АУТОР(И): Milevica D. Bojović
The study explores the university undergraduate biotechnology students’ perceived use of foreign language reading strategies, their perception of EFL classroom reading activities, and their potential relationships. For this purpose, a total of 91 university biotechnology students, learning English as a foreign language at the Faculty of Agronomy, University of Kragujevac, participated in this quantitative research. Two instruments were used in the study – the Inventory of Reading Strategies in a Foreign Language and Students’ Foreign Language Reading Activities Evaluation Scale. The measures of internal consistency, descriptive statistics, and Pearson correlation analysis were used for data processing. The obtained data were analyzed using SPSS 20.0 statistical software. The study demonstrates that the students used EFL reading strategies at a moderate level when reading texts in English and that their attitude toward EFL classroom reading activities was positive. The perceived use of reading strategies showed positive correlations with the students’ perceptions of EFL classroom reading activities. The students considered EFL classroom reading activities and reading comprehension testing as eﬀective practices in developing foreign language reading skills.
English as a foreign language, evaluation, reading strategies, reading activities
Aarnoutse, Leeuwe 1998: C. Aarnoutse, J. V. Leeuwe, Relation between reading comprehension, vocabulary, reading pleasure, and reading frequency, Educa- tional Research and Evaluation, 4(2), 143–166.
Bertram 2020: D. Bertram, Likert scales. CPSC 681–Topic report, <http://poincare. matf.bg.ac.rs/~kristina/topic-dane-likert.pdf>. 12. 10. 2020.
Block 1986: E. Block, e comprehension strategies of second language readers, TESOL Quarterly,20(3),463-494. doi:10.2307/3586295. 5. 10. 2020.
Block 1992: E. Block, See how they read: comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers, TESOL Quarterly,26(2), 319-343. doi:10.2307/3587008. 5. 10. 2020.
Bojović 2018: M. Bojović, Reading in a foreign language: Students’ evaluation of EFL classroom reading activities in a higher education setting, in: N. Lazarević, Paunović, Lj.Marković (eds.), Teaching languages and cultures: Developing competences, re-thinking practices, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholar Publishing, 271–292.
Brown 2000: J. D. Brown, What issues aﬀect Likert-scale questionnaire formats? Shi- ken: JALT Testing and Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 4(1), 27–33. <http://hosted. jalt.org/test/PDF/Brown7.pdf>. 12. 4. 2019.
Carrell, Eisterhold 1983: P. L. Carrell, J. C. Eisterhold, Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy, TESOL Quarterly,17(4), 553-573. doi:10.2307/3586613. 3. 6. 2015.
Chang, Sung, Chen 2002: The eﬀect of concept mapping to enhance text comprehen- sion and summarization, The Journal of Experimental Education, 71(1), 5–23.
Cohen 2001: A. D. Cohen, Preparing teachers for style- and strategies-based instruc- tion, The International Conference on Language Teacher Education (2nd), May 2001, Minneapolis, MN. <http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED455685.pdf>. 4. 10. 2020.
Cohen 2010: A. D. Cohen, Focus on the language learner: Style, strategies, and moti- vation, in: n N. Schmidt (ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (2nd edi- tion), London: Hodder Education, 161–178.
Deković et al. 1991: M. Deković, J. M. A. M. Janssens, J. R. M. Gerris, Factor structure and construct validity of the Block Child Rearing Practices Report (CRPR), Psychological Assessment, 3(2), 182–187.
Dochy et al. 1999: F. Dochy, M. Segers, M. M. Buehl, The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of research on prior knowledge, Review of Educational Research, 69(2), 145–186.
Dubin, Bycina 1991: F. Dubin, D. Bycina, Academic reading and the ESL/EFL teacher, in: M. Celce-Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language, New York: Newbury House, 195–215.
Ehrman, Oxford 1989: M. Ehrman, R. Oxford, Eﬀects of sex diﬀerences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies, The Modern Language Journal,73(1), 1-13. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1989.tb05302.x
Ekaningrum, Prabandari 2015: V. C. Ekaningrum, C. S. Prabandari, Students’ percep- tion of prereading activities in Basic Reading II Class of the English language education study program of Sanata Dharma University, LLT Journal,18(2), 133–140. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315992781_Students’_ Perception_on_Pre-reading_Activities_in_Basic_Reading_II_Class_of_ the_English_Language_Education_Study_Program_of_Sanata_Dharma_ University>. 4. 10. 2020.
Gardner, McIntyre 1991: R. C. Gardner, P. D. McIntyre, An instrumental motivation in language study: Who says it isn’t eﬀective? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(1), 57–72. <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009724>. 11.10. 2018.
Gibson, Levin 1975: E. J. Gibson, H. Levin, The Psychology of Reading, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Goodman 1973: K. S. Goodman, Miscues: Windows of the reading process, in: Mis- cue analysis: Application to Reading Instruction, Champaign, Urbana, Illi- nois: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication, NCTE, 3–14.
Grabe 1991: W. Grabe, Current development in second language reading research, TESOL Quarterly,25(3), 375-406. Accessed November 4, 2016. doi:10.2307/3586977. 4. 11. 2016.
Graham, Hebert 2010: S. Graham, M. Hebert, Writing to read: Evidence how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act Report, Washing- ton, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Harris 2009: J. Harris, Late-stage refocusing of Irish-language program evaluation: Maximizing the potential for productive debate and remediation, Language Teaching Research,13(1), 55–76. doi:10.1177/1362168808095523. 14. 10. 2016.
Hudson 1989: T. Hudson, Evaluation of content comprehension approach to read- ing English for science and technology, University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL,8(2), 143–170. <https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bit- stream/10125/38584/1/Hudson%20(1989)_WP8(2).pd>. 10. 10. 2020.
Holden et al. 1991: R. R. Holden, C. G. Fekken, D. H. G. Cotton, Assessing psychopathology using structured test-item response latencies, Psychological Assess- ment,3(1), 111–118.
Kirmizi 2010: F. S. Kirmizi, Relationship between reading comprehension strategy use and daily free reading time, Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 4572–4756. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.763.
Laslie 2016: C. Laslie, The engineering competency model, ASEE’s 123rd Annual Con- ference and Exposition, 26-29 June 2016. New Orleans, Louisiana: American Society for Engineering Education. <https://peer.asee.org/engineering-com- petency-model>. 4. 10. 2020.
Llosa, Slayton 2009: L. Llosa, Lorena, J. Slayton, Using program evaluation to inform and improve the education of young English language learners in US schools, Language Teaching Research, 13(1), 35-54. doi:10.1177/1362168808095522. 10. 11. 2016.
Medina 2012: S. L. Medina, Eﬀects of strategy instruction in an EFL reading compre- hension course: A case study, Profile, 14(1), 79-89. <http://www.scielo.org.co/ pdf/prf/v14n1/v14n1a06.pdf>. 6. 1. 2021.
Mokhtari, Sheorey 2002: K. Mokhtari, R. Sheorey, Measuring ESL students’ aware- ness of reading strategies, Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2–10.
Mokhtari, Reichard 2002: K. Mokhtari, C. A. Reichard, Assessing students’ metaconitive awareness of reading strategies, Journal of Education Psychology, 94(2), 249–259. doi:10.1037//0022-06126.96.36.199.
Nguyen 2007: H. T. Nguyen, Educating Vietnamese American students. Multicultural Education, 15(1), 23–26.
Norris 2009: J. M. Norris, Understanding and improving language education through program evaluation: Introduction to the special issue, Language Teaching Research, 13(1), 7–13. doi:10.1177/1362168808095520. 14. 10. 2016.
Nuttall 1996: C. Nuttall, Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language (rev. edn.), London: Heinemann Educational.
Oxford 1990: R. L. Oxford, Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know, New York: Newbury House.
Oxford 2017: R. L. Oxford, Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-regulation in Context, New York and London: Routledge.
Oxford, Crookall 1989: R. L. Oxford, D. Crookall, Research on language learning strategies: Methods, findings, and instructional issues, The Modern Language Journal,73(4), 404–419. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1989.tb05321.x. 20. 3. 2019.
Paris, Lipson, Wixson 1983: S. G. Paris, M. Y. Lipson, K. K. Wixson, Becoming a strategic reader, Contemporary Education Psychology, 8(3), 293-316. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(83)90018-8. 20. 3. 2019.
Park 2010: Y-H. Park, Korean EFL college students’ reading strategy use to comprehend authentic expository/technical texts in English, Doctoral dissertation, Depart- ment of Curriculum and Teaching, University of Kansas, USA. <https://kus- cholarworks.ku.edu/bitstream/handle/1808/6639/Park_ku_0099D_10804_ DATA_1.pdf?sequence=1>. 4. 10. 2020.
Pawlak 2018: M. Pawlak, Grammar learning strategy inventory (GLSI): Another look, Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching,8(2), 351-379. doi:10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.2.8. 11. 10. 2020.
Peacock 2009: M. Peacock, The evaluation of foreign-language-teache education programs, Language Teaching Research,13(3) 259-278. doi:10.1177/1362168809104698. 24. 10. 2020.
Richards, Schmidt 2010: J. C. Richards, R. Schmidt, Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.), Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Rubin 1975. J. Rubin, What the “good language learner” can teach us? TESOL Quar- terly, 9(1) 41–51. doi:10.2307/3586011. 11. 10. 2020.
Sheorey, Mokhtari 2001: R. Sheorey, K. Mokhtari, Diﬀerences in metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers, Sys- tem, 29(4), 431–449. doi:10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2. 11. 10. 2020.
Urquhart, Weir 1998: A. H. Urquhart, C. Weir, Reading in a Second Language: Process, Product and Practice, London and New York: Longman.
Waughn et al. 2012: S. Waughn, J. Wanzek, C. S. Murray, G. Roberts, Intensive Inter- ventions for Students Struggling in Reading and Mathematics: A Practice Guide, Portsmouth NH: RMR Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.