1 Anila Fejzo, Lucie Godard et Line LaplanteThe effects of morphological awareness instruction on second language student's literacy development Anila Fejzo, Lucie Godard et Line Laplante UQAM SSSR, July

2 Problematic Essential condition for success in reading and writing – acquisition of specific processes of : Identification  word reading (WR) Production  word spelling (WS) Contribution of Morphological Competence to WR and WS: Studies done in mother language (L1) Different populations: normal readers, dyslexics, deaf persons Studies done in second language (L2) Only one correlational study and one study investigating L2 relationships exists L2 student reading and spelling difficulties compared to those in L1 Greater difficulty in reading and spelling for Arabic-speaking students compared to other L2 students – difficulties originating from the L1 characteristics

3 Objectives and Research QuestionThe present research aims to support Arab-speaking students with respect to WR and WS through an MC intervention. Research question What are the effects of morphological competence development on the identification and production of written words for Arab-speaking students educated in French L2? Objectives: Learn the strengths and needs of Arab-speaking students educated in French L2. Verify the effects of Morphological Competence intervention on specific Word Reading and Word Spelling processes. Shed light on the content and modalities of the Morphological Competence intervention

4 Theoretical Framework: Contribution of Morphological Competence on Word Reading and SpellingFrench graphic functioning French encodes phonology and morphology In French, the silent morphology of the spoken language corresponds to the rich morphology of the written language /il paRl/  il parle / ils parlent /lè/  lait / laid Importance of morphological rule knowledge for Word Reading and Word Spelling

5 Morphological processing is placed at the last stage of development.Theoretical Framework: Contribution of Morphological Competence on Word Reading and Spelling Developmental models of word reading and spelling Frith (1986) Ehri (1997, 1999) Seymour (1999, 2006) Tsesmeli and Seymour (2006) Henderson (1985) Morphological processing is placed at the last stage of development. It facilitates the formation of orthographic representations of words and access to these representations.

6 Significantly positive effects of MC developmentTheoretical Framework: Research on Morphological Competence and Word Reading and Spelling Correlational Research MC appears to be implicated in: Word Reading (Mahony & al., 2000; Singson & al., 2000; Lyster, 2002; Casalis & Louis-Alexandre, 2000; Leong, 1989; Fowler & Liberman, 1995; Carlisle & Nomanbhoy, 1993) Word Spelling (Bryant & al., 2000; Fowler & Liberman, 1995; Nunes & al., 2006; Bryant, Nunes & Pretzlik, 2003; Shankweiler & al. 1996) Causal Research MC and WR In French (Casalis, 2007: dyslexic students); in English (Elbro & Arnbak, 1996: dyslexic students); in Norwegian (Lyster, 2002: normal readers) MC and WS In English (Bryant & al., 2003; Elbro & Arnbak,1996) 3 meta-analyses: Bowers & al. (2010) – 22 studies; Goodwin & Anh (2010) – 17 studies; Carlisle (2010) – 10 studies Significantly positive effects of MC development on WR and WS

7 Hypotheses H1 – Morphological Competence: Grade 3 & Grade 4 Arabic- speaking students educated in French and having received an intervention designed to develop morphological competence will have superior performance compared to their peers who have not completed the program. H2 – Word Reading: Grade 3 & Grade 4 Arabic-speaking students educated in French and having received an intervention designed to develop morphological competence will have superior performance compared to their peers who have not completed the program. H3 – Word Spelling: Grade 3 & Grade 4 Arab-speaking students educated in French and having received an intervention designed to develop morphological competence will have superior performance compared to their peers who have not completed the program.

8 Method Design & ParticipantsResearch method  mixed (principally quantitative) Research design  quasi-experimental Pretest (both groups)  CM intervention (experimental group)  posttest (both groups) Participants 2nd cycle primary school Arab-speaking students educated in French L2 Experiment group: 5 classes (n = 31) 3rd graders  21 4th graders  10 Control group: 5 classes (n = 22) 3rd graders  12

9 Method Intervention ProgramComponents: Morphological Competence (MC), Word Reading (WR) and Word Spelling (WS) Approach: Explicit teaching (as suggested by research – In L1: Elbro & Arnbak, 1996; Bryant & al., 2006, Nunes & al., 2006; Rispens & al., 2007; Fayol, 2008, Gombert, 2003, Gombert & al., 2000 – In L2: Koda, 2004; Fender, 2008, Randall & Meara, 1988). 10 Activities focusing on: Word families Prefixation (in-, dé-, re-, a-) Suffixation (-tion, -eur, -age, -ment, -ant, -ence, -eux, etc.) Lexical Morphograms (grand, court, gris, etc.) Derivation of pseudo-words Modalities Once a week in each of the 5 classes 10 sessions of 50 to 60 minutes  500 to 600 minutes

10 Method Measures Control Variables Dependent VariablesPhonological Awareness (BELEC, 1994) Rapid naming (RAN, Wolf & Denckla, 2005) Non-verbal intelligence (Matrices de Raven, 2002) Dependent Variables Morphological competence (experimental test) Word reading (subtest of BELEC, 1994) Word spelling (experimental test, semi-guided interview) Qualitative measures of the implementation Research journal Questionnaire completed by the students Questionnaire completed by the teacher

11 Morphological Competence MeasuresExperimental test Production of derived words (10 items) Example: Ma cousine se marie la semaine prochaine. J’ai hâte d’assister à son _______ (mariage). Root extraction (10 items) Example: Mon écriture est illisible. On ne peut pas la ___ (lire). Pseudo-word derivation (10 items) Example: Une petite pline est une _______ (plinette). Phonological neutral condition (marie - mariage) (10 items) vs. phonological complex condition (lire-illisible) (10 items).

12 Word Reading Measures MIM (72 items; pretest  series A; posttest  series B; BELEC, 1994) Reading conditions (6 words per condition) Short vs. long (or multimorphemic) Frequent vs. rare Simple vs. complex spelling Words vs. pseudo-words Precision (correct answers) Speed (reading time)

13 Word Spelling MeasuresExperimental test – 39 words to dictation : Prefixes (13 items) Example: Il est resté immobile quand il a vu l’ours s’approcher. Suffixes (13 items) Example: La gentillesse de son ami l’a beaucoup ému. Morphograms (13 items) Example: Le chant des oiseaux égayait la forêt. Semi-guided interview (pre & posttest): 3 weak students and 3 strong students in each group; Spelling word strategies

14 Pretest versus Posttest ResultsObjective 2: Hypothesis verification Objective 3: Didactic insight into the application modalities of an MC intervention program

15 Morphological Competence Results (Experimental Task)Significant difference between the pretest and the posttest for all targets in general and for morphological competence according to an ANCOVA (F1,52=33,058, p<.01), after controlling for learning capacity and phonological awareness. Hypothesis 1 is confirmed

16 Word Reading Results (BELEC)Improved performance for the L2 students Closing of the gap in terms of L1 performance, especially on multimorphemic items Better performance for the experimental group in all conditions, but no significant difference between the experimental and control groups for short and frequent items

17 Word Reading Results (BELEC)Groupe expérimental Significant difference between the two groups in terms of precision on morphologically complex items (F1,52=30,988, p<.01). No significant difference in terms of reading speed Hypothesis 2 is partially confirmed

18 Hypothesis 3 is confirmedWord Spelling Results Significant differences between the WS pre- and posttest results for both groups according to an ANCOVA (F1,52=13,745, p<.01) According to qualitative data, students of the experimental group used the morphographic strategy for WS on the posttest. These results corroborate results from Bryant et al. (2003) and Elbro & Arnbak, (1996). Prétest Posttest Hypothesis 3 is confirmed

19 Qualitative results and discussion of the intervention modalitiesThe activities were appreciated by the students and teachers. The students enjoyed reflecting on French spelling. The 3rd graders benefited from the program as much as the 4th graders. The activity content was dense: Difficulties for certain weaker students Some outliers in the experimental group for graphics Small size of the experimental effect (η2 = 0.27) It would be to the students’ advantage to spread the activities throughout the school year.

20 Conclusions Objective 2: The morphological competence intervention allowed for significant Morphological Competence, Word Reading and Word Spelling improvement among Arabic-speaking Grade 3 and Grade 4 students educated in French (FL2) Efficient intervention. Objective 3: This intervention could start from Grade 3 of primary school. The program’s activities could be used by the teacher as is, but spread throughout the year. The mixed methodology approach – a very interesting option for educational research.

21 Limitations Small sample sizeModalities of the application needing modification (length and contents) Interviews with a small number of participants Control the Pygmalion effect

22 Ideas for future researchVerify the effects of the MC program on reading comprehension and vocabulary among L2 learners. Compare the effects of the program on MC development among L1 and L2 students.

23 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]Thank you !