Rethinking Running Records: A Practical Approach for Supporting Struggling Readers

I used to be all about running records. I still am, but in a more organic sense.  You should’ve seen my notebooks—filled with detailed notes on every reader in my groups, week after week. Even then, when I first started 15 years ago, I didn’t need fancy forms or technology. Just a book, a student, and my trusty notebook. I was proud of how well I could track progress, and I’d share that notebook like it was my child’s latest achievement. But now? I’ve retired those notebooks for good. Running records are still great, and useful, but they are only part of the struggling reader’s present picture of performance. 

Let’s explore what running records are, why they fall short, and what we can do instead to truly support our readers using running records.

What is a Running Record?

A running record is a type of assessment where a student reads aloud from a leveled text while the teacher documents their reading behavior. For every correct word, the teacher marks a check, and for any errors, they note the mistake and what the student actually said. Afterward, the teacher analyzes these errors to determine whether the student used "meaning," "structure," or "syntax" when making the mistake. This analysis is supposed to help guide future instruction by focusing on the cueing system that needs more attention. Developed by Marie Clay, running records have been a cornerstone of the balanced literacy approach, aimed at providing teachers with insights into a student’s reading strategy.

But is this detailed method as effective as it claims? Here’s what the experts say:

Fountas and Pinnell argue that running records "give us a great deal of information about students’ use of strategic actions... We prefer using a running record to capture reading behaviors over asking ‘comprehension questions’ after reading" (Fountas and Pinnell, 2006, p.95). However, some critics suggest that running records focus too heavily on word accuracy and fail to fully measure comprehension, which is vital for reading success. Studies from Castles, Rastle, and Nation (2018) emphasize that comprehension involves complex skills beyond word recognition, raising questions about whether running records are a comprehensive tool for evaluating reading proficiency.

Reading A-Z similarly supports the use of running records, stating that they allow teachers to record and monitor a student’s reading behaviors as they read from a book. While this offers a snapshot of student performance, recent research highlights that such assessments can overlook key areas like deeper vocabulary knowledge and long-term retention of reading strategies.

Jan Richardson strongly supports running records, claiming that they are "the single most valuable tool for teaching early readers... Running records determine a student’s instructional text level and show what strategic actions a student uses and which ones he or she needs to learn". 

However, recent discussions within the science of reading community argue that relying too much on running records and cueing systems may inadvertently encourage guessing strategies rather than decoding skills, which are critical for long-term reading development (Moats, 2020).

In light of newer research, it's worth re-examining the effectiveness of running records. While they do offer insight into certain reading behaviors, their limitations—especially when it comes to comprehension and the development of decoding skills—suggest that more comprehensive tools may be needed to truly grasp the present level of reading to support struggling readers next action steps.

Running records are only part of the reader’s bigger picture.  One thing to avoid is using the running record to determine a reader's “level.” Both Jan Richardson and Fountas and Pinnell mention it’s great to determine a reader’s level.  For sure, in a class of 20 students, it is helpful to have a guide. If a reader can get through a random Level I book with 95% accuracy, they’re labeled as a Level I. Suddenly, everything revolves around that level—their small group reading, what their parents are told, and, in some cases, they’re only allowed to read Level I books independently. Helpful for a teacher, for sure! But here’s the thing: just because a reader gets through one Level I book with 95% accuracy doesn’t mean they can do the same with any Level I book.  

Why is that?  Guided reading levels are created based on:

• Word repetition
• Sentence length
• Total word count
• Sentence complexity
• Number of different words
• Inclusion of illustrations
• Amount of high-frequency words

A running record can be fast and easy.  Listening to a reader and watching their reading behaviors every 2 or 3 weeks can give you direct skills the reader needs. I don’t use the MSV (Meaning, Structure, and Visual) part, the system that’s often tied to running records.  I get this information simply by listening to them read and paying attention to their reading patterns.

Jan Richardson says that running records help us identify which “strategic actions” a reader needs to learn and that "the number of errors is less important than understanding why the student made those errors and figuring out which strategies will accelerate their progress"  The number of errors is telling.  It’s a guide for us to help struggling readers build their reading skills.  If a reader is unable to successfully read every other word, stop!  Or if it’s all too easy, that’s good to know too.  They can read 100% of the reading sample you gave them.  Good to know!  Can you find a text sample that’s a little bit more challenging for the reader?  If so, what’s the challenge and how can you focus their next action steps around that challenge?

Picking apart and analyzing in great detail what type of mistake the reader made overcomplicates things and takes away valuable time. We can recognize the type of mistake a student makes on a running record simply by listening to the reader and asking comprehension questions.  Once we know that, we can explicitly teach the phonics skills they need to decode those words accurately. Simple, direct, and effective.

How do I know if they’re reading on grade level?

The truth is, running records alone, never really gave us a real, comprehensive answer in the first place. Like I mentioned earlier, guided reading levels are only part of the picture.   I wouldn’t rely on a guided reading leveling system alone for anything, except making teaching easy and standardized for larger groups.  I didn’t trust this method when I started teaching 20 years ago, and for sure, I still doubt interventions that solely rely on “levels”.

Often, students would read on multiple levels, depending on interest, style of writing, topic, or experience with a genre.  It was a common teaching practice to put a “bucket of books” out for different students based on their level.  While it was a helpful teaching tool, reader’s weren’t allowed to read other texts because it wasn’t their level…yet.

So what should we do to find their reading level? 

The best practice is to build a portfolio, a present level of performance.  This is often used for student’s who are struggling learners, to build an individual learning plan.  I think it should be used for all learners.  All learners can benefit from a better present picture of their reading needs.  One tool should not be relied on as the reason a student is or is not, “grade level”

Include a running record.  You can use this as an informal assessment every 2 or 3 weeks, with a struggling reader.

I’m a big fan of using running records, but let’s skip the MSV part. It doesn’t need to be a formalized process. When your student is reading, just grab your notebook, sit beside them, and ask them to read to you—whether it’s 50-100 words or even just 10, depending on where they’re at. Take some simple notes: What words did they miss? Did they self-correct? How did they sound? What did they say when you asked them questions about the text?

Using a running record, you can learn about their accuracy and rate.  Are they self-correcting more and are they reading at a better speed?  You can get that information just by listening to them read. I don’t need to quantify growth and to break out percentages to understand how a child is handling a text, but it’s important to have consistent quantifiable data to share with others working with the reader.  My older struggling readers have always enjoyed seeing their growth, both organically and numerically.

Another supportive tool to include is a screening three times a year with a normed or standardized assessment. Tools like DIBELS offer free assessments for nonsense word reading and oral reading fluency, both of which can help determine if a child is reading at grade level. You can then use progress monitoring to track their growth if they’re not meeting benchmarks. (Ask me more about this!)

A phonics screener is also a helpful tool. There’s a lot out there…Something like the Gallistel-Ellis or The Wilson Program breaks down phonics patterns, starting with basic CVC words and moving into more complex ones like magic e, vowel teams, and r-controlled vowels. By using a phonics screener, you can tailor your phonics instruction to exactly what your students need. Really Great Reading offers a free phonics screener, or you can find a Quick Phonics Screener online.

Over time, you’ll start seeing patterns emerge, and it’ll become crystal clear where to focus with that reader. I’m all about letting reading feel as natural as possible, even for struggling readers. Yes, there are parts of the process that need to be explicit and direct, especially for readers who are behind. But when it comes to running records, keep it relaxed and organic, and use it as part of their bigger picture as readers.