Automatization and Basic Fact Performance of Normal and Learning Disabled Children

1983 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Garnett ◽  
Jeannette E. Fleischner
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Academic Skills ◽  
Older Age ◽  
Basic Fact ◽  
Disabled Children ◽  
Rapid Automatic Naming ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Naming Test

The relationship between automatization ability, as measured by the Rapid Automatic Naming Test (RAN), and proficiency in arithmetic basic fact computation was investigated. Subjects included 120 learning disabled and 120 nondisabled children between 8 and 13 years of age; 60 subjects in each group were designated as either younger or older. Significant correlations were obtained between RAN performance and basic fact proficiency for both the learning disabled and nondisabled groups. In addition, learning disabled subjects were found to be less proficient in basic fact computation and slower on RAN than their nondisabled peers at both younger and older age levels. Correlations were substantial enough to further inquire whether LD youngsters' lack of proficient basic fact skills may be due, in part at least, to weak automatization. The construct of automatization, or automaticity, has applicability to academic skills beyond those previously investigated.

scholarly journals Rapid automatic naming predicts more than sublexical fluency: Evidence from English-French bilinguals

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 ◽  
pp. 153-163
Author(s):  
Robert Savage ◽  
Miriam McBreen ◽  
Fred Genesee ◽  
Caroline Erdos ◽  
Corinne Haigh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Automatic Naming

scholarly journals Does self-correction in the Rapid Naming Test reflect cognitive and language performance in teens?

Revista CEFAC ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciana Cássia de Jesus ◽  
Vanessa de Oliveira Martins-Reis ◽  
Luciana Mendonça Alves
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Executive Functions ◽  
Visual Stimulation ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Rapid Naming ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Rapid Automatic Naming ◽  
Belo Horizonte ◽  
Naming Test

ABSTRACT Objective: to describe the occurrence of self-correction among adolescents in the rapid automatic naming test and the influence of schooling, type of visual stimulation and cognitive and language skills. Methods: 83 typical adolescents from 11 to 16 years old, enrolled from 6th to 9th grade of two public schools in Belo Horizonte participated in the study. The following tests were applied: rapid automatic naming, NEUPSILIN Brief Neuropsychological Assessment Instrument and Boston Naming. During rapid naming, substitutions and self-correction were accounted for. The variation in the number of errors, with and without self-correction, was related to schooling, functions and skills evaluated. Appropriate statistical tests were applied, adopting a significance level lower than 0.05. Results: individuals who made no mistakes had a better performance in attention, executive functions, memory, and vocabulary than those who made. Adolescents who performed self-correction were better at attention than those who did not correct themselves. Non-alphanumeric stimuli presented a higher occurrence of self-correction. Non-alphanumeric and alphanumeric tasks differed in terms of number of errors, both with and without self-correction. Adolescents from the early and late years of middle school differed regarding self-correction in the task of naming letters. Conclusion: self-correction was frequent in the evaluated sample and differentiated the group of adolescents who self-corrected or not, regarding attention, executive functions and vocabulary.

Rapid Automatic Naming

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Scott L. Decker ◽  
Rachel M. Bridges
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Automatic Naming

Evidence-Based Diagnosis and Treatment for Specific Learning Disabilities Involving Impairments in Written and/or Oral Language

2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia W. Berninger ◽  
Maggie O'Malley May
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Oral Language ◽  
Specific Learning Disabilities ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Rapid Automatic Naming ◽  
Response To Instruction ◽  
Orthographic Coding ◽  
Language Learning Disability ◽  
Specific Learning

Programmatic, multidisciplinary research provided converging brain, genetic, and developmental support for evidence-based diagnoses of three specific learning disabilities based on hallmark phenotypes (behavioral expression of underlying genotypes) with treatment relevance: dysgraphia (impaired legible automatic letter writing, orthographic coding, and finger sequencing), dyslexia (impaired pseudoword reading, spelling, phonological and orthographic coding, rapid automatic naming, and executive functions; inhibition and rapid automatic switching), and oral and written language learning disability (same impairments as dyslexia plus morphological and syntactic coding and comprehension). Two case studies illustrate how these differential diagnoses can be made within a conceptual framework of a working memory architecture and generate treatment plans that transformed treatment nonresponders into treatment responders. Findings are discussed in reference to the importance of (a) considering individual differences (diagnosis of impaired hallmark phenotypes) in planning and evaluating response to instruction and modifying instruction when a student is not responding; (b) recognizing that teaching may change epigenetic gene expression at one stage of schooling, but not the underlying gene sequences that render individuals still vulnerable as curriculum requirements increase in nature, complexity, and volume in the upper grades; and (c) using evidence-based diagnoses of specific learning disabilities that are consistent across states for free and appropriate education K to 12 and for accommodations throughout higher education and professional credentialing.

scholarly journals Phonological awareness, verbal working memory and rapid automatic naming as indicators of vocabulary development in preschool children

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 239-257
Author(s):  
Nevena Ječmenica ◽  
Slavica Golubović
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Preschool Children ◽  
Phonological Awareness ◽  
Vocabulary Development ◽  
Verbal Working Memory ◽  
Receptive Vocabulary ◽  
Expressive Vocabulary ◽  
Phonological Representations ◽  
Rapid Automatic Naming ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis

Introduction. According to the lexical restructuring model, the development of vocabulary initiates the development of phonological representations. Therefore, it can be predicted that children with developed vocabulary will possess very specific phonological representations of words. Aim. The aim of this research was to determine the significance of phonological awareness, verbal working memory, and rapid automatic naming as indicators of the development of expressive and receptive vocabulary in preschool children. Method. The research included 86 children of typical development. For the assessment of phonological awareness, verbal working memory, rapid automatic naming, expressive and receptive vocabulary, the subtests of Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals -Fourth Edition battery were used. Results. The results showed that the model containing age, phonological awareness, verbal working memory, and rapid automatic naming predicted 51% of the achievement variance on expressive vocabulary tasks (F = 7.73, df1 = 2, df2 = 75, p < .001) and 38% of the achievement variance on receptive vocabulary tasks (F = 4.65, df1 = 2, df2 = 75, p < .001). In the final model, only the tasks of phoneme identification, phoneme substitution, and rapid automatic naming (p < .05) stood out as statistically significant indicators of expressive vocabulary. On the other hand, statistically significant indicators of receptive vocabulary included analysis and synthesis of phonemes, verbal working memory, and rapid automatic naming (p < .05). Conclusion. The results showed that age, phonological awareness, verbal working memory, and rapid automatic naming significantly contributed to vocabulary development in children before reading acquisition.

Rapid Automatic Naming Test

1974 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha Bridge Denckla ◽  
Rita Rudel
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Automatic Naming ◽  
Naming Test

A-190 An Examination of the Equivalence of the in-Person and Remote Administration of the Feifer Assessment of Reading Screening Form

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 1245-1245
Author(s):  
Carrie Champ Morera ◽  
Alicia Carrillo ◽  
Steven G Feifer
Keyword(s):  
Sex Education ◽  
Phonemic Awareness ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Specific Procedure ◽  
Rapid Automatic Naming ◽  
Digital World ◽  
Semantic Concepts ◽  
Control Study

Abstract Objective As psychologists rely more on technology while navigating the digital world, we must adapt existing assessment tools. In response to this need, a process was designed for conducting remote administration of the Feifer Assessment of Reading Screening Form (FAR Screening Form; Feifer, 2015), which was designed to identify children “at risk” for developmental dyslexia. Our current study evaluates the equivalence between remote, online administration and in-person administration of the FAR Screening Form. Method This is a paired case control study in which 70 participants were administered the FAR Screening Form in an online, remote format, following a specific procedure to retain the validity of scores. These individuals were matched based on age, sex, education, and race with participants from the standardization sample of the FAR Screening Form. Results Independent-samples t-tests were conducted, and determined no significant effect of administration format for scores on the Phonemic Awareness (PA) and Semantic Concepts (SC) subtests, as well as the overall FAR Screening Index. Rapid Automatic Naming (RAN), a speeded subtest, showed a significant effect for administration format. Due to this effect, a new FAR Remote Screening Index (SRI) was created that includes only the PA and SC subtests. The SRI has demonstrated reliability and validity consistent with the FAR Screening Index. Conclusions The present study suggests that remote and in-person administrations of the PA and SC subtests of the FAR Screening Form are generally equivalent. During remote administration, it’s not recommended to use the RAN subtest; the SRI should be used to derive the screening index score.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document