INTRODUCTION
Background of the study
Reading is regarded as one of the most crucial skills for English learners since it is the primary means for gaining access to a wide range of information Carrell
Reading is highlighted as the most influential macro skill for student success, particularly for ESL and EFL learners It plays a crucial role not only as a standalone language skill but also as a vital source of input that enhances the development of speaking, writing, and listening skills Improved reading abilities enable ESL and EFL students to excel academically, even in non-native English environments.
Reading is a complex process that poses challenges even for native English speakers, particularly with long academic texts in higher education Consequently, reading in a second language can be even more demanding A study by Kindler (2002) found that only 18.7% of ESL students meet state standards in English reading comprehension, highlighting their ongoing struggles despite increased effort Factors contributing to these difficulties include reading fluency, vocabulary knowledge, reading strategies, and working memory (Johnston & Kirby, 2006; Macaruso & Shankweiler, 2010) However, a significant issue may stem from insufficient knowledge of effective reading strategies (Ouellettee & Beers, 2010) Reading strategies are intentional techniques employed by readers to enhance their understanding of texts (Paris, Wasik, & Turner, 1991).
Effective use of reading strategies enables students to navigate complex texts with greater ease Consequently, consistent exposure to diverse reading techniques is essential for students to develop and master this important skill.
Research by Nunan (1991) indicates that successful readers are aware of the effective strategies they employ, while Cohen (1998) highlights that the use of reading strategies is a key factor distinguishing successful learners from their less successful counterparts Successful readers selectively identify important information rather than reading mechanically, utilizing strategies more frequently and effectively In contrast, less successful readers often lack a true understanding of reading strategies, resorting to passive translation without knowing how to tackle difficulties in complex texts However, previous studies suggest that ineffective readers can learn these strategies (Carrell, Pharis, & Liberto, 1989), and with well-prepared lesson plans, English teachers can significantly enhance their reading comprehension By understanding the differences between successful and less successful readers, educators can implement pedagogical strategies that help less successful readers become more strategic in their reading approach.
Statement of the problem
At Kien Giang University, the sole institution of higher education in Kien Giang province, reading proficiency is considered the most crucial skill for students, significantly impacting their academic success To improve their reading abilities and understand specialized knowledge, students must engage with a diverse array of English textbooks and materials.
Two months into my university role, I've yet to officially teach classes, but my colleagues have invited me to observe their sessions, providing valuable insights for my future teaching I've noticed that students often become bored and demotivated while reading academic texts, heavily relying on translation and struggling with comprehension Despite their efforts, many students feel they cannot complete reading exercises successfully Reflecting on my own experiences as both a student and a teacher, I recognize the challenges they face Academic reading was once a significant hurdle for me, as I struggled to meet comprehension requirements and often failed to answer questions correctly, unlike my more successful peers My breakthrough came when I understood the importance of reading strategies, which are crucial for L2 learners Research by Carrell et al (1989) highlights that L2 readers can enhance their comprehension by employing effective reading strategies Consequently, I began focusing on techniques like scanning, skimming, and grasping the main ideas, both in academic settings and for leisure reading.
Many students at Kien Giang University struggle with mastering reading skills, prompting curiosity about their thought processes during reading It raises the question of whether they understand the importance of reading strategy instructions for comprehension and if they apply the reading strategies learned in class.
To date, there have been no studies at Kien Giang University examining the effectiveness of reading strategies on EFL learners or identifying the strategies most commonly used by students during class This highlights the need for empirical research to contribute to existing literature and provide new insights into second language reading strategies utilized by Vietnamese ESL learners, particularly at Kien Giang University This gap in research motivates the current study, which aims to propose pedagogical implications based on the findings to enhance students' reading proficiency and academic success at the university.
Research aims
This research investigates the reading strategies employed by non-English majors at Kien Giang University during reading comprehension tests and explores the correlation between these strategies and students' reading performance Additionally, it analyzes the differences in reading strategies between successful and less successful students The findings aim to inform pedagogical adjustments that could enhance the teaching and learning of English reading among Vietnamese non-English major students at the university.
Research questions
1) What kinds of English reading strategies are often used by Vietnamese non-English major students at Kien Giang University when taking a reading test?
2) What is the relationship between students’ use of reading strategies and their English reading performance?
3) What are the differences in reading strategy use between successful students and less successful students?
Significance of the study
This study aims to significantly enhance the understanding of reading strategies among ESL learners at Kien Giang University, addressing the gap in existing research By examining how full-time students utilize reading strategies for academic materials, the findings will contribute valuable insights and establish a theoretical framework for future research in Vietnam and specifically at Kien Giang University.
This study aims to assess the current state of reading comprehension at Kien Giang University, providing valuable insights for lecturers to better understand their students' challenges and evaluate their teaching methods By offering effective pedagogical recommendations, the research seeks to enhance the teaching and learning of reading comprehension in the future Additionally, the findings will help students recognize the crucial importance of reading strategies in fostering positive reading habits.
Definition of terms
Reading: is relavant to reading comprehension
Reading strategies: are actions or techniques consciously performed by readers for the purpose of resolving their problems emerging while reading as well as overcoming their comprehension breakdowns
Reading performance: measures learners’ capacity to understand, use and reflect on reading texts in order to achieve goals (OECD, 2015)
Successful readers: are good comprehenders (Snow et al, 1998 cited in
Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002) For the purpose of this study, successful readers are those who got above 7 in reading comprehension test
Less successful readers: have inadequate metacognitive knowledge of reading and fail to control their reading process (Paris & Winograd, 1990 cited in Mokhtari
& Reichard, 2002) For the purpose of this study, less successful readers are those who got below 5.5 in reading comprehension test.
Thesis structure
The research is organized into five chapters: Chapter 1 provides an overview of the background, problem statement, and study objectives; Chapter 2 offers a critical literature review relevant to the thesis; Chapter 3 details the research design and methodology; Chapter 4 discusses the results in relation to the research questions; and Chapter 5 concludes by summarizing key findings and suggesting implications for future studies on the topic.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The theory of reading
Understanding the theory of reading is crucial before exploring reading strategies This section begins with a definition of reading, followed by an overview of three key models: bottom-up, top-down, and interactive reading approaches.
Reading is essential for mastering a second language, yet its true nature is often misunderstood and difficult to define.
Reading is fundamentally understood as the process of decoding language symbols within a text Renowned structural linguists Bloomfield and Fries emphasize that the ability to identify these symbols is essential for readers Consequently, this perspective leads many to perceive reading as a basic skill, often underestimating its significance in the broader context of language learning.
In the 1960s, research in reading highlighted that mere word recognition fails to fulfill the demands of effective reading skills in language learning Scholars argued that a student’s ability to read aloud without grasping the essential meaning is ultimately futile Consequently, many definitions of reading from this era emphasize the significance of comprehension Anderson (1999) characterizes reading as an active process of meaning construction, where the reader engages interactively with the text.
Reading, as defined by Ur (2012), encompasses not just the act of decoding language symbols but also involves understanding and comprehension This broader definition emphasizes the importance of reading for meaning, highlighting that effective reading goes beyond mere recognition of words to include the ability to grasp and interpret content.
The review of reading history identifies two types of reading: the first focuses on word identification, spelling, and pronunciation without regard to content, while the second involves a deeper examination of the text for understanding its meaning This study emphasizes the importance of reading comprehension, and to enhance our understanding of the reading process, three models of reading comprehension will be explored in the following section.
Over the past four decades, significant attention has been directed towards understanding the reading process and effective teaching methods for this essential skill Although numerous reading models have been introduced, researchers generally categorize them into three primary groups: bottom-up, top-down, and interactive approaches.
The bottom-up reading model emphasizes the importance of analyzing the smallest units of text, such as letters and letter combinations, before understanding the overall meaning According to Grade (2009), readers engage in a mechanical process that builds textual meaning from individual letters and words to larger structures like phrases and clauses Consequently, word recognition is a vital component of this model, highlighting its critical role in the reading process.
(2015) claims that the rapid recognition skill from phonemes to full sentences is of great significance during the bottom-up processing Nunan (1991) illustrated this process in the following manner:
Nunan’s illustration highlights an overemphasis on decoding letters and words, leading to criticism of this model as a lower-level reading process It neglects higher-order reading skills, such as making inferences, resulting in a relatively passive role for readers in information reception Alderson (2000) argues that this approach underestimates the importance of readers' background knowledge and contextual information Additionally, Lynch and Hudson (1991) note that this model can hinder readers' ability to acquire larger language units effectively.
The top-down processing model emphasizes the significance of prior knowledge that readers utilize when engaging with a text Goodman (1967) characterizes reading as "a psycholinguistic guessing game," suggesting that readers make predictions about a text's meaning by leveraging their background knowledge alongside textual information Nunan (1991) further illustrates this concept, highlighting the interactive nature of reading comprehension.
The reading process begins with readers utilizing their past experiences and background knowledge to predict the meaning of the text They then identify which parts of the text to read in order to confirm these predictions Researchers like Nunan (1991) and Anderson (2000) highlight the importance of the reader as an active constructor of meaning, rather than a passive decoder of text Comprehension arises not from recognizing every letter and word, as suggested by the bottom-up model, but from the ability to select relevant cues to validate predictions Proponents of the top-down model argue that it enhances reading comprehension, as readers can understand the text's meaning even without knowing every word (Mohammad & Azizollah, 2014).
The top-down model presents certain limitations, particularly for readers lacking sufficient background knowledge, as it may hinder their ability to grasp the text's meaning According to Samuel and Kamil (1988), a key drawback is that readers without adequate prior knowledge struggle to make informed guesses Additionally, their study highlights the time factor, noting that even proficient readers require more time to make predictions compared to simply decoding the words.
Past experiences, language intuitions, and experiences
Meaning Sound, pronunciation if necessary
Each reading model has its limitations, and relying too heavily on one can create significant challenges for language learners To address these issues, Rumelhart (as cited in Redondo, 1997) introduces the interactive model of reading, which highlights the interplay between the information in the text and the reader's prior knowledge This model posits that meaning arises from the interaction between the reader and the text, as readers navigate between bottom-up and top-down processes, allowing higher-level information to engage with lower-level details Stanovich (1980) suggests that strengths in one area of knowledge can compensate for weaknesses in another within this interactive framework Therefore, readers should adopt both reading models as complementary strategies to enhance their reading comprehension.
Reading models are essential for understanding the reading process, as highlighted by Godman (1976), who emphasizes their role in explaining and predicting reading behavior These models detail the stages of reading, providing a theoretical foundation for teaching and learning Carrell et al (1989) note that most reading strategies stem from these theoretical frameworks, making it crucial to examine reading comprehension models before defining and classifying reading strategies In this paper, the interactive model will be utilized to analyze the reading comprehension process and the strategies employed by students at Kien Giang University Researchers, including McDonough & Shaw (2003), agree that the interactive model effectively captures the complexities of how reading occurs in a reader's mind, underscoring that both processes are vital for successful reading comprehension.
Reading strategies
This section aims to provide a broad picture of reading strategies Firstly, the definition of reading strategies is clarified The second part is a review of various classification of reading strategies
Among the four key factors influencing reading performance—reader, text, strategies, and goal—King (as cited in Karami, 2008) highlights strategies as the most crucial He argues that appropriate reading strategies significantly enhance students' outcomes by compensating for breakdowns in comprehension This perspective is echoed by researchers like Brown (2001), who emphasizes the importance of developing effective comprehension strategies, and Brantmeier (2002), Pani (2004), and Afflerbach et al (2008) Properly applied reading strategies can help learners overcome comprehension challenges, underscoring their vital role in the reading process.
Reading strategies are defined as conscious processes that active learners use to address comprehension failures (Garner, 1987) These strategies involve deliberate mental activities that help readers understand the text (Pani, 2004) Afflerbach et al (2008) clarify the distinction between "reading strategies" and "reading skills," noting that while strategies are intentional actions taken to decode text and construct meaning, skills operate automatically without conscious control Ultimately, reading strategies are behaviors that readers can consciously manage to enhance their comprehension.
Reading strategies are essential techniques that readers consciously employ to improve their reading performance and address comprehension challenges Researchers agree that these deliberate actions are crucial for effectively resolving difficulties encountered during reading.
Research on L2 reading strategies reveals a lack of consensus among scholars regarding their classification Some studies categorize these strategies into two or three main types (Block, 1986; Mokhtari & Reichard, 2000; Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001), while others expand the classification to four or more categories (Oxford, 1990; Alderson, 2000) According to Alkhaleefah (2016), variations in group categorization arise from differing theoretical frameworks and criteria among researchers A review of existing literature indicates that time and functions are two primary criteria frequently used to organize reading strategies into sub-categories.
Reading strategies can be divided into three categories: pre-reading, during reading, and post-reading strategies Pre-reading strategies, like predicting the topic from the title or headings, prepare readers by activating their background knowledge During reading strategies address comprehension issues, with techniques such as skimming for general information and scanning for specific details Finally, post-reading strategies involve evaluation, enabling readers to draw conclusions and make judgments, including assessing the text's purpose and confirming predictions.
Researchers categorize reading strategies based on their functions, primarily focusing on two main types: metacognitive strategies for monitoring understanding and cognitive strategies for constructing meaning (Koda, 2005) O’Malley and Chamot (1990) further classify these strategies into three groups: metacognitive, cognitive, and social/affective Metacognitive strategies involve higher-order skills for regulating and evaluating the learning process, including planning, comprehension monitoring, and self-evaluation Cognitive strategies, on the other hand, involve tactics like repetition, translation, and grouping that directly interact with information to enhance learning and address comprehension challenges Lastly, social/affective strategies emphasize the importance of communication and interaction with others in the learning process.
Strategies in Presslely and Afflerbach (1995)’s study are gathered into three main groups: identifying strategies, monitoring strategies, and evaluating strategies
In their study, strategies that aid readers in constructing meaning from texts are identified as cognitive techniques, which involve engaging directly with the content through methods like identifying related words, analyzing information, and utilizing context clues Additionally, monitoring and evaluating strategies are categorized as metacognitive processes; monitoring strategies help readers assess their comprehension by observing general characteristics of the text, while evaluating strategies allow them to reflect on and assess their reading experience.
Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001) categorize reading strategies into three main groups: metacognitive, cognitive, and support reading strategies, based on the MARSI framework by Mokhtari & Reichard (2000) Metacognitive reading strategies involve planned actions that help readers monitor their understanding, such as setting a purpose, previewing text structure, and predicting meaning This aligns with Phakiti's (2003) view of metacognitive strategies as goal-directed mental processes for tackling cognitive tasks In contrast, cognitive reading strategies are more directly linked to specific learning tasks, serving as "localized techniques" that readers employ when they encounter difficulties in comprehending the text.
Support strategies, as identified by Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001), are essential techniques that enhance reading comprehension, such as utilizing dictionaries Although this category was not included in earlier reading classifications by O'Malley and Chamot (1990) or Oxford (1990), its significant contribution to the reading learning process is undeniable.
This study adopts the classification scheme developed by Sheorey and Mokhtari, which offers a more detailed framework for reading strategies compared to other taxonomies Their framework categorizes strategies into three distinct groups: metacognitive strategies (10 items), cognitive strategies (12 items), and support strategies (6 items) Barnet (1988) highlights that a clear categorization of reading strategies enhances research on the link between these strategies and reading comprehension Unlike other taxonomies, such as those by Pressley and Afflerbach, which are broad enough to encompass various skills, Sheorey and Mokhtari's framework specifically focuses on reading skills, making it particularly suitable for this study.
Successful and less successful students
Since the late 1970s, the focus in reading education has shifted from assessing the final outcomes, like exam scores, to understanding the reading process itself ESL researchers emphasize exploring the experiences readers go through while reading There is a consensus among educators that reading strategies can be taught, and by analyzing the techniques proficient readers employ, teachers can create effective reading programs This approach ultimately aids individuals looking to enhance their reading skills.
Successful readers possess strong comprehension skills and actively engage in the meaning-making process while effectively monitoring their understanding In contrast, less successful or unskilled readers lack sufficient metacognitive knowledge, which hinders their ability to manage their reading process effectively.
Research on second language (L2) reading highlights significant qualitative differences between proficient and less proficient readers High-scoring IELTS candidates demonstrate greater awareness of metacognitive strategies, utilizing planning and monitoring techniques more effectively than their lower-scoring counterparts Effective readers set specific goals and take time to understand the text's structure through headings and visuals, while poor readers often rush into reading without considering the organization Studies indicate that proficient students exhibit more energy, concentration, and flexibility in their reading strategies, managing their time wisely compared to less successful peers Furthermore, successful readers are adept at identifying comprehension issues and applying appropriate strategies to address them, whereas less able readers struggle to implement effective strategies during comprehension breakdowns Additionally, high-level readers frequently use context clues to connect new information with their existing knowledge, while low-level readers tend to rely on lexical-level clues, such as translation or dictionary use, when faced with challenging texts.
Contrary to previous findings, several studies indicate that high and low Malaysian ESL readers employ similar reading strategies Research by Noli et al (2013) revealed no significant differences in the overall reading strategies used by both groups, as they frequently utilized specific strategies to comprehend texts Likewise, Kletzien (cited in Jie & Chun, 2015) observed that both proficient and less-proficient readers applied the same strategies on simpler passages However, when faced with more challenging texts, proficient readers demonstrated a greater ability to employ effective reading strategies compared to their less-skilled peers Ultimately, it appears that while successful readers may utilize the same or different strategies, strategic readers possess the flexibility to effectively navigate demanding reading materials.
Previous related studies
Over the past few decades, extensive research has provided educators and researchers with a thorough understanding of reading strategies While these studies varied in their settings, participants, and methodologies, they predominantly focused on two key areas: the reading strategies used by ESL and EFL learners and the correlation between the use of these strategies and reading performance This article will review some empirical research related to these topics.
2.4.1 Studies on reading strategies used by ESL or EFL leaners
A review of second language reading research highlights the importance of cognitive reading strategies, as noted by Ozek & Civelek (2006), who utilized both a questionnaire and Think-Aloud Protocol (TAP) to investigate the strategies employed by first and fourth-year students at Dicle University In the study, 185 students completed a self-report questionnaire, while only 23 participated in the TAP The questionnaire results indicated significant differences in the use of cognitive reading strategies among students, whereas the TAP analysis revealed that the students predominantly relied on a single strategy.
In the pre-reading phase, participants effectively related the title to the text content, while during the while-reading phase, they primarily employed the strategy of using the dictionary sparingly Notably, no post-reading strategies were utilized by the participants In a study by Asmara (2017), which adapted a questionnaire from Ozek & Civelek, the utilization of cognitive reading strategies among 30 Senior High school students in Rancaekek, Indonesia, was analyzed The findings indicated that only four cognitive reading strategies were reported as regularly used by more than half of the respondents, with "having a mental picture of the events in the text" being the most frequently employed strategy.
Metacognitive reading strategies have garnered significant interest among researchers, as evidenced by Vianty's (2007) study on Indonesian students This research focused on the use of analytic and pragmatic reading strategies in both English and Bahasa Indonesia A total of 101 students from the English Study Program at Sriwijaya University participated by completing two versions of a metacognitive reading strategies questionnaire and undertaking reading tests in both languages The findings indicated that students frequently employed analytic reading strategies when reading in their native language, while they favored pragmatic reading strategies for tasks in English.
Recent studies have examined gender differences in reading strategy use, revealing notable distinctions between males and females Li (2010) conducted research at a Senior Middle School in China, surveying 196 students, and found that females employed reading strategies more frequently than males across all categories Similarly, Lee (2012) investigated reading strategy usage among 159 Taiwanese college freshmen, utilizing a 39-item questionnaire The findings indicated significant differences, with male learners favoring memory, cognitive, and compensation strategies, while females demonstrated a higher tendency to use meta-cognitive and social-affective strategies.
In their 2011 study, Thao & Lap investigated the metacognitive reading strategies employed by EFL Vietnamese learners, focusing on a sample of eighty-four grade 11 students from a remote area in the Mekong Delta Data was gathered through questionnaires, reading comprehension tests, and interviews The findings revealed that learners predominantly utilized problem-solving strategies, while global and support strategies were used less frequently Additionally, the interviews highlighted challenges faced by learners in applying metacognitive strategies, including a lack of knowledge regarding cognition, difficulties in regulating cognition, and insufficient intrinsic motivation.
The online learning environment is increasingly becoming the norm for both teachers and students, highlighting the need for research on online reading strategies A study by Leon & Tarrayo (2014) examined the strategies used by 100 Filipino high school students when reading online materials Through the Online Survey of Reading Strategies, data revealed that students employed various approaches to online reading texts Among the three categories of strategies, cognitive strategies were utilized the most, followed by metacognitive reading strategies and support strategies.
2.4.2 Studies on the relationship between reading strategies use and reading comprehension performance
Numerous empirical studies have investigated the connection between the use of reading strategies and reading comprehension performance While many researchers recognize the significant impact of reading strategies on enhancing comprehension, findings on the relationship between these two elements have varied (Li & Kaur, 2014).
One of the earliest pieces of research on the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use and EFL reading performance was studied by Phakiti
A study conducted in 2003 with 384 Thai students revealed that the use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies significantly enhanced reading test performance among EFL learners After completing a reading comprehension achievement test, participants provided insights through a questionnaire, and eight individuals (four successful and four unsuccessful) were interviewed for deeper understanding This finding aligns with Naeini & Razaei’s (2015) research, which examined the relationship between reading strategy use and reading comprehension achievement among 190 Iranian intermediate EFL learners Their results confirmed a strong correlation between the application of reading strategies and improved reading comprehension performance.
In a study conducted by Hung & Thao (2014) in Vietnam, the impact of metacognitive reading strategies on EFL reading comprehension was examined with 64 learners from Can Tho University Over six weeks, the control group engaged in standard coursebook activities, while the experimental group received targeted instruction in metacognitive strategies Results from the reading post-test indicated that the experimental group showed greater improvement compared to the control group, and a subsequent post-questionnaire confirmed that the experimental group was more effective in consciously applying metacognitive strategies.
Several studies have challenged the positive correlation between reading strategy use and reading test performance Li & Kaur (2014) conducted research involving 290 Chinese students, revealing no significant link between reading strategies and comprehension test results Similarly, Sari (2016) studied 150 Indonesian pre-service teachers using a cognitive and metacognitive reading strategy questionnaire alongside a reading test, concluding that there was no significant relationship between the use of these strategies and reading comprehension performance.
A summary of previous studies was chronologically presented in table 2.1 below:
Table 2.1 A summary of previous studies
A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance
-RS positively affected reading test performance
A study on the use of cognitive RS by ELT students
-RS employed in pre-and while reading
-None of post RS were used
The comparision of students’use of metacognitive RS between reading in Bahasa Indonesia and in English
-Analytic RS used more when reading in Bahasa -Pragmatic RS employed more when reading in English
A study of English RS used by senior middle school students
-Females used more RS than males in each individual category and combined sub- categories
Leaners’ metacognitive strategy use and reading comprehension: insights from a Vietnamese context
-Problem-solving strategies most often used
-support strategies least often used
A study of the selection of RS among genders by EFL college students
Questionnaire -Males prefered memory, cognitive, compensation strategies -Females prefered meta-cognitive and social affective
Online reading strategies of students in a Philippine public high school
Questionnaire -Problem-solving strategies most often used followed by global reading and support reading strategies
Learners’ reading comprehension affected via Metacognitive strategy instruction
Students from Foreign Language Center/
-Experimantal group made more progress than control group
Textbook RS and its relationship to reading test performance
-No significant relationship between students’ overall RS use and their general reading test performance
Examining and dealing with the issue of reading strategy use by Iranian EFL leaners
-A strong correlation between reading strategy use and reading proficiency scores
Cognitive and metacognitive RS use and reading comprehension performance of
Indonesian EFL Pre- service teachers
-No relationship was found between application of cognitive and metacognitive RS and reading performance
RS used in reading comprehension
RS used by more than half of the participants
From the above mentioned studies, it is revealed that empirical research of reading strategies has been mainly carried out in other countries rather than in
This study aims to explore the reading strategies employed by non-English major students at Kien Giang University in Vietnam, addressing a gap in research that has primarily focused on English major students, high school students, and those attending English centers By investigating this specific demographic, the research seeks to contribute valuable insights into the reading strategies of non-English majors in Vietnam, particularly in the Kien Giang province.
The research model
The research model presented in figure 2.3 suggests that students, regardless of their English proficiency, utilize various reading strategies when faced with comprehension challenges However, the application of these strategies differs significantly between successful and less successful students The model indicates that effective use of reading strategies can impact students' reading performance in varying degrees Moreover, the relationship between reading performance and specific strategy categories, as well as individual strategies, may differ, with some strategies exerting a more substantial influence on performance than others.
Successful students Less successful students
Summary of chapter 2
The second chapter established a theoretical framework for the study by introducing fundamental concepts of reading and reading strategies It highlighted the distinctions between successful and less successful students and developed a research model based on a review of existing literature on L2 reading strategies Chapter 3 then details the methodology employed in the current research.
METHODOLOGY
Participants
The study involved 120 randomly selected sophomores from Kien Giang University, focusing on three popular academic majors: Economics, Accounting, and Construction Participants, aged 19 to 22, were all native Vietnamese speakers with a minimum of seven years of English education in secondary and high schools, along with at least one year at the tertiary level Table 3.1 provides a summary of the students' background information.
Table 3.1 The participants’ background information
Male Female 19 20 21 22 Economics Accounting Construction
At Kien Giang University, non-English major students must complete 9 credits in English, divided into three courses: English 1, 2, and 3, and obtain a B1-level English certificate for graduation By the time of the study, participants had just finished English 3 and were at an intermediate proficiency level Throughout the course, students practiced various reading strategies, including summarizing, skimming, and scanning, to enhance their comprehension skills However, many students struggled to apply these strategies effectively, resulting in minimal improvement in their test scores.
Instruments
The study utilized two primary research instruments: a reading comprehension test to assess student performance and a questionnaire to examine the reading strategies used by Vietnamese non-English major students at Kien Giang University The findings from the questionnaire facilitated a comparison of reading strategy usage between successful and less successful students.
In the study of second language acquisition, tests are commonly utilized to assess proficiency in various language areas This paper employs an extract from the Reading section of the Cambridge Preliminary English Test for Schools Volume 1 to evaluate participants' reading performance Developed by Cambridge University, the Preliminary English Test is recognized for its reliability The reading assessment comprises five distinct parts: Part 1 involves reading five brief texts and selecting appropriate answers; Part 2 requires matching descriptions of individuals seeking clothing stores with online reviews; Part 3 entails reading a longer text, "Citisport in Newport," and determining the accuracy of ten statements; Part 4 features the text "Baking-by Sam Jarvis, aged 12," where students answer five questions; and Part 5 consists of reading "Birth of the Movies" and filling in ten numbered spaces with the correct words.
There are 35 questions in the reading comprehension test The test scores were nomarlized to scale from 0 to 10, by dividing the number of correct answers by 3.5
The number of correct answers
Surveys are commonly used in educational research due to their advantages over other methods, such as time efficiency in data collection, consistency in responses when the same questionnaire is administered to all subjects, and ease of result calculation through multiple choice questions Therefore, a questionnaire will be utilized as the primary data collection method in this study.
The questionnaire for this study was primarily based on the Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) developed by Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001), which offers a clear classification of reading strategies Out of the original 28 statements in SORS, 21 were selected for this research, while additional items were incorporated from Oxford et al (2001) Certain statements were excluded due to redundancy, such as “pay attention to reading” and “stay focused on reading,” with the latter chosen for clarity Additionally, non-test-taking strategies were omitted to ensure relevance, as participants completed a reading test prior to the questionnaire Some statements were rephrased for better comprehension, such as changing “noting text characteristics” to “I determined what the type of the text is.” To enhance the diversity of reading strategies, items numbered 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, and 27 were included from Oxford’s Reading Strategy Questionnaire (2004).
The questionnaire designed for students consisted of two parts (see appendix
The questionnaire consisted of two main sections: the first part gathered demographic information, including students' age, class, and gender The second part focused on students' self-assessment of their reading strategies, featuring 27 statements that addressed metacognitive, cognitive, and support reading strategies Utilizing a 5-point Likert Scale, participants selected the option that most accurately reflected their opinions for each statement.
Validity and reliability of instruments
Prior to distribution to participants, it is essential to ensure that instruments are both valid and reliable Reliability pertains to the consistency of the measurements obtained, whereas validity relates to the degree to which the instrument accurately measures the intended construct.
3.3.1 Validity and reliability of the reading comprehension test
The reading comprehension test utilized in this study is deemed valid and reliable, as it is derived from the Cambridge Preliminary English Test (PET), a standardized international assessment created by Cambridge University for individuals with an intermediate level of English proficiency.
3.3.2 Validity and reliability of the questionnaire
The reliability of the questionnaire was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which should ideally exceed 0.7 to ensure the instrument's reliability (Bolarinwa, 2015) The internal reliability test indicated that the questionnaire effectively measured reading strategies among Vietnamese non-English major students, with Cronbach alpha values of 739 for metacognitive strategies, 776 for cognitive strategies, and 705 for support strategies Additionally, the majority of the questionnaire items were based on the validated study by Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001), which was supported by a large sample size and has been employed in various previous studies, including those by Zheng & Kang.
(2014), Gonen (2015), and Rastegar et al, (2017)
Table 3.2: Cronbach’s alpha test results
Data collection procedures
In May 2019, a pilot study was conducted to assess the comprehensibility of a questionnaire before its official implementation Fifteen sophomore students, selected based on a colleague's recommendation, participated in the study, aligning with Baker and Risley's (1994) guideline of having 10-20% of the total participants for pilot studies These students were not part of the main group of 120 for the official study The pilot study lasted approximately one hour, during which students were informed about the survey's purpose and assured that their responses would not affect any official evaluations To enhance clarity, the questionnaire was translated into Vietnamese and reviewed by a supervisor and two experienced colleagues to ensure accuracy All participants confirmed that the questionnaire items were clear, resulting in no changes being necessary.
In early June, Kien Giang University conducted a study involving 117 participants who completed reading comprehension tests and questionnaires, despite an initial agreement from 120 students The research aims were clearly explained to the students, who first took a 60-minute reading comprehension test, followed by a questionnaire on their reading strategies and methods After data collection, the researcher scored the tests and utilized SPSS 16.0 for analyzing the questionnaire responses.
Data analysis procedures
Question 1: What English reading strategies are often used by Vietnamese non- English major students at Kien Giang University when taking a reading comprehension tests? In order to answer this question, descriptive statistics was employed to calculate the mean score or the average value of using 27 reading strategies by 117 participants According to Oxford (1990), the frequency of reading strategy use can be evaluated on basis of the mean score as follows: scores between 1.0- 2.4 indicated as “low”; 2.5-3.4 as “medium”; 3.5 and above as “high” The interpretation of mean scores as designed by Oxford (1990) is shown in more detail in table 3.3 below
Table 3.3: Frequency scale designed by Oxford (1990)
Mean score Frequency scale Evaluation
Low Never or almost never used
4.5-5.0 Always or almost always used
Question 2: What is the relationship between students’ use of reading strategies and their English reading performance? This question was analyzed by using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient to measure the linear relationship between the frequencies of strategy use and the reading comprehension test scores Correlational analysis, according to Dornyei (2007), is among the most frequently used statistical tests when it comes to exploring the correlation between two variables The value of the Pearson correlation (r) lies between -1 and 1, close to 1 indicates a strong positive relationship, close to -1 implies a strong negative relationship There is no relationship between two variables when the value r reaches zero Cohen (1992) defines a correlation of 0.1 - 0.29 as “small”, 0.3 – 0.49 as “medium”, and 0.5 – 1 as
The correlation coefficient is deemed statistically significant when the p-value is less than 0.05, indicating a strong relationship, whereas it is considered insignificant if the p-value exceeds 0.05, suggesting a lack of meaningful correlation.
Question 3: What are the differences in reading strategy use between successful students and less successful students? Based on the results of the reading comprehension tests and the questionnaire, independent t-test was run to compare the use of reading strategies by two independent groups: successful students (scoring 7.0 and above) and less successful students (scoring 5.5 and below) Those who scored between 5.6 and 6.9 were excluded from this step The Oxford (1990)’s guideline for interpreting mean scores was also applied for this question.
A summary of chapter 3
Chapter 3 carefully described the methodology of the study Reading comprehension test and questionnaire were employed as two instruments for the study Before data collection was officially implemented, the pilot study was conducted to make sure the validity and reliability of the questionnaire Data gained from these instruments was then quantitatively analyzed in order to give answers for three questions of the study The next chapter focuses on the analysis of the collected data together with discussions.
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Results for research question 1
The study investigated the reading strategies predominantly employed by Vietnamese non-English major students at Kien Giang University To address this, mean scores were calculated for overall reading strategy use, as well as for three distinct categories: metacognitive, cognitive, and support reading strategies The findings include a presentation of these mean scores, followed by a detailed description of individual reading strategies within each category.
Table 4.1: Students’ mean scores of employing all strategies and each individual categories
According to Oxford (1990), mean scores between 1.0 and 2.4 indicate low usage, 2.5 to 3.4 signify medium usage, and scores of 3.5 and above reflect high usage Table 4.1 reveals that the overall mean score for reading strategies was 3.16, indicating a medium level of strategy use among students Each individual category also fell within the medium range, with cognitive reading strategies achieving the highest mean score of 3.37, followed by metacognitive reading strategies at 3.23 Conversely, support reading strategies recorded the lowest mean score of 2.88.
The article examines the frequency of reading strategy usage among different groups, highlighting key findings in a summary of descriptive statistics Table 5 presents a ranking of reading strategies employed by the metacognitive group, organized from highest to lowest frequency.
Table 4.2: Students’ mean scores of employing metacognitive reading strategies
Metacognitive reading strategies M Frequency scale
4 I skimmed the text quickly for understanding the general idea of the given text
3 I used the title, pictures or tables in the text to predict the content
7 I guessed the meaning of unknown words or phrases using clues from the context
1 I set plans on how to complete the text 3.32 Medium
6 I paid attention to the beginning and the end of each paragraph
9 I predicted what will come next 3.19 Medium
5 I determined what to read and what to ignore 2.32 Low
2 I determined what the type of the text is 2.17 Low
Table 4.2 indicates that three out of nine metacognitive reading strategies were rated as having a high level of usage Notably, the strategy "I skimmed the text quickly to understand the general idea" received the highest mean score.
3.95 It was followed by items number 3 “I used the title, pictures or tables in the text to predict the content” and number 7 “I guessed the meaning of unknown words or phrases using clues from the context” with means of 3.87 and 3.73, respectively In addition, there were four metacognitive reading strategies that students reported sometimes having applied during the reading tests Their mean scores ranged from 3.32 to 3.19 Finally, item number 5 “I determined what to read and what to ignore”
In the analysis of reading strategies, it was found that the items "I determined what the type of the text is" (2.17) and "N= 2.32" were categorized in the low usage group, indicating that students infrequently employed these strategies during reading comprehension tests.
Most cognitive reading strategies, like metacognitive ones, were used with medium to high frequency, with only 20% indicating low usage The sequence of 12 cognitive reading strategies is detailed in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Student’s mean scores of employing cognitive reading strategies
N o Cognitive reading strategies M Frequency scale
14 I read the text again for better understanding 4.01 High
11 I used prior knowledge to help complete the text 3.91 High
17 I translated what I read into Vietnamese 3.73 High
13 I read the questions several times to make sure that I completely understand them
20 I tried to stay on reading 3.41 Medium
15 I adjusted reading speed depending on the difficulty of the text
21 I evaluated what was read 3.34 Medium
10 I read the text slowly and carefully 3.24 Medium
19 I tried to understand the text without translation 3.22 Medium
16 I paused and thought about reading 2.46 Low
12 I made a picture in my mind about information what I read
In the high usage group, mean scores ranged from 3.51 to 4.01, indicating that students frequently employed various reading strategies The strategy "I read the text again for better understanding" had the highest mean score of 4.01, followed by "I used prior knowledge to help complete the text" at 3.91 The item "I read the questions several times to ensure full comprehension" scored 3.51, reflecting usage slightly above the "sometimes" threshold Five out of twelve cognitive reading strategies fell within a moderate usage level, with averages between 3.22 and 3.41; notably, "I tried to stay on reading" approached high frequency with a score of 3.41 Conversely, two strategies reported low usage, with "I made a picture in my mind about the information I read" receiving the lowest mean score of 2.43.
Unlike the other two categories, the support reading strategies did not achieve high usage levels, with their frequency rated between low and medium, as shown in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4: Student’s mean scores of employing support reading strategies
Support reading strategies M Frequency scale
22 I underlined main ideas while reading 3.40 Medium
24 I went back and forth in the text to find relationships among ideas in it
27 I marked topic sentences of each paragraph 3.31 Medium
25 I paraphrased the text for better understanding 2.67 Medium
23 I took notes while reading 2.35 Low
26 I asked myself questions when having problem understanding
In a study of reading strategies, four out of six were categorized as moderate usage, with mean scores ranging from 2.67 to 3.40 There was a significant disparity between the highest and lowest scores; the strategy "I underlined main ideas while reading" (M=3.40) approached high frequency, while "I paraphrased the text for better understanding" (M=2.67) was near the low usage category Additionally, low frequency was noted for the strategy "I took notes while reading."
“I asked myself questions when having problem understanding” with mean values of 2.35 and 2.22, respectively
Students’ preferences for individual reading strategies were also under investigation (see table 4.5)
Table 4.5: Most and least frequently used strategies
Most frequently used strategies Least frequently used strategies
I read the text again for better understanding Cog 4.01 I determined what the type of the text is Met 2.17
I skimmed the text quickly for understanding the general idea of the given text
I asked myself questions when having problem understanding Sup 2.22
I used prior knowledge to help complete the text Cog 3.91 I determined what to read and what to ignore Met 2.32
I skipped unknown words Cog 3.88 I took notes while reading Sup 2.35
The four most frequently used reading strategies predominantly fall within the cognitive category, with "I read the text again for better understanding" being the most utilized The second most common strategy is "I skimmed the text quickly for understanding the general idea," which represents the only metacognitive approach among the top four Following these are two cognitive strategies: "I used prior knowledge to help complete the text" and "I skipped unknown words." In contrast, the least frequently employed strategies belong to the support and metacognitive categories, with "I determined what the type of the text is" being the least used.
“I asked myself questions when having problem understanding”, “I determined what to read and what to ignore”, and “I took notes while reading”
Based on the results discussed above, it can be summarized that eight out of twenty seven reading strategies (29.6%) were high usage strategies, thirteen strategies
(48.1%) were considered as medium use while the remaining strategies (22.3%) were employed less frequently (see Figure 4.1)
Figure 4.1: The number of strategies by level of use
In this study, students demonstrated a medium level of overall reading strategy usage, with cognitive reading strategies being the most commonly employed, followed by metacognitive and supportive strategies Among the 27 strategies assessed, the most frequently used was "I read the text again for better understanding," while "I determined what the type of the text is" was identified as the least preferred strategy.
Results for research question 2
This research aims to explore the correlation between students' use of reading strategies and their reading performance Data collected from a questionnaire assessed students' reading strategy use, utilizing a 5-point Likert Scale to score each reported strategy from 1 to 5 Additionally, students' reading performance was evaluated through their scores on reading comprehension tests The gathered data was analyzed using SPSS version 16.0 to determine the relationship between these two variables.
High usage strategies Moderate usage strategies Low usage strategies
Table 4.6: Correlation between students’ use of all reading strategies and reading test scores
Reading test scores Pearson Correlation 1 735**
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
The correlation between students’ overall reading strategy use and their reading scores is presented in table 4.5 The Sig (2-tailed) or p-value was 000 (p
A significant positive correlation was found between the use of reading strategies and reading performance, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 735, indicating a strong relationship between these two variables.
Table 4.7: Correlations between students’ use of each category of strategies and their reading scores
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
The analysis in Table 4.6 reveals a significant positive correlation of 764 (p < 0.01) between students' use of metacognitive strategies and their reading scores, indicating a strong relationship Similarly, cognitive reading strategies also showed a statistically significant correlation with reading performance at the 0.01 level (p = 001), with a Pearson correlation of 551 While both correlations are positive, the correlation between metacognitive strategies and reading performance is stronger than that of cognitive strategies In contrast, the support category exhibited a negative correlation with reading scores, with a Pearson correlation of -.214, significant at the 0.05 level (p = 021), indicating an inverse relationship between these variables.
The study examined the correlation between students' reading performance and their use of various reading strategies Among the twenty-seven strategies analyzed, eleven showed a positive correlation, while five demonstrated a negative correlation, all at significant levels of 0.01 or 0.05 The remaining strategies were deemed insignificant due to p-values exceeding 0.05.
Table 4.8: Positive correlations between students’ use of individual strategies and their reading performance
MET 1 I set plans on how to complete the text 438 * 028 117 MET 3 I used the title, pictures or tables in the text to predict the content
MET 4 I skimmed the text quickly for understanding the general idea of the given text
MET 7 I guessed the meaning of unknown words or phrases using clues from the context
MET 9 I predicted what will come next 411 * 021 117 COG 11 I used prior knowledge to help complete the text
COG 13 I read the questions several times to make sure that I completely understand them
COG 14 I read the text again for better understanding 694 ** 003 117 COG 15 I adjusted reading speed depending on the difficulty of the text
SUP 24 I underlined main ideas while reading 460* 034 117
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 4.8 demonstrates a significant positive correlation between eleven reading strategies and reading test scores, comprising five metacognitive strategies, five cognitive strategies, and one support strategy The Pearson correlation values for these strategies range from 411 to 737, which can be categorized into two distinct groups according to Cohen's interpretation of correlation coefficients.
Group 1 demonstrates a strong correlation with reading test scores, showcasing high values between 736 and 695 Key metacognitive strategies include skimming the text for a general understanding (r=.736, p=.000), guessing meanings of unknown words using contextual clues (r=.705, p=.001), and using titles, pictures, or tables to predict content (r=.702, p=.000) Additionally, effective cognitive strategies involve utilizing prior knowledge to aid comprehension (r=.737, p=.000), re-reading for better understanding (r=.694, p=.003), and skipping unknown words (r=.695, p=.004).
Group 2 exhibits moderate correlations with reading test scores, with values ranging from 411 to 489 Key strategies include setting plans to complete texts (r=.438, p=.028), predicting upcoming content (r=.411, p=.021), reading questions multiple times for clarity (r=.423, p=0.07), adjusting reading speed based on text difficulty (r=.489, p=.001), and underlining main ideas during reading (r=.460, p=.034).
Table 4.9: Negative correlations between students’ use of individual strategies and their reading performance
COG 10 I read the text slowly and carefully -.337* 026 117 COG 17 I translated what I read into Vietnamese -.789** 004 117
SUP 23 I took notes while reading -.611** 002 117
SUP 25 I paraphrased the text for better understanding -.605** 000 117 SUP 27 I marked topic sentences of each paragraph -.483* 038 117
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 4.9 indicates that three correlations were significant at the 01 level, while others were significant at the 05 level Notably, three strategies showed a strong relationship with reading test scores: the cognitive strategy "I translated what I read into Vietnamese" (r=-.789, p=.004), and the support strategies "I took notes while reading" (r=-.611, p=.002) and "I paraphrased the text for better understanding" (r=-.605, p=.000) In contrast, the Pearson correlations for the cognitive strategy "I read the text slowly and carefully" (r=-.337, p=.026) and the support strategy "I marked topic sentences of each paragraph" (r=-.483, p=.038) were relatively negative in relation to reading scores.
The Pearson’s product-moment correlation analysis revealed a significant relationship between students' overall reading strategy use and their reading performance, suggesting that increased strategy use leads to improved results Specifically, positive correlations were found between metacognitive and cognitive strategy categories and reading scores, while the support category exhibited a negative correlation Notably, among the 27 strategies examined, 16 individual strategies showed significant correlations with reading performance.
Results for research question 3
Table 4.10: Differences in the use of overall reading strategies between successful and less successful students
Less successful students (nT) t Sig
Table 4.10 highlights a significant disparity in overall reading strategy use between successful students (M=3.48) and less successful students (M=2.84), with a t-value of 7.785 and p-value of 049 This indicates that successful students employ reading strategies more frequently Notably, differences in the use of all three strategy categories were found to be significant (p
