Annals of Dyslexia

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 60–80 | Cite as

Stimulating basic reading processes using auditory discrimination in depth

  • Stephen Truch
Part I Predicting, Preventing, And Remediating Reading Failures

Abstract

Recent research indicates that a major cause of reading (decoding) disabilities lies in an inability to manipulate speech at its phonemic (phonological) level. The Auditory Discrimination in Depth Program (ADD Program), stimulates basic phonological awareness and has been used extensively at The Reading Foundation in Calgary, Alberta. Here we present pre- and post-test data from 281 clients (ranging from school-age through adulthood) seen over a two-year period; post-test data was collected after 80 hours of ADD instruction. To assess whether significant gains had been achieved, an analysis of covariance was performed, covarying for age and initial vocabulary scores. After 80 hours of intensive instruction, highly significant gains (p<.001) were evident on measures of phonological awareness, sound/symbol connections, word identification, spelling, and decoding in context. In addition to the treatment effect, age and vocabulary had some influence on some of the variables. The data was also analyzed to determine whether the results went beyond a “group effect” only. A total of 229 cases were tabulated for gains or losses on the word attack subtest and on the reading and spelling subtests of the WRAT-R. Results indicate that the remediation was effective for all subjects, though gains on spelling tended to be less than on the two reading scores.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, M. J. 1990.Beginning To Read. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, A. W., Andersen, H. G., Heilman, P. C., Voeller, K. K. S., and Torgeson, J. K. 1991. Phonological awareness training and remediation of analytic decoding deficits in a group of severe dyslexics.Annals of Dyslexia 41:193–206.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, E. W., and Blachman, B. A. 1988. Phoneme segmentation training: Effect on reading readiness.Annals of Dyslexia 38:208–25.Google Scholar
  4. Bell, N. 1991a. Gestalt imagery: A critical factor in language comprehension.Annals of Dyslexia 41:246–60.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, N. 1991b.Visualizing and Verbalizing for Language Comprehension and Thinking. Paso Robles: Academy of Reading Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Blachman, B. 1991. Early intervention for children’s reading problems: Clinical applications of the research in phonological awareness.Topics in Language Disorders 12:51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradley, L. 1987. Categorising sounds, early intervention and learning to read: A follow-up study. Paper presented at the British Psychological Society London Conference, December, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. Bradley, L., and Bryant, P. E. 1983. Categorising sounds and learning to read—a causal connection.Nature 30:419–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradley, L., and Bryant, P. 1985.Rhyme and Reason in Reading and Spelling. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  10. Byrne, B., Freebody, P., and Gates, A. 1992. Longitudinal data on the relations of word-reading strategies to comprehension, reading time, and phonemic awareness.Reading Research Quarterly 27, 2:140–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dunn, L. M., and Dunn, L. M. 1981.Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  12. Gray, W. S. 1963.The Gray Oral Reading Test. Indianapolis, IN: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Jastak, S., and Wilkinson, G. S. 1984.The Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  14. Lindamood, C. H., and Lindamood, P. C. 1979.Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
  15. Lindamood, C. H., and Lindamood, P. C. 1975.Auditory Discrimination in Depth. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
  16. Lovett, M. W. 1991. Reading, writing, and remediation; Perspectives on the dyslexic learning disability from remedial outcome data.Learning and Individual Differences 3:295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lundberg, I., Frost, J., and Peterson, O. 1988. Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children.Reading Research Quarterly 23:263–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosner, J. 1990.Helping Children Overcome Learning Difficulties (2nd. ed.) Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Spear-Swerling, L., and Sternberg, R. J. 1994. The road not taken: An integrative theoretical model of reading disability.Journal of Learning Disabilities 27, 2:91–103, 122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Torgesen, J. K., and Morgan, S. 1990. The effects of two types of phonological awareness training on word learning in kindergarten children. Manuscript submitted for publication, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.Google Scholar
  21. Truch, S. 1990.The Missing Parts of Whole Language. Calgary: Foothills Educational Materials.Google Scholar
  22. Wechsler, D. 1991.Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  23. Wechsler, D. 1981.Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  24. Wechsler, D. 1974.Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised. New York: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  25. Woodcock, R. W. 1973.Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Orton Dyslexia Society 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Truch
    • 1
  1. 1.The Reading FoundationCalgary

Personalised recommendations