Premium
Syntax and reading comprehension: a meta‐analysis of different spoken‐syntax assessments
Author(s) -
Brimo Danielle,
Lund Emily,
Sapp Alysha
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
international journal of language and communication disorders
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.101
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1460-6984
pISSN - 1368-2822
DOI - 10.1111/1460-6984.12362
Subject(s) - syntax , comprehension , reading comprehension , spoken language , linguistics , psychology , syntax error , abstract syntax tree , reading (process) , construct (python library) , computer science , natural language processing , programming language , philosophy
Background Syntax is a language skill purported to support children's reading comprehension. However, researchers who have examined whether children with average and below‐average reading comprehension score significantly different on spoken‐syntax assessments report inconsistent results. Aims To determine if differences in how syntax is measured affect whether children with average and below‐average reading comprehension score significantly different on spoken‐syntax assessments. Methods & Procedures Studies that included a group comparison design, children with average and below‐average reading comprehension, and a spoken‐syntax assessment were selected for review. Fourteen articles from a total of 1281 reviewed met the inclusionary criteria. The 14 articles were coded for the age of the children, score on the reading comprehension assessment, type of spoken‐syntax assessment, type of syntax construct measured and score on the spoken‐syntax assessment. A random‐effects model was used to analyze the difference between the effect sizes of the types of spoken‐syntax assessments and the difference between the effect sizes of the syntax construct measured. Outcomes & Results There was a significant difference between children with average and below‐average reading comprehension on spoken‐syntax assessments. Those with average and below‐average reading comprehension scored significantly different on spoken‐syntax assessments when norm‐referenced and researcher‐created assessments were compared. However, when the type of construct was compared, children with average and below‐average reading comprehension scored significantly different on assessments that measured knowledge of spoken syntax, but not on assessments that measured awareness of spoken syntax. Conclusions & Implications The results of this meta‐analysis confirmed that the type of spoken‐syntax assessment, whether norm‐referenced or researcher‐created, did not explain why some researchers reported that there were no significant differences between children with average and below‐average reading comprehension, but the syntax construct, awareness or knowledge, did. Thus, when selecting how to measure syntax among school‐age children, researchers and practitioners should evaluate whether they are measuring children's awareness of spoken syntax or knowledge of spoken syntax. Other differences, such as participant diagnosis and the format of items on the spoken‐syntax assessments, also were discussed as possible explanations for why researchers found that children with average and below‐average reading comprehension did not score significantly differently on spoken‐syntax assessments.