Ronald Goldman, Ph.D.Martha E. Lynch, M.S.

AGS© American Guidance Service, Inc.4201 Woodland Road

Circle Pines, MN 55014-17961-800-328-2560

www.agsnet.com

Sounds&SymbolsEarly Reading Program

Technical References

© 2002 AGS® American Guidance Service, Inc.All rights reserved, including translation. No part of this publication may be reproduced

or transmitted in any form or by any means without written permission from the publisher.

Printed in the United States of America

A 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

ISBN 0-7854-3136-5 Product Number 10086

ContentsChapter 1 • Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Chapter 2 • About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Chapter 3 • Philosophy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Chapter 4 • Program Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Chapter 5 • Development and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Chapter 6 • Completed Research and Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Chapter 7 • Success Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

This technical manual provides informationabout the scientifically based research forthe development and on the effectiveness of

the Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Program.

This first chapter introduces the technical manualas well as highlights the features of the Sounds &Symbols Early Reading Program. The secondchapter gives pertinent background informationabout the program’s authors, Ronald Goldman and Martha E. Lynch. Chapter 3 presents thephilosophy upon which the Sounds & Symbolsprogram is based. Chapter 4 contains a briefdescription of the program manual and a list ofcomponents. The fifth chapter presents a historicalperspective, detailing the initial development andresearch involving the program. Chapter 6 containsan annotated bibliography of some of the Sounds &Symbols research and reviews. And finally, long-time and current believers in the program havetheir say in Chapter 7, which is comprised of testi-monials and “success stories” concerning theSounds & Symbols Early Reading Program.

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Programprovides an entertaining introduction to reading aswell as an engaging vehicle for speech improvement.

The program emphasizes phonics training andphonemic awareness as students learn the soundsand symbols of a slightly modified alphabet.Children are taught to:

discriminate speech sounds

determine sound positions (initial, medial,final)

segment or sound out syllables and words

delete and substitute sounds in syllables andwords

blend sounds and symbols into words andsentences

See the Sound Sheet on the inside back cover for a complete list of the sounds and symbols intro-duced in this program.

4 Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 1 Introduction

The Sounds & Symbols program wascreated for speech-language pathologistsand classroom teachers working inde-pendently or collaboratively on earlyreading development, remedial reading,or articulation therapy.

The Sounds & Symbols programemphasizes phonics training andphonemic awareness as students learnthe sounds and symbols of a slightlymodified alphabet.

Sounds & Symbols is mainly for children frompreschool through third grade. It also can be usedwith older children who have various kinds ofreading, speech, or phonemic difficulties. Theactivities are written for use with groups of chil-dren, but you can easily adapt them for workingone-on-one.

The program was created for speech-languagepathologists and classroom teachers working inde-pendently or collaboratively on early reading devel-opment, remedial reading, or articulation therapy.

The program can also be used by paraprofessionalsconsulting with a specialist in the area of readingor speech as necessary.

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Program wasoriginally published as the Goldman-Lynch Sounds& Symbols Development Kit, 1971, and High Hat,1986 (Circle Pines, Minnesota: American GuidanceService, Inc.). Because the former editions wereproven to be highly effective, the goal of thiscurrent revision was to maintain the structure andphilosophy of the program and to change andupdate only where necessary. Numerous speech-language pathologists and teachers who are greatfans and users of the program provided invaluablefeedback during this process

It is anticipated that this latest edition of Sounds &Symbols will continue to be an effective and funphonemic awareness program that provides anexcellent introduction to the written word. It willgive students the skills necessary to become profi-cient readers.

Chapter 1 Introduction 5

Because the former editions of theSounds & Symbols program were proven to be highly effective, the goal of this current revision was to maintainthe structure and philosophy of theprogram and to change and update only where necessary.

Ronald Goldman, Ph.D., has been highlyvisible in the profession of speech-languagepathology and audiology for over 40 years.

As a university professor, he was active as ateacher, clinician, researcher, and administrator.Dr. Goldman earned his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in speech and hearing from the University ofPittsburgh. He later served as a professor atTulane University, Vanderbilt University, and theUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham. He was thedirector of speech-language pathology as well asthe training director of a large interdisciplinarytraining program at the Sparks Center forDevelopmental and Learning Disorders.

As a scholar, Dr. Goldman has published numerousresearch articles dealing with auditory processing,articulation, and fluency disorders. He was one of thefirst to foresee the need for and then develop assess-ment procedures and remedial programs that couldbe employed with very young children. His standard-ized diagnostic tests and training programs are usedwidely by speech-language pathologists and specialeducators. In addition to the Sounds & Symbols EarlyReading Program (formerly published as Goldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols Development Kit and HighHat), the tests and programs developed by Dr.Goldman include the Goldman-Fristoe Test ofArticulation, Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock Test ofAuditory Discrimination, Goldman-Fristoe-WoodcockAuditory Skills Test Battery, and Listening to theWorld. The Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation iscurrently one of the most frequently employed diag-nostic procedures used by speech-language patholo-gists in the United States.

Dr. Goldman has beendirectly involved withnumerous national and state professionalassociations throughouthis career. He served onmany committees andboards for the American Speech-Language-HearingAssociation (ASHA), the Council for ExceptionalChildren (CEC), the American Speech-Language-Hearing Foundation (ASHF), the Louisiana Speechand Hearing Association (LSHA), and the Speechand Hearing Association of Alabama (SHAA). Hewas president of the Tennessee Speech and HearingAssociation, vice president for planning for ASHA,and president of ASHF. He was also active as anassociate editor for such publications as Topics inLanguage, Exceptional Children, Journal ofChildhood Communication Disorders, and Journal ofLanguage Disorders and Rehabilitation. For manyyears he served on numerous review boards for theNational Institutes of Health, the Department ofEducation, and other federal agencies.

Dr. Goldman has been honored by numerousnational and state associations for his clinical,teaching, and research contributions. SHAApresented him with their DistinguishedAchievement Award for Outstanding Contributionsin the Development of Innovative ClinicalProcedures. ASHA awarded him fellowship statusand later gave him their highest award, the Honorsof the Association, for which the recipient’sachievements must be “of such excellence that theyhave enhanced or altered the course of our profes-sion” (ASHA bylaws).

6 Chapter 2 About the Authors

Chapter 2 About the Authors

Ronald Goldman, Ph. D.

Martha E. Lynch, M.S., has been in theprofession of speech-language pathologyand educational tutoring for 39 years. She

earned her B.S. from Middle Tennessee StateUniversity and her M.S. from Vanderbilt University.She holds Tennessee certification in elementaryeducation and speech and hearing as well as herCertificate of Clinical Competence (CCC) throughASHA and is licensed through the state of Tennesseein speech-language pathology.

She has been an instructor at Vanderbilt Universityand Peabody College. She has served as a speech-language pathologist and educational consultantfor Metro Nashville Public Schools as coordinatorof the language delay classes and as a speech-language therapist for the orthopedically handi-capped children in Metro schools. In addition,she has served as a consultant for Clover BottomHospital and School. All of these duties wereperformed as part of her responsibilities while onthe staff of Bill Wilkerson Hearing & Speech Centerin Nashville. During Ms. Lynch’s 14 years at BillWilkerson, she served as a speech clinician, super-visor of the children’s language program, researchassistant, coordinator of speech pathology, clinicalcoordinator, and chief speech pathologist. For thepast 24 years she has been in private practice inNashville with Martha E. Lynch and Associates.She has specialized in helping children who are inacademic distress as a result of auditory processingproblems or language disorders. In addition todoing therapy for these disorders, she tutors thechildren in their academics, especially with readingand written language. She has had many years ofexperience working with dyslexic and dysgraphicchildren and adults in her practice.

Ms. Lynch has published a number of researchpapers and articles dealing with auditory processing,articulation, and language. She has presented numer-ous workshops and lectures in Tennessee andthroughout the United States. She was co-leader in a workshop on articulation in Prince Albert,Saskatchewan, Canada, and was a guest lecturer for

a week in the medicalschool in Medellin,Colombia, SouthAmerica.

She has co-authoredthe Sounds & SymbolsEarly Reading Program(formerly published asGoldman-Lynch Sounds& Symbols DevelopmentKit and High Hat) andListening to the World.

Ms. Lynch has been involved in several national andstate professional associations throughout her career.She has been a member of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA), theTennessee Association of Audiologists andSpeech/Language Pathologists (TAASLP), theCouncil for Exceptional Children (CEC),Communication Disorders for Exceptional Children,the Middle Tennessee Association for LearningDisabilities, the Tennessee Education Association,and the National Education Association. ForTAASLP, she has served as secretary and on severalcommittees, chairing many of them. In addition, shehas served on the nominating committee for theCommunication Disorders for Exceptional Children.

Ms. Lynch is the recipient of the Honors Awardand the Distinguished Service Award given byTAASLP and has been recognized for her signifi-cant contributions to ASHA. She was recognizedfor her outstanding clinical achievement by theASHA Foundation. As a result of her contributionsto the speech-language pathologists working in thepublic schools, a Guest Lecture Series has beenestablished in her honor by the Vanderbilt BillWilkerson Center for Otolaryngology andCommunication Sciences. This lecture series forthe past 10 years has provided an excellent oppor-tunity for additional training for speech-languagepathologists working in the public schools.

Chapter 2 About the Authors 7

Martha E. Lynch, M. S.

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Programhas been developed to:

help children develop skills in languageand its graphic or written symbolization

teach children to recognize and producethe sounds in the system by which wecommunicate

Jeanne Chall concluded that programs that includephonics when teaching reading tend to be superiorto those that do not (1983; Roswell & Chall, 1994).Chall’s research suggests that phonics instruction isan essential ingredient in teaching children to readwords. Chall also reports that classroom research(Johnson & Baumann, 1984; Pflaum, Walberg,Karegianes, & Rasher, 1980) demonstrates that chil-dren who are provided phonics training seem toget off to a better start in learning to read thanchildren who are not exposed to phonics. Thegreatest advantage seems to be on tests of wordidentification and tests of story and sentencecomprehension, particularly in the earlier grades.Phonics seems to facilitate word identification, anecessary component in comprehension.

Becoming a Nation of Readers: The Report of theCommission on Reading (National Academy of

Education, Commission on Education and PublicPolicy, 1985) states that “. . . the purpose ofphonics is to teach children the alphabetic prin-ciple. The goal is for this to become an operatingprinciple so that young readers consistently useinformation about the relationship between lettersand sounds and letters and meanings to assist inthe identification of known words and to inde-pendently figure out unfamiliar words . . . Theright maxims for phonics are: Do it early. Keep itsimple. Except in cases of diagnosed individualneed, phonics instruction should have beencompleted by the end of the second grade.”

The report concludes that whether or not childrenshould be taught phonics is no longer an issue; theissue is how phonics should be taught. This posi-tion was reiterated in the Report of the National

8 Chapter 3 Philosophy

Chapter 3 Philosophy

Programs that include phonics whenteaching reading tend to be superior tothose that do not.

The right maxims for phonics are: Do itearly. Keep it simple.

Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read, Reports ofthe Subgroups (National Institute of Child Healthand Human Development [NICHD], 2000). Also,several recent NICHD-sponsored studies havedemonstrated that speech-sound awareness, letterknowledge, and phonics are indispensable compo-nents of effective early reading instruction (Hall &Moats, 1999).

A major goal of the Sounds & Symbols EarlyReading Program is to demonstrate that there aresystematic relationships between letters andsounds. In this program, children learn phonicattack skills and auditory and visual discriminationskills that are necessary for many school activities,particularly reading. Children learn a phonicallyoriented symbol system that has only one soundfor each symbol but that is highly consistent withtraditional orthography. The modified symbolshelp children avoid the confusion created by tradi-tional letters in beginning reading activities.

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Program alsoteaches left-to-right progression of words andsentences, builds auditory and visual memory, andteaches sound blending (synthesis). The vocabularyused in the children’s reading activities is commonto primary reading programs.

Speech production is still a major emphasis of theSounds & Symbols Early Reading Program. TheAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing Association(ASHA, 2001) has taken the position that speech-language pathologists (SLPs) play an integral rolein the development of literacy for children. Theauthors believe that the best way to develop in chil-dren an awareness of speech sounds is to confrontthem with both visual and auditory stimulation(Mellin, 1962; Schoolfield & Timberlake, 1969).Speech instruction that relies on the auditory

channel is relatively abstract and frequently ineffec-tive for young children (McGinnis, 1963; Anderson,1968). When the auditory channel is used alone,children must learn not only to recognize andproduce sounds correctly, but also to place thesounds properly in words and sentences (Stern &Gould, 1965). For example, a child who says tite forkite must learn to articulate the k sound correctlyand also to place it at the beginning of the wordkite. Thus, the Sounds & Symbols Early ReadingProgram relies on both visual and auditory stimuli.Program activities train children to discriminatebetween the vowel and consonant phonemespresented through both auditory and visual chan-nels. Children learn to produce the phonemesaccurately in speech and to recognize the visualsymbols. The program then teaches the child anawareness of sound and symbol sequence in largerunits of speech—syllables, words, and sentences.Children learn to blend individual sounds intowords and to analyze the sounds in syllables andwords auditorily and visually.

Chapter 3 Philosophy 9

Studies have demonstrated that speech-sound awareness, letter knowledge, andphonics are indispensable componentsof effective early reading instruction.

The modified symbols in the Sounds &Symbols program help children avoidthe confusion created by traditionalletters in beginning reading activities.

The Sounds & Symbols program activities train children to discriminatebetween the vowel and consonantphonemes presented through both auditory and visual channels.

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2001).Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologistswith respect to reading and writing in children and adolescents (position statement, executive summary ofguidelines, technical report). ASHA Supplement 21, 17–27.Rockville, MD: Author.

Anderson, V. D. (1968). Reading and young children. NewYork: Macmillan.

Chall, J. S. (1983). Learning to read: The great debate(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hall, S. L., & Moats, L. C. (1999). Straight talk about reading.Lincolnwood (Chicago), IL: NTC/Contemporary PublishingGroup.

Johnson, D. D., & Baumann, J. F. (1984). Word identification.In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research. NewYork: Longman.

McGinnis, M. (1963). Aphasic children: Identification andeducation by the association method. Washington, DC:Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf.

Mellin, A. (1962). Phonics handbook for the primary grades.Palo Alto, CA: Fearon.

National Academy of Education, Commission on Educationand Public Policy. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: Thereport of the commission on reading. Washington, DC: Author.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching children to read, Reports of the subgroups(NIH Pub. No. 00-4754). Retrieved May 15, 2001, fromhttp://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/report.htm

Pflaum, S. W., Walberg, H. J., Karegianes, M. L., & Rasher, S. P. (1980). Reading instruction: A quantitativeanalysis. Educational Researcher, 9.

Roswell, F. G., & Chall, J. S. (1994). Creating successful readers.Chicago: Riverside Publishing.

Schoolfield, L. D., & Timberlake, J. B. (1969). The phonovisualmethod. Washington, DC: Phonovisual Products.

Stern, C., & Gould, T. S. (1965). Children discover reading: Anintroduction to structural reading. New York: Random House,L. W. Singer.

10 Chapter 3 Philosophy

Chapter 4 ProgramComponents

Chapter 4 Program Components 11

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Programhas several components. The manual, whichis the cornerstone of the program, contains

40 lessons. The first lesson introduces High Hat.The next 38 lessons introduce the 38 sounds andthe storybook characters that represent them. Thelast lesson introduces common consonant blends.Each lesson includes:

main objective(s)

necessary materials

teacher-led activities to address objectives

consonant sound production teaching techniques

review activities of previously learned sounds

The manual also contains a scope and sequence of the lessons, reinforcement activities, techniquesfor teaching the production of the vowel sounds,sound practice activities, the philosophy underlyingthe program, and the musical scores for all the songs.

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Program alsocontains the following components:

Storybooks—two full-color storybooks aboutHigh Hat and his adventures

Character cards—38 main story characters and 2 views of High Hat

Puppets—two High Hat puppets for use in lessonactivities

Flash cards—38 symbol cards and 2 arrow cards

CDs—two CDs of recorded stories; one CD ofsongs and sound training for teachers

Reproducible masters—for every lesson (bothteacher-led and take-home activities)

Stamps—six stamps for stamping students’ work

Ring binder with tabs—for organizing every lesson

Zippered canvas bag—roomy enough to hold theentire kit

12 Chapter 5 Development and Research

The initial work on the Goldman-LynchSounds & Symbols Development Kit occurredduring 1964 and 1965 with the construction

of a set of teaching materials (Goldman, Horton, &Neas, 1966). From June 1965 until February 1966,these materials were used with children ranging inage from 3 years 8 months to 5 years 1 month in 1-hour group sessions twice a week. The responsesof these children indicated that they were capableof rapidly learning the visual symbols (essentially a modified initial teaching alphabet devised by theauthors) and associating them with correlatedsounds. It was noted that these children exhibitedan increased ability to analyze and synthesize andthat they developed greater precision in articula-tory production. On the basis of these experiences,the materials were modified to enhance theirappeal and usefulness for young children.

Results with these children encouraged the authorsto consider this type of program for use with chil-dren who had problems in articulation. In a pilotinvestigation (Goldman, 1968), an attempt wasmade to determine the applicability of thisprogram for 4- and 5-year-old children with

articulatory disorders. The previously developedmaterials were modified and duplicated to makethem usable with children with articulation disor-ders. Then an investigation was carried out toassess the feasibility of these modified materials intreating children who had articulation problems.Twenty-four children were studied; 12 had theexperimental approach, and the other 12 had atraditional articulation program (Van Riper, 1963).Prior to the initiation of the experimental andcontrol treatments, the articulatory ability of eachsubject was carefully assessed. In addition, allsubjects were given tests measuring auditorymemory, auditory discrimination, and intelligence.

Chapter 5 Development and Research

In the initial study, children usingSounds & Symbols exhibited anincreased ability to analyze and synthe-size and developed greater precision inarticulatory production.

A second study, using a control groupand an experimental group (Sounds &Symbols), found that

1) the experimental group had a meanreduction of 25 articulatory errorsversus 16 in the control group;

2) the experimental group learned thevisual symbols and correlated themwith the phonemes faster and moreeasily; and

3) the experimental group exhibitedgreater gains in auditory discrimination.

In general, the findings of this study supported theexperimental approach as having value in thefollowing respects: (1) A greater degree of improve-ment, as measured by performance on theGoldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation, ExperimentalEdition (1969), was observed in the experimentalgroup. It was found that the children in this grouphad a mean reduction of approximately 25 articu-latory errors, while the children in the controlgroup had a mean reduction of only 16 errors. Thedifference between the means of the groups wassignificant at the 5 percent level of confidence.(2) The children in the experimental group learnedthe visual symbols and related them to theirphonemic correlates with great speed and facility.These children were consistent in saying the correctphoneme in word and sentence contexts when theywere stimulated by the visual symbols. (3) The chil-dren in the experimental group exhibited consider-able gains in auditory discrimination.

A third study of this approach was carried out inanother project, sponsored by the Office ofEducation, U.S. Department of Health, Education,and Welfare. In several speech clinics, these mate-rials were tested with 108 children with speechdisorders. The previous findings were verified, indi-cating that a program that relies heavily on the useof a phonic-visual symbol system has value.

Encouraged by these findings, the authors began toconsider enlarging the scope of the program.Feedback from various teachers and clinicians ledto a complete modification in the phonic alphabet,materials, and lessons to make the program suit-able for providing early reading experiences,

training in phonics, training in speech improve-ment, and modification of misarticulation. Thisrevised program was then tested in two preschoolprograms, two public school settings, and eightspeech and hearing centers. A total of 250 childrenwere exposed to an experimental version of theGoldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols Development Kit.

The children in these settings demonstrated signifi-cant improvement in auditory discrimination andvocal phonic ability. The children in the study whohad speech disorders showed a significant reduc-tion in their misarticulation. In auditory discrimi-nation, these children showed a 50 percent errorreduction. In vocal phonics, a 60 percent decreasein errors was obtained. Articulation errorsdecreased by 50 percent in words and by 55 percentin contextual speech after 6 months of exposure tothe experimental version of the program. The artic-ulation data were obtained through the use of theSounds-in-Words and Sounds-in-Sentences sectionsof the Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation.

When the program was used with children withnormal speech, teachers reported an increase inphonemic awareness. Some of the children enteringfirst grade were reported to have found readingexperiences much easier and to be performing athigh levels in vocal phonics and reading.

Chapter 5 Development and Research 13

A third study, sponsored by the Office ofEducation, U. S. Department of Health,Education, and Welfare, verified thefindings of the first two studies.

In a fourth study, children usingSounds & Symbols demonstratedsignificant improvement in auditorydiscrimination (50 percent errorreduction) and vocal phonic ability(60 percent error reduction). Twogroups of kindergarten classes scoredon average at approximately thesecond-grade reading level.

Children at the preschool level who had thisprogram were given the California Reading Test,Lower Primary, Form W (Tiegs & Clark, 1957)following the program. Two groups of kindergartenclasses, 40 children in all, scored on the average atapproximately the second-grade reading level. Thehighest achievement occurred generally in wordrecognition, a subtest in which the child mustexhibit phonic attack skills.

Lamphear and Berryman (1974) reported a studyin which they investigated the effects of theGoldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols Development Kiton reading skills of African-American children.They indicated that the group receiving this experi-mental procedure scored significantly higher asmeasured by the California Achievement Test (CAT)than those children in the control group did. Theyindicated that these results supported previousfindings that speech-improvement training is effec-tive in improving reading skills.

Siler (1977) designed a study to determinewhether a language-stimulation program, usingthe Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit, would be more effective withchildren demonstrating language delay or withchildren having both language delay and articula-tion disorder. The results of this investigationindicated that the program was an effective therapeutic approach to enhance receptive and

expressive language. Additionally, the programwas effective in correcting articulation errors.This was evidenced by a reduction in the numberof misarticulated sounds from 39 to 15 as a result of the program. Goldman and Lynch (1972) alsoreported a similar outcome when they presentedan approach for modifying articulation disordersusing the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit. It was noted that the programwas intended not only as an early phonicstraining program and introduction, but also as avaluable tool for speech-language pathologistsand teachers dealing with speech-improvementactivities. They reported the value of such aprocedure for helping children produce speechsounds accurately, recognize the visual symbolsfor these sounds, and understand the use oflanguage sounds in their various relationships in words, sentences, and contextual speech.

Richards (1995) designed a study to determine ifearly reading ability could be improved in youngchildren by adding phonemic awareness to awhole-language curriculum. Participants in thestudy were 29 rural Tennessee students in a transi-tion first grade between kindergarten and firstgrade. The control group received no additionalphonemic training beyond a pure whole-languageapproach. The treatment group received trainingwith the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit twice a week for 30 minutes eachtime. The Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation(GFTA), Sawyer’s Test of Awareness of LanguageSegments (TALS), the Slosson Oral Reading Test

14 Chapter 5 Development and Research

In a study examining the effects ofthe Sounds & Symbols program on the reading skills of African-Americanchildren, the experimental group(Sounds & Symbols) scored considerably higher on the CAT than the control group did.

The results of another investigationindicated that the Sounds & Symbolsprogram was an effective therapeuticapproach to enhance receptive andexpressive language.

(SORT), and the Lindamood Auditory Concept-ualization (LAC) Test were used as pretests andpost-tests to measure improvement. Although bothgroups showed improvement, the treatment groupscored considerably higher and showed greatergains at the end of the study.

The original Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit helped children to develop theirphonemic awareness skills, provided them with anintroduction to reading experiences, and offeredtraining in speech-sound production and improve-ment. The current Sounds & Symbols Early ReadingProgram is based on the same philosophy andretains basically the same lesson activities as itspredecessor; the program has been updated toachieve better gender and ethnicity balance in thecharacters and to modernize the stories. TheSounds & Symbols Early Reading Program continuesto provide an excellent introduction to the readi-ness skills so necessary in the development ofliteracy in all children.

References

Goldman, R. (1968). The initial teaching alphabet as anadjunct to articulation therapy. In J. R. Block (Ed.), i.t.a. as a language arts medium (pp. 217–221). Hempstead, NY: Thei.t.a. Foundation, Hofstra University.

Goldman, R., & Fristoe, M. (1969). Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.

Goldman, R., Horton, K. B., & Neas. B. J. (1966). The initialteaching alphabet. Peabody Journal of Education, 44, 17–20.

Goldman, R., & Lynch, M. E. (1972). New approach in modi-fication of articulation disorders. Journal of the TennesseeSpeech and Hearing Association, 16, 2.

Lamphear, J.M. & Berryman, J.D. (1974). The effects of ateacher-taught phonics visual symbol program in improvingreading skills of black children. Paper presented at theUniversity of Georgia.

Lindamood, C. H., & Lindamood, P. C. (1979). LindamoodAuditory Conceptualization Test. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Richards, M. L. (1995, May). Goldman-Lynch in the classroom:Does phonemic awareness improve early reading ability in awhole-language setting? Doctoral dissertation, University ofTennessee, Knoxville.

Sawyer, D. J. (1987). Test of Awareness of Language Segments.Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Siler, R.S. (1977, August). Comparison of the effectiveness ofthe Goldman-Lynch language stimulation program on twogroups of language delayed children, one with and one withoutarticulation problems. Master’s thesis, East Tennessee State University.

Slosson, R. L., & Nicholson, C. L. (1990). Slosson Oral ReadingTest. East Aurora, NY: Slosson Educational Publications, Inc.

Tiegs, E. W., & Clark, W. W. (1957). California Reading Test.Los Angeles: California Test Bureau.

Van Riper, C. (1963). Speech correction and principles.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Chapter 5 Development and Research 15

In a 1995 study using a control group(whole language only) and a treatmentgroup (Sounds & Symbols plus wholelanguage), the treatment group scoredconsiderably higher and showed greatergains at the end of the study.

16 Chapter 6 Completed Research and Reviews

This chapter contains abstracts of researchstudies and reviews of the Goldman-LynchSounds & Symbols Development Kit (prede-

cessor to the Sounds & Symbols Early ReadingProgram). These abstracts are listed on the AGSWeb site, and copies of several of the studies areavailable from AGS.

Allen, N. (1982). A descriptive study ofhigh incidence of honor roll students in anitinerant speech-language pathologist’s caseload. Unpublished manuscript.

The purpose of this study was to determine thereason why a large quantity of students in thespeech therapy program at Green Park ElementarySchool in the Jefferson Parish public school systemin Alabama were on the Honor Roll. It was discov-ered that 73 percent of the students participating inthe Goldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols DevelopmentKit program achieved at least a 3.0 grade pointaverage and 18 percent had at least a 3.5 average.The report established a direct relationshipbetween the number of Sounds & Symbols lessonscompleted and probability for academic success forthe students. An increase in student self-esteembecause of the lessons was also noted.

Goldman, R. & Lynch, M. E. (1972). A newapproach in modification of articulationdisorders. The Journal of the Tennessee Speechand Hearing Association, 16(2), 36–38.

The authors explain the rationale behind thedesign of the original Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit. The program links visual stimula-tion to auditory stimulation for better learning ofphonemes. In addition, the program teachesstudents both phonic attack skills and auditory andvisual discrimination skills that are necessary formany school activities, especially reading.

Kemp, D. M. (1974). Review report [Review of the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit]. Canberra, Australia:Canberra College of Advanced Education.

The purpose of this report was to evaluate theeffectiveness of the Goldman-Lynch Sounds &Symbols Development Kit for Australian schools.Thirteen experienced teachers and 30 pre-servicestudents reviewed the program. An additional 120pre-service students participated in inspection anddiscussion of the kit. Users of the program wereenthusiastic about results obtained. The reportcommends the comprehensive teacher manual andlesson plans. Ultimately, the kit was recommendedfor use by Australian schools.

Lamphear, J. M. & Berryman, J. D. (1974).The effects of a teacher-taught phonics visualsymbol program in improving reading skills of black children. Paper presented at theUniversity of Georgia.

The purpose of this study was to determine if useof the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit would positively affect the readingability of a group of first- and second-gradeAfrican-American children. The study focused on225 students from two predominantly African-American elementary schools in Georgia. Theexperimental group consisted of 124 students (62males and 62 females) comprising one class offirst-graders and three classes of second-graders.The control group consisted of 101 students (45males and 56 females) comprising two classes ofsecond-graders. The experimental classrooms wereadministered the Sounds & Symbols lessons as regu-larly as possible. The CAT (Lower Primary, FormW, Reading) was administered as the post-test. Thedata showed that the experimental classrooms did

Chapter 6 CompletedResearch and Reviews

significantly better on the CAT than the controls.Analysis of the means for all but one CAT readingscore yielded differences significant beyond the .05probability level. The use of the classroom teacheras the prime training agent appeared to be astrength of the study.

Matheny, P. (1977, May 10). A puppet and hispals conquer speech problems. RoanokeTimes & World News, p. C-3.

This newspaper article profiles Mrs. Doris Lewisand her class of 22 first-graders, most of whombegan the school year not being able to utter acomplete sentence. Using the Goldman-LynchSounds & Symbols program has accelerated herclass with language problems into skills Mrs. Lewissays are comparable to those of some third-graderswith no diagnosed speech difficulties.

Richards, M. L. (1995, May). Goldman-Lynchin the classroom: Does phonemic awarenessimprove early reading ability in a whole-language setting? Doctoral dissertation,University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

The purpose of this study was to determine if earlyreading ability could be improved in young chil-dren by adding phonemic awareness to a whole-language curriculum. Participants in the studywere 29 rural Tennessee students in a transitionfirst grade between kindergarten and first grade.The students were divided more or less evenlybetween two classrooms. The control groupreceived no additional phonemic training beyond a pure whole-language approach. The treatmentgroup received training with the Goldman-LynchSounds & Symbols Development Kit twice a week for 30 minutes each time. The GFTA, SORT, TALS,and LAC were used as pretests and post-tests tomeasure improvement. The treatment group scoredconsiderably higher at the end of the experiment.

Siler, R. S. (1977, August). A comparison of theeffectiveness of the Goldman-Lynch languagestimulation program on two groups oflanguage delayed children, one with and onewithout articulation problems. Master’sthesis, East Tennessee State University.

The purpose of this study was to determinewhether the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & SymbolsDevelopment Kit program would be more effectivewith children diagnosed with only language delayor with children diagnosed with language delay and defective articulation. Seven students aged 6 to 8 from Dupont Elementary in Chattanooga,Tennessee, participated. Four were classified asdelayed language students, and three had delayedlanguage as well as mild to severe articulationproblems. The following tests were used as pretestsand post-tests to measure progress: Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation, Utah Test of LanguageDevelopment, Northwestern Syntax Screening Test,Goldman-Fristoe-Woodcock Test of AuditoryDiscrimination, Grammatic Closure subtest of theIllinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities. The studentsreceived 7 weeks of training with Sounds & Symbolsthree times a week for 45 minutes. Significantlanguage growth occurred in both groups ofstudents. The children who had both delayedlanguage and articulation disorders made signifi-cantly larger gains. The number of misarticulatedsounds on the GFTA was decreased by half for thatgroup. Grammatic closure was tested, and nosignificant gains were made. However, gains on theUtah Test of Language Development were impres-sive, with most students gaining nearly a year’sworth of language development in 7 weeks.

Wallace, G. & Kaufman, J. M. (1974). Teachingchildren with learning problems. Columbus,Ohio: Merrill.

In this resource book, Goldman-Lynch Sounds &Symbols Development Kit is listed and described asa “widely used” program for children with spokenlanguage difficulties.

Chapter 6 Completed Research and Reviews 17

While Chapters 5 and 6 discuss the scientif-ically based research involving the Sounds& Symbols program over the years, this

chapter presents another type of program valida-tion—the stories and testimonials from the profes-sionals who have been using the program success-fully for many years. The following are representa-tive of the many letters in AGS files from speech-language pathologists, kindergarten teachers,special educators, reading teachers, etc.,commending the Sounds & Symbols programbecause of its effectiveness.

From a Special Education Teacher . . .

Success is sometimes in the eye of the beholder,and sometimes it is just plain fact. I am a specialeducation teacher, and I take great pleasure in small steps made by some children during theiracademic careers.

At this point in time, I have two very low studentswho have had traumatic lives. Neither of them isvery interested in learning, and they don’t quite seethe importance or significance of learning to read.In fact, one student in particular found itabsolutely amusing to see how little he could learnon any given day.

Recently my district ordered the Sounds & SymbolsEarly Reading Program, and it looked like fun.Fortunately, I wasn’t the only one who thought so!The first day I used it, my students walked out thedoor to go back to class singing, “High Hat, HighHat, that’s my name!” It was an instant hit, and Iknew I had them hooked!

They have made great progress in the last fewweeks. They are beginning to read simple CV words without any fighting or stalling on theirparts. They beg to hear certain songs, so I use themas “treats” for when their work is done well on anygiven day. But the best part of this program is thatthe children are learning and having fun at thesame time. They don’t realize that they arelearning; they just are!

Thank you for your program. You have made aworld of difference for me and for my students!

Zoë S. LeCoursSpecial Education TeacherFerguson Elementary SchoolKlamath Falls, Oregon

18 Chapter 7 Success Stories

Chapter 7 Success Stories

From a Speech-Language Pathologist . . .

I am a speech-language pathologist at a publicschool in Minneapolis. Several years ago I wasassigned to do preps for a new half-day High FiveProgram for children who just missed the kinder-garten cutoff and would be 5 years old beforeJanuary 1. I was able to develop my owncurriculum, and I chose High Hat to be a part of it.Two classes of 18 children received High Hatinstruction approximately three times per week for20- to 25-minute sessions. I incorporated a writingprogram with each new letter so that, by the end ofthe year, our pre-kindergarten students were notonly reading early reader books, but many werewriting paragraphs using High Hat spelling! Thechildren loved the characters and stories, and theinteractive lessons were fun and held their interest.The results amazed teachers, parents, visitors,everyone. I worked in that assignment for twoyears. Four classes of children reaped the benefitsof your program.

When I returned to my original school full time thenext year, I wanted our kindergarten students tohave the High Hat experience, too. Upon enteringkindergarten, our students always scored near thebottom of Minneapolis tests of reading skills. Iapproached our principal at the beginning of theyear with an offer. If she would let me pilot theHigh Hat program with a willing kindergartenteacher, I would promise improved reading scores.She approved the plan, and I collaborated with ayoung teacher from among our six kindergartenclassrooms. I offered to come into her classroomevery day for 25 minutes and teach High Hat. Sheagreed to observe the lessons and continue theprogram, if she liked the results, for the remainderof the year.

I began the lessons the first week of school. ByOctober, another experienced teacher who hadbeen noticing our activity asked if her classroomcould be next. In November, our principal stoppedin to see how the program was working. She was

totally amazed and immediately wanted to adoptHigh Hat as our kindergarten reading program.I began gathering as many kits as I could fromthroughout the district and started High Hat in two more classrooms. By the end of the first year,half of our teachers were using the High Hatprogram. The next year we added three more classrooms. At the beginning of that year, districttest results showed that our incoming kindergartenstudents had had the lowest reading scores in thedistrict. By the end of the year, thanks to High Hat,our kindergarten classes had outscored all of the other schools!

This year all six of our kindergarten teachers areusing the new Sounds & Symbols Early ReadingProgram. Our teachers have developed lots of activ-ities around the High Hat theme for students touse at stations. We are beginning to incorporatewriting programs, too. Everyone is very enthusi-astic about the program. First-grade teachers aredelighted in the skill level of students entering theirgrade. They asked for kits, too, so they could reviewlessons for students who needed more exposure tophonemic awareness activities.

Valerie SandlerSpeech-Language PathologistMinneapolis, Minnesota

From a Preschool Director . . .

I’ve been hanging out with High Hat for over 25years. As a speech therapist in Lennox SchoolDistrict in 1972, I introduced the Sounds & Symbolsprogram to the primary teachers. I did the programin their classrooms so they could observe its imple-mentation. Phonics began to have meaning to themany nonreaders with whom I worked. Ratherthan just relying on their memory to identifysymbols, they could remember the name of HighHat’s friend and listen for the beginning sound. Ihad fifth-graders willing to give up their lunch inorder to come and work with High Hat.

Chapter 7 Success Stories 19

In 1979 I started my own early childhood educa-tion center, Born Learners School, in Agoura,California. I used the Goldman-Lynch Sounds &Symbols Development Kit with my 4-year-oldclasses. They loved it. Because the program ismultileveled, there was no academic pressure.Children could just listen to the great stories andget a lot from the experience. However, themajority of the children learned the sounds andblending very easily. One little girl listened to hermother pronouncing the sounds in the word “cat”and responded, “That’s spelling—High Hat teachesus how to blend!”

Children really bond with High Hat and hisfriends. At the end of the school year, one of mykindergarten students began to cry when my lastHigh Hat lesson was over. I asked him what waswrong. He replied that he was sad because he wasgoing to miss High Hat so much!

After they “graduate” from Born Learners, most ofmy students enroll in the public school district.Teachers all say they can tell Born Learnersstudents as they are so well prepared in the area ofphonics. I am so glad that you reissued the

program; I now own all three versions (Goldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols Development Kit, HighHat, and Sounds & Symbols Early ReadingProgram). For 22 years, Born Learners School hassuccessfully used this program and has helpedmany a young reader to accomplish phonics in afun way. I love it when I hear the children exclaim,“Oh boy, it’s High Hat time!”

Beatrice ElliottOwner/DirectorBorn Learners SchoolAgoura, California

From a Kindergarten Teacher . . .

I have used High Hat since 1983. I think it is the greatest!!!

I use the workbook as “homework.” I tear thesheets from the workbook and send them homeone at a time after the lesson. As we all know, inclass it is difficult for everyone to have a lot ofturns. Using the workbook in this way, the childcan do the activities one on one. The parent can seethe progress. This is very beneficial, especially withblending sounds and listening where the sound isheard in a word (first, middle, last).

I teach in a school system that includes severalhousing projects. Parents are super supportive withthe homework assignments. Once a parent walkedin the rain to bring a “homework page” the childhad forgotten. If a child is unable, for whateverreason, to complete an assignment on the night Isend it home, I always receive a note explainingwhy. It is returned the next day. Parents tell meHigh Hat homework is the first thing their childwants to do as soon as he/she gets home fromschool. Several have said their child will not leavethem alone until the homework is done.

My children get so excited each day with High Hat.They get upset when we do not have a new character. My children do learn to read. The

20 Chapter 7 Success Stories

program is also helpful to my parents who strugglewith reading or language (ESL). As they do the“homework” with their child, this helps them with their reading.

Thank you for this program!!!

Juanita ScarbroughKindergarten TeacherCity Park SchoolAthens, Tennessee

From a Speech-Language Therapist . . .

I have been using the High Hat program for 21+ years. It was called the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols Development Kit back then.Every year I receive notes from parents expressingtheir pleasure with their children’s progress inarticulation development. Even during the “wholelanguage” era, I continued to use the programbecause I saw measurable growth in speech andreading (a bonus) skills.

When a set of twins who had developed their own phonological system entered school, I neededa program that would address many aspects ofsound discrimination, sound blending, and othermetalinguistic skills. Sounds & Symbols was thatprogram. At year’s end the twins had made remarkable progress. They loved the stories, andtheir parents loved the follow-up activities.

Since that time, I have ordered two additional kitsand have recommended the program to other SLPsas well as special education teachers. The response is always the same! They think the program isfantastic. It has been used for individualized therapyas well as the reading program for an entire class.

Thank you for years of success stories.

Paula JanickiSpeech-Language TherapistPine Hill Primary CenterCheektowaga, New York

From a Graduate Student . . .

Part of our preparation in graduate school at theUniversity of Nebraska–Lincoln is spent criticallyexamining a variety of materials that may be usefulto us while practicing as speech-language therapists.In a graduate class focusing on language disorders inelementary school-age populations, my projectinvolved learning the Sounds & Symbols EarlyReading Program. I chose this program because ofmy interest and past experience in working withpreschool and school-age children in the schools.

Working closely with preschool teachers in thepast, I have seen how few good choices there are foraddressing early reading skills with this age group.After learning the Sounds & Symbols program andpresenting it to my classmates, I am convinced thatthis is the kind of program that will keep childreninvolved, interested and learning, along with beingvery structured and easy to use. Everyone was veryimpressed with the program AND the evidence ofgrowth shown through research. It will be aprogram strongly considered as “necessary” fortheir classroom when out in the workforce.

The Sounds & Symbols Early Reading Program looksto be an effective means for getting those little ones“a step ahead!”

Kelly RemilyGraduate StudentDepartment of Special Education

and Communication DisordersUniversity of Nebraska–Lincoln

Chapter 7 Success Stories 21

From a Reading Specialist . . .

My kindergarten Title I students LOVE it whenHigh Hat visits them. As the group of five studentsrecently came to me for instruction, one little boytold me he had a song for Mr. High Hat andproceeded to sing a song he had composed aboutHigh Hat. Not to be outdone, a second student alsosaid he had a song for High Hat and sang it to thegroup. Due to peer group pressure, four of the fivestudents sang a song to High Hat (one child wassimply too shy). All of the songs were different. Iwas very impressed at the creativity the High Hatpuppet inspired!

Sandra FehrReading SpecialistCarroll Elementary SchoolShermans Dale, Pennsylvania

From a Speech-Language Therapist . . .

In the fall of 1976, I began my career as a schoolspeech-language therapist for a small Michiganschool system. At that time, I was introduced to the Goldman-Lynch Sounds & Symbols DevelopmentKit by the current therapist on staff. She was usingit to reinforce sound-symbol recognition in allkindergarten classrooms.

Fast forward to CUSD 301 in Burlington, Illinois.Upon being hired in the fall of 1990, I asked topurchase the program (by then known as HighHat) for use with all kindergarten classrooms.Permission was granted, and my adventures withthis program began.

I use a multisensory approach to help the studentslearn the sound-symbol connection. Each lesson is

22 Chapter 7 Success Stories

formatted in a similar manner. After one childholds the High Hat puppet and makes it dancewhile we sing the song, the lesson begins. I tell thestudents I must “check” their hearing, vision, andability to read lips before I can read the High Hatstory. I check vision by pointing to the lettersymbols and having them clap when I come to thesound of the week. Previous sounds have a sign orgesture that they must use so I know theyremember material taught before. For example, forMarti Mouse we use the ASL mouse sign, for AdaApe we pretend to be monkeys, etc. Then I checktheir hearing by turning my back and making thesound associated with the letter. Again, I assesstheir knowledge when they respond with clappingor signs/gestures of previously learned letters.Finally, so they understand and have another hookto help them develop reading/writing skills, thestudents must read my lips as I manipulate my oralstructure to formulate the way the sounds look onmy mouth. They learn the “bite your lip” sound ofFannie Fox and the back sound with voice box onof Gordon Goat.

Then the students play a game as they producethe sounds. For long sounds like /s/, /f/, /m/, theybattle against me to see who can hold on to thesound the longest. For short sounds, they mustwatch my fingers and as I extend one finger at atime; the students say the short sound: /k/, /t/,/p/, etc. Finally the moment they have beenwaiting for—the High Hat story of the week. Wefinish with an activity geared to each sound. Anexample is “Pin the Tail on the Tiger” for TigerTom. If the picture on the tiger tail has a /t/ wordon it, the student may pin it on the large tigerposter. As a last reminder, if children have theparticular sound in their first name, they get aHigh Hat stamp on their hand.

The importance of this program hit home for mewhen I went to service students in the middleschool last year and was recognized by so many asthe High Hat teacher. Wow! I even wear a High Hat

costume each year on Halloween. And I have beencalled Mrs. High Hat! This program has been agreat way for me to impact the youngest childrenin our schools. I feel that the parents approach memore easily with concerns about their childrenbecause I am loved by their sons and daughters.And other teachers have asked to include specialneeds children in the kindergarten High Hatclasses because they know it is a successful multisensory program.

Thank you AGS and High Hat for years of happymemories, because more than anything “High Hatlikes to make people happy!!!”

Jan HarnishSpeech-Language TherapistHoward B. Thomas Grade SchoolBurlington, Illinois

From a Kindergarten Teacher . . .

“Here comes High Hat, oh ho! He’s back againtoday.” My kids love that song! Every time we areready to start the High Hat lesson, the kids beg me to sing that song!

My kindergartners have learned so much from theSounds & Symbols program. They like to keep trackof the number of sounds they have learned. Evennew students to my room have easily picked up theprevious sounds the class had already learned. Therepetition is great with this program. The kids justnaturally begin to put the sounds together and thenread words. And they are able to remember thesounds and use them to help sound out words theyare not familiar with. When our class was makingMother’s Day cards, one of my students wrote on hiscard “tØ mom.” He did that all on his own!

Working with kids on the north side of Minneapolishas very many challenges. One challenge is that ourkids come to kindergarten with very few experiencesand very little vocabulary. High Hat helps them withboth. The kids love the stories and the characters.

Chapter 7 Success Stories 23

And learning the sounds helps them to develop morevocabulary words. They are so proud of themselveswhen they can read words, and then begin to readsentences. The first grade teachers have commentedon how prepared the kids are coming into first grade.

You would be amazed if you watched my kids inaction as they are doing their High Hat lesson. Eventhe shy and quiet kids want a turn to do the activi-ties. They all feel confident they will know the correctanswer so they want to participate.

I can’t say enough wonderful things about how High Hat has helped my kids learn sounds, letters,and words!

Barb StevensKindergarten TeacherMinneapolis, Minnesota

From a Speech-Language Pathologist . . .

Since I discovered High Hat, hundreds of childrenhave enjoyed the stories. As a speech-languagepathologist, I manage to make weekly visits tokindergartens and first grades. Kindergartners inMrs. K’s class in Leavenworth, Kansas, can tell youthat, on Tuesdays, High Hat comes with a newstory and sound. The picture cards remind thechildren all week of the character that received helpfrom High Hat.

I have never seen a better program for introducingsounds to children.

Marilyn LaneSpeech-Language PathologistPrivate PracticePlatte City, Missouri

From a Speech and Language Coach . . .

I used the Sounds & Symbols program in an entirelyunique way—I became Mr. High Hat!

Using cardboard and felt, I built a hat, just like thepuppet. I used a blue blanket, folded it in half, andcut out a slit for my head. I held my arms out (likea scarecrow) and sewed along just below my arm(making sleeves). I cut another slit in the front ofthe blanket to make a pocket. This enabled me toreach inside and get materials that I kept in yetanother pouch tied around my chest. I made awalking stick by dipping an ordinary cotton gardenglove in white glue and forming it into the shape ofa hand with one pointer finger extended. I glued afive-foot length of half-inch plastic pipe (PVC) intothe glove and painted it to look like the pointerthat used to be provided in the program. Oh, and Imustn’t forget the Groucho Marx type glasses withthe moustache (oversized nose removed)!

I memorized the High Hat song and then sang it asI walked through the school to the various classesto select those who were to come for speech andlanguage sessions. All of the children wanted to gowith Mr. High Hat. From time to time, I wouldselect children who were not in my caseload tocome along and participate in the sessions.

It was a superb way to generate interest, and Ifound that I had even better results by playing thepersona of Mr. High Hat. I was the talk of theschool, and even the older students wanted toparticipate (this was in a K-6, year-round,loft-style school).

I hope that others would also seek ways to fullyutilize such a great Sounds & Symbols program.It’s a winner!

Howard Baker, Jr.Speech and Language CoachAtkinson Graduate School

of Business ManagementSalem, Oregon

24 Chapter 7 Success Stories

1 m Marti Mouse me hammer time 2

2 E Eli Eel eat keep be 3

3 f Fannie Fox five coffee laugh 4

4 Ø Oopy Oops ooze boot too 5

5 p Penny Put pet apple top 6

6 ü Oily Oink oil soil boy 7

7 O Oh-No Oboe open boat go 8

8 b Buzzy Bee bed habit tub 9

9 A Ada Ape ate rake hay 10

10 t Tiger Tom tie potato sit 11

11 I I Spy ice bike my 12

12 s Sailor Sam sew pencil mouse 13

13 i Itchy Itch in pit • 14

14 c and k Copy Cat kite become rock 15

15 a Apple Annie at back • 16

16 h Hairy Horse hat ahead • 17

17 w Wendy Watch we sidewalk • 18

18 d Dirty Dan do ladder had 19

19 e Eddy Elf end bed • 20

20 n Noisy Nan no penny fun 21

21 o Ollie Octopus on hot • 22

22 z and Ω Zoo Zoo zebra busy buzz 23

23 g Gordon Goat get wagon egg 24

24 u Uncle Up us sun • 25

25 l Look and Listen lake pillow ball 26

26 ø Ooky Ook • book • 27

27 v Vernon and Vera voice shovel cave 28

28 å Awful Auto all talk law 29

29 † Thelma Thumb think nothing teeth 30

30 ß Shy Shadow she washing fish 31

31 U Outside Owl out about cow 32

32 y Yellow Yo-Yo yes onion • 33

33 é Early Bird early circus her 34

34 r Regular Rabbit red carrot car 35

35 ç Charlie Choo-Choo chain watching catch 36

36 j Jumping Jack jam engine bridge 37

37 T The Thup that father bathe 38

38 ñ Inky Inkpen • singer ring 39

• = The sound does not commonly occur in this position.

Order in whichsound is

introduced

Sound Sheet for Sounds & Symbols Early Reading ProgramSound-Symbol Character First Sound Middle Sound Final Sound

Lesson in whichsound is

introduced