ArtĂculo cientĂfico / Research paper
Reception date: November 3, 2020 – Acceptance date: November 15, 2=
020
Generally, teaching English a=
s a
foreign language (EFL) at elementary, secondary, and university levels in
Ecuador focuses primarily on applying teacher-centered=
approaches or on merely following up on the English textbooksâ€=
™ scope and sequence. There is much emphasis on
developing grammar skills, practicing isolated concepts, and studying diffe=
rent
realities depicted in commercial textbooks while neglecting students=
â€=
™ real interests and needs. These traditional pract=
ices
have created conscious and unconscious conditioning in students, and a significant numbe=
r of
instructors think that English learning is contingent upon grammar rules and
the repetition of irrelevant and unnecessary notions, which results in low
student academic performance. This descriptive study proposes the use of
reading as an educational tool for improving the English teaching and learn=
ing
process. The researchers applied five reading comprehension tests, three
related to General English and two to Academic English, and a confidence le=
vel
in reading comprehension questionnaire to 37 A1/A2 English third-level
university students. Measures of central tendency and variability were used=
for
data analysis. Results show significant improvements in understanding and <=
span
class=3DSpellE>analyzing texts, high confidence levels for reading in
English, and better overall language learning. We suggest making replicas of
these didactical practices in other courses offered at the university level=
.
=
Keywords: EFL learning, did=
actics,
reading, confidence, teaching approaches.
RE=
SUMEN
Generalmente, la enseñanza del Inglés c=
omo
lengua extranjera (ILE) en los niveles primario, secundario y universitario=
en
Ecuador se enfoca principalmente en aplicar metodologĂas centradas en el p=
rofesor
o simplemente en seguir contenidos y las secuencias de los libros de texto =
en
inglés. Por regla general, se pone mucho énfasis en el desarrollo de
habilidades gramaticales, la práctica de conceptos aislados y el estudio d=
e las
diferentes realidades descritas en los libros de texto comerciales, descuid=
ando
los intereses y necesidades reales de los estudiantes. Estas prácticas
tradicionales han creado un condicionamiento consciente e inconsciente en l=
os
estudiantes, y un nĂşmero significativo de profesores piensan que el aprend=
izaje
del inglés depende de las reglas gramaticales y la repetición de nociones
irrelevantes e innecesarias, lo que resulta en un bajo rendimiento académi=
co de
los estudiantes. Este estudio descriptivo propone el uso de la lectura como
herramienta educativa para la mejora del proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaj=
e del
inglés. Se aplicaron cinco pruebas de comprensión lectora, tres relaciona=
das
con el inglés general y dos con el inglés académico y un cuestionario de=
nivel
de confianza en comprensiĂłn lectora a 37 estudiantes universitarios de ter=
cer
nivel de inglés, niveles A1/A2. Se utilizaron medidas de tendencia central=
y
variabilidad para el análisis de datos. Los resultados muestran mejoras
significativas en la comprensión y el análisis de textos, altos niveles de
confianza para leer en inglés y un mejor aprendizaje general del idioma. S=
e sugiere
realizar réplicas de estas prácticas didácticas en otros cursos que se o=
frecen
a nivel universitario.
Pa=
labras
clave: =
ILE,
aprendizaje, didáctica, lectura, confianza, metodologĂa de enseñanza.
1. &nbs=
p;
INTRODUCTION
English teaching professionals worldwide wonder about
what are the best teaching practices that should be used to teach English, =
and
in general, how to introduce reading and writing to their daily work.
Traditionally, teachers of English as a second language (ESL) or as a forei=
gn
language (EFL) have taken the reading and writing separately from each other
(Tsai, 2006). Most of them have concentrated on using English teaching
methodologies that mainly emphasize the repetition of grammar structures,
vocabulary, isolated, and artificial language contents. As an overall resul=
t,
those types of approaches have caused discouragement, boredom, frustration,=
and
even aversion regarding learning English in elementary, high school, and
university students. Universidad de Cuenca (UC) students, in most cases, ta=
ke
English courses only to comply with a compulsory requirement for graduation,
which generally leads them to dislike the English language. However, Ecuado=
r is
in urgent need of emphasizing English learning to be part of a globalized
world. The director of the National Ministry of Education, Science, Technol=
ogy,
and Innovation stated that if Ecuadorians do not know English, they will be
lost in this era of knowledge because almost 90% of publications are in Eng=
lish
(RamĂrez, 2013). According to the Consejo de <=
span
class=3DSpellE>EducaciĂłn Superior (2016), for students to complete
undergraduate study programs, they must acquire at least a B1 level of the
Common European Framework level of proficiency for Languages (CEFRL) (Trim,=
Coste, North, &=
Sheils, 2001).
Likewise, it is widely known that English language
knowledge and acceptable proficiency is a must in master as well as doctoral
graduate programs, where there is an essential component of scientific and
academic reading. Therefore, it is imperative to rethink the methodologies =
and
tools currently used for teaching and learning English as a foreign languag=
e.
As the core contribution of this study, the authors believe that the use of
reading to teach EFL might be the answer to achieving the necessary English
language knowledge and proficiency. Thus, students will comply with the
national and international educational requirements for foreign languages f=
or
Ecuadorian university undergraduate as well as graduate students.
Based on the aforementioned
perspectives, the research questions addressed in this study are the
following:
- =
Does the level of reading comprehension
increase both in General and Academic English when using reading as a
foundation to teach EFL?
- =
Is there a significant difference in the =
scores
between Academic versus General English?
- =
Is there a significant gain in the English
language macro skills during this English course?
- =
What are the students’ levels of confid=
ence
when reading General and Academic English?
Many EFL and ESL researche=
rs
have agreed that reading is an essential academic skill to develop as a too=
l to
learn ESL or EFL. Yan (2017) in her article about close reading, states that
reading is one of the most important ways for human beings to process infor=
mation
and that reading, and literacy education, is always a critical part of
different levels of education (p.38). In university settings, reading is
considered as a primary means of acquiring new information and gaining acce=
ss
to alternative explanations and interpretations. However, English learners =
must
go beyond these simple practices and engage in the reading text by having a
purpose for reading. Paul & Elder (2008) point out that learners should
read for pure pleasure, to gain specific technical information, to figure o=
ut a
simple idea, or to enter, understand, and appreciate a new world view (p.1)=
. Grabe & Stoller (2001) mention that many EFL/ESL
researchers have argued that reading is the most critical academic language
skill for second language learners. It also offers the possibility of learn=
ing
synthesis and critical evaluation skills and independent learning whether t=
he
objective is to perform better academically, learn more about the subject
matter or improve overall language skills (p.1).
The ability to read can be=
the
most crucial skill to develop when learning a foreign language and of param=
ount
importance to teach in ESL/EFL courses. O´Malley & Chamot
(1990) on their reading strategy framework of Metacognitive and Cognitive
skills emphasize the need for teaching ESL/EFL students strategies such as
previewing the main ideas, self-monitoring, self-evaluation, skimming,
scanning, guessing, recognizing cognates and word families, reading for
meaning, deducing, predicting, activating general knowledge, making inferen=
ces,
following references, separating main ideas from supporting ones, note-taki=
ng,
summarizing and so on (p.144). Additionally, reading selected by instructors
(Intensive Reading) and reading for pleasure (Extensive Reading) are part of
reading programs of several English curricula offered in different ESL/EFL
courses.
On the one hand, intensive
reading can be used in academic settings where technical English can be par=
t of
an EFL course, as indicated by Torrie (2017). She points out that EFL stude=
nts
need to read and write about topics related to their majors in technology,
math, and science (p.22). Bernal & Feyen (2=
017),
on an EFL postsecondary university setting study, 106 psychology students
acknowledged that when introducing reading as the main component of the Eng=
lish
program at the Psychology School, it allowed them to improve their listenin=
g,
writing, comprehension, and speaking skills. On the other hand, Toland &=
; Fuisting (2017) indicated that extensive reading or r=
eading
for pleasure can also be successfully implemented in a diverse array of Eng=
lish
language learning contexts included ESL and EFL. There are also studies suc=
h as
Day (2015) that analyzed how L2 students improved their reading rates throu=
gh
the practice of extensive readings when allowing students to choose their
materials.
Another study carried out =
in
an EFL Japanese context done by Taguchi, Takayasu-Maass, & Gorsuch (2004) focused on whether and how assisted
repeated reading (ARR) following an auditory reading model enhances EFL
readers’ fluency. The results of this study show that repetition and list=
ening
components of ARR play an essential role to facilitate reading comprehension
and potentially develop weak ESL/EFL readers’ fluency and help them become
independent readers.
Beglar<=
/span>, Hunt, & Kite (2012) investigated the effe=
cts
of one year of reading for pleasure on the reading rate development of 97
Japanese first-year students. The results showed that the three reading for
pleasure groups improved 8.02, 12.84, and 16.85 standard wpm=
[1], respectively, while the intensive reading gro=
up
improved only 2.97 standard wpm (pp.20-22).
Narrow Reading (NR) is ano= ther type of reading approach that we can utilize in EFL settings. According to Krashen (1996), McQuillan (2016), and Schmitt & Carter (2000), NR is a = type of reading introduced in ESL/EFL courses in which readers focus on the work= of a single author or a single topic throughout several texts for an extended period. Chang & Millet (2017) carried out a study in an EFL setting whe= re they used narrow reading. They compared the reading speed, comprehension, a= nd perceptions of two groups of EFL students. Each group focused on one of two types of narrow reading: the same genre and the same title. EFL students responded positively to narrow reading, especially to the same title treatm= ent.
Chang (2012) investigated =
the
effect of timed reading (TR) and repeated oral reading (ROR) in two groups =
of
35 EFL adult students. Results showed the rate gains of both groups were
retained after six weeks with no additional instruction, the increasing of
reading amount improved, and that the ROR did not affect reading comprehens=
ion.
Top-down and Bottom-up Rea=
ding
Strategies and Reading Comprehension have also been used in ESL/EFL context=
s. A
study carried out by Chen & Yang (2015) states that lexical recognition=
and
syntactic knowledge are indispensable for EFL readers to better their readi=
ng comprehension
and that integrating reading strategies instruction into language courses
potentially impact EFL learners' reading comprehension.
In the bottom-up approach,
students are taught to focus on vocabulary and the structure of passage dur=
ing
reading. Even though bottom-up techniques have been considered as the most
appropriate learning methodology by authors, such as A=
ebersold
& Field (1997) and Khaki (2014), they sustain that top-down methodology=
is
more effective since students use their prior knowledge to have a close
interaction with a written text.
A study conducted by Bernal
& Feyen (2017) in an Ecuadorian university =
points
out that students had the opportunity to work with psychology texts as a wa=
y of
learning English as a Foreign Language. They had the freedom to choose read=
ings
they were interested in, which allowed them to acquire high levels of overa=
ll
comprehension. However, authors such as Kintsch
(2005), Eskey & Grabe<=
/span>
(1988), and Grabe & Stoller (2001) suggest =
the
use of a combined approach where the reader decides which approach is more
beneficial. In other words, by lack of previous knowledge of what students =
are
reading, a bottom-up approach would be more appropriate. Nevertheless, if
readers possess background knowledge of what they are reading, a top-down
methodology would be more helpful.
The interactive feature of
reading needs to be highlighted to help students involve themselves actively
while reading, which in turn will encourage them to use different strategie=
s.
The use of strategies to develop reading skills is determinant. In this reg=
ard,
extensive and intensive reading plays a decisive role in planning appropria=
te
teaching approaches. On the one hand, extensive reading, defined as reading
large amounts of texts focusing on general understanding without performing=
any
tasks after reading (Loh, 2009), is considered =
useful
when developing language proficiency. Conversely, Richard & Smith (2002)
recommend the administration of intensive reading programs in a regular
language course to develop reading habits, encourage knowledge of grammar
structures and vocabulary, and nurture the love of reading.
Furthermore, Brophy (1986)
indicates that providing students with challenging tasks offers students the
opportunity to learn “thoughtful information-processing and skill-building
strategies” with reasonable amounts of effort. Moreover, practicing these
reading approaches, in turn, increases students’ responsibility for their
learning. Miller (2003) states that challenging tasks offer students the
opportunity to use prior knowledge and construct an understanding of a topi=
c,
which engages students in a teaching and learning activity.
Considering reading in a
foreign language as a complex process, which involves two crucial acquisiti=
on
areas: understanding information and enhancing language proficiency, the de=
sign
of specific tasks as suggested by Mounts & Smirnova (2011) might be
essential for facilitating comprehension. The paragraph-by-paragraph reading
technique, recommended by these two authors, views a paragraph as a complete
text with its own semantic and structural organization. Therefore, tasks may
aim at obtaining and understanding information, as well as evaluating and
reflecting on it.
According to Tsai (2006), =
the
use of reading for writing and writing for reading are two strategies for
reading instruction that facilitate learning a foreign language in the EFL/=
ESL
classroom. Additionally, Pluck (2013) points out that the introduction of
reading academic and scientific articles to English teaching in postseconda=
ry
contexts presents additional challenges for students, but the overall benef=
its
are also significant.
Krashen (2004) points out =
that
both children and adults who practice recreational reading show better
development in reading, writing, grammar, and vocabulary. Similarly, Krashen
(1985) indicated that the best way to improve reading is by reading and that
English instructors should guide students to choose their reading material =
at a
level of comprehension that allows “comprehensible input”. He also advo=
cated
that the use of reading in regular English courses enables students to deve=
lop
a basic understanding of written texts. It, in turn, enables them to acquire
the necessary language constructs such as grammar, rules for writing,
listening, speaking, and so on, thereby facilitating language acquisition. =
Meyer (2014), in her
Evaluation report of an Ecuadorian university, believes that including the
reading of academic and general English materials gives the possibility of
having learning outcomes of a B2 level of the Common European Framework
Reference for Languages (CEFRL).
Feyen (2014), in his PowerPoint presentation on “How
to bring research into teaching”, in postsecondary education settings indi=
cates
that it is necessary to develop the four language skills: listening, speaki=
ng,
reading, and writing. To increase reading, he recommends further motivating
students to read articles related to the course content. For writing exerci=
ses,
he advises asking students to prepare outlines or short summaries of the
reading material. For speaking activities, students need to practice oral
presentations in the classroom on what they have read, and for listening
practice, students must listen to comments and suggestions from their
instructor and peers.
The University of Cuenca in
Ecuador, in recent years, has been in a transition process from being a
teaching university to a teaching university with research and
internationalization perspectives. Therefore, the authors argue that it is
vital to include more reading activities in research, teaching, and
administrative practices. A reading university is a university with a clear
vision and mission which will progress and become more known and competitiv=
e.
Outside observers of the English teaching situation at the Universidad de
Cuenca (UC) such as Meyer (2014) and Feyen (201=
4)
claim that it is necessary to rethink the implementation of different teach=
ing
practices where the emphasis must be on reading as the primary tool for the
acquisition of a foreign language. This new approach will boost students’,
instructors’, and researchers’ English reading practices.
Pablo Vanegas, the Preside=
nt
of the Universidad de Cuenca (UC), in Meyer’s report (2014), confirms the=
need
to include reading exercises in the English curricula since it is one of the
essential skills to develop. Reading can be taken as the foundation for the
development of the remaining language skills of listening, writing, grammar,
vocabulary, and speaking. Vanegas stresses that 80% of an English course at=
the
university level should be based on reading and 20% on writing.
To plan a course where rea=
ding
is embraced as the primary tool for teaching English as a foreign language,=
it
is fundamental to consider the following:
- First, the students’
population. When we know the interests of our students, the individuality a=
nd
synergy present in each student, and in the group with which we work, in
addition to their overall English level, we will be able to select appropri=
ate
methodologies together with the School Administration, students, and
instructors.
- Second, there must be
interest, motivation, and a positive attitude towards English language lear=
ning
and teaching processes in both teachers and students. For the authors, these
are determining factors for accomplishing language learning.
- Third, we must think ab=
out
the proper selection of reading materials that will comprise much of the
content of the teaching-learning program for specific courses.
By doing so, postsecondary
learners can be motivated to learn English as a foreign language, their lev=
els
of confidence can increase, and chances of using their transferring skills =
from
L1 to L2 would undoubtedly improve.
Additionally, when adult
EFL/ESL learners have had no or little exposure or have not been exposed to
their first written language in a daily routine either at elementary, high
school, or university level, they need to be taught how the written language
works and should receive individual ESL literacy instruction, in addition to
oral ESL practices (Burt, Peyton, & Adams, 2003). They also need to be
given opportunities to speak their minds, to propose English curricula where
reading can be the foundation for their language skills development. Accord=
ing
to Carlino (2005), “Reading and writing are a=
lways
present in developing communications in scientific conferences, professional
meetings, business conferences”, and academic settings. Consequently, EFL
instructors should be open and flexible in providing EFL students opportuni=
ties
to increase their self-confidence, to develop positive attitudes as language
learners as well as to become good English readers.
When dealing with adult EFL
learners at the university level who are fully literate in a language writt=
en
in a Roman alphabetic script (e.g., French, German, Croatian, and Spanish a=
s in
our case), they already know how to read from left to right and recognize
letter shapes and fonts. This type of learner needs instruction in the spec=
ific
letter-to-sound and sound-syllable correspondences of English (Burt =
et al., 2003, p.13). However, it is essential to
consider that reading in English is not the same as reading in Spanish. Rea=
ding
instruction needs to be based on training ESL/EFL students in new ways of
talking and thinking about the texts (Mikulecky,
2008).
En=
glish
Credit Courses from the Language Department of the Universidad de Cuenca
English courses for credits
offered by the Language Department (LD) are part of the three required cour=
ses
that all UC students must take as a prerequisite for graduation. Each of th=
ese
courses consists of 16 weeks of classes per semester, with a workload of 6
hours per week, and 96 hours per semester. The total number of hours for th=
e three
credit courses is 288 (three mandatory levels of English Instruction), a to=
tal
of 18 credits, and is administered by the LD teaching staff. The most typic=
al
methodology in these courses is a grammar oriented and commercial textbook-=
based
one, as stated in the course syllabi. The overall goal is to use English as=
a
means of communication in real-life situations at an intermediate level (Me=
yer,
2014). The main feature of this course not only emphasizes the language
practice through different physical and technological resources but also the
development of strategies and techniques that are the basis for continuous =
and
autonomous learning. The general objective of this course is to achieve the=
A2
level of the Common European Framework Reference for Languages (CEFRL) (Tri=
m et al., 2001) through a balanced development of the =
four
macro language skills: reading and listening comprehension as well as writt=
en
and speaking skills to become a basic language user.
En=
glish
credit courses in the School of Psychology
The focus of English cours=
es
I, II, and III, at the Psychology School of the Universidad de Cuenca, cons=
ists
of a sequence of beginning to intermediate levels and take into considerati=
on
students’ academic, professional, personal interests and needs. The prima=
ry
purpose is to provide English instruction according to the specific academic
students’ needs. It focuses on training students to read and understand
materials in English that are relevant to their majors, developing skills of
comprehension, and analyzing various general English and major-oriented rea=
ding
material to comply with the requirements of the Consej=
o
de EducaciĂłn Superior (2016). Students at the =
end of
288 hours are supposed to acquire the A2/B1 level of the CEFRL. Students can
also develop their writing, vocabulary, and grammar in context skills by us=
ing
different materials in the teaching-learning process. The Eclectic methodol=
ogy,
consisting of a series of activities combined with different methods of
teaching English as a foreign language, is mainly applied. The emphasis is =
on
reading activities as a teaching tool for the acquisition of other language
skills such as writing, understanding, analyzing texts, contextualizing gra=
mmar,
pronunciation, listening, and speaking.
3. =
METHOD
This is a cross-sectional
study that describes research on the benefits of the use of reading to teach
EFL, as well as the levels of confidence gained from reading general and ac=
ademic
English texts.
The participants in this
research corresponded to two English A1/A2 levels from the CEFRL groups that
took this class during the semester of September 2019 to February 2020 as a
mandatory prerequisite for graduation. There were 19 (9M,10F) students in t=
he
morning group and 21 (5M,16F) in the afternoon. A total of 37 (26 F/11 M) f=
rom
Psychology, Law, Medicine, Philosophy, Design, and Chemistry majors was the
sample. One student did not participate in the study due to his visual
impairment[2] and two of them quit the program (see Table 1)=
.
3.3. =
Reading
materials
The reading materials, as
contained in the syllabus, were discussed, and chosen by the students and t=
he instructor
whose first language (L1) is Spanish. Students chose their one thousand to =
one
thousand five hundred-word academic/scientific topic of interest, and a raf=
fle
was made to choose 6 to be read during the semester. As part of the reading
material students also used general English reading exercises from the read=
ing
platform readtheory.org[3].They
worked on an average of five General English readings per week.
3.4. =
English
instruction for
Several teaching activities
were carried out during the semester, and they had the objective of training
and enabling students to improve their overall English language skills, and
specifically their reading skills.
Skimming
Skimming practices served =
the
students to find the general idea of the text. It was interesting to note t=
he
level of prior knowledge, or background information, students had. It is
important to state the similarity between Spanish and English academic and
scientific terminology and the numerous cognates found in the readings, whi=
ch surely
helped them to increase their level of comprehension.
Scanning
Scanning was another reading technique used to find
keywords or ideas, answers to questions about the text, or details such as
tables, graphs, titles, subtitles, text organization, words in italics or b=
old,
and various types of keywords.
Mining
Tsai (2006) uses this term=
to
indicate the in-depth analysis performed in reading texts of valuable langu=
age
resources such as grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, organizing ideas, and m=
ore.
Participants in this study were encouraged to carefully observe and analyze=
how
a reading text in English is structured: titles, subtitles, new words relev=
ant
to the text, grammar structures, paragraphs, main and supporting sentences,=
and
other structural elements. This exercise allowed students to form clear and
critical ideas on how to write in English and gave them the foundations to
write better through simple imitation. The use of an extensive vocabulary in
reading exercises applied in and outside classes allowed students to achiev=
e a
significant increase in vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar analysis.
Reading monitoring
Weekly tests prepared by b=
oth
the instructor and students and given to students, using questionnaires with
true/false statements, completion, matching, inference, multiple-choice and
open questions were used during this language course. Such activities were =
open
book to comply with the stated objective of these English courses.
Additionally, students performed a three to a five-minute oral presentation
about their selected readings. The instructor also provided several web sit=
es
in the course syllabi, English books, newspapers, reading tips, and so on to
encourage in students the love of reading in a foreign language.
3.5.=
Reading tips for =
an
Ecuadorian university context used in the study
Pre-reading activities
As prereading activities,
students would look at the title and subtitles, graphs, pictures, tables, a=
nd
more details of the chosen reading material and think about it for a moment=
to
activate their prior knowledge on the subject. They were encouraged to form
pictures in their minds, infer, and discuss with their peers about it. As o=
ral
and writing practices, they talked and wrote about their previous knowledge
about the reading topic.
While reading activities
While performing the
reading exercises, students underlined/highlighted the new vocabulary or the
most important information they found. When reading paragraph by paragraph,
they identified the different grammar structures based on the A1-A2 language
skills according to the CEFRL charts. They also summarized in two to three
phrases or sentences the most relevant information of each paragraph and
started to write questions about the topic according to the information they
read in each paragraph. Additionally, the instructor encouraged them to col=
or
the text or use pictures that can represent each paragraph. Also, students
discussed the topic with their peers mostly in English. The role of the
instructor was to monitor and assist students in their understanding and the
writing of questions during these reading activities.
After-reading activities
Students formulated questi=
ons,
presented a one-minute summary of the most relevant information they had ab=
out
the topic they read. They worked in pairs or groups of three to write twenty
questions[4] about the topic. These twenty questions were
distributed among them to be answered. Additionally, students shared their
answers to recycle the information. As final tasks, students wrote a
three-hundred-word journal and made 3-5-minute presentations about the topi=
c.
3.6. =
Procedure
Administration of reading
tests (rt)
During the second half of =
the
semester September 2019-February 2020, the first General English reading te=
st
about Ch=
ocolate=
[5] was given on November 11, 2019. It is a 600-wo=
rd
long low advance reading passage with 5 comprehension and 5 vocabulary
questions. The second General English reading test about Chinese New Year=
[6], an A2 level reading test, was given on Decemb=
er
11, 2019. It contains 357 words and 10 questions (3 true/false, 3 completio=
n, 3
multiple-choice, and 1 matching question). The third about Mountain Area Forecast was given on January 13, 2020. It is a 313-word long A2 reading test with 10 m=
ultiple-choice
questions. The fourth reading test about Second Language learning and changes in the brain (Osterhout =
et al., 2008) took place on January 20, 2020. It is a
5,140-word long academic article with 24 questions prepared by the instruct=
or
and the fifth reading test about En=
glish
Songs as an Effective Asset to Improve Listening Comprehension ability;
Evidence from Iranian EFL Learners Rahbar & =
Khodabakhsh (2013), a 2,283-word long scientific arti=
cle
with 20 questions was given on February 3, 2020.
For the three general Engl=
ish
readings tests, (rt1, rt2, and rt3) the time allotted to complete the tests=
was
an average of 20 minutes, and an hour and thirty minutes for the two academ=
ic
reading tests (rt4 and rt5). Additionally, participants took a listening,
reading, and grammar English pre-and post-test during the September
2019-February 2020 semester.
Finally, for assessing the
level of confidence in reading academic and general English texts, at the e=
nd
of the semester, participants answered the Level of personal confidence in learning English
attributed to reading activities questionnaire =
(a.7.28). It consists of five statements related to reading
confidence: 1) I feel very confident when reading academic/scient=
ific
articles in English; 2) I feel very confident when reading general English
material; 3) Performing reading activities in English has helped me improve=
my
other English language skills (writing, listening, comprehension, speaking,
grammar and vocabulary); 4) I
think I can learn English by reading academic/scientific and general English
articles mainly, and 5) Reading has increased my level of
confidence when I need to search for information in English. Students responded to this questionnaire by
selecting Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Disagree, or
Strongly Disagree. Numerical values of 5-1, to Strongly agree (SA5), Agree
(A4), Neither agree nor disagree (NAD3); Disagree (D2), and Strongly disagr=
ee
(SD1), respectively, were used to quantify data.
4. =
FINDINGS
The research data came from
the assessment of five reading tests (Academic and General English) worth 10
points each, an online pre-and post-test on the Listening, Reading, and Gra=
mmar
skills, and from an online questionnaire on confidence levels for reading in
English.
The statistical results of=
the
five reading tests are shown in Figure 1. There was a significant degree of
understanding (average: 7.1) which was stable. However, there was a downtre=
nd
in the understanding of rt3. Not all the participants took rt1, rt2, and rt4
because they were absent on the testing days.
Table
2 shows the statistically significant difference between the results on the
Academic Reading Tests (ART) versus the General Reading Test (GRT). It is w=
orth
noting that there was a better understanding of Academic English material
(7.99) in comparison to General English (6.54).
Table 3 shows the results =
of
the Online Pretest (OT-Pre) versus the Online Posttest (OT-Post) which asse=
ssed
Listening and Reading skills and between Grammar Pretest (GRPre)
and Grammar Post-test (GRPost). It is worth not=
ing
that there was a statistically significant difference in the grammar pre-an=
d post-test.
|
|
OT-Pre |
OT-Post |
GRPre |
GRPost |
|
Average |
54.16 |
64.29 |
45.51 |
59.88 |
|
t |
-2.96 |
-6.73 |
||
|
p |
0.005 |
0.001* |
Note: *p<0.001
Figure 3 shows the results=
of
the Le=
vel
of personal confidence in learning English attributed to the reading activi=
ties
questionnaire.
Thirty-five participants
responded to the statements (S) about the levels of confidence when reading=
in
English (S1, S2, S3, S4, and S5) in a positive way. Only 2.86% disagreed on=
S3,
but the rest of the responses gave positive confirmations on their levels of
confidence when reading either academic or general English.
5. =
DISCUSSION
Results indicated an overa=
ll
robust and significant improvement in understanding reading texts related to
general and academic English. We also saw a significant difference between =
the pre-and
post-test online and grammar tests. Additionally, we found that confidence
levels in reading both for Academic and General English material were high.=
It
is, therefore, possible to include reading as an educational tool in regular
courses as it provides the possibility of further improvements in English
teaching and learning. Interestingly, the use of reading as the leading Eng=
lish
didactical tool is a different methodological experience. It motivates stud=
ents
to learn and understand reading material related to university courses and
increases their ability to understand more technical and general vocabulary.
This teaching approach might be conducive for the improvement of writing,
vocabulary development, listening, and oral skills and can expand studentsâ=
€™
knowledge in their majors. Pluck (2013) in her findings stated that includi=
ng
the reading of academic and scientific articles in teaching English can be =
more
challenging for university students. However, the benefits of this type of
approach are noteworthy and feasible to carry out. We contend that challeng=
ing
university students as well as language instructors when dealing with teach=
ing
methodologies must be the core of any English Program offered at the univer=
sity
level. The results also show that when giving the students the possibility =
of
reading what they are interested in or what they are studying in their majo=
rs,
chances of success in understanding English material and confidence levels =
in
reading increase.
Feyen (2014), RamĂrez (2013), Vanegas, in Meyer’s=
report
(2014), and Krashen (1985) recommend including the practices of intensive a=
nd
extensive reading as well as writing practices in our English courses. Read=
ing
and writing are the two most crucial core language skills used by the Engli=
sh
language program offered at UC’s Psychology School. Reading is taken as t=
he
foundation for the development of the other language skills as mentioned by
Richard & Smith (2002) who argue that developing the reading habits,
encourages the knowledge of grammar structures and vocabulary, and nurtures=
the
love of reading. Participants reported that writing summaries, making oral
presentations, and discussing and making analyses of what they read during =
the
semester gave them the possibility of developing their overall English lang=
uage
skills. The listening component of the program was achieved through listeni=
ng
to the instructors, peers, video presentations, TED Talks, and YouTube song=
s.
To sum up, reading generat=
ed
the possibility of offering a variety of activities that allowed students to
practice the four primary language skills. Additionally, we noticed sudden
changes in students’ motivation, levels of self-confidence, engagement, a=
nd
changes in their attitudes toward learning English.
However, looking at the
results shows us that some participants indicated that the readings assigned
for this English course were very extensive and that there was a lot of new=
and
challenging vocabulary to understand. The study done by Pluck (2013) showed
similar results. This approach presented new challenges and demands, but th=
ere
were obstacles to overcome to gain the significant benefits that it offered=
to
this type of student population.
6. =
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Reading should occupy an
essential and significant place in the English teaching and learning process
and be incorporated more frequently in regular language courses at universi=
ty
levels. It is recommended not to underestimate students’ capabilities and
linguistic transfer skills that add to this type of educational strategy, w=
here
the main emphasis is the understanding of academic and scientific material
related to their majors. Similarly, language instructors should be more awa=
re
that some students nowadays enter university much better prepared in Englis=
h language.
They should also realize that English reading comprehension is one of the m=
ost
evaluated skills in almost all the entrance examinations in most foreign
universities and graduate programs at the national or international level.
Therefore, our students need to take more advanced, demanding, and challeng=
ing
English courses that genuinely prepare and enable them to take international
standardized tests such as the TOEFL, GRE, CEFRL, and so on for admission t=
o foreign
universities or master or doctoral programs offered worldwide. Using readin=
g to
teach EFL might catapult students from being ready for more significant and
more rewarding challenges.
Nevertheless, an EFL
instructor must be a role model. A language teacher, whether at a universit=
y,
high or elementary school level, who does not read, cannot be a good example
and will not be able to motivate students to read. Therefore, good reading
teaching habits must be mandatory as part of any EFL training to increase t=
he
level of students’ motivation to read.
There are numerous EFL
methodologies mentioned by research about teaching English as a foreign
language that responds to different approaches, paradigms, interests, conte=
xts,
and realities (Menezes, 2013). It is evident to Ecuadorian English instruct=
ors that
not all students who are pursuing university majors intend to study their
master or doctoral programs in English-speaking countries or become pure
researchers. On the contrary, the main concern and intention of most of the=
m are
passing the three mandatory English language courses, currently to reach th=
e B1
level, to comply with one of their undergraduate requirements for graduatio=
n.
Therefore, our work as university professors should be to make these groups=
of
students realize and consider the enormous possibilities that knowing Engli=
sh
can offer them. If students do not have the intention to pursue graduate
studies within or outside the country where English is required, they shoul=
d at
least be aware of and ponder upon the enormous benefits that learning anoth=
er
language represents, not only in academia but also in their professional and
personal lives. Consequently, we think that reading can be used as an
educational tool and must be included in the daily practice of teaching and
learning foreign languages at university levels, for it can serve to better
students’ English learning skills.
The authors argue that rea=
ding
can enhance the rest of language skills, and the motivation to learn this
foreign language at the university level because our student populations
already have an acceptable level of literacy in L1 which affects the litera=
cy
skills that learners can transfer from L1 to L2 reading (Grabe
& Stoller, 2002).
Finally, we conclude by
inviting language instructors to consider the possibility of incorporating
reading as a useful didactical tool for language instruction and conducting
further research on this critical issue with bigger populations and in
different universities, schools, and contexts.
The
authors express their gratitude to the School of Psychology and the Language
Department of the Universidad de Cuenca for promoting and supporting resear=
ch
projects in the EFL area. Our thanks also go to the university students who=
participated
in this study.
Aebersold, J., & Field, M. (1997). From reader to
reading teacher: Issues and strategies for second language classrooms.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beglar<=
/span>, D., Hunt, A., & Kite, Y. (2012). The effe=
ct
of pleasure reading on Japanese university EFL learners' reading rates. =
Language Learning, 62(3), 665-703. https://doi.org/
Bernal, M. & Feyen,
J. (2017). Preliminary response from the Faculty of
Psychology students of the University of Cuenca =
to the
modified EFL teaching approach. =
Maskana, 8(1), 61-69.
Brophy, J. (1986). On motivating students.
Occasional Paper No. 101. East Lansing, Michigan, US:
Institute for Research on
Teaching, Michigan State University, October 1986. Retrieved from: http://f=
iles.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED276724.pdf
Burt, M. Peyton, J. K., & Adams, R. (2003).=
Reading
and adult English language learners: A review of the research. Washingt=
on
DC.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from:
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505537.pdf
Carlino, P. (2005). Enseñar no solo
exponiendo. Enseñar a exponer en la Universidad. Educación, Lenguaj=
e y
Sociedad, III(3), 207-229.
Consejo de EducaciĂłn
Superior (2016). Codificado del Régimen Académico del 4 de mayo d=
el
2016,
Chang, A. (2012). Improving reading rate activi=
ties
for EFL students: Timed reading and repeated oral reading,
24(1), 56-83.
Chang, A., & Millet, S. (2017). Narrow read=
ing:
Effects on EFL learners' reading speed, c=
omprehension,
and perceptions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 29(1),
1-19.
Chen, H., & Yang, Y. (2015). =
EFL students’ perceptions of top-down a=
nd
bottom-up reading strategies and reading comprehension.
Day, R. (2015). Extending extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language<=
/span>, 27(2), 294- 301.
Eskey, D., & Grabe, =
W.
(1988). Interactive models for second language reading: Perspectives=
on
instruction. In: Carrell, P., Devine, J., & Eskey<=
/span>,
D. (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp.
223-238). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Feyen, J. (2014). How to bring research into the
classroom. From: Universidad de Docencia a Universidad de Doce=
ncia
con InvestigaciĂłn. PowerPoint
Presentation, Slide 11.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2001). Reading f=
or
academic purposes: Guidelines for the ESL/EFL teacher.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F.L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow, England: Pearson Education.
Khaki, N. (2014). Improving
reading comprehension in a foreign language. The Reading Matrix<=
/i>, 14(2), 186-200.
Krashen, S. (1985). Insights and Inquires. <=
/i>Hayward,
CA: Alemany Press.
Krashen, S. (2004). Free voluntary reading: =
New
Research, Applications, and Controversies. RELC
conference, Singapore, April 2004, 1-9.
Krashen, S. D. (1996) The case for narrow
listening. System, 24, 97-100.
Kintsch=
, W. (2005). An overview of top-down=
and
bottom-up effects in comprehension:
The CI perspective. Discourse
Processes, 39(2-3),
125-128.
Loh, J. K. K. (2009). Teacher
modeling: Its impact on an extensive reading program. Reading in a Forei=
gn
Language, 21(2),
93-118.
McQuillan, J. (2016). What can readers read aft=
er
graded readers? Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(1),
63-78.
Menezes, V. (2013). Second
language acquisition: Reconciling theories. The graduate program in linguistic studies, Federal University of
Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Open Journal of Applied Sciences,
3, 404-412.
Meyer, L. (2014). Progress Report of the
Evaluation of the English Language Program Universidad de Cuenca, Ecuador.
Department of Language, Literacy & Sociocultural Studies, and Latin
American Programs in Education (LAPE). College of Education, University of =
New
Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Mikulecky, B. (2008). Teaching reading in a second
language. Pearson Education, Inc. Reading Monograph, 1-6. Retrieved from
http://longmanhomeusa.com/blog/teachingreading-in-a-second-language/
Miller, S. D. (2003). How
high-and low-challenge tasks affect motivation and learning: Implications f=
or
struggling learners. Reading &
Writing Quarterly, 19(1),
39-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308209
Mounts, E., & Smirnova, L. (2011). A
task-based approach to teaching reading. INTED2011 Proceedings, pp.
4046-4050. Retrieved from: https://library.iated.org/view/MOUNTS2011ATA
O´Malley, J., & Chamo=
t,
A. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambr=
idge
University Press. Retrieved from: http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/
samples/cam031/89009770.pdf
Osterhout, L., Poliakov, A.,
Inoue, K., McLaughlin, J., Valentine, G., Pitkanen,
I., Frenck-Mestre, C., & Hirschensohn,
J. (2008). Second-language learning and changes in the brain. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21(6), 509-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneurol=
ing.
2008.01.001
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). How to rea=
d a
paragraph: The art of close reading. Foundation for Critical Thinking
Press. Tomales, California, Retrieved from: htt=
ps://www.robeson.k12.nc.us/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=
=3D40522&dataid=3D55321&FileName=3DHow%20to%20Read%20a%20Paragraph.=
pdf
Pluck, G. (2013). Teaching
Psychology through English. Incidental improvement in academic reading
comprehension. Journal of Educational Services in
Psychology, LXV(1/2013), 38-42
Rahbar, S., &a=
mp; Khodabakhsh, S. (2013). English songs as an effective
asset to improve listening comprehension ability; Evidence from Iranian EFL
learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English
Literature, 2(6), 63-66. https://doi.org/0.7575/
aiac.ijalel.v.2n.6p.63
RamĂrez, R. (2013).=
BoletĂn
de Prensa No. 128, Julio 23, 2013. Quito,
Ecuador: Secretaria Nacional de =
Education, Ciencia, TecnologĂa e InovaciĂłn
(SENESCYT).
Richard, J. C. & Schmidt, R. (Eds.). (2002<=
i>).
Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. (3rd e=
d.)
London: Longman, 193-194.
Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2000). The lexic=
al
advantages of narrow reading for second language learners. TESOL Journal=
, 9(1),
4-9.
Taguchi, E., Takayasu-Maas=
s,
M., & Gorsuch, G. (2004) Developing reading flue=
ncy
in EFL: How assisted repeated reading and extensive reading affect fluency
development. Reading in a Foreign Language, 16(2), 70-96.
Toland, S., & Fuisting=
,
B. (2017). Read, create, and speed, mingle! T=
exTESOL IV – Spring, 33(1), 15-19.
Torrie, H. (2017). Preparing
students for academic writing by using stem topics and tasks. TexTESOL IV – Spring, 33(1), 22-25.
Trim, J., Coste, D.,
North, B., & Sheils, J. (2001). Common Euro=
pean
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFRL). Council of Europe in English
(Cambridge), and in French (Didier).
Tsai, J. (2006). Connecting
reading and writing in college EFL courses. The Internet TESL J=
ournal, XII(12). Retr=
ieved
from: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Tsai. ReadingWritingConnection.html
Yan, T. (2017). Close
reading: The historical trends and application to English learners. =
TexTESOL IV - Spring, 33(1), 38-41.
[1] Wpm: words per
minute
[2]A personal and tailored approach was developed to
cover his needs
[3] https://r=
eadtheory.org/
[4] Four True-False statements, four multiple-choice
questions, four matching questions, four completion questions, four
wh-questions.
[5=
] Chocolate Reading.
Retrieved from https://www.englishforeveryone.org/PDFs/Informational%20Pass=
ages%20RC%20-%20Chocolate.pdf.
[6]<=
span
style=3D'mso-special-character:footnote'>[7]=
MASKANA, Vol. 11, No. 2, 18-26, 2020 https://publicaciones.ucuenca.edu.ec/ojs/index.php/maskana/article/vi=
ew/3451 doi: 10.18537/mskn.11.02.02 © Aut=
hor(s)
2020. CC Attribution 4.0 License. M.
Bernal & P. Bernal: Using reading to teach English as a foreign languag=
e A
Sangurima et al.: Uso de teléfonos inteligentes para medición de r=
uido
ambiental urbano