WWC review of this study

Integration of letter–sound correspondences and phonological awareness skills of blending and segmenting: A pilot study examining the effects of instructional sequence on word reading for kindergarten children with low phonological awareness.

Oudeans, M. K. (2003). Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(4), 258–280.

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    41
     Students
    , grade
    K

Reviewed: October 2019

No statistically significant positive
findings
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Letter identification outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

DIBELS Letter Naming Fluency

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

0 Days

Full sample;
41 students

29.27

28.25

No

--
Show Supplemental Findings

DIBELS Letter Naming Fluency

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

6 Weeks

Full sample;
41 students

29.51

26.40

--

--

DIBELS Letter Naming Fluency

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

10 Days

Full sample;
41 students

29.57

27.10

--

--
Phonology outcomes—Substantively important positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Dynamic Indicators for Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Phoneme Segmentation Fluency

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

0 Days

Full sample;
41 students

46.04

38.40

--

--

DIBELS Onset Recognition-OnRF

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

0 Days

Full sample;
41 students

25.73

22.35

No

--
Show Supplemental Findings

Dynamic Indicators for Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Phoneme Segmentation Fluency

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

10 Days

Full sample;
41 students

44.70

38.30

--

--

Dynamic Indicators for Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Phoneme Segmentation Fluency

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

6 Weeks

Full sample;
41 students

48.76

42.15

--

--

DIBELS Onset Recognition-OnRF

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

6 Weeks

Full sample;
41 students

25.27

22.95

No

--

DIBELS Onset Recognition-OnRF

Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade vs. Parallel, Non-Integrated (PN-I) Instructional Sequence

10 Days

Full sample;
41 students

31.05

28.90

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.

    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    West

Setting

Both treatments consisted of 40 intervention lessons implemented for 10 weeks, 15 minutes per day, 4 days a week, to small groups of 3-4 children. The treatment groups were subsets of the normal classrooms.

Study sample

A requirement for study eligibility is that students are "nonreaders," as determined by reading 5 or fewer words on the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised, administered in November of the Kindergarten year. There is no indication that this classification is equated with a disability. The study does pay special attention to children with "low phonological awareness" (65% of the eligible sample) but this is not an identified learning disability, and the study does not focus exclusively on those students.

Intervention Group

During each day of the intervention, both Conditions received: (1) 7.5 minutes of activities involving printed letters, where students were taught the name of and sounds most commonly associated with each letter. (2) 7.5 minutes of activities that did not involve printed letters, where students were taught to blend phonemes into words or segment words into phonemes. Difference between Treatment Conditions: In the Parallel Integrated (PI) sequence, teachers made explicit references to skills from part (2) during the part (1) activities. In the Parallel Non-Integrated (PN-I) sequence, teachers did not make these references. Additional information is provided below. - The add-on intervention was implemented for 10 weeks during a half-day kindergarten program. Children in each kindergarten participate in a broad array of subjects throughout the day, but specific information on other literacy activities is not provided. - There is no home component. - The teachers that implemented each condition had a wide range of experience. They were hired for this study and it was not clear whether or not they were the students' normal classroom teachers. - A specific list of materials is not provided, but cards with picture representations of words were used during the activities without printed letters. - Each instructional sequence is scripted and involves specific activities and examples. -Formative assessments of students were administered during weeks 2,4,6, and 8 of the study using the DIBELS Phonemic Segmentation and Nonsense Word Fluency subtests. - Implementation fidelity was measured by the investigator, using a checklist of critical lesson features and the scripted lesson to monitor lesson delivery. Full observations were made of 27% of the total number of lessons and partial observations were made of 61% of the total number of lessons. After observations, the investigator provided feedback, offered additional training or modeled activities if necessary.

Comparison Group

This study compares the PI and PN-I instructional sequences, both of which are described above. The only difference is that teachers in the PI sequence make explicit references to blending and segmenting phonemes during the portion of the lesson otherwise dedicated to printed letters.

Support for implementation

Teachers who implemented the treatments participated in three hours of training on the first 20 lessons before the beginning of the study, and an additional three hours of training prior to the last 20 lessons. The study author delivered the training, modeled activities and allowed teachers to practice. Teachers were encouraged to develop a conceptual understanding of critical features of lessons in both conditions, as they were each responsible for implementing both treatments. After fidelity observations, the investigator provided feedback, offered additional training or modeled activities if necessary.

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

  • Oudeans, M. K. (2000). Integration of letter–sound correspondences and phonological awareness skills of blending and segmenting: An examination of the effects of instructional sequence on word reading for kindergarten children with low phonological awareness. Dissertation Abstracts International, Section A. Humanities and Social Sciences, 61(9), 163.

Reviewed: June 2012



Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Study sample characteristics were not reported.
 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top