1 / 21

Do vocabulary skills in infancy predict reading and language skills in later childhood?

Do vocabulary skills in infancy predict reading and language skills in later childhood?. Fiona Duff Gurpreet Reen , Kim Plunkett, Kate Nation. Language for Reading. decoding × linguistic comprehension = reading comprehension nonphonological language

tabraham
Télécharger la présentation

Do vocabulary skills in infancy predict reading and language skills in later childhood?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Do vocabulary skills in infancy predict reading and language skills in later childhood? Fiona Duff GurpreetReen, Kim Plunkett, Kate Nation

  2. Language for Reading decoding × linguistic comprehension = reading comprehension nonphonological language Clarke et al. (2010) phonological language Hulme et al. (2012)

  3. Language for Reading decoding × linguistic comprehension = reading comprehension nonphonological language Clarke et al. (2010) phonological language Hulme et al. (2012)

  4. Research Questions • If vocabulary predicts reading, vocabulary deficits signal risk of later reading difficulties • Is there a relationship between infant vocabulary and later literacy? • Could infant vocabulary deficits be used to identify children at risk of reading difficulties? Infant vocabulary School-age language/ literacy

  5. Measuring Vocabulary • Oxford Communicative Development Inventory • Parental checklist of infants’ knowledge of 416 words • Standardised on 669 British infants (Hamilton et al., 2000) Comprehension Production 319 200 127 16

  6. Participants in Infancy Correlation between CDIs at t1 and t2 (n=100): Comp. = .75, Prod. = .70 (p < .001)

  7. Participants at School-Age • 300 children in ≈150 schools

  8. School-Age Test Battery • Language • Receptive vocabulary (ROWPVT) • Expressive vocabulary (EOWPVT) • Phonological deletion (CTOPP Elision) • Reading • Reading accuracy (DTWRP) • Reading comprehension (YARC) • General cognitive ability • Nonverbal reasoning (BAS-II Matrices)

  9. Participants at School-Age

  10. School-Age Measures

  11. Research Questions • If vocabulary predicts reading, vocabulary deficits signal risk of later reading difficulties • Is there a relationship between infant vocabulary and later literacy? Infant vocabulary School-age language/ literacy

  12. Receptive Expressive .84 .73 Vocabulary Comprehension Production .79 .72 Infant vocabulary Phonological awareness Nonwords Regulars Exceptions .93 .97 .86 Reading accuracy Passage 1 Passage 2 .78 .79 Reading comprehension

  13. Receptive Expressive .84 .73 Vocabulary Comprehension Production .79 .72 .29 Infant vocabulary Phonological awareness .49 Nonwords Regulars Exceptions .81 .56 .93 .97 .86 Reading accuracy .38 .81 Passage 1 Passage 2 .78 .79 Reading comprehension

  14. Receptive Expressive .84 .73 Vocabulary Comprehension Production .79 .72 .29 .40 Infant vocabulary Phonological awareness .21 .49 .33 Nonwords Regulars Exceptions .43 .81 .56 .93 .97 .86 Reading accuracy .38 .81 Passage 1 Passage 2 .78 .79 Reading comprehension

  15. Receptive Expressive .84 .73 Vocabulary Comprehension Production .84 .79 .72 .29 .40 Infant vocabulary Phonological awareness .21 .49 .33 .96 Nonwords Regulars Exceptions .43 .81 .56 .93 .97 .86 Reading accuracy .38 .89 .81 Passage 1 Passage 2 .78 .79 N = 300 Chi-square test of model fit: χ2 (26) = 44.87 p = .012 CF1 = .989; RMSEA = .049 Reading comprehension .82

  16. Interim Summary • Infant vocabulary is a significant predictor of school-age outcomes, accounting for: • 4% variance in phoneme awareness • 11% variance in reading accuracy • 16% variance in vocabulary • 18% variance in reading comprehension • However, it is not a sufficient predictor • What else can explain the remaining variance? • Family-risk: a better predictor of language outcomes at 4 years than ‘late talker’ status at 18 months (Bishop et al., 2012)

  17. Family-Risk • Family-risk (FR) questionnaire • First degree relative with a reading or language difficulty

  18. Receptive Expressive .83 .74 Vocabulary Comprehension Production .84 -.09 .79 .71 .28 .38 Infant vocabulary Phonological awareness .18 .49 .28 -.15 .94 Nonwords Regulars Exceptions .38 -.16 .84 .55 .93 .97 .86 Reading accuracy Family risk -.32 .36 .79 .78 Passage 1 Passage 2 .77 .79 -.34 N = 300 Chi-square test of model fit: χ2 (31) = 48.58, p = .023 CF1 = .989; RMSEA = .043 Reading comprehension .70

  19. Conclusions and Implications • Infant vocabulary is a significant but not sufficient predictor of later reading and language outcomes • Family-risk explains additional variance in reading but not language outcomes • The two predictors explain: • 6% variance in phoneme awareness (cf. 4%) • 16% variance in vocabulary (cf. 16%) • 21% variance in reading accuracy (cf. 11%) • 30% variance in reading comprehension (cf. 18%)

  20. Conclusions and Implications • Caution against using parent report of vocabulary as sole predictor of outcomes, especially for language: • Low stability of vocabulary from pre-24 months to school-age • Around 70% of 18-month-old ‘late talkers’ resolve (Bishop et al., 2012) • Prediction of reading risk increased if consider infant vocabulary with family history • Future research needs to address: • What FR is tapping • Whether prediction is improved when language is measured later on, more comprehensively, or more objectively

  21. Acknowledgements • Julia Dilnot, University of Cambridge • Jane Ralph, University of Oxford • Dr Suzy Styles, Technical University, Singapore • Professor Dorothy Bishop, University of Oxford • Professor Charles Hulme, UCL • Schools, families and children

More Related