Professional practices and opinions about services available to bilingual children with developmental disabilities:an international study

This study aimed to gather information from school- and clinic-based professionals about their practices and opinions pertaining to the provision of bilingual supports to students with developmental disabilities. Using an online survey, data were collected in six socio-culturally and linguistically diverse locations across four countries: the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. In total, 361 surveys were included in the analysis from respondents who were primarily teachers and speech-language pathologists working in schools, daycares/preschools, or community-based clinics. The overall picture that emerged from the data reflected a disconnection between practice and opinion. In general, respondents believed that children with both mild and severe disabilities are capable of learning a second language, although their opinions were more neutral for the latter group. However, children with both mild and severe disabilities who spoke only a minority language at home had less access to services for second language learners than did their typically developing peers, although respondents agreed that such services should be more available. Regardless of clinical group, children who lived in homes where a minority language was spoken were often exposed to, assessed in, and treated in the majority language only; again, respondents generally disagreed with these practices. Finally, second language classes were less available to children in the two disability groups compared to typically developing bilingual children, with general agreement that the opportunity to acquire a second language should be more available, especially to those with mild disabilities. Although the results indicate that there is a considerable gap between current practices and professional opinions, professionals appear to be more supportive of bilingual educational opportunities for these populations than was suggested by previous research

A multi-site review of policies affecting opportunities for children with developmental disabilities to become bilingual

This review of special education and language-in-education policies at six sites in four countries (Canada, United States, United Kingdom, and Netherlands) aimed to determine the opportunities for bilingualism provided at school for children with developmental disabilities (DD). While research has demonstrated that children with DD are capable of learning more than one language (see Kay Raining Bird, Genesee, & Verhoeven, this issue), it was not clear whether recent policies reflect these findings. The review, conducted using the same protocol across sites, showed that special education policies rarely addressed second language learning explicitly. However, at all sites, the policies favoured inclusion and educational planning based on individual needs, and thus implied that students with DD would have opportunities for second language learning. The language-in-education policies occasionally specified the support individuals with special needs would receive. At some sites, policies and educational options provided little support for minority languages, a factor that could contribute to subtractive bilingualism. At others, we found stronger support for minority languages and optional majority languages: conditions that could be more conducive to additive bilingualism

Language Impairment in Multiple Sclerosis

There is little research on language involvement in MS, though the studies that do exist indicate a wide variety of language impairments. No comprehensive study has yet been done investigating MS abilities in all the major language domains. This study used one receptive and one expressive test for each of syntax, semantics, phonology and written language to assess patterns in MS language skills. The results of the group analysis indicate that MS patients are significantly impaired in receptive syntax, word-finding, reading, non-word repetition and spelling. The patients were then divided according to MS subtype. Analysis by subtype revealed that secondary progressive patients are linguistically preserved compared to primary progressive and relapsing-remitting groups on reading, and compared to the primary progressive group on word-finding. An individual analysis showed that subsets of individuals are significantly impaired on most of the language tests used. Syntax was impaired in exactly half of each subset, and double dissociations were seen between syntax and semantics. One case study is also reported: a woman with a suspicion of MS in her medical history and poor performance on the language tests

Professional support for bilingual language acquisition in children with developmental disabilities : a survey of speech-language pathologists in British Columbia, Canada

In a multicultural country, bilingualism can benefit many children, and be a necessity for some. However, support for bilingualism is not always a priority for children with developmental disabilities. Recent research has at least partially contradicted the ‘common sense’ view that bilingualism is detrimental to or unrealistic for these children. This study surveyed 42 speech-language pathologists from British Columbia, Canada to determine the extent to which children with developmental disabilities are exposed to languages other than English in professional settings. Questions considered two language learning scenarios: English language learners (ELLs) and optional second language learners (e.g. French immersion students). The questions probed access to language programs in the education system, as well as the languages used for assessment and treatment. Results showed that the severity of diagnosis impacted inclusion in language programs, most notably for optional second language learners. However, severity did not appear to play a role in the language of assessment and treatment. The opinions of the SLPs also differed significantly from their practices, showing that they would like to see more access to bilingual services than is currently the case.Medicine, Faculty ofAudiology and Speech Sciences, School ofGraduat

Evaluating invasion risk and population dynamics of the brown marmorated stink bug across the contiguous United States

BackgroundInvasive species threaten the productivity and stability of natural and managed ecosystems. Predicting the spread of invaders, which can aid in early mitigation efforts, is a major challenge, especially in the face of climate change. While ecological niche models are effective tools to assess habitat suitability for invaders, such models have rarely been created for invasive pest species with rapidly expanding ranges. Here, we leveraged a national monitoring effort from 543 sites over 3 years to assess factors mediating the occurrence and abundance of brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB, Halyomorpha halys), an invasive insect pest that has readily established throughout much of the United States.ResultsWe used maximum entropy models to estimate the suitable habitat of BMSB under several climate scenarios, and generalized boosted models to assess environmental factors that regulated BMSB abundance. Our models captured BMSB distribution and abundance with high accuracy, and predicted a 70% increase in suitable habitat under future climate scenarios. However, environmental factors that mediated the geographical distribution of BMSB were different from those driving abundance. While BMSB occurrence was most affected by winter precipitation and proximity to populated areas, BMSB abundance was influenced most strongly by evapotranspiration and solar photoperiod.ConclusionOur results suggest that linking models of establishment (occurrence) and population dynamics (abundance) offers a more effective way to forecast the spread and impact of BMSB and other invasive species than simply occurrence-based models, allowing for targeted mitigation efforts. Implications of distribution shifts under climate change are discussed. © 2022 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health