The impact of specific language impairment on performance in science and suggested implications for pedagogy

Abstract

The impact of specific language impairment (SLI) on the acquisition of literacy and numeracy skills has been well researched. In contrast little has been written on its impact on the third core subject in the National Curriculum (NC) of science and this article describes a preliminary investigation into the scientific reasoning skills of children with SLI in comparison with those of typically developing (TD) children. In individual assessment sessions 11 pairs of target children with SLI and control TD children in the Key Stage (KS) 2 age span (ages 7-11 years) undertook a series of scientific reasoning tasks appropriate to their age involving receptive and expressive language skills. The children with SLI had for the most part significantly more difficulty with expressive language tasks (ELTs) than the TD children, in spite of the provision of scaffolding, and there was some evidence that they also had greater difficulty with the production of causal connectives, e.g. because, so. However, there was no difference between the two groups on receptive language tasks (RLTs) when scaffolding was used. Some possible implications for pedagogy are considered in light of these findings, and problems in matching children with SLI and TD controls are discussed.

Core subjects at the end of primary school: identifying and explaining relative strengths of children with specific language impairment (SLI)

“… 2012 ) and this may be a valuable compensatory ability in Science and some areas of Mathematics. Consistent with this view, Matson and Cline ( 2012 ) report that children with SLI did not differ from TD peers in performance in Science education tasks designed to minimize language requirements and to maximize opportunities to use visual and symbolic representations. Similarly, Donlan et al .…”

“… 2004 , Tippett 2009 ). The Key Stage 2 Science curriculum requires children not only to describe but also to explain, and this makes higher order demands of language ability (Matson and Cline 2012 ). Wellington and Osborne ( 2001 : 2) observe that ‘Every Science lesson is a language lesson’.…”

“…Despite the importance of language in Science education, and despite the evident burden this could place on children with SLI, very little empirical research has been addressed to how these children perform in this area. However, Matson and Cline ( 2012 ) provide preliminary evidence to indicate that some of the visual scaffolding provided in some Key Stage 2 Science education may be helpful to children with language impairment. In a study of 7–11-year-olds, they found that, compared with TD peers, children with SLI had more difficulty in scientific tasks that required expressive language.…”

Feasibility and evaluation of Talk Boost KS2: A school-based programme for oral language skills in children with low-average communication skills in Key Stage 2

“…During Key Stage 2 (KS2) there are increased demands on oral language, combined with fewer visual prompts, requirements for more advanced executive functioning in the organisation of written work and learning/thinking in more abstract language. These requirements present increased challenges to children who have low-average communication skills (Matson & Cline, 2012).…”

Language intervention for causal adverbial production and science content learning

“…In other words, participants with SLI may benefit from multiple sessions focused on the same unit even more than typically developing children, given their known difficulties in science learning (Matson & Cline, 2012). If this were the case, participants would be expected to exhibit flat or randomly varying science content probe performance, but a pattern of increasing gains on unit tests over the course of the study.…”