Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000319
G. A. Troia, M. Emam
In this study of more than 1,000 typical and at-risk elementary Arabic-speaking students in Oman, we explore relationships between pragmatic (and other) language skills, literacy, cognition, and behavior and the degree to which demography impacts performance on associated tasks. We found, in most cases, that females performed better than males, students' performance improved between Grades 2 and 4 but declined in Grade 5, and at-risk students performed as well as their nonreferred peers except on a working memory task. Pragmatic competence was the best predictor of literacy proficiency, and vice versa, for both groups when controlling for other variables. Findings are discussed in the context of Omani education and the limited attention given to pragmatics in research on connections between language and literacy.
{"title":"Relations Between Pragmatic Language and Literacy-Related Skills in Omani Elementary Students","authors":"G. A. Troia, M. Emam","doi":"10.1097/TLD.0000000000000319","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000319","url":null,"abstract":"In this study of more than 1,000 typical and at-risk elementary Arabic-speaking students in Oman, we explore relationships between pragmatic (and other) language skills, literacy, cognition, and behavior and the degree to which demography impacts performance on associated tasks. We found, in most cases, that females performed better than males, students' performance improved between Grades 2 and 4 but declined in Grade 5, and at-risk students performed as well as their nonreferred peers except on a working memory task. Pragmatic competence was the best predictor of literacy proficiency, and vice versa, for both groups when controlling for other variables. Findings are discussed in the context of Omani education and the limited attention given to pragmatics in research on connections between language and literacy.","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41920385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1097/tld.0000000000000318
G. Olness, Jennifer J. Kurnal, Thomas G. Broussard, Faye S. Stillman, Catalina C. Assaad, L. M. García, Jodi Morgan
Millions of people worldwide have experienced abrupt and traumatic disruption in the flow of their personal life story as a result of stroke and the onset of aphasia. For each one who survives and embarks on the journey toward recovery, their unique and evolving narrative yields gems of wisdom borne of the experience. This wisdom is shared with others through interpersonal narrative exchange and engagement, which foster biographical coherence and provide sources of hope to others on the path toward a productive and fulfilling life. This case study illustrates how a biography-based approach to stakeholder-engaged research merges personal stories in three ways. First, the case illustrates how the personal and professional stories of the candidate research team members merged to form the team through networking over time. Second, the biography-based approach led the team to identify the written personal accounts of 259 people living with aphasia as the raw data set for their research, with the intended goal of mining gems of practical wisdom from these written biographical works. Third, the case illustrates how the biography-based approach draws on the personal stories of in-hospital experiences of research team members with aphasia to prospectively hone the initial research focus. Specifically, the team will tap the collective voice within the written accounts to evaluate the in-hospital experiences of people with aphasia. The ultimate goal will be to catalyze participatory action, in collaboration with transdisciplinary health care providers, to advance responsive, person-centered health care. The authors address challenges and priorities in stakeholder-engaged research team development, the importance of honing a research focus, and the identification of research dissemination venues. Oral and written accounts of life with aphasia offer a timeless and potentially rich source of wisdom that can be tapped through the process of stakeholder-engaged research.
{"title":"The Narrative-Based Evolution of a Stakeholder-Engaged Research Team","authors":"G. Olness, Jennifer J. Kurnal, Thomas G. Broussard, Faye S. Stillman, Catalina C. Assaad, L. M. García, Jodi Morgan","doi":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000318","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/tld.0000000000000318","url":null,"abstract":"Millions of people worldwide have experienced abrupt and traumatic disruption in the flow of their personal life story as a result of stroke and the onset of aphasia. For each one who survives and embarks on the journey toward recovery, their unique and evolving narrative yields gems of wisdom borne of the experience. This wisdom is shared with others through interpersonal narrative exchange and engagement, which foster biographical coherence and provide sources of hope to others on the path toward a productive and fulfilling life. This case study illustrates how a biography-based approach to stakeholder-engaged research merges personal stories in three ways. First, the case illustrates how the personal and professional stories of the candidate research team members merged to form the team through networking over time. Second, the biography-based approach led the team to identify the written personal accounts of 259 people living with aphasia as the raw data set for their research, with the intended goal of mining gems of practical wisdom from these written biographical works. Third, the case illustrates how the biography-based approach draws on the personal stories of in-hospital experiences of research team members with aphasia to prospectively hone the initial research focus. Specifically, the team will tap the collective voice within the written accounts to evaluate the in-hospital experiences of people with aphasia. The ultimate goal will be to catalyze participatory action, in collaboration with transdisciplinary health care providers, to advance responsive, person-centered health care. The authors address challenges and priorities in stakeholder-engaged research team development, the importance of honing a research focus, and the identification of research dissemination venues. Oral and written accounts of life with aphasia offer a timeless and potentially rich source of wisdom that can be tapped through the process of stakeholder-engaged research.","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47245677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000317
G. A. Troia, Lauren (Lo) Hennenfent, Mei-Yi Shen
We conducted a scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses to map the available research describing verbal pragmatic skills development and problems in school-age children with primary language impairments and children with language-learning disabilities. A total of 112 reports met inclusion criteria for our review. Many studies were published in journals focused on communication disorders between the years 2000 and 2019 and targeted K-12 children in the United States or the United Kingdom with developmental language disorder who were most often compared with age-matched typically developing peers using a group comparison research design. Over 60% of the studies had fewer than 25 participants in the target group. Nearly two thirds of study participants were boys, and most were Caucasian from middle- to upper-income families. The majority of studies used multiple outcome measures in data analyses, most often norm-referenced and researcher-designed tests, language sample analysis, and rating scales. A third of studies omitted information about outcome measure reliability and nearly all studies omitted validity data. Several studies are described in detail as examples and a summary of the major findings from the reviewed studies is presented.
{"title":"Pragmatic Skills in School-Age Children With Primary Language Impairment and Language-Learning Disabilities","authors":"G. A. Troia, Lauren (Lo) Hennenfent, Mei-Yi Shen","doi":"10.1097/TLD.0000000000000317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000317","url":null,"abstract":"We conducted a scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses to map the available research describing verbal pragmatic skills development and problems in school-age children with primary language impairments and children with language-learning disabilities. A total of 112 reports met inclusion criteria for our review. Many studies were published in journals focused on communication disorders between the years 2000 and 2019 and targeted K-12 children in the United States or the United Kingdom with developmental language disorder who were most often compared with age-matched typically developing peers using a group comparison research design. Over 60% of the studies had fewer than 25 participants in the target group. Nearly two thirds of study participants were boys, and most were Caucasian from middle- to upper-income families. The majority of studies used multiple outcome measures in data analyses, most often norm-referenced and researcher-designed tests, language sample analysis, and rating scales. A third of studies omitted information about outcome measure reliability and nearly all studies omitted validity data. Several studies are described in detail as examples and a summary of the major findings from the reviewed studies is presented.","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47007503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Continuing Education Instructions and Questions","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/tld.0000000000000320","url":null,"abstract":"Topics in Language Disorders 43(3):p E11-E14, July/September 2023. | DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000320","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135762284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1097/tld.0000000000000313
{"title":"Motivation and Literacy Development in Students With or at Risk for Reading Difficulties and Other Diverse Learners","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/tld.0000000000000313","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45468129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1097/tld.0000000000000316
{"title":"Continuing Education Instructions and Questions","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000316","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/tld.0000000000000316","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135573889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1097/tld.0000000000000311
Stephanie Al Otaiba, Jeanne Wanzek, Yaacov Petscher, Sally Fluhler, Brenna Rivas, Dayna Russell Freudenthal
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a virtual intensive reading intervention embedded with mindset training compared to typical reading instruction in a business-as-usual (BAU) condition delivered to fourth grade students with or at-risk for reading disabilities. After screening, the 59 participants were stratified and assigned randomly to condition. Highly trained interventionists delivered the intervention one-to-one with high fidelity and student engagement during the intensive intervention. Classroom teachers delivered the BAU. We examined the effects of the intervention on a variety of standardized timed and untimed measures of word reading and decoding, reading fluency, comprehension, and mindset. We addressed two research questions: What are the effects of intensive virtual reading intervention embedded with mindset training relative to a business-as-usual comparison (BAU) on the reading outcomes of fourth grade students with or at-risk for reading disabilities? Was initial mindset related to student response to intervention? Data analyses examined the main effect and moderation using linear mixed effects models. Significant differences in reading favored the virtual treatment condition for letter and word identification (g = 0.38). No other significant effects were observed. We note limitations in our study and offer directions for future research, including the need to explore additional moderators.
{"title":"Effects of a Virtually Delivered Reading and Embedded Mindset Intervention on Reading Performance for Fourth-Grader Struggling Readers.","authors":"Stephanie Al Otaiba, Jeanne Wanzek, Yaacov Petscher, Sally Fluhler, Brenna Rivas, Dayna Russell Freudenthal","doi":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000311","DOIUrl":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000311","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a virtual intensive reading intervention embedded with mindset training compared to typical reading instruction in a business-as-usual (BAU) condition delivered to fourth grade students with or at-risk for reading disabilities. After screening, the 59 participants were stratified and assigned randomly to condition. Highly trained interventionists delivered the intervention one-to-one with high fidelity and student engagement during the intensive intervention. Classroom teachers delivered the BAU. We examined the effects of the intervention on a variety of standardized timed and untimed measures of word reading and decoding, reading fluency, comprehension, and mindset. We addressed two research questions: What are the effects of intensive virtual reading intervention embedded with mindset training relative to a business-as-usual comparison (BAU) on the reading outcomes of fourth grade students with or at-risk for reading disabilities? Was initial mindset related to student response to intervention? Data analyses examined the main effect and moderation using linear mixed effects models. Significant differences in reading favored the virtual treatment condition for letter and word identification (<i>g</i> = 0.38). No other significant effects were observed. We note limitations in our study and offer directions for future research, including the need to explore additional moderators.</p>","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10481790/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10562285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000314
Ana Camacho, F. De Smedt, R. Maio, J. Cadima, H. Van Keer, Rui A. Alves
Prior research has consistently shown that motivation is a catalyst for students' writing performance, with important implications for writing instruction. However, this body of research has mainly relied on a variable-centered approach that does not acknowledge the similarities and differences between and within groups of students. In the current study, we sought to address this research gap by examining the association between different motivational profiles and writing performance using a person-centered approach. Accordingly, we aimed to (a) identify different motivational profiles in writing, based on students' implicit theories and achievement goals, and (b) examine whether students in different profiles varied in writing performance. To this end, we sampled 212 Portuguese sixth-grade students (M = 11.11 years, SD = 0.56) and collected motivational and writing performance measures at a single time point. Cluster analyses revealed two distinct writing motivation profiles: one profile reflected students with a growth mindset who were less oriented toward performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals, and another profile represented students with a fixed mindset who were more oriented toward performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Subsequent analyses indicated that one profile could be considered as more adaptive than the other. Specifically, students in the growth mindset and less performance-oriented profile wrote opinion texts with better quality and earned higher writing grades than students in the fixed mindset and more performance-oriented profile. Overall, these findings suggest that teachers should add motivation-enhancing practices to writing instruction and tailor their teaching practices according to students' unique motivational profiles.
{"title":"Writing Motivation Profiles and Their Association With Writing Performance","authors":"Ana Camacho, F. De Smedt, R. Maio, J. Cadima, H. Van Keer, Rui A. Alves","doi":"10.1097/TLD.0000000000000314","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000314","url":null,"abstract":"Prior research has consistently shown that motivation is a catalyst for students' writing performance, with important implications for writing instruction. However, this body of research has mainly relied on a variable-centered approach that does not acknowledge the similarities and differences between and within groups of students. In the current study, we sought to address this research gap by examining the association between different motivational profiles and writing performance using a person-centered approach. Accordingly, we aimed to (a) identify different motivational profiles in writing, based on students' implicit theories and achievement goals, and (b) examine whether students in different profiles varied in writing performance. To this end, we sampled 212 Portuguese sixth-grade students (M = 11.11 years, SD = 0.56) and collected motivational and writing performance measures at a single time point. Cluster analyses revealed two distinct writing motivation profiles: one profile reflected students with a growth mindset who were less oriented toward performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals, and another profile represented students with a fixed mindset who were more oriented toward performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Subsequent analyses indicated that one profile could be considered as more adaptive than the other. Specifically, students in the growth mindset and less performance-oriented profile wrote opinion texts with better quality and earned higher writing grades than students in the fixed mindset and more performance-oriented profile. Overall, these findings suggest that teachers should add motivation-enhancing practices to writing instruction and tailor their teaching practices according to students' unique motivational profiles.","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43535263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000312
Eunsoo Cho, Katlynn Dahl‐Leonard, Karen F. Kehoe, Philip Capin, Colby Hall, E. Solari
The purposes of this study were to (a) describe the extent to which motivational practices are incorporated in foundational reading interventions for students with or at risk for dyslexia in kindergarten through Grade 5 (K–5) and (b) explore whether the presence and type of motivational practices (i.e., supports vs. strategies) within foundational reading interventions influenced the magnitude of the intervention effects on reading outcomes. We analyzed the same set of studies as Hall et al. (2022), who meta-analyzed experimental and quasi-experimental research of reading interventions implemented with K–5 students with or at risk for dyslexia from 1980 to 2020. Results of the current study show that only 44% of the interventions included motivational practices. The majority (84%) of those interventions addressed student motivation and engagement through motivational supports, such as game-like activities, paired work, and setting improvement goals. A much smaller percentage (16%) provided explicit motivational strategy instruction. Results indicated that reading interventions that include direct motivational strategy instruction tend to have larger effects on reading outcomes than both interventions without any motivational practices and those that include motivational supports only. The positive effect of motivational strategy instruction was stronger on measures of word reading than overall reading or reading comprehension outcomes. These findings highlight the need to address motivational challenges of students with reading difficulties and lend insight into how foundational reading skills interventions can be bolstered through incorporating motivational strategy instruction.
{"title":"Motivational Practices in Reading Interventions for Students With or at Risk for Dyslexia","authors":"Eunsoo Cho, Katlynn Dahl‐Leonard, Karen F. Kehoe, Philip Capin, Colby Hall, E. Solari","doi":"10.1097/TLD.0000000000000312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000312","url":null,"abstract":"The purposes of this study were to (a) describe the extent to which motivational practices are incorporated in foundational reading interventions for students with or at risk for dyslexia in kindergarten through Grade 5 (K–5) and (b) explore whether the presence and type of motivational practices (i.e., supports vs. strategies) within foundational reading interventions influenced the magnitude of the intervention effects on reading outcomes. We analyzed the same set of studies as Hall et al. (2022), who meta-analyzed experimental and quasi-experimental research of reading interventions implemented with K–5 students with or at risk for dyslexia from 1980 to 2020. Results of the current study show that only 44% of the interventions included motivational practices. The majority (84%) of those interventions addressed student motivation and engagement through motivational supports, such as game-like activities, paired work, and setting improvement goals. A much smaller percentage (16%) provided explicit motivational strategy instruction. Results indicated that reading interventions that include direct motivational strategy instruction tend to have larger effects on reading outcomes than both interventions without any motivational practices and those that include motivational supports only. The positive effect of motivational strategy instruction was stronger on measures of word reading than overall reading or reading comprehension outcomes. These findings highlight the need to address motivational challenges of students with reading difficulties and lend insight into how foundational reading skills interventions can be bolstered through incorporating motivational strategy instruction.","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44887027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1097/tld.0000000000000315
Motivation is what drives and energizes students to engage in learning behaviors that help them achieve their goals. Motivation is essential in the active learning process where students engage with texts to construct meaning from print and to write to communicate their thoughts (Wigfield et al., 2016). Several models of reading, such as the Active View of Reading (Duke & Cartwright, 2021) and the Component Model of Reading (Aaron et al., 2008), have identified motivational components as critical contributors to reading development, in addition to decoding and language comprehension. Similarly, the Direct and Indirect Effects Model of Writing (Kim & Park, 2019) posits that motivation and various component writing skills are reciprocally related and influence writing development. Motivation plays an even more critical role in the literacy development of children with learning difficulties, including students with reading disabilities (Cho et al., 2022), who require optimal motivation to utilize their limited cognitive resources fully. However, research has shown that students with learning disabilities and other low achievers tend to demonstrate maladaptive motivational patterns characterized by lower efficacy and intrinsic motivation (Baird et al., 2009; Lee & Zentall, 2012) than peers without disabilities or learning struggles. Despite this, motivational needs have rarely been central to instructional design. This issue of Topics in Language Disorders includes two research syntheses that examined the extent to which motivational challenges of struggling readers are addressed in vocabulary (Louick et al.) and foundational reading (Cho et al.) interventions. It also presents a concrete example of how the motivational challenges of struggling readers can be addressed through a reading intervention with embedded growth mindset support (Al Otaiba et al.). Finally, a descriptive study (Camacho et al.) identifies writing motivational profiles associated with poor writing performance, offering implications for instructional environments that promote writing development. Louick et al. reviewed 55 studies of vocabulary interventions for students with or at risk for reading difficulties and identified 21 studies that incorporated at least one motivation construct into the vocabulary intervention. They found that effective vocabulary interventions focused on student interests and goals, using technology, or identifying topics of high interest to students. In addition, the interventions incorporated support for students' self-regulation through identifying goals, set either by teachers or by students, and/or monitoring progress toward the set goals. The authors offer suggestions for researchers and practitioners for incorporating motivation into instructional design to bolster vocabulary learning for students at risk for learning problems. In their secondary meta-analysis of reading interventions for students with or at risk for dyslexia, Cho et al. distingu
动机是驱动和激励学生参与帮助他们实现目标的学习行为。在主动学习过程中，动机是必不可少的，在这个过程中，学生通过文本来构建印刷的意义，并通过写作来交流他们的想法(Wigfield et al.， 2016)。一些阅读模型，如主动阅读观(Duke & Cartwright, 2021)和阅读成分模型(Aaron et al.， 2008)，已经确定除了解码和语言理解之外，动机成分也是阅读发展的关键因素。同样，写作的直接和间接影响模型(Kim & Park, 2019)认为动机和各种组成部分的写作技巧是相互关联的，并影响写作的发展。动机在有学习困难的儿童，包括有阅读障碍的学生的读写能力发展中起着更为关键的作用(Cho et al.， 2022)，他们需要最佳的动机来充分利用有限的认知资源。然而，研究表明，学习障碍学生和其他低成就学生往往表现出以低效能和内在动机为特征的不适应动机模式(Baird et al.， 2009;Lee & Zentall, 2012)比没有残疾或学习困难的同龄人要好。尽管如此，动机需求很少成为教学设计的中心。本期《语言障碍主题》包括两项综合研究，研究了在词汇(Louick et al.)和基础阅读(Cho et al.)干预中，困难读者的动机挑战在多大程度上得到了解决。它还提供了一个具体的例子，说明如何通过嵌入式成长心态支持的阅读干预来解决挣扎读者的动机挑战(Al Otaiba等人)。最后，一项描述性研究(Camacho等人)确定了写作动机与写作表现差有关，为促进写作发展的教学环境提供了启示。Louick等人回顾了55项针对有阅读困难或有阅读困难风险的学生的词汇干预研究，并确定了21项将至少一种动机结构纳入词汇干预的研究。他们发现，有效的词汇干预集中在学生的兴趣和目标上，使用技术，或者确定学生感兴趣的话题。此外，干预措施还包括通过确定目标(由教师或学生设定)和/或监控朝着设定目标的进展来支持学生的自我调节。作者为研究人员和实践者提供了将动机纳入教学设计的建议，以促进有学习问题风险的学生的词汇学习。Cho等人在对有阅读障碍或有阅读障碍风险的学生进行阅读干预的二次元分析中，区分了动机支持和动机策略指导，前者提高了学生的兴趣和参与程度，后者明确地教授学生调节其动机和阅读相关行为的策略。他们发现，只有44%的干预措施包括激励实践，其中80%以上的干预措施主要集中在没有明确指导的激励支持上。他们的荟萃分析结果表明，动机策略指导往往比只有动机支持或根本没有动机支持的干预对阅读结果产生更大的影响，尽管在这些类别中效果大小存在很大的异质性。Al Otaiba等人的第三篇文章举例说明了如何将促进成长心态的动机实践整合到单词阅读干预中。作者通过在阅读干预中嵌入动机支持，扩展了他们之前的工作，其中商业上可获得的心态和阅读干预是并行实施的。尽管结果好坏参半，但这项研究为他们的方法提供了初步支持。最后，Camacho等人研究了竞争性课堂环境下葡萄牙中学生的动机特征。他们发现，目标高度以成绩为导向、心态固定的学生比目标不那么以成绩为导向、心态成长型的学生在写作上更吃力。这一发现强调了认识到写作动机多样性的重要性，以及创造一个不强调分数和竞争的课堂环境的必要性。总的来说，这个问题解决了教育中的一个关键问题——有学习障碍或有学习障碍风险的学生和其他不同的学习者需要教学支持，以促进适应性动机和基于证据的扫盲干预。
{"title":"Motivation and Literacy Development in Students With or At Risk for Reading Difficulties and Other Diverse Learners","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/tld.0000000000000315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/tld.0000000000000315","url":null,"abstract":"Motivation is what drives and energizes students to engage in learning behaviors that help them achieve their goals. Motivation is essential in the active learning process where students engage with texts to construct meaning from print and to write to communicate their thoughts (Wigfield et al., 2016). Several models of reading, such as the Active View of Reading (Duke & Cartwright, 2021) and the Component Model of Reading (Aaron et al., 2008), have identified motivational components as critical contributors to reading development, in addition to decoding and language comprehension. Similarly, the Direct and Indirect Effects Model of Writing (Kim & Park, 2019) posits that motivation and various component writing skills are reciprocally related and influence writing development. Motivation plays an even more critical role in the literacy development of children with learning difficulties, including students with reading disabilities (Cho et al., 2022), who require optimal motivation to utilize their limited cognitive resources fully. However, research has shown that students with learning disabilities and other low achievers tend to demonstrate maladaptive motivational patterns characterized by lower efficacy and intrinsic motivation (Baird et al., 2009; Lee & Zentall, 2012) than peers without disabilities or learning struggles. Despite this, motivational needs have rarely been central to instructional design. This issue of Topics in Language Disorders includes two research syntheses that examined the extent to which motivational challenges of struggling readers are addressed in vocabulary (Louick et al.) and foundational reading (Cho et al.) interventions. It also presents a concrete example of how the motivational challenges of struggling readers can be addressed through a reading intervention with embedded growth mindset support (Al Otaiba et al.). Finally, a descriptive study (Camacho et al.) identifies writing motivational profiles associated with poor writing performance, offering implications for instructional environments that promote writing development. Louick et al. reviewed 55 studies of vocabulary interventions for students with or at risk for reading difficulties and identified 21 studies that incorporated at least one motivation construct into the vocabulary intervention. They found that effective vocabulary interventions focused on student interests and goals, using technology, or identifying topics of high interest to students. In addition, the interventions incorporated support for students' self-regulation through identifying goals, set either by teachers or by students, and/or monitoring progress toward the set goals. The authors offer suggestions for researchers and practitioners for incorporating motivation into instructional design to bolster vocabulary learning for students at risk for learning problems. In their secondary meta-analysis of reading interventions for students with or at risk for dyslexia, Cho et al. distingu","PeriodicalId":51604,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Language Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135573888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","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：