Individual differences in gains from computer-assisted remedial reading.

Two hundred second- to fifth-grade students (aged approximately 7 to 11 years) spent 29 h in a computer-assisted remedial reading program that compared benefits from accurate, speech-supported reading in context, with and without explicit phonological training. Children in the "accurate-reading-in-context" condition spent 22 individualized computer hours reading stories and 7 small-group hours learning comprehension strategies. Children in the "phonological-analysis" condition learned phonological strategies in 7 small-group hours, and divided their computer time between phonological exercises and story reading. Phonologically trained children gained more in phonological skills and untimed word reading; children with more contextual reading gained more in time-limited word reading. Lower level readers gained more, and benefited more from phonological training, than higher level readers. In follow-up testing, most children maintained or improved their levels, but not their rates, of training gains. Phonologically trained children scored higher on phonological decoding, but children in both conditions scored equivalently on word reading.

Training phonological awareness with and without explicit attention to articulation.

One hundred twenty-two second- to fifth-grade (7- to 11-year-old) children with reading difficulties studied phonological awareness with or without explicit attention to articulation and with or without manipulation of sounds. They all studied identical phonics and read stories on the computer with speech and decoding support for difficult words. Regular-instruction controls received regularly scheduled language-arts or reading activities. After 40 h of training, children in all three trained conditions outperformed controls on all tests except math. Conditions that manipulated sounds showed advantages over the condition without explicit practice manipulating sounds, but only on the two measures of phonological awareness. Articulatory awareness training yielded no unique benefits during this training period. Individual differences in response to treatment related to initial levels of phonological awareness, naming speed, IQ, and grade. The similar outcomes of the three conditions suggest that specific variations in good phonological training may be less important than once thought for most children with reading difficulties.

Computer-based phonological awareness and reading instruction.

Reading with Orthographic and Segmented Speech (ROSS) programs use talking computers to deal with deficits in word recognition and phonological awareness. With ROSS, children read stories on a computer screen. Whenever they encounter a word they find difficult, they can request assistance by targeting the word with a mouse. The program highlights the word in segments and then pronounces the segments in order. In previous studies, children improved in reading, but children with relatively lower initial phonological awareness (PA) gained less than the others. In order to maximize the benefits from ROSS for all children, the current study aimed to improve PA before and while reading with ROSS, by using some programs based on theAuditory Discrimination in Depth method (Lindamood and Lindamood 1975), and others focusing on phoneme manipulation with speech feedback for all responses. The study compared the effects of this training with training in Comprehension Strategies (CS) based on Reciprocal Teaching techniques (Palincsar and Brown 1984), among second- to fifth-grade students with problems in word recognition. While both groups received equal instructional time in small-groups and with the computer, the groups differed in how much time they spent reading words in context. Whereas PA children spent half their computer time on PA exercises involving individual words and half reading words in context with ROSS, the CS group spent all their computer time reading words in context with ROSS. Both groups made significant gains in decoding, word recognition, and comprehension; however the PA groups gained significantly more than the CS group on all untimed tests of phoneme awareness, word recognition, and nonsense word reading. The CS children performed better on a test of time-limited word recognition; they also achieved higher comprehension scores, although only while reading with a trainer. The PA children's improved decoding skill led to greater accuracy, but slower responses with difficult words, after one semester's training.

Whole words and decoding for short-term learning: comparisons on a "talking-computer" system.

Low-and average-ability readers in first and second grade studied a list of 36 words using a "talking-computer" system. The system highlighted and simultaneously pronounced orthographic units in the words when the children touched the words with a light pen. During two training sessions, the computer presented four groups of 9 words each, one group as whole words, one in syllabic units, one in subsyllabic units, and one as single grapheme-phoneme units. All children learned the least words with single grapheme-phoneme units, having had the greatest difficulty blending the units into words during training. The other presentation units did not differ significantly from each other for most students on post-testing. However, the low first-grade readers learned fewer words segmented and presented by subsyllables than by syllable or word units, but only for multisyllabic words. Monosyllabic words were blended and learned as easily with onset-rime segmentation as with whole word units, for all children.

Subsyllabic units in computerized reading instruction: onset-rime vs. postvowel segmentation.

Previous studies suggest that adults and children divide spoken syllables into subsyllabic onset-rime units more readily than into any other kind of subsyllabic unit. We asked whether this same onset-rime segmentation might also be beneficial in teaching children to read. That is, can children learn more words segmented at the onset-rime boundary (e.g., CL-AP, D-ISH) than words segmented after the vowel (CLA-P, DI-SH)? In three experiments, first-grade students studied single words presented by a computer connected to a high-quality speech synthesizer. Experiment 1 used words of four letters but only three phonemes apiece (e.g., WHIP, DISH). In some of these words the onset-rime segmentation corresponded to the initial bigram (e.g., WH-IP); in some it did not (e.g., D-ISH). Experiments 2 and 3 used words of four letters and four phonemes (e.g., CLAP, CORN). In all three experiments, onset-rime segmentation proved more helpful than postvowel segmentation in short-term learning of the words.