Metatheoretical Differences between Running Records and Miscue Analysis: Implications for Analysis of Oral Reading Behaviors

Research in the Teaching of English Aug 2018

Metatheoretical Differences between Running Records and Miscue Analysis: Implications for Analysis of Oral Reading Behaviors

Sinéad Harmey ; Bobbie Kabuto Queens College, CUNY

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine the metatheoretical differences that impact how runningrecords and miscue analysis differ in (a) the quantification of readers’ produced responses totext and (b) the analysis of oral reading behaviors. After providing historical and metatheoretical overviews of both procedures, we present the data source, which included 74 records of oral readings from an extant data set collected from an informal reading inventory. Each record was coded using running record and miscue analysis procedures. We used inferential statistics to examine relationships across conceptually similar items of analysis (for example, the number oferrors or miscues). Findings from the inferential statistics show that there were significant, positive correlations between three of the five conceptually similar items, and a lack of statistically significant correlations between the use of meaning and grammar between running records and miscue analysis. Based on the findings, we argue that both procedures, which are often confused and conflated, possess metatheoretical differences that influence how oral reading behaviors are interpreted. These differences, in turn, impact how reading ability is framed and socially constructed. We conclude with the significance of this research for education professionals.

Journal: Research in the Teaching of English
Published: 2018-08-15
DOI: 10.58680/rte201829753
Open Access: Closed
Topics: quantitative research

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (0)

No references match articles in this index.

Also cites 11 works outside this index ↓

Doyle (2013)

Clay’s theoretical perspective: A literacy processing theory

Theoretical models and processes of reading ↗
Keenan (2008)

Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on de…

Scientific Studies of Reading ↗
Kontovourki (2012)

Reading leveled books in assessment-saturated classrooms: A close examination of unmarked…

Reading Research Quarterly ↗
Nilsson (2008)

A critical analysis of eight informal reading inventories

Reading Teacher ↗
Pearson (2014)

Complicating the world of reading assessment: Toward better assessments for better teaching

Theory Into Practice ↗
Rodgers (2016)

Exploring the nature of effective scaffolding

Reading Research Quarterly ↗
Ukrainetz (2017)

Commentary on “Reading Comprehension Is Not a Single Ability”: Implications for child lan…

Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools ↗
Vaughn (2003)

Response to intervention as a means of identifying students with reading/ learning disabilities

Exceptional Children ↗
Walpole (2006)

The role of informal reading inventories in assessing word recognition

Reading Teacher ↗
Wilson (2005)

Accountability for reading and readers: What the numbers don’t tell

Reading Teacher ↗
Wixson (2017)

An interactive view of reading comprehension: Implications for assessment

Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools ↗

CrossRef global citation count: 9 View in citation network →