Martine van der Pluijm

30 Chapter 2 use specific activities and strategies to alter parental behavior, the effects of the strategies themselves have rarely been systematically researched (Barbarin & Aikens, 2009; Wasik & Sparling, 2012). Lower-educated parents probably lack some of the skills and experiences needed to carry out strategies that stimulate children’s literacy skills (Van Steensel et al., 2011). More knowledge about the effectiveness of strategies that lower-educated parents can use might help to strengthen interventions. The starting point of this review is the crucial role of oral language development for language and literacy development. Our aim is to contribute to research that shows that family literacy interventions have a positive effect on the oral language development of children. This review addresses the need to further investigate which of the many activities and strategies used in interventions are effective in stimulating the oral language development of children of lower- educated parents. Modes of delivery Recently, several authors raised the issue of delivery of family literacy interventions (De la Rie, Van Steensel, & Van Gelderen, 2016; Powell & Carey, 2012; Van Steensel et al., 2011). Delivery is defined as the methods used to transfer program features to parents (Powell & Carey, 2012). Prior meta-studies included modes of delivery of interventions directed at a mix of target groups that are defined as at risk, including higher- and lower-educated parents (Blok et al., 2005; Grindal et al., 2016; Manz et al., 2010; Van Steensel et al., 2011). A recurrent topic of debate is the effectiveness of center-based compared to home-based delivery. Blok et al. (2005) found that center-based or a combination of center and home-based delivery was more effective. In contrast, Manz et al. (2010) show stronger effects for home-based interventions. Another issue is the need for parent coaching. Although the duration of the intervention seems unrelated to effect size (Blok et al., 2005; Sénéchal & Young, 2008; Van Steensel et al., 2011), findings are not consistent. Some studies show that more frequent coaching of parents produces stronger effects (Grindal et al., 2016; Nievar, Van Egeren, & Pollard, 2010; Olds & Kitzman, 1993). One home coaching session a month has a stronger effect on child outcomes than home visits with less frequency. However, Manz et al. (2010) did not find this effect for coaching frequency. Olds and Kitzman (1993) showed that professional coaches had more positive effects on child outcomes than semi-professionals. In their meta-study, Van Steensel et al. (2011) did not find any difference between the two types of coaches. Additionally, several studies show that teachers can play an important role in the delivery of family literacy interventions (Bakker, Denessen, Dennissen, & Oolbekkink-Marchand, 2013; Epstein, 1991; Van Voorhis, Maier, Epstein, Loyd, & Leung, 2013). This requires teachers to be well-equipped for this role. Teachers need to be trained in how to connect to parents with different (cultural) backgrounds (Bakker et al., 2013; Manz et al., 2010).