Miscue Analysis and a Reading Revolution

References

1. Arya P., Martens P., Wilson G. P., Altwerger B., Jin L., Laster B., Lang D. (2005) Reclaiming literacy instruction: Evidence in support of literature-based programs. Language Arts, 83(1), 63–72.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bacon H. R., Anders P. L., Granados N. R., Murphy K. (2020) Women tutoring women: A community of learners. InHenry L., Stahl H., (Eds.). Literacy across the community: Research, praxis, and trends (pp.258–269). Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
3. InBrown J., Goodman K., Marek A., (Eds.) 1996) Studies in miscue analysis: An annotated bibliography. International Reading Association.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Carlsson-Paige N., McLaughlin G. B., Almon J. W. (2015) Reading instruction in kindergarten: Little to gain and much to lose. Alliance for Childhoodhttps://deyproject.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/readinginkindergarten_online-1.pdf.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Croce K. (2015) Latino(a) and Burmese elementary school students reading scientific informational texts: The interrelationship of the language of the texts, students’ talk, and conceptual change theory. Linguistics and Education, 29 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.02.001.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Crouch D., Cambourne B. (2020) Made for learning: How the conditions of learning guide teaching decisions. Richard C. Owen.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Crowell C. G. (2015) Miscue analysis v. DIBELS: A tale of resistance. Talking Points, 26(2), 2–9.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Dudley-Marling C., Paugh P. (2005) The rich get richer, the poor get Direct Instruction. InAltwerger B., (Ed.). Reading for profit: How the bottom line leaves kids behind (pp.156–171). Heinemann.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Edelsky C., Altwerger B., Flores B. (1991) Whole Language: What’s the difference?. Heinemann.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Feathers K. M., Arya P. (2015) Exploring young children’s patterns of image use in a picturebook. Language and Literacy, 17(1), 42–62.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Flurkey A. (2008) Reading flow. InFlurkey A., Paulson E., Goodman K., (Eds.). Scientific realism in studies of reading (pp.267–304). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Flurkey A. (2020) Revaluing readers with RMA: Miscue analysis as handwork. InWhitmore K. F., Meyer R. J., (Eds.). Reclaiming literacies as meaning making: Manifestations of values, identities, relationships, and knowledge (pp.148–158). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Flurkey A., Goodman Y. (2004) The role of genre in a text: Reading through the waterworks. Language Arts, 81(3), 233–244.
    [Google Scholar]
14. InFlurkey A., Paulson E., Goodman K., (Eds.) 2008) Scientific realism in studies of reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
15. InFlurkey A., Xu J., (Eds.) 2003) On the revolution in reading. Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Garcia A., Kleifgen J. (2018) Educating emergent bilinguals: Policies, programs, and practices for English learners (2nd ed. Teachers College Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Gilles C., Osborn A., Johnson D. (2017) Changing attitudes and engagement: Collaborative Retrospective Miscue Analysis with “intervention” middle schoolers. Talking Points, 28(2), 2–7.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Goodman D. (1989) So why don’t I feel good about myself?InHood W., Goodman K., Goodman Y., (Eds.). The whole language evaluation book (pp.189–212). Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Goodman D., Flurkey A. (2019) Readability. InDamico J. S., Ball M. J., (Eds.). The SAGE encyclopedia of human communication sciences and disorders. SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Goodman K. (1993) Phonics phacts. Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Goodman K. (1996a) On reading. Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Goodman K. (1996b) Principles of revaluing. InGoodman Y., Marek A., (Eds.). Retrospective miscue analysis: Revaluing readers and reading (pp.13–20). Richard C. Owen.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Goodman K. (2003a) A linguistic study of cues and miscues in reading. InFlurkey A., Xu J., (Eds.). On the revolution in reading (pp.117–123). Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Goodman K. (2003b) Miscues: Windows on the reading process. InFlurkey A., Xu J., (Eds.). On the revolution in reading (pp.107–116). Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Goodman K., Fries P., Strauss S. (2016) Reading—The grand illusion: How and why people make sense of print. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Goodman K., Goodman Y. (1978) Reading of American children whose language is a stable rural dialect of English or a language other than English. National Institute of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Goodman K., Goodman Y., Flores B. (1979) Reading in the bilingual classroom: Literacy and biliteracy. Inter-America.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Goodman K., Shannon P., Freeman Y., Murphy S. (1988) Report card on basal readers. Richard C. Owen.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Goodman K., Wang S., Iventosch M., Goodman Y. (2012) Reading in Asian languages: Making sense of written texts in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Goodman Y. (1972) Reading diagnosis: Qualitative or quantitative?. The Reading Teacher, 26(1), 32–37.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Goodman Y. (1976) Developing reading proficiency. InAllen P. D., Watson D., (Eds.). Findings of research in miscue analysis: Classroom implications (pp.113–128). National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Goodman Y., Allen K. (2017) Language is a resource: Discovering readers’ transliteracies through RMI and RMA. InDaniel M., (Ed.). Planning instruction for English learners: Culture, language, and curricular choices (pp.59–85). Rowman & Littlefield.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Goodman Y., Goodman D. (2014) “I hate ’postrophe s”: Issues of dialect and reading proficiency. InGoodman K., GoodmanY., (Eds.). Making sense of learners making sense of written language (pp.135–152). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Goodman Y., Goodman K. (2003) To err is human: Learning about language processes by analyzing miscues. InFlurkey A., Xu J., (Eds.). On the revolution in reading (pp.223–245). Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Goodman Y., Martens P., Flurkey A. (2014) The essential RMA: A window into readers’ thinking. Richard C. Owen.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Goodman Y., Watson D., Burke C. (2005) Reading Miscue Inventory: From evaluation to instruction. Richard C. Owen.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Kabuto B. (2016) A socio-psycholinguistic perspective on biliteracy: The use of miscue analysis as a culturally relevant assessment tool. Reading Horizons, 56(1), 25–44.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Kabuto B., Velasco P. (2016) Taking a value-oriented perspective of biliterate families. Multicultural Education, 23(3–4), 20–26.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Kim K., Goodman Y. (2011) Teaching strategies that revalue ELL readers: Retrospective Miscue Analysis. InMeyer R., Whitmore K., (Eds.). Reclaiming reading: Teachers, students, and researchers regaining spaces for thinking and action (pp.99–110). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Labov W. (1973) Language in the inner city. University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Lindfors J. W. (2008) Children’s language: Connecting, reading, writing, and talk. Teachers College Press.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Liwanag M. P. S. U., Pelatti C. Y., Martens R., Martens P. (2016) Children’s eye movements, Miscue Analysis patterns, and retellings when reading a counterpoint picture book. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 65(1), 253–267.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Meek M. (1988) How texts teach what readers learn. Thimble Press.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Murphy K. (2020) Parents as co-problem posers. InWhitmore K. F., Meyer R. J., (Eds.). Reclaiming literacies as meaning making: Manifestations of values, identities, relationships, and knowledge (pp.240–243). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Nelson R. L., Damico J. S., Smith S. K. (2008) Applying eye movement miscue analysis to the reading patterns of children with language impairment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 22(4–5), 293–303.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Noguerón-Liu S. (2020) Expanding the knowledge base in literacy instruction and assessment: Biliteracy and translanguaging perspectives from families, communities, and classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(6), 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
47. InParis D., Alim S. H., (Eds.) 2017) Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Paulson E. (2008) Miscues and eye movements: Functions of comprehension. InFlurkey A., Paulson E., Goodman K., (Eds.). Scientific realism in studies of reading (pp.247–264). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Paulson E., Freeman A. (2003) Insight from the eyes: The science of effective reading instruction. Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Peterson R., Eeds M. (2007) Grand conversations: Literature groups in action. Scholastic.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Rosenblatt L. M. (1994) The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Southern Illinois University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Russell D., Gates D., McCullough C. (1961) The stonecutter. In Roads to Everywhere. Ginn and Co.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Samuels S. J., Schermer N., Reinking D. (1992) Reading fluency: Techniques for making decoding automatic. InSamuels S. J., Farstrup A. E., (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction (2nd ed.ed., pp.124–144). International Reading Association.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Smith E., Goodman K., Meredith R. (1976) Language and thinking in school (2nd ed. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Van Allsburg C. (1993) The sweetest fig. Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Wolfram W. (1969) A sociolinguistic description of Detroit Negro speech. Center for Applied Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]