The Dreaded Miscue Analysis

So the miscue analysis is over, and all of the Lit III students can take a deep breath.  I am definitely making this assignment seem more dramatic and difficult than it actually was.  To be honest, I really enjoyed this type of miscue analysis.  I have only done one miscue analysis before this one, and it was way more intense.  It was very formal, and I felt as though I was testing the poor student, then just sitting down and listening to her read.  This time around was completely different.  I was able to talk to the student more this time around, get a sense of how and why he might have made a miscue, and teach him a little something during our time together. 

To start, I worked with a first grade boy from my reading practicum classroom.  He is an average reader and is in one of the middle level reading groups.  My cooperating teacher chose him for me when I discussed it with her.  She chose him mostly because she was interested in the results, and he had never done something like this.  He read Our Bakery by Melissa Wagner.  It was a leveled picture book about a family opening a bakery.  It was a good book for him, it had some challenging words in it, and I was able to get some great results and discussion ideas.  When we talked about some miscues he had made, our discussion focused on reading strategies.  He only used one or two while he was reading, and when we talked about it, he said it was his favorite.  I was able to take one of his miscue words and teach him a new strategy to use and he was so excited about it.  I loved that I was able to show him something new, and that he responded so well to it.  This showed me that he is very motivated when it comes to reading, and is more than willing to listen, learn, and try it out himself. 

Even though the discussion of miscues went really well, I think the retelling portion could have gone better.  My student did his retelling but only had one or two very minor details in it.  I really think he knew what happened in the story, but he maybe just didn't want to explain it to me.  Even though I asked leading questions about different things he had said, he was very brief and only went into a lot of detail once.  Looking back, I think I could have asked him better leading questions, to get a better understanding of what he remembered from the story. 

This miscue analysis change my entire opinion about them.  I was pretty against them after the first one because I felt like it was very long, and not authentic.  In this miscue analysis, I was able to have valuable discussions with the student, and actually gain real information about him as a reader.  This type of miscue analysis, for me, focused less on numbers and more on discussion.  I love this because, in my opinion, the discussion I had told me more about the first grader I worked with than the percentage of miscues that went uncorrected and had meaning change.  I was able to get to know this reader, find out what he excels at and what he needs work on, and help him become a better reader. 

Overall, I think it went really well.  I learned a lot about a student in my practicum classroom, as well as some ideas I would like to apply to my future classroom.  I am extremely excited to use this type of miscue analysis with my future students in order to learn more about them as readers.  I know not every miscue analysis will go as well as the one I had with this student, but I am sure with time I will be able to learn more and be prepared for any kind of miscue analysis.