AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
Regarding the time required to read the text, which is another
indicator of the reading level, we found out that approximately
2/3 of the pupils needed 56.0 to 340.17 seconds to read the text
(of 81 words).
Research question 2: Which deficits in partial cognitive
functions are exhibited in 4th grade pupils with mild intellectual
disability educated in school inclusion?
Based on the collected data we can evaluate current level of
individual partial cognitive functions in the cognitive processes
of pupils with MID:
Tactile perception and kinaesthetic sense, body scheme and
spatial orientation - as many as 58.70% of the pupils could not
distinguish materials by touch; as Bednářová & Šmardová
(2007) and Sindelar (2008) note, tactile perception and
kinaesthetic sense preconditions the perception of body scheme;
the fact that as many as 76.09% of the pupils made a maximum
number of mistakes only confirms this theoretical hypothesis;
the pupils with MID have problems with spatial orientation, but
researchers believe that if they receive adequate leadership and
stimulation, problems in this area do not have to come to the
surface (Lečbych, In: Valenta, Michalík, Lečbych et al., 2012);
our sample group confirmed this fact in the re-drawing exercise
when as many as 73.91% of the pupils failed to correctly place
the re-drawn pictures in space although they isolated them from
the background (visual separation), and so this area opens room
for considering the influence of another variable, namely the
social environment.
In the area of visual perception – the area of visual separation
(figure/background differentiation) is described by specialised
literature in terms of limited discrimination of figure and
background in the pupils with MID with pictures from the
background or letters in a text. However, this generalising view
was not confirmed to the full extent since only 13.04% of the
pupils could not isolate a picture from the background and as
many as 30.43% of the pupils did not make a single mistake in
the word re-writing exercise. This allows us to conclude that
pupils with MID do not suffer from significant difficulties in this
area. However, this does not apply to visual differentiation
described below; visual differentiation is characterised by
professional literature (Petráš, In:
Valenta, Michalík, Lečbych et
al., 2012) as troublesome in the pupils with MID when they
perceive the whole as a set of details and relations between them.
This view was confirmed when nearly two thirds of the pupils
made 6 to 10 mistakes (out of the maximum number of 10
mistakes). The opinion described in specialised literature that
pupils with mild intellectual disability often confuse similarly
shaped letters was only confirmed for a third of the pupils. This
allows us to conclude that pupils with MID have more
difficulties in this second phase of visual perception, which also
influences the level of visual memory and so we can presuppose
that if pupils with MID fail to correctly distinguish details by
sight, this deficiency also hinders their theoretical memorisation,
retaining and recalling; as regards the area of visual memory of
the pupils with mild intellectual disability, Svoboda (In: Valenta,
Michalík, Lečbych et al., 2012) makes a general note about the
memory of the pupils with mild intellectual disability, that it is
predominantly mechanic, concrete and short-term, while
Pipeková (2006) adds that it is conditioned by insufficient
quality of primary reception of information by way of
perception, in our case visual perception. In our testing, we only
assessed the short-term visual memory which exhibited, as has
already been mentioned, significant deficiencies in the pupils
with mild intellectual disability, also owing to the above
described facts. In this area, pupils with mild intellectual
disability employed compensatory techniques engaging auditory
perception showing better scores compared to visual perception.
This was also confirmed by the results recorded in the part
requiring pupils to work with unknown shapes (complex
geometric shapes), in which nearly 2/3 of the pupils made 5 to 8
mistakes (out of the maximum number of 8 mistakes).
Nevertheless, it should be emphasised here that 2/3 of the pupils
made 0 to 4 mistakes in the exercise requiring them to remember
letters. This allows us to reason that pupils with mild intellectual
disability do not work in this area with visual memory only,
since it shows significant limitations resulting from the
deficiencies in other areas. They can compensate for deficiencies
in this area to some extent by employing auditory perception
which is described below.
In the area of auditory perception – seems to be better in the
pupils with MID than the visual perception, within the auditory
separation (figure/background differentiation), nearly a half of
students did not make a single mistake in differentiation of
phonemes in a word. This finding was also confirmed in reading
when only 8.70% of the pupils confused acoustically similar
letters. This allows us to reason that these results do not confirm
the views held by some authors (Petráš, In: Valenta, Michalík,
Lečbych et al., 2012) that pupils with mild intellectual disability
have low phonological awareness (auditory analysis and
synthesis). We agree with Zezulková (2011) who asserts, based
on the research she made that these pupils reached a good up to
very good level in the areas of first sound isolation (74.6%
success) and in sound synthesis (56.00% success); in the area of
auditory differentiation, pupils with mild intellectual disability
achieved positive results. As many as 41.30% of the pupils did
not make any mistake and 91.30% of the pupils made 0 to 7
mistakes (out of the maximum number of 15 mistakes). Based
on this, we can conclude that pupils with mild intellectual
disability do not have any significant difficulties in this phase
either. This finding is confirmed in Zezulková's research (2011)
as well (N = 50 pupils with mild intellectual disability), resulting
in low figures in omission of sounds (11.6%), syllables (13.6%),
rhyme production (28.8%), sound substitution (34%) and word
analysis to sounds (40.4%) in the pupils with mild intellectual
disability; a good level in the first syllable isolation (55.2%),
synthesis of sounds (56%), recognition of rhymes (64.4%), first
sound isolation (74.6%); and a very good level in synthesis of
syllables (82%) and analysis of words into syllables (94%); the
peculiarities in the area of auditory memory described in
specialised literature as a difficulty appearing in the pupils with
mild intellectual disability with retaining words and sentences
heard in the short-term memory (Pipeková, 2006) were also
confirmed by the results of our research. Findings in this area
and the greatest percentage of mistakes allow us to conclude that
pupils with mild intellectual disability can remember 3 to 5
successive phonemes, 3 rhyming and non-rhyming words.
Analysis of the Relationship between Partial Cognitive
Functions and Reading Competence in the Pupils with Mild
Intellectual Disability
Given that the data included in statistic do not have normal
distribution, for the comparison Mann-Whitney U-test and T-test
were used, where applicable that if the calculated p-value is
lower than 0,05, then there is statistically significant difference
among analysed groups. In our testing of hypotheses, we
presuppose that one of the pillars of reading competence
(reading technique and method, reading comprehension)
includes specific modalities (visual perception, auditory
perception, tactile perception and kinaesthetic sense, as well as
memory, perception, attention) which do not work in isolation
but rather overlap, and which can be observed as partial
cognitive functions which are necessary for the pupil to produce
a complex performance, i.e. to be able to read, write, etc.
Therefore, we suppose that the fewer mistakes pupils with mild
intellectual disability make in the area of partial cognitive
functions, the fewer mistakes in the reading method and
techniques in quantitative tests. This relationship is also implied
in specialised literature which describes the influence of
cognitive functions on school skills (Blachman, 1991; Siegel,
2003; Leeber, 2006; Sindelar, 2007, 2008; Author, 2009;
Pokorná, 2010; Zezulková, 2011; Doidge, 2012; Liptáková,
2012; Krejčová, 2013; Co-author, 2013); Žovinec, 2014) which
we have used to support our hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1: The reading level within reading method of 4th
grade pupils with mild intellectual disability educated in school
inclusion at an elementary school is under a statistically
significant influence of the level of partial cognitive functions.
- 126 -