Effects of extensive reading on efl student's writing ability

Bạn đang xem bản rút gọn của tài liệu. Xem và tải ngay bản đầy đủ của tài liệu tại đây (618.97 KB, 18 trang )

(1)<div class='page_container' data-page=1>

ABSTRACT

</div>
(2)<div class='page_container' data-page=2>

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Page

Declaration ... iii

Acknowledgement ... iv

Abstract ... v

Table of contents ... vi

List of abreviations ... viii

List of tables ... ix

List of figures ... x

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1. Rationale ... 1

1.2. Aim of study ... 4

1.3. Research hypothesis ... 4

1.4. Research questions ... 4

1.5. Significance of the study ... 4

1.6. Organization of the thesis ... 5

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW... 6

2.1. Extensive reading ... 6

2.1.1.What is extensive reading? ... 6

2.1.2.Characteristics of extensive reading ... 6

2.1.3. Benefits of extensive reading. ... 8

2.2. Writing ability ... 8

2.2.1. Definition of writing ability………...….….8

2.2.2. Components of writing ability……….…9

[
2.3. The Impact of extensive reading on writing ability ... 10

2.4. Related previous studies ... 11

2.5. Students’ attitudes towards extensive reading ... 15

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 17

3.1. Research design ... 17

3.2. Research context and participants ... 18

3.3. Research procedure ... 19

</div>
(3)<div class='page_container' data-page=3>

vii

3.5. Measurements ... 25

3.6. Data analysis ... 29

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS ... 30

4.1. Quantitative data analysis ... 30

4.2. Quatitative data analysis ... 37

4.3. Supporting findings... 39

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ... 42

5.1. Summarizing and interpreting of the main findings ... 42

5.2. Discussion ... 42

5.3. Implications ... 44

5.4. Limitations of the study ... 44

5.5. Suggestion for the further research ... 45

5.6. Conclusion ... 45

References ... 46

Appendix 1: Regulation of English proficiency level for General English……….1

Appendix 2: Assessment rubric ... 6

Appendix 3 and 4: Questionnaires (Vietnamese and English versions) ... 7

Appendix 5: Sample of student’s writing text ... 8

Appendix 6: Cover page of English Objective PET course book ... 10

Appendix 7: Interview questions ... 11

Appendix 8: Interview transcripts ... 12

</div>
(4)<div class='page_container' data-page=4>

viii

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS

CG Control group

EG Experimental group

CB Course book

O1 Pre-test

O2 Post-test

ER Extensive reading

EFL English as a Foreign Language

</div>
(5)<div class='page_container' data-page=5>

LIST OF TABLES

Contents Page

1. Table 3.2: Design of the research.

2. Table 3.3.1 Tasks and time allocation for two groups in the research

3. Table 3.3.2 Course specification and two conditions.

4. Table 3.5.1 Reliability of the writing quality indicator. Correlation

(r) between the scores of the two raters.

5. Table 3.5.2 Reliability of questionnaire (Cronbach’s Alpha) in the

study.

6. Table 4.1. Means of two measurement occasions (O1-O2) of

control group (CG) and experimental group (EG) in three

indicators.

7. Table 4.2. Independence Sample t-test of pre-tests scores of a

variable of writing ability of the CG and EG (with the Standard

Deviation in bracket)

Table 4.3. Independence Sample t-test of post-test scores of a

variable of writing ability of the CG and EG (with the Standard

Deviation in bracket)

9. Table 4.4. Significant different between pre-test and post-test

within each group in indicator of writing quality

10. Table 4.5. Significant different between pre-test and post-test

within each group in indicator of writing fluency

11. Table 4.6. Mean score of the questionnaire on students’ attitudes

towards ER

12. Table 4.7. Correlation coefficient of two indicators of variable

“writing ability” in pre-test.

13. Table 4.8. Correlation coefficient of writing quality and writing

text length of two groups in post-test.

</div>
(6)<div class='page_container' data-page=6>

LIST OF FIGURES

Content

Page

1. Figure 1. Significance of difference of students’ writing

ability between two groups in post-test.

2. Figure 2. Mean scores of two groups in quality of writing

ability before and after the treatment.

3. Figure 3. Mean scores of students’ fluency in writing of

two both groups before and after the treatment

4. Figure 4. The comparison of students’ attitudes of

experimental group before and after the

treatment

</div>
(7)<div class='page_container' data-page=7>

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The chapter includes six main sections. The rationale of the research presents the 
current picture of issues related to the writing skills of EFL students in the context. These 
realities led to the reasons for conducting the current study. The next parts are related to 
the research aims, research hypothesis, research questions, and the significance of the 
study. Lastly, organization of the thesis is introduced.

1.1. RATIONALE

1.1.1 The present picture of English teaching and learning to non-English 
major students at Tra Vinh University.

The English boom began in December 1986, when at the sixth National Congress,
the Vietnamese Communist Party initiated an overall economic reform known as

(Renovation). In the context of economic renovation and of the open-door policy, English
became the first foreign language to be taught in Vietnam. It is one of the six national

examinations that students have to pass, if they want to achieve the Secondary School

Education Diploma and it is a compulsory subject for both undergraduates and graduates
at tertiary level. Therefore, English is taught in schools, and in universities. The students
at Tra Vinh university are not an exception. At the undergraduate level, all scientific
fields students have to take 4 courses of ten credits of General English. The curriculum
of English teaching and learning at the university is to prepare the students to achieve a
B1 defined in the CEFR after graduating from the university (See Appendix 1 for

regulation of English proficiency level for General English students). To achieve the B1

</div>
(8)<div class='page_container' data-page=8>

1.1.2. The necessity of improving writing skill for EFL students at Tra Vinh 
University.

According to the CEFR format at B1 level, the writing part in the CEFR requires
three types of writing. In type 1, candidates have to complete five questions that aim at
testing grammar. Type 2, candidates have to produce a short email or letter of between
35 to 45 words in length. Type 3 is the most challenging. Candidates have a choice of
task to write: either a story or an informal letter with 100 words for both tasks. For this
type of writing, it requires that students should better have their own stance with their
imagination and self- expression in the writing. Within English language learning,
however, I have recognized that when my students do writing, they find themselves
confused with choice of words word choice, grammatical use, organization and
generation of ideas. They tend to translate ideas from their respective mother tongue into
English, express ideas in long sentences and they cannot convey the idea that they want
to express. As, Binh, a Vietnamese EFL student majoring in Engineering in my pilot
interview, said that “I want to write, but I do not have enough vocabulary inputs and it is
very difficult to write down what I am thinking in my mind”, interviewed on October 20,

2017. Moreover, their writing products were poor of new ideas and did not include
personal views and creative thinking in the writing. The reasons are, firstly, because of
the influence of Vietnamese culture and social norms on their writing. They wrote long
sentences in a rather circular manner. It is so difficult for the reader to understand. As
Phan (2011) states, writing is much influenced by the culture and social manner of the

</div>
(9)<div class='page_container' data-page=9>

In order to have a better work of writing, Suleiman (2000) indicates that students
should set a scale of hierarchy, which involves critical thinking skills, social skills and
linguistic competencies. They have to determine the purpose of writing, the personal role
of the writer and the audience for whom their writing is intended. However, the reading
texts in the course book, which are about the facts, and figures. In addition to this, the
reading text and writing task in the course book do not link together, for instance, in unit
18. Shooting a film, the reading text is about “A day’s work at the seaside of the film
crew”, but the writing task asks students to write a letter about: “You are spending next
weekend with some friends who live in the country. Write a postcard to them, you should
say how you plan to get there, ask about what you will all do and tell them what time you
will arrive”. The students are not provided with meaningful input for their writing. As
for the pedagogical context, vocabulary and language structures will be picked up from
reading and should be able to make use of them in writing products.

From the aforementioned problems, the researcher thought that students should be
encouraged to engage in the authentic reading material, which is appropriate to their level
and interests in order to help them gain quality input from the reading. Hence, extensive
reading could be considered a powerful teaching activity to help students improve their
writing. According to Maley (2009), extensive reading offers comprehensive input,
especially where the target language is hardly contacted to. Besides, extensive reading
also helps improving the writing of students. There is a well-established link between
reading and writing. The more we read, the better we write. These are proved in numerous

studies (see discussion in Tsang, 1996; Mermelstein, 2015).

</div>
(10)<div class='page_container' data-page=10>

reading. They said that “the vocabulary is easy to understand; the setting is clear and the
pictures in the book help us understand the general idea of the story”.

1.2. AIM OF STUDY

The purpose of this study is to examine whether there is any relationship between
extensive reading and the improvement of EFL students’ writing ability. The focus of the
investigation is on the influences of extensive reading on the participants’ writing ability.
Also, the study examines students’ attitude towards the use of extensive reading.

1.3. HYPOTHESIS

From the aims above this study hypothesized that

1. Extensive reading has positive effects on non-English major students’ writing ability.
2. Students have a positive attitude towards the use of extensive reading in helping
them improve their writing skill.

1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The data was collected to answer these following research questions:

1. Is there an effect of extensive reading on the improvement of EFL students’
writing ability? If yes, to what extent is the effect?

2. What are students’ attitudes towards extensive reading?

1.5. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

</div>
(11)<div class='page_container' data-page=11>

1.6. THE ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

This research consists of five chapters: Introduction, Literature Review, Research
Methodology, Research Findings, Discussion and Conclusion.

Chapter One presents rationale, aim of research, research questions, significance
and organization of the research.

Chapter Two reviews literature which consists of two parts: Part 1 is theoretical
concepts related to extensive reading and writing ability, relationship between extensive
reading and writing ability; and related previous studies are the second part of the
Chapter.

Chapter Three, which describes the methodology of research consists of six parts.
Research design is the first part of this Chapter. Next, the research context and
participants part will be described in detail. The materials used in the research and course
specification of the research will be presented in the procedure part. In measurement part,
the measurement instrument of the study is presented in detail. The chapter concludes
with the data collection, and analysis parts.

Chapter Four reports the findings from the data collected through the use of tests,
questionnaires, and interviews.

</div>
(12)<div class='page_container' data-page=12>

46
REFERENCES

1. Abbott, R., Berninger, V., & Fayol, M. (2010). Longitudinal relationships of levels of
language in writing between writing and reading in grades 1 to 7. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 102, 281-298.

2. Acar, S., Burnett, C., & Cabra, J. (2017). Ingredients of creativity: Originality and
more . Creative Research Journal, 29(2), 133-144.

3. Alexander, J., & Filler, R. (1976). Attitudes and reading. Neward, DE: International 
Reading Association.

4. Applebee, N. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 
577-596.

5. Asraf, R., & Ahmad, I. (2003). Promoting English language development and the
reading habit among students in rural schools through the guided extensive reading
program. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 83-120.

6. Bamford, J. (1987). Extensive reading using graded readers....and beyond. Osaka, 
Japan: JAKT Osaka Chapter meeting.

7. Bell, T. (1998). Extensive reading: Why? and How? Retrieved 9 22, 1998, from 
Reading.html

8. Bell, T. (2001). Extenive reading: Speed and comprehension. Retrieved 9 22, 2001, 
from

9. Burges, J. (1934). Creative Writing. Syracue: Syracue university.

10. Cho, K., & Krashen, S. (1994). Aquisition of vocabulary from the sweet valley kids
series: Adults ESL acquisition. Journal of Reading, 37(8), 662-667.

11. Collins. (2003). Collins complete writing. Westerhill Road: Harper Collins Publisher. 
12. Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approach. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

13. Dar, M., & Khan, I. (2015). Writing anxiety among public and private sectors
Pakistani undergraduate university students. Pakistan Journal of Gender Studies,

10(1), 121-136.

14. Day, R. (2002). Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading. Reading in a

Foreign Language, 14(2), 136-141.

</div>
(13)<div class='page_container' data-page=13>

16. Day, R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom. 
Cambridge: Cambridge.

17. Day, R., & Bamford, J. (2002). Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading.

Reading in a Foreign Language, 14(2).

18. Diederich, P. (1974). Measuring growth in English. Urbana, IL: National Council of 
Teachers of English.

19. Elley, W., & Mangubhai, F. (1983). The impact of reading on second language

learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(1), 53-67.

20. Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and

Communication, 28, 122-128.

21. England, J. (2009). Writing wrongs. Creative Writing: Teaching Theory & Practice,

1(1), 1-14.

22. Gay, L. (1985). Educational evaluation and measurement: Competencies for analysis

and application. C.E.: Merrill Publishing Company.

23. Grabe, W. (2002). Reading in a second language. In R. K. (Ed.), The Oxford

handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 49-59). New York: Oxford University Press.

24. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory and practice writing. New York, NY: 
Longman.

25. Hafiz, E., & Tudor, I. (1989). Extensive reading and the development of language
skills. ELT Journal, 43, 4-13.

26. Hafiz, F., & Tudor, I. (1990). Graded readers as an input medium in L2 learning.

System, 18, 31-42.

27. Hall, D. (1988). Writing well. . Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

28. Hayashi, K. (1999). Reading strategies and extensive reading in EFL classes. RELC

Journal, 30(2), 114-132.

29. Huang, H., & Liou, H. (2007). Vocabulary learning in an automated graded reading
program. Language Learning & Technology, 11(3), 64-82.

30. Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. Harlow: Longman. 
31. Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Ernst Klett Sprachen.

32. Jacobs, L, H., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D., Hartfield, V., & Hughey, J. (1981).

Testing esl composition: A practical approach. English composition program. Rowly,

</div>
(14)<div class='page_container' data-page=14>

33. Janopoulos, R. (1986). The relationship of pleasure reading and second language
writing performance. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 763-768.

34. Kantor, K. (1975). Evaluating creative writing: A different ball game. The English

Journal, 64, 72-74.

35. King, I. (2013). Beyond cinderrella: using stories with seondary and adult learners.

Language and Linguistic Studies, 4(2), 94-106.

36. Kirin, W. (2010). Effects of extensive reading on students' writing ability in an EFL
class. The Journal of ASIA TEFL, 7(1), 285 - 308.

37. Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in

America. NY: Random House.

38. Krashen, S. (1981). Effective second language acquisition: Insights from research. In
J. Alatis, H. Altman, & P. Alatis, The second language research (pp. 97-109). New 
York: Oxford University Press.

39. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: 
Pergamon Press.

40. Krashen, S. (1984). Writing: Research, theory, and applicatios. Torrance, CA: 
Laredo.

41. Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional
evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73, 440-463. 
42. Lai, E. (1993a). The effect of a summer reading course on reading and writing skills.

System, 21, 87-100.

43. Lai, E. (1993b). Effect of extensive reading on English learning in Hong Kong.

CUHK Education Journal, 21(1), 23-36.

44. Lai, F. (1993). Effect of extensive readind on English learning in Hong Kong. CUHK

Education Journal, 21(1), 23-26.

45. Lee, S., & Hsu, Y. (2009). Determining the crucial characteristics of extensive
reading programs: The impact of extensive reading on EFL writing. The International

Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(1), 12-20.

46. Lee, S., & Krashen, S. (1996). Free voluntary reading and writing competence in
Taiwanese high school students. Perceptual and Motor Skill, 83(2), 687-690.

</div>
(15)<div class='page_container' data-page=15>

48. Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design. 
Routledge.

49. Maley, A. (2009, 12 16). Creative writing for language learners and teachers. 
Retrieved 12 16, 2009, from

50. Mason, B. (2004). The effect of adding supplementary writing to an extensive reading
program. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 2-16.

51. Masuhara, H., Kimura, T., Fukada, A., & Takeuchi, M. (1996). Strategy training
or/and extensive reading? In T. Hickey, & J. William, Language, education, and

society in a changing word (pp. 263-274). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

52. Mathewson, G. (n.d.). Model of attitude influence upon reading and learning to read.
In R. Ruddell, & N. Unrau, Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.) (pp. 
1431-1461). Neward, DE: International Reading Association.

53. Matsumura, M. (1987). Eigo no Riidingu [English Reading] (2nd ed.). Tokyo: 
Taishukan Shoten.

54. May, S. (2007). Doing creative writing. New York: Routledge.

55. Mehta, P., Foorman, B., Branum - Martin, L., & Taylor, W. (2005). Literacy as a
unidimensional multilevel construct: Validation, sources of influence, and
implications in a longitudinal study in grades 1 to 4. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 
85-116.

56. Meng, F. (2009). Developing students' reading ability through extensive reading.

English Language Teaching, 2(2), 132 - 137.

57. Mermelstein, A. (2015). Imrpoving EFL learners' writing through enhance extensive
reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 27(2), 182-198.

58. Muhamad, L. A., Lubna, S., Sadaf, M., & Sadia, A. (2017). Teaching English through
extensive reading and its impact upon the writing proficiency skills of ESL learners.

International Journal of English Research, 3(3), 120 - 124.

59. Murat, H. (2005). Teaching english through literature. Journal of language and

linguistic, 1(1), 53-66.

</div>
(16)<div class='page_container' data-page=16>

61. Murphy, R. (2010). Students' progress and attitudes in an extensive reading class. In
R. Reinelt, The new decade and (2nd) FL learning: The initial phase (Ed ed., pp. 
88-99). Japan: Rudolf Reinelt Researche Laboratory.

62. Murray, D. (1978). Internal revision: A process of discovery. In C.R.Cooper , & L.
Odell (Eds), Research on composing (pp. 85-103). Urbana, IL: National Council of

Teachers of English.

63. Nation, I., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language Curiculum Design. New York: 
Routledge.

64. Nation, P. (1997). The language learning benefits of extensive reading. The Language

Teacher, 21(5), 13-16.

65. Nelson, N., & Van Meter, A. (2007). Measuring written language ability in narrative
samples. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23, 287-309.

66. Nguyen, P. N. T. (2012). Second language writing and literary reading in university. 
Amsterdam: Universiteit Van Amsterdam.

67. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. United 
Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

68. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston, Mass: Heinle & 
Heinle.

69. Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies
and practices in the Asia - Pacific Region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589-613.

70. Park, J. (2015). Integrating reading and writing through extensive reading. ELT

Journal, 70(3), 287 - 295.

71. Paulson, & Paulson, E. (2006). Self-selected reading for enjoyment as a college
development reading approach. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 36(2),

51-58.

72. Phan, L. (2011). The writing and culture nexus: Writers' comparisons of Vietnameses
and English academic writing. In L.H.Phan, & B. (. Baurain, Voice, identities,

negociations, and conflicts: Writing academic English cross cultures (pp. 23-40).

Bingley: Emerald.

</div>
(17)<div class='page_container' data-page=17>

74. Puranik, C., Lombardino, L., & Altmann, L. (2008). Assessing the microstructure of
written language using a retelling paradigm. American Journal of Speech - Language

Pathology, 17, 102-120.

75. Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. New York: 
Cambridge University Press.

76. Robb, T., & Susser, B. (1989). Extensive reading vs. skills building in an EFL
context. Reading in a Foreign Language, 5, 239-251.

77. Sanders, T., & Schilperoord, J. (2006). Text structure as a window on the cognition
of writing: How text analysis provides insights in writing products and writing
processes. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald, Handbook of writing research 
(pp. 386-402). New York, Guilford.

78. Smith, M. (1990). Reading habits and attitudes of adults at different levels of
education and occupation. Reading Research and Instruction, 30(1), 50-58.

79. Smith, R. (1994). Understanding reading (5th ed.). Hillsdale: NJ: Erlbaum.

80. Taguchi, E., Takayasu-Maas, M., & Gorsuch, G. (2004). Developing reading fluency
in EFL: How assisted repeated reading and extensive reading affect fluency
development. Reading in a Foreign Language, 16, 70-96.

81. Tien, C. (2015). A large - scale study on extensive reading program for non - English
majors: Factors and attitudes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English

Literature , 4(4), 46-54.

82. Tsang, W. (1996). Comparing the effects of reading and writing in writing
performance. Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 627-642.

83. Tudor, I., & Hafiz, F. (1989). Extensive reading as a means of input to L2 learning.

Journal of Research in Reading, 12, 164-78.

84. Yamashita, J. (2007). The relationship of reading attitudes between L1 and L2: An
investigation of adult EFL learners in Japan. TESOL QUARTERLY, 41(1), 81-105. 
85. Yasemin, K. (2012). Incorporating short stories in english language classes. Navitas

- ROYAL (Research for Youth and Language), 6(2), 110- 125.

86. Yilmaz, A. (2015). Short stories via computers in efl classroom: An emprirical study
for reading and wrting skill. ReadingMatrix, 15(1), 41-53.

</div>
(18)<div class='page_container' data-page=18>

</div>