Abstract:
Use of pseudo-words, such as „tam‟ and „dib‟, is a common method to test phonics acquisition, but rarely for instructional purposes. Hence, little is known about its effectiveness as a teaching tool. This study compares two methods of phonics instruction, real words (the traditional approach) versus pseudo-words, on first graders to determine the approach that will yield better reading and spelling achievements. To that end, two mixed level groups of three students each were selected. Before starting the intervention, students‟ achievement in reading and spelling both real words and pseudo-words was tested (pretests) using four subtests of the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Achievement which are: Letter-Word Identification, Word Attack, Spelling, and Spelling of Sounds tests. Posttests were administered at the end of the intervention period. Students‟ performance was tracked throughout the study using CBM probes. The intervention consisted of a total of 20 sessions (30 minutes each) of phonics instruction based on the Recipe for Reading program. Both groups received the same intervention and followed the same lesson plan. The only difference was in the type of word lists provided for every group during the lesson. One group was exposed to real words only and the other group to pseudo-words only. Results showed that the phonics instruction based on real words was more effective in improving decoding of real words, spelling of real words, and spelling of pseudo-words. The effectiveness of the real word method was very significant especially with at-risk students. On the other hand, the pseudo-word instruction showed slight improvement with average students in reading real words and pseudo-words, and spelling pseudo-words. This study has important implications for reading instruction to both regular and at-risk students.
