Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review

Abstract

Despite the importance of spelling for both writing and reading, there is considerable disagreement regarding how spelling skills are best acquired. During this and virtually all of the last century, some scholars have argued that spelling should not be directly or formally taught as such instruction is not effective or efficient. We conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of experimental and quasi-experimental studies to address these claims. The corpus of 53 studies in this review included 6,037 students in kindergarten through 12th grade and yielded 58 effect sizes (ESs) that were used to answer eight research questions concerning the impact of formally teaching spelling on spelling, phonological awareness, reading, and writing performance. An average weighted ES was calculated for each question and the quality of included studies was systematically evaluated. Results provided strong and consistent support for teaching spelling, as it improved spelling performance when compared to no/unrelated instruction (ES = 0.54) or informal/incidental approaches to improving spelling performance (ES = 0.43). Increasing the amount of formal spelling instruction also proved beneficial (ES = 0.70). Gains in spelling were maintained over time (ES = 0.53) and generalized to spelling when writing (ES = 0.94). Improvements in phonological awareness (ES = 0.51) and reading skills (ES = 0.44) were also found. The positive outcomes associated with formal spelling instruction were generally consistent, regardless of students’ grade level or literacy skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis

  1. Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allred, R. (1977). Spelling: The application of research findings. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  3. *Anderson, P. A. (1973). Effectiveness of specific spelling lessons on an individualized spelling program (Unpublished master’s thesis). Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University.

  4. *Andrews, L. (1984). Visual imagery training and encoding (spelling) performance in third grade students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.

  5. Bean, W., & Bouffler, C. (1987). Spell by writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Berninger, V. (1999). Coordinating transcription and text generation in working memory during composing: Automatic and constructive processes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 99–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Berninger, V., Mizokawa, D., & Bragg, R. (1991). Theory-based diagnosis and remediation of writing disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 57–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. *Berninger, V. W., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R. D., Begay, K., Byrd, K., Curtin, G., et al. (2002). Teaching spelling and composition alone and together: Implications for the simple view of writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 291–304.

  9. *Berninger, V. W., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R. D., Brooks, A., Abbott, S., Rogan, L., et al. (1998). Early intervention for spelling problems: Teaching functional spelling units of varying sizes with a multiple-connection framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 587–605.

  10. Bornstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brown, A. (1990). A review of recent research on spelling. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 365–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. *Burzenski, C. (1990). The effects of structured writing on the vocabulary and spelling achievement of second grade students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Bellingham, WA: Western Washington University.

  13. *Butkovich, J. (2003). Differences in the spelling proficiency of first graders using the “buddy system” method versus a more traditional spelling approach (Unpublished master’s thesis). Atlanta, GA: Mercer University.

  14. *Butyniec-Thomas, J., & Woloshyn, V. E. (1997). The effects of explicit-strategy and whole-language instruction on students’ spelling ability. Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 293–302.

  15. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

    Google Scholar 

  16. *Catterall, M. M. (1957). An evaluation of the effectiveness of spelling enrichment exercises as an aid to learning and retention in grade VII (Unpublished master’s thesis). Boston, MA: Boston University.

  17. Clarke, L. (1988). Invented versus traditional spelling in first graders’ writing: Effects on learning to spell and read. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 281–309.

    Google Scholar 

  18. *Conrad, N. J. (2008). From reading to spelling and spelling to reading: Transfer goes both ways. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 869–878.

  19. Cornman, O. (1902). Spelling in the elementary school: An experimental and statistical analysis. Boston, MA: Ginn.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cortina, J. M., & Nouri, H. (2000). Effect size for ANOVA designs (Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  21. Cummings, D. (1988). American English spelling. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cutler, L., & Graham, S. (2008). Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 907–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Datchuk, S. M., & Kubina, R. M. (2012). A review of teaching sentence-level writing skills to students with writing difficulties and learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 180–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. *Davis, L. H. (2000). The effects of rime-based analogy training on word reading and spelling of first-grade children with good and poor phonological awareness (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.

  25. *Devonshire, V. & Fluck, M. (2010). Spelling development: Fine-tuning strategy-use and capitalising on the connections between words. Learning and Instruction, 20, 361–371.

  26. *Diaz, I. (2010). The effect of morphological instruction in improving the spelling, vocabulary, and reading comprehension of high school English language learners (ELLs) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cypress, CA: Trident University International.

  27. Edelsky, C. (1990). Whose agenda is this anyway? A response to McKenna, Robinson, and Miller. Educational Researcher, 19, 7–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Edelsky, C., Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1991). Whole language: What’s the difference?. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ehri, L. (1987). Learning to read and spell words. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 5–31.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 167–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Fitzsimmons, R., & Loomer, B. (1977). Spelling research and practice. Iowa City, IO: Iowa State Department of Public Instruction and University of Iowa.

    Google Scholar 

  33. *Frank, A. R. (2008). The effect of instruction in orthographic conventions and morphological features on the reading fluency and comprehension skills of high school freshmen (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). San Francisco, CA: The University of San Francisco.

  34. *Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Powell, S. R., Capizzi, A. M., & Seethaler, P.M. (2006). The effects of computer-assisted instruction on number combination skills in at-risk first graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 467–475.

  35. Gates, A. (1926). A modern systematic versus an opportunistic method of teaching. Teachers College Record, 27, 679–700.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gettinger, M. (1993). Effects of invented spelling and direct instruction on spelling performance of second-grade boys. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 281–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4 to 6: A national survey. Elementary School Journal, 110, 494–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gleser, L. J., & Olkin, I. (2009). Stochastically dependent effect sizes. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research syntheses and meta-analyses (2nd ed., pp. 357–376). New York, NY: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Goodman, K., & Goodman, Y. (1982). Spelling ability of a self-taught reader. Language and literacy: The selected writings of Kenneth S. Goodman. London: Gollash.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Goodwin, A. P., & Ahn, S. (2010). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: Effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 60, 183–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gordon, J., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1993). Spelling interventions: A review of literature and implications for instruction for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 8, 175–181.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Graham, S. (1983). Effective spelling instruction. Elementary School Journal, 83, 560–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Graham, S. (1999). Handwriting and spelling instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 78–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Graham, S. (2000). Should the natural learning approach replace traditional spelling instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Graham, S., Bollinger, A., Booth Olson, C., D’Aoust, C., MacArthur, C., McCutchen, D., et al. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers: A practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

  46. *Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2005, February). The impact of handwriting and spelling instruction on the writing and reading performance of at-risk first grade writers. Paper presented at the Pacific Coast Research Conference, Coronado, CA.

  47. *Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Fink-Chorzempa, B. F. (2002). Contribution of spelling instruction to the spelling, writing, and reading of poor spellers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 669–686.

  48. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2011). It is more than just the message: Analysis of presentation effects in scoring writing. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44(4), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2011). Writing to read: A meta-analysis of the impact of writing and writing instruction on reading. Harvard Educational Review, 81, 710–744.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012b). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 879–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Graham, S., & Miller, L. (1979). Spelling research and practice: A unified approach. Focus on Exceptional Children, 12(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Graham, S., Morphy, P., Harris, K., Fink-Chorzempa, B., Saddler, B., Moran, S., et al. (2008). Teaching spelling in the primary grades: A national survey of instructional practices and adaptations. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 796–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. *Hall, D. P., Cunningham, P. M., & Cunningham, J. W. (1995). Multilevel spelling instruction in third-grade classrooms. In K. A. Hinchman, D. L. Leu, and C. Kinzer (Eds.), Perspectives on literacy research and practice (pp. 384–389). Chicago, IL: National Reading Council.

  55. Hammill, D., Larsen, S., & McNutt, G. (1977). The effects of spelling instruction: A preliminary study. Elementary School Journal, 78, 67–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hedges, L. V. (1982). Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 490–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Hedges, L. V. (2007). Effect sizes in cluster-randomized designs. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 32, 341–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Hedges, L. V., & Hedberg, E. C. (2007). Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 60–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Henderson, E. (1990). Teaching spelling (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hillerich, R. (1971). Evaluation of written language. Elementary English, 48, 839–842.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

    Google Scholar 

  63. *Hilte, M. & Reitsma, P. (2011). Effects of explicit rules in learning to spell open- and closed-syllable words. Learning and Instruction, 21, 34–45.

  64. Horn, E. (1944). Research in spelling. Elementary English Review, 21, 6–13.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Horn, T. (1969). Spelling. In R. L. Ebel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research (4th ed., pp. 1282–1299). New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  66. *Horn, P. L. (1985). Spelling in written context: An evaluation of instructional emphasis on student achievement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University.

  67. *Ise, E. & Schulte-Körne, G. (2010). Spelling deficits in dyslexia: Evaluation of an orthographic spelling training. Annals of Dyslexia, 60, 18–39.

  68. Ivernizzi, M., & Hayes, L. (2004). Developmental-spelling research: A systematic imperative. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 216–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. *Jones, J. L. (1966). Effects of spelling instruction in eighth grade biological science upon scientific spelling, vocabulary, and reading comprehension; general spelling, vocabulary and reading comprehension; science progress; and science achievement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). College Park, MD: University of Maryland.

  70. *Jurka, P. A. (1992). The effects of invented spelling and direct spelling instruction on the spelling ability of first grade students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Chicago, IL: Chicago State University.

  71. *Kirk, C., & Gillon, G. T. (2009). Integrated morphological awareness intervention as a tool for improving literacy. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 341–351.

  72. *Kirkbride, S., & Wright, B. C. (2002). The role of analogy use in improving early spelling performance. Educational and Child Psychology, 19, 91–101.

  73. Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73, 440–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Krashen, S. (2002, Dec 11). Reading improves students’ spelling. Education Week. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2002/12/11/15letter.h22.htm.

  75. Krashen, S., & White, H. (1991). Is spelling acquired or learned? A re-analysis of Rice (1897) and Cornman (1902). Internationaler Technischer Literaturanzeiger, 91–92, 1–48.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Loomer, B., Fitzsimmons, R., & Strege, M. (1990). Spelling research and practice: Teacher’s edition. Iowa City, IA: Useful Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  78. *Lougheed, J. A. (1980). Training of self-study spelling strategies and their effectiveness on fourth grade students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Brockport, NY: State University College at Brockport.

  79. *Louis, R. N. (1950). A study of spelling growth in two different teaching procedures (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ellensburg, WA: Central Washington College.

  80. Marshall, J. C., & Powers, J. M. (1969). Writing neatness, composition errors, and essay grades. Journal of Educational Measurement, 6, 97–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. *Martins, M. A., & Silva, C. (2006). The impact of invented spelling on phonemic awareness. Learning and Instruction, 16, 41–56.

  82. *Mason, G. P. (1959). Word discrimination drill and spelling: An experimental study of the effect on spelling of drill in word discrimination (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pullman, WA: State College of Washington.

  83. McCutchen, D. (1988). “Functional automaticity” in children’s writing: A problem of metacognitive control. Written Communication, 5, 306–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. *McElwee, G. W. (1974). Systematic instruction in proofreading for spelling and its effects on fourth and sixth grade composition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.

  85. Moats, L. (1995). Spelling development, disabilities, and instruction. Baltimore, MD: York.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Moats, L. (2005/2006). How spelling supports reading: And why it is more regular and predictable than you may think. American Educator, Winter, 12–43.

  87. *Montésinos-Gelet, I. & Morin, M. (2005). The impact of a cooperative approximate spelling situation in a kindergarten setting. Educational Studies in Language and Literacy, 5, 365–383.

  88. *Nollau, C. B. (1974). A comparison of a linguistic approach to spelling and the test-study method of instruction in spelling (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). State College, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.

  89. *Norton, P., & Heiman, B. (1988). Computer literacy and communication disordered students: A research study. Educational Technology, 28(9), 36–41.

  90. *Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Olsson, J. (2003). Learning morphological and phonological spelling rules: An intervention study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7, 289–307.

  91. *O’Connor, R. E. & Jenkins, J. R. (1995). Improving the generalization of sound/symbol knowledge: Teaching spelling to kindergarten children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 29, 255–275.

  92. *Ouellette, G. (2010). Orthographic learning in learning to spell: The roles of semantics and type of practice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 50–58.

  93. *Ouellette, G., & Sénéchal, M. (2008). Pathways to literacy: A study of invented spelling and its role in learning to read. Child Development, 79, 899–913.

  94. *Ouellette, G., & Sénéchal, M. (2010). Invented spelling: An intervention strategy for kindergarten. Retrieved from Canadian Council of Learning website: http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Research/FundedResearch/201010OOuelletteSpelling.html.

  95. Perfetti, C. (1997). The psycholinguistics of spelling and reading. In C. A. Perfetti, L. Rieben, & M. Royol (Eds.), Learning to spell (pp. 21–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  96. *Pittman, R. T. (2007). Improving spelling ability among speakers of African American vernacular English: An intervention based on phonological, morphological, and orthographic principle (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). College Station, TX: Texas A&M University.

  97. Pressley, M., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2006). The state of educational intervention research. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. *Radaker, L. D. (1963). The effect of visual imagery upon spelling performance. Journal of Educational Research, 56, 370–372.

  99. *RahimOf, F., Amiri, S., Aboutalebi, M., & Molavi, H. (2011). The effects of multi-sensory training on spelling disability of gifted, primary school students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1457–1461.

  100. *Reutzel, D. R., Fawson, P. C., & Smith, J. A. (2006). Words to Go!: Evaluating a first-grade parent involvement program for “making” words at home. Literacy Research and Instruction, 45, 119–159.

  101. Rice, J. (1913). Scientific management in education. New York, NY: Hinds, Noble, & Elderedge.

    Google Scholar 

  102. *Rieben, L., Ntamakiliro, L. Gonthier, B., & Fayol, M. (2005). Effects of various early writing practices on reading and spelling. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 145–166.

  103. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1986). Written composition. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 778–803). New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Schlagel, B. (2007). Best practices in spelling and handwriting. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 179–201). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  105. *Sénéchal, M., Ouellette, G., Pagan, S., & Lever, R. (2012). The role of invented spelling on learning to read in low-phoneme awareness kindergartners: A randomized-control–trial study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 917–934.

  106. Shadish, W. R., Robinson, L., & Congxiao, L. (1999). ES: A computer program for effect size calculation. Memphis, TN: University of Memphis.

    Google Scholar 

  107. *Shippen, M. E., Reilly, A., & Dunn, C. (2008). The effects of the intensity of spelling instruction for elementary students at risk for school failure. Journal of Direct Instruction, 8, 19–28.

  108. *Simle, M. A. (1992). The effects of guided and unguided creative writing activities on spelling achievement in fifth grade (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.

  109. Smith, F. (1982). Writing and the writer. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  110. *Stephens, M., & Hudson, A. (1984). A comparison of the effects of direct instruction and remedial English classes on the spelling skills of secondary students. Educational Psychology, 4, 261–267.

  111. *Sussman, G. L., (1998). The effects of phonological constructed spelling on first graders’ literacy development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). New York, NY: Fordham University.

  112. Treiman, R. (1993). Beginning to spell. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  114. *Turco, T. L. (1987). Acceptability and effectiveness of group contingencies for improving spelling achievement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University.

  115. *Uhry, J. K., & Sheperd, M. J. (1993). Segmentation/spelling instruction as part of a first-grade reading program: Effects on several measures of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 219–233.

  116. *Wagner, J. H. (1978). Peer teaching in spelling: An experimental study in selected Seventh-day Adventist high schools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.

  117. Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Swanson, E. A., Edmonds, M., & Kim, A. (2006). A synthesis of spelling and reading interventions and their effects on the spelling outcomes of students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 528–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. *Weber, W. R., & Henderson, E. H. (1989). A computer-based program of word study: Effects on reading and spelling. Reading Psychology, 10, 157–171.

  119. Weiser, B., & Mathes, P. (2011). Using encoding instruction to improve the reading and spelling performances of elementary students at risk for literacy difficulties: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 81, 170–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Wilde, S. (1990). A proposal for a new spelling curriculum. Elementary School Journal, 90, 275–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. *Wilson, B. L. (1947). The effect of the incidental teaching of spelling in two tenth-grade social studies classes (Unpublished master’s thesis). Boston, MA: Boston University.

  122. Wolf, I. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis (Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-04). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steve Graham.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Graham, S., Santangelo, T. Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Read Writ 27, 1703–1743 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9517-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Spelling
  • Meta-analysis
  • Writing
  • Reading