Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA
READING STRATEGIES OF AVERAGE AND WEAK ESL READERS A CASE STUDY
ANGELINE SPYKERMAN
FPP 1988 3
It is hereby certified that we have read this thesis entitled 'Reading Strategies of Average and Weak ESL Readers : A Case Study' by Angeline Spykerman, and in our opinion it is satisfactory in terms of the scope, quality, and presentation as partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science
��.� .. SULAlMAN M . YASSIN, Ph.D.
Professor/Dean of Graduate Studies Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Chairman Board of Examiners)
Ul:�� . . vw • .-� • • � GRAHAM WARD THURGOOD, Ph. •
Associate Professor Faculty of Educational Studies
Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Internal 'Examiner)
.. �� .. ABDUL RAHMAN AROFF. Ph. D.
Deputy Dean Faculty of Educational Studies
Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Supervisor)
This thesis was submitted to the Senate of Universiti Pertanian Malaysia and was accepted as partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science .
Date: ...
.j. I JUt q c �';"��"�<"� •
SULAlMAN M . YASSIN, Ph.D. Professor/
Dean of Graduate Studies
READING STRATEGIES OF AVERAGE
AND WEAK ESL READERS A CASE STUDY
by
ANGELINE SPYKERMAN
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the
Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Pertanian Malaysia
June 1988
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisors,
Dr. Abdul Rahman Md. Aroff and Dr. Sharifah Md. Nor for their
guidance and encouragement.
I would also like to extend my thanks to the following
people:
the Guru Besar, teachers and pupils of Sekolah
Menengah Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur
Goh Keat Seong and Lean Nyeok Foo, for their useful
comments and invaluable help as second evaluators in
the analysis of the miscues.
J.C. Bailey and Bob Wilson of the Faculty of
Education, Queens University at Kingston, Ontario,
Canada.
Dr. B.G. Ong of the Royal Military College, Kingston,
Ontario, Canada.
Eddie Williams, Centre of Applied Language Studies,
University of Reading, England.
Dr. Lim Ho Peng, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Dr. Llyod Fernando, for being my 'teacher' in the
true sense of the word.
My husband, Andrew, for his patience, understanding
and encouragement
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . • ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • • . • . • . . . iii
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • vii
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • . • • . . . • . . . ix
CHAPTER 1 - THE PROBLEM . . . • • . . • • . . . . . . • • • . . • . . . . • . . . . • . . . 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 3
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . • . 4
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • • • . . . • . . . . • . . 11
CHAPTER 2 - REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . • . •• . . . . . . • . . . 13
THE READING PROCESS . . • • • • • . . . . • • . • • . • • . • • . . . . • . . • . . • 13
THE READER AND THE LANGUAGE CUES • . • . . . . . • . . . • . • . . • • . 14
MISCUE ANALYSIS . . . • . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . • . . . . . . 15
READING IN A SECOND LANGUAGE . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... . ... . . . 2 2
THE PROFICIENT READER AND THE WEAK (LOW PROFICIENT ) READER . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 27
CHAPTER 3 - RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
SAMPLING . . . . . . . . . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . • . . . • . . . . • 32
The School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
The Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
iii
PAGE
INSTRUMENTS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 35
The Cloze Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3S
The Reading Passage . • . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . 37
The Reading Miscue Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
PROCEDURE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • 42
Groundwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
The Investigations Process Using Miscue Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Scoring and Analysis of Miscues . . • . • . . • • • . 45
DATA ANALYSIS . . . • . • • • • . • • . . • . . . . • • . • . • • • . • . . . . . • . . • . 46
Quantitative Measures . • • . • • . . • . . • • • . • • . . • • 47
Qualitative Measures . . • . • • • • • • • . . . . • • • • • • • 48
Comprehensive Measures • • . . • • . • • • . • • . • . . • • • 49
CHAPTER 4 - ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS . • • • • • • • • • 50
QUANTITATIVE MEASURES • . • • • . . . • . • • • • • • • . . . . • . • • • . • • • • 50
Miscues Per Hundred Words (MPHW) . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Types of Miscues . • • • . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . • . • • . . • • 52
QUALITATIVE MEASURES 56
a) Analysis of the Reader's Use of The Three Language Cues . . • • • • • . . . • . • • • • . . • • 57
GraphiC Similarity and Phonic Similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Syntactic and Semantic Acceptability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
iv
PAGE
Meaning Change . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • . 67
Grammatical Function • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 71
Correction Strategies . • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • 73
Patterns of Grammatical Relationships • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • . • • • • 76
b) Analysis of the Quality of Each Type of Miscue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Substitutions . • . • • • • • • • • • . . . . . • . • . . • • 81
Omissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Insertions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
COMPREHENSION MEASURES • . • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • . . • . • • • • • • 91
Retelling Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Comprehending Scores . • • . • . • • • • • . • • . • • • . • • • . • • • • 93
Comprehension Patterns . • • • • . . • . . . . • • • • • . . . • • • • • 95
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS • • . . • • • • . . • . . • . • • • . • • . . . . • . • • . 99
CHAPTER 5 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS • . • . . • . • • • • . • • • . • • • . • • 106
THE PROBLEM . . • . • • • • • • • • • • • • . . • • • • • • • . • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • 106
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
THE METHODOLOGY • • • • • . . • . • • • . . . • • . • • • . • • • • • • • • • . . . . . • 107
THE FINDINGS . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 108
PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 109
SCOPE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH • • • • • • • • • . • . • . • • • . • • • • • • • • 114
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . • • • . . . • . • • . • • . • . • . . . . • • . . • • • . • • • . . 117
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . • . . • . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . • • . 119
v
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
PAGE
The Cloze Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
The Reading Passage • • • . • • . • • • • • • . • • • • • . • • . Questionnaire to Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sample Worksheet
Guidelines on Marking of Miscues • . • . . • . • • • Sample Coding Sheet
Reading Miscue Inventory Questions • • • . • • • • Rating Scale for Retelling Scores . • • • . • • . •
Patterns of Grammatical Relationships • • • • Patterns of Comprehension • . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Sample-Marked Worksheets • • • . • • . • • • • • • • • • • . Sample-Completed Coding Sheets • • • • . • . . • • .
vi
126
131
133
140
146
147
149
150
151
153
160
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES PAGE
1 PUPILS' CLOZE TEST SCORES AND TEACHER'S RATINGS . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . 36
2 TEACHERS' ASSESSMENT OF THE SELECTED PASSAGE • . . . . • • • . • • . • • • • . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 39
3 MISCUES PER HUNDRED WORDS (MPHW) . . • . . . . . • . . . • . 52
4 TYPES OF MISCUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5 MISCUES DUE TO INTER LANGUAGE AND INTONATION . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . 55
6 GRAPHIC SIMILARITy ............................ 58
7 PHONIC SIMILARITy ............................. 59
8 SYNTACTIC ACCEPTABILITy ....................... 64
9 SEMANTIC ACCEPTABILITy ........................ 65
10 SUMMARY OF GRAPHIC AND PHONIC SIMILARITY, SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC ACCEPTABILITY (IN PERCENTAGE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 66
11 MEANING CHANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
12 GRAMMATICAL FUNCTION OF MISCUES . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . 72
13 CORRECTION PERCENTAGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
14 CORRECTION OF SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTICALLY
UNACCEPTABLE MISCUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
15 GRAMMATICAL RELATIONSHIPS PATTERNS . . . . . . . . . . 79
16 GRAPHIC/PHONIC SIMILARITY (IN PERCENTAGE) . . . . . 80
17 SUBSTITUTION MISCUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
18 WORD SUBSTITUTIONS - SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC ACCEPTABILITy ........................ 83
vii
19 OMISSIONS - SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC
PAGE
ACCEPTABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • • . . . . • . . . • 86
20 INSERTIONS - SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC ACCEPTABILITY • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . 89
21 SYNTACTIC ACCEPTABILITY AND SEMANTIC ACCEPTIBILITY OF WORD SUBSTITUTIONS, OMISSIONS AND INSERTIONS (IN PERCENTAGE) . ..... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
22 RETELLING SCORES (IN PERCENTAGE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
23 COMPREHENDING SCORES (IN PERCENTAGE) . . . . . . . . • . 93
24 COMPREHENSION PATTERNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . 96
25 CLASSIFICATION OF READER'S EFFECTIVE USE OF READING STRATEGIES ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSION PATTERN RANGE AND RETELLING SCORE RANGE . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 97
26 AVERAGE AND WEAK READERS - COMPREHENSION PATTERN AND RETELLING SCORES (MEAN PERCENTAGE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
viii
An abstract of the thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Pertanian Malaysia as partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Science
READING STRATEGIES OF AVERAGE AND WEAK ESL READERS A CASE STUDY
Chief Supervisor
Supervisor
Faculty
by
ANGELINE SPYKERMAN
June 1988
Abdul Rahman Md. Aroff, Ph. D.
Sharifah Mohd. Noor, Ph.D.
Educational Studies
This study approaches reading from the psycholinguistic
standpoint. Miscue analysis is used to investigate the reading
strategies of a group of average and weak ESL readers from
Sekolah Menengah Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur. The readers' miscues
were analyzed in accordance with Yetta Goodman and Burke's
Reading Miscue Inventory (1972) . The research addresses itself
to the question of how these readers utilized the language cues
- graphophonic, syntactic and semantic - to help them make
sense of the text.
The findings shows that both groups of readers depended
extensively on graphophonic cues and were less efficient in
using syntactic and semantic cues. Qualitative analysis of the
ix
miscues show that when the readers did resort to the syntactic
and semantic cues , the average readers produced better quality
miscues .
The applicability of miscue analysis as a research tool is
indicated in the suggestions for further research . The
pedagogical implications of the findings underscore the
practical use of miscue analysis in the classroom .
x
Abstrak tesis yang dikemukakan kepada Senat Universiti Pertanian Malaysia sebagai memenuhi sebahagian daripada syarat
keperluan ijazah Master Sains
READING STRATEGIES OF AVERAGE AND WEAK ESL READERS A CASE STUDY
oleh
ANGELINE SPYKERMAN
Jun 1 988
Ketua Penyelia Abdul Rahman Md . Aroff, Ph . D .
Penyelia Sharifah Mohd . Nor, Ph . D .
Fakulti Pengajian Pendidikan
Kajian ini mendekati pembacaan dari sudut psikolinguistik .
Analisis "miscue" diguna untuk menyelidik strategi-strategi
pembacaan sekumpulan pembaca Bahasa Inggeris sebagai Bahasa
Kedua yang sederhana dan yang lemah dari Sekolah Menengah
Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur . "Miscue" pembaca-pembaca ini dianalisis
menurut ' Reading Miscue Inventory" (1972) oleh Yetta Goodman
dan Burke . Penyelidikan ini mengarah kepada soalan mengenai
bagaimana pembaca-pembaca ini menggunakan "cues" bahasa
grafofonik, sintaktik dan semantik - untuk membantu mereka
memahami teks.
Dapatan-dapatan menunjukkan bahawa kedua-dua kumpulan
pembaca bergantung atas "cues" grafofonik secara meluas dan
xi
kurang cekap dalam menggunakan "cues" sintaktik dan semantik .
Analisis kualitatif ten tang "miscues" itu menunjukkan bahawa
apabila pembaca-pembaca menggunakan "cues" sintaktik dan
semantik , pembaca-pembaca sederhana menghasilkan "miscues" yang
lebih bermutu .
Keboleh-terapan analisis "miscues" sebagai alat penyelidi-
kan dinyatakan dalam cadangan-cadangan
lanjutan . Implikasi-implikasi pedagogi
bagi penyelidikan
mengenai dapatan-
dapatan penyelidikan ini menegaskan faedah praktikal analisis
"miscues" di dalam bilik darjah .
xii
CHAPTER 1
THE PROBLEM
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM
Reading is a very complex mental process . There have
been many attempts at defining the reading process . Huey's
attempt in 1908 , resulted in his conclusion that it remains a
mystery . That it remains as complex as ever , has to do with
the fact that when one tries to analyse or define this process ,
one is probing the workings of the human mind . Huey was thus
to conclude that if we can analyse what happens when we read ,
we could have succeeded in describing as well as revealing "the
tangled story of the most remarkable specific performance that
civilization has learnt in all its history" ( Huey , 1908 , cited
in Lovett , 1981 : 1 ) .
Southgate et al . ( 1981 : 27 ) echo this difficulty and
emphasize that since most reading is done silently , the problem
of investigating what happens when one reads , is enhanced .
Mackay ( 1979 : viii ) in Reading in a Second Language voices
the same concern and extends the problem to the ESL ( English as
a Second Language ) scene . Mackay observes that applied
linguistics has attempted at coming to an understanding of the
reading process through learning from the learners ' errors in
their oral reading and their written work .
1
2
Goodman's work ( 1967 , 1 96 9 , 1981 ) on miscues is yet
another attempt at trying to make some sense of the "tangled
story" . Southgate et al . ( 1981 : 2 7 ) acknowledge Goodman's
contribution to this area of research . The writers affirm that
miscue analysis can help to explain the reading process .
Miscue analysis examines the errors made by readers in
oral reading and attempts to explain what the readers do
through these miscues . As such , the reading process that Chall
( 1977 , cited in Southgate et al . , 1 981 : 24) labels as "a complex
mental process" can then be explained. For this reason ,
Goodman ( 1974 : 3 ) sees it fit to refer to miscues as "windows on
the reading process" .
Research using miscue analysis requires one to subscribe
to the psycho linguistic view of reading as propounded by
Goodman ( 1967 ) . Thus , the following factors should be borne in
mind .
When the reader tries to grapple with a piece of text in
order to get meaning from it , three language cues play a part
in aiding him in his attempt . The three cues are the
graphophonic cues , the semantic cues and the syntactic cue s .
In addition , his reading is also influenced to some extent
by his knowledge and experience of the world ( Levin and
Williams 1970 ; Goodman , 1969 , 1981 ; Burke , 1981 ) .
3
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
In Malaysia , the medium of instruction is Bahasa Malaysia
and English is taught as a Second Language . One of the aims of
the most recent syllabus for the English Language in the KBSM
(Integrated Secondary School Syllabus ) , which will be
implemented in schools in 1988 , is to equip pupils with a
language which will provide them access to information vital to
their academic and professional studies . A survey of the major
libraries in the country will reveal that the bulk of the
references and academic texts are in English . Translated works
can be obtained but they are not as abundantly and readily
available as desired . The ability to read effectively and
efficiently in English is thus an important skill as it is a
means to getting information vital to one's education . Lee Su
Kim ( 1 983:2 ) emphasizes this point:
In Malaysia , although the medium of instruction is in the Malay language , the majority of the academic texts and references are in English , of which only a few have been translated into Malay . Consequently , English has become the library or "link" language , and a relatively good command of reading skills in ESL is essential as the means of access to information without which professional studies might be greatly impaired .
The role of reading in the ESL curriculum is thus a
significant one . Mackay et al . ( 1 979 : vi ) see it as a
"legitimate goal in the ESL curriculum" . Lee Su Kim ( 1983 : 3 )
expresses the same sentiment . There is a need , therefore , to
investigate the reading process so that a better and clearer
4
understanding of this process can be arrived at. Such gained
insights can then pave the way to better teaching strategies .
How then can one "look into a reader ' s mind" and
understand the way in which he reads? Reading comprehension
scores which claim to reflect a reader ' s reading ability
actually measure the product rather than the process by which
the product has been arrived at . Such scores only give a
picture of the end and not the means to the end. The mystery
of the reading process still has to be unravelled.
( 1979 : 68) sums up the problem :
The major problem here is that although we do know a great many interesting things about reading , no one knows exactly what reading is or how anybody learns to do it.
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
Eskey
Generally , thi s study attempts to analyse the reading
process of two groups of Second Language readers , that is the
average and weak readers. Both groups are following the Second
Language programme at the intermediate level. These readers
have completed six years of primary education during which
English was taught as a Second Language . They are now studying
in Form One. These pupils will continue to be taught English
as a Second Language in school. These pupils can thus be
considered to be at the intermediate level of the English
Language Programme . This study will examine how these two
groups of readers process information from the text.
5
Specifically , this study addresses the following research
questions :
1 . How are the three cues ( graphophonic , syntactic and
semantic cues) used by these readers in the reading
process?
2 . What types of operations ( substitution , omission ,
insertion and reversal ) are these readers engaged in
the process of reading?
3 . Do the readers exhibit a concern for getting meaning
from the text? If so , what strategies were used?
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Reading is an important skill in the context of the
teaching
Malaysia.
and learning of English as Second Language in
Consequently it is important that research into the
nature of the reading process be made so that one can obtain a
clear picture of what an average learner , at the intermediate
level of the language programme , does when he reads . (The
category 'average' refers in this study to the reader who is
not able to read independently . Such a reader is at the
instructional level of the reading programme . ) We need to have
some concept as to the sort of strategies that the average
reader uses , for detecting problems at this early stage of the
intermediate programme will go a long way to improving the
teaching of reading in Malaysian schools .
6
One also needs feedback on the way the weak reader reads .
( A ' weak' reader is one who is also at the instructional level
of the reading programme . Such a reader , however , reads with
much difficulty . ) Much has been written about the strategies
used by the proficient reader. One needs to know what
strategies the weak reader uses so that effective
strategies can be planned . This study will chart the
teaching
profile
of a small group of average and weak readers . Although the
sample size ( only eight readers were studied) is too small for
any generalization to be made , it will be the start of some
research that gives due attention to the weak readers .
Mackay et al . ( 1979 : viii ) make a call for more research to
be done in the ESL scene . The writers take the stand that
'reading comprehension ' should be defined in ' operational '
terms . They assert that what is needed in ESL teaching and
learning today is a "better and fuller understanding of what a
second language reader does" . This study aims to add then to
the existing body of research on reading in ESL for the
insights gained will enable one to teach reading in a Second
Language more effectively .
Since hardly any research has been carried out on the
reading process using miscue analysis in Malaysia , the findings
of thi s study will contribute positively to this particular
f ield especially in Malaysia .
7
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study has several limitations which stem from the use
of miscue analysis :
1 . Miscue analysis uses
behaviour ) to infer
oral reading
the workings of
( observable
the reader's
mind . As such , it would be impossible for one to
assert that the findings from such investigations can
accurately describe what the reader does at all times
when he reads. Nevertheless , as one might well
agree , the only recourse open to the researcher who
wants to study the 'mental process' of reading , is
still the reader's overt behaviour . Whatever the
limitations , only such research can offer more
'windows into the reading process' . It is hoped that
with more research conducted in this area , more and
more 'windows' will be opened so that one day the
'picture' of what goes on in the reading process will
stand clearly before us .
2. One also notes concern about the inconsistencies
which could arise through the observation process .
Page ( 1974 : 67-68) emphasiz es that miscue analysis
rests on the study of the discrepancy between the
reader's observed behaviour and the expected
behaviour ( the print ) . When a reader interacts with
the text and his observed behaviour does not match
8
the expected behaviour , a miscue has been generated .
However , Page asserts that there are two additional
interactions which one should be aware of :
i ) the observer's own interaction with the text
(which can produce miscues since miscues are
considered regular occurrences of proficient
reader s ) ,
i i ) the observer's own interaction with the reader's
spoken words , that is the reader's oral reading
- again giving rise to the possibility of other
miscues being generated .
Page ( 1974 : 69 ) thus draws attention to the need
for devising research strategies that account for the
inconsistencies known to be present in the
observation process .
Page suggests that the language differences
between the observer and the reader can contribute to
the inconsistencies in the observation process . Thus
for this research , it was with this limitation in
mind that the type of language the observer would use
and expect the reader to use was that of Standard
English . The definition of this is in line with that
given by Strevens ( 1982 ) in his article ' Varieties of
English : A TEFL Approach' . In his article , Strevens
9
( 1 982 : 69 ) lists six important features of Standard
English. Of these , this study notes the following :
i ) i t is used by educated people who make use of English all over the world , not solely in Britain.
iii ) it may be spoken with an accent from any geographical locality , or with a nonregional accent;
iv) it has been universally accepted in the English-speaking world as the only approach model for educational use (and hence , for the ' educated ' use ) whether we are thinking in English as the mother tongue or as a foreign or second language.
v ) it is the variety of English which has been the most comprehensively described and studied.
Thus differences in pronunciation and intonation
( if it did not affect meaning ) were discounted .
Dialectical differences will not have any part to
play at all and hence were not considered. However ,
interlanguage was a feature that had to be taken into
account.
In order to have some consistency in the
observation process , a second observer who has had
experience in teaching English as a Second Language ,
will be asked to evaluate the oral reading which has
been audio-taped. The taping of the oral responses
will enable the researcher to ensure that "the
limitations of the memory" ( Page , 1974 : 69) does not
10
add to the inconsistency of the observation process .
The making of the miscues , as the reader reads , will
be double checked against the taped responses . Page
( 1 974 : 69) notes that this technique is
substantially better than current clinical practice - relying solely on the single marking of a typed script while listening to the initial reading only once , at the actual time of the performance .
3 . The retelling session was the weakest part of the
instrument . This was because the reader had to depend
on some amount of recall in order to retell the
study . Gershon ( 1 985) also acknowledges this recall
factor as a limitation in his study .
To aid the readers in remembering the details of
the story , the researcher is expected to ask probing
questions . It was found that the readers ' lack of
mastery of the English Language contributed to their
problem of retelling as they could not express
themselves adequately . The researcher's probing
questions did not aid memory nor help clarify poorly
expressed ideas in cases when the readers '
comprehension of the language was weak . To solve
this problem the researcher resorted to the use of
Bahasa Malaysia. The readers were given the option
to retell the story in either English or Bahasa
Malaysia . Probing questions were also asked in
Bahasa Malaysia when the occasion warranted i t .
