. 4 l .2: a... . 2.. .ZL.E4§...V...;; .i r I .m. w. A n . .3 w.” 7 33% n a... it: a g :3 T 1.185. a...» in”? a. _ _ _ v.4 . m) .1 4.. .7d-1.» .- a .. . v.9" Pr. 0. 5.. a r a 3...! En LEV. “$.23: . 2. .3. u iii... v. 3 a. . . . .. :11... :5... . x a; 1 1. ”:1! :Ysfiaiwan . .. . .. .1; . 5,...fi......P}. .. E53 .. :1. .. 3..., ii... 5.9: l. :31) . 5:13! r 1.3.1.31 :1. . .11.. frzrt). .ta 5. I? 12.2 .lgvtt...!!... l...~!i$)flrn.ll.! .1... I17 .1. .Y 3!: (I ‘ a at 5.: 9:21! . v.1 3...!!! 7 .. 2“,)“.er i . _ swig. mm. , . 433%: ‘ .. :,:...r5.v.rs.m1nv‘n.uvfl .2- {Ft}. . « iii)... :( V W :5- '3’: . z"- Th1s IS to certrfy that the _ thesis entitled THE EFFECT OF HIGHLIGHTING MAJOR POINTS WITHIN RECORDED MATERIAL AS A MEANS OF INCREASING LISTENING COMPREHENSION OF FIFTH AND SIXTH GRADE PUPILS WITH POOR READING SKILLS presented by James Wendell Fleming has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for & degree in Education / Major professor / a l J1 12 194 Date my ’ 7 0-7639 ABSTRACT THE EFFECT OF HIGHLIGHTING MAJOR POINTS WITHIN RECORDED MATERIAL AS A MEANS OF INCREASING LISTENING COMPREHENSION OF FIFTH AND SIXTH GRADE PUPILS WITH POOR READING SKILLS By James Wendell Fleming This study evaluated the effectiveness of two auditory highlighting strategies that were devised to aid listening comprehension of fifth and sixth graders. Fifty-eight subjects were used in this study and were identified as having learning disabilities and/or reading problems that contributed to their academic difficulties. It was theorized that subjects who are poor readers (reading comprehension level 2 or more years below expected reading level) would represent a sample population of students that learn primarily through the auditory channel. Two specific auditory highlighting strategies were used separately to cue the listener to major points within recorded passages. These highlighting strategies were referred to as "voice cue" and "pause cue" treatments. The "voice cue" treatment used a recorded female voice for major points that were dubbed in place of the recorded male voice of the passages used in this study. "Pause U ”ffb James Wendell Fleming .0”) cues" used a tape recorder (Audiomate 590) that enables one to record signals on the recording to stop the recorder before the selected major points. The subjects were informed of this procedure and instructed to push a restart button to hear the major point. The STEP Listening Test (Level 4A & 4B) was used as the criterion task to determine the effectiveness of the auditory highlighting procedures. A recorded copy of the STEP Test for each form was made using the highlighting procedure throughout (pause cue or voice cue) and a third set was made of Level 4A and 4B using no cues or high- lighting procedure. The first two groups compared the two highlighting procedures to determine if one technique was more effective than the other. Groups III and IV received one treatment cued (voice or pause) and the other trial with no highlighting procedures employed to determine if cued treatments were more effective means of increasing listening comprehension. No significant difference was found for the means scores on the STEP Listening Test at the .05 level of confidence for the four groups. However, the mean scores were in favor of the highlighted or cued treatments. There were no consistent findings for the four groups when the test scores of the STEP were subdivided into types of material (Directions, Exposition, Narration, Argument, and Aesthetic Material). Measures of visual memory and auditory James Wendell Fleming memory from the Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude obtained initially for each subject were found to be related in several instances with difference scores between the two treatment trials. Pupil preference for a specific type of highlighting procedure was found to be related to actual scores achieved by the majority of the subjects. The "pause cue" technique was the most preferred technique chosen by the subjects in this study. THE EFFECT OF HIGHLIGHTING MAJOR POINTS WITHIN RECORDED MATERIAL AS A MEANS OF INCREASING LISTENING COMPREHENSION OF FIFTH AND SIXTH GRADE PUPILS WITH POOR READING SKILLS BY James Wendell Fleming A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education 1974 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study represents more than just research findings to the author. It serves to point out the magnitude of the countless ways and means that a university and people have extended themselves to him. The writer is extremely grateful for this opportunity to complete a major step in his professional career. Sincere appreciation is expressed to the principals, teachers, consultants, and students for their assistance and cooperation in this study. A special thanks goes to the Great Lakes Regional Special Educational Instructional Materials Center staff for their support, assistance, and suggestions for the study. The author is indebted to his colleagues at Michigan State University for their interest and moral support. Appreciation is extended to Dr. Charles V. Mange, major advisor and committee chairman, for his continued faith, support, and constructive criticism and advice throughout this study and the years before. A note of gratitude goes to S. Joseph Levine for his advice, support, and incentive throughout this endeavor. Thanks are extended to Charles Brown, Dick Burtschi, Kowit Pravalpruk, ii and Frank Vivio for their technical assistance in this study. Finally, to his wife, the writer expresses his love and appreciation for her faith in him, her moral support and patience, and assistance throughout the development and completion of this study. An unfinished goal is now complete and realized, that presents a very bright future for the writer in the forth- coming years. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Background to the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Assumptions and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . 9 Design of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll CHAPTER II Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Listening and Listening Comprehension . . . . . 17 Listening Comprehension . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Studies for the Improving Listening . . . . . . 19 Teaching Considerations Using Listening . . . . 21 Listening and Psychometric Variables . . . . . . 22 Media Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 CHAPTER III Design of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Test Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Audio Equipment and Material . . . . . . . . . . 43 Pilot Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 CHAPTER IV Findings and Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . 54 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Questionnaire Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 iv Page CHAPTER V Discussion and Recommendations . . . . . . . . 92 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Future Research Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Implications for Teaching . . . . . . . . . . 100 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 Appendix A Initial Directions Read to Subjects before Experiment . . . . 112 Appendix B Highlighting Example of Pause Cue Technique . . . . . . . . . . 113 Appendix C Highlighting Example of Voice Cue Technique . . . . . . . . . . 116 Appendix D Final Questionnaire Items for Auditory Highlighting Study . . . 118 Appendix E Raw Data for Subjects from Four Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . l21 Appendix F Table XVI - Summary of Score Increases . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 TABLE IA IB IC ID II III IV VI ‘VIIJX ‘VIJHB VIIKZ LIST OF TABLES Group I-Pupil Identification Data Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Group II-Pupil Identification Data Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Group III-Pupil Identification Data Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Group IV-Pupil Identification Data Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Pupil Identification Data for All Treatment Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Presentation Order of Experimental Methods of Recorded Materials with Voice Cues, Pause Cues, and No Cues for Subjects and Data Combinations Used with the Trial Scores . . . Comparison of Comprehension Scores for Groups 1 and 2 with Pause Cue and Voice Cue Treatment Trials . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of Comprehension Scores for Group 3 with Voice Cue and No Cue Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of Comprehension Scores For Group 4 with Pause Cue and No Cue Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ANOVA Table (Repeated Measure)-Group I, Voice Cue- Pause Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . ANOVA Table (Repeated Measure)-Group II, Pause Cue- Voice Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . ANOVA Table (Repeated Measure)-Group III, Voice Cue- No Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 37 38 39 40 41 50 56 57 57 59 59 59 TABLE VIID VIIIA VIIIB VIIIC VIIID IXA IXB IXC IXD ANOVA Table (Repeated Measure)-Group IV, No Cue- Pause Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Variance for Subtest Scores Achieved on STEP Listening Test by Group I-Voice Cue-Pause Cue Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Variance for Subtest Scores Achieved on STEP Listening Test by Group II—Pause Cue-Voice Cue Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Variance for Subtest Scores Achieved on STEP Listening Test by Group III-Voice Cue-No Cue Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Variance for Subtest Scores Achieved on STEP Listening Test by Group IV-No Cue-Pause Cue Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for Listening Compre- hension Scores and Visual and Auditory Memory Scores for Group l-Voice Cue & Pause Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for Listening Compre- hension Scores and Visual and Auditory Memory Scores for Group 2-Pause Cue & Voice Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for Listening Compre- hension Scores and Visual and Auditory Memory Scores for Group 3-Voice Cue and No Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for Listening Compre- hension Scores and Visual and Auditory Memory Scores for Group 4—No Cue and Pause Cue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Scores Between Voice Cue and Pause Cue Treatments Ranked According to Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #6-"Auditory Memory for Unrelated Words" for Groups 1 and 2 . . . vii Page 60 62 62 63 63 65 65 66 66 68 TABLE XB XC XD XE XIA XIB XIC XID XIE Comparison of STEP Listening Test Score Differences Between Voice and Pause Cue Treatments and Ranked Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #6-"Auditory Memory for Unrelated Words: for Group I . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Score Differences Between Voice and Pause Cue Treatments and Ranked Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #6-"Auditory Memory for Unrelated Words" for Group II . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Scores Between Voice Cue and No Cue Treatments Ranked According to Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #6-“Auditory Memory for Unrelated Words" for Group 3 . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Scores Between No Cue and Pause Cue Treatments Ranked According to Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #6-"Auditory Memory for Unrelated Words" for Group 4 . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Scores Between Voice Cue and Pause Cue Treatments Ranked According to Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #9-"Visual Attention Span for Objects" for Groups 1 and 2 . . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Score Differences Between Voice and Pause Cue Treatments and Ranked Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #9-"Visual Attention Span for Objects" for Group 1 . . . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Score Differences Between Voice and Pause Cue Treatments and Ranked Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #9-"Visua1 Attention Span for Objects" for Group 2 . . . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Scores Between Voice Cue and No Cue Treatments Ranked According to Raw Scores Achieved on the DTLA Subtest #9-"Visual Attention Span for Objects" for Group 3 . . . . . . . Comparison of STEP Listening Test Scores Between Pause Cue and No Cue Treatments Ranked According to Raw Scores Achieved viii Page 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 TABLE XIIA XIIB XIIC XIID XIII XIVA XIVB on the DTLA Subtest #9-"Visual Attention Span for Objects" for Group 4 . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for Auditory and Visual Memory Scores with Listening Comprehension Score Differences for Groups I, II, III, and IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for Auditory and Visual Memory Scores with Listening Comprehension Score Differences for Groups I & II Combined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary Table for Relationships with Visual Memory Scores (Highest/Lowest) and Differ- ence Scores with STEP Tests . . . . . . . . Summary Table for Relationships with Auditory Memory Scores (Highest/Lowest) and Difference Scores with STEP Tests . . . . . Summary of Simple Correlations of Variables for Subjects (N-58) in Experimental Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Students' Stated Preference for Highlighted Treatments (Pause Cue- Voice Cue) Compared with Their Actual Higher Score Received Data- Groups I and II . . . . . . . . . . . Subjects' Stated Preference for Highlighted Treatments (Cued-No Cue) Compared with Their Actual Higher Score Received Data . . . . . ix Page 77 78 79 81 82 84 87 87 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE Page 1 Experimental Procedure Flow Chart . . . . . . 49 2 Data Variables of Experimental Design . . . . 55 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION It is generally considered that the three primary channels for receiving information in today's educational programs are visual, auditory, and haptic (kinesthetic and tactile). This should not be interpreted as saying that other channels are excluded, such as smell, taste, temperature, pressure, pain or others. These other sensory channels although limited in their use in public school programs for the handicapped are not totally ignored. The teaching ideas of Montessori (Lillard, 1972)1 and the work of Dailey2 (1971) do incorporate taste and smell into the learning experience. Use of the visual channel as required in "reading" receives the most emphasis in research, instructional procedures, and remedial techni- ques. (Anderson, 1952)3 (Duker, 1971)4 Tactile and kinesthetic learning as used in the reading of "Braille" has also received a great deal of emphasis in research and instruction procedures from educators serving the blind and partially sighted. (Lowenfeld, 1969)5 (Nolan, 1963)6 Auditory learning or "listening/auding" is perhaps the most neglected area in terms of research, instructional procedures, and remedial techniques. (Anderson, 1952)7 (Devine, 1967)8 (Lundsteen, 1971)9 Wayne D. Lance (1973)10 in the monograph "Instructional Media and the Handicapped" points out, "The audio tape recorder, which has become almost as common a piece of equipment in classrooms for the handicapped as the over- head projection, has received relatively little coverage in the literature, perhaps due to the rather straight-forward advantages in this media." p. 13 The advantages of this medium are numerous, but the need to determine effective, more interactive and personalized ways to use this medium must be explored. Listening is a specific skill that is viewed by many educators as one that can be taught as any other communication skill (reading, speaking, or writing). There are many studies reported in the literature that deal with the measuring of 1 (Wilt, 1950)12, listening: (a) time (Rankin, 1926)1 (b) comprehension (Spearritt,l962)l3 (Durrell, l969)l4, (c) rates (Foulke, 1973)15 (Gore, 1968)l6 (Fergen, l954)l7, (d) instructional programs effectiveness (Fawcett, 1966)18 (Russell, 1964)19, and (e) easy and difficult material (Kibler, l962)20. While all of this information is necessary, it would appear that information on techniques or procedures to enhance and/or improve listening of tape recorded material is also important. Specifically, the technique of highlighting tape recorded materials to give the listener clues to major points, as the use of italics, quotation marks, bold face print, and underlining does in reading, needs to be further explored. This type of information would be useful for children with reading difficulties, children with learning disabilities that prefer the auditory channel for learning, the blind and partially sighted that depend a great deal on recorded material, to name a few groups that use recorded material for instructional purposes. There have been numerous studies dealing with the effectiveness of sensory channels, but relatively few with specific interest in means for increasing the effective- ness or, facilitating learning, through manipulations of elements within the particular sensory channel. It is also true that certain types of material may be learned more readily through a particular channel. As Twyford (1973)21 states, "On the basis of available research the effectiveness of a particular instructional material is more dependent upon the nature and quality of the message than the characteristics of the channel of communication." He further points out that instructional activities or material that were most effective incorporated much information in a concise form. This study had the students participate in the evaluation of certain auditory learning techniques as suggested in the report by Twyford (l973)22. A question- naire was administered to all subjects at the end of the two trial experiments to determine student's preference and acceptance of the procedures used in the study. Guidelines developed by Briggs et al. (1967)23 were employed in designing this media instruction. They were as follows: 1. Stating the Objectives, 2. Identifying the Type of Learning, 3. Designing a Media Program, 4. Preparing Summaries of Sequences of Media Alternatives, 5. Selection of Media, 6. Preparing the Specifications, and 7. Conducting Tryout and Revisions of the Materials. Four instructional events were employed in this study: 1.) Inform learner about performance required, 2.) Stimulate recall of component concepts, 3.) Verbal cueing, 4.) Appraisal. This study is intended to provide data regarding the effect of highlighting recorded material to cue the listener. "Voice cues" and "pause cues" were employed to signal or highlight major points within passages in an attempt to facilitate listening comprehen- sion of pupils with reading difficulties and/or learning disabilities. Data from this study may provide educators with evidence upon which decisions can be made in developing tape recorded lessons for the poor or non—reader. The study may also provide preliminary criteria used to deter- mine those type of learners who may profit most from these types of auditory cueing. THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was to obtain information that will assist educators who are seeking ways and means to improve or assist auditory comprehension of audio recorded material. This study evaluated two specific instructional strategies devised to highlight or cue major points within recorded passages for the listener. One strategy used in this study will be referred to as "voice cue" which is the use of a second voice in place of the original recorded voice for cueing major points within passages. The second strategy used will be referred to as "pause cue" whereby the tape recorder stops automati— cally at predetermined points within the passages to highlight major points for the listener. There were three independent experimental conditions; (1) tape recorded passages with "voice cue" highlighting throughout, (2) tape recorded passages with "pause cue" highlighting throughout, and (3) tape recorded passages with no cues or highlighting. The criterion task scores were compared using the comprehension scores achieved by the listeners with and without highlighting. Background to the Problem A listening activity requires many tasks of the listener when sorting and storing the significant informa- tion from the transitory fading auditory sensations. Fessenden (1955)24 has theorized seven levels of listening: (1) the first level is to isolate sounds, ideas, arguments, facts, organization, and the like. (2) the second level is to identify or give meaning to the aspects isolated, (3) the third level is to integrate what we hear with past experiences, (4) the fourth level is to inspect the new, (5) the fifth level is to interpret what we hear, (6) the sixth level is that we interpolate comments and statements, and (7) the seventh level is that we learn to introspect as well as listen. Highlighting recorded material at major points by the use of a "voice cue" or "pause cue" is intended to focus the listener's attention more closely to the first two levels and thereby aid listening comprehen- sion. The use of cueing or highlighting material to be learned has been reported in many studies dealing with the facilitation of visual learning. There is not however a great deal of research that supports cueing with auditory learning. We know cueing can assist verbal learning as suggested by Jung (1968).25 He reports learning (serial and paired associate) with cued conditions was found to assist recall, when employed during the initial presenta- tions or during retesting under cued conditions. At this time there is sparse research existing in regard to specific cue utilization techniques with tape recordings. Campeau (1967)26 states, "This (lack of research) is due in part to the small number of relevant classroom studies which have been published, and in part to inconclusive findings where evidence is available." This apparent lack of research on the role or impact of specific strategies used to cue recorded material led the examiner to focus on cues to aid the listener. This study will attempt to pro- vide some insight to the question: What effect if any,does the highlighting of recorded material by the use of "voice cues" and/or "pause cues" have upon the listener's comprehension level? Definition of Terms l - attention — a sensory adjustment providing for optimal stimulation of a sense modality. (Good, 1959)27 2 - auding - this term although not widely used will be used synonymously with listening and listening. comprehension. It is defined as the act of receiving a continuous flow of words that are trans- lated in meaning and involves one or more avenues of thought. (Taylor, 1964)28 *For a more complete discussion of the terms listening and auding one should refer to the article by Toussaint, Isabella in Duker, 1966, pp. 155-164. 3 - audio - pertaining to the transmission or reception of sound. (Good, 1959)29 4 - auditory learner - the subject who favors and learns more easily from auditory or oral instruction, than with similar material presented as a visual task, such as, reading. 5 - auditory memory span - the number of related or unrelated items that can be recalled immediately after one hearing. (Good, 1959)30 6 - highlighting - to make prominent. Specifically, the application of cues (verbal or non-verbal) to major points within a recorded passage in an attempt to focus one's auditory attention. 7 - listening comprehension - the skill or ability to interpret and recall information received by listening to a passage presented orally. 8 - pause cue - a non-verbal clue, whereby the tape recorder stOps automatically before major points within a recorded passage, and is intended to focus the subject's attention to the upcoming passage when the recorder is restarted. 9 - recordings - audio tape recordings of specific passages or instructional information. 10 - visual memory - memory of things seen. (Good, 1959)31 ll - voice cue - a sound quality one using a recording of a woman's voice in place of the original recording of major points within a recorded passage, that is intended to call attention to or highlight major points for the listener. Assumptions and Limitations The following assumptions are made with regard to the importance of auditory and verbal learning: 1. auditory learning skills are important in one's educational achievement and progress. 2. language facility and comprehension is important in educational achievement. 3. auditory learning can be enhanced through use of highlighting or cueing techniques. 4. auditory highlighting that cues the learner by verbal or non—verbal stimuli is similar or possibly an equivalent task to learning to recognize and focus on printed material that is cued by italics, quotation marks, underlining, or bold face print. The following limitations underlie this study: 1. other, non-auditory sensory systems are important channels for learning, but they are not the focus of this study. 2. auditory learning has many facets, but only one area, highlighting or cueing, is of prime concern in this study. 10 3. those limitations inherent in the specific tech- niques selected for use in this study and the subjects and conditions by which the study was conducted. Design of Study The population of this study consisted of 58 fifth and sixth students enrolled at Howell Middle School, Howell, Michigan: Waverly Junior High and Waverly Learning Center, and Webberville Middle School, Webberville, Michigan. The students selected for this study were attending regular classes, but were receiving special assistance for reading and/or academic difficulties. All students were reading at least two years below their expected grade level and were of average or near-average intelligence. Students were being served by teacher consultants for learning disabilities and/or special reading improvement programs. Each student was screened to determine if they met the basic requirements for inclusion in the study. Students in the fifth and sixth grades were currently being served by a teacher consultant, resource center, or special class for their reading and/or academic difficulties. The students were referred by the teacher consultants to the examiner. Pupils' permanent records were checked for birthdates, intelligence quotients, reading levels, and screening tests for vision and hearing losses. 11 Each student was serially assigned to one of four treatment groups. All students received two treatments that consisted of two listening comprehension tests in which the highlighting procedure varied. The raw scores for each listening comprehension test were tabulated and compared to determine if the null hypotheses were to be rejected. Hypotheses There are seven major hypotheses with this study. The hypotheses, stated as null hypotheses, are as follows: Hypotheses Related to Effects of Highlighting Recorded Material l - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of total comprehension scores with the "voice cue" treatment and the "pause cue" treatment with groups 1 and 2. 2 - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of total comprehension scores with the "voice cue" treatment and the "no cue" treatment with group 3. 3 - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of total comprehension scores with the "pause cue" treatment and the "no cue" treatment with group 4. 4 - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of subtest comprehension scores on all types 12 of materials with the "voice cue" treatment and the "pause cue" treatment with groups 1 and 2. 5 - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of subtest comprehension scores on all types of materials with the "cued" treatment and the "no cue" treatments used with groups 3 and 4. Hypotheses Related to Sensory Memory Test Scores and Listening Comprehension 6 - There will be no relationship between scores achieved on a test of "auditory memory" and comprehension scores achieved under any treatment condition. 7 - There will be no significant relationship between the scores achieved on a "visual memory" test and compre- hension scores achieved under any treatment condition. CHAPTER I REFERENCES lLillard, P. P. Montessori: A Modern Approach. New York: Schocken Books, 1972. 2Daily, R. F., "Media in the Round: Learning in the Special Experience Room," Teaching Exceptional Children, 4, No. 1, 1971, pp. 4-9. 3Anderson, Harold A., "Needed Research in Listening," Elementary English, 29:215-224, April, 1952. 4Duker, Sam (ed.) Listening: Readings. Vol. II. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, Chapters 9, 10, pp. 303-376. 5Lowenfeld, B., Abel, G. L. and Hatlen, P. H. Blind Children Learn to Read. Springfield, 111.: Charles Thomas, 1969. 6Nolan, C. Y., "Reading and Listening in Learning By The Blind," Exceptional Children, 29:313-316, 1963. 7Anderson, "Needed Research in Listening," Elementary English. 8Devine, Thomas 6., "Reading and Listening: New Research Findings," Listening: Readings, Vol. 2, Sam Duker (ed.) Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1971, pp. 82-85. 9Lundsteen, Sarah. Listening: Its Impact on Readipg and the Other Language Arts. NCTE/ERIC Studies in the Teaching of English, 1971. loLance, Wayne D. Instructional Media and the Handi- capped. Monograph ERIC Clearinghouse on Media & Technology. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University, December 1973, p. 13. l3 l4 llRankin, Paul Tory. The Measurement of the Ability to Understand Spoken Language. Doctoral Dissertation. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, 1926. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 12:847, 1952. Excerpts: Listening: Readings. Edited by Sam Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1966, pp. 51-62. 12Wilt, Miriam E., "A Study of Teacher Awareness of Listening as a Factor in Elementary Education." Journal of Educational Research. 43:626-636, April 1950. l3Spearritt, Donald. Listening Comprehension-A Factorial Analysis. Australian Council for Educational Research - Series No. 76, 1962. 14Durrell, Donald, "Listening Comprehension Versus Reading Comprehension," Journal of Reading 12:455-60, March, 1969. 15Foulke, E., "Comparison of Comprehension of Two Forms of Compressed Speech," Exceptional Children, 33: 169-173, 1966. l6Gore, George V. A Comparison of Two Methods of Speeded Speech Presented to Blind Senior High School Students. Doctoral Dissertation. New York City, N.Y.: Columbia University, 1968. Author's copy. l7Fergen, Geraldine K. Listening Comprehension at Controlled Rates for Children in Grades IV, V, and VI. Doctoral Dissertation. Columbia, Mo.: University of Missouri, 1954. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 15: 89, 1955. 18Fawcett, Annabel E., "The Effect of Training in Listening Upon the Listening Skill of Intermediate Grade Children," Elementary English 45:473-476, May 1966. 19Russell, David H., "A Conspectus of Recent Research on Listening Abilities," Elementary English 41:262-67, March 1964. 20Kibler, Robert J. II. The Impact of Message Style and Channel in Communication. Doctoral Dissertation. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, 1962. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 24:893, 1963. 15 21Twyford, Loran C., "Educational Communication Media" in Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 3rd edition (edited by C. W. Harris) New York: Macmillan, 1960, pp. 369-380. 22Twyford, "Educational Communication Media." 23Briggs, Leslie J., Campeau, Peggie L., Gagné, Robert M., and May, Mark A. Instructional Media: A Procedure for the Design of Multi-Media Instruction, A Critical Review of Research and Suggestions for Future Research. Monograph No. 2. Pittsburgh, Pa.: American Institutes for Research, 1967. 24Fessenden, Seth A., "Levels of Listening - A Theory Education 75:288-91, January 1955. 25Jung, John. Verbal Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1968. 26Campeau, Peggie, "Selective Review of Audiovisual Media of Instruction," Chapter V, Instructional Media: A Procedure for the Design of Multi-Media Instruction, A Critical Review of Research and Suggestions for Future Research. Monograph No. 2., Leslie J. Briggs, Peggie L. Campeau, Robert M. Gagne, and Mark A. May. Pittsburgh, Pa.: American Institutes for Research, 1967. 27Good, Carter V., editor. Dictionary of Education, 2nd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1959, p. 47. 28Taylor, Stanford E. Listening. What Research Says to the Teacher, No. 29. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1964. 29Good, Dictionary of Education, p. 48. 30Good, Dictionary of Education, p. 49. 31Good, Dictionary of Education, p. 561. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE There has been little research accomplished to date in the area of interest expressed in this study. Campeau (1967)1 reported in a review of literature on audiovisual media of instruction, " . . . no experimental analysis of Specific utilization techniques of the media (radio/ recordings) and no basic research reports on radio and recordings were discovered during this literature search." The experimenter made further confirmation on this with conversations with Dr. Paul Witt, Dr. Curtis McCarty, and Dr. James Nord of the Instructional Media Center at Michigan State University in January of 1974. With the exception of general studies reported in the literature on tape recorded and radio instruction, no comparable studies encompassing the variables for this specific study were located. It must, however, be stated that many previous research studies have investigated variables that do pertain to this proposed study. These studies have been reviewed and categorized, when appropriate, into one of five areas. These areas are: (1) Listening & Listening Comprehension, (2) Strategies for Improving Listening, (3) Teaching 16 17 Considerations, (4) Listening and Psychometric Variables, and (5) Media Instruction. Listening and Listening Comprehension Listening is recognized to be the first and the most basic area of language development. (Hildreth, 1948)2 (Lundsteen, 1971)3 During the 1950's and through the early 1960's we find the literature focusing on how listening was being neglected, not only as an area of instruction in the schools, but as an object of research study. (Anderson, l952fl (Duker, 1969)5 A report by Anderson in 19526 indicated over 3,000 studies made in reading as compared to 175 on listening, of which, only 50 could be classified as research. This is still the picture today, however, a vast resource of previous research findings in listening needs to be drawn together. Several individuals have contributed a great deal to this effort. (Duker, 1966, 1968, 1971, 1971)7 (Lundsteen, 1971)8 (Nichols, 1948, 1957)9 (Taylor, 1964)10 Burns and Lowe (1966)11 stated, "Four centuries of the printing press have made peOple print minded, . . . Now, in the past thirty years, advances in radio, sound recordings, and television have helped to point up the need for literacy of the spoken word." They further state, "the typical individual listens one book per day, talks one book per week, reads one book per month, and writes one book per year." (Burns and Lowe, 1966)12 Schools are reported to 18 be spending 52% of their classroom time teaching reading, but only 8% promoting listening and speaking skills. (Gallagher, 1963)13 The need for research in the area of listening is compounded when one considers the frequency of use in education and new material and equipment developments, but one must not ignore the findings of previous studies, no matter how small or obvious they may appear. Duker (1969)14 and others have pointed out that research on listening should expand the previous findings of studies and dissertations into working models and materials. Witty and Sizemore (1959)15 suggested that we abandon attempts to ascertain the superiority of one avenue of presentation (auditory vs visual) over another. This makes a great deal of sense primarily because certain stimuli are inherently received through a single sensory channel. Listening Comprehension A great deal of the previous research and writings in the area of listening have focused on the effect of training listening skills, testing listening comprehension, and comparing listening skills with reading, achievement, and intelligence levels. (Spearritt, 1962)16 These factors are important and a few of the general findings are as follows: 19 1. Low ability students benefit from training programs for improving listening. (Marsden, 1953)17 (Bakan, 1956)18 (Canfield, 1961)19 (Kraner, 1964)20 2. Slow readers and poor readers show a preference for oral presentations. (Friedman, 1959)21 (Schmidt, 1944)22 (Early, 1958)23 (Fenwick, 1971)24 3. Children in grades four, five, and six appear to acquire information more readily from listening than reading. (Caughran, 1953)25 (Witty & . 26 27 Sizemore, 1959) (Hampleman, 1955) (Fawcett, 1966)28 (Erickson & King, 1917)29 4. The listening vocabulary is much superior to the reading vocabulary. At grade five, reading comprehension reaches ninety percent of listening comprehension; the two abilities are equal in the eighth grade. (Durrell, 1969)30 Strategies :flmr Improving Listening Other research studies point out teaching strategies that should be used in teaching the auditory learner and in developing instructional materials. 1. A change or switch of voices, note taking, inter- action with an object related to the listening activity helps to maintain one's attention. (Allen, 1960)31 (Farrow, 1964)32 (Hanley, 1956)33 (Harrell & others, 1949)34 (Newman and Highland, 20 5 (Linsley, l961)36 (Witkin, l97l)37 1956)3 (Webster & Thompson, 1954)38 The greatest source of errors in listening arises from dificiencies in vocabulary. (Brown, 1950)39 Increasing the reading vocabulary helps the listening vocabulary. (Dawson & Zollinger, 1960)40 When informational content is attenuated, as much as sixty percent of each message was understood (two overlapping messages), increasing the auded information per unit of time. (Webster & Thompson, 1954)41 Some features identified that affect listeners recall of radio broadcasts are: a) limited number of items, b) human interest, c) index words, and d) dramatic events. (Harrell, Brown & Schramm, 1949)42 When the listener is required to piece together fragments of speech and make a correct response, voice change was helpful. (Hanley, 1956)43 Careful planning of listening experiences can bring about significant improvement without direct teaching of listening skills. (Canfield, 1960)44 Carroll (1972)45 suggested that pauses inserted into time-compressed materials might improve comprehensibility of the materials. Research by Teaching 21 Friedman and Johnson (1969)46 did confirm this with four speech rates using pauses, which resulted in the same amount of recall. This is reported as replicating the previous findings of Miller and Isard (1963).47 Sticht (1972)48 reports on a study by Friedman, Graae, and Orr (1967) in which they used the technique of presenting a cueing tone to alert listeners to important segments of a recorded message. He indicates that this may be viewed as somewhat analogous to use of underlining or capitalization. Although the results of this study did not indicate a facilitation effect due to cueing, Sticht suggests that this may have been due to the fact that the tone was not coded to signal any type of information processing strategy. He also suggested that a question follow the cued passage segment to serve as a guide and to terminate the processing of the cued information. Considerations Using Listening l. Intuitive judgements of both teachers and pupils are untrustworthy criteria of the actual ability of a pupil to listen. (Hall, 1954)49 The oral method of presenting certain types of examinations (True-false and multiple choice) is as effective a method as that involving the 22 presentation in written form. (Witty & Sizemore, 1959)50 3. Children who do poorly on auditory discrimination tests may still learn better by listening. (Murphy, 1972)51 Listening and Psychometric Variables A great deal of existing research on listening has focused on the search for related factors. Spearritt(l962)52 and Nichols (1952)53 have summarized many of the findings that have investigated related variables. They point out that research on listening comprehension seems to indicate the following: 1. Reading and listening comprehension appear to be related with correlations varying from .4 to .8 in studies reviewed. 2. Higher correlations with reading and listening are found in the upper grades. 3. Intelligence and listening comprehension correla- tions are similar to those found with reading comprehension and listening comprehension. 4. It appears that a variable affecting correlations with listening comprehension and intelligence is the degree of verbal and non-verbal content in the intelligence tests used in the studies. 23 Reading and listening comprehension studies indicate they are approximately equal in terms of efficiency in learning. Listening studies conducted in the elementary schools, high schools, and colleges suggest that listening is relatively more effective than reading in the lower grades for effecting comprehension. Reading comprehension is favored when the subject material becomes more difficult, and the auditory mode of listening is superior with easy material. Additional specific points that Nichols (1952)54 has reported from previous research studies on listening include: 1. "It is difficult to generalize accurately with respect to the efficiency of listening as a medium of learning." Studies have shown retention to vary from ten to seventy percent after two to three months. Recall of learning through listening after two months or more seldom exists beyond the twenty-five percent level of efficiency. Further points of interest that Spearritt (1962)55 has reported that are worthy considerations with regard to listening comprehension are: 1. "In an exploratory investigation of this area, there would appear to be an advantage in using groups at the upper elementary or early secondary 24 school levels, by which stage reasonable proficiency in both listening and reading could be expected." 2. The most appropriate rate for presenting tests by means of tape recordings would appear from the evidence to be 150 words per minute. 3. The effect of distortion of speech due to variation in intelligibility or time intervals on the per- formance on listening comprehension tests has not been explored. 4. Comprehension in the early grades of the elementary school is clearly more dependent on listening than on reading. 5. Variation in length of passage between 100 words and 700 words has been found to have no effect on the relative standing of fourth and sixth grade children on listening comprehension tests. 6. It appears that children with moderate hearing loss do at least as well as those with no hearing problems on listening comprehension tests. 7. There are strong theoretical and empirical grounds for the use of recorded tests spoken by one person in comparative studies of listening comprehension. Sticht (1972)56 in a paper presented to a workshop on Language Comprehension and the Acquisition of Knowledge, and a text of the papers presented, edited by Carroll and 25 Freedle (1972)57 reports on specific research with men in Army training classes and reviews research on learning by listening. Among the various points that are presented, the following appear to have application to this proposed study: Many poor-readers (men in Army training classes) stated a preference for learning by listening. Preference for learning by one modality or another does not mean that learning will be accomplished under the preferred modality or will information on job operations be sought after in this modality. He further states, ". . . the provision of listening materials in addition to reading materials in training programs and in on-the-job training might motivate learning where it otherwise would not even be attempted." Media Instruction Smith and Nagel (1972)58 reporting the findings of an NBA survey of 1,609 teachers made in 1967 revealed that 53.8% were using audio tape recordings for instructional purposes. The true advantages of this media equipment have been virtually untapped. This study will attempt to deter- mine if strategies, such as pause cue or voice cue, can indeed aid listening comprehension of audio recorded material. The tape recorder is an economical and easily used media item that is receiving increased use in the 26 public schools. Twyford (1960)59 stated, "Very little research has been done to define the new role of the teacher when media are employed to simplify the instructional task and to increase the number of students that can be handled." Although this study will not investigate this directly, it will be considered and discussed in the final chapter dealing with recommendations. Summary The cited literature does give credibility to the proposed study and the variables to be examined. Specifically, these supportive factors are as follows: 1. The role listening plays in the individuals' everyday life experiences is very high. 2. Use and availability of the tape recorder in school programs today has greatly increased. 3. Fifth and sixth pupils have a preference for oral presentations over reading. 4. Pupils in the elementary schools acquire informa- tion more readily from listening. 5. Pupils who are experiencing academic difficulties due to reading problems and/or learning disabilities tend to learn more by listening, although this modality may not be the most efficient for an individual. 6. There is little evidence to support the principle that one can rely on pupils' judgements of their 10. 27 ability to learn by listening as opposed to learning by reading. Auditory learning can be enhanced by cueing or prompting. A change in activity or interaction with an object related to the listening activity aids attention. Some types of materials are learned more easily than other types with oral presentation as opposed to visual presentation. Specific planning of listening experiences can improve listening without directly teaching listening skills. CHAPTER II REFERENCES lCampeau, Peggie, "Selective Review of Audiovisual Media of Instruction," Chapter V, Instructional Media: A Procedure for the Design of Multi—Media Instruction, A Critical Review of Research, and Suggestions for Future Research. Monograph No. 2, Leslie J. Briggs, Peggie L. Campeau, Robert M. Gagne, and Mark A. May. Pittsburgh, Pa.: American Institutes for Research, 1967. 2Hildreth, Gertrude, "Interrelationships Among the Language Arts," Elementary School Journal 48:538-549, June, 1948. 3Lundsteen, Sarah. Listening: Its Impact on Reading and the Other Language Arts. NCTE/ERIC Studies in the Teaching of English, 1971. 4Anderson, Harold A., "Needed Research in Listening," Elementary English, 29:215-224, April, 1952. 5Duker, Sam, "Listening" in Encyclopedia of Education Research, 4th ed. (Edited by Robert L. Ebel). New York: Macmillan, 1969. 6Anderson, "Needed Research in Listening," p. 216. 7Duker, Sam. Listening: Readings, Vol. I. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1966. Duker, Sam. Listening: Readings, Vol. II. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971. Duker, Sam. Teaching_Listening in the Elementary School. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971. Duker, Sam. Listening Biblipgrapny, 2nd Edition. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1968. 8Lundsteen, Sarah. Listening: Its Impact on Reading and the Other Language Arts. 9Nichols, Ralph G. and L. A. Stevens. Are You Listening? New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1957. 28 29 Nichols, Ralph G., "Listening Instruction in the Secondary School," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals 36:158-74, May, 1952. Excerpts: Listening: Readings, Duker, 1966, pp. 240-259. loTaylor, Stanford E. Listening. What Research Says to the Teacher, No. 29. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1964. llBurns, Paul C. and Lowe, Alberta L. Language Arts in Childhood Education. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1966, Chapter 3,p. 48. 12Burns and Lowe, Language Arts in Childhood Education, p. 49. l3Gallagher, Frank, "All Quiet on the 'Listening' Front," Advanced Management-Office Executive. 2(4):28-29, April, 1963. l4Duker, "Listening" in Encyclopedia of Education Research. 15Witty, Paul A. & Sizemore, Robert A. Studies in Listening. Champaign, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English, 1959. 16Spearritt, Donald. Listening Comprehension-A Factorial Analysis. Australian Council for Educational Research, Series No. 76, 1962. l7Marsden, W. Ware. A Study to Determine the Effect of Training in Listening Upon Ability to Listen. Doctoral field study. Greeley, Colorado: Colorado State College of Education, 1953. Abstract: Abstracts of Field Studies for the Degree of Doctor of Education, 15:111-113, 1954. 18Bakan, Paul, "Some Reflections on Listening Behavior," Journal of Communications, Autumn, 1956, pp. 108- 112. 19Canfield, George R., "A Study of the Effects of Two Types of Instruction on the Listening Comprehension of Fifth Grade Children," Doctoral Dissertation. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University, 1960. Dissertation Abstracts 21:2622, 1961. 30 20Kraner, Robert E. A Comparison of Two Methods of Listening and Reading Training in an Eighth Grade Language Arts Program. Doctoral Dissertation. Denton, Texas: North Texas University, 1963. Dissertation Abstracts 25:1046, 1964. 21Friedman, Robert M. A Comparative Study of the Retention Level of Verbal Material Presented Visually and Orally; Fifth Grade Pupils. Garden City, N.Y.: Adelphi College, 1959. 22Schmidt, Bernadine, "Visual and Auditory Associations in Reading Disability Cases," Journal of Exceptional Children. 10:98-105, January 1944. 23Early, Margaret J., "Developing Effective Listening Skills," Teaching Listening in the Elementary School, edited by Sam Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, pp. 34-44. 24Fenwick, James J., "Slow Learners and Listening," Listening: Readings, Vol. 2 (Editor, Sam Duker). Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971. 25Caughran, Alex M., "The Effect on Language Compre- hension of Three Methods of Presentation," Dissertation Abstracts, XIII, Part 2, No. 6, 1113, 1953. 26Witty,& Sizemore. Studies in Listening. 27Hampleman, Richard S., "Comparison of Listening and Reading Comprehension Ability of Fourth and Sixth Grade Pupils," Dissertation Abstracts XV, No. 10, 1757, 1955. 28Fawcett, Annabel E., "The Effect of Training in Listening Upon the Listening Skill of Intermediate Grade Children," Elementary English 43:473-476, May 1966. 29Erickson, C. I. and King, Irving, "A Comparison of Visual and Oral Presentation of Lessons in the Case of Pupils from the Third to the Ninth Grades," School and Society, Vol. 6:146-48, August 1917. 30Durrell, Donald E., "Listening Comprehension Versus Reading Comprehension," Journal of Reading 12:455-60, March, 1969. 31 31Allen, wm. H., "Audio-Visual Communication," Encyclopedia of Educational Research, (Edited by Chester W. Harris). New York: MacMillan, 1960, pp. 119-137. 32Farrow, Vern Leslie. "An Experimental Study of Listening Attention at the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Grade," Doctoral Dissertation. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon, 1963. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 24:3146, 1964. 33Hanley, Clair N., "A Factorial Analysis of Speech Perception," Journal of Speech and Hearinngisorders. 21:76-87, March 1956. 34Harrell, Thomas W., Brown, D. E. and Schramm, W., "Memory in Radio News Listening," Journal of Applied Psychology 33:265-274, June, 1949. 35Newman, Slater E. and Highland, Richard W., "The Effectiveness of Four Instructional Methods of Different Stages of a Course," Lackland Air Force Base - Field Study, 1956, 22 pp. 36Linsley, Wm. A. An Experimental Study to Examine the Effect of Note-Taking on Listening Efficiency in the College Classroom. Master's Thesis. Peoria, 111.: Bradley University, 1961. 37Witkin, Belle R., "Auditory Perception - Implications for Language Development," Listening: Readings, Vol. 2, edited by San Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, pp. 351—368. 38Webster, J. C. and Thompson, P. O., "Responding to Both of Two Overlapping Messages," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 26:396-402, May, 1954. 39Brown, Donald P., "And Having Ears They Hear Not," NEA Journal, 39:586-87, November, 1970. 40Dawson, Mildren A. and Zollinger, Marian, "The Role of Reading in Relation to Other Areas of Communication," International Reading Association Conference Proceedings, Vol. 5. New York: Scholastic Magazines, 1960. 41Webster and Thompson, "Responding to Both of Two Overlapping Messages." 32 4zHarrell, Brown and Schramm, "Memory in Radio News Listening." 43Hanley, "A Factorial Analysis of Speech Perception." 44Canfield, "A Study of the Effects of Two Types of Instruction on the Listening Comprehension of Fifth Grade Children." 45Carroll, John B., "Learing from Verbal Discourse in Educational Media: Some Research Studies," Proceedings of Project Aristotle Sympsoium. Washington, D.C., December, 1967. 46Friedman, H. L. & Johnson, R. L.. Time Compressed Speech as an Educational Medium: Studies of Stimulus Characteristics and Individual Differences (Report No. R69-l4), American Institutes for Research, Silver Springs, Md., 1969. 47Miller, G. A. and Isard, S., "Some Perceptual Consequences of Linguistic Rules," Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 2:217-228, 1963. 48Sticht, Thomas G., "Learning by Listening," Chapter II. Language Comprehension and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Eds. John B. Carroll and Roy 0. Freedle. Washington, D.C.: V. H. Winston & Sons, 1972, pp. 285-314. 49Hall, Robert Oscar, "An Exploratory Study of Lis— tening of Fifth Grade Pupils," Doctoral Dissertation. Los Angeles, Calif.: University of Southern California, 1954. 50Witty and Sizemore, Studies in Listening, pp. 20-24. 51Murphy, John F., "Learning by Listening: A Public School Approach to Learning Disabilities," Academic Therapy Quarterl . Vol. 8, No. 2, Winter 1972-73, pp. 167-189. 52Spearritt, Listening Comprehension-A Factorial Analysis. 53Nichols, Ralph G., "Listening Instruction in the Secondary School," Listening: Readings, Vol. I, Ed. Duker, Sam. New York: Scarecrow Pres, 1966, pp. 240-59. 33 54Nichols, "Listening Instruction in the Secondary School," p. 246. SSSpearritt, Listening Comprehension-A Factorial Analysis. 56Sticht, "Learning by Listening," p. 299. 57Carroll and Freedle, Learning by Listening." 58Smith, Hayden R. and Nagel, Thomas. Instructional Media in the Learning Process. Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill Co., pp. 67-77. 59Twyford, Loran C., "Educational Communication Media," in Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 3rd Edition (Edited by C. W. Harris). New York: Macmillan, 1960, p. 369. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY Introduction This study was designed to determine the effects of auditory highlighting upon listening comprehension scores of elementary students identified as having reading problems. The lack of specific research studies on elemen- tary pupils who rely on their listening abilities to acquire new knowledge because of low reading levels gave the examiner the impetus to conduct this study. The "Design of the Study" will be presented under the following headings: Subjects, Test Description, Audio Equipment, Pilot Study, and Procedure. Subjects Pupils in the fifth and sixth grades from four schools, Howell Middle School, Waverly Learning Center, Waverly Junior High, and the Webberville Middle School, in the Lan- sing, Michigan area were used in the study. A total of 13 students were referred to the examiner from the Howell Middle School, 14 from the Waverly Junior High School, 14 from the Waverly Learning Center, and 17 pupils from the Webberville Middle School. A total of fifty-eight subjects 34 35 were selected from the four public school programs. They were all identified as under achieving as a result of low reading levels and/or learning disabilities. All subjects were initially referred to the examiner by teacher consultants for learning disabilities or remedial reading consultants. Pupils had to meet the following criteria to be referred for inclusion in the study: 1. Presently in the fifth or sixth grade. 2. Reading level 2 years or more below expected grade level. (Two exceptions to this criterion are noted below.) 3. Average of near average intelligence quotient. 4. Served by a teacher consultant or special program for their reading and/or academic difficulties. All subjects were being served in special programs because of reading and/or academic achievement difficulties. The special programs were: resource learning center for children with learning disabilities (pupils segregated l/2 days - 4 days/week), teacher consultants for children with learning disabilities (pupils served within the regular classes on a referral basis), and special classes for remedial reading instruction. Fourteen pupils were being served in the resource center, twenty-seven pupils were being served by a special reading class on a daily basis, and seventeen were being served within their regular classes by a teacher consultant for learning disabilities. Subjects were evenly distributed in the fifth and sixth grades with twenty-nine in each grade. All but two 36 subjects were reading not less than two years below expected grade level as measured by group achievement tests given in January and February of 1974. The two subjects (#2 in group II and #1 in group III in Tables IB & IC) were included in the study because their teachers reported that their scores were higher than their instructional level. The two students were achieving satisfactorily with 3.5 level reading materials. The chronological age range for the population was 10 years 1 month to 13 years 7 months. The I.Q. range was 80 to 114 with a mean I.Q. of 92JL I.Q. scores were obtained from the pupils permanent record folders and were from group intelligence tests administered within the past two years. Eleven pupils had psychological reports in which case the I.Q. score used was from an individual I.Q. test (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children). Tables IA, IB, IC, ID, and II contain individual and group pupil identification data. The four different schools were used to provide a representative group of children from various geographic, social, and cultural backgrounds. Subjects school records were reviewed to check results of vision and hearing tests administered by the Michigan State Department of Public Health to eliminate any subject with significant uncorrected visual or auditory acuity deficits. Subjects were serially assigned within each school to one of the four experimental groups for the purpose of testing the null hypotheses. 37 TABLE IA GROUP I PUPIL IDENTIFICATION DATA DISTRIBUTION Subject Chronological Intelligence Grade Reading School Age Quotient Placement Level 1 11-10 89 5.9 3.0 WLC 2 11-11 92 5.9 2.0 WLC 3 10—1 93 5.9 2.1 WLC 4 11-1 91 5.9 1.8 WLC 5 12-0 89 6.9 2.2 WJH 6 12-1 111 6.9 3.0 WJH 7 12—9 99 6.9 3.2 WJH 8 11-5 103 6.9 3.8 WJH 9 13-1 82 5.9 2.6 HMS 10 13-3 80 5.9 2.6 HMS 11 12-10 99 6.9 3.4 HMS 12 10-8 98 5.9 3.7 HMS 13 11-8 96 6.9 3.8 WMS 14 11-8 87 6.9 4.4 WMS 15 12-3 99 5.9 2.2 WMS Mean ll-ll 93.87 2.92 Range 10-1 to 13-3 80 to 111 1.8 to 3.8 WLC = Waverly Learning Center WJH Waverly Junior High Howell Middle School — Webberville Middle School 3% 38 TABLE IB GROUP II PUPIL IDENTIFICATION DATA Subject Chronological Intelligence Grade Reading School Age Quotient Placement Level 1 12-3 87 6.9 3.6 HMS 2* 11-10 87 5.9 4.1 HMS 3 11-5 80 5.9 2.9 HMS 4 11-8 114 5.9 3.5 WLC 5 12-6 92 5.9 3.0 WLC 6 10-6 89 5.9 2.3 WLC 7 11-7 88 5.9 2.3 WLC 8 12-11 89 6.9 2.4 WJH 9 11—8 97 6.9 3.1 WJH 10 12-0 89 6.9 3.2 WJH 11 12-2 97 6.9 3.4 WJH 12 11-6 101 6.9 3.9 WMS 13 11-6 87 6.9 4.4 WMS 14 11-3 94 5.9 2.9 WMS 15 11—6 91 5.9 3.7 WMS Mean ll-9 92.13 3.25 Range 10—6 to 12-11 80 to 114 2.3 to 4.4 WLC = Waverly Learning Center WJH Waverly Junior High - Howell Middle School Webberville Middle School 2% 39 TABLE IC GROUP III PUPIL IDENTIFICATION DATA DISTRIBUTION Subject Chronological Intelligence Grade Reading School Age Quotient Placement Level 1* 11-1 104 5.9 4.3* HMS 2 12-9 83 5.9 3.6 HMS 3 11-10 95 5.9 3.4 HMS 4 13—1 89 6.9 3.5 WLC 5 11—1 87 5.9 3.5 WLC 6 11-8 86 5.9 2.0 WLC 7 12-1 87 5.9 2.0 WJH 8 13-6 105 6.9 3.2 WJH 9 11-9 82 6.9 3.4 WJH 10 11—11 89 6.9 3.8 WMS 11 11-8 98 6.9 3.8 WMS 12 11-6 86 5.9 2.9 WMS 13 11-5 87 5.9 2.6 WMS 14 12-5 94 5.9 2.6 WMS Mean ll-ll 90.86 3.19 Range 11-1 to 13-6 82 to 105 2.0 to 4.3 WLC = Waverly Learning Center WJH Waverly Junior High HMS - Howell Middle School WMS - Webberville Middle School 40 TABLE ID GROUP IV PUPIL IDENTIFICATION DATA DISTRIBUTION Subject Chronological Intelligence Grade Reading School Age Quotient Placement Level 1 11-4 89 5.9 3.7 HMS 2 11-0 97 5.9 3.2 HMS 3 11-6 102 5.9 2.4 HMS 4 11-2 98 5.9 3.5 WLC 5 10-9 90 5.9 2.0 WLC 6 11-5 90 5.9 2.5 WLC 7 13—0 106 6.9 2.5 WJH 8 12-10 80 6.9 3.2 WJH 9 13-7 98 6.9 3.6 WJH 10 12-2 85 6.9 4.2 WJH 11 12-3 99 6.9 3.8 WMS 12 11-3 92 5.9 3.0 WMS 13 11-6 85 6.9 2.7 WMS 14 11-8 90 6.9 3.0 WMS Mean 11-10 92.93 3.09 Range 10-9 to 13-7 80 to 106 2.0 to 4.2 WLC = Waverly Learning Center WJH waverly Junior High Howell Middle School Webberville Middle School 3% 41 TABLE II SUMMARY OF PUPIL IDENTIFICATION DATA FOR ALL TREATMENT GROUPS Chronological Intelligence Reading Grade Age Quotient Level Placement Mean 11.9 92.6 3.1 6.4 Range 10.1 to 13.6 80 to 114 1.8 to 4.4 5.9 to 6.9 Test Description Two standardized tests were used with this study. The Sequential Tests of Educational Progress (STEP) Listeningl test, Level 4, and two subtests from the Detroit Test of Learning Abilities (DTLA).2 The STEP Listening tests, Form 4A and 4B, were chosen for use with this study because: (a) both forms are equivalent, (b) they have been standard- ized for grades four, five, and six, and (c) the "Listening" passages are reported to be typical of the things that might actually be spoken to students in school situations. Each test form has 13 passages of various types of material followed by multiple choice questions. The content areas of the material are as follows: (1) Directions and Simple Explanation, (2) Exposition, (3) Narration (both simple and figurative), (4) Argument and Persuasion, and (5) Aesthetic material (both poetry and prose). Passages vary in length and the reading time for the selections ranges from 30 seconds to 3 minutes and 40 seconds. A professional male 42 broadcaster recorded both Form 4A and 4B general directions, passages, the comprehension questions and multiple choice answers. The listening tests were presented in recorded form through earphones with each pupil. Tests of auditory and visual memory were administered: 1. to insure that there was sufficient auditory memory ability to respond to the comprehension test items on the STEP, 2. to permit a comparison of auditory and visual memory and correlations with comprehension test scores. A minimum score of recall of five items (visual and auditory) was required of each subject to be included in the study. The Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude subtests; "Auditory Attention Span for Unrelated Words," and the "Visual Attention Span for Objects" were administered to each subject. Test 6, "Auditory Attention Span for Unrelated Words" consists of two sets of unrelated, one- syllable words. Each set contains seven groups of words, the groups increasing in number of words from two to eight. The words were read aloud to the subject at the rate of one word per second and the subject was then asked to repeat the words. Total scores for the number of words repeated to the examiner were collected for each pupil. Test 9, "Visual Attention Span for Objects" consists of seven sets of pictures of common objects increasing in number from two to eight. Each card was exposed for one second 43 for each picture on it and then removed to have the subject recall what pictures were on the card. Audio Equipment and Material An Ampex Recorder/Reproducer,3 Model AG 600 B, was used to make the master magnetic tape recording at 7 1/2 inches per second (ips) for the STEP Listening tests, Form 4A and 4B. Copies of the master reel were made to make the "voice cue" tapes of 4A and 4B. This required cutting out the original male voice recording of the major points and splicing in the female voice recording of major points. Cassette tapes were made from these reel to reel tapes with a TELEX Reel to Cassette Duplicating System, Model 300.4 Three sets of the STEP Listening tests, Form 4A and Form 4B, were made for each of the three treatments in this study. Separate sets of Form 4A and 4B were made of: the "voice cue" treatment, the "pause cue" treatment, and the "no cue" treatment. A Montage Audiomate Cassette Recorder/Producer, Model 5905 was used to record the "pause cue" inaudible signal to highlight major points within the recorded passages of the STEP Listening tests, Form 4A and 4B. The signal was placed before major points, related to comprehension questions, in the passages of the STEP tests. A stop signal was also placed at the end of the four multiple- choices for each comprehension question at the end of the passages. This recorder utilizes a 150 Hz pulse signal 44 that is recorded on the cassette tape to activate a shut off switch on the Audiomate 590. The "pause cue" tapes of STEP 4A and 4B were used with the Audiomate 590 and a "button box" accessory for this experiment. Subjects could restart the tape player again by pushing the button on this accessory when the tape stopped. The "button box“ was developed by staff members of the Great Lakes Regional SEIMC of Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. This accessory gave a more accessible restart button than found on the original Audiomate 590 equipment. A headphone jack on the "button box" enabled the examiner to plug in a listening post to accommodate two sets of headphones. The subjects used headphones for all the STEP tests and the examiner used the second set to monitor the experiment. Volume levels were set to the subjects individual prefer- ence level by asking or directing each subject to adjust the level to his satisfaction. Subjects exposed to the "Pause Cue" treatment were told in the initial directions, when and why the recorder would stop, and how they can restart the recorder. (See Directions, Appendix) The "voice cue" highlighting treatment utilized a male voice tape recorded presentation except that the major points within the passages were spoken by a woman. These major point recordings of sentences and/or phrases were spliced into a c0py of the master tapes of the STEP Listening tests, Forms 4A and 48, to replace the original sentences or phrases recorded by the male professional 45 broadcaster. A third copy of cassette tapes was made of the STEP tests for the "no cue" treatment trials. All comprehension questions and the four multiple choice answers that followed the recorded passages of all treatments had pulse signals recorded at the end of each question and the four choices. This enabled the subjects to have time to make their choice and record it on the answer sheet. Following the subjects response to each question, the examiner then reactivated the tape presenting the subsequent questions. The subjects used headphone, AKG Model k 180, to control for varied acoustical properties of the classrooms used and any distractions inside or outside of the testing sites. A listening post with additional headphone jack outlets was used with all trials and experiments to permit the experimenter to monitor the tests. Pilot Study A pilot study was conducted by the examiner to test various types of highlighting procedures to cue or aid the listener. Eighteen subjects in the fifth and sixth grades listened to five sample passages from the STEP Listening Tests Forms 4A and 48. Each of the five passages was recorded by a male broadcaster and four specific high- lighting procedures, "voice cue", "pause cue", "tone cue", and "repeat cue", were used along with a fifth sample 46 that used "no cue". The techniques or materials used to highlight recorded material were as follows: 1. "voice cue" - a woman's voice was used to indicate major points within the passage read by the male broadcaster. 2. "pause cue" - the Audiomate 590 was used along with the "button box" to stop the record- ing at the beginning of major points with the passages. Subjects were instructed to restart the recorder by pushing the "button box" switch to restart. 3. "tone cue" - a musical beep was recorded before major points to cue the listener. 4. "repeat cue" - a Repeatcorder was used that enabled the subject to replay any 15 seconds prior to the point when the repeat button was depressed. Sub- jects could select any number of points to replay. The fifth passage was played with "no cues" to indicate major points. Each of the eighteen subjects listened to the five different passages and answered the comprehension questions that followed each passage. Pupils listened to the recorded passages using earphones. 47 Percentage scores for the number of questions answered correctly were compared for each of the five recorded passages. Subjects were asked which procedure they preferred to assist them in listening to recorded material. Pause one was selected by eleven of the eighteen subjects as the most preferred method and seven stated they liked the voice cue technique. The highest percentage of correct answers to the comprehension questions favored the "pause cue and voice cue" procedures. The subjects rejected the tone cue beep on the basis that it was annoying and came too fast for them to get ready. Although they liked the repeat recorder, they indicated that they were not always sure of when to use the repeat function of the machine. Subjects reported that they liked the idea of the pause, because it permitted them to get ready and it gave them something to do when listening. The pupils who preferred the voice cue technique over the other cue techniques reported that they liked the continuous flow (not interrupted) of information and felt that it was more direct in pointing out the major points within the passages. On the basis of this pilot study the examiner chose to use the "pause cue" and the "voice cue" techniques to examine their effects on the listening comprehension of children with reading and/or academic difficulties. Subjects used in the pilot study were excluded from the experimental study. 48 Procedure The students were all tested initially with the two subtests from the Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude. Students were then assigned to one of the four treatment groups. Two specific treatments, in which the stimuli for highlighting major points in the recorded passages of the STEP Listening test was varied, were used for the study. The highlighting procedures were selected from a pilot study using various highlighting procedures to cue the learner to important phrases or sentences as an aid to improving comprehension scores. The treatment programs for this specific study were: (1) "voice cue" in which the major points to be highlighted were recorded by a female voice and spliced in place of the original male recorded tape of the STEP Listening test, (2) "pause cue" technique used an inaudible signal to stop the recorder before major points to highlight them for the learner, (3) "no cues" tape recorded passages of the STEP, Level 4 Listening Test. The multiple choice questions at the end of each selection were used to determine the listening comprehension levels of the subjects. The following flow chart diagram shows the actual steps employed for this specific study. All subjects were referred to the examiner by teacher consultants for inclusion in the study if they met the initial requirements 49 Figure 1 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE FLOW CHART Subjects referred to the examiner by teacher consultant Subjects school records reviewed for preliminary screening Subjects eliminated from study if the basic criteria were not met (I.Q., Rdg. Level) l All subjects tested individually with an "auditory memory" test and a "visual memory" test Subjects serially assigned to one of four treatment groups J Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 N = 14 Subjects given Trial one of experiment - test A with "voice cues" Subjects given Trial one of experiment - test A with "pause cues" Subjects given Trial one of experiment - test A with "voice cues" Subjects given Trial one of experiment - test A with "no cues" Subjects given Trial two of experiment - test B with "pause cues" Subjects given Trial two experiment - test B with "voice cues" I Analysis of Data made Subjects given Trial two of experiment - test B with Subjects given Trial two of experiment - test B with "pause cues" "no cues" J Analysis of Data made l Hypothesis reviewed-acceptance or fail to accept Other data reviewed for any significant points Summary and Recommendations Made 50 mmuz vsuz vauz z Hmuoe m ummp vanz..w muouw m ummu m ummu m ummu «Huz .m msouw mauz .H muons manz .m msouo 039 Hanna sauz .m msouo 4 ummu a ummn e pmmu sauz .v msouo mauz .m msouo manz .H msouw mao HMHHB Aamauozv Amcflunmflanmflm Hmnuw>unozv imcfipnmflanmflm Hmnum>v mono oz mono mwsmm mono moao> coaumuammmum mo Hmpuo mummB mcflcmpmfiq mmem mmmoom AdeB mmB EBHB QmmD mZOHadszEOU ¢B mBHB quHmmadz Qmomoomm mo mDOmBmE fidBZflZHmmmxm m0 mmmmo ZOHBfiBmemmm HHH mqmflfi 51 of (a) average or near average intelligence, (b) reading level at least two years below expected grade level, and (c) in the fifth or sixth grade. A cassette tape player with earphones was used to present the listening tests to the subjects. The initial instructions to the subjects were given by the experi- menter. (See Appendix A for Initial Directions) Subjects used the test booklets and a separate IBM answer sheet to record their answers to the multiple-choice questions following each passage. The answer foils are printed in the test booklets, but the questions are not. There are 80 multiple-choice questions in the STEP Level 4A and 4B. The listening tests are divided into two parts and each takes approximately 45 minutes. Administration of trial one and trial two were separated in time from ten to fourteen days. It was necessary to eliminate one subject and to replace her with another subject in group II. This was due to the strategies she employed during the second trial treatment. The subject indicated to the examiner that she found that after taking the "pause cue" treatment that she "needed to have something to do with her hands when listening." When she took the second treatment (voice cue) she used a piece of paper to doodle on at various times. No answers appeared to be recorded on this paper, but since this strategy was not available to the other subjects it was felt that the subject's scores should not be used. 52 A cassette tape player with earphones was used to present the listening tests to the subjects. The initial instructions to the subjects were given by the experimenter. Subjects used the test booklets and a separate IBM answer sheet to record their answers to the multiple-choice questions following each passage. The answer foils are printed in the test booklets, but the questions are not. There are 80 multiple—choice questions in the STEP Level 4A and 4B. The listening tests are divided into two parts and each takes approximately 45 minutes. Administration of trial one and trial two were separated in time from ten to fourteen days. CHAPTER III REFERENCES 1Educational Testing Service. Cooperative sequential tests of educational progress: Directions for administra- ting and scoring listening 4A. Princeton, ETS, 1957. . Cooperative sequential tests of educational progress: Directions for administering and scoring listening 4B. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative sequential tests of educational progress: Listening 4A. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative sequential tests of educational progress: Listening 4B. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative sequential tests of educational progress: Manual for interpreting scores: Listening. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative sequential tests of educational progress: Technical report. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative seguential tests of educational progress: Teacher‘s guide. Princeton: ETS, 1957. 2Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude, Harry J. Baker and Bernice Leland. Indianapolis, Indiana: Bobbs Merrill, 1967. 3AMPEX Operational and Maintenance Manual-Model AG 600 B. Redwood City, California: Ampex Corporation, 1969. 4TELEX Operation Manual-Series 300 Tape Duplicating Systems. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Telex, Communications Division, 1972. 5MONTAGE Audiomate 590 Operating and Programming Manual. Rutherford, N.J.: Montage Productions, Inc., 1970. 53 CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Introduction There are four areas of data to be reported in this study. The first deals with the findings of the effect that auditory highlighting strategies with recorded material has on listening comprehension scores. The second area examined deals with the differences in scores for any of the five specific types of material within the listening tests. The third area to be examined is the raw data obtained on all subjects (I.Q., Reading Level, Visual Memory, and Auditory Memory scores) for possible correla- tions with scores obtained on measures of listening comprehension. The fourth area of data reviewed was collected by a questionnaire for each subject on their preference and acceptance of recorded material and the strategies used in their trials. The design of this experiment involved the comparison of highlighting techniques and additional measures for any possible correlations. The design variables are diagrammed in Figure 2. 54 Individual Measures 55 Visual Memory Auditory Memory Grade Level Reading Level Intelligence Quotient Chronological Age Figure 2. \\\\ Voice Cue Pause Cue No Cue Highlighting Procedure Experimental Design Variables 56 Analysis of Data All data for the four treatment groups are summarized with the means and standard deviations for each treatment in Tables IV, V, VI. The differences in the means between the "pause cue" and "voice cue" treatments are very negligible with groups 1 and 2 (Table IV). The differences in the means between the highlighted ("voice/pause cue") treatments and the non-highlighted ("no cue") treatments was small. Group 3’s difference in means was 1.93 points in favor of the "voice cue" treatment over the "no cue" treatment (Table V). The difference in means was 4.07 in favor of the "pause cue" treatment in Group 4 (Table VI). TABLE IV COMPARISON OF COMPREHENSION SCORES FOR GROUPS 1 and 2 WITH PAUSE CUE AND VOICE CUE TREATMENT TRIALS Group/Time Number Mean S.D. Range Group 1 Trial 1 15 45.20 12.50 25 to 69 (voice cue) Trial 2 15 45.13 13.47 23 to 63 (pause cue) Group 2 Trial 1 15 45.93 9.45 17 to 62 (pause cue) Trial 2 15 44.73 14.15 25 to 60 (voice cue) 57 TABLE V COMPARISON OF COMPREHENSION SCORES FOR GROUP 3 WITH VOICE CUE AND NO CUE TREATMENTS Group/Time Number Mean S.D. Range Group 3 Trial 1 14 44.86 10.35 26 to 62 (voice cue) Trial 2 14 42.93 11.63 17 to 62 (no cue) TABLE VI COMPARISON OF COMPREHENSION SCORES FOR GROUP 4 WITH PAUSE CUE AND NO CUE TREATMENTS Group/Time Number Mean S.D. Range Group 4 Trial 1 14 41.00 11.04 19 to 60 (no cue) Trial 2 14 45.07 9.62 23 to 62 (pause cue) A "repeated measures design" of analysis of variance was used to determine if a significant difference did exist between the highlighted treatments or with the non- highlighted treatments. This statistical model is appropriate for studies that have observations of persons 58 that were made several times instead of once. (Glass & Stanley, 1970)1 The ANOVA Tables (Table VIIA-D) that follow presents the data analysis findings. The F ratio associated with the highlighted and non- highlighted treatments was found not statistically significant at the .05 level. This indicated that comprehension was not significantly affected by the highlighting cues. Therefore, there is no reason to reject the following null hypotheses: Hypothesis 1. There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of total compre- hension scores with the "voice cue" treatment and the "pause cue" treatment. Hypothesis 2. There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of total comprehension scores with the “voice cue" and the "no cue" treatment. Hypothesis 3. There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of total comprehension scores with the "pause cue" treatment and the "no cue" treatment. 59 TABLE VII A ANOVA TABLE (REPEATED MEASURE) - GROUP I VOICE CUE - PAUSE CUE Source df MS F P Repeated Measure 1 .0333 .0026 .9603 Score Error 14 TABLE VII B ANOVA TABLE (REPEATED MEASURE) - GROUP II PAUSE CUE - VOICE CUE Source df MS F P Repeated Measure 1 10.7967 .3072 .5882 Score Error 14 TABLE VII C ANOVA TABLE (REPEATED MEASURE) - GROUP III VOICE CUE - NO CUE Source df MS F P Repeated Measure 1 26.0279 .8758 .3665 Score Error 13 60 TABLE VII D ANOVA TABLE (REPEATED MEASURE) - GROUP IV NO CUE - PAUSE CUE Source df MS F P Repeated Measure 1 116.0007 1.8612 .1957 Score Error 13 Although no significant differences were found between total comprehension scores under the various treatment con- ditions, further analysis of the highlighting effect was made with the subtest scores of the comprehension measures. To test Hypotheses 4 and 5, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) procedure was used. This procedure is prescribed for analysis of data with experiments having two or more treatment variables each having two or more criterion measures by which to measure the outcome or effects of the experiment. (Tatsuoka, 1971)2 Hypotheses 4 and 5 were: 4 - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of subtest comprehension scores on all types of materials with the "voice cue" treatment and the "pause cue" treatment with groups 1 and 2. 5 - There will be no significant difference (p<.05) between the means of subtest comprehension scores on 61 all types of materials with the "cued" treatment and the "no cue" treatments used with groups 3 and 4. The comprehension raw scores for the STEP Listening Tests were subdivided into the five types of material as listed in the STEP Teacher's Guide. The five types of material are: 1) Directions, 2) Exposition, 3) Narration, 4) Argument, Persuasion, and 5) Aesthetic material. Tables VIII A, B, C and D present the statistical analysis of this data (MANOVA Tables) for all four treat- ment groups. Although there were no significant differences between treatments when total comprehension scores were used, there were some significant differences between subtest scores under different cued conditions. These differences were not consistent between either subject groups or subtests. Consequently, the results of these analyses did not offer consistent evidence for rejection of null hypotheses 4 and 5. The lack of consistency on differ- ences with individual subtests makes interpretation very difficult. It suggests that the type of material, as in the STEP tests, is not consistently affected by the cued and non-cued techniques used in this study. 62 TABLE VIII A MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR SUBTESTS SCORES ACHIEVED ON STEP LISTENING TEST BY GROUP I - VOICE CUE - PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS MANOVA Table Source df MS F P Subtest 1 (Directions) 1 1612.85 1.372 .261 Subtest 2 (Exposition) 1 425.50 .416 .530 Subtest 3 (Narration) l 24.29 6.517 .023* Subtest 4 (Argument) 1 58.78 .680 .424 Subtest 5 (Aesthetic) l 67.48 .092 .766 Error 14 *Significant at .05 level or below TABLE VIII B MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR SUBTESTS SCORES ACHIEVED ON STEP LISTENING TEST BY GROUP II - PAUSE CUE - VOICE CUE TREATMENTS MANOVA Table Source df MS F P Subtest l (Directions) 1 333.23 .321 .580 Subtest 2 (Exposition) 1 589.46 .527 .480 Subtest 3 (Narration) l 1.20 .268 .613 Subtest 4 (Argument) 1 246.46 6.748 .021* Subtest 5 (Aesthetic) 1 2304.94 1.216 .289 Error 14 *Signifcant at .05 level or below 63 TABLE VIII C MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR SUBTESTS SCORES ACHIEVED ON STEP LISTENING TEST BY GROUP III - VOICE CUE - NO CUE TREATMENTS MANOVA Table Source df MS F P Subtest 1 (Directions) 1 11763.446 7.239 .019* Subtest 2 (Exposition) 1 .036 .000 .995 Subtest 3 (Narration) 1 14.281 2.519 .137 Subtest 4 (Argument) 1 146.242 2.337 .150 Subtest 5 (Aesthetic) 1 349.930 .402 .537 Error 13 *Significant at .05 level or below TABLE VIII D MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR SUBTESTS SCORES ACHIEVED ON STEP LISTENING TEST BY GROUP IV - NO CUE - PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS MANOVA Table Source df MS F P Subtest 1 (Directions) 1 12176.893 6.803 .022* Subtest 2 (Exposition) 1 7070.186 9.257 .010* Subtest 3 (Narration) 1 .143 .015 .905 Subtest 4 (Argument) 1 9.140 .106 .750 Subtest 5 (Aesthetic) 1 5598.880 3.265 .094 Error 13 *Significant at .05 level or below 64 Hypotheses 6 and 7 dealt with relationships between scores obtained on the "auditory memory" and "visual memory" measures and the obtained listening comprehension scores for the four groups. The hypotheses restated were as follows: Hypotheses Related to Sensory Memory Test Scores and Listening Comprehension 6 - There will be no relationship between scores achieved on a test of "auditory memory" and comprehension scores achieved under any treatment condition. 7 - There will be no significant relationship between the scores achieved on a "visual memory" test and comprehension scores achieved under any treatment condition. Tables IX A, B, C, and D presents coefficients of correlation for listening comprehension scores and the visual and auditory memory measures for Groups I, II, III and IV. 65 TABLE IX A CORRELATION MATRIX FOR LISTENING COMPREHENSION SCORES AND VISUAL AND AUDITORY MEMORY SCORES FOR GROUP 1 - VOICE CUE & PAUSE CUE Auditory Memory Score Visual Memory Score (DTLA #6) (DTLA #9) Auditory Memory Score 1.000 Visual Memory Score .582* 1.000 STEP 4A (Voice Cue) .347 .285 STEP 4B (Pause Cue) .015 .153 N = 15 df = 13 *Significantly different from zero at the .05 level if >.514. TABLE IX B CORRELATION MATRIX FOR LISTENING COMPREHENSION SCORES AND VISUAL AND AUDITORY MEMORY SCORES FOR GROUP 2 - PAUSE CUE & VOICE CUE Auditory Memory Score Visual Memory Score (DTLA #6) (DTLA #9) Auditory Memory Score 1.000 Visual Memory Score .425 1.000 STEP 4A (Pause Cue) .274 .415 STEP 4B (Voice Cue) .269 .202 N = 14 df = 12 *Significantly different from zero at the .05 level if >.514. 66 TABLE IX C CORRELATION MATRIX FOR LISTENING COMPREHENSION SCORES AND VISUAL AND AUDITORY MEMORY SCORES FOR GROUP 3 - VOICE CUE AND NO CUE Auditory Memory Score Visual Memory Score (DTLA #6) (DTLA #9) Auditory Memory Score 1.000 Visual Memory Score .423 1.000 STEP 4A (Voice Cue) .298 -.099 STEP 48 (No Cue) .581* .289 N = 14 df = 12 *Significantly different from zero at the .05 level if >.532. TABLE IX D CORRELATION MATRIX FOR LISTENING COMPREHENSION SCORES AND VISUAL AND AUDITORY MEMORY SCORES FOR GROUP 4 - NO CUE AND PAUSE CUE Auditory Memory Score Visual Memory Score (DTLA #6) (DTLA #9) Auditory Memory Score 1.000 Visual Memory Score .162 1.000 STEP 4A (No Cue) .208 -.315 STEP 4B (Pause Cue) .183 .240 N = 14 df = 12 *Significantly different from zero at the .05 level if >.532. 67 No significant relationship was found to exist with the "visual or auditory memory" measures and the scores achieved with the "cued" listening comprehension scores. The only significant correlation found was with Group 3 subjects' scores on the "no cue" trial and scores achieved on the "auditory memory" measure. There was no statistically significant difference found when total score measures were used in determining the coefficients of correlations. Visual inspection of the ranked scores obtained on the auditory and visual memory measures with the difference scores between the two trials on the listening comprehen- sion treatments did suggest several relationships (See Tables X A, B, C, and D). Subjects whose scores favored the "voice cue" trial in Groups I and II were for the most part in the top half of the ranked "auditory memory" measure. For the highest 15 (re: auditory memory) 11 of them showed a higher score on the "voice cue" trial than "pause cue" trial. For the lowest 15 (re: auditory memory) 4 of them showed a higher score on the "voice cue" trial. 68 TABLE X A COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORES BETWEEN VOICE CUE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST # 6 - "AUDITORY MEMORY FOR UNRELATED WORDS" FOR GROUPS 1 AND 2 COMBINED Subject/Group Auditory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Memory Score "Voice Cue" "Pause Cue" Score 1/1 59 55 54 v 1 2/1 52 69 63 v 6 3/2 51 31 37 6 p 4/1 49 50 47 v 3 5/2 48 55 58 e p 6/2 47 58 51 V 7 7/1 47 4O 35 V 5 8/1 47 35 25 v 10 9/2 46 41 49 8 p 10/2 44 58 49 v 9 11/1 44 53 52 v 1 12/1 43 58 56 V 2 13/1 43 25 23 v 2 14/2 43 53 51 v 2 15/1 42 37 38 1 p 16/2 42 38 49 9 p 17/1 42 48 51 3 p 18/2 42 61 57 v 4 19/1 41 53 59 6 p 20/1 41 31 39 8 p 21/2 41 39 43 4 p 22/1 41 48 56 8 p 23/2 40 46 37 V 9 24/2 38 17 25 8 p 25/2 38 62 60 v 2 26/2 37 20 38 18 p 27/2 35 41 45 4 p 28/1 35 26 26 0 29/1 33 50 53 3 p 30/2 32 51 40 v 11 "v" indicates difference was in favor of "voice cue" treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of "pause cue" treatment 69 TABLE X B COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VOICE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS AND RANKED RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #6 - "AUDITORY MEMORY FOR UNRELATED WORDS" FOR GROUP I Subject Auditory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Memory Score "Voice Cue" "Pause Cue" Score 1 59 55 54 v 1 x 2 52 69 63 v 6 x 3 49 50 47 v 3 x 4 47 40 35 v 5 x 5 47 35 25 v 10 x 6 44 53 52 v 1 x 7 43 58 56 v 2 8 43 25 23 v 2 9 42 37 38 l p x 10 | 42 48 51 3 p x 11 41 53 59 6 p x 12 41 31 39 8 p x 13 41 48 56 8 p x 14 35 26 26 O 15 33 50 53 3 p x i = 43.93 Q = 45.20 i = 45.13 v; = 3.75 px = 4.83 x indicates subject preferred treatment in which highest score was obtained "v" indicates difference was in favor of "voice cue" treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of "pause cue" treatment 70 TABLE X C COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VOICE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS AND RANKED RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #6 ' "AUDITORY MEMORY FOR UNRELATED WORDS" FOR GROUP II Subjects Auditory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Memory Score "Pause Cue" "Voice Cue" Score 1 51 31 37 6 p x 2 48 55 58 3 p x 3 47 58 51 v 7 4 46 41 49 8 p x 5 44 58 49 v 9 6 43 53 51 v 2 7 42 38 49 9 p x 8 42 61 57 v 4 9 41 39 43 4 p x 10 40 46 37 v 9 11 38 17 25 8 p x 12 38 62 60 v 2 13 37 2o 38 18 p x 14 35 41 45 4 p x 15 32 51 40 v 11 i = 41.60 Q = 45.93 E = 44.73 v3 = 6.29 px — 7.50 x indicates subject preferred treatment in which highest score was obtained v" indicates difference was in favor of "voice cue" treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of "pause cue" treatment 71 TABLE X D COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORES BETWEEN VOICE CUE AND NO CUE TREATMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #6 "AUDITORY MEMORY FOR UNRELATED WORDS" FOR GROUP 3 Subject Auditory Memory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Raw Score "Voice Cue" "No Cue" Score 1 58 41 55 v 4 n 2 55 49 42 v 7 x 3 55 37 45 8 n 4 55 28 34 6 n 5 49 42 34 v 8 x 6 48 62 62 0 7 46 43 41 v 2 x 8 45 47 40 v 7 x 9 43 50 52 2 n 10 42 61 50 v 11 ll 42 50 47 v 3 12 41 42 30 v 12 13 36 50 52 2 n 14 33 26 17 v 9 Q = 46.29 i = 44.86 I = 42.93 v; = 7.44 nx 6.00 x subject indicated this treatment helped them in listening "v" indicates difference was in favor of voice cue treatment "n" indicates difference was in favor of "no cue" treatment 72 TABLE X E COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORES BETWEEN NO CUE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #6 - "AUDITORY MEMORY FOR UNRELATED WORDS" FOR GROUP 4 Subject Auditory Memory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Raw Score "No Cue" "Pause Cue" Score 1 54 19 48 29 p x 2 52 51 52 1 p 3 47 42 49 7 p 4 45 60 51 n 9 5 45 30 34 4 p x 6 45 35 62 27 p x 7 42 44 41 n 3 8 42 41 43 2 p x 9 40 26 23 n 3 10 40 37 36 n 1 ll 39 46 42 n 4 12 36 54 49 n 5 13 35 42 48 6 p x 14 35 47 53 6 p x Q = 42.64 Q = 41.00 Q = 45.07 pQ = 10.25 nx = 4.50 x subject indicated this treatment helped them in listening n" indicates difference was in favor of "no cue" treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of pause cue treatment 73 TABLE XI A COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORES BETWEEN VOICE CUE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #9 - "VISUAL ATTENTION SPAN FOR OBJECTS" FOR GROUPS 1 and 2 COMBINED Subject Visual STEP Score STEP Score Difference Memory Score "Voice Cue" "Pause Cue" Score 1 54 55 54 v 1 2 52 58 51 v 7 3 52 55 58 3 p 4 50 41 45 4 p 5 48 4O 35 v 5 6 48 53 52 v 1 7 47 38 49 9 p 8 47 25 23 v 2 9 47 31 37 6 p 10 46 50 47 v 3 ll 46 41 49 8 p 12 46 37 38 1 p 13 46 61 57 v 4 14 45 69 63 v 6 15 45 20 38 18 p 16 44 53 59 6 p 17 44 58 49 v 9 18 43 39 43 4 p 19 43 58 56 v 2 20 43 50 53 3 p 21 43 26 26 0 22 42 48 51 3 p 23 41 48 56 8 p 24 41 62 60 v 2 25 40 31 39 8 p 26 40 17 25 8 p 27 39 46 37 v 9 28 37 53 51 v 2 29 32 35 25 v 10 30 3O 51 40 v 11 v" indicates difference was in favor of "voice cue" treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of "pause cue" treatment 74 TABLE XI B COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VOICE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS AND RANKED RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST # 9 - "VISUAL ATTENTION SPAN FOR OBJECTS" FOR GROUP I Subject Visual STEP Score STEP Score Difference Memory Score "Voice Cue" "Pause Cue" Score 1 54 55 54 v 1 x 2 48 40 35 v 5 x 3 48 53 52 v 1 x 4 47 25 23 v 2 5 46 50 47 v 3 x 6 46 37 38 l p x 7 45 69 63 v 6 x 8 44 53 59 6 p x 9 43 58 56 v 2 10 43 50 53 3 p x 11 43 26 26 0 12 42 48 51 3 p x 13 41 48 56 8 p x 14 4O 31 39 8 p x 15 32 35 25 v 10 x Q = 44.13 Q = 45.20 Q = 45.13 vQ 3.75 px — 4.83 x indicates subject preferred treatment in which highest score was obtained "v" indicates difference was in favor of voice cue treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of pause cue treatment 75 TABLE XI C COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VOICE AND PAUSE CUE TREATMENTS AND RANKED RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #9 - "VISUAL ATTENTION SPAN FOR OBJECTS" FOR GROUP 2 Subject Visual STEP Score STEP Score Difference Memory Score "Pause Cue" "Voice Cue" Score 1 52 58 51 v 7 2 52 55 58 3 p x 3 50 41 45 4 p x 4 47 38 49 9 p x 5 47 31 37 6 p x 6 46 41 49 8 p x 7 46 61 57 v 4 8 45 2O 38 18 p x 9 44 58 49 v 9 10 43 39 43 4 p x 11 41 62 60 v 2 12 40 17 25 8 p x 13 39 46 37 v 9 14 37 53 51 v 2 15 30 51 40 v 11 Q = 43.93 Q = 45.93 Q = 44.73 vQ = 6.29 x indicates subject preferred treatment in which highest score was obtained v indicates highest score was with "voice cue" STEP test "p" indicates highest score was with "pause cue" STEP test 76 TABLE XI D COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORES BETWEEN VOICE CUE AND NO CUE TREATMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #9 "VISUAL ATTENTION SPAN FOR OBJECTS" FOR GROUP 3 Subject Visual Memory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Raw Score "Voice Cue" "No Cue" Score 1 54 41 55 14 n 2 52 50 52 2 n 3 50 62 62 0 4 49 50 47 v 3 5 48 43 41 v 2 x 6 45 37 45 8 n 7 45 49 42 v 7 x 8 44 61 50 v 11 9 42 28 36 6 n 10 41 47 40 v 7 x 11 4O 42 30 v 12 12 37 26 17 v 8 13 33 50 52 2 n 14 32 42 34 v 8 Q = 43.71 Q = 44.86 Q = 42.93 vQ 7.44 ni * 6.40 x subject indicated this treatment helped them in listening v" indicates difference was in favor of voice cue treatment n indicates difference was in favor of "no cue" treatment 77 TABLE XI E COMPARISON OF STEP LISTENING TEST SCORES BETWEEN PAUSE CUE AND NO CUE TREATMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO RAW SCORES ACHIEVED ON THE DTLA SUBTEST #9 "VISUAL ATTENTION SPAN FOR OBJECTS" FOR GROUP 4 Subject Visual Memory STEP Score STEP Score Difference Raw Score "NO Cue" "Pause Cue" Score 1 55 44 41 n 4 2 54 46 42 n 4 3 49 51 52 l p 4 48 41 43 2 p x 5 48 19 48 29 p x 6 46 42 48 6 p x 7 45 60 51 n 9 8 45 37 36 n 1 9 45 35 62 27 p x 10 44 54 49 n 5 11 4O 30 34 4 p x 12 39 42 49 7 p 13 36 47 53 6 p x 14 33 26 23 n 3 Q = 41.21 Q = 41.00 Q = 45.07 pi = 10.25 mi = 4.50 x subject indicated this treatment helped them in listening n indicates difference was in favor of "no cue" treatment "p" indicates difference was in favor of pause treatment 78 These data suggested that a correlation did exist between measures of auditory and visual memory and the highest scores obtained with the STEP Listening Tests treatments. For the correlations reported in Table XIIA, difference scores between the two cueing conditions (Groups 1 & 2) or between the one and no cue conditions in the case of Groups 3 & 4 were used. Positive values were assigned differences in favor of voice cue conditions for Groups 1 & 2, with negative values assigned to differences in favor of pause cue conditions. For groups 3 & 4, differences in favor of cued treatment were assigned positive values, while negative values were given to differences favoring no cue treatments. Consequently, the positive or negative sign of the resulting correlation coefficients were disregarded because they were indicative only of potential relationships, rather than direction of such relationships. TABLE XII A CORRELATION MATRIX FOR AUDITORY AND VISUAL MEMORY SCORES WITH LISTENING COMPREHENSION SCORE DIFFERENCES FOR GROUPS I, II, III, & IV Group I Group II Group III Group IV Difference Between STEP Scores on Trial 1 & 2 Auditory Memory .487** .063 .491** .131 (DTLA #6) Visual Memory .700* .363 .605* .040 (DTLA #9) * Significantly different from zero at the .05 level ** Significantly different from zero at the .10 level 79 Significant correlations at the .05 level of confidence were found with the measures of visual memory (DTLA #9) and the difference scores (the difference in scores obtained with voice cue and pause cue treatments) for Groups I and II. Auditory memory scores for Groups I and III were found to correlate with the difference scores at the .10 level of confidence. When the findings for Groups I and II were combined, a significant relationship at the .01 level of confidence was found between visual memory scores and the difference scores (See Table XII B). TABLE XII B CORRELATION MATRIX FOR AUDITORY AND VISUAL MEMORY SCORES WITH LISTENING COMPREHENSION SCORE DIFFERENCES FOR GROUPS I & II COMBINED Group I Group II Difference Between Pause Cue & Voice Cue Treatments As Measured by STEP Tests Auditory Memory .183 (DTLA #6) Visual Memory .817* (DTLA #9) * Significantly different from zero at the .01 level The significant correlations at the .05 level of confidence for visual memory scores and difference scores reported in Tables XIIA and B did offer support for the 80 rejection of the null hypothesis number 7. This hypothesis stated: 7 - There will be no significant relationship between the scores achieved on a "visual memory" test and compre- hension scores achieved under any treatment condition. The correlation findings for auditory memory and difference scores offered evidence to reject the null hypothesis num— ber 6 only when the .10 level of confidence was used as shown in Table XII A. Hypothesis 6 stated: 6 - There will be no significant relationship between the scores achieved on an "auditory memory" test and com- prehension scores achieved under any treatment conditions. Tables XII C & D present the findings for the highest and lowest memory scores and the treatment (voice, pause, or no cue) under which their highest score was obtained. There is some evidence to indicate that a relationship does exist between visual and auditory memory scores and auditory highlighting treatment scores. 81 mamas» ucmEumeu 03p on» somsumn monoumumap on no: uothSm 0:08 «a *MH ma sva ucosummue 090 02 mo mm\o v m uo>mm cfl muoom monouGMMHo nuflz muoom muoawz >HOUH©5¢ ummzoq ucmsummua 0:0 wmsmm mo VV\MH m v o Ho>mm ca mnoom mocmHmMMHQ nuaz whoom macaw: muouflps< umoBOA ucofiummue 0:0 moao> mo mm\m m m o uo>mm ca whoom mocmuwwwao nuflz muoom >u0802 huouflpsm umozoq ucmfiummne 050 oz mo mm\m m m uo>mm cfl muoom mocmHmMMHo nuflz muoom xuoamz muouflpsg ummnmflm ucosummue 0:0 wmzmm mo vv\m m w o uo>mm CH muoom mocmummmao zuflz muoom muoemz whouflps¢ umonmem ucmfiummne 050 ooHo> mo vV\mH m v m Ho>mm ca whoom mocwummwflo nuwz wuoow qusz wuouflpsm ummnmflm Aomsmmlosu ozv Amso ozquHo>v A050 moflo>|omsmmv A050 mmsmmuoofio>v >H msouw HHH msouw HH msouu H mnouo mBmmB mmBm mEHZ mmmoum muzmmmhmHQ 02¢ ABmm3OA\Bmmmemv mmmoom Mmozmz AdDmH> mBH3 mmHmmZOHaddmm mom mqmdfi Mmmzsz U HHx mqmfifi 82 m~\m ¢v\oa mN\NH mm\o CV\NH vvxea mHMHHu quEumoHu 03» one comsumn mocmummmap 0C pm: uomhnsm 0Co« ll 2 CH sva\ma n 2 ma u 2 «mH\VH N Z Awmsmmnmsu ozv >H MDOHO A050 OZIwOHo>V A050 moflo>lmwsmmv HHH Como MMImmmmm A050 wmsmmlmoflo>v quEunwuB 050 oz mo Ho>mm Cfl whoom moCmummmao CDHK mouoom SHOEmz anamfl> ummzoq quEummHB 0:0 mmsmm mo Ho>mm CH whoom mOCmquMHQ Cuflz mouoom muosoz HMCmH> umozoq quEummHB moo moflo> mo uo>mm CH muoom moCoummeQ CUHz mmuoom muofimz Hmsma> umw3oq quEummue 050 oz mo Ho>mm CH muoom moCmummmwo Cuaz mmuoom Sycamz HMCmH> ummCmHm quEummHB moo mmsmm mo uo>mm CH whoom moCoquMHD cues mouoom SHOEmz HowH> pmmCmHm uCosummue 090 00Ho> mo Ho>mm Ce muoom moCmummwflQ Cuflz mouoom zuoemz HMCmH> ummCmflm mBmWB mmfim mBH3 mmmOUm muzmthmHQ 92¢ ABmm3OA\BmmmUHmV mmmoom Mmozmz MMOBHDD¢ mBH3 mmHmmZOHfidqmm mom mqmdfi >m¢SEDm Q HHx mandfi 83 Table XIII presents the simple correlations between the raw data (I.Q., Grade Placement, Reading Level, Visual Memory Score, and STEP Comprehension Scores on Trials 1 and 2) for all subjects. The strength of the relationships can be described as "low correlations: definite but small relationships" (Guilford, 1956)3 for the majority of the simple correlations. The correlations between .40 and .70 are considered as "Moderate correlations; substantial relationship." The correlation between the raw scores achieved on the STEP 4A (Trial 1) and the STEP 4B (Trial 2) was the only measures found with a "High correlation; marked relationship." 84 muoom 3mm fiv QMBm «NMB. whoamz zuoamz zuouapsm HMCmH> NmH. nemwm. who. «Qhwm. «Ohm. Hm>mq maUmmm tomm. «mmw. mem. «awn. uCOEmomHm mpmuw cam. ehmm. MHH. summm. «mmv. Hmm.A Hm>mH OH. 06 ucmowmflcmfim44 msm.A Ho>ma mo. um pamoflmecmfim4 .O.H Amuoom sauce I m Hmwuee «mmm. me mmem Amuoom Hmuoe n a Hmwuev 4mmm. 44 mmem Amuoom 36m «490v mam. zuofimz muoufipsm Aouoom 36m ¢qeav mma. mnoamz HMCmH> mba. Hm>mq @Cflpmmm mma. uCofimomHm momma .O.H wooem geezmszmmxm zH Imm n zv meomemsm mom mmquHm¢> mo monedqmmmoo mqmsz mo emezzom HHHX mqmfle 85 Questionnaire Findings A questionnaire (Appendix B) was administered to all subjects when they had completed the two experimental treatments with the STEP Listening Tests. The questions all dealt with the subject's acceptance and/or preference of tape recorded material and procedures used in this study. Two forms of Question #1 were used since groups III & IV did not have two specific types of highlighting to compare. All subjects were urged to give their own opinions and feelings about the use of recorded materials as a means of instruction in the classroom. A summary of the findings for each specific question follows: Question #1 - "Which method of highlighting clues or major points did you prefer and find most helpful? Why?" (Used with subjects in Groups 1 & 2) Twenty-four of the thirty subjects chose the "pause cue" method, with the remaining six choosing the "voice cue" method. The subjects individual scores were examined to determine if their scores were higher in the stated preferred method. Fourteen of the twenty—four (67%) did achieve a higher score with the "pause cue" method of highlighting. Their scores were from 1 to 18 points higher. All six subjects who elected the "voice cue" method had scores from 2 to 10 points higher with this method (See Table XIV A). 86 (Alternative Questions Used With Groups 3 & 4) Question #1 - "Do you think that ("voice cue"/"pause cue") was helpful for you when listening to the taped material? Why?" A total of twenty of the twenty-eight subjects (71%) reported that they felt the highlighting of major points was helpful. The "pause cue" method was chosen by thirteen subjects and seven stated they preferred the "voice cue" method. Six subjects (46%) who reported that the "pause cue" method was helpful had scores 2 to 29 points higher than the "no cue" method. Four (57%) who chose the "voice cue" method had scores 2 to 8 points higher than with the "no cue" treatment (See Table XIV B). All subjects were asked why they felt the specific highlighting method they chose was helpful. A sampling of the responses to the question "Why?" with the first questions follows: "The pause helps you to understand better." "It's better than reading - easier." "Pauses, because you can think through what was said and get ready for the next thing." "Easier — You don't have to work as hard when listening." "Pause lets you get ready or organized." "Voice cues were direct - you didn't have to guess so much as with the pauses." "Voice kept going - a lot smoother." "The voice cues tapes were too fast." 87 TABLE XIV A STUDENTS' STATED PREFERENCE FOR HIGHLIGHTED TREATMENTS (PAUSE CUE - VOICE CUE) COMPARED WITH THEIR ACTUAL HIGHER SCORE RECEIVED DATA GROUPS I AND II Pause Cue Number of Students Who Picked Treatment 24 Actual Number of Students Who Received Highest Score 80% of total group Voice Cue 6 - 20% of total group With Their Choice 14 — 58% 6 - 100% Actual Number Who Received Lower Score With Their Choice of Treatments 9 - 38% 0 Actual Number Who Received the Same With Both Trials 1 - 4% 0 TABLE XIV B SUBJECTS' STATED PREFERENCE TREATMENTS (CUED - NO CUE) FOR HIGHLIGHTED COMPARED WITH THEIR ACTUAL HIGHER SCORE RECEIVED DATA GROUPS III & IV Cued No Cue Number of Students Who Picked Treatment 20 - 71% of total 8 - 29% group Actual Number of Students Who Received Highest Score With Their Choice 10 - 50% 4 - 50% 6/pause cue 4/voice cue Actual Number Who Received Lower Score With Their Choice of Treatments 9 - 45% 4 - 50% Actual Number Who Remained the Same With Both Trials 1 - 5% 0 88 "Voice cues were distracting." Pause - "you could go as fast as you wanted." Pause - "It gave you something to do." Aside from the point that subjects felt that listening was easier than reading, a few did identify some of the ration- ale and theory for using the highlighting techniques. Several subjects also identified factors they felt made the techniques not too helpful. These included the idea of being too distracting with two different voices or that it stopped too much. Although the "pause cue" method was preferred by the majority of subjects, there were those who found it distracting and not helpful. This serves to point out that individual differences must also be accounted for when using these highlighting techniques. Question #2 - "Would you listen to recorded school material if it were available for you to use?" In response to this question, only 2 of the 58 subjects stated that they did not want to listen to or use recorded school subject material. Question #3 - "What school subjects would you like to have tapes to learn and study with in school?" Recorded materials for math, reading, spelling, and social studies were the subject areas requested by the majority of the students. Other subject areas mentioned included art, geography, and science. 89 Question #4 - "What would be a reasonable or good time limit to listen to tape recorded material?" Twenty-six of the fifty-eight subjects (44.8%) chose 30 minutes as a good time limit for taped materials, with the next highest choice being 20 minutes listed by 13 subjects (22.4%). Seven subjects listed 25 minutes and 12 said 10 to 15 minutes was a good time limit or length for tapes. Question #5 - ”What didn't you like about listening to tape recorded material?" The only objection that was mentioned by the subjects (6 of 58) was the use of earphones. They reported that their ears got sore from listening with the earphones for long periods of time. (Subjects used earphones for approximately 35 minutes for each part of the STEP Listening Tests). Summary of Findings The experiment failed to show that auditory high- lighting using "voice cues" or "pause cues" could significantly increase the listening comprehension scores of subjects with low reading comprehension. No type of material, as found in the STEP Listening Tests, was found to be consistently augmented by the "pause cue" or "voice cue" treatments. However, the highlighting treatment did 90 effect significant change in scores for different types of material when considered separately with each group. A significant relationship between the scores achieved on the visual memory test and the difference scores for the two treatments was found at the .05 level of confidence for groups I and III. This same relationship was found to exist at the .01 level of confidence when the findings for groups I and II were combined. The measure of auditory memory and the difference scores for the two treatments was found to be statistically significant at the .10 level of confidence only for groups I and III. Data on subjects' preference for a specific type of highlighting treatment and the treatment in which the highest score was obtained indicated that two-thirds of the subjects in groups I and II preferred the method by which they achieved highest comprehension scores. Twenty-four of twenty-eight subjects (86%) in groups III and IV reported that they believed cueing to be helpful in comprehension, but only 50% of the 28 subjects actually achieved higher scores under cued conditions. CHAPTER IV REFERENCES lGlass, Gene V. & Stanley, Julian C. Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. Tatsuoka, Maurice. Multivariate Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1971. 3Guilford, J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1956, p. 145. 91 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Discussion Although the experimental study did not show statistically significant differences in comprehension scores achieved under the different treatment conditions by the subjects in groups I through IV, as pointed out earlier, these non-significant comprehension score differ- ences were in favor of the cued conditions for all groups (See Summary Data - Appendix F). There are several factors that may indeed explain the failure to show statistically significant findings. These factors include: a) number of subjects, b) characteristics of subjects, c) cueing techniques used, and d) the type of criterion task used. There is a suggestion that cued conditions can be helpful in achieving greater listening comprehension scores. This is consistent with previous related research reported by Sticht, 1972,1 and Ausubel, 1960.2 It should be noted that the number of subjects in any group did not exceed 15. If the obtained difference scores are truly dependent upon the different conditions, an increase in the number of subjects would result in significant statistical findings. 92 93 Another factor to consider is that many of the subjects were school failures and perhaps the movitvation to do well was not great. Many of them exhibited a defeat- ist attitude during the initial testing with the visual and auditory memory measure and may have contributed only token attempts with the treatment trials. The experimenter's experience with such children suggests that their repeated failures tend to produce a defeatist attitude in which there is a tendency to believe or feel that their best efforts are not sufficient. Consequently, many learn to make token efforts which may satisfy the teacher or prove that they are trying, but which are only minimal in effort. If such token efforts were shown in the tasks required in this study, it would be expected that only minimal gains would accrue to any treatment condition. Many of the teachers reported that they were surprised that their pupils would sit and attend for a 35 to 40 minute session. These same subjects were sometimes referred to as restless, hyperactive, and sometimes lazy or lethargic by their teachers. It may well be that the specific treatments used in this study helped the individuals to attend better and/or that escape from the classroom or novelty of the situation assisted in evoking greater attention span. This brings us to another point of consideration, which deals with the characteristics of the subjects. 94 The nature of the subjects used in this study may also have contributed to the failure to show significant differ- ences with the listening comprehension treatment trial scores. These pupils were reported as poor readers with low reading comprehension. Previous research findings point out correlations varying from .45 to .80 for reading comprehension and listening comprehension. It may well be that it takes more than a cueing or highlighting technique to effect significant improvement in listening Comprehension of subjects as used in this study. Specific training in how to listen, such as suggested by Lundsteen, 19713 and Duker, 1966, 19714 might have been an appropriate procedure to use with these subjects first followed by the use of the auditory highlighting treatments. It may also be true that certain approaches to cueing are of special assistance to particular individuals. If a class or group of individuals could be identified for whom certain cues or procedures were generally facilitative, direct application to the classroom situation could be suggested. An example of this was found with two bi—lingual subjects in this study. Their listening comprehension scores showed an increase of 27 and 29 points respectively. These subjects indicated that they preferred the pause cue treatment because it gave them "time to think." They also reported that the no cue treatment went too fast for them. Two other subjects that reported that they preferred the 95 pause cue treatment over the voice one treatment on the questionnaire indicated that "it gave me time to get ready and the 'voice cue' came without warning." One subject (Group I) received a score of 49 with the pause cue treatment and 38 with the voice one treatment. The other individual (Group II) received a score of 40 with the voice cue treatment and a score of 51 with the pause cue treatment. It should also be noted that only subjects who were experiencing reading difficulties were included in the study. Consequently, it is not know whether the cueing- highlighting techniques employed would be of greater (or possibly lesser) assistance in facilitating listening comprehension for subjects without reading deficiencies. It is also likely that cueing techniques can be further improved with specific attempts to alter their nature and form. Techniques selected for use in this study were determined on an a priori basis and applied in a limited pilot study procedure. However, there are numerous other alternatives which might be explored relative to their strength or effectiveness in facilitating comprehension. For example, cueing might be done with an attention cue prior to the significant material, a cue highlighting the material during its presentation and a cue signalling the termination of significant material. Attention cues might include such things as pauses, flashing light, tactile 96 stimulations, verbal admonishment, sound stimuli or any other device which might serve to direct attention to the task. Similarily, highlighting cues (those designed to increase the stimulus value of the significant material during its presentation) might include alteration in loud- ness level, voice quality changes, rhythmic cues, accompaniment by visual representation of the same material (rebus type) or other techniques. Termination cues may also be of numerous types involving various forms and sensory modalities. Repetition of significant points could also be a facilitating procedure under certain conditions and would be wholly compatible with recorded material presentations. The major purpose of these possible alternatives would be to increase the degree of comprehension and memory. An in-depth analysis of the effectiveness of any of them and their combinations is suggested as a pre-requisite to further study if one desires to maximize obtained differ- ences. Comparative studies with subjects who rely on listening a great deal, such as the visually handicapped, and the hearing handicapped who must rely more heavily on other sensory modalities, may do much to reveal techniques for improving the efficiency of cueing techniques. Another potentially profitable approach could include tasks in 97 which the subjects themselves select, arrange, or deploy the auditory highlighting cues to assist their auditory learning. Future endeavors that attempt to determine the effectiveness of auditory highlighting procedures should have the subjects use the techniques over an extended period of time. This would assist in determining if subjects can develop procedures that will help them over time to utilize the highlighting treatments more readily. A study of the effects of training for increasing visual and/or auditory memory to assist those individuals who may be deficient in one or both should also be explored to determine their effect on listening comprehension or auding ability. These considerations may help those individuals who exhibit a lack of familiarity with the medium being used or who do not make efficient use of the highlighting technique. The type of criterion task (STEP Listening Test) used in this study may have been an inappropriate measure to determine the effectiveness of the auditory highlighting treatments. There is very little agreement reported in the literature that supports the use of the STEP Listening Test or the other two major listening tests, Brown-Carlsen Listening Comprehension Test and the Durrell Sullivan Reading Capacity Test (Duker, 1966, l971).5-6 Other procedures for measuring comprehension have been suggested by Carver (1973),7 Lundsteen (1963),8 Spearritt (1962),9 98 Caffrey (1955),10 and Brown (1950)11. It would be interesting and possibly helpful to apply cueing techniques to these other measures, particularily if they sample comprehension of a more meaningful type. Two other areas of investigation in this study, (1) the relationships between visual and/or auditory memory measures and types of cueing treatments, and (2) subject's preference for specific types of cueing, need further study. Findings of significant relationships between auditory and/ or visual memory measures and cue type for certain subject groups is somewhat difficult to interpret in view of the fact that such relationships were not consistently present for all subject groups. It is interesting however to note that the highest achieving subjects in group I on auditory memory consistently achieved highest difference scores in favor of voice cues over pause cues. Similarly, group I also showed a relationship between high visual memory and higher voice cue scores compared to pause cue scores. Other groups however gave no indication of these relation- ships between auditory or visual memory and the type of cue or no cue treatment used in this study. One might expect that those high on auditory memory would perform better with auditory cueing techniques and that those scoring high on visual memory measures might perform better with visual cueing. This study did not utilize visual cueing and therefore offers no strong evidence pertaining to this question. It does however, 99 suggest that further study of these potential relationships would be useful and perhaps profitable. If it were shown that higher auditory memory or higher visual memory were predictive of higher comprehension with auditory or visual cueing techniques respectively, one could select procedures of maximum benefit for individual children. Thus, an approach to improving classroom performance could be demonstrated. Based upon the data obtained in this study regarding cue preference, it is not yet clear that such preferences are indicative of increased comprehension performance. It is likely however that when difference scores are great, there is a validity to student preference. Four subjects gave, in the experimenter's opinion, unequivocal preferential response and verbal elaboration regarding their treatment preference. In each of these cases comprehension scores were markedly improved under the treatment of choice. Consequently, it is likely that student preference, when marked, could be a useful guide to the teacher in selecting instructional techniques or approaches for individual children. Future Research Needs In order to study the variables that are closely related to auditory learning and/or listening comprehension and factors that influence this modality of learning the 100 experimenter believes that the following are principal needs: 1. Studies that investigate and identify effective cueing/highlighting procedures for use with recorded materials is a primary area needing further investigation. 2. Once specific cueing procedures have been established, the focus should be to relate these to specific types of children and/or styles of learning. Implications for Teaching There are many variables that one can alter or change when using recorded materials for instructional purposes. A great many of these have become possible as the result of new audio equipment that has been released recently. This equipment includes the speech compressor and expander that enables one to listen to materials at his own preferred rate, repeat recorders that will repeat material immediately heard as many times as deemed necessary, and the new recording rate of 15/16 ips used by the Library of Congress and the American Printing House for the Blind that significantly increases the amount of material that can be recorded on a cassette tape. These are but a few of new equipment items now available. The potential for the Audiomate 590 cassette tape recorder/player used in this study for individualized 101 instruction purposes in special and regular classes remains to be explored. This unit permits the operator (teacher, pupil or other) to insert a pause in the recording simply by pushing a button. On re-play of the material the pause will automatically occur and continue until a button is pushed for continuation. For pupils who appear to gain much from pauses, such as the bi-lingual children and those who reported "It gives me time to think," this equipment offers a very convenient way of receiving oral information at a rate which could facilitate comprehension. In addition, the interaction activity required of the learner to re-start the recorder may also be facilitative of learning as suggested in the previously cited research by 3 and Allen (1960).14 Witkin (1971),12 Farrow (1964),l Simms (1973)15 has reported a "New Approach Method" used in Trenton, N. J. preschools which used recorded material focusing on pre-reading skills. It employs an interaction activity as well as a highlighting technique involving a "beep" signal for attention purposes. Although no statistical analysis is provided, he does report high interest on the part of students. The area of "auditory learning" is experiencing a new found focus in education today. It is the hope of this author that it does not experience the misunderstanding, overestimation, and poor interpretation that "visual learning - visual perception" has acquired within the past few years in the educational mainstream. The needs are 102 great and the potential for this avenue for learning looks very good. It still remains for the countless studies and present ongoing efforts in this area of learning to be coordinated and communicated to the classroom teacher. The initial efforts of the "Auditory Learning Consortium" of the Special Education Instructional Materials Centers has made a significant contribution in this direction during the 1973-74 school year. Documents and publications from this project are available through the National Center for Educational Media Materials for the Handicapped located at Ohio State University and regional SEIMCs. The contributions of Duker, Lundsteen, Spearritt, Foulke, and numerous others relating to auditory learning point out a teaching variable that is too often ignored, many times forgotten, and yet easily accessible. This channel for learning remains one of the most frequently used and earliest to be developed in the child, yet it never has been developed to its true potential within the classroom. CHAPTER V REFERENCES lSticht, "Learning by Listening," Chapter 11. 2Ausubel, "The Use of Advance Organizers in the Learning and Retention of Meaningful Verbal Material," p. 76. 3Lundsteen, Listening: Its Impact on Reading and the Other Language Arts. 4Duker, Listening: Readiugs, Vol. I and II. 5Duker, Listening: Readings, Vol. I and II. 6Duker, Listening: Readings, Vol. I and II. 7Carver, Ronald P. Revised Procedures for Developing Reading-Input and Reading-Storage Tests. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research, Oct. 12, 1973. 8Lundsteen, Listening: Its Impact on Reading and the Other Language Arts. 9Spearritt, Listening Comprehension-A Factorial Analysis. loCaffrey, "Auding". lJ‘Brown and Carlsen, Brown-Carlsen Comprehension. 12Witkin, "Auditory Perception—Implications for Language Development." l3Farrow, "An Experimental Study of Listening Attention at the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Grade." l4Allen, "Audio-Visual Communication." 103 104 15Simms, "Ears to Read With." REFERENCES REFERENCES Allen, wm. H. "Audio-Visual Communication," Encyclopedia of Educational Research, (Edited by Chester W. Harris). New York: MacMillan, 1960, pp. 119-137. Anderson, Harold A. "Needed Research in Listening," Elementary English, 29:215-224, April 1952. Anderson, R. C. "Control of Student Mediating Processes During Verbal Learning and Instruction," Review of Educational Research, 40:340-369, 1970. Ausubel, David P. The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning. New York: Grune & Stratton, Inc., 1963. Ausubel, David P. "The Use of Advance Organizers in the Learning and Retention of Meaningful Verbal Material." Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 51, 267-272, 1960. Bakan, Paul, "Some Reflections on Listening Behavior," Journal of Communications, Autumn, 1956, pp. 108-112. Baldauf, Robert J. A Study of a Measure of Listening Comprehension and Its Relation to the School Achieve- ment of Fifth Grade Pupils. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Colorado, 1960. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 21:2979-80, 1961. Bird, Donald E. "Listening," NEA Journal, 49, No. 8, 31-33, Nov. 1960. Brown, Donald P. "And Having Ears They Hear Not," NEA Journal, 39:586-87, November, 1950. Brown, James I. and Carlsen, G. Robert. Brown-Carlsen Comprehension. Yonkers, N.Y.: World Book Co., 1955. Brown, James I. "Listening - The New Frontier," Reading and the Language Arts. Proceedings of the Annual Confer- ence on Reading. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963, pp. 47-55. 105 106 Bonner, Myrtle C. S. A Critical Analysis of the Relation- ship of Reading Ability to Listening Ability, Doctoral Dissertation. Texas: Auburn University, 1960. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts: 21:2167-68, 1961. Burns, Paul C. and Lowe, Alberta L. Language Arts in Childhood Education. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1966. Caffrey, John "Auding," Review of Educational Research, Vol. XXV, No. 2, Chapter IV, April 1955, pp. 121-138. Campeau, Peggie. "Selective Review of Audiovisual Media of Instruction," Chapter V, Instructional Media: A procedure for the Design of Multi-Media Instruction, A Critical Review of Research, and Suggestions for Future Research. Monograph No. 2., Leslie J. Briggs, Peggie L. Campeau, Robert M. Gagne and Mark A. May. Pittsburgh, Pa.: American Institutes for Research, 1967. Canfield, George R. "A Study of the Effects of Two Types of Instruction on the Listening Comprehension of Fifth Grade Children," Doctoral Dissertation. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University, 1960. Dissertation Abstracts: 21:2622, 1961. Carroll, John B. "Learning from Verbal Discourse in Educational Media: Some Research Studies," Proceed- ings of Project Aristotle Symposium. Washington, D.C., December, 1967. Carver, Ronald P. Revised Procedures for Developing Reading-Input and Reading-Storage Tests. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research, Oct. 12, 1973. Caughran, Alex M. "The Effect on Language Comprehension of Three Methods of Presentation," Dissertation Abstracts, XIII, Part 2, No. 6, 1113, 1953. Chalfant, James C. and Flathouse, Virgil E. "Auditory and Visual Learning," Chapter X, Progress in Learning Disabilities, Vol. II, editor, Helmer Myklebust. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1972. Cofer, Charles N. Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1961. Cutler, R. L. and others, "Teaching Psychology by Telephone,‘ American Psychologist 13:551-552, 1958. 107 Daily, R. F. "Media in the Round: Learning in the Special Experience Room," Teaching Exceptional Children, 4, No. l, 1971, pp. 4-9. Dawson, Mildren A. and Zollinger, Marian "The Role of Reading in Relation to Other Areas of Communication." International Reading Association Conference Proceedings, Vol. 5, 1960. New York: Scholastic Magazines. Denny, Terry, "In Grades Four through Eight," Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Reading. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964, pp. 37-40. Duker, Sam. Listening: Readings. Vol. I. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1966. Duker, Sam. Listening: Readings. Vol. II. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971a. Duker, Sam. Teaching Listening in the Elementary School, 1971b. Duker, Sam. "Listening" in Encyclopedia of Education Research, 4th ed. (Edited by Robert L. Ebel.) New York: Macmillan, 1969. Duker, Sam. "Listening," Chapter III, Review of Education Research, Vol. XXXL, No. 2, April, 1961, pp. 145-151. Durrell, Donald D. "Listening Comprehension Versus Reading Comprehension," Journal of Reading 12:455-60, March, 1969, and in Teaching Listening in the Elementary School. Ed. 8. Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, pp. 251-57. Early, Margaret J. "Communication Arts," in Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 3rd ed. (Edited by Chester W. Harris). New York: MacMillan, 1960, pp. 306-312. Early, Margaret J. "Developing Effective Listening Skills," Teaching Listening in the Elementary School, edited by Sam Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, pp. 36-44. Ehart, Violette Hunt. A Study of the Significance of Selected Sounds of Speech as Stimulants to Listening and Comprehension. Master's Thesis. Grand Forks, N.D.: University of North Dakota, 1964. Erickson, C. I. and King, Irving. "A Comparison of Visual and Oral Presentation of Lessons in the Case of Pupils 108 from the Third to the Ninth Grades." School and Society, Vol. 6:146-48, August, 1917. Educational Testing Service. Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Directions for Administra- ting and Scoring Listening 4A. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Directions for Administering and Scoring Listening 4B. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Listening 4A. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Listefiing 4B. Princeton: ETS, 1957. Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Manual for Interpreting Scores: Listening. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Technical Report. Princeton: ETS, 1957. . Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress: Teacher‘s Guide. Princeton: ETS, 1957. Farrow, Vern Leslie. "An Experimental Study of Listening Attention at the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Grade." Doctoral Dissertation. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon, 1963. Abstract. Dissertation Abstracts 24: 3146, 1964. Fawcett, Annabel E. "The Effect of Training in Listening Upon the Listening Skill of Intermediate Grade Children," Elementary English, 43:473-476, May, 1966. Fenwick, James J. "Slow Learners and Listening," Listening: Readings. Vol. 2 (editor, Sam Duker). Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971. Friedman, Robert M. A Comparative Study of the Retention Level of Verbal Material Presented Visually and Orally: Fifth Grade Pupils. Garden City, N.Y.: Adelphi College, 1959. Furness, Edna Lue. "Listening: A Case of Terminological Confusion," Journal of Education Psychology 48:477-82, December, 1957. Gallagher, Frank. "All Quiet on the 'Listening' Front," Advanced Management-Office Executive, 2(4): 28-29, April, 1963. 109 Glass, Gene V. & Stanley, Julian C. Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1956. Hall, Robert Oscar. "An Exploratory Study of Listening of Fifth Grade Pupils," Doctoral Dissertation. Los Angeles, Calif: University of Southern California, 1954. Hampleman, Richard S. "Comparison of Listening and Reading Comprehension Ability of Fourth and Sixth Grade Pupils," Dissertation Abstracts XV, No. 10, 1757, 1955. Hanley, Clair N. "A Factorial Analysis of Speech Percep- tion," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 21: 76-87, March, 1956. Harrell, Thomas W., Brown, D. E. and Schramm, W. "Memory in Radio News Listening," Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 33:265-274, June, 1949. Hildreth, Gertrude. "Interrelationships Among the Language Arts," Elementary School Journal 48:538-549, June, 1948. Keller, Paul. "Major Findings in Listening in the Past Ten Years," Journal of Communications 10:29-38, March, 1960. Kraner, Robert E. A Comparison of Two Methods of Listening and Readinngraining in an Eighth Grade Language Arts Program. Doctoral Dissertation. Denton, Texas: North Texas University, 1963. Dissertation Abstracts 25:1046, 1964. Lance, Wayne D. Instructional Media and the Handicapped. Monograph ERIC Clearinghouse on Media & Technology. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University, December 1973. Learning Through Listening. Proceedings of a Special Study Institute Sponsored by the Division of Special Education, California State Department of Education, Sacramento, 1973. Legge, William B. "Listening, Intelligence, and School Achievement," Listening: Readings. Editor Sam Duker, Vol. 2, pp. 121-134. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1971. 110 Lewis, Thomas P. "Listening," Review of Educationaly Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, April, 1958, PP. 89-95. Lillard, P. P. Montessori: A Modern Approach. New York: Schocken Books, 1972. Linsley, Wm. A. An Experimental Study to Examine the Effect of Note-Taking on Listening Efficiency in the College Classroom. Master's Thesis. Peoria, 111.: Lundsteen, Sarah. Listening: Its Impact on Reading and the Other Language Arts. NCTE/ERIC Studiesiin the Teaching of English, 1971. Marsden, W. Ware. A Study to Determine the Effect of Training in Listening Upon Ability to Listen. Doctoral field study. Greeley, Colorado: Colorado State College of Education, 1953. Abstract: Abstracts of Field Studies for the Degree of Doctor of Education 15:111-113, 1954. Mowbray, George H. "Simultaneous Vision and Audition: The Comprehension of Prose Passages with Varying Levels of Difficulty," Journal of Experimental Psychology 46:365-72, Nov., 1954. Murphy, John F. "Learning by Listening: A Public School Approach to Learning Disabilities," Academic Therapy Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 2, Winter, 1972-73, pp. 167- 189. Newman, Slater E. and Highland, Richard W. "The Effectiveness of Four Instructional Methods of Differ— ent Stages of a Course." Lackland Air Force Base - Field Study, 1956, 22 pp. Nichols, Ralph G. and L. A. Stevens. Are You Listening? New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1957. Nichols, Ralph G. "Listening Instruction in the Secondary School," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary-School Principals, May, 1952. Also in Listening: Readings, Vol. I, ed. 8. Duker. New York: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1966, pp. 240-59. Pratt, L. Edward "Effectiveness of Listening Instruction," Listening: Readings. Vol. 2, Ed. Sam Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, pp. 234-237. Schmidt, Bernadine. "Visual and Auditory Associations in Reading Disability Cases," Journal of Exceptional Children 10:98-105, January, 1944. lll Simms, Gregory. "Ears to Read With," Early Years, 3, No. 8’ April, 1973] pp. 34-35, 48- Smith, Hayden R. and Nagel, Thomas. Instructional Media in the Learning Process. Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill Co., pp. 67-77. Spearritt, Donald. Listening_Comprehension-A Factorial Analysis. Australian Council for Educational Research - Series No. 76, 1962. Spongen, Sue. "What is Listening?" A paper presented at the 1973 Special Study Institute conducted at California State University, San Francisco, Calif., 1973. Sticht, Thomas G. "Learning by Listening," Chapter II, Language Comprehension and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Eds. John B. Carroll and Roy 0. Freedle. Washington, D.C.: V. H. Winston & Sons, 1972, pp. 285-314. Tatsuoka, Maurice. Multivariate Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1971. Taylor, Stanford E. Listening. What Research Says to the Teacher, No. 29. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1964. Twyford, Loran C. "Educational Communication Media," in Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 3rd Edition (edited by C. W. Harris). New York: Macmillan, 1960, pp. 369-380. Wester, J. C. and Thompson, P. O. "Responding to Both of Two Overlapping Messages," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 26:396-402, May, 1954. Wilt, Miriam E. "A Study of Teacher Awareness of Listening as a Factor in Elementary Education," Journal of Educational Research 43:626-636, April, 1950. Witkin, Belle R. "Auditory Perception - Implications for Language Development," Listening: Readings, Vol. 2, edited by Sam Duker. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1971, pp. 351-368. Witty, Paul A. & Sizemore, Robert A. Studies in Listening. Champaign, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English, 1959. APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX A INITIAL DIRECTIONS READ TO SUBJECTS BEFORE EXPERIMENT "Today we are going to listen to some taped stories. They will vary in length from 30 seconds to 3 minutes in length. Following each story there will be a group of multiple-choice questions about the story. We are studying ways to help students to learn more when listening. Some of the tapes have been fixed to give you clues to major points in the stories. We have fixed some of the tapes with a pause cue that makes the tape recorder stop before major points in the stories. You will restart the tape by pushing the button on the button box (demonstrate) to hear the major points. A second way we have fixed the tapes is with a woman's voice to give you a clue to major points, we call this voice cue. A third set of tapes will have no EEEE to point out the major points. All students will listen to two types of listening tests for this study. I will tell you each time the method you will be listening to. Listen carefully, and I want you to tell me the method you prefer (like) when you finish the two tests." "Do you have any questions at this time?" 112 APPENDIX B APPENDIX B HIGHLIGHTING EXAMPLE FOR PAUSE CUE TECHNIQUE STEP 4A PART TWO (Selection VIII) Here is the eighth selection. The speaker is telling you how to prepare something to eat. (READING TIME - 50 Seconds) There are several kinds of toast * French toast, cinnamon toast, milk toast, and buttered toast. But here's one you may like to try because it's different. Besides, it's easy to prepare. * Beat two eggs in a shallow dish. Add a fourth of a cup of milk. Stir in one tablespoon of sugar and a tablespoon of grated orange rind. Then add a dash of salt. * Have ready six slices of bread. Dip each slice of bread in the egg mixture. Be sure both sides are coated lightly. * Pour some butter or margarine into a frying pan and let it melt. Brown both sides of each slice of bread. * Serve while hot with honey, syrup, or orange marmalade. This recipe will serve six. * Indicates where pause signal was inserted ** from Directors of Administering and Scoring Listening 4A page 13. (Educational Testing Service, 1957). 113 114 Appendix B (Cont'd) Form 4A QUESTIONS USED WITH SELECTION VIII PART TWO OF STEP LISTENING TEST Question number 1: The A. B. an C. an D. a f recipe tells you to cook this toast in a baking pan electric toaster oven rying pan * Question number 2: The an hon red bac mfi'fim Question The how how the how 0(3u1> Question Thi it it it . it SHOWN Question The mil ora bre but C(UUJD recipe suggests that the toast be servied with egg mixture ey, syrup, or marmalade raspberry jam on and eggs * number 3: recipe doesn't tell us many it will serve many eggs to use length of time for browning the bread much sugar to use * number 4: 8 would be a good recipe to try because is a different kind of toast is a familiar kind of toast is made from brown bread can be made ahead of time * number 5: recipe doesn't tell us how much k to use nge rind to use ad to use ter or margarine to use * 115 Appendix B (Cont'd) Question number 6: This would be a good recipe to use when you don't have enough time to make regular toast want a change from regular toast are getting your own breakfast have lots of orange juice on hand * IEQ'IJFJ Question number 7: Which of these is the best name for this talk? "Several Varieties of Toast" "French Toast" "A Good Breakfast" "Orange Toast" * Dow» * Indicates where pause signals were used. APPENDIX C APPENDIX C HIGHLIGHTING EXAMPLE FOR VOICE CUE TECHNIQUE STEP 4B ** PART ONE (Selection 1) Here is the first selection. The speaker is telling you how to make a gift for your father, a board for him to hang his keys on. (READING TIME - 30 seconds) You will need a smooth board. Choose the size of the board according to the number of keys to be hung. Then screw a hook into the board for each key. Under the hook, print the name of the key which is to be hung there. Put a screw eye at the top of the board so that it can be hung in a handy place around the house. ** from Directions for Administering and Scoring Listening 48, page 6. (Educational Testing Service, 1957) 116 117 Appendix C (Cont'd) LISTENING COMPREHENSION QUESTIONS USED WITH SELECTION I - PART ONE OF STEP 4B Question number 1: If you want to make this present, the first thing you need is A. keys B. hooks C. tools D. a board Question number 2: What kind of board is suggested? rough painted thick smooth :EOWFJ Question number 3: By following these directions, you could have a place to print collect keys make something for father . find your key UOtDS’ Question number 4: To be sure the right key is put in the right place, you are told to E. print the names under the hooks F. paint the keys different colors G. draw pictures of them H. arrange them according to size Question number 5: The size of the board would depend on the number of hooks you have the number of keys to be hung the place you will hang it the size of print you use cow» APPENDIX D APPENDIX D FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS FOR AUDITORY HIGHLIGHTING STUDY FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS FOR AUDITORY HIGHLIGHTING STUDY 1 Name Group Number *** *** Which way of highlighting clues or major points did you prefer and find most helpful? Voice cued Pause Cued Would you listen to tape recorded school subject material if it were available for you to use? YES NO What school subjects would you like to have tapes to learn and study with in school? What would be a good time limit or length for tape recorded school material? 5 min. - 10 min. - 15 min. - 20 min. - 25 min. - 30 min. alternative #1 question for groups 3 & 4 1 Do you think that (Voice cues?/Pause cues?) was helpful for you when listening to the tapes? 118 119 Appendix D (Cont'd) 5 - What didn't you like about listening to tape recorded material? too fast too slow earphones (other) APPENDIX E 120 mm mm me mm m m.m mm mloa H ma me we em mm m w.m moa mlaa 6 NH he om me me m e.m mm oauaa m Ha mm Hm mm be m m.m om mIHH m oa no om me me o v.m mm OHINH H m mm mm me me m m.m hm onaa w m em mm we mm m e.m mm mlma m n Hm mm we me o H.e mm canaa N o mm mm me mm m m.m om mlma H m me me mm be m m.m mm elaa e 6 mm Ho em mm m m.v eoa HIHH m m we om He mm m m.m mm mlma m m mm om mo mm m m.m mm Alma a H me mmem «e mmem muoom muoom quamomHm Hm>mq m HMHHB a HMHHB Hmsmfl> zuouflpsm mpmuw mCHpmmm .O.H .¢.O msonw pomflnsm QOOmUm MAOOHE Aqmzom 20mm mBUmmem mom 4940 34m >X mqmdB 121 ha mN oe mm m m.N mm SIHH N ea mm Hm oe He m m.a Hm HIHH a ma we ma we em m m.N om mlaa e NH ma mN mm mm m o.N om mIHH m Ha 0N mm me mm m m.N mm mica N oa MN mN be me m H.N mm anoa H m mN mN mm oe m o.N om mloa e m me mm me mm m m.m hm HIHH m n mm me me He m o.m Nm mINH N m me me He He m o.N Nm HHIHH a m we Ne we mm m m.m mm NIHH e e Nm om Nm me m m.m om Alma m m mm me ee ee m m.m eHH mlaa N N mm mm we Ne m o.m mm oauaa H a me mmam 4e mmBm whoom muoom pCoEwomam Hmbmq N amass H HCHHB adamw> muouapsm mpmuo mCHpmmm .O.H .¢.O moose pomflnsm mmezmo OZHZMémq qum>¢3 20mm mfiumhmbm mom deflo 34m >X mamdfi 122 Hm oe om Nm 6 e.m hm NINH N ea em mm em mm o N.N moa mIHH a ma He ee mm Ne w m.m mm puma e NH om Ho ee Ne w e.m Nm mIHH m Ha mm me we Ne w N.N mm oINH N 0H mm oe me me o N.N mm NINA a m mm mm me oe m N.m om OHINH e m Ne me me mm m N.m moa puma m n He me om mm o N.N mm mlaa N 0 mm mm me me o o.m HHH HINH a m me em ee mm o m.N Goa onma e e om Ne oe He 0 o.N em HINH m m am pm me am e e.N mm HHINH N N Nm mm we ee o N.N mm ouNH a a me mmam Ce mmem muoom muoom 9C05008Hm Hm>mq N amene a Adena Hmsmfl> NHOBHUCC mpmuw mCHommm .O.H .<.o moose poonnsm mem monah wqmm><3 20mm mBOMmem mom memo 3mm >x mqmfiB 123 Hm ow we we w o.m wuHH e NH em om oe me w N.N wuHH e wH Nm om mm wm w w.N mINH m mH mm mm Nm we m N.N wIHH N eH oe be He we w w.N mnHH m mH mm we wm mm m o.m mIHH e NH em Ne Nm me m o.N wIHH m HH we hm mm oe m N.N mIHH N OH mN mm Nm be m N.N mINH H m Nm Hm me Nm w m.m muNH e w Nw Nw om we w w.m mnHH m n He me we we w e.e wIHH N w Hm we Ne Ne w e.e wuHH H m me He we Ne w N.e NINH e e He me we we w N.N HHIHH m m mm Hm em me w m.m wIHH N N mm mm ee He w N.N wIHH H H me mmem 4e mmem ouoom wuoom quEmomHm Hm>mH N HCHHB H HMHHB HmsmH> muoqusd momuo mCHpmmm .0.H .«.O macho Doonnsm HOOmUm MHQQHE MHHH>mmmmm3 20mm meumhmbm mom fiBdQ Bfim >x mqmdB APPENDIX F v———..a“ APPENDIX F SUMMARY OF THE SCORES ON LISTENING COMPREHENSION TESTS BY NUMBER OF SUBJECTS, PRESENTATION TIME, CUED AND NON-CUED TREATMENTS, AND TOTAL SCORE INCREASES VOICE CUE TREATMENT Group I - Trial 1 - 8 of 15 subjects difference total favored voice cue. Point mean difference was equal to 3.75. Group II - Trial 2 - 7 of 15 subjects difference total favored voice cue. Point mean difference was equal to 6.29. Group III- Trial 1 - 9 of 14 subjects difference total favored voice cue. Point mean difference was equal to 7.44. PAUSE CUE TREATMENT Group I - Trial 2 - 6 of 15 subjects difference total favored pause cue. Point mean difference was equal to 4.83. Group II - Trial 1 - 8 of 15 subjects difference total favored pause cue. Point mean difference was equal to 7.50. Group IV - Trial 2 — 8 of 14 subjects difference total favored pause cue. Point mean difference was equal to 10.25. NO CUE TREATMENT Group III— Trial 2 - 5 of 14 subjects difference total favored no cue. Point mean difference was equal to 6.40. Group IV — Trial 1 - 6 of 14 subjects difference total favored no cue. Point mean difference was equal to 4.50. 124 Appendix SUMMARY : l 125 F (Cont'd) 24 of 44 subjects (55%) obtained highest score with "voice cue". Range was 1 to 12 points with total of 141 points gained by 24 subjects. i = 5.87 22 of 44 subjects (50%) obtained highest score with "pause cue". Range was 1 to 29 points with total of 171 points gained by 22 subjects. i = 7.77 10 of 28 subjects (36%) obtained highest score with "no cue". Range was 1 to 14 points with total of 51 points gained by 10 subjects. 2 = 5.10 14 of 29 subjects (48%) obtained 111 points when "pause cue" was the last trial. x = 7.92 7 of 15 subjects (47%) obtained 44 points when "voice cue" was the last trial. 2 = 6.29 46 of 58 subjects (70%) obtained with highlighting a total of 312 points. i = 6.78 10 of 28 (36%) obtained with no highlighting a total of 51 points. x = 5.10 2 subjects of 58 failed to increase scores, both listening test trials remained the same. S ._ BRflFwE u )1? '1 ER LIE JNi‘v HT"! u Y1“, l 7 31293 03056 530 EST) .2 .. {(379144 I. ‘W\s...\\7 11:51.12}: ‘51-}.- oil‘s»! 1:43:83!) .11..»i.!fi€}y.k .3 7 g . fivltlti . 12‘ (r «r131 . . l iIIi!.v...51\ 5.: . anathema... z .. . 3.1.10.5. :. SHHIH 1.68:8», JivliaaI-s’ Pitch-‘6 1.. ., is... .... swummr .. x... “251 93911:. 151.13...“ 3 . . fiugrifixé HELENE. . We . rm... Ewe... . wt. 5:: n K