اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 19 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 380 |
| تعداد مقالات | 3,141 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 4,263,314 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 2,858,394 |
مقایسهی رشد زبان گفتاری در دانشآموزان نارساخوان و عادی پایهی اول تا سوم | ||
| پژوهش نامه آموزش زبان فارسی به غیر فارسی زبانان | ||
| مقاله 4، دوره 7، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 15، اردیبهشت 1397، صفحه 31-52 اصل مقاله (727.62 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30479/jtpsol.2018.1349 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مریم نوذری رابری1؛ حیات عامری2؛ مجتبی منشی زاده* 3؛ ارسلان گلفام4 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری زبانشناسی- واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی- تهران | ||
| 2استادیار زبانشناسی- دانشگاه تربیت مدرس | ||
| 3دانشیار زبانشناسی- دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی | ||
| 4دانشیار زبانشناسی- دانشگاه تربیت مدرس | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 01 اسفند 1396، تاریخ بازنگری: 01 اردیبهشت 1397، تاریخ پذیرش: 01 اردیبهشت 1397 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف از پژوهش حاضر، مقایسهی رشد حوزههای زبانی کودکان نارساخوان و عادی بود. روش این پژوهش، توصیفی و از نوع پسرویدادی یا علّی– مقایسهای بود. در این پژوهش 60 نفر شامل: 30 دانشآموز نارساخوان رشدی و 30 دانشآموز عادی پایهی اول تا سوم دبستان شرکت داشتند. این دانشآموزان از طریق نمونهگیری در دسترس انتخاب شدند و با استفاده از آزمون هوش تجدید نظر شدهی وکسلر کودکان و آزمون خواندن و نارساخوانی (نما) مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند؛ درنهایت نیز، جهت ارزیابی رشد زبان گفتاری، از نسخهی نهایی آزمون رشد زبان استفاده شد. تحلیل یافتهها با استفاده از آزمونهای آماری من ویتنی و کروسکال والیس صورت گرفت. یافتههای بهدست آمده از این بررسی نشان داد بین میانگین نمرات کودکان نارساخوان و عادی در حوزههای زبان که شامل حوزههای معنایی یا واژگانی (واژگان تصویری، واژگان ربطی و واژگان شفاهی) و حوزههای دستوری (درک دستوری، تقلید جمله و تکمیل دستوری) است، تفاوت معناداری وجود دارد؛ بهطوری که میانگین نمرات دانشآموزان عادی در این حوزهها بیش از میانگین نمرات گروه نارساخوان است. بنابراین، با توجه به یافتههای حاصل از این تحقیق میتوان نتیجه گرفت که کودکان نارساخوان نسبت به همتایان عادی‌شان، تواناییهای زبانی ضعیفتری در حوزههای واژگانی، نحوی، زبان گفتاری و خردهآزمونهای مربوط به آن‌ها دارند؛ همچنین مقایسهی دادهها به لحاظ رشدی نیز نشان داد که بین حوزههای زبان کودکان نارساخوان و عادی در سه پایهی تحصیلی تفاوت معناداری وجود دارد و کودکان کلاس سوم در هر دو گروه، عملکرد بهتری در حوزههای زبان نسبت به کودکان کلاس اول و دوم دارند. ازاینرو، پیشنهاد میشود در برنامهی درمانی کودکان نارساخوان، آموزش حوزههای زبانی در کنار سایر مداخلات درمانی گنجانده شود. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| نارساخوانی؛ زبان گفتاری؛ معناشناسی؛ نحو | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Comparing spoken language development in Dyslexic and Normal First to Third Grade Students | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Maryam Nozari Rabari1؛ Hayat Ameri2؛ Mojtaba Monshizadeh3؛ Arsalan Golfam4 | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The goal of this study was to compare language development in dyslexic and normal children. This study was descriptive and employed causal-comparative ex post facto design. Participants were 60 first to third grade elementary students: 30 with developmental dyslexia and 30 normal students. These students were selected by availability sampling and by using Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) and Reading and Dyslexia (NAMA). At the end, the development of spoken language was measured via Test of Language Development (TOLD-P: 3). In order to analyze data, Mann-Whitney Test and Kruskal Wallis Test were used. Findings obtained from this research showed that there was a significant difference between mean of scores of dyslexic and normal children in linguistic areas which included: semantic or lexical areas (picture vocabulary, relational vocabulary, and oral vocabulary) and syntactic areas (grammatical comprehension, sentence imitation, and grammatical completion). That is, the mean of scores of normal children was higher than dyslexic group. Therefore, according to obtained findings from this survey, it can be concluded that dyslexic children compared to normal subjects had weaker linguistic abilities in semantics, syntax, and spoken language. Furthermore, there was a significant difference between mean of scores of dyslexic and normal children in Spoken language areas in grades 1-3 and third graders had better language performance compared to first and second graders in both groups. Therefore, it is suggested that along with other therapeutic interventions, teaching of linguistic areas be included in the treatment program for children with dyslexia. Extended Abstract: Dyslexia is a severe type of learning disability that affects some children, adolescents and adults (Lyon B, 1995). Weber (1985), in the Culture of psychology, refers to dyslexia as any kind of reading disability in which the children lag behind their class in the field of reading. There is no objective evidence that indicates deficiencies such as mental retardation, major brain damage or emotional and cultural problems as well as speech. Almost 80% of students with learning disabilities have difficulties in reading (Mays and Calhoun, 2006). Today many studies show that children with learning disabilities have less skills in phonological, semantic, syntactic and communicational skills than their peers. In addition, attempts to describe subgroups of children with learning disabilities prove that the largest subgroup is children with linguistic weaknesses that almost form half of the population of children with learning disabilities (Brian et al., 1991, p. 119). The prevalence of spoken language disorders among students with learning disabilities shows that these disorders are one of the most common problems of these students, but these problems have not been much considered (Halahan et al, 2011؛ quoted in Alizadeh et al., 1390, p. 442). One of the issues that has attracted the attention of researchers in recent years is the relationship between the development and evolution of language and its fundamental role in reading skills. Linguistic disorders affect not only the individual's ability to communicate in everyday life, but also prevent the learning of skills such as reading and writing, as well as have a negative effect on performance in other areas such as participation in social interactions and learning foreign language (Halahan et al., 2011؛ quoted in Alizadeh et al., 1390, p. 440) so, as for the importance and role of language in learning of reading skills, in this research, we sought to answer the general question of what is the difference between linguistic development of dyslexic children and normal children in the first to third grades of elementary schools. It should be noted that because spoken language is a very complex category (Halahan et al., 2011, quoted in Alizadeh et al., 1390, p. 439), in this study, only two aspects of the spoken language that are considered in Test of Language Development (TOLD-P: 3) (1998) have been studied. Therefore, the purpose of the development of spoken language in this research is the skills that include the semantic domains (picture vocabulary, relational vocabulary, and oral vocabulary) and syntax (grammatical comprehension, sentence imitation, and grammatical completion). It should be noted that the present study was conducted within the framework of psychology of language and examined the relationship between language and reading. In addition, the purpose of the growth of language in this article is the development of spoken language; therefore, the research hypotheses are: The first hypothesis: dyslexic children have a weaker performance than their normal counterparts in the growth of semantic / lexical domains (picture vocabulary, relational vocabulary, and oral vocabulary), and their difference in performance is statistically significant. The Second hypothesis: The performance of dyslexic children in the development of syntactic domains (grammatical comprehension, sentence imitation, and grammatical completion) is weaker than their normal counterparts, so that there is a significant difference between their performance. The third hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the development of spoken language (semantic and syntactic skills) in dyslexic children and normal children, and dyslexic children have a weaker performance than their normal children. The fourth hypothesis: With increasing educational level, the growth of speech language of children in both dyslexic and normal groups is significantly increased. The fifth hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the growth of spoken language domains of dyslexic children and the normal first to third grade elementary students. This study was descriptive and causal-comparative( ex post facto). participants were 60 students: 30 students with developmental dyslexia and 30 normal students of grades 1- 3 in elementary schools of Kerman city. These students were selected by non-random sampling and by using Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) and Reading and Dyslexia (NAMA) Test. At the end, the growth of spoken language between two groups were measured via Test of Language Development (TOLD-P: 3). The data that were analyzed in this study included scores that normal and dyslexic students in the first to third grade of elementary students received in Test of Language Development. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics includes the calculation of mean and standard deviations. The hypothesis tests was performed by using Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests with a significance level of 0.05 and With the help of the SPSS software. Findings obtained from this research showed that there is a significant relationship between mean of scores of dyslexic and normal children in linguistic areas which include: semantic or lexical areas (picture vocabulary, relational vocabulary, and oral vocabulary) and syntactic areas (grammatical comprehension, sentence imitation, and grammatical completion). The mean of scores of normal children was higher than dyslexic groups. Therefore, according to obtained findings from this survey, it can be concluded that dyslexic children compared to normal subjects have a weaker performance both in the whole test and in each subtests in semantics, syntax and spoken language. Furthermore, there is a significant difference between mean of scores of dyslexic and normal children in Spoken language areas in 1-3 grades. Children in third grade had better language performance compared to first and second graders in both groups. Therefore, it is suggested that teaching linguistic areas, along with other therapeutic interventions, be included in the treatment program for children with dyslexia. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| dyslexia, spoken language, semantics, syntax | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
شهیم، سیما. (1371). هنجاریابی آزمون هوش وکسلر کودکان در شیراز. مجله‌ی علوم اجتماعی و انسانی دانشگاه شیراز ، دوره 7، شماره 13 و 14، صص: 154-123. صفوی، کوروش. (1380). گفتارهایی در زبانشناسی. چاپ اول. تهران: شهر کتاب، هرمس. صص: 114-113. کرک، ساموئل و چالفانت، جیمز. (1377). اختلالات یادگیری تحولی تحصیلی. ترجمه‌ی سیمین رونقی و همکاران. چاپ اول. تهران: سازمان آموزش و پرورش استثنایی. کرمینوری، رضا و مرادی، علیرضا. (1387). آزمون خواندن و نارساخوانی(نما). تهران: دانشگاه تربیت معلم. لرنر، جانت. (1390). ناتوانیهای یادگیری. ترجمه‌ی عصمت دانش. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی. نبیفر، شیما. (1393).بررسی مقایسهای آگاهی نحوی در کودکان فارسیزبان طبیعی و خوانشپریش. فصلنامه‌ی تازههای علوم شناختی، سال16، شمارهی2، تابستان 1393: صص 36-25. نعمتی، پروین، سلیمانی، زهرا، مرادی، علی. و جلائی، شهره. (1387). مقایسهی برخی از ویژگیهای زبانی کودکان نارساخوان 7و 8 ساله‌ی فارسیزبان با کودکان طبیعی. مجله توانبخشی نوین. تهران: دانشکد‌ه‌ی توانبخشی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی. دورهی 2، شمارههای 3 و4 . پاییز و زمستان 1387: صص 46-41. نیوکامر، فلیس. ال. و دونالد، هامیل. (1381).آزمون رشد زبان. انطباق و هنجاریابی توسط سعید حسنزاده و اصغر مینایی. تهران: پژوهشگاه مطالعات سازمان آموزش و پرورش استثنایی کشور. هالاهان، دانیلپی. لوید، جان، کافمن، جیمز، ویس، مارگارت و مارتینز، الیزابت. (1390). اختلالهای یادگیری (مبانی، ویژگیها و تدریس مؤثر). ترجمه‌ی حمید علیزاده و همکاران. چاپ دوم. تهران: ارسباران. Batista Kida, A. de S., Brandão de Ávila,. & C. R. , Capellini, S. A. (2015). Syntactic markers in the oral retelling of dyslexic students. Journal ofCoDAS. 27(6). , 557-564.Cane, K. (2007). Syntactic awareness and reading ability: Is there any evidence for a special relationship? Journal of Applied psycholinguistics. 28(4). , 679- 694.
Gerrits E., & Bree E. de. (2009). Early language development of children at familial risk of dyslexia: speech perception and production. Journal of Communication Disorders, 42 (3) , 189-194.Gillon, G., & Dodd B. (1995). The effects of training phonological, semantics, and syntactic processing skills in spoken language on reading ability. Journal of Language, speech, and hearing services in schools, 26 (1) , 58-68.Glass A. L., & Perna J. (1986). The role of Syntax in Reading Disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities,19(9) , 354 – 359.
Goldsworthy C. (1996). Developmental Reading disabilities: A language based treatment approach .London: Singular Publishing Group. 1-48.Halahan, D. P. ,Lloyd, J., Kauffman, J. , Weiss,M. Margaret P. , & Martinez, E. A. (2011). Learning Disorders: Principles, Characteristics and Effective Teaching. Translated by Alizedeh H. , Hemmati Alamdarloo GH. , Rezaei Dehnavi S. , Shojaei S. . Tehran: Arasbaran.
Hung Chen, C. Y. ( 2015). Syntactic Deficit and Sentence Comprehension of Chinese Dyslexic Children. Journal of International Deficit and Sentence Comprehension of Chinese Dyslexic Children, 3(1), 32-37.
Hynd, G. W. (1992). Neurological aspects of dyslexia: Comments on the balance model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(2), 110-112, 123.Jimenez J. E.(2004). An evaluation of syntactic-semantic processing in developmental dyslexia. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 2(2). , 127- 142.Kirk, S., & Chulfant J. (1998).Educational Development Learning Disorders. Translated by Rounaghi, S.; Z. Khanjani & M. Vosughi. Tehran: Exceptional Education Organization Publications.
Koromi Nouri, R., & Moradi A. (1387).Test of Reading and Dyslexia (Nama). Tehran: Tarbiat Moallem University. Lerner, J. W. (1390).Learning disabilities. Translated by Esmat Danesh. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press. Nabihifar, Sh. (2014). The comparison of syntactic awareness in normal and dyslexic Persian speaking Children. Journal of Advances in Cognitive Science, 16 ( 2) , 25-36. Nation, K., & Snowling M. J. (2000). Factors influencing syntactic awareness skills in normal readers and poor comprehenders.Journal of Applied Psycholinguistic, 21(2), 229–241.Nemati P., Soleymani Z., Moradi AR., & Jalaei SH. ( 2008 , 2009). Comparison of some language characteristics between dyslexic children aged 7 & 8 years old and normal ones. Journal of Modern Rehabilitation, 2(3,4) , 41-46.
Newcomer, P., & Hammill, D. (2002). Testof Language Development (TOLD- P: 3). Normalization in Persian: Hassanzade, S. & Minayi, A. Tehran: Research institute of exceptional children pub.
Plaza M. Cohen H., Chevrie-Muller C. (2002). Oral language deficits in dyslexic children: weaknesses in working memory and verbal planning. Journal of Brain Cogn, 48(2,3) , 505-512.Safavi, K.(1380). Speeches in Linguistics. First Edition. Tehran: Book City, Hermes.
Shahim, S. (1371). Standardization of Wechsler Intelligence Test in Shiraz. Journal of Social and Human Sciences. University of Shiraz, 7(13, 14),123-154.
Stahl S. A., & Erickson L.G. (1986). The Performance of Third Grade Learning Disable Boys on Tasks at Different Levels of Language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(5), 285-290.Vogel, S. A. (1974). ). Syntactic Abilities in Normal and Dyslexic Children.. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7(2) , 103-109.
Vellotino, F.R., Fletcher J.M., Snowling M.J., Scanlon D.M. (2004). Specific reading disability(Dyslexia): What have we learned in past four decades? Journal of child psychology and Psychiatry, 45 (1) , 2-40. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,018 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 605 |
||