Perceptual Training: A Critical Retrospect

  • Lester Mann
  • Libby Goodman


Present-day concern with perceptual* adequacy is one facet of a larger trend currently in vogue in special education, that of diagnostic prescriptive teaching. The diagnostic-prescriptive approach seeks to maximize the efficiency of the teaching-learning process, by matching instructional methods with individual characteristics of the learner. According to a variety of current models, a child’s functioning levels in specific ability or “process” domains; i.e., his strengths and weaknesses, are assessed. This information, in turn, is used to design or direct instructional strategies appropriate to the child’s educational needs and personal learning style. Ideally, one would exploit the child’s strengths and remediate his weaknesses, so as to attain the greatest educational benefits for the child. Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching is not restricted to perceptual assessment alone. It is directed to other processes as well; e.g., auditory memory, language, and encoding skills. However, while there are many dimensions in diagnostic-prescriptive teaching, the perceptual has been most emphasized and popularized by clinicians and teachers.


Visual Perception Handicapped Child Learn Disability Reading Achievement Kindergarten Child 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allen, R. M. Factor Analysis of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception performance of educable mental retardates. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968, 26, 257–258.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alley, G. Perceptual-motor performance of mentally retarded children after systematic visual-perception training. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1968, 73, 247–250.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Alley, G., Snider, W., Spencer, J., and Angell, R. Reading readiness and the Frostig-Home training program. Exceptional children, 1968, 35, 68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Arciszewski, R. A. The effects of visual perception training on the perceptual ability and reading achievement of first grade students. Dissertation Abstracts, 1968, 29, 4174–A.Google Scholar
  5. Bateman, B. The efficacy of an auditory and a visual method of first grade reading instruction with auditory and visual learners. In H. K. Smith (Ed.), Perception and reading. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1968.Google Scholar
  6. Bennett, R. M. A study of the effects of a visual perception program upon school achievement, IQ and visual perception. Dissertation Abstracts, 1968, 29, 3864–A.Google Scholar
  7. Bloom, B. S. Learning for Mastery. Evaluation Comments, 1968, 1, No. 2.Google Scholar
  8. Bortner, M. Perceptual Skills and early reading disability. In L. Mann, and D. Sabatino (Eds.) The second review of special education. Philadelphia: Journal of Special Education Press, 1974, 79-101.Google Scholar
  9. Boyd, L., and Randle, K. Factor Analysis of the Frostig Developmental test of Visual Perception. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1970, 3, 253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bracht, G. H. Experimental factors related to aptitude-treatment interactions. Review of Educational Research, 1970, 40, 627–645.Google Scholar
  11. Buckland, P. and Balow, B. Effects of visual percentual training on reading achievement. Exceptional Children, 1973, 39, 299–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Corah, N. L., and Powell, B. J. A factor analytic study of the Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963, 16, 59–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cawley, J. F., Burrow, W. H., and Goodstein, H. A. An appraisal of Head Start participants and non-participants (Research report, Contract OEO4177, Office of Economic Opportunity). Storrs, Conn.: University of Connecticut, 1968.Google Scholar
  14. Cowles, J. D. An experimental study of visual-perceptual training and readiness scores with certain first grade children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Alabama, 1968.Google Scholar
  15. De Hirsch, K., Jansky, J., and Langford, W. S. Predicting reading failure. New York: Harper and Row, 1966.Google Scholar
  16. Ebel, R. L. And still the dryads linger. American Psychologist, 1914, 29, 485–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Falik, L. H. The effects of special training in kindergarten with second grade reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1969, 2, 325–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Faustman, M. N. Some effects of perception training in kindergarten on first grade success in reading. International Reading Association Conference (Seattle, May, 1967), ERIC ED 017-397.Google Scholar
  19. Fleishman, E. A. On the relation between abilities, learriing, and human performance. American Psychologist, 1972, 27, 1017–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Forgone, C. Effects of visual perception and language training upon certain abilities of retarded children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, 1966.Google Scholar
  21. Fortenberry, W. D. Effectiveness of a special program for development of word recognition by culturally disadvantaged first grade pupils. ERIC ED 027-368, 1968.Google Scholar
  22. Freer, F. J. Visual and auditory perceptual modality differences as related to success in first grade reading word recognition. Dissertation Abstracts, 6193-A. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, 1971.Google Scholar
  23. Frostig, M. Pilot program in early childhood education, Compton, City School District, 1970. Unpublished report, Project 75-E. 1. A.Google Scholar
  24. Frostig, M., and Horne, D. The Frostig program for the development of visual perception. Chicago: Follett, 1964.Google Scholar
  25. Frostig, M., Maslow, P., Lefevre, D. W., and Whittlesey, J. R. B. The Marianne Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception, Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1961.Google Scholar
  26. Garrison, E. B. A study in visual-motor perception training in first grade, ERIC ED 031-292, 1965.Google Scholar
  27. Getman, G. N., and Kane, E. R. The physiology of readiness: An action program for the development of perception for children. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Programs to Accelerate School Success, 1964.Google Scholar
  28. Goodman, L. Efficacy of visual motor training for orthopedically handicapped children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia, 1973.Google Scholar
  29. Goodman, L., and Hammill, D. The effectiveness of Kephart-Getman activities in developing perceptual-motor and cognitive skills. Focus on Exceptional Children, 1973, 4, 1–9.Google Scholar
  30. Goodman, L., and Hammill, D. The Goodman-Hammill Basic Schools Skills Inventory. Follett, 1975.Google Scholar
  31. Goodman, L., and Wiederholt, J. L. Predicting reading achievement in disadvantaged children. Psychology in the Schools, 1973, 10, 181–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Halliwell, J. W., and Solan, H. A. The effects of a supplemental perceptual training program on reading achievement. Exceptional Children, 1972, 38, 613–621.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hammill, D. Training visual perception processes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1972, 5, 552–559.Google Scholar
  34. Hammill, D., Colarusso, R. P., and Wiederholt, J. L. Diagnostic value of the Frostig test: A factor analytic approach. Journal of Special Education, 1970, 4, 279–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hammill, D., Goodman, L., and Wiederholt, J. L. Visual-motor processes: Can we train them? Reading Teacher, 1914, 27, 469–478.Google Scholar
  36. Hammill, D., and Wiederholt, J. L. Review of the Frostig Visual Perception Test and the related training program. In L. Mann and D. Sabatino (Eds.), The first review of special education. Philadelphia: Journal of Special Education Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  37. Hendry, B. C. The effects of gross-motor movements on the perceptual-motor development of primary age multiply handicapped children. Dissertation Abstracts, 1970, 31, 5231–A.Google Scholar
  38. Hiers, M. H. A comparison of the readiness test performance of a group of primary level educable mentally retarded children instructed on visual-motor perception tasks and a comparable group receiving no prescribed instruction. Dissertation Abstracts, 1970, 31, 6440–A.Google Scholar
  39. Jackson, R. Developing criterion-referenced tests. Princeton, New Jersey. Educational Testing Service, 1970. ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurement, and Evaluation, ED 041-052.Google Scholar
  40. Jacobs, J. N. An evaluation of the Frostig visual-perception training program. Educational Leadership, 1968, 25, 332–340.Google Scholar
  41. Jacobs, J. N., Wirthlin, L. D., and Miller, C. B. A follow-up evaluation of the Frostig visual perceptual training program. Educational Leadership Research Supplement, 1968, 4, 169–175.Google Scholar
  42. Janssen, D. R. Effects of visual and auditory perceptual attitudes and letter discrimination pretraining on word recognition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, 1971.Google Scholar
  43. Johnson, M. S., and Kress, R. A. Task analysis for criterion-referenced tests, measurement, and evaluation, ED 041 052, 1971.Google Scholar
  44. Keim, R. P. Visual-motor training, readiness, and intelligence of kindergarten children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1970, 3, 256–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Keogh, B. K., and Smith, C. E. Visuo-motor ability for school prediction: A seven year study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1967, 25, 101–110.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kephart, N. C. The slow learner in the classroom (2nd ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1971.Google Scholar
  47. Kibler, R. T. (Ed.). Behavioral objectives and instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1970.Google Scholar
  48. Kriewall, T. E., and Hirsch, E. The development and interpretation of criterion-referenced tests. Madison: University of Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, 1969. ERIC ED 042-815.Google Scholar
  49. Lewis, J. N. The improvement of reading ability through a developmental program in visual perception. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1968, 1, 652–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lilly, S. M., and Kelleher, J. Modality strengths and aptitude-treatment interaction. Journal of Special Education, 1973, 7, 5–13.Google Scholar
  51. Linn, S. H. From the classroom: Visual perceptual training for kindergarten children. Academic Therapy Quarterly, 1967, 4, 255–258.Google Scholar
  52. Lipton, E. D. The effects of physical education programs to develop directionality of movement on perceptual-motor development, visual perception, and reading readiness of first grade children. Dissertation Abstracts, 1969, 30, 2362–A.Google Scholar
  53. Mann, L. Perceptual training: Misdirections and redirections. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1970, 40, 30–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mann, L. Perceptual training revisited: The training of nothing at all. Rehabilitation Literature, 1971, 32, 322-237, 335. (a).Google Scholar
  55. Mann, L. The ground game in special education. Journal of Special Education, 1971, 5, 53–58. (b).Google Scholar
  56. Mann, L. and Phillips, W. A. Fractional practices in special education: A critique. Exceptional Children, 1967, 33. 311–317.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. McBeath, P. M. The effectiveness of three reading preparedness programs for perceptually handicapped kindergarteners. Dissertation Abstracts, 1966, 27, 115–A.Google Scholar
  58. McRaney, K. A. A study of perceptual motor exercises utilized as an early grade enrichment program for the improvement of learning activity and motor development. Dissertation Abstracts, 1970, 31, 2935–A.Google Scholar
  59. Mould, R. E. An evaluation of the effectiveness of a special program for retarded readers manifesting disturbed visual perception. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington State University, 1965.Google Scholar
  60. Newcomer, P. L., and Goodman, L. Effect of modality of instruction on the learning of meaningful and non-meaningful material by auditory and visual learners. Journal of Special Education, 1975, 9, 261–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. O’Connor, C. Effects of selected physical activities upon motor performance perceptual performance and academic achievement of first graders. Perceptual Motor Skills, 1968, 29, 703–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ohnmacht, F., and Olson, A. V. Canonical analysis of reading readiness measures and the Frostig DTVP. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1968, 28, 479–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Okada, D. M. The effects of perceptual and perceptual motor training on the visual perception, auditory perception, and language performance of institutionalized educable mental retardates. Dissertation Abstracts, 1969, 30, 2857–A.Google Scholar
  64. Popham, W. T. Objectives-based management strategies for large educational systems. Journal of Educational Research, 1972, 66, 4–9.Google Scholar
  65. Proger, B. B., and Mann, L. Criterion-referenced measurement: The world of gray versus black and white. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1973, 6, 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pryzwanski, W. E. The effects of perceptual-motor training and manuscript writing on reading readiness skills in kindergarten. Dissertation Abstracts, 1969, 31, 384–B.Google Scholar
  67. Roach, E. C., and Kephart, N. C. The Purdue Perceptual-Motor Survey. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1960.Google Scholar
  68. Rosen, C. L. An experimental study of visual-perceptual training and reading achievement in first grade. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 22, 979–1086.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sabatino, D. A., and Ysseldyke, J. E. An evaluation of diagnostic-prescriptive teaching with handicapped children. Mimeograph, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa., 1972.Google Scholar
  70. Sabatino, D. A., Ysseldyke, J. E., and Woolston, J. Diagnostics-prescriptive teaching utilizing perceptual strengths of mentally retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1973, 78, 7–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Sherk, J. K. A study of the effects of a program of visual perception on the progress of retarded readers. Dissertation Abstracts, 1968, 4392–A.Google Scholar
  72. Simpkins, K. W. Effect of the Frostig program for the development of visual perception on the readiness of kindergarten children. Dissertation Abstracts, 1970, 30, 4286–A.Google Scholar
  73. Turner, R. V., and Fisher, M. D. The effects of a perceptual motor training program upon the readiness and perceptual development of culturally disadvantaged kindergarten children. ERIC ED 041-663, 1969.Google Scholar
  74. Waugh, R. P. Relationship between modality preference and performance. Exceptional Children, 1973, 39, 465–496.Google Scholar
  75. Wimsatt, W. R. The effects of sensory-motor training on the learning abilities of grade school children. Dissertation Abstracts, 1967, 28, 347–B.Google Scholar
  76. Wiederholt, J. L., and Hammill, D. D. Use of the Frostig-Horne Perception Program in the urban school. Psychology in the schools. 1971, 8, 268–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ysseldyke, J. Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching: The search for aptitude-treatment interactions. In L. Mann and D. A. Sabatino (Eds.), The First Review of Special Education. Philadelphia: Journal of Special Education Press, 1973. (a).Google Scholar
  78. Ysseldyke, J. E. Aptitude-treatment interaction research with learning-disabled children. Paper presented at the 1973 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, February 27, 1973. (b).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lester Mann
    • 1
  • Libby Goodman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Special EducationMontgomery County Intermediate UnitBlue BellUSA

Personalised recommendations