Pub Date : 2017-07-03DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1402796
T. Nicholson
It has long been a puzzle that some children seem to learn to read and write no matter what the instructional method, whether it is implicit learning such as the book experience approach in whole language or whether it is explicit learning through the phonological approach. At the same time, it is well known that many children fail to read and write. Tunmer and Nicholson (2011) reviewed research on why some learn while others fail and concluded that literacy difficulties happen when beginner readers use the wrong strategy. Most first words are learned not through phonics but by memorization, selective association with a cue in the word that is remembered, such as the “tail” on “dog”. This is the way words are learned in other languages such as Chinese, but it puts a heavy load on memory and makes the learning process very slow. Not only this, children start school knowing perhaps 10,000 spoken words, and they will see many of these in print in their first years of school – and see them for the first time. The majority of children figure out a better way to learn to read and write than by memorizing words – instead, they crack the code, realizing that letters represent phonemes in the words they speak. They understand that print is speech written down. This insight however is not enough in that the letter-sound correspondence rules of English are really complex, and it takes years for children to become fluent just in decoding the words on the page. Gough (1996) called these letter-sound rules the “cipher”. Students without the cipher read and spell very differently. Children who know the cipher are better able to read nonwords and spell real words than those without the cipher. Their spelling is more phonetic; their reading errors have more graphic similarity. Their errors are very different to the students with difficulties whose errors are not anywhere near as close to the actual words. How do we teach the cipher? In the whole language approach, the aim is for children to use three cueing systems – semantic, syntactic, and graphophonic – and that these cueing systems are best accessed through reading of text, which is the basis of the book reading approach. In this approach, graphophonic cues are seen as of minor importance, so that the student only needs to look at the first one or two letters and can then guess the word they want to read. This approach relies very much on children being able to use their language knowledge to predict what the word must be using very few letter clues. The problem is that context is a fickle friend. It is there when you do not need it; not there when you do need it (Gough, 1996). Context clues enable us to predict with accuracy only when the word is highly predictable, at the end of a sentence, and with a lot of context help behind it. In real text reading, context clues only help us to predict one in ten content words and this is not enough (Tunmer & Nicholson, 2011). Phonics, however, directly teaches rules t
{"title":"Editorial: New directions in research on reading and writing difficulties","authors":"T. Nicholson","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1402796","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1402796","url":null,"abstract":"It has long been a puzzle that some children seem to learn to read and write no matter what the instructional method, whether it is implicit learning such as the book experience approach in whole language or whether it is explicit learning through the phonological approach. At the same time, it is well known that many children fail to read and write. Tunmer and Nicholson (2011) reviewed research on why some learn while others fail and concluded that literacy difficulties happen when beginner readers use the wrong strategy. Most first words are learned not through phonics but by memorization, selective association with a cue in the word that is remembered, such as the “tail” on “dog”. This is the way words are learned in other languages such as Chinese, but it puts a heavy load on memory and makes the learning process very slow. Not only this, children start school knowing perhaps 10,000 spoken words, and they will see many of these in print in their first years of school – and see them for the first time. The majority of children figure out a better way to learn to read and write than by memorizing words – instead, they crack the code, realizing that letters represent phonemes in the words they speak. They understand that print is speech written down. This insight however is not enough in that the letter-sound correspondence rules of English are really complex, and it takes years for children to become fluent just in decoding the words on the page. Gough (1996) called these letter-sound rules the “cipher”. Students without the cipher read and spell very differently. Children who know the cipher are better able to read nonwords and spell real words than those without the cipher. Their spelling is more phonetic; their reading errors have more graphic similarity. Their errors are very different to the students with difficulties whose errors are not anywhere near as close to the actual words. How do we teach the cipher? In the whole language approach, the aim is for children to use three cueing systems – semantic, syntactic, and graphophonic – and that these cueing systems are best accessed through reading of text, which is the basis of the book reading approach. In this approach, graphophonic cues are seen as of minor importance, so that the student only needs to look at the first one or two letters and can then guess the word they want to read. This approach relies very much on children being able to use their language knowledge to predict what the word must be using very few letter clues. The problem is that context is a fickle friend. It is there when you do not need it; not there when you do need it (Gough, 1996). Context clues enable us to predict with accuracy only when the word is highly predictable, at the end of a sentence, and with a lot of context help behind it. In real text reading, context clues only help us to predict one in ten content words and this is not enough (Tunmer & Nicholson, 2011). Phonics, however, directly teaches rules t","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"71 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1402796","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44091967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1287105
S. Mcleod, K. Crowe, Sarah Masso, E. Baker, Jane McCormack, Y. Wren, S. Roulstone, Charlotte Howland
Abstract Speech sound disorders are a common communication difficulty in preschool children. Teachers indicate difficulty identifying and supporting these children. The aim of this research was to describe speech and language characteristics of children identified by their parents and/or teachers as having possible communication concerns. 275 Australian 4- to 5-year-old children from 45 preschools whose parents and teachers were concerned about their talking participated in speech-language pathology assessments to examine speech, language, literacy, non-verbal intelligence, oromotor skills and hearing. The majority (71.3%) of children demonstrated lower consonant accuracy than expected for their age, 63.9% did not pass the language-screening task, 65.5% had not been assessed and 72.4% had not received intervention from a speech-language pathologist. The 132 children who were identified with speech sound disorder (phonological impairment) were more likely to be male (62.9%) who were unintelligible to unfamiliar listeners, and had poor emergent literacy and phonological processing skills, despite having typical hearing, oral structures, and intelligence. Children identified by parents and teachers with concerns may have a range of speech, language and communication needs requiring professional support.
{"title":"Profile of Australian preschool children with speech sound disorders at risk for literacy difficulties","authors":"S. Mcleod, K. Crowe, Sarah Masso, E. Baker, Jane McCormack, Y. Wren, S. Roulstone, Charlotte Howland","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1287105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1287105","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Speech sound disorders are a common communication difficulty in preschool children. Teachers indicate difficulty identifying and supporting these children. The aim of this research was to describe speech and language characteristics of children identified by their parents and/or teachers as having possible communication concerns. 275 Australian 4- to 5-year-old children from 45 preschools whose parents and teachers were concerned about their talking participated in speech-language pathology assessments to examine speech, language, literacy, non-verbal intelligence, oromotor skills and hearing. The majority (71.3%) of children demonstrated lower consonant accuracy than expected for their age, 63.9% did not pass the language-screening task, 65.5% had not been assessed and 72.4% had not received intervention from a speech-language pathologist. The 132 children who were identified with speech sound disorder (phonological impairment) were more likely to be male (62.9%) who were unintelligible to unfamiliar listeners, and had poor emergent literacy and phonological processing skills, despite having typical hearing, oral structures, and intelligence. Children identified by parents and teachers with concerns may have a range of speech, language and communication needs requiring professional support.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"15 - 33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1287105","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45162712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1287102
K. Wheldall, Robyn Wheldall, Alison Madelaine, Meree Reynolds, Sarah Arakelian
Abstract An earlier series of pilot studies and small-scale experimental studies had previously provided some evidence for the efficacy of a small group early literacy intervention program for young struggling readers. The present paper provides further evidence for efficacy based on a much larger sample of young, socially disadvantaged, at-risk readers. The participants comprised 14 successive intakes of Year 1 and Year 2 students into small group remedial literacy intervention programs hosted by two charitably run tutorial centres. In each semester, over the years 2005–2011, eight students (on average) attended each centre for one hour, for four days per week, for 15 weeks. Pre- and post-test assessment data on eight measures of early literacy performance were available on up to 194 students who completed the program. Substantial and statistically significant gains were evident on all literacy measures with large effect sizes. These results provide further evidence for the efficacy of the small group literacy intervention program.
{"title":"Further evidence for the efficacy of an evidence-based, small group, literacy intervention program for young struggling readers","authors":"K. Wheldall, Robyn Wheldall, Alison Madelaine, Meree Reynolds, Sarah Arakelian","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1287102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1287102","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract An earlier series of pilot studies and small-scale experimental studies had previously provided some evidence for the efficacy of a small group early literacy intervention program for young struggling readers. The present paper provides further evidence for efficacy based on a much larger sample of young, socially disadvantaged, at-risk readers. The participants comprised 14 successive intakes of Year 1 and Year 2 students into small group remedial literacy intervention programs hosted by two charitably run tutorial centres. In each semester, over the years 2005–2011, eight students (on average) attended each centre for one hour, for four days per week, for 15 weeks. Pre- and post-test assessment data on eight measures of early literacy performance were available on up to 194 students who completed the program. Substantial and statistically significant gains were evident on all literacy measures with large effect sizes. These results provide further evidence for the efficacy of the small group literacy intervention program.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"13 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1287102","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47601303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1322994
S. Wong, F. Press
Abstract In Australia, over 900,000 children attend some type of early childhood education and care service. Many of these children have learning difficulties and early childhood teachers play a significant role in identifying children’s needs and working with other professionals to instigate and/or implement appropriate interventions. When educators and allied health professionals work collaboratively in interprofessional ways, they are in a better position to support children and their families. Drawing on findings from a sustained body of research, this short paper shares our reflections on some of the benefits and challenges of two different approaches to working in interprofessionally in Australian early childhood education settings, and provides some suggestions for supporting this work.
{"title":"Interprofessional work in early childhood education and care services to support children with additional needs: two approaches","authors":"S. Wong, F. Press","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1322994","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1322994","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In Australia, over 900,000 children attend some type of early childhood education and care service. Many of these children have learning difficulties and early childhood teachers play a significant role in identifying children’s needs and working with other professionals to instigate and/or implement appropriate interventions. When educators and allied health professionals work collaboratively in interprofessional ways, they are in a better position to support children and their families. Drawing on findings from a sustained body of research, this short paper shares our reflections on some of the benefits and challenges of two different approaches to working in interprofessionally in Australian early childhood education settings, and provides some suggestions for supporting this work.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"49 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1322994","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46678777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1367152
G. Daniel, Cen Wang
Abstract International evidence indicates there may be little or no academic benefit for children who are retained, and the possibility of negative long term socio-emotional outcomes for these children. Drawing on data from the nationally representative Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (n = 4464), this paper provides an Australian perspective on the practice of grade retention, specifically investigating repeating the Kindergarten year. Our results indicated that nearly half of grade retention occurring by Year 6 occurs in the Kindergarten year, the main reasons being related to learning and behavioural difficulties. The analyses identified a number of child and family factors associated with grade retention, the strongest predictors being maternal mental health and parental receptive language concern, with school readiness, receptive language skills, and child hyperactivity also relevant factors. The paper considers implications for early intervention to support children’s academic trajectories through school.
{"title":"Inclusion and the practice of repeating Kindergarten in Australia","authors":"G. Daniel, Cen Wang","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1367152","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1367152","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract International evidence indicates there may be little or no academic benefit for children who are retained, and the possibility of negative long term socio-emotional outcomes for these children. Drawing on data from the nationally representative Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (n = 4464), this paper provides an Australian perspective on the practice of grade retention, specifically investigating repeating the Kindergarten year. Our results indicated that nearly half of grade retention occurring by Year 6 occurs in the Kindergarten year, the main reasons being related to learning and behavioural difficulties. The analyses identified a number of child and family factors associated with grade retention, the strongest predictors being maternal mental health and parental receptive language concern, with school readiness, receptive language skills, and child hyperactivity also relevant factors. The paper considers implications for early intervention to support children’s academic trajectories through school.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"57 - 69"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1367152","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42555448","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1289964
L. Harrison, S. Mcleod, L. McAllister, Jane McCormack
Abstract This study sought to assess the level of correspondence between parent and teacher report of concern about young children’s speech and specialist assessment of speech sound disorders (SSD). A sample of 157 children aged 4–5 years was recruited in preschools and long day care centres in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW). SSD was assessed independently by: (1) clinical diagnosis by a speech-language pathologist using the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology; (2) parent-reported concern using the Parent Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS); (3) teacher-reported concern using the PEDS. Agreement between parent identification of SSD and clinical assessment was high (86–90%). Agreement between teacher identification and clinical assessment was lower, and varied by state (Victoria 80%; NSW 63%). Differences in the accuracy of early childhood teachers’ identification of SSD are considered in relation to early childhood policies regarding the provision of speech-language pathology services in preschool settings.
{"title":"Speech sound disorders in preschool children: correspondence between clinical diagnosis and teacher and parent report","authors":"L. Harrison, S. Mcleod, L. McAllister, Jane McCormack","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1289964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1289964","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study sought to assess the level of correspondence between parent and teacher report of concern about young children’s speech and specialist assessment of speech sound disorders (SSD). A sample of 157 children aged 4–5 years was recruited in preschools and long day care centres in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW). SSD was assessed independently by: (1) clinical diagnosis by a speech-language pathologist using the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology; (2) parent-reported concern using the Parent Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS); (3) teacher-reported concern using the PEDS. Agreement between parent identification of SSD and clinical assessment was high (86–90%). Agreement between teacher identification and clinical assessment was lower, and varied by state (Victoria 80%; NSW 63%). Differences in the accuracy of early childhood teachers’ identification of SSD are considered in relation to early childhood policies regarding the provision of speech-language pathology services in preschool settings.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"35 - 48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1289964","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48174620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1367145
Lisa Limbrick, S. McDonagh
Early childhood education plays a significant role in enhancing the development of young children, particularly those identified with additional needs. Early identification and support for children who are at risk of experiencing learning difficulties is paramount across academic, social, emotional and behavioural domains. Early childhood services play a key role in identification and intervention, thereby ameliorating the likelihood of longer term difficulties once schooling commences. In this special issue of the Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, five articles are featured with a specific emphasis on early childhood and supporting young students with additional needs. They span the fields of reading difficulties, speech and language difficulties, grade retention, and interprofessional collaboration. Kevin Wheldall, Robyn Wheldall, Alison Madelaine, Meree Reynolds and Sarah Arakelian provide further evidence for the efficacy of an evidence-based program designed specifically for young struggling readers. Over a seven-year period, 194 students participated in the MiniLit program, a 15week explicit, systematic literacy intervention. Results suggest that MiniLit significantly improved the reading and related skills of young struggling readers, and highlight the importance of early detection and intervention of reading difficulties in the early years of schooling. Sharynne McLeod, Kathryn Crowe, Sarah Masso, Elise Baker, Jane McCormack, Yvonne Wren, Susan Roulstone, and Charlotte Howland examine speech and language characteristics of children identified with possible communication concerns using a large-scale longitudinal sample of 4to 5-year old children from 45 preschools. Preschool-aged children identified with phonologically-based speech sound disorders are more likely to be male, unintelligible to unfamiliar listeners, and possess poor emergent literacy and phonological processing skills. These early indicators of speech sound disorders may assist educators with the early identification of communication difficulties and aid families in seeking appropriate supports for these difficulties prior to commencing school. Early identification and provision of support may thereby enhance school readiness and reduce the likelihood of longer term risk for academic, social, emotional and/or behavioural difficulties. Linda Harrison, Sharynne McLeod, Lindy McAllister, and Jane McCormack explore the relationship between specialist assessment and parent and teacher reporting in identifying speech sound disorders in preschool children. Their study found that while parental concerns were more reliable in the detection of speech sound disorders than early childhood educators’ concerns, teacher reports nevertheless provided valuable information on communication in classroom settings. Sandie Wong and Frances Press provide a comprehensive discussion on the need for collaborative approaches to support children with additional needs. Interprofessional pract
{"title":"Editorial","authors":"Lisa Limbrick, S. McDonagh","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1367145","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1367145","url":null,"abstract":"Early childhood education plays a significant role in enhancing the development of young children, particularly those identified with additional needs. Early identification and support for children who are at risk of experiencing learning difficulties is paramount across academic, social, emotional and behavioural domains. Early childhood services play a key role in identification and intervention, thereby ameliorating the likelihood of longer term difficulties once schooling commences. In this special issue of the Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, five articles are featured with a specific emphasis on early childhood and supporting young students with additional needs. They span the fields of reading difficulties, speech and language difficulties, grade retention, and interprofessional collaboration. Kevin Wheldall, Robyn Wheldall, Alison Madelaine, Meree Reynolds and Sarah Arakelian provide further evidence for the efficacy of an evidence-based program designed specifically for young struggling readers. Over a seven-year period, 194 students participated in the MiniLit program, a 15week explicit, systematic literacy intervention. Results suggest that MiniLit significantly improved the reading and related skills of young struggling readers, and highlight the importance of early detection and intervention of reading difficulties in the early years of schooling. Sharynne McLeod, Kathryn Crowe, Sarah Masso, Elise Baker, Jane McCormack, Yvonne Wren, Susan Roulstone, and Charlotte Howland examine speech and language characteristics of children identified with possible communication concerns using a large-scale longitudinal sample of 4to 5-year old children from 45 preschools. Preschool-aged children identified with phonologically-based speech sound disorders are more likely to be male, unintelligible to unfamiliar listeners, and possess poor emergent literacy and phonological processing skills. These early indicators of speech sound disorders may assist educators with the early identification of communication difficulties and aid families in seeking appropriate supports for these difficulties prior to commencing school. Early identification and provision of support may thereby enhance school readiness and reduce the likelihood of longer term risk for academic, social, emotional and/or behavioural difficulties. Linda Harrison, Sharynne McLeod, Lindy McAllister, and Jane McCormack explore the relationship between specialist assessment and parent and teacher reporting in identifying speech sound disorders in preschool children. Their study found that while parental concerns were more reliable in the detection of speech sound disorders than early childhood educators’ concerns, teacher reports nevertheless provided valuable information on communication in classroom settings. Sandie Wong and Frances Press provide a comprehensive discussion on the need for collaborative approaches to support children with additional needs. Interprofessional pract","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"22 1","pages":"1 - 2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1367145","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42715470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1289963
Giannis Karagiannakis, A. Baccaglini-Frank, P. Roussos
Abstract Through a review of the literature on mathematical learning disabilities (MLD) and low achievement in mathematics (LA) we have proposed a model classifying mathematical skills involved in learning mathematics into four domains (Core number, Memory, Reasoning, and Visual-spatial). In this paper we present a new experimental computer-based battery of mathematical tasks designed to elicit abilities from each domain, that was administered to a sample of 165 typical population 5th and 6th grade students (MLD = 9 and LA = 17). Explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted on the data obtained, together with K-means cluster analysis. Results indicated strong evidence for supporting the solidity of the model, and clustered the population into six distinguishable performance groups with the MLD and LA students distributed within five of the clusters. These findings support the hypothesis that difficulties in learning mathematics can have multiple origins and provide a means for sketching students’ mathematical learning profiles.
摘要通过对数学学习障碍(MLD)和数学低成就(LA)相关文献的回顾，我们提出了一个数学学习技能模型，将数学学习技能分为核心数字、记忆、推理和视觉空间四个领域。在本文中，我们提出了一种新的基于计算机的实验数学任务，旨在激发每个领域的能力，并对165名典型的五年级和六年级学生(MLD = 9, LA = 17)进行了管理。对获得的数据进行解释性和验证性因子分析，并进行k均值聚类分析。结果显示了强有力的证据支持该模型的可靠性，并将人口聚类为六个可区分的绩效组，其中MLD和LA学生分布在五个集群中。这些发现支持了数学学习困难可能有多种原因的假设，并为描绘学生的数学学习概况提供了一种方法。
{"title":"Detecting strengths and weaknesses in learning mathematics through a model classifying mathematical skills","authors":"Giannis Karagiannakis, A. Baccaglini-Frank, P. Roussos","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1289963","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1289963","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Through a review of the literature on mathematical learning disabilities (MLD) and low achievement in mathematics (LA) we have proposed a model classifying mathematical skills involved in learning mathematics into four domains (Core number, Memory, Reasoning, and Visual-spatial). In this paper we present a new experimental computer-based battery of mathematical tasks designed to elicit abilities from each domain, that was administered to a sample of 165 typical population 5th and 6th grade students (MLD = 9 and LA = 17). Explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted on the data obtained, together with K-means cluster analysis. Results indicated strong evidence for supporting the solidity of the model, and clustered the population into six distinguishable performance groups with the MLD and LA students distributed within five of the clusters. These findings support the hypothesis that difficulties in learning mathematics can have multiple origins and provide a means for sketching students’ mathematical learning profiles.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"21 1","pages":"115 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1289963","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60129663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1322993
K. Wheldall, Sarah Arakelian
Abstract The aim of this study was to compare the York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension (YARC) with the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (NARA) and other measures of reading and related skills with a sample of older low-progress readers and to provide additional information regarding the validity of the YARC in Australia. The data from an opportunity sample of 78 older low-progress readers from two literacy tutorial centres, assessed on a battery of tests of reading and related skills, prior to intervention, were analysed. Correlations of the YARC with other measures were generally high and the YARC also appeared to yield similar mean reading age estimates as the NARA and other measures.
{"title":"Comparing the performance of older low-progress readers on the York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension with performance on the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability and other measures of reading and related skills","authors":"K. Wheldall, Sarah Arakelian","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1322993","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1322993","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The aim of this study was to compare the York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension (YARC) with the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (NARA) and other measures of reading and related skills with a sample of older low-progress readers and to provide additional information regarding the validity of the YARC in Australia. The data from an opportunity sample of 78 older low-progress readers from two literacy tutorial centres, assessed on a battery of tests of reading and related skills, prior to intervention, were analysed. Correlations of the YARC with other measures were generally high and the YARC also appeared to yield similar mean reading age estimates as the NARA and other measures.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"21 1","pages":"157 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1322993","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60129796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2017.1287103
L. Meeks, J. Stephenson, Coral Kemp, Alison Madelaine
Abstract This review examined studies that had addressed opinions of pre-service teachers (PSTs) concerning their preparedness for teaching early reading skills to all students, the extent of their content knowledge, and their attitudes towards code-based and/or meaning-based approaches to early reading. From the limited amount of research available, it would appear that although most PSTs were confident in their ability to teach early reading skills, they had reservations regarding their ability to teach children who struggle to learn to read. In addition, even though the majority of primary and early childhood PSTs favoured a code-based approach to teaching early reading, many lack both the necessary knowledge, and the confidence, to implement such an approach. A more comprehensive investigation across teacher training institutions is needed to confirm these findings.
{"title":"How well prepared are pre-service teachers to teach early reading? A systematic review of the literature","authors":"L. Meeks, J. Stephenson, Coral Kemp, Alison Madelaine","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2017.1287103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2017.1287103","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This review examined studies that had addressed opinions of pre-service teachers (PSTs) concerning their preparedness for teaching early reading skills to all students, the extent of their content knowledge, and their attitudes towards code-based and/or meaning-based approaches to early reading. From the limited amount of research available, it would appear that although most PSTs were confident in their ability to teach early reading skills, they had reservations regarding their ability to teach children who struggle to learn to read. In addition, even though the majority of primary and early childhood PSTs favoured a code-based approach to teaching early reading, many lack both the necessary knowledge, and the confidence, to implement such an approach. A more comprehensive investigation across teacher training institutions is needed to confirm these findings.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"21 1","pages":"69 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2017.1287103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60129490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：