The Structure of Word Learning in Young School-Age Children

Effects of Integrating Different Types of Physical Activity into Virtual Rapid Word Learning Instruction for Children who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing

The purpose of this study was to compare three intervention conditions in virtual rapid word learning instruction for young children who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH): traditional, general physical activity, and semantic richness physical activity. We focused on an initial step in learning a new word: mapping a word form to a referent. Fourteen children who are DHH and 14 children with typical hearing (TH) participated in a pseudoword-learning virtual session in each condition, and receptive and expressive knowledge of targeted pseudowords was assessed. Of interest was the impact of different types of physical activity on rapid learning of word-like forms. There was an interaction of group and condition for expressive production of pseudowords. Children who were DHH learned to produce more pseudowords in the general physical activity condition, whereas children with TH learned to produce more pseudowords in the semantic richness physical activity condition. There were no effects of group or condition on receptive learning of pseudowords. Children who are DHH can rapidly map word-like forms to referents via teleintervention, and physical activity may interact with word learning differently for children who are DHH and children with TH.

Assessing children's vocabulary: An exploratory cross-sectional survey of speech-language pathologists

PURPOSE

Past research highlights the importance of evaluating word learning abilities to build understanding of an individual's language-learning capacity and make evidence-informed decisions in speech-language pathology practice. However, little research has explored vocabulary and word learning assessment practices among speech-language pathologists (SLPs). This pilot, exploratory study aimed to explore current assessment practices and guide translation of research to practice among SLPs who work with children of all ages.

METHOD

SLPs (N = 127) from three predominantly English-speaking countries (Australia, USA, and UK) completed an online survey. The survey explored methods and purposes for assessing vocabulary knowledge and word learning skills via binary and multiple-choice questions. Responses to three open-ended questions were analysed using conventional content analysis. The survey also asked about perspectives regarding assessment practices with individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds.

RESULT

Of the surveyed SLPs, 118 (92%) reported using norm-referenced measures of vocabulary, with 27 reporting additional use of non-normed measures. Seventy-seven SLPs (61%) reported that they measure word learning skills, and 20 of these SLPs used dynamic assessment procedures to evaluate word learning. Responding SLPs across all three countries reported using vocabulary and word learning assessment data in a variety of ways (e.g. to support diagnostic decision-making). Regarding the use of standardised, norm-referenced vocabulary assessments with individuals from CALD backgrounds, SLPs reported concerns regarding poor cultural sensitivity and limited access to alternative methods.

CONCLUSION

The findings highlight the need for further development and dissemination of accessible resources to support SLPs' implementation of word learning assessment, including resources for dynamic assessment. This is especially critical considering the established limitations associated with using standardised, norm-referenced tests with minority groups who are underrepresented in standardisation samples.

Direct Instruction Improves Word Learning for Children With Developmental Language Disorder

PURPOSE

The current study compared the effects of direct instruction versus indirect exposure on multiple aspects of novel word learning for children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and children with typical language development (TLD).

METHOD

Participants included 36 children with DLD and 45 children with TLD. All children were in the first grade and 6-8 years of age (Mdn = 7 years; 2 months). Using a between-subjects design, children were randomly assigned to be exposed to novel words and their unfamiliar referents via either direct instruction (each referent presented in isolation with an explicit goal of learning) or indirect exposure (multiple referents presented with the goal of answering yes/no questions).

RESULTS

In alternative forced-choice measures of recognition, children with DLD were less accurate than their TLD peers in linking words to referents, encoding semantic categories for words, and encoding detailed representations of word forms. These differences in word learning were accounted for by a constellation of cognitive measures, including receptive vocabulary, phonological memory, visuospatial memory, and sustained attention. All children were similarly accurate in retaining word forms over a 24- to 48-hr delay. Children with TLD were more accurate in all aspects of word learning following direct instruction compared to indirect exposure. Benefits from direct instruction were observed for children with DLD in link and semantic, but not word form, learning.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that vocabulary interventions with direct instruction can help children with DLD learn some, but not all, aspects of novel words. Additional support is necessary to help children with DLD encode rich phonological representations.

The Dimensionality of Language and Literacy in the School-Age Years

PURPOSE

This was an investigation of the dimensionality of oral and written language to test the hypothesis that a two-factor model with sound/word and sentence/discourse language levels would best fit language and literacy data for a population-based sample in the school-age years.

METHOD

A stratified secondary data set of 1,500 participants was drawn randomly from a larger nationally representative U.S. data set (N = 1,853) gathered during standardization of the Test of Integrated Language and Literacy Skills. A sample of 254 students with prior diagnoses of language and literacy disorders (LLD) was drawn from the full data set. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to compare the hypothesized two-factor model with other theoretically possible models.

RESULTS

The hypothesized two-factor language-levels model had an acceptable-to-good fit to the full data set, as did the three-factor model, with verbal memory added. High interfactor correlation between verbal memory and sentence/discourse constructs, as well as a preference for parsimony, led to the acceptance of the two-factor model as best. This language-levels model had a good fit to the data at ages 8-11 years, and an excellent fit at ages 12-18 years, but only a poor fit for ages 6-7 years (yet still better than other two-factor or unitary models). It had a reasonable fit for students with LLD, although the three-factor model fit their data slightly better.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral and written language abilities during the school-age years are best explained by a two-factor model with sound/word and sentence/discourse language levels and memory as a contributing factor. Implications for identifying and treating language and literacy disorders as multidimensional rather than categorical are discussed.

Working Memory Predicts New Word Learning Over and Above Existing Vocabulary and Nonverbal IQ

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to use an established model of working memory in children to predict an established model of word learning to determine whether working memory explained word learning variance over and above the contributions of expressive vocabulary and nonverbal IQ.

METHOD

One hundred sixty-seven English-speaking second graders (7- to 8-year-olds) with typical development from two states participated. They completed a comprehensive battery of working memory assessments and six word learning tasks that assessed the creation, storage, retrieval, and production of phonological and semantic representations of novel nouns and verbs and the ability to link those representations.

RESULTS

A structural equation model with expressive vocabulary, nonverbal IQ, and three working memory factors predicting two word learning factors fit the data well. When working memory factors were entered as predictors after expressive vocabulary and nonverbal IQ, they explained 45% of the variance in the phonological word learning factor and 17% of the variance in the semantic word learning factor. Thus, working memory explained a significant amount of word learning variance over and above expressive vocabulary and nonverbal IQ.

CONCLUSION

Results show that working memory is a significant predictor of dynamic word learning over and above the contributions of expressive vocabulary and nonverbal IQ, suggesting that a comprehensive working memory assessment has the potential to identify sources of word learning difficulties and to tailor word learning interventions to a child's working memory strengths and weaknesses.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.19125911.

What Can a Child Do With One Normal-Hearing Ear? Speech Perception and Word Learning in Children With Unilateral and Bilateral Hearing Losses Relative to Peers With Normal Hearing

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of unilateral hearing loss on children's ability to perceive familiar words and to learn and retain new words. Because children with unilateral hearing loss receive full auditory input in one ear, their performance was expected to be consistent with that of children with normal hearing rather than that of children with moderate bilateral hearing loss.

DESIGN

Participants were 36 school-age children with normal hearing bilaterally, 11 children with moderate bilateral hearing loss, and 11 children with mild-to-profound unilateral hearing loss (six right and five left). Half of the normally hearing children and two-thirds of the children with unilateral hearing loss were from bilingual Spanish/English-speaking homes. One of the 11 children with bilateral hearing loss was from a bilingual Spanish/English-speaking home. All children completed a word recognition test in English and in Spanish, a word-learning task comprised of nonsense words constructed using the phonotactic rules of English, Spanish, and Arabic, and a next-day word-retention test.

RESULTS

Word recognition did not differ across groups in English or Spanish. Learning and retention of nonsense words was highest for the children with normal hearing in all three languages. The children with unilateral and bilateral losses learned and recalled the English nonsense words as well as their normally hearing peers, but performance for the Spanish and Arabic nonsense words was significantly and similarly reduced by hearing loss in either ear.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to learn and retain new words given a full auditory representation in one ear suggests that children with unilateral and bilateral hearing losses may share a unifying feature of impairment at the level of the central auditory system.

Word learning and verbal working memory in children with developmental language disorder

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Previous research into word learning in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) indicates that the learning of word forms and meanings, rather than form-referent links, is problematic. This difficulty appears to arise with impaired encoding, while retention of word knowledge remains intact. Evidence also suggests that word learning skills may be related to verbal working memory. We aimed to substantiate these findings in the current study by exploring word learning over a series of days.

METHODS

Fifty children with DLD (mean age 6; 11, 72% male) and 54 age-matched typically developing (TD) children (mean age 6; 10, 56% male) were taught eight novel words across a four-day word learning protocol. Day 1 measured encoding, Days 2 and 3 measured re-encoding, and Day 4 assessed retention. At each day, word learning success was evaluated using Naming, Recognition, Description, and Identification tasks.

RESULTS

Children with DLD showed comparable performance to the TD group on the Identification task, indicating an intact ability to learn the form-referent links. In contrast, children with DLD performed significantly worse for Naming and Recognition (signifying an impaired ability to learn novel word forms), and for Description, indicating problems establishing new word meanings. These deficits for the DLD group were apparent at Days 1, 2, and 3 of testing, indicating impairments with initial encoding and re-encoding; however, the DLD and TD groups demonstrated a similar rate of learning. All children found the retention assessments at Day 4 difficult, and there were no significant group differences. Finally, verbal working memory emerged as a significant moderator of performance on the Naming and Recognition tasks, such that children with DLD and poor verbal working memory had the lowest levels of accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that children with DLD struggle with learning novel word forms and meanings, but are unimpaired in their ability to establish new form-referent links. The findings suggest that the word learning deficit may be attributed to problems with encoding, rather than with retention, of new word knowledge; however, further exploration is required given the poor performance of both groups for retention testing. Furthermore, we found evidence that an impaired ability to learn word forms may only be apparent in children who have DLD and low levels of verbal working memory.

IMPLICATIONS

When working with children with DLD, speech-language pathologists should assess word learning using tasks that evaluate the ability to learn word forms, meanings, and form-referent links to develop a profile of individual word learning strengths and weaknesses. Clinicians should also assess verbal working memory to identify children at particular risk of word learning deficits. Future research should explore the notion of optimal intervention intensity for facilitating word learning in children with poor language and verbal working memory.

Working, Declarative, and Procedural Memory in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

Purpose Previous research into the working, declarative, and procedural memory systems in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) has yielded inconsistent results. The purpose of this research was to profile these memory systems in children with DLD and their typically developing peers. Method One hundred four 5- to 8-year-old children participated in the study. Fifty had DLD, and 54 were typically developing. Aspects of the working memory system (verbal short-term memory, verbal working memory, and visual-spatial short-term memory) were assessed using a nonword repetition test and subtests from the Working Memory Test Battery for Children. Verbal and visual-spatial declarative memory were measured using the Children's Memory Scale, and an audiovisual serial reaction time task was used to evaluate procedural memory. Results The children with DLD demonstrated significant impairments in verbal short-term and working memory, visual-spatial short-term memory, verbal declarative memory, and procedural memory. However, verbal declarative memory and procedural memory were no longer impaired after controlling for working memory and nonverbal IQ. Declarative memory for visual-spatial information was unimpaired. Conclusions These findings indicate that children with DLD have deficits in the working memory system. While verbal declarative memory and procedural memory also appear to be impaired, these deficits could largely be accounted for by working memory skills. The results have implications for our understanding of the cognitive processes underlying language impairment in the DLD population; however, further investigation of the relationships between the memory systems is required using tasks that measure learning over long-term intervals. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13250180.