Applying Scaffolding Types in Reading Classes: Different Experimental Situations
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه زبان و ترجمه
Noushin Asadipiran
1
(
Department of Languages and Literature, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran
)
Shahram Afraz
2
(
Department of English Language, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran
)
Seyyed Ayatollah Razmjoo
3
(
Department of language and Linguistic, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
)
کلید واژه: Reading Ability, reading strategy, Scaffolding types,
چکیده مقاله :
The present mixed-method research has been prepared to probate scaffolding types on EFL learners’ reading ability and reading strategy. To achieve this end, a multiphase design was implemented and the researchers recruited a total number of 80 intermediate students from Azad University of Bandar Abbas in Iran. The sample was divided into four groups as soft scaffolding group, hard scaffolding group, reciprocal scaffolding group, and virtual scaffolding group. The participants of these groups sat for a pretest of reading comprehension, a posttest of reading comprehension, along a test of reading strategies. In addition, the students’ self-reports and portfolios and the researchers’ observations and notes through filling out the checklists were used. Considering the students’ reading ability development, the results indicated that complex scaffolding enjoyed the highest mean on the posttest of reading. Regarding reading strategies, the findings highlighted that different scaffolding treatments had effects on the development of global, problem solving, and supporting reading strategies among the learners. The hard-scaffolding group had the highest use of reading strategies followed by the virtual scaffolding group. The reciprocal and soft scaffolding groups similarly had less use of reading strategies.
تحقیق ترکیبی حاضر برای اثبات انواع داربست در زبان آموزان زبان انگلیسی تهیه شده است.توانایی خواندن و استراتژی خواندن برای دستیابی به این هدف، یک طرح چند فازی اجرا شد وپژوهشگران در مجموع 80 نفر از دانشجویان مقطع متوسطه دانشگاه آزاد بندرعباس را انتخاب کردنددر ایران. نمونه به چهار گروه داربست نرم، گروه داربست سخت تقسیم شد..گروه داربست متقابل و گروه داربست مجازی. شرکت کنندگان این گروه ها یک نشستندپیش آزمون درک مطلب، پس آزمون درک مطلب، همراه با آزمون راهبردهای خواندن.علاوه بر این، خود گزارش‌ها و نمونه کارها و مشاهدات و یادداشت‌های محققین از طریقبرای تکمیل چک لیست ها استفاده شد. با توجه به رشد توانایی خواندن دانش آموزان، نتایجنشان داد که داربست های پیچیده بالاترین میانگین را در پس آزمون خواندن داشتند. با توجهبا مطالعه راهبردهای مطالعه، یافته‌ها نشان داد که درمان‌های مختلف داربست تأثیراتی بر روی آن دارد.توسعه راهبردهای جهانی، حل مسئله و حمایت از خواندن در میان فراگیران. درگروه داربست سخت بیشترین استفاده را از راهبردهای خواندن داشتند و سپس داربست مجازیگروه گروه های داربست متقابل و نرم به طور مشابه استفاده کمتری از راهبردهای خواندن داشتند.
Abugohar, M. A., Salheen, D. A. A., Yassin, B., Saed, H. A., & Yunus, K. (2020). Scaffolding oral fluency mediating the target language in ELT to tertiary-level students: A follow-up scheme. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 331-346.
Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. (2010). Determining and describing reading strategies: Internet and traditional forms of reading (H. S. Waters & W. Schneider Eds.). New York: Guilford Press.
Afflerbach, P., Hurt, M., & Cho, B. Y. (2020). Reading comprehension strategy instruction (D. L. Dinsmore, L. K. Fryer, & M. M. Parkinson Eds. Handbook of strategies and strategic processing ed.). London: Routlege.
Amro, F., & Dabbagh, N. (2020). Using primary language support in a computer-based intervention to scaffold second language learners. Journal of Online Learning Research, 6(1), 57-76.
Anderson, K. L. (2019). Explicit instruction for word solving: Scaffolding developing readers’ use of code-based and meaning-based strategies. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 63(2), 175-183.
Aro, M., & Lyytinen, H. (2016). Training reading skills in Finnish: from reading acquisition to fluency and comprehension (P. Raymond Ed. Reading fluency ed.). London: Springer International Publishing.
Attarzadeh, M. (2011). The effect of scaffolding on reading comprehension of various text modes on Iranian EFL learners with different proficiency levels. Social Science and Humanities, 4(2), 1-27.
Auer, N. (2016). Scaffolding foreign language learners’ reading strategies using tablet computers at two secondary schools in Denmark. (Doctoral dissertation). Copenhagen, Denmark.
Baker, F. S. (2015). Emerging realities of text-to-speech software for Nonnative-English-speaking community college students in the freshman year. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 39(5), 423-441.
Brevik, L. M. (2019). Explicit reading strategy instruction or daily use of strategies? Studying the teaching of reading comprehension through naturalistic classroom observation in English L2. Reading and writing, 32(9), 281-310.
Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education (pp. 453-482). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Buslon, J. B., & Alieto, E. O. (2019). Lexical inferencing strategies and reading comprehension in English: A case of ESL third graders. Online Submission, 22(1), 72-94.
Chu, S. K. W., Tse, S. K., Loh, E. K. Y., & Chow, K. (2011). Collaborative inquiry project-based learning: Effects on reading ability and interests. Library & Information Science Research, 33(3), 236-243.
Deshpande, S. K. (2016). Activating background knowledge: An effective strategy to develop reading comprehension skills. JELTL (Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics), 1(3), 27-32.
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gilakjani, A. P. (2012). The significant role of multimedia in motivating EFL learners’ interest in English language learning. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science (IJMECS), 4(4), 57-66.
Graves, M. F., & Graves, B. B. (2003). Scaffolding reading experiences: Designs for student success. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Hattan, C., & Alexander, P. (2018). Scaffolding reading comprehension for competent readers. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 67(1), 296-309.
Holton, D., & Clarke, D. (2006). Scaffolding and metacognition. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(2), 127-143.
Kargar, A. A. (2013). Investigating the effect of scaffolded extensive reading as an anxiety reducing strategy in an Iranian EFL context. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 1(1), 35-44.
Khodamoradi, A., Iravani, H., & Jafarigohar, M. (2013). The effect of teacher’s scaffolding and peers’ collaborative dialogue on the acquisition of English tenses in the zone of proximal development: A sociocultural perspective. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 2(2), 336-346.
Kim, J., & Craig, D. A. (2012). Validation of a video-conferenced speaking test. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(3), 257-275.
Kim, Y., Hamilton, E. R., Zheng, J., & Baylor, A. L. (2006). Scaffolding learner motivation through a virtual peer. International Society of the Learning Sciences: In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on learning sciences 335-341.
Kozulin, A. (2002). Sociocultural theory and the mediated learning experience. School Psychology International, 6(2), 125-136.
Mackey, A., & Sachs, R. (2012). Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning, 62(3), 704-740.
McGee, L. M., & Nelson, K. S. (2013). Scaffolding children’s reading during guided reading in intervention programs. In School-Based Interventions For Struggling Readers, K-8: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Meneses, A., Escobar, J. P., & Véliz, S. (2018). The effects of multimodal texts on science reading comprehension in Chilean fifth-graders: text scaffolding and comprehension skills. International Journal of Science Education, 40(18), 2226-2244.
Mirahmadi, S. H., & Alavi, S. M. (2016). The role of traditional and virtual scaffolding in developing speaking ability of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6(2), 43-56.
Ness, M. K. (2016). Reading comprehension strategies in secondary content area classrooms: Teacher use of and attitudes towards reading comprehension instruction. Reading Horizons (Online), 55(1), 58-67.
Ockey, G. J., Koyama, D., Setoguchi, E., & Sun, A. (2015). The extent to which TOEFL IBT speaking scores are associated with performance on oral language tasks and oral ability components for Japanese university students. Language Testing, 32(1), 39-62.
Poorahmadi, M. (2009). The effect of employing scaffolding strategies and classroom tasks in teaching reading comprehension. Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Literature, 1(3), 87-106.
Rahimi, A., & Tahmasebi, S. (2011). Mediating Iranian EFL learners: Private speech and scaffolding in reading comprehension. (LiBRI) Linguistic and Literary Broad Research and Innovation, 1(2), 56-71.
Reynolds, D., & Daniel, S. (2018). Toward contingency in scaffolding reading comprehension: Next steps for research. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(3), 367-373.
Riazi, M., & Rezaii, M. (2011). Teacher-and peer-scaffolding behaviors: Effects on EFL students’ writing improvement. In CLESOL 2010: Proceedings of the 12th National Conference for Community Languages and ESOL, 55-63.
Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., & Zenotz, V. (2018). Learning strategies in CLIL classrooms: how does strategy instruction affect reading competence over time? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 319-331.
Sato, M. (2014). Exploring the construct of interactional oral fluency: Second language acquisition and language testing approaches. System, 45, 79-91.
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.
Smit, N., Van de Grift, W., De Bot, K., & Jansen, E. (2017). A classroom observation tool for scaffolding reading comprehension. System, 65, 117-129.
Taguchi, E., Gorsuch, G., Lems, K., & Rosszell, R. (2016). Scaffolding in L2 reading: How repetition and an auditory model help readers. Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(1), 1-12.
Taherkhani, R., & Mahmoodi, M. H. (2015). The effect of collaborative peer-and teacher-scaffolding on Iranian EFL learners’ intentional and incidental grammar learning. International Journal of Language and Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 20-27.
Tajeddin, Z., & Tabatabaei, S. (2016). Concept mapping as a reading strategy: does it scaffold comprehension and recall. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 16(1), 194-208.
Tsai, Y., Ernst, C., & Talley, P. C. (2010). L1 and L2 strategy use in reading comprehension of Chinese EFL readers. Reading Psychology, 31(1), 1-29.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wibowo, Y., Syafrizal, S., & Syafryadin, S. (2020). An analysis of English teachers’ strategies in teaching reading Comprehension. JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), 4(1), 20-27.
Yelland, N., & Masters, J. (2007). Rethinking scaffolding in the information age. Computers & Education, 48(3), 362-382.
