The probability of a child reading a word correctly is influenced by both child skills and properties of the word. The purpose of this study was to investigate child-level skills (set for variability and vocabulary), word-level properties (concreteness), word structure (mono- vs polymorphemic), and interactions between these properties and word structure within a comprehensive item-level model of complex word reading. Students studies were in grades 2-5. Results indicate important predictors at both the child- and word-level and support the importance of morphological structure for reading abstract polysyllabic words.

This study evaluated whether the sophistication of children’s invented spellings in kindergarten was predictive of subsequent reading and spelling in Grade 1, while also considering the influence of well-known precursors. Children in their first year of schooling were assessed on measures of oral vocabulary, alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness, word reading, and invented spelling; approximately one year later they were assessed on multiple measures of reading and spelling. The researchers found a direct line from invented spelling leading to improved reading scores at the end of first grade. The study suggests that invented spelling integrates phonological and orthographic growth and is a unique predictor of growth in early reading skills, over and above children’s alphabet knowledge and phonological awareness.

Some scholars have argued that spelling should not be directly or formally taught as such instruction is not effective or efficient. The authors conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of experimental and quasi-experimental studies to address these claims. Results provided strong and consistent support for teaching spelling, as it improved spelling performance when compared to no/unrelated instruction or informal/incidental approaches to improving spelling performance. Increasing the amount of formal spelling instruction also proved beneficial. Gains in spelling were maintained over time and generalized to spelling when writing. Improvements in phonological awareness and reading skills were also found. The positive outcomes associated with formal spelling instruction were generally consistent, regardless of students’ grade level or literacy skills.

Orthographic mapping (OM) involves the formation of letter-sound connections to bond the spellings, pronunciations, and meanings of specific words in memory. It explains how children learn to read words by sight, to spell words from memory, and to acquire vocabulary words from print. This development is portrayed as a sequence of overlapping phases, each characterized by the predominant type of connection linking spellings of words to their pronunciations in memory. During development, the connections improve in quality and word-learning value, from visual nonalphabetic, to partial alphabetic, to full grapho-phonemic, to consolidated grapho-syllabic and grapho-morphemic. OM is enabled by phonemic awareness and grapheme-phoneme knowledge. Recent findings indicate that OM to support sight word reading is facilitated when beginners are taught about articulatory features of phonemes and when grapheme-phoneme relations are taught with letter-embedded picture mnemonics. Vocabulary learning is facilitated when spellings accompany pronunciations and meanings of new words to activate OM. Teaching students the strategy of pronouncing novel words aloud as they read text silently activates OM and helps them build their vocabularies. Because spelling-sound connections are retained in memory, they impact the processing of phonological constituents and phonological memory for words.

The authors reviewed all peer-reviewed studies with participants from preschool to Grade 8 for this meta-analysis of morphological interventions. They identified 22 applicable studies. The authors investigated the effects of morphological instruction (a) on reading, spelling, vocabulary, and morphological skills, (b) for less able readers versus undifferentiated samples, (c) for younger versus older students, and (d) in combination with instruction of other literacy skills or in isolation. Results indicate that (a) morphological instruction benefits learners, (b) it brings particular benefits for less able readers, (c) it is no less effective for younger students, and (d) it is more effective when combined with other aspects of literacy instruction. Implications of these findings are discussed in light of current educational practice and theory.

The article presents information on a research on preventing writing difficulties by providing additional handwriting and spelling instruction to at-risk children in first grade in the U.S. The difficulties with text transcription skills such as handwriting and spelling can even change the meaning of a message that a writer wants to convey. The difficulties like poor handwriting or spelling can influence the competency of the child. More over it can affect the execution of other composing processes. It also can curb the skill of a child to grow as a writer. Difficulties with spelling can affect the vocabulary of the students and in turn it can affect the writing skill and the total language ability. The article informs that the researchers in the Center on Accelerating Student Learning (CASL) have designed the CASL First Grade Hand writing/Spelling Program to improve the writing skills of students. The design includes the letters of the alphabet, handwriting fluency, knowledge of sound and letter combinations and spelling patterns.

In a quasi-regular orthography like English, children inevitably encounter irregular words during reading. Previous research suggests successful reading of an irregular word depends at least partially on a child’s ability to address the mismatch between decoded form and stored word pronunciation — referred to as a child’s “set for variability” — and the word’s relative transparency, measured here using a spelling-to-pronunciation transparency rating. From the study, significant predictors included general word reading, general set for variability performance, and item-specific set for variability performance; word frequency and spelling-to-pronunciation transparency rating; and an interaction between word reading and the transparency rating. Results underscore the importance of considering both general and item-specific factors affecting irregular word reading.