International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org THE IMPACT OF WORD KNOWLEDGE AND READING
COMPREHENSION STRATEGIES ON THE LEARNERS’
AUTONOMY IN ESP TEXT MATERIALS
Parvaneh Jahankohan
English Language Department, Yasuj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yasuj, Iran
E-mail: [email protected]
Mohsen Shahrokhi
English Department, Faculty of Humanities, Shahreza Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Isfahan, Iran
E-mail: [email protected] (Corresponding Author)
ABSTRACT
This study aimed at investigating the impact of word knowledge and reading comprehension
strategies on the learners’ autonomy in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) text materials. The
participants in this study were computer engineering university students at Azad University of
Kohgiloye & Bouyrahmad, Iran. To do so, out of 80 students enrolled to continue their ESP
course, 60 participants were selected based on their performance on the Oxford English
Language Placement Test (OELPT, 2009. An experimental-control group pre-test post-test
method was used. The participants were divided into two experimental and one control groups.
The treatment assigned to the EG1was word knowledge approach. EG2 experienced word
knowledge and reading comprehension strategies instruction, and control group received
ordinary classroom instruction in each session. The data collection for this study took place in
winter semester, 2013. The instruments utilized in this study included an Oxford English
Language Placement Test, ESP Computer Engineering pre-test, and ESP Computer Engineering
post-test. A paired sample t-test was run between the scores of pre and post of the participants in
each experimental group and the control group to investigate the possible effects of each
treatment. In order to ascertain that the mean difference between the post-tests of EG1, EG2 and
CG group is significant, a one way (ANOVA) was utilized. The results were the bases to accept
the second hypothesis and answer the second question in this way that word knowledge and
reading comprehension strategies instruction together does have a significant effect on
enhancement of ESP learners’ autonomy in ESP text materials. Based upon the findings of the
study, word knowledge and reading comprehension strategies instruction is thus recommended to
be integrated into the English instruction as part of an ESP course. The findings could also be of
importance for material developers and teachers in their development of instructional strategies
as they interact with students during teaching ESP reading comprehension.
KEYWORDS: reading comprehension, autonomy, reading comprehension strategies, word
knowledge, ESP text materials
518
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org INTRODUCTION
Many researchers believe that reading is by far the most important of all four skills in a second
language, particularly in English as a second or foreign language (e.g. Carrell, Devine, & Eskey,
1988, Richards & Renandya, 2002). Aebersold and Field (1997) also emphasize that the
acquisition of reading skills in a second or foreign language is a priority for millions of learners
around the world, and there is a growing demand for both effective reading courses as well as
high-quality second language reading materials.
Reading is a multi-factor complex process which involves word recognition and comprehension.
Word recognition refers to “the process of perceiving how written symbols correspond to one’s
spoken language” (Pang, Muaka, Bernherdt & Kamil, 2003, p.6) and comprehension is the
process of constructing meanings from the text. As reading is not a mechanical process but rather
a meaning constructing activity, readers need to utilize their linguistic, cognitive, and
sociocultural resources when they break the code, understand the meaning and interpret the
written text (Delbridge, 2008). Therefore, it is difficult for students to achieve high levels of
literacy, especially second language and foreign language learners. Most of the students have
experienced a breakdown in reading comprehension because they have inadequate prior
knowledge, misunderstand word meanings, acquire limited vocabulary, and misinterpret writers’
ideas and so on. To help students resolve these problems, some effective and efficient teaching
techniques should be used.
Researchers indicated that learning reading strategies has a positive effect on students’ reading
comprehension proficiency (National Reading Panel, 2000). Brantmeier (2005) defined reading
strategies as techniques which learners use in the process of reading comprehension in order to
read and figure out the context. Reading strategies allow students to evaluate their reading
comprehension achievement (Kletzien, 1991). In recent years, learning reading strategy has
become an important factor in literacy education. Oxford (1990) concluded that there are
generally two kinds of reading strategies, i.e. cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies. Cognitive
strategy refers to the mental activities involved during learning, but meta-cognitive strategy refers
to the students’ awareness of their cognitive process in learning. A significant outcome of the use
of reading strategies mentioned before resides mainly in the capability to achieve meaningful
reading. Cognitive reading strategies, such as prediction, skimming, scanning, inferring, and
guessing the meaning of unfamiliar words accompanied with meta-cognitive strategies such as
planning, setting goals, self-monitoring, self-management, and self-evaluation are effective
reading strategies, which enable EFL learners to achieve comprehension when reading
successfully. Research has suggested that learning reading strategies can be taught to students
whose foreign/second language is English. Thus, learning reading strategy as one of the most
important skills, receives the special focus of reading comprehension proficiency in foreign
language learning.
There are also two well established approaches towards reading comprehension process namely
bottom up and top down approach. According to Gough (1985), bottom up processing involves a
series of steps the reader has to go through i.e., a series that involve moving from a step to
another one, departing from recognizing the key features of every letter and then words,
519
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org sentences until reaching the meaning of the text. On the other hand, other researchers focus on
the top-down approach as conceptually driven process. This approach encourages students to use
their background knowledge in order to make predictions about the texts they read (Smith, 1985).
One of the important ingredients of language is its lexicon, an ingredient which is of prime and
critical importance to the language learners. The lexicon, or in simple day-to-day term,
vocabularies, are the building blocks of a language without which people cannot communicate
their intentions and, thus, the need for vocabulary is an issue of consensus among teachers and
learners (Allen, 1983). Having to absorb and retain many unfamiliar words in a limited time
without sufficient opportunity to internalize what have been learned requires vocabulary learning
to be performed through elaborate and effective approaches. It is noteworthy that there are many
reports of strong relationship between vocabulary knowledge/achievement and reading
comprehension (e.g. Grabe, 2004; Hilton & Hyder, 1995). This very interesting pattern of
relationship demonstrates that vocabulary knowledge contributes significantly to reading
comprehension; that is, the more words the learners are familiar with, the better comprehension
they have from the text (e.g. Anderson & Freebody, 1981; Koda, 1989). On the other hand,
learners with high-level reading comprehension skills are able to acquire more vocabularies and
retain them better (e.g. Coady, 1997; Paribakht & Wesche, 1999; Stoller & Grabe, 1993);
consequently, vocabulary learning is a by-product of reading (Swanborn, 1999). Similarly,
Huckin and Coady (1999) indicate that “except for the first few thousand most common words,
vocabulary learning dominantly occurs through reading, with the learner guessing at the meaning
of unknown words” (p. 182).
With respect to this mutual impact, it seems that both reading comprehension and vocabulary
learning should be approached with effective strategies. This point is well supported by Beck,
McKeown, and Kucan (2003) who state that former methods of vocabulary instruction, which
required students to view definitions before reading a text and then perform on a quiz or figure
out new vocabulary meaning from the context, proved to be less effective than once thought.
Beck et al. further argue that such approaches are effective for neither teaching word meaning,
nor enhancing reading comprehension, and may, in fact, lead to misunderstanding of word
meaning. Consequently, it seems that effective approaches are those that create ways in which the
learner interacts with the text and actively uses the word meaning. Therefore, as suggested by
Nagy, Herman, and Anderson (1985), instructional strategies that bring new vocabulary into a
student’s existing conceptual framework are effective in teaching vocabulary meaning and
conceptual understanding; that is, strategic instruction will facilitate the students’ process of
struggling with the text in order to comprehend the major concepts and sub-concepts. Word
knowledge and vocabulary instruction are therefore integral components of specific and general
reading comprehension and vocabulary recognition is the factor that makes the most difference in
group ability (Laufer & Sim, 1985; Weiss, 1984).
Over the last two decades, the concepts of learner autonomy and independence of the learners
have also gained momentum in the area of English for special purposes (ESP). It is a truism that
one of the most important byproducts of more communicatively oriented language learning and
teaching has been the premium placed on the role of the learner in the language learning process
(see Wenden, 1998). It goes without saying, of course, that this shift of responsibility from
520
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org teachers to learners does not exist in a vacuum, but is the result of a chain of changes to the
curriculum itself towards a more learner-centered kind of learning. However, learner autonomy
does not mean that the teacher becomes redundant; abdicating his/her control over what is
transpiring in the language learning process. Learner autonomy is a stable dynamic process
responsive to “educational interventions” (Candy, 1991), rather than a static product, a state,
which is reached once and for all. This study attempts to prove that in order to help learners to
assume greater control over their own learning it is important to help them to become aware of
and identify the strategies that they already use or could potentially use. The more our students
are exposed to reading material and utilized these strategies practically through the process of
comprehension, the sooner we, as teachers, will reach our goals in this regard. They need to be
moved from dependency on the teacher to more independent reading. This independence can be
achieved by assisting them in being efficient in the use of certain strategies.
The present study aimed to probe into this important issue by providing formal instruction of the
reading comprehension strategies to a group of Iranian ESP learners and comparing their reading
comprehension performance with another group experiencing word knowledge instruction and
the third group not receiving such instructions. This study, then, discussed whether sole word
knowledge instruction or word knowledge together with reading comprehension strategies
instruction enhance students’ autonomy in dealing with ESP text materials. This study also
attempted to probe practically that the lack of good reading strategy skills can hinder the central
role of reading comprehension in academic success when the learners are involved in ESP text
materials.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In the literature, studies that have been carried out on reading strategy instruction are divided into
two main categories. The first category of the studies describes the readers’ strategy use. The
results of these studies, as will be catered for in this section, have revealed that strategy use is
different among more and less proficient readers. In an early study on reading strategies,
Hosenfield (1977) used a think aloud procedure to identify relations between certain types of
reading strategies and successful or unsuccessful second language reading. The successful
readers, for example, kept the meaning of the passage in mind while reading, read it in broad
phrases, skipped inconsequential or less important words, and had a positive self-concept as a
reader. The unsuccessful reader, on the other hand, lost the meaning of the sentences when
decoded, read in short phrases, pondered over inconsequential words, seldom skipped words as
unimportant, and had a negative self-concept.
In their study involving good and poor readers, Hopkins and Mackay (1997) found that good
readers often have more ready access to a variety of purposeful reading strategies to undertake
reading tasks successfully and that they use them with greater frequency and flexibility. They are
active in making inferences and using dictionaries to resolve uncertainty about the meanings of
words or larger units of discourse. In another empirical study, Song (1998) studied 68 first year
tertiary students majoring in Archeology, Esthetics, and religion at a university in Korea to
investigate the impact of strategy training on the reading ability of EFL university students. He
521
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org also aimed to obtain answers for the differentiated effect of the strategy training on students’
reading proficiency level and types of reading comprehension questions. The findings of the
study showed that the reading strategy training does improve EFL college students reading
proficiency. Furthermore, the study demonstrated that less able readers might benefit from the
training more than more able readers. Finally the study revealed that the students’ ability of
grasping main ideas and of making inferences from the given passages was significantly
enhanced.
In still another study, Shang (2010) investigated a group of Taiwanese EFL learners’ use of three
reading strategies (cognitive, meta-cognitive, compensation strategies), their perceived impact on
the learners’ self-efficacy, and the link between reading strategy use and perceived self-efficacy
on their English reading comprehension. The results of this study showed that meta-cognitive
strategy was used most frequently, followed by compensation strategy, and then cognitive
strategy. Besides, a significant positive relationship was found between the use of reading
strategies and perceptions of self-efficacy. However, reading strategies were unrelated to reading
achievement.
The second category of studies has been conducted to investigate the effect of reading strategy
instruction on the readers’ reading performance. Carrell, Pharis & Liberto (1989) conducted a
study to examine the combined effects of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategy instruction on
reading comprehension in the L2 context; the results indicate that the combined effects of metacognitive and cognitive strategy instruction enhanced reading comprehension. In a recent study,
Davis (2010), based on a meta-analysis of comprehension strategy instruction for upper
elementary and middle school students in America, concluded that instruction on the use of
reading comprehension strategies has a positive impact on students’ achievements in grades 4-8.
Reading strategy instruction has also received some attention in Iran (Barati, 1992, Sedighi,
1998, Shirazi, 1999). In his study on the effect of reading strategies on recall and retention of
Iranian EFL learners, Barati (1992) considered two reading strategies: underlining and notetaking. Through analyzing the subjects' performance on factual and conceptual questions, he
concluded that in both experiments note-takers could significantly outperform under liners on
factual questions; but with reference to conceptual questions there was no significant difference
between the two strategies.
Few studies have focused on the significance of ESP teaching methodologies and the need for
fundamental changes of instructional approaches is an attempt to develop reading comprehension
and more specifically reading strategies of ESP students. To provide an adequate foundation and
background for the current research, some recent studies conducted in the realm of ESP and
reading strategies are reviewed in this section. In a study by Ajideh (2009), he aimed to present
the influential role of teaching methodology and learning strategies as a result of teaching and
curriculum reform in his article. He intended to highlight the differences between ESP and
general English study through stating that although choosing language specification and teaching
content is necessary for ESP course, instruction on learning strategies which leads to autonomous
learning should be considered as fundamental for ESP course. Ultimately, he concluded that there
should be a great effort to foster learning autonomy in ESP courses in Iranian academic teaching
522
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org context. In this regard, teaching learning strategies, particularly meta-cognitive strategies, should
play an important role in ESP classes to promote learning autonomy.
While lots of studies on reading strategy instruction have been done in EFL and ESL contexts,
few studies have been conducted on the impact of strategy training on ESP readers, especially in
Iran. As one of the earliest researcher, Shirazi (1999) conducted a research in order to determine
the impact of pre-reading strategy instruction on the reading comprehension of Iranian ESP
readers. The results of his study indicated that efficient comprehension requires effective
activating of the learner's background knowledge.
Hudson (1991) evaluated the ESP project designed for and integrated with the learner’s reading
comprehension strategies and motivation to learn content through the reading process for Science
and Technology at the Universidad de Guadalajara in Mexico. The result showed significant and
meaningful improvement by the students after the EST instructions. Henry and Roseberry (1998)
conducted a study to determine to what extent genre-based instruction and ESP context improved
the learners’ writing ability. Thirty-four participants were randomly assigned to two groups: the
genre group and the non-genre group. The genre group used genre-based ESP materials, and the
non-genre group used more traditional approach materials. The results show that the genre group
had significant improvement on two measures, and no genre group, did not show improvement.
Hence, the content comprehension helped students improve their ESP/EAP reading
comprehension as well as their general language reading ability.
Although it is generally clear that reading plays a significant role in a language, reading
comprehension remains a young field that merits greater research attention. Moreover,
knowledge about reading comprehension regarding learning strategies has been devoted to those
involving in listening, writing and speaking. While Shirazi (1999) only focused on the instruction
of a few pre-reading strategies, the present study intended to investigate the effect of all prereading, during-reading, and post- reading strategy instruction on reading ability of ESP readers.
The current study was therefore an attempt to make a contribution towards improving the reading
comprehension and autonomy of Iranian intermediate learners in ESP text materials through
reading comprehension strategy teaching.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Regarding the mentioned points above, the following research questions were put into the
spotlight:
1. Does word knowledge enhance the autonomy of the EFL reader during reading of ESP
text materials?
2. Is there any significant relationship between learning word knowledge and reading
comprehension strategies and the autonomy of the EFL reader during reading of ESP text
materials?
523
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org METHODOLOGY
Participants
The EFL population for this study was selected out of 80 computer engineering university
students at Azad University of Kohgiloye & Bouyrahmad, Iran. To establish the homogeneity of
the participants, they were chosen from among the learner population who were able to pass the
Oxford English Language Placement Test (OELPT, 2009) with a score range of 40-60 out of 100
which is the criterion to categorize the participants as being in intermediate English language
proficiency level. Based on the results of the OELPT, highly top and highly low participants were
omitted. The 60 final participants were those whose scores were within the aforementioned range.
The study considered a number of variables which characterize a homogeneous learner group.
Additionally, the participants were carefully selected and screened so that the potential
intervening variables including their age and field of study were controlled and sufficient
variations were identified for analysis. The participants ranged in age from 18 to 25 years.
Moreover, the participants were both male and female students approximately equal in number.
Materials and Instruments
For the purpose of data collection, in addition to OELPT and students’ technical English book
named “Special English for the Students of Computer”, by Haghani, (2005), two other
instruments were employed in this study namely ESP Computer Engineering pre-test, and ESP
Computer Engineering post-test.
ESP Computer Engineering Pretest
The pretest was a reading comprehension test designed to determine the prior reading
comprehension performance of the participants. The test items were selected from students’
technical English book (units 3, 6, & 8). To this end, three reading comprehension texts together
with their corresponding test items from the students’ textbook were chosen as the pre-test. The
total number of the test was 30 multiple-choice questions, 10 multiple-choice items for each
reading passage. The purpose of these questions was to assess the students’ prior ability in
reading comprehension. By this test it was also made sure that the pretest scores of all the
participants were almost the same before starting the treatments and ultimately any change in the
reading comprehension of the participants would be because of the type of the treatment they
received. The reliability of the test was gained, through a pilot study on the EFL learners (n=20)
who were similar to the learners of the main study in terms of age, sex, and proficiency level. The
results of Cronbach alpha analysis showed that the test was reliable (r = 0.82). The content
validity of the test was evaluated, and accepted, by three experts who were PhD holders of
applied linguistics with more than five years of teaching and testing experience at different
universities. Finally, the researcher decided to include the test as the pre and post-test for the
study. The time for the pre-test was twenty five minutes and students had to answer the questions
in multiple choice formats in given time.
ESP Computer Engineering Post-test
The post test was a parallel version of the pre-test consisting of the same 30 multiple-choice
questions which were the same for the three groups. In order to eliminate the probability of
remembering the correct answers of the test, the similar version of pre-test with different item
524
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org arrangement as well as option rearrangement functioning as post-test was used after
implementing the treatments of the study in order to detect the reading comprehension
performance of the participants.
Procedures
After performing the general English proficiency test, the participants were randomly classified
into three groups (table1): one control group and the two experimental groups. Thus there were
20 students in each group. A pre-test was then administered to the participants of the three
groups. Before starting the study, the researcher provided the participants of the two experimental
groups separately with a brief introduction of the study at the starting session of each group. The
experiment at hand took place over about 10 sessions (25 minutes each) in addition to two other
sessions of pre and post- test.
Table 1: Methodology of the Study
1-General English Language Proficiency Test (OELPT)
2-Grouping
(Randomization Method)
EG1: Word knowledge approach
EG2: Word knowledge+reading comprehension strategies approach
CG: Control group (conventional approach)
CG: Control group (conventional approach)
3.ESP Pre-Test (all groups)
4.Special treatment for each group
5.ESP Post-test (all groups)
6. Comparison of the results
Procedure for EG1 Group
The treatment assigned to the EG1was word knowledge approach. The words to be learned were
chosen based on the students’ technical English book. Some techniques which were used in the
classes causing vocabulary knowledge of the participants to expand are as follows: word
definition, synonyms, direct and indirect meaning of the words, teaching the use of dictionary,
teaching the use of contextual clues to figure out the meanings of unfamiliar and ambiguous
words.
Procedure for EG2 Group
EG2 experienced a mixed treatment which comprised of two techniques of word knowledge and
reading comprehension strategies instruction. The words to be learned were chosen based on the
students’ technical English book. In addition to the techniques explained in previous part, some
reading comprehension strategies were taught to the participants of this group. The strategies
consisted of cognitive reading strategies, such as prediction, skimming, scanning, inferring, and
guessing the meaning of unfamiliar words accompanied with meta-cognitive strategies such as
525
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org planning, setting goals, self-monitoring, self-management, and self-evaluation which as
explained in previous sections proved to be very effective reading strategies.
Procedure for Control Group
The students in control group received ordinary classroom instruction in each session. In order to
teach the reading comprehension the following steps were taken:
1. The first step included reading out each new word two or three times and having the
students repeat the words.
2. The next step included going through the vocabulary list and explaining each word by
giving examples and writing the definitions, synonyms and antonyms on the board.
3. The last step was to read the reading passage aloud and then explain the difficult points
through usual techniques such as definition and translation of the new words, etc.
Finally the participants of the three groups sat for the post-test. The administration time for
the post-test was twenty five minutes, the same as pre-test, and students had to answer the
questions in multiple choice formats in given time.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following steps were taken in order to find the best method in teaching reading
comprehension amongst the three aforementioned methods. To this end, the scores of the three
groups on the pre-test were first analyzed and tabulated. Accordingly, the pre-test was seen from
two different perspectives as follows: First, it was used as an indicator for making sure that all
groups are starting from the same level of reading comprehension proficiency; second, it was
used as the post test for measuring their reading comprehension gain after the treatment.
Descriptive statistics of the pretest is presented in table 2.
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics of the Reading Comprehension Pretest
N
Mean
Std.
Lower
Upper
Min
Max
Deviation
Bound
Bound
1 20
7.30
1.14
6.87
7.83
6
9
2 20
7.19
1.06
6.81
7.57
6
9
3 20
7.70
1.44
7.16
8.24
6
10
G
1= EG1
2= EG2
3= CG
The mean score of the three groups of the participants were almost the same. This was true
considering standard deviations. However, a one way ANOVA was also conducted to see if there
was any statistically significant difference between three groups. Table 3 shows the result.
Table 3: ANOVA Comparing the Performance of the EG1, EG2, and CG on Reading Comprehension Pretest
SS
df
MS
F
sig
Between
Groups
Within
Groups
0.217
2
0.109
2.047
57
1.36
2.443
.078
526
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org The results presented in Table 3 demonstrate no significant difference in the performance of the
three groups on reading comprehension pre-test (F= 2.443, p>0.05). The difference between the
reading performances of the three reading ability groups on the pre-test is not statistically
significant. These findings re-emphasized the result of OELPT. As it was approved based on the
results obtained in OELPT, it can be concluded that the three groups of the participants were
homogenous and any possible difference in their performance on the post test could be attributed
to the treatments utilized. As a result, the researcher being confident with the required conditions
of the research continued the study by conducting the aforementioned treatments in the
experimental groups and employing the typical method of teaching reading in the control group.
Descriptive statistics of the reading comprehension post-test are summarized in the following
table.
N
1 20
2 20
3 20
1= EG1
Table 4: Descriptive Statistics of the Reading Comprehension Post-Test
Mean
Std.
Lower
Upper
Minimum
Maximum
Deviation
Bound
Bound
15.005
3.27
13.67
16.82
7
17
17.197
2.09
14.54
18.51
8
19
14.379
3.58
13.2
15.18
6
16
2= EG2
3= CG
Based on the results represented in table 4, it can be claimed that the three groups have changed
in terms of their reading comprehension but they have not changed in the same manner since the
post-test mean for EG2, is 17.197 which is higher than that of EG1 being 15.005, and CG being
14.379. Even though the difference of the three groups seems to be obvious regarding the
descriptive statistics, the item at hand needs more exact clarification which will be taken care of
in the following parts.
In order to see if the observed difference in the means of the three groups was due to the assigned
treatments, a paired sample test was run between the pre- test and post- test of all three groups.
The results of paired sample test are presented in tables 5 and 6.
Table 5: Descriptive Statistics of Paired Sample T- test
G
Deviation
1 pre-test
Post-test
2 pre-test
Post-test
3 pre-test
Post-test
1= EG1
N
20
20
20
20
20
20
2= EG2
Mean
7.30
15.005
7.19
17.197
7.30
14.379
3= CG
Std.
1.14
3.27
1.06
2.09
1.44
3.58
In this paired sample test the pre- test and post- test of each group are compared. We want to
know whether the students have changed during the semester and if the treatments had any effect
on their reading comprehension. As it can be seen in all three groups there is an increase in the
means.
527
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Table 6: Paired Sample T- Test
Mean
Std.
Lower
Upper
T
df
sig
Deviation
Bound
Bound
1 pre -post
9.26
2 pre -post 10.13
3 pre -post
8.78
1= EG1
2= EG2
.45
.43
.55
3= CG
9.59
10.36
8.06
9.73
10.68
8.17
112.8
123.2
79.17
19
19
19
.000
.000
.000
There is a significant difference, as it is displayed in table 4.7, between the pretest and posttest of
all three groups based on the t values (112.8, 123.2, & 79.17 are all much greater than 2.093 at
p<0.05). These significant differences in two experimental groups are higher than control group,
and the experimental groups are very close to each other. So it can be concluded that the
treatments, even the traditional approach, affected ESP students’ autonomy in reading
comprehension.
Up to this point, we can conclude that word knowledge approach was not the only way to
enhance students’ reading comprehension in comparison to other methods. So, the answer to the
first question of the study is not clear yet. Thus, what follows are the further steps taken to find
an appropriate answer for this question and see if the treatments utilized for the EG1or EG2 were
effective or not.
In order to see if the observed differences among three groups under investigation were
statistically meaningful the statistical procedure of one way ANOVA was performed on the post
test scores of the three groups (table 7).
Table 7: ANOVA Comparing the Performance of the EG1, EG2, and CG on Reading Comprehension Post -Test
Sum of Squares
df
MS
F
sig
Between
Groups
Within
Groups
215.217
2
105.009
156.047
57
2.036
28.003
.000
An F-ratio of 28.003> 3.0718 (at α level of .05) revealed that there is a significant difference
somewhere among the mean scores on the independent variable (post-test scores) for the three
groups. It is difficult, however, at this point to tell if this significant difference occurred in EG1,
EG2, or CG group, since an ANOVA provides information on whether or not these groups differ,
but it provides no information as to the location or the source of the difference. Having received a
statistically significant difference, we can now look at the results of the post-hoc tests provided in
Table 8 to be able to locate the source of significance in our data.
528
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Table 8: Results of LSD Post-Hoc Tests
95% Confidence Interval
(I)
(J)
Mean
Lower
Upper Bound
VAR0001 VAR0002 Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.
Bound
1.00
2.00
3.00
2.00
-2.1925*
.70335
.000
-.5371
2.2898
3.00
.6269
.70764
.219
3.3860
4.2129
1.00
2.1925
*
.70335
.000
-2.2898
.5371
3.00
2.8186*
.71625
.000
2.4837
5.3624
1.00
-.6269
.70764
.219
-4.2129
-3.3860
2.00
-2.8186*
.71625
.000
-3.3624
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. 1= EG1 2= EG2
-2.4837
3= CG
As depicted in Table 8, in column called “mean differences”, there are some asterisks next to the
values listed. Asterisks show that the three groups being compared are significantly different
from one another at p<0.05 level. The exact significant value is given in the column labeled sig.
In the results presented above, group 2 which received word knowledge and reading
comprehension strategies instruction together, is statistically and significantly different from
groups 1, and 3 (.000<0.05). That is, EG2 outperformed EG1which received sole word
knowledge instruction, and CG receiving traditional method of reading comprehension. EG1 has
also surpassed CG, but the difference is not significant (.219>0.05).
These results tell us that even though EG1 performed better on post-test than CG, since the
difference was not statistically significant comparing to that of EG2, we can answer the first
question of the paper, and conclude that knowledge of word recognition solely cannot enhance
EFL learners’ autonomy in ESP text materials. Thus, the second question could be answered in
this way that the word knowledge and reading strategies instruction together can significantly
enhance EFL learners to be more autonomous in ESP reading text materials based on the findings
of the present study.
CONCLUSION
According to the results gained from this paper, it is obviously clear that even though
word knowledge approach proved to be better method in comparison to conventional method in
teaching reading comprehension, the observed difference was not significant. The effectiveness
of the instruction of the reading comprehension strategies over the sole word knowledge
was also justified throughout the study. Thus, given its many benefits and advantages,
an integration of word knowledge and reading comprehension strategies instruction is
considered among the best methods of teaching reading comprehension skills.
The implementation of comprehension strategies instruction accompanied with word
knowledge approach in this study has produced several desired outcomes. First,
participants, who experienced the mix treatment, achieved statistically significant
improvements in reading comprehension; and they answered more questions correctly,
529
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org especially those questions which were related to the comprehension strategies. Second,
students accepted that the comprehension strategies were useful and realized the
structure of texts so they could construct meanings effectively. Further, some students
agreed their meta-cognitive awareness was enhanced but some were doubtful about it.
However, it is a good sign that they were able to reach the self-control level use of
comprehension strategies.
These findings are in line with some previous research about the effect of reading
comprehension strategy instruction on EFL students’ reading achievement (Carrell, Pharis
& Liberto 1989; Salataci & Akeyl, 2002; Song, 1998). The results are also in harmony with
those gained by Carrell, Pharis and Liberto (1989) who conducted a study to examine the
combined effects of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategy instruction on reading comprehension
in the L2 context; which support the outcome of this study as in their study the results indicate
that the combined effects of meta-cognitive and cognitive strategy instruction enhanced reading
comprehension. The studies conducted in Iran are also in the same line considering their findings
(Barati, 1992, Sedighi, 1998, Shirazi, 1999). In all these studies, it was revealed that reading
strategy instruction enhances comprehension ability of the students.
The findings of the study in hand also lend support to studies conducted in the field of ESP
instruction (Aghaie & Zhang, 2012; Ajideh, 2009; Falk & Wehby, 2007; Shirazi, 1999). All in
all, more attention should be given to teaching reading through instruction of cognitive and metacognitive reading techniques and strategies which can be of utmost importance in achieving
autonomy in reading comprehension in general and in ESP text materials in particular since they
proved their effectiveness in these environments.
Limitations of the Study
One of the limitations of the present study is the time of implementing the instruction.
Normally, teaching reading comprehension strategies is a long-term project. It is
suggested that the training should last at least for a term to one academic year. The
present study was conducted for 10 sessions owing to the limited time. Although the
results of the present study support the improvement of students’ reading
comprehension, it is hard to observe the progress of individual students.
REFERENCES
Ajideh, P. (2009). Autonomous learning and metacognitive strategies essentials in ESP class.
English Language Teaching, 2 (1), 162-168.
Aebersold, J. A., & Field, M. L. (1997). From teacher to reading teacher: Issues and strategies
for second language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Allen, E. D., Bernhardt, M. T., & Demel, M. (1988). Comprehension and text Genre: Analysis of
secondary school foreign language readers. Modern Language Journal, 72, 163-72
Allen, V. F. (1983). Techniques in Teaching Vocabulary. Oxford: O.U.P.
530
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1983). Reading comprehension and the assessment and
acquisition of word knowledge. In B. Huston (Ed.). Advances in reading research (pp. 231256). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Barati, H. (1992). The effect of reading strategies on recall and retention. Unpublished Masteral
thesis, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2003). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary
instruction. New York: Guilford.
Brantmeier, C. (2002). The effect of passage content on second language reading comprehension
by gender across instruction levels. In J. Hammadou Sullivan. Literacy and the second
language learner. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Carrell, P. L., Devine, J., & Eskey, D. E. (1988). Interactive approaches to second language
reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carrell, P., Pharis, B., & Liberto, J. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading.
TESOL Quarterly, 23(4), 647-678. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587536
Coady, J. (1997). L2 vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading. In J. Coady & T. Huckin
(Eds.). Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 225-237). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cohen, A. (1986). Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. Heinle &
Heinle Publishers.
Davis, D. S. (2010). A meta-analysis of comprehension strategy instruction for upper elementary
and middle school students. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Vanderbilt University,
America.
Falk, K. B., & Wehby, J. (2007). The impact of reading instruction on student achievement:
Study findings. Retrieved from http://ici.Umm.Edu/productsimpact/182/182.pdf
Grabe, W. (2004). Research on teaching reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 4469.
Gough, p. (1985). One Second of Reading. IN H. Signer& R. Rudell (EDS). Theoritical Models
and Processes of Reading (3rd Ed.). New York, DE: International Reading Association.
Hilton, C., & Hyder, M. (1995). Vocabulary. London: Letts Educational.
Hopkins, N. M., & Mackay, R. (1997). Good and bad readers: A look at the high and low
achievers in an ESP Canadian studies reading and writing course. The Canadian Modern
Language Review, 53, 473–490.
Hosenfield, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of successful and
non-successful
second
language
learners.
System,
5,
110-123.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(77)90087-2
Huckin, T., & Coady, J. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: A
review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2), 181-193.
Koda, K. (1989). The effects of transferred vocabulary knowledge on the development of L2
reading proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 22(6), 529-540.
Kletzien, S.B. (1991). Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders reading expository text of
differing levels. Reading Research Quarterly, 26(1), 67-86.
Nagy, W. E., Hermann, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading
Research Quarterly, 20, 233-253.
531
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 6 (4), August 2014; 518-­‐532 Jahankohan, P., & Shahrokhi, M EISSN: 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN: 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York:
Newbury House.
Pang, E., Muaka, A., Bernhardt, E., Kamil, M. (2003). Teaching Reading. International Academy
of Education. Retrieved from http ://www.ibe.unesco.org/publications
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1999). Reading and “incidental” L2 vocabulary acquisition: An
introspective study of lexical inferencing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2),
195-224.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied
linguistics (3rd Ed.). London: Pearson Education.
Salataci, R. & Akyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2 reading.
Reading in a foreign language, 14 (1), 234-255.
Sedighi, A. (1998). The effects of training in the use of reading strategies on the improvement of
readingcomprehension. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Allameh Tabatabaei University,
Tehran.
Shang, Hui-Fang (2010). Reading strategy use, self-efficacy and EFL reading comprehension.
Asian EFL Journal, 12 (2), 18-42.
Shirazi, M. A. (1995). The effect of pre-reading strategies on reading comprehension of Iranian
ESP readers. Unpublished Masteral thesis, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran.
Smith.F. (1985). Reading Without Nonsense. (2nd ed). New York: Teachers College Press, 15.
Stoller, F. L., & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction
from L1 vocabulary research. In T.Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.). Second
language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 24-45). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Swanborn, M. S. L. (1999). Incidental word learning while reading: A meta-analysis. Review of
Educational Research, 69(3), 261-286.
Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive Knowledge and Language Learning1. Applied Linguistics,
19(4), 515-537.
532