individualized reading, a summary of research in review coordinator: marcella l. kystika...

RCH IN REVIEW

Coordinator: Marcella L. Kystika

Individualized Reading, A Summary of Research

RICHARD THOMPSON

This roundup of research on individualized reading over tour decades shows, among other findings, that this approach has been used successfully at practically all grade levels to facilitate reading achievement.

INTEREST in individualized read ing has spanned four decades, and through out this period many researchers have experimented with individualized reading instruction. A summarization of the research evidence would serve a useful purpose per mitting teachers the opportunity to evaluate these investigations and to formulate judg ments about whether individualized reading can be used with successful results.

Even though the concept of individual ized reading is as old as the "dame schools," initial quasi-experiments with this approach seem to have occurred in the 30's when three uncontrolled studies were reported (DeWitt and Agnew, 1937; and Loomis, 1939). These early individualized reading programs indi cated to their authors that the results were favorable to the individualized approach. Conclusions such as these, which are based on uncontrolled data, must be accepted as opinion rather than fact. Although the nature of these reports as factual evidence is dis counted, these early attempts at individual ized reading did lead the way for further

work in this area during the next decades.The earliest controlled study involving

individualized reading was conducted by Anderson ( 1946). Third grade students were the subjects with the experimental group using individualized reading and the control group using a basal program. The author reported no significant difference for the two groups. Table 1 illustrates significant infor mation about these early studies.

By the 50's, attention became focused sharply on individualized reading. Educators had become increasingly aware that students were individuals with wide ranges in ability and learning rate. Considering this fact, indi vidualized reading seemed to be the most likely developmental approach taking into account the assumption that more learning occurs when students are self-paced than when grouped. As a result of this high tide of enthusiasm for individualizing instruction throughout the 50's and 60's, a number of studies were conducted to assess the merits of individualized reading.

At least 16 studies were reported during the decade of the 50's. Although not all the experiments were controlled, nine of the 16 were. Table 2 reveals the details of these investigations.

Of the nine controlled studies reported in which individualized reading was the experimental treatment, seven authors re ported favorable results for the experimental

October 1975 57

groups over the control groups using basal programs. Two authors reported no signifi cant difference between the groups studied. It is noteworthy that not one basal group in these nine studies exceeded the achievement of the individualized reading groups. These results heightened the interest in individual

ized reading in the 60's when even more studies were reported than in the previous two and a half decades.

There were many reasons for this up surge of interest in individualized reading both inside the profession and outside. Reac tions to the successful Sputnik venture caused

Year

1937

1939

1939

1946

Researchers

DeWilt andAgnewGumlick

Loomis

Anderson

GradeLevel

1

Primary

K -6

3

No. ofSubjects

20

24 classes

81

_

Control GroupReading Approach

None

None

None

Basal

ControlledStudy

No

No

No

Yes

Table 1. Research on Individualized Reading,

Year

1951

1954

1954

19561957

1957

1957

1957

1958

1959

1959

1959

1959

1959

1959

1959

Researchers

Schmidt

Crirjui

Parker

OserWalker

Sperber

McChristy

Wood

Wiggins

Acinapuro

McHugh

Edwards

Hart

Patterson

Persig

Pollach

GradeLevel

1

8

6

5-84-6

2

5

6

3-6

4-6

4

6

1

6

Int.

No. of Subjects

_

24

35

81

Control Group Reading Approach

None

None

None

NoBasal

Basal

8 matched Basalpairs

37

30

156

35 classes

23

27

Approx. 14in each oftwo groups

130

235

—

Basal abilitygrouped

Three basalability groups

None

None

Basal



Controlled Study

No

No

No

NoYes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Compared topreviousyearsNo

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Results FavoredIRG CRG

No bas s forcompa isonNo bas s forcompa isonNo bas s forcompar son

No significantdifference

1930-1950.

Results Favored IRG CRG

No significantdifferenceYea

Yes

Yea

Yes

Yes forgrade 6only.

Yes

Yes

No significantdifference

Additional Notes

Researcher reportedimpressive results forGrades 3 through 6, butdue to lack of controls,positive affirmation infavor of individualizedapproach must beomitted.

Additional Notes

Group approximatednormal expectancy.Researcher reportedpupils gained from7.8 to 8.8 months In9 months of time.Average gain for 35 pupilsover 6 month periodwas 14 months.

IRG read more booksthan CRG.

Using individualizedreading, group gained16 months in achievement.IRG made 15 months gainand AG made 13 monthsgain over 4.5 monthperiod.

Average gain for 23 pupilsover 10 month periodwas 13 months.Average gain for 27 pupilsover 6 month periodwas 7 months.Researcher reported thatthe individualizedapproach appearedmore desirable.Treatment given for8 month IRG gained14.4 months to9.1 months gain forcontrol group.

Table 2. Research on Individualized Reading, 1950-1960.

58 Educational Leadership

Year

1960

1960

19601960

1960

1960

1960

1960

1960

1960

196119611961

1961

1961

1961

1961

1961

1961

1961

1962

1962

1962

1962

1965

1966

1967

1967

19681971

Researchers

Watford

Sartaln

GreshamBoyd

Satford

Braidford

Carline

Carlisle

Gresham

Izzo

SperryAronowGordon and ClarkNoall

Jones

Galolto

Donahue

Eickholz

Baker

Bailey

Adams

Cyrog

Roston

Ellingson

Johnson

USOE Project (Bond a t a /.)Telgland

Spencer

MellenDavla and Lucas

Grade Level

1

2

57

3-6

1

2-3

5

1

1 - 34-62

11 - 12

4

Junior High6

7

2Superior class5

1

3 -6

1 -2Superior students4

1 -3

1 -2

1 - 2

1 -2

Primary7-8

No. ol Subjects Ri

15

660

240

Experimental group was composed of 7 classes.

68

72 classes

83

68 IR 68 Control

350351

114

52

10 Exp. 10 Control

2 classes

11 Exp. 11 Control

22 Exp. 20 Control84 Exp. 88 Control

23 Exp 18 Control

24 Exp. 26 Control14 Exp. 14 Control

134

496

18267 Exp. 287 Control

Control Group fading Approach

None

Basal

BasalSee notes

Other methods

Basal

Basal ability groupedBasal ability groupedBasal ability grouped

Basal

BasalBasalBasal

Basal ability groupedBasal ability groupedBasal ability grouped

Basal

Basal ability grouped

Basal ability groupedModified basal program

See notes

Basal ability grouped

Basal ability groupedBasal

Basal

Basal

Basal

BasalBasal

Controlled Study

No

Yes

YesYes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

YesYetYes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yea

YesYes

Results Favored IRG CRG

Yes

No significant difference

YesNo significant difference


No significant differenceNo significant differenceNo significant differenceYes

No significant differenceYesYesYes

No significant differenceNo significant difference

Yes

Yes

Yes


Yes

Yes

Yes


Yes

Yes

Yes

No significant differenceYes

YesYes

Additional Notes

Results seemed to favor individualized reading but no controls were reported.Lower I.Q. students made greater gains in word recognition using basal readers.

IRG used SRA Reading Lab while control group was ability grouped using basal program.

IRG gained an avg. of 8 months while CRO avg. gain of 3 months. Treat ment extended over 4 months.

IRQ used SRA Reading Lab materials.

IRG gained 16 months. AG gained 6 months over 9 month period.Study involved vocabulary growth only.

For boys there was no significant difference. Girls In IRG gained in visual and auditory discriminative abilities and in word recognition.Control was other chil dren In school system over 7 year period.

IRG gained 12 months. AB gained 7.7 months.

High and low groups gained particularly.

Girls appeared to do better than boys.

Superiority for IRG was In rate. Also group was superior on all sub-tests but not statistically significant.

Table 3. Research on Individualized Reading, 1960-1971.

October 1975

much turbulence in education. Not only were the sciences targeted for criticism, but reading too received attention. Of course, Rudolph Flesch, author of Why Johnny Can't Read, had preceded this new interest so that reading educators were already manning the defenses.

From within the profession, concern developed about the traditional basal reading program. Basals were frequently challenged as making little provision for meeting indi vidual student needs, as not being founded on sound linguistic principles, or not con taining sufficient phonic drill. These and other concerns seem to have led professionals in search of other materials and ideas. Many new approaches and mediums were developed to teach reading. Interest in the modified alphabets, in extrinsic phonic programs, and in the new linguistic series caused excitement furthering comparative studies, some of which involved individualized reading.

The high interest in individualized read ing generated in the 50's was superseded by intensified activity with individualized read ing in the 60's when 30 or more studies were reported in the literature. Besides increasing in quantity, the studies in the 60's were con trolled more frequently than the earlier ones. Of the 30 investigations reviewed by this author, only one lacked controls.

In analyzing the 30 studies reported, or the 29 controlled ones, the most noteworthy feature was that 16 researchers stated that the individualized reading group exceeded the control group in achievement. These studies covered all elementary grade levels and a few secondary grades. Only one study (Galotto, 1961) was reported in which the control group, using basal readers and grouped into three ability groups, exceeded the achievement of the individualized read ing group. Twelve studies were reported in which no significant differences were found. Thus, the box-score for the 60's reads:

Individualized Reading Groups 16Control Groups 1Ties 12

Table 3 reveals the studies reported in the sixties.

The most recent study on individualized reading, and the only one found for the 70's, was reported by Davis and Lucas (1971). In comparing individualized reading to a basal program with seventh and eighth graders as subjects, it appeared that the IRG attained a significant superior reading rate; but the higher achievement in vocabulary and com prehension was not statistically significant.

Summary, This investigator found and reviewed 51 studies on individualized read ing reported in the literature between 1937 and 1971. Of this number, 40 of these studies were controlled at least to the extent of using control groups. In 24 cases the results favored the individualized reading group. Only one author reported higher read ing achievement for the basal control group. Fifteen researchers reported no significant differences between groups.

A note of caution seems warranted con cerning simply quantifying the studies as revealing superiority one way or another. As most researchers know, unless a significant difference in achievement is manifested be tween groups, there is some reluctance on the part of researchers and editors to publish the findings. Therefore, it is a reasonable as sumption that not all studies pertaining to individualized reading have been included in the literature.

Conclusions. Summarization of the pub licized research pertaining to individualized reading over four decades reveals that indi vidualized reading programs can facilitate reading achievement to the extent of basal reading programs; and that more often than not, individualized reading programs have facilitated higher reading achievement than basal programs in controlled studies. Point edly, the summarization reveals that individ ualized reading has been used successfully at practically all grade levels.

ReferencesPhilip Joseph Acinapuro. "A Comparative

Study of the Results of Two Instructional Reading Programs: An Individualized Pattern and a Three Ability Group Pattern." Unpublished doctoral dis sertation. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1959.

60 Educational Leadership

Phylliss S. Adams. "An Investigation of an Individualized Reading Program and a Modified Basal Reading Program in First Grade." Doctoral dissertation. Denver: University of Denver, 1962.

Eleanor P. Anderson. "A Comparative Study of Attainment in Reading Using Group and Indi vidualized Methods of Instruction." Master's thesis. Greenville, South Carolina: Furman University, 1946.

M. S. Aronow. "Study of the Effect of Indi vidualized Reading on Children's Reading Test Scores." The Reading Teacher 1 5: 86-91; Novem ber 1961.

Auline L. Bailey. "A Comparative Study of the Grouping Method of Teaching Reading with the Individualized Method." Master's thesis. Warrens- burg: Central Missouri State College, 1961.

Julaine E. Baker. "A Modified Individualized Reading Program for Superior Second Grade Chil dren." Master's thesis. Des Moines: Drake Univer sity, 1961.

Guy L. Bond. "First Grade Reading Studies: An Overview." Elementary English 43: 465; May 1966.

Danny W. Boyd. "A Study To Determine the Differences in Gains in Reading Ability Between Two Methods of Instruction in Language Arts." Doctoral dissertation. Denton: North Texas State University, 1960.

Margaret Braidford. "A Comparison of Two Teaching Methods, Individual and Group, in the Teaching of Comprehension in Beginning Reading." Doctoral dissertation. New York: New York Univer sity, 1960.

L. G. Breen. "An Investigation of the Self- Selection Practices of Second and Fifth Grade Children in Individualized Reading Programs." Dissertation Abstracts 28: 3355-A; 1968.

Donald E. Carline. "An Investigation of Indi vidualized Reading and Basal Text Reading Through Pupil Achievement and Teacher Perfor mance." Doctoral dissertation. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1960.

DonEtta J. Carlisle. "A Study of Individu alized and Basic Reading Methods of Instruction." Master's thesis. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young Uni versity, 1960.

L. G. Carson. "Moving Toward Individualiza- tion A Second Grade Program." Elementary Eng lish 24: 362-66; October 1957.

Orvel A. Criqui. "A Study of the Teaching of Individualized Reading in the Eighth Grade Class of Grainfield, Kansas." Master's thesis. Emporia: Kansas State Teachers College, 1954.

Frances V. Cyrog. Reading in a Responsible Society, Twenty-sixth Yearbook. Claremont Read ing Conference, 1962. pp. 106-13.

Floyd W. Davis and James S. Lucas. "An Ex periment in Individualized Reading." The Reading Teacher 24 (8): 737^13; May 1971.

B. C. DeWitt and K. Agnew. "Periods of Awakening or Reading Readiness." Elementary Eng lish Review 1 4: 183-87; May 1937.

Dorothy Donahue. "An Experiment in Indi vidualized Reading in an Unsejected Heterogeneous Sixth Grade Class." Unpublished master's thesis. New Britain: Central Connecticut State College, 1961.

Edith Edwards. "Initiating and Developing a Program of Individualized Reading in the Fourth Grade." Master's thesis. Garden City, New York: Adelphi College, 1959.

Gerhard Eickholz and Richard Barbe. "An Ex periment in Vocabulary Development." Educational Research Bulletin 40: 1-7, 28; January 1961.

Ruby Ellingson. "An Individualized Approach to Reading in a Specific Fourth Grade." Master's thesis. Mankato, Minnesota: Mankato State Col lege, 1962.

Robert L. Ebel, editor. Encyclopedia of Edu cational Research Fourth edition. London: The Macmillan Company, 1969. pp. 1074-93.

John V. Galatto. "The Comparative Effective ness of Individualized Reading Therapy and Group Reading Therapy." Doctoral dissertation. New York: New York University, 1961.

I. J. Gordon and C. H. Clark. "An Experiment in Individualized Reading." Childhood Education 38: 112-13; November 1961.

William Gray. "Role of Group and Individu alized Teaching in a Sound Reading Program." The Reading Teacher 1 1: 99-104; December 1957.

L. P. Gresham. "An Experimental Study of the Efficacy of Individualized Teaching of Reading in Comparison to the Basal Textbook Method." Unpublished master's thesis. Natchitoches: North western State College of Louisiana, 1960.

H. R. Gumlick. "Individualizing the Reading Program in the Primary Grades." National Elemen tary Principal 1 8: 549-58; July 1939.

T. Gurney. "My Individualized Reading Pro gram." Childhood Education 32: 334-36; 1956.

John D. Hart. "A Study of an Individualized Reading Program In a Sixth Grade." Master's thesis. Ithaca: Cornell University, 1959.

John D. Hart. "Individualized Reading Pro gram in Rural Communities, A Second Year Grades 1-2." U.S. Office of Education, Cooperative Research Program, 1965-1966. Educational Re sources Information Center. Washington, D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969.

Ruth K. Izzo. "A Comparison of Two Teach ing Methods, Individualized and Group, in the Teaching of Word Identification in Beginning Read ing." Doctoral dissertation. New York: New York University, 1960.

M. Jenkins. "Here's to Success in Reading Self-Selection Helps." Childhood Education 32: 124-31; November 1955.

Rodney Johnson. "Individualized and Basal Reading Program." Elementary English 42: 902- 904; December 1965.

Reginald L. Jones and Earl L. VanWhy. "The SRA Reading Laboratory and Fourth Grade Pupils." Journal of Developmental Reading 5 : 36-46; Fall 1961. ;

October 1975 61

M. Kingsley. "An Experiment in Individu alized Reading." Elementary English 35: 113-18; February 1958.

Johanna Kool. "A Study of a Multi-Level Reading Program at the Second Grade Level." Mas ter's thesis. Wayne: Nebraska State Teachers Col lege, 1962.

M. Largent. "My Third Graders Are Eager Readers." NEA Journal 48: 64-65; March 1959.

Y. M. Lofthouse. "Individualized Reading: Significant Research." The Reading Teacher 1 6: 35-74; September 1962.

Mary J. Loomis. "An Appraisal of a Func tional Reading Program in an Elementary School." Master's thesis. Columbus: Ohio State Univer sity, 1939.

Antoinette McChristy. "A Comparative Study To Determine Whether Self-Selection Reading Can Be Successfully Used at Second Grade Level." Un published master's thesis. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1957.

Walter J. McHugh. "Team Learning in Skill Subjects in Intermediate Grades." Journal of Edu cation 1 42: 22-51; December 1959.

M. E. Mellen. "Individualizing: To Stimulate the Slow Reader." The Grade Teacher 85 ( 7): 109- 110; March 1968.

Mabel Noall. "Automatic Teaching of Read ing Skills in High School." Journal of Education 14: 31-48; February 1961.

William H. Oser. "A Critical Analysis of an Experiment in Individualized Reading as Devel oped by an Educational Consultant and a Reading Staff." Master's thesis. Sacramento: Sacramento State College, 1956.

Ethel T. Parker. "An Experimental Study of Individualized Reading on the Sixth Grade Level." Unpublished master's thesis. Natchitoches: North western State College of Louisiana, 1954.

Agnes M. Patterson. "A Comparison of the Individualized Reading Approach with the Basal Reader Group Approach in the Teaching of Reading to a Selected Group of First Grade Children." M.Ed project. Indiana, Pennsylvania: Indiana State Col lege of Pennsylvania, 1959.

Elsie A. Persig. "A Study of the Individuali- zation of a Reading Program To Meet the Needs and Interests of a Specific Group of Sixth Graders." Master's thesis. Mankato, Minnesota: Mankato State College, 1959.

Samuel Pollach. "Meeting the Individual Reading Needs of Children in the Intermediate Grades." Master's thesis. Los Angeles: University of California, 1959.

Emma L. Rohm. "A Study of Individualized Reading in First Grade." Master's thesis. Oshkosh: Wisconsin State College, 1962.

Sylvia W. Roston. "An Individualized Read ing Program in a First and Second Grade." Mas ter's thesis. Evanston, Illinois: National College of Education, 1962.

Alton L. Safford. "Evaluation of an Individu alized Reading Program." The Reading Teacher 1 3: 266-70; April 1960.

Martin Saltz. "A Comparative Analysis of Selected Basal Reading Series." Dissertation Ab stracts 28: 3383-A; 1968.

Harry W. Sartain. "The Rosevill Experiment with Individualized Reading." The Reading Teacher 13: 277-81; April 1960.

E. Schmidt. "I Used Individualized Instruc tion." The Reading Teacher 5 : 7-9; September 1951.

M. W. Sharpe. "Individualized Reading Pro gram." E lementary English 35: 507-12; December 1958.

D. U. Spencer. "Individualized First Grade Reading Versus a Basal Reading Program in Rural Communities." The Reading Teacher 1 9: 595-600; May 1955.

D. U. Spencer. "Individualized Versus a Basal Reader Program in Rural Communities Grades One and Two." The Reading Teacher 2 1: 11-17; Oc tober 1967.

R. Sperber. "An Individualized Reading Pro gram in a Third Grade." Individual Reading Prac tices. New York: Teachers College, Columbia Uni versity, 1958.

F. Sperry. "The Relationship Between Read ing and Achievement and Patterns of Reading In struction in the Primary Grades." Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1961.

Anna E. Teigland. "A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Two Approaches to Teaching Read ing The Individualized and the Basal Reader." Dissertation Abstracts 27: 2754-A; 1967.

Clare C. Walker. "An Evaluation of Two Pro grams of Reading in Grades Four, Five, and Six of the Elementary School." Doctoral dissertation. New York: New York University, 1957.

P. Warford. "Individualized Reading in First Grade." Elementary English 37: 36-37; January 1960.

Evelyn L. Wiggins. "A Comparative Study of the Textbook and Self-Selection Methods of Reading Instruction in a Sixth Grade Class." Master's thesis. Logan: Utah State University, 1958.

P. A. Witty. "Individualized Reading: A Post Script." Elementary English 4 1: 211-17; March 1964.

M. Wolf. "Individualized Reading How I Broke the Mold." The Grade Teacher 8 7 (1): 158; September 1969.

Ruth V. Wood. "How Individual Differences Among Middle-Grade Pupils Are Provided for in Basic Reading Instruction Within the Class in West- side Elementary School." Master's thesis. Natchi toches: Northwestern State College of Louisiana, 1957.

E. Young. "Individualized Reading in Action." Reading in Action. IRA Conference Proceedings, 1957. pp. 144-45.

RICHARD THOMPSON, Associate Pro fessor of Education, Florida Technological University, Orlando.

October 1975 63