Kari Hoffman Research Proposal

1
Kari Hoffman
ISED 797
How does instruction in phonemic awareness affect decoding skills in readers with dyslexia?
Dr. Helen Hyun
December 8, 2015

2
Table of Contents
Problem and Purpose of the Study …………………………………………………………….. 3
Background and Review of Related Literature………………………………………………….. 5
Procedures …………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
Expected Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations ……………………………………… 17
References ……………………………………………………………………………………... 19

3
Problem and Purpose of the Study
Over the last thirty years, there has been extensive research on how typical and struggling
readers acquire reading skills. Due to the fact that I teach first grade in a specialized school for
students with language-based learning differences, particularlydyslexia, Iam interested in gaining a
better understanding of reading acquisition. This teacher study will investigatethe affect instruction
in phonemic awareness has on decoding skills in students with dyslexia.
Phonemic awareness is the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate phonemes in spoken
words. This includes the understanding that spoken words and syllables are made up of sequences
of speech sounds (Yopp, 1992). Phonemes are the smallest unit of sound in words, which make a
difference in meaning. Instruction in phonemic awareness would include activities aimed to teach a
reader that words are made up of phonemes. These phonemes or individual sounds can be
segmented, blended and manipulated to make new words. When preparing instruction, the aspects
of phonemic awareness to be considered include: grapheme phoneme relationships and phoneme
isolation, deletion, counting, blending and segmentation (Yopp, 1988). Instruction should guide
students in repetitive, structured practice with these phonemic skills.
Decoding is the ability to apply knowledge of grapheme phoneme relationships and
knowledge of letter patterns to correctly pronounce written words. Children who understand these
relationships have the ability to quickly recognize familiar words and to figure out words they
haven’t seen before. When reading a new or unfamiliar word, a reader decodes the word by
segmenting the sounds or phonemes, which correlate which each individual symbol or grapheme
and blending the sounds together to read the word.
Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is characterized by difficulties with accurate and
fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding. Developmental dyslexia is characterized
by an unexpected difficulty in reading in children and adults who otherwise possess the intelligence,

4
motivation, and schooling considered necessary for accurate and fluent reading (Shaywitz, 1998). A
deficit in phonological processing impairs the ability to decode and identify meaning from written
word (Shaywitz, 1996). Deficits in the phonological component of language are thought to be the
cause of these difficulties, and these deficits are not consistent when compared with other cognitive
abilities. Compared to typically developing readers, students with dyslexia have more difficulty
learning to read words and acquiring sight word vocabulary due to limited knowledge of decoding
and analogizing strategies (Ehri & McCormack, 1998). This deficit in decoding poses a challenge for
gaining meaning from text.
In this teacher study, I plan to implement instruction in phonemic awareness with two
students with dyslexia and monitor their process in decoding. The students in this study will be two
students from my first grade classroom who have been diagnosed with a specific learning disability
in reading. I will administer instruction in phonemic awareness four days a week for twenty minutes
each session. The progress monitoring tool I will use will be from the Wilson Fundations language
program, which I use to teach reading and writing in class. This progress monitoring tool will assess
the students’ abilities to decode written real words and nonsense words and their ability to segment
sounds in a word read aloud. Based on prior research on the phonological nature of dyslexia, my
assumption is that instruction in phonemic awareness will positively affect decoding skillsin
students with dyslexia.
In terms of ethical considerations, Iwill protect my students’ identity by using pseudonyms
to ensure confidentiality and that any documents copied in the appendix do not show names, birth
dates, addresses, or any other personal information. All of the data will be stored in a personal
computer with password protection or in a locked file in the office which is monitored by office
staff. Only I and my instructional coach will have access to scores and data for each student.
Parents will be informed of all procedures and attempts to protect student confidentiality.

5
Additionally, the information found in this study will not be related in the students’ school
performance reports. Parental consent will be acquired before conducting the study with students,
and the parents have the right to withdraw at any time as research is voluntary in nature.
I have chosen to do this teacher study because many studies on the topic focus on students
who are typical readers and students with various learning differences. I would like to learn the
effect that additional instruction in phonemic awareness has on a small group of students with
dyslexia. Students who have holes in their early learning of language typically struggle to read and
write fluently later in their schooling. The research question is: How does instruction in phonemic
awareness affect decoding skills in readers with dyslexia? If I can understand the effectiveness of
instruction in phonemic awareness, I may be able to prevent gaps in my students’ learning in the
future to prevent further struggles in learning language skills. In addition, if instruction in phonemic
awareness is affective, it may be a skill to focus on in intervention with students who are struggling
with reading and writing fluency in later years.
Background and Review of Related Literature
PHONEMIC AWARENESS
Phonemic awareness plays an important role in the ability to decode words that will
eventually become sight words read by memory. Ehri and McCormick (1998) caution in order for
students to gain sight word recognition and build fluency without relying too heavily on context,
students should be able to distinguish and manipulate phonemes sufficiently in order to make
connections between graphemes and phones spontaneously when reading text. Phonemic
awareness is the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate phones.
Smith (1998) discusses the importance of phonemic awareness in students’ abilities to read
and write. The article reviews strategiesfor assessing phonemic awareness in children and suggests
appropriate intervention strategies for each of the assessed skill. Immature phonemic awareness

6
underlies reading and spelling delays in both children with reading disorders and typically developing
readers. Deficits in phonemic awareness should be assessed and interventions should be put in
place as early as possible. In kindergarten and first grade, students are already expected to begin
learning rhymes, word patterns, and segmenting and manipulating phonemes. As children become
more mature in their phonemic awareness, they are able to segment words into individual sounds
and split syllables, deleteand substitute sounds in words. All of these skills are critical for the
decoding process, which requires children to be aware of the order of sounds when sounding out
and blending words. When students who have weak phonemic awareness receive appropriate
instruction, they make a more rapid improvement in reading and spelling words when the skill is
linked with instruction in letter-sound and word learning. Smith concludes instruction in both
phonemic awareness and whole language instruction can be integrated in order to maximize student
progress in vocabulary development, reading comprehension, and writing skills. “The faster we
boost children's phonemic awareness skills, the more likely children with weaknesses in this area will
"crack the code" and become readers” (p.24).
The purpose of the study described by Weiner (1994) was to teach beginning readers
phonemic skills and direct students’ attention to the relationship between their phonemic skills and
decoding abilities to determine whether phonemic awareness training would improve the phonemic
awareness and reading in beginning readers compared to no phonemic awareness training. Three
groups of beginning readers were instructed with the following approaches, phonemic awareness
training only, phonemic awareness training with decoding opportunities, and phonemic awareness
training with decoding and reading opportunities. The results show that phonemic skills’ training
does interact with reading ability in middle-level reading students. Due to limitations of this study,
Weiner calls for further studies in phonemic awareness. This provides rational for the study, which
focuses on instruction in phonemic awareness in order to improve decoding skills. It is apparent

7
that Weiner understands and supports the implications that phonemic awareness has on reading
acquisition and comprehension in mid-level reading students and recommends effective training
coupled with opportunities to read.
Yopp (1988) argues that phonemic test reliability should be an important consideration in
test selection for classroom and research use. She administered phonemic awareness test and a
word decoding test to 96 kindergarten children. The test results showed a correlation between the
results of the phonemic awareness tests administered. The study supports the notion that phonemic
awareness is necessary for reading acquisition. Yopp concludes that one assessment in both
compound Phonemic Awareness and Simple Phonemic awareness are necessary for assessing
reading acquisition than any one test alone. This information is necessary for teachers to choose
useful and well-rounded assessments in order to assess beginning readers’ phonemic skills. The
descriptions of the various assessments administered break down the various skills beginning readers
need to acquire through instruction in phonemic awareness.
de Carvalho (2014) investigated the relationship among reading fluency, reading
comprehension and phonological processing with typically developing readers and readers with
dyslexia. One hundred fifteen students from grades 3-8 were grouped into a control group and a
group with dyslexia. Students were assessed in their in their abilities to read words and
pseudowords; as well as in their text (decoding) abilities, listening and reading comprehension,
phonological short-term memory and working memory. The results showed that the dyslexic group
performed more poorly in all of these categories of assessment. However, both groups showed
similar performance in listening comprehension and in making “gap-filling” inferences in reading
comprehension. This study highlights the importance of working memory, which is necessary for
reading comprehension. Working memory in reading involves the ability to hold on to information
and decoded words while making sense of the text. Students with developmental dyslexia need

8
phonological working memory to decode and comprehend text. de Carvalho concludes the
correlation between reading fluency and phonological memory in students with dyslexia support the
specific nature of phonological disorder in students with dyslexia.
Instruction in phonemic awareness is necessary for beginning readers. Students must
understand that words are made up of individual letters and sounds, which can be blended together
to read words. They must learn to recognize graphemes and phonemes and demonstrate the ability
to manipulate these sounds. According to the dual-route theory, this is known as the indirect
(phonological) route. According to Coltheart et al. (1993), students with dyslexia who struggle to
master the skills needed to read using indirect route may have what is considered Developmental
Phonological Dyslexia (Temple & Marshall, 1983).
Because prevention is the best antidote for struggling readers, phonemic and whole word
instruction should be implemented as early as possible (Smith, 1998). For students who have
difficulty learning the connection between graphemes and phonemes, instruction can be as basic as
learning the names and shape of each letter and how the mouth, teeth, and tongue form different
sounds. This can lead into direct instruction in letter, sound correspondence, assigning keywords to
represent the connection between graphemes and phonemes (Ehri & McCormick, 1998). When
preparing instruction, the aspects of phonemic awareness which should be considered include:
grapheme phoneme relationships and phoneme isolation, deletion, counting, blending and
segmentation (Yopp, 1988). Teachers should guide students in repetitive, structured practice with
these phonemic skills. It is also vital to understand the instructional history in order to assess
student’s true reading abilities and potential (Weiner, 1994). For students with reading challenges, it
is possible that there are gaps in their phonemic skills, which need to be filled before building upon
phonemic concepts towards decoding and eventually reading and comprehending text.
DECODING

9
Decoding is the ability to apply knowledge of grapheme phoneme relationships and
knowledge of letter patterns to correctly pronounce written words. Children who understand these
relationships have the ability to quickly recognize familiar words and to figure out words they
haven’t seen before. Explicit instruction in this area is necessary to teach students the principles of
letter-sound relationships and how to sound out words (Reading Rockets, 2015).
Ehri argues that we must understand how readers process and remember the written form of
words. Because each student is unique, the process may vary from student to student. Readers
learn each skill and eventually become capable of reading words in all five ways:
1. By sounding out and blending letters, referred to as decoding or phonological recoding.
2. By pronouncing common spelling patterns, a more advanced form of decoding
3. By retrieving sight words from memory.
4. By analogizing words already known by sight.
5. By using context to predict words. (Ehri, 1997, 1994)
The process of learning to read sight words relies heavily on the phases involving phonemic
awareness. Sufficientlyread words often become sight words which are read from memory. The
processing of learning sight words and meanings in memory involves forming relationship between
graphemes and phonemes to the spelling of words and their pronunciations (Ehri, 2005).
Ehri theorizes that the course of development of sight word reading can be characterized by
four phases. These phases include pre-alphabetic, partialalphabetic, full alphabetic and consolidated
alphabetic phases. Readers move fluently between these four phases throughout the process of
learning to read. The first is decoding, also called phonological recording, where a reader can either
segment and blend graphemes into phonemes or break words into larger chunks of syllabic units,
hold them in mind, and blend them into pronunciations that are recognized as real words. Those
students who are reading at the pre-alphabetic phase are able to use their decoding skills in order to

10
decode less complex words. This is in contrast to readers who are reading in the partial alphabetic
phase, where readers used letter-sound cues to remember words. Ehri and McCormick (1998)
proposed readers learn to read sight words from memory by forming connections between letters in
spellings and sounds in pronunciation of the words. This strategy includes both decodable words
and irregular words, however the process differs between the two. Furthermore, as readers progress
from the earlier phases of reading to the most proficient phase, they learn to read words in several
different ways, including: using context, decoding by segmenting sounds or associating spelling
patterns, by analogy, and by sight. During each phase, reading improves as students gain and
practice more strategies for reading words.
Those students who are reading at the pre-alphabetic phase are able to use their decoding
skills in order to decode less complex words. Readers who are reading at the partial alphabetic
phase use their knowledge of letter-sound cues to read and remember words. Based on the phases
laid out by Ehri, most of my students are reading at the partial alphabetic phase and are growing into
the full alphabetic phase. According to Ehri and McCormick (1998), multiple word reading
deficiencies are apparent in struggling readers, specifically students with Dyslexia due to a
discrepancy in how strategies for reading words are developed. Each skill is dependent on the other;
if one skill is not adequately developed, the others will not develop adequately either. Decoding skill
is necessary to retain sight words in memory. A sight word vocabulary is necessary to read words by
analogy (recognizing how the spelling of an unfamiliar word is known similar word). Familiarity
with the relationship between sight words and spelling patterns is useful for more efficient decoding.
Instruction in all aspects of word reading is necessary for students who have difficulty learning to
read, “Very little can be left to self-discovery or chance” (Ehri & McCormick, 1998, p. 158.)
de Oliveria, da Silba, Dias, Seabra, and Macedo (2014) studied the importance of various
components in reading comprehension in students with dyslexia comprising a study on the

11
components of the reading comprehension model and predictive skills in 40 typicallydeveloping
students and students with dyslexia. In the study, listening, reading comprehension, and word
recognition skills were assessed. de Oliveria et al. introduce the cognitive model of reading
comprehension posits that reading comprehension is a result of the interaction between decoding
and linguistic comprehension. They include the notion of word recognition in her definition of
decoding skills, including processing speed and phonological awareness.
According to de Oliveria et al., The Simple View of Reading suggests reading
comprehension includes an interaction between decoding and linguistic comprehension. Decoding
can be understood as the conversion of graphic symbols into sounds. de Oliveria et al. describe
three different strategies for decoding and word recognition. The logographic strategy includes the
use of contextual cues and visual recognition. The alphabeticalincludes an understanding of the
correspondence between graphemes and phonemes in order to decode and encode words. The
orthographic strategy involves the accumulation of the reader’s experience and the development of a
“mental orthographic lexicon” (p.2) or ability to read sight words from memory and based on
understanding of vocabulary.
Results of de Oliveria et al.’sstudy showed a discrepancy in decoding and reading
comprehension skills between typicallydeveloping readers and readers with dyslexia. They found
students with dyslexia showed deficits in processing speed and word recognition, but preserved
auditory comprehension, which allows for the understanding of listening comprehension and text
comprehension in reading. When both abilities are intact, written text can be decoded and
understood in order for reading comprehension to occur. Alternately, if one of these processes is
impaired, reading comprehension will not occur due to the interaction between the two strategies
necessary for reading comprehension. Students with dyslexia have deficits related to word
recognition, specifically in orthographic strategy and have more difficulty in creating an

12
“orthographic mental lexicon,” which causes a challenge in the orthographic strategy of
reading. Students with dyslexia have appropriate knowledge in phonological awareness, vocabulary,
naming and oral accuracy and reading comprehension, although they require more time to complete
tasks which may be related to processing speed. The fact that these skills are intact suggests
students with dyslexia have the ability to comprehend text and make inferences regardless of
challenges in processing speed and phonological and decoding skills, which suggest that the readers
have developed strategies that enable them to compensate for these difficulties.
The ability to decode words relies heavily on phonological awareness. As students learn to
recognize and manipulate graphemes and phonemes to read words, they begin to build a lexicon of
words they are able to read from memory or by sight. According to the dual route theory, this
implies that students can build skills using the indirect or phonological route in order to broaden
their lexile vocabulary in order use the direct or orthographic route to read words. Students with
dyslexia may struggle with either the indirect or the direct route for reading words, and sometimes
both. Understanding how to support readers who struggle with either or both of these strategies is
vital for supporting struggling readers. Practice reading words using indirect route can be used as a
tool to strengthen the ability to read using the direct route. This implies that direct instruction in
both phonemic awareness and decoding are necessary for students to gain and appropriately practice
reading skills required for reading words by sight. This notion illustrates the importance of gaining
practice in segmenting sounds and blending phonemes for decoding words in order to gain a
broader sight word vocabulary in order to build reading fluency.
The studies reviewed show that there is a relationship between phonemic awareness and
decoding. The phonological nature of dyslexia mentioned in the literature reviewed also supports
the question asked in this study: How does instruction in phonemic awareness affect decoding skills
in readers with dyslexia?

13
Procedures
This teacher study will include a journal of teacher reflections. Each week, Iwill reflect on
the Phonemic Awareness lessons taught, student engagement and performance, and the progress
monitoring process for each student. Reflections will include observations of how the students
respond to instruction and to relate this information to student performance in progress monitoring.
It will also include ideas on what should be taught next based on assessments and how to improve
instruction in future lessons to increase student engagement.
My instructional coach, Rosa Lee Johansen will observe one lesson a week and give feedback
in our weekly debrief sessions. Rosa Lee is an instructional coach and specializes in teaching
language and beginning reading, specifically with students with language-based learning differences
such as dyslexia. She is trained in Wilson and Wilson Fundations programs and has been my
instructional coach in teaching Fundations for three years. During her observations, she will take
note of student engagement and performance in addition to reviewing my lesson plans and creating
suggestions on how to proceed with instruction.
In this teacher study, I plan to administer instruction in phonemic awareness and to monitor
student progress on a weekly basis for 17 weeks. The instruction in phonemic awareness will take
place four times a week for 20 minutes each session. The design of the instruction will be guided by
or directly taken from Phonemic Awareness in Young Children: A Classroom Curriculum, (Adams,
Foorman, Lundberg, & Beeler, 1998). The instruction includes teacher lead activities including
identifying beginning and ending sounds, replacing sounds to create new words, recognizing
rhyming words, and segmenting and blending sounds in words. There is an assessment included in
the curriculum, which I will administer as a pre assessment before beginning instruction in order to
choose appropriate activities for my group. I will also assess my students as a post assessment at the
end of the semester to see what my students have learned. This curriculum was recommended to

14
me by my instructional coach, Rosa Lee Johansen. She will provide feedback and guidance in using
the curriculum in addition to her observations throughout the study. The curriculum is research
based and created by experienced teachers in reading acquisition.
The progress monitoring tool will be taken directly from the WILSON Fundations®
program, which monitors student progress compared to skills taught in the program. The probes I
will be using from the WILSON Fundations® progress monitoring tool assess students’ abilitiesto
decode written real words and nonsense words and to segment sounds heard in a word spoken
aloud. In my research study, I will provide examples of these assessment tools. Students will be
given a minute to complete each of the three probes. The number of words read or sounds
segmented within 60 seconds will be recorded, and each error will be subtracted from the score.
When reading nonsense words, each sound correctly identified will be recorded, and each error will
be subtracted from the score. The number of words read and sounds segmented in the 60 seconds
will be recorded and plotted on a graph. A line will be drawn from the number of sounds read the
first week to the benchmark number of words or sounds to be read by week 17, which is provided
by WILSON Fundations®. As the number of words read and sounds segmented are charted onto
the graph each week, progress will be reflected by assessing where the data is plotted on the graph
compared to this benchmark baseline. According to the Qualitative Overview (2014) of the
WILSON Fundations® systematic, research-based program is a reliable source for instruction in
“…foundational skills for reading and spelling, emphasizing phonemic awareness, phonics-word
study, high frequency word study, fluency, vocabulary, handwriting and spelling.” The reliability of
the results of this progress monitoring tool will be strengthened by keeping a consistent time,
location and warm up routine for each testing session.
I will be using a convenience sample when collecting information and data in this teacher
study. The two students I have chosen are both first grade students in my classroom. They have

15
both been diagnosed with a specific learning disability in reading. In my study, I will write a more in
depth portrait of each of these two students.
Validity
I will use triangulation to increase the validity of this study and decrease data collection bias.
Triangulation means that I will gather information from multiple sources and perspectives.
Triangulation includes the use of my teacher reflection journal and observations and meetings with
my instructional coach. In addition, I will use two pre-existing assessments: a pre and post
assessment for phonemic awareness, and the WILSON Fundations® progress monitoring tool.
The use of a preexisting phonemic awareness curriculum and a research based language program for
progress monitoring assure that this teacher study supports the question being investigated. In
addition, the students participating in the study will have the diagnoses of dyslexia and/or specific
learning disability in reading. A major threat to the validity of this study is that students may acquire
phonemic awareness skills in settings outside of the instruction administered in this study. It will be
necessary acknowledge this possibility and to explore ways to ensure that any progress made in
decoding can be related specificallyto the addition instruction in phonemic awareness administered
in the study.
As a teacher study using a convenience sample, I acknowledge that there is still an element
of data collection bias to consider. The findings in this teacher study will mostly be valuable to me
as a teacher in this specific setting with these specific students and resources. The findings in my
teacher study may be generalizable to teachers who are searching for an intervention strategy for
readers with dyslexia who are struggling to acquire decoding skills. However, the small sample size
makes this study less generalizable. It would be useful to conduct a study with a larger sample size
and a wider demographic. Further

16
Threats to the validity of my teacher study include inconsistency, data collection bias,
history, subjects’ attitude, implementation and history. Inconsistency is a threat because it is
common for students with specific learning disabilities in reading to perform with inconsistency. In
order to help prevent this threat, I will take this inconsistency in performance into account in my
analysis of the results of my teacher research study. I will also begin each lesson and assessment
session with the same 3 minute warm up review procedure to refresh students’ memory of the
letters and sounds they have learned. Test anxiety is also a threat because many students who
struggle with reading are often hesitant to read aloud for assessments, especially when timed. Iwill
attempt to minimize this threat by allowing students to believe that this instruction and the
assessments are a typical part of the lesson, and not an assessment of them independent from the
group. I will tell them that I am using a timer to keep myself on track so that it does not take too
long, and that I am having them read aloud so that I can learn more about what they know so that I
can become better at teaching them how to read. Due to the possibility that the students may
struggle with test anxiety and distractibility, testing will be conducted in a small group room with
limited auditory and visual distractions in which students are familiar. History is a possible threat
because some students have had additional tutoring or speech and language services outside of
school, which may affect their performance in the classroom. I will acknowledge this possibility and
report it in my final teacher research study and discuss how any such services may affect student
performance in class and in assessments. Instrumentation is a threat because this teacher research
study is a convenience sample, and thus there is data collection bias in how I interpret the findings.
As stated above, Iwill use triangulation with my instructional coach and two different methods of
assessment to limit the threat of data collection bias to the best of my ability.
I will assess the data from my teacher reflection journal and my instructional coach’s
observations by discussing them with my instructional coach and comparing our findings. We will

17
compare our observations and findings throughout the teacher study in order to decide what
instruction strategy from the phonemic awareness curriculum to implement next. We can use
coding to find a theme within our reflections and notes as a data analysis tool. This way, the
common words and themes found can be analyzed in order to create an instruction strategy in
addition to understanding the results of this study. We will also discuss and compare our findings at
the end of the study. I will assess my students’ progress through comparing the scores in each
section of the pre and post assessment from the phonemic awareness curriculum. I will compare
my students’ improvement in decoding skills by comparing their weekly progress to where they
stand on the graph in relation to the projected growth baseline drawn after the first assessment. I
will also review this data with my instructional coach to gain her input on the effectiveness of the
additional instruction in phonemic awareness.
Expected Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
My expectation for this teacher study is that additional instruction in phonemic awareness
has the potential to improve decoding skills in students with dyslexia. This statement is based on
the phonological nature of dyslexia found in the research previously stated in this proposal. I expect
that the students will show improvement in their decoding abilities and that their progress will show
growth that is somewhat in line with their projected growth baseline set at the beginning of the
study. This will be shown in both their abilities to decode real and nonsense words. I also expect
that students will be able to segment sounds in words heard aloud with increased accuracy due to
the nature of instruction provided, which includes explicit instruction in segmenting sounds in many
lessons and activities.
As a beginning researcher, I am aware that this teacher study has limitations. However,
moving forward I might consider altering this study to increase the validity of the study and the
transferability of the findings. It would be beneficial to extend this study to a whole class of 12

18
students rather than limit the study to two students in my language group. The students in this
study may be of a narrow demographic, and the study would need a greater cross section, possibly
involving several classrooms or schools. I would recommend comparing data between a study
group and a control group of students with dyslexia or other specific learning disabilities in reading.
Although there may be ethical considerations to consider, it is worth considering implementing
instruction in phonemic awareness to one group, and to compare the findings to a control group
who has not received this additional instruction. This would be in addition to a teacher reflection
journal and additional observations and coaching sessions with an instructional coach, since the
findings should not be solely based on assessment data. It would be interesting to also research the
effects of instruction in phonemic awareness on students’ fluency and comprehension skills since
these skills are also necessary for reading acquisition.

19
References
Adams, M., Foorman, B., Lundberg, I., & Beeler, T. (1998). Phonemic awareness in young children:
A classroom curriculum. Baltimore, Md.: P.H. Brookes.
Blachman, B. (1997). Sight word learning in normal readers and dyslexics. In foundations of reading
acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp. 163-189). Mahwah, N.J.: L.
Erlbaum Associates.
Coltheart, M. , Curtis, B. , Atkins, P. , & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and
parallel distributed processing approaches. Psychological Review,100(4), 589-608.
Coltheart, M., Masterson, J., Byng, S., Prior, M., & Riddoch, J. ( 1983). Surface dyslexia. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35A, 469– 495.
de Carvalho, C. , Kida, A. , Capellini, S. , & de Avila, C. (2014). Phonological working memory and
reading in students with dyslexia. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 746-753.
de Oliveria, D. , da Silba, P. , Dias, N. , Seabra, A. , & Macedo, E. (2014). Reading component skills
in dyslexia: Word recognition, comprehension and processing speed. Frontiers in Psychology, 5,
1339-1344.
Ehri, L. (2005) Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2),
167-188.
Ehri, L. , & McCormick, S. (1998). Phases of word learning: Implications for instruction with
delayed and disabled readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 14(2), 135-163.
Holmes, J. M. (1973). Dyslexia: A neurolinguistic study of traumatic and developmental disordersof reading.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Pikulski, J. , & Chard, D. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The
Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510.
“Qualitative Overview.” SpringerReference (2014): n. pag.Http://www.wilsonlanguage.com/. Web.

20
<http://www.wilsonlanguage.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Fundations-Overview
and-Studies-of-Program-Effectiveness.pdf>.
Samuels, S. (1976). Automaticdecoding and reading comprehension. Language Arts, 53(3), 323-325.
Siegel, L (2006). Perspectives on dyslexia. Pediactrics & Child Health, 11(9), 581-587.
Samuels, S. , & Flor, R. (1997). The importance of automaticity for developing expertise in reading.
Reading & Writing Quarterly, 13(2), 107-121.
Smith, C. (1998). From gibberish to phonemic awareness: Effectivedecoding instruction. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 30(6), 20-25.
Stahl, S. , & Murray, B. (1994). Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 221-234.
Temple, C. , & Marshall, J. (1983). A case study of developmental phonological dyslexia. British
Journal of Psychology (London, England : 1953), 74 (Pt 4)(4), 517.
Weiner, S. (1992). Effects of Phonemic Awareness Training on Low and Middle-achieving First
graders’ Phonemic Awareness, Decoding, and Reading Ability. n.p.: ProQuest, UMI
Dissertations Publishing.
Yopp, H. (1988). The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly,
23(2), 159-177.

Kari Hoffman Research Proposal

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Kari Hoffman Research Proposal

Kari Hoffman Research Proposal