1 / 52

Overview

Prevention of reading and spelling deficits by training phonological awareness and letter-sound-correspondencies in kindergarten Peter Marx Department of Psychology, Universität Würzburg, Germany. Overview. Background: precursors of literacy acquisition

arista
Download Presentation

Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prevention of reading and spelling deficits by training phonological awareness and letter-sound-correspondencies in kindergartenPeter MarxDepartment of Psychology,Universität Würzburg, Germany

  2. Overview • Background: precursors of literacy acquisition • Phonological awareness training in kindergarten • Practical problems (some of which could be German- or Germany-specific) • Classic evaluation results from the 1990ies • Preschool prediction of reading difficulties - who should participate in the training? • New evaluation results with language-impaired children and children with migration background

  3. Introductory remarks: German(y)-specific • German children do not receive any formal reading instruction before they enter school (at the age of 6). • Reading instruction in first grade: phonics-based • In the 1990ies, German kindergarten teachers often refused to introduce letters. • The German orthography is quite shallow, as far as reading is concerned: Letter-sound-correspondences are more consistent for German than for English. • In Germany spelling is quite important (unfortunately).

  4. Only a small part of the picture… phonology ability to decode …but a central part!

  5. Background: precursors of literacy acquisition • Children acquire skills needed for literacy acquisition prior to formal reading instruction. • Skills proven to be important prerequisites for reading mainly belong to the language domain: Phonological processing (Wagner & Torgesen, 1987) • phonological awareness • phonological working memory • access to the long term store (speed)

  6. Phonological Awarenessinsight into the sound structure of the language • phonological awareness ability to differentiate or to segment larger units (words, syllables) or to identify rhymes (usually acquired before school entry) • phonemic awareness ability to identify and to discriminate smaller units (sounds) in spoken words (usually acquired during literacy acquisition)

  7. Phonological awareness training for kindergarten children

  8. The Würzburg program(s):Hören, Lauschen, Lernen 1(Küspert & Schneider, 1999, 2006)+ Hören, Lauschen, Lernen II (Plume & Schneider, 2004)

  9. The Würzburg program(s):Hearing, Listening, Learning 1(training of phonological and phonemic awareness)+ Hearing, Listening, Learning II (training of letter-sound-correspondences)

  10. The Würzburg program(s):Hearing, Listening, Learning 1(training of phonological and phonemic awareness)adaptation of the Lundberg program (Lundberg, Frost & Petersen, 1988)+ Hearing, Listening, Learning II (training of letter-sound-correspondences)

  11. Hören, Lauschen, Lernen 1+2 • last year of kindergarten (e.g. January - June) • 20 weeks, 15 minutes per day • groups of 4 - 8 children • conducted by kindergarten teachers

  12. Hören, Lauschen, Lernen 1+2 • Listening games • Rhymes • Sentences and words • Syllables • Identification of the initial phoneme • Phoneme blending and phoneme analysis • Letter-Sound-Correspondences

  13. Hören, Lauschen, Lernen 2: Letter-Training (Plume & Schneider, 2004) • To be combined with the phonological training • The children are to learn the correspondences of letters and sounds • Introduction of the 12 most commonly used letters (regarding first grade texts) • The children don´t have to write the letters • Phonological linkage hypothesis (Hatcher, Hulme & Ellis, 1994)

  14. Practical problems • How can program application in thousands of kindergartens be properly supervised? (5th edition; total print run of about 90.000) • Only words with regular letter-sound-correspondences should be used in the training (?) • Organisational problems (no specifically trained teachers, no additional teachers available) • Not all children attend kindergarten • Daily training is necessary to guarantee success

  15. Evaluation studies Evaluation studies have to deal with several problems, e.g. • Children from the control group might • enter school with lower levels of phonological awareness • but receive additional training at school • Ethical problem: children at risk as control group

  16. Meta-analyis: phonological awareness training (Bus & van IJzendoorn, 1999) n: number of studies; N: number of children; d: effect size

  17. Würzburg studies • Schneider, Küspert, Roth, Visé & H. Marx (1997): unselected kindergarten children, purely phonological training, 2 studies • Schneider, Roth & Ennemoser (2000): identification of children at risk (BISC), training of letter-sound-corr. included in the phon. awareness training • Schneider, Weber, P. Marx (2001 – 2006): unselected kindergarten groups, focus on children with migration background and on language impaired children; only the combined training was used

  18. Schneider, Küspert, Roth, Visé & H. Marx (1997)

  19. Schneider, Küspert, Roth, Visé & H. Marx (1997) d = .54

  20. Schneider, Küspert, Roth, Visé & H. Marx (1997) d = .26

  21. Children at risk for later reading deficits Bielefeld Screening (BISC) for the identification of children at risk for later reading deficits Prognostic validity of the screening Training effects for children at risk?

  22. Bielefeld Screening (BISC) for the identification of children at risk for later reading deficits (Jansen, Mannhaupt, H. Marx & Skowronek, 1999, 2002) • phonological awareness • rapid naming • phonological short term memory • regulation of visual attention

  23. Bielefeld Screening • phonological awareness • rhyme detection • syllable segmentation • sound categorization (syllables: „au“-to) • sound blending • rapid naming • phonological short term memory • regulation of visual attention

  24. Bielefeld study (Jansen et al., 1999) N = 153 The BISC (4 month before school entry) detected 73 % of the children with reading/spelling deficits at the end of Grade 2 (sensitivity). 56 % of the children „at risk“ had reading/spelling deficits 2 years later (prediction hit rate).

  25. P. Marx & Weber (2006)

  26. Kindergarten prediction of spelling deficits at the end of grade 2

  27. Selection of children at risk for later reading/spelling deficits by the screening? Training only for children at risk: More than half of the children with later reading/spelling deficits would be excluded from the training. Training for all children: Children really in need for the intervention might not be assisted sufficiently. The kindergarten teachers/educators providing the screening are sensitized for the issue of phonological awareness / phonological processing.

  28. Time schedule of the third Würzburg study I (Schneider, Roth, & Ennemoser, 2000)

  29. Pretests and posttests in kindergarten

  30. Time schedule of the third Würzburg study II (Schneider, Roth, & Ennemoser, 2000)

  31. Results: Grade 3

  32. Results: Grade 2 percentage of children with spelling problems (PR  25 in the spelling test DRT 2)

  33. Results: Grade 3 percentage of children with spelling problems (PR  25 in the spelling test DRT 3)

  34. What are the characteristics of those children who have trouble with literacy acquisition despite participation in the combined training before school entry?

  35. Background • Theoretically, children may develop reading and spelling problems • because their phonological/phonemic awareness was not sufficiently improved by the training, or because there was only a short-term effect, but no effect in the long run • because their reading/spelling problems are caused by other factors (e.g. more general language deficits)

  36. W. Schneider, J. Weber, P. Marx (2001–2006) • Sample: 606 children in the last year of kindergarten, consisting of • 499 children from regular kindergartens • 107 children from kindergarten groups from schools for children with special needs in the domain of language • training group: N=56 • control group: N=51

  37. Method • Regular kindergartens: 411 of the 499 trained children participated in the reading and spelling tests at the end of first Grade • 305 children with German as mother tongue (77,0%) • 33 bilingual children (8,3%) • 58 children with German as second language (GSL, 14,6%)

  38. Time schedule

  39. Language subgroups:phonological awareness(large units: syllables, rhymes)

  40. Language subgroups:phonemic awareness(small units: phonemes)

  41. Correlation phonemic awareness (posttest) – spelling

  42. Spelling deficits in the subgroups

  43. Reading comprehension deficits

  44. Special education sample • 107 children from kindergarten groups from schools for children with special needs in the domain of language • training group: N=56 • control group: N=51

  45. Short-term effects of the training:phonemic awareness (p < .05)

  46. Short-term effects of the training:phonemic awareness (p < .05)

  47. Special education sample:Phonemic awareness in first Grade (n.s.)

  48. Special education sample:Spelling in first Grade (n.s.)

  49. Only children still receiving special education:Spelling in first Grade (n.s.)

  50. Only children still receiving special education:Spelling in second Grade (p < .05, but…)

More Related