Forty-eight physically handicapped students in grades one to six were compared on the basis of their comprehension of Talking Book materials played at three rates using the Varispeech II Speech Time Compressor/Expander. Students were grouped by age and reading levels. An analysis of covariance with repeated measures, using the Detroit Test of Verbal Opposites to control for listening ability, found a significant difference (.028) in favor of expanded speed over compressed speed; but neither resulted in comprehension significantly different from that at normal speed. Age and reading level had no significant effect. The study showed that this technology, though it improved comprehension for some individuals, did not benefit the entire group.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenW.Intelligence, ability and instructional media design. Bethesda MD: Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), 1974. (ED 905 820).
2.
BakerH. J.LelandB.Detroit test of learning abilities. Indianapolis IN: Bobbs, Merrill, 1968.
3.
BannatyneA.Language, Reading and Learning Disabilities. Springfield IL: Charles C Thomas, 1971.
4.
BereiterC.EngelmannS.Teaching disadvantaged children in the preschool. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1966.
DeHoopW.Listening comprehension of cerebral palsied and other crippled children as a function of two speaking rates. Exceptional Children, 1965, 31, 233–40.
7.
DowneyJ.LowN. L.The child with disabling illness. Philadelphia PA: Saunders, 1974.
8.
DunnL.Exceptional children in schools. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1973.
9.
FoulkeE.The comprehension of rapid speech by the blind. Exceptional Children, 1962, 29, 134–41.
10.
FoulkeE. (Ed.) Proceedings of the first Louisville conference on rate and/or frequency controlled speech. Louisville KY: Center for Rate Controlled Recordings, 1969.
11.
FoulkeE.StitchtT.Research reviews. In DukerS. (Ed.), Time compressed speech (Vol. 1). Metuchen NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1974.
12.
GoldsteinH.Reading and listening comprehension at various controlled rates. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1940.
13.
GoreG. V.III, An analysis of the effects three modes of oral presentation have on certain communicative skills as measured by scores obtained by blind senior high school students. Research Report, 1969, 1 (1). New York: Teachers College, Columbia, Research and Demonstration Center for the Study of Handicapped Children.
14.
GropperG.Comprehension of narrative passages by fourth grade children as a function of listening rate and eleven predictor variables. Proceedings of the second Louisville conference. Louisville KY: Center for Rate Controlled Recordings, 1971.
15.
HallR.Linguistics and your language. Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1960.
16.
HirstW. E.Entrance age: A predictor variable for academic success?Reading Teacher, 1970, 23, 547–555.
17.
IrwinJ. V.Non-medical diagnosis and evaluation. In IrwinJ. V.MargeM. (Eds.), Principles of childhood language disabilities. Part 3. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
18.
KuperbergA.Some relationships between listening comprehension and rate of presentation. Bethesda MD: 1976. ERIC, (ED 110 919).
19.
KussatR. G.Information retained as a function of presentation rate of time compressed speech. (Doctoral dissertation) New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers, State Univ. of New Jersey, 1974.
20.
Library of Congress. For younger readers: Braille and Talking Books 1974–1975. Washington DC: LCDBPH, 1976.
21.
LovittT. G.Narrative rate preference in normal and retarded males as assessed by conjugate reinforcement. Psychological Record, 1968, 18, 205–214.
22.
LysagtC. E.The effect of speech rate and pacing procedures upon the responses to verbal stimuli by two age groups. (Doctoral dissertation, Boston Univ., 1970). DAI, 1970, 31, 434B. (UM NO. 70-12, 1880).
23.
MartinE.Federal programs. In JonesR. L. (Ed.), New directions in special education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1970.
24.
NapierG. D.Investigation into extended use of time compressed speech with intermediate grade subjects. In DukerS. (Ed.), Listening: Readings (Vol. 2). Metuchen NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1971.
ParkhurstB. G.The effect of time-altered speech stimuli on the auditory comprehension of adult aphasics. Proceedings of the second Louisville conference. Louisville KY: Center for Rate Controlled Recordings, 1971.
27.
SalamonG.Can we affect cognitive skills through visual media?Audiovisual Communications Review, 1972, 20, 401–422.
28.
ShortS. H.A comparison of variable time compressed speech and normal rate speech based on time spent and performance in a course taught by self-instructional methods. (Doctoral Dissertation, Syracuse Univ., 1975). DIA, 1976, 36, 6379A.
SpacheG. D.Good reading for poor readers. Champaign, IL: Garrard, 1974;.
31.
TaylorS. E.Listening: What research says to the teacher. Bethesda MD: ERIC, 1964. (ED 026 120).
32.
TraversR. M.Research and theory related to audiovisual information transmission. Bethesda MD: ERIC1964. (ED 003 625).
33.
TraversR. M.A study of the advantages and disadvantages of using simplified visual presentations in instructional materials. Bethesda MD: ERIC, 1967. (ED 031 951).
34.
US Congress, Senate. Public Law 89-522, 89th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1966. (S 3093).
35.
WoodcockR. W.Application of rate controlled recordings in the classroom. Proceedings of the second Louisville conference. Louisville KY: Center for Rate Controlled Recordings, 1971.
