09 SES 01 B, Early Literacy Interverventions and Development in Pre- and Primary School: Results from longitudinal studies
Rapid automatized naming (RAN) is a cognitive process that in previous research has been found to correlate with reading ability both concurrently and over time (Kirby, Georgiou, Martinussen, & Parrila, 2010; Van den Bos, Zijlstra, & Lutje Spelberg, 2002), even verified it to be one of the strongest predictors of reading outcome (Caravolas et al., 2012). RAN is easily assessed by letting the child name aloud a number of objects or symbols as quickly as possible. The most common stimuli in RAN-tasks are one of these four: objects, colours, digits or letters. The stimuli are also categorized as two types of measures: non-alphanumeric RAN (objects and colours) and alphanumeric RAN (letters and digits) (Meyer, Wood, Hart, & Felton, 1998; Rodriguez, van den Boer, Jimenez, & de Jong, 2015). In early ages RAN is often assessed by objects and colours, as it is crucial that the stimuli is well-known to the child. If not the stimuli is not automatized and will not measure RAN (Norton & Wolf, 2011).
Non-alphanumeric RAN has been found to predict later growth in reading fluency (Landerl & Wimmer, 2008; Lervåg & Hulme, 2009). However, when children start to develop reading skills alphanumeric RAN appears to be a better predictor of further reading fluency (Lervåg & Hulme, 2009). This is consistent with a number of studies implying that alphanumeric RAN is a better predictor of reading ability compared to non-alphanumeric RAN (Araújo, Petersson, Reis, & Faísca, 2015; Kirby et al., 2010; Norton & Wolf, 2011). In contrast, the predictive patterns between RAN and reading, comparable for both non-alphanumeric RAN and alphanumeric RAN have recently been evidenced (Moll et al., 2014; Poulsen, Juul, & Elbro, 2015). Hence, as findings are diverse it is still unestablished why and to what extent RAN relates to reading.
One reflection in later research is that focus has often been on the relation between RAN and reading ability, without taking the developmental perspective of RAN in to consideration (Georgiou, Papadopoulos, & Kaizer, 2014; Rodriguez et al., 2015). In their meta-analysis Araújo et al. (2015) emphasize participants’ age as one factor that may have an impact on the result. Counter to this, Rodriguez et al. (2015) suggest that changes in reading achievement and reading strategies rather than age impact the relation between RAN and reading ability. Rodriguez et al. base their assumption on results from a cross sectional study with 874 Spanish children varying in age between grade 2 and grade 6. Both non-alphanumeric RAN and alphanumeric RAN were examined with the intention to find whether the relation between RAN and word reading is stable over time. The results indicate differences in developmental patterns as the relation between RAN and word reading appears to decrease after grade 4, whereas the relation for RAN and pseudo word reading seems to be more consistent over time. What causes differences in RAN performance needs further examination and in the endeavor to find out what cognitive components are essential for RAN, a developmental perspective might be adopted (Georgiou et al., 2014). Therefore, aiming to examine the nature of RAN, this study investigates the relation within and between non-alphanumeric RAN and alphanumeric RAN, both concurrently and over time. From a developmental perspective the longitudinal design of this project enables to study any variations in relation within and between the different RAN-tasks, during a period when children learn to read.
Araújo, S., Petersson, K. M., Reis, A., & Faísca, L. (2015). Rapid Automatized Naming and Reading Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(3), 868-883. Caravolas, M., Lervåg, A., Mousikou, P., Efrim, C., Litavský, M., Onochie-Quintanilla, E., . . . Hulme, C. (2012). Common Patterns of Prediction of Literacy Development in Different Alphabetic Orthographies. Psychological Science, 23(6), 678-686. Georgiou, G. K., Papadopoulos, T. C., & Kaizer, E. L. (2014). Different RAN Components Relate to Reading at Different Points in Time. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27(8), 1379-1394. Gustafsson, J. -E., & Stahl, P. A. (2005). STREAMS 3.0 user's guide. Mölndal, Sweden: MultivariateWare. Kirby, J. R., Georgiou, G. K., Martinussen, R., & Parrila, R. (2010). Review of Research: Naming Speed and Reading--From Prediction to Instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 341-362. Landerl, K., & Wimmer, H. (2008). Development of Word Reading Fluency and Spelling in a Consistent Orthography: An 8-Year Follow-Up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 150-161. Lervåg, A., & Hulme, C. (2009). Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) Taps a Mechanism That Places Constraints on the Development of Early Reading Fluency. Psychological Science, 20(8), 1040-1048. Meyer, M. S., Wood, F. B., Hart, L. A., & Felton, R. H. (1998). Longitudinal course of rapid naming in disabled and nondisabled readers. Annals of Dyslexia, 48(1), 89-114. Moll, K., Ramus, F., Bartling, J., Bruder, J., Kunze, S., Neuhoff, N., . . . Landerl, K. (2014). Cognitive mechanisms underlying reading and spelling development in five European orthographies. Learning and Instruction, 29, 65-77. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User 's Guid. Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables. Version 7. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Norton, E. S., & Wolf, M. (2011). Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) and Reading Fluency: Implications for Understanding and Treatment of Reading Disabilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 427-452. Poulsen, M., Juul, H., & Elbro, C. (2015). Multiple Mediation Analysis of the Relationship between Rapid Naming and Reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 38(2), 124-140. Rodriguez, C., van den Boer, M., Jimenez, J. E., & de Jong, P. F. (2015). Developmental Changes in the Relations between RAN, Phonological Awareness, and Reading in Spanish Children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(4), 273-288. Van den Bos, K. P., Zijlstra, B. J. H., & Lutje Spelberg, H. C. (2002). Life-Span Data on Continuous-Naming Speeds of Numbers, Letters, Colors, and Pictured Objects, and Word-Reading Speed. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6(1), 25-49.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.