Written cohesion in children with and without language learning disabilities

Koutsoftas, Anthony D.; Petersen, Victoria

doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12306

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(128 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Translation involves the application of knowledge resources to craft text, especially linguistic knowledge about word-and sentence-level information, and thus adeptness with manipulating vocabulary and grammar is related to writing performance. For instance, better writers typically employ more diverse and sophisticated vocabulary in their compositions (e.g., Chipere et al, 2001;Koutsoftas & Petersen, 2017;McNamara et al, 2010;Silverman et al, 2015) and are more accurate in their grammar usage (e.g., Mackie & Dockrell, 2004;Nelson & Van Meter, 2007;Puranik et al, 2008;Windsor et al, 2000).…”

Section: Writing Cognitive Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Latent profiles of writing-related skills, knowledge, and motivation for elementary students and their relations to writing performance across multiple genres

Troia

Wang²,

Lawrence³

2022

Contemporary Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Writing Cognitive Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Latent profiles of writing-related skills, knowledge, and motivation for elementary students and their relations to writing performance across multiple genres

Troia

Wang²,

Lawrence³

2022

Contemporary Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Variables associated with narrative linguistic complexity also appear to differentiate writers of different ages and abilities (Beers & Nagy, 2009; Fey et al, 2004; Justice et al, 2006; Koutsoftas & Gray, 2012; Nelson & Van Meter, 2007; Scott & Windsor, 2000; Sun & Nippold, 2012). For instance, better writers typically use more diverse and sophisticated vocabulary in their compositions (e.g., Chipere, Malvern, Richards, & Durán, 2001; Koutsoftas & Petersen, 2017; McNamara, Crossley, & McCarthy, 2010; Silverman et al, 2015). Complexity is evaluated using measures such as mean length of T-unit, number of clauses per T-unit, and percent complex T-units (all of which relate to sentential complexity), as well as mean word frequency of written text, number of abstract nouns and metacognitive verbs, and number of different words per segment of text (all of which relate to lexical complexity).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidimensional Levels of Language Writing Measures in Grades Four to Six

Troia

Shen

Brandon

2019

Written Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined multiple measures of written expression as predictors of narrative writing performance for 362 students in grades 4 through 6. Each student wrote a fictional narrative in response to a title prompt that was evaluated using a levels of language framework targeting productivity, accuracy, and complexity at the word, sentence, and discourse levels. Graderelated differences were found for all of the word-level and most of the discourse-level variables examined, but for only one sentence-level variable (punctuation accuracy). The discourse-level variables of text productivity, narrativity, and process use, the sentence-level variables of grammatical correctness and punctuation accuracy, and the word-level variables of spelling/capitalization accuracy, lexical productivity, and handwriting style were significant predictors of narrative quality. Most of the same variables that predicted story quality differentiated good and poor narrative writers, except punctuation accuracy and narrativity, and variables associated with word and sentence complexity also helped distinguish narrative writing ability. The findings imply that a combination of indices from across all levels of language production are most useful for differentiating writers and their writing. The authors suggest researchers and educators consider levels of

show abstract

“…Moving beyond the word level, certain types of conjunctions are posited to be used more frequently in decontextualized language as they signal relations among multiple meaning units (Curenton et al, 2008). Specifically, coordinating (e.g., "and," "or," "but") and correlative (e.g., "both," "either," "if," "then") conjunctions provide information about connectivity between phrases and clauses, whereas subordinating conjunctions (e.g., "because," "since," "until," "when," "although") contain information about time, causality, continuality, or oppositional relations between meaning units (Koutsoftas & Petersen, 2017). Furthermore, embedded clauses, such as relative, nominal, and adverbial clauses, function within another clause or as part of the nominal group to make contributions to a more sophisticated or decontextualized discourse (Lundine & McCauley, 2016;Nippold et al, 2008;Schleppegrell, 2004).…”

Section: Linguistic Features Of Oral Language Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Second Graders Adjust Their Language by Discourse Context?

Cho

Kim

2023

LSHSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Children's ability to adjust one's language according to discourse context is important for success in academic settings. This study examined whether second graders vary in linguistic and discourse features depending on discourse contexts, that is, when describing pictures in contextualized (describing the picture to an examiner while looking at it together) and decontextualized (pretending to describe the picture to a friend while sitting in front of the examiner) conditions. Method: A total of 330 English-speaking second graders in the United States ( M age = 7.33 years; 53% boys; 55% Caucasian children, 35% African American children) described three pictures in contextualized and decontextualized conditions. Children's picture descriptions were transcribed verbatim and coded for linguistic (e.g., elaborated noun phrase) and discourse (e.g., proper character introduction, degree of decontextualization) features. Results: Type–token ratio was higher in the contextualized condition than in the decontextualized condition, whereas certain types of elaborated noun phrases (e.g., simple descriptive noun phrase, noun phrase with postmodification), coordinating conjunctions, and nonclauses occurred more frequently in the decontextualized condition, controlling for total productivity and student demographics. The proportion of proper character introduction was higher in the decontextualized condition, whereas higher degrees of decontextualization and complex perspective-taking were found in the contextualized condition. Conclusion: Various linguistic and discourse cues illustrated the extent to which primary grade students employ their discourse knowledge when producing oral language.

show abstract

Written cohesion in children with and without language learning disabilities

Abstract: Findings from this study demonstrate cohesion as a discourse-level measure of written transcription and how the use of cohesion can vary by genre and group (LLD, TD). Clinical implications for assessment, intervention, and future research are provided.

Cited by 14 publications

References 29 publications

Latent profiles of writing-related skills, knowledge, and motivation for elementary students and their relations to writing performance across multiple genres

Latent profiles of writing-related skills, knowledge, and motivation for elementary students and their relations to writing performance across multiple genres

Multidimensional Levels of Language Writing Measures in Grades Four to Six

Do Second Graders Adjust Their Language by Discourse Context?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About