As a reading specialist, it is my job to look for "behavior evidence" of cue use and evidence of the use of strategies such as cross-checking information. It is my job to examine each incorrect attempt and self-correction. It is my job to create hypothesizes about the cues or information sources the child might have been using. In Marie Clay's analysis, cues refer to the sources of information. There are 3 major categories:
Meaning- The teacher thinks about whether the child's attempt makes sense up to the point of error. The teacher might think about the story background, information, from the picture, and meaning in the sentence in deciding whether the child was probably using meaning as a source.
Structure-Structure refers to the way language works. Some refer to this information source as syntax because unconscious knowledge of the rules of the grammar of the language the reader speaks allows him to eliminate alternatives. Using this implicates knowledge, the reader checks whether the sentence "sounds right."
Visual information- Visual information includes the way the letters and words look. Readers use their knowledge of visual features of words and letters and connect these features to their knowledge of the way words and letters sound when spoken. If the letters in the child's attempt are visually similar to the letters in the word in the text (for example, if it begins with the same letter or has a similar cluster of letters), it is likely that the reader has used visual information.
(F&P, 1996)
Readers use all of these information sources in an integrated way while reading for meaning.
My running record form can be found HERE.
If you look at the form, for each error (E) and self-correction (SC), the letters M, S, V are indicated in the "error" column and the "SC" column.
How I learned to do a RR is to look for what the student is doing. So, I just look for what the student is probably using. If the student is probably using meaning, I would circle the "M". If structure (syntax) is probably being used, I would circle the S. If visual information is probably being used, I would circle the V.
In my opinion, in order to consider it a complete RR, there needs to be an analysis of each error and each self-correction. But, this takes time. A TON of time. Well, at first. Once you become familiar with how to "read" a student so to speak, it goes a lot faster. This is why I love doing the reading assessments on ALL of my studnets. It is very time consuming but I take valuable anecdotal notes that help me figure out where to go next with each individual. I feel that doing a RR is extemely valuable because it gives me (the teacher) a chance to look for patterns in the child's reading behaviors. It gives me a chance to reflect on the child's behavior, make my best hypothesis, and then look at data through the whole reading and over time. What I really look for is some type of indication that gives me a clue as to what kinds of strategies the child is using.
If a child isn't making many errors, I move to a higher level of text because I WANT to see them make some errors. If they are making too many errors, I move to a lower level of text because I don't want them to become frustrated (when students are frustrated, all strategies go right out the window).
The errors a student makes help me to indicate their strategic action. I observe whether a child is actively relating one source of information to another, a behavior that Clay (1991) calls cross-checking, because the child is checking one clue against another.
Once all miscues, or errors, are analyzed, I think about questions such as these:
- Does the reader use cues in relation to each other?
- Does the reader check information sources against one another?
- Does the reader use several sources of cues in an integrated way or rely on only one kind of information?
- Does the reader repeat what has been read as if to confirm his reading thus far?
- Does the reader reread to search for more information from the sentence or text?
- Does the reader make meaningful attempts before appealing to the teacher for help?
- Does the reader request help after making an attempt or several attempts?
- Does the reader notice when cues do not match?
- Does the reader stop at unknown words without actively searching?
- Does the reader appeal to the teacher in a dependent way or appeal when appropriate (that is, when the reader has done what he can)?
- Does the reader read with phrasing and fluency? (use my fluency rubric if needed)
- Does the reader make comments or responses in ways that indicate comprehension of the story?
Thinking about these questions will help reveal whether the child is using internal strategies, which may include:
Self-monitoring. These strategies allow the reader to confirm whether he is reading the story accurately. Readers who are reading accurately are consistently using meaning, structure, and visual information for confirm their reading. This is not a conscious process, but the internal system tells them whether the reading makes sense, sounds right, and looks right.
Searching. Searching is an active process in which the reader looks for information that will assist problem solving in some way. Readers search for and use all kinds of information sources, including meaning, visual information, and their knowledge of syntax of language.
Self-correcting. This is the reader's ability to notice mismatches, search for further accomplishes a precise fit with the information already known.
(F&P, 1996)
Reading A-Z has an excellent example of running records. Click here to view the example.
I hope this helps you to deeper alalyze the reading behaviors of your students.
Thanks for reading!
~*Gina*~
"The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go."
- Dr. Seuss a.k.a.....
No comments:
Post a Comment