WHAT IS LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION?
Understanding
what other people say and write (i.e., language comprehension) is more
complicated than it might at first appear. Comprehending language involves a
variety of capacities, skills, processes, knowledge, and dispositions that are
used to derive meaning from spoken, written, and signed language. In this broad
sense, language comprehension includes reading comprehension, which has been
addressed in a separate tutorial, as well as comprehension of sign language. Deriving
meaning from spoken language involves much more than knowing the meaning of
words and understanding what is intended when those words are put together in a
certain way. The following categories of capacity, knowledge, skill, and
dispositions are all brought to bear in fully comprehending what another person
says.
Communication
Awareness
- Communication awareness includes knowing (1) that spoken language has meaning and purpose, (2) that spoken words, the organization of the words, their intonation, loudness, and stress patterns, gestures, facial expression, proximity, and posture all contribute to meaning, (3) that context factors need to be taken into consideration in interpreting what people mean to communicate, (4) that it is easy to misinterpret another’s communication, and (5) that it often requires effort to correctly interpret another person’s intended meaning and that correct interpretation is worth the effort!
Hearing
and Auditory Processing
- Understanding a spoken utterance assumes that the listener’s hearing is adequate and that the spoken sounds are correctly perceived as phonemes of English (or whatever language is spoken). Phonemes are the smallest units of spoken language that make a difference to meaning – corresponding roughly to the letters in a word (e.g., the sounds that ‘t’, ‘a’, and ‘n’ make in the word ‘tan’). Auditory processing of language also includes the ability to integrate the separate sounds of a word into the perception of a meaningful word and of sequences of meaningful words.
Word
Knowledge and World Knowledge
- Word knowledge includes knowing the meaning of words (e.g., understanding them when they are spoken), including multiple meanings of ambiguous words. Knowing the meaning of a word is more than knowing what (if anything) that word refers to. Rather it is possession of a large set of meaning associations that comprise the word’s full meaning. For example knowing the meaning of the word “horse” includes knowing that horses are animals, that they engage in specific types of activities, that they have many uses, that they have specific parts, that they have a certain size, shape, and other attributes, that they are characteristically found in specific places, and the like. Understanding spoken language requires an adequate vocabulary, which is a critical component of the semantics of a language. Word meanings may be concrete (e.g., “ball” refers to round objects that bounce) or abstract (e.g., “justice” refers to fairness in the pursuit or distribution of various types of goods and services).
- World knowledge includes understanding the realities in the world – objects and their attributes, actions and their attributes, people, relationships, and the like – that words refer to and describe. For example, if a student has no knowledge of computers, then it is impossible to fully understand the word ‘computer’.
Knowledge
of Word Organization
- Syntax (or grammar) refers to the rules that govern the organization of words in a sentence or utterance. Comprehending an utterance requires an ability to decipher the meaning implicit in the organization of words. For example, “Tom fed the dog” and “The dog fed Tom” have different meanings despite containing exactly the same words.
- Morphology (a component of grammar) refers to rules that govern meaning contained in the structure of the words themselves. Changes within words (e.g., adding an ‘s’ to ‘dog’ to get ‘dogs’, or adding an ‘ed’ to ‘kick’ to get ‘kicked’) affects meaning. Comprehending an utterance requires an ability to decipher the meaning associated with such modifications of the words.
Discourse
- Just as there are rules that govern how speakers put words together in a sentence to communicate their intended meaning, there are also rules that govern how sentences (or thoughts) are organized to effectively tell stories, describe objects and people, give directions, explain complex concepts or events, influence people’s beliefs and actions, and the like. These are called rules of discourse. Effective comprehension of extended language (e.g., listening to a story or a lecture) assumes that the listener has some idea of what to listen for and in what order that information might come.
Social
Knowledge and Pragmatics
Pragmatics refers to the rules governing the use of language in
context (including social context) for purposes of sending and receiving varied
types of messages, maintaining a flow of conversation, and adhering to social
rules that apply to specific contexts of interaction. On the comprehension side
of communication, the first of these three types of rules is most critical. For
example, comprehending the sentence, “I will do it” requires deciding whether
the speaker intends to make a promise, a prediction, or a threat. Similarly
“We’d love to have you over for dinner” could be an invitation, a statement of
an abstract desire, or an empty social nicety. Or “Johnny, I see you’ve been
working hard at cleaning your room” could be a description of hard work or a
mother’s ironic criticism of Johnny for not working on his room. In each case,
correct interpretation of the utterance requires consideration of context
information, knowledge of the speaker, understanding of events that preceded
the interaction, and general social knowledge.
Indirect
Meanings include metaphor (e.g., “He’s a
real spitfire”), sarcasm and irony (e.g., “You look terrific” said to a person
who appears to be very sick), idioms or other figures of speech (e.g., “People
who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”), hyperbole (e.g., “The story
I wrote is about a million pages long!”), and personification (e.g., “Careful!
Not studying for a test can jump up and bite you!”). Comprehending indirect
meanings often requires abstract thinking and consideration of context cues.
Students with brain injury often have significant difficulty deciphering the
meaning of such indirect communication unless the specific use of words was
familiar before the injury. Understanding new metaphors, figures of speech and
the like makes significant demands on cognitive processing (e.g., working
memory, reasoning), discussed next.
Cognitive
Functions that Support Language Comprehension
- Attention: Comprehending spoken language requires the ability to focus attention simultaneously on the speaker’s words and nonverbal behavior (e.g., gesture, facial expression, body posture), to maintain that focus over time, to focus simultaneously on ones own response, and to flexibly shift attentional focus as topics change.
- Working Memory: Comprehending spoken language requires the ability to hold several pieces of information in mind at the same time, possibly including the words that the speaker just uttered, previous turns in the conversation, other information about the speaker, the topic, and the context, and the like.
- Speed of Processing: Because the units of spoken language arrive in rapid succession, comprehension requires the ability to process information quickly.
- Organization: Comprehending spoken language requires that the listener put together (i.e., organize) the various comments that the speaker makes, together with the listener’s own comments, background information, and the like. This assumes considerable organizational skill.
- Reasoning: Comprehending a speaker’s intended meaning is often a reasoning process. For example, if a speaker says, “I’m really busy today” and later in the conversation says, “I can’t come over to your house after school today,” the listener should be able to reason that the speaker is not being rude in rejecting an invitation, but rather is unable to come over because of his busy schedule.
- Abstract thinking ability: Comprehending abstract language, metaphors, figures of speech, and the like often requires a reasonable level of abstract thinking ability. (See Indirect Meanings, above.)
- Perspective Taking: Comprehending the intent underlying a speaker’s message critically relies on the ability to take that person’s perspective. For example, when a speaker says, “Don’t worry; it’s not a problem,” he just might intend to communicate that it is a huge problem! Correctly interpreting this message requires “mind reading” – getting inside the speaker’s frame of reference and understanding the issues and the words from that person’s perspective.
- Comprehension Monitoring and Strategic Behavior: Effective comprehension of spoken language requires routine monitoring of comprehension, detection of possible comprehension failures, a desire to fix breakdowns, and a strategic ability to repair the breakdown, for example by saying things like, “I’m not sure I understand what you mean; could you explain?”
In
light of the wide variety of skills, knowledge, and dispositions that come
together to support language comprehension, it is not surprising that language
comprehension is a communication difficulty for many students, including many
students with TBI.
WHY IS LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION IMPORTANT FOR MANY STUDENTS AFTER TBI?
Depending
on age and location and severity of the brain injury, students with TBI can
have varied profiles of strengths and weaknesses with components of language
comprehension and language expression. Often, basic language knowledge and skills
acquired before the injury, including word meanings, are recovered after the
injury. However, children are commonly impaired in areas that are developing
rapidly at the time of injury. For example, at ages 6, 7, and 8, children are
learning vocabulary related to success in the classroom (e.g., the words that
teachers use in giving instructions) and success in social life (e.g., the
language of peer interaction, compliments, teasing, and the like). The
transition into adolescence is similarly a time when new and abstract
vocabulary and a new and complex social code are being learned. Therefore, an
injury at those times may disrupt the process of learning and cause persisting
problems with language comprehension in school and social life.
More
generally, students with TBI often have problems with memory and new learning,
related to damage to the vulnerable hippocampus and also to the frontal lobes.
Therefore, students injured at a relatively young age may have difficulty
learning new words, rules of grammar, rules for organizing discourse, and
pragmatic/social rules typically learned at older ages. The student may appear
increasingly delayed in these areas over time. This gap between language
knowledge and developmental expectations may become increasingly obvious in
adolescence. Adolescents are expected to comprehend increasingly abstract and
academic language, and also to comprehend increasingly subtle social language
and nonverbal cues. A student injured before adolescence or in the early
adolescent years may have difficulty in these domains and may therefore require
intensive teaching and considerable support to meet these later developmental
expectations as effectively as possible.
Because
procedural learning tends to be better preserved after TBI than declarative
memory, learning rules of grammar is often less problematic than learning new
and abstract word meanings, and considerably less problematic than succeeding
in the discourse and social pragmatic domains. Both discourse and social
pragmatic competence presuppose effective organization, reasoning, social
perception and cognition, and working memory. Each of these cognitive domains
is vulnerable following TBI.
Students
with TBI also frequently have difficulties with other components of cognition
and self-regulation that influence language comprehension. These include
problems in the areas of attention, organization, reasoning, abstract thinking,
perspective taking, and comprehension monitoring. Each of these areas of
difficulty is associated with damage to the vulnerable frontal lobes. It is
also extremely common for students with TBI to process information slowly. Slow
processing can be caused by damage to the structure that connects the two
halves of the brain (i.e., the corpus callosum), to the long axons that connect
nerve cells (neurons) and networks of neurons throughout the brain, or to the
frontal lobes themselves. Comprehending spoken language might not seem to be an
organizational task, but consider what needs to be done to understand the
following little story: “I went to a game yesterday with my dad. I caught a
foul ball. I’m really happy to have the ball, but my hands still sting!” Understanding
this story requires bringing to bear some background understanding of baseball.
It also requires perceiving the relations among the sentences. For example the
happiness and pain referred to in the third sentence relate to catching the
ball referred to in the second sentence. Language comprehension is an ongoing
process of “making connections” of this sort, connecting ideas to one another
as the speaker expresses them and also to background knowledge of the world.
Making these connections is difficult for students with organizational, memory,
and reasoning impairments, common after TBI. Difficulty with the social aspects
of language and language pragmatics, for effective expression and comprehension
alike, is also common after TBI. In some cases this is due to the fact that the
child was injured at a young age and may not have matured sufficiently to
engage in effective social interaction with peers later in development. In
other cases, difficulty with the social and pragmatic aspects of language is a
direct result of damage to parts of the brain that facilitate processing of
social information. Damage to vulnerable prefrontal areas, in association with
the amygdala, parietal lobes, insula, anterior cingulate gyrus, and basal
ganglia (possibly right hemisphere more than left) results in difficulty
interpreting the emotional states of others and “reading” the non-literal
aspects of their communication.
WHAT ARE THE MAIN FEATURES OF INTERVENTION AND SUPPORT THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR STUDENTS WITH LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION PROBLEMS AFTER TBI?
Understanding
the Problem
As
always, step one in helping students with complex disability is understanding
the problem. For example, difficulty with comprehension of language could be a
consequence of weakness in any of the domains (outlined above) that contribute
to successful comprehension. The problem exploration steps on this web site
should help staff and family identify the factors associated with the student’s
difficulties. Intervention and support can then be targeted to the set of
problems known to contribute to the student’s difficulty with language
comprehension
Environmental
Compensations
Students
with language comprehension problems should receive some combination of the
intervention strategies outlined later in this tutorial to improve their
comprehension. However, there are also compensatory environmental procedures or
accommodations that might be useful in addition to more direct teaching
strategies.
·
Understanding: Parents, teachers, other relevant adults, and possibly even
peers should understand the nature of the student’s language comprehension
weakness so that they will be in a position to make appropriate adjustments as
they speak to the student, without speaking in a condescending or infantilizing
manner.
·
Adjustments
in the rate of speech: For
students who process information (including language) slowly, adjustments
should be made. This does not mean speaking each word slowly in a drone-like
manner. Rather it means speaking clearly and allowing greater than normal pause
time (processing time) between meaningful units of information (phrases or
short sentences). However, for students with a significantly reduced attention
span, slowing the rate of speech input may be counter-productive; the student’s
attention may be lost. Lengthy instructions should be accompanied by simple
written instructions or possibly picture cues to which the student can refer
when necessary (assuming adequate reading ability for written instructions). If
lecture notes are available in advance, the student can be “primed” for the
content of the lecture in order to comprehend more effectively.
·
Adjustments
in the amount of speech: For
students who process information slowly or have difficulty organizing
information, reasonable limits should be placed on the amount of information
given at one time. After a few units of information, it may be useful to have
the student summarize what she has understood of the information already given.
Then the speaker can proceed. Lengthy instructions should be broken into parts
and also accompanied by simple written instructions that the student can refer
to when needed (assuming adequate reading ability), or pictured instructions.
High school or college students who are required to take lecture courses may
need condensed versions of the lectures – organized summaries – in written form
or notes taken by an assistant teacher.
·
Adjustments
in the abstractness of language:
For students who are concrete thinkers and who have difficulty processing
abstract meanings and abstract or indirect forms of language (e.g., metaphor,
sarcasm), reasonable adjustments should be made. This does not mean eliminating
abstract and indirect language from the speech directed to the student. Rather
it means some combination of the following adjustments: (1) Use metaphors and
figures of speech that you know the student understands, or accompany an
unfamiliar metaphor or figure of speech with a simple embedded explanation
(e.g., “John, you’re going to fall flat on your face if you don’t study... you
know what I mean... you’ll fail and then be very unhappy”). (2) Similarly,
words with abstract meanings should be accompanied by simple definitions built
into the speech directed to the student (e.g., “The judicial branch of
government is responsible for interpreting the laws, that is, judges and courts
must decide exactly what a law means and whether a person or organization has
broken the law”).
·
Supports
for understanding social interaction: As
explained in the tutorial on Social Perception, students who have difficulty
understanding the intent of a speaker’s message may need to have that intent
made explicit. For example, a communication partner may need to say “Let me
tell you a joke...” rather than just telling the joke; or the communication
partner may routinely add “Just kidding” after a tease rather than leaving it
up to the student with social perception impairment to figure out that it is
teasing. In these and other ways, communication partners can make their mental
states known to the student with social perception and comprehension deficits.
·
Visual
supports: Visual supports are useful for
students with impaired comprehension of spoken language. These supports can
range from visual schedules and ample gestural support for young students to
written instructions and lecture summaries for older students. Some
experimentation may be required to determine the appropriate mix of spoken
language and visual supports.
Instructional Procedures
Teaching
Word Knowledge and World Knowledge
Critical
to comprehending the language that one hears is an understanding of the words
that are spoken and at least a general understanding of the topics included in
that language directed to the child. Students with TBI often retain their word
knowledge (vocabulary) and general knowledge of the world acquired before the
injury. Knowledge of this sort is stored in posterior brain regions, which are
not especially vulnerable in TBI (closed head injury).
However,
because of problems with new learning, the student may fall progressively
further behind in vocabulary knowledge and world knowledge over the years after
the injury. Therefore attention to both types of knowledge may be a component
of the student’s comprehensive language and reading comprehension programs.
What follows are some common suggestions regarding vocabulary acquisition and
acquisition of world knowledge.
Vocabulary
Practice: Words from the Curriculum: Given
the many thousands of words that exist in any language, teaching vocabulary can
seem to be a daunting task. For example, during the preschool years, typically
developing children learn on average 8 to 10 words per day! The most reasonable
way to simplify and organize the task of teaching vocabulary is to select words
from the student’s academic and social curricula. Thus the words to be focused
on by teachers, speech-language pathologists, special educators, and parents
should be words that the student needs to learn in order to comprehend the
language used in the classroom, on the playground, and at home. These include
words that teachers use in giving instructions, words that peers use in play
and other social interaction, and words from reading books and from science,
social studies, and other content classes.
Teaching
the meaning of a word includes exploring the many associations that comprise
the word’s meaning. (See below for principles of vocabulary teaching.) In the
case of a noun, for example, it is not sufficient for the student to point to a
picture of the item when named. She should know what category the item falls
into, what it does (if anything), what it is used for, what parts it has, what
features it has, what it is made of, where it is commonly found, and other
common associations. This broad and deep understanding is true knowledge of a
word’s meaning. Thus teachers and therapists should teach word meaning in this
organized associative manner. Furthermore, context is important in the
teaching. Students should have exposure to a variety of contexts in which the
word can be used, especially contexts relevant to the classroom curriculum.
Parents
can use and explore targeted words and their meanings during dinner time, car
time, and other relaxed conversational times. Teaching word meaning at home
need not be a boring “school-like” activity, but rather conversational use and
exploration of the word, using language at the student’s level of comprehension
and connected as much as possible to the student’s interests. Home-school
communication should include lists of words that are currently focused on in
school. However, these lists should not be so long that the student and family
are overwhelmed!
In
addition, the more students read, the faster their vocabularies grow. Therefore
there is a strong rationale for encouraging students to read as much as they
can. Homes should have interesting and engaging reading materials at an
appropriate reading level for the student. For example, topically interesting
magazines are available at many reading levels, including sports, current
events, and popular culture magazines. And students should be encouraged to
request a definition when they encounter words they do not understand.
World
Knowledge: Themes from the Curriculum:
Given the infinite extent of possible knowledge of things, places, events, and
people in the world, teaching world knowledge is a genuinely daunting task.
Again, the most reasonable way to simplify and organize the task is to select
themes from the student’s academic curriculum. General education teachers,
special educators, therapists, and parents can focus on and discuss themes and
issues that are found in reading texts or in the student’s content classes.
As
in the case of word meanings, parents can help the child acquire relevant world
knowledge by knowing what is being taught at school and then weaving those
curricular themes into dinner time, car time, and other relaxed conversations.
In addition, discussion of daily events presented in the newspaper or on TV can
help the student broaden her horizons and learn about events occurring in the
world. Furthermore, the more the student reads, the more she learns about the
world; therefore fun reading beyond school assignments should be encouraged.
Principles
of Vocabulary Instruction: The
following eight principles of vocabulary instruction are paraphrases of
principles of vocabulary instruction published by Roth (2002). These principles
capture the best evidence-based practices known to language specialists at that
time for teaching vocabulary to children who have language-learning
difficulties, regardless of the cause of that difficulty. However, it may be
that effectiveness of specific vocabulary teaching procedures is more dependent
on the student’s age, nature of the impairment, and specific vocabulary
objectives than this general list of procedures suggests.
Principle
1: Teach organized systems of word
associations (i.e., semantic knowledge). Common word associations for a noun
include what category the item falls into, what it does (if anything), what it
is used for, what parts it has, what features it has, what it is made of, where
it is commonly found, and other common associations. (See the Tutorial on
Graphic Organizers for a description of an organizer used in teaching word
meanings.)
Principle
2: Teach the student word-learning
strategies. For a young student, this may mean asking “What’s that?” when
encountering something unfamiliar. For a somewhat older student, this may mean
getting into the habit of asking “What does _____ mean?” when encountering an
unfamiliar word. For an older student, routine use of a dictionary should be
added to these strategies.
Principle
3: Teaching vocabulary should include
direct and explicit instruction as well as everyday incidental word learning.
Principle
4: Teaching vocabulary should involve
relevant context associations and active child engagement with the
to-be-learned meanings. A variety of activities and examples of the meaning
should be included in the teaching.
Principle
5: Students need to learn the meanings
of both common (high frequency) words and rare (low frequency) words.
Principle
6: Students need to learn both core
definitions and also relevant context information. For example, when learning
that “weird” means strange or unconventional, a student should also learn that
it is offensive to apply the word to people.
Principle
7: To fully understand a word’s
meaning, students should be given both examples and non-examples of that word’s
meaning. For example, to understand the meaning of “red”, students should know
what shades of color are called red and what shades are not called red;
similarly, to understand the meaning of “legislative responsibilities”,
students should know what the legislative branch of government is responsible
for (e.g., writing laws), but also what it is not responsible for (e.g.,
interpreting the laws and determining their constitutionality).
Principle
8: Students typically learn most
efficiently from a multidimensional approach, appealing to all of their senses
and to their activity as they learn the word’s meaning. For example color words
can be learned while finger painting; words related to government functions can
be learned while having mock legislative and judicial sessions.
Roth
also offers additional teaching suggestions: (1) Use adult-child shared book
reading as a context for teaching vocabulary; (2) Incorporate new vocabulary
into stories to heighten comprehension; (3) Use graphic organizers to
facilitate comprehension; (4) With young children, focus on the physical action
dimensions of meaning.
Improving
Listening Comprehension By Teaching Strategies
The
Tutorial on Reading Comprehension lists a number of strategies that
students can use to improve their understanding of what they read. Some of
these strategies can also be used by well selected students to improve their
listening comprehension. However, teachers and clinicians should exercise
caution in attempting to teach any of these listening comprehension strategies
to students with restricted space in working memory. Thinking about strategies
or using strategies may distract the student with brain injury, causing a
reduction rather than an improvement in comprehension. Furthermore, some of the
strategies, like requesting clarification, may be resisted by students who understandably
do not want to call attention to their disability. Sensitive counseling may be
a necessary component of this strategy instruction.
With
these qualifications as background, listening comprehension strategies include:
·
Clarifying the topic or theme in
what the communication partner is saying. This is analogous to the reading
comprehension strategy of doing a “book walk” or in other ways orienting to the
topic before reading.
·
Summarizing – out loud or silently –
the main points in what the person is saying. This is analogous to the
summarizing strategy in reading comprehension.
·
Elaborating – out loud or silently –
on what the person is saying. This is analogous to the elaboration or
self-questioning strategy in reading comprehension.
·
Creating a visual image to associate
with the main point made by the person. This is analogous to the visual imagery
strategy in reading comprehension.
·
Requesting repetition or
clarification of what the other person has said. This is analogous to the
reading comprehension strategy of re-reading a passage or requesting help.
·
Making a judgment about the
meaningfulness or value of what the person has said. This is analogous to the
parallel strategy in reading comprehension.
Teaching
Rules of Grammar
In
most cases of pediatric TBI, grammar is less problematic than vocabulary or the
social/pragmatic domains of language. However, a child with TBI may also have a
congenital language-learning disorder, or may be one of the few with specific
language impairment (or aphasia) caused by the injury. Therefore we include in
this tutorial the following principles of grammar instruction.
Principles
of Grammar Instruction: The
following ten principles of grammar instruction are paraphrases of principles
published by Fey, Long, and Finestack (2003). These principles capture the best
evidence-based practices known to language specialists at that time for
teaching grammar to children who have language-learning difficulties,
regardless of the cause of that difficulty. However, it may be that
effectiveness of specific grammar teaching procedures is more dependent on the
student’s age, nature of the impairment, and specific grammatical objectives
than this general list of procedures suggests.
Principle
1: Make sure that the grammar being
taught serves a communication purpose (e.g., in story telling, giving a
description, and the like).
Principle
2: Do not focus teaching sessions only
on grammar.
Principle
3: Choose a class of
grammatical forms (e.g., past tense, rather than highly specific words) and
ensure that there is environmental support for the meaning of the
component of grammar being taught. For example, in teaching past tense, there
should be meaningful conversation about events that took place in the past.
Principle
4: Choose developmentally
appropriate forms of grammar. This requires consultation with a
speech-language pathologist who knows in what developmental order children
typically acquire aspects of grammar.
Principle
5: Create many natural
opportunities throughout the day for supported practice.
Principle
6: Use varied linguistic contexts for
practice of grammar, including conversation, descriptions, and stories (spoken
and written).
Principle
7: Make the target aspect of grammar salient
and meaningful. For example, in teaching helping verbs, create an argument
like the following: “He is running” ... “No he isn’t” ... “Yes he is” ... “No
he isn’t” and so on.
Principle
8: Make sure that relevant adults know
how to use systematic recast procedures. For example, if the child says,
“He goed to school”, the adult follows that utterance by saying, “He went to
school”.
Principle
9: All adults should use grammatical
language models, not “baby talk” or telegraphed models. Furthermore,
relevant adults should know what specifically the child is working on so they
can make a point of modeling those aspects of grammar.
Principle
10: Adults should use the traditional
“You say what I say” imitation procedure sparingly. That is, avoid
over-use of the following teaching procedure, “John, say after me, ‘He kicked
the ball’ ... John imitates ... the adult says “Good job! He kicked the ball.”
And when this imitation procedures is used, it should be supplemented by more
natural language teaching procedures.
EVIDENCE REGARDING INTERVENTION FOR CHILDREN WITH LANGUAGE DISORDERS
This
summary of evidence is written for teachers and others who may be required to
support their intervention practices with evidence from the research literature
or who may simply be curious about the state of the evidence. This summary was
written in early 2008. Evidence continues to accumulate.
A
search of the literature revealed no studies of the effectiveness of language
intervention for students with a diagnosis of TBI, other than those that focus
on the behavioral dimensions of language. The summaries of vocabulary and grammar
teaching procedures presented earlier (Fey et al., 2003; Roth, 2002) are taken
from general reviews of state-of-the-art professional practice, not based on
systematic reviews of the experimental literature. Therefore these summaries
represent a useful point of departure in choosing teaching procedures, but they
cannot be considered evidence reviews.
Specific
evidence supporting language intervention for students with TBI can, therefore,
only be drawn – with great caution – from studies of other populations of
students. Cirrin and Gillam (2008) identified 21 studies of language
intervention for school-age children with primary spoken language disorders
(versus disorders of reading and writing, and disorders of language secondary
to other disabilities) published since 1985. Each study met high standards of
experimental rigor. No studies of middle and high school students were found.
Six studies focused on vocabulary, three on grammar, five on phonological
awareness and metalinguistics, five on general language processing, and two on
pragmatics. Effect sizes were moderate to high for the majority of studies.
Therefore the authors conclude that there is an unfortunately small but solid
body of evidence for language intervention for elementary-age students with
primary language disorders.
Jitendra
and colleagues (2004) systematically reviewed the evidence supporting specific
procedures for teaching reading vocabulary to students with learning
disabilities, grades 4 through 12. They found 19 articles that included 27
separate experimental studies. The following vocabulary teaching procedures
were supported by experimental evidence: cognitive strategy instruction (e.g.,
semantic feature analysis), visual imagery, direct instruction, error-free
learning (i.e., gradually increasing the time delay between presenting the word
and requesting a definition)(only one study), and activity-based methods (only
one study). Computer-assisted instruction yielded mixed results. The respected
evidence review of the National Reading Panel (2000) summarized the results of
a large number of successful experimental studies that support the use of
explicit instruction in teaching both reading vocabulary and comprehension,
with a focus on strategy intervention in the case of comprehension.
Other
reviews of language intervention for specific populations of students with
disability include Goldstein (2002, autism), and Sigafoos and Drasgow (2003,
developmental disabilities). The Goldstein review is relevant in that it
identified many successful experimental studies in which the social dimensions
of language were targeted or positive communication alternatives to negative
behavior were taught. Although there are differences in central tendencies
between autism and TBI, those two dimensions of communication intervention are
also important for many students with TBI. The systematic evidence review of
Ylvisaker and colleagues (2007) summarized several studies in which social
language and positive communication alternatives were successfully taught to
children and adults with TBI.
Cirrin,
F.M., & Gillam, R.B. (2008). Language intervention practices for school-age
children with spoken language disorders: A systematic review. Language,
Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools, 39, S110-S137.
Fey,
M., Long, S.H., & Finestack, L.H. (2003). Ten principles of grammar
facilitation for children with specific language impairments. American
Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 12, 3-15.
Goldstein,
H. (2002). Communication intervention for children with autism: A review of
treatment efficacy. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
32(5), 373-396.
Jitendra,
A., Edwards, L., Sacks, G., & Jacobson, L. (2004). What research says about
vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional
Children, 70(3), 299-322.
National
Reading Panel (NRP) (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its
implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: national Institute of
Child Health and Human Development and U.S. Department of Education.
Roth,
F.P. (2002). Vocabulary instruction for young children with language
impairments. Asha Division 1 (Language Learning and Education) Newsletter,
October 2002.
Sigafoos,
J. & Drasgow, E. (2003). Empirically validated strategies, evidence-based
practice and basic principles in communication intervention for learners with
developmental disabilities. Perspectives in Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 12, 7-10.
Ylvisaker,
M., Turkstra, L., Coehlo, C., Yorkston, K., Kennedy, M., Sohlberg, M., &
Avery, J. (2007). Behavioral interventions for individuals with behavior
disorders after TBI: A systematic review of the evidence. Brain Injury,
21(8), 769-805.
Written
by Mark Ylvisaker, Ph.D.
Last
revised: April 2008
Source:
http://www.projectlearnet.org/tutorials/language_comprehension.html
Post a Comment for "WHAT IS LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION?"