Miten tunnistat lapsen joka tarvitsee apua saavuttaakseen peruslukutaidon ja miten tuen häntä?

nonPeerReviewe

Lukivaikeuksien ennalta tunnistuksen ja ehkäisyn keinot - ja niiden perustelut

Kielikukossa 4/2015 kävimme läpi lukivaikeuksia koskevaa tietämystä tuen tarpeessa olevan lapsen tunnistamisesta ja vaikeuksien ennaltaehkäisystä. Tässä artikkelissa esittelemme näiden taustalla olevaa tieteellistä näyttöä. Samalla ohjeistamme lukutaitoa opettaville, miten vaikeuksien seurauksia on mahdollista minimoida.nonPeerReviewe

Language development, literacy skills and predictive connections to reading in Finnish children with and without familial risk for dyslexia

Discriminative language markers and predictive links between early language and literacy skills were investigated retrospectively in the Jyväskylä Longitudinal Study of Dyslexia in which children at familial risk for dyslexia have been followed from birth. Three groups were formed on the basis of 198 children’s reading and spelling status. One group of children with reading disability (RD; n = 46) and two groups of typical readers from nondyslexic control (TRC; n = 84) and dyslexic families (TRD; n = 68) were examined from age 1.5 years to school age. The RD group was outperformed by typical readers on numerous language and literacy measures (expressive and receptive language, morphology, phonological sensitivity, RAN, and letter knowledge) from 2 years of age onward. The strongest predictive links emerged from receptive and expressive language to reading via measures of letter naming, rapid naming, morphology, and phonological awareness.peerReviewe

Trajectories of Reading Development: A Follow-up From Birth to School Age of Children With and Without Risk for Dyslexia

In order to understand why some children are vulnerable to difficulties in their language development and their acquisition of reading skill, the Jyväskylä Longitudinal Study of Dyslexia followed 200 Finnish children from birth to school age. Half of these children had a family history of reading problems and were considered at risk for dyslexia; the other half were not at risk. A novel analysis, mixture modeling, revealed four subgroups with differential developmental trajectories to early reading. The subgroups who showed either a “dysfluent trajectory” (n = 12; 11 at risk vs. 1 control) or a “declining trajectory” (n = 35; 24 vs. 11) contained more children with familial risk for dyslexia. The subgroup showing an “unexpected trajectory” contained equal numbers of at-risk and non-risk children (n = 67; 33 vs. 34). The subgroup displaying a “typical trajectory” (n = 85, 38 vs. 47) contained more children born without dyslexia risk. This differential development of skills revealed that there are at least three troubled routes along which a child may ultimately encounter difficulties in reading acquisition. The most explicit routes are characterized by problems in either phonological awareness, naming speed, or letter knowledge—problems that increase in severity with age

Trajectories of reading development: A follow-up from birth to school age of children with and without risk for dyslexia

In order to understand why some children are vulnerable to difficulties in their language development and their acquisition of reading skill, the Jyväskylä Longitudinal Study of Dyslexia followed 200 Finnish children from birth to school age. Half of these children had a family history of reading problems and were considered at risk for dyslexia; the other half were not at risk. A novel analysis, mixture modeling, revealed four subgroups with differential developmental trajectories to early reading. The subgroups who showed either a “dysfluent trajectory” (n = 12; 11 at risk vs. 1 control) or a “declining trajectory” (n = 35; 24 vs. 11) contained more children with familial risk for dyslexia. The subgroup showing an “unexpected trajectory” contained equal numbers of at-risk and non-risk children (n = 67; 33 vs. 34). The subgroup displaying a “typical trajectory” (n = 85, 38 vs. 47) contained more children born without dyslexia risk. This differential development of skills revealed that there are at least three troubled routes along which a child may ultimately encounter difficulties in reading acquisition. The most explicit routes are characterized by problems in either phonological awareness, naming speed, or letter knowledge—problems that increase in severity with age.peerReviewe

Examining the double-deficit hypothesis in an orthographically consistent language

We examined the double-deficit hypothesis in Finnish. One hundred five Finnish children with high familial risk for dyslexia and 90 children with low family risk were followed from the age of 3½ years until Grade 3. Children's phonological awareness, rapid naming speed, text reading, and spelling were assessed. A deficit in rapid automatized naming (RAN) predicted slow reading speed across time and spelling difficulties after Grade 1. A deficit in phonological awareness predicted difficulties in spelling, but only in the familial risk sample. The effect of familial risk was significant in the development of phonological awareness, RAN, reading, and spelling. Our findings suggest that the basic premise of the double-deficit hypothesis—that RAN and phonological awareness are separable deficits with different effects on reading and spelling outcomes—holds also in a consistent orthography.peerReviewe