Do children use logic to spell logician? Implicit versus explicit teaching of morphological spelling rules

Background Intervention studies have reported the advantage of teaching children about morphemes for spelling, but direct comparisons between explicit and implicit been examined systematically in relation to only a few morphological rules. Aims This study compared versus functional rule conservation stem derived words English (e.g., logic is conserved derivative logician spite changes pronunciation). Sample Participants (n = 90; 7- 9-year-olds) were drawn from three schools with diverse intake. Methods The design included pre-test two post-intervention tests. randomly assigned one groups: an group, taught stems their words; exposed same derivatives without teaching; unseen control group. At pre- post-test, children’s spelling was assessed. interventions involved practice games which spelled after seeing base forms; group discussed connection spellings, whereas did not. Results Analyses variance revealed that led more significant improvements than or no teaching, this effect held at both post-tests. Conclusions It concluded forms combined appropriate shows sustained on spelling. evidence supports classroom practice.