document resume - ericdocument resume ed 056 844 re 003 919 author greenwald, marcia alpern title a...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 056 844 RE 003 919
AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia AlpernTITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey
Public School Reading Programs, Grades K-12.
PUB DATE Jan 72MOTE 94p.; Master's thesis submitted to Rutgers, the State
University, New Brunswick, N.J.
EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS
Mr-$0.65 TTC-3.29*Audio Equipment; Audiovisual Aids; *EducationalEquipment; Elementary Grades; InstructionalMaterials; Masters Theses; Reading Instruction;*Reading Programs; Remedial Reading Programs; *SchoolDistrict Spending; Secondary Grades; Tachistoscopes;*Teaching Machines
ABSTRACTThe use of machines in reading instruction was
examined in 174 New Jersey school districts. From data gathered byquestionnaire, the numbers, types, and usages of machines in various
school districts were examined. The ratio of pupil to machine wascorrel.ited with the size of the school district, expenditures perstudent, and organization of the school systems (K through 8, K
through 12, and 7 through 12). It was found that K through 8 school
districts had the most favorable pupil/machine ratios. The size of
the school district significantly influenced the number of machines
owned. There was no correlation between a district's size and thepupil/machine ratio nor between a district's expenditure per pupil
and its pupil/machine ratio. The instruments most frequently found inreading programs were listening and recording devices, followed bydirectional attack control devices and group tachistoscopes. Themajority of districts used machines in both developmental and
remedial reacting programs. Indications for further resParch made.
Tables, the questionnaire, and references are includ
![Page 2: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
RIC (D
cC
g L`t2eaci
:±.)
C..?
= .";,;
17,
La-140 C:6
-0z=n MASTER OF EDUCATION
C) CA c)
yEt2.17iFe
NEW BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY JANUARY, 1972
A SURVEY OF READING INSTRUMENT USAGE IN NEW JERSEY
PUBLIC SCHOOL READING PROGRAMS, GRADES KI2
A THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY
OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
OF
RUTGERS UNIVERS:TY
THE STATE UNIVERSITY C.F NEW JERSEY
BY
MARCIA ALPERN G.:EENWALD
IN PARTIAL FULFILLANT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR -HE DEGREE
OF
APPROVED:
IL
DEAN :
![Page 3: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to give my sincerest thanks to Dr.
Edward Fry for all of the help, understanding, and encour-
agement that he has given me. I would also like to thank
Mr. Pietro Pascale for the time that he spent in advising
me on the statistical portion of this paper.
To my husband, Bruce Greenwald, I owe a great deal
of thanks for the support and encouragement that he gave
me throughout the time I was working on this thesis.
Finally, to my son, Bryan Michael Greenwald, I want to
express my thanks for scheduling his arrival after the
completion of the preliminary draft.
ii
![Page 4: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Problem 1
Background 2
Procedure 2
Definitic:A of Terms 3
Limitations 4
SURVEY OF THE LITERATURF
National Surveys of Instrument Usage in
7
American Public Schools 7
Surveys of Reading Machinery Usa9- 14
III. PROCEDURE 19
Population 19
The Questionnaire 20
Pilot Study 22
DistributiOn of the Questionnaire 23
Treatment of the Data 24
IV, RESULTS 25
V, SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
iii
43
![Page 5: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Surnmary
Conclusions
Page
43
44
Organizational Plans 44
Size 44
Expenditure per Pupil 44
Order of Use of Various Instruments 45
Reading Skills Taught 46
Use in Remedial and DevelopmentalReading 46
Need for Further Research 46
REFERENCES48
APPENDIXES
A. Additional Dat- frmi- Responc: Jist- .
B. Reading Instrument Usage Questionnaire 78
iv
![Page 6: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
LIST OF TABLES
TablePage
1. Number of Teachers per Unit of AudiovisualEquipment in the U.S. Public Schools,1946-1962
9
2. Estimated Number of Units of Equipment perSchool by District Size, Spring 1961 . . 11
3. Incidence of Equipment Items in SchoolBuildings, 1962, for Both Types of Schools 13
4. Instrument Usage in 233 Colleges 15
5, Frequency of Mention of Usage of InstrumentTechniques by Grade Levels 17
6. Mean Data for Study Characteristics of 174Responding Districts by OrganizationalPlan
26
7. Comparison of Mean Data for Study Character-istics for 174 Responding Districts and 7(2%) Non-responding Districts 28
8. Correlations of Study Characteristics byOrganizational Plan 29
9. Rank Order and Percentage of Use of VariousReading Instrument Categories for allResponding Districts 31
10. Reading Instrument Usage for all RespondingDistricts
33
11. Comparison of the Use of Reading Instrumentsfor 174 Respondents and 7 Non-respondents . 39
12. Use of Major Instrumert Categories in Devel-opmental and Remedial Reading Programs 41
13. Rank Order and Percentage of Use of VariousReading Instrument Categories for AllOrganizational Plans .
. . 50
![Page 7: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Table
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page
14. Reading Instrument Usage by OrganizationalPlan 52
15. Use of Reading Instruments in Developmentaland Remedial Reading Programs ..... 59
16. Reading Skills Taught by Various Instruments 66
17. Frequency of Use of Reading Instruments . 74
vi
![Page 8: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
ABSTRACT
Reading instruction in many public-school dis-
tricts is supplemented by the use of various mechanical
implements. It is the purpose of this study to clarify
the role of machinery in New Jersey publin-school read-
ing programs by attempting to answer the following ques-
tions:
1. Does the pupil/machine ratio differ in school
districts of different organizational plans (N-8, K-12,
7-12) ?
2. Is there a relationship between pupil/machine
ratio and a district's yly expenditure per pupil?
3. Is there a relationship between a district's
pupil/machine ratio and its size?
4. What instruments are being used in public-
school K-12 reading programs?
5. For what reading skills are these instruments
being used?
6. Does machine usage differ for developmental or
remedial instruction?
In cxrder to answer these questions, a question-
naire was developed and sent to the 569 active school dis-
tricts in the State of New Jersey. Replies were received
from 174 (30%) of these districts. Additional information
![Page 9: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
concerning the responding districts was found in Financial
Statistics of School_Districts 1968-1969, a publication
of the New Jersey Commissioner of Education.
To determine the similarity betN-Ten the 174 respond-
ing districts and the remaining non-responding districts,
seven non-responding districts were randomly selected and
wcre sent questionnaires. Because of the similarity in the
pupil/machine ratio of these seven districts and those that
responded, it appears that the respondents are fairly reprs-
sentative of the entire population of 569.
Analysis of the data resulted in the following
findings:
1. K-8 public-school districts had the most favor-
able pupil/machine ratios.
2. There was a significant positive corelation
between the size of a district and the number of machines
owned.
3. There was no correlation between a district's
size and its pupil/machine ratio. There was also no cor-
relation between a district's expenditure per pupil and
its pupil/machine ratio.
4. The instrumerits most commonly used in public-
school reading programs were listening and recording
devices. These were followed by directional attack con-
trol devices and group tachistoscopes.
![Page 10: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
5. The majority of all districts using the various
instruments (except for the individual tachistoscope) use
them for both remedial and developmental reading.
![Page 11: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Simple observation of various reading programs at
all levels of instruction will confirm the fact that many
types of reading instruments are currently in use. Owing
to a changing technology, however, very little is known
about exactly what instruments are used. New and creative
ways of employing existing equipment leave us uncertain as
to the purposes for which these instruments are being used.
If an accurate picture of instrument usage is to be drawn,
it is necessary that we learn what equipment is being used
and in what way.
Problem
This study will attempt to answer the following
questions.
1. Does the pupil/machine ratio differ in school
districts of different organizational plans (K-8, K-12,
7-12)?
2. Is there a relationship between pupil/machine
ratio and a district's yearly expenditure per pupil?
3. Is there a relationship between a district's
pupil/machine ratio and its size?
Ic
![Page 12: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
2
4. Which instruments are most widely used in New
Jers(ly public school reading programs?
5. For what reading skills are these instruments
being used?
6. Does machine usage differ for developmental or
remedial instruction?
Background
Stanford Taylor, in a study done in 1960, found
that 59% of all responding IRA members made some use of
machines in their reading programs. The responses to this
study showed great confusion as to names and functions of
various instrument techniques (Taylor, 1962).
In conjunction with a presentation at the 1971
national convention, the International Reading Association
is concerned with obtaining a more current assessment of
instrument usage in American schools.
Procedure
In order to obtain statistical information on
instrument usage in public-school reading programs, grades
K-12, the public-school systems in New Jersey have been
selected for study. Each district superintendent was sent
a questionnaire developed to answer the previous questions.
The reading instruments included on the questionnaire were
limited to the following equipment:
ii
![Page 13: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
1. Tachistoscopic instruments
2. Directional attack control davices
3. Accelerating devices
4. Listening devices
5. Recording devices
6. Motion picture projectors
7. Computer-assis:ed instruction equipment
8. Instructior tEevision
9. Stopwatches
Additional information on each partiJipating dis-
trict was obtained from the 18th Annual Report of the Com-
missioner of Education, Financial Statistics of School
Districts 1968-1969 (State of New Jersey, 1970).
Definition of Terms
For the purposes of this study, a reading instru-
ment is defined as a mechanical implement used in reading
instruction.
Tachistoscopic instruments, as defined by Taylor
(1962), are individual or group projection devices which
present numbers, letters, words, etc., for brief time
exposuresusually ranging from 1/100 to 1-1/2 seconds.
They are used to "initiate efficient perceptual skills"
and to "increase recogO.tion ability" of reading and other
materials (Taylor, 1962).
Directional attack control devices are those which
12
![Page 14: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
4
present continuous reading materials in a timed, left-to-
right fashion. Taylor includes in this category 16 mm
motion picture films, 35 mm filmstrips, and specially
designed projectors. He states that -f-Ilese are primarily
used for "decreasing the time needed fc: '...rceptual pro-
cessing" and for "improving the accurac ± ih w .ch con-
tent is assimilated and understood [Tay: 196
Taylor describes accelerating devic s ag instru-
ments designed to give individual practi-e D cc Ipetent
readers. These machines provide a timin,,J- -charlsm (vis-
ual or auditory) which "urges the reader tc mair:.ain a
higher attention level, dissuades him from rereading and
encourages him to read at increasingly faster rates [Tay-
lor, 1962]."
Computer-assisted instruction is described by
Atkinson and Hansen (1966) as being a program of instruc-
tion, organized and programmed in a way that puts actual
teaching under the control of the computer. This system
includes complete individualization of instruction and
allows for each child to proceed at his own pace.
Limitations
As a questionnaire survey, this study was obvi-
ously subject to the common limitations of questionnaire
surveys. The validity of the results depend, to a large
degree, on the accuracl- of the responses and on the
114
![Page 15: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
5
ability to generalize the accumulated responses over the
entire population. Lack of specific knowledge or a desire
to appear in a favorable light could have caused E- of
the respondents to complete the questionnaire inacc-rately.
Failure to answer some of the questions was also a oblem.
This was particularly true of the question concerned with
the number of machines owned.
Secondly, since the various districts could not
be coerced into completing the questionnaire, those who
did complete it are, in essence, volunteers. Their inter-
est in completing the questionnaire may be a cause for
biased results.
Ideally, when received by the superintendent, the
questionnaire would be referred to a person or persons
familiar with the district's entire reading program. In
many districts, a person with this knowledge does not
exist, and copies of the questionnaire were sent by the
superintendent to the individual schools. Uneven results
from these schools have caused many incomplete and unus-
able district results.
Confined to the limited space of a questionnaire,
it was impossible to list all available reading instru-
ments. Because of their greater visibility, listed
instruments may have tended to elicit greater responses
than unlisted instruments.1.4
![Page 16: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
6
Finally, information on district size and yearly
expenditure per pupil had to be obtained from Financial
Statistics of School Districts 1968-69, th2 most recent
edition of the document currently in print. While more
recent data would have been preferable, they were impos-
sible to obtain at the time this thesis was being written.
The validity of the data presented here rests on the
assumption that changes in size and expenditure per pupil
have been relatively proportional throughout the state.
![Page 17: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
CHAPTER II
SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE
A search of the educational literature has reveEad
four studies of a nature similar to the reading inst-um
usage survey. Two of these, a 1962 publication by Finn,
Perrin, and Campion, and a 1967 study by Godfrey, deal
extensively with machine usage throughout the entire Ame -
ican education system. The surveys conducted by Miller
(1959) and Taylor (1962) deal only with machinery use in
reading instruction, the former at the college level and
the latter at all educational levels.
National Surveys of Instrument Usagein American Public Schools
Finn, Perrin, and Campion (1962) , in an extensive
study of technological growth in American education between
1930 and 1960, attempted to plot quantitative aspects of
audiovisual equipment in the public schools. Equipment
surveyed in this study included the following major cate-
gories:
I. Motion picture projection equipment
A. 16 mm sound projectors
II. Still picture projection equipment
7
![Page 18: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
8
A. Slide/filmstrip projectors
B. Opaque projectors
C. Overhead transparency projectors
III. Sound equipment
A. Record players
B. Tape recorders
C. Language laboratories
D. Central sound systems
IV. Broadcast reception equipment
A. Radio receivers
B. Television recei-iers
Table 1 shows growth figures for the number of teachers
per unit of audiovisual equipment in the United States for
the years 1946-1962. The authors divide the equipment
into two categories: those referred to as "older" media
(motion picture projectors, slide/filmstrip projectors,
record players, and radio receivers), and those referred
to as "new" media (television tape recorders, language
laboratories, and overhead projectors) . They state:
The "old" media are those developments introduced
prior to WW II which have reached or are in the pro-
cess of reaching the first plateau of their growth
curve. The "new" media are innovations introducedsince WW II and are still in the early stages ofgrowth [p. 67].
For 1962, the most recent year represented, it
appears that the record player was the most widely used
machine. It was followed by slide/filmstrip projectors
![Page 19: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
in
TABLE 1
NUMBER CF TEACHERS
PER UNIT OF AUDIOVISUAL
EQUIPMENT
IN THE U.S. PUBLIC
SCHOOLS, 1946-1962a
Year
16 mm
M.P.
Slide Opaque
F.S.
proj.
O.H.
proj.
Radio
Record
play-
ers
Tape
rec.
T.V.
sets
Central
sound
systems
Lan-
guage
labs
1946
47.2
29.3
66.0
28.7
24.8
259.7
1948
27.7
29.0
58.2
24.3
23.1
172.2
1950
21.3
25.4
56.4
17.2
20.7
130.6
1952
15.8
19.9
57.3
11.3
17.2
535.0
107.0
1954
12.4
15.9
58.7
267.0
10.8
11.4
138.7
593.3
97.1
1956
10.9
13.3
54.5
213.8
11.3
9.4
64.1
135.8
85.5
1958
11.0
10.9
47.1
127.9
12.2
6.1
35.8
52.8
68.8
1711.6
1960
10.8
9.0
39.2
84.9
13.4
4.9
21.1
31.3
56.2
247.4
1962
10.1
7.4
31.4
61.0
13.9
4.1
14.2
21.5
46.4
146.3
aFinn, Perrin, and Campion,
1962.
![Page 20: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
10
and 16 mm sound projectors.
Eleanor Godfrey, in The State of Audiovisual Tech-
nology, 1961-1966 (1967), based her study on the 35,482
school districts in operation in October, 1959. She sur-
veyed all 2,444 districts with a student population of
3,000 or more. The 33,038 remaining districts, those with
fewer than 3,000 pupils, were sampled in different propor-
tions according to their size. A total of 7,236 districts
were surveyed and usable returns were received from 2,927
districts (40%).
T,quipment studied in this survey included the fol-
lowing:
1. Record players
2. Slide/filmstrip projectors
3. 16 mm projectors
4. Radios
5. Tape recorders
6. Television sets
7. Opaque projectors
8. Filmstrip projectors
9. Overhead projectors
10. 2 x 2 slide projectors
11. Language laboratories
Table 2 ws usage of this equipment for school
districts of varying sizes. Godfrey points ou that the
![Page 21: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
.
TABLE 2
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF
UNITS OF EQUIPMENT
PER SCHOOL BY DISTRICT
SIZE, SPRING
1961a
District size
Number of units per
school
Recd
plyr
Slide
F.S.
proj
16mm
proj
Tape
Radio rec
T.V.
set
Opaq
proj
F.S.
(only)
proj
O.H.
proj
2x2
slide
proj
Lan-
guage
lab
Mean ratio
(all districts)
3.90
1.44
1.41
0.94
1.12
0.49
0.47
0.39
0.19
0.09
0.06
75,000 or more
9.29
2.51
2.64
4.05
1.52
1.74
0.64
0.24
0.16
0.09
0.06
25,000-74,959
7.23
2.15
2.16
1.87
1.53
1.46
0.63
0.25
0.22
0.05
0.07
12,000-24,999
6.22
2.03
2.08
1.33
1.57
0.68
0.61
0.38
0.31
0.09
0.05
6,000-11,999
5.63
1.85
1.78
1.03
1.46
0.70
0.64
0.44
0.25
0.07
0.05
3,000- 5,999
4.89
1.78
1.73
1.10
1.49
0.62
0.58
0.43
0.23
0.11
0.06
1,200- 2,999
4.11
1.53
1.55
0.89
1.24
0.52
0.57
0.58
0.22
0.11
0.07
600- 1,199
3.28
1.35
1.27
0.81
1.04
0.36
0.46
0.33
0.16
0.10
0.06
300-
599
2.53
1.08
1.04
0.81
0.85
0.23
0.36
0.33
0.14
0.20
0.03
150-
299
1.80
0.89
0.86
0.77
0.63
0.26
0.26
0.25
0.08
0.05
0.04
50-
149
1.29
0.60
0.69
0.52
0.35
0.18
0.17
0.27
0.04
0.02
0.01
1-
49
0.49
0.29
0.15
0.23
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.12
0.01
--
aGodfrey,
1962.
![Page 22: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
12
n13mber of units of the older and more available media are
directly related to the size of the school system. This
includes record players, slide/filmstrip projectors, 16 mm
projectors, and radios. She states that except for tele-
vision, the number of available units of the other media
r mains fairly constant across district size.
She feels that the even distribution of overhead
projectors may be due to the fact that the overhead pro-
jector was relatively new in 1961 and schools only bought
a Zew to be 'sed on an experimental basis. She states
that the low ratios for opaque projectors, slide projec-
tors, and filmstrip projectors may indicate that these
items are kept primarily in district administration build-
ings and distributed to the various schools when needed.
Table 3 represents a breakdown of instrument usage
in elementary and secondary schools. Record players, 16
mm projectors, and slide/filmstrip projectors were avail-
able in most elementary and secondary schools. Radios
were equally available in elementary and secondary
schools, but the remaining five instruments were used
most frequently in secondary schools. Godfrey feels that
this may be due to the fact that these instruments, espe-
cially the tape recorder and the overhead projector, are
more suitable for instruction at the secondary level. It
could also be related to the limited amount of storage
21
![Page 23: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
13
TABLE 3
INCIDENCE OF EQUIPMENT ITEMS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS,1962, FOR BOTH TYPES OF SCHOOLSa
(Equipment listed in order of overall availability)
Type of equipment
Percent of schoolsreporting item
Elementary(n = 308)
SeJondary(n = 209)
Record player 98 100
16 mm projector 95 100
Slide-filmstrip projector 95 98
Tape recorder 76 99
Radio 74 76
Opaque projector 61 76
Television set 40 52
Overhead projector 20 56
Language laboratory 4 42
aGodfrey, 1962.
4-
![Page 24: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
14
space in elementary schools.
Whatever the reason, she states that elementary
schools generally have a smaller variety of audiovisual
equipment. Excluding the language laboratories, 28% of
the secondary schools had all of the remaining eight kinds
of media, while only 6% of the elementary schools had all
eight kinds.
Surveys of Reading Machinery Usage
As part of a study of college-level reading pro-
grams, Lyle Miller surveyed instrument usage in partici-
pating colleges and universities. Equipment included in
this study was limited to machinery used mainly in reading
instruction. It did not include the many more general
items used in public schools (i.e., television, tape
recorders, record player-), etc.). The results for the
233 responding institutions can be seen in Table 4.
Miller found the tachistoscope and the reading acceler-
ator to be the most widely used instruments. Both instru-
ments were used primarily for motivation and individual
training. He also found that the controlled reader
received little use at the college level.
The most complete study available on the use of
instruments in reading instruction was done by Stanford E.
Taylor (1962). Prom a group of 7,616 members of the
International Reading Association, he received replies
![Page 25: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
15
TABLE 4
INSTRUMENT USAGE IN 233 COLLEGESa
InstrumentDiag-nosis
Moti-vation
Train-ing
Groupdrill
Opthalmograph
Me.:ronoscope
11
1
4
3
1
1
-
Telebinocular 65 2 2
Tachistoscope 25 99 84 75
Readingaccelerator
22 113 131 20
Films 19 74 69 47
Orthometer 4
Controlledreader
2 11 13 11
Rateometer 1 1
Tachitron 1
Flash readers
Shadowscope 1- _
Perceptoscope2 2
aMiller, 1959.
24
![Page 26: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
16
from 777 people (10%). Of these, 59% (417) made use of
at least one type of instrument.
The results of this study, covering all educa-
tional levels from grade one through college, can be seen
in Table 5. He found the EDL Tach-X to be the most com-
monly used group tachistoscope, with its greatest use in
the intermediate and junior high grades. None of the
individual tachistoscopes were found to b in wide _se.
The EDL Controlled Reader appears to be t..1c,, most exten-
sively used directional attack control de-Ice, with wide
use at all levels. Finally, the SRA Acc-E -'fator a7---ears
to be the most widely used reading accelel-,tor.
Of all listed educational levels Lt appears that
reading machinery is most commonly used in grades 4-12.
As can be seen from the four previously discussed
studies, there is no study that includes both the general
machinery used in a reading context and the specific read-
ing machinery. It is hoped that this study will fill part
of this gap.
![Page 27: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
17
TABLE 5
FREQUENCY OF MENTION OF USAGE OF INSTRUMENTTECHNIQUES BY GRADE LEVELSa
1-3 4-6 Jr.H. H.S. Col. Ad.
A. Tachistoscopes
1. Group projection instruments
a. EDL Tach-X 40 61 66 47 31 19
b. Keystone Flashmeter 10 26 23 17 16 9
C. SVE Speedioscope 2 5 6 2 3 4
d. Unspecified 10 24 27 24 16 10
2. Individual devices
a. Stereo-Optical 1 5 3 2 A 2
Tachitron (Renshaw)
b. AVR Eye-Span 1 1
Trainer
C. Tachisto-Flasher 1 1
B. Directional attack control techniques
1. Instruments
a. EDL Controlled 76 102 107 90 48 --
Reader
b. PDL Perceptoscope -- 2 3 4 3
c. Unspecified 2 2 2 1 1
2. 16 mm films
a. Harvard Universityfilms
3 11 15 7
(continued)
![Page 28: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
18
TABLE 5 (continuee'.)
1-3 4-6 Jr.H. H.S. Col. Ad.
b. Iowa Universityfilms (collegelevel)
15 13
c. Purdue Universityfilms
d. C-B educationalfilms
e. Iowa Univ-rsityfilms (hi:_lschool lc el)
f. Unspeciflad
--
--
2
2
4
3
2
12
4
1
1
2
1
1
C. Accelerators
1. SRA Accelerator 3 9 18 24 10 7
2. AVR Rateometer 2 7 9 7 2 2
3. Psychotechnics -- 2 2 4 2
Shadowscope
4. Stereo-Optical Reading 1 3 3 3 3
Rate Controller
5. Unspecified 1 4 7 10 8 3
Total instrument usage 147 248 287 264 184 84
by grade levels
aTaylor, 1962.
2 7
![Page 29: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
CHAPTER III
PROCEDURE
In order to discover what machinery is cu_rently
r_eing used in the -Leaching of reading, how this machinery
_s being used, and whether its use is affected by the size
of the various districts and the amount of money s.-ent on
each pupil per yeal:, a questionnaire was sent to all pub-
lic school systems in New Jersey. This chapter contains
descriptions of the population, the questionnaire and its
distribution, and the statistical analysis of the data.
Population
In order to obtain information regarding instru-
ment usage in public-school reading programs, the 592
public-school districts in the state of New Jersey were
selected for study. Of these, 20 districts have no pupils
and 3 districts enroll pupils only for special education.
This left 569 districts for study. Replies were received
from 66 of the 307 K-8 districts, 79 of the 207 K-12 dis-
tricts, and 29 of the 56 7-12 districts for a total
response of 174 (30%). Responding districts ranged in
size from 229 pupils to 36,687 pupils, and in yearly expen-
diture per pupil from $363.00 to $1,308.00.
![Page 30: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
20
The r-uestionnaire
In deve_t_-__ n the Reading Instrument Usage Ques-
ticl.-laire, I atteed to find answers to the following
queitions:
Which inst-ru:-.1ents are most widely used in New
Jersey public-schcol reading programs?
For what reading skills are these instruments
be-ng used?
Does machLne usage differ for developmental and
remedial instruc-tion?
The inform-iLion needed to answer the following
three questions was gained in part from the questionnaire
and in part from the 18th Annual Report of the Commis-
sioner of Education, Financial Statistics of School Dis-
tricts 1968-1969.
Does the pupil/machine ratio differ in districts
of different organizational plans?
Is there a relationship between the pupil/machine
ratio and a district's yearly expenditute/pupil?
Is there a relationship between a district's
pupil/machine ratio and its size?
Questions that could be answered by both the
school districts and by reference to the above-mentioned
document were not included in the questionnaire. Since
the information was available elsewhere- it was felt that
2:3
![Page 31: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
21
including it questionnaire would merely complicate
list of specific,
based on the results
list was supple-
mented by a s of various audiovisual catalogs. The
instruments in' _ded were brcken down into the following
categories:
1. TacL_s.toscopic instruments
2. Directional attack control devices
3. Accelrating devices
4. List-liaing devices
the task of tJ -,--_spondents.
The -u -.:Lonnaire contained a
commercially-:: -_::factured instruments
of Stanford Ta L:r's 1962 study. This
5. Recording devices
6. Moticm picture projectors
7. Inst=ctiona1 television
8. Comuter-assisted instruction
9. St:77watches
Space was left at the end of each category for
inclusion of instrumcints not specifically named in the
questionnaire. Similar space was also left at the end
of the questionnaire.
While trying to obtain the above-mentioned inf-or-
mation, great -ress was also given to developing a ques-
tionnaire that uld be brief, easy to complete, and easy
to tabulate. As mentioned in Good (1963), a questionnaire
![Page 32: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
22
must be short enough and clear enough for a respondent to
answer in a short amount of time.
Also mentioned in Good (1963) was the need to help
the respondents to see the importance of the study.
The questionnaire study should be important not
only to the investigator and to the particular field
of knowledge, but also to the respondent, whose psy-
chology of motivation involves his sympathy, interest,
cooperation and honesty in answering questions. Bet-
ter motivation for respondents is likely to prevail
if they can see the investigator's side of the problem
and procedure and can see the end-results in the form
of a concise summary of the study and possibly in the
implementation of the findings [pp. 271-272].
To stress the importance of their responses, each
district received, in the same mailing as the question-
naire, a cover letter from the Reading Center at Rutgers
University This letter emphasized the fact that the
results would be used as the basis for a presentation at
the 1971 Annual Convention of the International Reading
Association at Atlantic City, New Jersey.
Pilot Study
In order to test for clarity, completeness, and
ease of completion, a small pilot study was carried out in
three school districts. The appropriate person or persons
in each district were contacted and appointments were made
for individual interviews. During these interviews, the
Purposes of the study were given and the questionnaire was
filled out under the observation cf the experimenter. The
![Page 33: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
23
respondents were then asked to comment on the clarity of
the questionnaire. All reported that it was clear and
easy to complete.
Distribution of the Questionnaire
The Reading Instrument Usage Survey was mailed to
New Jersey's 569 active districts on January 6, 1971.
This date was chosen because it was followed by a long
period of time without a major vacation. As of February
5, 1961, 157 replies (26%) had been received.
In an attempt to increase the number of responses,
a follow-up letter was sent out during the week of Feb-
ruary 8, 1971. Because of a lack of funds, it was impos-
sible to send out a new questionnaire to the non-respon-
dents. As of February 26, the number of respondents had
increased to only 174 (30%).
To insure statistical accuracy of the findings,
2% of the 417 non-respondents were randomly chosen and
personE,1 appeals were made for the return of these ques-
tionnaires. These seven districts were sent new question-
naires and the importance of their responses was emphasized
through both letters and phone calls. These seven dis-
tricts were studied to see if their major characteristics
(size, expenditure per pupil, total number of machines,
and pupil/machine ratio) were similar to those of the 174
responding districts.
32
![Page 34: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
24
Treatment of the Data
Completed responses were grouped according to type
of organizational plan (K-8, K-12, and 7-12) and tabulated
to answer questions 4-6 in the Introduction. Information
related to questions 1-3 was computed with the use of UCLA
BioMed Computer Program BMDO3D, which produced the neces-
sary statistical output.
![Page 35: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
As already mentioned, usable responses were
received from 30% (174) of the 569 active New Jersey
public-school districts. These responses included 22%
of all K-8 districts, 38% of all K-12 districts, and 52%
of all 7-12 districts.
Mean data for size, expenditure per pupil, total
number of machines, and pupil/machine ratio are given in
Table 6. The mean number of pupils for all responding
districts was 3,044. The mean expenditure per pupil was
$713 and the mean number of machines per district was 75.
The K-12 school districts tended to be the largest and
also tended to have the greatest number of machines per
district. The 7-12 districts appeared to spend the most
money per child.
The first question posed in this paper concerned
the relationship between pupil/machine ratio and a dis-
trict's organizational plan. As shown in Table 6, the
average pupil/machine ratio has been calculated in three
ways. Two K-12 districts had pupil/machine ratios that
were so large (12,718 and 5,767) that the mean was
25
![Page 36: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
26
TABLE 6
MEAN DATA FOR STUDY CHARACTERISTICS OF 174 RESPONDINGDISTRICTS BY ORGANIZATIONAL PLAN
Allrespondingdistricts
Type of district
K-8(n 66)
K-12(n = 79)
7-12(n = 29)
Size ofdistrict
3044 1315 5111 1609
Expenditureper pupil
$713 $626 $703 $942
Total numberof machines
75 46 115 30
Pupil/machineratio
77a 52 88a 101
aMeans based on data eliminating two cases whoseextreme positions would have greatly distorted the results(12,718 and 5,767). Means including these two cases were211 for all responding districts and 384 for K-12 dis-tricts. Medians for these two categories were 45 and 49,
respectively. Medians for K-8 and 7-12 districts were 36
and 69, respectively.
![Page 37: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
27
calculated both with and without them. Both figures are
reported in Table 6. The mear pupil/machine ratth for all
districts without these two extreme cases was 77. The
median, with these two districts, was 45. It appears from
the data that K-8 districts had the lowest pupil/machine
ratio, followed by K-12 and 7-12 districts.
It was stated earlier in this paper that a small
follow-up survey was made of 2% of the non-responding dis-
tricts. A comparison of the 174 responding districts and
these 7 non-responding districts can be seen in Table 7.
While there was a substantial difference in size and total
number of machines between the two groups, they tended to
be quite similar in expenditure per pupil and pupil/machine
ratio. Because of the freat disparity in the number of
subjects in the two groups, a more exact statistical test
could not be performed. However, the appearance of the
means t:cr pupil/machine ratio, in my opinion the most
meaningful figure for this study, leads me to believe that
the 174 responding districts provided a sample that is
fairly representative of the total population.
In answeT to question 2, Table 8 shows no signif-
icant correlation between a district's expenditure per
pupil and its pupil/machine ratio.
The relationship between a district's size and its
use of machinery in the reading programs, as mentioned in
![Page 38: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
28
TABLE 7
COMPARISON OF MEAN DATA FOR STUDY CHARACTERISTICSFOR 174 RESPONDING DISTRICTS AND 7 (2%)
NON-RESPONDING DISTRICTS
Studycharacteristics
174Respondingdistricts
7 NoT,--,"
respOnding_districts
Size of district 3044 24
Expenditure perpupil
$713 $703
Total numberof machines
75 58
Pupil/machineratio
77 82
![Page 39: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
29
TABLE 8
CORRELATIONS OF STUDY CHARACTERISTICSBY ORGANIZATIONAL PLAN
Correlation
District sizeto
Total number of machines
District sizeto
Pupil/machine ratio
Expenditure per pupilto
Pupil/machine ratio
Allrespondingdistricts
Type of districtK-8 K-12 7-12
.70* .65* .67* .41**
.00a -.03 -.05a -.06
.01a -.19 -.04a -.15
*Significant at .01.
**Significant at .05.
aData do not include extreme cases, as mentioned in
Tat?ile 6.
![Page 40: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
30
the third question, was not quite as clear. As can be
seen in Table 8, there was a significant positive corre-
lation between district size and total number of machines,
Godfrey (1962) found a similar relationship between dis-
trict size and number of instruments per district for the
"older" media (record players, slide/filmstrip projectors,
16 mm projectors, and radios). She found that the number
of units for the "newer" machinery, however, remained
fairly constant regardless of district size.
When use of machinery was calculated as a pupil/
machine ratio, there appeared to be no significant corre-
lation between this figure and district size.
The fourth question in this pape.;:- is concerned
with the reading machinery used in New Jersey public
schools and their order of usage. As shown in Table 9,
89% of all responding districts used listening devices and
89% used recording devices in their reading programs, mak-
ing them the most frequently used types of irstrument.
These were followed by directional attack control devices
and group tachistoscopes.
Due to the differences in instruments surveyed,
it is difficult to make a detailed comparison between the
findings in Table 9 and the studies mentioned in Chapter
11. However, some limited remarks can be made. Among the
instruments designed specifically for reading instruction,
![Page 41: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
31
TABLE 9
RANK ORDER AND PERCENTAGE OF USE OF VARIOUSREADING INSTRUMENT CATEGORIES POR
ALL RESPONDING DISTRICTS
Rank Type of instrumentPercentage
of use
1 Listenina devices 89
1 Recording devices 89
3 Directional attack control devices 81
4 Group tachistoscopes 65
5 Stopwatches 62
6 Projectors 57
7 Accelerators 52
8 Individual tachistoscopes 40
8 Instructional television 40
![Page 42: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
32
I found the order of liage -zo be jirectional attack con-
trol devices (81%) , group tachistoscopes (65%), and accel-
erators (52%). Taylor (1962) found use of group tachisto-
scopes to exceed that of directional attack control
devices. Both surveys found the individual tachistoscope
to be the least-used reading instrument.
_le order of use of the various reading instru-
ments for all organizational plans can be found in Table
13 (Appendix A). It appears that there was a great sim-
ilarity in order of instrument usage for K-8 and K-12
districts, while 7-12 districts differed due to the higher
ranking of directional attack control devices. This appar-
ent difference in the secondary schools differs from God-
frey's (1967) findings (Table 3). She found the same
order of usage for elementary and secondary districts.
To answer question 4 further, the order of usage
for all responding districts can be found in Table 10. A
summary of this table f,'llows. Table 14 (Appendix A) con-
tains this same information for all organizational plans.
Sixty-five pE. .rit of all districts had some sort
of group tachistoscope. The EDL Tach-X was found to be
the most common instrument in this category, both in thisvl
study and in that of Taylor (1962) (Table 5). The Tach-X
was followed by the LTS Tachistoflasher, the Keystone
Flashmeter, and the Rheem Califone Perceptoratic.
41
![Page 43: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
33
TABLE 10
::ADING INSTRUMENT USAGE FOR ALL RESPONDING DISTRICTS
Name of instrument
Number ofdistricts
usinginstrument(N = 174)
Percentageof
respondentsusing
instrument
A. Tachistoscopes
1. Group
a. EDL Tach-X 93 53
b. Keystone Flashmeter 24 14
C. SVE Speedioscope 13 7
d. LTS Tachistoflasher 31 18
e. Psychotechnics 14 8
Tachistoscope
f. Rheem Califone 20 11
Perceptomatic
g. Cenco Tachistoscope 3 2
h. Tachamatic 500 1 1
Total--group tachistoscopes 113 65
2. Individual
a. AVR Eye Trainer 8 5
b. LTS Tachistoviewer 10 6
C. EDL Flash-X 45 26
d. Craig Reader 7 4
Total--individual tachistoscopes 70 40
(continued)
42
![Page 44: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
34
TABLE 10 (continued)
Name of instrument
Number ofdistricts
usinginstrument(N = 174)
Percentageof
respondentsusing
instrument
B. Directional attack control devices
1. EDL Controlled Reader
2. PDL Perceptoscope
3. Cenco
Total--directional attackcontrol devices
140
4
2
142
80
2
1
81
Accelerators
1. SRA Accelerator 74 43
2. AVR Rateometer 23 13
3. Psychtechnics 4 2
Shadowscope
4. Stereo-Optical Reading 2 1
Rate Controller
5. Keystone Accelerator 1 1
6. Literary Notes Pacer 2 1
Total--accelerators 91 52
D. Listening devices
1. Record player 143 82
2. Cassette playback unit 81 47
3. Listening station 22 13
(continued)
![Page 45: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
35
TABLE 10 (continued)
Name of instrument
Number ofdistricts
usinginstrument(N = 174)
Percentageof
respondentsusing
instrument
4. Language lab 29 17
5. Talking Page 7 4
Total--listening devices 155 89
E. Recording devices
1. Reel-to-reel taperecorder
125 72
2. Casette tapa recorder 94 54
3. Card reader 85 49
4. Dictaphone 1 1
Total--recording devices 156 89
F. Projectors
1. Motion picture projec-tors
80 45
2. Filmstrip projectors 54 31
3. Overithead projectors 41 24
4. Opaque projector 17 40
5. Slide projector 3 2
6. Super 8 projector 5 3
7. Filmstrip viewer 8 5
(continued)
![Page 46: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
36
TABLE 10 (continued)
Number ofdistricts
usinginstrument
Name of instrument (N = 174)
8. Dukane projector 4
Total--projectors 106
G. Instructional teievision 54
H. Computer-assistedinstruction
3
I. Miscellaneous
1. Cycloteacher 5
2. Autotutor 2
3. Stopwatch 108
4. Typewriter 10
5. Phonic mirror 1
6. EDL Skimmer 3
7. System 80 2
8. EDL Aud-X 9
Show-n-Tell projector 1
10. Hoffman projector 6
Percentageof
respondentsusing
instrument
2
57
31
2
3
1
62
6
1
2
1
5
1
3
45.
![Page 47: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
3 7
Individual tachistoscopes were used in 40% of the
174 districts. The most common instrument of this type
was the EDL Flash-X, a brand not included in Taylor's
study.
Directional attack control devices could be found
in 81% of the responding districts, and in this instance
one instrument, the EDL Controlled Reader, commanded
almost the entire market. Reading accelerators were used
by 52% of all districts. The SRA Accelerator was followed
by thc AVR Rateometer as the most commonly used acceler-
ator. Taylor also found the EDL Controlled Reader and the
SRA Accelerator to lead in each of these two categories.
The most common instruments, listening and record-
ing devices, could be found in 89% of the responding dis-
tricts. The record player was the most common listening
device, followed by the cassette playback unit. Both God-
frey (1967) and Finn, Perrin, and Campion (1962) also
found the record player to be the most extensively used
instrument. The cassette playback unit and the cassette
recorder were not included in either of their studies
because of their rather recent appearance.
Reel-to-reel tape recorders were found to be the
Most common recording devices, followed by cassette tape
recorders and card readers.
Finally, 57% of all responding districts used some
![Page 48: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
38
type of projector in reading instruction; 31% used instruc-
tional television; and only three districts used computer-
assisted instruction.
In relation to question 4, a comparison has also
been made concerning instrument usage in the 174 respond-
ing and 7 non-responding districts (Table 11). Even with
the great difference in the number of subjects, it is
interesting to note that the percentages of use for lis-
tening devices, recording devices, and group and individ-
ual tachistoscopes were very similar. This similarity in
usage between the two groups was not seen for directional
attack control devices, accelerators, projectors, and
instructional television. Because of the small number of
subjects in the group of non-respondents, the addition of
only one instrument made 1 huge difference in the percen-
tage of use.
Question 5 asks for a breakdown of the reading
skills for which the various instruments are used. This
infozmation can be found in Table 16 (Appendix A). In
order to allow the dis ricts to give all possible uses for
the instruments, this item wa left unstructured. However,
because of this and because many of the respondents may
not have been familiar with the teaching of specific read-
ing skills, some of the skills mentioned did not seem to
fit the corresponding instrument. For example, many of
![Page 49: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
39
TABLE 11
COMPARISON OF THE USE OF READING INSTRUMENTS FOR174 RESPONDENTS AND 7 NON-RESPONDENTS
Name ofinstrument
Responding dis-tricts usinginstrument
Non-respondingdistricts using
instrument
Number Percent Number Percent
Grouptachistoscopes
113 65 4 57
Individualtachistoscopes
70 40 3 43
Directional attackcontrol devices
142 81 3 43
Accelerators 91 52 2 29
Listening devices 155 89 6 86
Recording devices 156 89 6 86
Projectors 106 57 2 29
Instructionaltelevision
54 31 1 14
Computer-assistedinstruction
3 2^
![Page 50: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
40
the districts mentioned that they used the group tachisto-
scope for comprehension. Since this machine is designed
mainly to present only words or short phrases for
extremely brief exposures, its extensive use for com-
prehension is rather dubious. It should be noted, how--
eve- , that some tachistoscopic materials do contain some
basic comprehension drills.
The last question refers to the difference the
use of reading instruments for developmental and remedial
reading programs. This question is answered in Table 12.
For group and individual tachistoscopes, use in remedial
reading only greatly exceeded use in developmental reading
only, while the opposite was true for instructional tele-
vision and projectors. Use in remedial or developmental
programs only was about the same for directional attack
control devices. For all categories except individual
tachistoscopes, use for both remedial and developmental
reading far exceeded use for either program alone. For
a breakdowl. of the specific grade levels at which these
instruments were used, see Table 15 (Appendix A).
Frequency of use of the various instruments is
reported in Table 17 (Appendix A) . As uan be seen, use
for the more commonly owned instruments was usually either
moderate or great.
The preceding tables and those in the
![Page 51: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
41
TABLE 12
USE OF MAJOR INSTRUMENT CATEGORIES IN DEVELOPMENTALAND REMEDIAL READING PROGRAMS
Type ofinstrument
Percent of respondents using for
Developmental Remedialreading readingonly only
Group tachistoscopes
Individualtachistoscopes
Directional attackcontrol devices
9 25 67a
9 46 46
19 20 58b
Accelerators 29 30 37
Listening devices 16 17 62
Recording devices 11 15 71
Projectors 35 7 48
Instructional 54 9 25
television
Computer-assisted 100
instruction
aThe numbers in some rows may add up to greater than100% because all percentages were rounded off to the near-
est whole number.
bThe numbers in some rows may ad up to less than100% because some districts did not provide the necessaryinformation.
![Page 52: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
42
show clearly the great diversity of use for the various
instrunents. They differed in number, in skills taught,
and in use in remedial and developmental programs. How-
ever, even witn this great diversity, it has become obvi-
ous to me that they do play a large part in the reading
rograms of New Jersey public schools.
![Page 53: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
CHAPTER V'
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary
In an attempt to determine various factors in
reading instrument usage in New Jersey public schools, a
questionnaire was sent to the state's 569 active districts.
Usable replies were received :from 174 (30%) of the state's
public-school districts. Two percent of the non-respon-
dents were also surveyed so that a comparison between the
responding and the non-responding districts could be made.
The K-8 districts tended to have the most favor-
able pupil/machine ratio, followed by X-12 and 7-12 dis-
tricts. Mere was found to be no -.A.gnificant correlation
between pupil/machine ratio and expenditure par pupil. A
significant correlation did exist between district size
and total number of machines used, as could be expected,
but there was no relationship between district size and
pupil/machine ratio.
In comparing the 174 resnonding districts with the
7 non-responding districts, great similarities were seen
in expenditure per pupil and pupii/machine ratio. How-
ever, thi5 was not true of size and total number of
43
![Page 54: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
44
m&Achines.
It was found that the most widely used types of
instrument were listening and recording devices. These
were followed by directional Ettack control devices and
group tachistoscopes.
Finally, it was found that machinery was used by
the va7-ious districts to teach a wide range of reading
skills in both remedial and developmental p--grams.
Conclusions
Organizational plans. It appears from the data
that a district's pupil/machine ratio depended, in part,
on its organizational plan, wi h K-8 districts having
relatively more machines per pupil, followed by K-12 and
7-12 districts.
Size. It was found that there was a significant
positive correlation between the size of a school dis-
trict and its total number of reading instruments. There
was, however, no correlation between the size of a dis-
trict and its pupil/machine ratio.
From this information, it would seem that larger
districts were buying enough extra eciaipment to keep them
on a par with tiLe smaller districts, but not enough extra
to provide more reading machinery per child.
Expenditure per pupil. There was found to pe no
correlation between a district's expenditure per pupil and
RJA4
![Page 55: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
45
its pupil/machine ratio.
This leads to the conclusion that districts with
more available money to spend were not using it to provide
more equipment to be used in the teaching of reading.
Order of use of various instruments. The two most
popular categories seem to be recording devices and lis-
tening deN7ices. I feel that their great use can be
attributed to a number of factors. They are easy to
operate and can be used by teachers or pupils in individ-
ual or group situations. They also have many educational
uses outside of the reading program which would ensure
their presence in almost all schools. This ready avail-
ability can, in many ways, explain their intensive use.
DirecLional attack control devices and group
tachistoscopes were the most commonly used instruments
specifically intended to teach reading. Their extensive
use may be due to the fact that they fit in so well wit
the group teaching methods of most classroom teachers.
Besides order of use of the various categories,
a few words shovld be said about order cJf use within
categories. In the first three reading instrument cate-
gories, group tachistoscopes, individual tachistoscopes,
and directional attack control devices, products by tne
Educational Development Laboratories (EDL) scem to domi-
nate the market. There are a number of possible reasons
![Page 56: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
4 6
for this domination, and it would be ±ntestiig to find
out exactly what is causing it.
Reading skills taught. It appeazs that the public
schools use reading instruments to teach a number of
diverse reading skills. Those most commonly mentioned
were comprehension, phonics, word recognition, speed, vis-
ual training, listening, and oral reading. The extensive
use of this equipment in the teaching of reading seems to
contradict the fact that many research studies have con-
cluded that they are not particularly effective in the
teaching of reading. This leads me to believe that the
schools are either unaware of the existing research or
that they feel that it does not pertain to their partic-
ular situations.
Use in remedial and developmental reading. It
appears that most of the districts using machinery to
teach reading employed it in both developmental and reme-
dial programs.
Need for Further Research
1. It is impossible to tell from the data which
madrinery is being purchased solely for the teaching of
reading and which machinery is being Purchased for a num-
ber of other educational purposes.
2. Although it is apparent that reading instru-
ments are being used to teach a nunber of reading skills,
![Page 57: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
47
we do not know if the reading personnel in the various
districts are satisfied with their effeci:iveness.
3. It is apparent that one company dominates over
many others in the distribution of reading eq_ipment. It
would be interesting to discover the reasons for thi.3 dom-
ination.
4. It is suggested that any additional surveys in
this area uuilize the individual school rather than the
district as the basic unit of research. This should
generate a higher level of response due to the elimina-
tion of a non-productive element in the information flow.
By taking random samples from the pnpulations of elemen-
tary and secondary districts, the experimenter will also
be able to make more accurate comparisons between these
two levels of education.
![Page 58: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
REFERENCES
Atkinson, R. C., & Hansen, D. N. Computer-assistedinstruction in initial reading: The Stanford project.Reading Research Quarterly, 1966, 2 (1), 5-27.
Finn, J. D., Perrin, D. G., & Campion, E. Studies in the
growth of instructional technology. I. Audiovisualinstrumentation for instruction in the public schools,1930-1960. Washington, D,C.: National Education Asso-ciation of the United States, 1962.
Godfrey, E. P. The state of audio-visual technology:
1961-1966. Washington, D.C.: Department pf Audio-
Visual Instruction, Nat:.onal Education Associationof the United States, 1967.
Good, C. V. Introduction to educational research. New
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1963. PD. 243-340.
Miller, L. L. Current use of workbooks and mechanical
aids. In 0. Causey & W. Eller (Eds.), Starting andimproving college reading programs. Yearbook of theNational Readina Conference, 1959, 8, 67-75.
State of New Jersey. Financial statistics of school dis-
tricts. 18th Annual Report of the Commissioner ofEducation, Department of Education, Division of Busi-
ness and Finance, 1970.
Taylor, S. E. Reading instrument usage. The ReadingTeacher, 1962, 15 (8), 449-454.
48
![Page 59: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
APPENDIX A
ADDITIONAL DATA FOR RESPONDING DISTRICTS
![Page 60: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
50
TABLE 13
RANK ORDER AND PERCENTAGE OF USE OF VARIOUSREADING INSTRUMENT CATEGORIES FOR
ALL ORGANIZATIONAL PLANS
Rankorder
Reading instrumentcategory
Percentof use
All Responding Districts
1
1
Listening devices
Recording devices
Directional attack control devices
89
89
81
4 Group tachistoscopes 65
5 Projectors 57
6 Accelerators 52
7 Individual tachistoscopes 40
7 Instructional television 40
Respondin E-8 Districts
1 Recording devices 100
2 Listening devices 95
3 Directional attack control devices 85
Group tachistoscopes 67
5 Projectors 57
6 Accelerators 39
7 Individual tachistoscopes 36
Instructional television 21
(continued)
![Page 61: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
51
TABLE 13 (continued)
Rankorder
Reading instrumentcategory
Percentof use
1
2
Res onding K-12 Districts
96
88
Listening devices
Reco ding device
2 Directional attack control devices 8
4 Gr up tachistoscopes 75
5 Projectors 68
6 Accelerators 61
7 Instructional television 47
8 Individual tachistoscopes 45
Responding 7-12 Districts
1 Directional attack control devices 76
2 Listening devices 72
Recording devices 69
4 Group tachistoscopes 69
5 Accelerators 69
6 Projectors 38
7 Individual tachistose pes 34
Instructional television 14
80
![Page 62: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
TABLE 14
READING INSTRUMENT USAGE. BY
PLAN
Name of instrument
Responding districts using
instrument
Total
K-8
K-12
7-12
(n = 174)
(n = 66)
(n = 79)
(n = 29)
Num- Per-
Num- Per-
Num- Per-
Num- Per-
ber
cent
ber
cent
ber
cent
ber
cent
A. Tachistoscopes,
1. Group
a. EDL Tach-X
93
53
28
41
49
64
16
55
h. Keystone Flashmeter
24
14
913
10
13
517
C. SVE Speedioscope
13
76
97
9
d, Learning-through-See-
ing Tachistoflasher
e. Psychotechnics
31 14
18 8
9 3
13 4
21 8
27 10
1 310
Tachistoscope
f. Rheem Cal1fone Per-
ceptomatic
g. Cenco Tachistoscope,
20 3
11 2
710
13 3
18
(continued)
![Page 63: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
TABLE 14 (continued)
Responding districts using. instrument
Name of instrument
Total
(n. = 174)
K-8
.
(n = 66)
K-12.
(n = 79)
7-12
(n. = 29)
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
her
cent
Num- Per-
her
cent
Num-, Per-
her
cent
h. Tachamatic 500
Total--group tachistoscopes
1
113
1
65
44
67
59
75
1
20
69
2. Individual
a. AVR Eye Trainer
85
23
68
b, Learning-through-See-
ing Tachistoviewer
c. EDL Flash-X
10
45
6
26
2
24
3
35
8
32
10
42
11
38
c. Craig Reader
74
46
34
Total--individual tachisto-
scopes,
70
40
24
36
36
45
Li
3,4
B. Directional attack control devices
1. EDL Controlled. Reader
140
80
55
81
64
83
21
72
(continued)
![Page 64: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
dr)
TABLE 14 (continued)
Responding districts using instrument
Name of instrument
Total
(n = 1.74)
(nK-8
....,66)
K-12
n = 79)
7-12
(n = 29)
NUm- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
her
cent
Num- Per-
ber
cent
2. PDL Perceptoscope
3. Cenco
Total--directional attack
control devices
4 2
142
2 1
81
1
56
2
85
2
64
4 3
88
22
76
C. Accelerators
1. SRA Accelerator
74
43
17
25.
39
51
18
62
2. AVR Rateometer
23
13
913
lf)
13
414
Psychotechnics Shadow-.
scope,
4. Stereo-Optical Reading
42 1
3 1
4 21
1
1
Rate Controller
5. Keystone Accelerator
11
1
(continued)
![Page 65: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
TABLE 14 (continued)
Responding districts using instrument
Name of instrument
Total
(n = 174)
K-8
(11 = 66)
K-12
(n = 79)
7-12
(n = 29)
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
her
cent
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
ber
cent
6. Literary N tes Pacer
21
21
1
Total--acceleratoxs
91
52
26
39
45
61
20
69
D. Listening. devices
1. Record. player
143
82
58
85
65
84
20
69
2. Cassette playback. unit
81
47
34
50
39
51
828
3. Listening station
22
13
10
15
11
14
1
4. Language lab
29
17
12
18
15
19
27
5. Talking Page
74
46
34
Total--listening devices
155
89
63
95
71.
96
21
72
(continued)
![Page 66: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
TABLE 14 (continued)
Name, of instrument
Responding districts using instrurent
Total
K-8
E.-12
7-12
(n = 174)
(n, = 66)
(n = 79)
(n = 29)
Num- Per-
Num- Per-
Num- Per-
Num- Per-
ber
cent
ber
cent
her
cent
ber
cent
E. Recording devices
1. Reel-to-reel tape
recorder
125
72
48
71
61
79
16
55
2. Cassette tape recorder
94
54
39
57
48
62
724
.Card readers
85
49
33
49
46
60
621
4. Dictaphone
11
11
Total--recording devices
156
89
66
100
70
88
20
69
F. Projectors
1. Motion picture pro-
jectors
80
45
33
49
41
53
621
2. Filmstrip projectors
54
31
19
28
31
40.
414
3. Overhead projector
41
24
14
21
23
30.
414
(continued)
![Page 67: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
TABLE 14 (continued)
Responding districts using instrument
Name of instrument
Total.
(a = 174)
K-8
(n. = 66)
X-12
(n = 79)
7-12
(n = 29)
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Per-
ber
cent
Num- Fer-
ber
cent
4. Opaque projector
17
40
69
10
13
5. Slide projector
21
22
6. Super 8 projector
53
12
45
7. Filmstrip, viewer
85
23
6
8. Dukane projector
42
21
1.
Total--projectors
106
57
41
62
54
68
11
38
G. Instructional television
54
31
14
21
36
47
414
H. Computer-assisted
instruction
24
I. Miscellaneous
1. Cycloteacher
52
32
(continued)
![Page 68: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
TABLE 14 (continued)
Responding districts using instrument
Name of instrument
Total
(n. = 1.74)
K-8
(n, = 66)
(n. =
79)
7-12
(n = 29)
Num.- Per-
ber
cent
Num.- Per-
her
cent
Num- Per-
her
cent
Num.- Per-
her
cent
2. Autotutor
21
11
1
3. Stopwatch
108
62
38
56
49
64
21
72
4. Typewriter (used to
teach reading)
10
64
79
5. Phonic mirror
11
11
6. EDL Skimmer
23
4
7. System 80
21
23
EDL Aud-X.
95
12
45
517
9. Show-n-Tell Projector
11
11
10. Hoffman, Projector
63
5
![Page 69: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
TABLE 15
USE OF READING INSTRUMENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL AND REMEDIAL READING. PROGRAMS
No, of
dis-
tricts
using
instmt
Percent
using for
Devi Rmdl
rdg
rdg
only only Botil
Developmental %
Grades
10-
K73 4-6 7-9 12
Remedial %
Grades
10
K-3 4-6 7-9 12
A. Tachistoscopes
1. Group
a. EDL Tach-X
b. Keystone Flash-
meter
c. SVE Speedio-
scope
d. LTS Tachisto-
flasher
e. Psychotechnics
Tachistoscope
f. Rheem Califone
Perceptamatic
93
13
18
63
24
21
42
38
13
838
21
29
15
25
31
14 20
38 48
50
40
29
39
46
18
13
53
36
29
tri
417
33
29
25
46
33
21
15
46
23
831
38
31
8
32
35
632
48
13
14
21
36
36
7
15
35
15 ---
40
43
21
5
(continued)
![Page 70: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
TABLE 15 (continued)
No. of
Percent
dis-
using
tricts
Devl Rmdl
using
rdg
rdg
instmt
only only Both
g. Cenco
Tachisto-
367
33
33
scope
h. Tachomatic 500
1100
2. Individual
a. AVR Eye Trainer
863
---
b. LTS Tachisto-
10
20
60
30
viewer
c. EDL Flash-X
45
13
40
44
d. Craig Reader
735
20
45
B. Directional attack control devices
1. EDL Controlled
140
18
19
59
Reader
Developmental %
Remedial %
Grades
Grades
K-3
4-6
7-9
10-
12
K-3 4-6
7-9
10-
12
67
33
33
67
---
100
---
100
---
50
58
25
---
20
30
30
---
50
60
60
10
31
44
49
33
64
82
80
31
14
14
29
29
29
14
43
29
31
43
27
13
40
31
51
29
(continued)
![Page 71: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
CD
TABLE 15
(continued)
No. of
dis-
tricts
using
instmt
Percent
using. for
Developnental %
Remedial %
Grades
Grades
Devi Rmdl
rdg
rdg
only only Both
K-
4-6
7-9
10-
12
K-3
4-6
7-9
10-
12
PDL Pexceptosoope
425
50
25
25
25
50
25
1
Cenco
250
550
50
50
100
C. Accelerators
1, SRA Accelerator
74
31
24
26
11
15
38
47
16
36
42
30
2. AVR Rateometer
23
39
30
22
---
13
39
26
17
26
21
7
Psychotechnics
425
50
---
25
25
25
50
25
25
Shadowscope
4. Stereo-Optical
250
50
50
50
50
100
Reading Rate
Controller
5. Keystone Accel-
erator
1-
6. Literary Nbtes
2---
100
50
50
50
---
50
50
50
50
Pacer
(continued)
![Page 72: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
TAELE 15 (continued)
No. of
dis-
tricts
using
instmt.
Percent
using for
Developmental. %
Remedial %
Grades
Grades
Devi
rdg
only
Rmdl
rdg
only
Both,
K-3 4-6
7-9
10-
12
K-3
4-6
7-9
10-
12
D.
Listening devices
1. Record player.
143
21
15
63
73
69
55
26
57
63
48
11
2. Casette playback.
unit
81
20
21
52
64
54
41
10
57
49
32
5
3. Listening station.
22
18
45
73
55
23
555
45
27
14
4. Language, lab
29
38
24
34
45
55
21
17
41
45
45
7
5. Talking Page,
743
43
14
57
29
29.
14
71
43
14
E.
Recording devices
1. Reel-to-reel tape
recorder
125
19
12
62
45
57
47
29
51
55
45
14
2. Cassette tape
recorder
94
21
17
59
59
30
38
15
53
57
39
11
(continued)
![Page 73: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
F.
TABLE 15 (continued)
No. of
dis-
tricts
using
instmt
Percent
using for
Developmental %
Remedial %
Devl
rdg
only
Rmdl
rdg
only
Both
Grades,
Grades
K-3 4-6
7-9
10-
12
R-3
4-6
7-9
10-
12
Card Reader.
85
13
34
42
54
44
24
12
46
52
19
14
4. Dictaphone
1_
Proiectors
1. Motion picture
projectors
80
54
634
76
71
55
14
28
26
19
13
?. Filmstrip pro-
jectors
e4
10
....,
20
43
63
56
15
50
30
28
11
.Overhead, pro-
jectors
41
41
15
41
76
68
27
549
54
24
15
4. Opaque, projectors
17
41
635
29
35
18
624
24
12
6
5. Slide projectors.
67
33.
100
100
33
---
33
33.
33
---
6. Super 8 pro-
jectors
520
20
20.
20
60
---
60
40
---
(continued)
![Page 74: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
TABLE 15 (continued)
No. of
dis-
Percent
using for
Developmental %
Remedial
%
Devi
Rmdl
Grades
Grades
tricts
using
rdg
rdg
10-
10-
instmt
only
only Both.
K-3 4-6
7-9
12
K-3
4-6
7-9
12
7. Filmstrip viewer
25
50
38
38
13
13
38
38
38
---
.Dukane projector
425
50
75
75
25
75
75
---
G. Instructional
television
54
52
930
74
69
19
24
20
17
4
.44
t,,To
H. Computer-assisted
instructor
100
---
67
67
---
I. Miscellaneous
1. Cycloteacher
580
---
20
40
60
20
---
2. Autotutor
50
50
50
---
50
50
---
3. Stopwatch
108
12
28
44
24
31
19
16
39
52
43
25
4Typewriter.
10
20
30
230
20
---
30
30
--
(continued)
![Page 75: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
TABLE 15 (continued)
No. of
Percent,
using for
Developmental %
Remedial %
tricts
Devl Rmdl
using
rdg
rdg
instmt
only only. Both
K-3 4-6 7-9 12
K-3 4-6 7-9 12
Grades
Grades
10-
10-
5. Phonic mirror
6. EDL Skimmer
7. System 80
8. EDL Aud-X
9. Show-n-Tell Pro-
jector
10. Hoffman projector
1---
11010
100, 100
-
67
---
67 100
250
50 ---
50 ---
956
33
22
11
22
11
1100
---
100
617
33
56
56
44
---
17
17
17
17
67
33
Note: The percentages across the rows may add up to greater than
100% because .
many districts use, the
instruments at a number of grade levels, and the, percentages
across the rows may add up to less than 100%
because some districts did not provide
the necessary. information.
![Page 76: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
TABLE 1.6
READING SKILLS TAUGHT BY VARIOUS INSTRUMENTS
A.
Name of instrument
111 ea -irl
tn
...,-
1-1
-1
144
til 0
00 0
P ul
00
4.k.
4 ri
-ai
0 1,
.! 0
Z4-
1 -H
I
0 0 VI g 0 .. 111)
$-1
(34 E 0 0
t a 0 -r1 0 0 ,.:0 al
0 H -rt, 0 Olt
115
0)-
I U
0 a) k
rt::5 0 lo Q.
cil
,0
H H
113
00
-rt
0.,
fus
-,-1
P>
V
>1
s-u 0
0 H
I4-
1, 0
-,-,
1-.
--1
ro al
0 P
4 JP
01
-.-1 0 0 43 '
nil
A 4
>1
$,1 H 0 Q al u 0 >
Tachistoscope
tn
0r0
4- 1
(11:
101
(13
0
-,-1
H4-
1
.4-.
)ra
u)0
171
o0
Et
1. Group,
a. EDL, Tach-X.
93
41
28
17
60
29
9
b. Keystone Flash-
meter
c. SVE, Speedioscope
24 13
29 38
17 8
21
15
91
54
46 ---
31 ---
4
15
d. Learning-through-
31
35
45
29
48
13
6
Seeing Tachisto-
flasher
e. Psychotechnics
14
36
36
29
50
43 ---
---
---
---
---
1
(continued)
![Page 77: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
TABLE 16
(continued)
t m .d tn
7.3
0 otr
i,
'11
44'E
no
>i.
41)
'CI
00
-,-1
1
4-1
En
gg
-HI
171
$--1
10
00
qi0
mm
4)tr
i>
1 to
ilZ
rd0
0W
E-H
lui
R4.
U)
H0
P 0
,H
m c
tID
) al
40'
007
1
P 'a
rl 0
0U
0H
-A
0 -H
Ig
..-11
$.4
Id 0
ulP
00
4j P
PH
tnr0
rd. 0
44 0
0-Q
4 tIl
l0
H>
0 43
041
0'0
00
0 ...
d-.
4 H
.4)
fi'd
0 .,1
40
at-,
1H
4)E
04
00
011
It1r
dIt
En
00.
1 0
0 >
.4-,
Ird
im
04
0 W
al-r
i P0
4H
0X
ul
MI
a)0
P0
Name ot instrument.
Z 4
-) -
dr,
..,)
C14
,P
CD
> 4
)F
:14
4)1-
1>
41rg
,$4
It
0ID
f. Rheem Califone
Perceptamatic
g. Cenco Tachisto-
scope
h. Tachomatio 500
Individual
a. AVR Eye Trainer.
b. Learning-through-
Seeing. Tachisto-
viewer
c. EDL Flash-X
d. Craig Reader
20
---
20
15
35
30
---
10
333
---
67
33 ---
1 838
25
13
50
38
---
10
50
70
15
1.
45
22
51
53
76
31
--- ---
24 ---
2
714
---
---
14
57
14 ---
14 ---
14
---
14 ---
(continued)
![Page 78: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
TABLE 16
(continued)
i m0 0
tpr0
4 -.1-
111
4
-.1 01
4 0>
t.0
TT
43 0.-
-1 0.,.
4 -d14
k11
Er)
. 00
-dC
r)P
0 0
00
1-0
0 0
00
4-3.
tn>
4 17
CiL
-,-I
!ki
E4
01-1
4Z
'-i...
d.H
0 0
tri,
ail
4)0
tril
14 E
D '0
0rj
0H
-,1
-11
0 -d
i0i
0-1
-11.
1-1
rld
00
.4-3
PI3)
.H
01rr
iiti
04-
3!E
l11
14
$) I
T.0
H'1
.11
0 43
040
rd 0
W0
H.
H -
..,-I
43rC
r0
g'tr
i. 0
HH
.4-)
0P
00
Erl
MI!
rd 4
1M
IU
.R
I U
>4
0m
,14
.:0
40
0'0
41',1
.$4
$-oi
"r41
0X
rd
11 0
0$4
0Name of instrunent
'Z ..
.P H
I()
1 2
4Z
$4
0 1
> 4
3: r
t4j
i4
>P.
44.
'0Z
0E
l.
B. Directional attack control devices
1. EDL Controlled
140
85
16
771
15 ---
Reader
2, PDL Perceptoscope
475
25
25
25
100 ---
75 ---
3. Cenco,
250 ---
50
7--
C. Accelerators,
1. SRA Accelerator
74
54
85
66
2. AVR Rateometer
23
39
44
87
3.Psychotechnics,
425
50
---
75
Shadowscope.
(continued)
![Page 79: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
D.
TABLE, 16
(continued)
Name of instrument
bir0
g: .ri 4
44 0
1 g
0 0'
la)
$4 C
A g
04.
-I
CL
)-1
4'
-r1
01mg
Z 4
41' "
ri
0 -HI
LO g 0 4 all H al :','
0 C-)
VI 0 -,I Z 0
.. au
g 0 -01 4) -11 01 tt)
V 0
$4 0
0 a) 1-1
V 0 0 0..
03
tri 0
1-1
-.1
RI
:Z0
-.-1
En!
01-r
i$i
> -
I-3
';`.-
-tr
l g0
,r1
4-1'
Z-.
-I -
vi'V
43 $.4
fz4
-14'
01 0 -Iri 0 0 .4-) .0)
1ri
14
>1
1-1 fl H 0 .1
:1 r4 0 0 >
a)ro
U Z
Z 0
(1)
0-.
-I P tY
10
g0.
1 U
X I
ndfi
ll ..Q
0)4) 10
1 gi
rI3
00
Htn
a) >
RI
W1-
1, V
-Id
0Il
i
-14'
a.)
01
>-.
.qH
IH
44
r6ta
l
0$.
40
Z0
Ell
4. Stereo-Optical Read-
ing Rate, Controller
250
---
---
100
50
---
5. Keystone Accelerator
1100
---
100
100
---
_
6. Literary Notes Pacer
250
---
---
100
---
Listening devices
1. Record player
143
52
52
57
---
436
13
1
2. Cassette playback
unit
81
49
49
21
15
42
42
.Listening station
22
36
45
23
---
4. Language lab
29
34
45
77
37
7
5. Talking Page
743
43
14
14
29
43
---
(continued)
![Page 80: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
TABLE 16 (continued)
II LI)
g-,
1 C
D0
01
V g
-,1
g4
g-d
.4-3
DI
0>
I0
II:5
-1-1
Lk
to g
91C
)-1
)-)
0 0
00
'CI
0 0
00
4-3
0 >
1 tr
)Z
alg
'00
-1-4
H0
0tri ia,
.44
wuli
H cull
00
H .4
-10
-1-1
gg
-IA
HIl
l 0fr
3H
g0
4 A
H-1
101
V11
1$ g
4 g
cul
414
01
0 H
H4
0 4
04g
V 0
0g
-,1
-,-1
-ri
43itt
CD
' .,s
4'C
Da)
-.4
H4
-,-I
tn0
H0
CD
WM
Val
co0
at
0 g
>4-
)al
tn
04
0 0
04,
9-1
$.4
0,$1
-,-1
0X
rI3
0 0
0H
CD
Name of instrument
Z-I
J-I
d0
al
H(l)
1> 4
41 4
4>
17.1
1-c)
i4 rd
0El
E. Recording devices
I. Reel-to-reel tape
recorder
125
50
30
28
729
42
22
18
2. Cassette tape
recorder
94
55
40
---
4 ---
14
16
51
23
16 ---
.Card readers.
85
33
52
40
41
41
61
61
4. Dictaphone
F.
Projectors
1. Motion picture
projectors
80
39
---
13
11
13
54
5
2. Filmstrip pro-
jectors
54
70
52
94
(continued.)
![Page 81: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
TABLE 16 (continued)
II 01g
-rl b
io
tp,
rro z
-,1
043
0-,
-441
'M
.0
>1
0,71
44 M
O0.
-d01
00
0r0
00
043
tril
>i, en
r0g
0 5
-,1
Ind
4to
-d
Z-,
H1
H0
01:
11a,
4i0
1:13
1 4
En
00
Z,
r-4
-,-1
0 -d
0-1
11
. 4I
U O
M16
-1g
all
43$-
1$4
,1,1
en
195
Ai
4g
o,Q,
Ipi
-4
>-d
10-I
jat
0r0
0W
0 -,
1-,
r1 -
,14-
3M
0'.1
:F1
0-i
d,-
-.1
4-)
-HI
VI
0H
. 00
M c
ar0
0C
O0
al 0
Z >
-P(
a,4/
)
04
0 al
04-d
$-1
-d0
X: 0
M 0
0$q
(1)
Name, of instrument,
.Z
4P -
d0
P.'.
$1E
n>
-1-
3,r4
43
1-1
>la
LC
I4i
r0
Z0
EA
.Overhead projectors
41
49
59
5---
10
25
15
52
4. Opaque.. projectors
17
18
12
---
---
12
6
51
Slide projectors
333
33
33
33
33
---
33
6, Super 8 projector
20
---
7. Filmstrip. projector
50
25
---
13
---
Dukane projector
475
25
25
G. Instructional tele-
vision
54
39
11
220
2
H. Computer-assisted
instruction
(continued)
![Page 82: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
000
TABLE 16 (continued)
U -d g 0 4 Ai
o -H -P -ri 0
RI
01-
1 0
0 0 P
rd al (i) all
M
1:71 g
H -
Hni
g -dcn
i(I
S
'HI
$4
> 4
>I
171
P g
0 -H
4 g
-H -
Hrd
ni
4 4
0 -H Z 0 4 to -H 14
>... P IV H g -C
I ni U 0 >
WTI
0 g
Z a)
0.H
N P 0
0 g
Di C
.)X
ni
ri ..
Q
00 0
,,
cd 0
g H
0 0,
g >
ni 0
4 rt
.;
0 -H 4 ni > -H 4 0 Z
0 rd al fa) P H ni P 0
171 g -HI 4 co 0 El
1 mg
-IA
to0 to
14-1Eagg
0 g
o)(I
1)
Pm
m5
4 0a)
4 PI
PI0
-14
104
-H M
5P
Z0
Name of instrument
Z 4
.r1
o
I. Miscellaneous:
1.
Cycloteacher
520
---
20
2,
Autotutor
2
3.
Stopwatch.
108
15
38
- -
-2 ---
50
4.
Typewriter
10
10
---
10
---
20
10
10
---
10 ---
5.
Phonic mirror
1---
100
100
---
6.
EDL Skimmer
---
100
7.
System 80
2100
100
50
---
8.
EDL Aud-X
956
---
11
11 -
--
(continued)
![Page 83: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
TABLE 16 (continued)
Name of instrument
1 mZ
-r-1
1:71
o
0L
a
4tr, 0
-IA
44
>1
(1)
ra.
144
U)g
0-H
Cn
H0
0(1
)0
ra
0 0
01)
all
4-3
CPI
>1
CD
0ai
0 0
(1)
Hil3
r0-H
0'P
0.H
HQ
) 0
tn la
iP
a)01
gU
l
0)a
0H
-H
0 9-
I0
0-H
illi 0
id
CD
4-1
PP
ritI
nrC
i11
3 0
P 0
(1)
,Q$-
1en
0 H
>-H
0 P
ii'a
0wi
0 .H
-H .1
44-
)rC
iC
D M
01' 0
. HH
PH
an
00
in)
tocd
rcS
cti
an0
cii 0
44M
m
k g
0.0
OW
al-H
H0
$.-1
d0
XC
I11
0.1
0H
a)
Z 4
HU
PiE
a>
4 4
4i-
i>
TA
..C
11-
1 it
Z0
PI
9, Show-n-Tell Pro-.
1
jector
10. Hoffman projector
617 ---
100 ---
-.
100 ---
Note: The percentages across
the, rows may add up to greater
than. 100% because
many districts use
the, same instrument to
teach a number of skills.
![Page 84: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
74
TABLE 17
FREQUENCY OF USE OF READING INSTRUMENTS
Name of instrument
Percent
Number Lit- Moder-used tlea ateb Greatc
A. Tachistoscopes
1. Group
a. EDL Tach-X 93 10 30 62
b. Keystone Flash-meter
c. SVE Speedioscope
24
13
8
8
46
38
42
54
d. Learning-through- 31 13 39 4.5
Seeing Tachisto-flasher
e. Psychotechnics 14 50 29
Tachistoscope
f. Rheem Califone 20 5 30 60
Perceptomatic
g- Cenco Tachisto-scope
h. Tachomatic 500 1 100
Individual
a. AVR Eye Trainer 8 50 38
b. Learning-through- 10 10 40 20
Seeing Tachisto-viewer
c. EDL Flash-X 45 7 58 78
d. Craig Reader 7 14 43
(continued
![Page 85: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
75
TABLE 17 (continued)
Name of instrument
B. Directional attack control
1. BDL ControlledReader
2. PDL Pere ptoscope
3. Cenco
C. Accelerators
1. SRA Accelerator
2. AVR Rateomete-7
3, PsychotechnicsShadowscope
4. Stereo-Optical Read-ing Rate Controller
5. Keystone Accelerator
6. Literary Notes Pacer
D. Listening devices
1. Record player
2. Cassette playbackunit
3. Listening station
4. Language lab
5. Talking Page
Percent
Numberused
Lit- Moder-tlea ateb Greatc
devices
140 5 19 71
4 25 75
50 50
74 18 41 36
23 26 43 26
4 25 75
2 50
1 100
2 50
2 18 79
23 69
22 9 68
29 28 69
7 14 71
(continued)
![Page 86: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
76
TABLE 17 (continued)
Name of instrument
Percent
Number Lit- Moder-used tlea ateb Greatc
E. Recording devices
1. Reel-to-reel taperecorders
125 5 26 63
2. Cassette taperecorder
94 3 21 64
3. Card readers 85 __. 28 62
4. Dictaphone 1 --
F. Projectors
1. Motion picture pro-jector
80 6 19 66
2. Filmstrip projector 54 6 11 78
3. Overhead projector 41 12 24 63
4 Opaque projector 17 18 12 59
5. Slide projector 100
6. Super 8 projector 60 20
7. Filmstrip viewer 8 -- 13 63
Dukane projector 4 -- -- 100
9. EDL Aud-X 9 -- -- 100
10. Show-n-Tell Pro-jector
1 100
1 Hoffman projector 67
(continued)
![Page 87: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
77
TABLE 17 (continued)
Name of inst u entNumberused
Percent
Lit- Moder-tlea ateb Greatc
G. Instructional tele-vision
54 13 35 44
H. Computer-assis edinstruction
33 33
I. Miscellaneous
1. Cycloteacher 5 40
2. Autotutor 2 50
3. Stopwatch 108 8 25 55
4. Typewriter 10 -- 20 70
5. Phonic mirror 1 100
6. EDL Skimmer 3 33 33 33
7. System 80 2 -- 100
EDL Aud-X 9 -- -_ 100
9. Show-n-Tell Pro-jector
1 100
10. Hoffman projector 6 67
aLittle--used less than 6 times per year.
bModerate--used between 6-25 times per year.
cGreat--used more than 25 times per year.
Note: Percentages across the rows do not always add
up to 100% because some districts failed to include fre-
quency of use.
86
![Page 88: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
APPENDIX B
READING INSTRUMENT USAGE QUESTIONNAIRE
![Page 89: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
7 9
COVER LETTER
Rutgers--The State UniversityGraduate School of EducationNew Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
TO: NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS
FROM: READING CENTER
RE: SURVEY OF READING INSTRUMENT ( ACHINE) USAGE IN NEWJERSEY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
The Reading Center at Rutgers University, in con-junction with the International Reading Association, isinterested in ascertaining the degree of reading machineryusage in the public schools. To do this, we are askingthat each New Jersey school district fill out a briefquestionnaire. The findings of this survey will be pre-sented at the April, 1971, Convention of the InternationalReading Association.
We would appreciate it if you could aid us in thissurvey by forwarding the enclosed questionnaire to theperson in the district best qualified to answer it. If
there is a separate supervisor for each school level (ele-mentary, intermediate, secondary) , please duplicate aildprovide each one with a copy.
Please have the questionnaires returned to thefollowing address:
Reading CenterGraduate School of EducationRutgers UniversityNew Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
Thank you in advance for your prompt return of thisquestionnaire.
Enclosure,
![Page 90: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
NAME, OF. RESPONDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT
SIZE OF AREA REPORTING.
(are, you reporting for the
POSITION
DATE
hole district or a school,
etc.?)
Name of
instrument
Has it been
used within
last year?
(yes OT no)
Indicate
number of
instruments
Frequency of
use kgreat--
over 25 times/
yr; moderate
--6-25 times/
yr; little--
less than 6
times/yr)
At what, grade
levels, is it
used? (K-3, 4-6,
7-9, 10-12)
Develop-
mental
Remedial
For what pur-
pose is it
used? (i.e.,
phonics, com-
prehension,
speed, etc.)
A. Tachistoscopes
1. For group use
a. EDL Tach-X
b. Keystone
Flashmeter
c. SVE Speedi-
oscope
d. Learning
through See-
ing Tachis-
toflasher
(continued)
![Page 91: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
QUESTIONNAIRE (continued)
ame of
instrument
Has it been
used within
last year?
(yes or no)
Indicate
number of
instruments
Frequency of
use (great--
over 25 times/
yr; moderate
--6-25 times/
yr; little--
less than 6
times/yr)
At what grade
levels is it
used? (X-3, 4-6,
7-9, 10-12)
Develop-
mental
Remedial.
For what pur-
pose is it
used? (i.e.,
phonics, com-
prehension,
speed, etc.)
e. Psychotech-
nics Tachis-
toscope
L. Other
2. For individual
use
a. AVR Eye
Trainer
b. Learning
through See-
ing Tachis-
toviewer
c. EDL Flash-X
(continued)
![Page 92: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
QUESTIONNAIRE (continued)
Name of
instrument
Has it been
used within
last. year?
(yes or no)
Indicate
number of
instruments
Frequency of
use (great--
over 25 times/
yr; moderate
--6-25 times/
yr; little--
less than 6
times/yr)
At what grade
levels is it
used? (K-3, 4-6,
7-9, 10-12)
For what pur-
pose is it
used? (i.e.,
phonics, com-
prehension,
-
speed, etc.)
Develop-
mental.
Remedial.
d. Other
B. Directional attack
control devices
1. EDL Control
Reader
2. PDL Percepto-
scope
3. Other
C. Reading acceler-
ators or pacers
1. SRA Acceler-
ator
(continued)
![Page 93: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
QUESTIONNAIRE (continued)
Name of
instrument
Has it been
used, within
last year?
(yes or no)
Indicate
nuMber of
instruments
Frequency of
use (great--
over 25 times/
yr; moderate
--6-25 times/
yr; little--
less than 6
times/yr)
At what grade
levels is it
used.?
(K-3, 4-6,
7-9, 10-12)
Develop-
mental
Remedial
For what pur-
pose is it
used? (i.e.,
phonics, com-
prehension,
speed, etc-)
2. AVR Rateometer
Psychotechnics
Shadowscope
4. Stereo-optical
Reading Rate
Controller
5. Other
D. Listening devices
1. Record player
2. Cassette play-
back unit
(continued)
![Page 94: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
QUESTIONNAIRE (continued)
Name of
instrument
Has it been
used within
last year?
(yes or no)
Indicate
number of
instruments.
Frequency of
use (great--
over 25 tines/
yr; moderate
--6-25 times/
yr; little--
less than 6
times/yr)
At what grade
levels is it
used? (K-3, 4-6,
7-9, 10-12)
Develop-
mental
Remedial
For what pur-
pose is it
used? (i.e.,
phonics, com-
prehension,
speed, etc.)
Language lab.
4. Other
CDCO
E. Recording devices
1. Reel-to-reel
tape recorder
2. Cassette. tape
recorders
Card recorders.
(i.e., Lan,-
guage Master)
4. Other
(continued)
![Page 95: DOCUMENT RESUME - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 056 844 RE 003 919 AUTHOR Greenwald, Marcia Alpern TITLE A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs,](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042419/5f353365d4cac83e73155560/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
QUESTIONNAIRE (continued)
Nare of
instrument
Has it been
used within
last year?
(yes or no)
Indicate
.
number of
instruments
Frequency of
use (great--
over 25 times/
yr; moderate
--6-25 times/
yr; little--
less than 6
times/yr)
At what grade
levels is it
used? (K-3, 4-6
7-9, 10-12)
Develop-
mental
Remedial
For what pur-
pose is it
used? (i.e.,
phonics, com-
prehension,
speed, etc.)
F. Motion picture.
projector
G. Instructional
television
H. Computer-assisted
instruction
I. Stopwatch
Please list any other instruments 'machines
that you use for the, teaching of
reading..