ACQ Vol 11 no 2 2009

intensive nature that claim benefits for children’s literacy development. Pokorni, Worthington, and Jamison (2004) utilised a comparative group design to compare the benefits of Fast ForWord (FFW; Scientific Learning Corporation, 1999), Earobics Step 2 (Cognitive Concepts, 1998), and LiPs (Lindamood Phonemic Sequencing Program; Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998) to enhance the phonological awareness, language and reading skills for 7–9 year old children with language impairment. Twenty children were randomly assigned to each intervention condition which was implemented or supervised by a speech pathologist one hour each day for 20 days. The results indicated that only children who received Earobics or LiPs showed significant improvement in phonological awareness post intervention. However, these children’s improved phonological awareness skills did not transfer to the reading context. The authors suggested that training in phonological awareness should be integrated with activities that help children apply phonological knowledge to the reading process to gain maximum benefit from the programs. Summary Best practice in the management of children with speech and language impairment requires speech pathologists to understand the relationship between spoken and written language disorders and to apply this understanding in assessment, intervention, and monitoring practices. Phonological awareness is one critical area in reading and spelling acquisition. Speech pathologists need to ensure they screen this area of development in all children with speech and language impairment and provide in-depth assessment and intervention as appropriate to the child’s individual needs. A checklist for the assessment and intervention of phonological awareness summarises effective practices in this area. Summary checklist: Assessment and intervention of phonological awareness Assessment 1. Administer a formal test of phonological awareness skills appropriate to the child’s age: a. 4–5 years (e.g., syllable, rhyme awareness, and phoneme identity) b. 5 years and older: more complex phoneme level skills (e.g., phoneme blending, segmentation, manipulation). 2. Evaluate other phonological processing skills, particularly in older children (e.g., phonological memory and rapid naming evaluation). 3. Assess letter-sound knowledge. 4. Observe the child’s use of phonology in the reading and spelling process. 5. Consider phonological awareness assessment findings alongside other areas of spoken language related to written language ability. 6. Collect baseline data of phonological awareness and letter knowledge prior to intervention to evaluate intervention effectiveness. 7. Gather information about the home literacy environment with parents/carers as appropriate to a child’s situation (e.g., parent questionnaire) 8. Collaborate with the class teacher/early childhood educators and other relevant school, educational, or health professionals in the assessment process.

phonological awareness instruction has a statistically significant impact on developing word recognition, reading comprehension, and spelling (Ehri et al., 2001). This is one of the most comprehensive analyses of intervention outcomes in any area of spoken and written language development and provides robust evidence to support speech pathologists’ practices of integrating phonological awareness into interventions for children with speech- language impairments. Most researchers, however, caution practitioners that phonological awareness intervention should be implemented as part of a comprehensive program in literacy instruction or in early literacy experiences. The complexities of written language development preclude the possibility that one narrowly focused type of instruction such as phonological awareness can lead to successful reading and writing for all children. Rather, phonological awareness intervention must be seen in perspective with a host of other language experiences such as shared book reading, alphabetic instruction, storytelling, and involvement in meaningful reading and writing activities that all help to foster A range of factors need to be considered in planning phonological awareness programs. The importance of program content is highlighted by conflicting findings in the literature related to the effectiveness of phonological awareness interventions. For example, Nancollis, Lawrie, and Dodd (2005) found that a school-based phonological awareness intervention focused on teaching young children rhyme and syllable awareness (with no integration of letter knowledge) was effective in developing children’s rhyming skills, but had little long-term benefit for reading development. In contrast, Gillon’s (2005) phonological awareness intervention that facilitated preschool children’s awareness at the phoneme level and integrated letter knowledge had positive long-term effects for speech, reading and spelling development in children with speech impairment. Research findings suggest that intervention planning should consider the following aspects (see Gillon, 2004 for details): • Phonological awareness intervention should be integrated with letter sound knowledge training and include activities to transfer phonological awareness knowledge to decoding and encoding written words. • Phonological awareness intervention should focus on the development of skills at the phoneme level. • A range of phoneme analysis and synthesis activities should be incorporated with particular attention given to phoneme segmentation and blending skills for school- aged children. • A direct instructional approach to phonological awareness intervention has greater benefits for reading development than an indirect approach. • Flexibility in program implementation is required to ensure individual needs are met. • An intensive individual or small-group model of service delivery is necessary for children with severe phonological processing deficits. Best practice in the intervention of children with phonological awareness difficulties should demonstrate written language acquisition. Intervention planning

consideration of these factors. Commercial programs

Recent research has explored the effectiveness of commercial phonological awareness programs of an

74

ACQ Volume 11, Number 2 2009

ACQ uiring knowledge in speech, language and hearing