Abstract The ubiquitous weekly spelling test assumes that words are best learned by memorisation and testing but is this the best way? This study compared two well-known approaches to spelling instruction, the rule based and visual memory approaches. A group of 55 seven-year-olds in two Year 3 classrooms was taught spelling in small groups for three lessons a week, 20-min per lesson, over ten weeks. In the first intervention, students learned statistically likely spelling strategies for vowel sounds, syllable breaking strategies, and the doubling rule. In the second intervention, students used a look, say, cover, write, check, fix strategy, listed words in alphabetical order, and wrote them in sentences. The control group completed non-spelling activities. Results showed that although both intervention groups learned to spell taught words better than the control group, the rule-based approach had greater transfer to spelling of new words for both proficient and less proficient spellers.

中文翻译：

---

与语音拼写策略相比，通过look、say、cover、write、check、fix策略学习单词，孩子的拼写提高​​到什么程度？

摘要 无处不在的每周拼写测试假定单词最好通过记忆和测试来学习，但这是最好的方法吗？这项研究比较了两种众所周知的拼写教学方法，即基于规则的方法和视觉记忆方法。一个由 55 名 7 岁儿童组成的小组在两个三年级教室里被分成小组教授拼写，每周三节课，每节课 20 分钟，超过十周。在第一次干预中，学生学习了统计上可能的元音拼写策略、音节中断策略和倍增规则。在第二次干预中，学生使用看、说、盖、写、查、修策略，按字母顺序列出单词，并写成句子。对照组完成了非拼写活动。