Practice in correcting symbol reversals had no significant effect on reading achievement of 41 boys and 36 girls in first grade although there were significant gains in reading and reduction in reversal errors by both groups but no significant difference between the groups in gains or errors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AliottiN.NicholasC.Tendency to mirror image on a visual memory test. Academic Therapy, 1980, 15, 261–267.
2.
BoderE.Development dyslexia: a diagnostic approach based on three atypical reading spelling patterns. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 1973, 15, 663–687.
3.
CohnM.StrickerG.Reversal errors in strong, average, and weak letter namers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1979, 12, 533–537.
4.
HeydornB. L.A study of reading achievement in terms of symbol reversals in first grade children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State Univer., Baton Rouge, 1983.
5.
HeydornB. L.Treatment versus non-treatment in reduction of symbol reversals by first grade children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1984, 59. 36–38.
6.
JanskyJ.DehirschK.Preventing reading failure. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
KirshnerA. J.Kirshner program for the remediation of reversals. Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publ., 1977.
9.
LyleJ. G.Reading retardation and reversal tendency: a factorial study. Child Development, 1969, 40, 833–843.
10.
MacGinitieW. H.Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests Basic R, Forms 1 and 2. (2nd ed.) Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1978.
11.
ShankweilerD.LibermanI. Y.Misreading: a search for causes. In KavanaghJ. F.MattinglyI. G. (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: the relationship between speech and reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1972. Pp. 293–317.
