Much interest currently exists in topics related to the improvement of learning through such avenues as  mathemagenic activities,  and a considerable amount of research has been done recently in the area of visual cueing as a learning enhancement technique. This paper is restricted to a discussion of one visual cueing technique underlining and some implications arising from underlining research

Rocchio, Daniel J.

Schnell, Thomas R.

English

ScholarWorks at WMU

Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy andLanguage ArtsVolume 18Issue 2 January 1978 Article 41-1-1978A Comparison of Underlying Strategies forImproving Reading Comprehension and RetentionThomas R. SchnellUniversity of Missouri, St. LouisDaniel J. RocchioAffton High SchoolFollow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizonsPart of the Education CommonsThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the SpecialEducation and Literacy Studies at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has beenaccepted for inclusion in Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy andLanguage Arts by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks at WMU. For moreinformation, please contact maira.bundza@wmich.edu.Recommended CitationSchnell, T. R., & Rocchio, D. J. (1978). A Comparison of Underlying Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension andRetention. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts, 18 (2). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol18/iss2/4A COMPARISON OF UNDERLYINGSTRATEGIES FOR IMPROVINGREADING COMPREHENSIONAND RETENTIONThomas R. SchnellUNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, ST. LOUIS, MO.Daniel J. RocchioAFFTON HIGH SCHOOLMuch interest currently exists in topics related to the improvement oflearning through such avenues as "mathemagenic activities," and a considerable amount of research has been done recently in the area of visualcueing as a learning enhancement technique. This paper is restricted to adiscussion of one visual cueing technique underlining and some implications arising from underlining research.Review of Related LiteratureMatthews (1938) studied high school students to seeif the underlining ofimportant concepts and ideas by the students was more effective thanoutline notes or reading without notes. He reported no significant differenceson two comprehension measures between the treatment groups.Similar studies done by researchers such as Arnold (1942) and Idsteinand Jenkins (1972), which compared underlining done by students andother forms of study or repetitive reading, have consistently failed to showthe effectiveness of underlining of this type as a learning aid.A second type of underlining research is exemplified by the work ofCashen and Leicht (1970). They studied a group of collegefreshmen, usingpassages underlined by the examiners to determine if reading underlinedpassages facilitates comprehension; and, if so, what the effect was onlearning adjacent, non-related items. Theyfound their experimental groupscoredsignificantly higher on the criterion tests than the control group did.Related studies by Klare. Mabry and Gustafsen (1955) and by Crouseand Idstein (1972) also found that prior instructor underlining of prosepassagescan facilitate immediate comprehension.A third variation of underlining research is the type done by Willmore(1966). A group of college students were taught howto underline, then werecompared experimentally to students taught other study techniques. Oncriterion measures, the underlining (following instruction) group scoredsignificantly higher than any other. I   I  I   I  I  I   I     I I   URI,     .   I    t l  t   i s d t    t        i ,"   -                  .    i te    i        -   -   i            t        t t        r        t      f-       t . il r i s      l    t i        e     s     i g, e  il                 e  rli i g  s l        i t       ll ge , i     e i         r : ,   at     l i  j cent, -related i  ey nd t ir t   red i i  i er  t  rit ri  t  t  t  trol  i .  t   lare, r   st f  5)   r   l st i  (  ls  f  t t  i t t  rli i   r s  assages  f i  inune i t  prehensi n.  t ir  ri ti   rli i  r  is t  tYIx'   il  ( ).  r  f ll  st ents er  t  o  t  derline, t  ere pare  peri ental y t  st ents t t t r study t i .  crit ri  eas  t  erli i  (f ll ing i str ti ) r  s r  si i  i r t a  any t er. rh-\07Statement of the ProblemThe authors of this paper, after examining the existing work in underlining, designed a study to incorporate the various techniques alreadydescribed into a single experiment. The approaches examined sought to: 1.determine if underlining of various types improved immediate and delayedrecall of textbook-like material; 2. determine which technique was mosteffective; and 3. determine whether prior reading ability affects the value ofthese techniques for certain students.ProceduresThe study examined two populations, one at the senior high school leveland one at the junior college level, each of which was divided into fourgroups for experimental purposes. Group one received 110 minutes ofinstruction and practice in underlining prior to the experiment in whichthey were asked to read and underline the experimental passage. Group tworeceived no instruction or practice in underlining but read the experimentalpassage which had been previously underlined by the examiners. Groupthree received no prior instruction or practice in underlining, but was toldto underline the passage as they read. Group four was the control group,and was told only to read the passage.Immediately following their completion of the passage, each personreturned the passage to the examiner and received a 20-item multiplechoice test over the passage. Delayed recall was assessed by administeringthe same criterion test eleven days later (no reviewing or re-reading wasallowed).The instruments used were an 1100 word passage on neural maturationadapted from an educational psychology textbook by Cronbach (1963)which has a Dale-Chall readability of college level, and a 20-item multiplechoice test developed and used in earlier studies by Schnell (1973). The testhas a split-half reliability of .70 and overall item discrimination in the .40-.60 range.The underlining strategy taught and also used by the examiners inunderlining the passage for Group 2 was based on three criteria found inRead, Underline, Review (McGraw-Hill, 1970). Those criteria are: 1)Underline the right amount by selecting key words and phrases which, whenread together, make smooth, flowing sense; 2) Underline completely bymaking sure all main ideas are included; and 3) Underline correctly so thatthe information underlined and read in review will reveal in capsule formthe same information as the original passage.The sample populations consisted of 88 high school students (grades 10-12) from a suburban St. Louis school district and 53 junior college studentsfrom a school in the same approximate location as the high school. Thestudents were assessed on prior reading ability with one of two instruments- the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, SurveyF, Form 1M, or theNelson-Denny Reading Test, Form A. The groups were found to be equalin terms of standard score means and ranges on the reading tests.-1                 -.                                 t:'xtbo   .   t:'ch i    ft:' t:'             t:'    t:'rt                 t:'  t:'   l,           r ost:'S.         ctict:'      ri t:'            ri t:'  sagt:'    ivt:'           t:'ri             t:' t:'i t:'             dt:' int:' t:' sagt:'   t:'a              t:'  t:'ru tt:'l            agt:'   int:'       ict:' t:'  t:'       es t:'d    t:'  t:'S    r       t:' t:'   t:'         pt :'             lt:'-  t:'adabili    l,      t:'  t:'vd      it:'s                            t:' int:'    ' gt:'           , rlz'  t'i        nlint:' t:' t   i     s    t t:'     ;   l                  t:'rlin      l   lt:'       i l  t:' le        s        i t                       r  it      -ts ~         ,   - en            l             \08-rhResultsData gathered in the experiment were analyzed by computer, using amultiple regression analysis technique. The major findings (signifirant at alevel of at least 05) include:1. The groups which underlined for themselves and the group whichreceived instructor-underlined material all scored significantly higheron the criterion test than the control group on immediate recall.2. There were no significant differences between groups on delayed recall,but scores approached significance in the hypothesized direction.3. The groups which did their own underlining scored significantly higherthan the instructor-underlined group on immediate recall, but not ondelayed.4. There was a significant interaction between prior reading ability for allgroups and the criterion test scores on delayed recall, but not on immediate.Summary and ConclusionsBased on the data gathered in this experiment, plus data found in theexisting literature on underlining, it appears that the use of underlining canresult in significant improvement in reading comprehension and retentionof textbook tvpe materials. An analysis of the various cueing methods usedin this study indicated that active participation by the reader in underliningis more beneficial than using material underlined by the instructor.Several implications for instruction in content area classes are suggestedbv these results and observations. Teachers who selectively underline (i.e.up to 20% of the material) major ideas for the students, or students whounderline material immediately before some evaluative activity such as atest, are likely to find improved literal comprehension. Since literalcomprehension is necessary for students to reach interpretive and appliedlevels of understanding, these techniques should be employed before groupactivities which require the higher levels of understanding.Suggestions for the teacher should include such ideas as giving studentsa minimum of 5 hours of instruction and practice in underlining beforeexpecting them to use the skill. Lessons should start with short paragraphswhich have been underlined in various ways, with the students asked toselect the one which is best (multiple-choice). The next step would be tohave them do their own underlining on easy, short paragraphs, increasingthe length and difficulty as skills improved. The final stage would bepractice in underlining longer selections such as chapters.Another suggestion would be to allow students to review the underlinedparts of their materials at regular intervals to provide maximum retentionpossibilities.It seems that underlining is a viable "mathemagenic activity," andshould be taught as a regular part of any class which requires retention ofprose material.lOB-r        n: t'      Illlllti p J"f'g-fp"in  (l v<;i, pr p Il(' n  ing' ., llifi r ;m  (I  (l rw'  ;1I r:l<;  or)  r ll r' .  -fou   t' t'                         l.   n'   s t' t't'  s   , t      t'        r       t'     , t   v   Th               t'     t'   t   -        t'ft'                                 y    i                              t'        las..<;        h      .                         . c           r      t'    InTi        t'  h                                            t        .              t                        l        i s                            t'   t'                        rh-\09REFERENCESArnold, H. F. The comparative effectiveness of certain study techniques inthe field of history. Journal of Educational Psychology . 1942, 33, 449-457.Cashen, W. M. and Leicht, K. L. Role of the isolation effect in a formaleducational setting.Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1910,61 ,484-486.Cronbach. L. J. Educational Psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Harcourt,Brace and World, 1963.Crouse, J. H. and Idstein, P. Effects of encoding cues on prose learning.Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1972,65, 309-313.Dale, E. and Chall, J. A formula for predicting readability. EducationalResearch Bulletin, 1948,27, 11-20 and 37-54.Gates, A. I. and MacGinitie, W. H. The Gates-MacGimtie Reading Tests,Survey F. Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1965.Idstein, P. and Jenkins, J. P. Underlining versus repetitive reading./ourna/ofEducational Research, 1972,65, 321-323.Klare, G. R., Mabry, J. E. and Gustafsen, L. M. The relationship ofpatterning (underlining) to immediate retention and to the acceptability of technical material.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1955,39, 40-42.Matthews, C. O. Comparisons of methods of study for immediate anddelayed recall.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1938,29, 101-106.Nelson, M. J. and Denny, M. C. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Boston:Houghton Mifflin Co., 1960.Schnell, T. R. The effect of organizers on reading comprehension ofcommunity college freshmen./ourna/ of Reading Behavior, 1972-73, 5 ,169-176.Wark, D. M. and Mogen, M. Read, Underline, Review. New York:McGraw-Hill, 1970.Willmore, H. J. A comparison of four methods of studying a college textbook. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1966). Dissertation A bstracts International, 1967.-1                 ry.    y.                    .     7   48       ),          ,              J  l , 3 309- .  .  ,          ,11-    ,        tes-MacGinz"tz'   ts,         ,         j l   ,   ,   ,  .                -   l. l     40-              j  f  l ,        .   lson-Den _'V  st.        .           j l   a1./'ior, -73, ,           lz"   e1.lie                  -       z -   i   

A Comparison of Underlying Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension and Retention

Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and 
Language Arts 
Volume 18 
Issue 2 January 1978 Article 4 
1-1-1978 
A Comparison of Underlying Strategies for Improving Reading 
Comprehension and Retention 
Thomas R. Schnell 
University of Missouri, St. Louis 
Daniel J. Rocchio 
Affton High School 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons 
 Part of the Education Commons 
Recommended Citation 
Schnell, T. R., & Rocchio, D. J. (1978). A Comparison of Underlying Strategies for Improving Reading 
Comprehension and Retention. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts, 18 (2). 
Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol18/iss2/4 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by 
the Special Education and Literacy Studies at 
ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion 
in Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language 
Arts by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks at WMU. 
For more information, please contact wmu-
scholarworks@wmich.edu. 
A COMPARISON OF UNDERLYING
STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING
READING COMPREHENSION
AND RETENTION
Thomas R. Schnell
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, ST. LOUIS, MO.
Daniel J. Rocchio
AFFTON HIGH SCHOOL
Much interest currently exists in topics related to the improvement of
learning through such avenues as "mathemagenic activities," and a con
siderable amount of research has been done recently in the area of visual
cueing as a learning enhancement technique. This paper is restricted to a
discussion of one visual cueing technique underlining and some im
plications arising from underlining research.
Review of Related Literature
Matthews (1938) studied high school students to seeif the underlining of
important concepts and ideas by the students was more effective than
outline notes or reading without notes. He reported no significant dif
ferenceson two comprehension measures between the treatment groups.
Similar studies done by researchers such as Arnold (1942) and Idstein
and Jenkins (1972), which compared underlining done by students and
other forms of study or repetitive reading, have consistently failed to show
the effectiveness of underlining of this type as a learning aid.
A second type of underlining research is exemplified by the work of
Cashen and Leicht (1970). They studied a group of collegefreshmen, using
passages underlined by the examiners to determine if reading underlined
passages facilitates comprehension; and, if so, what the effect was on
learning adjacent, non-related items. Theyfound their experimental group
scoredsignificantly higher on the criterion tests than the control group did.
Related studies by Klare. Mabry and Gustafsen (1955) and by Crouse
and Idstein (1972) also found that prior instructor underlining of prose
passagescan facilitate immediate comprehension.
A third variation of underlining research is the type done by Willmore
(1966). A group of college students were taught howto underline, then were
compared experimentally to students taught other study techniques. On
criterion measures, the underlining (following instruction) group scored
significantly higher than any other.
 I   I  
I   I  
I  I  
 I  
   
I I   URI,    
 .  
 I   
 t l  t   i s d t    t  
      i ,"   -
             
     .    i te    
i        -   -
   i   
    
     t        
t t        r    
    t      f-
       t . 
il r i s      l    t i  
      e    
 s     i g, e  il    
           
  e  rli i g  s l      
  i t       ll ge , i  
   e i       
  r : ,   at     
l i  j cent, -related i  ey nd t ir t   
red i i  i er  t  rit ri  t  t  t  trol  i . 
 t   lare, r   st f  5)   r  
 l st i  (  ls  f  t t  i t t  rli i   r s  
assages  f i  inune i t  prehensi n. 
 t ir  ri ti   rli i  r  is t  tYIx'   il  
( ).  r  f ll  st ents er  t  o  t  derline, t  ere 
pare  peri ental y t  st ents t t t r study t i .  
crit ri  eas  t  erli i  (f ll ing i str ti ) r  s r  
si i  i r t a  any t er. 
rh-\07
Statement of the Problem
The authors of this paper, after examining the existing work in un
derlining, designed a study to incorporate the various techniques already
described into a single experiment. The approaches examined sought to: 1.
determine if underlining of various types improved immediate and delayed
recall of textbook-like material; 2. determine which technique was most
effective; and 3. determine whether prior reading ability affects the value of
these techniques for certain students.
Procedures
The study examined two populations, one at the senior high school level
and one at the junior college level, each of which was divided into four
groups for experimental purposes. Group one received 110 minutes of
instruction and practice in underlining prior to the experiment in which
they were asked to read and underline the experimental passage. Group two
received no instruction or practice in underlining but read the experimental
passage which had been previously underlined by the examiners. Group
three received no prior instruction or practice in underlining, but was told
to underline the passage as they read. Group four was the control group,
and was told only to read the passage.
Immediately following their completion of the passage, each person
returned the passage to the examiner and received a 20-item multiple
choice test over the passage. Delayed recall was assessed by administering
the same criterion test eleven days later (no reviewing or re-reading was
allowed).
The instruments used were an 1100 word passage on neural maturation
adapted from an educational psychology textbook by Cronbach (1963)
which has a Dale-Chall readability of college level, and a 20-item multiple
choice test developed and used in earlier studies by Schnell (1973). The test
has a split-half reliability of .70 and overall item discrimination in the .40-
.60 range.
The underlining strategy taught and also used by the examiners in
underlining the passage for Group 2 was based on three criteria found in
Read, Underline, Review (McGraw-Hill, 1970). Those criteria are: 1)
Underline the right amount by selecting key words and phrases which, when
read together, make smooth, flowing sense; 2) Underline completely by
making sure all main ideas are included; and 3) Underline correctly so that
the information underlined and read in review will reveal in capsule form
the same information as the original passage.
The sample populations consisted of 88 high school students (grades 10-
12) from a suburban St. Louis school district and 53 junior college students
from a school in the same approximate location as the high school. The
students were assessed on prior reading ability with one of two in
struments- the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, SurveyF, Form 1M, or the
Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Form A. The groups were found to be equal
in terms of standard score means and ranges on the reading tests.
-1  
    
           -
.          
           
          
  t:'xtbo   .   t:'ch i    
ft:' t:'             
t:'    t:'rt   
 
            
 t:'  t:'   l,        
   r ost:'S.       
  ctict:'      ri t:'    
        ri t:'  sagt:'    
ivt:'           t:'ri  
          
 t:' t:'i t:'            
 dt:' int:' t:' sagt:'   t:'a        
      t:'  
t:'ru tt:'l          
  agt:'   int:'       
ict:' t:'  t:'       es t:'d   
 t:'  t:'S    r      
 
t:' t:'   t:'         
pt :'          
   lt:'-  t:'adabili    l,     
 t:'  t:'vd      it:'s      
            
  
        t:' int:'   
 ' gt:'           
, rlz'  t'i        
nlint:' t:' t   i     s   
 t t:'     ;   l   
             
  t:'rlin      l   lt:'  
     i l  
t:' le        s 
       i t      
             
    r  it      -
ts ~         ,   
- en            l 
            
\08-rh
Results
Data gathered in the experiment were analyzed by computer, using a
multiple regression analysis technique. The major findings (signifirant at a
level of at least 05) include:
1. The groups which underlined for themselves and the group which
received instructor-underlined material all scored significantly higher
on the criterion test than the control group on immediate recall.
2. There were no significant differences between groups on delayed recall,
but scores approached significance in the hypothesized direction.
3. The groups which did their own underlining scored significantly higher
than the instructor-underlined group on immediate recall, but not on
delayed.
4. There was a significant interaction between prior reading ability for all
groups and the criterion test scores on delayed recall, but not on im
mediate.
Summary and Conclusions
Based on the data gathered in this experiment, plus data found in the
existing literature on underlining, it appears that the use of underlining can
result in significant improvement in reading comprehension and retention
of textbook tvpe materials. An analysis of the various cueing methods used
in this study indicated that active participation by the reader in underlining
is more beneficial than using material underlined by the instructor.
Several implications for instruction in content area classes are suggested
bv these results and observations. Teachers who selectively underline (i.e.
up to 20% of the material) major ideas for the students, or students who
underline material immediately before some evaluative activity such as a
test, are likely to find improved literal comprehension. Since literal
comprehension is necessary for students to reach interpretive and applied
levels of understanding, these techniques should be employed before group
activities which require the higher levels of understanding.
Suggestions for the teacher should include such ideas as giving students
a minimum of 5 hours of instruction and practice in underlining before
expecting them to use the skill. Lessons should start with short paragraphs
which have been underlined in various ways, with the students asked to
select the one which is best (multiple-choice). The next step would be to
have them do their own underlining on easy, short paragraphs, increasing
the length and difficulty as skills improved. The final stage would be
practice in underlining longer selections such as chapters.
Another suggestion would be to allow students to review the underlined
parts of their materials at regular intervals to provide maximum retention
possibilities.
It seems that underlining is a viable "mathemagenic activity," and
should be taught as a regular part of any class which requires retention of
prose material.
lOB-r  
 
     n: t'      
Illlllti p J"f'g-fp"in  (l v<;i, pr p Il(' n  ing' ., llifi r ;m  (I  (l 
rw'  ;1I r:l<;  or)  r ll r' 
.  -fou   t' t'        
       
          l. 
  n'   s t' t't'  s   , 
t      t'   
     r      
 t'     , t   
v  
 Th            
   t'     t'   t   -
 
   
    t'ft'          
            
         
  y    i        
            
          
t'        las..<;    
    h      . 
              
          
. c         
  r      t'    
InTi        t'  h   
        
           
            
          t  
      .      
        t     
           
        l    
    i s    
           
           
 
 t'   t'        
              
  
rh-\09
REFERENCES
Arnold, H. F. The comparative effectiveness of certain study techniques in
the field of history. Journal of Educational Psychology . 1942, 33, 449-
457.
Cashen, W. M. and Leicht, K. L. Role of the isolation effect in a formal
educational setting.Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1910,61 ,484-
486.
Cronbach. L. J. Educational Psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Harcourt,
Brace and World, 1963.
Crouse, J. H. and Idstein, P. Effects of encoding cues on prose learning.
Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1972,65, 309-313.
Dale, E. and Chall, J. A formula for predicting readability. Educational
Research Bulletin, 1948,27, 11-20 and 37-54.
Gates, A. I. and MacGinitie, W. H. The Gates-MacGimtie Reading Tests,
Survey F. Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1965.
Idstein, P. and Jenkins, J. P. Underlining versus repetitive reading./ourna/
ofEducational Research, 1972,65, 321-323.
Klare, G. R., Mabry, J. E. and Gustafsen, L. M. The relationship of
patterning (underlining) to immediate retention and to the ac
ceptability of technical material.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1955,
39, 40-42.
Matthews, C. O. Comparisons of methods of study for immediate and
delayed recall.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1938,29, 101-106.
Nelson, M. J. and Denny, M. C. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Co., 1960.
Schnell, T. R. The effect of organizers on reading comprehension of
community college freshmen./ourna/ of Reading Behavior, 1972-73, 5 ,
169-176.
Wark, D. M. and Mogen, M. Read, Underline, Review. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1970.
Willmore, H. J. A comparison of four methods of studying a college text
book. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1966). Disser
tation A bstracts International, 1967.
-1  
 
           
   ry.    y.   
 
               
 .     7   48
 
      ),      
    
,             
 J  l , 3 309- . 
 .  ,        
  ,11-    
,        tes-MacGinz"tz'   ts, 
        
,         j l 
  ,   
,   ,  .        
        -
   l. l     
40-  
           
 j  f  l ,   
     .   lson-Den _'V  st.  
    
  .         
  j l   a1./'ior, -73, , 
 
         lz"   e1.lie    
  
            -
       z -
   i   


https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2277&context=reading_horizons

A Comparison of Underlying Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension and Retention

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks at WMU

ScholarWorks at WMU