Acquisition is not spongelike:Using repetitions required to learn words to investigate influences on word recognition in Year 1 English children

How many times do children learning to read need to see printed words for the words to be reliably recognised? Reitsma (1983) demonstrated that Dutch children who had made average reading progress for six months could read words they had seen as few as four times significantly faster than similar unfamiliar words. This research has been quoted widely as suggesting that children learning to read English need similar level of exposures to learn unfamiliar vocabulary. To investigate this claim, a small group of English Year 1 children were assessed on words they had encountered varying numbers of times in books used to teach them to read. In addition to investigating whether four repetitions were sufficient for a variety of words, the vocabulary was analysed to evaluate the relative level of repetitions required for children to reliably recognise words varying in decodability, word class and morphemic complexity. The overall sample of words needed to appear in books more than 15 times for reliable recognition. Words children could decode required significantly fewer repetitions than those beyond their decoding ability. No significant differences were found for repetitions needed by words varying in word class or morphemic complexity. Decodable words, out of all the categories analysed, were those requiring the fewest repetitions, reliable recognition being attained within the band from 4 to 15 occurrences, and might therefore be considered as candidates for ‘spongelike acquisition’. Non-decodable words, however, did not attain reliable recognition until repetitions exceeded 40, confirming in an indirect manner the critical importance of decoding skills for children’s reading development. Repetition of vocabulary, though, a neglected factor in research, appears to be equally essential, and the results of this small pilot study seem to warrant a larger-scale investigation. Above all, what this study has shown is that, for at least some children and some types of word, acquisition is not ‘spongelike’

Staying faithful: Exploring the challenges of treatment fidelity

The LIVELY project (Language Intervention in the Early Years) aims to compare the efficacy of three different intervention approaches, each with a goal to improve the oral language skills of children (age 3;05 – 4;05) with severe language difficulties. The three approaches include Building Early Sentences Therapy (BEST), the Derbyshire Language Scheme (DLS) and Continued Classroom Support (CCS). BEST uses ‘usage-based’ linguistic theory to support more flexible understanding and use of a range of sentences. An adapted version of the DLS is also considered. The DLS supports children’s understanding and use of language by increasing the number of information carrying words that the child needs to understand. This approach has no explicit theoretical underpinning and has had limited evaluation. These approaches will be compared to CCS, where children will continue to receive the support that their school normally provides. Treatment fidelity has been an important consideration in the research process of the LIVELY project, to ensure that the research assistants can carry out the interventions consistently. Key areas of consideration are manualisation of the interventions, consistency of resources, development of treatment fidelity checklists, and methods of supporting parents to access and engage with homework. Research assistants have kept weekly reflections and sessions have been video-recorded and monitored by supervisors. In this presentation we reflect on the challenges, processes and importance of standardising interventions to be used reliably by different researchers and ideally in the future by varying teaching staff, in differing locations, and with a range of children. Key are issues of developing approaches that can be individualised to support children’s specific needs. We discuss the importance of creating tools and interventions that can be evaluated and used in controlled research whilst devising a useful and impactful intervention for children and school staff in the real world

A randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of pre-school language interventions: Building Early Sentences Therapy and an Adapted Derbyshire Language Scheme

The provision of language enriching early years environments in early childhood education and care (ECEC) is vital to children’s language development. Ensuring all children have access to such experiences has the potential to narrow inequalities in language outcomes associated with families’ socio-economic circumstances. Building Early Sentences Therapy (BEST) and the Derbyshire Language Scheme (DLS) are effective in improving children’s use and/or understanding of simple sentences. BEST is based on ‘usage-based’ theory: the systematic manipulation of the nature and quantity of language a child hears, promotes abstract, flexible knowledge and use of a range of sentence structures, accelerating future language learning. DLS incrementally increases the information carrying words children are asked to understand and produce. The adapted version of DLS (A-DLS) used in this study follows the principles of traditional DLS but delivers the programme more rapidly. This project aimed to determine whether BEST and A�DLS differ in their efficacy. Comparisons of effective interventions enable informed choices to be made regarding which work best for a given child, context, or family preference. Comparing interventions delivered with the same dosage, delivery context, and treatment fidelity tests whether it is the specific learning mechanisms exploited by the interventions which promote change. Twenty schools were independently randomised to receive BEST or A-DLS. Measures were collected at baseline, outcome, and follow-up. Children aged 3;06–4;06, identified by teachers as monolingual English speakers, and not meeting age-related expectations in their language development, were assessed and included if they: Scored ≤16th centile on the New Reynell Developmental Language Scales (NRDLS) comprehension and/or production subscales and had no sensorineural hearing impairment, severe visual impairment or learning disability. Interventions were delivered, with high fidelity, through ~15-minute group sessions delivered twice weekly for eight weeks in preschool settings by qualified Speech and Language Therapist researchers. Measures were completed blind to intervention arm. One-hundred-and-two children participated. There were no differences in NRDLS comprehension or production standard scores at outcome but children receiving BEST had higher comprehension and production standard scores at follow-up. Both interventions were associated with large clinically meaningful changes in communicative participation