Reading and Math Achievement in Children With Dyslexia, Developmental Language Disorder, or Typical Development: Achievement Gaps Persist From Second Through Fourth Grades

We Have to Talk About Something: Why NOT Talk About the Curriculum? A Guide to Embedding Language Interventions in Curricular Content

PURPOSE

Children with developmental language disorder frequently have difficulty with both academic success and language learning and use. This clinical focus article describes core principles derived from a larger program of research (National Science Foundation 1748298) on language intervention combined with science instruction for preschoolers. It serves as an illustration of a model for integrating language intervention with curricular content delivery.

METHOD

We present a five-step model for a speech-language pathologist and other school professionals to follow to (a) understand the grade-level core curriculum objectives; (b) align intervention targets with the curriculum; (c) select a therapy approach that aligns with both goals and curricular content, and (d) methods for implementing the intervention; and (e) verify that both the intervention and the curriculum have been provided in accordance with best practices. We apply this model to the Next Generation Science Standards, a science curriculum popular in the United States, and to grammar and vocabulary interventions, two areas of difficulty for children with developmental language disorders, though it would be possible to extend the steps to other curricular areas and intervention targets.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude by discussing the barriers and benefits to adopting this model. We recognize that both speech-language pathologists and teachers may have limited time to implement language intervention within a general education curriculum, but we suggest that the long-term benefits outweigh the barriers.

Preparing Student Clinicians to Provide Recast Therapy on Complement Clauses: A Training Program

PURPOSE

This study reports on a program to train student clinicians to provide recast therapy on complement clauses to children with developmental language disorder (DLD). To determine the efficacy of the program, we conducted secondary data analysis based on Owen Van Horne et al. (2023) and examined student clinicians' recasts after training and children's progress after treatment.

METHOD

Three student clinicians received a two-stage training, followed by a real intervention program targeting complement clauses in six children with DLD. A third of the intervention sessions were coded for the total number and number of unique verbs in complement clauses provided by the student clinicians. An elicited production task was completed to test children's knowledge of the target structure.

RESULTS

On average, student clinicians provided 30 targeted recasts to each child during each intervention session. They provided a greater number of and more variable input for that compared to WH complements. Children demonstrated significant improvement only in WH, but not in that, complements.

CONCLUSIONS

A targeted training program could strengthen clinicians' ability to provide recast therapy on complex syntax; however, future refinements should shorten and broaden training to include more targets. A mismatch between input patterns and learning patterns was observed. WH complement input is more stable than that input, given the less variable complement-taking verbs provided by the student clinicians and the overtness of the WH word as a stable complementizer, which may have facilitated the identification and extraction of the target syntactic structure.

Revisiting the definition of dyslexia

The International Dyslexia Association definition of dyslexia was updated 20 years ago and has been referenced frequently in research and practice. In this paper, researchers from the Florida Center for Reading Research consider the components of the definition and make recommendations for revisions. These include recognizing the persistence of word-reading, decoding, and spelling difficulties, acknowledging the multifactorial causal basis of dyslexia, clarifying exclusionary factors, and denoting comorbidity with other developmental disorders. It is also suggested that the academic and psychosocial consequences of dyslexia be highlighted to reinforce a preventive service delivery model. Lastly, the inclusion of dyslexia within a specific learning disability category is supported.

A Study on Differential Effects of Mathematics Reading Ability on Students' Value-Added Mathematics Achievements

Value-added assessments have become a reasonable and accepted assessment method for education and teaching. Mathematics reading ability is an important ability in mathematics learning which provides a prerequisite for solving mathematical problems. With the aim of uncovering the effects of mathematics reading ability on the continuous development of mathematics learning, this study focuses on the value added to students' mathematics reading ability as well as their mathematics performance. From a longitudinal perspective, we collected academic achievement data for 463 s-grade students, including their scores on their mathematics reading ability, which were then used a developed measurement tool. Building on Weiss's "Theory of Change", the students were divided into four categories: high academic achievement and high value-added, low academic achievement and high value-added, low academic achievement and low value-added, and high academic achievement and low value-added. Finally, we discussed the impact of the students' reading abilities in mathematics on their overall achievement. This study reveals a close correlation between mathematics reading skills and value-added performance. Higher scores in mathematics reading indicate higher value-added levels. For students with initially high scores, their mathematics reading skills greatly contributed to their high value-added performance.

Teaching little kids big sentences: A randomized controlled trial showing that children with DLD respond to complex syntax intervention embedded within the context of preschool/kindergarten science instruction

BACKGROUND

The language of the science curriculum is complex, even in the early grades. To communicate their scientific observations, children must produce complex syntax, particularly complement clauses (e.g., I think it will float; We noticed that it vibrates). Complex syntax is often challenging for children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and thus their learning and communication of science may be compromised.

AIMS

We asked whether recast therapy delivered in the context of a science curriculum led to gains in complement clause use and scientific content knowledge. To understand the efficacy of recast therapy, we compared changes in science and language knowledge in children who received treatment for complement clauses embedded in a first-grade science curriculum to two active control conditions (vocabulary + science, phonological awareness + science).

METHODS & PROCEDURES

This 2-year single-site three-arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in Delaware, USA. Children with DLD, not yet in first grade and with low accuracy on complement clauses, were eligible. Thirty-three 4-7-year-old children participated in the summers of 2018 and 2019 (2020 was cancelled due to COVID-19). We assigned participants to arms using 1:1:1 pseudo-random allocation (avoiding placing siblings together). The intervention consisted of 39 small-group sessions of recast therapy, robust vocabulary instruction or phonological awareness intervention during eight science units over 4 weeks, followed by two science units (1 week) taught without language intervention. Pre-/post-measures were collected 3 weeks before and after camp by unmasked assessors.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Primary outcome measures were accuracy on a 20-item probe of complement clause production and performance on ten 10-item unit tests (eight science + language, two science only). Complete data were available for 31 children (10 grammar, 21 active control); two others were lost to follow-up. Both groups made similar gains on science unit tests for science + language content (pre versus post, d = 2.9, p < 0.0001; group, p = 0.24). The grammar group performed significantly better at post-test than the active control group (d = 2.5, p = 0.049) on complement clause probes and marginally better on science-only unit tests (d = 2.5, p = 0.051).

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Children with DLD can benefit from language intervention embedded in curricular content and learn both language and science targets taught simultaneously. Tentative findings suggest that treatment for grammar targets may improve academic outcomes.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject We know that recast therapy focused on morphology is effective but very time consuming. Treatment for complex syntax in young children has preliminary efficacy data available. Prior research provides mixed evidence as to children's ability to learn language targets in conjunction with other information. What this study adds This study provides additional data supporting the efficacy of intensive complex syntax recast therapy for children ages 4-7 with Developmental Language Disorder. It also provides data that children can learn language targets and science curricular content simultaneously. What are the clinical implications of this work? As SLPs, we have to talk about something to deliver language therapy; we should consider talking about curricular content. Recast therapy focused on syntactic frames is effective with young children.

How we measure language skills of children at scale: A call to move beyond domain-specific tests as a proxy for language

PURPOSE

The aim of this research note is to encourage child language researchers and clinicians to give careful consideration to the use of domain-specific tests as a proxy for language; particularly in the context of large-scale studies and for the identification of language disorder in clinical practice.

METHOD

We report on data leveraged through the prospective Raine Study cohort. Participants included 1626 children aged 10 years (n = 104 with developmental language disorder [DLD] and n = 1522 without DLD). We assessed the predictive utility of common language measures including subtests of a standardised omnibus language assessment, non-verbal intelligence, and a domain-specific receptive vocabulary test.

RESULT

Children with DLD performed within the average range on a measure of non-verbal intelligence (z = -0.86) and receptive vocabulary (z = -0.38), as well as two out of the six subtests on the omnibus language assessment (zs > -1.50). The magnitude of the predictive relationship between language assessments and the likelihood of a child meeting criteria for DLD at 10 years was assessed using a logistic regression model, which was significant: χ²(8) = 16.91, p = 0.031. Semantic Relationships (OR = 1.13, CI = 1.04 - 1.23, p = .004), Formulated Sentences (OR = 1.07, CI = 1.01 - 1.13, p = .028), Recalling Sentences (OR = 1.20, CI = 1.15 - 1.26, p < .001), and Sentence Assembly (OR = 1.17, CI = 1.07 - 1.30, p = .001) were significant predictors of DLD.

CONCLUSION

Domain-specific language assessments, particularly those testing receptive vocabulary, may overestimate the language ability of children with DLD. Caution is urged when using such tests by clinicians and researchers, especially those measuring language skills of children at scale. Future directions for measuring the functional impact of DLD are presented.