The generation effect and word learning: a test of the effect of the language experience approach versus the text approach in the acquisition of new reading vocabulary

A class of twenty-two grade one children was tested to determine their reading levels using the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Achievement Test. Based on these results and teacher input the students were paired according to reading ability. The students ages ranged from six years four months to seven years four months at the commencement of the study. Eleven children were assigned to the language experience group and their partners became the text group. Each member of the language experience group generated a list of eight to be learned words. The treatment consisted of exposing the student to a given word three times per session for ten sessions, over a period of five days. The dependent variables consisted of word identification speed, word identification accuracy, and word recognition accuracy. Each member of the text group followed the same procedure using his/her partner's list of words. Upon completion of this training, the entire process was repeated with members of the text group from the first part becoming members of the language experience group and vice versa. The results suggest that generally speaking language experience words are identified faster than text words but that there is no difference in the rate at which these words are learned. Language experience words may be identified faster because the auditory-semantic information is more readily available in them than in text words. The rate of learning in both types of words, however, may be dictated by the orthography of the to be learned word.

Drama in education : deconstructing the role of movement in text

The purpose of this study was to conduct a comparative textual analysis on the role of movement in 3 texts in Drama in Education in Canada. As the subject is holistic and encourages creative, active participation, movement was expected to appear, even inadvertently, in both theory and practice. It was hoped that guidelines for the use of movement within Drama in Education would emerge from the texts and that these guidelines would serve as models for others to use. A total of 26 Drama in Education experts in Canada were each asked to list the 10 most important texts in the field. Those who answered were assigned numbers and charted according to age, gender, and geography. An objective colleague helped narrow the group to 16 participants. A frequency count was used, assigning 10 points to the first text on each list, and descending to 1 point for the tenth text listed. Based on the highest number of points calculated, the 5 most frequently used texts were identified. These were compared to ascertain the widest representation ofthe authors' geographic location and gender, as well as differences in theory and practice. The final selection included 3 texts that represented differing approaches in their presentation and discussion of Drama in Education theories and practices. Analysis involved applying 5 levels of commitment to determine if,how, why, when, and with what results movement was explicitly or implicitly addressed in the 3 texts. Analysis resulted in several unexpected surprises around each of the 3 texts. The study also provided suggestions for extending and clarifying the role of movement in teaching and learning in general, as well as for Drama in Education in particular.