Sticht's Law holds that reading skill cannot exceed listening skill¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 1997 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because 3 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Reading skill cannot exceed listening skill, so oral-aural competency limits literacy development. → Neiburg 1997

Evidence¶

Neiburg 1997¶

Neiburg, Michael S. (1997). Following Native Language Acquisition. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Japan Association for Language Teaching (23rd, Hamamatsu, Japan, October 11, 1997). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED417613

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

The article reports, citing Sticht's work with native language learners in reading and listening, that "reading skill cannot exceed listening skill." The article offers this as a cited research finding, not a new empirical test; no effect size is printed.

"shows that the lackof competency in the first stage of native language acquisition severely hinders progress in the next stage. Basically what Stichtwrites is that reading skill cannot exceed listening skill."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Communication Skills — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Japanese schools teach English literacy before oral-aural competency, inverting the natural sequence — reports the opposite
• The author of a 1997 conference paper reports finding no research supporting reverse transfer of skills from literacy to oral language — related
• A 1997 conference paper reports, citing Sticht, a positive correlation between preschool oral language skills and later reading achievement — a broader claim this one bears on
• Oral language measures of syntax, listening comprehension, and oral vocabulary do not predict which English learners will struggle with learning to read — reports the opposite
• L2 oral language proficiency predicts reading comprehension more strongly than decoding skills — related