Differences in morphological awareness, written composition and vocabulary in children from 8 to 11 years old;Diferencias en la conciencia morfológica, la escritura y el lenguaje en función del desarrollo y el nivel educativo del niño

Psicothema

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 171-179

  García, Jesús Nicasio ^a   González, Lorena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEÓN   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHILD; CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LANGUAGE TEST; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PRODUCTIVITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REVIEW; STUDENT; WRITING;

CHILD; CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; EFFICIENCY; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LANGUAGE TESTS; MALE; STUDENTS; VOCABULARY; WRITING;

EID: 33750598943     PISSN: 02149915     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Anglin, J.M. (1993). Vocabulary development: a morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society of Research in Child Development, 58 (10, Serial No 238).
2. Ball, B.W. y Blacgman, B. (1991). Does phonemic awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49-66.
3. Baumann, J.F., Edwards, B.C., Font, G., Tereshinski, C.A., Kame'enui, E.J. y Olejnik, S.F. (2002). Teaching morphemic and contextual analysis to fifth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 150-176.
4. Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word, 14, 150-177.
5. Berninger, V. (2001). Process assesment of the learner: Test battery for reading and writing, San Antonio, TX: Psichological Corporation.
6. Berninger, V., Abbott, R., Thomson, J. y Raskind, W. (2001). Language phenotypes in reading and writing disability: a family approach. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 59-105.
7. Bosque, I. y Demonte, V. (1999). Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, vol. 3: Entre la oración y el discurso. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, S.A.
8. Bradley, L. y Bryant, P.E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: a casual connection. Nature, 301, 419-421.
9. Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
10. Carlisle, J.F. (1995): Morphological awareness and early reading achievement. En L.B. Feldman (ed.): Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 189-209). Hillsdale, NJ.: LEA.
11. Carlisle, J.F. (1996): An exploratory study of morphological errors in children's written stories. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8 (1), 61-72.
12. Carlisle, J.F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: impact on reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 169-190.
13. Carlisle, J.E. (2003). Morphology matters in learning to read: a commentary. Reading Psychology, 24, 291-322.
14. Carlisle, J.F. y Flemming, J. (2003). Lexical processing of morphologically complex words in the elementary years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 239-253.
15. nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
16. Cunningham, A.E. (1990). Explicit versus implicit instruction in phonemic awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 429-444.
17. Clay, M.M. (1982). The development of morphological rules in children of differing language backgrounds. Oberving young readers: selected papers, 103-112. Porstmouth, NH: Heinemann.
18. García, J.N. y Arias-Gundín, O. (2004). Intervention en estrategias de revision del mensaje escrito. Psicothema, 16 (2), 194-202.
19. García, J.N. y de Caso, A.M. (2002). ¿Es posible mejorar la composition en alumnos con dificultades de aprendizaje y/o bajo rendimiento sin que cambie la reflexividad hacia la composition escrita? Psicothema, 14 (2), 456-462.
20. García, J.N. y de Caso, A. (2004), Effects of a motivational intervention for improving the writing of children with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27 (3), 141-159.
21. García, J.N., de Caso, A., Fidalgo, R., Arias-Gundín, O. y Núñez, J.C. (2005). La psicología del desarrollo y de la education en los Ultimos quince años de Psicothema. Psicothema, 17 (2), 190-200.
22. García, J.N. y Fidalgo, R. (2003). Diferencias en la conciencia de los procesos psicolögicos de la escritura: mecánicos frente a sustantivos y otros. Psicothema, 15 (1), 41-48.
23. García, J.N. y Fidalgo, R. (2004). El papel del autoconocimiento de los procesos psicológicos de la composition escrita en la calidad de las composiciones escritas. Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, 57 (3), 181-298.
24. García, J.N. y González, L. (2004): Validación del IECME: production y juicio. En J. de la Fuente (coord.): Intervención psicoeducativa en con-textos educativos y formativos (pp. 1.667-1.677). En F. Miras, N. Yuste y F. Valls (eds.): Actas del IV Congreso International de Psicología y Educación: calidad educative. Almería: Universidad de Almería.
25. García, J.N. y Marbán, J. (2001). Instrumento de evaluación individual de los procesos cognitivos de la escritura (IEPCE). En J.N. García: Dificultades de aprendizaje e intervención psicopedagógica (pp. 141-149). Barcelona: Ariel.
26. García, J.N. y Marbán, J.M. (2003). El proceso de composition escrita es alumnos con DA y/o BR: estudio instructional con énfasis en la planificación. Infancia y Aprendizaje. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 26 (1), 97-113.
27. García, J.N., Marbán, J. y de Caso, A. (2001). Evaluation colectiva de los procesos de planification y factores psicológicos en la composición escrita (EPPyFPE). En J.N. García: Dificultades de aprendizaje e intervención psicopedagógica (pp 151-155). Barcelona: Ariel.
28. González, L. y García, J.N. (2004): Instrumente de evaluación de la conciencia fonológica en escritura (IECME), En J. de la Fuente (coord.): Intervención psicoeducativa en contextes educativos y formativos (pp. 1.667-1.677). En F. Miras, N. Yuste y F. Valls (eds.): Actas del IV Congreso International de Psicologfa y Education: calidad educativa. Almería: Universidad de Almería.
29. Halliday, M. y Hassan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
30. Hauerwas, L.B. y Walker, J. (2003). Spelling of inflected verb morphology in children with spelling deficits. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18 (1), 25-35.
31. Henry, M.K. (1998). Structured, sequential, multisensory teaching: the Orton legacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 48, 3-26.
32. Kellogg, R.T (1994). The Psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.
33. Lovett, M., Lacerenza, L. y Borden, S.L. (2000). Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track: a program to integrate phonological and strategy-based remedial reading instruction and maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 458-476.
34. Lundberg, I., Frost, J. y Peterson, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for simulating phonological awareness in preschool children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 263-284.
35. Mather, N. y Roberts, R. (1995). Informal assessment and instruction in written language. A practitioner's guide for students with learning disabilities. New York: John Wiley Sons, Inc.
36. Moats, L. (1983). A comparison of the spelling errors of older dyslexic and second-grade normal children. Annals of Dyslexia, 33, 121-139.
37. Nagy, W. y Anderson, R.C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-330.
38. Nagy, W., Berninger, V., Abbot, R., Vaughan, K. y Vermeulen, K. (2003). Relationship of morphology and other language skills to literacy skills in at-risk second-grade and at-risk fourth-grade writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95 (4), 730-742.
39. Nagy, W. y Scott, J. (1990). Word schemas: expectations about the form and meaning of new words. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 105-127.
40. Nunes, T. y Bryant, P. (2004). Morphlogical awareness improves spelling and vocabulary. Literacy Today, 11, 1-19.
41. Nunes, T., Bryant, P. y Olson, J.M. (2003). Learning morphological and phonological spelling rules: an intervention study. Reading and Writing: an interdisciplinary journal, 63, 141-170.
42. Sanders, T.J.M., Spooren, W.P.M. y Noordman, L.G.M. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 15 (1), 1-35.
43. Windsor, J. (2000). The role of phonological opacity in reading achievement. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 43, 50-61.