Heterogeneity in English as a Foreign Language: Skills Among Norwegian 6th Graders with Dyslexia—The Impact of Language Comprehension and Processing Profiles

Kaydedildi:
Detaylı Bibliyografya
Yayımlandı:Brain Sciences vol. 15, no. 11 (2025), p. 1230-1247
Yazar: Helland, Turid Magnhild
Diğer Yazarlar: Kaasa Randi, Helland, Wenche Andersen
Baskı/Yayın Bilgisi:
MDPI AG
Konular:
Online Erişim:Citation/Abstract
Full Text + Graphics
Full Text - PDF
Etiketler: Etiketle
Etiket eklenmemiş, İlk siz ekleyin!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3275507719
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 2076-3425 
024 7 |a 10.3390/brainsci15111230  |2 doi 
035 |a 3275507719 
045 2 |b d20250101  |b d20251231 
084 |a 231436  |2 nlm 
100 1 |a Helland, Turid Magnhild  |u Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway; wenche.helland@uib.no 
245 1 |a Heterogeneity in English as a Foreign Language: Skills Among Norwegian 6th Graders with Dyslexia—The Impact of Language Comprehension and Processing Profiles 
260 |b MDPI AG  |c 2025 
513 |a Journal Article 
520 3 |a Background: English as a first foreign language (EFL) is often difficult for students with dyslexia. This study maps a broad range of EFL verbal and literacy skills in 6th graders with dyslexia compared to a control group. Methods: Participants were 127 controls (CON) and 60 students with dyslexia (DYS), split into dys+ and dys− by their comprehension scores. They were tested with “The English 2 Dyslexia Test” containing seven subtests within three domains: Sentences, Pragmatics, and Literacy. The data were analysed in Part 1: domains and groups, and in Part 2: linguistic skills and spelling by groups. Results: Part 1. CON scored better than DYS on all tests. However, the differences between the two subgroups, dys+ and dys−, were larger than expected. Dys+ scored in line with CON on several tests, while dys− scored below CON on all tests and lower than dys+ on all except for spelling. Part 2. Minor differences were seen between CON and dys+ in linguistic skills, and both CON and dys+ scored higher than dys−. Spelling was scored by the number of graphemes. CON scored higher than both dys+ and dys−, with no difference between the subgroups. Conclusions: The results were discussed in accordance with neurocognitive theories of the auditory and visual timing systems. The overall low scores in dys− were mainly attributed to auditory processing problems, while the specific low spelling scores in dys+ were mainly attributed to visual processing problems. More research is needed on how the behavioural patterns in the two dyslexia subgroups relate to neural correlates in the meeting between EFL and different L1 language typologies and orthographies. 
653 |a Language 
653 |a Students 
653 |a Cognition 
653 |a Comprehension 
653 |a Literacy 
653 |a Teaching methods 
653 |a Auditory processing disorder 
653 |a Memory 
653 |a Brain research 
653 |a Auditory processing 
653 |a English as a second language learning 
653 |a English as a second language 
653 |a Dyslexia 
653 |a Spelling 
653 |a Foreign language learning 
653 |a Cognitive ability 
653 |a Orthography 
653 |a Phonology 
653 |a Cognition & reasoning 
653 |a Skills 
653 |a Visual processing 
653 |a Second language learning 
653 |a Norwegian language 
653 |a Learning outcomes 
653 |a Middle school students 
653 |a Neural networks 
653 |a Pragmatics 
653 |a Information processing 
653 |a Sensory integration 
653 |a Bilingualism 
653 |a Morphology 
653 |a Reading 
653 |a Education 
700 1 |a Kaasa Randi  |u Logopaedic Clinic, Haukeland University Hospital, 5009 Bergen, Norway; kaasa.randi@gmail.com 
700 1 |a Helland, Wenche Andersen  |u Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway; wenche.helland@uib.no 
773 0 |t Brain Sciences  |g vol. 15, no. 11 (2025), p. 1230-1247 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Biological Science Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3275507719/abstract/embedded/H09TXR3UUZB2ISDL?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text + Graphics  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3275507719/fulltextwithgraphics/embedded/H09TXR3UUZB2ISDL?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3275507719/fulltextPDF/embedded/H09TXR3UUZB2ISDL?source=fedsrch