The Assessment of Adults with Reading Disabilities: What Can We Learn from Experimental Tasks?

Gottardo, Alexandra; Siegel, Linda S.; Stanovich, Keith E.

doi:10.1111/1467-9817.00019

Cited by 55 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings have particular implications for theories of dyslexia which place special emphasis on the role of phonological representations in this impairment. The results of the Pig Latin and Spoonerism tasks corroborate what has already been reported in the literature about the robustness and persistence of a deficit in dyslexia in the ability to manipulate phonological units even in adulthood (Birch & Chase, 2004;Bruck, 1992;Downey, et al, 2000;Gottardo, et al, 1997;Judge, et al, 2006;Pennington, et al, 1990, Snowling et al, 1997. The current results also extend these studies by showing a deficit in the manipulation of suprasegmental as well as segmental components of words.…”

supporting

confidence: 91%

“…Even more crucially for the question of implicit phonological representations, no deficit was found in the dyslexic group in the task which tested the implicit knowledge of suprasegmental contrasts (the suprasegmental version of the Picture Matching task). Since the suprasegmental Picture Matching task was specifically designed with a view to teasing apart the role played by orthographic knowledge from the role of knowledge specific to spoken language, we now have a basis for speaking to the question of phonological representations which are not (Birch & Chase, 2004;Bruck, 1992;Downey, et al, 2000;Gottardo, et al, 1997;Judge, et al, 2006;Pennington, et al, 1990, Snowling et al, 1997. The current results also extend these studies by showing a deficit in the manipulation of suprasegmental as well as segmental components of words.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Revisiting the phonological deficit in dyslexia: Are implicit nonorthographic representations impaired?

Dickie

Ota

Clark

2012

Applied Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates whether developmental dyslexia involves an impairment in implicit phonological representations, as distinct from orthographic representations and metaphonological skills. A group of adults with dyslexia was matched with a group with no history of speech/language/literacy impairment. Tasks Developmental dyslexia is widely believed to be caused either mainly (Snowling, 2000;Ramus, 2003) or in part (Stein & Walsh, 1997;Wolf et al., 2002) by a phonological deficit. In contexts where individuals with dyslexia are required to demonstrate a mastery of phonological units such as phonemes and syllables, their performance is consistently found to be weaker than that of controls matched for chronological age and/or reading age. This includes performance on phoneme deletion (Fawcett & Nicolson, 1995;Wilson & Lesaux, 2001), phoneme counting (Bruck, 1992), and syllable counting or deletion tasks (Pratt & Brady, 1988). Other tasks with a phonological component, such as rapid naming and nonword repetition, also elicit weaker performance from dyslexic than non-dyslexic individuals (Denckla & Rudel, 1976;Brady, 1991).A broad consensus has arisen in the field that this phonological deficit can be traced back to an impairment of phonological representations or phonological coding, defined as "the ability to use speech codes to represent information in the forms of words and word parts" (Vellutino, Fletcher, Snowling, & Scanlon, 2004: 12).Phonological representations have been implicated as causally linked to all the various manifestations of the phonological deficit, from paired associate learning and nonword repetition, to phonological awareness and reading (Brady, 1991;Ramus, 2003;Ramus, Pidgeon, & Frith, 2003;Snowling, 2000;Stanovich, 1988;Thomson, Richardson, & Goswami, 2005).However, two issues relating to phonological representations in dyslexia require further attention. One is the relationship between phonemes (as phonological Phonological deficit 5 segments) and the segments of conventional orthography (letters or graphemes). The other is the relationship between phonological awareness and phonological representations. Let us now consider each of these issues in turn. Phonological and orthographic segmentsOne controversial issue in dyslexia research is the nature of the relationship between phonological knowledge and familiarity with a writing system. Although spoken language and written language differ from each other in many significant ways, the two modalities nevertheless have a great deal in common. Current influential accounts of dyslexia seek to relate the deficit in written language to a deficit in aspects of spoken language (Snowling, 2000;Ramus, 2003), but the challenge which confronts this approach is the issue of how to handle what Harris (2000) calls the "symbiotic relationship" between these two modalities.Learning to read and write in any orthographic system means that learners have to reshape their analyses of the sounds of words so as to match the analysis conveyed or ...

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Revisiting the phonological deficit in dyslexia: Are implicit nonorthographic representations impaired?

Dickie

Ota

Clark

2012

Applied Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to gain meaning from the text to the same extent as normally achieving peers, individuals with LD need to be fluent in decoding at the word level (Kame'enui & Simmons, 2001). Some studies conducted with adults have shown that the accuracy of decoding improves with age (e.g., Gottardo, Siegel, & Stanovich, 1997). But whether this is the case or not, in addition to fluent decoding, effective reading comprehension requires vocabulary skills.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Timed and Untimed Testing Conditions on the Reading Comprehension Performance of Adults with Reading Disabilities

Lesaux¹,

Pearson

Siegel

2006

Read Writ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effects of extra time on the reading comprehension performance of a heterogeneous group of adults with reading disabilities. Sixty-four adults participated. A clinic that assesses learning disabilities identified 22 as reading disabled, and 42 as normal readers. The 64 adults took a reading comprehension test under both timed and untimed conditions. Other skills measured included vocabulary, word reading, non-word reading, spelling, arithmetic, and short-term memory. Under timed conditions, there were significant differences between the participants with reading disabilities and the normally achieving participants. All of the reading disabled participants in the present study benefited from extra time, but the normally achieving readers performed similarly under the timed and untimed conditions. Further, in the untimed condition, the performance of the individuals with a less severe reading disability was not significantly different that of the Average readers. The study suggests that extra time during testing is an appropriate accommodation to help individuals begin to compensate for reading disabilities.Colleges, universities, employers, and testing services are attempting to offer reasonable accommodations for individuals with learning disabilities (McCusker, 1995). Colleges and universities are legally required to provide reasonable accommodations to enable students with learning disability (LD) to obtain an education equal to that of their non-learning disabled peers, and many employers are also committed to supporting individuals with learning disabilities. The most frequent accommodation provided to individuals with LD consists of modifications to testing conditions. The most common modification is extra time in examination, but this is not necessarily consistent across all domains and content areas. The practice of allowing individuals with LD extra time during tests and exams stems from the belief that these students take longer to read and process the questions (e.g., Geary & Brown, 1990, Kail & Hall, 1984Stanovich, 1986). By allowing extra time, proponents believe, students with LD will at least have the opportunity to respond to as many questions as their normally achieving peers. Thus, the premise holds, providing

show abstract

“…(For reviews see Siegel, 1999;Gottardo, Siegel, & Stanovich, 1997;Gregg, Scott, McPeek, & Ferri, 1999;Rack, 1997.) It is not the intention to do a full appraisal of all the issues on identification here, but to highlight why the finding of the report needs to be questioned.…”

Section: Screening and Assessment Of The Adult Dyslexicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting dyslexic adults—a need for clarity (and more research): a critical review of the rice report ‘Developmental dyslexia in adults: a research review’

Siegel

Smythe

2006

Dyslexia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence based teaching methods are desirable not only for economic efficiency but also important for ensuring the learner is engaged in meaningful activity. Therefore, a review of the research that could inform both teaching practice and future research is to be welcomed. However, the NRDC review 'Developmental Dyslexia in Adults: A Research Review' contains so many methodological flaws, including the highly selective way in which the research has been used, that the overall value of the report is questionable. In this paper the authors have attempted to highlight the main issues of why this report appears to fall short of being a full 'Research Review'.

show abstract

The Assessment of Adults with Reading Disabilities: What Can We Learn from Experimental Tasks?

Cited by 55 publications

References 19 publications

Revisiting the phonological deficit in dyslexia: Are implicit nonorthographic representations impaired?

Revisiting the phonological deficit in dyslexia: Are implicit nonorthographic representations impaired?

The Effects of Timed and Untimed Testing Conditions on the Reading Comprehension Performance of Adults with Reading Disabilities

Supporting dyslexic adults—a need for clarity (and more research): a critical review of the rice report ‘Developmental dyslexia in adults: a research review’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About