Miscue Analysis of Oral Reading Among Non-Proficient Malaysian ESL Learners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17722/jell.v2i2.34Keywords:
miscue analysis, reading comprehension, oral reading, non-proficient learners, Malaysian ESL learners, language problemsAbstract
Reading is a vital skill. Research has shown that proficient learners usually have a greater comprehension of the reading material. This study focuses on non-proficient learners’ oral reading as a direct method of assessing their reading ability. Miscue analysis is used as a tool to gather information and measure strategies used in reading and comprehending a given material. The study investigates the types and frequencies of miscues made by learners when they orally read texts and assesses learners’ comprehension based on the oral reading through the use of multiple-choice questions. The number of miscues made and the scores for the multiple choice questions are patterned using Microsoft Excel program and are converted into percentages. This study found that when the number of miscues made by the learners reduced during the oral reading process, the scores on the comprehension section did not necessarily improve. The types of miscues made by learners were omission of words namely plural and past-tense endings of verbs, substitution of words such as the pronoun ‘she’ with ‘he’, and hesitation especially with complex words. The findings imply that learners have language problems in grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and the use of reading strategies.
References
Brown, J., Goodman, K. S., & Marek, A. M. (Eds.). (1996). Studies in miscue analysis: An annotated bibliography. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Davenport, M.R. (2002). Miscues not mistakes: Reading assessment in the classroom. Portsmouth: Heinemann Publishers.
Ediger, M. (2005). Struggling traders in high school. Reading Improvement, 42, 34-39.
Goodman, Y. M., & Goodman, K. S. (2004). To err is human: Learning about language processes by analysing miscues. In R. B. Ruddell, & E. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed. ) Newark: International Reading Association.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F.L. (2002).Teaching and researching reading. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Hamilton, S.S. & Glascoe, F. P. (2006). Evaluation of children with reading difficulties. American Family Physician, 74, 2079-2084.
Juliana Haji Abdul Hamid & Abosi, O. (2011). Miscue analysis of oral reading among less proficient readers in primary schools in Brunei Darussalam. The Journal of International Association of Special Education. 12(1): 42-49.
Kelly, A. (2010). Tutor tips on miscue analysis. Retrieved on October 18 from www.qcal.org.au/images/tips2010¬_06.pdf
National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instructions. National Institute of Child and Human Development .Retrieved from http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org
Nes, S.L. (2003). Using paired reading to enhance the fluency skills of less-skilled readers. Reading Improvement, 40, 179.
Lim, S.K. (1989). Reading skills achievements in the primary school level. BA Thesis, Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Institute of Education, University Brunei Darussalam.
Tolistelf. (2007). Miscue analysis in reading a second language. Retrieved on October 18 from http://proz.com/translationarticles/articles/1429/1/Miscue-Analysis-in-Reading-a Second -Language. 1-16.
Wilde, S. (2000). Miscue analysis made easy: Building on student strengths. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Journal of English Language and Literature

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.