Oral and Written Summarizing Strategy Training and Reading Comprehension: Peer-Mediated vs. Individualistic Task Performance

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Background. The benefits of collaboration and summarizing strategy training in second language (L2) learning rest on solid theoretical underpinnings. However, the empirical evidence of those benefits in EFL context and in the spoken discourse has proven difficult. Focusing on the long-term influence of collaboration on students' reading comprehension provides another justification for this study’s novelty.

Purpose. Drawing upon Socio-Cultural Theory (SCT), this study inspected the impact of spoken and written summary training on intermediate EFL students’ long-term reading comprehension in individual and peer-mediated conditions.
Methods. 120 Iranian EFL intermediate male and female learners aged 16 to 18 years were randomly assigned into two main conditions (i.e., individual and peer-mediated). Moreover, each condition was divided into spoken, written, and no summary groups. The treatment lasted for six sessions, and then a delayed post-test, summarization scale, and a researcher-developed collaboration scale were administered at the end of the study.
Results. The outcomes of one-way ANOVA revealed that summary training was efficacious in improving EFL students’ reading skills. However, the verbal summary group exceeded the written and control groups. In addition, the findings of the independent-samples t-test demonstrated that the learners’ reading skills in peer-mediated groups significantly improved in the delayed post-test compared to their counterparts. Similarly, the findings emerging from the analysis of the questionnaires highlighted both instructors’ and the students’ positive perceptions on summarizing strategies and collaboration in the classrooms.
Implications. The implications are presented concerning the effectiveness of summary training and peer-mediation in EFL reading courses.

About the authors

Z. Aghazadeh

Urmia University

Email: zahra.aghazadeh.zm@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4877-8140

M. Mohammadi

Urmia University

Email: mohammadi680@yahoo.co.uk
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8786-1035

M. Sarkhosh

Urmia University

Author for correspondence.
Email: mdsarkhosh@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2483-4662

References

  1. Abramczyk, A., & Jurkowski, S. (2020). Cooperative learning as an evidence-based teaching strategy: What teachers know, believe, and how they use it. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(3), 296-308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1733402
  2. Aghazadeh, Z., Mohammadi, M., & Sarkhosh, M. (2019). The effect of summary training on intermediate EFL learners' reading comprehension in individual and collaborative conditions. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 37(4), 47-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2019.33798.2695
  3. Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-472. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/329495
  4. Bean, T. W., & Steenwyk, F. L. (1984). The effect of three forms of summarization instruction on sixth graders' summary writing and comprehension. Journal of Literacy Research, 16, 297-306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968409547523
  5. Brown, A. L., & Day, J. D. (1983). Macro rules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 22(1), 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80002-4
  6. Chamot, A. U., & Harris, V. (2019). Learning strategy instruction in the language classroom: Issues and implementation. Multilingual Matters.
  7. Cheng, Y.-S., & Su, S.-W. (2012). A genre-based approach to teaching EFL summary writing. ELT Journal, 66(2), 184-192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr061
  8. Dobao, A. F. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002
  9. Duxbury, J. G., & Tsai, L. L. (2010). The effects of cooperative learning on foreign language anxiety: A comparative study of Taiwanese and American universities.International Journal of Instruction, 3(1), 3-18.
  10. Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
  11. Fahim, M., & Haghani, M. (2012). Socio-cultural perspectives on foreign language learning. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4), 693-699. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.4.693-699
  12. Fan, Y. C. (2010). The effect of comprehension strategy instruction on EFL learners' reading comprehension. Asian Social Science, 6(8), 19-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v6n8p19
  13. Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency and comprehension using repeated reading: Evidence from longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 27-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809346494
  14. Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1990). Does higher education promote independent learning? Higher Education, 19(3), 307-322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133895
  15. Huang, W. C. (2014). The effects of multimedia annotation and summary writing on Taiwanese EFL students' reading comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 14(1), 136-153.
  16. Jacobs, G. M., & Renandya, W. A. (2019). Cooperative learning in language education. TEFLIN Publication Division.
  17. Johns, A. M., & Mayes, P. (1990). An analysis of summary protocols of university students. Applied Linguistics, 11(3), 253-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.3.253
  18. Karbalaei, A. (2011). Assessing reading strategy training based on CALLA model in EFL and ESL context. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 16(27), 167-187.
  19. Khaki, N. (2014). Improving reading comprehension in a foreign language: Strategic reader. The Reading Matrix, 14(2), 186-200.
  20. Khan, S. A. (2008). An experimental study to evaluate the effectiveness of cooperative learning versus traditional learning method [Unpublished doctoral dissertation].International Islamic University Islamabad. http://prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/handle/123456789//414.
  21. Khoshsima, H., & Tiyar, F. R. (2014). The effect of summarizing strategy on reading comprehension of Iranian intermediate EFL learners.International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(3), 134-139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.11
  22. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2002). Collaborative writing in L2: The effect of group interaction on text quality. In S. Ransdell, & M. -L. Barbier (Eds.), New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 169-188). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  23. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 197-221). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  24. Marzec-Stawiarska, M. (2016). The influence of summary writing on the development of reading skills in a foreign language. System, 59, 90-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.04.006
  25. McDonough, K., Crawford, W. J., & De Vleeschauwer, J. (2014). Summary writing in a Thai EFL university context. Journal of Second Language Writing, 24, 20-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.03.001
  26. Mehrpour, S., & Rahimi, M. (2010). The impact of general and specific vocabulary knowledge on reading and listening comprehension: A case of Iranian EFL Learners. System, 38(2), 292-300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.01.004
  27. Memari Hanjani, A., & Li, L. (2017). Cooperative learning pedagogy: A response to an urgent need in the Iranian EFL reading comprehension context. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 36(3), 33-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2017.27008.2370
  28. Milla, R., & Gutierrez-Mangado, M. J. (2019). Language learning strategy reported choice by bilingual children in CLIL: The effect of age, proficiency and gender in L3 learners of English. System, 87, 102165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102165
  29. Mokeddem, S., & Houcine, S. (2016). Exploring the relationship between summary writing ability and reading comprehension: Toward an EFL writing-to-read instruction. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2 S1), 197-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n2s1p197
  30. Nassaji, H., & Tian, J. (2010). Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 397-419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375364
  31. Nguyen, B. H., & Nguyen, T. K. N. (2017). Summarizing strategy: Potential tool to promote English as a foreign language (EFL) students' reading comprehension in a vocational school, Vietnam. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(8), 51-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.834902
  32. Nudee, N. (2010). Effects of cooperative learning on writing ability of Thai secondary school students [Unpublished master's thesis]. Prince of Songkla University. https://kb.psu.ac.th/psukb/handle/2010/8874.
  33. Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. Heinemann.
  34. Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  35. Oxford, R. L., & Amerstorfer, C. M. (2018). Language learning strategies and individual learner characteristics: Situating strategy use in diverse contexts. Bloomsbury.
  36. Ozdemir, S. (2018). The effect of summarization strategies teaching on strategy usage and narrative text summarization success. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(10), 2199-2209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2018.061018
  37. Pan, C. Y., & Wu, H. Y. (2013). The cooperative learning effects on English reading comprehension and learning motivation of EFL freshmen. English Language Teaching, 6(5), 13-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n5p13
  38. Rinehart, S. D., Stahl, S. A., & Erickson, L. G. (1986). Some effects of summarization training on reading and studying. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 422-438.
  39. Rocca, K. A. (2010). Student participation in the college classroom: An extended multidisciplinary literature review.Communication Education, 59(2), 185-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903505936
  40. Swain, M. (2010). ‘Talking-it-through': Languaging as a source of learning. In R. Batstone (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning (pp. 112-130). Oxford University Press.
  41. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners' response to reformulation.International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3-4), 285-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00006-5
  42. Thomas, N., & Rose, H. (2019). Do Language Learning strategies need to be self-directed? Disentangling strategies from self-regulated learning. TESOL Quarterly, 53(1), 248-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.473
  43. van Rijk, Y., Volman, M., de Haan, D., & van Oers, B. (2017). Maximizing meaning: Creating a learning environment for reading comprehension of informative texts from a Vygotskian perspective. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 77-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9218-5
  44. Veldman, M. A., Doolaard, S., Bosker, R. J., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2020). Young children working together. Cooperative learning effects on group work of children in Grade 1 of primary education. Learning and Instruction, 67, 101308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101308
  45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  46. Winograd, P. N. (1984). Strategic difficulties in summarizing texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(4), 404-425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/747913
  47. Yasuda, S. (2015). Exploring changes in FL writers' meaning-making choices in summary writing: A systematic functional approach. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 105-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.008
  48. Yousefvand, Z. (2013, March 2-3). The effect of strategy-based reading instruction on Iranian EFL graduate students' reading comprehension and their attitudes toward reading strategies instruction [Paper presentation]. The First National Conference on Research in Teaching English, Translation, and Linguistics, Isfahan, Iran.
  49. Zafarani, P., & Kabgani, S. (2014). Summarization strategy training and reading comprehension of Iranian ESP learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1959-1965. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.629
  50. Zhang, L. J., Thomas, N., & Qin, T. L. (2019). Language learning strategy research in.
  51. System: Looking back and looking forward. System, 84, 87-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.06.002
  52. Zoghi, M., Mustapha, R., & Maasum. T. M. (2010). Collaborative strategic reading with university EFL learners. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(1), 67-94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2010.10850336
  53. Zou. W. (2011). The effects of cooperative learning on improving college students' reading comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(8), 986-989. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/TPLS.1.8.986-989

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.