The effects of practice on the reading rate, accuracy, duration, and visual fatigue of students with low vision when accessing standard-size print with optical devices

Abstract

There is a limited understanding of the effects of practice on reading efficiency and comfort when students with low vision read standard print with optical devices. This descriptive study used a multiple baseline single-subject design to examine effects of practice on the reading rate, accuracy, duration and visual fatigue of three high school students with visual impairments when they read standard print with newly prescribed optical devices (reading spectacles). The study also examined differences between measures of reading efficiency and comfort when students read large print without optical devices and when they read standard print with optical devices. Baseline data were collected prior to intervention. Intervention consisted of daily practice sessions reading novels in standard print with individually prescribed optical devices for a maximum of thirty-eight minutes. Measures of reading efficiency and comfort were graphed daily during baseline and intervention. Oral reading rate, accuracy, and comprehension were probed during intervention and maintenance. A positive relationship between practice and oral reading rate was demonstrated for three students and a positive relationship for silent reading rate for two students. No relationship was demonstrated between practice and duration nor between practice and fatigue. One student maintained oral reading rate three weeks after cessation of practice sessions. There were no advantages for reading large print over reading standard print with optical devices for two of the students on measures of reading rate, accuracy, or duration; one student demonstrated no differences between reading media while the other demonstrated faster reading rates with standard print. One student demonstrated no differences in accuracy, but faster rates and longer duration with large print. Although students reported the same symptoms of visual fatigue with both media, they demonstrated more frequent occurrences of fatigue when reading standard print with optical devices. All expressed preference for reading standard print with reading spectacles. Reasons included portability, availability of materials, and social implications. There were two additional findings not related to the purposes of this study. Although all students were proficient readers, their oral and silent reading rates were almost equivalent. Individual patterns of miscues appeared to reflect students' visual field losses.