Research Byte: Potential implications of performance on the WJ IV Oral Reading test in word reading and reading comprehension--indirect mediated effect of prosody

Click on image to enlarge

The WJ IV Achievement test battery includes a new reading test (Oral Reading) that contributes to the Reading Fluency cluster.  It is a measure of oral reading skill (story reading accuracy and prosody).  Briefly, prosody, in reading, refers to the expressiveness with which a student reads.  Why?  Because, fluent readers must be accurate readers.  The Oral Reading tests is a measure of fluency of oral expression in connected discourse. Fluent reading of the passages requires attention to the grammatical structure of prose. 

 

The recent study noted above may be relevant to the interpretation of the Oral Reading test.  This study suggests that prosody (prosodic sensitivity) does not have a direct causal effect on word reading or reading comprehension.  Rather, prosodic sensitivity may have an indirect impact on word reading via the mediating abilities of phonological and morphological awareness and an indirect impact on reading comprehension via word reading and listening comprehension.

 

This study suggests that the WJ IV phonological awareness tests (Phonetic Coding cluster; Oral Language tests of Segmentation and Sound Blending) should receive special attention when interpreting the impact of prosody (Oral Reading test) on the WJ IV Letter-Word Identification test (word reading).  In the case of performance on the WJ IV reading comprehension tests, the study suggests that special attention should be paid attention to prosody (Oral Reading) as mediated through a person's word reading (Letter-Word Identification) and listening comprehension (WJ IV Listening Comprehension cluster tests).

Conflict of interest disclosure.  I am a coauthor of the WJ IV.

Research bytes 6-20-2010: Cognitive correlates of bilingualism; morphological instruction and literacy

Adesope, O. O., Lavin, T., Thompson, T., & Ungerleider, C. (2010). A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Cognitive Correlates of Bilingualism.  Review of Educational Research, 80(20), 207-245.

A number of studies have documented the cognitive outcomes associated  with bilingualism. To gain a clear understanding of the extent  and diversity of these cognitive outcomes, the authors conducted  a meta-analysis of studies that examined the cognitive correlates  of bilingualism. Data from 63 studies (involving 6,022 participants) were extracted and analyzed following established protocols and procedures for conducting systematic reviews and guidelines for meta-analysis. Results indicate that bilingualism is reliably associated with several cognitive outcomes, including increased attentional control, working memory, metalinguistic awareness, and abstract and symbolic representation skills. Overall mean effect sizes varied from small to large, depending on the cognitive outcomes measured, and were moderated by methodological features of the studies.

Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, S. H. (2010). The Effects of Morphological Instruction on Literacy Skills: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 144-179.

The authors reviewed all peer-reviewed studies with participants from preschool to Grade 8 for this meta-analysis of morphological interventions. They identified 22 applicable studies. Instructional effects (Cohen’s d) were averaged by linguistic outcome categories (morphological sublexical, nonmorphological sublexical, lexical, and supralexical) and comparison group (experimental group vs. control or experimental group vs. alternative training). The authors investigated the effects of morphological instruction (a) on reading, spelling, vocabulary, and morphological skills, (b) for less able readers versus undifferentiated samples, (c) for younger versus older students, and (d) in combination with instruction of other literacy skills or in isolation. Results indicate that (a) morphological instruction benefits learners, (b) it brings particular benefits for less able readers, (c) it is no less effective for younger students, and (d) it is more effective when combined with other aspects of literacy instruction. Implications of these findings are discussed in light of current educational practice and theory.

Anyone interested in securing access to any of these articles, in exchange for a brief blog guest post, contact the blogmaster @ iap@earthlink.net