The study aims to investigate the potential of choir singing to enhance second language (L2)acquisition in healthy adults (age 18–64). 90 participants will be recruited to the study andallocated to three groups (n = 30 per group) to explore the effects of six months choir singingon L2 phonological awareness (PA), as measured by EventRelated Potentials (ERPs). Cognitive responses to phonological awareness as measured with rhyming tasks and ERP effects willbe assessed before and after the intervention of weekly choir singing. These responses will becompared to that of two other groups; one active control, where participants will listen toaudiobooks (in L2), and a no-intervention group. For all groups, ERPs will be recorded duringa rhyming task to examine the neural correlates of phonological processing (the ERP rhymingeffect, N450), while standardized measures of PA will provide behavioral indicators ofdevelopment of L2 proficiency. Statistical analyses, including repeated measures ANOVA, willbe used to evaluate changes in the ERP rhyming effects and PA tests following the interventionperiod. Findings from this study aim to contribute to our understanding of the potentialcognitive and neural mechanisms underlying possible beneficial effects of music-basedinterventions, such as regular choir singing on L2 acquisition, with implications for educationalpractices and interventions targeting language learning in healthy adult populations.

Does the intervention FonoMix (Löwenbrand et al., 2011) affect preschoolers' phonological awareness (PA) by its own account, or is it the result of differences in implementation of the intervention or secondary factors (spontaneous PA activities) arising from the introduction of the intervention in a preschool? When preliterate children are trained in PA, effects are observed on literacy up to grade four (Byrne and Fielding-Barnsley, 1991; Lundberg, 1994). However, previous studies do not investigate how the intervention generates its effect. We will discuss how the context, i.e., implementation, secondary effects, and/or the context such as the early childhood center, the teachers in the room, and the group of children, modulate or mediate the effect of an intervention andthus explain both between-group and within-group variances in an intervention effect. Teachers are observered during FonoMix sessions focusing on implementation of the intervention. Children are observed during two days focusing on spontaneous PA-activities. The study have undergone ethical vetting. Caregivers give informed consentand children give continuous consent during observations. We expect to replicate positive effects of PA-interventions on literacy (e.g., Fälth et al., 2020) as measured with LegiLexi. In addition find effects of the contextand the secondary factors according to our observational protocols indicating frequencies of spontaneous PA-activities. We extend previous theoretical studies (Matta et al., 2023), and study observations of activities and interplay between teachers and children during a PA-intervention to reveal the underlying mechanisms of theinterventions. Results could change how we develop new generations of interventions not specific to PA.

The aim is to raise teacher awareness of how to support children’s language development by transforming learning environment, opportunities and interactions.

A professional development programme (PDP) focusing communication supporting environment (Dockrell et al., 2015) was implemented in line with earlier findings on how to efficiently change teacher practice (Kraft et al., 2018; Snyder et al., 2015). Few studies on such PDPs have been conducted (e.g. Edlund 2025).

Based on the sociocultural perspective, we used a PDP as a conceptual framework to reflect on factors that support children’s language development.    

In this study, we analyse changes in teacher awareness and practice from a quantitative and qualitative point of view, as reflected in observation, survey and interview results within a larger one-year PDP involving three preschool units. The PDP was a collaboration between the preschool units and university language professionals.

Informed consent was obtained from all the participating teachers. To preserve confidentiality, all names and locations have received pseudonyms. Since the sole focus was on changes in teacher awareness, no observation data on children was collected.  

Preliminary findings show that the professional development programme increased teacher awareness of what constitutes language learning environments, opportunities and interactions, and their use of communication supporting strategies.

This study highlights collaborative gains between language professionals and preschool teachers. It indicates that a combination of a few lectures, workshops, self-reflection, discussion and observations in an iterative fashion has potential to make a considerable improvement in preschool communication supporting environment and make it inclusive for all children.   

Spelling difficulties are commonly associated primarily with spelling errors. However, it is not uncommon for spelling challenges to transform the whole writing process into a formidable struggle. This paper delves into the exploration of whether and to what extent analyses of children's writing processes can enhance our understanding of their difficulties, potentially contributing to the assessment of spelling challenges. We focused particularly on the degree of hesitation within words and the ability to detect and correct spelling errors among children with and without reading and spelling difficulties, as well as how these processes impact the quality and lexical diversity of their texts. Additionally, we sought to contribute to disentangling the influence of spelling and decoding abilities on these processes. A cohort of 47 children, aged 10-13, participated in the study, comprising 16 typically developing children, 16 with predominantly spelling difficulties, and 15 with both reading and spelling difficulties. Our analysis encompassed their spelling performance in both standardized tests and task-oriented writing samples, as well as an examination of their pausing and revision behaviour. As expected, we found robust correlations between the children's spelling test scores and the proportions of spelling errors in their texts. Furthermore, our findings indicated that children encountering spelling difficulties exhibited a reduced ability to detect and correct errors compared to their peers without such challenges. Additionally, they displayed a slightly higher tendency to experience word-internal interruptions, aligning with prior research. The children who also had reading difficulties produced fewer words and processed words more slowly compared to children in both the other groups. Intriguingly, process data did not reliably predict text characteristics, suggesting that dysfluent writing may not significantly detriment the overall quality of the text, contrary to our initial expectations based on prevailing writing development models. Nevertheless, the study revealed considerable individual variation, with some participants demonstrating a high degree of struggling and dysfluency, resulting in poorer text outcomes, but also others whose struggling processes led to better outcomes. We posit that the crucial aspect lies in identifying these individuals within a classroom context and gaining insights into their processes to provide them with appropriate, formative feedback and adequate writing tools to facilitate their writing.

The aim of this study was to investigate composition and error-correction processes, and their relationship with production rate, in children, age 10-12, with and without reading and writing difficulties using speech-to-text (STT) to write expository texts in Swedish. Measures of individual abilities: working memory, spelling ability and decoding ability, and the ability to interact with the STT tool under optimal conditions (STT success rate) were collected.

For both those with and without difficulties, neither working memory, nor spelling or decoding ability predicted burst length nor accuracy. Only a child’s STT success rate did predict accuracy during text composition. Further, none of the individual abilities predicted choice of error-correction modality (keyboard or STT) or error correction functionality. This indicates that the children’s behavior were independent of these abilities.

Furthermore, production rate was significantly predicted by both burst length and accuracy, and by working memory, but not by error-correction behaviour, nor by spelling or decoding ability. This indicates that composing text using STT is a cognitively complex process placing heavy demands on working memory. Dictating more than one word at a time and combining STT and keyboard use were identified as two useful strategies that can be taught in STT instruction.

The ability to perform revisions targeting the content of the text is important for text quality improvement, and it is hypothesized that lower-level transcription processes need to be automatized in order to free up capacity for higher- level processes such as revision. However, for people with reading and writing difficulties due to underlying difficulties with decoding and spelling, the transcription process is rarely automatized because of their troubles with spelling. One possible way to circumvent spelling difficulties, and possibly gaining capacity for higher level processes such as revision, is to write using speech-to-text (STT). This study investigates the revisions performed when children with reading and writing difficulties (n = 16), and a reference group without such difficulties (n = 12), compose text using STT and using a keyboard. More specifically, the study investigates whether, and if so how, revisions at various levels, errors left in the final text product, and text quality differ between conditions and between groups. The compositions were logged using keystroke logging (keyboard) and audio- and screen-recording (STT). The level of revisions were manually coded. The results showed that children with reading and writing difficulties gain more from composing with STT compared to keyboard than the reference group. They leave fewer errors in their final text product when composing by means of STT, even though they need to engage more in the correction of surface errors because of the large number of STT errors. Despite the numerous STT errors, neither the proportion of meaning-related revisions nor text quality decreased in composing with STT (for either of the groups). Taken together, the results suggest, albeit not emphatically, that STT may be appropriate as a facilitatory tool for children with reading and writing difficulties. However, more research is needed to investigate instruction that addresses strategies for STT transcription and highlights the shortcomings of the tool in the target language, and also focuses specifically on higher-level aspects of composition such as planning or revising, in order to gain further knowledge about the feasibility of using STT as a means of composition for children who struggle with writing, and its possible effects over time. 

Effective writing is a crucial skill that requires not only the mastery of various sub-processes but also deliberate orchestration of those sub-processes within the constraints of limited working- memory capacity. In practice, some of those sub-processes, such as transcription (spelling and handwriting), need to be automatised to free up capacity for other processes. Unfortunately, children who struggle with spelling rarely manage to fully automatise transcription. This often has a negative impact both on their writing process and on the final text. One solution to this problem could be to let them use speech-to-text (STT), because this would allow them to avoid spelling by using their voice to create text.This thesis consists of four articles where I investigate whether, and if so how, composing by means of STT can facilitate writing for children (aged 10–13) with reading and writing difficul- ties. I analyse both the composition processes and the final texts. I make comparisons both with text production by means of a keyboard and with a reference group of children without difficul- ties. In addition, I explore whether and how successful use of STT correlates with individual linguistic and cognitive skills. Overall, my results suggest that STT can indeed facilitate some aspects of writing for children with reading and writing difficulties, though not emphatically. In my studies, the use of STT does not yield any improvements at group level in processes such as meaning-related revisions or in assessed text quality. However, one important caveat is that the participants received only a very short introduction to STT. In general, the ability to use a new tool effectively is of course likely to improve with instruction and practice. Importantly, my results do suggest that instruction in STT use in conjunction with writing processes such as revising is crucial for successful usage of this tool. 

För barn med stavningssvårigheter är skriftspråkande en stor utmaning och behovet att hitta nya redskap för att understödja deras skriftspråksutveckling är därför stort.

Att skriva med taligenkänning, diktering, skulle kunna underlätta skrivprocessen eftersom dikteringsverktyget reducerar kraven på skribenten att stava själv, och detta skulle därmed kunna frigöra kognitiva resurser till annan textbearbetning. Att diktera text innebär emellertid inte med nödvändighet en enklare textproduktion; dels behöver texten följa skriftspråksnormer trots att den produceras muntligt, dels behöver skribenten hitta strategier för att hantera tillfällen när verktyget inte uppfattar talet korrekt.

I föreliggande studie undersöks text producerad av barn med stavningssvårigheter. Lexikala egenskaper, textlängd och stavfel studeras i muntlig, skriven och dikterad text. Analyserna visar att de dikterade texterna innehåller färre stavfel än de skrivna samt att både skriven och dikterad text har högre lexikal densitet och högre andel långa ord jämfört med muntlig text. Detta antyder att deltagarna klarar att diktera texter med skriftspråkliga egenskaper. Däremot skiljde sig dikterad text varken från muntlig eller skriven text gällande textlängd eller lexikal diversitet.

Vår slutsats är att dikteringsverktyg kan användas för att underlätta skrivprocessen för barn med stavningssvårigheter, men det behövs vidare forskning som studerar hur olika undergrupper producerar text med dikteringsverktyg.

For children with reading and writing difficulties, writing, in general, and spelling, in particular, is a significant challenge. Writing with speech recognition (dictation) can facilitate the writing process since the dictation tool removes the need to spell, freeing resources for other processes. Dictating, however, may not always provide a solution, since written text should follow the conventions of written language, even when produced orally. In addition, writers need strategies if the tool does not recognize the spoken words.

In the present study, children with spelling difficulties produced keyboard-written and dictated texts, and an oral account. The analyses showed that dictated texts, as expected, contained fewer spelling errors than keyboard-written texts, and that both of these had a higher lexical density than the oral accounts. This suggests that students are able to dictate using written language conventions. However, the dictated texts did not differ from the oral and keyboard-written texts in terms of length of text and proportion of long words. Our conclusion is that the dictation tool can be used to facilitate the children’s writing process, but further research is needed to see if training in the use of the tool would bring more substantial benefits.