Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 891–908 | Cite as

Dynamic assessment of phonological awareness in young foreign language learners: predictability and modifiability

  • Ying-Ying Lu
  • Chieh-Fang HuEmail author
Article
  • 230 Downloads

Abstract

Dynamic assessment has been recognized as a nonbiased approach to evaluating language learning potential among children who do not have equal access to the target language. However, it remains to be determined whether the graduated prompting approach of dynamic assessment is feasible in foreign language (FL) learning contexts as FL learners may not benefit from the small number of prompts administered in a single test session. The study explored the feasibility of a dynamic assessment of phonological awareness by examining its predictability of spelling performance in young FL learners and its potential to reveal learners’ modifiability in phonological awareness. Fourth-grade learners of English as a FL (N = 50) took two phonological awareness measures (dynamic and static) and two FL spelling tests (real words and pseudowords), along with a questionnaire of prior FL learning experience. Results showed that dynamic phonological awareness uniquely predicted performance in both spelling tests after controlling for static phonological awareness and FL learning experience. Performance on phonological awareness improved from the first to the second half of the dynamic measure but not in the static measure. These findings suggest that a dynamic measure holds promise for enhancing prediction of spelling performance and evaluating modifiability of phonological awareness in young FL learners.

Keywords

Dynamic assessment Phonological awareness Spelling Foreign language Children 

References

  1. Borodkin, K., & Faust, M. (2014). Native language phonological skills in low-proficiency second language learners. Language Learning, 64, 132–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bridges, M. S., & Catts, H. W. (2011). The use of a dynamic screening of phonological awareness to predict risk for reading disabilities in kindergarten children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 330–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brooks, P. J., Kwoka, N., & Kempe, V. (2017). Distributional effects and individual differences in L2 morphology learning. Language Learning, 67, 171–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burton, V. J., & Watkins, R. V. (2007). Measuring word learning: Dynamic versus static assessment of kindergarten vocabulary. Journal of Communication Disorders, 40, 335–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catts, H. W., & Kamhi, A. G. (2005). Language and reading disabilities (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  6. Chan, I. C., Hu, C. F., & Wan, I. P. (2005). Learning to read and spell: The relative role of phonemic awareness and onset-rime awareness. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 3, 65–100.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, A. S. W. (2011). Bodies and codas or core syllables plus appendices? Evidence for a developmental theory of subsyllabic division preference. Cognition, 121, 338–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheung, H., Chen, H. C., Lai, C. Y., Wong, O. C., & Hills, M. (2001). The development of phonological awareness: Effects of spoken language experience and orthography. Cognition, 81, 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cho, E., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Bouton, B. (2014). Examining the predictive validity of a dynamic assessment of decoding to forecast response to Tier 2 intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47, 409–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cho, E., Compton, D. L., Gilbert, J. K., Steacy, L. M., Collins, A. A., & Lindström, E. R. (2017). Development of first-graders’ word reading skills: For whom can dynamic assessment tell us more? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50, 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Choi, D., Hatcher, R. C., Dulong-Langley, S., Liu, X., Bray, M. A., Courville, T., et al. (2017). What do phonological processing errors tell about students’ skills in reading, writing, and oral language? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(1–2), 24–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chow, B. W. Y., McBride-Chang, C., & Burgess, S. (2005). Phonological processing skills and early reading abilities in Hong Kong Chinese kindergarteners learning to read English as a second language. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chow, B. W. Y., McBride-Chang, C., & Cheung, H. (2010). Parent-child reading in English as a second language: Effects on language and literacy development of Chinese kindergarteners. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 284–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de Graaff, S., Hasselman, F., Verhoeven, L., & Bosman, A. M. (2011). Phonemic awareness in Dutch kindergartners: Effects of task, phoneme position, and phoneme class. Learning and Instruction, 21, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elbro, C., Daugaard, H. T., & Gellert, A. S. (2012). Dyslexia in a second language? A dynamic test of reading acquisition may provide a fair answer. Annals of Dyslexia, 62(3), 172–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feuerstein, R. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The learning potential assessment device, theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Bouton, B., & Caffrey, E. (2011). The construct and predictive validity of a dynamic assessment of young children learning to read: Implications for RTI frameworks. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 339–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D. L., Bouton, B., Caffrey, E., & Hill, L. (2007). Dynamic assessment as responsiveness to intervention: A scripted protocol to identify young at-risk readers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 58–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gutierrez-Clellen, V. F., & Pena, E. (2001). Dynamic assessment of diverse children: A tutorial. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 212–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harris, L. N., & Perfetti, C. A. (2017). Individual differences in phonological feedback effects: Evidence for the orthographic recoding hypothesis of orthographic learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 31–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hasson, N., Camilleri, B., Jones, C., Smith, J., & Dodd, B. (2012). Discriminating disorder from difference using dynamic assessment with bilingual children. Child Language and Teaching Therapy, 29, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hu, C. F. (2004). Learning to spell with poor phonological awareness. English Teaching and Learning, 28, 31–52.Google Scholar
  23. Hu, C. F. (2013). Predictors of reading in children with Chinese as a first language: A developmental and cross-linguistic perspective. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 163–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hu, C. F., & Schuele, C. M. (2015). When language experience fails to explain word reading development: Cognitive and linguistic profiles of young foreign language learners. Modern Language Journal, 99, 754–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kantor, P. T., Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2011). Comparing two forms of dynamic assessment and traditional assessment of preschool phonological awareness. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kapantzoglou, M., Restrepo, M. A., & Thompson, M. S. (2012). Dynamic assessment of word learning skills: Identifying language impairment in bilingual children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43, 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim, Y. S. (2007). Phonological awareness and literacy skills in Korean: An examination of the unique role of body-coda units. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 69–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Laing, S. P., & Kamhi, A. (2003). Alternative assessment of language and literacy in culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Landerl, K., & Wimmer, H. (2008). Development of word reading fluency and spelling in a consistent orthography: An 8-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 150–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levelt, C. C., Schiller, N. O., & Levelt, W. J. (2000). The acquisition of syllable types. Language Acquisition, 8, 237–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lin, D., Liu, Y., Sun, H., Wong, R. K. S., & Yeung, S. S. S. (2017). The pathway to English word reading in Chinese ESL children: The role of spelling. Reading and Writing, 30, 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin-Chang, S., Ouellette, G., & Madden, M. (2014). Does poor spelling equate to slow reading? The relationship between reading, spelling, and orthographic quality. Reading and Writing, 27, 1485–1505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McDonough, K., & Trofimovich, P. (2013). Learning a novel pattern through balanced and skewed input. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 654–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McKague, M., Davis, C., Pratt, C., & Johnston, M. B. (2008). The role of feedback from phonology to orthography in orthographic learning: An extension of item-based accounts. Journal of Research in Reading, 31, 55–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Connor, R. E., & Jenkins, J. R. (1999). Prediction of reading disabilities in kindergarten and first grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 159–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Patterson, J. L., Rodríguez, B. L., & Dale, P. S. (2013). Response to dynamic language tasks among typically developing Latino preschool children with bilingual experience. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 22, 103–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schneider, E., & Ganschow, L. (2000). Dynamic assessment and instructional strategies for learners who struggle to learn a foreign language. Dyslexia, 6(1), 72–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shahar-Yames, D., & Share, D. L. (2008). Spelling as a self-teaching mechanism in orthographic learning. Journal of Research in Reading, 31, 22–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sparks, R. L., & Ganschow, L. (1993). Searching for the cognitive locus of foreign language learning difficulties: Linking first and second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 77, 289–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Spector, J. E. (1992). Predicting progress in beginning reading: Dynamic assessment of phonemic awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 353–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sun, H., Yin, B., Amsah, N. F. B., & O’Brien, B. A. (2018). Differential effects of internal and external factors in early bilingual vocabulary learning: The case of Singapore. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39, 383–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Treiman, R., Zukowski, A., & Richmond-Welty, E. D. (1995). What happened to the “n” of sink? Children’s spellings of final consonant clusters. Cognition, 55, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vaessen, A., & Blomert, L. (2013). The cognitive linkage and divergence of spelling and reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 89–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Wang, M., & Geva, E. (2003). Spelling performance of Chinese children using English as a second language: Lexical and visual–orthographic processes. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wolter, J. A., & Pike, K. (2015). Dynamic assessment of morphological awareness and third-grade literacy success. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 46(2), 112–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yeung, S. S., Siegel, L. S., & Chan, C. K. (2013). Effects of a phonological awareness program on English reading and spelling among Hong Kong Chinese ESL children. Reading and Writing, 26, 681–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yopp, H. K. (1988). The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhang, X., & Dong, X. (2016). Revisiting Zipfian frequency: L2 acquisition of English prenominal past participles. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 404–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of English InstructionUniversity of TaipeiTaipeiTaiwan, ROC

Personalised recommendations