Journal of Behavioral Education

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 16–36 | Cite as

Fluency Training in Phoneme Blending: A Preliminary Study of Generalized Effects

  • Brian K. Martens
  • Candace S. Werder
  • Bridget O. Hier
  • Elizabeth A. Koenig
Original Paper


We examined the generalized effects of training children to fluently blend phonemes of words containing target vowel teams on their reading of trained and untrained words in lists and passages. Three second-grade students participated. A subset of words containing each of 3 target vowel teams (aw, oi, and au) was trained in lists, and generalization was assessed to untrained words in lists, trained and untrained words in target passages, and novel words in generalization passages. A multiple probe design across vowel teams revealed generalized increases in oral reading accuracy for target words presented in both lists and passages for all 3 students on 2 vowel teams and for 1 student on all 3 vowel teams. Generalized increases in oral reading fluency in both lists and passages were found for all 3 students on the vowel team that was trained to a fluency criterion, with two students showing increases prior to training on the other two vowel teams. Implications of these results for building fluency in prerequisite phonemic awareness skills as an intervention for promoting generalized oral reading fluency are discussed.


Academic intervention Oral reading fluency Phoneme blending Generalization 


  1. Ardoin, S. P., & Christ, T. J. (2009). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Standard errors associated with progress monitoring outcomes from DIBELS, AIMSweb, and an experimental passage set. School Psychology Review, 38, 266–283.Google Scholar
  2. Ardoin, S. P., McCall, M., & Klubnik, C. (2007). Promoting generalization of oral reading fluency: Providing drill versus practice opportunities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 54–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blachman, B. A., & Tangel, D. M. (2008). Road to reading: A program for preventing and remediating reading difficulties. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  4. Bonfiglio, C. M., Daly, E. J, I. I. I., Martens, B. K., Lan-Hsiang, R. L., & Corsaut, S. (2004). An experimental analysis of reading interventions: Generalization across instructional strategies, time, and passages. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 111–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B. J. (2002). A synthesis of research on effective interventions for building reading fluency with elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 386–406.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christ, T. J., & Ardoin, S. P. (2009). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Passage equivalence and probe-set development. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Codding, R. S., & Poncy, B. C. (2010). Introduction to the special issue: Toward an explicit technology for generalizing academic behavior. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Daly, E. J., Bonfiglio, C. M., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Foreman-Yates, K. (2005). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skills deficits: Part I. An investigation of variables that affect generalized oral reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 485–497.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daly, E. J., Chafouleas, S. M., Persampieri, M., Bonfiglio, C. M., & LaFleur, K. (2004). Teaching phoneme segmenting and blending as critical early literacy skills: An experimental analysis of minimal textual repertoires. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Daly, E. J., Martens, B. K., Barnett, D., Witt, J. C., & Olson, S. C. (2007). Varying intervention delivery in response to intervention: confronting and resolving challenges with measurement, instruction and intensity. School Psychology, 36, 562–581.Google Scholar
  11. Daly, E. J., Martens, B. K., Hamler, K. R., Dool, E. J., & Eckert, T. L. (1999). A brief experimental analysis for identifying instructional components needed to improve oral reading fluency. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duhon, G. J., House, S. E., Poncy, B. C., Hastings, K. W., & McClurg, S. C. (2010). An examination of two techniques for promoting response generalization of early literacy skills. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 250–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ehri, L. C., & Robbins, C. (1992). Beginners need some decoding skill to read words by analogy. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 12–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1982). Developing goals and objectives for education programs [Teaching guide]. U.S. Department of Education Grant, Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  16. Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 230–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martens, B. K., Eckert, T. L., Begeny, J. C., Lewandowski, L. J., DiGennaro, F., Montarello, S., et al. (2007). Effects of a fluency-building program on the reading performance of low-achieving second and third grade students. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 39–54.Google Scholar
  19. Mesmer, E. M., Duhon, G. J., Hogan, K., Newry, B., Hommema, S., Fletcher, C., et al. (2010). Generalization of sight word accuracy using a common stimulus procedure: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  21. Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  22. Silber, J. M., & Martens, B. K. (2010). Programming for the generalization of oral reading fluency: Repeated readings of entire text versus multiple exemplars. Journal of Behavior Education, 19, 30–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Snow, C. E., Burns, S. M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  24. Thaler, V., Ebner, E. M., Wimmer, H., & Landerl, K. (2004). Training reading fluency in dysfluent readers with high reading accuracy: Word specific effects but low transfer to untrained words. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 89–113.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian K. Martens
    • 1
  • Candace S. Werder
    • 1
  • Bridget O. Hier
    • 1
  • Elizabeth A. Koenig
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologySyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations