Improving word reading speed: individual differences interact with a training focus on successes or failures

Abstract

The effect of two training procedures on the development of reading speed in poor readers is examined. One training concentrates on the words the children read correctly (successes), the other on the words they read incorrectly (failures). Children were either informed or not informed about the training focus. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 79 poor readers. They repeatedly read regularly spelled Dutch consonant–vowel–consonant words, some children their successes, others their failures. The training used a computerized flashcards format. The exposure duration of the words was varied to maintain an accuracy rate at a constant level. Reading speed improved and transferred to untrained, orthographically more complex words. These transfer effects were characterized by an Aptitude-Treatment Interaction. Poor readers with a low initial reading level improved most in the training focused on successes. For poor readers with a high initial reading level, however, it appeared to be more profitable to practice with their failures. Informing students about the focus of the training positively affected training: The exposure duration needed for children informed about the focus of the training decreased more than for children who were not informed. This study suggests that neither of the two interventions is superior to the other in general. Rather, the improvement of general reading speed in a transparent orthography is closely related to both the children’s initial reading level and the type of words they practice with: common and familiar words when training their successes and uncommon and less familiar words with training their failures.

Early reading intervention by means of a multicomponent reading game

“…Different exercises had to be completed to go to the next level. Letter Prince contains four types of evidence‐based exercise for enhancing literacy in beginning or struggling readers, largely based on Steenbeek‐Planting et al ( and ). The first type of exercise focused on letter knowledge, that is, grapheme‐to‐phoneme conversion.…”

“…This exercise was included given previous research, suggesting that semantic categorization training promotes reading fluency development (Berends & Reitsma, ). The third type of exercise was a sentence verification task (Heath et al, ; Steenbeek‐Planting et al, ). A short sentence was presented, for example, ‘Clouds jump with their feet’, followed by a short question, for example, ‘Is this possible?’ The child was asked to determine whether the sentence was semantically plausible.…”

“…However, the interval was shortened after each sequence of four correct answers and was extended after each mistake. This type of exercise was based on Steenbeek‐Planting et al (), who found that flashcard training successfully enhances reading speed without decreasing reading accuracy.…”

“…This is achieved by allowing the children to acquire reading skills in a step‐by‐step fashion, starting out with practicing the most frequent letters of the alphabet (e.g., s and v ) and proceeding to less frequent letters and letter combinations (e.g., j and au ; Noordenbos et al, ). In subsequent levels, the children practice reading short words (e.g., man ‘man’ and bak ‘bin’) and gradually move towards more complex words (e.g., bomen ‘trees’ and herenfiets ‘men's bike’; Steenbeek‐Planting et al, , ). In addition to the rewards and content, Letter Prince also provides a challenging experience by adapting its presentation time to the children's individual levels.…”

“…Vocabulary knowledge is another key determinant of early reading development (Gathercole, Service, Hitch, Adams, & Martin, ; Gathercole, Willis, Emslie, & Baddeley, ). One technique that may be used to enhance word learning is flashcard training, which facilitates reading speed without compromising reading accuracy (Steenbeek‐Planting et al, ) and leads to deeper, more sustained learning (Barcroft, ). Word learning may also be facilitated by access to word meaning (Rueckl & Olds, ) and by providing insight into the semantic relations between various newly acquired words (e.g., Rodd et al, ).…”