• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Teachers' Beliefs and Attitudes towards Teaching Reading Comprehension to EFL Students
 

Teachers' Beliefs and Attitudes towards Teaching Reading Comprehension to EFL Students

on

  • 8,861 views

This is a presentation a comparative a study that compares experienced teachers' belief system and attitudes with less experienced teachers toward the teaching of Reading Comprehension in EFL context

This is a presentation a comparative a study that compares experienced teachers' belief system and attitudes with less experienced teachers toward the teaching of Reading Comprehension in EFL context

Statistics

Views

Total Views
8,861
Views on SlideShare
8,861
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
179
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Teachers' Beliefs and Attitudes towards Teaching Reading Comprehension to EFL Students Teachers' Beliefs and Attitudes towards Teaching Reading Comprehension to EFL Students Presentation Transcript

    • Department of Languages Mohammed V University TRU/DSEA: Applied Faculty of Education – Souissi Linguistics and the Teaching of Rabat English as a Foreign Language 2006 An Investigation of the Moroccan EFL University Teachers’ Belief Systems about Reading Comprehension and their Effects on the Teachers’ Classroom Practice. DR. Mohamed MELOUK Abdeslam BADRE Supervised by: Presented by:
    • Acknowledgemets
      • I thank God for sending me all these wonderful people to assist me in my quest of knowledge
      • My deepest gratitude is due to my teacher and supervisor professor Mr. Mohammed MELOUK for assisting me in the various stages of the present paper. Indeed, I thank Mr. Melouk for willingly accepting to supervise my paper, regardless of all the time and energy constraints he has been undergoing during this academic year.
      • Special thank is due to my professor of Reading who initiated me to the field of Reading, Mrs Badiaa ZERHOUNI. Infact, I am indebted to Mrs. ZERHOUNI not only because she has been, and is still, my teacher, but also because she has always been there whenever I had hard times: thank you very much, Madam, just for being there.
      • For his speedy answers, unfailing guidance and hankered-for estimation of others, Mr. EZZAKI Abdelkader deserves more than just words of thanks, yet all I can do is just thank you very much, Mr. Ezzaki.
      • Indeed, one person who first encouraged me and provided me with some relevant articles on teachers’ belief systems is Dr. Naima BENMANSOUR.: I thank you Madam for your sincere kindheartedness and for the motivation you buried within me.
      • My heartfelt thanks and gratitude are due to my just-unique mother for all the love, care, energy, and faith she secures my life with.
      • Finally, I would like to thank my DESA classmates; and special thanks to KADMIRI Merriem & Khaoula El Baida as well as all the people who participated in filling in the research questionnaires.
    • Department of Languages Mohammed V University TRU/DSEA: Applied Faculty of Education – Souissi Linguistics and the Teaching of Rabat English as a Foreign Language 2006 An Investigation of the Moroccan EFL University Teachers’ Belief Systems about Reading Comprehension and their Effects on the Teachers’ Classroom Practice. DR. Mohamed MELOUK Abdeslam BADRE Supervised by: Presented by:
    • Outline
      • General introduction
        • Rationale of the study
        • Objectives of the study
        • The research questions
        • Research hypotheses
        • The framework of the research
      • I. Literature review
        • I.1 Reading models
        • I.2. Instruction of L2 Reading
        • I.3.1 Lesson planning
        • I.4 Teachers’ Belief Systems
      • II. Methodology
          • II.1 Design of the study
          • II.2 Data Collection Procedures
          • II.3 Statistical analysis
      • III. Presentation of Results
        • III.1. Question.1
        • III.2. Question.2
        • III.3 Question.3
      • IV Discussion
        • IV.1. Research quention.1
        • IV.2. Research quention.2
        • IV.3. Research quention.3
      • V. Conclusion
        • V.4. Pedagogical implications
        • V.5 Limitations of the study
    • General introduction
      • Rationale of the study
          • The need to explore the Moroccan EFL university belief systems about reading.
          • Scarcity of research investigating the Moroccan EFL university teachers’ belief systems.
    • Objectives of the study
      • To investigate the belief systems of the Moroccan EFL university teachers in the area of reading.
      • To determine the extent to which the teachers’ claimed beliefs are compatible with their actual classroom practices.
      • To know whether or not the “experienced” and “less experienced” teachers differ in their perceptions of Reading Comprehension.
    • The Research Questions
      • What are the Moroccan EFL university teachers’ beliefs about and practices of reading and the teaching of reading comprehension?
      • To what extent do the claimed beliefs match the actual teaching of these teachers?
      • Do the Moroccan “experienced” and “less experienced” EFL teachers of reading comprehension differ in terms of their pedagogical beliefs?
    • Research hypotheses
      • It is assumed that the Moroccan EFL university teachers of reading comprehension are more top-down oriented in terms of their beliefs and instruction of reading comprehension.
      • It is assumed that the teachers’ beliefs are consistent with their actual practices.
      • It is assumed that the “less experienced” teachers’ pedagogical beliefs are different from those held by “the experienced” ones.
    • The theoretical framework of the study
      • Bottom-up model
      • Top-down model
      • Interactive model
    • I. Literature review
        • I.1 Reading models
      • The bottom-up model
      • Gough. 1972
      • Input is first entered into the icon system where it is transformed into phonemic character, then to lexical level and ended up in the deep structural level. So the text serially moves from low-level sensory information into higher-level encoding, (Gough, 1972).
    • LaBerge and Samuels (1974)
      • A three-memory system based theory:
      • 1) the Visual Memory System which operates at the perceptual level.
      • 2) the Phonological Memory System related to spelling patterns of words
      • 3) the Semantic Memory System, responsible for associating a given meaning with the perceived input
    • Shortcomings of the model
      • Unidirectionnel. (Rumelhart, 1977)
      • Less Practicable. (McClellad & Johnson)
    • The top-down model
      • reading is not the outcome of an accurate identification of each item in the written text; rather, it is the result of an appropriate selection of minimum and most productive cues in the text.
    • Goodman (1970)
      • reading is a spiral process, marked by five main cyclical stages:
        • The reader identifies the written text,
        • predicts the meaning of the word by resorting to his/her prior knowledge of the topic
        • tests the made hypothesis in order either to validate it or reject it
        • modifies the hypothesis in order to construct meaning
        • comprehends and builds up new meaning/knowledge.
    • J.Coady (1979)
      • “ more or less a successful interaction among three factors: high-level conceptual abilities, background knowledge, and process strategies. The result of the interaction is comprehension. ”
    • Shortcomings of the Top-down
      • Overlooking the lower level processing.
    • The Interactive Model
      • Rumelhart (1977)
      • ‘ Reading is a process of multifaceted interactions, taking place at various levels, including different types of knowledge in the reader’s schemata.’
    • The three models’ classroom implications
      • Bottom-up skills
      • Top-Down skills
      • Interactive skills
    • Table.1: A description of some reading activities, as they most likely appear in reading: pre-reading, while-reading, and/or post-reading stage. To train students to practice fast reading of the text with a purpose in mind. Students engage in pair work to quickly read through a passage to extrapolate specific information. Scanning To train students read quickly to see what the text is about and how it is organized. Skimming allows students to predict the purpose, the main ideas before moving to any focused reading. Students quickly read through several short passages in order to match them to their correct headline. Skimming To allow students practice and identify the sequence of events within a text, which facilitates reading. Students work together to approximate the sequence of events in a passage before reading it. They then read with the purpose in mind Predicting-understanding sequence To make students guess what might happen next in the text by asking high level questions which require interpreting, extrapolating, applying, inferring, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information in the text. Students predict what a text will be about from viewing the title and reading pieces of the text one by one, asking the teacher and responding, and revising their guesses. Predicting asking questions To encourage students to personally determine what information they need about a text they are to read, which highly motivates the readers. In response to a picture or key word prompt about the text, students generate facts and questions about its topic. Questioning-enquiry strategy To develop reading comprehension by making the reader familiar with basic content and structure of the text and activating B.K. Students work with the teacher and then on their own. Exploiting the title, pictures, or subheading of the text to find out the main idea of the text. Previewing To activate students’ prior knowledge about a topic and its vocabulary. Grouping words into categories makes it easier for students to remember and grasp meanings. Students generate and categorize vocabulary they know about a topic into meaningful categories. - semantic mapping Pre – reading activities Objectives Description Activities
    • To raise students’ awareness of the cohesive devices (pronoun references, chronological order, and connectors). By recognizing the function of these words, students will be able to understand and construct a meaningful representation of the text. Students focus on specific time clues, transitional words of sentence and cross-sentence and paragraph coherence. Understanding discourse markers and details. To improve academic reading skills by focusing on main and supporting points. Students read and complete a cloze outline of the text. Focusing on main and supporting points To develop strategies of coping with unfamiliar words and expressions, rather than being dependent on the teacher. Thus, students grow aware of the ways through which they can cope with new words, especially when they analyze their process of inference. Students are encouraged to guess meaning of new vocabulary by considering different context clues. Inferring from context To make students aware of the importance of paying attention to details in reading so as to contribute in the re-organization of the text, also, these kinds of activities fosters students’ team-work. After segmenting a text into subsections and giving each section to a student to read it, students work in group/pairs to reconstruct the text. Jigsaw reading To train students on reading fluently not word-by word. Students are required to read a given text for 5 to 10 minutes at a time with the intent to read faster each time they re-read the text. Increasing reading rate While – reading activities
    • Most of the following activities are adapted from an in-class lesson plan, handed by the professor in the course “Issues in Reading II”, faculty of science of education Rabat, 2004-2005. To introduce students to the inter-connectedness of the literal, inferential and applied learning that occurs when reading. So students will be aware of the hierarchical relationships of the levels of comprehension. In this activity students react- either orally or in wittingly- to a series of statements about the text they have just read. Three-level guides To raise students’ awareness of what makes an effective summary of a given text; this helps them develop more effective understanding of future reading text. Students are required to write a summary of the already-read text or part of it, they will share it with colleagues for the sake of getting feedback. Writing summaries. To develop students’ sense of priorities and strategies for dealing with unfamiliar vocabulary. Students are trained on strategy-use while dealing with vocabulary in the text. Collaboratively, students work through a passage with difficult words with the aim of identifying the strategy they need to grasp meaning of these words. Vocabulary exercises. Post – reading activities
    • Effective Reading Teachers Leu and Kinzer (2003)
      • Be insightful as to what concerns the appropriate use of material, method, and management.
      • Focus on decoding skills as well as context-use strategy, and fluency.
      • Make use of various text’s genres and issues and link them to background knowledge and students’ experiences.
      • Teach reading as an integrated skill with other skills.
      • Enhance comprehension through instructional strategies and activating background knowledge.
      • Highlight the students’ needs as one of the course priorities, without overlooking individual needs
      • Organise the class in terms of time, class, and material managements.
      • Adopt a pedagogical approach to assessment far from being exam-oriented.
    • Teachers’ Belief Systems
      • Definition of “Beliefs” Richard and Lockhart (1996)
      • ‘ Teachers’ belief systems are founded on the goals, values, and beliefs teachers hold in relation to the content and process of teaching, and their understanding of the system in which they work and their roles in it .’
    • The source of teacher’s beliefs J. C. Richards (1994)
      • Teachers’ own experience as language learners.
      • Experience of what works best.
      • Established practice.
      • Personality factors.
      • Educationally-based or research-based principles.
      • Principles derived from an approach or method
    • Empirical studies on the issue of beliefs
      • Jack C. Richards (1992)
      • Pajares (1992)
    • II - Methodology
      • Design of the study
      • The subjects
    • The subjects 16 teachers Actual participants 11 teachers Discarded subjects 27 teachers Initial number of participants
    • The subjects’ Profile Table.2: describing the research subjects’ profile. 16 Total number 7 Teachers with no training and no more than 6 years of teaching G2 9 Teachers with training & above 10 years of teaching experience. G1 N Groups
    • The instruments
      • Questionnaire.1 (on teachers’ beliefs, constituted of 55 close items ).
      • Beliefs about what reading is (6 items)
      • Beliefs about factors that facilitate reading comprehension (8 items)
      • Beliefs about “a good” reader (10 items)
      • Beliefs about “an effective” reading teacher (14 items)
      • Beliefs about “efficient” reading materials (9 items)
      • Beliefs about “effective” assessment of reading comprehension. (8 items)
    • Questionnaire.2 (on teachers’ classroom practices, 24 close items)
      • While selecting the text you bring to the classroom, how often do you consider these factors? (9 items)
      • How often do you include these tasks and activities in your reading class? (8 items)
      • To assess students’ reading proficiency how often do you make of these tasks part of the test? (7 items)
    • Piloting
      • Probing the target population
      • Refining the main research instrument
    • Administration of the main instruments
      • Followed procedures of administration
      • Total number of the administered questionnaires:
      • Questionnaire.1 = 60 distributed copies
      • Questionnaire.2= 30 distributed copies
      • Valid number = 54 filled in copies
    • Data Analysis
      • Descriptives
      • Default ranking & comparison
       
    • Presentation of the Results
      • Question.1 :
      • What are the Moroccan EFL university teachers’ beliefs and practices about reading and the teaching of reading comprehension?
    • III.1.1.1Teachers’ beliefs about what reading is Table.3: Means and standard deviations for beliefs about what reading is M1 = Bottom-up oriented M2 = top-down oriented M3 = Interactive oriented ,91 3,40 16 M3 ,58 3,78 16 M2 1,85 2,84 16 M1 Std. Deviations Means N Underlying models
    • III.1.1.2 Teachers’ beliefs about factors that facilitate comprehension Table.4 means and standard deviations for the factors that facilitate comprehension 16 Valid N (listwise) 2,33 2,25 16 Awareness of strategy use 8 2,18 2,34 16 Materials’ authenticity 7 1,04 2,81 16 Prior knowlege of the topic 6 1,36 3,88 16 Knowlege of grammar 5 1,34 3,95 16 Awareness of text structure 4 1,34 3,95 16 Word recognition 3 ,80 4,13 16 Cooperative learning 2 ,38 4,38 16 Knowlege of vocabulary 1 Std. Deviation Mean N Factors
    • III.1.1.3 Teachers’ beliefs about a “good” EFL reader M1= Bottom-up oriented M2 = top-down oriented M3 = Interactive oriented 16 Valid N (listwise) ,34 4,01 16 M3 ,77 4,16 16 M2 1,42 2,94 16 M1 Std. Deviation Means N Underlying Theory
    • III.1.1.4 Teachers’ beliefs about a good teacher of reading Table.7: means and standard deviations for skills believed to be acquired by good teachers. 1,42 3,01 16 G.3-Organizational skills 1,03 3,95 16 G.2-Interactive skills 1,31 3,57 16 G.1-Teaching skills Std. Deviation Means N Groups
    • III.1.1.5 Teachers’ beliefs about effective reading materials 16 Valid N (listwise) 1,20 3,81 16
      • Cognitive skills
      1,40 3,13 16
      • Linguistic skills
      ,33 4,00 16
      • Practicality of materials
      Std. Deviation Means N Groups
    • III.1.1.6 Teachers’ beliefs about effective assessment of reading 16 Valid N (listwise) ,51 3,54 16 Reading skills ,66 2,78 16 Language skills Std. Deviation Mean N
    • III. 1.2 Teachers’ actual classroom practices of reading comprehension
    • III. 1.2.1 Factors teachers frequently rely on while selecting teaching materials 16 Valid N (listwise) 1,21 3,42 16 3-Cognitive skills 1,48 3,13 16 2-Linguistic skills 1,01 2,82 16 1-Practicality of materials Std. Deviation Means N Groups
    • III. 1.2.2 Classroom tasks and activities teachers actually use 16 Valid N (listwise) 1,13 3,55 16 Awareness of strategy use 8 1,18 3,34 16 Materials authenticity 7 1,00 4,00 16 Prior knowlege of the topic 6 ,36 4,18 16 Knowlege of grammar 5 1,04 2,25 16 Awareness of text structure 4 ,94 4,15 16 Word recognition 3 ,56 4,00 16 Cooperative learning 2 ,81 4,50 16 Knowlege of vocabulary 1 Std. Deviation Mean N Factors
    • III. 1.2.3 teachers’ assessment of students’ reading proficiency 16 Valid N (listwise) ,51 3,99 16 Reading skills 1,30 2,50 16 Language skills Std. Deviation Mean N
    • Question.2
      • . To what extent do the claimed beliefs match the actual teaching of these teachers?
    • comparing the beliefs and practices about factors that facilitate comprehension 1,13 3,55 2,33 2 ,25 16 Awareness of strategy-use 8 1,18 3,34 2,18 2,34 16 Materials’ authenticity 7 1,00 4,00 1,04 2,81 16 Prior knowlege of the topic 6 ,36 4,18 1,36 3,88 16 Knowlege of grammar 5 1,04 2,25 1,34 3,95 16 Awareness of text structure 4 ,94 4,15 1,34 3,95 16 Word recognition 3 ,56 4,00 ,80 4,13 16 Cooperative learning 2 ,81 4,50 ,38 4,38 16 Knowlege of vocabulary 1 Std. Devt. Mean Std.Devt. Mean N practices Beliefs Factors
    • Comparing the beliefs of effective teaching materials and the teachers’ selected materials. 1,21 3,42 1,20 3,81 16 Cognitive skills G3 1,48 3,13 1,40 3,13 16 Linguistic skills G2 1,01 2,82 ,33 4,00 16 Practicality of materials G1 Std. Devt. Mean Std. Devt. Mean practices Beliefs N Groups
    • III.2.3 comparing the participants’ beliefs and practices about effective assessment of reading 16 Valid N (listwise) ,51 3,99 ,51 3,54 16 Reading skills G2 1,30 2,50 ,66 2,78 16 Language skills G1 Std. Devt. Means Std. Devt. Means N Practices Beliefs Groups
    • Question.3
      • Do the Moroccan EFL “experienced” and “less experienced” teachers of reading comprehension differ in terms of their beliefs about reading comprehension?
    • III.3.1.1. ‘Experienced’ & ‘less experienced’ teachers’ Beliefs about Reading M1= bottom-up oriented M2= top-down oriented M3= interactive oriented 16 VALID N (listwise) 2,90 4,00 3,33 7 GROUP 2 3,90 3,85 2,20 9 GROUP 1 Means M3 Means M2 Means M1 Belief about what reading is N Groups
    • III.3.1.2 ‘Experienced’ and ‘less experienced’ Teachers’ beliefs about factors facilitating reading 16 VALID N (listwise) 1,93 2,00 2,22 4,43 3,00 4,00 4,03 4,41 7 GROUP 2 3,20 3,48 4,45 2,95 4,45 2,25 4,33 4,15 9 GROUP 1 F8 F7 F6 F5 F4 F3 F2 F1 Beliefs about factors facilitating comprehension N Groups
    • III.3.1.5 ‘Experienced’ and less ‘experienced’ Teachers’ beliefs about ‘good’ teaching material of reading F1= practicality F2= linguistic skills F3= cognitive skills 16 VALID N (listwise) 3,40 2,70 4,03 7 GROUP 2 3,83 2,88 4,43 9 GROUP 1 Means F3 Means F2 Means F1 Beliefs about good materials N Groups
    • III.3.1.6 ‘Experienced’ and less ‘experienced’ teachers’ beliefs about effective assessment of reading comprehension 16 VALID N (listwise) 3,80 2,86 7 GROUP 2 3,80 1,68 9 GROUP 1 Means for Reading skills Means for Language skills Belief about effective assessment N Groups
    • Discussion of Findings
    • Finding.1
      • 1. The Moroccan EFL university teachers’ beliefs about & thier actual instruction of Rg are generally on line with major underlying theories and classroom implication of L1 & L2 readig.
      • 2. The obtaied results revealed that it is not easy to make a clear-cut judgement on Moroccan EFL teachers’ beliefs about reading comprehension and say that they are top-down oriented or otherwise because there is a discernible overlap among the three models of reading in the teachers’ beliefs & practices with a highly measured tendency towards the top-down and the interactive models.
    • Finding.2
      • Consistency
      • In comparing between teachers’ beliefs about effective teaching materials and the nature of the materials they actually select for their reading class, the results demonstrated that there was a reassuring consistency between the teachers’ thoughts and actions.
      • The comparison between the teachers’ beliefs about effective reading assessments and the way they actually assess their students reading proficiency was found, as was being expected, that the participants guarded an even level of consistency between what they preach and what they teach.
    • Finding. 3
      • Inconsistency
      • Inconsistency was most apparent in the beliefs and practices of class-used activities, such awareness of text structure, prior knowledge of the topic and awareness of strategy use : participants believed that these activities were not very important for comprehension, but they had a frequent use of the latter.
      • It has not been determined whether or not the degree of the mismatch between the teachers’ belief and practice of these activities was significant or not because no T-test was run. Therefore, regardless of the sparred moments of discrepancy, the findings revealed that there was a “stable” consistency between the teachers’ claimed beliefs and their performance
    • Finding.4
      • Both ‘experienced’ & ‘less experienced’ were able to articulate well-developed personal theories of teaching that addressed their actual practices.
      • the comparison between “experienced” and “less experienced” teachers’ beliefs revealed that while each group’s perceptions of reading instruction, “a good reader”, alongside “a good teacher of reading” represented opposite perspectives: they both held common views about effective reading materials as well as effective assessments of reading comprehension .
    • Findig.5
      • The “less experienced” group:
      • considered reading as a mere macro-skill that has no impacts on the real life of the reader that is why they focus more on the linguistic aspects of reading .
      • were concerned with fostering the students’ vocabulary knowledge and strengthening the student-teacher interaction
      • The ‘experienced’ group:
      • paid more attention to the cognitive parts of reading and tried to focus more on interactive activities -in both teaching and assessment- that would enrich students’ background knowledge
      • Focused more on engaging students into peer and group activities that would help mapping students’ thinking through strategic tasks
    • Finding.6
      • Due to their accumulated years of teaching experience along with the formal pedagogical training they had, ‘Experienced’ teachers’ develop a holistic philosophy, allowing them to be more automatic and effective while coping with the different classroom encountered situations.
    • Conclusion
      • Pedagogical implication
          • It is high time teachers enrolled into formal pedagogical training and be active participants in the continuous training that provide them with academic pedagogies of teaching.
          • evidence revealed that teachers’ belief systems have tremendous influence on the learners” as well as the teaching/learning process, syllabus designers thus have to communicate the teachers’ salient underlying philosophy of the curriculum
    • Limitations of the study
      • Limited number of the participants
      • Elicitation techniques
      • Statistical tools
    • Recommendation for further research
      • Further research may be designed to dig into this issue with the intent to include a good size of the population and use various elicitation techniques so as to come up with generalizable findings and more insightful pedagogical implications.
      • We need to know the whether or not experienced teachers do the same things as the less experienced ones in terms of teaching reading comprehension
      • The results of present study have revealed that in some instances the teachers’ articulated beliefs may not match their actual pedagogical practices. However, the reasons behind this mismatch are not accounted for
    • Thank You Very Much, indeed