Developing reading proficiency for the 1st year english non majors at nghe an JTTC through cognitive strategy training

Ministry of Education and TrainingVINH UNIVERSITY ------NGUYỄN THỊ LAN ANH DEVELOPING READING PROFICIENCY FOR THE THROUGH COGNITIVE STRATEGY TRAINING SỬ DỤNG CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC TRI NHẬN

Ministry of Education and Training

VINH UNIVERSITY

- -NGUYỄN THỊ LAN ANH

DEVELOPING READING PROFICIENCY FOR THE

THROUGH COGNITIVE STRATEGY TRAINING

(SỬ DỤNG CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC TRI NHẬN ĐỂ PHÁT TRIỂN KỸ NĂNG ĐỌC HIỂU THÀNH THẠO CHO SINH VIÊN KHÔNG CHUYÊN NĂM THỨ NHẤT, TRƯỜNG CAO ĐẲNG SƯ PHẠM NGHỆ AN)

Field: Theory and Methodology of English Language Teaching

Code: 60.14.10

Master thesis in Education

Supervisor: Assoc.Prof.Dr NGÔ ĐÌNH PHƯƠNG

VINH, 2011

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I certify my authorship of the Thesis submitted today entitled:

Developing Reading Proficiency for the 1st-year English Non-majors at Nghe An

JTTC through Cognitive Strategy Training

In term of the statement of Requirement for Thesis and field study reports in Masters’

Programme issued by the Higher Degree Committee

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

In order to complete this action research I have received lots of help andassistances my supervisor, my colleagues and my students.

I am grateful to my supervisor, Mr Ngo Dinh Phuong who has given histime to advise, to guide and comment on various chapters of this work If it had notbeen for his help, this research wouldn’t have been completed My thanks go tostudents at Nghe An teacher’s training college for their enthusiastic cooperationwith data for this work to be well done

I‘d also like to express my gratitude to all lecturers and staff of theDepartment of Post Graduate Studies, Vinh University for their expertise to thiswork

Finally I’d like to thank my husband and my two little sons, who energize meand ground me the busy time writing this research

ABSTRACT

Reading has played a very important part in learning a foreign language and it

is recognized as the principle objective of language courses However, the Englishteaching procedure in many colleges in our country now focuses much onexploiting reading texts intensively, including syntactic, semantic, and lexicalanalyses and translation into L1 to study meaning This, as Alderson and Urquhart(1984) have argued, is not a reading but a language lesson It is, therefore, the needfor teachers to instruct the students how to comprehend a reading text and guidethem to “think about their thinking” about the reading text before reading the text,during reading the text and after reading the text This strategy of reading is known

as cognition Cognition represents a strategy of acquiring knowledge, namely theability to understand one’s method for learning and assimilating information Itconcerns "the knowledge of one’s thoughts," in addition to how various factorsinfluence psychological thought processing Cognitive learning strategy offers helpfor individuals who struggle to analyze, utilize, memorize and/or retain information.Consider several strategies to find the one that works best for oneself

I intend to experiment “cognitive reading strategies” to my first year Englishnon-majors specializing in pre-schooling education to see how effective thiscognitive strategy training is to help my students develop their reading proficiency.The study has made some contributions to training learning strategies to thelearners at Nghe An JTT College It has attempted to measure the effectiveness ofthis training to improvement in learners’ reading proficiency

While the study provides some implications for teachers and researchers ingeneral, it is not free from limitations The limitations are found in the datacollection instruments and the number of strategies to be taught

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Learning strategy definition and classification

(O'Malley and Chamot, 1990; 119).

Table 4.1 Central Tendencies, dispersions and

t-value of the pre-tests and post-tests

Table 4.2 Analysis of SS’ responses to

the importance of reading comprehension

to their language learning

Table 4.3 Analysis of SS’ self-evaluation of reading proficiency Table 4.4 Analysis of SS’ self-evaluation of reading speed

Table 4.5 Analysis of the students’ responses to grading

the importance of reading comprehension affecting factors

Table 4.6 Analysis of SS’ utilization of reading strategies

Table 4.7 Students' application of experimented cognitive strategies

Table 4.8 Coursebook tasks and students’ employment of

instructed strategies to complete reading tasks

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMEN ii

ABSTRACT iii

LIST OF TABLES iv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 4

1.1 Rationale 4

1.2 Scope of the study 5

1.3 Aims and purposes of the study 5

1.4 Research hypothesis 6

1.5 Significance of the study 6

1.6 Methods of the study 6

1.7 Organization of the thesis 7

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1 Cognitive Theory of Learning 8

2.2 Language as a cognitive skill 10

2.2.1 Acquisition of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge 11

2.2.2 Production System in Cognitive Skill Acquisition 15

2.2.3 Stages of Skill Acquisition 19

2.3 Learning strategies 20

2.3.1 Definition of learning strategies 20

2.3.2 Classification of learning strategies 21

2.4 Strategy Training 26

2.4.1 Strategy Training 26

2.4.2 Approaches to Strategy Training 27

2.4.3 Strategies-based Instruction 28

2.5 The theory of Reading 31

2.5.1 Definition 31

2.5.2 Models of Reading Process 32

2.5.2.1 Bottom-up Model 32

2.5.2.2 Top-down Model 33

2.5.2.3 Interactive Model 35

2.5.3 Reading strategies 36

2.5.3.1 Definition 36

2.6 Review of reading strategy research 37

2.7 Summary 40

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 44

3.1 Participants and Setting of the Study 44

3.1.1 Participants 44

3.1.2 Setting of the Study 44

3.2 Methods and Procedures 45

3.2.1 Methods 45

3.2.2 Procedure 46

3.3 Instruments of Data Collection 47

3.3.1 Tests 48

3.3.2 Questionnaires 49

3.3.3 Interviews 50

3.3.4 Think-aloud Report 50

3.4 Data Collection Procedure 51

3.5 Analytic Procedure 53

3.5.1 Test Scores 53

3.5.2 Questionnaire Data 53

3.5.3 Think-aloud Report 54

3.5.4 Interview Data 55

3.6 Summary 55

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 57

4.1 Results 57

4.1.1 Reading Tests 57

4.1.2 Questionnaires 58

4.1.2.1 Students’ Attitudes to Reading Comprehension 59

4.1.2.2 Investigation on Students’ Utilization of Cognitive Strategies 63

4.1.2.3 Students' Utilization of Instructed Cognitive Strategies 64

4.1.3 Think-aloud Reports 67

4.1.3.1 Transfer of Reading Strategies 68

4.1.3.2 Students’ Application of Cognitive Strategies 68

4.1.4 Interviews 71

4.2 Summaries of Main Findings 73

4.2.1 Reading Proficiency 73

4.2.2 Students’ attitudes to reading comprehension 73

4.2.3 Students’ Transfer of Cognitive Strategies 74

4.2.4 Students’ Application of Cognitive Strategies 75

4.3 Discussion of Main Findings 76

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION 79

5.1 Conclusion 79

5.2 Pedagogical Implications 81

5.3 Limitations 82

5.4 Suggestions for further study 83

REFERENCES 84 APPENDIX 1: Questionnaire I APPENDIX 2: Pre-test & Post-test V APPENDIX 3: Practice on instructed cognitive strategies XII APPENDIX 4: T- Test Analysis XX

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale

Exploring ways of making teaching responsive to learner needs and interestsand allowing them to play a fuller, more active and participatory role in the day-to-day teaching and learning processes has become one of the tremendous aims ofEnglish language teaching in the light of Communicative Language TeachingApproach in recent decades

Besides being armed with linguistic knowledge, learners are now encouraging

to look for effective learning strategies which best work for them in the process ofseeking for their language learning progress Recent study results have indicatedthat an increased emphasis on helping learners develop learning strategies would bevaluable for them to develop language proficiency Anderson, N J (1999) statesthat language learning will be facilitated if learners become more aware of the range

of possible strategies that they can consciously select during language learning andlanguage use This conscious selection is known as cognition This term concerns

"the knowledge of one’s thoughts," in addition to how various factors influencepsychological thought processing Cognitive learning strategy offers help forindividuals who struggle to analyze, utilize, memorize and/or retain information,and consider several strategies to find the one that works best for oneself

There have been plenty of various definitions of learning strategy, yet, perhapsthe definition that has been widely accepted to date was proposed by O'Malley andChamot (1990) According to them, learning strategies are "the special thoughts orbehaviors that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn or retain newinformation" (1990:1) In spite of being quite short, their definition covers the mostimportant aspects of learning strategies, that is learning strategies are both mentaland behavioral (therefore both observable and unobservable), and learningstrategies are individually characterized (i.e the use of strategies are individuallydifferent)

Being highlighted by the above belief, we intent to experiment the cognitivelearning strategies proposed by O'Malley and Chamot (1990) to improve the

reading proficiency to my first-year English non-majored students specializing inpre-schooling education.

It is hoped that the findings of this study will give English teachers someimplications on training learning strategies to improve English learners’ languageproficiency in general and reading proficiency in particular

1.2 Scope of the study

Reading proficiency can be affected by many different factors, such as learnermotivation, linguistic competence, level of reading skill, relevant knowledge, textsetc However, in order to make our tasks manageable in keeping the aims of thestudy within the time allowance, it is intended that the measure of how effective thetraining cognitive strategies are to develop my 1st-year English non-majoredstudents’ reading proficiency will be paid the most attention The study of otherfactors affecting learners’ reading proficiency, such as motivation, interest, textsetc would like to set aside for further study

1.3 Aims and Objectives

Within the scope of the study, we focus on measuring the effectiveness of thetraining of cognitive reading strategies proposed by O'Malley and Chamot (1990)

on improving my 1st-year English non-majored students’ reading proficiency Thestudy findings will be used as the base in giving some pedagogical implications fortraining learning strategies in general and cognitive reading strategies in particular

To complete the overall aim of the study, the following objectives must beobtained:

 Getting to know how much the 1st-year English non-majored studentsspecializing in pre-schooling education become aware of the use ofappropriate strategies to improve their reading proficiency

 Experimenting the training of cognitive strategies to the 1st-year Englishnon-majored students specializing in pre-schooling education to clarify

how effective the explicitly-instructed cognitive strategies are to developtheir reading proficiency.

 Giving suitable and appropriate pedagogical implications for traininglearning strategies in general and cognitive reading strategies inparticular

1.4 Research hypothesis

The study aims at testing the hypothesis:

“The instructed cognitive strategies can improve my students reading proficiency”

1.5 Significance of the study

 Theoretical aspect: It is hopefully expected that this study would make asmall contribution to investigating and training learning strategies tobeginning EFL learners, and more importantly, systemizing somelearning strategies that might work well with the beginning English non-majored students in learning English as a foreign language as well asmeasuring effectiveness of training learning strategies to EFL learners

 Practical aspect: With results of the study it is hoped that the languageteachers as well as language learners would find it useful to choose theappropriate learning strategies to incorporate in their teaching andlearning

1.6 Methods of the study

This study is conducted as an action research that employs both quantitative andqualitative approaches to collect data The quantitative analyses are used throughthe process of data collected from pretest and posttest, pre-questionnaires and post-questionnaires In addition, the qualitative approach is employed to deal with thedata gathered from think-aloud reports and interviews with the volunteer studentsbefore and after the treatment in order to obtain more in-depth understanding The

combination of these data collection methods will help the author achieve the aims

of the study

1.7 Organization of the thesis

The study consists of five chapters

 Chapter 1 is the Introduction, which states the rationale, scope, aims,

significance, method and organization of the study

 Chapter 2 reviews the literature relevant to the topic of the study and

summarizes some selected studies on cognitive learning theory, learningstrategies and learning strategy training, which serve as a theoretical andmethodological foundation of the study

 Chapter 3 presents the research methodology of the study It provides

information about the participants, the instrumentation, and the data collectionprocedures and data analysis

 Chapter 4 is the main part of the study that reports and discusses the main

findings according to the research questions

 Chapter 5 is the conclusion that summarizes the main findings, presents the

implications and limitations of the study and finally gives some suggestions forfurther research

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews theories related to cognitive theory of learning, learningstrategies and strategy training in general and reading strategies in particular It alsosummarizes some studies on strategies training that have been conducted so far All

of these serve as a basis for measuring the effectiveness of cognitive strategytraining to improving the learners’ reading proficiency which is carried out andpresented in the next chapter

2.1 Cognitive Theory of Learning

A cognitive theory of learning sees second language acquisition as a consciousand reasoned thinking process, involving the deliberate use of learning strategies.Learning strategies are special ways of processing information that enhancecomprehension, learning or retention of information In Longman dictionary ofLanguage Teaching & Applied Linguistics (1993: 60) cognitive learning isconsidered as the acquisition of knowledge and skill by mental or cognitiveprocesses — the procedures we have for manipulating information 'in our heads' Cognitive psychologists tend to see second language acquisition as the building

up of knowledge systems that can eventually be called on automatically forspeaking and understanding At first, learners have to pay attention to any aspect ofthe language which they are trying to understand or produce Gradually, throughexperience and practice, learners become able to use certain parts of theirknowledge so quickly and automatically that they are not even aware that they aredoing it This frees them to focus on other aspects of language which, in turn,gradually become automatic

Recently, cognitive psychologists have also investigated a phenomenon theycall ‘restructuring’ This refers to the observation that sometimes things which weknow and use automatically may not be explainable in terms of automaticallygradual building-up through practice They seem rather to be based on theinteraction of knowledge we already have, or on the acquisition of new knowledgewhich – without extensive practice – somehow ‘fits’ into an existing system andmay, in fact, ‘restructure’ this system This may lead to sudden bursts of progress

for the learner, but it can also sometimes lead to apparent back-sliding when asystematic aspect of learner language suddenly incorporates too much orincorporates the wrong things.

Cognitive theory is a relative newcomer to Second Language Acquisition(SLA) research, and has not yet been widely tested empirically Because the theoryitself cannot easily predict what kinds of structures will be automatized throughpractice and what will be restructured, direct applications of this theory forclassroom teaching are premature Cognitive theory is also notable to predict whichfirst language structures will be transferred and which will not This theory, whichlooks at the learning process, is incomplete without a linguistic framework of somekind This has led some psychologists to seek collaboration with linguists so that theaspects of language which are studied will have clearer relevance to the complexphenomenon of second language acquisition

Recent theoretical developments in cognitive psychology have provided ageneral framework in which to view the role of mental processes in learning Thisframework is based in part on information processing and in part on studies andtheory evolving over the past 15 or so years on the role of cognitive processes inlearning The purpose of the framework is to explain how information is stored inmemory and particularly how new information is stored in two distinct ways: in

short-term memory, the active working memory that holds modest amounts of information only for a brief period, or in long-term memory, the sustained storage of

information that may be represented as isolated elements or, more likely, as

interconnected networks In some representations, working memory is used to

describe short-term memory as a way of denoting the active use of cognitiveprocedures with the information that is being stored (Anderson et, al., 1985)

In this paradigm, new information is acquired through a four-stage encodingprocess involving selection, acquisition, construction, and integration (Weinstein &

Mayer, 1986) Through selection, learners focus on specific information of interest

in the environment and transfer that information into working memory In

acquisition, learners actively transfer information from working memory into

long-term memory for permanent storage In the third stage, construction, learners

actively build internal connections between ideas contained in the information thathas reached working memory The information from long-term memory can be used

to enrich the learner's understanding or retention of the new ideas by providingrelated information or schemas in which the new ideas can be organized In the final

process, integration, the learner actively searches for prior knowledge in long-term

memory and transfers this knowledge to working memory so it can be used in

further construction processes Selection and acquisition determine how much is

learned, whereas construction and integration determine what is learned and how it

is organized

The two-stage framework of short-term and long-term memory and the fourmental processes described above were not intended to meet the need for a theory toexplain the role of cognition in second language acquisition The framework hasbeen applied most regularly to problem solving, vocabulary learning, readingcomprehension, and the acquisition of factual knowledge, but not to the full range

of phenomena that form the totality of language A theory is needed that addressesmultiple aspects of language for integrative language use in all for language skillareas and that addresses language acquisition from the earliest stages of secondlanguage learning to proficient use of the target language Further, the theory must

be able to address language comprehension and production as central issues, as isrequired to represent topics of concern in second language acquisition research Thetwo-stage, four-process explanatory framework of learning presented earlier wasnot designed to address these concerns A specific advance beyond this frameworkemerged with the formulation in cognitive theory of mechanisms for representing

complex cognitive skills.

2.2 Language as a cognitive skill

2.2.1 Acquisition of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge

Anderson, J R., (1983) suggests that language can best be understood as acomplex cognitive skill, and that mental processes involved in language parallel the

processes used with other cognitive skills both in memory representations and inlearning.

Anderson, J R., (1983, 1985) distinguishes between what we know about, or static information in memory, and what we know how to do, or dynamic information in memory All of the things we know about constitute declarative knowledge, and all of the things we know how to do constitute procedural

knowledge His definition of declarative knowledge refers to the type of knowledge

is represented in long-term memory in terms of abstract meaning rather thanprecisely stored replication of events or specific language texts While images andtemporal strings play a role in memory, the most significant mode of storinginformation in memory for the analysis of language is through propositionalrepresentations Propositional representations maintain the meaning of informationwhile ignoring unimportant details Each proposition is denoted by a relationfollowed by an ordered list of arguments In his opinion, relations and arguments in

a propositional analysis can be represented schematically by a propositionalnetwork Larger units of meaning than can be represented by propositional networks

require a schema.

The principal value of schemas is that they facilitate making inferences aboutconcepts Schemas also enable us to organize and understand new information.Schemas are also used to infer information that is missing in recall Recall will beaccurate provided that the inferences match the original situation, but will beinaccurate if the inference and the situation fail to match Thus, schemas may eitherassist or detract from accurate recall

At least three sets of questions concerning SLA are raised by Anderson's

discussion of declarative knowledge in memory These questions concern (a) how

meaning in two languages is represented in memory, and how the transfer of firstlanguage (L1) knowledge to L2 expression takes place; (b) whether some types ofknowledge are more easily transferred to the L2 than others; and (c) how meta-linguistic information is stored and influences performance for bilinguals

According to Anderson, J R., (1985) an individual at the early stages ofproficiency in the L2 would either have to translate information from the L1 to theL2 or relearn the L1 information in the L2, capitalizing on existing L1 knowledgewhere possible In Anderson's theory, information in either the L1 or the L2 has ameaning-based representation and would be stored as declarative knowledgethrough either propositional networks or schemas.

The existence of separate propositional networks and schemas associated with

each language is consistent with the notion of domain-specific language skills.Learners may acquire one or more of these domain-specific capabilities in eitherlanguage by direct exposure or by training, but be ineffective in communicating inother domain or in the other language because of the highly specific nature of thelanguage involved Thus, domain-specific language proficiency may be constructedout of experience and not established by direct transfer from L1 proficiency

In contrast to this argument for separate L1 and L2 memory systems, Cummins(1981, 1984) has proposed a common underlying proficiency in cognitive andacademic language proficiency for bilinguals He argues that at least some of what

is originally learned through the L1 does not have to be relearned in the L2, but can

be transferred and expressed through the medium of the L2 Cummins does notlimit his view of common memory systems to content knowledge, but includescognitive academic language proficiency as well Cummins' view of commonunderlying language proficiency seems to be consistent with cognitive theory, at

least for content knowledge In cognitive theory, nodes in declarative memory are

based on meaning rather than on a direct replication of language-specific structures

or word sequences Nodes that access meaning in long-term memory may be

non-language-specific but also have built-in features that signal the use of one language

or the other In other words, the selection of the L1 or the L2 for comprehension orproduction is performed in short-term memory, whereas concepts are stored in and

retrieved from long-term memory as non-language-specific generalized meaning L2

learners may be able to transfer what they already know from the L1 into the L2 by(a) selecting the L2 as the language for expression, (b) retrieving information

originally stored through the L1 but presently existing as non-language-specificdeclarative knowledge, and (c) connecting the information to the L2 forms needed

to express it The first and third steps would be functions that occur in short-term memory In fact, learning strategy research (O'Malley, Chamot, Stewner –

Manzanares, Kupper, & Russo, 1985a, 1985b) indicates that students of English as

a second language (ESL) consciously and actively transfer information form theirL1 for use in the L2 Thus, the transfer of content knowledge as part of Cummins'common underlying proficiency can be described by referencing processes drawnfrom cognitive theory The transfer of what Cummins refers to as cognitiveacademic language proficiency is not so easily described and will be discussed in alater section

A second question raised by Anderson’s Theory is whether there is a variation

in the effectiveness or ease of transfer of declarative knowledge from L1 to the L2

Is all declarative knowledge originally acquired in an L1 context equally easy totransfer and access through the L2, or do the characteristics of the declarativeknowledge make a difference? Anderson's descriptions of the ways in whichdeclarative knowledge can be represented in memory provide clues to the answer tothis question

One way that declarative knowledge may be represented in memory is in theform of schemas, or organizational frameworks Anderson (1980) describes twomajor types of schema: organization by natural categories and organization byevents Natural category schemas are based on real world phenomena, such asclassification of plants, animals, minerals, quantities, and other aspects of thenatural world A natural category schema would appear to be easily transferable toexpression through an L2 because the information describes observable reality Schemas organized by events include both personal recollections of eventsequences and the sequences of events that characterize the discourse organization

of a story Story scripts (or story grammars) have been shown to be stronglyinfluenced by culture L2 learners who have internalized one type of story schema

may find it difficult to understand a differing schema not because of languagefactors, but because of cultural expectations.

Another type of event organization described by Anderson (1980) is referred to as

social cognition Persons organize their knowledge about individuals or groups

according to certain perceived characteristics This type of schematic organization ofknowledge may lead to stereotyping, because one person's individual knowledge about

a group may rely on data limited to personal experience or biased information Theinformation of stereotypes may also be culturally linked, so that a schema developed tocharacterize a certain group through the L1 may not be relevant to characterize thesame group through the L2 A stereotype transferred to an L2 context may interferewith accurate communication in the L2

Thus, the way in which declarative knowledge is organized in memory mayhave a substantial effect on the L2 learner's ability to transfer it effectively andaccurately into the new language The educational implications for L2 learners arethat concepts related to natural categories such as science, mathematics, andtechnical subjects may be easier to transfer to the L2 than are concepts related toculturally affected areas, such as literature or social studies, or concepts related todomain-specific knowledge

A third question raised by Anderson's views on declarative knowledge is howmetalinguistic information among bilingual persons is stored and how thisinformation influences performance One of the primary features definingmetalinguistic awareness is an understanding of the arbitrary uses of language(Miller, 1956) Bilinguals may be expected to have an advantage in understandingarbitrariness in language use and, accordingly, in metalinguistic awareness(DeAvila & Duncan, 1979) Metalinguistic awareness will be manifestedparticularly in fluent bilinguals, and these individuals will share advantages not only

in verbal skills, but also in problem-solving tasks Bilingualism has been viewed as

a "three-dimensional insight" into language that a monolingual rarely experiences(Lambert, 1981) Advantages found among bilinguals have included enhanced

concept formation and mental flexibility, as in the ability to switch object namesand use the new names in sentences.

Metalinguistic awareness may be described in part in Anderson's theory as anew schema constructed to link schema that reference the same domain in the L1and L2 That is, an individual with domain-specific knowledge in two languagesmay begin to see the different ways in which concepts can be expressed in the L1and L2 The person then establishes a new schema that differentiates applications ofeach language to identical concepts This explanation of metalinguistic awarenesspresumes that separate memory systems are developed in each language InAnderson's terms, schema linking knowledge based on independent languagesystems would not have sufficient connections to establish metalinguistic awarenessunless Cummins' threshold and interdependence conditions are met Failure to meetCummins' two conditions could also detract from the ability to transfer informationfrom the L1 to the L2, in that schemas established in the L1 may not have sufficientinternal linkages to provide an adequate foundation of information

2.2.2 Production System in Cognitive Skill Acquisition

The term cognitive skill is used by Anderson, J R., (1980) to refer to the ability

to perform various mental procedures Our ability to understand and generatelanguage or apply our knowledge of rules to solve a problem would be examples of

procedural knowledge He argues that as we use the same knowledge over and over

again in a procedure, we can lose our access to the rules that originally produced orenabled the procedure, and thus lose our ability to verbally report or "declare" theserules Whereas declarative knowledge of factual information may be acquiredquickly, procedural knowledge such as language acquisition is acquired graduallyand only with extensive opportunities for practice The representation of proceduralknowledge in memory is a key issue in cognitive theory and is contained in what

Anderson, J R., (1983, 1985) refers to as production systems.

Production systems are the basis for his argument for a unitary theory of themind or a common cognitive system for all higher-level mental processes This

position is in direct contrast to the opinion of many theorists, including Chomsky(1980), who view the mind as having specific faculties associated with languageand perhaps with other special symbolic systems such as numbers Anderson arguesthat all complex cognitive skills can be represented as production systems.Computer simulations using production systems have been developed for a number

of cognitive skills, including such seemingly diverse skills as reading and solving

algebra word problems In its most basic form, a production has a condition and an action The condition contains a clause or set of clauses preceded by IF, and the

action has a clause or set of clauses preceded by THEN

Condition-action pairs (or productions) such as this one can initially berepresented in declarative form, and gradually, through practice, can be compiledinto production sets and fine-tuned to the point of automatic execution Such arepresentational system can be used to describe specific procedures in any domain(math, physics, chess, language, and so on) as well as general strategies or domain-independent problem-solving procedures Moreover, the relationship amongelements of a skill can be clearly specified, and the conditions that must exist for aparticular skill to operate can be made explicit (see Gagne, 1985, for a discussion ofproduction system notation in the representation of basic skills)

The distinction between declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge hasboth theoretical and practical importance in SLA Knowing about language as agrammatical system, which involves knowing the rules underlying syntax,semantics, and phonology, is not a sufficient condition for knowing how to use thelanguage functionally, as many teachers and students of foreign languages havediscovered In order to use a language for communicative purposes, proceduralknowledge is required Instructional approaches need to provide for communicativeactivities that focus on language as a skill rather than on language as an object ofstudy The first issue concerns the representation of communicative competencethrough production systems Canale & Swain (1980) define the components ofcommunicative competence in SLA as the ability to use grammatical,sociolinguistic (socio-cultural and discourse rules), and strategic skills This

definition indicates that it is important to consider the idea of rule in its broadest

sense Rules apply to all aspects of a language and are not limited to systematicrules of grammar Furthermore, rules may be learned either in formal classroomsettings through direct instruction or through informal means, or they may be self-generated or ad hoc rules needed to understand or produce language for a specificpurpose

A general model of a conversation would contain multiple branching and exitopportunities in addition to a hierarchical structure with subroutines reflecting sub-goals that depend on the choice made at a given branching opportunity The choiceselected at one turn determines the next production set, which then creates a new set

of choices As a result, the limited speaker of English may explore a number ofpossible meanings for such utterances before reaching an accurate conclusion, each

of which may have new goals and choices

A second issue that emerges from the distinction between declarative andprocedural knowledge is the definition of the language component contained in

Cummins' (1981) common underlying proficiency As was noted above, the content

knowledge component of common underlying proficiency is consistent with thedescription in cognitive theory of meaning as represented in declarative knowledge.However, Cummins (1981) indicates that common underlying proficiency also

applies to Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) That is, "L1 and L2

CALP are manifestations of the same underlying dimension" (1981, p 179) CALPsare defined as "those dimensions of language proficiency that are strongly related toliteracy skills" (Cummins, 1981, p 23) and are best assessed by "linguisticmanipulation tasks (oral or written cloze, repetition, etc.)" (Cummins, 1980, p 177),but may also be assessed by communication tasks (oral fluency, accent,sociolinguistic competence) to the degree that these assess CALP CALP isrepresented as the intersect of language proficiency with cognitive and memoryskills, and is the major determinant of educational progress (Cummins, 1980) Threeterms that emerge as important in these descriptions of CALP are literacy, linguisticmanipulation, and cognitive and memory skills

An analysis of the relationship of CALP to common underlying proficiency incognitive theory is based on three of the principal features of production systems.The first is that productions systems may represent either overt actions (such aswalking or talking) or covert mental processes (such as reading) In Anderson'stheory, reading is seen as a special instance of language comprehension, that entailsthree mental activities: (a) perceptual processing, or encoding the written messageinto semantic memory; (b) parsing, or transforming the words in the message into amental representation or proposition; and (c) utilization, or initiating some type ofaction based on the proposition, such as storing the information in memory orresponding to a question Most importantly, both parsing and utilization are viewed

by Anderson as production systems In a theory of common underlying proficiency,these productions represent common processes irrespective of the language inwhich reading occurs

A second feature of production systems is that they require little consciouseffort to perform when they become fully automatic and, to the extent that they aregeneralized routines, should transfer to similar tasks Thus, when reading processessuch as parsing and utilization become automatic or routinized in the L1, theyshould transfer readily to the L2 A theory of common underlying proficiencywould predict that these processes are learned more efficiently when they aretransferred from the L1 to the L2 than if they are learned initially in the L2

A third feature of production systems concerns strategic processing, or what

Cummins has referred to as cognitive or memory skills Just as production systems

can be used to represent reading processes, they can also be used to represent thestrategies that are used by effective readers, such as inferencing from context orfrom linguistic knowledge, summarizing or self-review, questioning, clarifying, andpredicting Production systems can also be used to represent strategies that areapplied to L2 listening and speaking tasks When these processes are learned in theL1, they should transfer to similar tasks in the L2 as do the processing skillsunderlying comprehension, such as parsing The oral or written cloze used inassessing linguistic manipulation entails both inferencing and predicting strategies

that should transfer from L1 to L2 tasks Many of these same processes no doubtunderlie Cummins' (1981) report that there is a high correlation between L1 and L2reading scores, which he interprets as support for the interdependence hypothesis.

2.2.3 Stages of Skill Acquisition

The question that follows from the description of procedural knowledge inAnderson's theory is how one proceeds from the rule-bound declarative knowledgeused in performance of a complex skill to the more automatic proceduralized stage?This question concerns the mental processes that accompany acquisition of complexskills, the stages involved in acquisition, and the accessibility of the stored-procedural knowledge for later use

Anderson, J R., (1983, 1985) describes three stages of skill acquisition:cognitive, associative, and autonomous

Cognitive stage

For most learners, skill learning begins with the cognitive stage During the

cognitive stage, the learner is either instructed how to do the task or attempts to

figure it out and study it alone This stage involves conscious activity on the part ofthe learner, and the acquired knowledge at this stage is typically declarative and can

be described verbally by the learner This knowledge enables one to describe how toperform a complex task but is inadequate for skilled performance

Associative stage

During the second or associative stage, two main changes occur with respect to

the development of proficiency in the skill First, errors in the original declarativerepresentation of the stored information are gradually detected and eliminated.Second, the connections among the various elements or components of the skill arestrengthened During this stage, the declarative knowledge is turned into itsprocedural form However, the declarative representation initially formed is notalways lost Performance at this stage begins to resemble expert performance, butmay still be slower and errors may still occur

Autonomous stage

During the third or autonomous stage, the performance becomes increasingly

fine-tuned The execution or performance of the skill becomes virtually automatic,and errors that inhibit successful performance of the skill disappear The skill canoften be executed effortlessly, and there is much less demand on working memory

or "consciousness" at this stage Skilled performance improves gradually Whereas

a fact can often be learned in one trial, a skill can only be mastered after a relativelylong period of practice

2.3 Learning strategies

2.3.1 Definition of learning strategies

Over the last two decades, the study of learning strategies has seen an

"explosion of activity" (R.Ellis, 1994) with the contributions of such well-knownresearchers as Tarone (1981), Weinstein and Mayer (1986), Rubin (1987), O'Malleyand Chamot (1990), Oxford (1990) and Cohen (1998) These studies have helpedfigure out a comprehensive overview of learning strategies

Concerning the definition of learning strategies, there have been someconsiderable differences in the existing literature Rubin (1987) gave quite a broaddefinition of learning strategies: "Learning strategies are ones which contribute tothe development of the language system which the learner constructs and affectlearning directly" (1987: 23) Tarone (1981) defined learning strategies as attempts

to develop linguistic and sociolinguistic competence in the target language Thesedefinitions are too general in comparison to the complex nature of learningstrategies

Oxford, R L., (1990) claimed that "Learning strategies are specific actionstaken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more selfdirected, more effective and more transferable to new situations" (1990:5) Thisdefinition is judged to be quite comprehensive as it not only covers the cognitivebut also the affective aspects of learning strategies (i.e to increase enjoyment inlearning) However, Oxford's definition is not sufficient in the sense that it regardslearning strategies as “specific actions", i.e learning strategies are behavioral, and

therefore, they are mostly observable However, a lot of studies in this field haveshown that learning strategies are difficult to observe as they are not onlybehavioral.

In an attempt to define learning strategies in a more sensible manner, Weinsteinand Mayer (in Ellis, 1994: 531) claimed that learning strategies " are the behaviorsand thoughts that a learner engages in during learning that are intended to influencethe learner's encoding process" Thus, these two authors see learning strategies bothbehavioral and mental Their view has been shared by most researchers in strategystudies

The definition that has been widely accepted to date was proposed by O'Malleyand Chamot (1990) According to them, learning strategies are "the special thoughts

or behaviors that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn or retain newinformation" (1990:1) In spite of being quite short, their definition covers the mostimportant aspects of learning strategies, that is learning strategies are both mentaland behavioral (therefore both observable and unobservable), and learningstrategies are individually characterized (i.e every learner's strategies are different).Because of its comprehensive features, the present study utilized this definition asthe key direction in its investigation

2.3.2 Classification of learning strategies

Much of the earlier research (Rubin 1975 and 1981; Stern 1975; Naiman et al1978) focused on compiling inventories of the learning strategies that learners wereobserved to use or reported to use

Rubin (1981) proposed a classification scheme that subsumes learningstrategies under two primary groupings and a number of subgroups Rubin's firstprimary category, consisting of strategies that directly affect learning, includesclarification/ verification, monitoring, memorization, guessing/ inductive reasoning,deductive reasoning and practice The second category, consisting of strategies thatcontribute indirectly to learning, includes creating practice opportunities and usingproduction tricks such as communication strategies An alternative classification

scheme proposed by Naiman et al (1978) contains five broad categories of learningstrategies and a number of secondary categories The primary classification includes

an active task approach, realization of language as a means of communication andinteraction, management of affective demands and monitoring of second languageperformance

Subsequent descriptive studies have endeavored to identify broad classes oflearning strategies, under which a large number of more specific strategies can begrouped The works of Wenden (1983), Oxford (1990), O'Malley et al (1985a and1985b), O'Malley and Chamot 1990) have made an important contribution to ourknowledge of learning strategies Wenden's (1983) research examined the strategiesthat adult foreign language learners use in order to direct their own learning Sheidentifies three general categories of self-directing strategies: (1) knowing aboutlanguage (relating to what language and language learning involves, (2) planning(relating to what and how of language learning) and (3) self-evaluation (relating toprogress in learning and the learner's response to the learning experience) Wenden'sframework was devised as a basis for learner training

Oxford, R., (1990) built on the earlier classifications with the aim of subsumingwithin her taxonomy virtually every strategy previously mentioned in the literature.Oxford (1990) draws a general distinction between direct and indirect strategies.The former consists of memory, cognitive and compensation strategies while thelatter includes metacognitive, affective and social strategies However, Oxford'sclassification of learning strategies is somewhat complicated and confusing as shetreats compensation strategies as a direct type of learning strategies and memorystrategies as separate ones from cognitive strategies

Perhaps, the framework that has been most useful and generally accepted is O'Malleyand Chamot (1990)'s In O'Malley and Chamot's framework, three major types of strategiesare distinguished in accordance with the information processing model, on which theirresearch is based Cognitive strategies “operate directly on incoming information,manipulating it in ways that enhance learning “(O’Malley and Chamot, 1990:45) Thesubtypes of these strategies presented in table 2.1 were identified by O'Malley and Chamot

on the basis of their several descriptive studies on learning strategies used by secondlanguage learners

Learning strategy Definition

Table 2.1 Learning strategy definition and classification (O'Malley and Chamot 1990, 119)

A Metacognitive Strategies

Planning

Advance organizers Previewing the main ides and concepts of the material to

be learned, often by skimming the text for the organizing principle

Directed attention Deciding in advance to attend in general to a learning

task and to ignore irrelevant distracters

Functional planning Planning for and rehearsing linguistic components

necessary to carry out an upcoming language task.Selective attention Deciding in advance to attend to specific aspects of

input, often by scanning for key words, concepts, and/orlinguistic markers

Self-management Understanding the conditions that help one learn and

arranging for the presence of those conditions

Monitoring

Self-monitoring Checking one’s comprehension during listening or

reading or checking the accuracy and/or appropriateness

of one’s oral or written production while it is takingplace

Evaluation

Self-evaluation Checking the outcomes of one’s own language learning

against a standard after it has been completed

B Cognitive strategies

Resourcing Using target language reference materials such as

dictionaries, encyclopedias, or textbook.

Repetition Imitating a language model, including overt practice and

silent rehearsalGrouping Classifying words, terminology or concepts according to their

attributes or meaning

Deduction Applying rules to understand or produce the second language

or making up rules based on language analysis

Imagery Using visual images (either mental or actual) to understand or

remember new informationAuditory representation Planning back in one's mind the sound of a word, phrase

or longer language sequence

Key word method Remembering a new word in the second language by:

(1) identifying a familiar word in the first language that sounds like or otherwise resembles the new word, and (2) generating easily recalled images of some relationship with the first language homonym and the new word in the second language

Elaboration Relating new information to prior knowledge, relating

different parts of new information to each other, or making meaningful personal associations with the new information.Transfer Using previous linguistic knowledge or prior skills to assist

comprehension or production

Inferencing Using available information to guess meanings of the new

items predict outcomes or fill in missing information

Note taking Writing down key words or concept in abbreviated verbal,

graphic or numerical form while listening or reading

Summarizing Making a mental, oral or written summary of new information

gained through listening or reading

Recombination Constructing a meaningful sentence or larger language

sequence by combining known elements in a new way.

Translation Using the first language as a base for understanding and/ or

producing the second language

C Social/Affective strategies

Question for clarification Eliciting from a teacher or peer additional explanations,

rephrasing, examples or verification

Cooperation Working together with one or more peers to solve a problem,

pool information, check a learning task, model a language activity, or get feedback on oral or written performance.Self-talk Reducing anxiety by using mental techniques that make one

feel competent to do the learning task

This classification of learning strategies is comprehensive and sufficient and it

is applicable to learning strategy studies on four English disciplines Therefore, thecurrent study will adopt O'Malley and Chamot's classification of learning strategies

as the theoretical framework for investigation

2.4 Strategy Training

2.4.1 Strategy Training

Anderson, N J., (1996) argues that language learning will be facilitated ifstudents become more aware of the range of possible strategies that they canconsciously select during language learning and language use The view taken isthat the most efficient way for learner awareness to be heightened is by havingteachers provide strategies-based instruction to students as a part of the foreignlanguage curriculum A variety of approaches to providing student-directedlanguage learning and language use strategy instruction are discussed

Cohen (1998) believes that explicitly teaching students how to apply languagelearning and language use strategies can enhance students’ effort to reach languageprogram goals because it encourages students to find their own pathways to success,and thus it promotes learner autonomy and self-direction He also emphasizes that

strategies are not inherently ‘good’ or ‘effective’, but rather need to be evaluated interms of their effectiveness for the individual learner in the completion of thelanguage task at hand Choosing an effective strategy depends on many factors,including the nature of language task (its structure, purpose, and demands),individual learner differences (such as age, gender, learning style preferences,language learning aptitude, prior experience in learning other foreign languages,career orientation, and personal characteristics), and the current and intended levels

of language proficiency No single strategy will be appropriate for all learners forall tasks, and individual learners can and should apply the various strategies indifferent ways, according to their personal language learning needs

The goal of strategy training is to explicitly teach students how, when and whystrategies can be used to facilitate their efforts at learning and using a foreignlanguage Vogely (1995) drew some conclusions from her research on 83 Spanishcollege students’ strategy use in performing listening comprehension task as thatbeing strategic was not simply a matter of knowing what strategy to use, but alsoknow how to use it successfully She concluded that teachers could help learnersbridge the gap between ‘knowing what’ and ‘knowing how’ A further goal ofstrategy training is to promote learner autonomy and learner self-direction byallowing students to choose their own strategies and to do so spontaneously, withoutcontinued prompting from the language teacher Learners should be able to monitorand evaluate the relative effectiveness of their strategy use, and more fully developtheir problem-solving skills

2.4.2 Approaches to Strategy Training

Explicit training in the use of a broad range of strategies for learning foreignlanguage vocabulary, and for grammar, reading, writing, listening, and speakingskills has become a prominent issue in language acquisition research Efforts instrategy training have been undertaken and researched for some time in firstlanguage pedagogy, especially with regard to reading and parallel efforts inassessing foreign language strategy training have also appeared in the literature (seeO’Malley and Chamot, 1990)

The first approach to strategy training has been suggested by Pearson and Dole(1987) with reference to first language, but it can be also applied to the study ofsecond and foreign languages as well This model targets isolated strategies byincluding explicit modeling and explanation of the benefits of applying a specificstrategy, extensive functional practice with the strategy (ranging from highlystructured practice to independent strategy selection and use), and then anopportunity for transfer of the strategy to new learning contexts Students maybetter understand the applications of the various strategies if they are first modeled

by the teacher and then practiced individually After a range or set of strategies havebeen introduced and practiced, the teacher can further encourage learners to takeresponsibility for the selection, use, and evaluation of the various strategies theyhave been taught

As for the second approach to strategy training, Oxford, R L., (1990) outline auseful sequence for the instruction of strategies that emphasizes explicit strategyawareness, discussion of the benefits of strategy use, functional and contextualizedpractice with the strategies, self-evaluation and monitoring of languageperformance, and suggestions for or demonstrations of the transferability of thestrategies to new language tasks This sequence is not prescriptive regardingstrategies that the learners are supposed to use, but rather descriptive of the variousstrategies that they could use for a broad range of learning tasks After a range or set

of strategies have been introduced and practiced, the teacher can further encourageindependent strategy use and promote learner autonomy by helping learners takeresponsibility for the selection, use, and evaluation of the various strategies thatthey have been taught

With regard to the third approach to strategy training, Chamot and M.O’Malley’s (1994) sequence is especially useful after students have already hadpractice applying a board range of strategies in a variety of contexts Their approach

to helping students complete language learning tasks can be described as a

four-stage problem-solving process: planning, monitoring, problem-solving, and evaluation Each of these stages help students become more aware of their strategy

use, have a chance to practice using and transferring the strategies, engage in monitoring and evaluation of strategy use, and take part in discussions about therationale behind the strategies These instructional frameworks can be used invarious combinations to complement each other and add variety to a strategytraining program.

self-2.4.3 Strategies-based Instruction

A variety of instructional models for foreign language strategy trainingprograms have already been developed and put into practice in various educationalsettings The options to be suggested include: general study-skills training,awareness training both through lectures and through workshops, peer tutoring, andthe insertion of strategy discussion into the textbooks, videotaped mini-courses, andstrategies-based instruction In order to serve as a theoretical background for thestudy the strategies-based instruction is properly discussed in this part

Strategies-Based Instruction (SBI) is a learner-centered approach to teaching

that extends classroom strategy training to include both explicit and implicitintegration of strategies into the course content Students experience the advantages

of systematically applying strategies to the learning and use of the language they arestudying In addition they have opportunities to share their own preferred strategieswith the other students in the class and to increase their strategy repertoires withinthe context of the typical language tasks that they are asked to perform The teachercan individualize the strategy training, suggest language-specific strategies, andreinforce strategies at the same time that they are presenting the regular coursecontent

In a typical SBI classroom strategy training situation, the teachers:

1 describe, model, and give examples of potentially useful strategies;

2 elicit additional examples from students based on the students’ own learningexperiences;

3 lead small group/whole-class discussions about strategies;

4 encourage their students to experiment with a broad range of strategies; and

5 Integrate strategies into everyday class materials, explicitly and implicitlyembedding them into the language tasks to provide for contextualizedstrategy practice.

The first four of these components have often stood alone as the approach whenstrategies are included in the language classroom The field has referred to thisapproach as ‘strategy training,’ or ‘learner training’ The component that makes it

strategies-based instruction is the added element of explicit (as well as implicit)

integration of the training into the very fabric of the instructional program

Teachers have at least three options for how to conduct SBI:

1 They start with the established course materials and then determinewhich strategies to insert and where

2 They start with asset of strategies that they wish to focus on and designactivities around them

3 They insert strategies spontaneously into the lessons whenever it seemsappropriate

They also allow students to choose their own strategies and do sospontaneously, without continued prompting from the language teacher.Whether or not strategies are embedded into the textbooks, classroom teachersare always to integrate the strategy training into the regular language coursework, thus providing the students with contextualized strategy practice

The goal of this kind of instruction is to help foreign language students becomemore aware of:

 How they learn most effectively;

 How they can enhance their own comprehension and production of the targetlanguage; and

 How the can continue to learn on their own and communicate in the targetlanguage after they leave the language classroom

In other words, strategies-based instruction aims to assist learners in becomingmore responsible for their efforts in learning and using the target language It also

aims to assist them in becoming more effective learners by allowing them toindividualize the language learning experience.

In principle, SBI is not specific to any given teaching methodology or culture It

is possible that a given teaching method might favor certain strategies over others.SBI is not prescriptive, but rather provides panoply of strategies, and students mustdetermine which to use, when, for what purposes, and how to use them

Although it may be seem that in-class strategy training takes valuable timeaway from teaching the language content, teachers who have used this approachhave reported that their students become more efficient in completing classroomlanguage tasks, take more responsibility for self-directing their learning outside ofclass, and gain more confidence in their ability to learn and use the target language

2.5 The theory of Reading

2.5.1 Definition

For many students, reading is a very important skill, particularly in English as asecond or foreign language Concerning the role of reading, Carrell (1988:1) statedthat "Without solid reading proficiency, second language learners cannot perform atlevels they must in order to succeed" Anderson, N J., (1999) also confirms that

"the more exposure a student has to language through reading, the greater thepossibilities that overall language proficiency will increase"

Reading plays such a significant part in the success of second language learningand it is essential to understand what reading really is However, the act of reading

is neither completely understood nor easily described In a general term, reading isdefined as "an active, fluent process which involves the reader and the readingmaterial in building meaning" (Anderson, 1999:1) This definition of reading hasbeen generally shared by other researches

According to Rumelhart (1977), reading involves the reader, the text and theinteraction between the reader and text Aebersold and Field (1997:15) share thesame view on reading: "Reading is what happens when people look at a text andassign meaning to the written symbols in that text The text and the reader are the

two physical entities necessary for the reading process to start It is, however, theinteraction between the text and the reader that constitutes actual meaning" Theseinteractions, in their opinion, are the interactions between purpose and manner ofreading and through reading strategies and schema Purpose determines how peopleread a text People may read the text to understand it (reading for fullcomprehension), or simply to get the general idea (skimming), to find the part thatcontains the information they need (scanning) Readers also use some mentalactivities that are often referred to as reading strategies to construct meaning from atext In addition, readers base on their previous knowledge that they bring to the text

to assist their reading comprehension This prior knowledge is known as theschema Research in reading has shown that schema plays an important role inhelping the reader to comprehend a text

The above-mentioned views on reading are only general ones In order tounderstand more about the nature of reading, it is necessary to take a closer look atthe actual process that really takes place in the reader's mind So far, several modelshave been proposed to describe this process The next section is going to presentthese models of reading and discuss their strengths and weaknesses

2.5.2 Models of Reading Process

Up to now, attempts to describe the interaction between reader and text havebeen numerous and different views of the reading process have been proposed.These views are often grouped under three different reading models named thebottom-up, the top-down and the interactive ones

2.5.2.1 Bottom-up Model

Early researchers often assumed a passive, bottom up view of second languagereading, that is it was viewed as "a decoding process of reconstructing the author'sintended meaning" via recognizing the printed letters and words and building up ameaning for a text from the smallest textual units at the bottom (letters and words)

to larger and larger units at the top (phrases, clauses, inter-sentential linkages) Inother words, in the bottom-up reading model, the reader begins with the written text

(the bottom) and constructs meaning from the letters, words, phrases and sentencesfound within and then processes the text in a linear fashion The incoming data fromthe text must be received before the high level mental stages of understandingtransform and recode the data,

Gough (1972) who supported this reading model explained the sequence of thereading system from a bottom-up perspective as follows: First, the graphemeinformation enters through the visual system and is transformed at the first levelfrom a letter character, which is from a grapheme representation to a phonemicrepresentation Second, the phonemic representation is converted, at level two into aword The meaning units or words then pass on to the third level and meaning isassimilated into the knowledge system

In short, the bottom-up model tends to be linear as they start with the printedstimuli and proceed to higher level stage, one step after another The basis forbottom-up processing is the linguistic knowledge of the reader However, thismodel reveals several shortcomings in describing in describing the actual readingprocess

An important drawback of this model, as pointed out by Samuel and Kamil(1988:31), is " the lack of feedback, in that no mechanism is provided to allow forprocessing stages which occur later in the system to influence processing whichoccurs earlier in the system Because of the lack of feedback loops in the earlybottom - up models, it was difficult to account for sentence - context effects and therole of prior knowledge of text topic as facilitating variables in word recognitionand comprehension"

Due to this limitation, and together with the advent of Goodman's top-downview of reading, the bottom-up view of reading fell into disfavor

can, a message which has been encoded by a writer as a graphic display".According to this point of view, the reader reconstructs meaning from writtenlanguage by using the graphonic, syntactic and semantic systems of the language,but he/she merely uses cues from the three levels of language to predict meaning,and most important, confirms those predictions by relating them to his/her pastexperiences and knowledge of the language.

Although Goodman did not characterize his theory as a top-down model,several other reading experts have considered it as basically a concept-driven top-down pattern in which “higher level processes interact with and direct the flow ofinformation through low level processes" (Stanovich 1980:34) In this top-downapproach, the reader begins with set of hypotheses or predictions about the meaning

of text he is about to read and then selectively sample the text to determine whether

or not his predictions are correct Reading is a process of reconstructing meaningrather than decoding form, and the reader only resorts to decoding if other meansfail This perspective was shared by many other reading specialists such as Carrel(1988), Clarke and Siberstern (1977), as they viewed reading as " an active process

in which the second language reader is an active information processor who predictswhile sampling only parts of the actual text" (in Carrell, P R., 1983a:3)

Just like bottom-up models, top-down models do have some limitations Thesemodels "tend to emphasize such higher-level skills as the prediction of meaning bymeans of context clues or certain kinds of background knowledge at the expense ofsuch lower skills as the rapid and accurate identification of lexical and grammaticalform That is, in making the perfectly valid point that fluent reading is primarily acognitive process, they tend to deemphasize the perceptual and decodingdimensions of that process" (Eskey, 1988:93)

Samuel and Kamil (1988) also share the same view According to them, one ofthe problems for the top-down model is that for many texts, the reader has littleknowledge of the topic and cannot generate predictions A more serious problem isthat even if a skilled reader could generate predictions, the mount of time necessary

to generate a prediction may be greater than the amount of time the skilled readerneeds simply to recognize the words.

Due to the above limitation of both bottom-up and top-down models, a new andmore insightful model of reading process has been proposed by Rumelhart (1977),

Samuel, S and Kamil, M., (1988) under the name of interactive model.

2.5.2.3 Interactive Model

The interactive model combines elements of both bottom-up and top-downapproaches, assuming that " a pattern is synthesized based on information providedsimultaneously from several knowledge sources" (Stanovich, 1980:35)

Some other researchers have discussed reading as the process of combiningtextual information with the information a reader brings to a text In this view, thereading process is not simply a matter of extracting information from the text.Rather, it is one in which the reading activates a range of knowledge in the reader'smind that he or she uses, and that, in turn, may be refined and extended by the newinformation supplied by the text

Eskey (1988) defined the interactive model as a reading model that " posits aconstant interaction between bottom-up and top-down processing in reading, eachsource of information contributing to a comprehensive reconstruction of themeaning of the text"(1988:94) According to this view, good readers are regarded as

" both good decoders and good interpreters of texts, their decoding skills becomingmore automatic but no less important as their reading skill develops"(1988:94).Eskey also believed that to achieve both fluency and accuracy in reading,developing readers must work at perfecting both their bottom-up recognition skillsand their top-down interpretation strategies In other word, good reading- that is,fluent and accurate reading- can result only from a constant interaction betweenthese two processes

The following comment by Stanovich (1980) can summarize all the strengths ofthe interactive model over the other two models:

"Interactive models of reading appear to provide a more accurateconceptualization of reading performance than strictly top-down or bottom-upmodels When combined with an assumption of compensatory processing (that adeficit in any particular process will result in a greater reliance on their knowledgesources, regardless of their level in the processing hierarchy), interactive modelsprovide a better account of the existing data on the use of orthographic structure andsentence context by good and poor readers" (1980:32)

Therefore, it is generally agreed that the interactive model is the best one thatcan truly reflect the reading process that takes place in the reader's mind In thisprocess, the reader constantly shuttles between bottom-up and top-down processesand he cannot be successful in reading comprehension without either of these twoprocesses As this study focuses on reading strategies, the next part is going tosummarize some outstanding studies on reading strategies that have been carriedout

2.5.3 Reading strategies

2.5.3.1 Definition

Much attention has been paid to the study of reading in general and readingstrategies in particular Reading strategies are of interest for what they reveal aboutthe way the readers manage their interaction with written text and how thesestrategies are relate to text comprehension

As mentioned earlier, research in second language learning suggests thatlearners use a variety of strategies to assist them with the acquisition, storage andretrieval of information C Brantmeier (2002) defined reading strategies as "thecomprehension processes that readers use in order to make sense of what theyread"(2002:1) This process may involve skimming, scanning, guessing,recognizing cognates and word families, reading for meaning, predicting, activatinggeneral knowledge, making inferences, following references and separating mainideas from supporting ones (Barnet, 1988) Obviously, some strategies may be moreuseful than others with different types of reading texts and tasks