Effect of Accurate and Automatic Letter Naming on Reading Fluency and Comprehension

Main Content

Author(s):

Yirgshewa Bekele Abdi(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2013

Network:

04. Inclusive Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

04 SES 01 A, Interventions

Paper Session

Time:

2013-09-10

13:15-14:45

Room:

D-505

Chair:

Søren Langager

Contribution

Research question

RQ1. What achievement differences exhibited on letter reading accuracy and rate among students who attend Accurate and Automatic Letter Naming

(AALN) instruction and those who attend regular instruction (RI)?

RQ2.What is the difference on word reading fluency among students who attend AALNinstruction and those who attended the RI?

RQ3.What is the difference on non-word reading among students from AALN

Instruction and RI?

RQ4. Is there a long term effect on reading comperhension for students who participated in AALN instruction?

Theoretical approach

The theoretical approach chosen for this study is the model of automaticity. The model of automaticity theory from LaBerge and Samuels (1974) was adapted to the language nature of Amharic orthography. According to Samuels (2006), automaticity theory deals in reading fluency at basic reading level (word reading) where fluency is recognized as the ability to decode and comprehend concurrently. This theory emphasized fluency to begin at word reading level. However, in the orthographically consistent language (Amharic), fluency at word reading is the collection of automaticity at letter naming. Alphabet learning seems a school tradition in most schools around the world followed by word decoding however, automatic letter naming is rarely recognized as basic for fluency at word level. Hence, this research design includes accurate and automatic letter-name intervention which results in automaticity at word level and in turn contributes to word reading fluency and comprehension.

Method

Abstract This experimental study examined the effect of accurate and automatic letter naming on word reading fluency and comprehension among grade one students in one government primary school. To explore this purpose quantitative research method with experimental design was used. This research and its assessment component is a pre-test post-test control group design and have stratified random and simple random assignment of students to conditions. A pre-test assessment on letter identification was administrated and based on the selection criteria, eligible students were categorized in to letter reading level using stratified random sampling. Students from groups of letter reading level were assigned to the intervention and control group using simple random sampling. Accurate and Automatic Letter Naming (AALN) instruction was administered for the intervention group and control group attended the regular classroom instruction. The two groups attended similar content on similar time of instruction, except for the difference in the instructional approach. The data is statistically analyzed. The study involve one independent variable (AALN instruction) and the dependent variables are (letters reading fluency,word reading fluency and reading comprehension scores).

Expected Outcomes

To analyze the data, Cronbach’s Alpha reliability statistic for pretest measure, T test, Levene’s Test for Equality of Means, ANCOVA and correlation statistical were used to determine the significance on mean difference between groups. The assumption is to find evidence that in orthographically shallow language, explicit and prompt latter naming produces significant change on word reading fluency and reading comprehension without intention to teach word reading skill so that children with reading difficulty get at ease to develop word reading skill and intern enhance their reading comprehension.

References

Allington, L. R. (2006). Fluency: Still waiting after all these years. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Frastrup, What research has to say about fluency instruction. Newark: International Reading Association Inc. Archer, L. A., & Hughes, A. C. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient instruction. New York: The Guilford Press. Aro, M. (2003). Learning to read English in comparison to six more regular orthographies. Applied Psycholinguistics 24, 621–635. Aro, M., & Wimmer, H. (2003). Learning to Read: English in Comparison to Six More Regular Orthographies. Applied Psycholinguistics. 24,621–635. Ballatd, C., &Jacocks, K. (2001). Improving students reading fluency through the use of phonics and word recognition strategies .ERIC. Chicago, Illinois Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E. J., & Tarver, S. G. (2004). Direct instruction reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Merrill. Deeney, A. T. (2010). One-mnute fluency measures: mixed messages in assessment and instruction. The Reading Teacher, 63, (6), 440–450. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974).Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading.Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323. Lane, B. H., Hudson, F. R., Leite, L. W., Kosanovich, M., Strout, M., Fenty, N. & Wright, T.(2009). Teacher knowledge about reading fluency and indicators of students’ fluency growth in reading first schools. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 57–86

Author Information

Yirgshewa Bekele Abdi (presenting / submitting)

Addis Ababa University

Special Needs Education

Addis Ababa

The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)

Marginal Content

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.