Connective Use in Academic Writing by Students With Language Learning Disabilities From Diverse Linguistic Backgrounds

2020 ◽  
pp. 152574012093356
Author(s):  
Carla L. Wood
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
English Learners ◽  
English Proficiency ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
Writing Quality ◽  
Word Use ◽  
Fifth Grade Students ◽  
Language Learning Disabilities

The aims of the current project included to (a) describe the use of connectives in written language samples by fifth grade students, (b) examine differences in connective use between groups who differed in English proficiency and exceptionalities, and (c) examine the predictive relationship between connective measures and writing quality ratings. Investigators utilized written expository responses of 1,128 students in fifth grade who differed in English proficiency and language ability. The sample included 214 English learners and 144 students with language learning disabilities (LLD). Group differences were examined in the use of advanced connective words in academic writing. Regression analysis was used to examine connective measures as predictors of overall writing quality rating. Students with LLD used advanced connectives less frequently than their peers and demonstrated less variety in their connective word use. Two connective measures (total number of advanced connectives and the ratio of connectives) were significant predictors of writing quality. Findings support the need for additional efforts to improve the use of cohesive devices in academic writing for students with LLD to minimize achievement gaps.

scholarly journals The Relation Between Academic Word Use and Reading Comprehension for Students From Diverse Backgrounds

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Carla L. Wood ◽  
Christopher Schatschneider ◽  
Allyssa VelDink
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Word List ◽  
Written Language ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
Word Use ◽  
Fifth Grade Students ◽  
Language Learning Disabilities

Purpose The aims of the current project were twofold: (a) to describe the use of academic words in written language samples by fifth-grade students and (b) to examine the predictive relation between academic word use in academic writing and reading comprehension. Method Investigators utilized written expository responses of 1,128 students in fifth grade who differed in English proficiency and language ability. The sample included 214 students who were English learners (ELs) and 144 students with identified language learning disabilities (LLD). Group differences in the use of academic words from the Coxhead word list were examined. Results ELs and students with LLD used academic words less frequently than their peers and demonstrated less variety in their academic word use. There was a significant relation between students' use of academic words and reading comprehension. Academic word use accounted for 16% of the variance in reading comprehension, which was not significantly different for ELs or students with LLD. The relation was moderated by economic advantage, with the strength of the relation being lower for students who were eligible for free/reduced lunch. Conclusions Findings support the need for additional research on ways to improve academic vocabulary skills to minimize achievement gaps. The relation between academic word use and reading comprehension warrants further consideration.

Grammatical Verb Errors: Differences Between English Learners With and Without Diagnosed Language-Based Learning Disabilities

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Keisey Fumero ◽  
Carla Wood
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Progress Monitoring ◽  
Written Language ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
Language Abilities ◽  
Fifth Grade Students ◽  
School Year ◽  
Average Change ◽  
Grammatical Accuracy

Purpose: This study examines the written language samples of fifth grade English learner (EL) students with and without diagnosed language-based learning disabilities (LLDs) in an effort to explore the utility of such supplemental materials for aiding in differential diagnosis of ELs with and without LLDs. Method: This sample of 127 fifth grade students consisted of ELs without identified disabilities ( n = 89) and ELs diagnosed with LLDs ( n = 38). Written language samples from a classroom-based expository writing task were coded for grammaticality and specific verb type of errors. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the groups that differed by language abilities was conducted at two time points to compare the frequency of errors and the average change in grammaticality from the beginning of the school year to the end of the school year. Results: EL students with and without LLDs performed similarly at the beginning of the school year. ELs without LLDs showed greater average change in accuracy across the school year. Significantly, higher proportions of verb tense and verb omission errors were demonstrated by ELs with LLDs when compared with their EL peers at the end of the school year. Overall grammatical accuracy was also lower for ELs with LLDs. Conclusions: Group differences at the end of the school year were confirmed in types and rate of verb errors. Results support the potential clinical utility of monitoring verb errors in writing samples over time as a supplemental tool in diagnostic evaluations and assessments for progress monitoring.

Children’s Revision of Textual Flaws

1997 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 667-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Ann Cameron ◽  
Gail Edmunds ◽  
Barbara Wigmore ◽  
Anne Kathryn Hunt ◽  
M. J. Linton
Keyword(s):  
Reading Difficulty ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
Second Grade ◽  
Writing Quality ◽  
Text Revision ◽  
Fifth Grade Students ◽  
Comprehension Skills ◽  
Surface Flaws ◽  
Text Reading ◽  
Reading Comprehension Skills

Two studies are reported here that investigated elementary school children’s text revision. In the first experiment, both semantic and surface flaws were inserted in texts that varied in reading difficulty. Second-grade through fifth-grade students revised these experimenter-generated passages, presented as examples of submissions to a class newspaper. Differences in text reading difficulty did not affect revision effectiveness, nor were the semantic flaws especially difficult to detect and revise. An age effect showed growth in the revision of both semantic and surface errors from grades 2 to 4 with 2nd-graders revising one-third of the inserted errors, and 4th- and 5th-graders revising three-quarters of them. Revision and cloze reading comprehension skills were correlated. A second study compared students’ revision of their own as well as another’s text flaws. Fifth-graders wrote a narrative for a classroom anthology, and they revised both their own and inserted flaws. Their writing was evaluated holistically. Rates of both semantic and surface revision were somewhat lower for their own as opposed to another’s text errors, but revision rates were nevertheless relatively high, and they correlated with writing quality; that is, children who wrote high-quality texts also revised more errors, especially experimenter-inserted flaws. These data confirm that children respond positively to writing challenges in the area of revision, a skill in process of development, which is amenable to inspection and appears ripe for facilitation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document