scholarly journals Reading and math achievement in children with dyslexia, developmental language disorder, or typical development: Achievement gaps persist from second through fourth grades

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawna Duff ◽  
Alison Eisel Hendricks ◽  
Lisa Fitton ◽  
Suzanne Adlof
Keyword(s):  
Support Services ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Academic Functioning ◽  
Second Grade ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Growth Curve Models ◽  
School Based ◽  
Reading And Math ◽  
Research Criteria

We examined how children (n=448) who met research criteria for separate vs. co-occurring DLD and dyslexia performed on school-based measures of academic functioning in reading and math between second and fourth grades. Growth curve models were used to examine the overall form of growth and differences between groups. Children with DLD and/or dyslexia in second grade showed early and persistent deficits on school-administered measures of reading and math. In second grade, children with typical development (TD) scored significantly higher than all other groups, children with DLD+dyslexia scored significantly lower than all other groups, and children with dyslexia-only and DLD-only did not differ from each other. Only small differences in growth rates were observed, and gaps in second grade did not close. Few children (20-27%) meeting research criteria for dyslexia and/or DLD had received specialized support services. Children with DLD only received services at less than half the rate of the dyslexia groups, despite similar levels of academic performance. Evidence of significant and persistent functional impacts on academic achievement support the validity of standard research criteria for dyslexia and DLD. Low rates of reported support services in these children —especially those with DLD-only— highlight the need to raise awareness of these disorders.

Exploring the Use of Parent and Teacher Questionnaires to Screen for Language Disorders in Bilingual Children

2020 ◽  
pp. 027112142094230
Author(s):  
Amy S. Pratt ◽  
Ashley M. Adams ◽  
Elizabeth D. Peña ◽  
Lisa M. Bedore
Keyword(s):  
Language Disorder ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Second Grade ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Language Knowledge ◽  
Teacher Reports ◽  
Report Measure

We explore the classification accuracy of a parent and teacher report measure, the Inventory to Assess Language Knowledge (ITALK), to screen for developmental language disorder (DLD) in bilingual children. Participants included 120 Spanish English bilingual children with typical development (TD) and 19 bilingual children with DLD, ranging in age from 5 to 8 years old. Parents’ and teachers’ reports correlated moderately with each other and significantly predicted children’s performance on language-specific measures of morphosyntax and semantics. Results yielded sensitivity of .90 and specificity of .63 when using a composite of parent and teacher reports in Spanish and English. Examination of structure loadings in follow-up analyses by grade showed that teachers’ report of English and parents’ report of Spanish were the strongest predictors of impairment in kindergarten. In second grade, the strongest predictors were parent and teacher reports in English. Implications for referral and identification are discussed.

Considering the Language Disorder Label Debate From a School Speech-Language Pathology Lens

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-54
Author(s):  
Kimberly A. Murza ◽  
Barbara J. Ehren
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Speech Language Pathologist ◽  
School Based ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Education Act

Purpose The purpose of this article is to situate the recent language disorder label debate within a school's perspective. As described in two recent The ASHA Leader articles, there is international momentum to change specific language impairment to developmental language disorder . Proponents of this change cite increased public awareness and research funding as part of the rationale. However, it is unclear whether this label debate is worthwhile or even practical for the school-based speech-language pathologist (SLP). A discussion of the benefits and challenges to a shift in language disorder labels is provided. Conclusions Although there are important arguments for consistency in labeling childhood language disorder, the reality of a label change in U.S. schools is hard to imagine. School-based services are driven by eligibility through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which has its own set of labels. There are myriad reasons why advocating for the developmental language disorder label may not be the best use of SLPs' time, perhaps the most important of which is that school SLPs have other urgent priorities.

Compensation to Altered Auditory Feedback in Children With Developmental Language Disorder and Typical Development

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Caitlin Coughler ◽  
Emily Michaela Hamel ◽  
Janis Oram Cardy ◽  
Lisa M. D. Archibald ◽  
David W. Purcell
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Shift Condition ◽  
Vowel Space ◽  
Processing Component ◽  
Speech Motor

Purpose Developmental language disorder (DLD), an unexplained problem using and understanding spoken language, has been hypothesized to have an underlying auditory processing component. Auditory feedback plays a key role in speech motor control. The current study examined whether auditory feedback is used to regulate speech production in a similar way by children with DLD and their typically developing (TD) peers. Method Participants aged 6–11 years completed tasks measuring hearing, language, first formant (F1) discrimination thresholds, partial vowel space, and responses to altered auditory feedback with F1 perturbation. Results Children with DLD tended to compensate more than TD children for the positive F1 manipulation and compensated less than TD children in the negative shift condition. Conclusion Our findings suggest that children with DLD make atypical use of auditory feedback.

scholarly journals Association between CCC-2 and Structural Language, Pragmatics, Social Cognition, and Executive Functions in Children with Developmental Language Disorder

Children ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 123
Author(s):  
Clara Andrés-Roqueta ◽  
Irene Garcia-Molina ◽  
Raquel Flores-Buils
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognition ◽  
Executive Functions ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Spanish Version ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Pragmatic Skills ◽  
Child Assessments ◽  
Direct Child ◽  
Structural Language

(1) Background: Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is diagnosed when the child experiences problems in language with no known underlying biomedical condition and the information required for its correct evaluation must be obtained from different contexts. The Children’s Communication Checklist (CCC-2) covers aspects of a child’s communication related to structural language and pragmatic skills, which are linked to social cognition or executive functions. The aim of this article is to examine parents’ reports using the Spanish version of the CCC-2 questionnaire and its association with different formal assessments related to communication. (2) Methods: 30 children with DLD (3; 10–9 years old) and 39 age-matched (AM) children with typical development were assessed using formal measures of structural language, pragmatics, social cognition, and executive functions. Parents of children with DLD answered the Spanish version of the CCC-2. (3) Results: The performance of children with DLD was lower in all the formal assessments in comparison to AM children. The CCC-2 was significantly correlated with all the direct child assessments, although only formal measures of structural language predicted both the structural language and pragmatics scales of the CCC-2. (4) Conclusions: The CCC-2 answered by parents was consistent with formal assessments in children with DLD, and structural language seemed to be the best predictor of all the subscales.

scholarly journals Comparing Tense and Agreement Productivity in Boys With Fragile X Syndrome, Children With Developmental Language Disorder, and Children With Typical Development

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1181-1194
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Hilvert ◽  
Jill Hoover ◽  
Audra Sterling ◽  
Susen Schroeder
Keyword(s):  
Fragile X Syndrome ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Fragile X ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Complicated Pattern ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Mean Length Of Utterance

Purpose This study compared and characterized the tense and agreement productivity of boys with fragile X syndrome (FXS), children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and children with typical development (TD) matched on mean length of utterance. Method Twenty-two boys with FXS ( M age = 12.22 years), 19 children with DLD ( M age = 4.81 years), and 20 children with TD ( M age = 3.23 years) produced language samples that were coded for their productive use of five tense markers (i.e., third-person singular, past tense –ed , copula BE , auxiliary BE , and auxiliary DO ) using the tense and agreement productivity score. Children also completed norm-referenced cognitive and linguistic assessments. Results Children with DLD generally used tense and agreement markers less productively than children with TD, particularly third-person singular and auxiliary BE . However, boys with FXS demonstrated a more complicated pattern of productivity, where they were similar to children with DLD and TD, depending on the tense marker examined. Results revealed that children with DLD and TD showed a specific developmental sequence of the individual tense markers that aligns with patterns documented by previous studies, whereas boys with FXS demonstrated a more even profile of productivity. Conclusions These findings help to further clarify areas of overlap and discrepancy in tense and agreement productivity among boys with FXS and children with DLD. Additional clinical implications of these results are discussed.

scholarly journals Revisiting the Influences of Bilingualism and Developmental Language Disorder on Children's Nonverbal Processing Speed

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Kerry Danahy Ebert
Keyword(s):  
Processing Speed ◽  
Visual Detection ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Cognitive Effects ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
English Only ◽  
Hyperactivity Disorder

Purpose This study examined the influences of bilingualism and developmental language disorder (DLD) on nonverbal processing speed. DLD is associated with slower processing speed, but the extent to which slowing extends to bilingual populations is not established. The possible presence of bilingual cognitive effects could also lead to faster processing speed among bilingual children. Method Participants included 108 children of ages 6–8 years, including 56 Spanish–English bilinguals (29 with DLD and 27 with typical development) and 52 English-only monolinguals (25 with DLD and 27 with typical development). Language testing (in both languages for bilingual children) was combined with parent and school report to classify children as having DLD or typical language development. Children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were excluded from the sample. Reaction time from a choice visual detection task was used to index nonverbal processing speed. Results Children with DLD demonstrated slower processing speed than their typically developing peers, whereas bilingual children demonstrated faster processing speed than monolinguals. The effects of DLD and bilingualism did not interact. Conclusions This study replicates prior findings of slowed processing speed among children with DLD in both monolingual and bilingual children. Evidence of faster processing speed among bilingual children contributes to the complex literature surrounding the circumstances of bilingual cognitive effects. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15138747

Artificial Grammar Learning in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Jasmine Urquhart Gillis ◽  
Asiya Gul ◽  
Annie Fox ◽  
Aditi Parikh ◽  
Yael Arbel
Keyword(s):  
Language Disorder ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Artificial Grammar Learning ◽  
Artificial Grammar ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Grammatical Structure ◽  
Surface Features ◽  
Grammar Learning ◽  
Grammatical Judgment

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate implicit learning in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) by employing a visual artificial grammar learning task. Method: Thirteen children with DLD and 24 children with typical language development between the ages of 8 and 12 years completed a visual artificial grammar learning task. During the training phase of the task, participants were presented with strings of shapes that followed the underlying structure of a finite grammar. During the testing phase, participants were asked to judge whether new strings were grammatical or nongrammatical. Grammatical judgment of new strings served to measure generalization of the underlying grammatical structure. Endorsement based on chunk strength, or similarity to training exemplars, served to evaluate the extent to which children relied on surface features to guide their task performance. Results: As a group, children with typical development performed better on the artificial grammar learning task, compared with children with DLD, and accepted more grammatical strings regardless of their similarity to training exemplars. Task performance in both groups was not affected by surface features. Performance of children with DLD whose test accuracy exceeded the learning threshold of 0.5 was consistent with a generalization of the underlying grammatical structure that was unaffected by surface features. Conclusions: The study found group differences in learning outcomes between children with and without DLD. Consistent with previous reports, children with typical development correctly endorsed more grammatical strings than children with DLD, suggesting a better acquisition of the grammatical structure. However, there was no evidence to suggest that children in the DLD group (learners and nonlearners) relied on surface features (i.e., familiarity to training exemplars) in their grammatical judgment. These results refute our hypothesis that children in the DLD group would show judgment based on familiarity.

scholarly journals Working memory training enhances complex syntax in children with Developmental Language Disorder

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-35
Author(s):  
Hélène Delage ◽  
Emily Stanford ◽  
Stephanie Durrleman
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Potential Benefit ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Memory Training ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Direct Effects ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Complex Syntax ◽  
Sentence Repetition

Abstract Linguistic deficits attested in children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) have been explained in terms of limitations in working memory (WM). The goal of this research is to assess whether a tailored WM program can improve the syntactic abilities of children with DLD and those with typical development (TD). We created a novel iPad application consisting of five activities specifically designed to train the components of WM that have been shown to be the most predictive of performance on tests assessing complex syntax. Thirty-two children with DLD (M = 9;0) and 18 with TD (M = 8;5) followed the WM training (lasting 12 hours). Results show significant improvement in verbal WM (direct effects) in both TD and DLD groups, and in sentence repetition (transfer effects) in the DLD group, with the most pronounced improvements observed for complex syntactic structures. This progression is not observed for 38 age-matched children of the same age who followed an alternative, global scholastic training (20 DLD, 18 TD), which proves the specific efficacy of our WM training. The logical next step will be to incorporate the training into the therapy of children with DLD in order to reinforce the potential benefit of their interventions.

scholarly journals Mathematical Abilities in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra M. Cross ◽  
Marc F. Joanisse ◽  
Lisa M. D. Archibald
Keyword(s):  
Academic Success ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Numerical Cognition ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Number Line ◽  
Typical Development ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Magnitude Comparison ◽  
Mathematical Abilities ◽  
And Mathematics

Purpose This review article provides a scoping review of the literature on mathematical abilities in developmental language disorder (DLD). Children with DLD typically struggle with learning in school; however, the mechanism by which DLD impacts academic success is unclear. Mathematics involves demands in the multiple domains and therefore holds potential for examining the relationship between language and academic performance on tasks mediated by verbal and nonverbal demands. Method A scoping review was performed via computerized database searching to examine literature on mathematics and DLD. The 21 review articles meeting inclusion criteria compared children with typical development or DLD on various tasks measuring numerical cognition. Results Children with DLD consistently performed below peers with typical development on number transcoding, counting, arithmetic, and story problem tasks. However, performance was similar to peers with typical development on most number line, magnitude comparison, and conceptual mathematics tasks. Conclusions The findings suggest a relationship between DLD and mathematics was characterized by more detrimental performance on tasks with higher verbal demands. Results are discussed with respect to typical academic curricula and demonstrate a need for early identification and intervention in DLD to optimize academic outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document