Spelling Assessment

Masterson, Julie J.; Apel, Kenn

doi:10.1097/00011363-200020030-00007

Cited by 45 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It should be noted that, although the PIAT-R/NU subtest is titled "Spelling" because it measures children's ability to select the conventional spelling of a word from four phonologically and orthographically plausible spellings, it is a measure of MGR knowledge and not a measure of formulating word spellings. Masterson and Apel (2000) argued that tasks of MGR knowledge and spelling formulation clearly measure different skills. The raw score was used as the MGR predictor variable.…”

Section: Predictor Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linguistic Contributions to Word-Level Spelling Accuracy in Elementary School Children With and Without Specific Language Impairment

Werfel

Schuele

Reed

2019

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Children with specific language impairment (SLI) are more likely than children with typical language (TL) to exhibit difficulties in word-level spelling accuracy. More research is needed to elucidate the contribution of linguistic knowledge to word-level spelling accuracy in this population. The purpose of this study was to explore the contributions of linguistic knowledge to spelling accuracy in a group of 2nd- to 4th-grade children with SLI and a group of 2nd- to 4th-grade children with TL. Method Participants were 32 children with SLI and 32 children with TL in Grades 2 through 4. Five areas of linguistic knowledge were assessed: phonological awareness, morphological knowledge, orthographic pattern knowledge, mental grapheme representation knowledge, and vocabulary knowledge. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were utilized to address the research aim. Results Mental grapheme representation knowledge was selected as a significant predictor in both models; however, phonological awareness was the only additional significant predictor in the model for children with SLI, whereas morphological knowledge was the only other significant predictor in the model for children with TL. Orthographic pattern knowledge and vocabulary knowledge were not significant for either group. Conclusions The results suggest that spelling instruction and intervention for children with SLI should take linguistic knowledge into account and explicitly relate linguistic knowledge to spelling. Additionally, future research should consider if instructional targets for children with SLI should differ from targets for children with TL and if these findings represent a delay or a disorder in spelling acquisition for children with SLI.

show abstract

Section: Predictor Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linguistic Contributions to Word-Level Spelling Accuracy in Elementary School Children With and Without Specific Language Impairment

Werfel

Schuele

Reed

2019

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another approach to spelling analysis is to consider all spelling attempts (correct and incorrect). One tool designed to assist in this process is the Computerised Spelling Sensitivity System (CSSS; Masterson & Hrbec, 2011). Unlike the analyses outlined in the preceding section, the CSSS has the advantage of being able to quantify evidence of phonological, orthographic and morphological awareness simultaneously.…”

Section: Spelling Error Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Subskills associated with spelling ability in children with and without autism spectrum disorders

Bailey

Arciuli

2018

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims Effective literacy instruction demands a clear understanding of the subskills that underpin children’s reading and writing abilities. Some previous research on reading has questioned whether the same subskills support literacy acquisition for typically developing children and children with autism spectrum disorders. This study examined the subskills associated with spelling ability in a group of 20 children with ASD aged 5–12 years (ASD group). A group of 20 typically developing children matched for age and word spelling accuracy (TD group) provided comparative data. Methods Participants completed standardised assessments of vocabulary, phonological awareness, letter knowledge and word spelling. Errors produced in response to the word spelling assessment were analysed for evidence of phonological awareness. In addition, all spelling attempts were analysed for evidence of phonological, orthographic, and morphological awareness, ‘linguistic awareness’, using the Computerised Spelling Sensitivity System. Results Correlation and regression analyses showed statistically significant relationships between phonological awareness and word spelling accuracy for children in the ASD and TD groups. Spelling errors produced by both groups contained evidence of phonological awareness. Analysis of all spelling attempts showed that the overall level of linguistic awareness encoded by children in the ASD and TD groups was not significantly different. Conclusions These findings provide evidence that phonological awareness and other subskills support spelling in children with autism spectrum disorders as they do in typically developing children. Implications The similar spelling profiles exhibited by children with autism spectrum disorders and their typically developing peers suggest that these populations may benefit from literacy instruction that targets the same underpinning subskills.

show abstract

“…Some studies (Bishop & Clarkson, 2003;Brizzolara et al, 2011;Larkin & Snowling, 2008) hypothesize that an updating capacity deficit could also explain these phonographic errors in children with DLD, but no analysis was done to confirm this hypothesis. Observed types of phonographic errors include phoneme substitutions, omissions, and additions (Apel & Masterson, 2001;Fayol, 2008;Masterson & Apel, 2000, 2010. Only a single study (Nauclér, 2004) has examined these error types in the phonographic dimension in children with DLD, and it targeted Swedish language.…”

Section: Spelling In Children With Dldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To determine if qualitative differences in spelling errors were evident between groups, each error from the experimental dictation was coded. A fine-grained coding system inspired by previous studies (Fayol, 2008;Masterson & Apel, 2000, 2010 was used. Such an approach allows to examine linguistic factors that lead to different spelling error types (Fayol, 2008;Masterson & Apel 2000, 2010.…”

Section: Executive Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonographic spelling errors in developmental language disorder: Insights from executive functions

Godin¹,

Gagné²,

Chapleau³

2018

Neuroed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined the executive functions and spelling performance of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) over a school year. Through a fine-grained spelling error analysis, we investigated whether the measured executive functions would distinguish children's spelling profiles. The study comprised three groups: the DLD-S group (aged 7-9 years), including children with DLD matched on the total number of spelling errors produced on a dictation task with a typically developing group (n = 8); the DLD-AM group (aged 7-9 years), including children with DLD matched on chronological age and phonological awareness skills with the DLD-S group (n = 8); and the typically developing group (n = 16; aged 7-8 years). The results indicated that both DLD groups tended to produce more phonographic errors (i.e., spelling errors that change the phonology of the word) even if the DLD-S group produced a similar number of errors in comparison with the typically developing group. In particular, the DLD-AM group made more phoneme omissions than the other groups. The DLD-AM group also had the smallest spelling improvement over the school year and the weakest updating ability. In contrast, all groups had similar inhibition and cognitive flexibility abilities. This may indicate that some children with DLD present limitations in updating, which may lead to a slower spelling acquisition and a greater number of phonographic errors. Language impairments affect and delay spelling acquisition, and the presence of an updating deficit may exacerbate this delay.

show abstract

Spelling Assessment

Cited by 45 publications

References 0 publications

Linguistic Contributions to Word-Level Spelling Accuracy in Elementary School Children With and Without Specific Language Impairment

Linguistic Contributions to Word-Level Spelling Accuracy in Elementary School Children With and Without Specific Language Impairment

Subskills associated with spelling ability in children with and without autism spectrum disorders

Phonographic spelling errors in developmental language disorder: Insights from executive functions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About