Colourful Semantics vs Shape Coding

Colourful Semantics and Shape Coding are both visual approaches for teaching sentences to children who find language hard, but they target different things. Colourful Semantics colour-codes the meaning roles in a sentence (who, what doing, what, where). Shape Coding, created by speech and language therapist Susan Ebbels, uses shapes, colours and arrows to teach grammatical structure such as word class, tense and agreement. The short version: start with Colourful Semantics for meaning-based sentence building, move towards Shape Coding for explicit, more complex grammar.

This guide compares the two so you can choose for a particular child. For how to run each one, see our complete guide to Colourful Semantics and the complete Shape Coding guide; this page is the decision, not the how-to.

‍

At a glance

The table below summarises the difference. Use it as a quick decision aid, then read on for the detail.

‍

Feature	Colourful Semantics	Shape Coding
Created by	Alison Bryan (1997)	Susan Ebbels (2007)
Teaches	Meaning roles in a sentence	Grammatical structure and word class
Visual system	Colours for who, what doing, what, where	Shapes, colours and arrows for grammar
Best-suited stage	Early years and primary, emerging sentences	Older or more able learners, complex grammar
Grammar coverage	Sentence content and word order	Tense, agreement, morphology, clause types
Who delivers it	Teachers and support staff	Often a speech and language therapist
Evidence	Small-scale school and clinical studies	Promising individualised trials, limited overall base

‍

What Colourful Semantics does and who it suits

‍

‍

Colourful Semantics asks a child to think about meaning first: who is in the sentence, what they are doing, what to, and where. The colour carries the role, so the child builds and says a sentence without needing grammatical labels.

It suits younger learners and those at the stage of producing simple, complete sentences. A Reception child who says "dog run" can use orange and yellow to reach "The dog is running."

The evidence is small-scale but real: school-delivered groups improved sentence structure and mean length of utterance (Atwell, 2024), and a Colourful Semantics protocol rapidly increased full-sentence production in a single child (Papakyritsis et al., 2024).

‍

What Shape Coding does and who it suits

Shape Coding teaches the grammar itself. Shapes mark word classes, colours and arrows mark how words relate, and the system can represent complex structures such as tense, agreement and clause type. It was designed by an SLT for children with developmental language disorder.

It suits older or more able learners who already produce sentences but make grammatical errors, such as missing past tense or subject-verb agreement. A Year 5 child who writes "yesterday he walk to school" is working on something Shape Coding is built for.

There is encouraging evidence for specific targets: a randomised trial improved past tense marking in 5- and 6-year-olds (Calder et al., 2020), and individualised intervention improved morphosyntax in 8- to 10-year-olds (Ebbels et al., 2024).

‍

‍

‍

The core difference: roles versus structure

The cleanest way to hold the difference is meaning versus form. Colourful Semantics organises a sentence by what each part means; Shape Coding organises it by what each part is grammatically.

That is why Colourful Semantics is a strong starting point and Shape Coding a strong next step. A child usually needs to build a meaningful sentence before they can refine its grammar.

In practice, Colourful Semantics gets a child to "The girl is eating an apple." Shape Coding then helps with "The girls were eating apples," where tense and number have to be correct.

‍

How the visual systems differ

Colourful Semantics uses colour alone, mapped to wh-questions: orange answers "who?", yellow answers "what doing?", green answers "what?", blue answers "where?". The colours are consistent and easy for young children to learn.

Shape Coding layers more information. Shapes show word class, colours add grammatical detail, and arrows show relationships such as which word a tense marker applies to. This richness is what lets it teach complex grammar, but it also makes it harder to learn and usually needs trained delivery.

The visual load is part of the choice: more information means more power and more complexity.

‍

Which approach to choose

Choose by the child's need. If a learner is not yet producing complete, meaningful sentences, start with Colourful Semantics. If a learner produces sentences but makes specific grammatical errors, Shape Coding targets exactly that.

Consider who will deliver it. Colourful Semantics is feasible for teachers and support staff to run with groups (Atwell, 2024), whereas Shape Coding is often delivered individually by a speech and language therapist and is intensive (Ebbels et al., 2024).

‍

‍

Be honest about the evidence when you decide. A 2025 systematic review found only five Shape Coding studies and could not confirm its general effectiveness, suggesting it may be most appropriate in specialist SLT-led settings (Brown et al., 2025). Colourful Semantics has its own small evidence base. Neither is a guaranteed fix.

‍

How to move a child from one to the other

The two approaches are a progression, not rivals. Once a child reliably builds meaningful sentences with Colourful Semantics, they are ready to refine grammar with Shape Coding.

Bridge it explicitly. Take a sentence the child built with colour roles, then use Shape Coding to fix the grammar, for example turning "he walk" into "he walks". The child keeps the meaning structure they know and adds grammatical precision.

Foundational colour-coded sentence practice supports this move, so a child secure in building better sentences by meaning has the base for explicit grammar work.

‍

‍

‍

Can you use both together?

Yes, and many practitioners do. You can run Colourful Semantics as the meaning-first routine and bring in Shape Coding when a specific grammatical target needs attention.

Keep the roles separate so the child is not overwhelmed. Use colour to settle who-doing-what-where, then switch to shapes only for the grammatical feature you are teaching that week.

For a child working with an SLT, ask which targets they are addressing with Shape Coding so your classroom Colourful Semantics work reinforces rather than competes.

‍

What the evidence says about each approach

The honest picture is asymmetric. Colourful Semantics has small-scale school and clinical evidence for sentence structure and mean length of utterance (Atwell, 2024; Papakyritsis et al., 2024), but no large trials.

Shape Coding has stronger single designs for specific targets, including a randomised trial on past tense (Calder et al., 2020) and individualised gains in morphosyntax (Ebbels et al., 2024). It sits within a recognised family of explicit grammar approaches (Balthazar et al., 2020). However, a systematic review concluded the overall base is too limited and varied to confirm effectiveness (Brown et al., 2025).

For a teacher, that means treating both as evidence-informed rather than proven, and measuring each child's progress yourself.

For more in this series, see the Colourful Semantics activity bank and how to start the approach in EYFS and KS1.

‍

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between Colourful Semantics and Shape Coding?

Colourful Semantics colour-codes the meaning roles in a sentence (who, what doing, what, where), while Shape Coding uses shapes, colours and arrows to teach grammatical structure such as tense and agreement. Colourful Semantics builds meaningful sentences; Shape Coding refines their grammar.

‍

Should I use Colourful Semantics or Shape Coding for my pupil?

Use Colourful Semantics if the learner is not yet producing complete, meaningful sentences, and Shape Coding if they produce sentences but make specific grammatical errors. Younger learners usually start with Colourful Semantics.

‍

Can you use Colourful Semantics and Shape Coding together?

Yes. Use Colourful Semantics to settle the meaning and word order, then bring in Shape Coding for a specific grammatical target. Keep the two visual systems separate so the learner is not overloaded.

‍

Is Shape Coding just an advanced version of Colourful Semantics?

Not exactly. They share a visual, explicit approach, but Colourful Semantics organises sentences by meaning and Shape Coding by grammatical form. Shape Coding can represent more complex grammar, which is why it often follows Colourful Semantics.

‍

Which approach is better for children with DLD?

It depends on the target. Shape Coding has randomised and individualised evidence for specific grammatical features in children with DLD (Calder et al., 2020; Ebbels et al., 2024), though a systematic review judged its overall evidence base limited (Brown et al., 2025). Colourful Semantics suits earlier, meaning-based sentence building.

Decide for one current pupil: if they are not yet making full sentences, plan a Colourful Semantics routine; if they make specific grammar errors, note the target and discuss Shape Coding with your speech and language therapist.