Gender effects on phonological processing and reading development in Northern Sotho children learning to read in English: A case study of Grade 3 learners

Abstract

Gender differences in reading development are a global phenomenon, with girls typically performing better than boys. Some studies have reported gender differences favouring girls in reading comprehension in South Africa, but little systematic evidence exists about gender differences in the cognitive-linguistic abilities that underlie reading development. This study investigated the effect of gender on phonological processing and reading development in Northern Sotho–English bilingual children. Grade 3 learners who received their literacy instruction in English were tested on various phonological processing and reading measures. Phonological awareness was assessed using phoneme isolation and elision tasks. Phonological working memory was assessed using memory for digits and non-word repetition tests while rapid automatised naming was tested using rapid letter, rapid digit, rapid object and rapid colour naming tasks. Reading achievement was assessed with various word reading tasks and with a fluent reading task. A multivariate analysis of variance revealed that gender had a significant effect on the phonological processing and reading abilities of Northern Sotho– English bilingual children. Girls performed significantly better than boys on all the reading measures, as well as on some aspects of phonological processing. The findings provide behavioural evidence in support of biological theories of gender differences, in that girls seemed to have developed some of the cognitive-linguistic skills associated with reading before boys. The girls also coped better with tasks that required increased cognitive processing. This study suggests that sex differences in reading development cannot be ignored in South Africa and need to be addressed in future curriculum development.

Multisensory Learning Approach: Impacts on Phonological Awareness among Young ESL Learners in a Rural Setting

“…The data might be helpful in addressing reading problems that are likely to occur among Malaysian learners, namely, lacking of PA [36], and enhancing and strengthening the English language learning in Malaysia, regardless of geographical and demographical factors. The data obtained from the tests were considered greatly important in assisting teachers to come up with strategic schemata in to overcome early problems in reading because PA is fundamental to later reading [4,30,31,40]. The findings from this data were able to contribute to the empirical literature on PA progress among young ESL learners in Malaysia because PA is considered new to this setting [43].…”

Addressing gender discrimination in cognitive assessment using the English Comprehension Test

“…When observing the content of the items identified as statistically different (Table 5), there appears to be no obvious gender discrimination. The literature on gender differences relating to cognitive assessment suggests that women are more skilled at verbal tasks than men (Griskevica & Rascevska, 2009;Hur et al, 2017;Hyde, 1981;Miller & Halpern, 2014;Palejwala & Fine, 2015;Strand et al, 2006;Toivainen et al, 2017;Wai et al, 2018;Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018), but this finding cannot be concluded in respect of the ECT on the basis of three statistically different items.…”

“…Despite these diverse views on gender differences in cognitive assessment across numerous studies in American, European and Asian countries, in Africa very few studies have been conducted on differences in cognitive abilities between men and women (Hur et al, 2017). A recent study on differences in cognitive assessment in South Africa, however, noted a disconcerting trend amongst Grade 3 boys in this country, because they were consistently achieving much lower scores compared with women in Grade 3 (Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018). Another study conducted by Bakhiet and Lynn (2015) using the Ravens Coloured Progressive Matrices (a non-verbal intelligence assessment) on Xhosa South African schoolchildren found that the intelligence scores of these schoolchildren were similar to Zulu South African schoolchildren who had performed the same test some years before.…”

“…It was found in several studies that men tended to score better in verbal analogies and spatial relations tasks (Camarata & Woodcock, 2006;Hur et al, 2017;Hyde, 1981;Miller & Halpern, 2014;Palejwala & Fine, 2015;Toivainen et al, 2017), whilst women were found to be cognitively stronger in certain domains than men, such as verbal ability (reasoning) and other verbal-related cognitive assessments, such as word memory, anagrams, reading, writing, general and mixed verbal ability assessments (Griskevica & Rascevska, 2009;Hur et al, 2017;Hyde, 1981;Miller & Halpern, 2014;Palejwala & Fine, 2015;Strand, Deary, & Smith, 2006;Toivainen et al, 2017;Wai, Hodges, & Makel, 2018;Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018). These gender differences were explained as biological differences between the male and female sexes because of hormones or genetic differences between men and women (Hur et al, 2017;Miller & Halpern, 2014;Toivainen et al, 2017;Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018). Other reasons provided were the different socialisation of men and women, particularly through school and cultural influences, which, therefore, led to differences in the observation of intelligence across the genders (Miller & Halpern, 2014;Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018).…”

“…These gender differences were explained as biological differences between the male and female sexes because of hormones or genetic differences between men and women (Hur et al, 2017;Miller & Halpern, 2014;Toivainen et al, 2017;Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018). Other reasons provided were the different socialisation of men and women, particularly through school and cultural influences, which, therefore, led to differences in the observation of intelligence across the genders (Miller & Halpern, 2014;Wilsenach & Makaure, 2018). Another aspect included the psychosocial influence that led to differential performance in intelligence measures for men and women, which was also informed by the gender stereotypes associated with men and women (Hur et al, 2017;Miller & Halpern, 2014).…”