[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-599429-105":59,"doc-detail-599429-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","morphological-knowledge-and-self-efficacy-of-slps-and-educators","Morphological Knowledge and Self-Efficacy of SLPs and Educators","","The study investigates speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and educators’ morphological knowledge (MK) and MK self-efficacy to guide professional development and preservice training on morphological instruction. A U.S. sample of 850 participants included SLPs, English language arts teachers, special education teachers, and reading specialists. A survey captured professional experience, MK application self-efficacy, and an MK measure; correlations and ANOVAs compared groups by disciplinary background. Results show MK varies by profession and reading specialists report the highest MK confidence.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/morphological-knowledge-and-self-efficacy-of-slps-and-educators/599429/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/morphological-knowledge-and-self-efficacy-of-slps-and-educators/599429.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"WPS_1790064749","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":29},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What does the study examine about morphological knowledge?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It examines participants’ morphological knowledge (MK) and their self-reported self-efficacy for applying MK in instruction.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Who participated in the survey?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The study includes SLPs, English language arts teachers, special education teachers, and reading specialists, totaling 850 U.S. participants.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What were the main findings about MK and MK self-efficacy?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"MK differed by profession, with SLPs showing higher accuracy on morpheme counting and nonword derivation. MK self-efficacy also differed, with reading specialists rating themselves more confident than other professions.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},599429,1792165951,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":29,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747859154,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Morphological Knowledge and Self-Efficacy of SLPs and Educators  \nCommunication Disorders Quarterly 2023, Vol. 45(1) 53–63  \n© Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2022 Article reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[DOI: 10.1177/15257401221122677](DOI: 10.1177/15257401221122677)[ ](DOI: 10.1177/15257401221122677)[cdq.sagepub.com](cdq.sagepub.com)  \nKeisey Fumero, PhD 1, and Carla Wood, PhD 1  \nAbstract  \nThe current study examines the morphological knowledge (MK) and self-reported MK self-efficacy of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and educators in an effort to inform professional development and preservice training related to MK and skills in implementing morphological instruction. This sample of 850 U.S. participants consisted of SLPs (n = 406), English language arts teachers (n = 178), special education teachers (n = 201), and reading specialists (n = 65). A survey elicited professional experience, self-efficacy related to the application of MK, and a MK measure. Correlations and analyses of variance (ANOVAs) between the groups that differed by disciplinary backgrounds were conducted to assess differences in MK and MK self-efficacy. The results yielded two key findings: (a) MK differs by profession, with SLPs performing with higher accuracy in morpheme counting and nonword derivation tasks and (b) MK self-efficacy differs by profession with reading specialists rating themselves significantly more confident than all other professions.  \nKeywords  \nevidence-based practices, intervention strategies, survey, research, speech-language pathologists (SLPs), language/linguistics  \nHistorically, researchers have worked closely with policymakers and curriculum developers to ensure that classroom literacy instruction focuses on building the foundational skills of phonemic and phonological awareness. In contrast, preparing educational personnel to build morphological knowledge (MK) skills has been considered to a lesser extent. However, in the last decade, MK has received more attention as a core knowledge area for speech-language pathologists (SLPs; Brimo & Henbest, 2020), as it has become increasingly accepted that, along with phonemic and phonological awareness, MK is an important subskill associated with learning to read (Carlisle, 2000; Colenbrander et al., 2021; Levesque et al., 2018) .  \nGrowing recognition of the importance of MK is also evident in many universal standards for English language arts (ELA), which outline what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade level. In third grade, for example, the Common Core Standards state that students are expected to use a known root word as a clue to the meaning of an unknown word with the same root (e.g., company, companion) (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L3.C) . In fact, students are expected to understand the meaning of prefixes and suffixes to increase grammatical accuracy and aid in the understanding of unknown words when reading; however, concerns have been raised as to adequacy or frequency of MK instruction that occurs in typical instructional practices (Gabig & Zaretsky, 2013; Henbest et al., 2019) .  \nAmong barriers to MK instruction, the existing literature reports a lack of training and preparation in MK instruction  \nfor educational personnel (e.g., Good, 2019; Washburn & Mulcahy, 2019) and difficulties implementing MK interventions without extensive training (Colenbrander et al., 2021) . Based on a survey study of 105 school-based SLPs, recruited from American Speech-language and Hearing Association (ASHA)’s School-Based Issues Special Interest Group 16, 30% of the SLPs reported that they did not receive training in MK instruction in their preservice training and 17% were uncertain (Good, 2019) . Only 56% had received continuing education related to MK. In addition, 67.7% of the SLPs in Good’s study rated themselves as having moderate to low levels of confidence in providin","cbCailDhWMTT2iaC","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCailDhWMTT2iaC","pdf",428173,11,"English","# Abstract\n## Study purpose and participants\n## Measures and analysis\n## Key findings\n# Role of morphological knowledge in language and literacy\n## Terminology: morphological awareness vs morphological knowledge\n## MK in literacy standards and instruction","[{\"question\":\"What does the study examine about morphological knowledge?\",\"answer\":\"It examines participants’ morphological knowledge (MK) and their self-reported self-efficacy for applying MK in instruction.\"},{\"question\":\"Who participated in the survey?\",\"answer\":\"The study includes SLPs, English language arts teachers, special education teachers, and reading specialists, totaling 850 U.S. participants.\"},{\"question\":\"What were the main findings about MK and MK self-efficacy?\",\"answer\":\"MK differed by profession, with SLPs showing higher accuracy on morpheme counting and nonword derivation. MK self-efficacy also differed, with reading specialists rating themselves more confident than other professions.\"}]","Morphological Knowledge and Self-Efficacy of SLPs and Educators | PDF",1792088754,28]