Can poor readers visually recognize words they are unable to read? /

The ability to learn new reading vocabulary was assessed in 30 grade 3 poor readers reading approximately one to two years below grade level; the results of the assessment were compared to the performance abilities of 33 normal readers in grade 3 as obtained from an earlier study that employed the same approach and stimuli. The purpose of the study was to examine the strategies employed by poor readers in the acquisition of new reading vocabulary. Students were randomly assigned to either a treatment group (Mixed Phonics Explicit), or to a control group (Phonics Implicit). Subjects in the Mixed Phonics Explicit groups received explicit letter/sound correspondence training. Subjects in the Phonics Implicit group were asked to re-read the presented pseudo-words, receiving corrective feedback when necessary. The stimuli on which the subjects were trained involved a list of six pseudo-words presented in sentences as surnames. The training involved a teaching and test format on each trial for a total of six trials or until criterion had been reached. The results suggested that both normal and poor readers engage in visual learning and verbal coding when acquiring new reading vocabulary. However, poor readers appear to engage in less verbal coding than normal readers. Between group comparisons showed no difference between poor and normal readers in trials and errors to criterion in the visual recognition memory measure. However, normal readers performed significantly better in reading their visual recognition choices.

The effect of context on the acquisition of vocabulary in good and poor readers

This study examined the effectiveness of context on the acquisition of new vocabulary for good and poor readers. Twentyeight Grade Three children, fourteen good readers and fourteen poor readers, took part in a word-learning task within three conditions: (1) strong sentence context, (2) weak sentence context, and (3) list condition. The primary hypothesis was that poor readers would show less learning in the list condition than good readers and that there would be no difference in the amount of learning in the sentence conditions. Results revealed that: (a) Words are read faster in sentence contexts than in 1 ist contexts; (b) more learning or greater improvement in performance occurs in list contexts and weak sentence contexts as opposed to strong sentence contexts; and (c) that most of these differences can be attributed to the build-up of meaning in sentences. Results indicated that good and poor readers learned more about words in all three condi tions. More learning and greater performance occurred in the list condition as opposed to the two sentence conditions for both subject groups. However, the poor readers learned significantly more about words in both the list condition and the weak sentence condition than the good readers.

Visual word learning in good and poor readers

Forty students from regular, grade five classes were divided into two groups of twenty, a good reader group and a' poor reader group, on the basis. of their reading scores on Canadian Achievement Tests. .The subjects took. part in four experimental conditions iM which they .learned lists of pronounceable and unprono~nceable pseudowords, some with semantic referents, and responded to questions designed tci test visual perceptu~l learning and lexical ·and semantic association learning. It' was hypothesized "that the good reade~ group would be able to make use of graphemic and phonemic redundancy patterns in order to improv~·visuSl perceptual learning and lexical and semantic association lea~ningto a greater extent. than would .the poor reader gr6up. The data supported this hypothesis, and also indicated that, although the poor readers were less adept at using familiar sound and letter patterns, they were more dependent on· such pa~terns as an aid to visual recognition memory and semantic recall than were the good readers. It wa.s postulated that poor readers are in a double- ~ . bind situatio~ of having to choose between using weak graphemic-semantic associations or gr~pheme-phoneme associations which are also weak and which have hindered them in developing automaticity in. reading.

The effects of estimating good vs. poor knowledge of results during acquisition of a spatial motor task

Recent studies have shown that providing learners Knowledge of Results (KR) after “good trials” rather than “poor trials” is superior for learning. The present study examined whether requiring participants to estimate their three best or three worst trials in a series of six trial blocks before receiving KR would prove superior to learning compared to not estimating their performance. Participants were required to push and release a slide along a confined pathway using their non-dominant hand to a target distance (133cm). The retention and transfer data suggest those participants who received KR after good trials demonstrated superior learning and performance estimations compared to those receiving KR after poor trials. The results of the present experiment offer an important theoretical extension in our understanding of the role of KR content and performance estimation on motor skill learning.

The Feasibility of Using Vocalization Scoring as an Indicator of Poor Welfare During Cattle Slaughter

The article discusses the vocalization of cattle in six slaughter plants and the results indicate that "vocalization scoring could be used as a simple method for detecting welfare problems that need to be corrected".