A Case of Educational Retardation
- Author:
Charles L. Harlan,
University of Minnesota.
Early in October, 1916, Andrew C. applied to Unity House Settlement for instruction in reading the English language. He was referred to the writer as a fit subject for instruction and, as an educational experiment, the writer undertook to teach him to read. Accordingly he appeared October 12th and, with two exceptions, every Wednesday evening thereafter until May 16, 1917. He was given two hours of instruction and practice in reading each Wednesday evening, amounting in all to sixty hours. It is not to be understood that he read for two hours in any one evening. The work was varied in character, consisting of word-study, drill on sight and phonetic words, spelling, copying, writing answers to questions based on what had been read, both oral and written reproduction, testing of word recognition, determination of rate of oral and of silent reading, and some discussion of methods of mastering the symbols of the printed page and of oral expression. This two hours work was supplemented by evening study at home. The home study was also varied somewhat in the ways indicated for the instruction period with the exception that no testing was done at home. The Mann Readers (1) supplemented by other books and reading material, formed the basis for the instruction as well as the basis for determining the progress made.
The following facts are stated in order to make clear the conditions under which the subject worked: Andrew was born of Swedish parents in Sweden, July 24, 1898. He is eighteen years and four months old, emigrated to Saskatchewan, Canada, when he was three years of age, and to Minneapolis when he was sixteen. He attended a rural school in Canada in all seven or eight months. His attendance was irregular because of the severe weather, and the teachers were poor, he claims, since they always had trouble and left the school before the winter was over and no new teacher was secured until the following year. When he became older he had to remain at home and help his father on the farm. He could not speak English when he entered school, and during the short time which he attended he learned to speak but not to read or write English. He now speaks English practically without the accent 1 This experiment was condusted as a part of the work of Dr M. E. Haggerty’s Seminar in Educational Psychology during the year 1916?17.
peculiar to Swedish speaking people, but he has a very limited vocablary. Swedish is spoken at home by both parents, but he has a sister who is enrolled in the fifth grade of the Minneapolis schools, and who speaks, reads, and writes English. When beginning his work in reading it was discovered that he knew the alphabet, the sounds of most of the letters, could write the letters and a few words, and could recognize by sight probably fewer than a hundred words. He lives at home under favorable conditions, is now working as helper to a die-setter, and is making 17.5 cents per hour. He desires to become a die-setter because it offers good wages and he thinks he would like the work. He wanted to learn to read in order to be able to read signs, the newspapers, instructions about his work, and rhymes and stories which he hears his sister read and some of which he can repeat from hearing them read. He is somewhat handicapped by defective vision and has to wear thick-lensed glasses.
Figure I. The points at which the circles cross the radii represent the norms in the tests represented by the radii and for the ages represented by the circles. The dotted line indicates the thirteen year old norms which also represents the subject’s mental age as shown by the Stanford Tests. The heary line shows the subject’s standing in the various t?sts.
Figure I. The points at which the circles cross the radii represent the norms in the testa represented by the radii and for the ages represented by the circles. The dotted line indicates the thirteen year old norms which also represents the subject’s mental sge as shown by the Stanford Tests. The heary line shows the subject’s standing in the various tests.
On October 5th he was given the Stanford Revision of the Binet Tests (2) along with certain other mental and physical tests (3), (4), (5). His standing in these tests is represented graphically in figure 1. His performance indicates age-standings of from ten to eighteen years as compared with the age norms in the various tests. In the physical traits recorded, in the auditory memory for digits, and in accuracy in the substitution test he is up to the standard of the average eighteen-year-old individual. His performance in terms of time is always slower than the average. His low standing in cancellation may be due in part to defective vision. This may also account in part for his low standing in memory for digits through visual presentation. In all the other tests given him he ranks from three to eight years below the eighteen-year-old norms. His mental age is thirteen according to the Stanford Test. His inferior rank in these mental tests in all probability represents an educational retardation rather than a mental retardation, or at least a mental retardation due in large part to lack of schooling and lack of training in the use of language. In applying the Stanford Tests all exercises involving reading or visual knowledge of words had to be omitted. Likewise in the other tests word knowledge or vocabulary knowledge is involved. If one has never seen certain words in print, has never written them, and has never heard them understanding^, these words cannot be said be in such a person’s vocabulary. If tested, therefore, on material involving these words, even though visual presentation be not involved, one’s standing must necessarily be somewhat lower than that of persons whose familiarity with these words has been acquired through reading them, writing them, and speaking them. On these grounds it is claimed that Andrew’s case is one largely of educational rather than of mental retardation.
It is a difficult matter to measure progress in reading. A series of reading tests of equal difficulty is needed for this purpose. If a reading test be once given, its usefulness as a test for the same individual is destroyed. Moreover, there are several elements in the reading process, and in order to measure progress in reading it is necessary to measure each of these elements. Progress may be made in rate of either silent or oral reading, in quality of either silent or oral reading, in mastery of phonetic symbols, in number of words recognized in context, and in depth of meaning attached to printed or written symbols. Progress in only a part of these was measured as the subject learned to read.
When several pages had been read either silently or orally and the difficult words had been explained and the’ pronunciation fixed, the pupil was asked to read these pages again at home. By means of the lists at the back of the books used, the pupil’s recognition of the words previously gone over in context was tested during the following instruction period- A list of the words which the subject failed to recognize was made each time. In addition to these tests the pupil was tested five times on the complete primer and first reader lists, and four times on the complete second reader list. In these tests also lists of the unrecognized words were made. By comparing the above named lists it was possible to determine the difficult words, something of the nature of the difficulty, and the final percentage of words found Table I.?Percentage op Complete Lists of Words Recognized in Successive Tests.
Date Primer list: Nov. 22.. Nov. 29.. Jan. 3.. Feb. 7.. Apr. 25.. First Reader: Jan. 3.. Feb. 7. Feb. 14. Mar. 14. Apr. 25. Second Reader: Jan. 17 Jan. 24. Feb. 14. Apr. 25. Total No. of Words 333 333 333 333 333 457 457 457 457 457 666 666 666 666 Number Wrong 48 52 42 17 71 85 68 66 28 214 196 151 57 Percentage of Words Recognized 71.2 85.6 84.4 87.4 94.9 84.5 81.4 85.1 85.6 93.9 67.8 70.6 77.3 91.5 Time, minutes 27 27 27 30 31 31 35 26 23 42 104 100 47 45
in each book which had not been mastered, or at least not sufficiently well understood to be recognized at sight. No drill was given on any of these lists except that involved in the reading of these words whenever they occurred in the context. The results of these tests, therefore, give a basis for measuring the pupil’s increase in vocabulary, both in the recognition and in the understanding of words. The time required for giving each test was also recorded. Table I shows these data for the primer, first, and second reader lists.
The results of the tests on complete lists only are given in the above table. There is a marked increase in the percentages of words recognized at successive periods. There are two exceptions to this statement however. One is in the primer list for January 3d and the other is in the first reader list for February 7th. The words missed on each succeeding test are not necessarily the same words, but in general they are the same words as will be shown in a later table. The time taken for going over the complete lists does not vary greatly in the primer and first reader tests, but there is a marked decrease in the amount of time taken for the second reader list from the first two to the last two tests.
The curves of figure 2 represent the progress made in word recognition from the first test to the last in the complete as well as partial lists. All of these curves indicate gradual though not uniform progress in this performance in all three of the lists used. The curves all terminate near the same point.
This point in all cases is above 90 per cent- This means that on April 25th Andrew recognized at sight more than 90 per cent of all the words encountered in the reading of the primer and first and second readers. It will also be noted that at all times he was able to recognize 50 per cent or more of the words he had previously gone over. The testing was continued after the reading of the texts had been finished. It will be seen that the improvement after completing the texts was never quite so marked as while the text waa being read, 2?>cr9C ? BOH SC20101 Weeks, H-H Coranleted i 8 9 10 <Jomr)let”t la r Prim Firs ?eco IS ” 1 2?1 1 4 1 ^6 ” ‘ ‘ * Si er Wo rds. t Reader J: ad Reader i?r?r; jrds. lYo’rds,
Figure II.
Increase in percentage of words recognized in the various tests from week to week without any drill on words except when found in the context of the Primer, First, and Second Readers. nevertheless, there is improvement which is regular and continuous. Just how much of this improvement is due to repetition of primer words in the first reader, and of first reader words in the second reader was not ascertained. The reading of the Mann third and fourth readers was also completed. In addition to this, material from other readers, elementary geographies, language books and histories was read. In amount this additional material would total 125 pages. When one considers that the pupil had, in all, only fifty-six hours of instruction, with at least an equal amount of time spent in home study, it must be said that Andrew’s was a remarkable performance. He did in twenty-eight weeks what it takes the normal child under ordinary school conditions three or four years to do. This is significant in view of the fact that the Stanford tests indicate a mental age of thirteen as compared with a chronological age of eighteen for the pupil. Andrew’s performance seems to verify the statement that his is a case of educational rather than mental retardation. When tested on the Haggerty (6) phonetic and sight lists of words, the improvement is quite as marked as in the case of the Mann Readers lists. Table II shows the percentage of words in these lists recognized on three different dates. The lists were the same each time but the order of words was changed for each successive test. Table II.?Improvement in Word Recognition.
Date Nov. 1. Nov. 22. Dec. 20. Phonetic List Percentage Correct Time, hra. min. 1 50 1 50 2 10 Sight List Percentage Correct Time, hrs. min. 2 30 2 43 3 05
The standings in the sight test, for corresponding dates, are higher in every case than the standings in the phonetic test. There is, however, a material difference in the amount of time required to recognize the sight words over that required to recognize the words of the phonetic list. There is also a marked increase in the amount of time for recognizing the words of the sight list in successive tests. The increasing percentages of words correctly given is evident in both lists. The pupil was not tested on these lists later than December so it is impossible to indicate his present knowledge of these words, but since they are all found in the lists of the Mann Readers the pupil probably knows a larger proportion of them than indicated in the above table.
There was also an increase in the rate of oral reading. A part of each instruction period was devoted to oral reading. The rate was ascertained for the total amount of material read orally during any one period. This would tend to eliminate fluctuations in rate due to difficulty of reading matter. No correction was made for the increasing difficulty of material as the pupil proceeded from primer to fourth reader. The increase in the number of words read per minute is shown in table III, also graphically in figure 3. Table III.?Increase in Rate of Oral Reading.
Date Oct. 19. Oct. 25. Nov. 1. Nov. 8. Dec. 13. Jan. 31. Feb. 7. Feb. 21. Mar. 14. Apr. 25. Words Read per Minute 9 13 19 27 31 30 39 41 64 72
There is a gradual though not rapid increase in rate of oral reading as indicated for the different test periods. No doubt the fluctuations in rate would have been evident had the rate been ascertained for shorter periods of time and at more frequent intervals. It will be noted that the large increases in rate came during the earlier periods and again during the month of February. It is also to be noted that the subject still reads very slowly. This is due in part to the persistence of the phonetic methods of attacking words. The curve manifests the plateau aspect of the learning curve. The long plateau is probably to be accounted for by the fact that it was during this period the “sight” method of reading was being substituted for the phonetic method. The rapid rise during the February periods is due in part at least to a dominance of sight over phonic mastery of words. It is not known how much this curve is flattened by the increasing difficulty of the material in the texts read.
The silent reading at first was not at all silent. The words were whispered and very difficult ones were occasionally vocalized. Later the sounding was reduced to lip movements and still later, especially on the easier passages, there were no lip movements. This subordination of the motor aspects of silent reading took place apparently with no conscious effort on the part of the pupil and no suggestions Were made by the instructor as to changes in methods. The rate of silent reading was fifty-five words per minute on March 7th. This rate had increased to seventy-five words per minute by April 25th. This is much below the rate of normal children in the grades of the public schools.
The quality of reading done by the pupil, as measured by the amount he was able to reproduce or by answers to questions on what tad been read, indicates excellent ability along this line. Although he read slowly he was able to grasp approximately half the ideas presented in the printed page. On March 7th he was given the Fordyce (Narcissus) (7) tests in reading. His rate of silent reading at that time was fifty-five words per minute with a quality of fifty. He was again tested April 25th, when he showed a rate of seventy-five and quality seventy. For understanding of sentences a test was given on November 8th. He then ranked 4 on the Thorndike scale (Alpha 2.) (8). On January 31st he had reached and passed exercise of difficulty 6, and on March 7th he ranked at exercise of difficulty 8. In all these tests his reading was slow but comprehensive.
He was also given the Indiana revision of the Thorndike vocabulary scale (9) on November 8th, December 13th, and January 24th. On the first test his score was line value 15, on the second, 25, and on the third, line value 35. In the Trabue language test Scale C (10)
70 . ? O ! k) h O, ?O 40 M 0) I 20 t? 30 TO tr 2 3 4 5 Weeks. Figure III.?Increase in Rate of Oral Reading. W “35” Figure III.?Increase in Kate of Ural Heading. on November 8th his score was zero, but on February 7th he made a score of 7.
Although he knew how to write his name and could write most of the letters of the alphabet with pencil when he first appeared for instruction, it can not be said that he could write. He could draw the letters slowly and laboriously at the rate of about eight per minute. No instruction was given in writing and no effort was made to have the rate or quality of the copying improve. He was, however, asked to copy the script words of the primer and the sentences of the first reader. That he learned to write is indicated by his writing performance on April 25th, when he wrote a page of approximately quality 50, Ayres Scale (11), at the rate of fifty-six letters per minute.
Andrew’s attainments in these educational activities in the GH A3JE VIS.VMM language. VmiTl N ff Figure IV. The dotted line represents the pupil’s standing on November 8th relative to the norma of the different grades. The heavy line indicates his standing on April 25th relative to th? differeit grade norms. Figure IV.
The dotted line represents the pupil’s standing on November 8th relative to the norma of the different gradei. The heavy line indicates his standing on April 25th relative to th? different grade normi. initial periods and in the final periods are represented in figure IV. In this figure the dotted line represents his achievements on November 8th relative to the achievements of normal children in their respective grades. The heavy solid line represents relatively his attainment on April 25th. The distances between the solid and the dotted lines on the radii of the circles measure, in terms of grades, the improvement made during the twenty-eight weeks of instruction in reading. It will be seen that in this time he made from a gradeand-a-half of progress in rate of reading to four grades of progress m understanding of sentences or in quality of reading. It should also be noted that although no instruction was given in language as such, or in writing as such, there was marked progress in both of these performances. This suggests a close correlation between these school activities and reading.
Aside from the data of these tests there is the additional evidence that considerable improvement was made since he passed from the primer level to that of the fourth reader level in his ability to read. On May 16th he could read some in the newspapers, in the elementary geographies, histories, and language books. It is important to note the processes through which this improvement was made. With this in view careful records and notes were niade as to the difficulties encountered, how they were overcome, and devices and aids which proved helpful. In addition to these data the pupil was asked to state what his greatest difficulties were and how they were overcome.
First of all it must be kept in mind that the pupil wanted to learn to read. He had been confronted by obstacles which ability to read would have helped him to surmount. He had been somewhat chagrined to hear his younger sister read material the meaning of which he could not get without her aid. He had also discovered that in order to do the work he desired to do and to secure the wages he wanted to secure, ability to read was necessary. Under these conditions the services of an instructor, although somewhat necessary, Were never more than supplementary to the fundamental processes of learning to read.
No methods of procedure were outlined for the pupil since it was deemed desirable to discover how the pupil proceeded to learn to read. However, after a method, device or trick of mastering the printed page had been discovered by the pupil, its usefulness was discussed with him. The methods and devices of attacking words were the ones ordinarily used by pupils in learning to read. The sounding of letters and syllables, association of new words with objects pictured on the same page, combination of new syllables with stem words already known, similarity in appearance of words, similarity in sound of words, suggestiveness of rhymes and stories already known through hearing them read or recited, and recall of words because of their frequent occurrence in a phrase or familiar group of words, all proved helpful. It was found, however, that none of these aids and devices were adequate substitutes for a reasonable amount of drill and repetition. Pronunciation of the word by the teacher, although immediately helpful, did not prove useful in later encounters with the same words except when the pronunciation was repeated. Neither did discussing the meanings of words aid in more ready recognition of words at the next encounter. There were certain difficulties accompanying the use of the above mentioned aids and devices. In sounding the letters and syllables the different sounds of each of the vowels were very confusing. Association of words with pictures on the same page often led to failure to recognize those words in context on the following pages where no pictures were given. Recall of words through their phrase or group associations was helpful only when the other words of the phrase or group were familiar. The method of recognition of words through similarity of appearance was sometimes misleading in the case of words different in sound.
In addition to these difficulties of method there were certain difficulties inherent in the nature of the words or letters themselves. The following letters and syllables were found to be difficult: the distinction between m and n, b and d, p and q, and the phonograms, ch, sh, ea, ow, ou, ough, oa, ie, oo, gh, ght, ing, ly, ph, y, th, ng, sp, ive, etc. Letters known when alone were not known in certain combinations. Capital letters were not known as the same small letters. Contractions were not recognized as such. Words which begin or end alike were confused, e. g. than,?that, going?doing. Added syllables or changed endings sometimes make the word unrecognizable, e. g. small?smaller, go?goes, come?coming. Plurals and possessives were found to be confusing. These are undoubtedly the difficulties usually encountered by pupils in learning to read. There were also certain words which seemed to be difficult for the pupil and which were still difficult at the close. The list of words missed in the first test and in the last test is given on page 223. The starred words are the ones missed on both the initial and final tests and on the intermediate tests. In the primer list 11 of the 17, or 65 per cent, of the words missed in the list of 333 words are the same words missed on every test. In the first reader list of 457 words 28 were missed in the final test. Of these 17, or 61 per cent, are words which had been missed in all previous tests.
Primer list. (333) back fur “”business “”seize *bin “”gate *certain *shout *buy *gown chase “”silent *buzz “”grain “”color since *cabbage “”guess #curious *sour Mown “”lady daughter *stair *flour lid *dough *stalk fun *nut “”fierce *stir “gnaw “”ought *fury “straight *Kate plum *Grace *suit lion ?pond “”grieve sunshine now pur *groan *sure pot bailor *insect surround put scissors *known *throat *star sleigh “”language “”tickle *very Spain “”laugh tongue *want “”tall ^manner tooth “”threw meant treasure First Reader list. through notion treated (457) “”toss “”people “”truly bellows “”watch print “”violet brown promise “”wear *claw Second Reader list, puzzle *whine *eight (666) quite “”whose ^farther “”angel “”remain wigwam feather *beast replied “”wrinkle *field “”break “”secret
In the second reader list of 666 words, 57 were missed in the final test. Of these, 40, or 70 per cent, are words previously missed. These figures indicate that 60 per cent or more of the words encountered and presenting difficulties are persistently and inherently difficult. But since on the final test approximately 10 per cent of the total number of words encountered were found too difficult for recognition, this means that approximately 6 per cent were persistently and inherently difficult. That this was true of a small number of words has already been pointed out by Haggerty (9). These words should be discovered as soon as possible and selected for special drill. This was not done in Andrew’s case, consequently his vocabulary efficiency on April 25th was about 90 per cent of 1456 words.
The following summary sets forth some of the conclusions concerning this case: (1) Although the mental status of the subject indicated retardation of five years, the subsequent improvement in several abilities indicates that this was due to lack of schooling and not to low mentality.
(2) The progress made in learning to read was accompanied by corresponding improvement in language and in writing, as well as improvement in the several abilities involved in the reading process itself, such as increase of vocabulary, understanding of sentences, rate of silent and of oral reading, and in ability to reproduce what was read.
(3) The aids, devices, and methods of learning to read which were found helpful, were numerous and not limited to one process. These, although worked out independently, were found to correspond closely to those in ordinary use in most class rooms.
(4) The difficulties encountered, although varied in kind, are not numerous and the words causing difficulty are limited in number to about 6 per cent of all the words encountered.
References.
Horace Mann Readers, Primer, and Books One, Two, Three, and Four.
Terman. The Measurement of Intelligence. New York, 1916.
Whipple. Manual of physical and mental tests. New York.
(4) Bird T. Baldwin. A Scale for measuring physical growth. Swarthmore, Pa. (5) Helen T. Wooley. Mental and physical measurements of working children of Cincinnati. (6) M. E. Haqgertt. Vocabulary test for first and second grade children. Univ. of Minnesota. (7) Charles Fordtce. A Scale for the measurement of achievement in reading. Lincoln, Neb. (8) E. L. Thorndike. An Improved scale for measuring ability in reading. Teachers College Record, Nov., 1916. (9) M. E. Haggerty. Ability to read, its measurement and some factors conditioning it. Indiana Univ. Studies, No. 34. (10) M. R. Trabue. Language scale C, Columbia Contrib. to Ed. New York. (11) L. P. Ayres. A Handwriting scale. Russell Sage Foundation Publications, New York.
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.