content 1982 cpc accelerating the development of phonetic segmentation skills in kindergartners

8/19/2019 Content 1982 CPC Accelerating the Development of Phonetic Segmentation Skills in Kindergartners

1/11

Cahiers de l'ayt:!hologie Cognitive. 1982, 2. 259-269.

ACCELERA TING THE UEVELOPMENT OF PIWNETIC

SEGMENTATION SKILLS IN KINDERGARTNERS·

fllain CONTENT, Jo~é MORfilS, Jésus ALFX;RIA ct Paul IlERTEL..entiElSage. Les teG/;s oonsis-taient. ci. lluppÙlter ~e pllOrw initial.' de pseudo-mots

préeentés oraLement. le. phone à supprimer êtaJ1t noit une voyel.l.e., soit une fricrltive. soit Ime expLoiJive.

L'approntÙ1Mge comportait des jeux de das!JiFicationet de maniprÛatioM de mots au niveau phonétique. Lesgroupe8 expérimentaux ont améUoré 1.stœpel'formancep1.U3 que· ~egroupe. cOrJtrôLe pota' l.e8te6te de 8uppr-eGoion

dee consonn.es. L'lulhiLeté acquise n'était pao spécifiquedes phi:mes utiLisés tOJ'sde l. 'apprentiseag(! et était tou.jours présente six mais pLUE! tard. On conal.ut que7.. 'habHeté, d'a.naLyse pl!mlêtique peut être apprise avant te de'but dG 1.. 'appNmtissage dG .ta tectU1'e.

HoIs eLES : Pré-requis à. l'acquisition de.la. lecture,. habileté

de segment~tion phonétique.

KEY \fOnDS : f>rerequisite of reRding acquisition,' phonetic s~gmen-tation skills •.

11 Wc Wi8h ta thank tbe chii.d,l'en a,nd the staff from Z 'Eco I.e liama'i.de,in Brussels.

The present ,"'ork was Stlppoi-t~d in rut l,y th\' "Fonds dl' la '-Cdll~t·-cl,e scientifique 'médicale" (collt ra t nO 3.4553.79) ~lId by the "Fondsde' la recherche fondamentHe collective" (contrat nO 2.4S3S.ï9J.


2/11

INT/WDIICTlOtl

Th!' pr{'~ent raper dC;Jh wjth ("he po~sibility o.f acceleriJ:tingthe rlcvelol'lnC'nt of the ilhiLity to ul\'itll rh()lI~tic segmC'nts, r.xpel'inwiltai st\ldi~s on the issue haveusC'd di ffer~llt t~sks, sucll "lS CO\I1\t j Il!; tile plwllos in monosyllabicwor'ds ):>r'esen t l'cl ol'a J.1 y (Li be rman, Shalll


3/11

Dcvelopmcnt of phonetic sc~mcntation

segmen turion ofwords (Coleman, t 970 \ Skjeif jord , 1976 1 ~b\'Shand Mineo, 1977).

lYhatcver the' develop~lc(1tal coul'se of tll

ta rcading, mig~lt be enollgh for those chi Idren to Ife,,,me .11,are'lf 1;h~ el'.istcr.ce of ph\ll1ettr:: Ulllts" ln tllÎs vi~"'J ph"nes .ueaccessible, but no opportunity has becn offcrcd tCl ;lccess tathem, 1\ diff cretlt yic", (see Ilruce, 1964 and Leroy-Il,'uss i011,1975)' is that the difficulty obscrved iCl ~\st clÜhln~1\ bd'C'I'esix years of age is a sign of lack of some cognitive c.l.r.,citic~that are !mppo$cd to mature spont

~(


4/11

a ~I';)rch for sinli 1i tlldrs in l.or',ls, ,l'st tests. The! pretes t, the trai.nillg [lrogramand th!' fi l'st posttest ,.en r;\rried out in Janullry for haHof the cllildren, jn Febrtlary-flill'ch for tbe others, The secondpC1~ttcst w


5/11

IIt!veloµmcnt of rholll!tlc !:cgmcntatloll

it lâthout the initial phone. Children WCI'C toId thut pllprrt.~ srokean invented lan!\II,1ge. The firs t pUppet "'~


6/11

Cahi~rs de rsycholo~ie Cognitive

'.'

$CSS ion. The ch LI d t'en 1\;\11 to g.tICSS "",I.il t soulIdcd stTilti.e;c, .'l(1lllct il j ngone can h(!ilf in the srntence". Tile ain! \,las to attract attentiofl

ta the pholletic simihlrity of thase ~o'rds and to have the childrentryi.n,.; to prorHlllncc the cOllilTIDI\ phone in Î;;Oliltioll.

2, Picturc CL1SSificatioil : ("'0 pictlll'CS wc rI' shown. am! thecllild had t~ choQs~ the one wlH'lsc) ",une began \oIHh the key-phone,Wc ~i1v(' i111 rllH'!pr·l' ~,jlh il f'iÇ\llre rc.f(.d'n~ ta olle ctelDent,,[ the t ~11"lIe-twis t ~l' stl'I"y, all,J \ole· askeu the chi,Ld to takethe card ~llCJwil\g ~tl


7/11

Devclopment of phonetic sc~mcntation

Table 1. Pretest and first posttcat results.Mean percentage of' correct respons~s and standard deviations(ln parenthesis) for C (Control)', SP (Experirnent,Ù "Sarne Phones"),

and DP groups (Experimental "Different Phones") on the tlH'8rexpnrjmnn~nl ~rrlpn.

\'OWEl 'FRICAfliE' PLOSHE 1

Pr.t.st i 80 (15) ! 2! (23) 11,2 (\0) ),p~"ttest 1 98 (6) ! 46 ~4q 1 49 (JGI 1

Il DI ff. r e ne, 1 16 ',; 1 25.. 1 7 ); 1

I----------T-----~------,------------,------------T--------~---IPr.t.sl 81 (13), II, (20) JO (ll)

1 SP 1 p,.ttest 1 9S (6) 1 S9 (29) 1 61 (31) 1

1 1 Dj Her.ne, 1 14:t 1 1,5 % 1 31:t 11----------T------------,------------I------------I---·----'---11 1 Pretest 1 86 (Il) 1 27 (21) 1 42 (JI,) t1 OP 1 Posttest 1 98 (3) 1 ~7 (21] 1 81 (III 1

1 1 Differenc,1 12% 11,0:>; Il9:1: 1

Tableau 1. Résultats 81.1 prétest et aU premier posttest,Pourcentage moyen de réponses correctes et écart-type (811 tre p81'el1-

tbêses) ~our les group~s C (Contrale), ~P (Expérimentel, mêmesphones) et DP (Expérimental, phones différents) pour les troisséries expérimentales.

Examina tian of the indi vid,lal p;J. tt erns conf i med theprevlous analysis.Table Z gives the number of subjects whoseperformance l'as ,less than 33 % or greater 'than 66 % for eilchof the. CorlSOllant ser'ies. Consistent progresses l'cre obsened

in neill-Iy allchildren in the experimental groups, in a muchmore clear wa)' than i~ thoee of the control group.

Table 2. Number of subjects scof'ing wnder 33 % (-)or abo ...e 66 % (+)on the oonsonant series at pretest and first post test for C,(Control), SP ("Same Phones), and 'OP ("Different Phones") groups(N = 9 in each group).

1 11 pnEI(ST 1 POST-TEST1 Frlc"t~,e 1 Plo,l.e 1 Fricative .Plo,l"

C 1: -: 1 ~ : ~ 4' 4 4SP 1 6 0 1 6 2 1 2 fi 1 l 6

DP 1 fi 0 1 1, 3 1 1 6! 0 8

Tableau 2. Nombre de suj ets dans chaque groupe (Contr6le l "mêmes pho-nes", "phones différents") obtenant Un score inférieur à 33 % (-) 1ou supérieur à 66 % (+), pour les séries consonantiques au prétestet au premier posttest (N = 9 pour chaque groupe).


8/11

266 CalI iers de Psychologie Cognitive

The long-ter'm cffects of tt',1illi!\J; "'cre ~tudied by cornplIringthe ~lIb~l'oti p~ ,.ho p

who had

passed the second

po!;tte!;t. The data are from th~ pl(}siv" seri"" Il.t pretcst andfromtht! two fler·Lo·s st ·the SE'rrcct l'esp"ll~es i.ncrenscd rcgularly from thefirst to the firth, itern : 0 ~~, ,7 %, 11 %, 22 % 11.nd 48 %' of correct re~ 1.'''115 e~. Th is couJ cl exp ta in an othcr",iSe pu~~l.il1gresult, Il ilme l.v the, fClct thélt NI the pretest, performal1ce \,lasbette!' for plosives tltnn for friCfl.tives. Since the fric~tivc

test alllil}'sprcceded tlte p10,ÜI'e test, the differenc:c ceuHbe duc tothc training. prcviden by the first series. Further


9/11

Development of phonetic segmentation

rese


10/11

268 Cahiers de l'$ychologie Cognitive

The !'e~Hll t sor tll~ present cxperi!nent, ilS weIl. R~ the.:1l1fol'mal datn frOnl the tJwm(1fC j't'cciscly-.; which actlv;tic!l al'c·mosJ mlcqll.1tc to hdngClli J ,11'('11 t Cl all;r l)'?,(. ~l'r rdl a t Ilw l'h UJ le' 1 ic .1 ('V.!' 1 •

ABSTRACT

](indergartner~ W8r'8 tested 071' theil' ahi)_.ityto segment WOl'd6 at the phonetic Levei.. be{ot'eand. after '


11/11

Development cf phonetic sc~mentation

COLEflAN, E.n. 'Colleeting ~ do.tn ··btLse for' a rcarllll)!; tcr:hnolog}'. Journat of EducatiO'lai P8!1cho~ogy Monqgraph, 1970, 61" 4, 1_2]. ..

ELKONHI, !J. fi •. USSR. In J. Downin!l; (Ed.), ComparQtive reading. New. . YOl'k:' Hucmillan, 1973, ,551-57,9.

FOX, IL, &'ROUTfl,' O.K. IInaIyzin!;\ spollen language intl1 '""onls,syllablc~ and phoTlcmcs: Il devdop'm~nt;J.1 !>tudy. ,JOI""lClt o{ Psychotinguistic Research, 1975, 4, 4, 331-342. .

LEROY- lIOUSSION J fi. Unehabilet é aud i t i vo-rhonét iqll(, n';cc ssai npour appremtrc à lire : la fLJsion sylJ.abi 'lllr.. NO\l\'elleétude génétique entre 5 et 8 ans. cnfarwe, 1975,,2, 1('5-lnl1.

LIBERHi\N, A.H., COOPER,!'.::;., SHI\NKWEILER, 0.1'., &. STU[)D!';HT-KENNI~[)\',fI. Perception of the speech code. PSllcllO~ogi"aLRe!Jiew, 11)67,74, 431-461.

LIBERHAN, LY., & SHANKWEILER,teachlng ta ~cad. l~ L.Theory and Practice of r;al'~yrente Erlbaum Assac., 1976.

D. P. Speec:h, ttle al rlJabç t ilndRcsnick and l'.' \l'caver (f:d~.),

Reading. Hillsdalc, N.•J.: Law'-

LIDEHHAN, l.Y., Sfii\NKWEILF;R, D.P., fISIŒll, LW., '" CAHTER" D.Reading and the

content 1982 cpc accelerating the development of phonetic segmentation skills in kindergartners

Documents