Dissertations and Theses @ UNI

Availability

Open Access Thesis

Keywords

Reading; Cloze procedure;

Abstract

This study was conducted to detennine if a modified language experience cloze approach is an effective means of teaching reading to seventh grade students. Researchers and specialists in the field have indicated that the use of the cloze procedure is a valid technique for improving comprehension for two reasons. First, cloze forces the student to manipulate the semantic and syntactic cues of the language. Second, the cloze procedure material more closely approximates the reading process than the traditional questioning fonnat used with reading materials. The language experience approach was suggested for use in teaching reading since the approach eliminates the problems of readability and mismatch of language between the student and the material. It was also suggested that language experience, a beginning reading method, was adaptable for use with older readers. Three intact heterogeneous developmental reading classes, n = 51, at South Tama County Junior High, Toledo, Iowa, were assigned to the modified language experience cloze treatment, and two intact classes from the same population, n = 42, were assigned to the direct skills treatment for a total N = 93. The modified language experience cloze group constructed original stories to which a fifth-word cloze deletion pattern was applied. The direct skills group was introduced to a specific reading skill and practiced it in commercial material. Both treatment groups were instructed in the skill areas of context clues, main ideas, and inferences using the material appropriate to the assigned treatment. The following null hypotheses were tested for this study: l} There are no significant differences between the posttest scores of the modified language experience cloze group and the posttest scores of the direct skills group as measured by the comprehension subtest of the Brown Level, Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test (Karlsen, Madden, & Gardner, 1976}. 2) There are no significant differences between the posttest scores of the modified language experience cloze group and the posttest scores of the direct skills group as measured by the central focus, context clues, and inference subtests of the Scott, Foresman Criterion Referenced Tests {Niles & Tuinman, 1977). 3) There is no differential effect between good and poor readers using the modified language experience cloze approach and the direct skills approach. No significant differences were found among the five intact classes at the beginning of the project based on the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test {Karlsen, Madden, & Gardner, 1966). Good and poor readers were also determined from the pretest. Data to test the hypotheses were gathered from the posttest scores of the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test and the context clues, central focus, and inference subtests of the Scott, Foresman Criterion Referenced Tests. Using an analysis of covariance the two treatments were found not to differ significantly in effectiveness at the .05 alpha level. Using a two-way analysis of variance the treatments were found not to differ in effectiveness for either the good or poor readers, nor were any significant interaction effects found among treatments and levels. The modified language experience cloze approach is as effective as the direct skills method in developing reading abilities, while providing improvement in the non-measured variables of attitude and interest toward reading, and an increase in awareness of the syntactic and semantic structure of the stories. It is upon these non-measured variables that further research in the area should focus.

Year of Submission

1981

Degree Name

Specialist in Education

Department

Department of Curriculum and Instruction

First Advisor

Ned Ratekin

Second Advisor

Ernest K. Dishner

Third Advisor

Catherine W. Hatcher

Comments

If you are the rightful copyright holder of this dissertation or thesis and wish to have it removed from the Open Access Collection, please submit a request to scholarworks@uni.edu and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.

Date Original

1981

Object Description

1 PDF file (90 leaves)

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Included in

Education Commons

Share

COinS