A comparative study of a corrective reading program and its effects on two freshmen reading groups at Central Oregon Community College Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/v979v5322

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • This study compared intensive corrective reading instruction with less intensive corrective reading instruction at the community college level: Group 1 students received 50 fifty- minutes of intensive corrective reading instruction during ten weeks, while Group 2 students received the same amount of corrective reading instruction during 20 weeks. Reading instruction for both groups began at the same time. After reading instruction had ceased for each group, an additional ten-week period had been given for both groups to see if the reading skills which were taught during intensive and less intensive corrective reading instruction had been maintained. Materials, techniques, and methods to be used in this study had been initially prepared and refined in a pilot study. Through lectures and demonstrations, through assigned reading practices and independent reading, development and improvement of word recognition, vocabulary, spelling, comprehension, reading rate, reading for general and specific purposes, and study skills have been sought. The purpose of instruction was to make each reading activity so clear that success was assured. The hypothesis of this study was that there will be no differences in the total reading performance between one group of community college students using the intensive corrective reading approach and a second group using the less intensive corrective reading approach. The hypothesis was tested by 70 community college students in two experimental groups, one group using the intensive and the other group using the less intensive corrective reading instruction. Findings and Conclusions 1. Mean differences and the associated t values indicated that the results between intensive and less intensive corrective reading instruction at the end of the 10- and 20-week periods did not appear to be significantly different at the .05 level of confidence between Groups 1 and 2. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Forms A and B, were used as standardized instruments to measure reading improvement, 2. The single factor of time between the lessons differentiating intensive and less intensive corrective reading instruction did not appear to be a significant influence on the effectiveness of corrective reading instruction. Mean differences did not indicate significant superiority of either procedure. It would appear, at least within the 10- and 20-weeks of instruction, that the intensive corrective reading instruction is as effective as the less intensive corrective reading instruction. However, a difference between immediate post-test and delayed post-test for Group 2 was significant at the .01 level of confidence in total reading. Apparently, less intensive corrective reading instruction has produced a significantly better performance in total reading for Group 2 at the time of the delayed post-test. 3. Corrective reading instruction carried out in this study did appear to make a difference in students' reading performance between pre-tests and immediate and delayed post-tests as well as between immediate and delayed post-tests of Groups 1 and 2. The differences which appeared for both groups between pre-tests and immediate and delayed post-tests of the Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Forms A and B, and A in vocabulary, comprehension, total reading, and reading rate were all statistically significant at the .001 level of confidence. 4. When immediate and delayed post-test scores were compared for Group 1 a significant difference at the .01 level was found in total reading and a significant difference at the .05 level was found in vocabulary. When immediate and delayed post-test scores were compared for Group 2 significant differences at the .001 level were found in vocabulary and total reading and significant difference at the .01 level was found in comprehension. Students' individual improvement as a result of corrective reading instruction and the retainment of the reading skills has been assessed for both groups by using the residual gain statistics, both the computational and the graphical method. Reading improvement resulted apparently from teaching and student effort regardless of the time during which intensive and less intensive corrective reading instruction was taught. Evidence from this study indicates that many more community college students might be given the opportunity to participate in reading instruction if reading courses were taught intensively as, for example, five hours per week for ten weeks rather than extending less intensive reading instruction over a longer period of time.
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-6770A in PDF format. CVista PdfCompressor 4.0 was used for pdf compression and textual OCR.
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Katy Davis(kdscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-03-14T18:22:14Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TaschowHorstG1968.pdf: 864740 bytes, checksum: 9037242ed1491bb5fa27aa94d9155470 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Madison Medley (mmscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-03-13T19:39:04Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TaschowHorstG1968.pdf: 864740 bytes, checksum: 9037242ed1491bb5fa27aa94d9155470 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Patricia Black(patricia.black@oregonstate.edu) on 2014-03-13T20:18:52Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TaschowHorstG1968.pdf: 864740 bytes, checksum: 9037242ed1491bb5fa27aa94d9155470 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2014-03-14T18:22:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TaschowHorstG1968.pdf: 864740 bytes, checksum: 9037242ed1491bb5fa27aa94d9155470 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1968-05-09

Relationships

Parents:

This work has no parents.

Last modified

Downloadable Content

Download PDF

Items