Module 2: Reading Reflection

“The major folklore of reading instruction relates to “theory” that reading is considered an exact process.  In other words, the reader is expected to read everything exactly as printed on the page in order to understand the message of the author.  In general the consuming public, legislatures, courts and too many educators hold to this theory.  It is like the theory of the world being flat during the time of Columbus.”

-          Robert Harper and Gary Kilarr (Weaver, 2002)

After reading Chapters 3 & 4 in Constance Weaver’s Reading Process and Practice, I am going to have to say that I disagree with Harper and Kilarr’s quote.  This raises some concerns for me on many levels.  While I understand that readers do not have to fluently read a passage to understand the overall meaning, I feel that certain types of miscues alter the author’s message enough to cause readers confusion.  For example, take Danny’s sample on pages 78-79 (Weaver, 2002).  I read this passage twice: once with the miscues and once without the miscues.  I found that Danny’s miscues caused me some confusion while reading the passage (i.e. trumpets do not make tapping noises).  Yes, if you look at Danny’s retelling, he has the “gist” however, I feel doubtful that he would be able to answer detailed comprehension questions about the passage.

Also, what kind of examples do miscues create for writing?  Say a student wrote a story and wrote, “Prancing a mouthpiece of her tube to her lips, Emily puffed the keeth and began to play, softly at first and quiet loudly” (Weaver, 2002).  As a teacher, I would help this student make the necessary corrections to help make their writing clearer, so why wouldn’t I do the same for a reader?  If readers feel that miscues are acceptable in reading, I could see how writers would feel that miscues were acceptable in writing as well.

Lastly, as the author of a children’s book myself, why would I write something one way if I didn’t want it interpreted that way?

With the implementation of the Common Core’s rigorous standards and PARCC right around the corner, the students are going to have to answer some challenging reading comprehension questions, that I feel require their reading to be spot on with not a lot of wiggle room for interpretation.

References

Weaver, C. (2002). Reading Process and Practice. Portsmouth: Heinemann.