Comparison of Oral Reading Errors between Contextual ...
International Education Studies; Vol. 10, No. 1; 2017 ISSN 1913-9020 E-ISSN 1913-9039
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
Comparison of Oral Reading Errors between Contextual Sentences and Random Words among Schoolchildren
Nursyairah Mohd Khalid1, Noor Halilah Buari1,2 & Ai-Hong Chen1,2 1 Optometry, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Malaysia 2 iROViS, CoRe (Health and Wellbeing) Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Malaysia Correspondence: Ai-Hong Chen, Community of Research (Health and Wellbeing) Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Malaysia. Tel: 60-12-334-7032. E-mail: aihong0707@
Received: June 27, 2016 doi:10.5539/ies.v10n1p47
Accepted: August 10, 2016
Online Published: December 24, 2016
URL:
Abstract
This paper compares the oral reading errors between the contextual sentences and random words among schoolchildren. Two sets of reading materials were developed to test the oral reading errors in 30 schoolchildren (10.00?1.44 years). Set A was comprised contextual sentences while Set B encompassed random words. The schoolchildren were asked to read both contextual sentences and random words reading charts at random order, loudly at normal reading speed. The reading errors were quantified based on the number of mistakes made during reading. The errors were classified into 6 categories; mispronunciations, substitutions, refusals, additions, omissions, and reversals. The results indicated the mean number of errors made by schoolchildren in reading sentence of Set A and Set B were 1.30?0.23 words and 2.70?0.41 words respectively. Random words, Set B, gave a significantly higher number of reading errors compared to contextual sentences, Set A, (U=287, z=-2.46, p=0.01). Reading the random words gave higher number of errors compared to reading the contextual sentences. Mispronunciations and substitutions were the most possible types of errors made when reading Set B (U=234, z=-3.60, p=0.05), therefore the analysis then proceeded to use the independent samples of nonparametric tests, Mann-Whitney U Test. The significant value was set at p ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- chapter 7 probability arizona state university
- language production ucsd cognitive science
- probability free response w answers
- word length and the structure of short term memory
- delocalization of eigenvectors of random matrices
- bag of words meets bags of popcorn stanford university
- fast random integer generation in an interval
- feb 28 homework solutions math 151 winter 2012 chapter 6
- comparison of oral reading errors between contextual
Related searches
- oral reading fluency calculator
- oral reading fluency chart
- cpt biopsy of oral lesion
- oral reading fluency rates by grade level
- symptoms of oral thrush
- journal of oral implantology
- american academy of oral implantology
- international journal of oral implantology
- international college of oral implantology
- international college of oral implantologists
- list of oral oncology drugs
- international congress of oral implantologist