Project 3: Individual attributes
description
Transcript of Project 3: Individual attributes
EARLI 2009, AmsterdamMirjam Trapman (ACLC – UvA)
http://salsa.socsci.uva.nl
Project 3: Individual attributesLiteracy-related individual attributes of at-risk adolescents in grades 7-9 in
multilingual contextsMirjam Trapman, Jan Hulstijn, Amos van Gelderen, Roel van Steensel
Study into Adolescent Literacy of Students At-risk
SALSA
2Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Project SALSA
Project 4Reading and writing
DevelopmentVan Steensel
Project 1Literacy context
in schoolDe Milliano
Project 2Literacy context outside schoolVan Kruistum
Project 3Literacy-related
skills
3Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Outline presentation
1. Literacy-related variables and reading comprehension
2. Methodology
3. Analyses and results grade 7
4. Discussion
4Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Individual attributes
Research questions
• What are the literacy-related individual variables associated with reading comprehension of both monolingual and bilingual at-risk adolescents?
• What is the role of low order literacy skills in reading comprehension of at-risk adolescents?
5Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Decoding skills and reading comprehension
• Role of decoding skills diminishes over time – Correlations between both skills is higher for beginning
readers than for older children (a.o. Aarnoutse & Van Leeuwe 1988)
– Role of higher order skills increases
• Hypotheses for our population – two possibilities 1. There is no correlation – after elementary school 2. There is a correlation – participants lag behind
• Hypotheses tested for two groups of participants Monolingual and bilingual at-risk adolescents
6Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Sample
• Lower tracks of prevocational secondary education (vmbo): basic and middle management program
• 30% lowest end of CITO End of Primary School Test
• Grade 7
• N = 63
• Monolingual (N = 32) and bilingual students (N = 31)– Maroccan (n = 10), Turkish (n = 9), Antillean (n = 4), Surinamese (n = 4), Capeverdian
(n = 3), Chinese (n = 1)
7Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Reading comprehension
Basic reading
skills - wpm
Speed of word recognition Receptive
vocabulary
Speed of lexical
retrieval
Nonverbal IQ
Grammatical knowledge
WM / Sentence span
Metacognitive knowledge
Speed of sentence
verification
Included variables
8Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
SALSA Literacy test – Text comprehension
• 9 texts, 65 items
• 3 types of texts
– Narrative, expository, instructive
• 3 types of items
– Retrieving, interpreting, reflecting
• Cronbach’s alpha: .80
Reading comprehension
9Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Decoding speed
(excl. meaning)
1. Basic reading skills (wpm)
2. Word recognition
Speed
Grammatical form 3. Grammatical knowledge
Lexical knowledge4. Receptive vocabulary
(incl. meaning) 5. Lexical-retrieval
Speed
6. Working Memory – listening span
Meaning on sentence level 7. Sentence verification
Speed
High order skills 8. Metacognitive knowledge
9. Non-verbal IQ
low
high
Independent variables
10Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Total (N =63) Monolinguals (N = 31) Bilinguals (N = 32)
1. Basic reading skills (DMT)
.22 .40* .10
2. Word recognition Speed
-.16 -.45* .02
3. Grammatical knowledge
.66** .31 .78**
4. Receptive vocabulary .59** .20 .71**
5. Lexical retrieval Speed
-.47** -.33 -.43*
6. WM – listening span .42** .31 .45**
7. Sentence verification Speed
-.25 -.38* -.08
8. Metacognitive knowledge
.41** .11 .50**
9. Non-verbal IQ .36** .25 .45**
Correlations with reading comprehension
11Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Total (N =63)
Monolinguals (N = 31)
Bilinguals (N = 32)
1. Basic reading skills (DMT)
.22 .40* .10
2. Word recognition Speed
-.16 -.45* .02
3. Grammatical knowledge
.66** .31 .78**
4. Receptive vocabulary .59** .20 .71**
5. Lexical retrieval Speed
-.45** -.33 -.43*
6. WM – listening span .42** .31 .45**
7. Sentence verification Speed
-.25 -.38* -.08
8. Metacognitive knowledge
.41** .11 .50**
9. Non-verbal IQ .36** .25 .45**
Correlations with reading comprehension
12Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Monolinguals Bilinguals
Model R2 R2 change Sig F change R2 R2 change Sig F change
1 .26 .26 .03 .01 .01 .86
2 .26 .01 .71 .62 .61 .00
3 .36 .10 .23 .66 .04 .29
4 .48 .12 .14 .70 .04 .31
5 .48 .01 .68 .70 .00 .99
6 .48 .00 .84 .72 .02 .34
Model 1: basic reading skills and speed of word recognition
Model 2: + grammatical knowledge
Model 3: + receptive vocabulary and lexical retrieval
Model 4: + speed of sentence verification and sentence span
Model 5: + metacognitive knowledge
Model 6: + nonverbal IQ
Multiple regression analysis
13Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Monolinguals Bilinguals
Model R2 R2 change Sig F change R2 R2 change Sig F change
1 .26 .26 .03 .01 .01 .86
2 .26 .01 .71 .62 .61 .00
3 .36 .10 .23 .66 .04 .29
4 .48 .12 .14 .70 .04 .31
5 .48 .01 .68 .70 .00 .99
6 .48 .00 .84 .72 .02 .34
Model 1: basic reading skills and speed of word recognition
Model 2: + grammatical knowledge
Model 3: + receptive vocabulary and lexical retrieval
Model 4: + speed of sentence verification and sentence span
Model 5: + metacognitive knowledge
Model 6: + nonverbal IQ
Multiple regression analysis
14Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
• Total amount of explained variance
- 48% for the monolingual group
- 72% for the bilingual group
• Role of grammar
significant contribution for the bilingual group, but not for the monolingal group, once decoding skill is in the model already
• Role of decoding skills
significant contribution for the monolingual group, but not for the bilingual group
Difference between monolinguals and bilinguals
15Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
What are the literacy-related individual variables associated with reading comprehension of both monolingual and bilingual at-risk adolescents?
• Monolinguals: decoding skills
• Bilinguals: grammar
• What is the role of low-order literacy skills in reading comprehension of at-risk adolescents?
• Monolinguals: significant contribution
• Bilinguals: no significant contribution
Back to the questions
16Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Discussion
• Possible explanation
• role vocabulary and grammar?
• difference in performance between groups?
• Near future analyses
17Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Thank you!
Contact information
Mirjam Trapman
0031 20 525 4427
Website SALSA project:
http://salsa.socsci.uva.nl
18Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Results - Descriptives – grade 7
Total Monolingual Bilingual Differences
Reading comprehension 41 (8) 43 (6) 38 (9) p = .03
Basic reading skills (DMT)
81 (14) 82 (13) 79 (16) p = .50
Word recognition speed
825 ms (129) 828 ms (137) 822 ms (122) p = .87
Grammatical knowledge 34 (6) 36 (4) 31 (6) p < .001
Receptive vocabulary 50 (9) 54 (7) 46 (9) p < .001
Lexical retrieval speed
1871 ms (344) 1775 ms (314) 1971 ms (349) p = .02
WM – listening span 4.4 (2.0) 4.7 (1.7) 4.2 (2.3) p = .33
Sentence verification speed
4358 ms (746) 4213 ms (769) 4506 ms (704) p = .12
Metacognitive knowledge 28 (4) 29 (4) 26 (4) p = .01
Non-verbal IQ 37 (3) 37 (3) 37 (4) p = .88
19Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Correlation matrix (N = 63)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
1. Reading comprehension
1 .22 -.16 .66** .59** -.45** .42** -.25 .41** .36**
2. Basic reading skills (DMT)
1 -.30* .20 .18 -.21 -.04 -.50** .25 -.13
3. Word recognition Speed
1 -.18 -.09 .32* -.13 .59** -.01 -.05
4. Grammatical knowledge
1 .66** -.31* -.13 .59** -.01 -.05
5. Receptive vocabulary 1 -.29* .40* -.15 .58** .20
6. Lexical retrieval Speed
1 -.20 .22 -.19 -.17
7. WM – listening span 1 .07 .25 .21
8. Sentence verification Speed
1 -.05 .10
9. Metacognitive knowledge
1 .04
10. Non-verbal IQ 1
20Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Correlation matrix (monolinguals)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
1. Reading comprehension
1 .40* -.45* .31 .20 -.41* .31 -.38* .11 .25
2. Basic reading skills (DMT)
1 -.42* .35 .19 -.38* .22 -.51** .14 .21
3. Word recognition Speed
1 -.38 -.26 .42* -.35* .60** -.06 -.15
4. Grammatical knowledge
1 .33 -.09 .15 -.37* .15 -.12
5. Receptive vocabulary 1 .11 .36* -.27 .46** .00
6. Lexical retrieval Speed
1 -.27 .31 .09 -.28
7. WM – listening span 1 -.05 .15 .39*
8. Sentence verification Speed
1 -.09 -.01
9. Metacognitive knowledge
1 -.20
10. Non-verbal IQ 1
21Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Correlation matrix (bilinguals)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
1. Reading comprehension
1 .10 .02 .78** .71** -.40* .45** -.08 .50** .45**
2. Basic reading skills (DMT)
1 -.21 .07 .13 -.05 -.23 -.49** .31 -.34
3. Word recognition Speed
1 -.08 -.03 .26 -.05 .61** .03 .05
4. Grammatical knowledge
1 .70** -.28 .39* -.12 .59** .49**
5. Receptive vocabulary 1 -.37* .40* .11 .57** .39*
6. Lexical retrieval Speed
1 -.11 .05 -.28 -.12
7. WM – listening span 1 .23 .28 .11
8. Sentence verification Speed
1 .11 .20
9. Metacognitive knowledge
1 .24
10. Non-verbal IQ 1
22Mirjam Trapman, EARLI 2009
Correlations with reading comprehensionTotal
(N =63)
Monolinguals(N = 31)
Bilinguals(N = 32)
Fisher Z-test
2. Basic reading skills (DMT)
.22 .40* .10 p = .23 (2-tailed)
3. Word recognition Speed
-.16 -.45* .02 p = .06
4. Grammatical knowledge .66** .31 .78** p < .01
5. Receptive vocabulary .59** .20 .71** p < .01
6. Lexical retrieval Speed
-.45** -.41* -.40** p = .96
7. WM – listening span .42** .31 .45** p = .53
8. Sentence verification Speed
-.25 -.38* -.08 p = .22
9. Metacognitive knowledge .41** .11 .50** p = .09
10. Non-verbal IQ .36** .25 .45** p = .42