Relationship between spoken language and written assessment

relationship between spoken language and written assessment

Details of some of the differences between written and spoken language, include their structure, use, permanence, and so on. In addition to the analysis of standardized test results in .. relationship exists between language proficiency in speaking and writing. Initially, reading and writing are dependent on oral language skills. The purpose of the NRP was to conduct an evidence-based assessment of the words; Phonics – the relationship between the sounds and written symbols of language or.

The use of the semantic pathway may be particularly important for the reading of exception words that the phonological pathway does not handle efficiently.

As noted earlier, it is important to distinguish between the ability to read words accurately and fluently and the ability to comprehend text. Accurate and fluent word reading are essential for good reading comprehension. It follows from this model that problems with reading comprehension can arise from two different sources problems with decoding or problems with oral language comprehension.

Children with decoding problems are usually referred to as having developmental dyslexia.

The interface between spoken and written language: developmental disorders

The existence of both of these groups of children, who will be discussed below, is exactly what we would expect from the simple view of reading. This will be the main focus of this review. Developing and testing causal theories of developmental disorders The issue that lies at the heart of developmental psychology is an attempt to establish the causes of development.

relationship between spoken language and written assessment

The idea that learning to read is parasitic on earlier developing oral language skills is a broad and non-specific causal theory. In the sections that follow, this general theory will be fleshed out. Before doing so, it is useful to reflect on the sorts of evidence we can use to test causal theories in this area. Ultimately, all developmental disorders can be conceptualized as the product of interactions between genetic and environmental risk factors [ 5 ].

For present purposes however, we will focus on a cognitive level of explanation that links brain mechanisms to behaviour. In relation to reading disorders, this approach essentially focuses on trying to establish causal links between deficits in specific aspects of oral language skills and aspects of reading development. The approaches that have been developed to evaluate putative causal relationships involve a number of steps.

The interface between spoken and written language: developmental disorders

Establishing that variations in a given oral language skill e. In some cases where training studies are not practicable or ethical our only way of testing causal theories may be to conduct longitudinal studies and evaluate alternative interpretations for putative causal links. The approach, essentially, is to show that the relationship between a potential cause e.

Ultimately, however, to provide convincing evidence for causal hypotheses, we need to conduct training studies. If we can show in an experiment that training a particular oral language skill e. Finally, if we can measure the functioning of a hypothetical mechanism levels of phonemic awareness that is believed to be responsible for producing improvements in reading outcomes, then we can assess the extent to which changes in an outcome reading are directly proportional to changes in the intervening mechanism PA in a mediation analyses see [ 11 ].

Differences between written and spoken language

Put simply, if an intervention produces effects via an intermediate mechanism, then variations in the effectiveness of the intervention across individuals should be proportional to variations in the changes brought about in the hypothetical mechanism if reading improves because PA has improved, then improvements in reading should vary across individuals in line with improvements in PA.

Possible causal relationships between impairments of spoken and written language a Disorders of reading accuracy and fluency A necessary step towards becoming a skilled reader is the acquisition of efficient decoding skills: If we accept that dyslexia represents the lower end of a continuous distribution of decoding skills in the population, then to explain dyslexia, we need to understand the cognitive mechanisms that are causally linked to variations in decoding skills.

There is now good evidence that there are three main predictors of individual differences in the early stages of learning to decode in alphabetic languages: Arguably, most research has sought to understand the role of PA and whether it is a cause or a consequence of learning to read [ 1617 ].

Current evidence is consistent with the notion that variations in PA, and letter—sound knowledge, are two factors that have a causal influence on the development of decoding.

RAN appears likely to be another causal influence on decoding skill although here the evidence for causation is more equivocal. Evidence from studies of children at familial risk of dyslexia indicates that early in development children who go on to develop dyslexia have relatively broad oral language weaknesses that affect vocabulary knowledge and naming skills as well as phonological oral language skills [ 18 ].

Differences between writing and speech

Many concurrent and longitudinal studies have assessed the relationship between PA and children's reading ability. Analyses of studies of unselected samples showed that phonemic awareness was a strong correlate of individual differences in word reading ability, and that this effect remained reliable after controlling for variations in both verbal short-term memory and awareness of the onset-rime components of words.

Moderate correlations have been reported between LK assessed at the start of formal reading instruction and word reading skills measured later that year or early the next year [ 142021 ]. In different studies, LK has been assessed using measures of either letter—sound knowledge, letter—name knowledge or both.

Written language tends to be more complex and intricate than speech with longer sentences and many subordinate clauses. The punctuation and layout of written texts also have no spoken equivalent.

However some forms of written language, such as instant messages and email, are closer to spoken language. Spoken language tends to be full of repetitions, incomplete sentences, corrections and interruptions, with the exception of formal speeches and other scripted forms of speech, such as news reports and scripts for plays and films. Writers receive no immediate feedback from their readers, except in computer-based communication. Therefore they cannot rely on context to clarify things so there is more need to explain things clearly and unambiguously than in speech, except in written correspondence between people who know one another well.

Speech is usually a dynamic interaction between two or more people. Context and shared knowledge play a major role, so it is possible to leave much unsaid or indirectly implied. Writers can make use of punctuation, headings, layout, colours and other graphical effects in their written texts.

relationship between spoken language and written assessment

Such things are not available in speech Speech can use timing, tone, volume, and timbre to add emotional context.