Reading to Dogs in schools: a controlled feasibility study of an online Reading to Dogs intervention

Reading to Dogs as a form of animal‐assisted education: are positive outcomes supported by quality research?

“…Since Hall et al's (2016) and Brelsford et al's (2017) seminal SRs, various additional studies have been published, many which have adhered to their calls for greater methodological rigour (Connell et al, 2019; Kirnan et al, 2016; Kirnan & Ventresco, 2018; Lewis & Nicholas, 2018; Rousseau & Tardif‐Williams, 2019; Steel, 2023; Syrnyk et al, 2022).…”

“…These include a lack of quality measures (and/or failure to clearly specify measures), small sample sizes, the absence of control groups, and a failure to specify methods and intervention parameters such as setting, animal type, extent of animal involvement, participant demographics and goal of the AAI, across interventions and studies (Beetz, 2017; Brelsford et al, 2017; Gee et al, 2017; Hall et al, 2016; Rodriguez et al, 2021; Steel, 2022). Except for a few studies that have adopted both large sample sizes and control/comparison groups (Kirnan et al, 2016; Lewis & Nicholas, 2018; Steel, 2023 [all mixed methods]; Connell et al, 2019; Kirnan et al, 2018; Le Roux et al, 2014 [all quantitative methods]), the field lacks robust systematic evaluation. Collectively, the shortage of quality studies, and an overreliance on anecdotal evidence, casts uncertainty over purported benefits (Beetz, 2017; Brelsford et al, 2017; Fine et al, 2019; Gee et al, 2017; Hall et al, 2016; Reilly et al, 2020; Serpell et al, 2017).…”

“…Historically, where participant details are included, they often incorporated groups with particular reading difficulties or diagnosed conditions such as autism (see Table 3) (Lewis & Grigg, 2020; O'Haire et al, 2014), rather than typically developing children (Kirnan et al, 2018), potentially limiting much of the evidence base for positive effects to these environments, and conditions, when AAE/RTD may also be beneficial to other groups (Gee et al, 2017; Kirnan et al, 2016). However, many recent studies include participants of all abilities (Connell et al, 2019; Kirnan et al, 2016; Levinson et al, 2017; Linder et al, 2018; Steel, 2022, 2023; Syrnyk et al, 2022), although detailed demographic data are not always gathered.…”

“…A further factor, beginning to be addressed, is the reporting of participating dog details, which is important as different dogs may be more/less suitable for different interventions and children's needs (Kropp & Shupp, 2017). Similarly, the dog handler may have an important impact on the success of RTD, and therefore, handler demographics should be reported too (Reilly et al, 2020; Steel, 2023). Interventions themselves are still often not fully described and/or most involve a child reading to a dog with no additional resources, with the exception of Smith's (2009), Steel's (2022, 2023) and Kirnan et al's (2016, 2018) studies.…”

“…Reading to Dogs (RTD) interventions in schools are growing in popularity and prevalence (Brelsford et al, 2017; Hall et al, 2016; Steel, 2023). RTD is an animal‐assisted intervention (AAI), which, when employed within a school context with structured goals, is considered a form of animal‐assisted education (AAE) (International Association of Human‐Animal Interaction Organizations [IAHAIO], 2018).…”