Reading and Writing最新文献

{"title":"Comparing Tier 1 reading instruction with Tier 3 or special education intervention through an observational snapshot of school-implemented response to intervention across Grades 1–5","authors":"Stephanie Al Otaiba, Jennifer Stewart, W. van Dijk, Carlin L. Conner, Dayna Russell Freudenthal, Brenna K. Rivas, P. Yovanoff, J. Allor","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10534-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10534-7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141122947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Linguistically-driven text formatting improves reading comprehension for ELLs and EL1s","authors":"Jack Dempsey, Kiel Christianson, Julie A. Van Dyke","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10548-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10548-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Typical print formatting provides no information regarding the linguistic features of a text, although texts vary considerably with respect to grammatical complexity and readability. Complex texts may be particularly challenging for individuals with weak language knowledge, such as English language learners. This paper investigates the usefulness of a text format referred to as Linguistically-Driven Text Formatting (LDTF), which provides visual cues to grammatical structure for in-the-moment language support during reading. We assessed reading comprehension in adult English Language Learners after a two-session exposure to the new format (also called Cascade Format). Participants’ primary languages were Mandarin and Korean, which have substantially different syntactic structures from English. Ninety participants (30 L1 English, 30 L1 Mandarin, 30 L1 Korean) were randomly assigned to either the traditional or the LDTF format and read six English passages across two sessions within the same week. Comprehension was assessed via questions that probe sentence comprehension and global text properties. Participants also completed a TOEFL assessment, presented in either LDTF or traditional format. Bayesian analyses showed that the Cascade Format improved sentence comprehension relative to control participants for all language groups and experience levels. Effects on the TOEFL assessment, which taps inferencing and meta-linguistic skills, were not observed. Syntactic knowledge plays a fundamental role in reading comprehension, and LDTF appears to support comprehension by providing visual cues to this knowledge that can be used at the very moment of meaning construction.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140927090","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Preschool teachers’ literacy beliefs, their evaluations of children’s writing, and their recommendations for ways to support it","authors":"Shira Besser-Biron, Deborah Bergman Deitcher, Adi Elimelech, Dorit Aram","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10549-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10549-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Preschool teachers’ literacy-related beliefs and literacy knowledge relate to their educational practices and preschoolers’ literacy skills. In this light, we explored how preschool teachers’ beliefs regarding early literacy and its promotion predict their knowledge, reflected in how they evaluate three young children’s writing products and their recommendations for ways to promote these children’s writing, taking into consideration teacher and classroom variables (teacher training, preschool age group, and preschool SES). Participants were 110 teachers of preschoolers (aged 4–6). The teachers completed a literacy beliefs questionnaire. They were then presented with three products written by anonymous 5.5-year-old preschoolers, representing three writing levels: initial, intermediate, and advanced, and asked what each child knows about writing and recommendations for how they can be promoted. Responses were coded for the following aspects: letters, phonology, orthography, the writing system, and composing. Results showed that preschool teachers believe children’s early literacy and its promotion are important, and that these beliefs predicted some of their evaluations and recommendations. In the evaluations, the teachers did not relate at all to composing. They related primarily to letters and phonology, both in their assessments of the children’s knowledge and their recommendations for promoting the children’s writing. At more advanced writing levels, they also related to Hebrew orthography and the writing system, and made recommendations regarding these aspects. The study suggests that preschool teachers should be encouraged to incorporate composing and more complex aspects of writing into their writing activities and instruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140883562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Mathematics-writing synthesis: Kindergarten through Grade 12 mathematics-writing outcomes and instructional methods","authors":"Tessa L. Arsenault, Sarah R. Powell, Sarah G. King","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10530-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10530-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the last decade, researchers have focused more on how to provide instructional supports for mathematics writing (Powell et al., 2017). In this synthesis, we examined 22 studies about mathematics writing to determine the overall mathematics-writing and mathematics outcomes of mathematics-writing instruction, the mathematics-writing and mathematics outcomes based on study and instructional features, the methods used within mathematics-writing instruction, and the methods used within studies involving students with mathematics difficulty (MD). We conducted a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed studies, published since 2000, focused on instruction in mathematics writing in Kindergarten through Grade 12. We included studies with and without students with MD. Results demonstrated positive student outcomes for mathematics-writing instruction. Furthermore, instructional methods for mathematics writing frequently aligned with practices used for mathematics instruction and writing instruction. Although we identified positive outcomes related to mathematics-writing instruction, and we would recommend for practitioners to provide instruction in mathematics writing, results should be interpreted with caution. Additional high-quality research on mathematics-writing instruction is needed to verify and extend on the results from this synthesis.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140883566","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction: Literacy instruction from afar: evidencefor the effectiveness of a remotely delivered language-rich reading programme","authors":"Cameron Downing, Gwennant Evans-Jones, Simone Lira Calabrich, Caspar Wynne, Rachel Cartin, Joanna Dunton, Ruth Elliott, Markéta Caravolas, Charles Hulme, Manon Jones","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10546-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10546-3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140805571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The contributions of transcription skills to paper-based and computer-based text composing in the early years","authors":"Anabela Anabela Malpique, Mustafa Asil, Deborah Pino-Pasternak, Susan Ledger, Timothy Teo","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10543-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10543-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Digital tools are an integral part of most writing communities across the globe, enhancing the criticality of gaining a comprehensive understanding of both paper and computer-based writing acquisition and development. The relationships between transcription skills and children’s paper-based writing performance are well documented. Less is known about the relationships between transcription skills and children’s computer-based writing performance. In this study, we examined the unique contributions of transcription skills (i.e., handwriting automaticity, keyboarding automaticity and spelling) in predicting Grade 2 students (N = 544) paper-based and computer-based writing performance (i.e., compositional quality and productivity) after controlling for other student-level factors (i.e., gender, word reading, reading comprehension, and attitudes towards writing) and classroom-level factors (i.e., amount of time teaching handwriting, keyboarding, and spelling). Multilevel modelling showed that, compared to handwriting automaticity, spelling skills accounted for a larger percentage of unique variance in predicting paper-based compositional quality; handwriting automaticity accounted for a larger percentage of unique variance in explaining paper-based compositional productivity. Findings further showed that keyboarding automaticity accounted for a larger percentage of unique variance in students’ computer-based compositional quality and productivity when compared to spelling. Gender and word reading skills were also found to be uniquely related to students’ writing performance across modalities. These findings underscore the need for educators to address and nurture the automaticity of inscription and spelling skills to enhance students' compositional quality and productivity, whether in traditional paperbased or computer-based text composing.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140624806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring the writing attainment gap: profiling writing challenges and predictors for children with English as an additional language","authors":"Sophie A. Booton, Prerna Menon, Maria Kyriacou, Victoria A. Murphy","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10540-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10540-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>While there is some evidence of a gap in English writing achievement between children with English as an additional language (EAL) compared to their monolingual English-speaking (EL1) peers, the source of this gap remains unclear. This study examines whether writing presents a specific challenge for children with EAL beyond their oral language and reading skills, and whether the factors affecting writing skills differ between EAL and EL1 groups. In a longitudinal design, 100 children aged 9 to 10 years completed a fiction writing task and single-word spelling task twice over a school year. They also completed a non-fiction writing task, and measures of nonverbal intelligence, receptive vocabulary, expressive and receptive oral language, decoding, and reading comprehension. Children with EAL demonstrated lower general writing performance than monolinguals, commensurate with their other language and reading skills, but a relative strength in single-word spelling. Predictors were similar for children with EAL and monolinguals, with decoding skill predicting spelling and writing, and expressive oral language predicting writing. Effects of genre and specific writing sub-skills are also discussed, as well as implications for closing the writing attainment gap.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140608814","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Spatial biases in processing mirror letters by literate subjects","authors":"Katarzyna Patro, Antonia Gross, Claudia Friedrich","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10529-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10529-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Preschool children often confuse letters with their mirror images when they try to read and write. Mirror confusion seems to occur more often in line with the direction of script (e.g., left-to-right for the Latin alphabetic script), suggesting that the processing of letter orientation and text directionality may be interrelated in preliterate age. When children go to school, mirror mistakes in writing/reading letters disappear. Here we ask whether the processing of letter shapes and text direction are still related in readers at different proficiency levels. Literate subjects – school children from the 1st and 4th grades and adults – decided under time pressure whether a displayed letter was oriented correctly or incorrectly (mirrored). We observed that reaction times were faster when a letter was oriented rightward, i.e. in line with the cultural text direction (left-to-right), but we did not find any differences between the groups. We conclude that, even if mirror mistakes disappear during primary school years, letter shapes are still processed in a close relation to the left-to-right reading direction in the Latin script.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140608821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Co-occurrence and cognitive basis of low language and low reading skills in children speaking a transparent language","authors":"Joanna Kamykowska, Magdalena Łuniewska, Natalia Banasik-Jemielniak, Ewa Czaplewska, Magdalena Kochańska, Grzegorz Krajewski, Agnieszka Maryniak, Katarzyna Wiejak, Grażyna Krasowicz-Kupis, Ewa Haman","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10537-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10537-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We investigated the comorbidity of low language and reading skills in 6- to 8-year-old monolingual Polish-speaking children (<i>N</i> = 962) using three different approaches: norming data to determine the prevalence of co-morbid difficulties, group comparisons of profiles on key cognitive-linguistic measures, and a case series analysis examining the frequency of single versus multiple deficits. We identified four groups of children based on their oral language and reading skills: children with low oral language skills alone, low reading skills alone, comorbid low language/reading skills, and typically developing chronological-age controls. We characterized the four groups (<i>n</i> = 38 per group) in terms of oral language and reading skills measured with normed test batteries, and in terms of the cognitive-linguistic profiles measured by the phonological awareness test (PA), rapid automatized naming test (RAN), and nonword repetition tests (NWR). We found that 24–31% of children with one type of difficulty had comorbid difficulties in the other domain. All groups differed significantly in cognitive-linguistic profiles. For each measure, the comorbid group had the lowest results. The group of children with isolated low language skills had better results than the comorbid group in (1) Sentence repetition (sub-test in an oral language test), (2) discrimination-based, blending-based, and elision-based PA sub-tests, (3) RAN (both digits and letters). The group with isolated low reading skills had better results than the comorbid group in: (1) discrimination-based PA sub-test, (2) NWR tests. The results indicate differences in cognitive-linguistic profiles between the groups with low language and/or low reading skills. They highlight the need to control for both types of difficulties in researching low language and/or reading skills, and to screen for comorbid issues while diagnosing children.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140569518","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Typical spelling errors of Grade 1 spellers of Polish: An exploratory study adapting the POMAS classification to the Polish orthography","authors":"Marta Łockiewicz, Natalia Barzowska","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10532-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10532-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper presents the adaptation of the POMAS classification of spelling errors (Silliman et al., Developmental Neuropsychology 29:93–123, 2006, Bahr et al., Journal of Speech, Language &amp; Hearing Research 55:1587–1599, 2012; International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 18:73–91, 2015) to Polish orthography. We identified the most common phonological, orthographic, and/or morphological errors committed by Polish Grade 1 spellers based on a writing-to-dictation task. Some of the error types were included in the original POMAS; some we added, following the classification rationale, to adapt the classification to the specific features of the Polish orthography. Moreover, we found that the participants made, on average, an equal number of phonological and orthographic errors, and of phonological and morphological errors. However, orthographic errors were more frequent than morphological ones. A roughly equal proportion of orthographic and phonological errors occurred in the spelling of the most difficult words. The most frequent orthographic error type was grapheme substitution, followed by final consonant devoicing, and consonant devoicing within a word errors. The most frequent phonological error type were misspellings in diacritic signs, followed by consonant deletion, vowel deletion, and epenthesis. The developed POMAS-PL version may be used by other researchers of Slavic languages, to allow for intercultural comparisons. Moreover, our analyses can be used by teachers of Polish as a first and a second language to anticipate their students’ errors and to understand what knowledge the learners need to learn to spell correctly.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140569516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}