Promoting Reading Achievement in Children With Developmental Language Disorders: What Can We Learn From Research on Specific Language Impairment and Dyslexia?

Adlof, Suzanne M.

doi:10.1044/2020_jslhr-20-00118

Cited by 32 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 137 publications

(198 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Past research suggests that there is less public and parent awareness of oral language difficulties compared to literacy difficulties (Adlof, 2020;Bishop, 2010;McGregor, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the associations between parent concerns and school-age children’s language and reading abilities: A comparison of samples recruited for in-school vs. online participation.

Chan¹,

Adlof²,

Duff³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To examine the relationship between parent concerns about children’s oral language, reading, and related skills and their children’s performance on standardized assessments of language and reading, with a particular focus on whether those relationships differed between children recruited for in-school versus remote participation. Methods: This study used data from a larger, longitudinal project focused on children with and without developmental language disorder (DLD) and/or dyslexia. The “in-school” sample (n = 133) completed assessments in-person before the COVID-19 school closures, and the “remote” sample (n = 84) recruited via advertisements completed all assessments online. Parents completed a checklist of concerns regarding language and literacy development, attention and executive functions. All children completed norm-referenced assessments of language and reading.Results: The two recruitment strategies yielded samples that differed in racial diversity (higher in the in-school sample), caregiver education levels and financial resources (higher in the remote sample), and word reading test scores (higher in the remote sample). Parents in both samples reported higher levels of concerns about literacy skills than oral language skills, and the correlation between parent concerns about literacy and children’s word reading test scores was stronger than the correlation between parent concerns about oral language and children’s language test scores. We did not find higher level of concerns or a higher correlation between concerns and reading and language performance in the remote sample than the in-school sample.Conclusions: Researchers should be aware of the impact of different recruitment strategies on sample attainment. Referral models that rely on parent and teacher concerns about oral language to prompt a language evaluation may contribute to low rates of identification of children who meet criteria for DLD. Future research can consider parent concerns about literacy, attention, and executive functions as indicators of a need for language evaluation, especially considering the high comorbidity between language and other developmental disorders.

show abstract

“…Past research suggests that there is less public and parent awareness of oral language difficulties compared to literacy difficulties (Adlof, 2020;Bishop, 2010;McGregor, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the associations between parent concerns and school-age children’s language and reading abilities: A comparison of samples recruited for in-school vs. online participation.

Chan¹,

Adlof²,

Duff³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several of these benchmarks overlap with the characteristics of developmental language disorder (DLD) (Bishop, Snowling, Thompson, Greenhalgh, & Catalise-consortium, a. t., 2017;Gray et al, 2019) and of mathematic disorders (Butterworth, Varma, & Laurillard, 2011). Comorbidities between these three disorders are often seen (Adlof, 2020;Adlof & Hogan, 2018;Moll, Landerl, Snowling, & Schulte-Körne, 2019;Pennington, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Kindergarten screening tools filled out by parents and teachers targeting dyslexia. Predictions and developmental trajectories from age 5 to age 15 years

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of early 'efforts' has led to discussions for and against introducing language assessment for all kindergarten children. Evidence-based kindergarten screening tools completed by close caregivers could solve this controversy as the children themselves would only be indirectly involved. The aim of this study was to see whether the scores of such early screening tools aiming at developmental dyslexia could predict school marks of literacy competence 10 years later, and to see whether these screening tools would reveal different dyslexia trajectories. The study is part of the Bergen Longitudinal Dyslexia Study, and the results from individual testing are reported elsewhere. Here, the caregivers' views isolated from the rest of the study are focused. Three tools were used: the RI-5, a questionnaire assessing the risk of dyslexia; the TRAS, a non-standardized observation tool of children's communication skills; and the CCC-2, a questionnaire assessing Developmental Language Disorders. Screening was performed at age 5 (TP1), age 11, (TP2) and age 15 (TP3). At TP2, when dyslexia was identified, 13 children formed the dyslexia group, and the rest formed the control group. At TP3, the RI-5 and CCC-2 turned out to be predictive of literacy competence as measured by school marks. Developmental trajectories were seen through the regroupings and

show abstract

“…Note, also, that such a broad definition of language impairment could undermine replicability of outcomes across studies, because the samples could vary considerably in the proportion of children with or without S(P)CD or children with or without very low levels of nonverbal IQ. Another example is evident in the paper on dyslexia and SLI (Adlof, 2020). The paper highlights that predictors differ for dyslexia and SLI: Poor phonemic awareness is associated with dyslexia more than SLI, whereas SLI is more likely to be associated with grammatical weakness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The fifth paper (Adlof, 2020) addresses the possible overlap of SLI and dyslexia. A review of definitions and inclusionary and exclusionary criteria is provided, followed by a review of the intersection/overlap of the two disorders, focusing on language, working memory, and academic achievement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A common theme across the papers is concern with clinical issues related to identification of children with SLI, across a wide age span. Evaluation of diagnostic definitions or clinical markers are addressed in four of the papers (Adlof, 2020;Hadley, 2020;Redmond, 2020;Rice, 2020). Two of the papers focus on intervention methods (Adlof, 2020;Leonard & Deevy, 2020), and a third paper addresses intervention in the literature review (Hadley, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advances in Specific Language Impairment Research and Intervention: An Overview of Five Research Symposium Papers

Rice

2020

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This article provides an overview of five papers appearing together on the topic of “Advances in Specific Language Impairment Research and Intervention,” which was the 2019 program in an ongoing series of research symposia presented at the Annual Convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Method The article provides a historical context for the set of papers, then a short summation of each paper's content, followed by the identification of overarching themes and working conclusions. Results Each paper provides summations of empirical results, and some papers provide new empirical evidence. Conclusion The papers collectively highlight six points: (a) Children with specific language impairment (SLI) are likely to be unidentified among their age peers. (b) There is great need for better identification of children with SLI across developmental levels. (c) Progress is evident toward a better understanding of causal pathways, as examined across different research designs involving comparison of children with typical language acquisition to children with SLI and other possibly co-occurring atypical conditions. (d) Measuring multiple dimensions of language brings enhanced informativeness, with differing outcomes for differing dimensions. (e) Replicated research findings require precision of methods in order to reduce unexplained error variance especially when defining groups. (f) Accurate identification of children with SLI is the first step toward a sound treatment plan for SLI and reading disorders as well. Presentation Video https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13063721

show abstract

Promoting Reading Achievement in Children With Developmental Language Disorders: What Can We Learn From Research on Specific Language Impairment and Dyslexia?

Cited by 32 publications

References 137 publications

Examining the associations between parent concerns and school-age children’s language and reading abilities: A comparison of samples recruited for in-school vs. online participation.

Examining the associations between parent concerns and school-age children’s language and reading abilities: A comparison of samples recruited for in-school vs. online participation.

Kindergarten screening tools filled out by parents and teachers targeting dyslexia. Predictions and developmental trajectories from age 5 to age 15 years

Advances in Specific Language Impairment Research and Intervention: An Overview of Five Research Symposium Papers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About