Visual discrimination: comparison of two methods.

Abstract

There are instructional materials available that encourage the utilization of visual discrimination training as essential in a comprehensive reading program. For instructional staffs the available resources which may be used to reinforce visual discriminations vary in type and design. A basic consideration that should be acknowledged deals with the type of reinforcement a student could profit from in learning to read. Sheldon and Mills (1968) stated the abiliry to discriminate between geometric patterns is a prerequisite of the ability to discriminate between letters and words. However, Harris and Sipay (1971) contended the ability to march geometric designs has little to do with reading. English orthography is alphabetic in nature, that is, the letters of the alphabet represent the sounds of the language (Goodman, 1969). This study attempted to determine whether teaching geometric patterns would result in improved ability to discriminate berween letters and words to the same extent as teaching letters and words. In a school district in Northeastern Pennsylvania, 58 kindergarten children were randomly assigned to rwo equal groups (Kerlinger, 1973). Both groups received instruction in visual discrimination for 10 min. a day for 15 wk. One group received instruction in visual discrimination by matching geometric patterns, while the second group received visual discrimination instruction by matching letters and words. The ultimate purpose of instruction in visual discrimination is to assist the student to be more proficient in reading the English language, which requires an ability to discriminate between letters and words. Therefore, the measure used to determine if one method provided greater ability in this task was the eight letter and word items of the Matching subtest of the Metropolitan Readiness Test (1965). The mean number of correct items by the group that was taught to discriminate berween letters and words was 6.86 (SD = 1.04), while the mean number of correct items by the group that was taught t.~ discriminate between geometric patterns was 4.90 (SD = 1.90). The difference was statistically significant (t = 4.89, df = 56, p < ,001). The results of this study lend support to the Harris and Sipay (1971) contention that instruction in visual discrimination should deal primarily with letters and words. Furthermore, the results confirm the wellknown observations that training on a task to be performed yields the most transfer to that task