O n f e r e n c e

ABRA
. Exploring whether 
ABRA
produces 
different effects for synthetic and analytic phonics interventions on the early phonological 
abilities and reading skills of 53 disadvantaged urban kindergarteners in Canada, Abrami, 
et al. (2009a) arranged small groups of four students to work with 
ABRA
and being 
supported by the facilitator. The main focus was on finding learning activities that the 
students could engage in 
ABRA
. Compared with the analytic phonics group which had 
significant improvements in articulating shared rimes in words, the children in the 
synthetic phonics group showed improvements in both CV and VC phoneme blending 
tasks. The impacts of 
ABRA
on both phonics programs were significant.
In a follow-up study Abrami, Deault, Hipps and Savage (2009b) explored the effects 
of
ABRA
on learners’ reading and related skills. Drawn from dif
ferent schools in Montreal, 
144 first graders were divided into two groups. The experimental group received the 
intervention through 
ABRA
for 12 weeks, and was assessed on listening comprehension, 
word reading, and word meaning, as well as on sentence and passage comprehension at 
immediate and delayed posttests. The results revealed that the intervention had a 
significant impact on literacy. The experimental group made significant improvements in 
blending words, listening comprehension, and reading comprehension in the posttests 

---

-99- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
when compared with the control group. The authors further concluded three contributors 
to the effectiveness of the 
ABRA
intervention. First, technology not only aided reading 
acquisition but included the nature of the content such as CV or VC structure of the 
program.
Second, 
ABRA
provided the training and support with technology-based interventions. 
The final issue concerned 
ABRA
as an additional resource which could be a significant 
contribution to effective English teaching.
Abrami, Comaskey, Erten, Hipps, Lierop and Savage (2010) similarly investigated the 
effectiveness of 
ABRA
in grade 1 language programs. Sixty first graders from three 
schools of an English speaking, suburban school board in Quebec, Canada, were exposed 
to
 ABRA
activitiestwo hours per week for 8 weeks, whereas a control group received the 
regular provincial literacy program. Results suggested that 
ABRA
influenced the 
participants’ reading ability significantly if being used appropriately by teachers. 
Abrami, 
Bottrell, Harper, Helmer, Lea, Savage, and Wolgemuth, (2011) further investigated 
whether 
ABRA
improves Indigenous students’ literacy ability in Australia’s Northern 
Territory. One hundred and eighteen participants in the experimental group received 30 
minutes of 
ABRA
intervention per day, while 48 in the control group received regular 
classroom instruction. The result showed that the experimental group had significantly 
greater phonological awareness scores than the control group.
To examine how 
ABRA
was being implemented across a variety of contexts and how 
teachers would use 
ABRA
within regular school settings, Chalkiti, et al. (2012) selected a 
mix of Indigenous, who were perceived as a largely disadvantaged population, and non-
Indigenous students in four schools in Northern Territory of Australia. After three-year 
trials, 
the authors found students’ literacy ability greatly enhanced when teachers 
confidently integrated 
ABRA
in their teaching. Furthermore, the participants found that 
ABRA
is easy to deal with. 
ABRA
has been shown to be more effective than regular instruction in improving not only 
students’ phonological awareness but other skills. Nevertheless, th
ese previous studies 
were conducted mostly in ESL contexts, especially in Canada. Consequently, the present 
study aims to determine whether 
ABRA 
can be as effectively when implemented in an 
EFL classroom, especially when focusing on blending and segmentation training. The 
following research questions will be answered: 
1.
Are there any differences among fourth graders receiving teacher-directed web-
based instruction and student-controlled web-based instruction in terms of 
decoding learning?
2.
What are EFL fourth-
graders’ attitudinal differences toward English decoding 
learning with teacher-directed web-based instruction and student-controlled web-
based instruction ?