Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

IMPROVING INTERMEDIATE LEVEL STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION - REPORT

908

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
908
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Good morning everyone. At the beginning of the year, when the first ELASH results were gotten, the Academic Direction entrusted the Academic Teams to conduct focused research so important data were gathered to explain the problems test-takers were seemingly having in reaching expected CEFR standards. What we are going to show today is the results of a needs-analysis initiative conducted throughout the year in the Lima Centro branch. The said initiative could not have been feasible without the cooperation of the entire academic team (directors, heads, supervisors and especially teachers and students).
  • What I would like to say at this point is this project aims primarily at showing the current status of our High Intermediate students reading skils and to offer some suggestions on how to overcome the weaknesses found.
  • Analysis of ELASH 2 / WORLD PASS reading samples to determine level of difficullty (word level, readibility) Analysis of actual reading strategies required. Analysis of our upper-intermediate students word level/size & use of reading strategies. Diagnosis of upper-intermediate teaching of strategies. Preliminary conclusions – Elaboration of Hypothesis Devising of a tailor-made plan to tackle the problem Implementation of plan. Follow up Assessment
  • Analysis of ELASH 2 / WORLD PASS reading samples to determine level of difficullty (word level, readibility) Analysis of actual reading strategies required. Analysis of our upper-intermediate students word level/size & use of reading strategies. Diagnosis of upper-intermediate teaching of strategies. Preliminary conclusions – Elaboration of Hypothesis Devising of a tailor-made plan to tackle the problem Implementation of plan. Follow up Assessment
  • When comparing texts in the ELASH and in the WP, we see that the percentages are very similar for the General Word List (General Service List), with the WP being more demanding than the ELASH when it comes to knowing more words belonging to the 500-3000 range. Nevertheless, where the difference is more striking is when it comes to the Academic Word List, as you can see: WP reading tasks incorporate up to 22% of AW in their texts.
  • Readability is the ease in which text can be read and understood. In other words, how easy it is for reader to decode / understand a given text.
  • How did we measure readibility of ELASH and WP texts? We used the Microsoft Word Spelling Grammar Checker, more especifically the feature called FLESCH-KINCAID readibility scale
  • There is a widespread agreement that the following scores apply to EFL learners as well,
  • What is it that we found? We found that the ELASH reading section level of difficulty falls within the range where most ELL would have no trouble understanding the content. Let’s not forget that an I12 student at ICPNA has been exposed to the L2 a minimum of 650 contact hours.
  • Analysis of ELASH 2 / WORLD PASS reading samples to determine level of difficullty (word level, readibility) Analysis of actual reading strategies required. Analysis of our upper-intermediate students word level/size & use of reading strategies. Diagnosis of upper-intermediate teaching of strategies. Preliminary conclusions – Elaboration of Hypothesis Devising of a tailor-made plan to tackle the problem Implementation of plan. Follow up Assessment
  • 1.First, as musicians must practice their instruments alone before joining with the rest of the orchestra, so readers must practice and master each strategy alone. This means that we need to provide explicit, focused instruction on specific reading strategies. However, our teaching doesn't stop there . . . 2. Even when musicians master their parts alone, they still have to practice playing together. Likewise, we need to teach our students how to use a variety of strategies at the same time. Like a string bass, each strategy relates to and depends on the others—when we use them in combination, we'll achieve a specific goal quite powerfully. So we need to know more than which particular strategy to use. We must also know how to orchestrate it with other strategies. No pun intended, but we need to be strategic in our use of strategies. Keep This in Mind! It's extremely important to remember that readers don't use strategies in isolation. Strategies are meant to be used in combination with other strategies to complete certain tasks. Here's an example of this for you. One of my favorite strategies to teach is prediction. My students read up to a particular point in a narrative or expository text, and then I have them stop. When we pause, I ask some questions to get them to make predictions about what's coming next in the material. Then we read on to see if they predicted correctly. Is this just one strategy? Not at all. There's the strategy of making the prediction, and then there's the strategy of confirming or rejecting it. I can hardly think of a time when a reader would make a prediction without following up to see if he or she was right or wrong. So, rather than just focusing attention on teaching single strategies exclusively, we also need to be looking for natural opportunities to help readers see how they can use strategy clusters to accomplish their reading goals.
  • Think-aloud was originally developed by Newell and Simon (1972, cited by Block, 1986) to study problem-solving strategies. To what extent can text comprehension be regarded as a problem to be solved? Ericsson and Simon (1993), when considering the possibility of verbalisation during text comprehension, claim that easy and well-written texts are not suitable for verbalisation because most reading proceeds rapidly and automatically, so whatever the reader can say out loud is merely the reproduction of the text itself. As soon as the text gets more difficult due to its topic, organisation, poor writing or unfamiliar writing style, reading starts to resemble a problem-solving task and verbalisation can produce information other than the actual text. This is why think-aloud is particularly suitable for examining the strategies of those poor readers who encounter difficulties when trying to read an unfamiliar text (e.g. Olshavsky, 1977). Reading in a second language is a problem-solving activity per se, because it involves considerable efforts on the reader’s part to make sense of a text written in an unfamiliar code. Thus the cognitive processing required to comprehend a text written in a foreign language can easily become the subject of verbalisation in a think-aloud experiment. This is especially true for reading with a specific purpose, for example, reading for a test. The test questions pose an additional problem that readers need to solve, thus making the activity - reading and thinking in order to find the correct response - suitable for think-aloud.
  • Ss currently are not motivated enough to do extensive reading –at the expected levels. Making reading mandatory and graded will automatically increase the need for getting involved in the initiative.
  • Transcript

    • 1. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
    • 2. CEFR – B2 LEVEL
    • 3. CEFR – B2 Level OVERALL READING COMPREHENSION Can read with a large degree of independence, adaptingB2 style and speed of reading to different texts and purposes , and using appropriate reference sources selectively. Has a broad active reading vocabulary, but may experience some difficulty with low‑frequency idioms.
    • 4. OVERVIEW
    • 5. FIRST PARTDIAGNOSIS OF THE PROBLEM
    • 6. What is the problem?107 Target
    • 7. What is the problem?126 Target
    • 8. What is the problem?126 Target
    • 9. Why can’t our students reach the target for the Reading Section?
    • 10. SECOND PARTANALYSIS OF EXISTING DATA
    • 11. VOCABULARY
    • 12. ELASH/WP READING SECTIONS: CONTRAST CHART (%) (Against COCA) 1-500 501-3000 >3000 AcademicElash2 69 16.7 14.3 5.7 WP 62 22 16 22 100%
    • 13. READING SAMPLES - ELASH vs WP 6970 62605040 E1 E230 WP 22 22 16.720 14.3 1610 5.70 1-500 501-3000 >3000 Academic
    • 14. Analysis of ELASH 2 Reading Samples (against OXFORD3000) Sample 1 - 3000 1 95 % 2 96% 3 97% 4 89% 5 89% 6 91% 7 94% AVERAGE 92.8%
    • 15. READABILITY
    • 16. Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Test This test rates text on a U.S. school grade level. For example, a score of 8.0 means that an eighth grader can understand the document. For most documents, aim for a score of approximately 7.0 to 8.0.Flesch Reading Ease Test This test rates text on a 100-point scale. The higher the score, the easier it is to understand the document. For most standard files, you want the score to be between 60 and 70. Score Description (EFL students) 90-100 Easily understandable by an average 11-year-old student. 60-70 Easily understandable by 13- to 15-year-old students. 0-30 Best understood by university graduates
    • 17. ELASH - READING SECTION -SAMPLE READABILITYSample FLESCH-KINCAID GRADE LEVEL FLESCH READING EASE 1 7.2 64 2 10.5 46.4 3 8.7 62.6 4 5.1 78.7 5 10.8 51.6 6 9.5 59.2 7 8.8 62.3AVERAGE 8.66 60.69 Ideal : 7 to 8 Ideal : 60 to 70
    • 18. ELASH/WP : CONTRAST CHART (Readability) FLESCH-KINCAID FLESCH READING GRADE LEVEL EASEElash2 8.66 60.69 WP 12.6 40.9 Ideal : 7 to 8 Ideal : 60 to 70
    • 19. ELASH/WP : CONTRAST CHART (Readability)
    • 20. ANALYSIS OF OUR STUDENTS’WORD LEVEL/SIZE & READING STRATEGIES
    • 21. The Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation, P.) 2nd One Thousand Word List Target : I05 n=139 SCORE Number of Students Percentage16/30 535 words 16 ss 11.50%17/30 568 words 11ss 7.90%18/30 601 words 19 ss 13.60%19/30 634 words 10 ss 7.10%20/30 667 words 12 ss 8.60%21/30 700 words 15 ss 10.70%22/30 733 words 09 ss 6.40%23/30 766 words 13 ss 9.30%24/30 832 words 06 ss 4.30%25/30 832 words 04 ss 2.80%
    • 22. I05 STUDENTS WORD LEVEL 2nd 1000 WORD LIST14.00%12.00%10.00% 8.00% SCORE (in word families) 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% 533 567 600 633 667 700 SCORE (in word families) 733 767 800 833 683.3 wf
    • 23. Analysis of Reading Strategies Required in ELASH Texts
    • 24. ANALYSIS OF READING STRATEGIES REQUIRED BY ELASH 2 TESTS
    • 25. ANALYSIS OF READING STRATEGIES REQUIRED BY ELASH 2 TESTSO Inferences: Readers must draw conclusions about what is meant based on clues in the text (“reading between lines”).O ScanningO Skimming
    • 26. Taking the Test: Steps tothe Inferential StrategyO Test-takers are required to… O …read the target questions or statements carefully. O …identify relevant information related to the questions or statements in the text. O …evaluate how logical the link is between the identified relevant information and the target statements. O …double check their line of reasoning, provided there is enough time.
    • 27. Analysis of Teaching Strategies
    • 28. Diagnosis of Teaching StrategiesO Class Observation O Level: Intermediate O Formative basis O Goal: Determine level of effectiveness in the teaching of reading strategies during textbook activitiesO Outcome: O Listening and speaking skills are mostly integrated. O Very good application of “stretching the task” notion. O Teachers are primarily task-resolution oriented O Reading strategies are taught neither explicitly nor consistently
    • 29. Analysis of Students’Perception on Reading Strategies
    • 30. SURVEY OF READING STRATEGIES (SORS)Kouider Mokhtari and Ravi Sheorey, 2002The purpose of this survey is to collect information about the various strategiesyou use when you read school-related academic materials in ENGLISH (e.g.,reading textbooks for homework or examinations; reading journal articles, etc.). KEY TO AVERAGES3.5 or higher = High 2.5 – 3.4 = Medium 2.4 or lower =Low INTERPRETING SCORES1) The overall average indicates how often you use reading strategies when reading academic materials.2) The average for each subscale shows which group of strategies (i.e., Global, Problem Solving, or support strategies) you use most often when reading. It is important to note, however, that the best possible use of these strategies depends on your reading ability in English, the type of material read, and your reading purpose.3) A low score on any of the subscales or parts of the inventory indicates that there may be some strategies in these parts that you might want to learn about and consider using when reading
    • 31. SURVEY RESULTS ON Ss’ USE (PERCEPTION) ON READING STRATEGIES SORS - AVERAGE (3.5 or up being high) PROBLEM SOLVING SUPPORT TEACHER GLOBAL RS RS RS OVERALL 1 3.21 3.51 3.19 3.30 2 3.13 3.5 3.54 3.39 3 3.42 3.77 3.7 3.63 4 3.47 3.81 3.38 3.55 5 3.26 3.75 3.45 3.49 6 3.44 3.75 3.62 3.60 7 3.62 3.89 3.75 3.75 8 3.22 3.76 3.2 3.39 9 3.58 3.89 3.61 3.69 10 3.21 3.59 3.41 3.40 11 3.26 3.74 3.38 3.46 12 3.12 3.58 3.26 3.32 13 3.3 3.57 3.71 3.53 14 3.18 3.63 3.3 3.37 15 3.42 3.69 3.44 3.52 16 3.22 3.77 3.21 3.40 AVERAGE 3.32 3.70 3.45 3.49
    • 32. Ss’ Use of Reading Strategies Actual “A learning experience (…) perceived Low* to be of high quality can facilitatePerceived High** learner self-actualization(…)”Learning* Based on ELASH scores, current teaching orientation,observation of classes.** Based on SORS results Mercado, L. (2012)
    • 33. THIRD PART PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS
    • 34. Preliminary Conclusions
    • 35. Preliminary Conclusions
    • 36. Preliminary Conclusions* Not ICPNA’s program major focus.
    • 37. Hypotheses
    • 38. HOW DO WEACHIEVE THIS?
    • 39. tudents and teachers to take a fresh look at the learning process. Its strategies-based instruction guides students to become aware of their learning styles and to develop strategies to make their language learning successful. It can be us
    • 40. Anderson’s Guidelines on How to Teach Reading Strategies O Teach specific strategies explicitly. O Teach strategy clusters. O Integrate strategies consistently into your teaching. O Teach students a wide variety of strategiesFrom Neil Anderson Teaching ESL/EFL Reading
    • 41. Raising Awareness –Metacognitive Level
    • 42. TEACHING STRATEGIES DEMO
    • 43. THINK-ALOUD PROTOCOL O I predict that … O I can picture … O A question I have is … O This reminds me of … O This is like … O I’m confused about … O The big idea here is … O I believe … O The author’s purpose seems to be…
    • 44. STUDENT MATERIAL FOR APPLICATION (Samples) READING WORKSHEET I09 UNIT 3PART A: MAKING PREDICTIONS.What do you think the reading at page 16 will be about? Look at thepictures below and predict 5 words that might appear in the text. Justifyyour answer. Before… After …1.2.3.4.5.PART B: SKIMMINGAnswer the questions below. 1. The main idea of paragraph 2 is that June Diaz changed careers because: (A) she realized she had always wanted to be a teacher. (B) She majored in education. (C) she wasn’t successful in her business career. (D) She was offered a promotion. 2. According to the text, crossover teachers are not widely accepted because
    • 45. READING WORKSHEET / I11PART A: (MAKING PREDICTIONS) Look at the two pictures below. In general, they reflect whatthe article is about. Make predictions about its content by reading the statements below andwriting either “I agree” or “I disagree”. 1. To learn better, it is a good idea to know how the brain works. (_________________) 2. There are two types of memory (___________________) 3. The structure of our brain changes physically as a result of studying. (_________________) 4. The brain can remember better when the information is organized. (_________________) 5. The best way to learn something is to teach it to someone else. (__________________)Now, read the article on page 40 in your workbook. If your prediction was correct, whisper, “Yes!”If your prediction was wrong, whisper, “Oops!!” Say, “Aha!” or “Wow!” if you are learningsomething new from the text. Additionally, write one piece of information that you learned out ofthis first reading:______________________________________________________________________________ __PART B: (GUESSING MEANING FROM CONTEXT) Mark the best answer to the following questions.Be ready to justify your answer by thinking aloud. 1. The word “resolve” in the first paragraph is closest in meaning to …….. . a. work out c. make a firm decision b. avoid d. result 2. The word “key” in the first paragraph means …… . a. put information into a computer c. instrument b. unimportant d. deciding factor 3. The word “take in” in paragraph 2 is closes in meaning to ……. . a. perceive c. ignore b. misunderstand d. illusion 4. The expression “make up” in paragraph 5 is closest in meaning to …. . a. construct c. reconcile b. accommodate d. memorize
    • 46. FOURTH PART SUGGESTIONS
    • 47. SUGGESTION 1: IncorporateReading into the Evaluation System O Reading should be regarded as an objective grade O As of WHEN? O The sooner the better O How should it be evaluated?: O Multiple Choice Quiz? O Post-reading discussion in class?
    • 48. Suggested Class Objectives OBJECTIVES S S R W W
    • 49. Why would this change not drastically affect the current status (grading/ T’s workload, etc.) ?O Current 3rd Objective O Suggested 3rd Evaluation Objective O Speaking : Ss orally Evaluation report to O Reading : Ss will teacher/class orally report to teacher/class ANY GIVEN SOURCE SOURCE: TEXT
    • 50. Why is this change necessary?
    • 51. SUGGESTION 2: Standardize Effective Reading Strategy InstructionO Direct explanationO ModelingO Guided practiceO Application
    • 52. WL: Reading Strategies
    • 53. WL: Reading Strategies
    • 54. SUGGESTION 3: Provide Teachers with Tools to Model Reading StrategiesO TrainingO Video resourcesO Written material: worksheets / professional reading/ tips
    • 55. SUGGESTION 4: Promote Reading Portfolios (ALP?)O SORS.O Reading Worksheets.O Graphic Organizers.O Vocabulary cards (PAVE)O Vocabulary/learning logs
    • 56. PAVE STRATEGY
    • 57. SUGGESTION 5: Promote the Reading Flow InitiativeO 40 novels (ADV)O 40 graded readers (INT)O 18 Reader’s Digest + MAGAZINES (INT)O 60 Forum magazines (MET)O Graded Readers available in the library O Basic : 150 titles* O Intermediate : 92 titles* O Advanced : 62 titles**In some cases up to 3 copies per title
    • 58. Final RemarksO Crucial skillO Teaching of reading strategiesO MandatoryO Great opportunityO Now
    • 59. SOURCESO Anderson, N. (2010) Teaching ESL/EFL Reading. Education to Go, a part of Cengage Learning.O Anderson, N. (1999) Exploring Second Language Reading. Heinle & HeinleO Mercado, L.(2012) English Language Technology. Cengage LearningO Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25 (3), pp. 2-10.O Phillips, D. ((2006) Preparation Course for the TOEFL TEST. LongmanO SORS: (Adapted from Oxford 1990, pp. 297-300).O http://www.readingrockets.org/article/21160/O http://www.readingquest.org/strat/qta.htmlO http://www.educationoasis.com/curriculum/graphic_organizers.htmO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgUbdzL7gmkO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHTwGsnQ710

    ×