Dialect variation, dialect-shifting, and reading comprehension in second grade

Morphological Assessment Features and their Relations to Reading: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Modeling Study

Morphemes are the smallest meaningful unit of language (e.g., affixes, base words) that express grammatical and semantic information. Additionally, morphological knowledge is significantly related to children's word reading and reading comprehension skills. Researchers have broadly assessed morphological knowledge by using a wide range of tasks and stimuli, which has influenced the interpretation of the relations between morphological knowledge and reading outcomes. This review of 103 studies used meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM) to investigate the relations between commonly occurring morphological knowledge assessment features (e.g., written versus oral, spelling versus no spelling) in the literature to reading outcomes, including word reading and reading comprehension. Meta-regression techniques were used to examine moderators of age and reading ability. Morphological assessments that used a written modality (e.g., reading, writing) were more predictive of word reading outcomes than those administered orally. Assessments of morphological spelling were more predictive of both word reading and reading comprehension outcomes than those that did not examine spelling accuracy. Age was a significant moderator of the relation between morphology and word reading, such that the relation was stronger for the younger than the older children. Younger children also demonstrated higher relations between multiple task dimensions and reading comprehension, including oral tasks, tasks without decoding, and tasks that provided context clues. These findings have important implications for future morphological intervention studies aimed to improve children's reading outcomes, in particular the use of orthography and spelling within the context of teaching morphology.

An examination of 3rd and 5th grade students' use of dialect specific forms during a written editing task

PURPOSE

The goal of the current study was to examine the role of variety and frequency of dialectal features in relation to General American English (GAE) editing ability. This study focused on speakers of dialect-specific forms and their ability to edit to GAE. To gain insight into this relation, the following research questions were posed: (1). How do third and fifth-grade students differ in the variety of features of dialect-specific forms they use, the frequency of their use, and their editing ability to GAE? (2). Is there a significant relation between dialect use and editing ability?

METHODS

Participants included 68 third and fifth-grade students who produced at least one dialect-specific form. We measured students' ability to edit to GAE during a written editing task. Frequency and variety of dialect use were based on an oral language sample where students were asked to share their favorite game or sport.

RESULTS

Fifth-grade students are significantly better at editing written dialect specific forms to reflect GAE writing conventions as compared to third-grade students. However, there was not a significant difference in the dialect specific form usage between the two grades. Finally, there was not a significant relation between dialect specific form use and editing ability.

CONCLUSIONS

These results offer relevant clinical and educational implications for increasing cultural responsivity and promote the use of multiple measures across modalities to gain relevant information when assessing students who use dialect specific forms. Further, the results from this study provide further insights into how written editing ability exhibited through the awareness of GAE conventions improves with age despite the influence of dialect specific forms.

Evaluating Different Scoring Systems for a Picture Description Task Among Preschool Children Who Speak African American English

PURPOSE

Measures of grammatical accuracy are effective measures of children's language skills. However, many measures, such as percent grammatical utterances, were developed for children who speak General American English (GAE) and, therefore, may not be appropriate for students who speak other dialects. This study examines different scoring systems for a picture description task to explore the impact of different systems for children who speak African American English (AAE).

METHOD

Eighteen preschool-age children who speak AAE completed a play-based language sample and a picture description task. The Index of Productive Syntax (IPSyn) was calculated for the play-based language samples and used as the reference measure. The picture description task was scored using four scoring systems: an expansive AAE scoring system, a GAE scoring system, and two strategic scoring systems. Scores were compared for each scoring system, and correlations between IPSyn scores and picture description scores were conducted.

RESULTS

Scores on the picture description task were highest in the expansive AAE scoring system, followed by scores in the strategic scoring systems, all of which were higher than scores in the GAE scoring system. There was a significant correlation between IPSyn scores and picture description scores when using the GAE scoring system and the strategic scoring systems, but not when using the expansive AAE scoring system.

CONCLUSIONS

Different scoring systems affect AAE-speaking preschoolers' scores on measures of grammatical accuracy, and the use of an expansive AAE scoring system, based on lists of nonmainstream features, may diminish the ability to differentiate between children with different ability levels. Future research is needed to refine scoring systems and to explore the validity of different scoring systems for detecting differences between preschoolers who speak AAE, with and without developmental language disorder.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21498618.

Developmental behavioral genetics research on school achievement is missing vulnerable children, to our detriment

Gene-environment processes tell us how genetic predispositions and environments work together to influence children in schools. One type of gene-environment process that has been extensively studied using behavioral genetics methods is a gene-by-environment interaction. A gene-by-environment interaction shows us when the effect of your context on a phenotype differs depending on your genetic predispositions, or vice versa, when the effect of your genetic predispositions on a phenotype differs depending on your context. Developmental behavioral geneticists interested in children's school achievement have examined many different contexts within the gene-by-environment interaction model, including contexts measured from within children's home and school environments. However, this work has been overwhelmingly focused on WEIRD samples children, leaving us with non-inclusive scientific evidence. This can lead to detrimental outcomes when we overgeneralize this non-inclusive scientific evidence to racialized groups. We conclude with a call to include racialized children in more research samples.

Language Variation in the Writing of African American Students: Factors Predicting Reading Achievement

Purpose This study aims to examine the predictive relation between measures obtained from African American students' written narrative language samples and reading achievement, as measured by standardized academic assessments. Method Written language samples were elicited from 207 African American students in Grades 1-8. The samples were examined for morphosyntactic variations from standardized written Generalized American English (GAE). These variations were categorized as either (a) specific to African American English (AAE) or (b) neutral across AAE and standardized written GAE (i.e., considered ungrammatical both in AAE and in standardized written GAE). Structural equation modeling was employed to then examine the predictive relation between the density of AAE-specific forms in students' writing and their performance on standardized assessments of literacy and reading vocabulary. This relation was examined while accounting for the density of dialect-neutral morphosyntactic forms, reported family income, age, and written sample length. Results The written samples were highly variable in terms of morphosyntax. Younger students and those from lower income homes tended to use AAE-specific forms at higher rates. However, the density of AAE-specific forms did not significantly predict standardized literacy scores or reading vocabulary after accounting for dialect-neutral variations, income, and sample length. Conclusions These results support the ongoing need to better understand the language, literacy, and overall academic development of students from all backgrounds. It may be essential to focus on dialect-neutral language forms (i.e., morphosyntactic forms that are consistent across both AAE and standardized written GAE) in written samples to maximize assessment validity across students who speak varying dialects of English. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16879558.

African American English and Early Literacy: A Comparison of Approaches to Quantifying Nonmainstream Dialect Use

Purpose Many studies have found a correlation between overall usage rates of nonmainstream forms and reading scores, but less is known about which dialect differences are most predictive. Here, we consider different methods of characterizing African American English use from existing assessments and examine which methods best predict literacy achievement. Method Kindergarten and first-grade students who speak African American English received two assessments of dialect use and two assessments of decoding at the beginning and end of the school year. Item-level analyses of the dialect-use assessments were used to compute measures of dialect usage: (a) an overall feature rate measure based on the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test, (b) a subscore analysis of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test based on items that pattern together, (c) an alternative assessment where children repeat and translate sentences, and (d) "repertoire" measures based on a categorical distinction of whether a child used a particular feature of mainstream American English. Results Models using feature rate measures provided better data-model fit than those with repertoire measures, and baseline performance on a sentence repetition task was a positive predictor of reading score at the end of the school year. For phonological subscores, change from the beginning to end of the school year predicted reading at the end of the school year, whereas baseline scores were most predictive for grammatical subscores. Conclusions The addition of a sentence imitation task is useful for understanding a child's dialect and anticipating potential areas for support in early literacy. We observed some support for the idea that morphological dialect differences (i.e., irregular verb morphology) have a particularly close tie to later literacy, but future work will be necessary to confirm this finding. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13425968.

Teacher Report of Students' Dialect Use and Language Ability

Purpose For many school-age children, teachers are the first professionals to refer for speech/language services. However, many speech-language pathologists note that students without language disorders who speak non-mainstream American English (NMAE) dialects are referred to speech/language evaluation. This research note presents results of a preliminary study exploring teachers' ability to report student dialect use and how teacher reports of language ability depend on their perception of the student's dialect use. Method Teachers completed a brief two-question survey about students' dialect use and a standardized questionnaire about students' language and literacy skills for 254 students (K‑second grades). A subset of 30 students completed a standardized screener of dialect use and language ability. Results Teachers reported that 12.2% of students spoke an NMAE dialect, whereas 77.2% did not. In sharp contrast, the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test indicated that 63% of students spoke an NMAE dialect, and 37% spoke MAE, suggesting a discrepancy between teachers' perceptions of dialect use and children's dialect use. Written responses suggested teachers may confuse NMAE dialect use and bilingualism or speech/language difficulties. Interestingly, teachers reported lower language skills among students they believe speak an NMAE dialect (p = .021). Conclusions These results provide preliminary evidence that teachers may have difficulty determining student dialect use and may report lower language skills for students they believe speak an NMAE dialect. Interprofessional collaborations between teachers and speech-language pathologists may be able to reduce the likelihood of misdiagnosis of language disorders among students who speak NMAE dialects.

Rare Vocabulary Production in School-Age Narrators From Low-Income Communities

Purpose This study was designed to assess the utility of a tool for automated analysis of rare vocabulary use in the spoken narratives of a group of school-age children from low-income communities. Method We evaluated personal and fictional narratives from 76 school-age children from low-income communities (M _age = 9;3 [years;months]). We analyzed children's use of rare vocabulary in their narratives, with the goal of evaluating relationships among rare vocabulary use, performance on standardized language tests, language sample measures, sex, and use of African American English. Results Use of rare vocabulary in school-age children is robustly correlated with established language sample measures. Male sex was also significantly associated with more frequent rare vocabulary use. There was no association between rare vocabulary use and use of African American English. Discussion Evaluation of rare vocabulary use in school-age children may be a culturally fair assessment strategy that aligns well with existing language sample measures.

Production of Morphosyntax Within and Across Different Dialects of American English

Purpose This study examined the production of morphosyntactic markers by school-age children with and without developmental language disorder. Comparisons were made between students who speak mainstream American English (MAE) dialects and nonmainstream American English (NMAE) dialects. Method First- and second-grade students (N = 82) completed assessments of dialect use and language ability, which are designed for students who speak NMAE dialects. Students also completed an experimental production task targeting three morphosyntactic features: past tense -ed marking, third-person singular -s marking, and plural -s marking. Past tense marking and third-person singular are produced differently across MAE and NMAE dialects, whereas plural marking is produced more similarly across dialects. Results When comparing across dialects, children with typical language skills who spoke NMAE dialects overtly marked past tense and third-person singular less often compared to MAE peers. However, when comparing to same-dialect peers with language disorders, children with typical language skills who spoke NMAE dialects overtly marked these morphosyntactic markers more often than peers with developmental language disorder. Conclusion The results underscore the importance of considering a child's dialect use when assessing language ability, in particular with measures that include features that are variable in NMAE dialects. At the same time, within-dialect comparisons suggest that a broader set of morphosyntactic features may provide useful information for evaluations of language ability. Future research should investigate the source of these differences, including the extent to which students with language disorders have acquired the social and linguistic factors that condition the use of variable features.

Language and Literacy Predictors of Dialect Density Among School-Age African American Children From Two Geographic Regions

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between oral language, literacy skills, age, and dialect density (DD) of African American children residing in two different geographical regions of the United States (East Coast and Midwest). Method Data were obtained from 64 African American school-age children between the ages of 7 and 12 years from two geographic regions. Children were assessed using a combination of standardized tests and narrative samples elicited from wordless picture books. Bivariate correlation and multiple regression analyses were used to determine relationships to and relative contributions of oral language, literacy, age, and geographic region to DD. Results Results of correlation analyses demonstrated a negative relationship between DD measures and children's literacy skills. Age-related findings between geographic regions indicated that the younger sample from the Midwest outscored the East Coast sample in reading comprehension and sentence complexity. Multiple regression analyses identified five variables (i.e., geographic region, age, mean length of utterance in morphemes, reading fluency, and phonological awareness) that accounted for 31% of the variance of children's DD-with geographic region emerging as the strongest predictor. Conclusions As in previous studies, the current study found an inverse relationship between DD and several literacy measures. Importantly, geographic region emerged as a strong predictor of DD. This finding highlights the need for a further study that goes beyond the mere description of relationships to comparing geographic regions and specifically focusing on racial composition, poverty, and school success measures through direct data collection.

The Relation Between Dialect Density and the Codevelopment of Writing and Reading in African American Children

The purpose of this longitudinal study was to examine the influence of spoken dialect density on writing and on the codevelopment of reading and writing in African American English-speaking (AAE) children from first through fifth grades. The sample included 869 students, ranging in age from 5.8 to 12.5 years. Results indicated that dialect density had a negative influence concurrently and longitudinally on reading and writing in AAE-speaking children. High dialect users tended to have weak reading and writing skills and heavier dialect density slowed growth in reading and writing. However, this effect was moderated by the effects of reading and writing on each other. Reading had a facilitative effect on writing even in the presence of heavy dialect use.

The Impact of Dialect Density on the Growth of Language and Reading in African American Children

Purpose

The goal of the current study was to examine the impact of dialect density on the growth of oral language and reading skills in a sample of African American English (AAE)-speaking children reared in urban communities.

Method

Eight hundred thirty-five African American children in first through fifth grades participated. Using an accelerated cohort design, univariate and bivariate growth models were employed to examine dialect density, oral language and reading, and the relationships between these variables.

Results

For the univariate models, results indicated that (a) dialect density decreased over time by approximately 5% per year beyond first grade, (b) language skills improved approximately 0.5 SD per year, and (c) reading comprehension increased significantly from first to second grade and slowed 23% per year in second through fifth grades. Results from the bivariate models revealed that (a) dialect density and language ability are negatively associated, although dialect density did not affect change in language over time, and (b) higher dialect density is related to slower growth in reading.

Conclusions

Findings from this investigation provide converging evidence for accounts in the extant literature particularly supporting a negative relationship between dialect density and oral language and between dialect density and reading while also contributing novel longitudinal evidence that suggests that changes in dialect use over time may be driven by oral language skills and that reading and dialect have a reciprocal relationship.