Denna studie, som har en experimentell karaktär, handlar om högläsning i skolår 2. Syftet består i att ta reda på vad som skiljer starka och svaga läsares högläsning åt, samt att undersöka i vilken mån ett medvetet arbete med att göra en obekant text meningsfull kan påverka högläsningen och läsförståelsen i positiv bemärkelse. Dessutom vill jag ta reda på hur olika teorier om läsning kan redogöra för resultaten av ovanstående. För att uppnå dessa mål formulerades följande frågeställningar. (1) Vad skiljer starka och svaga läsare åt beträffande felläsningar och läsförståelse i deras högläsning av en obekant text? (2) Kan en vuxenledd preview-session (förberedande samtal) påverka felläsningarna och läsförståelsen i positiv bemärkelse? (3) Hur kan svaren på ovanstående frågor tolkas utifrån å ena sidan ett whole language-perspektiv och å andra sidan utifrån den nyare läsforskningen? Fyra barn, två starka och två svaga läsare, har deltagit i experimentet. I det första momentet har barnen högläst en obekant text samt återberättat texten muntligt. I det andra momentet har jag hållit en preview-session innan högläsningen. Samtliga högläsningar spelades in på band och har genomgått miscue-analys. Resultaten av det första momentet tyder på att det visserligen går att hitta väsentliga skillnader mellan de starka och de svaga läsarnas högläsning, men att det snarare handlar om kvantitativa än kvalitativa skillnader. Med det menas att skillnaderna inte kan karakteriseras i termer av strategival utan i stället som varierande grad av skicklighet i att avkoda ord. Resultaten av det andra momentet tyder på att en preview-session direkt kan påverka de svaga läsarnas högläsning och läsförståelse i positiv bemärkelse. Till sist visar denna studie att det inte finns någon anledning att upprätthålla en distinkt åtskillnad mellan whole language-traditionen och den nyare läsforskningen. The purpose of this experimental study was to investigate the differences between skilled and poor readers’ oral reading (in school year two) and to what extent teachers’ work with making unknown texts meaningful can improve children’s oral reading and actual comprehension. I was also interested in how different theoretical frameworks could explain the outcomes of this study. The following research questions were formulated: (1) What differences can be found between skilled and poor readers’ oral reading when looking only at their oral reading errors and comprehension? (2) Can a preview-session improve children’s oral reading and their comprehension of the text? (3) Can the answers to questions (1) and (2) be explained by the Whole language-movement and the modern science of reading? Four children, two skilled readers and two poor readers, participated in this experiment. In phase one they were instructed to read an unknown text and also to retell it orally. Phase two started with a preview-session of an unknown text and then it followed the same procedure as in phase one. All oral readings were recorded and later analyzed by using miscue-analysis. The results of the study show that it is possible to find significant differences between skilled and poor readers but also that these differences are quantitative in their nature. This indicates that differences cannot be explained in terms of reading strategies but rather as a result of different levels of skill. Results also indicate that a preview-session can improve both oral reading and comprehension of texts. Finally, the results indicate that both the Whole language-movement and the modern science of reading have important things to say about the process of reading.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2000. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 183-189). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2000. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 183-189). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 1998. / Title from title page screen, viewed July 3, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Dent Rhodes (chair), Susan Davis Lenski, Fred A. Taylor, Terry Underwood. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 132-140) and abstract. Also available in print.

No description available.

No description available.

College reading programs are traditionally remedial or developmental in nature and often take a decontextualized skills based approach to reading and to supporting college readers (Holschuh & Paulson, 2013). Skills oriented deficit-based approaches to reading provide deficit-based frameworks for readers to construct self-perceptions. TLS 239 Literacy Tutoring is an undergraduate service-learning course where students learn about reading process and theory and develop strategies to tutor in community schools for twenty-four required hours. Coursework frames literacy as a socially constructed process and students engage in a miscue workshop, strategy presentations and in exploring the reading process. In this study, I examine the coursework of 38 students enrolled in TLS 239 and students' reports of shifting their perceptions and self-perceptions of literacy through coursework that challenged their literacy conceptualizations. In this study, I conceptualize Ken Goodman's (2003) theory of revaluing as restorying through a construct of story (Bruner, 2004; Short, 2012) and a semiotic theory of inquiry (Peirce, 1877), a process of fixating new belief. This struggle, or inquiry into reading provides a framework for students to renegotiate and restory their perceptions of literacy and their self-perceptions as literate. Findings indicate that conceptualizing reading as a socially constructed process including the construct of a reading transaction (Rosenblatt, 1994) and the construct of miscue (Goodman, 1969) was anomalous to college students' perceptions of literacy and caused students to doubt previously held misconceptions about reading. Students reported shifts towards conceptualizing reading as the construction of meaning, shifts towards positive self-perceptions as readers, and shifts in their literacy engagements. Students reported an increase in confidence, reading differently, reading more effectively, becoming metacognitive, reading more assigned readings in college, reading more for leisure and feeling more actively engaged in their other courses. Implications include conceptualizing literacy learning as social and emotional learning and the pedagogical implications of literacy instruction framed within a construct of inquiry.

The purpose of this descriptive study was to determine the accuracy and practicality of May's Poor Reader (PR) scoring system for the informal reading inventory (IRI), an individual assessment device designed to determine a student's instructional reading level. The PR is a qualitative scoring system developed by Frank May that examines only two miscues (defaults and meaning-denigrating substitutions) in arriving at an estimate of instructional reading level. The predictor variable, PR, was compared for accuracy and practicality with five other predictor variables consisting of four traditional quantitative scoring systems and an additional qualitative system of May's; PR was also compared with four criterion variables: (a) a scoring system created by Frank May on the basis of research concerning miscues and informal reading inventories, a system that requires the use of a context scale and a graphophonic scale, (b) the judgments of tape recordings made by an experienced and knowledgeable reading coordinator, (c) the judgments of ten reading teachers of the students under their tutelage, (d) and a silent reading score on Form B of the same IRI. The comparisons were made through the use of Chi square tests of significance in which each of the six predictor variables was compared with each of the four criterion variables as to accuracy of agreement with the criterion variables. Examination of the results showed that there were no significant differences between the instructional estimates made by the PR scoring system and two of the four criterion variables, the research based scoring system and the experienced reading coordinator. This was also true for May's third qualitative scoring system called the CGQ. All other differences in the estimates of instructional level were highly significant--with the four traditional predictor variables and with two of the four criterion variables (p < .01). The main implications drawn from this study were: (1) Classroom teachers and reading teachers may wish to make use of May's PR scoring system for the IRI as a quick and qualitative way of estimating students' instructional reading level. (2) Since the PR scoring system met the criteria established for a qualitative IRI scoring system, researchers may wish to use this system in studies of informal reading inventories.

The aims of this thesis were to examine the utilisation of various linguistic levels in the oral reading of running texts among Swedish beginning readers, and specifically to question the supposedly predominant role of lower (i.e. sub-lexical) linguistic levels by also examining possible evidence of the utilisation of information at the syntactic or semantic levels, as well as textual context. The investigation is based on a corpus constructed from the oral reading of running texts and includes a number of studies using both quantitative and qualitative error analyses. The analyses confirm that other linguistic levels than the sub-lexical have an impact on reading. This was shown both in the linguistic acceptability of errors and the extent to which errors were corrected depending on linguistic acceptability. Although the natural point of departure seemed to be the graphemic level, analyses revealed that graphemic complexity or word transparency alone could not explain error frequencies. In quite a few cases, qualitative analyses revealed, for instance, that higher linguistic levels or knowledge of the world could explain both why words did and did not result in reading errors. However, phonological quantity appeared to be a major difficulty throughout the study, which is clearly related to the graphemic or phonological level. Some differences regarding the developmental perspective were observed. One study indicated that the readers might develop stepwise regarding their utilisation of various linguistic levels, in the sense that they appeared to rely mainly on lower linguistic levels early in reading development. Later they seemed to be dependent on higher linguistic levels, and ultimately they seemed to be sensitive to, rather than dependent on, higher linguistic levels. An interesting result was that the readers seemed to use different strategies for different kinds of words throughout the investigation, using a direct decoding strategy for frequent words, but using a letter-by-letter decoding strategy for less frequent or graphemically complex words.

No description available.