**6.1 Applying the seven vowel phonic analysis system to written language based on different language registers**

In Stage Four of Child H's writing and spelling fluency programme, he was thus taught how to apply the targeted revisualisation process using graded paragraphs, with the aim of developing working memory for individual words as well as words in sequence. Span of working memory was then increased by using graded written paragraphs based on different language registers used in different contexts. This was done as follows:


d. The targeted revisualisation methods were then applied to develop working memory for words in sequence, working with paragraphs which increased in length and phonic complexity.

The aim of the methods used in Stage Four of Child H's writing and spelling fluency programme was thus to enable Child H to use his good visual memory and spatial competencies to address his phonological and phonic difficulties, by use of phonological referencing, phonic analysis and revisualisation in developing working memory for individual words and for words in sequence. This was done by drawing on Child H's visual and spatial strengths in teaching him how to code and then recode the sequences of letters used in writing words accurately.

The combination of phonic analysis and revisualisation methods was applied repetitively in implementing the sequence of graded paragraphs used in the programme. This was also documented in a parent implementer's manual (reference) so that the methods used in The Targeted Analysis, Revisualisation and Sequential Spelling Programme could be reinforced with work done by Child H's parents at home.

### **7. Use of clinical teaching in programme implementation**

In implementing the activities described above, each session worked with Child H was implemented using clinical teaching on the following action research-based model (**Figure 7**). This was done to enable the focuses and sequence of instruction in the programme to be based on evidence from cognitive testing combined with pragmatic evidence indicating how Child H learned. It was also done to evidence from implementation to be used to establish how Child H learned optimally in working to address his phonological and phonic weaknesses.

## **7.1 Action research cycle for planning and implementation of child H's activity-based programme here**

The value of using this type of action research framework in classroom work has been described by Stenhouse and his colleagues [109–113]. In working with Child H, this type of session by session progress evaluation was conducted to enable his programme to be planned and altered session by session. This was done to establish how he learned optimally, as we worked to address his phonological and phonic weaknesses.

Based on this ongoing planning and evaluation process, materials for developing reading, writing and spelling fluency in Child H's programme were sent as email

**Figure 7.**

*Action research cycle for planning and implementation of child H's activity-based programme.*

attachments on a weekly basis to Child H's parents. The methods used were also summarised in illustrated in parent implementer manuals [114–118] which could then be used to reinforce the methods used at home.

#### **7.2 Evaluating response to intervention**

Child H's progress at school was monitored through contact with his school teachers as well as regular reports on his classroom progress. These indicated that despite continuing difficulties with reading, writing and spelling, he was a well-liked member of the school community who excelled at swimming and other sports. His school reports indicated steady progress in all subjects, despite his ongoing difficulties with reading, writing and spelling.

In addition, progress evaluation was conducted through scholastic testing undertaken annually, to enable comparison of age scores, based on re-administration of the tests administered at time of Child H's initial assessment in 2016. The results are presented in the **Table 5** below.

### **7.3 Child H—longitudinal indicators of ongoing difficulties with one word reading, sequenced reading, one word spelling and sequential spelling here**

It will be evident from the age scores in **Table 5** that Child H continued to have reading, writing and spelling fluency difficulties despite a number of different interventions conducted over a three-year period. These had involved use of a multivariate treatment approach based on implementation of phonically based reading, writing and spelling programmes, work to develop Child H's rapid naming and coding abilities, as well as work to develop working memory for words using phonological referencing techniques, as the basis for use of phonic analysis, visualisation and revisualisation methods.

Based on cumulative evidence of Child H's response to a number of different types of interventions, it was possible to motivate for additional time in tests and examinations once he reached the age of 12, as well as for a spelling concession. At the beginning of his Grade 6 year at primary school, IQ as well as achievement testing done, together with an analysis of reading difficulty based on diagnostic testing of reading comprehension, rate of reading, rapid word reading, word analysis, spelling, handwriting and working memory for words. The phonic inventories were also readministered at this point in time.


These results are reported below.

#### **Table 5.**

*Child H: Longitudinal indicators of ongoing difficulties with one word Reading, sequenced Reading, one word spelling and sequential spelling.*

### *7.3.1 Child H's profile on the WISC IV (UK)*

Child H's performance on the different subtests of the WISC IV (UK) [119] is summarised in **Table 6** below, which presents the profile of standard scores obtained in the verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory and processing speed areas of the test.
