Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Child Language Teaching and Therapy
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thordardottir, E. T.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Vocabulary learning in bilingual and monolingual clinical intervention

Elin T. Thordardottir

Department of Communicative Disorders, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Susan Ellis Weismer

Department of Communicative Disorders, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Mary E. Smith

Department of Communicative Disorders, University of Wisconsin-Madison

This study used a single-case alternating treatments design to compare the effectiveness of monolingual and bilingual clinical treatment approaches in teaching English vocabulary to a bilingual child with language impairment. In contrast to the widespread belief that regular exposure to two languages should not be recommended for children with language impairments, recent findings suggest that bilingual acquisition is a reasonable goal for these chil dren in a supportive environment. The bilingual intervention approach in this study was designed to combine the beneficial effects of a positive attitude towards both languages and the use of L1 to learn L2. Results revealed com parable learning of English in the monolingual and bilingual treatment con ditions, with a slight advantage in the latter. The results support the view that bilingual intervention does not restrict language growth compared to a mono lingual treatment, and is, therefore, desirable since it avoids important nega tive aspects that result from eliminating either language of children who live in bilingual environments.

Child Language Teaching and Therapy, Vol. 13, No. 3, 215-227 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/026565909701300301


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Young Exceptional ChildrenHome page
G. A. Cheatham, R. Milagros Santos, and Y. Ellie Ro
Home Language Acquisition and Retention for Young Children With Special Needs
Young Exceptional Children, October 1, 2007; 11(1): 27 - 39.
[PDF]