The presence of the text being read serves as a facilator for the
introspection. This procedure has been useful in revealing what readers
are doing and what they think they are doing. But it is also a powerful
device for getting readers to become more successful readers by
examining their own strategies. The language readers use in discussing
their introspection's are often influenced by common sense belief: "I
sounded it out" is a frequent explanation, for example, even when the
miscue in no sense involves sounding out. Over a series of RMA sessions
readers of all ages do shift toward the language of the teacher/
researchers. And even with adults there may be more change in the
reading strategies their miscues show than in their discussion of what
they were thinking/doing. Yetta feels that the opportunity to discuss
one's thinking, even at early ages has an effect on the thinking as
well. A child may wonder about things but needing to find words to let
some else know may change the nature and frequency of the thinking.
A just completed dissertation at the University of Arizona by Wendy
Black examines the role of the teacher/researcher in retrospective
miscue analysis. The same issues apply to any kind of introspection that
involves researchers engaging subjects in conversation about their
thoughts and activity. It appears that an issue is how well the
conversations find the learners zoped and how much the interviews take
direct control of conversations.
For her dissertation at Michigan State, my daughter Debra Goodman, has
done a longitudinal study of inner city Detroit children's reading and
writing development beginning in kindergarten. She has much
introspective data from children as young as 5 on their thoughts on
their reading and writing and learning to read and write.
Their is also a body of Piagetian research done by a group of
international researchers led by Emilia Ferreiro, an Argentinian working
in Mexico. Using Piagetian methodology, she gets very young children to
talk about print and their thoughts about it. For instance pre school
subjects think the written words for rooster, hen and chick should vary
in their length relative to their size. So rooster should be longer than
hen, and much longer than chick (the study of course was in Spanish).
Ferreiro and Teberosky, Literacy Before Schooling. Heinemann
--
Kenneth S. Goodman, Professor, Language, Reading & Culture
504 College of Education, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
fax 520 7456895 phone 520 6217868
These are mean times- and in the mean time
We need to Learn to Live Under Water