Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seeing the mouth: the importance of articulatory gestures during phonics training

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Substantial evidence exists suggesting that access to articulatory gestures during instruction improves students’ phonological awareness skills, but researchers have yet to explore the role of articulatory gestures in initial phonics instruction. The purpose of this study was to examine if visual access to articulatory gestures (i.e., mouth cues) of the instructor increases the acquisition and retention of grapheme-phoneme correspondences (GPC). A secondary purpose was to examine if strategic incremental rehearsal (SIR) is an effective method for teaching GPC to preschoolers. A multiple probe across behaviors with an embedded adapted alternating treatments design was used to examine intervention effects. Results provide strong evidence of the importance of students having visual access to their teachers’ articulatory gestures during GPC training.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, E. E., Lloyd, B. P., Spriggs, A. D., & Gast, D. L. (2018). Visual analysis of graphic data. In J. R. Ledford & D. L. Gast (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (pp. 179–214). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, I. (2009). Supporting adolescent literacy achievement [Issue brief]. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices.

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-Analysis. John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, N., & Ehri, L. C. (2011). Contribution of phonemic segmentation instruction with letters and articulation pictures to word reading and spelling in beginners. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(5), 440–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browman, C. P., & Goldstein, L. (1989). Articulatory gestures as phonological units. Phonology, 6(2), 201–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calfee, R. C., & Norman, K. A. (1999). WordWork. Unpublished manuscript, Graduate School of Education, University of California: Riverside.

  • Castiglioni-Spalten, M. L., & Ehri, L. C. (2003). Phonemic awareness training: Contribution of articulatory segmentation to novice beginners’ reading and spelling. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(1), 25–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19, 5–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, F. J., West, G., Sears, C., Hulme, C., & Lervåg, A. (2020). A longitudinal study of early reading development: Letter-sound knowledge, phoneme awareness, and RAN, but not letter-sound integration, predict variations in reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 24(2), 91–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Share, D. L. (2002). Orthographic learning during reading: Examining the role of self-teaching. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82(3), 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Ausilio, A., Pulvermüller, F., Salmas, P., Bufalari, I., Begliomini, C., & Fadiga, L. (2009). The motor somatotopy of speech perception. Current Biology, 19, 381–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeWalt, D. A., & Hink, A. (2009). Health literacy and child health outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. Pediatrics, 124, S265–S274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domingue, B. W., Dell, M., Lang, D., Silverman, R., Yeatman, J., & Hough, H. (2022). The effect of COVID on oral reading fluency during the 2020–2021 academic year. AERA Open, 8(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S45–S60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 393–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fälth, L., Gustafson, S., & Svensson, I. (2017). Phonological awareness training with articulation promotes early reading development. Education, 137(3), 261–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, C. A., Shankweiler, D., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (2016). Perception of the speech code revisited: Speech is alphabetic after all. Psychological Review, 123(2), 125–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, S. J., Landi, N., Mencl, W. E., Sandak, R., Fulbright, R. K., Tejada, E. T., Jacobsen, L., Grigorenko, E. L., Constable, R. T., & Pugh, K. R. (2009). Phonological awareness predicts activation patterns for print and speech. Annals of Dyslexia, 59(1), 78–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galantucci, B., Fowler, C. A., & Turvey, M. T. (2006). The motor theory of speech perception reviewed. Psychometric Bulletin and Review, 13(3), 361–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galazka, M. A., Hadijikhani, N., Sundqvist, M., & Johnels, J. Å. (2021). Facial speech processing in children with and without dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 71, 501–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galuschka, K., Ise, E., Krick, K., & Schulte-Körne, G. (2014). Effectiveness of treatment approaches for children and adolescents with reading difficulties: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE, 9(2), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, K. L., Schieltz, K. M., & Detrick, J. (2021). Evaluating the effects of instructional prompts and strategic incremental rehearsal on the letter identification mastery of two typically developing kindergarteners. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14, 20–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, K. M., Voeller, K., & Alexander, K. V. (1996). Developmental dyslexia: A motor-articulatory feedback hypothesis. Annals of Neurology, 39(3), 407–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • January, S.- A. A., Lovelace, M. E., Foster, T. E., & Author. (2017).

  • Joly-Pottuz, B., Mercier, M., Leynaud, A., & Habib, M. (2008). Combined auditory and articulatory training improves phonological deficit in children with dyslexia. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 18(4), 402–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (Vol. 94, pp. 67–84). Elsevier Science.

  • Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & Shadish, W. R. (2010). Single-case design technical documentation. What Works Clearinghouse. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED510743.pdf

  • Kupzyk, S., Daly, E. J., III., & Anderson, M. N. (2011). A comparison of two flash-card methods for improving sight-word reading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(4), 781–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyte, C. S., & Johnson, C. J. (2006). The role of phonological recoding in orthographic learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 93, 155–185.

  • Ledford, J. R., Lane, J. D., & Gast, D. L. (2018). Dependent variables, measurement, and reliability. In J. R. Ledford & D. L. Gast (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (pp. 97–131). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, A. M., Cooper, E. S., Shankweiler, D. P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74(6), 431–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, A. M., & Mattingly, I. G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, I. Y., & Liberman, A. M. (1990). Whole language vs. code emphasis: Underlying assumptions and their implications for reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 40, 51–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindamood, P. C. (1998). The Lindamood phoneme sequencing program for reading, spelling, and speech. Pro-Ed.

  • Lozy, E. D., & Donaldson, J. M. (2019). A comparison of traditional drill and strategic incremental rehearsal flashcard methods to teach letter-sound correspondence. Behavioral Development, 24(2), 58–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGurk, H., & MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (2020). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers. Brookes Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, D. (1981). Do dyslexics have difficulty accessing articulatory information? Psychological Research, 43, 235–243.

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). The nation’s report card: Reading. Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

  • Perfetti, C., & Helder, A. (2022). Progress in reading science: Word identification, comprehension, and universal perspectives. In M. J. Snowling, C. Hulme, & K. Nation (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (2nd ed., pp. 5–35). Wiley.

  • Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of Functional Literacy (pp. 67–86). John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pustejovsky, J. E., Chen, M., Hamilton, B., & Grekov, P. (2023). scdhlm: A web-based calculator for between-case standardized mean differences (Version 0.7.2) [Web application]. https://jepusto.shinyapps.io/scdhlm

  • Pustejovsky, J. E., Hedges, L. V., & Shadish, W. R. (2014). Design-comparable effect sizes in multiple baseline designs: A general modeling framework. Journal of Education and Behavioral Studies, 39(5), 368–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

  • Rodgers, D. B., & Loveall, S. J. (2023). Writing interventions for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 44(3), 239–252.

  • Seidenberg, M. (2017). Language at the speed of sight: How we read, why so many can’t, and what can be done about it. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 5(2), 151–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurmann-Moe, A. C., Melby-Lervåg, M., & Lervåg, A. (2021). The impact of articulatory consciousness training on reading and spelling literacy in students with severe dyslexia: An experimental single case study. Annals of Dyslexia, 71, 373–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Alexander, A. W., & Conway, T. (1997). Preventive and remedial interventions for children with severe reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8, 51–61.

  • Trainin, G., Wilson, K. M., Murphy-Yagil, M., & Rankin-Erickson, J. L. (2014). Taking a different route: Contribution of articulation and metacognition to intervention with at-risk third-grade readers. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 19(3–4), 183–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel (U. S.) & National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U. S.). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. U. S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

  • Venezky, R. L. (1999). The American way of spelling: The structure and origins of American English orthography. Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metaphor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48.

  • Wanzek, J., Stevens, E. A., Williams, K. J., Scammacca, N., Vaughn, S., & Sargent, K. (2018). Current evidence on the effects of intensive early reading interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(6), 612–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, B. W., & Olson, R. K. (1995). Computer-based phonological awareness and reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 45(1), 97–122.

  • Wise, B. W., Ring, J., & Olson, R. K. (1999). Training phonological awareness with and without explicit attention to articulation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 271–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolery, M., Gast, D. L., & Ledford, J. R. (2018). Comparative designs. In J. R. Ledford & D. L. Gast (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (pp. 215–238). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, J. C., & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 3–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Christina Novelli was supported in part by Grant H325H190003 from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U.S. Department of Education, and no official endorsement by it should be inferred.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    Christina Novelli & Scott P. Ardoin

  2. University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

    Derek B. Rodgers

Authors
  1. Christina Novelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott P. Ardoin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Derek B. Rodgers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christina Novelli.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Novelli, C., Ardoin, S.P. & Rodgers, D.B. Seeing the mouth: the importance of articulatory gestures during phonics training. Read Writ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10487-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10487-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation