Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2/04/2014
1
Links between Language
& Social Disadvantage
Patricia Eadie, PhDPatricia Eadie, PhDPatricia Eadie, PhDPatricia Eadie, PhD
Dept Audiology & Speech PathologyDept Audiology & Speech PathologyDept Audiology & Speech PathologyDept Audiology & Speech Pathology
AEDI Master Class: February 2014
Typical Language Learning
� for the majority of children is robust & occurs
effortlessly
� emerges through social interaction with
caregivers in the child’s environment
Increasingly seen to be strongly affected by
relatively small shifts in the details of the
environment
for example, conversational exchange or social-emotional
engagement
2/04/2014
2
Language Development & Outcomes
Risk & Protective
Factors:
leading to poorer
developmental
outcomes
Subsequent
outcomes in other
developmental
domains
Language
Delay/
Language
Impairment
Language delay is both the outcome of potential risk factors and and and and
a risk factor itself for poorer outcomes in other developmental
domains.
Long History of Associations between
Language & Social Disadvantage
� Schatzman, L., & Strauss, A. (1955). Social Class and
Modes of Communication. American Journal of Sociology,
60(4), 329-338
� Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the
everyday experience of young american children.
2/04/2014
3
Estimated cumulative differences in language experience by 4 years of age.
Reproduced from Hart & Risley (1995)
Continued debate regarding the association
between Language and social disadvantage
� Nelson, K. E., Welsh, J. A., Trup, E. M. V., & Greenberg, M. T.
(2011). Language delays of impoverished preschool children
in relation to early academic and emotion recognition skills.
First Language, 31(2), 164-194
� Roy, P. & Chiat, S. (2012) Teasing apart disadvantage from
disorder: the case of poor language. In C. Marshall (Ed)
Current Issues in Developmental Psychology, Springer
Publishing
� Dorothy Bishop blog: Parent Talk & Child Language
• http://deevybee.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/parent-talk-
and-child-language.html#comment-form
2/04/2014
4
Understanding Social Disadvantage
� Not all socially disadvantaged children have poorer outcomes; increased likelihoodincreased likelihoodincreased likelihoodincreased likelihood
� Outcomes likely to be poorer when compared to children of higher socioeconomic groups
� Poor outcome more likely to represent low average low average low average low average performance performance performance performance than performance in the clinical range
� Multiple risk factor models – lower SES groups also experience greater levels of poor prenatal care, exposure to violence/abuse, inadequate nutrition
Prevalence of language difficulties in
disadvantaged cohorts of children
StudyStudyStudyStudy Prevalence of Language DifficultiesPrevalence of Language DifficultiesPrevalence of Language DifficultiesPrevalence of Language Difficulties
(≤(≤(≤(≤----1sd)1sd)1sd)1sd)
USA Head Start (Preschool) CohortNelson et al (2011)
32.7%
Scottish Primary School Cohort Law et al (2011)
40%
Longitudinal cohort studies of children
across the spectrum of SES (at 7yrs)7-18%
2/04/2014
5
What predicts language outcome across the
SES spectrum in different studies?
2 years 4 years
Late Talker Low Language
Predictor
Gender ���� ����
Family history ���� ����
Birth order ����
NESB ���� ����
Mat education ����
Maternal vocabulary ����
Birth Weight ����
SES (social disadvantage) ����
Social Disadvantage & Language Outcomes
18months/2 years18months/2 years18months/2 years18months/2 years 4/5 years4/5 years4/5 years4/5 years
Late TalkerLate TalkerLate TalkerLate Talker
Low Language Assessed/Low Language Assessed/Low Language Assessed/Low Language Assessed/
Parent Report of Language Parent Report of Language Parent Report of Language Parent Report of Language
DifficultiesDifficultiesDifficultiesDifficulties
StudyStudyStudyStudy
Early Language in Victoria Study
(ELVS) (Reilly et al 2007 & 2010)̶ ����
Looking at Language (LaL) (Zubrick
et al 2007 & Rice et al 2008)̶ ̶
Longitudinal Study of Australian
Children (LSAC) (Harrison et al 2010)
n/a ����
Norwegian Mother & Baby Cohort
Study (MoBa) (Schjolberg et al 2011 &
Zambrana et al 2013)
���� ����
Millenium Cohort Study
(Law et al 2012)
n/a ����
2/04/2014
6
THE EARLY LANGUAGE IN VICTORIA STUDY
A prospective study of the evolution of language impairment
and literacy problems across the first 13 years of life
Funded by the National Health & Medical Research Council (NHMRC)
2003-7, 2007-10, 2013-2016
Trajectories
Pathways to language outcomes:
• Used to identify classes/groups exhibiting
distinct communication development profiles
• Each profile represents the average average average average
trajectory of development for children in a
given group rather than the trajectory
followed by every individual child
Ukoumunne, O. C., Wake, M., Carlin, J., Bavin, E. L., Lum, J., Skeat, J., . . . Reilly, S. (2012). Profiles of language development in
pre-school children: a longitudinal latent class analysis of data from the Early Language in Victoria Study. Child Care Health Dev,
38(3), 341-349
2/04/2014
7
Profiles of Language Development:
Social Disadvantage
• Characteristics in families that indicate
social advantage are found most
commonly in groups with improving
profiles – suggesting a greater need for
language enrichment interventions in
disadvantaged communities
2/04/2014
8
Narrowing the Disadvantage Gap: Rethinking Speech Pathology Services for
Vulnerable Children
Response to Intervention Approach
All Children:All Children:All Children:All Children:Oral Language Supporting Early
Literacy
Vulnerable Children: Vulnerable Children: Vulnerable Children: Vulnerable Children:
Targeted Risk Group Interventions
Children with Additional needsChildren with Additional needsChildren with Additional needsChildren with Additional needs:
1:1 speech pathology
Parent based interventions
2/04/2014
9
Public health framework :
Language Competence and Early Literacy
� Language competence as a protective factor in early
life� Development of prosocial skills
� Development of problem solving skills
� Links with social abilities
� Underpins the transition to literacy & academic
achievement
� Impacted by social disadvantage - AEDI
� Education as a public health intervention� Critical developmental window to maximise
� Learning to Read versus Reading to Learn
� Positive feedback loop between literacy and oral language
• Catholic Education Commission
of Victoria
– University of Melbourne
– Monash University
• Funded by Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace
Relations (DEEWR), through the
Literacy & Numeracy Pilots scheme.
OOOOral
LLLLanguage
SSSSupporting
EEEEarly
LLLLiteracy
2/04/2014
10
Aim:
To determine whether teacher Professional
Development with a specific focus on oral
language competence in the first two years of
primary school in low SES schools would result
in improved oral language and early reading
abilities.
Structure of the OLSEL Intervention
WhenWhenWhenWhen WhoWhoWhoWho PD FocusPD FocusPD FocusPD Focus
Yr 1 Early Teachers,
Principals &
OLSEL Coordinators
6 Days of PD
•Framework for the intervention x 3 days
(ICPALER)
•Implications for the classroom
•Four elements introduced that were the focus
of oral language
•Assessment & Evaluation
Yr 1 Late Teachers,
Principals &
OLSEL coordinators
School Presentations of work achieved to date.
Yr 2 Early Teachers,
Principals &
OLSEL Coordinators
Review x 2 days
2/04/2014
11
Language & Literacy Outcomes by School Language & Literacy Outcomes by School Language & Literacy Outcomes by School Language & Literacy Outcomes by School
• Significant gains for children in OLSEL schools on
reading and standardised language measures, and on
the omnibus measure of story grammar.
• Educationally significant gains were also found with
subgroup comparisons of
• children from lower SES (EMA)
• children from Language Backgrounds Other than English
• OLSEL provided a better start for oral language and
literacy for the children in Prep-Yr 2 in the schools
where it was implemented
2/04/2014
12
Rationale CPOL builds on the pilot work of the OLSEL project and
focuses on 3 areas of policy-relevant research:
1. The importance of the early years of school (Prep to
Grade 3) as an opportunity to shift children’s
developmental pathways
2. The importance of teacher quality for children’s
academic outcomes
3. The intrinsic relationship between oral language skills
and future literacy, numeracy and social development.
2/04/2014
13
CPOL CollaboratorsThe University of Melbourne Associate Professor Sharon Goldfeld
Associate Professor John Munro
Dr Patricia Eadie
Murdoch Childrens Research
Institute
Professor Frank Oberklaid
Dr Kate Lee
The Royal Children’s Hospital
Education Institute
Mr Tony Barnett
Dr Liza Hopkins
Monash University Associate Professor Pamela Snow
Catholic Education Commission of
Victoria
Judy Connell and
Brenda Andersen-Dalheim
Victorian Government Department
of Education and Early Childhood
Development
Chris Thompson
Jenny Schenk
Gail Inniss
Deakin University Associate Professor Lisa Gold
Nelson et al (2011)Nelson et al (2011)Nelson et al (2011)Nelson et al (2011)
“given the high prevalence of language delays
(in children from low SES backgrounds) and
strong associations of language levels to
multiple skills important for school
readiness......
intervention, education and clinical service intervention, education and clinical service intervention, education and clinical service intervention, education and clinical service
programsprogramsprogramsprograms need to expand the use of high-quality
and high-quantity language teaching and
language therapy procedures”