Language learning difficulties Mental and Behavioural Disorders
Conditions
Interventions
Phase 1 – Screening. Every child in participating nursery classrooms will be assessed using the Automated Test of Language Abilities (ATLAS). This test assesses four core language skills: expressiv
Sponsors
University of Oxford
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Attending nursery within a state primary school during the autumn school term in 2019. 2. Aged 3 to 4 years at pretest 3. Children receiving in-depth language assessments and additional targeted intervention support will be selected for having language weaknesses in comparison to their peers at pretest.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Start nursery for the first time after 1st December 2019 2. Significant visual impairment 3. Significant auditory impairment 4. Significant behavioural difficulties, such that they would not be able to take part in whole class or small group activities.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The primary outcome will be a language latent variable defined by loadings from 4 ATLAS subtests (expressive vocabulary, receptive vocabulary, sentence repetition, and listening comprehension) plus the individually administered language tests (CELF recalling sentences subtest, CELF expressive vocabulary subtest, Renfrew Action Picture test (information and grammar). This language latent variable will be created for baseline, posttest (20 weeks) and delayed posttest (circa 40 weeks). Analyses will be based on latent variable ANCOVA models implemented in an SEM framework. The pretest latent language variable will be the covariate, and the posttest or delayed posttest latent variables will be the outcome measures. Errors for the language latent variable indicators may be correlated to provide an adequate model fit. The effects of the intervention will be measured by the y-standardized regression coefficient for a group dummy variable. The effects of clustering within schools will be accounted for by using robust (Huber-White) cluster standard errors (60 Schools). Separate ANCOVA models will be conducted to assess the effects of the language intervention programme on 1. Typically developing children (those not identified as having poor language skills); and 2. Children identified as having language difficulties (the 6 children in each class with the lowest language composite score who will get extra small group and individual language teaching). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The secondary outcome measures taken at baseline, posttest and delayed posttest will be: 1. Teachers’ ratings of children’s behaviour at school, using the behavioural adjustment subscale of The Brief Early Skills and Support Index (BESSI) 2. Knowledge of taught vocabulary assessed using expressive picture naming and receptive picture selection tests. These secondary analyses will use hierarchical linear models with random intercepts for schools. 3. Children’s letter sound knowledge and early word reading skill, assessed with subtests from the York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension (YARC) at delayed posttest only (circa 40 weeks after baseline). We will assess the extent to which children in the intervention groups (separately for typically developing children and children with language difficulties) show improvements, using latent variable ANCOVA models with the language pretest latent variable as the pretest and a latent variable for letter-sound knowledge or Early Word Reading as the outcome latent variables (Latent variables for these two outcome measures will be constructed by using item parcelling) | — |
Countries
England, United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed