Spelling analyses can be used to investigate sources of linguistic knowledge underlying children’s literacy development and may be useful in predicting later achievement. This study explored the utility of six analysis metrics in predicting the spelling achievement of school-aged children with literacy learning difficulties via post-hoc analyses of data collected in a clinic. Participants were 48 children aged 7 to 12 years. Spelling accuracy was assessed using the Dalwood Spelling Test (Dalwood Assessment Centre, 2008) at baseline and 37–70 weeks later. Spelling attempts at baseline were analysed using metrics designed to quantify evidence of phonological, orthographic, and/or morphological awareness. Scores from each metric were associated with baseline and later conventional spelling accuracy. A metric which credits evidence of phonological, orthographic and morphological awareness shared a significantly stronger association with baseline conventional spelling accuracy as compared to the remaining metrics. There were no significant differences in the strength of associations among the baseline metrics and later spelling achievement. Supplementary analyses focused exclusively on children’s spelling errors returned a similar pattern of results with a few notable exceptions. The utility of spelling analyses is discussed.

拼写分析可用于调查儿童识字发展背后的语言知识来源，并可用于预测以后的成就。本研究通过对诊所收集的数据进行事后分析，探讨了六项分析指标在预测有识字学习困难的学龄儿童拼写成绩方面的效用。参与者是 48 名 7 至 12 岁的儿童。使用 Dalwood 拼写测试（Dalwood 评估中心，2008 年）在基线和 37-70 周后评估拼写准确性。使用旨在量化语音、正字法和/或形态意识证据的指标来分析基线的拼写尝试。每个指标的分数与基线和后来的常规拼写准确性相关。一个衡量音系证据的指标，与其他指标相比，正字法和形态意识与基线常规拼写准确度的关联明显更强。基线指标和后来的拼写成就之间的关联强度没有显着差异。专门针对儿童拼写错误的补充分析返回了类似的结果模式，但有一些值得注意的例外。讨论了拼写分析的效用。专门针对儿童拼写错误的补充分析返回了类似的结果模式，但有一些值得注意的例外。讨论了拼写分析的效用。专门针对儿童拼写错误的补充分析返回了类似的结果模式，但有一些值得注意的例外。讨论了拼写分析的效用。