Skip to main page content

• HOME
• Current
• Archive
• Contact us
• Help
• Custom Print FAQ

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) CEUs available Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Custom Print Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wallach, G. P. Articles by Christie, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wallach, G. P. Articles by Christie, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Making a Broader Case for the Narrow View: Where to Begin?

Stephen Charlton
Huntington Beach Union High School District, CA

Julie Christie
Los Angeles Unified School Board, CA

Contact author: Geraldine P. Wallach, California State University at Long Beach, Department of Communicative Disorders, 1250 Bellflower Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 90840. E-mail: coronacape{at}aol.com.

Purpose: This final article covering the topic of the interplay between decoding, comprehension, and content versus structure knowledge describes a set of language initiatives that are focused toward content area learning. Inspired by the work of their colleagues from diverse fields and their own work, the authors offer suggestions to clinicians who are interested in creating and delivering curriculum-relevant and strategic-based language intervention to school-age students with language learning disabilities (LLD).

Method: The discussion covers selected topics that form the foundation for an evolving intervention framework, including (a) understanding the content and structural requirements of textbooks, (b) integrating metacognitive and metalinguistic techniques into intervention goals and objectives, and (c) emphasizing meaning-based activities that cut across connected discourse (macrostructure levels) and sentence/word components (microstructure levels) of spoken and written language.

Conclusion: Starting with ways to find clues about "what to do" with students by looking in their textbooks, the authors continue with examples that integrate content and structure knowledge using social studies and science as backdrops for language intervention. The article ends with a reminder to clinicians to consider ways that preschool language intervention can be more effective in helping children prepare for the academic demands of the future.

KEY WORDS: content knowledge, structure knowledge, curriculum-based intervention, metalinguistic language initiatives

CiteULike    Connotea    Delicious    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Anderson The Influence of Process Drama on Elementary Students' Written Language Urban Education, September 1, 2012; 47(5): 959 - 982. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Kumin and G. Mason Collaborative Planning To Teach Strategies for the Language of Testing School-Based Issues, December 1, 2011; 12(4): 139 - 152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. P. Wallach Peeling the Onion of Auditory Processing Disorder: A Language/Curricular-Based Perspective Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, July 1, 2011; 42(3): 273 - 285. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. P. Wallach, S. Charlton, and J. Christie What Do You Mean By That? Constructive Beginnings When Working With Adolescents With Language Learning Disabilities Language Learning and Education, October 1, 2010; 17(3): 77 - 84. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. W. Catts The Narrow View of Reading Promotes a Broad View of Comprehension Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, April 1, 2009; 40(2): 178 - 183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. G. Kamhi The Case for the Narrow View of Reading Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, April 1, 2009; 40(2): 174 - 177. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]