Invented spelling intervention programmes: Comparing explicit and implicit instructions

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of two invented spelling intervention programs, one with explicit instruction of graph-phonetics matches and another based on questioning and reflection on the graph-phonetic correspondences (implicit instructions). Ninety pre-school children, whose invented spellings use conventional letters unconventionally to represent sounds, were allocated to three groups, two experimental and one control. All groups were equivalent in age, intelligence, letter knowledge, and phonological awareness. We manipulated the type of instructions (implicit vs. explicit) between the pre- and post-tests in two experimental groups where children participated in an intervention programme of invented spelling. Children who participated in the implicit intervention programme showed a significant improvement in the number of correct letters mobilized in their spelling and phonemic awareness compared with children of control and explicit instruction group. Children from explicit instruction group showed significant more improvements than the children from the control group. These results suggest that questioning and reflection applied to invented spelling programmes seems to enhance a more significant knowledge about the relations between the oral and written code.

Orthographic Knowledge and Clue Word Facilitated Spelling in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

Purpose This study investigated the orthographic knowledge and how orthographic and phonological information could support children with developmental language disorder (DLD) to make more accurate spelling attempts. Method Children with DLD ( N = 37) were matched with chronological age–matched (CAM) children and language age–matched children. These children completed specific and general orthographic knowledge tasks as well as spelling task conditions with either no clue word (pretest), a phonological clue word, or an orthographic clue word. Results Children with DLD were significantly less accurate in their specific orthographic knowledge, compared with CAM children, but had similar scores for general orthographic knowledge to CAM children. Children with DLD and both controls had significantly higher spelling scores in the orthographic clue word condition compared with a pretest pseudoword spelling task. Conclusions Children with DLD acquire the general knowledge of a written language's orthography but, possibly through less print exposure, have less well-represented word-specific orthographic knowledge. Moreover, children with DLD are able to extract the orthographic features of a clue word and employ these to produce more accurate spellings. These findings offer support for a spelling intervention approach based on orthography.

Semantics impacts response to phonics through spelling intervention in children with dyslexia

We examined the response to a phonics through spelling intervention in 52 children with dyslexia by analyzing their phonological, morphological, and orthographical spelling errors both before and after the intervention whereas their spelling errors before the intervention were compared with those of 105 typically developing spellers. A possible compensatory role of semantics on the intervention effects was also investigated. Results showed that before the intervention, children with dyslexia and the typically developing children both made most morphological errors, followed by orthographic and phonological errors. Within each category, children with dyslexia made more errors than the typically developing children, with differences being largest for phonological errors. Children with dyslexia with better developed semantic representations turned out to make less phonological, morphological, and orthographic errors compared with children with dyslexia with less developed semantic representations. The intervention for children with dyslexia led to a reduction of all error types, mostly of the orthographic errors. In addition, semantics was related to the decline in phonological, morphological, and orthographic spelling errors. This study implicates that semantic stimulation could benefit the spelling development of children at risk for or with dyslexia.

SPELLING TEST FOR LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA LEARNING GERMAN AS A SECOND FOREIGN LANGUAGE

Spelling is a basic skill as well as means of acquiring knowledge over the school years. Moreover, it is a complex cognitive process, which can be challenging for learners with specific learning difficulties (dyslexia) in their mother language as well as when learning a foreign language. A challenge, that foreign language teachers face in everyday practice, is being able to respond to the needs of all learners within the mainstream classroom in primary education, including learners with dyslexia. Foreign language teachers need to become equipped with further knowledge and skills, so that they are able to identify these difficulties and teach learners with dyslexia more effectively in an inclusive way (Tsakalidou, Koufokotsiou, & Gaganis, in press; Tsakalidou, 2021, 2020, in press). In the present study we examined the spelling difficulties of learners with dyslexia, when learning German as a second foreign language. The aim of the study was twofold: (a) the comparative analysis of the spelling difficulties across two populations (95 learners between 10 and 11 years, twenty of who had dyslexia) and (b) the evaluation of the effectiveness of spelling intervention in respect to learners with dyslexia. In this article we will describe the Spelling Test constructed and adjusted for the doctoral research, which was undertaken in order to record the spelling difficulties that the learners with dyslexia face, when learning German as a second foreign language in primary education. This test was based on a standardized Spelling Test in the Greek language (Mouzaki, Protopapas, Sideridis, & Simos, 2010). As far as the Spelling Test, we constructed is concerned, satisfactory construct validity and internal reliability were demonstrated, as the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .944 and revealed a high degree of internal consistency of the instrument. <p> </p><p><strong> Article visualizations:</strong></p><p><img src="/-counters-/edu_01/0771/a.php" alt="Hit counter" /></p>

A sentence-combining intervention for struggling writers: response to intervention

Children who struggle with writing are a heterogeneous group and may experience difficulties in a range of domains, including spelling, reading, and oral language. These difficulties are reflected in their writing and may influence their responsiveness to writing interventions. The effectiveness of a targeted sentence-combining intervention to improve the writing skills of 71 struggling writers, aged 7 to 10 years, was compared with a spelling intervention and a business as usual (waiting list) control condition. Some struggling writers also performed poorly on measures of reading and oral language. Children's performance on a range of writing measures were assessed at baseline (t1), immediate post-test (t2) and delayed post-test (t3). Children receiving the sentence-combining intervention showed significant improvements in the sentence combining measure at t2 and t3 compared to both the spelling intervention and waiting list controls. Exploratory regression analyses found that children in the sentence-combining intervention, with a low t1 sentence combining score, low reading skills or better t1 spelling skills, were more likely to show improvements at t2. Findings indicate that when devising interventions for struggling writers, specific profiles of skills should be considered. Specifically, sentence combining may be more appropriate for SWs whose primary area of difficulty is reading, rather than poor spelling or oral language.

The Link Between Language and Spelling: What Speech-Language Pathologists and Teachers Need to Know

Purpose Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working within the pediatric field will find themselves working with school-age children and consequently collaborating with teaching staff. Knowledge of the links between language, speech, and literacy can support and inform successful collaboration between the SLP and the teacher and their shared goal of facilitating the school-age child in accessing the curriculum. To facilitate and develop the collaborative working practices of SLPs working with school-age children and teaching staff, it is helpful, to both parties, to develop and extend their explicit understanding of the link between language, speech, and spelling. Method In this tutorial, I describe how verbal and written speech and language skills are inextricably linked and key to spelling development and progress. I will (a) discuss the complexities of spelling in the English language; (b) describe the links between language, speech, and spelling; and (c) propose a linguistically informed approach to spelling intervention. Conclusion SLPs have expertise in the key speech and language domains such as phonology, morphology, and semantics and are therefore well placed to play an important role in supporting learners in making links between these domains in relation to spelling development and intervention.

Spelling: Why Explicit Instruction Is a Critical Component of Literacy Intervention for Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Spelling is an often-overlooked aspect of literacy, receiving less instructional time in classrooms than decoding, fluency, or reading comprehension skills. This chapter describes why spelling intervention—particularly explicit and systematic instruction—is necessary for successful overall reading development of students who are at risk for delay, specifically children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH). An overview of current research on spelling development in children who are deaf is presented, as well as what we know about the efficacy of spelling interventions in this and other populations. Based on this research, suggestions are made on how best to teach DHH children how to tackle the seemingly chaotic English orthographic system.