This study examined the effects of two previewing activities on poor readers' oral reading miscues. The two previewing activities consisted of (a) a concept analysis activity (CAA) and (b) a motivation statement (MS). The oral reading miscues measured were (a) graphophonemic, (b) syntactic, and (c) semantic. To counterbalance for order of previewing activity and experimenters, a factorial/modfied Latin-Square design was used. An analysis of variance with repeated measures on the last factor was used to analyze the data. The results indicated the CAA significantly decreased oral reading miscues and increased oral reading speed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aulls, M. (1982). Developing readers in today's elementary school.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
Bransford, J. D. (1979). Human cognition: Learning, understanding and remembering.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
3.
Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717–726.
4.
Burns, P. C., & Roe, B. D. (1980). Informal Reading Assessment: Preprimer to twelth grade.Chicago: Rand McNally.
5.
Downing, J. & Leong, C. K. (1982). Psychology of reading.New York: Macmillan.
6.
Hansen, J. (1981). Effects of inference training and practice on young children's reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly. 16, 391–417.
7.
Hansen, J. (1984). The role of prior knowledge in content area learning. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 3(4), 66–72.
8.
Juel, C. (1983). Development and use of mediated word identification. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 306–327.
9.
Kintsch, W. (1970). Learning, memory, and conceptual processes.New York: Wiley & Sons.
10.
Lesgold, A. M., & Perfetti, C. A. (1978). Interactive processes in reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 1, 323–336.
11.
Leu, D. J. (1983). Oral reading error analyses: A critical review of research and application. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 420–437.
12.
Liberman, I. Y., & Shankweiler, D. (1979). Speech, the alphabet and teaching to read. In L. B. Resnick & P. A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 2).Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
Mulchahy, R. F., Lupart, J., & Price, M. A. (1983, November). The development of reading strategies in good and poor readers: A cross-sequential analyses. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Austin, TX.
14.
Pace, J. P., & Golinkoff, R. M. (1976). Relationship between work difficulty and access of single-word meaning by skilled and less skilled readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 760–767.
15.
Pearson, P. D., & Johnson, D. D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension.New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
16.
Rumelhart, D. (1976). Toward an interactive model of reading. (Report No. 56). San Diego: University of California.
17.
Rumelhart, D. E. & McClelland, J. L. (1981). Interactive processing through spreading activation. In A. M. Lesgold & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive processes in reading (pp. 37–63). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
18.
Sachs, A. (1983). The effects of three prereading activities on learning disabled students' reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 248–251.
19.
Smith, R., & Hess, K. (1969). The effects of prereading assistance on the comprehension and attitudes of good and poor readers. Research in the Teaching of English, 3, 166–171.
20.
Spiegel, D. L. (1981). Six alternatives to the directed reading activity. Reading Teacher, 34, 914–920.
21.
Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive compensatory-model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32–71.
22.
Stanovich, K. E. (1983, April). The interactive-compensatory model of reading: A confluence of developmental, experimental, and educational psychology. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Detroit.
23.
Vellutino, F. (1979). Dyslexia: Theory and research.Cambridge: MIT Press.
