ThePlan( Phonemic)Awareness:) To)Whom,)and)How)Much)

Phonemic Awareness Tx Teresa A. Ukrainetz, Ph.D. University of Wyoming
OSHA Convention, Salem OR October 2016 1
Phon Aware Tx 1
Nowadays
Teresa A. Ukrainetz, Ph.D., S-LP(C) University of Wyoming [email protected]
Phon Aware Tx 2
The Plan

Learner Outcomes
1. Know the research evidence for specific aspects of phonemic awareness instrucMon.
2. Plan phonemic awareness targets, procedures, and acMviMes for preschoolers and kindergartners.
3. Scaffold young learners to reach advanced skills of phoneme segmentaMon and blending.
Phon Aware Tx 3
Text Comprehension 4
P.O. Box 163 • Eau Claire, WI 54702-0163 ISBN 1-932054-47-2 1.800.225.GROW (4769) • Fax 1.800.828.8885 • www.ThinkingPublications.com
COMMUNICATION SOLUTIONS THAT CHANGE LIVES®
C ontextualized
krainetz
“Provides a model for how to clearly connect theory, research, and clinical application. It is readable and well organized, and the topics covered are timely, relevant, comprehensive, and important for clinical practice, especially with regard to provision of services in educational environments…The contributors are recognized as leaders in their areas of expertise.”
Vicki A. Reed, EdD, CCC-SLP James Madison University
“A beginning clinician who is using this book in a graduate-level language course will go into the school setting equipped not only with excellent tools (RISE), but also with a better understanding of how to work toward helping students achieve standards or benchmarks.”
Janet C. S. Harrison, PhD, CCC-SLP Purdue University
“I was mesmerized…An incredible collection of top-notch intervention!” Judy K. Montgomery, PhD, CCC-SLP
Chapman University
Dr. Ukrainetz has selected an outstanding corps of contributors to develop a cutting-edge reference on theory and practice in language and literacy
intervention. Contextualized Language Intervention lives up to its promise by grounding practical intervention strategies in sound theory and research.
Chapter Topics Contextualized skill framework Literature-based units Vocabulary Grammar Narrative Exposition Peer interaction Classroom discourse Emergent literacy Phonemic awareness Fluency and motivation Text comprehension Self-regulated writing
Contributing Authors Teresa A. Ukrainetz, PhD, S-LP(C), Editor Anthony S. Bashir, PhD, CCC-SLP Bonnie Brinton, PhD, CCC-SLP Sarita Eisenberg, PhD, CCC-SLP Helen Ezell, PhD, CCC-SLP Martin Fujiki, PhD, CCC-SLP Ronald B. Gillam, PhD, CCC-SLP Laura M. Justice, PhD, CCC-SLP Susan B. Leahy, EdD Nickola Wolf Nelson, PhD, CCC-SLP Catherine L. Ross, MS, CCC-SLP Bonnie Singer, PhD, CCC-SLP Lori Skibbe, MA Adelia Van Meter, MS, CCC-SLP Carol Westby, PhD
From: Pro-Ed [email protected] http://www.uwyo.edu/
Phonemic Awareness
• Understanding that speech is composed of minimal units of sound that are separable and manipulable – and ability to conduct those separa7ons and manipula7ons
• Phoneme = a minimally contrasMve unit of speech dogs = /d/ /aw/ /g/ /z/ clogs = /k/ /l/ /aw/ /g/ /z/
– /r/ and /l/ are phonemes in English, but not Japanese – /ph/ and /p/ are only phones in English
Phon Aware Tx 6
1. Phonemic awareness
Plus 2. Onset - rime (/d/-/awg/, /bl/-/awg/) 3. Syllables (/ba/-/na/-/na/)
Plus sort of but not really: 1. Words (hot-dog, I see mom) ← involves meaning 2. Environmental sounds (tweet-tweet) ← not speech
BUT NOT THE SOUNDS OF LETTERS
Phon Aware Tx 7
• Phones • Phonemes • Phonemic awareness • Phonological awareness • Phonological processing
• Phonology • Phonological producMon • Phonological disorder
• PhoneMc spelling • Phonics • AlphabeMc principle • Graphemes • Orthographic knowledge
Phon Aware Tx 8
Phonemic Awareness in Reading
• In scienMfically-based curricula • In NICHD (2000) report as 5 big areas of reading:
– Phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, comprehension, fluency
• In simple view of reading – In the Decode part of Decode + Comprehend
• In DIBELS progress tesMng for K-1 – First phoneme matching, phoneme segmenMng
• In actual teacher pracMces – Classroom reading curricula and instrucMon
Increasing Levels of Phonemic Awareness
Ukrainetz, Nuspl, Wilkerson, & Beddes (2011) PreK tx study on teaching phonemic vs syllable awareness • Data collected in 2005 and 2007 • No formal instrucMon in the daycares Results • Big increase on first phoneme isolaVng:
– 2005, n = 15, pre-test mn = 1.2 (2.0), 0 ≥ 8/10 – 2007, n = 24, pre-test mn = 5.3 (4.2), 12 ≥ 8/10 – t(37) = 3.528, p = .001, d = 1.19
• Variable acoss children, with trend to increase, but staMsMcally stable on leier names: – 2005, pre-test mn = 14.9 (10.5) – 2007, pre-test mn = 20.1 (8.7) – not sig diff, d = 0.50
PhonAwarePlus Tx 9 5330 Phon Aware Tx 10
So What Should SLPs Do?
• Formally our domain as an oral language skill important for reading
• Used to teach teachers about it but no longer • SMll our domain for children with language disorders • But need to be strategic and efficient in tx, doing only
what is needed for as long as needed
For once, we may need to do less rather than more!
Phon Aware Tx 11
3-4 yrs: Sounds & sentences tasks ⇓
4-5 yrs: Rhyme & syllable tasks ⇓
5-6 yrs: First phoneme tasks ⇓
6-7 yrs: All other phoneme tasks in monosyllablic words ⇓
8 yrs+: All other phoneme tasks in mulMsyllabic words
Phon Aware Tx 12
3-4 yrs: First phoneme tasks ⇓
4-5 yrs: First phoneme, rhyme, syllable tasks ⇓
5-6 yrs: Phoneme segment & blend in monosyllabic words ⇓
7 yrs+: Other phoneme tasks in monosyllables & mulMsyllabic words
So What to Teach?
For EffecMveness and Efficiency?
Phon Aware Tx 13
Common Core Standards & Decoding • Reading code skills paramount in NCLB
– Improved early basic reading performance across naMon • AienMon shimed to comprehension and composiMon with
Common Core (NaMonal Governors AssociaMon Center for Best PracMces and the Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010)
The Common Core’s emphasis on high-level comprehension skills calls for a reversal of NCLB’s focus on decoding and low-level literacy skills (Calkins et al., 2012, p. 29)
Phon Aware Tx 14
English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects
Common Core Language Arts Categories Reading Standards And the Rest
Reading: Foundational Skills Writing
• Print Concepts • Phonological Awareness • Phonics and Word Recognition • Fluency
• Text Types and Purposes • Production and Distribution of Writing • Research to Build and Present Knowledge • Range of Writing
Reading Literature and Informational Text
Speaking and Listening
• Key Ideas and Details • Craft and Structure • Integration of Knowledge and
Ideas • Range of Reading and Level of
Text • Complexity
Language
• Conventions of Standard English • Knowledge of Language • Vocabulary Acquisition and Use
Ukrainetz Contextualized Tx & Common Core 15
Common Core Kindergarten Standards
Demonstrate understanding of spoken words, syllables, and sounds (phonemes) 1. Recognize and produce rhyming words X 2. Count, pronounce, blend, and segment syllables in
spoken words X 3. Blend and segment onsets and rimes of single-syllable
spoken words J 4. Isolate and pronounce the iniMal, medial vowel, and
final sounds in three-phoneme (CVC) words ( not including final /l/, /r/, or /x/) J
5. Add or subsMtute individual phonemes in simple, one- syllable words to make new words J
First Grade Standards Demonstrate understanding of spoken words, syllables, and sounds (phonemes) J
1. DisMnguish long from short vowel sounds in spoken single-syllable words
2. Orally produce single-syllable words by blending sounds, including consonant blends
3. Isolate and pronounce iniMal, medial vowel, and final sounds in spoken single-syllable words
4. Segment spoken single-syllable words into their complete sequence of individual sounds
Phon Aware Tx 17
Standards & Research Evidence
• Phoneme isolaMon, segmenMng, and blending for simple words needed for reading and spelling
• First grade standards make sense • Lack of second grade fancy task standards make sense • BUT kindergarten standards include opMonal skills, adding
unnecessary complexity and work
Don’t interpret the CCSS [Common Core] as a mandate to shoehorn more stuff into an already overcrowded curriculum (Calkins et al., 2012, p. 182)
Phon Aware Tx 19
Past PracVces
• Teach phonological awareness – Syllables and rhyme are obvious and easy – Entry into speech sound awareness
• Start with these large speech units – For preschoolers – K-1 tx progression – IniMate minimal speech unit amer mastery of larger unit
• Phoneme achievements – Preschoolers culminate with first sound introducMon – K could master first sound tasks – 1st could master simple segmenMng
Phon Aware Tx 20
Revising the RecommendaVons – Start and Stay with Phonemes
• Larger speech units not an easier entry – Rhyme and syllable not needed for early reading/spelling – Nor for entry into phonemes – Some first phoneme tasks very easy – Syllable to phoneme segmenMng confusing
• Right from the get-go – Start with phonemes for K and preschoolers – Use rhyme incidentally to highlight sounds of words
• Phoneme achievements – Pre-K can master first sounds (many w/o explicit instrucMon) – K can master simple segmenMng
So that should save 7me!
Phon Aware Tx 21
Tasks to Teach
1. IsolaMng first, middle, final phonemes 2. Matching first, middle, final phonemes 3. SegmenMng simple words into phonemes 4. Blending simple words from phonemes
Just teaching these should save 7me.
And Even Phoneme Order Not Strict 1. Visible and conMnuant consonants
/m/, /b/, /f/, /s/… 2. Not visible but salient consonants:
/g/, /n/, /sh/, /dz/… 3. Word iniMal consonant clusters and tense vowels:
/sp/, /sm/, /sk/, /i/, /u/… 4. Everything else
/r/, /l/, /w/, /j/ /sl/,/gr/, /tw/ /a/, /aw/, /E/ V-/sk/, V-/nk/, V-/gz/
Guide to task order OR to support and expecta7ons
5330 PhonAwarePlus Tx 22
Phon Aware Tx 23
Making Tasks Harder or Easier
• Tasks can be made harder by increasing cogniMve and memory demands
• e.g., phoneme matching – Match from two words – Match from four words – With or without pictures – With known or unknown vocabulary
What About These Fancy Tasks?
1. DeleMng and subsMtuMng (change the /g/ in blog to /t/ ) 2. MulMsyllabic words (extraordinary, inspira7onal) 3. DeleMng and subsMtuMng communicaMvely (Pig LaMn)
Maybe benefits, but not as phonemic awareness per se • Phonemic awareness contributes liile to reading ability
beyond 3rd grade level • Advanced phonemic awareness tasks involve cogniMve
operaMons, memory, and spelling • Reading and spelling experiences improve phonemic
awareness
Phon Aware Tx 25
Fancy Phonemic Awareness Tasks for Reading and Spelling
• Long words NOT read or spelled leier by leier – Syllabic, morphemic chunks, and MGRs
• And listening hard can make your spelling worse! • buPer, been, words • /u/ as in moo, through, do, lieu, new, blue, tune
• What about all that work holding exclama7on in mind while sounding it out and moving blocks around? More on that to come…
PhonAwarePlus Tx 26 5330
Phon Aware Tx 27 Phon Aware Tx 28
Who Should Get Phonemic Awareness Tx?
• Children on our IEPed caseload (Tier III) – First phoneme awareness for preschool – Basic phonemic awareness for K-2, depending... – Fancy phonemic awareness for 3+, depending...
• Basic phonemic awareness part of Tier I and II reading instrucMon – Check on explicitness and quality – Possibly parMcipate in Tier II remediaMon You can be an extra pair of hands, but don’t you have something else you should be doing?
Phon Aware Tx 29
Phonemic Awareness Tx Need
• Basic phonemic awareness (isolaMng, segmenMng, blending) • Indicators:
– Low on first phoneme isolaMng or matching in late preschool or early K
– Low on phoneme segmenMng in late K – Spelling is pre-phoneMc or missing phonemes:
m mom ab cat sa sun
pas place fat fast
Phon Aware Tx 30
Phon Aware Tx 31
Overview of Phonemic Awareness InstrucVon
1. A culminaMon of a verMcal hierarchy of environmental sound, word, syllable, rhyme, and phoneme acMviMes
2. Hierarchical verVcally-ordered discrete single-skill phoneme tasks
3. Cycled horizontally-ordered and integrated mix of contextualized and discrete phoneme tasks
Phon Aware Tx 32
– Rhymes – Preschool joke talk – Pig LaMn
• Talk about text – Let’s read a story – Let’s write a story
Phon Aware Tx 33
Remember the Reciprocal RelaVonship
1. Name play – No materials needed
2. Contrived drill-games – Matching, Fishing, Guess-the-Word – ArMc cards, phonology cards, plasMc food, puzzles
3. Shared books – Aphabet – AlliteraMve – Rhyming
4. Message WriMng – WriMng to dictaMon, child wriMng – White board, paper, or computer
Phon Aware Tx 35
Phon Aware Tx 37
• Big BEAR buys a bike • Liile BEAR buys a bike
Phon Aware Tx 39 Rhyming Books
Phon Aware Tx 40
• Use rhyme as a tool not as a tx objecMve
Phon Aware Tx 41
Talking about Speech Sounds during Book Sharing
There was a boy named Fred. He didn’t want to go to bed. • What are the rhyming words? • What is the first sound of Fred and bed? • Let’s count the sounds in Fred and bed, get your fingers
ready. Which is longer? • I’m going to say the sounds of another word that
rhymes with Fred and shed. /r-E-d/
Phon Aware Tx 42
Phon Aware Tx 43
Talking about Speech Sounds while Message WriVng
• Let’s write Happy Birthday Mom. • What is the first sound in happy? I will write that. • Let’s say all the sounds in happy. Fingers ready? /h-ae-
p-i/ 4 sounds, I will write the leiers. • There should be 4 leiers for 4 sounds, but wriMng is
funny someMmes, 4 sounds, 5 leiers!
CriVcal Tx Features: RISE
Explicit Skill Focus Learner Factor: AienMon, MoMvaMon & Engagement
SPPA5330 FoundaMons of Language Tx 44
How Much R-I-S-E+? Regular à Supportive à Intervention Contexts
R Few ⇒ Some ⇒ Many
Frequent; Short ⇒ Middling ⇒ Long
S Little ⇒ Some ⇒ Lots
E Implicit ⇒ Explicit ⇒ Meta
Passive & minimal ⇒ Motivated attentive ⇒ Self-directed &
sustained engagement SPPA5330 FoundaMons of Language Tx 45 Phon Aware Tx 46
RISE+ in Book Sharing Tx
Repeated Opps
Isolate + segment 2 words / pg for 5 pgs = 20 opps
Intensity Grps of 2-3 ch, 30 min/wk for 8-10 weeks
SystemaMc Support
Structural scaffolds: Rhyme to highlight form > content; leiers to represent phonemes; simple single skill games Interac7ve scaffolds: Wait for answer, stress sound, give hand cues, model, expand part to full segmentaMon
Explicit Skill Focus
+ Learner Factor
Children’s literature, clear link of skill to purposeful reading
Two EffecVve Approaches to Phonemic Awareness InstrucVon
1. Skill Mastery – Hierarchical verMcally-ordered discrete single-skill phoneme tasks AKA Skill mastery, Clinician-directed
2. Integrated MulVple Skill – Cycled horizontally-ordered mix of contextualized and discrete phoneme tasks AKA Whole-part, Hybrid, Contextualized Skill
Both linked to print and spelling experiences And with some form of classroom instrucMon
Guide to Task Order OR Task Support 1. Visible and conMnuant consonants
/m/, /b/, /f/, /s/… 2. Not visible but salient consonants:
/g/, /n/, /sh/, /dz/… 3. Word iniMal consonant clusters and tense vowels:
/sp/, /sm/, /sk/, /i/, /u/… 4. Everything else
/r/, /l/, /w/, /j/ /sl/,/gr/, /tw/ /a/, /aw/, /E/ V-/sk/, V-/nk/, V-/gz/
• In simple word shapes: CVC à CV, CVCV, CCVC à VC, CVCC • SomeMmes in challenging words: Teresa, Veronica, Nadia 5330 PhonAwarePlus Tx 48
Tx Reminders
• Repeat, emphasize, or extend isolated consonants • Isolated stop consonants impossible, but minimize
following vowel to short schwa • Have fun with long names but don’t expect accuracy
• AGAIN, SOUNDS OF SPEECH NOT SOUNDS OF LETTERS despite – Purpose is read and write not speak and listen – Teaching in a print context – Teaching along with sound-leier instrucMon
Phon Aware Tx 49
Phon Aware Tx 50 Carson et al. (2013)
Week Skill Activities
4 & 5 Phoneme
phoneme and consonant clusters to extend students
6 & 7 Phoneme
phoneme and consonant clusters to extend students
8 & 9 Phoneme
sounds in words to create new words
10 Review Reviewed prior 9 wks with focus on phoneme segmenting
and blending
MulVple Skill
b. Naming
c. Book
c. Book has four skill tasks
d. Game has one primary skill task
d. Specific answer from each child
2 a. Open Skill Qn
b. Naming
different skill tasks
b. Naming
c. Writing
tasks
Phon Aware Tx 51
Ukrainetz et al. (2009)
Phon Aware Tx 52
VerVcal vs Horizontal Task Order VerVcal: /b/à/b-a/à/b-a-d/ • Single subskill or task
focus • Contrived, controlled
before the next • Minimal instructor
support during task
foci • Purposeful, complex tasks • Varied difficulty • Varied performance
across tasks • InteracMve scaffolding
Why Horizontal?
• VerMcal discrete skill is convenMonal approach that is simpler to execute and collect data in structured, contrived games
• Horizontal requires a skilled clinician to dynamically scaffold child in purposeful and complex acMviMes
Why bother?
Phon Aware Tx 54
Why I Like Horizontal
• AlternaMve to verMcal • Less advance planning • Learned more like in daily life • Taught like other language skills • Allows child self-regulated learning • Allows SLP to respond to need in the moment • Allows variaMon in level within a group • Links to use in books and message wriMng • More interesMng for everyone
Phon Aware Tx 55
• Horizontal ordering – Integral part – From imitaMon to independence
• VerMcal ordering – Light scaffolding possible – Heavy to moderate indicates need to back up
Phon Aware Tx 56
Scaffolding Phoneme IsolaVon
Heavy Isolate and exaggerate phoneme in isolation and in the word, point to mouth and tell children to look, say the correct response, elicit response from child.
What is the first sound in milk, /m/m/m/m/m/ milk? Watch my mouth, /m/m/m/m/ilk. The first sound is /m/. You say /m/.
Moderate Isolate phoneme and exaggerate, point to mouth and tell children to look, exaggerate phoneme in word (use two or more depending on need).
What is the first sound in milk? /m/m/m/m/ milk? (point to mouth).
Phon Aware Tx 57
Light Emphasize beginning phoneme in the word.
What is the first sound in milk?
None Ask the question What is the first sound in milk?
Arriving at Independence for IsolaVon
Phon Aware Tx 58
Scaffolding Beyond The First A_empt High Scaffolding: SLP: Okay Amanda, here’s another one for you. What’s the first sound, Amanda, look at me. What’s the first sound in dare? A: Don’t you dare! SLP: What’s the first sound in dare? A: /g-g-g/ SLP: Look at my mouth -- /d-d/ A: D SLP: D is the letter. The sound is /d/ A: /d/ SLP: Good job! /d/ is the first sound in dare
Phon Aware Tx 59
Scaffolding SegmenVng Heavy Isolate and raise finger for
each phoneme in the word. The child copies and counts. Confirm correct number, repeat segmented sounds.
The word is red. Get your fists ready to count the sounds. /r/ (raise one finger) Say the sounds with me. /E/ (raise second finger). Yes, /r/ / E/ /d/. How many sounds? Count my fingers. Right three sounds. /r/ /E/ /d/
Moderate Get mouth ready for first phoneme, but pause for children to say it, raise finger, then mouth sound but pause for the other phonemes. Have child tell how many phonemes.
The word is red. Get your fists ready. You say the sounds this time (mouth /r/ and raise finger). /E/ (raise finger), /d/ (raise finger)? Yes, /r/ /E/ /d/. How many sounds? Phon Aware Tx 60
Arriving at Independent SegmenVng
Light Get the mouth ready to say each phoneme. Raise finger for each phoneme. Say aloud only the middle sounds.
The word is red. Get your fists ready. (mouth the sound / r/), /e/, (raise fingers), (mouth / d/). Yes, /r/ /e/ /d/. How many sounds?
None Ask the question. Say the sounds in red.
Phon Aware Tx 61
Scaffolding SegmenVng a Simple Word
Light Scaffolding, Simple Word: SLP: How many sounds are in the word the? Show me the sounds. Tap my fingers and show me. J: /th-e/ SLP: Yes! /th-e/, /th-e/. Two sounds.
Phon Aware Tx 62
Scaffolding SegmenVng a Hard Word
Light Scaffolding, Complex Word: SLP: What’s the next word? J: Titanic SLP: Titanic! That has a lot of sounds in it. What do you think the first sound is? J: /T-i-tan-i-c/ (sticks out five fingers as he says sounds). SLP: Good! You counted most of the sounds. J: There’s five sounds. SLP: Okay, that was good for such a long word.
Scaffolding Tips for Young Children
• In the zone – Enough help for success with effort; vary effort vs success
– Recognize parMal and increasing correctness • Blending – Closed choices with rhyming/pictures/objects • SegmentaMon
– Mouth and finger assists segmentaMon – Present the correct model but accept approximaMons – For preschoolers, aim is idea of phoneme segmentaMon and embedded isolaMon opps
IniVaVng Speech Sound Awareness
• Listening pracMce, but on phonemes • Becoming aware of mouth and ear • Isolated phoneme pracMce, but Med to word context • Choral and individual, for a few minutes • First sound in my name, Teresa, /t-t-t-t-t/ (point to my
mouth) everyone say this together… • Use salient phoneme contrasts – /p/ vs /s/ vs /n/
Phon Aware Tx 65
How Much?
For 3 months? 2 years? 15 min a week? 60 min a week?
Phon Aware Tx 66
How Much – The Teaching Episode & Tx Dosage
• To determine intensity, think about drug dosages • AcMve treatment element in its minimal unit
– Teaching episode = IniMaMon+Response+EvaluaMon • A dosage framework (Warren, Yoder, & Fey, 2007)
– Dose: 1 session – Form: Nature of acMviMes in session – Strength: Number of episodes in 1 dose – Frequency: Number of doses per week – DuraMon: Number of weeks of does – Total intensity: DuraMon x Frequency x Strength
Phon Aware Tx 67
Beyond the Basic IRE Episode • IRE plus
– Clinician model without response – Peer response heard as model – Choral response belonging to whom?
• MulMple task episodes – Let’s see if sun and slow match. What is the first sound in sun? [match + isolate]
– Let’s say the all the sounds in sun. You start, the first sound is-- [segment + isolate]
– What am I holding in this bag? /P-i-ch/. Peach. Your turn. You say the sounds in the next word and I will guess. [blend + isolate]
Phon Aware Tx 68
Intensity Evidence to 2001
• Large number of controlled studies have obtained significant and large gains
• Intensity has varied considerably: – Session lengths of 15 to 90 minutes – Frequencies of 1 to 5 Mmes weekly – DuraMons of 4 to 32 weeks – Individual, group, and whole class arrangements – Learners from 4 to 8 years, of a range of abiliMes
• No report of number of teaching episodes • Rarely treatment fidelity or child aiendance info
Phon Aware Tx 69
Ehri et al. (2001) Meta-Analysis
• Part of NRP (2000) • Evidence for phonemic awareness treatment effects • 52 studies with 96 treatment-control comparisons reviewed
– Mixed pre-phonemic and phonemic • Results:
– Small group beier than individual or whole class – Typical learners had larger gains than weaker learners – 1-2 tasks beier than 3+ phonemic/pre-phonemic tasks – 5 to 18 hours best, with no difference in this span
Intensity – How Much Tx? Depends on How
• The long way: 6 months if full phonological spectrum, whole K class 15-min daily instrucMon (24 hrs): – Brady et al. (1994), moderate gains on segmenMng: d = 0.57
• The short way: 7 weeks if phoneme-level only, small K groups, 3-4x/wk 20-30 min instrucMon (12 hrs): – Ball & Blachman (1988): Say-it-and-move it blank/leier Mles; SegmenMng: vs no-tx & leier tx, d = 1.85, d = 1.67.
– Ukrainetz et al. (2000): Sound talk embedded in rhyming books and shared wriMng acMviMes; SegmenMng: d = 1.37
Phon Aware Tx 71
Tx Intensity for Children with Language Impairment
• 7 controlled group studies at phoneme level (incl. rhyme) for 4-7 yr olds – Warrick et al. (1993), van Kleeck et al. (1998), Gillon (2000, 2005), Segers & Voerhoeven (2004), Denne et al (205), Hesketh et al. (2000)
• 4 included other speech/language objs • Individual or small group, 3-20 hrs • Best results for 12-20 hours, large segmenVng effect
(>d = 1)
• Studies unMl recently contrasted phonological awareness tx to regular classroom instrucMon with
• BUT now... – One of the 5 pillars of reading (NRP, 2000) – Part of K-1 standardized reading dx (DIBELS) – Omen taught in RTI and in classroom – Primarily at the phoneme level in K
• So how much is enough for tx with classroom phonemic awareness instrucVon?
Phon Aware Tx 73
A Study of Intensity
Ukrainetz, Ross, & Harm (2009) • 41 5-6 year old kindergartners, including 22 English
learners, with low leier and first sound knowledge on DIBELS
• 11 hours of phonemic awareness treatment: – Concentrated (CP, 3x/wk, Oct - Dec) – Dispersed (DP, 1x/wk, Oct to March) – Vocabulary control (CON, 1x/wk to March)
Ukrainetz, Ross, & Harm (2009) What is the effect on phonemic awareness and nonsense word reading of supplementary phonemic awareness instruc7on concentrated in the fall compared to dispersed through the year for at-risk Ks?
• 41 Ks: low leier & first sound knowledge on DIBELS, incl 22 ELL • 11 hours of phonemic awareness tx:
1. Concentrated (CP, 3x/wk, Oct - Dec) 2. Dispersed (DP, 1x/wk, Oct to March) 3. Vocabulary control (CON, 1x/wk to March)
• Effects in December of more tx • Effects in April of different distribuMon of tx
Phon Aware Tx 75
Activities Name, picture, object, book, & writing activities (fingers for segmenting)
Phon Aware Tx 76
Episodes (IRE +)
≥ 5 per task per child = 20 + listening to 1/2 the 40 peer models /.. Session dose = 40 episodes
Phon Aware Tx 77
Total time 12 hours of tx
Total intensity 960 teaching episodes
Phon Aware Tx 78
Mild
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
M ea
n/ 40
Phon Aware Tx 79
Results of Ukr&al (2009) Intensity Tx Study
• Over a school yr, for SLP tx and classrm instrucMon • Most improved into the normal range • A few sMll below expectaMons; rec’d for sped dx • English learners = naMve English speakers • Short intense tx = long weekly tx • At-risk Ks, esp mild deficits, improve a lot with only
classroom instrucMon and incidental self-regulatory gains from tx for another area
Phon Aware Tx 80
RecommendaVons for Phonemic Awareness Intensity
• Total intensity – 5-18 hours for typical ch – 12-20 hours for ch w/ lang imp
• Most of this in the regular classroom • AddiMonal tx?
– 8 sessions of 20 episodes per child? – 5 episodes per child in tx sessions on other goals over 24 sessions?
– An addiMonal boost for our kids, but not a lot
Spend the 7me you save on increasing intensity for other language skills
Phon Aware Tx 81
Phonemic Awareness in Summary
1. Tier I and II -- teachers handling phonemic awareness 2. Tier III -- SLPs, but strategically and efficiently 3. Teach at the phoneme level 4. Teach isolating, blending, and easy segmenting 5. Do not teach students to listen really hard 6. Use both drill-game and purposeful print activities 7. Use RISE+ in all tx activities 8. Use vertical or horizontal ordering 9. Match scaffolding to child need and task difficulty
* A little quality tx will go a long way for this teachable skill *
The Rest of the Story of Phonological Processing Tx
Deficits underlying most reading disabiliMes (aka dyslexia) 1. Phonemic awareness 2. Phonological working memory 3. Phonological code retrieval (wordfinding) And #4, Phonological ProducMon?
Phon Aware Tx 82
Saying the Words – The ProducVon Part of Phonological Processing
• Not sig part of phonological processing deficits – For ch with sig speech sound disorders, 1/3 show
comprehension deficits and 3/4 producMon deficits (Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1994)
– BUT low co-morbidity (<2%) for Ks ided with language impairment (Shriberg et al., 1999)
• If only phonological disorder, not sig predictor of later reading problems – BUT LI and RD show mild difficulMes with mulMsyllabic
pronunciaMon (Goffman, 2004; Munson et al., 2005) – And oral & limb motor coordinaMon (Zelaznik & Goffman,
2010) Phon Aware Tx 83 Phon Aware Tx 84
Phonological Processing Tx Need
• Word-reading problems • Persistent trouble on phonemic awareness compared to
peers • Low on auditory memory and rapid automaMzed naming
(CTOPP) • Spelling may be convenMonal for most words but student
gets lost in mulMsyllabic words decious delicious camatily calamity
• Watch student spell: Spelling process shows forge\ng and repeated tries even if answer correct
Phon Aware Tx 85
A Fancy Task Program
• Structured hierarchical procedure with step-by-step tasks and prompts
• Blocks and leier-blocks represent phonemes in nonsense & real words
• IniMate with arMculatory phoneMcs instrucMon on disMncMve features (stop, fricaMve, alveolar)
• Invented vocabulary for arMculators (7p tapper, lip popper, skinny air)
• Omen extended Mme of 1+ years • Phonemic awareness, leier-sound correspondence,
auditory memory, word retrieval, convenMonal spelling Phon Aware Tx 86
But Maybe Intense Quality Tx More than LiPS?
• Reading: Torgesen et al. (2001) • LiPS & Embedded Phonics for 10-12yr SLD : indiv 100 min/ day for 8 wks
• --> For both txs, rdg accuracy & compreh average range, rate improved, 40% no longer SPED
• Language: Gillam et al. (2008)
• Computerized or SLP tx for 6-9yr SLI: indiv 100 min/day for 8 wks
– --> For all txs, big changes in standardized lang measures incl phonemic awareness & auditory temporal proc
Phonological Memory IntervenVon
• Advanced phonemic awareness segmentaMon, subsMtuMon, and deleMon “work-outs”
• As a way in to less-accessible components of phonological processing? – With or w/o color-coded Mles and leiers – Require sustained aienMon, memory, retrieval and problem-solving
• What about Pig LaMn? • Memory and rapid naming drills? • Specialized computer training somware?
Phon Aware Tx 87
Pig LaVn • Take first consonant or consonant cluster of English word,
move it to end of word and add suffix ay [e] pig → igpay banana → ananabay truck → ucktray happy → appyhay
• For words that begin with vowel sounds or silent leier, "way" or “yay” or “ay” added at word end egg → eggway inbox → inboxway
• Iway antway ootway iecpay oastay ithway amjay
Phon Aware Tx 88
Emerging PosiVve Evidence for Memory Tx
Maridaki-Kassotaki (2002) – Randomly assigned 120 6-9 yr Greek ch to tx & no-tx control – Tx: Non-word repeMMon exercises for 15-min, 4 days/wk, 7 mos
– Results: Significantly beier non-word rep and reading Garcia-Madruga et al. (2013)
– Randomly assigned 31 Spanish 8-9yr to tx & control – Tx: Drills on ain focus, ain switching, using prior knowledge, semanMc updaMng in working mem, & inhibiMon
– Results: Sig beier IQ scores, reading compreh, and working memory
Phon Aware Tx 89
CogMed Dual n-back Training
• n-back task: Listen to or look at stream of leiers or numbers and decide if item matches one that occurred a designated number of items earlier – 2-back: 1-4-5-7-5-2-7-2-7-3-6-8-6 – Dual version, parMcipants look at and listen to different sequences simultaneously
• Tx involves moving incrementally from 1-back to 2-back and so on
• Claims to improve memory and intelligence • See www.soakyourhead.com
Phon Aware Tx 90
Promising But… • Controlled studies à improvements in aienMon, working
memory, and reading (Gillam & Gillam, 2010; Holmes et al., 2009, 2010) – BUT with no-tx comparisons, DK acMve tx features (e.g., greater monitoring and encouragement)
– DK if same outcomes for other txs with mental rehearsal and manipulaMon
– DK if changes maintain and generalize to academics • DK what is changing (Holmes et al., with 8-11 yr olds)
– Capacity or control of aienMon & strategy use? – Majority reported concentraMng harder to improve perf (e.g., close eyes, rehearse items, and trace paierns with eyes)
Phon Aware Tx 91
• Other ways to improve daily life performance (Boudreau & Constanza, 2011) – Language skills, knowledge base, learning skills… – You remember bePer with founda7onal understanding and awareness of task purpose
• Berninger et al. (2008): for 4th to 6th graders with reading disability, – Explicit orthographic and morphological training improved pseudo word reading and real word spelling
– But hands-on, engaging problem-solving science instrucMon improved phonological working memory
Phon Aware Tx 92
Phonological Code Retrieval
• Accurately and quickly accessing the phonological code represenMng the meanings of known words – AKA word retrieval, word-finding, rapid naming – In spoken language expression and in fluent reading
• Double Deficit Source for RD: Combo of difficulMes in phonological awareness and phonological code retrieval (Wolf & Bowers, 1999)
• Central phonological retrieval component – But also taps aienMonal, perceptual, memory, lexical, and arMculatory elements
Phon Aware Tx 93
1. Improve word depth and elaboraMon in tradiMonal semanMcs treatment
2. Use phonological and semanMc cues to aid word retrieval
3. Teach children how to cue and organize themselves 4. Rapid naming drills for leiers, digits, objects
Phon Aware Tx 94
Effects of Rapid Naming Tx on Retrieval • Improves accuracy and latency of word retrieval in
confrontaMon naming tasks (McGregor & Leonard, 1995) – BUT liile generalizaMon to untrained words (e.g., Bragard et al., 2012)
– And none to communicaMve and reading tasks • Rapid leier naming txs show immediate increase in leier
naming speed and reading fluency – BUT improvements temporary or require addiMonal orthographic training (Kirby et al., 2010)
• But rapid naming performance can improve somewhat as a result of reading intervenMon (Torgesen et al., 2010)
Phon Aware Tx 95
In Sum – Phonological Processing Tx
1. Tx can improve memory performance – Qns re: criMcal tx elements, what is being improved, and whether improvements maintain and generalize
2. Retrieval performance strongly resistant to cueing & rapid naming tx – Improve language and reading skills, which then improves retrieval
3. Keep phonemic awareness focused and efficient – Phoneme-level awareness tx linked to reading and
wriMng
Phon Aware Tx 97
Phonemic Awareness References Ball, E.W., & Blachman, B.A. (1988). Phoneme segment tx. Annals Dyslexia, 38,
208-225. Boudreau, D., & Costanza-Smith, A. (2011). Assessment and tx of working memory
deficits in school-age ch: Role of the SLP. LSHSS, 42, 152-166. Bragard, A. et al. (2012). Word-finding interv for ch with SLI: A mulMple single-case
study. LSHSS, 43, 222-234. Calkins, L., & al. (2012). Pathways to the Common Core. NH: Heinemann. Carson, K.L. et al. (2013). Classrm phonological aware instrucMon and literacy
outcomes in first year of schl. LSHSS, 44, 147-160. Denne, M. et al. (2005). Txg ch w/ exp phonol dis. Internat J Lang & Comm Dis, 40,
493-504. Ehri, L.C., et al. (2001). Phonemic aware instruct helps ch learn to read: Evidence frm
NRP’s meta-analysis. Rdg Res Q, 36, 250-287. Garcia-Madruga, J.A. et al. (2013). Rdg compreh and working memory’s exec
processes: Tx study. Rdg Res Q, 48, 155-174. Gillam, R.B., & Gillam, S.L. (2012). N-Back and CogMed working memory training:
Proceed with cauMon. Perspec7ves Lang Learning & Educ, 19(3), 108-116. Gillam, R.B. et al. (2008). Efficacy of Fast ForWord-Lang interv in school-age ch with
lang imp: A randomized controlled trial. JSLHR, 51, 97-119. Gillon, G.T. (2000). Efficacy of phonol aware tx for ch w/ lang impair. LSHSS, 31,
126-141.
Gillon, G. (2002). F/u study invesMg benefits of phonol aware tx for ch w/ spoken lang impair. Internat J Lang & Comm Dis, 37, 381-400.
Gillon, G.T. (2004). Phonological awareness: From res to prac7ce. NY: Guilford. Gillon, G.T. (2005). FacilitaMng phoneme aware develop in 3-&4-yr ch w/ spch impair.
LSHSS, 36, 281-284. Hesketh, A. et al. (2007). Teaching phoneme aware to pre-literate ch w/ spch dis.
Internat J Lang & Comm Dis, 42, 251-271. Holmes, J., et al. (2009). AdapMve training leads to sustained enhancement of poor
working memory in ch. Developmental Science, 12(4), F9–F15. Holmes, J., et al., (2010). Working mem deficits can be overcome: Training and
medic on working mem in ch with ADHD. Applied Cogni7ve Psych, 24, 827–836. Maridaki-Kossotaki, K. (2002). RelaMon bet phonol memory and rdg ability in Greek-
speaking ch: Training of phonol memory. European J Psych of Educ, 17, 63-73 McGee, L.M., & Ukrainetz, T.A. (2009). Using scaffolding to teach phonemic aware in
presch & K. Rdg Teacher, 62, 599-603. McGregor, K.K. & Leonard, L. (1995). Interv for word-finding deficits. In M.E. Fey et
al. (Eds.), Lang interv: Preschl through elementary years (pp. 85-106). Brookes. Munson, B. et al. (2005). Influence of vocab size, phonotacMc probability, and
wordlikeness on nonword reps of ch with/without SLI. JSLHR, 48, 1033-1047. Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2004). Computer-supported phonol aware tx for K ch w/
SLI. LSHSS, 35, 229-239. Shriberg, L. D. et al. (1999). Prevalence of spch delay in 6-year-old ch and
comorbidity with lang impairment. JSLHR, 42, 1461-1481. Phon Aware Tx 98
Phon Aware Tx 99
Torgesen, J.K. et al. (2001). Intensive remed instruct for ch with severe RD. J Learning Dis, 34, 33-58.
Ukrainetz, T.A. (2006). Scaffolding young students into phonemic awareness. In T.A. Ukrainetz (Ed.), Contextualized Lang Interv (pp. 429-467). Pro-Ed.
Ukrainetz, T.A. (2008). Phonemic aware instruct for presch: Pre-phonemic vs phonemic. EBP Briefs, 2, 47-58.
Ukrainetz, T.A. (2009). Phon aware: How much is enough in changing pic of rdg instrucMon? Topics Lang Dis, 29, 344-359.
Ukrainetz, T.A. et al. (2000). An invesMg into teaching phonemic aware thru shared rdg & wrtg. Early Childhood Res Q, 15, 331-355.
Ukrainetz, T.A. et al. (2009). An invesMg of tx scheduling for phonemic awareness with at-risk Ks. LSHSS, 40, 86-100.
Ukrainetz, T.A. et al. (2011). Effect of syllable instrucMon on phonemic awareness in preschlers. Early Childhood Res Q, 26, 50-60.
van Kleeck, A. et al. (1998). Study of classrm-based phonol aware tx for prschlrs w/ spch & lang dis. AJSLP, 7, 65-76.
Warren, S.F. et al. (2007). DifferenMal tx intensity res: Missing link to creaMng opMmally effecMve comm interv. MR and DD Res Reviews, 13, 70-77.
Warrick, N. et al. (1993). Phon aware lang-delay ch. Annals Dyslexia, 43, 153-172. Zelaznik, H.N., & Goffman, L. (2010). Generalized motor abiliMes and Mming beh in ch
with SLI. JSLHR, 53, 383-393.

ThePlan( Phonemic)Awareness:) To)Whom,)and)How)Much)

Documents

Transcript of ThePlan( Phonemic)Awareness:) To)Whom,)and)How)Much)