International journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN:2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 4, Issue 12 (December 2017, Part 2), Pages: 263-272

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Fostering reading comprehension skill among ESL tertiary level students through discourse engagement

 Author(s): Puteri Rohani Megat Abdul Rahim *

 Affiliation(s):

 Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 32610 Bandar Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.012.045

 Full Text - PDF          XML

 Abstract:

This exploratory study presents how ESL tertiary level students’ reading comprehension skill can be fostered when students were given the opportunity to share their thoughts in reading through discourse engagement. The purpose was to explore how by considering discourse as a strategy to facilitate the student’s reading comprehension skill. The students were given opportunities to share their understanding and thoughts as they pen their ideas in a form of a letter with their peers. A class consisting of 20 third year degree students participated in this qualitative case study. Data were collected through class observations, semi-structured interviews and documents. The data were analyzed using the constant-comparative method. Findings showed that the students appreciated the opportunities to interact with the printed texts with their peers and the instructor. The experience does not only facilitate the student’s reading comprehension skill but also enable them to strengthen their identity as readers. The research highlights the potential value of considering discourse engagement as a strategy in fostering student’s reading comprehension skill. 

 © 2017 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Reading comprehension skill, Second language students, Tertiary level students, Discourse engagement

 Article History: Received 21 December 2016, Received in revised form 2 September 2017, Accepted 5 October 2017

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.012.045

 Citation:

 Rahim PRMA (2017). Fostering reading comprehension skill among ESL tertiary level students through discourse engagement. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(12): 263-272

 Permanent Link:

 http://www.science-gate.com/IJAAS/V4I12(2)/Rahim.html

----------------------------------------------

 References (65)

  1. Alvermann D and Earle J (2003). Comprehension instruction. In: Sweet AP and Snow CE (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension: 12-30. Guilford Press, New York, USA. 
  2. Alvermann DE (2004). Instructional practices for working with youth who struggle to read: A summary research directions and issues. In the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, USA. PMid:15372686     
  3. Anderson NJ and Cheng X (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Heinle and Heinle, Boston, USA.     
  4. Baer AL (2003). I can, but I won't: A study of middle school reading engagement. Ohio Reading Teacher, 36(1): 27-36.     
  5. Berne JI and Clark KF (2006). Comprehension strategy use during peer-led discussions of text: Ninth graders tackle "The Lottery." Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 49(8): 674-686. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.49.8.4 
  6. Bernhardt EB (2005). Progress and procrastination in second language reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25: 133-150. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000073 
  7. Bernhardt EB (2010). Understanding advanced second language reading. Routledge, Abingdon, UK.     
  8. Borgdan RC and Bicklen SK (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, Londong, UK.     
  9. Cantrell SC and Carter JC (2009). Relationships among learner characteristics and adolescents' perceptions' about reading strategy use. Reading Psychology, 30(3): 195-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710802275397 
  10. Creswell JW (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, USA.     
  11. David MK and Govindasamy S (2006). National identity and globalization in Malaysia. In: Tsui ABM and Tollefson JW, (eds.), Language policy, culture, and identity in Asian contexts: 55-72. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, USA.     
  12. Dornyei Z (2006). Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA Review, 19(1): 42-68.     
  13. Droop M and Verhoeven L (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first- and second-language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1): 78-103. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.38.1.4 
  14. Duke N, Pearson PD, Strachan S, and Billman A (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. What Research Has to Say About Reading Instruction, 4: 51-93. https://doi.org/10.1598/0829.03 
  15. Ellis NC (2002). Reflections on frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2): 297-339. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102002140 
  16. Evans S (2007). Reading reaction journals in EAP courses. ELT Journal, 62(3): 240-247. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm018 
  17. Freire P and Macedo D (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Bergin and Garvey, Santa Barbara, USA.     
  18. Garcia GE and Godina H (2004). Addressing the literacy needs of adolescent English language learners. In: Jetton TL and Dole JA (eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice: 304-320. Guilford Publications, New York, USA.     
  19. Gough PB and Tunmer WE (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1): 6-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104 
  20. Grabe W (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.     
  21. Grabe W and Stoller FL (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Pearson Education, Essex, UK.     
  22. Graddol D (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of English as a foreign language. British Council, London, UK.     
  23. Guthrie JT (2004). Classroom contexts for engaged reading: An overview. In: Wigfield A (Ed.), Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction, perencevich: 1-24. Routledge, Abingdon, UK.     
  24. Harison MS (2010). An analysis of the EFL secondary reading curriculum in Malaysia: Approaches to reading and preparation for higher education. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.     
  25. Haynes J (2009). Dialogue as a playful and permissive space in communities of philosophical enquiry. Critical and Reflective Practice in Education, 1(1): 1-14.     
  26. IRA (2007). Best practice brief: Research to guide adolescent literacy program development. International Reading Association, Newark, Delaware, USA.     
  27. Jetton TL and Dole JA (2004). Introduction. In: Jetton TL and Dole JA (eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice: 1-14. Guilford Publications, New York, USA.     
  28. Johns T and Davies F (1983). Text as vehicle for information: The classroom use of written texts in learning reading in a foreign language. Reading in a Foreign Language, 1(1): 1-19.     
  29. Keeling RP (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student experience. American College Personnel Association, Washington, USA.     
  30. Klinger JK and Vaughn S (2004). Strategies for second-language readers. In: Jetton TL and Dole JA (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice: 183-209. Guilford Publications, New York, USA.     
  31. Klinger K and Edwards P (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1): 108-117. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.6 
  32. Koda K (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524841 
  33. Kucan L and Beck IL (2003). Inviting students to talk about expository texts: A comparison of two discourse environments and their effects on comprehension. Literacy Research and Instruction, 42(3): 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070309558388 
  34. Maxwell JA (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage publications, Thousand Oaks, USA.     
  35. McElvain CM (2009). English learners reading in the transactional learning community. In: Farmer JLM (Ed.), The education of young children: Research and public policy: 47-64. Linton Atlantic Books, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.     
  36. McKeown MG and Beck IL (2011). Making vocabulary interventions engaging and effective. In: O'Connor RE and Vadasy PF (eds.), Handbook of reading interventions: 136-168. Guilford Press, New York, USA.     
  37. Merriam SB (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, USA.     
  38. Mezirow J (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74): 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401 
  39. Nambiar GR (2005). Why don't they read the way they should?. Available online at: www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=ED490379 
  40. Nassaji H (2007). Schema theory and knowledge-based processes in second language reading comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives. Language Learning, 57(s1): 79-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00413.x 
  41. Nassaji H (2011). Issues in second language reading: Implications for acquisition and instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(2): 173-184. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.46.2.5 
  42. Olson CB (2007). The reading/writing connection: Strategies for teaching and learning in the secondary classroom. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, USA.     
  43. Patton MQ (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, USA.     
  44. Pressley M (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-of-the century status report. In: Pressley M (Ed.), Comprehension instruction: 11-27. Guilford Press, New York, USA. PMid:12372782     
  45. Pugh SL, Pawan F, and Antommarchi C (2000). Academic literacy and the new college learner. In: Flippo RF and Caverly DC (Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study research: 25-42. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, USA.     
  46. Puteri RMAR (2014). Priming interaction to foster reading engagement among tertiary level ESL students. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.     
  47. Puteri RMAR (2015). Integrating reading and writing to facilitate reading engagement through epistolarity writing among ESL tertiary level students. Journal of Creative Practices in Language Learning and Teaching, 3(1): 30-46.     
  48. Puteri RMAR and F. Hashim (2015). Facilitating reading engagement by foregrounding students' voices through epistolary writing: A case study. Journal of Language Studies, 15(1): 57-75.     
  49. Robinson A (1977). Comprehension: An elusive concept. In the Annual Meeting of the International Reading Association, Miami Beach, Florida, USA. Available online at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED141758 
  50. Sivasubramaniam S (2009). Issues and insights for promoting agency, voice and subjecthood in reading and assessment. Asian EFL Journal, 11(1): 8-38.     
  51. Smith F (1983). Reading. Cambridge University Press, London, UK.     
  52. Smith F and Goodman KS (2008). On the psycholinguistic method of teaching reading" revisited. Language Arts, 86(1): 61-65.     
  53. Stanovich KE (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4): 360-407. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1 
  54. Storch N (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students' reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3): 153-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002 
  55. Sweet AP and Snow CE (2003). Rethinking reading comprehension. Guilford Press, NY, USA.     
  56. Tomlinson CA (2004). The Mobius effect: Addressing learner variance in schools. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6): 516-524. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370060601 PMid:15586470     
  57. Van Manen JM (1991). The tact of teaching: The meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness. The Suny Press, Albany, USA.     
  58. Van Manen JM (1994). Can teaching be taught? Or Are real teachers found or made?. Phenomenology and Pedagogy, 9: 182-199.     
  59. Van Manen JM (2007). The pedagogy of epistolarity: Writing to read-reading to write. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.     
  60. Van Manen JM (2016). The tone of teaching. Routledge, Abingdon, UK.     
  61. Von Worde R (2003). Students' perspectives on foreign language anxiety. Inquiry, 8(1): 1-15.     
  62. Vygotsky LS (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts, USA.     
  63. Willis AI (2008). Reading comprehension research and testing in the US: Undercurrents of race, class, and power in the struggle for meaning. Routledge, Abingdon, UK.     
  64. Zamel V (1992). Writing one's way into reading. Tesol Quarterly, 26(3): 463-485. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587174 
  65. Zoghi M., Ramlee M, and Tengku NTM (2010). Collaborative strategic reading with university EFL learners. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(1): 67-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2010.10850336