive Shared Book Reading

IES What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report.

Indicators of Review Quality:

The review addresses a clearly focused question No
Criteria for inclusion of studies are provided Yes*
Search strategy is described in sufficient detail for replication No
Included studies are assessed for study quality Yes
Quality assessments are reproducible Yes

Description: This is a systematic review of studies investigating the effectiveness of an interactive book reading treatment on the literacy and language skills of preschool children. The effectiveness of the intervention was categorized as Meets Evidence Standards, Meets Evidence Standards with Reservation or Does Not Meet Evidence Standard based on the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) classification system. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are considered strong evidence (Meets Evidence Standards), quasi-experimental studies are considered weaker evidence (Meets Evidence Standards with Reservations) and single-case design studies are considered insufficient evidence or under development (Does Not Meet Evidence Standards).

Question(s) Addressed:

Question not specifically stated.

Population: Preschool children (ages 3-5).

Intervention/Assessment: Interactive book reading (shared book reading)

Number of Studies Included: 3

Years Included: Not stated



  • Treatment
    • Language
      • Reading
        • Interactive Book Reading
          • Two studies met the WWC criteria as Meets Evidence Standards and one study met the criteria as Meets Evidence Standards with Reservations.
          • Based on these studies, "[t]he WWC found Interactive Shared Book Reading to have mixed effects for oral language, no discernable effects for print knowledge, and potentially positive effects for early reading/writing" (p. 5).
          • The majority of children included in the studies were considered at-risk and were from economically disadvantaged families.

Keywords: Literacy

Access the Review


* See the WWC Evidence Review Protocol for inclusion criteria

Added to Compendium: January 2012

ASHA Corporate Partners