By 15 April 2020, more than 1.5 billion students worldwide experienced school closures in an effort to slow the spread of a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), during the worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. These interruptions in formal in-person educational experiences caused adverse consequences on school-age children’s academic outcomes. Using a pre-existing database, we calculated changes in children’s reading ability without formal education (i.e., the summer months). The resultant models predicted that the rate of reading ability gain in kindergarten children during COVID-19 school closures without formal in-person education will decrease 66% (2.46 vs. 7.17 points/100 days), compared to the business-as-usual scenario, resulting in a 31% less reading ability gain from 1 January 2020 to 1 September 2020. Additionally, the model predicted that kindergarten children who have books read to them daily would have 2.3 points less loss (42%) compared to those who do not, who are predicted to have a 5.6-point loss during the same time period. Even though reading books to children will not substitute the critical role of formal education in teaching children how to read, families, educators, and policy makers can promote this simple strategy to facilitate and maintain reading ability gain during school closures, which may be a common occurrence as nations see the public health benefits of physical distancing for the current and future pandemic outbreaks.

Purpose: This review aims to comprehensively summarize, compare, and evaluate screeners used to identify risk for developmental language disorder (DLD), a common learning disability that is underidentified. Screening for DLD is a cost-effective way to identify children in need of further assessment and, in turn, provides much needed supports. Method: We identified 15 commercially available English language DLD screeners in North America. We then characterized each screener on 27 aspects in three domains, including (a) accessibility information (acronym, subtest, website, cost, materials included, publish year, examiner qualification, age range, administration time, and administration format), (b) usability features (dialect compatibility, progress monitoring function, actionable follow-up instruction, group assessment capability, and online administration availability), and (c) technical standards (the availability of a technical manual, conceptual definition, the sample size used in classification accuracy calculation, sample distribution, year of sample collection, outcome measure, sample base rate, cutoff score, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value). Results: We obtained sufficient accessibility information from 14 out of 15 (93%) screeners. In contrast, none of the screeners (0%) included comprehensive usability features. Ten screeners (67%) included a range of classification accuracy (70%–100% sensitivity and 68%–90% specificity). We provided areas of strength and weakness for each screener as a quick reference for users and generated screener recommendations for five practical scenarios. Conclusions: Our findings presented some DLD screeners that meet most standards and highlight numerous areas for improvement, including improving classification accuracy and clarifying follow-up instructions for children who are identified with DLD risk. Screening for DLD is critical to provide timely early identification, intervention, and classroom support, which in turn facilitates student outcomes.

By 15 April 2020, more than 1.5 billion students worldwide experienced school closures in an effort to slow the spread of a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), during the worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. These interruptions in formal in-person educational experiences caused adverse consequences on school-age children’s academic outcomes. Using a pre-existing database, we calculated changes in children’s reading ability without formal education (i.e., the summer months). The resultant models predicted that the rate of reading ability gain in kindergarten children during COVID-19 school closures without formal in-person education will decrease 66% (2.46 vs. 7.17 points/100 days), compared to the business-as-usual scenario, resulting in a 31% less reading ability gain from 1 January 2020 to 1 September 2020. Additionally, the model predicted that kindergarten children who have books read to them daily would have 2.3 points less loss (42%) compared to those who do not, who are predicted to have a 5.6-point loss during the same time period. Even though reading books to children will not substitute the critical role of formal education in teaching children how to read, families, educators, and policy makers can promote this simple strategy to facilitate and maintain reading ability gain during school closures, which may be a common occurrence as nations see the public health benefits of physical distancing for the current and future pandemic outbreaks.

Purpose: To advance our current knowledge of singer physiology by using ultrasonography in combination with acoustic measures to compare physiological differences between musical theater (MT) and opera (OP) singers under controlled phonation conditions. Primary objectives addressed in this study were (a) to determine if differences in hyolaryngeal and vocal fold contact dynamics occur between two professional voice populations (MT and OP) during singing tasks and (b) to determine if differences occur between MT and OP singers in oral configuration and associated acoustic resonance during singing tasks. Method: Twenty-one singers (10 MT and 11 OP) were included. All participants were currently enrolled in a music program. Experimental procedures consisted of sustained phonation on the vowels /i/ and /ɑ/ during both a low-pitch task and a high-pitch task. Measures of hyolaryngeal elevation, tongue height, and tongue advancement were assessed using ultrasonography. Vocal fold contact dynamics were measured using electroglottography. Simultaneous acoustic recordings were obtained during all ultrasonography procedures for analysis of the first two formant frequencies. Results: Significant oral configuration differences, reflected by measures of tongue height and tongue advancement, were seen between groups. Measures of acoustic resonance also showed significant differences between groups during specific tasks. Both singer groups significantly raised their hyoid position when singing high-pitched vowels, but hyoid elevation was not statistically different between groups. Likewise, vocal fold contact dynamics did not significantly differentiate the two singer groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest that, under controlled phonation conditions, MT singers alter their oral configuration and achieve differing resultant formants as compared with OP singers. Because singers are at a high risk of developing a voice disorder, understanding how these two groups of singers adjust their vocal tract configuration during their specific singing genre may help to identify risky vocal behavior and provide a basis for prevention of voice disorders.

This fact sheets contains information on published English language screeners for Developmental Language Disorder available in the US and Canada.