Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Module 2 – Instructional Challenge


 Original Response

  Expected Response

It my little monkey here.
Is my little monkey here?
We got to tell.
We've got to tell.
Frog look at Toad calendar.
Frog looked at Toad's calendar.
A word what sounded good.
A word that sounded good.
hisself
himself
I can come to your party?
Can I come to your party?












Overall, upon examination of the responses, I would consider this child to be a proficient reader. The child did not change the general meaning of most of the responses with the exception of the first response where the meaning did change somewhat when the punctuation was ignored. This could imply that this child is a non-proficient reader.  However, the text stated that proficient readers “may actually make as many or more miscues involving pronouns and simple function words” (2002, p. 63).  This is because they are constructing meaning instead of identifying each individual word.  I agree that all proficient reading is not miscueless due to our schema and context clues.  Nevertheless, I would like to see the entire passage so as I could examine the other sentences to see which context clues the student used before they miscued.

            I would reinforce that this child corrects their own miscues instead of me prompting with the correct response. However, I would tell them to try that sentence again if they did have a miscue. I might let them use a ruler when reading so they can follow the words more easily or let them use highlighting tape to emphasize the words they miscued. I would also want us to monitor their comprehension together to see if they can still understand the overall meaning of the passage with the miscues. I would allow the child to read the passage individually, with partners, and with me several times throughout the week. I would pay attention to see how the miscues are fixed and changed throughout the week and keep up with their comprehension.




Weaver, C. (2002). Reading process and practice (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

4 comments:

  1. I also viewed this person as a proficient reader.I agreed that the meaning of the text was not changed by the reader, also stating my concern for ignoring the grammar in the first sentence. Seeing the whole passage would be very beneficial for educators analyzing these sentences. It is hard to use context clues to decide if the meaning was kept, but based on our view, I believe it was. Asking or allowing a student to reread a sentence where miscues took place can be very beneficial and create that "ah-ha" moment, I have found. Sometimes just rereading can allow for comprehension and understanding.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lindsey,

    I too agree that this student did not change the meaning of the text they were reading. Therefore, I think this student is proficient. I like how students can miscue without changing the meaning and still be 'considered' proficient. I found it interesting that students who make the most miscues are sometimes our most proficient readers. I think it would be interesting to see the entire passage these sentences came out of as well. It would be nice to see what sentences came prior to or afterwards, possibly causing their miscues.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I also found that the children in the above example were proficient readers. If our true goal in reading instruction is that a child comprehends what they are reading, then we need to follow through with this goal by focusing more on children's comprehension than their correct identification of every word. Being that the meanings did not seem to change between the original sentences in the chart and the way that the children read them, this shows evidence of comprehension to me. I like your idea of having students who make miscues due to dialects read passages individually, with partners, and with you to see how their miscues change.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I also thought the reader was proficient. I think questioning for understanding is a great way of figuring out if the student is gaining meaning even with miscue mistakes. I don't think that it does any harm having students re-read passages throughout the week. I think having students read with a partner is a great way for students to work on their fluency as well because they hear people other than themselves and their teacher. Also having familiar reads can boost students confidence with reading because they don't make as many mistakes (we hope) once they have seen the text previously.

    ReplyDelete