[MOSAIC] Fluency and Flow

[RASINSKI, TIMOTHY]

Lori -- nice example hat we need to go deeper than reading rate -- there
are many variables that need to be considered.  At the same time, I
think the notion of automaticity (not rate) is critical for proficient
reading and for students to continue their growth in reading.

Timothy Rasinski, Ph.D.
Reading and Writing Center
404 White Hall
Kent State University
Kent, OH  44242

email:  trasinsk at kent.edu
Phone:  330-672-0649
Cell:  330-962-6251
Fax:  330-672-2025
Informational website:  www.timrasinski.com
Professional Development DVD:  http://www.roadtocomprehension.com/



-----Original Message-----
From: mosaic-bounces at literacyworkshop.org
[mailto:mosaic-bounces at literacyworkshop.org] On Behalf Of
ljackson at gwtc.net
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:38 AM
To: Mosaic: A Reading Comprehension Strategies Email Group
Subject: Re: [MOSAIC] Fluency and Flow

I am at Hoffstra University this week, studying Miscue.  Allan Flurkey
has been sharing his research on fluency, in which he 
actually takes the notion of rate and WPM to paragraph and sentence
level, showing that readers modulate their rate--reading 
some sentences slowly and some more quickly.  He likened fluency to a
river that flows at different rates depending upon the 
topography. Readers will slow for emphasis or in response to challenges.
That makes such sense to me and when thinking 
about Tim's comments regarding Martin Luther King's I Have A Dream
speech, added a different perspective on fluency.  He 
shared data from both proficient and less proficient readers and while
overall rate remains higher with the proficient child (no 
surprise there, right?), the less proficient child attained very high
rates in portions of the text that were less challenging.  I 
suppose I would postulate that these two children were responding to
different  purposes when adjusting rate, the more able 
reader perhaps more conscious and more deliberate of the modulations.
Both of these children demonstrated comprehenion 
through unaided retells.  More food for thought, don't you think?  I
know that it has me nodding as I recently administered the 
DRA2 4-8 to a young reader who was largely fluent to my ear.  His
phrasing was natural, he was responsive to punctuation and 
he maintained what seemed to me a very conversational tone.  He was
reading very much above his grade level and encountered 
vocuabulary that was unknown to him.  He pronounced all of these words
correctly, but paused always in reflection in these 
parts of the text.  He is a very reflective young man and luckily for
me, one to verbalize his thinking strategies and he was 
clearly thinking through these words, stretching himself for meaning.
These places slowed him down, interferring with the flow 
but clearly not with the comprehension.  His accuracy level was 99% and
I ignored the admonition to discontinue the assessment 
due to his fluency levels.  My reasoning at the time was that his rate
was acceptable, even strong, by grade/age level 
expectations.  I would now justify that decision differently.  His
comprehension score was one point from perfect!!  Obviously, 
those places in which he had lost 'fluency' by strict WPM ratings (he
scored well on other aspects of the fluency rubric) had 
served him very well.  There are lots of layers to this onion, and the
more we know, the more we know!!

Lori



_______________________________________________
Mosaic mailing list
Mosaic at literacyworkshop.org
To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org.

Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.