Neurocognitive Development and Predictors of L1 and L2 Literacy Skills in Dyslexia: A Longitudinal Study of Children 5–11 Years Old

Helland, Turid; Morken, Frøydis

doi:10.1002/dys.1515

Cited by 28 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Practitioner Pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the last 40 years many studies have investigated the relationship between RAN and reading in children with different reading abilities and found that RAN is an early and significant predictor of reading across different orthographies. RAN is related to reading abilities (Di Filippo et al, , ; Helland & Morken, ; Papadopoulos, Spanoudis, & Georgiou, ; Peterson et al, ; Zoccolotti, De Luca, & Spinelli, ) regardless of the type of stimulus to be named (Landerl et al, ; Papadopoulos et al, ; van den Bos, Zijlstra, & Spelberg, ). Some studies and meta‐analyses suggest, however, that alphanumeric RAN stimuli are more strongly related to reading than are nonalphanumeric stimuli (Araújo, Reis, Petersson, & Faísca, ; Georgiou, Aro, Liao, & Parrila, ; Song, Georgiou, Su, & Hua, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Training RAN or reading? A telerehabilitation study on developmental dyslexia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rehabilitation procedures recommended for developmental dyslexia (DD) are still not fully defined, and only few studies directly compare different types of training. This study compared a training (Reading Trainer) working on the reading impairment with one (Run the RAN) working on the rapid automatized naming (RAN) impairment, one of the main cognitive deficits associated with DD. Two groups of DD children (N = 45) equivalent for age, sex, full IQ, and reading speed were trained either by Reading Trainer (n = 21) or by Run the RAN (n = 24); both trainings required an intensive home exercise, lasting 3 months. Both trainings showed significant improvements in reading speed and accuracy of passages and words. Bypassing the use of alphanumeric stimuli, but empowering the cognitive processes underlying reading, training RAN may be a valid tool in children with reading difficulties opening new perspectives for children with severe impairments or, even, at risk of reading difficulties.

show abstract

Section: Practitioner Pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training RAN or reading? A telerehabilitation study on developmental dyslexia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the cognitive level, the same group of children showed a variety of deficits with language processing, visual and auditory memory functions, attention, and executive functions, but degree and impact of the deficits changed with age. However, early scores of RAN and digit span seemed to be reliable predictors of later reading and spelling outcomes (Helland & Morken, ). Other studies have found that children's early RAN skills and literacy skills appear to have a reciprocal effect (Peterson et al, ; Wolff, ).…”

Section: The Reading Network and Literacy Skills In Dyslexiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditive training effects from a dichotic listening app in children with dyslexia

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dichotic listening (DL) taps information on the brain's language laterality, processing, and attention. Research has shown that DL responses in dyslexia deviate from the typical pattern. Here, effects of DL training and its correspondence to rapid naming (RAN) and digit span (DS) in typical children and children with dyslexia were assessed. Three groups of third graders participated: two training groups, control training (CT) and dyslexia training (DT), and a control group that received no training (control no training, CnT). All took part in testing pretraining and posttraining. DL measures were on laterality, response scores, and attention. The three groups showed different response patterns: minor changes in CnT, change in all measures in CT, and some changes in DT. RAN and DS scores correlated significantly with some of the DL measures, especially with the attention scores. Our findings support arguments that brain architecture for language in dyslexia is lateralised in the same way as in children without dyslexia. However, the ability to modulate attention during DL is weaker in dyslexia than in typically developing children. A training‐induced normalisation of lateralisation was observed in free recall in the dyslexia group, which suggests that DL training may be a promising intervention approach.

show abstract

“…L1 phonological awareness, especially syllable and phoneme awareness, predicted EFL decoding abilities in 5–6-year old Korean children, who were instructed in English (Kang, 2012). Similarly, L1 phonological awareness of 5–6-year old pre-literacy, Year 1 pre-school Norwegian students predicted their subsequent EFL spelling, word reading, and translation skills when 11-year old (Helland and Morken, 2016). Thus, a cross-linguistic transfer of phonological skills occurs in educational contexts of different FL exposure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Syllable and intrasyllabic element awareness precedes letter identification (Awramiuk and Krasowicz-Kupis, 2014), while phonological sensitivity and letter knowledge reciprocally contribute to the development of one another prior to formal reading instruction (Burgess and Lonigan, 1998). In 5-year old Chinese children, syllable awareness predicted word reading at ages 8 and 10 (Pan et al, 2011), and in 5–6-year old Norwegian native speakers phonological awareness predicted spelling, word reading, and translation at age 11 (Helland and Morken, 2016) in learning EFL. In a bit older 6-year old English native speakers, at an early literacy stage, reading readiness (as measured with, e.g., phonological awareness tasks: rhyming and letter-sound relationships) predicted L2 (Spanish, French, and German) proficiency in Year 10 (Sparks et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Predictors of Learning a Foreign Language in Pre-school – Polish as a First Language, English as a Foreign Language

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a foreign language (FL) acquisition begins in preschool, at which time young learners are particularly linguistically sensitive, it allows for a higher FL competence in future. Moreover, a second language learning depends on a learner’s aptitude. The aim of our study was to assess the early predictors of learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in Polish pre-school students who had not yet started formal literacy instruction, and to characterize the level of their oral receptive and active skills in English. 30 children aged between 3 years 5 months and 5 years 10 months who attended two private and one state kindergarten, participated in the study. All were native speakers of Polish, and apart from English classes, communicated in their first language at kindergarten and in their everyday life. Non-verbal intelligence, emerging literacy, phonological awareness in Polish, and knowledge of English were assessed. We found that in Polish pre-school children emerging letter identification from their first language alphabet, phonological awareness in their first language, and non-verbal intelligence were related to the achievements in learning EFL, despite the differences in transparency between the two languages. Moreover, the children’s passive color vocabulary was larger than their active vocabulary, and they were used to repetition tasks. The participants in our study attempted to communicate in English during the assessment, which suggests that even at a pre-school age they were able to differentiate between first language and FL discourse. We also identified some problems possibly stemming from linguistic transfer, like articles omissions. Therefore, teachers should pay more emphasis to the differences between the first and the second language, in terms of: syntax, morphology, phonetics, phonology, and orthography, to prevent later consolidation of early errors. The automatisation of correct linguistic habits in young learners would equip them with skills for their later FL educational success.

show abstract

Neurocognitive Development and Predictors of L1 and L2 Literacy Skills in Dyslexia: A Longitudinal Study of Children 5–11 Years Old

Cited by 28 publications

References 78 publications

Training RAN or reading? A telerehabilitation study on developmental dyslexia

Training RAN or reading? A telerehabilitation study on developmental dyslexia

Auditive training effects from a dichotic listening app in children with dyslexia

Early Predictors of Learning a Foreign Language in Pre-school – Polish as a First Language, English as a Foreign Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About