Reading Strategies and Assessment in EFL Business Reading Context

1. READING STRATEGIES FOR PROCEDURAL
INFORMATION IN EFL BUSINESS WRITING
ENVIRONMENT
Debopriyo Roy
Associate Professor, University of Aizu, Japan
8th July, 2010 - IEEE IPCC, Enschede, Netherlands
1
Monday, June 28, 2010

2. Introduction
• Not much research has been done in understanding how students read and understand English in EFL technical
context.
• Is reading English a conscious activity in EFL context or is an automatic and subconscious operation?
• Reading in EFL context will often involve different cognitive and meta-cognitive rhetorical reading strategies
toward comprehending the full scope of the readings on the topic.
2
Monday, June 28, 2010

3. Factors Affecting Reading
• Posing the problem
• Providing background on the
topic, research methods
• Motivation and attitude
• Content familiarity
• Text structure
A Path Analysis Model (Extension of multiple regression analysis) - • Use of reading comprehension
strategies
Showing more than one dependent variable for multiple predictor variables
3
Monday, June 28, 2010

4. Research Questions
• Do readers in an EFL context adopt cognitive and metacognitive
strategies for understanding the assignment context in a technical
business-writing environment?
• The extent to which learners consciously understand and can explain the
different ways of using text information in a collaborative learning
environment.
• Learners in an EFL context, such as in Japan, often are passive and complete a task merely at
a subconscious and operational level, rather than as a conscious activity.
4
Monday, June 28, 2010

5. Brief Review of Literature
• Krashen’s Monitor model [1982] differentiates between learning and acquisition in an EFL
context. Acquisition for Krashen is spontaneous, subconscious, and leads to conversational
fluency, while learning follows traditional instructions in grammar and leads to more rule-
based behavior. Krashen [1982] argued that learning does not lead to acquisition.
• Applying metacognitive strategies is more automatic and subconscious (acquisition) while
learning is related to reading the full content adequately.
• Question: Is reading every or most sentences necessary OR whether metacognitive
strategies provide enough information to understand the context adequately?
5
Monday, June 28, 2010

6. Cognitive Reading Strategies
• Cognitive strategies are used to help an individual achieve a particular goal (e.g.,
understanding a text) [Maghsudi & Talebi, 2009].
• Metacognitive reading strategies in an EFL context clearly have shown that strategies like
skimming and scanning often are practiced for extracting the required information [Dhieb &
Henia, 2003], without a deeper-level analysis.
• Analysis of time data showed that participants spent more time per word reading the pages
with headings than pages which did not have headings [Surber and Schroeder, 2007].
• The results were that participants who received training and/or read the text with headings
remembered text topics and their organization better than participants who
received no training and read the text without headings [Sanchez, 2001].
• With more and more practice, this skimming/scanning or headings-based reading
behaviors becomes more automatic and subconscious. [Alyousef, 2006].
6
Monday, June 28, 2010

7. Learning VS. Acquisition
• Spolsky [12] theorized a cognitive-based second language acquisition model in which he
mentioned a gradient condition where more frequent conditions probably open up
more opportunity for learning.
• My idea is to test whether more effective use of acquisition skill (through
more practice of skimming, headings reading, scanning methods) leads to
actual content learning as Krashen theorized?
• Self-Reflection: A key premise in this study is that for students to be able to improve,
they must develop the capacity to monitor the quality of their own work during actual
production.
7
Monday, June 28, 2010

8. Methods - 1
• As part of this PILOT experiment and exercise, students read one business article every week.
• Examples: How Amazon Works, How Craiglist Works, How Fiber Optic Cables Work in Business.
• Students are intentionally given no specific instructions for the reading exercise, so that we can
study their ability to learn and extract information.
• After reading the article, each participant in the experiment had to design an oral presentation as a
slideshow in www.slideshare.net. Students were shown examples of good PowerPoint presentation.
Students were asked to include at least six slides per presentation every week.
• Following this activity, they had to submit the slide share URL in the learning management system
called Moodle. They repeated this activity over a period of three weeks during the semester and
once in 2 weeks.
• Students were handed out a questionnaire following each slideshare assignment submission.
8
Monday, June 28, 2010

9. Methods - 2
• Predictor (Independent) Variables:
•
Ability to Search Information (Type #1) - Read the article and put the correct words in the gaps.
•
Ability to understand the reading (Type #2) - According to the __ page of the article, what major features put
____ (e.g., Fiber Optic cables) at another level?
•
Understanding Context of Using the tools (Type #3) - Whether readers could understand the purpose for
using slide share and Moodle in the given assignment.
•
Understanding Presentation of Text (Type #4) - Identify the headings that are most appropriate for the given
paragraphs.
•
Understanding Applications of Weekly Readings (Type #5) - Identify the phrase(s) that best summarize what
is suggested in the weekly reading:You might choose more than one option.
* Understanding Task Sequence - Explain the sequence in which the above-mentioned work should be
completed using Moodle, MS Power Point and slideshare.
9
Monday, June 28, 2010

10. Sample
• The assignment grade is considered as the dependent variable.
• Sample: The students were all junior-level students in undergraduate level at a technical
institute of higher learning. The students had 2 years (8-10 credits) of English education at
the college level, although their level of English proficiency is low to moderate at best.
10
Monday, June 28, 2010

11. Experiment Design
Question 1 Question 2 Total Score
Predictor Variables
Correct Option 1 Correct Option 2 Correct Option 1 Correct Option 2
Type 1 2 Points Maximum 2 Points Maximum 4
Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Type 5
Total Score on Slideshare Per Week 4
11
Monday, June 28, 2010

12. Findings - 1
• Summary: Overall results indicate that there is hardly any significant overall correlation
between the final score on the slide share assignment each week and each of the five
aspects that participants were tested on.
• However bivariate correlation between predictor variables show some significant values.
• Predictor variables were indicative of the final score during the 1st week of analysis.
12
Monday, June 28, 2010

13. Findings - 2
13
Monday, June 28, 2010

14. Findings - 3
14
Monday, June 28, 2010

15. Multiple Regression Analysis
R-square (Approx. __% of
R (Multiple
variance in slideshare score can
Weeks correlation Sig. Value Implications
be predicted by the combination
coefficient)
of 5 predictor variables
0.788
Less than .05 - Model fits
1 - High level of 0.621 0.036
well
correlation
0.626 - High level More than .05 - Model
2 0.392 0.291
of correlation does not fit well
0.581- High level of More than .05 - Model
3 0.337 0.405
correlation does not fit well
15
Monday, June 28, 2010

16. Significant Values
• Score #1 and Scan #1 = .522 (significant at .05 level).
• Score #1 and Score #2 = .789 (significant at .01 level)
• Score #1 & Score #3 = .883 (significant at .01 level)
• Context #1 and Score #1 = -.594 (significant at .05 level).
• Presentation #1 & Scan #1 = .524 (significant at .05 level).
• Presentation #2 & Scan #2 = .588 (significant at .05 level).
• Applications #2 & Applications #3 = .489 (significant at .05 level).
16
Monday, June 28, 2010

17. Discussion
• Overall results indicate that this preliminary analysis is not enough to suggest a significant
pattern in terms of understanding how predictor variables might have played a role in
explaining the final score for the slide share assignment.
• There might have been random improvement for one or more of the
predictor or dependent variable score.
• An open-ended screening test (reading comprehension) for technical reading
could be added before testing actual ability to analyze and draw inferences
based on the readings.
• Further, results also indicate that within the same week and between weeks, there are some
significant correlation values between different strategies and the final score.
17
Monday, June 28, 2010

18. Formative Assessment Model
• Purpose is to understand students’ internal processes and resultant outcomes
• Prior Knowledge and Motivational Belief (Self-rate ability and motivation to search for
information, understand interfaces, work with LMS)
• Understanding Student Goals (Ability to represent correctly the goal for the assignment)
• Tactics and Strategies (extent of reading, time spent, focus on headings, highlighting of text,
using online translation software, electronic dictionary etc)
• External learning outcome (searching for information from article, understanding the
reading, understanding presentation of text, identifying all possible heading, understanding
applications of weekly reading, understanding context of using tools, understanding task sequence
etc)
• Internal learning outcome (confidence ratings and reading ability, understanding text and
tools)
18
Monday, June 28, 2010

19. Design of the Model
• Butler and Winne (1995) Model of
Formative Assessment.
• In the future study, there will be
systematic feedback and guidelines for
improvement provided after each week
to analyze and measure student
performance.
• For specific text, headings will be
pointed out, reasoning provided,
skimming, highlighting examples are to
be demonstrated after each week.
19
Monday, June 28, 2010

20. Model
External
Group 1 Group 2 Score on each
Outcome-
Weeks category
Score on each
N = 30 N = 30 (Max score = 4)
category
Ability to search
4
information
Ability to understand
3
reading
Week 1 How Fiber Optic How High Speed Understanding context 3
(Networks) Cables Work Internet Works
Understanding text
4
presentation
Understand reading
2
applications
Week 2 How Amazon How Craiglist Understanding task
3
sequence
(E-commerce) Works Works
Score on
Slideshare 4 4
Assignment
20
Monday, June 28, 2010

21. THANK YOU !
Monday, June 28, 2010