Keywords
comprehension
isolated word training
bottom-up strategy
context word training
top-down strategy
How to Cite
Number of views: 1269
Number of downloads: 871
Abstract
The current research examines the effect of two methods of vocabulary training on reading fluency and comprehension of adult English as second language (ESL) tertiary-bound students. The methods used were isolated vocabulary training (bottom-up reading) and vocabulary training in context (top-down reading). The current exploratory and quasi-experimental study examines the effectiveness of these methods in two intact classes using pre- and posttest measures of students’ reading fluency and comprehension. The results show that bottom-up training had a negative impact on fluency and comprehension. In contrast, top-down training positively affected fluency but had no impact on comprehension. Further, the results do suggest that fast-paced reading may potentially lead to improved comprehension. These findings have implications for the type of language instruction used in classrooms and, therefore, for teachers of adult ESL learners.References
Abbott, M. L. (2005). English reading strategies: Differences in arabic and mandarin speaker performance on the CLBA reading assessment (287889779). Retrieved from ProQuest Education Journals. (Order No. NR08197).
Ahmad, J. (2011). Intentional vs. incidental vocabulary learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(5), 67-75. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/904423892?accountid=10382
Akinwumiju, J. A. (2010). An analysis of basic academic skills associated with success in various areas of vocational education: A technique for planning academic programs. Retrieved from (762998234). Retrieved from ProQuest Education Journals. (Order No. 3429804)
Alexander, J. C. (1998). Reading skill and context facilitation: A classic study revisited. The Journal of Educational Research, 91(5), 314-318.
Archer, N., & Bryant, P. (2001). Investigating the role of content in learning to read: A direct test of Goodman’s model. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 579-591.
August, G. (2011). Spelling facilitates good ESL reading comprehension. Journal of Developmental Education, 35(1), 14-16, 18, 20, 22, 24.
Baumann, J. F., Kame’enui, E. J., & Ash, G. E. (2003). Research in vocabulary instruction: Voltaire redux. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (2nd ed.) (pp. 752-785). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bernhardt, E. (2005). Progress and procrastination in second language reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 133-150. doi: 10.1017/s0267190505000073
Brantmeier, C. (2005). Non-linguistic variables in advanced second-language reading: Learners' self-assessment and enjoyment. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 494-504.
Breznitz, Z. (1997). Enhancing the reading of dyslexics by reading acceleration and auditory masking. Journal of Educational. Psychology, 89, 103-113.
Breznitz, Z., & Berman, L. (2003). The underlying factors of word reading rate. Educational Psychology Review, 15(3), 247-265.
Breznitz, Z., & Share, D. L. (1992). Effects of accelerated reading rate on memory text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(2), 193-199.
Carrell, P., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 441-469.
Carver, R. P. (1990). Reading rate: A review of research and theory. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Diamond, L., & Gutlohn, L. (2006). Teaching vocabulary. Retrieved from the Reading Rockets website: http://www.readingrockets.org/article/teaching-vocabulary
Drucker, M. J. (2003). What reading teachers should know about ESL learners? The Reading Teacher, 57(1), 22-29.
Ehri, L. C., & Wilce, L. S. (1980). Do beginners learn to read function words better in sentences or in lists? Reading Research Quarterly, 1, 675-685.
Foss, J. A. (2009). Individual differences and text genre in L2 French reading comprehension (304927740). Retrieved from ProQuest Education Journals (Order No. 3363884)
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Goodman, K. S., (1965). A study of cues and measures in reading. Elementary English, 42, 639-643.
Gough, P. B. (1996). How children learn to read and why they fail. Annals of Dyslexia, 46, 3-20.
Gough, P., & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding and reading disability. Remedial Special Education, 7, 6-10.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3. American Educator, 22, 4-9.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second-language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 349-381). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2002). Current research and practice in teaching vocabulary. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 258-266).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Iwai, Y. (2009). Metacognitive awareness and strategy use in academic English reading among adult English as a second language (ESL) students. Retrieved from ProQuest Education Journals (305001132). (Order No. 3367175)
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. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2010.526051
Johnston, F. R. (2000). Word learning in predictable text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 248-255.
Kim, Y. H., & Goetz, E. T. (1994). Context effects on word recognition and reading comprehension of poor and good readers: A test of the interaction-compensatory hypothesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 178-188.
Knight, S. (1994). Dictionary use while reading: The effects on comprehension and vocabulary acquisition for students of different verbal abilities. Modern Language Journal, 78, 285-299.
Levy, B. A., Abello, B., & Lysynchuk, L. (1997). Transfer from word training to reading in context: Gains in reading fluency and comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 173-188.
Li, D., & Nes, S. L (2001). Using paired reading to help ESL students become fluent and accurate readers. Reading Improvement, 38(2), 50-61.
Lipka, O., & Siegel, L. S. (2012). The development of reading comprehension skills in children learning English as a second language. Reading and Writing, 25(8), 1873-1898. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9309-8
Lukhele, B. B. S. (2013). Exploring relationships between reading attitudes, reading ability and academic performance amongst primary teacher trainees in Swaziland. Reading & Writing, 4(1), 1-8. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1366064830?accountid=10382
Martin-Chang, S. L., & Levy, B. A. (2005). Fluency transfer: Differential gains in reading speed and accuracy following isolated word and context training. Reading and Writing, 18, 343-376. doi: 10.1007/s11145-005-0668-x
Martin-Chang, S. L., & Levy, B. A. (2006). Word reading fluency: A transfer appropriate processing account of fluency transfer. Reading and Writing, 19, 517-542. doi: 101007/s11145-9007-0
Martin-Chang, S. L., Levy, B. A., & O’Neil, S. (2007). Word acquisition, retention, and transfer: Findings from contextual and isolated word training. Journal of experimental Child Psychology, 96, 37-56.
Mokhtar, A. A., Rawian, R. M., Yahaya, M. F., Abdullah, A., Mansor, M., Osman, M. I., Zakaria, Z. A., & Mohamad, A. R. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge of adult learners. English Language Teaching, 3(1), 71-80.
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233-253.
Nation, P. (2002). Best practice in vocabulary teaching and learning. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 267 -273). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1998). Individual differences in contextual facilitation: Evidence from dyslexia and poor reading comprehension. Child Development, 69, 996-1101.
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 Vol. NIH Pub. No 00–4754. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Nisbet, D. L. (2010). Vocabulary instruction for second language readers. Journal of Adult Education, 39(1), 10-15. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/375484843?accountid=10382
Pretlow, A. T. (2009). A study of the predictive value of oral reading fluency benchmarks to student success on the Georgia CRCT in reading comprehension for struggling readers (751613102). Retrieved from ProQuest Education Journals. (Order No. 3421363)
Rieder, A. (2003) Implicit and explicit learning in incidental vocabulary acquisition. Vienna Working Papers, 12, 24-39.
Rochecouste, J., Oliver, R., & Mulligan, D. (2012). English language growth after university entry. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 1-8. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.11.005
Schmitt, N. (2008). Review article: Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 329-363.
Singer, H., Samuels, J. S., & Spiroff, J. (1974). The effect of pictures and contextual conditions on learning responses to printed words. Reading Research Quarterly, 9, 555-567.
Swanson, H. L., & O'Connor, R. (2009). The role of working memory and fluency practice on the reading comprehension of students who are dysfluent readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(6), 548-75. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022219409338742
Tze-Ming Chou, P. (2012). A pilot study on the potential use of Tomatis Method to improve L2 reading fluency. Teaching English with Technology, 1, 20-37. Retrieved from www.ceeol.com
Weaver, C., Gillmeister-Krause, L., & Vento-Zogby, G. (1996). Creating support for effective literacy education. Portsmouth. NH: Heinemann.
Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 33-52. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224066064?accountid=10382. doi:1040170s0272263105050023
Webb, S. (2008). The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 232-245.
Xue, G., & Nation, I. S. P. (1984). A university word list. Language Learning and Communication, 3, 215-229.
Yu-han, M., & Wen-ying, L. (2015). A study on the relationship between English reading comprehension and English vocabulary knowledge. Education Research International. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/209154
Zhang, L. J. (2008). Constructivist pedagogy in strategic reading instruction: Exploring pathways to learner development in the English as a second language (ESL) classroom. Instructional Science, 36(2), 89-116. doi: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s11251-007-9025-6
Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction make a difference? An empirical study. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 121-140. doi: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587978
Zumeta, R. O., Compton, D. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (2012). Using word identification fluency to monitor first-grade reading development. Exceptional Children, 78(2), 201-220. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/916923335?accountid=10382
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.