What does research tell us about teaching alphabet knowledge?
Alphabet knowledge, knowledge of letter names, form and sound, is one of the best predictors of later success and difficulty in learning to read (Georgiou et al., 2012; NELP, 2008; Piasta et al., 2012; Scarborough 1998). Because it is so important in shaping the trajectory of a child’s reading health, it makes sense that we get it right from the start. So what is the best way to teach alphabet knowledge?
The truth is, there is limited evidence as to what comprises effective alphabet knowledge instruction (NELP; PCER, 2008; Piasta & Wagner 2010a). Also, different groups of children tend to have different speeds of alphabet learning over time– children with lower socioeconomic statuses tend to have alphabet knowledge gaps in preschool and, despite appropriate instruction, these groups of children don’t catch up (D’Agostino & Rodgers, 2017; Denton & West, 2002; Strang & Piasta, 2016; Torrpa et al., 2006; Piasta, Logan et al., 2022).
Nonetheless, a number of studies do exist to point us in the right direction in terms of what might work best for students.
Shayne Piasta, an Ohio State professor of Reading and Literacy in Early and Middle Childhood, recently reviewed 45+ studies (some causal, some correlational) on how to best teach alphabet knowledge. In this post I attempt to distill her findings so that you can take them back to the classroom and feel confident in how you are teaching alphabet knowledge. Credit for this summary goes to Shayne. If you would like to read more about her findings in detail, check out The Science of Early Literacy Handbook.
The summary below is organized by the topics she reviewed, with the number of studies following each topic name:
Teaching letter names vs letter sounds (4)
Teaching uppercase v lowercase (0)
Instructional sequences (4)
Instructional pacing (4)
Mnemonics (6)
Explicit instruction (4)
Teaching in the context (4)
Teaching via writing (5)
Adding phonemic awareness instruction (4)
Multisensory Instruction (6)
Technology integration (4)
Differentiation (none)
Teaching Letter Names vs Sounds
What do we teach first? Letter names or sounds? Two of the four studies Piasta examined showed advantages for teaching both letter names and sounds together (Piasta et al., 2010, Roberts et al., 2018). A third study showed advantages of teaching letter sounds first, and the fourth study found no advantages for teaching either letter names or sounds first. This suggests that teaching letter names and sounds is likely to have a strong impact on alphabet learning.
Teaching Uppercase vs Lowercase
There are no causal studies, but some correlational studies that suggest children may use their knowledge of the name and sound of uppercase letters to learn the name and sound of lowercase letters (Huang & Invermizzi, 2014; Turnbull et al., 2010; Treiman & Kessler, 2004).
Instructional Sequences
There are no studies done to show the effectiveness of using any one specific sequence over another. There is one study (Carnine, 1976, 1980) that showed a causal relationship between spacing out letters that look or sound the same– i.e not teaching p and b together, for example. It is, however, important to note that there are many characteristics of letter names and sounds that make certain letters easier to learn than others. We should consider these when we choose a sequence.
Letters in the beginning of the alphabet are typically learned before letters near the end
Acrophonoicity (letter names that also contain the letter sound, such as f - the letter sound is at the end of the letter name, or p- the letter sound is at the beginning of the letter name)
Frequency of letters in words
Visual or phonological differences in letters- b/d/p/q visual confusion or the confusion around letter sounds such as /f/ and /v/; kids will be least familiar with letter sounds like h, which does not contain the sound in the letter name.
Children are typically more familiar with sounds that are pronounced earlier in a child’s development like /d/ in “Dada”.
Children tend to be more familiar with the letters in their own name
Instructional Pacing
Three correlational studies show some evidence suggesting that a quicker pace (multiple letters each week vs one letter each week) may have advantages (Jones Reutzel, 2012; Vadasy & Sanders, 2021; Sunde et al., 2022). The benefits of teaching more letters faster may be due to children having more opportunities to engage with letters which can have an impact on later reading and spelling skills.
Distributed practice (review) has been shown through a couple studies (Kryznowski & Carnine, 1980; Volpe et al., 2011) to be related to better alphabet knowledge outcomes.
Mnemonics
Mnemonics and its impact on alphabet knowledge is well researched. There is an advantage to using embedded mnemonics (Ehri et al., 1984; Hetzroni and Shavit, 2002; Marsh & Desberg, 1979).
There are mixed findings for non-embedded mnemonics: when the letter and the picture are together but not embedded such as the W and watermelon below.
One study shows a disadvantage to using anthropomorphic images to represent sounds in alphabet books such a dog for the letter D. This has instead been shown to distract kids, but only by one study (Both-de Vries & Bus, 2014).
Explicit Instruction
Explicit instruction (unsurprisingly) has advantages over other types of instruction (Piasta et al., 2010; Piasta, Park et al., 2022; Roberts et al., 2018). Explicit instruction is helpful because it utilizes paired-associate learning (PAL). PAL is basically explicit modeling: you show the letter you are teaching, model saying the name and sound, and ask the child to look at the letter and repeat the name and sound (Roberts et al., 2019).
Teaching in Context
There are mixed findings for teaching alphabet knowledge through alphabet books or through using the letters in a child’s name. Some studies have found that children are not learning letters from just reading alphabet books and some studies have. Roberts et al., 2020 found that there is a disadvantage of teaching letters in the context of students’ names, familiar words, and storybooks when compared to paired associate learning.
Teaching Through Writing
Some studies show advantages when letters are taught in the context of writing instruction- handwriting or letter formation (Hall et al., 2014; Piasta, Park et al., 2022; Puranik et al., 2017, 2018). However, these studies have all tested alphabet knowledge instruction that includes handwriting component, relative to typical instruction. There has only been one study on the isolated skill of handwriting instruction and alphabet learning which showed no added benefit (Roberts et al., 2019). We need more research on this topic.
Integrating Phonemic Awareness into Alphabet Knowledge Instruction
No conclusions have been drawn on how the addition of phonemic awareness in alphabet knowledge instruction impacts alphabet learning (NELP, 2008; Piasta & Wagner, 2010a). A few studies suggest that providing children with phonemic awareness instruction first speeds up letter-sound learning, but there are also some studies that show limited benefits to adding phonemic awareness instruction (Castles et a., 2009; Lonigan et al., 2013; Schneider et al., 2000; cf.; Cardoso-Martins et al., 2011). It’s important to note that these studies were focused on alphabet learning and the effects of phonemic awareness, not the effects of pairing phonemic awareness and alphabet knowledge on other skills like phonemic awareness itself or reading and spelling outcomes.
Multisensory Teaching
There are two studies that might suggest multisensory teaching (this includes articulatory awareness) could have some benefits, but these studies had design flaws. Many studies show that adding multisensory components are not necessarily beneficial for learning letter names or sounds (Bara et al., 2004; Labat et al., 2014; Roberts et al., 2019; see also Schlesinger & Gray, 2017; cf. Bara et al., 2007; McMahan et al., 2003; DiLorenzo et al., 2011). A multisensory approach may be more beneficial than typical instruction, but we don’t know if it is the specific multisensory tasks that impact alphabet learning.
Technology
There are a few studies showing positive effects of apps on alphabet learning (Elimelech & Aram, 2020; Numann, 2018, Schmitt et al., 2018). One study found an advantage of teaching via technology (i.e stylus with ipad) over the traditional approach (i.e using magnetic letters or pencil and paper, for example) (D’Agostino et al., 2016).
Differentiation
We know that there are differences across children and differences across the complexity of letters, so undoubtedly we need to differentiate. However, to date, differentiation and its effects on alphabet learning have not been tested.
Conclusion
We really don’t have a whole lot of evidence around best practices for teaching alphabet knowledge. However, there is growing evidence for things like:
Simultaneously teaching letter names and letter sounds
Teaching multiple letters a week vs just one
Embedded mnemonics
Explicit Instruction
It’s important to keep in mind that many of these practices have been only tested by a single study, not tested rigorously, just suggested but not actually tested. There needs to be more research and continued work on the topic!
