The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of two modes of prereading assistance on fifth-graders' literal and interpretive comprehension of selected material. Readers of average ability were considered. The two modes of prereading assistance studies were Directed Reading Question introductions (tape-recorded prereading assistance given pupils which set purposes for reading by having them read to find answers for specific questions) and Cognitive Organizer introductions (tape-recorded prereading assistance given pupils which included both general information about the topic and a preview of the sequence of events in the passage). Additionally, one-third of the pupils were given no prereading assistance and were used as the Control group. From an original population of all fifth-grade pupils reading on grade level in Anderson, Indiana's twenty-eight elementary schools, fifth-graders in three representative schools were chosen by the Assistant Superintendent. All fifth-graders in these three schools (159 subjects) were given Ransom's Cloze Test as an initial screening device. Those students scoring between fourth and seventh-grade instructional level, inclusive, on the Cloze Test were individually administered the Silvaroli Classroom Reading Inventory. Of the fifth-graders found to have an instructional reading level of fifth-grade, sixty-three were randomly divided into three groups, the Directed Reading Question group, the Cognitive Organizer group, and the Control group. The Directed Reading Question and Cognitive Organizer groups listened to the appropriate tape-recorded introductions before reading each of the three reading passages (three-selections from SPA Kit IIIb), and then answered the posttest questions over each passage. The Control group received no prereading assistance before reading the passages and answering the posttest questions. All materials, the introductions, passages, and fifteen literal and fifteen interpretive subtest questions were validated by a panel of reading experts. Additionally, all materials were field tested with fifth-graders reading on grade level from a fourth representative Anderson School. Kuder-Richardson-20 reliability estimates for the subtests were .69 and .78. Total posttest was .85. Nine null hypotheses were tested using Bonferroni t procedures and multivariate and univariate analysis. Using the .05 level of confidence as the predetermined criterion, six of the nine null hypotheses were rejected. On the total posttest, the scores of the three groups were significantly different. The students who received the Cognitive Organizer introductions scored significantly higher than the other two groups on the total post-test. The Directed Reading Question group scored significantly higher than the Control group on the total posttest. In the three cases involving individual subtests where the null hypothesis was not rejected (those comparing the DRQ and CO groups on the literal and interpretive subtests and that comparing the DRQ group and CG on the interpretive subtest), existing differences, though not statistically significant, favored the Cognitive Organizer group over both the other two groups, and the Directed Reading Question group over the Control group. The findings of this study indicate in general that for these particular students, subject to the limitations of this investigation, the Cognitive Organizer type of introduction was superior to the Directed Reading Question type of introduction and to giving no introductions at all. Giving the Directed Reading Question introductions was more facilitative than giving no prereading assistance. While the results for the individual subtests were statistically significant in only three of the six cases, all existing differences favored the Cognitive Organizer treatment over the other two treatments, and the Directed Reading Question treatment over the Control treatment. It would appear that under the limitations of this study, students benefited most by being exposed to introductions which gave both general information about the topic and a preview of the sequence of events in the passage. Those who listened to the Directed Reading Questions and read to find answers for specific questions did better than those who were asked to read the passages without being provided any "mind-set" for the selections.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/176280 |
| Date | January 1977 |
| Creators | Fulda, Trudi Annette |
| Contributors | Cooper, J. David |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | viii, 139 leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds