The Science of Comprehension Checks (tangible symbols instruction)

charity.rowland@gmail.com

3/17/2016 10:16 AM

Comprehension Checks

When you are first introducing a symbol system to a learner who has no capacity to use any sort of symbols, you are really charting new territory. You need to be pretty scientific about it. In most cases, you need to take a very scientific approach to this effort to insure that the learner understands what these new-fangled “symbols” are (for communication) and what each one means. You will need to take data regularly to chart success, changing the instructional program based on the data. If the learner is succeeding, up the ante: if the learner is struggling, adjust instructional variables to make it easier.

In the beginning, you will need to ascertain that the learner understands the meaning of each new symbol (once she’s on a roll, you don’t need to worry so much about this). In the initial stages of instruction, include a “comprehension check” in your program. Comprehension checks begin when the array of symbols includes two or more. Now the learner must discriminate the correct symbol from an array of at least two possibilities. If there is going to be a correct versus incorrect symbol, then you need to use symbols for very specific things, rather than more generic concepts such as “want”, “help”, “more”, etc. Those generic concepts are pretty much always appropriate to use and thus are not revealing in terms of whether they are being used correctly. So stick with symbols for very specific items to begin with.

There are two major requesting procedures used to check comprehension as a learner first attempts to use tangible symbols in multi-symbol arrays. They differ in the order of presentation of the object and symbol arrays.

Objects first, then symbols. First, offer the learner a choice of objects. Once the learner has indicated which object she wants, offer a choice of symbols for the same objects. If the learner chooses the symbol that corresponds to the chosen object, this shows comprehension, as opposed to random choice. If the learner chooses the wrong symbol, do not give her the chosen object. Show her the correct symbol and set up a new choice of items.

Symbols first, then objects. The second procedure is just the opposite--the learner first chooses from an array of symbols, and then chooses the corresponding object. This is closer to the natural sequence of communication--first we ask for something, then we get it. Again, if the learner chooses the wrong object, do not give it to him. Show him the correct object and set up a new choice of symbols.

Comprehension checks are built into instruction for every new tangible symbol, and is continued until the data show that the learner clearly understands the meaning of that symbol. We generally require the learner to demonstrate comprehension for each symbol with at least 80% accuracy across two consecutive sessions. (Consider that if a student demonstrates 50% accuracy in selecting a symbol from a 2-symbol array, that is only random performance.) The comprehension check should be eliminated on a symbol- by-symbol basis. Once the comprehension check is eliminated, the learner is allowed to use tangible symbols just like one uses words; without an elaborate routine.

See Tangible Symbol Systems, 2nd Ed. (2000) by C. Rowland & P. Schweigert for further information on this topic.

This post is part of the collection