This study investigates developmental paths of reading fluency and comprehension among adolescents in lower secondary education. Furthermore, we examined the association between these paths, literacy-related emotions and psychological well-being. This longitudinal study’s sample (n = 1,035, 55
The present study investigates a principal mechanism underlying reading development and individual differences in reading skills, namely sensitivity to orthotactic regularities in lexical processing. This sensitivity can be seen as a reflection of statistical learning (SL), as it pertains to accumulated experience with statistical regularities in print. However, empirical evidence regarding the link between such sensitivity and reading skills remains mixed, and it is particularly unclear what role it plays in orthographically shallow languages. The present study addressed this issue by assessing sensitivity to orthotactic regularities in Finnish pseudowords using a lexical decision task, and examining how this sensitivity depends on vocabulary skill and grade by comparing students from grades 3, 4, and 7 (N = 818). We identified distinct differences between grade levels, with the orthotactic sensitivity effect being significantly stronger in higher grade levels. Furthermore, we observed substantial within-grade individual differences, with higher vocabulary proficiency predicting greater effects of orthotactic regularities in pseudowords. These findings demonstrate a link between sensitivity to orthotactic constraints and linguistic skills. Importantly, our findings indicate that sensitivity to statistical information is critical even in markedly shallow orthographies, challenging earlier literature. We discuss the implications of our findings for SL views of reading. We also discuss whether sensitivity to regularity exists at the level of orthotactics, phonotactics, or both, given that in the shallow writing system of Finnish the distinction between these levels is blurred.
Shared cognitive–linguistic skills support reading and spelling, yet they may dissociate into heterogeneous literacy profiles. This study examined whether Chinese students learning English as a second language (ESL) with poor reading (PR), poor spelling (PS), combined word-reading and spelling difficulties (English learning difficulties; ELD), and typical development (TD) exhibited distinct literacy outcomes and cognitive–linguistic profiles, and which skills uniquely predicted subgroup membership. Participants were 190 Grade 2–3 Hong Kong Chinese students who were classified into predefined literacy profiles based on grade-normed performance on standardized English word reading and word spelling measures. Students completed assessments of vocabulary knowledge, phonological awareness, orthographic knowledge, rapid naming, morphological awareness, working memory, and IQ. Multivariate analyses of covariance showed that the predefined literacy profiles were associated with overlapping but differentially expressed cognitive-linguistic patterns. Hierarchical multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that vocabulary knowledge and phonological awareness consistently differentiated all difficulty groups from TD peers. In contrast, orthographic knowledge uniquely predicted PR and ELD but not isolated PS. Rapid naming and morphological awareness did not show unique contributions. These findings are consistent with literacy difficulties reflecting shared but differentially weighted cognitive-linguistic constraints, supporting a multiple-deficit perspective and highlighting vocabulary knowledge and phonological awareness as important targets for assessment and intervention in ESL learners.
Spelling instruction requires educators’ explicit knowledge of phonological, orthographic, morphological, and etymological rules (Joshi et al., 2008). However, it remains unknown whether teacher educators have a systematic understanding of English spelling. The current study aims to examine teacher educators’ knowledge of English spelling and its association with their self-perceived expertise in literacy instruction. Forty-nine teacher educators completed a researcher-developed survey that examined their perceived expertise to teach reading and spelling. They also answered questions on their spelling knowledge in phonological, orthographic, morphological, and etymological domains. On average, teacher educators achieved 68
