| OR: It my little monkey here. | ER: Is my little monkey here? |
| OR: We got to tell. | ER: We've got to tell. |
| OR: Frog look at Toad calendar. | ER: Frog looked at Toad's calendar. |
| OR: A word what sounded good. | ER: A word that sounded good. |
| OR: hisself | ER: himself |
| OR: I can come to your party? | ER: Can I come to your party? |
Are these children proficient or non-proficient readers? I think these children are proficient readers. It seems that their dialect is factoring into their reading. According to Weaver, "Proficient readers make miscues that reflect their predictions, their prior knowledge, and even their preferred language structures" (2002, p.74). It is natural to pull one's own language into reading a text. Weaver provided a good example when she gave the rural mountain speech passage and discussed how she found herself making miscues by translating the text into her own proper way of reading and writing.
I feel that these children are doing the same thing. I do not feel that their miscues are affecting the overall meaning of the text. The children are comprehending what they are reading even with such miscues. Weaver explains this as the readers changing the surface structure, but the deep structure is still understood (2002. p.76).
If I were teaching a student that was making miscues based on his or her dialect, I would not correct the child. The most important thing would be to ensure that this student is comprehending the text. If the student is not comprehending the text, I would correct the child and decide why the child is making miscues.
I do wonder if dialect related miscues would reflect in their writing. If so, at what point would dialect miscues need to be corrected?
References:
Weaver, C. (2002). Reading process & practice. (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
I agree with your view on correcting the child only if they were not comprehending the material. When I first read these miscues I saw this child as an emerging reading, but now I can see how the miscues were because of the child's dialect. This makes perfect sense to me now.
ReplyDeleteHi Kimberly,
ReplyDeleteI do wonder if dialect related miscues would reflect in their writing. If so, at what point would dialect miscues need to be corrected?
I wanted to answer this question based on my personal experience. I speak another language at home with my family and friends. Therefore, I have always struggled with making dialect related miscues. Yes, I do think that when I make dialect related miscues when speaking. I would make the same miscues in writing. I would have difficulty switching from informal to formal language.For me, seeing corrected examples of how it should be written really is beneficial.
Ah, thank you for your personal perspective. That is very helpful. :)
DeleteI also agree with your view on correcting the child only if the miscues were effecting overall comprehension. If do feel it would be neccesary for a teacher to correct a student if the miscues were carried over into their writing.
ReplyDeleteI do disagree with you on one aspect. I don't believe all the children are proficient readers. I felt the first child changed the overall meaning of the sentence based of his use of the punctuation. The student changed a statement sentence into asking sentencing which changed the overall meaning.When reading it is importance to maintain meaning to gain full understanding of the text. I felt his/her miscue changed the child's understanding of the text. I also fell it would be important to read the sentence before and after to gain more information about the students level of comprehension. It would provide more insight into the student's reading ability.
That is a very true point about the change in punctuation. That is something I did not notice. That does change the overall meaning, which makes this child not a proficient reader.
Delete