Verbal Retelling Abilities in Adolescents With and Without Language-Learning Disabilities for Social Studies Lectures

Abstract

Verbal retelling abilities for social studies lectures were examined and compared in 20 adolescent boys, ages 12-5 to 14-7, with language-learning disabilities (LLD) and 29 with normal language abilities (NL). Participants viewed one videotaped social studies lecture with a comparison expository discourse structure and one with a causation discourse structure. Following each lecture presentation, participants verbally retold the lecture. Results of several repeated-measures analyses of variance indicated that the group with LLD produced a significantly smaller number of T-units, subordinate clauses, subordinate clauses per T-unit, T-units per second, lecture components per second, and percentage of lecture components in their retellings, compared with the group with NL, regardless of lecture type. Both groups produced a significantly greater number of T-units and subordinate clauses for the comparison lecture. By contrast, both groups recalled a significantly greater number of lecture components per T-unit and per second for the causation lecture. Results indicated that the comparison discourse structure facilitated more substantive and elaborate retellings, whereas the causation discourse structure facilitated more efficient, concise retellings in both groups. Research and instructional implications are discussed.

Adolescent Summaries of Narrative and Expository Discourse: Differences and Predictors

“…For example, in one study (Nippold et al, 2007), syntactic complexity was higher when adolescents and young adults retold a problem-solution expository passage than when they spontaneously generated a procedural passage. In another study of 12-to 14-yearold students with normal language and those with language impairments (Ward-Lonergan, Liles, & Anderson, 1999), productivity (the amount of language produced) was higher for compare-contrast retellings than for cause-effect retellings, regardless of group. Therefore, although existing studies provide preliminary evidence suggesting that student performance differs by expository type, many questions remain regarding the ways in which expository type and other methodological variables (e.g., method or modality of elicitation) might lead to differences in performance.…”

Spoken expository discourse of children and adolescents: Retelling versus generation

“…In retelling tasks, the child or adolescent listens to an expository passage and retells the information that was presented. A retelling task may involve hearing information and restating it (Hay & Moran, 2005), or listening to information in conjunction with a visual support (Moran, Nippold, Mansfield, & Gillon, 2005;Ward-Lonergan, Liles, & Anderson, 1999).…”

Note‐Taking and Secondary Students with Learning Disabilities: Challenges and Solutions

“…In many of their content‐area classes, students with LD must master difficult content and integrate high‐level thinking skills within problem‐solving activities (e.g., experiments and research reports) (Deshler et al, 2001). Moreover, students with LD must learn new skills and content while at the same time dealing with their own deficiencies in listening comprehension, written language, and reading (Mason & Graham, 2008; Schumaker & Deshler, 2009; Ward‐Lonergan, Lilies, & Anderson, 1998, 1999). To complicate matters, secondary teachers are less likely to provide substantive support in the form of accommodations and modifications to address students’ learning problems (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2001), and by the time students with LD reach middle and high school, teachers expect them to be independent and autonomous learners who will meet the same standards as students without LD (Olson, 2004; Schumm et al, 1995).…”