The possible use of IBM-compatible computers and digital-to-analog conversion to assess children for reading disabilities and to increase their phonemic awareness

Abstract

Hurford and Sanders (1990) and Hurford (1990) have been successful at employing digital-toanalog (D/A) conversion to remediate phonemic processing deficiencies in young disabled readers. The present study outlines how D/A conversion might be used to identify students who are at risk for reading disabilities. A large sample of first-quarter first graders (227) was administered tests of reading (the Word Identification and Word Attack subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised), a measure of intelligence (IQ according to the Peabody Picture Vocabu1ary Test-Revised), and two measures of phonemic processing (phonemic discrimination and phonemic segmentation). The phonemic processing measures were significantly related to the measures of reading (ps < .0001). Students assigned to at-risk and not-at-risk groups on the basis of their reading scores were significantly different on the phonemic processing measures and on IQ. No differences were due to age. After the data were reanalyzed with IQ as a covariate, only phonemic segmentation differentiated the two groups. Although phonemic discrimination may be less useful for identifying young at-risk students, it seems to help in the remediation of phonemic processing deficiencies. Phonemic discrimination training would be less effective were it not for D/A conversion with personal computers.

Models of Speech Perception and Phonological Processing in Reading

“…Speech perception also represented a specific, special skill, separate from phonological processing in the present study. Piesearchers who have previously hypothesized that phor tologieal processing deficits rnay be caused by underlying rudimentary speech perceptual difficulties (Hurford, 1991, Heed, 1989Torgesen et al, 1990;Wagner et al, 1994)m ight consider this distinction as a point ot departure for new research. A speech perplaon factor may represent a fairly novel ly to explore these fundamenfal deficits.…”

“…Flege et al (1992) concluded diat these children's varying levels of speech perception may have been caused by their differences in phonepie segmentation abilitj-. Hurford (1991); reported a moderate correlation (.36) ije^tween phoneme segmentation abilitj.' and discrindiiatiGn of speech syllable pairs.…”

“…Others have found similar difficulties in reading-disabled children in both identifying and discriminating consonantal phonemes (e.g.. DeWeirdt, 1988;Godfrey, Syrdal-Lasky. Millay, & Knox, 1981;Hurford, 1991;Manis, McBride-Ghang, Seidenberg, Doi, & Custodio, 1993;Reed, 1989;Xallal, 1980;Werker & Tees, 1987).. However, two studies of children (e.g., Scarborpugh, 1990;Snowling, Goularidris, Bowlby, & Howell, 1986) have repotted no consistent differences in the identificatioa of high frequency : Words by adequate and disabled readers.…”

“…Given this background on phonological processing and speech perception abilities, the question arises as to whether and how these abilities overlap. Several investigations (Brady et al, 1983;Hurford, 1991;Reed 1989;' Wagner et al, 1994) have suggested tha.t simple speech perception difficulties form tie basis for poor readers' reading and phonoiogleal processing deficits (for a re\dew, see MeBride-Cliarig, 1995a).…”

“…However, it is plausible, from this theory, that quickly naming symbols is easier for those with better refined speech perception skills. Others (e.g., Hurford, 1991;Torgesen, Wagner, Simmons, & Laughon, 1990;Wagner et al, 1994) have suggested tliat fundamental misperceptions of phonemes may underlie many of the phonological processing deficits experienced by disabled readers^ including their relative slowness in n;iming speed. Pennington et al (1990) found a significant association between a measure of speech perception and Catherine McBride-Chang 1839 a measure of articulation speed in adults.…”