Reading Miscue Analysis:. Purposes and Procedures. A Brief Historical Perspective:. Developed by Kenneth Goodman in the 1960’s Sought to enhance our understanding of the reading process This knowledge can help us to improve reading instruction. Miscue:. What does it mean? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Reading Miscue Analysis:
Purposes and Procedures
1. All readers make miscues when they read aloud
2. The miscues of effective and ineffective readers are qualitatively different
3. The correction behaviors of effective and ineffective readers is different
4. Effective readers engage in a great deal of prediction when they read
5. Effective and ineffective readers use grapho-phonic knowledge differently
6. Effective readers use a wider range of strategies in the attempt to understand text.
1. Collecting and recording data
2. Analyzing miscue data on the coding form
3. Interpreting the data Reader Profile
1. Select a student subject:
2. Conduct the first session:
3. Recording the interview data:
4. Preparing for the second session, I:
4. Preparing for the second session, II:
5. Conducting Session II - Oral Reading and Retelling/Discussion:
6. Conducting the oral reading:
7. Conducting the retelling/discussion
8. Transcribing the Retelling
9. Recording the Miscues on the Selection Copy
10. Coding the Miscues and Analyzing Patterns
11. Numbering the miscues on the selection copy:
12. Recording Miscues on the Coding Form:
13. What questions do we ask of each of the miscues?
1. Does it reflect the child’s ordinary speech patterns?
2. Did it go with the preceding grammar and meaning?
3. Did it go with the following grammar and meaning?
4. Did the miscue leave the essential meaning of the sentence intact?
5. Was the miscue corrected?
6. Was the miscue graphically similar?
7. Was the sentence, as the reader left it, semantically acceptable within the whole original selection?
14. Figuring percentages for each column
15. Drawing conclusions about the reader’s use of cueing systems and reading strategies (see Weaver, p. 201)
Almost never / seldom / about half the time / frequently / almost always
16. Drawing together data from various sources
1. High quality miscue ~ Good comprehension
2. Low quality miscue ~ Poor comprehension
3. High quality miscue ~ Poor comprehension
4. Low quality miscue ~ Good comprehension