Explicit Grammar Intervention for Bilingual Children With DLD: A New Research Study
Research on grammar intervention in bilingual children is sorely lacking. That’s why the recent clinical focus article by Kornelis et al. (2025) stands out - it outlines an explicit grammatical intervention designed for Spanish–English bilingual children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD). It also includes concrete steps for implementation by monolingual clinicians.
Study Design
This was a single-subject, nonconcurrent multiple-baseline design involving three Spanish–English bilingual children (ages 4–8) with DLD. All children spoke Spanish as their first language. Intervention sessions focused on two common English grammatical targets:
Regular past tense (-ed)
Third person singular present tense (-s)
The approach was designed to be implemented in English, with cross-linguistic connections to Spanish built in to facilitate potential transfer to the untreated language.
Intervention Approach: Principles and Procedures
The researchers described a seven-step process to design the intervention, integrating principles from existing explicit grammar intervention literature and adapting them for bilingual learners.
The seven steps:
Determine intervention fit: Confirm bilingualism and morphosyntactic deficits in both languages.
Choose intervention targets: Select grammatical forms present and challenging in both English and Spanish.
Develop explicit grammatical rules: Provide child-friendly explanations of target forms.
Make cross-linguistic connections: Highlight similarities and differences between English and Spanish grammar.
Deliver intervention activities: Use sentence imitation, story retell, structured play, and auditory bombardment.
Monitor progress: Track accuracy of grammatical forms during sessions and through language samples.
Adapt as needed: Adjust session content, materials, or approach based on child response.
Each session lasted 15–25 minutes and included:
At least 12 explicit rule presentations
Cross-linguistic examples prerecorded in Spanish (to support monolingual clinicians)
At least 62 models or recasts of the target English forms
Results
Outcomes were mixed:
In English: Two of the three participants demonstrated progress on the target grammatical forms.
In Spanish: There was limited evidence of cross-linguistic transfer, though some participants improved on Spanish morphosyntactic probes.
Note: Only eight sessions per grammatical form were delivered, which likely limited the extent of change observed.
Highlights
This is one of the very few studies that looks at explicit grammar instruction with bilingual children with DLD.
Feasible for monolingual SLPs: With prerecorded Spanish audio and structured scripts for providing models/recasts in English, the intervention design can be implemented.
Grounded in evidence-based principles for grammar, including varied input, rule explanation, and structured feedback.
Structured intervention activities included auditory bombardment, narratives, and structured play, making implementation practical.
The study was designed well - I particularly appreciated the one-week and one-month probes post-intervention to track change.
Limitations
Despite targeting bilingual development, intervention occurred only in English. There were pre-recorded explanations and examples in Spanish that were provided, but Spanish usage by the participant was not targeted across any of the session activities.
Limited evidence of transfer to Spanish. Cross-linguistic transfer was modest at best, raising questions about how much benefit Spanish grammar actually gained.
Small sample size and short duration: Results were preliminary, and a longer duration and larger group are needed.
Variable comprehension among participants - Younger children or those with lower English proficiency may struggle with metalinguistic explanations in English.
Final Thoughts
This study is a step forward in the push for evidence-based intervention for bilingual children with DLD. While the lack of explicit Spanish instruction is a major shortcoming, the study offers practical tools and a replicable framework for clinicians - especially those working without consistent bilingual supports.
Given that Spanish was the first language for all participants, I wonder how outcomes would have differed if the intervention had included explicit instruction in Spanish, with metalinguistic explanations in English. While the authors clearly aimed to support the many monolingual clinicians who encounter bilingual students, I would love to see future research that also centers the 8% of us providing services directly in Spanish.
Takeaways for Clinicians
Don’t underestimate the value of explicit instruction.
Consider the child’s language dominance and comprehension level before diving into explicit rule instruction.
Use cross-linguistic comparisons (and I would start in the stronger language).
Track language gains in both languages.
