IPCC2010-2

READING STRATEGIES FOR PROCEDURAL INFORMATION IN EFL BUSINESS WRITING

ENVIRONMENT

Debopriyo RoyAssociate Professor, University of Aizu, Japan

8th July, 2010 - IEEE IPCC, Enschede, Netherlands

1

Monday, June 28, 2010

Introduction

• Not much research has been done in understanding how students read and understand English in EFL technical context.

• Is reading English a conscious activity in EFL context or is an automatic and subconscious operation?

• Reading in EFL context will often involve different cognitive and meta-cognitive rhetorical reading strategies toward comprehending the full scope of the readings on the topic.

2


Factors Affecting Reading

• Posing the problem

• Providing background on the topic, research methods

• Motivation and attitude

• Content familiarity

• Text structure

• Use of reading comprehension strategies

3

A Path Analysis Model (Extension of multiple regression analysis) -

Showing more than one dependent variable for multiple predictor variables


Research Questions

• Do readers in an EFL context adopt cognitive and metacognitive strategies for understanding the assignment context in a technical business-writing environment?

• The extent to which learners consciously understand and can explain the different ways of using text information in a collaborative learning environment.

• Learners in an EFL context, such as in Japan, often are passive and complete a task merely at a subconscious and operational level, rather than as a conscious activity.

4


Brief Review of Literature

• Krashen’s Monitor model [1982] differentiates between learning and acquisition in an EFL context. Acquisition for Krashen is spontaneous, subconscious, and leads to conversational fluency, while learning follows traditional instructions in grammar and leads to more rule-based behavior. Krashen [1982] argued that learning does not lead to acquisition.

• Applying metacognitive strategies is more automatic and subconscious (acquisition) while learning is related to reading the full content adequately.

• Question: Is reading every or most sentences necessary OR whether metacognitive strategies provide enough information to understand the context adequately?

5


Cognitive Reading Strategies

• Cognitive strategies are used to help an individual achieve a particular goal (e.g., understanding a text) [Maghsudi & Talebi, 2009].

• Metacognitive reading strategies in an EFL context clearly have shown that strategies like skimming and scanning often are practiced for extracting the required information [Dhieb & Henia, 2003], without a deeper-level analysis.

• Analysis of time data showed that participants spent more time per word reading the pages with headings than pages which did not have headings [Surber and Schroeder, 2007].

• The results were that participants who received training and/or read the text with headings remembered text topics and their organization better than participants who received no training and read the text without headings [Sanchez, 2001].

• With more and more practice, this skimming/scanning or headings-based reading behaviors becomes more automatic and subconscious. [Alyousef, 2006].

6


Learning VS. Acquisition

• Spolsky [12] theorized a cognitive-based second language acquisition model in which he mentioned a gradient condition where more frequent conditions probably open up more opportunity for learning.

• My idea is to test whether more effective use of acquisition skill (through more practice of skimming, headings reading, scanning methods) leads to actual content learning as Krashen theorized?

• Self-Reflection: A key premise in this study is that for students to be able to improve, they must develop the capacity to monitor the quality of their own work during actual production.

7


Methods - 1

• As part of this PILOT experiment and exercise, students read one business article every week.

• Examples: How Amazon Works, How Craiglist Works, How Fiber Optic Cables Work in Business.

• Students are intentionally given no specific instructions for the reading exercise, so that we can study their ability to learn and extract information.

• After reading the article, each participant in the experiment had to design an oral presentation as a slideshow in www.slideshare.net. Students were shown examples of good PowerPoint presentation. Students were asked to include at least six slides per presentation every week.

• Following this activity, they had to submit the slide share URL in the learning management system called Moodle. They repeated this activity over a period of three weeks during the semester and once in 2 weeks.

• Students were handed out a questionnaire following each slideshare assignment submission.

8


http://www.slideshare.net

http://www.slideshare.net

Methods - 2• Predictor (Independent) Variables:

• Ability to Search Information (Type #1) - Read the article and put the correct words in the gaps.

• Ability to understand the reading (Type #2) - According to the __ page of the article, what major features put ____ (e.g., Fiber Optic cables) at another level?

• Understanding Context of Using the tools (Type #3) - Whether readers could understand the purpose for using slide share and Moodle in the given assignment.

• Understanding Presentation of Text (Type #4) - Identify the headings that are most appropriate for the given paragraphs.

• Understanding Applications of Weekly Readings (Type #5) - Identify the phrase(s) that best summarize what is suggested in the weekly reading: You might choose more than one option.

* Understanding Task Sequence - Explain the sequence in which the above-mentioned work should be completed using Moodle, MS Power Point and slideshare.

9


Sample

• The assignment grade is considered as the dependent variable.

• Sample: The students were all junior-level students in undergraduate level at a technical institute of higher learning. The students had 2 years (8-10 credits) of English education at the college level, although their level of English proficiency is low to moderate at best.

10


Experiment Design

11

Predictor VariablesQuestion 1Question 1 Question 2Question 2 Total Score

Predictor VariablesCorrect Option 1 Correct Option 2 Correct Option 1 Correct Option 2

Type 1 2 Points Maximum2 Points Maximum 2 Points Maximum2 Points Maximum 4

Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

Type 5

Total Score on Slideshare Per WeekTotal Score on Slideshare Per WeekTotal Score on Slideshare Per WeekTotal Score on Slideshare Per WeekTotal Score on Slideshare Per Week 4


Findings - 1

• Summary: Overall results indicate that there is hardly any significant overall correlation between the final score on the slide share assignment each week and each of the five aspects that participants were tested on.

• However bivariate correlation between predictor variables show some significant values.

• Predictor variables were indicative of the final score during the 1st week of analysis.

12


Findings - 2

13


Findings - 3

14


Multiple Regression Analysis

15

WeeksR (Multiple correlation coefficient)

R-square (Approx. __% of variance in slideshare score can be predicted by the combination

of 5 predictor variables

Sig. Value Implications

10.788

- High level of correlation

0.621 0.036 Less than .05 - Model fits well

2 0.626 - High level of correlation

0.392 0.291 More than .05 - Model does not fit well

3 0.581- High level of correlation

0.337 0.405 More than .05 - Model does not fit well


Significant Values

• Score #1 and Scan #1 = .522 (significant at .05 level).

• Score #1 and Score #2 = .789 (significant at .01 level)

• Score #1 & Score #3 = .883 (significant at .01 level)

• Context #1 and Score #1 = -.594 (significant at .05 level).

• Presentation #1 & Scan #1 = .524 (significant at .05 level).

• Presentation #2 & Scan #2 = .588 (significant at .05 level).

• Applications #2 & Applications #3 = .489 (significant at .05 level).

16


Discussion

• Overall results indicate that this preliminary analysis is not enough to suggest a significant pattern in terms of understanding how predictor variables might have played a role in explaining the final score for the slide share assignment.

• There might have been random improvement for one or more of the predictor or dependent variable score.

• An open-ended screening test (reading comprehension) for technical reading could be added before testing actual ability to analyze and draw inferences based on the readings.

• Further, results also indicate that within the same week and between weeks, there are some significant correlation values between different strategies and the final score.

17


Formative Assessment Model• Purpose is to understand students’ internal processes and resultant outcomes

• Prior Knowledge and Motivational Belief (Self-rate ability and motivation to search for information, understand interfaces, work with LMS)

• Understanding Student Goals (Ability to represent correctly the goal for the assignment)

• Tactics and Strategies (extent of reading, time spent, focus on headings, highlighting of text, using online translation software, electronic dictionary etc)

• External learning outcome (searching for information from article, understanding the reading, understanding presentation of text, identifying all possible heading, understanding applications of weekly reading, understanding context of using tools, understanding task sequence etc)

• Internal learning outcome (confidence ratings and reading ability, understanding text and tools)

18


Design of the Model

• Butler and Winne (1995) Model of Formative Assessment.

• In the future study, there will be systematic feedback and guidelines for improvement provided after each week to analyze and measure student performance.

• For specific text, headings will be pointed out, reasoning provided, skimming, highlighting examples are to be demonstrated after each week.

19


Model

20

WeeksGroup 1

N = 30

Group 2

N = 30

External Outcome-

Score on each category

Score on each category

(Max score = 4)

Week 1(Networks)

How Fiber Optic Cables Work

How High Speed Internet Works

Ability to search information 4

Week 1(Networks)



Ability to understand reading 3

Week 1(Networks)



Understanding context 3Week 1(Networks)



Understanding text presentation 4

Week 1(Networks)



Understand reading applications 2

Week 2(E-commerce)

How Amazon Works

How Craiglist Works

Understanding task sequence 3Week 2

(E-commerce)How Amazon

WorksHow Craiglist

Works

Score on Slideshare

Assignment4 4


THANK YOU !


Education

IPCC2010-2