Tag: Language Development

How early do field-related stereotypes start? Understanding children’s gender beliefs in STEM and verbal abilities

By Carmen Pannone, University of Cagliari

In a recent meta-analysis on children’s gender stereotypes about STEM and verbal abilities, data from 98 studies across 33 nations involving more than 145,000 children were integrated. The findings reveal that verbal stereotypes favoring girls’ abilities (b = 0.19) are actually stronger than aggregated STEM stereotypes (b = 0.09). A closer look shows that at age 6, stereotypes reflected in-group bias—boys favoring boys, and girls favoring girls. These gender differences declined with age, and by age 16, the stereotypes tended to align with traditional gender roles: boys were favored in STEM ability, and girls in verbal ability.

Girls showed stronger pro-female verbal stereotypes than boys, and while verbal stereotypes increasingly favored girls with age, STEM stereotypes remained more stable. Girls’ STEM beliefs shifted from pro-female to pro-male around ages 10–12, while boys’ verbal beliefs flipped to pro-female around ages 8–10. By age 8, verbal stereotypes already significantly favored girls. STEM stereotypes varied by domain, with stronger male-favoring beliefs in computer science, engineering, and physics (b = 0.25), and weaker or negligible biases in general math (b = 0.06) and science (b = 0.09). Background also mattered: children identified as Black held weaker STEM stereotypes than those identified as White, especially among girls. Black children’s views were largely gender-neutral, while White children slightly favored boys.

These results suggest that stereotypes emerge early, and may shape children’s interests and academic choices. Addressing these beliefs calls for cross-disciplinary collaboration and greater research focus on understudied areas like computing, engineering, and verbal ability development. Interventions could aim to challenge or broaden stereotypes and mitigate their impact, guided by a clear understanding of when such beliefs typically take root.

Chatbot interaction shows positive effects on language learning

By Susan Davis, Johns Hopkins University

Chatbots are reminiscent of a gossipy co-worker—full of chatter, not all of it credible, yet nonetheless useful now and then. In a meta-analysis of 28 studies comparing Chatbot users to non-users, Wang, Cheung, Neitzel, & Chai recently examined the effects of chatbots on users’ language learning, and the moderators that affected this interaction in terms of 18 characteristics of the humans and chatbots.

Results showed that chatbot users demonstrated greater gains in language learning than comparable non-users (ES=+0.48). Other findings included that language gains were greatest for secondary school students and adult learners; second language learners at the intermediate level (versus beginning or advanced), particularly those learning English; and for those who used a mobile-based program instead of a laptop or PC. Chatbot-driven interaction showed greater gains than user-driven interactions, and were most effective when used 1:1 in-class instead of out-of-class. Voice-based and voice-plus-text-based interactions both demonstrated positive effects on language learning. Implications for the classroom are that chatbots are a valid in-class language learning tool for older students, especially those learning English as a second language.

Enhancing early literacy: Evaluating the impact of the TELL Curriculum in preschool settings

By Cynthia Lake, Johns Hopkins University

High-quality preschool programs are pivotal in enhancing literacy outcomes and bridging the achievement gap among children from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. Early childhood education not only supports cognitive and social development but can also play a crucial role in preparing children for future schooling. A recent study published by Shelley Gray and colleagues evaluated the efficacy of Teaching Early Literacy and Language (TELL), a universal whole-class curriculum, in enhancing the oral language and early literacy skills of preschool children from low-SES backgrounds.

The study employed a three-cohort randomized controlled trial design with preschool teachers from the Phoenix area randomly assigned to either the TELL or business-as-usual (BAU) condition, stratified by agency/school district. The TELL curriculum included a year-long sequence of instruction, books, lesson plans, and language-rich activities. Despite challenges including COVID-19 disruptions, 58 teachers (30 TELL, 28 BAU) completed the study, with over 300 students (174 TELL, 150 BAU) included in the final analysis.

The findings showed significant effects in favor of TELL on experimenter-created curriculum-based measures, particularly on print awareness, letter naming, and phonological awareness. These foundational skills are critical predictors of future reading success and were systematically taught throughout the curriculum. However, for more distal measures, such as the Woodcock–Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language and PELI assessments of vocabulary and comprehension, the effects were not significant. This discrepancy highlights ongoing debates regarding the appropriateness of different assessment tools in early childhood education and intervention research.

Effects of a home-visit shared reading intervention in the Netherlands

By Nathan Storey, Johns Hopkins University

Researchers in the Netherlands recently explored the effects of Reading Express, an intervention for children ages 2-8 at risk of language delays. This program emphasizes interactive shared reading via home visits with parents of low socio-economic and ethnic minority status. In a quasi-experimental study, Dias-Broens & van Steensel assessed 176 children from 146 families (94 experimental, 80 control), measuring vocabulary, story comprehension, and book exposure, and surveyed parents about their reading practices.

Researchers found positive home literacy environment changes in children’s book exposure and families’ shared reading experiences. These changes were maintained over time. In addition, the program identified short-term effects on story comprehension, but positive trends leveled off 20 weeks after the program ended. No effect was seen on receptive vocabulary.

These findings suggest that it is possible to change parent reading practices through home visits, although the effects leveled off at 20 weeks. The authors surmised that some of the limited impact may be due to implementation issues such as mixed parental engagement during home visits. They argue that more specific adaptation and tailoring of home visit practices and processes for the intended audience may further support programmatic success in improving student literacy outcomes in the long term.