Reading comprehension and strategy awareness of Grade 11

English second language learners

In This Original Research... Open Access

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Purpose of the study
• Current theoretical perspective
• Problem statement and research objectives
• Rationale of the study
• Research method
• Design
• Subjects
• Instrumentation
• Data collection procedure
• Teaching procedure
• Data analysis
• Results
• Discussion of results
• Implications
• Conclusion
• Acknowledgements
• Competing interests
• References
• Appendix A
• Predicting what is to come in a text
• Presentation
• Description of the teaching procedure
• Evaluating students� strategy development

Abstract Top ↑
The aim of this study was to examine the reading strategies used by Grade 11 English Second Language
(ESL) learners and the possible effects of reading instruction on their reading comprehension and
strategy awareness. A quasi-experimental pre-test and post-test control group design was used. The
participants included a total of 60 Grade 11 learners from a high school. The results of this study
indicate that (1) learners who received reading strategy instruction scored both statistically and
practically significantly higher marks on the reading comprehension test than those in the control group
and (2) explicit instruction in the use of reading strategies was essential to bring about the increased
use of reading strategies of learners in the experimental group. The study has implications for learners,
teachers, university students and lecturers.
Introduction Top ↑
In recent years, there has been an increased focus on reading instruction in primary, secondary and
higher education (Lei 2010).The literature has shown that comprehension strategy instruction, including
multiple reading strategies, have been justified in being beneficial to helping learners become strategic
readers and improve their reading comprehension (Klapwijk 2012; Medina 2011; Fan 2010; Antoniou &
Souvignier 2007) . Thus, it is necessary to provide learners with a reading strategy instruction which
focuses on teaching reading strategies that can help them become strategic readers. Strategic reading,
according to Alfassi (2010) requires that learners intentionally engage in planned actions under their
control, in the manner that proficient readers do when they encounter difficulty in comprehending a
text. Alfassi further points out that those strategic readers must become cognisant of their performance
limitations, intentionally weigh their options and wilfully execute compensatory procedures. Thus,
reading strategies instruction is directed towards teaching learners a repertoire of reading strategies
that will allow them to develop a sense of conscious control of their cognitive processes.
In a South African context, the need for a reading strategy instruction should be seen against the poor
reading performance of the learners at primary, high school and tertiary level. According to Pretorius
(2002), reading is a powerful learning tool, a means of constructing meaning and acquiring new
knowledge. Moreover, reading is the cornerstone of instruction for all learners regardless of their ability
level because it sets the foundation for future progress and success in virtually all other facets of life
(Scott 2010; Luckner & Handley 2008). However, poor reading comprehension is cited as a fundamental
feature of academic underperformance in South Africa (Pretorius 2002; Granville 2001; Dreyer 1998).
Many learners in the high schools demonstrate a low level of strategy knowledge and lack of
metacognitive control (Dreyer 1998; Strydom 1997). According to Nel, Dreyer and Kopper (2004:95),
many South African students enter higher education underprepared for the reading demands that are
placed upon them. Analysing the reading assessment profiles of a group of first-year university students
at Potchefstroom, Nel, Dreyer and Kopper (ibid: 95) revealed that those students experienced problems
across all aspects of the reading process (i.e. vocabulary, fluency, reading comprehension and reading
strategy use). Yet, there is little evidence to suggest that learners at any level will acquire the reading
skills and strategies that can improve their reading comprehension if they have not been taught
(Tannenbaum, Torgesen &Wagner 2006).
The literature has revealed that awareness and monitoring of one’s comprehension processes are
important aspects of skilled readers (Alexander & Jetton 2000; Makhtari &Reichard 2002). The same
authors further point out that such awareness and monitoring processes are often referred to in the
literature as metacognition, which can be thought of as the knowledge of the reader’s cognition about
reading and the self-control mechanisms they exercise when monitoring and regulating text
comprehension. One of the objectives of the current study is to explore whether reading strategies
awareness is a better predictor of reading comprehension. The results of a similar study conducted by
Ilustre (2011) in the Philippines showed that amongst the three subscales of metacognitive reading
strategies, only problem solving strategies correlated positively with text comprehension.
Purpose of the study
In order to meet the reading needs of learners, educators are pressed to develop both effective
instructional means for teaching reading comprehension and the use of reading strategies. Thus, this
study seeks to examine the contribution of reading strategy instruction to the reading comprehension
and strategy awareness of Grade 11 ESL learners with a view to offering suggestions for the
development of effective reading strategy instruction so as to improve learners’ reading comprehension
and strategy awareness skills. Specifically, the study seeks to address the following research questions:
1. What does the reading comprehension and reading strategy use profile of the Grade11 ESL learners
portray?
2. Do learners in the experimental group who received strategic reading instruction attain statistically
and practically significantly higher scores on the reading comprehension test and do they differ
significantly in terms of their use of reading strategies?
Current theoretical perspective Top ↑
How readers extract meaning from a text has long been a focus of attention because the process of
extracting meaning gives learners invaluable information about readers’ cognitive processes during
reading (Salataci & Akyel 2002). In addition, studies conducted on reading instruction and reading
strategies indicate that strategy instruction with a focus on comprehension monitoring can help less
skilled readers overcome their difficulties in reading (Franco-Fuenmayor, Kandel-Cisco & Padron 2008;
Salataci & Akyel 2002; Pretorius 2002; Grabe & Stoller 2002; Granville 2001; Anderson 1999). In
addition, Oxford (1990) points out that it appears that successful language students have the ability to
orchestrate and combine particular types of strategies in effective ways according to their own learning
needs. Thus, strategy teaching is an important part of teaching a second language and constructing
meaning is the goal of comprehension (Dalton & Proctor 2007). In addition, McKeown, Beck and Blake
(2009:28) point out that recent research on comprehension has certainly provided increased
understanding of the comprehension process and broad and general knowledge of what makes for
effective instructional practice. According to Antoniou and Souvignier (2007), the main aims of strategy
training are monitoring understanding, enhancing understanding, acquiring and actively using
knowledge, and developing insights. In addition, Cubukcu (2007) points out that to be effective,
students must have a wide array of reading strategies at their disposal and know where, when and how
to use these strategies.
The literature on strategy instruction has shown that there are two different approaches to teaching
reading strategies. These are explicit instruction and implicit instruction. According to Hall (2009),
explicit instruction is a systematic instructional approach that includes a set of delivery and design
procedures derived from effective schools research merged with behaviour analysis. Hall further points
out that there are two essential components to well-designed explicit instruction:
1. Visible delivery features are group instruction with a high level of teacher and student interactions.
2. This concerns the less observable, instructional design principles and assumptions that make up the
content and strategies to be taught. According to Van Keer (2004), explicit reading strategies
instruction and engaging learners in interaction with the text promotes learners’ reading comprehension
ability.
In addition, Van Keer states that even when children do not use effective comprehension strategies on
their own, explicit reading strategies instruction is a feasible tool for teaching learners to apply them
successfully. The current study has been triggered by this view because it seeks to improve the reading
comprehension and strategy use of disadvantaged learners. The literature reveals that explicit
instruction in reading comprehension is the widely recommended method of improving learners’ reading
comprehension and strategy use (Franco-Fuenmayor, Kandel-Cisco & Padron 2008).
On the other hand, the US Department of Education (2008) points out that implicit learning is
acquisition of knowledge about the underlying structure of a complex stimulus environment by a
process which takes place naturally, simply and without conscious operations. In addition, Dalton and
Proctor (2007) point out that implicit reading strategy instruction refers to a reading environment that
provides the learner with a variety of embedded features that are designed to support individual
learning needs whilst being sensitive to the interactive nature of the reading process. Dalton and Proctor
further point out that those learners who struggle with creating meaning are supported in an apprentice
model of reading strategy instruction where scaffolds decrease as learners’ understanding and self-
regulation improves.
Problem statement and research objectives Top ↑
The role that reading comprehension plays in the process of learning is widely documented (Shanakan,
Callison, Carriere, Duke, Pearson, Torgesen, et al. 2010; Luckner & Handley 2008; Coleman 2003).
These studies and many other similar studies point to the fact that reading comprehension forms the
basis for the learning process. Thus, learners who read without comprehending what they read have
fewer chances of succeeding academically than learners who read with comprehension. However,
studies conducted in South Africa at primary, high school and tertiary level reveal poor reading
comprehension by learners. For example, a pilot study was conducted by Dreyer (1998) in a
multilingual classroom in the North West Province amongst Grade 8 learners on a reading
comprehension test. The results showed a failure rate of approximately 75%.
Systematic Evaluations conducted recently on the reading performance of learners in South Africa
showed no improvement. The Systematic Evaluations conducted by the Department of Education,
provincial Departments of Education as well as international bodies, show that learners in South African
schools performed poorly when tested for their ability to read at age-appropriate levels (National
Reading Strategy 2008:5). Specifically, the results of the Systemic Evaluation held in 2005 amongst the
Intermediate Phase learners, showed that 14% of learners were outstanding in their language
competence; 23% were satisfactory or partly competent, but a large majority of 63% were below the
required competence for their age level (South African National Reading Panel 2008:6)
The above-mentioned reading comprehension results are a cause for concern. Specifically, the current
study has been triggered by the above-mentioned state of affairs as far as reading comprehension is
concerned in South Africa. Amongst the factors that improve learners’ reading comprehension is training
in the use of reading strategies. In the literature review the benefits of training learners to be strategic
readers has been highlighted. Thus, the current study seeks to examine the effect of reading strategies
instruction in order to inform instructional practice in reading comprehension.
Rationale of the study Top ↑
Based on the reading situation highlighted under the problem statement, the current study is necessary
so as to improve the reading comprehension of learners by training them in the use of reading
strategies. If teachers are made aware of the benefits of reading strategies instruction, they are likely to
improve their instructional practice and as a result improve learning outcomes.
Research method Top ↑
Design
The research approach used in this study was quantitative. This kind of research approach usually
involves collecting and converting data into numerical form so that statistical calculations can be made
and conclusions drawn. According to MacMillan and Schumacher (2001), designing quantitative research
involves choosing subjects, data collection techniques (such as questionnaires, observations or
interviews), and procedures for gathering data and implementing treatments. The quantitative research
approach was suitable for this study as its design was quasi- experimental, it analysed data through
statistics and had a treatment group that was used to measure the impact of the reading strategies
instruction.
A quasi-experimental pre-test and post-test control group design was used in this study. According to
Moore (2008), a quasi-experimental study is a type of evaluation which aims to determine whether a
programme or intervention has the intended effect on a study’s participant. In this study there were
both a control and experimental groups. The reading comprehension test scores for each group were
compared before and after the study. The reading comprehension scores were also compared for both
groups before and after the study.
Subjects
The accessible population was comprised of 60 Grade 11 Xhosa-speaking learners taking English as a
Second Language (ESL) in one high school in East London in the Eastern Cape. This school was selected
by means of convenience sampling. In convenience sampling, the selection of subjects from the
population is based on easy availability or accessibility. The major disadvantage of this technique is that
researchers have no idea how representative the information collected about the sample is to the
population as a whole. However, the information can still provide some fairly significant insights and be
a good source of data in exploratory research (Ary, Jacobs & Razavieh 2005). The subjects were in two
intact classes in order to prevent disruption to the normal teaching routine at the school. One class was
randomly assigned, using a random numbers table, to the experimental group (N = 30) and the other
to the control group (N = 30). The ages of the subjects ranged from 18–22 and the sample consisted of
both boys (N = 19) and girls (N = 41).
Instrumentation
The following instruments were used in this study:
• The Reading Performance Test in English Advanced Level (Roux 1996) was used to determine the
students’ reading comprehension in English within the range of Senior Secondary Performance Levels
(i.e. Grades 10, 11 and 12). This standardised test consists of 50 items. Questions are based on prose,
passage, advertisements, a film review, a cartoon and two close-test passages. All the questions are in
multiple-choice form consisting of four options per item. This test was used as a pre-test and a post-
test.
• A Reading Strategies Questionnaire based on the work of Oxford (1990) and Pressley and Afflerbach
(1995), was used to determine learners’ use of reading strategies. This test was also used as a pre-test
and a post-test.
Data collection procedure
All subjects took the tests (e.g. reading strategies questionnaire and reading comprehension tests)
during their regular classroom periods and both groups were taught by the same teacher. All
participants received uniform instructions on how to complete the questionnaire, which was taken on
the first day by both groups. The Reading Strategies Questionnaire was followed by the reading
comprehension test in English which was used as a pre-test and was administered to both groups
(control and experimental) on the following day. The experimental group received the reading strategy
instruction which lasted for three months. For the control group there was no strategy instruction. Their
lessons were presented in the normal way (i.e. no strategy development or practice was used). In a
study conducted by Dreyer (1998:23), she stated that the three-month interval between administration
is deemed long enough to control any short-term memory effects. Considering that the subjects were
not provided with the correct answers after the pre-test, even were they to remember how they had
answered a question the first time, they had no way of knowing whether that answer was correct. At
the end of the third month both groups (control and experimental) were given the same tests (reading
comprehension test and strategy questionnaire) as post-tests. At the end of the study, the control group
received the same reading strategy instruction and amount of instructional time that was received by
the experimental group during the study.
Teaching procedure
Each session over the course of the three months included the following stages similar to those of
Wilhelm (2001):
1. How to use the strategy.
2. Why, when and where the strategy should be used in actual reading.
3. Teacher modelling. This entailed the use of Think-Aloud on how to perform the strategy in the actual
context of reading.
4. Teacher scaffolding. This entailed the use of strategies on a temporary basis so that once the learners
were able to accomplish the task successfully, the scaffold was gradually decreased or removed.
Learners practised what they were capable of doing on their own and the teacher intervened only when
support was needed.
5. Independent learner practice. Learners practised the use of strategies independently and verified the
use of procedures.
6. Integrated use with other materials. The teacher gave ample practise with school materials and
integrated the use of Think-Aloud with other lessons and content reading. The aim was for learners to
apply these strategies independently and think in their heads whenever they encounter a text.
The strategies to be developed were presented in the following format:
• ‘Before Reading’ (e.g. making inferences and predicting what is to come in a text)
• ‘During Reading’ (e.g. guessing the meaning of words from the context, identifying the main idea in a
text and rejecting or confirming predictions and inferences)
• ‘After Reading’ (e.g. summarising).
The major focus in the reading strategy instruction was on explaining the main features of a particular
strategy and explaining why that strategy should be learned (i.e. the potential benefits of use). The
benefit of use was linked to the learners’ reading profiles. In this way, students could see the necessity
of reading strategy use, as well as the link to their reading comprehension.
An example of the instructional procedure followed in this study is available in Appendix A.
Data analysis
A t-test was used in this study. The t-test is one type of inferential statistics. It is used to determine
whether there is a significant difference between the means of two groups. In the current study the t-
test was used to determine whether the mean scores of the experimental and control group differed
reliably from each other (cf. Tables 1 and 2). Cohen’s effect size was used to calculate the difference
between two means. Cohen (1977) uses the following scale for the d-values:
Small effect d = 0.2
Medium effect d = 0.5
Large effect d = 0.8
Results Top ↑
In terms of reading strategy use, the results (pre-test) indicated that there were no statistically
significant or practically significant differences between learners in the experimental and control groups
(cf. Table 1).
TABLE 1: The pre-test reading strategy use profile of Grade 11 ESL learners:
Experimental group versus control group.
Specifically, the results of the reading strategy analysis indicated that the learners in the experimental
group and the learners in the control group did not significantly differ in the use of the strategies at the
before-reading, during-reading and after-reading stages. The post-test results, however, indicated that
the learners in the experimental group used certain strategies statistically (p < 0.05), as well as
practically, significantly (small to large effect sizes), more often than the learners in the control group
(cf. Table 2).
TABLE 2: The post-test reading strategy use profile of Grade 11 ESL learners:
Experimental group versus control group.
The post-test results cited in Table 2 revealed an improvement in the frequency of usage of the reading
strategies by the learners in the experimental group. During the pre-reading stage, the frequency of use
of the following reading strategies improved ‘I briefly skim the text before reading’ (experimental group
pre-test – 2.99; post-test – 3.60) and ‘I often look for how the text is organised and pay attention to
headings and sub-headings’ (experimental group pre-test – 2.55; post-test – 2.98). During reading
strategies and after reading strategies also showed some improvement in terms of the frequency of
usage of reading strategies during those stages.
The pre-test reading comprehension scores of the Grade 11 ESL learners in the experimental and
control groups indicated that there was not a statistically significant difference in their mean scores on
the reading comprehension test (cf. Table 3).
TABLE 3: The reading comprehension test profile of Grade 11 ESL learners: Experimental
group vs. control group.
The pre-test reading comprehension scores indicated that both experimental and control groups scores
were weak and below 50% (experimental group – 37.53; control group – 36.73). Their weak reading
comprehension may have had a negative effect on their performance in the language class and also in
other content areas. The situation is true if one considers that reading comprehension has come to be
the essence of reading (Tannenbaum, Torgesen & Wagner 2006), essential not only to academic
learning in all subjects areas but also to professional success and to lifelong learning (Pritchard, Romeo
& Muller 1999; Rings 1994; Strydom 1997). An analysis of the post-test reading comprehension scores
of Grade 11 ESL learners in the experimental and control groups indicated that learners in the
experimental group achieved statistically significantly (p < 0.05) higher mean scores on the reading
comprehension test in comparison to the Grade 11 ESL learners in the control group (cf. table 2).
Discussion of results Top ↑
The results of this study indicate that a well-developed reading strategy instruction programme can
have a strong positive effect on the Grade 11 ESL learners’ reading comprehension and reading
strategies development. In other words, the results indicate that reading strategy instruction can and
does make a contribution in increasing the reading comprehension and reading strategy choice. This
finding is consistent with other reported research (e.g. Van Keer & Verhaeghe 2005; Lau & Chan 2003;
Alfassi 1998; Dreyer 1998; Kern 1989).
The learners in the experimental group improved their performance in the comprehension test
significantly after the intervention, whereas the learners in the control group did not improve their
performance on the comprehension test. Thus, the findings portray the intervention as a viable method
for enhancing the reading comprehension of the Grade 11 ESL learners. The findings in this study
support the previous studies on the effect of reading strategy instruction on learners’ reading
comprehension (Alexander & Jetton 2000; Dale, Duffy, Roehler & Pearson 1991; Glaser 1990; Wittrock
1998).
To determine whether the instruction affected the use of the reading strategies, the frequencies with
which the participants used reading strategies before and after instruction were compared in both
groups. Findings also revealed that explicit instruction in the use of reading strategies was essential to
bring about increased use of reading strategies for learners in the experimental group. Considering that
the more the strategies were used the better the results for students in the experimental group
demonstrated that there was a need to promote strategy awareness and application in the learning and
teaching of the English language. Specifically, the following reading strategies were utilised more
frequently by learners in the experimental group:
• I briefly skim the text before reading.
• I often look for how the text is organised and pay attention to headings and sub-headings.
These results are congruent with previous research confirming the positive effect of explicit strategies
instruction on reading comprehension achievement (e.g. Li 2010; Cubukcu 2007; Van Keer & Verhaeghe
2005; Pressley et al. 1989). The results of this study also indicated that the learners’ ability to use
reading strategies is the most critical factor determining their reading comprehension. Thus, the close
relationship between strategy use and reading comprehension provided support for the possibility that
educators should enhance learners’ reading comprehension through explicit reading strategies
instruction.
Implications Top ↑
There are a number of practical implications for the above findings and discussion. The primary goal of
reading instruction is to improve learners’ reading comprehension. This study has revealed that explicit
instruction in reading strategies can improve learners’ reading comprehension. Thus, teachers at
primary high school and tertiary institutions should teach learners how to use reading strategies in order
to improve their reading comprehension. The literature has revealed that the situation at tertiary
institutions demands knowledge of reading strategies in order to be successful as learners are exposed
to huge volumes of reading material. The results of this study suggest that explicit instruction in reading
strategies can improve the learners’ reading comprehension. This suggests that teachers need to design
reading strategy instruction that focuses on explicit instruction. The results of the study have shown
that those learners who use a wide range of reading strategies comprehend the texts they read better
than those who use limited reading strategies. This requires that teachers should help learners identify
their reading strategies. This could be achieved by using reading strategies inventories. Such
inventories are likely to inform the teachers and learners as to which reading strategies learners
currently use. Having that information will assist the teachers in designing reading strategies instruction
that focuses on reading strategies that are new to the learners.
Conclusion Top ↑
In the above discussion an attempt was made to address the two research questions on which the study
is based. The most important outcome of this study is that the use of reading strategy instruction and
learners’ reading strategy awareness play a significant role in improving their reading comprehension.
In other words, learners who receive strategy training generally read better than those who do not. As
for the relationship between perceived strategy use and reading comprehension, this study revealed
that strategy use did positively affect reading comprehension. Thus, teachers should assess learners’
awareness of strategy use, raise awareness of the importance of strategic reading and of the repertoire
of strategies available to aid reading comprehension.
The study further revealed the importance of training students in the use of reading strategies. The
literature has shown that strategic awareness and monitoring of the comprehension process are
critically important aspects of skilled reading. As a result of the reading strategy instruction, some
strategies were utilised significantly more frequently by learners in the experimental group after the
intervention. Thus, this study provided the English Second Language teachers with a better
understanding of the benefits of reading strategy instruction.
Acknowledgements Top ↑
Competing interests
The author declares that he/she has no financial or personal relationship(s) which may have
inappropriately influenced him/her in writing this paper.
References Top ↑
Alexander, P.A. & Jetton, T.L., 2000, Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental
perspective, in Kamil, M.L., Mosenthal, B.P., Pearson, P.D., & Barr, R. (eds.), Handbook of reading
research, Hillsdale, N.J., Erlbaum.
Alfassi, M., 1998, Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students,
Bar-Han University, Israel.
Anderson, N.J., 1999, Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies, Heinle and Heinle,
New York.
Antoniou, F. & Souvignier, E., 2007, ‘Strategy instruction in reading comprehension: An intervention
study for students with learning disabilities’, Learning Disabolities: A Contemporary Journal 5 (1), 41-
57.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C. & Razavieh, A., 2005, Introduction to research in education, 7th edn., Wadsworth /
Thomson Learning, California.
Carrell, P.L., Pharis, B.G. & Liberto, J.C., 1989, ‘Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading’, TESOL
Quarterly23(4), 647–678.
Cohen, J., 1977, Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences, revised edn., Academic Press,
New York.
Coleman, M.F., 2003, Promoting reading comprehension competence among English Second Language
high school learners in a disadvantaged community, Med Dissertation, UNISA.
Cubukcu, F., 2007, ‘An investigation of reading strategies employed by trainee teachers’, GEMA Online
Journal of Language studies 7(2), 95–110.
Dale, J.A., Duffy, G.G., Roehler, L.R. & Pearson, P.D., 1991, ‘Moving from the old to the new: Research
on reading comprehension instruction’, Review of Education Research 61, 239–264.
Dalton, B. & Proctor, C.P., 2007, ‘Reading as Thinking: Integrating strategy instruction in a universally
designed digital literacy environment’, in D.S. McNamara (ed.), Reading comprehension strategies:
Theories, interventions, and technologies, pp. 421–439, Lawrence Erlbaum Association Inc. Mahwah,
NJ,
Dreyer, C., 1998, ‘Improving learners’ reading comprehension by means of strategy instruction’, Journal
for Language Teaching 31(1), 18–29.
Durkin, D., 1993, Teaching them to read, Allyn & Bacon Boston, MA, .
Fan, Y., 2010, The effect of comprehension strategy instruction on EFL learners’ reading comprehension,
Canadian Center of Science and Education.
Franco-Fuenmayor, S.E., Kandel-Cisco, B.E. & Padron, Y.N., 2008, Improving reading comprehension in
dual language programmes, Reading Research Quarterly 41 (40), 524–539.
Garrigus, R., 1999, Design in reading, Allyn and Bacon, New York.
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F.L., 2002, Teaching and researching reading, Pearson Education Limited, Great
Britain.
Glazer, R., 1990, ‘The re-emergence of learning theory within instructional research’, American
Psychologist 45, 29–39.
Granville, S., 2001, ‘Comprehension or comprehending? Using critical language awareness and
interactive reading theory to teach learners to interact with texts’, Southern African Linguistics and
Applied Language Studies 19, 13–21.
Hall, T., 2009, Explicit instruction, Center on Accessible Instructional Material, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Ilustre, C.A., 2011, ‘Beliefs about reading, metacognitive reading strategies and text comprehension
among college students in a Private University’, Philippine English Second Language Journal 7, 28–36.
Kern, R., 1989, ‘Second language reading strategy instruction: Its effects on comprehension and word
inference ability’, Modern Language Journal 73, 135–149.
Kliewer, C. & Landis, D., 1999, ‘Individualizing literacy instruction for young children with moderate to
severe disabilities’, Exceptional Children 66, 85–100.
Lau, K. & Chan, D.W., 2003, ‘Reading strategy use and motivation among Chinese good and poor
readers in Hong Kong’, Journal of Research in Reading, 2, 177–190.
Lei, S.A., 2010, ‘Strategies for improving reading skills among college students’, Reading Improvement
2(1), 1-15.
Li, F., 2010, ‘A study of English reading strategies used by senior middle school students’, Asian Social
Science 6 (10), 184–192.
Luckner, J.L. & Handley, C. M., 2008, ‘A summary of the reading comprehension research undertaken
with students who are deaf or hard of hearing’, American Annals of the Deaf 1, 6–36.
National Reading Panel, 2008, Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read,
Washington, D.C. : National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Clearinghouse.
MacMillan, J.E. & Schumacher, S., 2001, Reseach design: A conceptual introduction, Harper Collins, New
York.
McKeown, M.G., Beck, I.L. & Blake, G.K, 2009, ‘Reading comprehension instruction:Focus on content or
strategies?’ Perspectives on Language and Literacy 2(4),28-31.
Medina, S.L., 2011, ‘Effects of strategy instruction in an EFL reading comprehension course: A case
study’, Profile14(1), 79–89.
Makhtari, K. & Reichard, C.A., 2002, ‘Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading
strategies’, Journal of Educational Psychology 94(2), 249–259.
Moore, K.A., 2008, Quasi-experimental evaluations: Child trends, Heile and Heinle, Washington.
Nel, C., Dreyer, C. & Kopper, M., 2004, ‘An analysis of the reading profiles of first-year students at
Potchefstroom University: A cross-sectional study and a case study’, South African Journal of
Education (1), 95–103.
Oxford, R., 1990, Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know, Newbury House
Publishers, New York.
Paris, S.G., & Winograd, P., 1990, ‘How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction’,
in B.F. Jones and L. Dol (eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction, pp. 15– 51, Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Pressley, M. & Afflerbach, P., 1995, Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive
reading, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Pretorius, E.J., 2002, ‘Reading and applied linguistics: A deafening silence?’ Southern African Linguistics
and Applied Language Studies 20, 91–103.
Pritchard, R.E., Romeo, G.C., Muller, S.A.B., 1999, ‘Integrating reading strategies into the accounting
curriculum’, College Student Reading 33(1), 77–82.
Rings, S., 1994, The role of computer technology in teaching critical reading, viewed 23 March 2011,
from http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/critR
South African National Reading Panel, 2008, Department of Education, Republic of South Africa,
Pretoria.
Salataci, R. & Akyel, A., 2002, ‘Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2 reading’, Reading in
Foreign Language 14(1), 1–17.
Scott, R.M., 2010, ‘Word study instruction: Enhancing reading comprehension’, The Literacy and
Numeracy Secretariat.
Shanakan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, N.K., Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Schatschneider, C. & Torgesen, J.,
2010, Improving reading comprehension in Kindergarten through 3rd Grade, Institute of Education
Sciences.
Strydom, J.F., 1997, The counselling needs of students in a resource-based learning programme.
Unpublished dissertation, University of Free State, Bloemfontein.
Tannenbaum, K.R., Torgesen, J.K. & Wagner, R.K., 2006, ‘Relationship between word knowledge and
reading comprehension in Third Grade children’, Scientific Studies of Reading 10 (4), 381–398.
United States Department of Education, 2008, Institute of Education Sciences National Assessment of
Educational Progress, Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.
Van Keer, H., 2004, ‘Fostering reading comprehension in Fifth Grade by explicit instruction in reading
strategies and peer tutoring’, British Journal of Education 74, 37–70.
Van Keer, H. & Verhaegher, J.P., 2005, ‘Comparing two teacher development programmes for
innovating reading comprehension instruction with regard to teachers’ experiences and student
outcomes’, Teaching and Teacher Education 21, 543–562.
Wilhelm, J., 2001, Improving comprehension with think-aloud strategies, Scholastic Professional Books,
New York.
Wittrock, M.C., 1998, ‘Cognition and subject matter learning’, in N.M Lambert, & B.L. McComb
(eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered schooling, Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association, pp. 31-120.
Appendix A Top ↑
Predicting what is to come in a text
Presentation
In the introductory session, the teacher and students brainstorms the meaning of ‘prediction’. The
 teacher then explains to the students the meaning of ‘prediction’. He further explains the rationale for
use of predictions, how, when and where to use them, how to evaluate use of the strategy (prediction)
and how to apply it to other tasks and contexts.
Description of the teaching procedure
The teacher works with the entire class and models how making predictions works before, during and
after reading. The teacher records the learners’ responses on a large chart paper. The prediction chart,
as a framework, consists of two headings: Predictions and Support. It aims at organising thinking and
helps learners sort out whether predictions come from clues in the text or their own experiences. As
reading proceeds, the teacher stops once or twice and invites learners to predict. The teacher then tells
the learners that if after reading they notice that the predictions made earlier are not correct, they will
be forced to change their predictions after reading. The teacher then advises the learners to look for
‘clues’ in the text as they make their predictions.
Evaluating students’ strategy development
The teacher then introduces another text and asks the learners to mark the words in the text that
support or help them correct their predictions. The learners’ attention is drawn to clues that lead to their
predictions. Additional questions will include the following: ‘Did you need to change your prediction?
Where? Why? How did you know your prediction needed changing?’ After finishing the story, the teacher
invites the learners to return to the prediction chart to confirm or adjust their ideas. The adjustments
are then written on the chart with a different colour marker pen so that the learners can easily compare
initial predictions with what actually occurred in the story.

Crossref Citations
No related citations found.
African Online Scientific Information Systems (Pty) Ltd t/a AOSIS
Reg No: 2002/002017/07
RSA Tel: 086 1000 381
International Tel: +27 21 975 2602
15 Oxford Street, Durbanville, Cape Town, 7550, South Africa
publishing(AT)aosis.co.za replace (AT) with @

All articles published in this journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
license, unless otherwise stated.
Website design & content: ©2019 AOSIS (Pty) Ltd. All rights reserved. No unauthorised duplication allowed.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy.

__________
Subscribe to our newsletter
Get specific, domain-collection newsletters detailing the latest CPD courses, scholarly research and

call-for-papers in your field.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading & Writing | ISSN: 2079-8245 (PRINT) | ISSN: 2308-1422 (ONLINE