BackHome
Refresh: OffView Personal Schedule
Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Socioeconomic Disparities in Language Learning Capacity: Evidence from Dual Language Learners

Thu, March 21, 2:15 to 3:45pm, Baltimore Convention Center, Floor: Level 3, Room 323

Integrative Statement

Dual language learners (DLLs) are a rapidly growing population, accounting for 25% of all U.S. children under age 8. Similar to monolingual children, DLLs’ language development is correlated with their socioeconomic status (SES) because SES relates to differences in home language environment (e.g., quality of language input, access to books, frequency of book-reading; Farver, Xu, Lonigan, & Eppe, 2013). Unlike most studies that focus on DLL children’s vocabulary and syntactic knowledge, we examined SES variation in an important yet underexplored domain: the language learning process, namely, the ability to learn new language items with minimal exposure. Although some evidence suggests few SES differences in 2-year-old children’s fast mapping skills (Horton-Ikard & Weismer, 2007), other studies show SES differences in DLLs’ ability to process language input, a prerequisite for language learning (Hurtado, Marchman, & Fernald, 2010). Yet, no study to our knowledge has examined SES differences in DLLs’ language-learning processes.
We assessed English-Spanish DLLs’ vocabulary, syntax, and language-learning process skills, asking: 1) Does SES relate to these three language components? 2) Does the magnitude of SES differences in language-learning processes vary by child age? 3) Does home literacy environment mediate the effect of SES on language-learning processes?

Participants were 117 3- to 5-year-old children who received the Quick Interactive Language Screener-English and Spanish (QUILS-ES; Iglesias, de Villiers, Golinkoff, Hirsh-Pasek, & Wilson). QUILS-ES assessed children’s vocabulary (i.e., nouns, verbs, prepositions, conjunctions), syntax (i.e., wh-questions, past tense, prepositional phrases, embedded clauses), and language-learning processes (i.e., fast mapping nouns, verbs, and adjectives, converting active verbs to passive verbs) in both English and Spanish and the items were totally non-overlapping. SES (i.e., education) was based on parental report as was children’s dual-language production, exposure, and home literacy environment (see Table 1).

Consistent with previous work, SES predicted children’s vocabulary and syntax in English and Spanish (p’s < .05), over and beyond children’s gender, age, and dual-language experience. Importantly, SES also predicted English (b=.06, SE=.02, beta=.24, p=.003) and Spanish learning processes (b=.05, SE=.02, beta=.27, p=.002). The effect of SES persisted after controlling for vocabulary and syntax (p’s < .05). To examine change across ages, we added an SESxAge interaction term to the regression models. The interaction term was not significant (English process, p=.937; Spanish process, p=.246), suggesting that SES differences in English and Spanish language-learning processes were stable from age 3 to age 5. Finally, when we included book-reading frequency and the number of children’s books as mediators, the latter partially mediated the effect of SES on children’s English and Spanish learning processes (see Figure 1).

Thus, DLL children from low-SES backgrounds lagged behind their more affluent DLL peers on vocabulary, syntax, and language-learning skill. The SES disparity in language-learning processes calls for attention from researchers and educators, as it exists in both English and Spanish, persists throughout preschool, and can set low-income children on a disadvantaged language trajectory. Finding ways to augment children’s exposure to both English and Spanish through learning materials and language and literacy activities may be crucial for ameliorating these differences.

Authors