Keywords
vocabulary knowledge
general language ability
reading comprehension
How to Cite
Number of views: 3835
Number of downloads: 2359
Abstract
This exploratory study represents an attempt to investigate the factors that may affect the reading comprehension abilities of English as an additional language (EAL) learners. For this study, we examined a participant group of 31 (25 EAL and 6 first language English) learners studying at an international school in Japan. We assessed the participants according to four factors shown to influence reading comprehension: vocabulary knowledge, word decoding skills, reading fluency, and general linguistic ability. Our results show that differences in vocabulary knowledge show more variance in reading comprehension scores than the other factors examined in this study, highlighting the importance of vocabulary knowledge for reading comprehension. However, other factors such as reading fluency and general linguistic knowledge are also shown to be moderate to strong predictors of reading comprehension. Based on these results, we suggest that EAL learners need targeted language support to enhance academic text comprehension.
Funding
the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research under Grant number 17K03035
References
Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component? Reading and Writing, 19(9), 933-958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-006-9024-z
August, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice: A Publication of the Division for Learning Disabilities, Council for Exceptional Children, 20(1), 50-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00120.x
Babaii, E., & Ansary, H. (2001). The C-test: A valid operationalization of reduced redundancy principle. System, 29(2), 209-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00012-4
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford University Press.
Baghaei, P., & Grotjahn, R. (2014). Establishing the construct validity of conversational C-tests using a multidimensional Rasch model. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 56, 60-82. https://www.psychologie-aktuell.com/fileadmin/download/ptam/1-2014_20140324/04_Baghaei.pdf
Beglar, D. (2010). A Rasch-based validation of the Vocabulary Size Test. Language Testing, 27(1), 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209340194
Bellocchi, S., Tobia, V., & Bonifacci, P. (2017). Predictors of reading and comprehension abilities in bilingual and monolingual children: A longitudinal study on a transparent language. Reading and Writing, 30(6), 1311-1334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9725-5
Bruce, P. C. (2015). Introductory statistics and analytics. John Wiley & Sons.
Burgoyne, K., Kelly, J. M., Whiteley, H. E., & Spooner, A. (2009). The comprehension skills of children learning English as an additional language. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 735-747. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X422530
Coxhead, A. (2012). Researching vocabulary in secondary school English texts: ‘The hunger games’ and more. English in Aotearoa, 78, 34-41. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.984965735419059
Coxhead, A., & Boutorwick, T. J. (2018). Longitudinal vocabulary development in an EMI international school context: Learners and texts in EAL, maths, and science. TESOL Quarterly, 52(3), 588-610. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.450
Coxhead, A., Stevens, L., & Tinkle, J. (2010). Why might secondary science textbooks be difficult to read. New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 37-52.
Dörnyei, Z., & Katona, L. (1992). Validation of the C-test amongst Hungarian EFL learners. Language Testing, 9(2), 187-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229200900206
Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first‐and second‐language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1), 78-103. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.38.1.4
Eckes, T., & Grotjahn, R. (2006). A closer look at the construct validity of C-tests. Language Testing, 23(3), 290-325. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532206lt330oa
Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading: The Official Journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, 9(2), 167-188. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0902_4
Farnia, F., & Geva, E. (2011). Cognitive correlates of vocabulary growth in English language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(4), 711-738. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716411000038
Fawcett, A. J., & Lynch, L. (2000). Systematic identification and intervention for reading difficulty: Case studies of children with EAL. Dyslexia, 6(1), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0909(200001/03)6:1%3C57::AID-DYS163%3E3.0.CO;2-W
Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. Sage.
Fraser, C. A. (2007). Reading rate in L1 mandarin Chinese and L2 English across five reading tasks. Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 372-394. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00587.x
García, J. R., & Cain, K. (2014). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research, 84(1), 74-111. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313499616
Geva, E., & Farnia, F. (2012). Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1. Reading and Writing, 25(8), 1819-1845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9333-8
Geva, E., & Zadeh, Z. Y. (2006). Reading efficiency in native English-speaking and English-as-a-second-language children: The role of oral proficiency and underlying cognitive-linguistic processes. Scientific Studies of Reading: The Official Journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, 10(1), 31-57. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr1001_3
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104
Grabe, W. (2010). Fluency in reading: Thirty-five years later. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 71-83. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/66645
Graves, M. F., August, D., & Mancilla-Martinez, J. (2012). Teaching vocabulary to English language learners. Teachers College Press.
Green, C., & Lambert, J. (2019). Position vectors, homologous chromosomes and gamma rays: Promoting disciplinary literacy through Secondary Phrase Lists. English for Specific Purposes, 53, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.08.004
Greene, J. W., & Coxhead, A. J. (2015). Academic vocabulary for middle school students. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Harsch, C. (2014). General language proficiency revisited: Current and future issues. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(2), 152-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.902059
Hawkins, E. (2005). Out of this nettle, drop-out, we pluck this flower, opportunity: Re-thinking the school foreign language apprenticeship. The Language Learning Journal, 32(1), 4-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730585200141
Henriksen, B., Albrechtsen, D., & Haastrup, K. (2004). The relationship between vocabulary size and reading comprehension in the L2. Angles on the English-Speaking World, 4(1), 129-140.
Henriksen, B., & Danelund, L. (2015). Studies of Danish L2 learners’ vocabulary knowledge and the lexical richness of their written production in English. In P. Pietilä, K. Doró, & P. Renata (Eds.), Lexical issues in L2 writing (pp. 29-55). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hill, C. (2011). What can teachers do to improve reading comprehension?: An examination of second language reading research and implications for English language teaching practices. The Arbutus Review, 2(1), 62-74. https://doi.org/10.18357/tar2120119063
Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799
Hsueh-Chao, M. H., & Nation, P. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13(1), 403-430. https://doi.org/10125/66973
Hutchinson, J. M., Whiteley, H. E., Smith, C. D., & Connors, L. (2003). The developmental progression of comprehension‐related skills in children learning EAL. Journal of Research in Reading, 26(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.261003
Ishihara, K., Hiser, E., & Okada, T. (2003). Modifying C-test for practical purposes. Doshisha Studies in Language and Culture, 5(4), 539-568. https://doi.org/10.14988/pa.2017.0000004420
Jeon, E. H., & Yamashita, J. (2014). L2 reading comprehension and its correlates: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 64(1), 160-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12034
Jiang, X., Sawaki, Y., & Sabatini, J. (2012). Word reading efficiency, text reading fluency, and reading comprehension among Chinese learners of English. Reading Psychology, 33(4), 323-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2010.526051
Kamimoto, T. (1993). Tailoring the test to fit the students: Improvement of the C-test through classical item analysis. Language Laboratory, 30, 47-61. https://doi.org/10.24539/llaj.30.0_47
Kremmel, B. (2018). Development and initial validation of a diagnostic computer-adaptive profiler of vocabulary knowledge (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nottingham). Nottingham eTheses. http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/49085/
Laufer, B. (1989). What percentage of text-lexis is essential for comprehension. In C. Lauren & M. Nordman (Eds.), From humans thinking to thinking machines (pp. 316-323). Multilingual Matters.
Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 20-34). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524643.004
Laufer, B., & Ravenhorst-Kalovski, G. C. (2010). Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 15-30. https://doi.org/10125/66648
Lee, K., & Chen, X. (2019). An emergent interaction between reading fluency and vocabulary in the prediction of reading comprehension among French immersion elementary students. Reading and Writing, 32(7), 1657-1679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9920-z
Lervåg, A., & Aukrust, V. G. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge is a critical determinant of the difference in reading comprehension growth between first and second language learners. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 51(5), 612-620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02185.x
Lesaux, N. K., Crosson, A. C., Kieffer, M. J., & Pierce, M. (2010). Uneven profiles: Language minority learners’ word reading, vocabulary, and reading comprehension skills. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(6), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.09.004
Lin, L.-F. (2010). The impact of the retelling technique on Chinese students’ English reading comprehension. Asian EFL Journal, 12(2), 163-191. http://asian-efl-journal.com/PDF/June-2010.pdf
Linnemann, M., & Wilbert, J. (2010). The C-test: A valid instrument for screening language skills and reading comprehension of children with learning problems. In R. Grotjahn (Ed.), C-test: Contributions from current research (pp. 113-124). Peter Lang.
McLean, S., & Kramer, B. (2016). The creation of a new vocabulary levels test. Shiken, 19(1), 1-9. http://teval.jalt.org/node/33
Melby-Lervåg, M., & Lervåg, A. (2014). Reading comprehension and its underlying components in second-language learners: A meta-analysis of studies comparing first-and second-language learners. Psychological Bulletin, 140(2), 409-433. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033890.supp
Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S.-A. H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 322-352. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026744
Miralpeix, I., & Muñoz, C. (2018). Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0016
Murphy, V. A. (2014). Second language learning in the early school years: Trends and contexts. Oxford University Press.
Murphy, V. A., & Unthiah, A. (2015). A systematic review of intervention research examining English language and literacy development in children with English as an Additional Language (EAL). Educational Endowment Foundation. http://www.naldic.org.uk/Resources/NALDIC/Research%20and%20Information/Documents/eal-systematic-review-prof-v-murphy.pdf
Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(3), 304-330. https://doi.org/10.2307/747823
NALDIC. (2015). EAL Achievement: The latest information on how well EAL learners do in standardized assessments compared to all students. National Association for Language Development in the Curriculum. https://www.naldic.org.uk/research-and-information/eal-statistics/ealachievement/
Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Beyond phonological skills: Broader language skills contribute to the development of reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(4), 342-356. 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00238.x
Nation, P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59
Nation, P. (2012). The BNC/COCA word family lists. https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/1857641/about-bnc-coca-vocabulary-list.pdf
Nation, P. (2016). Making and using word lists for language learning and testing. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.208
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Pub. No. 00-4769). National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf
Neff, P. (2015). Peer review use in the EFL writing classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Japan Campus). Temple University Electronic Theses and Dissertations. https://digital.library.temple.edu/digital/collection/p245801coll10/id/329588/rec/1
Ouellette, G., & Beers, A. (2010). A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabulary and visual-word recognition complicate the story. Reading and Writing, 23(2), 189-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9159-1
Oxley, E., & de Cat, C. (2019). A systematic review of language and literacy interventions in children and adolescents with English as an additional language (EAL). The Language Learning Journal, 49(3), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1597146
Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning, 52(3), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00193
Raatz, U., & Klein-Braley, C. (1981). The C-test: A modification of the cloze procedure. In C. Klein-Braley & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Practice and problems in language testing 7 (pp. 113-138). University of Essex.
Rasinski, T., Samuels, S. J., Hiebert, E., Petscher, Y., & Feller, K. (2011). The relationship between a silent reading fluency instructional protocol on students’ reading comprehension and achievement in an urban school setting. Reading Psychology, 32(1), 75-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710903346873
Read, J. (1988). Measuring the vocabulary knowledge of second language learners. RELC Journal, 19(2), 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368828801900202
Ready, R. E., Chaudhry, M. F., Schatz, K. C., & Strazzullo, S. (2013). “Passageless” administration of the Nelson–Denny Reading Comprehension Test: Associations with IQ and reading skills. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(4), 377-384. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412468160
Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01146.x
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-88. https://doi.org/10.1191/026553201668475857
Schoonen, R., Hulstijn, J., & Bossers, B. (1998). Metacognitive and language-specific knowledge in native and foreign language reading comprehension: An empirical study among dutch students in grades 6, 8 and 10. Language Learning, 48(1), 71-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00033
Snowling, M. J., Stothard, S. E., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., Nation, K., & Hulme, C. (2009). YARC York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension Passage Reading. GL.
Stæhr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730802389975
Strand, S., Malmberg, L., & Hall, J. (2015). English as an Additional Language (EAL) and educational achievement in England: An analysis of the National Pupil Database. Educational Endowment Foundation. https://doi.org/10871/23323
Trakulphadetkrai, N. V., Courtney, L., Clenton, J., Treffers-Daller, J., & Tsakalaki, A. (2020). The contribution of general language ability, reading comprehension and working memory to mathematics achievement among children with English as additional language (EAL): An exploratory study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(4), 473-487. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1373742
Treffers-Daller, J., & Huang, J. (2020). Measuring reading and vocabulary with the Test for English Majors Band 4: A concurrent validity study. In J. Clenton & P. Booth (Eds.), Vocabulary and the four skills: Current issues future concerns (pp. 91-113). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429285400-11
Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2012). The simple view of reading redux: Vocabulary knowledge and the independent components hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(5), 453-466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411432685
Tunmer, W. E., & Nicholson, T. (2011). The development and teaching of word recognition skill. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 405-431). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203840412.ch18
Twist, L., Schagen, I., & Hodgson, C. (2007). Readers and reading: The national report for England 2006 (PIRLS: Progress in International Reading Literacy Study). National Foundation for Educational Research. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED504613
Wang, Y., & Treffers-Daller, J. (2017). Explaining listening comprehension among L2 learners of English: The contribution of general language proficiency, vocabulary knowledge and metacognitive awareness. System, 65, 139-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.013
Wright, D. B., London, K., & Field, A. P. (2011). Using bootstrap estimation and the plug-in principle for clinical psychology data. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 2(2), 252-270. https://doi.org/10.5127/jep.013611
Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1991). Children’s problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation. Cambridge University Press.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.