Using phonics to develop the emergent English literacy skills of Spanish learners

111111 Porta Linguarum 35, enero 2021 111-128 Using phonics to develop the emergent English literacy skills of Spanish learners Sara iSabeL rendón-romero University of Córdoba macarena navarro-PabLo eduardo garcía-Jiménez University of Seville Received: 21-11-2019 / Accepted: 21-9-2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.v0i35.16876 ISSN paper edition: 1697-7467, ISSN digital edition: 2695-8244 ABSTRACT: Phonics is well established in the English-speaking world, but to date it has been implemented to only a limited extent in contexts where English is a foreign language. This study aimed at evaluating the appropriateness of phonics for developing literacy skills of Spanish learners of English. An experimental pre-test – post-test design was used to determine the method’s added value. The sample consisted of two equivalent groups in a Spanish bilingual state primary school, a control and a treatment group, where a phonic method was implemented by the researcher. Data were collected through tests measuring emergent Spanish and English literacy skills. Non-parametric tests and correlations were used for data analysis. The treatment group presented a significant improvement in phonological awareness, naming and letter and pseudo-word reading in the Spanish and English post-test. These 7-year-old children attained a level in English literacy skills equivalent to English children aged 5.8. The findings also suggested a positive transference of skills between English word reading and Spanish pseudo-word reading. The present study can serve as a possible proposal to help improve our Spanish bilingual programmes through the use of phonics in the early years in order to increase learners’ English reading level. Keywords: Phonics, biliteracy, Spanish, English, literacy methods. El uso del método fónico para desarrollar la alfabetización emergente en inglés de alumnos españoles RESUMEN: El método fónico está implantado en el mundo anglosajón, pero hasta ahora se ha aplicado de forma limitada en contextos donde el inglés es una lengua extranjera. El objetivo era evaluar la eficacia del método fónico para desarrollar habilidades lectoras en inglés en un colegio público bilingüe de Educación Primaria en España. Se utilizó un diseño experimental para determinar el valor añadido del método. La muestra la formaron dos grupos equivalentes, uno control y otro experimental, donde se implementó el método fónico por el investigador. Los datos recogidos sobre las habilidades de alfabetización bilingüe se analizaron a través de pruebas no paramétricas y correlaciones. El grupo experimental mostró una mejora mayor en conciencia fonológica, denominación y lectura de letras y pseudopalabras en español e inglés. Este alumnado de siete años alcanzó habilidades de alfabetización en inglés equivalente a niños nativos de 5,8 años. Se encontró una transferencia positiva entre la lectura de palabras en inglés y de pseudopalabras en español. Este estudio presenta importantes implicaciones para la enseñanza de la alfabetización temprana en inglés en contextos Porta Linguarum Nº 35, enero 2021 112 donde el inglés no es la primera lengua, concretamente un mayor nivel de lectura en inglés del alumnado y la mejora de los programas bilingües. Palabras claves: Fonética, alfabetización bilingüe, español, inglés, métodos de alfabetización. 1. IntroductIon Phonological systems are acquired through the development of different phonological processes, such as phonological awareness (Mott, 2011). As Kennedy et al. (2012) mention, there are important aspects to be considered in the early literacy development, some of which can be essential for acquiring effective emergent literacy skills in two languages: phonological awareness and vocabulary are highlighted because they can also function as possible predictors for reading not only in the first but also in the second language. It has been suggested that the early development of phonological awareness can positively influence reading skills in the long term (Stanley, Petscher & Catts, 2018). Previous research has also mentioned that there are no negative effects when developing literacy skills in two languages (Bialystok, Luk & Kwa, 2005). Furthermore, Fonseca-Mora & Fernández-Corbacho (2017) point out that children should develop phonological awareness through early explicit teaching of the different letter sounds in the foreign language. The relationship between phonology and the emergent literacy skills would depend on the moment, timing and type of instruction performed in the classroom (Pinto, Bigozzi, Vezzani, & Tarchi, 2016; Casillas & Goikoetxea, 2007; Márquez, 2013). In the same way, literacy methods used in the classroom play an important role in the development of phonological processes. Some studies indicate that the synthetic phonic method has a dynamic and efficient influence on the learning process (Cuetos, 2008; Jiménez & Ortiz, 2007). One reason is that pupils can directly acquire this phonological awareness to decode and read (Cuetos, 2008). The results of a study by Johnston & Watson (2005) also reveal that pupils achieved a level on literacy that was seven months ahead of their actual age with a high level of rhyming and phonological awareness. Thus, it may be suggested that a synthetic method could be appropriate for the development of these abilities. Historically, applied linguists have sought to enhance the learning experience through the development of successive methods and approaches. From the Grammar-Translation Method to the Communicative Language Teaching, through alternative methods and post-communicative approaches, different aspects have been the focus for learning a second language (L2) (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). The case of English phonics appears to have received little attention in Spain. Conversely, phonics has been promoted through government policy as a method for developing first language (L1) early literacy throughout the English-speaking world since the 1980s. As stated in the Primary Framework for Literacy and Mathematics (2006, p. 25) for Year 1 pupils, children learn to ‘spell new words using phonics as the prime approach’. Consequently, various publishers have generated related resources, such as Jolly Phonics (Lloyd & Wernham, 1998), Letter and Sounds (DfES, 2007) and Read Write Inc (Miskin, 2011). In addition, THRASS (Teaching Handwriting, Reading and Spelling Skills) has been included as an option which uses both synthetic and analytic phonic approaches. The present research was carried out implementing a phonic method with Jolly Phonics materials (Lloyd & Wernham, 1998), which are commonly used in many British schools nowadays. Sara ISabel rendón-romero et al. Using phonics to develop the emergent... 113 2. EnglIsh PhonIcs This section includes a literature review concerning different aspects of the selected method. There is an introduction to the method and several studies providing findings about its implementation are presented. It was developed in 1975 in the Primary School of Woods Loke, Lowestoft (Suffolk, UK) where a group of pupils appeared to have some reading problems. By implementing this method, these pupils were instructed to first learn sounds associated with actions and, then, to relate them to letters. It has been reported that the Woods Loke’s pupils learnt with much fluidity and their reading problems eventually disappeared (Lloyd & Wernham, 1998). The method itself consists of teaching 42 English sounds during a period of nine weeks (a sound per day) when children are three or four years old. The authors also suggest that the implementation period could be longer depending on the contexts of the pupils. These sounds are classified into seven groups1 depending on their difficulty for learning. Sounds are presented together with actions and then through stories, songs, flashcards, and games; visual resources, then, play an important role in the method. Pupils are also instructed to read problematic words or joining sounds into words. In that way, pupils work on the five skills presented by the method: identifying letter sounds in words, letter formation, blending (joining sounds to form words), phonological awareness and ‘tricky’ words (problematic words which do not follow the phonetic rules of the method and have to be learnt by heart or by using different strategies). An example of ‘tricky’ word is ‘we’. Following the phonetic patterns given by this method, this word would be read as /we/. However, children are encouraged to find the ‘tricky’ part of the word and use different strategies in order to learn to pronounce it correctly. Since 1975, several experimental studies involving this method have been carried out around the world, for teaching English not only as a first but also as a foreign language. Stuart (1999) considered a twelve-week implementation of the method for their pupils, whose results revealed that the treatment group presented superior levels of phonological awareness and significant differences were found in comparison to the control group, confirming the development of their reading skills. These positive results are also reinforced with similar studies (Ekpo, Udosen, Afangideh, Ekukinam & Ikorok, 2010; Inaja, Ubi & Anagbogu, 2012; Eshiet, 2016; Zaidi, Aftab, Naeem & Naheed, 2016; Nasrawi & Al-Jamal, 2017; Savage, Georgiou, Parrila & Maiorino, 2018; Dussling; 2018) in which the use of proper conditions and materials also seemed to improve pupils’ reading skills (Ekpo et al., 2010). Bowyer-Crane et al. (2008) mention that pupils who participated in this particular study based on the teaching of phonology and reading significantly improve their phonological awareness and reading skills with a positive effect on their emergent literacy. The results 1 Group 1: <s, a, t, i, p, n> /s/, /æ/, /t/, /ɪ/, /p/, /n/. Group 2: /<k, e, h, r, m, d> /k/, /e/, /h/, /r/, /m/, /d/. Group 3: <g, o,u, l, f, b> /g/, /ɒ/, /ʌ/, /l/, /f/, /b/. Group 4: <ai, j, oa, ie, ee, or> /eɪ/, / dʒ /, /əʊ/, /aɪ/, /i:/, /o:/. Group 5: <z, w, ng, v, short and long oo> /z/, /w/, /ŋ/, /v/, /ʊ/, /u:/. Group 6: <y, x, ch, sh, voiced and unvoiced th> /j/, /ks/, /tʃ/, /ʃ/, /ð/, /θ/. Group 7: <k, ou, oi, ue, er, ar> /k/, /aʊ/, /ɔɪ/, /ju:/, /ɜ:/, /a:/. Porta Linguarum Nº 35, enero 2021 114 of a study carried out by Callinan & Van der Zee (2010) also reveal that after a nine-week implementation of the method, pupils were able to recognize more words and pseudo-words as well as individual phonemes. Similarly, there have been different case studies published which reinforce these ideas. Smith (n.d.) from St. Michael School, Bristol, explains his need to change his non-phonic teaching method given that some reading problems were found in his pupils. He decided to implement a phonic method and, three months later, all his pupils improved their reading and writing skills. Wainwright (n.d.) (Reading and Special Needs Teacher) also indicates that her pupils were reading six months ahead of their chronological age. Another example is found in the study carried out by Johnston & Watson (2005), who mention that the participating pupils managed to read seven months ahead of their actual age with high improvement in rhyming and phonological awareness. The phonic method provides an age reference scale which has been used in many studies and proved to be reliable. This scale was designed for native English children. Based on the test results provided by the method, this scale indicates the reading English age that pupils reach after one year of implementation of the method. Hence, with the use of this scale, it is possible to determine the difference between pupils’ actual age and their reading English age. Hannon (2001) argues that phonics can clearly facilitate the development of phonological awareness. However, Hannon (2001) and Campbell, Torr & Cologon (2011) consider that as phonics is focused on pre-reading skills, comprehension is not developed with the use of this type of approach in the early years. Reading comprehension is normally trained in subsequent levels but these authors consider it should be included in the early learning process. In addition, Stuart (2006) raises the question whether learning letter sounds before letter names could be beneficial or detrimental. It has been hypothesised that learning letter names could be less helpful since pupils can be confused by learning two aspects of the same symbol: a name and a sound. Jiménez & Artiles (2001) mention that it may be more efficient to teach phonemes before graphemes in terms of rapid association and decoding process. This type of synthetic method may also help children to acquire more autonomy and instruct them to decode any word or pseudo-word to be able to read on their own. On the other hand, if children learn the alphabet first, it could be used as prior knowledge and may help them understand some alternative sounds of a phoneme (Jolliffe & Waugh, 2012). There seems to be little consensus, then, on which one is the best method. A possible explanation for this may be that it depends more on how methods are implemented, the type of resources used and how teachers can adapt them to the children’s needs and difficulties. Therefore, there are many issues about the use of phonics which have not been researched yet. For example, the type of activities which are better to practice with this method or the best options for evaluations of synthetic phonic programmes. (Bowey, 2000). Furthermore, transference processes may seem to help create new cognitive structures and affect learning development. As Cummins (2001) mentions, transference can happen from an L1 to an L2, and Reyes (2006) adds that this transference can be bidirectional depending on the type of languages involved (opaque or transparent languages). Additionally, a study carried out by Montanari (2014) about bi-literacy development reveals that there is a transference from Italian decoding skills into English. Similarly, the study performed by Kremin, Arredondo, Hsu, Satterfield & Kovelman (2016), reports that ‘children’s exposure to Sara ISabel rendón-romero et al. Using phonics to develop the emergent... 115 a phonologically transparent orthography enables the transfer of skills to their phonologically opaque language’ (p. 2). In addition, Zhao, Dixon, Quiroz & Chen (2015) comment that phonological awareness learnt in Spanish could influence the reading of words in English and that English can also influence Spanish. Wawire & Kim (2018) also confirm that a positive benefit can be found in the bilingual learning process since the phonological awareness developed in a language can be transferred to the second language. Despite many publications based on phonics, the present research seems to be the first experimental study carried out in Spain which implements a phonic method to foster emergent English literacy skills. It is important to mention that in Spain, English is the most studied L2 according to Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. Our study tries to address the recommendation for research suggested by Lázaro Ibarrola (2007) based on the use of English phonics in Spanish primary classrooms since, through it, Spanish children could find the English phonological system easier to acquire. 3. MEthod 3.1 Research questions After presenting the literature review, it would seem necessary to analyse the appropriateness of phonics to develop emergent literacy skills in English and a possible transference among languages, being Spanish the mother tongue and English, the foreign language. Thus, the following research questions were raised: 1. Are there any differences between the level of pupils’ emergent literacy skills in Spanish? Are there differences between the level of pupils’ emergent literacy skills in English? 2. Are there any differences between the number of errors committed in The English Reading Predictors Test (see Appendix I) at the beginning and at the end of the study regarding the variables of Phonological Awareness and Naming and both treatment and control groups? 3. Are there correlations between Spanish and English Letter, Word and Pseudo-Word Reading? 4. Are there differences between pupils’ actual age and their English reading age according to the Age Reference Scale for native English speakers provided by the phonic method chosen? 3.2 Research setting and sample Participants were selected from a Spanish bilingual state primary school (Spanish-English). This school was chosen according to purposive sampling method, through a typical case strategy (Flick, 2014). The main reason is that this school was carrying out an early immersion bilingual programme, so it was not yet implementing a specific method for teaching English. In addition, it was found that teachers were quite receptive to experiment with new methodologies. Furthermore, there was no sociocultural bias since the school received students from different socioeconomic and cultural contexts. Porta Linguarum Nº 35, enero 2021 116 Finally, the school to be chosen needed to have at least two groups in order to work with a treatment and a control group. The two groups of the school finally selected belonged to the first year of Primary Education (6-7-year-old children) formed by 26 students each. The 52 pupils were randomly assigned to each group of the first year of Primary Education (A and B). 3.3 Instruments and data collection Three instruments were used to gather information about emergent Spanish and English literacy skills and the reading level achieved. All of them were validated based on the participating sample. First, in order to be able to answer our first research question, the Spanish ALE1 test (Reading and Writing Learning Activities), designed by González & Cuetos (2008), was used as it is adapted to children between four and seven years old. The overall reliability of the test was statistically guaranteed with α=0.758. The test consisted of 3 sections: Phonological Awareness; Picture, Colour, Number, and Letter Naming; Speed Naming; and Word and Pseudo-Word Reading. This test was used with the purpose of comparing emergent Spanish literacy skills in both treatment and control groups. Secondly, it was necessary to design an English test which included the content that the participating pupils had previously studied. So, the content covered during previous years was analysed and selected in order to create a new test. The test, called English Reading Predictors Test, was also designed with the same type of activities that the Spanish test included so that comparisons could be made between the two languages. The reliability of the test was α=0.81. This test comprised two sections: Phonological Awareness and Naming. Thirdly, the chosen phonic method also provided a specific reading assessment which was carried out in the treatment group to determine the English reading level reached at the end of the intervention. The reliability of the test was α=0.91. It consisted of six phonological and reading activities. The first one was based on the pronunciation of individual English sounds (n=42). In the second one, pupils had to read ‘tricky’ words (n=11). The third one focused on the pronunciation of alternative sounds (n=16). The fourth exercise consisted of reading words and pseudo-words (n=26). The fifth activity (n=24) was based on recognizing the word or pseudo-word pronounced by one of the researchers of the study. The last one consisted of reading 3 sentences (total of words: n=16). However, it was not possible to use this test in the control group as they had not reached any reading level during the school year. The ALE1 and English Reading Predictors tests were performed both as pre-tests and post-tests. When the implementation of the phonic method finished, a final assessment test focused on phonics was also carried out as post-test. The study took place over the course of the school year 2017-2018, from September 2017, when pre-tests were carried out, to June 2018, when the implementation of the phonic method concluded and post-tests were performed. The implementation was carried out by one of the researchers. During the phonic lessons, the regular teacher was also in the classroom of the treatment group because she was in charge of these pupils. While observing, she could learn about the phonic method, which she could progressively implement towards the end of the course year. The phonic lessons carried out in the treatment group were recorded with Sara ISabel rendón-romero et al. Using phonics to develop the emergent... 117 video cameras, a diary and an observation checklist completed by the regular teacher of the group so that the results could also be analysed by external researchers. Tests were carried out and scored by the external researchers in order to avoid any bias possibly caused by the fact that one of the researchers was also implementing the method in the treatment group. In the case of the control group, the regular teacher was in charge of teaching lessons with the use of the non-phonic method which had been used until then in both groups. The researcher could observe the control group lessons in order to have enough information to compare the results from the two groups. The researcher carried out a participant observation, supporting the regular teacher, being part of the teachers team and working in a coordinated fashion in both the treatment and control groups. 3.4 Design and Procedure An experimental pre-test - post-test design with equivalent control group was carried out in order to be able to compare results between a treatment group, with whom the phonic method was implemented by the researcher, and a control group, with whom a non-phonic method was used by their own teacher during the whole year, who had been teaching them for two years. As all pupils were underage, parents from both control and treatment groups were previously informed through a letter and a meeting and voluntarily signed the consent document to participate in the project before any observation was carried out. Families from the treatment group also signed that they had to participate and help children at home. With the purpose of guaranteeing the equivalence between both treatment and control groups, a Student’s t-test was performed. No statistically significant differences were found between both groups in the Spanish ALE1 test and the English Reading Predictors Test; therefore, the groups were considered equivalent. The independent variable was the phonic method and the dependent variable was the learning of English as an L2. Intervention was performed in the treatment group by using phonics material, which included storybooks, reading books, flashcards, songs, and puppets, among others. The method was implemented over the course of seven months (November-May), three days per week (45 minutes sessions). Pupils were taught one sound per session. Each lesson started with the introduction of one sound and one action which the children repeated. After this, the children listened to a story presented through storybooks which had pictures and words containing the sound being taught in the lesson. Later, the children were asked comprehension questions so that they could pronounce the words that were the focus of the current session. To continue, flashcards were used to practise the sound. When they saw the flashcards, they automatically said the sound and repeated the action. On the other side of the flashcard, dots represented the number of sounds contained in a word, so children could identify the position of a specific sound. After this, they listened to a song based on the sound and action of the current session. Some other group activities were performed depending on the time of the session. These activities could be games based on sounding out a word or identification of words which contained specific sounds. To conclude the lesson, a short assessment was carried out. This exercise consisted of 4 pictures, whose names were pronounced by the researcher. Once children listened to them, they had to cross out the picture whose name did not contain the sound being learnt during the session. After fifteen Porta Linguarum Nº 35, enero 2021 118 days, when they learnt a whole group of sounds, another assessment was carried out based on different types of activities to measure the development of pupils in this group. In such a way it was possible to analyse the process of learning through two types of assessments. The control group continued using the method initially programmed by the teacher. It was a non-phonic method based on materials provided by a publishing house. Activities were based on a book and a workbook and the study of vocabulary through flashcards. Children memorised vocabulary in each unit and did not use that vocabulary in the subsequent units. 4. data analysIs The data were analysed descriptively in order to know the different means and standard deviation of the Spanish (Phonological Awareness (PA), naming (N),speed naming (SN), letter reading (LR), word reading (WR), pseudo-word reading (PWR)) and English (PA, N) variables for both pre-test and post-tests and for both treatment and control groups. For this reason, the Levene’s test for Equality of Variances and the Student’s t-test and were carried out. Due to the fact that the sample size was less than 60, the Wilcoxon signedrank test was also performed in order to contrast the results achieved by a paired samples t-test. Cohen›s d was used to calculate the effect size of the differences between the means of the treatment and control groups (Cohen, 1988). Due to the significant differences found between the two groups regarding PA and N in English, an analysis of errors motivated by previous research (Corder, 1967; Brown, 2007; Richards and Schmidt, 2010) was performed in order to identify the most frequent phonological errors. To take account of the differences between the control and the treatment group, the number of errors committed in the English test were scrutinized and examined for relevant information about the learning of vocabulary and the phonological awareness development achieved in each group. In addition, bivariate correlations were carried out in order to measure the relations between Spanish (LR, WR, PWR) and English variables (SR, WR, PWR). The latter were taken from the phonics’ final assessment so that these might be compared to ALE1. Finally, pupils’ actual age was compared to the reading age which pupils reached in English at the end of the study. The comparison was analysed by introducing the Age Reference Scale provided by the phonic method as a variable. 5. FIndIngs and dIscussIon Results are presented in the following order in order to answer our research questions: emergent Spanish literacy skills, emergent English literacy skills, errors committed in the English Reading Predictors Test, correlations between English and Spanish variables and comparison between pupils’ actual age and the Age Reference Scale provided by the phonic method. 5.1. Emergent Spanish literacy skills Before analysing emergent Spanish literacy skills, it was necessary to check that both treatment and control groups were initially homogeneous. No statistically significant differences were found between both groups in the pre-test in PA (t= -0.650; p= 0.522), N (t= Sara ISabel rendón-romero et al. Using phonics to develop the emergent... 119 -0.882; p= 0.387), SN (t= 0.344; p= 0.734) and WR, PWR (t= -0.631; p= 0.531), assuming, in all cases, equality of variances according to the Levene’s test. Statistically significant differences were detected between both treatment and control groups in the post-test in PA (t= -1.603; p= 0.115) and N (t= -0.655; p= 0.516), SN (t= -0.577; p= 0.567) and WR, PWR (t= -3.032; p= 0.005), assuming equality of variances according to the Levene’s test in all cases except for WR, PWR. The Wilcoxon test was also used to confirm these results. The differential growth was found to be higher in the treatment group in all variables except Naming and Speed Naming in Spanish. In addition, post-test PA was analysed by using Cohen’s d (d= 0.44) in order to determine the effect size among both groups, which was small (s) in this case (0.22). In the case of post-test N (d = 1.18), it also revealed a small effect size (0.09). Regarding post-test SN (d = 0.16), it presented a small effect size as well (0.08). Finally, post-test WR, PWR (d = 0.86) represents a medium effect size (m) (0.40). This may be due to the fact that pupils evolved from a nonlexical route towards a lexical route (Cuetos, 2008). So, they were able to decode in a more automatized way and, then, read words and pseudowords. The results for the emergent Spanish literacy skills reveal that the treatment group reached a higher level in phonological awareness and reading. The control group achieved higher means in the variables of N and SP. The reason as to why the treatment group attained higher means in the post-test, obtaining greater differential growths in phonological awareness and reading, could be due to the implementation of English phonics, whose results are presented below. It is possible, then, that there is confirmation with López-Cirugeda & López-Campillo (2016) since a phonic method could be a reinforcement for the Spanish literacy process. It is also possible to agree with Stanley, Petscher & Catts (2018) on the fact that phonological awareness can positively affect the reading development. 5.2. Emergent English literacy skills By following the same procedure, the development of the emergent English literacy skills was analysed. Before the intervention with phonics, it was necessary to check that both treatment and control groups were also homogeneous in the English test. Considering the English Reading Predictors Test and according to the Levene’s test, no statistically significant differences were detected between both groups in the pre-test in both variables PA (t= 0.175; p= 0.862) and N (t= -1.359; p= 0.181), assuming, in both cases, equality of variances. Statistically significant differences were found between both treatment and control groups in the post-test in variables PA (t= -3.130; p= 0.003) and N (t= -3.716; p= 0.001), assuming, in both cases, equality of variances according to the Levene’s test. The Wilcoxon test was also used to confirm these results. Both English PA and N presented higher means and, so, higher differential growth in the treatment group, which received an implementation with phonics. In addition, the post-test PA was analysed by using Cohen’s d (d= 0.83) in order to determine the effect size among both groups, which was small (s) in this case (0.38). In the case of post-test N (d = 1.04), it represented a medium effect size (m) (0.46). These results suggest that phonics may help to develop English PA and N but, related to the findings presented above, it may also have some influence on the Spanish language. This aspect became clear when the mentioned emergent English literacy skills were ana- Porta Linguarum Nº 35, enero 2021 126 Hannon, P. (2001). Reflecting on literacy in education. Taylor & Francis e-Library. Inaja, A., Ubi, I. & Anagbogu, E. (2012) Report of second assessment pilot test conducted in Cross River State, Nigeria. Universidad de Calabar, Nigeria. Recovered from http:// jollylearning.co.uk/2011/03/24/research/ Jiménez, J. E. & Artiles, C. (2001). Cómo prevenir y corregir las dificultades en el aprendizaje de la lectoescritura. Síntesis. Jiménez, J.E. & Ortiz, M.R. (2007). Conciencia fonológica y aprendizaje de la lectura: Teoría, evaluación e intervención. Síntesis. Johnston, R. & Watson, J. (2005). A seven year study of the effects of synthetic phonics teaching on reading and spelling attainment. Edinburgh: Insight. Jolliffe, W. & Waugh, D. (2012). Teaching systematic synthetic phonics in primary schools. London: Learning Matters. Kennedy, E., Dunphy, E., Dwyer, B., Hayes, G., McPhillips, T., Marsh, J., O’Connor, M. & Shiel, G. (2012). Literacy in early childhood and primary education (3-8 years). National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Kremin, L.V., Arredondo, M.M., Hsu, L.S.J., Satterfield, T., & Kovelman, I. (2016). The effects of Spanish heritage language literacy on English reading for Spanish–English bilingual children in the US. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 0, 1-15. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2016.1239692 Lázaro Ibarrola, A. (2007). Enseñanza de la lectura a través de phonics en el aula de Lengua Extranjera en Educación Primaria. Porta Linguarum, 8, 153-167. López-Cirugeda, I. y López-Campillo, R.M. (2016). El método sistemático-sintético de lectoescritura Phonics como herramienta para la adquisición de la fonética inglesa. Revista Fuentes, 18 (2), 183-195. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes. 2016.18.2.05 Lloyd, S. & Wernham, S. (1998). The phonics handbook. A handbook for teaching reading, writing and spelling; in print letters. (3rd edition). Jolly Learning. Márquez, M. (2013). Estrategias utilizadas en aulas bilingües en la enseñanza de la lectura en español. (PhD). Universidad de Texas-Pan American. Recovered from http://0-search. proquest.com.fama.us.es/index. McKurty, C. & Ruttle, K. (2012). Jolly phonics reading assessment. Manual. Jolly Learning Ltd. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. (2012). European study of linguistic competences ESLC. Spanish report. Vol. I. Madrid: Secretaria General Técnica. Recovered from http:// www.mecd.gob.es. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. (2016). Estudio internacional de progreso en comprensión lectora, Matemáticas y Ciencias. PIRLS-TIMS. (Vol. I) Informe Español. Madrid, Spain: Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa. Recovered from http://www.mecd.gob.es. Miskin, R. (2011). Read write Inc.: Phonics handbook. Oxford University Press. Montanari, S. (2014). A case study of bi-literacy development among children enrolled in an Italian–English dual language program in Southern California. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 17 (5), 509-525, doi: 10.1080/13670050.2013.833892 Mott, B. (2011). English phonetics and phonology for Spanish speakers. (2nd edition). Universitat de Barcelona, UBe: Publicacions i edicions Nasrawi, A. & Al-Jamal, D. (2017). The effect of using jolly phonics on Jordanian first grade pupils’ reading. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 4, (2). 106-119. Sara ISabel rendón-romero et al. Using phonics to develop the emergent... 127 Pinto, G., Bigozzi, L., Vezzani, C., & Tarchi, C. (2016). Emergent literacy and reading acquisition: a longitudinal study from kindergarten to primary school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1-17. doi: 10.1007/s10212-016-0314-9 Primary Framework for literacy and mathematics (2006). Department of Education. Primary National Strategy. Reyes, I. (2006). Exploring connections between emergent biliteracy and bilingualism. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 6 (3), 267-292. doi: 10.1177/1468798406069801 Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T.S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. (3rd edition). Cambridge University Press. Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. (4th edition). Pearson. Savage, R., Georgiou, G., Parrila, R. & Maiorino, K. (2018). Preventative reading interventions teaching direct mapping of graphemes in texts and set-for-variability aid at-risk learners. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22 (3), 225–247. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2018.1427753 Smith, P. (n.d.). And why are all these children pretending to click castanets? U.K.: Jolly Learning Ltd. Recovered from http://jollylearning.co.uk/2011/03/24/research/ Stanley, C.T., Petscher, Y. & Catts, H. (2018). A longitudinal investigation of direct and indirect links between reading skills in kindergarten and reading comprehension in tenth grade. Reading and Writing, 31, 133–153. doi: 10.1007/s11145-017-9777-6 Stuart, M. (1999). Getting ready for reading: Early phoneme awareness and phonics teaching improves reading and spelling in inner-city second language learners. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 587-605. Stuart, M. (2006). Learning to read: developing processes for recognizing, understanding and pronouncing written words. London Review of Education, 4 (1), 19-29. doi: 10.1080/13603110600574330 Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Rowen, N. & Hart, D. (1990). The role of mother tongue literacy in third language learning. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 3 (1), 65-81. doi: 10.1080/07908319009525073 Zaidi, S., Aftab, F., Naeem, H. & Naheed, S. (2016). Early teaching of English through synthetic phonics approach using jolly phonics program. In Teaching of English in early years. Research Society of Synthetic Phonics. Recovered from http://jollylearning.co.uk/2011/03/24/ research/ Wainwright, T. (n.d.) Easier reading, easier writing. U.K.: Jolly Learning Ltd. Recovered from http://jollylearning.co.uk/2011/03/24/research/ Wawire, B. A. & Kim, Y. G. (2018) Cross-language transfer of phonological awareness and letter knowledge: Causal evidence and nature of transfer. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22 (6), 443-461. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2018.1474882 Zhao, J., Dixon, L. Q., Quiroz, B., & Chen, S. (2015). The relationship between vocabulary and word reading among head start Spanish-English bilingual children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45 (1), 27-34. doi: 10.1007/s10643-015-0764-8 Porta Linguarum Nº 35, enero 2021 128 8. aPPEndIcEs Appendix 1: The English Reading Predictors Test