Metapragmatic Awareness of Explanation Adequacy II Follow-Up Research Article
Research Article  |   April 01, 1997
Metapragmatic Awareness of Explanation Adequacy II
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Molly E. Gottschalk
    Savannah Rehabilitation & Nursing Center, Savannah, GA
  • Patricia A. Prelock
    University of Vermont, Burlington
  • Ernest M. Weiler
    University of Cincinnati, OH
  • David Sandman
    St. Francis/St. George Hospital, Cincinnati, OH
  • Contact author: Patricia Prelock, University of Vermont, Communication Sciences Department, E.M. Luse Center for Communication Disorders, Allen House, Burlington, VT 05405-0010.
    Contact author: Patricia Prelock, University of Vermont, Communication Sciences Department, E.M. Luse Center for Communication Disorders, Allen House, Burlington, VT 05405-0010.×
Article Information
School-Based Settings / Research Articles
Research Article   |   April 01, 1997
Metapragmatic Awareness of Explanation Adequacy II
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 1997, Vol. 28, 108-114. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2802.108
History: Received February 28, 1995 , Accepted April 30, 1996
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 1997, Vol. 28, 108-114. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2802.108
History: Received February 28, 1995; Accepted April 30, 1996

Kaufman, Prelock, Weiler, Creaghead, and Donnelly (1994)  showed that third-grade students improved in metapragmatic awareness immediately following training. However, training is only effective if it results in long-term changes. The present study reexamined 24 of the original 32 students in the Kaufman et al. study 6 months following intervention. Two groups of students, those who had participated in a collaborative, classroom-based communication skills unit (CSU) and those who had not, were asked to rate the adequacy of explanations modeled on videotape by children solving math problems and to provide a justification for their ratings.

Results showed that students who had received training 6 months earlier maintained their understanding of the inadequacy of providing only the answer when explaining math problems. Some change also occurred for the untrained students, in that their understanding of the inadequacy of providing only the answer improved from third to fourth grade. Their level of understanding, however, did not surpass and was typically less than that of students who had received training. Results of the current study lend further support to training metapragmatic skills in the classroom, where students can apply their knowledge to enhance their academic and social learning.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Research for this article was supported in part by a U.S. Dept. of Education pupil personnel training grant awarded to the University of Cincinnati (HQ29B0009692). The authors wish to thank Nancy A. Creaghead for her input on earlier versions of this paper. The authors depended on the statistical consultants at the Institute for Policy Research, University of Cincinnati, for the ANOVAs, the reanalyses, and the advice on the use of exact F-ratios for contrast effects. We are particularly grateful for the help of David Moore, who elucidated the strategy of analysis and spent many hours discussing the results. Any errors in the direction of conservative or liberal interpretations result from the authors’ decisions.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access