INTRODUCTION 1 Rationale for the study
Aims of the study
The aim of the study is to investigate reading strategies used by non English major students at High School for Gifted students In particular, the study
uncovers the overall use of reading strategies among students when reading academic materials
explores the frequency of reading strategies that students use while dealing with academic reading text
finds out the differences (if possible) in reading strategies used by high proficiency and low proficiency students
The research questions
1 What reading strategies are used by non English specialized students at Grade 10 at High School for Gifted Students?
2 Are there any differences between the reading strategies employed by high proficiency and low proficiency students at grade 10 at High School for Gifted Students?
Significance of the study
This study is significant for some reasons Firstly, for teachers who are teaching reading to high school students, it revealed students‘ general awareness and perceived use of reading strategies while reading academic materials Secondly, the study uncovered reading strategies used most commonly and least commonly by the students Finally, it may point out the differences in reading strategies between high and low proficiency students Thus, teachers can identify effective reading strategies for their students and have proper ways to promote more reading strategy instruction in class.
Scope of the study
Reading strategies are interrelated with many other factors including reading comprehension, students‘ proficiency level, text types, etc In the scope of this study, reading strategies are only investigated in relationship with student‘s proficiency levels In addition, the sample of the study was drawn from non English major students at Grade 10 at High School for Gifted Students.
Method of the study
To achieve the aims mentioned above, data were collected through the survey questionnaire and students‘ profile of proficiency levels
The quantitative research method is used with the aim of obtaining information on reading strategies used among students in general and between more proficient students and less proficient students in particular.
Design of the study
The study consists of three main parts: the introduction, the development and the conclusion
Part I: Introduction: presents the rationale for the study, the aims, the method, significance, the scope of the study as well as the design of the thesis
Part II: Development: consists of three chapters
Chapter 1 discusses the theoretical background relevant to the research topic including the reading, reading process, reading comprehension, reading strategies and reviews research conducted in the fields of reading strategies
Chapter 2 presents the research methodology of the study, which focuses on the participants, the instrument, data collection procedure, and data analysis
Chapter 3 presents the results of the study, analyzes the data and solves the requirements in the research questions
Part III: Conclusion: offers major findings, pedagogical implications and provides limitations for the study, also some suggestions for future study.
DEVELOPMENT
LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Definition of reading
This chapter briefly discusses the theoretical background related to the study
Review of aspects of reading in foreign language relevant to the study will be included in: reading comprehension, reading process, reading comprehension level, and reading strategies In addition, a brief overview on related studies will be presented
Reading is a very personal activity which can be omnipresent in various forms By reading a lot, people can grasp what is happening all over the world and keep pace with the humankind civilization At the times of explosion of information, reading plays a greater role in our lives However, the ability to read is such a natural part of human being that people find it impossible to give an exact definition of reading
Different scholars define it in different ways
According to Smith (1985: 102), ―reading is understanding the author’s thought‖
It means that the readers ―read the author’s mind not the author’s words.” If the readers only understand the words in isolation in the text without understanding the author‘s mind, their reading is useless
Rumelhart (1997) indicates that reading involves the reader, the text, and the interaction between reader and text It can be seen that the reader and the text are two essential components of reading process; it is, however, the interaction between them that composes actual reading Sharing the same idea with Rumelhart, Silberstein (1994: 12) states that ―reading is a complex cognitive process in which reader and text interact to (re)create meaningful discourse‖ From these definitions, it is apparent that reading is a process in which the reader interacts with the text to gain some kind of meaning This meaning mainly depends on the reader who is the cognitive subject of the text
Goodman (1971: 135) claims that reading is ―psycholinguistics process by which the reader, a language user, reconstructs, as best as he can, a message which has been encoded by a writer as a graphic display‖ Goodman thought that this act of reconstruction is viewed as ―a cyclical process of sampling, predicting, testing and confirming.‖ William (1986: 3) shares the same view on reading as Goodman, especially on the act of reconstruction He argues that ―written texts, then, often contain more than we need to understand them The efficient reader makes use of this to take what he needs, and no more, to obtain meaning.‖
From a different perspective, Harmer (1989: 153) views reading as a mechanical process that ―eyes receive the message and the brain has to work out the significance of the message‖ It means that he focuses on two actions that dominated by the eyes and the brain
In short, each author defines reading from different perspectives However, most of the definitions reveal some common features, that is, the close relationship between reading and understanding; and reading process which involves the reader, the text, and the interaction between the reader and the text
Reading purposes refer to readers‘ aims and objectives in reading texts That is to say, different readers have different purposes of reading Therefore, reading purposes are one of the important factors which can lead us to be successful readers
Ruiqi (2007) claims that reader‘s reading purpose is an integral part of successful reading
According to Ruiqi (2007), there are two major reading purposes: reading for getting information and reading for pure fun or enjoyment Additionally, Grabe and
Stoller (2002) have classified the reading purposes under seven main headings as follows: 1) Reading to search for simple information; 2) Reading to skim quickly;
3) Reading to learn from the text; 4) Reading to integrate information; 5) Reading to write (or search for information needed for writing); 6) Reading to critique texts; 7) Reading for general comprehension
In short, many scholars such as Grabe, Stoller, and Ruiqi have recognized the importance of reading and demonstrated the reading purposes As mentioned earlier, there are a number of different reading purposes; therefore, recognizing the reading purposes is one factor which can help the students succeed in their reading tasks For the present study, only reading academic texts has been considered
Therefore, the main purpose of reading for this study is to read for getting the information
Numerous efforts to define and explain the process of reading have done in various research areas These efforts have brought up different models and views of reading, among which are: the bottom-up model (Gough, 1972), the top-down model (Goodman, 1967) and the interactive model (Rumelhart, 1977) are most frequently mentioned
Bottom-up reading model emphasizes the written or printed text, and it indicates that reading is compelled by text and that reading proceeds from part to whole
Specifically, in bottom-up model, the reader begins with the written text (the bottom), and constructs meaning from letters, words, phrases and sentences found within, and then processes the text in a linear direction In the process of meaning interpretation, the language is translated from one form of symbolic representation to another (Nunan, 1991) According to Eskey (2005), bottom-up processes are composed of a broad array of various complex skills, such as word recognition, spelling, morpho-phonemic processing and morpho-syntactic parsing
In this model, the reader seems to play a relatively passive role because the basis of bottom – up processing is the linguistic knowledge of the reader Samuel and Kamil
(1988) pointed out the shortcomings of these models as follows:
―Because of the lack of feedback loops in the early bottom – up models, it was difficult to account for sentence – context effects and the role of prior knowledge of text topic as facilitating variables in word recognition and comprehension.”
Sharing the similar viewpoint with Samuel and Kamil, Rumelhart (1977) indicates that the linear process in the bottom-up model implies that no higher level information ever modifies or changes lower level analysis In some cases, readers are able to identify a word correctly only by employing higher level semantic and syntactic processing
A top-down reading model is a reading approach that emphasizes what the reader brings to the text, and it states that reading is compelled by meaning and proceeds from whole to part Specifically, in the top-down process, readers predict what will come next, test their predictions and adjust or confirm them They use background knowledge to create inferences and decode symbols only when necessary for comprehension In this model it is evident that the flow of information proceeds from the top downward so that the process of word identification is dependent upon meaning first Thus the higher level processes embodied in past experiences and the reader's knowledge of the language pattern interact with and direct the flow of information, just as listeners may anticipate what the upcoming words of speakers might be This view identifies reading as a kind of ―psycholinguistic guessing game‖(Goodman, 1967)
This approach emphasizes the interaction between the reader and the text Readers have a prior sense of what could be meaningful in the text, based upon their previous experiences and their knowledge about language Readers are not restricted only to one source of information—the letters before their eyes, but have applied two other important kinds of information which are available at the same time: semantic cues (meaning), and syntactic cues (grammatical or sentence sense)
METHODOLOGY 2.1 Settings
In this chapter, the research methodology including five sectors: settings, participants, instruments for data collection, data collection procedure, and data analysis will be presented
The study was conducted at High School for Gifted Students, Hanoi University of Education At high school, students have to take English as one formal subject
They study general English through five parts in each unit: reading, speaking, listening, writing and language focus The subject is mainly taught in formal settings according to the nationwide course distribution
At High School for Gifted Students, students are grouped into 9 specialized classes according to their aptitude and interests, namely, Mathematics, English, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Information Technology, Literature, and two non-major classes Except for the special programme for English major students, students from other classes follow the basic English curriculum for high school students
Participants of the study were 120 grade 10 th students from non English specialized classes at High School for Gifted Students including 85 male students and 35 female students Students came from different parts of the country and were currently studying at 10 Mathematics 1, 10 Mathematics 2, 10 Chemistry, and 10 Biology Those students had at least 4 years studying English at lower-secondary school and underwent an English test when taking the entrance examination into the school The participants who are all aged between 15 or 16 have just finished their first term The course book used was ―Tiếng Anh 10‖ by Hoàng Văn Vân, Hoàng Thị Xuân Hoa, Đào Ngọc Lộc, Vũ Thị Lợi, Đỗ Tuấn Minh and Nguyễn Quốc Tuấn
The participants under investigation were divided into three proficiency groups (high, intermediate, and low) according to their average scores of three English tests administered among the whole population These exams were standard progressive tests and final term English tests designed by English teachers of the school to assess students‘ overall English proficiency These tests were employed to measure students‘ reading proficiency by virtue of their strong emphasis on reading comprehension and vocabulary, as has been the practice in foreign language instruction in high schools in Vietnam The scores of the high – proficiency group ranged from 8.0 to 9.5, those of the middle from 6.5 to 7.9, and those of the low- proficiency group from 5.1 to 6.4 The gap between the high – proficiency group and low proficiency group is quite large This is to say, the researcher found it easier to find out the clear differences in their reading strategy use Twenty students were selected randomly from the high proficiency group and twenty students were chosen randomly from the low proficiency group in order to make comparison between these two groups about reading strategy use
Students‘ proficiency levels are illustrated as follows:
Level Score Number of Students Percentage
Figure 5: Distribution of students’ proficiency levels
Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) (see Appendix)
The SORS was used as a main instrument in this study because it emphasizes the importance of cognitive strategies and metacognitive awareness in L2 reading The SORS consists of 30 items, each of which uses a 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1
(―I never or almost never do this‖) to 5 (―I always or almost always do this‖) The SORS investigates three broad fields of reading strategies: namely, Global strategies, Problem Solving strategies, and Support strategies The following is a brief description of each category of the SORS and the number of items within each category
• Global strategies (GLOB) are those intentional, carefully planned techniques by which learners monitor or manage their reading, such as having a purpose in mind, previewing the text as to its length and organization, or using typographical aids and tables and figures (13 items)
• Problem Solving Strategies (PROB) are the actions and procedures that readers use while working directly with the text These are localized, focused techniques used when problems develop in understanding textual information; examples include adjusting one‘s speed of reading when the material becomes difficult or easy, guessing the meaning of unknown words, and rereading the text to improve comprehension (8 items)
• Support Strategies (SUP) are basic support mechanisms intended to aid the reader in comprehending the text such as using a dictionary, taking notes, underlining, or highlighting textual information (9 items)
The SORS was not translated into Vietnamese because the language for the SORS is simple and easy
Before the main study, a pilot study was carried out to examine reliability of the instruments for the study In addition, this pilot study was purposed to see what problems would occur while administrating this study, and more importantly how the research design for this study would work In the pilot study, 20 students (13 male and 7 female) studying at grade 10 at High School for Gifted Students participated in this pilot study As a result, no serious problems were found in conducting the pilot study More importantly, the pilot study showed that the research design for this study worked well
In the main study, the procedures were conducted as follows Before beginning the main stages of the study, the researcher provided participants with some brief explanations about the purposes of this study and general instructions
First step, the participants were asked to complete the SORS with a view to measuring the participants‘ general reading strategy use in reading academic texts and investigate what strategies are used most commonly and least in total and in each subgroup When the students received the questionnaire, the author went over with the students in class question by question to make sure that they could fully understand all the questions before giving their final answers After the students freely completed the questionnaire, the author collected immediately
Second step, the questionnaires by 20 high proficiency students and 20 low proficiency students were selected to compare reading strategy use between these two groups
Third step, these students‘ results from the SORS were collected, summarized, and analyzed
One hundred twenty students in total participated in this data collection, and all students completed the survey
The present study is quantitative in nature This method helps find out the number of common reading strategies employed by students and measure the extent of students‘ awareness of reading strategies through an examination of the frequencies and variances of strategy use Therefore, this study employed statistical data analysis procedures to obtain descriptive statistics
Descriptive statistics were employed to identify what reading strategies non English major students used and how frequently they used them In examining students‘ strategy use in terms of the Likert scale that ranges from 1 to 5, this study employed three levels of usages, as suggested by Mokhtari and Sheorey‘s (2002) for strategy use in language learning, that is, high (mean of 3.5 or higher), moderate (mean of 2.5 to 3.4), and low (mean of 2.4 or lower).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Profile of reading strategies by non English major students at High School for Gifted Students
This chapter presents the results of data analyses and the findings for this study The purpose of this study was to explore the use of reading strategies among students at High School for Gifted Students This study also examined the differences in the use of reading strategies between two groups of proficiency
3.1 Profile of reading strategies by non English major students at High School for Gifted Students
Descriptive statistics were employed to find out the profile of reading strategies
The descriptive statistics included means of each strategy use, the overall use, and the use of three strategy categories The average score of the overall use of the reading strategies was 3.23, which is moderate according to Mokhtari and Sheorey‘s
(2002) interpretation key Mokhtari and Sheorey interpret that mean of 3.5 or higher is high usage, mean of 2.5 to 3.4 is moderate usage, and mean of 2.4 or lower is low usage As shown in Table 1, Problem Solving strategies were at the high level of usage, while Global and Support strategies were at the moderate level of usage
Use of Each Strategy Category (N = 120)
Categories of Strategy Mean Level
The average score of overall use of the reading strategies was 3.23 on the 5-point Likert scale According to established strategy usage criteria as described previously, this indicates that students at High School for Gifted Students show
―moderate‖ usage of the reading strategies when they read academic materials In studies conducted in EFL learning environments, such as in Korea (Lee, 2007) and in other Asian countries (Wu, 2005) For example, Lee (2007) investigated reading strategy use in reading general English texts among Korean EFL college students and reported moderate usage of reading strategies (M = 2.92 for one group; M 3.01 for the other group, on 5 point Likert scale) Wu (2005) examined the use of reading strategies among 204 Taiwanese EFL college students and reported moderate usage of the reading strategies (M = 3.08, on 5 point Likert scale) Wu used the SORS to measure reading strategy use In terms of the averages of self- reported scores for reading strategy use, twelve strategies were reported as high usage, and sixteen strategies were reported as moderate usage and two strategies were reported as low usage
With regard to each category of the reading strategies, the most frequently used category of the reading strategies was Problem Solving strategies (M = 3.59), followed by Support strategies (M = 3.06) and Global strategies (M = 3.03) The result of this study is consistent with the results of other studies (Wu, 2005)—
Problem Solving strategies were used most frequently followed by Global strategies and Support strategies It is also consistent with the results of Sheorey and Mokhtari‘s (2001) study on reading strategy use of ESL college students and native English speaking American college students That is to say, the participants in this study showed a greater use of the Problem Solving strategies This result is understandable when identifying features of the Problem Solving strategies as Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002) described them as follows: ―problem solving strategies are the actions and procedures that readers use while working directly with the text These are localized, focused techniques…‖ (p 4) Direct and localized Problem Solving strategies, for example ‗re-reading for better understanding‘,
‗trying to stay focused‘, ‗paying close attention‘, and ‗reading slowly and carefully‘, do not seem to demand many resources and efforts from readers to be implemented
In comparison with the usage of the Problem Solving strategies, the use of the even though they still showed moderate usage One possible explanation for this result is that the Global strategies and the Support strategies might be demanding to readers unlike the Problem Solving strategies Some strategies, for example
‗analyzing and evaluating what is read‘ (GLOB), ‗checking how text content fits purposes‘ (GLOB), ‗confirming predictions‘ (GLOB), ‗previewing text before reading‘ (GLOB), ‗asking oneself questions‘ (SUP), ‗taking notes while reading‘
(SUP), and ‗paraphrasing for understanding‘ (SUP), can be demanding by requiring additional resources or actions from readers Another possible explanation is that students at High School for Gifted Students might be unfamiliar with or unaware of how to implement those strategies Some strategies, for example ‗analyzing and evaluating what is read‘, ‗asking oneself questions‘, and ‗taking notes while reading‘ might require more sophisticated techniques or actions reading between lines of the texts
Thirteen strategy items which fall into the category of Global strategies are listed in the order of mean of the strategy use score reported by the participants in Table 2
GLOB 15 Using text features (e.g., table, figures) 3.9 HIGH
GLOB 3 Using prior knowledge 3.7 HIGH
GLOB 1 Setting purpose for reading 3.67 HIGH
GLOB 20 Using typographical features (bold, italics) 3.52 HIGH
GLOB 24 Predicting or guessing text meaning 3.08 MODERATE
GLOB 23 Checking my understanding when new information comes 3.07 MODERATE
GLOB 4 Previewing text before reading it 2.78 MODERATE
GLOB 17 Using context clues 2.73 MODERATE
GLOB 6 Checking how text content fits purpose 2.7 MODERATE
GLOB 8 Noting text characteristics (e.g., length, organization) 2.59 MODERATE
GLOB 12 Determining what to read 2.56 MODERATE
As can be seen from the table, four strategies were reported as high usage, and eight strategies were reported as moderate usage and one strategy were reported as low usage In general, students at HSGS tend to make full use of text features, typographical features, and background knowledge to make it easier to understand the texts One possible explanation may lies in the fact that language and figures in the table are normally easier than the content of the text and typographical features are quite simple to follow; thus, it is understandable for students to resort to these strategies to facilitate their understanding On the other hand, students are not aware of and not familiar to how to analyze and evaluate what is read Seemingly, this strategy requires students to employ sophisticated skills which need careful instruction from the teachers However, in the context of Vietnam, lack of time in class and well-trained English teachers prevents students to achieve this strategy
Nine strategy items which fall into the category of Support strategies are listed in the order of mean of the strategy use score reported by the participants in Table 3
SUP 13 Using reference materials (e.g., dictionary) 3.84 HIGH
SUP 29 Translating into a native language 3.62 HIGH
SUP 30 Thinking about information in both English and mother tongue 3.53 HIGH
SUP 10 Underlining or circle information in the text to help me remember it 3.4 MODERATE
SUP 2 Taking notes while reading 2.8 MODERATE
SUP 22 Going back and forth in the text to find relationship among ideas 2.78 MODERATE
SUP 5 Reading aloud when text becomes difficult 2.76 MODERATE
SUP 26 Asking oneself questions 2.45 MODERATE
SUP 18 Paraphrasing (restate ideas in my own words) for understanding 2.37 LOW
As shown in the table, three strategies were reported as high usage, and five strategies were reported as moderate usage and one strategy were reported as low usage Clearly, students are good at using reference materials, especially dictionary
This may come from the availability of dictionary and the encouragement from the teachers to use it effectively in their learning In addition, students always interpret the text in both their mother tongue and English through the high use of such strategies as ―translating into a native language‖ and ―thinking about information in both English and mother tongue‖ This action may be conducted habitually as at lower grades, Vietnamese teacher usually employ Grammar-Translation method to teach students Additionally, limit in language proficiency deters learners from thinking in English
Eight strategy items which fall into the category of Problem Solving strategies are listed in the order of mean of the strategy use score reported by the participants in Table 4
Use of Problem Solving strategies (N = 120)
PROB 9 Trying to stay focused when losing concentration 4.12 HIGH PROB 7 Reading slowly and carefully to make sure I understand 3.82 HIGH
PROB 25 Re-reading for better understanding when text becomes difficult 3.71 HIGH
PROB 28 Guessing meaning of unknown words or phrases 3.68 HIGH
PROB 11 Adjusting reading speed 3.64 HIGH
PROB 14 Paying closer attention to reading when text becomes difficult 3.33 MODERATE
PROB 19 Visualizing information read 3.23 MODERATE
PROB 16 Pausing and thinking about reading 3.16 MODERATE
As can be seen from the table, five strategies were reported as high usage, and three strategies were reported as moderate usage and no strategy was reported as low when losing concentration‖, ―reading slowly and carefully to make sure I understand‖, and ―re-reading for better understanding when text becomes difficult‖
CONCLUSION 1 Conclusion
Pedagogical Implications
The findings of this study can suggest some educational implications for EFL teaching and learning in Vietnam The implications are obviously intended for students at High School for Gifted Students who were the target subjects for this study, but the implications might not be limited only to them First, students at HSGS were reported moderate use of reading strategies In other words, students‘ reading strategy use should be improved to meet the requirement of the course as well as develop their language proficiency in general Therefore, Vietnamese EFL teachers might strengthen reading strategy instruction in class to improve students‘ overall reading strategy use and their critical thinking as well
Second, as shown in this study, students who have high language proficiency seem to use a certain type of reading strategies (i.e., Global strategy) and some specific reading strategies, such as ―using context clues‖, ―re-reading for better understanding when text becomes difficult‖, ―using prior knowledge‖, ―setting purpose for reading‖ more often than their colleagues who have less proficient reading comprehension ability Therefore, it is suggested that Vietnamese EFL teachers introduce high proficiency students‘ characteristics of using these reading strategies to their students, especially low proficiency English readers, and encourage them to use these reading strategies
Third, students at High School for Gifted Students showed that they do not frequently use certain reading strategies, such as ―noting text characteristics (e.g., length, organization)‖ ―asking oneself question‖ and ―analyzing and evaluating what is read‖, for successful comprehension These strategies help readers monitor and evaluate if their comprehension is successful or unsuccessful during or after reading It is quite probable that students at High School for Gifted Students are not familiar with sophisticated reading strategies including these two Additionally, it is recommended that Vietnamese EFL teachers provide their students with instruction that helps them know what those reading strategies are, how to use them, why to use them, and when to use them, and finally leads the students to be more active strategic English readers In the mean time, Vietnamese EFL teachers should keep in mind that reading strategy use might be able to help the improvement of their students‘ language proficiency, and students also develop their own awareness of reading strategies.
Limitations and recommendations for further study
While the study contributed to understanding reading strategies used by students at High School for Gifted Students, shortcomings are unavoidable
The first limitation is about the reliability of the questionnaire responses Although students reported use of some strategies, it is difficult to know whether they are actually using these strategies Future research should incorporate on-line think- aloud protocols or interviews to further examine students‘ actual strategy use
Another limitation lies in the limited number of participants; therefore, generalization of the results of this study should be acted with caution
Finally, considering that the participants in the study were from a specialised high school in Vietnam, their overall EFL proficiency may be relatively higher than those in other high schools, which might have indirectly contributed to their overall moderate usage of strategies Therefore, findings from the study should be interpreted with caution Further studies are needed to examine how students‘ awareness of reading comprehension strategies interacts not only with their perceived use of the strategies but also with their actual use of reading strategies
1 Afflerbach, P, Pearson, P D , Paris, S G (2008) Clarifying Differences Between Reading Skills and Reading Strategies.The Reading Teacher, 61(5), pp 364-373
2 Alexander, P A., and Jetton, T L (2000) ‗Learning from text: A multidimensional and
3 Anderson, N.J (1991) ―Individual difference in strategy use in second language testing and reading‖ The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-
4 Barnett, M A (1989) More than Meets the Eye Foreign Language Reading:
5 Barnett, M.A (1988) ―Reading through context: how real and perceived strategy use affects L2 comprehension‖ The Modern Language Journal, 12(2),150-162
6 Bialystok, E (1990) Communication Strategies, Oxford: Blackwell
7 Block, E (1986) ‗The comprehension strategies of second language readers‘,
8 Brown, H D (1994) Teaching by Principles Prentice Hall Regents
9 Carrell, P., Pharis, B., & Liberto, J (1989) Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading TESOL Quarterly 23/4:647-678
10 Cohen, A D (1990) Language Learning: Insights for Learners, Massachusetts: Heinle and Heinle
11 Dao, T.M.H (2012).The relationship between first – year Nghe An college students’ motivation to read and their use of reading strategies Unpublished
M.A minor thesis, University of Langauges and Interational Studies.
12 Goodman, K S (1971) Reading a Psycholinguistic Guessing Game In
Harry Singer and Rorbert B Ruddell (Eds)
13 Grabe, W 1991 Current developments in second language reading research
TESOL Handbook of Reading Research,Vol III,Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp 285–
14 Harmer, H (1989) The Practice of English Language Teaching Harlow:
15 Lee, K R (2007) Strategy Awareness-Raising for Success: Reading
Strategy Instruction in the EFL context Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Maryland, College Park
16 Mokhtari, K & Sheorey, R (2002) Measuring ESL students‘ awareness of
17 Mokhtari, K & Reichard, C.A (2002) ―Assessing students‘ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies.‖ Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259
18 Oxford, R (1990) Learning Strategies – What every Teacher Should Know
19 Pang, J (2008) ―Research on good and poor reader characteristics:
Implication for L2 reading research in China‖ Reading in a Foreign
20 RAND Reading Study Group (2002) Reading for understanding: Toward and R & D program in reading comprehension Washington, DC: RAND
21 Read, T A S (1983) What is a good classroom test? (in) Guilines a periodical for classroom language teachers Classroom tests Crabbe, D
(ed.) Volumn 5 No.1 Singapore: SEAMEO regional language centre
22 Sheorey, R & Mokhtari, K (2001) ―Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and nonnative readers‖
23 Singhal, M (2001) ―Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and L2 readers‖ The Reading Matrix, 1(1), 1-15
24 Teoh, S A (1996) ‗Academic reading strategies: Focus on ESL learners at advanced level studies‘,MA Dissertation, UM
25 Weinstein, C E and Mayer, R E (1987) ‗The teaching of learning strategies‘ M C
26 Wolf, M., & Bowers, P (1999) The double-defict hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias Journal of Educational Psychology 91, 3, 415-
27 Wu, C.-P (2005) An investigation of metacognitive reading strategies used by EFL Taiwanese college students to comprehend familiar versus unfamiliar Chinese and English texts Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
APPENDIX Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) –
The purpose of this survey is to collect information about the various techniques you use when you read academic materials in English (e.g., reading textbooks, reading journal articles, etc.)
All the items below refer to your reading of college-related academic materials (such as textbooks, not newspapers or magazines)
Each statement is followed by five numbers, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and each number means the following:
‗1‘ means that ‗I never or almost never do this‘
‗2‘ means that ‗I do this only occasionally‘
‗3‘ means that ‗I sometimes do this‘ (About 50% of the time)
‗4‘ means that ‗I usually do this‘
‗5‘ means that ‗I always or almost always do this‘
After reading each statement, circle the number (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) which applies to you
Note that there are no right or wrong responses to any of the items on this survey If you have any questions, let the instructor know immediately
1 I have a purpose in mind when I read
2 I take notes while reading to help me understand what I read
3 I think about what I know to help me understand what I read
4 I take an overall view of the text to see what it is about before reading it
5 When text becomes difficult, I read aloud to help me
6 I think about whether the content of the text fits my reading purpose
7 I read slowly and carefully to make sure I understand what
8 I review the text first by noting its characteristics like length and organization
9 I try to get back on track when I lose concentration
10 I underline or circle information in the text to help me remember it
11 I adjust my reading speed according to what I am reading
12 When reading, I decide what to read closely and what to ignore
13 I use reference materials (e.g., dictionary) to help me understand what I read
14 When text becomes difficult, I pay closer attention to what I am reading
15 I use tables, figures, and pictures in text to increase my understanding
16 I stop from time to time and think about what I am reading
17 I use context clues to help me better understand what I am reading
18 I paraphrase (restate ideas in my own words) to better understand what I read
19 I try to picture or visualize information to help remember what I read
20 I use typographical features like bold face and italics to identify key information
21 I critically analyze and evaluate the information presented in the text
22 I go back and forth in the text to find relationship among ideas in it