One hundred-thirty students were analyzed in this study to discern if there is a significant difference between good and poor readers when the subjects arc grouped as advantaged or disadvantaged. The P/S Oral Language Inventory was used and responses from subjects were considered as paradigmatic or syntagmatic. When these results were subjected to an Analysis of Variance, measureable dif ferences were noted.The data are used as background for a proposed frame of reference for both advantaged and disadvantaged learners. In such a frame the individuals would share a common reference base.The lack of verbal fluency among the disadvantaged students has been cited in many recent studies (Thomas 1962, Filmer 1967. They communicate among themselves quite easily but when it comes to formal education the breakdown is disastrous. Is it that the teacher doesn't understand them or that they do not understand the teacher? What is it that a child from an advantaged background brings to school that helps him make the formal schooling connection significantly more times than his disadvantaged counterpart? The authors are aware of the physiological, psychological, social and emotional factors present when any individual or group is measured for achievement in a school setting. This study was undertaken to ascertain whether or not any measureable differences could be identified, in verbal behavior, as a possible indication of thinking patterns.More specifically is there a difference in the paradigmatic-synta?-matic responses between high and low achievers in reading as identified by a classroom teacher? Is there a significant difference, advantaged socio-economic versus disadvantaged, between good and poor readers?Twenty-five second, third, and fourth grade teachers were asked to identify six or seven of their poorest readers and six or seven of their best readers. Several from each group were then randomly selected to take the P/S Oral Language Inventory. Each subject was asked to go with the examiner and orally respond to thirty stimulus words with the first word they thought of when they heard the stimulus word. No trials were given, no other directions stated.
Test conditions ( ns = 37) permitted comparison of responses to test items which were dependent upon reading a passage prior to their successful completion with responses to test items which were loosely related to the reading paragraph. Differential responding was observed, reading a related paragraph leading to better responding to test items.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.