Many studies have been done comparing individualized and basal reading programs, but few have employed a valid attitude scale to evaluate attitudes toward reading at the primary level

Frederick, E. Coston

Warren, Ann

English

ScholarWorks at WMU

Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy andLanguage ArtsVolume 15Issue 4 July 1975 Article 27-2-1975A Comparative Study of Attitudes of First GradeChildren in Two Reading Programs--Individualizedand BasalAnn WarrenBoise State CollegeE. Coston FrederickBoise State CollegeFollow 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 CitationWarren, A., & Frederick, E. C. (1975). A Comparative Study of Attitudes of First Grade Children in Two Reading Programs--Individualized and Basal. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts, 15 (4). Retrieved fromhttps://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol15/iss4/2A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ATTITUDES OF FIRST GRADE CHILDREN IN TWO READING PROGRAMS-INDIVIDUALIZED AND BASAL Ann Warren & E. Coston Frederick BOISE STATE COLLEGE Background of Problem Many studies have been done comparing individualized and basal reading programs, but few have employed a valid attitude scale to evaluate attitudes toward reading at the primary level. Adams (1962), while comparing individualized reading with basal oriented reading, failed to use an attitude scale in his test data, yet concluded that a more favorable attitude toward reading was found in the individualized reading program. Duker's study (1957) sug-gested that his individualized group evidenced larger vocabulary, read more books, and enjoyed reading more. Again, no scale was used to measure attitudes. Acinapuro's study (1959) of upper elementary children found that an individualized program created more positive attitudes, as measured on an attitude scale. Since more favorable attitudes had been alluded to in some primary studies which used no attitude scale, and other studies used scales but were concerned with a higher grade level, perhaps studies need to be done on the first grade level also using an attitude scale. Statement of Problem Will children at the first grade level show a more favorable atti-tude toward reading in an individualized reading program, as mea-sured by an attitude scale, compared to children in a basal oriented program? Population Ninety-eight first grade children from seven classrooms were in-volved in the research project. Fifty-three children were system~tically sampled from three classrooms employing an individualized reading program and were assigned to the experimental group. Forty-five were 190-rh systematically sampled from children involved in a basal-oriented rf':1oing program and assigned to the control group. Selection of Groups The classrooms were selected by the reading technique used. Pro-fessors who had visited the classrooms reported teachers who employed techniques favoring individualized reading or basal oriented reading. The teachers selected for the individualized group had to be employ-ing the principles of seeking, self-selection, and pacing. Individual conferences between the teacher and child, held one or more times a week, were also necessary for a classroom to be included in the individ-ualized group. No provision was made to control the teacher variable except that they were considered outstanding by a professor or by the teacher's principal. The basal oriented group, the control, was also selected by recom-mendation of the teacher's principal or a professor who had visited the class. These teachers were also reported to be outstanding. The basal group had to be using ability grouping for reading and also a basal series. When a reading group had completed one book in the series, the children would go on to the next book in the series. Measurement Instrument The most intriguing aspect of the study was finding a measurement instrument which would effectively reflect young children's attitudes. None of the usual manifest attitude tests were appropriate for first grade children. The semantic differential was selected for this study for three reasons: validity has been supported (Osgood, et. al.) 1957), reliability has been established (Osgood, et. al.) 1957), and the test could be adapted to young children. The semantic differential is an instrument normally involving twelve opposite adjectives on bipolar scales. The subject places an "X" on a seven-point scale representing how he feels about a particu-lar concept, within the limitation of the opposite adjectives. For example: sweet ........................................................ sour The twelve opposite adjectives represent three factors of any concept, identified by Osgood (1957) as evaluative, potency and activity. The adjectives used in this study resulted from a large scale, trans culture, trans language study by Miron and Osgood (1966) to identify the twelve "purest" adjectives. rh-191 The evaluative factor is the descriptive attribute of a concept reflected by adjectives such as "nice/awful." The potency factor is the power attribute reflected by adjectives such as "old/young." The activity factor is the movement attribute reflected by ad-jectives such as "fast/slow." Because primary aged children were used in the study, a simplified form of the semantic differential was used. It was felt that first grade children might have had difficulty with semantic space represented by a continuum, so a presentation different from the usual was' employed. First, the seven-point scale was reduced to three. The three-point scale was then represented by three clowns, each holding his hands at dif-ferent widths. 3 The clO\vn with the widest hands represented a positive reaction and the number three was assigned to it. The middle clown was number two, and the clown with the narrowest hands was considered negative and assigned the number one. Thus, a child could be asked, How well do you like spinach? The expected answer would be number one. Ice cream would be more likely to gain a "three" response. The concept chosen for the present experiment was: How does reading make me feel? Instead of presenting both of the opposite adjectives for each scale, the tester used only the positive adjective in the sentence, How ................ does reading make me feel? Each child was asked: How Big does reading make me feel? How Helpful does reading make me feel? How Old does reading make me feel? and so on. The child then indicated his answer by pointing to the clown which represented the degree to which he related to the adjective. The total list of adjectives are as follows: big, helpful, old, strong, power-ful, deep, nice, fast, sweet, alive, good, quiet. The tester then made a check on a three-division scale to indicate which degree the child pointed to. At the completion of the test, the tester grouped the scales according to factors and tallied the results for each factor-evaluative, potency, and activity. 192-rh Design and Statistical Analysis The post-test only control group design was used in the experiment. It was assumed that the children entered first grade with randomized attitudes concerning reading. The children were tested individually by the tester in May of the school year. The clown's order was reversed twice during the test in order to prevent response sets. Raw score means were obtained for each of the three factors-evaluative, potency, and activity-for the concept: How does reading make me feel? The difference between the means was determined, the standard error for each s'et of means was calculated, and the one-tailed t test was applied. Alpha was set at .05. Hypothesis and Analysis Hypothesis Number 1 : There will be no significant difference in the evaluative factor on a semantic differential at the first grade level between children in an individualized reading program and children in a basal oriented pro-gram on the concept: How does reading make me feel? TABLE I A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE EVALUATIVE FACTOR FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Total Basal Total Individualized N 53 45 Mean 2.255 2.372 S.D. .456 .524 1.170 No significant difference appeared between the basal group and the individualized group on the evaluative factor. The null hypothesis was accepted. Hypothesis Number 2: There will be no significant difference in the potency factor on a semantic differential at the first grade level between children in an individualized reading program and children in a basal oriented program on the concept: How does reading make me feel? rh-193 TABLE II A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE POTENCY FACTOR FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Total Basal Total Individualized N 53 45 * = significant at the .05 level. Mean 2.250 2.416 S.D. .370 .395 1.196* A significant difference appeared between the basal group and the individualized group on the potency factor in favor of the experi-mental group. The null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis Number 3 : There will be no significant difference In the actIvIty factor on a semantic differential at the first grade level between children in an individualized reading program and children in a basal oriented pro-gram on the concept: How does reading make me feel? TABLE III A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE ACTIVITY FACTOR FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Total Basal Total Individualized N 53 45 * = significant at the .05 level. Mean 2.161 2.339 S.D. .380 .531 1.832* A significant difference appeared between the basal group and the individualized group on the activity factor. The null hypothesis was rejected. Comparison of Mean Scores for Girls After closer investigation of the data, the tester felt it valuable to compare the girls involved in basal reading with the girls involved in individualized reading on the three factors: evaluative, potency, and activity. 194-rh TABLE IV A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE EVALUATIVE FACTOR FOR THE GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? N Mean S.D. Girls Basal 24 2.354 .396 .040 Girls Individualized 23 2.348 .573 No significant difference appeared between the girls in the basal group and the girls in the individualized group on the evaluative factor. TABLE V A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE POTENCY FACTOR FOR THE GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Girls Basal Girls Individualized N 24 23 Mean 2.208 2.337 S.D. .381 .338 1.229 No significant difference appeared between the girls in the basal group and the girls in the individualized group on the potency factor. TABLE VI A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE ACTIVITY FACTOR FOR THE GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Girls Basal Girls Individualized N 24 23 * = significant at the .05 level. Mean 2.146 2.391 S.D. .375 .527 1.788* A significant difference appeared between the girls in the basal group and the girls in the individualized group on the activity factor in favor of the individualized group. rh-195 Comparison of Mean Scores for Boys It was also felt to be of valuf' to compare the boys im"oh:ed in basal reading with the boys involved in individualized reading on the thrf'e factors: cvaluativf', potency, and activity. TABLE VII A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE EVALUATIVE FACTOR FOR THE BOYS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Boys Basal Boys Individualized N 29 22 Alean 2.172 2.398 S.D. .491 .480 ~o significant difTerence appeared Of'tWf'f'1l the boys in the basal group and thf' boys in tilt' individualizf'd group on the evaluative factor. TABLE VIII A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE POTENCY FACTOR FOR THE BOYS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Boys Basal Boys Individualized N 29 22 * = significant at the .05 level. Mean 2.284 2.500 S.D. .364 .443 1.830-1(· A significant difference appeared between the boys in the basal group and the boys in the individualized group on the potency factor in favor of the individualized group. TABLE IX A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE ACTIVITY FACTOR FOR THE BOYS ON THE CONCEPT: HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? Boys Basal Boys Individualized N 29 22 Mean 2.181 2.284 S.D. .389 .542 .746 196-rh No 51ignificant difference appeared between the boys in the basal group and the boys in the individualized group on the activity factor. Conclusions and Discussion The evaluative factor in the semantic differential reflects somewhat of a cognitive response. As such, the children may have been respond-ing to what they had been taught about reading-that reading is nice, sweet, and good. Very few children in either the experimental or con-trol group responded negatively. Unlike the evaluative factor, however, children are not told that reading will make them feel big, old, strong, or powerful-the adjec-tives used for the potency factor. If children respond to these scales favorably, they are reflecting how they feel about the concept rather than what they have been told. The significant difference in favor of the experimental group apparently indicates that when children select their own books and read without being compared to other children that they feel more positively about reading. It would appear that the individualized reading program provided more support through self-selection and success so that the children in that program felt bigger, older, stronger, and more powerful than the children in the basal program. The activity scales (helpful, fast, alive, and quiet), like the potency factor, are not learned. Basal reading programs are often characterized by immobility of the children. That is, the physical orientation of the reading group precludes much movement away from the reading circle. The books are often on the table when the children arrive for reading groups. When they return to their desks, they become occupied with various worksheets. Little opportunity is available for children to share their books or carry out book activities. Thus, children in an in-dividualized reading program possibly feel more active about reading than those in a basal program. There is a further possibility that children in an individualized reading program simply read much more than basal children, and therefore reflect a greater change in attitude. It is interesting to note that boys in the individualized reading program seemed to reflect more positive potency attitudes toward reading than boys in the basal programs. There has been much dis-cussion concerning the possible female orientation of early school read-ing programs. Perhaps further research will throw more light on in-dividualized reading as one method to re-orient the personal responses to reading. rh-197 Further research is needed on the adaptation of the semantic dif-ferential to first grade children. It is an intriguing concept of measur~­ment, and seems to represent the personalized goals of reading more realistically than the u9ual standardized instruments. SUMMARY First grade children in an individualized reading program reflected more positive attitudes on the potency and activity factors of a semantic differential than children in a basal reading program on the concept: How does reading make me feel? No differences occurred on the evaluative factors. First grade boys in an individualized reading program reflected a more positive potency attitude than boys in a basal program. First grade girls in an individualized reading program reflected a more positive feeling of activity than girls in a basal program. REFERENCES Acinapuro, Philip J0geph. "A Comparative Study of the Results of Two Reading Programs-An Individualized Pattern and a Three Ability Group Pattern," Doctoral Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University (New York, 1959). Adams, Phylliss. "Investigations of an Individualrized Reading Pro-gram and a Modified Basal Reading Program in Grade One," Dissertation Abstracts) 23, No.3, 1962. Duker, Sam. ":Masters' Studies in Individualized Reading," Elemen-tary English) Vol. 36 (March, 1963),280-82. Miron, Murray, and Osgood, Charles E. "Language Behavior: The Multivariate Structure of Qualification," Handbook of Multivari-ate Experimental Psychology. Edited by R. B. Cattell. Chicago: Rand, McNally, 1966. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. j., and Tannenbaum, P. H. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957. 

A Comparative Study of Attitudes of First Grade Children in Two Reading Programs--Individualized and Basal

Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and 
Language Arts 
Volume 15 
Issue 4 July 1975 Article 2 
7-2-1975 
A Comparative Study of Attitudes of First Grade Children in Two 
Reading Programs--Individualized and Basal 
Ann Warren 
Boise State College 
E. Coston Frederick 
Boise State College 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons 
 Part of the Education Commons 
Recommended Citation 
Warren, A., & Frederick, E. C. (1975). A Comparative Study of Attitudes of First Grade Children in Two 
Reading Programs--Individualized and Basal. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts, 
15 (4). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol15/iss4/2 
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 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF 
ATTITUDES OF FIRST GRADE CHILDREN 
IN TWO READING PROGRAMS-
INDIVIDUALIZED AND BASAL 
Ann Warren & E. Coston Frederick 
BOISE STATE COLLEGE 
Background of Problem 
Many studies have been done comparing individualized and basal 
reading programs, but few have employed a valid attitude scale to 
evaluate attitudes toward reading at the primary level. 
Adams (1962), while comparing individualized reading with basal 
oriented reading, failed to use an attitude scale in his test data, yet 
concluded that a more favorable attitude toward reading was found 
in the individualized reading program. Duker's study (1957) sug-
gested that his individualized group evidenced larger vocabulary, read 
more books, and enjoyed reading more. Again, no scale was used to 
measure attitudes. Acinapuro's study (1959) of upper elementary 
children found that an individualized program created more positive 
attitudes, as measured on an attitude scale. 
Since more favorable attitudes had been alluded to in some primary 
studies which used no attitude scale, and other studies used scales but 
were concerned with a higher grade level, perhaps studies need to be 
done on the first grade level also using an attitude scale. 
Statement of Problem 
Will children at the first grade level show a more favorable atti-
tude toward reading in an individualized reading program, as mea-
sured by an attitude scale, compared to children in a basal oriented 
program? 
Population 
Ninety-eight first grade children from seven classrooms were in-
volved in the research project. Fifty-three children were system~tically 
sampled from three classrooms employing an individualized reading 
program and were assigned to the experimental group. Forty-five were 
190-rh 
systematically sampled from children involved in a basal-oriented 
rf':1oing program and assigned to the control group. 
Selection of Groups 
The classrooms were selected by the reading technique used. Pro-
fessors who had visited the classrooms reported teachers who employed 
techniques favoring individualized reading or basal oriented reading. 
The teachers selected for the individualized group had to be employ-
ing the principles of seeking, self-selection, and pacing. Individual 
conferences between the teacher and child, held one or more times a 
week, were also necessary for a classroom to be included in the individ-
ualized group. No provision was made to control the teacher variable 
except that they were considered outstanding by a professor or by the 
teacher's principal. 
The basal oriented group, the control, was also selected by recom-
mendation of the teacher's principal or a professor who had visited the 
class. These teachers were also reported to be outstanding. The basal 
group had to be using ability grouping for reading and also a basal 
series. When a reading group had completed one book in the series, 
the children would go on to the next book in the series. 
Measurement Instrument 
The most intriguing aspect of the study was finding a measurement 
instrument which would effectively reflect young children's attitudes. 
None of the usual manifest attitude tests were appropriate for first 
grade children. 
The semantic differential was selected for this study for three 
reasons: validity has been supported (Osgood, et. al.) 1957), reliability 
has been established (Osgood, et. al.) 1957), and the test could be 
adapted to young children. 
The semantic differential is an instrument normally involving 
twelve opposite adjectives on bipolar scales. The subject places an 
"X" on a seven-point scale representing how he feels about a particu-
lar concept, within the limitation of the opposite adjectives. For 
example: 
sweet ........................................................ sour 
The twelve opposite adjectives represent three factors of any concept, 
identified by Osgood (1957) as evaluative, potency and activity. The 
adjectives used in this study resulted from a large scale, trans culture, 
trans language study by Miron and Osgood (1966) to identify the 
twelve "purest" adjectives. 
rh-191 
The evaluative factor is the descriptive attribute of a concept 
reflected by adjectives such as "nice/awful." 
The potency factor is the power attribute reflected by adjectives 
such as "old/young." 
The activity factor is the movement attribute reflected by ad-
jectives such as "fast/slow." 
Because primary aged children were used in the study, a simplified 
form of the semantic differential was used. It was felt that first grade 
children might have had difficulty with semantic space represented by 
a continuum, so a presentation different from the usual was' employed. 
First, the seven-point scale was reduced to three. The three-point scale 
was then represented by three clowns, each holding his hands at dif-
ferent widths. 
3 
The clO\vn with the widest hands represented a positive reaction 
and the number three was assigned to it. The middle clown was 
number two, and the clown with the narrowest hands was considered 
negative and assigned the number one. Thus, a child could be asked, 
How well do you like spinach? The expected answer would be number 
one. Ice cream would be more likely to gain a "three" response. 
The concept chosen for the present experiment was: How does 
reading make me feel? Instead of presenting both of the opposite 
adjectives for each scale, the tester used only the positive adjective in 
the sentence, How ................ does reading make me feel? Each child 
was asked: How Big does reading make me feel? How Helpful does 
reading make me feel? How Old does reading make me feel? and so 
on. The child then indicated his answer by pointing to the clown 
which represented the degree to which he related to the adjective. The 
total list of adjectives are as follows: big, helpful, old, strong, power-
ful, deep, nice, fast, sweet, alive, good, quiet. 
The tester then made a check on a three-division scale to indicate 
which degree the child pointed to. At the completion of the test, the 
tester grouped the scales according to factors and tallied the results 
for each factor-evaluative, potency, and activity. 
192-rh 
Design and Statistical Analysis 
The post-test only control group design was used in the experiment. 
It was assumed that the children entered first grade with randomized 
attitudes concerning reading. 
The children were tested individually by the tester in May of the 
school year. The clown's order was reversed twice during the test in 
order to prevent response sets. 
Raw score means were obtained for each of the three factors-
evaluative, potency, and activity-for the concept: How does reading 
make me feel? The difference between the means was determined, the 
standard error for each s'et of means was calculated, and the one-
tailed t test was applied. 
Alpha was set at .05. 
Hypothesis and Analysis 
Hypothesis Number 1 : 
There will be no significant difference in the evaluative factor on 
a semantic differential at the first grade level between children in an 
individualized reading program and children in a basal oriented pro-
gram on the concept: How does reading make me feel? 
TABLE I 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE EVALUATIVE FACTOR 
FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Total Basal 
Total Individualized 
N 
53 
45 
Mean 
2.255 
2.372 
S.D. 
.456 
.524 
1.170 
No significant difference appeared between the basal group and 
the individualized group on the evaluative factor. The null hypothesis 
was accepted. 
Hypothesis Number 2: 
There will be no significant difference in the potency factor on 
a semantic differential at the first grade level between children in 
an individualized reading program and children in a basal oriented 
program on the concept: How does reading make me feel? 
rh-193 
TABLE II 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE POTENCY FACTOR 
FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Total Basal 
Total Individualized 
N 
53 
45 
* = significant at the .05 level. 
Mean 
2.250 
2.416 
S.D. 
.370 
.395 
1.196* 
A significant difference appeared between the basal group and the 
individualized group on the potency factor in favor of the experi-
mental group. The null hypothesis was rejected. 
Hypothesis Number 3 : 
There will be no significant difference In the actIvIty factor on a 
semantic differential at the first grade level between children in an 
individualized reading program and children in a basal oriented pro-
gram on the concept: How does reading make me feel? 
TABLE III 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE ACTIVITY FACTOR 
FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Total Basal 
Total Individualized 
N 
53 
45 
* = significant at the .05 level. 
Mean 
2.161 
2.339 
S.D. 
.380 
.531 
1.832* 
A significant difference appeared between the basal group and the 
individualized group on the activity factor. The null hypothesis was 
rejected. 
Comparison of Mean Scores for Girls 
After closer investigation of the data, the tester felt it valuable 
to compare the girls involved in basal reading with the girls involved 
in individualized reading on the three factors: evaluative, potency, 
and activity. 
194-rh 
TABLE IV 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE EVALUATIVE FACTOR 
FOR THE GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
N Mean S.D. 
Girls Basal 24 2.354 .396 
.040 
Girls Individualized 23 2.348 .573 
No significant difference appeared between the girls in the basal 
group and the girls in the individualized group on the evaluative factor. 
TABLE V 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE POTENCY FACTOR 
FOR THE GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Girls Basal 
Girls Individualized 
N 
24 
23 
Mean 
2.208 
2.337 
S.D. 
.381 
.338 
1.229 
No significant difference appeared between the girls in the basal 
group and the girls in the individualized group on the potency factor. 
TABLE VI 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE ACTIVITY FACTOR 
FOR THE GIRLS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Girls Basal 
Girls Individualized 
N 
24 
23 
* = significant at the .05 level. 
Mean 
2.146 
2.391 
S.D. 
.375 
.527 
1.788* 
A significant difference appeared between the girls in the basal 
group and the girls in the individualized group on the activity factor 
in favor of the individualized group. 
rh-195 
Comparison of Mean Scores for Boys 
It was also felt to be of valuf' to compare the boys im"oh:ed in 
basal reading with the boys involved in individualized reading on 
the thrf'e factors: cvaluativf', potency, and activity. 
TABLE VII 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE EVALUATIVE FACTOR 
FOR THE BOYS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Boys Basal 
Boys Individualized 
N 
29 
22 
Alean 
2.172 
2.398 
S.D. 
.491 
.480 
~o significant difTerence appeared Of'tWf'f'1l the boys in the basal 
group and thf' boys in tilt' individualizf'd group on the evaluative 
factor. 
TABLE VIII 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE POTENCY FACTOR 
FOR THE BOYS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Boys Basal 
Boys Individualized 
N 
29 
22 
* = significant at the .05 level. 
Mean 
2.284 
2.500 
S.D. 
.364 
.443 
1.830-1(· 
A significant difference appeared between the boys in the basal 
group and the boys in the individualized group on the potency factor 
in favor of the individualized group. 
TABLE IX 
A COMPARISON OF THE MEAN SCORES ON THE ACTIVITY FACTOR 
FOR THE BOYS ON THE CONCEPT: 
HOW DOES READING MAKE ME FEEL? 
Boys Basal 
Boys Individualized 
N 
29 
22 
Mean 
2.181 
2.284 
S.D. 
.389 
.542 
.746 
196-rh 
No 51ignificant difference appeared between the boys in the basal 
group and the boys in the individualized group on the activity factor. 
Conclusions and Discussion 
The evaluative factor in the semantic differential reflects somewhat 
of a cognitive response. As such, the children may have been respond-
ing to what they had been taught about reading-that reading is nice, 
sweet, and good. Very few children in either the experimental or con-
trol group responded negatively. 
Unlike the evaluative factor, however, children are not told that 
reading will make them feel big, old, strong, or powerful-the adjec-
tives used for the potency factor. If children respond to these scales 
favorably, they are reflecting how they feel about the concept rather 
than what they have been told. The significant difference in favor of 
the experimental group apparently indicates that when children select 
their own books and read without being compared to other children 
that they feel more positively about reading. It would appear that the 
individualized reading program provided more support through self-
selection and success so that the children in that program felt bigger, 
older, stronger, and more powerful than the children in the basal 
program. 
The activity scales (helpful, fast, alive, and quiet), like the potency 
factor, are not learned. Basal reading programs are often characterized 
by immobility of the children. That is, the physical orientation of the 
reading group precludes much movement away from the reading circle. 
The books are often on the table when the children arrive for reading 
groups. When they return to their desks, they become occupied with 
various worksheets. Little opportunity is available for children to 
share their books or carry out book activities. Thus, children in an in-
dividualized reading program possibly feel more active about reading 
than those in a basal program. 
There is a further possibility that children in an individualized 
reading program simply read much more than basal children, and 
therefore reflect a greater change in attitude. 
It is interesting to note that boys in the individualized reading 
program seemed to reflect more positive potency attitudes toward 
reading than boys in the basal programs. There has been much dis-
cussion concerning the possible female orientation of early school read-
ing programs. Perhaps further research will throw more light on in-
dividualized reading as one method to re-orient the personal responses 
to reading. 
rh-197 
Further research is needed on the adaptation of the semantic dif-
ferential to first grade children. It is an intriguing concept of measur~­
ment, and seems to represent the personalized goals of reading more 
realistically than the u9ual standardized instruments. 
SUMMARY 
First grade children in an individualized reading program reflected 
more positive attitudes on the potency and activity factors of a 
semantic differential than children in a basal reading program on the 
concept: How does reading make me feel? 
No differences occurred on the evaluative factors. 
First grade boys in an individualized reading program reflected a 
more positive potency attitude than boys in a basal program. 
First grade girls in an individualized reading program reflected 
a more positive feeling of activity than girls in a basal program. 
REFERENCES 
Acinapuro, Philip J0geph. "A Comparative Study of the Results of 
Two Reading Programs-An Individualized Pattern and a Three 
Ability Group Pattern," Doctoral Dissertation, Teachers College, 
Columbia University (New York, 1959). 
Adams, Phylliss. "Investigations of an Individualrized Reading Pro-
gram and a Modified Basal Reading Program in Grade One," 
Dissertation Abstracts) 23, No.3, 1962. 
Duker, Sam. ":Masters' Studies in Individualized Reading," Elemen-
tary English) Vol. 36 (March, 1963),280-82. 
Miron, Murray, and Osgood, Charles E. "Language Behavior: The 
Multivariate Structure of Qualification," Handbook of Multivari-
ate Experimental Psychology. Edited by R. B. Cattell. Chicago: 
Rand, McNally, 1966. 
Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. j., and Tannenbaum, P. H. The Measurement 
of Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957. 


https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2486&amp;context=reading_horizons

A Comparative Study of Attitudes of First Grade Children in Two Reading Programs--Individualized and Basal

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks at WMU

ScholarWorks at WMU