Can phonological awareness predict concurrent reading outcomes in a deep orthography?

Phonological awareness can predict reading skills in typical readers (Bradly & Bryant, 1983; Stahl & Murray, 1994) and can distinguish between typical reading and reading deficit in alphabetic languages (Snowling, 1981; Stanovich & Siegel, 1994; Bryant et al., 1990). Yet the nature of phonological awareness and the causal link between phonological awareness and reading skill are subject to debate (Harm & Seidenberg, 1999; Castles & Coltheart, 2004; Blomert & Willems, 2010). Phonological awareness is often defined as sensitivity to the phonological structure of language and the ability to segment, isolate and manipulate the sounds of a specific language. We report the results of a study whose aim was to determine the sensitivity of phonological awareness tests in distinguishing between typical readers and deficit readers in Urdu. Urdu has a deep orthography, which however, presents readers with challenges different from the type offered by a language, such as English (Farukh & Vulchanova, 2014). The tasks included in the battery were typical phonological awareness tasks, such as phoneme manipulation, rhyme oddity, rhyming, and syllabification. Our results show that none of the phonological awareness tasks successfully predict concurrent poor reading skills. Most notably, one task, syllabification, predicts reading accuracy in the Control group only, but not in the Reading Deficit group. We discuss these results in light of the grain-size hypothesis and the orthographic depth hypothesis of reading, and from the point of view of stages in literacy acquisition.

Reading as Statistical Learning

Purpose The purpose of this tutorial is to explain how learning to read can be thought of as learning statistical regularities and to demonstrate why this is relevant for theory, modeling, and practice. This tutorial also shows how triangulation of methods and cross-linguistic research can be used to gain insight. Method The impossibility of conveying explicitly all of the regularities that children need to acquire in a deep orthography, such as English, can be demonstrated by examining lesser-known probabilistic orthographic cues to lexical stress. Detection of these kinds of cues likely occurs via a type of implicit learning known as statistical learning (SL). The first part of the tutorial focuses on these points. Next, studies exploring how individual differences in the capacity for SL relate to variability in word reading accuracy in the general population are discussed. A brief overview of research linking impaired SL and dyslexia is also provided. The final part of the tutorial focuses on how we might supplement explicit literacy instruction with implicit learning methods and emphasizes the value of testing the efficacy of new techniques in the classroom. The basic and applied research reviewed here includes corpus analyses, behavioral testing, computational modeling, and classroom-based research. Although some of these methods are not commonly used in clinical research, the depth and breadth of this body of work provide a compelling case for why reading can be thought of as SL and how this view can inform practice. Conclusion Implicit methods that draw on the principles of SL can supplement the much-needed explicit instruction that helps children learn to read. This synergy of methods has the potential to spark innovative practices in literacy instruction and remediation provided by educators and clinicians to support typical learners and those with developmental disabilities.

How young children make sense of two different writing systems: Korean written in the Hangul alphabet, and English written in the Roman alphabet

Although many young children become literate within an environment in which different writing systems exist, there is little research on what children know about different writing systems and how they understand and develop them when they are learning more than one simultaneously. This qualitative study discusses how Korean EFL (English as a Foreign Language) children understand two different writing systems, the Korean alphabet, Hangul, and the Roman alphabet, used for English, within a peer teaching setting. The findings show that they were able not only to discover key orthographic principles which characterise each writing system but also to find similarities and differences between Hangul and English from different points of view: shapes of letters (block shaped vs linear), language units (syllables vs letters) and sound–letter relationship (shallow orthography vs deep orthography). The paper suggests that young children are able to look for key concepts in different writing systems by constructing their own ideas about the principles of reading and writing from an early age as active language learners.

German and English Bodies: No Evidence for Cross-Linguistic Differences in Preferred Orthographic Grain Size

Previous studies have found that words and nonwords with many body neighbours (i.e., words with the same orthographic body, e.g., cat, brat, at) are read faster than items with fewer body neighbours. This body-N effect has been explored in the context of cross-linguistic differences in reading where it has been reported that the size of the effect differs as a function of orthographic depth: readers of English, a deep orthography, show stronger facilitation than readers of German, a shallow orthography. Such findings support the psycholinguistic grain size theory, which proposes that readers of English rely on large orthographic units to reduce ambiguity of print-to-speech correspondences in their orthography. Here we re-examine the evidence for this pattern and find that there is no reliable evidence for such a cross-linguistic difference. Re-analysis of a key study (Ziegler et al., 2001), analysis of data from the English Lexicon Project (Balota et al., 2007), and a large-scale analysis of nine new experiments all support this conclusion. Using Bayesian analysis techniques, we find little evidence of the body-N effect in most tasks and conditions. Where we do find evidence for a body-N effect (lexical decision for nonwords), we find evidence against an interaction with language.

Literacy predictors and early reading and spelling skills as a factor of orthography

The majority view of reading development maintains the importance of specific cognitive and linguistic abilities, e.g. phonological awareness (PA) and vocabulary and verbal working memory (VWM). Another factor in attaining literacy may be the language of exposure, e.g. whether it has a transparent or a deep orthography. This study examines the interaction between known predictors for literacy development and the orthography. It focuses on early levels of literacy (decoding and spelling) amongst children with typical language development. English-speaking (deep orthography) and Croatian-speaking (transparent orthography) kindergarteners were assessed on measures of vocabulary, PA, functions of verbal working memory, and early literacy skills at the beginning of the kindergarten year. The results indicate that a transparent orthography (Croatian) increases early decoding and encoding skills and they show expected correlations between PA, vocabulary, and early literacy abilities. English speakers did not show these correlations at the onset of the kindergarten year. We postulate that the nature of the deep orthography requires some instructional time for English-speaking children before PA and vocabulary will show predictive validity for reading acquisition.