Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Teacher candidates’ mastery of phoneme-grapheme correspondence: massed versus distributed practice in teacher education

  • Published:
Annals of Dyslexia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Matching phonemes (speech sounds) to graphemes (letters and letter combinations) is an important aspect of decoding (translating print to speech) and encoding (translating speech to print). Yet, many teacher candidates do not receive explicit training in phoneme-grapheme correspondence. Difficulty with accurate phoneme production and/or lack of understanding of sound-symbol correspondence can make it challenging for teachers to (a) identify student errors on common assessments and (b) serve as a model for students when teaching beginning reading or providing remedial reading instruction. For students with dyslexia, lack of teacher proficiency in this area is particularly problematic. This study examined differences between two learning conditions (massed and distributed practice) on teacher candidates’ development of phoneme-grapheme correspondence knowledge and skills. An experimental, pretest-posttest-delayed test design was employed with teacher candidates (n = 52) to compare a massed practice condition (one, 60-min session) to a distributed practice condition (four, 15-min sessions distributed over 4 weeks) for learning phonemes associated with letters and letter combinations. Participants in the distributed practice condition significantly outperformed participants in the massed practice condition on their ability to correctly produce phonemes associated with different letters and letter combinations. Implications for teacher preparation are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: effective and efficient teaching. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Averell, L., & Heathcote, A. (2011). The form of the forgetting curve and the fate of memories. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 55, 25–35. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2010.08.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, A., & Blachman, B. (1991). Does phoneme segmentation training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, V., Reithler, J., van Atteveldt, N., Seitz, J., Gerretsen, P., Goebel, R., & Blomert, L. (2010). Deviant processing of letters and speech sounds as proximate cause of reading failure: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study of dyslexic children. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 133, 868–879. doi:10.1093/brain/awp308.

  • Bos, C., Mather, N., Dickson, S., Podhajski, B., & Chard, D. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of preservice and inservice educators about early reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 97–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bude, L., Imbos, T., Van De Wiel, M., & Berger, M. (2011). The effect of distributed practice on students’ conceptual understanding of statistics. The Journal of Higher Education, 62, 69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bursuck, W. D., & Damer, M. (2015). Teaching reading to students who are at risk or have disabilities: a multi-tier, RTI approach (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, M. L., & Mechling, L. C. (2009). Small group computer-assisted instruction with SMART board technology: an investigation of observational and incidental learning of nontarget information. Remedial and Special Education, 30, 47–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cepeda, N. J., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., Mozer, M. C., & Pashler, H. (2009). Optimizing distributed practice: theoretical analysis and practical implications. Experimental Psychology, 56, 236–246. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.56.4.236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: a review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheesman, E. A., McGuire, J. M., Shankweiler, D., & Coyne, M. (2009). First-year teacher knowledge of phonemic awareness and its instruction. Teacher Education & Special Education, 32, 270–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. I. (2004). Disciplinary knowledge of K-3 teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 139–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayana Networks Ltd. (2015). Voice Record Pro [mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. doi:10.1177/1529100612453266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebbinghaus, H. (1964). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A. Ruger, C. E. Bussenius, & E. R. Hilgard, Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1885).

  • Gormley, S. & Ruhl, K. (2007). Language structure knowledge of preservice teachers: Connecting speech to print. Teacher Education and Special Education,30(2), 83–92.

  • Hammill, D. (2004). What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 70(4), 453–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haq, S. S., & Kodak, T. (2015). Evaluating the effects of massed and distributed practice on acquisition and maintenance of tacts and textual behavior with typically developing children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Head, K. D., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., & Ault, M. J. (2011). A comparison of simultaneous prompting and constant time delay procedures in teaching state capitals. Journal of Behavioral Education, 20, 182–202. doi:10.1007/s10864-011-9127-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hocevar, D., & Zimmer, J. (1994). Effects of massed versus distributed practice of test taking on achievement and test anxiety. Psychological Reports, 74, 915–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, F. L., Tortorelli, L. S., & Invernizzi, M. A. (2014). An investigation of factors associated with letter-sound knowledge at kindergarten entry. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29, 182–192. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. A., Fredrick, L. D., & Keel, M. C. (2002). Learning to effectively implement constant time delay procedures to teach spelling. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23, 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janiszewski, C., Noel, H., & Sawyer, A. G. (2003). A meta-analysis of the spacing effect in verbal learning: implications for research on advertising repetition and consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 138–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., Clark, S., & Reutzel, D. (2013). Enhancing alphabet knowledge instruction: research implications and practical strategies for early childhood educators. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(2), 81–89. doi:10.1007/s10643-012-0534-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, R. M., Binks, E., Hougen, M., Dahlgren, M. E., Ocker-Dean, E., & Smith, D. L. (2009). Why elementary teachers might be inadequately prepared to teach reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 392–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justice, L. M., Pence, K., Bowles, R. B., & Wiggins, A. (2006). An investigation of four hypotheses concerning the order by which 4-year-old children learn the alphabet letters. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 374–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konold, K. E., Miller, S. P., & Konold, K. B. (2004). Using teacher feedback to enhance student learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(6), 64–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kupper-Tetzel, C. (2014). Understanding the distributed practice effect: strong effects on weak theoretical grounds. American Psychological Association, 222(2), 71–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logan, J., Castel, A., Haber, S., & Viehman, E. (2012). Metacognition and the spacing effect: the role of repetition, feedback, and instruction on judgments of learning for massed and spaced rehearsal. Metacognition & Learning, 7, 175–195. doi:10.1007/s11409-012-9090-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacSuga-Gage, A. S., & Simonsen, B. (2015). Examining the effects of teacher-directed opportunities to respond on student outcomes: a systematic review of the literature. Education & Treatment of Children, 38, 211–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (1994). The missing foundation in teacher education: knowledge of the structure of spoken and written language. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (2009). Knowledge foundations for teaching reading and spelling. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (2010). Speech to print: language essentials for teachers (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L., Carreker, S., Davis, R., Meisel, P., Spear-Swerling, L., & Wilson, B. (2010). Knowledge and practice standards for teachers of reading. Baltimore: International Dyslexia Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudeans, M. K. (2003). Integration of letter-sound correspondences and phonological awareness skills of blending and segmenting: a pilot study examining the effects of instructional sequences on word reading for kindergarten children with low phonological awareness. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(4), 258–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piasta, S. B., & Wagner, R. K. (2010). Learning letter names and sounds: effects of instruction, letter type, and phonological processing skill. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 105, 324–344. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2009.12.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salinger, T., Mueller, L., Song, M., Jin, Y., Zmach, C., Toplitz, M., ... Bickford, A. (2010). Study of teacher preparation in early reading instruction (NCEE 2010-4036). Jessup: National Center For Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

  • Sayeski, K. L., Gormely Budin, S. E., & Bennett, K. (2015). Promising practices in the preparation of special educators to provide reading instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic, 51, 82–89. doi:10.1177/1053451215579266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., & Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: a longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 265–282. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seabrook, R., Brown, G. D. A., & Solity, J. E. (2005). Distributed and massed practice: from laboratory to classroom. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 107–122. doi:10.1002/acp.1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D. M., & Sundberg, M. L. (2008). How a neurologically integrated approach which teaches sound-symbol correspondence and legible letter formations impacts at-risk first graders. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 14(1), 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snowling, M. J., Duff, F., Petrou, A., Schiffeldrin, J., & Bailey, A. M. (2011). Identification of children at risk of dyslexia: the validity of teacher judgments using ‘phonic phases’. Journal of Research in Reading, 34, 157–170. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01492.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., Brucker, P. O., & Alfano, M. P. (2005). Teachers’ literacy-related knowledge and self-perceptions in relation to preparation and experience. Annals of Dyslexia, 55, 266–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storch, S., & Whitehurst, G. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading: evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 934–947. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.38.6.934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szadokierski, I., & Burns, M. K. (2008). Analogue evaluation of the effects of opportunities to respond and ratios of known items within drill rehearsal of Esperanto words. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 593–609. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2008.06.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2004). Phonics and word study. Research-based methods of reading instruction: Grades K-3 (pp. 30–48). Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G. (2008). Constant and progressive time delay procedures for teaching children with autism: a literature review. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 38, 261–275. doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0390-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, E. K., Binks-Cantrell, E. S., Joshi, R. M., Martin-Chang, S., & Arrow, A. (2015). Preservice teacher knowledge of basic language constructs in Canada, England, New Zealand, and the USA. Annals of Dyslexia. doi:10.1007/s11881-015-0115-x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, E. K., Matesha Joshi, R., & Binks Cantrell, E. (2011). Are preservice teachers prepared to teach struggling readers? Annals of Dyslexia, 61, 21–43. doi:10.1007/s11881-010-0040-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Jennifer Lindstrom for her valuable feedback on the development of the study and manuscript and Bethany Hamilton-Jones for her support in study implementation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication Sciences and Special Education, University of Georgia, 517 Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    Kristin L. Sayeski, Gentry A. Earle, R. Paige Eslinger & Jessy N. Whitenton

Authors
  1. Kristin L. Sayeski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gentry A. Earle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Paige Eslinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jessy N. Whitenton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristin L. Sayeski.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 2 Phoneme-grapheme correspondence assessment
Full size table
Table 3 Constant time delay scoring sheet
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sayeski, K.L., Earle, G.A., Eslinger, R.P. et al. Teacher candidates’ mastery of phoneme-grapheme correspondence: massed versus distributed practice in teacher education. Ann. of Dyslexia 67, 26–41 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-016-0126-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-016-0126-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation