말소리와 음성과학 (Phonetics and Speech Sciences)

  • 제16권3호
  • /
  • Pages.39-48
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 2005-8063(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2586-5854(eISSN)
한국음성학회 (Korean Society of Speech Sciences)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

중학교 읽기부진 학생의 시나리오 글 읽기 유창성 특성

Characteristics of scenario text reading fluency in middle school students with poor reading skills

  • 박지혜 (충남대학교 언어병리학과) ;
  • 성철재 (충남대학교 언어학과)
  • Jihye Park (Speech-Language Pathology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Cheoljae Seong (Linguistics, Chungnam National University)
  • 투고 : 2024.07.31
  • 심사 : 2024.08.24
  • 발행 : 2024.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

읽기 유창성은 문장이나 문단 글을 정확하고 빠르게, 적절한 운율 표현으로 읽는 능력을 의미한다. 대부분의 읽기 유창성 평가에서는 표현력에 대한 객관적인 측정이 어려운 이유로 인해 이를 제외하는 경우가 많다. 이에 본 연구에서는 표현력 있는 읽기를 극대화할 수 있는 시나리오 글 읽기에서의 문형별 운율 특성을 분석하여 모든 읽기 유창성 요소를 살펴보고자 하였다. 연구 대상은 중학교 1-2학년 남학생 30명(일반학생 15명, 읽기부진학생 15명)이었으며, 중학교 국어 교과서에서 발췌한 3편의 시나리오 글을 학생과 연구자가 역할을 나누어 읽고 녹음한 뒤 음성자료를 분석하였다. 정확성 측면의 분석을 위해 각 집단별로 음절 수준에서의 오류유형을 분석하였고, 속도와 운율성 측면에 대해서는 관련 음향변수를 측정하여 살펴보았다. 읽기 정확성 분석 결과, 읽기부진학생집단이 일반학생집단에 비해 높은 오류율을 보였으며, 오류유형의 경우 일반학생집단이 '대치>생략>수정>삽입>반복' 순인 반면, 읽기부진학생집단은 '수정>대치>반복/삽입>생략' 순인 것을 확인하였다. 속도 관련 변수에서는 읽기부진학생집단이 일반학생집단에 비해 모든 문장 유형의 속도가 느렸다. 또한, 운율성 측면으로 살펴본 변수에서도 읽기부진 집단이 문장 내 강세구와 억양구 빈도가 높고 강도 범위가 넓은 특징을 보였다.

Reading fluency refers to the ability to read sentences or paragraphs accurately, quickly, and with appropriate prosodic expression. Most reading fluency assessments exclude expressive ability because it is difficult to objectively measure. Therefore, in this study, we examined all elements of reading fluency by analyzing prosodic characteristics of reading scenario texts to maximize expressive reading. The subjects were 30 male students in the first and second grades of middle school (15 normal and 15 poor readers). To analyze the accuracy aspect, error types at the syllable level were analyzed for each group, and related acoustic variables were measured and examined in terms of prosodic aspects. The reading accuracy analysis showed that the poor reading group had a higher error rate than the normal. In terms of error types, the normal group showed the order of 'substitution>omission>correction>insertion>repetition', whereas the poor reading group was in the order of 'correction>substitution>repetition/insertion>omission'. For the speech tempo, the dyslexic students were slower than the typical students for all sentence types. The prosodic variables also showed a high frequency of accentual phrases (AP) and intonation phrases (IP) in sentences along with a wide intensity range.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Benjamin, R. G., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2010). Text complexity and oral reading prosody in young readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(4), 388-404. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.45.4.2
  2. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2019). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 5.3.14) [Computer program]. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/
  3. Chall, J. S. (1996). Stages of reading development (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
  4. Henderson, A., Goldman-Eisler, F., & Skarbek, A. (1965). Temporal patterns of cognitive activity and breath control in speech. Language and Speech, 8(4), 236-242. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383096500800405
  5. Jun, S. (2000). K-ToBI (Korean ToBI) labelling conventions (version 3.1). Retrieved from https://linguistics.ucla.edu/people/jun/ktobi/k-tobi.html
  6. Kim, A., & Park, S. (2021). Reading fluency of middle school students in Korea: Reading developmental patterns and error patterns. Secondary Education Research, 69(1), 93-120.
  7. Kim, A., Kim, E., & Kim, J. (2022). Reading and writing test for secondary school students: RWT. Seoul, Korea: Insight of Psychology.
  8. Kim, Y. (2017). Systematic and precise instruction of reading and writing. Seoul, Korea: Hakjisa.
  9. Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 230-251. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.45.2.4
  10. Mather, N., & Wendling, B. J. (2012). Essentials of dyslexia assessment and intervention. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Son.
  11. Ministry of Education (2019). Elementary school Korean language 5-2 Na. Seoul, Korea: Miraen.
  12. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the national reading panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implication for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
  13. Park, H. (1999). A study of informal assessment through error analyses in reading disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation & Inclusion Research, 3(2), 20-39.
  14. Park, S., & Seong, C. (2021). A comparative study of prosodic features according to the syntactic diversities between children with reading disability and nondisabled children. Phonetics and Speech Sciences, 13(4), 55-66. https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2021.13.4.055
  15. Ryu, S., Jeon, M., Lee, D., Choi, D., Jeong, J., Kang, H., Park, Y., ... Park, S. (2018). Middle school Korean language 1-2. Seoul, Korea: Kumsung Publishing Company.
  16. Shim, Y., & Jeong, P. (2022). Analysis of characteristics of oral reading fluency and types of reading errors for typically developing students, students with underachievement in reading and students with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability, 24(1), 31-54.
  17. Valencia, S. W., Smith, A. T., Reece, A. M., Li, M., Wixson, K. K., & Newman, H. (2010). Oral reading fluency assessment: Issues of construct, criterion, and consequential validity. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 270-291.
  18. Whalley, K., & Hansen, J. (2006). The role of prosodic sensitivity in children's reading development. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(3), 288-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00309.x