The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of milieu language teaching(MLT / mother-implemented language intervention) and child-directed language teaching(CLT) on vocabulary improvement and language development in about three-year-old c...
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of milieu language teaching(MLT / mother-implemented language intervention) and child-directed language teaching(CLT) on vocabulary improvement and language development in about three-year-old children with language delay. The subject for the study were thirty children who had about 3 to 10(more than three and less than ten) spontaneous vocabulary, and had no sensory or motor impairments. All subjects’ mothers had academic background of high school graduation and were full-time housewives. Subjects were randomly assigned to three groups; MLT group, CLT group, and control group. And control group was provided only pretest and posttest. The major findings obtained from the study were as follows:
First, both MLT group and CLT group showed more vocabulary increase than the control group. The intervention effects were different according to the intelligence level of the subjects. Among the subjects with higher intelligence level, the intervention effects (vocabulary improvement) were greater in order of CLT group, MLT group and control group, and among the subjects with lower intelligence level, the vocabulary incresed in order of MLT group, CLT group and control grou. The ANOVA yielded significant results for the interaction effects between intervention groups and the intelligence level; In order of vocabulary increase, CLT group with high intelligence level showed the greatest increase of vocabulary, and the effects were followed by all MLT group(with high and low intelligence level), CLT group with low intelligence level, and control group. In short, MLT showed little effects on the intelligence, but CLT showed different effects on the subjects’s vocabulary improvement according to their intelligence level.
Second, two language interventions had an effect on both receptive and expressive language development of children who received either MLT or CLT; Both group showed faster receptive and expressive language development than the control group. The high intelligence-CLT group and the low intelligence-MLT group significantly displayed faster expressive language development than the control group; The high intelligence-MLT group than the control group. However, there was no significant difference between MLT and CLT in receptive language development.
In conclusion, based on the findings of this study, it is suggested that mother- implemented language intervention has a significant effect on language development; CLT is an effective method for children with high intelligence and MLT has an effect on the language development of children with low intelligence.