The effects of speed reading courses have been widely researched (cf. Berger, 1968). Stevens and Orem (1963) have suggested that the superior reader entering such a course with a more rapid reading rate, is an average or above average student, and likes to read. Rauch and Weinstein (1968) and Combs (1966) stress  read, read, read  as the best method for gaining speed. However, the National Association of Secondary School principals (1965) has warned that speed and comprehension do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, a finding which challenged earlier research by O\u27Brien (1921). A study of Air Force personnel (Brim, 1968) suggests that comprehension remains fairly constant as speed increases. Ray (1962) summarized nineteen representative studies since 1945 and found that most of these reported gains in rate of reading. Fewer than half the studies showed gains in both speed and comprehension

Labmeier, Angela M.

Vockell, Edward L.

English

ScholarWorks at WMU

Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and 
Language Arts 
Volume 13 
Issue 2 January 1973 Article 3 
1-1-1973 
A Reading Development Course 
Angela M. Labmeier 
Seton High School, Cincinnati, Ohio 
Edward L. Vockell 
Purdue University 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons 
 Part of the Education Commons 
Recommended Citation 
Labmeier, A. M., & Vockell, E. L. (1973). A Reading Development Course. Reading Horizons: A Journal of 
Literacy and Language Arts, 13 (2). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/
vol13/iss2/3 
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 READING DEVELOPMENT COURSE 
Angela M. Lohmeier and 
SETON HIGH SCHOOL 
CINCINNATI, OHIO 
Edward L. V ockell 
PURDUE UNIVERSITY 
The effects of speed reading courses have been widely researched 
(cf. Berger, 1968). Stevens and Orem (1963) have suggested that 
the superior reader entering such a course with a more rapid reading 
rate, is an average or above average student, and likes to read. Rauch 
and Weinstein (1968) and Combs (1966) stress "read, read, read" 
as the best method for gaining speed. However, the National Associ-
ation of Secondary School principals (1965) has warned that speed 
and comprehension do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, a finding 
which challenged earlier research by O'Brien (1921). A study of 
Air Force personnel (Brim, 1968) suggests that comprehension re-
mains fairly constant as speed increases. Ray (1962) summarized 
nineteen representative studies since 1945 and found that most of these 
reported gains in rate of reading. Fewer than half the studies showed 
gains in both speed and comprehension. 
Ray and Belden (1965) reported on a program calling for thirty 
hours of class work which produced significant gains in both speed and 
comprehension. Staton (1950), Beasley (1959), and Siegel (1962) 
have also reported significant gains in reading skills after speed read-
ing courses. Retesting in these studies varied between three and six 
months. Stebens and Belden (1970) report significant gains in reading 
skills, except comprehension, five semesters after a college speed read-
ing course. 
The studies mentioned have focused on college and adult reac-
tions to speed reading programs. Holmes and Singer (1966) have 
reported on a high correlation between speed reading and power 
among high school students and have presented a detailed correla-
tional analysis of all the variables involved in their study. The present 
study was undertaken to test the effect of a speed reading course on 
ninth grade girls, replicating to some extent at the high school level 
studies reviewed above (Ray and Belden, 1965; Stebens and Belden, 
1970). There were three major hypotheses: (1) that there would be a 
significant improvement in speed and comprehension as a result of the 
speed reading course; (2) that these gains would endure over a period 
of time; and (3) that gains in speed would be related to such varia-
bles as initial speed, initial and final comprehension, IQ, time of the 
year the course was taken (first or second quarter), and number of 
books read. 
rh-65 
Subiects and Procedures 
The subjects were 94 ninth grade girls at a Catholic high school 
for girls in a largely middle class section of a large midwestern city. 
All were members of "B" (average) or "c" (above average) classes. 
Mean IQ was 116. All students took a 30-lesson programmed-learning 
television course in speed reading (Visual Concepts Company, 1969). 
Six television lessons on study skills followed the speed reading pro-
gram. The television lessons lasted from 28 to 30 minutes and were 
given five days a week, with supplementary practice sessions each day 
with a reading drill directed by a record provided by the Visual Con-
cepts program. 
The Nelson-Denny Reading Test A was administered to a "B" 
class (N==26) and a "c" class (N==19) who began the course In 
September, 1970, and to a "B" (N==28) and "c" (N==21) class who 
began the course in November. All classes took the Nelson-Denny 
Reading Test B at the completion of the course. Retesting was done 
with the Nelson-Denny A Test (cf. Brown, 1971) in April, 1971, 
approximately six months after the first group had completed the 
course and three months after the second group finished it, similar to 
the time intervals used by Ray and Belden (1968). An additional 
retest was given in October, 1971, to 34 of the students in the "c" 
classes. In addition to the test, students were asked to estimate the 
number of books they had read in the three months after the end of 
the course. 
Results and Discussion 
Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2 show significant improvements in 
both speed and comprehension subsequent to the speed reading 
course. Results also substantiate the hypothesis that gains made in 
reading skills would remain over a period of time (Tables 2 and 3). 
Although speed leveled off and eventually dropped slightly after the 
Table 1. Gains in Speed and Comprehension During Course 
Words per min. 
Comprehension score 
Beginning End of course t p 
255.7553 628.6277 227.2 <.01 
36.4481 40.0000 11.44 <.01 
Table 2. Gains in Speed and Comprehension as 
Reflected in First Retest Scores 
Words per min. 
Comprehension score 
Beginning 
255.7553 
36.4681 
Retest 
615.1851 
44.2340 
t 
235.9 
26.51 
P 
<.01 
<.01 
66-rh 
Table 3. Gains in Speed and Comprehension as 
Reflected in Delayed Retest Scores 
(Including only 32 Above Average Students) 
Beginning Delayed Retest 
Words per min. 
Comprehension score 
262.8125 508.3125 
43.3125 53.0000 
t 
109.9 
19.54 
P 
<.01 
<.01 
Figure 1. Mean Reading Rates at Beginning and End of Course 
and on Retest and Delayed Retest 
Words/min. 
700 
600 
500 
300 
200 
262.8/ 
255.7 
Beginning 
/ 
/ 
665.4-
/-
/ 628.6 615.2" ........ 
/ ,---~ 5083 
End of 
Course Retest 
Delayed 
Retest 
end of the course, there was still a substantial improvement over the 
initial speed. The increased rate of comprehension even after the 
course was over (Figure 2) might indicate that reading skills learned 
during the course continued to develop even after it was over. How-
ever, the fact that speed dropped as comprehension increased after 
the course provides evidence that improvement in speed and compre-
hension are unrelated. This lack of relationship is further corroborated 
by the low correlations between speed and comprehension in Table 4. 
Table 4 presents the correlations used to test the various parts of 
the third hypothesis. Although amount of reading as reported by the 
students was related to initial speed and to final speed, there was no 
relation between improvement in comprehension or speed and amount 
of reading. IQ was related to comprehension on each testing occa-
rh-67 
Figure 2. Mean Comprehension Scores at the Beginning and End 
of the Course and on the Retest and Delayed Retest 
Words/min. 
54 53.6 
52 /' 
/' 
49.8 /' 
/' 
50 ,., 
.,/ 
48 .,/ 
47.7/" 
46 / 
/ 
44 / 44.2 
43.3/ 
42 
40 40.0 
38 36.4/ 36 
End of Delayed 
Beginning Course Retest Retest 
Solid line All students (N = 94) 
Broken line Above average students who were available for retest (N = 32) 
sion, but it was not related to speed or to improvements in speed or 
r.omprehension. Initial speed was positively related to initial compre-
hension, to comprehension at the end of the course, and to final speed, 
but was unrelated to improvement factors (variables 10 to 13). Initial 
comprehension was negatively related to improvement in comprehen-
sion (probably a ceiling effect), but was not at all related to gains in 
speed. 
Although the number of books read in the three months after the 
course was not related to the amount of gain in reading speed or com-
V
ar
ia
bl
e 
1.
 
G
ro
up
 "
C
" 
o
r 
"B
")
 
(A
bo
ve
 a
ve
ra
ge
 o
r 
av
er
ag
e)
 
2.
 
T
im
e 
of
 C
ou
rs
e 
(N
ov
. 
o
r 
S
ep
t.
) 
3.
 
In
it
ia
l 
S
pe
ed
 
4.
 
In
it
ia
l 
C
om
pr
eh
en
si
on
 
5.
 
S
pe
ed
 a
t 
E
n
d
 o
f 
C
ou
rs
e 
6.
 
C
om
po
 a
t 
E
n
d
 o
f 
C
ou
rs
e 
7.
 
S
pe
ed
 o
n 
R
et
es
t 
8.
 
C
om
po
 o
n 
R
et
es
t 
9.
 
IQ
 
10
. 
C
om
po
 G
ai
n 
D
ur
in
g 
C
ou
rs
e 
(N
o
.6
-N
o
.4
) 
11
. 
C
om
po
 G
ai
n 
B
ef
or
e 
R
et
es
t 
(N
o
.8
-N
o
.4
) 
12
. 
S
pe
ed
 G
ai
n 
D
ur
in
g 
C
ou
rs
e 
(N
o
.5
-N
o
.3
) 
13
. 
S
pe
ed
 G
ai
n 
B
ef
or
e 
R
et
es
t 
(N
o
.7
-N
o
.3
) 
14
. 
B
oo
ks
 R
ea
d 
W
it
hi
n 
3 
M
on
th
s 
af
te
r 
C
ou
rs
e 
T
A
B
L
E
 4
. 
T
ab
le
 o
f 
C
or
re
la
ti
on
s 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
1.
00
0 
.0
06
 1
.0
00
 
.0
20
 *
.3
24
 1
.0
00
 
*.
47
6 
-.
05
0 
*.
29
6 
1.
00
0 
.1
00
 
-.
07
8 
.2
46
 
.2
40
 1
.0
00
 
*.
56
7 
.0
63
 *
.3
35
 *
.6
79
 
.1
84
 1
.0
00
 
.1
53
 
.1
01
 *
.3
4-
5 
*.
27
3 
*.
57
1 
.2
49
 1
.0
00
 
*.
36
7 
-.
08
7 
.2
35
 *
.7
02
 *
.2
98
 *
.5
83
 
.2
65
 1
.0
00
 
*.
69
2 
.0
42
 
.1
71
 *
.5
77
 
.2
01
 *
.5
67
 
.2
26
 *
.4
92
 1
.0
00
 
.1
66
 
.1
41
 
.0
80
*-
.3
15
 
-.
04
8 
*.
48
3 
-.
00
4 
-.
08
3 
.0
45
 1
.0
00
 
-.
16
8 
-.
04
4 
-.
07
1*
-.
44
1 
.0
58
 
-.
16
5 
-.
02
8 
*.
32
9 
-.
14
5 
*.
31
2 
1.
00
0 
.0
97
 
-.
18
8 
-.0
'7
9 
.1
49
 *
.9
47
 
.0
78
 *
.4
73
 
.2
22
 
.1
50
 
-.
07
6 
.0
83
 1
.0
00
 
.1
55
 
-.
01
7 
-.
O
l7
 
.1
77
 *
.5
14
 
.1
36
 *
.9
32
 
.1
84
 
.1
75
 
.0
35
 
-.
00
3 
*.
53
4 
1.
00
0 
.0
15
 
.2
11
 *
.3
84
 
.1
32
 
.2
20
 
.1
15
 *
.3
33
 
.1
92
 
.1
28
 
-.
00
8 
.0
67
 
.0
99
 
.2
07
 1
.0
00
 
*=
=
S
ig
ni
fi
ca
nt
 a
t 
th
e 
.0
1 
le
ve
l. 
C
or
re
la
ti
on
s 
of
 .
26
7 
ar
e 
si
gn
if
ic
an
t 
at
 t
he
 .
01
 l
ev
el
 
(G
ui
lf
or
d,
 1
96
4)
. 
0"
> co
 I -; ~
 
rh-69 
prehension, this variable was related both to initial speed and to speed 
on the retest. Thus it would seem that reading practice could be 
regarded as a "natural" way to improve reading speed. There is also 
evidence that students who had a quarter of the school year during 
which to practice their reading skills started the course with a higher 
rate of speed than those who started at the beginning of the school 
year. It is noteworthy that these beneficial "natural" effects do not 
occur with regard to comprehension, although improvements in com-
prehension do occur after the course. 
Conclusions and Summary 
The present data confirms on a sample of high school girls the 
findings of previous researchers that significant gains in speed and 
comprehension can be brought about and retained over a period of 
time. In the present study, both speed and comprehension increased 
significantly, although these gains were not correlated. Thus Brim's 
(1968) findings that comprehension remains constant are not sup-
ported, while the warning of the National Association of Secondary 
School Principals (1965) that improvements in speed and compre-
hension may be unrelated would seem to be supported. Somewhat 
contrary to previous findings (Stebens and Belden, 1970), comprehen-
sion was an area of very significant improvement, especially after the 
course was over. 
The results confirm the findings of Stevens and Orem (1963) that 
the superior reader enters the course with a higher reading speed, 
is a better student, and likes to read. But at the same time there is 
evidence that their findings should not be misinterpreted or over-
emphasized, since there is no evidence that the student described by 
Stevens and Orem is more or less likely to profit from such a course 
than other students. 
Similarly, the "read, read, read" theory is somewhat supported, 
since practicing reading in itself has been shown to be somewhat re-
lated to reading speed; but the amount of reading has been shown to 
be unrelated to any of the gain scores, and thus it cannot be viewed 
as a total solution. It would seem that while some gains can come 
about through mere practice, a specialized program brings about much 
greater gains for students who might otherwise remain untouched. 
It would seem highly unlikely that the gains in Figure 1 would occur 
in a program depending entirely on individual practice. 
In summary, then, it would seem that speed and comprehension 
are relatively independent variables. The evidence indicates that a 
7o-rh 
speed reading program such as the one used in this study can provide 
rather widespread and practical benefits: students on the average can 
read a book over twice as fast as previously with a gain rather than a 
loss in comprehension. This in itself is worthwhile. In addition, it 
seems evident that theories advocating work solely with superior or 
extremely slow readers are inaccurate, since neither of these groups 
showed extreme benefit or lack of benefit from this program. 
Bibliography 
1. Beasley, C. E., Jr. A freshman reading program. Journal of De-
velopmental Reading, 1959, 2 (Winter), 23-29. 
2. Berger, A. Ten important sources of infonnation on speed read-
ing. Journal of Reading, 1968, 11, 359-361. 
3. Brim, B. L. Impact of a reading improvement program. Journal 
of Educational Research, 1968, 62, 177-182. 
4. Brown, J. 1. University of Minnesota. Personal communication. 
April, 1971. 
5. Combs, S. L. Reading for speed and comprehension. Journal of 
Secondary Education, 1966, 41, 296-297. 
6. Dixon, VY. J. (ed.) BlvID Biomedical Computer Programs. Los 
Angeles: University of California Press, 1968. 
7. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental statistics in psychology and educa-
tion. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1964. 
8. Holmes, J. A., and Singer, H. Speed and power of reading in 
high school. Washington: U. S. Government Publications, 1966. 
9. National Association of Secondary-School Principals. Better read. 
Curriculum Report Number 1. Washington: NASSP, 1965, 1-5. 
10. O'Brien, J. A. Silent Reading. New York: MacMillan, 1921. 
11. Rauch, S. J., and Weinstein, A. B. A slow look at speed reading. 
Journal of Reading, 1968, 11, 353-361. 
12. Ray, D. D. A statistical examination of immediate gains and re-
tained gains of students in the Oklahoma State University Read-
ing Improvement Program. Unpublished dissertation, Oklahoma 
State University (August, 1962). 
rh-71 
13. Ray, D. D., and Belden, B. An examination of immediate gains 
on a college reading improvement program. Journal of Reading~ 
1965, 8~ 201-205. 
14. Siegal, M. Adult reading improvement: A five-year report. The 
Reading Teacher~ 1962, 15~ 246-253. 
15. Staton, T. E. Preliminary evidence of permanence of reading 
rate increases following an intensive training in reading lab. 
American Psychologist~ 1950, 5~ 341-342. 
16. Stebens, L. D., and Belden, B. R. Retention of gains in reading 
after five semesters. Journal of Reading~ 1970, 13~ 339-344. 
17. Stevens, G. L., and Orem, R. Characteristic reading techniques 
of rapid readers. The Reading Teacher~ 1963, 16~ 102-108. 
18. Visual Concepts Company. Perceptive reading and study skills 
course. Cleveland: Visual Concepts, Inc., 1969. 


A Reading Development Course

Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy andLanguage ArtsVolume 13Issue 2 January 1973 Article 31-1-1973A Reading Development CourseAngela M. LabmeierSeton High School, Cincinnati, OhioEdward L. VockellPurdue UniversityFollow 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 CitationLabmeier, A. M., & Vockell, E. L. (1973). A Reading Development Course. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts,13 (2). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol13/iss2/3A READING DEVELOPMENT COURSE Angela M. Lohmeier and SETON HIGH SCHOOL CINCINNATI, OHIO Edward L. V ockell PURDUE UNIVERSITY The effects of speed reading courses have been widely researched (cf. Berger, 1968). Stevens and Orem (1963) have suggested that the superior reader entering such a course with a more rapid reading rate, is an average or above average student, and likes to read. Rauch and Weinstein (1968) and Combs (1966) stress "read, read, read" as the best method for gaining speed. However, the National Associ-ation of Secondary School principals (1965) has warned that speed and comprehension do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, a finding which challenged earlier research by O'Brien (1921). A study of Air Force personnel (Brim, 1968) suggests that comprehension re-mains fairly constant as speed increases. Ray (1962) summarized nineteen representative studies since 1945 and found that most of these reported gains in rate of reading. Fewer than half the studies showed gains in both speed and comprehension. Ray and Belden (1965) reported on a program calling for thirty hours of class work which produced significant gains in both speed and comprehension. Staton (1950), Beasley (1959), and Siegel (1962) have also reported significant gains in reading skills after speed read-ing courses. Retesting in these studies varied between three and six months. Stebens and Belden (1970) report significant gains in reading skills, except comprehension, five semesters after a college speed read-ing course. The studies mentioned have focused on college and adult reac-tions to speed reading programs. Holmes and Singer (1966) have reported on a high correlation between speed reading and power among high school students and have presented a detailed correla-tional analysis of all the variables involved in their study. The present study was undertaken to test the effect of a speed reading course on ninth grade girls, replicating to some extent at the high school level studies reviewed above (Ray and Belden, 1965; Stebens and Belden, 1970). There were three major hypotheses: (1) that there would be a significant improvement in speed and comprehension as a result of the speed reading course; (2) that these gains would endure over a period of time; and (3) that gains in speed would be related to such varia-bles as initial speed, initial and final comprehension, IQ, time of the year the course was taken (first or second quarter), and number of books read. rh-65 Subiects and Procedures The subjects were 94 ninth grade girls at a Catholic high school for girls in a largely middle class section of a large midwestern city. All were members of "B" (average) or "c" (above average) classes. Mean IQ was 116. All students took a 30-lesson programmed-learning television course in speed reading (Visual Concepts Company, 1969). Six television lessons on study skills followed the speed reading pro-gram. The television lessons lasted from 28 to 30 minutes and were given five days a week, with supplementary practice sessions each day with a reading drill directed by a record provided by the Visual Con-cepts program. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test A was administered to a "B" class (N==26) and a "c" class (N==19) who began the course In September, 1970, and to a "B" (N==28) and "c" (N==21) class who began the course in November. All classes took the Nelson-Denny Reading Test B at the completion of the course. Retesting was done with the Nelson-Denny A Test (cf. Brown, 1971) in April, 1971, approximately six months after the first group had completed the course and three months after the second group finished it, similar to the time intervals used by Ray and Belden (1968). An additional retest was given in October, 1971, to 34 of the students in the "c" classes. In addition to the test, students were asked to estimate the number of books they had read in the three months after the end of the course. Results and Discussion Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2 show significant improvements in both speed and comprehension subsequent to the speed reading course. Results also substantiate the hypothesis that gains made in reading skills would remain over a period of time (Tables 2 and 3). Although speed leveled off and eventually dropped slightly after the Table 1. Gains in Speed and Comprehension During Course Words per min. Comprehension score Beginning End of course t p 255.7553 628.6277 227.2 <.01 36.4481 40.0000 11.44 <.01 Table 2. Gains in Speed and Comprehension as Reflected in First Retest Scores Words per min. Comprehension score Beginning 255.7553 36.4681 Retest 615.1851 44.2340 t 235.9 26.51 P <.01 <.01 66-rh Table 3. Gains in Speed and Comprehension as Reflected in Delayed Retest Scores (Including only 32 Above Average Students) Beginning Delayed Retest Words per min. Comprehension score 262.8125 508.3125 43.3125 53.0000 t 109.9 19.54 P <.01 <.01 Figure 1. Mean Reading Rates at Beginning and End of Course and on Retest and Delayed Retest Words/min. 700 600 500 300 200 262.8/ 255.7 Beginning / / 665.4-/-/ 628.6 615.2" ........ / ,---~ 5083 End of Course Retest Delayed Retest end of the course, there was still a substantial improvement over the initial speed. The increased rate of comprehension even after the course was over (Figure 2) might indicate that reading skills learned during the course continued to develop even after it was over. How-ever, the fact that speed dropped as comprehension increased after the course provides evidence that improvement in speed and compre-hension are unrelated. This lack of relationship is further corroborated by the low correlations between speed and comprehension in Table 4. Table 4 presents the correlations used to test the various parts of the third hypothesis. Although amount of reading as reported by the students was related to initial speed and to final speed, there was no relation between improvement in comprehension or speed and amount of reading. IQ was related to comprehension on each testing occa-rh-67 Figure 2. Mean Comprehension Scores at the Beginning and End of the Course and on the Retest and Delayed Retest Words/min. 54 53.6 52 /' /' 49.8 /' /' 50 ,., .,/ 48 .,/ 47.7/" 46 / / 44 / 44.2 43.3/ 42 40 40.0 38 36.4/ 36 End of Delayed Beginning Course Retest Retest Solid line All students (N = 94) Broken line Above average students who were available for retest (N = 32) sion, but it was not related to speed or to improvements in speed or r.omprehension. Initial speed was positively related to initial compre-hension, to comprehension at the end of the course, and to final speed, but was unrelated to improvement factors (variables 10 to 13). Initial comprehension was negatively related to improvement in comprehen-sion (probably a ceiling effect), but was not at all related to gains in speed. Although the number of books read in the three months after the course was not related to the amount of gain in reading speed or com-Variable 1. Group "C" or "B") (Above average or average) 2. Time of Course (Nov. or Sept.) 3. Initial Speed 4. Initial Comprehension 5. Speed at End of Course 6. Compo at End of Course 7. Speed on Retest 8. Compo on Retest 9. IQ 10. Compo Gain During Course (No.6-No.4) 11. Compo Gain Before Retest (No.8-No.4) 12. Speed Gain During Course (No.5-No.3) 13. Speed Gain Before Retest (No.7-No.3) 14. Books Read Within 3 Months after Course TABLE 4. Table of Correlations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.000 .006 1.000 .020 *.324 1.000 *.476 -.050 *.296 1.000 .100 -.078 .246 .240 1.000 *.567 .063 *.335 *.679 .184 1.000 .153 .101 *.34-5 *.273 *.571 .249 1.000 *.367 -.087 .235 *.702 *.298 *.583 .265 1.000 *.692 .042 .171 *.577 .201 *.567 .226 *.492 1.000 .166 .141 .080*-.315 -.048 *.483 -.004 -.083 .045 1.000 -.168 -.044 -.071*-.441 .058 -.165 -.028 *.329 -.145 *.312 1.000 .097 -.188 -.0'79 .149 *.947 .078 *.473 .222 .150 -.076 .083 1.000 .155 -.017 -.Ol7 .177 *.514 .136 *.932 .184 .175 .035 -.003 *.534 1.000 .015 .211 *.384 .132 .220 .115 *.333 .192 .128 -.008 .067 .099 .207 1.000 *==Significant at the .01 level. Correlations of .267 are significant at the .01 level (Guilford, 1964). 0"> co I -; ~ rh-69 prehension, this variable was related both to initial speed and to speed on the retest. Thus it would seem that reading practice could be regarded as a "natural" way to improve reading speed. There is also evidence that students who had a quarter of the school year during which to practice their reading skills started the course with a higher rate of speed than those who started at the beginning of the school year. It is noteworthy that these beneficial "natural" effects do not occur with regard to comprehension, although improvements in com-prehension do occur after the course. Conclusions and Summary The present data confirms on a sample of high school girls the findings of previous researchers that significant gains in speed and comprehension can be brought about and retained over a period of time. In the present study, both speed and comprehension increased significantly, although these gains were not correlated. Thus Brim's (1968) findings that comprehension remains constant are not sup-ported, while the warning of the National Association of Secondary School Principals (1965) that improvements in speed and compre-hension may be unrelated would seem to be supported. Somewhat contrary to previous findings (Stebens and Belden, 1970), comprehen-sion was an area of very significant improvement, especially after the course was over. The results confirm the findings of Stevens and Orem (1963) that the superior reader enters the course with a higher reading speed, is a better student, and likes to read. But at the same time there is evidence that their findings should not be misinterpreted or over-emphasized, since there is no evidence that the student described by Stevens and Orem is more or less likely to profit from such a course than other students. Similarly, the "read, read, read" theory is somewhat supported, since practicing reading in itself has been shown to be somewhat re-lated to reading speed; but the amount of reading has been shown to be unrelated to any of the gain scores, and thus it cannot be viewed as a total solution. It would seem that while some gains can come about through mere practice, a specialized program brings about much greater gains for students who might otherwise remain untouched. It would seem highly unlikely that the gains in Figure 1 would occur in a program depending entirely on individual practice. In summary, then, it would seem that speed and comprehension are relatively independent variables. The evidence indicates that a 7o-rh speed reading program such as the one used in this study can provide rather widespread and practical benefits: students on the average can read a book over twice as fast as previously with a gain rather than a loss in comprehension. This in itself is worthwhile. In addition, it seems evident that theories advocating work solely with superior or extremely slow readers are inaccurate, since neither of these groups showed extreme benefit or lack of benefit from this program. Bibliography 1. Beasley, C. E., Jr. A freshman reading program. Journal of De-velopmental Reading, 1959, 2 (Winter), 23-29. 2. Berger, A. Ten important sources of infonnation on speed read-ing. Journal of Reading, 1968, 11, 359-361. 3. Brim, B. L. Impact of a reading improvement program. Journal of Educational Research, 1968, 62, 177-182. 4. Brown, J. 1. University of Minnesota. Personal communication. April, 1971. 5. Combs, S. L. Reading for speed and comprehension. Journal of Secondary Education, 1966, 41, 296-297. 6. Dixon, VY. J. (ed.) BlvID Biomedical Computer Programs. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968. 7. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental statistics in psychology and educa-tion. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1964. 8. Holmes, J. A., and Singer, H. Speed and power of reading in high school. Washington: U. S. Government Publications, 1966. 9. National Association of Secondary-School Principals. Better read. Curriculum Report Number 1. Washington: NASSP, 1965, 1-5. 10. O'Brien, J. A. Silent Reading. New York: MacMillan, 1921. 11. Rauch, S. J., and Weinstein, A. B. A slow look at speed reading. Journal of Reading, 1968, 11, 353-361. 12. Ray, D. D. A statistical examination of immediate gains and re-tained gains of students in the Oklahoma State University Read-ing Improvement Program. Unpublished dissertation, Oklahoma State University (August, 1962). rh-71 13. Ray, D. D., and Belden, B. An examination of immediate gains on a college reading improvement program. Journal of Reading~ 1965, 8~ 201-205. 14. Siegal, M. Adult reading improvement: A five-year report. The Reading Teacher~ 1962, 15~ 246-253. 15. Staton, T. E. Preliminary evidence of permanence of reading rate increases following an intensive training in reading lab. American Psychologist~ 1950, 5~ 341-342. 16. Stebens, L. D., and Belden, B. R. Retention of gains in reading after five semesters. Journal of Reading~ 1970, 13~ 339-344. 17. Stevens, G. L., and Orem, R. Characteristic reading techniques of rapid readers. The Reading Teacher~ 1963, 16~ 102-108. 18. Visual Concepts Company. Perceptive reading and study skills course. Cleveland: Visual Concepts, Inc., 1969. 

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2552&context=reading_horizons

A Reading Development Course

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks at WMU

ScholarWorks at WMU

ScholarWorks at WMU