Teaching Reading and Spelling: Exclusion and Stimulus Equivalence

Abstract

In Experiment 1, 7 nonreading children were exposed to a program designed to teach reading of 51 training words. The program featured an exclusion‐based procedure in which the children (a) matched printed to dictated words and (b) constructed (copied) printed words with movable letters and named them. All children learned to read the training words. Five children also read generalization words and showed progress in spelling. Experiment 2 applied the program to 4 different children, omitting the word‐construction task. They also learned to read the training words, but only 1 participant read generalization words. The data support a stimulus equivalence account of reading acquisition and suggest that reading generalization may be obtained, especially when the teaching program includes word construction.

Recombinative Generalization: An Exploratory Study in Musical Reading

“…The recombined units in this study were onsets (initial consonant sounds in a syllable) and rimes (the vowel and subsequent consonants in the syllable). Similar results have been obtained with Portuguese-speaking children, in studies that extended generalization to words that recombined syllables of the training words (e.g., de Rose, de Souza, & Hanna, 1996;Hübner, Gomes, & McIlvane, 2009;Matos, Avanzi, & McIlvane, 2006).…”

Emergence of Reading and Writing in Illiterate Adults After Matching-to-Sample Tasks

“…An example of a teaching curriculum based on Behavior Analysis, which has been used with different populations and has shown good results is the Learning to read and write in small steps curriculum, developed by Rosa-Filho, de Rose, de Souza, Hanna and Fonseca (1998) for individual application, in both a printed version (de Rose, de Souza, & Hanna, 1996;de Souza & de Rose, 2006), and a computerized version Rosa Filho et al, 1998). The initial module of this curriculum focuses on teaching simple words, with consonant-vowel sequences, and was experimentally applied with children with learning disabilities (de Rose et al, 1996Reis, de Souza, & de Rose, 2009), deaf children using hearing aids (França, Bandini, & Bandini, 2011), preschool children (Melchiori, de Souza, & de Rose, 2000), individuals with intellectual disabilities (Alves, Kato, Assis, & Maranhão, 2007;Melchiori et al, 2000) and illiterate adults (Medeiros, Monteiro, & Silva, 1997;Melchiori et al, 2000).…”

“…The initial module of this curriculum focuses on teaching simple words, with consonant-vowel sequences, and was experimentally applied with children with learning disabilities (de Rose et al, 1996Reis, de Souza, & de Rose, 2009), deaf children using hearing aids (França, Bandini, & Bandini, 2011), preschool children (Melchiori, de Souza, & de Rose, 2000), individuals with intellectual disabilities (Alves, Kato, Assis, & Maranhão, 2007;Melchiori et al, 2000) and illiterate adults (Medeiros, Monteiro, & Silva, 1997;Melchiori et al, 2000). The second module of the curriculum aims at teaching complex words, with sequences that encompass consonant clusters (irregular syllables) and was also applied to children with learning difficulties (de Souza, de Rose, Fonseca, & Hanna, 1999) and illiterate adults (Medeiros et al, 1997).…”

“…Divided into two studies, this paper aimed to evaluate, in Study 1, the effects of Module 1 (simple and regular words), and, in Study 2, the effects of Module 2 (complex and irregular words) of the Learning to read and write in small steps curriculum (de Rose et al, 1996) in its computerized version (Rosa Filho et al, 1998) on reading and writing behaviors in two groups of illiterate adults. This article differs from the studies of Medeiros et al (1997) and Melchiori et al (2000) in some important aspects.…”

The Analysis of Verbal Behavior: Where Are We?

“…For example, there has been a sizable amount of research on behavior that could be labeled as mands, but the authors of this research have often spoken of the research in terms of teaching requests (Brady, Saunders, & Spradlin, 1994-1995Shafer, 1994Shafer, -1995. Similarly, there has been considerable research on textual behavior, but this research has most often been labeled as research on reading (de Rose, de Souza, & Hanna, 1996;de Rose, de Souza, Rossito, & de Rose, 1992;Joyce & Wolking, 1989;Mackay, 1985;Sidman, 1971;Sidman & Cresson, 1973;Wultz & Hollis, 1979). There has also been research on autoclitics and the combination of fragments of verbal behavior and minimal units; however, this research has often been discussed in such terms as morphology (Baer & Guess, 1973;Guess, Sailor, Rutherford, & Baer, 1968).…”