This study compared two highly dissimilar approaches for teaching students to determine character motive when reading three types of narrative text. The three text types used were textually explicit, textually implicit, and scriptually implicit. The two approaches were an explicit rule-based instruction approach and a basal-reader activity-based approach.
Forty students with learning disabilities were randomly assigned to either the explicit rule-based or the basal-reader activity-based instructional group. Daily instructional sessions lasted 45 minutes and were conducted for 2 weeks. The groups were evaluated on four comprehension measures: (a) daily retells of stories, (b) unit tests, (c) a transfer measure, and (d) a maintenance measure. The results suggest that rule-based instruction is superior to an activity-based approach when teaching students with learning disabilities to determine character motives irrespective of text type on short-term measures. However, there were no significant differences between the two instructional groups on the maintenance and transfer tests.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, R.C., Heibert, E.H., Scott, J.A., & Wilkinson, I.A.G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report on the commission on reading. Washington, DC : The National Institute of Education, U.S. Department of Education.
2.
Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kameenui, E.J. (1990). Direct instruction reading (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
3.
Carnine, D., Stevens, C., Clements, J., & Kameenui, E.J. (1982). Effects of facilitative questions and practice on intermediate students' understanding of character motives. Journal of Reading Behavior, 14, 179-190.
4.
Darch, C.B. (1990). Research in direct instruction. In D. Carnine, J. Silbert, & E. J. Kameenui (Eds.), Direct instruction reading (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
5.
Darch, C.B. (1993). Direct instruction: A research-based approach for designing instructional programs. In R. C. Eaves & P. J. McLaughlin (Eds.), Recent advances in special education and rehabilitation. (pp. 88-106). Boston: Andover Medical.
6.
Darch, C.B., & Kameenui, E.J. (1988). Teaching LD students critical reading skills: A systematic replication. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 82-91.
7.
Dunning, D.B. (1992). Instructional questions that clarify story character's feelings and motivations: Their effect on students' narrative comprehension. (Tech. Rep. No. 563). Champaign: University of Illinois Center for the Study of Reading.
8.
Durkin, D. (1978-1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 481-533.
9.
Engleman, S., Becker, W., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1988). The direct instruction follow through model: Designs and outcomes. Education and Treatment of Children, 11, 303-317.
10.
Fry, E. (1978). Fry readability scale. Providence, RI: Jamestown.
11.
Gaskin, I. (1982). Let's end the reading disabilities/learning disabilities debate. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 569-582.
Johnston, P.H. (1983). Reading comprehension assessment: A cognitive basis. New-ark, DE: International Reading Association.
17.
Kameenui, E.J., Simmons, D.C., & Darch, C.B. (1987). LD children's comprehension of selected textual features: Effects of proximity of information. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10237-248.
18.
Macmillan. (1989). Sketches (Teacher's Edition). New York: Author.
19.
Maria, K. (1990). Reading comprehension instruction issues and strategies . Parkton, MD: York.
20.
Mercer, C.D. (1987). Students with learning disabilities. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
21.
Montague, M., Maddox, D., & Dereshiwsky, M.I. (1990). Story grammar and comprehension and production of narrative prose by students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 190-196.
22.
Newby, R.F., Caldwell, J., & Recht, D.R. (1989). Improving the reading comprehension of children with dysphonetic and dyseidetic dyslexia using story grammar. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 373-380.
23.
Patching, W., Kameenui, E.J., Carnine, D., Gersten, R., & Colvin, G. (1983). Direct instruction in critical reading skills . Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 406-418.
24.
Rottman, T.R., & Cross, D.R. (1990). Using informed strategies for learning to enhance the reading and thinking of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 270-278.
25.
Rumelhart, D. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and Performance (Vol. 6) (pp. 58-65). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26.
Shannon, P., Kameenui, E.J., & Bauman, J.F. (1988). An investigation of children's ability to comprehend character motives. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 441-462.
27.
Silver Burdett Ginn (1993). On the Horizon (Teacher's Edition). Needham, MA: Author.
28.
Simmons, D.C., Kameenui, E.J., & Darch, C.B. (1988). The effect of textual proximity on fourth- and fifth-grade LD students' metacognitive awareness and strategic comprehension behavior. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 380-395.
29.
Stein, N., & Trabasso, T. (1981). What's in a story: An approach to comprehension and instruction. (Tech. Rep. No. 200). Champaign: University of Illinois Center for the Study of Reading.
30.
Umbach, B.T. (1990). A comparison of two methods of teaching written language to low-performing fourth grades in two rural schools. Unpublished manuscript, Auburn University.
31.
Velleman, P.F. (1992). Data desk 4.0. [Computer software]. Ithaca, NY: Data Description.
32.
Wechsler, D. (1974). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-Revised . San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
33.
Woodcock, R.W. (1987). Woodcock reading mastery tests-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service .
