Search

We report a 9-year longitudinal study (N = 323) starting in preschool, tracing the developmental interrelationships between language, metalinguistic awareness and reading skills. The work has been supported by colleagues who will also be co-authors for the publication: Margaret J. Snowling, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford Charles Hulme, Department of Education, University of Oxford Arne Ola Lervåg Department of Education, University of Oslo

Data are drawn from a large sample (N = 569) of 6- to 7-year-old children unselected for ability, assessed at two time points, 6 months apart. Hand preference is assessed using the Quantitative Hand Preference (QHP) task and five uni-manual motor tasks. Language skills (expressive and receptive vocabulary, receptive grammar, and morphological awareness) are assessed with standardized measures.

Purpose: We developed and evaluated in a randomized controlled trial a computerized speechreading training program to determine (a) whether it is possible to train speechreading in deaf children and (b) whether speechreading training results in improvements in phonological and reading skills. Previous studies indicate a relationship between speechreading and reading skill and further suggest this relationship may be mediated by improved phonological representations. This is important since many deaf children find learning to read to be very challenging.Method: Sixty-six deaf 5- to 7-year-olds were randomized into speechreading and maths training arms. Each training program was composed of a 10-min sessions a day, 4 days a week for 12 weeks. Children were assessed on a battery of language and literacy measures before training, immediately after training, and 3 months and 11 months after training.Results: We found no significant benefits for participants who completed the speechreading training, compared to those who completed the maths training, on the speechreading primary outcome measure. However, significantly greater gains were observed in the speechreading training group on one of the secondary measures of speechreading. There was also some evidence of beneficial effects of the speechreading training on phonological representations; however, these effects were weaker. No benefits were seen to word reading.Conclusions: Speechreading skill is trainable in deaf children. However, to support early reading, training may need to be longer or embedded in a broader literacy program. Nevertheless, a training tool that can improve speechreading is likely to be of great interest to professionals working with deaf children.Supplemental Material S1. CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial.Supplemental Material S2. Further details regarding training arms and assessments.Pimperton, H., Kyle, F., Hulme, C., Harris, M., Beedie, I., Ralph-Lewis, A., ... MacSweeney, M. (2019). Computerized speechreading training for deaf children: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62, 2882–2894. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0073

Supplemental Material, HulmeSupplementalMaterial for Language Skills, but Not Frequency Discrimination, Predict Reading Skills in Children at Risk of Dyslexia by Margaret J. Snowling, Debbie Gooch, Genevieve McArthur, and Charles Hulme in Psychological Science

SP is a Royal Society University Research Fellow. Support to the analysis was provided by the St Andrews Bioinformatics Unit funded by the Wellcome Trust [grant 097831/Z/11/Z]. Analysis of the cohort was supported by a Wellcome Trust Programme Grant to MJS [WT082032MA]. EF is the recipient of a Wolfson Intercalated Award. MTMC is the recipient of the Wilkinson Junior Research Fellowship at Worcester College, Oxford and was funded by the Esther Yewpick Lee Millennium Scholarship. RN was funded by a University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Medicine Prize Studentship. DFN is an MRC Career Development Fellow. The work of the Newbury lab is funded by the Medical Research Council [G1000569/1 and MR/J003719/1]. The work of the Wellcome Trust Centre in Oxford is supported by the Wellcome Trust [090532/Z/09/Z]. Background: Specific Language Impairment (SLI) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder, observed in 5-10% of children. Family and twin studies suggest a strong genetic component, but relatively few candidate genes have been reported to date. A recent genome-wide association study (GWAS) described the first statistically significant association specifically for a SLI cohort between a missense variant (rs4280164) in the NOP9 gene and language-related phenotypes under a parent-of-origin model. Replications of these findings are particularly challenging because the availability of parental DNA is required. Methods: We used two independent family-based cohorts characterised with reading- and language-related traits: a longitudinal cohort (n = 106 informative families) including children with language and reading difficulties and a nuclear family cohort (n = 264 families) selected for dyslexia. Results: We observed association with languagerelated measures when modelling for parent-of-origin effects at the NOP9 locus in both cohorts: minimum P = 0.001 for phonological awareness with a paternal effect in the first cohort and minimum P = 0.0004 for irregular word reading with a maternal effect in the second cohort. Allelic and parental trends were not consistent when compared to the original study. Conclusions: A parent-of-origin effect at this locus was detected in both cohorts, albeit with different trends. These findings contribute in interpreting the original GWAS report and support further investigations of the NOP9 locus and its role in language-related traits. A systematic evaluation of parent-of-origin effects in genetic association studies has the potential to reveal novel mechanisms underlying complex traits. Publisher PDF

Presents cutting-edge, evidence-based interventions for dealing with specific difficulties of reading comprehension in children aged 7-11.

Purpose: We developed and evaluated in a randomized controlled trial a computerized speechreading training program to determine (a) whether it is possible to train speechreading in deaf children and (b) whether speechreading training results in improvements in phonological and reading skills. Previous studies indicate a relationship between speechreading and reading skill and further suggest this relationship may be mediated by improved phonological representations. This is important since many deaf children find learning to read to be very challenging.Method: Sixty-six deaf 5- to 7-year-olds were randomized into speechreading and maths training arms. Each training program was composed of a 10-min sessions a day, 4 days a week for 12 weeks. Children were assessed on a battery of language and literacy measures before training, immediately after training, and 3 months and 11 months after training.Results: We found no significant benefits for participants who completed the speechreading training, compared to those who completed the maths training, on the speechreading primary outcome measure. However, significantly greater gains were observed in the speechreading training group on one of the secondary measures of speechreading. There was also some evidence of beneficial effects of the speechreading training on phonological representations; however, these effects were weaker. No benefits were seen to word reading.Conclusions: Speechreading skill is trainable in deaf children. However, to support early reading, training may need to be longer or embedded in a broader literacy program. Nevertheless, a training tool that can improve speechreading is likely to be of great interest to professionals working with deaf children.Supplemental Material S1. CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial.Supplemental Material S2. Further details regarding training arms and assessments.Pimperton, H., Kyle, F., Hulme, C., Harris, M., Beedie, I., Ralph-Lewis, A., ... MacSweeney, M. (2019). Computerized speechreading training for deaf children: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62, 2882–2894. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0073

Purpose: We developed and evaluated in a randomized controlled trial a computerized speechreading training program to determine (a) whether it is possible to train speechreading in deaf children and (b) whether speechreading training results in improvements in phonological and reading skills. Previous studies indicate a relationship between speechreading and reading skill and further suggest this relationship may be mediated by improved phonological representations. This is important since many deaf children find learning to read to be very challenging.Method: Sixty-six deaf 5- to 7-year-olds were randomized into speechreading and maths training arms. Each training program was composed of a 10-min sessions a day, 4 days a week for 12 weeks. Children were assessed on a battery of language and literacy measures before training, immediately after training, and 3 months and 11 months after training.Results: We found no significant benefits for participants who completed the speechreading training, compared to those who completed the maths training, on the speechreading primary outcome measure. However, significantly greater gains were observed in the speechreading training group on one of the secondary measures of speechreading. There was also some evidence of beneficial effects of the speechreading training on phonological representations; however, these effects were weaker. No benefits were seen to word reading.Conclusions: Speechreading skill is trainable in deaf children. However, to support early reading, training may need to be longer or embedded in a broader literacy program. Nevertheless, a training tool that can improve speechreading is likely to be of great interest to professionals working with deaf children.Supplemental Material S1. CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial.Supplemental Material S2. Further details regarding training arms and assessments.Pimperton, H., Kyle, F., Hulme, C., Harris, M., Beedie, I., Ralph-Lewis, A., ... MacSweeney, M. (2019). Computerized speechreading training for deaf children: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62, 2882-2894. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0073

Purpose: We developed and evaluated in a randomized controlled trial a computerized speechreading training program to determine (a) whether it is possible to train speechreading in deaf children and (b) whether speechreading training results in improvements in phonological and reading skills. Previous studies indicate a relationship between speechreading and reading skill and further suggest this relationship may be mediated by improved phonological representations. This is important since many deaf children find learning to read to be very challenging.Method: Sixty-six deaf 5- to 7-year-olds were randomized into speechreading and maths training arms. Each training program was composed of a 10-min sessions a day, 4 days a week for 12 weeks. Children were assessed on a battery of language and literacy measures before training, immediately after training, and 3 months and 11 months after training.Results: We found no significant benefits for participants who completed the speechreading training, compared to those who completed the maths training, on the speechreading primary outcome measure. However, significantly greater gains were observed in the speechreading training group on one of the secondary measures of speechreading. There was also some evidence of beneficial effects of the speechreading training on phonological representations; however, these effects were weaker. No benefits were seen to word reading.Conclusions: Speechreading skill is trainable in deaf children. However, to support early reading, training may need to be longer or embedded in a broader literacy program. Nevertheless, a training tool that can improve speechreading is likely to be of great interest to professionals working with deaf children.Supplemental Material S1. CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial.Supplemental Material S2. Further details regarding training arms and assessments.Pimperton, H., Kyle, F., Hulme, C., Harris, M., Beedie, I., Ralph-Lewis, A., ... MacSweeney, M. (2019). Computerized speechreading training for deaf children: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0073