2006 4 :100124918 (2006) 0420068275 : G442 :A - 3 1 1,2 1 1 3 4 (11, 100875 ;21, 450014 ; 31, 100007 ;41, 100875) : -, 39, 23, 28, - : (1) -,; (2), ; (3), ;,, : ;; ; ; 1, ( map), ( [ m p ]), ( map), ; ( [ m p ]),,,,,,, 40,, [1 4 ] : (1) -,, : (1),; (2), [5,6 ],,,, :, [7 ] 68,, :,. E2mail : linchongde @2631net,,,( ) ( ),,, ( ) ( ),,, :,-, ;,,,,? (2) -,? (3),?, -,,, -,?
: - [1,8 11 ] : ( National Reading Panel) 2000 [12 ] :, : (1) ; (2),; (3), :,?,,,, 2 211,, : ;,,28,, 1 1 ( + ) ( M SD) ( ) 39 (27 + 12) 6198 0188 23(16 + 7) 6191 0176 28 (18 + 10) 9169 0136,,,,, ;, ;,, 212 9,,5,4,, 213 -, : (1),, ; (2), ; (3),,,,, 214 11, 3 21411 8 : (1) - A CVC ( + + ) 26,,, 24 :,,, : [ s m],, : [ s ] - [ ] - [m],,,,, :!,,,,, 10 1,, 24, 1 5 0188 (2) - B - A, 24, 0188 (3) - A CVC 26,,, 24 :,,, : [ m ] - [ ] - [ p ],, : [m p ] 69
2006 4,, - A,,, - A 24, 0190 (4) - B - A, 24,0180 (5) - A 26,,, 24 24 : CVC CCVC CVCC CVCCC CCCVC :, :,,, :,?, : [m p ],,, : [m p ] [p ],? : [m ],,,,,,, - A,,, 8, 24 0179 (6) - B - A, 24, 0178 (7) - A 26,,, 24 24 : CVC CCVC CVCC CVCCC CCCVC :,, 1,,,, :,?, : [m p ],,, : [ m p ] [p ] [ t ],? : [m t ],, 1, 139, 70, 6 4 14, 24 0185 (8) - B - A, 24, 0171 21412 1, : CVC 32 ( ),,, 30,,,, [m p ],, : [m p ],,,, 10 1,, 30, 1 5 0179 21413 : (1) - A CVC CV 52,,, 50 :,,, 50,,, sim, [ sim], 3 ; [ s ], 1,,, 50,,,, 0193
: - (2) - B - A, 0189 215 - : - ( ) - ( ),,, 48 90, 24,:,,,,,, -,,,,,,,;, 216 21611 (1) - A - A - A - A - A 6, 3 (2), 8, 3,15,, 24 ( :8 3 Π ), 360 (24 15 Π ) 24, 24 15, (3) - B - B - B - B - B 6, 3 21612,, :,, ;,,, 21613,, :,,, -, 3 311, 2 2 ( M SD) ( n = 39) ( n = 23) ( n = 28) 3187 5158 7148 6142 6121 5193 4179 7151 6157 8173 17171 4124 9123 6198 11122 7116 19146 3112 1177 2174 5100 4168 14154 5121 0135 0116 0174 2150 3104 2157 3126 6127 7135 17181 44196 33155 : 24 ; 30 ; 139., 2, (one2way ANOVA) : (1),, F(2,87) = 2197, p > 0105 (2),, F(2,87) = 29175, p < 01001 ;, p < 01001,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) (3),, F(2,87) = 24111, p < 01001 ;, p < 0101,, p > 0105 (Bon2 ferroni ) (4), 71
2006 4, F(2,87) = 79124, p < 01001 ;, p < 0101,, p < 0101 (Bonferroni ) (5),, F(2,87) = 21100, p < 01001 ;, p < 01001,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) (6),, F(2,87) = 35114, p < 01001 ;, p < 01001, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) 312, 3 3 ( n = 39) ( M SD) ( n = 23) ( n = 28) 11155, p < 01001,, F(1,86) = 5108, p < 0105 ;,, p < 0101,,, p > 0105,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) (4),, F(2,86) = 42172, p < 01001,, F(1,86) = 19164, p < 01001 ;,,, p < 0101,,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) (5),, F(2,86) = 48106, p < 01001,, F(1,86) = 1160, p > 0105 ;,,, p < 0101,,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) (6),, F(2,86) = 4124, p < 0105,, F(1,86) = 10141 5133 19104 3120 7164 5168 13146 61 07 21152 3107 18188 4100 16126 5120 21196 3181 20154 3116 6110 4159 17117 3194 12189 4195 5162 61 36 18152 8104 3100 2187 25140 17164 36157 18129 60171 29170 : 24 ; 30 ; 139. 3,,,,, (ANCO2 VAs) : (1),, F(2,86), F(1,86) = 34163, p < 01001, = 9160, p < 0101 ;,,, p < 0101,,, p < 0105 (Bonferroni ) (2),, F(2,86), F(1,86) = 21124, p < 01001, = 16116, p < 01001 ;,, 14125, p < 01001 ;, p < 0105,,, p > 0105,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) 313,?,, Pearson,4 4 11 1100 21 0158 333 1100 Pearson 1 2 3 4 5 6 31 0150 333 0130 3 1100 41 0173 333 0167 33 3 0161 33 1100 51 0171 333 0157 333 0153 333 0176 33 1100 61 0144 333 0134 333 0127 3 0141 33 0155 33 3 1100 : 3 p < 0105, 33 p < 0101, 333 p < 01001. 4,( ),,, p < 0101,,,, p > 0105 (Bonferroni ) 314 (3),, F(2,86) =, 72
: -?,,,, 5 5 S E t p 18117 2197 6111 01000 1109 0121 0155 5112 01000 5,,, ( ),, :, 30 %, 29 % 4 411 -, :,, [3 ],,,? [5,6,13 ],,, : (1) ; (2),?? : (1),,,,,,,,;,, :,,, (2),,,,,,,, ;,, :,,,, ;,, ;,,, (3),,,,,,,,,, :,,, ;,, ;,,, (4),,,,,,,, ;,, :,,,, ;,,, ;,,,, :,, 73
2006 4, ;,,,,,,- 412 -,, :,, ;,, : (1) -,,; (2),,,,? : (1),,, ;,,,,,,,, :,,,,,,,,,, (2),, ;,,,,,,, 74 :,,,,,, (3) Pearson : ( ),;,;,; : ( ),,,,,,, (4),,,:,,,, :, 30 %, 29 % :, -,,, ;,,, :,,, ;,,,,,,, (
: - ),,,, -,,,,,,,,,,,, :,,,,,,,,,, : [ 1 ]Ball E W, Blachman B A. Does phoneme awareness training in kin2 dergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spell2 ing? Reading Research Quarterly, 1991, 24, 49-661 [2 ]Bradley L, Bryant P. Categorizing sounds and learning to read : A causal connection. Nature, 1983, 301, 419-4211 [3 ]Bus A G, van IJzendoorn M H. Phonological awareness and early reading : A meta2analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educa2 tional Psychology, 1999, 91, 403-4141 [4 ]Oudeans M K. Integration of letter2sound correspondences and pho2 nological awareness skills of blending and segmenting : A pilot study examin2 ing the effects of instructional sequence on word reading for kindergarten chil2 dren with low phonological awareness. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2003, 26, 258-2801 [5 ] Hatcher P J, Hulme Ellis A W. Ameliorating early reading failure by integrating the teaching of reading and phonological skills : The phonologi2 cal linkage hypothesis. Child Development, 1994, 65, 41-571 [6 ]Schneider W, Roth E, Ennemoser M. Training phonological skills and letter knowledge in children at risk for dyslexia : A comparison of three kindergarten intervention programs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2000, 92, 284-2951 [7 ].,,2002, (4) :53-59. [8 ]Ball E W, Blachman B A. Phoneme segmentation training : Effect on reading readiness. Annals of Dyslexia, 1988, 38, 208-2251 [9 ]Davidson M, Jenkins J R. Effects of phonemic processes on word reading and spelling. Journal of Educational Research, 1994, 87, 148-1571 [ 10 ]Fox B, Routh D K. Phonemic analysis and synthesis as word attack skills: Revisited. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1984, 76, 1059-10641 [ 11 ]Torgesen J K, Morgan S, Davis C. The effects of two types of pho2 nological awareness training on word learning in kindergarten children. Jour2 nal of Educational Psychology, 1992, 84, 364-3701 [12 ]National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read : An evidence2 based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its impli2 cations for reading instruction, 20001 Retrieved July 15, 2006 from http :ΠΠ www. nichd. nih. govπpublicationsπnrpπsmallbook. htm. [13 ] Yopp K. The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly,1988,23, 159-1771 75
2006 4 Effects of Integration Training of Phonemic Transcription with Phonological Awareness on Quasi2reading in English LI Qing2an 1 XU Ying 1, 2 ZHAN G Meng 1 LIN Chong2de 1 YAO Feng 3 LIN Yi 4 (11 Institute of Developmental psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875 ; 21Department of Education, Henan Educational College, Zhengzhou 450014 ; 31 Fuxue Hutong Primary School, Dongcheng District, Beijing 100007 ; 41School of Psychology, Beijing Normed University, Beijing 100875) Abstract : In order to mainly investigate the effects of integrated training of phonemic transcription with phonological awareness on quasi2reading skills in English, a pretest2posttest, comparison group quasi2experimental design was adopt2 ed, 39 grade 1 pupils were used as the group of integrated training of phonemic transcription knowledge with phonemic segmentation and blending skills, 23 grade 1 pupils were used as the group of integrated training of phonemic transcrip2 tion knowledge with phonemic segmentation, blending, deletion and substitution skills, while 28 grade 3 pupils were used as the comparison group. It was found that (1) integrated training of phonemic transcription with phonological awareness could enhance the phonological awareness in English as well as the quasi2reading skills in English in grade 1 pupils ; (2) the waining of the quasi2reading skills in English in grade 1 pupils is helpful to their reading skills in English ; (3) both the integrated training of phonemic transcription knowledge with phonemic segmentation and blending skills, and the inte2 grated training of phonemic transcription knowledge with phonemic segmentation, blending, deletion and substitution skills, could enhance quasi2reading and reading skills in English in grade 1 pupils ; howerver the former one is not com2 narable to the latter one. Key words :phonemic transcription ; phonological awareness ; integration ; intervention ; quasi2reading 76