• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • UA Graduate and Undergraduate Research
    • UA Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • UA Graduate and Undergraduate Research
    • UA Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UA Campus RepositoryCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournal

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutUA Faculty PublicationsUA DissertationsUA Master's ThesesUA Honors ThesesUA PressUA YearbooksUA CatalogsUA Libraries

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE READING MISCUE INVENTORY AND THE READING APPRAISAL GUIDE IN GRADUATE READING PROGRAMS (ASSESSMENT, REMEDIAL, TEACHER EDUCATION).

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    azu_td_8421975_sip1_m.pdf
    Size:
    5.276Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Description:
    azu_td_8421975_sip1_m.pdf
    Download
    Author
    LONG, PATRICIA CATHERINE.
    Issue Date
    1984
    Keywords
    Reading teachers -- United States.
    Reading -- Code emphasis approaches.
    Miscue analysis.
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Publisher
    The University of Arizona.
    Rights
    Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
    Abstract
    The purpose of this study was to examine differences in the effectiveness of two graduate teacher education programs in reading assessment, one group using the Reading Miscue Inventory and the other using one of its simplified forms, the Reading Appraisal Guide. The main question that is answered in this study is whether it is more effective for teachers to be given training in the Reading Miscue Inventory, or is training in the Reading Appraisal Guide sufficient to enable teachers to carry out competent assessments of children's reading ability? In the six months of the study's duration, different types of data were collected. These consisted of assessments of children's taped readings of a story by two groups of teachers before (the pretest) and after (the posttest) their respective training programs; anecdotal records of the teachers' views of the programs and the assessment instruments they were using, and observations of the teachers' reading assessments of children selected by them for their practicum. Quantitative analyses of the pretest and posttest were made; these were based on criteria drawn from the Reading Miscue Inventory manual and the investigator's own miscue analysis of the children's taped readings. They showed that the teachers trained in miscue analysis, as reflected in the Reading Miscue Inventory, were able to make significantly better assessments of children's reading ability than the teachers trained in the Reading Appraisal Guide. In addition to the quantitative analysis, written and oral statements made by the teachers during the pretest, posttest and training programs were subjected to qualitative analysis and comparisons. These indicated that both groups' programs had strengthened the teachers' adherence to the Goodman model of reading, but those trained in the use of the Reading Miscue Inventory developed more effective assessment abilities and were more approving of the instruments they used, than were those trained in the use of the Reading Appraisal Guide. It was concluded that the Reading Miscue Inventory is an appropriate assessment instrument for use in college graduate reading programs. It proved complex and time-consuming to use, but at the same time it enabled teachers to make more accurate, in-depth assessments of children's reading than did the Reading Appraisal Guide. The latter was found to have some serious drawbacks, mostly arising from attempts to make it quicker and easier to use.
    Type
    text
    Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
    Degree Name
    Ph.D.
    Degree Level
    doctoral
    Degree Program
    Elementary Education
    Graduate College
    Degree Grantor
    University of Arizona
    Collections
    Dissertations

    entitlement

     
    The University of Arizona Libraries | 1510 E. University Blvd. | Tucson, AZ 85721-0055
    Tel 520-621-6442 | repository@u.library.arizona.edu
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.