Session Information
27 SES 06 B, Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages
Paper Session
Contribution
The topic of this study presented in this paper is reading in English as a second language in lower secondary school (13-14 year old students). The main objective of the study is to investigate the link between instructional practices and student achievement in English as a second language, with an emphasis on how reading comprehension strategies are taught and used in lower secondary classrooms.
This paper reports from the following three research questions:
- RQ1: What characterises the English reading achievement among the students in the sampled classrooms?
- RQ2: To what extent is there a statistical relationship between their reading achievement in English and Norwegian?
- RQ3: What are prominent differences and similarities in English reading instruction among the sampled classrooms?
This paper builds on and contributes to research on instructional practices in reading English as a second language (L2), by linking student achievement data from national tests and video data from classroom observations in grades 8 and 9 (13-14 years) in Norwegian lower secondary school. While prior research indicates that strategy instruction does not take place in all-too-many classrooms, findings in the present study are more optimistic. The present study follows students in six classrooms at six different schools across two school years, by identifying components of classroom practices that can be related to student achievement in reading. The paper builds on a combination of achievement data (national reading tests in English) and instructional data (video observations from English lessons). In order to juxtapose the findings from these data sources, a mixed methods approach is used (e.g. Bazeley & Kemp, 2012; Creswell, 2013; Johnson & Christensen, 2013).
Theoretical framework
There are several similarities between reading in a first language (L1) and a second (L2). Bernhardt has argued that “when students have had opportunities to develop L1 literacy skills, these are transferrable to second-language reading” (Bernhardt, 2011), a view that is echoed by Bunch and colleagues (2014). There are of course also some differences between reading in the L1 and the L2, although these have not always been articulated. Koda (2007) has explained that, unlike in the L1, L2 reading involves two languages, and for this reason is cross-linguistic. She argued that L1 literacy influences and changes the reading process in the L2, and suggested that a primary focus within L2 reading research should be to get a clearer understanding of how the two languages interact.
A commonly accepted view on this dual-language system is the compensatory hypothesis, which states that students transfer reading skills between the L1 and the L2 when necessary. This explanation indicates that reading variables interact and that when readers experience comprehension problems, a weakness in one area might be compensated for by knowledge from another (Stanovich, 1980). Based on research and Stanovich’s (1980) hypothesis, Bernhardt (2011) suggested in her Compensatory Model of Second Language Reading that L1 reading accounts for 20% of L2 reading achievement, while L2 language knowledge (vocabulary, grammar, etc.) accounts for 30% of L2 reading achievement. Together these two components are referred to as explained variance, while the remaining 50% relates to an unexplained variance (comprehension strategies, engagement, prior knowledge, interest, etc.).
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Bernhardt, E. (2011). Understanding advanced second language reading. NY: Routledge. Bernhardt, E.B., & Kamil, M. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypothesis. Applied Linguistics, 16, 15–34. Brantmeier, C., van Bishop, T., Yu, X., & Anderson, B. (2012). Readings on L2 reading: Publications in other venues 2011–2012. Reading in a Foreign Language, 24(2), 256–272. Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Strachan, S.L., & Billman, A.K. (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Farstrup, (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed.) (pp. 51–93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Grossman, P., Cohen, J., Ronfeldt, M., & Brown, L. (2014). The test matters: The relationship between classroom observation scores and teacher value added on multiple types of assessment. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 293–303. Grossman, P., Loeb, S., Cohen, J., Hammerness, K., Wyckoff, J., Boyd, D., & Lankford, H. (2010). Measure for measure: The relationship between measures of instructional practice in middle school English language arts and teachers’ value added scores. Cambridge: NBER. Grossman, P., Loeb, Cohen, & Wycoff (2013). Measure for measure: The relationship between measures of instructional practice in middle school English language arts and teachers’ value-added scores. American Journal of Education, 119(3), 445–470. Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Koda, K. (2007). Reading and linguistic learning: Crosslinguistic constraints on second language reading development. Language Learning, 57(1), 1–44. McNamara, D.S., & Magliano, J.T. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 51, 297–384. Moje, E.B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96–107. Pearson, P.D. (2011). Toward the next generation of comprehension instruction: A coda. In H. Daniels (Ed.), Comprehension going forward (pp. 243–253). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Pearson, P.D., & Gallagher, M.C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317–344. Pressley, M. (2004). The need for research on secondary literacy education. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 415–432). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Towards an interactive compensatory model of individual differences in the development in reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32–71.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.