An experimental comparison of additional training in phoneme awareness, letter-sound knowledge and decoding for struggling beginner readers.
awareness
decoding
early reading
graphemephoneme-correspondences
letter-sound knowledge
phoneme awareness
phonics
phonological
reading difficulties
synthetic phonics
Journal
The British journal of educational psychology
ISSN: 2044-8279
Titre abrégé: Br J Educ Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370636
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Nov 2023
20 Nov 2023
Historique:
revised:
05
10
2023
received:
05
12
2019
accepted:
23
10
2023
medline:
21
11
2023
pubmed:
21
11
2023
entrez:
20
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Despite evidence that synthetic phonics teaching has increased reading attainments, a sizable minority of children struggle to acquire phonics skills and teachers lack clear principles for deciding what types of additional support are most beneficial. Synthetic phonics teaches children to read using a decoding strategy to translate letters into sounds and blend them (e.g., c-a-t = "k - ae - t" = "cat"). To use a decoding strategy, children require letter-sound knowledge (LSK) and the ability to blend sound units (phonological awareness; PA). Training on PA has been shown to benefit struggling beginning readers. However, teachers in English primary schools do not routinely check PA. Instead, struggling beginner readers usually receive additional LSK support. Until now, there has been no systematic comparison of the effectiveness of training on each component of the decoding process. Should additional support for struggling readers focus on improving PA, or on supplementary LSK and/or decoding instruction? We aim to increase understanding of the roles of LSK and PA in children's acquisition of phonics skills and uncover which types of additional training are most likely to be effective for struggling beginner readers. We will compare training on each of these components, using a carefully controlled experimental design. We will identify reception-age children at risk of reading difficulties (target n = 225) and randomly allocate them to either PA, LSK or decoding (DEC) training. We will test whether training type influences post-test performance on word reading and whether any effects depend on participants' pre-test PA and/or LSK. Two hundred and twenty-two participants completed the training. Planned analyses showed no effects of condition on word reading. However, exploratory analyses indicated that the advantage of trained over untrained words was significantly greater for the PA and DEC conditions. There was also a significantly greater improvement in PA for the DEC condition. Overall, our findings suggest a potential advantage of training that includes blending skills, particularly when decoding words that had been included in training. Future research is needed to develop a programme of training on blending skills combined with direct vocabulary instruction for struggling beginner readers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Despite evidence that synthetic phonics teaching has increased reading attainments, a sizable minority of children struggle to acquire phonics skills and teachers lack clear principles for deciding what types of additional support are most beneficial. Synthetic phonics teaches children to read using a decoding strategy to translate letters into sounds and blend them (e.g., c-a-t = "k - ae - t" = "cat"). To use a decoding strategy, children require letter-sound knowledge (LSK) and the ability to blend sound units (phonological awareness; PA). Training on PA has been shown to benefit struggling beginning readers. However, teachers in English primary schools do not routinely check PA. Instead, struggling beginner readers usually receive additional LSK support.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
Until now, there has been no systematic comparison of the effectiveness of training on each component of the decoding process. Should additional support for struggling readers focus on improving PA, or on supplementary LSK and/or decoding instruction? We aim to increase understanding of the roles of LSK and PA in children's acquisition of phonics skills and uncover which types of additional training are most likely to be effective for struggling beginner readers.
SAMPLE AND METHOD
METHODS
We will compare training on each of these components, using a carefully controlled experimental design. We will identify reception-age children at risk of reading difficulties (target n = 225) and randomly allocate them to either PA, LSK or decoding (DEC) training. We will test whether training type influences post-test performance on word reading and whether any effects depend on participants' pre-test PA and/or LSK.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Two hundred and twenty-two participants completed the training. Planned analyses showed no effects of condition on word reading. However, exploratory analyses indicated that the advantage of trained over untrained words was significantly greater for the PA and DEC conditions. There was also a significantly greater improvement in PA for the DEC condition. Overall, our findings suggest a potential advantage of training that includes blending skills, particularly when decoding words that had been included in training. Future research is needed to develop a programme of training on blending skills combined with direct vocabulary instruction for struggling beginner readers.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e12641Subventions
Organisme : British Academy/ Leverhulme
ID : SRG\170066
Organisme : Aston University Research Impact Fund
ID : IFOC1-2021/2-004
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. British Journal of Educational Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.
Références
Babayiğit, S., & Shapiro, L. R. (2020). Component skills that underpin listening comprehension and reading comprehension in learners with English as first and additional language. Journal of Research in Reading, 43, 78-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12291
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.5823.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. Guilford Press.
Bowyer-Crane, C., Snowling, M. J., Duff, F. J., Fieldsend, E., Carroll, J. M., Miles, J., & Hulme, C. (2008). Improving early language and literacy skills: Differential effects of an oral language versus a phonology with reading intervention. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(4), 422-432.
Brooks, G. (2016). What works for children and young people with literacy difficulties. The effectiveness of intervention schemes (5th ed.). Frensham, Dyslexi-SpLD Trust.
Carroll, J. M., Snowling, M. J., Stevenson, J., & Hulme, C. (2003). The development of phonological awareness in preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 39(5), 913-923.
Carroll, J. M., Solity, J., & Shapiro, L. R. (2016). Predicting dyslexia using prereading skills: The role of sensorimotor and cognitive abilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57(6), 750-758.
Castles, A., Coltheart, M., Wilson, K., Valpied, J., & Wedgwood, J. (2009). The genesis of reading ability: What helps children learn letter-sound correspondences? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104(1), 68-88.
Cunningham, A., & Carroll, J. (2011). Age and schooling effects on early literacy and phoneme awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109(2), 248-255.
Cunningham, A. J., Burgess, A. P., Witton, C., Talcott, J. B., & Shapiro, L. R. (2021). Dynamic relationships between phonological memory and reading: A five year longitudinal study from age 4 to 9. Developmental Science, 24(1), e12986.
Deacon, S. H., Pasquarella, A., Marinus, E., Tims, T., & Castles, A. (2018). Orthographic processing and children's word reading. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 40(2), 509-534. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716418000681
Department for Education. (2016). Achievement of 15-YearOlds in England: PISA 2015 National Report. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/574925/PISA-2015_England_Report.pdf
Department for Education and Skills. (2007). Letters and Sounds: Principles and Practice of High Quality Phonics.
Education Policy Institute. (2018). Education in England: Annual Report 2018. Retrieved from https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/annual-report-2018
Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 393-447.
Elbro, C., & Jensen, M. N. (2005). Quality of phonological representations, verbal learning, and phoneme awareness in dyslexic and normal readers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46(4), 375-384.
Elbro, C., & Petersen, D. M. (2004). Long-term effects of phoneme awareness and letter sound training: An intervention study with children at risk for dyslexia. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 660-670.
Hatcher, P. J., Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Explicit phoneme training combined with phonic reading instruction helps young children at risk of reading failure. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(2), 338-358.
Hulme, C., Bowyer-Crane, C., Carroll, J. M., Duff, F. J., & Snowling, M. J. (2012). The causal role of phoneme awareness and letter-sound knowledge in learning to read: Combining intervention studies with mediation analyses. Psychological Science, 23(6), 572-577.
Hulme, C., Stothard, S. E., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., & Snowling, M. J. (2009). YARC York assessment of reading for comprehension. Early reading. GL Publishers.
Ilie, S., Sutherland, A., & Vignoles, A. (2017). Revisiting free school meal eligibility as a proxy for pupil socio-economic deprivation. British Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 253-274.
Lloyd, S., Wernham, S., Jolly, C., & Stephen, L. (1998). The phonics handbook. Jolly.
Machin, S., McNally, S., & Viarengo, M. (2018). Changing how literacy is taught: Evidence on synthetic phonics. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(2), 217-241.
Magnan, A., & Ecalle, J. (2006). Audio-visual training in children with reading disabilities. Computers & Education, 46(4), 407-425.
Mann, V. A., & Foy, J. G. (2003). Phonological awareness, speech development, and letter knowledge in preschool children. Annals of Dyslexia, 53(1), 149-173.
Masterson, J., Stuart, M., Dixon, M., & Lovejoy, S. (2010). Children's printed word database: Continuities and changes over time in children's early reading vocabulary. British Journal of Psychology, 101(2), 221-242.
McArthur, G., & Castles, A. (2017). Helping children with reading difficulties: Some things we have learned so far. Npj Science of Learning, 2(1), 7.
McLeod, S., Van Doorn, J., & Reed, V. A. (2001). Normal acquisition of consonant clusters. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology., 10, 99-110.
Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S. A. H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 322-352.
Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M. J., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 665-681.
National Reading Panel (US). (2000). National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on Reading and its implications for Reading instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.
NFER. (2018). NFER Education Briefings: Key insights for England from PIRLS, THRASS and PISA. Retrieved from http://www.easybib.com/reference/guide/apa/website
Perfetti, C. A., Beck, I., Bell, L. C., & Hughes, C. (1987). Phonemic knowledge and learning to read are reciprocal - a longitudinal-study of 1st-grade children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly-Journal of Developmental Psychology, 33(3), 283-319.
Pfost, M., Blatter, K., Artelt, C., Stanat, P., & Schneider, W. (2019). Effects of training phonological awareness on children's reading skills. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 65, 101067.
R Core Team. (2013). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org
Ricketts, J., Davies, R., Masterson, J., Stuart, M., & Duff, F. J. (2016). Evidence for semantic involvement in regular and exception word reading in emergent readers of English. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 150, 330-345.
Rose, J. (2006). Independent review of the teaching of early reading: Final report. Department for Education and Skills.
Roy, P., Chiat, S., & Dodd, B. (2014). Language and socioeconomic disadvantage: From research to practice. City University London. http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/4989/
Rvachew, S., Nowak, M., & Cloutier, G. (2004). Effect of phonemic perception training on the speech production and phonological awareness skills of children with expressive phonological delay. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology., 13(3), 250-263.
Schad, D. J., Vasishth, S., Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (2020). How to capitalize on a priori contrasts in linear (mixed) models: A tutorial. Journal of Memory and Language, 110, 104038.
Shapiro, L. R., Carroll, J. R., & Solity, J. (2013). Separating the influences of pre-reading skills on early word and nonword reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(2), 278-295.
Shapiro, L. R., & Solity, J. (2016). Differing effects of two synthetic phonics programmes on early reading development. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 182-203.
Snowling, M. J. (2001). From language to reading and dyslexia 1. Dyslexia, 7(1), 37-46.
Spector, J. E. (1992). Predicting progress in beginning reading: Dynamic assessment of phonemic awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 353-363.
The Highland Council. (2016). Phonological awareness informal assessment for school-age children. Designed by: Care & Learning Service - Speech and Language Therapy.