The dilemma of error and accuracy: An exploration

Reading Psychology

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 353-372

  Barksdale Ladd, Mary Alice ^a   King, James R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84997914642     PISSN: 02702711     EISSN: 15210685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/027027100750061967     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Allington, R. (1980). Teacher interruption behaviors during primary grade oral reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 371-379.
2. Allington, R. (1983). The reading instruction provided readers of differing ability. Elementary School Journal, 83, 255-265.
3. Barksdale-Ladd, M. A., & King, J. R. (1997). The worlds of a reader’s mind. Students as authors. The Reading Teacher, 50, 564-575.
4. Bartholomae, D. (1980). The study of error. College Communication and Composition, 31, 253-269.
5. Bruner, J., & Feldman, C. (1990). Metaphors of consciousness and cognition in the history of psychology. In D. Leary (Ed.), Metaphors in the history of psychology (pp. 230-238). New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Clay, M. (1993). An observation survey on early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
7. Conners, R., & Lunsford, A. (1988). Frequency of formal errors in current college writing, or Ma and Pa Kettle do research. College Communication and Composition, 39, 395-409.
8. Freedman, A., & Pringle, I. (1980). The writing abilities of a representative sample of grade 5, 8, and 12 students. (ERIC Document, ED 217 413).
9. Gergen, K. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 24, 266-75.
10. Goodman, K. (1965). A linguistic study of cues and miscues in reading. Elementary English, 14, 121-129.
11. Goodman, K. (1969). Analysis of reading miscues: Applied psycholinguistics. Reading Research Quarterly, 5, 9-30.
12. Goodman, Y., & Burke, C. (1972). Reading miscue inventory manual. Procedures for diagnosis and evaluation. New York: Macmillan.
13. Haswell, R. (1988). Error and change in college student writing. Written Commu-nica, tion, 5, 479-499.
14. Hycner, R.H. (1985). Some guidelines for the phenomenological analysis of interview data. Human Studies, 8, 279-303.
15. Johnston, P. (1993). Constructive evaluation of literate activity. New York: Longman.
16. Johnston, P., & Allington, R. (1991). Remediation. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. 2 (pp. 984-1012). New York: Longman.
17. Perl, S. (1979). The composing processes of unskilled college writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 317-336.
18. Powell, W. (1970). Reappraising the criteria for interpreting informal reading inventories. In D. L. DeBoer (Ed.), Reading diagnosis and evaluation (pp. 100-109). Newark, DE: IRA.
19. Powell, W., & Dunkeld, C. (1971). Validity of the IRI reading levels. Elementary English, 48, 637-642.
20. Smith, F. (1994). Understanding reading (5th ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
21. Spivey, N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing, and the making of meaning. New York: Academic.
22. Steward, M. & Grobe, C. (1979). Syntactic maturity, mechanics of writing, and teachers’ quality ratings. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 207-215.
23. Williams, J. (1981). The phenomenology of error. College Communication and Composition, 32, 152-168.