Wolf Beverly, Abbott Robert D, Berninger Virginia W
The Slingerland® Institute for Literacy.
University of Washington, Statistics and Measurement.
Read Writ. 2017 Feb;30(2):299-317. doi: 10.1007/s11145-016-9674-4. Epub 2016 Jul 23.
In Study 1, the treatment group ( = 33 first graders, = 6 years 10 months, 16 girls) received Slingerland multi-modal (auditory, visual, tactile, motor through hand, and motor through mouth) manuscript (unjoined) handwriting instruction embedded in systematic spelling, reading, and composing lessons; and the control group ( =16 first graders, = 7 years 1 month, 7 girls) received manuscript handwriting instruction not systematically related to the other literacy activities. ANOVA showed both groups improved on automatic alphabet writing from memory; but ANCOVA with the automatic alphabet writing task as covariate showed that the treatment group improved significantly more than control group from the second to ninth month of first grade on dictated spelling and recognition of word-specific spellings among phonological foils. In Study 2 new groups received either a second year of manuscript ( = 29, = 7 years 8 months, 16 girls) or introduction to cursive (joined) instruction in second grade ( = 24, = 8 years 0 months, 11 girls) embedded in the Slingerland literacy program. ANCOVA with automatic alphabet writing as covariate showed that those who received a second year of manuscript handwriting instruction improved more on sustained handwriting over 30, 60, and 90 seconds than those who had had only one year of manuscript instruction; both groups improved in spelling and composing from the second to ninth month of second grade. Results are discussed in reference to mastering one handwriting format before introducing another format at a higher grade level and always embedding handwriting instruction in writing and reading instruction aimed at all levels of language.
在研究1中，治疗组（n = 33名一年级学生，平均年龄 = 6岁10个月，16名女生）接受了斯林格兰多模式（听觉、视觉、触觉、手部运动和口部运动）手写体（非连笔）书写指导，该指导融入了系统的拼写、阅读和写作课程；对照组（n = 16名一年级学生，平均年龄 = 7岁1个月，7名女生）接受了与其他读写活动无系统关联的手写体书写指导。方差分析显示，两组在凭记忆自动书写字母方面均有进步；但以自动书写字母任务为协变量的协方差分析表明，在一年级的第二个月至第九个月，治疗组在听写拼写以及对语音陪体中特定单词拼写的识别方面，比对照组有更显著的进步。在研究2中，新的小组要么在二年级接受第二年的手写体（n = 29，平均年龄 = 7岁8个月，16名女生）指导，要么在二年级接受连笔书写指导（n = 24，平均年龄 = 8岁0个月，11名女生），指导融入斯林格兰读写计划。以自动书写字母为协变量的协方差分析表明，接受第二年手写体书写指导的学生在持续书写30秒、60秒和90秒时，比只接受过一年手写体指导的学生进步更大；两组在二年级的第二个月至第九个月在拼写和写作方面均有进步。研究结果结合在高年级引入另一种书写形式之前先掌握一种书写形式，并始终将书写指导融入针对各级语言的写作和阅读指导进行了讨论。
