6  Domains and Measures

Multitudes includes measures of domains that underlie reading development. They were chosen for their importance in predicting risk of reading difficulty, including dyslexia in English and in Spanish (Riva et al. 2021; Taran et al. 2022; Washington et al. 2020; Wren and Herrera 2021). We realize that no single measure fully isolates a single domain, nor the neural networks subserving it, and thus have chosen a taxonomy that integrates concepts from both cognitive and educational sciences and considers the practical relevance for instruction. 

The sections that follow present a description of each domain, the Multitudes tasks that measure them, and the empirical relationships to reading and risk prediction that ground and inform domain selection and task development.

6.1 Language

Language includes many subdomains, including syntax, semantics, morphology, phonology. and pragmatics. It refers to the components of spoken words that support communication, both receptive (understanding others) and expressive (sharing our thoughts). Language has been found to be strongly related to reading comprehension among monolingual speakers of English (Deacon and Kieffer 2018; M. J. Snowling and Hulme 2020; Storch and Whitehurst 2002a), particularly as children move into the upper elementary grades (Catts, Hogan, and Adlof 2005; B. R. Foorman et al. 2015; García and Cain 2014; Vellutino et al. 2007). Among Spanish-English bilingual children, English oral language skills have been found to be predictive of both English decoding and reading comprehension skills (Miller et al. 2006a; Nakamoto, Lindsey, and Manis 2006; Swanson, Xinhua Zheng, and Jerman 2009). Spanish oral language skills, like vocabulary and syntax, have also been shown to predict small, but important amounts of variance in English reading outcomes (Miller et al. 2006a; Proctor et al. 2006; Proctor, Harring, and Silverman 2017; Sun-Alperin and Wang 2009). Spanish oral language has also been found to contribute to Spanish reading comprehension in bilingual children (Nakamoto, Lindsey, and Manis 2008).

Multitudes measures language with the following five tasks:

6.1.1 Expressive Vocabulary (EVO)

Vocabulary has been defined as the body of words used in a particular language (Nagy and Scott 2000). In educational research, the measurement of vocabulary is often used to provide an estimate of an individual’s language development and is one of the most important predictors of reading comprehension in both English and Spanish (Biemiller and Slonim 2001; Kieffer and Lesaux 2007; Proctor et al. 2006; Stahl and Nagy 2007). Vocabulary development is important for all children and especially for children who are in the process of acquiring English (Mancilla-Martinez et al. 2020; Proctor et al. 2006). Therefore, measuring expressive vocabulary is foundational to identifying children who might struggle with reading comprehension in both English and Spanish. Multitudes uniquely provides a conceptually scored vocabulary measure for bilingual children,that recognizes responses in either Spanish or English.

6.1.2 Listening Comprehension (LCO)

Listening comprehension is a critical skill for reading and for academic success, as well as an excellent measure of a child’s ability to understand connected text when it is presented orally. Listening comprehension tasks tap multiple domains of oral language skills, including phonology, morphology, semantics, and syntactic skills, all of which are related to reading development. Listening comprehension has been shown to be highly related to reading comprehension among monolingual English speakers (Adlof, Catts, and Lee 2010; Catts et al. 2001; Hogan, Adlof, and Alonzo 2014; Nation et al. 2004, 2010; Storch and Whitehurst 2002b). Listening comprehension in Spanish has also been found to be related to reading comprehension (Goodwin, August, and Calderon 2015; Nakamoto, Lindsey, and Manis 2008). Similar to many other components of language, among bilingual children, within-language relationships between listening and reading comprehension are strong, while cross-language relationships are weak or not found (Jeon and Yamashita 2014; Oh, Mancilla-Martinez, and Hwang 2023; Proctor et al. 2006).

6.1.3 Narrative Story Production (NSP)

Narrative story production is a naturalistic measure of storytelling and functional language use (Fiestas and Penã 2004; Heilmann et al. 2010; Uccelli and Paéz 2007). Both macrostructure (i.e., character, setting, problem, solution) and microstructure elements (i.e., morphosyntax, vocabulary) can be scored to measure a child’s language. Narrative story production tasks have long been used to determine language delays and disorders. More recently, they have been used in reading screening (Petersen and Spencer 2012). Children at risk of language disorders consistently show lower performance across a range of narrative measures (Winters et al. 2022). Numerous experts have recommended using oral narratives when assessing the language abilities of bilingual children, given the natural communication involved in the task (Fiestas and Penã 2004; Uccelli and Paéz 2007). Narrating a story may also feel more familiar and comfortable for children from diverse backgrounds compared to formal language tests (Mandler 1980), as it is an opportunity to emulate the narratives produced by their families and their culture (Gutierrez-Clellen, Peña, and Quinn 1995; Melzi 2000). Narrative story production has been found to be related to reading achievement in both Spanish and English (Miller et al. 2006b; Reese et al. 2009). Bilingual children can also use both Spanish and English in their narrative response and will be scored based on their overall content and not what they produced in isolation in each language.

6.1.4 Semantic Mapping (SMT)

Semantic mapping provides a measure of semantic depth versus the breadth measured by the Expressive Vocabulary (EVO) task. Measures of semantic depth show slower growth in children with language disorders across school age (McGregor et al. 2013) and can be used to distinguish bilingual children with and without language difficulties (Jasso et al. 2020). In such tasks, individuals identify underlying relationships between objects; this measures not only measures semantic knowledge but also underlying concept development. Concept development undergirds reading comprehension and is crucial across languages (Y.-S. G. Kim 2023).

6.1.5 Sentence Repetition (SRT)

Sentence repetition involves the ability to recall and repeat sentences of varying length and complexity. Such tasks measure syntactic skills, as well as lexical knowledge and memory (Marinis and Armon-Lotem 2015; Polišenská, Chiat, and Roy 2014). Repeating sentences requires processing, analyzing, and reconstructing abstract linguistic information (Marinis and Armon-Lotem 2015). Sentence repetition also measures verbal short-term memory (Pratt, Peña, and Bedore 2020), and the ability to retain information momentarily is essential for reading comprehension. For bilingual populations, existing studies show the importance of testing individuals in both their languages (Simon-Cereijido and Gutiérrez-Clellen 2017). While most existing studies of sentence repetition examine its utility in the context of oral language disorders, sentence repetition has been found to be related to reading in both English and Spanish in several studies (MOLL et al. 2013).

6.2 Phonological Awareness

Phonological awareness (PA) refers to the ability to perceive and manipulate sounds in language (Lonigan 2006). It includes the manipulation of sounds at different units that increase in difficulty from word to syllable to onset-rime to phoneme awareness (Anthony et al. 2011). There is much research that links PA to word reading in English (Vellutino et al. 2004; Maryanne Wolf et al. 2002; Ziegler and Goswami 2005) and in Spanish (Martínez and Goikoetxea 2019; Míguez-Álvarez, Cuevas-Alonso, and Saavedra 2021). In neuroscience literature, children with dyslexia have shown differences in auditory processing compared to typically developing readers (Qi et al. 2023).

Significant correlations have also been found between PA development in English and Spanish (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011). Phonological awareness is generally assessed in both English and Spanish with measures of alliteration (Car, tree, cat: “Which two start with the same sound?”), blending (“What is m (pause) oon?”), segmenting (“How many syllables are in the word ma-ni-pu-late?”), and elision (“What is butter without /b/?”) (Kilpatrick 2012). Elision was selected for the Multitudes suite of measures as it has demonstrated the strongest relationship with reading ability in both English and Spanish(Kilpatrick 2012).

Multitudes measures phonological awareness with the following two tasks:

6.2.1 Elision Expressive (ELIE) & Elision Receptive (ELIR)

Elision, sometimes called deletion, refers to manipulating the sounds in a word by removing them (Semel et al. 2006). Difficulty can depend on factors such as what is removed, i.e., a syllable or a phoneme (Anthony et al. 2011, 2009), as well as the location of the removed sounds, i.e., the beginning, middle, or end of the word (McBride-Chang 1995). For example, a relatively easier item might be, “What is baseball without ball?” whereas more difficult items might be, “What is money without /mun/?” or “What is toy without /t/?”. Elision tasks in assessment batteries account for unique variance in reading abilities, explaining more variance in reading ability than blending and segmenting in English with first and second graders (Kilpatrick 2012). Elision has been found at kindergarten entrance to be predictive of later reading outcomes and/or risk for reading difficulties; this predictiveness, however, does not persist after second grade (Hogan, Catts, and Little 2005). Elision also predicts reading (identification, word attack) and spelling of nonwords (Swank and Catts 1994). Targeting elision skills through reading instruction appears to improve English reading skills, and the inverse has also been shown: elision skills improve as a result of more reading (Clayton et al. 2019).

Elision has also been used with Spanish-speaking children to measure their phonological awareness in the early elementary grades (Anthony et al. 2011). In studies of cross-linguistic transfer of literacy skills between Spanish and English, elision measures have been found to be related to both Spanish and English reading outcomes(Dickinson et al. 2004; Kremin et al. 2016; Pasquarella et al. 2015). Elision is a relatively difficult phonological awareness task in Spanish, making it a good candidate for students in early elementary up until second grade (Anthony et al. 2011). Elision has also been included in other tests of phonological awareness in Spanish (e.g., Test of Phonological Awareness in Spanish, Riccio et al. (2004); Get Ready to Read!, Grover J. Whitehurst and Lonigan (2001)).

6.3 Alphabetic Knowledge

The acquisition of alphabetic knowledge, or knowledge of letter names and sounds, is foundational in children’s early literacy development (Graver J. Whitehurst and Lonigan 1998) and recognized as the strongest predictor of later reading ability in English and Spanish (National Research Council 1998; Scarborough 1998; Schatschneider et al. 2004). Knowing letter names is related to reading performance, and children who demonstrate higher letter name knowledge tend to demonstrate higher reading acquisition (National Research Council 1998; O’Connor and Jenkins 1999; M. J. Snowling, Gallagher, and Frith 2003; Torppa et al. 2006). Knowing letter sounds is a critical and predictive skill, and children who can accurately connect graphemes to their corresponding sounds are also better decoders and readers (Piasta, Purpura, and Wagner 2009). Among bilingual children, kindergarten English letter naming fluency significantly predicted English oral reading fluency through the end of first grade (Roberts 2005; Yesil-Dagli 2011). The knowledge of letter names and letter sounds has also been found to be strongly related to reading development in Spanish (Signorini 1997).

Multitudes measures alphabetic knowledge with the following two tasks:

6.3.1 Letter Naming Fluency (LNF) & Letter Sound Fluency (LSF)

Identifying letter sounds and names remain two of the most predictive measures of Spanish and English oral reading fluency (Anthony et al. 2006; Kremin et al. 2016; Lindsey, Manis, and Bailey 2003; Pasquarella et al. 2015; Solari et al. 2013). Letter names and letter sounds have remained stable and valuable contributors over time to screening for reading difficulties in both English and Spanish (Genesee et al. 2006; Ozernov-Palchik et al. 2017). Letter naming and letter sounds are both important predictors of reading in Spanish, and it is important to measure both (Lindsey, Manis, and Bailey 2003); there is no reason to choose one over the other. In kindergarten, children are more likely to know letter names than letter sounds based on exposure to letter names in preschool and in popular children’s media. Letter names are emphasized in the United States, given their relationship to reading in English, which makes this different than the context of monolingual Spanish-speaking countries. At the same time, letter naming has also been shown to be a strong predictor of reading with pre-literate monolingual Spanish-speaking students (De la Calle 2018). (Lindsey, Manis, and Bailey 2003) also found a cross-linguistic relationship such that the knowledge of Spanish letter names in kindergarten predicted English reading fluency in first grade. The knowledge of letter sounds becomes more stable in first grade based on having a year of literacy instruction, making letter sounds a more appropriate measure for first grade rather than kindergarten.

6.4 Reading and Spelling

The Reading and Spelling domain is comprised of subdomains including decoding, reading fluency, and spelling. Decoding refers to the process of translating printed words to speech (B. Foorman 2023). This process requires that a child has accurate and fluent knowledge of letter-sound correspondences. Decoding is foundational to fluent reading and is highly correlated with reading comprehension, especially early in the process of learning to read (Ehri 2020). Decoding is central to both English and Spanish reading (Goodwin, August, and Calderon 2015). Word reading is fundamentally important to reading comprehension (Garcia et al. 2006) as word reading encompasses the ability to recognize words, whether by decoding or by having a consolidated orthographic representation, allowing for automatic recognition of that word (i.e., sight word reading). The ability to accurately and efficiently read words underpins the broader skill of understanding text. Major theories of reading comprehension include word reading as a critical skill set for both monolingual and Spanish-English bilingual children (Hoover and Gough 1990; Y.-S. G. Kim 2020; Scarborough, Neuman, and Dickinson 2001).

Oral reading fluency is the ability to read a connected text aloud with speed, accuracy, and expression. This involves not just reading the words correctly but doing so in a way that is effcient and sounds natural and conveys the meaning of the text.

Spelling, often referred to as encoding, is a skill that has been shown to be highly related to reading in monolingual (Ellis and Cataldo 1990; Treiman and Kessler 2021) and bilingual (Vettori et al. 2023) children. Caravolas and Samara (2015) identify three core skills that underpin this relationship: knowledge of the alphabet, phoneme awareness, and rapid automatized naming. The developmental sequence of writing skills acquisition has been shown to be remarkably similar in monolingual and bilingual children (Ferreiro and Teberosky 1982; Gentry 1982, 2000; Rubin and Carlan 2005).

Multitudes measures Reading & Spelling with the following four tasks:

6.4.1 Nonword Reading (NRE)

Nonword reading is a strong predictor of reading ability in both Spanish and English (Diana L. Baker, Park, and Baker 2010; Durgunoğlu, Nagy, and Hancin-Bhatt 1993; Genesee et al. 2006; Y.-S. Kim 2012; Leafstedt and Gerber 2005; Proctor et al. 2006). Nonword reading also has the benefit of removing the variable of familiarity with words to isolate the skill of decoding. Nowords are carefully constructed to capture a range of decoding ability and to adhere to the syntactical rules of the target language. Nonword reading has been found to capture the initial abilities and growth of both Spanish-and English-speaking children (Doris Luft Baker, Park, and Baker 2010; Y.-S. Kim and Pallante 2010).

6.4.2 Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)

Among monolingual English-speaking children, oral reading fluency has been found to be moderately to highly correlated with reading comprehension outcomes (Adams 1990; Cutting and Scarborough 2006; Fuchs et al. 2001; National Reading Panel (US) 2000; Reschly et al. 2009; Yeo 2009). Among bilingual children, as with monolinguals, research has found that oral reading fluency in the language of instruction is moderately to highly correlated with reading comprehension outcomes (Ives Wiley and Deno 2005; Riedel 2007), but may be moderated by oral language proficiency in the target language (Crosson and Lesaux 2009). Oral reading fluency has been found to correlate across languages in bilingual children (De Ramírez and Shapiro 2007); however, within-language relationships between foundational skills and oral reading fluency are stronger than cross-language relationships (Solari et al. 2013). Importantly, since Spanish has a more transparent orthography than English, children who are instructed in Spanish often reach a higher level of word reading accuracy at an early age (Seymour, Aro, and Erskine 2003); therefore oral reading fluency which accounts for speed and accuracy among Spanish monolinguals has been a more sensitive measure of dyslexia or other reading problems (Y.-S. Kim and Pallante 2010; Serrano and Defior 2008; Verhoeven and Keuning 2017).

6.4.3 Spelling (SPE)

Spelling has been shown to be a good diagnostic marker for detecting reading difficulty (Chua, Rickard Liow, and Yeong 2014). Spelling errors in English and Spanish have been found to be indicative of children with reading and writing problems (Serrano and Defior 2010). Spelling development follows a known sequence that can be tapped in the construction of a spelling assessment (Defior and Serrano 2005). First, children learn to recognize words based on their visual features and do not relate the sounds to the letters in the words. After this pre-reading phase, children begin to learn phoneme-to-grapheme correspondence. The second stage is further divided into three substages. The first of these is the “semiphonetic” stage, where children initially demonstrate certain understandings of the relations between spelling and the sounds of words. In the second substage, “phonetics,” children develop the ability to segment words and represent all the sounds they hear in a word. In the final substage, “transitional,” children follow certain spelling conventions but are still acquiring irregular or exceptional words. In the third stage, once the code is mastered, spelling is orthographically correct, and children have mastered orthographically irregular words (Ellis 1994). Understanding these stages and issues, such as the spelling of diphthongs and consonant clusters (Serrano and Defior 2010) facilitated the careful curation of a corpus of words and tasks in the Multitudes spelling test that map onto these stages.

6.4.4 Word Reading (WRE)

Word reading in Spanish and English has been found to be positively correlated in bilingual children (Durgunoğlu, Nagy, and Hancin-Bhatt 1993; Gottardo 2002), but studies show that the magnitude of correlation between L1 and L2 word reading skills depends on several factors, including the degree of similarity between scripts (Geva and Siegel 2000; Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011) and the instructional context in which children learn these skills (Gottardo, Chen, and Huo 2021). Word reading skills have been shown to be predictive of reading comprehension outcomes within languages for both English monolinguals and Spanish-English bilinguals (Gottardo and Mueller 2009; Silverman et al. 2015).

6.5 Processing Speed | Automaticity

Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) measures processing speed and how quickly an individual can label a repeating set of familiar stimuli (Denckla and Rudel 1974; Maryanne Wolf and Bowers 1999). RAN mimics the skills needed for automatic reading; both processes, reading and rapid naming, require serial processing of visual information with visual or orthographic representations, access to phonological representations or labels, and oral articulation of the stimuli that are presented visually (Georgiou and Parrila 2020; Georgiou et al. 2013). Furthermore, both processes require similar fluency and integration skills (Kirby et al. 2008). RAN taps into a language-universal cognitive mechanism involved in reading alphabetic orthographies that is independent of complexity and is a good predictor of reading across alphabetic languages (Landerl et al. 2018). Learning to read can enhance the automaticity in retrieval and labeling, with particular benefit for more difficult lexical items (Araújo and Faísca 2019); therefore, more proficient readers become more efficient labelers. Extensive research suggests that low naming speed is a characteristic of poor readers or individuals with dyslexia (Denckla and Rudel 1976; Heikkilä et al. 2009; Willburger et al. 2008; Maryanne Wolf et al. 2002) and that RAN tasks can be a particularly useful task to identify risk of dyslexia in languages other than English (Kirby et al. 2010).

Multitudes measures processing speed | automaticity with the following two tasks:

6.5.1 Rapid Automatized Naming – Letters (RANL)

Rapid Automatized Naming – Letters (RANL) is a strong predictor of reading and spelling (Chen et al. 2021). Research shows that rapid naming of letter tasks successfully predict reading ability beyond kindergarten and are more strongly related to future reading performance in English-speaking children compared to non-alphanumeric RAN tasks (McWeeny et al. 2022). Importantly, assessing rapid naming of letters has been found to make a significant, unique contribution to reading prediction beyond phonological awareness (Katzir et al. 2006; McWeeny et al. 2022). 

Neuroimaging studies have demonstrated that rapid naming of letters activates key components of the reading network, including the angular gyrus, superior parietal lobule, and medial extrastriate areas, making it a more informative measure for assessing and predicting reading skills, especially as children advance in their literacy development (Misra et al. 2004). Rapid letter naming shows unique regions of activation over rapid naming of objects, particularly in semantic and articulatory regions (Cummine et al. 2014).

6.5.2 Rapid Automatized Naming – Objects (RANO)

Rapid Automatized Naming – Objects (RANO) can be a useful predictor of reading ability in the early stages of literacy development. Neurologically, rapid naming of objects activates similar brain areas as reading, including motor planning (e.g., cerebellum), semantic access (middle temporal gyrus), articulation (supplementary motor association, motor/pre-motor, anterior cingulate cortex), and grapheme–phoneme mapping (ventral supramarginal gyrus) (Cummine et al. 2014). This task is often used in kindergarten assessments to avoid biasing results against children with limited alphabetic knowledge (Norton and Wolf 2012). However, the predictive power of rapid object naming tends to decrease after kindergarten, once children become more familiar with letter names (Misra et al. 2004).

6.6 Auditory Short-Term Memory

Auditory short-term memory (ASTM) is defined as, “[the] capacity for temporarily maintaining verbal information when the external stimulus is no longer available to sensory systems” (Yue and Martin 2021, 72). This skill is often assessed with digit span and nonword repetition.

It is unclear what effect ASTM has on reading acquisition. While some studies suggest that ASTM does not predict reading when other skills (e.g., phonological awareness and naming speed) are considered (McDougall et al. 1994; Parrila, Kirby, and McQuarrie 2004), others propose that it is a direct predictor of early word-level reading from ages 4 to 6 (Cunningham et al. 2020). There is more agreement in the literature that ASTM is typically reduced in children and adults with dyslexia (Brady 1986; Brady, Shankweiler, and Mann 1983; Majerus and Cowan 2016; M. Snowling et al. 1997; Swanson and Siegel 2011), especially serial order Short Term Memory (STM) impairment.

Multitudes measures auditory short-term memory with the following two tasks:

6.6.1 Digit Span (DGS)

Digit span is a measure of working memory and auditory short-term memory. Digit span is a brief store of acoustic information as children are read a series of numbers in increasing length and are asked to repeat the string of numbers accurately. Performance on digit span tasks has been found to distinguish children with dyslexia from children with general learning disabilities, with lower span scores in children with dyslexia (J. Torgesen and Goldman 1977; J. K. Torgesen and Houck 1980). Among several models of working memory, the classical Multicomponent Model of Working Memory (A. Baddeley 2003; A. D. Baddeley and Hitch 1974) has proven useful in understanding the role of working memory in reading and writing. The model consists of the ‘‘central executive’’ and its two component systems: the ‘‘phonological loop’’ and the ‘‘visuospatial sketchpad.’’ The speech-based ‘‘phonological loop’’ is presented as a system that comprises a brief acoustic store and an articulatory rehearsal process (A. Baddeley 2003). The relationship of digit span tasks to reading in Spanish has not been as well studied, but digit span has been related to reading rate in Spanish (Naveh-Benjamin and Ayres 1986).

6.6.2 Nonword Repetition (NWR)

Nonword repetition is a task that requires repeating a nonsense or nonword (Gathercole et al. 1994). Nonword items can be mono- or multisyllabic but must follow the phonotactic structure of the language, since this will influence accuracy. While usually accepted as a measure of phonological working memory, nonword repetition requires multiple language processes, including language perception, phonological encoding, phonological memory, and articulation (Coady and Evans 2008).

Nonword repetition has been shown to have close developmental links with vocabulary, reading, and comprehensive language skills in children (Gathercole et al. 1994). It is considered one of the most effective predictors of language learning ability in childhood (Gathercole 2006). Nonword repetition and existing vocabulary knowledge both contribute to children’s word learning, but their relative influence depends on how word learning is measured. Nonword repetition is a stronger predictor of phonological recall, phonological recognition, and semantic recognition, while vocabulary knowledge is a stronger predictor of verbal semantic recall (Adlof and Patten 2017). Moreover, nonword repetition and vocabulary development have reciprocal relationships in preschoolers, although the predictive relationship from vocabulary to nonword repetition is stronger than vice versa (Verhagen et al. 2019). Nevertheless, these tasks appear to be less influenced by children’s language proficiency.

While the skills measured through nonword reading tasks are crucial for early language acquisition, they remain important for word learning across the lifespan (Gathercole 2006). However, the long-term relationship between nonword repetition and word reading is less clear: while learning to read predicts growth in nonword repetition between ages 6 and 7, nonword repetition is not a longitudinal predictor of reading growth (Nation and Hulme 2010).

6.7 Visual-spatial Processing

Visual processing deficit theories in dyslexia date back to the 1850s, when dyslexia was first conceived as a visual problem (M. Snowling et al. 1997). Ever since, many theories have been proposed in the field and have a contentious history (Hulme 1988; Pennington 2011; Stein and Walsh 1997; Vellutino et al. 2004; M. Wolf et al. 2024). Despite years of research and many theories, a fundamental methodological impediment to understanding the underlying integration of visual factors associated with dyslexia has been sample size. Hundreds of studies have tested models of various deficits that contribute to reading difficulties, but samples are not sufficiently large and diverse to discern the contribution of different risk factors, with only a couple of studies exceeding N>100(O’Brien and Yeatman 2021; Talcott et al. 2002; Valdois et al. 2021).

Multitudes measures visual-spatial processing with the following two tasks:

6.7.1 Rapid Visual Processing - Letters (RVPL) & Rapid Visual Processing – Symbols (RVPS)

Rapid visual processing is the ability to rapidly encode and recall multiple visual elements simultaneously in a brief glimpse (Bosse, Tainturier, and Valdois 2007; Valdois, Bosse, and Tainturier 2004). It involves processing visual information quickly without taxing working memory (Pelli et al. 2006; Sperling 1960). Extensive research links rapid visual processing to reading ability across various languages, including French, English, Dutch, and Chinese (Bosse, Tainturier, and Valdois 2007; Van Den Boer, Van Bergen, and Jong 2015). This skill has been shown to i) correlate with reading ability (Ramamurthy, White, and Yeatman 2024); ii) differ in children with dyslexia (Ramamurthy, White, and Yeatman 2024); iii) be independent of phonological awareness deficits; and iv) identify a subgroup of poor readers with intact phonological skills (Bosse and Valdois 2009; Lobier, Zoubrinetzky, and Valdois 2012). Rapid visual processing is assessed using two tasks: Rapid Visual Processing with Letters (RVPL) and Rapid Visual Processing with Symbols (RVPS). RVPL measures the ability to rapidly identify letters in 2- and 4-letter strings, while RVPS assesses the ability to rapidly locate and identify non-namable visual symbols, making it language-agnostic. These tasks are considered promising tools for early identification of struggling readers not captured by conventional phonological awareness measures.

Adams, Marilyn J. 1990. Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Adlof, Suzanne M., Hugh W. Catts, and Jaehoon Lee. 2010. “Kindergarten Predictors of Second Versus Eighth Grade Reading Comprehension Impairments.” Journal of Learning Disabilities 43 (4): 332–45.

Adlof, Suzanne M., and Hannah Patten. 2017. “Nonword Repetition and Vocabulary Knowledge as Predictors of Children’s Phonological and Semantic Word Learning.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 60 (3): 682–93. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_jslhr-l-15-0441.

Anthony, Jason L., Jeffrey M. Williams, Rachel G. Aghara, Martha Dunkelberger, Barbara Novak, and Anuja Divatia Mukherjee. 2009. “Assessment of Individual Differences in Phonological Representation.” Reading and Writing 23 (8): 969–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9185-7.

Anthony, Jason L., Jeffrey M. Williams, Lillian K. Durán, Sandra Laing Gillam, Lan Liang, Rachel Aghara, Paul R. Swank, Mike A. Assel, and Susan H. Landry. 2011. “Spanish Phonological Awareness: Dimensionality and Sequence of Development During the Preschool and Kindergarten Years.” Journal of Educational Psychology 103 (4): 857–76. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025024.

Anthony, Jason L., Jeffrey M. Williams, Renee McDonald, Deborah Corbitt-Shindler, Coleen D. Carlson, and David J. Francis. 2006. “Phonological Processing and Emergent Literacy in Spanish-Speaking Preschool Children.” Annals of Dyslexia 56 (2): 239–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-006-0011-5.

Araújo, Susana, and Luís Faísca. 2019. “A Meta-Analytic Review of Naming-Speed Deficits in Developmental Dyslexia.” Scientific Studies of Reading 23 (5): 349–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1572758.

Baddeley, Alan. 2003. “Working Memory and Language: An Overview.” Journal of Communication Disorders 36 (3): 189–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9924(03)00019-4.

Baddeley, Alan D., and Graham Hitch. 1974. “Working Memory.” In, 47–89. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60452-1.

Baker, Diana L., Young-Suk Park, and Scott K. Baker. 2010. “Effect of Initial Status and Growth in Pseudoword Reading on Spanish Reading Comprehension at the End of First Grade.” Psicothema 22 (4): 955–62.

Baker, Doris Luft, Yonghan Park, and Scott K. Baker. 2010. “The Reading Performance of English Learners in Grades 13: The Role of Initial Status and Growth on Reading Fluency in Spanish and English.” Reading and Writing 25 (1): 251–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9261-z.

Biemiller, Andrew, and Naomi Slonim. 2001. “Estimating Root Word Vocabulary Growth in Normative and Advantaged Populations: Evidence for a Common Sequence of Vocabulary Acquisition.” Journal of Educational Psychology 93 (3): 498–520. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.498.

Bosse, M.-L., M.-J. Tainturier, and S. Valdois. 2007. “Developmental Dyslexia: The Visual Attention Span Deficit Hypothesis.” Cognition 104 (2): 198–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.05.009.

Bosse, M.-L., and S. Valdois. 2009. “Influence of the Visual Attention Span on Child Reading Performance: A Cross-Sectional Study.” Journal of Research in Reading 32 (2): 230–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01387.x.

Brady, Susan. 1986. “Short-Term Memory, Phonological Processing, and Reading Ability.” Annals of Dyslexia 36 (1): 138–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02648026.

Brady, Susan, Donald Shankweiler, and Virginia Mann. 1983. “Speech Perception and Memory Coding in Relation to Reading Ability.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 35 (2): 345–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(83)90087-5.

Caravolas, M., and Anna Samara. 2015. “Learning to Read and Spell Words in Different Writing Systems.” In.

Catts, Hugh W., Marc E. Fey, Xuyang Zhang, and J. Bruce Tomblin. 2001. “Estimating the Risk of Future Reading Difficulties in Kindergarten Children.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 32 (1): 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2001/004).

Catts, Hugh W., Tiffany P. Hogan, and Suzanne M. Adlof. 2005. “Developmental Changes in Reading and Reading Disabilities.” In The Connections Between Language and Reading Disabilities, edited by Hugh W. Catts and Alan G. Kamhi, 25–40. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Chen, Yi-Jui Iva, Christopher G. Thompson, Zhihong Xu, Robin C. Irey, and George K. Georgiou. 2021. “Rapid Automatized Naming and Spelling Performance in Alphabetic Languages: A Meta-Analysis.” Reading and Writing 34 (10): 2559–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10160-7.

Chua, Shi Min, Susan J. Rickard Liow, and Stephanie H. M. Yeong. 2014. “Using Spelling to Screen Bilingual Kindergarteners At Risk for Reading Difficulties.” Journal of Learning Disabilities 49 (3): 227–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414538519.

Clayton, Francina J., Gillian West, Claire Sears, Charles Hulme, and Arne Lervåg. 2019. “A Longitudinal Study of Early Reading Development: Letter-Sound Knowledge, Phoneme Awareness and RAN, but Not Letter-Sound Integration, Predict Variations in Reading Development.” Scientific Studies of Reading 24 (2): 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1622546.

Coady, Jeffry A., and Julia L. Evans. 2008. “Uses and Interpretations of Non-Word Repetition Tasks in Children with and Without Specific Language Impairments (SLI).” International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 43 (1): 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820601116485.

Crosson, Amy C., and Nonie K. Lesaux. 2009. “Revisiting Assumptions about the Relationship of Fluent Reading to Comprehension: Spanish-Speakers’ Text-Reading Fluency in English.” Reading and Writing 23 (5): 475–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9168-8.

Cummine, Jacqueline, Eszter Szepesvari, Brea Chouinard, Wahab Hanif, and George K. Georgiou. 2014. “A Functional Investigation of RAN Letters, Digits, and Objects: How Similar Are They?” Behavioural Brain Research 275 (December): 157–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2014.08.038.

Cunningham, Anna J., Adrian P. Burgess, Caroline Witton, Joel B. Talcott, and Laura R. Shapiro. 2020. “Dynamic Relationships Between Phonological Memory and Reading: A Five Year Longitudinal Study from Age 4 to 9.” Developmental Science 24 (1). https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12986.

Cutting, Laurie E., and Hollis S. Scarborough. 2006. “Prediction of Reading Comprehension: Relative Contributions of Word Recognition, Language Proficiency, and Other Cognitive Skills Can Depend on How Comprehension Is Measured.” Scientific Studies of Reading 10 (3): 277–99. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5.

De la Calle, Guzmán-Simón, A. M. 2018. “Letter Knowledge and Learning Sequence of Graphemes in Spanish: Precursors of Early Reading.” Revista de Psicodidáctica (English Ed.) 23 (2): 128–36.

De Ramírez, Romilia Domínguez, and Edward S. Shapiro. 2007. “Cross-Language Relationship Between Spanish and English Oral Reading Fluency Among Spanish-Speaking English Language Learners in Bilingual Education Classrooms.” Psychology in the Schools 44 (8): 795–806. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20266.

Deacon, S. Hélène, and Michael Kieffer. 2018. “Understanding How Syntactic Awareness Contributes to Reading Comprehension: Evidence from Mediation and Longitudinal Models.” Journal of Educational Psychology 110 (1): 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000198.

Defior, Sylvia, and Francisca Serrano. 2005. “The Initial Development of Spelling in Spanish: From Global to Analytical.” Reading and Writing 18 (1): 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-004-5893-1.

Denckla, Martha Bridge, and Rita Rudel. 1974. “Rapid “Automatized” Naming of Pictured Objects, Colors, Letters and Numbers by Normal Children.” Cortex 10 (2): 186–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-9452(74)80009-2.

Denckla, Martha Bridge, and Rita G. Rudel. 1976. “Rapid ‘Automatized’ Naming (R.A.N.): Dyslexia Differentiated from Other Learning Disabilities.” Neuropsychologia 14 (4): 471–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(76)90075-0.

Dickinson, David K., Allyssa McCabe, Nancy ClarkChiarelli, and Anne Wolf. 2004. “Cross-Language Transfer of Phonological Awareness in Low-Income Spanish and English Bilingual Preschool Children.” Applied Psycholinguistics 25 (3): 323–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716404001158.

Durgunoğlu, Aydin Y., William E. Nagy, and Barbara J. Hancin-Bhatt. 1993. “Cross-Language Transfer of Phonological Awareness.” Journal of Educational Psychology 85 (3): 453–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.453.

Ehri, Linnea C. 2020. “The Science of Learning to Read Words: A Case for Systematic Phonics Instruction.” Reading Research Quarterly 55 (S1). https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334.

Ellis, Nick. 1994. “Longitudinal Studies of Spelling Development.” In Handbook of Spelling: Theory, Process and Intervention, edited by Gordon D. A. Brown and Nick C. Ellis, 155–77. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Ellis, Nick, and Suzanne Cataldo. 1990. “The Role of Spelling in Learning to Read.” Language and Education 4 (1): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500789009541270.

Ferreiro, Emilia, and Ana Teberosky. 1982. Literacy Before Schooling. Heinemann Educational Books Inc.

Fiestas, Christine E., and Elizabeth D. Penã. 2004. “Narrative Discourse in Bilingual Children.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 35 (2): 155–68. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2004/016).

Foorman, Barbara. 2023. “Learning the Code.” In Handbook on the Science of Early Literacy, edited by Sonia Q. Cabell, Susan B. Neuman, and Nicole P. Terry, 73–82. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Foorman, Barbara R., Sarah Herrera, Yaacov Petscher, Alison Mitchell, and Adrea Truckenmiller. 2015. “The Structure of Oral Language and Reading and Their Relation to Comprehension in Kindergarten Through Grade 2.” Reading and Writing 28 (5): 655–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9544-5.

Fuchs, Lynn S., Douglas Fuchs, Michelle K. Hosp, and Joseph R. Jenkins. 2001. “Oral Reading Fluency as an Indicator of Reading Competence: A Theoretical, Empirical, and Historical Analysis.” Scientific Studies of Reading 5 (3): 239–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0503_3.

Garcia, Gilbert E., Gail McKoon, Diane August, and Timothy Shanahan. 2006. Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

García, J. Ricardo, and Kate Cain. 2014. “Decoding and Reading Comprehension.” Review of Educational Research 84 (1): 74–111. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313499616.

Gathercole, Susan E. 2006. “Nonword Repetition and Word Learning: The Nature of the Relationship.” Applied Psycholinguistics 27 (4): 513–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716406060383.

Gathercole, Susan E., Catherine S. Willis, Alan D. Baddeley, and Hazel Emslie. 1994. “The Children’s Test of Nonword Repetition: A Test of Phonological Working Memory.” Memory 2 (2): 103–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658219408258940.

Genesee, Fred, Esther Geva, Cheryl Dressler, and Michael Kamil. 2006. “Synthesis: Cross-Linguistic Relationships.” In Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, 153–74. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gentry, J. Richard. 1982. “An Analysis of Developmental Spelling in "GNYS AT WRK".” The Reading Teacher 36 (2): 192–200. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20198182.

———. 2000. “A Retrospective on Invented Spelling and a Look Forward.” The Reading Teacher 54 (3): 318–32. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20204910.

Georgiou, George K., and Rauno Parrila. 2020. “What Mechanism Underlies the Rapid Automatized Namingreading Relation?” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 194 (June): 104840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2020.104840.

Georgiou, George K., Rauno Parrila, Ying Cui, and Timothy C. Papadopoulos. 2013. “Why Is Rapid Automatized Naming Related to Reading?” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 115 (1): 218–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.10.015.

Geva, Esther, and Linda S. Siegel. 2000. Reading and Writing 12 (1/2): 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008017710115.

Goodwin, Amanda P., Diane August, and Margarita Calderon. 2015. “Reading in Multiple Orthographies: Differences and Similarities in Reading in Spanish and English for English Learners.” Language Learning 65 (3): 596–630. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12127.

Gottardo, Alexandra. 2002. “The Relationship Between Language and Reading Skills in Bilingual Spanish-English Speakers.” Topics in Language Disorders 22 (5): 46–70. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-200211000-00008.

Gottardo, Alexandra, Xi Chen, and Michelle Ru Yun Huo. 2021. “Understanding Within- and Cross-Language Relations Among Language, Preliteracy Skills, and Word Reading in Bilingual Learners: Evidence From the Science of Reading.” Reading Research Quarterly 56 (S1). https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.410.

Gottardo, Alexandra, and Julie Mueller. 2009. “Are First- and Second-Language Factors Related in Predicting Second-Language Reading Comprehension? A Study of Spanish-Speaking Children Acquiring English as a Second Language from First to Second Grade.” Journal of Educational Psychology 101 (2): 330–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014320.

Gutierrez-Clellen, Vera F., Elizabeth Peña, and Rosemary Quinn. 1995. “Accommodating Cultural Differences in Narrative Style.” Topics in Language Disorders 15 (4): 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-199508000-00006.

Heikkilä, Riikka, Vesa Närhi, Mikko Aro, and Timo Ahonen. 2009. “Rapid Automatized Naming and Learning Disabilities: Does RAN Have a Specific Connection to Reading or Not?” Child Neuropsychology 15 (4): 343–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040802537653.

Heilmann, John, Jon F. Miller, Ann Nockerts, and Claudia Dunaway. 2010. “Properties of the Narrative Scoring Scheme Using Narrative Retells in Young School-Age Children.” American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 19 (2): 154–66. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2009/08-0024).

Hogan, Tiffany P., Suzanne M. Adlof, and Crystle N. Alonzo. 2014. “On the Importance of Listening Comprehension.” International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 16 (3): 199–207. https://doi.org/10.3109/17549507.2014.904441.

Hogan, Tiffany P., Hugh W. Catts, and Todd D. Little. 2005. “The Relationship Between Phonological Awareness and Reading.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 36 (4): 285–93. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/029).

Hoover, Wesley A., and Philip B. Gough. 1990. “The Simple View of Reading.” Reading and Writing 2 (2): 127–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00401799.

Hulme, C. 1988. “The Implausibility of Low-Level Visual Deficits as a Cause of Children’s Reading Difficulties.” Cognitive Neuropsychology 5 (3): 369–74.

Ives Wiley, Hilda, and Stanley L. Deno. 2005. “Oral Reading and Maze Measures as Predictors of Success for English Learners on a State Standards Assessment.” Remedial and Special Education 26 (4): 207–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260040301.

Jasso, Javier, Stephanie McMillen, Jissel B. Anaya, Lisa M. Bedore, and Elizabeth D. Peña. 2020. “The Utility of an English Semantics Measure for Identifying Developmental Language Disorder in SpanishEnglish Bilinguals.” American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 29 (2): 776–88. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_ajslp-19-00202.

Jeon, Eun Hee, and Junko Yamashita. 2014. “L2 Reading Comprehension and Its Correlates: A Meta-Analysis.” Language Learning 64 (1): 160–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12034.

Katzir, Tami, Youngsuk Kim, Maryanne Wolf, Beth O’Brien, Becky Kennedy, Maureen Lovett, and Robin Morris. 2006. “Reading Fluency: The Whole Is More Than the Parts.” Annals of Dyslexia 56 (1): 51–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-006-0003-5.

Kieffer, Michael J., and Nonie K. Lesaux. 2007. “The Role of Derivational Morphology in the Reading Comprehension of Spanish-Speaking English Language Learners.” Reading and Writing 21 (8): 783–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9092-8.

Kilpatrick, David A. 2012. “Phonological Segmentation Assessment Is Not Enough.” Canadian Journal of School Psychology 27 (2): 150–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573512438635.

Kim, Young-Suk. 2012. “The Relations Among L1 (Spanish) Literacy Skills, L2 (English) Language, L2 Text Reading Fluency, and L2 Reading Comprehension for Spanish-Speaking ELL First Grade Students.” Learning and Individual Differences 22 (6): 690–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.06.009.

Kim, Young-Suk Grace. 2020. “Hierarchical and Dynamic Relations of Language and Cognitive Skills to Reading Comprehension: Testing the Direct and Indirect Effects Model of Reading (DIER).” Journal of Educational Psychology 112 (4): 667–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000407.

———. 2023. “Oral Discourse Skills: Dimensionality of Comprehension and Retell of Narrative and Expository Texts, and the Relations of Language and Cognitive Skills to Identified Dimensions.” Child Development 94 (5). https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13935.

Kim, Young-Suk, and Daniel Pallante. 2010. “Predictors of Reading Skills for Kindergartners and First Grade Students in Spanish: A Longitudinal Study.” Reading and Writing 25 (1): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9244-0.

Kirby, John R., Alain Desrochers, Leah Roth, and Sandy S. V. Lai. 2008. “Longitudinal Predictors of Word Reading Development.” Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne 49 (2): 103–10. https://doi.org/10.1037/0708-5591.49.2.103.

Kirby, John R., George K. Georgiou, Rhonda Martinussen, and Rauno Parrila. 2010. “Naming Speed and Reading: From Prediction to Instruction.” Reading Research Quarterly 45 (3): 341–62. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.45.3.4.

Kremin, Lena V., Maria M. Arredondo, Lucy Shih-Ju Hsu, Teresa Satterfield, and Ioulia Kovelman. 2016. “The Effects of Spanish Heritage Language Literacy on English Reading for SpanishEnglish Bilingual Children in the US.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22 (2): 192–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1239692.

Landerl, Karin, H. Harald Freudenthaler, Moritz Heene, Peter F. De Jong, Alain Desrochers, George Manolitsis, Rauno Parrila, and George K. Georgiou. 2018. “Phonological Awareness and Rapid Automatized Naming as Longitudinal Predictors of Reading in Five Alphabetic Orthographies with Varying Degrees of Consistency.” Scientific Studies of Reading 23 (3): 220–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2018.1510936.

Leafstedt, Jill M., and Michael M. Gerber. 2005. “Crossover of Phonological Processing Skills.” Remedial and Special Education 26 (4): 226–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260040501.

Lindsey, Kim A., Franklin R. Manis, and Caroline E. Bailey. 2003. “Prediction of First-Grade Reading in Spanish-Speaking English-Language Learners.” Journal of Educational Psychology 95 (3): 482–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.3.482.

Lobier, M., R. Zoubrinetzky, and S. Valdois. 2012. “The Visual Attention Span Deficit in Dyslexia Is Visual and Not Verbal.” Cortex 48 (6): 768–73.

Lonigan, Christopher J. 2006. “Development, Assessment, and Promotion of Preliteracy Skills.” Early Education & Development 17 (1): 91–114. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed1701_5.

Majerus, Steve, and Nelson Cowan. 2016. “The Nature of Verbal Short-Term Impairment in Dyslexia: The Importance of Serial Order.” Frontiers in Psychology 7 (October). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01522.

Mancilla-Martinez, Jeannette, Jin Kyoung Hwang, Min Hyun Oh, and Janna Brown McClain. 2020. “Early Elementary Grade Dual Language Learners from Spanish-Speaking Homes Struggling with English Reading Comprehension: The Dormant Role of Language Skills.” Journal of Educational Psychology 112 (5): 880–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000402.

Mandler, George. 1980. “Recognizing: The Judgment of Previous Occurrence.” Psychological Review 87 (3): 252–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.87.3.252.

Marinis, Theodoros, and Sharon Armon-Lotem. 2015. “Sentence Repetition.” In Assessing Multilingual Children: Disentangling Bilingualism from Language Impairment, edited by Sharon Armon-Lotem, Jan de Jong, and Nirit Meir, 13:95–124. Multilingual Matters.

Martínez, Naroa, and Edurne Goikoetxea. 2019. “Predictors of Reading and Spelling Words Change as a Function of Syllabic Structure in Spanish.” Psicología Educativa 26 (1): 37–48. https://doi.org/10.5093/psed2019a20.

McBride-Chang, Catherine. 1995. “What Is Phonological Awareness?” Journal of Educational Psychology 87 (2): 179–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.179.

McDougall, Siné, Charles Hulme, Andrew Ellis, and Andrew Monk. 1994. “Learning to Read: The Role of Short-Term Memory and Phonological Skills.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 58 (1): 112–33. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1994.1028.

McGregor, Karla K., Jacob Oleson, Alison Bahnsen, and Dawna Duff. 2013. “Children with Developmental Language Impairment Have Vocabulary Deficits Characterized by Limited Breadth and Depth.” International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 48 (3): 307–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12008.

McWeeny, Sean, Soujin Choi, June Choe, Alexander LaTourrette, Megan Y. Roberts, and Elizabeth S. Norton. 2022. “Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) as a Kindergarten Predictor of Future Reading in English: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Reading Research Quarterly 57 (4): 1187–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.467.

Melby-Lervåg, Monica, and Arne Lervåg. 2011. “Cross-Linguistic Transfer of Oral Language, Decoding, Phonological Awareness and Reading Comprehension: A Meta-Analysis of the Correlational Evidence.” Journal of Research in Reading 34 (1): 114–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01477.x.

Melzi, Gigliana. 2000. “Cultural Variations in the Construction of Personal Narratives: Central American and European American Mothers’ Elicitation Styles.” Discourse Processes 30 (2): 153–77. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3002_04.

Míguez-Álvarez, Carla, Miguel Cuevas-Alonso, and Ángeles Saavedra. 2021. “Relationships Between Phonological Awareness and Reading in Spanish: A Meta-Analysis.” Language Learning 72 (1): 113–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12471.

Miller, Jon F., John Heilmann, Ann Nockerts, Aquiles Iglesias, Leah Fabiano, and David J. Francis. 2006a. “Oral Language and Reading in Bilingual Children.” Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 21 (1): 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00205.x.

———. 2006b. “Oral Language and Reading in Bilingual Children.” Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 21 (1): 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00205.x.

Misra, Maya, Tamar Katzir, Maryanne Wolf, and Russell A. Poldrack. 2004. “Neural Systems for Rapid Automatized Naming in Skilled Readers: Unraveling the RAN-Reading Relationship.” Scientific Studies of Reading 8 (3): 241–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0803_4.

MOLL, KRISTINA, CHARLES HULME, SONALI NAG, and MARGARET J. SNOWLING. 2013. “Sentence Repetition as a Marker of Language Skills in Children with Dyslexia.” Applied Psycholinguistics 36 (2): 203–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716413000209.

Nagy, W. E., and J. A. Scott. 2000. “Vocabulary Processes.” In Handbook of Reading Research, edited by M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, and R. Barr, 3:269–84. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Nakamoto, Jonathan, Kim A. Lindsey, and Franklin R. Manis. 2006. “A Longitudinal Analysis of English Language Learners’ Word Decoding and Reading Comprehension.” Reading and Writing 20 (7): 691–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-006-9045-7.

———. 2008. “A Cross-Linguistic Investigation of English Language Learners’ Reading Comprehension in English and Spanish.” Scientific Studies of Reading 12 (4): 351–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430802378526.

Nation, Kate, Paula Clarke, Catherine M. Marshall, and Marianne Durand. 2004. “Hidden Language Impairments in Children.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 47 (1): 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2004/017).

Nation, Kate, Joanne Cocksey, Jo S. H. Taylor, and Dorothy V. M. Bishop. 2010. “A Longitudinal Investigation of Early Reading and Language Skills in Children with Poor Reading Comprehension.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 51 (9): 1031–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02254.x.

Nation, Kate, and Charles Hulme. 2010. “Learning to Read Changes Children’s Phonological Skills: Evidence from a Latent Variable Longitudinal Study of Reading and Nonword Repetition.” Developmental Science 14 (4): 649–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01008.x.

National Reading Panel (US). 2000. “Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction: Reports of the Subgroups.” Technical Report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health; Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council. 1998. Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Naveh-Benjamin, Moshe, and Thomas J. Ayres. 1986. “Digit Span, Reading Rate, and Linguistic Relativity.” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A 38 (4): 739–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748608401623.

Norton, Elizabeth S., and Maryanne Wolf. 2012. “Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) and Reading Fluency: Implications for Understanding and Treatment of Reading Disabilities.” Annual Review of Psychology 63 (1): 427–52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100431.

O’Brien, G., and J. D. Yeatman. 2021. “Bridging Sensory and Language Theories of Dyslexia: Toward a Multifactorial Model.” Developmental Science 24 (3): e13039.

O’Connor, Rollanda E., and Joseph R. Jenkins. 1999. “Prediction of Reading Disabilities in Kindergarten and First Grade.” Scientific Studies of Reading 3 (2): 159–97. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0302_4.

Oh, Min Hyun, Jeannette Mancilla-Martinez, and Jin Kyoung Hwang. 2023. “Revisiting the Traditional Conceptualizations of Vocabulary Knowledge as Predictors of Dual Language Learners’ English Reading Achievement in a New Destination State.” Applied Psycholinguistics 44 (1): 51–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716422000479.

Ozernov-Palchik, O., E. S. Norton, G. Sideridis, S. D. Beach, M. Wolf, J. D. E. Gabrieli, and N. Gaab. 2017. “Longitudinal Stability of Pre-Reading Skill Profiles of Kindergarten Children: Implications for Early Screening and Theories of Reading.” Developmental Science 20 (5).

Parrila, Rauno, John R. Kirby, and Lynn McQuarrie. 2004. “Articulation Rate, Naming Speed, Verbal Short-Term Memory, and Phonological Awareness: Longitudinal Predictors of Early Reading Development?” Scientific Studies of Reading 8 (1): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0801_2.

Pasquarella, Adrian, Xi Chen, Alexandra Gottardo, and Esther Geva. 2015. “Cross-Language Transfer of Word Reading Accuracy and Word Reading Fluency in Spanish-English and Chinese-English Bilinguals: Script-Universal and Script-Specific Processes.” Journal of Educational Psychology 107 (1): 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036966.

Pelli, D. G., C. W. Burns, B. Farell, and D. C. Moore-Page. 2006. “Feature Detection and Letter Identification.” Vision Research 46 (28): 4646–74.

Pennington, B. F. 2011. “Controversial Therapies for Dyslexia.” Perspectives on Language and Literacy 37 (1): 7–8.

Petersen, Douglas B., and Trina D. Spencer. 2012. “The Narrative Language Measures: Tools for Language Screening, Progress Monitoring, and Intervention Planning.” Perspectives on Language Learning and Education 19 (4): 119–29. https://doi.org/10.1044/lle19.4.119.

Piasta, Shayne B., David J. Purpura, and Richard K. Wagner. 2009. “Fostering Alphabet Knowledge Development: A Comparison of Two Instructional Approaches.” Reading and Writing 23 (6): 607–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9174-x.

Polišenská, Kamila, Shula Chiat, and Penny Roy. 2014. “Sentence Repetition: What Does the Task Measure?” International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 50 (1): 106–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12126.

Pratt, Amy S., Elizabeth D. Peña, and Lisa M. Bedore. 2020. “Sentence Repetition with Bilinguals with and Without DLD: Differential Effects of Memory, Vocabulary, and Exposure.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 24 (2): 305–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728920000498.

Proctor, C. Patrick, Diane August, María S. Carlo, and Catherine Snow. 2006. “The Intriguing Role of Spanish Language Vocabulary Knowledge in Predicting English Reading Comprehension.” Journal of Educational Psychology 98 (1): 159–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.159.

Proctor, C. Patrick, Jeffrey R. Harring, and Rebecca D. Silverman. 2017. “Linguistic Interdependence Between Spanish Language and English Language and Reading: A Longitudinal Exploration from Second Through Fifth Grade.” Bilingual Research Journal 40 (4): 372–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2017.1383949.

Qi, Ting, Maria Luisa Mandelli, Christa L. Watson Pereira, Emma Wellman, Rian Bogley, Abigail E. Licata, Edward F. Chang, Yulia Oganian, and Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini. 2023. “Anatomical and Behavioral Correlates of Auditory Perception in Developmental Dyslexia.” http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.09.539936.

Ramamurthy, M., A. L. White, and J. D. Yeatman. 2024. “Children with Dyslexia Show No Deficit in Exogenous Spatial Attention but Show Differences in Visual Encoding.” Developmental Science 27 (3): e13458. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13458.

Reese, Elaine, Sebastian Suggate, Jennifer Long, and Elizabeth Schaughency. 2009. “Children’s Oral Narrative and Reading Skills in the First 3 Years of Reading Instruction.” Reading and Writing 23 (6): 627–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9175-9.

Reschly, Amy L., Todd W. Busch, Joseph Betts, Stanley L. Deno, and Jeffrey D. Long. 2009. “Curriculum-Based Measurement Oral Reading as an Indicator of Reading Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Correlational Evidence.” Journal of School Psychology 47 (6): 427–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.07.001.

Riccio, C. A., B. Imhoff, J. E. Hasbrouck, and G. N. Davis. 2004. Test of Phonological Awareness in Spanish. Pro-Ed.

Riedel, Brant W.RIEDEL. 2007. “The Relation Between DIBELS, Reading Comprehension, and Vocabulary in Urban First-Grade Students.” Reading Research Quarterly 42 (4): 546–67. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.42.4.5.

Riva, Anna, Alessandro Musetti, Monica Bomba, Lorenzo Milani, Valentina Montrasi, and Renata Nacinovich. 2021. “Language-Related Skills in Bilingual Children with Specific Learning Disorders.” Frontiers in Psychology 11 (January). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.564047.

Roberts, Theresa A. 2005. “Articulation Accuracy and Vocabulary Size Contributions to Phonemic Awareness and Word Reading in English Language Learners.” Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (4): 601–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.4.601.

Rubin, Renée, and Verónica Galván Carlan. 2005. “Using Writing to Understand Bilingual Children’s Literacy Development.” The Reading Teacher 58 (8): 728–39. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.58.8.3.

Scarborough, Hollis S. 1998. “Predicting the Future Achievement of Second Graders with Reading Disabilities: Contributions of Phonemic Awareness, Verbal Memory, Rapid Naming, and IQ.” Annals of Dyslexia 48 (1): 115–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-998-0006-5.

Scarborough, Hollis S., Susan B. Neuman, and David K. Dickinson. 2001. “Connecting Early Language and Literacy to Later Reading (Dis) Abilities: Evidence, Theory, and Practice.” In Handbook of Early Literacy Research, 1:97–110. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Schatschneider, Christopher, Jack M. Fletcher, David J. Francis, Coleen D. Carlson, and Barbara R. Foorman. 2004. “Kindergarten Prediction of Reading Skills: A Longitudinal Comparative Analysis.” Journal of Educational Psychology 96 (2): 265–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.265.

Semel, E., E. H. Wiig, W. A. Secord, and H. W. Langdon. 2006. Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (4th Ed., Spanish). Pearson Education Inc.

Serrano, Francisca, and Sylvia Defior. 2008. “Dyslexia Speed Problems in a Transparent Orthography.” Annals of Dyslexia 58 (1): 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-008-0013-6.

———. 2010. “Spanish Dyslexic Spelling Abilities: The Case of Consonant Clusters.” Journal of Research in Reading 35 (2): 169–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01454.x.

Seymour, Philip H. K., Mikko Aro, and Jane M. Erskine. 2003. “Foundation Literacy Acquisition in European Orthographies.” British Journal of Psychology 94 (2): 143–74. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712603321661859.

Signorini, Angela. 1997. “Word Reading in Spanish: A Comparison Between Skilled and Less Skilled Beginning Readers.” Applied Psycholinguistics 18 (3): 319–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/s014271640001050x.

Silverman, Rebecca D., C. Patrick Proctor, Jeffrey R. Harring, Anna M. Hartranft, Brie Doyle, and Sarah B. Zelinke. 2015. “Language Skills and Reading Comprehension in English Monolingual and SpanishEnglish Bilingual Children in Grades 25.” Reading and Writing 28 (9): 1381–1405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9575-y.

Simon-Cereijido, Gabriela, and Vera F. Gutiérrez-Clellen. 2017. “Bilingual Education for All: Latino Dual Language Learners with Language Disabilities.” In Immersion Education in the Early Years, 117–36. Routledge.

Snowling, Margaret J., Alison Gallagher, and Uta Frith. 2003. “Family Risk of Dyslexia Is Continuous: Individual Differences in the Precursors of Reading Skill.” Child Development 74 (2): 358–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.7402003.

Snowling, Margaret J., and Charles Hulme. 2020. “Annual Research Review: Reading Disorders Revisited the Critical Importance of Oral Language.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 62 (5): 635–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13324.

Snowling, Margaret, Kate Nation, Philippa Moxham, Alison Gallagher, and Uta Frith. 1997. “Phonological Processing Skills of Dyslexic Students in Higher Education: A Preliminary Report.” Journal of Research in Reading 20 (1): 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00018.

Solari, Emily J., Terese C. Aceves, Ignacio Higareda, Cara Richards-Tutor, Alexis L. Filippini, Michael M. Gerber, and Jill Leafstedt. 2013. “LONGITUDINAL PREDICTION OF 1ST AND 2ND GRADE ENGLISH ORAL READING FLUENCY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS: WHICH EARLY READING AND LANGUAGE SKILLS ARE BETTER PREDICTORS?” Psychology in the Schools 51 (2): 126–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21743.

Sperling, G. 1960. “The Information Available in Brief Visual Presentations.” Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 74 (11): 1.

Stahl, S. A., and W. E. Nagy. 2007. Teaching Word Meanings. New York, NY: Routledge.

Stein, J., and V. Walsh. 1997. “To See but Not to Read; the Magnocellular Theory of Dyslexia.” Trends in Neurosciences 20 (4): 147–52.

Storch, Stacey A., and Grover J. Whitehurst. 2002a. “Oral Language and Code-Related Precursors to Reading: Evidence from a Longitudinal Structural Model.” Developmental Psychology 38 (6): 934–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.38.6.934.

———. 2002b. “Oral Language and Code-Related Precursors to Reading: Evidence from a Longitudinal Structural Model.” Developmental Psychology 38 (6): 934–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.38.6.934.

Sun-Alperin, M. Kendra, and Min Wang. 2009. “Cross-Language Transfer of Phonological and Orthographic Processing Skills from Spanish L1 to English L2.” Reading and Writing 24 (5): 591–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9221-7.

Swank, Linda K., and Hugh W. Catts. 1994. “Phonological Awareness and Written Word Decoding.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 25 (1): 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.2501.09.

Swanson, H. Lee, and Linda Siegel. 2011. “Learning Disabilities as a Working Memory Deficit.” Experimental Psychology 49 (1): 5–28.

Swanson, H. Lee, Xinhua Zheng, and Olga Jerman. 2009. “Working Memory, Short-Term Memory, and Reading Disabilities.” Journal of Learning Disabilities 42 (3): 260–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409331958.

Talcott, J. B., C. Witton, G. S. Hebb, C. J. Stoodley, E. A. Westwood, S. J. France, P. C. Hansen, and J. F. Stein. 2002. “On the Relationship Between Dynamic Visual and Auditory Processing and Literacy Skills; Results from a Large Primary-School Study.” Dyslexia 8 (4): 204–25.

Taran, Nikolay, Rola Farah, Mark DiFrancesco, Mekibib Altaye, Jennifer Vannest, Scott Holland, Keri Rosch, Bradley L. Schlaggar, and Tzipi Horowitz-Kraus. 2022. “The Role of Visual Attention in Dyslexia: Behavioral and Neurobiological Evidence.” Human Brain Mapping 43 (5): 1720–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25753.

Torgesen, Joseph K., and D. Griffith Houck. 1980. “Processing Deficiencies of Learning-Disabled Children Who Perform Poorly on the Digit Span Test.” Journal of Educational Psychology 72 (2): 141–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.72.2.141.

Torgesen, Joseph, and Tina Goldman. 1977. “Verbal Rehearsal and Short-Term Memory in Reading-Disabled Children.” Child Development 48 (1): 56. https://doi.org/10.2307/1128881.

Torppa, Minna, Anna-Maija Poikkeus, Marja-Leena Laakso, Kenneth Eklund, and Heikki Lyytinen. 2006. “Predicting Delayed Letter Knowledge Development and Its Relation to Grade 1 Reading Achievement Among Children with and Without Familial Risk for Dyslexia.” Developmental Psychology 42 (6): 1128–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.6.1128.

Treiman, Rebecca, and Brett Kessler. 2021. “Statistical Learning in Word Reading and Spelling Across Languages and Writing Systems.” Scientific Studies of Reading 26 (2): 139–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2021.1920951.

Uccelli, Paola, and Mariela M. Paéz. 2007. “Narrative and Vocabulary Development of Bilingual Children From Kindergarten to First Grade: Developmental Changes and Associations Among English and Spanish Skills.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 38 (3): 225–36. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2007/024).

Valdois, S., M.-L. Bosse, and M.-J. Tainturier. 2004. “The Cognitive Deficits Responsible for Developmental Dyslexia: Review of Evidence for a Selective Visual Attentional Disorder.” Dyslexia 10 (4): 339–63.

Valdois, S., C. Reilhac, E. Ginestet, and M.-L. Bosse. 2021. “Varieties of Cognitive Profiles in Poor Readers: Evidence for a VAS-Impaired Subtype.” Journal of Learning Disabilities 54 (3): 221–33.

Van Den Boer, M., E. Van Bergen, and P. F. de Jong. 2015. “The Specific Relation of Visual Attention Span with Reading and Spelling in Dutch.” Learning and Individual Differences 39: 141–49.

Vellutino, Frank R., Jack M. Fletcher, Margaret J. Snowling, and Donna M. Scanlon. 2004. “Specific Reading Disability (Dyslexia): What Have We Learned in the Past Four Decades?” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 45 (1): 2–40. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0021-9630.2003.00305.x.

Vellutino, Frank R., William E. Tunmer, James J. Jaccard, and RuSan Chen. 2007. “Components of Reading Ability: Multivariate Evidence for a Convergent Skills Model of Reading Development.” Scientific Studies of Reading 11 (1): 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430709336632.

Verhagen, Josje, Jan Boom, Hanna Mulder, Elise de Bree, and Paul Leseman. 2019. “Reciprocal Relationships Between Nonword Repetition and Vocabulary During the Preschool Years.” Developmental Psychology 55 (6): 1125–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000702.

Verhoeven, Ludo, and Jos Keuning. 2017. “The Nature of Developmental Dyslexia in a Transparent Orthography.” Scientific Studies of Reading 22 (1): 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2017.1317780.

Vettori, Giulia, Oriana Incognito, Lucia Bigozzi, and Giuliana Pinto. 2023. “Relationship Between Lexical, Reading and Spelling Skills in Bilingual Language Minority Children and Their Monolingual Peers.” Frontiers in Psychology 14 (August). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1121505.

Washington, Julie A. et al., eds. 2020. Dyslexia: Revisiting Etiology, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Policy. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Whitehurst, Graver J., and Christopher J. Lonigan. 1998. “Child Development and Emergent Literacy.” Child Development 69 (3): 848–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06247.x.

Whitehurst, Grover J., and Christopher J. Lonigan. 2001. Get Ready to Read! Revised. National Center for Learning Disabilities; Pearson Education Inc.

Willburger, Edith, Barbara Fussenegger, Kristina Moll, Guilherme Wood, and Karin Landerl. 2008. “Naming Speed in Dyslexia and Dyscalculia.” Learning and Individual Differences 18 (2): 224–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.01.003.

Winters, Katherine L., Javier Jasso, James E. Pustejovsky, and Courtney T. Byrd. 2022. “Investigating Narrative Performance in Children With Developmental Language Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 65 (10): 3908–29. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_jslhr-22-00017.

Wolf, Maryanne, and Patricia Greig Bowers. 1999. “The Double-Deficit Hypothesis for the Developmental Dyslexias.” Journal of Educational Psychology 91 (3): 415–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415.

Wolf, Maryanne, Alyssa Goldberg O’Rourke, Calvin Gidney, Maureen Lovett, Paul Cirino, and Robin Morris. 2002. Reading and Writing 15 (1/2): 43–72. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1013816320290.

Wolf, M., R. J. Gotlieb, S. A. Kim, V. Pedroza, L. V. Rhinehart, M. L. G. Tempini, and S. Sears. 2024. “Towards a Dynamic, Comprehensive Conceptualization of Dyslexia.” Annals of Dyslexia, 1–22.

Wren, Yasmin, and Socorro Herrera. 2021. “Early Literacy Predictors of Spanish Reading Achievement in Bilingual Children.” Bilingual Research Journal 44 (1): 58–73.

Yeo, Seungsoo. 2009. “Predicting Performance on State Achievement Tests Using Curriculum-Based Measurement in Reading: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis.” Remedial and Special Education 31 (6): 412–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327463.

Yesil-Dagli, Ummuhan. 2011. “Predicting ELL Students’ Beginning First Grade English Oral Reading Fluency from Initial Kindergarten Vocabulary, Letter Naming, and Phonological Awareness Skills.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 26 (1): 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.06.001.

Yue, Qiuhai, and Randi C. Martin. 2021. “Maintaining Verbal Short-Term Memory Representations in Non-Perceptual Parietal Regions.” Cortex 138 (May): 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2021.01.020.

Ziegler, Johannes C., and Usha Goswami. 2005. “Reading Acquisition, Developmental Dyslexia, and Skilled Reading Across Languages: A Psycholinguistic Grain Size Theory.” Psychological Bulletin 131 (1): 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.3.