0.

Introduction

The present assignment was conducted in order to evaluate an existing reading

lesson. The reading lesson under investigation derives from the text book “Reading
for the real world 1” by Compass Publishing and can be located by the human eye on
the very first Unit, under the title “American Superstitions”. The class size the
particular lesson is aimed at is not clarified and neither is the level of the students, but
it could be inferred by the size of the text and the linguistic elements found in it that it
targets Upper Intermediate learners. After the assessment of the reading activities and
the reading lesson as a whole were completed, further suggestions of improvement
were delivered.

1
 1. Description and Evaluation

1.1 Short Description and Evaluation of the reading activities

Commencing from the assessment of the reading activities, it can be argued that the
reading lesson under discussion follows the pre-, while- and post- reading structure.
As stated by Wallace (1992) this signifies “three main types of reading activities,
those which precede presentation of the text, those which accompany it and those
which follow it … now a common feature of discourse about reading”. The reader’s
mind is brought into the reading ‘arena’ at the pre-reading stage, the actual grappling
with the text takes place at the while-reading stage, while the short- and longer-term
effects of the reading ‘baptism’ appear at the post-reading stage (Calfoglou, 2019).
According to the aforementioned research results, it is propitious that this structure is
followed on the specific reading text in an uninhibited flow.

In particular, the pre-reading stage consists of two different types of activities,

namely three introductory questions and a vocabulary preview. The first activity
focuses on introducing the topic by engaging the students in some speaking practice,
which as progresses becomes more personalized. After having divided the
superstitions in “bad or good”, the learners are inquired to answer if they themselves
believe in superstitions. Involving the students in more personalized questions, which
do not exceed the limits, is a beneficial way to make them cultivate some interest in
the topic and the text that is about to follow. In addition the successful integration of
the speaking skill takes place.

Moving on to the second pre reading activity, a vocabulary exercise that requires
matching a word to its definition can be located and that could be characterized as a
common practice met in that stage. The main aim of the activity is to “pre-teach”
vocabulary elements that are about to follow. As Dr. Andrea Révész, Senior Lecturer
in Applied Linguistics at the University of London states, some scholars have found
that “pre teaching vocabulary can be useful if it involves rich instruction of frequent
vocabulary items”. Nation (2001) clarifies the notion “rich instruction” as the
instruction that “involves several meetings with the word, focuses on many aspects of
what is involved in knowing a word including fluency of access to the word… and
meeting the word in several sentence contexts…and gets the learner actively involved

2
in processing the word”. Taking into consideration the definition given by Nation, the
existing task does not include rich instruction of the vocabulary items but rather a
surface level engagement. It could be argued that pre teaching vocabulary elements
requires delicate handling as “there is always the danger that pre teaching vocabulary
will result in learners’ treating the task as an opportunity to practice pre- selected
words” (Ellis,2003). That would disorient the learners and the main point of reading
would be missed.

As far as the while-reading stage is concerned, a number of while-reading

comprehension activities can be witnessed. To begin with, the aforementioned
activities are presented in the type of True or False statements, multiple choice
questions and short answer open-ended questions. Furthermore, the last type of
activity is an incomplete summary of the text which the learners have to fill in with
the appropriate words. It is evident that True or False statements and multiple choice
questions are usually chosen by textbook writers as a means to check the
understanding of a text. Nevertheless, “multiple choice and T/F questions have
generally been characterized as being more typical of testing, not teaching reading”
(Widdowson, 1979). Taking into account the aforementioned statement, learners who
deal with such types of activities are not taught how to connect the text to their
background knowledge or employ other top-down processes in order to accomplish
comprehension, but how to succeed in the examinations that will follow their foreign
language instruction sooner or later. In other words with the implementation of such
tasks, the text is perceived as a linguistic object and not a vehicle for information. It
should be mentioned that making learners able to achieve at a testing situation is not
underestimated, but activities that are more creative and interactive than multiple
choice questions or T/F statements could have the same or even better results as they
would increase the motivation levels and the involvement of the students in the
process. Additionally, the short answer open-ended questions that follow have the
same properties. What Widdowson (1979) aims at drawing our attention to is that
comprehension questions are equal “to rummaging around in the text for information
in a totally indiscriminate way, without regard to what purpose might be served in so
doing”. On the other hand, Grabe (2012) argues that comprehension questions can
offer good instructional opportunities if teachers have students explain why an answer
is appropriate and explain where the text supports his/her answer”. According to that,

3
there is a high possibility that the way in which the teacher selects to face the
comprehension questions, will make all the difference in the learning process. Last
but not least, the final type of while-reading activity that was detected on the lesson
under discussion, is a typical “fill-in-the-gaps” exercise, which does not enhance
students’ creativity or involvement in the learning process as well. All of the above
types of activities target testing comprehension and product reading, rather than
focusing on the process that a learner should follow to accomplish adequate
understanding of the text and this is what makes them vulnerable for criticism.

As far as the post-reading stage is under discussion, it is necessary to mention that it

commences with a vocabulary extension activity, introducing new vocabulary items,
yet related to the topic of the main text. It is presented as a “fill-in-the-gaps” exercise
and the specific type of vocabulary activity has already been met in the while- reading
stage, failing to trigger the learners’ interest once again. This type of activity is mainly
based on bottom-up processing and so failing to activate the students’ minds in a
metacognitive way. The most possible scenario is that the students will forget the
lexical items involved, as they didn’t engage themselves with them and just viewed
them as a means of completing the exercise.

The second part of the post-reading stage incorporates an additional text, again
connected to the thematic notion of superstitions. The second text is of a smaller size
compared to the main one. Following the text appear two speaking questions. The
evident problem with this post-reading activity is that there appears to be no actual
reason for reading the text under discussion. The two questions that follow could be
more accurately characterized as parts of a pre- reading stage as they do not require
any data from the text so as to be addressed. Despite these two general questions, no
other activities could be detected, making the text seem purposeless. Further
suggestions on what could accompany the text will be given on the second part of the
assignment.

4
 1.2 Evaluation of the reading text as a whole

Having taken into account the evaluation of each part of the reading lesson under
discussion, adequate data have surfaced so as for a holistic assessment to be delivered.
The lesson under investigation is mainly based on bottom-up rather than top-down
processes. In other words, more lower-level processes are implicated throughout the
reading instruction, while the higher-level processes of inferencing or background
knowledge seem to be unexploited. It can be argued that the lesson is language
focused as the lexical and semantic elements are highlighted as well as the
automaticity of word recognition in all of the while-reading activities. Furthermore,
the reading text selected is treated primarily as a linguistic object and not as a vehicle
for information, which if employed is more beneficial to the instruction. In particular,
the TAVI approach looks at information, overall meaning, and what is known (Johns
& Davies, 1983). As stated by Jordan (2015) “this is where TAVI has a distinct
advantage as it motivates the students to concentrate on things they know. TALO on
the other hand has a more unnatural approach in that students concentrate on language
structure rather than meaning”. The aforementioned fact can be verified in the case
under discussion by the fact that the focus of the lesson is on knowing and
additionally the reading text is handled as a new vocabulary quarry. What also comes
to confirm the text as a linguistic object is the absence of any student negotiation over
the text or the development of the readers’ autonomy, showing that product
defocusing is not accomplished and product reading is prevailing.

5
 2. Improvement Suggestions

As far as the improvement of the specific reading lesson is on the spectrum, there
are a number of recommendations that could be proven beneficial if employed. First
and foremost, more focus should be given on the top-down processing of the tasks,
taking into account the actual involvement of the readers. For instance, some visual
elements could be used on the pre-reading stage and the speaking questions could be
altered so as to encourage interaction between the students themselves and not only
student-teacher interaction. In regard to the while reading stage crucial modifications
could be made. Instead of the loads of comprehension questions, an activity that
includes the creation of a visual map of the text could be adopted or an activity that
involves the ordering of the main ideas of the text. Nevertheless, the stage that needs
the more radical alterations is the post-reading stage. It should be mentioned that an
efficient idea would be to include not only one, but two additional texts. The texts
shouldn’t be visible to the whole group of learners so as for a jigsaw activity to take
place. Each half of the students would study their text and then their collaboration
would be needed to address certain questions. Another idea would be to encourage the
students to conduct their own survey on superstitions among their inner circle and
present it in the next lesson using technological means.

6
 3. Conclusion

The assignment in question has attempted to evaluate a reading lesson based on a

specific set of criteria that are associated with its prosperity. Moreover, suggestions
concerning the improvement of the specific activities and the lesson as a whole were
offered. It is vital to mention that the lesson under investigation is based on the pre-,
while- and post-reading structure, which adds to its effectiveness. However, radical
changes were recommended on various parts of its stages, so as for more top-down
processes to be incorporated. Last but not least, the notion of reading comprehension
has changed over the years and both textbook writers and instructors need to take this
piece of information into account. As Samuels & Kamil (2013) state ““… contrary to
conventional wisdom, which states that comprehension is the process of getting
meaning from a page, comprehension is … the process of bringing meaning to a text”.

7
8