University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Auditory Perceptual Si Factors As Non-Predictors Of Reading Achievement In An Upper-Class And Upper-Middle-Class Population

(USC Thesis Other)

Auditory Perceptual Si Factors As Non-Predictors Of Reading Achievement In An Upper-Class And Upper-Middle-Class Population

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content AUDITORY PERCEPTUAL SI FACTORS AS NON-PREDICTORS
OF READING ACHIEVEMENT IN AN UPPER AND
UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS POPULATION
by
Annabelle Light Cloner
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
January 1974
74-9061
CLONER, Annabelle Light, 1920-
AUDITORY PERCEPTUAL SI FACTORS AS NON-PREDICTORS
OF READING ACHIEVEMENT IN AN UPPER AND
UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS POPULATION.
University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1974
Education, psychology
[ University Microfilms, A X E R O X Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.
UNIVERSITY O F SO UTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA S 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
.........
under the direction of h.eX ... Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Graduate
School, in partial fulfillment of requirements of
the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y
....
(J Dean
D a t e j Q . & £ d ? h l L i ^ J . / . 5 . . + . l 9 . . ' 2 3 .
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
Affectionately dedicated to those who thought this
wild endeavor was a good idea; perhaps, one day, you'll
have my gratitude.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION.................... ii
LIST OF TABLES................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES................................... vi
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS IMPORTANCE........... 1
Introduction
Background and Purpose of the Problem
Importance of the Study
Statement of the Problem
Definition of Terms
Organization of the Remaining Chapters
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................. 11
Rationale for the Search of the
Literature
Auditory Perception
The Structure-of-Intellect
The Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic
Abilities
Summary
III. METHODOLOGY............................... 41
The Subjects
The Criterion Measures
Testing Procedures
Hypotheses
Statistical Procedures
IV. REPORT AND INTERPRETATION OF THE
FINDINGS............................... 54
Interpretations
V. REVIEW, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS......................... 68
iii
Chapter Page
Review
Discussion
Conclusion
Recommendations
APPENDIX.......................................... 95
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................... 97
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Categories in the Structure of Intellect . . . 24
2 Description of Subtests of the ITPA ...... 35
3 Summary of Structure-of-Intellect Factors
and their Measures......................... 48
4 Means, Standard Deviations and Maximum
Possible Scores of Variables .............. 55
5 Pearson Correlation Coefficients ............. 57
6 Intra-Factor Correlations Among Tests
Representing SI Factor Variables .......... 58
7 Stepwise Multiple Regression Between
Predictor Variables, Including IQ, and
Vocabulary Scores ........................... 60
8 Stepwise Multiple Regression Between
Predictor Variables and Vocabulary
Scores..................................... 61
9 Stepwise Multiple Regression Between
Predictor Variables, with IQ and Sound
Blending Excluded, and Vocabulary
Scores..................................... 61
10 Stepwise Multiple Regression Between
Predictor Variables, Including IQ, and
Comprehension Scores ....................... 62
11 Stepwise Multiple Regression Between
Predictor Variables, Excluding IQ, and
Comprehension Scores ....................... 62
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Structure of-Intellect-Cube* .... .......... 23
2 Clinical Model of the I T P A ..................... 31
vi
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS IMPORTANCE
Introduction
Curriculum guides offer ample evidence that one of
the most important school tasks is teaching primary grade
children to read. The steps from kindergarten and first
grade "reading readiness" activities to the act of reading
are spelled out in detail. There seems to be substantial
agreement (Carroll, 1972; Fries, 1964; Singer, Starkey &
Ruddell, 1970; Mackworth, 1971) as to the nature of these
steps even though authorities disagree on the order of pre
sentation. Many mysteries remain, for it is clear that
there are large numbers of children who do not progress in
reading although they have the requisite intelligence and
apparently intact sense modalities. The problem, always
important, has taken on new dimensions since the 1954
Supreme Court decision in Brown vs the Board of Education,
for it exists to a large extent in the black and brown
ghettoes at a time when minorities are pushing for "equal"
education. Psycholinguists such as Baratz (1969), Carroll
(1972b),Cazden (1970) have made us aware of the need to
look at the language abilities of the child as determi
nants of reading skill. Guilford (1960, 1963, 1967) and
1
McCarthy and Kirk (1961) have provided us with models by
means of which we may assess some of the skills assumed to
relate to success in reading.
Background and Purpose of the Problem
It appears difficult to challenge the statement
that those children who are reading at a level appropriate
to their age have the necessary ability to do so. However,
among educators the overwhelming concern of reading re
search has been with the content and methods of instruction
with relatively little interest displayed in the skills
employed by the beginning reader (Venezky, Calfee, Chapman,
1970). Instead, the interest in perceptual skills in the
field of education has fallen chiefly within the province
of workers whose concern is for children who require
assistance in order to progress in reading.
Since the tools for analyzing perceptual skills
spring primarily from the hands of specialists concerned
with remediation, a question occurs as to their usefulness
in predicting reading performance among an upper and upper-
middle class standard English speaking population. It is
the hypothesis of this study that much of the testing of
perception which is done is not useful for prediction in
an upper and upper-middle class standard English speaking
population, for these abilities are generally well
developed, as part of the competency in standard English,
3
when this child arrives in school.
The point of view of this study is that reading is
a psycholinguistic process which in turn has a perceptual
base. The attributes considered are the auditory per
ceptual factors which have been placed in the Guilford SI
model (Feldman, 1970) and which have been identified by
Wepman (1961), Toma (1971), and Chalfant and Flathouse
(1971), as prerequisites to reading accomplishment.
Thus, in order to provide a framework for this
study the following questions were proposed.
1. According to information presently available,
what psycholinguistic abilities must the child bring
to the act of reading?
2. How can we show the relationship of these
abilities reading?
To answer these questions and as preparation for
the research questions the following topic are discussed
in Chapter II.
1. Reading and its developmental nature.
2. Psycholinguistic abilities as they relate to
language and reading, and presentation of the
Illinois Test of Psycholinguistics (ITPA) as a model
of language learning.
3. Auditory perception as a key aspect of the
psycholinguistic process.
4. The Structure-of-Intellect (SI) as a model
which specifies discreet intellectual abilities which
relate to language and reading.
This exploration is designed to serve several purposes:
1. To establish baseline data on the level of de
velopment of these abilities in a certain sector of
the population.
2. To determine the extent of the correlations
between auditory perceptual factors, reading, and IQ.
3. To show that the present measures of psycholin
guistic ability used by educators are not useful as
predictors of reading in an upper and upper-middle
class first grade population possessing normal in
tellectual abilities and intact central nervous
systems.
Importance of the Study
The study and testing of perceptual skills within
the SI framework provides us with normative data which may
be used as reference for other kindergarten and primary
grade children.
There are implications, once these baseline data
are established, as to the appropriateness of various
kinds of perceptual tests for children who are similar to
the target population. The data should suggest where one
might (and might not) profitably look for answers to
reading problems in an upper or upper-middle class
5
population whose members speak standard English and whose
central nervous systems appear to be intact.
Looking at auditory perceptual skills within the
overlapping contexts of language ability, as defined by
the ITPA, and intellectual abilities, as defined by the SI,
provides a broader point of view from which to discuss pre
requisite language skills in all school children. An
understanding of auditory perceptual skills within these
contexts, hopefully, will indicate which educational ex
periences are most relevant to the art of reading for each
individual.
Statement of the Problem
The intention of this study is to determine the re
lationship between selected auditory perceptual factors,
represented by cells in the SI, and reading, in an upper
and upper-middle class first grade population. The goal is
to determine the appropriateness or inappropriateness of
these measures as predictors of reading competence in the
target population.
Questions to be answered
1. Can the following measures which represent
Cognition of Figural Units-Auditory (CFU-A) be used
to predict reading?
a) The Auditory Closure Test (ITPA)
b) The Sound Blending Test (ITPA)
6
c) The Auditory Blending Test (Gates-
MacGinitie)
2. Can the following measures which represent Mem
ory for Figural Units-Auditory (MFU-A) be used to
predict reading ability?
a) The Digit Memory Test (Meeker)
b) The Auditory Letter Span Test (Orpet and
Meyers)
c) The Auditory-vocal Sequencing Test (ITPA)
3. Can the following measures which represent
Evaluation of Figural Units-Auditory (EFU-A) be used
to predict reading success?
a) The Wepman Auditory 'Discrimination Test
b) The Phoneme Test in the Murphy-Durrell
Reading Readiness Analysis
c) The Auditory Discrimination Test (Gates-
MacGinitie)
Assumptions and Limitations of the Study
1. An intimate relationship exists between reading
and language and therefore between reading and the
perceptual abilities upon which language partially
depends.
2. Reading and language are complex processes,
and each may be broken down into intellectual abili
ties, some of which are held in common.
3. The language system, including speech which is
spoken and heard, is reasonably well developed in most
7
children by the time they enter school. Children
from upper and upper-middle class homes who speak
standard English have the relatively simple task (com
pared with minority and lower socio-economic class
children who may not speak standard English), of
matching their language to reading.
4. This study considers only auditory perceptual
factors on the assumption that difficulty in this area
impedes development in reading, for these abilities
are necessary in order to make a sensible transfer
from spoken to printed or written language.
5. Language, heard and spoken, precedes reading,
and, as a corollary, auditory perceptual tasks, which
are an aspect of language, precede the visual discri
mination tasks associated with reading.
6. Only those auditory perceptual factors for
which Feldman (1970) identified tests by means of the
method of factor analysis will be used. Other aspects
of auditory perception were not used because they had
not been defined by the method of factor analysis or
they had not been shown to exist in a population of
this age. Therefore the picture of relationships be
tween reading and auditory perceptual factors is ne
cessarily incomplete.
7. The study was conducted upon a homogeneous
first grade population attending a private school:
8
such results cannot be generalized to a dissimilar
population although inferences can be made.
8. Reading instruction was assumed to be equiva
lent across the two classrooms used in the study.
Definition of Terms
Psycho1inguistics--The study of language and communication
as related to the individual who uses language
(Chapin, 1968).
The study of the relations between communications or
messages and the characteristics of the persons who
communicate; specifically the study of language as
related to the general and individual process by which
a speaker or writer emits signals or symbols
(encoding) and the processes by which these signals
are interpreted (decoding) , (English and English, 1964).
The science of encoding and decoding processes in
individual communicators (Osgood, 1963).
Language--An arbitrary code of audio-lingual symbols by
means of which men in a given culture communicate,
interact, and cooperate in terms of the culture as a
whole (LeFevre, 1962).
Standard English--That dialect which uses a set of gramma
tical patterns in oral production that are similar to
those used in the written form of the language
(Baratz, 1970).
Structure-of-Intellect (SI)--The information processing
model developed by Guilford which hypothesizes 120
independent intellectual abilities and presents a
morphological model for their organization. The in
tellectual domain is defined by three major dimen
sions: Operations, Contents, and Products. Each
ability is symbolized by a trigram which represents a
point (or cell) at which a particular Operation, Con
tent, and Product interact. The SI abilities selected
for this study are limited to those using the audi
tory modality. A more complete discussion of the SI
and a review of the literature is presented in Chapter
II. The SI abilities selected are:
Cognition of Figural Units-Auditory, represented
by the trigram (CFU-A)
Memory for Figural Units-Auditory, represented by
the trigram (MFU-A)
Evaluation of Figural Units-Auditory, represented
by the trigram (EFU-A)
Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA)--The
psycholinguistic model developed by McCarthy and Kirk
(1961) is based on the communications model of Osgood
(1957) which deals with psychological functions of
the individual as they operate in communications
activities. In Kirk's words,
The hypothetical construct on which the ITPA
10
is based relates those functions whereby the inten
tions of one individual are transmitted (verbally
or nonverbally) to another individual, and reci
procally, functions whereby the environment or the
intentions of another individual are received and
interpreted. It attempts to interrelate the pro
cesses which are involved, for example, when one
person reveives a message, interprets it, or be
comes the source of a new signal to be transmitted...
1971, pp. 20-21
A more complete discussion of the ITPA will be presented
in Chapter II.
Organization of the Remaining Chapters
Chapter II presents the rationale for the search
of the literature and offers some answers to the questions
which provide a framework for the study.
Chapter III provides a description of the sample,
the assessment instruments, the rationale behind their use,
the research hypotheses and the methodology.
Chapter IV describes the findings of the study and
offers interpretations.
Chapter V presents the summary, findings, con
clusions and recommendations resulting from the study.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Rationale for the Search of
the Literature
To relate some of the auditory perceptual abilities
in the Guilford SI to reading success requires a number of
intervening steps. Auditory perceptual abilities as a
determinant of psycholinguistic competence have been re
ported by Kass (1966), Kirk (1961, 1966, 1968, 1969),
Legum (1969), and Poulsen (1971). The relationship of
language functioning to reading has been documented by
many including Fries (1964), Carroll (1972), Harris (1965),
and LeFevre (1968). The ITPA of McCarthy and Kirk (1961),
provides a bridge between perceptual abilities and reading
for it helps us organize what we know about language
learning Wiseman (1968), as well as providing some of the
tests which represent factors in the SI matrix. The SI
offers a model of specific intellectual abilities, some of
which are hypothesized as requisite to reading. Included
in the model are the auditory perceptual abilities in
volved in beginning reading as well as those abilities
which define the mature process.
11
12
Auditory Perception
Although Witkin (1969) stated that there is no
generally accepted model of auditory perception, she ten
tatively identified focus, attention, tracking, sorting,
scanning, retrieving, and sequence of a spoken message as
aspects of such a model. While these abilities are nec
essary in the acquisition of language and in learning to
read, she indicated that it is difficult to discern the
boundaries of the perceptual and cognitive processes, or
the temporal order of occurrence and the interrelationships
between them.
Flower's model (1968) reflects another way of
organizing thought about perception and includes:
Auditory discrimination including both the
ability to identify the presence of a given
sound in a sequence of sounds and the ability
to differentiate among similar sounds.
Auditory memory including the amount of
heard infomation that can be retained and the
ability to retain the elements of a series of
stimuli in accurate sequence.
Auditory integration or the ability to
synthesize elemental signals into meaningful
oral signs.
Auditory-visual integration or the ability
to establish relationships between heard signals
and graphic representations of these signals.
(p. 22)
McNinch (1971) and Seymour (1970) suggest that
word representation, that is the recognition of discrete
words as a segment of the speech string, is too often
13
taken for granted and should be included as a perceptual
factor.
Auditory Discrimination
Monroe (1932), Goetzinger, Dirks, and Baer (1960),
Robinson (1964), Wepman (1961), Clark and Richards (1966),
and Toma (1971) have indicated correlations between read
ing and auditory discrimination. Chalfant and Flathouse
(1971) make the statement that discrimination of the
peculiar features or signal qualities of a stimulus is one
of the most important psychological processes upon which
auditory and visual learning is based. Rubin and Pollack
(1970) make the point that, while it is the ability to in
tegrate stimuli from the visual and auditory modalities
which is critical, the child's ability to discriminate
equivalence in one modality must exist before he can be
expected to reliably integrate multi-modal input.
Lingren (1969) found that where IQ was controlled normal
readers did better than disabled readers on auditory dis
crimination. Thompson (1963), in a two year study, found
a high correlation between auditory discrimination and
reading ability and carefully concluded that adequacy in
one trait is frequently accompanied by adequacy in the
other, and that this was more likely to be true at the
higher mental age level. Dykstra (1966) noted small
positive correlations with reading when auditory discri
mination was used as a pretest measure. Much of the work
14
in auditory perception has involved auditory discrimina
tion (Witkin, 1969; MacGinitie, 1967).
Other Perceptual Factors
Investigation of the other parameters of auditory
perception is relatively new (Witkin, 1969). Lindamood
and Lindamood (1970) studied the emergence of the ability
to conceptualize and sequence auditory pattern contrast
and found that lags in perceptual function could be de
tected early, wide variations existing in these abilities
in children from kindergarten through grade four. Golden
and Steiner (1969) indicated that poor readers were pri
marily lacking in auditory rather than visual functions,
significant differences being found in sound blending and
auditory sequential memory. Flynn and Byrne (1970) utili
zing third grade readers, who were either a year ahead or
a year behind in reading, found that significant differ
ences existed in auditory task performance and these dif
ferences cut across socio-economic class lines. The tasks
which showed significant differences between advanced and
retarded readers required blending of phonemes and sylla
bles, and auditory discrimination. Auditory sequencing
did not differentiate.
Birch and Belmont (1965) and Muehl and Kremack
(1966) stressed cross-modal integrative functions of audi
tory perception as providing clues to reading disability.
Chalfant and Scheffelin (1969) discussed central
15
processing dysfunction, citing abilities of analysis and
synthesis and integration as determinants of the basic
potential for reading.
Developmental Aspects of Perception
A number of the studies discussed thus far imply
development as an aspect of perception. In the citations
which follow, the main thrust has been to chart emerging
perceptual abilities. Poole (1934) described the order in
which consonant sounds appear; high frequency sounds ap
pearing somewhat later than low frequency sounds. He
listed them as occuring in the following sequence:
age 3% b,p,m,w,h
4% d,t,n,g,k,ng,y
5% f
6% v,th (then), sh,zh,l
7% s,z,r,th (thin), w,ch, (j)
Although it appears obvious, Flower (1969) and Robinson
(1964) remind us that auditory acuity, while not in it
self a perceptual process, is not to be taken for granted
and Robinson noted some loss of acuity for high frequencies
among poor readers.
Chall, Roswell, and Blumenthal (1963), in a longi
tudinal study exploring the relationships between auditory
blending, reading achievement, and IQ, found substantial
relationships between reading achievement and perceptual
measures. Auditory blending ability increased steadily
16
from first to fourth grade. Tinker (1969) stated that
auditory perception has special significance for the be
ginning reader but in more advance readers the visual
modality becomes prominent. DeHirsch (1962) and Wepman
(1967) also corroborate the developmental nature of per
ceptual abilities. Morency (1967) describes auditory
discrimination and auditory memory as part of the aural
input pathway and records a progression in these abili
ties which is related to success in reading. McNinch,
Palmatier and Richmond (1962), seeking to determine the
existence of several auditory perceptual skills, designed
the STAPS Test (Screening Test of Auditory Perceptual
Skills) in order to show the developmental nature of thes
abilities. They found significant differences between be
ginning and ending first year students in these abilities
and concluded that maturity, as well as first grade
reading and language instruction, played a part. Chris
tine and Christine (1964) declare that auditory discrimi
nation is no longer related to poor reading in the inter
mediate grades, and MacGinitie (1969) warns that auditory
perceptual difficulties may be largely left behind by the
time reading problems are studied.
The Nature of the Reading Process and
Its Developmental Aspects K
Carroll (1972b) defined reading as the ability to
get meaning from a written or printed message. Fries
17
(1964) and Carroll (1972b) remind us that learning to read
is a process of transfer from auditory signs, for the
language signals which the child has already learned, to
the new visual signs for the same signals. Spache and
Spache (1969) discuss the changing nature of reading from
one developmental stage to the next; at one time emphasis
may be on visual and auditory discrimination as a store of
sight words is acquired, later there is the development of
word recognition skills and still later comprehension.
Masland and Cratty (1970) point out that reading in the
primary grades emphasizes the decoding process, that is,
the recognition and learning of visual cues and their re
lationship to a corresponding auditory verbal signal.
Later, when the precise analysis of word structure is no
longer necessary, the emphasis shifts to meaning. The
skills required for these two processes appear to differ;
the decoding process involves specific cognitive abilities,
whereas the ability to extract meaning involves minimal
cues and is related more closely to general overall intel
ligence .
As the child matures, according to Harris (1965),
and has learned to say the correct words, the words begin
to fall into a familiar sequence whose meaning is apparent
because of his previously acquired facility in compre
hending speech. He recognizes short familiar phrases as
meaningful units, word attack skills improve and the
18
nature of reading changes; the reasoning side becomes in
creasingly important. Meaning is at the heart of this
process.
Reading Skills
It is Carroll's (1972) point of view that the
"great debate" about how reading should be taught is really
a debate about the order in which the child should learn
reading skills. He specifies the following components of
reading skill stating that some of them come out of the
mature process; other out of a further analysis of these
components.
1. The child must know the language that he is
going to learn to read. What is implied is that the
child needs to understand the language to a certain
level of skill before he starts to read.
2. The child must learn to dissect spoken words
into component sounds.
3. The child must learn to recognize and dis
criminate the letters of the alphabet in their
various forms < ,
4. The child must learn the left-to-right prin
ciple by which words are spelled and put in order in
continuous text.
5. The child must learn that there are patterns
of highly probable correspondence between letters and
19
sounds, and he must learn those patterns of cor
respondence that will help him to recognize words
that he already knows in his spoken language or that
will help him to determine the pronunciation of un
familiar words.
6. The child must learn to recognize printed
words from whatever cues he can use: their total
configuration, the letters composing them, the
sounds represented by those letters, and/or the
meaning suggested by the context.
7. The child must learn that printed words are
signals for spoken words and that they have meanings
analogous to those of spoken words. While "de
coding" a printed message into its spoken equiva
lent, the child must be able to apprehend the meaning
of the total message in the same way that he would
apprehend the meaning of the spoken message.
8. The child must learn to reason and think about
what he reads within the limits of his talent and
experience. (p. 5)
The Psycholinguistic Nature of the
Reading Process
The study of language and communication, as re
lated to the individual who uses language, is fundamental
to our understanding of the skills which are a necessary
part of the ability to read. Lenneberg (1968) reminds us
20
that the innate capacity for language is part of our bio
logical inheritance. LeFevre (1968) makes the point that
language is learned creatively by each infant as he adapts
his audio-lingual capabilities so as to develop the sys
tematic habits required by the particular language and
dialect he is born to. Menyuk (1967), and Brown and
Frazer (1964) conducted investigations to ascertain the
sequence in which the universals in the general American
language code are acquired, and it appears that the child
comes closer and closer to adult production with advancing
age. Language is learned by hearing and then imitating
sounds of a model, the rate of acquisition being in pro
portion to the exposure and interaction with adults, as
the child fits labels to various forms of objects and
actions observed and to his experience. The middle class
child learns by corrective feedback, by being heard, cor
rected and modified, by using the words he hears (John and
Goldstein, 1964). Menyuk (1967) discusses the universal
components of language.
The syntactic component contains rules for
defining the classes of the language and their
functional relationships. The semantic component
contains rules for interpreting the meaning of
lexical items and the underlying syntactic struc
ture of the sentence. The phonological component
contains rules for defining classes of sounds of
the language and translating the underlying
structure of the sentence into a sequence of
sounds. (p. 313)
By the time he takes the first steps in the reading
process the student has already internalized these cue
systems to the point where he responds to them without
being consciously aware of the process (Goodman, 1968).
Fries (1963) defines reading, "...as a type of linguistic
performance depending first of all upon the language con
trol achieved by each individual reader" (p. 186).
One of the assumptions we make is that the child
speaks and understands the language he is learning to read
at a certain level of skill. But we are also reminded
that the purpose of reading is to help him get messages
from print that are similar to messages he can already
understand if they are spoken (Carroll, 1972b). If the fit
between reading instructional materials and the language
system is not close then it is likely that reading will
suffer (Legum, 1969) .
Fries (1964) put it this way:
The 'transfer stage1 will have less confusion
for the pupil if the body of language meanings
and language signals used is limited very strictly
to those already within his linguistic experience.
(p. 120)
This is true for the middle class child for whom
the processes of speech and reading are psychologically
similar.
Betts (1946) suggested that, since reading is only
j
one step removed from the use of auditory symbols, it is |
j
reasonable to conclude that control over oral language is j
I
a prime prerequisite to reading. Hildreth (1964) too, j
emphasized that importance of oral language experience as
22
the most important prerequisite to reading. DeHirsch
(1970) made the statement that ontogenetically mastery
of spoken language precedes mastery of its graphic forms,
reading being one segment of the interrelated skills which
we call language.
The Strueture-of-Intellect
The SI is described by Guilford (1967) as a morph
ological model which classifies phenomena in intersecting
categories rather than in hierarchical arrangement. This
model of intellectual abilities is a product of factor
analytic research much of which has been done at the
Psychological Laboratories at the University of Southern
California by Dr. Guilford and his associates. He ac
knowledges a prior debt to Thorndike, Thurstone, Kelley,
and others who supported a differentiated concept of in
telligence.
Guilford (1963) stated that the factor approach
was needed to explain the inconsistencies in intellectual
functioning within individuals as well as explaining the
inadequate predictions of IQ tests, and the lack of cor
relation between various IQ measures.
His model, presented in Figure 1 and Table 1, de
lineates a profile along three dimensions which is at once
more specific and more inclusive than earlier measures of
intellectual abilities; it encompasses and provides a
means of organizing most of those abilities defining
23
FIGURE 1
STRUCTURE OF-INTELLECT-CUBE*
OPERATION
Evaluation
Convergent production
Divergent production
Memory
Cognition
E H
O
S3
Q
O
O h
Ph
Units-
Classes
Relations
Systems
Transformations
Implications
CONTENT:
Figural
Symbolic
Semantic
Behavioral
The three dimensions of the model specify first, the ope
ration, second, the content, and third, the product of a
given kind of intellectual act. Each factor hypothesized
or accounted for by the model is uniquely located and de
fined by specifying a category on each of the three dimen
sions. The three categories that specify each factor are
coding in terms of a trigram symbol specifying the Opera
tion, Content, and Product, respectively, for the factor.
For example, reading clockwise— CFU stands for Cognition of
a Figural Unit.
*The Structure of Intellect Cube (cover from
Guilford, 1967). From J. P. Guilford (1967)
TABLE 1
CATEGORIES IN THE STRUCTURE OF INTELLECT
OPERATIONS
C Cognition
M Memory
D Divergent
Production
N coNvergent
Production
E Evaluation
CONTENTS
F Figural
Major kinds of intellectual activities or processes; things that the
organism does with the raw materials of information, information being
defined as ’’that which the organism discriminates."
Immediate discovery, awareness, rediscovery, or recognition of infor
mation in various forms; comprehension or understanding.
Retention or storage, with some degree of availability, of information
in the same form it was committed to storage and in response to the
same cues in connection with which it was learned.
Generation of information from given information, where the emphasis is
on variety and quantity of output from the same source. Likely to in
volve what has been called transfer. This operation is most clearly
involved in aptitudes of creative potential.
Generation of information from given information, where the emphasis is
on achieving unique or conventionally accepted best outcomes. It is
likely the given (cue) information fully determines the response.
Reaching decisions or making judgements concerning criterion satis
faction (correctness, suitability, adequacy, desirability, etc.) of
information.
Broad classes or types of information discriminable by the organism.
Information in concrete form, as perceived or as recalled possibly in
the form of images. The term "figural’1 minimally implies figure-ground
to
■ p -
TABLE 1-Continued
S Symbolic
M seMantic
B Behavioral
PRODUCTS
U Units
C Classes
R Relations
S Systems
perceptual organization. Visual spatial information is figural. Dif
ferent sense modalities may be involved; e.g., visual kinesthetic.
Information in the form of denotative signs, having no significance in
and of themselves, such as letters, numbers, musical notations, codes,
and words, when meaning and form are not considered.
Information in the form of meanings to which words commonly become at
tached, hence most notable in verbal communication but not identical
with words. Meaningful pictures also often convey semantic information.
Information, essentially non-verbal, involved in human interactions
where the attitudes, needs, desires, moods, intentions, perceptions,
thoughts, etc., of other people and of ourselves are involved.
The organization that information takes in the organism's processing of
it.
Relatively segregated or circumscribed items of information having
"thing" character. May be close to Gestalt psychology's "figure on a
ground."
Conceptions underlying sets of items of information grouped by virture
of their common properties.
Connections between items of information based on variables or points
of contact that apply to them. Relational connections are more
meaningful and definable than implications.
Organized or structured aggregates of items of information; complexes
of interrelated or interacting parts.
t o
Ln
TABLE 1-Continued
T Trans formations
I Implications
Changes of various kinds (redefinition, shifts, or modification)
or existing information or in its function.
Extrapolations of information, in the form of expectancies, pre
dictions , known or suspected antecedents, concomitants, or con
sequences . The connection between the given information and that
extrapolated is more general and less definable than a relational
connection.
N>
c r >
27
testable performance of human intellectual functions
(Guilford, 1967). This broader concept of intelligence
includes those factors most associated with creativity.
It is these abilities which have been largely missing from
other scales of intelligence and which Guilford regards as
his unique contribution.
Meeker (1969) provides us with a concise overview
of the SI.
Every intellectual ability in the Structure is
characterized in terms of a type of Operation
which is employed, the Content involved, and the
sort of Product which results. Complete charac
terization of an intellectual ability is achieved
in terms of the possible subclass differentiation
on each of the three major dimensions. "Operations"
is differentiated five ways: Memory, Cognition,
Evaluation, Divergent Production, and coNvergent
Production..."Content" is differentiated by four
subclasses: Figural, Symbolic seMantic, and Be
havior. "Products" is differentiated by six sub
categories: Units, Classes, Relations, Systems,
Transformations, and Implications. The complete
scheme is represented by a three-dimensional
classification array of 120 predicted cells or
categories of intellectual abilities. (pp. 195-196)
Just as 120 distinct types of intellectual abili
ties are derived from the intersection of the three-way
classification scheme, so, conversely, a unique definition
can be obtained for each cell by simply specifying its
characteristics in terms of the three major dimensions.
The earliest work on these hypothesized abilities
was done with young adult populations; subsequent studies
concentrated on younger populations. Here the research
concerned itself generally with the following problems:
28
demonstrating the abilities already defined in an adult
population in younger age groups, and discovering the con
stancies and variations in abilities within and between
different populations. Educational interest centered on
planning based upon the predictive power of the model.
Schmadel (1960) found that SI tests of creativity
related to school achievement, making an additional con
tribution to prediction beyond that of the traditional
intelligence tests. Hoepfner, Guilford, and Bradley
(1968) found significant correlations between transforma
tional abilities and school achievement and suggested that
assessing these abilities, which are not measured by the
usual educational tasks, significantly improved prediction.
Meeker (1966) reported significant correlations between
memory factors and ability in arithmetic and spelling; the
memory factors proved to be distinct depending upon wheth
er the input was visual or auditory.
In another study designed to make the best and
most relevant use of the SI, Meeker (1969) undertook the
development of an SI flow diagram to be used in transla
ting information from the Stanford-Binet (form L-M), the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, the Wechsler
Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, and the ITPA
away from a single or verbal and performance score into a
profile of intellectual abilities.
A body of literature exists in the work of Meyers
29
and associates who have addressed themselves to the task
of identifying Guilford factors in preliterate populations.
As part of a series to come out of the University of
Southern California-Pacific State program, factor differ
entiation has been shown to be present in children ranging
in ages from two to six. Meyers, Orpet, Attwell, and
Dingman (1962) identified six group factors in six-year-
olds of normal intelligence, and five factors in retarded
children whose mental age was six. The retarded group
presented a less clearly differentiated factorial picture
and appeared lacking in divergent production ability.
Meyers, Dingman, Orpet, Sitkei, and Watts (1964) found
factor differentiation to exist in children ranging in
age from two to six among normal and retarded populations.
Another study by Orpet and Meyers (1966) extended earlier
work and confirmed additional primary abilities in child
ren who were six years of age.
Feldman (1970), working with a broad population
sample, took as his task the identification of several
abilities not yet reported at the six year level. CFU-A
emerged as a new factor at the six year level. EFU-A was
identified for the first time at any age. In his research
he found that short term memory factors had the strongest
influence on reading success, with auditory blending and
sound discrimination making a substantial contribution.
The Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic
Abilities
The ITPA McCarthy and Kirk (1961) and (Kirk,
McCarthy, and Kirk, 1968) in both the original and revised
editions has been conceived as a diagnostic rather than a
classificatory tool. While disclaiming either the purpose
or possibility of providing a complete language picture,
the authors' note that this test of specific cognitive
abilities provides a framework within which tests of dis
crete and educationally relevant abilities have been
generated.
Not needing a disclaimer nor restrained by the
author's modesty Wiseman (1968) does consider the ITPA a
conceptual model and as such a useful tool. At the least
the ITPA provides a heuristic devise which allows us to
view language ability from a conceptual point of view.
Figure 2 is a schematic presentation of the model.
It provides patterns of performance along three dimensions
(1) the channels of communication, including auditory and
visual input and verbal (vocal) and motor response; (2)
psycholinguistic processes, including reception, associa
tion, and expression; and (3) levels of organization,
including the automatic and representational levels.
1) Channels of Communication— the channels or
routes through which communication flows are the
sense and motor modalities through which linguistic
symbols are received and through which a response
FIGURE 2
CLINICAL MODEL OF THE ITPA
31
< D
>
C D
J
Receptive
Process
Organizing
Process
Expressive
Process
c
o
■ r l
4 J
r t
•u
< u
C O
< u
5-1
C D
P h
Auditory
Reception
----i
Visual
Reception
7R----
Auditory
Association
Visual
Association
Verbal
Expression
Manual
Expression
*Auditory
Closure
r
Auditory
Sequential
Memory
Visual
Closure
Visual
Sequential
Memory
Auditory Visual
Stimuli Stimuli
Verbal
Response
Manual
Response
<
Grammatic Closure subtest
Auditory Closure subtest
Sound Blending subtest
Psycholoinguistic Learning Disabilities: Diagnosis and Re
mediation. Samuel Kirk and Winifred Kirk, University of
Illinois Press, Urbana, 1971.
32
is made. Since the most common modalities used in
communication are sight and sound at the receiving
end or voice and gesture at the expressive end, Kirk
has labeled these the Auditory-vocal Channel and the
Visual-motor Channel. Theoretically, other channels
are possible. Helen Keller received communication
through a tactile modality. Cross-channel communi
cation is also possible whereby the receptive process
involves auditory stimuli and the expressive process
is motor; or a visual-vocal channel could be used.
2) Psycholinguistic Processes--three main pro
cesses are involved in the acquisition and use of
language: (a) the receptive process, that is the
ability involved in recognizing and/or understanding
what is seen or heard; (b) the expressive process,
that is, those skills necessary to express ideas
either visual-vocally or by gesture or movement;
(c) an organizing process which involves the internal
manipulation of percepts, concepts, and linguistic
symbols.
3) Levels of Organization--in the act of communi
cation the necessary degree of organization within
the individual is described by the levels of language
organization. Two levels are postulated in the clini
cal model of the ITPA: (a) the representational level
which requires the mediating process of utilizing
33
symbols which carry the meaning of an object and
(b) the automatic level in which the individual's
habits of functioning are less voluntary but highly
organized and interpreted.
Description of the Subtests of
the ITPA
Although a description of the subtests of the ITPA
might seem properly to belong in Chapter III they are dis
cussed here for purposes of continuity. The model des
cribed and presented graphically in Figure 2 has been used
to generate ten discrete tests and two supplementary tests
whose purpose is to identify the developmental strengths
and weaknesses in psycholinguistic ability inorder to
delineate those areas requiring remediation.
Two facts should be noted: there are no tests for
those areas which are shaded: isolating factors for the
three processes at this level is tenuous (Kirk, McCarthy,
Kirk, 1968). Two tests, Auditory Closure and Auditory
Blending, which occur together on the ITPA model, and are
seen as providing supplementary information to the Gramma-
tic Closure Test, were found by Feldman (1970) to measure
the same SI ability EFU-A. The Automatic Level has been
bifurcated into two types of ability. The first is the
ability to repeat a sequence of nonmeaningful stimuli re
ferred to in the model as "Sequential Memory"; the second
is the ability to recognize a common unit of experience
34
when only part of it is presented (and/or the somewhat re
lated ability to synthesize isolated parts into a whole).
This second ability is referred to in the model as
’'Closure'1 and involves three tests in the Auditory-vocal
Channel and one in the Visual-motor Channel.
The twelve tests are described in Table 2 and the
functions they tap are incorporated in the three dimen
sions of the ITPA model.
These twelve test are designed to isolate defects
in (a) three processes of communication, (b) two levels of
language organization, and (c) two channels of language
input and output. Performance on specific subtests of
this battery should pinpoint specific psycholinguistic
abilities and disabilities (Kirk, McCarthy, and Kirk,
1968, pp. 11-13).
A wealth of literature has developed around the
ITPA in journals whose purview is the child educationally
defined as "learning-disabled", that is, the child who is
two years or more below expectancy in one learning process
or another (Kirk, 1966; Kass, 1966).
McLeod (1967), in a factorial study designed to
predict whether a child belonged to a reading disability
group or a normal control group, found that the factor
which made the most significant contribution to prediction
transcended sense modalities and specific channels of
communication and was interpreted as an integrative
TABLE 2
DESCRIPTION OF SUBTESTS OF THE ITPA
Test
1
2
3
4
Level
Representational Level
A The Receptive Process (Decoding). There are two tests at this level
which assess the child's ability to comprehend visual and auditory
symbols.
1) Auditory Decoding
Assesses the ability of the child to derive meaning from verbally
presented material. Responses are "yes" or "no" in order not to
tap the expressive process.
2) Visual Decoding
Child is asked to respond to one of four pictures which is struc
turally most like the stimulus picture.
B The Organizing Process (Association). These tests indicate the
ability to relate, organize and manipulate visual or auditory
symbols in a meaningful way.
1) Auditory-vocal Association
Taps the child's ability to relate concepts orally. Items are pre
sented as analogies, as: "I cut with a saw; I pound with a ."
2) Visual-motor Association
Organizing Process is presented visually. Child has to select the
one picture out of four which goes best with the stimulus picture. u>
TABLE 2-Continued
Test Level
C The Expressive Process (Encoding). Involves the childs ability to
use verbal or manual symbols to transmit an idea.
1) Vocal Encoding
The child is asked to tell all he can about four objects, one at a
time.
2) Motor Encoding
The child is asked to pantomime the use of fifteen familiar objects
presented individually.
Automatic Level
A Closure. These tests assess the child's ability to fill in the
missing parts in an incomplete picture or verbal expression (or
the ability to integrate discrete units into a ’ whole).
1) Auditory-vocal Automatic
Assesses the child's ability to make use of the redundancies of
oral language in acquiring automatic habits for handling syntax
and grammatic inflections. Example: "Here is a hat; here are
two ___."
2) Supplementary Tests
a) Auditory Closure
Assesses the child's ability to fill in missing parts which
were deleted in the auditory presentation, and to produce a
complete word.
(j O
ON
TABLE 2-Continued
Test Level
b) Sound Blending
The sounds of the word are spoken singly at half-second inter
vals and the child is asked to tell what the word is. He must
synthesize the separate parts to produce an integrated whole.
10 3) Visual Closure
Assesses the child’s ability to identify a common object from an
incomplete visual presentation.
B Sequential Memory. Assesses the child's ability to reproduce a
sequence of auditory or visual stimuli.
8 1) Auditory Sequential Memory
Assesses the child's ability to reproduce a sequence of digits
increasing in length from two to eight digits.
9 2) Visual Sequential Memory
Assesses child's ability to reproduce a sequence of nonmeaningful
figures from memory.
38
sequencing factor. His study also indicated a significant
loading in auditory memory among those in the reading dis
ability group.
In summarizing a large body of her work, Kass
(1972), noted the following correlates of severe reading
disabilities in the abilities to:
1. Use grammar (Grammatic Closure)
2. Reproduce a series of symbols presented visually
(Visual Sequencing)
3. Predict a whole from a part (Visual Closure)
4. Blend parts into a whole (Sound Blending)
5. Reproduce a design from memory (Memory for
Design or Visual Sequential Memory)
6. Note likenesses and differences rapidly (Per
ceptual Speed or Visual Closure)
7. Execute a visual prediction manually (Mazes, no
ITPA equivalent)
Her conclusion is that learning to read involves
more than comprehension of the printed page and includes
certain integrative functions which we associate with the
skill of reading.
Bateman (1968) reviewing the research, gathered to
gether group profiles which again suggest that children
with reading problems show deficiencies at the automatic-
sequential level of psycholinguistic functioning. She has
shown the persistence of the same patterns of weaknesses
and strength for both older and younger readers. While
children with severe and persistent reading disability
show deficits in both auditory and visual memory, of the
two, she finds auditory memory to be more important for
successful reading. Poulsen (1971) reported that the
auditory modality, as represented by the tests of Grammatic
Closure, Auditory Association and Auditory Closure differ
entiated among high and low achievers in the Mexican-
American community. Ikeda (1970) also taps the Automatic
Level and Auditory-vocal Channel as being more closely
related to acquistion of reading skills.
The results appear to be highly consistent. Child
ren who are poor readers show deficiencies in the Automatic
Level.
Summary
This chapter undertook to answer the following
questions:
1. According to information presently available,
what are the psycholinguistic abilities which the
child must bring to the act of reading?
2. How can we define and identify these abilities
in order to show their relationship to the act of
reading?
The psycholinguistic abilities considered necessary
for reading have been discussed from the point of view of
40
two disciplines: education and psychology, and have been
defined and identified within the context of the language
model offered by the ITPA and the model of intellectual
abilities provided by the SI.
McCarthy and Kirk (1961), building upon the communi
cations model of Osgood (1963, 1965) designed the ITPA
which incorporates a model of the psycholinguistic process.
It directs attention to the discrete functions that com
prise the learning act; its various components receive,
assimilate, process, store, and express information.
Through it language comes to be seen as an integral part
of learning and its relationship to reading is established.
The SI provides a differentiated way of looking at intelli
gence and includes auditory perceptual factors which are a
part of the language process and thus of reading.
Reading was shown to be a complex psycholinguistic
process in which language is considered as a system; at the
same time the fundamental relationship between oral and
written language is stressed. Research was cited in sup
port of these statements.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
In this chapter a description is given of the
sample, the tests and procedures used, and the research
design employed.
The Subjects
The first grade population of Pasadena Polytechnic
School numbers forty-two children all of whom participated
in the study. There is considerable competition for places
in this prestigious school for it is part of the fabric of
the upper class social structure of the community (Hollings-
head, 1951). As such Polytechnic can afford to set high
standards for admission, which it does. The children who
attend represent a basically homogeneous advantaged group
and have, with one exception, been together since the start
of kindergarten. It is interesting to note that many of
the children are second generation students.
Initial admission in kindergarten depends upon a
behavioral observation in both a group and an individual
setting and upon performance on the Metropolitan Readiness
Test. The criteria are as follows:
1. Ability to follow instructions
41
42
2. Ability to get along in a group setting and
to participate in group activities
3. An acceptable score on the readiness test.
Although there is no hard criterion on the^ readi
ness instrument children are generally taken from the
higher percentile rankings on the Metropolitan Readiness
Test. If there are many candidate to choose from, prefer
ence is given to those whose families have already been
presented in the school.
In January and February all the kindergarten child
ren are given the Stanford Binet (form L-M) and, at that
time, and considering developmental progress intellectually
and socially, the decision is made as to whether the child
will be allowed to return for the first grade.
Although there has been no formal reading program
in the kindergarten there is a strong emphasis on language
experience. All the children were free of hearing or
visual defects. In sum, they represent an "unblemished"
group, intelligent, highly verbal and able to conform to
the standards of the school.
The Criterion Measures
Structure-of-Intellect Factors
The factors of auditory perception which were used
were taken from the test battery developed by Feldman
(1970). He stated that, since there were few factor
43
analytic studies available, his selection was guided
chiefly by the definition of the SI in accordance with
criteria suggested by Orpet and Meyers (1966), as follows:
1. Suitability for individual (or group) admini
stration with six-year old children.
2. Face validity of the test as a univocal mea
sure of the hypothesized ability.
3. Previous utilization in a factor study.
4. Efficiency in test time. (p. 341)
The decision was made to use the three tests for
each factor as provided by Feldman (1970) in order to an
ticipate these possibilities:
1. Questioning the reliability of a measure
should a unique profile occur. If each test of a
factor showed significant correlation with the cri
terion measure then the results would appear con
clusive.
2. The possible loss of a measure of sensitivity
should only one of the three tests of a factor be
used.
3. Factors of attention or order which might in
crease the source of error unduly in a young popula
tion. Here again, three measures are likely to
describe the variance more adequately than one mea
sure .
An effort was made to keep the administration pro
cedures as close as possible to those followed by Feldman.
44
Where they had to be changed the difference was considered
slight enough not to affect the test. The SI factors and
their measures follow:
Cognition of Figural Units-Auditory (CFU-A)
Defined by Meeker as "The ability to perceive auditory
figural units (sounds) by organizing groups of successive
inputs" (p. 31).
Test I
Auditory Closure Test. Source: ITPA (Kirk,
McCarthy, Kirk, 1968): taped presentation,
individually administered. The test consists
of thirty mutilated words presented at a nor
mal rate of speed with the indicated sounds
omitted, care being taken to preserve the same
phonemes as used in the completed word. The
words are of a low order of difficulty.
Example: da/ y for daddy.
Test II
Sound Blending Test. Source: ITPA (Kirk, McCarthy,
Kirk, 1969): taped presentation, individually
administered. The subject is required to fuse
separate phonemes into a whole word. The thirty-
two words are common words, but increase in dif
ficulty from two to eight sounds. Example:
f-oot for foot.
Test III
45
Auditory Blending Test. Source: Gates-MacGinitie
Reading Tests, Kindergarten and Grade One (1968):
taped presentation, individually administered.
This test of auditory closure requires that the
child mark one of three pictures in a frame which
represents the spoken word. There are a total of
fourteen frames, and fourteen stimulus words.
Example: the child is asked to mark the picture
which represents the word rab-bit.
Memory for Figural Units Auditory (MFU-A)
Defined as the ability to remember auditory figural ele
ments. These tests differ from the usual memory tests
because they do not require recall of units in sequence.
The rationale for this decision was that memory for numbers,
in order, seemed to involve memory for systems rather than
for units.
Test IV
Digit Memory Test. Source: Meeker (1966), oral
presentation, individually presented. Two lists
of numbers are given, increasing from two to six
digits. Presentation is one digit a second.
Test V
Auditory Letter Span Test. Source: Orpet and
Meyers (1965), oral presentation, individually
presented. Two lists of letters are given, in
creasing from two to six digits. Presentation is
46
one digit a second.
Test VI
Auditory-vocal Sequencing Test. Source: ITPA
(Kirk, McCarthy and Kirk, 1961), oral presenta
tion, presented individually. The list of digits
range from two to seven but are presented at the
rate of two per second, which, according to Kirk
and Kirk (1971) is more appropriate for young
children. As stated above the order requirement
was modified to meet the needs of the study.
Evaluation of Figural Units-Auditory (EFU-A)
Defined as a "process of comparing a product of information
with known information according to logical criteria,
making a decision concerning criterion satisfaction"
(Guilford, 1967, p. 185).
Test VII
Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test. Source:
Wepman, (1958), oral presentation, individually
presented. Measures the ability to evaluate the
similarity or differences of words on the basis
of a single phoneme. There are forty pairs of
words, ten of which are identical. The child
responds "same" or "different."
Test VIII
Phonemes Test. Source: Murphy-Durrell (Part I
1965), oral presentation to group. The phonemes
47
were taught and then tested. Response required
marking the pictures which began with the same
sound as the stimulus word. There were twenty
correct items to be marked in a total of ten
frames, each consisting of four separate pictures.
Test IX
Auditory Discrimination Test. Source: Gates-
MacGinitie (1968), taped presentation administered
to group. This test measures the child's ability
to distinguish between two words which differ in
one sound. Response is made to the twenty-one
pairs by marking a test booklet. Table 3 summa
rizes the SI factors and their measures.
Other Measures
Stanford-Binet. form L-M (Terman and Merrill, 1960)
The 1960 revision of the Stanford-Binet incorporates
in a single form the best of the subtests from the two 1937
scales. It is an age scale making use of age standards of
performance, and it undertakes to measure intelligence,here
regarded as general mental adaptability. The selection of
subtests to be included in the 1960 scale was based on re
cords administered from 1950 to 1954. The main assessment
group for evaluating the subtest consisted of 4498 subjects
ages two and one-half to eighteen years. Changes in diffi
culty of subtests were determined by comparing the per
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF STRUCTURE-OF-INTELLECT FACTORS AND THEIR MEASURES
Factors and Tests
I CFU-A Cognition of Figural Units Auditory
1 ITPA: Auditory Closure Test (ITPA:AC)
2 ITPA: Sound Blending Test (ITPA:SB)
3 G-M Auditory Blending Test G-M: AB
II MFU-A Memory for Figural Units-Auditory
4 Meeker Digit Memory (MDM)
5 Auditory Letter Span Test (0-M:ALST)
6 ITPA: Auditory-vocal Sequencing Test (ITPA:AS)
III EFU-A Evaluation of Figural Units-Auditory
7 Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test (WADT)
8 M-D Phonemes Test (Part 1) (MDP)
9 G-M: Auditory Discrimination Test (GM:AD)
Authors
Kirk, McCarthy, Kirk
Kirk, McCarthy, Kirk
Gates-MacGinitie
Meeker
Orpet and Meyers
McCarthy, Kirk
Wepman
Murphy-Durrell
Gates-MacGinitie
■ P '
00
49
cents passing the individual test in the 1950's with the
per cents passing in the original 1930 standardization
group. Criteria for selection of test items were: (1) in
crease in the per cent passing with age (or mental age);
and (2) validity determined by biserial correlation of items
with total score. Items were eliminated which were found
unsuitable by virtue of cultural changes. Revised and ex
tended IQ tables provide standard score IQ's which are com
parable at all age levels.
The ITPA
The revised edition of the ITPA was standardized
upon 962 children, about 120 in each of eight age-groups,
who were carefully screened to have "average" intelligence
(IQ 84 to 116). The children came from the middle range of
schools in a middle class community. There are no "learn
ing disabled" children nor are minority children adequatedly
represented; all children in the sample are free of sensory
or physical handicaps. The authors explain their choice of
norming populations by saying they wanted a reference group
against which learning disabled and mentally retarded popu
lations can be evaluated.
Correlation of Total ITPA with Stanford-Binet mental
age is .85; however, only two of the ITPA subtests corre
lated well with the Stanford-Binet. They are Auditory-vocal
Automatic (.76) and Auditory-vocal Association (.81). Test-
50
retest reliabilities over a five or six month period for
total ITPA scores range from .70 to .83.
Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, Primary A,
form 2 "(1965)
This test was selected as the criterion measure
because it appeared to offer a suitable range for the testee
population, and because the standarization procedures seemed
to be adequate. Vocabulary grade scores ranged from 1.3 to
3.5, while the range of comprehension scores was 1.2 to
3.7. Standardization was done on approximately 40,000
pupils selected according to criteria designed to give a
representative cross-section. The manual states that each
student took one form of the reading test for his grade
level and then either another form of the same test (retest
sample) or a form of the test designed for the grade above
or below his own (grade norm subsample). The two tests
were administered six months apart thus providing a firm
anchor for the norms. Alternate forms reliabilities were
.86 for vocabulary and .83 for comprehension; split-half
reliabilities were .91 for vocabulary and .94 for compre
hension.
Testing Procedures
All of the testing was done by one examiner, a
credentialed school psychologist. The Stanford-Binet had
been administered as part of the admission requirement in
51
January and February of 1972 while the children were in
kindergarten. The remainder of the tests were done during
January and February of the following year.
Individual testing was started first so that the
children would come to view the examiner as someone familiar
to them. Three presentations of the testing materials were
arranged in such a manner that no two tests of any factor
were presented sequentially; the children were randomly
assigned to one of the three testing presentations. The
sessions lasted approximately twenty minutes.
The criterion measure, the Gates-MacGinitie Reading
Test, was presented on two consecutive days. On the first
day the vocabulary subtest was given and, following a five
minute "stretch," the Murphy-Durrell Phoneme Test (M-DP)
was given. Total test time was thirty minutes.
On the second day the Gates-MacGinities Test of
Auditory Discrimination (G-M AD) was administered, and,
after a brief interval, the comprehension subtest of the
Gates-MacGinities was given. Total testing time was forty
minutes. These measures were administered to each class as
a group (N=21). The teacher acted as a monitor to assist
in the mechanics of test taking as well as helping to keep
the children on task.
Hypotheses
Research Hypotheses
52
1. There would be a significant relationship be
tween IQ and first grade reading achievement.
2. There would be a significant relationship be
tween SI abilities in the auditory modality and
first grade reading achievement.
3. First grade reading achievement can be predicted
from a combination of selected auditory SI
abilities.
Statistical Hypotheses
1. IQ would not correlate significantly with reading.
2. There would be no significant correlation between
any of the following SI measures of auditory per
ception and first grade reading achievement as
follows:
a. Between reading and Cognition of Figural Units-
Auditory (CFU-A) represented by:
1) The ITPA Test of Auditory Closure (ITPA:AC)
2) The ITPA Test of Sound Blending (ITPA:SB)
3) The Gates-MacGinitie Auditory Blending
Test (G-MAB)
b. Between reading and measures of Memory for
Figural Units-Auditory (MFU-A) represented by:
1) Meeker Digit Memory (MDM)
2) The Orpet-Meyers Auditory Letter Span Test
(0-M ALST)
53
3) The ITPA Auditory-vocal Sequencing Test
(ITPA:AS)
c. Between reading and Evaluation of Figural
Units-Auditory (EFU-A) represented by:
1) Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test (WADT)
2) The Murphy-Durrell Phoneme Test (M-DP)
3) The Gates-MacGinitie Auditory Discrimina
tion Test (G-MAD)
2. There would be no significant multiple correlation
between reading and the auditory perception tests.
Statistical Procedures
The following statistical procedures were employed:
1. The selected auditory SI factors and IQ were cor
related separately with the vocabulary and com
prehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie
reading test.
2. Stepwise multiple regression analyses were con
ducted between the predictor and criterion
measures.
CHAPTER IV
REPORT AND INTERPRETATION OF THE FINDINGS
This chapter is concerned with reporting and inter
preting the research findings.
Statistical Analysis
The data were treated using three approaches.
Initially the means,standard deviations (SD), and general
characteristics of the distribution of the variables were
calculated. Following the descriptive data, Pearson pro
duct moment correlations were obtained, and finally the
data were analyzed according to the stepwise multiple re
gression procedure.
The raw scores of the ten predictor variables and
the two subtests of the criterion measures were analyzed
using the stepwise multiple regression program (Statisti
cal Package for the Social Sciences, Nie, Bent and Hull,
1970). The statistical analyzes were completed at the
University of Southern California Computer Center. Signi
ficance was accepted at the .05 level for all correlations
Descriptive data--The means and standard devia
tions (SD) shown in Table 4 offer evidence of a high but
restricted range of abilities. Total possible raw scores
54
55
TABLE 4
MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND MAXIMUM
POSSIBLE SCORES OF VARIABLES
Variable Mean SD
Maximum
Score
Gates-MacGinitie Reading
Test
Raw Score Vocabulary
37.31 8.49 48
Gates-MacGinitie Reading
Test
Raw Score Comprehension
17.12 8.42 34
Stanford-Binet IQ 127.76 11.44
ITPA Auditory Closure 21.14 2.26 30
ITPA Sound Blending 27.38 2.64 32
Gates-MacGinitie
Blending
12.78 1.54 14
Meeker Digit Memory 36.33 3.24 40
Orpet-Meyers Auditory
Letter Span
33.69 3.68 40
ITPA Auditory Sequencing 80.64 5.80 92
Wepman Auditory
Discrimination Test
36.50 1.89 40
Murphy-Durrell Phoneme
Test
19.88 0.50 20
Gates-MacGinitie Auditory
Discrimination
20.48 0.97 21
Age 77.78 3.60
N = 42
56
are included for comparison. The mean IQ (127) was high
as was anticipated for this middle and upper class popu
lation. The other variables also reflect the homogeneity
of ability within this group.
Pearson correlations--The Pearson1s product moment
coefficient of correlation was used to correlate each
variable with every other variable in the study. One of
its functions is to describe the relationship between an
independent variable and a dependent variable. It may also
be used to examine the relationship between sets of inde
pendent variables. It is often employed, as it is here,
as the first step to more complicated multivariate pro
cedures .
Table 5 presents the Pearson correlation coeffici
ents and shows a correlation of .82 between the two sub
tests of the criterion measure. The correlation between
IQ and vocabulary is .40 and between IQ and comprehension
is .49: both are significantly greater than zero at the
.01 level. Of the SI variables, only one, the ITPA Sound
Blending, correlated at the .05 level (r=.32) with the
vocabulary subtest of the Gates-MacGinitie reading measure.
Table 6 selects the data from Table 5 which indicate the
correlations among the tests representing the SI variables.
Stepwise multiple regression— Following the compu
tation of the Pearson coefficients, the stepwise multiple
regression technique was utilized. This program computes
TABLE 5
PEARSON CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
ass*
Evaluation of Figu
ral Units-Auditory
RSC IQ ITPA:AC ITPA:SB G-M:AB MDM 0-M:ALST ITPA:AS WADT MDP G-M:AD
Gates-MacGinitie
Raw Score Vocabulary .82** .40**
(RSV)
.05 .32* .11 -.01 .11 .14 -.14 -.07 -.03
Gates-MacGinitie
Raw Score Comprehension .49**
(RSC)
.04 .21 .02 -.03 .06 .08 .05 .01 -.06
Stanford-Binet IQ .11 .16 .11 -.02 -.01 .12 .12 .16 -.12
ITPA Auditory Closure
(ITPA:AC)
.10 .35* -.07 -.06 -.27 .03 .44** .30
ITPA Sound Blending
(ITPA:SB)
.29 -.07 .16 .05 .10 -.02 .07
Gates-MacGinitie Blending
(G-M-.AB)
.04 .13 .03 -.01 -.16 .32*
Meeker Digit Memory
(MDM)
.57** .66** .14 -.17 .26
Orpet-Meyers Auditory
Letter Span (0-M:ALST)
.67** -.12 -.22 .07
ITPA Auditory Sequencing
(ITPA:AS)
-.11 .23 .04
Wepman Auditory Discrimination
Test (WADT)
.04 .19
Murphy-Durrell Phoneme (MDP)
-.13
Gates-MacGinitie Auditory Discrimination
(G-M:AD)
*p < .05
**p <.01
Ui
58
TABLE 6
INTRA-FACTOR CORRELATIONS AMONG
TESTS REPRESENTING SI
FACTOR VARIABLES
Factor Tests
(CFU-A) ITPA Test of Auditory
Closure (ITPArAC)
ITPA Test of Sound
Blending (ITPA:SB)
Gates-MacGinitie
Auditory Blending
(G-M:AB)
ITpA:SB
.10
G-M.-AB .
.35**
.29
O-M:ALST ITPA: A!
(MFU-A) Meeker Digit Memory
(MDM)
Orpet-Meyers Auditory
Letter Span (0-M:ALST)
ITPA Auditory-vocal
Sequencing Test
(ITPA:AS)
.51** .66**
.67**
MDP G-M: AD
(EFU-A) Wepman Auditory Dis
crimination Test
(WADT)
Murphy-Durrell Phoneme
Test (MDP)
.04 .19
-.13
Gates-MacGinitie Auditory
Discrimination Test
(G-M:AD)
*p < . 05
**p <.01
59
a sequence of multiple linear regression equations in a
stepwise order, adding one independent variable at a time.
The first step is to choose the single variable which is
the best predictor; the second independent variable to be
added is that which provides the best prediction in con
junction with the first variable. This recursive pro
cedure adds variables step by step until no variable makes
a significant contribution to the regression equation as
determined by an F value of 1.00 or greater. The coeffi
cient of multiple correlation (R) indicates the strength
of the relation between the dependent variable and two or
more independent variables taken together, selected as
stated above. It is related to the intercorrelations with
the dependent variables: it represents the maximum cor
relation between a dependent variable and a weighted com
bination of independent variables. Of interest in this
research is the magnitude of R and the systematic increase
of R^, for those variables which have been entered because
an F value greater than 1.0 would result.
Two separate stepwise regression programs were run
for each criterion measure, one with IQ included and one
without IQ. IQ was found to correlate significantly with
reading ability for both vocabulary and comprehension.
This finding corroborates existing data as well as con
firming the validity of the Gates-MacGinitie reading test
as a criterion measure. However, the purpose of this
60
study was not to belabor the expected correlation between
IQ and reading, but rather to investigate the auditory
perceptual data as predictors of reading success.
Table 7 presents the summary of the stepwise re
gression procedure for prediction of reading vocabulary
from Binet IQ and selected SI factors. The only variable
to significantly predict reading vocabulary on its own was
the IQ scale which accounted for sixteen per cent of the
variance. The R was increased significantly by ITPA
Sound Blending, however.
TABLE 7
STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION BETWEEN
PREDICTOR VARIABLES, INCLUDING IQ,
AND VOCABULARY SCORES
Summary Table Multiple
variable Step Number R Rz F
Stanford-Binet 1 .40 .16 6.19*
ITPA Sound Blending 2 .48 .23 3.12*
Wepman Auditory Discrimi
nation Test 3 .52 .27 1.83
Murphy-Durrell Phoneme 4 .54 .28 .64
*p < . 05
In order to determine the power of prediction of
the SI variables without the influence of IQ, the multiple
regression procedure was carried out excluding IQ. Table
8 provides data which express the linear relationship between
61
the SI predictor variables and vocabulary scores. With
IQ unavailable the only variable to significantly predict
scores on the vocabulary instrument was the ITPA Sound
Blending scale which accounts for ten per cent of the
variance.
TABLE 8
STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION BETWEEN PREDICTOR
VARIABLES AND VOCABULARY SCORES
Summary Table Multiple
Step Number R R2 F
ITPA Sound Blending 1 .32 .10 3.20*
Wepman Auditory Discrimi
nation Test 2 .36 .13 .57
*p < . 05
Table 9 indicates that Gates-MacGinitie Blending
becomes the single best predictor when the ITPA
Test of
Sounding is excluded. However, the F value was less than
1.0.
TABLE 9
STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION BETWEEN PREDICTOR
VARIABLES, WITH IQ AND ITPA SOUND BLENDING
EXCLUDED, AND VOCABULARY SCORES
UariflKlp Summary Table Multiple
variable Step ^ b e r R
R2 F
Gates-MacGinitie
Blending 1 .15
ITPA Auditory Sequencing 2 .10
.02
.04
.86
.74
62
Table 10 summarizes the stepwise regression pro
cedure between SI variables and reading comprehension and
indicates that the proportion of variance accounted for by
IQ is twenty-four per cent. None of the remaining vari
ables combined with IQ added significantly to the pre
diction of comprehension scores. In Table 11 with IQ held
out, the results were much the same, none of the correla
tions between comprehension and the remaining SI predictor
variables achieved the required level of significance.
TABLE 10
STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION BETWEEN
PREDICTOR VARIABLES, INCLUDING IQ,
AND COMPREHENSION SCORES
Variable
Summary Table
Step Number
Multiple
R R2 F
Stanford-Binet 1 .49 .24 9.72*
ITPA Sound Blending 2 .51 .26 .81
*p < .05
TABLE 11
STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION BETWEEN
PREDICTOR VARIABLES, EXCLUDING IQ,
AND COMPREHENSION SCORES
Variable fianmary Ttble
Step Number
Multiple
R R2 F
ITPA Sound Blending 1 .20 .04 .18
ITPA Auditory Sequencing 2 .08 .007 .28
63
Summary of Findings
1) IQ was found to be a significant predictor of
both reading vocabulary and reading comprehension
scores.
2) The only SI variable to achieve significance
in the prediction of vocabulary as a criterion measure
was the ITPA Test of Sound Blending.
3) None of the SI variables was significant pre
dictors of reading comprehension as a criterion
measure.
Hypotheses
The conclusions, related to the hypotheses ex
pressed in Chapter III are as follows:
1. The null hypothesis which states that IQ will
not significantly predict vocabulary is rejected.
2. The null hypothesis which states that IQ will
not significantly predict comprehension is rejected.
3. The null hypothesis which states that the
measures representing SI factor Cognition of Figural
Units-Auditory will not significantly predict vocabu
lary is rejected in part. The ITPA Sound Blending
considered a measure of cognition of Figural Units-
Auditory, predicts at the .05 level of probability.
4. The null hypotheses which state that the
measures representing SI factors Evaluation of Figural
64
Units-Auditory and Memory for Figural Units-Auditory
will not significantly predict vocabulary are not
rejected.
5. The null hypotheses which state that the
measures representing SI factors CFU-A, MFU-A, and
EFU-A will not significantly predict vocabulary are
not rejected.
Interpretations
This study was undertaken to investigate selected
perceptual abilities, considered to be related to reading,
as useful predictors of reading success with upper or
middle class first graders.
The findings of the study corroborated Feldman
(1970) in identifying the SI factor MFU-A as present in
a six-year-old population. However, the record is less
clear for factors CFU-A and EFU-A.
Feldman (1970), using the principle of overdeter
mination, provided three measures for each of the SI
factors which form part of the data base of this study. A
factor is assumed to represent a discrete psychological
unit thus offering a meaningful way of looking at perform
ance. Since factors are defined within the parameters of
the research problem, the comparison between the data
obtained by Feldman (1970) and the data obtained in this
study, and offered in Appendix A, provides another view
65
of the research problem.
In general,the direction of the two studies are
similar and the fact that the magnitude of correlation is
higher in Feldman's work may well be a function of the
larger sample size as well as the greater heterogeneity of
his population.
Measures representing MFU-A follow the same pat
tern in both studies. Since the content is similar, con
sisting of figural units of numbers or letters, and the
administration, which is oral, is the same for all mea
sures , the large intrafactor correlations found in both
studies are not surprising.
The case is somewhat different for measures repre
senting the factor CFU-A. Here again the same directional
character is maintained, and although each test is admini
stered individually the manner of response is not the
same. The ITPA Sound Blending and the ITPA Auditory
Closure require only an oral response, whereas the Gates-
MacGinitie Blending requires marking a picture. It is
likely that this cross-modal task involves other abilities
than these which are purely auditory. At the same time,
these tests, and particularly the ITPA Auditory Closure,
would involve the ability to evaluate and compare sounds
with a modelo In fact Feldman found that the ITPA Audi
tory Closure does load on EFU-A.
The correlations for factor EFU-A are not
66
impressive in either study. Here again, one test, the
Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test requires only an oral
response, whereas the other two measures of EFU-A require
the marking of a test booklet. The cross-modal task does
not seem to be the source of poor correlation. Rather it
appears, looking at Table 4, that the abilities repre
sented by these measures are so well developed in first
grade children that they lose the power to discriminate.
The same explanation would seem to pertain to the
other findings, for the multiple regression analysis re
veals that only one SI variable, the ITPA Sound Blending,
had significant correlation with reading success. The
ITPA correlated at .32 with the vocabulary criterion mea
sure; however, since it accounted for such a small portion
of the variance (.10) it cannot be considered a useful
predictor for this population. Even IQ, which has been
shown to have a high correlation with reading success,
here has a limited predictive value.
These data, which appear to offer equivocal sup
port for the presence of factors found by Feldman (1970),
may be interpreted in other ways, for although the
direction of Feldman's data are preserved in this study,
there are a number of possibilites which may have contri
buted to the lack of closer agreement.
It is understood that small sample size may
introduce a source of error inversely related to the size
67
of the sample. But the second, and more important source
of the discrepancy between these data and Feldman's, re
late to the nature of the populations used.
This research population overlaps Feldman's only
in the upper ranges of ability and social class background,
and, therefore, results which he obtained are not likely
to be entirely duplicated here. One of the assumptions
for this population was that the perceptual abilities, as
related to beginning reading, would be so well developed
in this highly selected group that these testing measures,
many of which have been in common use, would not discri
minate among the individuals who made up the sample popu
lation. Examination of the means and standard deviations
in Table 4 support such a conclusion.
In sum, the restricted range of ability may have
resulted in depressed correlations and therefore, incon
clusive predictions. The assumptions of the study appear
to be upheld: these measures are not good predictors of
reading success in the target population. Nor is it
likely that these tests would be useful in similar popu
lations as they engage in the tasks which, together, make
up the beginning reading process.
CHAPTER V
REVIEW, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS,
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Review
The population used for this study consisted of
high ability, upper and upper-middle class first graders
whose responses on all measures clustered at the upper end
of the range. The study was undertaken to explore the re
lationship between selected perceptual abilities and reading
success.
Thus far the problem has been defined, and the
population and research design have been described. The
criterion measures were derived from the Structure-of-
Intellect (SI) which provides a concept of IQ as composed
of numerous discrete abilities. Both the SI and the ITPA,
which provides us with a useful, although incomplete model
of language abilities, have been discussed in some detail.
Since tests of the ITPA are used to measure SI factors, the
reciprocal nature of intellective and psycholinguistic
factors is apparent. Further, reading as a psycholinguistic
process which depends upon language ability has been docu
mented.
68
69
A1thought the ITPA Sound Blending test correlated
significantly with vocabulary (one of the criterion mea
sures) the correlation was too low to be considered a
meaningful predictor for the target population. Even IQ,
which has high correlations with reading success, here has
limited predictive value.
A considerable body of research has expressed the
relationship between measures of auditory perception and
reading. Feldman (1970), who provided some of the SI mea
sures used in this study, also found significant correla
tion between auditory perception and reading.
The hypothesis of no relationship,which is sug
gested, here appears to contradict Feldman. However, the
explanation is to be found in the differences between the
subject populations. Whereas the present study included
only children from upper and upper-middle class families,
whose characteristics for purposes of this study are indis
tinguishable, Feldman (1970) worked with a more heterogene
ous group described as primarily lower-middle and middle
class. The overlap between the two populations was minimal.
The small N and lack of range of ability of this population
precludes comparison with Feldman's larger and more in
clusive group.
Discussion
The idea for this study began with the observation
70
that lower socio-economic class and ethnic minorities do not
progress academically at a level commensurate with their
ability. This dysjunction is critically felt in school
systems where large numbers of children perform poorly on
reading and related achievement measures, most of which
depend, at least in part, upon reading ability.
While sociologists, like Havighurst and Neugarten
(1967), mention innate ability, motivation, family values,
and self-concept as factors which determine school achieve
ment, and while these qualities are of undeniable importance,
it does not seem logical that these factors, taken singly
or together, are sufficiently lacking in all children who
perform poorly to account for the magnitude of the problem.
Psycholinguists such as Cazden (1970), Labov
(1970a), and Baratz (1970) make the point that one quality
most of these children have in common is a mismatch between
their language and culture and the language and culture of
the schools. Teachers, texts, diagnostic and remedial in
struments all reflect the language of a middle class
culture.
Fries (1964), Goodman (1967-1968), Cazden (1966)
remind us that the mismatch of language to texts makes the
task of reading far more difficult for the lower socio
economic class child than for the middle class child.
The line of reasoning considered here was that
language performance of all children entering school is at
71
a level which is adequate to insure their functioning with
in their own culture. The child who comes to school
speaking a dialect or a language which is different than
the language of the school has an additional and often mis
understood problem which stands in the way of learning.
Fries (1964) discusses reading as building upon
habits of precise language responses which exist for the
learner at the time he begins to learn to read. He states
that the child of four has developed, by means of 5000
hours of practice, great skills in making high speed recog
nition responses to patterns of sound features that repre
sent language signals.
Goodman (1967) states that:
the child's deeply internalized knowledge of the
system of sounds and grammar of the dialect of
English he speaks sets up expectations which strongly
influence his perceptions and, in fact his ability
to perceive. The reason we can follow a familiar
language or dialect more easily than an unfamiliar
one is that we are constantly able to anticipate the
perceptual output. More than a little of what we
think we perceived is what we guess we heard or saw.
This is true of phonemes (the unit sounds of language).
It is true of letters. It is true of words.
(p. 542)
Class Basis of Language Behavior
With the conceptual framework established and in order
to develop a basis of support for the findings of this
particular study, the nature of the target population, par
ticularly with regard to language control, needs to be
explored. By contrasting the target population with lower
72
socio-economic class and ethnic groups it is hoped that a
useful understanding of their differences will emerge.
Havighurst and Neugarten (1967) stated that there
are four factors which determine the level of achievement
of a child in school.
One is the inborn ability of the child. Another
is the kind of family life or family training ex
periences. A third is the quality of the schooling
he receives. The fourth is his self-concept or
aspiration level which grows out of his family and
school experiences. (p. 159)
According to these criteria, language ability at the
time the child enters first grade, and assuming normal in
telligence, is a function of the kind of family life or
family training experience which the child has had. Al
though a great deal has been written about the "deficient"
language of lower socio-economic class and ethnic groups,
studies concerning the language of middle class children
are quite different. Their purpose primarily has been to
chart language development, as the research of Berko (1961),
Brown and Fraser (1964), Tripp and Miller (1963), Bloom
(1970) and Menyuk (1970) testifies. Developmental language
research, by and large, has been done on middle class
children,for theirs is the language of the schools and the
accepted standard,against which all, consciously or not,
are judged.
There is an abundant literature on the class nature
of language. Bernstein (1960, 1962) startled educators and
73
psychologists with his description of restricted and elab
orated codes and in so doing provided a strong incentive
for viewing language as a reflection of sociological con
text rather than as intrinsically "good" or "bad."
John and Goldstein (1964) and Bernstein (1964) con
tend that a crucial difference exists between middle and
lower class individuals in the use of language. Bernstein
(1962) considered that function and diversity in language
may be a result of the occupations and educational experi
ences of the middle class who are constantly called on to
readjust their speech to meet new situations, and therefore
develop more flexible use: lower class occupations, on the
other hand, being more routine in nature, demand less of
this ability. In a study in which lower class children
i
jwere given the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and un-
I
!expected finding was that these children had trouble with
action words. John and Goldstein (1964) hypothesized that
these children had less opportunity than middle class child
ren to engage in active dialogue when learning labels be- j
cause they had less interaction with adults and, as a con-
|sequence, had to rely upon the frequency of co-occurence of
label and referent to a greater extent than the middle
class child. Words like "tying" were failed on the test,
not because the children were deficient in the experience
with the referent, but because they had difficulty fitting
the label to the varying forms of the action. This fitting
~74
process consists of selecting the connection between word
and referent and occurs more easily when there is a variety
of verbal interaction with adults so that the child gets
corrective feedback. Generalizing from a word in one
setting to another requires the discovery of the invariant
j
features and is a signal for the formation of a hypothesis
about the essential invariance of the word (Brown, 1958).
This process of discovering invariance is essential for the
conceptual as well as the verbal development of the child.
Without the feedback the word is seen in a customary con
text and the child may have trouble generalizing its use.
Wolfram (1970) offers another explanation, sug
gesting that children may have trouble in recognizing a
legitimate form difference.
John and Goldstein (1964), in another phase of the
same study, found that the middle class children did better
on a conceptual sorting task and offered more explicit
statements of the concepts, while lower class children were
inclined to focus on non-essential attributes. They sug- |
i
gest that children who are skillful in overt verbal ex- j
pression also rely upon covert language or verbal media- j
tion processes when approaching a complex problem. In this
view communication and cognition are seen as fundamentally
interrelated in the early stages of language acquisition,
and,at the same time as the child is developing communica
tion skills, he is also organizing his social and perceptual
75
worlds through language. They state that,, instead of inter
action and corrective feedback as experienced by the middle
class child, the lower class child learns more through re
ceptive exposure. The conclusion is that the child whose
language is characterized by active participation with more
verbally mature individuals develops greater verbal profi
ciency as a result of being listened to,and corrected and
is also more likely to rely on and use words as mediators.
Vygotsky (1962) refers to this process as one of testing
tentative notions about meanings of words and the structure
of sentences.
Hess and Shipman (1965), in an effort to understand
why some children learn a more elaborate language code than
others, studied the ways in which mothers taught their four-
year-old children. They discovered that the techniques
used by mothers varied by social class and amount of educa
tion; middle class mothers talked almost twice as much to
their children as working class mothers and used more com
plex grammar, more adjectives, more abstract words, and
longer sentences. They also gave more explicit instruc
tions and let their children know what was expected and
praised them for their accomplishments. As a result middle
class children learned more readily and were more frequently
able to explain the principles behind the task they had
learned than were lower socio-economic class children.
Middle class mothers were more person oriented,
76
requiring the child to take the needs of others into con
sideration. Their children entered school with a greater
capacity to choose among alternatives, and to reflect be
fore acting, whereas the lower class child, whose mother
expected obedience, did not reflect overly long on alterna
tives or consequences and was inclined to be more impulsive.
A similar study was carried on by Greenberg and
Formanek (1971) who unobtrusively watched mother-child
interaction in a doctor's office. In this situation,
assuming normal interaction, analysis according to formal
categories of content and number of words spoken divided
according to social class. Middle class mothers talked
twice as much as working class mothers and devoted eighteen
per cent of their remarks to orders about behavior; working
class mothers gave orders thirty-three per cent of the time.
Middle class children talked almost four times as much as
working class children!
Williams and Naremore (1969) also discuss class
differences as favoring the middle class in terms of the
ability to employ more elaborated syntactic patterns. In
their study black and white middle class children out per
formed their lower class counterparts. Loban (1963) in a
longitudinal study, involving 338 children in grades
kindergarten through twelve, matched children on language
fluency and found that, although a low and high scoring
group varied little in basic structures, the high scorers
77
used greater variety in language. He observed that the
child with less power over language appeared less flexible
in his thinking, seeing fewer alternatives and making more
dogmatic statements. The gap increased each year and was
related to social class.
Coding. Krauss and Potter (1968), using an array
of abstract figures as stimuli, found that coding ability
of both speaker and listener increased with social class.
Coding is designated as any two-way person communication
task in which a speaker encodes one referent in an array to
a listener, separated by a visual screen or lapse of time,
and the listener must try to decode the message and select
the identical referent. There was no evidence that intra
status communication was more effective than interstatus
communication.
Heider (1971) had 143 ten-year-olds describe ab
stract stimuli which were picked out at a later time by
another child. For each class the most successful style
was the class preferred encoding style. Overall, middle,
class subjects were superior encoders and decoders. No
consistent sex or race differences were reported.
In another study, Heider, Cazden, and Brown (1968)
found that black children utilized the verbal descriptions
of middle class whites more effectively than they utilized
the verbal descriptions of their peers.
Baldwin, McFarlane, and Garvey (1971) describe a
78
study in which 96 fifth-grade children were arranged in
dyads with peers of the same socio-economic class and race.
The children worked on a task which required the accurate
communication of descriptive information. Middle class
dyads were significantly more accurate than black dyads.
There were no observed differences in mean dyad IQ or in
verbal production. The significant factor seemed to be the
number of critical descriptive attributes communicated. In
this study, as in the study of Heider et al, (1970) those
who performed poorly gave less part and more global descrip
tions. The largest differences in these studies was in
social class, although race, too, was a significant factor.
Rychman (1967), in a factor study, thought that a
general language ability best separated the social class
levels within an all black sample.
Dialect. Baratz (1969b) administered a repetition
task involving standard English and nonstandard English
sentences. The result indicated that black children per
formed significantly better than whites on nonstandard
sentences, just as white children performed significantly
better on standard English sentences. Interaction of age
and grammatical features was also significant for both
groups. She concluded that there are two dialects involved
in the education of black children; and because these child
ren are generally not bi-dialectal there is interference
from their dialect when they attempt to use standard
79
English.
Hagerman and Saario (1971) define dialect inter
ference as the conflict of two dialects in the mind of a
speaker which cause him to attempt to use part of his
native dialect when he tries to function in a second
dialect. They prepared a test in which 76 standard English
sentences were presented in multiple choice questions, each
standard sentence being buried among three similar sentences
written correctly in black nonstandard English. The test
was administered to fifty black and fifty white high school
girls and its purpose was to measure how well high school
students can recognize standard English. The hypothesis
was that the standard English speakers would recognize only
one of each of the four sentences as correct, whereas the
nonstandard speakers might recognize three or four as cor
rect. The hypothesis was strongly supported. The authors
speculated that it is possible for dialect interference to
result in the translation of written standard English to
nonstandard from which might interfere with progress in
early reading, and thus be one more contributor to what
Deutsch (1967)calls the "cumulative deficit."
The authors of this study evidently remembering
that "one picture (read: experience) is worth a thousand
words," included an experiment for teachers in order to
provide them with some insight into the nature of dialect
interference.
80
It seems appropriate to include it here:
1. Remember the rule that the third person
singular remains non-inflected in black
nonstandard English.
2. Construct a sentence using no inflection
on the third person singular.
3. Describe the activities of one of your
students. Each time you use a verb other
than black English do not inflect.
4. Record yourself in this endeavor for a
three minute period of connected speech.
5. Listen to the tape, count hesitations,
corrections and verbs which are inflected
according to standard English.
6. Tell how you felt as you spoke on the
tape. (p„ 163)
Teachers who speak standard English natively have
no difficulty understanding the process they are expected
to apply. They find, however, that once they attempt to
use this very simple rule in connected speech, they must
consciously edit their native dialect before they speak in
order to correct nonstandard verbs. The editing appears on
the tape as a pause. In telling how they felt during the
recording session, most standard English speakers reported
that they needed to make a real effort to sustain speech
which required just one inflection difference. The con
flict between their native standard English morphology and
nonstandard morphology produced anxiety which led to
editing, hesitation, as well as requiring considerable
effort, and interfered with the ability to speak naturally.
81
This is dialect interference. Hagerman and Saario (1971)
offer some comfort, stating that only a small number of
standard English speakers can sustain one nonstandard
morphological difference in connected speech for three
minutes.
The ITPA. This study, following the factor analy
tic work of Feldman (1970), makes use of three substests of
the ITPA in order to tap auditory perceptual factors of the
SI model. However, even though the ITPA is the major stand
ardized instrument of language function, its use as a
language measure is limited. The literature which is re
viewed should be interpreted bearing the following qualifi
cations in mind.
Carroll (1972b) complained that the authors of the
ITPA consider a "psycholinguistic ability" as any ability
that reflects or involves some kind of communicative trans
action between the individual and his environment. From
this point of view almost any testable cognitive ability
could be viewed as psycholinguistic. He defines psycholin
guistics as the study of the role of natural language sys
tems in human communication and thinking. He explains that
if the ITPA were truly a test of psycholinguistic abilities
it would limit its attention to language functions (half
the subtests are non-language) and would provide informa
tion on a much wider range of functions with more detail
and precision. He adds that chief among the abilities
82
tested is a vocabulary factor, or to be more precise, a
factor having to do with the range of cultural experiences
(symbolized by words) to which the child has been exposed.
Meyers (1969) synthesizing the factor analyses of
the 1961 Experimental Edition of the ITPA, reports, among
other findings, that the representational level is identi
fied mainly by a verbal comprehension factor; Uhl and Nurss
(1970) identified three or four factors, among them a fac
tor of "vocabulary,1 1 which was tapped by six of the nine
tests for upper middle class children, but which split into
"expressive" and "receptive" verbal factors for lower class
children.
As indicated in Chapter III, the norming population
was carefully limited, and included no children with
emotional or physical handicaps. Blacks were not repre
sented adequately and learning disabled were not represented
at all.
The ITPA, as a measure of psycholinguistic func
tioning for nonstandard speakers, appears to be measuring
cultural differences rather than psycholinguistic ability
which, properly, is measured within the speech community of
the individuals tested. It must therefore be used with
caution, for a deviant performance may simply mean that the
child does not conform to the norming population. Since a
major use of the test has been to assess psycholinguistic
abilities of lower class children (Carroll, 1972b)
83
particularly Blacks, Chicanos, and even various Indian popu
lations, and since there are no norms for these groups,
test results cannot be interpreted as necessarily reflecting
an intellectual deficit. Uhr and Nurss (1970) and Howard,
Hoops, and McKinnon (1970) suggest that the test might be
measuring the ability of the child to understand the
examiner, thus penalizing the child who comes from a non
standard English speaking community. Severson and Guest
(1970) ask whether the language difference between exami
ners and children may not result in the avoidance of the
auditory channel by these children.
Spradling (1967) noted that only one ITPA subtest
required an answer consisting of more than one or two words.
However, since that test is not scored for linguistic fea
tures, any psycholinguistic features which are solely re
lated to extended oral language could not be assessed.
To summarize, the ITPA used with a disadvantaged
population must carry the reminder that it is a relative
measure of language function in a situation where the mid
dle class is the norm. If an individual's test scores are
used only to describe his relative standing with respect to
a specified norm group, disadvantaged status may be accu
rately reflected by relatively low performance. In this
circumstance it may be said to have predictive validity for
it differentiates culturally to the same extent that the
reading measures differentiate.
84
Studies of the ITPA. Klaus and Gray (1968) followed
children defined as culturally disadvantaged from ages three
to eight. Half the children were involved in various treat
ment programs designed to modify behaviors thought to be
related to cultural disadvantage. Although significant
gains occurred in mean subtest scores of those children
subject to treatment, the repeated testing did not lead to
changes in the group subtest patterns obtained on the ITPA.
The profiles continued to show highest relative scores on
the Auditory-vocal Sequential (immediate memory) and Visual-
motor Association (knowledge of functional relationships
between objects) subtests. This contrasted with consistent
ly low scores on Auditory-vocal Automatic (capacity to com
plete words and phrases with standard grammatical form).
Klaus and Gray (1968) and Bateman (1968) both underscore
the fact that the assessment of grammatical correctness may
be particularly influenced by difference in cultural back
ground of the black children when compared to the predomi
nantly white sample used for standardization. Klaus and
Gray (1968) also speculate upon the general preference of
black culturally disadvantaged groups for visual as against
auditory channels of communication. Bateman (1968) reviewed
studies carried on with different races and social class
levels, and, although a selectively low score turns up again
on the Auditory-vocal Automatic and a high score on the
Auditory-vocal Sequential, the marked IQ and age differences
85
within groups makes it difficult to assess the findings.
Gordon (1970), working with groups of Navajo, Pueblo,
and rural Spanish-Americans, found that a significant rela
tionship existed between scores on the ITPA and the langu
age modeling of the mother. In these groups the use of
English increased with social class status, which in turn
increased as the individual families became more assimi
lated. Since Gordon (1970) defines the ITPA as a measure
of English language ability her findings seem logical.
Cross-modality. Blank, Weider, and Bridger (1968)
designed a study to test the supposition that cross-modal
difficulties, as suggested by Birch and Belmont (1965) and
Muehl and Kremenak (1966), have a perceptual base. They
found that temporal stimuli, whether visual or auditory,
could not be utilized unless coded in a number system.
What appeared to be a cross-modal deficiency was in fact a
failure to code the temporally presented components of a
task accurately. When the coding aspect of the task was
removed there was no significant difference in performance
between normal and retarded readers.
This study done at the end of the first grade
school year, replicated an earlier work utilizing forth
grade retarded readers (Blank and Bridger; 1966, 1967). As
with the older population, these children experienced dif
ficulty establishing equivalence between physically dif
ferent stimuli even though the stimuli were presented
86
within a single modality. This second study was carried
out in order to determine whether the difficulties in
abstraction were a result of the reading problem, or
whether they were present at its onset. In moving the re
search down to first grade it was determined that the same
coding difficulty existed at both levels and differenti
ated between those readers who, at the end of the first
grade were adjudged to be making normal progress, and those
who seemed to be learning at a slower rate.
An additional finding was that the poorer readers
improved during the trials of the tasks and from one task
to another. Blank est al, (1968) suggested this might in
dicate that the initial approach of a poor reader is less
conceptual than the approach of a good reader. -However,
they caution that any one task can only mirror a limited
aspect of the deficits of a poor performer; at the same
time as they call attention to the fact that younger
readers are thought to have perceptual problems and older
readers conceptual problems. They conclude that attempts
to prevent reading problems should perhaps not emphasize
perceptual training but rather focus more on techniques to
develop abstract thinking.
In a follow-up porgram, Blank and Solomon (1968)
considered that the child must be actively engaged in tasks
requiring the internal manipulation of experience in order
to develop skills in comprehension and in organizing and
87
structuring thought. They undertook a one-to-one tutoring
program, using the Socratic dialogue method. Only verbal
responses were accepted. Although the tutoring time took
no more than fifteen or twenty minutes a day a significant
increase in IQ was reported at the end of three months.
The point of view of the body of work carried for
ward by Blank et al, (1966, 1967, 1968) is that the dis
advantaged are not in the habit of using language in prob
lem solving and must learn to use language to structure and
guide their experience. Blank concluded that deficiency in
labeling, as suggested by John and Goldstein (1964), is not
a central issue, rather it is a failure to use language in
abstract symbolic mediation. These workers make an impor
tant distinction, which is that language is not to be
equated with thinking although it is intimately linked with
it at the higher levels.
Values
Havighurst and Neugarten (1967) make few distinc
tions between middle and upper class families, their con
clusion being that the difference seems to be chiefly one
of life style. For upper class families education is conr
sidered a matter of proper rearing, and formal education is
no more important than other aspects of life. Their child
ren go into status professions such as architecture, medi
cine and law. The keynote appears to be one of "graceful
living."
88
Upper middle class families place a great emphasis
on education as the means by which they have risen to their
positions. The central value here is "career."
The relative influence of family and school in
mental development is unclear. Review of the literature
reveals no studies which make a distinction between the
language of middle class and the upper class, for these
social groups may be expected to have internalized standard
English so that the transfer from oral to written language
is within the same language system and is likely to be
easily accomplished. It is conceivable that certain cate
gories; lawyers, professors, and scientists might speak and
require of their children an oral expression of consider
able precision and grace; however, this is speculation,
and, beyond a certain level of ability, differences in
expressive language are certainly gratuitous as they relate
to reading.
Differences between upper middle and upper class on
the one hand, and lower class on the other, may be dicoto-
mized as being between conformity and internal process.
While the working class values conformity, neatness,
obedience, dependability, and good school performance, upper
and middle class focus on self-direction, and empathic
understanding and feeling are taken into account (Kohn,
1967). Whereas middle class families punish for loss of
self control, working class children are punished for
89
disobeying their parents (Hess and Shipman, 1965).
Kneller (1965) describes the typical American
school as imbued with middle class values. Children are
expected to be polite, follow conventions, respect other
people's property; they are encouraged in sportsmanship and
hard work. Kneller (1965) continues with a description of
the lower class child as one who does not feel himself a
part of the school because its values are not his. He is
at a disadvantage in many ways: the language of the school
is unfamiliar, texts appeal to middle class attitudes, and
often show middle class children in middle class situations.
The subjects taught seem to have little bearing on his life
and in fact may violate some of the canons to which he is
accustomed. In short, he has little of the middle class
motivation.
Hess and Shipman (1965) remark that where working
class mothers want to help their children succeed they
often don't know how.
The Target Population
From the forgoing description a picture of the tar
get population emerges. Some observations of test-taking
behavior are included because they help round out a picture
of children in whom attitudes towards school have been well
internalized as early as the first grade. The children
were uniformly cooperative during the individual testing
sessions, and while there was a wider range of behaviors
90
during the group testing, here too, the general attitude
was business-like.
An example is discussed: on the Murphy-Durrell
Phoneme Test, which involves a fairly lengthy teaching
period before the children mark their test booklets, it was
observed that a number of first-graders did not wait for
instructions to be completed but went on to respond to the
test as soon as they understood the nature of the task. It
may be noted that this was one of the tests in which the
group either received perfect scores or were near the
ceiling.
While it is hardly ’ ’ hard data" it appeared as
though the testing population understood that they were ex
pected to perform. Some were competitive (checking on the
progress of their neighbors to see if they had finished),
several little girls showed signs of anxiety (tearfulness)
and said they didn't understand the instructions. Several
were mildly inattentive, but all seemed to know they had a
job to do. Inattentiveness, where it existed, was
momentary.
Conelusion
In 1953, the UNESCO report regarding the role of
language in education stated that:
It is axiomatic that the best medium for
teaching a child is his mother tongue. Psycho
logically, it is the system of meaningful signs
that in his mind works automatically for ex-
91
pression and understanding. Sociologically, it
is the means of identification among the members
of the community to which he belongs. Education
ally he learns more quickly through it than
through an unfamiliar medium. (p. 17)
Study after study has implicated facility in stand
ard English as a key to school progress. Precisely because
the problems of the nonstandard speaker are not obvious
(after all he does speak English) his difficulties with
language cause confusion for him and his teachers. His
lack of certainty as to what constitutes correctness shows
up at the automatic level at which language is so well
practiced and overlearned that little thought is required.
The issue of difference between lower class and
middle class children is one of the "hidden curriculum,"
the notion that the middle class child is well prepared for
school since he has, by the time he enters school, received
approximately five years of individual tutoring in standard
English.
Lawton (1968) supports the view that inadequacy of
linguistic range and control is an important factor in
under-achievement, it is the "cumulative deficit," a dis
advantage which generates a vicious circle of difficulties
increasing in magnitude as school life progresses. These
difficulties are closely related to wider questions of
"motivation" and culture. He states:
To see a problem simply as language is in
adequate for language use is a translation of a
culture through a specific social structure.
92
He continues:
...there is little doubt that it (language)
exerts a channeling influence on thought processes.
To ask whether language is a primary or secondary
influence is less important than to think of the
reciprocal relations between language and culture,
language and social structure, language and
cognition. (p. 158)
The effort of this paper was directed towards
demonstrating that the SI measures used by Feldman (1970)
are not appropriate predictors of reading success in an
upper or upper-middle class population. Research has sug
gested strongly that perceptual abilities such as auditory
discrimination, auditory closure, auditory memory are not
relevant as predictors in population which is characterized
as speaking standard English, and as having intact central
nervous systems and normal or above IQ. By the time this
child comes to school his language abilities are already so
well internalized that, should he have a reading problem,
answers would have to be found elsewhere.
Recommendations
Studies
1) This paper has made reference to research which
indicates that children are fluent in their native dialect
by the time they enter school. It is not surprising then
that children who speak standard English should do well in
the tests of auditory perception which are developed around
the words and speech sounds of standard English. Following
93
the line of reasoning of this paper, some suggestions are
made in order to further probe the relationship between
social class, auditory perceptual abilities, language, and
reading. Additional linguistic measures, mainly those
which consider free speech samples would be likely to con
tribute valuable information, particularly in a population
which is more representative of the community at large than
was this study population. Such a project would represent
a very necessary collaboration between educators and
linguistic.
2) On the ground that presently available measures
of auditory perception are not necessarily predictive
(given the general level of language competence of the
beginning standard English speaking student) tasks of a
more complex nature should be investigated in order to de
sign appropriate instruction. Blank, Weider, and Bridger
(1968) have suggested that it is not perception but rather
the child's ability to conceptualize which causes diffi
culties in cross-modal tasks. This seems a most promising
idea for it follows along with observations, made over a
period of time, that perceptual task difficulties in the
younger child are replaced by conceptual difficulties in
an older population (MacGinitie, 1967). Blank, Weider,
and Bridger (1968) suggest that it is really the same
problem at all levels, that is, the ability to conceptu
alize. Blank and Solomon (1968) acting on the above
94
assumption found that children can be trained to conceptu
alize thus improving in their ability to solve such tasks.
While it does not seem necessary to spell out precise
ideas this seems to be an area which might yield a bounti
ful harvest.
3) Accepting the assumption that there is a value
in testing auditory discrimination as an aspect of auditory
perception, it is suggested that tests be designed which
make use of the sound patterns within black and other
minority dialects. The point would be to be able to de
termine whether a difficulty lies in the ability to per
ceive phonemic distinctions in standard English, or whether
the difficulty lies in the ability to perceive distinctions
within the child's own speech community.
Teacher Training
Training in linguistics should be a part of a core
program for teachers in order to help them acquire a per
spective which recognizes the structure of different
dialects as systems in their own right. This is a critical
need if teachers are to be able to instruct with under
standing and effectiveness. Much remains to be done in the
area of language which demands the most active cooperation
of educators, linguists, and psychologists. Curricular
concerns and methodology have yielded a poor return; it is
time to be looking at the child and his language and his
culture.
APPENDIX
95
96
COMPARISON OF INTRA-FACTOR CORRELATIONS AMONG
TESTS REPRESENTING SI FACTOR VARIABLES
IN TWO STUDY POPULATIONS
Factor Tests
ITPA:SB G-M:AB
(CEU-A) ITPA Auditory
Closure (ITPA:AC)
ITPA Sound Blending
(ITPA:SB)
Gates-MacGinitie
Auditory Blending
(G-M:AB)
.10
(.22)
35**
(.26)
.29
(.54)
O-MALST ITPA:AS
(MFU-A) Meeker Digit Memory
(MDM)
Orpet-Meyers Auditory
Letter Span (0-M:ALST)
ITPA Auditory-vocal
Sequencing Test
(ITPA:AS)
.57**
(.74**)
.66**
(.76**)
.67**
(.71**)
MDP G-M:AD
(EFU-A) Wepman Auditory Dis
crimination Test
(WADT)
Murphy-Durrell Phoneme
Test (MDP)
Gates-MacGinitie Auditory
Discrimination Test
(G-M:AD)
.04
(.26)
.19
(.33)
-.13
(.37*)
*p < . 05
**p < .01
figures in parentheses indicate correlations
obtained by Feldman for the same variables.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
97
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anastasi, A. Psychological Testing (third edition). New
York: MacMillan^ 1968.
Baldwin, T. L., McFarlane, P.T., and Garvery, C. J. Child
ren's Accuracy Related to Race and Socioeconomic
Status. Child Development 42, 1971, 345-357.
Baratz, J. C. Language and Cognitive Assessment of Negro
Children: Assumptions and Research Needs. The
Florida FL Reporter, Fall, 1969a, 11-14.
________. A Bi-dialectal Task for Determining Language
Proficiency in Economically Disadvantaged Negro
Children. Child Development 40, 1969b, 889-901.
________. Should Black Children Learn White Dialect?
ASHA Journal Vol. 12, (91), September 1970, 415-417.
Bateman, B. Interpretation of the 1961 Illinois Test of
Psycholinguistic Abilities. Seattle: Special
Child Publications, 1968a.
________. Temporal Learning Dimensions in Early Learning
Series. San Raefael, California: Dimensions
Publishing Co., 1968b.
Bereiter, C. and Engelmann, S. Teaching Disadvantaged
Children in the Preschool. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall, T966.
Berko, J. The Child's Learning of English Morphology. In
Saporta, S. (Ed.), Psycholinguistics: A Book of
Readings. New York: Rinehart & Winston, 1961.
Bernstein, B. Language and Social Class. British Journal
of Sociology 11, 1960, 271-276.
________. Social Class, Linguistic Codes and Grammatical
Elements. Language and Speech _5, 1962, 221-240.
Birch, H. G. and Belmont, L. Auditory-Visual Integration,
Intelligence, and Reading Ability in School
Children. Perceptual and Motor Skills 20, 295-305.
98
99
Betts, E. A. Foundations of Reading Instruction. New
York: American Book Co., 1946.
Blank, M. and Bridger, W. Deficiencies in Verbal Labeling
in Retarded Readers. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry 36, 1966, 640-647.
Perceptual Abilities and Conceptual Deficiencies
in Retarded Readers. In Zubin, J. (Ed.), Psycho
pathology of Intelligence. New York: Gruene &
Stratton, 1967.
and Solomon, F. A Tutorial Language Program to
Develop Abstract Thinking in Socially Disadvantaged
Preschool Children. Child Development 39, 1968,
379-389.
and Weider, and Bridger, W. Verbal Deficiencies
in Abstract Thinking in Early Reading Retardation.
American Journal of Orthpsychiatry 38, (5),
Bloom, L. Language Development: Form and Function in
Emerging Grammars. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press,
1970.
Brown, R. Words and Things. New York: The Free Press,
and Fraser, F. The Acquisition of Syntax, (Eds.).
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development. In Bellugi, U. and Brown, R., The
Carlson, D. C. and Meyers, C. E. Language, Memory and
Figural Ability Hypotheses in Retardates of Mental
Age Four. American Journal of Mental Deficiency 73,
Carroll, J. B. Language Development in Children. In
Saporta, S. (Ed.), Psycholinguistics: A Book of
Readings. New York: Holt. Rinehart & Winston.
1961.
. . Language and Thought. Englewood Cliff, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1964.
Reviewing the ITPA (Revised Edition) in Buros,
O.K., The Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook Vo1.
1^ Highland Park, New Jersey: Gryphon Press, 1972,
October, 1968, 823-834.
195'ST
(1), Serial No. 92,
(1), July, T9'6§~, 1(55-112.
100
________. The Nature of the Reading Process. In Calkins,
E. (Ed.), Reading Forum. National Institute of
Neurological Diseases and Stroke, Department of
Health Education and Welfare, Monograph #11, (NIH)
1972, 72-44.
Cazden, C, B. Subcultural Differences in Child Language:
An Interdisciplinary Review. Merrill-Palmar
Quarterly 12. (3), July, 1966, 185-220.
________. Studies of Early Language Acquisition. Child
hood Education 46, (3), Dec., 1969, 127-131.
________. The Neglected Situation in Child Language
Research and Education. In Williams, F. (Ed.)
Language and Poverty: Perspectives on a Theme.
Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1970.
________. Child Language and Education. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1972.
Chalfant, J. C. and Flathouse, V. E. Auditory and Visual
Learning. Chapter X. In Myklebutst, H. R., (Ed.),
Progress in Learning Disabilities, Vol. II, New
York: Gruene & Stratton, 1971.
________ and Scheffelin, M. Central Processing Dysfunc
tions in Children: A Review of Research.
Washington, D. C.: National Institute of Neurologi
cal Diseases and Stroke, Monograph # 9, Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, 1969.
Chall, J. S. Learning to Read: The Great Debate. New
York: McGraw Hill, 1967.
Chaplin, J. P. Dictionary of Psychology. New York: Dell
Pub. Co.', 1968.--
Chall, J. and Roswell, F. and Blumenthal, S. Auditory
Blending Ability: A Factor in Success in Beginning
Reading. Reading Teacher 17, November, 1963,
113-118.
Christine, D. and Christine, C. The Relation of Auditory
Discrimination to Articulatory Defects and Reading
Retardation. The Elementary School Journal 65,
Nov., 1964, 97-100.
101
Clark, A. D. and Richards, C. J. Auditory Discrimination
Among Economically Disadvantaged and Non-Disadvant-
aged Preschool Children. Exceptional Children 33,
(4), 1966, 259-262.
De Hirsch, K. Psychological Correlates of the Reading
Process. In Figurel, J. A. (Ed.), Challenge and
Experiment in Reading. International Reading
Association Conference Proceedings, Reports on
Elementary Reading, 7, 1962, 218-226.
- . ______ . Preschool Intervention. In Calkins, E. (Ed.)
Reading Forum, NINDS Monograph #11, Department of
Health Education and Welfare, #(NIH) 72-44, 1972.
Deutsch, M. The Disadvantaged Child: Selected Papers of
Martin* Deutsch and Associates. New York: Basic
Books, 1967.
Durrell, D. and Murphy, H. A. The Auditory Discrimination
Factor in Reading Readiness and Reading Disability.
Education 73, May, 1973, 556-560.
Dykstra, R. Auditory Discrimination Ability and Beginning
Reading Achievement. The Reading Research
Quarterly _1, 1966, 5-34.
English, Ho B. and English, A. C. A Comprehensive
Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytical
Terms. New York: David McKay Co., Inc., Feb.,
1964.
Ervin, S. M. and Miller, W. R. Language Development in
Child Psychology: 62nd Yearbook of the National
Society for the Study of Education, Part I.
Chicago: National Society for the Study of Educa
tion, 1963, 108-143.
Feldman, B. Prediction of First Grade Reading Achievement
from Selected Structure of Intellect Factors.
Unpublished Dissertation, University of Southern
California, January 1970.
Flowers, A. Crandell Ed. Relationship among Central Audi
tory Abilities, Socio-Economic Factors, Speech De
lay, Phonic Abilities, and Reading Achievement: A
Longitudinal Study. Grand Blanc Community Schpols,
DHEW, June 1, 1966-August 31, 1967, Ed 033 833,
Department of Health Education and Welfare, 1968.
102
Flynn, P. T. and Bryne, M. C. Relationship Between Reading
and Selected Auditory Abilities of Third-Grade
Children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
13, (4), Dec.-’ 157117 73T-T407"------------------
Fries, C. C„ Linguistics and Reading. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, August 1964.
Goetzinger, C. P., Dirks, D. D„ and Baer, C. J. Auditory
Discrimination and Visual Perception in Good and
Poor Readers. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and
Laryngology 69,“l?6iT7 Tll~lT3. -------- ----
Golden, N. and Steiner, S. Auditory and Visual Functions
in Good and Poor Readers. Journal of Learning
Disabilities 2, (9), September 1569, 476-481.
Goodman, K. S. Linguistic Insights which Teachers May
Apply. Education 88, April-May 1967-1968, 313-316.
Word Perception: Linguistic Basis. Education
87, 1967, 540-543.
Gordon, S. B. Ethnic and Socioeconomic Influences on the
Home Language Experiences of Children. Southwestern
Cooperative Educational Laboratory, Albuquerque,
New Mexico: Office of Education, Department of
Health Education and Welfare, Washington, D. C.:
March 1970, ED 043-377.
Greenberg, S. and Formanek, R. Social Class Differences in
Spontaneous Verbal Interactions. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, New York: Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, Feb. 1971, (DHEW)
ED 047-306.
Guest, K. E. Relationships Among the Illinois Test of
Psycholinguistic Abilities, Receptive and Expres
sive Language Tasks, Intellignece and Achievement
Dissertation Abstracts 31, 1971, 5845.
Guilford, J. and Hoepfner, R. Current Summary of Struc-
ture-of-Intellect Factors and Suggested Tests. A
Report form the Psychological Laboratory, University
of Southern California, December, 1963.
________ . Structure-of-Intellect Factors and Their Tests.
Reports from the Psychological Laboratory 36,
University of Southern California, 1966.
103
________. The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1567.
Gunderson, D. V. Research in Reading Readiness. U. S.
Department of Health Education and Welfare, (Bul
letin #8), OE-30013, 1964.
Harris, A. J. How to Increase Reading Ability. New York:
David McKay, Inc., 1965.
Havighurst, R. J. and Neugarten, B. L. Society and
Education (third edition), Boston! Allyn and
Bacon, T967.
Heider, E. R. Style and Accuracy of Verbal Communications
Within and Between Social Classes. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 18, (1), 1971,
33-47.
________, Cazden, C. B. and Brown, R. Social Class Dif
ferences in the Effectiveness and Style of Child
ren's Coding Ability. Project Literacy Reports,
#9, Ithica, New York: Cornell University, 1968.
In Williams F. (Ed.) Language and Poverty: Per
spectives on a Theme, Chicago: Markham Publishing
Co., 1970.
Hildreth, G. H. Linguistic Factors in Early Reading
Instruction. Reading Teacher 18, 1964, 172-178.
________ , Griffiths, N. and McGauvran, M. Metropolitan
Readiness Tests, Grades K-l, Harcourt, Brace,
Jovanovich, Inc., 1969.
Hollingshead, A. B. Two Factor Index of Social Position.
Paper, New Haven, Connecticut: 195 7.
Howard, M. J. Jr., Hoops, H. R. and McKinnon, A, J. Langu
age Abilities of Children with Differing Socio
economic Backgrounds. Journal of Learning
Disabilities 3, (6), June 1970, 328-335.
Ikeda, M. The Relationships Between the Illinois Test of
Psycholinguistic Abilities, Reading Performance,
and IQ of Third Grade Children. Dissertation
Abstracts, 1971, 5270.
John, V. P. and Goldstein, L. S. The Social Context of
Language Acquisition. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 10
1964, 265-275.
104
Kass, C. E. Psycholinguistic Disabilities of Children with
Reading Problems. Exceptional Children 32, (8),
April 1966, 533-539":
________ . Relation of Early Language Development to Sub
sequent Reading Disorder. Reading Forum National
Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke,
Department of Health Education and Welfare,
#(NIH) 72-44, 1972, 65-70.
Katz, P. A. and Deutsch, M. Visual and Auditory Efficiency
and Its Relationship to Reading in Children.
Cooperative Research Project #1009. New York:
Institute for Developmental Studies, 1965.
Kirk, S. A. and McCarthy, J. J. The Illinois Test of
Psycholinguistic Abilities—An Appraoch to Dif
ferential Diagnosis. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency 3;, November 1966, 399-412.
________ . Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities:
Its Origin and Implications. In Hellmuth, J. (Ed),
Learning Disorders, Vol. Ill, Seattle: Special
Child Publications, 1968.
________ and Kirk, W. Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic
Abilities, Examiners Manual. Urbana: University
of Illinois, 1968a.
________ . Psycholinguistic Learning Disabilities. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1971.
________ . The Diagnosis and Remediation of Psycholinguist
Disabilities. Institute for Research on Excep-
tional Children, Urbana: University of Illinois,
1966.
Kneller, G. F. Educational Anthropology: An Introduction.
University of California, Los Angeles: New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965.
Kohn, M. L. Class and Conformity: A Study in Values.
Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1969.
Krauss, R. M. and Rotter, G. S. Communication Abilities
of Children as a Function of Status and Age.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 14, (2), April 1968,
161-173.
105
Labov, W. The Study of Nonstandard English. Published by
National Council of Teachers of English by special
arrangement with the Center for Applied Linguis
tics, Washington, D. C.: 1970a.
________ . The Logic of Nonstandard English. Chapter 9.
In Williams, F. (Ed.), Language and Poverty:
Perspectives on a Theme. Chicago: Markham Pub.
Co., 1970b.
Lawton, D. Social Class, Language and Education. New
York~ Schocken Books, 1968.
Lefevre, C. A. A Multidisciplinary Approach to Language
and to Reading: Some Projections. In Goodman, K.
(Ed.), The Psycholinguistic Nature of the Reading
Process. Detroit: Wayne State University Press,
1963:
Legum, S. E., Williams, C. E., and Lee, M. Social Dia
lects and Their Implications for Beginning Reading
Instruction. Southwest Regional Laboratory for
Educational Research and Development. Technical
Report #14, June 6, 1969.
Lenneberg, E. H. A Biological Perspective of Language.
In Oldfield, R. C. and Marshall, J. C. (Eds.),
Language. Baltimore: Penguin Books Ltd., 1968.
Lindamood, C. and Lindamood, P. Conceptualization of
Auditory Patterns. Paper presented at Inter
national Reading Association Conference, Anaheim,
California: May 6-9, 1970.
Lingren, R. H. Performance of Disabled and Normal Readers
on the Bender-Gestalt, Auditory Discrimination
Test and Visual Motor Matching. Perceptual Motor
Skills 29, (1), 1969, 152-154.
MacGinitie, W. H. Evaluating Readiness for Learning to
Read: A Critical Review and Evaluation of Re
search. Reading Research Quarterly 4, 1969,
306-410.
Auditory Perception in Reading. Education 87,
1967, 532-538.
McCarthy, J. J. and Kirk, S. A. Illinois Test of Psycho-
lingusitic Abilities— Examiners Manual. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1961.
106
McLeod, J. Some Psycholinguistic Correlates of Reading
Disability in Young Children. Reading Research
Quarterly 11, (3), Spring 1967, 5-32.
McNinch, G. Auditory Perceptual Factors and Measured
First-Grade Reading Achievement. Reading Research
Quarterly 6, Simmer 1971, 472-492.
________ and Hafner, L. Systematic Evaluation of an Audi
tory Perceptual Skill Model in a Prereading Sample.
Perceptual and Motor Skills 33, (2), October 1971,
387-394.
________, Palmatier, R. and Richmond, M. Auditory Per
ceptual Testing of Young Children. Journal of
Reading Behavior 4, (2), 1972, 120-123.
Mackworth, N. H. Seven Cognitive Skills in Reading. Pro
ceeding, 79th Annual Convention American Psycho
logical Association, 1971, 6 (part 2), 509-510.
Mas land, R. and Cratty, B. The Nature of the Reading Pro
cess, The Rationale of Non-Educational Remedial
Methods. In Calkins, E. (Ed.), Reading Forum
National Institute of Neurological Diseases and
Stroke, Department of Health Education and Welfare,
Monograph ?/ll, (NINDS), 141-176.
Meeker, M. Immediate Memory and Its Correlates with
School Achievement. Unpublished doctoral disser
tation, University of Southern California, 1966.
________. The Structure of Intellect. Columbus, Ohio:
Charles E. Merrill, 1969.
Menyuk, P. Innovative linguistic descriptions of the
language acquisition of children who acquire
language normally and those whose language acqui
sition is deviant. Paper presented at the Inter
national Convocation on Children, 1967.
________. Language Theories and Educational Practices.
Chapter 10. In Williams, F. (Ed.), Language and
Poverty: Perceptives on a Theme. Chicago:
Markham Publishing Co., 1970.
Meyers, C. E. and Dingman, H. The Structure of Abilities
at the Preschool Ages: Hyposthesized Domains.
Psychological Bulletin 57, (6), 1960, 514-532.
107
Orpet, R. E., Attwell, A. A. and Dingman, H. F.
"Primary Abilities at Mental Age Six. Monographs
of the Society for Research in Child Development
27, (1), Serial #82, 1962.
_, Dingman, H. F., Orpet, R. E., Sitkei, E. G. and
Watts, C. A. Four Ability Factor Hypotheses at
Three Preliterate Levels in Normal and Retarded
Children. Monographs of the Society for Research
in Child Development 20, (5), Serial #96, 1964.
What the ITPA Measures: A Synthesis of Factor
Studies of the 1961 Edition. Educational and
Psychological Measurement 29, 1969, 867-876.
Miller, W. and Ervin, S,
Child Language.
1964, 9-34.
The Development of Grammar in
Child Development Monographs 29,
Monroe, M. Children Who Cannot Read,
of Chicago Press, 1932.
Chicago: University
Morency, A. Auditory Modality Research and Practice.
Paper Presented at the International Reading
Association Conference. University of Chicago
Speech and Language Research Laboratory, Seattle:
May 1967.
Muehl, S. and Krememak, S. Ability to Match Information
Within and Between Auditory and Visual Sense
Modality and Subsequent Reading Achievement.
Journal of Educational Psychology 57, 1966,
235-239.
Nie, N., Bent, D., and Hull, C. H. SPSS: Statistical
New York: Package for the Social Sciences.
McGraw-Hill, 1970.
Orpet, R. E. A Factor Analysis of Some Hypothesized
Abilities of Six-Year-Old Children. Unpublished
dissertation, University of Southern California,
June 1960.
________ and Meyers, C. E. A Study of Six Structure of
Intellect Hypotheses in Six-Year-Old Children.
Journal of Educational Psychology 57, 1966, 341-346.
Osgood, C. E. A Behavioral Analysis of Perception and
Language as a Cognitive Phenomena. In Bruner, J.
(Ed.), Contemporary Approaches to Cognition.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957.
108
________ . Psycholinguistics. In Koch, S. (Ed.), Psycho
logy: A Study of a Science Vol. VI., New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1963.
________ and Sebeok, T. A. Psycholinguistics. Blooming
ton, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1965.
Otto, W., Barrett, T., and Smith, R. Summary and Review
of Investigations Relating to Reading: July 1,
1969 to June 30, 1970. Journal of Educational
Research 64, (6), Feb. 1971, 242-268.
Paraskevopoulos, J. and Kirk, S. A. The Development and
Psycholmetric Characteristics of the Revised
Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1969.
Poole, I. Genetic Development of Articulation of
Consonant Sounds in Speech. Elementary English
Review II, June 1934, 159-161.
Poulsen, M. K. Automatic Pattering of Grammatical
Structures and Auditory Stimuli as Related to
Reading in Disadvantaged Mexican-American Children.
Unpublished dissertation, University of Southern
California, June 1971.
Robinson, H. M. The Role of Auditory Perception in
Reading. In Downing, J. (Ed.), The First Inter-
national Reading Symposium, Oxf or'd: John Day Co..
1964.
________ . Why Children Fail in Reading. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1946.
Rubin, L. and Pollack, C. Auditory Perception in Kinder
garten Children. In Swartz, G. and Tracy, N.
(Eds.), Language-Learning System and Learning
Disability, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1970.
Ryckman, D. B. A Comparison of Information Processing
Abilities of Middle and Lower Class Negro Kinder
garten Boys. Exceptional Children 33, (8), April
1967.
Schmadel, E. The Relationship of Creative Thinking Abili
ties to School Achievement. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California,
June 1960.
109
Severson, R. A. and Guest, K. E. Toward the Standardized
Assessment of the Language of Disadvantaged
Children. In Williams, F. (Ed.), Language and
Poverty; Perspectives on a Theme, Chicago;
Markham Pub., Co., 1970.
Seymour, D. What Do You Mean Auditory Perception?
Elementary School Journal 70, January 1970,
175-179.
Sitkei, E. G. and Meyers, C. E. Comparative Structure of
Intellect in Middle and Lower Class Four-Year-Olds
of Two Ethnic Groups. Developmental Psychology 1,
(5), 1969, 592-604.
Singer, Harry, Starkey, R., and Ruddell, R. (Eds.)
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading-
Monograph, International Reading Association,
Newark, New Jersey: 1970.
Smith, H. K. (Ed.) Perception and Reading Vol. 12 (4).
Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Convention,
International Reading Association, Newark,
Delaware: 1968.
Spache, G. D. and Spache, E. B. Reading in the Elementary
School. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, Inc., 1969.
Spradlin, J. E. Procedures for Evaluating Processes
Associated with Receptive and Expressive Language.
In Schiefelbusch, R. L., Copeland, R. H. and Smith,
J. 0. (Eds.), Language and Mental Retardation,
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967.
Stodolsky, S. and Lesser, G. Learning Patterns in the
Disadvantaged. Harvard Educational Review 37, (4).
1967, 546-593.
Sutherland, S. P. A Factor Analytic Study of Tests De
signed to Measure Reading Ability. Unpublished
dissertation, University of Southern California,
1966.
Templin, M. C. Certain Language Skills in Children.
Minneapolis: University o£ Minnesota Press, 1957.
Thompson, B. B. A Longitudinal Study of Auditory Discri
mination. Journal of Educational Research 56, (7),
March 1963, 376-378.
110
Tinker, M. A. Current Issues in Reading. In Smith, N. B.
(Ed.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Con
vention, International Reading Association, Newark,
New Jersey: 1969, 178-183.
Toma, R. J. The Efficiency of Auditory and Visual Discri
mination Tasks in the Reading Process. Disserta
tion Abstracts 31, 1971, 3357.
Uhl, N. P. and Nurss, J. R. Socio-Economic Level Styles
in Solving Reading-Related Tasks. Reading Re
search Quarterly 5, (3), Spring 1970, 452-285.
UNESCO The Uses of Vernacular Languages in Education;
Monographs on Fundamental Education, VIII, Paris:
UNESCO, 1953.
Vellutino, F. K., DeSetto, L. and Steger, J. Categorical
Judgement and the Wepman Test of Auditory Dis
crimination o Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders _37, May 1972, 252-257.
Vygotsky, L. Thought and Language. Hanfmann, E. and
Vakar, G. (Ed. and trans.), New York: Wiley, 1962.
Weintraub, S. Readiness Measures for Predicting Reading
Achievement. The Reading Teacher 20, 1967,
551-557.
Wepman, J. and Morency, A. School Achievement as Related
to Developmental Speech Inaccuracy, Final Report.
Bureau of Research, Department of Health, Education
and Welfare, Washington, D. C.: July 1967,
ED 024-694.
Wepman, J. The Modality Concept--Including a Statement of
the Perceptual and Conceptual Levels of Learning.
In Smith, H. K. (Ed.), Perception and Reading,
Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Convention of
the International Reading Association. (4),
Newark, Delaware: May 1967.
Williams, F. and Naremore, R. C. Social Class Differences
in Children's Syntactic Performance: A Quantita
tive Analysis of Field Study Data. Journal of
Speech and Hearing Research 12, (4), December 1969,
778-793.
Ill
Wiseman, D. E. The ITPA and Remediation. In Arena, J.
(Ed.), Selected Papers in Learning Disabilities
Vol. 5. Pittsburg, Penn.: Association for
Children with Learning Disabilities, 1968.
Witkin, B. R. Auditory Perception: Implications for
Language Development. Journal of Research and
Development in Education 3, (l), 1969, 53-71.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Effects Of Preschool Enrollment And Parent Participation On Academic Growth

PDF

The Relative Efficiency Of Prompting And Confirmation Learning Paradigms

PDF

Immediate Memory And Its Correlates With School Achievement

PDF

Acoustic And Associative Variables In The Retention Of Words By Children With Learning Disabilities

PDF

Prescriptive Teaching As A Supplement To Behavior Modification In The Remediation Of Learning Disorders

PDF

The Conditioning Of A Discriminative Stimulus Measured As An Orienting Reaction In Profoundly Retarded Blind Children

PDF

The effect of noise on intellectual performance as related to personality and social factors in upper division high school students

PDF

Effects Of Associative And Category Cuing On Recall Of Items From Exhaustive And Nonexhaustive Lists

PDF

Maternal Child-Rearing Attitudes And Developmental Growth Of Rubella Deaf-Blind Children

PDF

A Historical Perspective Of Special Education In California. (Volumes I And Ii)

PDF

Reading Achievement And In-Grade Retention Rate Differentials For Mexican-American And Black Students In Selected States Of The Southwest

PDF

Relationship Of "Hearing Loss Remission"/"Nonremission" To Selected Predictor Variables For Thirty-Four Children With Identified Hearing Loss Within The First Twenty-Four Months Of Life

PDF

Development Of An Adapted Systems Model For Design Of College Level Instruction

PDF

The Modification Of Maladaptive Behavior Of A Class Of Educationally Handicapped Children By Operant Conditioning Techniques

PDF

Development And Evaluation Of An Auto-Instructional Media Package For Teacher Education

PDF

The Appropriateness Of Field And Level Of Vocational Choice As Related Toself-Concepts, Intelligence, School Achievement, And Socioeconomic Status

PDF

Value Orientations Of Parents Of Academically Successful And Unsuccessfulchildren

PDF

The Effects Of Monetary Rewards On Reading Level, Attitude Toward Reading, And Self-Concept Of Ability And School Achievement

PDF

School Behavior And Attitudes Of Retarded And Average High School Boys Asconcomitants Of Intelligence And Socioeconomic Status

PDF

Placement Characteristics Of Educable Mentally Retarded And Educationallyhandicapped Children: A Multi-Statistical Approach

Asset Metadata

Creator Cloner, Annabelle Light (author)

Core Title Auditory Perceptual Si Factors As Non-Predictors Of Reading Achievement In An Upper-Class And Upper-Middle-Class Population

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor McIntrye, Robert B. (committee chair), Briere, Eugene J. (committee member), Meyers, Charles Edward (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-827620

Unique identifier UC11363287

Identifier 7409061.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-827620 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7409061

Dmrecord 827620

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Cloner, Annabelle Light

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