Population differences and learning proficiency.

The cognitive movement in instruction∗

“…With adults and children, pictures of objects are remembered better than are the names of the objects. Illustrations often facilitate the comprehension of narrative prose by children, although the results depend upon the age, sex, and socioeconomic status of the learners, as Rohwer and his associates have found in several studies (e.g., Rohwer, 1970;Rohwer, Ammon, Suzuki, & Levin, 1971). Rohwer and Harris (1975) found that with low-SES black fourth graders, but not with high-SES white students, multimedia, especially pictures with an oral presentation, facilitated prose learning.…”

Intellectual Abilities and Processes: An Exploratory Study with Implications for Person-Teaching Method Interactions

“…Thus, Visual Short-Term-Memory, Serial Recall, Free Recall and Digit Span can be viewed as measures of Level I abilities whereas Raven's Matrices, Peabody Picture Vocabulary and Lorge-Thorndike Tests represent Level II tasks. Rohwer et al, 1971;Vernon, 1973;MacKenzie, 1976) was unsuccessful in attempting to replicate the "twisted pear" formulation which is necessary for positing a functional dependence of Level II on Level I. But this should not be surprising as both Vernon (1973) and MacKenzie (1976) note that some children are found with good Level II and poor Level I abilities.…”

“…The theory rests on the premise that the magnitude 'Of the correlation between learning ability and IQ is significantly greater in high SES groups than in corresponding low SES groups. Although Jensen (1968) has obtained correlations of .60 and over and .20 and under in high and low SES groups respectively, more recent investigations (Rohwer, Ammon, Suzuki and Levin, 1971;Vernon, 1973;MacKenzie, 1976) have attempted to replicate the "twisted pear" formulation in contrasted SES groups, but have been unsuccessful. By comparing two disparate SES groups, the purpose of this study was to further investigate the relative merits of the hierarchical model versus the Luria scheme positing two parallel modes of processing information.…”

Developmental Changes in the Effects of Presentation Mode on the Storage and Retrieval of Noun Pairs in Children's Recognition Memory

“…Design differences may serve in part to account for the discrepancies in results concerning this trend. For example, this trend has been most consistently detected in studies which have evaluated presentation condition effects by the mixed-list procedure (e.g., Rohwer et al 1971), whereas this developmental trend has not been consistently detected in studies, like the present, which have used a between-subjects evaluation (e.g., Rohwer et al 1975;Means & Rohwer, Note 1). Because mixed-list estimates of presentation condition effects can be contaminated by problems of item selection, the present betweensubjects evaluation probably offers the more robust estimate of such effects.…”

“…A developmental study by Rohwer, Ammon, Suzuki, and Levin (1971) examined the influence of presentation conditions within subjects (i.e., mixed-list procedure) across the grade levels of kindergarten versus first versus third. Their results indicated that the superiority of combined presentation relative to verbal presentation remained invariant across grade levels, whereas the superiority of combined presentation relative to pictorial presentation decreased with grade level.…”