Reviews o f S c h o o l Psychological Materials 79

this test will not apply equally well to children in various instructional programs.
Second, despite the use of "mastery" in the label given to the test, it is plainly
norm-based. Furthermore, without performance objectives for each item, the require-
monts for a criterion-referenced test ate not met, thus making it difficult to make
specific prescriptive statements from the Reference Scales.
In summary, the WRMT comes to a market which longs for a precise method of
assessing reading skills. The possibility that such an instrument could lead to diagnostic
tnescriptions using criterion-referenced procedures brings the practitioner to complete
attention. Unfortunately, such a product is not here yet. The practitioner will need to
collect additional data before specific diagnostic prescriptions may be developed. With
further evidence of the WRMT's external validity, it may well be that it can serve
effectively as a screening device for identifying children who are experiencing reading
difficulties.

Cherry Houck
Larry A. Harris
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061

REFERENCES

Bormuth, J. R. Factor validity of cioze tests as measures of reading comprehension.

Snelbecker, G. E. Learning theory, instructional theory, and psychoeducational design.

No one since Hllga~d has written as well about learning as has the author. His
treatment of Thorndike is outstanding, and the entire volume is a testimonial of his
dedication to the application of these theories to the instructional situation. This book
reveals the author as a diligent, kind, umally impartial gentleman imbued with concern
for the philosophy of teaching and learning. It also reveals such a store of knowledge
that it makes one pause and marvel at how weli the principles of learning have
functioned in order to produce an individual with such a wealth of educational lore.
As the title implies, Snelbecker distinguishes between learning theories and instruc-
tional theories. He finds the main learning theories to be Thorndike's connectionism,
Pavlov's classical conditioning, Huli's hypothetico-deductive behaviorism, Skinner's
operant conditioning, information processing, and mathematical learning theories. De-
rived from, and differentially related to, these learning theories axe the five classes of
instructional theories-behavior modification, cognitive construct theory, Bugelski's prin-
ciples of learning theory, Gagn6"s and B~iggs' types of learning and system of instruc-
tional design. In addition, the f'mal chapter of the book is concerned with humanistic
psychology and concentrates on Carl Rogers' freedom to learn principles. The treatment
of these theories varies from good for the chapter on Skinner to truly exceptional for the
chapter on Thomdike. The style of writing in the chapter on operant conditioning is
somewhat turgid, and the difficulty of comprehension may be the reason that one
notices the rather numerous typographical errors such as on page 303 " . . . while
differentially reinforcing ,re.sponses only in tbe l~rocess of, SD stimuli. . . . ' Undoubtedly
the author meant to say 'in the presence of S ~' stimuli. Also on page 315 one whole
line is omitted from the quotation from MacCorquodale's article in the Journal of the
Experimental Behavior.
Although the author has done an excellent overall job of discussing and illuminating
theories of learning and instruction, these matters make up only 60% of the book. The
80 J o u r n a l of School Psychology

first some 200 pages-40% of the b o o k - a r e devoted to " . . . the contention of the
author that them has been need for a 'middle position' between psychology, theoretical
research, and educational practice. . . . " (p. 18). This f'wst portion of the volume is
concerned with "psychoeducational design," with a culmination in Chapter 6. The basic
approach is that education can be viewed as a technology which can derive its procedures
from the basic science of psychology, and the urgent need is for a group of interpreters
to translate scientific laws into specific rules and actions.
The author espouses the position that it is unreasonable to expect direct application
of laws of learning to the instructional situation. He supports his contention by use of
analogies from the physical sciences where difficulties arise in applying basic principles
to practical affairs. From analogies he moves to studies which conclude that there is a
need for interdisciplinary workers who can mediate between the findings of the scientific
laboratory and the requirements of the everyday teaching situation. The workers who
will fill this void are the psychological designers. As he says, " . . . We use the term
psychoeducational design to refer to that aspect of the development process in which
psychological information is used to design innovations or to improve exist~g educa-
tional practice . . . . " (p. 167).
The content and style of the first five chapters are admirable, the organization is well
conceived and presented. In Chapter 6, however, the author retreats somewhat from his
stance of impartial objectivity. Concerning the contributions of institutes, centers, and
laboratories, it would have been more consistent with the scholarly nonpartisan tone of
the early part of the book if the author's treatment of these agencies had been more
restrainod. There also is an inconsistency, or imbalance: he devotes much space to
scientific philosophy, hypotheses, and experimentation, while devoting only 22 pages to
a very perceptive survey of humanistic psychology.
Snelbecker has a compact plan for his presentation, but the overall product is a
loose-jointed book which, nevertheless, has many excellent features. The author com-
ments that many colleagues and students have contributed to the ideas in his book and
the result is clear evidence of these varied contributions. Any worker who wishes to
attain a good overview of current trends in learning and instruction theory and applica-
tion can fred no better introduction than this volume. There is a wealth of information,
which on the whole is expressed with more clarity than one usually expects, but the
more or less mechanical errors do much to reduce the attractiveness of the book.

Everett E. Davis
University of Texas at E1 Paso
El Paso, Texas 79968