Using the Neurological Impress Method with Learning Disabled Readers

Abstract

T he Neurological Impress Method (NIM) attempts to teach reading skills by having the pupil and the teacher read aloud in unison. The method is described in precise detail by Heckelman (1969). However, little research has been conducted regarding the NIM, and none has been published relating the NIM to learning disabled pupils.Gardner (1965), Embrey (1968), Heckleman (1969), and Langford, Slade, and Barnett (1974) have reported success with various adaptations of the NIM. However, because of the absence of control groups in some cases and the high probability of an expectancy effect in others, these studies have methodological shortcomings in regard to internal and external validity (Campbell & Stanley 1963). Hollingsworth (1970) used a tape-recorded variation of the NIM and found no significant impact.The NIM may hold considerable promise for learning disabled pupils because of its simplicity and reports of its promotion of rapid improvements within a short time. However, because of its emphasis on the auditory modality, it might be less effective for children with auditory learning disabilities. The present study, therefore, was undertaken to examine the effectiveness of the NIM for learning disabled pupils. The following two questions were examined:(1) Will the use of the NIM increase comprehension and word-recognition abilities among learning disabled students?(2) Does the method work less effectively with children who have auditory rather than visual or unidentified learning disabilities? METHODThe 44 students in the study included 14 second graders, 15 third graders, 7 fourth graders, and 18 fifth graders. The four teachers who took part in the study were all certified learning disabilities teachers with four or more years of teaching experience. The students were housed in eight different school buildings in Lake County, Indiana. They ranged in reading ability from 2.6 years below grade level to five months above grade level as measured by the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT), and IQs ranged from 79 to 113. Actual instructional level of reading, according to the learning disabilities teacher and the regular classroom teacher, ranged from three years to six months below grade level. All students were in a regular classroom for the major portion of the school day.The students were seen by the learning disabilities teachers 30 minutes per day and three days per week. The students in the experimental

A Component Analysis of Assisted Reading with a Third Grade Student with a Reading Deficit in a Psychiatric Hospital Setting

“…It replicated much of the previous research with assisted reading (Alber-Morgan et al, 2007;Gilbert et al, 1996;Sherman et al, 2009;Van Holmes & McLaughlin, 1987;Van Wagenen et al, 1987) and its many variations (Blum & Koskinen, 1991;Carbo, 1970;Cunningham, 1978, Heckelman, 1979Lorenz, 1979;Samuels, 1979). In the present analysis, we could employ assisted reading in a unique classroom setting in a hospital.…”

“…The student is required to follow the teacher's finger and read along with the teacher. Although Lorenz (1979) suggested that this procedure might hold promise for students with learning disabilities, he cautioned that the impress method would most likely be less effective with children who have auditory learning disabilities because of the method's dependence on the auditory modality.…”

Fluency and Comprehension Gains as a Result of Repeated Reading

“…The goal of this strategy is to increase fluency by having students and teachers read aloud simultaneously. Although preliminary findings for the method were encouraging, subsequent studies did not produce significant results (Langford et al, 1974;Lorenz & Vockell, 1979).…”

“…Fluency strategies have been designed and empirically tested. One of the first empirically evaluated strategies to focus on fluency was the neurological impress method (Hollingsworth, 1970(Hollingsworth, , 1978Langford, Slade, & Barnett, 1974;Lorenz & Vockell, 1979). The goal of this strategy is to increase fluency by having students and teachers read aloud simultaneously.…”

The Method of Repeated Readings

“…Anecdotal evidence suggested that the students developed more positive attitudes toward reading, were more motivated to pick up a book voluntarily and read it, and appeared more confident in their ability to read (Lorenz & Vockell 1979). Conversely, research also has shown that the method failed to produce gains in reading fluency (Hollingsworth 1970), word recognition, and comprehension (Lorenz & Vockell 1979). The contradictory research findings concerning the NIM leave the practitioner without a clear empirical basis from which to evaluate the applicability of the NIM for classroom instruction, and particularly for learning disabled children.…”