Road to the Code aligns fully with research supporting the importance of phonological awareness instruction for kindergarten, first-grade, and special education students. The program is backed by the following results:

• Studies have found that when children are taught phonemic awareness, they are more prepared to learn to read and spell. Also, phonemic awareness instruction, combined with instruction connecting the phonemic segments to alphabet letters, significantly improves early reading and spelling skills (Ball and Blachman, Reading Research Quarterly, 1991, Vol. 26, No. 1, p. 49).
  
  
• Research has shown that phonemic awareness instruction gives at-risk students a bigger boost in reading than it gives typical readers or readers with disabilities (Ehri et al. Reading Research Quarterly, July/August/September 2001, Vol. 36, No. 3, p. 266).
  
  
• Overall, studies have found that phonemic awareness instruction can be beneficial for all children, including those from low-income, inner-city schools.
  
  
• Studies have shown that teachers can incorporate phonemic awareness instruction into their regular day through games and learning activities.

Road to the Code has been shown to be particularly effective as a supplementary program for teaching the two essential skills of phonemic awareness and letter naming and as an intervention program for bringing students’ phonological awareness skills up to speed as quickly as possible. In the National Reading Panel report, Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction, Road to the Code was cited as an example of an effective curriculum.

Annotated Research Bibliography

Ball, E. W. (1997). Phonological awareness: Implications for whole language and emergent literacy programs. Topics in Language Disorders, 17(3), 14–26.

A sub-group of students with the lowest letter–sound recognition among a group of children who took part in a phonological awareness intervention in kindergarten was retested in first grade. In the original study, 90 children were assigned to three groups: a group that received instruction in phonological awareness and letter sounds, a control group that received letter–sound instruction and participated in language activities, and a no-intervention control group. At the end of the intervention, the phonological awareness group outperformed both control groups in phoneme awareness, reading of phonetically regular words, and sophistication of developmental spellings. In the follow-up study of 38 of the original children who knew fewer than 10 letter sounds at the start of the intervention, differences in phonological awareness were not maintained in first grade. However, the group that received the phonological awareness intervention in kindergarten performed significantly better on word recognition and reading decoding measures in first grade. The findings suggest that phonological awareness intervention may have a positive impact on the first-grade reading abilities of those kindergartners who are behind their peers in letter–sound knowledge.

Ball, E. W., Blachman, B. A. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26(1), 49–66.

To evaluate the effects of training in phonemic segmentation and instruction in letter names and sounds on kindergarten children’s reading and spelling skills, 90 students from three public schools were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a phoneme awareness group, a language activities group, and a control group (see previous entry). Results indicated that phoneme awareness instruction, combined with instruction connecting the phonetic segments to alphabet letters, significantly improved the early reading and spelling skills of the children in the phoneme awareness group.

Blachman, B. A. (1994). What we have learned from longitudinal studies of phonological processing and reading, and some unanswered questions: A response to Torgesen, Wagner, and Rashotte. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27(5), 287–291.

In response to the findings of a longitudinal study by Torgesen, Wagner, and Rashotte (1994) that “individual differences in phonological processing abilities are remarkably stable from kindergarten through second grade,” the author makes the point that if this stability makes the processes difficult to alter, it becomes incumbent on researchers and clinicians to learn more about the strategies that best facilitate growth in reading for children with deficits in phonological processing. For example, they must answer the questions:

• What strategies facilitate the development of fluency in word recognition for children who have trouble retrieving phonological codes from long-term memory (as measured, for example, by naming speed measures)?
• Do speed drills on isolated lists of words make a difference?
• What about choral reading, sustained silent reading, and practice in rereading favorite books? 

Also in response to the suggestion from the Torgeson et al. study that phonological awareness training, by itself, may have only a limited effect on reading achievement, the author expresses concern that some may infer that phonological awareness training is not worth the effort. To the contrary, the author contends, because of the importance of phonological awareness for reading acquisition, researchers must look carefully at factors that increase its effectiveness. While phonological awareness training alone may not be enough, especially for the most resistant readers, the author concludes, researchers need to learn more about the optimal length, intensity, and timing of treatment, as well as the best combination of instructional elements.

Blachman, B. A. (2000). Phonological awareness. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 483-502). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Phonological awareness has been systematically studied for almost 30 years and has gained prominence because of its unique contribution to successful reading acquisition. According to the author, research now provides evidence that instruction that heightens phonological awareness and emphasizes the connections to the alphabetic code promotes greater skill in word recognition. An important implication of the research is that teachers need to understand and provide for individual differences in phonological awareness. All children need to learn about the segmental nature of speech and how the sound segments are represented in print. Although many children appear to make these discoveries on their own—by playing oral language games, connecting speech and print when being read to, and being given opportunities to write—many other children will not. Some children will not have the necessary preschool exposure to language play and early literacy experiences that trigger these associations. Other children, because of differences or deficiencies in phonological ability, will not discover the connections between print and speech on their own, even if they have important preschool literacy experiences. On the basis of the research findings, the author suggests that explicit instruction in phonological awareness and the connections between sound segments and letters may help to close the gap between those beginning readers who lack insight into the phonological structure of spoken words and those who seem to acquire the awareness effortlessly.

Blachman, B.A., Ball, E. W., Black, R. S., & Tangel, D. M. (1994). Kindergarten teachers develop phoneme awareness in low-income, inner-city classrooms: Does it make a difference? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–18.

Recent evidence suggests that training in phoneme awareness has a positive impact on beginning reading and spelling. Eighty-four treatment children and 75 control children took part in a study designed to investigate the effectiveness of instruction in phonological awareness provided in low-income, inner-city kindergarten classrooms by kindergarten teachers and their teaching assistants. No significant pretreatment differences existed between the groups. After the 11-week intervention, the treatment children significantly outperformed the control children on measures of phoneme segmentation, letter name and letter sound knowledge, two of three reading measures, and a measure of invented spelling. This study was significant in that the activities were provided to groups of children in the regular classroom and introduced effectively by teachers and their assistants using manipulatives and language games, suggesting that kindergarten teachers can successfully incorporate these activities into the regular school day.

Blachman, B. A., Tangel, D. M., Ball, E. W., Black, R., McGraw, C. K. (1999). Developing phonological awareness and word recognition skills: A two-year intervention with low-income, inner-city children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 239-273.

Low-income, inner-city children were involved in a 2-year intervention delivered in a regular classroom by regular classroom teachers to develop phonological awareness and word recognition skills. For the treatment children, an 11-week phoneme awareness program in kindergarten was followed by a first grade reading program (extended to second grade for some children) that emphasized explicit, systematic instruction in the alphabetic code. Control children participated in the school district’s regular basal reading program. Both groups participated in a phonetically based spelling program mandated by the district. At the end of grade 1, 66 treatment children significantly outperformed 48 control children on measures of phonological awareness, letter name and letter sound knowledge, and three measures of word recognition.  They also significantly outperformed the control children on two measures of spelling. One year later, at the end of second grade, 58 of the treatment children significantly outperformed 48 of the control children on all four measures of word recognition. For the groups as a whole, there were no differences on the one measure of spelling readministered at the end of second grade. However, there were significant differences in spelling between the 16 treatment and the 13 control children who remained in the bottom quartile of spellers at the end of second grade when partial credit was given for phonetically correct selling, and significant differences in reading favoring the treatment children on all four measures of word recognition.

Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(3), 250–287.

The National Reading Panel, formed under a 1997 directive from Congress to assess the status of research-based knowledge regarding the effectiveness of various approaches for teaching children to read, conducted a meta-analysis on phonemic awareness instruction. Its analysis of 52 published studies supported causal inferences about the impact of phonemic awareness on learning to read. The benefits of phonemic awareness instruction were replicated multiple times across experiments and provided solid support for the claim that phonemic awareness instruction is more effective than alternate forms of instruction or no instruction in helping children acquire reading and spelling skills.

Tangel, D. M., Blachman, B. A. (1992). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on kindergarten children’s invented spelling. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(2), 233-261.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether children trained in phoneme awareness in kindergarten would differ in invented spelling from children who did not have this training. A reliable scoring system was created to evaluate the invented spelling of the kindergarten children. The children were selected from 18 all-day kindergartens in four demographically comparable low-income, inner-city schools. Prior to the intervention, no significant pretreatment differences existed between the 77 treatment children and the 72 control children. During March, April, and May of the kindergarten year, treatment children participated in an 11-week intervention that included instruction in letter names and sounds. After the intervention, the treatment children significantly outperformed the control children in phoneme segmentation, letter name and letter sound knowledge, and reading phonetically regular words and nonwords. Of primary interest in this study is the fact that the treatment children produced invented spellings that were rated developmentally superior to those of the control children.

Tangel, D. M., Blachman, B. A. (1995). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on the invented spelling of first-grade children: A one-year follow-up. Journal of Reading Behavior 27(2), 153-185.

In a follow-up to the previous study, low-income, inner-city children who received 11 weeks of instruction in phoneme awareness produced invented spellings at the end of kindergarten that were rated developmentally superior to those of control children. The purpose of the follow-up study was to investigate the invented and standard spelling of the same children in first grade. During first grade, the treatment children participated in a reading program that continued to emphasize phoneme awareness and the alphabetic code. In measures taken in February and May of first grade (the end of the second year of the study), treatment children significantly outperformed the control children on measures of invented and standard spelling. A reliable scoring system had been created to evaluate the invented spelling of the kindergarten children. For this study, the scoring system was expanded to evaluate later developing spelling patterns.

Richgels, D. J. (2001). Phonemic awareness. The Reading Teacher, 55(3), 274–278.

As “phonemic awareness” has spread as a buzzword, the market has been flooded with books on the topic, “too many of which,” the author notes, “fail to provide adequate information about phonemes, phonemic awareness, and phonics.” To be useful to instructors, the author contends, books on phonemic awareness should contain the following five elements:

1. A definition of phoneme that explains how phonemes work in spoken language.
2. A definition of awareness that emphasizes conscious attention.
3. The realization that phonemes are not discrete entities, but rather are categories within which there is much variation.
4. Delineation of the differences among phonological, phonemic, and phonic.
5. An appreciation of the small, albeit necessary, part that phonemic awareness plays in beginning reading and writing. 

In a review of available books, the author included Road to the Code: A Phonological Awareness Program for Young Children (as well as Phonemic Awareness in Young Children: A Classroom Curriculum; see separate entry) among those meeting these criteria.

Wasik, B.A. (2001). Phonemic awareness and young children. Childhood Education, Spring, 128–133.

Over the past 20 years, considerable research has been devoted to phonemic awareness and the role it plays in young children’s learning to read. Many teachers of young children, however, fail to include phonemic instruction based on the assumption that phonemic awareness is 1) phonics, and 2) not developmentally appropriate for young children. To disabuse that notion, the author highlights four of the key findings of the research:

1. Children who know how to manipulate sounds in words at any early age have greater success in learning how to read in the first and second grades.
2. Children as young as 3 and 4 have demonstrated phonemic awareness.
3. Opportunities to play with language result in the development of phonemic awareness.
4. Adults can create opportunities for children to learn phonemic awareness.

The author concludes that children need to learn phonemic awareness by engaging in fun and motivating activities that promote the recognition and manipulation of sounds in words.