文献综述的例子 英语专业学期论文

Literature review of reading issues

Introduction:

Reading is regarded as the one of the four basic skills l in language learning because people get information through reading as well as listening rather than speaking and writing. Barnes & Powell think that “Reading holds the key to advanced language learning.” (1996, p.13) Krashen‟s input hypothesis (1982) also provided the theoretical support reading in second or foreign language acquisition which argues for the learners acquire a language by enough and high-quality comprehensible input. The development of technology like faxes, computers makes reading more important in daily life and language learning or acquisition. However, the widespread of Communicative Language Teaching nowadays avert more of educator‟s attention from reading to speaking all over the world, particularly in Asian countries like China whereas reading comprehension is the most important and necessary part in all English exams. This makes reading instruction in a dilemma and unpopular in most Chinese universities because regular classes generally tend to emphasize reading the course book assigned rather than extensive reading. And students are taught in a way that focus on direct teaching of reading comprehension and intensive reading of short, difficult texts coming form assigned course book, which causes a heavy burden of dictionary workload. Both of the two forms of reading are necessary in reading instruction and I will review relevant literature concerning the two forms in different areas, but much of the focus will be on extensive reading due to its significance and weak implementation in China. Reading comprehension for a text

1

APPL559-09B (NET)

While the reader was once believed to be a passive receiver of information, he or she is now considered an active participant in a reading activity. Sadeghi (2007) argues that a reader is an active participant in the reader-writer interaction who interacts with the text, the context and the writer by using his or her linguistic schema, particularly content schema, formal schema. Singhal (1998, p. 2) further distinguishes between three types of schema: content schema, referring to one‟s background or world knowledge; formal schema, also known as textual schema, referring to one‟s knowledge about a text‟s organizational and rhetorical structure; and language or linguistic schema, referring to one‟s knowledge of lexicon, syntax, and semantics. They all play different but important role in the interpretation of a reading text. Important text characteristics such as text type, topic, genre, lexical density, syntactic complexity, semantic abstractness, complexity of structure sentence length also affect text comprehensibility (Pearson & Camperell, 1981, p. 33). For the role of vocabulary in reading, there is a figure that learners need to have minimum amount of vocabulary, about 3000 word families or 5000 lexical items in order to read effectively (Laufer, 1997, p.25). But they didn‟t relate the text length to reading comprehension. And Mehrpour and Riazi (2004) found the length of the text did not have any statistically significant effect on the students' performance on the test. However, empirically, students tend to feel anxious, impatient or frustrated when facing a long text than a short text if at the same level of difficulty and if the text is a little bit difficult. This tells us when testing a student, teachers or test paper producers do not need to consider too much about the text‟s length, but difficult and long texts surely demotivate and frustrate the student. This is also true to classroom reading instruction. And the implication of schemata theory in reading instruction is

2

APPL559-09B (NET)

that while L2 readers bring their L1 content and formal schema to L2 situations, teachers need help them develop L2 language schema from the beginning. In Chinese universities, teachers tend to emphasize developing students‟ linguistic schema by teaching vocabulary and grammar rather than formal and content schema, particularly the latter. Therefore, there is a must that instructors need to cover formal and content schema knowledge in reading instruction.

For reading strategies, Schoonern et al (1998, cited in Guan, 2004, p.23) find that an effective reader can effectively use and make constant shifts between top-down and bottom-up approaches with the meta-cognitive knowledge. Meta-cognitive knowledge, referring to a reader‟s ability to adjust his or her strategies to complete a task (Baker & Brown, 1984), is very useful for effective reading in that it enables the reader to compensate his or her deficiencies in linguistic schema. The top-down approach basically emphasizes on the reader‟s content schema knowledge in that it emphasizes on his or her interpretation and prior knowledge. It demands the reader to activate his or her schema to arrive at the text meaning. However, the bottom-up approach involves the reader to arrive at the text meaning by decoding the text through the knowledge of linguistic schema and text schema. Due to the lack of their content schema and insufficient reading amount, Chinese learners of English tend to use bottom-up approach during reading process. This once again calls for the necessity of their content schema input by sufficient reading and teachers‟ instruction. Besides, strategy instruction is also important in reading comprehension domain (Nuttall, 1996; Danielle, 2008) especially for those who have less content schema knowledge For example, teachers are suggested to use mental modelling to makes their reading process visible and easy for the students to imitate their reading procedures, thus further to help to

3

APPL559-09B (NET)

develop students‟ reading strategies by improving their reasoning by imitating the teacher‟s process of reasoning (Pani, 2004, p. 361). Students can be put in groups to take turns self-explaining a part of the textbook using the strategies of paraphrasing, elaboration, prediction and bridging inference (Danielle, 2008, p.35). Extensive reading

Richards and Schmidt (2002, pp.193-194) define extensive reading as “…reading in quantity and in order to gain a general understanding of what is read.” It attempts to build up knowledge of vocabulary and structure, arouse interest in reading and develop good reading habits. Krashen‟s input hypothesis (1982) also emphasized the value of extensive reading in reading instruction because of its sufficient comprehensible input and his reading hypothesis (1993) points out the positive effect of extensive reading on other skills like speaking, listening and writing and other abilities like reading comprehension and speed, vocabulary, grammar and spelling. This reading hypothesis has been supported by many researches (Mason & Krashen, 1997; Bell, 2001; Macalister, 2008) and Meng also supplements the hypothesis with the cultivation of interest and motivation, positive attitude and learning habits towards reading and general language learning. However, Yamashita (2008, p.668) argues that extensive reading has little effect on linguistic ability by surveying a group of students. No matter to what extent one agrees with the two hypothesis, it is undeniable that extensive reading has a very positive role in second or foreign language learning thus should be integrated in school curriculum. As how to employ extensive reading in reading instruction, Day and Bamford (2002, p.137-140) introduce ten guidelines for extensive reading teaching and learning from perspectives of reading materials, teachers, students

4

APPL559-09B (NET)

and reading itself. Reading materials should be easy and enjoyable and concerning a variety of topics; teachers need to orient and guide their students and also act as a role model of a reader; students can choose what they want to read and they should read as much as possible; the purpose of reading is for pleasure, information gaining and general understanding and reading is individual and silent. Meanwhile reading speed should be faster. Bell (1998) suggests that extensive reading should “avoid the use of tests”. But in China, students are use to the way that they learn for the exam, and if teachers don‟t test them, they are probably not to read. Of course, other forms like keeping a journal of reading materials, card file system or the reader interview might be better choices but kind of difficult to employ in a large class to monitor everybody‟s reading. Therefore, testing can be occasionally used in my teaching context to ensure that everybody involves in reading, but it should not be used too much in case of the cause of readers‟ demotivation and frustration.

In addition, Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) was regarded as an effective way no matter for intensive reading or extensive reading. But success of SSR calls for a quiet, relaxing and non-evaluative classroom environment and teachers need to provide a role model of silent reading (Chow & Chou, 2000 cited in Yang, p. 118). Although Bell (1998) and Wallace (1992, pp.-56) advocate read aloud (RA) in language learning as well as reading instruction, but this is based on the reason that RA can motivate and encourage the students to involve in classroom reading and improve pronunciation of individual words, but Wallace (1992, p.56) and Gabrielatos (2002, p.2) admit that RA can be detrimental to the development of reading skills in terms of reading comprehension and reading speed. Therefore, we can choose to use SSR or RA in reading according to

5

APPL559-09B (NET)

different purposes. But for higher-level of reading like my university students‟, SSR might be a better choice while for young children with a low level English, RA can be used together with SSR. Ozburn (1995) argues that the benefits of extensive reading can not be observed until the minimum of four months has passed. Therefore, educators should not give up extensive reading if students do not get instant positive result when integrating extensive reading in EFL instruction, but if there is any inappropriate misconduct in the implementation in extensive reading, it also needs time to make it clear thus educators need to try to predict and avoid such problems. To arrive at the best results, Campbell (19) reports that teachers should make comments on and talk about the books which the students have read. Helgesen (2005) advocates using the forms of summary, draw a picture form, your own question, the book and you for readers to self-monitor their extensive reading process which can replace the use of testing in my teaching context. Conclusion

The literature I reviewed all shed the light on the importance of reading in terms of intensive reading and extensive reading in language proficiency, and on the necessity that reading instruction should be taught blended with speaking, listening and writing since the integration can provide motivation and reinforce the general language development, but I also want to emphasize that the blend should be focused on reading itself in reading instruction. Nuttall (1996), Harmer (2000) and Riddell (2003) all introduces a detailed reading teaching procedure from the perspectives of before-, during- and post-reading combined with speaking, writing and /or listening as well as reading strategies, class organization mode, reading assessment and tips that teachers

6

APPL559-09B (NET)

need to beware, but these are all mainly about teaching reading for a text and fails to cover the elements of extensive reading. Though some researchers like Bell (1998), Mocalister (2008) and Day and Bamford (2002) provide some practical and helpful advice or guidelines on implementation of extensive reading in EFL instruction, there is a great lack in how to integrate extensive reading in reading instruction and its assessment in a very detailed way that I need to keep close eyes to. References

Baker, L. & Brown, A. L. (1984). Cognitive monitoring in reading. In Flood, J. (ED.),

Understanding reading comprehension: Cognition, language, and the structure of prose (pp.21-44). Newark, Delaware: The International Reading Association.

Barnes, A. & Powell, B. (1996). Developing advanced reading skills in modern foreign

languages, Cheltenham: Mary Glasgow Publications.

Bell, T. (1998). Extensive reading: Why? And how?. The Internet TESL Journal, 4(12).

Retrieved July 29, 2009, from http://www. itslj.org/Articles/ Bell-Reading. html/ Campbell, R. (19). The teacher as a role model during sustained silent reading (SSR).

Reading, 23(3), pp.179-183. Chow, P. & Chou, C. (2000). Evaluating sustained silent reading in reading classes. The

Internet TESL Journal, 6(11). Danielle, S. (2009). The importanve of teaching reading strategies. Perspectives on

Language and Literacy, 35(2), pp.34-38. Day, R. & Bamford, J. (2002). Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading. Reading in

a Foreign Language, 14(2), pp.136-141. Gabrielatos, C. (2002). Reading aloud and clear: Reading aloud in ELT. ERIC, ed477572. Guan, C. (2004). Some suggestions for effective reading based on an analysis of a reading

extract. Sino-US English Teaching, 1(12), pp.22-26. Harmer, J. (2000). How to teach reading. In How to teach English (pp.68-78). Beijing,

China: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

7

APPL559-09B (NET)

Helgesen, M. (2005) Extensive Reading Reports - Different Intelligences, Different

Levels of Processing. Asian EFL Journal, 7(3). Retrieved August 3, from http://asian-efl-journal.com/sept_05_mh.pdf Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York,

USA: Prentice Hall.

Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading. In J. Coady & T. Huckin

(Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 20-34), Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Macalister, J. (2008). Implementing extensive reading in an EAP programme. EFL Journal,

62(3), pp.248-256.

Mason, B. & Krashen, S. (1997). Extensive reading in English as a foreign language.

System, 25(1), PP. 91-102. Mehrpour, S& Riazi, A. (2004). The impact of text length on EFL students' reading

comprehension. Asian EFL Journal, 6(3). Retrieved August 3, from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/september_04_sm_ar.php Meng, F. (2009). Developing students‟ reading ability through extensive reading. EFL, 2(2).

PP. 132-137. Nuttall, C. (1996). Planning reading lessons. In Teaching reading skills in a foreign

language (pp. 149-168). Oxford, England: Heinemann.

Ozburn, M.S. (1995). A successful high school sustained silent reading program. English in

Texas, 26(3), pp.4-5.

Pani, S. (2004). Reading strategy instruction through mental modelling. ELT Journal 58 (4),

355-362. Pearson, P. D. & Camperell, K. (1981). Comprehension of text structures. In Guthrie, J. T.

(Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research Reviews. (pp.27-55). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Richards, J.C. and Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and

applied linguistics (3rd edition). London: Longman.

Riddell, D. (2003). Receptive skills 1: reading. In Teaching English as a foreign/second

language (pp. 96-106). London: Hodder &Stoughton Educational. Sadeghi, K. (2007). The key for successful reader-writer Interaction: factors affecting

reading comprehension in L2 revisited [Electronic version]. Asian EFL Journal, 9(3), 198-220.

8

APPL559-09B (NET)

Schoonern, R., Hulstijin, J. & Bossers, B. (1998). Metacognitive and language-specific

knowledge in native and foreign language reading comprehension: An empirical study among Dutch students in Grade 6, 8 and 10. Language Learning, 53(1), PP.165-202. Singhal, M. (1998). A comparison of L1 and L2 Reading: Cultural differences and schema.

The Internet TESL Journal, IV(10), PP.1-6. Wallace, C. (1992). Early reading: Teaching and learning. In Reading (pp.53-62). Oxford,

England: Oxford University Press.

Yamashita, J. (2008). Extensive reading and development of different aspects of L2

proficiency.System, 36(4) PP. 661-672. Yang, A. (2007). Cultivating a Reading Habit: Silent Reading at School [Electronic version].

Asian EFL Journal, 9(2), 115-129.

9

APPL559-09B (NET)

Department of General and Applied Linguistics Assignment Report

Name of Student HongXia Zheng Course APPL 559-09B NET Assignment 3. Literature review Due date: 11th September 2009 – submitted late, extension given Provisional grade B+

(all grades are provisional until the Examiners‟ Meeting)

Good clear introduction in which you situate this literature review in the context of L2A theories such as Krashen‟s Input Hypothesis, and CLT. You signal that your focus is on extensive reading: this is quite justifiable. But your second section is on broader topics, although these are still important in the teaching of L2 reading. This section needs to be broken up into shorter sections dealing with one issue at a time.

Your discussion of extensive reading is quite insightful, as you refer to the Chinese exam-oriented context, which creates a dilemma for anyone wishing to encourage students to read extensively, as this „reading for pleasure‟ is normally not subject to formal assessment.

In you conclusion you discuss integration of skills, but do not relate this closely enough to your own teaching context. Assessment criteria Comments from the assignment guidelines Selection of appropriate articles or You have selected a wide range of appropriate chapters relevant to your chosen skill readings for discussion in this review area Reference to important points, findings You have summarized and reflected on and recommendations in the readings findings etc. from the readings in an appropriate fashion. Comparison and contrast of points, You have achieved this in some parts of your findings and recommendations made review but not in all. by different authors Following the guidelines regarding the The conclusion should discuss the relevance of structure of the literature review findings about extensive reading to your own classes.

10