Reading and Writing

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 289–324 | Cite as

The necessity of the alphabetic principle to phonemic awareness instruction

  • Barbara R. Foorman
  • Dung-Tsa Chen
  • Coleen Carlson
  • Louisa Moats
  • David J. Francis
  • Jack M. Fletcher
Article

Abstract

This investigation examined the extent to whichcurricular choice and incorporation of phonemicawareness (PA) into the kindergarten curriculumaffects growth in kindergarten literacy skillsand first-grade reading and spelling outcomesin 114 classrooms in 32 Title 1 schools for4,872 children (85% African American). Literacy curricula were described as havingmore or less teacher choice and more or less PAand were implemented with ongoing professionaldevelopment. Observations of curriculumfidelities and ratings of student behavior werealso obtained. Alphabetic instruction withoutPA was not as effective as alphabeticinstruction with PA. However, effectiveinstruction in PA and alphabetic codingappeared to be as much a consequence of ongoingprofessional development as it was a functionof prescribed PA activities. Results providelarge-scale classroom support for findings onPA reported by the National Reading Panel[(2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-basedassessment of the scientific research literature onreading and its implications for reading instruction.Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health andHuman Development].

Early reading instruction Kindergarten curriculum Phonemic awareness Phonological awareness Reading readiness 

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, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, M.J., Foorman, B.R., Lundberg, I. & Beeler, T. (1998). Phonemic awareness in young children. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  3. Agronin, M.E., Holahan, J.M., Shaywitz, B.A. & Shaywitz, S.E. (1992). The multi-grade inventory for teachers. In S.E. Shaywitz & B.A. Shaywitz (Eds.), Attention deficit disorder comes of age (pp.29‐67). Austin, Texas: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, E.W.& Blachman, B.A. (1991). Does phonemic awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49‐66.Google Scholar
  5. Blachman, B.A. (2000). Phonological awareness. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. III (pp. 483‐502). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  6. Blachman, B.A., Ball, E.W., Black, R. & Tangel, D.M. (2000). Road to the code. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Bradley, L. & Bryant, P.E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection, Nature, 30, 419‐421.Google Scholar
  8. Byrne, B. & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children, Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 451‐455.Google Scholar
  9. Castle, J.M., Riach, J. & Nicholson, T. (1994). Getting off to a better start in reading and spelling: The effects of phonemic awareness instruction within a whole language program, Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 488‐503.Google Scholar
  10. Dunn, L.M. & Dunn, L.M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, Minnesota: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  11. Ehri, L.C. (1984). How orthography alters spoken language competencies in children learning to read and spell. In J. Downing & R. Valtin (Eds.), Language awareness and learning to read (pp.119‐147). New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. Ehri, L.C. (1987). Learning to read and spell words, Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 5‐31.Google 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.Google Scholar
  14. Eimas, P.D., Siqueland, E.R., Jusczyk, P. & Bigorito, J. (1971). Speech perception in infants, Science, 171, 303‐306.Google Scholar
  15. Englemann, S. & Bruner, E. (1995). Reading Mastery I. Chicago, Illinois: SRA/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  16. Foorman, B.R. & Francis, D.J. (1994). Exploring connections among reading, spelling, and phonemic segmentation during first grade, Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6, 1‐26.Google Scholar
  17. Foorman, B.R., Francis, D.J., Fletcher, J.M., Schatschneider, C. & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children, Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37‐55.Google Scholar
  18. Foorman, B.R. & Moats, L.C. (in press). Conditions for sustaining research-based practices in early reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education.Google Scholar
  19. Francis, D.J., Schetschneider, C. & Carlson, C.D. (2000). Introduction to individual growth curve analysis. In D. Drotar (Ed.), Handbook of research in pediatric and clinical child psychology. (pp.51‐73). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  20. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N.J., Braun, M. & O’Connor, R.E. (2001). Is reading important in reading-reading readiness programs? A randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers, Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 251‐267.Google Scholar
  21. Goswami, U. & Bryant, P.E. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Hatcher, P., Hulme, C. & Ellis, A. (1994). Ameliorating early reading failure by integrating the teaching of reading and phonological skills: The phonological linkage hypothesis, Child Development, 65, 41‐57.Google Scholar
  23. Houghton Mifflin (1996). Invitations to literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
  24. Kaufman, A.S. & Kaufman, N.L. (1985). Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement. Circle Pines, Minnesota: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  25. Lukatela, G. & Turvey, M.T. (1998). Reading in two alphabets, American Psychologist, 53, 1057‐1072.Google Scholar
  26. Lundberg, I., Frost, J. & Petersen, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children, Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 263‐284.Google Scholar
  27. MathSoft (2000). S-Plus 2000 guide to statistics, 1. Seattle, Washington: Author.Google Scholar
  28. Maxwell, S.E. & Delaney, H.D. (1990). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparisons perspective. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  29. Morse, P.A. (1972). The discrimination of speech and nonspeech stimuli in early infancy, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 14, 477‐492.Google Scholar
  30. 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 Institute of Child Health and Human Development.Google Scholar
  31. Neuhaus, G.F., Foorman, B.R., Francis, D.J. & Carlson, C.D. (2001). Measures of information processing in rapid automatized naming (RAN) and their relation to reading, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 78, 359‐373.Google Scholar
  32. Open Court Reading (1995). Collections for young scholars. Chicago and Peru, Illinois: SRA/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  33. SAS Institute (1997). SAS/STAT software: Changes and enhancements through release 6.12. Cary, North Carolina: Author.Google Scholar
  34. Schatschneider, C., Francis, D.J., Foorman, B.R., Fletcher, J.M. & Mehta, P. (1999). The dimensionality of phonological awareness: An application of item response theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 439‐449.Google Scholar
  35. Schiller, P., Ada, A.F. & Hurst, C.O. (1995). The DLM early childhood program. Columbus, Ohio: SRA Macmillan/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  36. Slavin, R.E., Madden, N.A., Dolan, L.J. & Wasik, B.A. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for all. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  37. Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  38. Stanovich, K.E., (1992). Speculations on the causes and consequences of individual differences in early reading acquisition. In P.B. Gough, L.C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 307‐342). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  39. Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K. & Rashotte, C.A. (1999). Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, Texas: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  40. Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K. & Rashotte, C.A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bi-directional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73‐87.Google Scholar
  41. Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., Rashotte, C.A., Hecht, S.A., Barker, T.A., Burgess, S.R., Donahue, J. & Garon, T. (1997). Changing causal relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from beginning to fluent readers: A five-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 468‐479.Google Scholar
  42. Woodcock, R.W. & Johnson, M.B. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson psychoeducational battery ‐ revised. Allen, Texas: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara R. Foorman
    • 1
  • Dung-Tsa Chen
    • 2
  • Coleen Carlson
    • 2
  • Louisa Moats
    • 1
  • David J. Francis
    • 2
  • Jack M. Fletcher
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Academic and Reading SkillsUniversity of Texas-Houston Health Science CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and StatisticsUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations