Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

ESL Learners’ Use of Reading Strategies Across Different Text Types

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current study sought to provide information on whether ESL learners’ use of reading strategies is associated with the type of text they are reading. To address this objective, 21 ESL learners read 20 different texts of varying types and answered the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory by Mokhtari and Sheorey (J Educ Psychol 94(2):249–259, 2002) to measure their use of reading strategies. Using descriptive and inferential statistics, results showed that ESL learners generally applied a wide range of strategies consistently when reading different text types. These results were explained using a schema-theoretic view of reading. Findings further revealed that there was a significantly higher use of global reading strategies compared to the two other factors (i.e., problem-solving reading strategies and support reading strategies). Such a finding was attributed to the reading proficiency level of the learners. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afflerbach, P., David Pearson, P., & Paris, S. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75, 460–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. (1989). More than meets the eye: Foreign language reading: Theory and practice. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrot, J. S. (2013). Revisiting the role of linguistic complexity in ESL reading comprehension. 3L; Language, Linguistics and Literature, The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 19(1), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrot, J. S. (2014a). Combining isolated and integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on productive skills. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 27(3), 278–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrot, J. S. (2014b). A macro perspective on key issues in English as second language (ESL) pedagogy in the postmethod era: Confronting challenges through sociocognitive-transformative approach. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(3), 435–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2006). On-task versus off-task self-assessments among Korean elementary school students studying English. Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 506–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çakir, O. (2008). The effect of textual differences on children’s processing strategies. Reading Improvement, 45(2), 69–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrell, P. L. (1984). The effects of rhetorical organization on ESL readers. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 441–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrell, P. L. (1992). Awareness of text structure: Effects on recall. Language Learning, 42(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chomphuchart, N. (2006). The effect of text genre on Thai graduate students’ reading strategy use. Unpublished dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.

  • Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denton, C. A., Wolters, C. A., York, M. J., Swanson, E., Kulesz, P. A., & Francis, D. J. (2015). Adolescents’ use of reading comprehension strategies: Differences related to reading proficiency, grade level, and gender. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 81–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2008). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. Journal of Education, 189(1/2), 107–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (2009). The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, Z. (2008). Going beyond the Fab Five: Helping students cope with the unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in intermediate grades. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(6), 476–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fludernik, M. (2000). Genres, text types, or discourse modes? Narrative modalities and generic categorization. Style, 34(2), 274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frønes, T. S., Narvhus, E. K., & Aasebø, M. C. (2013). Nordic results from the PISA digital reading assessment. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 8(01–02), 13–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, M., Juel, C., & Graves, B. (1998). Teaching reading in the 21st century. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, C. (2004). Understanding reading development. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedge, T. (1988). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilenman, L. K. (1990). Self-assessment of second language ability: The role of response effects. Language Testing, 7(2), 174–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkle, D., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. (2003). Applied statistics for the behavioural sciences (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, H. C., Chern, C. L., & Lin, C. C. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers & Education, 52(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, G., & Yong, S. (2004). Using cooperative learning to teach via text types. The Reading Matrix, 4(2), 117–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1), 34–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kletzien, S. B. (1991). Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders reading expository text of differing levels. Reading Research Quarterly, 67–86.

  • Kobayashi, M. (2002). Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: Text organization and response format. Language Testing, 19(2), 193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, K. L., & Ho, E. S. C. (2015). Reading performance and self-regulated learning of Hong Kong students: What we learnt from PISA 2009. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(1), 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. (2006). A study of the effects of rhetorical text structure and English reading proficiency on the metacognitive strategies used by EFL Taiwanese college freshmen. Unpublished dissertation, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

  • Lei, J. I. (2009). An investigation of the effects of discourse types on Taiwanese college students’ reading strategy use. Unpublished dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

  • Liu, P. L., Chen, C. J., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students’ English reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 54(2), 436–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., & Floyd, R. G. (2011). Comprehension challenges in the fourth grade: The roles of text cohesion, text genre, and readers’ prior knowledge. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 229–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B. J., Brandt, D. M., & Bluth, G. J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassaji, H. (2002). Schema theory and knowledge-based processes in second language reading comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives. Language Learning, 52(2), 439–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxford, R., Cho, Y., Leung, S., & Kim, H. J. (2004). Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use: An exploratory study. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 42(1), 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance (Vol. VI, pp. 573–603). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saenz, L. K., & Fuchs, L. S. (2002). Examining the reading difficulty of secondary students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, K.M., Kostin, I., Futagi, Y., & Flor, M. (2010, December). Generating automated text complexity classifications that are aligned with targeted text complexity standards. (Publication No. RR-10–28), Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

  • Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, L. (2010). Reading expository material: Are we asking the right questions? Topics in Language Disorders, 30(1), 39–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 808–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Y. S. (2003). A study of the effects of two text structures on Taiwanese EFL junior high school students’ strategy use. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.

  • Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tercanlioglu, L. (2004). Postgraduate students’ use of reading strategies in L1 and ESL contexts: Links to success. International Education Journal, 5(4), 562–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trosborg, A. (1997). Text typology: Register, genre and text type. Benjamins Translation Library, 26, 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, D., & Oxford, R. (1997). A gender-related analysis of strategies used to process input in the native language and foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 8, 43–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X. (2008). The effects of formal schema on reading comprehension: An experiment with Chinese EFL readers. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 13(2), 197–214.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National University, 551 M.F. Jhocson St., Sampaloc, Manila, Philippines

    Jessie S. Barrot

Authors
  1. Jessie S. Barrot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessie S. Barrot.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 4.

Table 4 Self-report questionnaire
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barrot, J.S. ESL Learners’ Use of Reading Strategies Across Different Text Types. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 25, 883–892 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-016-0313-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-016-0313-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation