Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The correlations of reading achievement and self concept at grades three, five, seven, eight, ten and… Gordon, Maria Geertruida 1976

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A8 G67.pdf [ 2.56MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0078244.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0078244-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0078244-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0078244-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0078244-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0078244-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0078244-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0078244-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0078244.ris

Full Text

THE  CORRELATIONS OF READING ACHIEVEMENT AND AT GRADES THREE, F I V E ,  SELF  SEVEN, E I G H T , TEN AND  CONCEPT TWELVE  by MARIA  GEERTRUIDA GORDON  B.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y  A  THESIS THE  of B r i t i s h  Columbia,  SUBMITTED I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF REQUIREMENTS  FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER  OF ARTS in  THE  FACULTY OF EDUCATION Department  We  accept to  THE  this  o f Reading  thesis  the required  as c o n f o r m i n g standard  U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H September,  (c^  1967  Maria Geertruida  COLUMBIA  1976  Gordon,  1976  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesi$  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y s h a l l I  in p a r t i a l  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia,  make it  freely available  f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n  for  this  representatives. thesis  It  EDUCATION  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  Columbia  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  t  this  that  study. thesis  is understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n  f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l  Department of  a  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  written permission.  D  for  I agree  s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or  by h i s of  f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r  e  SEPTEMBER  20.  1976  not be allowed without my  ii  ABSTRACT The purpose of t h i s study was to determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f concept and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y a t d i f f e r e n t school career.  stages i n a c h i l d ' s  S u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d a t random from grades t h r e e ,  seven, e i g h t , t e n and twelve from s c h o o l s i n one s c h o o l  five,  district.  Approximately 125 to 150 s t u d e n t s a t each grade l e v e l were t e s t e d w i t h the Nelson Reading T e s t o r the N e l s o n Denny Reading T e s t and the s t u d e n t s were then a s s i g n e d to groups of poor, average or good r e a d e r s on the b a s i s of t h e i r p e r c e n t i l e s c o r e s f o r t h e i r grade.  Twenty s t u d e n t s were  randomly  s e l e c t e d from each a b i l i t y group a t each grade l e v e l to r e c e i v e the P i e r s H a r r i s C h i l d r e n ' s S e l f Concept  Scale.  Raw s c o r e s on the r e a d i n g t e s t were c o r r e l a t e d w i t h s e l f concept s c o r e s f o r each grade l e v e l . three, f i v e ,  C o r r e l a t i o n s were s i g n i f i c a n t a t the grade  seven, and e i g h t l e v e l s ,  lower but s i g n i f i c a n t a t the grade  ten l e v e l and not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the grade twelve l e v e l .  Mean s c o r e s f o r  each a b i l i t y group a t each grade l e v e l were computed and a n a l y z e d i n a s i x by t h r e e f a c t o r a l d e s i g n .  Effects for ability  grade and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y were s i g n i f i c a n t .  group and i n t e r a c t i o n of  D i f f e r e n c e s between means f o r  good and poor r e a d e r s were s i g n i f i c a n t a t the grade t h r e e , f i v e , seven and eight l e v e l s .  P o s t hoc t e s t s were done to f i n d  significant  tetrad  differences. I t appears from the r e s u l t s of t h i s study t h a t a l t h o u g h s e l f concept and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y a r e p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d  i n the lower grades, the  r e l a t i o n s h i p becomes weaker a f t e r grade e i g h t and i s n o n s i g n i f i c a n t a t the grade twelve l e v e l .  iii TABLE OF CONTENTS  CHAPTER I.  INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE S e l f Concept S e l f Concept and School Achievement S e l f Concept and Reading Achievement C r i t i c i s m of E x i s t i n g Research  II.  THE PROBLEM The G e n e r a l Problem Hypotheses D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms  III.  GENERAL PROCEDURE Subjects T e s t Measures General Design Sample S i z e  IV.  V.  1 1 3 6 8  9 9 11 12  13 13 13 16 17  DATA ANALYSES AND RESULTS  18  CONCLUSIONS  32  Summary C o n c l u s i o n s and D i s c u s s i o n Suggestions f o r F u t u r e Research  REFERENCES  32 33 36  38  APPENDIX A F a c t o r a l D e s i g n f o r Grades v s . A b i l i t y v s . Sex on Dependent V a r i a b l e S e l f Concept A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e T a b l e f o r Grades v s . A b i l i t y v s . Sex on Dependent V a r i a b l e S e l f Concept  43 43  APPENDIX B Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , N's, and A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e T a b l e s from Computer Program BMD:10V A n a l y s i s o f A b i l i t y Groups C o l l a p s e d over Grades  44  iv LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Correlation coefficients for self reading scores  concept and 18  S i g n i f i c a n c e o f d i f f e r e n c e s between c o r r e l a t i o n s of r e a d i n g and s e l f concept f o r p a i r s o f grades  20  Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s on s e l f f o r r e a d i n g groups by grade l e v e l  21  Analysis of variance f a c t o r a l design  concept  scale  t a b l e f o r the t h r e e by s i x 21  D i f f e r e n c e s between means w i t h i n each grade f o r the e f f e c t s o f r e a d i n g a b i l i t y .,  24  T a b l e o f unknown parameters f o r the 3 x 6 f a c t o r a l design  24  T a b l e o f t e t r a d d i f f e r e n c e s f o r spread o f means between two a b i l i t y groups f o r p a i r s o f grades  28  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1  Graph of i n t e r a c t i o n s of grade and r e a d i n g on s e l f concept  ability  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Self Concept In the welter of accumulated research done i n education  and i t s  many, often c o n f l i c t i n g , conclusions, there i s one thing that r e s u l t s have repeatedly assured us of, and that i s that each c h i l d i s a unique and i n d i v i d u a l personality.  How an i n d i v i d u a l acts and reacts within  his environment i s determined by his s e l f concept.  During the past few  decades, the study of s e l f concept as a determinator of behavior has become an important facet of educational  research.  Several well known theorists have presented t h e i r views on the influence of s e l f concept on the individual's behavior, stating that personality i s not anchored on b i o l o g i c a l variables but i s determined by s o c i a l psychological factors.  Lecky (1945) contributed to the theory of  self-consistency as a primary motivating  force i n human behavior, stating  that an i n d i v i d u a l i s constrained i n his behavior by the picture he has formed of s e l f .  C a t t e l l (1950) considered  the s e l f the p r i n c i p a l  organizing influence exerted on the i n d i v i d u a l which gives s t a b i l i t y to his behavior and he emphasizes s e l e c t i v e perception i n the maintenance of s e l f esteem.  Carl Rogers (1951) emphasized the importance of s e l f i n  human adjustment and stated that s e l f i s the central aspect of personali t y — p e o p l e behave i n terms of the way they see themselves.  Snygg and  Combs (1949) proposed that the basic drive of individuals i s the 1  2 maintenance and enhancement o f s e l f and they c l a i m t h a t " a l l b e h a v i o r , w i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n , i s c o m p l e t e l y determined phenomenal f i e l d o f t h e behaving organism".  by and p e r t i n e n t t o , t h e How a p e r s o n behaves i s t h e  r e s u l t o f how he p e r c e i v e s the s i t u a t i o n and h i m s e l f a t the moment o f h i s action.  I n d i v i d u a l s c o n s t a n t l y behave i n a manner which i s c o n s i s t e n t  w i t h t h e way they view themselves  (Evans, 1968).  Today, more and more  p s y c h o l o g i s t s a r e l o o k i n g a t s e l f concept i n r e l a t i o n t o e d u c a t i o n a l t h e o r y and  practice. The p e r c e p t i o n s a person has o f h i m s e l f a r e on a continuum o f  p o s i t i v e t o n e g a t i v e t r a i t s t o the extent t h a t he f e e l s these t r a i t s a r e worthy o r unworthy i n t h e eyes o f h i s s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s .  If a child  f e e l s he i s n o t o f worth i n the eyes o f those important t o him he becomes u n a c c e p t a b l e to h i m s e l f and develops a n e g a t i v e s e l f  concept.  I t i s g e n e r a l l y accepted t h a t the s e l f concept o f an i n d i v i d u a l i s not p r e s e n t a t b i r t h but t h a t i t develops as p e r s p e c t i v e powers develop (Bodwin, 1959).  The s e l f concept i s determined by t h e i n t e r a c t i o n o f  t h a t i n d i v i d u a l w i t h h i s environment,  the most important elements o f  which a r e the persons most important t o him e m o t i o n a l l y and c o g n i t i v e l y . These s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s a r e i n f l u e n t i a l i n shaping t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s  self  concept through the responses they make t o him, o r more important, how he p e r c e i v e s t h e i r responses and how he i n f e r s t h e i r v a l u a t i o n s o f him from t h e i r b e h a v i o r t o him. Once the s e l f concept i s e s t a b l i s h e d , i t has a h i g h degree o f s t a b i l i t y and tends t o r e s i s t  change (Hamachek, 1965).  I n d i v i d u a l s may even  u n w i t t i n g l y choose those b e h a v i o r s which 'prove' he i s r i g h t about hims e l f and o t h e r s ' i n f e r r e d p e r c e p t i o n s o f him, (Soares and Soares, 1971) so t h a t as a c h i l d  grows and e x p e r i e n c e s , he may s u b c o n s c i o u s l y behave i n  3 such ways as to evoke the treatment or response t h a t he response which tends to r e i n f o r c e h i s s e l f view. t h e s i z e d t h a t a person may  expects—the  Jersild  r e s i s t l e a r n i n g t h a t might  (1952) hypo-  be b e n e f i c i a l to him  because he i s t r y i n g to p r o t e c t h i s image of h i m s e l f based on the ence of h i s s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s .  T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y important i f e a r l y  f a m i l y or s c h o o l e x p e r i e n c e s c o n v i n c e a c h i l d  t h a t he i s unable to l e a r n .  S i n c e the s e l f concept o f an i n d i v i d u a l i s forming from onward, those p e o p l e who life,  influ-  birth  a r e c l o s e s t to him i n the f i r s t y e a r s o f h i s  h i s p a r e n t s and o t h e r members o f h i s f a m i l y , a r e p r i m a r y f o r c e s i n  the shaping of h i s s e l f concept.  However, when a c h i l d  enters school,  the t e a c h e r s a l s o assume the r o l e of s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s , p a r t i a l l y as a r e f l e c t i o n of emphasis p l a c e d on e d u c a t i o n by p a r e n t s .  As the c h i l d  grows o l d e r h i s peers become more and more important as s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s , g r a d u a l l y r e p l a c i n g the shaping i n f l u e n c e of p a r e n t s and t e a c h e r s as he a t t a i n s adulthood.  The c h i l d who  has l e a r n e d to see h i m s e l f as  inadequate  i s i n f l u e n c e d i n h i s b e h a v i o r by t h i s s e l f concept u n t i l some s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s behave toward him i n such a way h i m s e l f as c a p a b l e and of worth.  as to enable t h a t i n d i v i d u a l to see  For example i f a c h i l d f e e l s h i s  p a r e n t s a r e not p l e a s e d w i t h h i s b e h a v i o r or accomplishments a n e g a t i v e s e l f concept. him  (such as peers who  When he meets o t h e r people who  assume importance  him f o r h i s b e h a v i o r or accomplishments  he may  build  a r e important to  i n teen y e a r s ) and they h i s s e l f concept may  admire  become more  positive.  S e l f Concept  and School Achievement  Many r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s have attempted  to d i s c o v e r the r e l a t i o n s h i p  between the s e l f concept of an i n d i v i d u a l and h i s achievement  i n school.  4 A c h i l d ' s academic achievement i s determined by s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s and such f a c t o r s as i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y , economic background, p a r e n t s ' emphasis  on  e d u c a t i o n and t e a c h i n g s t a n d a r d s have been l i n k e d w i t h s c h o o l achievement. These do not, however, f u l l y e x p l a i n why g r e a t d i f f i c u l t y l e a r n i n g to r e a d . i n f l u e n t i a l i n whether  some c h i l d r e n appear to have  I n a t t e m p t i n g to f i n d o t h e r  factors  a c h i l d a c h i e v e s i n s c h o o l , r e s e a r c h e r s have  the r e l a t i o n s h i p of s e l f concept and academic achievement.  studied  Different  s t u d i e s have used d i f f e r e n t methods of r a t i n g academic achievement and have used such measures  as grade p o i n t average, t e a c h e r s ' r a t i n g s ,  results  o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s o r a combination o f one o r more o f t h e s e w i t h i n t e l lectual  ability. Many s t u d i e s have shown p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s e l f concept  and academic achievement.  Lumpkin  (1959) matched  twenty-four o v e r -  a c h i e v e r s w i t h twenty-four u n d e r a c h i e v e r s on the b a s i s of c h r o n o l o g i c a l age, mental age, sex and home background.  The o v e r a c h i e v e r s r e v e a l e d  i c a n t l y more p o s i t i v e s e l f c o n c e p t s .  Shaw, Edson, and B e l l  a c h i e v e r s i n j u n i o r and s e n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s and compared  signif-  (1960) used  them t o under-  a c h i e v e r s and found a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e f o r males i n s e l f concept, the u n d e r a c h i e v e r s h a v i n g more n e g a t i v e f e e l i n g about s e l f than the achievers.  F i n k (1962) s t u d i e d  two groups of n i n t h grade s t u d e n t s p a i r e d  f o r achievement and underachievement.  S e l f concept of each was judged  adequate or inadequate by t h r e e p s y c h o l o g i s t s on the b a s i s of s e v e r a l r a t i n g s c a l e s and t e s t s .  Data showed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between  a c h i e v e r s and n o n - a c h i e v e r s , the a c h i e v e r s b e i n g r a t e d as f a r more adequate i n t h e i r concepts of s e l f .  Campbell  (1967) r e p o r t e d a low  p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between Coppersmith's S e l f Esteem I n v e n t o r y and academic achievement of f o u r t h , f i f t h and s i x t h grade s t u d e n t s .  Caplin  5 (1966),  i n a study o f Negro children, found t h a t children who professed  more p o s i t i v e s e l f concepts  tended  t o have h i g h e r academic achievement.  C o l e (1975) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f concept, and achievement m o t i v a t i o n o f one hundred, average, w i t h t h e i r academic achievement. significant achievement.  attitude  t h i r d grade c h i l d r e n  T h e i r d a t a y i e l d e d low, p o s i t i v e and  (p < .05) c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r s e l f  concept and  Quimby (1967) u s i n g a c h i e v e r s v e r s u s u n d e r a c h i e v e r s ,  found  t h a t t h e s e l f - i d e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s of t h e a c h i e v e r s was s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r than t h e s e l f - i d e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f u n d e r a c h i e v e r s .  Others who  have found p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s e l f concept and academic a c h i e v e ment are Coopersmith (1967), Hughes (1967), Oakland (1969), Jones and Grieneeks (1970) and Bailey  (1971).  Some r e s e a r c h e r s have p o s t u l a t e d t h a t d e f i c i e n c i e s i n s e l f may cause academic underachievement.  esteem  Gann (1945) s t a t e d t h a t h e r r e s e a r c h  showed t h a t . p e r s o n a l i t y t e n s i o n u n f a v o u r a b l e t o l e a r n i n g had formed b e f o r e the c h i l d s t a r t e d s c h o o l and she r e j e c t e d t h e i d e a t h a t r e a d i n g i t i e s caused  personality d i f f i c u l t i e s .  disabil-  Kunst (1949, p. 133) suggests  Reading f a i l u r e i n a c h i l d o f normal i n t e l l i g e n c e , who has had good t e a c h i n g , i s a n e u r o t i c symptom i n d i c a t i n g emotional c o n f l i c t . . . . They s i m u l t a n e o u s l y ( w h i l e wanting t o read) though often u n c o n s c i o u s l y , wish t o f a i l t o r e a d . I think of reading f a i l u r e not as a p a s s i v e i n a b i l i t y to l e a r n , but as an a c t i v e , though u s u a l l y unconscious, p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t l e a r n i n g to r e a d . T h i s view i s supported by Combs' (1957) c l a i m s t h a t a person w i t h an adequate s e l f concept w i l l meet l i f e  e x p e c t i n g t o be s u c c e s s f u l and w i l l  t h e r e f o r e behave i n ways t h a t tend t o b r i n g about s u c c e s s , w h i l e a person who f e e l s he i s unable, w i l l  f e e l he cannot  succeed  and w i l l behave i n a  manner t h a t w i l l n o t l e a d to s u c c e s s . Other r e s e a r c h e r s oppose t h e view t h a t poor s e l f concept o r  6 p e r s o n a l i t y d i f f e r e n c e s cause r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s . (1957) suggest  Bond and T i n k e r  t h a t evidence g e n e r a l l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t emotional  ment i s more f r e q u e n t l y the e f f e c t  than the cause.  Whether poor  concept  causes underachievement or underachievement causes poor  concept  is s t i l l  reading  i t may  Holmes (1955)  t h a t where r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s and p e r s o n a l i t y  appear t o g e t h e r , the l a t t e r may  self  self  a c o n t r o v e r s i a l i s s u e i n r e s e a r c h l i t e r a t u r e and  w e l l be t r u e t h a t both are t r u e i n d i f f e r e n t c a s e s . suggests  maladjust-  be causes, concomitants  difficulties or r e s u l t s of  difficulties.  S e l f Concept and Reading Achievement A number of s t u d i e s have i n v e s t i g a t e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r s o n a l i t y and  r e a d i n g achievement.  r e a d e r s aged s i x to f o u r t e e n and a g g r e s s i v e and  Spache (1954) s t u d i e d f i f t y r e t a r d e d  concluded  t h a t r e t a r d e d r e a d e r s were more  cocky, l e s s apt to a c c e p t blame or admit f a u l t , l e s s  toler-  ant and more n e g a t i v i s t i c . These t e n d e n c i e s were l e s s pronounced i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s w i t h a d u l t s than w i t h p e e r s .  They tended  w i t h a d u l t s , o f t e n assuming a p a s s i v e a t t i t u d e .  to a v o i d open c o n f l i c t  Strang  (1940),  (1949) and Bond and T i n k e r (1957) a l s o s t a t e d t h a t emotional  disturbances  i n c h i l d r e n were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s i n e a r l y S e v e r a l s t u d i e s have d e a l t w i t h r e a d i n g and ally.  Wattenburg and C l i f f o r d  Kunst  grades.  s e l f concept  (1964) o b t a i n e d measures of s e l f  specificconcept  of k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n , based on s e l f r e f e r r e n t statements  obtained  c h i l d r e n drew p i c t u r e s of t h e i r f a m i l y and as they responded  to  sentences, and o b t a i n e d s c o r e s r e p r e s e n t i n g two and  goodness ( p e r s o n a l w o r t h ) .  s e l f concept  appear antecedent  as  incomplete  dimensions—competence  The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t measures of to and p r e d i c t i v e of r e a d i n g  achievement  7 in  the second grade.  Lumpkin (1959) compared twenty-four good r e a d e r s  w i t h twenty-four poor r e a d e r s i n grade f i v e to show t h a t good r e a d e r s revealed s i g n i f i c a n t l y  more p o s i t i v e s e l f c o n c e p t s .  Lang  (1965) found  c h i l d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n s of s e l f gave as good a p r e d i c t o r of l a t e r r e a d i n g achievement  as d i d i n t e l l i g e n c e s c o r e s .  Pollock  primary c h i l d r e n found t h a t r e a d i n g achievement to  (1972), working w i t h  was  significantly  related  s c h o o l s e l f concepts i n most groups she t e s t e d , but found t h a t the  r e l a t i o n s h i p between g l o b a l s e l f concept and r e a d i n g achievement approached  .10 s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r the t o t a l f i r s t  grade subgroup.  only  grade group and one  McClenden (1968) found a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between  s e l f esteem and r e a d i n g a t the f i r s t  grade l e v e l .  W i l l i a m s and C o l e  (1967) worked w i t h e i g h t y s i x t h grade c h i l d r e n and found p o s i t i v e t i o n s between s e l f concept and r e a d i n g achievement. Allebrand  third  (1965) s t u d i e d urban f o u r t h and f i f t h  correla-  Zimmerman and  g r a d e r s of m i d d l e to  lower socio-economic s t a t u s and found t h a t poor r e a d e r s t e s t e d on the California freedom, ment.  Test of P e r s o n a l i t y , lacked s u f f i c i e n t  sense of p e r s o n a l worth,  s t a b i l i t y and adequacy t o the e x t e n t t h a t they avoided a c h i e v e Bodwin (1959) found c o r r e l a t i o n s of .72 f o r grade t h r e e and  f o r grade s i x s u b j e c t s between r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t y and immature  .62  self  concepts. There a r e a few s t u d i e s , however, t h a t have found no r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e a d i n g and s e l f concept.  W i l l i a m s (1973)  gated c o r r e l a t i o n s of s e l f concept and r e a d i n g f o r 133 students and found no s i g n i f i c a n t concept and t h e i r (1967) and Rushley  first  significant  first  investi-  grade  c o r r e l a t i o n f o r the s t u d e n t s ' s e l f  or second grade r e a d i n g achievement.  (1970) a l s o found no s i g n i f i c a n t  r e a d i n g a b i l i t y and s e l f concept f o r elementary  Butcher  r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  children.  8 C r i t i c i s m o f E x i s t i n g Research There a r e s e v e r a l weaknesses i n the r e s e a r c h done t o date on t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e a d i n g and s e l f concept. of t h i s r e s e a r c h has c o n c e n t r a t e d  on students  The f i r s t  i s t h a t most  i n the elementary  and l i t t l e r e s e a r c h has been done w i t h h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s .  grades, A second  weakness i s t h a t many o f t h e c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s may be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e use o f s e l f concept  measures f o r which no adequate v a l i d i t y o r r e l i a b i l i t y  had been e s t a b l i s h e d and which, i n many cases had been c r e a t e d e x p r e s s l y f o r the purpose o f a p a r t i c u l a r study.  A t h i r d weakness i s t h a t when  d i f f e r e n t r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s use d i f f e r e n t measures o f s e l f concept reading a b i l i t y ,  the r e s u l t s o f these s t u d i e s cannot be d i r e c t l y  In cases where the instrument  to measure s e l f concept  s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r a p a r t i c u l a r study, duplicated.  and o f compared.  had been c r e a t e d  the r e s e a r c h study  can a l s o n o t be  A f o u r t h weakness i s t h a t many o f t h e s t u d i e s , e s p e c i a l l y  those done w i t h h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s , were p r i m a r i l y i n t e r e s t e d i n the underachiever  and t h e r e f o r e worked o n l y w i t h h i g h i n t e l l i g e n c e  subjects  r a t h e r than the normal range o f s t u d e n t s . To date, no attempt has been made a t a s y s t e m a t i c study o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f concept  and r e a d i n g a t d i f f e r e n t stages  ina  c h i l d ' s e d u c a t i o n a l c a r e e r , u s i n g one measure o r c o r r e l a t e d measures o f r e a d i n g , and one measure o f s e l f concept and  s e l f concept  so t h a t c o r r e l a t i o n s o f r e a d i n g  a t d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e l s c o u l d be compared.  sought t o do t h i s .  This  study  CHAPTER I I  THE PROBLEM  The  General  Problem  Educators  today a r e becoming more aware t h a t each c h i l d  i s an  i n d i v i d u a l , a c t i n g and r e a c t i n g i n h i s environment i n d i f f e r e n t ways, and t h a t t e a c h i n g can t h e r e f o r e not be done t o a c l a s s but must be done t o each i n d i v i d u a l w i t h i n a c l a s s .  As a r e s u l t , r e s e a r c h r e g a r d i n g t h e  nature o f the i n f l u e n c e t h a t s c h o o l has on each i n d i v i d u a l i s important to e d u c a t o r s .  When a c h i l d f i r s t  e n t e r s s c h o o l t h e r e i s g e n e r a l l y a degree  of p r e s s u r e on him from h i s s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s extent, h i s teachers)  to succeed  i n school.  ( h i s parents  and, t o some  S i n c e s c h o o l success i n  e a r l y grades i s measured t o a l a r g e extent by achievement i n r e a d i n g , i t can r e a d i l y be seen t h a t s e l f concept  (as a m i r r o r o f the p e r c e i v e d  feel-  ings o f s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s ) can be s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d by s u c c e s s , o r l a c k of i t , i n r e a d i n g . important  But as a c h i l d advances i n s c h o o l , peers become more  as an i n f l u e n c e on s e l f concept,  and peer group a c t i v i t i e s and  a t t i t u d e s , i n s c h o o l or o u t s i d e s c h o o l , become i n c r e a s i n g l y more i n f l u e n tial.  Often,  t h i s means t h a t success  i n areas such as s p o r t s , c l u b s and  s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s or whatever e l s e the peer group h o l d s important i n f l u e n t i a l on the s e l f concept e n t e r s h i g h e r grades,  than r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t y .  i s more  A l s o , as a c h i l d  he u s u a l l y has the o p p o r t u n i t y t o take a much g r e a t e r  v a r i e t y o f courses, many o f which do n o t p l a c e a g r e a t demand on r e a d i n g ability  f o r success  (P.E., Home Economics, I n d u s t r i a l A r t s , S e c r e t a r i a l 9  10 Courses,  Band, A g r i c u l t u r e , Work E x p e r i e n c e Programs).  This i s especially  t r u e i n today's h i g h s c h o o l s which a r e s t r e s s i n g more and more t h a t one o f the main aims o f e d u c a t i o n a t t h a t l e v e l i s t o p r o v i d e each student w i t h a chance t o e x p l o r e s e v e r a l areas o f endeavor and to p r o v i d e each student w i t h some success i n one o f these a r e a s . whole c h i l d ' ,  Such phrases  ' i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n ' and 'provide success  c u r r e n t l y used by e d u c a t o r s , i l l u s t r a t e t h i s f e e l i n g .  as 'educate t h e experiences' When c h i l d r e n a r e  p r o v i d e d w i t h success i n areas o t h e r than r e a d i n g , the f a c t t h a t the c h i l d i s a poor r e a d e r w i l l p r o b a b l y not have as g r e a t an e f f e c t on h i s v a l u a t i o n s of s e l f . T h i s study sought 1)  A r e s e l f concept  answers t o the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s :  and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated at  v a r i o u s grade l e v e l s ? 2)  Are t h e r e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the c o r r e l a t i o n s o f s e l f concept  3)  and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y f o r v a r i o u s grade l e v e l s ?  I s t h e r e a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the group means on the s e l f concept  s c a l e f o r good, average  o r poor r e a d e r s w i t h i n each grade  level? 4)  I f t h e r e i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e on s e l f concept between good, average  and poor r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  groups,  a r e these d i f f e r e n c e s t h e  same f o r each grade l e v e l o r do they change as a c h i l d through  progresses  school?  In t h i s study the v a r i a b l e s o f i n t e l l i g e n c e and s t a t u s were n o t b u i l t  i n t o the d e s i g n .  socio-economic  S e v e r a l s t u d i e s have found  t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f i n t e l l i g e n c e and s e l f concept 1965;  Wattenburg and C l i f f o r d , 1967;  Hesse and Bradshaw, 1970).  ever, some s t u d i e s have found some c o n f l i c t i n g  evidence and  that (Mayer, How-  Coopersmith  11 (1967) o b t a i n e d an o v e r a l l c o r r e l a t i o n o f .28 between s e l f intelligence.  esteem and  D i f f e r e n c e s i n c o r r e l a t i o n s o f i n t e l l i g e n c e and s e l f  concept i n d i f f e r e n t groups may w e l l depend on how w e l l the c h i l d knows and a c c e p t s h i s own a b i l i t y l e v e l . i n r e a d i n g performance the i n d i v i d u a l ' s  I n t h i s study, the b a s i c i n t e r e s t i s  and i t s r e l a t i o n t o s e l f concept, r e g a r d l e s s o f  intelligence.  The m a j o r i t y o f r e c e n t s t u d i e s have found l i t t l e o r no r e l a t i o n s h i p between the v a r i a b l e o f s e l f concept and socioeconomic s t a t u s 1968;  Soares and Soares, 1969, 1971, 1973;  Trowbridge,  1970).  (Carter,  Hess and Bradshaw, 1970;  D e n n e r e l l (1971) i n a study w i t h 208 f i f t h  grade  c h i l d r e n found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n s e l f concept by sex r o l e o r socioeconomic  status.  Although t h e v a r i a b l e , sex o f s u b j e c t s , was not b u i l t  i n t o the  d e s i g n , i t was c o n t r o l l e d i n the study by randomly s e l e c t i n g , where p o s s i b l e , e q u a l numbers o f boys and g i r l s to each a b i l i t y  group.  Hypotheses H y p o t h e s i s I - There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between c o r r e l a t i o n s o f r e a d i n g achievement  and s e l f concept f o r grades t h r e e ,  f i v e , seven, e i g h t , t e n and twelve. :  H 0  r  3  =  r  5  = r  7  = r  8  = r  1  0  = r  1  2  H y p o t h e s i s I I - There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between means on the s e l f concept s c a l e f o r groups a t v a r i o u s grade H o  o f poor, average and good r e a d e r s  levels. : M.. = M.,. = M.., = M.,., xj l j iji I j  12 D e f i n i t i o n of Terms 1)  S e l f Concept  - The s e l f concept i s an o r g a n i z a t i o n of images which  i n d i v i d u a l has about h i m s e l f i n h i s environment.  These  an  images  develop over time from the r e f l e c t e d a p p r a i s a l of o t h e r s around • him  ( B e a t t y , 1969).  The s e l f concept can be measured i n terms  of the p o s i t i v e or n e g a t i v e t r a i t s a p e r s o n f e e l s i s p a r t of h i s character.  S e l f concept of the i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h i s study w i l l  r e f e r to t h a t person's o b t a i n e d s c o r e on the P i e r s H a r r i s S e l f Concept 2)  Children's  Scale.  Reading A b i l i t y - The s u b j e c t ' s r e a d i n g a b i l i t y w i l l be h i s o b t a i n e d s c o r e ( t o t a l s c o r e ) on the N e l s o n Reading T e s t , R e v i s e d E d i t i o n , Form A f o r grades t h r e e , f i v e , seven and e i g h t , or on the N e l s o n Denny Reading T e s t , R e v i s e d E d i t i o n , Form C, f o r grades t e n and twelve. a) Good Reader - a s t u d e n t whose t o t a l s c o r e on the above r e a d i n g t e s t s f a l l s on or above the 68th p e r c e n t i l e f o r h i s grade. b) Average Reader - A student whose t o t a l s c o r e on the above r e a d i n g t e s t s f a l l s on or above the 34th p e r c e n t i l e f o r h i s grade but below the 68th p e r c e n t i l e . c) Poor Reader - A student whose t o t a l r e a d i n g s c o r e on the above t e s t s f a l l s below the 34th p e r c e n t i l e f o r h i s grade.  CHAPTER I I I GENERAL PROCEDURE Subj ects A l l subjects came from schools i n the Kamloops school d i s t r i c t , a c i t y with a population of approximately  sixty thousand.  The subjects  came from three elementary schools, one junior secondary school and one senior secondary school.  The elementary schools serve as feeder schools  to the junior secondary school which serves as a feeder school f o r the senior secondary school. t i o n area.  In this way, a l l subjects come from one popula-  This area from which the subject were drawn i s populated by  people from a wide range of socioeconomic l e v e l s — f r o m professional people such as doctors and lawyers, to welfare recipients.  The majority  of the population consists of predominantly middle class, working, white subculture.  Test Measures 1.  Piers Harris Children's Self Concept Scale The Piers Harris Children's Self Concept Scale was chosen for this  study for several reasons.  Although there are a large number of s e l f  concept and personality measures available today, most of these have several weaknesses.  Some of these were created solely for s p e c i f i c  research studies and were not tested for v a l i d i t y or r e l i a b i l i t y , or only minimumly tested.  Many tests deal with multiple personality factors 13  and/or interests rather than solely with s e l f A major concern of this study was  concept.  to measure children's s e l f con-  cept at d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e l s , and i n order to do this and be able to compare r e s u l t s , only one measure could be used for a l l grade l e v e l s . Unfortunately, many of the tests that have been more widely used are suitable only for the f i f t e e n and over age group and are not suitable for younger students, and those designed for the young children are not suitable for secondary school students.  The Piers Harris Children's Self  Concept Scale i s designed for use with grades three to twelve. The Piers Harris Children's Self Concept Scale was standardized on 1183 school d i s t r i c t .  originally  students i n grades four through twelve i n one suburban  Several follow-up studies were l a t e r done.  The  i n t e r n a l consistency of the scale ranges from .78 to .93 and test-retest r e l i a b i l i t y ranges from .72 to .77.  Correlates with similar  are i n the mid-sixties and the scale possesses c o e f f i c i e n t s of about .40.  instruments  teacher and peer v a l i d i t y  The current reviews of this test i n the  Seventh Annual (Buros, 1972) Mental Measurements Yearbook terms the test as a 'psychometrically adequate scale' and gave i t a favourable review for research purposes. In grades three, f i v e and seven the instructions and items for the test were read aloud by the examiner as the manual recommends. higher grades, only the instructions were read aloud.  At the  There was no time  l i m i t for responding to the questions. The score on the Piers Harris Children's Self Concept Scale i n d i cates the extent of p o s i t i v e s e l f 2.  concept.  Nelson Reading Test, Revised E d i t i o n , Form A, (1972) Nelson. Denny Reading Test, Revised Edition, Form C (1972)  15 One of the main concerns i n choosing a reading measure was that the test would measure the same reading s k i l l s i n the same way at d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e l s .  There are no adequate reading tests on the market which  allow one form to be used by students ranging from grade three to grade twelve.  Most tests require that d i f f e r e n t forms be used f o r approximately  every second or t h i r d grade l e v e l .  The Nelson Reading Test and the  Nelson Denny Reading Test were thus chosen partly because they spanned a larger number of grade l e v e l s with one form, thereby eliminating as much as possible a confounding due to d i f f e r e n t tests at d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e l s . Another reason these tests were chosen was that they measured two major factors of reading a b i l i t y — v o c a b u l a r y and comprehension—important to this study, and did not attempt to measure other s k i l l s such as grammar, s p e l l i n g , alphabetizing or study s k i l l s , which were extraneous to this study.  In this study, the Nelson Reading Test was used with students i n  grades three, f i v e , seven and eight.  The Nelson Denny Reading Test was  used with students i n grades ten and twelve.  Both tests y i e l d three  scores—vocabulary, comprehension and t o t a l score.  The Nelson Denny  Reading Test also y i e l d s a rate score which was not used i n this study. The r e l i a b i l i t y for the Nelson Denny Reading Test t o t a l score i s .92.  The r e l i a b i l i t y for the Nelson Reading Test t o t a l score ranges from  .88 to .93.  The percentile norms for both of the reading tests, which  were used i n this study to assign students to a b i l i t y reading a b i l i t y groups, were c a r e f u l l y constructed, using a wide range and-large number of students across a l l grade l e v e l s .  Both tests received favourable  reviews i n the Seventh Annual Mental Measurements Yearbook (Buros, 1972). In order to determine the c o r r e l a t i o n between the Nelson Reading Test and the Nelson Denny Reading Test forty-seven students i n grade nine  16 r e c e i v e d both t e s t s .  T h e i r s c o r e s on the two  c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t of  .91.  The measures of r e a d i n g and examiner.  reading tests y i e l d e d a  s e l f concept were a d m i n i s t e r e d by  Both measures can be o b t a i n e d commercially  r e p l i c a t i o n of t h i s  f o r use  one  i n any  study.  General Design All  students  i n grades t h r e e , f i v e , and  seven of the  elementary  s c h o o l s i n v o l v e d i n t h i s study were g i v e n the Nelson Reading T e s t .  Because  of the much g r e a t e r number of s t u d e n t s w i t h i n each grade l e v e l f o r the j u n i o r and  s e n i o r secondary  schools, approximately  one hundred and  fifty  s t u d e n t s were randomly s e l e c t e d from each grade l e v e l to be t e s t e d w i t h  the  Nelson Reading T e s t i n grade e i g h t or the Nelson Denny Reading T e s t i n grades t e n and  twelve.  In a d m i n i s t e r i n g the r e a d i n g t e s t s ,  instructions  from t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e manuals were f o l l o w e d . For each s t u d e n t , a t o t a l r e a d i n g s c o r e was  c a l c u l a t e d , and  each of  these s c o r e s were t r a n s l a t e d to a p e r c e n t i l e r a n k i n g a c c o r d i n g to the norms i n the a p p r o p r i a t e t e s t manual.  Each of these s t u d e n t s was  to one of the f o l l o w i n g t h r e e g r o u p s — p o o r r e a d e r s average r e a d e r s  then  ( 1 s t to 33rd  (34th to 67th p e r c e n t i l e s ) or good r e a d e r s  assigned  percentile),  (68th to  99th  percentiles). From each of these groups, a t each grade l e v e l ,  twenty s u b j e c t s were  randomly s e l e c t e d , u s i n g random number t a b l e s ( M a r a s c u i l o , 1971), to r e c e i v e the P i e r s H a r r i s C h i l d r e n ' s S e l f Concept S c a l e .  The  scale  was  administered  to s t u d e n t s b e f o r e they were g i v e n t h e i r s c o r e s on the r e a d -  ing t e s t s .  A s e l f concept  w i t h each group and  s c o r e was  then c a l c u l a t e d f o r each  group means were c a l c u l a t e d .  student  17 To all  test the f i r s t hypothesis,  the raw s c o r e s f o r a l l s t u d e n t s  t h r e e groups a t each grade l e v e l on the P i e r s H a r r i s C h i l d r e n ' s  within Self  Concept S c a l e and on t h e t o t a l r e a d i n g s c o r e were c o r r e l a t e d , and these c o r r e l a t i o n s were t e s t e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s u s i n g the Z t r a n s f o r m a t i o n and C h i square d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r a = .05.  A computer program  - ( B j e r r i n g , 1975) was used t o determine c e l l means f o r a t h r e e by s i x f a c t o r a l d e s i g n and t o compute the a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e t a b l e , w i t h r e a d i n g a b i l i t y and grade l e v e l as independent measures and s c o r e s on the P i e r s H a r r i s C h i l d r e n ' s S e l f Concept S c a l e as the dependent v a r i a b l e . T h i s was f o l l o w e d by S c h e f f e t e s t s t o determine sources  of s i g n i f i c a n t  e f f e c t s of the independent v a r i a b l e s and t o determine s i g n i f i c a n t  inter-  actions .  Sample S i z e O r i g i n a l numbers of students  t o whom the r e a d i n g t e s t s were  Grade 3  138  Grade 5  136  Grade 7  183  Grade 8  164  Grade 10  143  Grade 12  128  Total  892  Number o f students  r e c e i v i n g the s e l f concept  administered:  s c a l e and used i n r e s e a r c h  analysis: Number o f s u b j e c t s i n each group  20  Number o f s u b j e c t s i n each grade  60  T o t a l s u b j e c t s i n r e s e a r c h study  360  CHAPTER IV  DATA ANALYSES AND  RESULTS  In order to t e s t the f i r s t h y p o t h e s i s — t h a t icant differences  signif-  between c o r r e l a t i o n s o f r e a d i n g achievement and  concept f o r grades t h r e e , s c o r e s f o r each s u b j e c t  f i v e , seven, e i g h t ,  self  t e n and t w e l v e — t h e raw  on the r e a d i n g t e s t and on the s e l f  were c o r r e l a t e d f o r each grade l e v e l by computer 1970).  t h e r e a r e no  concept s c a l e s  program BMD:02D (Halm,  The r e s u l t i n g c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e g i v e n i n T a b l e 1.  TABLE 1 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELF CONCEPT AND READING SCORES  Grade  N  Correlation  3  60  .31**  5  60  .57**  7  60  .57**  8  60  .58**  10  60  .23*  12  60  .19  C o r r e l a t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .05 * * c o r r e l a t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01  The c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r grades t h r e e , significant.  The h i g h e s t  seven and e i g h t ,  level level  f i v e , seven, e i g h t and t e n were  c o r r e l a t i o n s were o b t a i n e d f o r grades f i v e ,  a f t e r which the c o r r e l a t i o n s dropped u n t i l , 18  f o r grade  19 twelve, the c o r r e l a t i o n was nonsignificant. The correlations were then tested for s i g n i f i c a n t differences using the z transformation and the c h i square d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r k independent values of r (Edwards, 1973):  X  2 = E(nk-3)  z k  2 _ |(nk-3) zk] 2 k I(nk-3)  1  = 14.43* * s i g n i f i c a n t at the .02 l e v e l The correlations for d i f f e r e n t grades were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t and the f i r s t hypothesis was rejected. As the c h i square test showed a s i g n i f i c a n t difference, a Z transformation for r for i n d i v i d u a l grade correlations was computed to determine which grades were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from other grades using the equation (Edwards, 1973): Z =  where :  = vcr Z1-Z2  z\  zi - z a  z  2  l" 2  - a  z  1  Z2  =  v  o H  ni - 3  o VL2  -  3  = .19 The results of these calculations are shown i n Table 2. From the results depicted i n Table 2, i t appears that the c o r r e l a tions for grades three, f i v e , seven and eight are not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from each other.  However, each of these grades' correlations  are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from the correlations f o r grade ten and twelve which are also not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from each other.  20 TABLE 2 SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CORRELATIONS OF READING AND SELF CONCEPT FOR PAIRS OF GRADES  GRADE 3 5 7 8 10 12  N  r  60 60 60 60 60 60  .31 .57 .57 .58 .23 •19  Zl =  z  5  - z  3  = 1.72  z  z  r  .321 .648 .648 .662 .234 .192 Zg -= z  1 2  - z  5  = -2.40*  z  7  =  2  =  z  7  - z  3  = 1.72  z  Z3  =  z  8  - z  3  = 1.79  Zll  = z  1 0  - z  7  = -2.18*  z  =  z  10  -  z  3  =  -.46  12  = z  1 2  - z  7  = -2.40*  -  z  3  =  -.68  z  8  = -2.25* = -2.47*  k  z  5  =  z  12  z  6  =  z  7  -  z  5  =  Zy =  z  8  -  z  5  =  =  z  10  z  8  "  z  5  z  10  =  -  Zg  Zl3  =  0  Z  1 4  = z  1 2  - z  8  .07  Zl5  = z  1 2  - z  1 0  z  "  10  .07  =  -.22  = -2.18*  * s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t a t the .05  level  In order to t e s t the second h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e r e were no  signif-  i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between means on the s e l f concept s c a l e f o r groups of poor, average and good r e a d e r s a t v a r i o u s grade l e v e l s , the s u b j e c t s ' s c o r e s on the P i e r s H a r r i s C h i l d r e n ' s S e l f Concept S c a l e s were a n a l y z e d by computer  program BMD;10V ( B j e r r i n g , et a l , 1975).  The r e s u l t i n g means and  s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r each group on the dependent measure, s e l f concept, a r e g i v e n i n T a b l e 3.  The t o t a l means f o r each grade and f o r each t o t a l  a b i l i t y group a r e a l s o g i v e n i n the t a b l e .  21 TABLE 3 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS ON SELF CONCEPT SCALE FOR READING GROUPS BY GRADE LEVEL  TOTAL n=60  GOOD n=20  AVERAGE n=20  POOR n=20 M  S.D.  M  S.D.  M  S • D.  M  S.D.  GRADE 3  52.50  10. 27  51.95  11.72  60.60  8 .48  55.02  10. 83  GRADE 5  45.75  13. 40  51.30  11.95  65.05  9 .95  54.03  14. 23  GRADE 7  50.35  12. 99  60.25  8.55  66.90  7 .18  59.17  11. 90  GRADE 8  47.45  9. 75  51.60  10.89  64.00  6 .84  54.35  11. 58  GRADE 10  52.50  7. 94  53.00  7.20  55.25  11 .51  53.58  9. 00  GRADE 12  53.00  9. 90  57.70  12.07  55.70  12 .15  55.47  11. 39  TOTAL  50.26  11. 00  54.30  n= 360  n= L20  n= L20  n=^120  10.90  61.25  55.27  10 .40  An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r t h e s i x by t h r e e f a c t o r a l  11. 66  design  w i t h the two independent v a r i a b l e s o f r e a d i n g a b i l i t y and grade l e v e l and the dependent v a r i a b l e as p o s i t i v e s e l f concept s c o r e was a l s o by the same computer program.  calculated  The r e s u l t s a r e g i v e n i n T a b l e 4.  TABLE 4 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE FOR THE THREE BY SIX FACTORAL DESIGN  SOURCE-  SUM OF SQUARES  D.F.  ABILITY  7418.2  2  GRADES  1230.4  5  INTERACTION  3517.6 36651.0  WITHIN TREATMENT  MEAN SQUARE 3709.1  PROB. 34.61078  .0000  246.09  2.29635  .0450  10  351.76  3.28239  .00049  342  107.17  22 The above r e s u l t s show t h a t a l l t h r e e s o u r c e s of v a r i a n c e — a b i l i t y , grades and i n t e r a c t i o n were s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .05 l e v e l .  T h e r e f o r e the  second n u l l h y p o t h e s i s  H  : M.. = M.,. o  was  13  = M..,  i J  =  M.,.,  13  13  rejected. A graph of the i n t e r a c t i o n of grades and a b i l i t y  1.  T h i s graph shows the i n t e r a c t i o n t h a t was  ANOVA t a b l e .  i s given i n Figure  proved s i g n i f i c a n t  i n the  The graph a l s o shows t h a t the spread between good and poor  and good and average r e a d e r s i n terms of p o s i t i v e s e l f concept i s g r e a t e r at  the lower grade l e v e l s than at the grade t e n and twelve grade  where the spread i s o n l y t h r e e to f i v e p o i n t s .  levels,  In grade twelve, the  good r e a d i n g a b i l i t y mean s c o r e i s lower than the average r e a d i n g  ability  mean s c o r e . S i n c e the ANOVA t a b l e showed a s i g n i f i c a n t  effect for a b i l i t y ,  a  S c h e f f e t e s t was used t o determine a t which grade l e v e l s the d i f f e r e n c e between r e a d i n g a b i l i t y ing  e q u a t i o n was  groups was  statistically  significant.  The  used i n the c a l c u l a t i o n s and the r e s u l t s are p r e s e n t e d i n  T a b l e 5 (Glass and S t a n l e y , / * +  A  \  1970).  —  7^ /  c 2  2 C  l  2  +  —  +  •••  +  / ( I  -  1 ) F  ' I-I,N-U  The d i f f e r e n c e between means f o r the good and poor r e a d i n g groups was  s i g n i f i c a n t f o r grades t h r e e , f i v e , seven and e i g h t .  d i f f e r e n c e between means f o r good and average r e a d i n g a b i l i t y also s i g n i f i c a n t  follow-  f o r grades t h r e e , f i v e and  ability The  groups  eight.  To l o c a t e the main e f f e c t s of a b i l i t y ,  the main e f f e c t s of grade  and the main e f f e c t s o f the i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the e f f e c t s o f grade and ability  was  removed, the unknown parameters f o r the t h r e e by s i x f a c t o r a l  7068666462605856545250484644424010  12  GRADES good r e a d e r s average r e a d e r s poor r e a d e r s  FIGURE 1:  Graph of i n t e r a c t i o n s of grade and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y on s e l f concept  TABLE 5 DIFFERENCES  GRADE  BETWEEN MEANS WITHIN EACH GRADE FOR THE EFFECTS OF READING ABILITY  GOOD-POOR  GOOD-AVERAGE  AVERAGE-POOR  3  8.65*  8.10*  -.55  5  13.75*  19.30*  5.55  7  6.65  16.55*  9.90*  8  12.40*  16.55*  4.15  10  2.25  2.75  .50  12  -2.00  2.70  4.70  10.99*  4.04  TOTAL  6.95  * s i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 l e v e l  d e s i g n were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g t h e d a t a from T a b l e 3.  These unknown  parameters a r e r e c o r d e d i n T a b l e 6.  TABLE 6 TABLE OF UNKNOWN PARAMETERS FOR THE 3 x 6 FACT0RAL DESIGN  GRADE  POOR  ABILITY AVERAGE  GOOD  MAIN EFFECT  GRADE 3  2.49  -2.10  -.40  -.25  GRADE 5  -3.27  -1.76  5.04  -1.24  GRADE 7  -3.81  2.05  1.75  3.90  GRADE 8  -1.89  -1.78  3.67  -.92  GRADE 10  3.93  .39  -4.31  -1.69  GRADE 12  2.94  3.20  -5.75  .20  MAIN EFFECT  -5.01  -.197  5.98  25 The unknown parameters were c a l c u l a t e d  i n r e s p e c t to t h e grand mean.  For example, on the b a s i s o f the d a t a i n T a b l e 3 and T a b l e 6 i t i s found that w i t h i n rounding e r r o r s 1.  ( e f f e c t o f a b i l i t y poor) = y  = y  2.  ( e f f e c t o f grade 3)  3.  ( e f f e c t o f i n t e r a c t i o n , poor a b i l i t y  = 50.26 - 55.27 = -5.01  = y . -y •J • •  55.02 = 55.27 = -.25 x grade 3)  = Yii - a, - j3, = 52.5 ± 5.01 + .25 - 55.27 = 2.49 From the above t a b l e c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l s were e s t a b l i s h e d ,  using  the S c h e f f e t e s t t o determine which treatment e f f e c t s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y different  from z e r o , r e l a t i v e t o the grand mean.  for significant differences follow A.  The t h r e e  calculations  ( M a r a s c u i l o and L e v i n , 1970) :  C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l s around i n d i v i d u a l a. used to l determine which treatment e f f e c t o f a b i l i t y was s i g n i f i c a n t l y ent from z e r o , u s i n g the e q u a t i o n : a. = a. ± S SE. i i a. I  where S* = ( I - D F ^ ^ ^ S  E  S  2  =  ^ 1 J  1-.95  MS^ J.N  a. = a. ± 1.90 ( c r i t i c a l v a l u e ) I l Main e f f e c t s f o r a b i l i t y ai  = 5.61*  a  = -.97  2  a 3 = 5.98*  * s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .05 l e v e l  differ-  26 According  to the c a l c u l a t i o n s ,  p r o v i d e s i g n i f i c a n t sources the estimated B.  treatment  two l e v e l s o f a b i l i t y  (poor and good)  o f v a r i a t i o n r e l a t i v e t o the grand mean s i n c e  e f f e c t s were l a r g e r  C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r confidence  i n a b s o l u t e v a l u e than 1.90. g. used t o  i n t e r v a l s around i n d i v i d u a l  3 determine which treatment  e f f e c t o f grade were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t  from z e r o , u s i n g t h e e q u a t i o n : 3. 3  = 3. ± S SE. 3  3  where S* = ( J - D F ^ ^ ^ j and  SE* 3  3. J  - * ±  j  ^ E I.N  J  = 3 . ± 4.09 J  From T a b l e 7 t h e main e f f e c t s 3  3  1-95  f o r grade a r e :  = .25 35 = 1.24 37 = -3.90 3s = -92 g  1 0  = 1-69 g  1 2  = -.20  T h e r e f o r e no simple l e v e l o f grade r e l a t i v e to grand mean r e p r e s e n t s significant  sources o f v a r i a t i o n  s i n c e each e s t i m a t e d  treatment  effect  was s m a l l e r i n a b s o l u t e v a l u e than 4.08. C.  C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r confidence  with the e f f e c t s interaction  i n t e r v a l s around each c e l l  o f grades and a b i l i t y  removed, used t o determine which  e f f e c t s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t  grand mean. Y. . = Y. . ± S E„. . = Y.. ± 7.41 where 5  - ( - )( - > (I-1)(J-1),  2  S E  I  2  1  J  1  F  „ (I-1)(J-D  MS  E  interaction  IJ(N-l)  x  ~  a  from zero r e l a t i v e t o  27 T h e r e f o r e no simple combinations  of grades  and  a b i l i t y were s o l e l y  r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the s i g n i f i c a n t F - r a t i o f o r i n t e r a c t i o n i n the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e t a b l e as not even the l a r g e s t Y = -5.75 confidence  was  o u t s i d e the  interval.  S i n c e the S c h e f f e i s c o n s i d e r e d a v e r y c o n s e r v a t i v e t e s t and simple i n t e r a c t i o n s have not proved (1970) suggest  since  s i g n i f i c a n t , M a r a s c u i l o and L e v i n  t h a t an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of c o n t r a s t s i n v o l v i n g two  or more  i n t e r a c t i o n s would be n e c e s s a r y  to i d e n t i f y reasons  o r d e r to f i n d these s i g n i f i c a n t  i n t e r a c t i o n s the d a t a were r e - a n a l y z e d  u s i n g the c a l c u l a t i o n s suggested One  (i.e.,  good/average or average/poor  w i t h whether than  the spread between means f o r good/poor or was  g r e a t e r a t some grade l e v e l s than  c o r r e s p o n d i n g spread i n o t h e r grade l e v e l s ) .  The  concerned  i n e a r l y grades v a r i e d more w i t h the r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  i n the h i g h e r grades  s h i p s were f i r s t  In  by M a r a s c u i l o and L e v i n .  of the main q u e s t i o n s of t h i s study was  the s e l f concept  for rejection.  i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r p a i r s of  T h e r e f o r e , these  the  relation-  grades.  f o l l o w i n g t a b l e p r e s e n t s the t e t r a d d i f f e r e n c e s between a b i l i t y  groups f o r d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e l s . i.e.,  ¥ = (Y.. - Y... , ) - (Y. , . + Y. , . ,) ij 13 3 iJ 1  The  Scheffe equation  ( M a r a s c u i l o and L e v i n , 1970)  e s t a b l i s h c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l s around the t e t r a d AB The  The yet,  two  used  to  differences.  = A. - A., ± S SEI x' Ax-Ax'  t a b l e shows no s t a t i s t i c a l l y  means between any  was  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between p a i r s of  grades, as none reached  the c r i t i c a l v a l u e of 20.02.  simple t e t r a d d i f f e r e n c e s were proved  to be not  a c c o r d i n g to S c h e f f e ' s Theorem, i f the i n i t i a l  significant,  t e s t of h y p o t h e s i s i s  28 TABLE 7 TABLE OF TETRAD DIFFERENCES FOR SPREAD OF MEANS BETWEEN TWO ABILITY GROUPS FOR PAIRS OF GRADES  DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GRADES  AVERAGEPOOR  GOODPOOR  GOODAVERAGE  -.61  -11.20  3- 5  -5.10  3- 7  2.00  -8.45  -10.45  3- 8  -3.75  -8.45  -4.70  3-10  6.40  5.35  -1.05  3-12  10.65  5.40  -5.25  5- 7  7.10  2.75  -4.35  5- 8  1.35  2.75  1.40  5-10  11.50  16.55  5.05  5-12  15.75  16.60  .85  7- 8  -5.75  0  5.75  7-10  4.40  13.80  9.40  7-12  8.65  13.85  5.20  8-10  10.15  13.80  3.65  8-12  14.40  13.85  -.55  10-12  4.25  .05  4.20  s i g n i f i c a n t t h e r e must a l s o e x i s t some r e l a t e d c o n t r a s t s which a r e a l s o significant.  M a r a s c u i l o and L e v i n (1970) suggest  then c o l l a p s e over c e l l s i n meaningful contrasts i n differences.  ways to produce more complex  S i n c e p a r t of the o r i g i n a l problem was  c o n t r a s t the r e l a t i o n between r e a d i n g and w i t h the c o r r e s p o n d i n g of c e l l means was  t h a t the r e s e a r c h e r  s e l f concept  to  a t the lower  r e l a t i o n s h i p s a t the h i g h e r grades,  the  grades  collapsing  done i n t h r e e d i f f e r e n t ways to s e t up t h r e e d i f f e r e n t  ways of comparing lower v e r s u s h i g h e r grades. between the t h r e e lower  grades and  The  first  the t h r e e h i g h e r grades  comparison  was  (3,5,7:8,10,12).  Because many o f t h e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r s t u d e n t s t o s p e c i a l i z e i n programs s t a r t a f t e r grade e i g h t , and s i n c e involvement i n s c h o o l a c t i v i t e s , o t h e r than c l a s s e s , o f t e n become g r e a t e r a f t e r the f i r s t y e a r i n h i g h s c h o o l a second comparison was made between t h e f o u r lower grades and the two s e n i o r grades  (10 and 1 2 ) .  (3,5,7, and 8)  A t h i r d comparison was then made  between the two lower grades and t h e two m i d d l e grades and t h e two upper grades  (3,5:7,8:10,12). The computer program, BMD:10V, ( B j e r r i n g e t a l , 1975) was used t o  c a l c u l a t e means, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s and ANOVA t a b l e s f o r each o f t h e above c o n t r a s t s ,  (these a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Appendix B ) , and the r e s u l t s  were a n a l y z e d by t h e S c h e f f e e q u a t i o n to t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n t of  interaction  ( M a r a s c u i l o and L e v i n , AB  differences  1970).  = A. = A. , ± S SE„. I i A i - A.i,' x  ,  a =.05 n!  The c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r each grouping f o l l o w s . A.  C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r grades 3,5,7 v s . 8,10,12. D i f f e r e n c e s between means o f a b i l i t y groups f o r each l e v e l o f grades. GOOD-POOR grades 3,5,7 grades 8,10,12  GOOD-AVER.  AVER.-POOR  14.65  9.68  4.97  7.34  4.22  3.12  7.31*  5.46  1.85  TETRAD DIFFERENCES (3,5,7) - (8,10,12)  The c r i t i c a l v a l u e by the S c h e f f e e q u a t i o n was 6.30.  Therefore d i f f e r -  ences f o r means o f good r e a d e r s from means o f poor r e a d e r s f o r lower grades 3,5,7, was s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from those d i f f e r e n c e s f o r upper grades, 8,10,12.  30 B.  Calculations for grades 3,5,7,8 vs. 10,12. Differences between means of a b i l i t y groups for each l e v e l of grades. GOOD-POOR grades 3,5,7,8 grades 10,12  GOOD-AVER.  AVER.-POOR  15.13  10.37  4.77  2.72  .12  2.60  12.41**  10.25**  2.16  TETRAD DIFFERENCES (3,5,7,8) - (10,12)  The c r i t i c a l value by the Scheffe equation was 2.71.  Therefore the  averaged means for grades 3,5,7,8 were s i g n i f i c a n t l y different  from the  averaged means for grade 10 and 12 i n differences between good and poor readers good and average readers at a = .01. C.  Calculations for grades 3,5 vs. 7,8 vs. 10,12. Differences between means of a b i l i t y groups for each l e v e l of grades. GOOD-POOR  GOOD-AVER.  AVER.-POOR  grades 3,5  13.70  11.20  2.50  grades 7,8  16.55  9.53  7.02  2.72  .12  2.60  (3,5) - (7,8)  -3.85  1.67  4.52  (3,5) - (10,12)  10.98  11.08*  -.10  (7,8) - (10,12)  13.83*  9.41  4.42  grades 10,12 TETRAD DIFFERENCES  The c r i t i c a l value of the Scheffe equation i s 10.23.  Therefore the  spread between means of good and poor readers was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y different  for grades (3,5) from (7,8) but was s i g n i f i c a n t between each  of these grade l e v e l groups and grades (10,12).  The spread between good  and average readers for grades (3,5) was s i g n i f i c a n t l y different corresponding spread for grades (10,12).  from the  CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS  Summary The purpose of this study was to determine i f reading a b i l i t y was related to s e l f concept and to what extent they were related at various grade l e v e l s .  Previous studies had shown a positive relationship i n  primary grades where most research had been concentrated, but l i t t l e research had been done using the normal range of high school students. Furthermore, most studies used d i f f e r e n t measures of s e l f concept and of reading a b i l i t y so that i t was d i f f i c u l t to compare the results of d i f f e r ent studies.  This study i s unique i n that i t takes groups of good,  average and poor readers i n intermediate and secondary grades to study the relationship between reading and s e l f concept, using one measure of s e l f concept and correlated measures of reading a b i l i t y . The subjects who participated i n this study were 360 students i n grades three, f i v e , seven, eight, ten and twelve i n one school d i s t r i c t . There were sixty students i n each grade l e v e l — t w e n t y good, twenty average and twenty poor readers, as determined by subjects' scores on the Nelson Reading Test or the Nelson Denny Reading Test.  Each of these subjects  responded to the Piers Harris Children's Self Concept Scale which yielded a score indicating p o s i t i v e s e l f  concept.  The data were analyzed i n order to accept or reject two hypotheses: 1)  There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t differences between correlations of 32  33 r e a d i n g and s e l f concept and 2)  f o r grades t h r e e , f i v e , seven, e i g h t , t e n  twelve.  There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between means on the s e l f concept  s c a l e f o r groups of poor, average and good r e a d e r s a t v a r i o u s  grade l e v e l s . The  f i r s t h y p o t h e s i s was t e s t e d by c o r r e l a t i n g raw s c o r e s on the  r e a d i n g t e s t s w i t h s e l f concept  s c o r e s a t each grade l e v e l .  Correlations  were s u b j e c t e d to post hoc t e s t s to f i n d s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s .  The  second h y p o t h e s i s was t e s t e d w i t h i n a t h r e e by s i x f a c t o r a l d e s i g n .  An  a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e was done f o l l o w e d by S c h e f f e t e s t s to f i n d the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r l e v e l s of main e f f e c t s and f o r s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n s between means and between p a i r s of means.  Conclusions  and D i s c u s s i o n  Both of the n u l l hypotheses posed i n t h i s r e s e a r c h study were r e j e c t e d so t h a t : H  :  vi  ±  r  2  # • . •  o H  : M.. ^  t  r, k  M.,.,  S e v e r a l q u e s t i o n s were posed as p a r t of the r e s e a r c h problem. first  q u e s t i o n asked i f r e a d i n g and s e l f concept  l a t e d a t any of the s i x grade l e v e l s s t u d i e d . and  significant  significant  were p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e C o r r e l a t i o n s were p o s i t i v e  f o r grades t h r e e , f i v e , seven, e i g h t and t e n but as not  f o r grade twelve.  The second q u e s t i o n asked whether t h e r e  were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the c o r r e l a t i o n s of r e a d i n g and  s e l f concept  The  f o r the v a r i o u s grade l e v e l s .  showed t h a t t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e .  ability  The s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s Furthermore, i t appeared  from the data t h a t r e a d i n g a b i l i t y and s e l f concept  were most h i g h l y  34 c o r r e l a t e d a t the middle  grades ( f i v e , seven and  correlation  dropped as c h i l d r e n p r o g r e s s e d  correlation  f o r grade twelve was  The  not  e i g h t ) and  through  that  this  h i g h s c h o o l so t h a t the  significant.  t h i r d q u e s t i o n asked whether t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s  between group means f o r d i f f e r e n t  a b i l i t y groups w i t h i n each grade,  and  whether these d i f f e r e n c e s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from grade to grade.  From  the a n a l y s e s of d a t a , i t appeared t h a t t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the s e l f concept five,  seven and  of good and poor r e a d e r s at the  grades  three,  e i g h t l e v e l s , but t h a t these d i f f e r e n c e s decreased  grade t e n and were not s i g n i f i c a n t between the s e l f concept  f o r grade twelve.  of good r e a d e r s and  by  The d i f f e r e n c e s  the s e l f concept  of poor  r e a d e r s were g r e a t e s t f o r grades f i v e , seven and e i g h t . Some data from t h i s study appear to c o n f l i c t w i t h the m a j o r i t y of data from p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s , which g e n e r a l l y showed h i g h e r c o r r e lations  between r e a d i n g s c o r e s and  s e l f concept  s c o r e s f o r primary  than f o r h i g h e r grades.  The data from t h i s study show a lower,  significant  correlation  seven and but two  and p o s i t i v e ,  eight.  One  f a c t o r s may  can o n l y c o n j e c t u r e on causes f o r t h i s  h e l p to e x p l a i n t h i s .  The  grades a r e not as y e t aware of t h e i r poorer compared to the average r e a d e r s , f o r two  first  i s t h a t a c c o r d i n g to  l e v e l of r e a d i n g  reasons.  discrepancy,  One  primary ability  i s t h a t the a c t u a l  r e a d i n g l e s s o n s a r e u s u a l l y done i n r e a d e r s w r i t t e n f o r d i f f e r e n t levels.  Secondly,  r e a d i n g s k i l l s to succeed s c i e n c e and  even math.  more o f t e n and may  although  f o r grade t h r e e than f o r grades f i v e ,  the grade t h r e e t e a c h e r s , the m a j o r i t y of poor r e a d e r s i n the  ability  grades  reading  i n grade t h r e e t h e r e i s not y e t an emphasis  on  i n other s u b j e c t areas such as s o c i a l s t u d i e s , However, good r e a d e r s , because they tend to read  be g i v e n the o p p o r t u n i t y to do more r e a d i n g o r i e n t e d  35 p r o j e c t s i n o t h e r s u b j e c t a r e a s , do r e a l i z e t h e i r a b i l i t y  differences.  The o t h e r p o s s i b l e cause f o r the d i s c r e p a n c y i s t h a t both  grade  t h r e e poor r e a d e r s and grade f i v e poor r e a d e r s had unequal numbers o f boys (11) and g i r l s  (9) i n each c e l l .  T h i s was  due t o the f a c t t h a t i n  both grade t h r e e and i n grade f i v e , the boys outnumbered the g i r l s i n t o t a l grade, poor r e a d i n g groups. the grade  As the mean s e l f concept  for g i r l s i n  t h r e e poor r e a d i n g c e l l i s lower than t h a t f o r the boys,  t o t a l group mean may  have been lower had  the  the number of g i r l s and boys  been even (see Appendix A ) . The d a t a i n t h i s study do not, of c o u r s e , show what f a c t o r s ence the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e a d i n g a b i l i t y d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e l s or why  and s e l f concept a t the  the c o r r e l a t i o n s between these v a r i a b l e s  decrease as the c h i l d reaches the upper grades. a r e p r e s e n t e d here which might account When a c h i l d  influ-  However, s e v e r a l i d e a s  f o r the changes.  e n t e r s s c h o o l he i s v e r y much concerned w i t h success  i n s c h o o l , mainly as a r e f l e c t i o n of the concerns o f h i s p a r e n t s and, some e x t e n t , h i s t e a c h e r s (the s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s ) .  In the e a r l y  to  grades  success i n r e a d i n g i s a l a r g e p a r t of the measure f o r success i n s c h o o l . A l s o , most of the c h i l d ' s concern i n s c h o o l i s w i t h i n - c l a s s work. As the c h i l d  grows o l d e r he may  s c h o o l or peer group a c t i v i t i e s ,  e s p e c i a l l y i f he i s not a t t a i n i n g much  success w i t h academic a c t i v i t i e s . related  become more i n v o l v e d i n o t h e r a f t e r  T h i s involvement w i t h a c t i v i t i e s  to academic achievement becomes more important as the c h i l d  o l d e r , so t h a t i n a d o l e s c e n c e , peer acceptance important than success i n s c h o o l s u b j e c t s . of the b a s k e t b a l l team or who  not grows  i s o f t e n as, or more,  For example, a boy who  i s star  p l a y s i n a l o c a l r o c k band on weekends w i l l  p r o b a b l y r e g a r d these a c t i v i t i e s and  the peer s t a t u s they b r i n g as more  36 important than good r e a d i n g a b i l i t y and  success i n academic s u b j e c t s .  As w e l l as t h i s , the student can, when he reaches h i g h s c h o o l , e l e c t more courses each y e a r on the b a s i s of p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t — o n e s f o r which r e a d i n g s k i l l  i s not p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r s u c c e s s .  e i g h t i n B r i t i s h Columbia grouped  are s t i l l ,  f o r the most p a r t ,  Students  i n grade  heterogeneously  and r e q u i r e d to take Math, E n g l i s h , S o c i a l S t u d i e s , S c i e n c e and  French, g e n e r a l l y without any a p p r e c i a b l e streaming f o r a b i l i t y . a f t e r grade e i g h t , s t u d e n t s are o f t e n streamed  However,  by a b i l i t y , whether i n t o  academic, v o c a t i o n a l , o c c u p a t i o n a l or work e x p e r i e n c e programs or l e v e l s one,  two  and  t h r e e , based on achievement.  through the secondary year u n t i l , all  grades he has to take fewer  into  As the student advances r e q u i r e d courses  each  i n grade twelve, E n g l i s h 12 i s the o n l y r e q u i r e d c o u r s e  o t h e r s u b j e c t s may  be e l e c t e d from h i s own  vocational interest  and areas  ( I n d u s t r i a l A r t s , Community S e r v i c e , S e c r e t a r i a l A r t s , Food S e r v i c e s , F i n e A r t s o r Academic c o u r s e s ) .  By grade n i n e or t e n , s t u d e n t s a l s o become  much more i n v o l v e d w i t h peer o r i e n t e d p u r s u i t s such as s p o r t s , s t u d e n t s ' c o u n s e l , p a r t time j o b s and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s i n which they may success.  attain  C e r t a i n l y the f a c t t h a t s c h o o l s today aim more than ever b e f o r e  at p r o v i d i n g success e x p e r i e n c e s f o r each i n d i v i d u a l w i l l have i t s e f f e c t s on the s e l f concepts o f those  Suggestions f o r F u t u r e  individuals.  Research  The r e s u l t s of t h i s study suggest s e v e r a l areas i n which r e s e a r c h may  be d i r e c t e d .  s t r u c t such as s e l f concept  S i n c e the v a l i d i t y of any measure of a  con-  i s always i n q u e s t i o n to some e x t e n t , a  c a t i o n of t h i s study might be done u s i n g a d i f f e r e n t measure of c o n c e p t — e i t h e r another  further  self  s e l f r e p o r t measure or a t e a c h e r s ' o r p e e r s '  repli-  37  rating scale or a combination of the two. As the correlations for reading and s e l f concept f o r grades f i v e , seven and eight were very similar and the drop i n correlations appears, from this data, to occur after grade eight, a similar study might be done with grades eight, nine, ten, eleven and twelve, to see where and how the correlations vary within these grades and to ascertain where the c o r r e l a tions decrease through the secondary grades. A t h i r d area towards which research may be directed i s a study over time, testing the same students i n grade eight, grade ten and grade twelve, to see how the group means f o r these students change as they progress through school, especially the change i n s e l f concept for poor and good readers.  38 REFERENCES  B a i l y , R. " S e l f Concept D i f f e r e n c e s i n Low and High A c h i e v i n g J o u r n a l of C l i n i c a l Psychology, 27, 1971, 188-191.  Children,"  Bazemore, J . S., and W. K. Gwaltny. " P e r s o n a l i t y and Reading A c h i e v e m e n t — The use of c e r t a i n p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s as d i s c r i m i n a t o r y , " C a l i f o r n i a J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 24, 3, 1973, 114-119. Beatty,  W. H. i n Improving Assessment and an Inventory Of Measures of A f f e c t i v e B e h a v i o r , W. H. B e a t t y ( E d . ) , N.E.A. A s s o c i a t i o n f o r S u p e r v i s i o n of C u r r i c u l u m Development, Washington, 1969.  B e r e t t a , S. " S e l f Concept Development i n the Reading Program," Reading Teacher, 24, 1970, 232-238. B j e r r i n g , J . H., G r e i g , M., and Holm, J . (Adapted b y ) . General Linear H y p o t h e s i s Computer Program. (UBC BMD:10V), H e a l t h S c i e n c e s Computing F a c i l i t y , UCLA & B e r k e l e y , 1975. Bodwin, R. F. "The R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Immature S e l f Concepts and C e r t a i n E d u c a t i o n a l D i s a b i l i t i e s , " D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 19, 1645-1646. Bond, Guy L., and M i l e s A. T i n k e r . Reading D i f f i c u l t i e s , T h e i r D i a g n o s i s and C o r r e c t i o n . A p p l e t o n Century C r o f t s , New York, 1957. Bonney, M. E. "Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n S o c i a l Success and C h i l d Development, 15, 1944, 63-79.  Personality Traits,"  Buros, Oscar K r i s e n (Ed.), Mental Measurements Yearbook, S i x t h E d i t i o n , The Gryphon P r e s s , New J e r s e y , 1968. Buros, Oscar K r i s e n ( E d . ) , Seventh M e n t a l Measurements Yearbook, Gryphon P r e s s , New J e r s e y , 1972.  The  Brownfain, John J . " S t a b i l i t y of S e l f Concept as a Dimension of P e r s o n a l i t y , " J o u r n a l of Abnormal and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y, 47, 1952, 597-606. Bruck, M. A Study of Age D i f f e r e n c e s and Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n the R e l a t i o n s h i p between S e l f Concept and Grade P o i n t Average, unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1957. Bruck, M., and R. F. Bodwin. "The R e l a t i o n s h i p Between S e l f Concept and the Presence or Absence of S c h o l a s t i c Underachievement," J o u r n a l of C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y, 18, 1962, 181-182. Butcher, D. G. A study of the R e l a t i o n s h i p of Student S e l f - C o n c e p t to Academic Achievement i n S i x High A c h i e v i n g Elementary S c h o o l s , Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y , U n i v e r s i t y Microf i l m s , Ann A r b o r , Mi., No. 68-7872, 1967.  39 Campbell, P. 1967,  B. " S c h o o l and 510-515.  S e l f Concept," E d u c a t i o n a l  Leadership,  24,  C a p l l n , M. D. "The R e l a t i o n s h i p Between S e l f Concept and Academic A c h i e v e ment, Between L e v e l s of A s p i r a t i o n and Academic Achievement," D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 27, 1966, 979A. C a r t e r , T. P. "The N e g a t i v e S e l f Concepts of Mexican American S t u d e n t s , " School and S o c i e t y , 96, 1968, 217-219. C a t t e l , R. B. P e r s o n a l i t y : A S y s t e m a t i c , T h e o r e t i c a l and New York, McGraw H i l l , 1950.  Factual  Study.  C o l e , J . L. "The R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l e c t e d P e r s o n a l i t y V a r i a b l e s to Academic Achievement of Average A p t i t u d e T h i r d Grades," J o u r n a l E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 67, 7, 1974, 329-330. Combs, A. W. i n P e r c e i v i n g , Behaving, Becoming, ASCD Yearbook, A. W. Chairman, N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n , Washington, 1962. Coopersmith, S. "A Method f o r Determining Types of S e l f Esteem," of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology, 59, 1959, 87-94. Coopersmith, S. The Antecedents of S e l f Esteem. Company, San F r a n c i s c o , 1967. D e B l a s s i e , R. R., and G. Spanish American, and Socioeconomic CRIER M i c r o f i l m s ,  W.  H.  Freedman  Combs,  Journal  and  W. Headley. S e l f - C o n c e p t — a comparison of Negro and Anglo A d o l e s c e n t s a c r o s s E t h n i c , Sex V a r i a b l e s . New Mexico S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , ERIC No. Ed 037287, 1969.  Edwards, A l l e n L. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods, T h i r d E d i t i o n , H o l t , R i n e h a r t Winston, Inc., 1973. E r i k s o n , E. H.  C h i l d h o o d and  Society.  New  York, Norton,  Evans, E. D. ( E d i t o r ) . C h i l d r e n , Readings i n B e h a v i o r and H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston, 1968. F i n k , M. B. " S e l f Concept as i t R e l a t e s C a l i f o r n i a J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Gann, E. Reading D i f f i c u l t i e s and King's Crown P r e s s , 1945. Glass,  of  and  1950. Development.  t o Academic Underachievement," Research, 13, 1962, 57-62.  Personality Organization.  New  York,  G. V., and S t a n l e y , J . C. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods i n E d u c a t i o n P s y c h o l o g y. P r e n t i c e - H a l l , New J e r s e y , 1970.  Halm, Jason. C o r r e l a t i o n with Transgeneration. (UBC BMD:02D), Sciences Computing F a c i l i t y , UCLA and B e r k e l e y , 1970.  and  Health  40 Hamachek, D. C. The S e l f i n Growth, Teaching and C l i f f s , New J e r s e y , P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1965.  Learning.  Englewood  Hess, Anne and H. L. Bradshaw. " P o s i t i v e n e s s of S e l f Concept and I d e a l S e l f as a F u n c t i o n of Age," J o u r n a l of G e n e t i c P s y c h o l o g y, 35, 1970, 57-67. Holmes, J . A. "Emotional F a c t o r s and Teacher, 9, 1955, 11-17.  Reading D i s a b i l i t i e s , " The  Reading  Hughes, T. M. "A Study of the R e l a t i o n s h i p s of Coping S t r e n g t h to S e l f Concepts, School Achievement and G e n e r a l A n x i e t y S c a l e , " D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Tennessee, U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , No. 68-3747, 1967. H u r l o c k , E. B. 1967.  Adolescent  Development, Second E d i t i o n .  J e r s i l d , A. T. In Search of S e l f . Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1952.  New  McGraw H i l l ,  York, Bureau o f P u b l i c a t i o n s ,  Jones, John G., and Laurabeth G i e n e c k s . "Measure of S e l f P e r c e p t i o n s P r e d i c t o r s of S c h o l a s t i c Achievement," J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 63, 5, 1970, 201-203. Kinch,  J . W. 1963,  "Theory of the S e l f Concept," J o u r n a l o f S o c i o l o g y , 481-486.  as  68,  Kunst, Mary S. " P s y c h o l o g i c a l Treatment i n Reading D i s a b i l i t i e s , " C l i n i c a l S t u d i e s i n Reading, Supplementary E d u c a t i o n Monographs, 68, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago P r e s s , 1940. Labene, W. D., and B. F. Greene. E d u c a t i o n a l I m p l i c a t i o n s of the S e l f Concept Theory. Goodyear P u b l i s h i n g Company, P a c i f i c P a l i s a d e s , California, 1969. Lang, M. W. " R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l f P e r c e p t i o n s of e a r l y Primary C h i l d r e n to Achievement i n Reading," i n Human Development, Readings i n Research, I . J . Gordon, ( E d i t o r ) , Chicago, .Scott, Foresman and Co., 1965. Lumpkin, D. D. The R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l f Concept to Achievement i n Reading, unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Southern California, 1959. Lundholm, H. " R e f l e c t i o n s upon the Nature o f P s y c h o l o g i c a l P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 47, 1940, 110-127. M a r a s c u i l o , L. A. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods f o r B e h a v i o r a l New York, McGraw-Hill, 1971.  Self,"  Science  Research.  41 M a r a s c u i l o , L. A., and J . R. L e v i n . A p p r o p r i a t e Post Hoc Comparisons f o r I n t e r a c t i o n and Nested Hypotheses i n A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e D e s i g n s : The E l i m i n a t i o n of Type IV E r r o r s , " American E d u c a t i o n a l Research J o u r n a l , 7, 3, 1970, 397-421. Maslov, A. H.  Motivation  and P e r s o n a l i t y .  New  York, Harper,  1954.  Mayer, C. L. A study of the R e l a t i o n s h i p of E a r l y S p e c i a l C l a s s Placement and the S e l f Concept of M e n t a l l y Handicapped C h i l d r e n , unpublished D. Ed. D i s s e r t a t i o n , Syracuse U n i v e r s i t y , 1965. M a z u r k i e w i c z , A. J . " S o c i a l C u l t u r a l Influences Developmental Reading, 3, 1940, 254-263.  of Reading," J o u r n a l  of  McClendon, P. R. The R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l e c t e d A s p e c t s of the A f f e c t i v e Domain to Reading Achievement at the F i r s t Grade L e v e l , D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , F l o r i d a State U n i v e r s i t y , U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , Ann A r b o r , Mi., No. 67-724, 1968. Neal,  C a r o l y n M. Ability," 133-144.  "The R e l a t i o n s h i p of P e r s o n a l i t y V a r i a b l e s to Reading C a l i f o r n i a J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 18, 3, 1967,  P o l l a c k , S. M. The R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l f Concept of Achievement i n Reading i n Primary Grades, Ed. D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 33, 1972, 2243-A. Purkey, W. S e l f Concept and Jersey, 1970.  School  Achievement.  Prentice-Hall,  New  Oakland, J . A. "Measurement of p e r s o n a l i t y c o r r e l a t e s of the problems of s c h o l a s t i c achievement i n h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s , " J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g y, 16, 5, 1969, 452-457. Quimby, V i o l e t . " D i f f e r e n c e s i n the s e l f i d e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p of an a c h i e v e r and an u n d e r a c h i e v e r group," C a l i f o r n i a J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 1, 1967, 23-31. Rogers, C. R. C l i e n t Centered Therapy, I t s Current P r a c t i c e , I m p l i c a t i o n s and Theory. Boston, Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 1951. Rushley, V. M. A study of the R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l f Concept, Socio Economic Background, and P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c A b i l i t i e s to Reading Achievement of Second Grade Males R e s i d i n g i n a Suburban Area, D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , Ann A r b o r , Mi., No. 71-448, 1970. S a r b i n , T. R. "A p r e f a c e to a p s y c h o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s of s e l f , " Review, 59, 1952, 11-22.  Psychological  42 Shaw, M e r v i l l e , C , Kenneth Edson, and Hugh M. B e l l . "The s e l f concept of b r i g h t u n d e r a c h i e v i n g h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s as r e v e a l e d by the a d j e c t i v e c h e c k l i s t , " P e r s o n n e l and Guidance J o u r n a l , 39, 1960. S i e g e l , M. "The p e r s o n a l i t y s t r u c t u r e of c h i l d r e n w i t h r e a d i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s as compared w i t h c h i l d r e n p r e s e n t i n g o t h e r c l i n i c a l problems," The Nervous C h i l d , 10, 1954, 409-413. Snygg, D., and A. W. Combs. I n d i v i d u a l B e h a v i o r , A P e r c e p t u a l Approach to B e h a v i o r , New York, Harper, 1949. Soares, A. T., and L. M. Soares. " S e l f p e r c e p t i o n s of c u l t u r a l l y vantaged c h i l d r e n , " American E d u c a t i o n a l Research J o u r n a l , 31-45.  disad1969,  Soares, A. T., and L. M. Soares. "Comparative d i f f e r e n c e s i n s e l f p e r c e p t i o n s of d i s a d v a n t a g e d and advantaged c h i l d r e n , " J o u r n a l of School P s y c h o l o g y , 9, 4, 1971, 424-429. Soares, A. T., and L. M. Soares. " T e s t s of s e l f concept as Measures o f P e r s o n a l i t y , " ERIC CRIER m i c r o f i c h e , ED 076638, 1973. Spache, George D. " P e r s o n a l i t y C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of r e t a r d e d r e a d e r s as measured by the p i c t u r e f r u s t r a t i o n s t u d y , " E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, Supplement on Reading Research, 14, 1954, 186-192. S t r a n g , Ruth. " D i a g n o s i s and Remediation" i n Readings i n G e n e r a l E d u c a t i o n , W i l l i a m S. Grey (Ed.), American C o u n c i l on E d u c a t i o n , Washington, 1940. Walsh, A. M. S e l f Concepts of B r i g h t Boys w i t h L e a r n i n g D i f f i c u l t i e s , New York Bureau of P u b l i c a t i o n s , Teacher's C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1956. Wattenberg, W. W., and C. C l i f f o r d . " R e l a t i o n s o f S e l f Concept to B e g i n n i n g Achievement i n r e a d i n g , " C h i l d Development, 46, 1967, 478-481. W i l e y , R. C. The S e l f Concept, R e v i s e d E d i t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska P r e s s , 1974. W i l l i a m s , Jean H. "The R e l a t i o n s h i p of S e l f Concept and Reading A c h i e v e ment i n F i r s t Grade C h i l d r e n , " J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 66, 8, 1973. W i l l i a m s , Robert L., and Spurgeon C o l e . " S e l f Concept and School A c h i e v e ment," P e r s o n n e l and Guidance J o u r n a l , 46, 1967. Zimmerman, I. L., and G. N. A l l e b r a n d . " P e r s o n a l i t y C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and A t t i t u d e s Toward Achievement of Good and Poor Readers," J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 59, 1965, 28-30.  43 APPENDIX A  F a c t o r a l D e s i g n f o r Grades v s . A b i l i t y v s . Sex on Dependent V a r i a b l e S e l f Concept Ability N  Average  N .  Good  N  F M  45.33 58.36  9 11  50.20 53.70  10 10  59.40 61.80  10 10  51.86 57.97  55. 02  5  F M  40.87 49.73  9 11  49.50 53.10  10 10  61.40 68.70  10 10  50.93 56.94  54. 03  7  F M  50.20 50.50  10 10  58.80 61.70  10 10  68.50 65.30  10 10  59.17 59.17  59. 17  8  F M  47.60 47.30  10 10  51.40 51.80  10 10  62.50 65.50  10 10  53.83 54.87  54. 35  10  F M  52.70 52.30  10 10  51.20 54.80  10 10  49.10 61.40  10 10  51.00 56.17  53. 47  12  F M  53.90 52.10  10 10  53.60 61.80  10 10  53.80 57.60  10 10  53.77 57.17  55. 47  F M  48.62 51.79  58 62  52.45 56.15  60 60  59.12 63.38  60 60  53.45 57.05  50.26  120  54.30  120  61.25  120  Sex  3  TOTAL GRAND TOTAL  . .  Total  Poor  Grade  55 27  A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e T a b l e f o r Grades v s . A b i l i t y v s . Sex on Dependent V a r i a b l e S e l f Concept  Source Ability Grades Sex Interaction A b i l i t y x Sex Interaction A b i l i t y x Grade Interaction Grade x Sex Interaction Total Error  Mean Square  Sum of Squares  D.F.  7629.4 1261.3 1263.0  2 5 1  3814.7 252.26 1263.0  14.741  2  7.3705  3512.7  10  571.25 1193.3 33616.  F  Probability  36.76743 2.43138 12.17359  .000 .03493 .00055  0.07104  .93144  351.27  3.38567  .00035  5  114.25  1.10118  .35961  10 324  119.33 103.75  1.15011  .32394  There i s no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n f o r a b i l i t y and sex o r f o r grade and sex i n t o t a l d e s i g n .  44 APPENDIX B  I.  Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , N's, and A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e T a b l e s from Computer Program BMD:10V A n a l y s i s o f A b i l i t y Groups C o l l a p s e s over Grades  Grades 3,5,7 v e r s u s  Grades  8,10,12  Poor  Average  Good  Total  3,5,7  Mean N. S.D.  49.53 60 12.42  54.50 60 11.43  64.18 60 8.87  56.07 180 12.53  8,10,12  Mean N. S.D.  50.98 60 9.43  54.10 60 9.43  58.32 60 10.03  54.47 180 10.69  ANOVA T a b l e  Source  Sum o f Squares  Ability  7418.2  D.F. 2  Mean Square 3709.1  Probability 32.58244  .0000  Grades  232.00  1  232.00  2.03803  .15429  Interaction  868.41  2  434.20  3.81425  .02297  354  113.84  Error  II.  40298.  Grades 3,5,7,8 v e r s u s 10,12  Grades  Poor  Average  Good  Total  3,5,7,*  Mean N. S.D.  49.01 80 11.78  53.77 80 11.30  64.14 80 8.37  55.64 240 12.30  10,12  Mean N. S.D.  52.75 40 8.87  55.35 40 10.10  55.47 40 11.68  54.52 120 10.27  45 Appendix B, c o n t i n u e d ANOVA T a b l e  Source  Sum of Squares  D.F.  Mean Square  Ability  4291.7  2  2145.9  19.49821  Grades  99.756  1  99.756  0.90643  .34171  Interaction  2339.9  2  1170.0  10.63089  .00003  Error  38959.  354  III.  F  Probability .0000  110.05  Grades 3,,5 v e r s u s: 7,8 v e r s u s 10,12 Average  Poor  Grades  Good  Total  3,5  Mean N. S.D.  49.12 40 12.27  51.62 40 11.68  62.82 40 9.40  54.52 120 12.60  7,8  Mean N. S.D.  48.90 40 11.43  55.92 40 10.61  65.45 40 7.08  56.76 120 11.94  10,12  Mean N. S.D.  52.75 40 8.87  55.35 40 10.10  55.47 40 11.68  54.52 120 10.27  ANOVA T a b l e  Source  Sum of Squares  Ability  7418.2  Grades  399.02  D.F. 2  Mean Square 3709.1  F  Probability  33.85895  .00000  2  199.51  1.82127  .16335  5.81790  .00015  Interaction  2549.3  4  637.32  Error  38450.  351  109.55  

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.831.1-0078244/manifest

Comment

Related Items