James Javorsky

Identifying Native Language Difficulties Among Foreign Language Learners in College: A "Foreign" Language Learning Disability?

The present study compared successful and unsuccessful college foreign language learners on measures of intelligence, foreign language aptitude, native oral and written language, and math. Unsuccessful students had received petitions to waive the foreign language requirement. No significant differences between groups were found on intelligence and reading comprehension. Significant differences were found on the Modern Language Aptitude Test, on tests of written and oral language in the syntactic and phonological domains, and on math calculation. Authors suggest that students with foreign language learning difficulties may have underlying native language problems manifested especially in the areas of syntax and phonology. Suggestions for diagnosing a foreign language disability are made.

Foreign Language Learning Difficulties An Historical Perspective

For 10 years, the authors of this article have examined cognitive, affective, and linguistic influences on foreign language learning. They have proposed the Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis (LCDH) as a model for understanding foreign language learning problems. The authors review their empirical support for the LCDH and explain the diagnostic, pedagogical, and policy implications of their research.

Early first-language reading and spelling skills predict later second-language reading and spelling skills.

This prospective study examined early first-language (L1) predictors of later second-language (L2) reading (word decoding, comprehension) and spelling skills by conducting a series of multiple regressions. Measures of L1 word decoding, spelling, reading comprehension, phonological awareness, receptive vocabulary, and listening comprehension administered in the 1st through 5th grades were used as predictors of L2 reading (word decoding, comprehension) and spelling skills in high school. The best predictor of L2 decoding skill was a measure of L1 decoding, and the best predictors of L2 spelling were L1 spelling and L1 phonological awareness. The best predictor of L2 reading comprehension was a measure of L1 reading comprehension. When L2 word decoding skill replaced L1 word decoding as a predictor variable for L2 reading comprehension, results showed that L2 word decoding was an important predictor of L2 reading comprehension. The findings suggest that even several years after students learn to read and spell their L1, word decoding, spelling, and reading comprehension skills transfer from L1 to L2.

Comparison of Students Classified as LD Who Petitioned for or Fulfilled the College Foreign Language Requirement

In this study, we compared the cognitive, academic achievement, and demographic profiles of 46 students from one university who had been classified as learning disabled (LD) and had received permission to substitute courses for the universitys foreign language (FL) requirement (petition group) with the profiles of 21 students from the same university who had been classified as LD and had fulfilled the universitys FL requirement by passing FL courses (nonpetition group). Results showed no significant differences between the two groups on measures of reading, mathematics, written language, American College Testing score, and graduating grade point average when IQ was used as a covariate. More petition than nonpetition students had at least a 1.0 SD discrepancy between IQ and achievement and had been referred only for FL learning problems. More nonpetition than petition students had taken an FL in college and received accommodations in the FL. The two groups together appeared to constitute a heterogeneous group of learners, with more than half failing to meet a minimum discrepancy criterion for classification as LD. The discussion addresses the classification system for LD, the process for determining the presence of FL learning problems and how to address them, and directions for further research.

Students Classified as LD and the College Foreign Language Requirement A Quantitative Analysis

This study was conducted to determine whether students classified as learning disabled (LD) who were permitted to substitute courses for the college foreign language (FL) requirement at one university would display significant cognitive and academic achievement differences when grouped by level of discrepancy between IQ and achievement, by discrepancy between achievement according to different measures, and by level of performance on phonological-orthographic processing measures, on the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT), and in FL courses. Results showed that there were no differences among students with different levels of discrepancy (i.e., < 1.0 SD, 1.0-1.49 SD, and > 1.50 SD) on MLAT and American College Testing (ACT) scores, graduating grade point average (GPA) or college FL GPA. Results also showed that among students who scored below versus at or above the 25th percentile on phonological-orthographic processing measures, there were no differences on measures of IQ, ACT, MLAT, and GPA, as well as most measures of academic achievement. Implications for the use of the LD label to grant FL course substitutions or waivers, use of the MLAT in the diagnostic and course substitution/waiver process, and the validity and reliability of traditional criteria for the classification as LD are discussed.

An Examination of Youth with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Language Learning Disabilities: A Clinical Study

This study examined the performance of 96 youth hospitalized at an acute-care psychiatric hospital on a battery of language measures. The participants were separated into four groups: (a) participants with language learning disabilities (LLD; n = 14), (b) participants with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; n = 26), (c) participants with both ADHD and LLD (ADHD/LLD; n = 18), (d) participants with neither ADHD nor LLD (Neither; n = 38). Participants with ADHD/LLD performed significantly more poorly than did the ADHD group or the Neither group on measures of phonology and syntax, but not semantics. However, participants with ADHD/LLD did not significantly differ from participants with LLD on a majority of language-based measures. This finding suggests that participants with ADHD/LLD have profiles more similar to those of participants with LLD than participants with ADHD. Educational implications for instruction for students with ADHD/LLD are presented.

Students Classified as LD Who Received Course Substitutions for the College Foreign Language Requirement: A Replication Study

This replication study examined whether 158 college students classified as learning disabled (LD) who were granted course substitutions for the foreign language (FL) requirement would display significant cognitive and academic achievement differences when grouped by levels of IQ—achievement and achievement—achievement discrepancy and by level of performance on an FL aptitude test (Modern Language Aptitude Test; MLAT), phonological/orthographic processing measures, and in FL courses. The results showed that there were few differences among groups with differing levels of IQ—achievement or achievement—achievement discrepancy (i.e., < 1.0 SD, 1.0—1.49 SD, and > 1.50 SD) on MLAT and American College Testing (ACT) scores, graduating grade point average (GPA), or college FL GPA. The results also showed that between groups who scored at or above versus below the 15th percentile (i.e., < 1.0 SD) on the MLAT, there were no differences on measures of graduating GPA, college FL GPA, native language skill, ACT score, and Verbal IQ. Demographic findings showed that 44% of these petition students met a minimum IQ—achievement discrepancy criterion (≥ 1.0 SD) for classification as LD. These findings suggest that many traditional assumptions about LD and FL learning are likely to be false.

Professional Development for Teachers of Students With ADHD and Characteristics of ADHD

Inservice education has the potential to provide teachers with knowledge and skills that are necessary to manage challenging classroom behavior and improve academic and social/emotional outcomes. To assess the effectiveness of 3 inservice programs that focused on knowledge, understanding, and/or functional-assessment interventions, we identified 49 educators of students with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and 196 of their students. Three months after implementing all programs we found improved teachers’ attitudes about and confidence in teaching students with ADHD and improved self-reported ability to provide accommodations. Our findings were documented differentially in a comparison of program type and by real changes in teaching practices and in ratings and observations of student behavior.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Research-to-Practice through Distance Education

Through advances in technology, educators will be able to provide school districts with opportunities to present the latest in researcb-based inservice training at minimal costs to individual students. This article will compare factors in the literature associated with successful outcomes in distance education with our experiences providing an inservice teacher education program on attention deficit/hypeactivity (AD/HD). We present the method of a satellite and telephone-based course and the evaluation of this graduate level inservice course.