Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fostering alphabet knowledge development: a comparison of two instructional approaches

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Preschool-aged children (n = 58) were randomly assigned to receive small group instruction in letter names and/or sounds or numbers (treated control). Alphabet instruction followed one of two approaches currently utilized in early childhood classrooms: combined letter name and sound instruction or letter sound only instruction. Thirty-four 15 minute lessons were provided, with children pre- and post-tested on alphabet, phonological awareness, letter–word identification, emergent reading, and developmental spelling measures. Results suggest benefits of combined letter name and sound instruction in promoting children’s letter sound acquisition. Benefits did not generalize to other emergent literacy skills.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Alphabet production and recognition abilities are typically assumed to represent two separate constructs of letter knowledge, as discussed by Dodd and Carr (2003) and reflected in a number of studies of emergent literacy (e.g., Lafferty, Gray, & Wilcox, 2005; Solity, 1996; Stuart, 1999; Sumbler, 1999; Vandervelden & Siegel, 1997; Williams, 1980).

  2. Tasks were administered in this manner to minimize both assessment time and children’s frustration.

  3. Significant positive skew was noted for the letter sound production, letter sound recognition, and developmental spelling tasks (skewness statistic ranging from 1.906 to 2.826). Transformations (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996) with the DST variable did not significantly improve its distribution; reported analyses were conducted on the untransformed variable and ought to be interpreted cautiously. Given the relative robustness of ANOVA to violations of non-normality (Maxwell & Delaney, 2004), isolation of skew to the LNLS condition, and meaningful metric of these measures (i.e., number of letter sounds known), no further transformations were conducted on the letter sound outcomes, and analyses were conducted on both the original and outlier-adjusted variables. These analyses yielded similar results; thus, only the analyses for the unadjusted variables are reported. Additional assumptions for repeated measures and one-way ANOVAs were satisfied (Maxwell & Delaney, 2004).

  4. With the exception of the emergent reading and developmental spelling measures, on which only posttest data was available, effect sizes were computed to align with interaction contrast results. Thus, effect sizes reflect relative differences among conditions in learning gains as opposed to simple posttest comparisons.

References

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). The head start path to positive child outcomes. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from http://www.hsnrc.org/CDI/outcontent.cfm.

  • Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aram, D., & Biron, S. (2004). Joint storybook reading and joint writing interventions among low ses preschoolers: Differential contributions to early literacy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 588–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, E. W., & Blachman, B. A. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 57, 289–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., Campione, J., Carruthers, I., Hirshber, J., McKeough, A., Pressley, M., et al. (2003). Open court reading Pre-K. Retrieved June 8, 2008, from https://www.sraonline.com/products.html?PHPSESSID=5f4933c7b29f0ddaf8f04a56eef7f143&tid=16&sid=147.

  • Blachman, B. A. (1994). What we have learned from longitudinal studies of phonological processing and reading, and some unanswered questions: A response to Torgesen, Wagner, and Rashotte. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 287–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blachman, B. A., Ball, E. W., Black, R. S., & Tangel, D. M. (1994). Kindergarten teachers develop phoneme awareness in low-income, inner-city classrooms: Does it make a difference? Reading and Writing, 6, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blachman, B. A., Tangel, D. M., Ball, E. W., Black, R., & McGraw, C. K. (1999). Developing phonological awareness and word recognition skills: A two-year intervention with low-income, inner-city children. Reading and Writing, 11, 239–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S., Fowler, A., Stone, B., & Winbury, N. (1994). Training phonological awareness: A study with inner-city kindergarten children. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 26–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, F., & Ireson, J. (1997). Training phonological awareness: A study to evaluate the effects of program of metalinguistic games in kindergarten. Reading and Writing, 9, 241–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brownell, R. (2000). Receptive one-word picture vocabulary test. Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, S. R., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Bidirectional relations of phonological sensitivity and prereading abilities: Evidence from a preschool sample. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 70, 117–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1989). Phonemic awareness and letter knowledge in the child’s acquisition of the alphabetic principle. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 313–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 451–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1993). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 1-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 104–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1995). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 2- and 3-year follow-up and a new preschool trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 488–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caravolas, M., Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2001). The foundations of spelling ability: Evidence from a 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 751–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, S. (1998). Sing, spell, read, & write: PreK readiness program. Parsipanny, NJ: Modern Curriculum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodd, B., & Carr, A. (2003). Young children’s letter-sound knowledge. Language, Speech, & Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 128–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrooks, S. R., & Estes, E. L. (2007). Developing literacy skills in children with hearing losses. In helping deaf and hard of hearing students to use spoken language: A guide for educators and families (pp. 105–129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (1983). A critique of five studies related to letter-name knowledge and learning to read. In L. M. Gentile, M. L. Kamil, & J. S. Blanchard (Eds.), Reading research revisited (pp. 131–153). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (1997). Sight word learning in normal readers and dyslexics. In B. A. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp. 163–189). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (1998). Grapheme-phoneme knowledge is essential to learning to read words in English. In J. L. Metsala & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C., Deffner, N. D., & Wilce, L. S. (1984). Pictorial mnemonics for phonics. Journal of educational psychology, 76, 880–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellefson, M., Treiman, R., & Kessler, B. (2009). Learning to label letters by names or sounds: A comparison of England and the United States. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102, 323–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M. A., Bell, M., Shaw, D., Moretti, S., & Page, J. (2006). Letter names, letter sounds, and phonological awareness: An examination of kindergarten children across letters and of letters across children. Reading & Writing, 19, 959–989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida Department of Education. (n.d.). Grade level expectations for the sunshine state standards: Language arts, Grades K-2. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from http://www.firn.edu/doe/curric/prek12/pdf/langglek.pdf.

  • Foulin, J. N. (2005). Why is letter-name knowledge such a good predictor of learning to read? Reading &Writing, 18, 129–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Karns, K. (2001). Enhancing kindergartners’ mathematical development: Effects of peer-assisted learning strategies. Elementary School Journal, 101, 495–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groff, P. J. (1984). Resolving the letter name controversy. Reading Teacher, 37, 384–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammill, D. D. (2004). What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 70, 453–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heroman, C., & Jones, C. (2004). Literacy: The creative curriculum approach. Teaching Strategies, Inc: Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindson, B., Byrne, B., Fielding-Barnsley, R., Newman, C., Hine, D. W., & Shankweiler, D. (2005). Assessment and early instruction of preschool children at risk for reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 687–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four factor index of social status. New Haven: Yale university press.

  • Iversen, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the reading recovery program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jastak, S., & Wilkinson, G. S. (1984). The wide range achievement test-revised. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolly Learning Ltd. (n.d.). Jolly phonics parent/teacher guide. Retrieved June 8, 2008, from http://www.jollylearning.co.uk/2008%20UK%20%20Guide.pdf.

  • Justice, L. M., Pence, K., Bowles, R. B., & Wiggins, A. (2006). An investigation of four hypotheses concerning the order by which 4-year-old children learn the alphabet letters. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 374–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesselman, H. J., Cribbie, R., & Holland, B. (1999). The pairwise multiple comparison multiplicity problem: An alternative approach to familywise and comparisonwise Type I error control. Psychological Methods, 4, 58–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knotternerus, J. A., & Bouter, L. M. (2001). The ethics of sample size: Two-sided testing and one-sided thinking. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 54, 109–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafferty, A. E., Gray, S., & Wilcox, M. J. (2005). Teaching alphabetic knowledge to pre-school children with developmental language delay and with typical language development. Child Language Teaching & Therapy, 21, 263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Land of the Letter People. (1996). Waterbury, CT: Abrams & Company.

  • Levin, I., Shatil-Carmon, S., & Asif-Rave, O. (2006). Learning of letter names and sounds and their contribution to word recognition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 93, 139–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., Anthony, J. L., & Barker, T. A. (1998). Development of phonological sensitivity in 2- to 5-year-old children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 294–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lonigan, C. J., Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2007). Test of preschool emergent literacy. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malofeeva, E., Day, J., Saco, X., Young, L., & Ciancio, D. (2004). Construction and evaluation of a number sense test with head start children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 648–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massachusetts Department of Education. (2001). Massachusetts English language arts curriculum framework. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/ela/0601.pdf.

  • Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (2004). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison perspective (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBride-Chang, C. (1999). The ABCs of the ABCs: The development of letter-name and letter-sound knowledge. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 285–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill-Franzen, A., Lanford, C., & Adams, E. (1997). Learning to be literate: A comparison of five urban early childhood programs. Albany, NY: National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuinness, D. (2004). Early reading instruction: What science really tells us about how to teach reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montessori, M., & Gutek, G. L. (2004). The Montessori method: The origins of an educational innovation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Academy Press: Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy. National Institute for Literacy: Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, R. E., & Jenkins, J. R. (1999). Prediction of reading disabilities in kindergarten and first grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 159–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piasta, S. B. (2006). Acquisition of alphabetic knowledge: Examining letter- and child-level factors in a single, comprehensive model. Unpublished thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

  • Piasta, S. B., & Wagner, R. K. (2008). Developing emergent literacy skills: A meta-analysis of alphabet learning and instruction. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Pillemer, D. B. (1991). One- versus two-tailed hypothesis tests in contemporary educational research. Educuational Researcher, 20, 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Rankin, J., & Yokoi, L. (1996). A survey of instructional practices of primary teachers nominated as effective in promoting literacy. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 363–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, T. A. (2003). Effects of alphabet-letter instruction on young children’s word recognition. Journal of educational psychology, 95, 41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, H. S. (1998). Early identification of children at risk for reading disabilities. In B. K. Shapiro, P. J. Accardo, & A. J. Capute (Eds.), Specific reading disability: A view of the spectrum (pp. 75–120). Timonium, MD: York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., & Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 265–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and Quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L. (2004). Knowing letter names and learning letter sounds: A causal connection. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 213–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L., Jorm, A. F., Maclean, R., & Matthews, R. (1984). Sources of individual differences in reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1309–1324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1999). Comprehensive approaches to cooperative learning. Theory into Practice, 38, 74–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snowling, M. J., Gallagher, A., & Frith, U. (2003). Family risk of dyslexia is continuous: Individual differences in the precursors of reading skill. Child Development, 74, 358–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solity, J. (1996). Phonological awareness: Learning disabilities revisited? Educational and Child Psychology, 13, 103–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • SRA/McGraw-Hill. (2003). Open court reading Pre-K. Colubmus, OH: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A mode-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56, 72–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, D. D., & Harper, H. (1983). Teaching written language as a first language to a deaf boy. In F. Coulmas & K. Ehlich (Eds.), Writing in focus (pp. 327–354). New York: Mounton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, M. (1999). Getting ready for reading: Early phoneme awareness and phonics teaching improves reading and spelling in inner-city second language learners. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sumbler, K. (1999). Phonological awareness combined with explicit alphabetic coding instruction in kindergarten: Classroom observations and evaluation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tade, W. J., & Vitali, G. (1994). Children’s early intervention for speech-language-reading (CEI). East Aurora, NY: Slosson Educational Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tangel, D. M. (1991). Effect of phoneme awareness training on kindergarten and first-grade children’s invented spelling. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY.

  • Tangel, D. M., & Blachman, B. A. (1992). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on kindergarten children’s invented spelling. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 233–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., & Hudson, R. F. (2006). Reading fluency: Critical issues for struggling readers. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 130–158). Newark, DE, US: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1997). Prevention and remediation of severe reading disabilities: Keeping the end in mind. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T., et al. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 579–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torppa, M., Poikkeus, A.-M., Laakso, M.-L., Eklund, K., & Lyytinen, H. (2006). Predicting delayed letter knowledge development and its relation to grade 1 reading achievement among children with and without familial risk for dyslexia. Developmental Psychology, 42, 1128–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treiman, R., Berch, D., & Weatherston, S. (1993). Children’s use of phoneme–grapheme correspondences in spelling: Roles of position and stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 466–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treiman, R., Tincoff, R., Rodriguez, K., Mouzaki, A., & Francis, D. J. (1998). The foundations of literacy: Learning the sounds of letters. Child Development, 69, 1524–1540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treiman, R., Weatherston, S., & Berch, D. (1994). The role of letter names in children’s learning of phoneme-grapheme relations. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 97–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U. S. Department of Education. (2002, April). Guidance for the reading first program. Washington, D. C.: Author.

  • U. S. Department of Education. (2003, March). Guidance for the early reading first program. Washington, D. C.: Author.

  • Vandervelden, M. C., & Siegel, L. S. (1997). Teaching phonological processing skills in early literacy: A developmental approach. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, L., & APA Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. P. (1980). Teaching decoding with an emphasis on phoneme analysis and phoneme blending. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock–Johnson tests of achievement (3rd ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Preschool Language and Literacy Lab, The Ohio State University, 356 Arps Hall, 1945 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA

    Shayne B. Piasta

  2. Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    David J. Purpura & Richard K. Wagner

Authors
  1. Shayne B. Piasta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David J. Purpura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard K. Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shayne B. Piasta.

Additional information

This study reports results from the dissertation of Shayne B, Piasta, submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. at Florida State University. The research was supported by a Predoctoral Interdisciplinary Research Training Grant (R305B04074) from the Institute of Education Sciences. The opinions articulated are ours and do not represent views of the university or funding agency. Gratitude is expressed to Christopher J. Lonigan, Christopher Schatschneider, and Carol McDonald Connor for providing comments on early drafts of this manuscript, Avni Vyas for her daily work within the preschool centers, Caroline Phythian-Sense and Shari Watson for conducting assessments, Liz Wagner and Samyuktha Kashinath for fidelity coding, and the preschool directors, teachers, parents, and children for welcoming us into their classrooms.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Piasta, S.B., Purpura, D.J. & Wagner, R.K. Fostering alphabet knowledge development: a comparison of two instructional approaches. Read Writ 23, 607–626 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9174-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9174-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation