Effects of Contextualized and Decontextualized Practice Conditions on Word Recognition

Abstract

Two commonly used teaching strategies in reading are reading in context alone (contextualized practice) and reading in context supplemented with isolated word practice (decontextualized practice). This study by Fleisher and Jenkins was designed to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of the two strategies with a population of learning disabled boys. Results indicated that decontextualized practice produced significantly greater isolated word recognition, and that performance following contextualized practice exceeded that of a no instruction control. However, the instructional treatments did not differentially affect oral reading in context as measured by rate or accuracy. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the selection of reading objectives and reading measures by remedial reading teachers.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bank Street Readers. New York: MacMillan Company, 1966.

Beery

Buktenica

The developmental test of visual-motor integration. Chicago: Follett, 1967.

Dahl

P.R.

Mastery based experimental program for teaching high speed word recognition skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 1975–76, 11, 203–211.

Dolch

E.W.

Dolch basic sight vocabulary. Champaign, Ill.: Garrad Publishing Company, 1942.

Gilmore Oral Reading Test. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1968.

Goodman

K.A.

A linguistic study of cues and miscues in reading. Elementary English, 1965, 42, 639–643.

Goodman

K.A.

Reading: The key is in the children's language. Reading Teacher, 1972, 25, 505–508.

Goodman

K.A.

The thirteenth easy way to make learning to read difficult: A reaction to Glutman and Rozin. Reading Research Quarterly, 1973, 8, 484–501.

Hartley

Effects of list types and cues on the learning of word lists. Reading Research Quarterly, 1970, 6, 97–121.

10.

Jenkins

J.R.

Larson

Evaluating error correction procedures for oral reading (Tech. Rep. No. 55). Urbana, Ill.: Center for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois, July 1978.

11.

Kirk

R.E.

Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, Ca.: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 1968.

12.

LaBerge

Samuels

S.J.

Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 1974, 6, 293–323.

13.

Otto

McMenemy

Smith

Corrective and remedial teaching (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1973.

14.

Perfetti

Hogoboam

Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975, 67, 461–469.

15.

Samuels

S.J.

Recognition of flashed words by children. Child Development, 1970, 41, 1089–1104.

16.

Samuels

S.J.

Jeffreys

W.F.

Initial discriminability of words and its effect on transfer in learning to read. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1966, 57, 337–340.

17.

Shankweiler

Liberman Misreading

A search for causes. In Kavanagh

J.F.

Mattingly

I.G.

(Eds.), Language by ear and eye: The relationship between speech and reading. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1972.

18.

Singer

Samuels

S.J.

Spiroff

The effect of pictures and contextual conditions on learning responses to printed words. Reading Research Quarterly, 1973–74, 9, 555–567.

19.

Slosson Oral Reading Test. East Aurora, New York: Slosson Educational Publications, 1973.

20.

Smith

Psycholinguistics and reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1973.

21.

Sullivan Associates Programmed Reading. St. Louis: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1963.

22.

Wide Range Achievement Test. Willmington, Delaware: G. L. Strong Company, 1965.