Phonological awareness and spelling abilities of Cantonese–English bilingual children

Jackson, Nicola; Holm, Alison; Dodd, Barbara

doi:10.1179/136132898805577205

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The standard error of the mean is computed as the square root of the sum of the inverse variance weights (Hedges & Olkin, 1985). The standard error of the mean is computed as the square root of the sum of the inverse variance weights (Hedges & Olkin, 1985).…”

Section: Calculation Of Effect Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For one study (Jackson, Holm & Dodd, 1998), the sample encompassed children from 3 to 10 years old in grades 1-5, so the average grade level 3 was used in the analysis. Lower grade level was defined as grades kindergarten to 3, and upper grade level was defined as grades 4-7.…”

Section: Grade Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…procedures for combining and averaging effect sizes are based on the assumption that larger sample sizes will be associated with smaller variance and therefore are more precise estimates of population effect sizes (Hedges & Olkin, 1985). The inverse variance weight was calculated by this following formula:…”

Section: Calculation Of Effect Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A significant homogeneity statistic indicates that effect sizes comprising the weighted-average effect size may be coming from different populations. The standard error of the mean is computed as the square root of the sum of the inverse variance weights (Hedges & Olkin, 1985). In addition, lower CI = g mean 1.96 * SE (mean) and upper CI = g mean + 1.96 * SE (mean).…”

Section: Calculation Of Effect Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lower grade level was defined as grades kindergarten to 3, and upper grade level was defined as grades 4-7. For one study (Jackson, Holm & Dodd, 1998), the sample encompassed children from 3 to 10 years old in grades 1-5, so the average grade level 3 was used in the analysis. This decision of recording a midpoint is arbitrary but used quite often in practice (Card, 2012).…”

Section: Grade Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparing Bilingual to Monolingual Learners on English Spelling: A Meta‐analytic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports on a meta-analysis to examine how bilingual learners compare with English monolingual learners on two English spelling outcomes: real-word spelling and pseudo-word spelling. Eighteen studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1990 and 2014 were retrieved. The study-level variables and characteristics (e.g. sample size, study design and research instruments) were coded, and 29 independent effect sizes across the 18 retrieved studies were analysed. We found that bilinguals outperformed monolinguals on real-word spelling overall and more so in early grades, but monolinguals outperformed bilinguals on pseudo-word spelling. Further, bilinguals at risk for reading difficulties did better on real-word spelling than monolinguals at risk for reading difficulties. Having investigated systematic sources of variability in effect sizes, we conclude that in comparison with their monolingual peers, bilingual learners, especially those from alphabetic L1 backgrounds, are able to master constrained skills, such as English spelling, in the current instructional context. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Calculation Of Effect Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Grade Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Calculation Of Effect Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Calculation Of Effect Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Grade Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing Bilingual to Monolingual Learners on English Spelling: A Meta‐analytic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Becoming Bilingual, Biliterate, and Bicultural

Snow

Kang

2007

Handbook of Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gray matter volume differences between early bilinguals and monolinguals: A study of children and adults

Schug

Brignoni-Pérez

Jamal

et al. 2022

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gray matter has been shown to be greater in early bilingual adults relative to monolingual adults in regions associated with language (Mechelli et al., 2004), and executive control (EC; Olulade et al., 2016). It is not known, however, if language experience‐dependent differences in gray matter volume (GMV) exist in children. Further, any such differences are likely not to be the same as those observed in early bilingual adults, as children have had relatively shorter duration of dual‐language exposure and/or less development of brain regions serving EC. We tested these predictions by comparing GMV in Spanish–English early bilingual and English monolingual children, and Spanish–English early bilingual and English monolingual adults (n = 122). Comparing only children revealed relatively more GMV in the bilinguals in bilateral frontal, right inferior frontal, and right superior parietal cortices (regions associated with EC). Bilinguals, however, had less GMV in left inferior parietal cortex (region associated with language). An ANOVA including these children with bilingual and monolingual adults revealed interactions of Language Background by Age Group. There were no regions of more GMV in bilinguals relative to monolinguals that were less pronounced in children than adults, despite the children's shorter dual‐language experience. There were relative differences between bilingual and monolingual children that were more pronounced than those in adults in left precentral gyrus and right superior parietal lobule (close to, but not directly in areas associated with EC). Together, early bilingual children manifest relative differences in GMV, and, surprisingly, these do not diverge much from those observed in studies of bilingual adults.

show abstract

Phonological awareness and spelling abilities of Cantonese–English bilingual children

Cited by 7 publications

References 26 publications

Comparing Bilingual to Monolingual Learners on English Spelling: A Meta‐analytic Review

Comparing Bilingual to Monolingual Learners on English Spelling: A Meta‐analytic Review

Becoming Bilingual, Biliterate, and Bicultural

Gray matter volume differences between early bilinguals and monolinguals: A study of children and adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About