Combined letter name and sound instruction produced greater letter sound gains than number instruction, with a trend over letter sound only instruction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Children in the LNLS condition learned more letter sounds (production) than children in the Number condition (d = 0.47), and more letter sounds by recognition (d = 0.29). → Piasta 2010 q3 i? A trend favoring LNLS over LS for letter sound production gains did not reach significance (d = 0.51, p = .051). → Piasta 2010 (2) q3 i? Only the letter sound production contrast between LNLS and Number remained significant after step-up correction for multiple comparisons. → Piasta 2010

Evidence¶

Piasta 2010¶

Piasta, S. B., Purpura, D. J., & Wagner, R. K. (2010). Fostering Alphabet Knowledge Development: A Comparison of Two Instructional Approaches. Reading and Writing, 23(6), 607-626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9174-x

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

In the randomized preschool experiment, repeated measures ANOVA interaction contrasts showed LNLS children outgained Number-condition children on letter sound production (d = 0.47) and recognition (d = 0.29); only the production contrast survived step-up correction.

"children in the LNLS condition learned more letter sounds than children in the Number condition (F[1, 52] = 5.997, p = .009, d = 0.47 for letter sound production; F[1, 52] = 3.097, p = .042, d = 0.29 for letter sound recognition)"

Piasta 2010 (2)¶

Piasta, S. B., Purpura, D. J., & Wagner, R. K. (2010). Fostering Alphabet Knowledge Development: A Comparison of Two Instructional Approaches. Reading and Writing, 23(6), 607-626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9174-x

q3 · i? · causal · r2

The same ANOVA analysis showed a marginal trend "favoring the LNLS condition over the LS condition for letter sound production" that did not reach the significance threshold; no corrected test supported it.

"a similar trend favoring the LNLS condition over the LS condition for letter sound production was also apparent, F(1, 52) = 2.767, p = . 051, d = 0.51"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Alphabet Knowledge and Print Awareness — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Combined letter name and sound instruction produced greater letter name production gains than letter sound only instruction in preschoolers — related
• Letter sound only instruction may interfere with letter name learning relative to incidental exposure — related
• Number instruction outperformed both alphabet instruction conditions on number identification gains — related