Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Theory and reported practice in EFL literacy instruction: EFL teachers’ perceptions about classroom practices

  • Published:
Annals of Dyslexia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Acquiring literacy in English as a foreign language (EFL) is important for language development. However, many students enter middle school without adequate EFL literacy skills. This may indicate a gap between EFL literacy instruction theory and the classroom practice that is occurring in elementary school classrooms. The aim of this study was to explore the components of EFL literacy instruction as perceived by teachers. The study investigated whether perceptions of classroom practices are theoretically based, thus shedding light on the gap between EFL literacy theory and practice. The participants were 167 EFL elementary school teachers, who submitted anonymous online questionnaires regarding their reported EFL teaching in year one, two, three, four, and five of elementary school. The research was based on the five pillars of literacy instruction for English as a first language (National Reading Panel, 2000) and additional EFL components (August & Shanahan, 2006). Results of this study showed that EFL teachers expressed views that may indicate a gap between teachers’ practices and most cutting-edge research. The study concluded that providing EFL elementary school teachers with theoretical knowledge may lead to more productive literacy programs and may improve classroom practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronin, L., & Spolsky, B. (2010). Research in English language teaching and learning in Israel (2004–2009). Language Teaching, 43(3), 297–319. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Executive summary: developing literacy in second-language learners: report of the National Literacy Panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • August, D., McCardle, P., & Shanahan, T. (2014). Developing literacy in English language learners: findings from a review of the experimental research. School Psychology Review, 43(4), 490–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Begeny, J. C., Ross, S. G., Greene, D. J., Mitchell, R. C., & Whitehouse, M. H. (2012). Effects of the helping early literacy with practice strategies (HELPS) reading fluency program with Latino English language learners: a preliminary evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 21(2), 134–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-011-9144-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaz, D. (2006). Differentiated instruction: a guide for foreign language teachers (pp. 109–122). NY: Eye on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, C., Mather, N., Dickson, S., Podhajski, B., & Chard, D. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of preservice and inservice educators about early reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 51(1), 97–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S., & Moats, L. (1997). Informed instruction for reading success: foundations for teacher preparation. A position paper of the international dyslexia association. Baltimore: International Dyslexia Association.

  • Brusnighan, S. M., & Folk, J. R. (2012). Combining contextual and morphemic cues is beneficial during incidental vocabulary acquisition: semantic transparency in novel compound word processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(2), 172–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carreker, S., & Birsh, J. R. (2005). Multisensory teaching of basic language skills. Activity book (pp. 18–24). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, R. P. (1998). Predicting reading level in grades 1 to 6 from listening level and decoding level: testing theory relevant to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 10(2), 121–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, J., Valadez, C. M., & Garrett, S. D. (2010). Literacy trends and issues: a look at the five pillars and the cement that supports them. The Reading Teacher, 63(8), 644–655. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.63.8.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosson, A., & Lesaux, N. K. (2010). Revisiting assumptions about the relationship of fluent reading to comprehension: Spanish-speakers’ text-reading fluency in English. Reading and Writing, 23, 475–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9168-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A. E., Zibulsky, J., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (2009). How teachers would spend their time teaching language arts: the mismatch between self-reported and best practices. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 418–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409339063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: construction, administration and processing. NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ediger, A. M. (2014). Teaching second/foreign language literacy to school-age learners. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed., pp. 154–188). Boston: National Geographic Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (2001). The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign language curriculum. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 17–34). NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: an SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 83–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, G., & Donno, S. (2003). One-month teacher training courses: time for a change? ELT Journal, 57(1), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, S. (2017). Relationships between theory and practice in EFL literacy instruction in Israel: teachers’ and experts’ perceptions about classroom practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Haifa University.

  • Georgiou, G. K., Das, J. P., & Hayward, D. (2009). Revisiting the “Simple View of Reading” in a group of children with poor reading comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408326210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geva, E., & Wang, M. (2001). The development of basic reading skills in children: a cross-language perspective. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 182–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geva, E. (2006). Second-language oral proficiency and second-language literacy. Developing literacy in second-language learners: report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, 123–140.

  • Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabe, W. (2009a). How reading works: the building blocks of fluency and comprehension. In Reading in a second language: moving from theory to practice (pp. 21–38). NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabe, W. (2009b). Reading fluency, reading rate and comprehension. In Reading in a second language: moving from theory to practice (pp. 289–310). NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabe, W. (2009c). Developing reading comprehension abilities. In Reading in a second language: moving from theory to practice (pp. 195–219). NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Reading and Writing, 27, 1703–1743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9517-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hersch, J., & Andrews, S. (2012). Lexical quality and reading skill: bottom-up and top-down contributions to sentence processing. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(3), 240–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2005). A framework for developing EFL reading vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, R. M., Binks, E., Hougen, M., Dahlgren, M. E., Oker-Dean, E., & Smith, D. L. (2009). Why elementary teachers might be inadequately prepared to teach reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 392–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, R. M., Washburn, E. K., & Kahn-Horwitz, J. (2016). Introduction to the special issue on teacher knowledge from an international perspective. Annals of Dyslexia, 66(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-015-0119-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn-Horwitz, J. (2015). ‘Organizing the mess in my mind’: EFL teachers’ perceptions and knowledge of English orthography. Reading and Writing, 28(5), 611–631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9541-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn-Horwitz, J. (2016). Providing English foreign language teachers with content knowledge to facilitate decoding and spelling acquisition: a longitudinal perspective. Annals of Dyslexia, 66(1), 147–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-015-0120-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn-Horwitz, J., Shimron, J., & Sparks, R. (2005). Predicting foreign language reading achievement in elementary school students. Reading and Writing, 18, 527–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-005-3179-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn-Horwitz, J., Sparks, R. L., & Goldstein, Z. (2011). English as a foreign language spelling development: a longitudinal study. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000397.

  • Katzir, T., Kim, Y., Wolf, M., O'Brien, B., Kenney, B., Lovett, M., & Morris, R. (2006). Reading fluency: the whole is more than the parts. Annals of Dyslexia, 56(1), 51–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. S., Capotosto, L., Hartry, A., & Fitzgerald, R. (2011). Can a mixed-method literacy intervention improve the reading achievement of low-performing elementary school students in an after-school program? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(2), 183–201. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373711399148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipka, O., & Siegel, L. (2012). The development of reading comprehension skills in children learning English as a second language. Reading and Writing, 25, 1873–1898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9309-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (2000). Speech to print: language essentials for teachers. Baltimore: Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. (2014). What teachers do not know and why they aren’t learning it: addressing the need for content and pedagogy in teacher education. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 19, 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2014.941093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. Report of the subgroups: National Reading Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olshtain, E. (2014). Practical tasks for mastering the mechanics of writing and going just beyond. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed., pp. 208–221). Boston: National Geographic Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. Precursors of Functional Literacy, 11, 67–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piasta, S. B., McDonald Connor, C., Fishman, B. J., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Teachers’ knowledge of literacy concepts, classroom practices, and student reading growth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13, 224–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primor, L., Pierce, M. E., & Katzir, T. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension of narrative and expository texts among Hebrew-speaking readers with and without a reading disability. Annals of Dyslexia, 61, 242–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-011-0059-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). (2006) Teacher questionnaire. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

  • Quirk, M., & Beem, S. (2012). Examining the relations between reading fluency and reading comprehension for English language learners. Psychology in the Schools, 49(6), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasinski, T. V. (2012). Why reading fluency should be hot. The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 516–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2(2), 31–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saiegh-Haddad, E., & Geva, E. (2010). Acquiring reading in two languages: an introduction to the special issue. Reading and Writing, 23, 263–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, S. J (2002). Reading fluency: its development and assessment. In A.E. Farstrup & S.J. Samuels (Eds), What research has to say about reading instruction 3rd edition (pp. 166-181). International Reading Association.

  • Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, P. H., Aro, M., & Erskine, J. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94(2), 143–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shankweiler, D., & Fowler, A. E. (2004). Questions people ask about the role of phonological processes in learning to read. Reading and Writing, 17, 483–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solis, M., Ciullo, S., Vaughn, S., Pyle, N., Hassaram, B., & Leroux, A. (2012). Reading comprehension interventions for middle school students with learning disabilities: a synthesis of 30 years of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(4), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411402691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., & Zibulsky, J. (2014). Making time for literacy: teacher knowledge and time allocation in instructional planning. Reading and Writing, 27(8), 1353–1378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • State of Israel Ministry of Education in Israel. (2015). MATANA document, page 124. Retrieved July 18, 2016, from: http://meyda.education.gov.il/files/MinhalPedagogy/b-print.pdf

  • Treiman, R., & Kessler, B. (2014). Theories. In How children learn to write words (pp. 84–102). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ur, P. (2011). Grammar teaching. In Hinkel, E. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Volume II, 507–522. NY: Routledge.

  • Ur, P. (2012). A course in English language teaching (pp. 60-75, 76-87, 101-116, 117-132, 133-146, 150-166). Cambridge University Press.

  • Vellutino, F. R., & Scanlon, D. M. (2001). Emergent literacy skills, early instruction, and individual differences as determinants of difficulties in learning to read: the case for early intervention. Handbook of Early Literacy Research, 1, 295–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, E. K., Binks-Cantrell, E. S., Joshi, R. M., Martin-Chang, S., & Arrow, A. (2016). Preservice teacher knowledge of basic language constructs in Canada, England, New Zealand, and the USA. Annals of Dyslexia, 66, 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-015-0115-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 211–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeltsman-Kulick, R. (2015). English reading comprehension of adolescent Hebrew speakers learning English as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Haifa University.

  • Zhao, J., Joshi, R. M., Dixon, L. Q., & Huang, L. (2016). Chinese EFL teachers’ knowledge of basic language constructs and their self-perceived teaching abilities. Annals of Dyslexia, 66, 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-015-0110-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Learning Disabilities, University of Haifa Gordon College of Education, Haifa, Israel

    Stephanie Fuchs

  2. Oranim College of Education, Kiryat Tiv’on, Israel

    Janina Kahn-Horwitz

  3. Department of Learning Disabilities, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Tami Katzir

Authors
  1. Stephanie Fuchs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Janina Kahn-Horwitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tami Katzir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Fuchs.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Teachers’ questionnaire

Options for each year (unless otherwise stated): not at all/less than once a week/once a week/twice a week/three times a week/every lesson

Section I

Part A

  1. 1.

    How often do you usually include activities such as identifying sounds at the beginning or end of words in your lessons in each grade (for example, the teacher asks “What sound do you hear at the beginning of the word ‘sit’”? The pupil’s answer: /s/)?

  2. 2.

    How often do you usually include oral rhyming activities in your lessons (for example, the teacher says “Which word rhymes with the word ‘cat’; ‘bat’ or ‘car’”. The pupils answer: ‘bat’)?

  3. 3.

    How often do you usually include activities that deal with counting the number of sounds in words in your lessons (for example, the teacher shows a picture of a fish and pronounces the word “fish” asking how many sounds do they hear. The pupil’s answer: three sounds)?

  4. 4.

    How often do you usually include activities such as deleting or switching one sound in a word in your lessons (for example, the teacher asks the pupils to say the word “back” without the /b/ sound)?

Part B

  1. 1.

    In which years do you teach the sounds of the letters?

  2. 2.

    In which years do you teach the names of the letters?

  3. 3.

    In what order do you teach the sounds of the letters? According to the sequence that appears in the textbook/according to the alphabetic sequence/according to letter frequency/other

  4. 4.

    In which years do you teach the sounds of the letter combinations (two or more letters that form one sound, such as sh, ow, ea)?

  5. 5.

    How often do you usually teach spelling rules in your lessons for example “silent/magic e” (e.g., cake) “soft c” (e.g., city—the letter c sounds like /s/)?

  6. 6.

    How often do you usually provide your pupils with phonic texts for reading practice (texts that can be read by sounding out each letter or letter combination that you have already taught, with no or very few irregular words)?

Part C

  1. 1.

    How often do you usually ask your pupils to silently reread the same text (three times or more)?

  2. 2.

    How often do you usually read a text aloud to your pupils, when they have a copy of the text in front of them to follow your reading while emphasizing punctuation and intonation?

  3. 3.

    How often do you usually ask your pupils to read aloud in pairs or small groups?

  4. 4.

    How often do you usually ask a pupil to read a paragraph aloud to you so that you can evaluate his word decoding and fluency?

Part D

  1. 1.

    How many new vocabulary items do you usually teach in a lesson in each of your classes?

Options for each year: none/less than 4/4–5/6–7/8–10/more than 10

  1. 2.

    Which type of vocabulary items do you usually teach? single words/chunks of language (two or more words that form meaning together)/chunks of language within sentences

  2. 3.

    How often do you teach commonly used words that are not directly connected to the topic that you are teaching, such as only, just, but?

  3. 4.

    How many times do you review the same vocabulary item?

Options for each year: none/less than 4/4–5/6–7/8–10/more than 10

Part E

  1. 1.

    How often do you ask your pupils to identify the main idea of a text they have read?

  2. 2.

    How often do you have your pupils read simple texts silently, without hearing you reading aloud, and then demonstrate understanding by answering questions orally or in writing?

  3. 3.

    How often do you read aloud to your pupils and then ask them to demonstrate understanding by answering questions orally or in writing?

  4. 4.

    How often do you ask your pupils to compare what they have read to their own personal experiences or to other things that they have read?

  5. 5.

    How often do you ask your pupils to make predictions about what will happen next in the text they are reading?

  6. 6.

    How often do you ask your pupils to identify and describe the type of text they have read?

Section II

Part A

  1. 1.

    How often do you usually teach grammar in your lessons (examples: word order in sentences; prefixes and suffixes; letter/s added to nouns, verbs, and adjectives for different grammatical forms)?

  2. 2.

    Do you usually teach grammar explicitly (explaining the grammar rule and providing practice)?

Options for each year: yes/no/I don’t teach grammar in this grade

Part B

  1. 1.

    How often do you usually include listening activities in your lessons (for example, having the pupils draw a picture according to a description that they listen to)?

  2. 2.

    How often do you usually include speaking activities in your lessons (for example, having the pupils gather information by walking around and asking their classmates questions)?

Part C

  1. 1.

    How often do you usually include dictations to assess spelling?

  2. 2.

    If you include dictations in your lessons, which type of dictations do you usually use? I don’t use dictations/vocabulary words that appear in the unit that you are currently teaching from your textbook/words that have one sound in common/irregular words/other (please specify)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fuchs, S., Kahn-Horwitz, J. & Katzir, T. Theory and reported practice in EFL literacy instruction: EFL teachers’ perceptions about classroom practices. Ann. of Dyslexia 69, 114–135 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-018-00172-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-018-00172-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation