PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your need.
To AVOID FINES rotum on or bdom date duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

  

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU I. An Afflrmdivo Adm/Equal Opponunny Institution
cWM1

THE EFFECTS OF TEACHING A NULTICOHPONENT READING STRATEGY
ON UNIVERSITY ESL STUDENTS' READING COMPREHENSION AND

REPORTS OF READING STRATEGIES

BY

Ronald L. Brown

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Teacher Education

1991

ABSTRACT
THE EFFECTS OF TEACHING A MULTICOHPOXEXT STRATEGY

ON UNIVERSITY ESL STUDENTS' READING COMPREHENSION
AND REPORTS OF READING STRATEGIES

BY

Ronald L. Brown

Although extensive research has been conducted on the effects
on comprehension of teaching reading strategies to native
English speakers, research in this area has not been
conducted with students in English as a Second Language (ESL)
classes. This dissertation examined the effects of teaching
SQBR both with a focus on strategic reading and as a non-
strategic study skills unit on university ESL students?
reading comprehension and ability to report their use of
reading strategies. Forty-five Malay students were divided
into two treatment groups and one control group. One
treatment group received instruction in SQBR with additional
instruction in strategic reading, while the second treatment
group was instructed in SQBR in a procedural. non-strategic
manner. A control group received no treatment. The subjects
were given posttreatment measures in reading comprehension
and reporting reading strategies. The results indicated that
the effects on comprehension of teaching SQBR either
strategically or procedurally were beneficial to
comprehension. In addition. after treatment both treatment

groups reported using more reading strategies than the

control group.

Copyright by
RONALD LEE BROWN
1991

iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

After grappling with this dissertation for almost four
years, I have accumulated debts of gratitude to more people
than I can do justice in a brief acknowledgment. My
committee was particularly helpful and supportive. Gerry
Duffy, aka "The Mentor", deserves combat pay for acting as my
advisor. He frequently wondered which would arrive first:
this dissertation or his retirement. Jim and Barb Gallagher
gave me shelter, transportation, and working space during my
pilgrimages to campus. and refrained from reminding me of Ben
Franklin's advice that guests and fish smell after three
days. Taffy Raphael and Perry Lanier took time away from
their overwhelming workloads to read. reread. and again read
drafts of this dissertation, yet despaired not. Bob Flagler,
now back with the University of Minnesota in Duluth, deserves
special thanks for assisting me with the testing and
evaluation of the data. I also owe much to Bruce Burke and
Laura Roehler for providing me with the means of supporting
myself and family while at the same time gaining valuable
experience during my residency on campus. And I am indebted
to the Michigan winter for fostering within me a love of the
tropics. Finally, of course, to my wife, Carol, who is
undoubtedly relieved that she is no longer a dissertation

widow.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter One: Introduction and Purpose .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . .
Background . . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem . .
Research Questions . . . .
Significance of the Problem . .
Definitions . . . . . . . . . .
Limitations . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Chapter One . .

Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation

Chapter Two: Review of Relevant Research . . . . .
Section One: Reading Instruction in ESL . . .

Section Two: Strategic Reading and Comprehension

Section Three: Using SQ3R as a Multicomponent
Strategy . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Chapter Two . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter Three: Design and Methods . . .
Subjects . . . . . . . . . .
Instructional Procedures .
Data Collection . . . . . .
Data Analysis . . . . . .
Summary of Chapter Three . . . . .

Chapter Four: Results of Data Analysis . . . . . .
Results of the Pretreatment Measures in
Comprehension and Reports in Strategy Use
Results of the Posttreatment Comprehension
Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Analysis of the Reports of Strategy Use . . . .
Summary of Chapter Four . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter Five: Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Design and Procedures . . . . . . .
Discussion of the Findings . . . . . . . . . .
Implications of the Findings . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Chapter Five . . . . . . . . . . . .

100

102
102
105
107
118
126

Appendices . .
Appendix

Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix

EQ'VIMUUOU! 3'

List of References

vi

Structure of the Malaysian Education
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ESL Composition Profile . . . . . .
ESL Reading Syllabus . . . . . . . .
The SQBR Study System . . . . . . .
Pretreatment Reading Selection . . .
Posttreatment Reading Selection . .
Pretreatment Scoring Measure . .
Posttreatment Scoring Measure . . .
Strategy Use Evaluation Form . . . .

O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

127

127
129
132
135
137
140
143
144
145

146

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

5.1

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Results of the Pretreatment Comprehension
Test 0 O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 87

Results of the Mann-Whitney U Test Comparing
Group Performance on the Pretreatment
Comprehension Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Summary of Reported Strategy Use by Each
Group Before Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Results of the Posttreatment Comprehension
Test O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 92

Results of the Mann-Whitney U Test Comparing
Group Performance on the Posttreatment
Comprehension Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Summary of Reported Strategy Use by Each
Group After Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Summary of Reported Strategy Use by Each
Group Before and After Treatment . . . . . . . 99

CompariSon of Reported Strategy Use by Each
Group Before and After Treatment . . . . . . 113

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

Introduction

Universities in the United States accept a large number
of foreign students into both undergraduate and graduate
programs. Frequently, these students have severe
deficiencies in English that must be resolved before they can
succeed in academic programs. This remedial instruction is
usually provided by English as a Second Language (ESL)
components within the university. Since these components are
usually within the English or linguistics departments. ESL
instruction tends to be based on linguistic theories with a
focus on the content of language structure rather than on
the metacognitive processes of language.

ESL reading instruction at the university level is
frequently devoted to drill and practice with grammar, word
forms, and vocabulary toward the objective of improving the
students' decoding skills but with little or no attention
directed to the process of actively and consciously applying
strategies to reading problems.

Research investigating reading comprehension of native
English speaking students, for instance, has shown that
effective readers have a knowledge of strategies and possess
metacognitive awareness (Palincsar and Brown, 1989). In

addition, research has shown that students show significant

 

gains in reading comprehension after instruction in reading
strategies (Duffy, Roehler, Meloth, Vavrus, Book, Putnam, and
Wesselman, 1986; Duffy, Roehler, Sivan, Rackliffe, Book.
Meloth, Vavrus, Wesselman, Putnam, and Bassiri, 1987: Paris,
Cross. and Lipson, 1984: Paris, Lipson, and Wixson, 1983) and
in metacognitive training (Baker and Brown, 1984; Gundstone.
1988: Karabenick, 1987: Paris and Jacobs, 1984: Wade and
Reynolds, 1989).

These studies have demonstrated the importance of being a
strategic reader and have identified specific strategies that
are particularly useful, such as setting purpose, predicting
content, and generating questions. Despite the necessity of
linguistic proficiency as a prerequisite, success with
reading academic English requires more than competence with
decoding linguistic structures and recognizing word forms.
Moreover, Clarke (1980) has suggested that relying on the use
of syntactic cues in reading may ”short-circuit” effective
reading systems used by students before ESL instruction,
resulting in their reverting to poor reading behaviors when
confronted with difficult reading.

Furthermore, it is unlikely that an ESL program can even
develop linguistic competence in the limited time allocated
for instruction. In short, teaching grammar and vocabulary
is not enough: ESL students need instruction and practice in
applying strategies to reading to help compensate for their
linguistic weaknesses.

The purpose of this dissertation was to study the

effects that the explicit instruction of a multicomponent
strategy has on the reading comprehension of students
enrolled in a university level English as a Second Language
A multicomponent strategy is an integrated system of
self-regulated actions focused on developing the awareness
and use of reading strategies. This means that readers were
taught to regard strategic reading as an integration of
several skills and activities that can be used together or
independently to resolve reading problems. Included in a
multicomponent strategy is the self-monitoring of reading.
recognition of problems, and self—evaluation of reading
comprehension.

The SQBR (Survey-Question-Read-Recite-Review) method
developed by Francis P. Robinson (1970) was selected as the
basis for teaching strategic reading. SQ3R consists of five
steps that direct the reader to (1) gain an overall
orientation of a reading selection, (2) devise questions
before reading, (3) read with the specific purpose of
answering questions, (4) summarize what was read, and (5)
review in order to confirm understanding. While uSing this
method. students are engaged in using reading strategies such
as questioning, summarizing, using headings and text
structure. notetaking, and organizing information.

SQBR was selected as the basis for a multicomponent
strategy for this study because it is an integrated and
Systematic method that is useful in introducing several

strategies. In addition, it encourages the students to

activate schema while giving them a sense of potential
difficulty. SQ3R has been used successfully with all age
groups and reading levels of native English speakers (Adams.
Carnine, and Gersten, 1982; Donald, 1987: Durr, 1963). and
has been found to be particularly effective with college
level students (Simpson. 1986; Snyder, 1984: Tomilson, 1987).

Factors that have been considered in the development of
this project include the nature of reading comprehension, the
effect that strategic reading has on the reading
comprehension of native speakers, the nature of reading
instruction in ESL classrooms, and the potential role of
teaching reading strategies in ESL classes.

The subjects used in this study were ethnic Malays who
are enrolled in a Malaysian-American university cooperative
program. These students came from a strict, prescriptive
educational system that does not teach strategic reading.

The subsequent sections of this chapter will provide
background information by describing the educational
background of the subjects, some characteristics of Malay

students, and the site of data collection.

Background
The Content gt the Ster
h Description gt the Malaysian Education System. The
education system in Malaysia was established by the British
during the colonial era and continued to follow the British

model after independencel The underlying philosophy is that

beyond the government's responsibility for providing literacy
and basic skills necessary for functioning in society.
education is not a right, but a privilege that must be
earned. The education system operates on a prescribed
national curriculum in which less promising children are
screened out early (Inglis, 1979). Schools are crowded with
an average class size of fifty students, and the majority of
schools operate on daily split sessions (Robertson, 1984).
Children begin schooling at age six and are provided
with six years of compulsory education designated as
Standards One through Six. At the end of Standard Five, all
students are given a general ability assessment to identify
high achievers who are transferred to special government
residential schools. Upon completion of Standard Six, all
students are automatically promoted to the secondary level,
which are called Forms. At this point, education is no
longer compulsory and continued schooling depends entirely on
student performance on a series of standardized government
examinations given at various levels (See Appendix A).
Although the official medium of instruction is the Malay
language, ”Bahasa Malaysia” or "Bahasa" for short, Chinese
and Indians are permitted to operate their own schools in
Mandarin or Tamil at the Standards level as long as they
follow the prescribed government curriculum. However, formal
government testing is conducted in Bahasa and the medium of
instruction at the secondary level is completely in Bahasa.

All students are tested for proficiency in Bahasa at the end

of Standard Six and, if the results are unsatisfactory, are
required to spend another year, called the ”Remove Year“, of
intensive training in Bahasa.

The secondary level is divided into two sublevels: lower
secondary, consisting of Forms I through III, and upper
secondary, which includes Forms IV and V. The lower
secondary curriculum is a prescribed general curriculum
including science, math, and English. Students are permitted
to study one vocational subject, such as industrial arts.

Upon conclusion of Form III, all students are required
to sit for a government examination called SRP (Sijil Rendah
Pelanjaran). Those who fail are dismissed from further
education in government schools. The successful students
receive the SR? diploma and, based on the examination
results, are tracked by the government into one of two upper
form streams: academic and vocational. The academic stream
is further dividend into the Arts, Science, and Technical
Tracks. The science track is considered to be the more
desirable since these students have the best opportunity to
continue with post-secondary education. At the end of Form
V, students must sit for the SPM (Sijil Pelanjaran Malaysia)
examinations which are patterned after the British General
Certification (GCE) examinations. Tests are given in a
variety of subjects and students must pass at least six
exams, including English and Bahasa, to receive the SPM

diploma. SPM examinations are graded as follows:

 

l and 2 Pass with Distinction
3 through 6 Pass with Credit

7 and 8 Pass with No Credit

9 Fail

Depending on performance on the SPM examinations, the
government selects students to attend either preeuniversity
training (Form VI), an alternative diploma program, or
sponsors students for study at universities in the United
Kingdom, Australia, or the United States. The government
determines who will be admitted to which program and what
each student's major or specialty will be.

In the two year pre-university program, students
continue to study academic subjects. At the conclusion of
Form VI, they must pass the STPM (Sijil Tingli Persekolahan
Malaysia) exam to be admitted to one of Malaysia's seven
degree awarding’universities. Students who do not move into
Form VI have other options depending on their SPM scores.
Those whose scores are inadequate for continued academic
consideration may study at vocational or teaching training
institutions.

Students with higher scores will either continue studying
at any of a variety of diploma awarding public institutions
or transfer to private programs. Many of these private
programs have agreements with universities in the United
States, the United Kingdom, and Australia that permit direct
entry to degree programs if the student has maintained a

sufficiently high GPA. The drawback with these schemes is

that students receive no government financial support.

However, the Malaysian government has established ethnic
quotas for all government sponsored post-secondary education.
Presently, 60% of all Malaysian university and diploma
program admissions are reserved for Malays, with 30% reserved
for Chinese, 9% for Indians, and 1% for ”others", which
refers to non-Muslim indigenous ethnic populations in the
country. For government sponsored overseas study, 95% of the
scholarships is reserved for Malays and 5% for non-Malays
(Lim, Singh, Muzaffer, and Tan, 1985). One effect of this
quota system is that Malays are under less pressure to score
well on the SPM than are Chinese or Indians. A Malay with
low SPM results has as good or better a chance of being
admitted to a university than a Chinese or Indian with higher
scores. In addition, Malays who have been selected for these
programs have all academic expenses paid by the government
and are provided with cash allowances to cover living
expenses.

The largest public diploma awarding institution in
Malaysia is the Institut Teknologi MARA (ITM) which offers
over eighty degree and diploma programs. Entrance and
graduation requirements for programs vary and some are
designed for direct transfer to the United States or
Australia. Admission to ITM is restricted to Malays and the

total cost of education. both in Malaysia and overseas, is

funded by the government.

 

A Description _f_ the M Student. The majority of Malays
live in rural areas and thus a high percentage of Malay
students who enter post-secondary programs were graduated
from rural areas and small towns. Because of this, the
'"classroom culture” of Malay students is substantially
different from the American student.

To begin with, it is worthwhile to note that the least
variable aspect of Malay life is religion. Islam is the
focus of Malay consciousness and the Malaysian constitution
formally defines ”Malay" as a Muslim (Anwar, 1987). Islam is
the official state religion of Malaysia, and standards of
religious orthodoxy are established and enforced by the
government. Conversion by a Malay to another religion is
illegal, although conversion to Islam by non-Muslims is
encouraged, and any variation from the government mandated
doctrine is severely repressed.

Formal religious training begins at age six, the same age
that the child enters school, and much effort is devoted to
memorizing sections of the Qur'anI the holy book of Islam, in
addition to instruction in Islamic doctrine and in each
person's obligations as a Muslim and a Malay.

The teaching methodology in Malay schools complements the
strict discipline of the religious training. A rigid and
authoritarian teacher-student relationship and the preference
for rote memorization of material has been transferred to the
public school classroom (Coletta, 1977). Individualism is

repressed and conformity is demanded: for example, in both

 

10

the Standards and the Forms students are required to wear the
government mandated uniforms at all public functions.

Deference to authority becomes ingrained. Malays will
not readily criticize any authority, not even a government
o‘ficial who is known to be corrupt (Fisk and Osman, 1982).
In school, this unquestioned acceptance of authority is
constantly reinforced. Malay children are taught to respect
and obey teachers in silence. and corporal punishment in the
form of beating is expected and freely administered.

Students are not permitted to make their own decisions, but
are expected to become obedient citizens (Fisk and Osman,
1982).

Malay students resist change, avoid being analytical and
critical in thinking, and depend on unquestioned authority
and absolutes. They dislike being presented with new ideas
and new theories which might inspire doubt and uncertainty.
They prefer the familiar and find satisfaction in a little
knowledge that is based on tradition and authority (Anwar,
1987: Muzaffer, 1987 Provencher, 1982). Thus, in a
classroom, a Malay student is reluctant to speak out at any
instance for fear that a comment may be viewed as a challenge
to the authority of the teacher. The most successful Malay
student is the most passive.

Many Malay students have been accepted by a university
or overseas program because of the quota system rather than
for their academic success at the secondary level or high SPM

scores (Anwar. 1987). Because they have come from rural

11

areas with poorly equipped schools, they are frequently ill
prepared to cOpe with the demands of university work. Often
they are unaware of the nature of their assigned majors and
the requirements for completion of a degree. Their poor
command of English, limited general knowledge, and demand for
absolutes encourage them to rely on study habits that were
successful in their village schools: rote memorization.
unquestioning obedience, and passivity in the classroom
(Anwar, 1987).

As a result, Malay students enter an overseas university
program not only with deficiencies in English language
proficiency, but with problems in higher conceptual skills.
They lack ability in critical thinking, defined by Marzano
and Brandt and their colleagues (1988) as reasonable,
reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to
believe or do, but accept without question only that which is
presented by an authority and which does not conflict with
the doctrines of Islam, which to their minds is the ultimate

authority.

, They also lack critical reading skills, such as the
ability to distinguish between fact and opinion. They are
unable to evaluate support for an assertion or recognize the
implications and logical conclusions that follow explicit
statements. The students' reliance on the absolute authority
of the printed page is such that they seldom, if ever,

question the validity or consider the implications of what

appears in textbooks or other class readings unless such

12

information is in conflict with their religious beliefs.

Furthermore, Malay students tend to perceive information
in a text as unrelated, discrete points that must be
memorized. They have difficulty recognizing the logical
organization of paragraphs as well as the organization of
information within larger sections of chapters or an entire
textbook. Moreover, Malay students often are unable to
relate concepts and information from different sources, and
become particularly anxious and confused when reading
material is contradictory.

Thus, Malay students have problems that do not generally
occur with native speakers. Besides the anticipated
difficulties in vocabulary and syntax, their experiences and
attitudes further hinder the development of proficient
reading. The rigid government system of testing in addition
to strict Islamic influences encourage the Malay students to
view their role in learning as passive acceptance.

A Description pt the Research Site. This study was
conducted within the University Preparation Program (UPP) of
the ITM/MUCIA Project in Malaysia, which is a cooperative
venture between ITM and the Midwest Universities Consortium
for International Activities (MUCIA). The program, which
permits selected Malay students to complete their first two
years of undergraduate studies in Malaysia, is jointly
administered by Indiana University and ITM, and the courses.
which are taught primarily by American faculty, are

accredited by Indiana University. Graduates of the project

13

may be granted an Associate of General Studies degree by
Indiana University upon successful conclusion of study, then
transfer to upper-division programs in the United States.

Although English is a required subject in the Malaysian
secondary curriculum, students spend only two hours a week in
English classes. Experience with students who initially
enter the ITM/MUCIA program has shown that they need from one
to two semesters of intensive English language instruction
before they can assume a full academic course load. The
students are provided this instruction through a two track
curriculum called the University Preparation Program (UPP).
Track 2 students receive instruction in English and study
skills for one summer term and two academic semesters while
the Track 1 students are in the program for one summer term
and one academic semester.

Before entry into UPP, the students' English
proficiency is assessed through two tests: (1) Indiana
University's Comprehensive English Language Test (CELT).
which tests for grammar and vocabulary, and (2) a writing
sample evaluated by the UPP staff with the modified version
of the Newbury ESL Composition Profile (See Appendix 8).

During the preliminary summer session in UPP, students
are placed tentatively into either Track 1 or Track 2 based
on their performance on diagnostic English language tests.
Upon completion of the summer term, the students' writing is
reevaluated and final placement is determined based on this

sample. Most students enter at Track 2 and remain in the

14

program for two full academic semesters.

While studying in the University Preparation Program.
students take courses in reading, expository writing.
listening, computer literacy. and English for academic
purposes, which is a special course to provide students with
experience in listening to lectures in social studies and the
physical science. Students may be permitted to add a
remedial mathematics course if necessary. All UPP courses
are non-credit.

For both Track 1 and Track 2, a semester is divided into
two eight week sessions separated by a midterm evaluation.
This evaluation permits the staff to target students who are
having difficulties.

Upon completion of the UPP study, students enter the
final phase in which they must complete a three credit course
in advanced ESL reading and composition that has been
designed to prepare them for freshman English Composition.

The data for this study was gathered during the second
academic semester. Since the Track 1 students were taking
only the advanced ESL reading and writing course at this ,
time, subjects were drawn from Track 2. Students are placed
in Track 2 if their composite score on the modified Newbury
Profile is lower than 70 points out a possible hundred and a
language use (grammar) subscore of fewer than 18 points out a
possible 25. A language use subscore below 18 points
automatically places the student in Track 2 regardless of the

composite score. The writing samples are evaluated by two

15

members of the ESL staff and the average of the two Newbury
Profile scores is taken as the final score. If composite
scores of the two evaluations are more than six points apart,
a third ESL faculty member evaluates the sample and the
student's score is the average of the two closest scores.
Reading scores are not considered in the placement decision.
The Track 2 schedule consists of reading, writing, English
for Academic Purposes, listening skills, a remedial
mathematics course, and a course in computer literacy.

In order to proceed to full academic work, students must
have a minimum 2.0 average in ESL courses. Students who do
not meet this requirement may be dismissed from the program.

Two basic textbooks are used during the second semester

 

of Track 2 reading: Academic Reading ehe Study Skills tee
International Students by Rosenthal and Rowland (1986) and
Critical ThinkingI Critical Choices: hegh tt Reading ehg
Writing by Aebersold, Rowitz, Schwarte, and Smith (1985).
Academic Reading ehg_§thgy Skills for International Students
consists of eight chapters, each focusing on an academic
discipline. Each chapter contains two readings from an
introductory college-level textbook from a specific field.
These readings are placed in the center of the chapter,
preceded by vocabulary, dictionary, and language skills
sections and are followed by comprehension and discussion
questions. One shortcoming of the textbook is that, although
the reading selections have been taken from college-level

textbooks, they are short sections of chapters taken out of

16

context. The UPP reading course uses the chapters on
psychology, biology, anthropology, and literature as unit
topics.

Critical ThinkingI Critical Choices: Book tt Reading egg
Writing is an advanced ESL reading textbook consisting of six
units that focuses on the central theme of environmental
problems. The readings, which range from moderate to
extended length, have been selected from textbooks and
academic journals, such as Natural History; that are directed
toward an educated audience. The exercises in each unit are
devoted to activities such as notetaking, speaking in
seminars, and evaluating written material.

In addition to Academic Reading ehg §tpgy Skills tgt
International Students and Critical ThinkingI Critical
ChoicesI supplementary articles from other textbooks and
journals have been included as part of the course curriculum
(See Appendix C). Student progress is evaluated through
performance on six quizzes, a midterm, and a final
examination. The quizzes are given during regular class
sessions while the midterm and final are given to all
students at a common sitting. During the first session,
quizzes are based on materials used in classroom instruction,
but, during the quiz, the students are permitted access to
notes they have taken. In the second session, students are
not permitted access to these notes and the quizzes are

designed to match the tests they will have in the academic

program.

l7

Ehe Rationale tee the Stggy

The students who are studying in the ITM/MUCIA program
face a formidable challenge. Within two semesters, they must
overcome severe weaknesses in English and comprehend academic
texts in English with sufficient competence and independence
to meet the requirements of university level courses. Many
reading behaviors that have made these students successful
within the Malaysian school system are not appropriate for
American classes. The students have been taught to memorize
and have not been taught how to use strategic reading.

This situation extends beyond the ITM/MUCIA program.
University ESL programs generally face the dilemma of
preparing non-native speakers with major language
deficiencies for academic work within an academic year or
less. Given the limited period of time allocated to ESL
programs to prepare students, instruction is concise,
structured, and intense.

Carrell (1987: 1989) has argued that ESL reading
instruction must move away from the emphasis on linguistic
methodology toward an interactive approach that includes
strategy use. Yet, no research has been published that
either supports or disconfirms that the explicit instruction
of reading strategies is effective with non-native speakers
of English.

Since research on the effects of direct and explicit
instruction of reading strategies on ESL readers'

comprehension is lacking, the results of this study will be a

18

step in providing evidence of the relationship between
instruction of strategic reading techniques and improved
comprehension for ESL students.

In addition. research has established that the active
use of reading strategies is closely associated with the
metacognitive awareness. which is defined as the conscious
awareness of one's knowledge and abilities, how this
knowledge and these abilities can be used, why they are
important, and ways in which knowledge and abilities can be
monitored and controlled (Baker and Brown, 1984; Brown,
Palincsar, and Armbruster, 1984: Duffy, Roehler, Meloth.
Vavrus, Book, Putnam. and Wesselman, 1986: Paris and Jacobs,
1984). However, the effects that explicit instruction of
reading strategies has on the development of the
*metacognitive awareness of ESL students has not been studied.

Since strategic reading must be taught in ESL classes
within a limited time, SQ3R was selected for this study as
the means of introducing reading strategies within the
existing structure of the ITM/MUCIA program. The method
serves as a condensed and abbreviated strategic reading
procedure that integrates several strategies into a unified

instructional component.

Statement gt the Problem
That strategic reading plays an essential role in the
reading comprehension of native English speakers has been

well supported through research. However, the effects of

19

explicit instruction of reading strategies to ESL students
has not been investigated.

ESL reading programs face the problem of preparing
students with severe language problems to read and comprehend
academic texts within one academic year. Furthermore, ESL
students frequently view reading and studying as memorizing
as much material as possible in order to pass a test.

Despite the time limits imposed on ESL programs, an
academic year of intensive language instruction should result
in some positive benefits for the students' comprehension and
use of English. Generally, however, ESL reading classes have
responded to the problem by providing an intensive
linguistically based curriculum. More effective objectives
in ESL reading would be to introduce the students to the
practice of being strategic in reading in order to develop
the students‘ metacognitive awareness. the conscious
awareness and use of knowledge and abilities, to the point
that they will reflect on and evaluate their own reading.

The motivation underlying this study was to examine the
possibility that the SQ3R method could be used as an concise
multicomponent strategy to teach strategic reading.

The purpose of this dissertation was to determine (a)
if ESL students who receive instruction in SQBR as an
multicomponent reading strategy with training in the self-
regulated use of strategic reading exhibit better reading
comprehension and report the use of reading strategies more

often than their control-group counterparts. (b) if ESL

20

students who receive instruction in SQ3R as a study skills
unit exhibit improved reading comprehension and report more
awareness of reading strategies than their control-group
counterparts, and (c) if ESL students who receive instruction
in SQ3R as a multicomponent strategy exhibit better
comprehension and report more awareness of reading strategies
than students who have received training in SQ3R as a study

skills unit.

Research Questions

Given the research supporting the necessity of conscious
use of reading strategies for effective reading comprehension
and the evidence that reading abilities improve from the
explicit instruction_in strategic reading, this dissertation
investigated the following general research question:

What are the differences in comprehension performance

between ESL university students who receive instruction

in SQ3R both as a study skills unit and with a focus on
developing reading strategies. and those who do not
receive such instruction. and what are the differences
in the strategies they report after instruction?

Six specific questions were asked. The first three
questions were concerned with differences in comprehension
among groups after treatment while the remaining three
questions regarded differences in students' reports of
their use of reading strategies:

1. What are the differences in the reading comprehension
performance of ESL students who receive instruction
in SQBR with a focus on developing their use of

reading strategies and a control group that does
not receive this instruction?

 

21

2. What are the differences in the reading comprehension
performance of ESL students who receive instruction
in SQ3R in a procedural method and a control group
that does not receive this instruction?

3. What are the differences in the reading comprehension
performance of ESL students who receive instruction
in SQBR with a focus on developing their use of
reading strategies and those who receive instruction
in SQBR in a procedural method?

4. What strategies do ESL students report using after
they have received instruction in SQBR with a focus
on developing their use of reading strategies?

5. What strategies do ESL students report using after
they have received instruction in SQBR in a
procedural method?

6. What strategies do ESL students report using if they
have not received instruction in SQBR either with a

focus on developing their use of reading strategies
or procedurally?

Significance of the Problem
This study has significance for the teaching of reading
to ESL students for the following reasons.

First, despite evidence that many ESL comprehension
problems result from a lack of understanding of the nature of
reading rather than from language deficiencies (Block. 1986).
research on the effects teaching strategic reading to ESL
students has been neglected.

This study examines whether ESL students who are
explicitly taught strategic reading show significant
improvement in their comprehension of English texts.

In addition, ESL instruction should be more effective in
meeting the needs of international students. Instruction as

it is usually given does little to prepare these students for

22

success in academic classes. This study examines the
possibility that methods which have been proved beneficial
for native English speakers are appropriate for ESL students.
Furthermore, while a few studies have found a positive
correlation between awareness of text features, such as text
organization, with improved ESL reading performance, no
instructional study has examined whether direct instruction
of reading strategies results in a significant difference in

ESL students' awareness and use of reading strategies.

Definitions

Awareness: Knowledge that is either present or is
accessible to conscious recall and can be demonstrated.
verbalized or communicated.

Explicit instruction: Instruction which directly informs
students of important content, reasons to learn the content,
and how to use the information from the content.

Functional tegt: A text, such as a textbook or journal
article, that has been designed for a utilitarian or
practical purpose.

Metacognitive awareness: Conscious awareness of one‘s
knowledge and abilities, how this knowledge and these
abilities can be used, why they are important, and ways in
which knowledge and abilities can be monitored and
controlled.

Metacognition: Knowledge about cognition and the

regulation of cognition. This knowledge affects the way in

23

which an individual establishes and meets objectives.

hglticomponent stretegy: An integrated system of
strategic reading with a focus on developing the awareness
and use of strategic reading. In this study, SQ3R was
presented to one of the treatment group as a multicomponent
strategy. This means that the subjects were taught to regard
SQBR as an integration of several strategies that can be used
together or independently to resolve reading problems.
Included in this system is self-monitoring of reading,
recognition of problems, and a self-evaluation of
comprehension.

Procedural method: Subjects are taught how to use SQ3R
as a study skill, and are given practice exercises with SQ3R.
but are not taught to use SQBR strategically.

Proposition: A unit of meaning consisting of a predicate
(represented by a verb, adjective, or connector) and one or
more arguments (represented by nouns, noun phrases, or
prepositional phrases) which are related to each other.
Within longer texts, superordinate propositions represent the
main ideas while subordinate propositions act as supporting
material.

Questioning: A procedure in which the reader devises
questions before, during, and after reading to be answered
from reading. The questions may range from the general
”What's the point" to locating a specific name or date.
Questions may be devised by using subheadings as a basis or

through a sequence of "Who. What, Where, When. Why, and How"?

24

Regardless, devising questions gives the reader the means to
concentrate on locating important information while reading.
Reading comprehension: The process of recalling and
organizing information and ideas from a text in order to

reconstruct meaning through a summary or retelling.

Strategy: A term used to indicate the specific
activities that can be used to resolve a problem in reading
or learning: for example, looking back to discover missed
information.

Strategic reading: The process of using strategies while
reading; for example, the conscious act of turning back to a
section and rereading. Strategic reading is the flexible,
adaptable. and conscious use of knowledge about reading to
remove a blockage to meaning. The use of reading strategies
is a conscious activity which involves an overt procedure on
the part of the reader. As a prerequisite, the reader must
be conscious of a problem and aware of strategies that can be
used to resolve it.

Surveying: A systematic examination of a text before
reading to gain a sense of the type of information presented
in the text. to anticipate the level of reading difficulty
before reading in depth. and to devise strategies to resolve
potential problems.

Teaching: An intentional effort involving active
planning. motivation, information giving, and mediation to
create specific curricular outcomes in students.

Text: A document written to convey information or ideas.

25

Limitations

Limitation 1: Subjects' Ethnic and Linguistic Background

The subjects in this study come from the same ethnic and
language population. No claim will be made regarding the
effectiveness of the treatment for ESL classes of mixed
nationalities and languages.
Limitation 2: Subjects' Educational Level

Since the study has been limited to university students,
no claim will be made for the effectiveness of the treatment
for secondary or elementary grade levels.
Limitation 3: Subjects' Level of English

Subjects used in this study are in the advanced levels
of English as a Second Language. No claim will be made for
the effectiveness of the treatment for beginning or
intermediate level ESL students.
Limitation 4: Treatment Instructor

The fact that both treatment groups were taught by one
instructor, the researcher, is also a limitation. More
research in this area will need to be conducted with groups
of a wider variety of language and cultural backgrounds and
with different instructors.
Limitation 5: Subjects' Cultural Background

The subjects' cultural and religious background has

emphasized a passive and submissive approach to learning that
may affect their reactions to a system that emphasizes an

active, self-regulated approach.

26

Limitation 6: Lack of Instructional Observation
Because of the restricted scheduling during the term, the

treatment classes were not observed by a neutral instructor.

Summary of Chapter One

The purpose of this research was to investigate the
effects of teaching strategic reading through multicomponent
strategy on the reading comprehension of university ESL
students. To investigate these effects, SQ3R was taught to
an experimental group as a multicomponent strategy in
conjunction with instruction in how and why reading
strategies are used, and to a second experimental group as a
procedural study skills system. A control group that
received no instruction in strategic reading or SQ3R was
included.

The study was conducted with Malay students enrolled in
a special university training program. The educational
background of these students encouraged rote memorization as
the best method of learning. The objective of this study was
to study the effects of introducing ESL students to an
active, self-regulated approach to reading. Because of the
time constraints, SQ3R was selected as the method for
introducing this approach.

This dissertation has implications for future research in
the effects of teaching strategic reading to ESL students as
well as in the development of reading courses that better

meet the needs of ESL students.

27

Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation
The remainder of this dissertation will be organized
into four chapters.

Chapter 2 discusses ESL instruction and reviews research
in strategic reading and SQ3R.

Chapter 3 describes the design of the study, including
the subjects, treatments, data gathering procedures, and the
analyses performed on the data.

Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study.
Chapter 5 discusses the results and implications of the

findings to reading instruction in university ESL classes.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELEVANT RESEARCH

This dissertation examined the effects of teaching
reading strategies on the reading comprehension and the
reported use of reading strategies by university ESL
students. To investigate these effects, SQBR was taught to
one treatment group as a multicomponent strategy with a focus
on the self-regulated use of strategic reading. and
procedurally to a second treatment group as a study skills
unit. A control group that received no instruction in SQBR
or strategic reading was included.

The study was conducted with a group of Malay students
enrolled in a university cooperative program in Malaysia.
The educational background of these students encourages rote
memorization with no training in strategic reading.

The purpose of this dissertation was to study the
effects of introducing ESL students to the use of reading
strategies. While research conducted with native English
speakers supports the necessity of explicit instruction in
using reading strategies, research in this area has not been
conducted with ESL students. SQ3R was selected as a
multicomponent strategy to introduce this approach.

The remainder of this chapter surveys the research in
reading instruction in ESL classrooms, strategic reading and

comprehension, and the SQBR method.

28

29

Section One
Reading Insttggtion th get
Introduction .

Effective reading instruction operates from a
theoretical model of the nature of reading comprehension and
how reading should be taught which provides the basis for
objectives and instructional procedures in curriculum design
as well as therationale for the type of materials and
techniques that will be employed in the classroom.

ESL instruction has been based on a model that views
reading as a decoding process in which the reader replicates
an author's intended meaning through recognition of words and
sentence structures (Carrell, 1988). The foundation for this
approach was the linguistic theory that language acquisition
is prerequisite to language learning. "Language acquisition”
is the process of developing language through experience and
imitation during which minimum attention is given to the
“rules“ of language. ”Language learning“ refers to the
direct teaching of the rules which are consciously applied to
language. With learning, one monitors language to correct
errors (krashen. 1987).

The original theoretical foundation of ESL was that
language is a hierarchy of competencies in which reading is
subordinate to speaking and listening: that is, whereas
spoken language is acquired before rules have been learned,
reading is a learned component which is based on the acquired

language. and which cannot be introduced until competence in

3O

spoken language has been developed.

The assumption in ESL has been that the focus in reading
instruction is to teach vocabulary along with patterns of
word form transformations, and to provide students with a
means of systematically applying linguistic rules to a text
to decode the written language. Therefore, ESL reading
instruction has favored a ”bottom-up" approach in which the
essential classroom activities have been extensive practice
with grammar and vocabulary. Reading comprehension has been
viewed as the product of linguistic monitoring during which
the reader applies knowledge of language structure and
vocabulary to a text in order to decode meaning.

The role of the ESL reading instructor has been
influenced by these assumptions. ESL teachers generally
perceive their responsibility to be the dispensation of the
rules of language and the introduction of vocabulary to the
learner. Once the learner has the rules and the words,
competent language use naturally follows. The priority in
the ESL classroom, therefore, has been to focus on
introducing vocabulary. practicing with word forms and
English grammar, and on correcting learner errors.

While some ESL research has disputed this model and has
recommended that reading instruction break away from the
strict linguistic mode and incorporate instruction in reading
strategies into the ESL reading curriculum (Clarke and
Silberstein, 1978: Clarke, 1980: Carrell, 1987). ESL

instruction remains devoted to form and linguistic accuracy.

31

Research eh Classroom Instruction th pet

' Although research has been devoted to discovering the
means by which students learn a second language, few studies
have dealt with what actually occurs in ESL classrooms,
particularly at the university level. Generally, the
research suggests that ESL teachers at all levels focus
instruction on linguistic forms, evaluate students on their
ability to replicate language structures, and give limited
opportunities for students to produce language (Brock, 1986:
Brown, 1990: Long, 1983: Long and Sato, 1983: Mendelsohn.
1981: Schinke-Llano, 1983). Dinsmore (1985) concluded that
ESL instruction involves mostly "time-passing” activities
with little meaningful learning.

In a study of ESL instruction given to elementary level
children in bilingual programs, Campoverde (1985) concluded
that the underachievement of these children in English medium
classrooms was a result of the inadequate language
instruction during which linguistic structures of English
were taught with no regard to the children's conceptual
development.

Research also indicates that consideration of reflective
thinking about language occurs neither explicitly nor
indirectly in ESL classrooms. For instance, the type of
questions given to students in a class can be a means of
developing language awareness and use. Long and Sato (1983)
conducted a study on the form and functions of teacher

questions directed toward elementary level ESL students in

32

regular classrooms. They found that these questions
significantly focused on display, calling for simple one or
two word answers, for example:

Teacher: What color was the car?

Student: Blue

Teacher: Right

Referential questions, which call for contextual
information about situations, events, actions. purposes. and
relationships, were not directed to ESL students, both within
and outside of formal classroom activities. Referential
questions are usually followed by further related
questioning, for instance:

Teacher: Why did he take the blue car?

Student: Because he liked it?

Teacher: How do you know he liked it?

Long and Sato conclude that. by encouraging the ESL
student to go beyond a simplistic display, referential
questions are a means of encouraging and developing active
use of language.

Chan (1988) also suggests that referential questioning
can be a powerful means of teaching strategic reading to ESL
students, particularly when the instructor explains the
function of the questions and shows students how they
themselves can use self-generated questions as a strategy in
independent reading.

In an observational study, Brown (1990) discovered that

the reading instruction in the ESL classes of a large

33

American university was devoted to requiring students to
memorize vocabulary lists and complete exercises in grammar
based textbooks. Little actual instruction was observed, and
no attention was given to strategic reading. The study also
noted that the ESL instructors were primarily graduate
assistants with minimal background or experience in teaching

either ESL or reading.

Recent Research eh Factors Affecting pet Reading

While not disputing that students need knowledge of
vocabulary and grammar to read successfully, recent research
in ESL reading has been exploring other factors that affect
successful reading comprehension, such as English text

organization.

In a study investigating differences in the recall of
expository English among native-English, Japanese, and
Spanish speakers. Connor (1984) proposed that there may be
patterns in a reader's awareness of text organization which
correlates with the recall of important information, and that
ESL students might not be aware of the organization common to
English expository texts and, therefore, have difficulty
recognizing, retaining. and recalling the content.

She reported that while native-English speakers
performed better than all ESL students in total recall,
no significant differences among the groups were found in
the recall of main points; the differences were that native

English speakers recalled more supporting details of the

34

passage than did any of the ESL subjects. Connor suggests
that ESL reading courses include instruction in text
organization and the relationship between main ideas and
supporting details.

Carrell (1984) studied the effects of organization of
different types of expository prose on the reading
comprehension of university ESL readers of different language
backgrounds. She proposed that the organization of
expository text affects the reading recall of ESL students.
that the effect of differences of various language
backgrounds are related to differences in the organization of
expository texts, and. finally, that a relationship exists
between the ability of ESL readers to recognize and utilize
organization and the amount of information that is recalled
from an expository text.

Carrell assigned advanced ESL students from four
language groups (Spanish, Arabic, Oriental, and Other) to
read one of four versions of a text. The versions consisted
of a passage on the effects of the loss of body water that
had been written into four types of discourse: description.
causation, problem/solution, and comparison. The students
read the passage then wrote down everything in complete
sentences that they could remember from the text. In the
second session, 48 hours later, the students again wrote down
everything they could remember from the text and were given a
fill-in-the-blank quiz. The written summaries were scored

according to the number of ideas recalled and were then

35

classified as to discourse type in order to compare each's
subject's use of discourse with the discourse type in the
text .

Her results showed that immediate recall of information
was significantly higher than delayed recall for all groups
except the Oriental, that recall was significantly better
with description, causation, and problem/solution than with
comparison, that various discourse types had different
effects on the recall within the four groups, and that
students who duplicated the discourse type of the text they
read had better recall than those who used a‘different
discourse type.

In a later study with intermediate level university ESL
students, Carrell (1985) examined the effects that training
in text structure has on ESL students' reading comprehension.
A treatment group was given training in recognition.and
strategic use of four types of expository discourse
(description. causation, problem/solution, and comparison)
and practiced with sample texts. A control group worked
through the same texts, but with no training in recognition
and use of text structure. Testing consisted of reading a
text, writing an immediate summary, and identifying text
types.

After the training sessions, the experimental group were
able to recognize and use text structure types showing that
the training sessions were effective in increasing reading

comprehension. In addition, Carrell reported that the

36

treatment group's test means were significantly higher for
all levels of ideas units.

In 1987, Carrell reported the effects on ESL reading
comprehension of cultural-specific schema and content
schemata Carrell suggested that texts of culturally familiar
content are easier to read and comprehend than are texts with
culturally unfamiliar content (cultural specific schema). and
that texts with familiar organization are easier to read than
are texts with unfamiliar organization (formal schema).

Two samples of high—intermediate university ESL
consisting of Muslim and Catholic students read two
religiously oriented texts (Islamic and Catholic). each using
the historical narrative structure. Each text was matched
with an alternate text with modified chronological order.
Each group was given two texts, one with Catholic orientation
and the other with an Islamic focus. In addition, within
each group, half of the subjects read the texts written in
standard rhetorical structure, while the other half read the
structurally modified texts. Students were given a multiple-
choice test after reading each text.

The results supported Carrell's assertion that
conditions of familiar content with familiar structure
encourage successful reading comprehension, while unfamiliar
content with unfamiliar structure result in poorer
comprehension. In mixed conditions, familiar content with
unfamiliar structure resulted in significantly better

comprehension than unfamiliar content with familiar

37

structure. Carrell concluded that familiar content is
generally more important for reading comprehension than text
structure, except in situations that demand an understanding
of structure, such as the correct sequence of events in a

narrative.

Research eh Strategic Reading th get

While the use of strategies by native speakers has been
shown to improve reading comprehension, little research has
been conducted to study the degree to which teaching
reading strategies affects second language reading
comprehension. Connor (1987) has observed that, as of 1987,
only three studies dealing with teaching reading in ESL
classes have been published while studies in this area with
native English readers are numerous. No evidence exists that
empirical research studying the effects of teaching SQBR on
the comprehension of ESL students has been conducted.

An observational study of elementary students by knight,
Padron, and Waxman (1985) indicated that monolingual English
speakers use twice as many strategies while reading English
as bilingual Spanish speakers. However, no attempt to teach
strategies was used with this study. Interestingly, the two
strategies cited by the bilingual students as being most
important to them in reading were attempting to determine
what the teacher wanted to know and using correct decoding

techniques.

In a more recent study, Padron and Waxman (1988)

38

examined the relationship between Hispanic ESL students'
reported use of cognitive reading strategies with narrative
texts and their performance on measures of reading .
comprehension. According to the authors, the most frequently
reported strategies were (1) asking questions about what was
not understood, (2) reviewing after reading, (3) imagining
the story after reading, and (3) looking for definitions of
unknown words in a dictionary. The least reported strategies
were (1) reading fast, (2) thinking of something else while
reading, (3) writing down words, and (4) skipping difficult
sections.

In their analysis, three variables were found that
predicted posttest achievement. Pretest performance was the
best positive predictor for posttest performance while
thinking about something else and repeating the main idea
were found to be negative predictors: that is, the more
frequently students reported these two strategies, the lower
their posttest achievement.

The authors concluded that ESL student perceptions of
the cognitive strategies that they use have predictive
validity for their reading comprehension. Furthermore, they
state that the findings support previous research that has
found that lower achieving students use less sophisticated
and inappropriate cognitive reading strategies during
reading. Finally, they conclude that the results support the
use of self-report measures by classroom teachers to assess

students‘ cognitive strategy use in reading.

39

O'Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Russo, and kupper
(1985) conducted a study to identify learning strategies
associated with a range of ESL tasks, and to study the
effects of learning strategy training on ESL students'
vocabulary, listening, and speaking. The authors proposed
that students who receive instruction in using a combination
of metacognitive, cognitive, and/or socioaffective strategies
would perform better than students who do not receive
instruction in using metacognitive strategies, and that
students who receive instruction in a combination of
cognitive and/or socioaffective strategies would perform
better than students in a control group. The results
demonstrated that strategy training with ESL listening and
'speaking skills significantly improved students‘ abilities in
these areas and that classroom instruction in strategies
facilitated learning. The authors recommended that future
research be directed at refining strategy training methods,
determining specific metacognitive strategies for language
tasks, and strengthening the effects of strategy training on
student learning and transfer.

In a descriptive study by Block (1986), the reading
strategies used by ESL students who had been designated as
poor English readers were compared to those used by native
English speakers who had been identified as poor readers.
Block suggested that readers of any language background use
two different modes of approaching reading. In the reflexive

mode, the reader relates to the text personally and focuses

40

on one's own thoughts and feelings, rather than on the text.
In the extensive mode. the reader attempts to deal with the
information conveyed by the author and, therefore, focuses on
understanding.

In Block's study, nine freshman university students, who
had been placed in remedial reading courses, were used.
Three of the students were native speakers of Chinese, three
of Spanish, and three of English. All nine subjects were
given two selections taken from an introductory psychology
textbook and were asked to "think aloud” as they read the
passages. They were directed to report exactly what they
were thinking while reading and were cautioned against
analysis or explanation. The subjects were then tested with
two comprehension measures: an oral retelling and a
multiple-choice test.

Block reported that the results indicated language
background did not seem to account for differences strategy
use or test performance. No patterns of strategy use were
observed that distinguished native speakers from non-native
speakers or one group of non-native speakers from the other.
Moreover, performance on both the retelling and multiple
choice test was not significantly different among language
backgrounds.

Results of retellings followed a similar pattern as
strategy use: stating a thesis, mentioning main ideas, and

identifying support varied among the subjects, but with no

distinction among language groups.

41

Block concluded that the differences among individuals
were a reflection of an awareness of reading strategies
rather than language background. and suggested that ESL
students transfer their knowledge of strategies to reading in
English.

These studies, while suggesting factors that affect ESL
reading comprehension, do not deal with the instruction nor
with independent use of reading strategies. In strategic
reading, the student controls strategy use, but in each of
these studies. student control of reading was compromised by
assigning materials which aided comprehension. While
Carrell's results, for instance, showed that an awareness of
text structure and organization improves ESL reading
comprehension, the subjects were not taught to use this
knowledge independently as a strategy. Furthermore, Carrell
recommends that the use of text organization in reading be a
teacher initiated activity used as an advanced organizer for

activating schema for a particular task rather than as a

general independent strategy.

Summarv gt Section ghe

ESL reading has traditionally operated from a
structured, linguistic model that views reading as being
subordinate to the spoken language. ESL reading instruction
has been devoted to teaching decoding skills. Classroom
instruction in ESL reading has been devoted to practice and

drill with vocabulary and grammar, and has ignored strategic

42

reading. Nevertheless, recent ESL research has disputed the
traditional approach, suggesting that factors other than
linguistic Competence affect ESL reading comprehension.

While the research on the effects of teaching strategies
to ESL students is limited, the few studies that have been
conducted support the assertion that strategy use improves
reading comprehension. Nevertheless, research on the effects
of teaching strategic reading to ESL students has not been

conducted.

Section Two
Strategic Reading and Comprehension

A theoretical model that is presently influencing
reading research and instruction asserts that a reader.
through active mental processes, utilizes the form and
structure of text to interact with knowledge sources to
generate meaning (Rumelhart. 1977; Samuels and Kamil, 1984;
Garner, 1988). Reading is not a precise application of
decoding skills focused on a sequence of words. spelling
patterns, or sentence structure. Information from a text is
processed through the reader's schemata, knowledge that has
been stored in memory, and becomes in turn part of the
reader's knowledge store.

Reading comprehension depends on the awareness and the
appropriate use of strategies that permit the reader to
effectively sort out, evaluate, and organize the information

from a text (Beck. 1989). This means that, while reading is a

43

process of seeking meaning, the reader does not discover
meaning in text: text is interpreted to arrive at meaning.
The key to comprehension is the ability of the reader to
apply experience, schemata, and knowledge of the language to
the reading task in order to construct meaning. The
application of these features is strategic reading (Duffy and
Roehler, 1986: Paris, Lipson, and Wixson, 1983).

Strategic reading is an activity during which readers
consciously apply what they know about reading to a text in a
certain situation in order to construct comprehension. For
example, a student recognizes that a chemistry textbook is
written differently than time magazine and consciously
modifies reading behavior according to the content and
purpose of each.

During the reading process, the reader organizes
information from the text in relation to schemata and refers
to this knowledge to predict outcomes and to confirm or
reject these predictions. This interaction of new
information with previously learned knowledge produces
comprehension. Thus, comprehension depends on the amount of
relevant topical information that is already known by the
reader as well as the reader's competence with the language
(Adams and Collins, 1979: Armbruster, Echols, and Brown,
1982).

A native English speaker's reading comprehension.
therefore, is less dependent on linguistic analysis, such as

word recognition and syntax transformation, than on

44

information processing in which the reader refers to
knowledge and experience in order to make predictions which
are then confirmed, modified, or rejected (Adams and Collins.
1979: Anderson and Pearson, 1984: Carroll, 1970).

Reading. therefore, is not a precise application of
language skills focused on an exact and sequential perception
of linguistic units, but is an interactive process between
the reader and a text during which the reader attempts to
correlate input with existing information. Comprehension
involves organizing the information in a text in terms of the

information that is available to the reader.

The Role gt Metacognitive Awareness th Reading

 

 

Reading strategies are frequently discussed in the
context of metacognition. This term refers to the knowledge
and monitoring of one's own cognitive processes (Flavell,
1976: Wade and Reynolds, 1989).

Baker and Brown (1984) suggest that metacognition
consists of two components: knowledge and self-regulation.
knowledge is the awareness of the skills and strategies
needed for successful performance, while self—regulation
refers to the effective use of these skills while performing
the activities. In this context, strategic reading becomes a
metacognitive activity that is characterized by (l) the
recognition of a comprehension problem, (2) selection of a
strategy to resolve the problem, (3) application of the

strategy to the problem, and (4) the evaluation of the

45

results (Paris. Lipson, and Wixson, 1983: Nist, Simpson and
Holgrebe, 1985: Pitts, 1983: Wade and Reynolds, 1989).

Metacognitive awareness is described as the conscious
knowledge of one's thinking while performing specific
activities, such as reading. and using this knowledge to
control what one is doing (Brown, 1978).

Three types of knowledge have been identified that are
relevant to metacognitive awareness (Marzano, Brandt, Hughes.
Jones, Presseiren, Rankin, and Suhor, 1988: Paris, Lipson,
and Wixson, 1983). First is decletetive knowledge, which
consists of the facts and concepts that one knows: in other
words, the "what“ of knowledge. Procedural knowledge is the
awareness of activities that are needed to perform a task: in
short, the 'how'. Finally, conditione; knowledge is being
aware of appropriate contexts and conditions during which one
applies a certain procedure, that is the knowledge of ”when”
and "why".

Wade and Reynolds (1989) have identified three
subcategories of metacognitive awareness: task awareness.
strategy awareness, and performance awareness. Task
awareness refers to the recognition of what to study during
a reading task. Before reading, the student establishes a
reading purpose and makes decisions about the type of
information that is essential to learn in order to meet this
purpose. For example, a student who is certain that
information in a textbook chapter will be included in a unit

test establishes "test preparation” as the reading purpose,

46

decides that type of information that is necessary to know
for this test, and selects strategies that will effectively
help the student find, understand, and remember the necessary
information. The student realizes that attempting either to
learn every item of information or recall only random items
of information is ineffective.

Students are engaged in task awareness when they review
their knowledge of the tOpic and survey a text to establish
categories of important information on which they will focus
attention, such as main ideas, definitions, and key examples.
Wade and Reynolds note that it is important for students to
distinguish between internal criteria of importance,
information that is interesting or personally relevant to the
reader, and external criteria of importance, information
essential for a particular task. Effective readers
consciously allocate time and attention to information that
meets the external criteria of importance.

Strategy awareness refers to decisions of what specific
strategies to use before and during reading, such as ,
surveying to anticipate the various organizational signals an
author uses or devising questions to be answered while
reading. This type of awareness may be divided into
subcategories of ”Observable Study Methods”, which would
include underlining, highlighting, notetaking, and outlining,
and ”In-the-head Study Methods, such as previewing,
predicting content, looking back, relating information to

what is already known, and self—questioning.

47

With performance awareness, students monitor their
reading to determine both the degree of comprehension and the
success of the strategies that they are emplbying. Wade and
Reynolds note that students may report using strategies.
or even appear to be using strategies, without improving
comprehension. This final subcategory directs the student
consciously to monitor the extent to which reading has been
successful.

Research suggests that good readers have different
metacognitive awareness of the purpose of reading and the
types of strategies used during reading than poor readers do
(Brown, Palincsar, and Ambruster, 1984). and that poor
readers' metacognitive awareness and reading comprehension
can be improved by explicit instruction of reading strategies
(Duffy, Roehler, Meloth, Vavrus, Book, Putnam, and Wesselman.
1986).

Efficient readers reflect on their purposes and
objectives of reading, select and use strategies consciously
while reading, and monitor their performance during and after
reading. The essential element is self-activated and self-
regulated activity. Thus, transition from other-regulated
activities, those controlled by teachers, to conscious self-
regulation is essential in developing effective readers.

An example of one type of metacognitive awareness is
using text structure as a comprehension aid while reading.

At the middle school level, Richgels, McGee, Lomax, and

Sheard (1987) found that students who are aware of different

48

types of text structures, such as comparison/contrast,
causation. and problem/solution. are likely to use this
knowledge as an aid to comprehension while they are reading.

Similarly. Ohlhausen and Roller (1988) examined the
operation of text structure and content schemata both in
isolation and as they interact with both children and adults.
They found that, in schema accessibility conditions, readers
use the accessible schema to identify important information
and, furthermore, that readers perform better with two
accessible types of schemata, such as knowledge of text
structure and familiarity with content, than they would with
only one. In addition, they reported that structure and
content schemata show a developmental trend based on age and,
finally, that readers are aware of the type of schema they
use.

In a study of a different area of metacognitive
awareness, Rowe and Rayford (1987) reported that readers will
activate their own background knowledge in response to
questions given before reading. The authors found that a
broad range of students from the elementary to the secondary
school levels can use prereading questions as cues to
activate background knowledge, but that these questions may
differ in their value as cues depending on how they are
written.

A means of developing metacognitive awareness in
students proposed by Raphael (1984: 1986) is instruction in

self-questioning. Rather than depend on teacher generated

49

pre- and post reading questions, students can be taught to
formulate their own questions before and during reading.
Raphael suggested using three processing levels for question-
answer relationships (QARS): Text explicit, text implicit.
and experienced based. Renaming each of the levels to aid
student understanding, Raphael describes text explicit
(”right there") questions as those in which answers can be
found directly from the text. With text implicit (”think and
search") questions, answers are available from text, but the
wording of the questions differs from the language in the
text. Finally, experienced based (”on my own”) questions
depend on information not found directly from the text.

Chan (1988) has recommended teaching self-questioning in
ESL classes as a means of developing metacognitive awareness.
She suggested that self-generated questions actively involve
the student with text by (1) activating schema that is
relevant to the text, (2) setting a purpose for reading. (3)
directing attention to the important ideas in a text, and (4)
anticipating difficulties and selecting strategies to deal
with these difficulties.

The Role f Strategiee th Reading

* _L

 

A Description _t Strategic Reading. For this study,

"strategy” is used to indicate a specific activity that can
be used to resolve a problem in reading or learning: for
example. looking back to discover missed information.

”Strategic reading” will be used to indicate the process of

50

using these strategies: for example, the conscious act of
looking back to clarify understanding.

Duffy and Roehler (1986) have defined strategic reading
as the flexible, adaptable, and conscious use of knowledge
about reading to remove a blockage to meaning. It is
noteworthy that Duffy and Roehler, as well as Paris and Myers
(1981), describe the use of strategies as a conscious
activity which involves an overt procedure on the part of the
reader. As a prerequisite, the reader must at least be
conscious of a problem and aware of strategies that can be
used to resolve them.

Since strategic reading is defined as the overt
application of strategies to a reading problem which
involves recognition of a difficulty, knowledge of the
strategies that can resolve the difficulty, and conscious
application of the strategies to the difficulty, spontaneous
or unconscious actions of which the reader is unaware while
reading are excluded. Under these circumstances, automatic
corrections unconsciously made while reading would not be
considered strategies. I

The implication of this view is that strategies are
overt and observable behaviors which can be taught and,
since strategy use improves reading comprehension, teaching
strategies is a means of improving comprehension (Baird and
White, 1984: Cohen. 1985: de Klerk, 1987: Dermody, 1988:
Gilbert, 1986: Palincsar, 1985: Rinehart and Platt, 1984:

Simpson, 1986: Tei and Stewart, 1985).

51

One difficulty in discussing strategies is the number of

activities that have been identified as strategies. A sample

of
1.
2.

10.

11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

the literature includes:

Outlining (Nist, Simpson, and Holgrebe, 1985).
Summarizing (Dermody, 1988: Knight, Padron, and Waxman,
1985: Nist. Simpson, and Holgrebe, 1985).

Self-generated questions (Palincsar and Brown, 1989:
Rakes and Scott, 1983: Raphael, 1984: Tomlinson, 1987).
Use of text structure (Beck, 1989: Berkowitz, 1986:
Chaffee, 1985: Tei and Steward, 1985).

Use of text organization. (Spyridakis and Standal, 1987).
Paraphrasing (Cioffi, 1986).

Consulting other sources (Davey and Porter, 1982)
Monitoring comprehension (Baker and Anderson, 1982:
Gilbert, 1988: Paris and Myers, 1981).

Making predictions about content before reading (Dermody.
1988: Olshavsky and Kletzing, 1979: Palincsar and Brown.
1989).

Reviewing after reading (Knight, Padron, and Waxman.
1985: Palincsar and Brown, 1989).

Notetaking (Duffy and Roehler, 1986: Pitts, 1988).
Looking back while reading (Cioffi, 1986: Smith, 1985).
Focusing attention (Palincsar and Brown. 1989).

Mental imagery (Gambrell and Bales. 1986), and

Drawing inferences (Pearson and Gallagher, 1983: Wilson

and Hamil. 1982).

52

T e Distinction Between Studv Strategies and Repair

 

Strategies. One method of organizing strategies into a
coherent system has been to classify them into two
categories: study strategies and repair strategies
(Armbruster, Echols, and Brown, 1982: Duffy and Roehler,
1986). Study strategies are used by students to facilitate
text processing and memory. Examples of these include
previewing, highlighting, notetaking, or summarizing. These
are broad and general strategies that are used primarily to
anticipate and avoid possible blockages to meaning before and
during the reading activity.

Care must be taken, however, to be certain that these
activities are strategies for the purpose of facilitating
memory and comprehension. and are not merely techniques that
have slight relevance to successful reading. For instance.
the university student who highlights as a strategy must be
conscious of the reason and propriety of highlighting. That
is, the student highlights an item after consciously
assessing the importance of the item to the overall reading
task. Randomly highlighting sections of a text because they
may ”look important" would be considered a “technique" rather
than a ”strategy” (Armbruster, Echols, and Brown, 1982).

Research has shown that training in study strategies is
effective in improving comprehension. A study by Rinehart,
Stahl, and Erickson (1986), for example, concluded that
training in writing summaries at the sixth grade level is an

effective means of improving reading and study skills.

53

Researching the use of reading strategies at the
university level. Spyridakis and Standal (1987) examined the
effects of three signal devices, headings, previews, and
connectives, on the reading comprehension of sophisticated
readers. The authors found that all three signal types
enhanced comprehension, but the extent depended on text
length and difficulty. Shorter, easier passages produced
higher scores than longer, more difficult ones. The passage
that was most appropriate for the readers in length and
difficulty produced the clearest effect for signals.

Repair strategies, which are also called "fix-up"
strategies, are used when comprehension fails during reading.
The reader consciously makes several decisions beginning with
whether or not strategic action should be taken and then
considers the available options. These options include
"lookbacks", a quick skimming of relevant sections of the
text, storing the problem as a potential question that will
be answered later, or using available information to infer
meaning, or consulting another source.

xhe Effects gt Teaching Strategic Reading. In general,
students at all academic levels, from elementary through
university, have shown improved comprehension after
instruction in the use of reading strategies. Furthermore,
Paris, Cross, and Lipson (1984) have demonstrated that
metacognitive awareness can be promoted by direct

instruction. and that this increased awareness leads to

better strategy use.

54

Simpson (1984) has suggested that students lack
independent reading strategies because they either have not
been taught these strategies or, if aware of strategies, they
do not know how to apply them, and, therefore, students are
unable to self-regulate their reading. Yet, ample evidence
exists that direct instruction of both study and repair
strategies has a positive effect on reading comprehension
(Brown, 1981: Baumann, 1984: Hare and Borchardt, 1984:
Roehler and Duffy, 1984: Smith and Dauer, 1984: Smith, 1985:
Montague and Tanner, 1987). Several studies have been
conducted that support the effectiveness of teaching
strategic reading procedures (Hansen and Hubbard, 1984:
Holmes 1983, 1985: McCormick and Hill, 1984: Paris, Wasik,
and Van der Westhuizen, 1988: Short and Ryan, 1984).
Generally, the literature recommends building adequate
background knowledge, teaching the learner to relate this
knowledge to text while reading, and instruction on how to
make predictions and self-monitor while reading (Weinstein,
1987).

In a study on the effects of teaching text organization
to 6th grade students, Berkowitz (1986) found that the
subjects' recall and comprehension were significantly
improved after instruction of use of organizing ideas as a
framework for studying.

Armbruster, Anderson, and Ostertag (1987) studied the
effects of teaching text structure on fifth grade students'

ability to learn similarly structured material. They

55

reported that training in text structure improved recall of
main idea information required for an essay test, but did not
significantly improve a recall of specific information
required by a short answer test. In addition, they found
that training in text structure improved the subjects'
ability to include more main ideas in a written summary and
to write better organized summaries

In a study to examine the effect of teaching inferential
strategies to fifth grade students, Dewitz, Carr, and Patberg
(1987) reported significant improvement in both reading
comprehension and comprehension monitoring after six weeks
instruction. Furthermore, the effects continued for some
time after instruction and transfer to unfamiliar texts.

Duffy, Roehler. Meloth, Vavrus, Book, Putnam, and
Wesselman (1986) have shown that students do not intuitively
acquire strategic reading and that teacher intervention has
significant influence on student behavior. Teachers who were
trained to be explicit while teaching elementary level
children how to use reading skills produced significantly
greater student awareness of what they were being taught and
better student performance on achievement measures.
Specifically, the teachers were trained to tell their
students the strategy being taught, how the strategy is used,
and the situation during which the strategy would be used.

In a study designed to investigate the effects of
directly explaining the mental acts associated with strategic

reading in classroom situations. Duffy, Roehler, Sivan.

56

Rackliffe, Book, Meloth, Vavrus, Wesselman, Putnam, and
Bassiri (1987) reported that teachers can learn to be more
explicit in explaining the reasoning aSsociated with using
basal text skills as strategies, that explicit teacher
explanations increases low-group students' awareness of both
lesson content and the need to be strategic while reading,
and that explicit teacher explanations increases low-group
students' conscious use of skills as strategies, leading to
greater reading comprehension.

However, as Duffy and Roehler (1989) have pointed out,
the act of explicitly treaching strategic reading is not a
magic bullet that instantaneously resolves all reading
problems. They observe that, while strategies can be
effectively taught, strategy instruction is difficult for
several reasons. First, students must restructure their own
understanding of successful reading in light of the new
information. Moreover, curricular demands may interfere with
the objectives of strategy instruction. Finally. teachers'
instructional behaviors must be sensitive both to student
understanding and misunderstanding of the process. They
conclude that successful strategy instruction demands
not only teacher awareness and instructional consistency, but
a long range of time for the students to integrate the
process into their learning habits.

At the university level, Smith (1985) has concluded that
when competent college level readers approach difficult and

unfamiliar reading material, they employ strategies that they

57

have accumulated over years of successful study.

Lundeberg (1987) conducted a study to test the theory
that university level students who are novices in their field
of study can be taught to use reading strategies employed by
experts and improve their reading comprehension of legal
materials. Identifying six general reading strategies used
by legal experts. but not by law students, when reading legal
documents (use of context, overview, analytical rereading.
underlining, synthesis, and evaluation). he conducted a
series of experiments with law students to test the effects
of teaching the experts' strategies on the reading
comprehension of students with limited experience with legal
documents. Lundeberg's results showed that instruction in
the use of experts' strategies significantly improved reading
comprehension of the novices.

Swafford and Alvermann (1989), in a survey of research
on reading strategies conducted with postsecondary students,
found that seventy percent of the studies involved prereading
organizer strategies while twenty-five percent dealt with the
use of text structure. The authors note that while the
overall research indicates that teaching reading strategies
to university level students is effective, serious weaknesses
in many of the studies renders their conclusions
questionable. First, in several studies the subjects were
not told why they were using a strategy or how to use it. In
addition, although university students are required to read

extensive amounts of material over an extended period of

58

time, the passages used in the research were usually brief
and the effectiveness of the strategies were measured only
once, immediately after subjects had read the selection.
Finally, few studies indicated the reading competence of the

subjects.

Summary gt Section Two

Research has shown that reading comprehension is
improved by the conscious use of reading strategies. Despite
some confusion over identifying specific strategies. studies
have shown that reading strategies can be taught to students
at all levels and that instruction in strategies usually

results in improved comprehension.

Section Three
Using SQ3R as a Multicomponent Strategy
A Description gt ghee.

SQ3R (Survey-Question-Read-Recite-Review). devised by
Francis P. Robinson (1941: 1970) as a study system, has been
shown to be useful with functional texts (Duffy and Roehler,
1986: Kopfstein, 1982: Reed, 1987: Simpson, 1986: Snyder,
1984: Tadlock, 1978: Tomlinson, 1987: Whittaker: 1981). The
SQ3R method guides students to become actively involved in
establishing the purpose for reading, provides them with an
idea of the complexity of the material, encourages them to
focus their attention while reading, and develops a habit of

reviewing. With SQ3R, students are engaged in questioning,

59

summarizing, using headings and text organization. and
review.
The SQ3R method consists of five steps: Survey.

Question, Read. Recite, and Review. The survev is a

 

systematic examination of a text during which the student
first notes the title, the author, and the date of
publication. This is followed by an examination of headings
and subheadings, information in charts, graphs, and pictures.
and sections in boldface or italics. Finally, the student
reads the first paragraph, the first sentence in each
subsequent paragraph, and the final paragraph. By surveying.
the reader can gain a sense of the type of information
presented in the text, anticipate the level of reading
difficulty before reading in depth, and predict the
information that will discovered in the text.

Questioning follows the survey. With this step, the
reader produces questions that may be answered from reading.
The questions may range from the general ”What's the point"
to locating a specific name or date. Questions may be
devised by using subheadings as a basis or through a sequence
of "Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How”? Questions may
also come from the text itself or from study guides provided
by the instructor. Regardless, producing and using questions
give the student the means to focus on locating specific
information.

While reading, students actively seek answers to their

questions. When they have finished reading, the students

60

recite. by producing a summary of what they have read.
Finally. the students review the text to confirm their

understanding.

Research eh SQBR Effectiveness.

Although well received during the 1960's (Courtney,
1965: Durr, 1963: Johnson, 1964: Spache, 1963: Van Gilder,
1967). SQBR has recently been a center of some dispute. 4
Johns and McNamara (1980) contend that empirical evidence
supporting the effectiveness of the method has been meagre.
While not denying the usefulness of SQ3R, they conclude that
more research should be conducted. Gustafson and Pederson
(1984) concurred with Johns and Mchmara, although in an
update (Gustafson and Pederson, 1985), while retaining
reservations about research methodology, modified their
earlier concerns by conceding that the evidence supports the
effectiveness of SQBR at the university level.

More recent research has supported the effectiveness of
the method. Studies by Adams, Carnine, and Gerten (1982) and
Hodges (1982) found significant improvement in reading
comprehension of intermediate grade students after
instruction in SQ3R, while Whittaker (1981), Snyder (1984).
Simpson (1986), Reed (1987), and Tomlinson (1987) have shown
that instruction in SQ3R improves comprehension for
university students. Kopfstein (1982) concluded that while
SQBR is a sound procedure, it has been so poorly taught that

students fail to use it independently.

61

leechihg Strategic Reading with SQBR

While SQ3R is an established study skills method, it has
not been used specifically for teaching strategic reading.
The method is typically introduced in developmental reading
textbooks as a self-contained unit which is taught as a
series of skills without reference to reflection or self-
monitoring.

Nevertheless, SQ3R lends itself to being used as a
multicomponent strategy if supplementary instruction and
practice are provided that guide the student toward
monitoring and evaluating reading performance. As Tomlinson
(1987) observed, SQ3R provides an opportunity to enhance
students' metacognitive awareness of the organization and
demands of a text.

To develop a self—regulating approach to reading,
Palincsar and Brown (1989) recommend six strategies that
encourage metacognitive awareness in reading:

1. Clarifying purpose of reading to determine the

appropriate approach to the task.

2. Activating background knowledge.

3. Focusing attention on major content.

4. Evaluating content critically for internal

consistency and compatibility with prior knowledge.

5. Using monitoring activities such as self-questioning

and paraphrasing.

6. Drawing inferences, such as predictions and

interpretations, and testing them.

62

Each of these strategies can be addressed through SQ3R
as a multicomponent strategy. First, during the survev step.
the teacher can direct Students to recall information they
already know and to relate it to the text before reading, to
look at text headings, charts, pictures, boldface and
italicized items in order to predict the nature and
difficulty of the content, and to reflect on the results of
the survey to establish the purpose for reading.

With the guestioning step, the teacher encourages
readers not only to devise questions that will be answered
while reading, but to focus their attention to the text
structure and organization.

While reading, the students are directed to monitor
their comprehension while referring to the questions they
devised in the preceding step, to look back when they realize
that comprehension has broken down, and to use text
organization and structure as comprehension aids.

During the reciting step, the students produce a written
summary which they use as a means of evaluating their
comprehension. Finally, in the review step, the students
skim the material to confirm their conclusions, to resolve
remaining problems, and to evaluate their understanding.

When teaching SQ3R procedurally. the instruction is
limited to informing the student of what to do, and does not
address how, when, what, or why, nor does procedural
instruction encourage self-monitoring and self-evaluation.

As Kopfstein (1982) observed, for SQBR to be most effective,

63

students must understand the purpose of each step. be given
opportunity to practice and evaluate the method. and to

accept SQBR as a viable tool for enhancing comprehension.

Summary of Chapter Two
Although research has shown that teaching reading
strategies facilitates comprehension and enhances the
metacognitive awareness of native English speakers, research
on the effects of these factors on the reading comprehension
of ESL students has not been conducted.

Research does show that ESL reading instruction
generally ignores strategic reading and metacognitive
awareness while emphasizing drills in linguistic structures
and word—attack skills, and frequently using materials that
have little relevance to academic reading. Furthermore,
since ESL teachers tend to evaluate ESL students on their
facility with structures rather than their grasp of meaning,
students are provided with few opportunities to learn or
practice strategic reading techniques. This type of
instruction limits learning to one dimension of reading,
depriving students of other options that can improve
comprehension. Effective reading in both native and second
language calls for the student to be aware of the strategic
options, such as reviewing what one knows about a topic
before reading, or anticipating what types of information
might be important, and to apply these options independently.

An established method of guiding students to establish

64

reading purpose, predict content, and actively monitor
reading is SQ3R. Although SQ3R has been used with native
English speakers since 1941. research on the effects of the
method with ESL students has not been conducted.

SQ3R was not originally devised with strategic reading
as an objective: however, the method may be used as a
multicomponent strategy when taught with the objective of

establishing strategic awareness and self-monitoring.

CHAPTER THREE

DESIGN AND METHODS

This dissertation examined the effects of teaching
strategic reading on reading comprehension and the reported
use of reading strategies by university level ESL students.
Because of imposed time limitations, SQ3R was selected as the
treatment method. The SQ3R method was taught to one
treatment group with explicit instruction in how and why the
method can be used strategically, and to a second treatment
group as a study skills unit with no reference to strategic
reading. A control group was included that received no
instruction in either SQ3R or strategic reading.

The research was conducted with a group of Malay
students who are participating in the ITM/MUCIA cooperative
program in Malaysia. This program, which is jointly
administered by Indiana University and the Institut Teknologi
MARA (ITM), provides Malay students with two years of lower
division undergraduate study which is transferable to
American universities. This chapter details the data
collection and analysis procedures for this dissertation.

The first section describes the subjects who participated in
the study. The next section details the instructional
procedures for the treatment groups. Section three provides
a description of the data collection, while the final section

describes procedures used to analyze the data.

65

66

Subjects

A sample of thirty subjects was drawn randomly from a
group of 283 students studying in the Track 2 ESL reading
classes taught at the Shah Alam campus of the ITM/MUCIA
program. At the time of data collection, the students had
completed a summer session and one semester of ESL in the
ITM/MUCIA program.

All subjects were ethnic Malays between 17 and 19 years
of age who spoke Bahasa Malaysia as their first language.

The subjects come from a wide range of geographical locales
in Malaysia, both urban and rural.

The first treatment group of fifteen students, called
the "strategic" group in this dissertation. was taught SQBR
with a focus on the conscious use of the six steps in SQ3R as
reading strategies. The subjects were instructed to think
about and evaluate the success of their reading.

The second treatment group of fifteen students, referred
to in this dissertation as the “procedural“ group, was taught
SQ3R as a study skills unit. Instruction was given in a
sequential, procedural manner with no reference to strategic
reading.

A control group of fifteen subjects, who received
training in neither SQ3R nor reading strategies, was selected
randomly from the pool of remaining students.

The strategic group was made up of eight men and seven
women, the procedural group consisted of nine males and six

females, and the control group had ten males and five women.

6?

Permission was secured from the ITM/MUCIA administration

and the MSU Human Subjects Committee to conduct the study.

Instructional Procedures

Classes

The data were collected during an eight week period in
the second semester. Both the strategic and procedural
groups consisted of fifteen students randomly assigned to ESL
reading classes that I taught as the regular classroom
instructor. Both groups completed the required reading
selections from semester curriculum in addition to
supplementary instruction in 803R. The strategic group was
taught how and why they should use SQ3R as a multicomponent
reading strategy in order to enhance their awareness and use
of strategies. The procedural group was taught SQ3R as a
study skills unit with no instruction on using the method
strategically. A log on both classes was kept to document
that both groups have received an equal amount of
instructional time in SQBR.

A control group, which received training in neither SQ3R
nor strategic reading, was drawn from the Track 2 pool. All
subjects were given the same reading materials, and took the

same unit quizzes and final examination established in the

reading syllabus.

Strategic Group Instruction
At the beginning of the treatment period, the strategic

class was taught SQ3R using a unit from a reading skills

68

textbook, Reading and Study Skills (Langan, 1982).

 

The 803R method was introduced sequentially during a five
day period with each day devoted to a step and practice with
previously introduced steps. The first day of instruction
started with an overview of SQBR that acquainted the students
with each step and its purpose, then the specifics of
surveying were introduced. The survey step in SQBR follows
this sequence:

1. Look at the title, author, and date of publication

2. Read the first paragraph

3. Read the first sentence of the subsequent paragraphs

4. Read headings and subheadings

5. Look at pictures, graphs, charts, and tables

6. Look for boldface or italicized items

7. Read the last paragraph.

On the second day, after a brief review and practice with
surveying, the students were introduced to questioning:

1. Use headings and subheadings to form questions.

2. Form questions from boldface and italicized items.

The reading step was introduced the next day, after a
review and practice with surveying and questioning. For this
step, the student were told to:

1. Find answers to the questions devised in the previous

step.

2. Use the headings and subheadings as a guide.

Reciting and reviewing were introduced at the beginning

of the next class. Students were informed that immediately

69

after reading a text. they should:

1. Put the text aside and try to recall information.

2. Write a brief summary of what they recalled.

Finally, they were told to review the material by using
their summaries as a guide, correcting misinformation, and
adding important points they had missed.

The final day of the instructional week was devoted to a
brief review of the entire sequence and a practice session.

On Monday of the next week, the students were given
instruction in using SQBR as a multicomponent strategy.
First, the students were introduced to an explanation of
strategic reading and how the six steps in SQBR could be used
as strategies.

For example, they were taught that the survey step is not
limited to looking over headings, boldface words, and
diagrams. They were taught that during the this step, they
(1) established their purpose for reading, (2) wrote brief
notes on what they knew about the topic, (3) estimated the
difficulty of the text, (4) reserved an appropriate amount of
time to read and study it, (5) predicted in writing what they
would find in the content, (6) anticipated the likely
problems, and (7) set up strategies to meet these problems.

Since the emphasis in the strategic group was to develop
self-regulated use of reading strategies, the students were
encouraged to consider the purpose of each part of the survey
sequence. For example, the following sample is based on the

log that was kept during the treatment period:

70

The first step is called ”survey". Quickly skim
through the selection, look at the title and any
heading. look at boldface words and italics,
pictures, and charts. Quickly read the first
sentence of each paragraph.

Why should you read the title and headings?
Find out what the article is about.

OR, you get general idea of what you will read. Why
look at boldface words and italics?

They are important.

They are important. It‘s the author‘s way of telling
you that you should remember something. Would you
expect to find these things on a test?

Yes.

Sure, but do you know why would you want to look for
them before you started reading?

(Silence)

You read a title and the subheadings to get a general
idea of what the article is about. You'look at the
boldface words and italics to give an idea of what
will be important to learn. This will also give you
an idea of how difficult the article will be. This
way, you can plan out how much time yOu will need to

study the information

Let's repeat some reasons for surveying. First, you
want to know what the article is about. Next, you
want an idea of what will be important to understand
and to learn. Third, you want to get a idea of how
difficult it will be so you can plan on how you will
read and study it.

Similarly, the objective with questioning was not only to

provide the students with a procedure. but direct their

attention to the purpose and usefulness of the procedure:

T:

The title and each of the subheadings can be turned
into questions. For instance, the title of this
chapter is "Some Matter and Energy Laws". How can
this be made into a question?

What are some matter and energy laws?

T:

71

Sure, that is the obvious question. What other
questions can you ask?

How about "What IS a matter law?” Anyone know?
(Silence)

Before you can really know what some of the matter
laws are, you should what a matter law is, right?
This is a question you should be asking yourself
before you start to read. How about another
question?

What is an energy law?
That makes sense, doesn't it? In fact, you should
ask “What is energy?" and ”What is matter?" You

think you know what matter is, but will the article
agree with you?

So, from the title, how many questions have you got?

Five.

0k. Before you have begun to read the article, you
already know five things you need to find out. Write

them down. -

The students were also given the following guide to help

them in formulating their own questions to be answered while

reading.

1.

Select the best type of question to match information
present in the reading selection: what, how, why,
where, who, and when.

Look at questions at the end of the text. Check to
see if the questions are in the same sequence as the
information in the reading selection.

Which questions, if any, can you answer before you

begin to read. Write down you answers.

The students were taught that, while reading, they should

apply and modify the strategies they had previously set up,

72

look for answers to their questions and verify any answers
they had written down in advance, devise new questions as
necessary, relate the information in the reading selection to
what they already knew, and monitor the extent to which they
understood the material, noting both what they understood and
did not understand.

The students were also instructed to mark sections that
they believed would be covered in a test and to indicate why
they thought this. They were told only items which were
important and which they thought would be difficult to
remember should be underlined or highlighted.

Reciting was presented as a means of comprehension
monitoring. After completing a written summary, the students
were told to evaluate and to reflect on how much they
understood and recalled. They were advised to draft follow-
up questions that would be answered during the review

>Finally, the students were taught that a review does not
mean simply rereading an entire chapter, but to verify the
information they had written down during the previous four
steps, evaluate their comprehension, and determine where
their understanding had broken down. A key element in this
step was for them to write down questions of what they had
not understood, which could be used in discussions with other
class members or brought up to the course instructor either
in class or in a private conference.

The students in the strategic group were required to use

SQ3R with each subsequent reading assignment. As part of

73

the class routine, the students met in small teams of three
to discuss what each had done and why, and to compare notes,
outlines, or summaries. In addition, they wrote test items
that were distributed to other groups. A team leader would

report a synopsis of discussion to the whole class.

Procedural Group Instruction
The procedural group was taught SQBR from Reading gag
§£ggy Skills (Langan, 1982) as a study skills method during
the same week as the strategic group, but were not provided
with the subsequent instruction in using SQ3R strategically.
Subjects in this group were taught SQ3R as a self-
contained study skills unit and were not taught to be
reflective about their reading. For example, when they were
introduced to surveying, they were told the sequence without
elaboration:
T: The first step is called ”survey”. This means you
look over the article quickly to get an idea what
it's about.

So, the first thing is to look at the title, the
author's name, and the publication date.

Next, look through the article and read the headings.
look for boldface words and italics, and glance at
any pictures or figures.
The instruction was heavily dependent on the SQ3R chapter
from Reading and Study Skills (See Appendix D). and the
subjects were provided with no information about the use of

SQ3R that was not included in the chapter.

For the remainder of the term, the students were required

74

to apply SQ3R to all in-class assignments. They were not
required to work in teams, but were permitted to do upon

request.

Data Collection
Two types of data were gathered: a measure of

comprehension and a measure of reported use of strategies.

Procedures for Collecting the Comprehension Measure

Data on comprehension were collected through student
retellings of reading selections. A pretest was given before
treatment to validate the equality in reading comprehension
among the groups. The subjects read a section of Chapter 1,
"The Origin of the Earth, Its Oceans, and Life in the Oceans"
(See Appendix E) from Essentials 9: Oceanography (Thurman.
1983), drafted an outline of the chapter, and wrote a
retelling of the chapter.

A section of Chapter 4, "The Origin of the Ocean Basins:
Theory of Plate Tectonics" (See Appendix F) from the same
textbook was used for the posttest to measure and compare
posttreatment comprehension among groups.

These chapters were selected because both are early
chapters of an introductory textbook that has been
specifically written for the community college level and
do not require extensive prerequisite knowledge of the
topics. Moreover, the chapters are concise, with headings,

subheadings, definitions of technical terms, and diagrams

75

included as reading guides.

Before gathering data, a colleague, who is presently
teaching study skills in the ITM/MUCIA program, and I
independently read the reading selections, drafted outlines.
and wrote out retellings. We compared the results and
reached an agreement on the main ideas, supporting details.
and organization of both selections. We developed scoring
instruments in which the main ideas were assigned two points
each and supporting ideas were given one point each.

Scoring forms incorporating these main and supporting
ideas with the points for each was developed for both the
pretest (Appendix G) and the posttest (Appendix H).

Retelling was selected over discrete item testing
because the subjects would be obliged to produce evidence of
comprehension rather than recognize possibilities. Retelling
is a widely used measure of both awareness and recall
(Richgels, McGee, Lomax, and Sheard, 1987), while outlining
permits the students to organize recalled information before
attempting to write out a retelling.

In the research in ESL students' recall of expository
text, Carrell (1984, 1987), Connor and McCagg (1983). and
Connor (1984) used retelling as the preferred method of
gathering information on ESL students' reading comprehension
on the assumption that students recall and write down what
they consider to be the most important aspects of a passage.

Pearson, Dole, Duffy, and Roehler (in press) observe that

although discriminating between more important and less

76

important concepts or facts, such as distinguishing main
ideas from supporting details, is useful, being able to
integrate these ideas into coherent summaries or retellings
is considerably more useful as a means retaining and
expressing information. In a retelling, the students
synthesize what they have read by deleting irrelevant and
redundant information, creating superordinate labels for a
list of things or activities, locating the topic sentences
that are essential, and creating topic sentences that are not

accessible from the text.

Establishment g: Pretreatment Reading Comprehension
Eguality Among Groups

To confirm that the three groups were of equitable
reading proficiency, a pretest was administered before
treatment. This pretreatment test was given to the strategic
and procedural groups as part of the two hour reading and
writing block. The control group met in classroom on the
same day for the specific purpose of taking the test.

The subjects were given a packet consisting of:

1. The reading sample: A selection from Chapter 1, “The
Origin of the Earth, Its Oceans, and Life in the
Oceans” from Essentials 9; Oceanogrgphv.

2. Instructions.

3. Three sheets of paper for writing the responses.

The first two sheets were blank except for the headings

designations of "Outline" and "Retelling", plus a space for

their ITM identification number. The subjects were told not

77

to write their names on any of the papers. The third sheet
was for writing out the reports of strategies.
The subjects were given the following instructions which
were also read orally to them before the test:
I. Study the attached article carefully. Pretend you

have to read this article for a course and that you
will have a test on it. You may mark on the article

as much as you like.
2. After you have finished studying the article, raise

your hand so that I can collect it. Then, on Sheet
#1 draft an outline of what you remember from the

article.

3. On Sheet #2, using the outline, write a brief
retelling of what you recall from the article.
Do not worry about grammar or spelling since these
will not be considered when I evaluate the papers.
The subjects were then given verbal instructions to read
and study the article for as long as necessary and were
advised to use any reading techniques they wished. When they
confident that they understood the selection, they were
instructed to set aside the reading and draft an outline on
the first sheet of blank paper. The purpose of the outlines
was to give the students the opportunity to write down and
organize the information before writing a retelling. When
they had completed drafting the outline, they were told to

write a brief retelling of the selection on the second

response sheet using the outline as a guide.

Collection 9: Posttreatment Comprehension Data

The above procedure was repeated after the eight-week
treatment period using a different reading sample, a

selection from Chapter 4, ”The Origin of the Ocean Basins:

78

Theory of Plate Tectonics". All procedures were identical to

the pretest.

Procedure for Collecting Reports g; Strategy Use

Reports of strategy use were collected by having the
subjects write a description of their reading behaviors
immediately after they had completed writing the retellings
of the selection.

The subjects were provided with the following written
instructions which were also orally read to them before they
began the test:

On the third sheet of paper, tell me what you did

and what you were thinking while you were reading

the article. Write down everything you can remember

doing while you read the article and when you wrote

the retelling. Try to think of everything you did,

but only tell me what you did -- I am not looking

for any particular "correct" answers.

In addition, the subjects were provided with following
back-up instructions on the response sheet:

You have just read part of a chapter of a textbook and

have written out an outline and a retelling. Take a few
minutes to think about HOW you read this selection.

For example:

* What did you do, if anything, before you began to read
it? ,

a What did you do while you were reading?

* If you did not understand something, what did you
do?

* Did you do anything after you finished reading the
article?

Please write out a description of how you read this
article. Tell me anything you remember of what you did

79

while reading. Do not worry about grammar, spelling, or
neatness -- just write out what you did while you were
reading the article.
Upon completing the report, the subjects handed in all
papers and were permitted to leave the testing room.
Written reports were selected over verbal interviews to
preserve anonymity during the gathering of data, to relieve
student anxiety that might interfere with reporting if the
students were being interviewed by an authority figure, and
to accumulate quickly metacognitive data on all subjects
rather than with a small sample.
An instrument to rate the subjects' reports consisted of
the following categories:
1. Recall of general knowledge before reading
2. Surveying
3. Formulating Questions
4. Using text organization
5. Using general knowledge while reading
6. Using repair strategies
7. Taking notes
8. Underlining or Highlighting ,
9. Reviewing
10. Comprehension monitoring
A separate category was labelled “other strategies" to
include reported strategies not covered by the other ten.
Using this instrument, my colleague and I read each of

the reports and tallied the instances of reported strategy

use, then compared the tallies.

80

Procedure for Maintgining Subject Anonymity

To protect objectivity, the subjects‘ ITM identification
numbers were used during the data collection in lieu of
names. These student numbers are assigned by ITM for their
records, and are not used by Indiana University. The ITM
student numbers of all subjects were kept sequentially in a
computer database file so that there was no indication of
which group any subject was in while the data was being
collected and scored. The student numbers were resorted by
group for analysis after the data had been collected and

scored.

Data Analysis
To establish interrater reliability, a pilot sample was
collected from a group of fifteen students from Track 1 who
took the comprehension tests and wrote out strategy reports.
Using an instrument developed before data was gathered, the
samples were scored by a colleague and myself during a
practice session. Interrater reliability was .93 for the

retellings and .98 for the reports of strategy use.

Analvsis pf the Comprehension Measures

All retellings from both the pretest and posttest were
scored by my colleague and myself.

Following the procedure described by Connor (1984), the
retellings scored on the basis of the number of superordinate

propositions (main ideas) and subordinate propositions

81

(supporting details) included in the retelling.

Analysis p; the Pretest Comprehension Measures

The purpose of the pretest was to establish that there
were no significant differences among the groups before
treatment. Each of the pretest retellings were read
independently by my colleague and myself and scored with the
measure developed and refined before data had been gathered
(See Appendix G).

A value for each recalled proposition was assigned
depending on its category as either a main idea
(superordinate proposition) or a supporting idea (subordinate
proposition). Main ideas were assigned two points each.
while supporting ideas were given one point each., For the
pretest measure, a total of twelve points were possible for
main ideas and eighteen points for supporting ideas for a
potential total of thirty points. The raw scores were then
converted to percentages.

The mean, standard deviation, and range were derived
through the ABSTAT Statistical Program, an IBM compatible
software package produced by Anderson-Bell (1982). The
results were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U Test, a
nonparametric statistical procedure, to determine if there
were significant differences in comprehension among the three
groups. The .05 level of significance was selected.

A nonparametric statistical test was chosen over

parametric testing because of the small samples and the type

82

of measures used to derive the scores.

Rather than analyzing the variance of means, the Mann-
Whitney U Test determines if the distribution of scores of
independent samples differ significantly from each other.

The null hypothesis is that there is no significant
difference among a distribution of scores between groups. If
the C is significant, than a larger grouping of scores in one
sample will higher or lower than that of the other sample

(Borg and Call. 1983).

Analysis _; ppg Posttest Comprehension Measure.

The procedures described above for the pretest validation
were followed with the posttest. The retellings were scored
with the measure developed earlier with a pilot sample (See
Appendix H).

As with the pretest, a value for each recalled
proposition was assigned depending on its category as either
a main idea or supporting idea. Main ideas were assigned two
points each while supporting ideas were given one point each.
For the posttest measure, a total of twenty points were
possible for the main ideas and sixteen points for supporting
ideas for a potential total of thirty~six points. The raw
scores were converted to percentages.

To answer the comprehension research questions, each of
the scores were compared with the Mann-Whitney U Test to

detect significant differences between groups. The .05 level

of significance was selected.

83

Analysis 9; the Reports 9; Strategv Use

 

The reports of strategy use were analyzed to provide
answers for questions four, five, and six, the effects that
teaching SQ3R has on ESL students' reports of their use of
strategies in their own reading.

Upon completion of the both the pre-test and post-test
retellings, the subjects were instructed to write a brief
description of how they studied the reading selections.
These reports were scored with the instrument listing the
following strategies:

Strategy Indicator
Recall of General Knowledge Subject reports reflecting on
previously known information
about the topic before reading.
Surveying Subject reports previewing the
selection before reading and
identifies previewing

activities such as reading
headings, looking at graphs,

etc.

Formulating Questions Subject reports generating
questions to be answered while
reading.

Using Text Organization Subject reports using the

organization devices included
in the text to help ease
reading, such as signal words.
transitions, etc.

Using General Knowledge Subject reports referring to
knowledge and experience to
explain, clarify, question, or
extend information while
reading.

Using Repair Strategies Subject reports using a repair
strategy, such as looking back.
to resolve a reading problem.

84

Taking Notes Subject reports making notes
while reading

Underlining or Highlighting Subject reports marking
important items in the text by
underlining or by highlighting
with marker.

Reviewing Subject reports systematically
reviewing notes, underlined or
highlighted’items, recalling
information, etc.

Comprehension Monitoring Subject reports assessing
reading comprehension throughout
the task.

In addition to these specific strategies, space was
provided to record reported strategies not listed in the
instrument.

The reports were independently reviewed and the reports
of strategy use were tallied by myself and my colleague. The
tallies were scored on a two point scale:

0 = No reference to the specific strategy

1 = Specific strategy and its use is reported

The results of the posttest strategic reports were

compared to determine if differences in the reported use of

strategies were indicated by the three groups.

§ummarv

Forty-five subjects were divided into two treatment
groups and one control group of fifteen participants each.
The two treatment classes were taught by myself as the
classroom instructor while the control was drawn randomly

from the pool of remaining students.

85

One treatment group, the "strategic group" was taught
SQ3R, but with additional instruction in actively using each
of the SQ3R steps as reading strategies. The ”procedural
group”, was taught SQ3R as a study skills unit with no
reference to using the method strategically. The control
received training in neither SQBR nor strategic reading.

Data for comprehension testing was collected by having
the subjects read a brief selection and write a retelling of
what they recalled. Data on strategy use was collected by
having the subjects write out a description of their reading
activities during the collection of the comprehension data.

The comprehension data was analyzed with the Mann-Whitney
U Test while the reports of strategy use were evaluated

through a tally of the students' reports.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of
teaching strategic reading on university ESL students'
reading comprehension and reports of strategy use after
reading. To answer the research questions, one treatment
group received instruction in the SQ3R method as a
multicomponent strategy, while the other was taught SQ3R as a
study skills unit. Data were collected on reading
comprehension and reported use of reading strategies. The
sources of data were written retellings of a textbook
selection and written self-reports of a strategy use.

This chapter reports the results of the comprehension

measures and the strategic reports.

Results of the Pretreatment Measures in Comprehension
and Reports of Strategy Use

The purpose of the pretreatment measures was to establish
that there were no significant differences in comprehension
ability among the groups before treatment and to establish

the number and type of strategies reported by the subjects.

Results pf the Pretreatment Comprehension Test
The results of the pretreatment comprehension test are

reported in Table 4.1. The percentages were used for data

analyses.

86

87
Table 4.1

Results of the Pretreatment Comprehension Test

 

Raw Scores and Percentages

 

1 = Strategic Group 3 = Control Group
2 = Procedural Group

 

 

 

 

1 2 3
RS 29. 8.5. 1 RS 2‘.
14 47 16 53 15 50
13 43 13 43 12 40
12 40 13 43 11 37
12 40 12 40 10 33
11 37 11 37 9 3O
10 33 10 33 8 27
8 27 10 33 8 27
8 27 8 27 8 27
7 23 8 27 7 23
6 20 8 27 7 23
6 20 8 27 6 20
6 20 8 27 6 20
5 17 7 23 6 20
5 17 5 17 6 20
3 10 4 l3 4 13
Group n Mean SD Range
Strategic 15 28 11.228 37
Procedural 15 31 10.554 40

Control 15 27 9.507 37

 

‘88

A comparison of the results by the Mann-Whitney U Test
is reported in Table 4.2. The U obtained for the strategic
group versus the control group was 112: for the procedural
group versus the control group, U was 83: and for the
strategic group versus the procedural group, U was 92. Since
a U of 72 or less would have been significant for each
comparison, no significant differences among the groups'

reading comprehension was indicated before treatment.

Results 91 the Pretreatment Reports 9; Strategy Use

 

A summary of the reported strategy use by each group
before treatment is presented in Table 4.3.

A review of the written reports of strategy use reveal
that no group reported using significantly more strategies
than the other two groups. The results do show frequent
reports of surveying, underlining/highlighting, and use of
repair strategies across all three groups. Comprehension
monitoring was totally unreported, while reports of the

remaining six strategies were limited.

Results of the Posttreatment Comprehension Measure
The three research questions directed specifically to

comprehension were:

1. What are the differences in the reading comprehension
performance of ESL students who receive instruction
in SQ3R with a focus on developing their use of
reading strategies and a control group that does
not receive this instruction?

2. What are the differences in the reading comprehension
performance of ESL students who receive instruction

89
Table 4.2

Results of the Mann-Whitney U Test Comparing Group
Performance on Pretreatment Comprehension Test

 

 

Between Sample

Variable Size U
Strategic Group 15 112
Control Group 15 113
Procedural Group 15 83
Control Group 15 142
Procedural Group lb 92

Strategic Group 15 133

 

90
Table 4.3

Summary of Reported Strategy Use by Each Group Before
Treatment '

 

Groups

1 = Strategic Group (n = 15)
2 = Procedural Group (n = 15)
3 = Control Group (n = 15)

 

 

Groups: 1 g 3
Strategv Categories

1. Underlining/Highlighting 13 13 14
2. Surveying 13 11 10
3. Using Repair Strategies 9 8 8
4. Reviewing 4 2 4
5. Taking Notes 3 2 2
6. Using General Knowledge 1 2 2
7. Using Text Organization 1 l l
8. Recall of General Knowledge 0 3 1
9. Formulating Questions 0 1 0
10. Comprehension Monitoring 0 0 0

 

Total: 44 41 42

91

in SQ3R in a procedural method and a control group
that does not receive this instruction?

3. What are the differences in the reading comprehension
performance of ESL students who receive instruction
in SQ3R with a focus on developing their use of

reading strategies and those who receive instruction
in SQBR in a procedural method?

The results of the posttreatment measure are reported in
Table 4.4.

A comparison of the comprehension scores between the
strategic and control groups shows the strategic group's
comprehension performance with the selection was
significantly higher than the control group's. The strategic
group's scores ranged from a high of 58% to a low of 17%
while the control group's scores ranged from 39% to 6%.
Moreover, the strategic group's mean of 32% was twelve points
higher than the control group's. An analysis of the scores
with the Mann-Whitney U Test indicated that the differences
were statistically significant at the .05 level (See Table
4.5).

. These results suggest that in answer to Question 1, which
addresses differences in the comprehension performance of ESL
students who receive instruction in SQ3R with a focus on
developing their use of reading strategies compared to a
control group that does not receive such instruction,
students who have been taught SQ3R as a multicomponent
strategy show a higher level of comprehension than students

,who have been instructed in neither SQ3R nor strategic

reading.

92
Table 4.4

Results of the Posttreatment Comprehension Test

 

Raw Scores

 

1 2 Strategic GroUp 3 : Control Group
2 2 Procedural Group

 

 

 

 

1 2 3
RS as. 8—8 32 RS 22
21 58 17 47 14 39
21 58 16 44 12 33
20 56 15 42 11 31
15 42 13 36 9 25
15 42 12 33 9 25
11 31 10 28 8 22
10 28 10 28 7 19
10 28 9 25 7 19
8 22 9 25 6 17
8 22 8 22 6 17
8 22 7 19 4 11
7 19 6 l7 4 11
7 19 5 14 4 11
6 17 5 14 2 6
6 17 2 6 2 6
Group n Mean STD Range
Strategic , 15 32 15.234 41
Procedural 15 27 11.974 41

Control 15 20 9.841 33

 

93
Table 4.5

Results of the Mann-Whitney U Test Comparing Group
Performance on the Posttreatment Comprehension Test

 

 

Between Sample
Variable Size U
Strategic Group 15 58*
Control Group 15 167
Procedural Group 15 72*
Control Group 15 152
Strategic Group 15 94
Procedural Group 15 130

 

8p < .05

94

A comparison of the comprehension scores between the
procedural and control groups shows the procedural group‘s
comprehension performance with the selection was
significantly higher than the control group's. The
procedural group's comprehension scores ranged from 47% to 6%
as compared to the control group's range of 39% to 6%. In
addition, the procedural group's mean of 27% was seven points
higher than the control group's mean of 20%. The difference
in performance was found to be significant when analyzed with
the Mann-Whitney U Test (See Table 4.5).

This indicates that the answer for Question 2, which is
concerned with differences in the comprehension performance
of ESL students who receive instruction in SQ3R as a study
skills procedure and a group that has not been instructed in
SQ3R, is that students who have been taught SQ3R show a
higher level of comprehension than students who have not been
taught SQ3R.

A comparison of the comprehension scores between the
strategic and procedural groups shows the strategic group's
comprehension of the selection was somewhat higher than the
procedural group's. However, the statistical analysis of
these scores with the Mann-Whitney U Test did not show that
the differences were statistically significant.

These results, in response to Question 3 which addressed
the differences in the comprehension of ESL students who
receive instruction in SQBR with a focus on developing the

use of reading strategies with students who are taught SQ3R

95
as a study skills procedure, suggest that students who have
been taught SQ3R as a multicomponent strategy do not show a
significantly higher level of comprehension after treatment
than students who have been instructed in SQBR as a

procedural method.

Summary pf Comprehension Results

 

The research questions asked if significant differences
in reading comprehension would result after providing ESL
students with instruction in SQBR as a multicomponent
strategy and as a procedural study skills method.

The results of the posttreatment comprehension measure
showed that both treatment groups scored significantly higher
in comprehension than the control group. No significant
differences were indicated between the performance of the two
treatment groups.

These results indicate that teaching ESL students to use
SQ3R either strategically or as a procedural method has a
positive effect on their reading performance. While the
results suggest that teaching SQ3R as a multicomponent
reading strategy results in a higher level of comprehension
than limiting instruction to using SQ3R as a study skills

unit, the differences were not statistically significant.

Analysis of the Reports of Strategy Use

The three research questions directed to the reported use

of reading strategies were:

96

4. What strategies do ESL students report using after
they have received instruction in 803R with a focus
on developing their use of reading strategies?

5. What strategies do ESL students report using after
they have received instruction in SQ3R in a
procedural method?

6. What strategies do ESL students report using if they
have not received instruction in SQBR either with a
focus on developing their use of reading strategies
or procedurally?

The focus of these questions was to determine if teaching
SQ3R, both as a multicomponent strategy and as a study skills
procedure, would have positive effects on ESL students'
reports of strategy use.

The subjects wrote reports of their reading behaviors as
part of the pretreatment measure, which was then analyzed to
assess the extent to which they reported strategy use before
exposure to SQ3R (See Table 4.3). After the treatment
period, the subjects again wrote reports describing their
reading behaviors as part of the posttreatment measure. A
summary of the posttreatment reports of strategy use by each
of the three groups is presented in Table 4.6.

As with the pretreatment measure, the three strategies
most frequently reported by all three groups, with little
change in the number of reports, were surveying, underlining/
highlighting, and using repair strategies. Thus, the effects
of teaching SQ3R as either a multicomponent strategy or a
study skills procedure on reports of these three strategies
cannot be reliably assessed and will be excluded in the

'general discussion of the results.

Question 4 was concerned with the strategies that the

97
Table 4.6

Summary of Reported Strategy Use by Each Group After
Treatment

 

Groups

1 = Strategic Group (n = 15)
2 s Procedural Group (n = 15)
3 = Control Group (n = 15)

 

123
Strategv Categories

1. Underlining/Highlighting 13 12 10
2. Surveying 13 13 14
3. Using Repair Strategies 11 7 4
4. Reviewing 10 9 7
5. Comprehension Monitoring 10 5 0
6. Taking Notes 4 6 6
7. Recall of General Knowledge 4 4 l
8. Formulating Questions 4 4 0
9. Using General Knowledge 2 1 0
10. Using Text Organization 2 1 0

 

Total 73 62 42

98
strategic group would report using after they had received
instruction and practice in SQ3R as a multicomponent
strategy. The most notable gains in the number of strategies
reported by the strategic group were in comprehension
monitoring and reviewing after reading, while gains in the
reported use of the remaining strategies were limited.
Overall, the total number of strategies reported by this
group increased by twenty-seven from nine reported strategies
to thirty-six

A comparison of the remaining reports of strategies by
the three groups before and after treatment is presented in
Table 4.7.

Question 5 was concerned with the strategies that the
subjects in the procedural group would report using after
they had received instruction and practice in SQ3R as‘a
study skills unit. The greatest increase in the number of
strategies reported by the procedural group was with
reviewing after reading and comprehension monitoring, while
gains in the reported use of the remaining five strategies
were limited. Overall, the total number of strategies
reported by this group increased by twenty from eleven
reported pretreatment strategies to thirty-one strategies
after treatment.

Question 6 was concerned with the strategies that the
subjects in the control group, who received neither
instruction nor practice in either SQ3R or strategic reading,

would report. This group showed a moderate increase in

99
Table 4.7

Summary of Reported Strategy Use by Each Group Before and
After Treatment

Strategic Group

 

 

esters After
Comprehension Monitoring 0 10
Reviewing 10
Recall of General Knowledge 0 4
Formulating Questions 0 4
Taking Notes 3 4
Using General Knowledge 1 2
Using Text Organization 1 2
Total 9 36

Procedural Group

Before After
Reviewing 2 9
Taking Notes 2 6
Comprehension Monitoring 0 5
Recall of General Knowledge 3 4
Formulating Questions 1 4
Using Text Organization 1 2
Using General Knowledge 2 1
Total 11 31

Control Group

Before After
Reviewing 4 7
Taking Notes 2 6
Using General Knowledge 2 0
Using Text Organization 1 0
Recall of General Knowledge 1 1
Formulating Questions 0 0
Comprehension Monitoring 0 0
Total 10 14

100
the number of students reporting the use of reviewing and
notetaking: however, with three strategies, the number of
reports declined after eight weeks. Overall, the total
number of strategies reported by this group showed a net
increase of four, from ten to fourteen reports, at the end of

the treatment period.

Summary pf Reports 9; Strategy Use

The research questions were concerned with the strategies
that each group would report after the treatment period. The
results show that most commonly reported strategies by all
three groups before and after treatment were surveying,
underlining/highlighting, and using repair strategies.

With the remaining strategies, both the strategic and
procedural groups showed an increase in the reported use of
comprehension monitoring and reviewing, and both groups
showed significant gain in the number of reported strategies.

The control group showed little change in the number of

reported strategies after the treatment period.

Summary of Chapter Four
The results of the comprehension measure indicate that
the strategic group showed the highest level of reading
comprehension on the posttreatment selection, followed by the
procedural and control groups. The comparison of scores
indicated that both the strategic and procedural groups'

scores were significantly different from the control groups'.

101
The difference between the strategic and procedural groups'
scores were not found to be statistically significant.

The results of the reports of strategy use indicate that
the strategic and procedural groups reported a significant
increase in the number of strategies after the treatment
period, while the control group showed minimal gains in

reports of strategy use.

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of
teaching the SQ3R method as a multicomponent strategy on
university level ESL students' reading comprehension and on
their awareness of reading strategies. The general research
question addressed in this study was:

What are the differences in comprehension performance

between ESL university students who receive instruction

in SQ3R both as a study skills unit and with a focus on
developing reading strategies, and those who do not
receive such instruction, and what are the differences
in the strategies they report after instruction?

The dilemma facing university level ESL reading programs
guided the formulation of this general question. Within an
academic year or less, an ESL program must help students
overcome severe weaknesses not only in their language
proficiency, but frequently in their study habits and
attitudes toward learning, so that they will be able to
comprehend academic texts with sufficient competence and
independence to meet the requirements of university level
courses in English.

Given the limited period of time allocated to prepare
their students for academic classes, ESL programs usually
cope by providing instruction that is concise, structured.

and intensive, and with an emphasis on syntactic features.

Specifically, an ESL reading curriculum focuses on teaching

102

103
reading as a decoding process in which the objective is to
replicate information. The theoretical basis for this
approach is that language development is a linear,
hierarchical process in which reading is subordinate to the
spoken language. Bluntly stated, reading is ”parasitic on
language" (Mattingly, 1972). 'Thus, providing students with
extensive training in vocabulary and teaching them how to
apply the rules of language systematically to a text in order
to decode meaning has been viewed as the most efficient means
to improve reading (Carrell, 1988). As noted in Chapter Two,
ESL reading instruction frequently consists of extensive
practice with grammar, word forms, and vocabulary under the
assumption that language proficiency naturally follows
(Carrell, 1987: Dinsmore, 1985).

Knowledge of the vocabulary and grammar of English is
certainly essential for reading English texts, and
appropriate instruction in these areas should not be
neglected. The key word is appropriate; international
students who plan to work toward undergraduate or graduate
degrees in the United States should be competent in English
before they are admitted to American universities. To expect
an ESL program to develop a beginning English language
learner into a successful American university student within
two or three academic terms is unrealistic. Nevertheless,
ESL programs frequently are organized as though the students
were complete novices in the language.

A survey of the research in reading shows that for

104 .
native English speakers effective reading is a constructive
process that requires awareness of the strategic options and
the appropriate application these options to the reading
task. Although one may intuitively assume that this is also
true for non-native speakers, research has not been conducted
to provide support this conclusion. Carrell (1984: 1985) and
Connor (1984) have shown that schemata and knowledge of both
text organization and text structure are important when
considering the reading proficiency of university level ESL
students, but these studies have not examined the effects of
teaching strategic reading on either second language reading
performance or on the develOpment of ESL students' use of
reading strategies.

Recognizing that knowledge of vocabulary and language
structure is necessary in reading, limiting ESL reading
instruction to these two domains restricts learning to a
single dimension and deprives students of essential Options
for improving their reading comprehension. Expertise in
English syntax and an exceptional knowledge of English
vocabulary will not by themselves produce successful readers.
Clarke (1980) has suggested that the reverse is true: ESL
students who become overly reliant on their knowledge of
grammar and vocabulary often ignore their own good reading
skills while attempting to decode complex English texts.

The research in reading has established that explicit
instruction in strategic reading with a focus on developing

metacognitive awareness can transform a native English

105
speaking students into an active, self-regulated reader.
Research is now needed to determine if similar effects occur

after teaching strategic reading in ESL settings.

Summary of the Design and Procedures

This dissertation addressed the effects of teaching SQBR
on the reading comprehension and reported use of reading
strategies by ESL students. First, the study examined
whether instruction in SQBR as either a multicomponent
strategy or as a study skills procedure affects ESL students‘
reading comprehension, and, second, if instruction in SQ3R
affects ESL students' reports of their use of strategies.

The study was conducted with students enrolled in the ESL
program of the ITM/MUCIA project in Malaysia. 'After a summer
session and a maximum of two academic semesters in the ESL
program, the students spend two years at the Malaysian campus
completing lower division requirements before transferring to
universities in the United States.

These students come from an educational system that
values rote memorization of information at the expense of
reflection, analysis, and evaluation. As a result, testing
in this system is based entirely on recall of information
that has been mandated by the Ministry of Education.

Students thus enter the ITM/MUCIA program not only with
deficiencies in the language, but with little or no
‘background in approaching reading either strategically or

with metacognition. To these students, reading comprehension

106
is the quantitative measure of details that can be memorized
in a limited period of time.

While memorizing sections of textbooks may get these
student through some tests, the process is time consuming,
inefficient, and is unlikely to result in learning. Thus,
the objective ESL instruction should be to introduce the
students to the practice of being strategic in reading and to
develop the students' use of reading strategies so that they
will reflect on and evaluate their own reading.

Recognizing that an ESL program is allocated limited
time to meet these objectives, one purpose of this
dissertation was to examine the possibility that the SQ3R
method could be used as a multicomponent strategy to improve
both the students' reading comprehension and their use of
reading strategies.

To compile data for this study, a random sample of forty—
five students was selected from a group of 283 enrolled in
the ESL program of the ITM/MUCIA program in Malaysia. The
students were randomly assigned to two treatment groups and a
control group. One group, called the strategic group,
received instruction in SQ3R with additional instruction on
how and why the method should be used, while a second group,
called the procedural group, studied SQ3R only as a study
skills unit. A control group received no instruction in
SQ3R.

All subjects participated in a pretreatment assessment

to confirm the equity of their reading proficiency and to

107
analyze their reported use of reading strategies. The
strategic and procedural groups then received instruction and
guided practice in their respective treatments for eight
weeks. The strategic group was taught SQ3R as a
multicomponent strategy and the procedural group was taught
SQ3R as a study skills procedure and was not provided with
information on using the method strategically.

At the conclusion of the term, all subjects were given a
comprehension posttest and wrote out descriptions of their
use of strategies. The comprehension tests were analyzed to
determine if significant differences in comprehension were
indicated among the three groups, while the descriptions of
strategy use were compared to determine differences in the
reported use of strategies. The pre- and posttreatment
measures were not compared because of the non-equivalence of
the pre- and posttests. Moreover, such comparisons were
irrelevant to the research questions which addressed the
differences among the groups after instruction in SQ3R.

This remainder of this chapter discusses the findings.
implications, and future directions of research on explicit
instruction of strategic reading and improving use of reading

strategies of students in university ESL courses.

Discussion of the Findings

Summary f the Posttreatment Comprehension Spores

 

Comprehension measures were obtained by having the

subjects read a textbook selection and write a retelling.

108
The selection was taken from a chapter of a college textbook.
The retellings were scored by myself and a colleague using
instruments that had been tested and refined with a pilot
sample before data was collected. Results of the scoring
were computed into percentages and analyzed with the Mann—
Whitney U Test.

The strategic group showed the highest level of
comprehension with a mean of 32, while the procedural group
had a mean of 27 and the control group showed the poorest
performance with a mean of 20. A comparison of all scores
with the Mann—Whitney U Test yielded significant differences
between the comprehension performance of the strategic group
and the control group, and between the procedural group and
control group. However, no significant difference in

comprehension was found between the strategic group and the

procedural group.

Discussion 9; the Comprehension Finding;

At the outset, the general research question asked if
teaching SQ3R either as a multicomponent strategy or as a
study skills procedure would have an effect on university ESL
students' reading comprehension. Based on research conducted
with both reading strategies and SQ3R, it seemed reasonable
that either approach would result in higher comprehension
scores for ESL students, and, furthermore, that those who had
been taught SQ3R as a reading strategy would show a higher

level of comprehension than those taught SQ3R as a procedure.

109

The data produced mixed results. First, both treatment
groups did score significantly higher on the posttreatment
comprehension measure than the control group. In particular,
the data shows that the strategic group exhibited a
significantly higher level of comprehension on the
posttreatment test than the control group. The strategic
group's mean of 32 was a full twelve points higher than the
control group's 20, and the control group's highest
individual score of 39 was only slightly above the strategic
group's mean. The procedural group, with a mean of 27, also
scored significantly higher on the comprehension posttest
than the control group. Thus, teaching SQ3R to ESL students
appeared to have positive effects on their reading
comprehension.

These results provide evidence that successful reading
approaches for native speakers are applicable to reading in
English as a second language: teaching ESL students to be
strategic in reading English improves comprehension.’ This
supports assertions by Long and Sato (1985) and Carrell
(1987) that effective ESL instruction need not be limited to
the form and accuracy of linguistic structures, but must
include practice in the active process of reading.

Based on the research described in Chapter 2, it seemed
likely that the strategic group would exhibit a higher degree
of comprehension than the procedural group. Studies have
shown that explicit instruction of the how and why of

strategic reading is a prerequisite for effective reading

110
comprehension (Duffy, Roehler, Meloth, Vavrus, et al., 1986;
Duffy, Roehler, Sivan, Rackliffe, et al. 1987: Paris, Wasik,
and Van der Westhizen, 1988; Weinstein, 1987). While SQ3R as
a study skills procedure does encourage students to be active
and thoughtful about reading, the method does not provide for
metacognitive guidance into how, when, and why each step
should be used. Thus, it seemed reasonable that teaching'
SQ3R as a multicomponent reading strategy would have a
greater effect on comprehension teaching it as a study skills
procedure.

However, this assertion was not supported by the data.

A comparison of the results indicates that teaching SQ3R
either with explicit instruction on using the method
strategically or as a self-contained study skills unit has
about the same benefits on ESL reading comprehension.
Although the descriptive analysis suggested that the
strategic group showed a higher degree of comprehension than
the procedural group, these differences were not found to be
statistically significant.

The question arises as to why no significant differences
were found between the comprehension performance of the two
treatment groups. While the research reviewed in Chapter Two
suggested that teaching SQ3R as a multicomponent strategy
would lead to more effective comprehension than teaching the
method in a procedural approach as a study skills unit, the
results of this study indicate that short term instruction

with either approach results in equally beneficial effects on

111
reading comprehension. In short, significant differences in
comprehension effects between the two approaches cannot be
quickly accomplished. Duffy and Roehler (1989) have observed
that changing reading habits is a lengthy, and often
discouraging. process, and that students seldom undergo
complete transformations in response to initial instruction.
Thus, an eight week treatment period was too brief to affect
a significant difference between the two treatments. While
both approaches resulted in beneficial effects, the
instructional period was not sufficient for the students to
fully understand and utilize the complexities of strategic

reading.

Summary 9; the Comprehension Findingg

The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of
two approaches of teaching SQ3R on university ESL students
reading comprehension.

Results of the analysis indicate that both treatment
groups performed significantly better than the control group
in reading comprehension. However, while the strategic
groups' means were higher than the procedural groups', they
do not provide support for concluding that teaching SQ3R as a
multicomponent strategy was significantly more effective than
teaching SQ3R as a study skills method. This lack of
significant difference between the two approaches may be due

to the short term instructional period.

112
Summary 9; the Reports 9; Reading Strategies

The objective of Research Questions 4 -.6 was to
determine the effects of teaching SQ3R as a multicomponent
strategy and as a study skills procedure on university level
ESL students' reports of strategy use.

All subjects wrote reports on their reading behaviors as
part of the pretreatment measure. These reports showed no
group stating a more extensive use of strategies before
treatment than the other two groups; the strategic group had
a total of forty-four reports of strategies, while the
procedural group had forty-one reports and the control group
had forty-two reports. Furthermore, the number of reports
for each strategy was consistent across the three groups.
For example, underlining/highlighting was the most commonly
reported strategy in all three groups, mentioned by a
majority of subjects in all three groups, while comprehension
monitoring was completely unreported.

Results of the posttreatment measure showed the
strategic group reporting seventy-three total instances of
strategy use, the procedural group reporting sixty-two
instances, and the control reporting forty-two. Thus, the
strategic and procedural groups both showed a substantial
increase in the number of reported strategies, while the
control group‘s total of reports of strategy use remained

virtually unchanged (See Table 5.1).

113
Table 5.1

Comparison of Reported Strategy Use by Each Group Before and
After Treatment

 

Groups

1 = Strategic Group (n = 15)
2 = Procedural Group (n = 15)
3 = Control Group (n = 15)

 

Before After

1 2 3 1 2 3

1. Surveying 13 11 10 13 13 14
2. Underlining/Highlighting 13 13 14 13 12 10
3. Using Repair Strategies 9 8 8 11 7 4
4. Reviewing 4 2 4 10 9 7
5. Taking Notes 3 2 2 4 6 6
6. Using General Knowledge 1 2 2 2 1 0
7. Using Text Organization 1 1 1 2 1 0
8. Recall of General Knowledge 0 3 1 4 4 1
9. Formulating Questions 0 1 0 4 4 0
10. Comprehension Monitoring 0 0 0 10 5 0

Total 44 41 42 73 62 42

114
Discussion pf the Reportg _; Reading Strategies

The professional literature underlying the development
of native English speaking literacy asserts that explicitly
teaching students about strategies substantially improves
their awareness and active use of strategies (Pearson, Dole,
Duffy, and Roehler. 1989: Paris and Wixson, 1987: Wade and
Holmes, 1989). Based on this, it seemed likely that teaching
ESL students the SQ3R method as a multicomponent strategy
would increase their reports of strategy use. while teaching
SQ3R in a procedural approach would have a less positive
effect on the reports.

The posttreatment data provided some encouraging support
for this assertion. In reference to Research Question Four,
overall the strategic group produced the greatest number of
posttreatment reports of strategy use. Before comparing the.
pre- and posttreatment reports, the data were adjusted to
exclude surveying, underlining, and using repair strategies
since these had been reported by a majority of subjects
in all three groups before treatment. Surveying had been
introduced in the first semester ESL curriculum and was
emphasized throughout both terms, while underlining and using
repair strategies have usually been adOpted by students
during secondary education. Hence the students had awareness
and experience with these strategies before treatment.

After adjusting for the three excluded strategies, the
_strategic group reported a posttreatment total of thirty-six

instances of strategy use. an increase of twenty-seven

115
reports over the pretreatment measure. The most substantial
increase was in the area of comprehension monitoring,
assessing one's own comprehension while reading, which was
unreported in the pretreatment measure, but reported by ten
subjects in the strategic group after treatment. This
appears to be a clear case of treatment effect since the
reciting step of SQBR was taught to the strategic group as a
means of comprehension monitoring.

A second strategy that showed an increase of reported
posttreatment usage by the strategic group was reviewing.
This, too, appears to be a result of treatment, but possibly
more directly from SQ3R than from explicit strategy
instruction since the procedural group experienced a similar
increase in reports of this strategy. The remaining
strategies showed a moderate increase in reported use by the
strategic group.

At first glance, the results seem to be somewhat
disappointing since each strategy had been emphasized as part
of the treatment. However, as mentioned previously in the
discussion of the comprehension results, the eight week
treatment period was probably too brief to bring about a
substantial transformation in the students' independent
awareness and use of strategies. Thus, while the data do not
indicate that the subjects became independent, self-regulated
readers after eight weeks of strategy instruction, the
results do indicate increased awareness and use of strategies

on the part of the strategic group.

116

Research question five was concerned with the strategies
reported by the procedural group after receiving instruction
in SQ3R as a study skills unit during an eight week treatment
period. Again adjusting for the three excluded strategies,
the data showed an overall increase of 19 reports of strategy
use over the pretreatment measure. Thus, although teaching
SQBR as a study skills procedure does not explicitly
introduce strategic reading, exposure to the method did have
beneficial effects on the subjects' reporting of strategies.

The highest increase of procedural group reports
between measures was reviewing, with a gain of seven reports.
Taking notes and formulating questions before reading also
showed a moderate increase in reports. Since these three
activities are part of the SQ3R method, the increase in
reports are likely the result of treatment.

Interestingly, comprehension monitoring, which is not
explicitly addressed by SQ3R and was completely unreported by
all three groups before treatment, was reported in the
posttreatment measure by five subjects in the procedural
group. The reciting step of SQ3R does implicitly direct the
reader toward comprehension monitoring and procedural groups'
reports of this strategy are encouraging.

In reference to research question six, which was
concerned with the strategies reported by the control group.
the most interesting observation is that while this group
showed moderate gains in the reported use of three

strategies. they reported fewer instances of using four other

117
strategies after eight weeks. An overall posttreatment total
of forty-two strategies reported by the control group was
virtually unchanged from the pretreatment totals where
forty-one strategies were reported. After the adjustment for
the three excluded strategies, the control groups' total of
reported strategies is fourteen instances.

From the evidence provided by these results, giving ESL
students instruction and practice in approaching reading as
an active and constructive activity enhances their reported
use of strategies. In particular, explicitly teaching these
students to be strategic in their reading seem to have the
greatest effect on their strategy reports, especially with
comprehension monitoring. However, it is also evident that
instruction over a longer time frame is necessary for ESL
students to become totally selferegulating readers of

English.

Summary 9; the Reports 9; Reading Strategies

The purpose of these research questions was to examine
university ESL students reported use of reading strategies
after eight weeks of instruction in SQ3R.

The results showed that the strategic group had the
greatest number of reports in strategy use, followed by the
procedural and control groups. Furthermore, when comparing
the posttreatment reports with those written before
treatment, both the strategic and procedural groups showed a

sizeable increase in the number of reported strategies. The

118
most encouraging development was the increase of reports by
the strategic and procedural groups of comprehension
monitoring.

Overall, these results indicated that teaching ESL
students’ to SQBR both as a multicomponent strategy and as
study skills procedure has a beneficial effect on their
reported use of reading strategies. However, a longer
instructional period is necessary for ESL students to become

independently strategic in reading English.

Implications of the Findings

Implications for Teaching Reading p_ ESL Studentg

 

International students are often admitted to American
universities with language deficiencies which place them at a
severe disadvantage and, without supplementary instruction in
English, these students can expect to experience difficulties
in academic courses that emphasize learning from text
materials. The responsibility for providing this instruction
is usually delegated to English as a Second Language
programs. While enhancement of ESL students' competence with
English syntax and vocabulary may be necessary, teaching
these students strategies to help them successfully and
independently read academic textbooks should also be
integrated into the ESL reading curriculum.

However, the ESL approach to reading instruction seems
to have hardened into a linguistic dogma: language

proficiency is a prerequisite to strategy instruction.

119
Hudson (1982). for instance, contended that teaching ESL
students to use strategies before they have developed
linguistic competence impedes their reading comprehension.

This dissertation does not completely dispute this view.
Proficiency with the English language is necessary for
successful reading in English. Yet, the professional ESL
literature fails to provide guidance as to what constitutes
language proficiency or competence. That is, if language
competence is necessary before strategy instruction, what is
the criteria for determining sufficient language competence?
At the university level, placement in ESL automatically
assumes lack of language competence. Thus, ESL programs see
their responsibility as linguistic development: once students
have demonstrated minimal language proficiency. they are
dismissed from ESL. This approach thereby excludes any
opportunity for strategy instruction since by definition
linguistically competent students are not enrolled in ESL
courses.

The viewpoint of this dissertation, however, is that
while university level ESL students frequently have severe
deficiencies in the English language, their competence is at
a level of proficiency that is conducive to strategy
instruction. Moreover, it is the contention of this
researcher that teaching students to be active users of
reading strategies can compensate for many of their
linguistic weaknesses.

The results indicate that, at the university level at

120

least, teaching international students to be active and
reflective in their reading improves both their comprehension
and their use of reading strategies. These results have
implications for the teaching of reading to ESL students.

First, the inability of international students to
comprehend text may stem as much from their lack of effective
strategies as from deficiencies in syntax and word forms.
However, at present, little progress has been made toward
developing ESL instructional methods that improve the
awareness and use of reading strategies. Consequently, ESL
students do not receive instruction in becoming independent
and self-regulating readers who are fully engaged in the
constructive aspects of reading. This results of this study
suggest that university ESL students are not only capable of
receiving instruction in strategic reading, but benefit from
this instruction.

This implies a need to change the approach and design of
ESL reading instruction. As discussed earlier in this
dissertation, traditional approaches to reading in ESL have
been based on the premise that comprehension is inherent in
language and can be decoded through extensive familiarity
with linguistic structure and enhanced vocabulary, which
suggests that reading is a passive activity with the reader
as a receiver of information. Such an attitude is not
supported by current research in literacy, where the reading
process has been shown to be an active and complex

involvement of constructing meaning from text (Pearson, Dole.

121
Duffy, and Roehler, 1989). According to this viewpoint, a
reader does not passively look at text, but must use several
sources of information in the processing of constructing
meaning. These include the reader‘s knowledge of the
interrelated dynamics of the reading process, such as the
immediate purpose for reading, text structure and
organization, and background knowledge.

Despite extensive research supporting this view, much of
the ESL reading instruction remains devoted to workbook
exercises wherein the student is required only to discover
discrete points of information. For example, Long and Sato
(1983) concluded that despite two decades of language
teaching literature encouraging ESL instruction to focus
more, or even exclusively, on the communicative aspects of
language, ESL teachers continue to emphasize form over
meaning, accuracy over communication. Dinsmore (1985)
concurred commenting that ESL lessons often pass from
meaningless activity to silence as teachers and students work
at passing the time, and recommended that both ESL teachers
and teacher trainers question the basis of ESL instruction.

At present, university ESL reading instruction focuses
on testing and practice, using paragraphs or short selections
followed by lists of questions and with no attention directed
toward the strategic processes of reading although these
processes are essential for comprehension of text (Brown,
1990). This approach to teaching reading with contrived

reading material does not transfer to academic reading

122
situations wherein texts are complex, usually sequential, and
contain extensive amounts of novel information that the
reader is expected to comprehend and remember.

The results of this dissertation provide evidence that
university level ESL programs can successfully provide
students with instruction and practice in dealing with
lengthy and complex academic texts. Moreover, the results,
particularly the increased reports of comprehension
monitoring by both treatment groups, indicate that such
instruction encourages students to be reflective and more
active in their approach to reading tasks, exactly the
behaviors they need when they are dealing with academic
materials.

Another implication of this study is that, as a teaching
field, ESL needs not only to address the content of the
reading curriculum but also the training of ESL teachers to
implement the curriculum. For a strategy based curriculum to
work, the instructors must themselves be knowledgeable of the
nature and use of the metacognitive processes in reading, and
be capable of competently teaching these processes. This
means educating ESL instructors to be actively engaged in a
mediational role rather than merely monitoring student
responses to textbook exercises.

In the traditional approach, ESL instructors act
primarily as technicians who provide tools for decoding. A
TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages)

degree is usually a master of arts conferred through a

123
linguistics or English department. Few candidates enter the
programs with formal background in education, and the
programs are not concerned with cognitive learning theory.
Frequently, the only experience in teaching that ESL teachers
have before they take on classroom responsibilities is what
they have done as graduate assistants.

However, if the ESL reading curriculum incorporated
metacognitive instruction, the role of the ESL teacher would
change. The goal would be to provide the learner with means
of a becoming independent, self-regulating reader.

This suggests another implication to be drawn from this
dissertation. The results indicate that a university level
ESL student can be given responsibility for learning. In the
ESL reading instruction, classroom activity is centered on
the teacher with the students as passive respondents. While
this may logical in an approach that assumes the teacher has
the essential information need for success, in practice it
provides a false sense of the nature of academic reading.
With the primary class activity focused on responding to
exercises, the ESL student assumes that successful reading is
concentrating on discrete points of information, and is not
provided with experiences in what he or she will be expected
to do in academic coursework.

This study suggests that when university ESL students
are given the responsibility and opportunity to engage
actively in strategic reading, their perception of reading

changes. However, the results also indicate that this

124
change in perception requires time and practice before the
student becomes an independent, self-regulating reader. Yet,
ESL programs have a limited amount of time to devote to their
students before they transfer to their academic program,
after which student access to ESL is curtailed. Recognizing
this limitation, the design and implementing of the ESL
reading curriculum should be directed to providing
international students with worthwhile and relevant
instruction that fosters their development as capable and
independent readers of English.

To sum up, the implications of this dissertation for

teaching reading to ESL students are:

1. Since instruction in strategic reading and use of
reading strategies of the kind provided in this study
have a positive effect on university level ESL
students' reading comprehension and their reported
use of strategies, instruction in the active use of
reading strategies should be incorporated in the ESL
reading curriculum.

2. ESL classroom activities should be directed toward
active reading. not filling out exercises. Class
situations should be organized to encourage active
interaction of readers with text. University ESL
students do not need to sit behind desks listening to
the ESL reading teacher talk about word forms for
fifty minutes. They do need opportunities to learn

and practice reading within the classroom situation.

125

3. ESL instructors must have a background in cognitive
learning theories in general and with metacognitive
processes in particular. In addition, ESL teachers
need goal directed and supervised teaching experience
before they are awarded a TESOL degree.

4. ESL reading materials need to be longer and more
complex and should reflect the real language of
academic coursework.

5. International students should be given more
responsibility for their own learning. ESL
instructors need to shift their instructional
approach to a mediational role that encourages

students to be aware and active while reading.

Implications for Future Research

While this study suggested that instruction in strategic
reading and use of reading strategies improves ESL students'
reading performance, the results are inconclusive due to the
brief treatment period.

Further research replicating and extending this study is
needed. ‘Larger samples are needed and students of.different
language and educational background need to be studied. In
addition, improved measures of both comprehension and reports
of strategy use need to be developed and tested.

Research is also needed to determine if certain
strategies, such as comprehension monitoring, have more

impact on ESL students' reading comprehension than others.

126
Finally, research investigating the effects of training
ESL instructors in cognitive learning theories and teaching

strategic reading is needed.

Summary of Chapter Five
The results of this study indicate that using SQ3R as
a medium for teaching strategic reading and use of reading
strategies is beneficial for ESL reading instruction. These
results have implications for ESL curriculum development,
training of ESL instructors, and the role of ESL students in
classroom activities.

The findings of this dissertation suggest that future
research needs to address three specific areas. First, the
study should be replicated and expanded to include larger
samples and subjects of different linguistic and educational
backgrounds. In addition, measures need to be revised and
improved to effective gather data. Additional research is
also needed to identify specific strategies that would be
particularly useful for ESL students. Finally, effects of
training in strategic reading on ESL instructors should be

investigated.

APPENDICES

United States

lst
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th

7th
8th
9th

Appendix A

STRUCTURE or THE MALAYSIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM

Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade

Grade
Grade
Grade

10th Grade
11th Grade

2:93:31“.

Form VI

Diploma Courses

Primary and Secondary Education

Malaysia Notes

Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard

O‘U‘LUNH

All students are given an
assessment exam in Stan-
dard 5, but automatically
move to Form I after com-
pleting Standard 6

Form I

Form II

Form III All Form III students take
the SRP examination. Stu-
dents who pass continue on
with Form IV and Form V.
Those who do not pass are
dismissed from public
education

Form IV

Form V All Form V students take

the SPM examinations.
Those who fail receive a
general certificate and
are dismissed from public
education. Those who pass
are assigned to post—
secondary options.

Post-Secondary Options

Notes

Intensive two year pre-university
training. At the end of Form VI,
students take the STPM examination.
Those who pass are assigned to a local
University for degree study.

Several programs of various length.
including the two year teacher training
program, technical training courses, and
secretarial colleges. The largest num-
ber of diploma programs are offered by
ITM, which is open to Malays only.

127

Pro ram

Matriculation

Local University

Foreign Universit'
l

128
Notes

One or two year programs sponsored by
local universities. Students are
admitted to a degree program if their
grades are adequate.

Offer a variety of degrees. Eligible
students are assigned to a university by
the government. Sixty percent of all
openings are reserved for Malays

Students are sponsored by the government
and either sent directly to universities
in Britain. Australia. or the United
States or participate in a two year
matriculation program, such as the
ITM/MUCIA project, before entering the
university. Ninety percent of sponsored
openings are reserved for Malays. ITM
programs are open to Malays only.

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(F)

(A)

(B)

Range
25-23

22-20

19-18

17-15

14-1

Range
25-23

22-20

129
Appendix B
ESL COMPOSITION PROFILE

CONTENT

Description
EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD

Knowledgeable, thorough development of t0pic,
relevant

GOOD TO ABOVE AVERAGE

Some knowledge of subject. topic is
developed, but lacks detail, mostly relevant

AVERAGE TO FAIR

Limited knowledge of subject, topic not fully
developed, lacks detail, some irrelevant
support

POOR

Little knowledge of subject, inadequate
development of topic, mostly irrelevant
support

VERY POOR
No apparent knowledge of topic, topic
undeveloped, irrelevant support

or
Not enough to evaluate

ORGANIZATON
Description
EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD

Fluent expression of ideas, logical
organization and sequencing, unified

GOOD TO ABOVE AVERAGE

Somewhat fluent expression of ideas, topic
sentence supported, but may lack details

(C)

(D)

(F)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(F)

19-18

17-15

14-1

Range
25-23

22-20

19-18

17-15

14-1

130
AVERAGE TO FAIR
Expression often lacks fluency, limited
support of topic sentence. ideas may

sometimes be confused, development may be
illogical

POOR

Non-fluent, ideas are confused or
disconnected, lacks logical development

VERY POOR

Does not communicate. no real attempt at
organization

or
Not enough to evaluate

VOCABULARY
Qescpiption
EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD

Sophisticated range. effective word choice
and usage, word form mastery

GOOD TO ABOVE AVERAGE

Fairly sophisticated range, may have
occasional errors in word choice, meaning is

clear
AVERAGE TO FAIR

Adequate range, some errors in word choice,
meaning is occasionally unclear

POOR

Inadequate range, frequent errors in word
choice, meaning is sometimes unclear

VERY POOR

Little knowledge of English vocabulary.
little knowledge of word forms

or
Not enough to evaluate

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(F)

Range
25-23

22-20

19-18

17-15

14-1

131

LANGUAGE USE

Description
EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD

Effective complex constructions. syntax
variety, very few errors in spelling,
punctuation, and capitalization

GOOD TO ABOVE AVERAGE

Effective simple constructions and few errors
in complex constructions, few errors in
negation,agreement, tense, number, word
order, function. articles. pronouns, and
prepositions. few errors in spelling.
punctuation, and capitalization

AVERAGE TO FAIR

Some errors in simple and complex
constructions, some errors in negation,
agreement, tense. number. word order.
function, articles, pronouns. and
prepositions. presence of fragments. run-ons
and common splices. may have some errors in
spelling, punctuation, and capitalization

POOR

Frequent errors in simple constructions and
no attempt at complex conStructions, frequent
errors of agreement, tense, number, word
order, function, articles, pronouns, and
prepositions. presence of fragments, run-ons
and common splices. frequent errors in
spelling, punctuation, and capitalization

VERY POOR

No mastery of sentence construction, grammar,
or rules of mechanics, dominated by errors
or
Not enough to evaluate

132
Appendix C

ESL READING SYLLABUS

Instructional Objectives

1. General Instructional Objective

The student selects and employs the necessary language
skills, and comprehension strategies that are necessary
for comprehending academic materials that have been
written in a variety of modes.

Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of the course, students will

1.

apply pre—reading strategies before reading.
including
a. predicting audience, purpose. and content,
b. identifying the thesis of a selection,
c. using headings and subheadings,
d. using key vocabulary to derive predictions,
e. using pictures, charts, or graphs,
f. using questions at end of a text to predict
content,
recall explicitly stated information,
recall the main ideas of a selection by restating the
logical sequence of ideas,
infer information that is not explicitly stated.
distinguish between explicit facts and implied
information
identify author's purpose by
a. showing how the use of style, tone. and choice
of vocabulary indicates purpose,
b. detecting author's attitude toward topic,
use critical reading skills such as
a. distinguishing between facts and opinions,
b. identifying cause-effect relations,
c. formulating appropriate conclusions about
information
d. specifing content to support these conclusions,
and
independently use reading skills and strategies such
as -
a. outlining and summarizing to discriminate
between main ideas and supporting details.
b. using the text organization as an aid to
comprehension
c. drawing inferences and conclusions.
d. taking notes and marking text, and
e. recognizing problems and developing strategies
to solve the problems, such as rereading,
checking another source, or writing questions to
ask instructors.

Grading:

l.

133

Class Tests 50% 2. Midterm 25% 3. Final 25%

Work will be assigned points according to the Indiana
University system:

97-100 A- 83-86 B 70-72 C-
93-96 A 80-82 B- 67-69 D-
90-92 A- 77-79 c- 63-66 D
87-89 B- 73-76 C 60-62 D-

Instructional Schedule

a.
b.

Weeks 1 - 3 (Biology)

Textbook Sample: "The Chemical Background for
Biology”
Articles:

1. “The Natural History of AIDS"

2. ”The Cruel Logic of Our Genes"
Supplementary:

l. “Molecules of Memory"

2. “Junk Food Monkeys"

Weeks 4 - 6
(Sociology & Anthropology)

Textbook Samples:

1. “The Scope and Method of Sociology"

2. "What is Anthropology?"

3. ”Culture and Its Transmission"
Articles:

1. 'The Great Leap Forward"

2. “The Thera Theory"
Supplementary:

l. "The Education of a Samoan Child"

2. "What Does It Take to Be a Meat Eater?"

Weeks 7 - 10 (Environmental Science)

Textbook Sample: "Some Matter and Energy Laws"
Critical Thinking, Critical Choices

Unit 2. "The Ecosphere"
Articles:

1. ”You CAN Keep a Good Forest Down"

2. "Rape of the Rain Forest”

d. Supplementary:

1. Critical Thinking. Critical Choices
Unit 3, "Peaceful Coexistence"

2. “The Gripping Story of Paranthropus"

3. I'The Accidental Conquerer"

134
Weeks 11 - 13 (Business)

a. Textbook Sample: ”Societal Challenges Facing

Business”
b. Article: ”Consumer Behavior: Basic Concepts“
c. Supplementary: "Key Business Decisions"

Weeks 14 & 15 (Psychology)

a. Textbook Sample: ”Perception”
b. Article: "Depression at an Early Age”
c. Supplementary: "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation”

Supplementary Articles:

Alper, J. 1986. ”Depression at an Early Age,” Science
_8_, l: 5:47‘50.

Benderly, B. L., Gallagher, M. F., and Young, J. M.
1977. "What is Anthropology?" In Discovering
Culture: Ag Introduction pp Anthropology.
Wadsworth Publishing: Belmont. CA.

Diamond, J. 1989. "The Accidental Conquerer,” Discover
19, 12:70-76.

Diamond, J. 1989. ”The Cruel Logic of Our Genes.“
Discover 19, 11:72-79.

Diamond, J. 1989. "The Great Leap Forward,” Discover
1Q, 5:50-60.

Gonda. M. A. 1986. "The Natural History of AIDS."
Natural History 25, 5:78-81.

Miller, E. T. 1987. ”Some Matter and Energy Laws”. In
L. D. Latulippe (Ed.). Developipg Academic Reading
Skills. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs. NJ.

Montgomery, G. 1989. ”Molecues of Memory,” Discover
12; 12:46-55.

Shipman, P. 1988. ”What Does It Take to Be a Meat
Eater,” Discover 2, 9:38-45.

Sapolsky, R. M. 1989. "Junk Food Monkeys," Discover
LO_I 9:48-51.

Uhl, C. 1983. ”You Can Keep a Good Forest Down."
Natural History 22, 4:70-79.

135
Appendix D
THE SQ3R STUDY SYSTEM

The SQ3R study system is taught by many reading instructors.
The letters stand for the five steps in the process: (1)
Survey, (2) Question, (3) Read, (4) Recite. (5) Review.
Explanations of the five steps follow.

STEP 1 Survey

Survey or preview the selection before you begin reading
closely. Quickly skim through the material, noting the title
and main headings, the first and last paragraphs, words
marked in boldface or italics, and pictures and charts.

3 How long do you think a preview of a one-page article
should take?

 

* How long do you think a preview of a twenty-five page
chapter should take?

 

The length of the preview will vary with the nature of the
material and your purpose in reading. In general, though, a
preview of a one-page article might take a minute or so, and
the preview of a chapter might take four or five minutes.

STEP 2 Question

As you start reading closely, ask questions about the
material. Turn the title and subheadings and other key words
into basic questions. Use simple question words such as 522.
what, when, where, or gpy. For example, if the first heading
is "The Nature of Power,” ask yourself, “What is the nature
of power?" The look actively for the answer to the question.
Keep asking questions and trying to guess what will come next
all through your reading. The questions will help you
concentrate on the material and make your reading an active

rather than a passive process.

a What basic question could be made out of the chapter
title. "Deviant Behavior"?

 

1 What question could be made out of the heading, "The Myth
of the Southern Gentlemen"?

 

136

STEP 3 Read

Read the selection carefully. Look for answers to your
questions and change the questions when necessary. Try to
spend more time with the material that seems most important
and go quickly through material that seems less important.
You may want to use a pen as you read to highlight key

points.
STEP 4 Recite

Look away after you complete a section. See if you can
recite to yourself the important points in the material.
This recitation will make clear exactly what you know and
what you don't. Go back and reread as necessary until you
can recall all the important material in a section.

While carrying out this step, you may also want to write down
all the information you feel you must remember on a separate
sheet of paper. This information can be in the form of basic
questions and your answers to the questions. It can also be
in an outline form. Such study notes will help you with the

last step of SQ3R.

* Do you study material mainly by reading and rereading or
mainly by reading and reciting?

 

STEP 5 Review

Go back over all the material. You have already tested
yourself on individual sections: now study until you can
recite to yourself all the important ideas in the selection.
If you have taken written notes from the start, the material

will be much easier to review.

137
Appendix E

PRETREATMENI READING SELECTION

Selection from "The Origin of the Earth, Its Oceans, and Life
in the Oceans”

Origin of the Atmosphere and Oceans

The solidification of the earth's crust marks the
beginning of geologic history, and evidence indicates that
this event occurred about 4.5 million years ago. At this
time the earth had lost all but a small fraction of its
original gas envelope. It would seem improbable that there
would have been much of an atmosphere surrounding the earth
at this time, if we consider the tremendous amount of energy
that was being radiated from the earth as it cooled from its
molten condition.

All of this heat energy was made available to the
molecules of the atmosphere, and they undoubtedly would have
been able to achieve a velocity well above that required to
escape the earth's gravitational field. The lighter the
molecule and the higher the energy of that molecule, the
greater is the probability that a gas composed of such
molecules will escape from the earth's surface. It has been
calculated that when the average molecular velocity in an
atmosphere exceeds one-fourth of the planet's escape
velocity, which for earth is 11.4km/s, the atmosphere will be
lost into space within a relatively short period of time. At
present hydrogen and helium are rapidly lost from the earth's
atmosphere, while gases such as oxygen and nitrogen, composed
of heavier molecules, are retained.

The Atmosphere Forms

Where did the material to make the present atmosphere and
ocean come from? Although the earth's surface had become
relatively cool by this stage in its development, there was
still much volcanic activity according to the geologic
record. As volcanic gases bubbled up from the earth's upper
mantle, they formed a new atmosphere as soon as the earth had
cooled enough to retain one. This atmosphere was far
different from the one that the earth had lost and from the
one that it presently has. It contained little free oxygen
and was composed of large percentages of carbon dioxide and
water vapor. As the earth cooled to the point at which it
could retain these gases, a vast envelope of clouds
surrounded the planet, causing the earth to reflect about 60
percent of all the sunlight that was directed toward it.

Most of the energy it absorbed from the sun remained in the
.thick envelope of gases and did not reach the surface of the

solid earth.

138

Water vapor released from the surface of the earth was
captured in the thick envelope and was forced to remain there
as a vapor until sufficient cooling of the earth's crust
would allow it to condense and begin to accumulate as a
liquid. Eventually. cooling of the crust allowed the water
vapor to condense and fall under the force of gravity to the
earth's surface. Finally, with further decrease in the
surface temperature, permanent accumulation of water began in
depressions on the earth‘ irregular surface.

The Oceans Evolve

These accumulations were the initial oceans on planet
earth, and it is assumed that this water has been permanently
in existence since its formation. The oceans were probably
somewhat less saline than the present oceans, but the primary
crystalline rocks that made up the earth's crust were
weathered and eroded. The inorganic compounds of which they
were composed were dissolved in the waters that fell
relentlessly upon their surfaces and were carried into the
newly forming oceans.

The process of cooling the earth's surface, which allowed
the water vapor to finally condense and accumulate to form
the earth's first oceans, was accelerated by water's property
of high heat capacity. The heat energy that prevented the
water from accumulating on the earth's surface was being
absorbed by that massive cloud of water vapor and carbon
dioxide that surrounded the earth's surface. As the
individual molecules of water absorbed the heat at the
earth's surface and moved through the cloud to its outer
edges where they were frozen into ice crystals, large
quantities of heat were released into outer space. We
Inight say that water vapor was working hard to achieve its
ultimate goal of establishing for itself a permanent resting
place on the earth's surface.

The Chemical Balance Sheet

As chemical weathering of the primary rocks that composed
the original earth's crust was made possible by the
.appearance of water, the process of chemical weathering
should be considered. As a result of chemical weathering,
the elements that were contained in the primary crystalline
.rock were freed, dissolved in the water, and carried off to
accumulate in the ocean. As the water carried these
dissolved elements and compounds into the ocean, it also
carried a great load of particulate material that had been
weathered and eroded from the crystalline rocks and deposited
this material as sediment. The components of the primary
crystalline rock that were freed by chemical weathering must
be found (1) dissolved in the ocean, (2) as components of the
earth's atmosphere. or (3) chemically bound with the
sediments that have been carried into the sea by the rivers.

The estimates that have been made for these various

139

amounts, of course. will not be exact, The estimate for the
ocean is probably one of the most accurate, since the ocean
volume is relatively well known and its composition is
comparatively uniform because it is well mixed. The
estimates are less accurate for crystalline rock, which is
quite heterogeneous, and for the sediments, which are of
various types. Nevertheless, geochemists have drawn up
balance sheets for the various elements and those calculated
by different individuals working on the problem agree fairly
well. For those elements which are most common in
crystalline rocks. the geochemical equations balance well
within the limits set by the accuracy of the estimates.

Excess Volatiles

 

There are some components that do not balance in any of
the attempts that have been made. These elements and
compounds appear to be much more abundant in the atmosphere.
the ocean. and the sediments than can be accounted for by the
volume of crystalline rocks which have been estimated to have
undergone chemical weathering. All of these substances that
are found in excessive amounts compared to the products of
chemical weathering are volatile (gaseous) at or slightly
above the average temperatures found at the earth's surface
and are therefore called excess volatiles. Most abundant of
the excess volatiles are water vapor and carbon dioxide: also
important are quantities of chlorine, nitrogen, sulfur,
hydrogen, and flourine.

Volcanic activity is presently producing these gases and
venting them into the earth's atmosphere. A great percentage
of the gases that surface as a result of volcanic activity
may simply be recycled volatiles that have been dissolved in
groundwater and carried down from the earth's surface. but it
has been determined that a small percentage of the total
volatiles is always composed of new gases that have for the
first time been released from the crystalline rock of the
earth's crust. When molten magma cools, solid minerals are
formed and some of the gaseous constituents of the magma are
freed. These gases, freed during the crystallization
process, represent the new material coming to the earth's

surface from the mantle.

140
Appendix F

POSTTREATMENT READING SELECTION

Selection from ”The Origin of Ocean Basins: The Theory of
Plate Tectonics"

The fact that we live on a dynamic earth on which
movement is the rule rather than the exception has long been
accepted by geologists. Geologic processes responsible for
the ever-changing landscape of the continents are believed to
require long periods of geologic time to build such features
as mountains. However, many geologists weie not prepared
until recent years to accept, along with the movements
associated with the building of mountain ranges, a dynamic
characteristic of the earth that was of a much broader scope
-- the movement of continents. When geologists speak of the
movement of continental masses across the earth's surface,
they sometimes refer to this phenomenon as continental drift.

Marine geologists who have studied the ocean floor and
recently developed theories concerning why the continents are
moving relative ot one another may use the term pg; floor
spreading. The name for this theory is derived from
evidence indicating the the new oceanic crust and rigid upper
mantle material is being formed along the axes of a series of
midocean ridges and rises. The newly formed material then
moves down both slopes away from the axes. The continents
float on this denser material and are carried along by the
moving layer of denser rock.

A third term used to encompass the totality of the proces
is plate tectonics. Study of the process has indicated that
there are a number of major plates into which this rock
sphere, or lithosphere, can be divided. The interaction of
these plates as they move builds the structural features of
the earth's crust that can be observed by geologists. Thus.
tectonics refers to the building of the earth's crustal
structure and is dervied from the Greek tektonikog, which
means to construct.

The possibility that the continents may be moving across
the surface of the earth is not new. Such a possibility was
suggested early in the 19th century, and the first theory
attempting to explain the movement was presented in 1912.
With such a long history of awareness of the possibility of
such movement, why has acceptance of theories related to the
process been so long in coming?

Development 9; the Theorv

 

The first scientific observations related to the possible
breakup of the continents that moved to either side of the
Atlantic Ocean were made by Antonio Snider-Felligrini in
1858. He presented the first reconstruction of the
continents as they may have existed prior to their

141

separation. He considered that the 300-million-year-old coal
deposits so widespread in western Europe and eastern North
America must have been deposited when these landmasses were
united.

Also using geological evidence, particularly the origin
and alignment of mountain ranges on opposite sides of the
Atlantic, were two Americans. Frank Taylor and Howard Baker.
Taylor, who included in his discussion the possible origin of
these mountain ranges, presented in 1908 a well-developed
argument for large-scale continental movements.

Alfred Wegener,.however, is considered by most scientists
to be the pioneer of the modern continental drift theory.
This German scientist originally was drawn to the concept in
an attempt to explain the ancient climates that were recorded
in the rocks deposited in ocean basins and on landmasses of
the past. Wegener's theory was published in 1912 and met a
great deal of resistance from the scientific community.

Wegener considered that about 200 million years ago all
of the continental mass of the earth was one large continent.
Pangaea. About 180 million years ago, the continent began to
break up and the various continental masses we know today
started to drift towward their present position. Since it
was impossible at that time to present evidence that would
support a mechanism for such transportation, the theory did
not receive wide acceptance.

It is interesting that John Joly, an Irish physicist,
suggested that the heat generated in the interior of the
earth by radioactive decay found its way to the surface
through slowly moving convection cells that could carry the
continents laterally across the earth's surface. Although we
call on such a process today to account for the movement of
continental masses, Joly's theory ran into great difficulty
because there were no observational data that would indicate
the presence of convection cells in the earth's interior.
Such a theory was further developed by Arthur Holmes in 1927.
Holmes, a strong proponent of continental drift as a
geological reality, derived much of his supporting data from
the radioactive methods of dating rocks, a field in which he
was a pioneer.

Although many Southern Hemisphere geologists had accepted
continental drift as a geological reality. it was not until
the 1950's that geologists of the Northern Hemisphere began
to give it serious attention. The impetus for the renewed
attention arose from the study of the earth's ancient
magnetis:. The British geophysicist, S. Keith Runcorn.
explained his observations of the magnetic properties of the
rocks of Europe and North America in terms of continental
movements. .

On the basis of this study of the earth's ancient
magnetic fields. convincing arguments could be made for the
fact that the continents had drifted relative to one another.
.As study continued, more evidence was gathered to support
this movement, and additional data suggested the mechanism by

w-.‘

which the movement might have taken place. In the next

142

section, we will outline in some detail the early
observations that led to the intial interest in the theory of

continental drift.

Continental Jigsaw

We should consider how well the continents do fit
together. Attempts were made by many of the early
investigators to arrange the continents in a manner that
would achieve a reasonable fit and support their data. Most
of these attempts used the existing shoreline as the margin
of the continent. However, the continental shelf and the
continental slope should also be considered to be part of the
continental mass. Studies of the magnetic intensity and
gravitational attraction of the earth's crust support such a
contention.

There is a distinct increase in the magnetic intensity of
oceanic crustal rocks over that of the continental crustal
rocks. and the gravitational attraction over the ocean is
measurably greater than that at the same elevation on the
continents. The increase intensity of the magnetism of the
rocks is caused by higher iron content of oceanic crustal
rocks. while the increased gravitational attraction indicates
a higher average density of the oceanic crustal material as
compared to that of the continent.

Sir Edward Bullard, an English geophysicist, constructed
a computer fit of all the continents in 1965. The
arrangement that produced minimum overlaps and gaps was found
to be formed by continents outlined by the 2000-m-depth
contour. This contour represents a depth that is
approximately halfway down the continental slope. The
greatest doubt as to the fit presently lies along the east
coast of Africa. where the margin of the continent is not so
easily defined. In general, the fit of the continents is
remarkably good, and it is difficult to explain such a '
fit without having to consider very strongly the possibility
that these continents were at one time united.

143
Appendix G
PRETREATMENT SCORING MEANSCRE

Origin of Atmosphere and Oceans

(Solidifying of Earth's Crust) Pt

Earth's crust solidified {about 4.5 billion years ago] 2

a. Tremendous amount of heat energy was lost
b. Hydrogen & helium molecules escaped from earth
c. Oxygen & nitrogen molecules remained

(The Atmosphere Forms)

Material for atmosphere & oceans came from volcanic

activity which released water vapor 2

a. As earth cooled, water condensed into rain
b. Further cooling cause water to form on surface

(The Oceans Evolve)

The oceans evolved from water formed out of the
atmosphere
a. Oceans were less salty than now
b. Crystalline rocks dissolved in waters
c. Cooling of earth was helped by water
d. Some heat was absorbed by clouds and released
into space

I“)

(The Chemical Balance Sheet)

[Because of chemical weathering]. elements in crystaline

rocks was dissolved & taken to oceans 2

a. Other materials became sediment
b. Material from crystalline rocks are found
in ocean, atmosphere, or sediment
c. Amounts of material in each area can only be

estimated
d. Amounts in ocean probably most accurate estimate
e. Estimates in rock least accurate
f. However. scientists have drawn up balanced
estimates

(Excess Volatiles)

Excess Volatiles are excess substances in a gaseous

(volatile) state 2
Most abundant are water vapor & carbon dioxide

Excess volatiles come from volanos 2
a. Most excess volatiles are recycled
b. Some are new gases freed by volcanic heat

pm

HHH

HHH

HH

144
Appendix H
POSTTREATMENI SCORING MEASURE
Origin of Ocean Basins

Earth's continents are moving across the earth's surface 2

Three types of continental movement 2
a. Continental drift -- movement of continental mass 1
b. Sea floor spread -- moxement of sea floor 1
c. Plate techtonics -- movement of plates 1

Development of the Theory

First continental reconstruction was proposed [by Antonio
Snider-Pelligrini in 1858]

He suggested that coal was deposited in Europe

and North America when continents were united. 1

It.)

Mountain ranges were used as evidence [by Frank Taylor

and Howard Baker] 2
Well developed argument presented by Taylor in 1908

1

Alfred Wegener is considered the pioneer of modern drift
theory [1912] _ 2
He tried to explain the ancient climates 1

Wegener's Theory: Continental mass was originally one
continent, Pangaea 2
a. 180 million years ago the continent broke up and

parts began to drift
b. Wegener's Theory was not well accepted

HH

John Joly suggested that heat from earth's interior

created convection cells 2
a. Process explains continental movement
b. Evidence provided by Arthur Holmes in 1927

HP

Geologists in northern hemisphere did not give theory
attention until 1950's 2
a. Arose from study of ancient magnetism 1
b. Magnetic properties explained by continental
drift [by 8. Keith Runcorn] 1

How well do continents fit together? 2
a. Early attempts used shoreline l
b. Continental shelf and slope work better 1

Computer fit of continents constructed [in 1969 by

Sir Edward Bullard] 2
a. Best arrangement was at 2000 m depth 1
b. Overall continental fit is good 1

9.

145
Appendix I

STRATEGY USE EVALUATION FORM

Recall of general knowledge (RK) -- subject reports
relecting on previously known information before reading.

Surveying (SV) -- subject reports previewing the selection
before reading and identifies previewing skills such as
reading headings and subheadings, looking at graphs and
diagrams, etc.

Formulating questions (FQ) -- subject reports generating
questions to answered while reading.

Using text organization (TO) -- subject reports using
organizatonal devices included in the text to help ease
reading, such as signal words, transitions, etc.

Using general knowledge (UK) -- subject reports referring
to knowledge and experience to explain, clarify, question,
or extend information from the text while reading.

Using repair strategy (RS) -- subject reports using a
strategy. such as looking back, to resolve a comprehension
problem.

Taking Notes (NT) -- subject reports making notes for
later reference while reading.

Underlining or highlighting (UL) -- subject reports
marking important items in the text by underlining or
highlighting with a marker.

Reviewing (RV) -- subject reports systematically reviewing
notes and marked items, recalling the information, etc.

10. Comprehension monitoring (CM) -- subject reports

comprehension throughout the reading activity.

11. Other strategies (OT) -- subject reports using a strategy

that is not covered by any of the above categories.

_

LI ST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Adams, A., Carnine, D., and Gersten, R. (1982). Instruc-
tional strategies for studying content area texts in
intermediate grades. Reading Research Quarterlv ;§.
1:27-54.

Adams, M. J. and Collins, A. (1979). A schema-theoretic
view of reading. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), New Directions
ip Discourse Procegsing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Aebersold, J. A., Kowitz, J., Schwarte, 8., and Smith, E. L.
(1985). Critical Thinking; Criticgl Choices: Book A;
Reading and Writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.

Anderson, R. C. and Pearson. P. D. (1984). A schema-
theoretic view of basic processes in reading. In P. D.
Pearson (Ed.), Handbook 9; Reading Research. New York:
Longman.

Anwar. Z. (1987). Islamic Revivalism ip Malaysia: Dakwah
Among the Students. Kuala Lumpur: Pelanduk Publications.

Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., and Ostertag, J. (1987).
Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate
learning from expository text? Readigg Research Quar-
terly 22, 3:331-346.

Armbruster, B. B., Echols, C. H., and Brown, A.L. (1982).
The role of metacognition in reading to learn: A
developmental perspective. _Volta Review £33 5:45-56.

Baird, J. R. and White, R. T. (1984). Improving learning
through enhanced metacognition: A classroom study.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 1984.

Baker, L. and Anderson, R. I. (1982). Effects of incon-
sistent information on text processing: Evidence for
comprehension monitoring. Rggding Resegrch Quarterlv
11. 2:281-294.

Baker, L. and Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and

reading. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook 9; Reading
Research. New York: Longman.

146

147

Baumann, J. (1984). The effectiveness of a direct instruc-
tion paradigm for teaching main idea comprehension.

Reading Research Quarterly g9, 1:93-115.

Beck, I. L. (1989). Improving practice through understanding
reading. In L. B. Resneck and L. E. Klopfer (Eds.).
Toward the Thinking Curriculum: Current Cognitive
Research. 1989 Yearbook of the Association for
‘Supervision and Curriculum Development

Berkowitz, S. J. (1986). Effects of instruction in text
organization on sixth-grade students' memory for
expository reading. Reading Research Quarterly 2;,
2:161-178.

Block. E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second
language readers. TESOL Quarterly g9, 3:463-494.

Borg, W. R. and Gall, M. D. (1983) Educational Reseprch. Ag
Introduction. New York: Longman.

Brock, C. A. (1986). The effects of referential questions
on ESL classroom discourse. TESOL Quarterly 29. 1:47-
60.

Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where and how to
remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser
(Ed.), Advances 1p Instrpctiongl Psychology. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.

Brown, A. L. (1981). Metacognition and reading and writing:
The development and facilitation of selective attention
strategies for learning from text. In M. Kamil (Ed.).
Directions ip Reading: Research gpg Instruction.
Washington, DC: National Reading Conference.

Brown, A. L. (1985). Metacognition: The development of
selective attention strategies for learning from texts.
In H. Singer and R. B. Rudell (Eds.). Theoreticgl Models
gpg Processes 9; Reading. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.

Brown, A. L., Palincsar, M. S. and Ambruster. B. B. (1984).
Inducing comprehension-fostering activities in
interactive learning situations. In H. Mandl, N. Stein,
and T. Trabasso (Eds.). Learning gpg Comprehension pf
Texts. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brown, R. L. (1990). Strangers in a Strange Land: An
Observational Study of a University English as a Second
Language Reading Class. Paper submitted for possible
publication in the TESOL anrtlerlv.

148

Campoverde. C. (1985). Metacognitive language in bilingual
children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Chicago,
1985. '

Carr, E. M., Dewtiz, P., and Patberg, J. P. (1983). The~‘
effect of inference training on children's comprehension
of expository text. Journal 9; Reading Behgyior lg,
3:1-18.

Carrell, P. L. (1984). Effects of rhetorical organization on
ESL readers. TESOL Quarterly lg. 3:441-470.

Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching
text structure. TESOL Quarterly 12. 4:727-752.

Carrell. P. L. (1987). A view of written text as communi-
cation interaction: Implications for reading in a
second language. In J. Devine, P. L. Carrell, and D.

E. Eskey (Eds.). Research 1p Reading 1p English pp p
Second Language. Washington, D.C.: Teachers of English
to Speakers of Other Languages.

Carrell. P. L. (1989). Metacognitive study training for ESL
reading. TESOL Quarterlv pg, 4: 647-678.

Carrell, P. L. and Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory
and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly 11” 4:553-
574.

Carroll, J. (1970). The nature of the reading process. In
Doris V. Gunderson (Ed.), Language and Reading. Wash-
ington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Chaffee, J. (1985). Viewing reading and writing as thinking
processes. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Chicago, 31
March - 4 April. 1985.

Chan. L. (1988). The role of language in metacognitive
instruction. In v. Bickley (Ed.), Language in Educggion
ip’g Bi-Lingyal pp Multi-Lingpal Setting. Hong Kong:
Institute of Language in Education.

Cioffi, G. (1986). Relationships among comprehension
strategies reported by college students. Reading
Research and Instrpgtion 2;, 2:220-231.

Clarke, M. A. (1980). The short circuit hypothesis of ESL
reading -- or when language competence interferes with
reading performance. Modern Language Journal pi, 2:203-
209.

149

Clarke, M. A. and Silberstein. S. (1978). Toward a
realization of psycholinguistic principles in the ESL

class. Language Learning 21: 1:135-154.

Coh-:~ S. F. 1985). Comprehension monitoring strategies for
whole text. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the College Reading Association. Pittsburg, 1985.

Coletta, N. J. (1977). Class and cultural manifestations of
Malay education in a plantation context. In J. Lent
(Ed.) Cultural Pluralism ip flglavsia: Polityy Military,
Education; Religiongrgpg Social Class. DeKalb, IL:
Center for Souteast Asian Stuoies. Northern Illinois
University (Special Report No. 14).

Connor, U. (1987). The eclectic synergy of methods of
reading research. In J. Devine, P. L. Carrell, and D.
E. Eskey (Eds.) Research 1p Reading 1p English pg 2
Second Lapgpage. Washington, D.C.: Teachers of English
to Speakers of Other Languages.

Connor, U. (1984) Recall of Text: Differences between
first and second language readers. TESOL Quarterlv 12,
2:239-56.

Courtney. L. (1965). Recent develOpments in reading
instruction in content areas. In H. A. Robinson (Ed.).
Recent Developmentg in Reading. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.

Davey, B. and Porter, S. M. (1982). Comprehension-rating: A
procedure to assist poor comprehenders. Journal 92
Reading 2g, 3:197-202.

De Klerk, L. F. (1987). The role of prior experience in
learning from instruction. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Washington. DC. 1987.

Dermody, M. (1988). Metacognitive strategies for develop-
ment of reading comprehension for younger children.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of American
Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New
Orleans, 1988.

Dewitz, P., Carr. E. M., and Patberg, J. P. (1987). Effects
of inference training on comprehension and comprehension
monitoring. Reading Research Quarterly 22, 1:99-121.

Dinsmore. D. (1985). Waiting for Godot in the EFL class-
room. ELT Journal 22, 4:225-234.

Donald, M. (1967). The SQ3R method in grade seven. Journal
9; Reading 2;, 1:33-35, 43.

150

Duffy, G. G. and Roehler. L. R. (1986). Improving Classroom
Reading Instruction: 2 Decision-making Approach. New
York: Random House.

Duffy, G. G. and Roehler, L. R. (1989). Why strategy
instruction is so difficult’and what we need to do about
it. In C. B. McCormick, G. Miller, and M. Pressley
(Eds.), Cognitive Stratggy Research: From Basic
Research pp Educational Applications. New York:
Springer-Verlag.

Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L.,
Book, C., Putnam, J., and Wesselman. R. (1986). The
relationship between explicit verbal explanations during
reading skill instruction and student awareness and
achievement: A study of reading teacher effects.

Reading Resegrch Quarterly 2;, 3:237-252.

Duffy. G. G., Roehler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, 6., Book,
C., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. R., Wesselman, R., Putnam,
J., and Bassiri, D. (1987). Effect of explaining the
reasoning associated with using reading strategies.

Reading Research Quarterly 22, 3:347-368.

Durr, W. K. (1963). Improving secondary reading through the
content subjects. In J. A. Figurel (Ed.). Reading pg
pp Intellectugl Activity. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.

Fisk, E. K. and Osman, R. (1982) The Political Economy 9;
Malaysia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem
solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The Nature 9;

Intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gilbert, L. C. (1986). Inducement of metacognitive learing
strategies: Task knowledge, instructions, and training.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association. San Francisco, 1986.

Gunstone, R. F. (1988). Some long-term effects of unin-
formed conceptual change. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association

New Orleans. 1988.

Gustafson, D. J. and Pederson, J. E. (1984). SQ3R -- Myth or
sound procedure? Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the Wisconsin State Reading Association, Oconomowoc.

"1319840

151

Gustafson, D. J. and Pederson, J. E. (1985). SQ3R: Survey-
ing and questioning the recent (and not so recent)
research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Great Lakes Regional Conference of the International
Reading Association, Milwaukee, 1985.

Hanson, J. and Hubbard. R. (1984). Poor readers can draw
inferences. Reading Teacher 11, 7: 586-89.

Hare, V. C. and Borchardt. K. M. (1984). Direct instruction
of summarization skills. Reading Research Quarterlv 2g,
1: 62-78. .

Hodges, C. (1982). Enhancing imtermediate grade students'
comprehension and attitude toward reading in the content
areas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Eastern Regional Conference of the International Reading

Association. Boston, 1982.

Holmes, B. C. (1983). A confirmation strategy for improving
poor readers' ability to answer inferential questions.

Reading Teacher 21. 2: 144-48.

Holmes, 8. C. (1985). The effects of a strategy and
sequenced materials on the inferential comprehension of
disabled readers. Journal 9; Learning Disabilities lg.
9: 542-46.

Hudson, T. (1982). The effects of induced schemata on the
”short circuit” in L2 reading: Non-decoding factors in

L2 reading performance. Language Learning 22, 1:1-31.

Inglis, C. (1979). Educational policy and occupational
structures in peninsular Malaysia. In J. Jackson and M.
Ruder (Eds.). Issues in_Malavsian Development. Sing-
pore: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.

Johns, J. L. and McNamara, L. P. (1980). The SQ3R study
technique: A forgotten research target. Journal 9;

Reading 2;, 8:705-708.

Johnson, H. W. (1964). Another study method. Journal g;
Developmental Reading 1, 4:269-82.

Kopfstein, R. W. (1982). SQ3R doesn't work -- or does it?
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western
College Reading Association, San Diego, 1982.

Karabenick, S. A. (1987). Cognitive learning strategies:
Their relation to perceived need and help-seeking
behavior. Paper presented at the annual convention of
-the American Psychological Association, New York, 1987.

152

Knight, S. L., Padron, Y. N., and Waxman, H. C. (1985). The
cognitive strategies of ESL students. TESOL Quarterlv
12. 4:789-792.

Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and Practice in Second
Language Acquisition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.

Langan, J. (1982). Reading and Study Skills. New York:

Lim, K. S., Singh, K., Muzaffer, C. and Tan. P. (1985)
Human Rights in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Democratic
Action Party Human Rights Committee.

Long, M. H. and Sato, C. J. (1983). Classroom Foreigner
Talk Discourse: Forms and Functions of Teachers'
Questions. In H. W. Seliger and M. H. Long (Eds.).
Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language
Acguisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Lundeberg, M. A. (1987). Metacognitive aspects of reading
comprehension: Studying understanding in legal case
analysis. Reading Research Quarterlv 22, 4:407-432.

McCormick, S. and Hill. D. S. (1984). An analysis of the
effects of two procedures for increasing disabled
readers' inferencing skills. Journal 9; Educational
Research 11, 4:219-26.

Mattingly, I. G. (1972). Reading, the linguistic process.
and linguistic awareness. In J. F. Kavanaugh and I. G.
Mattingly (Eds.), Language by Ear and Eye. Cambridge.
MA: MIT Press.

Mendelsohn, D. J. (1981). We Should Assess Lexical
Richness, Not Only Lexical Errors. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of TESOL, Detroit, 1981.

Montague, M. and Tanner, M. L. (1987). Reading strategy
groups for content area instruction. Journal 9; Reading
19. 8:716-725.

Muzaffer, C. (1987). Islamic Resurgence in Malaysia. Kuala
Lumpur: Penerbit Fajar Bakti Sdn. Bhd.

Nist, S. L., Simpson, M. L., and Hogrebe. M. C. (1985). The
relationship between the use of study strategies and
test performance. Journal 9; Reading Behavior 11, 1:
15-28.

Ohlhausen, M. M. and Roller, C. M. (1988). The operation of
' text structure and content schemata in isolation and in

isolation. Reading Research Quarterlv 22, 1:70-88.

153

Olshavsky, J. E. and Kletzing. K. (1979). Prediction: One
strategy for reading success in high school. Journal 9;

Beading 22, 6:513-516.

O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G.,
Russo, R. P., and Kupper, L. 1985. Learning strategy
applications with students of English as a second
language. TESOL Quarterlv 22, 3:557-584.

Padron. Y. N. and Waxman, H. C. (1988). The effect of ESL
students'perceptions of their cognitive strategies on
reading achievement. TESOL Quarterly 22, 1:146-150

Palincsar, A. S. (1985). The unpacking of a multi-
component, metacognitive training package. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Chicago, 1985.

Palincsar. A. S. and Brown. A. L. (1989). Instruction for
self-regulated reading.‘ In L. B. Resnick and L. E.
Klopfer (Eds.). Toward ppg Thinking Curriculum: Current
Cognitive Research. Alexandria, VA: AssOciation for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Paris, 8. 6., Cross. D. R, and Lipson, M. Y. (1984).
Informed strategies for learning: A program to improve
children's reading awareness and comprehension. Journal

92 Educational Psychology 1g, 6: 1239-52.

Paris. S. G. and Jacobs. J. E. (1984). The benefits of
informed instruction for children's reading awareness
and comprehension skills. Child Development 2;, 2083-
2093 0

Paris, 5. G., Lipson, M. Y., and Wixson, K. K. (1983).
Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational

Psychology 2, 293-316.

Paris, S. G. and Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension
monitoring. memory, and study strategies or good and
poor readers. Journal 92 Reading Behavior 22. 1: 5-22.

Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A. and Van der Westhuizen, G.
(1988). Metacognition: A review of research on
metacognition and reading. In J. E. Reardence and R. S.
Baldwin (Eds.), Dialogues in Literacy Research, Chicago:
National Reading Conference.

Paris, S. G. and Wixson, K. K. (1987). The development of
literacy: Access, acquisition, and instruction. In
Bloome, D. (Ed.), Literacv gpg Schooling. Norwood, NJ:
Ablex.

 

154

Pearson,-P. D., Dole, J., Duffy, G. G., and Roehler, L. R.
(1989). Developing expertise in reading comprehension:
What should be taught? How should it be taught? In
Fastrup. A. amd Samuels, S. J. (Eds). What Research 22;
lg 22y About Reading Instruction, Second Edition.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Pearson, P. D. and Gallagher. M. C. (1983). The instruction
of reading comprehension. Contemporarv Educational

[svchology g, 317-344.

Pitts, M. M. (1983). Comprehension monitoring: Definition
and practice. Journal 9; Reading 2g. 6: 516-23.

Provencher. R. (1982). Islam in Malaysia and Thailand. In
R. Israeli (Ed.), The Crescent 1p the East: Islam in

Asia Major. London: Curzon Press.

Rakes. T. A. and Scott, S. M. (1983). Using teacher/student
generated questions. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the Florida Reading Association. Hollywood.

13 - 16 October, 1983.

Raphael, T. E. (1984). Teaching learners about sources of
information for answering comprehension questions.
Journal 9; Reading 21. 303-11.

Raphael. T. E. (1986). Teaching-question answer
relationships, revisited. The Reading Teacher 22, 516-
22. '-

Reed, K. N. (1987). An analytical comparison of reading
levels of junior college students with the readability
levels of textbooks used in content area courses. Paper
presented at the annual conference of the post-secondary
reading council of Alabama, Montgomery, 1987.

Richgels, S. J., McGee,L. M., Lomax, R. G., and Sheard, C.
(1987). Awareness of four text structures: Effects on

recall of expository text. Reading Research Quarterlv
.22. 2:177’96 .

Rinehart, S. D. and Platt, J. M. (1984). Metacognitive
awareness and monitoring in adult and college readers.

Eorum for Reading 2;, 2:54-62.

Rinehart, S. D., Stahl, S. A. and Erickson. L. G. (1986).
Some effects of summarization training on reading and
studying. Reading Research Quarterly 2;. 4:422-438.

155

Robertson. A. F. (1984). Malaysia: A case study. In A. F.
Robertson (Ed.), People and The State: An Anthropologv
9; Planned Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Robinson, F. P. (1941). Diagnostic and Remedial Techniques
for Effective Stugy. New York: Harper and Brothers.

Robinson, F. P. (1970). Effective Studv, 4th Edition. New
York: Harper and Row.

 

Roehler, L. R. and Duffy, G. G. (1984). Direct explanation
of comprehension processes. In G. G. Duffy. L. R.
Roehler. and J. Mason (Eds.) Comprehension Instruction:

Perspectives and Suggestions. New York: Longman.

Rosenthal, L. and Rowland, S. B. (1986). Academic Reading
and Study Skillg for Internationgl Students, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Rowe, D. W. and Rayford, L. (1987). Activating background
knowledge in reading comprehension assessment. Reading
Research Quarterly 22, 2:160-176.

Rumelhart, D. (1977). Toward an interactive model of
reading. In S. Doric (Ed.), Attention and Performgnce

£2. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Samuels, S. J. and Kamil, M. L. (1984). Models of the
reading process. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.). Handbook 9;
Rgading Research. New York: Longman.

Schinke-Llano, L. A. (1983). Foreigner Talk in Content
Classroom. In H. W. Seliger and M. W. Long
(Eds.), Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language
Agguisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Short, E. J. and Ryan, E. B. (1984). Metacognitive
differences between skilled and less skilled readers:

Remediating deficits through story grammar and
attribution training. Journal 9; Educational Psychology

2.6.. 2: 225-35.

Simpson. M. L. (1984). The status of study strategy
instruction: Implications for classroom teachers.

Journal 92 Reading 22, 2: 136-43.

Simpson. M. L. (1986). Teaching university freshman to
employ, regulate, and transfer study strategies to the

content areas. Forum for Reading 21, 2:61-71.

Smith, R. J. and Dauer, V. L. (1984). A comprehension-
monitoring strategy for reading content area materials.

Journal 9: Reading 22, 2: 144-47.

156

Smith, S. P. (1982). Learning strategies of mature college
learners. Journal 92 Reading 22, 1:5-13.

Smith, S. P. (1985). Comprehension and comprehension
monitoring by experienced readers. Journal 9; Reading
at 4: 292-300.

Snyder, V. (1984). Effects of study techniques on
developmental college students' retention of textbook
chapters. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, New Orleans,

1984.

Spache, G. D. (1963). Toward Better Reading. Champaign,
IL: Garrard.

Spyridakis, J. H. and Standal, T. C. (1987). Signals in
expository prose: Effects on reading comprehension.
Reading Research Quarterly 22, 3:285-298.

Swafford, J. and Alvermann, D. E. (1989). Postsecondary
research base for content reading strategies. Journal

Reading 22, 3:164-169.

Tadlock, D. F. (1978). SQ3R -- Why it works. Based on an
information processing theory. Journal 9; Reading 22.
2:110-112. ~

Tei, E. and Stewart, 0. (1985). Effective studying from
text: Applying metacognitive strategies. Eorum for
Reading lg, 2:46-55.

Thurman. H. V. (1983). Essentials 9; Oceanographv.
Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.

 

Tomlinson, L. M. (1987). Recognition to recall: Self-
questioning to enhance students' metacognition of.
organization and demands of text. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the International Reading
Association (32nd, Anaheim, CA, May 3-7, 1987)

Van Gilder, L. L. (1967). Meeting reading demands of
content subjects. In J. A. Figuel (Ed.). Vistas ip
Reading. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.

Wade, S. E. and Reynolds, R. E. (1989). Developing
metacognitive awareness. Journal 9; Reading 2;, 1:6-14.

Weinstein, C. E. (1987). Fostering learning autonomy
through the use of learning strategies. Journal 9;

Reading 29, 7:590-595.

157

Whittaker. J. W. (1981). Three approaches to teaching
college reading skills. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Western College Reading Association.
Dallas, 1981.

Wilson, C. R. and Hamil, C. (1982). Inferencing and
comprehension in ninth graders reading geography
textbooks. Journal 9; Reading 22, 5:424-30.