1. FACULTY OF EDUCATION
EDU 702: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
THE INFLUENCE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORTS AND TEACHING PRACTICES ON
YEAR TWO STUDENTS’ READING SKILL
A Comparative Study in Whole Language and Phonics Classes
BY:
NURUL HANA BINTI MOHD NAZRI (2011146955)
M. ED TESL (ED770)
PREPARED FOR:
ASSOCIATE PROF. DR. TEOH SIAN HOON

2. TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Chapter 1
Introduction 1–3
Statement of Research Problem 3–4
Research Objectives 5
Research Questions 5
Operational Definition 6–8
Significance of the Study 8
Limitation of the Study 8
Chapter 2
Literature Review 9 – 19
Chapter 3
Methodology 20
Research Design 20 – 21
Sample and Participants 21
Instrumentation 22 – 23
Data Analysis 23
Reference
Appendices

3. THE INFLUENCE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORTS AND TEACHING PRACTICES
ON YEAR TWO STUDENTS’ READING SKILL
A Comparative Study in Whole Language and Phonics Classes
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
In most ESL classrooms, recent changes in reading instruction have included a
movement away from the traditional skill-based approach to what has been
termed reading through ‘phonics’. However, many question the effectiveness in
the traditional approach as compared to the new and hip approach which is
practiced worldwide as being termed as the ‘whole language approach.
In Malaysia, the government has introduced this type of approach in the
new syllabus of English Language for the new curriculum, the KSSR. Starting
from the Year 1, the pupils will be exposed to the systematic reading instruction
as opposed to the past curriculum which firmly anchored to the skill-based
approach. Previously, the syllabus in English Language for primary school
divided into four major skills of a language which are listening, speaking, reading
and writing. However, the introductory of the new curriculum back in 2011, the
KSSR, proposed that English language teaching and learning should be diverted
from examination-oriented skills and more focus should be paid to the
communicative and authentic skills in the language. So, the government
introduced the new approach to the language which diverted away from the chalk
and talk lessons to a more sound system approach in order to gain basic literacy.

4. It is however a ‘back-to-basic-approach and conventional method’ whereby the
phonics is outlined as basic principles in learning to read as compared to the
whole-language that is considered as revolutionary. It also includes all the skills
needed in a language (listening and speaking, reading, writing) plus the language
art as a guideline in teaching and learning in primary schools. The assessment of
the subject is no longer summative, but a school-based assessment is
introduced. The students are assessed and evaluated through their six years of
primary schooling based on a banding system. Although English language
teachers who have been practitioners of this whole-language approach in KBSR
for the past years, this may seem a bit odd in a way of adapting phonics and
basal reading to their teaching.
The common element of these reading approaches however is still an
early focus on teaching of English grapheme-phoneme correspondence to read
and write alphabetically (decoding and encoding). Thus, for most ESL teachers,
early and systematic emphasis on decoding leads to better achievement than
less systematic phonics instruction. Although most studies on beginning reading
provide strong evidence that explicit teaching of phonics improves word
identification in reading (Adam,1990; Chall, 1967), they say little about the
differences in ways of learning phonics under the various kinds of reading
instruction (Thompson, Johnston, 1993). The question whether research
supports a ‘phonics first’ approach to the teaching of reading is especially hard to
answer since it is partly a matter of values and opinions (McKenna, Stahl,
Reinking,1994). Various lines of research demonstrate that children do not need

5. intensive phonics instruction to develop the functional command of letter or
sound patterns that they need as readers (Weaver,1990). Proponents of whole
language make it clear that phonics instruction is required (Goodman,1992;
Newman, Church, 1990), but distinguish between embedding phonics instruction
in whole language lessons and teaching isolated skills, as has been typical in
traditional approaches. It is assumed that embedded phonics instruction in the
context of reading authentic literature and invented spelling may be as effective
as other forms of phonics instruction (Freppon, Dahl, 1991).
The component of written language is much affected to the exposure of
the development of recognition and spelling. This exposure happens in all
language classes including the whole language classes. However, it may be
differences in the challenge of the material read by the children that lead to
variability in the use of various strategies and achievement (Beck,
McCaslin,1978). “The types of words which appear in beginning reading texts
may well exert a more powerful influence in shaping children’s word identification
strategies than the method of reading instruction” as being pointed out by Juel &
Roper-Schneider (1985).
1.2 Statement of Research Problem
For years, people have been searching for the best approach to teach children to
read. Traditionally, the use of phonics is a popular approach among the teachers
to teach reading by associating letters or graphemes with the sounds. However,
many questions on the effectiveness as learning to read with phonics have

6. ignored the literary element of reading (Puerro, Michelle, 1997). The way the
children learn to read will contribute on their cognitive development especially in
reading and writing. A general assumption is made that the way in which children
learn the written language differs according to the way the teacher presents it.
Normally, reading skill is evaluated as one of the language skill in
Malaysian school English language syllabus. Not much attention was given to the
materials such as stories as they did not being recorded as a formal evaluation.
Teachers should not be blamed as the pressure to pass the examination is
greater as compared to be a successful reader. Therefore, this has failed to
develop a reading-habit nation especially in the youngsters.
As this study is a replicate of a study that has been done previously by
Puerro and Michelle, 1997, the aim of the study is to observe the effects on
whole-language approach and basal-reading approach to improve reading skill.
First, this study aims to see through analysis of the errors, the children’s
conceptual understanding of the oral and written units and the relation between
those units. The second purpose is to interpret the children’s representations of
the written language in light of the instructional differences between the two
classes.

7. 1.3 Research Objective
This study is intended to see whether by adopting a social construction
perspective on literacy can make visible instructional influence on learning to
read. It is a comparative study which compares the Year 2 acquisition of literacy
in two different instructional settings. Reading development is observed both in
traditional setting of phonics classroom and in a whole language classroom.
The research aims to find out:
1. What strategies teachers can use to help students further develop
phonics skills and apply them actively in their learning;
2. Whether the development of phonics skills can enhance students’
confidence and competence in reading as well as spelling.
1.4 Research Questions
This study will be guided by the following research questions;
i. Will students in phonics classroom show higher achievement in reading as
compared to the students in whole language classroom?
ii. How do our students respond to phonics learning?

8. iii. How do teachers perceive phonics learning after two years’ experience in
adapting the pendulum swing of diverting the instructional methods in
teaching reading, from a whole-language approach in KBSR syllabus to
sound system and phonics approach in KSSR?
1.5 Operational Definition
1.5.1 Whole-language approach
The whole-language approach advocates the holistic teaching of reading
throughout the language curriculum and emphasis the importance of a print-rich
environment (Hempenstall, 1996). The teaching of letter-sound correspondences
with blending skills relatively little direct instructions, being taught explicitly and
happens during higher level reading skills. This assumes that children who learn
language in whole-language approach acquire the knowledge and language
skills through their reading for meaning experience with relatively little explicit
teaching.
The term "whole language" does not refer only to providing interesting
comprehensible texts and helping children understand less comprehensible
texts. It involves instilling a love of literature, problem-solving and critical thinking,
collaboration, authenticity, personalized learning, and much more (Goodman,
Bird, and Goodman, 1991). In terms of the process of literacy development,
however, the Comprehension Hypothesis is a central part of whole language.
Reading pedagogy, according to the Comprehension Hypothesis, focuses on
providing students with interesting, comprehensible texts, and the job of the

9. teacher is to help children read these texts, that is, help make them
comprehensible. The direct teaching of "skills" is helpful only when it makes texts
more comprehensible. More precisely, comprehension of messages is necessary
for language acquisition and literacy development, but it is not sufficient. It is
certainly possible to comprehend a text or message and not acquire anything.
We acquire when we understand messages that contain aspects of language
that we have not yet acquired but are developmentally ready.
1.5.2 Phonics
According to Chitravelu et al. (1995) in ELT Methodology: Principles and
Practice, phonics is a system of teaching children to read by paying special
attention to help children to see the relationships between English graphemes
and their sounds, and blending them together to make out meaningful words.
Through the phonics approach, children will first learn the isolated sound of each
grapheme and then they put the sound together to form the whole words. The
theory underlying in this approach comprised that the language is being learnt is
phonemically regularly. Once the children learned the phonemic elements, they
can obtain the sound of the words by blending the sounds in sequence. And
once they had attained the sound of the word, they will get to understand the
meaning of it.

10. 1.5.3 KSSR
KSSR stands for Kurrikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah which started to
be implemented in Malaysian school as the new syllabus replacing KBSR.
Ministry of Education Malaysia has introduced the standardized English
Language Curriculum for Primary Schools (Kurikulum Standard Sekolah
Rendah), which will be implemented phase by phase starting from 2011. The
new curriculum emphasizes on holistic development of the students which
encompasses new elements such as grooming of creativity and innovation,
entrepreneurship, and integration of Information and Communication Technology
(ICT). In English language, the underlying principle to teach reading is ‘back-to-
basic’ skill which introduces the phonics skills in teaching reading skill.
1.6 Significance of the Study
The results of this study will be beneficial for many reasons. Most teachers will
be able to use these results to refine their lesson plans by adapting the new
curriculum syllabus (KSSR) into their teaching. Furthermore, the teachers will
utilize the results to make modifications to the reading instructional strategies
used in their classrooms.

11. 1.7 Limitation of the Study
Since the observations collected will be limited to small sample population and
related to two contrasted instructional approaches, the hasty generalization
should be aware of. Maybe the classes will be observed in different angle and
views as to observe the reading and writing lessons. Perhaps the differences
between the two settings should be highlighted as they may contribute to the
result.
CHAPTER 2
2.0 Literature Review
2.1 Phonological Awareness
The phonological awareness can be defined as having “….an awareness of
sounds in spoken (not written) words that is revealed by such abilities as
rhyming, matching initial consonants, and counting the number of phonemes in
spoken words” (Stahl & Murray, 1994, p.221). Furthermore, the phonological
awareness of oral language is seen as the vital key to the development of
reading because it helps for “…quick access to oral vocabulary in lexical memory
because it is stored in phonological forms…” (Koda, 2005, p.33).
On the other hand, it can be argued that the ESL learners may be prompted
to certain phonological awareness in their first language (L1) that may not exist in
English language. A research conducted by Lesaux & Siegel (2003) opposed the

12. belief by suggesting that learner’s phonological awareness in their L1 does
positively affect reading acquisition in the ESL. Thus, in addition to a sufficient
vocabulary base, phonological awareness (in learners’ L1 or L2) can be
distinguished as an essential component to the development and acquisition of
reading skill.
The Figure 1 shows the interactive model of reading acknowledges that
reading skill acquires the interaction of both bottom-up processes, such as
decoding skills (including phonological and orthographic awareness) and top-
down processes (knowledge of context and culture) as a way for one to be able
to read effectively.
Contextual knowledge Social and Cultural
knowledge
Grapheme Input Working Memory Interpretation Input
Vocabulary knowledge Orthographic knowledge Phonological knowledge
Figure 1: Interactive Model of Reading
Adapted from: Rumelhart (1985)

13. There is a belief that stated most children will learn to read no matter what
method of instruction is used (Baumell, 2003). However, if children are struggling
with this literacy skill since the early age, the negative impact will affect the other
cognitive skills in listening, speaking and writing. Reading has long been
considered as the essential skill that children need to learn. Once the children
acquire the reading skill, they will be able to obtain any information from any
reading materials as well as to enjoy the literature read. Thus, there have been
debates over the best method to teach children the reading skill. Figure 2
discusses the reading instruction which can be referred to three types of
language instruction: 1. Whole language approach; 2. Whole word approach; 3.
Phonics-based approach.
Figure 2: Reading Instruction Approaches
Adapted from: Sumanpreet Purewal (2008)
2.2 Whole-language Approach

14. For the past years, phonics skill has been taught as the guideline to teach
reading. However, the alternate method, the whole language approach has been
accepted as the new effective trend. The debates are ongoing on which methods
on the efficacy on both approaches.
On one end of the continuum, there are proponents of the whole language
approach who claim that “…children who learn to read are those who are read to,
and the stories and books they hear are chosen for their interest and appeal, and
not for the sequence and scope of vocabulary and language structures” (Piper,
2003, p.272). The idea suggests that learners should learn to read by making the
meaning of the language rather than on decoding skills. The underlying premise
of the whole language approach is that
“language is actually learned from whole to part. We first use whole
utterances in familiar situations. Then later we see and develop
parts, and begin to experiment with their relationship to each other
and to the meaning of the whole. The whole is always more than the
sum of the parts and the value of any part can only be learned within
the whole utterance in a real speech event” (Goodman, 1986, p.19).
This perspective shows how whole language approach is corresponded
with how language is acquired. The whole language approach therefore suggests
that learners would be able to acquire meaning from the text as well as
implementing the higher-level processing skills such as ‘prediction’, where
reading is perceived as a ‘psycholinguistic guessing game’ (Sumanpreet, 2008).

15. Krashen (1985) identifies whole language approach as The Comprehension
Hypothesis (a.k.a Input Hypothesis). The hypothesis claims that the development
of literacy and language occurs in only one way which is when children
understand the messages conveyed. The proponents of the whole language
approach state that this approach is preferable as it integrates every language
components (speaking, listening, reading and writing) into the teaching of reading
therefore this will improve the comprehension skill (Holland & Hall, 1989). The
whole language classroom also requires the rich in print and print-oriented
activities environment. However, Goodman et al. (1991) state that the term of
whole language classroom should not be focusing on providing interesting
comprehensible texts but it also involves instilling a love of literature, problem
solving and critical thinking, collaboration, authenticity, personalized learning, and
much more.
The whole language proponents also claim that phonetic decoding skills are
essential for fluent reading as the skills are learned through reading experience
(Smith, 1988). They believe that when children can relate experience to reading,
reading becomes more personal (Pickering, 1989). This shows that the whole
language proponents believe that phonetic decoding skills should be acquire by
early readers but in an explicit ways rather than teaching the phonetics skill as an
isolated skill.
On the other hand, Wood (1984) reported that more negative effects than the
positive were found in order to support this method of teaching reading subskills.
Wood also stated that not much research out there to indicate the sound

16. empirical evidence to validate wither the specific skills supported or the sequence
of their instruction in modern basal programs.
A study conducted by Holland (1989), presented a comparative analysis of
the effect of both basal and whole language approaches on the reading
achievement of first grade students. The result of the study by analyzing of
variance indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in
reading achievement between the traditional approaches of phonics with the
whole language approach. Another study regarding the approach was conducted
by Shapiro (1988) that found the comparison of vocabulary generated by the
children with the phonetics skill basic indicated that high frequency vocabulary
was nearly identical. But the low frequency words that were used by the children
were judged to be more current. And the misspellings demonstrated as an over
generalization of phonics principles. Shapiro concluded that the whole language
approach does not limit children’s exposure to systematic repetition of important
vocabulary.
Stahl and Miller (1989) claimed that whole language approaches might be
effective for teaching functional features of reading such as print concepts and
expectations about reading. In order to help students master the word recognition
skills as prerequisite to effective comprehension requires a more direct approach.
So, the use of whole language activities are fundamentally important in teaching
reading skills such as the use of context for monitoring and predictive purposes,
vocabulary enrichment to support printed words for meaning, discussion that
would encourage reading for comprehension, integration of reading, writing and

17. spelling. Relatively, Bracey (1992) suggests that the teaching of reading should
be a balanced approach which integrates both instructional methods. Thus, one
of the major limitations of the whole language approach is the assumption that all
‘good’ readers rely on the meaning-making process when reading; however, the
use of context is used by both skilled and beginning readers but in different ways
(Sumanpreet, 2008).
2.3 Phonics Approach
On the other end of the continuum, a phonics-based approach focuses
mainly on the teaching of decoding skills, isolated in a systematic manner.
Phonics instruction teaches letter-sound associations and how to use these
associations to read words. When provided systematically, phonics instruction
helps children learn to read more effectively than does non-systematic instruction
or instruction without phonics. Phonics benefits reading, spelling, and
comprehension in many readers, and effects persist even after instruction ends
(Ehri et al., 2001). Phonics is an extremely important component of literacy
instruction because English is fundamentally an alphabetic code (Moats, 2000;
Venezky,1999); spoken language is rendered into a written form using letters to
represent the sounds in words. Phonics, along with other strategies, is used to
recognize words. Ehri (Ehri & McCormick, 1988; Ehri & Sweet, 1991) suggested
four strategies that a reader might use to recognize a word: (1) predicting—using
context and linguistic knowledge to make a likely guess; (2) decoding—
converting individual letters and patterns of letters into sounds and blending
these sounds; (3) analogy—using word parts including morphemes to analyze

18. the structure of a word; and (4) recall—retrieving a known word from memory.
Decoding and analogy strategies both require knowledge of phonics.
We believe that there are three very important points to make about word
recognition and phonics. First, phonics, like any other word-recognition tool, is
used to assist the reader in obtaining an approximate pronunciation for a written
word that, when checked for a match with his or her store of known spoken
words and the context, gets the reader one step closer to the meaning
(Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985). Second, phonics is a means to an
end and not an end unto itself. Third, a sight strategy eventually predominates as
readers become more and more skilled.
Chall discovered that children that learn to read by using the phonics
approach showed greater achievement in word recognition as well as reading
comprehension (Chall, 1967). Flesch (1981) supported the finding by claiming
that children who learn “phonics first” can read more words at the end of their first
grade as compared to the “look and say” learners. Flesch further explained that
those children who learn to read by the latter method rely much on the pictures
and context clues so that they don’t learn the mechanics of learning to read as it
is often a guessing game (Flesch, 1981). Elridge and Baird (1996) state that a
phonemic awareness approach was claimed to be superior to the whole
language, as the whole language readers who are taught to read words and
stories begin with the same steps of children who learn to read by using the
phonics based approach. Lapp and Flood (1997) observed that most teachers
agree that children’s acquisition of phonics skills is a vital part of learning to read.

19. They concur that “children who start slowly in acquiring decoding skills rarely
become strong readers” (Lapp & Flood, 1997, p.698).
However, the question often arises on the effectiveness of using the
decoding skills in reading because its lacks of meaningful literature. According to
Flesch (1955), through phonics ones can learn the “natural system of learning
how to read”. For years, researches have shown that people learned to read by
memorizing letters and sounds with much ease by phonics approach. As time
goes by, the teaching of reading word by word had claimed to become tedious,
boring and primitive. It resembled the time when people had to memorize
pictures and symbols for words (Flesch, 1955). According to Weaver (1994) and
Krashen (1996), the comprehension hypothesis does not forbid the direct
instruction of phonics. They pointed out that proponents of phonics merely
support the teaching of just the straight-forward phonics rules, and expect
children to “induce” the more complex rules. This can be seen as the position of
those sometimes considered to be anti-phonics.
There is this argument by Fox (1986), stating that learning systematic
phonics is definitely not enough and there has been relationship between reading
and meaning-making. However, phonics is seen as a helpful tool to achieve
effectiveness in learning to read. Thus, a relevant experimental research finding
suggests that phonics knowledge is a prerequisite to early reader accurate
identification of written words (Chall, 1983; Share & Stanovich, 1995). A study
has been conducted by Griffith (1992) to find out the effect of phonemic
awareness on the literacy development of first grade children in a phonics class

20. or a whole language class. Phonemic awareness is the meta linguistics ability
that allows children to reflect the features on spoken language (Griffith, 1992). A
correlational study by Juel (1988) identified the phonemic awareness as a
powerful predictor of reading achievement in first grade. So, the instruction that
assists both phoneme awareness and decoding skill is vitally important in
teaching reading. Overall, it is important to take a balanced approach to phonics
instruction, teaching children letter-sound associations as well as letter
sequences and rhymes, and helping children to use guides from the words that
they already know to decode new words.
Teachers’ personality also plays an important role in children’s knowledge
construction. Many have argued that children’s failure to acquire the reading skill
might be evidence that the instruction was lacking (Calfee, 1982). Children learn
in various ways, not only from the direct instructions given by the teachers in the
classroom, but through their observation on how teacher relates with their peers
(Brazee, 1986). De Walt (1988) states that the main issue most likely will be that
teachers and administers need to work together that the reading program is to
cater the needs in helping teachers to carry out effective reading instruction. De
Walt also suggests that the focus should be placed on training the teachers to
effectively deliver and guide the methods used. The encouragement and
challenge to students’ ideas through the use of variety of materials which can
encourage children to become active and interested learners will be beneficial in
helping them to acquire the reading skill (De Walt,1988). In this sense, instruction
should focus on immersing students in language. Teachers can employ the use

21. of the story books to engage students in active discussions in the hope that
learning will be more meaningful for students.
Schools are often evaluated on how well students perform on the
standardized tests. Thus, teachers may feel pressured to teach the test and
stressed out to find a reading program that will produce high achievement in
reading. Education express concern over declining reading achievement scores
(Chall, 1983). Though research on phonics approach versus whole language
approach has been plentiful, but the results from study to study can be conflicting
and contradictory. This has caused a great pressure placed on teachers and
administers for having high standardized test scores.
As time goes by, Malaysia’s education system undergoes big changes. In
1983, Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (KBSR) was introduced and made some
changes to the education system. 10 years later, its name was changed to
Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah (KBSR). Now, a new curriculum was
introduced a year ago, 2011 to replace KBSR: Kurikulum Standard Sekolah
Rendah (KSSR). KSSR was introduced to reorganize and upgrade the current
curriculum. Changes can be clearly seen in the aspect of key areas, curriculum
documentation, curriculum design, curriculum organization, curriculum content,
elements and focus. In KSSR, we can clearly see the big change in this syllabus
is that phonics is emphasized as a new method to teach reading which is
different from a whole language approach that was used in KBSR. In modules of
reading of KSSR, the whole module is focused on phonics while in KBSR,
phonics is taught under the language content known as ‘sound system’. For ten

22. years, we have been comfortable with the Whole Language approach under
KBSR. Now, through KSSR, most probably we are about to see the pendulum
swings to the other side.
CHAPTER 3
3.0 Methodology
Before further discussion on the methods used for this study, it is important to
emphasize that this study is a comparative study. This study compares Year 2’s
(second graders) acquisition of literacy in reading skill in two different
instructional settings. One teacher uses the whole language approach by
integrating the language skills in the classroom. While another teacher applies
the phonics based approach as the instruction in the classroom.

23. In collecting data for this research, the research instruments are divided
into two categories which are (i) qualitative data and (ii) quantitative data. The
methods to collect qualitative data are interview and observation while the
method in collecting data for quantitative data is a formal assessment on
student’s phonics skills and reading aloud are built into the oral examination in
both terms.
3.1 Research Design
An interview and a reading test (Appendix 1) on the students’ mastery of sounds,
their confidence in sounding out words and their competence in reading aloud
are conducted at the beginning of the first semester of schooling to find out the
students’ confidence level and how much they know. The same test will be
conducted again at the end of the second term to measure the students’ change
in performance and confidence level. Some open-ended questions will be asked
to seek students’ view on the learning process and their experience in learning to
read in English language. Students’ oral presentation during the teaching and
learning process will be recorded and transcribed as the evidence of learning and
improvement. The observations will be conducted during the process of teaching
to check and not down students’ progress, their problems and evaluate the
instructional strategies.

24. Beside observations and interviews, formal assessment on students’
phonics skills and reading aloud will be conducted to inform about the students’
progress in developing phonics skills.
3.2 Sample and Participants of the Study
Sample consisted of 40 Year 2 students, members of two different
classes situated in a same school, located in sub-urban area in Wilayah
Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Both of the settings come from nearly
identical in terms of socio-economic and ethnic background. Groups of 20
students are formed in each class. At the beginning of the school year, the two
group formed are similar in the age (the average is 7) and language skills (in
each class the teacher are asked to select children with average levels). As
being mentioned before, the essential difference is only the instructional
methods. The teachers devoted between 4 to 5 hours per week of teaching
English language in primary school.
Group 1
i. Receive traditional-approach instruction with a focus on symbol-sound
relationships from the beginning of the school year
ii. Using the 26 basic graphemes in English writing
Group 2

25. i. Receive a whole-language approach by using literature and writing
experiences with incidental attention to phonics
ii. Using the phonemes in both the vowels and consonants of English
language
3.3 Instrumentation
The observation is the main research instrument for the study. A Classroom Jolly
Phonics Observation Checklist in Appendix 2 is used as the guideline. The
checklist then will be summarized, compared and interpreted. The field notes
taken at each classroom observation will also be one of the instrumentation in
guiding this study. A pre-test or a diagnostic oral test will be conducted at the
beginning of the first term to find out students’ confidence level and their
knowledge on using phonics skills to read. The same test will be conducted again
towards the end of the school term to observe improvement and progression
level. Interviews with the teachers will be conducted and coded into few
constructs, their teaching styles, and strategies, methods used within the
classrooms, reading materials used and a basic overview of the schedule for the
reading curriculum for the year. The interviews are audiotaped, transcribed and
interpreted.
3.4 Data Analysis
The study requires quantitative and qualitative data analyses. Classroom
observation and interviews are compiled. Each observation will be summarized
and compared in order to draw appropriate conclusions and interpretations. The
interviews transcripts are group and coded to strengthen the basis of argument.
The score of the tests will be recorded and compared to measure the change of
behavior and progression.

26. REFERENCES
Laurence Pasa (2001). The Influence of Instructional Supports and Teaching
Practices On First Grade Reading and Writing. Netherlands. Kluwer
Academic Publisher
Stephen Krashen (2000). Has Whole Language Failed? University of Southern
California
Chall, J. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill
Goodman, K. (1982). Language, literacy and learning. London: Routledge
Kagan Paul
Holland, K. and Hall, L. (1989). Reading achievement in first grade classrooms:
A comparison of basal and whole language approaches. Reading
Improvement 26:323-329
Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis. Beverly Hills: Laredo
Smith F. (1975). Comprehension and learning. Katonah, NY: Owen
Weaver, C. (1994). Reading Process and Practice. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann
Juel, C., & Roper-Schneider, D. (1985). The Influence of basal readers on first
grade reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 134-152
Lapp, D., & Flood J. (1997). Where’s the phonics? Making a case (again) for
integrated code instruction. The Reading Teacher, 50, 696-700
Share, D. L., & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading
development: Accommodating individual differences into a mode of
acquisition. Issues in Education, 1,1-57

27. Curriculum Development Council (1997). Syllabuses for primary schools:
English Language (Primary 1-6). Hong Kong: the Education Department
Miller, W. (2000). Strategies for developing emergent literacy. Boston: McGraw
Hill Higher Education
Purewal, S. (2008). Synthetic phonics and the literacy development of second
language young learners. University of Leeds. UK
Curtis, J. (1997). Phonics vs. whole language: Which is better? Retrieved from
http://wwwsuperkids.com/aweb/pages/features/reading/phonics.shtml
Ruth, S. S. (2000). Helping your child learn to read: Phonics and words.
Retrieved from http://www.mycinnamontoast.com/reading2.htm
Baumel, J. (2000). Learning to read – research informs us. Schwab
Learning.org. Retrieved June 11, 2012, from
http://www.schwalblearning.org/Articles.asp?r=22

28. APPENDICES

29. Appendix 1
Jo Jo has a new bicycle,
It has a red seat…and a yellow bell…
And a green horn…and blue wheels.
Jo Jo cleans her bicycle…
And rides it around the garden.
Teacher’s comment (student’s confidence, attitude, strengths, weaknesses, skills
applied)
Duration : minutes
Running words :
Errors :
Self corrections :
Error rate :

30. Appendix 3
Interview Questions
1. What strategies have the teachers used in teaching reading skill?
2. Which strategies are effective? Why?
3. What have you learnt in phonics approach learning?
4. When do you apply the phonics skills?