191 Vol. 24, No. 4, December 2021 YOUNG EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN https://doi.org/10.1177/1096250620928335 DOI: 10.1177/1096250620928335 journals.sagepub.com/home/yec Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions © 2020 Division for Early Childhood José, a 3-year-old boy with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attends an early childhood inclusive classroom. He uses gestures and single words to communicate his wants and needs. He spends much of his time engaged in solitary and stereotypic play with his favorite toys, trains and trucks. José’s teacher, Ms. Baca, is concerned about his social communication skills because he does not have an independent means of communicating with his peers, teachers, or other adults in the classroom. When Ms. Baca asks José to put his toys away during clean up, he often cries. He pushes his peers out of his space when they approach him to play. José receives an hour of speech and language therapy in his classroom each week. Ms. Chavez, his speech-language pathologist (SLP), notes that although José is able to use single words to request, he only requests routines that include his favorite toys. José’s parents also report that they have difficulty understanding what he is trying to communicate when he cries or screams and that he only uses single words for requesting. Together, the teacher and SLP examine current evidence-based 928335 YECXXX10.1177/1096250620928335Young Exceptional ChildrenEnhanced Milieu Teaching Strategies / Davison et al. research-article2020

PurposeThis study examined the psychometric properties of the Preschool Language Scales–Fifth Edition (PLS-5 English) among preschool children from low–socioeconomic status (SES) families.MethodThe PLS-5 was administered individually to 169 3- to 4-year-old children enrolled in Head Start programs. We carried out a Mokken scale analysis (MSA), which is a nonparametric item response theory analysis, to examine the hierarchy among items and the reliability of test scores of the PLS-5 Auditory Comprehension (AC) and Expressive Communication (EC) scales.ResultsThe PLS-5 EC items retained a moderate Mokken scale with the inclusion of all the items. On the other hand, the PLS-5 AC items formed a moderate Mokken scale only with the exclusion of five unscalable items. The latent class reliability coefficients for the AC and the EC scale scores were both above .90. Several items that violated the invariant item ordering assumption were found for both scales.ConclusionsMSA can be used to examine the relationship between the latent language ability and the probability of passing an item with ordinal responses. Results indicate that for preschool children from low-SES families, it is appropriate to use the PLS-5 EC scale scores for comparing individuals' expressive language abilities; however, researchers and speech-language pathologists should be cautious when using the PLS-5 AC scale scores to evaluate individuals' receptive language abilities. Other implications of the MSA results are further discussed.

English learners (ELs) present a unique and growing population in preschool settings in the United States. Therefore, it is important for speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to understand the best evidence in enhancing the language abilities in preschool children who present with language learning difficulties and who are also learning more than one language. The purpose of this review is to provide an analysis of current language strategies shown to be effective in enhancing the language outcomes of preschool children who are English learners. These strategies include shared book reading approaches that are incorporated across home and school settings, explicit vocabulary instruction, and repeated exposure to vocabulary in both languages.

There are multiple aspects of language to consider when treating language and literacy impairments in school-age children. Therefore, it is important for speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to understand how to systematically and comprehensively target language in intervention while also considering home and school expectations. The purpose of this paper is to explore a case involving a third grade student struggling with writing and the use of a cognitive apprenticeship model of writing to promote multiple aspects of language using curriculum-based materials and parent support.

Many students struggle with gaining knowledge and writing about content text material and therefore require effective intervention. In a randomized controlled trial study, 77 low-achieving fourth-grade students received reading comprehension instruction or reading comprehension plus writing instruction or were assigned to a no-treatment control. Knowledge outcomes were evaluated through students’ retelling and performance on a standardized reading test. Written language-based outcomes were analyzed using a computer software program for semantic and syntactic measures. Analyses indicated that students in reading comprehension instruction and reading comprehension plus writing instruction outperformed the control group on oral and written retelling, a standardized reading test, and semantic measures. Syntactic measures, however, did not show statistically significant differences by treatment or control group. Implications for including language instruction and assessments within multi-component instruction are suggested.

Previous research in the USA studying Spanish-English bilingual children's language development has largely focused on children's developing abilities in Spanish. However, relatively little research has been conducted on children's English grammatical development. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the English grammatical development of bilingual (Spanish-English) Head Start children during the preschool years. The goals were to determine (a) whether there are differences in children's productions of English grammatical morphemes based on timing of English exposure and (b) which morphological structures met mastery, emerging and early emerging levels of production by bilingual children. These aims were accomplished through in-depth analyses of spontaneous language samples collected over a two-year period in Head Start. Comparisons were made between Spanish-speaking children who were exposed to English at home from birth (home English communication (HEC)) and Spanish-speaking children who were not expected to communicate in English until their entry into Head Start (school English communication (SEC)). Results indicated that children in the HEC group mastered more morphemes earlier than the children in the SEC group; however, by the end of children's second year in Head Start both groups had mastered a similar number of morphemes. Additionally, the children in both groups differed in which morphemes were mastered at the end of Head Start when compared to monolingual English-speaking children. The results of this investigation provide information to clinicians about typical English grammatical development of Spanish-English preschool children.

ABSTRACTThis longitudinal study investigated changes in reported language usage between Puerto Rican mothers and their preschoolers over a 4-year period. It also examined whether differences in language usage occurred depending on the timing of children's exposure to English and children's gender. Seventy-six mothers reported the languages they and their children used when talking to each other during 2 years in Head Start, kindergarten, and first grade. Mothers of children who were exposed to Spanish and English prior to preschool entry reported using more English to their children than mothers of children who were not exposed to English until after preschool entry. The language usage of the children followed the same patterns as their mothers. The difference between the groups was maintained over the 4 years, although both groups increased their English usage. A gender effect was observed. Mothers of girls were five times more likely to use “More or All Spanish” than mothers of sons. In addition, girls who were exposed to Spanish only prior to preschool entry were six times more likely to speak to their mothers in “More or All Spanish” than other participating children. The bidimensional model of acculturation is used to present and interpret the findings.

It is well established that monolingual preschoolers' oral language development (vocabulary and oral comprehension) contributes to their later reading abilities; however, less is known about this relationship in bilingual populations where children are developing knowledge of two languages. It may be that children's abilities in one language do not contribute to their reading abilities in their other language or that children's experiences with either language assist them in developing a common underlying proficiency that they draw upon when learning to read. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship among bilingual children's receptive language development and reading outcomes in first grade. Eighty-one bilingual children who were attending Head Start participated in the study. Growth curve models were used to examine the relationship between children's language abilities during two years in Head Start and reading outcomes at the end of first grade. Children's growth in both English and Spanish receptive vocabulary and oral comprehension predicted their English and Spanish reading abilities at the end of first grade within languages. Associations were also observed between languages with growth in English receptive language predicting Spanish reading comprehension and growth in Spanish receptive language predicting English reading comprehension. Learning outcomes: The reader will be able to (1) describe the common underlying proficiency model; (2) identify key factors of consideration when studying bilingual children; (3) understand the associations between preschool language abilities in English and Spanish and English and Spanish reading outcomes; and (4) identify ways in which future clinical practice may be impacted by the study's findings.

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderFeature1 Feb 2010Kids Write and CreateA Service Learning Project in North Philadelphia Rena Krakow, PhD Megan Dunn Davison andPhD, CCC-SLP Brian GoldsteinPhD, CCC-SLP Rena Krakow Google Scholar More articles by this author , PhD, Megan Dunn Davison Google Scholar More articles by this author , PhD, CCC-SLP and Brian Goldstein Google Scholar More articles by this author , PhD, CCC-SLP https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.FTR3.15022010.18 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Located a mile apart from each other in North Philadelphia, Temple University and the Frederick Douglass Elementary School seem worlds apart. Temple is a public research university with one of the most diverse student bodies in the country; Douglass, a local public school, is almost uniformly a school of children from minority backgrounds, 89% of whom qualify for reduced or free lunch. Moreover, literacy achievement at Douglass is woefully inadequate; fewer than 10% of its fifth-grade students achieved a score of “proficient” or better on the state reading assessment in the 2007–2008 school year (Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2009). Research on inner-city adolescents and adults reveals correlations between reading failure and dropping out of school, un- and underemployment, and poor health outcomes (Craig, Connor, & Washington, 2003; Rudd, Colton, & Schacht, 2000). Although it is imperative to focus on the later school years and beyond, it also is critical to recognize that children living in poverty typically start school at a significant disadvantage in terms of their emergent literacy development (Foster & Miller, 2007). One approach to overcoming these challenges is to provide one-on-one mentoring/tutoring. Consider- able evidence attests to the value of such programs on children’s literacy development, self-esteem, and motivation to stay in school (Moore-Hart & Karabenick, 2009; Weinberger, 2007). One-on-one mentoring/tutoring of inner-city children is most likely to be effective when the mentor/tutors are professionals in the area of literacy (e.g., teachers), but there are not enough teachers available to meet the overwhelming need. Hence, many programs recruit volunteers, providing them with varying amounts of training and supervision, resulting in varying degrees of effectiveness (Wasik & Slavin, 1993). Service Learning A unique way of addressing the need for skilled tutor/mentors, especially in communities that have both universities with speech-language pathology programs and public schools serving children who live in poverty, is to make service learning part of the curriculum for the speech-language pathology students. Indeed, literacy and serving a diverse client base are included in the scope of practice for SLPs (ASHA, 2007). The “Kids Write and Create Program,” developed in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Temple University, provides young students at the Douglass School with literacy mentors. Every second-year master’s student participates for two consecutive semesters in this project, which is integrated into a two-course sequence: “Written Language Development and Disorders” (fall) and “Assessment and Treatment of Diverse Populations” (spring). Temple students are paired one-on-one with kindergarten or first-grade students who attend an after-school program at Douglass. Pairings remain the same throughout the year unless a child leaves the school or after-school program. Mentorship through service offers benefits for both the mentor and the mentored (Eyler & Giles, J., 1999). Temple mentors repeatedly express their feelings of enhanced learning about education and literacy development in an inner-city public school through participation in this program. The experience also fills a gap in the programs of some speech-language pathology students, whose school practicum may lack a literacy component. “Kids Write and Create” targets the youngest students because of evidence that children who do not read at grade level by the end of first grade are unlikely to ever catch up (e.g., Torgeson, 1998). The program is designed to be highly motivating to children of this age. Research shows that children who are engaged in pleasurable literacy activities are more likely to persevere when learning tasks become more challenging and thus are more likely to be successful at reading (Paris & Oka, 1986; Schunk, 1985). We build on notions at the core of “kid writing” programs: that young children recognize differences between spoken and written language (Sulzby, 1996) and have the desire and ability to communicate through writing, well before they have mastered the mapping of orthography to speech and the mechanics of handwriting (Feldgus & Cardonick, 1999). Such programs demonstrate that it is possible and desirable to use “writing as a gateway to literacy” (Kucer & Harste, 1991). Individual Attention Our program differs from most children’s writing programs, however, in the use of mentors who work one-on-one with children (as opposed to a teacher circulating around the room) and who have the knowledge and skills to scaffold the children’s developing writing and reading (as opposed to volunteers). “Kids Write and Create” also provides continuity with buddy pairs matched and working consistently for the entire school year. Mentors help their buddies plan, compose, revise, finish, and read their own books at levels best suited to each child. The children write personal narratives in the fall term and expository works in the spring. In spring 2009, the topic for the expository texts was famous African Americans; children chose, among others, Barack Obama, Frederick Douglass, Beyonce, Rosa Parks, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Although in many writing programs children write as best they can, our program allows children to dictate their sentences. SLP mentors take dictation but also scaffold the children’s oral language to facilitate growth in written language skills. Mentors type the text and scan into digital files the accompanying illustrations that the children make. In addition, each book has a cover, title page, and an “about the author” page with a photograph. At the end of each semester, books are bound and presented to the authors, who are recognized at a special celebration held in their honor attended by parents/guardians, teachers, and the Temple mentors. Many children are amazed that their own ideas and words are worthy of being “published.” For some, it is the first book they have ever owned. Outcomes “Kids Write and Create” has operated at the Douglass School since fall 2007. In 2008–2009, we began to assess program effectiveness using the Test of Early Reading Ability (TERA-3; Reid, Hresko, & Hammill, 2001) along with questionnaires administered to the children and their mentors about their experiences with the program. Pre- and post-test data (reading quotients) from the TERA on the 30 children assessed in 2008–2009 showed a significant increase in literacy achievement over the academic year [t (1, 30)=-2.13, p=.04, d=.29]. Moreover, at pre-test, 53% of participants were performing significantly below the mean on the TERA (i.e., > 1 s.d. below the mean) compared to 30% at post-test. It is important to note that the population at Douglass is highly mobile and many children do not complete a full academic year at the same school or even in the same neighborhood, making it impossible to post-test some children for our analyses. Nonetheless, the decision was made to include even those Douglass children who live in the local homeless shelter; recognizing that they were most unlikely to attend the entire year, we placed the service part of service learning ahead of the desire to obtain the most robust statistical outcome. We will add to the number of students pre- and post-tested as we continue the program. According to the National Commission on Service Learning (see Fiske, 2001), service learning is a teaching and learning approach that integrates community service with academic study to enrich learning, teach civic responsibility, and strengthen communities (p.3). We believe that this definition aptly characterizes what “Kids Write and Create” is doing and we believe that SLPs in training have much to offer and much to gain through their participation. Mentors, Children Respond Positively to Temple Literacy Project When asked what they learned from participating in the “Kids Write and Create” program, the children responded with the following comments: “It felt good because I know how to write a book.” “To be a better writer.” “It is important to read.” “I learned that I can sound out the words if I want to read to someone.” “I learned about putting periods and question marks at the end of the sentences.” “I learned to read it by myself.” “I learned about how to put my sentences in order in my story.” “It is fun that you can write something that you want.” Temple mentors also valued the experience, providing some measure of ecological validity: “I think my students gained ownership over their knowledge and words. When I brought in the first draft of their book, and they started reading their own words, their eyes lit up.” “[Student] was very excited to see his book by the end of the program. I think he was almost in disbelief that it was his creation. This may be presumptuous, but I don’t think he previously experienced creating and owning something. An adult hadn’t previously said, ‘what we make is yours, I’m a helper, but you are the boss.’ Maybe that sounds lame. The kids all loved the one-on-one time with adults.” “[Student] seemed to gain confidence and pride in creating his story. He really put a lot of effort into it.” “I think that this experience showed the children that there are people from the community who care about them and are willing to help them in any way possible.” “Keep doing the project! The experience really meant a lot to [student] and I’m so glad that I could share it with him.” “I think [student] was extremely proud of what he accomplished.” “[Student] gained the experience of learning how to use his imagination to create a storybook. He learned the different components of a story. He also gained ownership of creating and receiving the finished book.” “I liked seeing [student] get so excited about my presence—he couldn’t wait to get started.” References American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2007). Scope of Practice in Speech-Language Pathology [Scope of Practice]. Available from www.asha.org/policy. Google Scholar Craig H., Connor C., & Washington J. (2003). Early positive predictors of later reading comprehension for African American students: a preliminary investigation.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 34, 31–43. Google Scholar Eyler J., & D.E. Giles J. (1999). Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning?San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar Feldgus E. & Cardonick I. (1999) Kid writing: A systematic approach to phonics, journals, and writing workshops (3rd ed.). Write Group/Mcgraw-Hill. Google Scholar Fiske E.B. (2001). Learning in Deed. The Power of Service-Learning for American Schools. Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Google Scholar Foster W. & Miller M. (2007). Development of the literacy achievement gap: A longitudinal study of kindergarten through third grade.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 173–181. LinkGoogle Scholar Kucer S.B. & Harste J. (1991). The reading and writing connection: Counterpart strategy instruction.In Hayes B. (Ed.), Effective strategies for teaching reading. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Google Scholar Moore-Hart M. & Karabenick S. (2009). Becoming successful readers: A volunteer tutoring program for culturally diverse students.Literacy Research and Instruction, 48, 149–171. Google Scholar Nolen S. (2007). Young children’s motivation to read and write: Development in social contexts.Cognition and Instruction, 25, 219–270. Google Scholar Author Notes Rena Krakow, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Temple University.She has degrees in linguistics and special education. contact her a [email protected]. Megan Dunn Davison, PhD, CCC-SLP, is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Temple University. Her research interests include language and literacy development in at-risk populations. Brian Goldstein, PhD, CCC-SLP, is associate professor and chair in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Temple University. Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 15Issue 2February 2010 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Feb 1, 2010 Metrics Downloaded 285 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagleader-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2010 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

Abstract Given the increasing number of children from homes in which a language other than English is the primary language, it is important for speech-language pathologists to understand how bilingualism is defined and the implications of different defining factors for language development and later literacy outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to explore the factors contributing to the differences observed across bilingual language and literacy development. Previous research suggests there are differences in the language and literacy development of bilingual children due to differing ages of exposure to each language and the context in which each language is then used. Implications for assessment and interventions are discussed.

This investigation examined the impact of maternal language and children's gender on bilingual children's vocabulary and emergent literacy development during 2 years in Head Start and kindergarten. Seventy-two mothers and their children who attended English immersion programs participated. Questionnaires administered annually over a 3-year period revealed that mothers increased their usage of English to their children. In addition, more mothers of sons reported using More or All English with their children than mothers of daughters. Growth curve modeling indicated that increased usage of English did not impact children's English vocabulary or emergent literacy development. However, increased usage of English slowed the growth of children's Spanish vocabulary. Despite differences in mother-to-child language usage, gender did not impact growth in either language. These findings provide evidence that maternal usage of Spanish does not negatively affect children's developing English vocabulary or emergent literacy abilities. Maternal usage of Spanish appears necessary to maximize children's developing Spanish vocabulary.

PURPOSE:This study examined (a) the extent of genetic and environmental influences on children's articulation and language difficulties and (b) the phenotypic associations between such difficulties and direct assessments of reading-related skills during early school-age years. METHOD:Behavioral genetic analyses focused on parent-report data regarding the speech-language skills of 248 twin pairs (M = 6.08 years) from the Western Reserve Reading Project. In addition, phenotypic associations between children's speech-language status and direct assessments of early reading-related abilities were examined through hierarchical linear modeling (HLM). RESULTS:Probandwise concordance rates and intraclass tetrachoric correlations indicated high heritability for children's difficulties in expressive language and articulation, with estimates of .54 and .97 accordingly. HLM results indicated that children with histories of speech-language difficulties scored significantly lower than unaffected children on various measures of early reading-related abilities. CONCLUSIONS:Results from the parent-report survey provided converging evidence of genetic effects on children's speech and language difficulties and suggest that children with a history of speech-language difficulties are at risk for lower performance on early reading-related measures. The extent of risk differed across measures and appeared greatest for children who demonstrated a history of difficulties across articulation, expressive language, and receptive language. Implications for future genetic research and clinical practice are discussed.