Crystal C. Randolph, MCD, CCC-SLP
Doctoral Student
Jan Norris, Ph.D.
Louisiana State University
Rhyming is the changing of a word’s onset in order to form
new, similar sounding words. Rhyme is argued to be the
simplest and foundational element of phonological awareness
skills. Mothers are typically the first individual to expose a
child to rhyme through the reciting and singing of nursery
rhymes and word games. A child’s ability to rhyme typically
emerges as an effect of word play. As the child grows older,
she is expected to engage in increasingly complex rhyming
tasks such as rhyme cloze procedures, reciting nursery rhymes,
identifying rhyme pairs, and creating rhyme pairs.
• Rhyming plays an important role in spelling, learning how to
read, and in learning phonemic awareness skills (Goswami,
1999, Goswami & Bryant, 1992).
• Rhyming enables the child to engage in word play and to tune
in to the sounds of words (Norris & Hoffman, 2001).
A causal link exists between sound categorization
and reading and spelling (Bradley & Bryant, 1984)
A direct causal link exists between reading
acquisition and rime (Goswami and Bryant, 1992)
The consistent spelling sequences used in rhyme
may facilitate reading (Goswami, 1999).
Longitudinal studies indicate a relationship among
rhyme awareness and other measures of
phonological awareness (Neuman & Dickinson,
2006) .
The current study sought to answer the
following:
1. Does using a visual analogy (Spuzzles) teach
expressive and receptive rhyme more
efficiently?
2. Does teaching rhyme have a significant effect
on phonemic awareness learning?
3. Does using a visual analogy with words
embedded in pictures have a significant effect
on decoding one-syllable words?
Characteristics of Children Participating in Study
Participants
Age
in
Mos.
Gender
Racea
Rhyme Task
Alliteration
IGDI
Rhyming Picture
Naming
Phonemic
Awareness
Letter
Identification
Sound
Identification
Experimental Group
1
50
F
EA
3
1
3
13
2
52
16
2
51
M
EA
2
4
4
26
0
25
6
b
3
45
F
EA
0
1
4
8
0
17
1
4
39
F
EA
0
0
1
14
0
40
0
5b
45
M
EA
0
2
0
9
0
8
0
6
50
F
EA
2
2
2
24
1
32
9
7
54
F
EA
3
5
16
20
6
48
23
8
51
M
AA
0
2
0
5
0
2
3
9
46
M
AA
2
2
2
10
0
0
0
10
58
F
EA
2
4
14
27
4
50
22
48.90
1.40
2.30
4.60
15.60
1.30
27.40
8.00
Total (Mean)
Control Group
11
45
F
EA
3
3
3
19
1
43
13
12
50
M
EA
2
3
7
16
5
41
14
13
39
F
AA
1
1
4
11
0
45
2
14
37
M
EA
0
0
5
15
0
18
0
15
57
M
EA
2
15
10
26
14
52
22
16
45
F
EA
2
11
8
23
2
47
20
17
50
F
EA
2
5
6
9
0
12
11
18
36
M
AA
0
2
3
9
0
1
0
19
37
M
AA
0
1
0
6
0
0
0
Total (Mean)
44.00
1.33
4.56
5.11
14.89
2.44
28.78
9.11
Note: IGDI - Individual Growth and Development Indicators (University of Minnesota, 1998); Phonemic Awareness Assessment-National Center on Education and the Economy and the University of Pittsburgh (1998); Rhyme
Task-Investigator created task (2009)
a EA = European American; AA = African American
b – bilingual participants
Participants were chosen based on the following
inclusion criteria:
1. 3.0-4.11 years in age
2. Typically developing without cognitive, visual,
hearing, speech/language impairments per
parent or daycare provider report
3. Non-readers
4. Do not demonstrate receptive or expressive
rhyming ability
Materials
• Spuzzles (Norris, 2001)
• Read and Rhyme Short Vowels
puzzle cards (Carson Dellosa)
• Single Word Decoding Task
• Rhyme Task
Assessments
• Individual Growth &Development
Indicators (IGDI)
• Phonemic Awareness Assessment
• Letter and Sound Identification
• Nineteen typically developing 3 and 4 year olds
selected from private childcare centers
• Matched on age, early literacy skills, and
phonemic awareness skills and randomly assigned
to an intervention group
• Pre- and Post- assessments in phonemic
awareness (e.g., onset-rime blending, phoneme
blending), letter and sound identification, early
literacy skills (e.g., alliteration, picture naming)
• 8 week study (2 weeks testing, 6 weeks
intervention)
20 minutes/session
Settings: small classroom, hallway
Each session began by giving/showing
children definition of rhyme
Seven rime families with 5 rhyming words in
each family were targeted (Spuzzle group)
Twelve rime families with 3 rhyming words in
each family were targeted (Puzzle group)
Number of Receptive Rhyme Items
Answered Correctly
Gain Scores
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
Spuzzles
Puzzles
Number of Expressive Rhyme Items
Answered Correctly
Gain Scores
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Spuzzles
Puzzles
Number of PA Items Answered Correctly
Gain Scores
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Spuzzles
Puzzles
Number of Words Correctly Decoded
Gain Scores
25
20
15
10
5
0
Spuzzles
Puzzles
Visual inspection of gain scores indicated that
using onset-rime strategies (e.g., Spuzzles)
has greater effects on receptive and
expressive rhyming skills and single-word
decoding skills. Both methods of teaching
rhyme had the same effect on gains in
phonemic awareness skills.
• Typically developing children between the ages of
3;0 and 4;0 can learn rhyming skills in a short
intervention time
• All of the children in the Spuzzles group made
gains in expressive rhyming but several children in
the Read and Rhyme group did not
• The visual strategy of showing children what
rhyme looks like by using Spuzzles that did not
make a picture if the words didn’t end with the
same rime gave more effective feedback than
matching unparsed rhyming words
Findings were consistent with prior studies that
have found a causal link between rhyming and
reading (Bryant and Bradley, 1984; Goswami and
Bryant 1992). The results of the single-word
decoding task are confirm a prior study by
Goswami (1995) stating that children read by
analogy and “end” analogies are the first to
emerge. Because existing literature has shown that
rhyme is vital to early literacy skills, it is imperative
to continue to examine strategies that are most
effective in teaching rhyme to preschoolers (Bryant
and Bradley, 1984; Goswami and Bryant, 1992).
Although some people recommend teaching
phonemic awareness skills without visuals, the
children in this study made rapid changes
when visuals, including print, were used. The
visuals that provided immediate feedback on
correctness of the rime (i.e., Spuzzles)
appeared to help children revise their
hypothesis regarding the critical features of
rhyme to a greater extent than matching
whole words that rhyme. Future studies will
need to test this with children who have
demonstrated delays in the acquisition of
rhyme.
• Bradley, L. L., Bryant, P. E. (1984). Rhyme and Reason in Reading
and Spelling. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
• Goswami, U. & Bryant, P. (1992). Rhyme, analogy, and children's
reading. Reading Acquisition. (pp. 49-63). Hillsdale, NJ, England:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. xii, 384 pp.
• Goswami U. (1995). Phonological development and reading by
analogy: what is analogy and what is it not? Journal of Research
in Reading. 18: 139-145.
• Goswami U. (1999). Orthographic analogies and phonological
priming: a comment on Bowey, Vaugham, and Hansen (1998).
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.72: 210–219.
• Individual Growth and Development Indicators . (1991).
University of Minnesota.
• Norris, J. & Hoffman, P. (2001). Phonemic Awareness: A Complex
Developmental Process. Topics in Language Disorders, 22 (2), 1446.
• Norris, J. A. (2001). Spuzzles. Elementory, Inc. Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.
• Neuman, S. B. & Dickinson, D. K. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of
Early Literacy Research (Vol. 2). New York: Guilford Press.
• Phonemic Awareness Assessment. (1998). National Center on
Education and the Economy and the University of Pittsburgh.
For more information contact Crystal
Randolph at [email protected]