This article presents a critical analysis of Hammill and Larsen's review (1974) of studies on the effectiveness of psycholinguistic training. Variables to be described and controlled in such efficacy studies are presented.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrachtG.H. Experimental factors related to aptitude-treatment interactions. Review of Educational Research, 1970, 40, 627–645.
2.
BushW. J. & GilesM. T.Aids to psycholinguistic teaching. Columbus OH: Charles E. Merrill, 1969.
3.
DunnL. M. & SmithJ. O.The Peabody language development kit. Circle Pines MN: American Guidance Service, 1966.
4.
HammillD. D. & LarsenS. C.The effectiveness of psycholinguistic training. Exceptional Children, 1974, 41, 5–16.
5.
KarnesM. B.Helping young children develop language skills: A book of activities. Washington DC: The Council for Exceptional Children, 1968.
6.
KirkS. A.McCarthyJ. J., & KirkW. D.Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press, 1968.
7.
MinskoffE. H. & MinskoffJ. G.The roles of disability and ability teaching in the over-all educational program for the learning disabled. Manuscript submitted for publication, 1974.
8.
MinskoffE. H.WisemanD. E., & MinskoffJ. G.The MWM program for developing language abilities. Ridgefield NJ: Educational Performance Associates, 1972.
9.
MinskoffE. H.WisemanD. E., & MinskoffJ. G.The MWM program for developing language abilities. Level II. In preparation, 1974.
10.
PainterG.The effect of a rhythmic and sensory motor activity program on perceptual motor spatial abilities of kindergarten children. Exceptional Children, 1966, 33, 113–116.
11.
SpollenJ. C. & BailiffB. L.Effectiveness of individualized instruction for kindergarten children with a developmental lag. Exceptional Children, 1971, 38, 205–209.
12.
US Office of Education.Title VI-A, Elementary and Secondary Education Act Annual Reports for 1968, Washington DC: Author, 1969.
