A correcting program for symbol reversals by first grade children (n = 38) did not significantly reduce symbol reversals below those of a non-treated control group (n = 39). There were significant reductions in reversals within both groups. The practice of remediating reversals and the use of directionality to explain symbol reversals are both questioned. The possibility that maturation plays a role seems plausible as an explanation of the changes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BannatyneA.Reading: An auditory-vocal process. San Rafael, CA: Academic Therapy Publ., 1973.
2.
BraceyS. A.WardJ.‘Dark, dark, went the bog’: Instructional interventions for remediating b and d reversals. Reading Improvement, 1980, 17, 104–111.
3.
CohnM.StrickerG.Inadequate perception vs reversals. Reading Teacher, 1976, 30, 162–167.
4.
GibsonE. J.GibsonJ. J.PickA. D.OsserH.A developmental study in the discrimination of letter-like forms. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1962, 55, 897–906.
5.
HeydornB. L.Effect of treatment of symbol reversal errors on reading achievement by first grade children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, in press.
6.
HeydornB. L.A study of reading achievement in terms of symbol reversals in first grade children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana Sate Univer., Baton Rouge, 1983.
7.
HeydornB. L.CheekE. H.Reversals in reading and writing: Perceptual, developmental, diagnostic, and remedial aspects. Reading Improvement, 1982, 19, 123–128.
