An evaluation of systematized phonics on reading proficiency in Swedish second grade poor readers: Effects on pseudoword and sight word reading skills

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of systematized phonics on word reading in Swedish second grade poor readers. Forty-nine children who performed at or below the 25th percentile on pseudoword reading and/or sight word reading at the beginning of second grade participated in the study. The study had a cross-over design exploring within-and between-group effects of two different conditions: systematized phonics and classroom instruction. Overall, systematized phonics proved more effective than classroom instruction. At pre-intervention, no child performed above the 30th percentile in pseudoword reading or sight word reading. At post-intervention, corresponding numbers were 69% for pseudoword reading and 35% for sight word reading. Implications for a policy change in Sweden towards mandatory systematized phonics in primary school are discussed.

Early Elementary School Interventions in Reading and Mathematics

“…The outcomes from reading study underscore that phonics is an effective method of reading instruction in the Swedish orthography, as indicated from previous research (Levlin & Nakeva von Mentzer, 2020;Wolff, 2011). Intense word reading practice based on explicitly training PA accompanied with letters, analyzing and segmenting sounds had a substantial effect on reading comprehension in this intervention.…”

“…In Sweden, a few quasi-randomized and randomized controlled studies conducted in schools were built on explicitly teaching phonics to students with reading difficulties. In a second grade, one-on-one intervention (Levlin & Nakeva von Mentzer, 2020) and in a third grade program (Wolff, 2011), the interventions yielded strong to small effects favoring the intervention groups compared to controls. The Levlin and Nakeva von Meltzer study showed, compared to Wolff, strong effects on decoding, which they attributed to the focused intervention on decoding skills.…”

Effects of a phonics intervention in a randomized controlled study in Swedish second‐grade students at risk of reading difficulties

“…Such information could be informative considering the intervention group's substantial improvement in word recognition, since it reflects the quality of and access to orthographic representations of lexically stored words (Cunningham et al, 2001). Recently, in a Swedish quasi‐experimental second‐grade study Levlin and Nakeva von Mentzer (2020) suggested systematic phonics should be made a mandatory practice in early elementary school. We consider it well justified to recommend explicit phonics as a supplemental special education intervention to accelerate word decoding and word recognition in young Swedish students.…”

“…Code-based instruction has traditionally been taught in Scandinavian/Nordic elementary classrooms, but teaching phonics has rarely been evaluated for effectiveness in Swedish educational research (Levlin & Nakeva von Mentzer, 2020;Pontoppidan et al, 2018;Taube et al, 2015). To date, only three RCTs of reading interventions representing semi-transparent Swedish, Norwegian, and transparent Finnish orthography have been reported (Saine et al, 2011;Solheim et al, 2018;Wolff, 2011Wolff, , 2016.…”

“…The present program corresponds to a Tier 3 intervention in intensity and tutoring. The intervention program includes the combination of phonics and extensive decoding practice aligned with the overall targets of similar explicit phonics programs (Levlin & Nakeva von Mentzer, 2020; McArthur, Castles, et al, 2015; McArthur, Kohnen, et al, 2015). Instructions are manualized to ensure teachers deliver instructions that are highly explicit and provide content in a systematic manner (Gersten et al, 2008).…”