儿童非词阅读测试能测量出我们想让他们得到的东西吗?第2年误差响应分析

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties Pub Date : 2018-07-03 DOI:10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088
A. Castles, V. Polito, Stephen C. Pritchard, T. Anandakumar, M. Coltheart
{"title":"儿童非词阅读测试能测量出我们想让他们得到的东西吗?第2年误差响应分析","authors":"A. Castles, V. Polito, Stephen C. Pritchard, T. Anandakumar, M. Coltheart","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Nonword reading measures are widely used to index children’s phonics knowledge, and are included in the Phonics Screening Check currently implemented in England and under consideration in Australia. However, critics have argued that the use of nonword measures disadvantages good readers, as they will be influenced by their strong lexical knowledge and err by making word errors (e.g. reading flarm as “farm”). We tested this claim by examining the errors made by a group of 64 Year 2 children when reading aloud a set of simple nonwords. We found that stronger word readers were less likely to make a word error response than weaker word readers, with their most prevalent type of error being another nonword that was highly similar to the target. We conclude that nonword reading measures are a valid index of phonics knowledge, and that these tests do not disadvantage children who are already reading words well.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"23 1","pages":"153 - 165"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses\",\"authors\":\"A. Castles, V. Polito, Stephen C. Pritchard, T. Anandakumar, M. Coltheart\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Nonword reading measures are widely used to index children’s phonics knowledge, and are included in the Phonics Screening Check currently implemented in England and under consideration in Australia. However, critics have argued that the use of nonword measures disadvantages good readers, as they will be influenced by their strong lexical knowledge and err by making word errors (e.g. reading flarm as “farm”). We tested this claim by examining the errors made by a group of 64 Year 2 children when reading aloud a set of simple nonwords. We found that stronger word readers were less likely to make a word error response than weaker word readers, with their most prevalent type of error being another nonword that was highly similar to the target. We conclude that nonword reading measures are a valid index of phonics knowledge, and that these tests do not disadvantage children who are already reading words well.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"153 - 165\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2018.1549088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

非单词阅读测量被广泛用于索引儿童的自然拼读知识,并被纳入目前在英国实施和正在考虑在澳大利亚的自然拼读检查。然而,批评者认为,使用非词测量不利于优秀的读者,因为他们会受到自己强大的词汇知识的影响,犯单词错误(例如,将flarm读成“farm”)。我们通过检查64名2年级儿童在大声朗读一组简单的非单词时所犯的错误来验证这一说法。我们发现,阅读能力强的人比阅读能力弱的人更不容易犯单词错误,他们最常见的错误类型是另一个与目标高度相似的非单词。我们的结论是,非单词阅读测试是一个有效的语音知识指标,这些测试并不不利于已经阅读单词的孩子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses
ABSTRACT Nonword reading measures are widely used to index children’s phonics knowledge, and are included in the Phonics Screening Check currently implemented in England and under consideration in Australia. However, critics have argued that the use of nonword measures disadvantages good readers, as they will be influenced by their strong lexical knowledge and err by making word errors (e.g. reading flarm as “farm”). We tested this claim by examining the errors made by a group of 64 Year 2 children when reading aloud a set of simple nonwords. We found that stronger word readers were less likely to make a word error response than weaker word readers, with their most prevalent type of error being another nonword that was highly similar to the target. We conclude that nonword reading measures are a valid index of phonics knowledge, and that these tests do not disadvantage children who are already reading words well.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Build it and they will come: responses to the provision of online science of language and reading professional learning “It is more than the average parent goes through”: using the experiences of Australian parents of dyslexic children to draw a distinction between advocacy and allyship The impact of an online training program on pre-service teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about dyslexia An implementation case study for the Response to Intervention (RTI) approach for oral language and reading instruction in the early years of primary school A Linguistic Approach to the Study of Dyslexia
×
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