12

2.2. History of Storytelling 15

2.2.1. Storytelling in the English Language Classroom 16

2.2.2. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and

Storytelling 17

2.2.3. Storytelling and Task-based Language Teaching 19

2.2.4. The National Curriculum, Communicative Language 20

Teaching (CLT) and Storytelling

2.2.5. Learner Autonomy and Storytelling 21

2.2.6. Multiple Intelligences (MI) and Storytelling 22

2.2.7. Rationale for Storytelling 24

2.2.8. Studies on Storytelling 24

2.3. Role playing 26

2.3.1. Role playing and Task-based Language Teaching 26

(TBLT)

2.3.2. Advantages of Role playing 27

2.3.3 Disadvantages of Role playing 31

2.3.4. Rationale for Using Role playing 32

2.4 Motivation 34

2.4.1. Types of Motivation 37

2.4.1.1 Instrumental and Integrative Motivation 37

2.4.1.2 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation 38

2.5.Theories and Constructs Reflecting Motivational Beliefs 39

and Attitudes

2.5.1 Attribution Theory 39

2.5.2 Self- efficacy 41

2.5.3 Mastery Experience 41

2.5.4Social Modeling 41

2.5.5.Social Persuasion 42

2.5.6.Psychological Response 42

2.5.7.Self – worth Theory 43

2.5.8.Goal Theories 43

2.5.9. Self – Determination Theory (SDT) 44

 

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 46

3.1. Introduction 47

3.2. Participants 47

3.3. Instrumentations andMaterials 48

3.3.1. Tests 48

3.3.1.1. The Preliminary English Test (PET) 48

3.3.1.2. Attitude and Motivation Test Battery a 50

Pretest and a Posttest

3.3.2. Materials 51

3.3.2.1. Main Course Book for Both Groups

3.3.2.2. Flashcards and Posters for Both Groups 51

3.4. Procedure 51

3.5. Design 54

3.6. Statistical Analyses 55

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 56

4.1. Introduction 57

4.2. Participant Selection 57

4.2.1 PET Pilot Study 58

4.2.1.1 PET Administration for Homogenizing 59

the Participants

4.2.2. Inferential Statics 67

4.2.2.1. Post-Test Results 71

4.2.2.2. Post-Test Descriptive Statistics 71

4.3. Testing the Null Hypotheses 74

4.4. Discussion 75

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND PEDAGOGICAL 82

IMPLICATIONS

5.1. Introduction 83

5.2. Summary of the Findings 83

5.3. Pedagogical Implications 85

5.3.1. Implication for EFL Teachers 85

5.3.2. Implication for EFL Syllabus Designers 86

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research 87

REFERENCES 89

APPENDICES 97

Appendix A: Preliminary English Test (PET) 98

Appendix B: Appendix B: Writing Rating Scale 120

Appendix C: Attitude and Motivation Test Battery 122

by Gardner, 1985 (AMTB)

Appendix D: Sample Lesson 126

 

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

 

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Pilot Administration 58

Table 4.2 Reliability Estimates of the PET before and after Removing 59

Malfunctioning Items

Table 4.3 Reliability of the PET in First Homogenization 60

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Two Ratings of PET Writing 60

Section (First Homogenization)

Table 4.5 Correlation between the Two Ratings of the PET 61

Writing Tasks (First Homogenization)

Table 4.6: Descriptive Statistics of Total PET (First Homogenization) 62

Table 4.7 Reliability of the PET (Second Homogenization) 62

Table 4.8 Descriptive Statistics of the Two Ratings of PET Writing 63

Section (First Second Homogenization)

Table 4.9 Correlation between the Two Ratings of the PET Writing 64

Tasks (Second Homogenization)

Table 4.10 Descriptive Statistics of Total PET (Second Homogenization) 64

Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics of the Total PET Scores of the Two 65

Experimental Groups

Table 4.12: Independent Samples Test on the Total PET at the Onset 66

Table 4.13: T-test for both experimental groups 67

Table 4.14: Paired Samples Test for the experimental group 1 68

Table 4.15: Paired Samples Test for the experimental group 2 69

Table 4.16: Independent Samples Test Experimental 1 70

and Experimental 2 (Pretest)

Table 4.17: Descriptive Statistics of the motivation Post-test 72

Table 4.18: Independent Samples Test Experimental 1 74

and Experimental 2(Posttest)

Figure 4.1: Scatter Plot of Descriptive Statistics of the motivation Post-test

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

 

 

1.1 Introduction

Scholars in the field of teaching and learning English as a foreign or second language have long been concerned with finding ways to increase the learners’ motivation and removing the barriers they bring with themselves into the educational environment. Incorporating different instructions and techniques into the classroom adds variety as well as opportunities for a lot of language production. Some believe that these techniques can be used as integral part of the class. Using storytelling and role playing in EFL classes have gained special attention in recent years. If the teacher believes that the activity will work and the necessary support is provided, it can be very successful. However, if the teacher is not convinced about the validity of using role-play, the activity “will fall flat on its face just as you expected it to” (Ladousse, 1987, p.7). A widely spread and one of the best communicative activities as well as cooperative learning is a role play which trains the students in the classroom to cope with unpredictable real-life situations in an English speaking environment. Ladousse (1987) points out the special reasons for using role play in the lessons. It puts students in situations in which they are required to use and develop language necessary in social relationships and helps them to build up their social skills. Using role play is useful especially while teaching shy students who have difficulty participating in conversations about themselves. Through this activity they are put into various roles and no longer feel that their own personality is implicated. Role play is an essential communicative technique which develops fluency, promotes interaction in the classroom and increases motivation.

Nowadays, with the development of communication technology, the necessity of learning English as one of the most important languages of the world became more apparent. Therefore, the need for learning communicative skills increases. On important issue in teaching – learning settings is psychological ones like stress, anxiety, and motivation. The present study deals with the effect of two applicable instructions of teaching on motivation. It is important that educators recognize the impact of the tasks on their students and ensuring that they are considering learners academic and emotional needs.

However, storytelling has a strong effect on learners’ perception and comprehension. Baker and Greene (1977) assert “storytelling increases the listeners’ awareness-sense of wonder, of mystery, of reverence for life” (p.17).

Equivalents …

2.4.1 Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability. 18

2.4.2. Processing Group Interaction. 18

2.4.3. Peer Feedback. 19

2.5. Cooperative writing in EFL classrooms. 19

2.6. Perspectives on cooperative writing. 21

2.7. Benefits of Cooperative Approach in EFL Writing Classroom.. 25

2.8. Preparing EFL Students for peer response in writing classrooms. 26

2.9. Guidelines for preparing EFL students for peer response. 27

2.10. Personality Factors and Teaching Writing. 30

C H A P T E R III : METHODOLOGY.. 37

3.1. Overview.. 38

3.2. Participants. 38

3.3. Instrumentation. 39

3.3.1 Personality Questionnaire. 39

3.3.2 Preliminary English Test (PET) 40

3.2.2 Essay Writing Test 42

3.2.3 Writing Rating Scales. 42

3.4 Procedure. 43

3.5. Design. 45

3.6. Statistical Analysis. 45

C H A P T E R IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.. 47

4.1. Introduction. 48

4.2. Participant Selection. 48

4.2.1. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49

4.2.2. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Administration. 50

4.2.3. Identifying the Degree of Extroversion. 51

4.3. Posttest 54

4.4. Testing the Null Hypothesis. 56

4.5. Discussion. 57

C H A P T E R V : CONCLUSION, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. 61

5.1. Introduction. 62

5.2. Restatement of the Problem.. 62

5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 64

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 66

REFRENCES. 68

Appendices. 76

APPENDIX A: Eysenck Personality Inventory. 77

APPENDIX B: Preliminary English Test (PET) 80

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49

Table 4.2 Reliability of the PET in the Pilot Phase. 50

Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for PET Proficiency Test 51

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ Performance in EPI 52

Table 4.5 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ E-Score in EPI 53

Table 4.6 Reliability of the EPI Questionnaire. 54

Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for the Essay Writing Posttest in Both Groups 54

-Test on the Performance of Both Groups in the Essay Writing Posttest 56

 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Piloting. 49

Figure 4.2 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Administration. 51

Figure 4.3 Histogram of the Participants’ Scores in EPI 52

Figure 4.4 Histogram of the E Scores of the Participants in EPI 53

Figure 4.5 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Introvert Group 55

Figure 4.6 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Extrovert Group 55

 

 

 

 

 

C H A P T E R I

 

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

1.1 Introduction

Living in 21 century and being a part of the global village, writing in English is a fundamental skill. Writing well is a necessity for academic success and a basic requirement for communication. ” It is unique and stands out of the four skills of language because its nature allows for examination and reexamination, debate and decision making, choice and revision and cognitive activities which require higher order thinking skills of communicator” (Hobson& Schafermeyer, 1994, p.51 ).

1.4 Statement of the Research Hypothesis. 10

1.5 Definition of Key Terms. 10

1.5.1 Vocabulary achievement 10

1.5.2 Team-Teaching. 11

1.6 Significance of the Study. 11

1.7 Limitations and Delimitation. 13

1.7.1 Limitations of the study. 13

1.7.2 Delimitation of the study. 13

1.8 Assumptions. 13

CHAPTER II Review of the Related Literature

2.1 Introduction. 15

2.2 The characteristics of co-teaching. 17

2.3 Different version of co-teaching. 19

2.4 Issues Involved in Team Teaching. 23

2.5 Related studies. 27

2.6 Vocabulary teaching. 30

2.6.1 Presentation of new lexical items. 32

2.6.2 Review and consolidation of lexical items. 35

2.6.3 Studies on the vocabulary: 38

CHAPTER III Methodology

3.1 Participants. 46

3.2 Instrumentation. 46

3.2.1 Homogeneity vocabulary test 46

3.2.2 Language Proficiency test 47

3.2.3 Vocabulary achievement post test 48

3.2.4 Observation and conversation. 49

3.2.5 Questionnaire. 49

3.2.6Materials. 50

3.3 Procedure. 50

3.3.1 Piloting the tests. 50

3.3.2 Homogenizing the Participants. 50

3.3.3 The Treatment 51

3.4 Design. 56

3.5 Statistical Analysis: 57

CHAPTER IV Results and Discussion

4.1 Introduction . 59

4.2 Results and Discussion. 60

4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics for the Piloting KET Proficiency Test 60

4.2.1.2 Descriptive Statistics of the KET Main Administration for Homogenization. 61

4.2.2 Descriptive Statistics of the grammar Pre-test 63

4.2.3 Analysis of posttest 65

4.2.3Analysis of Student Questionnaire. 67

4.2.3 Analysis of Teacher’s Questionnaire. 69

4.3 Discussion ………………………………………………………………………………………70

CHAPTER V Conclusions, Pedagogical Implications, and Suggestions for Further Research

5.1 Restatement of the Problem.. 76

5.2 Overview of the Study. 76

5.3 Pedagogical Implications. 76

5.3.1 mplications for Teaching and Teacher Training. 77

5.3.2 Implications for Materials Development 77

5.4 Suggestions for Further Research. 77

References. 79

Appendices: 85

List of Tables

Table 2.1: different type of co-teaching ……………………………………….…….19

Table 3.1: The contents and titles of the lessons …………………………………….52

Table 3.2 Teacher’s Actions during Co-Teaching ……………………………………53

Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics for KET Proficiency Test piloting…………………60

Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics for KET Proficiency Test ………………………….60

Table 4.3: Reliability of the KET Proficiency Test Piloting ………………….……..61

Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics for KET Main Administration for Homogenization.61

Table 4.5: The Results of Normality Check of the Distribution of scores on KET…..61

Table 4.6: Independent Sample T-test for Control and Experimental Groups’ KET scores …………63

Table 4.7: Descriptive Statistics for the Results of the Pre-test……………….……. 64

Table 4.8: Results of Normality of Distribution of Scores for vocabulary homogeneity test …….….64

Table 4.9: Independent Samples T- Test for Pre-test ………………………………..65

Table 4.10 Group Statistics of the team-teaching and normal class Participants for post test scores …….……65

Table 4.11 Independent Samples T-Test of the team-teaching and normal class Participants for post-test ……67

Table 4.12 Student Responses to Social Validity Questions ……….………….…….68

Table 4.13 Teacher’s Responses to Social Validation Questions ……………………69

List of Figures

Figure 4.1: The Histogram of Scores of KET Main Administration ………………62

Figure 4.2 Comparing scores obtained from post-test ……….…………………….66

Figure 4.3 Student Responses to Social Validation Questions ……………………69

To those who have tried to wipe out unawareness and darkness and finally they died in Anonymity.

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

Background and Purpose

 

1.1 Introduction

Nowadays English is known as the language of the science, everyday communication and most widely used language in the world. Although it is a well-known fact that Mandarin Chinese is the most commonly spoken language on the planet, we should know that “while English does not have the most speakers, it is the official language of more countries than any other language” (Flamiejamie, 2008). English, also, is the language in which the sciences are most often discussed and presented. A study done in 1997 indicated that 95% of scientific publications and submissions, even at that time, were done in English(collegeofenglishmalta.com). Therefore, it seems that learning English is a need for everyone who wants to keep himself updated and in touch with real out world. In learning English, language skills and language components cannot be separated. Language components can complete the language skills. In order to learn English the students should be able to use suitable structures and master grammar and vocabulary. Vocabulary is an important language component for forming words and building English sentences. Harmer also claimed, “Language structures make up the skeleton of language and it is vocabulary that provides the vital organs and the flesh.” (Harmer, 1994 as cited in Baniabdelrahman, 2013) There is no doubt about the importance of vocabulary. “It is necessary in the sense that words are the basic building blocks of the language, the units of meaning from which larger structures such as sentences, paragraphs and whole text are formed” (Read, 2000, p 1). “Without a good working knowledge of words and their meanings, both written and verbal communication will be muddied or poorly understood” (wisegeek.com). Wilkins (1972) believed that, without learning grammar very little can be conveyed and without learning vocabulary, nothing at all can be conveyed. Researchers suggest that early elementary students’ word knowledge is a determinant of reading comprehension both in early elementary school and throughout their schooling(Hansen, 2009). Some research findings also disclose that students who have acquired more vocabulary items, they will be more likely to articulate and communicate the massage. Therefore, as a result their achievement in speaking skills is better than those who are short of vocabulary understanding or have acquired less vocabulary items. Since vocabulary is important in communication, the students should master it. In this regard, Hippner-page also believes that “vocabulary is the key component which guarantees acquiring a second language and becoming a functional and fluent reader and writer of a second language” (2000, p. 7).

Baumann and Kameenui (1991) believed that we need to have a good vocabulary size to speak and write naturally and effectively. Students’ word knowledge is also linked strongly to their academic success (As cited in Baker, Simmons, & Kameenui, 2007). Moreover it is believed that “perhaps the greatest tools we can give students for succeeding, not only in their education but more generally in life, is a large, rich vocabulary and the skills for using those words” (Pikulski & Templeton, 2004). If we are not sure that Knowledge of this vocabulary will guarantee success, it will be clear that lack of knowledge of vocabulary can ensure failure (Biemiller, 1999 as cited in Jobrack, 2010).

Some researchers (Harley, 1996; Yoshii, and Flaitz, 2002) point to vocabulary learning as a vital part of each student’s life, while other researchers though accept the importance of vocabulary acquisition in language proficiency and academic achievement; their ideas about how vocabulary should be learned have varied widely. (Ghabanchi & Anbarestani, 2008) Unfortunately, learning vocabulary is not easy for students and most of students believe memorizing and learning vocabulary is a difficult, boring, and tedious task. Moreover, what is hard to learn, is easy to forget. So finding ways to increase students’ vocabulary growth throughout the school years must become a major educational priority.

Everyone remembers some words better than others, because of the nature of the words, the circumstances they are learnt under, and the methods of teaching (Ur, 1996). The attention drawn to the important role of vocabulary unveils the importance of vocabulary and the most effective ways to teach vocabulary. Here the teacher plays the most important role in creating the learning context and choosing methods used in the classroom. Especially in EFL contexts in which there is a little chance for the students to encounter English language out of the classroom. In addition, Hedge believes that “Although the teacher’s ultimate role may be to build independence in students by teaching them good strategies for vocabulary learning, s/he will frequently need to explain new words” (2008, p. 112). Books and materials developers provide teachers with different ways of presenting new words to the students such as using synonyms, antonyms, translation, minimal pairs, description, illustration, using context, association of ideas, examples, and many other ways, which usually demand qualified and knowledgeable teachers to put the most proper in practice. It was claimed that learners need to be given explicit instruction of vocabulary strategy in order to facilitate their awareness of vocabulary learning strategies that they can use to learn their own outside the classroom (Atay & Ozbulgan, 2007 as cited in Chen & Hsiao, 2009). Moreover, there is no doubt that “the teacher’s role in vocabulary development is critical” (Yopp, Yopp, & Bishop, 2010).

As mentioned before, there are different techniques and strategies by which the teachers can teach a new vocabulary; but most of them are teacher-dependent and their practicality or impracticality is a function of teachers’ performance. Since different teachers have different abilities, capabilities, resources, personalities and characteristics teaching vocabularies by two or more teachers (known as co-teaching) sharing their knowledge and competence may be efficient and helpful in teaching vocabularies. Teaming can bring out the creative side of teachers. Woodrow Wilson once said, “I not only use all of the brains I have, but all I can borrow” (28th president of US, 1856 – 1924). His acknowledged reliance on others may fit our co-teaching context as well. This also shows the fact that “A community of peers is important not only in terms of support, but also as a crucial source of generating ideas and criticism” (Sykes, 1996, as cited in Jang, 2006).

The very binging point of co-teaching was in 1975, in which Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. This act stated that free and appropriate public education (FAPE) must be provided for all children (Right, 2010). After that, a very important project (No-Child Left behind) in USA was applied in which they tried to provide a better teaching context for students with disabilities (either physical or mental) and facilitate their learning by using two teachers in the classroom. In those classes, they used a pull out model in which these types of students; were pulled out by the second teacher and there they were taught individually and privately. A similar approach was used in classes in which most of the students were emigrants whose native language was something rather than English. In these classes one of the teachers was mainstream teacher (e.g. math, geology) and the second teacher was an English teacher who tried to eliminate the speaking and listening problems of the students. The setting of the classroom and the role of teachers in those classes shaped different models of co-teaching.

• Purpose of Study…………………………………………………………….……….14

• The Significance of the Study……………………………………………………..…15

• Research Questions………………………………………………………………..…16

• Research Hypotheses……………………………………….……………………..….16

• Definition of Key Words……………………………………………………………..17

1-8-1. Semantic Map……………………………………………………………………17

1-8-1-1. Characteristics of Semantic Maps………….……………………………20

1-8-1-2. Constructing semantic Maps……………………..………………………22

1-8-1-3. Steps of Semantic Mapping……………………………………………..24

1-8-1-4. Types of Semantic Mapping…………………………………………….24

1-8-2. Reading Comprehension……………………………………….……………….. 32

1-8-2-1. Decoding………………………………………………..………….……..33

1-8-2-2. Vocabulary…………………………………..…………….……….……..34

1-8-2-3. World Knowledge………………………..…….…………………….…..34

1-8-2-4. Active Comprehension Strategies…………..……………………………35

• Limitations of the Study…………………………………………..………………….36

CHAPTERTWO: REVIW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

2-1. Introduction………………………………………………..…………………………….37

2-2. Theories Relating to Semantic Maps…………………………………………………….37

2-3. Theoretical Section………………………………………………….……………….….39

2-4. Practical Section…………………………………………………………..…………..…42

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3-1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………55

3-2. Participants…………………………………………………………………………….…55

3-3. Instrumentation…………………………………………………………………….…….56

3-4. Procedures…………………………………………………………………………..……58

3-4-1. Procedures of Developing a Semantic Map……………………………………..58

3-4-2. Procedures of a Semantic Mapping Activity…..……………………….……….61

3-4-2-1. Introducing the Topic………………………..…………………………….61

3-4-2-2. Brainstorming…………………………………….……………………….61

3-4-2-3. Categorization…………………………………………………………….62

3-4-2-4. Personalizing the Map……………………………………………………63

3-4-2-5. Post-assignment Synthesis……………….……..…………………….….63

3-4-3. Procedures of Reading Tests………………………….……………………….…64

3-5. Design……………………………………………………………………………………66

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4-1. Introduction………………………………………..………………………………….…67

4-2. Validity and Reliability of the Study………………………………………..…………..68

4-2-1. Validity of the Pre-test and Post-test……………………………..…….…………68

4-2-2. Validity of the Semantic Maps……………………………..…………….…..…..68

4-3. Reliability of the Tests…………………………………………….………………….…69

4-4. The Conditions of the Research Variables………………….…………………….……..70

4-4-1. Pre-test and Post-test Variable Scores in Experimental Group……..…..………..70

4-4-2. Pre-test and Post-test Variable Scores in Control Group………..….…..…………73

4-5. Consideration of Research Hypotheses……………………………….…………….…..75

4-5-1. First Hypothesis……………………………………………………………………75

4-5-2. Second Hypothesis……………………………..…………………………………78

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION

5-1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………81

5-2. Summery…………………………………………………………………………………81

5-3. Discussion of Findings………………………………………..……………………..…..82

5-4. Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………………….….84

5-5. Suggestions for Further Study…………………………………………….……….……86

References…………………………………………………………….……………………..88

Appendixes………………………..………………………………..……………………..…96

Appendix A: Reading Comprehension Test as Pre-test……………….…………………..…96

Appendix B: Reading Comprehension Test as Post-test………………………..….……….98

Appendix C: Reading Comprehension Lesson 1 and the Related Semantic map..…………100

Appendix D: Reading Comprehension Lesson 2 and the Related Semantic map………..…102

Appendix E: Reading Comprehension Lesson 3 and the Related Semantic map…….…….104

Appendix F: Reading Comprehension Lesson 4 and the Related Semantic map…….…….106

Appendix G: Reading Comprehension Lesson 5 and the Related Semantic map……….….108

Appendix H: Reading Comprehension Lesson 6 and the Related Semantic map…….…….110

Appendix I: Reading Comprehension Lesson 7 and the Related Semantic map……….…..112

Appendix J: Reading Comprehension Lesson 8 and the Related Semantic map………..….114

List of Tables

Table 4.1:The correlation of test-retest…………………………………….…………….…69

Table 4.2:Pre-test and post-test statistics in experimental group………………..………….71

Table 4.3:Pre-test and post-test statistics in control group……………………………….….73

Table 4.4:T-test statistics for comparison between mean scores of experimental and control groups in post-test………………………………….…………………………………….…..76

Table 4.5:The comparison between the pre-test and the post-test in experimental group…………………………….……………………………………………………………77

Table 4.6:The post-test statistics for three subgroups: A, B and C………………….………79

List of Graphs

Graph 4.1:Pre-test descriptive statistics in experimental group…………………..………..72

Graph 4.2:Post-test descriptive statistics in experimental group……………………………72

Graph 4.3:Pre-test descriptive statistics in control group…………………………………..74

Graph 4.4:Post-test descriptive statistics in control group………………………………….74

Graph 4.5:The comparison of the post-test scores distributed in experimental and control group………………………………………………………………………………………….76

Graph 4.6:Statistics of sub-groups A, B and C in the post-test……………………………..80

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of semantic mapping strategies on reading comprehension of learners in intermediate level and also to determine the most effective strategy type among: teacher-initiated, student-mediated and teacher-student interactive strategies. Some 60 female participants in high school participated in the study.

Two valid reading comprehension tests were used in this study as pre-test and post-test. To investigate the effect of semantic mapping strategies a treatment after the pre-test and before the post-test was conducted in order to teach semantic mapping strategies to learners. To analyze the recorded data, Sample T-test was used. To determine the best strategy among the three considered kinds, factor analysis was conducted.

The final analysis showed that using semantic mapping strategies before, during or after reading texts increased the comprehension of the learners and among the three kinds of semantic mapping strategies in this study; teacher-initiated, student-mediated and teacher-student interactive kind; the latter is the most effective one.

Keywords:Semantic mapping strategies, Reading comprehension

 

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION