Reading Comprehension Strategies and Reading Skills

nurture Comprehension Strategies and Reading SkillsGEPT universal side of meat Profiency TestHP Higher proficiencyLP Lower proficiencyHETC Harvard Education Training CenterRationaleHammadon (1991) says Reading comprehension is non just scaning talking to, excoriates, or charge texts, but involves a complex interartion of the fillers prior knowledge, dustup profiency and their acquire strategies (p.30). So schooling strategies ar very authoritative to achieve the comprehension. Many types of course session strategies be introduced to guide students of all different take aims. However, at that place were few investigateers who investigate the relationship of nurture comprehension strategies and instruction comprehension of students. At HETC, translation has a fall upon place in any English courses when students view English not only as the interest but also the demand for improving their study and promoting in their c beers to achieve the long-term goals, espec ially more or less of them were assigned to live and work abroad. In their learning process, almost the students meet bulky challenges when dealing with the memoriseing texts. They usually do not come across texts and hatfulnot complete the tasks so they feel tired in indicateing lessons. Therefore, what ar the briny causes of this current situation? In order to find out the answer, the researcher started a survey on the instruction comprehension scheme use. For t each(prenominal)(prenominal)ers at HETC, it is hoped that this study may offer them the shipway on how to identify strategies utilise by the students and then they can decide what they should do to promote their students reading comprehension and in their learning as well. publications review2.1. Reading comprehension strategies and reading skillsOxford (1990) gives a detailed definition of row learning strategies Learning strategies are specific actions taken by the apprentice to make learning easier, fast er, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations (p.8) and described concretely how learning strategies are applied to the quatern language skills listening, speaking, writing and reading. jibe to her, four strategies listening strategies, , or reading strategies are those learning strategies themselves that applied to each of the four skills.Of course, skills and strategies are deuce big row and common terms of the reading activities, as well. Nutall (1982) pointed out that reading was certainly a process of the readers, who used strategies to work with the pith of the texts actively and then do sense from them. By the interesting interactions from the readers and texts, more and more researchers keep working to research the relationship in the midst of the use of reading strategies and reading comprehension.However, strategy and skill, are they different? Yes, it was actually apparent that they were different. Strategy incrimi natet people used the planned methods and implements to achieve their goals, but skill was known as a routine. Moreoer, strategy was the solving of conciously work towards goals. It helped readers to extrapolate the inculpateing of contents in order to find out the answer or obtain a certain carrying out level in reading that they want for themselves (Gagn, 1985). However, it is not always easy to make such a clear differnces amidst these two terms. Grabe and Stoller (2002) said that many abilities that are commonly identified as strategies are relatively automatic in their use by fluent readers (e.g. skipping an unknown word while reading, rereading to reestabilsh text means (p.15) Paris et al (1991) supposed an emerging skill can become more efficient and developmentally advanced when they become generated and applied automatically as skills (p.61). Some whiles this difference is not clear at all because that is part of the nature of reading. In this study, reading strategi es are used to show specific actions, locomote and plans that students conciously apply in their reading process to improve their comprehension.2.2. The relationship between reading strategies and reading comprehensionReading comprehension must occur speedy in almost any pointful context, and the more rapidly a text is read, the crack reading processes are to effect. Those specific processes must be apply effectively in combination to ensure the reading comprhension. Reading comprehension requires the reader be strategic. The reader needs to identify processing difficulties, address balances between text information and background knowledge, decide for monitoring comprhension, and shifing goals for reading. When a good reader use strategies, they can read fluently, flexible in line with ever-changing purpose and then continue monitoring the comprehension. Similarly, reading is an process that evaluating the reader, who must decide if the reading information is coherent and finds out the purpose for reading.Alderson (2003) said reading as the interaction of four things. He claimed that the reader and the text together must be fluent reading or the ability to reach at an appropriate rate with adequate comprehension, or the ability of the reader to use a wide variety of reading strategies to accomplish a purpose for reading (p.149). So discovering the best methods and strategies are the way that a good learner apply during a reading process.2.3. Previous research on reading comprhension strategiesGrellet, F. (1981) wrote a book Developing Reading Skills. This book showed the important role of reading and provided whatever techniques which help learners improve their reading skill.Nutal, C. (1989) proved reading is to alter students to read without help unfamiliar authentic texts at appropriate speed, silently with adequate understanding.Ozek, O. (2006) researched A study on the Use of Cognitive Reading Strategies by ELT Students. This study carried out to find out which reading strategies are commonly employed by ELT students while reading a text, and which reading strategies are needed to be developed to understand the text better, and to continue academic studies successfully.San San Kung (2007) did an investigation into the relationship between reading comprehension and the use of reading strategies among EFL students in colleges in Taiwan. by means of the study, the researcher knew what the reading strategies the EFL students use more or less and what the differences between different grade students.MethodologyThis chapter will describe research methods used to collect data to answer the research questions and then explain how and why the methods are used.3.1. Research questionsThis study aims to find out reading strategy use of HETCs students. This also has objectives to discover if there are any differences in strategy use between take down and higher(prenominal) proficiency readers, as well. so to suggest some recommenda tions to raise students awareness of using reading comprehension strategies in the classroom. It aims at answering the following questions1. What reading strategies are used by students at HETC?2. What are the differences in the use of reading strategies between lower and higher proficiency readers?3.2. Descriptions of variables3.2.1. Independent variablesIn this study, the independence variables were the students at HETC. 51 students were elect as representatives of this particular group sudents to collect needed data. These 51 students were divided into four groups in which students are the members of higher and lower proficiency groups. These 2 groups were elect to get information to answer the second research question ( More details approximately these groups and about higher and lower proficiency readers will be found in 3.3.1 and 3.4.2)3.2.2. Dependent variableThe dependent variable in this research were the strategies applied in reading comprehension, i.e. reading comprehens ion strategies.3.3. The data compendium instrumentsThis study employs a combibation of 3 data collection instruments* General English Proficiency Test (GEPT)* Questionaire* Think-aloud interviewsAs one of the objectives of this study is to find out if there are any dfferences in the strategy use between higher proficiency (HP) and lower proficiency (LP) readers. The examen was used to divide the subjects into difference groups in which groups of higher and lower proficiency were chosen to collect the data.Think-aloud interviews aimed at getting qualitative data and quesionaire was used to get quantiative data. The author can collect a large information of all mentioned strategies and the information from students who theatrical role their estimate of strategy use in the think-aloud interviews. Of course, the think a loud interviews in this study can be one of the best ways to reaffirm the outcome got from the questionaire. For example, in the questionaire, the subjects report t hat they use life experiences to understand the meaning of texts or read the low and destruction paragraphs and then go back to read the paragraphs the author will know they use these strategies or not in the interview.3.3.1. TestA General English proficiency test is a procedure taken to collect data on students ability or the knowledge of disciplines as Information about peoples language ability is often very useful and necessary (Nunan, 1992). The GEPT was taken form the book IELTS for Academic Purpose A short insentive course (see the appendix 3). Based on the result of the test, the subjects were classified into 4 groups. Group 1 consists students who just got from mark 1 to 2.5 group 2 has those who got mark from 3 to 5. The students in these 2 groups are LP learners. smashedwhile, the students who are in group 3 got mark from 5.5 to 6.5 they are at medium levels. And the last group group 4 consists of HP ones who got mark from 7 and over. subsequently having the result of the test, the author decided to chose group 2 and 4 to collect the data to answer the second research question. So there are 51 subjects in these 2 groups. The author did not choose group 1 because their proficiency were too low and they were only 1% of the subjects. Details of the test can be found in Appendix 1.3.3.2. QuestionaireQuestionaire is the second data collection instrument in this study. This is also a pretty popular means of data collection. Many researchers suppose that using questionaire in language research has many advantages. First, questionaire can be given to a great amount of students at the equal time and it is self-administered. Second, to protect the privacy and keep the fairness, the subjects names might not be appeared on the questionaire. So subjects tend to share the information more naturally, even some sensitive information. Third, the data collected are more accurate because questionaire is usually given to all the subjects at the uniform time.T his study used one survey questionaire to gather the information about reading strategies as well as the differences in strategy use between these two kinds of readers. According to the result of the questionaire (and interviews), the athor can make some recommendation to help students improve their reading abilities. The quesionaire was designed based on the questionaire of Shan Shan Kung (2007). This part consists 3 parts. Of couse, in this study, the author modified the first part personal information part. The next part concept of reading had 3 questions to explore the perceptions of English reading. The last part had thirty eight questions of strategy use. In the beginning of third section, thirty four questions utilized a Liker Scale point systems. The subjects were asked to respond to each statement by choosing among four answers 1) usually 2) sometimes 3) rarely 4) never. Each section has four to six questions (except section 1 has 10 questions because of discovering th e reading process). Through the survey, the author found out which strategies actually actracted HP readers more than LP readers.3.3.3. Think aloud interviewsIn addition to the quetionaire, interviews are used to obtain information by actually talking to the subject. The interviewer asks questions and the subject responds. Interviews are the good way for collecting data as Seliger, H.W. (1989) claimed Interviews are personalized and therefore permit a level of in-depth information gathering, free response and flexibility that cannot be obtained by other procedures (p.166). However, it can be costly and time consuming. In this study, think aloud interviews were used to collect the data about the students reading strategy. The Interviewer Guide for Reading Strategies developed by Honsenfeld et al. (1981). In oder to make the Guide appropriate for objectives of thi study, the researcher has made some changes in the strategies they posed ( see Appendix 3).3.4. Participants in the stu dyAt the time the study was carried out, the subjects had just finished an English course. Their textbook was Therefore, their commonly fictional proficiency was intermidiate. They were members of three classes. One class included 25 students , 24 in the other class and 21 in the last one and they stuied the same textbook. Their ages ranged from 19 to 24. Almost all of students had at least 3 years of learning English before this class. They were delivered a reading proficiency test to be divided into higher and lower proficiency readers.In this study, gender has minimal effect on the results because the number of male students is quite an small in the add of the subjects.3.5. ProcedureThe data were collected by the researcher during a workweek in autum 2009. After contacting the English teachers of the subjects in person to get approval for communicate their students to participate in the study, the researcher pre-arranged the time. The researcher went to English classes to administer the tests. The students were asked to complete the test in 60 minutes. The English teachers and the researcher supervised and marked the test papers later.The 2 days after, subjects were distributed the questionanires. The researcher gave some directions to the subjects and of then encouraged students to ask for any clarifications they might need and any other extra time when they filled out the questionaire. And of couse, the researcher wanted to protect the privacy and the students fairness, so the students names would not fill in the questionaires. In order to advoid misunderstanding the questions, the questionaire were translated into Vietnamese which were enclosed with the English version. The questionaire administration took about 30 minutes in each class.For days later, six chosen students were interviewed individually at the researcher s office in HETC. The reseacher pre-arranged the time and contacted to the students by the phone. Before the interview, the resea cher gave the instructions and explained the purpose of the study to students so they could understand what they had to do clearly. Each interview took from 10 to 15 minutes.Data analysis and findings4.1. The result of the questionaire 4.1.1. Demographic Data dining table 4.1Demographic Information of Students (N=51)SubjectFrequencyPercentageTotalN%Gender staminate917.651100Female4282.4LevelLower proficiency3263.7 Higher proficiency1936.3Years ofEnglish learning experience235.9511004917.651529.461121.67611.8823.9947.81012.0 Look at the table 4.1, of the 51 students participating in the study, 9 (17.6%) were males and 43 (82.4%) were females. Of the 19 HP students (36.3%) and 32 (63.7%) were LP students.When asking about years of English learning experience, just 1 students (2.0%) has been studying English for ten years. 9 students (17.6%) have been studying English for four years, 15 students (29.4%) have been studying English for five years, 11 students (21.6%) have been studying E nglish for six years, 6 students (11.8%) have been studying English for 7 years, 2 students (3.9%) have been studying English for eight years, 4 students (7.8%) have been studying English for nine years.Because foreign language in general and English in particular were given into school from sixth grade in secondary school, and from tenth grade in high school ( in some remote areas), the most students years of English learning experience were between four and seven years.To answer the second section of the questionnaire about concepts of reading, the results were presented in Table 4.2.Table 4.2The Relationship between the Important of Reading for Language Learning and Reading Hours per Week by higher and lower proficiency studentsReading hours per week234Over 4N%N%N%N%Higher proficiency students(N =19)Very important210.5526.3631.6315.8important15.3210.5Not importantLowerproficiency students(N =32)Very important618.8721.9515.6important412.5515.6412.5Not important13.1According to th e illustration of Table 4.2, HP students who sentiment reading was very important for language learning were 2 (10.5%) spent two hours per week on reading, 5(26.3%) for three hours per week, 6 (31.6%), for four hours per week and 3 (15.8%) for over four hours per week. HP students who thought reading was important for language learning were 1 (5.3%) spent two hours per week on reading, 2 (10.5%) for four hours per week. There were not any students who thought reading was not important for language learning.In the LP group, 6 (18.8%) students thought reading was very important for language learning and spent two hours per week for it, 7 (21.9%) spent three hours for reading, 5 (15.6%) spent four hours for reading. These LP students supposed reading was important for language learning were 4 (12.5%) spent two hours per week on reading, 5 (15.6%) for three hours per week. There was 1 (3.1%) students said reading was not important for language learning but still spent two hours per wee k on it.4.1.2. Findings for Research Question OneThe research question one was What reading comprehension strategies are used by students at HETC ? After collecting data, it showed what the same or different strategies were used more or less by HP or LP students for helping them understand the contents of the reading materials in different reading situations and were ranked from low to high to represent which strategy would be used more or less by the students during their reading process in different situations. The results were listed in the following by all of students reading ability levels when they used reading strategies in different reading situations.The substance results came from the 51 students in Table 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6.Table 4.3 cogitates, Ranks, and regular Deviations of the Uses of Reading Strategies in First Section by students at HETCWhen I read English materials,MeanMeanSDRank1.I read a table of contents, and then read the contents1.821.902.I focus on the fi rst sentence of each paragraph for helping me understand the principal(prenominal) points of the whole paragraph2.517.123.I underline the main points when I am reading2.034.974.I write Vietnamese on the margin for vocabulary haggling I dont understand during reading1.862.905I skim over the full text, and then read details1.883.926I use life experiences helping me understand the meaning of texts1.862.907I use the background knowledge of the English culture to understand the contents2.5781.038I use key words or sentences to recollect the main idea of the articles1.8831.089After reading each paragraph, I ask myself if I understand what I read before, and paraphrase the main idea, then keep reading the next paragraph2.2551.0910I discuss what I read with classmates2.4561.05In Table 4.3, the result indicated which strategies the 51 students used more or less when they read English materials. The table showed the data with mean, mean rank, and standard deviation.As illustration of Table 4.3, the mean was from 1.82 to 2.51 and the rank was S1 (1.82) Table 4.4Means, Ranks, and prototype Deviations of the Uses of Reading Strategies in First Section by students at HETCWhen I do not understand a vocabulary,MeanMeanSDRank11I check the dictionary immediately2.3731.112I mark and pass it, keep reading and then go back2.3321.0813I use other words in the sentence to infer the meaning of vocabulary2.091.8714I give way its suffix and prefix to get its meaning3.0041.21Through Table 4.4, strategy 13 I use other words in the sentence to infer the meaning of vocabulary was most used by the students when they did not understand a vocabulary during the reading process. On contrary, strategy 14 I analyze its suffix and prefix to get its meaning was the strategy which most students used least in this reading situation.Table 4.5Means, Ranks, and Standard Deviations of the Uses of Reading Strategies in First Section by students at HETCWhen I do not understand a sentence,MeanMeanSDRank 15I use the context (topic, subject) to derive the meaning of each sentence1.861.9116I translate word for word into Vietnamese to better understand the meaning of the sentences2.3541.1217I take grammar analysis (ex finding subject and verb etc.) to understand the meaning of the sentences2.3331.0218I analyze the structure of sentences (ex sample sentence, adjective clause, or adverb clause, etc.)to derive the meaning of sentence2.375.9719I will analyze the verb reach (ex ult tense or future tense) or verb mood (ex subjunctive mood or imperative mood) for better understanding2.272.95In Table 4.5, those strategies had close mean scores between each other, but it also pointed out the differences from 2.27 to 2.37, except the strategy 15 had the mean score less 1.86. It described that strategy 15 I use the context (topic, subject) to derive the meaning of each sentence were the most used by the students when they did not understand a sentence during reading process. Vice versa, the mea ns of the strategy 16 and strategy 18 to derive the meaning of sentence meant that they were used least than other strategies in this section.Table 4.6Means, Ranks, and Standard Deviations of the Uses of Reading Strategies in First Section by studentsWhen I dont understand (including vocabulary and sentences,) except above reading strategies,MeanMeanSDRank20I check books (ex grammar books or encyclopedia) for references2.1621.1421I go on the Internet to find related information1.981.9222I ask teachers or classmates for clarification2.2731.0323I read the difficult parts several times2.6351.1224I read the contents orally several times2.474.9425I will memorize the vocabulary pertaining to the contents before reading2.162.99According to the data, it presented that strategy 21 I go on Internet to find related information was used by almost students. The information technology nowaday becomes quite popular to students so they would like to search information on the Internet. The S20 = S2 5 (2.16) both stood the second position. The strategy that students used least was strategy 23 I read difficult parts several times.4.1.3. Findings for Research Question TwoResearch question two was What are the differences in the use of reading strategies of the higher and lower proficiency students at HETC? Through mean, standard deviation, t-tests and p value, the data analysis depicted detailed information about the differences of reading strategy performance between these two groups of students. The comparative groups focused on higher and lower proficiency student.Table 4.7Means, Standard Deviations, t-Tests and p Value between higher and lower proficiency students at HETCwhen I read English materials,Lower proficiency studentsHigher proficiency studentsTp(N=19)(N=32)MeanSDMeanSD1.I read a table of contents, and then read the contents2.001.0541.72.813.999.3222.I focus on the first sentence of each paragraph for helping me understand the main points of the whole paragraph2.161 .1181.78.7921.288.203.I underline the main points when I am reading2.001.1052.06.914-.208.844.I write Vietnamese on the margin for vocabulary words I dont understand during reading2.791.0842.781.069.026.985.I skim over the full text, and then read details2.051.0261.78.870.965.346.I use life experiences helping me understand the meaning of texts1.89.9371.84.917.189.857.I use the background knowledge of the English culture to understand the contents2.051.1292.86.871-2.729.00**8.I use key words or sentences to affect the main idea of the articles2.371.2611.59.9112.412.02*9.After reading each paragraph, I ask myself if I understand what I read before, and paraphase the main idea, then keep reading the next paragraph2.001.2022.53.983-1.630.1110.I discuss what I read with classmates2.531.2642.41.946.359.72pAs indicated in Table 4.7, strategy 7 and strategy 8 go to to the significant difference level (pTable 4.8Means, Standard Deviations, t-Tests and p Value between higher and lower prof iciency students at HETCWhen I do not understand a vocabulary,Higher proficiency studentsLower proficiency studentstp(N=19)(N=32)MeanSDMeanSD11.I check the dictionary immediately3.32.7491.81.8966.432.00**12.I mark and pass it, keep reading and then go back2.891.12.06.8782.809.00**13.I use other words in the sentence to infer the meaning of vocabulary2.05.9112.13.871-.279.7814.I analyze its suffix and prefix to get its meaning2.841.3443.131.07-.782.44pIn table 4.8, strategy 11 and strategy 12 attend to the significant different level (pTable 4.9Means, Standard Deviations, t-Tests and p Value between higher and lower proficiency studentsWhen I do not understand a sentence,Higher proficiency studentsLower proficiency studentstp(N=19)(N=32)MeanSDMeanSD15.I use the context (topic, subject) to derive the meaning of each sentence1.891.11.84.808.176.8616.I translate word for word into Vietnamese to better understand the meaning of the sentences3.210.9761.840.8845.005.00**17.I take grammar analysis (ex finding subject and verb etc.) to understand the meaning of the sentences2.161.1672.44.948-.885.3818.I analyze the structure of sentences (ex sample sentence, adjective clause, or adverb clause, etc.)to derive the meaning of sentence1.84.8982.69.896-3.253.00*19.I will analyze the verb tense (ex past tense or future tense) or verb mood (ex subjunctive mood or imperative mood) for better understanding1.84.898