| 1 |
Behavioral and brain evidence for language by ear, mouth, eye, and hand and motor skills in literacy learning
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Movement Issues Identified in Movement ABC2 Checklist Parent Ratings for Students with Persisting Dysgraphia, Dyslexia, and OWL LD and Typical Literacy Learners
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Self-government of complex reading and writing brains informed by cingulo-opercular network for adaptive control and working memory components for language learning
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
Sequential Prediction of Literacy Achievement for Specific Learning Disabilities Contrasting in Impaired Levels of Language in Grades 4 to 9
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Sequential regression was used to evaluate whether language-related working memory components uniquely predict reading and writing achievement beyond cognitive-linguistic translation for students in grades 4–9 (N=103) with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) in subword handwriting (dysgraphia, n=25), word reading and spelling (dyslexia, n=60), or oral and written language (OWL LD, n=18). That is, SLDs are defined on basis of cascading level of language impairment (subword, word, and syntax/text). A 5-block regression model sequentially predicted literacy achievement from cognitive-linguistic translation (Block 1); working memory components for word form coding (Block 2), phonological and orthographic loops (Block 3), and supervisory focused or switching attention (Block4); and SLD groups (Block 5). Results showed that cognitive-linguistic translation explained an average of 27% and 15% of the variance in reading and writing achievement, respectively, but working memory components explained an additional 39% and 27% variance. Orthographic word form coding uniquely predicted nearly every measure, whereas attention switching only uniquely predicted reading. Finally, differences in reading and writing persisted between dyslexia and dysgraphia, with dysgraphia higher, even after controlling for Block 1 to 4 predictors. Differences in literacy achievement between students with dyslexia and OWL LD were largely explained by the Block 1 predictors. Applications to identifying and teaching students with these SLDs are discussed.
|
|
Keyword:
Article
|
|
URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219417691048
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5538955/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28199175
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Brain and Behavioral Assessment of Executive Functions for Self-Regulating Levels of Language in Reading Brain
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Effective Beginning Handwriting Instruction: Multi-modal, Consistent Format for 2 Years, and Linked to Spelling and Composing
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Relationships between Presence or Absence of ADHD and fMRI Connectivity Writing Tasks in Children with Dysgraphia
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Modes of Alphabet Letter Production during Middle Childhood and Adolescence: Interrelationships with Each Other and Other Writing Skills
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Predicting Levels of Reading and Writing Achievement in Typically Developing, English-Speaking 2nd and 5th Graders
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Levels of Phonology Related to Reading and Writing in Middle Childhood
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 12 |
Differences between Children with Dyslexia Who Are and Are Not Gifted in Verbal Reasoning
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
Listening Comprehension, Oral Expression, Reading Comprehension, and Written Expression: Related Yet Unique Language Systems in Grades 1, 3, 5, and 7
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 19 |
Writing Problems in Developmental Dyslexia: Under-Recognized and Under-Treated2,3
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
