The primary purpose of this study was to compare a student self-directed method for developing comprehension of explicitly stated meanings and implicitly stated meanings with a teacher-directed method of comprehension instruction. A secondary purpose was to determine which instructional method was most beneficial for low-average readers and high-average readers. / The participants in this study were 129 sixth grade average readers at a sixth grade center in an inner-city locale. The students were bused from six different feeder schools, and their home backgrounds ranged from a low socio-economic level to a high socioeconomic level. Six classes of students were involved in the study. Two each were randomly assigned to Teacher Feedback Instruction (TFI), Student Self-Directed Instruction (SSDI), and control group (CG) treatments. / Comprehension materials were developed and piloted by the investigator to be used with each of the experimental treatment groups. The materials used were expository passages with eight comprehension questions for each passage. The questions included four questions to provide practice in comprehension of explicitly stated meanings and four questions to provide practice in comprehension of implicitly stated meanings. / Individuals in the SSDI group read the expository passages and answered the comprehension questions. Next, they scored their answers and then proceeded to the next story. Students in the TFI group read one story each session and completed the questions. Following this, the group identified and discussed the appropriate answer to each of the questions. Additional questions were posed by the teacher. Students in each of the experimental treatments worked in comprehension materials 30 minutes per session for 2 days each week for 10 weeks. The students in the control group worked in the regular basal program. / An analysis of covariance was conducted to determine which instructional treatment was most effective for developing vocabulary, comprehension of explicitly stated meanings, and comprehension of implicitly stated meanings. A t-test was used to determine if each of the methods was effective for developing comprehension. / It was found that the type of instruction, TFI, SSDI, or regular basal, did not result in a significant difference in performance for comprehension of explicitly and implicitly stated meanings or for vocabulary development. However, each of the instructional methods did prove effective (significant at the .01 level) for developing comprehension of implicity stated meanings. Conversely, none of the instructional methods favorably improved explicitly stated meanings. Both TFI and SSDI groups significantly improved their vocabulary scores, but the regular basal group did not improve significantly. Low-average readers being instructed using TFI or SSDI made a significant (p < .01) improvement in comprehension of implicitly stated meanings. However, the performance of high-average readers was not significantly increased by either of the two instructional treatments. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 41-03, Section: A, page: 1005. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1980.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_74098 |
| Contributors | KLESIUS, JANELL PUTNAL., The Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text |
| Format | 259 p. |
| Rights | On campus use only. |
| Relation | Dissertation Abstracts International |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds