Grammar intervention in young children with DLD (Calder et al., 2020)

Purpose: This study evaluated the efficacy of an explicit, combined metalinguistic training and grammar facilitation intervention aimed at improving regular past tense marking for nine children aged 5;10–6;8 (years;months) with developmental language disorder.Method: This study used an ABA across-participant multiple-baseline single-case experimental design. Participants were seen one-on-one twice a week for 20- to 30-min sessions for 10 weeks and received explicit grammar intervention combining metalinguistic training using the SHAPE CODING system with grammar facilitation techniques (a systematic cueing hierarchy). In each session, 50 trials to produce the target form were completed, resulting in a total of 1,000 trials over 20 individual therapy sessions. Repeated measures of morphosyntax were collected using probes, including trained past tense verbs, untrained past tense verbs, third-person singular verbs as an extension probe, and possessive ’s as a control probe. Probing contexts included expressive morphosyntax and grammaticality judgment. Outcome measures also included pre–poststandard measures of expressive and receptive grammar.Results: Analyses of repeated measures demonstrated significant improvement in past tense production on trained verbs (eight of nine children) and untrained verbs (seven of nine children), indicating efficacy of the treatment. These gains were maintained for 5 weeks. The majority of children made significant improvement on standardized measures of expressive grammar (eight of nine children). Only five of nine children improved on grammaticality judgment or receptive measures.Conclusion: Results continue to support the efficacy of explicit grammar interventions to improve past tense marking in early school-aged children. Future research should aim to evaluate the efficacy of similar interventions with group comparison studies and determine whether explicit grammar interventions can improve other aspects of grammatical difficulty for early school-aged children with developmental language disorder.Supplemental Materials:S1. Expressive raw scores of participants on trained past tense verbs within-session.S2. Expressive raw scores of participants on trained past tense verbs between-session.S3. Expressive raw scores of participants on untrained past tense verbs.S4. Expressive scores of participants on third-person singular (extension).S5. Summary of Tau-U analyses for expressive repeated measures baseline versus treatment phase contrasts on untrained third-person singular targets (extension).S6. Graph of % correct on expressive third-person singular repeated measures (extension).S7. Expressive raw scores of participants on possessive ’s (control).S8. Summary of expressive repeated measures baseline versus treatment phase contrasts on untrained possessive ’s targets (control).S9. Graph of % correct on expressive possessive ’s repeated measures (control).S10. Grammaticality judgment raw scores of participants on trained past tense verbs within session.S11. Grammaticality judgment raw scores of participants on trained past tense verbs between-session.S12. Grammaticality judgment raw scores of participants on untrained past tense verbs.S13. Summary of grammaticality judgment repeated measures baseline versus treatment phase contrasts on trained and untrained targets.S14. Graph of % correct on grammaticality judgment within-session repeated measures.S15. Graph of % correct on grammaticality judgment between-session repeated measures.S16. Graph of % correct on expressive untrained repeated measures.S17. Grammaticality judgment raw scores of participants on third-person singular (extension).S18. Summary grammaticality judgment repeated measures baseline versus treatment phase contrasts on untrained third-person singular targets (extension).S19. Graph of % correct on grammaticality judgment third-person singular repeated measures (extension).S20. Grammaticality judgment raw scores of participants on possessive ’s (control).S21. Summary of grammaticality judgment repeated measures baseline versus treatment phase contrasts on untrained possessive ’s targets (control).S22. Graph of % correct on grammaticality judgment possessive ’s repeated measures (control).Calder, S. D., Claessen, M., Ebbels, S., & Leitão, S. (2020). Explicit grammar intervention in young school-aged children with developmental language disorder: An efficacy study using single-case experimental design. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51(2), 298-316. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_LSHSS-19-00060 Publisher Note: This article is part of the Forum: Morphosyntax Assessment and Intervention for Children.

本研究旨在评估一种旨在提升五岁十个月至六岁八个月（年/月）之间发育语言障碍儿童常规过去时标记能力的显性、结合元语言训练和语法促进干预措施的有效性。研究方法采用跨参与者、多重基线单案例实验设计。参与者每周进行两次一对一的20至30分钟会话，持续10周，并接受结合SHAPE CODING系统元语言训练与语法促进技巧（一种系统性的提示层级）的显性语法干预。每次会话中完成50次产生目标形式的试验，总计在20个单独的治疗会话中完成了1,000次试验。通过探针收集形态句法重复测量数据，包括训练过的过去时动词、未训练过的过去时动词、作为扩展探针的第三人称单数动词以及作为控制探针的所有格's。探查语境包括表达性形态句法和语法正确性判断。结果测量还包括表达性和接受性语法的标准前测后测。结果分析显示，在训练过的动词（九名儿童中的八名）和未训练过的动词（九名儿童中的七名）的过去时生产上均有显著改善，这表明治疗的有效性。这些改善在5周内得以维持。大多数儿童在标准化表达性语法标准测量上取得了显著进步（九名儿童中的八名）。只有五名儿童在语法正确性判断或接受性测量上有所改善。结论：研究结果继续支持显性语法干预措施对提升学龄前儿童过去时标记能力的有效性。未来的研究应旨在通过组间比较研究评估类似干预措施的有效性，并确定显性语法干预措施是否可以改善发育语言障碍学龄前儿童语法困难的其它方面。补充材料包括：参与者会话内训练过去时动词的表达性原始分数、会话间训练过去时动词的表达性原始分数、未训练过去时动词的表达性原始分数、第三人称单数（扩展）的表达性分数、表达性重复测量的Tau-U分析总结、表达性第三人称单数重复测量的正确百分比图表、会话内控制探针（所有格's）的表达性原始分数、控制探针的重复测量总结、控制探针的正确百分比图表、会话内语法正确性判断的原始分数、会话间语法正确性判断的原始分数、接受性未训练重复测量的正确百分比图表、第三人称单数（扩展）的语法正确性判断原始分数、扩展的重复测量总结、第三人称单数重复测量的正确百分比图表、控制探针（所有格's）的语法正确性判断原始分数、控制探针的重复测量总结和控制探针的正确百分比图表。Calder, S. D., Claessen, M., Ebbels, S., & Leitão, S. (2020). 发育语言障碍年轻学龄儿童显性语法干预：一项使用单案例实验设计的有效性研究。语言、言语和听力学校服务，51(2)，298-316. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_LSHSS-19-00060 发表者注释：本文是论坛的一部分：儿童形态句法评估与干预。