I&#x27;ve got several problems with your comment...<p>Firstly, that link you posted &quot;determined the emergent literacy and language effects of a LOW-INTENSITY LITERACY PROMOTION PROGRAM&quot;.  So if it had not much effect, that&#x27;s not very surprising since its not actually talking about the same thing as the original link.  It would back up what we know about most education programs and schooling: it generally has a very small&#x2F;negligible effect after you control out for genetics and home environment.<p>But I will just quote some lines from the linked article, just so we&#x27;re clear what it actually says:<p>&quot;Children who are read to more often and earlier in life have better academic and social outcomes at school,1 which in turn predict their future work and life outcomes&quot;<p>&quot;Recent literature reviews11- 14 have identified several features of early literacy environments that most consistently predict better outcomes. These reviews suggest that children who achieve at school typically have more books in the home, have parents that report reading to them more frequently (usually every day but at least 3 times per week), and begin shared reading at a very early age (usually before 18 months of age). How parents read to children also appears to be important. The dialogic approach is a child-adult interactive approach to reading aloud that, compared with other styles,15 predicts better emergent literacy skills, such as print motivation, vocabulary, print awareness, narrative skills, letter knowledge, and phonologic awareness.&quot;