THE RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF MODELLING AND SHAPING ON ENGLISH LANGUAGE ACHIEVEMENT OF DEAF CHILDREN

Abstract

The present study investigated the relative effectiveness of modelling and shaping on the English language achievement of deaf students. The study also investigated the possible effect of modelling and shaping on the subjects attitudes, and self-concept during English language sessions. The sample was a natural cluster of 45 form four secondary school Nigerian deaf students drawn from a secondary school for the deaf in Ibadan. A 3 x 3 factorial design was adopted. Four instruments namely a Special English language achievement test, an attitude scale, and a self-concept scale were used for the study. The subjects were divided randomly into three groups – the modelling, shaping and control groups. Each group comprised of five students of high, live students of average, and five students of low achievement levels. The three groups were pre and post-tested. The data obtained were analysed by the analysis of covariance and t-test, using the pre-test scores as the covariate and post-test scores as criterion. It was found that both modelling and Shaping programmes significantly improved the EngliSh language achievement of the deaf subjects (F=23.87, df=2/36, P<.01). When the modeling group was compared with the control group with the help of t-test, the modelling group was superior (t=3.13, df=28, P <.001). The shaping group was also found to be superior to the control group (t=2.88, df=28, P <.05). But there was no significant difference between the modelling and shaping programmes in improving the English language of the deaf when the two procedures were compared, although the modelling group had superior adjusted Y-mean score. The average achievement level subjects who used the modelling programme were however superior to their shaping counterparts (t=6.3, df=8, P<.001). The treatment programmes also improved the attitude of the subjects during the study, (F=4.73, df=2/36, P <.05). Although there was no significant difference between the effect of modelling and shaping programmes on the subjects attitude both collectively and at various achievement levels, the modelling high achievers were superior to the shaping high achievers (t=2.31, df=8, P <.05). When the modelling group was compared with the control group, the modelling group was superior (t=3.67, df=28, P<.001). The shaping group was also found to be superior to the control group (t=3.59, df=28, P <.001). Modelling and shaping strategies were found to have significantly influenced the self-concept of the subjects (F=7.52, df=2/36, P<.01). Further analysis showed that the modelling and shaping programmes influenced the self-concept of the subjects equally. But the modelling group was superior to the control (t=2.08, df=8, P<.05). The shaping group was also superior to the control group (t=2.08, df=8, p<. 05). Apart from the modelling low achievers who showed superiority over the shaping low achievers (t=2.96, df=8, P<.05), there was no significant difference between the various modelling achievement levels and their shaping counterparts in self-concept. These findings have important implications for the remediation of deficiencies in underachievement and poor achievement motivation.