Exploring spelling ability in school-aged children with literacy learning difficulties using data collected in a clinical setting

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q4 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Child Language Teaching & Therapy Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.1177/02656590211019446
B. Bailey, Kalaichelvi Ganesalingam, J. Arciuli, Gillian Bale, Suzi Drevensek, M. Hodge, Carol Kass, N. Ong, Rebecca Sutherland, N. Silove
{"title":"Exploring spelling ability in school-aged children with literacy learning difficulties using data collected in a clinical setting","authors":"B. Bailey, Kalaichelvi Ganesalingam, J. Arciuli, Gillian Bale, Suzi Drevensek, M. Hodge, Carol Kass, N. Ong, Rebecca Sutherland, N. Silove","doi":"10.1177/02656590211019446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Spelling analyses can be used to investigate sources of linguistic knowledge underlying children’s literacy development and may be useful in predicting later achievement. This study explored the utility of six analysis metrics in predicting the spelling achievement of school-aged children with literacy learning difficulties via post-hoc analyses of data collected in a clinic. Participants were 48 children aged 7 to 12 years. Spelling accuracy was assessed using the Dalwood Spelling Test (Dalwood Assessment Centre, 2008) at baseline and 37–70 weeks later. Spelling attempts at baseline were analysed using metrics designed to quantify evidence of phonological, orthographic, and/or morphological awareness. Scores from each metric were associated with baseline and later conventional spelling accuracy. A metric which credits evidence of phonological, orthographic and morphological awareness shared a significantly stronger association with baseline conventional spelling accuracy as compared to the remaining metrics. There were no significant differences in the strength of associations among the baseline metrics and later spelling achievement. Supplementary analyses focused exclusively on children’s spelling errors returned a similar pattern of results with a few notable exceptions. The utility of spelling analyses is discussed.","PeriodicalId":46549,"journal":{"name":"Child Language Teaching & Therapy","volume":"37 1","pages":"264 - 278"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/02656590211019446","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Language Teaching & Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02656590211019446","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Spelling analyses can be used to investigate sources of linguistic knowledge underlying children’s literacy development and may be useful in predicting later achievement. This study explored the utility of six analysis metrics in predicting the spelling achievement of school-aged children with literacy learning difficulties via post-hoc analyses of data collected in a clinic. Participants were 48 children aged 7 to 12 years. Spelling accuracy was assessed using the Dalwood Spelling Test (Dalwood Assessment Centre, 2008) at baseline and 37–70 weeks later. Spelling attempts at baseline were analysed using metrics designed to quantify evidence of phonological, orthographic, and/or morphological awareness. Scores from each metric were associated with baseline and later conventional spelling accuracy. A metric which credits evidence of phonological, orthographic and morphological awareness shared a significantly stronger association with baseline conventional spelling accuracy as compared to the remaining metrics. There were no significant differences in the strength of associations among the baseline metrics and later spelling achievement. Supplementary analyses focused exclusively on children’s spelling errors returned a similar pattern of results with a few notable exceptions. The utility of spelling analyses is discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用临床收集的数据探讨有读写学习困难的学龄儿童的拼写能力
拼写分析可以用来调查儿童识字发展的语言知识来源,并可能有助于预测以后的成就。本研究通过对诊所收集的数据进行事后分析,探讨了六种分析指标在预测识字学习困难学龄儿童拼写成绩方面的效用。参与者是48名7至12岁的儿童。在基线和37-70周后,使用Dalwood拼写测试(Dalwood评估中心,2008)评估拼写准确性。使用旨在量化音韵学、正字法和/或形态学意识证据的指标来分析基线时的拼写尝试。每个指标的得分与基线和后来的传统拼写准确性相关联。与其他指标相比,音韵学、正字法和形态学意识的证据与基线传统拼写准确性有着显著更强的联系。基线指标和后来的拼写成绩之间的关联强度没有显著差异。专门针对儿童拼写错误的补充分析得出了类似的结果模式,但有几个明显的例外。讨论了拼写分析的实用程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Child Language Teaching and Therapy is an international peer reviewed journal which aims to be the leading inter-disciplinary journal in the field of children"s spoken and written language needs. The journal publishes original research and review articles of high practical relevance and which emphasise inter-disciplinary collaboration. Child Language Teaching and Therapy publishes regular special issues on specific subject areas and commissions keynote reviews of significant topics. The readership of the journal consists of academics and practitioners across the disciplines of education, speech and language therapy, psychology and linguistics.
期刊最新文献
Notes on contributors A speech-to-symbol app for supporting communication partner to model and improve vocabulary Explicit cognate instruction facilitates vocabulary learning by foreign language learners with developmental language disorder ‘They make it easier to learn and cope’: The views of adolescents with speech, language and communication needs on attending a flexible learning programme Effectiveness of a group intervention for lexical enrichment in 6-to-10-year-old children with developmental language disorder
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1