Translating Interdisciplinary Research on Language Learning into Identifying Specific Learning Disabilities in Verbally Gifted and Average Children and Youth

Working Memory and Manual Dexterity in Dyslexic Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Dyslexic children have impairments in working memory and manual dexterity. Studies have shown that when cognitive development has deficits, motor development is often impaired, indicating a strong interconnection between both domains, and the possibility of interference with each other's proper functioning. Thus, a new literature review is necessary to understand which components of working memory and manual dexterity are affected in dyslexic children and the possible relationship between them. This review aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze both skills in dyslexic children. The protocol was carried out according to the criteria established by PRISMA being registered at PROSPERO under number CRD 42021238901. Six literature databases were searched to locate studies published between 2001 and 2021: EMBASE, ERIC, ISI Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus. 21 studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings suggest that dyslexic children have significantly poorer visuospatial and verbal working memory with more impairments in the phonological loop. No significant differences were found in manual dexterity.

Neuropsychological Profile of Intellectually Gifted Children: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The term intellectually gifted (IG) refers to children of high intelligence, which is classically measured by the intelligence quotient (IQ). Some researchers assume that the cognitive profiles of these children are characterized by both strengths and weaknesses, compared with those of their typically developing (TD) peers of average IQ. The aim of the present systematic review was to verify this assumption, by compiling data from empirical studies of cognitive functions (language, motor skills, visuospatial processing, memory, attention and executive functions, social and emotional cognition) and academic performances.

METHOD

The literature search yielded 658 articles, 15 of which met the selection criteria taken from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses model. We undertook a qualitative summary, to highlight any discrepancies between cognitive functions.

RESULTS

IG children exhibited better skills than TD children in a number of domains, including attention, language, mathematics, verbal working memory, shifting, and social problem solving. However, the two groups had comparable skills in visuospatial processing, memory, planning, inhibition, and visual working memory, or facial recognition.

CONCLUSION

Although IG children may have some strengths, many studies have failed to find differences between this population and their TD peers on many other cognitive measures. Just like any other children, they can display learning disabilities, which can be responsible for academic underachievement. Further studies are needed to better understand this heterogeneity. The present review provides pointers for overcoming methodological problems and opens up new avenues for giftedness research.

Behavioral and brain evidence for language by ear, mouth, eye, and hand and motor skills in literacy learning

Two studies were conducted of students with and without persisting Specific Learning Disabilities (SLDs-WL) in Grades 4 to 9 (M = 11 years, 11 months) that supported the hypotheses that CELF 4 parent ratings for listening (language by ear), speaking (language by mouth), reading (language by eye), and writing (language by hand) were correlated with both (a) normed, standardized behavioral measures of listening, speaking, reading, and writing achievement (Study 1, 94 boys and 61 girls); and (b) fMRI connectivity or DTI white matter integrity involving brain regions for primary motor functions or motor planning and control, or motor timing in a subsample of right handers who did not wear metal (Study 2, 28 boys and 16 girls). Results of these assessment studies, which have implications for planning instruction for three SLDs-WL (dysgraphia, dyslexia, and oral and written language learning disability [OWL LD]), show that more than multisensory instruction is relevant. Language by ear, by mouth, by eye, and by hand, as well as motor planning, control, and output skills and motor timing should also be considered. Research is also reviewed that supports other processes beyond multisensory input alone that should also be considered for students with SLDs-WL.

Movement Issues Identified in Movement ABC2 Checklist Parent Ratings for Students with Persisting Dysgraphia, Dyslexia, and OWL LD and Typical Literacy Learners

Movement, which draws on motor skills and executive functions for managing them, plays an important role in literacy learning (e.g., movement of mouth during oral reading and movement of hand and fingers during writing); but relatively little research has focused on movement skills in students with specific learning disabilities as the current study did. Parents completed normed Movement Assessment Battery for Children Checklist, 2nd edition (ABC-2), ratings and their children in grades 4 to 9 (M = 11 years, 11 months; 94 boys, 61 girls) completed diagnostic assessment used to assign them to diagnostic groups: control typical language learning (N = 42), dysgraphia (impaired handwriting) (N = 29), dyslexia (impaired word decoding/reading and spelling) (N = 65), or oral and written language learning disability (OWL LD) (impaired syntax in oral and written language) (N = 19). The research aims were to (a) correlate the Movement ABC-2 parent ratings for Scale A Static/Predictable Environment (15 items) and Scale B Dynamic/Unpredictable Environment (15 items) with reading and writing achievement in total sample varying within and across different skills; and (b) compare each specific learning disability group with the control group on Movement ABC-2 parent ratings for Scale A, Scale B, and Scale C Movement-Related (Non-Motor Executive Functions, or Self-Efficacy, or Affect) (13 items). At least one Movement ABC-2 parent rating was correlated with each assessed literacy achievement skill. Each of three specific learning disability groups differed from the control group on two Scale A (static/predictable environment) items (fastens buttons and forms letters with pencil or pen) and on three Scale C items (distractibility, overactive, and underestimates own ability); but only OWL LD differed from control on Scale B (dynamic/unpredictable environment) items. Applications of findings to assessment and instruction for students ascertained for and diagnosed with persisting specific learning disabilities in literacy learning, and future research directions are discussed.