Miscue analysis: A glimpse into the reading process

Che Ton binti Mahmud, Revathi Gopal

Abstract


This paper aims to analyse Form One students’ ability in reading prose. A qualitative research method was carried out involving 6 average ability students. The prose “Fair’s Fair” byNarinder Dhami was used as an instrument to gauge students’ ability in oral reading. The assessment carried out on the reading is miscue analysis, a tool to measure oral reading accuracy at the word level by identifying when and the ways in which the students deviates from the text while reading aloud. Miscues analysed are insertions, hesitation, omission, repetition and substitution. Miscues that maintain the meaning of the sentences are the participants’ strengths while miscues which disrupt the meaning of the sentences are the participants’ weaknesses. The data collected are analysed using descriptive statistics. The findings show that the percentage of strengths outweighed the percentage of weaknesses for all the participants on the occurrences of miscues.  The students’ reading behaviour has provided insights into their language cueing system and the strategies they use during the reading process to comprehend a text.


Keywords


reading, ability, miscue analysis

Full Text:

PDF

References


Almazroui, K. M. (2007). Learning together through retrospective miscue analysis: Salem’s case study. Reading Improvement, 44(3), 153–168.

Argyle, S. B. (1989). Miscue analysis for classroom use. Reading Horizons, 29(2), 93-102.

Davenport, M. R. (2002). Miscues not mistakes. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Dhami, N. (2014). Fair’s fair. Literature component for secondary schools. Form 1 (Student’s Edition.). Marang: Zulfashah Book Service.

Ebersole, M. (2005). Reflecting on miscues in content area reading. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 9(2), 1-9.

Goodman, K. S. (1969). Analysis of reading miscues. Reading Research Quarterly, 5, 9-30.

Goodman, K. S. (1973). Miscue analysis: Applications to reading instruction (pp. 3-18). Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Goodman, K. S. (1994). Reading, writing, and written texts: A transactional sociopsycho-linguistic view. In A. Flurkey & J. Xu (Eds.), On the revolution of reading: The selected writings of Kenneth S. Goodman (pp. 3-45). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Goodman, K. S. (1996). On reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Goodman, Y. M., & Marek, A. (1996). Retrospective miscue analysis. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen Publishers Ltd.

Goodman, Y. M., Watson, D. J., & Burke, C. L. (2005). Reading miscue inventory: From evaluation to instruction (2nd ed.). Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen Publishers.

Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. In J. F. Kavenaugh & I. G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye (pp. 331-358). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Huszti, I. (2008). The micro level of reading miscues: Case studies of six learners. WoPaLP, 2, 105-118.

Kabuto, B. (2009). Parents and children reading and reflecting together: The possibilities of family retrospective miscue analysis. Reading Teacher, 63(3), 212–221.

LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward automatic information and processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.

Moore, R. A., & Brantingham, K. L. (2003). Nathan: A case study in reader response and retrospective miscue analysis. Reading Teacher, 56(5), 466–474.

Moore, R. A., & Gilles, C. (2005). Reading conversations: Retrospective miscue analysis for struggling readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Rhodes, L. K. (1993). Literacy assessment: A handbook of instruments. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Rosenblatt, L. M. (2004). The transactional theory of reading and writing. Theoretical models and processes of reading. International Reading Association, 48, 1363-1398.

Shapiro, J., & Riley, J. (1989). Ending the great debate in reading instruction. Reading Horizons, 30(1), 67-78.

Smith, F. (1982). Understanding reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Turbill, J. (2002). The four ages of reading philosophy and pedagogy: A framework for examining theory and practice. Reading Online, 5(6). Retrieved from http://www.readingonline.org/international/inter_index.asp?HREF=/international/turbill4/index.html

Wilson, J. (2005). The relationship of dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (DIBELS) oral reading fluency to performance on Arizona‘s instrument to measure standards (AIMS). Tempe, AZ: Tempe School District No. 3.

Wixson, K. L. (1979). Miscue analysis: A critical review. Journal of Reading Behaviour, XI(2), 163-175.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v5i1.9927

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2018 Syiah Kuala University

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.