Reading Difficulties
Conditions
Brief summary
The goal of the proposed study is to directly and rigorously address current scientific controversy about phonological awareness intervention content and timing for prekindergarten and kindergarten children. Using an experimental design, we will compare the relative impact of phonological sensitivity + phonemic awareness intervention versus phonemic awareness intervention on children's phonemic awareness and later reading and spelling abilities. We expect that both types of intervention will lead to impacts beyond business-as-usual instruction but do not have directional hypotheses as to which type of intervention will be most effective. Also, we will determine the relative efficacy of intervening in prekindergarten versus kindergarten, examine child characteristics that might moderate effects, and explore whether a transition point can be identified as to when phonemic awareness intervention may be most effective. Ultimately, our findings will help optimize early phonological awareness instruction.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALphonemic awareness intervention (PA)
All 12 weeks of lessons will exclusively focus on instruction at the phoneme level (i.e., the individual sounds in words), with activities addressing the blending of sounds to form short words. Other activities may include counting the number of sounds heard in a word, matching letter tiles to the sounds heard in the word, and separating short words into their component sounds.
BEHAVIORALphonological sensitivity + phonemic awareness intervention (PSPA)
The first six weeks of intervention will include a focus on being able to manipulate (separate and blend) parts of words larger than the individual sounds. This will include manipulating compound word components, syllables, and initial sounds and rhyming components of words. Activities may include matching pictures of words, assembling/disassembling puzzle pieces that represent words, and sorting pictures (words) by their first or ending sounds. The second six weeks of intervention will focus on phonemic awareness, as described for the PA intervention condition, and be the same as what the children in the DPA intervention condition experience.
BEHAVIORALdelayed onset phonemic awareness intervention (DPA)
The six weeks of intervention will focus on phonemic awareness, as described for the PA intervention condition, and be the same as the second six weeks of lessons that the children in the PSPA intervention condition experience.
Sponsors
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Florida State University
Ohio State University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Dr. Schatschneider, who will have no role in recruitment/enrollment, no communication with participants/parents/teachers, and will be blind to children's pretest/screening assessment results, will randomly assign participating children within each center/school to study conditions. All child measures will be administered individually at the children's school by trained research assistants who are blind to the child's experimental condition to the extent possible.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
4 Years to 9 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Parent consent * Child assent * Enrollment in prekindergarten or kindergarten * At least 4 years old * Score below the 50th percentile on the Phonological Awareness Component Score of the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing 2 (CTOPP 2).
Exclusion criteria
* Severe sensory impairment that interferes with the capacity to hear instructions or see visual stimuli as reported by parents on the initial Child/Family Survey. * Inability to speak or understand English at a basic level, as indicated by a criterion score \< 6 on the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool-3 Screening Test (CELF:PS). * Severe behavior issues as indicated by (a) a score 3 on the aggressive behavior item of the externalizing subscale of the Student Risk Screening Scale-Early Childhood (SRSS-EC) or (b) a total score ≥ 16 on the externalizing subscale of the SRSS-EC.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Test of Preschool Early Literacy: PA subtest | screening/pretest (within first 3 months of school year prior to intervention), midtest (within 2 months following the first 6 weeks of intervention and before starting the second 6 weeks of intervention), posttest (within 3 months of intervention end) | The TOPEL phonological awareness subtest includes 27 items with a focus on blending and deleting various sound components within words (e.g., compound word components, syllables, individual sounds). Some items do, and others do not include pictorial supports where children can respond by pointing to their answer. |
| Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing 2: Elision, Blending Words, and Sound Matching subtests | screening/pretest (within first 3 mos, prior to intervention), midtest (within 2 mos after first 6 weeks of intervention, posttest (within 3 mos of intervention end), followup 1 (~15-18 mos after enrollment), followup 2 (PK only, ~27-30 mos after enroll) | The CTOPP2 includes three core subtests that we will administer. Elision is a 34- item subtest to assess how participants can say a word then say what is left after leaving out designated sounds. Blending Words is a 33-item subtest to see how a participant would combine sounds by listening to a series of audio recorded separate sounds then putting together the sounds to make a full word. Sound matching is a 26-item subtest to see how a participant can match sounds. The examiner says a target word then says three other words while pointing to drawings showing the words. For the first 13 items, participants have to point to pictures that match the first sound in the target word and for the following 13 items they match the end sound. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement IV: Letter Word ID, Word Attack, and Spelling subtests | posttest (within 3 months of intervention end), followup 1 (~15-18 mos after enrollment), followup 2 (PK only, ~27-30 mos after enroll) | We will administer three subtests of the widely used standardized measure the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement IV (WJ Letter Word ID, WJ Word Attack, and WJ Spelling). Letter Word ID requires children to correctly label individual letters and then individual words of increasing difficulty (maximum 75, with stopping rules after successive errors). Word Attack requires children to correctly pronounce nonwords of increasing length and difficulty (maximum 32, with stopping rules after successive errors). Spelling requires children to write the conventional spelling of words dictated to them by a recording (maximum 30, with stopping rules after successive errors). |
| Test of Word Reading Efficiency 2 | posttest (within 3 months of intervention end), followup 1 (~15-18 mos after enrollment), followup 2 (PK only, ~27-30 mos after enroll) | The Test of Word Reading Efficiency 2 is a standardized and widely used measure of reading fluency. In both subtests children are given 45 seconds in which to read as many of a list of presented words as possible. In list one, the words are real words. In list two the words are pronounceable nonsense words. Both lists become increasingly difficult. |
| Word Spelling assessment | posttest (within 3 months of intervention end), followup 1 (~15-18 mos after enrollment), followup 2 (PK only, ~27-30 mos after enroll) | The Word Spelling assessment includes two parts: asking children to spell 5 dictated real words and 5 dictated nonsense words, with each part scored separately. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
Primary ContactShayne B Piasta, PhD
Backup ContactCaitlin Florek
Outcome results
None listed