Banter Speech & Language

Sydney speech pathologists helping adults and children speak for themselves.

Literacy

Should we spend time teaching our kids to spell? If so, how, and what should we teach them?

by Leave a Comment

Learning to spell is hard and time-consuming. Should we invest precious school time teaching kids how to spell? I think so. Here’s why:

1. Teachers, bosses and peers judge people who can’t spell negatively

Misspelled words:

  • make writing more difficult to read (Graham et al., 2008); and
  • cause readers to devalue the quality of a writer’s message (Marshall & Powers, 1969).

At school, papers with misspelled words are scored more harshly by teachers for the quality of ideas than the same papers with no spelling errors (Graham et al., 2011). This is consistent with my experience in the corporate and finance sectors: many professionals (me included!) judge spelling errors as a sign of sloppiness and even incompetence – especially in business communications like resumes and business proposals.

2. Spelling problems detract from a person’s writing quality and can reduce motivation to write

For example:

  • if kids have to think hard about how to spell words correctly, they may have less brainpower to expend on the content of what they are writing. They may forget ideas they have yet to write down (Graham et al., 2002);
  • spelling problems can affect a child’s choice of words: they may choose a more general or even incorrect word to describe an object or idea simply because they are unsure of how to spell the more exact word precisely (Graham & Harris, 2005); and
  • kids who are aware that they have spelling problems may avoid writing whenever possible, and become convinced that they “can’t write”, leading to less writing practice and development (Berninger et al., 1991).

3. Learning to spell improves other literacy skills

Learning to spell can improve a child’s:

4. Spelling skills improve more when they are expressly taught to kids than when they are not taught to kids

For decades, researchers have argued about whether spelling should be explicitly taught to kids, or whether it’s better for kids to figure out spelling “naturally”, i.e. without being taught, e.g. from reading lots of stuff and recognising spelling patterns – so-called “statistical learning”. In other words, researchers argue about whether spelling should be “taught” or “caught”.

The weight of good quality, peer-reviewed evidence tells us that:

  • to learn a skill from our environment (e.g. spelling) without being explicitly taught it, we need to pay attention to the to-be-learned material (e.g. Toro et al., 2005). It’s true that kids do learn some spelling patterns from their environment and interests, e.g. how to spell their name. But, for many kids, printed words are simply not attractive enough for them to pay enough attention to spelling as they read. For example, a study showed that, on average, 4 year olds spent only around 5% of the time paying attention to written words when being read to by parents, with the majority of their time spent looking at the pictures (e.g. Evans & Saint-Aubin, 2005; Justice et al., 2008). This is not surprising: unlike with speech, humans did not evolve to pay attention to writing (Treiman, 2018); and
  • the best way to improve a child’s performance on a skill such as spelling, is to focus on the skill directly. In other words, to improve spelling, you need to practice spelling (and not other skills, such as working memory or pattern recognition) (Smith et al., 2015; McArthur & Castles, 2017; Treiman, 2018);
  • children learn to spell more efficiently and effectively when they receive systematic instruction about spelling than when they do not. A major meta-analysis of peer-reviewed spelling studies showed that direct and systematic spelling instruction:
    • improves students’ spelling skills by slightly more than one-half of a standard deviation, across a range of ages/years of school (from Kindergarten to Year 10!);
    • results in long-term gains;
    • results in gains that transfer to students’ performance in some writing tasks; and
    • improves phonological awareness and reading skills, including word reading and comprehension skills (but – interestingly – not fluency) (Graham & Santangelo, 2014).

5. Components of effective spelling programs

Spelling programs come in many shapes and sizes, ranging from practising lists of spelling words, to teaching specific spelling skills, to more sophisticated programs targeting a range of spelling skills. Consistent with our approach to literacy teaching and the weight of peer-reviewed evidence, we favour a phonics-based approach to teaching spelling, combined with phonological and morphological awareness training. This includes teaching students:

  • phonological awareness skills like blending sounds most often linked to letters to form words (and segmenting words into sounds);
  • links between combinations of letters and different speech sounds, e.g. “sh”, “ee”, “ou”, “ow”, “ai”, “ay”, “oi,”, “oy”, “oa”, “er”, “ir”, “ur”, “wor”, “ear”, “au”, “ck”, “ng”, “ch”, “ph”, and “ough”;
  • common spelling probabilities and patterns, including context rules (sometimes referred to as “graphotactics”), such as:
    • English words rarely ending in the letters “i”, “v” or “u” (hence “spy”, “love”, “have”, and “blue”);
    • “ck” being used to signify /k/ after a short vowel (hence “black” and “kicking”);
    • “ll” and “ff” being used to signify /l/ and /f/ after a short vowel in stressed syllables (hence “full” and “biff”);
    • vowel letters at the end of open syllables signifying a long vowel sound (hence “navy”, “be”, “I”, “no” and “music”);
    • using a silent “e” at the end of a word to signify a long vowel (hence “like” and “mate”); and
    • “c” signifying a /s/ sound when followed by “i”, “e” or “y” (hence “circle”, “ceiling” and “cycle”);
  • syllable segmentation tactics (recognising that, usually, each syllable in English contains at least one vowel sound); and
  • morphological awareness skills such as the meanings of common:
    • prefixes, e.g. “un”, “dis”, “super”, “sub”, “pro”, “pre”, “con”, “trans”, “ex”, “in”, “uni”, bi”, “tri”, “quad” and “bene”; and
    • suffixes, e.g. “s”, “es”, “ed”, “ing”, “er”, “est”, “ful”, “less”, “able”, “ous”, and “ness”; and
    • common word roots.

While the purpose of this article is not to promote any specific spelling program, we use a range of spelling and word attack programs in our clinic, including Spelfabet, Spalding and Yoshimoto’s morphological awareness programs. We’re also fans of Sounds-Write and other phonics-based programs that aim to teach kids to read through writing.

Clinical bottom line

Kids should be taught to spell because:

  • it improves their spelling, phonological awareness and some reading skills; and
  • poor spelling skills can affect academic and work achievements.

Kids can learn spelling skills through reading/exposure to print – through statistical learning – but progress depends on how much attention they pay to spelling when reading. Many kids don’t pay much attention to spelling patterns when they read.

Structured spelling instruction is more effective and efficient than statistical learning. Spelling programs that focus directly on spelling are more likely to benefit spelling than interventions that focus on other skills, such as working memory or pattern recognition.

Related articles:

Principal references:

  1. Graham, S. & Santangelo. (2014). Does Spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27, 1703-1743.
  2. Treiman, R. (2018). Statistical Learning and Spelling. Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools, 49, 644-652.

Whoops, you're not connected to Mailchimp. You need to enter a valid Mailchimp API key.

Image: https://tinyurl.com/yd8ft2mz

Banter Speech & Language Banter Speech & Language
Banter Speech & Language is an independent firm of speech pathologists for adults and children. We help clients in our local area, including Concord, Concord West, North Strathfield, Rhodes, and Strathfield, and all other suburbs of Sydney.

Banter Speech & Language is owned and managed by David Kinnane, a Hanen- and LSVT LOUD-certified speech-language pathologist with post-graduate training in the PreLit early literacy preparation program by MultiLit, the Spalding Method for literacy, the Lidcombe and Camperdown Programs for stuttering, and Voicecraft for voice disorders. David is also a Certified PESL Instructor for accent modification.

David holds a Master of Speech Language Pathology from the University of Sydney, where he was a Dean’s Scholar. David is a Practising Member of Speech Pathology Australia and a Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP). David sits on Speech Pathology Australia’s Ethics Board and Professional Standards Advisory Committee.

Why are boys more at risk for reading problems like dyslexia than girls?

by Leave a Comment

Peer-reviewed evidence tells us that:

  • boys are 3-5 times more likely than girls to be referred to professionals for help with reading difficulties, including dyslexia;
  • on average, boys don’t do as well as girls on standardised reading tests;
  • boys’ performance on reading tests tends to be more variable than girls; and
  • boys are over-represented in the population of children with significant reading difficulties like dyslexia.

 

Why? 

We’re not sure. There are several possible candidates, including:

1. Referral/selection bias.  Children selected to participate in reading studies may not always reflect the population as a whole. For example, more boys may be referred to reading professionals (and thus recruited into their research studies) because boys may display higher rates of acting out, e.g. in some boys with ADHD (Willcutt & Pennington, 2000).  In population studies, however, the sex ratio of boys:girls with reading difficulties still ranges from 1.5:1 to 3.3:1 (Rutter et al., 2004; Wadsworth et al., 1992).

2. Test bias. Perhaps some reading tests are biased in favour of girls, although the weight of existing data does not support this theory (e.g. McGrew & Woodcock, 2001).

3. Cultural differences between boys and girls. There is some older evidence to suggest interactions between culture and sex on cognitive performance (DeFries et al., 1981). But girls appear to be advantaged in reading as early as the age of 5 years (Camarata & Woodcock, 2006) and 7 years (e.g. Flannery et al., 2000). And girls tend to do better than boys across cultures with widely differing education practices and languages (e.g. Stoet & Geary, 2015).

4. Brain differences between boys and girls that develop before school starts. Studies have demonstrated significant average differences between boys and girls in:

  • Processing speed: Processing speed is a cognitive predictor of reading skill. Girls show an advantage over boys by age 5 that is maintained until adulthood (e.g. Camarata & Woodcock, 2006; Irwing, 2012).
  • Inhibition skills: on average, girls tend to restrain their impulses more than boys (Arnett et al., 2012, 2017).
  • Verbal reasoning skills. One study, suggested that boys, on average, outperform girls, on average, on verbal reasoning skills (Arnett et al., 2017), despite an overall female advantage in writing, verbal production, and fluency (Camarata & Woodcock, 2006; Halpern & LaMay, 2000).

 

Clinical bottom line

A 2017 study published by Anne Arnett and colleagues confirmed that:

  • boys are over-represented in the population of children with significant reading difficulties; and
  • brain differences between boys and girls – differences in processing speeds and inhibition (in favour of girls), and verbal reasoning (in favour of boys) – explained the difference (see citation below).

A word of caution: we’re still a very long way from understanding how physical sex-based differences in brains and brain development – e.g. in size, volume, and white matter tracts – advantage girls in the development of reading skills.

Related articles:

Key source: Arnett, A.B., Pennington B.F., Peterson, R.L., Willcutt, E.G., DeFries, J.C., Olson, R. K. (2017). Explaining the sex difference in dyslexia. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58:6, 719-727.

Image: https://tinyurl.com/ycquua8f

Banter Speech & Language Banter Speech & Language
Banter Speech & Language is an independent firm of speech pathologists for adults and children. We help clients in our local area, including Concord, Concord West, North Strathfield, Rhodes, Strathfield and all other suburbs of Sydney’s Inner West.

Banter Speech & Language is owned and managed by David Kinnane, a Hanen- and LSVT LOUD-certified speech-language pathologist with post-graduate training in the PreLit early literacy preparation program by MultiLit, the Spalding Method for literacy, the Lidcombe and Camperdown Programs for stuttering, and Voicecraft for voice disorders. David is also a Certified PESL Instructor for accent modification.

David holds a Master of Speech Language Pathology from the University of Sydney, where he was a Dean’s Scholar. David is a Practising Member of Speech Pathology Australia and a Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP).

Starting high school? 6 practical, evidence-based principles to help students succeed at STEM subjects

by Leave a Comment

My undergraduate degree is in science, so I’m keen on:

  • supporting clients to study and succeed in STEM subjects – Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics; and
  • using the latest cognitive science research to help clients achieve their school and life goals.

Starting high school is an exciting time – new school, new teachers, new friends, new subjects. I remember being overwhelmed, with 11 different subjects in my timetable, including English, Maths, History, Geography, and Science.

So much to learn!

STEM courses contain lots of specialised vocabulary and new concepts. Many students – including students with language, reading and other learning disorders – struggle with STEM subjects because of their limited vocabulary, conceptual, and categorisation skills.

 

So how can we help these students?

Here are six key cognitive science principles supported by research evidence:

 

Principle 1. Identify student misconceptions and prior knowledge

Students bring a range of misconceptions into the classroom. These can include:

  • factual errors (e.g. “the Sun revolves around the Earth”);
  • misunderstood vocabulary (e.g. “perimeter means the size of a shape”);
  • simplistic models (e.g. “animals are things with legs”); and
  • lack of understanding of scales (e.g. “the stars and the moon are the same distance from the Earth”).

These misconceptions need to be identified and corrected to help students to learn. Ideally, these misconceptions will be addressed before the introduction to a new topic. In reality, this can happen at any stage.

 

How?

(a) Identify what students already know, and what they think they know about the topic. You can do this with a general discussion, or a pre-quiz. For example: in a biology unit on “life”, you could ask the question “what does it mean for something to be alive?”.

(b) List misunderstandings. For example, a student may think that movement is a key feature of life. This may mean the student thinks that non-moving things (such as trees and flowers) are not alive.

(c) Correct these misunderstandings. Adult-driven explanations are not enough to do this (Schunn et al., 2018). Students need to overcome their own misconceptions. Adults can support students by:

  • comparing student predictions with actual results. (e.g. If a flower isn’t alive, what might happen when we cut it from the root? If it is alive, what might happen?)
  • structuring case comparisons. (Comparing properties of different examples from a category for similarities and differences.) (See Principle 2.)
  • using visualisation. (Teaching students how to interpret images, tables, and graphs themselves, rather than relying on an adult.) (See Principle 3.)

 

Principle 2. Make Comparisons

This is simply the process of contrasting cases to identify similarities and differences. It:

  •  improves understanding of course content and test results (Alfieri et al., 2013);
  •  prepares students with basic conceptual understanding and can help address misconceptions; and
  • is an especially important skill for students who have difficulties with semantic (meaning) knowledge and categorisation.

There are several templates available freely online which help students:

  • learn about similarities and differences; and
  • learn to compare and contrast concepts.

 

Free resources:

We like the (free) “Semantic Feature Analysis Grid” from Reading Rockets. This can be customised for any level of vocabulary or concept.

For younger students, our free resource is useful for discussing attributes of objects.

 

Example:

Begin listing various features (e.g. appearance, location, what it does) of different objects. For example, “tree”, “ant” and “dog”. These all fall within the category of “life”, while only “dog” and “ant” are animals. By examining similarities, students can begin understanding which features are necessary for “life”, including the fact they all:

  • are composed of cells;
  • reproduce;
  • are found on Earth; and
  • are not man-made.

Some features only apply to dogs and ants, not trees. For example, only dogs and ants:

  • have legs;
  • eat food; and
  • are able to move around.

These differences help students understand subcategories of “things that are alive”, such as plants versus animals.

For students who have trouble generating features, using a range of ‘wh’ questions can help structure their thinking (e.g. “What is it made of? What does it do? Where do you find it? When would you use it? What does it look like? How does it feel/smell/taste?”).

 

Principle 3. Complete visualisation Exercises

Many students have difficulty interpreting illustrations, which are often critical to understand content. Visualisation exercises help students learn how to interpret different aspects of visuals. For example, you can look at a diagram discussing the use of:

  • colour;
  • scale;
  • arrows;
  • axis titles;
  • text boxes; and
  • other conventions of diagrams and graphs.

 

How?

(a) Start with images that have only one feature requiring interpretation (e.g. scale or colour).

(b) Discuss what that feature represents and how to interpret it, as well as common conventions. For example: “Look at the legend to see what each colour means when interpreting a graph.” or “The overlapping part of a Venn diagram illustrates the similarities. The non-overlapping parts represent the differences.”.

As students become more familiar with interpreting different features, begin introducing more complex illustrations. For example, create a Venn diagram of different things that are alive, and what they have in common (see Principle 2 for how to help generate these).

Principle 4. Interleaved practice

Blocked practice – where you study one subtopic or type of problem for a single long block of time – can lead to confusion between similar content. For example, between:

  • different science concepts (e.g. gravity versus mass versus weight);
  • different math techniques (e.g. calculating perimeter versus area versus mass); and/or
  • different vocabulary (e.g. illusion versus allusion, compare versus contrast).

As we’ve discussed previously, “interleaved”  practice – where you mix up subtopics and different problem types – encourages comparison and contrast of content. (See Principle 2). It requires the student to understand when and how to apply the content (Rohrer, 2012).

 

How to do it

  • When teaching a new concept, e.g. in mathematics:
    • first, give several problems with the same formula. (This helps the student learn to apply the formula);
    • then, give a mix of math problems that need the student to decide which formula to use.
  • While studying/revising:
    • don’t spend your whole time on one type of problem. This encourages rote completion of the task rather than active engagement; and
    • instead, practice over several days and do a variety of questions each day. This helps the student learn to discriminate between problems. They also learn when to apply each concept.

 

Principle 5. Over-learning

When do you stop a study session? After one correct answer or three?

Research suggests that it all depends on how long you have left before the test!

“Overlearning” means studying more after the student has “mastered” the content (e.g. continuing to practice vocabulary after one correct response). “Overlearning” helps in the short-term, but the gains fade rapidly over time. So:

  • if there’s only one week until the test – overlearning appears to be beneficial. Cram away!
  • if the test is a longer time away – say more than three weeks – it may be more time efficient to move on to another concept. You can then revisit concepts after a break (see Principle 6).

 

Principle 6. Spaced Testing (spacing + testing combined) 

This is aimed at avoiding ‘forgetting’. It’s a combination of two evidence-based study tips:

  •  “Spacing”- revisiting concepts after a delay; and
  •  “Testing” – quizzing yourself on content, which is more beneficial than simply reviewing content.

In the main study cited below, the authors completed “Spaced Testing” by:

  • daily ‘warm-up’ questions; and
  • end-of-section quizzes, with questions from current and previous sections of the unit. (Notice how this also incorporates “Interleaving”- see Principle 5!).

 

Clinical Bottom Line

There’s a range of ways to support students with (and without) language disorders across STEM subjects. One way to help students is by applying cognitive science research principles. It’s likely that there is a cumulative impact to using these techniques together, rather than in isolation.

Related articles:

Key References:

Schunn, C. D., Newcombe, N. S., Alfieri, L., Cromley, J. G., Massey, C., & Merlino, J. F. (2018). Using principles of cognitive science to improve science learning in middle school: What works when and for whom? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(2), 225-240.

Alfieri, L., Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Schunn, C. D. (2013). Learning through case comparisons: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 48(2), 87-113.

Rohrer, D. (2012). Interleaving helps students distinguish among similar concepts. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 355-367.

Rohrer, D., Taylor, K., Pashler, H., Wixted, J. T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2005). The effect of overlearning on long‐term retention. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 361-374.

Image: https://tinyurl.com/ybe4uofl

 

Banter Speech & Language Banter Speech & Language

Brittany Richardson holds a Master of Speech Language Pathology from the University of Sydney and a Bachelor of Neuroscience/Linguistics from the University of New South Wales. Brittany is a Practising Member of Speech Pathology Australia and a Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP).

Brittany is Hanen-certified and trained in the Lidcombe and Camperdown Programs for stuttering. Brittany’s experience includes working in a community health setting to assess and treat a range of speech, language and fluency disorders in children. Brittany is particularly interested in speech sound disorders and early language development. Brittany sees clients at Banter Speech & Language on Thursdays and Fridays.

Banter Speech & Language is an independent firm of speech pathologists for adults and children. We help clients in our local area, including Concord, Rhodes, Strathfield, as well as all other suburbs of Sydney.

My school-age child can’t write properly! How to help, including a practical (free) exercise you can use today

by Leave a Comment

“I like platypuses. They are the best. They are awesome. Really cool.” 

“Augustus Caesar was a great Emperor. He did many good things for his people. He died a hero. He’s very famous. He even has a month named after him.”

Weak, right? These sentences are simple, general, and unsubstantiated. They tell us nothing about when, where, why or how things happened. They include unreasoned assertions, unsupported by evidence.

But many students – even high-schoolers – write like this.

A. Why writing skills are important

To succeed at school and, later, in life, children need to explain things in writing. But lots of students have problems writing clearly. This is a problem at school – writing skills are essential for good exam results across the curriculum (even in STEM subjects). Poor writing is an even bigger obstacle in the workplace, with professional email, social media and report-writing skills key to advancing in many careers.

When children learn to write well:

  • you can spot their comprehension gaps more easily;
  • they get better at comprehending and producing sentences with complex grammar;
  • they learn to organise, structure and sequence their thoughts logically; and
  • they learn to improve their study skills.

 

B. Six principles to improve writing instruction at all stages of learning

As with reading, learning to write is not natural. Writing has to be taught explicitly.

But how?

Paraphrased for space, here are six teaching principles developed by Judith Hochman and Natalie Wexler in their wonderful book, “The Writing Revolution” (see citation below).

1. Students need writing explicit instruction in writing, starting in Kindergarten.

2. Focus, first, on improving writing at the sentence level. Sentences are the building blocks of all writing. If you can’t write a complex sentence, you’ll struggle to write a decent paragraph, much less a well-reasoned essay, explanation or story.

3. Teach writing while working on subject content, e.g. animal habitats, or Ancient Egypt, or maths. You can’t write well about something you don’t know well. Writing shouldn’t be seen as a skill separate from the rest of the curriculum.

4. Writing activities might be the same, but the subjects covered (including the complexity of ideas discussed) will become harder with the curriculum. For example, you might use sentence cues such as “because”, “but” and “so” to cue students to write well-reasoned compound and complex sentences at all stages of learning:

  •  If you’re teaching Year 1 kids, you might talk about an age-appropriate book like “Who Sank the Boat?” and give students “because”, “but” and “so” cues, e.g.:
    •  “The boat sank because too many animals got into the boat”.
    • “The boat sank, but at first it didn’t.”
    • “The boat sank, so all the animals had to swim back to the pier.”
  • If you’re teaching Year 12 young adults, you would talk about an age-appropriate play like The Crucible, or a science text, and expect more sophisticated answers with the same cues, e.g.:
    • “The Crucible is an allegory because it compares 20th century McCarthyism to the Salem witch trials.”
    • “The Crucible is an attack on show trials and blacklists in 20th century politics, but is disguised as an historical novel in the late 17th century US town of Salem, Massachusetts.”
    • “The Crucible is designed as a tragedy, so it contains the key elements of a tragedy, including hamartia, hubris, peripeteia, anagnorisis, and catharsis.”

5. Grammar for school-age children should be taught with combined oral/written tasks. Teaching a bunch of grammar rules in a vacuum doesn’t work. Students need repeated practice applying rules in their own writing, e.g. by completing sentence fragments (see below) or combining sentences.

6. Planning and revising are the most important phases of writing well.

 

C. Enough theory. Give us an exercise we can use!

Taking my cue from “The Writing Revolution”, here is an exercise I’ve developed for use in the clinic with my clients. The idea is to use incomplete sentence cues or “fragments” to help writers recognise:

  • first, that sentences need to contain a subject and a verb (at least a “who”, “what did they do”); and
  • second, that basic noun-verb sentences can be improved by responding to cues such as:
    • where did it happen? (e.g. in the park, at the beach, on the soccer field, in Ancient Rome, in Victorian England);
    • when did it happen? (e.g. in the morning, at night, at 7am, in Winter);
    • why did it happen? (e.g. because he wanted to win the game, because Augustus Caesar centralised control of the Treasury, or because of gravity); and
    • how did it happen? (e.g. suddenly, gradually, tragically, comically, violently).

Note: Ideally, I use fragments tied to what my clients are learning at school (i.e. applying writing principle 3 above). For demonstration purposes, however, I’ve chosen random sentence fragments matching the interests of many of my younger male clients so you can see how the exercise works in practice.

 

 

Example writing activity

Turning sentence fragments into sentences

A fragment is a small part that is broken off from something. A sentence fragment is a group of words that have broken off from a sentence: a fragment doesn’t make sense on its own. We need to add more information for it to make sense.

For example:

“caught the ball”

doesn’t make sense on its own. We need to know who caught the ball.

“Peppa Pig and George…”

doesn’t make sense on its own. We need to know what Peppa and George did: what happened?

To turn fragments into sentences, ask yourself some questions:

Level 1 questions: To make a basic sentence from a fragment, ask yourself these questions:

Who did it?

What happened?

Let’s level up!

Level 2 questions: Now that you have a basic sentence, make it even better by asking yourself:

Where did it happen?

When did it happen?

Why did it happen?

How did he/she/it do it?

Exercise A

Turn these fragments into sentences by answering the level 1 questions. For bonus points, make the sentences more interesting by answering level 2 questions.

…cut the cake…

Chris and Jack…

…kicked the goal…

…saw a ghost….

Christiano Ronaldo….

…won the battle….

…fought the Hulk…

Optimus Prime…

…saw Mum…

…was jealous…

I like…

…Superman…

…went to the zoo…

…found a…

…slipped and fell over…

…picked up the Beyblade.

Exercise B

Turn these fragments into sentences by answering the level 1 questions. For bonus points, make the sentences more interesting by answering level 2 questions.

Luke Skywalker…

…defeated Megatron…

Michelangelo and Raphael…

…saved up $20…

…told Sam to be quiet…

…my family put…

…put on his pyjamas….

…dropped the plate…

The next day….

…couldn’t see…

Spiders have…

…taught the Kindergarten kids…

The fox…

…stole the girl’s lunch…

I’m going to put….

…when I found…

Wonder Woman…

Clinical bottom line

“The Writing Revolution”, by Hochman and Wexler, provides a very clear, methodical way of teaching students to write well regardless of their age or stage of learning. It demystifies how to teach and how to learn to write well by breaking the process into easy-to-understand chunks. Even better, it links syntactical and verbal reasoning skills to writing skills, language and learning content, helping to prepare students to express their thoughts and ideas in the real world.

Related article:

Main Source: Hochman, Judith C., and Wexler, Natalie (2017). The Writing Revolution: A Guide to Advancing Thinking Through Writing in All Subjects and Grades, Jossey-Bass San Francisco, California, USA (via a recommendation made by John Walker of theliteracyblog.co.uk on Twitter).

Image: https://tinyurl.com/y94372eg

Banter Speech & Language Banter Speech & Language
Banter Speech & Language is an independent firm of speech pathologists for adults and children. We help clients in our local area, including Concord, Concord West, North Strathfield, Rhodes, Strathfield and all other suburbs of Sydney’s Inner West.

Banter Speech & Language is owned and managed by David Kinnane, a Hanen- and LSVT LOUD-certified speech-language pathologist with post-graduate training in the PreLit early literacy preparation program by MultiLit, the Spalding Method for literacy, the Lidcombe and Camperdown Programs for stuttering, and Voicecraft for voice disorders. David is also a Certified PESL Instructor for accent modification.

David holds a Master of Speech Language Pathology from the University of Sydney, where he was a Dean’s Scholar. David is a Practising Member of Speech Pathology Australia and a Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP).

Free resources to help our preschoolers and primary school-age kids to read

by Leave a Comment

To help our kids to read, we need good tools to put independent, peer-reviewed research into practice. Decades of evidence-building tells us that kids need phonological awareness, vocabulary, synthetic phonics, comprehension and fluency skills to read well; and that oral language comprehension and morphological awareness are important, too.

Putting theory into action

The key challenge is how to teach these skills to kids with reading difficulties. It’s time-consuming (and often expensive) to find quality, evidence-based reading resources. But, there are researchers out there focused on how to implement evidence-based reading practices.

You just have to know where to look.

One of our favourite organisations is the Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR): a multidisciplinary research centre based at Florida State University.

Free reading resources, activities and ideas 

The FCRR houses a goldmine of free pre-reading and reading resources, ideas, and activities.

Most of the resources we use are found in two sections:

So check out the FCRR! We hope you find their marvellous free resources as useful as we do.

Related articles:

Key source: Florida Center for Reading Research, reviewed by Carol Westby, Word of Mouth 28:5 May/June 2017.

Editor’s note: we’ve used US spelling conventions for FCRR’s name; and Australian spelling conventions for everything else.

Image: https://tinyurl.com/y7ufaan8

Banter Speech & Language Banter Speech & Language
Banter Speech & Language is an independent firm of speech pathologists for adults and children. We help clients in our local area, including Concord, Concord West, North Strathfield, Rhodes, Strathfield and all other suburbs of Sydney’s Inner West.

Banter Speech & Language is owned and managed by David Kinnane, a Hanen- and LSVT LOUD-certified speech-language pathologist with post-graduate training in the PreLit early literacy preparation program by MultiLit, the Spalding Method for literacy, the Lidcombe and Camperdown Programs for stuttering, and Voicecraft for voice disorders. David is also a Certified PESL Instructor for accent modification.

David holds a Master of Speech Language Pathology from the University of Sydney, where he was a Dean’s Scholar. David is a Practising Member of Speech Pathology Australia and a Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP).

10 great words to teach young high-schoolers (and why) – with brilliant free resources!

by 2 Comments

Welcome to 2018, dear readers!

Over the last years, we’ve published hundreds of free articles, and ebooks summarising some of the latest research about speech, language, reading, stuttering, accent management and voice. You can access them all, anytime, on our new website.

This year, we’re committed to bringing you more free, Plain English, evidence-based information. But, this year, we’re going for something different.

Based on reader feedback, you’ll see fewer long articles covering theoretical academic debates in minute detail. You’ll see more short, sharp articles summarising practical strategies and tips you can implement at home, at school, or in your clinic.

So let’s get started!

Based on the terrific work of Dr Sarah Spencer and colleagues, here are 10 words we should teach young high-schoolers (12-14 year olds) and older children with language or reading difficulties.

1. Which words should you teach?

  • Interpret
  • Evaluate
  • Exclude
  • Sustain
  • Discriminate
  • Infer
  • Contribute
  • Generate
  • Summarise
  • Consult

 

2. Why these words?

All these words are:

  • cross-curriculum words. In other words, they are used in high school across multiple subjects. Cross-curriculum words are also known as “academic words” or “tier 2 words”. You can read more about these words, find out why they are so useful, and access longer words lists and other free resources here;
  • highly functional. They can be used in all sorts of places, with all sorts of people in the “real world”; and
  • verbs. Verbs are harder to learn than nouns, especially for children with language, learning or reading difficulties (e.g. Nash & Snowling, 2006).

To date, vocabulary interventions show that you can teach kids new words with lots of effort. But choosing the right words is really important because:

  • it takes lots of work for a child to learn a new word, especially if the child has language, learning or reading difficulties; and
  • learning a word doesn’t seem to automatically help a child learn other words (e.g. Snow et al., 2009).

 

3. How should the 10 words be taught?

  • Intensively: at least an hour a week, with home exercises between sessions.
  • Teach one word at a time, e.g. spend a teaching session talking only about “consult”.
  • Define the word explicitly (you can teach children to use a dictionary at the same time), e.g. “consult means to seek information or advice from, or to seek permission or approval from”.
  • Use lots of repetition, in lots of different contexts, e.g. you can consult a rulebook, the teacher, a school counselor, the principal, an umpire, a dictionary, Ikea instructions, a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher, a psychologist, a speech pathologist, an accountant, a weatherman/woman, a psychic (although not recommended!), Centrelink, the Department of Housing, a website, etc.
  • Teach to small groups (3-5 children) so they can work together and discuss the words based on their real world experiences.
  • Give children lots of opportunities to use the word in different ways.
  • Focus on different aspects of the word including the:
    • meaning of the word;
    • speech sounds and syllables that make up the word /kənsʌlt/, rhyming words (e.g. cult, adult, result);
    • grammatical role of the word, e.g. “consult is a verb” – it’s something you do;
    • morphology of the word, including the word origin (Latin meaning “take counsel”), its prefix (“con” meaning “with”) and root (“sult”, meaning to leap upon), as well as different word forms, e.g. consult, consults, consulted, consulting, consultant, consultation; and
    • spelling of the word (c-o-n-s-u-l-t).
  • Use activities the kids like to increase motivation and engagement (e.g. by consulting “experts” on YouTube or Reddit).
  • Act out the word (there is some evidence that miming an action while saying the word can help younger children to learn verbs e.g. Riches et al., 2005).
  • Give the kids personal challenges at the end of the session where they have to use and act out the word at home or out and about.

Final tip: when teaching kids new words, go for depth of word knowledge, rather than breadth.

 

4. Where can you find free resources to teach these words to young high-schoolers?

For more information and resources (including free lesson plans!), go to this wonderful, evidence-based website run by Dr Spencer, a Lecturer and Speech and Language Therapist at the Department for Human Communication Sciences, at the University of Sheffield, United Kingdom. Free lesson plans and resources for each of these 10 words can be found here.

 

5. How can you assess whether your high-schooler has learned the words properly?

Check out Dr Spencer’s Word Knowledge Profile here.

 

Clinical bottom line

Young teenagers at risk of school failure often have poor knowledge of cross-curriculum words like the 10 listed above. Knowing cross-curriculum words can be a big help at school and in life.  We should teach cross-curriculum words to teenagers, especially those at risk of school failure.  Thanks to the wonderful research and resources provided by Dr Spencer and her colleagues, we’re well equipped to teach at least 10 of these words.

Principal source: Spencer, S., Clegg, J., Lowe, H., Stackhouse, J. (2017). Increasing adolescents’ depth of understanding of cross-curriculum words: an intervention study. International Journal or Language and Communication Disorders, 52(5), 652-668. Abstract link: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1460-6984.12309/abstract

Further reading and free resources:

Image: https://tinyurl.com/ybaufb2o

Banter Speech & Language Banter Speech & Language
Banter Speech & Language is an independent firm of speech pathologists for adults and children. We help clients in our local area, including Concord, Concord West, North Strathfield, Rhodes, Strathfield and all other suburbs of Sydney’s Inner West.

Banter Speech & Language is owned and managed by David Kinnane, a Hanen- and LSVT LOUD-certified speech-language pathologist with post-graduate training in the PreLit early literacy preparation program by MultiLit, the Spalding Method for literacy, the Lidcombe and Camperdown Programs for stuttering, and Voicecraft for voice disorders. David is also a Certified PESL Instructor for accent modification.

David holds a Master of Speech Language Pathology from the University of Sydney, where he was a Dean’s Scholar. David is a Practising Member of Speech Pathology Australia and a Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP).