Does Introducing the Letters Faster Boost the Development of Children’s Letter Knowledge, Word Reading and Spelling in the First Year of School?

Sunde, Kristin; Furnes, Bjarte; Lundetræ, Kjersti

doi:10.1080/10888438.2019.1615491

Cited by 29 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the poor performance of our discovery-learning participants even after hours of training raises questions about whether a purely discovery-based approach would be viable, given the vast body of knowledge that must be acquired in learning to read. Furthermore, school-based research increasingly suggests that a fast pace of reading instruction yields superior outcomes later (Sunde, Furnes, & Lundetrae, 2020), possibly because reading skills provide the opportunity to gain vital text experience through independent reading (van Bergen, Vasalampi, & Torppa, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dramatic Impact of Explicit Instruction on Learning to Read in a New Writing System

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is profound and long-standing debate over the role of explicit instruction in reading acquisition. In this research, we investigated the impact of teaching regularities in the writing system explicitly rather than relying on learners to discover these regularities through text experience alone. Over 10 days, 48 adults learned to read novel words printed in two artificial writing systems. One group learned spelling-to-sound and spelling-to-meaning regularities solely through experience with the novel words, whereas the other group received a brief session of explicit instruction on these regularities before training commenced. Results showed that virtually all participants who received instruction performed at ceiling on tests that probed generalization of underlying regularities. In contrast, despite up to 18 hr of training on the novel words, less than 25% of discovery learners performed on par with those who received instruction. These findings illustrate the dramatic impact of teaching method on outcomes during reading acquisition.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dramatic Impact of Explicit Instruction on Learning to Read in a New Writing System

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another explanation, supported by the results from our previous intervention (Potier Watkins et al, 2020), is that this project minimized the importance of introducing graphemephoneme correspondences simultaneously with the focused experience of learning to read in the classroom. As stated, the goal of our phonics software was to provide children with many grapheme-phoneme correspondences early in learning, a practice supported by previous observational and intervention studies (Goigoux, 2017;Sunde et al, 2020). In fact, children that participated in the intervention were exposed to more grapheme-phoneme training than children in the control group, as shown by the end test and early 1 st grade results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…In one intervention study, classrooms that taught many grapheme-phoneme correspondences early in learning (i.e. up to two a week, compared to the frequent practice of once a week) produced greater literacy outcomes (Sunde et al, 2020). In France, an observational study of 1 st grade teaching practices and student outcomes also demonstrated improved reading ability in classes where a larger number of grapheme-phoneme correspondences are taught early in the year (Goigoux, 2017).…”

Section: Numeric Responses To Literacy Curriculummentioning

confidence: 99%

Can a game application that boosts phonics knowledge in kindergarten advance 1st grade reading?

Cp¹,

Dehaene²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Kalulu software is a tablet-based suite of phonics and reading-related lessons and minigames. In a previous intervention with a previous version of the software in 1st grade students, fluency and comprehension were boosted, but only when used in concert with reading instruction at the start of the year. Here, we asked whether a similar intervention would be more efficient if it started a year earlier, in kindergarten. Forty classes (1092= children) were randomized into playing Kalulu phonics or an active matched control game (Kalulu numbers) for the first half of the year. Those assignments were reversed in the second half of the year. Ten non-randomized business-as-usual classes also participated. In a cross- over effect, children who used the phonics version improved in letter naming, grapheme- phoneme matching and reading fluency, while those with the number version improved in number knowledge. In a longitudinal follow-up, intervention participants maintained an advantage in phoneme awareness and grapheme-phoneme matching at the start of 1st grade, but this advantage failed to translate into school literacy gains in the middle of 1st grade, and no longitudinal benefits were found for numbers. Those results improve our understanding of when and for how long to introduce phonics and question the possibility that a short-term intervention may address the complex challenges of long-term educational goals.

show abstract

“…Students saw 24 letters from the Norwegian alphabet, in upper case, in random order, one at a time (Sunde et al, 2019). They were asked to give the sound of the letter.…”

Section: Grapheme-to-phoneme Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Handwriting versus keyboarding: Does writing modality affect quality of narratives written by beginning writers?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To date, there is no clear evidence to support choosing handwriting over keyboarding or vice versa as the modality children should use when they first learn to write. 102 Norwegian first-grade children from classrooms that used both electronic touchscreen keyboard on a digital tablet and pencil-and-paper for writing instruction wrote narratives in both modalities three months after starting school and were assessed on several literacy-related skills. The students’ texts were then analysed for a range of text features, and were rated holistically. Data were analysed using Bayesian methods. These permitted evaluation both of evidence in favour of a difference between modalities and of evidence in favour of there being no difference. We found moderate to strong evidence in favour of no difference between modalities. We also found moderate to strong evidence against modality effects being moderated by students’ literacy ability. Findings may be specific to students who are just starting to write, but suggest that for children at this stage of development writing performance is independent of modality.

show abstract

Does Introducing the Letters Faster Boost the Development of Children’s Letter Knowledge, Word Reading and Spelling in the First Year of School?

Abstract: Does introducing the letters faster boost the development of children's letter knowledge, word reading and spelling in the first year of school?Effects of a faster pace of letter instruction 3

Cited by 29 publications

References 42 publications

The Dramatic Impact of Explicit Instruction on Learning to Read in a New Writing System

The Dramatic Impact of Explicit Instruction on Learning to Read in a New Writing System

Can a game application that boosts phonics knowledge in kindergarten advance 1st grade reading?

Handwriting versus keyboarding: Does writing modality affect quality of narratives written by beginning writers?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About