바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

메뉴
search

ISSN : 1229-0718

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.25 No.1

A Comparison of the Reading Game Program and the Direct Instruction Program for Low Achievers in Reading

Jong-Sook Lee (Dept. of Psychology, Duksung Women's University)
Hee-Joung Cho (Dept. of Psychology, Duksung Women's University)
The Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology / The Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology, (P)1229-0718; (E)2671-6542
2012, v.25 no.1, pp.77-99
Lee, J., & Cho, H. (2012). A Comparison of the Reading Game Program and the Direct Instruction Program for Low Achievers in Reading. The Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25(1), 77-99.

Abstract

This study compared the effectiveness of two reading comprehension programs, which consist of word strategies and comprehension strategies. The direct instruction program is developed based on behavioral principles, teacher's explicit explanations and demonstration,and students‘ practice. The reading game instruction program is developed transferring strategies into appropriate games. The subjects were twelve grade 3-4 students who have decoding skills and IQ 70 or above but are behind the class in reading comprehension by teachers' reports. The subjects were assigned into the direct instruction group and the reading group matching IQ, BASA scores, and BAAT scores. Both programs consist of 15sessions. The results of this study showed the reading game group outperformed the direct instruction group on vocabulary selection(BAAT) and true or false test(reading span), but the direct instruction group outperformed the game group on sentence arrangement(BAAT) and reading tasks developed by the authors. But both programs enhanced subjects' sentence comprehension but not passage comprehension. These results are discussed in terms of teaching materials which include a lot sentences but a few passages.

keywords
Submission Date
2012-01-15
Revised Date
2012-02-11
Accepted Date
2012-02-12

Reference

1.

곽금주, 박혜원, 김청택(2001). 한국 웩슬러 아동지능검사 지침서. 서울: 도서출판 특수교육.

2.

권주석(2009). 문장구조이해프로그램의 적용이읽기학습부진아동의 읽기인식능력 및 읽기이해력에 미치는 효과. 특수아동교육연구,11, 55-76

3.

권혁선(2011) 균형적 읽기게임놀이 프로그램이입학전 아동의 읽기능력과 음운인식 읽기태도에 미치는 영향. 덕성여자대학교 석사학위 청구논문.

4.

김동일(2000). 기초학습기능 수행평가체제 읽기검사. 서울: 학지사

5.

김동일, 이일화(2010). 읽기 저성취 초등학생의언어 지식과 독해력과의 관계. 학습장애연구,7, 27-45.

6.

김동일, 이대식, 신종호(2010). 학습장애아동의 이해와 교육. 서울: 학지사.

7.

김동일, 정광조(2005). DI(직접교수) 한글읽기프로그램이 읽기학습부진 학생의 읽기능력에미치는 효과. 정서행동장애연구, 21, 149-169.

8.

김명순(2003). 어휘력의 재이해와 지도 방법.청람어문교육, 27, 1-25.

9.

김성숙, 김윤옥(2008). 어휘획득 전략 훈련프로그램이 초등학교 학습장애 학생의 어휘력신장과 자기효능감에 미치는 영향. 특수교육연구, 15, 281-307.

10.

김희규, 이정현(2009). 게임을 통한 협력학습이영어학습부진아의 영어읽기능력과 학습태도 및 자아효능감에 미치는 효과. 지성과창조, 127-149

11.

문병상(2010). 초등학생의 읽기 동기, 읽기 활동 및 읽기 능력간의 구조적 관계. 초등교육연구, 23, 133-152.

12.

박경산, 김계옥, 송영준, 정동영, 정인숙(2005).국립특수교육원 읽기 기초학력검사 읽기검사요강. 서울: 국립특수교육원

13.

박경산, 박재국, 김윤해(2003). 독해학습전략 훈련이 읽기장애아의 독해력 향상 및 학업성취도에 미치는 효과. 정서행동장애연구, 19,241-261.

14.

성경화(2000). 게임을 통한 효과적 어휘지도.서울교육대 교육대학원 석사논문.

15.

신인영(2012). 읽기 부진 학생을 위한 읽기게임프로그램과 직접교수 읽기 프로그램의 효과 비교. 덕성여자대학교 석사학위 청구논문.

16.

원호택, 신민섭, 송종용(2000). 작업기억과 해부호화기술이 한글 읽기장애에 미치는 영향,한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 19,771-792.

17.

유영옥, 안성우(2002). 읽기 전략 지도방법의 차이가 중학교 읽기장애아의 독해력 및 국어과학업성취도 향상에 미치는 효과. 정서행동장애연구, 18, 151-173.

18.

이병택(2002). 읽기폭 검사의 신뢰도 연구. 심리과학, 11, 15-33.

19.

이임숙, 조중열(2003). 초등학생의 읽기와 인지-언어적 변인들과 인과적 관계. 한국심리학회지: 발달, 16, 211-225.

20.

이종숙, 조희정(2010). 읽기부진아동을 위한 읽기게임프로그램 효과. 한국심리학회지: 학교, 7, 107-133.

21.

정난숙, 안성우, 김자경(2005). 읽기장애아동의독해력 설명변인연구. 특수교육저널: 이론과 실천, 6, 385-403.

22.

조선구, 윤치연(2009). 스토리 맵을 활용한 동화읽기가 자폐성 장애아동의 회상능력 향상에미치는 효과. 심리행동연구, 1, 1-19.

23.

정종성(2011). 직접교수에 의한 요약하기 지도와 협력학습에 의한 요약하기 지도가 초등학교 4학년 일반학생과 읽기 위험군 학생의 독해와 요약학기 능력에 미치는 효과.특수교육학연구, 45(4), 23-46.

24.

최성규, 남상직(2004). 마인드맵 학습전략이 학습장애아동의 어휘력에 미치는 효과. 특수교육저널: 이론과 실천, 5, 341-367.

25.

Adams, G., & Carnine, D.(2003). Direct instruction. In H.L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Grahm(Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 403-416). New York: Guilford Press.

26.

American Psychiatry Association(1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorder(IV). Washington DC: Author.

27.

Andreassen. R., & Braten. I.(2011). Implementation and effects of explicit reading comprehension instruction in fifth-grade classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 21, 520-537.

28.

Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A.(1980). Individual and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.

29.

Flores, M. M., & Ganz, J. B.(2007). Effectiveness of direct instruction for teaching statement inference, use of facts, and analogies to students with developmental disabilities and reading delays. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 244-251.

30.

Gardill, M. C. , & Jitendra, A. K. (1999). Advanced story map instruction: Effects on the reading comprehension of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 33, 2-17,28.

31.

Garnar, R., Alexander, P. A., & Hare, V. C.(1991). Reading comprehension failure in children. In B. Y. L. Wong(Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (pp. 283-307). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

32.

Graves, A. W.(1986). Effects of direct instruction and metacomprehension training on finding main ideas. Learn Disabilities Research, 1, 92-100.

33.

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L.,& Cox, K. E.(1999). Motivational andcognitive predictors of textcomprehension and reading amount.Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 231-256.

34.

Jintendra, A. K., Burgess, C., & Gajria, M.(2011). Cognitive strategy instruction forimproving expository text comprehension ofstudents with learning disabilities: TheQuality of Evidence. Exceptional Children,77, 135-159.

35.

Jintendra, A. K., Hoppes, M. K., & Xin, Y. P.(2000). Enhancing main idea comprehension for students with learning problems: The role of a summarization strategy and self-monitoring instruction. Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 127-139.

36.

Kamii, C., & Lewis, B.(1992). Primary arithmetic: The superiority of games over worksheets. In V. Dimidjiam(Ed.), Play's place in public education for young children (pp 85-103). Washington, DC: NAEYC.

37.

Keaton, J. M., Palmer, B. C., Nicholas, K. R.,& Lake, B. E.(2007). Direct instructionwith playful skill extensions actionresearch in emergent literacydevelopment. Reading Horizons, 47,229-250.

38.

Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Arguelles, M. E., Hughs, M .T., & Leftwich, S.A.(2004). Collaborative strategic reading: "Real-world" lessons from classroom teachers. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 291-302.

39.

Krashen, S., (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73, 445-464.

40.

Lyon, G. R., Fletcher, J. M., Fuchs, L. S.,& Chhabra, V. (2006). Learningdisabilities. In E. J. Mash & R. A.Barkley(Eds.), Treatment of ChildhoodDisorders(pp. 512-591). New York:Guilford.

41.

Manset-Williamson, G. & Nelson, J. M.(2005). Balanced, strategic reading instruction for upper-elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(1), 59-74.

42.

Vaughn, S., & Klingner, J. K.(2004). Reading comprehension: Instruction/intervention frameworks. In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B.. Ehren, & K., Apel(Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders. New York: Guilford.

43.

Vaughn, S., Klingner, J. K., & Bryant, D. P.(2001). Collaborative strategic reading as a means to enhance peer-mediated instruction for reading comprehension and content-area learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 64-74.

44.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T.(1997). Relation of children's motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420-432.

45.

Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., Shinn, M. R.,& McGue, T.(1982). Similarities anddifference between low achievers andstudents classified learning disabled. TheJournal of Special Education, 16, 73-85.

logo

e-Submission
OA Policy
KOREAN