This article discusses the important role of background knowledge in a psycholinguistic model of EFL/ESL reading and demonstrates the relevance of schema-theoretic views of reading to the teaching of reading to EFL/ESL students. According to schema theory, reading comprehension is an interactive process between the text and the reader's prior background knowledge (Adams and Collins 1979, Rumelhart 1980). Reading comprehension involves one's knowledge of the world, which may be culturally based and culturally biased. Classroom implications of the schema-theoretic view of reading for EFL/ESL reading pedagogy are discussed, with techniques suggested for bringing about reader-centered EFL/ESL reading. Every act of comprehension involves one'sknowledge Of the world as well. (Anderson, Reynolds, Schallert, and Goetz 1977:369)
This article reports the results of an experiment investigating the simultaneous effects on ESL reading comprehension of both culture-specific content schemata and formal schemata, as well as any potential interaction between them. In the study, highintermediate ESL students read, recalled, and answered questions about each of two texts. For each of two groups of readers (students of Muslim and Catholic/Spanish backgrounds), one text had culturally familiar content, the other culturally unfamiliar content. Within each group, one half of the subjects read the texts in a familiar, well-organized rhetorical format, the other half read the texts in an unfamiliar, altered rhetorical format. Results showed the conditions expected to yield good reading comprehension (familiar content, familiar rhetorical form) did so. Similarly, the conditions expected to yield poor reading comprehension (unfamiliar content, unfamiliar rhetorical form) did so. More interestingly, the results for the "mixed" conditions (familiar content, unfamiliar rhetorical form; unfamiliar content, familiar rhetorical form) indicated that content schemata affected reading comprehension to a greater extent than formal schemata. Specific results are presented and discussed, as are limitations of the study and teaching implications.One type of schema, or background knowledge, a reader brings to a text is a content schema, which is knowledge relative to the content domain of the text. Another type is a formal schema, or knowledge relative to the formal, rhetorical organizational structures of different types of texts.In empirical tests of these two different types of schemata, it is fairly easy to separate out and to test for the effects of one type, while holding the effects of the other type constant. For example, in testing for the effects of content schemata, one keeps the formal rhetorical structure of a text constant, manipulates the content, and has comparable groups of subjects process each different content. Any differences on the dependent measures (answers to literal or 461 inferential questions, written or oral recall protocols, summaries, and so on) are then presumed to be due to the manipulation of content and readers' background knowledge of that content.This type of research has in fact been typical in the field. The seminal study of Steffensen, Joag-dev, and Anderson (1979) is a good example of this type of cross-cultural research on content schemata. In that study, two groups of subjects with different cultural heritages were investigated-a group of Asian Indians living in the United States and a group of Americans. Each subject was asked to read and recall two personal letters, both of which were constructed with similar rhetorical organization. However, the cultural content of the two letters differed; one described a traditional Indian wedding, the other a traditional American wedding. It was assumed that all adult members of a society would have a well-developed system of background knowledge about the marriage customs of their own c...
Recent research in second language reading has focused on metacognition, literally, cognition of cognition. These studies investigate metacognitive awareness of reading strategies and the relationships among perception of strategies, strategy use, and reading comprehension.Strategy research suggests that less competent learners may improve their skills through training in strategies evidenced by more successful learners. Relatively little research on metacognitive strategy training has been done in a second language context or, more specifically, in second language reading. This article reports a study of metacognitive strategy training for reading in ESL. Strategy training was provided to experimental groups. Control groups received no strategy training, but participated in pre-and posttesting. Several research questions are addressed: "Does metacognitive strategy training enhance L2 reading?" If so, "Does one type of strategy training facilitate L2 reading better than another?" "How is the effectiveness of metacognitive strategy training related to the learning styles of the students?" Results show that metacognitive strategy training is effective in enhancing second language reading, and that the effectiveness of one type of training versus another may depend upon the way reading is measured. Further, our results show that the effectiveness of the training is related to differences in the learning styles of the students. TESOL QUARTERLY FIGURE 1 Sample Training Passage NUTRIENTS IN FOODNutrients are parts of food that are important for life and health. Nutrients are important for three reasons. First, some nutrients provide fuel for energy. Second, some nutrients build and repair body tissues. Third, some nutrients help control different processes of the body like the absorption of minerals and the clotting of blood. Scientists think there are 40 to 50 nutrients. These nutrients are divided into five general groups: carbohydrates, fats, proteins, minerals, and vitamins.The first group of nutrients is carbohydrates. There are two kinds of carbohydrates: starches and sugars. Bread, potatoes, and rice are starches. They have many carbohydrates. Candy, soft drinks, jelly, and other foods with sugar also have carbohydrates. Carbohydrates are important because they provide the body with heat and energy. Sugar, for instance, is 100 percent energy. It has no other food value. Sugar does not build body tissues or control body processes. If there are too many carbohydrates in the body, they are stored as body fat. The body stores fuel as fat.There are two types of fats: animal and vegetable. Butter, cream, and the fat in bacon are animal fats. Olive oil, corn oil, and peanut oil are vegetable fats. The body has fat under the skin and around some of the organs inside. The average adult has 10 to 11 kilograms (20 to 25 pounds) of body fat. If adults eat too many carbohydrates and fats, they can add another 45 kilograms (100 pounds) to their bodies. Fat is extra fuel. When the body needs energy, it changes the fat into car...
Research in native (English) and nonnative (ESL) reading comprehension has shown that the ability to understand texts is based not only on the comprehender's linguistic knowledge, but also on general knowledge of the world and the extent to which that knowledge is activated during processing. Separate components of background knowledge which have been identified in the literature are: (1) prior knowledge in the content area of the text (familiar vs. novel); (2) prior knowledge that the text is about a particular content area (context vs. no context); and (3) degree to which the lexical items in the text reveal the content area (transparent vs. opaque). This paper reports a study which shows the individual and interactive effects of these three separate variables on the reading comprehension of both native (English) and nonnative (ESL) readers. Results indicate that, unlike native speakers for whom all three components of background knowledge play a significant role in reading, understanding, and recalling a text, nonnative readers show virtually no significant effects of background knowledge. Further, also unlike native readers, nonnative readers appear not to have a good sense of how easy or difficult a text is for them to understand. These findings are discussed in relation to schema‐theoretical views of reading as an interactive process between the text and the reader, and in relation to their implications for ESL reading pedagogy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.