What Can You Do with a Miscue: High School Prosody and Literary Analysis Intersect

 

Note: The video is PRIVATE - If you would like to study the video, I'll arrange a private viewing. 

Transcription (I used otter.ai. You should be able to hear the recording.)

Text Source

My markings (if I get time to scan it.) 

Context: 

The teacher selected a learner to provide data for an assessment class she was taking for her Master’s Degree. 

This 11th grade learner works from home. They are NOT a struggling reader or student.

Source/Text

This is the source of the document: https://www.henryanker.com/FluencyMasters.html 

Explanation: 

I've seen a lot of people do a lot of things with Running Records. Even though the SoT says that RR's are not sound SoR practices (Texas Education Agency [TEA], 2020). Call it a miscue analysis then.

And a lot of secondary folks don't realize anything about how to conduct, code, or analyze an oral reading. 

I have goals: 

1. Show what a running record could look like in upper grades.

2. Show that MSV isn't nonsense about guessing. 

3. To show that our work with miscues goes beyond guessing and decoding for fonics - it's about meaning.

4. Show the advanced analysis the reading can reveal about reading behaviors and underlying reader beliefs and processes about reading. 

5. Show how we can use technology and AI to make the process easier.

The Data: 

I know. It's a lot. There is much to know and learn. And I'm relentless and detailed. Not sorry.

Results: 

So - the data: 

Matteo read at 157 words per minute at 98% accuracy.

Note: The calculation for accuracy didn’t really count all the lexical density and subordination issues as errors. 

Pretty impressive to survive the “icy climes” of 19th century prose with such ease.

There’s no evidence of reading ability issues for much of anything most of us would consider problems. 

The Intervention: 

But how in the world do we help a reader that is THIS good at such a complex text? 

Step One: Establish a purpose for reading. Matteo is reading this in that “I’m-reading-this-aloud-to-read-it” cadence.

They are doing what the teacher asked them to do. I really do think Matteo understands the text from other conversations and interactions with their teacher. Matteo would have benefitted from knowing WHY the teacher wanted them to read aloud.

“Matteo - I’m taking a class where we assess learners to see what we need to do to help them advance

their reading skills. Will you read this as well as you can? Focus on reading to understand what you are

reading. I’ll be asking you some questions about what you read to also test your understanding."

Step Two: Matteo has a pattern of omitting punctuation.Part of this is because this stuff was written in the 1800’s. We don’t talk like that anymore. Part of this is because Matteo is reading to finish. But part of it is because they aren’t used to thinking about how the punctuation is the FIRST place we hear how the author divides up complex ideas beyond subjects, verbs, and compound sentences. Matteo needs support to understand how the punctuation replicates speaking and the musical arc of phrases

inside sentences. 

Step Three: Matteo's fluency doesn't connect/transact with the author or the characters.

Matteo’s purpose doesn’t include decision making about WHO is speaking, WHAT they reveal about

the narrative, or WHY the author shares the ideas in this way.

And this is where prosody, fluency, and literary analysis intersect to bring us deeper comprehension and

transactions with the text and the author (Rosenblatt, 1978).

Here’s a few decisions that need to be made before reading that help determine how we read aloud.

These decisions completely change how the text would sound: 

• Do we read this aloud as if we were the author, Mary Shelley?
• To whom would she be reading? To her publisher? Editor? To me?
• Do we read this aloud as if we were Mrs. Saville’s brother?
• Is he reading it while writing it? Or sharing with one of his shipmates before sending it on? 
• Do we read this aloud as if we were Mrs. Saville reading her brother’s letter?
• How is she feeling and reacting to all of this news? 

Imagine how these three interventions would change Matteo's experience with the text. Imagine what Matteo could do with this kind of cuing support in the Science of Teaching Reading.

References: 

Anker, H. (n.d.). Fluency 68: Frankenstein. Mr. Anker Tests. https://www.henryanker.com/FluencyMasters.html

Google. (2026). Gemini (Feb 19 version) [Large language model]. https://gemini.google.com/

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Southern Illinois University Press.  

Texas Education Agency. (2020). Texas reading academies: Module 2, the science of teaching reading. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/early-childhood-education/reading/texas-reading-academies-hb-3