Video Self-Modeling as a Tool for Improving Oral
and Self-Confidence
Debbie Greenberg M.S. Ed.
305-984-4404
Inclusion Specialist,
Tom Buggey Ph. D.
Professor
Dept of Instruction and Curriculum Leadership
400-C Ball Hall The
901-678-3415
Carole L. Bond,
Ph.D.
Professor
Emeritus
cbond@memphis.edu
901-678
3490
Running head: SELF-MODELING
Abstract
Oral reading fluency is an
important component of the reading process.
Many students develop negative attitudes about reading due to
self-consciousness of their below average oral reading skills. In this study, video self-modeling was used
with three students who were below grade level in reading. The self-modeling procedure allowed the
students to view themselves succeeding in oral reading. A multiple baseline, single subject design,
across students was utilized to evaluate whether the method would affect oral
reading fluency and students’ perceptions of self as readers. Qualitative information was collected. All participants in the study made gains in
oral reading fluency and in their perceptions of self as readers.
Video Self-Modeling as a Tool for Improving Oral
and
Self-Confidence
Review of the Literature
Oral reading
fluency, the natural and smooth production of written text, has been found to
be a vital component for effective reading (Allington, 1983; Strecker, Roser,
& Martinez, 1998). There appears to be a strong correlation between fluency
and comprehension. Several researchers attribute this to the fluent reader
being able to concentrate on gaining meaning rather than decoding individual
words (Bos & Vaughn, 1998; Dowhower,
1987). Thus, problems with fluency can lead to weakness in comprehension and
leave the non-fluent reader at-risk for failure in school. Along with the
comprehension problem, there is a negative social factor that can contribute to
a cycle of failure in those who are weak oral readers.
For the weak oral reader, group and class oral
reading may provide a stage for repeated failure. McPherson and Rust (1987)
found strong correlations among popularity, reading ability, and self-concept,
with poorer readers being the less popular and having lower self-esteem. Oral
reading presents a paradox to teachers and students. Oral reading is often the
mechanism which teachers use to assess reading needs of students and to provide
peer models. Conversely, when a student repeatedly reads less fluently than
peers, she/he will likely develop reluctance toward oral reading and a negative
attitude to reading in general. Although it is recognized that poor readers
typically lack fluency, it is often ignored in the classroom (Allington, 1983).
The challenge to teachers is to find methods for mediating the negative affects
that oral reading can have on poorer readers.
Researchers have
evaluated strategies teachers can employ to assist the struggling oral
reader. These include repeated readings
(Dowhower, 1987; Rasinski, 1990; Skinner, Robinson, Adamson, Atchinson, &
Woodward, 1998; Weinstein & Cooke, 1992), choral reading (Polloway &
Patton, 1987), and paired reading (Prentice, 1987). Modeling is an important
component of these strategies. Teachers and peers are typically the source of
modeling. These models think out-loud
allowing students to observe the desired behavior. In regard to fluency, the student listens to
and watches appropriate reading. This
guidance when internalized and copied can eventually translate into efficient reading
fluency (Bos & Vaughn, 1998; Reutzel & Cooter, 1999).
Repeated
readings involve selecting passages of approximately two hundred words and
having the student read and reread the passage until the student can read it
fluently. There are several versions of
repeated readings. They include
independent repeated readings and repeated readings that involve a modeling
component (Dowhower, 1987; Lerner, 2000;
Polloway & Patton, 1987; Rasinski, 1990; Weinstein & Cooke, 1992). Dowhower (1987) conducted a study with second
graders and divided them into groups using either independent repeated reading
or modeled repeated reading using a tape approach called
Listen-While-Reading. It was found
initially that those who used the tape were less frustrated and, as their
fluency rate improved, they tended to diminish the use of the tapes. Dowhower’s
findings suggest significant improvement in fluency, accuracy and comprehension
with both types of repeated readings. In another study investigating
listen-while-reading, Rasinski (1990) had similar results. Rasinski tested third grade students using
independent repeated readings and a listen-while-reading method. He too found that neither strategy produced
better results than the other, but the later strategy actively involved the
teacher as the model in the fluency process.
This concept of modeling is important, as it has been found that
children who are read to repeatedly at home enter school with the stronger
reading skills (Griffin & Morrison, 1997).
Thus, the teacher becomes the surrogate model for demonstrating fluency
(Allington, 1983). Weinstein and Cooke
(1992) further support the findings of Dowhower and Rasinski. They studied four males with learning
disabilities who were emergent readers in the very beginning stages of
acquisition. They found repeated
readings increased fluency with marked passages as well as promoted
generalization to unknown readings.
While the
modeling aspect seems important mainly in the beginning stages of repeated
readings (Dowhower, 1987), another technique, paired reading relies on a model
for acquisition. In this method, two
students read a given passage out loud simultaneously. The passages often are familiar to begin with
and then, as rapport builds, more unfamiliar text is introduced. Both students serve as the model for each
other to assist when the other needs help with the text. This strategy can also be used as a component
of choral reading (Polloway &
Patton, 1987; Winebrenner, 1996).
Choral reading
is a non-threatening way of increasing fluency using both the teacher and peers
as models. Students listen to the
teacher illustrate the passage with proper intonation, volume, and appropriate
speed. Students join in following the
teacher as the model. This can involve
an entire class or groups of students including paired readers (Polloway &
Patton, 1987; Winebrenner, 1996).
All of the
strategies presented involve frequent practice and can be time-intensive for
the student. Similarly, the techniques
are time-consuming for the teacher. S/he not only has to find the appropriate
materials, but also must provide the correct motivation as the model for oral
fluency (Power, Dowrick, Ginsburg-Block, & Manz, 1999). Despite these drawbacks the practice and
modeling nature of these interventions appears to be effective. Dowhower (1987)
found that the second graders who had a model initially had decreased
frustration compared to the independent group.
According to Allington (1983), the teacher as the model provides
powerful stimulation for the development of oral reading fluency. Schunk and Hanson (1989) further discuss
modeling as vital to the discouraged reader who has been used to failing and
has little self-confidence in his or her skill.
Similarly, peer
models used in paired and sometimes choral reading have also proven
effective. In a study conducted by
Topping (1987), ten different peer-tutoring projects were reviewed. The
findings suggested that peer tutored paired reading accelerates children's
reading progress. The question arises as to who would make the most effective
model in these situations. Researchers have found that the most effective
models tend to be individuals close to the observing child's age with similar
characteristics (gender, personality, race, and mood), and who are functioning
only slightly above the level of the observer (Bandura, 1969; Thoresen &
Hosford, 1973). Because peer modeling
provides a more relevant representation of achievement to the observer, it may
be logical to assume the student, as his or her own model, may provide an even
stronger stimulus (Buggey, Toombs, Gardener, & Cervetti, 1999).
Self-modeling is
operationally defined as a procedure in which people see themselves on
videotapes showing only positive, adaptive behavior (Dowrick, 1999). One especially promising form of videotaped
self-modeling (VSM) is feedforward which involves providing persons a future
view of themselves demonstrating skills and behaviors within their abilities,
but not yet being performed. Through a planned storyboard and planned editing,
a video is made that only displays the positive future skill. The video is crafted to be two to three
minutes long and is viewed by the person several times a week or daily
depending on the need. Videotaped self-modeling has been shown to be an
effective treatment across an extensive range of behaviors, ages, and
abilities. Positive results have been
obtained for treating depression (Kahn, Kehle, Jenson & Clark, 1990),
stuttering (Bray & Kehle 1996), attention disorders (Dowrick & Raeburn,
1977; Woltersdorf, 1992), behavior disorders (Lasater & Brady, 1995), and
aggressive behaviors (Creer & Miklich, 1970; McCurdy & Shapiro,
1988). Likewise, VSM has proved
efficacious as a tool for teaching skills such as math (Schunk & Hanson,
1989), life skills (Miklich, Chida & Brown, 1977), social behaviors
(Lonnecker, Brady, McPherson & Hawkins 1994), and language (Buggey, 1995;
Haarmann & Greelis 1982). These
studies have covered the age range from toddlers to great-grandmothers
(Dowrick, 1991). A significant finding throughout these studies is that VSM
seems to generate immediate results that are maintained and generalize to novel
situations (Buggey, 1999).
Although
feedforward is being used to assist reading fluency in two community-assisted
reading tutoring programs one in
There was only
one empirical study found that examined the use of videotaped self-modeling
with students to increase reading fluency (Bray, Kehle, Spackman, & Hintze,
1998). Five third grade students were
assessed using a timed oral fluency probe during baseline to measure fluency.
The researcher proceeded to make feedforward tapes for each student depicting
them reading fluently. The students
initially watched a 5-minute tape twice. Subsequently, one-minute tapes were
substituted and were shown twice a week for four weeks. All students involved
in the study made substantial improvement in fluency and continued to improve
in the follow-up. The classroom teacher
reported gains in her day-to-day classroom reading practice. The researchers found that reading fluency
can be positively influenced when readers serve as their own models.
Self-modeling does have limitations. Teachers must have access
to the proper video equipment, have time to do individual tapings, and acquire
skill to edit videotapes. However, Buggey (1999) discussed a simple way to edit
the tapes for self-modeling in his article.
In his method, Buggey suggested making the filming a fun event for the
child. The student became a star of his or her own movie. For editing purposes,
a camcorder with a tape of the raw footage was linked to a VCR with a blank
tape. With practice, tapes could be produced in under half an hour. Using Buggey’s
method of editing with feedforward would not be a time consuming process for
the teacher or student. More
importantly, feedforward uses the student as the model for future behaviors and
allows the student to see him/herself succeeding.
Purpose of the Study
Although
feedforward has been utilized as an intervention with many different
populations there has been only one empirically based study published using
feedforward with at-risk readers to increase oral fluency. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
assess the efficacy of feedforward as a classroom-based intervention with
elementary at-risk readers. More
specifically the study sought to 1) determine if the use of feedforward as a
classroom-based intervention would increase oral reading fluency and, 2) alter
the self-perception of the students as readers.
Methodology
Participants
The students
participating in this study were from a third grade population in an elementary
school designated as a laboratory school connected with a large urban
university. The school is part of the
twelfth largest school district in the
Instruments
Data were collected using a
curriculum-based measure called the timed oral fluency probe used to assess
oral reading fluency. Norms have been
established for grades 2 through 5 using this method (Hasbrouck & Tindal,
1992). Passages were generated from the
intact Harcourt and Brace reader, Treasury of Literature used in the
curriculum for that grade. A readability
graph (Fry, 1985) was used in order to insure that all passages used for
assessment were commensurate with the students’ reading levels.
Additionally,
the Reader Self-Perception Scale (RSPS) developed by Henk and Melnick (1995)
was administered to assess how the individual students felt about themselves as
readers before and after the intervention.
The RSPS contains 33 items that measure: 1) general perception (one item
used to gauge a general idea of the child’s reading ability; 2) progress
(perception of past achievement compared to present achievement in reading); 3)
observational comparison (the child’s perception of his/her reading ability
compared to other students in the class), 4) social feedback (perception of the
input or lack thereof by teachers, other students and parents or other family
members); and 5) physiological state (perception of the child’s feelings about
his/her reading ability). Students chose
a response using a Likert scale with point values ranging from 1 to 5 (strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, and strongly agree). The points for each
category are added and a raw score is obtained for each category. These scores can then be compared to the
normed data to establish low, average, or high reader self-perceptions. Henk and Melnick (1995) have established
reliability (alpha reliabilities range from .81 to .84) and validity
(administered to 625 students initially, revised by a panel of experts, and
then administered to an additional 1,479 students), for this instrument. Permission from the authors was obtained to
use the RSPS in this study.
Procedures
Three selected students were individually evaluated twice
a week for eight weeks to assess oral fluency.
There were three phases of this study: 1) Baseline, 2) Intervention, and
3) Follow-up. This single-subject design
employed a multiple baseline across students with a one-week time limit in
between the starting point of the intervention for each of the three
students. Baseline continued for student
2 and student 3 as the intervention began for student 1. Baseline then continued for student 3 as
student 2 began intervention. Student 3
began one week after student 2. The
three students being studied were assessed in a follow-up as well.
Baseline
During baseline each student was asked to
read two passages containing two hundred words each from the reading text used
in the classroom. The students were
timed for one minute for each passage.
The number of words read during that minute was counted. The number of errors were totaled and
subtracted from the number of words read during that minute. Errors counted as one point and included
omissions, substitutions, mispronunciations, and words that took longer than
three seconds to read. The scores of
words correct per minute (WCPM) for the two passages were averaged and then
recorded to show a WCPM score for each day of assessment.
During the
second week of collecting the baseline, each student was interviewed using the
RSPS (Henk & Melnick, 1995) to assess their awareness and confidence in
their ability to read. Before conducting
the interview, the researcher explained the purpose for conducting the
interview, the importance of answering honestly, and emphasized that this was
not a test. The rating scale used was
then explained and an example was given for practice and clarity. Each item was
read to the student and the participant then responded with strongly agree,
agree, undecided, disagree, or strongly disagree. The student was also given a note card with
the scale on it to provide visual representation of their response choices.
Intervention
At the end of
the second week, the classroom teacher and researcher chose a passage that was
goal level for each student. It was
determined that the students would read a passage from the end of a chapter
book that was going to be started at the time of the study. The passage was chosen from the end of the
book because the study would end before the book was finished; therefore, there
would be no reinforcement of the passage in the classroom. The student was then videotaped reading
his/her goal level passage. Any help
given by the researcher was edited out using in-camera editing so that the
finished videotape showed only the student reading fluently for two minutes.
Upon arriving at school, each student watched his/her two-minute videotape of
his/her future reading. The researcher
continued to assess the children twice a week using the timed oral reading
fluency probe. The students watched
their tapes individually, each day for four weeks in the teacher’s office
located in the back corner of the classroom.
Follow-up
The students
discontinued watching the tapes after the full four weeks. This began the follow-up phase. Students continued to be assessed using the
timed oral reading probe. The RSPS was
administered again during the follow-up to assess the perception of the student
as a reader.
Inter-rater
Reliability
To establish
consistency in measurement of errors, a trained individual recorded errors
during administration of the timed oral reading probe on three occasions. This individual was provided with a copy of
the text for each child as well as examples of how to mark various reading
errors. After each of the three sessions the researcher and trained individual
met to compare and discuss their scores. The percentage of agreement was
recorded twice during intervention and once during follow-up. The percentage of agreement was 99% for all
students during all of the sessions the trained individual attended.
Results
Oral Reading
To
answer the question of whether the use of feedforward as a classroom based
intervention would increase oral reading fluency, data were obtained bi-weekly
using a timed oral reading probe.
Students read two passages that were timed for one minute each. Errors were calculated and then scores were average
to find a word correct per minute (WCPM) score.
Hasbrouck and Tindal (1992)
established curriculum based norms in oral reading fluency for grades 2 through
5 calculating rates for the 25th, 50th, and 75th
percentiles for fall, winter, and spring.
Student 1’s mean words correct per minute (WCPM) during baseline was 51,
during the intervention the WCPM mean was 70 and continued to climb to 85
through the follow-up. This represented
a shift from below the 25th percentile for spring of second grade to
the 25th percentile for spring of third grade. (This study was conducted during the last
eight weeks of school of the students’ third grade.)
Student 2’s mean WCPM during
baseline was 37. During the intervention
the mean WCPM was 66 however, the follow-up mean WCPM was 58. Even with the drop in mean WCPM from
intervention to follow-up, there was an upward shift in percentile scores. Student 2 placed at the 25th
percentile for fall-winter of second grade at baseline and finished at the 25th
percentile for fall of third grade.
Student 3’s mean WCPM during
baseline was 70. During the intervention
the mean WCPM was 98 and continued to climb to a mean WCPM of 100. This represented a shift from the 25th
percentile to the 50th percentile for winter of third grade. See figure 1.
_______________________
Insert Figure 1
about here
_______________________
Self
Perception
To answer the question of whether feedforward altered the
self-perception of the students as readers, data were obtained during the baseline
and follow-up using the Reader Self Perception Scale (RSPS) (Henk &
Melnick, 1995). Students were asked 33
questions responding with a range from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Students answered questions in five
categories: general perception,
progress, observational comparison, social feedback, and physiological
states. Students’ responses were
converted to a likert scale of 1-5 and a raw score was obtained for each
category. The total raw score for each
area was then interpreted using the scale set by the RSPS of high, average, and
low. Self-perception of the students as
readers according to pre-test and post-test scores is presented in Table 1.
_______________________
Insert Table 1
about here
_______________________
Computing pre- and
post-test assessment and using the RSPS table it was determined that student 1
moved from undecided to high in general perception, from average to high in
progress, remained high in observation comparison and social feedback and,
moved from average to high in physiological states. .
Student
2 remained high in general perception from pre- to post-test. In progress student w moved from average to
high, in observational comparison moved from low to high, and remained high in
social feedback and physiological states.
Student
3 moved from low to high in the areas of general perception and progress,
remained average in observational comparison and social feedback, and moved
from average to high in physiological states.
All three students gained points in at least 3 of the 5 categories that
indicated an overall increase in self-perception as readers.
Discussion
The purpose of
this study was to investigate efficacy of feedforward as an intervention to
increase oral reading fluency in three at-risk third graders. Additionally, the design included a pre and
posttest to determine self-perception as a reader before and after the
intervention determining if the intervention increased self-perception as a
reader.
The use of
feedforward to increase oral reading fluency was successful with all three
students. All students made impressive
gains from baseline to follow-up and did not return to baseline words correct
per minute (WCPM) when the intervention was withdrawn. Feedforward appeared to affect these students
in a short period of time (4 weeks) to
acquire more fluent oral reading. The
data for the three students showed a consistent upward learning curve from
baseline to intervention and through the withdrawal phase.
Feedforward
tapes only lasted 2 minutes for each student and each student viewed them
before class began each day. The use of
feedforward was unobtrusive and did not interfere with the academic day. Tapes were easily edited and the students
enjoyed watching themselves. If the
results of this study are any indication of the effectiveness of the use of
feedforward, then implementing this strategy in the classroom may be of great
benefit. It is interesting that it is relatively unknown why or how feedforward
produces results such as these, but it seems to be related to self-perception.
Students who
have struggled to read through the primary grades are painfully aware by the
third grade of their reading capabilities and often feel frustrated especially
when comparing themselves to their peers.
Feedforward allows students to view themselves in a way that would not
be possible in normal school situations.
Students with little confidence in their ability to read watch
themselves reading difficult text with ease and may begin to believe that they
are truly capable of overcoming their difficulties. This new confidence could very well translate
into their reading improvement. The
results of the Reader Self-perception Scale (RSPS) (Henk & Melnick, 1995)
lend credence to this assumption. In the
crucial category of Progress, all three students had an increase in
scores. This subtest measures student
perception of past achievement compared to present achievement in reading. Two of the three students progressed from
average to high and the third student from low to average. The increase may be attributed to the fact
that as they read the timed passages biweekly they could see themselves able to
read more words each time.
Throughout the
study, the students gave unsolicited comments about how the intervention had
affected them. One student noticed that
she scratched her head and leg constantly because of nervousness and
frustration. After viewing herself on
video this behavior was extinguished. One student related that he became
excited each time a probe was administered because he could see his progress.
Although one student labored through his passages, he began to use different
voices and dramatized the passages, truly enjoying reading. All three students expressed their delight at
seeing themselves read so fluently. Student 3, who began the intervention last,
would ask every time the researcher was there when his tape would be
viewed. When the day came to begin his
intervention phase he beamed and said, “I’m a movie star”. It is this reaction of these students to
themselves captured on video that was the most gratifying.
Limitations
This study
focuses on three students who were at-risk readers in the third grade. Therefore, generalization of the findings
should be treated with caution until more research can be carried out. This
study was conducting during the fall semester of the school year and had to be
worked around holiday and time restraints.
Thus, baseline scores were neccessarily
shortened. Although the scores obtained were in line with teacher
perceptions, more stable baseline data would have been desired.
Much effort was spent to deter any halo
effects that may have occurred to the students receiving individual attention;
however, this may also have had some effect on performance.
Conclusions
Many studies
have been conducted using feedforward as an intervention. Its success has been documented in various
empirical studies as a positive technique with a wide range of behaviors and
populations. Buggey et al. (1999) used
feedforward to elicit appropriate responses to questions from children with
autism. Power et al. (1999) used
feedforward to enhance reading fluency in a community-assisted reading-tutoring
program with emergent readers. Bray et
al. (1998) examined the relationships between feedforward and self-monitoring
to improve reading fluency with a third grade population. All of these studies showed positive results
when using feedforward as an intervention.
It seems to span age group, ability or disability, and the type of
behavior.
Like the past
studies, this study supports the use of feedforward as a method for increasing
oral reading fluency in a short period of time.
The intervention also assisted students in gaining important positive
feelings about themselves as readers.
Teachers
have to make accommodations for students who are struggling. If students are struggling in oral reading
fluency what better intervention to use then one that lets the student model
her/himself and her/his own success.
This is probably the least intrusive method and when implemented can be
an effective, research based.
Recommendations
for future research
It is important
that future studies compare traditional methods to remediate oral reading
fluency with feedforward to find the most effective and efficient method to use
with students. It would also be
beneficial to study how a feedforward approach could be embedded into other
remediation techniques to maximize impact. A longer study that focuses on the
withdrawal of the intervention would further strengthen the efficacy of using
feedforward. Another research focus should include studying different grade
levels and students already identified as having learning disabilities in the
area of reading to expand the narrow participant group of this study.
Another
recommendation is to study the connection between fluency and comprehension
when using feedforward as an intervention.
Since comprehension is the ultimate goal of efficient reading, it is
important that future research focus on the impact that the newly acquired
fluency has on comprehension.
Finally, the
affects of reading failure on self-perception and methods that can reverse this
trend must be emphasized. The role that feedforward can play in this process
should be explored on a continuing basis.
References
Allington, R.
(1983). Fluency: The neglected reading
goal. The
Bandura, A. (1969).
Principles of behavior modification.
Bos, C. S.,
& Vaughn, S. (1998). Strategies for
teaching students with learning and behavior problems (4th ed.).
Bray, M. A.,
Kehle, T. J., Spackman, V. S., & Hintze, J. M. (1998). An intervention program to increase reading
fluency. Special Services in the Schools,
14, 105-125.
Buggey, T. (
1995). An examination of the
effectiveness of videotaped self-modeling in teaching specific linguistic
structures to preschoolers. Topics in
Early Childhood Special Education, 15, 434-458.
Buggey, T.
(1999). Look! I’m on TV: Using videotaped self-modeling to change
behavior. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 31, 27-30.
Buggey. T.,
Toombs, K., Gardener, P., & Cervetti, M. (1999). Training responding behaviors in students
with autism: Using videotaped
self-modeling. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1,
205-214.
Creer, T. L.,
& Miklich, D. R. (1970). The application of a self-modeling procedure to
modify inappropriate behavior: a
preliminary report. Behavior Research
and Therapy, 8, 91-92.
Dowhower, S.
(1987). Effects of repeated reading on
second-grade transitional readers’ fluency and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 22,
389-405.
Dowrick, P. W.
(1991). Practical guide to using video
in the behavioral sciences.
Dowrick, P. W.
(1999). A review of self-modeling and
related interventions.
Applied and Preventive Psychology, 8,
23-29.
Fry, E.
(1985). The new reading teacher’s book
of lists.
Haarmann, B. S.,
& Greelis, M. T. (1982). Video
therapy case study: The therapeutic use
of edited videotapes as a primary means of behavioral intervention in the
shaping of appropriate grammatical and contextual use of language. Journal of Special Education Technology, 5, 52-56.
Hasbrouck, J.
E., & Tindal, G. (1992).
Curriculum-Based oral reading fluency norms for students in grades 2
through 5. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 24, 41-44.
Henk, W. A.,
& Melnick, S. A. (1995). The reader
self-perception scale (RSPS): A new tool for measuring how children feel about
themselves as readers. The
Kahn, J. S.,
Kehle, T. J., Jenson, W. R., & Clarke, E.
(1990). Comparison of
cognitive-behavioral, relaxation, and self-modeling interventions for
depression among middle-school students.
School Psychology Review, 19, 196-211.
Lasater, M. W.
& Brady, M. P.. (1995). Effects of
video self-modeling and feedback on task fluency: A home-based intervention. Education
and Treatment of Children, 8 389-407.
Lerner, J. (2000).
Learning disabilities: Theories,
Diagnosis, and Teaching Strategies (8th ed.).
Lonnecker, C.,
Brady, M. P., McPherson, R., Hawkins, J.
(1994). Video self-modeling and
cooperative classroom behavior in children with learning and behavior problems:
training and generalization effects. Behavioral Disorders, 20,
24-34.
McCurdy, B. L.,
& Shapiro, E. S. (1988).
Self-observation and the reduction of inappropriate classroom
behavior. Journal of School
Psychology, 26, 371-378.
McPherson,
C. Rust, J. O. (1987). Relationships among popularity,
reading ability, and self-concept in second-grade children. Reading
Improvement; 24 (4), 282-89.
Miklich, D. R.,
Chida, T. L., & Danker-Brown, P.
(1977). Behavior modification by
self-modeling without subject awareness.
Journal of Behavior and Experimental Psychiatry, 8,
125-130.
Polloway, E. A.,
& Patton, J. R. (1987). Strategies
for teaching learners with special needs (6th ed.).
Power, T.J.,
Dowrick, P. W., Ginsburg-Block, M. & Mantz, P. H. (1999, April). Community assisted reading tutoring: Building capacity in urban schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
National Association of School Psychologists,
Prentice, J.
(1987). Real books and paired reading in context.
Rasinski, T. V.
(1990). Effects of repeated reading and
listening-while-reading on reading fluency.
Journal of Educational Research,
83, 147-150.
Reutzel, D. R.,
& Cooter, R. B. (1999). Balanced
reading strategies and practices.
Schunk, D. H.,
& Hanson, A. R. (1989).
Self-modeling and children’s cognitive skill learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 155-163.
Skinner, C. H.,
Robinson, D. H., Adamson, K. L.,.
Strecker, S.
K., Roser, N. L., &
Thoresen, C.,
& Hosford, R. (1973). Behavioral approaches to counseling. Behavior modification in education. Seventy-second Yearbook of the National
Society for the Study of Education, Part 1.
Topping, K.
(1987). Peer tutored paired reading: Outcome data from ten projects.
Educational
Psychology, 7 (2), 133-145.
Weinstein, G., & Cooke, N. L. (1992). The effects of two repeated reading intervention
on generalization of fluency.
Learning Disability Quarterly,
15, 21-28.
Winebrenner, S. (1996).
Teaching Kids with Learning Difficulties in the Regular Classroom.
Woltersdorf, M. A.,
(1992). Videotape self-modeling
in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Child & Family Therapy, 14,
53-73.
Figure
1. Words Correct Per Minute Oral
Number of Sessions
|
|
Table
1. Students: Self-Perception as Readers
|
RSPS |
General
Perception |
Progress |
Observational
comparison |
Social
Feedback |
Physiological
States |
|
Student
1. Pre-test |
3 |
43 A |
26 H |
38 H |
35 A |
|
Student
1. Post-test |
5 |
45 H |
30 H |
45 H |
40 H |
|
Student
2. Pre-test |
5 |
40 A |
17 L |
39 H |
40 H |
|
Student
2. Post-test |
5 |
45 H |
26 H |
44 H |
40 H |
|
Student
3. Pre-test |
2 |
38 L |
21 A |
35 A |
31 A |
|
Student
3. Post-test |
4 |
42 A |
21 A |
36 A |
40 H |
Note. Score interpretation:
H=High, A=Average, L=Low, as dictated by the Reader Self-Perception Scale
(RSPS). Henk, W. A., & Melnick, S.
A. (1995). The reader self-perception
scale (RSPS): A new tool for measuring how children feel about themselves as
readers. The