1991Remedial and Special EducationRequires access

The Oral Reading Errors of Readers with Learning Disabilities: Variations Produced Within the Instructional and Frustrational Ranges

Arlene Adams

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the word recognition abilities of readers with learning disabilities (LD) at four levels: Grades 2, 5, 8, and 11. The study's premise was that previous findings in relation to the word recognition abilities of readers with LD have been confounded by the use of frustration level materials for these readers. Therefore, this study compared the word recognition errors of readers with LD when they were reading instructional level materials (between 3% and 9% word recognition errors) and frustrational level materials (greater then 9% word recognition errors). The word recognition errors considered by this study were basic miscues (substitutions, omissions, insertions, teacher-pronounced); substitution types; reversal errors; and linguistic acceptability (syntactic and semantic). Findings showed that in the categories of linguistic acceptability, the readers produced significantly fewer acceptable responses when reading frustration level materials than when reading instructional level materials. No such difference was found in any of the other miscue categories when the two difficulty levels were compared.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The purpose of this study was to examine the word recognition abilities of readers with learning disabilities (LD) at four levels: Grades 2, 5, 8, and 11. The study's premise was that previous findings in relation to the word recognition abilities of readers with LD have been confounded by the use of frustration level materials for these readers. Therefore, this study compared the word recognition errors of readers with LD when they were reading instructional level materials (between 3% and 9% word recognition errors) and frustrational level materials (greater then 9% word recognition errors). The word recognition errors considered by this study were basic miscues (substitutions, omissions, insertions, teacher-pronounced); substitution types; reversal errors; and linguistic acceptability (syntactic and semantic). Findings showed that in the categories of linguistic acceptability, the readers produced significantly fewer acceptable responses when reading frustration level materials than when reading instructional level materials. No such difference was found in any of the other miscue categories when the two difficulty levels were compared.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the word recognition abilities of readers with learning disabilities (LD) at four levels: Grades 2, 5, 8, and 11. The study's premise was that previous findings in relation to the word recognition abilities of readers with LD have been confounded by the use of frustration level materials for these readers. Therefore, this study compared the word recognition errors of readers with LD when they were reading instructional level materials (between 3% and 9% word recognition errors) and frustrational level materials (greater then 9% word recognition errors). The word recognition errors considered by this study were basic miscues (substitutions, omissions, insertions, teacher-pronounced); substitution types; reversal errors; and linguistic acceptability (syntactic and semantic). Findings showed that in the categories of linguistic acceptability, the readers produced significantly fewer acceptable responses when reading frustration level materials than when reading instructional level materials. No such difference was found in any of the other miscue categories when the two difficulty levels were compared.

Key concepts: Miscue analysis, Reading (process), Psychology, Word recognition, Word (group theory), Learning disability, Premise, Spelling

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Oral Reading Errors of Readers with Learning Disabilities: Variations Produced Within the Instructional and Frustrational Ranges — Research Paper | ScholarLens