CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
THE RELATIONSHIP
OF ORAL READING TO COMPREHENSION
,,
SKILLS IN PRIMARY LEVEL CHILDREN
A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in
Education
by
Lynn S. Adams
/
June, 1973
•,
.-
,-
--···---
i
i
@
Copyright by
Lynn S. Adams
1973
The thesis/ of. ;Lynn S, Adams is approved:
.California State University, Northridge
June, 1973
ii
To My Mother and Dad,
Ruth and Robert Stolz,
Who Introduced Me to
Life
and
True Knowledge
As Was Written
by
God
and
Is Learned by Man
And Who Have Encouraged Me
At Each Step of Growth
in
My Education
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My deep appreciation is hereby expressed to Dr.
Gwenneth Rae, who was my committee chairman and whose
scholarly editing and enthusiastic guidance have contributed to this work; to Dr. Sue Wasserman and Dr, Marilyn
Lombard for their time and consideration in the final
readings of the manuscript; to Dr, Walter Nelson and Dr.
Helen Fielstra for their suggestions in the initial stages
of this study; to Mrs. Ishikawa for her assistance in the
selection of appropriate titles from children's literature; to Carolyn Evans for her careful typing of the
ma~uscript;
to my husband, Lawson, and the other members
of my family for their patience and understanding; and
to "myn boys and girls whose cooperation made this study
a rewarding and pleasurable experience.
iv
.-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
•ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
iv
LIST OF TABLES
vii
viii
ABSTRACT
·chapter
I.
INTRODUCTION:
THE PROBLEM
. . . . . ...
1
Statement of Hypothesis
Definition of Terms
II.
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
..
.
7
....
.
16
......
30
. . . . . .
Introduction
External Influences on the
Development of Comprehension
Internal Influences on the
Development of Comprehension
Summary
I I I.
METHOD . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
Subjects
Procedure
Materials
Time Schedule
Data Analysis
IV.
RESULTS
. . . . . . .
Results of the t Tests
Range Scores
Large Gain Scores
v
-·-- ·-·-···-
----
.•.........•.•.....
-···· --- ---. ---·-······ ·-------·-·-···········-·
Page
_Chapter
v.
DISCUSSION . . .
43
Restatement of Hypothesis and
Summary of Test Findings
Findings from the Literature
Summary and Conclusions
Recommendations
i
I
... ...........
REFERENCES .
50
. . . . . . ... .
APPENDIXES
A.
B.
Instructions and Illustrations of
Game Materials . . . .
55
Sample Worksheets
64
vi
'··
_
.-
54
LIST OF TABLES
:Table
Page
Pairing of Subjects on the Basis of
Pretest Scores and Assignment of
Partners to Groups on the Basis
of Randomization . . . . . . . .
1.
2.
31
Relationships between Pretest Comprehension
Scores and Posttest Comprehension Scores
of the Experimental Group . . . . . . . . .
32
Relationships between Pretest Comprehension
Scores and Posttest Comprehension Scores
of the Con tro 1 Group . . . . .
. . . . .
34
Relationships between Pretest Comprehension
Scores of Experimental Group and Control
Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
Relationships between Posttest Comprehension
Scores of Experimental Group and Control
Group . . . . . . . . . . .
37
Range of Comprehension Scores Achieved by
the Experimental Group after Receiving
the Oral Reading Treatment . . . . .
38
Range of Comprehension Scores Achieved by
the Control Group on the Posttest . . .
39
Subjects Achieving a Positive Gain of One
Year or More on the Posttest . . . . . .
41
4.
6.
7.
8.
9.
21
Comparison of the Posttest Comprehension
Scores and Pretest Comprehension
Scores of the Subjects in Both the
Experimental Group and the Control
Group
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
5.
...
vii
...
--
...
_.,.,._
•.·
_,.._
ABSTRACT
THE RELATIONSHIP OF ORAL READING TO COMPREHENSION
SKILLS IN PRIMARY LEVEL CHILDREN
by
'.
Lynn
s.
Adams
Master of Arts in Education
June, 1973
The purpose of this investigation was to study the
relationship between oral reading by the teacher to thirdgrade children and their development of comprehension
skills, as measured by the contrast in pretest and
posttest comprehension scores on alternate forms of a
standardized instrument.
Procedures
Twenty-eight white, upper-middle class, Englishspeaking, third-grade children between 7 and 9 years of
The subjects were members of a
age participated.
self~
contained third-grade classroom at a suburban public
elementary school.
Subjects were matched on the basis of their scores
on the pretest.
One
m~mber
of each pair was randomly
assigned to the experimental group which participated in
viii
daily oral reading sessions by the teacher of 30 minutes
!duration for a period of 8 weeks.
The other member of
each pair was assigned to the control group which participated in special activity sessions during the same daily
30-minute period.
The t test was used to determine statistical
significance at the .OS level of confidence,
Conclusions
1.
Results of the t test indicate that classroom
oral reading to children for 30 minutes per
school day over a period of 8 weeks in time
did not result in the significant improvement
of comprehension scores,
2.
The similar range scores of the experimental
group and the control group indicate that the
great homogeneity of the population may have
eliminated the experimental results.
3.
Subjects who have received limited oral
reading in their preschool development may
respond more rapidly to an oral literature
program, as measured by their comprehension
scores.
4.
Oral reading appears to be an effective
motivational factor in encouraging independent
reading,
ix
5.
The positive effects of an oral literature
program appear to influence the subject 1 s
command of his written language, as well as
his oral vocabulary.
: Recommendations
1.
Longitudinal studies are recommended with
subjects who have and have not received
extensive oral reading as part of their
preschool background.
2.
A similar investigation to this study is
recommended with subjects selected from the
lower half range of a population, as suggested
by the range scores.
3.
Further studies in the effects of oral reading
on less homogeneous populations and for
varying durations of time would seem advisable.
4.
Another measure of student growth in comprehension skills and command of written language
is suggested.
X
-.·
.-
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION:
THE PROBLEM
The process of acquiring interpretative reading
skills begins in the child's preschool environment and
continues throughout his school years.
Durkin (1970,
p. 5) wrote that a child has various vocabularies which.
she called listening, speaking, and reading vocabularies.
A child learns to listen by listening to something.
He
learns to speak and write by speaking and writing.
Finally, he learns to read by reading about something.
One way to develop the child's listening, speaking, and
reading vocabularies is to have an adult read selections
of children's literature to the child who participates
initially, by listening to the selections and
late~by
reading them for himself.
The importance of oral reading to children of
preschool age and during the elementary years was
summarized by May (1971) as follows:
Children who have been exposed to a well
planned literature program at an early age are
more likely to develop an early interest in
reading. However, little will be gained by
pushing children into reading programs before
they are ready.
We already have too many stu~
dents in remedial and regular classes who hate
reading. We must do something about this in the
future, for if we believe that there is no
1
2
·--··----·-·····-· ·--···········-
.. ·····
------ ..... ·····---·-------- ·········- ....
·- ..
--·· . ··-··-
1
!
universal optimum time to begin reading, and if we
really believe in individual differences, we will
change our reading program to include alternatives
[ pp • 4 0 - 41 ] •
Teaching reading through the use of children's
literature is one interesting and effective way of
l
teaching and reinforcing reading skills.
~view
of DuBois (1971),
This was the
She further stated that, in
:addition to developing an appreciation of reading,
.children's literature can be used to teach all facets of
:reading,including the area of thinking processes.
These
I
:were enumerated by Spache (1969, p. 3) as recall, inter-
!
I
ipretation, judgment, and evaluation.
Baxter (1971) discussed the evolution of
. literature in elementary school history.
At one time, the
I
:sole use of literature was for recreational reading.
Later, as the views of educators changed, literature was
'used as a source of enrichment material in the curriculumareas of language arts, mathematics, science, social
'studies, and reading.
In recent years, more emphasis has
:been given to literature as an instructional instrument.
• Literature is used in vocabulary development and in the
improvement of comprehension skills.
Recent research
indicates that oral language development, including
grammatical interpretation, continues at least throughout
the elementary grades (Chomsky, 1970; Loban, 1963; Menyuk,
1963; Ruddell, 1966, 1970).
It seems reasonable that oral
reading is one facet of oral language development.
3
r~ ·~.--...._·------~· ~-----"- ~-- --~------,.~---~---·
I
i
---------- -- ··-· ----·-··---·--- ·- -~-
-----~
~~---
-~---------~--------~-- ---~----------~----
·--..
-----------~
..
-------~--
.
--·---~-- ~----~--1
Several designs, such as the Sounds of Language
I
'Series
I
1
I
!
(Martin, 1966) and the Reading Caravan Series (Wittyj
J
& Freeland,
1968), use literature selections as the basis
for their elementary school approach to reading, language,
,literature, and composition.
Another literature program
which is neither a reading program nor a substitute for
:such
a program is the Nebraska Curriculum (Nebraska
;
'
I
Curriculum Development Center, 1966).
The following
statement by the authors is appropriate to this study:
It is a basic premise of this curriculum that
probably the best basis for building a child's
competence in composition and his understanding
of the nature and possibilities of his native
language is an exposure to literature of superior
quality over a relatively long period of time
[p. xv].
Labov (1970, p. 11) also emphasized the importance
: of time in development of the maximum impact from a
language influence.
He stated that the longer the
'contact exists, the stronger and more lasting will be the
effect on all areas, including vocabulary development.
In surveying the literature, the studies were
found to be lacking in their presentation of quantitative
evaluation of the many statements affirming the value of
oral reading to children.
In addition, a need for data
was felt for the purpose of evaluation of the effects of
reading to elementary school children during a specified
time interval of limited duration,
lt was to meet the
need for such objective data that this study was
l
4
originated.
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
determine the effect of oral reading by the teacher on
achievement of comprehension skills of pTimary-grade
children, as measured by standardized comprehension scores.
Statement of
Hypothe~is
The null hypothesis of this study stated that no
·significant difference will be found between the reading
• comprehension scores of third-grade students receiving
, oral reading by the teacher and a matched group of
i
1
students who do not receive this treatment.
A method of parametric statistics
selected to analyze the data.
(! test) was
Significance was chosen at
the .OS level of confidence.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms
are defined.
External.--The term external refers to the area
of concern beyond the student's elementary-school
experiences.
Internal.--This term refers to the elementaryschool experiences of the student.
5
Interpretative reading skills.--Monroe (1951, pp.
218-219, 260) discussed the components which enable the
reader to communicate orally or graphically about the
material he has read or that has been read to him.
Interpretative reading skills include the ability to
interpret what is read by giving careful attention, using
verbal thinking, creating sensory imagery, making inferences based on reasoning, seeing relationships, organizing
ideas for the purpose of remembering, evaluating, and
integrating ideas with past experiences.
Oral language
develop_EJ.~nt.--Wilson
and Hall (1972,
p. 124) used this term to refer to the background which
affects comprehension and the facility with which children
associate meaning with printed words.
Both listening and
speaking vocabularies comprise this aspect of consideration.
Oral language vocabulary.--Gallant (1970, p, 33)
asserted the potentially strong influence of the teacher
in this area affecting the student's ability to gain
meaning from reading selections.
Oral language vocabulary
consists of the words, phrases, and other meaningconveying units which the student has heard in spoken
conversation and which he understands -v.rhen presented in
similar contexts, either verbal or written.
The student
may or may not use elements of this vocabulary in his own
'··
·"'"'
6
speech.
Oral reading.--For the purpose of this study, oral
reading refers to the reading to children by an adult.
It does not refer to the oral presentation by a student of
a selection he has read independently.
Primar_y level.--This term may be used synonymously
with primary grades.
Strang (1962, p. 146) defined this
period as the first three years of school (beyond kindergarten).
Reading comprehension skills.--Karlsen, Madden,
and Gardner (1966, p. 4) presented a schematic description
of the major components of reading.
They divided reading
comprehension into two major subdivisions--vocabulary and
word recognition skills (i.e., blending, syllabication,
sound discrimination, beginning and ending sounds, and
auditory discrimination.
The integration of the two
subdivisions in conjunction with the individual's
experiential background is assumed to enable the student
to understand the printed word as a form of communication.
'•
......
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
The major purpose of this study was to evaluate
the effect of oral reading by the teacher on the achievement of comprehension skills.
In connection with this
:problem, the null hypothesis stated that there would be
· no significant difference between the reading comprehension
scores of the students who received the oral reading and a
matched group of students who did not receive the experimental treatment.
This chapter is a review of the
existing literature to examine research data relating to
the external influences on the development of comprehension and the internal influences on the development of
comprehension.
External Influences on the Development
of Comprehension
Hurlock (1964) described the acquisition of
comprehension skills which enable the reader to gain
meaning from the printed page.
This is a process which
neither begins nor ends with the student's primary-school
years.
The young child first begins to understand his
7
8
environment and its meaning in terms of his personal needs
'and involvement through his senses.
As his development
progresses, he learns to differentiate certain aspects of
.his surroundings in terms of more detailed refinements.
Auditory growth is one aspect of the total development
process.
Through often gradual but continuous refinement,
the more mature child learns to apply his ability to
distinguish differences among similar sounds and sound
patterns to the process of verbal communication and
comprehension of his daily experiences with others.
Wilson and Hall (1972) noted that at all levels,
oral language background affects comprehension in reading
and the facility with which children associate meaning
with printed words.
If a child has heard a word prior to
encountering it in print, and if he uses the word in his
own speech; learning to read the words is simplified.
In her discussion of comprehension, Monroe (1951)
pointed out the importance of the child's background of
experience in language patterns and his basic attitudes
toward reading.
The more familiar a child is with language,
the more language patterns he has heard,understood and used, the more readily he will think in
language symbols. His ideas are quickly formulated into oral speech because he thinks the
words for objects and relationships as he understands and clarifies meaning. Verbal symbols
are, in fact, the tools with which he thinks .
. . . A child's desire to learn to read depends
upon what hi5 past experie~ces with bcoks have
9
been, whether he has learned to enjoy them or not,
and whether he is growing up normally and welcomes
growth [pp. 31-32].
Strang (1962, p. 109), too, emphasized the effect
of background upon the student's reading achievements.
In
her summary entitled "Prereading Achievements and How They
•Are Acquired," she descTibed various preschool experiences
.which parents or other adults may provide in preparing
, the child so that his first formal reading instruction
will be both enjoyable and educational.
As Strang
:suggested, seeing others enjoy reading, being read to,
I
'handling and looking at books, being listened to, participating in family discussions and playtime conversations
:with friends, and visiting new places are a few of the
;many positive influences which form the background of the
. child, who later establishes reading skills which enable
him to decipher and understand a variety of written
communication forms.
In confirming the need for such background
·experiences, Boutwell (1971) discussed a finding of the
1
Gallup International.
Four out of five young children who
: are read to regularly become high achievers when they
·start to school.
Furthermore, an interview of first-
graders and their mothers showed that reading to a child
. as early as age one gives the child a statistically
significant head start.
Of the !!bright high achievers"
in the poll, 79% had been read to regularly by their
10
parents.
Of the "slow low achievers," only 48% had been
read to regularly.
Similarly, Harris and Sipay (1971) stressed the
parents' role in the formation of basic attitudes toward
. reading.
Long before children begin to read, parents
who read to them regularly are paving the way for
success in reading. Once children have started
to read, many parents stop reading to them and
telling them stories [pp. 382-383].
Unfortunately, the parents who stop reading to their
, children are eliminating a great source of potential
enjoyment and are not providing an equally important
opportunity for the child to assume his turn to read
orally in the family situation.
This is the position
declared by Wilson and Hall (1972, p. 315).
Boutwell (1971) offered a caution to parents and
other adults who read frequently to children,
When you are reading stories to children, it
is helpful if you explain what you are doing,
showing them special words from time to time and
explaining the difference between telling and
reading a story. Many children believe that
adults look at the pictures in a book and make up
the story.
They do not understand the significance of the printed word [p. 18].
The importance of the home environment upon the
formation of reading attitudes and skills is affirmed by
Strang (1962, p. 104).
In her study of
children~s
attitudes, she presented the testimony of one child who
recollected that her avid reading was largely a result of
11
her grandmother's reading to her.
Internal Influences on the Development
of Comprehension
The acquisition of comprehension skills which
ibegan in the child's preschool environment continues
throughout his school years.
Although the parents are
·the child's first teachers, the classroom teachers during
his primary years exert a strong influence upon the
success or failure of the child's progress in acquiring
icomprchension skills.
Allen's finding (1971, p. 32) that
'
i
one out of every four students cannot read well points to
the need for concentrated effort and further research of
the various factors which influence reading achievement.
In view of the frequent need for teachers to
·correct deficiencies in the child's oral language develop· ment and other factors of his background, Russell (1949)
stated suggestions to aid the teacher in providing many
opportunities for children to expand their experience
l backgrounds.
Oral reading by the teacher is one of those
i
suggestions.
Suggestions for the frequent use of literature
through oral reading are given by Potter and Rae (1973)
who affirm the role of the elementary-school classroom
teacher in fostering positive attitudes toward reading.
They pointed to the frequent use of literature in the
12
'reading and language arts program, regardless of the age
'of the children, as a motivation force, as well as an
effective means of increasing the child's repertoire of
'vocabulary and language patterns.
These authors stated:
There are at least three principal avenues for
building literary appreciation in the classroom
and they should all be included in a well-rounded
program.
The first is the teacher 1 s frequent oral
reading of passages designed to stimulate interest.
This should be done regularly at odd moments.
Poems, short stories, chapters from a book, or
short excerpts are all appropriate. This can be
done with small groups of children or the entire
class, but should be for relatively short periods
of time. .
Even children who have read a story
frequently enjoy hearing it agajn in oral form .
. Children who have heard a story will frequently ask for a chance to reread it independently
so that they can reexperience it [pp. 156-157].
Similarly, Bond and Bond (1960) described oral
reading by the teacher as providing an opportunity for
increasing the child's knowledge of words and concepts.
They suggested:
The reading of stories and of other materials
by the teacher is a means of building understandings that every teacher has used to a greater or
lesser degree. This method is among those recommended for building backgrounds for children in
the primary grades and is of especial value in
the pre-reading period when the children cannot
yet read for themselves. Teachers, however, at
all levels have found that reading interesting
and pertinent materials to students is an effective means of building background [pp. 111, 113114].
Various authors presented further evidence in
support of the teacher's positive role in reading orally
to the entire classroom (Harris, 1963; Miller, 1962;
13
Monroe, 1951).
! ature
They cited the use of appropriate liter-
as the best means of allowing children to respond
to oral language, develop interpretative reading skills,
i
and thereby increase the entire range of reading compre-
'hension skills.
Another source which affirms the positive value
; of listening to literature is the Nebraska Curriculum
:Development Center (1966).
The authors suggested:
Since the child ordinarily enters school with
a full intuitive grasp of the sound, morphology,
and syntactic repertory of the language, he may
appropriately be exposed to a language and literature program which will conform to and strengthen
this grasp.
Until the child has a good control of
basic reading skills, the program must perforce be
an oral one; even after the student controls the
basic reading skills, however, a large part of the
program may properly continue to be oral since
oral exposure to literature may quicken his ear
to the "tunes" of language, sharpen his sense of
syntax, and continue to widen his oral vocabulary
[p. xxiii] .
The issue of offsetting inadequate oral language
through exposure to literature has also been explored by
Cohen (1967).
In her experimental design involving
socially disadvantaged children, the experimental
variable, story-reading, was introduced and maintained
only by the experimental teachers for a period of 8 months~
Their findings confirmed the positive relationship between
oral language and reading.
The experimental group showed an increase
over the control group in:
(a) vocabulary,
significant at .005; (b) word knowledge,
14
significant at .005; (c) reading comprehension,
significant at .01 [p. 4162A].
Harris and Sipay (1971), Larrick (1971), and
.Wilson and Hall (1972) presented considerations for the
selection of appropriate literature to be read to a class
'of children.
Important factors include age level, sex,
·and the teacher's preferences.
During the primary grades,
there are few differences between the reading interests
of boys and girls; both preferring short fanciful tales,
adventure stories, and animal stories.
'sports stories.
Boys also enjoy
Girls will often like books intended for
!
boys, but boys will rarely touch a book that is identified
·or meant for girls.
For the teacher who has selected literature
sources in accordance with the interests and abilities of
the age levels of her pupils and who has participated in
a planned program of oral reading of this literature for
some duration of time, many formal tests and inventories
are available for the purpose of assessing the comprehen, sion skills of her students.
Several of these evaluation
' materials were listed and discussed by Harris and Sipay
j
(1971).
Madden,
The Stanford
& Gardner,
~iagnostic
Re9-_ding Test (Karlsen,
1966) is one of these tests and was
. utilized in this study.
15
r .
~-··
Summary
The process of acquiring comprehension skills
'begins during the preschool years and continues throughout
the child's elementary-school years.
At all levels, oral
; language background affects comprehension in reading.
'The child's basic attitudes toward books and reading are
• other factors in his development of comprehension skills.
Reading appropriate literature orally to children is an
effective pre-reading experience, a facet of the reading
instruction program, and an effective remedial activity.
Parents and other adults in the external environment can
assist in the child 1 s reading development by reading to
him regularly.
Teachers in the internal environment can
improve the comprehension skills of their students by
reading orally to them on a regular basis,
Sources for
the selection of books and comprehension tests were
discussed.
.-
CHAPTER III
METHOD
Subjects
The subjects for this study were drawn from the
population of third-grade students enrolled at a public
elementary school in the San Fernando Valley of Los
Angeles County, California (an area with a population of
approximately 1 million inhabitants).
From the four
classrooms of third-graders at Beckford Avenue Elementary
School, located in the Porter Ranch housing tract of
Northridge, California; the researcher selected her own
classroom of students as subjects for this study.
This
decision was made in order to assure maximum control of
internal influences on the development of comprehension,
The selection of subjects was confined to one classroom of
students,as the reading programs established by the four
third-grade teachers involved varied greatly in types of
materials used and methods of presentation.
Since no specific criteria was used to assign
students to classrooms at this school, student assignments
were assumed to be random.
The students participating in
the study are representative of the school's suburban
16
17
!population, which consists predominantly of children from
:white, uppeT-middle class, English-speaking parentage.
None of the students had been retained during their
kindergarten, first-, or second-grade experiences.
Data
, from the cumulative records of these children showed no
i
. evidence of abnormalities in intelligence, chronological
age, or physical development.
The students were between
7 and 9 years of age.
Of the 30 children who comprised the original
sample, 28 remained in the group during the entire 8-week
period.
Two children were dropped from the study; 1
transferred to a parochial elementary school, and the
other was not in attendance during the final 2 weeks of
the study, due to an out-of-state family vacation trip.
Procedure
Each of the subjects (Ss) took part in two testing
sessions conducted in the classroom at Beckford Avenue
Elementary School.
Design of the study
The research method employed for this study was
experimental design.
The specific approach was referred
to by Hillway (1969, p. 41) as the "Pre-test-post-test
'..with control group" design.
Tuckman (1972, pp. 106-109)
described this method in more detail and labeled it
18
:
1
11
Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design."
The design was
chosen because it provided control to such threats of
validity and sources of bias as selection and mortality,
,as well as providing data for assessing the degree of
.change in comprehension scores resulting from the oral
reading received by the experimental group, and the lack
of oral reading received by the control group.
It was
assumed that the testing effect (i.e., the gain on the
posttest due to experience on the pretest) would not be
:significant, since an alternate form of the pretest was
i
: selected for the posttest and was administered after a
. time lapse of 8 weeks .
. Testing sessions
The first testing session consisted of the
administration of the reading comprehension portion of
the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test, Level I, Form W
(Karlsen, Madden,
& Gardner,
1966).
All directions
presented in the authors' manual were followed by the
researcher_i_n administering the test.
The directions were
read exactly as presented and strict adherence to the 30minute time limitation was observed.
The test was
administered prior to the recess break.
All of the Ss
participated during the initial testing session.
The
researcher was present and circulated throughout the
session, replacing broken pencils and observing that all
19
,------------------------- ----------
------ ------ - ------ -- ---- ---- - --- -- -------------------------------------------- ----. --------- -----·- ------ --'
Iss completed the test independently.
~-
The second testing session occurred 8 weeks after
ithe initial session.
Form X, an alternate form of the
Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test, Level I, was administered
in accordance with the directions presented in the manual.
The physical conditions for both sessions were duplicated
as nearly as possible.
study participated.
All of the 28 Ss remaining in the
No interruptions by other students or
school personnel entering the classroom occurred during
either testing period.
Grouping~-matched
pairs
Two groups of Ss were established in accordance
with the research design chosen for the study.
Ss were
paired on the basis of their scores on the pretest.
One
member of a given pair was then randomly assigned to the
experimental group, which received the independent variable
treatment (i.e., the oral reading to them by the teacher);
and one S was assigned to the control group, which did not
receive the experimental treatment.
This enabled later
analysis of the dependent variable (i.e., the result in
achievement scores for comprehension skills, as measured b/
comparison of the pretest and posttest scores of the two
groups).
Assignment of each partner of a matched pair to a
particular group was made by consulting a table of random
digits (Diamond, 1959) (see Table 1 for pairing of Ss and
20
their assignments to the experimental group or the control
!group).
Regular reading instruction
During the duration of the 8-week experimental
jdesign, each matched pair of Ss received identical
'instruction during the regular reading period of each day.
A combined basal-individualized approach was employed and
a strong emphasis was given to phonetic instruction rather
. than to comprehension.
No extra practice involving
'
! reinforcement of comprehension skills was assigned.
However, when a follow-up worksheet contained comprehen' sion questions about a story the students had read
; independently or directed the children to summarize a
·portion of the story read silently, these activities were
assigned and corrected with the students.
In all daily
instruction periods, growth in expanding phonetic word
attack skills was encouraged, and additional phonics
follow-up worksheets, as well as phonics games, were
provided for the students' use.
ExpeTimental group
In addition to the two separate testing sessions
and the regular reading instruction program, each of the
Ss randomly assigned to the experimental group participated in the daily oral reading sessions.
Each of the
sessions consisted of a 20-minute period during which the
Table 1
PAIRING OF SUBJECTSa ON THE BASIS OF PRETEST SCORESb AND ASSIGNMENT OF PARTNERS
TO GROUPS ON THE BASIS OF RANDOMIZATION
Subject
(§)
Pretest
score
of S
Subject's
partner
1
1.5
2.1
2.4
2.8
2. 8
2.9
2. 9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.7
3.7
4.4
3.0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30c
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29c
(~)
Pretest
score
of
partner
Partner (S)
assigned to
experimental
group
1.5
2.1
2.6
2. 7
2. 8
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3,4
3.7
3.7
4.4
3.0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
Partner (S)
assigned to
control
group
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
aNumerals were assigned to matched partners after randomization had occurred,
bScores are grade equivalents.
cThese subjects were dropped from the study.
N
.......
22
.researcher read orally to the Ss from a predetermined list
'of books classified as children's literature, and an
additional 10-minute period during which words, phrases,
.and any difficult concepts from the portion read orally
were briefly explained or elaborated.
Three or four oral
:questions about the content of the story were interspersed
during the oral reading to reinforce good listening habits
and focus attention.
The initial two oral reading sessions were
:conducted outside the researcher's classroom.
The first
iI
1
and second days of the experiment, the control group met
;just outside the door of the classroom where chairs had
'
·been placed on the concrete patio in front of the large
• exterior picture windows of the classroom.
'
The venetian
blinds had been raised so that the investigator could
observe the control group working simultaneously inside
the classroom.
The Ss' chairs were placed in a semicircle
around the researcher with their backs to the window in
order to reduce potential distractions.
This physical
environment was satisfactory but did not, in the
researcher's opinion, provide for maximum interest and
enjoyment by the Ss.
Although the quietest 30 minutes of
the day had been determined earlier (the 30-minute period
following the upper-grade recess period and prior to the
lower-grade lunch period), it was impossible to locate a
time when no classroom used the playground for physical
23
education instruction.
During the remaining oral reading sessions, Ss
met indoors and sat in a semicircle on the carpet in front
of the researcher.
On Friday afternoons, the experimental
group and researcher were alone in the classroom during
1
the 30-minute session.
This was made possible by the
scheduling of the weekly reading laboratory period to
coincide with the oral reading session.
Oral reading sessions were conducted each Monday
through Thursday, with both the experimental group and
control group present within the researcher's large,
carpeted classroom.
At times when the three major
interest centers were set up in the back portion of the
classroom, the experimental group met in the front portion
of the room.
At other times, the arrangement was
reversed.
Oral reading sessions were conducted at various
times during the school week.
The decision to hold the
session during the morning or afternoon of any given day,
and the specific time period within a day, was determined
by the special activities of the day and the researcher's
agreement with the view presented by Potter and Rae
(1973) that classroom reading to children should be
practiced both regularly and at odd moments.
In order to provide nonidentifying labels for the
experimental group and the control group, Ss were asked
i
.-
24
.to choose a name for their appropriate "committee."
The
!experimental group chose the Peanuts character Snoopy as
!
their mascot.
The researcher prepared a large poster
:containing a picture of Snoopy and the names of the Ss on
his committee.
'Control group
The Ss randomly assigned to the control group
:participated in the two separate testing sessions, the
regular reading instruction program, and a special activity
i session which lasted 30 minutes daily.
Ss in this group
,were separated by the researcher into three smaller
"committees" on the basis of their ability to work
harmoniously with the other members of their subgroup.
·Prior to the transfer of one S to a parochial school, each
'"committee" had five members.
The "committees" chose the
·Peanuts characters Linus, Charlie Brown, and Schroeder as
their mascots and were known as "Linus' Committee,"
"Charlie Brown's Committee," and "Schroeder's Committee."
!
The researcher prepared a poster for each committee.
Each
poster displayed a picture of the Peanuts mascot and the
names of the Ss who were members of the committee.
All members of the control group met inside the
classroom 4 days a week and met in the reading laboratory
(a large room adjacent to their classroom and in the
center of the 8 adjoining classrooms comprising one of
25
the school's two such rectangular structures) on the fifth
day of each school week.
On Fridays, the reading
laboratory teacher assigned to the school supervised the
control group committees as they played phonics games.
1
'
1
At other times during the school week and at times other
than the oral reading sessions, these same games were used
by Ss in the experimental group for an equal duration of
time.
During control group sessions conducted Mondays
through Thursdays, Ss belonging to the control group met
at the three major interest center areas of the classroom.
As was stated earlier, these centers were rotated
periodically from the front to the back of the classroom,
depending upon the opposite site chosen by the researcher
at which to conduct the oral reading sessions with the
experimental group.
Each of the three major interest centers
consisted of two tables moved together and five chairs
positioned around the tables.
Materials placed for use
at the three centers were rotated daily and were replaced
by new materials at the end of a 3-day cycle.
These
centers were not used during other times of the school
day.
Free-time games and other activities requiring
additional surface space were relegated to the many
remaining unused carpeted sections of the classroom
floor.
.26
Materials
The materials chosen by the researcher for use
with the experimental group consisted of books of
children's literature which were selected in accordance
with the interest and content level criteria established
by Larrick (1971), the researcher's experience, and
.i consultation with the children 1 s librarian of the Granada
-Hills Branch Library of the Los Angeles Public Library.
The specific titles were Charlotte's Web (E.B, White,
:New York:
I
i
Harper and Brothers, 1952), How Baseball Began
in Brooklyn (LeGrand, Nashville, Tenn.:
Abingdon Press,
1958), Misty of Chincoteague (Marguerite Henry, Chicago:
Rand McNally and Co., 1947), The Cricket in Time Square
(George Seldin, New York:
Farrar and Straus, 1960), and
'The Trumpet of the Swan (E. B. White, New York:
Harper,
1970).
The materials used by the control group were
constructed and prepared by the researcher and were
coordinated to reinforce classroom curriculum in the areas
of spelling and math.
Cassette tapes were prepared to provide extra
practice in spelling the current spelling words and to
r~inforce
the basic multiplication facts .§_s were studying
at other times during the school day.
materials presented on the tapes were
Some of the
self~corrected
by
27
·the Ss.
i
!
The other materials were checked by the
researcher.
Self-correcting and non-self-correcting tapes
were rotated to encourage maximum interest and attention
:of the Ss.
Each of the tapes was carefully and deliber-
: ately constructed in a non-storytelling manner which could
in no way be misconstrued as oral reading.
The control group also used researcherconstructed games as described in Appendix A,
Worksheet materials were also used by Ss assigned
'
I to the control group.
i
1
These contained spelling and math
drill of a different format but similar content to that
I being
studied concurrently during spelling and math
lessons, but involved neither the use of context clues to
fill in a missing word nor story problems,
Examples are
contained in Appendix B.
Most of the activities chosen for use by the
~s
of the control group required the Ss to wear headsets or
to whisper their responses orally.
i
This was done to
reduce the possibility of Ss in the control group listening to the oral reading in the experimental group.
I
When
written worksheets were provided, the materials were of
sufficient length to require strict attention to the task
at hand.
28
r-·,.·----- ·"··-------------- .... -
·····---~---·-
..... -·-··-- ......
f
Time Schedule
The study took place during the 8-week period
beginning October 23, 1972, and ending December 15, 1972.
Three school holidays occurred during this period
(Veteran's Day, October 23; and Thanksgiving, November 23
and 24).
In order to provide the activities which would
have occurred on these three dates, committee sessions
were doubled in length on October 24, November 22, and
:November 27.
The pretest was administered just prior to
the beginning of the study, on October 20.
The posttest
was administered on December 15 after committees had
participated in their oral reading or special activity
II
sessions.
I
Data Analysis
I
The hypothesis was tested by a statistical
analysis of the scores achieved by the Ss on the pretest
and posttest.
The t test for matched pairs of Ss
(Diamond, 1959) was selected in accordance with the
criteria established by Tuckman (1972) for the number and
type of variables present in this study.
The t test was
conducted four separate times in order to analyze various
considerations of grouping and the effect produced by the
independent variable.
The independent variable was the
oral reading received by the experimental group
a~d
was
29
,classified as nominal.
The dependent variable was the
resultant effect of the oral reading upon comprehension
scores, and was classified as interval.
Significance was
established at the .OS level (p <.OS) of confidence,
In addition, range scores were calculated at the
.quartile and half levels to enable comparison of the
potential differences of dispersion between the experimental group and the control group, as affected by the
independent variable treatment.
This was done to deter-
;mine whether Ss scoring at a similar level on the posttest
i
I
-
;experienced a degree of change (as measured by a comparison
'·of individual posttest and pretest scores) unlike that
'recorded by other groups of similar Ss scoring at a
different level on the posttest.
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Table 2 presents a composite profile of the
pretest and posttest comprehension scores of all Ss
participating throughout the study.
Results of the t Tests
'
! t-Test 1
The results of the first
.Table 3.
The purpose
!
test are presented in
6£ this analysis was to determine
the amount of change i~ the reading comprehension scores
of the experimental group after treatment by the inde, pendent variable had occurred.
The resulting t value of
5.16 was greater than the table value of 2.16 (df
=
13),
thus substantiating the null hypothesis that no significant
difference exists between the reading comprehension scores
~s
of those
receiving the oral reading and the scores of
the Ss not receiving the experimental treatment.
' t-Test Z
The purpose of conducting the
!
test using the
pretest and posttest comprehension scores of the control
group was to determine the amount of change in
30
(.,.!
j-1
Table 3
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRETEST COMPREHENSION SCORES AND POSTTEST COMPREHENSION
SCORES OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
Subject
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
I
Sums
D
Post test
score
Pretest
score
D
n2
1. 21
1. 21
.16
2,56
1. 44
,64
2,25
.49
.09
,49
.09
.09
.09
.49
2.6
3.2
2. 0
4.4
4.0
3.7
4.4
3.7
3.7
4.1
3.7
4.0
4.0
5.1
1.5
2.1
2.4
2.8
2. 8
2. 9
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.7
3.7
4.4
1.1
1.1
- .4
1.6
1.2
.8
1.5
.7
.3
.7
.3
.3
.3
.7
52.6
42.4
10.2
= . 73, SITz = . 0 2_, df = 13,
11.3
!__= 5. 17
w
N
33
comprehension skills which occurred during the 8-week
; period. ·As in the results of the first test, the value
of t obtained from calculation (t
. the listed table value
(!
=
3.55) was greater than
= 2.16, df = 13).
Therefore,
, the null hypothesis that no significant difference exists
· between the scores of the experimental group and the
scores of the control group, due to the oral reading
factor, is again substantiated.
Table 4 lists the
results.
t-Test 3
A comparison of the pretest scores of the
experimental group and the control group is shown in
Table 5.
The t values (table = 2.16, calculated = r,82)
further substantiate the assumption of the null hypothesis
that the oral reading did not significantly increase the
comprehension scores of the Ss in the experimental group.
t-Test 4
Results of the analysis of difference between the
posttest scores of the two groups, experimental and
control, may be seen in the data of Table 6.
A dissimilar
relationship to that of Tests 1 and 2 exists in the lower
calculated value of t
value
(! = 2.16).
(t
=
0) when compared to the table
However, the t value obtained from
calculation lacks significance, nonetheless.
Further
evidence was, thus, found in substantiating the null
Table 4
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRETEST COMPREHENSION SCORES AND POSTTEST
COMPREHENSION SCORES OF THE CONTROL GROUP
Subject
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
Sums
D
=
.71, Sn
2
Post test
score
Pretest
score
D
3.0
2. 3
3.2
2.9
5.1
3.7
3. 7
3.4
4.4
3.7
5.1
3,7
4.4
4.0
1.5
2.1
2.6
2. 7
2. 8
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.7
3.7
4.4
1.5
.2
.6
.2
2.3
.7
.8
.4
1.0
.3
1.7
0
.7
- .4
52.6
42.6
10.0
= .04, df = 13, ! = 3.55
n2
2.25
.04
.36
.04
5.29
.49
.64
.16
1.0
.09
2.89
0
,49
,16
-13.9
···-------·-·--
tN
.,...,
Table 5
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRETEST COMPREHENSION SCORES OF
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP AND CONTROL GROUP
Subjects
(matched pairs)
3,
2
4
5'
7,
6
8
1.,
9' 10
11' 12
13' 14
15'
17'
19'
21'
16
18
20
22
23' 24
2 5' 26
2 7' 28
Sums
D
Pretest score
Experimental
group
Control
group
1.5
2.1
2.4
1.5
2.1
2.6
2. 8
2. 7
2. 8
2.8
2.9
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.7
3.7
4.4
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.7
3.7
4.4
42.4
42.6
= -.01, SD 2 = .00, df = 13,
t
D
D2
0
0
-.2
.1
0
- .1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.04
.01
0
.01
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-. 2
• 06
0
= -.82
~
V1
.36
hypothesis.
Range Scores_
Table 7 presents the findings when the range of
posttest comprehension scores is calculated at the
! quartile
and half levels for the group of ~s receiving
the experimental treatment.
The range of scores including
·the total range is as follows:
Upper quartile range
= 1.0 years
Upper half range
= 1.1 years
Lower half range
= 1.7 years
Bottom quartile range= 1.7 years
Total range
=
3.1 years
Range scores for the control group are presented
in Table 8 and are summarized as follows:
Upper quartile range
=
Upper half range
= 1.4 years
Lower half range
=
Bottom quartile range =
Total range
=
• 7 years
1.4 years
•9
years
2.8 years
A comparison of the range scores for the experimental and control groups as a whole or at the quartile
and half levels yields no statistical significance.
However, the range may be observed to be greatest within
-
--~---··
.. -·
---·--·· ..
·--------~---··
..
·· ·-···-
··--~--·~
Table 6
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN POSTTEST COMPREHENSION SCORES OF
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP AND CONTROL GROUP
Posttest score
Subjects
(matched pairs)
1'
3'
5,
7'
9'
11'
13'
15'
17'
19'
21'
23'
2 5'
2 7'
Sums
·D
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
Experimental
group
Control
group
2.6
3.2
2. 0
4.4
4.0
3.7
4.4
3.7
3.7
4.1
3.7
4.0
4.0
5.1
3.0
2.3
3.2
2.9
5.1
3.7
3.7
3.4
4.4
3.7
5.1
3.7
4.4
4.0
52.6
52.6
D
- .4
.9
-1.2
1.5
-1.1
0
.7
.3
- .7
.4
-1.4
.3
- .4
1.1
0
D2
.16
.81
1. 44
2.25
1.21
0
.49
. 09
.49
.16
1.96
.09
.16
1.21
10.52
= O, SD 2 = .06, df = 13, t = 0
v.l
-....!
38
Table 7
RANGE OF COMPREHENSION SCORES ACHIEVED BY THE
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP AFTER RECEIVING THE 0~~1
READING TREATMENT
Subject
Post test
score
27
5.1
7
4.4
13
4.4
19
4.1
23
4.0
9
4.0
25
4.0
Range (r)
Upper
quartile
(r = 1. 0
-years)
Upper half
(r = 1.1
-years)
'·
_.;....
39
Table 8
RANGE OF COMPREHENSION SCORES ACHIEVED BY THE
CONTROL GROUP ON THE POSTTEST
Subject
Post test
score
22
5.1
10
5.1
18
4.4
26
4.4
Range (r)
Upper
quartile
(r = . 7
years)
Upper half
(r = 1. 4
-years)
28
4.0
24
3.7
14
3.7
12
3.7
20
3.7
16
3.4
6
3.2
2
3.0
8
2.9
4
2.3
Lower half
(r = 1. 4
-years)
Bottom
quartile
(r = . 9
years)
40
. the lower half of each group.
The great homogeneity of
ithe sample population appears to have cancelled out the
experimental results.
Large Gain Scores
Two pairs of matched Ss and 5 other Ss achieved
positive gain scores of one year or more on the posttest .
. Table 9 presents the Ss, their posttest scores, and the
respective gains.
of these 9
~s
Individual conferences with the mothers
revealed a general lack of time spent with
their children during the preschool years.
Very little
reading had been done to them by their mothers.
This may
, partially explain the wide gains by those 5 Ss who were
members of the experimental group.
Of course, a detailed
, analysis of the type and regularity of oral reading to
them by their kindergarten, first-, and second-grade
teachers would be necessary before further correlation
could be assigned.
In addition, extensive information
about the preschool and beginning school environments of
all other Ss would be necessary to establish positive
correlation.
One other possible correlation between the gain
in comprehension scores and the Ss themselves is their
background of minor difficulty in visual perception and/or
speech.
Three of the 5 Ss reverse letters of the alphabet
occasionally during manuscript writing.
One of the Ss
41
Table 9
SUBJECTS* ACHIEVING A POSITIVE GAIN OF ONE YEAR
OR MORE ON THE POSTTEST
Subject
Posttest score
Gain (in years)
la
2.6
1.1
2a
3.0
1.5
gb
4.0
1.2
lOb
5.1
2.3
3
3.2
1.1
7
4.4
1.6
13
4.4
1.5
18
4.4
1.0
22
5.1
1, 7
*Odd-numbered
subjects belonged to the experimental group. Even-numbered subjects belonged to the
control group.
aSubjects formed a matched pair.
bSubjects formed another matched pair.
reverses pairs of words, such as "saw" and "was, 11 while
reading orally and reverses other words on written
spelling assignments.
Two of the Ss have received school
speech instruction and are presently attending special
instruction for one-half hour period during the school
week.
However, none of these problems is so severe as to
label the Ss deficient beyond the normal range of
42
abilities.
One of the Ss has experienced neither diffi-
;culty.
Of the remaining 4 Ss who achieved individual gain
scores of one year or more and who were members of the
:control
group, 1 child is known to have experienced visual
!
perception difficulty during the previous school year, but
had received extra help during the past summer months .
. Perhaps the correction of his minor deficiencies, as in
·the case of the other Ss discussed, has resulted in
; greater maturity which influences learning in all educal
tional areas.
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
While reseaTch data from the existing literature
indicate the need for quantitative evaluation studies on
the value of oral reading to children in a primary
classroom of elementary-school children for specific and
;varying intervals of time, a number of researchers point
to the time factor as a critical variable.
Restatement of Hypothesis and Summary
of Test Findings
The null hypothesis of this study suggesting that
there would be no significant difference between the
reading comprehension scores of third-grade students
receiving oral reading by the teacher and the matched
group of students who did not receive this treatment was
;affirmed.
Results of the t test indicated the lack of
:significant improvement of comprehension scores as a
,result of the oral reading by the teacher for a period of
8 weeks.
Similar range scores indicated the influence
:exerted by the homogeneity of the population,
The back-
ground of the subjects appears to influence their response
to an oral literature program.
43
44
r·~--------·--·----------··--.
I
----------------- -------- ------·------ -- ---- -- . - -----·· ------ ....
-------···------------------------·-------~-------~--------·,
Findings from the Literature
Statements by the Nebraska Curriculum Development
i
!center (1966) and Labov (1970) emphasized the importance
Jof exposure to literature for a relatively long period of
I
!time in order to achieve maximum impact.
Although the
!
I expression "a relatively long period of time' 1 was not
defined by the authors, the research data 6athered from
this study indicate
1
that two school months of oral
reading in the classroom environment is probably not
sufficient to provide maximum influence,
Potter and Rae (1973) made two suggestions for
the classroom teacher with which findings in this study
present concurrence.
The first of these is their sugges-
tion that oral reading should be done at odd moments, with
small groups of children or the entire class, and for
short periods of time.
The experimental group subjects in
this study commented verbally on several different
occasions that they enjoyed guessing when the "fun Snoopy
Committee" was going to meet.
Their attention to the
story being read at any given point in time and the
1resistance to distraction during oral reading sessions
suggest that the 30-minute daily interval was appropriate
;
i in
length.
Seating close to the researcher by all members
i of the experimental group during the oral reading also
i appeared to contribute to the lack of gross physical
I
!
45
'movement.
The second consideration of Potter and Rae which
was affirmed by the behavior of the subjects in the
experimental group was the authors' statement regarding
.the positive motivation provided by reading to students.
:As was stated by these authors, subjects in the experimental group frequently asked for a chance to borrow a
book that had previously been read to the committee.
In
addition, members of the committee asked for help in
,locating a title that had been read orally during biweekly
visits to the mobile branch library.
When it was possible
:to locate copies of the appropriate books, the subjects
'checked them out eagerly and were observed reading them
during free time.
Another aspect of oral reading considered by
'several authors of existing literature was the selection
of appropriate material to be read to specific groups of
children.
The advice given by Harris and Sipay (1971) and
:wilson and Hall (1972) as to the subject matter and
!
1
considerations of the sex of the listener was found to be
·appropriate for this study.
The third-grade boys and
girls of the experimental group thoroughly enjoyed the
books selected by the researcher on the basis of length
and the appropriate subject contents--adventures, animals,
and sports.
46
Although the statistical data derived from this
study did not provide quantitative support for the use of
oral reading as one important means of improving compre'
hension skills, it should not be concluded that the value
;does not exist.
The authors comprising the Nebraska
!Curriculum Development Center (1966) cited the positive
effects of oral exposure to literature--quickening of the
ear to the "tunes" of language, a sharpening of the
student's sense of syntax, and a widening of his oral
:vocabulary.
All three of these effects were observed by
.the researcher in the oral and written expression of the
i
,students who participated in the experimental group--not
;only during meetings of the committee, but at other times
in the school day as well.
It is possible that analysis
of the student's written material would be a more
appropriate measure of change than the standardized
instrument used in this study.
Summary and Conclusions
. Summary
Purpose.--The purpose of this investigation was to
study the relationship between oral reading by the teacher
to third-grade children and their development of comprehension skills, as measured by the contrast in pretest
and posttest comprehension scores on alternate forms of a
standardized instrument.
47
Procedures.--Twenty-eight white, upper-middle
class,
English-spea~ing
third-grade children between 7 and
9 years of age participated.
The subjects were all
members of one self-contained third-grade classroom at a
.suburban public elementary school located in the San
Fernando Valley of Los Angeles County, California,
Subjects were matched in pairs on the basis of
their scores on the pretest.
One member of each pair was
randomly assigned to the experimental group which partici!pated in daily oral reading sessions of 30 minutes
I
!
1
duration for a period of 8 weeks.
The other member of
· each pair was assigned to the control group which participated in special activity sessions during the same
·daily 30-minute period.
The t test was used to determine statistical
significance at the .OS level of confidence.
Conclusions
1.
Results of the t
test indicate that classroom
oral reading to children for 30 minutes per
school day over a relatively short period of
8 weeks 1n time did not result in the achievement of comprehension scores significantly
greater than the scores of those children who
did not receive the experimental treatment.
2.
The similaT range sco·tes of the experimental
group and the control group indicate that the
48
great homogeneity of the population may have
eliminated the experimental results.
3.
Subjects who have not received a great amount
of oral reading in their preschool development
may respond more rapidly to an oral literature
program, as measured by their large gains in
comprehension scores.
4.
Oral reading appears to be an effective
motiv&tional factor in encouraging independent
reading,
5.
The positive effects of an oral literature
program appear to influence the subject's
command of his written language, as well as
his oral vocabulary,
Recommendations
1.
Longitudinal studies are recommended with
subjects who have and have not received
extensive oral reading as part of their
preschool background.
2.
A similar investigation to this study is
recommended with subjects selected from the
lower half range of a population, as suggested
by the range scores.
3.
Further studies in the effects of oral reading
on less homogeneous populations and for
-.-
.;,..
49
varying durations of time would seem advisable.
4.
Another measure of student growth in comprehension skills and command of written language
might be more appropriate and show additional
values of this approach.
'·
.-
REFERENCES
so
REFERENCES
•Allen, J. E., Jr.
Reading--the fundamental "Rl!: What
parents can do to upgrade school programs .
.Parents Magazine, April 1971, p. 32.
\,
Baxter, C. Using literature for diagnosis and
motivation.
In D. C. Waterman (Comp.), Teaching
reading through children's literature.
Proceedings of the First Annual Reading
Conference, Indiana State University, Terre
Haute, June 21-22, 1971.
'Bond, G. 1., & Bond, E. W. Teaching the child to read.
(3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan, 1960.
'
, Boutwell, W. D.
Putting parents into the reading picture,
PTA Magazine, October 1971, p. 18 .
...;-,
~
Chomsky, C. Stages in language development and reading
exposure. Harvard Educational Review, 1972, ~~'
1-33.
Cohen, D.
Effect of a special program in literature on
the vocabulary and reading achievement in special
service schools. Dissertation Abstracts, 1967,
~(11), 4162A.
Diamond, S.
Information and error.
Books, 1959.
New York:
Basic
DuBois, J. J.
Teaching reading through the use of films
and children's literature.
In D. C. Waterman
(Comp.), Tec_tching reading throug_!l children's
literature. Proceedings of the First Annual
Reading Conference, Indiana State University,
Terre Haute, June 21-22, 1971.
Durkin, D. Teaching them to read.
Bacon, 1970.
Boston:
Gallant, R.
Handbook in corrective reading:
Ohio:
Charles E. M~rrill, 1970.
51
Allyn and
Basic tasks,
... ,.,
::u.
:Harris, A. (Ed.) Readings on reading instruction.
York: David McKay Co., 1963.
New
iHarris, A., & Sipay, E. R. Effective teaching of reading.
(2d ed.) New York: David McKay Co., 1971.
Hillway, T. Handbook of educational research.
Houghton Mifflin Co., 1969.
;Hurlock, E. B. Child development.
McGraw-Hill, 1964.
Boston:
(4th ed.)
New York:
Karlsen, B., Madden, R., & Gardner, E. F. Stanford
Diagnostic Reading Test, Level I, F~rms Wand X.
New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1966.
Karlsen, B., Madden, R., & Gardner, E. F. Stanford
Diagnostic Reading Test--manual for-a:crministering
and interpreting. New York: Harcourt, Brace and
Wo r TCf, 19 6 6 .
Labov, W. Study of nonstandard English. Champaign, Ill.:
National Council of Teachers of English, 1970.
Laban, W. D. !he language of elementary school children.
Champaign, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of
English, 1965.
Martin, B., Jr. Sounds of the storytelle£.
Holt, Rin~hart, & Winston, 1966,
New York:
May, C. R. New insights concerning preschool reading and
literature. In D. C. Waterman (Comp.), Teaching
reading through children's literature.
Proceedings of the First Annual Reading Conference,
Indiana State University, Terre Haute, June 21-22,
1971.
·Menyuk, P. Syntactic structures in the language of
children. Child Devel~, 1963, 34, 407-422.
;Miller, E. F. Stimulus reading with reading--just for fun.
Grade Teacher, 1969, ~(8), 70, 134-135.
Monroe, M. Growing into reading.
Foresman and Co., 1951.
New York:
Scott,
Nebraska Curriculum Development Center. A curriculum for
p~g1 ish: __ Lang:'}ag_~-'~IPl_?rations _f"OY}~:_~l~men tary
1 - •
Un.i ~ ' .~ r .::>..L
" t J 0 ]" )\ Te b r ~ ,-.K'- a p r c.,..::;;:,'
-~ ........
g.]'. ct.\.1\..,-J • I_ _, ]. n \..-V.LlJ....
1966.
r
("J
r
_1
r- ,,
...LVr C
.!
H
.J...
c.l.::J
1'4
'•'
--
..._
-
53
Potter, T. C., & Rae, G.
Informal reading diagnosis: A
practical guide for the classroom teache!.
Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
·Ruddell, R. B. Oral language and the development of other
language skills. Elementary English, 1966, 43,
489-498 .
. Ruddell, R. B. Language acquisition and the reading
process.
In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.),
Theoretical models and the process of reading.
Newark, Del.:
International Reading Association,
1970.
Russell, D. H.
Children learn to read.
and Co., 1949.
New York:
Ginn
Spache, G. D., & Spache, E. B. Reading in the elementary
school.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1969.
Strang, R. W. Helping your child improve his reading.
New York: E. P. Dutton arrd Co., 1962.
Tuckman, B. W.
Conducting educational research. New
York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1972.
Wilson, R. M., & Hall, M. F.eading and the eleme_!ltary
school child--theory and practice for teachers.
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1972.
Witty, P. A., & Freeland, A.M. Meadow green.
(Rev. ed.)
Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath and Co., 1968.
APPENDIXES
54
APPENDIX A
INSTRUCTIONS AND ILLUSTRATIONS OF
GAME MATERIALS
55
56
Multiplication Bingo
Sample individual
playing card
3 30 If c27
IS
~I
0
9
()
c2L/-- )7
c--
f
Materials:
, Directions:
IS
/~
sample calling cards
6 If DDDDD
sample markers
Construction paper and a black marking pen
(playing cards, markers, and calling cards)
Multiplication Bingo is played like Bingo,
except that the "caller" calls out a
multiplication fact problem rather than a
numeral. The "winner" is the first player
to cover all the numerals on his playing
card with markers.
57
The Tortoise and the Hare Race
,~
-- -- -
L -
-- -
-
-
:r:
R
-z
A
LL.
E
V)
-
c
~
<I:
0:::
T
V)
~
R
A
r-
-- -
:r:
-
-- -
V)
-z
-
LL.
L -
1-
-
-- -
--
0:::
<!:
1-
V)
·-
Timothy
Tortoise
c
K
B
0
A
R
D
Henry Hare
Playing Cards (enlarged beyond
proportion)
Sample Check Card
Sample Flashcards
i
'--~~- -~~---···-~-----··-·---
58
Materials:
Directions:
Black butcher paper and whjte crayon (race
track board), unlined index cards (playing
cards, flashcards, and teacher's card), and
colored marking pens (playing cards, flashcards, and teacher's card)
This racing game may be played in either of
two ways, depending upon the maturity of the
players.
In some instances, the "leader"
displays one flashcard at a time to two
"players" who whisper the answer as quickly
as possible. The "winner" is the first
person to whisper the answer correctly to
the leader.
In other instances, the leader
displays first one flashcard for one player,
who whispers the answer, and second, another
flashcard for the other player.
In either
case, the game continues until one or both
players progress to the finish line.
Throughout the game, another player, who is
called "teacher," checks the ans-wers
whispered by the two racing players.
59
The Jumping Frogs of Tampa Creek
Playing Board
(lily pad trails and creek)
Playing Cards (enlarged beyond proportion)
••reacher • s 11 Card
1/-
/.j
'Xo
o
XJ
-Jf
~ 'Xfo:. ;1.-/
1-/-
J.J
Y;J.
X.3
-e
J;:
l/X7= ~
4
#
Xlf XS
Tt;;
xo
IJ'X8 e 32.
Sample Check Card
60
___________ ,. ____
··--··-····.
ii
jMaterials:
I
In·
.
l 1rect1ons:
I
Construction paper (playing board and playing
cards) and clear contact paper (playing cards)
The directions for this racing game are the
same as those for "The Tortoise and the Hare
Race."
61
r-·"·-···-·----·· ··-- ..
I
Computer Man
I
I
!
ROBOT A
DxG
D
Half portion of playing board showing
Robot A (the other half of the game
board is identical to that pictured, but is
entitled Robot B)
Computer
Reader's
Card
2 X 0 ;:= 0
2 X 1 = 2
2 X 2 = 4
2 X 3 = 6
2 X 4 = 8
2 X 5 = 10
2 X 6 = 12
2 X 7 = 14
2 X 8 = 16
2 X 9 = 18
2 X 10 = 20
Sample Check Card
Sample Computer
Card (enlarged
beyond proportion)
62
,-.
--~--
..
-~-··-···· ·········~--········--·
............................................. ········· ····•····· ······--
!
!Materials:
l
!Directions:
Cardboard (playing board), construction paper
(playing board and computer cards), and marking
pens (playing board and computer cards)
Player places small "computer cards" on
computer robots to form multiplication
problems. The "computer reader" reads and
checks the two multiplication problems formed
by one player. Turn then rotates to next
player.
63
The Lady Bugs Race
.,.
Extra
turn
L
A
D
y
Go back
3 spaces
B
Move 1
space
ahead
~
1'
u
Move 2
spaces
ahead
G
Lose 1
turn
s
Winner
~
START
Playing Board
Sample
Flashcard
Teacher 1 s Card
Jxo = o
.3X/~..3
.:J x '- ::. If
.3X7c .ZJ
ax~'=.!..
~y.t
3x.a =-9
.3~
3
Li
':!./~
XS= IS
Materials:
Directions:
';:.
.3x9
~tf
= .:?7
.3XIo,. .3o
l3l
~
3
x(,
Sample Playing Card
(lady bugs on other
playing cards are
different colors)
Cardboard and felt pens (playing board, playing
cards, and check card), and unlined index cards
(flashcards)
This game is played like "The Tortoise and
the Hare Race. 11
.•
APPENDIX B
SAMPLE WORKSHEETS
64
65
Date
•Name
Math Fun Paper
~
~:
0
Pink
Red
16 Green
2
Yellow
10
Blue
18 Brown
4
Orange
12
Purple
20 Pink
6
Black
14
White
8
dots
66
•••
•
><
' • - · - - • •"
• •••-
-"""·•a~~·
""'• · - • - - • - • · • - -
--·~••V•
~--·
"'
I
Name
Date
Math Fun
When you have finished putting the numerals in the
puzzle, color the even numerals in the puzzle
yellow.
Color the odd numerals pink.
.2 ~
/-7>
J,
J,
@
ti •
OE!)~
••• •• •o•e
• • e •
•••
•
•
•
G7
e
•••
g •••
•••
~
•
..
3-7
'I
~
~
J
~
•• 0
De ~ e~
I 0
••
••
2 •••
• e • c
I
0
•
0 •
G 8
5
••• :2 0
e ••••••
I e•••
•e ••
e e
Gee
c;
F ••••
••
0
./,
•
0
8
•• 0
E!
E
•
•
0
1~
Put the sums or products in the right boxes,
1.-7
3 + 9
4 .~
10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10+10
1. {,
6 + 5
5 • .J,
2 X 9
2 •"'
2 X 10
6.--? 2 X 4
3.~
2 X 8
7.
3.-lt
(6 + 5) + 1
.
'·
......
~
1 + (3 + 5)
67
Spelling Worksheet
7.
8.
10.
11.
12.
, Name
Put your Unit 8
spelling words
in alphabetical
order.
Print
them on the
umbrella,
Spelling Fun
'~
68
Name
-------------------
Date
-----------
Directions:
Unscramble the letters to make your spelling words.
' Use your spelling book (page 27) to help you.
1.
{find)
plul
2.
3.
tcos
4.
5.
ofnrt
dink
o Its
6.
7.
8.
9.
if d n
t smo
utp
f Ia I
11.
fof
uf II
12.
am Is I
13.
d Io t
e wf
fmro
10.
14.15.