Estimating the Risk of Future Reading Difficulties in Kindergarten Children

Abstract

A logistic regression formula and classification data based on these results are provided. Suggestions are offered concerning how this information could be used in an early identification and intervention program for children who are at risk for reading difficulties.

Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool classrooms serving at-risk pupils

“…Curriculum description-MTP-LL provides a 36-week scope and sequence for six targets of instruction, with selection of the targets informed by the work of the National Early Literacy Panel (see Lonigan, 2006), meta-analyses by Hammill (2004) and Scarborough (2002), and longitudinal studies of the relationship between specific early language and literacy abilities and later reading, language, and academic adjustment (e.g, Bryant, Maclean, & Bradley, 1990;Catts et al, 2001;Chaney, 1998;Gallagher et al, 2000;Storch & Whitehurst, 2002). The language and literacy targets addressed in MTP-LL include: (1) phonological awareness, (2) alphabet knowledge, (3) print awareness, (4) vocabulary and linguistic concepts, (5) narrative, and (6) pragmatics and social language.…”

“…Educational-policy initiatives that seek to improve the quality of early education, particularly in the area of literacy and language instruction, are grounded in developmental theory and empirical evidence emphasizing the continuity between children's early literacy and language development and their later achievement of skilled reading (e.g., Catts, Fey, Zhang, & Tomblin, 2001;Lonigan, 2006;Storch & Whitehurst, 2002;Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Evidence shows that children with well-developed language and literacy Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.…”

“…Consistent with other available preschool curricula designed to provide explicit supplemental instruction in language and literacy, it provides (1) a 36-week scope and sequence of six "high-priority" instructional targets in language and literacy appropriate for preschool children, (2) weekly lesson plans including specific objectives for addressing each of these targets and sample lesson scripts, and (3) supplementary materials and manipulatives for delivering lessons, including access to a companion website providing depictions of high-quality implementation. Teachers were asked to implement at least six lessons per week as a supplement to (but not a replacement of) the general curriculum framework used in the classroom, which was High/Scope for 81 teachers (60%), Creative Curriculum for 26 teachers (19%), and an "Other" curriculum for the remainder (n = 28, 21%).Curriculum description-MTP-LL provides a 36-week scope and sequence for six targets of instruction, with selection of the targets informed by the work of the National Early Literacy Panel (see Lonigan, 2006), meta-analyses by Hammill (2004) and Scarborough (2002), and longitudinal studies of the relationship between specific early language and literacy abilities and later reading, language, and academic adjustment (e.g, Bryant, Maclean, & Bradley, 1990;Catts et al, 2001;Chaney, 1998;Gallagher et al, 2000;Storch & Whitehurst, 2002). The language and literacy targets addressed in MTP-LL include: (1) phonological awareness, (2) alphabet knowledge, (3) print awareness, (4) vocabulary and linguistic concepts, (5) narrative, and (6) pragmatics and social language.…”

“…As an example, the U.S. Department of Education's Early Reading First program provides funds to preschool programs to support their achievement of "excellence" in programming, particularly the provision of high-quality instruction in literacy and language through improved classroom print richness, professional development for staff, and implementation of scientificallybased curricula. The anticipated outcome of such proactive and prevention-oriented initiatives is that more children will enter school with the skills and competencies needed to succeed in early and later reading instruction.Educational-policy initiatives that seek to improve the quality of early education, particularly in the area of literacy and language instruction, are grounded in developmental theory and empirical evidence emphasizing the continuity between children's early literacy and language development and their later achievement of skilled reading (e.g., Catts, Fey, Zhang, & Tomblin, 2001;Lonigan, 2006;Storch & Whitehurst, 2002;Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Evidence shows that children with well-developed language and literacy Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.…”

Identification of Specific Language Impairment in Bilingual Children: I. Assessment in English

“…We used an iterative method known as maximum likelihood to obtain the intercept and coefficient values because this approach did not assume normally distributed outcomes. The additional ROC analysis identified optimal criterion scores based on the predicted probability of being language impaired (e.g., Catts et al, 2001). Individual predicted probabilities were calculated using the following formula: Predicted Probability (0-1 scale) =1 / {1 + Exponential [− (Intercept + b1 × Predictor + b2 × Predictor 2 + b3 × Predictor 3 + b4 × Predictor 4)]}.…”