Relations between the Levels of Fluent Reading and Reading Comprehension and the Levels of Phonological Awareness of Individuals with Down Syndrome in Turkey

Author(s):  
Gülefşan Özge Kalaycı ◽  
Özlem Diken
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 828
Author(s):  
Maja Roch ◽  
Kate Cain ◽  
Christopher Jarrold

Reading for meaning is one of the most important activities in school and everyday life. The simple view of reading (SVR) has been used as a framework for studies of reading comprehension in individuals with Down syndrome (DS). These tend to show difficulties in reading comprehension despite better developed reading accuracy. Reading comprehension difficulties are influenced by poor oral language. These difficulties are common in individuals with DS and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), but they have never been compared directly. Moreover, the components of reading for comprehension have rarely been investigated in these populations: a better understanding of the nature of reading comprehension difficulties may inform both theory and practice. The aim of this study was to determine whether reading comprehension in the two populations is accounted for by the same component skills and to what extent the reading profile of the two atypical groups differs from that of typically developing children (TD). Fifteen individuals with DS (mean age = 22 years 4 months, SD = 5 years 2 months), 21 with ASD (mean age = 13 years 2 months, SD = 1 year 6 months), and 42 TD children (mean age = 8 years 1 month, SD = 7 months) participated and were assessed on measures of receptive vocabulary, text reading and listening comprehension, oral language comprehension, and reading accuracy. The results showed similar levels in word reading accuracy and in receptive vocabulary in all three groups. By contrast, individuals with DS and ASD showed poorer non-word reading and reading accuracy in context than TD children. Both atypical groups showed poorer listening and reading text comprehension compared to TD children. Reading for comprehension, investigated through a homograph reading accuracy task, showed a different pattern for individuals with DS with respect to the other two groups: they were less sensitive to meaning while reading. According to the SVR, the current results confirm that the two atypical groups have similar profiles that overlap with that of poor comprehenders in which poor oral language comprehension constrains reading for comprehension.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-43
Author(s):  
Deborah M. Cates ◽  
Matthew J. Traxler ◽  
David P. Corina

Abstract This study investigates reading comprehension in adult deaf and hearing readers. Using correlational analysis and stepwise regression, we assess the contribution of English language variables (e.g., vocabulary comprehension, reading volume, and phonological awareness), cognitive variables (e.g., working memory (WM), nonverbal intelligence, and executive function), and language experience (e.g., language acquisition and orthographic experience) in predicting reading comprehension in deaf and hearing adult bilinguals (native American Sign Language (ASL) signers, non-native ASL signers, and Chinese–English bilinguals (CEB)), and monolingual (ML) controls. For all four groups, vocabulary knowledge was a strong contributor to reading comprehension. Monolingual English speakers and non-native deaf signers also showed contributions from WM and spoken language phonological awareness. In contrast, CEB showed contributions of lexical strategies in English reading comprehension. These cross-group comparisons demonstrate how the inclusion of multiple participant groups helps us to further refine our understanding of how language and sensory experiences influence reading comprehension.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 366-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann-Christina Kjeldsen ◽  
Lic Educ ◽  
Silja K. Saarento-Zaprudin ◽  
Pekka O. Niemi

Training in phonological awareness has brought about well-documented positive effects on learning to read in lower-primary grades. Less is known about long-term gains extending to upper-primary and junior high school. The few longitudinal studies covering at least 5 years suggest that gains in decoding are sustained, whereas effects on reading comprehension have either not been studied or produced equivocal results. The present study followed up the reading development of 209 Finland Swedish students from kindergarten until Grade 9, half of whom participated in an 8-month phonological intervention in kindergarten. The intervention group outperformed the control group in both word reading and reading comprehension in Grades 1 through 9. However, albeit statistically significant, the differences at the group level were small. The main result was a clear-cut difference in both skills among readers at risk belonging to the lowest 25% in foundational skills at the beginning of kindergarten. In Grade 6, altogether 60% of the nontrained readers at risk still belonged to the lowest quartile in reading comprehension as opposed to 24% of their peers in the intervention group. The pattern was repeated in Grade 9, with trained readers at risk performing at the level of nontrained mainstream readers.


2020 ◽  
pp. 073194872095812
Author(s):  
Miriam McBreen ◽  
Robert Savage

This research assessed the impact of combining small-group cognitive reading intervention with a motivational program targeting students’ goals, emotions, and self-efficacy beliefs on the reading performance and motivation of third-grade students at-risk for reading difficulties ( n = 25, Mage = 8.99, SD = 0.38). Using a quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test efficacy trial design, effects of the intervention on phonological awareness, listening comprehension, accuracy, fluency, reading comprehension, and motivation were assessed. Results indicate that compared with students who received Cognitive-Only reading intervention, students who received the combined Cognitive plus Motivational reading intervention showed greater gains in reading comprehension and phonological awareness. Findings provide preliminary evidence that supplementing cognitive reading intervention with the proposed motivational program can improve the reading performance of students at-risk for reading difficulties.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glynis Laws ◽  
Heather Brown ◽  
Elizabeth Main

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document