San Fernando Valley State College
'lllE MARQUEZ READING IMPROVEt-IENT CENTER
A PILOT PROJECT USING
COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER 'l'UTORS
A project submitted in partial satisfaction of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in
Education
Psychological Foundations,
Specialization in Educational Psychology
by
Frances Reynolds Waters
June, 1972
The projeot o:f Franoes Reynolds Waters is
approved:
San Fernando
Valle~
June,
State College
1972
ACKNOWLEDGE!~NTS
To
Mr. Robert Van Duzer, Principal
Marquez Elementary School
without '~ose continual support
and encouragement this.projeot
could not have been carried out.
To
Mrs. Melinda Binder, Teacher
Marquez Elementary School
without whose dedication,
expertise and teamwork this
program would not have
succeeded.
To
All the tutors who did such
a marvelous job this year.
I
I
-~~--~-~--~~~-----~· ~-·-----~-~--~--------~-~~-·~·~-~- ..---------·····- ·-----~------- ··-· . !
.----------------------------~~~~~~-~~~-~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
I. Introduction and Overview
1
II. Statement oC the
3
Prob~em
y?·-
III. Review o C the Literature
4
IV. Tl1e, Program
7
v.
Trai-ning o£ Volunteer
Tu~ors
10
V:.. Evaluation and Results
11
Vi:t. Problems
14
VIII. Conclusion
15
Appendixes
16
A - Tips for· Tutors
17
B - Parents Information Sheets
24
C - Teacher and Tutor Questionnaires
27
D -
E -
Checklist for Slosson Oral
Reading Test and the Test
33
Tables o£ Results
36
F - Miscellaneous Forms
40
G - Suggested Reading Improvement
Program
45
H - Bibliography for Reading
Consultants and Volunteers
48
Ref'erenoes
50
I
~-~-~~-~---------~--- .I
~
--~- --~·
THB MARQUEZ READING IMPROVEMENT CENTER
A PILOT PROJECT USING
COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER TUTORS
I
In June of 1971 the principal of Marquez Elementary
School in Pacific Palisades requested the help of the
I
I
faculty and Community Advisory Council to set up a remedial!
reading program to help many of the children in the school
with reading difficulties.
1
Because of the high overall
reading scores of the school a reading specialist was not
warranted - however, there were approximately forty childreJ
with reading difficulties.
The Volunteer Recruitment
Committee of the Advisory Council consequently asked me to
serve as volunteer coordinator and reading consultant along
with a faculty member to set up a program for these children.
During the summer, Mrs. Melinda Binder, of the
faculty and I worked out a tentative program and in October!
I
I
tutor for several half-hour sessions a week on a one-to-one
I
basis. The tutors were to be volunteers from -the community
began the pilot program.
Each child was to have his own
1
1
!
i
'
-2-
(parents, teenagers, retired people and otne;~·~in_t_e_r~-;;;~· ~-~~l
adults.
Second, third and fourth graders were members of the
first group of tutees.
We felt we could be most effective
with children at these grade levels under the assumption
that the earlier the intervention the more success there
would be.
As the referred children were interviewed and
I
I
tested informally we found that many had characteristics in!
common.
Among them were:
Most were boys,
2.
They had short attention spans,
The group's physical development, in most oases,
was behind other children in their age group,
4.
As a group, they could be distracted easily,
Some were classroom discipline problems,
6.
The boys of the group were interested mainly in
sports, motorcycles - everything that involved
active participation,
The members of the group were one to three years
behind in reading as based on the Slossen Oral
Reading Test (a fairly reliable measurement of
child's basic sight vocabulary),
8.
Most had no method of word attaclt,
Their vocabularies were not limited but in fact
were very rich.
-
Most were very verbal, using
-=1=0~·~-"":=e=::~:: :: ::k: ::::~
0
.. •
Book§_
I
word~
we~~ ~~P»~e~,l
-311.
'lbeir self'-oonoept as a learner was low:-~-~·~--·~~~~~~~~~1
These characteristics, of course, have not gone unobserved
j
by many experts in the reading :field such as Durrell, Dolch
I
Helen Robinson, R. Van Allen, Gates, etc, and there is much!
literature to support thist
The only exception being the
'
point made in number nine concerning vocabulary.
II.
Statement of the Problem
I
We hypothesized that most of the children were in whatl
Piaget terms
ment.
11
the pre-operational staget• of concept develop+
If this was a valid assumption then these children
needed many concrete experiences to provide the basis for
I
more abstract thinking that is required in the reading pro-1
cess.
'lbus these children needed activities designed for
this stage.
Our problem then was to set up a tutorial program
I
I
which would:
1.
!
I
Develop remedial techniques to fit the needs of
each(> child.
I
Develop techniques that non-proCessional volunteer~
could use easily and feel successful themselves as
tutors.
).
Develop this program with very limited resources
(time and money).
4.
Develop evaluation procedures to determine if the
children are making progress and to use as the
basis f'or a model program.
J
-4In reviewing the literature I :found that little nas
been researched or written on the use and/or effectiveness
of volunteer tutors in a reading situation.
The Reading
Research Quarterly in the Winter, 1969, 1970. 1971 and 1972
issues.reviews research relating to reading for the previous year.
There was little corresponding to our situa-
tion but several research studies have been done on the
use of older children to tutor younger children such as
that of Niedermeyer and Ellis (8).
They
sixth graders to tutor Kindergartners.
trai~ed fi:fth~ and
I
They had :four
schools in the experimental group and one school as the
I
control.
They found that better results were achieved with
trained tutors.
Most studies relating to reading clinics or labs have
the services of reading consultants or specialists and use
paid paraprofessionals as assistants.
However, some were
helpful in setting up our program as to format and type of
training the tutors needed.
Shaver and Nunn (12) reported
on'the ef:feotiveness of tutoring underachievers in reading
'
and writing in a program at the Utah Tutorial Center.
They
set up two tutoring arrangements: one-to-one and one-tothree •. · They used paid tutors but did not &utline their
~;.:~ning
program.
'llley reported greater gains f'or seventh
· ··~~d tenth graders than f'or fourth.
Janovi tz ( 6) f'ound in
I
I
I
I
I
her studies in Chicago's after-school study centers that a!
I
OV:~riety of' volunteers could help ef:fecti vely~nd ~~!~~-~t~e -~- _j
_,_
children make a month 1 s progress in a month • s
net detail the training methods used
~or
time.-~~-~h~~ ~~4
the volunteers.
Heinicke and Leserman (4) in the Reiss-Davis Clinic's
journal reported on the parent tutoring program at Kenter
Canyon Elementary School.
the
di~ferent
Their parent tutors worked in
classrooms on a variety of tasks.
Most re-
ported sa t:&s~action wi tb the program and the teachers reported that the direct help was good.
Pope (9) described
a program that was part of the psychological-education
service in a hospital mental health setting using paid
paraprofessional tutors.
the tutors worked every day on a
one-to-one basis with several children.
The tutors had
three days of training on how children learn, fail to learn
the purpose of schooling, child behavior, analysis of read-!
ing skills and tbe use or a
mul~i-sensery approach,
They
I
were taught how to make daily lesson plans, to keep reoordsl
and bow to work errectively with parents and teachers,
Pope
~ound
I
that the paraprofessional improved in many ways
as did the children.
I
She sets forth excellent guidelines
for the development of such a program Which were helpful
I
to our situation.
There were several excellent articles in the journals
that effectively espoused the use of volunteers and set up
guidelines for using them effectively.
McGinnis (7) felt
that using volunteers was an inexpensive alternative for
insuring every child "the right to read" and that such a
------------·---~---~-~-~---~--
I
I
.~ . I
-6~
~
"'~~~~-~~ "~~~ ~~~1
program can provide a flexible, individualized and personal
approach to the reading situation.
In The
R~adins
Teacher
Criscuolo {2) reports on the New Haven Public Schools
Tutorial reading program in which they have five types of
programs including paid tutors, youth-serving-youth, after
school program, sixth graders tutoring first graders and
a volunteer program.
i
He states that five sessions of pre-
service training is adequate; that the training not be too
j
I
oJ
technical and rather informal and that there be a variety
materials.
communica~
He also feels that there must be good
cation between teacher and tutor.
He suggested
tha~
Read-
ing Specialists be available for frequent consultation.
a most helpful article Humphrey (5) sets forth the
ents of a good program using a systems approach.
In
oompon~
These
I
1
components are: planning, organization, staffing, direction,
control, innovation, representation, communication and
justification.
Be suggests that the principal and staff
re-evaluate their total reading program.
For evaluating pupil growth, Ahmann and Glock (1) in
their book set forth guidelines for informal reading tests
I
that are helpful for diagnosis •
In doing this literature search I found some very use- !
ful additional information, i.e. that in 1970 the United
States Office of Education had organized a
11
I!
National Right
to Read" campaign and also established a National Reading
I
I
:v.ol.un.te-e-r-t-Pa.i-ni~R(;t-P:tan--packag.e~-P-U-s•-by--the-~ncl---·0-£---1.972-.--~'
Council and a National Reading Center which would develop a
1
-7Also the Department o€ Health, Education and
Wel~are
has an
O:f:fiee of' Citizen Participation wbioh has produced some
tutoring guides including the School Volunteer Reading
Re:ferenoe Handbook.
Other in:formative sources have been the Educational
Progress reports (3) :from the Los Angeles City Schools on
the Westminster Avenue Lab and the lllth Street School's
:::::":.::b:nv:::::a::~:ther
:rv.
reading clinics
in the oountyl
I
The Program
The educational objectives of' our program were to help'
each child improve his basic reading skills.
These skills
include acquisition of a basic sight vocabulary, a method
or methods of word attack, comprehension and speed - and
hopefully, as an adjunct, a better self-concept.
The Reading :Improvement Center was held in the only
spare classroom every afternoon, except Friday, :from 2-3
P.M.
Initially, we had many donated paperback books and
magazines.
We were able to buy more paperbacks of high
interest and low reading level.
We also bought a set of th
Sullivan Programmed Reading series.
Also purchased were a
variety of games (Junior Scrabble, Split Words, Quizmo,
Sound Hunt, Dolch Crossword Puzzle books, Readers 11 Digest
Skill Builder series, Dolch basic sight vocabulary cards
and phrase cards. vowe1 and consonant Wheels, Doghouse,
U-No,
etc.)
We also had dot-to-dot )picture books, comic
j
-8books and visual-perceptual skills workbooks and a primary
typewriter (casually confiscated from the teachers' work
rooml}.
Most of the consumable type workbooks were used
with acetate sheets and crayon so that they could be used
with many children.
Less than two
hund~ed
dollars was
spent overall.
We asked the teachers in the second, third and fourth
grades to refer those children whom they felt needed help.
With each referral we asked for a brief summary of what he
j
!1.
or she thought the child's possible problem area(s} were,
1
his strenghts, weaknesses, his interests and where we could!
I
be of most help. Most teachers, however, sent referrals
I
with little or no additional information.
We set up an ambitious testing program that was to
in~lude:
Slossen Verbal IQ Test
'
Columbia Scale of Mental Maturity
Winterhaven Perceptual-Motor Test
Durrell Analysis of Reading Difficulty
Mills Learning Abilities Test
Informal Diagnostic Survey
Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test
Slossen Oral Reading Test
Fry Oral Reading Paragraphs
I
Vision and Hearing Check-Ups (parents would
i
be asked to have these done)
I
From the testing program a profile would be drawn up for
lI
I
·-~.---·--·~·--~·~~~~·~--········-·~- ... - .1
-~-
each child.
From this a program was to be planned
~or
the
child, with him and with his tutor.
The volunteers were recruited
ity who signed up
~or
~rom
the parent commun-
various volunteer positions during
the first weeks at school and on Parents' Night.
Those who
wished to tutor in the Reading Improvement Center were calltI
ed and the program was explained to them in more detail.
They were asked which days they could tutor.
quired about their experience.
We also in•
Some mothers were
~ormer
teachers and some had taken the L.A. City Schools Volunteer
Training Course the previous year; many had had no re1ated I
experience.
We :felt that our local high sohoolers would bel
I
excellent tutors so the Power Reading Teacher,Mrs. Gilbert, I
at Palisades H1gh School was contacted.
I
I
semester~
She sent ten boys
and girls the
~irst
semester and eleven the second
Some from the
~irst
semester continued on into the second. i
I
!
Mrs. Gilbert gave these young people some very good tips onl
tutoring.
We also recruited tutors by making announcements
at every PTA or Advisory Council meeting and through notice]
in the PTA and Advisory Council Newsletters.
Some tutors
were older members in the community who enjoyed working with
children.
During the program we bad a total of forty tutori
I
and approximately twenty-five tutored consistently ~our to
I
six months twice weekly.
a week for one hour.
for the
~ollowing
-~~-
I
A few were only able to tutor one;
II
Some of' the "drop-outs» did not stay
!
reasons: change of semester schedule.
-------------~--------~-·-·-· ---~~----·--~~·-·----·-··· -·
I
.·
!'
-10-
moving and jobs.
11dropped-outu
Only two
because of.' dissat-
is£aotion with the program.
v.
Training of Volunteer Tutors
Initially we set up an orientation session t:or all thel
tutors before the program began.
We discussed the purposes
of the program, who the children were and what their problems were.
We gave instruction on the Language-Experience
Approach with a f.'ollow-up
11
Tips for Tutors" sheet.
We also!
I
tried to discuss, privately, each tutee with his or her
tutor.
We set up two other workshops in late January.
One
I
was to acquaint the tutors with the Sullivan Programmed
Reading Materials and to teach them how to use them and givt
the plaoement tests.
The other workshop was Cor a round-
I
table problem-solving session and to show the tutors the
dif.'ferent ways they could work with many of the games.
We
scheduled each of these workshops twice to reach all o£ the
tutors.
Both Mrs. Binder and I spent a minimum
of.'
two afte1-
noons each per week in the center to help and consult with
the tutors.
We also asked the tutors to keep an anecdotal
record on each child.
, Mrs. Binder and I spent the first week of the program
in Ootober matching up tutors and tutees.
I
had the inf.'or-
mation on the tutors and Mrs. Binder knew many
children or had talked to their teachers.
of.'
the
From the testing
did~~
to
m.~up
1
I1
and interviewing we tried to match up tutors and tutees
according to how we :f'el t one would work with the other.
1
We
I
I
the boys :wi :th..Jlo.y___:tD_t.tl.rs~_.f:ro_m~~the~high. ~ J
-11sohool.
On the first day of tutoring one of us woul.~~~;~-~-~--~~
with the tutor to the obil.d 1 s room, introduce him or her to
the teacher and the child.
VI.
Evaluation and Results
In the middl.e of May we began an evaluation of the
program.
We re-tested the children who had been consistent
l.y tutored and sent questionnaires to the teachers and
tutors.
On the basis of the information obtained our model
program for next year is based.
The questionnaire forms arr
The tables of resul.ts are in Appendix E.
I
To eval.uate the program at the end of the six month
I
in Appendix
c.
tutoring period we post-tested the children who had been
consistently tutored for that period of time.
seventeen children in this group.
We had
I
I
I
We gave them the Slosseni
Oral Reading Test with a cbeek•sheet (Appendix D) to note
I
There were other children who bad bad only two to tour
I
I
I
months of tutoring but we did not post-test them as we felt
1
method of word attack, types of errors, confidence, etc.
I
we would get a better measure from the longer-tutored groupj
Of the group of seventeen children there were seven
second graders, three third graders, five fourth graders
and two fifth graders.
In the six month tutoring period
I
I
the second graders gained- an average of 1.0 year, the third \
graders an average of .7. the fourth graders an average of
.6 and the fifth graders, 1.4.
The overall group gain was
.9 months, three months more than the expected gain of' one
I
I
II
1
I
montJ:Lgain per one month of tutoring.•~--Xh.e-~number-~1'--~u.to.~sJ
-12-
t'aotor in the gains.
What seemed to be a determining :fact•
or was the one-to-one relationship and the special attention.
Two children (:fourth graders) did not gain at all.
One has severe perceptual problems and the other is very
immature and will be retained for another year in fourth
grade.
In giving the test, however, other signi:fioant
factors were noticed:
most children now had a method of
word attack, were more oon:fident, were more willing to
attack new words, kept trying and expressed pleasure when
they worked on an unknown word and succeeded.
Only two
children said n'lhis list is too hard - can I go now? 11
I
II
The teachers were asked to evaluate some o:f the child- I
ren from their room o:f the group of seventeen.
They were
I
asked i:f the children had improved and i:f so, in what areas
and if they thought that the improvement
to the tutorial program.
lfllS
due, in part,
They were also asked to evaluate
the program and to make suggestions for next year.
O:f
thirteen questionnaires sent out ten were teturned (two
teachers had unfortunate accidents were were absent during
the evaluation period).
O:f the ten, eight :felt that there
was a lot o:f improvement in the children's reading and in
their confidence and that the program was an e:ffective
supplement.
next year.
They expressed hope that it would continue
These eight also asked :for
results of the testing and evaluation.
in~ormation
on the
I
I
I
I
I
One teacher replied!
that there was little improvement and one said_ th_~~--!!!~E.! .. __
I
-1.3was no improvement; as evidenced in the classroom. ~~Tb.;;;O~<~ --~
children, however, did improve according to our tests.
Eight of the teachers evaluated the program and
o~
those,
1
six made lenglihy,helpful comments such as monthly con~eren-1
I
oes between tutor and teacher, tutor observation time in
the classroom, more boy tutors, longer tutoring times, etc.
Some also
~elt
that next year they should know more about
the program and wanted an orientation session too.
The tutors were asked to evaluate their tutee 1 s
progress, the materials they worked with and were the most
successful and asked for their comments on the program.
Fourteen tutors replied and of these, thirteen felt that
I
I
their children had improved - mainlr in word recognition
skills and confidence.
0~
the materials used
~ive
said thaT
the Sullivan materials were helpful, all liked the variety
of,games, ·and
~our
es~eoiallruith
found the Language-Experience approach,
the typewriter successfUl.
All tutors
wrote in-depth evaluations of their tutee(s)
1
program and made many excellent suggestions
~or
I
progress, thel
improvement
i.e. better teacher-tutor communication, more training and
consultative help for them and better diagnostic testing.
Most agreed to volunteer again next year which could be
in~erred
to mean that they enjoyed it. felt it worthwhile
and gained some satisfaction from their work.
I
From the teacher, tutor evaluations and
~rom
ing, many of the results for each child concur.
.m~nd.
. i
the test-
We also
that manl(....Jl:f the tutors wer.e--Y..a.ey innoxa.ti.ve
1
II
in~ __ j;J1_e.ir J
..
-14·--·
-------------------~--·~·-
reading approaches.
~·-~~~-~~~.··
They tried to match the child's
interests to the materials.
v.
Probl.ems
In
~utting
the program into practice we had to modify
our original plans for several reasons.
First, our tests
that had been ordered never came
too late.
O·~t:..'oame
1
I
We alsol
did not have enough trained personnel to do t~e testing.
j
We realized that the testing program was too ambitious timel
wise.
We did use the Slossen Oral Reading Test for a post-
test with a check-sheet.
We also could have used more in-
I
formation initially from the teachers.
Howev~r,
many
te~che~s initiated contacts w.i th the tutors and vi'ce-versa
after the program was well under liTay.
lve had planned a
meeting with the parents to tell them: about tl,'le program
'
and to
''.
'
enoourag~
them to have their children's -v·ision and
I
...
hearing checked . thoroughly.
r~.
oa~led
the parents.
The nurse did this and then
We never did have a meeting with the
parents except informally at School Open House night in
Ap~il.
One of the most difficult
tutors to tutees.
prob~ems
was matching
In most cases the matches worked out
beautifully but unfortunately, some of the most severe
problems had inoonsisten or "drop-outu tutors.
Most of the
I
I
tutors. however, were ver.r faith£ul and called tdlenever the~
I
could not come. The high sohoolers were most enthusiastic i
and were also prompt and consistent.
rate was very low.
Actually, the absent
Another problem was soheduling the
children so that their
~g
did not
II
I
in..t..arf~ld._:th~thei~
-15classroom reading time or P.E., especially the latter for
the boys.
Most
o~
the teachers were
know their schedules.
help~ul
in letting us
Mrs. Binder and I both felt that we
did not have enough time to consult with each tutor and
give the quality of help needed as often as we wished.
However, all in all, the rewards far
outweighe~l.:.
the
problems.
VI. Conclusion
In spite of the many limitations of space, materials,
adequ·ate testing, time, etc. the children in the program
did improve in many areas.
'lbere were many whose perform ... I
anoe improved in the classroom.
Many
o~
I
the tutors seemed
i
to gain satisfaction from helping these ohildre and most
1
became truly involved with them.
I
Many of the teachers also
reported gains on the part of the children.
An added
benefit was improved teacher-parent communication.
The
teachers realized that volunteers could play a viable role
in the school.
Mrs. Binder and I realized, too, that an
effective, successful reading improvement program could be
1
run on limited resources if one was ldlling to put in alot
of time, and personal effort.
We also learned a great deall
more about the reading process itself.
We look forward to
a much improved program next year based on our leaming
experience this year.
j
l
IIIII
I
I
-----·-------·-----~~--~-------~--~---------~-· ---- --· ... I
APPENDIX A
This appendix contains the Tips
for Tutors '1handou ts n.
-17TIPS FOR TUTORS
#1
The Language
Bxper~ence
Approach to Teaching Reading
(14)
"What I can think about. I can talk about.
What I can say, I can write - or someone can write for me.
What I can write, I can read.
I can read what I can write and what other people can write
for me to read. 11
R. Van Allen
The Language experience approach is based on the child's o~
language - language that he uses and understands. It bringJ
together all of the communication skills.
Materials: paper, pencil, black crayon, Word Bank and paper
motivating. interestinsg materials (i.e. picture$
magazines. sports pages, rocks, shell, etc.)
I
Procedure:
I
1.
Ask the child what he is goin to write about (can be a
story, peem, list of words, description, etc.)
2.
The child will either write his own story or dictate it
to you. If he needs a word write it for him on a word
bank slip saying each letter as you write them. Have
the child say the letters with you. Underline the llTOrd
in the story that he needed.
1
After completing the story - re-read it. Then go over
the word slips with the child. If he doesn't recall a
word use the Visual-Aural-Kinesthetic-Tactile Method of
learning the word.
4. Have the child file words in
word bank.
.s.
Next session: Have the child read the typed story •
Review new words. Use VAKT with llTOrds missed.
6.
Periodically go through Word Bank words for test of
recall and for review.
II
I
I
I
~ ----~-~~~ --- -- - -- _I
-18.------------------·-------~-~-----~--~-···~"'-·-~~
.. ···-··-
TIPS FOR TUTORS
#2
Pro o edu re for Word Attaok *
1.
Start with context and examine for context clues.
2.
Examine word for structural characteristics: prefixes,
suffixes and oompotind words.
).
Loook carefully at the word - from left to right.
4.
Divide word into syllables and try to pronounce it.
5.
Establish the vowel sounds and try to pronounce them.
6.
Sound out all the letters and attempt to pronounce the
word.
7.
If then the child cannot pronouoe or derive meaning
a. refer to dictionary; b. be directed to word attack
skills again for that word; o. tell the word.
*Wilson, Robert M., Dia&nostio
Classroom and Clinic
------~-
--- -------
~Remedial
Reading -
~
-19TIPS FOR 'l'UTORS
#J
Many words are similar in configuration and also many
have abstract meanings which can confuse the child. For
example:
there, theirj then, these and them, on, no, own, nowj how,
won, where, when, were, ever, even and every
They are repeatedly confused or not remembered. These word
derive meaning totalll from context. They should ~ be
taught in isolation but in context. How??
I
1. Compo.sing an experience story
2. Drill on prepared phrase cards (oan use Dolch cards)
J. Construction of sentences from word cards (use word~
from word bank)
I
With severe oases of word confusion. instruction shoulj
be as simplified as possible. Focus on one word at a time
and proceed by small steps from easy to more difficult
I
learnings. The following suggested procedure should be
'
adapted to each cbild 1 s problems and capabilities:
1
Have child trace the word
Have child !!2t the word
a. from a model
b. from memory
Have obi ld match the word with similar words. ,
.
~·-·simultaneously (while looking at the confused
word)
b. successively (after looking at the confused
word)
4 •. Have child read the word in context.
.5. Have child proii'ounce the word in isolation.·
·a. untimee
b. flashed
1.
2.
__
)
Whef<F the child has mastered two confused words individually
by:this procedure, two more steps can,be added
absolute mattery.
6.
7.
Present two or more similar (oonfused) words in
context to be read orally.
Present two or more similar (confused) words in
isolation to be pronounced.
~~-----·--------·---~----~---------~~~~·~-----~-~--~~---
1
I
.... 1
-20TIPS FOR TUTORS
Inventorr o£ Readins
pi££i~ulties*
Dif'f'iculties
Low sight vocabulary
(oral)
Guesses at unknown words
(oral)
Remediation
Teach basic vocabulary
Kinaesthetic method
Copy words with typewriter
Use word games
Additional firsthand exper•
ience
Experience chart stories
Read easier materialHave child find tford in story
Learn oonsonent sounds
Enlarge sight vocabulary
Use context and configuration
clues
Divide words into syllables
Record, so child hears what
he reads
Motivation and easier materia:
Use of context clues
Use easier material - much
praotioe
Enlarge sight vocabulary
Phrase reading exerciees
Silent reading before oral
Hand Tachistoscope (using
phrase cards),~
Choral Readin_g Jfo r group~s1
Dramatization (I~ll read a
line - you read a line)
Audience reading
Read by thought units
Lots of oral reading
Dramatize bodily the punctuation marks.
Choral verse
Praotioe in phrase perception
Emphasize meaning (talk about
words, their meaning, bow
they can be used in other way~
words that can take their
I
1
Ignores errors and reads
on (oral)
Word by Word Reading
(oral)
Ignores punctuation
(oral)
Incorrect phrasing
(oral)
~~~--~~~~~--------~p~l-a~c-e~)~----~~~--------·,l
Habitual Repetition
of Words (Oral)
Use easier material
Use recorder (or typewriter
take dictation)
Cover lines just read
'--..~-·-~-----~~----------
o~
-~-~·· .. ~ ..........
I
I
-21-~--~~~~~~
T:Lps Cor Tutors #4, page 2
Omits Words
(Oral)
-
.
Mispronunciation
(eral)
Easy, interesting material
Read to follow directions
(i.e. model kits, coupons)
Read for specific points, as
arithmetic word Eroblems
Read for pleasure
Observe initial parts and
endings
Observe vowels - how they
change pronunciation
Give help in enunciation and
2ronounoiation individually
I
1
i
Silent Reading
Low rate of reading
Use easy material
I
Silent reading first
1
Use vocabulary notebook
Use card above line as word
1
accelerator
-~H:"'l'i-g"!"h---:Ra.::-_-t":"'e--a-.t-:E:-x_p_e_n_s_e_o_£~--~G;.:;i;,.;v_e__e•x•e•r-o•i:o-s-e_s_w~h~i-c~h-s""!h:-o-w-hi~-s I
Accuracy
inaocuraoi es
I
Use easier material as he is I
probably skipping
Word recogpition technigues
Word Reeogni tion
Meaning Attack
1. Does not use context Provide firsthand experiences
Increase spoken vocabulary 1
and use mf materials of high
interest level such as experience records, labels, bulle-1
tiri boards, key sentences, etq.
Show importance of context
Teaching guessing at words in
a sentence with just beginnin
letter as, "The boys play b_•
2. Does not use expect- Use visual aides, discussion
ancy of words and
Study root words and suffixes
conc:)epts
Use words in different ways
Visual Attack
1. Poor visual discrimina- Use interest, meaning, and
tion
observation of needs
Use context
Child may need a systematic
lcinaesthetic procedure (KAVT)
Point out tho similarities &
2. Does not use word configuration
differences of words in
I
sentences
1
I
J
~~~i-s_u_a~l~A~t~t~a-c-k~----------------~-.-.-..-----------------------1
3. Syllabication
Teach principles of syllabicaf
·-~---·--~----------·-t_i_o_n~-~-----~-~--------~----~-~- ·- -~-. ____ J
-22-
Tips for Tutors #4, page J
Syllabication, cont.
Visual Attack
· 4. Fu 11 and Part Reversals
.
..
be
Sound Attaolc
1. Initial Consonants
.and blends not known
2. Errors on vowels
Teach principles of syllabication
Listen for aoeents; division
of words; teach prefixes and
suffixes; use syllabication
games
Emphasize left-to-right eye
movement
Use kinaesthetic method
Emphasize beginning letter
sounds
Use in context and make first
letter red and last word gree
"Stop and Go"
Use typewriter or handprinting press
Compare words which ~re reversed i.e. saw and was
Anagrams
._
Listen for beginning sounds
Classify pictures and words
that begin alike
Exercises to analyze vowel
sounds.
*Excerpts from Dr. Douglas Robertson
----·~------~-~--·-·---~·-·--·--·-I
I
APPENDIX B
These are the information
sheets that were given to
the parents on Open House
Night.
-24:MARQUEZ READING IMPROV:ZIENT CENTER
-
FOR PARENTS
·,How you can help with your child's reading ••••••••
1.
Read to your child ••• and read with him.
Take your child to the library.
Take your child on trips and on excursions
to places of interest and significance.
4.
Provide your child with books •• enoourage
recreational reading.
Emphasize the importance o£ communication and 1
I
language skills. Listen to your child.
Encourage discussion.
I
Encourage and foster independence and responsibility.
Help your child maintain good health. A
yearly, thorough vision, hearing and physical
cheek-up are important. Encourage good eating, sleeping and exercise habits.
I
1'
'l1lE MARQUEZ READING Il\IPROVBMENT OENTltR IS •••••• • •.
A learning center
A center ~or children in Grades 2,3.4 who need extra
help with their reading skills.
An individualized tutorial program.
Eaoh child is
tutored on a one-to-one basis several times a week
by a volunteer tutor. Each child has had an in~ormal reading diagnostic test.
From this a program
has been planned for him.
A reading improvement materials center. Many special
reading materials such as programmed instructional
workbooks and reading games have been purchased.
There is also a good selection of paperback books.
1
A Reading Improvement Workshop £or tutors. Each tutor!!
has participated in several training workshops as
well as informal weekly discussions with the teacheri
director. The volunteer tutors are £rom the parent I
community, the high school and junior high.
The program has been set up under the direction o£
Mrs. Melinda Binder and Mrs. Fran Waters. I£ you are
interested in volunteering now or next year. please call
4.;4-3031 t l J
APPENDIX C
Questionnaire forms sent
to teachers and tutors.
-27MARQUEZ READING IMPROVEMENT CENTER
May, 1972
Dear Mrs. or Miss or Mr••••••••••••••
We need your help in evaluating the Reading Improve•
ment Center tutorial program that was initiated this year
so as to have a more effective program next year.
First, we would like to know if the referred pupils
frem your class have made progress. Do you feel that the
progress was partially a result of the reading center?
Secondly, we would like your suggestions as to how we could
improve the program as to set-upt methods, materials,
teacher-tutor communication, etc. Please use the attached 1
forms and return as soon as possible (no later than May 26) 1
to Mrs. Binder's box. Also, we would like to know if you 1
would like some feedback on our general findings from this i
year's program?
I
Your help and cooperation this year have been invalu- ·
we thank you.
1
able.
1
Sincerely,
Melinda Binder
Fran lva ters
I
I
-28MARQUEZ READING IMPROVEMENT CENTER
!eaoher Evaluation of' Program
1.
Please comment on this year's program:
a.
Set-up (time, place. tutors. etc.)
b.
Methods-
c.
Materials
d.
Tutor-Teacher Communication
e.
Other
l
2. Would you like information on the results of our evalua-i
tions?
What
No
suggestions do you have for our tutorial program
Yes
:for next year?
a.
Set;-;!U;p (time. plaoe, tutors, etc.)
b.
!-fethods
c.
1\Iaterials (can you suggest specific helps?)
d.
Tutor-Teacher Communication
e.
Other
I
I
.J
-29MARQUEZ READING IbiPROVEI\IENT CENTER
Teacher Evaluation of Pupil Prosres.!
____________
To: ------------~------~~--~--~------Room
(teacher)"
Re: Progress of----------~~~~~---------Grade___________
(child h.
What improvements in reading have you observed in this
child?
a. Oral reading
1. Bate
2. Comprehension
3. Expression
4. Enunciation
I
J
b.
Utilizes some method of word identification - whiohr
c.
Comprehension (i.e. better comprehension of work
read silently or of math word problems, etc.)
I
I
d.
Is he or she doing more voluntary reading? Using tht
library more, etc?
1
2.
What and where have been the most noticeable improvements?
I!
I
3.
lfhat improvements in attitude, self-concept, confidence!
have you observed?
4.
Do you feel that the progress was partially a result ofl
our tutorial program? Yes ____No _____
.s.
In your opinion will he or she need further help?
Yes
No ______
I
a.
If yes, in what specific areas?
-:JO.-----------------------------~~-~~-~~-~,--,--~
MARQUEZ READING IMPROVEMENT CENTER
Tutor Evaluation
To help us improve and revise our program for next year we
would appreciate your help in answering this questionnaire.
Please be as concise as possible - but informative!
Tutor___________________________.Days and Time________________
Tutee(s) 1.
2.
~0~N-am--e-,--g-r-ad~e-,-a-g--e~)---
~(~N~am--e-,--~g-r-a~d~e-,--a-g_e_)~------
1. Please sum up what you think your tutee(s) problem was
when-you began J.i.e. low self-concept, slow oral reading
rate, little comprehension, low sight vocabulary, no method
o£ word identification, perceptual problems, short attentio
span, physical handicaps, emotional or developmental
problems, etc.)
:::
i
I
2. Please summarize your tutee(s) progress now.
List
specific improvements. Please include any factors that
have improved or impeded his progress. Will he need £urthe
help? If so, in what areas?
(1)
.
(2)
I
i
:J. -What specific activities or approaches have you used
which have seemed particularly successful (i.e. Sullivan
Series, Language-Experience Activities, Readers' Digest
Skill Builders, beoks, games, magazines, etc. etc.,)
(1)
(2)
4. Will you continue to tutor next year? Yes
No
•
yes, what days?
• You will be contaeted-rn
September for more definite times and days. Your phone
number is
•
I
I
I
If I
I
,J
-.:31-
Tutor Evaluation
Page 2
5. Additional comments ••••• Pleasel! We need suggestions asll
to set-up, tutor guidance, methods, teacher communication,
testing program, etc. (use back i~ needed).
·
Our thanks ~or your time, care and overwhelming
support. We have enjoyed working with each and every one
o~ you and appreciate your continuous support.
Sincerely,
Fran lfa ters
Melinda Binder
APPENDIX D
Checklist to accompany the
Slosson Oral Reading Test.
Sample o£ the test
-33Checklist to Accompany Slo sson Oral Reading Test (Pr;..~~;~-;~)
Name____________________D_ate (1) _________ (2) __________
Given By________________________Grade, Room, Teaoher_______
1
Observed Behavior
1. Eyes:
2. Hearing:
J. Attention Span:
4. Emotional (selC-oonoept,
cooperation, trying, etc.)
5. Articulation:
6. Enunciation:
Method oC Word Attack Used
1. Phonic
2. Structural
J. Syllabic
!rPes oC oral reading errors
1. Omission
2. Insertion
3. Mispronounciation
4. Reversal
$. Reads only beginning and/or
ending oC words
6. ConCuses vowel sounds
Results
Pre-Test
Post-Test
APPENDIX E
Tables of Results of Teacher,
Tutor and Tutee Evaluations.
-36-----
~-~-~~~~-~=-==~~~·--·
RESULTS OF SLOSSON ORAL READING TEST
yame
Age
1. Chris
8
2. Dennis
-
Sex:
GraQ.e
Pre-Test
Post-Test
9-.!!!!.
:r.J
2
1.0
2.6
8
)I
2
0.7
1.4
·7
J. Adam
8
M
2
1.6
2.1
• .5
4. Ron
7t
M
2
1.7
3.2
1 • .5
.?. Je'£€
8
M
2
.s
1.1
.6
6. Dustin
9
M
2
1.2
2.4
1.2
7. John
7!
l\I
2
2 • .5
3.5
1.0
1.6 :Mos
Average gain - 2nd grade
1.0
8. :f\iike K.
at
M
J
2.3
3.3
1.0
9· Kelly
9
F
3
2.4
3.3
.9
10. Danny
at
M
3
1 • .5
1.8
.3
Average gain - Jrd grade
.7
11. Jon
10
I-I
4
4.7
4.7
12. Paul
10
!-I
4
3.1
J.l
.o
.o
13. George
10
M
4
2.7
4.0
1.3
14. Mike
10
M
4
3.1
4.1
1.
15. Joel
9
},{
4
J.s
4.2
.7
Average gain - 4th grade
16. Ricky
10
17. Cassandra 11
.6
M
5
4.6
6.2
1.6
F
5
2.7
4.o
1.3
Average gain
- .5th grade
Total group gain - average
I
I
I
1.4
.o
I
I
I
-
·~~~----~··-~~~-~-~·-~-=~~-
l
I
-37RESULTS OF TEACHER EVALUATIONS
Key: Initial - teacher's last name
N.c. - No comment
Con£. - eon£idence
Comp. - Comprehension
All • all areas (oral, silent, word attaot, etc.)
N.r.o. - No improvement observed
Child
Grade
l. Chris
Teacher Observed
ImJ2rovement
No return
2. Dennis
No return
3. Adam
No return
4. Ron
H.
'·
&
Je££
c.
Yes
Result o£
Program?
All areas
Yes
H.
Yes
All areas
Yes
6. Dustin
B.
some
N.C.
Yes
7. John I.
H. •
yes
all
Yes
s.
no return
rate,
cong.
Yes
Mike K.
9. Kelly
c.
Yes
10. Danny
M.W. little
N.C.
Yes
11. Jon
L.B. Yes
Compre.
Conf'.
Yes
12. Paul
v.
Yes
All
Yes
1.3. George
D.
Yes
All
Yes
14. Mike B.
L.B. Yes
rate
oompre.,
Yes
15. Joel
T
N.C.
N.I.O.
no
16. Ricky
w
Yes
Con:f.
Yes
17. Cassandra
w
Yes
Con:f.
Compre.
Yes
-.38RESULTS OF TUTOR B'VALUATIONS
The tutor evaluations were not consistent with the child
and teacher evaluations as some ot the tutors did not return their ~orms in time ~or the purposes o~ this study.
Most reported gains - especially in word attack and in
oon~idenoe.
APPENDIX F
l'lisoellaneous forms and
letters used during the
year o£ the pilot program.
-4oLetter Sent to Tutors
Marquez School
November 4, 1971
Dear
lbank you £or volunteering for the Marquez Reading
Improvement Center.
You will be working with:
from
on
(room)
(name of child)
_.,..~-~~-~
(day and timel
on
from
(name of child)
(day and time)
!
(room)
We will begin the week of November 8 in Room l).
If
you cannot come any day please call the school - 4S4-4ol9
and leave your name and your child(s)' name.
We look £orward to working with you.
Sincerely.
Melinda Binder
Fran Waters
-41Marquez Reading Improvement Center
To:
(teacher)
The following children in your class have been assigned a
tutor in the Reading Clinic. If you have information about
the particular kind of help which you would like to see
your students have, plase let me know. The reading program
will begin the week of November 8th. For the first session
the tutor will come to the room to pick up his particular
child.
We hope that we are able to help these children.
Thanks~
Melinda Binder
Fran Waters
Child's name
Days of the week
-Time
If there are any other children whom you have recommended
and whose names are not on this list, we will try to place
those children as soon as we find additional tutors.
Thanks for your patience.
-42)larquez Reading Improvement Center
Individual Check Sheet
Name______________________________Grade and
Room~----------
Age _____.Birthdate__________Teacher_________________________
1
Interviewed and Tested by___________________________________
1
Tutor
Physical:
Days and Time _________
General Health.___________________________________
Hearing and Date Tested._________________________
Vision and Date Tested
~-----
Tests:
Results
IQ - Verbal - Slossen
Formal Reading Survey - Durrell
Informal Survey:
Perception:
Learning Abilities:
Mills
Evaluation and Recommendations:
1
-43- -.-••
~-·~~~•o-
''~-
<•
--
The Marquez Reading Improvement Center
Anecdotal and Observation Record
Name
Tutor______________________
------------------
-
Date
•..___._~~·~-=-
Specific Taskf>
&~~-·~~--~---·~·
Conunents
.,-~--~--~~·~-·-~~-,-··· ·-·
I
._I
APPENDIX G
Suggested reading improvement program using volunteers
based on this pilot program.
-~---·-.--··-~-·-~-··--·-----·-------
-45PROPOSED MODEL FOR AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL READING
IMPROVEMENT CENTER USING CO)~IUNITY VOLUNTEERS
Educational Objectives
To help each child improve his basic reading skills. These
skills include acquisition of a ba&to sight vocabulary
(words most frequently found in primary level books), a
method of method of word attack, comprehension and speed.
Program
1. Personnel
a. Teacher-Director - acts as consultant and as liasion
with faculty.
b. Volunteer Coordinator - act as consultant and as
liasion with volunteers.
c. Volunteer Tutors
d. Testing Committee - a nucleus of trained volunteers ~who will conduct testing program.
1
I
2. Set-Up - use available classroom or library with storage I
available for materials and supplies. Set a specific
time, i.e. 1-3 P.M. !-Ion. - Thurs.
3. Classroom Teachers
a. Orientation meeting to acquaint teachers with program
and materials.
b. Teacher will refer those children needing help.
With each referral the teacher will be asked to write
a brief summary of what she thinks the ehild 1 s
problem areas are, his strengths and weaknesses and
observed interests. They will indicat_e areas l'lhere
specific help is needed.
4. Diagnostic Testing Program
a. Initial interview with the child by the profes~ional
personnel who will also conduct the testing program.
b. Testing: IQ - Verbal ... Slosson'
Non-Verbal - Oolumbia:Seale of' Mental
Maturity·
Physical - Vision and Hearing Checks
(ask parents to have. these done)
Peroeptual-~lotor - Rosn•r Perceptual Survey
Formal Reading Diagnostic Survey Durrell Analysis of Reading Difficulty
Informal Diagnostic Survey
Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test
_
westminister School Informal Survey
o. From the testing program, int-erviews and teacher
I
comments a profile will be drawn of each child. Fromj
I
---~~.thi..s a
prog.r.a~nn..e.d.___C.nr_him.--~-~----~-~--~----------
-46-
s.
-~·~~-~-~-~===·~--=co.'
Volunteer Tutors
a. Recruit from Community - parents, high sohoolers, retired people via newsletters, meeting announcements,
letters,to specific groups.
b. Training Workshops
a. Orientation Meeting to state objectives of program
b. Two workshops before tutoring begins.
1. Components of the reading process; how children
learn or fail to learn; developmental aspects.
Physical characteristics.
2. Speoi~io techniques or methods and use of
materials.
o. Monthly round table meetings to discuss problems,
share ideas, etc.
o. Consultants will be available during tutoring time
for assistance.
Parents
1. Orientation Meeting - to acquaint parents with program
and enlist support.
2. Request vision and hearing checks
3. Suggest how they can help child at home.
Materials
Basic Approach - Language Experience
Have individual word banks and paper
2. Sullivan Series
3. Variety of paperbacks on all levels and interests
(Scholastic has good selection)
4. Variety of games, i.e. Junior Scrabble, Split Words,
Quizmo, Sound Hunt, Dolch materials, Vowel and consonant
wheels.
5. Visual-perceptual skills workbooks, dod-to-dot pictures
6. Comic books, i.e. Snoopy series
7. Magazines, newspapers
8. Typewriter
9. Magnetic letter board and letters
10. Paper, crayons, scissors, glue
11. Readers Digest Skill Builders series
I.
Evaluations
1. Evaluate informally as year progresses - readjust as
deems necessary.
2. Set up post-testing program based on original test.
3. Tutor Evaluations
4. Teacher Evaluations
-~~~---
___ j
APPENDIX H
This bibliography is expeoially
useful for the Reading Specialist,
Consultant and for Volunteer
Tutors
---~--~---~------------
-------~~=~~-~-~--~~-~~~~-~~·-•• ~~-~u-
•·'•'
I
·•~--~,~~-<'!
-4a-
,.--
~
~l
HELPFUL READING FOR THE
READING CONSULTANT
AND/OR VOLUNTEER TUTOR
Austin, David, Velma Clark, Gladys Fitchett, Reading Rights
!!£ Boys, ~ B2!! !ll Language Experiences, AppletonCentury-Crofts, New York, 1971 (paper)
Della-Piana, Gabriel M., Reading Dia~nosis ~Prescription
-An IntrGduotion, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
New York, 19bB (paper)
Department of Exceptional Children, School of Education,
u.s.c., Los Angeles 90007, Lansuage Development Experiences !2£ YounG Children (paper)
Ekwall, Eldon E., Locating~ Correcting Reading Di£ficul!!!!• Chas. E. Merrill Pub. Co., 1970 (pap~r)
.
Gallant, Ruth, Handbook !ll Corrective Readfng: Basic Tasks,
Chas. E. Merrill Pub. Co., 1970 (paper.l./
I
Heilman, Arthur w., Phonics in Proper Pers2eotive, Chas. E.
Merrill Pub. Co., 196H7 (paper)
Hunter, E. Encounters in the Classroom, Holt, Rhinehart and
Winston, Inc. 1972,~;;-York (paper)
Kt~g§~y,
a~rq~rd, Reading Skills (simple games, aid and
devices} Fearon Publishers, Inc. no date.
National Reading Center, 1776 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington n.c. 20036
Rooinson; H. Alan, and Sidney J. Rauch, Guiding !e! Reading
Program, A Reading Cons~ltant's Handbook, Science Research Associates, C~ioago, 1965.
Rosner, Jeromes, "screening for Perceptual Dy:-;funotion"
Journal o£ the American 0EtometRtG Association
v.41, #107 OCtOber, 1970--Excellent tests for screening
out potential perceptual-problem children.
Los Angeles Chapter has a speakers bureau and will send
good brochures on visi-on screening on request. Address:
Stephan A. Bensussen, O.D. President, 14540 Sylvan St.
Van Nuys, California 91401
Sleisenger, Lenore, ~debook !!£ ~ Volunteer Reading
Teacher, Teachers College Press, Columbia University
196$. (paper)
--~-----~-·--,~---·~~-·-~····---~-- ···-"·--.1
--49..~---~~·~~---~
-~~-->·-"--
Helpful Reading :for the Reading Consultant, cont.
Spaobe, George, ~ Reading !!£ ~ Readers, Girard
Publishing Co., Champagne, Illinois, 196M.
Spencer, Peter L., Readin~ Reading, College Press, Claremont, California, 1970. (paper}
Stauffer, Russell,. The Lanyaage
Teaching_ Reading;;;: (paper
Experie~ce
Approach to
Wilson, Robert M. Diaano,stio !!.!2.. Remedial Reading - !.2£
Classroom !!!!!! Clini,o, Charles E. ~ierrill Books, Inc.
Columbus, Ohio. 1967
·-~-·.--~-~~-·~-
-·
-·---~·~-~-·-·-----·-'""·-··------"'·"·-'"''·"~--~
-,50-
·--------
REFERENCES
(1) Ahmann, J, Stanley and Marvin D. Glock, Evaluating
Pupil Growth: Principles of Tests and Measurement,
Allyn and Bacon, Inc. BostOn, 1967--(2) Criscuolo, Nicholas P., "Training Tutors Effectively,"
~
Reading Teacher, November, 1971
(J) Educational Progress Reports, Los Angeles City Schools,
April, 1972
M.,
Ph.D. and Jean Leserman, 11 Paren.
Tutoring: Individualized Use to Enhance Individual i
Needs", Reiss-Davis Clinic Bulletin, Fall, 1971.
(4) Heinicke, Christoph
w., "Remedial Programs: Can They be
Justified?", Journal 2!. Reading, October, 1971.
(5) Humphrey, Jack
;
(6) Janowitz, Gayle, "Educational Roles for Volunteer Youth'r
Teacher's College Record, September, 1971.
j
I
( 7) McGinnis, Dorothy J., "Should Tutoring be Encouraged?"
Reading Horizons, Winter, 1972
I
(8) Niedermeyer and Ellis, Elementary School Journalc,, 1971
Reviewed in Reading Research Quarterly, Winter, 1972
(9) Pope, Lillie, "Blueprint for a Successful Paraprofessional Tutorial Program", Negro Educational Review,
April, 1971.
(10) Robinson, n. Alan and Sidney J. Rauch, Guiding !!!!.
Reading Prosram:_a Reading Consultant's Handbook,.
Science Research Associates, Chicago, 1965.
(11) Reading Research Quarterly,
1969, 1970, 1971, 1972
Winter editions, International Reading· Association,
!
I
I
Shaver, James P. and Dee Nuhn, 11The Effectiveness of
Tutoring Underachievers in Reading and Writing, 11
i
~Journal!£ Educational Research, November, 19711
(lJ) Sleisenger, Lenore, Guidebook !2£ !!! Volunteer Readin~
Teacher, Teachers Colle€fe Press, Teachers College, 1
Columbia University, 1965.
1
~$ring Your Own: An Invitation to All
I
Children· ·to Bring Their Personal Language to School'f
Claremont Reading Conference, JOth Yearbook, 1966, 1
(14) Van Allen,
I