Virginia W. Berninger

Purpose: Morphology, which is a bridge between phonology and orthography, plays an important role in the development of word-specific spellings. This study, which employed longitudinal sampling of typically developing students in Grades 3, 4, and 5, explored how the misspellings of words with derivational suffixes shed light on the interplay of phonological, orthographic, and morphological (POM) linguistic features as students learn to integrate POM features appropriately to generate correct spellings.Method: Sixty typically developing Grade 3 students were tested using the Spelling subtest from the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Second Edition (Wechsler, 2001) and were divided into superior, average, and poor spellers. Students' spelling skill was then assessed using the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Second Edition annually for another 2 years. Misspelled derivations from these three testing sessions were analyzed for linguistic feature errors and error complexity/severity. Differences in the integration of POM features across spelling ability levels at Grades 3–5 were analyzed with Kruskal–Wallis analyses of variance.Results: Longitudinal results demonstrated POM integration for the development of word-specific spellings involving derivational morphology was in its initial stages over Grades 3–5 and was influenced by spelling ability level. Information from a qualitative analysis revealed considerable variability in how students applied their POM knowledge to spell complex derivations.Conclusions: Word-specific spellings draw on multiple linguistic codes—P, O, and M—and their interconnections. It involves more than an understanding of orthographic rules. Rather, accurate spelling develops through an increased understanding of the phoneme–grapheme relationships as facilitated by the identification of word parts (base + or − affixes) in written language. Educational and clinical implications are discussed.

Dysgraphia, a specific learning disability, impairs legible and automatic letter production by hand, which can interfere with written composing. The goal of the current study was not to investigate effective methods for teaching self-regulated writing to students with dysgraphia, but rather to investigate their self that is involved in their self-regulated writing. Students with dysgraphia in grades 4 to 9 (17 males; 3 females, M = 139.44 months, SD = 12.15) composed six personal narratives about themselves and their relationships with others. Five indicators of self/self-others, informed by Theory of Mind, were coded in the six personal narratives. They also completed normed measures of self-regulation of attention and of written composing. Correlations identified which coded indicators of self/self-others and which measures of attention regulation were significantly related to the same written composing measure to be used as predictors in multiple regressions. Results showed that coded quality of Text Organization (Self Schema in Personal Story) for “My Life Before the School Years” as first predictor AND either Focused or Switching Attention as second predictor jointly accounted for significant variance and each predictor explained unique variance in writing fluency (timed composing). Implications of findings for educational practice and future research are discussed.

Two studies were conducted of students with and without persisting Specific Learning Disabilities (SLDs-WL) in Grades 4 to 9 (M = 11 years, 11 months) that supported the hypotheses that CELF 4 parent ratings for listening (language by ear), speaking (language by mouth), reading (language by eye), and writing (language by hand) were correlated with both (a) normed, standardized behavioral measures of listening, speaking, reading, and writing achievement (Study 1, 94 boys and 61 girls); and (b) fMRI connectivity or DTI white matter integrity involving brain regions for primary motor functions or motor planning and control, or motor timing in a subsample of right handers who did not wear metal (Study 2, 28 boys and 16 girls). Results of these assessment studies, which have implications for planning instruction for three SLDs-WL (dysgraphia, dyslexia, and oral and written language learning disability [OWL LD]), show that more than multisensory instruction is relevant. Language by ear, by mouth, by eye, and by hand, as well as motor planning, control, and output skills and motor timing should also be considered. Research is also reviewed that supports other processes beyond multisensory input alone that should also be considered for students with SLDs-WL.

In students in grades 4 to 9 (22 males, 20 females), two reading disability groups—dyslexia (n = 20) or oral and written language learning disability (OWL LD) (n = 6)—were compared to each other and two kinds of control groups—typical readers (n = 6) or dysgraphia (n = 10) on word reading/spelling skills and fMRI imaging before and after completing 18 computerized reading lessons. Mixed ANOVAs showed significant time effects on repeated measures within participants and between groups effects on three behavioral markers of reading disabilities—word reading/spelling: All groups improved on the three behavioral measures, but those without disabilities remained higher than those with reading disabilities . On fMRI reading tasks, analyzed for graph theory derived clustering coefficients within a neural network involved in cognitive control functions, on a word level task the time x group interaction was significant in right medial cingulate; on a syntax level task the time x group interaction was significant in left superior frontal and left inferior frontal gyri; and on a multi-sentence text level task the time x group interaction was significant in right middle frontal gyrus. Three white matter-gray matter correlations became significant only after reading instruction: axial diffusivity in left superior frontal region with right inferior frontal gyrus during word reading judgments; mean diffusivity in left superior corona radiata with left middle frontal gyrus during sentence reading judgments; and mean diffusivity in left anterior corona radiata with right middle frontal gyrus during multi-sentence reading judgments. Significance of results for behavioral and brain response to reading instruction (RTI) is discussed.

Children in grades 4 to 6 (N = 14) who despite early intervention had persisting dyslexia (impaired word reading and spelling) were assessed before and after computerized reading and writing instruction aimed at subword, word, and syntax skills shown in four prior studies to be effective for treating dyslexia. During the 12 two-hour sessions once a week after school they first completed HAWK Letters in Motion© for manuscript and cursive handwriting, HAWK Words in Motion© for phonological, orthographic, and morphological coding for word reading and spelling, and HAWK Minds in Motion© for sentence reading comprehension and written sentence composing. A reading comprehension activity in which sentences were presented one word at a time or one added word at a time was introduced. Next, to instill hope they could overcome their struggles with reading and spelling, they read and discussed stories about struggles of Buckminister Fuller who overcame early disabilities to make important contributions to society. Finally, they engaged in the new Kokopelli’s World (KW)©, blocks-based online lessons, to learn computer coding in introductory programming by creating stories in sentence blocks (Thompson and Tanimoto 2016). Participants improved significantly in hallmark word decoding and spelling deficits of dyslexia, three syntax skills (oral construction, listening comprehension, and written composing), reading comprehension (with decoding as covariate), handwriting, orthographic and morphological coding, orthographic loop, and inhibition (focused attention). They answered more reading comprehension questions correctly when they had read sentences presented one word at a time (eliminating both regressions out and regressions in during saccades) than when presented one added word at a time (eliminating only regressions out during saccades). Indicators of improved self-efficacy that they could learn to read and write were observed. Reminders to pay attention and stay on task needed before adding computer coding were not needed after computer coding was added.

In a 5-year longitudinal study of typical literacy development (Grades 1–5 or 3–7), relationships were examined between (a) parental responses to questionnaires about home literacy activities and ratings of children’s self-regulation at home, both completed annually by the same parent, and (b) children’s reading and writing achievement assessed annually at the university. Higher reading and writing achievement correlated with engaging in more home literacy activities. Parental help or monitoring of home literacy activities was greater for low-achieving than for high-achieving readers or writers. Children engaged more minutes per week in reading than writing activities at home, but parents provided more help with writing and reported computers were used more for homework than for school literacy instruction. Parental ratings of self-regulation of attention remained stable, but executive functions—goal-setting, hyperactivity, and impulsivity—tended to improve. Results are translated into consultation tips for literacy learning and best professional practices.

Parents completed the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition: Parent Rating Scale (BASC2 PRS) while their children (94 boys, 61 girls; M = 11 years 11 months) were given tests. Evidence-based profiles of multiple test scores and history (emergence and persistence) were used to assign to groups without specific learning disabilities in written language (SLDs-WL; n = 42 control) or with SLDs-WL (n = 29 dysgraphia, n = 65 dyslexia, or n = 19 oral and written language learning disability [OWL LD]). Parent ratings fell in the clinical or at-risk ranges for some individuals in all groups, but mean BASC2 PRS ratings showed nine significant main effects for group (n = 4): Behavioral Symptoms Index, Internalizing Problems Composite, Adaptive Skills Composite, two Clinical Scales (Atypicality and Attention Problems), and four Adaptive Scales (Adaptability, Activities of Daily Living, Leadership, and Functional Communication). Each SLDs-WL group differed significantly from the control group on these nine ratings, except dysgraphia on Atypicality and dyslexia on Adaptive Composite, Adaptability, and Leadership; and each correlated with one or more hallmark impairments associated with a specific SLD-WL. In a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study (without OWL LD), the dysgraphia and dyslexia groups, but not control group, showed connectivity with amygdala; BASC2 PRS Internalizing Problems Composite (internal stress) correlated with amygdala connectivity from two cortical regions involved in written word processing and production for total sample (N = 40). Applications to assessing emotional and behavioral correlates of SLDs-WL for educational services and future research are discussed.

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 through 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 (oral and written language learning disabilities, n = 18). That is, SLDs are defined on the basis of cascading level of language impairment (subword, word, and syntax/text). A five-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 (Block 4); 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% of variance. Orthographic word-form coding uniquely predicted nearly every measure, whereas attention switching uniquely predicted only 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 oral and written language learning disabilities were largely explained by the Block 1 predictors. Applications to identifying and teaching students with these SLDs are discussed.

While eye movements were recorded and brains scanned, 29 children with and without specific learning disabilities (SLDs) decided if sentences they read (half with only correctly spelled words and half with homonym foils) were meaningful. Significant main effects were found for diagnostic groups (non-SLD control, dysgraphia control, and dyslexia) in total fixation (dwell) time, total number of fixations, and total regressions in during saccades; the dyslexia group had longer and more fixations and made more regressions in during saccades than either control group. The dyslexia group also differed from both control groups in (a) fractional anisotropy in left optic radiation and (b) silent word reading fluency on a task in which surrounding letters can be distracting, consistent with Rayner's selective attention dyslexia model. Different profiles for non-SLD control, dysgraphia, and dyslexia groups were identified in correlations between total fixation time, total number of fixations, regressions in during saccades, magnitude of gray matter connectivity during the fMRI sentence reading comprehension from left occipital temporal cortex seed with right BA44 and from left inferior frontal gyrus with right inferior frontoccipital fasciculus, and normed word-specific spelling and silent word reading fluency measures. The dysgraphia group was more likely than the non-SLD control or dyslexia groups to show negative correlations between eye movement outcomes and sentences containing incorrect homonym foils. Findings are discussed in reference to a systems approach in future sentence reading comprehension research that integrates eye movement, brain, and literacy measures.

This interdisciplinary research, drawing on cognitive psychology and linguistics, extended to middle childhood past research during early childhood or adulthood on thinking aloud prior to written composing. In year 5 of a longitudinal study of typical writing, when cohort 1 was in grade 5 (n = 110 ten year-olds) and cohort 2 in grade 7 (n = 97 twelve year-olds), a cross-sectional study was conducted. Children were first asked to think aloud while they generated ideas and second while they planned their essays to express and defend their opinions on a controversial topic in the region of the United States where they lived. Third, they wrote their essays. Their think-aloud protocols were audio-recorded and later transcribed into writing for analysis. The authors developed and applied rating scales for quality of idea generating and planning in the written transcriptions and quality of opinion expression, opinion defense, organization, and content in the essays children wrote after thinking aloud; total number of words in essays was also counted. Seventh graders scored significantly higher than fifth graders on quality of idea generation but not planning, and higher on all variables rated for quality in the written essays including length. Quality of expressing opinions and defending opinions were uncorrelated in grade 5, but moderately correlated in grade 7. Whether idea generating or planning quality explained unique variance in essays varied with coded written essay variables and grade. Educational applications of results for assessment, assessment-instruction links, instruction in social studies, and theory of mind in persuasive essay writing are discussed.