Defining Developmental Language Disorder and Dyslexia in Schools: A Mixed-Methods Analysis.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Defining Developmental Language Disorder and Dyslexia in Schools: A Mixed-Methods Analysis.
Authors:	DeLuca, Tim¹ tdeluca1@mghihp.edu, Radville, Katharine M.¹, Pfeiffer, Danika L.², Hogan, Tiffany¹
Source:	Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research. Feb2025, Vol. 68 Issue 2, p618-635. 18p.
Subject Terms:	Interprofessional relations, Dyslexia, Content analysis, Schools, School administrators, Teachers, Language disorders, Research methodology, *Special education, Word deafness, Terms & phrases, Professional practice, Research funding, Questionnaires, Descriptive statistics, Professions, Medical coding, Evidence-based medicine
Abstract:	Purpose: Interprofessional practice requires regular communication between professionals from different disciplines using shared terminology. Within schools, many professionals are tasked with supporting children with language disorders, namely, developmental language disorder (DLD) and/or dyslexia. Limited information exists as to (a) how school-based professionals’ definitions of DLD and dyslexia align with research definitions, (b) how different school-based professionals define language disorders, (c) how school-based professionals’ definitions of DLD and dyslexia align across professional groups, and (d) how one’s definition of a language disorder correlates with other measures of knowledge. Method: In this mixed-methods study, we analyzed 304 definitions of language disorders from school-based professionals using a summative content analysis process. We explored the relationship between definitions and knowledge of disorder characteristics and best practices. Results: Data reflected limited alignment between professional and research definitions of DLD and dyslexia. Common misconceptions related to each disorder were prevalent among school-based professionals’ definitions. There were differences between the extent to which professional groups’ definitions aligned with research definitions of DLD and dyslexia. Conclusion: Results highlight the need for shared terminology between professional groups and researchers to improve collaborative practices and to narrow the research-to-practice gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Purpose: Interprofessional practice requires regular communication between professionals from different disciplines using shared terminology. Within schools, many professionals are tasked with supporting children with language disorders, namely, developmental language disorder (DLD) and/or dyslexia. Limited information exists as to (a) how school-based professionals’ definitions of DLD and dyslexia align with research definitions, (b) how different school-based professionals define language disorders, (c) how school-based professionals’ definitions of DLD and dyslexia align across professional groups, and (d) how one’s definition of a language disorder correlates with other measures of knowledge. Method: In this mixed-methods study, we analyzed 304 definitions of language disorders from school-based professionals using a summative content analysis process. We explored the relationship between definitions and knowledge of disorder characteristics and best practices. Results: Data reflected limited alignment between professional and research definitions of DLD and dyslexia. Common misconceptions related to each disorder were prevalent among school-based professionals’ definitions. There were differences between the extent to which professional groups’ definitions aligned with research definitions of DLD and dyslexia. Conclusion: Results highlight the need for shared terminology between professional groups and researchers to improve collaborative practices and to narrow the research-to-practice gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	10924388
DOI:	10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00202