Online discussion with Yetta Goodman Transcript © 2007 by Richard C. Owen Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. 

Permission is granted to print, copy, or transmit this transcript for personal use only, provided this entire copyright statement is included. This transcript, in part or in whole, may not otherwise be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electrical or mechanical, including inclusion in a book or article, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

                                                                                                Richard Owen

 Good morning Everyone,

I want to welcome current subscribers and recent subscribers to TLN for this discussion with Yetta Goodman.  We are looking forward to a lively exchange. 

I particularly want to welcome Yetta Goodman--scholar, student, writer, friend.  And I want to thank Yetta for agreeing to participate in this discussion.

Yetta brings a wealth of experience about reading process and about miscue analysis to the conversation.  We are fortunate to be publishers of Reading Miscue Inventory 2/e, and Reading Strategies 2/e, and we were honored to publish the first edition of Retrospective Miscue Analysis. 

Earlier this morning Darcy Bradley posted the following query, which looks like a very good place to start. 
I encourage your participation as well.  Ask questions, offer comments.  We are all here to learn. 

As before, if anyone has any difficulty with any aspect of the listserve, please contact me offline at richardowen@rcowen.com. 

Richard Owen

Darcy Bradley

Dear Yetta, 

Thank you for agreeing to be part of this professional conversation.

Please start us off by talking about miscues and why miscue analysis is so valuable to teachers. We'll eagerly look forward to your response as an entry point to our discussion and comments and questions from our listserve colleagues. 

Cordially,

Darcy Bradley

Yetta Goodman

I am happy to participate in this conversation and I hope many of you will join our conversation. Please respond with comments or questions. You need to know that I really believe that there is no such thing as a "stupid" question. Every question you ask is worthy of a serious response. So.....

Why is miscue analysis valuable for teachers...........??

Most of my work has been with kids in classrooms and clinical settings. I've also worked with preservice and inservice teachers. When I work with teachers and they do at least two or three miscue analyses on their own children at home and/or students in their classrooms at almost any age beyond kindergarten, the teachers tell me............... "I'll never be able to listen to a kid read in the same way any more. Miscue analysis opened my eyes to what kids know about reading not just what they don't know."

Miscue analysis shows us how smart the brain is as it reads a whole story or article or headline or whatever. But what is read must be in the context of something whole. Miscue analysis is always done on a whole story or article and is followed by a retelling. Teachers discover that readers know grammar as they substitute the same part of speech that is in the written story or article. They discover that kids are predicting what is going to happen next in the sentence based on what they already know as learners. Or the prediction fits with the sentence up to the miscue and the reader stops, hesitates and/or self corrects. Teachers find out that readers are monitoring what they are reading --- searching for meaning when they self-correct a prediction  that was understandable (acceptable) up to the point of the miscue. Most of these miscues are self-corrected. These show readers' strengths.

If we do not value readers' strengths as they read, then we often consider that each miscue is equal to the others -- usually treating them as something wrong that needs teacher correction. Unacceptable miscues also provide important information for teachers but I can talk about some of those based on your questions or comments. If you have some specific examples, I'd love to respond to those. I don't like to work on hypothetical miscues.

So the most important things for teachers about miscue analysis is they learn so much about their readers -- what they know about content in the written text and what they know about language. It also shows how much phonics (graphophonics) knowledge the kids have and teachers can use this to check off that knowledge on rubrics that they may have to use. I don't know of any instrument that provides as much information about reader's capabilities as miscue analysis.

The second thing teachers learn is to understand how the reading process works in general. We discover the strategies of sampling, predicting, confirming (self-correcting) and the degree to which readers are searching for meaning. We learn that many miscues should not be corrected by the reader because it makes so much sense in the passage. It shows the reader is comprehending the text very well. One high school reader told me "Boy that miscue is better in that sentence than what the author put there!!” And the more we examine miscues, the more we evaluate the reader's use of reading strategies whenever they read aloud in any situation.

Please let me know if I have used any ideas or concepts you are not sure about and I'll be happy to respond to those.

By the way, were you aware of any miscues you made while you were reading this? It also helps for teachers to become aware of their own reading miscues. The concept of miscue analysis is based on the idea that EVERYONE makes miscues. Most of us as effective readers are making smart miscues more than we know.

thanks .... yetta............

                                                                                                          Nancy

Well, I made a miscue on the last sentence: “The concept of miscue analysis is based on the idea that EVERYONE makes miscues.  Most of us as effective readers are making smart miscues more than we know.”

I read it as: “Most of us ARE effective readers.”  Then I got to ARE MAKING and I reread the first part of the sentence. 

Nancy Barth

Shelly

Ms. Goodman
Thank you so much for taking the time to share with us! As I read your writing below, I thought of my own daughter (entering first grade) and some reading we did this summer at “Mommy’s summer-school boot camp”  

When she was reading, I would encourage & support her by reminding her of the various decoding strategies and when she was ‘stuck’, I might say things such as, “Well, look at the first letters and think what would make sense in that place…?” etc. – However, there were times that she substituted a word that did make sense but was incorrect: I always hesitate to ‘correct’ such errors as it surely seems to ‘squelch’ confidence that is newly-blossoming. When these errors were made, although the meaning was not compromised, I noted that my daughter did not slow or correct herself.  Your statement, “We learn that many miscues should not be corrected by the reader because it makes so much sense in the passage. It shows the reader is comprehending the text very well.”  leads me to the age-old controversy- To correct? Or not to correct? What’s a mom (teacher) to do?? This is my question! J 

*In other words, when is ‘correction’ supportive and an act of assisting in the advancement of skill, and conversely, when is it discouraging and counter-productive? In my ‘infinite wisdom’ and desire to help, I do not want to discourage any readers! 

I appreciate your time in addressing this!

Sincerely,

Shelly Franco-Westacott
CPT,MAS,AESD

Yetta

The longer I work with readers, the less I find myself interrupting and telling the reader what to do. As a tutor, teacher or grandma I sit with the reader and just follow along quietly. I try not to respond when the reader looks up at me for HELP. I've discovered that we have made readers dependent on us when we so quickly and willingly respond to their questioning eyes and voice. Their voices also tell us that they are questioning us as they say "monster?" with a questioning tone and look up to see us nod our heads or smiling with joy and know they can continue to read. When readers do this they are telling us that they are reading to please us and not reading for themselves. Ultimately to be a good reader, we must be independent of those around us. When readers get too much help from others (kids or teachers or tutors) they begin to control the behavior of those around them and look up to get the other person to help rather than to work at making sense for self.

How to get readers to do their own work as they read --. In miscue analysis we tell the reader that we will not help them as they read. We want to know what they do when they read by themselves so we can support the strategies they use. Reading is to make sense to you!

Sometimes I work with a reader who stops and looks at me and I just remind them.... I want to see what you can do yourself.... If you come to something you don't know you can skip it or guess but read on. The amazing thing is that after looking up at me two or three times and realizing that I won't help, the reader begins to use strategies in new ways. We even have research to document readers shifting how they read as the teacher interferes less in the reading process. My friend Carolyn Burke says that the teacher/tutor/family member should think about being like a football coach. The field is the book. The player is on the field and the coach can't go there. The coach can support before or after the play but not during.

This is a hard shift to make for all of us. We want to be helpful and supportive but in this case being supportive means to help the reader "do it by myself".

Yetta  

                                                                                                                        Yetta

When I read with students one-on-one or with my grandkids, I let them know that I like to read along as they read but I won't help them with any specific part of the text. After they finish reading, I'll discuss any areas of the text they think they had difficulty with. So I observe them carefully and I do miscue analysis as I go along..
I explain to them that as they continue reading and think about what they are reading they will come across the same words or phrases and they will probably be able to work out their problems. Good authors use redundancy in a good way and repeat names and words to help readers build vocabulary, characterization, story line across the text. As they keep reading the "text will teach". I borrow that last phrase from Margaret Meek who writes a lot about reading and is well known for her work especially in England.

After the reading, I'll ask the reader, "As you were reading did something trouble you or bother you".  Often the student goes back to a spot where s/he made a miscue. I first say now read me the whole sentence. So often they read it and do not make a miscue anymore. I can then say... "So who taught you that .... how did you learn it?" And they say ... The book helped me or I did it myself.

By the way we should discuss miscues with parents so they support their own kids while they read together.

Yetta

Marlene

Dear Dr. Goodman,

Thank you for allowing us this opportunity to converse.

In your theoretical framework of reading, do you believe that comprehension precedes fluency, or that fluency precedes comprehension, or that comprehension and fluency work as scaffolds or supports to each other in the process of meaning making? Or none of the above.

I am very curious because within these dark times of DIBELS, fluency is sometimes conceived as fast word calling -- something completely unrelated to the process of reading and comprehending.

Please share your thoughts about fluency.

Marlene Montgomery
Graduate Research Assistant
Texas Woman's University

                                                                                                                        Yetta

In miscue analysis, we tend not to worry about fluency when readers are reading new material. To me "fluency" is a goal for dramatic reading that is a practiced art form.   So when I want to teach children/ adolescents about reading for an audience, I set up time for reader's theatre,  many opportunities to read to others, but there has to be time set aside for practice with the material being read.

I expect readers to make miscues especially when they are working in challenging material.  But readers enjoy challenging material (think of Harry Potter and the names of people and places) but I also expect readers to slow down to work at problem solving as they read....they say to themselves, “What's going on here?.."  “Why isn't this making sense?.." “Hmm, I know that's the name of a mountain but I wonder how to say it?…" "Where did this character come from?"  "That's a strange way to write things.”   In such settings reading slows down, readers eyes regress or jump ahead and they are working hard at trying to make sense.  That's exactly what I want readers to do. We need to find ways to support such hard work by readers.  And the best way to support them is to give them lots of opportunity to read a wide range of material -- easy and challenging.

What I just described is true for all readers. Proficient readers do it faster than readers who struggle but we all work hard at it if we want to make sense. And also remember that we are all struggling readers in a number of reading contexts -- for me is physics and lawyers contracts, and income tax information and knitting instructions. Some people think reading about miscue analysis is hard work.  I find it very easy.

By the way there are excellent adult readers who do not read orally. If most of a person's reading is silent in his/her adult life then oral reading can be a chore for such readers.  You can hear them sometimes when they read in church or at a Passover seder. Most teachers read with expression and intonation shifts because they are expert oral readers, especially if they read to their kids every day.  Alan Flurkey calls the way readers read, their flow of reading, which means they slow down when they need to or speed up when there is nothing blocking the stream of reading. We have lots of 4th - 6th grade readers who don't sound good at oral reading but their comprehension is great.  Their silent reading is fine and that's what reading should be all about.  If we want them to read well orally, we need to set up opportunities and purposes for good oral reading.

Jay Samuels is a researcher who has done a great deal of research on fluency. We do not agree on many aspects of reading process and how to teach reading, but we both agree that DIBELS does not test reading. He is unhappy with DIBELS tests because the test is written so that people come to believe that you can have fluency in reading without comprehension. 

There are already kids who have learned that when they are tested on measures like DIBELS they just do it fast.  But when they read for themselves they are wonderfully flexible readers who respond to authentic literature and read  it well for themselves. We need to worry about the kids though who become dependent on instruction and think all reading is supposed to be fast, be nonsense and not have any sense to it.

I do not believe that just responding to print orally is reading.  If comprehension is not involved at some level, if readers do not know what they are reading is supposed to make sense, they are NOT reading.

Yetta

Yetta

I'm trying to make sure I've responded to your satisfaction.  I have discussed fluency in a number of posts.  Let me know if you have other concerns.

DIBELS  folks use the term fluency in each of their tests but never describe what it could mean.    Ken Goodman has published a book this year with Heinemann called The Truth about DIBELS. 

Yetta

                                                                                                                                    Renee

I am interested in the answer to Marlene's question about comprehension and fluency.

Thanks for posting that.

Also, do you have any thoughts about comprehension strategy instruction that could be helpful?

Thanks!

Renee

                                                                                                                                    Yetta

All strategy instruction should be focused on comprehension.  Literature Circles is a great program to set up in your class to highlight comprehension.  Readers learn to listen to the interpretation of others; to find the clues in the text that support their ideas; to realize that reading is something people can do together and not just for answering questions. 

There are so many strategy lessons in both the RMI and the Reading Strategies book. I always develop reading strategy instruction keeping all the language in a whole context.  Selected slotting strategy lessons (cloze procedures) where readers fill in omitted words and phrases is another more focused strategy lesson.  However, I never use it with correct answers.  I like to  have small groups read the page of a short short story together and argue about what they think belongs in the slot or why. Then the small groups share their responses with each other.  This is a good strategy lesson that focuses kids on the grammar of language, too.  

I'm sure other folks on this listserve will have other good ideas.  I probably should have asked first what age kids you are working with.  That would make a difference too. 

Yetta

                                                                                                                                    Bonnie

I am curious about miscues from English language learners (ELL's)...  I know that the teacher would mark them since they are an important part of analyzing what the student is doing/thinking while reading, but should you count them in an accuracy rate?  Particularly if the student is consistent with the same miscue throughout?  I think I've read your take on this somewhere, but I don't remember exactly what you thought. 

Thank you for clarifying for me.  I am excited to learn from you "first hand"! 

Bonnie Jones

Texas--Instructional Facilitator

                                                                                                                                     Yetta

We have learned a great deal about ELL readers as a result of miscue analysis research. Examining ELL's miscues allows teachers to discover the degree of English learning that is taking place. Just a simple miscue such as "a" for "the" shows that the ELL learner knows that the two words are determiners and go into the same slot in an English sentence. If ELL learners are not yet controlling the English determiner system, such miscues are not made. 

I often ask ELL readers (after they've read the whole piece) "Look back over the story/article and tell me where you know you had trouble". They often can tell me where they omitted a word or produced a sounded-out non word. Then I'll say "Read it again and tell me what you think is happening here. What do you think that word means?" Not only can they explain what is happening they say, "I know that word in Arabic" or whatever language is their L1. I then encourage them that when they are reading on their own that's exactly what they need to do and keep reading. They can make a list of the concepts they are not sure of and write the word/phrase in their own language next to it and then ask an English speaker about it. But I encourage them to keep reading (silently) to build a sense/knowledge of what they are reading.

In regard to the "a" / "the" miscue above, ELL readers have told me "But this is a specific noun and not general." So I know that they know the rule but the miscue tells me more -- it tells me that they can use it to make sense of English while they read

We don't do accuracy rates in miscue analysis since number of miscues is not as important as quality of miscues. So we look at the degree to which miscues are acceptable in sentences. Unacceptable miscues that are not corrected help us know the syntactic and semantic places where readers may be having difficulty. However, if I have worked with students to come up with a good substitution for the word they do not know, I have a sense of their knowledge base. ELL learners often know the concepts of what they are reading in their L1. If we use strategy lessons to help ELL readers know that the importance of reading is to make sense then they are more comfortable in substituting or saying "something" for a word or phrase they do not know in English. We do keep track of miscues per hundred words in the statistical part of miscue analysis to see how many miscues readers can make and still understand what they are reading. -- That helps us to not be overly concerned about numbers of miscues. And through helping readers to always focus on making sense (comprehending) as they read, their miscues per hundred words usually diminish.

If I had to do accuracy rates because I was mandated to do so, I would count the miscues that result in unacceptable sentences and not count the miscues that are acceptable or if unacceptable are corrected.

An important thing we've learned about ELLs is that they can read in English silently and then discuss or retell what they have read in their L1 with another student who speaks the same language or with the teacher if she does. This helps them focus on comprehension and not an over focus on accuracy and the sounding out of words.

Yetta

                                                                                                                                    Jeri

Yetta - Thank you for such a detailed answer to Bonnie.  I teach in a

school which 95% of the students L1 is Spanish.  What you have to say

hits the spot!  Thank you so much.  

Jeri Trujillo

"Desire is all it takes"

Fantastic Fifth!

                                                                                                                                    Lucy

Yetta,

Could you recommend us some references that document miscue analysis conducted
with ELLs?

Thanks!

Lucinda Soltero, Ph.D.
Department of Language, Reading & Culture
The University of Arizona

                                                                                                                                    Yetta

Finally I've collected some references for Lucy and others. I include bilingual as well as ELL references.  I believe they support each other.

Freeman and Freeman have new books out (one in English and a companion in Spanish) Heinemann.  Teaching Reading and Writing in Spanish and English in Bilingual and Dual Language Classrooms.  They have a nice section on miscue analysis in their book. David has taught miscue analysis for many years.  ELL teachers should know their work in any case.  They have a very complete bibliography of literature books for students as well as professional books for teachers.

In addition look for Hudelson's works especially her 1981 book on reading and miscues in languages other than English.   

Caryl Crowell has a good article in Primary Voices (NCTE) 1995 on her miscue work with bilingual Spanish/ English readers.  There is an article I did with Kathy Wallace in 1989 for Language Arts.  Miramontes did a miscue study she reported in 1987. Look for the work of Carmen Roldan who does Literacy Studies but uses miscue analysis.

Since it is easier these days to find specific references on line I haven't done a specific reference list.  If anyone needs more specific references please let me know. I probably won't repond to any emails about references until I return from Germany on August 15.  I'm off to the European Reading Association Conference next week.

We know from both miscue analysis and eye movement research that the reading process looks very much the same across alphabetic and non alphabetic languages. One set of miscues that Caryl Crowell explains are the reader's miscues of toro (bull), vaca (cow), marrano (pig)  one after the other for cerdo (pig) in the sentence
-Cui, cui- le canta el cerdo a la luna..  And the reader used picture clues to help with her miscues.

Yetta

Jan

Dear Yetta,

Thanks so much for taking the time to be so thorough and expansive for this
discussion. I surely enjoyed 'listening in'. Currently the miscue analysis
is VERY devalued by 'our professional development gurus' in my area, but I
personally continue to learn a lot more about my young readers through its
use. I appreciate the work you and Ken have dedicated to our field.

Enjoy the European conference!

Janice E. Spohn
Reading Specialist, Peebles Elementary
North Allegheny School District
V.President Elementary - P.C.T.E.L.A.
W.P.C.T.E. - Executive Board Secretary

                                                                                                                                     Katie

Dear Yetta:

Interestingly, when I go to visit my daughter and son-in-law in Spain, this is exactly what I do....what you have described above.   I go around Spain reading Spanish and then discuss/retell what I have read in English with my daughter.  It drives her nuts.  She wants me to speak in Spanish to her, but I feel comfortable right now just reading in Spanish then speaking in English.  I have to force myself to speak in Spanish to overcome my own inhibitions.  I must say it takes a great deal of courage to speak in another language you don't feel secure in...at least for me it does.

Thank you for this thought-provoking discussion!

Katie

                                                                                                                        Yetta

Katie --
Your experience is indeed just what I'm talking about.  All of our language(s) and dialect(s) are resources for us to use to understand our world.  They inform each other If we hide one or keep it away from our learning opportunities we are missing those resources.  That makes learning much harder than it needs to be. 

Yetta

                                                                                                                        L. Cioffi

As far as I am concerned...ESL students are learning a new language - thus when they read learn -ed for learned, I don't consider that an error for the root/base word was pronounced correctly. If the entire word is mispronounced - then that is an error. In working with bi-lingual students, I have found that their decoding skills are great and they can sound out many words correctly...however, they lack an understanding of the meanings of these words. Therefore, their comprehension is far lower than their reading ability.

L. Cioffi

                                                                                                                                    Shelly

L.,

You indicate, “ESL students are learning a new language - thus when they read learn -ed for learned, I don't consider that an error for the root/base word was pronounced correctly. “ 

Do you adhere to this same approach with all readers or just your ELL kiddos?

Shelly

                                                                                                                                    Paula

Hi Shelly,

Excuse my "interruption"... I hope you don't mind my jumping in!  :)  I just wanted to point out that where I teach, even the so-called English-only speakers also have limited language structures.  In my opinion, I do treat many kids as ELL in that respect... but in terms of a non-ELL student the question to ask is did the child make the error (miscue) and not notice because inflectional endings are not in his oral vocabulary, or was he not adequately comprehending and self-monitoring so that he didn't notice the structural error?  As a Reading Recovery teacher I am trying to see what the child is attending to and what he is neglecting.  Pay attention to the child's oral language and this may provide some insight.  Make sense?  Of course, I know this is easier to do in a one to one tutoring session than in a classroom setting. :)

Paula 

                                                                                                                                    Shelly

Thanx for the ‘interruption’!

 It is so difficult to nail jello to a tree isn’t it? It seems that it is hard to have steadfast ‘rules’ when it comes to kiddos who are all so different…I find myself in a position of advising MANY teachers re: reading instruction and the learner-scenarios are many…I really appreciate hearing from the ‘pool’ of soldiers in the trenches with me: Thank you.

p.s. In my school/district, we’re ‘all about’ focusing on authentic/effective/intentional vocabulary instruction to additionally address some of what you reference below …it’s all interrelated!

Shel

Priscilla

When an ELL student mispronounces the word and says learn-ed, they are doing so because of their knowledge thus far about how English tenses work and are trying to apply this knowledge. In language acquisition, it is referred to as over-regulation. They over-generalize about pronunciation or grammar based on their understandings and lack of knowledge about exceptions (and English is full of 'em!). I love using this example to illustrate the concept: Years ago when teaching in a bilingual classroom, we were returning to the classroom from lunch recess. One of the students in line had a tickle in his throat and kept coughing and coughing. The young man in front of him who had a large English vocabulary, turned to me and said, "Hey teacher, he's tozing."

In Spanish, a person is said to "have a cough," so the phrase is "El tiene toz." The young man used the /ing/ form of the verb "cough" because he knew it was the correct context to use /ing/, but because he couldn't remember the word in English, he borrowed the Spanish word and did a pretty sophisticated grammatical code-switch, over-generalizing how to use the /ing/ form of a verb.

Also keep in mind how the pronunciation of a word in large part depends upon the syntactic and semantic cueing systems. Years ago, Yetta handed out a story developed by Gary Kilaar that beautifully illustrates this. I still use it in my university classes. The pronunciation as well as meaning of many words in English depend upon how they are used. For example, the word minute either has a long /i/ or a short /i/. The syllabic stress changes depending upon whether we mean small or time. And if I start a sentence with the word /does/ we tend to assume it's a question word and pronounce it /duz/. However, if I write the sentence, "Does were standing in the field," we get thrown into temporary cognitive dissonance until we figure out it means female deer.

We do use the pronunciation, learn-ed, when referring to an extremely well-read, educated person. If the ELL student mispronounces the word, I would not necessarily consider it a true miscue - merely a mispronunciation. It depends on whether or not they understand what the word means within the context of what they are reading...

Priscilla Shannon Gutierrez
Outreach Specialist
Center for Information, Training and Professional Development
New Mexico School for the Deaf

                                                                                                                                     Yetta

As L. Cioffi makes clear it is important to know your learners well to decide on the quality of the miscue.  With young children and ELL's who miscue learn-ed for learned, I have two responses:  As Priscilla said the reader is overgeneralizing the past tense rule.  But it may also be that a teacher is over focusing the reader on looking carefully at the endings of words to make sure they have enunciated the final suffix.  (I'd use a different teaching strategy if this was an older reader who didn't say learn-ed in the sentence.....   “He was considered a highly learned scholar.”

I have worked with African American readers who over emphasize past tense and plural forms. It does not help them because they can't use their own language knowledge to help them understand what they are reading.  They keep trying to remember the rules the teacher taught them. 

I remember Tony who I did research on for eight years.  He was reading “There's going to be a big contest in Mr. Vine's candy shop.”  He repeated both “There's going” and “Mr. Vine's” three or four times each...he read: 1) “There gonna be a ....... Mr. Vine candy shop....”  2) Very slowly and deliberately   “There's go-ing to be a....  Mr. Vine'es candy shop”.  And 3) he repeated the sentence a few more times some times enunciating and other times just saying it as he would as if he were speaking.  I'm dong a miscue analysis on Tony and do not say a word. He finally looks up at me and says....  “I hate 'postrophe s”.....  He sighs heavily and continues reading. Tony was great at knowing what the teacher wanted and always tried to read her way but he really knew what the sentence meant....  It slowed him down and he was not always engaged in reading as he worried about the teacher's way of saying English rather than using the resources of his own English.

When kids are taught to focus on sounding out, checking each word carefully, over pronouncing, they attend more to the graphophonic cueing system (the relationships between the system of sounds (of their language)  and the system of graphemes (letters of their language) than to the syntax (grammar) and semantics (meaning). If your attention is only on one system of language then you begin not to worry about making sense. Then you become a good oral recoder (like a t.v. announcer) and you don't pay attention to making sense for yourself. This does happen among Spanish ELLs a lot.     

Yetta

Yetta

I love the "tozing" example.  Some folks are concerned about such explorations that speakers make as they learn and expand on their language use.   I believe such examples show how children invent language when they need it.  It is part of what the people who build on Piaget and Vygotsky call constructivism.  The child is constructing language and as a result is learning how it works.

Yetta

                                                                                                                                    Yetta

Thanks to Paula and Shelly for reminding us of the importance of listening carefully to kids to find out how they use oral language.  Teachers who are in the classroom and stay with their kids in the playground are in a good position to notice those more quiet/ silent kids in the school yard playing with their friends, at the lunch table or working in small groups in the classroom.  Our language changes from setting to setting and children also do this and learn to use language differently in different environments.  Some of them are very quiet with adults and in teaching settings but very talkative with their friends.  It's important to know about and observe all these settings.  Linguists call the changes we make in language use from setting to setting -- registers -- it is a natural part of language learning and children seem to learn this very early. 

Yetta  

                                                                                                                                    Yetta

All students benefit from have lots of opportunities to express themselves in different ways. We've known for decades that the more opportunities children have to talk, the more complex their language becomes. Also changing the context of the situation allows the talk to expand and develop too. Paying attention to children's oral language is very important. Collecting such language on tape and listening to it later helps as well. Our research in Detroit showed us that in some contexts children reduce the consonant cluster on certain nouns and verbs but not in all contexts. For example most of us say "wesside" for "west side" but most us say “west end.” In the first instance we do not pronounce the "t " but in the “west end” we do pronounce the "t".  The phonemes that surround other phonemes influence how they are pronounced.

Yetta

                                                                                                                                    Yetta

A miscue is an unexpected response (not an error).  Ken Goodman coined the word miscue to suggest that the reader missed the cues expected by the teacher/tutor/researcher and came up with something based on other cues.  All miscues are based on the knowledge of the reader.

Priscilla discussed the concept of over generalization well.  We all do it as we learn new language.  All of us are language learners and over generalize/ invent our own language forms/ adapt old language to new experiences/ develop new concepts and labels/ etc. etc.  So all of us who use English are English Language Learners.  I am collecting how many terms there are for flash drives or jump sticks or ????  New objects and concepts need new terms. 

Miscues, learning new language forms and terms, are part of using language.  Language is always changing and we are all part of that change.  No matter how much we love to read and write and say “amongst”, for example, it is being used less and less in American English. 

So miscues tell us what people KNOW about their language not what they do not know.  So whether they are right or wrong is not the point.  What did I expect to hear when someone read that and what did the reader do that was different?  The more we examine this the more we learn about language. 

By the way some people say "he larnd it" and in their dialect it is acceptable.  I have learned a lot about dialect variations as I have listened to children and adult readers of English throughout the U.S. England, Australia, NZ, South Africa, etc. etc.  When I was using Althea in New Zealand they all told me that she made a miscue when she read  "wanned" for wanted.  "How should she say it?" I asked.  "Want – ted," they all said.  I learned that in some dialects of British English they say it that way too. In neither case are these errors but they are miscues because of listeners’ expectations.  But as a teacher/ researcher, it helps me learn about the variation in language and languages.

Now that I know readers do that, I decide as a teacher what to do about it.  Do I correct children every time I hear the language different than I expect to? Or, do I accept the notion that different speakers of a language use language in different ways, and how do I help my students understand this?

Yetta

Barbara

Dr. Goodman,

Thanks so much for being willing to join our conversation and offer your
insights. As someone who works with preservice teachers, I am interested
in hearing how long you think it takes for teachers to become
comfortable with doing miscue analysis. Often, teachers want to use
assessment tools that are quick and easy for them to learn how to use. I
know that miscue analysis offers valuable information to teachers that
merits the time spent in doing it, but I also want to reassure my
beginning teachers about the time. I'm looking forward to your comments.

Barbara Ward
Washington State University Tri-Cities

                                                                                                                        Nancy 

I agree with you Barbara.  As someone who also works with new teachers, I find the analysis of miscues to be difficult for them to understand.  Any suggestions for an easy way to teach this?

Nancy

                                                                                                                        Yetta

I teach about miscue analysis differently for preservice and inservice teachers. I use miscue analysis in all classes that relate to language, early literacy, reading diagnosis, language arts, etc. etc. In graduate classes on reading and miscue analysis I involve students in in-depth work on miscue analysis and we use the Reading Miscue Inventory book quite a bit and I encourage the students to use the Research Form of Miscue Analysis.  
With undergraduates I make miscue analysis available but I use the information differently. The question is "What are my purposes in using miscue analysis with each type of student -- graduate or undergraduate; preserivce, inservice."?

With undergraduates and some general graduate language arts courses, I want them to understand the reading process as it has been supported by miscue analysis since the 1960's. I want them to know how to support student's development of reading through reading strategy lessons. I want them to understand the nature of "error" or miscue in language use in general. (To Err is Human is my motto and Ken Goodman and I have written an article about this somewhere). At this point, I believe that all language processes (listening, speaking, reading and writing) involve miscues at every turn. Miscues are part of language development and reading development, too. So it is a general concept I need to help students understand. The underlying issue is "How do humans use and develop language"? I also want to help them know how to use strategy lessons in supportive ways to help their students revalue themselves as readers. 

I like to focus my university/college students on themselves as language learners and users to help them investigate (inquire into) language use. They write a literacy autobiography -- what they remember about learning to read and write. They interview their parents or caregivers to find out what family members remember. We talk about how children construct language and move toward conventions. We talk about multilingualism, dialects and the range of language variation as they use language with friends, bosses, in academic settings, etc. etc. 

Then I lead them into a discussion about who they are as literate humans today.... what do they read, write, speak listen on a two day period (a weekday and a weekend day -- we turn this into an ethnographic study as they collect data overtime and report back to small groups and then the whole class). We discuss what makes them readers and writers -- what they read and write in their world - including but beyond books (e.g. medication, instructions for washing clothes).  Eventually we relate all this to their students -- if they are working in a classroom, they interview kids to get answers to similar questions about what makes kids literate. 

I also let them know that teachers need to know as much about language use, variation, differences, development as a doctor needs to know about the human body. And that is hard work to know and learn. But language is to a language arts/ reading/ content area teachers as the human body is a doctor. But I organize the class and experiences to make it all interesting and motivating especially as they are involved with me in exploring these issues in their daily lives. I don't want to apologize for miscue taking time or being hard. That's what professional teachers do. 

Then I use a reader such as Betsy in the RMI book (RCOwen). We do not go quickly to the analysis on the worksheets but we examine her miscues and talk about whether they are good or problematic by examining the typescript. Which miscues help Betsy in her reading and which disrupt her reading? 

I often give an assignment that they have to come to class and report on their own miscues. Two or three people start the session with their miscues each time we meet (for 10 minutes) and we explore what cueing systems they used to make the miscues, how their background knowledge evoked the miscues and what caused them. They become aware of prediction, confirming, self correction, selecting language cues etc. through talking about their own miscues at the same time we talk together in class about Betsy's miscues. So we come to see the reading process and miscuing as a human process. Many people can relate this to writing (invented spelling, invented punctuation, font use, the composing process, learning a second and third language, content of writing, etc. etc.).  I ask them to work in pairs or threes and do one miscue on one student they find available. They tape the reader and do the miscue and we work on it in class. I don't expect them to become proficient users of miscue analysis with all the coding forms. I expect them to understand what miscues tell them about their students. I expect them to want to understand more about how language works because that's what they will be engaged in with their own students all day long, every day. I want them to respect and value the language and languages of their students including their literacies and to realize that miscue analysis shows that readers are using their knowledge of language to problem solve as they are reading. 

I hope this isn't too long an answer. I will stop here and wait for additional questions. With this approach where the students themselves become involved in studying themselves and one student as I use Betsy and usually another reader later in the semester, they become interested in the major concepts that underlie miscue analysis and the transactional nature of the reading process. 

Yetta 

                                                                                                                                    Yetta

Another email asked me to say something about miscue analysis and running record and I will respond to that one later today.  However at the moment, I want to use the "pointing to words" idea as one example where I think miscue analysis and reading recovery has some difference.

Miscue analysis builds its theory on the idea that reading and writing are language processes. So our focus is on the whole -- using a whole story, having a retelling so we know what the reader understands and has interpreted, examining miscues in the whole story and the whole sentence.  We use the context of the literacy experience whenever we think of miscues.  I should have said that we don't make decisions on one miscue analysis but keep in mind that a second miscue analysis on another story or article will yield different data.

Running record keeps the teacher's attention on the word and a lot of the teacher's responses tend to focus on words.  Checking off each word as a child reads is also word focused. 

I think this is an important theoretical difference.  I think reading instruction over the years has focused a lot on words: spelling, accuracy counts, vocabulary out of context, etc. etc.  I think such a focus limits both teaching and learning of reading and writing.

I'd love to hear any responses to this. 

Yetta

                                                                                                                                    Lori

I have found running records to be an effective tool, but I made so many notes about what I saw children doing that I am not sure how ‘pure’ I ever was in their use.  I did talk kids through my running records, so they were totally in on the game, and never did one without a comprehension follow up—generally just a conversation about the book.  In all honesty, the freedom of not having the typed text was just a godsend in day to day classroom work.  I just told kids the checkmarks were for me to figure how where it was in the text they did smart things, so we could talk about them.  They did help me go back to those points in the text I wanted to celebrate as well as helped me shape a teaching point.  Honestly, for me, my greatest take away from Marie Clay was that mantra about praise points and teaching points.  It helped me as a teacher concentrate on teaching READERS and let go of teaching THIS BOOK. I think that shaped me as a reading teacher, but miscue is soooo much more.  I have always sort of thought of running records as seeing a G.P.--pretty helpful with most readers. Where I found miscue the most informative was with children who didn’t ‘measure up’ to the magic numbers of 90% and 95%, the ones who still managed to make meaning despite what would be considered a flawed reading with rr.  It also has helped me think more deeply about what readers are doing when they make downright brilliant miscues...

Lori

                                                                                                            Yetta

I probably should just let Lori's comments stand. I find them so well thought out.   But I thought I would highlight and emphasize their importance.   Lori is a teacher who lets her kids lead her evaluation of what they do. She is a thoughtful kid watcher.   No one else's system should become formulaic for a teacher who understands what she is doing.

You were engaging your students in retrospective miscue analysis and demystifying the reading process for them. You took them into your confidence and talked straight to them and they realized you were supporting their knowledge and understandings.

Although many miscues can tell me that kids are comprehending what they are reading, I never leave a reading without some kind of retelling (rewriting, drawing, and talk about it). I want to hear what the kid got out of the reading.

Teaching points -- I think I call them critical moment teaching -- show that the teacher is learning from her students and listening to them carefully.

Yes -- teaching readers not teaching a book or an author.

Yes -- I get so excited about downright brilliant miscues, too..... And sometimes when I talk about the less brilliant ones in a group, we find out that those miscues are pretty interesting, too. 

Yetta