L2 Learners’ Reading Problems in Terms of the Factors Relating to Their Meta-Knowledge of English Information Structure
Main Article Content
Abstract
Abstract: This paper reports part of a project granted by Vietnam National University (VNU)-Hanoi (project code: QG.13.13), carried out in an effort to enhance the quality of teaching English to International Standard Programme (ISP) students. The paper explores two related issues. First, it investigates the problems L2 learner groups of different levels of proficiency might encounter in their reading in the English language in terms of the factors relating to their meta-knowledge of English information structure. Second, it attempts to find out whether a cognitive meta-linguistic approach can help the learners overcome their reading problems and develop their reading comprehension by first enhancing their meta-knowledge of English information structure. Analyses of the problems were based on learners’ responses to the pre-teaching phase questionnaire and interviews, their post-teaching phase meta-linguistic test scores, their pre- and post-teaching phase reading test scores, and while teaching phase classroom worksheets and answer-sheets. Data analyses show that no strong evidence was found of mother tongue reading strategy interference in any of the reading problems. The fall in experience of problems in the while and post-teaching phase suggests there was a positive relationship between the meta-cognitive teaching method and the learners’ overcoming the problems. There were no big differences between the two groups in their encountering and solving the problems. The insignificant differences in percentages varied according to each specific problem, however, no generalization could be made with respect to the relationship between the learners’ levels of proficiency and their problems.
Article Details
Keywords
Keywords: L2 learners’ reading problems, meta-knowledge, information structure, cognitive meta-linguistic approach, levels of proficiency.
References
[2] Tuan, H.A. (2013 b). Fundamental issues of English information structure at discourse level. Journal of Foreign Studies-VNU Journal of Science, 29, 1S, 102-121.
[3] Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural Differences in the Organization of Academic Texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 211-247.
[4] Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second Language Writing. CUP.
[5] Hinds, J. (1987). Reader vs. Writer Responsibility: A New Topology. In U. Connor, & Kaplan, R.B. (Eds.), Writing across Languages: Analysis of L2 Text. Addison-Wesley, 141-152.
[6] Hinds, J. (1990). Inductive, Deductive, Quasi-inductive: Expository Writing in Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Thai. In U. Connor, and Johns, A.M. (Eds.), Coherence in Writing - Research and Pedagogical Perspectives. TESOL, 97-109.
[7] Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP Rhetoric: Metacontext in Finnish-English Economics Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 3-22.
[8] Ventola, E. (1992). Writing Scientific English: Overcoming Cultural Problems. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2, 2, 191-220.
[9] Ventola, E., and Mauranen, A., and Ed. (Eds.) (1996). Academic Writing: Intercultural and Textual issues, John Benjamins.
[10] Grabe, W., and Kaplan, R.B. (1996). Theory and Practice of Writing. Longman.
[11] Grabe, W. (2002). Narrative and Expository Macro-genres. In A. M. Johns (Eds.), Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. LEA, 249-268.
[12] Tuan, H.A. (2014). A Cognitive Meta-linguistic Approach to Teaching L2 Learners Reading and Writing Skills. Journal of Foreign Studies-VNU Journal of Science, 30, 2, 48-70.
[13] Anderson, J. R. (1983). The Architecture of Cognition. Havard University Press.
[14] Anderson, J. R. (1985). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. W.H. Freeman and Company.
[15] Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. W.H. Freeman and Company.
[16] Anderson, J. R. (1995). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. W.H. Freeman and Company.
[17] Johnson, K. (1996). Language Teaching and Skill Learning. Blackwell.
[18] Singer, H. (1984). Friendly Texts. In E. K. Dishner, Bean,T.W., Readance, J.E., and Moore, D.W. (Eds.), Content and Reading: Improving Classroom Instruction. Kendall Hunt, 114-127.
[19] Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. OUP.
[20] Mackey, A., and Gass, S.M. (2005). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
[21] Nunan, D. (1992). Research Methods in Language Learning. CUP.
[22] Johnson, D. M. (1992). Approaches to Research in Second Language Learning. Longman.
[23] Bachman, L., and Palmer, A. (1996). Language Testing in Practice. OUP.
[24] Glendinning, E. H., and McEwan, J. (2006a). Oxford English for Information Technology. OUP.
[25] Glendinning, E. H., and McEwan, J. (2006b). Oxford English for Information Technology: Teacher's Guide. OUP.
[26] Fulcher, G., and Davidson, F. (2007). Language Testing and Assessment: An Advance Resource Book. Routledge.