Aim. This study investigates the impact of repeated and dialogic reading strategies on vocabulary development in Palestinian Arabic-speaking children, focusing on receptive and productive vocabulary across different word types (mental vs. general, (Mental words refer to abstract vocabulary, while general words are more concrete)) and age groups: OLDER (n = 27, mean age = 66.2 months) and YOUNGER (n = 38, mean age = 55.1 months). Methods. A total of 65 children participated in the study, where both reading strategies were implemented, and vocabulary acquisition was measured before and after the learning sessions. Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMM) were employed to analyze receptive vocabulary, while Ordinal Logistic Mixed-effects models were used for productive vocabulary. Results. The results demonstrated significant improvements in receptive and productive vocabulary, particularly among older children, with repeated reading showing greater effectiveness. Mental words were more easily recognized than general words in both groups, particularly in younger children, while older children showed significant improvements across both word types after reading sessions. Conclusions. The study contributes to the understanding of vocabulary acquisition by challenging the assumption that general words are more accessible to learn than abstract ones, particularly for younger children. It also highlights the importance of type of reading the story and educational contexts in shaping language outcomes, suggesting that vocabulary interventions must be tailored to developmental stages and specific word types. These findings offer practical recommendations for educators, highlighting the importance of tailoring reading strategies to developmental stages and word types. They emphasize the need for flexible, age-sensitive strategies that support language development in diverse linguistic environments by providing actionable methods for improving vocabulary acquisition.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tallas-Mahajna et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: