Reading and Language Learning
Problems in Spanish-Speakers
Learning English
*Elizabeth Ijalba, M.PH., CCC
*Loraine K. Obler, Ph.D.
Ph.D. Program in Speech and Hearing Sciences, Graduate
Center, City University of New York
Introduction
•
Research points to strong links between dyslexia and
problems in foreign language or L2 learning (Sparks and
Ganschow, 1993; Ganschow et al., 1998; Ganschow and Sparks, 2000; Sparks
et al., 1998; MacIntyre, 1995)
•
•
Deficits in the phonology-orthography domains in L1
interfere with reading in L2 and with overall L2 language
learning
Identifying dyslexia in Spanish should predict problems
in the learning of English as a second language and in
reading in English
Dissertation goal
•
Test in Spanish for markers of dyslexia
• Phonological processing
• Orthographic processing (word recognition)
• Visual-verbal processing (automaticity)
•
Participants
•
•
•
•
20-50 years of age
broad range of English-learning abilities
residing in the US for at least 3 years
learning English for at least 2 years
What is dyslexia?
•
Difficulty learning to read
•
•
•
•
•
in spite of learning opportunities
normal intelligence
no obvious learning problems
no obvious spoken language problems
Characteristics of dyslexia in Spanish
•
•
•
•
•
Strong decoding strategy
Weak word recognition
Spelling problems
Slow reading
Poor comprehension
60 adult Spanish-speakers learning ESL rated themselves on a
3 point scale in terms of ease or difficulty in learning English
and in their ability to read English
1
“Better than most”
(N = 1)
2
“Average”
(N = 25)
3
“Worse than most”
(N = 34)
Students and Teachers ratings on English learning ability
Years of Education
6th to 11th grade
12th grade
14 (some college)
17 (college grad)
Poor Learners
9
5
2
0
Good Learners
2
2
1
1
The best and worst English-language learners/English-language
readers were selected from a pool of 60 participants based on
their self-rating scores. The highlighted participants were
compared on dyslexia measures in Spanish and English
vocabulary
Groups
PPVT-III
Years in
(receptive
US
English
vocabulary)
Years
English
Study
Good
Learners
(N=6)
72.50
8
3.33
Poor
Learners
(N=7)
27.57
7.57
3.14
English receptive vocabulary scores and years in the
US for groups compared
Testing for dyslexia in
Spanish
Reading efficiency
•
Test of Reading Efficiency, Carrillo and Marin (2000)
• El caballo tenía la pata… (The horse’s leg was …)
ropa
rola
rota
roka
• Tu pelota es de color… (The color of your ball is…)
rogo
roco
robo
rojo
Timed task in which participants must read and
complete sentences.
Test of Reading Efficiency
Minutes and Accuracy
70
60
50
40
Good Learners
Poor Learners
30
20
10
0
Minutes
TEL time:
U = 1.00; p <.01
TEL accuracy: U = 1.00; p < .01
Accuracy
Reading of words vs. nonwords
•
Recognition of familiar words
• vs.
•
Decoding
• Lectura de Palabras by Carrillo (2002)
• Lectura de Pseudo-Palabras by Carrillo (2002)
time and raw scores
Words-Nonwords time and accuracy
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Good Learners
Poor Learners
Words time
Words accur
Nonwords
time
Nonwords
accur
Good and Poor learners
Words Time: U = 15, p = .430
Words Accuracy: U = 12, p = .082
Nonwords Time: U = 4, p < .05
Nonwords Accuracy: U = .000, p < .001
Spelling problems in Spanish
•
Exceptions:
•
•
•
•
•
/s/ as in cesto and in siesta (basket and nap)
/y/ as in lluvia and yerba (rain and grass)
/v/ as in banco and vaca (bank and cow)
/h/ as in gitana and jinete (gypsy and rider)
silent “h”
• hija --idea
• habitacion--alimentación
Spelling tasks
•
•
Dictation of familiar words with exception
spelling patterns in Spanish
Orthographic Decision task (Carrillo, 2002)
• habitación
• gigante
abitación
jigante
Dictation and Orthographic Decision
250
200
150
Good Learners
Poor Learners
100
50
0
Dictation
Orthog.Time
Dictation, U = 9.00; p = .084
Orthog. Time, U = .000; p < .01
Orthog. Accur, U = 14; p = .313
Orthog. Accur.
Phonological Awareness
•
Ability to segment and manipulate
phonemes in spoken words
• Test of Phonological Awareness in Spanish
(TPAS) by Riccio et al., 2004
• Subtest of Deletion
• e.g.: Say “anoche” without “a” = “noche”
TPAS and Auditory Discrimination
50
45
Raw scores
40
35
30
Good Learners
Poor Learners
25
20
15
10
5
0
TPAS
U =12, p = .194,
Auditory Discrimination
Rapid Automatized Naming
•
Subtests from the Comprehensive test of
phonological processing (CTOPP):
• Rapid naming of colors
• Rapid naming of familiar objects
• Rapid naming of letters
Rapid Automatized Naming
Seconds and Accuracy
40
35
30
25
Good Learners
20
Poor Learners
15
10
5
0
Colors Time
Colors Accur Objets Time
Objects
Accur
Letters Time
Letters
Accur
Colors: time (U = .000; p < .005); accuracy (U = 6.00; p <.05)
Objects: time (U = 5.00; p < .05); accuracy (U = 3.00; p <.005)
Letters: time (U = 3.50; p < .05); accuracy (U = 3.00; p <.005)
Conclusions
•
•
•
English language learners who report difficulty learning
English/ reading in English demonstrate native
language deficits associated with dyslexia
They have deficits in: phonological processing, word
recognition and in rapid automatized naming
Identifying dyslexia in the native language may predict
English learning and reading success
References:
Alegria, J., Carrillo, M., Sanchez, E. (2005). La enseñanza de la lectura. Investigacion y Ciencia, 6-14.
Carrillo, M. (1994). Development of phonological awareness and reading acquisition. A study in Spanish language. Reading
and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6, 279-298.
Carrillo, M., Calvo, A. (2002). La mejora de la ruta ortografica, en Aplicaciones de Intervencion Psicopedagogica, 84-3681690-0, 67-75.
Castles, A. & Coltheart, M. (2004). Is there a causal link from phonological awareness to success in
learning to read? Cognition, 91, 77-111.
Ganschow, L., Sparks, R.L., Javorsky, J. (1998). Foreign language learning difficulties: an historical perspective. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 31, 3, 248-258.
Ganschow, L., and Sparks, R.L. (2000). Reflections on foreign language study for students with language
learning problems: research, issues and challenges. Dyslexia, 6, 87-100.
Ijalba, E. & Obler, L.K. (2002). Grapheme-Phoneme Correspondence Learning in Spanish and English
Speakers. Graduate Center, CUNY, unpublished 2nd level project.
Jiménez González, J.E. and Hernández-Valle, I. (2000). Word identification and reading disorders in the
Spanish language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 1, 40-60.
Lyon, R.G., Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz, B.A. (2003). Part I, Defining dyslexia, comorbidity, teachers’
knowledge of language and reading. A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, Vol. 53, 2003.
Paulesu, E., Demonet, J.F., Fazio, F., McCrory, E., Chanoine, V., Brunswick, N., Cappa, S.F., Cossu, G.,
Habib, M., Frith, C.D., Frith, U. (2001). Dyslexia: cultural diversity and biological unity. Science,
291, 2165-2167.
Wimmer, H., Mayringer, H. and Landerl, K. (2000). The double-deficit hypothesis and difficulties in
learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 4, 668-680.
Wolf, M. and Bowers, P.G. (1999). The double deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 91, 415-38.
Special thanks:
•
To Loraine K. Obler, Ph.D. for her
continued support and guidance