Application of cohesion theory in discourse analysis to the teaching of reading comprehension to foreign language learners = Áp dụng lý thuyết về liên kết văn b

This is an action research in which the researcher taught reading comprehension by applying cohesion theory in the lessons and guide students to use the knowledge conveyed to enhance the

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

BỒ THỊ LÝ

APPLICATION OF COHESION THEORY IN DISCOURSE

ANALYSIS TO THE TEACHING OF READING

COMPREHENSION TO FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNERS

(Áp dụng lý thuyết về liên kết văn bản trong việc dạy đọc hiểu tiếng Anh cho

học viên học Tiếng Anh như một ngoại ngữ)

MINOR M.A THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 60.14.10

Hanoi, December, 2012

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOIUNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDY

BỒ THỊ LÝ

APPLICATION OF COHESION THEORY IN DISCOURSE

ANALYSIS TO THE TEACHING OF READING

COMPREHENSION TO FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNERS

(Áp dụng lý thuyết về liên kết văn bản trong việc dạy đọc hiểu tiếng Anh cho

học viên học Tiếng Anh như một ngoại ngữ

MINOR M.A THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 60.14.10

Supervisor: Huỳnh Anh Tuấn, PhD

Hanoi, December, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENT

Declaration i

Acknowledgements ii

Abstract iii Table of content iv

Lists of tables, figures and abbreviations vi

Part A: INTRODUCTION I Rationale 1

II Aims 2

III Scope of the study 2

IV Research methodology 3

V Significance of the study 5

PART B: DEVELOPMENT Chapter I: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND and LITERATURE REVIEW I Theoretical background 1.1 RAND Model of reading comprehension 7

1.2 Previous approaches to teaching reading comprehension 9

1.3 Discourse and discourse analysis 12

1.4 Cohesion and coherence 13

1.5 The role of cohesion competence in reading comprehension 17

II Literature Review 19

Chapter II: Methodology 2.1 Research questions 21

2.2 Research approach 21

2.3 Data collection methods 21

2.4 Data analysis methods 28

Chapter III: Data Analysis: Results, Discussions and Recommendations 3.1 Results and discussions 31

3.1.1 Student‘s pre-existing knowledge about cohesion and coherence 31

3.1.2 Students‘ level of improvement in reading comprehension 33

3.2 Recommendations 35

PART C: CONCLUSION I Major findings of the study 38

II Limitations of the study 39

III Suggestions for further studies 39

IV Contributions of the studies 40

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

LISTS OF TABLES, FIGURES AND ABBREVIATIONS

List of tables:

Table 3.1 Descriptive Statistics for the group‘s performance in the

pre-test and post-test

Table 3.2 Results of the Paired-Sample T-tests

List of figures

Figure 1.1 The RAND model of reading comprehension From

Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension, by RAND Reading Study Group (p 12), 2002, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Copyright 2002

by RAND

Figure 3.1 Number of students who have learnt and have not leant

about cohesion Figure 3.2: Importance of cohesion in a written text

Figure 3.3: Necessity of understanding cohesion in comprehending a

PART A: INTRODUCTION

I Rationale

It is widely known that reading is very important for almost everyone, especially for second language learners According to Tomlinson (1990), a good reading competence is a necessity for those using English for academic and occupational purposes and many curricula therefore devote large amounts of time

to intensive and extensive reading lessons in order for their learners to achieve such competence

As a result, teaching English reading has been always the focus of much concern However, after a great deal of research has been done in this aspect, we are aware that many students, though having learnt English for years, often end in failure about their comprehension when asked to read a passage After years of practice in reading, many learners still find it difficult to make sense of the texts they want to read One of the reasons is, as pointed out by many scholars such as Cook (1989) and Nuttal (1982), the failure to interpret the writer‘s cohesive signals as intended and so to understand correctly the functional value of individual sentences as thus their relationship to each other and the whole

In the view of Halliday and Hasan (1976) the continuity that cohesive relations bring about is a semantic continuity This makes it possible for cohesive patterns to play an indispensable role in the processing of text by a listener or reader It is, therefore, necessary to help our students identify different kinds of cohesive relations which form the backbones of different types of text, because those chains signal organizational patterns of different types of text

All these conditions stimulated the researcher to conduct a study on

comprehension to foreign language learners” This is an action research in which

the researcher taught reading comprehension by applying cohesion theory in the lessons and guide students to use the knowledge conveyed to enhance their reading ability

II Aims

As mentioned above, the knowledge about cohesion may assist students‘ comprehension of a reading text Therefore, the study aims to investigate the effect

of cohesion competence on students‘ reading comprehension

In order to fulfill such an aim, two main objectives were set for the study Firstly, the study was expected to provide an insight into students‘ prior knowledge about cohesion and cohesion in reading Secondly, the researcher expected to find out whether the teaching of cohesion to students could improve their reading ability

III Scope of the study

Although the title of the research is generally ―cohesion theory‖, this paper mainly focuses on analyzing types of cohesion that appeared in reading texts Furthermore, the teaching of cohesion in reading does not only mean the researcher would teach cohesion theoretically but also by analyzing and guide student to analyze cohesive items in reading passages In addition, the researcher

adapted the reading passages in the reading course book for B1 level namely Issue

For Today 3 combined with several further practices as homework instead of

providing new out-book reading materials for in-class practice

The informants of the study were 24 non-English majored first year students They were all of B1 level of English according to the Common European Framework of Reference The participating students were in the same class to whom the researcher was in charge of teaching reading

IV Research methodology

1 Research questions

The study was conducted to address the following two research questions:

1 What kind of prior knowledge did the students in the study have in terms

of cohesion and cohesion in reading comprehension before the experimental teaching phase?

2 How does the teaching of cohesion improve the reading comprehension

of second language learners?

2 Research approach

To address the two research questions, action research was adopted as the research approach as it meets the aim and objectives of the study This approach is also justified to offer significant benefits for the researcher, who is also a teacher Johnson (1995) pointed out three mains advantages of action research namely to promote personal and professional growth, to improve practice to enhance student learning, and to advance the teacher profession

3 Data collection instruments

The four main instruments for data collection used in the study were observation and field notes, reading comprehension tests, and survey questionnaires

An observation checklist was particularly designed to assess the students‘ participation and motivation in the reading lesson The researcher based on the observation checklist and takes notes about the students‘ performance in the class There are two reading comprehension tests, namely a pre-test taken before the intervention and a post-test taken after the intervention Both tests were of the same level of difficulty regarding timing, number of questions, number of text, length, passage structure and vocabulary level

Two survey questionnaires were designed to gain data for the research One questionnaire was sent out before the intervention to find information about students‘ prior knowledge, experience and belief in learning cohesion The other was distributed after the intervention to collect data about students‘ attitude towards the experimental teaching

4 Data collection procedure

The data collection was conducted through 3 phases including intervention, while-intervention and post-intervention The data collection instruments were adopted flexibly for each phase as illustrated in the timeline below:

pre-Pre- intervention While – intervention

(6 weeks)

Post- intervention

Survey questionnaire Observation Survey questionnaire

The survey questionnaires and reading comprehensions tests went through three stages regarding piloting, delivering and collecting Observation and field

notes were taken during the six-week experimental teaching phase to assess students‘ motivation and participation in the reading lessons

5 Data analysis methods

Both quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized to analyze the data collected Specifically, quantitative method was used to analyze objective data from tests and survey questionnaires Meanwhile, qualitative method was for data from field notes and open-ended questions in the survey questionnaires

Furthermore, statistical analysis was employed to analyze the data collected Simple descriptive statistics is the most suitable method to present the finding of this study in terms of the study scope as well as the researcher‘s own capabilities

V Significance of the study

In general, teachers, educational administrators and researchers working on related issues could gain certain benefits from the study First, the researcher was provided a precious chance to reflect her own teaching, to investigate a new teaching strategy and raise other teachers‘ awareness of such a strategy

Besides, this research could offer references about updated and reliable information about a context of applying cohesion in teaching reading skills for second language learners to interested individual to conduct further studies

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND

LITERATURE REVIEW

I Theoretical background

1.1 RAND Model of reading comprehension

Researchers and linguists have presented different definitions on the concept

of reading, ranging from the simple to complicated ones According to Durkin (1993: 37), reading is ―intentional thinking during which meaning is constructed through interaction between text and reader‖ Similarly, Harris & Hodges (1995: 26) see reading as a process of constructing meaning of a written text through ―…a reciprocal interchange of ideas…‖ between the reader and the text

More expansively, reading is a complicated process of ―simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language‖ which engages different factors as pointed out by Rand Reading Study Group (2002): the reader, the text and the activity or purpose for reading This is one of the most comprehensive definitions of reading as it describes reading with its specific elements Reading is not the unilateral activity of readers but an active interaction between the reader and the text in which the salience of both the text (extracting meaning) and the reader (constructing reading) through interaction (the activity) with written language is emphasized

Below is the model of reading comprehension by RAND (2000)

Figure 1 The RAND model of reading comprehension From Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension, by RAND Reading Study Group (p 12), 2002, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Copyright 2002 by RAND

Reader The reader factor includes:

 cognitive capacities: attention, memory, critical analytic ability, inferencing,

visualization ability

 motivation : a purpose for reading, an interest in the content being read,

self-efficacy as a reader

 various types of knowledge : vocabulary, domain and topic knowledge,

linguistic and discourse knowledge, and knowledge of specific comprehension strategies

Text The text features that impact comprehension, including:

 Genre

 Structure: the organization of the text and

 the overall coherence: degree of similarity of ideas from one sentence to the

next

 Media forms

 Sentence difficulty: including vocabulary and syntax

 Content

Activity: This factor consists of 3 elements

 Purpose/task: skimming for gist, studying to retain information…

 Operations to process the text : decoding, higher-level linguistic and

semantic processing, or self-monitoring for comprehension)

 Outcomes of performing activity: an increase in knowledge, a solution to

real-world problem, or increased engagement with text

As can be clearly seen, from the simple to the complex definitions, reading is understood as abroad term that covers reading comprehension In other words, reading comprehension is not a separate process but a component stage in the multi-element process of reading To sum up, reading is a multi-component process which involves a ―…triangular relation…‖ between reader, author and the text rather than a linear transmission of meaning from author to reader (Lunzer, E.A and Gardner, K, 1979)

1.2 Previous approaches to teaching reading comprehension

Three teaching approaches are proposed and discussed for their respective benefits and drawbacks: bottom-up, top-down and interactive reading

1.2.1 Bottom-up reading approach

Bottom-up approach focuses on the text as the convergence of encoded messages to be deciphered Instructors who uphold bottom-up processing focus on how learners extract information from the printed page, and on whether or not learners deal with letters and words in a systematic fashion Therefore, the goals of the bottom-up approach are automatic word recognition and rapid reading rate To

reach the aims, explicit instruction in phonetics and spellings is crucial; students should not be ―word-bound‖ in bottom-up processing (Grabe, 1991)

This bottom-up teaching approach has been proved of its effectiveness through eye-movement experiment, and been realized in Grammar-Translation Method, in which native language may be adopted to translate the target language

to make sense the whole verbal construction From the bottom-up viewpoint, therefore, reading is a process of decoding written symbols into their aural equivalents It‘s a text-centered move in which texts are the containers of rules and codes to be deciphered Specifically speaking, in this lower-level reading process (Grabe 1991), readers are passive recipients of textual information During the decoding process, understanding the hierarchal, linguistic structures of the language promises reading comprehension The focus is never the meaning of the whole text, but detailed linguistic forms—from phoneme to lexical, syntactic levels

1.2.2 Top-down reading approach

As to top-down teaching approach, the learner‘s prior knowledge is activated, which is capable of enhancing learner‘s language learning, and making possible reading comprehension In other words, in top-down approach, content schemata,

or background knowledge, are to be activated; prior knowledge plays a major role

in learner‘s comprehension Carrell (1988) argued that a lack of content schemata activation would lead to insurmountable processing difficulties with second language readers Hudson (1982) has even argued that a high degree of background knowledge can overcome linguistic deficiency In addition to prior knowledge as a key point, top-down model is actually a whole-language teaching approach, in which readers focus on the context, and manage to construct meanings in the text (Treiman, 2001) In this sense, top-down reading strategies

contain predicting, inferring, and focusing on meanings (Grabe 1991) Reading is actually ―a psychological guessing game‖, in the words of Goodman (1970: 45)

1.2.3 Interactive Reading approach

Kern (2000) defined reading as a dynamic, interactive process which produced meanings and derived discourse from texts Reading is an active, constructive, and meaning-making process Therefore, reading comprehension is generally associated with the ability to read, and to construct meanings as well (Fielding & Pearson, 1994)

Iser (1980) further developed the cognitive view of reading to response theory In reading process, readers stand at the center; readers‘ prior knowledge and textual reading interact Meanings are thus eventually incited in this way There is a dynamic relationship between reader and text, in which reading is a creative process rather than a textual decoding only The reader is therefore granted an authorial role

reader-Therefore, the interactive model for teaching and reading refers to the dynamic relationship between bottom-up and top-down, between decoding and interpretation, and between text and reader This approach is best applied to teaching literary works because the reading/teaching goals—interpretation and meaning construction—are likely to be reached, and the reader/learners are not excluded from the text/learning process

1.3 Discourse and discourse analysis

Discourse analysis, as remarked by Brown and Yule (1983:8), ―has come to

be used with a wide range of meanings which cover a range of activities at the intersection of many disciplines from sociolinguistics, philosophical linguistics to computational linguistics‖ In other words, discourse analysis is a field of study

which concerns different aspects basically including three basic strands; that is text grammar, conversation analysis, and pragmatics, as pointed out by Hoa Nguyen (2000:11) He also defines discourse analysis, in the eyes of a linguist, as‖

a study of how and for what purposes language is used in a certain context of situation and the linguistic means to carry out these purposes.‖

In the study of discourse analysis, it is crucial to make a clear distinction between two terms: discourse and text

According to Brown and Yule (1983:6), text is ―the verbal record of a communicative act‖; meanwhile, discourse … ―is language in use‖…(p.1) De Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) presents an elaborate definition of text as a

―communicative occurrence which possesses seven constitute conditions of textual communication, cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informability, situationality and intertextuality‖ In this approach, De Beaugrande and Dressler see text and discourse in the same light

The most explicit and clearest distinction is by Widowson (1984) He elaborates discourse as ―a communicative process by means of interaction Its situational outcome is a change in a state of affair: information is conveyed, intention made clear, its linguistic product is Text‖ (as cited in Hoa Nguyen, 2000, p.14) In the explanation, text is understood as simply a representation of a communicative process In other words, text is the verbal realization of discourse

1.4 Cohesion and Coherence

Basically, cohesion can be thought of as all the grammatical and lexical links that link one part of a text to another According to Linke et all (2004: 245), cohesion refers to the ―relations between sentences that are indicated by explicit syntactic or semantic ties between linguistic element‖ Halliday & Matthiessen (2004:523) provide a more comprehensive elaboration of cohesion; that is:

“set of lexico-grammatical systems that have evolved specifically as a

resources for making it possible to transcend the boundaries of the clause-

that is the domain of the highest-ranking grammatical unit.”

Coherence, on the other hand refers to the semantic relations that underline texts Van Dijk (1979:93) writes:

“Coherence is a semantic property of discourse formed through the interpretation of each individual sentence relative to the interpretation of other sentences, with “interpretation” implying interaction between the text and the reader”

With this definition, Van Dijk (1979) highly relates coherence with the interpretation of the text However, the text here is limited to written texts, not covering spoken texts

Palmer (1983) defines coherence as the type of rhetorical relationships terms of both written and spoken texts, that is‖ coherence refers to the rhetorical devices, to ways of writing and speaking that bring about order an unity and emphasis‖

Blum-Kulka (1986: 17) provides an elaboration which covers both the ideas of Palmer (1983) and Van Dijk (1979); that is, coherence is viewed as ―a covert potential meaning relationships among parts of a text, made overt by the reader or listener through processes of interpretation‖

Briefly put, a text has cohesion, or is cohesive if its elements are tied together with explicit linguistic marking of meaning relation Meanwhile, a text has texture, or is coherent, if it makes sense In other words, it builds up mental creation of meaning relations during text processing

If the reference item is endophoric, it can be either anaphoric or cataphoric Anaphoric reference occurs when the writer refers back to someone or something that has been previously identified, to avoid repetition It points the listeners and readers backward to previous entity to understand the text In constrast, cataphoric reference lead listeners and readers forward to the text

Exophoric reference is different from these two types by describing generics

or abstracts without ever being identified In this case, the interpretation is assisted

by the context of the situation

Reference items in English comes into three main forms, including personal reference expressed by pronouns (he, she, it, me, mine…) and determiners (his, her, your…); demonstrative reference (this, that, there, then, etc.) and comparative reference which is expressed by adjectives and adverbs such as same, identical, equal, different, other, etc

1.4.1.1.2 Substitution

Halliday and Hasan (1976:89) define substitution as ―a relation between linguistic items such as words or phrases and in terms of linguistic level, it is a relation on the lexico-grammar level, the level of grammar and vocabulary‖ Hoa

Nguyen (2000: 24) also sees substitution as ―a device which shows the relation between sentences, where it is derivable to avoid repetition‖

In this light, Halliday and Hasan (1976) categorized substitution into nominal, verbal and clausal substitution Nominal substitution is realized by one, ones, and same Verbal substitute in English is ―do‖ and clausal substitutes are ―so‖ and not Clausal substitution is commonly used after verbs: think, hope, suppose, etc

1.4.1.1.3 Ellipsis

In Halliday and Hasan (1976:142)‘s point of view ellipsis is ―the omission of certain elements from a sentence, allowed by context‖ It is important to make a difference between ellipsis and substitution With ellipsis, the omitted parts can be recovered based on the context but such possibility does not exist

Quirk et all (1972) discuss three conditions under which ellipsis may occur namely, repetition, expansion and replacement

a Repetition: the speaker repeat what has been said by the first

E.g/ Did you go there?

Yes, I did (go there)

b Expansion: the speakers adds to what has been said

E.g/ Will he come?

Probably (he will come)

c Replacement: the second speaker replaces what has been said by the first with new information

E.g/ Where did he go?

(He went to) Canada

1.4.1.1.4 Conjunction

According to Cook (1989:21), ―conjunction is words or phrases which explicitly draw attention to the type of relationship between one sentence and clause and another‖ Briefly speaking, conjunctions are used to connect sentences and clauses together into one context

Halliday and Hasan (1976: 242-243) divide conjunction into four types including additive, adversative, causal and temporal

a additive: the relation of adding meaning among sentences

E.g/ and, also, moreover, in addition, etc

b adversative: information appears in the contradict way

E.g/ but, yet, though, however, on the contrary, etc

c causal: the relation of cause and effect

E.g/ so, hence, before, consequently, as a result, etc

d temporal: this relation creates unified and tied discourse

E/g : then, next, last, etc…

1.4.1.2 Lexical cohesion

According to Van (2006:80-81), the concept of lexical cohesion was first defined in terms of collocation by Firth (1975), then developed by Halliday and Hasan (1976) Eggins (1994) and Halliday (1985) share the same idea that lexical relation analysis is a way of systematically describing how words in a text related

to each other, how they cluster to build up lexical sets or lexical strings Lexical relation appears in two main types, reiteration and collocation

1.4.1.2.1 Reiteration

According to Mc Carthy (1991:65) presents that ―reiteration means either

restating an item in a later part of discourse by direct repetition or else reasserting

its meaning by exploiting lexical relations‖ Reiteration is divided into five types, namely repetition, synonyms, super-ordinate and general words

1.4.1.2.2 Collocation

Collocation occupies an important role in lexical items to create cohesion in a text In fact, words seldom stand alone, but tend to combine together and relate to each other According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), ―Word combination‖ or

―word co-occurrence‖ is known as collocation which brings a particular sense or meaning

1.4.2 The role of cohesion competence in reading comprehension

Halliday and Hasan (1976) propose that the distinction between a text and a nontext is the existence of texture which is primarily provided by cohesion and

―since the speaker and writer uses cohesion to signal texture, the listener and the reader has to react to it in order to interpret it‖ In the view of the two scholars the continuity that cohesive relations bring about is a semantic continuity The importance of cohesion lies in the continuity it expresses which is necessary for the interpretation of the text Yue (1993) points out the 4 roles of cohesions in assisting reading comprehension

1 Cohesion provides the main thread of a text by showing that some entity or circumstance, some relevant feature or argument persists from one moment

to another in the semantic process as meaning unfold

2 Cohesion creates the characteristic ―feel‖ of a text The continuity expressed

by cohesion not only makes a text interpretable, it also provides it with its affective power

3 Cohesion enables readers to supply all the missing items necessary for the interpretation of a text

4 Cohesion provides the basis for making predictions and building expectation

II LITERATURE REVIEW

Within the recent decades, there have been numerous researches on cohesion, coherence and EFL reading worldwide, in which many have shown the important role played by cohesion and coherence in facilitating reading comprehension Chapman (1983) finds a relationship between reading ability and the ability

to complete anaphoric relation in a cloze test, and he concludes that the masters of such textual features- including cohesive ties (Halliday and Hasan, 1976)- is a central factor in fluent reading and reading comprehension Mackay (1979) and Cowan (1976) similarly argue that the recognition of conjunctions and other intersentential linguistic devices is crucial to the information gathering skills of second language readers As a result, the teaching of reading should include classroom instruction on the cohesive devices of English, and their function across sentences and paragraphs

William (1983) not only discusses the importance of recognizing cohesive ties in reading in a foreign language, but also suggests teaching materials and methods to bring this about Specifically, he proposes a system of symbols and textual markings that teach foreign readers how to use cohesive signals in order to increase their reading comprehension and its relationships to reading development

In the study ―Cohesion and the teaching of EFL reading‖, Fulcher (1987) determines the roles of cohesion in assisting reading comprehension The scholar also states that cohesion plays a crucial role on the interpretation of a text

Muto, Keiko (2007) in his study named ―The Use of Lexical Cohesion in Reading and Writing‖ provokes the considerable effect that the knowledge of lexical cohesion has on their understanding of the story The necessary information, which authors hint at in the text, could be exposed by paying attention to the cohesive ties among words There were, however, occasions when

L2 learners needed to improve in order to make the general knowledge of lexical cohesion more useful for reading: acquiring cultural knowledge, expanding the area of lexical cohesion to the whole text, creating original

Many researchers have come to the conclusion that all types of textual cohesive conjunctions facilitate reading comprehension in the same way (Cooper (1984); Chung (2000); Degand & Sanders 2002)

Overall, it can be seen clearly that these aforementioned findings are inarguably illuminating and valuable in the world However, as far as concerned, such researches have remained limited in the context of Vietnam

First, cohesion and coherence have been widely studied as an aspect of linguistics field by Vietnamese researchers To be more specific, almost studies related to cohesion are associated with analyzing cohesive items in well-known texts or contrasting the use of cohesion in Vietnamese and English written texts In other word, most studies on cohesion and coherence belong to linguistics and contrastive analysis Little has been done in the field of teaching methodology Second, in terms of cohesion and coherence, Vietnamese researchers have given considerable attention to EFL writing rather than EFL reading as one of essential criteria for assessing writing, coherence and cohesion

All these aforementioned conditions have motivated the researcher to conduct

an action study on the cohesion and EFL reading teaching in the context of Vietnam

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

2.1 Research questions:

The research is conducted to address the following two research questions:

1 What kind of prior knowledge did the students in the study have in terms of cohesion and cohesion in reading before the experimental teaching phase?

2 How does the teaching of cohesion improve the reading comprehension of second language learners?

2.2 Research approach

Action research was adopted as the research approach to firstly answer the two research questions and finally achieve the aim and objectives of the study According to Ferrance (2000), action research is a suitable method for teachers who want to make appropriate changes to student learning and measure the possible effects Ferrance (2000:27) demonstrates ―Action research is used to chart the effects of implementation of a curriculum or strategy, to study student learning and responses.‖ This method is also justified to offer significant benefits for the researcher, who is also a teacher Johnson (1995) pointed out three mains advantages of action research namely to promote personal and professional growth, to improve practice to enhance student learning, and to advance the teacher profession

2.3 Data collection methods

2.3.1 Informants

Since the study was designed to assess the effectiveness of applying teaching cohesion in teaching reading comprehension, students‘ role was put into great consideration Therefore, 24 students from a class were chosen as the subjects of the study They were homogeneous regarding their time of having English education in school and L1 background Furthermore, at the time of the study, they were all first-year non-English majored students from the International Standard Programme (ISP) who were studying to reach B1 level according to the Common European Framework of Reference The homogeneity in terms of language proficiency of the participating students was established thanks to a placement test

at the beginning of the course These students were selected because they all belonged to one class to whom the researcher was in charge of teaching reading

As a result, effects from other factors on students‘ reading were limited to the minimum

2.3.2 Data collection instruments

The data to be analyzed principally came from four main sources, namely observation, field notes, reading comprehension tests and survey questionnaires

Survey questionnaires:

According to Dornyei (2003), questionnaires are ―easy to construct, extremely versatile, and uniquely capable of gathering a large amount of information quickly in a form that is readily processible‖

Before the intervention, or the experimental teaching phase, students filled out one survey questionnaire in order to provide insightful information regarding their prior experiences as well as their general knowledge about cohesion in English

The questionnaire covers 6 questions in two themes, namely Students’

experience with cohesion in reading lessons and Students’ belief/ knowledge about cohesion in a text

After the intervention, the students were asked to complete another six- question survey questionnaire to express their thoughts about their level of understanding and the knowledge and skills they grasp after the learning process Since the questionnaires were designed for collecting factual, behavioral and attitudinal data so that it uses various types of questions regarding yes- no question, multiple-choice items, open-ended questions, and likert-scale However, most of the questions do belong to the two main kinds multiple-choice and likert scale The survey questionnaires are in Appendix A (p.I) and Appendix B (p.III)

Tests of reading comprehension in English:

The tests of reading comprehension in English (one pre-test and one post-test) were designed by the researcher The time allowed was 40 minutes with 30 items and 3 reading passages The pre-test and the post-test were designed to have the same level of difficulty regarding the number of questions, question types, the length of the text, the text structure Regarding vocabulary range, a software named Lexical tutor was used to make sure the passages in the pre-test and post-test have similar lexical level

The reading passages used in this study was carefully selected from the TOELF reading practice passages and contained a general content, which were of interest to the students The questions used in the tests were all objective with the main type of multiple choice questions The two reading comprehension tests are

in Appendix F (p.XIV.) and Appendix G (p XX)

Direct Observation and Field Notes:

Observations and field notes on the student‘s performance were taken in order to keep records of relevant information used in data analysis The

observation and note taking was conducted with two key themes in terms of students‘ motivation and participation The criteria for students‘ motivation and participation were listed out in detail in the comprehension checklist (see Appendix C, p.V)

2.3.3 Data collection procedure

The data for the research results came from the information collected throughout three main phases, namely pre-intervention, while intervention and post-intervention With each stage, different data collection instruments were utilized in order to gain the most valid and reliable information The use of the instrument in the data collection process was primarily illustrated in the following timeline

Timeline

Pre- intervention While – intervention

(6 weeks)

Post- intervention

Survey questionnaire Observation Survey questionnaire

2.3.3.1 Pre-intervention

The purpose of the first phase - pre-intervention, or before the experimental

teaching phase, is find out the answer for the first research question, ―What kind of

prior knowledge did students in the study have in terms of cohesion and cohesion

in reading before the experimental teaching phase?” Therefore, one survey

questionnaire and a test of reading comprehension were used as the data collection

instruments for this stage

The procedure of data collection for the two instruments was carried out through 3 stages including piloting, delivering and collecting

Piloting This stage was carried out in order to assess the reliability of the reading

comprehension test and the survey questionnaire The reading comprehension tests were pre-tested with a sample group of 24 students having characteristics similar to the target group Then after interpreting the collected data, weak, malfunctioning and non-functioning items were removed from the whole test, and some were modified

As to the questionnaires, ten volunteer students were chosen randomly from the sample group to complete the questionnaires They were encouraged to mark any items that they considered unnecessary, unclear and unsuitable Suggestions for improvement were welcome and highly appreciated Once the first versions were reviewed and completed, printed handouts were made for the researched participants

Delivering

At the first stage, the pre-test was administered to all the students before the intervention The students were told that the result of the test was counted in their final learning result; therefore, all the students did the test to the best of their ability

The survey questionnaire was delivered at the break time of the class All the key terms related to cohesion were explained and exemplified in Vietnamese for students to easily understand and know what they are asked about The students were asked to spend some time reading the questionnaire to grasp the nature of the topic and the key terms Questions were exchanged frequently between the students and the researcher to ensure the comprehension of the questions and the accuracy of the collected data

Collecting

After all, the researcher collected the data After all the questionnaire papers and tests were collected, the researcher checked whether all the given items had been collected or not Additionally, the participants got the researcher‘s feedback for their questions about the questionnaires and the tests

2.3.3.2 While-intervention

After doing the pre-test and the survey questionnaire, the students took part in

a 6-week experimental teaching phase, in which they had 12 reading lessons delivered by the researcher During the phase, the researcher taught and raised students‘ awareness about cohesion in a written text as well as oriented and guided them to apply their knowledge and understanding about cohesion during the reading process to enhance comprehension

In this stage, observation and field notes were employed to gather data for the study An observation checklist was designed for the researcher to take notes about the performance of the students in class During every lesson, the teacher observed and made notes regarding the students‘ attitudes and participation in class activities The observation checklist was attached in Appendix C

The comprehensive syllabus designed was covered in Appendix D (p.VI) The detailed lesson description is illustrated below:

LESSON DESCRIPTION

The time limit for each reading lesson was 100 minutes In general, each reading lesson goes through 2 key phases, namely knowledge development and skill practice

Phase 1: Knowledge development

This phase lasted 50 minutes with 3 main steps regarding illustrating examples, explanation and item practice

 Step 1: Illustrating examples:

Easy examples were deliberated designed and provided to give students confidence as well as simply introduce the type of cohesive devices to students Teacher modeled analyzing one example and guides students to do the task themselves

 Step 2: Explanation

Teacher explained and lectured about the cohesive items to the students

 Step 3: Item practice

Teacher guided students to find cohesive items in the reading passage and analyzed them This activity could be done in pair work or group work

Phase 2: Skill practice

The second phase lasted 50 minutes with two steps: workbook covering and homework assignment

 Step 1: Workbook covering

After analyzing and making sure that students understood about the type of cohesion, teacher let students do the reading exercises provided in the course book

 Step 2: Homework assignment

Another reading passage would be assigned as homework to students The students have to analyze the use of cohesive devices just as what they had done during the class practice

3.3.3.1 Post-intervention

Since the purposes of this phase is to answer research question 2 ―How does

the teaching of cohesion improve the reading comprehension of second language

learners?”, the students were required to sit for another reading comprehension

test in order to assess their improvement in reading ability

Besides, another survey questionnaire was delivered to collect information about students‘ satisfaction about the intervention as well as their suggestions for a better experimental teaching

Just like what had been done in the pre-intervention, the test and survey questionnaire in the post-intervention underwent three stages; that is, piloting, delivering and collecting with a view to gaining the most reliable and valid data

for the data analysis procedure

3.4 Data analysis methods

Both quantitative and qualitative methods were adopted to analyze the data collected Each method of data analysis corresponded with the information

collected from one data collection instrument As a result, the data analysis

method was illustrated in accordance with the instruments

Survey questionnaires

Quantitative data analysis was the key method to analyze the information from survey questionnaires At first, the researcher intended to use both qualitative and quantitative method for the questionnaires; to be more specific, qualitative method for open-ended questions and quantitative method for yes/no, multiple choice and likert-scale However, there was no information gathered from open-ended question As a result, quantitative is the only method of data analysis for questionnaires

Reading Comprehension tests

Similarly, quantitative method was employed to analyze data from the reading comprehension tests since both the tests were designed objectively with multiple choice questions Besides, in order to comprehensively analyze and clearly illustrate to improvement of the students, a soft ware named SPSS, more specifically the Paired Sample T-tests was utilized to show whether the intervention did have a significant effect on students‘ reading comprehension or not

Observation and field notes

As for observation and field notes, the data analysis method was qualitative The notes from observation was numbered and analyzed under two key terms for the corresponding three themes namely students‘ motivation and participation

In the study, statistical analysis was employed to analyze the data collected from the questionnaires and reading comprehension tests Simple descriptive statistics is the most suitable method data analysis for this study in terms of the study scope as well as the researcher‘s own capability

CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS: RESULTS, DISCUSSIONS

After all the results are presented, three recommendations are put forward for administrators, teachers and those of concerns to enhance and develop the new approach in teaching reading comprehension

3.1 Results and discussions

3.1.1 Student’s pre-existing knowledge about cohesion in reading

Taking into account the surveys, twenty two out of twenty four students claimed that they had not learnt or read about cohesion before One of the other two students explained that they noticed the existence of cohesion when translating reading texts and referring to Vietnamese language The other said he knew about cohesion in written text through the feedback of a teacher in one of his

writing task As a result, when answering the question of “What do you think can

make a text coherent?” the answer of most of the students was limited to primarily

two factors, namely linking words and repetition Several students mentioned

synonyms The options of ellipsis, substitution and collocation were rarely chosen More noticeably, all the students stated that they had never done any exercises related to analyzing cohesion in reading lessons

As to the result of the pre-test, it was shown that the students did poorly with questions related to cohesion or cohesive devices, even those who got quite good marks

Figure 3.1 Number of students who have learnt and have not leant about cohesion

2

22

 Students’ belief about the role of cohesion and the study of cohesion in reading lessons

According to the survey, although the students had poor knowledge about cohesion in English, most of them considered cohesion important in a written text The students‘ rate of the importance is illustrated in figure 2 below:

Not important Little important

Quite important Important

Figure 3.3: Necessity of understanding cohesion in comprehending a text?

0 5

―little necessary‖, five ―quite necessary‖ and seventeen ―necessary‖ because understanding about cohesion helped them to follow the reading text more easily,

as responded by the majority of the students

Overall, it can be seen that the students had strong motivation to learn about cohesion since they all believed this would help them improve their reading ability

3.1.2 Students’ level of improvement in reading comprehension

The improvement in reading performance was strikingly illustrated through the difference in their reading results in the pre-test and post-test In order to examine the effect of the , SPSS software, more specifically the Paired Sample T-tests, was employed to analyze and compare the students‘ results in the pre-test and the post-test Bellow is the result of the analysis process

Descriptive Statistics for the group’s performance in the pre-test and post-test

As can be clearly seen, there was a significant rise in the average score of the whole students In the pre-test, the mean stood at 5.8750 After 6 week training, this figure rose to 6.3125, which is an indicator of the students‘ general improvement

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std Deviation Std Error Mean