Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies.

Abstract

In a quantitative meta-analysis, the effects of phonological awareness training on reading were shown. In a homogeneous set of U.S. studies with a randomized or matched design, the combined effect sizes for phonological awareness and reading were d = 0.73 (r = .34, N = 739) and d = 0.70 (r = .33, N = 745), respectively. Thus, experimentally manipulated phonological awareness explains about 12% of the variance in word-identification skills. The combined effect size for long-term studies of the influence of phonological awareness training on reading was much smaller, d = 0.16 (r = .08, N = 1,180). Programs combining a phonological and a letter training were more effective than a purely phonological training. Furthermore, training effects were stronger with posttests assessing simple decoding skills than with real-word-identification tests. In sum, phonological awareness is an important but not a sufficient condition for early reading.

Examining the independent contribution of prosodic sensitivity to word reading and spelling in early readers

“…As expected from the Wood et al (2009) model and a wealth of past studies the variables suggested to mediate between prosody and literacy, namely phonological awareness comprising both phoneme and rhyme (Anthony & Lonigan, 2004;Bus & van Ijzendoorn, 1999;Cain, 2010;Snowling, 2000) and morphological awareness (e.g., Deacon et al, 2009;Kirby et al, 2008;Nunes & Bryant, 2009) were able to make independent contributions to reading and spelling when all other variables were controlled for. Vocabulary made a contribution when entered to the model alone but not when the other variables were entered supporting the assertion that its primary effect is on phonological awareness (Walley, 1993) which then in turn influences literacy as mentioned above.…”

“…Regarding vocabulary, it was argued that sensitivity to syllabic stress (which is louder, articulated more forcefully, higher in pitch, and longer in duration) might facilitate spoken word segmentation and recognition given that 85% of lexical words in English begin with a strong syllable (Cutler & Carter, 1987). Growth in vocabulary supports the development of phonological awareness (Walley, 1993), a skill that has been extensively linked to early reading and spelling attainment (e.g., Bus & van Ijzendoorn, 1999;Cain, 2010;Snowling, 2000) and thus would ultimately support written word recognition.…”

The impact of invented spelling on phonemic awareness

“…This argument also extends to the impact that phonological programs have on the prevention of learning difficulties. Bus, Marinus, and Ijzendoorn (1999) analysed the impact that 36 experimental phonological training studies had on learning to read and concluded that this type of intervention program significantly affects both the promotion of phonological awareness and e albeit to a lesser extent e reading skills. At the same time, when he looked at the methodological characteristics of this type of study, Troia (1999) confirmed the positive effect that phonological training has on phonemic synthesis and analysis.…”

Conocimiento de vocabulario, representaciones fonológicas y sensibilidad fonológica en niños pequeños de distinto sector social de procedencia

“…Estudios de entrenamiento en conciencia fonológica con pequeños grupos de niños han mostrado que es posible mejorar los niveles de sensibilidad fonológica de los niños a través de la intervención sistemática (Borzone, 1997;Bradley & Bryant, 1883;Bus & van Ijzendoorn, 1999;Defi or & Tudela, 1994;Ehri et al, 2001;Hecht & Close, 2002;Signorini & Borzone, 1996). Asimismo, existe evidencia creciente de que las intervenciones con grupos de clase completos pueden dar lugar a incrementos considerables (Borzone, 1997;Ehri et al, 2001).…”