Lexia Software

Moderators: Debbie Hepplewhite, maizie, Lesley Drake, Susan Godsland

Post Reply
Derrie Clark
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Kent

Lexia Software

Post by Derrie Clark » Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:47 pm

Is anyone familiar with this? I was quite concerned recently as I observed a young child on it. Some of the sounds produced by the computer are not pure. Also when introducing high frequency words it uses letter names rather than phoneme to grapheme matching, for example, 'all' was taught as 'ay, el, el' and 'there' as 'tee, aitch, ee, are, ee'?

User avatar
Susan Godsland
Administrator
Posts: 4973
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:10 pm
Location: Exeter UK
Contact:

Re: Lexia Software

Post by Susan Godsland » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:50 pm

It was discussed earlier this year:

http://www.rrf.org.uk/messageforum/view ... f=1&t=5230

Derrie Clark
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Kent

Re: Lexia Software

Post by Derrie Clark » Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:39 pm

Thanks Susan. It looks like another one of those programmes that does not reflect a good understanding of the underpinning principles of the alphabet code which removes consistency across teaching and causes some muddlement for children.

cartwheel
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 5:30 pm
Location: USA

Re: Lexia Software

Post by cartwheel » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:40 am

I have a bit of experience with Lexia. It's not synthetic phonics. It's phonics of the Not-Terribly-Effective type. But around where I live in the U.S. it's better than the "No Phonics" that so many children suffer from. I don't see any reason for folks in the U.K. to use Lexia. You have much better programs readily available.

The entry level of Lexia covers phonological awareness (first/last sounds and rhyming). It drove me crazy in a school setting recently when I watched struggling students in Spring of their kindergarten year trying to move through these PA activities instead of learning letter-sound correspondences and blending right from the start. I learned that I could by-pass that level and get them into the next level (letter-sounds). It had to be done manually. Interestingly, the students became far more engaged once they were actually learning something that they knew was connected to learning to read.

There are lots of sight words with no indication of "tricky parts" plus blending.

There is some connecting of words to their pictures (yes, I saw lots of guessing based on the first letter).

Digraphs don't show up until well into the program. (Children were often removed from Lexia before they ever got to that level.)

There don't seem to be explicit instructions from the program that the child should be saying the sounds out loud.

There are assessments that can be used: letter-sounds (alphabet sounds); real words; nonsense words. But the reports that result from the assessments are visually confusing and don't provide clear enough guidance to the instructor.

There absolutely needs to be direct oversight by a trained adult. It is not unknown for students to stay on the same activities and make zero progress over the course of many months.

Jennie (U.S.)

geraldinecarter
Posts: 988
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:40 pm

Re: Lexia Software

Post by geraldinecarter » Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:27 am

Thank you Jennie. What an admirably clear summary.

Some time ago Lexia approached the government but I hope that nothing came of that.

Derrie Clark
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Kent

Re: Lexia Software

Post by Derrie Clark » Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:06 am

Thank you Jennie. I will print off your answer and show it to Head Teachers.

I think schools assume that any of these phonic resources on the market all share the same principles and computer packages, on the face of it, don't require an adult with the child.

User avatar
Susan Godsland
Administrator
Posts: 4973
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:10 pm
Location: Exeter UK
Contact:

Re: Lexia Software

Post by Susan Godsland » Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:34 am

From Brooks 'What works for pupils with literacy difficulties?'

Lexia
(1) Norfolk
Main reference: Worsley (2003b)
Research design: One-group pre-test/post-test study
Date: 2003
Age range: Y2–3
Type of children: Low attainment (most had r.a’s 2 years or more below c.a.)
N of experimental group: 37 in 13 schools
N of comparison group: (no comparison group)
N of alternative intervention group: (no alternative intervention group)
Length of intervention in weeks: 10
Tests used: Salford Sentence Reading Test, revised; Young’s Parallel Spelling Test
Pre- and post-test average r.a’s in years and months, average s.a’s in years and decimal years,
gains in months of r.a./s.a. (s.d’s not stated), and ratio gains:
pre post gain RG
reading comprehension 5:1 5:7.4 6.4 2.6
spelling 6.5 6.7 2.4 1.0
Effect sizes: n/a
Statistical significances: were not stated and could not be calculated
Starting and ending levels and progress: The pre- and post-test average scores were all within the
functionally illiterate range. There was useful progress in comprehension, only standard progress in spelling.
These children would need systematic further intervention.
Follow-up: (no follow-up)

Googling reveals that many schools are using their precious pupil premium money to fund Lexia.

Derrie Clark
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Kent

Re: Lexia Software

Post by Derrie Clark » Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:40 am

Oh dear! Thank you Susan, I will add this to my note to Head Teachers!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests