Cunningham, Anna

Powell, Daisy

Shapiro, Laura R.

Vousden, Janet

In 2012, a Year 1 phonics screening check (including 20 nonwords and 20 regular words) was introduced for all six-year olds in the UK. Talks 1 and 2 present evidence that irregular word reading has declined and nonword reading has improved as a consequence. Second, we look at how different cognitive skills are involved in the two types of reading. The dual-route theory hypothesizes two separate routes for reading nonwords/regular words (phonological recoding route) and irregular words (lexical route). Talks 3 and 4 investigate the predictors of lexical and phonological reading respectively

Coventry University Pure Portal

1	/	9BDA	10th	International	ConferenceAbstract	Site	-	Second	CallResponse	ID Completion	date144358-144352-8862103 8	Jul	2015,	15:46	(BST)Title: DrFirst	Name: AnnaLast	Name: CunninghamAffiliation: Coventry	UniversityE-mail	address: anna.cunningham@coventry.ac.uk2	/	9A	symposiumproposer	should	fill	inthe	details	of	allpapers	within	thesymposium.	She/he	isalso	responsible	forcontacting	thesymposiumpresenters	aboutacceptance/rejectionof	the	symposium.Your	contribution	isa:Symposium:	4	Spoken	Research	Papers	on	aSpecific	TopicTitle	of	the	proposedSymposium	(max	100characters)Nonword	and	irregular	word	reading	in	youngchildrenContent	andrelevance	of	theSymposium	(max	600characters)In	2012,	a	Year	1	phonics	screening	check(including	20	nonwords	and	20	regular	words)was	introduced	for	all	six-year	olds	in	the	UK.Talks	1	and	2	present	evidence	that	irregularword	reading	has	declined	and	nonword	readinghas	improved	as	a	consequence.	Second,	we	lookat	how	different	cognitive	skills	are	involved	in	thetwo	types	of	reading.	The	dual-route	theoryhypothesizes	two	separate	routes	for	readingnonwords/regular	words	(phonological	recodingroute)	and	irregular	words	(lexical	route).	Talks	3and	4	investigate	the	predictors	of	lexical	andphonological	reading	respectively.3	/	9Author	1,	Affiliation1,	Email	1,	(Co-author(s)	andaffiliation(s))Daisy	A.	Powell,	University	of	Reading,D.A.Powell@reading.ac.uk,	Lynette	Atkinson,University	of	Reading,	Rhona	Stainthorp,University	of	Reading.Title	of	Paper	1	(max100	characters)The	roles	of	print	exposure,	vocabulary	anddecoding	in	early	irregular	word	and	nonwordreadingPurpose	of	study	1.What	is	your	studyabout	and	why	is	itimportant/relevant,given	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)Over	the	last	decade	there	has	been	policy	shiftto	a	greater	emphasis	on	phonics	in	early	literacyinstruction,	with	the	advent	of	the	national“phonics	screening	check”	(PSC)	in	2012.Phonological	skills	reliably	predict	alphabeticdecoding,	but	less	is	known	about	the	impact	ofthis	policy	shift	on	children’s	developingorthographic	knowledge,	or	sight	vocabulary.	Weexamined	the	role	of	home	literacy,	printexposure,	vocabulary	and	decoding	skills	on	wordlevel	reading,	contrasting	those	learning	to	readbefore	(Year	4	at	test)	and	after	(Year	1	and	2)the	recent	policy	change.Method	of	study	1.How	did	you	set	upyour	study:Participants,	Design,Procedures,Instruments,Statistical	Analysis?(max	600	characters)Participants	were	90	children	attending	Year	1,	2and	4	of	a	state	maintained	primary	school	inBerkshire.	Children	in	Years	1	and	2	hadparticipated	in	the	PSC,	and	experienced	slightlymore	phonics-intensive	reading	instruction.Reading	was	assessed	using	a	standardizedmeasure	of	nonword,	regular	and	irregular	wordreading.	Vocabulary	and	print	exposure	were	alsoassessed,	and	parents	completed	a	home	literacyquestionnaire.4	/	9Results	andConclusion	of	study1.	What	came	out	ofyour	study	and	whatdoes	it	mean	interms	of	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)Standard	scores	were	significantly	lower	onirregular	than	regular	words	for	the	younger,	butnot	the	older	group.	In	the	younger	group,	printexposure	accounted	for	unique	variance	inirregular	word	reading	over	and	above	vocabularyand	alphabetic	decoding	skills,	unlike	in	the	oldergroup	where	vocabulary	and	decoding	was	theonly	unique	predictor.	Findings	suggest	thatrecent	emphasis	on	phonics	may	supportalphabetic	decoding	abilities	but	with	a	slight	costfor	irregular	word	reading,	emphasizing	theimportance	of	print	exposure	for	orthographicdevelopment.Please	review	thispageI'm	happy	with	this	submissionAuthor	2,	Affiliation2,	Email	2,	(Co-author(s)	andaffiliation(s))Laura	R.	Shapiro,	Aston	University,L.R.Shapiro@aston.ac.uk,	Anna	J.	Cunningham,Coventry	Univeristy,	Caroline	Witton,	AstonUniversity,	Joel	B.	Talcott,	Aston	University,	AdrianP.	Burgess,	Aston	UniversityTitle	of	Paper	2	(max100	characters)Examining	profiles	of	reading	difficulties	at	age	6:lexical	versus	phonological	deficits5	/	9Purpose	of	study	2.What	is	your	studyabout	and	why	is	itimportant/relevant,given	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)We	aimed	to	characterise	the	skill-profiles	ofchildren	at	the	end	of	their	second	year	ofsynthetic	phonics	instruction	(UK	Year	1).	Thestudy	coincided	with	the	second	year	of	thephonics	screening	check	(2013),	a	UKgovernment	commissioned	assessment	of	all	Year1	pupils’	reading	progress	which	includes	anonword	reading	test.	We	aimed	to	measure	theproportions	of	children	showing	different	types	ofreading	difficulty	(nonword	vs.	irregular	worddeficits)	and	to	examine	differences	in	the	skill-profiles	of	these	groups.Method	of	study	2.How	did	you	set	upyour	study:Participants,	Design,Procedures,Instruments,Statistical	Analysis?(max	600	characters)We	recruited	pupils	from	16	schools	deliveringsynthetic	phonics	programmes	(717	children).We	assessed	children’s	progress	at	school	entryand	at	the	end	of	Reception	and	Year	1	using	abespoke	set	of	tasks	that	isolated	keycomponents	of	reading	related	skills	plusstandardised	reading	assessments	which	enabledclassification	of	different	types	of	reading	deficit:phonological	(PD	–	a	deficit	in	nonwords	only),lexical	(LD	–	a	deficit	in	irregular	words	only)	andmixed	(MD)	at	the	end	of	Year	1.6	/	9Results	andConclusion	of	study2.	What	came	out	ofyour	study	and	whatdoes	it	mean	interms	of	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)A	PD	profile	was	rare	(2%)	compared	with	LD	orMD	profiles	(9%	each).	The	PD	group	performedsignificantly	better	on	orthographic	choice,exception	and	regular	word	reading	compared	tothe	other	deficit	groups	but	did	not	differ	onnonverbal	reasoning	or	vocabulary.The	incidence	of	PDs	may	have	been	reduced	bysynthetic	phonics	teaching	and	preparation	forthe	phonics	check.	The	children	with	a	LD	or	MDshowed	the	greatest	difficulties	overall.	Furtherwork	is	needed	to	examine	how	readingprograms	can	encourage	children	with	LD	or	MDprofiles	to	develop	a	more	effective	lexicalstrategy.Please	review	thispageI'm	happy	with	this	submissionAuthor	3,	Affiliation3,	Email	3,	(Co-author(s)	andaffiliation(s))Janet	Vousden,	Coventry	University,Janet.Vousden@coventry.ac.uk,	Michelle	Ellefson,University	of	CambridgeTitle	of	Paper	3	(max100	characters)The	development	of	irregular	word	reading:	therole	of	word	knowledge7	/	9Purpose	of	study	3.What	is	your	studyabout	and	why	is	itimportant/relevant,given	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)Previous	research	indicates	that	there	are	linksbetween	vocabulary	knowledge	and	reading,especially	for	irregular	words.	So	far,	few	studieshave	explored	the	nature	of	these	links	at	an	itemlevel.	i.e.	does	knowing	a	word	help	you	read	it(e.g.,	Nation	&	Cocksey,	2009)?	This	longitudinalstudy	explores	the	link	between	different	forms	ofvocabulary	knowledge	and	reading	irregularwords.Method	of	study	3.How	did	you	set	upyour	study:Participants,	Design,Procedures,Instruments,Statistical	Analysis?(max	600	characters)One	hundred	and	twenty	beginning	readers	aged5	–	7-years-old	were	assessed	on	two	differentforms	of	item-specific	word	knowledge	of	120irregular	words	(knowledge	of	meaning	andknowledge	of	the	spoken	form	of	a	word),	theirability	to	read	those	words,	and	their	ability	tocorrect	a	phonically	regular	translation	of	theirregular	word	to	its	correct	irregular	form.General	vocabulary	knowledge	and	decoding	weremeasured	with	standardized	tests.Results	andConclusion	of	study3.	What	came	out	ofyour	study	and	whatdoes	it	mean	interms	of	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)Results	at	item-level	and	participant-level	indicatedsignificant	relationships	between	word-knowledgeand	irregular	word	reading	ability,	such	thatknowing	the	spoken	form	of	an	irregular	word	is	auseful	cue	to	reading	it.	Results	also	indicated	thatspoken	form	knowledge	cues	reading	bysupporting	the	ability	to	correct	a	phonicallyregular	approximation	of	an	irregular	word.	Theseresults	suggest	that	encouraging	children	to	usetheir	oral	vocabulary	during	decoding	could	be	afruitful	avenue	for	developing	skills	to	readirregular	words.8	/	9Please	review	thispageI'm	happy	with	this	submissionAuthor	4,	Affiliation4,	Email	4,	(Co-author(s)	andaffiliation(s))Anna	J.	Cunningham,	Coventry	University,Anna.Cunningham@coventry.ac.uk,	CarolineWitton,	Aston	Univeristy,	Joel	B.	Talcott,	AstonUniversity,	Adrian	P.	Burgess,	Aston	University,Laura	R.	Shapiro	(Aston	University)Title	of	Paper	4	(max100	characters)Phoneme	awareness	and	letter-knowledge/decoding	skills:	A	reciprocalrelationship?Purpose	of	study	4.What	is	your	studyabout	and	why	is	itimportant/relevant,given	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)The	influence	of	phoneme	awareness	(PA)	on	thedevelopment	of	letter	knowledge	and	decodingskills	is	well	established,	but	much	less	is	knownabout	the	reciprocal	influence	of	these	skills	onthe	development	of	phoneme	awareness.	It	maybe	that	learning	letters	in	the	first	year	of	schoolstimulates	an	awareness	of	phonemes	by	makingthe	sounds	in	words	explicit	(the	phonologicalhypothesis).	Alternatively,	it	could	be	that	learningto	read	in	general	allows	children	to	useorthographic	information	solve	to	phonemeawareness	tasks	(the	orthographic	hypothesis).Method	of	study	4.How	did	you	set	upyour	study:Participants,	Design,Procedures,Instruments,Statistical	Analysis?(max	600	characters)We	tested	707	children	at	three	time	pointsacross	the	first	two	years	of	school	(Reception	–Year	1).	Tests	of	phoneme	awareness	(nonwordphoneme	isolation	and	deletion),	letter-soundknowledge,	and	decoding	(regular	and	nonwordreading)	were	administered.	Structural	equationmodels	were	built	to	show	longitudinalrelationships.9	/	9Results	andConclusion	of	study4.	What	came	out	ofyour	study	and	whatdoes	it	mean	interms	of	the	topic	ofthe	symposium?(max	600	characters)Phoneme	awareness	predicted	letter	knowledge,and	letter	knowledge	predicted	phonemeawareness	from	the	beginning	to	the	end	ofReception.	In	contrast,	while	phoneme	awarenesspredicted	decoding,	decoding	did	not	predictphoneme	awareness	in	Year	1.	Results	currentlysupport	the	phonological	hypothesis.	In	addition,a	strong	association	between	those	scoring	0	forphoneme	deletion	and	later	reading	impairmentsuggests	that	children	would	benefit	from	havingbasic	phoneme	awareness	in	place	before	theybegin	phonics-based	reading	programs.Please	review	thispageI'm	happy	with	this	submission

Symposium: Nonword and irregular word reading in young children

https://pure.coventry.ac.uk/ws/files/22637380/BDA_symposium_finalsubmission.pdf

Symposium: Nonword and irregular word reading in young children

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Coventry University Pure Portal