To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood.

Abstract

This research synthesis examines whether the association between print exposure and components of reading grows stronger across development. We meta-analyzed 99 studies (N = 7,669) that focused on leisure time reading of (a) preschoolers and kindergartners, (b) children attending Grades 1-12, and (c) college and university students. For all measures in the outcome domains of reading comprehension and technical reading and spelling, moderate to strong correlations with print exposure were found. The outcomes support an upward spiral of causality: Children who are more proficient in comprehension and technical reading and spelling skills read more; because of more print exposure, their comprehension and technical reading and spelling skills improved more with each year of education. For example, in preschool and kindergarten print exposure explained 12% of the variance in oral language skills, in primary school 13%, in middle school 19%, in high school 30%, and in college and university 34%. Moderate associations of print exposure with academic achievement indicate that frequent readers are more successful students. Interestingly, poor readers also appear to benefit from independent leisure time reading. We conclude that shared book reading to preconventional readers may be part of a continuum of out-of-school reading experiences that facilitate children's language, reading, and spelling achievement throughout their development.

Distinguishing cause from effect – many deficits associated with developmental dyslexia may be a consequence of reduced and suboptimal reading experience

“…Accurate assessments of home literacy environments will be crucial (cf. Boerma, Mol, & Jolles, 2017;Katzir, Lesaux, & Kim, 2009;Mol & Bus, 2011;Stanowich & West, 1989). Third, cross-sectional studies will continue to be useful but we need to recognise and take more seriously their limitations.…”

Is Europe open to a student-oriented framework for literature? A comparative analysis of the formal literature curriculum in six European countries.

“…In a time when it is becoming harder and harder to get young people to read, we have to watch out for the possible negative influence of certain teaching methods on reading behaviour. This is underlined by a great deal of research showing that language proficiency development and related social success are closely related to reading books in your spare time (Mol & Bus, 2011). Todorov (2006) wrote a book suggestively entitled La Littérature en péril (Literature in danger), where he claims that the analysis of literary texts in school should not aim to illustrate certain literary concepts, but rather help students to construct meaning by themselves -because in this way they can grasp a knowledge of humanity that is the ultimate purpose of reading literature.…”

An Analysis of Public Libraries' Ability to Represent Preschool Children in Terms of Their Missions and Responsibilities

“…Another study has proven that children who have good reading comprehension and possess a good vocabulary, have more of an opportunity to read more books and to continually better themselves, than their counterparts who do not (Mol & Bus, 2011). According to the study in question, preschool children who are introduced to children's books with pictures, magazines and publications are 12% better at spoken language than their counterparts who have not been introduced to such materials.…”

“…Such children are ahead in terms of these skills by 13% at primary school, 19% at middle school, 30% at high school and 34% at university level respectively. In a similar vein, it is also anticipated that those who enjoy reading and have a culture for reading, have more advanced verbal and written communication skills than their counterparts, who do not partake in the above (Mol & Bus, 2011).…”