UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Relationship between sight vocabulary of beginning second grade children and visual closure and visual… Moore, Donna-Mae 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 M65_9.pdf [ 3.99MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054441.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054441-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054441-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054441-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054441-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054441-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054441-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054441-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054441.ris

Full Text

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SIGHT VOCABULARY OP BEGINNING SECOND GRADE CHILDREN AND VISUAL CLOSURE AND VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY AS MEASURED BY THE ILLINOIS TEST OF PSYCHOLINGUISTIC ABILITIES  DONNA-MAE MOORE B.Ed., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1972  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  i n the Department of Special Education  We accept this thesis' as- conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA January, 1975  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y s h a l l I  f u r t h e r agree  for scholarly by h i s of  this  written  make i t  t h a t permission  r.  for  the requirements  Columbia,  I agree  r e f e r e n c e and  f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f  this  It  for financial  is understood that gain s h a l l  Special Education  January 13. 1976  Columbia  not  copying or  for  that  study. thesis  purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada  Date  freely available  permission.  Department of  fulfilment of  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  representatives. thesis  in p a r t i a l  or  publication  be allowed without my  i i  ABSTRACT Research reading the  indicates  achievement  Illinois  Test  is  tests  specific  ance  and on  tended ting not  the to  the  relationship  as  reading  beginning  recognition analysis.  second year  of  memory a s  vocabulary  defined  the  Columbia These  subjects  ITPA were  Visual  subjects  Purrell  to  be  and  Closure  was  Analysis  the  and  the  defined  which have  This  study  examines  measured of  was  the  drawn  from  defects  a range  Sequential  scored according to using  the  the  assumed  of  and  permitdoes by  children visual to  closure  sight orally  exposure  time,  British  general  population.  to  native be  of  English  representative, achievement.  Memory s u b t e s t s  standardized  an  have  Vancouver,  Word R e c o g n i t i o n  Difficulty  skills  identified  five of  of  (1968)  and a l l were  were  perform-  tasks  among  controlled  representative  existence  ITPA  correctly  using a  sub-  identification  relationship  by  words  linked  of  "been  procedure  This  the  level  "by t h e s e  identification  time.  between  not  recognition  and  and V i s u a l  Reading  What has  sight  achievement  measured of  of  as  exists  automatic  at  sensory  confirmed  administered  vocabulary  seconds.  number  no known  Intelligence  The  t h e  had  school records  Sight  156  schools believed  speakers. and  as  of  at  word  those  tachistoscopic presentation sample  with  school,  sequential  A  Studies  subtests  and v i s u a l  following  tasks  skills  unspecified lengths  structural  their  s k i l l s .  visual  d i s t i n g u i s h between or  "between  c r i t e r i o n measures,  scanning for  phonetic  on  relationship  Psycholinguistic Abilities.  automatic  use  a positive  and performance  of  clarified  that  of  procedure.  subtest  exposure  the  time  of of  .25  i i i  U s i n g raw calculated;  their  test.  The  Visual  Closure,  Closure raw of  pairs  these  four  categories  year  variables  Sight  Visual pairs  an  letter  to  Closure  of by  grades  a numerical  the  from  correlations  were  two-tailed  Vocabulary  Sequential  and Sight  were  with  Memory,  Vocabulary  "t"  Visual  with  mean  Memory.  For  each  obtained  for  nine  sex.  validity to  of  obtained  subjects  by  school records  scale,  Sight  and V i s u a l S e q u e n t i a l  assigned  obtained  correlations  u s i n g the  Visual  Memory,  and/or  of  estimated  with  variables, age  Moment  c o r r e l a t e d were  Vocabulary  estimate  one were  verted  of  defined  As  Product  s i g n i f i c a n c e was  with Visual Sequential  scores for  scores,  scores, Pearson  and  Sight  teachers  following  correlated with  Vocabulary  at  a l l  Sight  the  end  of  testing,  con-  Vocabulary  scores. Results uted.  Means  reveal  and  that  standard  for  the  standardization  .10  for  Visual  Sight to  confirm  with  a  other  the  hypothesis  sight  year  of  school.  closure  obtained  a s was  letter  and memory  skills  the  very  the  performance of  the  were  five  which  are  test  is  that not  those  reported  high,  of  Correlations  of  ranging  .56*  from  schools.  low  the  distrib-  correlation  and  positive  and  do  Closure  and  Visual  Visual  closely related  children beginning  c o u l d mean the  sample  Memory.  I T P A may b e  acquired by  that  on  normally  similar to  total  grades  over  .77  These r e s u l t s  insignificant,  were  c o r r e l a t i o n s were  that  vocabulary  approximately  Visual Sequential  teacher  Memory s u b t e s t s  of  are  group,  correlation of  size  skills  with  All  Sequential  deviations  Closure with  Vocabulary  .93  s c o r e s were  factors  their  to  the  the  second  common t o  measuring  closely related  to  not  these  kinds  acquiring  of  sight  vocabulary, levels  of  this  Ceiling  that  sample  While  sequential tionship  of  are  study  does  skills  i n hopes  panded  sight  measured  support  that  and  the  improved  vocabulary.  to  both to  particularly  memory a s not  enough  seems  vocabulary  would  does not  data  certainly  this  sight  test  well  Examination  effects  acquired  the  functioning  variance. for  or  discriminate obtain  for  the  support  apparent  reveal  by  the  accurate  ITPA,  efficacy  of  functioning  individual  estimates  standardization this  for  last  Visual  a positive  functioning  between  group  and  explanation. Sequential  closure  magnitude  providing would  co-  relationship  in visual the  of  be  of  Memory.  between and  visual  this  training  accompanied  in by  relathese ex-  V  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  CHAPTER I. II.  PAGE INTRODUCTION REVIEW OF  OF T E E  THE  STATEMENT  PROBLEM  6  Visual  Closure  6  Visual  Memory a n d V i s u a l  Research  Using  Statement III.  L I T E R A T U R E AND  of  Sequential  Memory  9  t h e ITPA  11  the Problem  16  METHOD  18  Subjects Instruments  IV. V.  18 and M a t e r i a l s  18  Procedure  19  Scoring and Data Analysis  20  RESULTS  23  DISCUSSION  33  REFERENCES  38  APPENDICES  kl  A.  S Y M B O L S AND A B B R E V I A T I O N S  B.  S I G H T WORDS  C.  (1)  MEDIANS,  k2  USED  ^3 MEANS,  DISTRIBUTION  STANDARD D E V I A T I O N S ,  O F M E A N RAW S C O R E S FOR  AND VISUAL  C L O S U R E AND V I S U A L S E Q U E N T I A L MEMORY (2)  MEDIANS,  MEANS,  DISTRIBUTION (3)  MEDIANS,  MEANS,  DISTRIBUTION (k)  MEDIANS,  AND  SIGHT VOCABULARY  STANDARD D E V I A T I O N S ,  .  .  .  .  k6  AND  OF S C O R E S FOR V I S U A L C L O S U R E  M E A N S , STANDARD D E V I A T I O N S ,  DISTRIBUTION MEMORY  STANDARD D E V I A T I O N S ,  OF S C O R E S FOR  k5  OF S C O R E S FOR  VISUAL  AND  SEQUENTIAL **8  vi  CHAPTER  PAGE  APPENDICES (Continued) D.  (1)  (2)  SCORES FOR THIRTY-SIX FEMALE SUBJECTS AGE 6-9 TO 7-3 SCORES FOR THIRTY-THREE MALE SUBJECTS AGE  (3) (*0  *9  6-9 TO 7-3  51  SCORES FOR FIFTY FEMALE SUBJECTS AGE 7-^ TO 7-10  53  SCORES FOR THIRTY-SEVEN MALE SUBJECTS AGE 7-^ TO 7-10  56  vii  LIST OF TABLES TABLE I.  PAGE (a) Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Sight Vocabulary . . . .  2k  (b)  Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r V i s u a l Closure  25  (c)  Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r V i s u a l Memory  26  (d) II.  III. IV. V.  Sequential  Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s for Mean Raw Scores f o r V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory . . . .  27  Means and Standard Deviations of Raw Scores f o r V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory by Age Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28  Correlations: V i s u a l Closure with V i s u a l Sequential Memory  ..  29  Correlationsj Sight Vocabulary with Teacher Letter Grades f o r Reading at the End of Year One . . . .  30  (a) Correlations: Sight Vocabulary with Mean Raw Scores f o r V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory  31  (b)  (c)  Correlations: Sight Vocabulary with V i s u a l Closure  32  Correlations: Sight Vocabulary with V i s u a l Sequential Memory  32  1  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Fundamental to reading i s the a b i l i t y to recognize words i n print.  Word perception or word recognition s k i l l s , here used synon-  ymously, comprise the essential f i r s t step i n extracting meaning from printed discourse. The c h i l d who i s d e f i c i e n t i n these a b i l i t i e s w i l l c e r t a i n l y become a disabled reader. Capable readers are f l e x i b l e i n their use of a v a r i e t y of word recognition techniques.  Contextual and configurational cues,  phonetic and structural analysis and synthesis, and reliance on an adequate sight vocabulary are probably the most important of these techniques.  Most severely, and many moderately disabled readers are  d e f i c i e n t i n one or more of these s k i l l s (Kottmeyer, 1959; Gray, I960; Harris,  1961; Bond and Tinker, 1967; Schelly 1972; Wilson, 1972). When a reader encounters a word f o r the f i r s t time he must  use some means of i d e n t i f y i n g i t .  Subsequently, repeated exposure  to that word usually results i n i t becoming a sight word.  That i s ,  f a m i l i a r i t y precludes the necessity of i d e n t i f y i n g i t through some process of word attack, and i t i s recognized by sight, grasped at a glance.  Unless a reader develops an adequate sight vocabulary, h i s  reading w i l l be hesitant and i n e f f i c i e n t as he must repeatedly analyze words he has seen many times.  F a i l u r e to b u i l d a large sight vocabulary  l i m i t s the a b i l i t y to group words into thought units f o r adequate comprehension, and impedes the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of new words either from context or through s t r u c t u r a l analysis.  Because h i s reading  2  fluency depends on i t , a c h i l d needs to learn to recognize  at sight  an ever increasing number of words. Teachers and c l i n i c i a n s are aware that some children f a i l to develop adequate word recognition s k i l l s i n spite of i n t a c t sensory acuity, competent i n s t r u c t i o n using standard methods, and the presumed absence of environmental deprivation, mental retardation, or emotional disturbance.  Some, f o r instance, develop sight vocabulary quite r e a d i l y  but have d i f f i c u l t y acquiring phonetic word attack s k i l l s ;  others,  attack nearly a l l words phonetically, seemingly unable to perceive them as e n t i t i e s . The goal of reading i n s t r u c t i o n i s to provide f o r every c h i l d , a program which w i l l develop his reading s k i l l as e f f i c i e n t l y and e f f e c t i v e l y as p o s s i b l e .  Fundamental to achieving this goal i s the  recognition not only of differences between, but also within individuals as regards learning strengths and weaknesses.  I f i n s t r u c t i o n i s to be  i n d i v i d u a l i z e d , i t must be based upon a detailed understanding of the child's s k i l l d e f i c i t s and a b i l i t i e s , and of his learning s t y l e , the way  he seems to learn best.  This process of s e l e c t i n g or devising  remedial and/or developmental programs to meet i n d i v i d u a l needs neces* s i t a t e s diagnostic techniques and instruments s u f f i c i e n t l y sensitive to pinpoint s p e c i f i c d e f i c i t s . Some c l i n i c i a n s and educators have devised theories to explain, instruments to evaluate, and/or programs to develop reading s k i l l s  and  basic a b i l i t i e s believed to underlie the a b i l i t y to learn to read. B a s i c a l l y , there have been two approaches to the problem.  One  could be  c a l l e d a task orientation i n which the d i r e c t teaching of d e f i c i e n t  3  academic s k i l l s receives the primary emphasis (Fernald, 19^3; Spalding and Spalding, 1957; Gillingham and Stillman, 1 9 6 5 ) .  The other might  be termed a process orientation i n which the major emphasis i s on developing s k i l l s deemed prerequisite or fundamental to subsequent academic success (Kephart, I 9 6 0 ; Getman, 1961; F r o s t i g and Home, 196^; Wiseman, 1965; K i r k , 1 9 6 8 ) .  I t i s not the purpose, here, to debate  the r e l a t i v e merits of either of these approaches, but to focus on one standardized test and i t s relationship to one aspect of reading. The I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s (Kirk et a l , 1961  and 1968) was designed to evaluate functioning of the auditory-  vocal and visual-motor channels of communication, through the processes of reception, association and expression, at the automatic and representational levels.  B r i e f l y , the automatic l e v e l purports to evaluate  closure, sequential memory, and sound blending, functions believed to be less voluntary, more automatic than those of the symbolic l e v e l which includes a c t i v i t i e s involving the meaning of auditory and v i s u a l symbols, their association and subsequent expression. mental ( l 9 6 l )  Both the experi-  and revised (1968) editions have generated a considerable  body of research. Of p a r t i c u l a r relevance to this study i s the research involving the performance of disabled readers on the ITPA-.  I t has been demonstrated  repeatedly that when compared with their reading achieving peers, d i s abled readers function at a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lov/er l e v e l on subtests at the automatic l e v e l (Kirk and K i r k , 1 9 7 2 ) .  Furthermore,  their d e f i -  ciencies appear to be primarily at the automatic rather than representational l e v e l .  These findings seem to indicate that severely disabled  readers have more d i f f i c u l t y with closure and sequential memory than they have with r e c i p t i o n , association and expression of more meaningful  ideas. This notion seems d i r e c t l y related to references made e a r l i e r  concerning the f a c t that most severely disabled readers are deficient i n one or more word recognition s k i l l s .  S p e c i f i c a l l y , i f sight vocab-  ulary i s acquired as a r e s u l t of repeated exposure u n t i l at a glance replaces  recognition  conscious i d e n t i f i c a t i o n through phonetic and  s t r u c t u r a l analysis, then the s k i l l may well be related to basic underlying processes of v i s u a l closure and sequential memory as defined by these subtests of the ITPA , 1  The purpose of this study i s to investigate the relationship of V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory as defined and measured by the ITPA (1968) to sight vocabulary acquired by children beginning t h e i r second year of school.  Since research indicates a p o s i t i v e  c o r r e l a t i o n between reading a b i l i t y and performance on the subtests at the automatic l e v e l , i t i s hypothesized that l i m i t e d sight vocabulary may be a s i g n i f i c a n t common factor i n this r e l a t i o n s h i p .  That i s , the  better one's functioning on tasks requiring v i s u a l closure and sequential memory, the larger one's sight vocabulary w i l l be.  S i m i l a r l y , less  e f f i c i e n t functioning on these automatic v i s u a l tasks w i l l be associated with a more l i m i t e d sight vocabulary. Beginning second grade has been selected f o r t h i s c o r r e l a t i o n a l study because children at this age have had time to develop a sight vocabulary and are s t i l l well within the age norms of the ITPA.  More-  over, age i s a variable undoubtedly relevant to the maturation of the  5  automatic v i s u a l functions i n question.  Hence, given the opportunity  to have acquired a store of sight words, the younger the subjects the better, especially f o r purposes of devising developmental programs, or a n t i c i p a t i n g possible d i f f i c u l t y with purely v i s u a l approaches to reading i n s t r u c t i o n .  I f such a relationship i s demonstrated to e x i s t ,  s p e c i f i c developmental programs could be devised and alternate methods of teaching reading selected, f o r children whose preschool performance on the V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory tasks i s d e f i c i e n t .  6  CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM I.  VISUAL CLOSURE  Visual closure i s the a b i l i t y to i n f e r a v i s u a l whole from the presentation of a part or parts of that whole.  Several  researchers  have linked this automatic perceptual function to the reading In his f a c t o r i a l study of perception, Thurstone (l9kk)  process. reports  that "...reading seems to involve a form of closure..." and that "Some readers are able to form an acceptable a c t u a l l y perceiving a l l the d e t a i l . "  closure over a wide span without He suggests that closure i s involved  i n i d e n t i f y i n g a figure which i s mutilated, obscured, or imbedded i n another f i g u r e , and i n recognizing a whole from presentation of parts of i t i n what at f i r s t may seem to be merely a scattered c o l l e c t i o n of v i s u a l s t i m u l i . Commenting on the development of v i s u a l closure, K i r k and Kirk (1972) state: Reading i t s e l f includes v i s u a l closure, since with each f i x a t i o n of the eye only part of the l e t t e r s of a word or phrase are a c t u a l l y perceived. It may well be that during the process of learning to read, the c h i l d develops v i s u a l closure and speed of perception. Reading i t s e l f may be a good experience f o r developing closure. Whenever possible, v i s u a l closure a c t i v i t i e s should be developed around' l e t t e r s , words, and phrases, since this i s the most important school task to which v i s u a l closure i s applicable. For the younger c h i l d , other forms of v i s u a l closure may be necessary as a preliminary experience to bringing closure to bear on reading material.  7  Regarding the various aspects of closure Kirk and K i r k ( 1 9 7 2 ) also say: Remediating a v i s u a l closure d e f i c i t involves g i v i n g the c h i l d those experiences which help him to organize and integrate his v i s u a l f i e l d automatically to create a recognizable v i s u a l percept. This may involve the a b i l i t y to f i l l i n missing parts automatically. I t may involve extracting the necessary parts from a d i s t r a c t i n g background. I t may involve r e j e c t i n g extraneous superimposed marks such as the cross-hatching effect of a screen, a fence, a blot of ink, or a smear of mud. I t may involve s e l e c t i n g the relevant parts from a v i s u a l f i e l d that includes i r r e g u l a r pieces or a l t e r i n g parts of the v i s u a l f i e l d to f i t a v i s u a l image as i n the Rorschach. Or i t may involve r e o r i e n t i n g the pieces and putting them together as i n the object assembly test of the WISC. Goins (1958) states that " I t i s probable that, i n rapid reading, incomplete  images are often perceived and that a type of ' f i l l i n g i n '  or closure may take place."  Her study f o r the purpose of determining  the l e v e l of competence i n v i s u a l perception of f i r s t - g r a d e children, and the c o r r e l a t i o n of v i s u a l competence with t h e i r achievement i n reading, revealed that of the fourteen subtests, Pattern Copying correlated highest with achievement on a reading test (.519), and had the highest loading on the closure f a c t o r ( . 9 3 0 ) .  None of the v i s u a l  perceptual tests used i n the study involved reading per se.  Analysis  revealed two factors of v i s u a l perception, and she states: One f a c t o r , designated as P - l , was related to speed of perception but also seemed to involve the a b i l i t y to hold i n mind a Gestalt during rapid perception. The second f a c t o r , designated as P - 2 , appeared to be best described as strength of closure, or the a b i l i t y to keep i n mind a f i g u r e against d i s t r a c t i o n . The second f a c t o r , P - 2 , had a substantial common variance with reading s k i l l , although s u p e r f i c i a l l y the two tasks involved i n these perception tests were unlike the act of reading.  8  Goins concludes, i n part, that strength of closure, or the a b i l i t y to keep i n mind a configuration against the d i s t r a c t i o n of the figure ground r e l a t i o n s h i p , was  involved i n performing many of the  tasks, and that there i s considerable v a r i a t i o n among i n d i v i d u a l f i r s t grade pupils i n their competency to perform.  She further states that  the substantial c o r r e l a t i o n with reading scores i s a r e s u l t contrary to that obtained by previous  investigators, and concludes that v i s u a l  perception i s more important at the stage when children are learning to read. In a study involving modified word recognition, reading  achieve-  ment and perceptual de-centration, E l k i n d , Horn and Schneider (1965) found that reading achievement was p o s i t i v e l y correlated with nonverbal measures of perceptual de-centration.  They state i n summary:-  If word recognition and reading achievement involve perceptual de-centration we should expect some degree of communality between measures of them and nonverbal measures of the underlying a b i l i t y . Our factor analysis did indeed show such commonality. Research, then, seems to indicate that v i s u a l closure i s a s i g n i f i c a n t factor i n reading.  I t may  be involved i n the a b i l i t y  v i s u a l l y to i s o l a t e words and phrases from the d i s t r a c t i o n of surrounding p r i n t , and to hold them i n mind while scanning aspects relevant to their identification.  9  II.. VISUAL MEMORY AND VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY Visual memory i s the a b i l i t y to r e c a l l v i s u a l s t i m u l i ; v i s u a l sequential memory, the a b i l i t y to r e c a l l a series of s t i m u l i i n the correct order.  Kirk and Kirk  (1972) state that i t seems to be the  v i s u a l memory task required to remember and reproduce a series of symbols rather than designs or forms which i s related to reading. They describe a c h i l d d e f i c i e n t i n this- s k i l l as- follows: The c h i l d frequently shows reversals i n reading and s p e l l i n g , i n writing his name, i n recognizing sight words, i n f i n d i n g the r i g h t page number. He cannot remember a word or a series of numbers long enough to get to the blackboard to write i t . In reading, he i s quite dependent on phonics and often remembers items better i f he can say them out loud or write them down. Using a random l e t t e r task with children i n grades two to twelve, Rizzo  (1939) studied v i s u a l memory span r e l a t i v e to reading d i s a b i l i t y  and concluded that i n extreme cases of reading retardation, l i m i t e d memory span could be an important contributing f a c t o r , e s p e c i a l l y i n younger subjects.  She reports:  When the memory span of good and poor readers were compared, at d i f f e r e n t chronological age l e v e l s , the r e s u l t s show that the good readers excelled the poor readers (with whom they were paired) i n memory span scores, judged on the basis of percentage of the scores earned by good readers, which exceeded the corresponding scores earned by poor readers. Further, at the younger age l e v e l a b i l i t y to read well was more c l o s e l y associated with r e l a t i v e l y higher scores of memory span than was the case at the older l e v e l s . :  Raymond  (1955) investigated the psychological c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  of retarded and achieving readers and concluded that performance on tests of v i s u a l memory span appears to discriminate between reading achievers and retarded readers of the same chronological age.  10  Rudisill  (1956) used a hand tachistoscope to f l a s h d i g i t s and  phrases at an exposure time of less than .2 seconds and measured rate of o r a l and concrete responses i n advanced and retarded t h i r d grade readers.  Two of the factors she studied were span and accuracy of  flashed phrase recognition. A highly s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p was found to exist between these factors and reading accomplishment. McLeod  (1965) compared eleven WISC subtest scores of 177 success-  f u l pre-adolescent readers and 116 backward pre-adolescent readers of average age about twelve-and-a-half  years, and found that the retarded  reading group scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than the control group on, among others, the Coding subtest.  V i s u a l memory and perceptual speed appear  to be considerable factors i n executing the Coding task e f f e c t i v e l y . In a study primarily concerned with examining the rate of decay of memory traces among normal readers and reading disabled subjects, Alwitt  (1963) presented d i g i t sequences t a c h i s t o s c o p i c a l l y at an exposure  time of .1 seconds to subjects having a mean chronological age of ten years, seven months.  She observed lowered memory span among cases of  reading d i s a b i l i t y , and reasoned that i t i s possible that "...low memory span contributes to reading d i s a b i l i t y i n that the c h i l d i s unable to remember a s u f f i c i e n t number of stimulus elements to u t i l i z e them f o r reading." Research appears to have established with reasonable that v i s u a l memory i s a f a c t o r i n reading e f f i c i e n c y .  certainty  I t may be related  to the a c q u i s i t i o n of an adequate sight vocabulary, or to the discrimination between words such as pots and post.  11  III.  RESEARCH USING THE 'ITPA  Many research studies have "been done using the ITPA i n both i t s experimental and revised forms.  The 1968 e d i t i o n includes at the  automatic l e v e l , subtests of v i s u a l closure as well as v i s u a l sequential memory.  Since the 1961 e d i t i o n did not include v i s u a l closure, several  investigators, deeming i t an important f a c t o r , included such measures i n t h e i r test batteries along with the ITPA. One such researcher was Kass ( 1 9 6 6 ) who i d e n t i f i e d some psychol i n g u i s t i c correlates of reading d i s a b i l i t y among non-reading or dysl e x i c subjects.  In general, these children were found to have d e f i c i t s  at the automatic l e v e l , i n d i c a t i n g possible d e f i c i e n c i e s i n decoding printed symbols rather than i n comprehending the material.  Kass supple-  mented the I 9 6 I ITPA with, among other t e s t s , one involving closure and another, perceptual speed.  The closure task required the a b i l i t y  to predict a whole from i t s . p a r t s , and the perceptual speed task, the a b i l i t y v i s u a l l y to compare detailed figures as r a p i d l y as possible. This l a t t e r task was included because Kass believed that this a b i l i t y might be one of the bases for discrimination of d e t a i l s which d i f f e r e n t i a t e words.  Predictions that children with reading d i s a b i l i t y would  be d e f i c i e n t i n V i s u a l Sequencing, V i s u a l Automatic (closure) and Perceptual Speed were confirmed.  Although the number of subjects ( 2 l )  used i n this study was small, and hence the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y perhaps l i m i t e d , other research has tended to confirm the v a l i d i t y of the findings, Bateman (1963) studied reading and psycholinguistic characteri s t i c s of p a r t i a l l y seeing children and found that reading achievement  12  was  correlated p o s i t i v e l y with the ITPA subtests at the  automatic-  sequential l e v e l . Sutton  (1963) studied the relationship between v i s u a l i z i n g  a b i l i t y and reading among educable mentally retarded children and  found  that the correlation with reading a b i l i t y increases as the v i s u a l memory task approaches the reading task i n s i m i l a r i t y .  Tests of l e t t e r recog-  n i t i o n i n non-meaningful material, f o r instance, were more closely related to reading a b i l i t y than were tests i n v o l v i n g forms or designs. Although high reading achievers scored higher than low achievers on the ITPA test of v i s u a l sequencing,  they did not do so to a s i g n i f i c a n t  degree. Ragland (196k) compared educable mentally handicapped students reading a year or more below expectation based on mental age, with reading achievers of similar mental a b i l i t y i n performance on the ITPA. He found that the two groups d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on the t o t a l score, and on the t o t a l score at the automatic  sequential l e v e l .  While those  achieving i n reading scored higher than t h e i r reading retarded peers on the v i s u a l motor sequential subtest, they did not do so to a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t degree. results.  This f i n d i n g concurs with Sutton's  (1963)  No s i g n i f i c a n t performance differences were observed at the  representational l e v e l . and of Bateman  This r e s u l t substantiates those of Kass  (1966)  (1963) referred to previously, that disabled readers  d i f f e r from achieving readers on tasks at the automatic rather than representational l e v e l of the ITPA. In a study on the effects of individualized remedial programs on mentally retarded children with psycholinguistic d i s a b i l i t i e s ,  13  Wiseman (1965) looked into the f e a s i b i l i t y of improving p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c functioning through s p e c i f i c remediation.  Among the battery of tests  administered were the ITPA (l96l) and the Kass V i s u a l Closure Test (1962). He found support f o r the theory that p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c functioning can be improved.  The mean gain scores of h i s experimental subjects exceeded  those of h i s matched control subjects i n mental age and IQ., visual-motor integration, and v i s u a l closure.  As a supplementary f i n d i n g , moreover,  Wiseman reports that s i g n i f i c a n t l y more instances of d i s a b i l i t y were found i n the automatic-sequential l e v e l subtests than i n those at the representational l e v e l . The p r e d i c t i v e e f f i c i e n c y of four t e s t s , one of which was ITPA (l96l), was  the  investigated by Weaver (196?) i n a study on p r e d i c t i n g  f i r s t grade reading achievement i n c u l t u r a l l y disadvantaged A v a r i e t y of p r e d i c t i v e batteries emerged from the study.  children. For members  of the group which received an enrichment program, the ITPA Visual Motor Sequencing subtest was  included i n the optimum p r e d i c t i v e battery f o r  achievement i n Word Knowledge on the Metropolitan Achievement Test. Weaver concluded: The major inference r e s u l t i n g from the multiple regression analyses i s that the v i s u a l motor s k i l l s are more c l o s e l y related to reading achievement i n c u l t u r a l l y deprived children than are s p e c i f i c language s k i l l s . This study seems to support the importance of v i s u a l motor perceptual s k i l l s to reading. Hirshoren (1969) compared the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the revised Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and the ITPA (l96l).  These tests were  administered to f o r t y normal children at the beginning of kindergarten; the C a l i f o r n i a Achievement Test (1963), to the same group at the beginning of the second grade.  He found performance on the ITPA subtests at  Ik  the automatic sequential l e v e l to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d to performance on a l l seven of the achievement variables from the CAT.  Further-  more, he states: ... the V i s u a l Motor Sequential subtest appeared to have s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y f o r school achievement 2 years l a t e r . This subtest obtained the highest correlation (.51 to .71) with each of the achievement v a r i a b l e s . Ten Brink  (1970) cautions against over generalizing Hirshoren's findings,  however, i n part because of the small sample upon which the correlations were based. The psychological correlates of reading d i s a b i l i t y as defined by the ITPA.  (1968) were investigated by Macione (1969) who compared  disabled and achieving readers of average a b i l i t y .  Boys i n the second  and t h i r d grades were used i n the study which found that four subtests at the automatic l e v e l , among them Visual Sequential Memory and V i s u a l Closure, r e l i a b l y discriminated between achieving and non-achieving readers.  Furthermore, disabled readers were found to function better  at the representational than at the automatic l e v e l s .  When compared  with t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l mean scaled scores f o r the twelve subtests, scores on f i v e out of six of those at the automatic l e v e l f e l l below mean scaled scores.  V i s u a l Sequential Memory and V i s u a l Closure were among  these f i v e . Goodstein, Whitney and Cawley  (1970) investigated the psycho-  educational correlates of academic success or f a i l u r e i n a study on p r e d i c t i n g perceptual reading d i s a b i l i t y among disadvantaged i n the second grade.  Psychoeducational  children  measures were administered i n  the f i r s t grade; reading achievement measures, i n the second.  Although  15  the ITPA t o t a l score correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with subsequent reading scores, on the Word Recognition and Language Perception subtests of the SRA Achievement Test f o r Reading, Level 1-2,  the v i s u a l subtest a t the  automatic l e v e l proved to be the best of a l l ITPA scores at p r e d i c t i n g reading success.  The authors state:  The task (ITPA Visual-Motor Sequencing) involves memory for v i s u a l patterns. The a b i l i t y to discriminate and remember words, patterns of l e t t e r s , may r e l a t e to discriminating and remembering v i s u a l patterns. In order to determine what might account f o r t h e i r d i f f e r i n g patterns of reading achievement, Nurss  (1970)  compared successful and  non-successful t h i r d grade p u p i l s on twenty-three  variables measuring  t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l , perceptual, language, and reading s k i l l s .  (1961),  subtests of the ITPA part of the battery.  Three  including Visual-Motor Sequencing formed  This subtest was found to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y related  to the reading achievement of the group experiencing d i f f i c u l t y i n mastering reading.  The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of the twenty-three  variables f o r this group indicated that "...the variables s i g n i f i c a n t l y related to reading are p r i m a r i l y visual-motor perception and sequencing v a r i a b l e s , rather than oral language v a r i a b l e s . " For successful readers, o r a l language variables were s i g n i f i c a n t l y related to reading achievement.  Nurss states:  This difference must be considered i n l i g h t of the l e v e l of functioning i n reading of these two groups. Group A has mastered the decoding phase of reading and i s involved i n using more complex vocabulary and comprehension s k i l l s . Group B, however, has not mastered decoding and i s more involved i n using perceptual and sequencing s k i l l s .  16  TV.  STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM  That a relationship exists between v i s u a l perceptual s k i l l s reading achievement seems c l e a r . automatic perceptual a b i l i t y may  Research suggests, moreover, that be more important to beginning readers  than are language s k i l l s upon which interpretation depends. i s unable accurately  and  If a child  to decode or transform a printed v i s u a l symbol into  an auditory symbol, the question of reading comprehension becomes secondary. These aspects of decoding and interpretation seem to be embodied i n the l e v e l s of the ITPA, and research using this instrument seems to indicate that a s i g n i f i c a n t discrepancy exists between the a b i l i t y of disabled readers to function e f f e c t i v e l y on representational matic tasks.  (Kass,  auto-  That s k i l l s at the automatic l e v e l are related to reading  achievement has been demonstrated with children who (Hirshoren,  and  are average  1969; Macione, 1969), severely reading disabled or dyslexic  1966), p a r t i a l l y sighted (Bateman, 1963), c u l t u r a l l y disadvan-  taged (Weaver,  1967; Goodstein et a l , 1970), and educably mentally  retarded (Sutton,  1963? Ragland, 1964; Wiseman, 1965).  Research seems to have c l a r i f i e d the r e l a t i v e importance of s k i l l s at the automatic and representational  l e v e l s to reading a b i l i t y .  What i s less clear i s the relationship between s k i l l s as defined by  the  subtests at the automatic l e v e l of the ITPA and s p e c i f i c reading s k i l l s . In what way,  f o r instance, does a functional d e f i c i t i n v i s u a l  or v i s u a l sequential skills?  closure  memory a f f e c t the a c q u i s i t i o n of p a r t i c u l a r reading  I t seems reasonable to predict, i n t h i s case, a f a i r l y high  p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between the a b i l i t y to recognize words at sight,  17  and performance of automatic functions as measured by these v i s u a l subtests. Studies which have linked performance on these automatic v i s u a l tests with word recognition have tended to use as c r i t e r i o n measures, those i d e n t i f i c a t i o n tasks permitting scanning f o r an unspecified length of time.  Using this procedure, i t i s impossible to d i s t i n g u i s h  between words i d e n t i f i e d at s i g h t , recognized at a glance, and those i d e n t i f i e d by phonetic or s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s .  Therefore, while the  existence of a r e l a t i o n s h i p between word recognition and v i s u a l closure and sequential memory has been f a i r l y c e r t a i n l y established, the d i s t i n c t i o n between i d e n t i f i c a t i o n by sight, or by analysis during uncont r o l l e d scanning, has not been c l e a r l y s p e c i f i e d . I t i s the purpose of this study to investigate among beginning second-graders, the r e l a t i o n s h i p of v i s u a l closure and v i s u a l sequential memory as measured by the ITPA  (1968) to sight  vocabulary defined as  the number of words c o r r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d o r a l l y following tachistoscopic presentation using a controlled exposure time.  I t i s hypothesized  that  a reasonably high p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n should exist between the a b i l i t y to i d e n t i f y under timed conditions a common figure from an incomplete v i s u a l presentation as required i n the closure t e s t , the a b i l i t y to reproduce sequences of figures from memory as required i n the sequential memory t e s t , and the a b i l i t y to recognize words at a glance.  I t i s sug-  gested that this r e l a t i o n s h i p contributes to the disparate performance of disabled and successful readers on tasks at the automatic l e v e l of the ITPA,  18  CHAPTER I I I METHOD Subjects A sample of one hundred f i f t y - s i x subjects beginning their second year of school i n September, 197"+, was drawn from f i v e schools i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia.  These subjects had no known sensory  defects, and a l l were native English speakers.  T h i r t y - s i x g i r l s and  thirty-three boys ranged i n age from s i x years, nine months, to seven years, three months at the time of t e s t i n g .  F i f t y g i r l s and t h i r t y -  seven boys were from seven years, four months, to seven years, ten months.  In c a l c u l a t i n g age, more than f i f t e e n days was  f u l l month.  considered a  The f i v e schools were believed to represent the general  school population as closely as possible, and i n t e l l i g e n c e and achievement of the subjects was presumed to be representative through t h i s s e l e c t i o n process.  That a range i n achievement existed was  subsequently  determined by consulting school records. Instruments and Materials The two v i s u a l subtests from the automatic l e v e l of the I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s  (1968), V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l  Sequential Memory, hereafter referred to as VC and VSM,  were used.  Sight vocabulary, hereafter r e f e r r e d to as SVj was measured using the Word Recognition subtest of the D u r r e l l Analysis of Reading D i f f i c u l t y ( D u r r e l l , 1955).  Because the words i n t h i s t e s t are presented t a c h i s t o -  s c o p i c a l l y , exposure time i s controlled by the examiner who moves the shutter at a rate of .5 seconds per word, allowing the subject a glance  19  of about .25 seconds but not long enough to apply phonetic analysis while studying a word. Procedure To avoid introducing error due to multiple experimenters, one examiner collected the data.  A l l three tests were administered to each  subject i n d i v i d u a l l y during one session. were presented was counterbalanced,  The order i n which the tests  each subject being randomly assigned  to e i t h e r the VC - VSM - SV, the VSM - SV - VC or the SV - VC - VSM sequence of presentation such that one t h i r d of the subjects i n each of the four groups G l , G2, B l and B 2 , defined by sex and age, received each presentation treatment. As subjects entered the room, time was taken to e s t a b l i s h rapport and to explain the general procedure as follows:  The examiner said,  I am a teacher, and you are here because you are just the r i g h t age to help me f i n d out what I need to know. I am going to give you some things to do. Some of them are for younger children too, and so they w i l l be easy, but some of them are also f o r older boys and g i r l s , and so I don't expect you to know a l l the answers. You just t r y your best and we'll see how many things you can do. The V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory tests were administered according to standardized procedure with the examiner seated opposite the subject. The examiner sat beside the subject to present the sight words, holding the tachistoscope at reading distance, about twelve inches from the subject.  To introduce the test the examiner s a i d , "I'm going to  show you some words.  Each time I show you a word I want you to t e l l me  what i t i s . Let's p r a c t i s e . " Following the p r a c t i s e items, the f i r s t word of each l i s t was preceded by the examiner's words, "See i f you can  20  see what this word i s . Ready!" To f a m i l i a r i z e each subject with the action of the tachistoscope and the task he was to perform, two practice words, the and and were used.  These words are not part of the D u r r e l l t e s t , but were prepared  on a separate l i s t using i d e n t i c a l cardboard and presentation materials and technique, the only difference being that a f t e r each f l a s h  presen-  t a t i o n , the word was shown to the subject f o r confirmation or correction, and then presented again using the standardized  technique.  The words contained i n Appendix B were presented to a l l subjects i n the following order;  L i s t A, L i s t B, L i s t 1,  L i s t 2.  Testing was  discontinued following seven consecutive f a i l u r e s , and the number of correct responses was recorded.  Only one t r i a l per word was given, and  no words were pronounced f o r the subject.  The examiner d i d not indicate  the accuracy of responses, but encouraged the subjects as seemed necessary with neutral comments such as, "Good!" responses were accepted.  Spontaneously corrected  I f the subject gave more than one response,  a neutral question such as, "Which one i s i t ? " was asked.  The subject's  f i n a l response was then scored even i f a previous one was correct. reluctant or hesitant subject was encouraged to guess.  The  Subjects who  seemed apprehensive when approaching a c e i l i n g were encouraged by the comment, "You'll know that one when you are older." A subject's score i n sight vocabulary was.defined as the t o t a l number of correct responses below the c e i l i n g of seven consecutive failures.  Raw scores on the V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory  tests were obtained through standardized means.  21  Using raw scores, Pearson Product Moment correlations were subsequently calculated i n order to examine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between several combinations of v a r i a b l e s .  The significance of the obtained  correlations was estimated using the two-tailed " t " t e s t .  The follow-  ing pairs of variables were correlated: 1.  SV with VC  2.  SV with VSM  3.  SV with mean raw scores f o r VC and VSM  k.  VC with VSM  For each of the above four pairs of v a r i a b l e s , correlations were obtained f o r the following  categories:  1.  Gl:  G i r l s age 6-9 to 7-3  2.  Bl:  Boys age 6-9 to 7-3  3.  G2z  G i r l s age 7-k to 7-10  k.  B2:  Boys age 7-^ to 7-10  5.  G:  G i r l s age 6-9 to 7-10 (Gl and G2)  6.  B:  Boys age 6-9 to 7-10 (Bl and B2)  7. A l :  Subjects age 6-9 to 7-3 (Gl and B l )  A2:  Subjects age 7-^ to 7-10 (G2 and B2)  8.  9. TS:  Total sample (Gl, B l , G2, and B2)  Although the number of scores involved i n 1, 2  t  and _ i s r e l a t i v e l y  small, correlations were calculated because i t was believed that the available data should be used to explore a l l relationships to the extent possible. As an estimate of the v a l i d i t y of the obtained SV scores,  cor-  r e l a t i o n s with l e t t e r grades i n reading which were assigned to the sub-  22  jects by t h e i r teachers at the end of year one were calculated.  Follow-  ing a l l testing, these l e t t e r grades were obtained from the school records.  The same type of correlation and estimate of significance was  used to examine t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p .  23  CHAPTER IV RESULTS Examination of Appendix C seems to confirm that scores f o r SV, VC, VSM, and mean raw scores f o r VC and VSM are approximately distributed. 6 - 9 to 7 - 3 *  A possible exception i s SV f o r boys i n the age group There the d i s t r i b u t i o n of scores appears to be s l i g h t l y  p o s i t i v e l y skewed. skewed.  normally  B2 scores are also p o s i t i v e l y , but less markedly,  Gl and G2 are s l i g h t l y negatively skewed, with the r e s u l t  that these e f f e c t s are neutralized i n A l and A 2 .  The t o t a l sample d i s -  t r i b u t i o n appears to be s l i g h t l y negatively skewed, but not s i g n i f i cantly so. Descriptive s t a t i s t i c s f o r SV, VC, VSM, and mean raw scores f o r VC and VSM are recorded i n Table I . Predictably, a l l mean scores f o r A2 are higher than f o r A l . While there appears to be l i t t l e d i f ference i n the performance of boys and g i r l s on VC and VSM, g i r l s scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than boys on SV. both age groups.  This r e s u l t obtained f o r  Mean score f o r G l , however, i s very s l i g h t l y higher  than f o r G2, and may indicate a better-than-average  sample of g i r l s  for that age group. Scores ranged from zero to eighty-two were widely d i s t r i b u t e d about the mean.  i n sight vocabulary and  Data i n Appendix C indicate  that this d i s t r i b u t i o n may be s l i g h t l y negatively skewed.  Scores f o r  VC and VSM were f a i r l y closely grouped about the mean, probably cont r i b u t i n g to the low correlations obtained. p a r t i c u l a r l y to VSM.  This statement applies  TABLE I (a) DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR SIGHT VOCABULARY  Al N  Mdn  X  A2 S.D.  R  F  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  N  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  G  36 ^5.50 42.83 21.36 80  50  43.50  42.44  21.15  79  86  45.00  42.60  21.24  80  B  33 26.00 29.42 20.90 70  37  36.00  37.81  22.43  78  70  34.00  33.86  22.12  81  69  87  41.00  40.47  21.82  79  156  40.50  38.68  22.07  82  37.00  36.42  22.18  82  TABLE I (t>) V DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS" FOR VISUAL CLOSURE  Al  A2  N  Hdn  X  S.D.  R  N  Mdiv  X  S.D.  R  H  G  36  25.00  25.00  "+.58  24  50  27.00  27.58  4.81  24  B  33  2"+.00  25.09  "+.58  18  37  26.00  27.05  5.33  69  25.00  25.04  "+.58  26  87  27.00  27.36  5.04  2  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  86  27.00  26.50  4.88  27  23  70  25.00  26.13  5.08  23  5  156  26.00  26.33  4.98  28  ro  TABLE I (c) DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  Al  A2  N  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  N  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  N  G  36  20.00  20.11  3.46  14  50  22.00  21.68  2.67  13  B  33  20.00  20.15  2.96  14  37  21.00  20.76  2.90  14  69  20.00  20.13  3.23  15  87  21.00  21.29  2  '81  !5  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  86  21.00  21.02  3.13  16  70  20.00  20.47  2.94  14  21.00  20.78  3.06  16  TABLE I (d) DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR MEAN RAW SCORES FOR VISUAL CLOSURE AND VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  Al  A2  N  Mdri  X  S.D.  R  N  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  Mdn  X  S.D.  R  G  36  22.25  22.56  3.20  17.0  50  24.25  24.63  2.62  11.5  86  23.50  23.76  3.06  18.0  B  33  22.50  22.65  2.75  14.0  37  23.50  24.07  3.16  12.5  70  23.50 23.40  3.06  15.0  69  22.50  22.60  2.99  20.5  87  24.00  24.39  2.88  12.5  156  23.60  3.06  20.5  N  23.50  28  A comparison of means and standard deviations obtained f o r VC and VSM with those reported f o r the normative group close i n age to A l and A2 (Paraskevopoulos and K i r k , 1969, p. 79) indicates that obtained means are s l i g h t l y higher and standard deviations, generally very s l i g h t l y lower than f o r the standardization group. mation i s recorded i n Table I I .  This i n f o r -  I t may be, that while scores are  approximately normally d i s t r i b u t e d , the sample as a whole i s s l i g h t l y above average i n a b i l i t y .  TABLE I I MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF RAW SCORES FOR VISUAL CLOSURE AND VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY BY AGE GROUP  VC  Age Group  Normative Group  Present Study  VSM  X  S.D.  X  S.D.  6- 7 to 7-1  22.4  4.86  18.6  3.05  7- 7 to 8-1  26.5  5.46  20.7  3.60  6- 9 to 7-3  25.0  4.58  20.1  3.23  7-4 to 7-10  27.4  5.04  21.3  2.81  29  A f a i r l y low positive c o r r e l a t i o n between the ITPA subtests of Visual Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory would be anticipated. In order to estimate the v a l i d i t y of r e s u l t s obtained f o r these measures, scores were correlated and r e s u l t s compared with those r e ported by Paraskevopoulos and Kirk (1969, P* 186) f o r the normative group.  They record a mean c o r r e l a t i o n across eight age levels of .09,  but do not report levels of s i g n i f i c a n c e . correlations f o r the nine categories.  Table I I I indicates obtained  While the l e v e l s of significance  are unimpressive, a t o t a l sample correlation of .10 c e r t a i n l y seems comparable to that reported f o r the standardization  group.  TABLE I I I CORRELATIONSr  VISUAL CLOSURE WITH VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  Al  A2  N  r  P  G  36  .26  p< .14  50 --.11  p<.46  86  .12  p<.28  B  33  -.001  P>.90  37  .06  p<.72  70  .05  p<.66  69  .14  p< .26  87  -.02  p<.84  156  .10  P<.24  N  r  P  N  r  P  30  In order to v a l i d a t e obtained sight vocabulary scores, l e t t e r grades i n reading which were assigned by teachers to each subject at the end of year one were obtained from the school records, converted to a numerical scale of nine, and correlated with sight vocabulary scores.  Table IV indicates that the r e l a t i o n s h i p ranged from f a i r l y  high to extremely high. t i o n of . 7 7  For 1 5 2 subjects i n f i v e schools, a c o r r e l a -  obtained, i n d i c a t i n g that some f i f t y - n i n e percent of the  variance i n reading grades could be accounted f o r by the obtained scores f o r sight vocabulary.  TABLE TV CORRELATIONS: SIGHT VOCABULARY WITH TEACHER LETTER GRADES FOR READING " AT THE END OF YEAR ONE  N  r  P  School One  24  .93  p<.001  School Two  25  .83  PC.001  School Three  33  .56  p<.001  School Four  23  .73  p<.001  School Five  47  .76  p< . 0 0 1  152  .77  p< . 0 0 1  Over 5 Schools  31  Table V records correlations obtained f o r the nine categories i n each of three of the combinations very low and p o s i t i v e .  of variables examined.  A l l are  Levels of confidence vary widely, and only those  of .05 or better on the two-tailed " t " test are considered s i g n i f i c a n t . Thus i t appears that f o r SV with VC, only r e s u l t s f o r G2, A 2 , G and TS are s i g n i f i c a n t ; f o r SV with mean raw scores f o r VC and VSM, only G2, A2, G, B, and TS:; and f o r SV with VSM, no r e s u l t s are s i g n i f i c a n t . Sample size combined with low correlations appears to contribute to low l e v e l s of confidence. TABLE V (a) CORRELATIONS 1 SIGHT VOCABULARY WITH MEAN RAW SCORES FOR VISUAL CLOSURE AND VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  A2  Al N  r  P  N  r  P  G  36  .20  P < .26  50  .32  p< .02  B  33  .15  p< .40  37  .24  P< »  69  .16  p<.18  87  .29  p<.01  r  P  86  .24  p<.02  70  .24  p< .05  .156  .24  p<.01  N  16  32  TABLE V (b) CORRELATIONS:  SIGHT VOCABULARY WITH VISUAL CLOSURE  A2  Al N  r  P  N  r  P  N  r  P  G  36  .20  p< .26  50  .31  p< .02  86  .25  p<.02  B  33  .001  P>.90  37  .21  P< .22  70  .15  p<.20  69  .10  P< .44  87  .27  p<,02  156  .21  PO  0 1  TABLE V (c) CORRELATIONS:  SIGHT VOCABULARY WITH VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  Al N  A2  r  P  N  r  p  N  r  P  G  36  .11  P<.54  50  .05  p<.72  86  .07  P< .50  B  33  .26  P<.14  37  .10  P<.54  70  .19  P< .12  69  .16  p<.18  87  .09  P<.38  156  .14  p< .08  33  CHAPTER V DISCUSSION The  low p o s i t i v e correlations obtained do not confirm the  hypothesis that performance on the ITPA tests of V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory i s c l o s e l y related to the size of sight vocabulary acquired by t h i s sample of children beginning t h e i r second year of school.  In discussing these r e s u l t s i t i s important to remem-  ber that the study i s concerned with the extent to which sight vocabul a r y s i z e i s r e l a t e d to s k i l l i n v i s u a l closure and v i s u a l sequential memory as measured by the ITPA, and not to the v i s u a l closure and memory constructs  i n general.  That i s , we are not concerned, here,  with the question of the test's construct  validity.  There are several possible explanations f o r the low positive correlations obtained.  One, of course, i s that any common factor which  does exist may be i n s i g n i f i c a n t , another i s that the V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory subtests are not measuring the kinds of closure and memory s k i l l s which are c l o s e l y related to the a c q u i s i t i o n of sight vocabulary, and a t h i r d i s that the tests are not discriminating between i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s of functioning s u f f i c i e n t l y well to be able to obtain accurate estimates of covariance. Resolution of the f i r s t two questions would require r e p l i c a t i o n of the study using other measures of closure and sequential memory. One might argue that the designs to be arranged i n V i s u a l Sequential Memory may be too unlike the alphabet to require the same kind of pro-  3^  cessing as do l e t t e r s i n a word.  Furthermore, a task involving f i r s t  the analysis of i n t a c t series of v i s u a l s t i m u l i presented p i c t o r i a l l y followed by synthesis i n reforming the series with t i l e s , may require s k i l l s other than those needed to i d e n t i f y words seen f o r only a quarter of a second.  S i m i l a r l y , the kinds of figures to be i d e n t i f i e d i n c l o -  sure may be too remote from the reading task. The t h i r d explanation of the low correlations, that which questions the a b i l i t y of these subtests to discriminate s u f f i c i e n t l y well between subjects of this age seems a v a l i d comment.  The r e l a t i v e l y  low standard deviations i n d i c a t i n g a narrow d i s t r i b u t i o n of scores about the mean are p a r t i c u l a r l y evident f o r V i s u a l Sequential Memory. For example, i n G2, t h i r t y of the f i f t y scores f a l l i n a range of four, from twenty-one to twenty-four  (see Appendix C).  This spread seems  i n s u f f i c i e n t to distinguish accurately between the functioning of i n d i v i d u a l subjects.  For instance, reference to the ITPA manual, page 102,  Table of Psycholinguistic Age Norms, reveals that raw scores f a l l i n g one standard deviation either side of the mean of twenty-one obtained f o r the t o t a l sample on V i s u a l Sequential Memory account f o r only s i x psycholinguistic ages ranging from 6-6 to 10-5. The V i s u a l Closure subtest appears to discriminate somewhat better, there being some eleven psycholinguistic ages ranging from 6-6 to 9-0 accounted f o r i n raw scores f a l l i n g one standard deviation either side of the mean.  Indeed, cor-  r e l a t i o n s obtained f o r Sight Vocabulary with V i s u a l Closure are, f o r the most part, higher and more s i g n i f i c a n t than those obtained f o r Sight Vocabulary with V i s u a l Sequential Memory.  The fact remains, however,  35  that c e i l i n g e f f e c t s appear to be contributing to the low correlations obtained. Examination of Table V and the twenty-seven correlations obtained f o r Sight Vocabulary with each of V i s u a l Closure, V i s u a l Sequent i a l Memory, and mean raw scores for V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequent i a l Memory indicates that many r e s u l t s are too i n s i g n i f i c a n t to i n t e r pret with confidence.  With t h i s f a c t i n mind, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to  speculate on several possible r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  The f i r s t i s that there  may be a closer c o r r e l a t i o n between V i s u a l Closure and Sight Vocabul a r y i n g i r l s than i n boys, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n A l .  The opposite may be  the case when considering Sight Vocabulary and V i s u a l Sequential Memory. We can be more confident, however, i n concluding that Sight Vocabulary and V i s u a l Closure are more closely related i n A2 than they are i n A l . While no such conclusion  i s warranted by the data, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g  to speculate that Visual Sequential Memory and Sight Vocabulary may be more c l o s e l y related i n the early stages of reading, with closure becoming increasingly important.  Perhaps i n i t i a l l y , close scrutiny of  the sequence of l e t t e r s i n words i s required f o r t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , whereas l a t e r , when blends, endings and vowel combinations have been encountered often enough, i t becomes a matter of speedily closing on f a m i l i a r groupings of them at a glance. Since V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory are the only two v i s u a l subtests at the automatic l e v e l of the ITPA, the t o t a l sample c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e i r mean raw scores and Sight Vocabulary i s probably the best figure to use when r e l a t i n g these r e s u l t s to pre-  36  vioua research reporting positive correlations between reading achievement and functioning at the automatic l e v e l .  The high c o r r e l a t i o n  obtained with reading grades indicates that the Sight Vocabulary  scores  are probably a v a l i d representation of achievement i n that one aspect of reading.  Because these scores are then correlated with only the  v i s u a l subtest mean scores, and functioning on the four auditory chann e l subtests at the automatic l e v e l i s not considered, the r e s u l t i n g correlation of ,2k  (p<.0l)  i s probably not inconsistent with previous  research findings based on consideration of both auditory and v i s u a l subtests at the automatic l e v e l .  That i s , although i t i s i n t u i t i v e l y  appealing to speculate that recognition by sight at a glance i s predominantly a v i s u a l s k i l l , functioning on such auditory subtests as closure, sequential memory and sound blending may, i n f a c t , account f o r at least as much, and perhaps more of the variance i n Sight vocabulary scores than do the v i s u a l s k i l l s . Although i t was not a relationship of primary concern, the high p o s i t i v e correlation obtained between Sight Vocabulary and teacher's l e t t e r grades i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note, not only i n terms of the accuracy of teacher evaluation, but also because the r e s u l t s indicate that some f i f t y - n i n e percent of the variance i n reading grades could be predicted from scores obtained on Sight Vocabulary.  While such a measure of sight  vocabulary has rather l i m i t e d diagnostic value, i t appears to be a quick and f a i r l y r e l i a b l e estimate of general reading a b i l i t y . Further research i n this area could take several forms. The study could be replicated using younger subjects.  Perhaps c e i l i n g  37  effects could be reduced by using f i r s t grade children toward the middle of the school year so as to have allowed them time to acquire a store of sight words.  I t would also be i n t e r e s t i n g to compare Sight  Vocabulary scores of children i n f i r s t and even i n second grade with scores on V i s u a l Closure and V i s u a l Sequential Memory obtained i n k i n dergarten.  Perhaps v i s u a l closure and, most p a r t i c u l a r l y , v i s u a l se-  quential memory s k i l l s may be most c l o s e l y related to sight vocabulary at the very e a r l i e s t stages of learning to read.  Moreover, a study  c o r r e l a t i n g sight vocabulary with scores on a l l s i x subtests at the automatic l e v e l of the ITPA, and with the v i s u a l and auditory separately  subtests  f o r comparison, may reveal that auditory s k i l l s are at least  as relevant, and possibly are more closely associated with sight vocabulary than are the v i s u a l s k i l l s measured.  Since many subjects seem  to code the sequence of v i s u a l s t i m u l i v o c a l l y , one would suspect that auditory sequential memory i s a very important f a c t o r . While t h i s study does reveal a positive relationship between acquired sight vocabulary and functioning i n v i s u a l closure and v i s u a l sequential memory as defined and measured by the ITPA, neither the magnitude of the relationship revealed, nor the l e v e l of confidence obtained i n many instances, would support the e f f i c a c y of providing t r a i n i n g i n these two psycholinguistic s k i l l s i n hopes that improved functioning would be accompanied by expanded sight vocabulary.  More-  over, given the larger and unresolved question currently pondered, whether, indeed, i t i s even possible to t r a i n psycholinguistic processes, this conclusion  seems e s p e c i a l l y appropriate and timely.  38  REFERENCES A l w i t t , Linda A. Decay of Immediate Memory f o r V i s u a l l y Presented D i g i t s Among Non-Readers and Readers. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1963, 5 4 , 144-148. Bateman, Barbara. The I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s i n Current Research. I n s t i t u t e f o r Research on Exceptional Children, A p r i l , 1 9 6 4 . Bateman, Barbara. Reading and Psycholinguistic Processes of P a r t i a l l y Seeing Children. CEC Research Monograph. Series A, No. 5 , 1 9 6 3 . Bond, Guy and Tinker, Miles. Reading D i f f i c u l t i e s : Their Diagnosis and Correction. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1 9 6 7 . Delacato, C. H. Neurological Organization and Reading. 111.: Thomas, I 9 6 6 .  Springfield  D u r r e l l , Donald D. D u r r e l l Analysis of Reading D i f f i c u l t y . Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1 9 5 5 .  New York:  E l k i n d , David, Horn, J . and Schneider, G. Modified Word Recognition, Reading Achievement and Perceptual Decentration, Journal of Genetic Psychology. 1 9 6 5 , 1 0 7 , 235-251. Fernald, G. M. Remedial Techniques i n Basic School Subjects. York: McGraw H i l l , 1 9 4 3 .  New  F r o s t i g , M. and Horne, D. The F r o s t i g Program f o r the Development of V i s u a l Perception: Teachers Guide. Chicago: F o l l e t t , 1 9 6 4 . Getman, G. N. How to Develop Your Child's I n t e l l i g e n c e . Minn.: Author, 1 9 6 2 .  Lucerne  Gillingham, A. and Stillman, B. Remedial Training f o r Children With S p e c i f i c D i s a b i l i t y i n Reading. S p e l l i n g , and Penmanship ( 7 t h ed). Cambridge Mass.: Educators Publishing Service, 1 9 6 5 . Goins, Jean T. Visual Perceptual A b i l i t i e s and Early Reading Progress. Chicago, 1 1 1 . : University of Chicago Press, 1 9 5 8 . Goodstein, H. A., Whitney, G., and Cawley, J . F. Prediction of Perceptual Reading D i s a b i l i t y Among Disadvantaged Children i n the Second Grade. Reading Teacher. 1 9 7 0 , 24 ( l ) , 23-28. Gray, William S. On Their Own i n Reading. man and Company, I 9 6 0 .  Chicago, 111:  Harris, Albert J . How to Increase Reading A b i l i t y . McKay Company, Inc., 1 9 6 1 .  Scott, Fores-  New York:  David  39  Hirshoren, A l f r e d . A Comparison of the Predictive V a l i d i t y of the Revised Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and the I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s . Exceptional Children. 1969t  35 (7), 517-521.  Kass, Corrine E. Psycholinguistic D i s a b i l i t i e s of Children with Reading Problems. Exceptional Children. 1966. 32 (8), 533-539. Kephart, N. C. The Slow Learner i n the Classroom. M e r r i l l , 196~0.  Columbus, Ohio:  K i r k , S. A. The I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s : I t s Origin and Implications. In Learning Disorders. V o l . 3» Jerome Hellmuth (Ed.). S e a t t l e , Wash: Special Child Publications, 1968. K i r k , Samuel A. and K i r k , Winifred D. Psycholinguistic Learning Disa b i l i t i e s : Diagnosis and Remediation. Urbana, 111: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1972. K i r k , Samuel A., McCarthy, J . J . and K i r k , W. D. The I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s (Exp. Ed.). Urbana, 111: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1961. K i r k , S. A., McCarthy, J . J . and Kirk, W. D. The I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholingaistic A b i l i t i e s (Revised Ed.). Urbana, 111: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1968. Kottmeyer, William. Teacher's Guide f o r Remedial Reading. McGraw-Hill Book Co., 195^7  New York:  McLeod, J . A Comparison of WISC Sub-Test Scores of Pre-adolescent Successful and Unsuccessful Readers. Australian Journal of  Psychology. 1965, 17 (3), 220-228.  Macione, Joseph. Psychological Correlates of Reading D i s a b i l i t y as Defined by the I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s . Doctor's Thesis, University of South Dakota, 1969. Nurss, Joanne R. A Diagnostic Comparison of Two Third Grade Reading Classes. In William Durr (Ed.) Reading D i f f i c u l t i e s : Diagnosis. Correction, and Remediation'; Newark, Del: IRA, 1970, pp 42-54. Osgood, Charles E. A Behavioral Analysis. In Contemporary Approaches to Cognition. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1957. Paraskevopoulos, J . and K i r k , S. A. The Development and Psychometric Characteris t i c s of the Revised I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s . Urbana, 111: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1969.  40  Ragland, G i l b e r t G, Performance of Educable Mentally Handicapped Students of D i f f e r i n g Reading A b i l i t y on the I l l i n o i s Test of Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s . In Special Educationt Strategies f o r Educational Progress. Selected Convention Papers, 44th Annual CEC Convention, 1966, pp 69-72. Wash. D.C: Council f o r Exceptional Children. Raymond, D. M. The Performance of Reading Achievers on Memory Span and Association i n Reading Tests. Journal of Educational Research.  1955, 48, 455-465.  Rizzo, N. D. Studies i n V i s u a l and Auditory Memory Span with Special Reference to Reading D i s a b i l i t y . Journal of Experimental Educat i o n . 1939, 8, 208-244. R u d i s i l l , Mabel. Flashed D i g i t and Phrase Recognition and Rate of Oral and. Concrete Responses: A Study of Advanced and Retarded Readers i n the Third Grade. Journal of Psychology. 1956, 42, 317-328. S c h e l l , Leo M. How to Prevent and Correct Word I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Problems. In S c h e l l , L. M. and Bums, P. C. (Eds.), Remedial Reading: Classroom and C l i n i c . Boston: A l l y n and Bacon, Inc., 1972. Spalding, R. B. and Spalding, W. T. New York: Morrow, 1957.  The Writing Road to Reading.  Sutton, Peggy. The Relationship of V i s u a l i z i n g A b i l i t y to Reading. In Bateman, Barbara, The I l l i n o i s Test o f Psycholinguistic A b i l i t i e s i n Current Research. I n s t i t u t e f o r Research on Exceptional Children, A p r i l , 1964. Ten Brink, T. D. Critique of Hirshoren s ITPA V a l i d i t y Study. Exceptional Children. 1970, 36 (5), 351-356. 1  Thurstone, L. L. A F a c t o r i a l Study of Perception. University of Chicago Press, 1944.  Chicago, 111:  Tiegs, E. W. and Clark, W. W. C a l i f o r n i a Achievement Tests, Complete Battery - Lower Primary. Manual. Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a : C a l i f o r n i a Test Bureau, 1963. Weaver, Ann. The Prediction of F i r s t Grade Reading Achievement i n C u l t u r a l l y Disadvantaged Children. Doctor's Thesis, George Peabody College f o r Teachers. N a s h v i l l e , Tenn: 1967.  DA 28: 3789A  Wilson, Robert M. Diagnostic and Remedial Reading f o r Classroom and C l i n i c . Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. M e r r i l l Pub. Co., 1972. Wiseman, D. A Classroom Procedure f o r Identifying and Remediating Language Problems. Mental Retardation, 1965, 3 (2), 21.  APPENDIX  42  APPENDIX A SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED Al:  Age One:  Subjects age s i x years, nine months to seven years, three months at the time of t e s t i n g (BI and Gl)  A2:  Age Two:  Subjects age seven years, four months to- seven years, ten months at the time of t e s t i n g (B2 and G2)  B:  Boys age s i x years, nine months to seven years, ten months at the time of t e s t i n g (BI and B2)  BI:  Boys age s i x years, nine months to seven years, three months at the time of t e s t i n g  B2:  Boys age seven years, four months to seven years, ten months at the time of t e s t i n g  G:  G i r l s age s i x years, nine months to seven years, ten months a t the time of t e s t i n g (Gl and G2j)  Gl:  G i r l s age s i x years, nine months to seven years, three months at the time of t e s t i n g  G2:  G i r l s age seven years, four months to seven years, ten months at the time of t e s t i n g  SV:  Sight Vocabulary  TS:  Total Sample  VC:  V i s u a l Closure  VSM:  V i s u a l Sequential Memory  43  APPENDIX B SIGHT WORDS* L i s t A (Grade l )  L i s t B (Grade :  1. you  1.  2. look  2. seen  3. l i t t l e  3. breakfast  4.  4.  me  rain  other  5. day  5. hole  6. tree  6. cry  7. a l l  7. love  8.  8.  come  9. away  sister  9. l o s t  10.  are  10.  joy  11.  run  11.  bark  12.  father  12.  blow  13.  children  13.  please  14.  morning  14.  sand  15.  sleep  15.  tall  16.  fish  16.  cover  17.  around  17.  dark  18.  name  18.  afraid  19.  chair  19.  place  20.  live  20.  chimney  D u r r e l l , Donald D. D u r r e l l Analysis of Reading D i f f i c u l t y . New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.,  1955.  APPENDIX B (Continued) .st 1 (Grades 2 to 6)  L i s t 2 (Grades 2 to 6)  1.  road  1.  drawn  2.  ground  2.  chapter  3.  know  3.  broadcase  4.  drink  4.  invent  5.  turkey  5.  photograph  6.  elephant  6.  blunt  7.  different  7.  imagine  8.  inch  8.  disturb  9.  strong  9.  carpenter  10.  stamp  10.  provide  11.  fair  11.  battery  12.  quickly  12.  ceiling  13.  believe  13.  delayed  14.  handle  14.  pretend  15.  bridge  15.  freight  16.  speed  16.  championship  17.  battle  17.  crowned  18.  cleaned  18.  advertisement  19.  either  19.  prairie  20.  quarter  20.  blundering  21.  guard  21.  shingle  22.  forgotten  22.  wrenches  23.  crawl  23.  circumstances  24.  tongue  24.  triumphant  25.  single  25.  thorough  APPENDIX C (1) MEDIANS, MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND DISTRIBUTION OF MEAN RAW SCORES FOR VISUAL CLOSURE AND VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  29.5 to 31  31.5 to 33  3  0  0  5  0  0  1  16  8  10  1'.  0  8  8  6  6  2  0  9  24  21  13  13  1  0  2  17  13  17  11  6  2  1  0  4  17  19  14  10  3  0  1  0  1  2  9  18  24  14  16  3  0  0  1  6  26  37  38  24  19  3  1  Mdn  X  S.D.  KI  11.5 to 13  13.5 to 15  15.5 to 17  17.5 to 19  19.5 to 21  21.5 to 23  23.5 25.5 27.5 to to to 29 27 25  Gl  22.25  22.56  3.20  36  1  0  0  3  5  14  5  5  Bl  22.50  22.65  2.75  33  0  0  0  1  12  5  9  G2  24.25  24.63  2.62  50  0  0  0  1  4  10  B2  23.50  24.07  3.16  37  0  0  1  1  5  G  23.50  23.76  3.06  86  1  0  0  4  B  23.50  23.40  3.06  70  0  0  1  Al  22.50  22.60  2.99  69  1  0  A2  24.00  24.39  2.88  87  0  TS  23.50  23.60  3.06  156  1  APPENDIX C (2) MEDIANS, MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES FOR SIGHT VOCABULARY  Mdn  X  S.D.  N  •  0 to  6  11 to 15  16 to 20  21 to  26 to  5  to 10  25  30  31 to 35  36 to 40  41 to 45  46 to 50  55  to 60  61 to 65  51 56 to  70  71 to 75  76 to 80  81 to 85  66 to  Gl  45.50  42.83  21.36  36  2  1  1  3  3  1  2  1  4  3  6  0  3  2  2  1  1  BI  26.00  29.42  20.90  33  5  4  2  1  3  3  1  3  3  1  4  0  1  1  1  0  0  G2  43.50  42.44  21.15  50  2  3  3  2  1  2  4  5  6  3  3  5  3  3  1  3  1  B2  36.00  37.81  22.43  37  2  3  3  3  3  2  2  2  3  2  4  1  2  1  2  1  1  G  45.00  42.60  21.24  86  4  4  4  5  4  3  6  6  10  6  9  5  6  5  3  4  2  B  34.00  33.86  22.12  70  7  7  5  4  6  5  3  5  6  3  8  1  3  2  3  1  1  Al  37.00  36.42  22.18  69  7  5  3  4  6  4  3  4  7  4  10  0  4  3  3  1  1  A2  41.00  40.47  21.82  87  4  6  6  5  4  4  6  7  9  5  7  6  5  4  3  4  2  TS  40.50  38.68  22.07  156  11  11  9  9  10  8  9  11  16  9  17  6  9  7  6  5  3  APPENDIX C (3) MEDIANS, MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND DISTRIBUTION OP SCORES FOR VISUAL CLOSURE  10 Mdn  X  S.D.  N  to  12  19  22  15  18  21  13  16  to  to  to  25  28 to  24  to  to  31  34  37  to  to  27  30  33  36  39  to  Gl  25.00  25.00  4.58  36  1  0  1  5  10  8  8  2  1  0  Bl  24.00  25.09  4.58  33  0  0  1  7  9  7  4  2  3  0  G2  27.00  27.58  4.81  50  0  1  1  1  8  18  10  4  5  2  B2  26.00  27.05  5.33  37  0  1  0  5  7  8  6  5  4  1  G  27.00  26.50  4.88  86  1  1  2  6  18  26  18  6  6  2  B  25.00  26.13  5.08  70  0  1  1  12  16  15  10  7  7  1  Al  25.00  25.04  4.58  69  1  0  2  12  19  15  12  4  4  0  A2  27.00  27.36  5.04  87  0  2  1  6  15  26  16  9  9  3  TS  26.00  26.33  4.98  156  1  2  3  18  34  41  28  13  13  3  APPENDIX C (4) MEDIANS, MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES FOR VISUAL SEQUENTIAL MEMORY  , Mdn  X  S.D.  N  13  15  17  19  21  23  25  27  29  14  16  18  20  22  24  26  28  30  Gl  20.00  20.11  3.46  36  1  5  6  9  6  3  5  1  0  BI  20.00  20.15  2.96  33  1  3  6  9  7  5  1  1  0  G2  22.00  21.68  2.67  50  0  1  7  8  13  17  2  1  1  B2  21.00  20.76  2.90  37  1  0  8  9  9  7  2  1  0  G  21.00  : 21.02  3.13  86  1  6  13  17  19  20  7  2  1  B  20.00  20.47  2.94  70  2  3  14  18  16  12  3  2  0  Al  20.00  20.13  3.23  69  2  8  12  18  13  8  6  2  0  A2  21.00  21.29  2.81  87  1  1  15  17  22  24  4  2  1  TS  21.00  20.78  3.06  156  3  9  27  35  35  32  10  4  1  APPENDIX D  (1)  SCORES FOR THIRTY-SIX FEMALE SUBJECTS AGE 6-9  VC S .No *  Age  1  7-3 7-3 7-2 6-10 7-3 7-3 6-10 7-1 7-3 7-0  2 3 4 5 6 7  8 9 10 11 12 13 14  15 16  6-10 7-3 7-1 6-11 7-2 6-11 ^S.No.: RSi SS: MRS: MSS: Schl: LG:  SV  19  70 32 71 79 45 45 82  51 63 2 23 23 64  15 7  RS  SS  38 44 20 39 24 37 29 43 30 46 19 31 26 39 27 40  24  7-3  VSM  25 30 10 25  22 21 27 23 22  TO  36 33 40  37 34 38  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  23 27 13 21 19 20 21  43 51  24.0  40.5  28.5  47.5 22.0 40.0  36 38  11.5 23.0 21.5 24.5  40.5  41  25.5  18  34  18.5  15  28  43.5 32.5 33.5 38.0  24 41  19 36  20.5 23.0  19 37 26 49 17 32 20 39 21 40 20 39  20.5 23.5 22.0 21.5 21.5 22.0  36.5  36.5 41.0  36.0 38.0 37.0 38.5  Schl  1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3  Subject Number Raw Score Scaled Score Mean Raw Score Mean Scaled Score School Letter Grade i n Reading at the End of Year One  LG C A  m A A B B A B C C B C C+ CD  50 APPENDIX D (1) (Continued)  VC  VSM  S.No.  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  LG  17  7-0  53  25  38  19  36  22.0  37.0  4  C+  18  7-0  37  33  4?  24  45  28.5  46.0  4  C  19  7-1  35  27  40  23  43  25.0  41.5  4  C+  20  7-2  44  34  48  17  32  25.5  40.0  4  B  21  7-3  22  29  43  18  34  23.5  38.5  4  C*  22  7-0  51  29  43  26  49  27.5  46.0  4  C+  23  7-3  48  21  33  17  32  19.0  37.5  5  c  24  7-1  62  27  40  25  47  26.0  43.5  5  A  25  7-3  71  32  46  20  38  26.0  42.0  5  B  26  6-11  55  28  43  15  29  21.5  36.0  5  C+  27  7-3  46  22  34  16  30  19.0  32.0  5  C  28  7-2  16  23  36  22  42  22.5  39.0  5  C-  29  7-2  30  28  42  16  30  22.0  36.0  5  C  30  7-2  53  24  37  21  40  22.5  38.5  5  C+  31  7-1  52  28  42  25  47  26.5  44.5  5  B  32  7-0  67  20  32  25  47  22.5  39.5  5  A  33  6-10  42  22  36  22  ^3  22.0  39.5  5  B  34  7-0  3  21  33  18  34  19.5  33.5  5  C-  35  7-1  18  19  31  20  38  19.5  34.5  5  B  36  7-0  46  24  37  16  30  20.0  33.5  5  C+  51  APPENDIX D (2) SCORES FOR THIRTY-THREE MALE SUBJECTS AGE 6-9 TO 7-3  VC  S.No.  Age  37  VSM  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  7-3  0  19  31  20  38  19.5  34.5  1  D  38  6-11  5  26  41  16  31  21.0  36.0  1  -  39  6-9  6  23  37  21  41  22.0  39.0  1  C-  40  7-1  37  23  36  20  38  21.5  37.0  1  B  41  6-10  34  21  35  20  39  20.5  37.0  1  B  42  7-2  9  22  34  14  26  18.0  30.0  1  C  43  6-9  8  34  50  18  35  26.0  42.5  2  D  44  6-11  37  23  37  18  35  20.5  36.0  2  A  45  7-1  65  32  46  19  36  25.5  41.0  2  B  46  6-11  44  21  35  21  41  21.0  38.0  2  B  47  7-2  0  28  42  21  40  24.5  41.0  2  D  48  7-3  16  29  43  19  36  24.0  39.5  2  C+  49  6-11  71  24  38  23  45  23.5  41.5  2  A  50  7-1  54  21  33  20  38  20.5  35.5  3  C  51  7-0  44  26  39  19  36  22.5  37.5  3  C  52  6-10  53  20  34  22  43  21.0  38.5  3  B  53  7-1  21  36  51  28  53  32.0  52.0  3  B  54  7-2  5  23  36  18  34  20.5  35.0  3  C+  55  7-2  21  32  46  15  28  23.5  37.0  3  C  56  6-10  8  18  31  21  41  19.5  36.0  3  c  LG  52 APPENDIX D (2) (Continued)  VC  S.No.  VSM  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  57  7-2  26  28  k2  16  30  22.0  36.0  3  C  58  7-0  26  27  ko  21  40  24.0  40.0  3  C  59  6-10  k2  29  43  18  34  23.5  38.5  3  c  60  6-10  k6  23  37  24  46  23.5  41.5  4  B  61  7-2  27  25  38  22  42  23.5  40.0  4  C+  62  7-3  2k  22  34  18  34  20.0  34.0  5  C  63  7-3  11  25  38  24  45  24.5  41.5  5  C-  64  7-2  70  26  39  25  47  25.5  43.0  5  B  65  7-3  39  23  36  23  43  23.0  39.5  5  B  66  6-10  51  3k  50  19  37  26.5  43.5  5  C  67  7-2  lk  25  38  24  45  25.5  41.5  5  c  68  7-3  5k  19  31  20  38  19.5  34.5  5  B  69  7-1  3  21  33  18  34  19.5  33.5  5  E  LG  53 APPENDIX D (3) SCORES FOR FIFTY FEMALE SUBJECTS AGE 7-4 TO 7-1G  VC  VSM  S.No.  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  70  7-4  55  23  34  17  31  20.0  32.5  1  71  7-4  9  25  36  22  40  23.5  38.0  1  72  7-8  46  27  37  22  39  24.5  38.0  1  B  73  7-7  2  26  37  21  38  23.5  37.5  1  D  74  7-7  19  24  35  22  40  23.0  37.5  1  C+  75  7-8  57  27  37  20  36  23.5  36.5  1  A  76  7-8  81  25  35  23  41  24.0  38.0  1  A  77  7-8  11  24  34  21  37  22.5  35.5  1  C  78  7-8  57  13  21  23  41  18.0  31.0  2  A  79  7-6  62  37  51  22  40  29.5  ^5.5  2  A  80  7-6  62  26  37  17  31  21.5  34.0  2  A  81  7-7  45  22  33  24  44  23.0  38.5  2  B  82  7-7  40  33  45  24  44  28.5  44.5  2  B  83  7-6  39  36  49  20  36  28.0  42.5  2  B  84  7-4  76  33  45  24  44  28.5  44.5  2  A  85  7-8  58  28  39  29  51  28.5  45.0  2  A  86  7-6  3  25  36  18  33  21.5  34.5  3  C-  87  7-6  59  34  46  20  36  27.0  41.0  3  B  88  7-6  40  25  36  21  38  23.0  37.0  3  B  89  7-7  69  25  36  23  42  24.0  39.0  3  A  LG  A  -  54  APPENDIX D (3) (Continued)  VC  VSM  S.No.  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  LG  90  7-7  52  34  46  20  36  27.0  41.0  3  B  91  7-6  33  29  41  18  33  23.5  37.0  3  C  92  7-7  46  36  49  19  35  27.5  42.0  3  B  93  7-6  45  22  33  23  42  22.5  37.5  3  B  94  7-6  19  18  28  22  40  20.0  34.0  3  C  95  7-4  33  27  39  21  38  24.0  38.5  4  C+  96  7-6  47  27  39  25  46  26.0  42.5  4  C  97  7-5  11  27  39  21  38  24.0  38.5  4  C+  98  7-9  37  23  33  19  34  21.0  33.5  4  C+  99  7-6  58  27  39  23  42  25.0  40.5  4  B  100  7-8  28  32  43  20  36  26,0  39.5  4  C+  101  7-4  22  23  34  23  42  23.0  38.0  4  c+  102  7-6  68  35  48  20  36  27.5  42.0  4  B  103  7-5  39  25  36  24  44  24.5  40.0  4  C+  104  7-4  43  29  41  18  33  23.5  37.0  4  C  105  7-6  31  29  41  28  51  28.5  46.0  4  C+  106  7-6  6  30  42  22  40  26.0  41.0  5  -  107  7-9  44  29  40  23  41  26.0  40.5  5  c+  108  7-9  32  27  37  16  28  21.5  32.5  5  c  109  7-4  51  30  42  26  48  28.0  45.0  5  c  55  APPENDIX D (3) (Continued)  VC  VSM  S.No.  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  110  7-8  10  26  36  24  43  25.0  39.5  5  C  111  7-9  42  29  40  23  41  26.0  40.5  5  B  112  7-4  71  37  51  18  33  27.5  42.0  5  A  113  7-10  77  33  44  24  43  28.5  43.5  5  B  114  7-7  68  24  35  . 22  40  23.0  37.5  5  A  115  7-4  61  29  41  24  44  26.5  42.5  5  B  116  7-7  41  26  37  23  42  24.5  39.5  5  -  117  7-9  76  30  41  18  32  24.0  36.5  5  A  118  7-7  14  21  32  21  38  21.0  35.0  5  C  119  7-7  27  27  39  23  42  25.0  40.5  5  C  LG  56 APPENDIX D (4) SCORES FOR THIRTY-SEVEN MALE SUBJECTS AGE 7-4 TO 7-10  VC  VSM  S.No.  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  120  7-8  30  36  48  19  34  27.5  41.0  1  B  121  7-5  28  24  35  18  33  21.0  34.0  1  C+  122  7-5  10  24  35  18  33  21.0  34.0  1  C  123  7-6  34  38  52  21  38  29.5  45.0  1  B  124  7-7  17  33  45  26  48  29.5  46.5  1  C  125  7-6  11  27  39  17  31  22.0  35.0  1  C  126  7-7  46  22  33  21  38  21.5  35.5  2  B  127  7-6  72  29  41  18  33  23.5  37.0  2  B  128  7-5  19  26  37  25  46  25.5  46.5  2  B  129  7-9  18  26  36  17  30  21.5  33.0  2  C  130  7-5  65  30  42  19  35  25.5  38.5  2  B  131  7-8  12  21  30  19  34  20.0  32.0  2  C  132  7-7  4  27  39  20  36  23.5  37.5  3  C  133  7-5  44  24  35  21  38  22.5  36.5  3  B  134  7-4  13  25  36  18  33  21.5  34.5  3  D  135  7-9  8  19  28  22  39  20.5  33.5  3  C  136  7-7  36  29  41  21  38  25.0  39.5  3  D  137  7-6  34  31  43  20  36  25.5  39.5  3  C-  138  7-8  9  33  44  24  43  28.5  43.5  3  D  139  7-8  81  34  45  20  36  27.0  40.5  4  A  LG  57  APPENDIX D (4) (Continued)  VC  VSM  S.No.  Age  SV  RS  SS  RS  SS  MRS  MSS  Schl  140  7-6  25  29  41  24  44  26.5  42.5  4  C  141  7-5  74  25  36  22  40  23.5  38.0  4  A  142  7-6  38  25  36  22  40  23.5  38.0  4  C  143  7-4  69  26  37  19  35  22.5  36.0  5  B  144  7-5  53  19  30  28  51  23.5  40.5  5  B  145  7-8  50  36  48  21  37  28.5  42.5  5  B  146  7-8  76  34  45  23  41  28.5  43.0  5  A  147  7-6  54  31  43  17  31  24.0  37.0  5  148  7-6  45  21  32  23  42  22.0  37.0  5  B  149  7-8  25  23  33  14  25  18.5  29.0  5  C-  150  7-10  3  23  33  18  32  20.5  32.5  5  C  151  7-5  25  21  32  24  44  22.5  38.0  5  C  152  7-5  55  30  42  24  44  27.0  43.0  5  B  153  7-6  55  33  45  24  44  28.5  44.5  5  C+  154  7-8  58  15  23  19  34  17.0  28.5  5  C  155  7-6  41  23  34  22  40  27.5  37.0  5  C+  156  7-9  62  29  40  20  36  24.5  38.0  5  B  LG  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054441/manifest

Comment

Related Items