The coursework cohort showed particular strength segmenting words with blends, with 17% scoring 100% on phoneme identification versus 0% of the comparison preservice group¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Item-level analysis showed the research cohort had a particular strength in segmenting words with blends, and 17% of the cohort scored 100% of phoneme identification items correctly compared to 0% of the preservice comparison group and 5% of the inservice-without-PD group. → McNeill 2018

Evidence¶

McNeill 2018¶

McNeill, B. C. (2018). Improving Preservice Teachers' Phonemic Awareness, Morphological Awareness and Orthographic Knowledge. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1). http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol43/iss1/2

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Qualitative item-by-item analysis (Figure 2) comparing percent correct per phoneme identification item across the research cohort, preservice comparison group and inservice-without-PD group. The graph showed the research group's strength "in segmenting words with blends (e.g., trim, brush, string)".

"Further analysis revealed 17% of the research cohort scored 100% of items correctly (compared to 0% in the preservice comparison group and 5% in the 'in-service without PD' group."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Phonological Awareness — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Preservice teachers completing 10 hours of metalinguistic coursework outperformed preservice teachers without such content in phoneme and morpheme identification — related
• The coursework cohort's phoneme identification exceeded inservice teachers without professional development and was comparable to inservice teachers with 30 hours of professional development — related
• In morpheme identification the cohort outperformed inservice teachers with 30 hours of professional development, though accuracy of 72.9% raised competency questions — related