Language Development Race and Ethnicity

1. Language DevelopmentRace and Ethnicity Mike Rice Jeff Keis Matt Bolin Sylvia Wise Andrew Driscoll

2. Race and Ethnicity Introduction • Race ~A group of people related by common descent • Ethnicity ~Identity with or membership in a particular racial, national, or cultural group and observance of that group's customs, beliefs, and language

3. Topics Covered • Language Development ~Asians ~African Americans ~Caucasians ~Native Americans • In-depth detail of topics such as….. ~Language acquisition, reading comprehension, vocabulary, grammar, etc…

4. Language Development in Adopted Asians • A study that examined 55 preschoolers adopted from China ~5% scored below average but majority scored at or above average ~Language acquisition proceeds rapidly in the majority of preschool aged children adopted as infants ~Children that perform the lowest were exposed to the English language for the least amount of time

5. Language Development in Adopted Asians, continued • If infants are adopted before one year of age they are much more likely to acquire the English language quicker • In a study of 26 preschool-age children adopted from Asian countries, it was found that the sample as a whole performed significantly above average on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test after at least 23 months of English exposure, despite the poor health conditions of many of the children upon arrival.

6. African Americans • Language Acquisition ~Study of 701 low-income African American Preschoolers on the Preschool Language Scale-3 test ~Measures- Preschool Language Scale-3(PLS-3), Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition(PPVT-III), and Expressive Vocabulary Test(EVT)

7. African Americans • Reading Comprehension- the ability to integrate effectively and meaningfully previously acquired knowledge with the information provided in a text ~Study was of a Group of African American Graduate Students on reading comprehension ~Shows signs that the current educational program is not working as well for African American students ~Teachers must take into account socio-cultural backgrounds when teaching language development

8. African Americans Continued • Vocabulary ~49 3-5 year old African American Children enrolled at Head Start were assessed using the Peabody Vocabulary Test ~They scored significantly lower than the normative group, which included minorities ~Factors: Language skills learned at home may not coincide with the grammar taught in schools ~Another factor to consider is that all participants came from impoverished families so socioeconomic status could play a large part

9. Caucasians • Experiment to examine literate language features in 2, 3 and 4 year old Caucasian and African Americans ~Illustrated that there was age related differences in the use of mental/linguistic verbs ~There was no difference between African American and Caucasian children’s evaluations and usage rates ~Showed differences in scores between children of low-income families with those of higher income families

10. Caucasians Continued • Experiment took place is Alabama to evaluate low socioeconomic preschool kids by giving a standardized test. ~Studied the performance of 70 African American and Caucasian children attending a Head Start program ~Both the Caucasian and African American students performed well below existing PLAI scores of middles-class northern children ~Caucasians at Head Start Programs scored higher than African American children in the same study especially on the levels of language complexity

11. Native Americans • Tests on 60 Cherokee head start children from Oklahoma. ~Tests were for speech language and hearing ~Tests were administered to groups of twenty 3, 4, and 5 year olds ~Scores for the 5 year old children were lower ~One sample test shows that these scores are not significantly different than that of the U.S. population

12. Native Americans Continued • Test was administered to the Northeastern Oklahoma Head Start (NOHS). The staff and children attending were of mixed status ~Test scores were the similar for the 3 and 4 year olds while the scores for the 5 year old children were lower ~Was found that CNHS children’s language comprehension exceeded their language production

13. Conclusion • In cases in which the children scored lower than the average in language development tests, socioeconomic status was more of a factor than race/ethnicity • Asians: Scored at or above the average ~African Americans: Performance reflected socioeconomic status ~Native Americans: Similar scores to U.S. population. Cultural teachings reflected in language tests • Socioeconomic status plays a much larger role than race/ethnicity in language development

14. Questions?

15. Works Cited • Anthony J Onwuegbuzie,  Eric Mayes,  Leslie Arthur,  Joseph Johnson,  et al. The Journal of Negro Education. Washington: Fall 2004.Vol.73, Iss. 4;  pg. 443, 15 pgs • Cathy Huaqing Qi,  Ann P Kaiser,  Stephanie E Milan,  Zina Yzquierdo,  Terry B Hancock. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Rockville: Jun 2003.Vol.46, Iss. 3;  pg. 576 • Currenta, Stephanie. Laura Justice. “Literate Language Features in Oral Narratives.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in School. Vol. 35, Jul 2004. 240-253. • Fagundes, Deana. William Haynes. “Task Variability Effects on The language test performance.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. Washington Vol. 29, Jul 1998. 148-158. • Jenny A Roberts,  Karen E Pollock,  Rena Krakow,  Johanna Price,  et al. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Rockville: Feb 2005.Vol.48, Iss. 1;  pg. 93, 15 pgs • Long, Edgarita E. and Christensen, John M. Indirect Language Assessment Tool for English Speaking Cherokee Indian Children. Journal of American Indian Education. Volume 38. Issue 1. Fall 1998. • Long, Edgarita E. Native American Children’s Performance on the Preschool Language Scale-3. Journal of Children’s Communication Development. Volume 19. Issue 2. 1997. • Tempii B Champion,  Yvette D Hyter,  Allyssa McCabe,  Linda M Bland-Stewart. Communication Disorders Quarterly. Austin:Spring 2003.Vol.24, Iss. 3;  pg. 121