Proofreading errors in good and poor readers

Supramaniam, S.

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(83)90058-9

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this study did not investigate incidental learning due to reading experience, its finding that spelling accuracy was increased due to exposure of correct spellings during proofreading was consistent with Krashen's Input Hypothesis. In addition, Supramanian (1983) found proofreading to be related to reading ability and suggested that this relationship was probably due to reading experience involving the correct forms of the words. Therefore, additional research regarding the relationship between proofreading and spelling may offer one way to help us better understand the nature of the reading and writing connection.…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Proofreading on Spelling: How Reading Misspelled and Correctly Spelled Words Affects Spelling Accuracy

Bradley

King

1992

Journal of Reading Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of proofreading on the spelling accuracy of fifth-grade students were studied by having them read and detect errors in text containing misspelled words. The treatment involved an error detection task requiring a decision as to whether an underlined stimulus word embedded in a sentence was correctly spelled or misspelled. Serving as their own controls, the students were exposed to three spelling exposure frequency conditions during the proofreading treatment: (a) four exposures to a misspelling, (b) two exposures to a misspelling and two exposures to the correct spelling, and (c) four exposures to the correct spelling. The students proofread two types of spelling words in terms of sound-spelling correspondence; half were predictable and half were unpredictable. The major finding was that exposure to correctly spelled words did improve spelling accuracy for immediate and delayed posttests. Exposure to misspelled words did not significantly affect the spelling accuracy of the sample as a whole, but the accuracy of a few outliers was substantially impaired. Unpredictable words were found more difficult to spell than predictable words. No interaction was found between spelling ability and spelling accuracy improvement as the result of proofreading correctly spelled words; poor spellers improved as much as average and good spellers. Goodman (1984) has suggested that people read texts for a variety of purposes, and that with the exception of some forms of ritualistic reading, all forms of reading involve an attempt by the reader to make sense of the text. Proofreading is a form of reading that is typically associated with either the revision process of writing or spelling assessment and instruction. Although proofreading for spelling errors in a 413

show abstract

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Supramanian (1983) investigated proofreading as a measure of reading ability with British primary-grade students. He had good and poor readers read two passages of varying difficulty and circle embedded misspellings.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Proofreading on Spelling: How Reading Misspelled and Correctly Spelled Words Affects Spelling Accuracy

Bradley

King

1992

Journal of Reading Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Losing sight of errors: the effects of typographical conditions on error salience in L2 proof-reading

Porte

2001

System

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rechtschreibung ohne Schreiben

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung. Die Fähigkeit zur Rechtschreibung ist eine Kernkompetenz schriftsprachlichen Ausdrucks, die üblicherweise mithilfe von Diktaten erfasst wird. Eine ökonomischere, aber im deutschen Sprachraum nur wenig verbreitete Alternative stellen Verfahren der Fehleridentifikation dar. In der vorliegenden Studie wurde die psychometrische Güte eines Diktats und eines Fehleridentifikationstests am Ende der Sekundarstufe I verglichen. Hierzu wurden einer Stichprobe ( N = 188) von Schülerinnen und Schülern der neunten und zehnten Jahrgangsstufe der bayerischen Mittelschule (vormals Hauptschule) und des Gymnasiums ein Fehleridentifikationstest sowie ein Diktat vorgegeben. Es ergaben sich sowohl in der Gesamtstichprobe als auch in homogeneren Substichproben hohe Korrelationen zwischen Fehleridentifikationstest und Diktat. Beide Verfahren zeigten ähnlich hohe Zusammenhänge mit Lese- und Hörverstehen. Ebenso waren beide Verfahren vergleichbar gut in der Lage, zwischen Schülerinnen und Schülern der Mittelschule und des Gymnasiums zu unterscheiden, Schülerinnen und Schülern mit einer Lese-Rechtschreib-Schwäche zu identifizieren, sowie zwischen Schülerinnen und Schülern deutscher und anderer Erstsprache zu differenzieren. Ein Fehleridentifikationstest scheint sich somit auch in höheren Klassenstufen als ökonomische Alternative zum klassischen Diktat zu empfehlen.

show abstract

Proofreading errors in good and poor readers

Cited by 3 publications

References 22 publications

Effects of Proofreading on Spelling: How Reading Misspelled and Correctly Spelled Words Affects Spelling Accuracy

Effects of Proofreading on Spelling: How Reading Misspelled and Correctly Spelled Words Affects Spelling Accuracy

Losing sight of errors: the effects of typographical conditions on error salience in L2 proof-reading

Rechtschreibung ohne Schreiben

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About