1. Being smart about teaching spelling Anna M. T. Bosman Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen a.bosman@pwo.ru.nl www.annabosman.eu Kingston Ontario, September 20, 2007

2. Dutch education system Kindergarten at 4 years (K1 and K2) Primary school –Grade 1 starts at 6 years –Grade 6 ends at 12 years Special Education –Schools for a-specific problems –Schools for specific disorders (Blind, deaf, behavioral problems,physically handicapped etc.)

3. Consistency levels between letters & sounds Letters Sounds [di:r] deer/dear [par] pair/pear Tear Wind English 28% Dutch 37% English 69% Dutch 86%

4. The effect of visual dictation van Hell, J. G., Bosman, A. M. T., & Bartelings, M. G. C. (2003). Visual dictation improves spelling performance in three groups of Dutch students with spelling disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 239-255.

5. Words ConsistentInconsistent matpair (pear) stormfoam (fome) notcheap (cheep/chiep)

6. Participants

7. Students with specific learning problems

8. Students with general learning problems

9. Students with severe behavioral problems

10. Gain from pretest to retention test

11. Conclusions Visual dictation is effective for all types of students Visual dictation is particularly effective for words with inconsistent spellings

12. Regularized vs. Standard reading Bosman, A. M. T., van Hell, J. G., & Verhoeven, L. (2006). Learning the spelling of strange words in Dutch benefits from regularized reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 879-890.

13. Words

14. Participants

15. Regular education

16. Special education

17. Conclusions Regularized reading is more effective than standard reading for all spellers The spelling is well retained in regular- education students The spelling is not so well retained in special- education students

18. Regularized reading vs. Enhanced regularized reading Bosman, A. M. T., van Hell, J. G., & Verhoeven, L. (2006). Learning the spelling of strange words in Dutch benefits from regularized reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 879-890.

19. Words

20. Participants (special education)

21. ‘Good’ spellers

22. ‘Poor’ spellers

23. Conclusions Regularized reading in special-education students is relatively well retained when the training is extended ‘Poor’ spellers benefit to the same extent as ‘good’ spellers Practicing the ‘funny’ pronunciation contributes to learning the spelling

24. Improving spelling while writing essays Willemen, M., Bosman, A. M. T., & van Hell, J. G. (2000). Beter leren spellen tijdens het stellen [Improving spelling while writing essays]. Pedagogische Studi ë n, 77, 173-182.

25. Participants EducationAgeG/BTrainingControl Regular8;88/1612 Special11;83/1177

26. Spelling errors in essays (%)

27. Conclusions Regular-education as well as special- education students can succesfully spell check their essays A very short training helps to reduce the number of spelling errors in essays

28. The lesson of this story Spelling needs to be taught and practiced Poor spellers gain as much as good spellers Spelling exercises are best geared to the spelling problem at hand

29. Thank you for your attention Anna M. T. Bosman Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen a.bosman@pwo.ru.nl www.annabosman.eu Kingston Ontario, September 20, 2007