Sarah Akkad

Does learning to read influence children’s audiovisual (AV) speech perception? This study aimed to answer this question by delving into whether the process of learning to read in Uzbek, a language with a transparent orthography, influences the sensitivity to AV speech cues (i.e., mouth movements corresponding to phonetic/lexical information). Furthermore, the study examined the mediating role of phonological awareness (PA) skills in potentially linking reading and AV speech sensitivity. 283 pre-readers (age=5-6 years) and readers (age=7-10 years) in Tashkent, Uzbekistan completed PA, AV speech perception, and reading assessments. Overall, better reading skills predicted increased sensitivity to AV speech cues. These findings suggest that there is a potential shared mechanism between reading and AV speech perception. However, in the case of languages with transparent orthographies, this shared mechanism does not seem to be significantly mediated by phonological awareness skills of children.

Internally-displaced children often lack schooling and reside in highly multilingual contexts. In Nigeria, children must learn to read in a local language (e.g., Hausa), and English; here, language skills can transfer across languages to support biliteracy. Importantly, the strength of transfer is constrained by proficiency in language skills. Formal schooling and early life exposure are crucial for acquisition of language skills. In our sample of 1595 Nigerian internally-displaced children, we investigated how pre-displacement school enrollment and early life language language exposure (i.e., at home) predict language skills, and how language skills transfer across languages to support literacy. Pre-displacement school enrollment particularly supported phonological awareness, and early life language exposure particularly supported vocabulary. Phonological awareness was stronger in Hausa relative to English, resulting in greater transfer from Hausa to English. IDP context allows the investigation of cognition and environment to enrich theoretical models of biliteracy, and inform pedagogical practices.

The role of migration experiences on first language (L1) and second language (L2) literacy and cross-linguistic transfer in refugee foreign language learners has recently received attention, but remains empirically underspecified. We investigated (1) migration-related ecological predictors of L1 reading; (2) within- and across-language predictors of reading; and (3) migration-related ecological moderators of cross-linguistic transfer from L1 phonological awareness (PA) to L2 reading. Our sample included 81 Syrian refugees between 9 and 18 years-old who resettled in Canada. Displacement in an Arabic-speaking country, shorter displacement durations, and older ages of L2 acquisition (L2 AoA) were associated with better L1 reading. Cross-linguistic transfer of phonological awareness (PA) to reading was overall greater in the L2-L1 direction, and migration experiences associated with better L1 reading were also associated with greater transfer in the L1-L2 direction. These findings highlight the need to understand refugees’ biliteracy in the context of their migration experiences.

Background: Bilingualism and biliteracy impact the development of phonological awareness and reading. However, existing research is Indo‐European‐centric, limiting our understanding of reading development in diverse linguistic environments. Method: Addressing this gap, this study examined the relation between phonological awareness and reading in monolingual and bilingual/biliterate children in Uzbekistan, where both Uzbek and Russian are widely spoken. One hundred two Uzbek–Russian bilingual and 98 Uzbek monolingual (6–10 years; Grades 1–4) children in Uzbekistan completed phonological awareness and reading tasks. All children attended a bilingual school; however, the language of instruction was primarily Uzbek for Uzbek children and Russian for Uzbek–Russian bilinguals. Results: Overall, children demonstrated stronger reading skills in their respective language of instruction; however, bilingual children showed stronger reading skills than monolinguals, despite being instructed in their second language. This suggests that bilingual children demonstrate a reading advantage when tested in instructional languages, but not in non‐instructional languages. Bilinguals' phonological awareness significantly predicted cross‐linguistic reading performance, specifically from the instructional language (Russian) to the non‐instructional language (Uzbek). Conclusion: Phonological awareness is a significant cross‐linguistic predictor of reading skills, even when the languages have overlapping but competing orthographies, providing support for interactive cross‐linguistic transfer in reading.

The role of migration experiences on first language (L1) and second language (L2) literacy and cross‐linguistic transfer in refugee foreign language learners has recently received attention, but remains empirically underspecified. We investigated (1) migration‐related ecological predictors of L1 reading; (2) within‐ and across‐language predictors of reading; and (3) migration‐related ecological moderators of cross‐linguistic transfer from L1 phonological awareness (PA) to L2 reading. Our sample included 81 Syrian refugees between 9 and 18 years old who resettled in Canada. Displacement in an Arabic‐speaking country, shorter displacement durations, and older ages of L2 acquisition (L2 AoA) were associated with better L1 reading. Cross‐linguistic transfer of PA to reading was overall greater in the L2‐L1 direction, and migration experiences associated with better L1 reading were also associated with greater transfer in the L1‐L2 direction. These findings highlight the need to understand refugees' biliteracy in the context of their migration experiences.

Bilingualism and biliteracy significantly influence the development of phonological awareness and reading. However, existing research is Indo-European-centric, limiting our understanding of reading development in diverse linguistic environments. Addressing this gap, this study examined the relation between phonological awareness and reading in monolingual and bilingual/biliterate children in Uzbekistan, where both Uzbek and Russian are widely spoken. 102 Uzbek-Russian bilingual and 98 Uzbek monolingual (6-10 years; grades 1-4) children in Uzbekistan completed phonological awareness and reading tasks. All children attended a bilingual school however, the language of instruction was primarily Uzbek for Uzbek children and Russian for Uzbek-Russian bilinguals. Overall, children demonstrated stronger reading skills in their respective language of instruction, however bilingual children showed stronger reading skills than monolinguals, despite being instructed in their second language. This suggests that bilingual children demonstrate a reading advantage when tested in instructional languages, but not in non-instructional languages. Bilinguals’ phonological awareness significantly predicted cross-linguistic reading performance, specifically from the instructional language (Russian) to the noninstructional language (Uzbek), even when the languages have overlapping but competing orthographies, providing support for interactive cross-linguistic transfer in reading.