Comparing Effect of 'Summarizing', 'Question-Answer Relationship', and 'Syntactic Structure Identification' on the Reading Comprehension of Iranian EFL students

Fatemeh Hemmati, Safoora Bemani

Abstract


This study aimed at comparing the effects of 'question-answer relationship strategy', 'summarizing', and 'syntactic structure identification training'on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. The participants were sixty (34 women and 26 men) intermediate students who answered an English reading comprehension test consisting of three reading passages as the pretest. During the treatment, the students in the first group were supposed to summarize the passages. The subjects in the second group familiarized with the syntactic structure identification strategy and the ones in the third group were taught the question-answer relationship strategy. At the end of the treatment, an English reading comprehension test similar to the pretest was administered to the groups as a posttest. The results suggested that there is statistically significant difference between the reading comprehension abilities of the three classes. Furthermore the use of QAR strategy led to better comprehension of reading texts with syntactic structure training and summarizing between which there was no significant difference.

 


Keywords


Reading comprehension, summarization, question-answer relationship, syntactic structure

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alderson, J. C. (1993). The relationship between grammar and reading in English for academic purposes test battery. In D. Douglas & C. Chapelle (Eds.), A new decade of language testing research: Selected papers fromthe 1990 Language Testing Research Colloquium (pp. 203-219). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Au, K.H., &Highfield, K., & Raphael, T.E. (2006).QAR now: a powerful and practical framework that develops comprehension and higher-level thinking in all students. New York, NY: Scholastic, Inc.

Au, K. H. & Raphael, T. E. (2005).QAR: enhancing comprehension and test taking across grades and content areas. The Reading Teacher, 59(3), 206-221.

Barry, S., & Lazarte, A. A. (1995). Embedded clause effects on recall: Does high priorknowledge of content domain overcome syntactic complexity in students of Spanish?TheModern Language Journal, 79, 491-504.

Bernhardt, E. (1986). Cognitive processes in L2: An examination of reading behaviors. In J.Lantolf & L. Labarca (Eds.), Research in second language learning: Focus on the classroom (pp. 35-51). Norwood, NJ:

Ablex.

Bowey, J. A. (1986). Syntactic awareness in relation to reading skill and ongoing reading comprehension monitoring. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41(2), 282-299.

Demont, E., &Gombert, J. E. (1996). Phonological awareness as a predictor of reading skills and syntactic awareness as predictor of comprehension skills. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 315-332.

Chamot, A.U., and J.M. O’Malley (1994).Language Learner and Learning Strategies. In N. Ellis (Eds.), Implicit andExplicit Learning of Languages (pp. 371- 92). London: Academic Press

Corder-Ponce, W.L. (2000). Summarization interaction: effects on foreign language comprehension and summarization of expository texts. Reading research and instruction, 39 (4), 329 – 350.

Crandall, Jaramillo, Olsen, and Peyton (2002).Using Cognitive Strategies to DevelopEnglish Language and Literacy.Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-3/using.htm.

Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49 (2), 222-251.

Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Lenz, B. K., and Ellis, E. (1984). Academic and cognitive interventions for LD adolescents: Part II. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 170-179.

Diaz-Rico, L.T., & Weed, K.Z. (2006). The crosscultural language and academic development handbook: Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Dogan, B. (2002). The effects of strategy teaching on reading comprehension, motivation and retention in coopertaive and traditional classes. Unpublished Doctorate Thesis, DokuzEylul University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Izmir.

Dugan, J. (1997). Transactional literature discussions: Engaging students in the appreciation and understanding of literature. The Reading Teacher, 51, 86–96.

Grabe (1991).Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly.

Grabe, W. and Stroller, L.F. (2002).Teaching and Researching Reading.Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.

Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., &Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371e395

Hardebecek, M. M. (2006). Effectiveness and usage of reading comprehension strategies for second grade title 1 students. Unpublished Master Thesis, Minesota State University, Education Department, Minnesota.

Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production.Psychological Review, 85(5), 363-394.

Koda, K. (1988). Cognitive process in second language reading: Transfer of L1 reading skills and strategies. Second Language Research, 4, 133-156.

Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 3-21.

McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-Explanation Reading Training. Discourse Processes, 38, 1–30.

Nation, K. &Snowling, M. (2000). Factors influencing syntactic awareness skills in normal readers and poor comprehenders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 229-241.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. New York: Newbury House.

Palinscar, A. S. (1987). Metacognitive strategy instruction. Exceptional Children, 53,118-124. Raphael, T.E. (1982). Question-answer strategies for children. The reading teacher.36, 186-190.

Resnick , L.B. (1984). Comparing and learning: Implications for a cognitive theory of instruction. In H.Mand1, N.L. Stein, &T.Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and Comprehension of Text.(pp. 431- 443).Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.

Schumaker, J. B., Denton, P.H., and Deshler, D.D. (1984).The paraphrasing strategy. Lawrence: University of Kansas.

Shahriari, S. (2002).Comparing the effect of oral and written summarization on the reading comprehension ability of Iranian high school students.

Tunmer, W. E., Herriman, M. L., & Nesdale, A. R. (1988).Metalinguistic abilities and beginning reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(2), 134-158.

Urquhart, S. and Weir, C. (1998). Reading in a Second Language: Process, Product and Practice. New York: Longman.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.2n.1p.151

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2020 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.