A comparison of the inductive and deductive group approaches in teaching selected phonic generalizations to second grade children Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/rv042w895

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • The purpose of this study was to answer three questions in terms of learning methodology: (1) Is the inductive or deductive approach more effective in teaching phonic generalizations to second grade children? (2) Is the inductive or deductive approach more effective in promoting retention ability after a three week interim? (3) Is the inductive or deductive approach more effective in promoting greater transfer of learning? Three second grade classes in the Portland Public Schools, Portland, Oregon participated in this study concerning teaching methodology and eight phonic generalizations. Three classes of approximately twenty -five children each were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups by this researcher. The three schools in which these classes were located were described as being in average socio-economic areas as determined by Portland Public School District criteria. In order to determine a child's ability to analyze vocabulary terms, an Individual Informal Oral Phonic Generalization Test was constructed by this writer based on eight phonic generalizations. The construction of the phonic instrument was based upon a survey of vocabulary terms found in seven basal reader series used in the Portland Public Schools developmental reading program. The Individual Informal Oral Phonic Generalization Test consisted of three test forms containing sixteen vocabulary terms and sixteen nonsense terms. Three second grade classrooms participated in this study with two classes comprising the experimental groups and a third class the control group. Experimental group I was taught four generalizations via the inductive approach for two weeks and then four different generalizations by the deductive approach during the final two weeks. Experimental group II was taught four phonic generalizations via the inductive approach for two weeks and then four different generalizations by the deductive approach during the final two weeks. The combined test performances of experimental groups I and II on eight phonic generalizations taught inductively comprised the inductive methodology group. The combined test performances of experimental groups I and II on eight phonic generalizations taught deductively comprised the deductive methodology group. Experimental groups I and II were taught eight phonic generalizations over a period of four weeks time using inductive -deductive lesson plans specifically designed for this experimentation. Each phonic generalization lesson was presented to the whole class during a thirty minute period. Findings and Conclusions To determine whether method alone constituted a significant variable when instructing second grade children to utilize phonic generalizations, the study analyzed the scores made by seventy - three second grade youngsters on three informal phonic generalization tests. The t test statistic comparing the difference in mean scores of the inductive and deductive methods indicated that significant differences did not exist between the inductive and deductive groups on three phonic tests, a Pre -test, a Measure of Learning, and a Measure of Retention. When comparing the inductive -deductive methods with the control group method on the Pre -test the results showed no differences. However, when comparing the inductive -deductive methods with the control group method on a Measure of Learning test the findings showed a difference significant at the .05 level favoring the deductive group method on the total mean score. A comparison of the inductive- deductive groups with the control group in terms of retention revealed significant differences did not exist between the groups. This study indicated that differences in retention and ability to transfer knowledge were not significant when comparing the inductive -deductive groups and the control group. Method alone as exemplified in this research did not appear to be a significant factor in terms of immediate learning, retention, or transfer of learning.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Advisor
Academic Affiliation
Non-Academic Affiliation
Subject
Rights Statement
Peer Reviewed
Language
Digitization Specifications
  • File scanned at 300 ppi using ScandAll PRO 1.8.1 on a Fi-6670 in PDF format. CVista PdfCompressor 5.0 was used for pdf compression and textual OCR.
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Lauren Kaysen (lkscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-03-14T18:50:56Z No. of bitstreams: 1 BrittonGwynethW1968.pdf: 4442350 bytes, checksum: a798484f777b84d27536293309a28729 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Patricia Black(patricia.black@oregonstate.edu) on 2014-03-17T14:06:18Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 BrittonGwynethW1968.pdf: 4442350 bytes, checksum: a798484f777b84d27536293309a28729 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Katy Davis(kdscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-03-18T20:09:36Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 BrittonGwynethW1968.pdf: 4442350 bytes, checksum: a798484f777b84d27536293309a28729 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2014-03-18T20:09:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 BrittonGwynethW1968.pdf: 4442350 bytes, checksum: a798484f777b84d27536293309a28729 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1968-05-31

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 08/14/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items