1. • It has been well-documented that children who come from low-socioeconomic (SES)
environments are often at a high risk for developing later reading disabilities 2, 10.
• These inequities in reading success are thought to be partially due to the amount and the
quality of language- and literacy-related experiences in a child’s early years5.
• PA has been shown to be a highly predictive skill of later literary skills, and children with
poor PA skills in first grade are at-risk for difficulties reading and responding to reading
instruction6. In fact, the most common cause of early difficulties in acquiring the ability to
decode words involves individual differences in PA10.
• As these inequities in early literacy skills are often environment-related, early intervention
efforts can be highly preventative of delays for children from low-income backgrounds8.
• Intervention addressing phoneme awareness and letter knowledge increases intervention
impact as compared to phoneme awareness alone. A bi-directional relationship between
letter knowledge and early phoneme awareness development supports the integration of
these two PA components in intervention3.
• Embedded-explicit approaches to intervention are highly recommended in the prevention
of reading and writing difficulties, as they enable explicit instruction within a natural
context4.
• Shared Storybook Reading (SSR) is a viable option for implementing embedded-explicit
intervention6, as it gives SLPs and teachers the opportunity to involve children in positive
and meaningful literacy-focused interactions.
• SSR is an effective context for teaching PA skills in high-need preschool populations and
for children with language delays5, 7.
• Few studies have utilized SSR as a tool for class-wide PA instruction for preschoolers in
high-need populations in which struggling students are not pulled out or grouped apart from
the class.
• The aim of the current study is to investigate the effect of an embedded class-wide
PA intervention on letter name knowledge, letter sound knowledge, and initial sound
awareness in 3- and 4- year-old children in high-need preschool classrooms.
The following research question was addressed:
1. Is a twice weekly, eight-week long classroom-based intervention effective in
improving letter name knowledge, letter sound knowledge, initial sound awareness, in
3- and 4-year-old children in a high-need preschool?
Phonological Awareness Training in a Low-Income Preschool Classroom
School of Communication Science & Disorders, Florida State University
Toby Macrae, Ph.D., Emily Lakey, Ph. D., Erin Barr, B.H.S., Khalyn Jones, B.A., Brooke Ossi, B.S., Emily Panek, B.S.
Literature Review Discussion
Results
Participants
In this multiple-baseline-across-participants design, the participants were assigned to two
groups based on their classroom in the preschool. Group A began treatment one week after
the pre-assessment period, while Group B began two weeks after the pre-assessment
period. During this period, baseline was established at two weeks for Group A and three
weeks for Group B. Probes (baseline, treatment, post-treatment, and follow-up) will
include the following measures:
1. Letter name knowledge: Assessed by asking children to name the 26 uppercase letters
of the Roman alphabet (see Torgesen, 1998).
2. Letter sound knowledge: Assessed by asking children to pronounce the sound the letter
makes in words when presented with all lowercase letters (see Torgesen, 1998).
3. Initial sound awareness: Assessed by showing the children a picture and asking what
the first sound is (e.g. this is a cat; what is the first sound in cat?).
In order to teach the letter names, letter sounds, and initial sound awareness, the children
participated in shared storybook reading activities in the classroom. Different activities
targeted the letter name, the letter sound, and initial sound awareness through the weeks of
PA training, with new letters/sound being targeted each week. Attention was focused on the
target letter/sound throughout the reading activity, with journal activities being completed
after reading to reinforce and provide practice opportunities for producing target letter
names, letter sounds, identifying initial sounds. Three months post treatment, a set of
follow-up probes were administered in order to determine how well the participants
maintained the skills acquired in training.
References
1. Byiers, B.J., Reichle, J., & Symons, F.J. (2012). Single-subject experimental design for evidence-based practice. American Journal of Speech-Language
Pathology, 21, 297-414.
2. Duncan, L. G., & Seymour, P. H. K. (2000). Socio-economic differences in foundation-level literacy. British Journal of Psychology, 91,145–166.
3. Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic Awareness Instruction Helps Children
Learn To Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(3), 250-287.
4. Justice LM, Chow S-M, Capellini C, Flanigan K and Colton S (2003) ‘Emergent Literacy Intervention for Vulnerable Preschoolers: Relative Effects of
Two Approaches.’American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 12(3): 320–332.
5. Justice LM and Ezell HK (2002) ‘Use of Storybook Reading to Increase Print Awareness in At-Risk Children’. American Journal of Speech-Language
Pathology 11(1): 17–29.
6. Justice LM and Kaderavek JN (2004) ‘Embedded-Explicit Emergent Literacy Intervention I: Background and Description of Approach’. Language,
Speech, & Hearing Services in Schools 35(3): 201–211.
7. Lefebvre, P., Trudeau, N., & Sutton, A. (2011). Enhancing vocabulary, print awareness, and phonological awareness through shared storybook reading
with low-income preschoolers. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(4), 453-479.
8. McCardle, P., Scarborough, H. S., & Catts, H. W. (2001). Predicting, explaining, and preventing reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and
Practice, 16, 230-239.
9. Torgesen, J.K. (2002). The prevention of reading disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 40(1), 7-26.
10. Torgesen, J. K., & Mathes, P. (2000). A basic guide to understanding, assessing, and
teaching phonological awareness. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Method
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
BL1 BL2 BL3 BL4 BL5 INT1 INT2 INT3 INT4 INT5 INT6 INT7 POST POST FU
Letter Name - 3 Year Olds
Lynn
Loren
Alex
Zach
Peter
Pate
Elle
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
BL1 BL2 BL3 BL4 BL5 INT1 INT2 INT3 INT4 INT5 INT6 INT7 POST FU
Letter Name - 4/5 Year Olds
Donnie
Nay
Nikki
Rae
Chas
Peter
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
BL1 BL2 BL3 BL4 BL5 INT1 INT2 INT3 INT4 INT5 INT6 INT7 POST POST FU
Letter Sound - 3 Year Olds
Lynn
Loren
Alex
Zach
Peter
Pate
Elle
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
BL1 BL2 BL3 BL4 BL5 INT1 INT2 INT3 INT4 INT5 INT6 INT7 POST FU
Letter Sound - 4/5 Year Olds
Donnie
Nay
Nikki
Rae
Chas
Peter
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
BL1 BL2 BL3 BL4 BL5 INT1 INT2 INT3 INT4 INT5 INT6 INT7 POST POST FU
Initial Sound - 3 Year Olds
Lynn
Loren
Alex
Zach
Peter
Pate
Elle
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
BL1 BL2 BL3 BL4 BL5 INT1 INT2 INT3 INT4 INT5 INT6 INT7 POST FU
Initial Sound - 4/5 Year Olds
Donnie
Nay
Nikki
Rae
Chas
Peter
BL Avg: 10.9 INT Avg: 32 Post Avg: 70 FU Avg: 50 BL Avg: 26.7 INT Avg: 67.8 Post Avg: 100 FU Avg: 20
BL Avg: 11.7 INT Avg: 14.1 Post Avg: 15 FU Avg: 16.6 BL Avg: 9.7 INT Avg: 15.7 Post Avg: 14 FU Avg: 15.7
BL Avg: 19.1 INT Avg: 22.2 Post Avg: 22 FU Avg: 24.3BL Avg: 18.1 INT Avg: 20.4 Post Avg: 21.7 FU Avg: 22.4
Prior to the PA training, pre-testing was completed with 12 children between three and five
years old from low-income households.
• To measure speech sound production abilities, the Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation,
Second Edition (GFTA-2, Goldman Fristoe, 2000) was administered: nine children
scored within normal limits (WNL) and two children scored below the typical range for
their age.
• For receptive vocabulary, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition (PPVT-4,
Dunn Dunn, 2007) was administered: nine children scored WNL and two children scored
below the typical range for their age.
• For overall phonological awareness, the Test of Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL,
Lonigan, Wagner, Torgesen, Rashotte, 2007) was administered: nine children scored
WNL and two children scored below the typical range for their age.
• The goal of this project was to determine if a phonological training program embedded
in a shared-storybook reading activity would be effective in improving the early literacy
skills of preschool students from low-income backgrounds. Visual inspection and effect
by means of percent of nonoverlapping data (PND) are two appropriate measures to
analyze the results of a single-subject experimental design1.
• Results for letter name training indicated that children with initially higher scores
maintained their high scores throughout the study, and that the children with initially
lower scores showed more substantial improvement for both age groups.
• In the 3-year-old group, the three children with the lowest baseline scores showed a
steady increase in their letter name knowledge, and the four children with higher baseline
scores maintained their letter name knowledge throughout the course of the training.
Using PND analysis, it was determined that these three children exhibited scores higher
than baseline for more than 60% of the intervention probes administered.
• Similarly, the children with the lowest baseline scores in the 4-year-old group showed
greater increases in their knowledge throughout the course of the training and the
children with higher baseline scores either showed only slight increases or maintained
knowledge of letter names. Of the four children that showed increases in letter name
knowledge, three of the children’s intervention probe scores were greater than their
baseline scores for 80% of the probes administered. One child showed less consistent
results, with intervention probe scores higher than baseline 44% of the time.
• Results for letter sound training also indicated greater increases for the four 3-year-old
children that began the training with less knowledge of letter sounds. PND analysis for
these children showed that two of the children scored higher than baseline 90% of time or
higher; intervention for the other two had less of an effect at 22% and 37.5%. Results
indicated maintenance for the three children who began with more knowledge.
• Results for the 4-year-old group were much more consistent. All of the children showed
improvement in letter sounds, regardless of their baseline knowledge. For this group,
PND analysis revealed that only one child did not score above their baseline scores for
60% or more of the intervention probes administered. Three of the children scored higher
than baseline 100% of the time. This suggests that letter sound knowledge may be more
developmentally attainable for 4-year-old children.
• Both visual inspection and PND analysis of initial sound awareness for both the 3- and
4-year-old groups was highly variable throughout the course of data collection, including
during the baseline phase. For this reason, no significant conclusions can be derived
based on the data.
• It is concluded that a phonological training program embedded in a shared storybook
activity is effective in improving the letter name and letter sound knowledge of 3- and 4-
year-old children who are at-risk for reading difficulties, especially for those children
who already behind their peers in knowledge of these concepts. More research should be
conducted to expand on the applications of this training method for speech-language
pathologists, parents and early-childhood educators.