PB Detail Reading Miscue Inventory- Yetta Goodman

Professional Development \| Book Publishing \| E-mail Us \| Catalogs \| Our Company
PROFESSIONAL BOOKS - Detail Page Reading Miscue Inventory: From Evaluation to Instruction by Yetta M. Goodman, Dorothy J. Watson and Carolyn L. Burke
DETAILS ABOUT THIS BOOK: Foreword Preface Contents Author Bio Introduction BROWSE by Author by Subject by Title Professional Books Introduction COURSE ADOPTION Exam/Desk copy OTHER Permissions Submissions Exhibit Schedule Sales Representatives CHILDREN'S BOOKS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT	Other Books by The Author Reading Strategies: Focus on Comprehension 2/E	This authentic assessment provides substantive data on how readers engage with the reading process to make meaning; it also illuminates the disconnects in that process when reading is challenging. Unlike most reading assessments that only provide a label or a "level," the Reading Miscue Inventory provides teachers with the insights to know how to help readers better succeed. Wendy C. Kasten, Ph.D. Professor of Curriculum and Instruction—Literacy, Kent State University Coauthor of Living Literature: Using Children's Literature to Support Reading and Language Arts Item #544 2005 pb 328 pages ISBN 1-57274-737-4 $29.95 [Add to Cart] [View Cart]


TOP Foreword Preface Contents Author Bio	FOREWORD Most of us have had those moments of illumination, which perception psychologists call the "ah-ha experience." Sometimes the illumination is slow, like the gradual understanding of the punch line of a joke you don't initially "get." Other times it can be a sudden, "eureka-like" illumination that occurs in a flash, when, like Archimedes in the bath, the solution to a complex problem we've been struggling to resolve suddenly emerges. While "ah-ha" experiences are merely one of the many forms of learning we can engage in, they're often more memorable and long-lasting than other mundane learning experiences we have in the course of our daily lives. Some of these experiences change our lives to such a degree that we can never go back to thinking, knowing, understanding, or behaving in the ways we did prior to this particular "ah-ha." I had one of these life-changing "ah-ha's" in 1975 and remember it clearly. I was engaged in postdoctoral work at Harvard, where some of the luminaries of the reading world, including Jeanne Chall, Courtney Cazden, Carole Chomsky, Helen Popp, and others, mentored, guided, and continually challenged me. I also had auditing privileges with MIT, which was two stations away on the MTA. I spent many hours auditing courses in MIT's linguistics department and attending seminars conducted by its psycholinguistic and artificial intelligence research groups. I considered myself to be at the centre of the learning, language, and reading universe. I thought I was in academic heaven. During one of the many coffee breaks I took at Harvard, the late Jeanne Chall said to me, "Brian, there's this fellow Ken Goodman who's writing a lot about something called miscue analysis. He claims it shows that meaning-based approaches support learning to read better than code-based approaches. Seeing you have more time than the rest of us, why don't you research his claims? Perhaps you could do a paper for the Harvard Ed. Review, which we could publish?" She gave me a rather large red box, which had the words "Reading Miscue Inventory" written on its shiny new exterior. I also noted the authors' names and recall commenting to Jeanne thus: "I thought you said it was 'Ken Goodman' who was responsible for miscue analysis. Only one of these authors is a Goodman, someone named 'Yetta.' " Jeanne informed me that the authors had worked with Ken on his miscue research and that Yetta was Ken's wife. She then explained how they'd taken the original miscue taxonomy Ken had used in his research and made it more teacher friendly. She finally commented, "A version which has been modified for classroom use might be a good way to 'get into his work." I took this red box back to my office and opened it. It contained several red booklets, some scoring templates, and some audiotapes. I quickly skimmed the titles of books. The one called Manual for Using RMI caught my eye. I opened it and began reading. Much later, after studying Ken's original research, deconstructing the original full version of the miscue Taxonomy, and after publishing an essay on his work in the Reading Research Quarterly (Cambourne 1975-1976) I recognized the brilliance of their work. They'd taken a very complex, multitheoretical taxonomy and turned it into a classroom teacher-friendly tool without "dumbing it down." They'd created a multifaceted educational tool that not only helped teachers understand the reading process, but which helped them identify all students' reading strengths and weaknesses and then offered them viable classroom-based strategies that were based on these strengths and weaknesses. In one sense it was a full reading curriculum in a box. It had a solid theoretical base; it could be used as a diagnostic tool; it could be used to quantitatively evaluate, compare, and rank readers in terms of strengths and weaknesses; it could be used to design and justify theoretically valid teaching strategies for each individual member of a class. From that point my life changed forever. I began a wild, exhilarating, unpredictable, sometimes frightening, intellectual ride, not unlike those I had experienced as a youthful member of the surfboard fraternity in an earlier life. Intellectually it was like pushing oneself over the edge of a huge, slowly breaking wave, feeling it pick you up, thrust you forward with its power, never knowing whether you should stand and cut left, right, or even pull back from the wave before it broke, fearful that if you continued to "go with it" it might suddenly break and "dump" you painfully in the shallows. As I reflect on that period of my professional growth with the benefit of thirty years' hindsight, it is now obvious that in 1975 I'd been caught up in a Kuhn-ian scientific revolution. According to Strauss (2005), "Scientific revolutions occur when a crisis within the scientific paradigm is resolved by the adoption, within the scientific community, of new, empirically supported principles that redefine what counts as a theoretically significant problem, and the way that problem is solved" (Strauss 2005, 166). Of course, in 1975 I wasn't aware that I was caught up in a Kuhn-ian scientific revolution. I thought I was simply experiencing multiple "ah-ha's" about reading, language, learning, and teaching. One in particular stands out. I clearly remember reading a statement, somewhere in the RMI materials that Jeanne Chall had loaned me, a statement something like this: "The oral and written forms of language are parallel versions of the same thing—language." The implications of this statement struck me with tsunami-like force. Michael Halliday's (1975) Learning How to Mean had just been published. When I put Halliday's work and this one particular concept from the RMI together in my head, thoughts started bubbling up and spilling over each other at a frenetic pace; I can still remember the trains of thought that rattled through my head: "If learning to talk is learning how to mean using the oral mode of language, then perhaps learning how to read and write is learning how to mean using the written form of language. If they're parallel versions of the same thing, then perhaps they can be learned similarly? Perhaps learning how to mean is natural? Perhaps complex meaning making is what the human brain has evolved to do? Perhaps the processes inherent in the complex learning that makes learning to talk possible have some implications for learning to read?" Those of you who know my work will realize that this one ah-ha pushed me in the direction that I've been traveling for the last thirty years. This long-awaited revised edition of the RMI—a now classic work—will certainly provide fresh insights for both the current and a new generation of educators and scholars. Those familiar with the RMI will revisit Betsy in a new case study, explore on a deeper level the value and use of the Burke Reading Interview, find extensively updated references and new research, and discover several new chapters on differentiated reading instruction. And those new to the RMI will understand readers and reading on an entirely different plane. I urge you—teachers of children, teachers of adult readers and writers, professors, and graduate students—to use the RMI with real learners reading real texts. I can guarantee that if you do, you too will experience some eureka-like "ah-ha's" that will push you in new professional directions. Brian Cambourne References Cambourne, Brian. 1976-1977. "Getting to Goodman: An Analysis of the Goodman Model of Reading with Some Suggestions for Evaluation." Reading Research Quarterly. Volume 12, number 4, pp. 605-636. Halliday, Michael A.K. 1975. Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language (Explorations in Language Study Series). London: Edward Arnold. Strauss, Steven L. 2005. The Linguistics, Neurology, and Politics of Phonics: Silent "E" Speaks Out. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
TOP Foreword Preface Contents Author Bio	Preface: In the original Reading Miscue Inventory (RMI), we stated that educators will more readily make changes in their reading curricula if they have a "window on the reading process" that helps them observe and understand their students' reading. This insight remains the major benefit of learning miscue analysis. Knowing miscue analysis helps reading specialists, classroom teachers, special educators, and reading researchers develop an understanding of the reading process that guides everyday decision making in the teaching of reading. As reading professionals are informed by studying students' miscues (a place where the reader's response does not match the expected response), new questions about the reading process arise and must be addressed. For example, when studying the complexity of third grader Frank's occasional substitution of for for from, it becomes obvious that he miscues in some grammatical settings, but not others, and that he makes the substitution only when there are certain language relations expressed. Through such analysis, researchers learn about language and how readers use it and how text structures affect the reading process. Teachers begin to understand that simplistic remediation will not help Frank and may even cause further problems. Frank's knowledge and use of the syntactic and semantic complexities of his language become evident through the analysis of his miscues. Rather than attempting to eliminate Frank's "errors," professionals who use miscue analysis understand that miscues may represent strengths that are used to address his needs. In addition to increasing our understanding of the reading process in general, miscue analysis supplies specific information about a single miscue. John, a fourth-grade student, omits the word oxygen each time it appears in a story. During the retelling, as he tries to tell why "the men were getting so sleepy," John shows that he understands the text throughout his reading when he explodes with, "Oxygen ... that's the word I didn't get... oxygen." The miscue analysis of John's reading shows how he transacts with the text and how his transaction builds his comprehension. Reading specialists and classroom teachers who analyze such processing are aware that students like John are actively involved in their reading, and beginning with that knowledge they find ways to support the reader's strengths. When Alta reads then for when throughout a story, but reads whistle and white without problems, her special education teacher has more to offer than the simple idea that Alta has "a th/wh confusion." For example, he helps Alta think about how she uses then and when in her writing, thus clarifying when each word is appropriately used. Although miscue analysis is complex and time consuming, its use allows teachers and readers to take charge. Miscue analysis is based on theoretical notions informed by linguistic, psycholinguistic, and sociolinguistic knowledge and by a view of science that empowers educators to ask their own questions, solve their own problems, and consequently come to their own conclusions. Miscue analysis is an open-ended heuristic instrument, that is, a tool that helps teachers and researchers gather information about the reading process, discover supportive information available in the field of literacy learning today, and contribute to that body of knowledge. Little did we realize when we introduced the ideas behind the RM1 to 25 teachers in a school district near San Diego in 1970 that three decades later we would be part of a movement of professional educators and researchers who are committed to understanding why readers do what they do and that what they do reflects their knowledge about language and the world. This is not to imply that miscue analysis alone has been responsible for this historic movement or for teachers taking ownership of their professional responsibilities in the classroom. However, we believe that this tool has played a part in paving the way for teachers and researchers to raise questions about the relationship between learning to read and teaching reading. Those of you who know us are aware of our enthusiasm for the use of miscue analysis and our conviction that it is the most powerful reading diagnostic tool available. We have been told by teachers and researchers that reading research and the teaching of reading are never the same once one is informed by miscue analysis. We agree. In the years since the first publication of the Reading Miscue Inventory, many colleagues have advised us in our work. To all those who raised questions, criticized, and wondered with us, we want to express our sincere thanks. Let's continue the inquiry for the sake of learning and learners.
TOP Foreword Preface Contents Author Bio	Table of Contents: Foreword x/iii Preface xvii PART I: MISCUE ANALYSIS AND THE READING PROCESS 1 Observing the Reading Process 3 Purposes of Miscue Analysis 4 The Quest for Understanding Reading: A Historical Look at Miscue Analysis 5 The Goodman Taxonomy of Reading Miscues 5 Miscue Analysis Procedures 6 The Classroom Procedure 6 The Informal Procedure 6 The In-Depth Procedure 7 Building a Personal Model of Reading 7 Audiences for Miscue Analysis 8 Teachers, Special Educators, and Reading Specialists 8 Researchers, Including Teacher Researchers 9 Material Developers 11 Discovering How People Read 11 Observing the Reader: Meet Betsy, Our Reader and Teacher 12 Betsy's Reading 14 Betsy's Unaided Retelling 14 Betsy's Aided Retelling 21 2 A Holistic View of Reading: Theoretical Understandings 23 Theoretical Assumptions 23 Reading: An Active, Meaning-Making Process 23 Reading: A Language Process 24 Readers Have Knowledge about Language and Their World 26 Authors Have Knowledge about Language and Their World 28 Holistic Theory of Reading 29 Language Cuing Systems 30 Reading Strategies 36 Summary 41 PART II: PROCEDURES FOR MISCUE ANALYSIS 3 General Procedures for Data Collection: Readers, Materials, and Retellings 45 Selecting Readers 45 Selecting Materials 46 Compiling a Set of Reading Materials 48 Text Analysis and Miscue Patterns 48 Supportive Text 49 Preparing the Typescript 50 Preparing the Retelling Guide 51 Data Collection Session 52 Before and During the Reading 53 Stopping the Reader 54 Readers' Retellings and Presentations 55 Oral Retelling Procedures 55 Other Responses and Presentations 60 4 General Procedures: Marking the Typescript 63 Typescript Markings: Miscues and Other Phenomena 63 Substitutions 64 Omissions 66 Insertions 66 Repetitions 67 Additional Markings 70 Complex Miscues 72 Repeated Miscues 75 Multiple Miscues 75 5 General Procedures: Analyzing Miscues 77 Questions to Evaluate Reading 77 Syntactic Acceptability and Semantic Acceptability 78 Issues Relating to Syntactic and Semantic Acceptability 81 Meaning Change 83 Dialect 84 Correction 86 Graphic Similarity and Sound Similarity 89 Additional Research Questions to Evaluate Reading 95 6 The Classroom Procedure and the Informal Procedure 96 The Classroom Procedure 96 Preparing the Typescript for Marking and Coding 97 Coding the Classroom Procedure Typescript 97 Classroom Procedure Questions 97 Betsy's Miscue Patterns 105 Gordon's Miscue Patterns 110 Graphic Similarity and Sound Similarity 113 Classroom Procedure Statistical Summary 115 Checklist for the Classroom Procedure: Using the Typescript ................. 116 The Classroom Procedure Coding and Reader Profile Forms 116 The Classroom Procedure Coding Form 117 The Classroom Procedure Reader Profile Form Retelling 125 Checklist for the Classroom Procedure: Using the Coding Form 127 The Informal Procedure 128 Informal Procedure Conference Form 128 Checklist for the Informal Procedure 130 7 The In-Depth Procedure 131 Numbering Miscues 131 Selecting Miscues for Numbering and Coding 132 Repeated Miscues 133 Multiple Miscues 133 Complex Miscues 134 Analyzing Miscues 134 In-Depth Procedure Questions 134 Syntactic and Semantic Acceptability (Questions I and 2) 134 How to Read for Syntactic Acceptability 136 How to Read for Semantic Acceptability 137 Examples of Responses to Questions 1 and 2 Coded YY 138 Examples of Responses to Questions 1 and 2 Coded YP and YN 138 Examples of Responses to Questions 1 and 2 Coded YN 139 Examples of Responses to Questions 1 and 2 Coded PP 140 Examples of Responses to Questions 1 and 2 Coded PN 141 Examples of Responses to Questions 1 and 2 Coded NN 142 Meaning Change (Question 3) 143 How to Read for Meaning Change 143 Correction (Question 4) 146 Graphic and Sound Similarity (Questions 5 and 6) 148 The In-Depth Procedure Coding Form 148 Meaning Construction and Grammatical Relations 148 Patterns 148 Patterns for Constructing Meaning 152 Patterns for Grammatical Relations 154 Statistical Analysis 155 Retelling Guide and Scoring 158 The In-Depth Reader Profile 158 Checklist for the In-Depth Procedure 160 PART III: KNOWING READERS. THEIR INSTRUCTION, AND THEIR CURRICULUM 8 Reading Miscue Analysis Information 163 Reader Profile Form 163 The Role of the Text 163 Proficient Readers 164 Moderately Proficient Readers 167 Nonproficient Readers 168 Coding Form 171 Typescript 172 Repeated Identical Miscues (RM) on a Single Item Across Text 172 Multiple Miscues on a Single Text Item 173 Partials 173 Repetitions 173 Peripheral Field 174 Corrections 174 Pauses 174 Additional Miscues 174 Types of Miscues 175 Miscue Clusters 175 Location of Miscues 175 Comments Written in the Margin of the Typescript 175 Retelling 175 Transition to the Burke Reading Interview 176 9 Perceptions of the Reading Process: Models of Reading and the Burke Reading Interview 177 Models of Reading 177 Subskills Model 178 Skills Model 178 Holistic Model 179 Understanding the Burke Reading Interview (BRI) 179 BRI Interviews of Three Readers 182 10 Betsy as a Reader: Case Study 186 Betsy's Reader Profile from the In-Depth Procedure 186 Patterns from Betsy's Classroom Procedure Reader Profile 188 Scoring Betsy's Reading with the Informal Procedure 189 Betsy's Use of Language Systems 189 Betsy's Use of Reading Strategies 192 Initiating and Sampling 192 Predicting and Confirming 192 Correction 193 Betsy's Integrating 194 Betsy's Retelling 194 Summary of Betsy's Strengths and Needs 195 11 Reading Curriculum and Strategy Lessons 98 The Ongoing Reading Curriculum 199 Listening to a Variety of Texts 199 Listening to Stories and More 199 Silent Reading 200 Selecting Material 200 Reading Aloud 201 Content Area Reading and Conceptually Related Materials 201 Literature Study Groups 202 Writing for Personal and Social Reasons 203 Reading Strategy Lessons 203 Strategy Lesson: Conscious Awareness of Reading: Retrospective Miscue Analysis 204 Strategy Lesson: What Smart Readers Do 205 Strategy Lesson: How to Reach Your Goal 206 Strategy Lesson: Functions of Reading and Writing 206 Strategy Lesson: Brainstorming (Preview, Overview, Review) 207 Strategy Lesson: Schema Story 207 Strategy Lesson: Selected Deletions or the Cloze Procedure 208 Strategy Lesson: Meaningful Substitutions 209 Strategy Lesson: Name and Keep Going 210 Strategy Lesson: You Become the Author 210 Strategy Lesson: After Retelling 211 Reading Strategy Lessons for Proficient Readers 213 Strategy Lesson: Understanding Story Conventions 213 Strategy Lesson: Exploring Literature 214 Strategy Lesson: Critical Conversations 214 Strategy Lesson: Notice Something New 215 Reading Strategy Lessons for Nonproficient Readers 215 Strategy Lesson: Reading Along with Me 216 Strategy Lesson: Big Books 216 Strategy Lesson: Estimate, Read, Respond, Question 217 Strategy Lesson: Language Experience 217 An Invitation 218 Appendix A: Summary of Procedures 221 Appendix B: Gordon's Miscue Analysis: The Beat of My Heart 228 Appendix C: Blank Forms 247 Appendix D: Previous Miscue Analysis Formats 277 Bibliography and References 287 Books for Children and Young Adults 293 Index 295
TOP Foreword Preface Contents Author Bio	Author Bio: Yetta M. Goodman is Regents Professor of Education at the University of Arizona – Tucson, College of Education, Department of Language, Reading, and Culture. She has been researching miscue analysis, early literacy process, and kid watching for many years. In addition to her leadership roles in many professional organizations, she has authored and co-authored many books and articles, including Reading Miscue Inventory: Alternative Procedures, Retrospective Miscue Analysis: Revaluing Readers and Reading, and the first edition of Reading Strategies: Focus on Comprehension. Dorothy J. Watson is Professor of Education at the University of Missouri – Columbia, where she teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in literacy education and is Chair of the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. A leader of many professional organizations, Dorothy has been involved in research, curriculum development, writing, and presentations in the fields of reading and language development. She is co-author of Reading Miscue Inventory: Alternative Procedures and numerous other books and articles. Carolyn L. Burke is Professor of Language Education at Indiana University, Bloomington, where she teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in literacy and children’s literature. She was involved in the earliest miscue research with Ken Goodman and continues to be known for her work in inquiry curriculum, reader interviews, and miscue studies. She is a co-author of Reading Miscue Inventory: Alternative Procedures and the first and second editions of Reading Strategies: Focus on Comprehension.