The effects of two prepractice procedures on oral reading

An alternating treatments design was used to investigate the relative effects of two oral reading previewing, or prepractice, procedures: (a) silent, in which the student reads silently the assigned reading passage prior to reading the passage aloud, and (b) listening, in which the teacher reads the assigned selection aloud and the student follows along silently prior to the student reading the passage aloud. Six elementary school aged learning disabled students, three boys and three girls, participated in the study. Results indicated that systematic prepractice procedures were related to higher performance levels than was baseline (no prepractice). Differential effects were noted: the listening procedure was related to higher rates of words read correctly than was the silent procedure. Results are discussed further in terms of the implications for research and instructional procedures. The value of oral reading as a viable instructional procedure has been the center of controversy for a number of years (e.g., Goodman 1967, Smith 1973). Critics of oral reading have charged that oral reading is not a functional adult skill, is slower than silent reading, and may conflict with efficient silent reading (e.g., Kirk, Kleibhan, & Lerner 1978). Proponents of oral reading suggest that its diagnostic capabilities, relationship to comprehension, and enhancement of word recognition skills are legitimate rea-sons to continue the use of oral reading as an integral part of early reading in-struction (e.g., Kirk, et al. 1978, Perfett