Is the Phonetic Generalization Hypothesis in Spelling Valid?

Abstract

This study was conducted to help settle a major controversy in spelling instruction concerning the phonetic generalization hypothesis. It utilized Solomon’s Four-Group Experimental Design for 2x2x2 factorial analyses-girls versus boys, pretesting versus nonpretesting, and phonetic instruction versus no phonetic treatment. Dependent variables were two spelling test scores of pupils in 106 Grades 2-6 classes: (1) spellings consistent with two phonetic generalizations taught to treatment groups and (2) spellings unrelated to the two phonetic generalizations. In order of most significant effects found, results showed girls superior to boys, pretesting better than nonpretesting, and questionable advantage for phonetic instruction over no phonetic instruction. Test-Study methods appear to be more promising than phonetic approaches. Further research is necessary to ascertain the definite value of Test-Study methods.