ANÁLISIS DE COMPETENCIAS

Mastropieri, Scruggs, and Levin (1987) reviewed research on the use of mnemonic instruction in teaching students with LD. Their review focused mainly on the areas of vocabulary learning and content-area information learning. One study they discussed (Mastropieri, Scruggs, Levin, Gaffney, and McLoone, 1985) focused on vocabulary learning and used junior high students with LD as experimental participants. Those i n a mnemonic condition were given strategy instruction and provided with interactive pictures showing recoded stimulus and response items. For example, if they had to learn that barrister means "lawyer," they were provided with a keyword (e.g., bear) that was a concrete familiar word resembling a salient part of the vocabulary word. They were then shown an interactive picture relating the keyword to the definition - for example, that of a bear acting like a lawyer. Compared to a control group of

students who were given direct instruction and non-interactive pictures (pictures depicting only the vocabulary words), those in the mnemonic group performed significantly better (80 vs. 31% correct) on a subsequent test. In a second experiment, they found that students placed in a mnemOnIC condition still outperformed those in a similar control condition (69 vs. 47% correct) even when the former were only provided keywords and had to generate their own interactive images.

Other studies have also found the keyword method, combined with interactive pictures, effective in teaching new vocabulary to children with LD. Condus, Marshall, and Miller (1986), for example, compared the performance on vocabulary learning of students with reading LD in a keyword-image condition with those in a picture-context condition, a sentence-context condition, and a control condition. Those in the picture-context condition were given illustrations representing the definitions of the vocabulary words; those in the sentence-context condition were given sentences that explained the definitions of the words, and asked to relate the meaning of the words to personal experiences; and those in the control condition were asked to use their own study methods to learn the vocabulary word meanings. Condus et al. found that those in the keyword-image condition significantly outperformed those in all the other conditions in remembering word meanings. They found this not just immediately after instruction but also one week, two weeks, and eight weeks afterwards.

Mastropieri, Scruggs, and Fulk (1990) used adolescents with LD as experimental participants, and assigned them to either a keyword mnemonic condition or an experimenter-directed rehearsal condition. These adolescents had to learn 16 difficult vocabulary words - half of them concrete (e.g., oxalis, meaning clover-like plant), and the other half abstract (e.g., vituperation, meaning abusive speech). They found that o n both recall and comprehension tests, those in the mnemonic condition performed significantly better than those in the rehearsal condition.

The pegword mnemonic described earlier ("one is a bun, two is a shoe, ... ten is a hen") has also been found to be an effective strategy in teaching students with LD. Elliott and Gentile (1986) used both LD and non-LD students as experimental participants. They were assigned to either a peg-mnemonic condition or a control condition in which they used their own strategies for learning. The students had to learn lists of words. Elliott and Gentile found that those in the mnemonic condition, for both LD and non-LD groups, recalled more words than those in the control condition.

In a study on content-area information learning, Scruggs, Mastropieri, Levin, and Gaffney (1985) used a combination of keyword, imagery, and pegword strategies in the experimental mnemonic condition to teach three specific attributes of eight North American minerals to adolescents with LD. For example, these students had to learn that (i) pyrite is sixth on the hardness scale of these minerals, (ii) it is yellow in colour, and (iii) it is used in the manufacture of acid. Those in a mnemonic condition were given strategy instruction and provided with interactive pictures incorporating a keyword for the mineral in question, the colour of the mineral, a peg word representing its position on the hardness scale, and something representing its use. For example, for pyrite, a picture of a yellow (colour) pie (keyword) supported by sticks (peg word for six in the previously mentioned peg mnemonic technique that begins "one is a bun, two is a shoe ... ") with acid (use) being poured over it was shown. Three control groups were used: a free-study, and two direct-instruction groups. Students in the free-study group were provided with the necessary materials and told to study independently; those in one of the direct-instruction groups were taught using a teacher-directed question and answer format; and those in the other direct-instruction group were taught using a similar teacher-directed format but were given only half of the minerals list to learn. Scruggs et al. found that students in the mnemonic group performed significantly better than those in control groups on a test that was subsequently administered. They also found

that mastery rate (number of attributes learned over a given amount of time) was higher for those in the mnemonic group compared to those i n the control group that only had to learn half of the list.

Scruggs, Mastropieri, McLoone, Levin, and Morrison (1987) found that using mnemonic pictures was also effective even in the absence of teacher-directed instruction. In their Experiment 1, students with LD were required to remember attribute dichotomies of North American minerals. Students in both the mnemonic and the control conditions were provided with study booklets containing instruction and expository prose. Those in the mnemonic condition, however, had mnemonic pictures in their booklets. For example, to remember that the mineral crocoite is soft, dark, and used in the home, a picture was provided of a crocodile (keyword for crocoite) that was dark (its colour), next to a baby (symbolising soft - instead of hard, which was symbolised by an old man), and in a home setting (to represent home use instead of industrial use). Those in the control condition were also provided with pictures in their booklets, but the pictures were non-mnemonic. The main difference between this experiment and previous similar experiments was that the students with LD had to independently read and learn from the expository prose passages. In a test following the students' independent reading of the passages, Scruggs et al. found that those in the mnemonic condition remembered significantly more.

In Scruggs et al.'s (1987) Experiment 2, the students with LD were required to remember specific attributes of North American minerals (e.g., that crocoite is level 2 on the hardness scale, it is dark orange in colour, and is used for display cases in the home) rather than dichotomous attribute classifications. The procedures were much the same as in Experiment 1, and students in the mnemonic condition were provided with mnemonic pictures (e.g., for crocoite: of a crocodile that was orange in colour, wearing shoes, and inside a display case) while those in the control condition were provided with non-mnemonic pictures. In a test o n

specific attributes that immediately followed independent studying of the passages, those in the mnemonic condition scored significantly better than those in the control condition. The students were also tested o n dichotomous attribute classifications of the minerals, which were not explicitly taught and had to be inferred from the material covered in the passages. The results showed those in the mnemonic condition again performing better, indicating that even in an LD population, mnemonic­ based learning can facilitate information comprehension and usage. That is, information that has been explicitly learnt through mnemonics can be transformed for other purposes. Scruggs et al. also assessed longer term retention (one week after studying the passages) and found that students in the mnemonic condition retained significantly more information than those in the control condition. This was found in both specific-attribute recall and dichotomous-attribute identification.

In two experiments carried out by Peters and Levin ( 1986), the effectiveness of mnemonic imagery in facilitating prose information recall by good and poor readers was investigated. In their first experiment, the students had to learn the names and accomplishments of fictitious characters (similar to the Shriberg et al., 1982, study described earlier). They found that mnemonic imagery helped the recall of not just the good readers but also the poor readers: both scored better than their control counterparts both immediately and after one week. In their second experiment, Peters and Levin examined whether the mnemonic strategy would still be effective in ecologically valid instructional passages. Thus they used nonfictitious passages (again, about famous people and their accomplishments) taken from actual school reading materials. For example, the students had to learn that a violinist named Joseph E. Maddy (the keyword 'mad' was used for those in the mnemonic condition) started the National Music Camp in Interlochen in 1928. Again, as in their first experiment, they found that the mnemonic strategy was effective in facilitating recall of both the good and the poor readers. Both good and poor readers in the mnemonic condition

performed better than their control counterparts in immediate and delayed tests.