11 research outputs found

    Gender Differences in Early Reading Strategies: a Comparison of Synthetic Phonics Only with a Mixed Approach to Teaching Reading to 4-5 Year-Old Children

    Get PDF
    A survey of primary schools in England found that girls outperform boys in English across all phases (Ofsted in Moving English forward. Ofsted, Manchester, 2012). The gender gap remains an on-going issue in England, especially for reading attainment. This paper presents evidence of gender differences in learning to read that emerged during the development of a reading scheme for 4- and 5-year-old children in which 372 children from Reception classes in sixteen schools participated in 12-month trials. There were three arms per trial: Intervention non-PD (non-phonically decodable text with mixed methods teaching); Intervention PD (phonically decodable text with mixed methods teaching); and a ‘business as usual’ control condition SP (synthetic phonics and decodable text). Assignment to Intervention condition was randomised. Standardised measures of word reading and comprehension were used. The research provides statistically significant evidence suggesting that boys learn more easily using a mix of whole-word and synthetic phonics approaches. In addition, the evidence indicates that boys learn to read more easily using the natural-style language of ‘real’ books including vocabulary which goes beyond their assumed decoding ability. At post-test, boys using the nonphonically decodable text with mixed methods (Intervention A) were 8 months ahead in reading comprehension compared to boys using a wholly synthetic phonics approach

    Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders reflect underlying language impairments.

    No full text
    Three experiments assessed memory skills in good and poor comprehenders, matched for decoding skill. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated phonological and semantic contributions to short-term memory by comparing serial recall for words varying in length, lexicality, and concreteness. Poor comprehenders showed normal sensitivity to phonological manipulations (length and lexicality) but, consistent with their semantic weaknesses, their recall of abstract words was poor. Experiment 3 investigated verbal and spatial working memory. While poor comprehenders achieved normal spatial spans, their verbal spans were impaired. These results are discussed within a theoretical framework in which the memory difficulties associated with poor reading comprehension are specific to the verbal domain and are a concomitant of language impairment, rather than a cause of reading comprehension failure
    corecore