Date of Award:

5-1955

Document Type:

Thesis

Degree Name:

Master of Science (MS)

Department:

School of Teacher Education and Leadership

Department name when degree awarded

Education

Committee Chair(s)

E. A. Jacobsen

Committee

E. A. Jacobsen

Abstract

The problem of reading continuity through primary and intermediate grades in Garfield County has been one of growing concern to our supervisors and administrators for some time. It has been felt that, because of the high correlation of good reading and success of other school subjects, all possible effort should be made in developing a reading program which would insure continuous progress. The slow child would then be assured of meeting only school work of which he would be capable of doing.

Learning to read is difficult. Reading may be considered as a tool, a technique which if mastered would enable the student to take his place in society and make some contribution. However, it is a highly complex process; and despite all attempts to make reading easy for young people, they still experience difficulty with it. Its importance can not be minimized, for the student has to be able to read well if he is to be able to analyze critically, weigh evidence, and evaluate in terms of his own purpose.

According to Betts, 1 reading growth takes place in every normal child, but the process is unique in each individual. Students vary in the time necessary to arrive at independence in the use of these techniques. We are told that the child is not the sum total of all his experiences, but rather the evaluator and retainer of those experiences most meaningful to him. His reading readiness will depend upon this qualitative summation. Emotional stability, breadth of experience, extent of speaking vocabulary, interests in words, desire to read, willingness to express ideas are but some of the guide signs that will enable the teacher to detect the desire to read.2

Analysis of reading techniques used, methods employed, and procedures followed leads one to ponder the question, "Will those guide signs be obscured because of inadequacies which may exist in the present school organization and administration?" Schools today accept the basic premis of education "that all normal children have a learning capacity." However, does the school organization accept that all children vary in time necessary to arrive at independence in the use of learning techniques? Or, do they tend to ignore the fact that children can not all learn the same thing at the same time, nor to the same degree?

The problem of reaching all the children with a basic curricula is difficult to solve. Admittedly, children are different; they learn at different rates and respond to different teaching methods. But does the school recognize this or do they give them all the same diet? When confronted with the problem of meeting and reaching all the children, people in education begin to theorize and point to the disgruntled parent and say, "Allowances are being made to meet individual differences. The teaching techniques now employed will be adequate." Here they are admitting that the basic curricula is inadequate; yet, rather than attempt a drastic curricula change, the "red herring" (individual differences) are loosed.

Accepting individual differences and the schools attempt to adjust to meet them raises another question of concern; can individualized teaching function adequately within the close confines of the school group without conflicting with the following basic needs which are felt to be so important if learning is to take place (positive and not negative): (1) physical well-being, (2) security, (3) recognition, (4) belongingness, and (5) achievement.3 It is true that some adjustment can be made between the needs and wants a student has, and the satisfaction they may receive in partial attainment; but here the teacher is confronted with the task of over-coming curricula imposed obstacles.

It is the teachers duty to develop within the child and the group the feeling of belongingness; she must aid the students in their endeavor for security; the reading program must so be organized that success is not a stranger. Yet the schools have an advancement system where the pupil is carried by the group. The non-reader must feel success even though reading, the basic subject, is foreign to him. The question again presents itself, is it possible to adhere to the students' basic needs, submit to group advancement, and not develop within students a set of false values?

When the mentally retarded child is admitted to the school, it is with certainty that he is going to miss all the pleasant reading experiences enjoyed by the majority of the group. If the severity of his handicap retards reading readiness for a period of two years, what effects will it have on his personality? The child by nature is egocentric. His ego has to be fed. But even if we can do this subtly, is subterfuge justified? Can the child be expected to see white where only black exists? Can the students make grade progress without understanding that effort is necessary and with effort some achievement is expected? Isn't it rather ironical to assume intelligence at one time and stupidity another? Why can't the curricula undergo a change so as to work with the teacher and not against her? For do what we can, we must give credit where credit is due. We must recognize that the pupil is able to distinguish between opposites and that he is not living in a vacuum. Though the day of awakening is due, another question is, "Will the student read when ready?"

As grade advancement is made and reading readiness develops, can the student be assured that he will get similarly complete and gradually ascending attention that his peers received when they began reading? In reviewing second and third grade offering are they equivalent to the first? Do the teachers in these grades use techniques not too different from those employed by the first or is the student to be confronted with advanced methodology which will be even more confusing than it was in the first grade? As these questions remain unanswered at this time, the only solution seems to lie with the teacher. Is she competent enough to overcome those first harrowing experiences encountered when his group reads and he does not? Is she the genius, the omnipotent, who will be able to right all wrongs?

Reading continuity implies curricula development which will lend depth and breadth to the child's experiences, for he is the retainer of those most meaningful. As he enters school he finds advancement is continuous. Here he enters a new world in a strange setting. The close knit family group gives way to the community. As he enters school for the first time, he encounters imposed obligations. The basic curricula, seemingly functional in all situations, has been prescribed by society with not too much concern for the receiver. Here the teacher is called to act as a mediator. Any time imposed obligations are confronted by a disinterested party, with little or no consideration given to the receiver; difficulties can be expected. Interchange of events in one's environment determines his experiences. These experiences, if meaningful, are learning situations that can add to self realization. But when some one else imposes duties and obligations which aren't meaningful, then continuity of learning begins to break down.

Checksum

a1f79a50b8511ead5432185d52ed037d

Download

Included in

Education Commons

Share

COinS

Copyright for this work is retained by the student. If you have any questions regarding the inclusion of this work in the Digital Commons, please email us at .