Advertisement

Effects of the Computer-Based Training Program Lautarium on Phonological Awareness and Reading and Spelling Abilities in German Second-Graders

  • Maria Klatte
  • Kirstin Bergström
  • Claudia Steinbrink
  • Marita Konerding
  • Thomas Lachmann
Part of the Literacy Studies book series (LITS, volume 16)

Abstract

Intact phonological processing abilities are of major importance for successful acquisition of literacy skills. Training studies confirmed that programs which combine phonological training with systematic instruction on letter-sound-relationships are effective in fostering reading and spelling skills. Based on this evidence, we developed the computer-based training program Lautarium for German-speaking primary school children experiencing reading and spelling difficulties. This chapter provides an overview of the structure and contents of Lautarium, and summarizes the empirical evidence concerning the effectiveness of Lautarium-training in children with poor literacy skills. Additionally, we describe a study on the effects of Lautarium-training in two groups of second-graders with relatively low class-level reading skills. Group 1 performed Lautarium-training for a period of 8 weeks at the beginning of second grade, while Group 2 received regular classroom instruction. A significant training effect was found for spelling, but not for phonological awareness or reading. Since only a few children finished the training within the 8-week period, Lautarium was modified in order to allow faster completion of the exercises. Group 2 trained with the modified version at the end of second grade. Subsequent tests revealed stronger improvements in reading, spelling, and phonological awareness in Group 2 when compared to Group 1.

Keywords

Dyslexia Intervention Reading Spelling Phonological awareness Speech perception Children 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to the children and teachers who participated in the studies, and to our student assistants for their help in organization, data acquisition, and data entry. Special thanks to Martin Dirichs for programming Lautarium.

The Lautarium project was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Educational Research (BMBF 01GJ1003/01 GJ 1401).

References

  1. Aikens, N. L., & Barbarin, O. (2008). Socioeconomic differences in reading trajectories: The contribution of family, neighborhood, and school contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bischof, J., Gratzka, V., Strehlow, U., Haffner, J., Parzer, P., & Resch, F. (2002). Reliabilität, Trainierbarkeit und Stabilität auditiv diskriminativer Leistungen bei zwei computergestützten Mess- und Trainingsverfahren. Zeitschrift für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie, 30(4), 261–270. https://doi.org/10.1024/1422-4917.30.4.261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bishop, D. V. M. (1997). Uncommon understanding: Development and disorders of language comprehension in children. Cambridge, MA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bos, W. (Ed.). (2007). IGLU 2006: Lesekompetenzen von Grundschulkindern in Deutschland im internationalen Vergleich. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  5. Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 301(5899), 419–421. https://doi.org/10.1038/301419a0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll, J. M., Maughan, B., Goodman, R., & Meltzer, H. (2005). Literacy difficulties and psychiatric disorders: Evidence for comorbidity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(5), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00366.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ecalle, J., Magnan, A., Bouchafa, H., & Gombert, J. E. (2009). Computer-based training with ortho-phonological units in dyslexic children: New investigations. Dyslexia, 15(3), 218–238.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eden, G. F., Jones, K. M., Cappell, K., Gareau, L., Wood, F. B., Zeffiro, T. A., …Flowers, D. L. (2004). Neural changes following remediation in adult developmental dyslexia. Neuron, 44(3), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.10.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071003393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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(3), 250–287.  https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.36.3.2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elbro, C., & Jensen, M. N. (2005). Quality of phonological representations, verbal learning, and phoneme awareness in dyslexic and normal readers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46(4), 375–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2005.00468.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Esser, G., Wyschkon, A., & Schmidt, M. H. (2002). Was wird aus Achtjährigen mit einer Lese- und Rechtschreibstörung? Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 31(4), 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1026/0084-5345.31.4.235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fischbach, A., Schuchardt, K., Brandenburg, J., Klesczewski, J., Balke-Melcher, C., Schmidt, C., …Hasselhorn, M. (2013). Prävalenz von Lernschwächen und Lernstörungen: Zur Bedeutung der Diagnosekriterien. Lernen und Lernstörungen, 2(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1024/2235-0977/a000035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fischer, M. Y., & Pfost, M. (2015). Wie effektiv sind Maßnahmen zur Förderung der phonologischen Bewusstheit? Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 47(1), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fricke, S., Szczerbinski, M., Fox-Boyer, A., & Stackhouse, J. (2016). Preschool predictors of early literacy acquisition in German-speaking children. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(1), 29–53.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.116Google Scholar
  16. Galuschka, K., Ise, E., Krick, K., & Schulte-Körne, G. (2014). Effectiveness of treatment approaches for children and adolescents with reading disabilities: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One, 9(2), e89900.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gonzalez, M. d. R. O., Espinel, A. I. G., & Rosquete, R. G. (2002). Remedial interventions for children with reading disabilities: Speech perception: An effective component in phonological training? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 334–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194020350040401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hatcher, P. J., Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Explicit phoneme training combined with phonic reading instruction helps young children at risk of reading failure. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(2), 338–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00225.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hintikka, S., Aro, M., & Lyytinen, H. (2005). Computerized training of the correspondences between phonological and orthographic units. Written Language & Literacy, 8(2), 155–178.  https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.8.2.07hinGoogle Scholar
  20. Hornickel, J., Skoe, E., Nicol, T., Zecker, S., & Kraus, N. (2009). Subcortical differentiation of stop consonants relates to reading and speech-in-noise perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(31), 13022–13027.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901123106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hulme, C., Bowyer-Crane, C., Carroll, J. M., Duff, F. J., & Snowling, M. J. (2012). The causal role of phoneme awareness and letter-sound knowledge in learning to read: Combining intervention studies with mediation analyses. Psychological Science, 23(6), 572–577. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611435921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ise, E., Engel, R. R., & Schulte-Körne, G. (2012). Was hilft bei der Lese-Rechtschreibstörung? Ergebnisse einer Metaanalyse zur Wirksamkeit deutschsprachiger Förderansätze. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 21(2), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1026/0942-5403/a000077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kaernbach, C. (1991). Simple adaptive testing with the weighted up-down method. Perception & Psychophysics, 49(3), 227–229. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Klatte, M., Bergström, K., Konerding, M., & Lachmann, T. (manuscript in preparation). Kaiserslauterer Gruppentest zur Lautbewusstheit (KaLaube).Google Scholar
  25. Klatte, M., Steinbrink, C., Bergström, K., & Lachmann, T. (2013). Phonologische Verarbeitung bei Grundschulkindern mit schwacher Lesefähigkeit. Lernen und Lernstörungen, 2(4), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1024/2235-0977/a000045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klatte, M., Steinbrink, C., Bergström, K., & Lachmann, T. (2016). Lautarium: Ein computerbasiertes Trainingsprogramm für Grundschulkinder mit Lese-Rechtschreibschwierigkeiten. In M. Hasselhorn & W. Schneider (Eds.), Förderprogramme für Vor- und Grundschule (pp. 115–141). Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.Google Scholar
  27. Klatte, M., Steinbrink, C., Bergström, K., & Lachmann, T. (2017). Lautarium – ein computerbasiertes trainingsprogramm für Grundschulkinder mit Lese-Rechtschreibschwierigkeiten. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.Google Scholar
  28. Klatte, M., Steinbrink, C., Prölß, A., Estner, B., Christmann, C., & Lachmann, T. (2014). Effekte des computerbasierten Trainingsprogramms “Lautarium” auf die phonologische Verarbeitung und die Lese-Rechtschreibleistungen bei Grundschulkindern. In G. Schulte-Körne (Ed.), Legasthenie und Dyskalkulie (pp. 127–144). Bochum: Winkler.Google Scholar
  29. Klauer, K. (1989). Denktraining für Kinder I. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.Google Scholar
  30. Landerl, K. (2003). Categorization of vowel length in German poor spellers: An orthographically relevant phonological distinction. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(4). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716403000262
  31. Lenhard, W., & Schneider, W. (2006). Ein Leseverständnistest für Erst- bis Sechstklässler (ELFE1-6). Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Leppänen, U., Aunola, K., Niemi, P., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2008). Letter knowledge predicts grade 4 reading fluency and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 18(6), 548–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Macaruso, P., Hook, P. E., & McCabe, R. (2006). The efficacy of computer-based supplementary phonics programs for advancing reading skills in at-risk elementary students. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(2), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00282.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Manis, F. R., Mcbride-Chang, C., Seidenberg, M. S., Keating, P., Doi, L. M., Munson, B., & Petersen, A. (1997). Are speech perception deficits associated with developmental dyslexia? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66(2), 211–235.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1997.2383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. May, P. (2012). Hamburger Schreib-Probe (HSP 1-10). Manual/Handbuch: Diagnose orthografischer Kompetenz zur Erfassung der grundlegenden Rechtschreibkompetenzen. Stuttgart: Verlag für pädagogische Medien.Google Scholar
  36. McArthur, G. M., Ellis, D., Atkinson, C. M., & Coltheart, M. (2008). Auditory processing deficits in children with reading and language impairments: Can they (and should they) be treated? Cognition, 107(3), 946–977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McArthur, G. M., Eve, P. M., Jones, K., Banales, E., Kohnen, S., Anandakumar, T., …Castles, A. (2012). Phonics training for English-speaking poor readers. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 12, CD009115. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009115.pub2
  38. McBride-Chang, C. (1995). Phonological processing, speech perception, and reading disability: An integrative review. Educational Psychologist, 30(3), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3003$backslash$_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Melby-Lervag, M., Lyster, S.-A. H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 322–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moore, D. R., Rosenberg, J. F., & Coleman, J. S. (2005). Discrimination training of phonemic contrasts enhances phonological processing in mainstream school children. Brain and Language, 94(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.11.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Näslund, J. C., & Schneider, W. (1996). Kindergarten letter knowledge, phonological skills, and memory processes: Relative effects on early literacy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 62(1), 30–59.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1996.0021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nieven, N., & Folmer, E. (2013). Formative evaluation in educational design research. In T. Plomp & N. Nieven (Eds.), Educational design research. Part A. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).Google Scholar
  43. Noordenbos, M. W., & Serniclaes, W. (2015). The categorical perception deficit in dyslexia: A meta-analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(5), 340–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2015.1052455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pfost, M. (2015). Children’s phonological awareness as a predictor of reading and spelling. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 47(3), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rausch, J. R., Maxwell, S. E., & Kelley, K. (2003). Analytic methods for questions pertaining to a randomized pretest, posttest, follow-up design. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 32(3), 467–486. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15374424JCCP3203_15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Snowling, M. J., & Hulme, C. (2012). Interventions for children’s language and literacy difficulties. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 47(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00081.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Steinbrink, C., Klatte, M., & Lachmann, T. (2014). Phonological, temporal and spectral processing in vowel length discrimination is impaired in German primary school children with developmental dyslexia. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(11), 3034–3045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Strehlow, U., Haffner, J., Bischof, J., Gratzka, V., Parzer, P., & Resch, F. (2006). Does successful training of temporal processing of sound and phoneme stimuli improve reading and spelling? European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 15(1), 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-006-0500-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Swan, D., & Goswami, U. (1997). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the phonological representations hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66(1), 18–41.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1997.2375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Thomé, G. (2000). Linguistische und psycholinguistische Grundlagen der Orthografie: Die Schrift und das Schreibenlernen. In R. Valtin (Ed.), Rechtschreiben lernen in den Klassen 1–6. Frankfurt am Main: Arbeitskreis Grundschule der Grundschulverband.Google Scholar
  51. Thomson, J. M., Leong, V., & Goswami, U. (2013). Auditory processing interventions and developmental dyslexia: A comparison of phonemic and rhythmic approaches. Reading and Writing, 26(2), 139–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9359-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Torgesen, J. K. (2002). The prevention of reading difficulties. Journal of School Psychology, 40(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00092-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Torgesen, J. K., & Barker, T. A. (1995). Computers as aids in the prevention and remediation of reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18(2), 76. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wagner, R. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 192–212. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ziegler, J. C., Pech-Georgel, C., George, F., & Lorenzi, C. (2009). Speech-perception-in-noise deficits in dyslexia. Developmental Science, 12(5), 732–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00817.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Klatte
    • 1
  • Kirstin Bergström
    • 1
  • Claudia Steinbrink
    • 2
  • Marita Konerding
    • 1
  • Thomas Lachmann
    • 1
  1. 1.University of KaiserslauternKaiserslauternGermany
  2. 2.University of ErfurtErfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations