View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA
MISCUE ANALYSIS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO GROUPS OF PUPILS IN A SECONDARY SCHOOL
LEE POH LE
FPP 1995 9
MISCUE ANALYSIS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO GROUPS OF PUPILS IN A SECONDARY SCHOOL
By
LEE POH LE
Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the
Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Pertanian Malaysia.
June 1996
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wou ld lik e t o extend my s i ncer e appr ec i at i on t o
a l l thos e who have kind ly r ende r ed me the i r assist ance
in one way or another in wr i ting this thesis .
S pecia l t hanks g o t o Dr . S a li Zaliha Mustapha , the
cha i rman of my supervisory comm i tt ee, and Dr . Shar i f ah
Mohd Nor and Puan Hajah Nor a Mohamed Nor who have
kind ly d evoted much t i me and patience to he l p in the
writing of t his t hesis .
r wou l d a ls o lik e t o thank the Educat i on Ministry
and th� Fed e r a l Ter r i t ory Educat i on Depar tment for
gr anting me the permission t o carry out my r esearch in
the schoo l . Specia l thanks a lso go to the pup i ls of
Sek o l ah Menengah Bandar Bar u Seri Petaling and
Mr Ph i l i p r.oo Kim S eng ( AMN ) , the Principa l of S ek o l ah
Menengah Bandar Baru S eri Petal ing, who have not only
granted me the permissio n to carry out the r esearch i n
the school , but have al�o voluntar ily helped me i n much
o f my data co l l ec t i on work .
Of cours e , I d o not leave out my coursemat es, Mr
Fr eddie Low and Miss Ting Su H i e i n my express i on of
grat i t ud e . They have been of tr emend ous help to me .
i i
Thanks also go to Dr. Zain Mohd Ali for
introducing me to this Master of Science (TESL)
programnle. Without him, this thesis would not have been
written.
Finally, I would like to express my deepest
appreciation to my two daughters, Evelyn and Joyce for
their patience, encouragement and sacrifices to help
write this thesis.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PaC,1e ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i i LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES v i ii ABSTRACT i x ABSTRAK xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II
III
cont ext of the Research Problem ..... 1 st at ement of the Problem ......... ... 7 Obje c t i v es of the S tudy ............. 9 S i gnificance of the Study ...... ..... 1 1 Limi t a t i ons o f t h e Study ............ 1 5 Operational Definitions ............. 17
Average Readers ................ 17 S e c ond Language (L2) Learning .. 18 Nati onal Primary Schools ....... 18 N a t i onal-Type Primary Schools .. 18 Reading Stra t egi es ............. 1 9 Interlanguage In t erference .. ... 20
LITERATURE REVIEW • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reading :A Psycholingui sti c Process . Bottom-up T op-down Vi ews ........... . Miscues and Reading Strategi es ..... . Miscues and Contextual Cues ........ . Language Cues and Reading stra t egi es ......................... . Miscues and the Proc ess of Reading Acquisi t i on ................ . Pro f icient and Less Pro f ic i ent
2 1 2 1 23 2 6 31
34
3 5
Readers ...... . ...................... 36 Retelling ........................... 40 The Reading Process and Text Struct ure ...................... 42
RESEARCH Sampling
The The The
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGy ..... .. .. . . ....................... School .................... . Subjeats .................. . T ext ...................... .
Prev i ew
iv
47 47 47 48 5 0 51
IV
V
Page
Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 Cloze Passage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Reading P assage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Data Gathering Proc edure .. . . . . . . .... 5 9
Groundwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9 The Invest i gati on . . .. . . . . . ..... 60
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSS ION OF F IND INGS . R esults of the Miscue Analysis ..... .
QUestion 1 .. . ................. . Question 2 • . • • • . • . . • . . . . . . • . . . . Question 3 • . . • • . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . Question 4 • • • . . . • . • . . • . • . • • • . . . Question 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • . •
Examples of Two Readers ............ . a ) Yap • • • • • • • • • . • • • . • . • . • . . • . . . b ) Kho o ....................... .
Conclusi on about the Two Readers ... .
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............ . P egagogical Impli cat i on ............ . S uggesti ons f or Further Research ... . Concl usi ons ........................ .
70 7 0 72 7 5 90 94 97
103 103 116 12 6
128 131 13 5 136
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
ADDIT IONAL REFERENCES . . . . . . . .... ........... 144
APPENDIX
A Cloze Passage • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
B Reading S electi on .................. . 1 5 1
C Miscue Analysis: Quest i onna i re f or Tea chers . ...................... . 1 5 6
D P r ev i ew Exerc i se ................... . 158
E Reading S ele ct i on -Teacher's Copy ..................... . 15 9
v
F
G
H
I
J
H
VITA
Reading Mis cue Inv ento ry Quest ions .......................... .
Reading S election -Marked Sampl e ...................... .
A Sample Analysis of Miscues -Affendi (NP ) ...................... . .
Classific ation of Miscues -in the P a s s age from Maimunah
Re ading Mis c ue Inv entory Coding Sheet ....................... .
Additional Tables .................. .
. .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
vi
Page
1 6 5
1 67
173
17 4
17 5
17 6
18 1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Use o f Syntac t i c and S emant i c Cues
Page
as Strat eg i es in Read i ng . . ....... ... 32
2 Languag e Cues and Read i ng strateg i es . 35
3 Pupi l s' C l o z e Test S c ores and Teachers' Rat i ng . . . . ....... .... ...... 53
4 Teachers' Assessment o f the Passag e . . 58
5 Rat ing Sca l e f or Retel l ing Scores . . . . 63
6 Mean Sc ores, Standard Deviat i ons and t-va l ues o f Miscues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
7 Summary o f Quant i tat ive Ana l ysis .. . . . 77
8 Re t e l l i ng Sco�es . . . . ................. 94
9 Mean Sc ores for Graphi c and Grammat i cal U t i l i zat i on, and Ret e l l i ng According to Age C l assi f i cat i on .. ..... ......... 98
10 Yap (NTP)- Ana l ysis o f Mi scue Tota l s . III
11 Yap's st rengths . . . . . . . . . ........ ..... 111
12 Khoo (N P)- Ana l ysis o f Mi scue Tota l s . 124
13 Khoo's streng ths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14 Types o f Miscues Made by the NTP Pupi l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15 Typ es o f Miscues Made by the NP
124
176
Pupi l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
16
17
18
19
20
Miscues P er Hundred Words (MPHW) and Perc entag e o f R i ght Words (RW) . . . .. . .
Graphi c S i mi l ari t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Phon i c Si mi l ar i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Grammat i ca l Functi ons of Mi scues . . . . .
Meaning Change
vi i
178
178
179
179
180
Figure
1
2
LIST OF FIGURES
Miscue Tota l s of the Nationa l -Type Primary School (NTP) pupi l s and the Nationa l Prima ry School (NP) pupi l s
Rete l l ing Scores o f the Nationa l -Type Primary Schoo l ( NTP) pupi l s and the Nationa l Primary (NP) pupi l s . ... . .... .
3 Re l ationship between RW and Retel l ing
Page
7 3
92
Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
viii
An abstract of the thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Pertanian Malaysia as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science
MISCUE ANALYSIS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO GROUPS OF
PUPILS IN A SECONDARY SCHOOL
by
LEE POH LE
June 1995
Chairman Sali Zaliha Mustapha, Ph. D.
Faculty Educational Studies
This study made use of Miscue Analysis as a
psycholinguistic approach to investigate the reading
strategies of a group of English as a Second Language
pupils from the National-Type Primary Schools and
National Primary Schools who are currently in Sekolah
Menengah Bandar Baru Seri Petaling in Kuala Lumpur. The
Reading Miscue Inventory by Yetta Goodman and Burke
(1972) was modified for data collection in this study.
The main question addressed here is whether the
National-Type Primary and the National Primary pupils
make the same miscues in oral reading and if they do,
ix
to what extent do these miscues commensurate with their
comprehension of the text as revealed in their
retelling scores.
The findings show that both the National-Type
Primary ( UTP ) and the National Primary ( NP ) pupils
primarily made miscues in this order; substitutions,
omissions and insertions. The NTP pupils made more
miscues than the NP pupils. Both groups of pupils
relied heavily on graphophonemic cues when they fail to
break a code with the syntactic and semantic cues.
Their omissions of inflected plural and past tense
endings showed that they were conscious of word-economy
in processing text. However the NTP pupils were less
efficient than the NP pupils in the use of reading
strategies and were therefore weaker readers resulting
in poorer comprehension. Age had a negative effect on
the NTP pupils.
Miscue Analysis could be further modified for use
in schools as a research tool.
x
Abs t rak t es i s yang d ikemukakan kepada S enat Uni vers i t i Pertanian Mal aysia s ebagai memenuhi s ebahagi an daripada
syarat keperl uan i jazah Mas ter Sains
ANALISIS KESILAPAN KIU: KAJIAN PERBANDINGAN ANTARA DUA KUMPULAN MURID DI SEBUAH SEKOLAH MENENGAH
ol eh
LEE POH LE
June 1 9 95
Pengerusi Sa l i Zal i ha Mus tapha , Ph . D .
Fakul t i P engaji an Pendidikan
Ka j i an ini menggunakan Ana l i s i s Kesi l apan Ki u
s ebagai pendekatan psiko l ingui s t i k untuk menye l i dik
s t rategi -strat egi pembacaan s ekumpu l an pembaca Bahasa
I nggeris s ebagai Bahasa Kedua . Mereka t e rd i ri dari pada
murid -murid Sek o l ah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan ( SRJK ) dan
Sekol ah Rendah Kebangs aan (SRK) yang rnenuntut di
Seko l ah Menengah Bandar Baru Seri Pet a l ing, Kua l a
Lumpur . "Readi ng M i s cue I nvent ory" ( 1 97 2 ) o l eh Yet ta
Goodman dan Burke di ubahsuaikan untuk kegi atan
pengumpulan dat a kaji an ini .
xi
Persoa l an penye l i dikan ini berarah kepada
perbandi ngan kes i l apan kiu di antara kedua-dua kumpul an
murid
dengan
da l am
ka j i an ini , dan j uga pe rbandingan kes i l apan
tahap k e f ahaman t eks yang mer eka
sesi penc e r i t aan s emu l a t eks yang dibaca .
k i u
baca
Keputusan ana l i s i s menun jukkan bahawa k edua -dua
kumpul an mur i d ka j i an i ni me l akukan k es i l apan k i u
s emasa membaca . P enggantian perkataan yang t i dak
diketahui , ket i ngga l an perkat aan serta peny i s i pan
perkat aan atau ayat yang dibaca dengan perkataan
s end i r i merupakan beberapa kes i l apan k i u yang
di l akukan o l eh kedua -dua kumpul an muri d .
Muri d-murid SRJK me l akukan l ebih kes i l apan k i u
berbanding dengan muri d-murid SRK . Kedua-dua kumpu l an
muri d ka j i an ini amat berg antung kepada i s yarat
g r a f o f onemik apabi l a mereka gaga l meneka sesuatu
perkat aan denqan rnenggunakan is yarat sintaktik ataupun
i s ya rat s emant i k . Ket i nggal an imbuhan akhi r yang
di l akukan o l eh mer eka menun j ukkan bahawa mereka cuba
mengurangkan penggunaan perkat aan s emasa memproses
t eks . Wa l au bagaimanapun muri d-murid SRJK kurang mahi r
dari s egi penggunaan s t rategi pembacaan berbandi ng
dengan muri d -mur i d SRK . Ol eh i t u , kumpul an mur id ini
xi i
lebi h lemah da l am kefaharnan . Us i a seseo r ang di dapa t i
memberi kes an neg a t i f bagi rnuri d-rnuri d SRJK.
Anali s i s kes i lapan ki u ho l eh di ubahs ua i kan l ag i
untuk di gunakan sebagai ala t penye l i d i kan d i seko l ah.
x i i i
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Context of the Res earch Problem
Reading is a vita l s ki l l that ho l ds the k ey t o the
who l e
litt l e
wor l d o f t houghts
att ention has
and
been
imaginations . H owever ,
pa id to deve l o p t his
import ant ski l l among chi l d r en in schoo ls . I t is a
k nown fa l l acy that chi l d r en a f ter be i ng taught t h e
r udiments a n d mechanics o f r e ading wil l d eve l o p the
s ki l l of reading ( Southgat e , Ar n o l d and Johnson , 1981) .
As Englis h is t aught as a S econd Language in sch o o ls in
Ma l aysia , the ability to r ead i n Eng lis h is made even
mor e dif ficu l t . The l ack of abi lity to r ead in Eng lish
wi l l be a drawback for l earners who w i l l pursue the i r
education in ins titutions o f higher l ear ning as most
r e fer ence materia ls are s ti l l in Eng lish . The r e f or e ,
the teaching of r eading in Eng lis h should not be treated light l y . A more i n-d epth k nowl edge o f the
r eading pr ocess wou l d be r equ ir ed in t h is cas e .
Howeve r , there are con f licting v i e ws about the
r eading pr ocess . Rosenbl att (19 78) and Zame l (19 9 2)
1
2
c l a im that peo p l e generate and organ ize the i r memor i es
r e l ated t o a t op i c , a l l ow t he i r t h i nk i ng t o be gu i d ed
externa l ly , ass i mi l ate new id eas, accommodate o ld ones
and t hen r e- or ganize t h em in r ead i ng . Ther e f or e, ther e
i s a cont i nuous i nteract i on between the r eader and the
wr i ter . I t is this i nt er act i on wh i ch r es u l ts in an
i nt e r pr etat i on of the wr i t er's mess age .
On the other hand , there a r e a ls o res earche rs and
theor i s ts , l i k e Shannon and Ros e ( c i ted i n Zame l,
199 2) who have s uggested that the r ead i ng process has
been ove r l y s imp l i f i ed by text wr i t ers . They f e e l that
r ead i ng is not a r eceptive and s tatic pr ocess, but
r ather, o ne that i s act i ve and part i c i patory, wh i ch
i nvo l ves dynami c contr i but i ons o f the r eader .
Bar t h o l omae (1986) ho lds a s i mi l ar v i ew that reading
has been over l y simp l i f i ed, c i t i ng ev i dence f r om
the language used i n r ead i ng i ns t r uct i ons and tes t
questions which call f o r pr edetermi ned answers. Th is
mod e l o f r ead i ng has r ed uced the purpose o f r ead i ng t o
mer e l y answer i ng ques t i ons t h a t f o l l ow a t ext ( Barnet t,
1989) . A r eader wou ld, ther e f or e, f e e l that he has
understood a text we l l i f he can answer a l l the
ques t i ons that f o l l ow it ( Be l ano f f, 1987).
t hese viewpoint s , we wou l d t hen be f aced
Seen f r om
wit h these
ques t i ons : Wha t, then, is the r ead i ng process; and, how
can we go about to learn mor e about this process ?
3
Ear l i e r attempts to ana l ys e t h i s r ead i ng process
have not been abl e to t r ac e the psych o l og i cal aspect i n
read i ng. Huey ( 19 0 8 ) f a i l s t o ana l yse what actua l l y
goes on i n the mind o f the r ead er when he i nteracts
wi th the t ext . Th i s v i ew i s suppor ted by S outhgate et
a l . ( 19 81 ) who c l aim that si l en t r e ading enhances the
pr o b l em of t h i s i nves t igat i on .
Goodman ( 19 67 , 19 6 9 , and 19 81 ) , a psycho l i ngu i s t ,
f i nds that mi scue ana l ys i s can be us ed to exp l a i n the
r ead i ng pr ocess . This v i ew is suppo r t ed by Southgate
e t ale ( 19 8 1 ) . Accord i ng t o them, mi scue ana l ys i s
examines t h e e r r or s mad e by r eaders i n o r a l r ead i ng
and attempts to exp l a i n what the r eaders d o thr ough
these miscues . Thus , r esearch us i ng miscue anal ysis ,
will v i ew r ead i ng f r om the ps ych o l i ng u i s t i c po i nt o f
view ( Goodman , 19 6 7 ) .
According t o Goodman ( 1976 ) and Rume1har t ( 1977 ) ,
three major cues a r e used by r ead ers to i nteract
with the text in r eading: semant i c, syntact i c and
graphophonemic. These thr e e cues w i l l g i ve i ns i ght
int o the pr ocess of c ompr ehend i ng text as they wil l
r evea l :
(l) what i nitiat es the r ead i ng ;
(2) how r eaders process i n f o rmat i on; and
( 3 ) how r e aders or ganize in f or mation .
App l i ed l i ngu i s t i cs has us ed oral read i ng t o
analyse t h is comp l ex pr oces s . K enneth Goodman and Yett a
Goodman ( 19 81 ) a r e o f the op i n i on that e r r or s i n
r ead ing are not the r e s u l t o f f a i l u r e t o compr ehend ,
but r ather,
psych o l ingu is t ic
turns r e s u l ting
the evid ence o f the e f f ects o f
processes t hat have taken
in miscues . The nature
unexpect ed
o f these
miscues r eveal s the underly ing cogn it ive schema that
guid es a person ' s comprehension of the text .
Accur acy o f v isual and aud itory s t r ateg i es is then
o f prime i mpor tance. To arr i ve at the meaning, the
r eader mus t go thr ough a language pr ocess t hat d epends
l arge l y o n s o und equiva l ence for words .
Goodman ( 1 9 6 7 ) , h owever, v iews that r ead ing beg ins
w i t h a hypot hes i s o r pr edic tion about the mean i ng o f
what is to be read . Readers must mak e i n it ial use of
the i r prior k nowl edge and l anguage competence . The
r eader
every
r eade r
use f u l
does not need to l ook at or pr onounce
l etter o r word to get to the meaning. The
s a�p l e s and s e l ects f r om the t ext only the mos t i n f ormation w i t h the intent o f con firming
expectat ions .
5
Rume l hart ( 19 7 7 ) , on the other hand , suggests that
t h e r ead i ng pr ocess may b e initiat ed eith er by the
pr i n t or by the r eader ' s expectations . The reader mak e s
u s e of whatever strat egies need ed at t h a t time . This
v i ew is further suppor t ed by Zame l ( 19 9 2 ) who sees
r eading as an act ive engagement thr ough which meaning
i s pr oduced. Pehr son and Rob i nson ( 19 8 5:5 ) sum up that
"read i ng begins and ends wit h mean i ng " . The outcome
of r ead ing then , wi l l a l so d e pend on the r ead er ' s
k nowl edge and experience of the wor l d t o create an
af f e c t ive pr o x i mi ty w i t h the wr i ter . However , r ead i mg
s e l ections i n scho o l t extbooks d o not usua l ly cater f o r
i nd i vidual pup i l ' s need o r even i nd i v id u a l scho o l need .
Ther ef or e , the way r e ading is taught i n schoo l s ,
suggests to pup i ls that r ead i ng i s a r eceptive and
s tatic pr ocess . It i s an act o f finding a particu l ar
i d ea i n the text . Bartho l omae ( 19 8 6 ) points out that
r ead i ng inst r uctions support this approach to r eading. Pup i ls need not have t o und e r s tand the text we l l t o be
abl e t o answer test questions given at the end
o f the
t hr ough
ques t i ons
As such
process
f o l l owing
r ead i ng text . They on l y need to
the text progr ess ive l y , f o l l owing
as they go to answer them ( Barnett ,
pup i l s see t h e pur pose of r eading
l ook
the
19 8 9 ) .
as a
r equ i r ed pr i or to answer i ng ques t i ons
a t ext ( Be l anoff , 1987 ) . Pupi l s have c ome t o
6
be l i eve that 'r ead i ng is the att empt t o memor ize t e x t
wh i c h s omeone e lse s e l ects s o t h a t o n e can r epr oduce
factua l
1 9 8 9 : 9 1 ) .
i n f ormat i on when ques t i oned'
I n t his context , mean i ng i n
predetermi ned and the r ead er has to f i nd
This has caused a gener al decl i ne i n the
r ead we l l among pup i ls today .
a
( Shannon ,
text is
t h is o u t .
a b i l i ty t o
I n an ESL s i tuat i on , t h i s pr o b l em i s further
c ompounded. Emphas is on determ i n i ng and ident i fyi ng
the meaning i n a text wi l l g i ve r is e t o i ne f f ect i ve
r e ad i ng strat egy l i k e word f or word r e ad i ng . H i rsch
( 1 9 8 7 ) agr e es t ha t t h i s f or m of r ead i ng d e n i es t h e
r eade r h is own transact i ons with a t e x t and t h e
understanding t h a t r eading invol ves s uch t ransact i ons
( Rosenb l at t , 197 8 ; Fre i r e , 19 83 ; Bartho l omae and
Petrosky, 1 9 8 7 ) .
Reading theory and r es earch i n s ec o nd
language ( Ca r e l l ,
19 8 9 ; M i k u l ecky ,
Dev i ne and Eskey, 19 8 8 ; Bar net t ,
1 9 9 0; Grabe , 19 9 1 ) also s t r ess t h e
impor t ance o f r ec ogn i z i ng that r eaders br i ng mean i ng
t o t he text whil e i nt er ac t i ng w i t h i t . H owever ,
r ead i ng s e l ect i ons f o r c l assr oom us e d o not g i ve enough
room for teachers to interact w i t h them i n a mean i ngfu l
7
way. The teacher's role is reduced to only monitoring
and managing students (Shannon, 1989). But, if reading
is affected by purpose and goal, it should involve
recursiveness which then makes the text malleable and
open to interpretations.
On the other hand, if reading ends with meaning,
that is, a developed meaning arising from readers'
comprehension of the text, it is then imperative that a
device be used to gauge this comprehension. Guszak
(1972) states that retelling of the material by the
readers will demonstrate their understanding of it.
Gershon (1985), however, cautions that retelling is a
weak instrument to assess comprehension as this
requires the reader to recall in order to retell. Thus,
probing questions and prompts need to be used to help
readers retell when necessary during the retelling
session to evaluate their comprehension of the text
read.
statement of the Problem
The reading process is difficult to understand.
Yet reading plays an important role in the ESL
8
cu�� i cu l um . The�e f o�e , the �ead i ng p�ocess s hould be
further i nves t i gated s o that the t each i ng of r ead i ng
s t�ateg i es can be i mpr oved.
I.ee Su K i m ( 1 9 83) and Spyk erman ( 19 8 8 ) car r i ed out
r es earches on the read i ng pr ocess among Ma l a ys i a n
pup i ls . They f ound that miscues made i n oral r ead i ng
can be ana l ys ed quan t i ta t i ve ly and qua l i ta t i ve l y t o
i nves t i gate t h e r ead i ng pr ocess ( Go odman and Bur k e ,
1972 and Spyke�man , 19 8 8 ) . I t i s the a i m o f t h i s
s t udy t o i nves t i gate t h e e f f ect o f miscues on t h e
c ompr ehens i on o f a t e x t among Form Two pup i ls i n a
s econdary schoo l .
The pur pose o f this s t ud y g i ves r is e t o two
pr imary ques t i ons :
( i ) Do r eaders who wer e
Nat i on a l -Type Pr i mary
f or mer l y f r om
Scho o ls ( NTP )
t h e
and
the Nat i onal Pr i mary Schools ( NP ) d i f f e r
i n us i ng miscues as s t r ateg i es i n or a l
r e ading ?
( i i) I f they d o , to what extent d o these
m iscues i n o r a l �ead i ng a f f ect �ete l l i ng
wh i ch wou ld be us ed as a compr ehens i on
measur e ?
9
I t i s hoped that the i mpl i cat i ons f r om the
r esults of t h e analys i s would help educators plan and
evaluate the i r r ead i ng programmes .
Objectives of the study
I t i s w i th i n the context o f these propos i t i ons
t hat t h i s study attempts to analyse the r ead i ng pr ocess
of two gr oups of ESL r eader s , that is , pup i ls fr om the
Nat i onal-Type Pr i mary Schools ( NTP ) and pup i ls f r om the
Nat i onal Pr i ma r y Schools ( NP ) . Both groups of pup ils
ar e i n Form Two and ar e f ollowi ng the Engl i sh
Language progr amme at the " i nter med i at e " level . Th is
i ntermed i acy i s d e termi ned by the Cur r i culum and
Developmen t Centre of the M i n istry o f Ed ucat i on
( Engl i sh I.anguage S yllabus for S econdary Schools ,
1989).
The NP pup ils h ave
educat i on whe r e Engl ish
completed s i x years of pr i mary
is i nt r od uced as a S econd
Language f r om year one . The NTP pupi ls have
completed s i x years of pr i mary educat i on whe r e Engl i sh
i s i nt r od uced onl y i n the t h i rd year o f the i r pr i mary
educat i on . These NTP pup ils d o a year of i ntens i ve
10
c ou r s e to e qu ip them with su ffic ie nt s k il l s in the
E ng l ish L a nguage to mee t the r e qu ir eme nt of the
F or m One E ng l ish La nguag e p r og r amme . Both g r oups of
pup il s ar e taugh t E ng l is h as a S e c ond L a ngua g e .
S p e c ifica l l y, th is s tud y s e eks a ns we rs to the
fol l owing ques tions :
( 1 ) Is the r e a s ig nifica nt d iffe r e nc e in
the tota l number of m is cues us ed be twe e n
the NTP pup il s a nd the NP pup il s ?
( 2 ) Is of
the r e a
mis cues
ma rked d iffe re nc e in the typ e
(su bstitution, omis s ion, ins e r tion, r e p e tition, paus e a nd r e v e r s a l ) us ed by the NTP pup il s a nd the NP pup il s in
r ead ing ?
(3) Is the r e a significant difference in c omp r eh e ns ion be twe e n the two gr oups bas ed
on r e te l l ing ?
(4) Is the r e a r e l a tionsh ip be twe e n the ir mis cue s c or e s a nd r e te l l ing s c or es ?
(5) Does a d iffe r e nc e in age a ffe c t the s tr a te g ies us ed in r e a d ing ?
11
Significance of the study
Read i ng i s an i mpor tant sk i l l i n any l anguage
t each i ng and l ear n i ng context . As a t eacher , one ought
to have a mor e i n-depth understand i ng of the r ead i ng
pr ocess . Th i s understand i ng wi l l mak e i t poss i b l e f o r
t h e t eacher t o p l ace t h e pup i l s a t t h e correct l evel i n
the r ead i ng programme, supply appr opr i at e r ead i ng
mater i a l , and , at the same t ime r ecommend r ecreat i onal
r ead i ng f or them ( Burns and Roe , 1989) . Thus , we
need t o k now t h e s t r at eg i es the r ead ers use i n
c ompr e hend i ng text .
Th i s und e r s tand i ng o f the r ead i ng pr ocess wi l l
a l s o h e l p l earners bu i ld up conf id ence i n r ead i ng .
Ther e f or e , a r es earch i nt o the r ead i ng pr ocess i s
i mportant s o that one can understand what the average
l earners at the i nt ermed i at e level do wh i l e reading.
An unpub l i s hed ear l i er s t udy was d one by the
r es earcher o n three hundr ed and s i x ty- f our pup ils to
ver i fy the ach i evement of the NTP pup i l s and the NP
pup i l s bas ed on t he i r Engl i sh Language m i d -year
e xaminat i on r es u l ts . I t was f o und tha t mor e
( 2 6% N P a s opposed t o 4 \ NTP ) wer e p l aced a t
N P pup i l s
t h e t o p
Recommended