University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An Investigation Of The Effect Of Instruction And Practice Upon The Listening Comprehension Skills Of Community College Freshmen

(USC Thesis Other)

An Investigation Of The Effect Of Instruction And Practice Upon The Listening Comprehension Skills Of Community College Freshmen

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS
This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.
Xerox University Microfilms
300 North Z aeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
75-1048
BROWN, Donald Holmes, 1936-
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECT OF
INSTRUCTION AND PRACTICE UPON THE LISTENING
COMPREHENSION SKILLS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE
FRESHMEN.
University of Southern California, Ed.D., 1974
Education, higher
Xerox University Microfilms , Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECT OF INSTRUCTION AND
PRACTICE UPON THE LISTENING COMPREHENSION SKILLS
OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE FRESHMEN
A Dissertation
Presented to
the Faculty of the School of Education
University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education
by
Donald Holmes Brown
August 1974
This dissertation, written under the direction
of the Chairman of the candidate’s Guidance
Committee and approved by all members of the
Committee, has been presented to and accepted
by the Faculty of the School of Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of D octor of Education.
September, 1974
Date.
Dean
Guidance Committee
Chairman
TABLE OP CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ................................
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION ............................
The Problem
Background of the Problem
Importance of the Study
Objectives and Hypotheses
Definition of Terms
Limitations and Delimitations
Organization of the Remainder
of the Study
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...................
Studies Relative to the Nature of
Listening As A Psychological
Variable
Studies Relative to the Improvement
of Listening Comprehension at the
Secondary and College Levels
Summary
III. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES .............
Description of Subjects
Research Design
Hypotheses
Pilot Study and Development of
Treatment Materials
Administration of the Experimental
Program
Measurement of the Dependent Variable
Data Collection, Processing and
Analysis
Summary
IV. FINDINGS ................................
All Subjects (Total gain-scores)
All Subjects, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E gain-scores)
Chapter Page
Males (Total gain-scores)
Males, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E gain-scores)
Females (Total gain-scores)
Females, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E gain-scores)
Subjects less than 20 years of
age (Total gain-scores)
Subjects less than 20 years of
age, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E gain-scores)
Subjects 20 years of age and over
(Total gain-scores)
Subjects 20 years of age and over,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
gain-scores)
Subjects who indicated that a Foreign
Language was spoken in the home at
least one-half time (Total gain-
scores)
Subjects who indicated that a Foreign
Language was spoken in the home at
least one-half time, Lecture Compre
hension (Section E gain-scores)
Subjects who indicated that English
was the language spoken at home
(Total gain-scores)
Subjects who indicated that English
was the language spoken at home,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
gain-scores)
Discussion
Summary
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . •
Summary
The Problem
Review of Research
Methodology and Procedures
Conclusions
Recommendations
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................
iii
. 101
. 110
APPENDICES .......................................
A. Materials Distributed to Experimental Group
Subjects Relating to Listening Skill
Building
B. Sample Script, Quiz, and Lecture Notes
C. Daily Summary of Experimental Group
Activities
Page
135
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Correlations Between Listening and
Reading in Selected Studies ............... 22
2. Correlations Between Listening and
Intelligence in Selected Studies ........... 32
3. Summary Results of Testing For
Listening Comprehension Skills;
Fall 1971 Through Fall 1973 61
4. Analysis of Variance Summary: Test
for Homogeneity of Variance ..................63
5. Pilot Test Results: Pre- to Post
test Scores on the Brown-Carlsen
Listening Comprehension Test ............... 68
6. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: All Subjects
(Total gain-scores) .................... 80
7. Analysis of Variance Summary: All
Subjects (Total gain-scores) ............... 80
8. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: All Subjects,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores) ................................. 81
9. Analysis of Variance Summary: All
Subjects, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores) ...................... 81
10. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Males (Total
Gain-Scores) ................................ 82
11. Analysis of Variance Summary: Males
(Total Gain-Scores) ........................ 82
v
Table Page
12. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Males (Section
E Gain-Scores) ................................ 83
13. Analysis of Variance Summary: Males,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores) ................................ 83
14. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Females (Total
Gain-Scores) ............................
84
15. Analysis of Variance Summary: Females
(Total Gain-Scores) ...............
84
16. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Females,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores) ................................... 83
17. Analysis of Variance Summary: Females,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores) ................................... 88
18. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Subjects Less
Than 2 0 Years of Age (Total Gain-
Scores)........................................ 86
19. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
Less Than 20 Years of Age (Total
Gain-Scores) ................................... 88
20. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Subjects Less
Than 20 Years of Age, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores) .... 87
vx
Table Page
21. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
Less Than 20 Years of Age, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores) .... 87
22. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Subjects 20
Years of Age and Over (Total Gain-
Scores)..........................................88
23. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
20 Years of Age and Over (Total Gain-
Scores)..........................................88
24. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Subjects 20
Years of Age and Over, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores) .... 89
25. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
20 Years of Age and Older, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores) .... 89
26. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Group: Subjects Who
Indicated That a Foreign Language
Was Spoken in The Home at Least One-
Half Time (Total Gain-Scores ............... 90
27. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subject
Who Indicated That a Foreign Language
Was Spoken in The Home At Least One-
Half Time (Total Gain-Scores) ............. 90
28. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Subjects Who
Indicated That a Foreign Language
Was Spoken in The Home at Least One-
Half Time, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E ) ..................................... 91
vii
Table Page
29. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
Who Indicated That a Foreign Language
Was Spoken in The Home at Least One-
Half Time, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E) ..........................
30. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Group: Subjects Who
Indicated That English Was The
Language Spoken at Home (Total
Gain-Scores) ..........................
31. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
Who Indicated That English Was The
Language Spoken at Home (Total
Gain-Scores) ........................
32. Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and
Standard Deviation for Experimental
and Control Groups: Subjects Who
Indicated That English Was The
Language Spoken at Home, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-
Scores)....................................... 93
33. Analysis of Variance Summary: Subjects
Who Indicated That English Was The
Language Spoken at Home, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-
Scores)....................................... 93
34. Gain Scores by BCLCT Section For
Experimental Group, Control Group,
and Total of Both Groups ......................96
35. Gain-Scores For Section E (Lecture
Comprehension) For Hypotheses in
Which The Null Was Rejected................... 98
viii
ABSTRACT
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECT OF
INSTRUCTION AND PRACTICE UPON
THE LISTENING COMPREHENSION
SKILLS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE
FRESHMEN
Donald Holmes Brown
University of Southern California, August, 1974
Prof. L. Wilbur, Chairman
Purpose. The purpose of this study was the de
velopment, administration and evaluation of the effect of
an eight-week experimental program designed to improve the
listening comprehension skills of community college fresh
men students. The listening training program consisted of
instruction in the fundamentals of effective listening, as
determined by researchers in the field, and practice in
the application of those principles to brief, single-con
cept tape recorded lectures in the social sciences.
Procedure. To achieve the purpose of the study,
the following activities were undertaken: (1)A review of
the literature was conducted in two areas, studies which
explore the nature of the listening process and studies
which explore techniques designed to improve the listening
ix
skills of secondary and college level subjects; (2)A pilot
study was conducted in order to evaluate and refine the
instruction in listening comprehension, the taped lectures,
and the quizzes used to determine the students' lecture
comprehension; (3)Six sections of Social Science 1 (Intro
duction to Social Science) at Skyline College, San Bruno,
California (N = 115), were chosen to participate in the
study. Three sections were randomly designated to receive
the listening program and three served as control groups.
Overall gains in listening comprehension were measured by
pre- to posttest gains on the Brown-Carlsen Listening Com
prehension Test. Lecture listening skill gains were mea
sured by pre- to posttest gain scores on Section E (Lec
ture Comprehension) of the Brown-Carlsen; (4)Raw score
gains were analyzed for the experimental and control groups
by one-way analysis of variance. The analysis of variance
was also used to examine the effect of the listening train
ing program upon subjects by sex, age, and language spoken
at home in order to investigate the effect of the program
upon these specific subpopulations separate from the over
all experimental population.
Findings. (1)There was no significant difference
in the total test gain-scores of the experimental and con
trol group subjects taken as a whole, (2)The total experi
x
mental group, experimental group females, subjects less
than 20 years of age, and subjects who indicated that a
foreign language was spoken in the home at least one-half
time performed significantly better (p < .05) on Section E
(Lecture Comprehension) than their control group counter
parts .
Conclusions. The major conclusion drawn from the
study was that Lecture comprehension skills, as measured
by the Brown-Carlsen, are amenable to improvement through
instruction in the principles of effective listening and
practice in the application of those principles.
Recommendations. (l)The validity, reliability,
claims of equivalency of forms, and lecture section subject
matter of the Brown-Carlsen should be thoroughly reexamined.
Further research should be conducted which investigates the
"structuralization" component of listening skill and the
selective effect of listening training programs. (3)The
potential benefits to be derived from the development of
listening skill building programs which utilize the funda
mental concepts of the various academic and vocational
areas as vehicles for the improvement of listening skills
should be investigated.
xi
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The Problem
The principal objective of this study was to de
velop, administer and evaluate the effect of an eight-week
experimental program designed to improve the listening com
prehension skills of selected community college freshmen
students. The program consisted of instruction in the
fundamentals of effective listening, as determined by re
searchers in the field, and practice in the application of
these principles to brief, single-concept, tape-recorded
lectures in the social sciences. The experimental program
was administered within the context of a regularly sched
uled series of introduction social science classes using
subject matter content as the vehicle for listening train
ing.
Background of the Problem
The phenomenal growth of the community college in
the United States has been a natural result of the trend in
American higher education towards more education for more
1
2
people. The concept of equality of opportunity, especially
in education, is a deeply ingrained part of the American
value system. Of over seven million students enrolled in
institutions of higher education in the United States,
roughly two-million are enrolled in over one-thousand com
munity and junior colleges. The most advanced community
college system, that of California, enrolls approximately
one-million students in over ninety colleges in sixty-five
community college districts. The one-million student en
rollment more than doubles that of the State College and
University system and the University of California com
bined.
Historically, the functions of the community junior
colleges have been stated by professionals as: (1) Prepa
ration of students planning to transfer to four-year col
leges and universities, (2) The training of terminal stu
dents preparing for semi-professional and skilled occupa
tions, (3) Community education and service, and (4) Coun
seling and guidance.
Community colleges are seen by their proponents as
institutions uniquely sensitive to the needs of the local
community. James Thornton (1962), a nationally recognized
authority on the community college, makes a strong case for
the institution in the American system of higher education:
3
The community college philosophy sees the college
as a creation and servant of mankind, responsible
to the will of its creator, ready to adapt to
changing educational needs with appropriate edu
cational opportunities. Its curriculums are to
be judged to be effective or ineffective, good or
bad, not by reference to any inherited definition
but in relation to their effects on people. (p. 1)
The open-door admissions policy of the community
colleges of California and most other states has some
rather profound implications for those interested in stu
dent personnel work and curriculum building. Selective
colleges and universities can limit the diversity of their
student bodies by manipulation of admissions standards,
tuition, scholarship and probation policies and recruitment
methods. The community colleges, on the other hand, cannot
regulate effectively the composition of their student bod
ies. The long-term trend in American higher education to
wards increasingly heterogeneous student populations has
been multiplied several times over in the community college
student body.
Compared to the voluminous studies of the under
graduate populations of colleges and universities, the lit
erature of the community college student is rather narrowly
based and often so broad in its conclusions as to be of
little value in application. Nevertheless, two broad
trends seem to be emerging which are having, and will con
tinue to have, major effects upon educational policy making
4
in the community college.
Over the past twenty-five years an increasing pro
portion of community college students come from urban
areas. Blacks and other minorities, screened out by urban
universities, see the community college as the first step
towards higher education. The new community college stu
dent is the first generation college student, the poor
reader and late bloomer who needs the community college for
remedial and transitional work (Brazziel, 1970). Roveche
and Hurlburt (1968) described the community college student
body as becoming more nearly representative of the total
community population; mentally, sociall and academically
more heterogeneous than ever before. Thus, the remedial,
or salvage, function has been added to transfer, vocational
and community education and service as increasing numbers
of lower ability students aspire to college training (Lemb-
ke, 1968) .
More and more community colleges are observing that
larger proportions of their full time students are those
with lower academic ability. In a 1964 study Schenz found
that, even though ninety-one percent of the community col
leges surveyed admitted low ability students, only thirty
percent had designed special programs and curricula for
them.
A more recent study by Hoyt and Munday (1969) cor
5
roborated the findings of earlier researchers. In a study
of community college students in eighty-five schools the
students were found to be less able academically than their
peers at 205 four-year colleges. However, academic poten
tial among community college students ranged so widely that
the least able students in one college would be well above
average in another. The academic ability among students in
several community colleges was found to be well above the
average in typical four-year institutions.
Community college students have been reported in a
variety of studies of student characteristics as inferior
to four-year students in academic abilities as measured by
standardized aptitude tests. The average community college
student ranks at about the thirtieth percentile on scales
designed for four-year college and university students
(American College Testing Program, 1969).
The conclusions of the American College Testing
Program reported above support an earlier California study
cited by Medsker (1960) in which community college students
scored from ten to fourteen points lower than four-year
college students on intelligence tests. A study by Cooley
and Becker (1966) of data from Project Talent indicated
that, in general, community college students were more like
non-college youth than four-year college students in terms
of academic abilities.
6
The implications for the community college of large
numbers of lower ability students seeking higher education
have been stated by Monroe (1972):
What has happened to the American high schools
since 1930 is now happening to the American college.
When 50 percent or more of a high school graduating
class presents itself for admission to the col
leges, then the colleges are in trouble. The old
notions of what a college is and what constitutes
a college faculty and curriculum fly out the aca
demic window. And when in less than a generation
75 percent of the high school graduates seek col
lege admission, then the colleges are faced with
a serious problem. Even at the 50 percent level,
colleges have some hard decisions to make. This
is where programs for the disadvantaged enter the
picture. (p. 106)
As increasing numbers of students whose academic
and personality characteristics place them in the "high
risk" category enter the community college, the obligation
to provide meaningful and relevant educational experiences
for these students increases. For many of these students
the open door is also a revolving door.
There would seem to be two potential courses of ac
tion which could prove to be beneficial to these students:
First, institutions must begin to change curricular and in
structional strategies in order to take advantage of the
skills already possessed by these students and, secondly,
intensive remedial work must be done in the area of the
communications skills. Instructional strategies aimed at
7
improving skills must be utilized in all of the academic
and technical areas. Responsibilities for skill improve
ment are institution-wide. However, a major weakness of
much of what passes for remedial work is its tendency to
isolate the student and fragment his educational experi
ence.
This study, directed at skill development, is not
to be construed as a denial of the validity of the push
for curricular reform. It is an attempt to provide stu
dents with an opportunity to sharpen a critical, and fre
quently ignored, college survival skill.
Importance of the Study
Rankin (1926) conducted the first major study deal
ing with the importance of listening comprehension skill.
The subjects of Rankin's study were asked to keep detailed
logs of the time spent engaging in reading, writing, speak
ing and listening. Over a sixty day period twenty-one sub
jects reported that they spent an average of seventy per
cent of their working day engaging in some form of communi
cation. Of the time spent in communicating, Rankin's sub
jects reported that forty-two percent was devoted to lis
tening, thirty-two percent to talking, fifteen percent to
reading and eleven percent to writing.
8
Rankin's findings concerned the time spent in com
munication by the general population. A study by Markgraf
(1957) of secondary school students found that listening
activities comprised forty-six percent of their class time.
In English classes students were expected to listen ninety-
seven percent of the time.
Rankin and Markgraf1s findings were confirmed in a
study by Bird (1960) in which it was reported that high
school students spent forty-eight percent of their time in
listening activities, twenty-three percent speaking, six
teen percent reading, and twelve percent writing.
A search of the literature failed to unconver stud
ies which paralleled those of Rankin, Markgraf and Bird re
garding time spent in listening at the college and univer
sity level. However, the prevalence of the lecture as a
pedagogical technique in higher education would indicate
that research findings regarding the general population and
secondary school students might well be generalizable to
college and university students.
The importance of listening skill to success in
college has been widely recognized by educators. The Com
mission on the English Curriculum of the National Council
of Teachers of English (1952) devoted one chapter in The
English Language Arts to a discussion of the importance of
listening skill and its relationship to scholastic success.
9
Studies by Brown (1955) and Blewett (1955) provided
support for assertions of the importance of listening skill
to academic success. Brown's study found that graduates
with honors at the University of Minnesota scored signifi
cantly higher in tests of listening comprehension than did
graduates in general. Blewett reported correlations be
tween listening and grade point average of .37 and reading
and grade point average of .38 which led him to the conclu
sion that listening and reading contributed equally to aca
demic success.
With reference to community college students, the
importance of the development of listening skill as a de
sirable goal of general education was stated by Johnson
(1952). Collins (1967) saw listening comprehension skill
as critical to the success of community college students:
Students cannot progress in any type of collegiate
training until they first achieve better mastery
of tool subjects or the symbol systems: reading,
composition, listening, speech, fundamental logic
and arithmetic. (p. 26)
While the importance of skill in listening has been
stressed by researchers and educators, this skill has been
viewed as of particular importance to lower ability stu
dents. Hawk (1965), in a study of the relationship of lis
tening skill and reading skill to efficient learning in
secondary schools, concluded that listening was the superi-
10
or mode of learning for low ability students, reading was
the superior mode for high ability students and that read
ing and listening were equally efficient for average abil
ity students. Nichols and Lewis (1954), Montgomery (1970),
Caffrey (1949, 1955) and Taylor (1964) conducted studies
which supported the findings of Hawk. In summarizing the
findings of a variety of studies Hawk concluded:
In general, less competent students, those judged
to be less intelligent and scholastically below
average show a marked preference for listening in
most learning situations and do retain more from
listening. Better students prefer to accomplish
more through, and do accomplish more through,
reading. (p. 17)
The importance of listening skill has not been lost
to American business and industry. In 1955 Frank Fisher,
director of the communications course of the American Man
agement Association stated:
Efficient listening is of such critical importance
to industry that as research and methodology im
prove I feel that training departments will have
to offer courses in this field. (Nichols, 1956,
p. 15)
Lewis (1954) surveyed the communications practices
of industrial organizations in the Los Angeles area and
found that listening training was a major factor in train
ing programs. A survey by Carter (1963) of 754 large
firms, to which 540 responded, revealed that 344 firms had
11
no listening improvement programs in existence or in con
templation; 43 firms had no such program but reflected an
interest in developing one; 153 firms had some sort of
training in listening improvement. Of the latter, 32 had
discrete programs of listening improvement training; 84
integrated such training in "communications" training pro
grams; 41 integrated it with "Human Relations" training
programs; and 63 firms reported some listening improvement
training in connection with "Conference Leadership" and/or
"Executive Development" training programs.
In most cases listening improvement training was
confined to management personnel. Carter's survey un
covered a lack of evaluation procedures in business train
ing courses and supplemented Duker's (1963) survey of the
500 largest United States corporations in which thirty per
cent reported that they provided some form of training in
listening. (Duker, 1970)
Laird and Hayes (1966) criticized the majority of
industrial and business listening courses and development
programs as "three hour quickies" which pretended to de
stroy lifetime habits.
Despite evidence regarding the amount of time de
voted to listening and its importance to academic success,
it has been largely ignored in the schools. Bird (1960)
described listening as "the orphan among the language arts"
12
largely due to its lack of identification with any of the
traditional areas of language study.
Bird's assertions were supported by Markgraf (1962)
whose survey of the status of listening training in 406
teacher training institutions found a large discrepancy
between professed attitudes towards listening training and
actual practice. Ziemann (1966) examined the content of
communications courses at eighty colleges and discovered
that listening improvement, while usually stated as a prin
cipal goal, was generally given only passing attention.
Objectives and Hypotheses
The principal objective of this study was the de
sign, administration and evaluation of a program designed
to improve the listening comprehension skills of selected
community college freshmen students.
The research hypothesis was stated as follows:
Community college freshman students in
introductory social science sections will
gain in listening comprehension, as com
pared to control group sections, through
participation in an eight-week unit of
instruction in listening comprehension
skill development.
13
The differential effect of training in listening
comprehension skill development upon specific subpopula
tions was also of interest. It was considered to be en
tirely possible that training would not be effective for
some groups of subjects and highly effective for others.
Failure of the experimental group, taken as a whole, to
achieve significant improvement, would not preclude the
possibility of significant improvement in listening skills
on the part of subpopulations within the total experimental
group. It was further hypothesized that the following sub
populations would gain in listening comprehension as com
pared to control group sections, through participation in
an eight-week unit of instruction in listening comprehen
sion skill development:
1. Male subjects
2. Female subjects
3. Subjects less than 20 years of age
4. Subjects 20 years of age and oyer
5. Subjects who indicated that a foreign language
was spoken in the home at least one-half time
6. Subjects who indicated that English was the
principal language spoken the home.
The general hypothesis and the hypotheses which
refer to the six populations mentioned above apply to gains
14
from pre- to post-test on the Brown-Carlsen Listening Com
prehension Test in terms of raw-score gains for the entire
test and raw-score gains for Section E (Lecture Comprehen
sion) . Section E gain-scores were of particular interest
as the experimental program was constructed to emphasize
the particular skills which are measured by Section E of
the Brown-Carlsen.
Definition of Terms
Listening. Webster has defined listening as "to
give ear, to hearken, to heed, to hear with attention." To
hear was defined as "To have the sense or faculty of per
ceiving sound, to become conscious of sound." Hearing does
not imply understanding or attention as does listening.
One may hear a conversation, the sound of children playing,
or a foreign language being spoken without giving attention
' or understanding.
Rankin (1926), in his pioneering dissertation on
listening comprehension, defined listening as the ability
to understand the spoken language. Most later researchers
have accepted Rankin's definition with minor qualifications
and extensions.
(
Brown (1954) suggested the term auding as a sub-
| stitute for listening in an effort to distinguish between
j
j
15
hearing and understanding the spoken language. Brown's
suggestion was seconded by Caffrey (1955) who defined the
term as the process of hearing, listening to, recognizing,
and interpreting or comprehending spoken language. Al
though the need to differentiate between the terms listen
ing and hearing exists, the term auding has not met with
wide acceptance in the literature. (Duker, 1969)
For the purposes of this study the term listening
was operationally defined as the ability to comprehend the
spoken language as measured by the Brown-Carlsen Listening
Comprehension Test. (1955)
Instruction and Practice. The training in listen
ing comprehension skill development consisted of an eight-
week unit (24, 50 minute sessions) of instruction in the
principles of effective listening as determined by re
searchers in the field and practice in the application of
these principles to a series of single-concept, taped lec
tures on the fundamental principles of the social sciences.
Community College Freshmen. Community college
freshmen are those students enrolled in six sections of So
cial Science 1 (Introduction to Social Science) at Skyline
College, San Bruno, California. Students enrolled in these
classes are first or second semester freshmen. Social Sci
ence 1 is recommended for students enrolled in two-year
programs and those students who have been identified as in
16
need of remedial work in the communications skills.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations
1. The study was limited to six sections of an
introductory course in the social sciences in one community
college.
2. Data obtained relative to listening comprehen
sion skills were limited by the reliability and validity of
the Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test.
3. The results of this study were limited in ap
plication to students of similar social, psychological, and
academic characteristics and to settings similar to that in
which the experimental program was conducted.
4. Randomization was not possible due to schedul
ing by student preference rather than the convenience of
the researcher.
5. The relatively high attrition rate among commu
nity college freshmen students could be a factor which
would jeopardize experimental validity.
Delimitations and Assumptions
1. This study, and the review of the related lit-
17
erature, is concerned primarily with the effect of training
in listening comprehension upon community college freshmen
students.
2. This study assumed that the three instructors
chosen to participate in the study were comparable in abil
ity, interest and dedication to the experimental program.
3. This study assumed that the treatment of exper
imental and control groups was identical with the exception
of the exposure to the experimental program.
4. This study assumed that subjects chosen for the
experimental program are representative of students who
will be enrolled in Social Science 1 sections in the future
and have characteristics which are similar to those of
lower-ability community college students in general.
5. This study assumed that the Brown-Carlsen Lis
tening Comprehension test was sensitive, reliable, and
valid.
Organization of the Remainder
of the Study
The remainder of this study is organized into four
chapters:
1. Chapter II: Review of the Related Literature.
This chapter begins with a general review of the research
18
on listening comprehension which outlines the historical
evolution of research in the field. The balance of the
review emphasizes the following areas of research: (1)
Studies which explore the nature of listening comprehension
as a psychological variable and as it relates to other lan
guage related skills, and (2) Studies which explore tech
niques designed to improve listening at the secondary and
collegiate levels.
2. Chapter III: Methodology. This chapter de
scribes the experimental program, outlines the research de
sign employed in the study, describes the pilot study con
ducted and the process used to select the subjects for the
study. In addition, the instrument utilized in estimating
listening comprehension skills, the Brown-Carlsen Listening
Comprehension test, is described and evaluated.
3. Chapter IV: Findings. In this chapter the
findings of the study are presented with respect to each of
the research hypotheses.
4. Chapter V: Summary, Conclusions, Recommenda
tions. This chapter presents a summary of the first four
chapters, the conclusions reached in the study, and makes
recommendations for implementation of the research findings
and for further study.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This Chapter reviews the literature in the follow
ing areas:
1. Studies which explore the nature of listening as a
psychological variable and as it relates to other
language-related skills
2. Studies which explore techniques designed to im
prove listening comprehension skills at the second
ary and college levels
Studies Relative to The Nature
of Listening As a
Psychological Variable
Recent research in the area of listening skills has
emphasized the complex nature of listening. Hackett (1955)
summarized the attitude of the majority of the researchers
in the field:
If the teaching of listening is to become a val
uable part of our school program it must start
from a base - the social psychology of perception
and cognition, attitude formation and change, the
19
20
relation of culture and language to the develop
ment of listening habits of children and the
nature of adult listening. (pp. 350-51)
Bakan (1956) was especially critical of researchers
who viewed listening as a unitary skill. He suggested that
the emphasis upon listening as a unitary skill, as opposed
o to a complex of abilities, minimized the importance of
other psychological variables. In particular, Bakan felt
that listening skill was dependent upon intellectual, moti
vational and personality variables. This position was sup
ported by evidence obtained by Haberland (1956), who exam
ined the relationship of listening to reading, Blewett
(1949), who studied the contribution of general intelli
gence to listening comprehension, and Crook's (1957) study
of listening and reading, writing, and speaking, as well as
general academic ability.
Listening and Reading
The relationship between listening comprehension
skill and reading has been intensively studied. Crook
(1957), in a study of mental ability, language ability,
reading comprehension and study skills in 141 tenth-grade
students, concluded that transmittive (speaking and writ
ing) and receptive (listening and reading) skills tend to
form two separate clusters. Despite Crook's assertions
21
regarding the similarities of listening and reading as re
ceptive skills, he concluded that:
Correlations as a whole tend to show that each of
these selected language abilities studied is re
lated in a positive manner to the other language
abilities, independent of the effects of intelli
gence. (p. 305)
Haberland's (1956) study of the listening abilities
of 110 college freshmen reported high correlations among
the results of listening comprehension tests. However, the
listening tests results were found to yield significantly
different comparisons when correlated with reading tests.
Haberland concluded that listening ability is probably a
combination of abilities working in association with each
other. These findings supported an earlier study by Ble-
wett (1949) in which a significant difference between lis
tening and reading skills was found.
Rose (1958) reported high correlations between
scores on the Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test
and five widely used reading tests. However, Rose sug
gested caution in concluding that reading and listening
scores correlated highly, because to a high degree all of
the tests were measuring general intelligence. When intel
ligence was held constant, the correlations between lis
tening test scores and the reading tests dropped signifi
cantly. Similar findings were reported in a later study
22
by Bonner (1961).
High correlations between listening and reading
skills have been reported in a variety of studies. Table
1 presents a compilation of the correlations reported in a
sampling of the literature. With one exception, Abrams
(1964), the correlations were reported to be significant at
the .01 level. Abrams explained this relatively low corre
lation, which differed from previous studies, as a result
of the nature of the subject population and the manner in
which sub-test scores on the Nelson-Denny were weighted in
order to obtain a total score.
TABLE 1
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN LISTENING
AND READING IN SELECTED STUDIES
Study r
Johnson (1948) .52
Nichols (1948) .46
Heilman (1951) .66
Erickson (1954) .67
Still (1955) .44
Rose (1958) .60
Bonner (1960) .65
Trivette (1961) .61
Abrams (1964) .28
23
Listening and Verbal Ability
Studies which have investigated the relationship
of verbal ability to listening skill have yielded mixed,
and often contradictory, results. Blewett (1951), Brown
and Carlsen (1957), Haberland (1956, 1959) Hall (1954) and
Howe (1960) have found that verbal ability contributes sig
nificantly to listening skill.
Hall (1954), in a study of grade school children,
demonstrated that children with higher listening than read
ing scores tended to have higher "language" than "non-lan
guage" IQ scores.
Brilhart (1965), Brown (1959), Howe (1960), Stark
(1956) and Stites (1948) conducted studies in which general
verbal ability was found not to make a significant contri
bution to listening comprehension skill.
Brilhart (1965) examined the relationship between
listening comprehension skill and the ability to describe
orally a series of geometric figures of three grades of
complexity'.' In general, correlations between ability to
describe orally and listening, as measured by the Brown-
Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test were not found to be
significant.
The relationships between expressed interest in
listening and verbal flexibility to listening skill in 51
24
college speech students were studied by Brown (1959). The
author reported that he found no relationship between lis
tening ability and verbal flexibility, as measured by the
ability to make a large number of word associations in a
given time.
Stites (1948) studied the contribution of speech
effectiveness to listening skill. 173 freshmen students
were judged, by a panel of five experts, as to speech ef
fectiveness. The twenty most effective speakers were com
pared to the twenty least effective on the basis of lis
tening test scores. No significant difference between ef
fective and ineffective speakers were found.
Listening and Vocabulary
Vocabulary level would appear to be an obvious con
comitant of listening comprehension. Nichols (1948) enu
meration of factors which influence listening comprehension
as a significant element includes vocabulary. However,
vocabulary level alone is not the critical factor in deter
mining listening skill. Studies by Blewett (1951) Haber-
land (1956, 1959) and Trenaman (1951) have shown that lis
tening comprehension is only partially affected by vocabu
lary level. Vocabulary is seen to be one of a number of
related factors which influence listening behavior.
25
Erickson (1954) studied the contribution of several
language related skills to listening comprehension and re
ported a correlation between listening test scores and vo
cabulary of .67. 'In his review of the literature Erickson
estimated that the average correlation obtained in studies
of listening and vocabulary was approximately .46.
Anderson and Fairbanks (1937) administered the Iowa
Silent Reading Test and two forms of the Inglis Test of En
glish Vocabulary to 220 college freshmen. One form of the
Inglis Test was orally administered and the other adminis
tered in the usual written form. The authors found corre
lations between oral and written vocabulary of .80 and be
tween oral vocabulary and the Iowa Silent Reading Test of
.61. In addition, a correlation of .80 between reading
test scores and reading vocabulary was obtained. Both oral
and written vocabulary were found to be closely related to
intelligence. The results of this study were closely re
lated to those reported by Young (1951). Vocabulary level
appears to be a general skill which operates independent of
the mode of presentation.
Petri (1961) concluded that vocabulary level plays
a significant part in the development of skill in listen
ing. Nicholson (1947) studied lecture listening comprehen
sion and demonstrated that misinterpretation of a speakers
message frequently resulted from vocabulary limitations.
26
Nicholson's findings were subsequently supported in a study
by Sticht (1969) who investigated the possibility of sub
stituting listening for require reading for marginally
literate army personnel. Sticht concluded:
Low aptitude men display a deficiency in recog
nizing individually spoken words. This may ac
count, in part, for some of their reading and
listening difficulties. (p. vi)
Listening and the Ability
to Structure Material
Researchers have suggested that the ability to
structure material being heard is basic to listening skill.
Nichols and Lewis (1954) have been concerned with the con
tribution of the ability to structuralize material state
that:
...good listeners focus on central ideas, they
tend to recognize the characteristic language in
which central ideas are usually stated, and they
have the ability to discriminate between fact and
principle, idea and example, evidence and argu
ment. Poor listeners tend to lack these powers,
(p. 21)
Petri (1961) cited a study by E. C. Thompson in
which individuals with higher levels of organizational
skill made significantly higher scores on both immediate
and delayed recall than did those with a lower level of or
ganizational skill.
27
Adams (1947) and Emsley, et. al. (1943) have sug
gested that the ability to understand the main points and
the organizational plan of an oral presentation is one of
the most important skills needed for effective listening.
Using 171 college speech students as subjects,
Campbell (1959) found correlations between scores on the
Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test and his own test
of ability to structure material auded to be .53.
Roughton (1959), using 69 high school English stu
dents with reading difficulties, reported that intensive
discussion and teaching of sentence structure had no appre
ciable effect on reading skills, but did have a signifi
cantly favorable effect on listening skills, as measured by
the Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test.
Abrams (1966) administered the Brown-Carlsen and
the Knower-Goyer Organization Test to a group of pre-col
lege summer session students who did not qualify for regu
lar admission to the University of Maryland. The correla
tion obtained between the Brown-Carlsen and the Knower-
Goyer was reported as .39. It was concluded that, despite
the common elements in the tests, the hypothesis that the
ability to perceive the structure of a written message
correlates significantly and positively with listening com
prehension was supported. Abrams' study suggested a
"structuralization" component of listening comprehension.
28
Listening and Speaker Quality
Writers and researchers in the area of communica
tion have long assumed that the quality of the speaker,
in terms of personality, speech organization and style of
delivery, influences the effectiveness of communication.
Haiman (1949), Nichols (1960), and others, have suggested
that listening effectiveness may be improved if the lis
tener will concentrate upon the structure of the communica
tion and suspend judgment as to personality factors and
style of delivery. Effective listening is often inhibited
as the listener reacts to appearance, voice, mannerisms,
emotion-laden terms and general considerations of style of
delivery. Stromer (1954) has conjectured that:
In training ourselves and others to better lis
teners I should think one important step would be
to realize what kinds of sights and sounds gener
ate favorable or unfavorable reactions in us.
(p. 323)
The credibility of the communicator apparently has
little influence upon listening comprehension. Hovland,
Janis and Kelley (1953) have shown that credibility has an
effect upon a speaker's ability to influence the listener's
attitudes, but relatively little impact upon comprehension.
The results of experiments designed to evaluate
the impact of speech delivery have been mixed. Downing
29
(1971) demonstrated that listening comprehension tends to
decline as the rate of speech increases in both high and
low ability subjects. Pierce and David (1958) suggested
that listening comprehension deterioriates as speech rate
increases because the brain is unable to recognize and in
terpret auditory symbols at increased rates of delivery.
The results of Downing's study and the assertions
of Pierce and David are in direct opposition to the widely-
accepted view of Nichols (1949) that lack of comprehension
may be due to the discrepancy between the typical rate of
speech delivery and the rate at which thought occurs. Ni
chols suggested that listening comprehension could be in
creased by increasing the rate of speech. Sticht (1969)
has shown that listeners can assimilate information auraly
at higher than normal rates of delivery without significant
loss of comprehension. However, comprehension tends to de-
terioriate at excessive speeds.
Diehl and McDonald (1956) were unable to prove ex
perimentally that moderately poor vocal quality or fluency
interfered to any great extent with the listener's ability
to understand. Similar results were reported for both
grade-school students and college freshmen in a study by
Utzinger (1953). Regional accents are also relatively un
important as influences upon listener comprehension (Orr
and Graham, 1968).
30
The impact of trained and untrained speakers upon
audience comprehension is unclear. Knower (1944) and
Knower, Phillips and Koeppel (1945) found trained speakers
more able to effect immediate recall than untrained speak
ers. Haiman (1948), Beighley (1952) and Highlander (1954)
were unable to detect significant differences in immediate
recall, regardless of the quality of the speaker. Beighley
(1952) suggested that the influence of speaker delivery
upon listening comprehension has been overrated.
Listening and
Scholastic Achievement
The relationship of listening comprehension skill
to scholastic achievement has been studied by several re
searchers. Blewett (1951), Brown and Carlsen (1955), Brew
ster (1957), Still (1955) and Haberland (1956, 1959) have
reported moderate to relatively high coefficients of corre
lation (.24 to .71) between listening test scores and grade
point averages at both the secondary and the collegiate
levels.
Blewett (1951) and Nichols (1952) compared correla
tions between reading ability and grades and listening
ability and grades. Their findings that the correlations
between the two sets were of approximately equal size led
both researchers to the conclusion that reading skill and
31
listening skill contributed equally to academic success.
Petri (1961) suggested that the reason for the similarities
in obtained correlations was that both tests were largely
measures of the same variable, general intelligence.
Condon (1965) studied the relationship of listening
test scores to scholastic achievement and several commonly
used predictors of academic success and concluded:
...listening is positively related to reading,
intellectual ability, GPA in English, and GPA in
all school subjects; that is, students who score
high on a standardized test in listening also
score high on a standardized test of reading and
of intellectual ability. (p. 144)
Studies by Christensen (1961) and Meyers and Gates
(1966) failed to find significant relationships between
listening and grades. Canute (1965) reported that scores
on a listening test used in conjunction with a scholastic
aptitude test served as a predictor of grades for college
freshmen. Canute did not find a significant relationship
between grades and listening test scores taken alone.
Listening and Intelligence
Studies by Blewett (1955), Dow (1954), Haberland
(1959), Heilman (1951), Petrie (1961), Krueger (1950),
Kramar (1955), Nichols (1948) and Johnson (1951) have at
tempted to determine the relationship between listening
32
comprehension and intelligence. Since Rankin's (1926)
pioneering dissertation on listening, researchers have
sought to determine if general intelligence is a control
ling factor in listening skill. The question is of special
interest to researchers who are interested in the potential
of listening instruction as a technique for the improvement
of comprehension. If intelligence is a controlling factor,
the potential of training for improved listening skill
would appear to be limited. Moderately high correlations
between intelligence and listening have been reported in
several studies. Table 2 represents the results of a sam
ple of studies which investigated the association between
listening and intelligence.
TABLE 2
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN LISTENING
AND INTELLIGENCE IN SELECTED STUDIES
Study r
Nichols (1948) .53
Krueger (1950) .41
Heilman (1951) .56
Johnson (1951) .33
Erickson (1954) .77
Still (1955) .54
Bonner (1961) .38
33
Erickson (1954) estimated the average correlation
obtained in a variety of studies of listening and intelli
gence to be on the order of .46.
Larsen and Feder (1940) found that intelligence and
reading ability tend to be more closely associated than in
telligence and listening ability. Blewett (1951) concluded
that:
Scholastic aptitude, or general intelligence, ap
pears to have some relationship to listening com
prehension. However, this relationship is not
substantial enough to justify the use of a scho
lastic aptitude test for the prediction of lis
tening effectiveness. (p. 583)
Studies by Brassard (1968), Childers (1970), Heil
man (1951), Vineyard and Bailey (1960), Hill (1961), Haber-
land (1959) and Erickson (1954) have demonstrated that the
relationship of intelligence to listening comprehension is
much stronger with students of lower intelligence and aca
demic ability. In high intelligence and academic ability
students the correlations between reading and intelligence
are higher than those of intelligence and listening compre
hension. Bassard (1968) studied the relationships among
intelligence, reading skill and listening skill in elemen
tary school children and suggested that:
Statistical comparisons between reading comprehen
sion and listening comprehension reveal that lis
34
tening is a far better channel for learning among
the slower students. (p. 174)
Hawk (1965), Nichols and Lewis (1954), Montgomery
(1970), Caffrey (1949, 1955) and Taylor (1964) conducted
studies in which Bassard's findings were essentially sup
ported with respect to secondary and college students.
Intelligence appears to be an important, although
not a controlling, influence upon listening comprehension
skill. Investigators have generally concluded that, for
students of lower intelligence and academic ability, the
relationship of listening skill to intelligence is not par
ticularly close and that for these students listening is
the preferred, and most efficient, mode of learning.
Listening and Mode
of Presentation
There have been relatively few studies of the ef
fect of the mode of presentation upon listening comprehen
sion. Nichols (1960) , Stromer (L954) and others have sug
gested that speaker mannerisms and general appearance in
fluence comprehension. It has been assumed that comprehen
sion is enhanced by visual cues provided by the speaker.
Casambre (1962) found that visual clues aided aural com
prehension and retention of speech content when delayed
recall was tested. No significant differences were found
35
in recall between subjects who listened to a taped presen
tation and the same speech delivered with the speaker
present.
Bohn (1964) conducted a study of the impact of mode
of presentation upon immediate and delayed recall. One
hundred and twenty college speech students were divided in
to two groups. One group viewed a twelve-minute televised
speech and the second heard only the audio portion. Bohn
found no significant differences between the groups in ei
ther immediate or delayed recall. A portion of each group
was promised exemption from the course final examination
if they scored high on the test used to measure recall.
Both groups promised the reward of exemption scored sig
nificantly higher than the groups who were not promised the
reward regardless of mode of presentation. It was hypothe
sized that higher performance was due to anxiety produced
c.
by the promised reward. Higgins (1964) studied the rela
tionship of anxiety to listening comprehension and produced
evidence that anxiety had little or no impact upon compre
hension.
Studies by Brooks and Wulftange (1964), Gaugher
(1952) and Jones (1961) failed to find significant differ-
i
i ences in comprehension between groups of subjects exposed
to televised speeches and speeches with the speaker present
| and recorded speeches and the same speeches with the
i
36
speaker present. Jones found no significant differences
in scores on the Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension
Test when subjects were given the test on tape and when the
test was administered with the speaker present.
Anderson (1951) and Brooks and Wulftange (1964)
have produced evidence that televised and speeches or lec
tures with the speaker present are more effective in pro
ducing attitudinal changes and eliciting aesthetic re
sponses than are purely aural modes of communications.
However, in situations where recall of information and con
cepts are concerned, comprehension appears to be unrelated
to the mode of presentation.
Listening and
Listening Experience
Research has been reported by Nichols (1948, 1949,
1954) to show that individuals who have had more experience
in difficult listening tasks score higher on standardized
listening comprehension tests than those who have had lit
tle experience in difficult listening situations. Studies
by Beighley (1952) and Erickson (1954) have reported no
significant differences between listening scores of those
who have spent little or a great deal of time in listening
tasks.
37
Listening and Sex
Hall (1954), Hampleman (1958), Irvin (1953), King
(1959), Caffrey (1955) and Dow (1953) have reported that
male subjects tend to score higher than females on listen
ing comprehension tests. Condon's (1965) study of 874
secondary students failed to find any significant sex dif
ferences in listening comprehension. Haberland (1958) re
ported that women scored significantly higher on the Brown-
Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test than men with or with
out the speaker present. It appears likely that obtained
sex differences in listening comprehension may be traced to
conditions in the testing environment and not intrinsic
differences between the sexes.
Listening and
Aural Acuity
That individuals with relatively serious hearing
loss cannot comprehend verbal communications efficiently
can be accepted as obviously true. In studies of adults
with normal aural acuity Ainsworth and High (1954) Blewett
(1951, 1955) and Larsen and Feder (1940) have reported that
the ability to differentiate between sounds has little or
no effect upon listening comprehension test scores.
Sticht (1969) suggested that difficulties in dis
38
crimination among speech sounds may account for problems
in reading and listening however, his conclusions were not
supported by experimental results.
Listening and Personality
Nichols (1949) and Haberland (1952, 1959) have re
ported very low correlations between listening comprehen
sion and a variety of personality characteristics. Higgins
(1964) studied the relationship between listening and anxi
ety in 181 college freshmen. He used the STEP Listening
Test and the Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test as
listening measures and the Manifest Anxiety Scale and the
Test Anxiety Scale as measures of anxiety. Higgins report
ed no significant correlations between listening and anxi
ety and no significant differences in performance on the
listening tests between subjects identified as high and
low anxious.
Brown (1959) and Nichols (1948, 1949, 1954) have
reported that poor listeners tend to overestimate their
listening skills while good listeners tend to underestimate
or correctly estimate their skills.
Stromer (1952) suggested that listening is closely
related to personality factors and that the relationship of
listening to personality is closer than that of listening
39
to intelligence. He observed that listening comprehension
is negatively influenced by such personality characteris
tics as feelings of insecurity, feelings of inferiority,
fear of failure and personal worries.
Bird (1960) and Kelley (1963) suggested that emo
tional and social maturity are necessary concomitants to
effective listening. Stromer (1954) feels that the good
listener has a wide range of interests and respects others
and their points of view. The good listener
...understands his own attitudes and interests well
enough that he doesn't need to jump to their de
fense even in a situation where he hears ideas ex
pressed which conflict with his own. (p. 325)
Petrie (1961) summarized the status of research on
personality factors in listening by stating that no empiri
cal evidence has been produced which establishes a definite
relationship between listening comprehension skill and per
sonality variables.
Listening and Motivation
Nichols and Lewis (1954) have observed that good
listeners are highly motivated to listen and find something
interesting about a variety of topics. Poor listeners, on
the other hand, often find topics uninteresting.
Gauger (1952), Brown (1959), Heath (1952), and
40
Karraker (1952) have conducted studies in which the sub
jects were asked to estimate interest in a topic prior to
having the listening experience. In each of these studies
it was found that an expressed interest in the subject and
comprehension were not significantly related.
Contrary findings have been reported by Hovland,
Janis and Kelley (1953) and Cantril and Allport (1935) who
concluded that motivation must be aroused if the content of
a speech is to be learned. Cantril and Allport (1935) sug
gested that even the simplest material would not be learned
or learned very slowly, unless interest is aroused and
maintained throughout the speech. Trenaman (1951) found
that the presentation must offer new and interesting mate
rial, otherwise initially expressed interest will disap
pear .
Stromer (1952) suggested that attitudes and emo
tions, when added to expressed interest in a subject, cre
ate a "set to learn" which may interfere with or assist in
effective listening. Carlton (1954) has demonstrated that
listeners comprehend the spoken word better when they heard
words that were in agreement with their own personal val
ues.
Berio (1957), Matthews (1947) and Pence (1954)
have reported studies in which the listener's initial at
titudes towards a subject had no influence upon recall of
41
speech content. Hoveland, et. al. (1953) suggested that
the intensity of opinions and attitudes held was more im
portant than their direction. They concluded that the
strongly opinionated listener, pro or con, was more in
clined to pay close attention and to review the lecture
material afterwards, which would facilitate retention.
Their findings are in contradiction to Nichols' (1952) view
that emotion-laden words, and emotion-arousing style of
presentation, tend to interfere with listening comprehen
sion.
Studies Relative to the Improvement
of Listening Comprehension at the
Secondary and College Levels
Researchers in the area of listening comprehension
skill development have, to a considerable extent, proceeded
from the assumption that an understanding of the structure
of verbal communication is central to efficient listening
comprehension. Studies by Nichols and Lewis (1954), Petrie
(1961), Abrams (1947), Emsley, et. al. (1943), Campbell
(1959), Roughton (1959) and Abrams (1966) lend experimental
support to this assumption.
Petrie (1961) concluded that, of the many compo
nents of most listening training programs, only four appear
42
to significantly influence listening ability. These are;
(1) motivation to listen, (2) linguistic skill, (3) skill
in verbal organization and (4) practice in directed lis
tening.
Nichols (1952), perhaps the most influential writer
and researcher in the area of listening skill development,
has suggested that programs designed to improve listening
skill ought to be based upon specific objectives. Nichols
lists these objectives as:
1. To develop a respect for listening as a medium
of learning
2. To eliminate bad listening habits already ac
quired
3. To increase markedly experience in listening
to difficult informative speech
4. To develop the basic skills essential to good
listening habits
5. To co-ordinate specific listening assignments
with speaking, reading and writing (p. 165)
Nichols stressed the primary importance of an un
derstanding of the structure of speech communication in the
development of efficient listening. He concluded that the
ability to recognize main and subordinate ideas and to re
late them to the structure of the speech are of particular
importance.
Hackett (1970), after an analysis of a number of
43
studies, suggested that listening ability could be arranged
in the following hierarchy of skills arranged from simple
to complex:
1. Identifying stated main ideas
2. Providing examples by detail
3. Reinstating a sequence of ideas
4. Inferring the main idea from specifics
5. Identifying mood
6. Applying standards to judge persuasion
7. Predicting the sequence of thought
8. Inferring connotations and word meaning
9. Identifying sequence ambiguities
10. Inferring the speaker's or writer's purpose
11. Judging logical validity (p. 5)
Fessenden (1955) hypothesized seven levels of lis
tening and suggested that:
The teaching of listening should tend to encourage
variation in level, flexibility, for shifting of
levels, and the choice of the most appropriate
level for the specific occasion. (p. 289)
The seven levels of listening were:
Level 1. The listener learns how to isolate sounds,
ideas, arguments, facts and organization. At this
level there is little or no evaluation or analysis
but, rather, an attempt to recognize specific in
dependent items.
44
Level 2. The listener learns to give meaning to
those aspects which have been isolated.
Level 3. The listener learns to integrate what is
heard with his past experiences. This process is
partly conscious and partly unconscious.
Level 4. The listener learns to inspect the new,
and the general, configuration of the new and old
data.
Level 5. The listener learns to interpret what is
heard.
Level 6. The listener learns to interpolate com
ments that are heard. The listener infers the
meaning of the spoken word.
Level 7. The listener learns to introspect or to
examine his own feelings and the manner in which
his attitudes, values and feelings influence com
munication. (p. 290)
Hook (1949), Taylor (1964), Cease and Haley (1969),
and DeSousa and Cowles (1967) have examined the listening
process and concluded that the ability to understand the
structure of the communication and to grasp the main ideas
contained in communication is critical to effective lis
tening.
Way (1973) has suggested that the purpose of the
listener determines the energy and skill he brings to bear
to the task. He makes a distinction between casual and
intent listening. Intent listening is
That type of listening wherein focus is intently
held on the development of a theme in order to
elicit facts, sequence of ideas, to attain fuller
understanding of content and to detect the main
ideas and purposes of the speaker. (p. 273)
Efficient listening is frequently blocked by some
rather common assumptions about the nature of the act of
listening. Bird (1955) listed the nine common misconcep
tions which may account for a considerable amount of in
efficient listening and, at the same time, retarded re
search in the area. These assumptions, shared, at least to
some degree, by educators and laymen are:
1. Listening is a passive function
2. Listening is easy
3. Hearing is listening
4. Listening is an automatic, involuntary reflex
5. Listening can be commanded
6. Speaking is more important than listening
7. The speaker is 100 percent responsible for the
success of communication
8. Listening skill comes naturally
9. Listening is only a matter of understanding
the speaker's words (p. 18)
Nichols (1956) stressed the need to understand the
basic principles of effective listening upon which instruc
tion aimed at improvement of listening comprehension should
be based. These principles, according to Nichols are:
46
1. The listener, not the speaker, is primarily
responsible for any learning which may take
place.
2. A speaker's point must be fully understood
before it can be judged accurately.
3. The contribution of note-taking to efficient
listening depends upon the utilization of the
notes taken.
4. Sustained attention to oral discourse depends
upon the listener1s continual mental manipula
tion of its contents.
a) mental anticipation of each of the speaker's
points
b) identification of the materials used to sup
port each point
c) mental recapitulation of points already de
veloped
d) an occasional search for implied meaning
(p. 16)
Nichols places primary responsibility for the suc
cess of communication upon the listener. Surveys by Mark-
graf (1962) and Ziemann (1966) provide evidence that col
lege and universities, despite stated recognition of the
importance of listening, emphasize the role of the speaker
in communication. Nichols (1952, 1956) and others feel
that this lack of recognition of the responsibility of the
listener in communication has created a widespread problem
in which inefficient listening, due largely to inappropri
ate attitudes and bad listening habits, makes the aural as
similation of information difficult at best. Nichols (1956)
47
has identified ten common habits which have a negative ef
fect upon listening comprehension:
1. Calling the subject uninteresting
2. Criticizing the speaker's delivery
3. Getting overstimulated by some point within
the speech
4. Listening only for facts
5. Trying to take all notes in outline form
6. Taking attention to the speaker
7. Tolerating or creating a distraction
8. Avoiding difficult expository material
9. Letting emotion-laden words arouse personal
antagonism
10. Wasting the advantage of thought speed over
speech speed (p. 16)
Lewis (1960) has suggested that listening training,
in order to be effective, must be based upon specific goals
which are consistent with what is known about the listening
process. Lewis' statement of the goals of listening in
struction is similar to those suggested by Nichols (1952,
1956).
1. He (the listener) is aware of the importance
of listening in the learning process
2. He (the listener) understands the roles of the
speaker and the listener in the communications
process
48
3. He (the listener) listens through to the end
of a discourse before he attempts to draw
conclusions
4. He (the listener) can follow directions given
orally
5. He (the listener) adjusts his listening to the
purpose at hand
6. He (the listener) enjoys listening
7. He (the listener) is a critical listener
(pp. 456-457)
The assertions of the authors mentioned above re
garding the nature of listening skill, goals and objectives
upon which listening training should be based and the hab
its and attitudes which either retard or facilitate the de
velopment of listening comprehension skill have a measure
of logical validity. However, as Broiles (1969), Laird and
Hayes (1966), Petrie (1961) and others have suggested, the
quality and conclusiveness of listening research has been
of a questionable nature. Due to the lack of solid empiri
cal evidence upon which a theoretical model of the listen
ing process may be based, these assertions lack scientific
credibility. As Gray and Wise (1959) have stated
The actual amount of objective information obtained
as a result of careful research employing rigorous
scientific procedures is so meager that any gener
alizations with reference to the process would be
precarious if not in most cases actually invalid.
(p. 61)
49
One of the earliest studies which involved an at
tempt to increase listening comprehension skills through
instruction was done by Irvin (1953). A pilot study done
at Michigan State University yielded results which indi
cated that students were generally incapable of identifying
the main points of a well-organized lecture. In addition,
it was discovered that the subjects of the study were only
sixty-percent accurate when asked to draw inferences from
materials presented orally. As a result of the findings of
the pilot study Irvin developed a series of seven units
which were given to 600 college freshmen. The listening
training units were integrated into the lecture material in
a basic communications course and consisted largely of a
review of the essentials of effective listening and at
tempts to motivate the students to become more effective
listeners. As a result of the training program Irvin con
cluded
1. A sufficient number of the processes involved
in listening can be positively influenced by
training to result in the improvement of lis
tening comprehension.
2. Listening training at Michigan State Univer
sity created a highly significant difference
between the experimental and the control
group. Differences in mean test scores were
found to be significant at the .01 level.
3. Listening training can be credited with a
very significant gain in listening skill among
the below average listeners. Over fifty per
50
cent of below average subjects lifted them
selves out of that category into the upper
levels.
4. Listening training was apparently not effec
tive with the above average listeners.
5. Male subjects performed significantly better
on the listening test than the female subjects.
Brown (1954) conducted a study at the University of
Minnesota in which he compared gains in listening skill
made by an experimental listening emphasis class of 24 sub
jects to those made by an equal number of subjects in a
control group. As a result of the one semester listening
training the experimental group subjects gained an average
of 8.45 raw score points on the Brown-Carlsen Listening
Comprehension Test. Control group subjects gained an aver
age 3.83 raw score points. The experimental group gains
were equal to a thirty-three percent raw score gain, which
raised the group from the twenty-ninth percentile of the
college freshman norms on the Brown-Carlsen to the sixty-
second percentile. Brown concluded that instruction in the
fundamentals of effective listening and practice in appli
cation of the fundamentals to lecture and discussion situa
tions, resulted in the significant gain scores. Brown fur
ther concluded that listening is as amenable to improvement
through instruction as its companion skill, reading.
A similar study was conducted by Canute (1965) in
51
which he examined the relative merits of three somewhat
similar methods of improving listening instruction. In all
three methods an understanding of the structure of verbal
communication was emphasized. The instruction was inte
grated into the content of a basic study skills course.
Canute reported significant gains in listening comprehen
sion, as measured by the Brown-Carlsen, for all three
groups after one semester.
In a study of effective listening and cognitive
learning at the college level Myers and Gates (1966) ad
ministered Basic System's Effective Listening tapes to 67
college students selected from basic psychology courses.
The post-test, which is part of this course, was adminis
tered to these students and to a control group. At the end
of ten days both groups were asked to summarize a class
lecture by stating main points and supporting reasons,
omitting irrelevant details. Ten weeks later a test simi
lar to the original post-test was administered. Except in
the case of the lecture summary, the performance of the ex
perimental group was significantly better than that of the
control group. The authors concluded that the Effective
Listening course, although designed for industry, did work
in a college setting.
Cease and Haley (1969) examined the feasibility of
offering an audio-tutorial no-credit course in listening
52
skill development. The audio-tutorial program developed by
Erway (1969) , which stresses understanding of structure and
utilizes a programmed test and tapes, was administered over
a period of three weeks to twenty-two college summer ses
sion freshmen. An equivalent number of subjects were des
ignated as a control group. As a result of the program the
pre- to post-test gains of the experimental group were
found to be statistically significant at the .01 level.
Gains made by the control group were not significant.
Using 309 college communications students as sub
jects, Erickson (1954) reported that students given twelve
weeks of systematic listening instruction showed a sig
nificantly greater increase in listening comprehension, as
measured by the Brown-Carlsen, than did students taking the
regular communications sequence. The experimental program
consisted of lectures on the principles of effective lis
tening and small group discussions.
Hill (1961) examined the results of special train
ing in listening as compared to training in reading. 96
freshman education students were divided into three groups:
one group was given training in reading, one in listening,
and one served as a control group. The 32 students who re
ceived training in listening were divided into two classes
of 16 each and given 16 training sessions of approximately
45 minutes each. Hill found that both training in listening
53
and reading resulted in significant gains in listening test
scores. There was no significant gain in either skill on
the part of the control group. Hill found that both verbal
and non-verbal intelligence were factors which strongly in
fluenced the potential for increasing listening skills.
Whitfield (1964) developed a six week listening
skill development program. The program consisted of 18,
50 minute training sessions. His subjects were 130 speech
students who engaged in a series of directed listening and
speaking activities combined with lectures which were de
voted to the principles of effective speech and listening.
Whitfield's study differed from many similar listening
skill building units in that a majority of the training
time was spent in actual listening experiences, rather than
lecture. At the end of the program students in the experi
mental and control groups were tested using the Brown-Carl
sen Listening Comprehension Test. The scores of the exper
imental group were found to be significantly higher than
those of the control group. As Whitfield did not pre-test
his subjects the finding of significant gains on the part
of the experimental group must be viewed with some suspi
cion and weakens his conclusions.
Seymour (1965) conducted a study in which he exam
ined the effect of instruction in reading, writing, speak
ing and listening given to students who had been identified
54
as non-proficient in these skills. In addition to the ef
fect of training in the initially non-proficient skill,
Seymour was interested in the effect of training in that
skill upon achievement in the other communications skills
and in critical thinking. The subjects of the study were
entering freshmen on the St. Paul campus of the University
of Minnesota.
Groups given special instruction in reading, lis
tening and speaking made significant gains in the areas of
instruction. The writing emphasis group did not achieve
statistically significant gains. Training in each of the
following communications skills resulted in statistically
significant gains in other skills in which no direct train
ing was received at the noted statistical levels of sig
nificance:
1. Training in reading brought gains in speaking
confidence. (.01)
2. Training in listening brought gains in reading.
(.01)
3. Training in speaking brought gains in reading
and writing. (.05)
4. Training in writing brought gains in reading
and speaking (.01) and in critical thinking.
(.05)
Marks, et. al. (1963) examined the effect of three
college freshman curricula upon scores on a battery of
55
tests of communication skills and critical thinking. The
three curricula consisted of: (1) one semester of English
composition followed by one semester of speech, (2) one
semester of speech followed by one semester of English
composition and (3) a two-semester sequence in the language
arts. Subjects were pre- and post-tested using the STEP
Reading, Listening, and Writing Tests, the ACE Critical
Thinking, and the verbal subtest of SCAT. All subjects
gained significantly on each of these tests, but there was
no significant differences in gains from pre- to post-test
by curriculum followed.
Berry and Victor (1966) and Hollingsworth (1966)
used commercially prepared listening skill building pro
grams in studies designed to test the effectiveness of
training in listening for adults. Berry and Victor used
Basic System's taped course, Effective Listening, in a
training program given to a single bank department and to
188 supervisors. The results of post-testing indicated
significant improvement, as measured by the test which
comes with the program, and the researchers reported that
the subjects were highly enthusiastic about the program.
Hollingsworth used the SRA Listening Skill Program,
Are You Listening? and case studies of communication and
listening problems in a course given to twenty business
executives. The courses consisted of ten two-hour training
56
session given over a twelve week period. The author re
ported an average gain from pre- to post-test, on the
Brown- Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test, of fifty-per-
cent.
Petrie (1961) has been an especially severe critic
of research in listening comprehension skill improvement.
In particular, Petrie has criticized programs which have
been developed without any clear-cut scientific explanation
and description of the listening process.
Although to attempt to teach without a clear con
cept of what one is teaching is a practice of
dubious merit, most listening training programs
have been based upon speculation rather than sound
evidence. Even though many of the experimentally
tested listening programs appear to have resulted
in significant improvements in listening comprehen
sion, it is not now possible to determine what
aspects of such programs actually contributed to
the improvement. For instance, of the many com
ponents of most listening training programs, only
four appear to significantly influence listening
ability— motivation to listen, linguistic skill,
skill in verbal organization, and practice in
listening— and these factors are already being
attended to in other academic disciplines, in
cluding speech and English courses. (p. 8)
Petrie developed a unit of instruction in listening
skill development which was administered to an experimental
group. The program consisted of four fifty-minute sessions
which were devoted to lectures on the principles of effec
tive listening and some group discussion. A second group
of equal size was given training in reading for the same
57
period and a third group had no particular instruction.
The Brown-Carlsen was used as a pre- and post-test. No
significant differences were found between the groups when
gain scores from pre- to post-test were compared.
Lewis (1964) conducted a study in which reading and
listening instruction were combined in a one-semester study
skills course. The subjects of the study were 164 college
freshmen. The experimental treatment was a weekly instruc
tional unit in listening during which the subjects were to
implement the procedures suggested within weekly lectures,
and a self-evaluation following each listening exercise.
At the end of a nine-week period the experimental and con
trol groups were tested. No significant differences were
found between the groups.
In a similar study Alston and Williams (1964) de
veloped and administered a twelve week unit of listening
instruction to ninety-five college students. The lessons
consisted of outlining and analyzing assembly lectures,
summarizing and analyzing student speeches and parapharas-
ing selections read in class. Despite findings of no sig
nificant improvement as a result of training, the authors
concluded that "beneficial gains" are possible as a result
of training for low-achievers if greater and continued em
phasis is placed upon listening skill development in col
lege classes. (p. 199)
58
Broiles (1969) used Principles of Effective Lis
tening by John W. Blyth in a study of the measurement and
teaching of listening. Using 132 freshmen students,
Broiles divided his subjects into two experimental and two
control groups. Gain scores from pre- to post-test were
compared and no significant gains were found. Broiles con
cluded that while listening skill could be measured objec
tively, it was not amenable to improvement through instruc
tion regardless of mental ability.
Summary
Research in the area of listening comprehension has
tended to stress the complexity of listening as a variable.
Moderate to high correlations have been found between lis
tening skill and reading comprehension, general verbal abil
ity and vocabulary. In addition moderate correlations have
been found in a variety of studies between listening skill
and scholastic achievement, intelligence, listening expe
rience and selected personality variables. Listening com
prehension does not appear to be influenced by the sex of
the listener and is apparently unrelated to the mode of
presentation. Despite the relationship of listening to
skill in language in general and to intelligence and vocab
ulary, researchers have postulated the existence of a sepa
59
rate listening skill, independent of these variables.
Of particular interest to researchers has been the
relationship of listening comprehension skill and the abil
ity to understand the structure of oral communication. A
majority of the programs designed to increase listening
skill have made this "structuralization" component central
to instruction. This assumption is basic to the skill
building program developed in this study.
Approximately two out of three investigation of the
effect of training upon listening comprehension skill have
reported significant gains in scores on a variety of lis
tening comprehension skill tests. However, as Petrie
(1961) has argued, the lack of understanding of the nature
of listening makes it virtually impossible to determine
which elements of the experimental programs account for the
observed gains in listening skill. This inability to de
scribe the nature of the listening process has been, and
continues to be, a major weakness of research in the area.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
Description of Subjects
The subjects of this investigation were 115 commu
nity college freshmen enrolled in six sections of Social
Science 1 (Introduction to Social Science) at Skyline Col
lege, San Bruno, California, during the Fall Semester of
1973.
Social Science 1 is an introduction to the basic
concepts of the behavioral sciences which was developed as
a beginning course for students whose entrance examination
scores (SCAT and Cooperative English Test) and high school
records indicate potential academic difficulties. A major
ity of the students enrolled in Social Science 1 do so as a
result of the recommendations of their counselors.
A three-semester testing program, conducted between
Fall 1971 and Fall 1972, indicated that marked deficiencies
in listening comprehension existed in Social Science 1 stu
dents. Table 3 summarizes the results obtained from this
testing program, the pilot study conducted in Spring 1973,
and the pre-test of subjects selected for the investigation
of listening skill development conducted in Fall 1973. The
60
61
instrument used in the measurement of listening was the
Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test (Form Am) con
structed by Brown and Carlsen (1957).
TABLE 3
SUMMARY RESULTS OF TESTING
FOR LISTENING COMPREHENSION SKILLS,
FALL 1971 THROUGH FALL 1973*
Testing
Program
Pilot
Study
Investigation
Mean 41.21 40.03 39.50
S. D 10.77 10.20 11.54
%ile** 10 8 6
Max. 65 65 68
Min. 14 17 18
Range 51 48 50
N 320 115 115
* Raw score, Brown-Carlsen (Form Am)
**College Freshman Norms, Brown-Carlsen Manual of
Directions
The data in Table 3 indicate that the subjects of
the investigation are quite similar in listening skill, as
measured by the Brown-Carlsen, to those of the pilot study
and testing program. For the purpose of this study it was
assumed that the subjects of the investigation were similar
62
in listening skill to students who would enroll in Social
Science 1 in the future and to lower-ability community col
lege students generally.
Research Design
The research design chosen for this study was the
non-equivalent control group design as described by Camp
bell and Stanley (1963). This design has also been re
ferred to as a comparative survey (Fox, 199) a compromise
experimental group-control group (Kerlinger, 1973) and a
non-randomized control group pre-test post-test design
(Issac and Michael, 1971). Each semester six sections of
Social Science 1 are offered at Skyline College. These
sections are selected by the students according to individ
ual needs and, as a result, randomization is not possible.
The inability to randomize creates the possibility of lack
of equivalence. After three sections were randomly desig
nated as experimental groups and three as control groups
the means and standard deviations of the six sections were
examined for equivalence by analysis of variance. Table 4
presents the results of the F test for homogeneity of vari
ances.
63
TABLE 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY:
EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL SECTIONS,
TEST FOR HOMOGENEITY OF VARIANCE
Source D.F. Sum of Squares Mean Squares
Between Groups 5 726.8750 145.3750
Within Groups 109 14444.0000 132.5137
Total 114 15170.8750
F = 1.097, F Probability = 0.366
The pre-test raw score mean of the Brown-Carlsen
for the experimental group of 52 subjects was 40.87 with a
standard deviation of 12.383. For the 63 control group
subjects the raw score pre-test mean was 38.38 with a stan
dard deviation of 10.79. The ratio of maximum variance to
minimum variance was 1.903. Given the findings of the
analysis of variance the assumption was made that the ex
perimental and control groups were equivalent. For the
purposes of this investigation the inability to randomize
was not considered to be a serious limitation. This as
sumption has been supported by Kerlinger (1973).
The fact must be faced that frequently in research
it is extremely difficult or impossible to equate
64
groups by random selection or random assignment,
or by matching. Should one then give up the re
search? By no means. Every effort should be made,
first, to select and to assign at random. If both
of these are not possible, perhaps matching and
random assignment can be accomplished. If they
are not, an effort at least to use samples from
the same population or to use samples as alike as
possible. The experimental treatments should be
assigned at random. Then the similarity of the
groups should be checked using any information
available— sex, age, social class, and so on. The
equivalence of the groups should be checked using
the means and standard deviations of the pre-tests:
t tests and F tests will do. The distributions
should be checked. Although one cannot have the
assurance that randomization gives, if these items
all check one can go ahead with the study knowing
that at least there is no evidence against the
equivalence assumption. (p. 342)
The mean age of subjects assigned to the control
group was 21.5 years and 22.9 for the experimental group
subjects. The control group consisted of 30 male and 31
female subjects and the experimental group had 27 males and
27 females. Slight differences in age and sex distribution
between experimental and control groups were considered of
relatively little importance as the literature suggests
that listening is unrelated to sex. This is consistent
with a correlation between listening and sex of .19 ob
tained in the pilot study done prior to this investigation.
The pilot study also indicated that age of the subject is
unrelated to listening skill. A correlation of .06 (N =
115) was obtained in the pilot study.
Gains in listening comprehension were measured by
65
raw score changes from pre to posttest on the Brown-Carlsen
Listening Comprehension Test (Forms Am and Bm). Lecture
comprehension skill gains were measured by raw score
changes from pre- to posttest on Section E (Lecture Compre
hension) of the Brown-Carlsen.
Hypotheses (Null)
General Hypothesis
There will be no differences in the listening com
prehension gain scores of community college freshmen stu
dents in experimental and control groups as a result of
participation in an eight-week unit of instruction in lis
tening comprehension skill development.
The general hypothesis applies to the following
specified subpopulations:
Hypothesis 1. All Subjects (Total gain score)
Hypothesis 2. All Subjects; Lecture Comprehension,
(Section E gain scores)
Hypothesis 3. Male subjects (Total gain score)
Hypothesis 4. Male Subjects; Lecture Comprehension,
(Section E gain scores)
Hypothesis 5. Female subjects (Total gain score)
Hypothesis 6. Female subjects; Lecture Comprehen-
66
sion, (Section E gain scores)
Hypothesis 7. Subjects less than 20 years of age
(Total gain score)
Hypothesis 8. Subjects less than 20 years of age;
Lecture Comprehension, (Section E gain scores)
Hypothesis 9. Subjects 20 years of age and over
(Total gain scores)
Hypothesis 10. Subjects 20 years of age and over;
Lecture Comprehension, (Section E gain scores)
Hypothesis 11. Subjects who indicate that a for
eign language is spoken in the home at least one-half time
(Total gain scores)
Hypothesis 12. Subjects who indicate that a for
eign language is spoken in the home at least one-half time,
Lecture Comprehension, (Section E gain scores)
Hypothesis 13. Subjects who speak English only
(Total gain scores)
Hypothesis 14. Subjects who speak English only;
Lecture Comprehension (Section E gain scores)
Pilot Study and Development
of Treatment Materials
In the Spring of 1973 a pilot study was conducted
for the purposes of attaining information concerning the
67
probable characteristics of the proposed experimental pop
ulation, field testing the treatment materials and gaining
information about the Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension
Test.
Six sections of Social Science 1 (Introduction to
Social Science) were selected for the pilot study. A total
of 115 students were enrolled in the six sections during
the eight-week duration of the pilot study. The students
were pretested at the beginning of the third week of the
semester after enrollments had stabilized. The Am form of
the Brown-Carlsen was administered in tape-recorded form.
Studies by Jones (1961) and Johnson and Fransden (1963)
have provided evidence that scores are not significantly
influenced by the presence or absence of the speaker and
that taped administrations yielded higher coefficients of
reliability. The tapes were recorded under controlled
conditions in the Skyline College Media Center. Although
evidence obtained by Haberland (1958) indicates that scores
on the Brown-Carlsen are not influenced by speaker quality,
a trained speaker was used in the recording of both the Am
and Bm forms of the test. The Bm form of the Brown-Carlsen
was administered as the posttest at the end of the eight-
week pilot study. Table 5 summarizes the results of pre-
and post-testing.
68
TABLE 5
PILOT TEST RESULTS: PRE- TO POSTTEST
SCORES ON THE BROWN-CARLSEN TEST
OF LISTENING COMPREHENSION
Section
Pretest
Mean S.D.
Posttest
Mean S.D. Gain
1. (N=21) 36.45 9.11 37.33 10.33 2.30
2. (N=17) 36. 60 11.93 40.26 12.85 4.11
3. (N=20) 40.63 7.92 45.38 7. 05 4.75
4. (N=18) 43.39 10.59 47.78 9.35 3.11
5. (N=21)
41.95 9.46 46.48 7.29 4.76
6. (N=18) 41.68 10.09 47.59 9.33 5.52
Totals 40.03 10.20 44.51 10.64 4.48
The mean gain of 4.48 raw score points on the
Brown-Carlsen indicated that increased scores were probable
for both the experimental and control groups in the pro
posed investigation which would follow the pilot study. As
the Manual of Directions for the Brown-Carlsen claims that
the mean difficulty index for both forms (Am and Bm) is
63.5, it would appear that some slight increase in listen
ing skill occurs as a result of the total college experi
ence or, as an alternative explanation, students become
69
test-wise as a result of pretesting. An administration of
the Am form of the Brown-Carlsen to 124 students at the end
of the Fall Semester 1974 resulted in a mean raw score of
40.86 with a standard deviation of 9.32. Results of test
ing indicate that, despite the claims of the Manual of Di
rections, the Am form of the Brown-Carlsen appears to be
slightly more difficult than the Bm form.
Males in the pilot study (n=64) gained an average
of 5.58 raw score points from 39.99 to 45.55. Females
(n=51) gained an average of 3.1 points from 40.12 to 43.22.
in neither case was the gain statistically significant. It
was considered that males might well be more likely to ben
efit from training in listening comprehension than females.
During the semester preceeding the pilot study a
series of twelve lectures were developed by three staff
members of the Social Science Division at Skyline College.
These lectures were designed to last from four to fifteen
minutes and centered around basic concepts in the social
sciences. For each lecture a lecture outline was written
and a ten question multiple-choice and true-false quiz was
developed. The quizzes were designed to test understanding
of main ideas and supporting evidence or the structure of
the lecture. Three members of the College drama staff re
corded these lectures under controlled conditions in the
College Media Center.
70
The twelve recorded lectures followed by the quiz
zes were administered to one of four sections involved in
the pilot study. The section which received the material
was selected at random. Two sections (1. and 2. in Table
5) did not receive ajiy of the materials. After the lecture
and quiz had been administered the instructor and students
discussed both the concept covered in the lecture and the
lecture itself. An observer took notes and the student
criticisms of the material were considered when modifica
tions were made. In addition, each taped lecture and ac
companying quiz was administered to a panel of five staff
members (three instructors, one member of the classified
staff and one administrator). After each administration
the material was critiqued and information gained in these
sessions was incorporated into the materials to be pre
sented to the experimental group.
During the Summer of 1973 the twelve lectures,
quizzes and lecture outlines were modified, utilizing the
findings of the pilot study, and re-recorded.
The pilot study provided a thorough testing of the
treatment materials, provided evidence that the means and
variances of Social Science 1 sections on the Brown-Carlsen
were sufficiently similar to make working with pre-exist
ing, or intact groups, feasible and supplied evidence that
gains from pre- to post-tests over an eight-week period
71
were probable regardless of student experiences.
Administration of the
Experimental Program
The listening skills development program was admin
istered during the Fall Semester, 1973, to six sections of
Social Science 1 students (N=115). The three sections ran
domly assigned to the experimental section contained fifty-
two students. The three designated control sections con
tained sixty-three students. Administration of the program
began on the first day of the third week of the semester
after section enrollments had stabilized.
The program was administered over an eight-week
period. In all, the program consisted of twenty-four
fifty-minute sessions. Pre-testing and post-testing were
done on the first and twenty-fourth days of the program.
The pre-test utilized the Am form of the Brown-Carlsen Lis
tening Comprehension Test and the Bm form was used in post
testing. Appendix C summarizes the session-by-session ac
tivities of the experimental groups. The control groups
covered the same topics (exclusive of the listening in
struction) as did the experimental groups. Control sec
tions were taught in a lecture-discussion style. The three
films used during the period were presented to both experi
72
mental and control groups.
After the pre-test session three periods were de
voted to instruction in the fundamentals of effective lis
tening with particular emphasis given to the necessity of
understanding the structure of oral communication. Appen
dix A contains the materials given to experimental group
subjects during sessions one through four.
Sessions 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21
and 22 (12 sessions) were devoted to the presentation of
the taped lectures and quizzes developed and tested during
the pilot study conducted the previous semester. At the
beginning of each session the instructor took roll and an
nounced the topic to be covered by the taped lecture. Sub
jects were asked not to take notes and were told that de
tailed lecture notes would be distributed at the end of the
session.
After the lecture was presented the instructor
passed out the accompanying quiz which the subject were
given five minutes to complete. At the end of that time
the quiz papers were exchanged and the instructor wrote the
correct answers on a chalk-board at the front of the class.
After the papers were corrected and returned the remainder
of the session was used in a discussion of the content of
the lecture in order to clarify the concept and to deter
mine the reasons for errors on the quiz. The emphasis of
73
the discussion was on the basic idea or theme of the lec
ture. At the end of the session a lecture outline was
passed out. Appendix B contains a sample script of a taped
lecture, the accompanying quiz and lecture outline.
In sessions 9, 15 and 20 films, which related to
the topics under consideration, were presented. These
films were presented to both the experimental and control
groups. A midterm examination was administered to both the
experimental and control groups at session 12.
In sessions 5, 13 and 23 a group discussion tech
nique called "Role Reversal" was employed. Each section
was divided into groups of five to six subjects. Each
group was assigned a discussion topic and one member was
appointed as discussion moderator. In role reversal no
person may state his or her opinions or react to other's
statements until he has been able correctly to summarize
the statement of the previous speaker. Such summary must
be acceptable to the previous speaker or the discussion
moderator will not allow him to state his own opinion.
This technique has been recommended as a listening training
technique by Bois (1966) and Chase (1954) Student reaction
to the technique appeared to be highly favorable.
After a taped lecture-quiz session the tape was
placed in the Skyline College Media Center. Students who
had been absent during the classroom presentation were in-
|
!
1
74
structed to pick up the tape in the Media Center and play
it at the Center. They were furnished with the appropriate
quiz and lecture outline. After completion of the quiz the
student returned it to his instructor and was given credit
for accomplishment of the lesson.
Measurement of the Dependent Variable
The instrument used to measure listening compre
hension skill in this investigation was the Brown-Carlsen
Listening Comprehension Test. The Brown-Carlsen has two
comparable forms, Am and Bm, each comprising 76 test items.
These items are grouped into five sections: (A) Immediate
Recall, (B) Following Directions, (C) Recognizing Transi
tions, (D) Recognizing Work Meanings and (E) Lecture Com
prehension. Section E (Lecture Comprehension) measures the
ability to listen for details, get the central idea, draw
inferences, understand organization and note the degree of
relevancy in a brief lecture presentation. Section E is of
particular interest as it concentrates upon the specific
skills which the experimental program was designed to de
velop. The early form of the Brown-Carlsen was the product
of a dissertation by Brown (1949). The currently available
edition is a part of the Evaluation and Adjustment Series
published by Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich and copyrighted in
1955.
75
The Manual of Directions suggests that the test be
read by the examiner. However, studies by Bateman, el:, al.
(1964), Johnson and Fransden (1965) and Jones (1961) pro
vide evidence that the reliability of the test is enhanced
when the test is administered by tape recorder.
The Brown-Carlsen Manual of Directions reports
split-half reliability coefficients for the Am form which
ranged from .84 to .90 in six administrations to tenth and
twelfth grade students. Six determinations of alternate
form reliability are reported in the Manual as yielding a
median estimate of .78. Data from the pilot study adminis
tration of the Am form (N=115) yielded a reliability esti
mate of .83 by the Kuder-Richardsen 21 formula. The same
formula yielded an estimate of .87 (N=115) for the pre-test
administration conducted at the beginning of the experimen
tal unit in October of 1973.
The Brown-Carlsen is the best known and most widely
used listening comprehension test. Its validity has been
challenged by Petri (1961) on the grounds that notenough is
known about the elements of listening to enable a valid
measurement of this factor to be made. Petri's assessment
of the Brown-Carlsen was supported by Lindquist (1959):
...no satisfactory evidence of the validity of the
test, either in the form of a carefully developed
rationale or of experimental data providing that
76
the test measures anything not measured by a silent
reading test, is found in the single manual pro
vided. (p. 651)
Lindquist's criticism of the Brown-Carlsen on the
grounds of lack of evidence of validity has merit. The
Manual reports a mean "validity index" of 42.5 (p. 3).
This index is, in reality, an estimate of test item dis
crimination, not of validity of the test.
Of equal concern is the norming procedure used in
standardization of the Brown-Carlsen. College freshman
norms are based on a single administration of the test to
300 subjects. The Manual fails to report any of the char
acteristics of the norming group. For this reason only raw
score gains from pre- to post-test have been reported.
Despite criticism of the validity and norming pro
cedures of the test its use has been strongly defended by
Johnson and Fransden (1963), Jones (1961), Batemann, et.
al. (1964), Higgins (1964), Haberland (1958) and others.
Duker (1969) has suggested that the wide and continued use
of the Brown-Carlsen over a period of time, while not a
technical way of establishing validity, is at least some
what persuasive evidence in favor of validity.
Data Collection, Processing and Analysis
Prior to the administration of the pre test each
student was given a card which contained the following in
formation:
1. Name
2. Age at nearest birthday
3. Sex
4. College units completed
5. Foreign language spoken at home more than one-
half time
6. Section number
7. SCAT Verbal (raw score and percentile scores)
8. Cooperative English Test sub-test scores (raw
scores and percentile scores)
9. Brown-Carlsen (Am Form) pretest total raw score
10. Brown-Carlsen (Bm Form) Post-test total raw
score
11. Raw score gain from pre- to post-test
12. Brown-Carlsen pre-test score (Section E)
13. Brown-Carlsen post-test score (Section E)
14. Raw score gain pre- to post-test (Section E)
15. Semester grade point average
16. Course grade
For the purpose of statistical analysis the three
experimental groups have been combined into one group and
the three control groups have been combined into one group.
78
For each of the hypotheses stated in this chapter
the level of significance for the rejection of the null
hypothesis was set at p<.05.
Summary
This chapter has described the subjects of the in
vestigation, the research design and restated the research
hypotheses in null in order to make testing by inferential
statistical methods possible. The pilot study used in at
taining information concerning the probable characteristics
of the experimental population, field-testing the treatment
materials and gaining information regarding the Brown-Carl
sen Listening Comprehension Test was described. The admin
istration of the independent variable (the listening skill
building unit) was described and the dependent variable
(The Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test) was evalu
ated. Finally, the method of data collection, processing
and analysis was described.
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS
This chapter presents the findings of the analysis
of data obtained in the investigation with respect to each
of the hypotheses stated in the previous chapter.
The general hypothesis was stated in null form as:
There will be no differences in the listening comprehension
gain-scores of community college freshmen students in
experimental and control groups as a result of participa
tion in an eight-week unit of instruction in listening
comprehension skill development.
Hypothesis 1 tests the general hypothesis of no
difference in gain-scores and hypotheses 2 through 14 test
the hypotheses of no difference in gain-scores on the part
of specified subpopulations from pre- to post-test on the
Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test and Section E
(Lecture Comprehension) of the Brown-Carlsen.
79
80
Hypothesis 1; All Subjects (Total gain-scores)
TABLE 6
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: All Subjects
(Total Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 48 4.73 8.65
Control 60 4.95 7.15
Total 108* 4.85 7.81
*7 scores did
Analysis
not change
TABLE 7
of Variance Summary:
All Subjects (Total Gain-Scores)
Source of Sums of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 1.03 1.30 < 1.0
Within Groups 106 6526.33 61.57
Total 107 6527.63
81
Hypothesis 2; All Subjects, Lecture Comprehension,
(Section E gain-scores)
TABLE 8
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: All Subjects,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 48 -0.56 3.55
Control 54 -2.00 3.19
Total 102* -1.32 3.42
*13 scores did not change
TABLE 9
Analysis of Variance Summary:
All Subjects, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores)
Source of
Variation df
Sums of
Squares
Mean
Square
F
Ratio
Between Groups 1 52.51 52.51 4.64*
Within Groups 100 1131.81 11.32
Total 101 1184.32
*p < .05
82
Hypothesis 3: Males (Total gain-scores)
TABLE 10
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Males
(Total Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 21 3.81 4.97
Control 29 5.10 7.64
Total 50* 4.56 6.62
*7 scores did. not change
TABLE 11
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Males (Total Gain-Scores)
Source of Sums of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 20.39 52.51 < 1.0
Within Groups 48 2127.93 44.33
Total 49 2148.32
83
Hypothesis 4: Males, Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores)
TABLE 12
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Males
(Section E Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 22 -1.14 3.03
Control 25 -1.80 3.04
Total 47* -1.49 3.03
*10 scores did not change
TABLE 13
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Males, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores)
Source of Sums of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1
Within Groups 45
Total 46
5.15 5.15 < 1.0
416.59 9.26
421.74
84
Hypothesis 5: Females (Total §ain-Scores)
TABLE 14
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Females
(Total Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 27 5.44 10.72
Control 31 4.81 6.77
Total 58 5.10 8.76
TABLE 15
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Females (Total Gain-Scores)
Source of
Variation df
Sums of Mean
Squares Square
F
Ratio
Between Groups 1 5.87 5.87 < 1.0
Within Groups 56 4365.50 77.96
Total 57 4371.37
85
Hypothesis 6: Females, Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores)
TABLE 16
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Females,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 26 -0.08 3.92
Control 29 -2.17 3.36
Total 54* -1.18 3.75
*scores did not change
TABLE 17
Analysis < of Variance Summary:
Females, : Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores)
Source of
Variation
df
Sum of Mean
Squares Square
F
Ratio
Between Groups 1 60.20 60.20 4.56*
Within Groups 53 699.98 13.21
Total
54 760.18
*p < .05
86
Hypothesis 7: Subjects less than 20 years of age (Total
Gain-Scores)
TABLE 18
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Subjects Less
Than 20 Years of Age (Total Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 24 7.46 7.92
Control 43 5.93 6.80
Total 67 6.48 7.20
TABLE 19
Analysis of Variance Summary
:
Subjects Less Than 20 Years of Age (Total
Gain-Scores)
Source of Sums of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 35.97 35.97 < 1.0
Within Groups 65 3384.75 52.07
Total 66 3420.72
87
Hypothesis 8: Subjects less than 20 years of age:
Lecture Comprehension (Section E
Gain-Scores)
TABLE 20
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Subjects Less
Than 20 Years of Age, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 26 0.31 3.58
Control 37 -1.95 3.16
Total 63 -1.02 3.49
TABLE 21
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Subjects Less Than 20 Years of Age:
Lecture Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores)
Source of Sum of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 77.55 77.55 6.96*
Within Groups 61 679.43 11.14
Total 62 756.98
*p < .05
88
Hypothesis 9: Subjects 20 years of age and over (Total
Gain-Scores)
TABLE 22
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Subjects 20 Years
of Age and Over (Total Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 24 2.00 8.63
Control 17 2.47 7.60
Total 41 2.20 8.12
TABLE 23
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Subjects 20 Years of Age and Over
(Total Gain-Scores)
Source of S\im of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 2.20 2.20 < 1.0
Within Groups 39 2638.24 67.65
Total 40 2640.44
89
Hypothesis 10: Subjects 20 years of age and over,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E Gain-
Scores)
TABLE 24
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Subjects 20 Years
of Age and Over, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 22 -1.59 3.30
Control 17 -2.12 3.35
Total 41 -1.82 3.29
TABLE 25
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Subjects 20 Years of Age and Older
Lecture Comprehension (Section E)
Source of
Variation
Sum of Mean
df Squares Square
F
Ratio
Between Groups 1 2.66 2.66
<
1.0
Within Groups 37 409.08 11.06
Total 38 411.74
90
Hypothesis 11: Subjects who indicated that a foreign
language was spoken in the home at least
one-half time (Total Gain-Scores)
TABLE 26
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Group: Subjects Who
Indicated that a Foreign Language Was Spoken in
The Home at Least One-Half Time (Total Gain-Score)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 13 8.46 10.32
Control 24 4.25 7.05
Total 37 5.73 8.45
TABLEi 27
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Subjects Who Indicated That a Foreign Language
Was Spoken in the Home at Least One-Half 1 lime
(Total Gain-Scores)
Source of
Variation df
Sum of Mean
Squares Square
F
Ratio
Between Groups 1 149.57 149.57 2.16
Within Groups 35 2421.73 69.20
Total 36 2571.30
91
Hypothesis 12: Subjects who indicated that a foreign
language was spoken in the home at least
one-half time, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores)
TABLE 28
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Subjects Who
Indicated That a Foreign Language Was Spoken in
The Home at Least One-Half Time, Lecture Comprehension
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 12 0.0 4.43
Control 22 -2.41 2.59
Total 34 -1.56 3.49
TABLE 29
Analysis < Df Variance Summary:
Subjects Who Indicated That a Foreign Language
Was Spoken in the Home at Least One-Half Time
t
Lecture Comprehension (Section E)
Source of Sum of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 45.06 45.06 4.04*
Within Groups 32 357.32 11.17
Total 33 402.38
*p < .05
92
Hypothesis 13: Subjects who indicated that English was
the language spoken at home (Total Gain-
Scores)
TABLE 30
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Group Subjects Who
Indicated that English was the Language
Spoken at Home (Total Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 35 3.34 7.64
Control 36 5.42 7.27
Total 71 4.39 7.48
TABLE 31
Analysis of Variance Summary:
Subjects Who Indicated That English Was the Language
Spoken at HOme (Total Gain-Scores)
Source of Sum of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 76.32 76.32 1.37
Within Groups 69 3836.64 55.60
Total 70 3912.96
93
Hypothesis 14: Subjects who indicated that English was
the language spoken at home, Lecture
Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores)
TABLE 32
Sample Size, Mean Gain-Score, and Standard Deviation
For Experimental and Control Groups: Subjects Who
Indicated That English Was The Language Spoken at
Home, Lecture Comprehension (Section E Gain-Scores)
Group n Mean S.D.
Experimental 36 -0.75 3.25
Control 32 -1.72 3.56
Total 68 -1.21 3.41
TABLE 33
Analysis of Variance Summary
Subjects Who Indicated That English Was The Language
Spoken at Home, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E Gain-Scores)
Source of Sum of Mean F
Variation df Squares Square Ratio
Between Groups 1 15.90 15.90 1.38
Within Groups 66 763.22 11.56
Total 67 779.12
94
Discussion
As a result of the analysis of variance the null
hypothesis of no difference in gain-scores was accepted for
the following hypotheses:
1. Hypothesis 1; All Subjects (Total gain-score)
2. Hypothesis 3; Male Subjects (Total gain-score)
3. Hypothesis 4; Male Subjects, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E gain-score)
4. Hypothesis 5; Female Subjects (Total gain-score)
5. Hypothesis 7; Subjects less than 20 years of age
(Total gain-score)
6. Hypothesis 9; Subjects 20 years of age and over
(Total gain-score)
7. Hypothesis 10; Subjects 20 years of age and over,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E gain-score)
8. Hypothesis 11; Subjects who indicated that a
foreign language was spoken in the home at least
one-half time (Total gain-score)
9. Hypothesis 13; Subjects who indicated that English
was the language spoken at home (Total gain-score)
10. Hypothesis 14: Subjects who indicated that English
was the language spoken at home, Lecture Compre
hension (Section E gain-score)
I
i
95
The null hypothesis of no difference in gain-scores
was rejected for the following hypotheses (p < .05):
1. Hypothesis 2; All Subjects, Lecture Comprehension
(Section E gain-scores)
2. Hypothesis 6; Female Subjects, Lecture Comprehen
sion (Section E gain-scores)
3. Hypothesis 8; Subjects less than 20 years of age,
Lecture Comprehension (Section E gain-scores)
4. Hypothesis 12; Subjects who indicated that a
foreign language was spoken in the home at least
one-half time, Lecture Comprehension (Section E
gain-scores)
The results of the pilot study suggested that a
mean gain-score from pre- to posttest on the Brown*Carlsen
could be expected regardless of the subject's experiences
as members of the experimental or control groups. The sub
jects in the pilot study gained an average of 4.48 raw-
score points from pre- to posttest. The performance of
both the experimental and control groups, in each case
where total test (Section A through E) gain-scores were
evaluated, closely approximated the gains experienced in
the pilot study. In four of the seven cases where total
test gain-scores were examined the control group gains ex
ceeded those of the experimental group.
96
Gains from pre- to posttest were largely a result
of gains in Sections A through D of the Brown-Carlsen.
Table 34 describes the pattern of gain-scores from pre- to
posttest for the experimental, control and total group.
TABLE 34
Gain Scores by BCLCT Section For Experimental
Group, Control Group, and Total of Both Groups
Group Gain(A-D) Gain(E) Total
Experimental 5.18 -0.56 4.73
Control 6.66
o
o
•
CN
1
4.95
Total 6.00 -1.32 4.85
The Manual of Directions for the Brown-Carlsen
reports a mean difficulty index of 63.5 for both the Am
and Bm forms of the test. Difficulty values for each item
were computed by averaging the percent passing each item
in the upper and lower 27 percent of the grade 11 norm
group. The Manual reports mean difficulty indices by sec
tion for the Am Form, but not for the Bm Form. This
omission makes it difficult to determine if gain-scores
in Sections A through D and Section E are caused by dif
ferences in levels of difficulty, by maturation, or by
97
environmental conditions, including programs designed to
improve listening skills. Despite the claims of the
Manual, it would appear that the Am and Bm forms of the
Brown-Carlsen are not equivalent. Sections A through D
in the Am Form appear to be considerably more difficult
than in the Bm Form. Section E in the Bm Form appears to
be more difficult than in the Am Form. Replication of this
investigation using the Bm Form as the pre-test and the Am
Form as the posttest or random assignment of forms to pre-
and posttests might lead to a better understanding of the
differences between the two forms in terms of difficulty
level by section and for the total test.
In three of the seven hypotheses in which no sig
nificant differences in gain scores for Section E (Lec
ture Comprehension) were tested the null hypothesis was
rejected (p < .05). However, only the experimental sub
population consisting of subjects less than 20 years of age
(Hypothesis 8) achieved a positive pre- to posttest gain
score. For this sub-population the control group lost a
mean 2.00 points in raw score. Table 35 summarizes the
gain scores obtained in Section E (Lecture Comprehension)
for the four sub-populations in which the null hypothesis
of no difference in gain-scores was rejected.
98
TABLE 35
Gain-Scores For Section E (Lecture Comprehension)
For Hypotheses in Which The Null Was Rejected
Hypothesis Group Gain-Score n
2 Experimental
< £ >
in
•
o
l
48
2 Control -2.00 54
6 Experimental
00
o
•
o
1
26
6 Control -2.17 29
8 Experimental 0.31 26
8 Control -1.95 37
12 Experimental 0.00 12
12 Control -2.41 22
For the sub-population of interest in Hypothesis
12 (Subjects who indicated that a foreign language was
spoken in the home at least one-half time) the mean gain-
score was 0.00 for the experimental group and -2.41 for the
control group. This was the largest obtained difference in
gain-score means for Section E (Listening Comprehension).
Provided that the assumption, based on data ob
tained from the pilot study and the investigation pre- and
99
posttests, that Section E (Lecture Comprehension) in the
Bm Form of the Brown-Carlsen is more difficult than the
same section in the Am Form, the statistically significant
drop (or negative gain-score) for the control group sec
tions may be considered a significant savings for the ex
perimental sections.
Summary
It appeared from the data that statistically sig
nificant improvements in lecture comprehension, as mea
sured by Section E (Lecture Comprehension) of the Brown-
Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test, were made by experi
mental group subjects, taken as a whole, as a result of
the experimental listening skill building program. The
following sub-populations also made significant gains in
Lecture Comprehension as a result of the training in lis
tening comprehension:
1. Experimental group female subjects
2. Experimental group subjects less than 20
years of age
3. Subjects who indicated that a foreign language
was spoken in the home at least one-half time.
The experimental listening skill building program
was not effective in increasing the overall listening com
100
prehension skills of any of the sub-populations of interest
as measured by the total Brown-Carlsen (Sections A through
E) .
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The Problem
The objective of this investigation was the devel
opment, administration and evaluation of the effect of an
eight-week experimental program designed to improve the
listening comprehension skills of selected community col
lege freshmen.
The rapid quantitative growth of the community col
lege in California and other states since the end of World
War Two has resulted in qualitative changes in the commu
nity college student body. Cooley and Becker (1966), in a
study of Project Talent data, have indicated that, in gen
eral, community college students are more like non-college
youth than four-year college students in terms of academic
abilities. As a result of the changing community college
student population remedial instruction, in particular,
instruction in the communications skills, has assumed a new
importance.
Studies by Rankin (1926), Markgraf (1957) and Bird
101
102
(1960) have found that listening is the most frequently
used of the communications skills. The importance of lis
tening skill to academic success has been supported in
studies by Brown (1955) and Blewett (1955).
Hawk (1965) concluded that listening was the supe
rior mode of learning for lower ability students. Nichols
and Lewis (1954), Montgomery (1970), Caffrey (1949, 1955)
and Taylor (1964) conducted studies which supported Hawk's
findings.
Review of Research
This chapter reviewed the literature in two areas:
(1) Studies which explored the nature of listening as a
psychological variable and as it relates to other language-
related skills and (2) Studies which explored techniques
designed to improve the listening comprehension skills of
secondary and college students.
Researchers have emphasized the complex nature of
listening. Listening skill was found to be related to the
other communications skills, intelligence, scholastic abil
ity and certain personality variables including the sub
jects motivation to listen. There is strong research sup
port for the assertion, central to this study, that listen
ing skill is influenced by the listener's ability to under-
103
stand the structure of aural communication. Listening
skill appears to be unrelated to speaker quality, mode of
presentation, sex, age and aural acuity.
Studies designed to improve the listening skills of
secondary and college students have had mixed results. The
assertions of Nichols and Lewis (1954), Adams (1947),
Roughton (1959), Abrams (1966) and others that there is a
"structuralization" component to listening skill have been
central to most listening skill building programs. Al
though the majority of such studies have reported signifi
cant improvements in listening skill, the lack of a theo
retical model of the listening process has made it diffi
cult to evaluate what elements of the experimental programs
caused the improvement.
Methodology and Procedures
The subjects of this investigation were 115 commu
nity college freshmen enrolled in six sections of Social
Science 1 (Introduction to Social Science) at Skyline Col
lege, San Bruno, California. Three sections were randomly
designated as experimental groups and three as controls.
The experimental unit consisted of instruction in
the fundamentals of effective listening (with special em
phasis upon understanding the structure of aural communica-
104
tion) and practice in applying these understandings to a
series of tape recorded lectures on the fundamental princi
ples of the social sciences.
Gains in listening comprehension were measured by
gains from pre- to post-test on the Brown Carlsen Listen
ing Comprehension Test. Analysis of variance was used to
test the hypothesis of no difference in gain scores between
experimental and control groups. The same statistical test
was applied to specified sub-populations within the experi
mental and control groups.
Findings
Statistically significant improvements in lecture
comprehension, as measured by Section E (Lecture Comprehen
sion) of the Brown-Carlsen, were made by experimental group
subjects, taken as a whole, as a result of the experimental
listening skill building program. The following sub-popu
lations also made significant gains as a result of the
training: (1) Experimental group female subjects, (2) Ex
perimental group subjects less than 20 years of age and
(3) Subjects who indicated that a foreign language was
spoken in the home at least one-half time.
The experimental program was not effective in in
creasing the overall listening skills of any of the sub-
105
populations of interest as measured by the total Brown-
Carlsen (Sections A through E).
Conclusions
1. The eight-week program of listening skill de
velopment resulted in significant differences in gain-
scores from pre- to posttest on the Brown-Carlsen Section E
(Lecture Comprehension) for the following populations:
(1) All experimental group subjects, (2) Experimental group
female subjects, (3) Experimental group subjects who indi
cated that a foreign language was spoken in the home at
least one-half time and (4) Experimental group subjects
under twenty years-of-age. It was concluded that the sav
ings from pre- to posttest of these populations was the re
sult of the instruction and practice provided in the skill
building program. While lecture comprehension skills, as
measured by Section E of the Brown-Carlsen, were apparently
increased, there was no significant impact upon total lis
tening skill as measured by the total Brown-Carlsen (Sec
tions A through E).
2. It was concluded that lecture comprehension
skill, as measured by the Brown-Carlsen, Section E is ame
nable to improvement through instruction in the principles
of effective listening and practice in the application of
106
those principles.
Recommendations
1. The results of the pilot study and the experi
mental investigation indicate that there is doubt regarding
the validity of claims made in the Manual of Directions;
Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test: Forms Am and
Bm that the Am and Bm forms are equivalent in terms of mean
difficulty level. The difficulty levels reported in the
Manual of Directions were derived by analysis of the re
sults of testing, for standardization purposes, a group of
eleventhgrade subjects. It is recommended that the Am and
Bm forms of the Brown-Carlsen be reevaluated, in terms of
difficulty levels, and that data be obtained for college
and community college freshmen. The assumption, implicit
in the Manual, that difficulty level equivalence, estab
lished by analysis of the performance of the eleventh grade
norm group, is applicable to community college and univer
sity freshmen appears to be unjustified.
2. College freshmen norms reported in the Brown-
Carlsen Manual of Directions are based upon the administra
tion of the Am and Bm forms for the purposes of standard
ization to a sample of 300 students. The Manual does not
supply information regarding the characteristics of the
107
norm group. The test was standardized in 1955. It is rec
ommended that the Brown-Carlsen manual be updated to in
clude more recent data regarding the characteristics of the
norm groups and that the test be restandardized. The cur
rently existing norms are outdated and this situation lim
its seriously the value of the test as a diagnostic in
strument and as an experimental tool.
3. Students in both the experimental and control
groups reported that the test created feelings of hostility
and anxiety. In particular, Sections A through D appeared
to generate the highest levels of negative response. Sec
tion E (Lecture Comprehension) was frequently criticized as
boring and irrelevant to student interests. It is recom
mended that the lecture section of the Brown-Carlsen (Sec
tion E) be rewritten in order to create a higher level of
student interest. The criticisms of the Brown-Carlsen by
Lindquist (1959) and Petrie (1961), discussed in the review
of the related literature (Chapter II), regarding the triv
iality of many of the tasks required by the test appear to
be supported by student reactions.
4. The listening skill building program developed
for this study stressed the importance of the ability to
understand the structure of materials presented aurally.
Section E (Lecture Comprehension) of the Brown-Carlsen Lis
tening Comprehension Test was designed, in part, to test
108
this "structuralization" component of listening skill. The
instructional unit, and related practice sessions, resulted
in significant differences in gain scores for the experi
mental group, taken as a whole, for female subjects, sub
jects less than 2 0 years of age and for subjects who indi
cated that a foreign language was spoken in the home at
least one-half time.
It is recommended that further research be con
ducted in order to investigate the reasons for the higher
impact of the program upon these subpopulations. A study
which concentrated upon the development of listening skills
in students for whom English is a second language would be
of particular value as increasing numbers of community col
lege students come from bilingual or foreign language
speaking home environments. In addition, further research
into the nature of the "structuralization" component of
listening skill would provide valuable insights into the
nature of the listening process and contribute towards the
development of a theoretical model of the listening process.
5. It is recommended that instructors and curricu
lum specialists, in both the community colleges and the
secondary schools, investigate the potential benefits to be
derived from the development of listening skill building
programs which utilize the fundamental concepts of the var
ious academic and vocational areas as vehicles for the im
j
i
109
provement of listening comprehension skills. Research
findings regarding the communications skills of community
college students suggest that the traditional distinctions
between remedial and subject matter classes are largely
artificial. Community college instructors are, almost by
definition, involved in remedial education. The integra
tion of skill building programs into the regular academic
and vocational curricula would provide the capability for a
more widespread attack upon the problem of communication
skill deficiencies and, at the same time, reduce the stigma
attached to remedial classes.
In recent years, the use of audio-tutorial programs
designed to individualize instruction have gained favor
among community college educators. The findings of this
investigation indicate that such programs have the added
potential of listening skill development as well as concept
learning and information transmission.
i
|
j
|
BI B LI OGRAPHY
110
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abrams, A. G. "The Relation Between The Ability to Per
ceive Message Structure and Comprehension In Read
ing and Listening." Journal of Communications,
1966, 16:116-125.
Adams, Hv M. "Teaching The Art of Listening." The Nation's
Schools, 1944, 34:51-54.
"Learning to Be Discriminating Listeners."
English Journal, 1944, 34:11-15.
Aiken, J. A Comparison of Junior College Withdrawees,
Washington, D. C.: United States Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, 1958.
Ainsworth, S. and High, C. "Auditory Functions and Abil
ities in Good and Poor Listeners." Journal of Com
munications , 1954, 4:84-86.
Alston, F. C. and Williams, R. 0. "Johnny Doesn't Listen—
Didn't Hear." Journal of Negro Education, 1964,
33:197-200.
American College Testing Program. The Two-Year College And
Its Students. Iowa City: American College Testing
Program, 1969.
Anderson, H. A. "Teaching The Art of Listening." School
Review, 1949, 57:63-67.
Anderson, H. D. "Whose Children Attend Junior College?"
Junior College Journal, 1934, 4:165-72.
Anderson, I. H. and Fairbanks, G. "Common and Differential
Factors in Reading Vocabulary and Hearning Vocabu
lary." Journal of Educational Research, 1937, 30:
317-324.
Anderson, J. C. "The Relative Effectiveness of Personal
and Recorded Presentation of Persuasive Speeches."
Speech Monographs, 1951, 18:200-201.
Arronson, D. "Temporal Factors in Perception and Short
Term Memory." Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 67:130-
144.
Ill
112
Auston, J. T. "Improving Everyday Speaking and Listening
Efficiency." Journal of Communications, 1954, 4:
49-53.
Bailey, B. E. "The Development and Validation of A Test of
Listening Skill." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois,
1971.
Bakan, P. "Some Reflections on Listening Behavior."
Journal of Communications, 1956, 6:108-113.
Balcer, C. L. "The Vocal Aspect of Delivery Traced Through
Representative Works of Rhetoric and Public Speak
ing— Aristotle to Rush." Central States Speech
Journal, 1959, 11:34.
Ballenger, M. T. "A Study of the Effectiveness of Teaching
Through a Planned Daily Program." Master's thesis,
Texas Technological College, Lvlbbock, 1963.
Bateman, D., Pransden, K. and Dedmon, D. "Dimensions of
'Lecture Comprehension1: A Factor Analysis of
Listening Test Items." Journal of Communications,
1964, 14:183-189.
Beighley, K. C. "An Experimental Study of the Effect of
Four Speech Variables on Listener Comprehension."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State Uni
versity, Columbus, 1952.
Berio, D. K. and Gulley, H. E. "Some Determinants of the
Effect of Oral Communication in Producing Attitude
Change and Learning." Speech Monographs, 1957,
24:10-20.
Berry, D. R. and Victor, R. F. "How Are Your Listening
Habits?" Banking, 1966, 59:48+.
Bird, D. E. "Teaching Listening Comprehension." Journal
of Communications, 1953, 3:127-130.
"Are You Listening?" Office Executive, 1955,
4:18-19.
_________. "Listening." National Education Association
Journal, 1960, 49:31-32.
c>a
113
Blewett, T. T. "An Experiment in The Measurement of
Listening at the College Level." Journal of Educa
tional Research, 1951, 14:575-585.
Bohn, T. W. "A Study of Immediate and Delayed Recall as a
Function of Mode of Presentation and Anticipation
of Reward." Master's thesis, Southern Illinois
University, Carbondale, 1964.
Bois, J. S. A. "The Art of Listening." The Clarkson
Letter, Potsdam, New York: Clarkson Institute of
Technology, May-June, 1952. Reprinted in Listening:
Readings, Duker S. (Ed.), Netuchen, New Jersey:
Scarecrow Press, 1966, pp. 43-47.
Bonner, M. C. S. "A Critical Analysis of the Relationship
of Reading Ability to Listening Ability." Unpub
lished doctoral dissertation, Auburn University,
Auburn, 1960.
Brandon, J. R. "An Experimental Television Study: The Rel
ative Effectiveness of Presenting Factual Informa
tion By The Lecture, Interview and Discussion
Methods." Speech Monographs, 1956, 23:272-283.
Brassard, M. B. "Listening and Reading Comprehension In
Intermediate Grades." Unpublished doctoral disser
tation, Boston University, Boston, 1968.
Brazziel, W. F. "New Urban Colleges For The Seventies."
Journal of Higher Education, 1970, 41:169.
Brewster, L. W. "An Exploratory Study of Some Aspects of
Critical Listening Among College Freshmen." Speech
Monographs, 1957, 24:86-87.
________ . "The Effect of a Brief Training Program in
Listening Improvement." The Speech Teacher, 1966,
15:8-10.
Brigance, W. N. "How Fast Do We Talk?" Quarterly Journal
of Speech Education, 1926, 12:337-342.
Briggs, T. H. and Armacost, G. H. "Results of an Oral
True-False Test." Journal of Educational Research,
1933, 26:595-596.
114
Brilhart, B. L. "The Relationship Between Some Aspects of
Communicative Speaking and Communicative Listening
in Freshmen Men and Women." Journal of Communica
tion/ 1965, 15:36-46.
Broadbent, D. E. Perception and Communication. New York:
Pergamon, 1958.
Broiles, M. R. A Study of The Effectiveness of Teaching
Listening. East Texas School Study Council, Com
merce, 1969, (ERIC Document, ED 031 167).
Brooks, K. and Wulftange, Sister I. M. "Listener Response
To Oral Interpretation." Speech Monographs, 1964,
31:73-79.
Brown, C. T. and Keller, P. W. "A Modest Proposal For
Listening Training." Quarterly Journal of Speech,
1962, 48:395-399.
Brown, D. P. "And Having Ears They Hear Not." NEA Journal,
1950, 39:586-587.
Brown, D. E. "Auding as The Primary Language Ability."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univer
sity, Palo Alto, 1954.
Brown, J. I. "A Comparison of Listening and Reading Abil
ity." College English, 1948, 10:105-107.
________ . "The Construction of a Diagnostic Test of Lis
tening Comprehension." Unpublished doctoral dis
sertation, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1949.
________ . "The Objective Measurement of Listening Ability."
Journal of Communications, 1951, 1:44-48.
________ . "Teaching Listening Through Listening-Type
Tests." College English, 1952, 13:224-225.
"Can Listening Be Taught?" College English,
1954a, 15:290-291.
________ . "How Teachable is Listening?" Educational Re
search Bulletin, 1954b, 13:85-93.
________ . "Evaluating Student Performance in Listening."
Education, 1955, 75:316-321.
115
________ . "Studies in Listening Comprehension." Speech
Monographs, 1959, 26:288-294.
Brown, J. I. and Carlsen, R. G. Brown-Carlsen Listening
Comprehension Test, Manual of Directions: Forms
Am and Bm. New York: Harcourt, 1957.
Brumbaugh, A. J. "Better Student Personnel Services in
Junior Colleges." Junior College Journal, 1950,
21:37-41.
Buckelew, J. "An Exploratory Study of the Psychology of
Speech Reception." Journal of Experimental Psy
chology , 1942, 32:473-494.
Caffrey, J. G. "An Introduction to The Auding Concept."
Education, 1949, 70:234-299.
________ . "Auding As A Research Problem." California
Journal of Education, 1953, 4:155-156.
"Auding Ability at the Secondary Level." Educa
tion, 1955, 75:303-310.
Campbell, D. T. and Stanley, J. C. Experimental and Quasi-
Experimental Designs for Research. New York: Rand
McNally, 1966.
Campbell, H. J. "An Analysis of The Ability to Structure
Material Auded as a Factor Contributing to Auding
Effectiveness." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Berkeley, 1959.
Cantril, H. and Allport, G. W. The Psychology of Radio.
New York: Harper, 1935.
Canute, R. J. "An Exploratory Evaluation of Certain As
pects of the Listening Program as Part of the Study
Skills Course at the University of Wyoming." Un
published doctoral dissertation, University of
Wyoming, Laramie, 1961.
Carlson, E. F. "Effective Listening." Chicago Schools
Journal, 1949, 30:187-191.
Carlton, R. L. "An Experimental Investigation of the Rela
tionship Between Personal Value and Word Intelligi
bility." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio
State University, Columbus, 1958.
116
Carroll, J. B. and Brimer, M. A. "Sex Differences in
Listening Comprehension." Journal of Research and
Developmental Education, 1969, 3:72-81.
Carter, R. E. "Listening-Improvement Training Programs in
Business and Industry in the United States." Pro
gram In Organizational Communication, Bulletin No.
1^ Department of Speech and Drama, University of
Kansas, Lawrence, 1965.
Cartier, F. A. "The Social Context of Listenability Re
search." Journal of Communication, 1952, 2:44-47.
Carver, R. P. "Analysis of Chunked Test Items as Measures
Of Reading and Listening Comprehension." Journal
of Educational Measurement, 1970, 7:141-150.
Casambre, A. J. "The Effects of Certain Variables in In
formative Speaking on Listener Comprehension." Un
published doctoral dissertation, Ohio State Univer
sity, Columbus, 1962.
Cease, J. S. and Haley, L. D. "Testing and Feasibility of
Offering a Voluntary NN-Credit Audio-Tutorial
Course in Listening Skills." (Final Report), Wis
consin State Universities Consortium of Research
and Development, October 31, 1969, (ERIC Document,
ED 054 167).
Chase, S. Power of Words, New York: Harcourt, 1954.
Childers, P. R. "Listening Ability is a Modifiable Skill."
Journal of Experimental Education, 1970, 38:1-3.
Christensen, G. V. "A Study of Listening Intelligibility.
Skills of Honor Students Versus Probation Students
at Brigham Young University." Master's thesis,
Brigham Young University, Provo, 1961.
Clark, B. R. The Open-Door College. New York: McGraw
Hill, 1960.
Cody, Mother M. I. "An Investigation of the Relative Ef
fectiveness of Four Modes of Presenting Meaningful
Material to Twelfth-Grade Students." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York,
1962.
117
Cohen, A. M. A Constant Variable. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 1971.
Collins, C. C. Junior College Student Personnel Programs:
What They Are and What They Should Be. Washington:
American Association of Junior Colleges, 1967.
Commission on the English Curriculum of the National Coun
cil of Teachers of English. "The Program in Listen
ing." The English Language Arts, New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1952, Chapter 14, pp. 328-
347.
Conboy, W. A. "A Study of the Retention of Speech Content
as Measured by Immediate and Delayed Recall."
Speech Monographs, 1955, 22:143.
Condon, E. F. "An Analysis of the Differences Between Good
and Poor Listeners in Grades Nine, Eleven and
Thirteen." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Kansas, Lawrence, 19 65.
Cook, J. B. "Student Achievement As A Function of Verbal
Interreaction in the Classroom." Unpublished doc*
toral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Min
neapolis, 1969.
Cooley, W. W. and Becker, S. J. "The Junior College Stu
dent." Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1966, 44:
464-469.
Crawford, C. C. "The Correlation Between College Lecture
Notes and Quiz Papers." Journal of Educational Re
search, 1925, 12:282-291.
Crawford, H. E. "A Note of Caution on Listening Training;
Study Shows Possible False Impressions and Over-
Evaluation." Training and Development Journal,
1967, 21:23-28.
Crook, F. E. "Interrelationships Among a Group of Language
Arts Tests." Journal of Educational Research, 1957,
51:305-311.
Cross, K. P. Beyond the Open Door: New Students to Higher
Education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1971.
118
Crowley, F. A Comparison of the Listening Ability of Blind
Students And The Listenxng Ability of Sighted Stu
dents in the Intermediate Grades. Office of Educa
tion, Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Washington, D. C., 1965, (ERIC Document, ED 021
373) .
DeSousa, A. M. and Cowles, M. "An Experimental Study To
Determine The Efficacy of Specific Training in
Listening." Paper read at the American Educational
Research Association, February 18, 1967 (ERIC Doc
ument, ED 016 656).
Dengan, D. A Critical Bibliography of Listening Materials.
Edmonton: Alberta Teachers Association, 1969 (ERIC
Document, ED 036 512).
Devine, T. G. "Suggested Approach to Controlled Research
in Language-Thinking Relationships." Journal of
Research And Developmental Education, 1969, 3:82-
86.
Diehl, C. F. and McDonald E. T. "Effect of Voice Quality
on Communication." Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders, 1956, 21:233-237.
Diehl, C. F., White, R. C. and Burke, K. W. "Rate and Com
munication." Speech Monographs, 1959, 26:229-232.
Dietrich, J. E. "The Relative Effectiveness of Two Modes
of Radio Delivery in Influencing Attitudes." Speech
Monographs, 1946, 13:58-68.
Dow, C. W. "The Development of Listening Comprehension
Tests for Michigan State College Freshmen." Speech
Monographs, 1953, 20:120.
_________. "Integrating the Teaching of Reading and Listen
ing Comprehension." Journal of Communications,
1958, 8:118-126.
Downing, D. I. "The Effect of Speech Rate, Listener Apti
tude, and Passage Listenability Upon Listening Com
prehension." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, 1971.
Drake, F. E. "How Do You Teach Listening?" Southern Speech
Journal, 1951, 16:268-271.
119
Dreyer, D. E. "Listening Performance Related to Selected
Academic and Psychological Measures." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, 1970.
Duker, S. "A Selective Bibliography on The Teaching of
Listening at The Secondary Level." Journal of Com
munications , 1955, 5:7-15.
"Basics in Critical Listening." English Journal,
1962, 51:565-567.
________ . "Doctoral Dissertations on Listening." Journal
of Communications, 1963, 13:106-117.
"Listening." Review of Educational Research,
1964, 34:156-163.
________ . "An Annotated Guide to Audiovisual Aids Avail
able for the Teaching of Listening." Audiovisual
Instruction, 1965, 10:320-322.
________ . "Listening." Encyclopedia of Educational Re-
search, Ebel, R. L. (Ed.), New York: MacMillan,
1969, pp. 747-748.
________ . "Teaching Listening: Recently Developed Pro
grams and Materials." Training and Development
Journal, 1970, 24:11-15.
Duker, S. and Petrie, C. R. "What We Know About Listening:
Continuation of a Controversy." Journal of Communi
cations , 1964, 4:245-252.
Edwards, A. L. "Political Frames of Reference as a Factor
in Influencing Recognition." Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, 1941, 36:34-50.
Emsley, B., Jones, F. E. and Timmons, W. M. Speaking And
Listening. New York: American Book Company, 1943.
Erickson, A. G. "An Analysis of Several Factors in an Ex
perimental Study of Listening at the College Level."
Journal of Communications, 1954, 4:128-132.
Erickson, C. I. and King, I. "A Comparison of Visual and
Oral Presentation of Lessons in the Case of Pupils
From the Third to the Ninth Grades." School and
Society, 1917, 6:146-148.
120
Feldman, K. A. and Newcomb, T. M. The Impact of College
On Students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970.
Vol. 1.
Fessenden, S. Designed For Listening. Dubuque: William
C. Brown, 1951.
"Levels of Listening; A Theory." Education,
1955, 75:288-291.
Forster, R. F. "Judge's Instructions; A Quantative Analy
sis of Juror's Listening Comprehension." Today's
Speech, 1970, 18:34-38.
Fox, D. J. The Research Process in Education. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1969.
Furness, E. L. "Listening and Learning." Peabody Journal
of Education, 1956, 33:212-216.
Gauger, P. W. "The Effect of Gesture and The Presence or
Absence of The Speaker on The Listening Comprehen
sion of Elementary and Twelfth Grade High School
Pupils." Speech Monographs, 1952, 11:116-117.
Gilkinson, H., Paulson, S. F. and Sikking, D. E. "Condi
tions Affecting the Communication of Controversial
Statements in Connected Discourse: Forms of Pre
sentation and The Political Frame of Reference of
The Listener." Speech Monographs, 1953, 20:253-260.
Goalsby, T. M. and Lasco, R. A. "Training Non-Readers in
Listening Comprehension." Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 1970, 3:467-470.
Gouran, D. S. "Attitude Change and Listeners Understanding
of a Persuasive Speech." Speech Teacher, 19 66,
15:289-294.
Goyer, R. S. "Oral Communication: Studies in Listening."
Audio-Visual Communication Review, 1954, 24:263-
276.
Gray, G. W. and Wise, C. M. The Bases of Speech. (Third
edition), New York: Harper, 1959.
Greene, E. B. "The Relative Effectiveness of Lecture and
Individual Reading as Methods of College Teaching."
Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1928, 4:457-563.
121
Haberland, J. A. "An Investigation of Listening Ability in
College Freshmen." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, Northwestern University, Evanston, 1956.
________ . "Speaker Effectiveness and the Brown-Carlsen
Listening Test." School and Society, 1958, 86:198-
199.
________ . "A Comparison of Listening Tests With Standard
ized Tests." Journal of Educational Research,
1959, 52:299-302.
Hacket, H. "A Null Hypothesis: There is not Enough Evi
dence." Education, 1955, 75:349-351.
Hacket, M. G. A Hierarchy of Skills in Listening Compre
hension and Reading Comprehension^ Florida State
University, Tallahassee, 1970 (ERIC Document, ED
041 701).
Haiman, F. S. "An Experiment in Informative Speaking."
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1948, 34:355-360.
________ . "An Experimental Study of the Effects of Ethos
in Public Speaking." Speech Monographs, 1949, 16:
190-202.
Hall, R. O. "An Exploratory Study of Listening of Fifth
Grade Pupils." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
1954.
Hampleman, R. S. "Comparison of Listening and Reading
Comprehension Ability of 4th and 6th Grade Pupils."
Educational Screen, 1958, 37:175.
Hannah, J. M. "A Study of Listening from the Ruesch-
Bateson Theory of Communication." Unpublished doc
toral dissertation, University of Denver, Denver,
1962.
Hartmann, E. L. and Caple, R. B. "Academic Achievement of
Junior College Transfer Students and Native Univer
sity Students." Journal of College Student Person
nel, 1969, 10:378-385.
Harwood, K. A. "An Experimental Comparison of Listening
Comprehension With Reading Comprehension." Unpub
lished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, 1950.
122
________ . "Listenability and Rate of Presentation."
Speech Monographs, 1955, 22:58-59.
Hawk, R. L. "The Relative Effectiveness of Auditory and
Printed Programs for Varying Reading Abilities."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington State
University, Pullman, 1965.
Heath, M. A. "A Study in Listening: The Relationship Be
tween Interest, Educability and Score on Objective
Over Factual Content of an Informative Speech."
Speech Monographs, 1952, 19:159-160.
Heilman, A. W. "An Investigation in Measuring and Improv
ing the Listening Ability of College Freshmen."
Speech Monographs, 1951, 18:303-308.
"Listening and the Curriculum." Education, 1955,
75:283-287.
Heinberg, P. "Factors Related to an Individual's Ability
to Perceive Implications of Dialogues." Speech
Monographs, 1961, 28:274-281.
Higgins, I. D. "An Empirical Study of Listening Related to
Anxiety and to Certain Other Measures of Ability
and Achievement." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, 1964.
Highlander, J. P. "Audience Analyzer Measurements and In
formational Effects of Speaker Variables in Radio
Talks." Speech Monographs, 1954, 21:188-189.
Hill, E. S. "An Analysis of the Results of Special Train
ing in Listening Compared to Special Training in
Reading Skills." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, Indiana University, Bloomington, 1961.
Hollingsworth, P. M. "A Study To Compare the Effect of Two
Listening Programs on Reading Achievement and
Listening Comprehension." Unpublished doctoral dis
sertation, Arizona State University, Tempe, 1963.
"So They Listened: The Effects of a Listening
Program." Journal of Communications, 1965, 15:14-
16.
123
________ . "Effectiveness of a Course in Listening Improve
ment for Adults." Journal of Communications, 1966,
16:189-191.
________ . Interrelating Listening and Reading. U. S.
Office of Education, Department of Health, Educa
tion and Welfare, Washington, D. C., 1968, (ERIC
Document, ED 019 208).
Hook, J. N. "Developing Good Listeners," Journal of Edu
cation, 1949, 132:110-114.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L. and Kelley, H. H. Communica
tion and Persuasion, New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1953.
Howe, D. L. "An Exploratory Study Concerning Listening
Comprehension and Speaking Effectiveness." Master's
thesis, University of Arizona, Tucson, 1960.
Hoyt, D. P. and Munday, L. "Academic Description and Pre
diction in Junior Colleges." In The Two-Year Col
lege And Its Students: An Empirical Report, Ameri
can College Testing Program, Iowa City, 1969, (ERIC
Document, ED 035 404), pp. 108-120.
Irvin, C. E. "Report of the NSCC Listening Committee."
Journal of Communications, 1951, 1:66-67.
________ . "Evaluating a Training Program in Listening for
College Freshmen." School Review, 1953, 61:25-29.
________ . "Motivation in Listening Training." Journal of
Communications, 1954, 4:42-44.
Issac, S. and Michael, W. B. Handbook in Research and Eval
uation. New York: Knapp, 1971.
Jencks, C. and Riesman, D. The Academic Revolution.
Garden City; Doubleday, 1968.
Johnson, B. L. General Education in Action. Washington,
D. C.: American Council on Education, 1952.
Johnson, F. C. and Fransden, K. "Administering the Brown-
Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test." Journal of
Communications, 1963, 13:38-45.
Johnson, K. 0. "A Study of the Effect of an Experimental
Course on Listening Comprehension." Journal of
124
Communication, 1951, 1:57-62.
Jones, J. A. "An Investigation of Scores on the Brown-
Carlsen Listening Test as Correlated with Subjec
tive Instructor Ratings and as Influenced by Media
of Presentation." Master's thesis, University of
Washington, Seattle, 1961.
Karraker, M. E. "An Evaluation of the Influence of Inter
est and 'Set' on Listening Effectiveness in the
Basic Communications Class." Speech Monographs,
1952, 19:117-118.
Keller, P. W. "Major Findings in Listening in The Past
Ten Years." Journal' of Communication, 1960, 10:29-
35.
Kelley, C. M. "Actual Listening Behavior of Industrial
Supervisors as Related to Listening Ability, Gen
eral Mental Ability, Selected Personality Factors
and Supervisory Effectiveness." Unpublished doc
toral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafay
ette, 1962.
_. "Mental Ability and Personality Factors in
Listening." Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1963,
49:152-156.
_. "Listening: Complex of Activities— And a Uni
tary Skill?" Speech Monographs, 1967, 34:455-465.
Kelley, W. and Wilbur, L. Teaching in The Community Col
lege. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.
Kelty, A. P. "An Experimental Study to Determine The Ef
fect of Listening For Certain Purposes Upon Achieve
ment in Reading for Those Purposes." Unpublished
doctoral field study, No. 1, College of Education,
Colorado State College, Greeley, 1953.
Kerlinger, F. N. Foundations of Behavioral Research. (2nd
edition), New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1973.
Kibler, R. J. "Effect of Sex on Comprehension and Reten
tion." Speech Monographs, 1970, 37:287-292.
125
Kielsmeier, M. "Learning Differences Between High and Low
Auding Subjects." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, University of Southern California, Los Ange
les, 1960.
Kimmell, G. M. "Acquisition of the Auding Skills." Aca
demic Therapy Quarterly, 1965, 1:31-32.
King, W. H. "An Experimental Investigation into the Rela
tive Merits of Listening and Reading Comprehension
For Boys and Girls of Primary School Age." British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 1959, 29:42-49.
Kirk, R. E. Experimental Design: Procedures for The Be
havioral Sciences, Belmont: Brooks/Cole, 1968.
Knoell, D. M. and others. "Researchers View Junior College
Students." Washington, D. C.: American Association
of Junior Colleges, 1969.
Knower, F. H. "Speech." Review of Educational Research,
1952, 22:102-115.
Kramar, E. J. "The Relationship of the Weschler-Bellevue
and ACE Intelligence Tests With Performance Scales
in Speaking and the BCLCI." Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Pittsburg, Pittsburg,
1955.
Kroll, H. M. "The Relative Effectiveness of Reading and
Individualized Referable Listening as Modes of
Learning in The Intermediate Grades." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Cal
ifornia, Los Angeles, 1972.
Krueger, D. H. "A Study of the Results of Teaching Factors
of Listening Comprehension to College Freshmen in
the Basic Communication II Course." Master's
thesis, Whittier College, Whittier, 1950.
Laird, D. and Hayes, J. R. "Communications Skills or Pink
Pills." Training in Business and Industry, 1966,
3:22-27.
Lane, H. "On The Necessity of Distinguishing Between
Speaking and Listening." Center for Research on
Language Behavior, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, 1968,(ERIC Document, ED 021 221).
126
Langholz, A. P. "A Study of the Relationship of Listening
Test Scores to Test Item Difficulty." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Colum
bus, 1966.
Labtz, W. C. "An Experimental Study of Listeners' Percep
tion of Speech Content as Compared with Speech
Delivery." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
1956.
Larsen, R. and Feder, D. D. "Common and Differential
Factors in Reading and Hearing Comprehension."
Journal of Educational Psychology, 1940, 31:241-
252.
Lewis, I. G. "A Survey of Management's Attitudes Regarding
Oral Communication Needs and Practices in Large
Industries in Los Angeles County." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Cal
ifornia, Los Angeles, 1954.
Lewis, M. S. "The Effect of Training in Listening for Cer
tain Purposes Upon Reading for Those Same Purposes."
Unpublished doctoral field study, Colorado State
College, College of Education, Greeley, 1951.
"Teaching Children to Listen." Education, 1960,
80:455-459.
Lewis, R. F. "Complementing Instruction in Reading Improve
ment of College Students with Instruction in Aud
ing." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Auburn
University, Auburn, 1964.
Lewis, T. R. "Listening." Review of Educational Research,
1958, 28:89-95.
Lillywhite, H. "Toward a Ehilosophy of Communication."
Journal of Communications,1962, 2:29-32.
Lindquist, E. F. "Review of Brown-Carlsen Listening Com
prehension Test." Fifth Mental Measurement Year-
book. Buros, O. K. (Ed.), Highland Park: Gryphon,
1959, pp. 650-651.
Linsley, W. A. "An Experimental Study to Examine the Ef
fect of Note-Taking on Listening Efficiency in the
College Classroom." Master's thesis, Bradley Uni
versity, Peoria, 1961.
127
Loder, J. E. "A Study of Aural Learning With and Without
The Speaker Present." Journal of Experimental Edu
cation, 1937, 6:47-60.
Lunneborg, P. W., Lunneborg, C. E. and Greemun, R. "Non-
Intellectual Indices of Junior College Students."
Education and Psychological Measurement, 1970, 30:
399-403.
McClarty, E. L. "Auding Ability Related to Achievement in
Two Telecourses." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, Stanford University, Stanford, 1957.
McClendon, P. I. "An Experimental Study of the Relation
ship Between Note-Taking Practices and Listening
Comprehension of College Freshmen During Expository
Lectures." Journal of Developmental Reading, 1963,
6:276-278.
McConnell, T. R. A General Pattern for American Public
Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
Macorie, K. "Teaching Listening." College English, 1951,
12:220-223.
Many, W. A. "Reading and Listening: Is There Really a
Difference?" Reading Teacher, 1965, 19:110-113.
Markgraf, B. R. "An Observational Study Determining the
Amount of Time That Students in the Tenth and
Twelfth Grades Are Expected to Listen in the Class
room." Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, 1957.
________ . "A Survey of Listening Pedagogy in American
Teacher-Training Institutions." Journal of Communi
cations , 1962, 12:33-35.
Marks, A., Cathcart, R. and Michael, W. B. "The Prediction
of Gains in Mean Performance in Various Measures of
Communication Skills Relative to Type of Curriculum
Pursued." Journal of Experimental Education, 1963,
31:303-306.
Marsden, W. W. "A Study of The Value of Training in Listen
ing to Achievement in Reading.” Unpublished doc
toral field study, Colorado State College, Greeley,
1951.
128
Mathis, R. W. and James, W. H. "Internal-External Control
As An Environmental Variable in Listening." Journal
of Experimental Education, 1972, 40:60-63.
Matthews, J. "The Effect of Loaded Language on Audience
Comprehension of Speeches." Speech Monographs,
1947, 14:176-186.
Medsker, L. The Junior College: Progress and Prospect.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
Mersand, J. "How to Train Pupils to Listen." Senior
Scholastic, 1964, 85:9.
Minium. E. W. Statistical Reasoning in Psychology and Edu
cation. New York: Wiley, 1970.
Monroe, A. H. Principles and Types of Speech. (4th edi
tion), New York: Scott, Foresman, 1955.
Monroe, C. R. Profile of The Community College. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1972.
Montgomery, M. A. "An Investigation of Students Who Suc
ceed Academically And Those Who Do Not Succeed
Academically in a Community College." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburg,
Pittsburg, 1970.
Moray, N. "Attention in Dichotic Listening: Affective
Cues and the Influence of Instructions." Quarterly
Journal of Speech, 1959, 11:56-60.
Myers, R. L. and Gates, L. W. Effective Listening and
Cognitive Learning at the College Level. Muncie:
Ball State University, 1966.
National Council of Teachers of English. "Developing Com
petence in Listening." The English Language Arts in
the Secondary School, New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts, 1956, Chapter 8, p. 251-292.
Needham, A. "Listening Exercises With a Purpose." Educa
tion, 1955, 75:311-315.
Nichols, R. G. "Listening Questions and Problems."
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1947, 33:83-86.
129
________ . "Factors Accounting for Difference in Comprehen
sion of Materials Presented Orally In the Class
room." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State
University of Iowa, Iowa City, 194 8.
________ . "Teaching of Listening." Chicago Schools
Journal, 1949, 30:273-278.
________ . "Listening Instruction in the Secondary Schools."
National Association of Secondary School Principals1
Bulletin, 1952, 36:158-74.
________ . "He Who Has Ears— There is a Real Awakening to
The Importance of Instruction in How to Listen."
National Education Association Journal, 1956, 45:15.
"Do We Know How To Listen?" Speech Teacher,
1961, 10:118-124.
Nichols, R. G. and Cashman, P. H. "The Approval Factor in
Listening." Education, 1960, 80:268-271.
Nichols, R. G. and Lewis, T. R. Listening and Speaking:
A Guide to Effective Oral Communication. Dubuque:
Wm. C. Brown, 1954.
Nicholson, H. "On Human Misunderstanding." The Atlantic
Monthly, 1947, 180:113-114.
Nie, N. H., Bent, D. H. and Hull, C. H. SPSS: Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences, New York: McGraw
Hill, 1970. ”
O'Connell, D. "New Students for the New Colleges."
Journal of the National Association of College Ad
missions Counselors, 1970, 15:13.
Orr, D. B. "Note on Rapid Listening." Phi Delta Kappan,
1965, 46:460.
Orr, D. B. and Graham, W. R. "Development of a Listening
Comprehension Test to Identify Educational Poten
tial Among Disadvantaged Junior High School Stu
dents." American Educational Research Journal,
1968, 4(2):167-177.
Panos, R. J. Some Characteristics of Junior College Stu
dents . ACE Research Paper 1(2), American Council
on Education, Washington: American Council on Edu
cation, 1966.
130
Pence, O. L. "Emotionally Loaded Argument; Its Effective
ness in Stimulating Recall." Quarterly Journal of
Speech, 40:272-276.
Penfield, D. A. and Marascuilio, L. A. Learning to Listen:
A Broad Demonstration Study. American Educational
Research Association, Washington, 1970,(ERIC Docu
ment, ED 037 790).
Petrie, C. R. "An Experimental Evaluation of Two Methods
for Improving Listening Comprehension Abilities."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue Univer
sity, Lafayette, 1961.
Pflaumer, E. M. "Personality Correlates of Effective
Listening," Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Ohio State University, Columbus, 1971.
Pierce, J. R. and David, E. E. Man's World of Sound.
Garden City: Doubleday, 1958.
Plummer, R. C. and Richardson R. C. "Broadening the Spec
trum of Higher Education: Who Teaches the High-
Risk Student?" Journal of Higher Education, 1964,
35:308-314.
Popham, W. J. "Tape Recorded Lectures in the College
Classroom." Audiovisual Communications Review,
1961, 9:109-118.
Rankin, P. T. "The Measurement of the Ability to Under
stand Spoken Language." Unpublished doctoral dis
sertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1926.
________ . "The Importance of Listening Ability." English
Journal, 1928, 17:623-630.
________ . "Listening Ability: Its Importance, Measurement,
and Development." Chicago Schools Journal, 1930,
12:177-179.
Rasmussen, W. I. "An Experiment in Developing Basic Listen
ing Skills Through Programmed Instruction," Unpub
lished doctoral dissertation, University of South
ern California, Los Angeles, 1971.
Redden, E. "Listening Instruction, Reading and Critical
Thinking." The Reading Teacher, 1968, 21:654-658.
131
Rivers, W. M. "Listening Comprehension." Modern Language
Journal, 1966, 50 (4):196-204.
Rockwell, L. L. "The Fourth R is Listening." College
English, 1939, 1:61-67.
Rogers, G. W. "Lecture Listening Skills: Their Nature and
Relation to Achievement." Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, 1959.
Rose, E. "A Comparative Study of the Brown-Carlsen Listen
ing Comprehension Test and Three Tests of Reading
Comprehension." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
New York University, New York, 1959.
Roueche, J. E. Followups of the Junior College Transfer
Student. University of California, Los Angeles,
1967, (ERIC Document, ED 013 067).
Roueche, J. E. and Hurlburt, A. S. "The Open-Door College:
The Problem of the Low Achiever." Journal of Higher
Education, 1968, 39:435-42.
Roughton, R. D. "The Study of Sentence Structure as a
Method of Improving Reading and Listening Compre'-
hension." Master's thesis, Ohio State University,
Columbus Ohio, 1959.
Schenz, R. F. "What is Done For Low Ability Students?"
Junior College Journal, 1964, 34:22-27.
Schmeyer, J. W. "Factors Related to Listening." Reading
Teacher, 1971, 24:369-370.
Seashore, H. "Academic Abilities of Junior College Stu
dents." Junior College Journal, 1958, 29:74-80.
Seymour, P. J. "A Study of the Relationship Between the
Communications Skills and a Selected Set of Pre
dictors and of the Relationships Among the Com
munications Skills." Unpublished doctoral disser
tation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1965.
Stark, J. "An Investigation of the Relationship of the
Vocal and Communicative Aspects of Speech Competen
cy with Listening Comprehension." Unpublished doc
toral dissertation, New York University, New York,
1956.
132
Stewart, N. "Listen to the Right People." Nation*s
Business, 1963, 51:60-63.
Sticht, T. G. Learning By Listening in Relation to Apti-
tuide, Readxng and Rate-Controlled Speech, United
States Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Human Resources Research Organization (Technical
Report, 69-23) Alexandria, Virginia, 1969, (ERIC
Document, ED 037 666).
Still, D. S. "The Relationship Between Listening Ability
and High School Grades." Unpublished doctoral dis
sertation, University of Pittsburg, Pittsburg, 1955.
Stites, W. H. "A Study of Some Factors Relating to Speak
ing Effectiveness of the Basic Communications Stu
dents of the University of Denver." Master's
thesis, University of Denver, Denver, 1948.
Story, M. L. "Need for Critical Listening." High School
Journal, 1955, 38:297-299.
Stratton, O. "Techniques for Literate Listening." English
Journal, 1948, 37:542-544.
Stromer, W. F. "An Investigation Into Some of the Rela
tions Between Reading, Listening, and Intelligence."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Denver, Denver, 1952.
"Listening and Personality." Education, 1954,
75:322-326.
Taylor, S. E. Listening; What Research Says to The Teacher.
American Educational Research Association, Washing-
ton, D. C., 1964, (ERIC Document, ED 026 120).
Thompson, E. "Some Effects of Message Structure on Listen
er's Comprehension." Speech Monographs, 1967, 34:
51-57.
Thonssen. L. and Baird, A. C. Speech Criticism, New York:
Ronald Press, 1948.
Thornton, J. W. The Community Junior College. New York:
Wiley, 1972.
Toussaint, I. H. "A Classified Summary of Listening."
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960,
l'U':T2b-m.---------^ 1 .
j
133
Treisman, A. M. "Contectual Cues in Selective Listening."
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960,
12:242-248.
Trenaman, J. "Understanding Radio Talks." Quarterly
Journal of Speech, 1951, 37:173-178.
Trent, J. W. and Medsker, L. L. Beyond High School. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968.
Trivette, S. E. "The Effect of Training in Listening for
Specific Purposes." Journal of Educational Re
search, 1961, 54:276-277.
Utzinger, V. A. "An Experimental Study of the Effects of
Verbal Fluency Upon the Listener." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California, 1952.
Van Valkenburg, J. "Learning Through Listening: Implica
tions For Reading." Unpublished doctoral disserta
tion, University of Rochester, Rochester, 1968.
Vineyard, E. E. and Bailey, R. B. "Interrelationship of
Reading Ability, Listening Skill, Intelligence and
Scholastic Achievement." Journal of Developmental
Reading, 1960, 3:174-178.
Wang, M. and Lindvall, C. M. An Exploratory Investigation
of the Carroll Learning Model and the Bloom Strat
egy For Mastery Learning, Pennsylvania Learning
Research and Development Center, University of
Pittsburg, 1969, (ERIC Document, ED 028 841).
Warren, V. B. How Adults Can Learn More— Faster: A Prac
tical Handbook for Adult Students, National Associ-
ation for Public School Adult Education, Washing
ton, D. C., 1966, (ERIC Document, ED 024 911).
Way, J. G. "Teaching Listening Comprehension." The Read
ing Teacher, 1973, 26:472-477.
Westover, F. L. "A Comparison of Listening and Reading as
a Means of Testing." Journal of Educational Re
search, 1958, 52:23-26.
Whitfield, G. W. "Listening Instruction a Factor in Im
proving Listening Comprehension." Unpublished doc
toral dissertation, University of Arkansas, Fayette
ville, 1964.
134
Wiksell, W. "The Problem of Listening." Quarterly Journal
of Speech/ 1946, 32:505-508.
Williams, F. D. "An Experimental Application of the Seman
tic Differential and 'Cloze' Procedure as Measure
ment Techniques in Listening Comprehension." Un
published doctoral dissertation, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, 1962.
Wills, F. H. and Banas N. "Learning to Listen." Academic
Therapy, 1971, 6:317-320.
Young, J. D. "An Experimental Comparison of Vocabulary
Growth by Means of Oral Reading, Silent Reading,
and Listening." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
1953.
Young, W. E. "The Relations of Reading Comprehension and
Retentions to Hearing Comprehension and Retention."
Journal of Experimental' Education, 1936, 5:30-39.
Zelko, H. P. "An Outline of the Role of Listening in Com
munication." Journal of Communication, 1955,
4:71-75.
Zelniker, T. "Selective Auditory Attention: A Develop
mental Study." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
1970.
Ziemann, N. C. "A Study of the Communication Courses in
Selected Colleges and Universities in the United
States." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North
western University, Evanston, 1960.
APPENDICES
)
135
APPENDIX A
MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED TO EXPERIMENTAL
GROUP SUBJECTS RELATING TO LISTENING
SKILL BUILDING
1. "Are You Listening?"
2. "Listening and Concentration"
3. "Locating the Lecture's Main Idea"
4. "Cue Words to Main Ideas"
136
137
R. Barker
D. Brown
M. J. Watkins Social Science 1
ARE YOU LISTENING?
We have all been hearing a great deal recently
about problems of communications in the modern world. Peo
ple, in particular those of college age, are deeply con
cerned with the difficulty of communication in a rapidly
changing world. Communications problems and their solu
tions absorb a major portion of the time of thousands of
people throughout the world. College and university facul
ty and administration are well aware <5f the importance of
communications skills and have developed a wide variety of
courses in reading, writing and speech to assist the stu
dent.
In the past few years experts in communications
have begun to appreciate the importance of a fourth, and
largely neglected, skill— listening. As early as 1926 a
study by Paul Rankin indicated that the typical adult
spends as much as 70% of his waking time in some form of
communication activity. Rankin's analysis of his findings
suggested that time spent in communications could be broken
down into percentages as follows:
1. 42% listening
2. 15% reading
3. 32% talking
4. 11% writing
Several surveys indicate that college students rank
listening skills as equal to reading skills and more impor
tant than writing skills as a factor in success in college.
In addition, American business is beginning to realize that
skill in listening is of critical importance to business
success. Over 300 major U.S. corporations, including AT&T,
3M, General Motors and Dow Chemical have courses which train
students in critical and effective listening. Frank Fisher,
recently the director of the Communications Course for the
American Management Association, stated that "Efficient
listening is of such critical importance to industry that,
138
as research and methods improve, I feel that training de
partments will have to offer courses in this field."
Listening is probably the least understood, as well
as the most neglected of the four communications skills.
Some of the most common false assumptions regarding listen
ing may be summarized as:
1. Listening is a passive function
2. Listening is easy
3. Listening is hearing
4. Listening is an automatic, involuntary reflex
5. Listening can be commanded
6. Speaking is more important than listening
7. The speaker is 100% responsible for the success
of communication
8. Listening skill comes naturally
9. Listening is only a matter of understanding the
speakers words
In common with reading, writing and speaking, in
efficient listening is largely a matter of poor habits.
Listening problems are not usually a matter of poor hearing.
It has been estimated that only 3% of students have hearing
problems which are severe enough to be a handicap in the
classroom. Ralph Nichols has listed the ten worst habits
in listening. It may be valuable to review them here.
1. Calling the subject uninteresting
2. Criticizing the speaker's delivery
3. Getting overstimulated by some point within the
speech
4. Listening only for facts
5. Trying to take all notes in outline form
6. Faking attention to the speaker
7. Tolerating or creating distraction
8. Avoiding difficult expository material
9. Letting emotion-laden words arouse personal
antagonism
10. Wasting the advantage of thought speed over speech
speed
Nichols has developed four basic principles of good
listening which can be of use to all of us.
139
1. The listener, not the speaker, is primarily re
sponsible for any learning which might take place.
2. A speaker's point must be fully understood before
it can be judged accurately.
3. The contribution of note-taking to efficient listert-
ing depends upon the use of the notes.
4. Sustained attention to speech depends upon the
listeners continual mental manipulation of its con
tents .
a. anticipation of the speakers points
b. identification of supporting materials
c. mental review of points already developed
d. an occasional search for implied meaning
140
R. Barker
D. Brown
M. J. Watkins
LISTENING AND CONCENTRATION
Social Science 1
Summary
Concentration is clearly a discipline of the mind.
It is fortunate of course, if you have a natural aptitude
for concentration. But if you don't there are certain ex
cellent habits you can form that will aid you considerably.
An ambitious person with a specific goal will have
more success concentrating than a lazy person who doesn't
really care much.
Curiosity is also a great asset. When a person is
interested in something he usually pays attention.
All great people in history have solved exception
ally difficult problems by their ability to think hard and
make the correct decisions.
One note of caution: When you begin to realize the
success of concentration, do not become overconfident.
Just continue working in the same way, with the same care
and attention as before, overconfidence can turn your head
and be just as dangerous as lack of confidence.
When you work late at night and find it difficult
to solve a particular problem, relax and sleep on it.
Sleep has wonderful theraputic powers. You will probably
wake up in the morning and understand the issue perfectly.
By concentrating you are training your memory.
Whenever you need it, all that information will be ready
and available to you.
Don't worry if you cannot grasp a particular issue.
Rest for a while and approach it again. Break it down into
smaller units. Take it apart as if you were fixing a watch.
Remember These Clues
for Better Concentration
Keep track of your progress.
Don't worry. Just settle down and work.
Don't let your mind wander.
Work actively when you work.
Relax completely when you relax.
Never force yourself to read a book that doesn't
interest you.
Remember, even a genius has to concentrate hard and
often.
141
12 Checkpoints for Concentration
1. Are you interested in what is going on around you?
2. Are you curious and questioning?
3. Do you have a goal you want to achieve? Something
you want to learn to do? A project to complete?
4. Do you observe people and objects?
5. Do you have a high level of awareness?
6. Can you find a place to work where you are free
from distractions?
7. Are you persevering?
8. Can you relax yourself physically and mentally?
9. Are your goals realistic?
10. Do you break your work down into small units?
11. Do you review your progress as you go along?
12. Do you read?
The Power of Concentrated Observation
A good way to relax and develop your power of con
centration is to select an object for observation. No
matter where you are or what you are doing, take a few
minutes out of the day and look at something.
Exclude every other thought from your mind and con
centrate on that one object. Look at a vase, a lamp, or a
painting. Anything you want to look at. What can you
notice about it? Its shape; its exact color; its value and
usefulness?
If you're looking at a photograph or a painting,
you have many levels of observation to deal with. Style,
color, statement, and many other considerations.
While observing a painting, your concentrated
thought may carry you back centuries to the lifetime of the
painter. You can begin an incredible jouney by concentra
tion.
Do these observations and exercises all the time.
Make them a habit. Your awareness level will rise to a
hightened sensitivity you have never experienced before.
Guide to Good Listening
Tests have proven that good listeners regularly
engage in four specific mental activities. These activities
are well coordinated when listening is at its best. They
seem directed entirely to the message being received, and
do not allow much leeway for sidetracking. Here are the
four processes:
142
1. The good listener thinks ahead of the speaker. He
anticipates where the conversation is going and
what conclusions may be drawn.
2. He weighs the evidence the speaker uses to support
his points.
3. The good listener does periodic quick mental re
views and summaries of the points the speaker is
making.
4. Throughout, the listener listens between the lines.
He listens for hidden meanings and inferences. He
pays close attention to nonverbal communication on
all levels.
Because we think so much faster than people can
talk, we have plenty of time for these four activities,
without missing out on anything the speaker has to say.
All it takes is practice.
The Levels of Listening
There are three levels that we listen on. The
first is the non-hearing level where we really don't listen
at all. We may look at the person speaking and nod from
time to time, but we really don't hear a work he has to
say.
The second level is the level of hearing. We know
what the person is saying— we can repeat the words— but we
don't really understand the ideas. As soon as the conver
sation is over, we forget all of it.
The third level is the level of thinking. On this
level we think about what the speaker is saying. We anal
yze and evaluate. We draw a conclusion.
It is only on this third level that it is worth
while for us to communicate. Anything less is merely pas
sing the time of day.
R. Barker
D. Brown
M. J. Watkins
Social Science 1
Summary Sheet
LOCATING THE LECTURE'S MAIN IDEA
Finding the main idea of a lecture is a very dif
ficult task for many people. Only one out of four people
walk away from a lecture with the main idea grasped.
1. The Purpose Lecture (No central idea present)
a. math and science
b. skills in humanities (English, language,
speech)
c. the lecture is intended to instruct you in a
technique. (How, rather than why)
d. Get each step of each technique being explained
(also get underlying ideas behind each tech
nique if possible)
e. Technical areas demand learning close to
memorization.
2. The Idea Lecture
a. The task here is to try to spot the main idea.
1. main idea (an abstraction)
2. subordinate ideas (lead to main idea)
3. facts (statistics, descriptions)
b. a 50 minute lecture will introduce no more than
five central ideas. 45 minutes will be spent
explaining the 5 ideas.
c. Learn to spot cues which will tell important
facts or ideas are coming up (see hand out of
'Main Ideas').
3. Tips on normal location of main points
a. Material in the opening and closing positions
of a lecture is likely to be most important.
b. Important material is likely to be repeated
c. Emphasis (largely verbal) gives a clue to im
portance.
144
R. Barker
D. Brown
M. J. Watkins Social Science I
CUE WORDS TO MAIN IDEAS
The following groups of words frequently indicate
that the speaker is beginning to develop a main point in a
speech. Familiarize yourself with such cues. They appear
in both speech and writing to stress the important ideas of
each.
Group I; "For example," "to illustrate," "a demonstration
o£ tnis point is..." are phrases signalling that a series
of FACTS will now explain or prove an IDEA. The speaker
just uttered the idea and thinks it important enough to pin
it down by facts. He will repeat the idea in case you did
not get it down at first.
Group 2; "There are three causes...," "This condition has
two results," are cues that the organization of the materi
al now will be to relate causes to effects.
Group 3: "Gaul is divided into three parts...," There are
four major classifications and seven sub-divisions..." in
dicate that the organization will be a "breaking-down" into
major class (DOG), sub-division of class (TAME DOG); (WILD
DOG), and perhaps a subdivision of that (COLLIE/SPANIEL/
etc.; COYTE/WOLF/ etc.) An outline form would be natural
for taking notes.
Group 4: "The process is as follows..." or "The first step
is..." are cues often used by speakers in a technical
course. He is trying to give you a step-by-step account of
the performing of a process which he will probably want you
to form. As I have said before, there generally is no idea
here, just time-related incidents.
GrougS: "All authorities now agree..." or "There are few
specialists in my field who would deny" are cues to a main
idea; you will find that it is very rare for a speaker's
authorities to entirely agree upon a certain idea. Write
it down.
145
Group 6; "Some authorities say...but others disagree" or
"There is considerable debate about..." are cues suggesting
that the speaker is about to discuss an area where there is
great controversy and accordingly a great amount of pro
fessional energy being spent. It is bound to be important.
Group 7; "This is such-and-such but on the other hand..."
"Thereare similarities and differences here both worthy of
note..." indicate that there will be a two-part organiza
tion of material, part of which will be spent on likenesses
and part of which will be spent on differences. A slight
rephrasing of the cue will lead you to see that he is
going to dwell only on differences: "Despite the many dif
ferences between A and B, there are these significant simi
larities..." Or vice versa for emphasis of differences.
When he turns from one of these subjects to another, he
will probably cue you by saying, "On the other hand...,"
"To turn to the second point of resemblance,..." and so on.
APPENDIX B
SAMPLE SCRIPT, QUIZ, AND LECTURE NOTES
1. Script: "The Organization of Society"
2. Lab Quiz: "CRIS"
3. Lecture Notes: "Basic Units of Social
Organization"
4. Handout: "Schematic Diagram of Social
Organization"
146
SCRIPT
The Organization of Society
In this lecture we shall examine the manner in
which society organizes itself in order to provide for the
minimum requirements of social life As has been sug
gested, a society, in order to survive must make the fol
lowing adaptations.
First, society must adapt to the physical, external
environment. Secondly, society must adapt to human psycho
logical needs, and third, because adaptation to the exter
nal environment and human psychological needs requires that
man work together in a social context, society must adapt
itself to the unique problems of collective living.
Broadly speaking..there are four component parts to
the organization of society as it seeks to satisfy human
physical and psychological needs.
These four component parts are customs, roles, in
stitutions and systems.
Customs are expected forms of behavior. Customary
forms of behavior are of critical importance to a society
as they allow us to anticipate or predict an individuals
acts in a specific situation. If social processes are to
be successful in achieving goals there must be a reasonable
level of predictability in the patterns of our interaction
with others. Some examples of customs are the practice of
14 < 7
148
shaking hands when being introduced, male college teachers
wearing ties, and driving a car on the right hand side of
the road (at least in the United States). Many customs,
about which we feel strongly, are codified, or formalized
into laws.
The second component part of social organization,
the role, is a cluster of customs which are the expected
behaviors of individuals due to their position in society
or the functions which they perform.......Roles may be ei
ther achieved, when you have to do something in order to
perform them, or assigned, when you are expected to perform
in a certain way because of certain characteristics. An
example of achieved role is the Doctor: He has to go to
medical school....An assigned role example would be child,
woman or Chicano....
To illustrate the idea of role as a cluster of cus
tomary behaviors think of the role student What are
some of the customs we associate with the role student?....
Well.... students are expected to attend class (at least
once in a while) take notes in class, wear certain styles
of clothes and take tests..to name only a few customs...a
student is seen as successful or a failure in terms of how
well he performs the behaviors, or customs, associated with
his role.
Because a person is often required to perform more
149
than one role at a time these roles may conflict.... a work
ing mother, for example, may find that the requirements
associated with her occupational role..secretary for in
stance. .. .conflicts with her other roles as wife and
mother..role conflict can be a source of considerable agony
for many people in a complex society.
The third component part of social organization is
the institution. Institutions are the organization through
which human beings, acting collectively, attempt to achieve
satisfaction of human needs.... Institutions are comprised
of clusters of associated roles which interact with each
other in more or less predictable ways and which have as
their objective the satisfaction of specific human needs...
Churches, the family, schools, city councils and
modern business corporations are institutions.
A hospital is an institution its aim is the
delivery of health services which are human physical
needs.... some of the roles associated with the institution,
hospital, are nurse, patient, doctor, X-ray technician and
so on. Each role carries with it a cluster of customary
behaviors which lend predictability to human interaction
within the context of the organization.
The fourth component of social organization is the
system. A system is a unit comprised of interacting com
ponents (institutions in this case) which performs a func-
150
tion or set of functions. It may be a subsystem, or a
part, of a larger unit.
A relatively new area of study in the social sci
ences is that of systems analysis which is an approach to
the study of social phenomena which focuses on the inter
relatedness of all aspects of social behavior. It also
emphasizes the need to examine entire social processes in
order to fully understand any aspect of those processes....
R. Barker Social Science 1
D. Brown Lab Quiz
M. J. Watkins CRIS
Name___________________
Hour
Score (missed)
Directions: Circle the number of the correct answer in the
multiple choice section. Place a T in the space provided
in the True/False section if the answer is true and an F
if it is false.
Multiple Choice
1. The main idea of the lecture was
A. The organization of institutions.
B. How society is organized in order to satisfy human
needs.
C. How society adapts to the psychological needs of
human beings.
D. The minimum requirements for social life.
2. Which of the following statements is not true?
A. Roles are composed of a cluster of customs.
B. Institutions are organizations which are made up of
interacting roles.
C. A system is the smallest unit of social organiza
tion.
D. Customs are expected behaviors.
3. All of the following are achieved roles
A. woman
B. student
C. doctor
D. carpenter
4. Which of the following is not a custom?
A. A doctor wearing a white coat.
B. A child being happy at a party.
C. A student taking notes in class.
D. A police officer carrying a revolver
152
5. Which of the following would not be considered an in
stitution?
A. A family
B. A group watching a film
C. General Motors Corporation
D. Skyline College
True/False
1. A system is composed of a cluster of interacting
customs.
2. Systems analysis is the study of role interactions.
3. Role conflict is more common in complex, modern
societies than in "primitive" societies.
4. The role of "doctor" is an assigned role.
5. An institution is a cluster of interacting roles.
R. Barker
D. Brown
M. J. Watkins
Social Science
153
Basic Units of Social Organization
In order to survive in a group man has to adapt to the
conditions of collective living. Man must organize himself
in order to prevent chaos.
Customs. Customs are specific behaviors. They are the
normal expected way of doing things in a society.
Roles. A collection of specific customs which are related
to the same objective, problem or condition.
Assigned roles; Roles which are given to people
because they possess specific
characteristics. (sex, age, race)
Achieved roles; People are placed in these roles
because of some action on their part,
(occupation)
Institutions. Some activities are considered by the soci
ety to be so crucial that the roles are
formalized into institutions. In an in
stitution a cluster of roles interact with
each other in relatively predictable ways.
Institutions are organized in order to pro
vide for the minimum requirements for social
life.
Types of institutions:
Political concerned with power, its use and who
shall have it.
Economic concerned with the production, distribution
and consumption (use) of goods and service.
Expressive concerned with outlets for individuality
Kinship concerned with problems of sex and child
care
Social Systems. All the customs, roles, and institutions
tied together in a complex of interac
tions. Each element of the system is in
terconnected and interdependent. The
parts are linked by common understandings,
obligations and privileges.
154
R. Barker Social Science I
D. Brown Social Organization
M. J. Watkins
A Schematic Diagram of Social Organization
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
custom
role
institution
role
system
role
institution
role
Notes:
APPENDIX C
DAILY SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTAL GROUP ACTIVITIES
155
DAILY SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTAL
Week
1
1
1
2
GROUP ACTIVITIES
Session Topic
1 Pretest
2 Introduction
3 Listening and
Concentration
1 Fundamentals of
Effective Listening
2 Understanding the
Structure of Oral
Communication
Activities
Brown-Carlsen
(Am Form)
1. The problem of
listening
skill
2. Purposes of
the listening
program
3. Methodology
1. Tape Presenta
tion : Lis
tening and
Concentration
(Akers, D. and
Masline, P.,
Automated
Learning,
Inc.)
2. Discussion of
presentation
1. Discussion
based on hand
out "Are You
Listening"
2. Discussion:
"Listening and
Concentration"
1. Discussion:
"Locating the
Lecture1s
Main Idea"
2. Discussion:
"Cue Words to
Main Ideas"
156
Week Session Topic
157
Activities
Areas of Interest
in The Social
Sciences
Social Role
Culture
Information
Processing
Cultural Diversity
and Conflict
Basic Units of
Social Organization
1. Concept Tape
2. Quiz
3. Discussion of
concept
4. Hand out tape
summary
1. Concept tape
2. Quiz
3. Discussion of
concept
4. Hand out tape
summary
1. Concept tape
2. Quiz
3. Discussion of
concept
4. Hand out tape
summary
1. Film: "Infor
mation Proces
sing "
2. Discussion
3. Concept Quiz
1. Concept Tape
2. Quiz
3. Discussion of
concept
4. Handout of
tape summary
1. Concept tape
2. Quiz
3. Discussion of
concept
4. Handout of
tape summary
4
5
3
1
Midterm Examination
Changing Role Con
cepts of Women
1. "Role Rever
sal session
2. Critique
Week
5
5
6
6
6
7
Session Topic
2 Economic Roles 1.
2.
3.
4.
3 Political Roles 1.
2.
3.
4.
1 Learning 1.
2.
2 Education and 1.
Communication 2.
3.
4.
3 Social Roles 1.
and Processes 2.
3.
4.
1 Human Relations 1.
2.
3.
4.
2 Race Relations 1.
2.
3.
158
Activities
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
Film: "Cogni
tive Develop
ment"
Concept quiz
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
Concept quiz
Film: "Social
Psychology"
Discussion
159
Week
7
8
Session Topic
3 Role Integration 1.
2.
3.
4.
1 Human Existence 1.
and Social Self 2.
3.
4.
Role Conflicts in 1.
College Students
2.
Activities
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
Concept tape
Quiz
Discussion of
concept
Handout of
tape summary
"Role Rever
sal" session
Critique
8 3 Posttest Brown-Carlsen
(Bm Form)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Community College Health Education Classroom And Television Instruction: A Comparative Study Of Student Characteristics And Achievement

PDF

The Role Of The California Community Colleges In The Education Of The Aged

PDF

An Investigation Of Prediction Of Academic Success In A Community Junior College

PDF

Faculty Perceptions Of Institutional Environment And Counseling Services At Selected Community Colleges Utilizing Centralized And Decentralized Systems

PDF

The Organization And Promotion Of Sacramento Junior College, 1916-1940

PDF

The Perception Of Academic Rank-Based Incentive Systems Among Faculty Members At Selected California Community Colleges

PDF

A Proposed Model For Predicting Success In A First Course Of College Calculus In The Community Junior College

PDF

Student Perceptions Of Institutional Environment And Counseling Services At Selected Community Colleges Utilizing Centralized And Decentralized Systems

PDF

Change Among Selected College Student Groups In Awareness Regarding The Nature Of Prejudice

PDF

A Study Of Selected Programs And Graduates At The University Of Nigeria, Nsukka

PDF

Organization And Administration Of Guidance And Counseling Services In Public Community Colleges In California

PDF

The Impact On Community College Students Of An Orientation Course Emphasizing The Nature, Functions, And Purposes Of Higher Education

PDF

A Suggested Journalism Curriculum For California Junior Colleges

PDF

The Delineation And Function Of Course Offerings Of The Los Angeles Community Colleges And The Los Angeles City Schools Division Of Career And Continuing Education

PDF

Environmental Presses Within An Academic Community Of An Evolving Canadian Community College

PDF

Academic Performance And Persistence Characteristics Of Special Admissionminority-Poor Freshmen And Regular Freshmen At Six California State Colleges

PDF

Attitudes Of Selected Groups Toward Utilization Of Instructional Aides Incalifornia Community Colleges

PDF

An Evaluation Of The United States Air Force Flying Safety Officer Courseat The University Of Southern California

PDF

An Analysis Of The Campus Environment Of A Church-Related Liberal Arts College, With Student Enrollment Implications

PDF

The Relationship Of A Collaborative Counseling Technique To The Patterns Of Enrollment, Curricular Choice And Curricular Achievement At The Community College

Asset Metadata

Creator Brown, Donald Holmes (author)

Core Title An Investigation Of The Effect Of Instruction And Practice Upon The Listening Comprehension Skills Of Community College Freshmen

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, higher,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Wilbur, Leslie (committee chair), Grafton, Clive L. (committee member), Smith, Robert A. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-737858

Unique identifier UC11356494

Identifier 7501048.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-737858 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7501048.pdf

Dmrecord 737858

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Brown, Donald Holmes

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA