See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/287047127

Learning English as Foreign Language in Indonesia through

English Children’s Literature

Article in International Journal of Literacies · January 2012

DOI: 10.18848/2327-0136/CGP/v19i04/48801

CITATIONS READS

4 16,559

1 author:

Leni Marlina
Universitas Negeri Padang
13 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BILINGUALISM AND BILINGUAL EXPERIENCES: A CASE OF TWO SOUTHEAST ASIAN FEMALE STUDENTS AT DEAKIN UNIVERSITY View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Leni Marlina on 06 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 VOLUME 19 ISSUE 4

The International Journal of

Literacies

thelearner.com
The International Journal of Literacies
…………………………………

The Learner Collection

VOLUME 19 ISSUE 4 2012

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES
www.thelearner.com

First published in 2013 in Champaign, Illinois, USA

by Common Ground Publishing LLC
www.commongroundpublishing.com

ISSN: 2327-0136

© 2012-2013 (individual papers), the author(s)

© 2012-2013 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground

All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes
of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the
applicable copyright legislation, no part of this work may be
reproduced by any process without written permission from the
publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact
cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com.

The International Journal of Literacies is

peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterion-
referenced article ranking and qualitative commentary,
ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance
and highest significance is published.
 EDITOR(S)

…………………………………

Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA

Mary Kalantzis, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign, USA

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

…………………………………

Michael Apple, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA

David Barton, Lancaster University, Milton Keynes, UK
Mario Bello, University of Science, Cuba
Manuela du Bois-Reymond, Universiteit Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands
Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA
Robert Devillar, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, USA
Daniel Madrid Fernandez, University of Granada, Spain
Ruth Finnegan, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
James Paul Gee, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA
Juana M. Sancho Gil, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Kris Gutierrez, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Anne Hickling-Hudson, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Australia
Roz Ivanic, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Paul James, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Carey Jewitt, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK
Mary Kalantzis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA
Andeas Kazamias, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA
Peter Kell, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia
Michele Knobel, Montclair State University, Montclair, USA
Gunther Kress, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK
Colin Lankshear, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia
Kimberly Lawless, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA
Sarah Michaels, Clark University, Worcester, USA
Jeffrey Mok, Miyazaki International College, Miyazaki, Japan
Denise Newfield, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
Ernest O’Neil, Ministry of Education, Sana’a, Yemen
José-Luis Ortega, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
Francisco Fernandez Palomares, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
Ambigapathy Pandian, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Miguel A. Pereyra, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
Scott Poynting, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
Angela Samuels, Montego Bay Community College, Montego Bay, Jamaica
Michel Singh, University of Western Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Helen Smith, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Richard Sohmer, Clark University, Worcester, USA
Brian Street, University of London, London, UK
Giorgos Tsiakalos, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Salim Vally, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
Gella Varnava-Skoura, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
Cecile Walden, Sam Sharpe Teachers College, Montego Bay, Jamaica
Nicola Yelland, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia
Wang Yingjie, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
Zhou Zuoyu, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

…………………………………

Isela Almaguer
Patrick Baughan
Christine Clayton
Ruth Fielding-Barnsley
Macarena Donoso González
Christopher W. Johnson
Marianna Kondyli
Kunlaphak Kongsuwannakul
Chung Yee Lai
Tatzia Langlo
Lauren McCann
Megumi Okugiri
Michelle Picard
Afnan Qutub
Michael Whitacre
Mun Wong
 Scope and Concerns
LEARNING AND EDUCATION: THEIR BREADTH AND DEPTH

…………………………………

‘Learning’ is bigger than education. Humans are born with an innate capacity to learn, and over
the span of a lifetime learning never stops. Learning simply happens as people engage with each
other, interact with the natural world and move about in the world they have constructed. Indeed,
one of the things that makes us distinctively human is our enormous capacity to learn.
Other species learn, too, from the tiniest of insects to the smartest of chimpanzees. But none has
practices of pedagogy or institutions of education. As a consequence, the main way in which
other species develop over time is through the incremental, biological adaptations of evolution.
Change is natural. It is slow.
Education makes human learning unlike the learning of any other creature. Learning allows
humans to escape the strict determinations of nature. It gives humans the resources with which to
understand themselves and their world, and to transform their conditions of living, for better or
for worse.
Education is a peculiarly human capacity to nurture learning in a conscious way, and to
create social contexts that have been specially designed for that purpose: the institutions of
education. Everyday learning happens naturally, everywhere and all the time. Education –
encompassing institutions, its curricula and its pedagogies – is learning by design.

THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEACHING

…………………………………

Teaching happens everywhere. Many people are naturally quite good at teaching. They explain
things clearly. They are patient. And they have the knack of explaining just enough, but not too
much, so the learner gains a sense that they are gradually mastering something, albeit with a
more knowledgeable person’s support. You can find the practice of teaching in action
everywhere in everyday life. In fact, it is impossible to imagine everyday life without it.
Teaching and learning are integral to our nature as humans.
Teaching is also a vocation, a profession. People in the business of teaching are good at their
job when they have developed and apply the dispositions and sensibilities of the person who is a
good teacher in everyday life.
But there is much more to the teaching profession than having a natural knack, however well
practised. There is also a science to education, which adds method and reflexivity to the art of
teaching, and is backed up by a body of specialist knowledge. This science asks and attempts to
answer fundamental and searching questions. How does learning happen? How do we organize
teaching so it is most effective? What works for learners? And when it works, how do we know it
has worked? The science of education attempts to answer these questions in a well thought-
through and soundly analyzed way.

LEARNING PRACTICES

…………………………………

Learning is how a person or a group comes to know, and knowing consists of a variety of types
of action. In learning, a knower positions themselves in relation to the knowable, and engages.
Knowing entails doing—experiencing, conceptualizing, analysing or applying, for instance.
 A learner brings their own person to the act of knowing, their subjectivity. When
engagement occurs, they become a more or less transformed person. Their horizons of knowing
and acting have been expanded.
Learning can be analyzed at three levels: ‘pedagogy’, or the microdynamics of moments of
teaching and learning; ‘curriculum ’, or the learning designs for particular areas of knowledge;
and ‘education’ or the overall institutional setting in which pedagogy and curriculum are located.
Pedagogy is a planned and deliberate process whereby one person helps another to learn.
This is what First Peoples did through various formalized rites of passage, from child to adult to
elder – learning law, spirituality and nature. It is also how teachers in the era of modern, mass,
institutionalized education have organized the learners in their classrooms and their learning.
Pedagogy is the science and practice of the dynamics of knowing. Assessment is the measure of
pedagogy: interpreting the shape and extent of the knower’s transformation.
Curriculum is the substantive content of learning and its organization into subjects and
topics – mathematics, history, physical education and the like. In places of formal and systematic
teaching and learning, pedagogy occurs within these larger frameworks in which the processes of
engagement are given structure and order. These often defined by specific contents and
methodologies, hence the distinctive ‘disciplines’. Well might we ask, what is the nature and
future of ‘literacy’, ‘numeracy’, ‘science’, ‘history’, ‘social studies’, ‘economics’, ‘physical
education’ and the like? How are they connected, with each other, and a world in a state of
dynamic transformation? And how do we evaluate their effectiveness as curriculum?
Education has traditionally been used with reference formal learning communities, the
institutions of school, college and university that first appeared along with the emergence of
writing as a tool for public administration (to train, for instance, ‘mandarins’ or public officials in
imperial China, or the writers of cuneiform in ancient Mesopotamia/Iraq); to support religions
founded on sacred texts (the Islamic madrasa , or the Christian monastery); and to transmit
formally developed knowledge and wisdom (the Academy of ancient Athens, or Confucian
teaching in China).
Learning happens everywhere and all the time. It is an intrinsic part of our human natures.
Education, however is learning by design, in community settings specially designed as such—the
institutions of early childhood, school, technical/vocational, university and adult education.
Education also sometimes takes informal or semiformal forms within settings whose primary
rationale is commercial or communal, including workplaces, community groups, households or
public places.

TOWARDS A SCIENCE OF EDUCATION

…………………………………

What is this overarching institution, ‘education’? In its most visible manifestation it consists of
its institutional forms: schools, colleges and universities. But, more broadly conceived, education
is a social process, a relationship of teaching and learning. As a professional practice, it is a
discipline.
The science of education analyzes pedagogy, curriculum and educational institutions. It is a
discipline or body of knowledge about learning and teaching – about how these practices are
conceived and realized
‘Science’ or ‘discipline’ refers to a privileged kind of knowledge, created by people with
special skills who mostly work in research, academic or teaching jobs. It involves careful
experimentation and focused observation. Scientists systematically explore phenomena, discover
facts and patterns and gradually build these into theories that describe the world. Over time, we
come to trust these and ascribe to them the authority of science.
In this spirit, we might create a science of education that focuses on the brain as a biological
entity and the mind as a source of behaviors (cognitive science). Or we might set up experiments
in which we carefully explore the facts of learning in order to prove what works or doesn’t work.
Like the medical scientist, we might give some learners a dosage of a certain kind of educational
medicine and others a placebo, to see whether a particular intervention produces better test
results—such are the formal experimental methods of randomized, controlled trials.
Often, however, we need to know more. It is indeed helpful to know something of how the
mind works, but what of the cultural conditions that also form the thinking person? We need
good proofs of which kinds of educational interventions work, but what if the research questions
we are asking or the tests we are using to evaluate results can only measure a narrow range of
capacities and knowledge? What if the tests can prove that the intervention works – scores are
going up – but some learners are not engaged by a curriculum that has been retrofitted to the
tests? What if the tests only succeed in measuring recall of the facts that the tests expect the
learners to have acquired – simple, multiple-choice or yes/no answers? A critic of such
‘standardized testing’ may ask, what’s the use of this in a world in which facts can always be
looked up, but problem solving and creativity are now more sought-after capacities, and there
can be more than one valid and useful answer to most of the more important questions? For these
reasons, we also need to work with a broader understanding of the discipline of education, based
on a broader definition of science than experimental methods.

AN INTERDISCIPLINARY SCIENCE

…………………………………

The discipline of education is grounded in the science of learning, or how people come to know.
It is a science that explores what knowing is. It focuses on how babies, then young people, then
adults, learn. Education-as-science is a specially focused form of knowing: knowing how
knowing happens and how capacities to know develop. It is, in a sense, the science of all
sciences. It is also concerned with the organization of teaching that supports systematic, formal
learning and the institutions in which that learning occurs.
Too often, education is regarded as a poor cousin of other disciplines in the university – the
natural sciences, the humanities and the other professions, for instance. It is regarded as
something that enables other disciplines, rather than being a discipline in its own right. This is
often reflected in reduced levels of research funding, lower student entry requirements and the
destination salaries of graduates. Education seems to be less rigorous and derivative. Its
disciplinary base borrowed from other, apparently more foundational disciplines – sociology,
history, psychology, cognitive science, linguistics, philosophy – and the substantive knowledge
of various subject areas, such as literature, science and mathematics.
For sure, education is broader-ranging and more eclectic than other disciplines. Education
draws on a number of disciplinary strands – the philosophy of knowledge (epistemology), the
cognitive science of perception and learning, developmental psychology, the history of modern
institutions, the sociology of diverse communities, the linguistics and semiotics of meaning – to
name just a few of education’s disciplinary perspectives. These and other strands come together
to make the discipline of education. In this sense, education is more than a discipline – it is an
extraordinarily interdisciplinary endeavor.

EDUCATION AS THE SCIENCE OF SCIENCES

…………………………………

Education is also the soil in which all the other disciplines grow. You can’t do any of the other
disciplines in a university or college except through the medium of education. No other discipline
exists except through its learning. A novice can only enter a discipline – physics, or law, or
history, or literature – through education, learning the accumulated knowledge that has become
that discipline. In this sense, education is more than just interdisciplinary. It does more than just
stitch together other disciplines. It is a metadiscipline, essential as the practical grounding of all
disciplines. Education is the discipline of disciplines.
Education is the systematic investigation of how humans come to know. It focuses on
formal, institutionalized learning at all its levels from preschool to school, college and university.
Education is also concerned with the processes of informal learning – how babies learn to speak
at home, or how children and adults learn to use an interface or play a game. It is concerned with
how organizations and groups learn, collecting and acquiring knowledge that is applied in their
communities, professions and workplaces. In fact, as knowledge is needed and used everywhere,
learning happens everywhere. There is no part of our lives to where the discipline of education
cannot provide a useful perspective.
Maybe, then, education is more than just an interdisciplinary place that ties together shreds
and patches from other disciplines – a bit of psychology here, a bit of sociology there, a bit of
management there. Education should be regarded as the metadisciplinary foundation of all
disciplines. Its focus is the science of knowing, no less.
The metadiscipline of education inquires into learning, or how we come to know and be.
Education-as-metadiscipline explores knowing and being. It analyzes how people and groups
learn and come to be what they are. As such, it is a specially expansive exploration of knowing.
It is interested to know how knowing happens and how capacities to know develop.

EDUCATION IS THE NEW PHILOSOPHY

…………………………………

What if we were to think of education in these more expansive and more ambitious ways? If we
are to think in these terms, then the intellectual and practical agenda of education is no less than
to explore the bases and pragmatics of human knowledge, becoming and identity. Education asks
this ur -disciplinary question: How is it that we come to know and be, as individuals and
collectively? If this is education’s central question, surely, then, we can argue that it is the source
of all other disciplines? It is the means by which all other disciplines come into being.
Philosophy used to claim a metadisciplinary position like this. It was the discipline where
students not only thought, but thought about thinking. However, for decades, philosophy has
been making itself less relevant. It has become too word-bound, too obscure, too formal and too
disconnected from practical, lived experience.
But philosophy’s metaquestions still need to be asked. Education should perhaps take the
former position of philosophy as the discipline of disciplines, and do it more engagingly and
relevantly than philosophy ever did. Education is the new philosophy.

INVESTING IN EDUCATION FOR A ‘KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY’

…………………………………

Add to these expanded intellectual ambitions, widened ambitions for education in public
discourse and everyday social reality—and these should be good times to be an educator.
Politicians and captains of industry alike tell us that knowledge is now a key factor of
production, a fundamental basis of competitiveness – at the personal, enterprise and national
levels. And as knowledge is a product of learning, education is more important than ever. This is
why education has become such a prominent topic in the public discourse of social promise.
The expectations of education have been ratcheted up. More than ever before, people are
saying that education is pivotal to social and economic progress. This does not necessarily
translate immediately into greater public investment in education (a businesslike approach, one
would think). But today’s rhetoric about the importance of education does give educators greater
leverage in the public discourse than we had until recently.
 Stated simply, in a knowledge economy in which more and more jobs require greater depths
of knowledge, schools must do what they can to bridge the knowledge gaps. If they can achieve
this, they are at least doing something to ameliorate the worst systemic material inequalities.
Schools, in other words, have a new opportunity, a new responsibility and a new challenge to
build societies that are more inclusive of social classes whose access to material resources was
historically limited.
Despite this, educators struggle to find the resources to meet increasing expectations, despite
all talk of a ‘knowledge society’ and ‘new economy’. We may have listened to this rhetoric with
a great deal of skepticism given the struggles we educators face.
Nevertheless, we need to grasp what is rhetorically or genuinely new in our times. We must
seize the drift of contemporary public discourse, and position ourselves centrally. Here is our
chance: the stuff of knowledge is no more and no less than the stuff of learning. Surely too, this
new kind of society requires a new kind of learning and that a new social status is ascribed to
education. It is our role as educators to advocate for education, to make a claim for the allocation
of the social resources required in order to meet expanding expectations.

DESIGNS FOR SOCIAL FUTURES: TOWARDS ‘NEW LEARNING’

…………………………………

How might we imagine a better society which locates education at the heart of things? This heart
may well be economic in the sense that it is bound to material self-improvement or personal
ambition. Equally, however, education is a space to re-imagine and try out a new and better
world which delivers improved material, environmental and cultural outcomes for all. Education
must surely be a place of open possibilities, for personal growth, for social transformation and for
the deepening of democracy. Such is the agenda of ‘New Learning’, explicitly or implicitly. This
agenda holds whether our work and thinking is expansive and philosophical or local and finely
grained.
If we were to choose a single word to characterize the agenda of the New Learning, it is to
be ‘transformative’. New Learning is thus not simply based on a reading of change. It is also
grounded in an optimistic agenda in which we educators can constructively contribute to change.
If knowledge is indeed as pivotal in contemporary society as the ‘new economy’ commentators
and politicians claim, then educators should seize the agenda and position themselves as forces of
change. We have a professional responsibility to be change agents who design the education for
the future and who, in so doing, also help design the future.
You might see this as a sensible conservatism, sensible for being realistic about the
contemporary forces of technology, globalization and cultural change. Or you could see it to be
an emancipatory agenda that aspires to make a future that is different from the present by
addressing its many crises – of poverty, environment, cultural difference and existential meaning,
for instance. In other words, the transformation may be pragmatic (enabling learners to do their
best in the given social conditions) or it may be emancipatory (making the world a better place)
or it may be both.
At its best, transformative New Learning embodies a realistic view of contemporary society,
or the kinds of knowledge and capacities for knowing that children need to develop in order to be
good workers in a ‘knowledge economy’; participating citizens in a globalized, cosmopolitan
society; and balanced personalities in a society that affords a range of life choices that at times
feels overwhelming. It nurtures the social sensibilities of a kind of person who understands that
they determine the world by their actions as much as they are determined by that world. It creates
a person who understands how their individual needs are inextricably linked with their
responsibility to work for the common good as we become more and more closely connected into
ever-expanding and overlapping social networks.
The issue is not merely one of quantity. It is not simply a matter of providing more education
for more people. While many nations persevere with educational structures founded in the 19th
century or earlier, the knowledge economy demands different and creative approaches to
learning. Schools, at least in their traditional form, may not dominate the educational landscape
of the 21st century. Neat segregations of the past may crumble. Givens may give.

LEARNER DIVERSITY

…………………………………

No learning exists without learners, in all their diversity. It is a distinctive feature of the New
Learning to recognize the enormous variability of lifeworld circumstances that learners bring to
learning. The demographics are insistent: material (class, locale, family circumstances),
corporeal (age, race, sex and sexuality, and physical and mental characteristics) and symbolic
(culture, language, gender, affinity and persona). This conceptual starting point helps explain the
telling patterns of educational and social outcomes.
Behind these demographics are real people, who have always already learned and whose
range of learning possibilities are both boundless and circumscribed by what they have learned
already and what they have become through that learning. Here we encounter the raw material
diversity – of human experiences, dispositions, sensibilities, epistemologies and world views.
These are always far more varied and complex than the raw demographics would at first glance
suggest. Learning succeeds or fails to the extent that it engages the varied identities and
subjectivities of learners. Engagement produces opportunity, equity and participation. Failure to
engage produces failure, disadvantage and inequality.
The questions we face as educators today are big, the challenges sometimes daunting. How
do we, for instance, ensure that education fulfills its democratic mission, through quality
teaching, a transformative curriculum and dedicated programs that address inequality? Targeting
groups who are disadvantaged and ‘at risk’ is an essential responsibility of educators, not on the
basis of moral arguments alone but also because of the economic and social dangers of allowing
individuals and groups to be excluded.

EDUCATION’S AGENDAS

…………………………………

In this time of extraordinary social transformation and uncertainty, educators need to consider
themselves to be designers of social futures, to search out new ways to address the learning needs
of our society, and in so doing to position education at an inarguably central place in society.
Professional educators of tomorrow will not be people who simply enact received systems,
standards, organizational structures and professional ethics.
Indeed, powerful educational ideas – about how people act and build knowledge in context
and in collaboration with others, for instance – could well become leading social ideas in
currently more privileged areas of endeavor, such as business and technology. Perhaps, if we can
succeed at putting education at the heart of the designs for society’s future, we might even be
able to succeed in our various campaigns to ensure that education is innovative, empowering, just
and adequately resourced.
Education in all its aspects is in a moment of transition today. The idea of ‘New Learning’
contrasts what education has been like in the past, with the changes we are experiencing today,
with an imaginative view of the possible features of learning environments in the near future.
What will learning be like, and what will teachers’ jobs be like? Are we educators well enough
equipped to answer the questions we encounter and address the challenges we face? Does our
discipline provide us with the intellectual wherewithal to face changes of these proportions? It
could, but only if we conceive education to be a science as rigorous in its methods and as
ambitious in its scope as any other.
 Education’s agenda is intellectually expansive and practically ambitious. It is learner-
transformative, enabling productive workers, participating citizens and fulfilled persons. And it is
world-transformative as we interrogate the human nature of learning and its role in imagining
and enacting new ways of being human and living socially: shaping our identities, framing our
ways of belonging, using technologies, representing meanings in new ways and through new
media, building participatory spaces and collaborating to build and rebuild the world. These are
enormous intellectual and practical challenges.
Transformative education is an act of imagination for the future of learning and an attempt to
find practical ways to develop aspects of this future in the educational practices of the present. It
is an open-ended struggle rather than a clear destination, a process rather than a formula for
action. It is a work-in-progress.
The science of education is a domain of social imagination, experimentation, invention and
action. It’s big. It’s ambitious. And it’s determinedly practical.
The Learning Conference, journals, book imprint and online community provide a forum for
dialogue about the nature and future of learning. They are places for presenting research and
reflections on education both in general terms and through the minutiae of practice. They attempt
to build an agenda for a new learning, and more ambitiously an agenda for a knowledge society
which is as good as the promise of its name.
 Table of Contents
On the Relationship between Reading Self-efficacy, Perceptual Learning Style and
the Use of Reading Strategies among Iranian EFL Learners......................................1
Maryam Ghezlou and Reza Biria
Forming a Community of Practice: Exploratory Teacher Research of an English as
a Foreign Language Community at a University in Taiwan .....................................17
Paul S. Berg
Process Drama for 21st Century Learning: Building Multiliteracies and Creative-
Adaptive Capacity .........................................................................................................27
Shamini Dias
Learning English as Foreign Language in Indonesia through English Children’s
Literature .......................................................................................................................41
Leni Marlina
Narrative Skills and Genre Based Literacy Pedagogy Teaching Material: The Case
of Greek Upper Elementary School Pupils One Year after the Implementation of
the Current Teaching Material ....................................................................................53
Anna Fterniati
Associations of the Home Literacy Environment with Thai University Students’
Leisure Reading Habits.................................................................................................69
Nicholas Ferriman
Text-to-Speech Use to Improve Reading of High School Struggling Readers .........89
Kelly Roberts, Kiriko Takahashi, Hye-Jin Park, and Robert Stodden
Where Is that Reference From? Identifying the Source of Student Citations as
First Step in Assessing Reference Appropriateness ...................................................99
Christine Armatas and Andrew Vincent

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, www.thelearner.com, ISSN: 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Author(s) Name(s), All Rights Reserved, Permissions:
cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
 On the Relationship between Reading Self-
efficacy, Perceptual Learning Style and the Use of
Reading Strategies among Iranian EFL Learners
Maryam Ghezlou, Khurasgan (Isfahan) Azad University, Iran
Reza Biria, Khurasgan (Isfahan) Azad University, Iran

Abstract: The present study aimed at exploring the possible relationship between Iranian EFL learners’ major perceptual
learning styles, reading self-efficacy, and the use of metacognitive and compensation reading strategies. 86 Iranian
sophomore students were presented 3 questionnaires on perceptual learning style, reading self-efficacy, and reading
strategies use. The results revealed that the Iranian EFL learners’ major perceptual learning style preferences highly
correlated with metacognitive reading strategy, not the compensation. The findings also confirmed the positive interface
between the participants’ reading self-efficacy and the metacognitive reading strategy. The findings introduce
compensation reading strategy as a lost ring in the context of the Iranian educational system, and further implies
incorporation of such prominent reading strategy into the curriculum of every EFL context.

Keywords: Perceptual Learning Style, Metacognitive Reading Strategy, Compensation Reading Strategy, Reading Self-
efficacy

Introduction

R eading as a key element in language learning has been at the mercy of vigorous
investigation from various perspectives (Pang, 2008; Saricoban and Saricaoglu, 2008;
Shannon and College, 2008). One of the most recent lines of study attracting the attention
of researchers in ESL and EFL contexts has been purported to be the actual processes involved in
taking this highly complex skill, and the ways through which readers can achieve autonomy in
the process of language learning. As a result learners’ strategies, or more specifically readers’
strategies seem to play a crucial role in bringing up independent but more prosperous learners, or
readers. Reading strategies indeed provide interaction with the written text (Singhal, 2001), and
can assist learners with the acquisition, storage, and retrieval of information. They can also
enhance the comprehension of the reading text (Sheory and Mokhtari, 2001). Different
researchers have provided different classifications for learning strategies among which
Rubin’1987, O’Mally and Chamot’s 1990, and Oxford’s 1990 typologies have confirmed to be
the forerunners. Moreover, recent lines of study highlight envisaging individual features that
might affect the strategy use. The differences could include the proficiency level (Shang, 2011),
gender (Naseri and Zaferanieh, 2012), age (Chen, 2002; Ok, 2003; Szoke and Sheorey, 2002),
attitudes, motivation, self-efficacy (Li and Wang, 2010; Rahimi, Riazi, and Saif, 2009), and
learning style (Ehrman and Oxford, 1990; Ghonsooly and Eghtesadi, 2006).
Of the various individual features that might influence the type and rate of strategy use could
be learner’s beliefs or self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as people’s beliefs about their
capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that
affect their lives. Self-efficacy beliefs determine how people feel, think, motivate themselves and
behave (Bandura, 1994). Learning style is another attribute exerting influence upon learners’ use
of strategies. Oxford (2003, p.273) describes it as an “overall pattern that provides broad
direction to learning and makes the same instructional method beloved by some students and
hated by others.” Of the various classifications introduced for learning style (see Tabanlioglu,
2003 for a comprehensive introduction), the one which has been deprived of rigorous research is
the sensory or perceptual learning style, particularly in the context of the present study. Such
learning style based on the taxonomy of Reid (1998, p.x) includes auditory, visual, tactile,

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, thelearner.com, ISSN 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Maryam Ghezlou, Reza Biria, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

kinesthetic, group, and individual learning styles. The present study’s primary aim was to figure
out the major types of Iranian EFL learners’ learning styles. It further tried to explore the
interface between the participants’ major perceptual learning styles with metacognitive and
compensation reading strategies as the most prevalent reading strategy types in EFL contexts
diagnosed by previously conducted studies (Rahimi et.al., 2009; Saricoban and Saricaoglu, 2008;
Shang, 2010). The current study also attempted to reveal the possible relationship between
reading self-efficacy and the metacognitive and compensation strategy use of Iranian EFL
learners.

Review of Literature
Metacognitive Reading Strategies

Metacognition, in Harries’ (2003) opinion, acts as a guide for learning process so it comprises
planning and monitoring strategies on the one hand and evaluates both language use and
language learning on the other. Reading metacognitive strategies based on Pintrich (1999, cf.
Shang, 2012), could be related to planning activities such as skimming a text before reading or
generating questions before reading a text, monitoring activities such as paying attention to the
text or overviewing and linking with already known material, and finally regulatory activities
such as slowing the pace of reading or postponing the questions. Studies in EFL contexts
(Oxford, Judd, and Giesen, 1998) uncovered evidence that metacognitive strategies are often
strong predictors of L2 proficiency.

Compensation Reading Strategies

A compensation strategy generally helps the learners make up for missing knowledge. Oxford
and Ehrman (1995) asserted that compensation strategies are significantly related to L2
proficiency. It is particularly helpful in the comprehension of lexicon and reading texts. Readers
encountering unfamiliar vocabularies in the text have been highly recommended to resort to
compensation strategies which include both semantic and syntactic cues (Sinatra, Dowd, 1992,
cf. Shang, 2011). Semantic clues encompass intra and inter sentence meaning relationship while
syntactic clues deal with the grammatical structures. Examples of such strategy use are guessing
from context, neglecting new vocabularies, repeating new vocabularies for several times while
reading the text, underlying key words, segmenting the key words into their constituent parts
(root, prefix, suffix), and inferencing.

The Interface between Perceptual Learning Style and the Learning/Reading Strategy Use

Regarding the significant role of learning style and its broad contribution to learning, Oxford
(2003) notifies other researchers on the paucity of researches on the interface between learning
strategy use and learning style. The literature has also revealed a strong relationship between the
strategy use and the success of learners, or more particularly readers, in comprehending the
reading texts (Pang, 2008; Tercanlioglu, 2004). Of the various dimensions introduced for
learning styles including personality learning styles, cognitive learning styles, sensory or
perceptual learning styles; last dimension and its relationship with learning strategies have been
least studied.
Rossi-Li (1995) conducted a research with respect to perceptual learning styles and found a
strong relationship between visual, auditory, tactile, kinesthetic, and the overall strategy use of
the students. In another study, Riazi and Riasati (2006) made an attempt to investigate the
language learning style of Iranian EFL learners and the degree of teachers’ awareness of them.
The findings demonstrated that both the learning preferences of students in different areas, and
the teachers’ awareness of their students’ learning preferences accommodated in some situations,
but not in others. In the same line of study, Riazi and Mansoorian (2008) explored the preferred

2
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

learning styles of Iranian EFL students in different cities of Iran. To do so, they presented Reid’s
Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire (PLSPQ, 1987) to a group of 300 students.
They found out that the students preferred the auditory, visual, tactile, and kinesthetic learning
styles as their major styles.
Unfortunately, no relevant studies were found concerning the perceptual learning styles and
their probable relationship with the reading strategies use. It was one of the major incentives for
conducting the present research.

Self-efficacy and its Relationship with Strategy Use

Self-efficacy as a subset of motivation has proved to strongly affect the successful performance
of learners in different skills (Ghonsooly and Elahi, 2011; Magogwe and Oliver, 2007; Mills,
Pajares and Herron, 2006; Tilfarlioglu and Cinkara, 2009).
Nelson and Conner (2008) emphasized on students’ motivation, locus of control, self-
regulation, and metacognition for ensuring their self-directedness. Magogwe and Oliver (2007)
conducted a study on the relationship between self-efficacy and language learning strategy use.
They found meaningful relationship between the two variables. Li and Wang (2010) examined
the relationship between reading self-efficacy from a motivational perspective and reading
strategies from a cognitive perspective. They concluded that reading self efficacy positively
correlated with the use of reading strategies in general and the use of three subcategories of
reading strategies, i.e., metacognitive, cognitive, and social/affective strategies, in particular. The
findings also confirmed that highly self-efficacious readers used reading strategies more
frequently than those with low self-efficacy. In the same vein, Shang (2010) examined the use of
three reading strategies of cognitive, metacognitive, and compensation strategies by Taiwanese
high intermediate EFL learners. She further tried to inspect the interaction between reading
strategy use and perceived self-efficacy on the learners’ English reading comprehension. The
results demonstrated that metacognitive strategy was the most frequent strategy used by EFL
learners, while compensation and cognitive proved to hold the second and third rank. Besides,
significant relationship was found in all three strategy uses and perceived self-efficacy of the
learners.
Accordingly, Ghonsooly and Elahi (2011) investigated the relationship between Iranian EFL
learners’ reading self-efficacy and reading anxiety on the one hand, and their reading self-
efficacy and reading achievement on the other. Their findings demonstrated the existence of high
correlation between high self-efficacy and reading comprehension achievement. In the same
vein, Naseri and Zaferanieh (2012) explored the interface between reading self-efficacy beliefs,
reading strategies use, and reading comprehension level among Iranian EFL learners. Their
findings indicated a significantly positive correlation not only between reading self-efficacy and
reading comprehension, but also between reading self-efficacy and reading strategy use.
The above review of literature requires more vigorous lines of research as the outcomes
might well clarify the requirements of learner success in EFL context. In the same endeavor, the
following research questions were posed by the present study:
1. What are the major perceptual learning styles of the Iranian High-Intermediate EFL
learners?
2. Is there any relationship between Iranian High-Intermediate EFL learners’ major
perceptual learning style and the use of reading strategies?
3. Is there any relationship between Iranian High-Intermediate EFL learners’ reading self-
efficacy and their use of reading strategy?

3
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Method
Participants

Participants of the present study were randomly selected from sophomore students majoring in
English Translation and TEFL from two state universities in Tehran and Miandoab. They made
an overall of 86 from both genders including 46 females and 40 males. Results of demographic
questionnaire revealed that the subjects ranging in age from 18 to 24 with a mean of 21 enjoyed
an average of 7-8 years of formal education in English at high school and university. All the
participants were of high-intermediate in terms of their proficiency level.

Instrumentation

The present research attempted to reveal the major perceptual learning styles of Iranian EFL
learners. It further examined the interface between perceptual learning style and the use of
reading strategies on the one hand, and the link between reading self-efficacy and the use of
reading strategies on the other hand. To meet this end, three questionnaires were utilized. The
first one was Reid’s (1987) Perceptual Learning Style Questionnaire (PLSQ) which consisted of
thirty statements on six learning style preferences, i.e., visual, auditory, kinesthetic, tactile,
group, and individual learning. The participants were asked to respond on the basis of a five
point-Likert Scale from “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree”. The second questionnaire
which evaluated the participants’ reading self-efficacy (RSEQ) was constructed based on 1)
Horwitz’s (1988) Beliefs about Language Learning (BALL), 2) Li and Wong’s (2010) the Use
of Reading Strategies Questionnaire, and 3) Ghonsooly and Elahi’s (2011) EFL Learners’ Self-
efficacy Scale in Reading Comprehension questionnaire. It included 16 five point-Likert type
items. The participants were asked to read the statements and decide if they 1. Strongly disagree,
2. Moderately disagree, 3. Slightly disagree, 4. Moderately agree, and 5. Strongly agree. The
third instrument was devised based on 1) Oxford’s (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language
Learning Questionnaire (SILLQ) and 2) Shang’s (2012) Reading Strategy Questionnaire. This
newly devised questionnaire, i.e. Reading Strategy Questionnaire (RSQ) comprised 23
statements on compensation and metacognitive strategies (8 and 15 respectively). To insure
the clarity of the items, all questionnaires (PLSQ, RSEQ, RSQ) were translated into
participants’ native language, Persian. They were further checked and analyzed by four experts
in the field and their comments were incorporated into the questionnaires by modifying the
problematic items. Finally they were piloted with a group of 30 sophomore students majoring at
English Translation from Allameh Tabatabai University in Tehran. Results indicated relatively
high reliabilities for PLSQ (r=.81), RSEQ (r=.78), and RSQ (r=.72) based on Cronbach’s alpha
formula.
Procedure

The three questionnaires of Perceptual Learning Style (PLSQ), Reading Self-efficacy (RSEQ),
and the Reading Strategy Use (RSUQ) were administered to the participants during three
intermittent weeks in their regular class time. Before the distribution of the questionnaires,
participants were assured on the confidentiality of their identity throughout the study. They were
also familiarized with the general format of the questionnaires, the real purpose behind them, and
the way through which they could make their choice. As it was mentioned earlier, the
questionnaires were translated into the students’ native language, Persian, for setting any kind of
ambiguity aside. The time allocated for each questionnaire was 30, 10, and 20 respectively. The
time allocations were specified during the piloting session. Finally, the obtained results were
analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 19.

4
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

Data Analysis

Data with respect to participants’ perceptual learning styles were collected through the PLSQ.
Two further questionnaires namely RSEQ and RSUQ were also administered aiming at assessing
the learners’ reading self-efficacy and reading strategy use respectively. The statistical analyses
were conducted by using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 19). Descriptive
statistics was applied to diagnose not only the major, minor, and negligible learning styles of the
learners, but also their overall self-efficacy and reading strategy use. In order to reveal whether
there was a relationship between EFL students’ major learning style preferences and their reading
strategy use, Pearson Correlation Coefficient was used. The same inferential statistics was
applied to answer the third research question, i.e. the relationship between Iranian EFL learners’
reading self-efficacy and reading strategy use.

Results
Results of Descriptive Statistics concerning Participants’ Reading Strategy Use, and
Reading Self-efficacy

Table 1 demonstrates the participants’ mean scores on metacognitive reading strategy,

compensation reading strategy and reading self-efficacy. Based on the results, participants got a
moderate overall mean on metacognitive and compensation reading strategies. An average of 3
(M=3) in the Reading Strategy Use Questionnaire indicates “somewhat true of me” which is an
indication of subjects’ moderate use of strategy. Metacognitive reading strategy, however
obtained a higher mean compared to its competitor (M=3.54, SD=.48 vs. M=3.43, SD=.38). With
regard to the reading self-efficacy, students reported slightly confident (M=3.24) since mean of
3(M=3) in the Reading Self-efficacy Questionnaire indicated subjects’ neutral idea with respect
to their self-efficacy.

Table 1. Mean and Standard Deviations of Metacognitive and Compensation Reading

Strategies, and Reading Self-efficacy (n=86)
Metacognitive RS Compensation RS Reading Self-
efficacy
Mean 3.54 3.43 3.24
Standard Deviation .48 .38 .62

Major Learning Preferences of the Participants

The participants’ responses to PLSQ were first tallied. Results were categorized based on Reid’s
introduced method for analysis. Table 2 demonstrates the total means of all six perceptual
learning styles. Of the six learning styles, the visual, tactile, and kinesthetic, as the major styles,
revealed to stand in the gamut of 38-50 by holding the values of 38.25, 39.22, and 39.85
respectively. Minor learning styles were disclosed to be auditory, group, and individual with a
total value of 35.21, 32.47, and 32.56 (between 25-37). No negligible learning style (ranging
from 0-24) however was found among the students. As the table indicates tactile learning style
with the mean of 39.85 holds the highest rank in major styles, followed by kinesthetic (M=39.22)
and visual (M=38.25).

5
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Table 2. The Major and Minor Learning Styles Preferred by Learners (n=86)
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic Tactile Group Individual
Mean 38.25 35.21 39.22 39.85 32.47 32.56
Type Major Minor Major Major Minor Minor

Relationship between Major Perceptual Learning Styles and Reading Strategy Use

In order to diagnose the relationship between participants’ major learning styles, i.e., visual,
tactile and kinesthetic, with their metacognitive and compensation reading strategies, Pearson
correlation coefficient formula was applied. Table 3 demonstrates that each of the major
perceptual learning styles of visual, tactile, and kinesthetic proved to have moderately correlated
with the metacognitive reading strategy ;i.e., r=.51, r=.50, r=.42 at the level of 0.01 respectively.
Quite contrary, none of the major learning style preferences of the participants revealed any kind
of significant correlation with the compensation reading strategy. The results of Pearson
correlation coefficient indicated the absence of such interrelationship (r=-.21, r= -.01, r= -.03
respectively).

Table 3. Correlations between the Major Perceptual Learning Styles and the Reading
Strategy Use
Metacognitive strategy Compensation strategy
Visual learning style .511** -.218
Tactile learning style .505** -.011
Kinesthetic learning style .428** .033
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

The Relationship between the Reading Self-efficacy and the Use of Reading Strategies

The results of correlation coefficient demonstrated that reading self-efficacy had a significant and
positive correlation with the metacognitive reading strategy (r=.48). This finding is in line with
the previously conducted studies (Zhang, 2004; Li and Wong, 2010; Naseri and Zaferanieh,
2012) which indicated a positive relationship between reading self-efficacy and reading strategy
use. With regard to compensation reading strategy however, as Table 4 demonstrates, no
significant correlation was found between reading self-efficacy and compensation reading
strategy (r=.02).

Table 4. Correlation between the Reading Self-efficacy and the Use of Reading Strategies
Metacognitive strategy Compensation strategy
Reading self-efficacy .481** .028
**.correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Discussion and Conclusion

The current study made an attempt to figure out the relationship between Iranian high
intermediate EFL learners’ major perceptual learning styles and metacognitive and
compensation reading strategies on the one hand, and the interface between reading self-efficacy
and the metacognitive and compensation reading strategies on the other. Results of the PLSQ
revealed that participants’ major learning styles were visual, tactile, and kinesthetic. It was to
some extent consistent with Riazi and Riasati’s (2006), and Riazi and Mansoorian’s (2008)
studies conducted in Iran. More specifically, the obtained results demonstrated tactile as the most
6
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

preferred perceptual learning style among the EFL learners. That is, they are inclined to learn
more effectively through touch (Riazi and Riasati, 2006) such as writing and drawing. The
second stance belongs to kinesthetic learning style, i.e., learning via body experience like
interviewing, dramatizing, and pantomiming (Kinsella, 1995, p.72). Finally they are apt to make
use of visual learning style. As Oxford (1995, p.36) asserts “[such learners] like to read a lot,
which requires concentration and time spent alone…. they must have written directions if they
are to function well in the classroom”. The other styles; that is, auditory, group and individual
proved to be the learners’ minor learning styles with the means of 35.21, 32.47, and 32.56
respectively. It is worth noting that none of the styles were chosen as a negligible or negative
learning style by participants. Compared to studies conducted in other EFL contexts (Reid, 1987;
Rossi-Li, 1995), findings indicated the learners’ outperformance in the application of perceptual
learning styles in the learning process. Riazi and Mansoorian (2008) also arrived at the same
conclusion with respect to the Iranian EFL learners’ learning styles.
Regarding the second research question, results of Pearson correlation coefficient signified a
positive relationship between participants’ major perceptual learning styles and their
metacognitive reading strategy use. This is in line with previously conducted studies in other
contexts (Rossi-Li, 1989; Jie and Xionoqing, 2006; Pang, 2008) despite being scanty in number.
Visual, tactile and kinesthetic learners in the context of the current research proved to be familiar
with the metacognitive reading strategy which based on Chamot and Kupper (1989, cf. Shang,
2011) comprises thinking about reading process, planning for reading, monitoring the reading
task, and evaluating how well one has read. Such learners are to a great extent capable of
planning, arranging and evaluating the reading task by themselves. Learners with visual, tactile
and kinesthetic learning styles, however, did not demonstrate any inclination towards
compensation strategy use. Concerning such reluctance, it is worth to mention that Iranian EFL
teachers are required to diagnose their learners’ style needs first and then provide the most
appropriate modes of instruction and strategy training in the classrooms. The needs of visual
learners are definitely in sharp contrast with the needs of auditory or tactile students. Lack of
such knowledge, in Oxford’s (2003) opinion, could be quite disadvantageous to teachers since
they will not be able to create the “instructional variety” normally.
Concerning reading self-efficacy, subjects did not reveal significantly high levels of self-
belief in their reading ability. Low levels of such prominent attitude could definitely lead to
learners’ failure in completing the reading tasks. In Bandura’s opinion (1994, p.1), people with
high self-efficacy see “the difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than threats to be
avoided”. In order to foster such positive attitude among the EFL learners, literature has provided
plenty of instances of strategy training as a solution. It is replete with studies which unanimously
consent on the positive correlation not only between self-efficacy and strategy use in general, but
also between reading self-efficacy and reading strategy use in particular (Alfassi, 2004; Chan,
1994; Li and Wang, 2010; Pintrich, 1999; Naseri and Zaferanieh, 2012). Naseri and Zaferanieh
(2012) contend that there is a correspondence between students’ appropriate strategy use and
their successful self-control in strategy use. Results of the present study despite revealing very
significant correlation between such self-belief and metacognitive reading strategy, did not
signify any interrelationship between reading self-efficacy and compensation reading strategy.
As was mentioned earlier, contrary to metacognitive strategy which entails learner’s own efforts
in planning the learning process, compensation strategy is usually shouldered by those other than
learners including curriculum developers, materials providers, and teachers as the mediators
between the learners and the former authorities. In the same vein, results of the current research
imply the notification of the pedagogical authorities in the context of Iran on fostering self-
efficacy among Iranian EFL learners. Accompanying such high self-belief with various reading
strategies, particularly compensation reading strategy which is to some extent unfamiliar to the
learners, could contribute to the students’ success in reading skill. Hence, measures need to be
taken in order to reconstruct the current reading curriculum in Iran based on enhancement of self-
efficacy and reading strategy use.

7
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

In conclusion, the present study substantiated the vital role that self-efficacy and learning
style could exert on the performance of the EFL learners on the one hand, and their use of
reading strategies on the other. Needless to mention that developing appropriate reading
strategies among high-intermediate EFL learners is contingent on their belief concerning the
reading task, and the kind of the perceptual learning style that they enjoy. In other words, the
students’ effective use of reading strategies can be guaranteed first by introducing different skills
essential for improving their confidence in the reading task, and second through distinguishing
their preferred learning styles. This study further implied incorporation of various reading
strategies particularly the compensation reading strategy in the pedagogical curriculum of EFL
contexts such as Iran.

Limitations

One of the limitations of the present study could be the small sample size which might have
threatened the generalizability of the results to EFL learners inside or outside the context of the
present study. The other demerit could be the reliability of the self-made questionnaires i.e.
reading self-efficacy and the reading strategy use, and as Li and Wong (2010, p.155) reiterate,
the reliability of the results could be enhanced by incorporating some qualitative methods such as
interviews and observations. Still another limitation can be traced back to lack of comprehensive
conclusion of all the reading strategies present in the literature. Future studies could make more
comprehensive generalizations by considering social, affective, and memory strategies. Last but
not the least, the current research has been primarily concerned with reading skill per se.
Considering other skills of listening, speaking and writing and the effect of individual differences
such as self-efficacy and learning styles on them could be helpful in arriving at a better
understanding of strategies and their role in the process of EFL learning.

8
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

REFERENCES
Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school
students. Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 171-184.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior
(Vol.4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. (Reprinted in H. Friedman [Ed.],
Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press, 1988.
Chan, L. (1994). Relationship of motivation, strategic learning and reading achievement in
grades 5, 7, and 9. Journal of Experiential Education, 62 (4). (Academic Search
Premier).
Chen, I.J. (2002). Language learning strategies used by high and low English proficiency
students in a technology college. Master’s thesis, Changhuan Normal University,
Changhuan, Taiwan.
Ehrman, M. and Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive
training setting. Modern Language Journal, 73, 1-13.
Ghonsooly, B. and Eghtesadi, A.R. (2006). Role of cognitive style of field-
dependence/independence in using metacognitive and cognitive reading strategies by a
group of skilled and novice Iranian students of English literature. Asian EFL Journal:
English Language Teaching and Research Articles, 8 (4).
Ghonsooly, B. and Elahi, M. (2011). Learners’ self-efficacy in reading and its relation to foreign
language anxiety and reading achievement. Journal of English Language Teaching and
Learning Year 53 (217).
Harris, V. (2003). Adapting classroom-based strategy instruction to a distance learning context.
TESL Internet Journal, 7(20).
Jie, L., and Xiaoqing, Q. (2006). Language learning styles and learning strategies of tertiary level
English learners in China. Regional Language Center, 37 (1), 67-90.
Kinsella, K. (1995). Understanding and empowering diverse learners in ESL classrooms. In J. M.
Reid (Ed.) Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 170-194). New York: Heinle
and Heinle Publishers.
Li, Y. and Wang, C. (2010). An empirical study of reading self-efficacy and the use of reading
strategies in the Chinese EFL context. Asian EFL Journal, 12(2), 144-162.
Magogwe, J.M. and Oliver, R. (2007). The relationship between language learning strategies,
proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: a study of language learners in Botswana.
System, 35 (3), 338-352.
Mills, N., Pajares, F., Herron, C. (2006). A reevaluation of the role of anxiety: self-efficacy,
anxiety, their relation to reading and listening proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 39
(2),
Naseri, M., and Zaferanieh, E. (2012). The relationship between reading self-efficacy beliefs,
reading strategy use and reading comprehension level of Iranian EFL learners. World
Journal of Education, 2(2), 64-75.
Nelson, L., and Conner, C. (2008). Developing self-directed learners. Retreived January 15,
2008<from http://www.nwrel.org/planning/reports/self-directed/self.pdf>.
Ok, L. (2003). The relationship of school year, sex and proficiency on thr use of learning
strategies in learning English of Korean junior highschool students. Asian EFL Journal,
5(3), 1-36.
O’Malley, M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston:
Heinle and Heinle.
Oxford, R.L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: concepts and relationships. IRAL.
41, 271-278.
Oxford, R.L., and Crookall, D. (1989). Research on language learning strategies: methods,
findings and instructional issues. The Modern Language Journal, 73 (4), 404-419.

9
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Oxford, R.L. and Ehrman, M.E. (1995). Adults’ language learning strategies in an intensive
foreign language program in the United States. System, 23, 359-386.
Oxford, R.L., Judd, C., and Giesen, J. (1998). Relationships among learning strategies, learning
styles, EFL proficiency, and academic performance among secondary school students in
Turkey. Unpublished manuscript, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research,
66(4), 543-578.
Pang, J. (2008). Research on good and poor reader characteristics: implications for L2 reading
research in China. Reading in a Foreign Language. 20(1), 1-18.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning.
International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459-470.
Rahimi, M., Riazi, A.M., and Saif, S. (2008). An investigation into the factors affecting the use
of language learning strategies by Persian EFL learners. Canadian Journal of Applied
Linguistics (DJAL), 11(2), 31-59.
Reid, J. (1987). The learning style performance of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 21(1), 87-
111.
Reid, J. (1998). Understanding learning styles in the second language classroom. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Riazi, A.M., and Riasati, M.J. (2006). Language learning style preferences: a student’s case study
of Shiraz EFL institution. Asian EFL Journal, 9(1), 97-125.
Riazi, A.M., and Mansoorian, M.A. (2008). Learning style preferences among Iranian male and
female EFL students. The Iranian EFL Journal, 2, 88-100.
Rossie-Li, L. (1995). Learning styles and strategies in adult immigrant ESL students. In J. M.
Reid (ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (p. 119-125). Boston: Heinle and
Heinle.
Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history and typology. In
A. Wenden and J. Rubin (eds.), Learner strategies and language learning. (pp. 15-29).
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Saricoban, A. and Saricaoglu, A. (2008). The effect of the relationship between learning and
teaching strategies on academic achievement. Novitas-ROYAL, 2(2), 162-175.
Shang, H. (2010). Reading strategy use, self-efficacy and EFL reading comprehension. Asian
EFL Journal, 12(2), 18-42.
Shang, H. (2011). Exploring the Relationship between EFL Proficiency Level and Reading
Strategy Use. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(3), 18-27.
Shannon, S.V., and College, W.S. (2008). Using metacognitive strategies and learning styles to
create self-directed learners. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1, 14-28.
Sheory, R. and Mokhtari, K. (2001). Reading strategies among native and non-native readers.
System, 29, 431-449.
Singhal, M. (2001). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and L2
readers. The Reading Matrix, 1 (1). http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/singhal/
Szoke, E., Sheory, R. (2002). A comparative study of the learning strategies of Hungarian and
Russian college students, novELTY, 9(3), 23-36.
Tabanlioglu, S. (2003). The relationship between learning styles and language learning strategies
of Pre-intermediate EAP students. An Unpublished thesis, Middle East Technical
University, Turkey.
Tercanlioglu, L. (2004). Postgraduate students’ use of reading strategies in L1 and ESL contexts:
links to success. International Educational Journal, 5(4), 562-569.
Tilfarlioglu, F.T., and Cinkara, E. (2009).self-efficacy in EFL: differences among proficiency
groups and relationship with success. Novitas-ROYAL, 3 (2), 129-142.
Zhang, Q.Z. (2004). An investigation on the relationship between English self-efficacy and
language learning strategies use. English Education in China,2.
http://www.sinoss.com/portal/webgate/CmdArticleShow?articleID=2795

10
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

Appendices
Reading Strategy Questionnaire

Strongly Agree No Disagree Strongly

agree idea disagree
1 I use different strategies for
comprehending the text
2 I use my previous mistakes for
understanding the new texts
3 When I confront unfamiliar
words in the text, I try to guess
their meaning
4 I try to guess the content of the
following paragraph
5 I am always looking for new
strategies for improving my
reading skill
6 I set myself a time limit before
starting reading
7 I don’t pay attention to new
vocabularies
8 I look for opportunities to read
more
9 I have set special goals for
improving my reading skill
10 In reading the texts, I try to
guess its overall meaning
11 I reread the previous sentences
or paragraphs in order to
understand the whole text
12 I read the text without looking
up every new word
13 I usually think about my
progress in reading the English
texts

11
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

14 I try to guess the meaning of

new vocabularies by repeating
them several times
15 I attempt to guess the meaning
of new vocabularies by
segmenting them into their
constituent parts
16 I am usually after making
connections between what I’m
reading with my background
information
17 Underlying the key
vocabularies aids me in
comprehending the text
18 Reading the introduction,
summary, and conclusion
helps me in understanding the
new vocabularies
19 Understanding the title, helps
me in improving the whole
text
20 I pay attention to the
punctuation while reading an
English text
21 While reading the text, I
usually ask myself if I have
understood well or not
22 Before reading the text, I
usually skim over it
23 I ask myself questions
concerning the reading text
while reading it

12
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

Reading Self-efficacy Questionnaire

Strongly Agree Partially Disagree Strongly

agree agree disagree
1 I am the best student in my
reading class
2 I don’t need the help of any
one in my reading tasks
3 No matter how much
challenging the reading
task is. I do try to handle it
enthusiastically
4 My reading teacher
considers me an intelligent
reader
5 I have the courage to
answer the most difficult
reading questions
6 I enjoy reading authentic
texts such as novels or
poems
7 Browsing the net and
understanding it is one of
my favorites
8 I can handle
comprehending English
newspapers and magazines
9 I don’t feel stressful while
answering reading
questions
10 I need the help of my
reading teacher or a
proficient reader while
doing a reading task
11 When I can’t understand
the text, I use different

13
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

strategies to take care of

that
12 I can handle the most
difficult texts full of
unknown words or
structures
13 Reading is not a boring
task to me anymore
14 I can concentrate on the
reading tasks quite well
15 I can read and understand
the text within the
proposed time limit
16 In my idea, reading can
improve my writing and
speaking skills

14
 GHEZLOU AND BIRIA: READING SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEPTUAL LEARNING STYLE AND READING STRATEGIES

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Maryam Ghezlou: Maryam Ghezlou is a Ph.D. student at Khurasgan (Isfahan) Azad University's
English Department, currently teaching ELT courses at Garmsar Azad University with major
interests in strategy training in reading comprehension and writing, syntax, and critical pedagogy.

Dr. Reza Biria, Khurasgan (Isfahan) Azad University

15
 Forming a Community of Practice: Exploratory
Teacher Research of an English as a Foreign
Language Community at a University in Taiwan
Paul S. Berg, Ling Tung University, Taiwan

Abstract: This exploratory teacher research study explores a community of practice (Wenger 1998) at a university in
Taiwan. The community comprised two groups, one of foreign graduate students new to Taiwan, the other of students in
the Tourism Management Department. The practice of the community was formed around the need of the foreign students
to learn their way around the city and that of the Taiwanese students to learn to use English for tourism-related contexts.
This paper describes the practice of the community and analyzes the data in terms of the effect of the practice of the
community on the English of the Taiwanese students. Results show that close bonds were formed within the community,
the students were very positive about the experience, and English improvement, while limited, was noticeable.

Keywords: English as a Foreign Language (EFL), Community of Practice, Social Language Learning, Communicative
Language Teaching, Situated Learning

Introduction

A ll teaching is a creative process. This idea may not always be readily apparent in the
classroom itself, especially in a teacher-centered classroom where students sit and
“receive” the transmitted information that they must, in turn, produce in the correct form
and context (usually an exam) when called upon. However, in order to offer such a class, the
teacher and perhaps others would certainly have engaged in a creative process of developing,
planning, and prognosticating. One drawback of such a creative process is that it would take
place before a class was ever held. Such a creative process, then, would be the result of the
utilization of imagination (Wenger 1998, 175-8) on the part of the teacher and/or course
designers rather than because of the interaction between the teacher and students. Additionally,
when students are perceived as “receivers” of information, rather than as “agentive” (Ahearns
2001 and van Lier 2008, both cited in Miller 2010, 466) people, the level of classroom
interaction expected of them is to pay attention to what the teacher says. Thus, their creative
capacity is left to the imagination as well.
In some subject areas and for some purposes, it may be perfectly acceptable to relegate
creative engagement to the realm of individual imagination. English as a foreign language (EFL),
when the purpose is to assist learners to use the language communicatively, is not such a subject.
Since Chomsky’s writing in the 1960s, it has been an accepted fact that the use of language is a
creative process. In Taiwan, education has long followed a teacher-centered approach, largely
focused on test-taking, which has limited the exercise of creativity in the classroom (see, e.g.,
Chang and Su 2010; Chen and Squires 2007; and Savignon and Wang 2003). When the goal for
language education centers on communication, it is incumbent upon teachers to rethink the
learning experience for students to provide language use situations through which learners can
interact creatively.
One source that provides conceptual support for teachers seeking to better understand how to
provide more creative learning situations for students is social language learning (SLL) theory
(Duff 2007). While understanding the concepts in SLL is a helpful first step, to gain a greater
insight into how to teach using these concepts, it seems necessary to put them to the test. This
would mean trying to use the ideas in a practical setting with students, and in the process, to
collect and analyze data. The current study is based Wenger’s (1998) theory on communities of
practice (CoP) and Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder’s (2002) ideas on implementing a

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, thelearner.com, ISSN 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Paul S. Berg, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

community of practice. The literature contains some criticism of Wenger’s CoP (e.g., Haneda
2006; Duff 2007). Haneda takes issue with the usefulness of Wenger’s theory in a foreign
language classroom setting and with the focus of Wenger’s research on business situations. Duff
reports that others have suggested that Wenger’s theory is too idealized. Although such views
have been expressed, I am not aware of any practical studies which have sought to test these
claims.
The focus of the current study is not on the merits of Wenger’s CoP theory as a theory.
Rather, it is meant to explore the implementation of the theory and what can be learned from the
attempt to form a community of practice. This study is designed as exploratory teacher research
(Borg 2010). Such research is qualitative (Richards 2009) because it is “’… a situated activity
that locates the observer in the world’” (Denzin and Lincoln 2000, cited in Richards 2009, 149).
Crucially, for this study, Richards (2000, 149) states that qualitative research is “participant
oriented in that it is sensitive to and seeks to understand, participants’ perspectives on their
world.” Exploratory teacher research is conducted by teachers “for the purposes of understanding
their own professional contexts” (Borg 2010, 392). “Exploratory practice, is action for
understanding” (Ibid., 397).

The Study
The opportunity for this study arose when Daniel (pseudonyms will be used throughout this
paper), an EFL teacher at a university in Taiwan, met four foreign graduate students who were
new to Taiwan. Hearing their expressed needs—that they didn’t know the area (Taichung, a city
in central Taiwan), where to go to buy necessities, or how to get around—Daniel began to think
of how he could help them. Concurrent to this, Daniel was teaching several English conversation
courses for the Tourism Management Department. In these courses, he sought to provide students
with as much practical use of English focused on tourism themes as possible. He saw that there
was a convergence of needs. The new graduate students, who had grown up using English as a
second language, needed to learn about living in Taiwan, while the tourism students needed to
learn to use English to help visitors to learn about Taiwan.
Daniel and I agreed that the opportunity that presented itself was too good to pass up. The
question was how to take advantage of it. Fortunately, we had been working together on
research, during which time I had read Wenger’s theory on CoP. We agreed that I would serve as
the consultant to the project and that Daniel would facilitate the community. Volunteers from a
sophomore Tourism Department conversation course were sought. At the outset, five students
agreed to participate. Both the Taiwanese and the foreign graduate students were informed that
we intended to collect data for the purpose of publishing the findings. Everyone involved gave
their consent to this.
The basic guiding principle for the formation and practice of the community was the needs
of the students involved. Daniel devised the idea of holding “events” that would serve to provide
the opportunity for the community’s practice to develop. Because the graduate students spoke
English, the need of the tourism students to have contexts to communicate in English could be
addressed. Because the Taiwanese students knew the area, they could provide this knowledge to
help meet the needs of the foreign graduate students to become familiar with, and hopefully more
comfortable with, living in Taiwan over their two years of study.
Data was collected in a variety of ways from all of the participants involved in the CoP. The
focus of data collection was based on the goals of the study: The main goal was to learn from the
attempt to form and maintain a community of practice (Wenger 1998; Wenger, McDermott, and
Snyder 2002). More specifically, the questions that guided this study were: Can a CoP be
formed? Can the Taiwanese students improve in their ability to use English through the practice
of the CoP? What did I learn from this study?
Because the goals were more oriented to what was learned by the Taiwanese students, they
were asked to keep journals, in the form of narrative commentaries, of their perspectives of the
events. They also participated in interviews after the events. The questions for these interviews

18
 BERG: FORMING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE

were developed by Daniel and me: one, to obtain feedback from the students about their
perceptions about the forming of the community; and two, to provide them with an opportunity
to reflect on their viewpoints pertaining to communicating in English. The students also
presented a summary of the events and their learning to the department at the end of the spring
semester. The interviews and the presentation were recorded and transcribed.
Daniel, the facilitator, also kept a written journal to maintain a record of his thoughts and
feelings about the events, about the process of learning to form a CoP, and about undertaking
such a task in broader terms. The numerous hours of consultation between Daniel and I
constituted another data source. This consisted of regular and unscheduled face-to-face meetings,
telephone conversations, and emails. These communications ranged from broad-based discussion
about Wenger’s theory, to questions of how to interact with the university about the CoP, to
discussions Daniel had with the foreign graduate students, to dealing with emotions of individual
students, to deciding whether or not to let someone bring a boyfriend to one of the events. To
ensure the validity of this data, Daniel read over the drafts of this paper and provided corrective
feedback based on his understanding of the communications. The data reported from this source
is thus based on our collective memory rather than on mine alone.
A countless number of decisions had to be made in forming and maintaining the community.
The process that we adhered to when questions arose was to follow my understanding of
Wenger’s theory. A question would be posed, I would “translate” the idea into Wenger’s CoP
terminology, I would relate this understanding back to Daniel, and finally we would agree on a
course of action that we felt would work best toward supporting the development of the practice
of the community. For example, the question of a student bringing a guest arose. I reposed the
question, according to Wenger’s theory, by asking if we wanted the relationship of the
community to the “outside world” to act as boundary or as a periphery (Wenger 1998). We chose
periphery as long as we felt the impact of the guest(s) would not serve to alter the practice of the
community. In other words, the basics needs of the two groups of students should always remain
the focus of the practice of the community.
The “events” that served as the main opportunities for the practice took place over the course
of a school year. The events were spread out largely due to the fact of the time commitments of
all participants. The events were held outside of any university-scheduled activities and all were
conducted off campus. This was essential as one primary goal was for the practice of the
community to develop based on the need of the foreign students to acclimate to their
surroundings and to have the tourism students learn to use English to help the foreign students
with this acclimatization. Daniel and I agreed that we could not allow the focus of the practice of
the community to deviate from the needs that had served as the impetus to create it. Because I
functioned as the consultant to the project and was not involved in the events themselves, my role
was to ensure that the needs of the students remained the focus of the practice.
The CoP was organized into events on four different days over the course of the school year.
In order for the events to run smoothly, there was a great effort put into preparing for them.
Daniel would preplan the event, meet with students, come to a consensus on what would occur,
and agree on places and times. Then the students also had to make plans specific to the various
events, for example, planning the route to a store and being able to explain this to the foreign
student in English. The events were as follows: 1) Meeting New People: the two groups of
students met, paired off, got onto scooters and went to several different stores in Taichung. 2)
Going to Buy Things: student with same partners, on scooters to different stores in Taichung. 3)
Cultural Event: The foreign students prepared a meal like they would eat at home, taught some
songs and dances, and introduced their culture to the tourism students. 4) Cultural Event: The
tourism students prepared a meal like they would eat at home, taught some songs, and introduced
the main festivals of Taiwan to the foreign students.
The first two events were focused on the practical needs of the foreign students to learn how
to get around in Taichung and where to go to buy daily necessities within their budgets. The
second two events were less concrete because the focus was on more abstract cultural ideas like
the meaning of certain festivals, while at the same time providing the opportunity for

19
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

communication in concrete situations such as cooking. Daniel made no attempt to control the
flow of the conversations in any of the events. He remained present, but quiet for the most part,
choosing to observe how things were going and spoke only when questions were directed to him.
This was also the case when language misunderstandings occurred. Daniel chose to let the
students interact with each other to seek understanding. He clarified language points only when
he was directly addressed for this purpose.

Findings
Did a Community Form?

To answer this question, Wenger’s descriptors of a CoP were used as an analytical tool. One
element of a CoP is that it should have a clearly identifiable practice (Wenger 1998, 45-9). In
this study, the two groups of students agreed to enter into relationships with each other. The
nature of the relationship was intended to be one that provided skills and knowledge from one
group of students to the other, acclimatization to a new environment for the foreign students and
experience at introducing a new environment in English for the tourism students. In interviews,
the students stated that they gave directions, mentioned good places to eat, showed the foreign
students where to go to buy different kinds of things, discussed food and how to prepare it, and
asked about clothing. That the students were engaged in a clear practice at the various events
suggests that they were identifying themselves as part of a unique community.
Wenger states that communities of practice form unique centers in which members engage in
practice. Thus, there is an insider/outsider dynamic to a community which forms a border that
functions as a boundary or a periphery (Wenger 1998, 119-121). With a few exceptions, the edge
of the community functioned primarily as a boundary—that is there was not much opportunity
for outsiders to become part of the community. This was a conscious decision by Daniel and me
due mainly to considerations of availability constraints, such as time and space. Since the group
was small, with very clearly defined needs and thus a focused practice, we were careful about
disturbing this dynamic.
At the third event, a friend and her boyfriend of one of the foreign students were allowed to
attend. This was a consensus decision. One tourism student mentioned this situation in a journal
entry: There is a one more thing is Ella take her friend Irene. But something is wrong. Because
Irene didn’t ask Ella and not process that agree. Irene go with her boyfriend. That is impolite.
But we still agree her boyfriend to join us this event. What this seems to indicate is that the
Taiwanese members of the CoP see that there is boundary to the community and that they
actively took an attitudinal position toward that boundary. From Daniel’s report on this, the
boyfriend did not engage much with those in the community, nor did the two of them engage
much in the community’s practice of discussing food, eating style, music, or dance.
In the spring semester, Daniel mentioned that he was receiving requests from other tourism
department students to join in the situated events. On a couple of occasions this was allowed
when original members couldn’t participate because of illness or part-time work obligations.
When a new student became part of the group, they agreed to participate fully, which included
the planning and other outside-the-events activities. That other students began requesting the
opportunity to join in the CoP seems to indicate that even though they hadn’t engaged in the
enterprise of the community, they recognized what was transpiring within the events as unique to
that group of people. That they wanted to take part can be taken to mean that they saw the
practice of that group of people as desirable. This also provides evidence that a CoP actually
existed.
Part of what occurs during the practice of a community is that the members learn the “rules”
of that particular community. When members engage in practice, some of these practices become
accepted as the “things we know and do,” or as Wenger (1998, 57-71) calls this aspect of
meaning, reification. Perhaps the most telling data concerning reification occurred well after
these events had finished. In the following fall, one of the Taiwanese students participated in an

19
 BERG: FORMING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE

event coordinated by Daniel with a different group of students. This event had a somewhat
different purpose, though the goal of improving English use was the same. When some of the
students began to talk in Chinese, the student from the current study reminded everyone that, “At
Daniel’s home, we speak in English.” This interjection seems to show that the practice of
speaking in English came to be reified by the tourism students. In the interviews and journals, the
students acknowledged reverting to using Chinese at times. However, the data also shows that
these students struggled to try to speak in English even when their vocabulary knowledge failed
them. The students seem to have internalized this process to the point where speaking English
was accepted as the “way we do this.” This provides more evidence that a community had been
formed.
Identity (Wenger 1998, 181) is broadened when people engage with one another toward a
shared goal. In the early stages, Daniel took much of the responsibility of organizing the events
upon himself. By the last event, he was removed from this. In their report to their department, the
tourism students commented on what they did as well as what they learned. They each explicated
their roles and the preparation they engaged in for the Taiwanese cultural event. They realized
that the event would not have been as successful without such planning. For example:

(Student 1)

I’ll tell you about my responsibility, such as, first one, I have to know about everything
of the event, just about the time, the … the thing what to do, and up the entertainment,
and the Powerpoint. We just practice, practice for that. And, … second, we prepare the
vegetable dumpling, because they’re, re … religious, religions of the ah (foreign)
students.

(Student 2)

And many dishes we need to consider. And because how food need to have, and how
much to prepare, and to … attention what kind of food they can eat, because we didn’t
have any experience before. And our … conclusion is … planning an event takes a long
time to prepare.

(Student 3)

And to be a host we have to know about a lot of things, and the time, where, and
before… after the event, we have to call the (foreign) student to tell them tomorrow we
have an event, and you should come. And… it is, it is very tired, but it's just a, have a lot
of experience for ourself.

The students use “we” quite often to express their ideas. This seems to be clear evidence that
they have learned through and identified with their engagement in the practices they mention,
and that they see themselves as part of a community.

Did English Use Improve?

When one considers the events and planning for the events in terms of the amount of time
expended, this would be roughly equivalent to a normal, 2-hours-per-week, semester course at
the university. The students in this study would, however, experience much more intense English
use than what would occur in a classroom because each of the events was approximately six
hours in length. The data available for answering this question is limited to the data collected as
well as my judgment about what I found in the data. No pre- post-test regime was followed. Part
of the reason for this is that this study is teacher research and therefore limited in scope, and
another part of the reason is that there is no test known to me that would accurately measure the
language in the language use situations that occurred in the study.

21
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

The tourism students were asked to reflect on their English in the post-event interviews and
journals. After the first two events, all the students reported that they were nervous about using
English with the foreign students. They felt there were difficulties in communicating because of
pronunciation and vocabulary. One student’s journal entry provides a good summary: Sometime I
don’t know what they are talking, because sometime they are talk too fast and sometime they are
talk not really standard so sometime I am very confuse. Also, the students found communicating
in English for six hours to be a taxing experience:

Daniel: how did you feel that you had to use English so much? Student: So much. … It’s
harder. D: It’s hard? S: Yeah, I think it’s harder. D: I just laugh. Ariel just said… I
asked her about using so much English,… and I said tonight you will dream about it,
and she said, “nightmare, nightmare!” S: And just in your brain, a lot of English, and
run, run, run, run and you don’t know what is right.

Data collected after later events shows changes in the tourism students’ experiences about
using English. There is expression that their confidence in using English grew significantly, they
stated that they developed ways to deal with the misunderstandings that arose (strategic
competence), they showed ability to use humor in English, and they felt their listening ability had
improved. By the third event, the Taiwanese students were using English (mostly) rather than
Chinese among themselves. The more abstract nature of the English use contexts in the third and
fourth events was clear to the students:

Daniel: Was using English easier, the same, or more difficult than previous events?
Student: Easy. D: Easy? S: Easy. … But, the food, the food thing more difficult.

An important point here is that even while the students expressed difficulty with some
specific communication topics, at the same time they reported that their overall ability to
communicate in English was improving:

Student: Oh, what’s difference. I think my Eng, uh… ah, uh, my… talking… ah, uh,
speaking and listening is more better than before.

The narrative concerning the word “peanut butter” provides an interesting description of the
communicative, contextualized language learning that was available to the tourism students. The
first encounter was in the second event at a store. The foreign students wanted to buy peanut
butter. However, the Taiwanese students did not understand the word:

(Student 1)

Daniel: What…difficulties did you have understanding in English? Student: When the…
ah… what’s the… peanut butter/D: Peanut butter?/S: I really don’t… I know butter… is
the means butter, but the peanut, I don’t… forget that, that word. (D: Yeah.) So now I
know the peanut butter.

(Student 2)

Daniel: What difficulties did you have in communicating in English with your partner?
Student: Mm… I think it’s… using words. Yes. Uh… like vocabulary or… nn… S:
(laughing)/when they said “peanut butter?” What that was? … I don’t know… what the
things is. Yes. Um hm… And maybe our culture is different, so I don’t know what about
it.

The tourism students learned about the meaning of the word—the product was found in the
store and subsequently purchased by the foreign students. The tourism students could see the jar

21
 BERG: FORMING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE

of peanut butter and gain an understanding that such a product with that name existed, even in
Taiwan. Beyond this, in event three, the students gained further experience with peanut butter:

(Student 3)

Daniel: What did you use English mostly for? Student: Mostly for? … Mm… For ask
them the… um… D: Asking questions? S: Yes, question. Asking how to cook … And
what is the food…And the sauce with, uh… something. Yes. D: OK. Cause they made a
peanut butter sauce. S: Yes. D: So, you were asking questions about/S: Yeees/D:
that?/S: It’ very, it’s very good (laughs).

(Student 1, journal)

They fry and barbeque the chicken. There is a special sauce. Make with peanut butter
and tomato sauce. It’s a special feeling. But it’s really delicious.

By this point, the Taiwanese students had the experience of tasting peanut butter used in a
sauce in addition to having seen a jar of it in a store. What I’m suggesting here is that the
richness and depth of how they experienced “peanut butter” has helped them create a very
distinctive understanding of what peanut butter is. The “peanut butter” experience was not
singular. Other vocabulary and phrasing was learned similarly.
In summation, the Taiwanese students have reported that their confidence grew, their
listening improved, and their communication became smoother. The data also shows that the
students took part in situations that provided a natural environment for language acquisition and
necessitated engagement in strategic competence. On the whole, the data certainly lead me to the
conclusion that the students have improved in their ability to communicate using English.

What Did I Learn?

One lesson I have taken from this study is that the amount of time necessary to undertake such a
learning opportunity was onerous. With little support available from the formal educational
system for such projects, the vast majority of what occurred in the study was outside of the
purview of the university. This also includes the learning that occurred. It seems to me that what
took place—that the whole endeavor was constructed upon a goal that was not and could not
have been preplanned—does not easily mesh with the formalistic, preplanned nature of the
existing educational structure. As Daniel wrote to me in an email:

… the students told me that the hosting/Chinese cultural event was the most difficult in
using English - more specifically trying to use English to explain the cultural stories,
such as Chinese New Year - they spent hours preparing that. … the students became
very involved in supporting and helping each other in using English to explain the
different cultural festivals etc. This became more apparent when all their learning
events were put into a powerpoint and presented at the school. Their advisor could only
say WoW - your English has become very good. The video of that really demonstrated
the students’ identity and the growth and support of an established CoP. In reading
between the lines one can realize the overall skills being learned as well.

The learning that occurred in this CoP enjoys no reified status such as that determined from
psychometric measurement or a scheduled university course. What this implies to me is that
more negotiation is necessary within the educational system in order to create status for the
learning that can occur within a social structure such as the one in this study. To leave such
learning outside the formal system only serves to limit the learning opportunities available within
the system.

23
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Another realization I have had is that the learning that occurred in this study was not limited
to the students. There has been a noticeable difference in the conversations I commonly engage
in with Daniel about our teaching. In the past, the focus of the conversations about Daniel’s
classes was more on what he was doing as the teacher. Since having gone through the process of
facilitating a community of practice, the focus has shifted toward the learning that is going on, by
both the students and him. This seems to parallel what occurred through the cycle of the CoP. At
the beginning, Daniel served as the chief planner of the events. Gradually this changed, and the
students took on the majority of the responsibility for planning. In allowing this to occur, Daniel
was able to take a step back and become more of an observer which allowed him to act according
to the needs that arose based on the students engagement with their own plans, rather than based
on the needs coming from the students seeking to implement Daniel’s plan. I wonder if this
information could be profitable for teacher educators and teachers seeking further professional
development.
Finally, I have noticed a difference in my own teaching. Reading Wenger’s theory has
helped provide me with a new vocabulary that has been useful when I ponder what is going on in
my classrooms. First, I feel I am better at giving clearer feedback to my students for their group
projects. Second, when dealing with students that seem to have poor attitudes, I now try to think
of this in terms of alienated identity. I find myself better at looking for opportunities to engage
these students in English, no matter how negative the interaction might seem, rather than
attending to the barrier that arises in my mind when I affix the student with a poor attitude. Third,
I have changed my approach to what I am looking for in terms of group performances. I have
become much more concerned that students not write and memorize what they will say for such
performances. I still allow them to do this, however, I understand more clearly than before that
such a performance is bereft of the creativity that I would like to be available in my classroom.

23
 BERG: FORMING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE

REFERENCES
Borg, Simon. 2010. “Language Teacher Research Engagement.” Language Teaching 43(4):391-
429.
Chang, Chialin, and Yelin Su. 2010. “Educational Reform in Taiwan: Beliefs about EFL
Teaching and Learning.” The International Journal of Learning 17(2):265-277.
Chen, Mei-Ling, and David Squires. 2007. “Influence of Cooperative Learning Beliefs on
Classroom Practices in Chinese English as a Foreign Language Teachers.” The
International Journal of Learning 14(4):101-110.
Duff, Patricia. 2007. “Second Language Socialization as Sociocultural Theory: Insights and
Issues.” Language Teaching 40:309-319.
Haneda, Mari. 2006. “Classrooms as Communities of Practice: A Reevaluation.” TESOL
Quarterly 40(4):807-817.
Miller, Elizabeth. 2010. “Agency in the Making: Adult Immigrants’ Accounts of Language
Learning and Work.” TESOL Quarterly 44(3):465-487.
Richards, Keith. 2009. “Trends in Qualitative Research in Language Teaching since 2000.”
Language Teaching 42(2):147-180.
Savignon, Sandra, and Chao Chang Wang. 2003. “Communicative Language Teaching in EFL
Contexts: Learner Attitudes and Perceptions.” International Review of Applied
Linguistics in Language Teaching 41(3):223-249.
Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, Etienne, Richard McDermott, and William M. Snyder. 2002. Cultivating Communities
of Practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Paul S. Berg: I have taught EFL at universities in Taiwan for over twenty years. My research
interests include curriculum and policy issues especially pertaining to EFL, communicative
practices, situated learning, and social learning.

25
 Process Drama for 21st Century Learning:
Building Multiliteracies and Creative-Adaptive
Capacity
Shamini Dias, Claremont Graduate University, USA
Abstract: This paper builds a case for the serious consideration of process drama as an effective and relevant pedagogy
for the twenty-first century. Today, we witness the outcomes of a paradigm shift from an industrial economy to a post-
industrial, postmodern, creative and knowledge economy. Our world is marked by accelerating change and multiplicity
that are paradoxically inter-connected into a global economy through rapidly developing technological communication
and information networks. We, therefore, live in an organic, dynamically evolving knowledge space that constantly shapes
and re-shapes our lives and identities. As educators, we are charged to prepare students to be effective knowledge makers.
This means focusing on multiliteracies, which enable students to access, sense-make, query, deconstruct, and re-construct
knowledge using multiple modes beyond reading and writing. These include audio, visual, gestural, physical
communication in both traditional and digital forms. However, these skills cannot be effectively nurtured without also
building the adaptive capacities of flexibility and resilience that enable us to deal with unpredictable and rapidly shifting
information and knowledge. These skills also demand creative capacities of openness and precision that support
collaborative and divergent ways of working to find new pathways for thinking and building knowledge. This paper
synthesizes these creative-adaptive capacities with the New London Group’s (1996, 2000) four-part design pedagogy for
multiliteracies (overt instruction, situated practice, critical framing, and transformed practice). This synthesis
demonstrates how process drama, or unscripted and facilitated role-play drama, offers us pathways for helping students
develop multiliteracies and learning skills for the twenty-first century. The paper shows how process drama engages
students in situated learning, using overt instruction as a facilitation process in collaborative, improvisational role-playing
through critical framing and transformed practice. Process drama is, thus, shown to be a viable approach for
multiliteracies development. Implications for action and further research are suggested.

Keywords: Process Drama, Literacy Development, Literacy Pedagogy, 21st Century Skills, Multiliteracies, Creative-
Adaptive Capacities

I n the twenty-first century, we can no longer only be concerned with literacy. Our world is
richly diverse, increasingly connected, with all aspects of life dependent on knowledge
innovation, exchange, and communication. Our students are called upon to use a wide range
of sense-making skills to navigate multiple points of information, perspectives, and text-types
that are constructed and delivered via multiple forms, channels, and processes. We must, therefore,
move beyond literacy to “multiliteracies”, a more embodied sense of communication that
integrates words, still and moving images (gestural, physical, relational), and sound. Luke and
Freebody define multiliteracies as “the flexible and sustainable mastery of a repertoire of practices
with the texts of traditional and new communication technologies via spoken, print, and
multimedia” channels (Luke and Freebody 2000, 9). Anstey and Bull (2006) expand this definition
by locating multiliteracies as embedded in and mediated by socio-cultural contexts. They propose
a flexible, multiliterate identity that must constantly master emerging literacy modes in multiple
contexts. Other researchers have also contributed significantly to our growing understanding of the
importance of developing multiliteracies in our classrooms (Anstey and Bull 2006; Cazden 2000;
Cope and Kalantzis 2000; Luke 2000; Luke and Freebody 2000; New London Group 1996;
Thwaites 1999; Tracy, Storer and Kazerounian 2010; Unsworth 2001; Villeneuve 2003).
Multiliteracies are also reflected in the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE 2008)
definition of literacies for the twenty-first century, viz., technological proficiency; cross-cultural
collaboration in solving problems; information design and sharing for multiple purposes in global
settings; managing, analyzing, and synthesizing multiple streams of simultaneous information; and
working ethically in complex environments.

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, thelearner.com, ISSN: 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Shamini Dias, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

While multiliteracies are clearly critical for thriving in the twenty-first century, there has been
far less research on the human capacities that would best support multiliteracies development in
the face of constant, rapid change and unpredictability. We must be able to constantly re-learn and
adapt. John Dewey wrote that “it is impossible to foretell definitely just what civilization will be
twenty years from now,” and exhorted educators to, therefore, prepare students to know how to
learn (Dewey 1897, 78). Over a century later, Sir Ken Robinson echoes Dewey but with a
compressed time frame, describing the “massive unpredictability” that precludes knowing “what
the world’s going to look like in five years, or even next year” (Robinson 2001, 24). Scholars
across different disciplines find common ground in defining our world in terms of constantly
emerging socio-cultural spaces shaped by intensely inter-connected but divergent perspectives,
media, and information (Argryis 2003; Banathy 1996; 2000; Brown 2010; Darling-Hammond
2010; Drucker 1996; Florida 2002; Habermas 1996; Jarvis 2000; Lipman-Blumen 1996; Lyotard
1984; Peters and Araya 2010).
Rapid and constant change being the tenor of our world, we cannot develop multiliteracies
without also developing the supporting or foundational capacities of adaptivity and creativity1 that
will help students thrive in a world of multiplicity and constant change. In this paper, I analyze
how process drama can integrate adaptive and creative capacities into the development of
multiliteracies using a design pedagogy. Process drama has strong precedents in multiliteracies
development (Anderson and Donelan 2009; Bolton and Heathcote 1995; Crumpler 2003; Edmiston
1991, 2007; Edmiston and Wilhelm 1998; Flinthoff 2009; O’Neill 1995; Schneider, Crumpler, and
Rogers 2006; Wagner 1998), particularly in integrating digital texts (Carroll and Cameron 2003;
Davis 2006). This paper extends this research by demonstrating how process drama can
simultaneously nurture creative-adaptive capacities. I argue that these capacities are the
foundations that sustain multiliteracies by providing agency and self-determination to effectively
and ethically access, build, and share knowledge.

Foundations for Nurturing Multiliteracies

A Design Pedagogy

Multiliteracies entail active sense-making of the multiple “texts” and contexts we live among and
within. Calling attention to a pluralized, inter-connected world, and especially to digitally mediated
spaces, the New London Group2 proposes approaching multiliteracies from a design perspective,
where sense-making is a conscious, semiotic activity to access, deconstruct, re-combine, and
construct meaning. This idea of “design”, rather than “comprehension” underscores the active
nature of communication; we seek patterns of meaning by linking elements in a text or situation,
and by understanding a text’s purpose and audience. Literacy is a multimodal design process,
where we seek “the pattern of interconnections among the other modes” (New London Group 2000,
25) i.e. our linguistic, visual, audio, gestural, and spatial social conventions of meaning. We work
transformatively in a Bakhtinian dialogic process (Bakhtin 1982) when we integrate different
perspectives and re-contextualize meaning in this way. Thus, instead of just reproducing meaning,
we re-construct and design it through our own perspectives. Meaning comprehension and
knowledge construction shift from passive one way transmission (sender to receiver,) to an active,
dynamic, constructive process. This reflects the shifting, emerging nature of the knowledge-world
today, as well as the embodied and socially situated nature of knowledge and learning. It further

1
In this paper, “creative” expands the term’s more common and narrow meaning of artistic processes and outcomes to
include innovative and constructive processes of knowledge building.
2
This four-part pedagogy has also been explored and clarified by Paul Gee (2000), and Cope and Kalantzis (2000).

28
 DIAS: PROCESS DRAMA FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING: BUILDING MULTILITERACIES

points to how our unique identities, perspectives, and contexts are integral in this dynamic sense-
making process. Therefore, an appropriate pedagogy for nurturing multiliteracies must address the
social embeddedness of knowing and the metacognitive nature of sense-making as design, a
creative and transformative process. The New London Group’s (2000) four-part pedagogy for
multiliteracies does this, comprising situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and
transformed practice.
Learner-centered situated practice is based on contextual or social theories of learning (Brown
and Campione 1994; Gee 1996, 2000; Lave and Wenger 1991; Vygotsky 1978) where meaning is
socially and contextually embedded and learning is grounded in students’ lives and interests. Gee’s
(2000) analysis of the knowledge economy’s more distributed, agentic system distinguishes
between learning that is focused on disciplinary reproduction, and knowledge building as a
collective enterprise to “add value through distributed knowledge and understanding” (50). This
suggests that we can develop multiliteracies effectively through situating learning in a community
of practice (Gee 2000; Lave and Wenger 1991) where different levels and modes of knowing
interact dialogically to find and design new meaning and knowledge. In practice, this means
moving from teacher-centered knowledge transmission to locating learning in communities of
learners who collaborate experientially to explore and construct knowledge. We see this in project
based learning, and in process drama, as will be shown below.
In overt instruction (not to be confused with top-down, teacher-centered approaches) the
teacher explicitly focuses students on making sense of and constructing texts using different design
modalities (speaking, print, electronic text, images, gestures, sound). In addition to building
multimodal sense-making skills, students also develop metacognitive capacities, which are critical
in working with open or multiple texts that present different perspectives. Students, thus, are able
to actively query, seek patterns, and create their own pathways to understanding meaning 3 .
Increasingly, we find that we must work in this way rather than in situations where meaning is so
fixed and explicit that no active interpretation and engagement is needed. Overt instruction also
helps students develop awareness of intentionality as they learn that all texts are created with a
purpose in relation to an audience or audiences. When they are more explicitly aware of this, they
become skilled in selecting and designing texts to actively shape meaning. They become more
effective communicators.
Critical framing develops positioning and perspective skills, adding another layer of
metacognition to help students understand how context, structure, mode, intention, and audience
interact to create meaning. Students, thus, gain skills in analyzing and querying a variety of texts
to identify veracity, assumptions, gaps, and implications. In 1987, Freire and Macedo wrote about
the importance of relating text information to real contexts (“reading the world”) in order to
critically access meaning. They argued that “reading the world is not preceded merely by reading
the word, but by a certain form of writing it or rewriting it, that is, of transforming it by means of
conscious, practical work” (Freire and Macedo 1987, 25). Today, in a pluralistic world, this
dynamic interaction between the audience, text, and context is even more important. Critical
framing helps us become active, autonomous readers, confident in not merely taking a position in
relation to texts and contexts, but also in exploring these texts and contexts from multiple
perspectives or positions.
In transformed practice, we interpret or create texts in new contexts and forms by applying
our understanding of how meaning is designed. In recognizing that narratives are unstable because

3
In his critique of traditional, canonical literature, Roland Barthes (1975) distinguished “writerly” texts where the
meaning is the product of the audience’s interpretation, from canonical, “readerly” texts which imposes meaning on the
audience. Today, we can say that many, if not most, texts our students encounter in the real world are of the “writerly”
type, demanding active and cogent interpretation.

29
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

of shifting audiences and contexts, we become aware of and comfortable with multiplicity in
accessing and creating meaning. Texts may contain contradictions, be inter-textual, where one text
references or embeds another, or hybrid in articulating and connecting in new ways. We become
effectively multiliterate in playing with these semiotic multiplicities and instabilities, shifting our
perspectives to better craft texts that connect with different audiences and contexts.

Creative-Adaptivity: Foundations for Effective Design Pedagogy

Design pedagogy, as shown above, presupposes adaptive and creative skills and capacities. In
discussing optimal human functioning, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, whose seminal research gave us
the theory of optimal experience or “flow,” describes adaptive and creative capacities as innate and
interrelated drives of self-preservation (adaptivity) and expansiveness (creativity)
(Csikszentmihalyi 1996, 11). The four aspects of design pedagogy that help develop multiliteracies
are richly strengthened by these twinned capacities. To be multiliterate, we must engage in creative,
critical collaboration using multiple modes and media with diverse audiences. To do this
effectively, we must be simultaneously adaptive and creative. We must be flexible and agile in our
thought and actions, while remaining open and insightful in working with plurality. This
combination of creativity and adaptivity is, thus, an important human capacity that supports
multiliteracies.
The adaptive capacities of flexibility and resilience help us adjust to emerging, unpredictable
contexts, and to persist through turbulence and the unknown. This, in turn, enables and supports
openness and precision which determine success in dealing with multiple sources and possibilities
of meaning. Flexibility, a pliability of mind, supports the risk-taking and cognitive shifting we
need in order to be open to wonder, imagination, curiosity, empathy, divergent ideas, and multiple
perspectives. Resilience, the ability to persist through turbulence, reinforces this flexible openness.
In addition, resilience is critical for precision, which is an important multiliteracies skill. Precision
enables critical exploration, reflection, pattern seeking, and analysis. This is important for
identifying assumptions, implications, and gaps in information in order to query, interpret, connect,
and position knowledge construction. Precision, therefore, supports critical thinking and the
accuracy needed for effective feedback, debate, and reflection in sense-making, especially when
using new information. 4 Together, adaptive-creativity support us in engaging in critical and
creative thinking and collaboration, which are essential attributes of multiliteracies skills and life-
long learning processes.
The argument so far has demonstrated that a design pedagogy for nurturing multiliteracies
comprising situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and transformed practice
demands a complex range of skills that enable critical, creative thinking, collaboration, and
communication. The creative capacities of openness and precision that drive these skills demand
adaptive strengths of flexibility and resilience to sustain them; creative-adaptive capacities are
inextricably interconnected. To effectively implement a pedagogy for developing multiliteracies,
we must help learners develop a foundation of dynamically interacting creative and adaptive
capacities. In the section below, I demonstrate how process drama is an effective way to do this.

Process Drama: Building and Sustaining Multiliteracies

4
These critical qualities are also being investigated in studies of psychological capital (Luthans and Youssef 2004) and
human flourishing (Seligman 2011; Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000).

30
 DIAS: PROCESS DRAMA FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING: BUILDING MULTILITERACIES

Process drama approaches learning through dramatic, improvisatory, and collaborative actions to
“explore issues, events, and relationships (O’Neill and Lambert 1982, 11). Founded on social-
constructivist theories of learning (Bruner 1990; Vygotsky 1978), it is congruent with the pedagogy
for multiliteracies. Process drama emerged strongly in the United Kingdom through Dorothy
Heathcote’s innovative teaching, and was further developed by Peter Slade, Brian Way, Gavin
Bolton, and Cecily O’Neill among others 5 . Bolton defines process drama as “engaging with
something outside oneself using an ‘as if’ mental set in order to activate, sustain, or intensify that
engagement” (Bolton 1984, 19). In the video Pieces of Dorothy (Mantle of the Expert, n.d.),
Heathcote describes process drama as engaging in “education for self-direction”. Neelands (2009)
advocates process drama’s ensemble approach as effective for breaking classroom boundaries and
positioning content material more relevantly in students’ lived experiences, and helping them
develop a model of democratic living. McCaslin (2006) defines it as a way of learning where
children collaborate to explore and discover knowledge, and thus develop skills for group work,
responsibility, and self-expression. This is echoed by O’Toole, Stinson and Moore (2009). Process
drama is clearly distinct from theatre where students are cast in roles, often with a pre-existing
script, and taught the craft of acting, script analysis, and play production. In process drama, by
contrast, students co-create and collaborate through improvisation both in and out of role to explore
problems, situations, or ideas.
Process drama is guided by four principles, viz., collaboration and co-creation, role-playing
and positioning, improvisation and emergence, and feedback and reflection. The teacher co-creates
with students using improvisation and a reflective process to explore and construct ideas. A trigger
or pre-text (O’Neill 1995) initiates exploration, suggests roles and actions, establishes situations
and atmospheres, offers pathways for explorations, and constraints to maintain coherence. The
trigger or pre-text is not deceptive, although O’Neill points out the play on the word “pretext” in
that students and teacher agree to enter into the imaginative drama world. The pre-text could be a
line or quotation, a real or manufactured artifact, a fragment of a letter or story, a news article, an
image, a song, a film clip, etc. In the second principle, The teacher works in-role, playing different
characters within the dramatic frame, interacting and improvising with students, as well as out of
role, to facilitate interaction between dramatic and real worlds. Process drama, therefore, is
strongly reflective. That is, moving between worlds integrates emergence and discovery of new
meaning with reflective sense-making. This consolidates emerging knowledge while building
metacognition of self, other, and meaning structures.
These four process drama principles help articulate and implement the design pedagogy for
developing multiliteracies. At the same time, these principles activate and build creative-adaptive
capacities through dynamic and sustained situated practice within which overt instruction
optimizes critical framing and transformed practice. The conceptual analysis and model developed
below are informed and illustrated by examples drawn from process drama explorations of a
historical theme. These examples come from different after-school programs conducted with
groups of Singaporean students aged fourteen to fifteen. The examples function as illustrations and
anecdotes to the conceptual model being built rather than as data points to be analyzed.

5
In the United States process drama was propounded as early as the 1930s with Winifred Ward’s book Creative
Dramatics that proposes much the same notion of a non-performance approach to drama. However, for historical reasons
that are beyond the scope of this paper, this rapidly reverted to theatre for children in many places, and the main thrust
and study of drama as an educational process was more significantly developed in the United Kingdom.

31
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Co-Creation and Collaboration

Process drama powerfully enacts Lave and Wenger’s (1991) presentation of learning as a
contextualized, social process of knowledge co-construction. This collaborative learning process
helps us use situated practice to develop multiliteracies awareness and skills in a community of
inquiry where context, intention, negotiation, and the co-existence of multiple meanings and
possibilities become richly salient. The teacher uses a theme from a curricular area and works on
discovery and knowledge building with students, drawing from both real-world and imagined
sources. For example, exploring prejudice and power in the context of Nazi oppression of Jews in
World War Two, students role-played from Anne Frank’s perspective (the teacher’s choice) as
well as from the perspectives of fictitious characters, for example, non-Jewish neighbours’
confusion and torn loyalties, a Nazi soldier’s torment at turning on his friends, and Anne’s modern-
day Singaporean pen-friend (moving the drama into a non-real temporal frame). Other students
developed a parallel drama based on digital and print texts and images of the Rwandan genocide.
In doing this, they broadened their exploration of race-relations, oppression, and politics using
multiple modes and sources of information. This process strongly nurtures openness (creativity) as
well as flexibility and resilience in working with the ambiguities and contradictions of multiple
perspectives (adaptivity).

Mantle-of-the-Expert and Positioning: Multiple Perspectives

Role playing, the engine that drives dramatic exploration, engages situated practice and critical
framing as we work in and out of role to integrate our perspectives with perspectives from imagined
contexts and roles. In the Mantle-of-the-Expert approach (Bolton and Heathcote 1995), students
learn by being and doing as “experts” in role, situated in real and imagined contexts in a shared
exploration of multiple roles and perspectives. Here, they have full agency in learning. Through
role-play, they entered and adopted the perspectives of people connected with the topic. They
explored current conflicts and genocides dramatically across time or in their own contexts of local
race tensions. By playing multiple roles students were able to critically frame these different
perspectives in relation to each other, and move from pre-conceived black and white assumptions
and judgments to a more nuanced understanding of how ideology and group-think affect race
relations. This dynamic, embodied critical framing develops our ability to accept and work with
diverse viewpoints. Thus, we develop cognitive and affective flexibility and resilience in tolerating
multiple perspectives and, hence, ambiguity.

Improvisation and Emergence

The improvisation process in collaborative, role-playing facilitates emergent learning, engaging

students in critical framing and transformed practice. Improvisation demands a strong integration
of creative capacities, i.e. open exploration within precise structures and parameters (Berliner
1987; Gershon 2002; Leinhardt and Greeno 1986; Sawyer 2004). We must be adaptive in working
with uncertainty and unpredictability, adjusting pathways depending on discoveries emerging as
we work. We, therefore, must pay mindful attention to what is emerging while, at the same time,
transposing, querying, and constructing new ideas as needed.
For example, in an improvised scene, students converged time-lines putting Anne Frank into
conversation with a school boy in the 1964 Singapore race riots, as well as with fictitious students
in immediate contexts of school bullying. This improvisation allowed students to critically
examine assumptions and intentions around the themes of race, power, and politics, both
historically as well as in local, contemporary settings. In these co-constructive improvisations,
students also practiced group skills, learning to listen and make offers, to debate and champion

32
 DIAS: PROCESS DRAMA FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING: BUILDING MULTILITERACIES

ideas, to concede to group decisions, and explore from multiple perspectives. The demands for
constant contextualization and knowledge sharing as different pieces of real and fictitious
information developed their understanding of the ideas being explored. Improvising scenes
between Jews and non-Jewish neighbours surfaced ideas of fear and crowd mentality students had
not previously anticipated, prompting new research and perspectives.

Feedback and Reflection

Feedback and reflection through explorations in- and out-of-role are integral in activating
discovery and knowledge construction. This strongly engages both critical framing in questioning
from different perspectives and transformed practice in changing thought and action. Students
listen, watch, comment, and reflect on themselves and each other from multiple perspectives in
role-play, and as themselves. For example in Hot-Seating6, a student playing a young German
officer was questioned about thoughts, contexts, and motivations. This reflection in-role revealed
the disconnect between outer actions of harsh duty and an inner tension of conflicting loyalties,
ethics, and fear. Students realized how what we see is often complicated by hidden and
unarticulated explanations. In Still Images7, students built tableaux of critical moments or ideas, so
externalizing and visualizing thoughts and assumptions about historical events. In reflecting on
tableaux on oppression, fear, and courage, students developed metacognition of the semiotics of
spatial and body language and the assumptions we make in response. We also reflected in and out
of role through journals, letters, or drawing. These processes of revelation and re-construction build
metacognition about the fluidity of ideas, perspectives, and identities, and the many different
modes through which we access and construct meaning.
Feedback and reflection are hallmarks of exploratory learning and innovation in all domains
and are critical life-long learner skills (Argryis 2003; Argryis and Schon 1996; Boud, Keogh, and
Walker 1985; Dewey 1933; Kolb and Kolb, 2005). Kolb defines learning as “the process whereby
knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (Kolb 1984, 38). Kolb’s model of
Experiential Learning is congruent to process drama in moving from Experience (imaginative role
playing) to Reflection (in-role and out of role), to Generalizing (developing and synthesizing
meaning), and Testing (using discoveries in and out of role to move the drama forward).
At the Reflection phase, process drama’s unique use of reflection in multiple roles makes us
query fundamental values and assumptions. This then shifts us into double-loop learning. Argryis
(2003) explains double-loop learning as a shift toward new knowledge construction, which is
contrasted to single-loop learning where we work within established knowledge structures, values,
and assumptions. In Piagetian terms, we assimilate information in congruence with existing
knowledge structures. Double-loop learning, in contrast, queries and changes what we know
according to the emerging situation. We accommodate new information, de-constructing
assumptions and building new knowledge structures. When this happens, we engage in
transformed practice. Multiple role exploration in process drama, thus, creates a mechanism for
powerful transformed practice. This conscious interaction of experience and prior knowledge
builds metacognition, which is a valuable capacity for developing multiliteracies skills and
buliding new knowledge.
None of the above intersecting principles would be half as effective if not for the unique
integration of overt instruction in process drama. Overt instruction facilitates collaborative role-

6
Hot-seating is a drama structure where one student answers questions while in role, from the perspective of a character.
The questions are asked by the class either in role as other characters or out of role as themselves.
7
Still Images is a drama structure where students working in groups use their own bodies to capture a moment, an idea,
or a situation.

33
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

playing, improvisation, and reflection and helps develop metacognitive skills for multiliteracies.
Working in and out of role, the teacher instrumentally moves the drama process into double-loop
learning that constructs new understanding and knowledge. The dramatic-reflective process is
intensified as a result of engaging in multiple roles and perspectives, giving students an acute and
explicit design awareness of how meaning is subjective, depending on multiple factors of identity,
intention, and interaction.
The centrality of co-construction, improvisation, and role-play in process drama powerfully
involves students in multimodal design (working with different text-types and media), which is
fundamental to developing multiliteracies. The flexibility and student-centeredness of process
drama enables us to use print and digital media, accessing linguistic, visual, audio, physical, and
gestural semiotic patterns to explore, interpret, reflect, and express ideas. We can integrate real and
digital worlds using websites, wikis, podcasts, blogs and other social networking tools 8 . As
exploration commences, students and teachers collaboratively reach for different modes, as
needed, to explore ideas. This helps us differentiate learning across students’ preferred modalities
and interests. At the same time, this also helps students interact with multiple text-types and
communication forms, thus developing multiliteracies skills and metacognition of how meaning is
shaped and communicated in different ways.
For example, in exploring the Nazi oppression of Jews, students role-played, researched, and
expressed discoveries and ideas using printed and digital texts, (paper letters and journals, emails,
blogs), and art work. They made soundscape collages comprising footsteps and other sounds of
hiding while soldiers searched a home, of crowds rioting and gunfire, superimposing these with
their own written narration; they found songs in contemporary pop culture that reflected some of
the ideas about power and prejudice they were exploring. In other projects, Carroll and Cameron
(2003) describe a process drama using the interactivity of websites, e-mail, blogs, and video to
facilitate an exploration of the history of the Dutch East India Company through the fictitious
Australian Netherlands Marine Research Centre. Davis (2006) also used similar multiple digital
modes to facilitate a drama about a missing girl called Cleo.

Conclusion
The above analysis demonstrates the relevance of process drama for teaching and learning in the
21st century. Process drama could be a powerful way to realize a design pedagogy that nurtures
multiliteracies and prepare students to be both creative and adaptive. Overt instruction within
collaborative, reflective improvisational role-playing engages students in critical framing and
transformed practice. At the same time, process drama integrates seemingly opposing qualities
like precision and attention to accuracy with openness and flexibility in working with multiple
possibilities and differences. In thus integrating cognitive-affective sense-making in a dialogic
design process, process drama equips students with agility and resilience to navigate the complex
knowledge age in which they live and work. At the same time, it also offers an organic way of
integrating and embedding multiple technological modes and tools into the teaching and learning
process. Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21), a United States based organization that
focuses on developing twenty-first century readiness, highlights creativity, critical thinking,
communication, and collaboration, as essential for twenty-first century learners (P21, 2012). In

8 See, for example, a process drama that was initiated by a blog text and involved students in an authentic investigation to
find a missing character interacting with actors who behind the scenes (in cyberspace) mediated the emerging story the
students’ reflections and actions created. See www.cleo-missing.com

34
 DIAS: PROCESS DRAMA FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING: BUILDING MULTILITERACIES

developing multiliteracies through process drama, we engage students in developing these four
skills areas.
We need more research on targeted areas of process drama implementation to improve
the case this paper makes for process drama as a promising approach for developing multiliteracies
and effective pedagogy for twenty-first century learning. We must further define the extent to
which process drama may be applied in formal educational contexts. Which specific subjects and
topics are best suited for this approach? How can we best include process drama in formal school
curricula? What are the implications for teacher education and professional development? What
training will enable teachers to facilitate exploratory, student-centered learning using process
drama? And, most importantly, how can process drama better integrate the burgeoning array of
digital tools ubiquitous in our students’ lives?
John Dewey (1897) spoke of the impulse to learn throughout one’s life. This attitude has never
been more important than it is now. The mindsets we nurture will determine whether our students
feel limited and afraid of this rapidly changing world or see their interaction with the world as
challenging but full of opportunities. Process drama might well be a learning mode that can make
a difference as to whether students approach their work and lives seeing opportunities and
connection rather than barriers and divisions.
It, therefore, seems a shame that process drama is under-utilized in spite of its potential for
highly motivating and relevant experiential learning processes. Currently, process drama is
delivered in schools by teaching artists, often in after school settings, and sometimes by teachers
in formal curriculum time. For the most part, process drama has had more play in second-language
teaching contexts, helping learners develop language facility through meaningful construction of
meaning (Di Pietro 1982; Kao and O’Neill, 1998). Yet, even here, the use of process drama tends
to be limited to teacher-directed, short exercises focusing on smaller units of language rather than
global sense-making skills (Kao and O’Neill 1998) and the developmental needs underpinning
multiliteracies.
If we are to effectively address education’s mission in the knowledge era, we should address
this gap between process drama’s potential for multiliteracies and learning capacity development.
Clearly, further research to gather more empirical data, specifically on outcomes of process drama
instruction based on a design pedagogy, will help establish more clearly what drama practitioners
know experientially. However, it is not the case that we lack evidence entirely; we do, in fact, have
robust evidence for the power of the arts in general to motivate and engage students toward success
(See for example, Catterall 2009; Edmiston 1991; Henry 2000; Hovda and Kyle, 1997; Inner City
Arts, 2000; Werner 2002). Undoubtedly, drama and arts integration seem daunting or impractical,
given the systemic, economic, and environmental realities in many of our schools. We are severely
challenged by massive legacy problems from the transmission model of education that worked
well through most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries but is now woefully incongruent with
the world and future demands being made on our children. To persist in pedagogies rooted in an
incongruent past is to ignore impending reality. Our future requires that we teach children to thrive
in complexity and that we nurture adaptive creativity and multiliteracy skills. The glaring fact
remains that twenty-first century education can no longer ignore pedagogy that addresses and
facilitates the development of skills critical for sustainable lives.
As educators, we reach out and touch the future. We make a difference today to our students’
intentions and actions tomorrow. Given the highly inter-connected lives we lead, we do not merely
teach our students to succeed academically in school; we prepare them to be responsible citizens.
Thoreau wrote that engaging in civic life demands that we make “an effort to throw off sleep” so
that we may “live deliberately” rather than lead “lives of quiet desperation” (Thoreau 1854/2004,
66). Today, civic life encompasses the whole world, and a highly diverse, complex, and rapidly
changing world at that. If our students are to live deliberately, they must be multiliterate in working
with multiple and shifting meanings that swirl about us as combinations of text, image, movement,

35
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

and sound. They must also be resilient in the face of change. They must have agency in navigating
challenges and opportunities so they remain life-long learners, able to sustain and develop their
multiliteracies as the world about them changes. Process drama is a design-based pedagogy that
nurtures these complex and inter-related skills. In offering effective pathways for developing
multiliteracies, process drama, is no longer merely a desirable extra for privileged children, but a
critical right of all children that we cannot afford to ignore.

36
 DIAS: PROCESS DRAMA FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING: BUILDING MULTILITERACIES

REFERENCES
Anderson, Michael and Kate Donelan. 2009. “Drama in Schools: Meeting the Research Challenges
of the Twenty-First Century.” Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied
Theatre and Performance, 14(2): 165 – 171.
Anstey, Michele. and Geoff Bull. 2006. Teaching and Learning Multiliteracies. Delaware, USA:
International Reading Association.
Argryis, Chris. 2003. “A Life Full of Learning.” Organizational Studies 24(7): 1178-1192.
Argyris, Chris, and Donald Schön. 1996. Organizational learning II. Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1982. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Edited by Michael Holquist.
Translated by Vadim Liapunov and Kenneth Brostrom. Austin, TX: University of Texas
Press.
Banathy, Bela. H. 1996. Designing Social Systems in a Changing World. NY: Plenum Press.
Banathy, Bela. H. 2000. Guided Evolution of Society: A Systems View. NY: Plenum Press.
Barthes, Roland. 1975. S/Z: An Essay . Translated by Richard Miller. London: Cape,.
Berliner, David C. 1987. “Ways of Thinking About Students and Classrooms by More and Less
Experienced Teachers.” In Exploring Teachers’ Thinking, edited by James Calderhead,
60–83. London: Cassell Education Limited.
Bolton, Gavin. 1984. Drama as Education. London: Longman.
Bolton, Gavin and Dorothy Heathcote. 1995. Drama for Learning: Dorothy Heathcote's Mantle of
the Expert Approach to Education. New Hampshire: Heinemann.
Boud, David, Rosemary Keogh, and David Walker. 1985. Reflection: Turning Experience into
Learning. New York: Routledge.
Brown, John Seely. 2010. “Foreword.” In Education in the Creative Economy: Knowledge and
Learning in the Age of Innovation, edited by Daniel Araya and Michael A. Peters, ix-xii.
New York: Peter Lang.
Brown, Ann L., and Joseph C Campione. 1994. “Guided Discovery in a Community of Learners.”
In Classroom Lessons: Integrating Cognitive Theory and Classroom Practice edited by
Kate McGilly, 229 – 272. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bruner, Jerome. 1990. Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Catterrall, James. 2009. Doing Well and Doing Good by Doing Art: A 12-Year Longitudinal Study
of Arts Education. Effects on the Achievements and Values of Young Adults. Los Angeles,
CA: I-Group Books.
Carroll, John. and David Cameron. 2003. “To the Spice Islands: Interactive Process Drama.” Fine
Art Forum, 17(8).
Cazden, Courtney. 2000. “Taking Cultural Differences into Account.” In Multiliteracies: Literacy
Learning and the Design of Social Futures, edited by Bill Cope and Mary Kalantzis, 249-
266. London: Routledge.
Cope, Bill. and Mary Kalantzis. 2000. “Introduction.” In Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and
the Design of Social Futures, edited by Bill Cope and Mary Kalantzis, 3 – 8. London:
Routledge.
Crumpler, Thomas P. 2003. “Becoming Dragons and Pirates: The Possibilities of Using Process
Drama with Literature To Reimagine Young Children's Writing Instruction.” New
Advocate, 16(1): 17 – 27.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. 1996. Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention.
New York: Harper Collins.
Darling-Hammond, Linda. 2010. The Flat World and Education: How America’s Commitment to
Equity will Determine Our Future. New York: Teachers College Press.

37
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Davis, Sue. 2006. “Cyberdrama: Exploring possibilities.” Drama Australia Journal, 30(1): 91–
103.
Dewey, John. 1897. “My Pedagogic Creed.” The School Journal 44(3): 77-80.
Dewey, John. 1933. How We Think. A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the
Educative Process. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Di Pietro, Robert J. 1982. “The Open-Ended Scenario: A New Approach to Conversation.” TESOL
Quarterly, 16(1): 15-20.
Drucker, Peter. 1996. Landmarks of Tomorrow. 2nd ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
Publishers.
Edmiston, Brian W. 1991. “What Have You Travelled? A Teacher-Researcher Study of
Structuring Drama for Reflection.” PhD Dissertation., Ohio State University.
Edmiston, Brian W. 2007. “Mission to Mars: Using Drama to Make a More Inclusive Classroom
for Literacy Learning.” Language Arts, 84(4): 337-346.
Edmiston, Brian W., and Jeffrey D Wilhelm. 1998. “Repositioning Views/ Reviewing Positions:
Forming Complex Understandings in Dialogue.” In Educational Drama and Language
Arts: What Research Shows, edited by Betty Jane Wagner, 90-117. Portsmouth, New
Hampshire: Heinemann.
Flintoff, Kate. 2009. “Second Life/Simulation. Online Sites for Generative Play. In Drama
Education with Digital Technology, edited by Michael Anderson, John Carroll, and David
Cameron, 202 – 221. London: Continuum Press.
Florida, Richard. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class and How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure,
and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
Freire, Paolo and Donaldo Macedo. 1987. Literacy: Reading the Word and the World. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Gershon, Walter S. 2002. Improvisation: A Theoretical Lens for Classroom Observation.
Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Riverside.
Gee, James P. 1996. Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. London: Taylor
and Francis.
Gee, James P. 2000. “New People in New Worlds: Networks, the New Capitalism and Schools.”
In Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures, edited by Bill
Cope and Mary Kalantzis, 43 – 68. London: Routledge.
Habermas, Jurgen. 1996. “Modernity: An Unfinished Project.” In Habermas and the Unfinished
Project of Modernity, edited by Maurizio P. Dentreves and Seyla Benhabib, 39-55.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Henry, Mallika. 2000. Drama’s Way of Learning. Research in Drama Education, 5(1): 45-62.
Hovda, Ric. A. and Diane W. Kyle. 1997. Different Ways of Knowing. Study B: Research and
Evaluation Project. Louisville, KY: The Galef Institute – Kentucky Collaborative for
Teaching and Learning.
Inner-City Arts. 2000. Arts for Language and Learning Project (Project ALL) Evaluation Report.
Los Angeles, CA: Inner-City Arts.
Jarvis, Peter. 2000. “Globalization, the Learning Society and Comparative Education.”
Comparative Education 36(3): 343–355.
Kao, Shin-Mei and Cecily O'Neill.1998. Words into Worlds: Learning a Second Language
Through Process Drama. Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Kolb, David A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and
Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kolb, Alice Y. and David A Kolb. 2005. “Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing
Experiential Learning in Higher Education.” Academy of Management Learning and
Education, 4(2): 193–212.

38
 DIAS: PROCESS DRAMA FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING: BUILDING MULTILITERACIES

Lave, Jean and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leinhardt, Gaea and James G Greeno. 1986. “The Cognitive Skill of Teaching.” Journal of
Educational Psychology, 78(2): 75–95.
Lipman-Blumen, Jean. 1996. Connective Leadership: Managing in a Changing World. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Luke, Allan. 2000. “Critical Literacy in Australia: A Matter of Context and Standpoint.” Journal
of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43(5): 448-461.
Luke, Allan and Peter Freebody. 2000. Literate Futures: Report of the Review for Queensland
State Schools. Brisbane, Australia: Education Queensland.
Lyotard, Jean-Francois. 1984. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Translated by
Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Mantle of the Expert. Pieces of Dorothy. Retrieved 15th April, 2012 from
http://www.mantleoftheexpert.com/film-and-video/dh-video-archive/pieces-of-dorothy/
McCaslin, Nellie. 2006. Creative Drama in the Classroom and Beyond. Boston: MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). 2008. “The NCTE Definition of 21st Century
Literacies”. National Council of Teachers of English. Retrieved May 4th 2011 from
www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition
Neelands, Jonathan. 2009. “Acting Together: Ensemble as a Democratic Process in Art and Life.”
Research In Drama Education, 14(2): 173-189.
New London Group. 1996. “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.” Harvard
Educational Review, 66(1): 60-92.
New London Group. 2000. “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies Designing Social Futures.” In
Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures, edited by Bill Cope
and Mary Kalantzis, 9 - 37. London: Routledge.
O'Neill, Cecily. 1995. Drama Worlds: A Framework for Process Drama. Portsmouth: New
Hampshire: Heinemann.
O'Neill, Cecily and Alan Lambert. 1982. Drama Structures: A Practical Handbook for Teachers.
Portsmouth: New Hampshire: Heinemann.
O’Toole, John., Madonna Stinson, and Tiina Moore. 2009. Drama and Curriculum: A Giant at the
Door. Dordrecht: Springer.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. 2012. Framework for 21st Century Learning. Retrieved March
20 from http://www.p21.org/overview/skills-framework.
Peters, Michael A. and Daniel Araya. 2010. “Introduction.” In Education in the Creative Economy:
Knowledge and Learning in the Age of Innovation, edited by Daniel Araya and Michael
A. Peters, xiii-xxx. New York: Peter Lang.
Robinson, Ken. 2001. Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Oxford, UK: Capstone
Publishing.
Sawyer, R. Keith. 2004. “Creative Teaching: Collaborative Discussion as Disciplined
Improvisation.” Educational Researcher, 33(2): 12-20
Schneider, Jenifer J., Thomas P. Crumpler, and Theresa Rogers. 2006. Process Drama and
Multiple Literacies: Addressing Social, Cultural and Ethical Issues. Portsmouth, New
Hampshire: Heinemann.
Thoreau, Henry David. 1854/2004. Walden: A Fully Annotated Education, edited by Jeffrey S.
Cramer. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Thwaites, Trevor. 1999. “Multiliteracies: A New Direction for Arts Education” Australian
Association for Research in Education. Retrieved April 11th 2012 from
http://www.aare.edu.au/99pap/thw99528.htm

39
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Tracey, Diane H., Alex W. Storer, and Sohrob Kazerounian. 2010. “Cognitive Processing
Perspectives on the New Literacies. In The New Literacies: Multiple Perspectives on
Research and Practice, edited by Elizabeth A. Baker. New York: Guildford Press.
Unsworth, Len. 2001. Teaching Multiliteracies Across the Curriculum: Changing Contexts of Text
and Image in Classroom Practice. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Vygotsky, Lev. 1978. Mind in Society. London: Harvard University Press.
Villeneuve, Pat. 2003. “Why Not Visual Culture?” Arts Education, 56(2): 4 – 5.
Wagner, Betty Jane. 1998. Educational Drama and Language Arts: What Research Shows.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Werner, Linnette R. 2002. Artist, Teacher, and School Change Through Arts for Academic
Achievement: Artists Reflect on Long Term Partnering as a Means of Achieving Change.
Minneapolis, MN: Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Shamini Dias, PhD: Shamini is a researcher and Director of the Preparing Future Faculty program
at Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California. Her research focuses on imagination and
adaptive capacity as a core skill for learning in the 21st century, specifically in the development of
literacy and information literacy skills in a knowledge economy. She has a transdisciplinary
research interest in exploring meaning-making processes integrating research in art, mindfulness,
positive psychology, and literature. Shamini has also been an education consultant in Singapore,
working with schools and businesses to advocate and develop creative approaches to literacy,
communication, thinking, and leadership development. Between 1997 and 2001, she was the
Director of the Written Language Arts programme, and Director for Curriculum and Publishing at
the Julia Gabriel Speech & Drama Centre, Singapore. Shamini has presented workshops on
creative approaches to literacy, leadership, and life skills at regional conferences for the
International Reading Association, Singapore and LitCon, Malaysia, as well as at international
conferences for NAEYC (National Association of the Education of Young Children), ACEI
(Association for Childhood Education International), the American Educational Research
Association (AERA), and the Imaginative Education Research Group (IERG).

40
 Learning English as Foreign Language in
Indonesia through English Children’s Literature
Leni Marlina, State University of Padang, Indonesia

Abstract:In order to improve learning English as foreign language (EFL) in the developing country such as Indonesia,
English teachers need to integrate children’s literature in teaching and learning process. Despite children’s literature is
sometimes stereotyped as books for young learners only, the use of English children’s literature for teaching EFL at
secondary schools has many benefits for the adolescent students. The aim of this paper is to discuss: (1) the importance
of utilizing English children’s literature; (2) the types of English children’s literature which can be used in teaching; and
(3) the implementation of integrating English children’s literature into EFL classroom. The main reason to use English
children’s literature in EFL classroom according to Hismanoglu (2005) is that because it has valuable authentic
material, cultural enrichment, language enrichment and personal involvement. The implementation of integrating English
children’s literature has to consider two main factors: selection of the literary texts and teaching implementation. The
model of teaching by using children’s literature can use a certain format which suggested by Richard-Amato and Snow
(2005), it is framed as a sequence of Into, Thought, and Beyond (ITB). Into is the step that occurs before reading. On the
stage of Into, a teacher attempts to make students interested in the text upon preparation of many resources. Thought is
the step when students are ready to read the literary works. On the stage of Thought, it requires the way to engage the
class to a story by reading aloud and having expression. Beyond is the step where students can do activities to extend the
appreciation of the work. In improving student’s English learning capacity, the model of ITB will strongly need to be
supported by Literature Circle which is design to be able use both in and outside classroom.

Keywords: Teaching English as Foreign Language, Children’s Literature

Introduction: English as Foreign Language (EFL) in Indonesia

I n Indonesia, as well as many other countries, it is necessary for students to learn at least three
languages. They are mother language, national language and appropriate foreign language.
English has been taught and used as a foreign language in Indonesia over sixty five years.
Jayadi (2004) points out that English as a foreign language is being made as a compulsory
subject in secondary schools throughout Indonesia in 1945 soon after the Indonesian
Independence Day, August 17, 1945. Meanwhile at Indonesian primary schools, formal ELT
education began since early nineties and English has been taught at primary schools students
starting in Grade Four as a local curriculum only (Cahyono and Widiati 2004). However, the
recent policy of curriculum Indonesia (curriculum 2013) has just removed English at elementary
school in order to increase Indonesian students’s awareness and ability to study their national
language.
There have been at least eight curriculum reforms that have been introduced and
implemented in Indonesia secondary schools until nowadays. Despite these efforts most
Indonesian students still face the same issues in English learning. Most of students are far than
successful in both and in oral and written English (Nur, 2004), unless those who take extra
English course outside the formal classroom. Lie (2007:1) also insists the same issue and she
points out “In spite of the many years of English instruction in formal schooling, the outcome has
not been satisfying. Very few high school graduates are able to communicate intelligibly in
English.” The similar issue in the teaching of English as foreign language encountered in
Indonesia also probably happens in other countries where English is taught as foreign language.
Ho (2004:3) suggests that the term of English as foreign language (EFL) and English as
second language (ESL) sometimes can be used interchangeably. In the general contact of
teaching English in most of Indonesians schools, the term of EFL is more appropriate than ESL
because the EFL learning refers to the situation where the learners are learning English in context

The International of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, thelearner.com, ISSN: 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Leni Marlina, All Rights Reserved
Permissions:cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

where English as a target language is not uncommon within the society in which the learners are
living.This situation is different with Indonesian neighbor countries such Malaysia and Singapore
in which they regard English as a second language. Since there is increasing number of
international schools in many cities in Indonesia recently and since there are more learners are
situated in a context where English has a communicative function in urban areas, the term of ESL
is also probably appropriate for those learners. However, EFL is the most appropriate term in
Indonesian contexts until nowadays.
One of the most challenging tasks constantly faced by EFL teachers is how to empower or
enable their students in studying English. Also, the teachers are expected to capture the interest
and stimulate the imagination of their students so that they will be more motivated to learn. Oura
(2010) states that there is currently a wide array of teaching materials available to ESL and EFL
teachers to accommodate student’s various study needs and empower them in studying. Many of
these materials are commercially produced and can be authentic teaching materials. Nunan
(1999) defines authentic materials as spoken or written language data that has been produced in
the course of genuine communication, and not specifically written for the purposes of language
teaching. One of the authentic materials which can empower students in studying English is
literary texts.
Additionally, Brown (2004) states that typically in an EFL or ESL context literary texts are
mostly taught to advanced level for university students or other high level adults’ proficiency. It
is no surprise that the use of literary texts as part of authentic texts are likely absent in the EFL
curricula of secondary schools in Indonesia. This occurs probably because students seem to lack
the grammar and cultural knowledge necessary to understand the complex nature of literary texts.
When presented with canonical literature or text for young adults, many EFL students at EFL
secondary schools can feel overwhelmed, frustrated, discouraged and anxious. In search of other
forms of authentic texts, children’s literature can be accepted by students. Utilizing children’s
literature in EFL classroom of secondary schools will give many benefits for students. Besides
having interesting topics, children’s literature employs simple grammar and vocabulary, colorful
illustrations, and short length, among other characteristics that facilitated comprehension.
In fact, teaching English by using literature especially children’s literature at Indonesian
secondary schools is still neglected. Even though English current curricula has given much
proportion to functions in English, experience and observation as well as research shows that
EFL classrooms in Indonesia still emphasizes on forms. School textbooks in secondary schools
tend to include less literary works as teaching materials. The use of literature in English learning
in schools does not extend to discussions of language use or cross cultural understanding. If
literature is presented, it is usually to model a generic structure for a narrative text. So, teaching
English like nowadays at most of secondary schools in Indonesia is not optimal enough to enable
students to understand English and to practice critical thinking because typically teachers ignore
English children’s literature in the process of teaching and learning.

The Importance of Appropriating Children’s Literature

There are four main reasons which lead an English teacher to use literature included children’s
literature in a foreign language class (Hismanoglu, 2005). They are valuable and authentic
materials, children’s literature has highly cultural enrichment, language enrichment and personal
involvement.

Valuable Authentic Material

Children’s literature is authentic material. Most of works of children’s literature are not created
for the primary purposes of teaching a language. Thus, in a classroom context, learners are
exposed to actual language samples of real life settings. In reading children’s literary text,
secondary school students have to also cope with language intended for native speakers.

42
 MARLINA: LEARNING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN INDONESIA

Therefore, the students become familiar with many different linguistic forms, communicative
functions and meanings. In addition, since children’s literature requires teaching authentic
material, it is good to expose learners to this source of unmodified language in the classroom.
The skills the students acquire in dealing with difficult or unknown language can be used outside
the class.

Motivating Material

Children’s literature is more likely to engage and motivate students than artificial teaching inputs
because it is generated by some genuine impulse of the writer and it deals with subjects and
themes which may be interesting to the students as readers. Furthermore, Rass and Holzman
(2010) in their research show that authentic children’s stories could be very motivating,
enjoyable and effective method of foreign language learning. In addition, it could be used as a
stimulus to increase the learners' participation in EFL classroom language learning activities. In
other word, using children’s stories in EFL classrooms could be a very motivating and
encouraging tool for achieving a positive attitude among the learners as well as their teachers.

Cultural Enrichment

Children’s literature facilitates understanding of methods of communication in the country within

which English is spoken. The world described in tales, short stories or novels is an imaginary
one; it presents a full and colorful setting in which characters from many social or regional
backgrounds can be described. The students can discover the way the characters in such literary
works see the world outside such as their thoughts, feelings, customs, traditions, possession,
belief, fear, how they speak and behave in different settings.

Language Enrichment

Children’s literature provides learners with a wide range of individual lexical or syntactic items.
The students become familiar with many features of written language, reading a substantial and
contextualized body of text. Thus, the students can enrich their writing skills. Smallwood (1998)
explains that children's literature is important for both students at primary and secondary schools
to developed language and literacy skills and content knowledge. In addition, because high
quality children's literature is characterized by economy of words, stunning illustrations,
captivating but quickly moving plots, and universal themes, carefully chosen children’s literature
can offer educational benefits for adult English language learners as well as for children. In
addition to improving reading and writing skills in general, literature presents an excellent source
of vocabulary.

Personal Involvement

Children’s literature can be useful for students’ personal involvement. Once the students read the
literary works, they begin to inhabit the text. They are drawn into the text. The students become
enthusiastic to find out what happens as events unfold culminating in the climax. They feel close
to certain characters and share their emotional responses. Furthermore, children’s literature can
train readers’ mind and sensibility. Children’s literature also has a significant role because it
evokes critical discussion since literature presents problems faced by human beings. In addition,
it is significant to secondary students because of its memorable themes and symbols. The last,
Harvey and Burrows (1992) explains that EFL teachers can empower students by giving them
more control over their own learning. Generally, empowerment means the development of
knowledge, skills and abilities of students to enable them to control and develop their own
learning.

43
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Students’ Language Skills Empowerment

Students’ language skill empowerment means enabling students to gain language skills: reading,
writing, speaking and listening. Children’s literature, compared to adult literature, has arguably
simpler language, fewer lengthy stories, fewer abstract ideas, less complicated themes and offers
just as a wide variety of stories. All of these features were encouraging, especially in boosting
reading confidence. In reading children’s literary text, secondary school students have to cope
with language intended for native speakers. It is good to expose learners to this source of
unmodified language in the classroom because the skills they acquire in dealing with difficult or
unknown language can be used outside the classroom.
Moreover, the natural convergence between literature, language, and culture suggests the use
of children’s literature in the EFL curriculum. In an EFL classroom where mastery of linguistic
and cultural literacy becomes the main attention, children’s literature can be suitable material for
literacy development due to its simple language style, embedded cultural information, and
comfortable length (Chen, 2006).
Furthermore, children’s literature encourages students to reflect on what they read and to
share their thoughts in writing, thus developing their writing skills. When students read
children’s literature, they are exposed to horizons of possibility. They raise questions, recognize
problems and look for causes and solutions, reflect on ideas, and make connections. For that
reason, literature encourages students to talk, thus developing their listening and speaking skills.

Areas of Empowerment in Students’ Language

To empower means to enable students to meet learning objectives. In terms of vocabulary, the
language used in children’s literature shows certain characteristics (Martin, 2009). They are (1)
simple but creatively-built, (2) used in daily casual interaction, and (3) rhythmical. These
features can be represented in various linguistic forms dominantly found in the the texts, such as
specific registers to children and onomatopoeias - the vocabularies derives from the imitation of
the real objects’ sound. Consequently, children’s literature presents an excellent source of
vocabulary. Students absorb the sophisticated words found in books through language activities,
which resulted in a significant improvement in vocabulary.

Students’ Critical Thinking Empowerment

Learning and classroom activities using children’s literature will help the students to provide
stimulating materials for peer interaction, foster co-operation, open up avenues for individual
expression and critical thinking, encourage the faculty of imagination, and increase multicultural
exposure (Hai-yan, 2008). Accordingly, texts in children’s literature are often rich in multiple
layers of meaning, and the text can be effectively used for discussing and sharing feelings or
opinions. This evokes critical discussion since literature presents problems faced by human
beings. In doing so, students are expected to be aware of not only how to use English correctly
and appropriately, but also to engage their mind critically.

The Types of Children’s Literature Which Can be Used in Teaching English

at Secondary Schools
Hancock (2000:5) defines children’s literature as ‘literature that appeals to the interests, needs,
and reading preferences of children and captivates children as its major audience’. However,
adults can be sometimes as part of that audience for certain purposes. The term children’s
literature is not like what many people assume that children’s literature means picture books

44
 MARLINA: LEARNING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN INDONESIA

only. Children's literature can be divided in many ways. Basically, children’s literature can be
classified into four categories. They are books written by children, books written for children,
books chosen for children and books chosen by children. The most suitable definition of
children’s literature for secondary school students are books written for children. In addition,
children’s literature can be also categorized based on its genre. Typically, children’s literature is
divided into prose and poetry. Genres in prose include nonfiction and fiction. Furthermore, Hunt
(1994) states that children’s literature encompasses stories, rhymes, poetry and plays. The stories
are the most popular genre used in EFL classroom.
I argue that the most appropriate of children’s literature for the beginner level at secondary
schools are picture books, because pictures can speak louder than words. Putri (2007) claims that
‘picture books are outstanding ones that can carry the readers beyond the plain and the literal
sense towards the more intangible and visible concepts and ideas.’ Both of picture books and
other types of children’s literature with fewer pictures or without picture at all are suitable for
secondary school students who have different level of ability or proficiency.
Moreover, the other form of appropriate children’s literature for the intermediate level at
secondary schools is short stories. Tseng (2010) claims that the choice of short stories is the most
students’ favorite literary genre among other genres such as novels, poems, and plays. Short story
is very useful to improve students’ vocabulary and reading.The short stories have a variety of
choice for different interests and tastes. Even more, short stories can be used with all levels (from
beginner to advance level), all ages (from young learners to adults) and all classes. Furthermore,
they also can be powerful and motivating source for writing in EFL, both as a model and as
subject of subject matter. In addition, the short story can be a powerful and motivating source for
teaching both speaking and listening.
In this paper, I will discuss two kinds of short stories as literary texts which can be used in
EFL classroom. The short stories I mean are folktales and short fictions.

Folktales

Folktales are the oldest spiritual companion of people. Very long ago folktales have been short
and with simple structure but with the time passing they have become longer, richer, complicated
stories. They have always been a source of moral values, a kind of religion, philosophy, and
science. They have always enchanted and fascinated children as well as adults. There are many
kinds of folktales such as the list below.

1. Fables: animal stories

2. Folktales of the sea
3. Starlore: tales of the night sky
4. Story feast: folktales about food
5. A garden of stories: folktales about plants
6. Folktale heroes
7. Myths from around the world
8. Folktales of feathered friends (bird stories)
9. Gender and story (strong women/ men)
10. Tales of the supernatural (ghost stories)
11. The flowing story (water in myth, legend, sea stories)
12. Geographical studies through folktales (India, Arctic, Africa, Asia, America,
etc.)
13. Rites of passage (tales of childhood)
14. Tales of peace & war
15. Journeys: folkloric travel
16. Tales of clothing (magical shoes, caps of invisibility, changing clothes
17. Big and small: stories about size (giant tales, miniature characters)

45
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

18. Topography tales such as frost and fantasy in Artic, jungle expedition in global
tropic, and story of desert.

Short Fictions

Fictions can be classified into some genres. Some of them which can be used in ELF context are
science fiction, crime story, love story and realistic story. Most of these fictions are written in
novel genre, but a few of them are also available in the form of short stories. For that reason,
these short stories are not appropriate for students who still have low English proficiency. Firstly,
science fiction plots commonly explore ideas like space travel, cloning, time travel, or aliens.
Science fiction is a genre of fiction in which its plots commonly explores imaginary but more or
less plausible content such as space travel, cloning, time travel, or aliens. One purpose of science
fiction is exploring the consequences of scientific innovations by employing various fictional
elements.
Secondly, crime story is also called mystery. Crime story is usually distinguished from
mainstream fiction and other genres such as science fiction, but boundaries can be, and indeed
are, blurred. Its plots always involve characters trying to discover a vital piece of information
which is kept hidden until the climax. Unlike some literary fiction, the crime story retains many
of the time-honoured techniques of fiction character, theme, narrative, and tension.
Thirdly, a realistic story is a story that can actually happen in real life. Realistic fiction is
basically just showing real characters dealing with real problems, which may not be true at all
times and could take place in the past, present or the future. Realistic fiction is mostly set in
modern and present times. It can also have a historical setting - events usually have something to
do with an important historical event, characters will be ordinary, believable people.

Integrating Children’s Literature in EFL Classroom

Selection of Children’s Literature

Tseng (2010) states that to maximize the benefits of literature teaching in language classrooms,
selection of literary text is a crucial issue. Selection of literary texts should partly depend on the
target students’ needs and preferences. Criteria for literature selection generally involve two
aspects: students and the text itself. Regarding the students, the literary text selected should
consider the students’ tastes, interests and. The selected text should also consider the students’
linguistic proficiency, cultural background, and literary background. Additionally, Chen (2006)
mentions that when a teacher faces numerous literature resources, selection becomes the first and
foremost issue. To choose appropriate materials for EFL students, generally an English teacher
needs to take three important factors into consideration: language, content, and length.
First, the language of literature text should not be stylized, dialectal, or otherwise difficult.
This does not mean simplifying the text by limiting the length of sentences or the number of
words within the text. The text should be simple but it does not kill readers’ interest. Second, the
good content of literature should involve the readers at three levels: personal, cultural, and
universal. Priority must be placed on stories that enable the students to relate their own
experiences and feelings to the reading. The students’ interests and backgrounds may influence
their responses to and comprehension of the stories. Third, length is another important element in
choosing literature. The story should be short but long enough to stimulate students’ interests and
feelings.

Implement Model of ITB (Into, Thought, and Beyond)

Once children’s literature has been selected, the teacher, supplied with strategies and methods,
begins lesson planning. The model of teaching by using children literature can use a certain

46
 MARLINA: LEARNING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN INDONESIA

format suggested by Richard-Amato and Snow (2005), it is framed as a sequence of Into,

Thought, and Beyond (ITB). ITB model is easy to be remembered, fits well with the reading and
writing process, and allows for great adaptation.

Into

Into is the step that occurs before reading. During Into, the teacher draws upon many resources to
be prepared and make students interested in the text. There are some activities can be done such
as using illustration, pre-teaching vocabulary, introducing theme and talking cultural background.
On Into step, the teacher may need to first explain and justify the use of tale or story. The story is
then briefly introduced, key vocabulary is previewed, and some key illustrations or characters
may be highlighted. The students are invited to predict the story from the illustrations and other
clues. These motivational strategies involve the students in the story and help them to connect
with the story, other experiences, and literary or real-life.

Thought

Thought is the step which is followed when students are ready to read the work. The way to
engage a class with a story is to read aloud with expression. The teacher can also use the
following strategies: move slowly around the room; take time to show the pictures; modify the
language of the text as needed to facilitate comprehension; and pause occasionally for dramatic
effect, to highlight new words or concepts, or to check for comprehension. Furthermore, there are
some activities during reading such as using a variety of ways to read, sustaining reading, total
physical response, following characters and their voice, and vocabulary assistance. During
Thought, there is no passive activity but an interactive one. To comprehend and appreciate a
work, the students need to follow an event sequence, recognize foreshadowing, distinguish
flashback, visualize the setting, analyze characters and motive, experience the mood,
comprehend the theme and symbols. Moreover, the students need activities to aid them in these
tasks. The teacher may select passages for in-depth discussion and analysis, help the students to
draw attention to the significant features and issues in the work.

Beyond

Beyond is the step which enable the students to do various activities in order to extend the
appreciation of the works. This step is also called post-reading activity. The student’s activities in
this step are to check quick comprehension, make a poster or illustrated story, do stimulus for
writing, and do role play or acting out. During Beyond, students traditionally write to clarify their
thinking and deepen understanding. Moreover, the students recall the plot of the short story and
identify the process that furthers the plot. To become successful in writing, students need
opportunities for conferencing and comments on the content of their writing, peer revision
activities, and comprehensible feedback on their attempts to use the new language in academic
ways. Another Beyond activity includes comparing a text with its film representation or
preparing a dramatization based on scenes or ideas from the work. On Beyond step, the teacher
may give different tasks depending on the story and on our aims. The task may include multiple
choices, true or false, guessing the meaning, writing the sentences in the correct order, and
answering the questions about the story.

Implementation by Using Literature Circle

To empower the students, the teacher also has to ask students to read children’s literature texts as
homework and to come to class prepared to discuss the story. Sometimes students are very

47
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

resistant to this type of assigned reading and whole class discussion. To anticipate this condition,
the introduction of Literature Circle is required.
According to Furr (2010) Literature Circle is small student reading groups which provide a
specific framework allowing EFL students to have meaningful discussions about literature in
English. It is fun and focused classroom-based student reading and discussion groups which
naturally combine the skills of reading, writing, speaking and listening. Successful EFL
Literature Circles will contain most of the following features. First, the teacher selects reading
materials appropriate for her students. Then, small temporary groups are formed. Different
groups usually read the same text. After the books are finished, readers may prepare a group
project. Next, groups meet to a predictable schedule to discuss their reading. To make this
becomes true, a Role Sheet is needed. The Role Sheets break down the skills of a reader into
smaller, manageable parts so that each member of the group is responsible for one aspect of what
a reader does naturally. The role of students consists of Group Discussion Leader (GDL),
Summarizer, Connector, Word Master (WM), Passage Person (PP) and Cultural Collector (CC).
Each student will have an active role in doing Literature Circle. GDL acts as a facilitator in
the group and to keep the discussion flowing. Summarizer presents the summary early in the
discussion so that everyone can remember the plot of the story. It is important to emphasize that
the summarizer gives a brief, but complete summary of the plot. Connector is to try to find
connections between the text and the real world in which she lives. For example, the Connector
may make connections between the thoughts, feelings or actions of characters in the story and
family members, friends or classmates. While GDL and Summarizer need to read the text and
prepare to discuss the story from a global standpoint, WM focuses on single words or very short
phrases; thus, the WM is doing a very close reading of the text. WM may choose only five words
which he believes to be the most important words found in a story. PP is asked to make a very
close reading of the text and to look for well-written or key passages in the story. CC is to work
with the cultural and historical backgrounds of some of the stories which they had read.
As discussed above, Literature Circle will enable the learners to strengthen their personal
capacity and empower themselves in English learning process. Furthermore, learners who are
following steps of ITB and implementing Literature Circle will have intentional actions in order
to do their role and achieve their goals in studying English through children’s literature. For that
reason, the sense of agency is clearly embedded in each learner who is studying English by using
children’s literature.

Conclusion
Children’s literature appears to be a great means to EFL at Indonesian secondary schools. The
discussion above has focused largely the benefits of using children’s literature on secondary
students’ EFL. However, the content of children’s literature may not necessary reflect the
experience of the secondary students since the children’s literature are written for the younger
ones. On account of this limitation, the use of children’s literature is highly appropriate for those
who are still in the beginner and intermediate levels of English proficiency. For EFL classrooms
which have dominantly student with advanced proficiency are suggested to integrate the selected
texts for young adults (YA) since YA literature may strongly reflect the general experience of
secondary students as teenagers. For this purpose, EFL teachers need to be creative in teaching
English by using texts for young adults. However, the other forms of children’s literature such as
novel and poems still can be highly appropriate for those with advanced level of English.
To repeat, integrating children’s literature in Indonesian EFL secondary classroom gives
large benefit in the process of learning English. In the meantime, the use of children’s literature
in EFl classroom also provides some challenges for teacher. The main challenge for the English
teachers is to select children’s literature which is appropriate to be used in different classroom. I
would like to suggest that the most appropriate type of children’s literature to be used in

48
 MARLINA: LEARNING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN INDONESIA

Indonesian EFL classroom at secondary schools are folktales which consist of various forms and
short fictions. Teacher can adapt the usage of children’s literature as part of authentic materials to
suit the age and language proficiency level of the students. To empower the students in learning
English, the teacher should apply Richard-Amanto and Snow’s model of ITB (Into, Though,
Beyond) at EFL classroom and ask the students to run Literature Circle outside the classroom. To
sum up, the learning practice of EFL in Indonesian secondary schools through English children’s
literature should apply the model of ITB (Into, Though, Beyond) which is supported by Literature
Circle.

49
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

REFERENCES

Brown, E. 2004. “Using Children’s Literature with Young Learners”. TESL Journal, Vol. X, No.
2, February 2004. (Online). http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Brown-Childrens
Lit.htm.Retrieved in July 2010.
Chen, Y. 2006. “Using Children’s Literature for Reading and Writing Stories”. ASIAN EFL
Journal. Vol. 8. No. 4. (Online). www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Dec_06_ymc.php.
Retrieved in January 2010.
Cahyono, B.Y; Widiati, U. 2004. “Introduction”. In BY Cahyono and U Widiati (eds.). The
Tapestry of English Language Teaching and Learning in Indonesia. Malang, Indonesia:
State University of Malang. pp. xi-xxi.
Furr, M. 2010. “How and Why to Use EFL Literature Circles”. (Online).
http://www.eflliteraturecircles.com. Retrieved in November 2010.
Hancock, M. 2000. A Celebration of Literature and Response: Children, Books, and Teachers in
K-8 Classrooms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Harvey, L.; Burrows, A.1992. “Empowering students”.New Academic. Vol.11, No. 3.
Ho, W.K. 2004. “English Language Teaching in East Asia Today: an Overview.” In WK Ho and
R Wong (eds.). English Language Teaching in East Asia Today: Changing Policies and
Practices. 2ndEdition. Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.
Hunt, P. 1994. An Introduction to Children’s Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hismanoglu, M. 2005. “Teaching English through Literature”. Journal of Language and
Linguistic Studies. Vol.1 No.1.
Jayadi, I. 2004. “ELT in Indonesia in the Context of English as a Global Language”. In BY
Cahyono and U Widiati (eds.). The Tapestry of English Language Teaching and
Learning in Indonesia. Malang, Indonesia: State University of Malang. pp. xi-xxi.
Lie, A. 2007. “Education Policy and EFL Curriculum in Indonesia: Between the Commitment to
Competence and the Quest for Higher Test Scores”. TEFLIN Journal. Vol. 18. No. 1.
Martin, L.2009. “Children’s Literature in EFL Classroom: The Stylistic Considerations”.
(Online). http://cotefl.blogspot.com/2009/05/childrens-literaturelaily-martin.
Retrievedon July 27, 2010.
Metcalf, E. 2009. “Using Literature in the EFL Classroom with Specific Reference to Children’s
Literature and Literature and Film”. (Online). http://www.developing
teachers.com/articles_tchtraining/litemma2.htm. Retrieved on July 27 th, 2010.
Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle Publishers.
Nur, C. 2004. “English Language Teaching in Indonesia: Changing Policies and Practical
Constraints”. In WK Ho and R Wong (eds.). English Language Teaching in East Asia
Today: Changing Policies and Practices. 2ndEdition. Singapore: Eastern Universities
Press.
Oura, G. 2010. ”Authentic Task- Based Materials: Bringing the Real World Into the Classroom.”
(Online). www.jrc.sophia.ac.jp/kiyou/ki21/gaio.pdf. Retrieved in September 2010.
Putri, D.P. 2007. “Picture Speak Louder Than Words”. JurnalPolygot. Vol.1 No.2. January 2007.
Rass, R.A.; Holzman, S. 2010. “Children’s Literature in traditional Arab Schools for Teaching
English as a Foreign Language”. English Language Teaching. Vol.3 No.1. (Online).
www.ccsenet.org/elt. Retrieved on July 14th, 2010.
Richard-Amato, P.; Snow, M.A. 2005. Academic for English Language Learners. New York:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Smallwood, B.A. 1992. “Children’s Literature for Adult ESL Literacy”. ERIC Digest. (Online).
http://www.ericdigests.org/1993/adult.htm. Retrieved on July 14th, 2010.
Tseng, F. 2010. “Introducing Literature to an EFL Classroom: Teacher’s Presentations and
Students’ Perception”. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. Vol. 1, No. 1.

50
 MARLINA: LEARNING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN INDONESIA

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

LeniMarlina: Leni Marlina is an English Teaching staff at State University of Padang (UNP) in
West Sumatra, Indonesia. She has been teaching at UNP since 2006. She finished her bachelor
degree in 2005 at UNP. Additionally, she finished her master degree program (Master of Writing
and Literature) in April 2013 at Deakin University, Australia. One of her study specializations is
Children’s Literature. She studied in Australia by having scholarship sponsored by DGHE
(Directorate General of Higher Education of Indonesia). Leni is registered as the member of
ACLAR (Australasian Children’s Literature Association for Research), Victoria writer, Indonesia
Society for the Advancement of Children’s Literature, and ChLA (The Children’s Literature
Association) in U.S.A. In addition, she is interested in EFL. The last but not the least, she is also
interested in young adults literature and creative writing.

51
 Narrative Skills and Genre Based Literacy
Pedagogy Teaching Material: The Case of Greek
Upper Elementary School Pupils One Year after
the Implementation of the Current Teaching
Material
Anna Fterniati, University of Patras, Greece

Abstract: This article presents and discusses the findings of a research study on the issue of literacy competency, focusing
on the narrative written text production. The study examines the narrative text writing skills of 11-12 year old students
(attending the last grade of Greek elementary school), before and after the first year of implementing the language teaching
material introduced in 2006-07, considered to be consistent with the logic of genre based literacy pedagogy. It also
investigates whether parameters such as gender, socio-educational background, and teachers’ practices regarding
students’ written discourse production influence such performances. The students’ narrative skills were examined using
part of the written composition test of the IEA - International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement
(the part assessing the narrative text), revised and adapted to the Greek language and educational context. Analysis of the
pre- and post- implementation data suggests that after the first year of implementing the current teaching material, the
pupils’ narrative skills display a considerable increase. Additionally, their performances are related to their gender, social
background, and practices regarding students’ written discourse production.

Keywords: Literacy, Narrative Genre, Narrative Skills, Genre-based Literacy Pedagogy, Textual Competence, Written
Discourse Production, Writing Assessment, Language Arts Textbooks, Primary Education, Elementary School.

Introduction

O ver the last three decades, language teaching worldwide has revolved around the concept
of literacy, that is a social practice constantly redefined in terms of the socio-cultural
environment in which it takes place and that deals with the individual’s ability to
understand, interpret, critically manage and produce all genres and discourse types necessary for
society and generally to control his/her life and environment through written discourse (Barton,
Hamilton and Ivanic 2000). Over this period of time, the debate on the concept of literacy created
the framework and principles of literacy pedagogy. According to genre based literacy pedagogy
(see Sydney school, i.e. Johns 2002; Macken et al. 1989), the main unit of literacy is the genre, as
shaped by the respective socio-cultural reality. As students become familiarised with authentic
texts from the social sphere belonging to different genres (e.g. narrative, descriptive,
argumentative), which are inter-related to the cultural dimension of language, and learn about their
rules and conventions, they gain the opportunity to participate in social processes and function
successfully in any situational context (Baynham 1995; Freedman and Medway 1994).
Consequently, school literacy (Macken et al. 1989) is mainly achieved through the elaboration
and production of – mostly written – genres considered important for defining and transmitting
knowledge in various sectors, aiming to develop critical language awareness (Goatly 2000;
Fairclough 1992). It is recommended to conduct communicational and interactive activities
(between students and their peers or their teachers), which include practices that help students
realise the characteristics of each genre, and to allocate time for the production, reviewing and
editing of written discourse by the students themselves. In this way, language is not viewed as a
static product, constructed through specific grammar and syntax rules, but as a dynamic semiotic
system.

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, www.thelearner.com, ISSN 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Anna Fterniati, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Such educational programmes have already been successfully implemented worldwide over
the last thirty years (Brown 2001; Cope and Kalantzis 1993; Hedge 2000; Richards and Renandya
2002).
In Greece, this debate led to the 2003 National Curriculum for the Greek language in the
Elementary School (FEK 2003) and the 2006 school textbooks and teacher manuals for the
language arts class (Ministry of Education 2006a, 2006b).
Prior to the implementation of the 2003 and 2006 material, several Greek studies and research
projects (see Fterniati and Spinthourakis 2004; Koukourikou et al. 2006; Kostouli 1997, 1998;
Papoulia-Tzelepi 2000; Papoulia-Tzelepi and Spinthourakis 2000) had been conducted on the
previous teaching material and, more generally, on the quality of language teaching in primary
education and on important points revealed by the pupils’ written text production. These studies
focused both on the common problems faced by children of different social background when
producing written texts and on socially determined differences in language use. The studies
included textual analysis of a large number of texts of various genres, written by students of
different social background and addressed the problems faced by children of different social groups
when producing written discourse. The results were disappointing. They demonstrated that the
majority of students displayed medium or low written discourse achievement, while their success
depended on their social background. The above results were attributed to the nature of the teaching
material, which was based on the structural approach in language teaching (Galisson 1980) and
relevant teaching practices, as well as to a lack of adequate educator training.
Furthermore, these results were due to the teachers’ views and practices on teaching written
discourse (Kostouli 2002; Papoulia-Tzelepi and Spinthourakis 2000). As they point out, before the
2003 curriculum and the 2006 teaching material were implemented, written discourse production
as a dynamic cognitive process was ignored. This refers to a process that includes the elaboration
of various versions of a text before the final product, under interactive circumstances, and taking
into account both the communicational objective and the intended recipient/audience. According
to the above research, written discourse practices were limited to 15-minute written production
exercises, with neither previous planning nor later elaboration, and without any self- or peer-
evaluation. Evaluation, conducted by the teacher, was limited to the discussion of grammatical
errors, and paid little or no attention to generic structure. Therefore the pupils received no feedback
from their teachers, in the sense of fruitful guidance that would help them realise any weaknesses
and find relevant solutions, but solely consisted of unfruitful error correction.
As a result, new educational material (language arts textbooks, student workbooks, grammar
guide, dictionaries, literature anthologies and software, as well as the teacher’s guide) was
implemented in elementary school language arts, as mentioned above.
This teaching material introduces important changes in Greek elementary school practices,
including the formal adoption of specifically defined communicative genre-oriented approaches,
as well as collaborative teaching/learning. According to the teacher’s guide (Ministry of Education
2006b), the new teaching approach aims to help students realise each genre’s different structure,
and choose the appropriate linguistic means to produce specific texts. This is attempted through
the analysis and production of different discourse types and genres in specific situational contexts.
Ultimately, students should develop efficient communicative skills, by perceiving and producing
various socially acceptable discourse types and genres. Texts provided should be authentic, while
discourse production should be placed in context and culminating in the assessment of the
produced discourse by the students themselves (self- and peer-evaluation). The reforms outlined,
while not new in contemporary language learning and teaching theory and practice, are however
highly innovative from the vantage point of the Greek educational reality (see Glossa 2002;
Fterniati and Spinthourakis 2006).
So far, the research conducted to evaluate the above, in terms of meeting the stated objectives,
focus on the teaching material (see Kapsalis and Katsikis 2007; Fterniati 2007; Papoulia and
Fterniati 2010; Pourkos and Katsarou 2011). They examine whether the textbooks implement the

54
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

main teaching practices adopted worldwide. Most of them take the view of aligning the textbooks’
theoretical and practical choices with contemporary principles of teaching modern languages.
However, so far no research has been conducted on evaluating the impact of introducing the
current material and related teaching practices on the students’ literacy skills level.
For this reason, it was considered necessary to conduct research focusing not on the teaching
material, but on its actual product, that is the students’ written production, and on relevant teaching
practices. The results of such a study could demonstrate whether the pupils’ literacy skills display
any improvement after the implementation of the current textbooks, which is whether the current
Greek elementary school Language Arts practices are effective, in relation to the improvement of
the pupils’ literacy skills.

Methodology
Research Objective

The aim of the above mentioned study is to examine and discuss the findings of a research study
focusing on the writing skills of Greek elementary school pupils producing narrative, descriptive
and argumentative text before the current material was introduced in 2006-07, one year after its
implementation, and six years after its implementation.
The research lasted six years (2006-2012), so that the pupils who attended the first grade in
2006, when the current books were introduced, would complete their primary education with this
teaching material.
This paper presents some initial results from the first year of data collection on the pupils’
narrative skills. In particular, the study examines the narrative text writing skills of 11-12 year old
students (attending the last grade of Greek elementary school), before and after the first year of
implementing the language teaching material introduced in 2006-07, which is considered to be
consistent with the logic of genre based literacy pedagogy.
Specifically, the paper aims to reveal any differences on the level of the pupils’ narrative skills
after the 1st year of implementing the current teaching material in schools that operate in areas of
different social background.
An effort was also made to explore whether the pupils’ skills are influenced by parameters
such as gender, social background, and teachers’ practices regarding written discourse production.

Sample

The research took place in two phases (pre and post-test), October 2006 and June 2007, in ten
Greek state elementary schools. The grade that participated was the 6th (ages 11-12).
The schools were located in a large prefecture and operated in urban, suburban, semi-urban
and mountain rural areas, and were chosen so that both higher and lower parental social
background could be represented.
The population of the study consisted of 151 students (78 boys and 73 girls).

Data Collection

The students’ literacy skills were examined using part of the written composition test of the IEA
(International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement), revised and adapted to
the Greek language and educational context (ΙΕΑ 2010).
This specific test examines a variety of pupil literacy skills, including narrative, descriptive
and argumentative text production skills, information management skills and metacognitive skills.
Overall, the study evaluates the effectiveness of pupil discourse and their awareness, in terms
of the respect shown to restrictions imposed by linguistic and extralinguistic (purpose,
recipient/audience) factors in different genres (narrative, descriptive and argumentative).

55
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

In this phase, as mentioned, the research initially utilised narrative text criteria.
It examined the effectiveness (Clark and Ivanic 1997) of the pupils’ narrative discourse,
regarding the main characteristics of the narrative genre, grouped into 5 categories:
1. the narrative pattern (de Beaugrande and Dressler 1981; Labov and Waletzky 1967; van
Dijk 1980), that is the basic generic structure including orientation, complicating action and coda,
2. the evaluation (commentary) (Labov and Waletzky 1967), 3. the cohesion (Halliday and Hasan
1976) 4. the coherence (Halliday and Hasan 1976) and 5. the grammaticality and semantic
acceptability of the text.
The above was analysed in twenty criteria and each criterion was evaluated using a five-point
scale. The total score of the five categories, in case of the highest performance, would be 100.
Apart from the analytic scoring it was considered useful to include the texts’ holistic scoring
(evaluation of the text as a whole, overall impression). Both a six-point and a ten-point scale were
used, so as to ensure greater objectivity (McCabe 1996).
The 5 categories are analysed below:

1. Regarding the narration of a complete episode (de Beaugrande and Dressler 1981; Labov
and Waletzky 1967; van Dijk 1980) based on narrative generic structure, the criteria
examined the degree to which the pupils’ texts:
a. Developed orientation successfully, that is whether they provide sufficient
information on the characters/heroes, the place, the time frame, and the initial
situation in general, so that the reader can be orientated and successfully
introduced to the narration.
b. Developed complicating action, that is first whether they: Include the event that
upset the initial state, sufficient plot/action development (internal and external
action), the climax and the end of the episode.
c. Developed complicating action, that is second whether they: Develop the heroes’
characters according to the facts.
d. Developed complicating action, that is third whether they: Follow a clear
sequence of events.
e. Display a successful coda/resolution, that is a conclusive statement that provides
a sense of closure.
Five criteria were utilised in order to examine the above.

2. The study then examined whether the pupil provides an evaluation (commentary) of the
narration, that is whether the text presents the pupil’s judgment as a narrator, on the
meaning of the story, the point of the facts, and the narrator’s attitude and feelings (Labov
and Waletzky 1967).
The texts were tested for:
a. Commentary on actions or situations, e.g. with adverbs that define the heroes’
actions, with explanatory (because, since), final (so that, in order to),
concessive clauses (although, however), or other phrases/utterances expressing
an event’s cause or consequence.
b. Commentary on the characters/heroes, e.g. clauses (mostly relative), adjectives,
participles, or other phrases/utterances that state perception, judgment, will,
feelings and constitute the narrator’s comments on the heroes’ behaviour and
state of mind.
Two criteria were utilised in order to examine the above.

3. The study then examined whether the pupils’ texts displayed cohesion, that is how they
structured meaning intratextually. The term refers to various linguistic means (grammar,
vocabulary) that link sentences to form larger units and comprises the functional use of

56
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

grammar and syntax structures. Starting from the original work of Halliday and Hasan
(1976), cohesion is considered to be the main quality that distinguishes a text from a
random series of sentences. Cohesion is established by linking successive utterances with
specific elements (connectors, pronouns, zero reference, etc.).
In a narrative, events are semantically linked with time and causal relationships, that is the
ways in which a situation or an event affects the circumstances of another situation or event (de
Baugrande and Dressler 1981). The verbs are in past tenses.
The texts were tested for:
a. The number and successful use of time indicators (conjunctions, adverbs,
various determiners, participles, etc.).
b. The number and successful use of causal indicators (conjunctions, adverbs,
various determiners, participles, etc.) and other connectors.
c. Textual cohesion, established through reference to people and places.
d. Textual cohesion, established through lack of reference to people and places.
e. The variety of past tenses.
f. The correct use of past tenses.
Six criteria were utilised in order to examine the above.

4. The term coherence, according to Halliday and Hasan (1976), refers to the sequence of
meanings, which makes a piece of discourse understood as a text. It refers to the suitability
of the text content relative to the situational context. Coherence is established when the
text is suitable, in part and in whole, for the reader and the purpose for which the text was
written. The study examined the extent to which:
a. The pupils understand the text’s purpose and their texts are suitable for the
specific situational context.
b. The texts are focused. All details are organised in a distinct pattern. The story is
developed sufficiently, clearly, without digressions, with logical connections
throughout the parts of the narration (including the paragraphs). It includes all
necessary information, no more and no less.
Two criteria were utilised in order to examine the above.

5. Regarding grammaticality and acceptability, the study examined the texts’:

a. Grammar and syntax (compliance with rules, grammar and syntax errors,
spelling and punctuation).
b. Conceptual and semantic correctness, and the accuracy and compatibility with
its linguistic choices for written discourse.
c. Visual presentation and readability.
d. Errors, and the extent to which they influence its understandability.
e. The study also examined whether the vocabulary was rich and suitable for the
occasion, also accounting for verbs and other utterances that indicate action,
change, contact, distancing, request, provision and so on, describing the heroes’
actions.
Five criteria were utilised in order to examine the above.

As mentioned above, the texts were scored both analytically and holistically (evaluation of the
text as a whole). To ensure greater objectivity, two scales were used, both a ten-point and a six-
point. The study examined whether the plot is clear, complete, interesting, and sufficiently
developed, and whether the narrative is vivid and reveals personal style.
Each text was evaluated by two examiners, who had been previously trained on evaluating the
effectiveness of student narrative discourse in terms of the main characteristics of the narrative
genre. The final score emerged from the mean average of the two scorings. On the rare occasion

57
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

that the two scorings displayed a difference larger than two points, a third examiner was called in
to evaluate the text.
The data collected from the pupils’ texts were complemented by two questionnaires. The first
questionnaire was administered to the parents of the participant pupils, and referred to the parents’
educational level, which was measured in a ten point scale, from not completing elementary school
(1) to obtaining a doctorate degree (10). The questionnaire aimed at relating parental education to
pupil performance.
The second questionnaire was administered to the participant pupils’ teachers, and referred to
written production in class, in terms of allocated time, how it is conducted, and whether self/peer
assessment is implemented. The questionnaire aimed at relating the above to pupil performance,
to see whether the allocation of more time for text elaboration including interactive practices
enhances pupil performance.
All data were statistically elaborated using the SPSS software, with both descriptive and
inferential statistical elaboration. The data analysis below reflects the above.

Presentation and Analysis of Findings

As seen above (in the methodology section), pre and post-test evaluation comprised of 20 criteria
(score of 100 for the highest performance) measuring five aspects of narrative competency, and
two types of holistic scoring were used. Table 1 presents the performance mean average of all
participant pupils and the difference between pre and post-test.

Table 1: Performance Mean Average throughout the Sample

Mean average
Mean
POST-TEST PRE-TEST
difference
Category

1. Holistic score (1-10) 6,2050 5,5917 0,61333

2. Holistic score (1-6) 3,4603 3,1159 0,34437

A. Narration (orientation, complicating

10,1329 9,4580 0,67483
action, coda)

B. Commentary – Evaluation 5,7604 5,1875 0,57292

C. Cohesion 16,4615 14,5105 1,95105

D. Coherence 2,2014 1,9410 0,26042

E. Grammaticality - Acceptability 16,9894 16,0709 0,91844

Narrative competency:
Total of mean average A, B, C, D, E. 51,5081 46,9879 4,52016

Mean average difference is statistically significant at α = 0,01

This section first examines the two holistic scorings (six-point and ten-point, for greater
objectivity), and then the categories/factors that constitute a clear, interesting and coherent
narration: Complete episode narration (orientation, complication action, coda), Evaluation–

58
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

Commentary, Cohesion, Coherence, Grammaticality–Acceptability. For each category, the tables

present the mean average of the sum of the criteria involved, while at the end of the table (Narrative
Competency), there is the mean average of the sums of all twenty criteria of the five categories
(excluding the initial two holistic scorings). The total score of the five categories in the case of the
highest performance would be 100.
All cases demonstrate enhanced performance from pre to post-test. The most marked increase
is demonstrated by cohesion, followed by grammaticality-acceptability. They are followed by
episode narration and its evaluation. The least marked increase is demonstrated by coherence.
Inferential statistical elaboration revealed that all the differences are statistically significant at α =
0.01.
Table 2 presents the pupils’ performance mean average per school location, and the difference
between pre- and post-test.

Table 2: Performance Mean Average per School Location.

School MOUNTAIN
SEMI-URBAN SUBURBAN URBAN
location RURAL
POST

POST

POST

POST
Diff.

Diff.

Diff.

Diff.
PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE
Category

1. Holistic score (1-

5,39 4,69 0,70 5,82 5,24 0,59 5,65 5,40 0,25 7,38 6,51 0,87
10)

2. Holistic score (1-

2,97 2,51 0,46 3,21 2,85 0,35 3,10 3,00 0,10 4,20 3,73 0,47
6)

A. Narration 9,15 8,69 0,45 9,71 8,62 1,09 9,49 9,11 0,38 11,61 10,55 1,06

B. Commentary –
4,42 3,93 0,49 5,59 4,50 1,09 4,88 4,69 0,18 7,58 6,81 0,77
Evaluation

C. Cohesion 15,74 13,35 2,39 14,59 13,97 0,62 14,41 13,73 0,67 19,08 16,11 2,97

D. Coherence 1,99 1,62 0,36 1,88 1,56 0,32 2,05 1,87 0,18 2,59 2,35 0,24

E. Grammaticality –
14,73 13,49 1,24 15,91 14,26 1,65 15,99 15,07 0,92 20,24 19,69 0,55
Acceptability

Narrative
competency: Total of
46,31 41,26 5,05 48,13 42,91 5,21 46,64 44,39 2,25 61,34 55,89 5,45
mean average A, B, C,
D, E.

Mean average difference is statistically significant at α = 0,05

We observe that all cases demonstrate enhanced performance from pre to post-test. Inferential
statistical elaboration revealed that the differences are statistically significant at α = 0.05.

59
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Three area types show enhanced performance. The most marked increase is demonstrated in
urban schools, followed by semi-urban and mountain rural locations. The least marked increase is
demonstrated in suburban areas. These findings can be explained as follows:
Table 3 presents parental education (mean average) per school location.

Table 3: Parental education per School Location (Ten-Point Mean Average)

Mean: Father’s Mean: Mother’s

School location
educational level educational level

URBAN 8,45 7,92

SEMI-URBAN 4,82 5,06

SUBURBAN 4,23 4,60

MOUNTAIN RURAL 3,05 3,43

Total 5,46 5,51

As seen above, parental education was measured in a ten-point scale, from not completing
elementary school (1) to obtaining a doctorate degree (10). We can see that parental education
levels are high in urban schools, because the corresponding area is populated by a higher social
class (most of the parents belong to the teaching and administrative staff of the University of
Patras). In terms of parental education level, the next area is the semi-urban location, which is
actually an affluent small town. This is followed by parental education level in the suburban
location, which is a degraded area, characterised mostly by working class population and more
immigrants than the other areas under study. This location demonstrated the least marked increase
in pupil performance. The lowest parental education level is displayed by mountain rural area. This
area demonstrated both the lowest pupil performance and a marked performance increase from pre
to post-test, almost equal to the urban and semi-urban locations. The area consists of poor mountain
villages which are populated mostly by farmers, and have few immigrants.
Over the last decades, the correlation of the students’ linguistic performance to their social
background has been established by numerous research worldwide (cited in Hannon 1995) and has
been interpreted in various ways (i.e. Bernstein 1971; Labov 1972). A common point is that the
process of mastering language as a communication tool can only be understood in relation to the
social environment in which it takes place. As expected, the present study confirms this, as is
indicated by the correlation between parental educational level and pupil performance (Tables 4
and 5). The correlations here are shown to be strong. The more privileged their background the
higher the students’ performance in written expression.

60
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

Table 4: Correlation of Father’s Educational Level and Pupil Performance

Father’s Narrative Narrative

educational competency competency
level (PRE-TEST) (POST-TEST)

Pearson
Father’s 1 ,546** ,575**
Correlation
educational
level
Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 5: Correlation of mother’s educational level and pupil performance

Mother’s Narrative Narrative

educational competency competency
level (PRE-TEST) (POST-TEST)

Pearson
Mother’s 1 ,507** ,554**
Correlation
educational
level
Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 6 shows a difference between performance mean average for boys and girls, with girls
displaying higher performance.

Table 6: Performance Mean Average per Gender

Mean Narrative competency

Sex PRE-TEST POST-TEST Difference

Girl 50,4365 53,5076 3,07

Boy 44,4133 49,3986 4,98

Difference 6,02* 4,10

Mean average difference is statistically significant at α = 0,01

However, the boys show a more marked increase compared to the girls (mean difference from
pre to post test: 4,98 for boys versus 3,07 for girls). Moreover, the mean difference between boys
and girls in the pre-test is higher (6,02) than in the post-test (4,10).

61
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Inferential statistical elaboration revealed that the difference of performance mean average
between boys and girls in the pre-test is statistically significant at α = 0.01, while at the post-test
this difference is not statistically significant.
This can probably be explained by the fact that all recommended activities to utilise the
teaching material serve as a motive for action and sociability. Compared to girls, boys are more
active and with a narrower attention span, so it is easier for them to be distracted when performing
repetitive mechanical exercises to reproduce discourse (previous teaching material) than when
involved in various communication roles (current teaching material) (Μillard 1997).
Summarising, the results suggest a strong and consistent effect of the use of genre based
literacy pedagogy teaching material and of the respective practices adopted in some cases to the
narrative competency of the students. This effect may vary depending on some other factors but it
is always present.
However, given that the total score of the five categories for the highest performance would
be 100, as can be seen (Table 1) from the performance mean average for all students (46,9879 in
pre- and 51,5081 in post-test), pupil performance is mediocre even after the implementation of the
new material and despite their improvement.
When we examine the results for each location (seen above in Table 2), we observe that even
in the higher socio-educational level area, mean scores are barely 61,33/100, followed by 48,25 in
the semi-urban area, 46,63 in the suburban area and 46,30 in the mountain rural area. In the last
three areas, student performance remains below average scoring (50/100).
Finally, Tables 7-9 examine the relationship between pupil performance and the way in which
written discourse is produced, since in the teacher’s guide (Ministry of Education 2006b) it is
recommended to allocate time for the production, reviewing and editing of written discourse by
the students themselves and their peers at school.

Table 7: Performance Mean Average per Location of Written Discourse Production

Where do students produce written discourse? Narrative competency

(POST-TEST)
Both at home and at school 47,6194
At school 55,1397

Table 8: Performance Mean Average per Way of Producing Written Discourse

How are the students’ texts edited? Narrative competency

(POST-TEST)
Only the teacher edits texts 44,4800
Texts are edited by both teacher and students 47,6194
Texts are mostly corrected with self/peer editing 61,3372

Table 9. Performance Mean Average per Time Allocated to Written Discourse Production

Time allocated to the production and editing of written Narrative competency

discourse (POST-TEST)
Twenty (20) minutes 43,5250
One (1) hour 48,8056
Two (2) hours 49,3704
Three (3) hours 57,2981

62
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

We observe that performance is higher when written discourse is produced exclusively at

school and lower when written discourse is sometimes produced at home (Table 7). It also seems
that performance is higher when the pupils’ texts are reviewed and edited using communicational
and interactive practices and when the pupils themselves are involved in the process (Table 8). We
also observe that pupil performance is higher when more time is allocated to producing and editing
written discourse (Table 9).

Discussion and Conclusions

The findings of the study indicate that after the first year of implementing the current teaching
material and the respective teaching practices, the pupils’ narrative skills display a considerable
improvement, since both the scoring in all separate criteria and the two holistic scorings display a
significant difference from pre to post-test. It also suggests that their skills, at both time points,
relate to their gender, social background, and teachers’ practices, with higher performance
attributed to girls, high social background and more time allocated to the production and (self)
reviewing of written discourse in the classroom.
Particularly regarding the relationship between performance and gender, although the boys’
performance before the implementation is often remarkably lower than the girls’, after the
implementation the boys demonstrate a more marked increase in their performance than the girls.
As mentioned above (see analysis of Table 6), this fact could possibly be attributed to the fact that
all recommended activities to utilise the teaching material serve as a motive for action and
sociability (Μillard 1997).
Furthermore, pupils display an improved performance, to a greater or lesser degree, regardless
of whether they come from a privileged or less privileged social background (see Table 2).
Sociolinguistics have established that children from non privileged backgrounds have less access
to formal language, particularly to written discourse, which represents its most challenging form
(see analysis of Tables 4 and 5). It is most important that these children are introduced to this
challenging process through original texts from the social sphere, which are more familiar, and
through their participation in different interactive activities, where they assume various roles. It
seems that this practice offers non privileged children a motivation to critically elaborate different
genres and expand their discourse competency. However, despite a general enhancement, we
observed that the pupils of the sample overall display a mediocre performance in terms of narrative
competency. For most pupils, the scores are mediocre and their performance greatly depends on
their social background.
To a great extent, the findings of the present research confirm previous research mentioned
above (Fterniati and Spinthourakis 2004; Koukourikou et al. 2006; Kostouli 1997, 1998; Papoulia-
Tzelepi 2000; Papoulia-Tzelepi and Bleka 2000) on pupil written discourse performance in the
Greek elementary school (see Introduction). They are also related to the findings of research
conducted in the USA and other countries (Kress 1994; Reading today 2000; U.S. Dept of
Education 2000; U.S. Dept of Education NAEP 2011). In the above studies, textual analysis of a
large number of texts of various genres, written by students of various socio-cultural backgrounds,
demonstrated that the text performance scores of most students are low or medium, and their
success is directly related to their social background; the more privileged their background the
higher the students’ performance in written expression.
According to previous research on the quality of written discourse teaching in Greece
(Kostouli 2002; Papoulia-Tzelepi and Spinthourakis 2000), these results are partly due to certain
older views and practices on teaching written discourse. This refers to a process that ignores the
written discourse production as a dynamic cognitive process (elaboration of various versions of a
text, allocating time for interactive activities, that is self- or peer-evaluation) (see also
Introduction).

63
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

To a certain extent, these older views still survive in primary education, as can be seen from
the teachers’ questionnaire answers. For instance, in some cases written discourse production is
assigned as homework. When conducted in school, in some cases it is neither allocated sufficient
time nor characterised by interactive practices and self- and peer-assessment techniques.
These causes probably explain the pupils’ mediocre performance in terms of their narrative
competency, both before and after the implementation of the current teaching material, despite a
significant increase in the first year of the material.
This happens because it does not suffice to simply design and implement teaching material
based on contemporary teaching principles. It is also necessary to properly and sufficiently train
all educators involved, so that the teaching material can be implemented properly and yield
maximum benefits.
In the context of training educators in the new (at the time) educational materials, the Greek
Pedagogical Institute organised and implemented a large scale training programme from 2005 to
2007 (Pedagogical Institute Report for 2005-2007). However, this training programme received
heavy criticism and was considered insubstantial, as it failed to help educators to meet the demands
of the new teaching material. According to research conducted by the Institute of Pedagogical
Research of the Greek Teachers Association (IPR-GTA 2009) throughout the country on the new
textbooks, educators were not satisfied by the instructions provided by competent authorities for
the implementation of the new books. Apparently, the training focused mostly on presenting the
books and not on illustrating the underlying teaching approach.
Of course, for any educational reform to succeed, educators must familiarise themselves with
the new fields of information and knowledge, so that they can obtain the appropriate qualifications
to master teaching practices that are different than the previous teaching practices. Despite the
intention to change educational practice, the change can be pointless when the educators have not
been properly trained or not as productive when educator training is limited to short informational
presentations which are not followed up.
The findings of this study indicate that, after the implementation of the current teaching
material and the respective teaching practices adopted in some cases, the pupils enhanced their
awareness of textual communication, particularly their understanding of a text’s communicational
effectiveness, for a specific genre in this phase of the research. At the same time, the findings stress
the need to enhance written discourse teaching practices. Overall, after the findings of the six year
research on the pupils’ literacy skills in narrative, descriptive and argumentative text have been
completed and published 1, the conclusions of this study could contribute to the debate on
promoting changes in language arts teaching in Greece. This is particularly valid for the need to
change the teaching of written discourse in Greek elementary schools, after the current teaching
material has been enhanced and the educators have been properly trained on genre based literacy
pedagogy teaching practices.

Acknowledgement
This study was supported by the ‘‘K. Karatheodoris’’ research grant (contract D157) awarded to
the author by the Research Committee of the University of Patras.

1
More recent findings of the six year research are going to be announced in Ninth Bi-annual
Conference of IAIMTE (International Association for the Improvement of Mother Tongue
Education), to be held in Paris, 11-13 June 2013, focusing on Literacies and Effective Learning
and Τeaching for all. Moreover, more findings will be announced at the International
Conference on Greek Linguistics, to be held in Rhodes, 26-29 September 2013, with a special
focus on Language and Education.

64
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

REFERENCES
Barton, David, Mary Hamilton, and Roz Ivanic, eds. 2000. Situated Literacies: Reading and
Writing in Context. London: Routledge.
Baynham, Michael. 1995. Literacy Practices: Investigating Literacy in Social Contexts. London:
Longman.
Beaugrande de, Robert-Alain and Wolfgang Ulrich Dressler. 1981. Introduction to Text
Linguistics. London: Longman.
Becker, Patricia. 2010. Who, Did What, Where, When: Facilitating Personal Narrative and
Storytelling Skills. Presentation on WSHA 2010. Retrieved from http://www.
wisha.org/convention/
con_10/handouts/Session%2055.pdf (accessed September 22, 2012).
Bernstein, Basil. 1971. Class, Codes and Control. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul
Brown, Douglas H. 2001. Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. London: Longman.
Clark, Romy and Roz Ivanic. 1997. The Politics of Writing. London: Longman.
Cope, Bill, and Mary Kalantzis. 1993. The Powers of Literacy: A Genre Approach to Teaching
Writing. London: The Falmer Press.
Fairclough, Norman, ed. 1992. Critical language awareness. London: Longman.
FEK (Government Gazette). Vol. B, 303/13-03-2003, tome A΄. National Curriculum for the Greek
language in the Elementary School.
Freedman, Aviva, and Peter Medway, eds. 1994. Learning and teaching genre. Portsmouth, NH:
Boynton/Cook.
Fterniati, Anna, and Julia Athena Spinthourakis. 2004. “The L1 communicative-textual
competence of Greek upper elementary school students”. L1. Educational Studies in
Language and Literature 4: 221-240.
Fterniati, Anna, and Julia Athena Spinthourakis. 2006. “National curriculum reform and new
elementary school language arts textbooks in Greece”. The International Journal of
Learning 13: 37-44.
Fterniati, Anna. 2007. “The New Greek Elementary Language Arts Textbooks: Teaching Written
Discourse Production”. The International Journal of Learning 14 (9): 112-121.
Galisson, Robert. 1980. D'hier à aujourd'hui la didactique générale des langues étrangères: Du
structuralisme au fonctionnalisme. Paris : CLE International
Glossa. 2002. Special Issue dedicated to the new National Language Arts Curriculum. Glossa, 54.
[in Greek]
Goatly, Andrew. 2000. Critical Reading and Writing: An Introductory Coursebook. London & New
York: Routledge.
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood and Ruqayia Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London:
Longman.
Hannon, Peter. 1995. Literacy, Home and School. London: Falmer Press
Hedge, Tricia. 2000. Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
IEA. 2010. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
http://www.iea.nl/written_composition.html (accessed on April 13, 2010).
IPR-GTA. 2009. Institute of Pedagogical Research of the Greek Teachers Association.
http://www.doe.gr/1nea/books19102009.pdf (accessed May 6, 2012) [in Greek].
Johns, Ann, ed. 2002. Genre in the classroom. Multiple perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Kapsalis, Georgios and Apostolos Katsikis, eds. 2007. Primary education and contemporary
challenges. Ioanninna: University of Ioannina.

65
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Kostouli, Triantafillia. 1997. “Social environment, textual skills and school achievement”. Glossa
41: 43-57. [in Greek]
Kostouli, Triantafillia. 1998. Social differences in language use. In Studies on the Greek Language:
Minutes of the 18th Meeting of the Linguistics Department of the Faculty of Philosophy.
Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki. [in Greek]
Kostouli, Triantafillia. 2002. “Teaching Greek as L1: Curriculum and textbooks in Greek
elementary education”. L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature 2: 5–23.
Koukourikou, Aristi, Aidinis Athanasios et al. 2006. “Evaluating the structure, content and
vocabulary of narrative and descriptive texts written by pupils of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th grades
of elementary school”. http://ipeir.pde.sch.gr/educonf/2/05DimotikoSholio/
koukourikou/koukourikou.pdf (accessed November 25, 2011) [in Greek].
Kress, Gunther. 1994. Learning to Write. London ; New York : Routledge.
Labov, William and Joshua Waletsky. 1967. Narrative analysis. In Essays in the Verbal and Visual
Arts. Edited by June Helm. Seattle: University of Seattle Press.
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns: Conduct and Communication, 4. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Macken, Mary, Mary Kalantzis, Gunther Kress, Jim Martin, and Bill Cope. 1989. A Genre-Based
Approach to Teaching Writing, Years 3-6, Book 1: Introduction. Sydney: Directorate of
Studies, N.S.W. Department of Education.
McCabe, Allissa. 1996. Evaluating narrative discourse skills. In Assessment of communication and
language. Edited by Kevin N. Cole, Philip S. Dale, and Donna J. Thal. Baltimore, MD:
Paul H. Brookes.
Millard, Elaine. 1997. Differently Literate: Boys, Girls and the Schooling of Literacy. London:
Falmer Press.
Ministry of Education. Pedagogical Institute. 2006a. Glossa. (Language textbooks, first to sixth
grade , 17 volumes). OEDB. [in Greek]
Ministry of Education. Pedagogical Institute. 2006b. Glossa. Book for the teacher. (First to sixth
grade, six volumes). OEDB. [in Greek]
Papoulia, Panayota, and Anna Fterniati, eds, 2010. Minutes of the 5th International Literacy
Conference. Writing and writings in the 21st century: A challenge for education. Patras:
Faculty of Primary Education, University of Patras, and the Greek Society of Language
and Literacy [in Greek].
Papoulia-Tzelepi, Panayota, and Julia Athena Spinthourakis. 2000. “Greek teacher’s personal
theory on writing at the elementary level”. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies
5(1): 55-75.
Papoulia-Tzelepi, Panayota, and Vassiliki Bleka. 2000. Writing from personal experience:
Developing specific characteristics of the narrative written expression. In Teaching Greek
as a native or a foreign language. Edited by Michalis Vamvoukas and Aspa Hatzidaki.
Athens: Atrapos [in Greek].
Papoulia-Tzelepi, Panayota. 2000. Written expression in the elementary school: first estimates. In
Literacy in the Balkans. Edited by Panayota Papoulia-Tzelepi. Athens: Greek Language
and Literacy Association. [in Greek]
Pedagogical Institute. 2005-2007 Report. Athens: Pedagogical Institute. [in Greek].
Pourkos, Marios and Eleni Katsarou, eds. 2011. Experience, Metaphor and Multimodality:
Implications in Communication, Education, Learning and Knowledge. Thessaloniki:
Nisides [in Greek].
Reading Today. (December 1999 – January 2000). US students writing falls short of
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) goals. Reading Today
Bimonthly Newspaper of the International Reading Association.
Richards, Jack C. And Willy A. Renandya, eds. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching.
An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

66
 ANNA FTERNIATI: NARRATIVE SKILLS & GENRE BASED LITERACY PEDAGOGY

Stern, Ηans Η. 2001. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford Uniνersity
Press.
U.S. Dept of Education NAEP http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ (accessed November 25,
2011).
United States Department of Education. National Center for Educational Statistics (2000). Major
Findings from the NAEP 1998 Writing Report Card.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/writing/ (accessed December 10, 2000).
van Dijk, Teun Adrianus. 1980. Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures
in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Press.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Anna Fterniati: Anna Fterniati is an assistant professor in language education at the Department
of Elementary Education of the University of Patras in Greece. She has participated in various
research projects, and has published papers and books in the field of language education, literacy
pedagogy-written discourse instruction, and multiliteracies. She also has experience and
publications in curriculum design, development, and assessment.

67
 Associations of the Home Literacy Environment
with Thai University Students’ Leisure Reading
Habits
Nicholas Ferriman, Mahidol University International College, Thailand

Abstract: This study investigated the long-term impact of the Home Literacy Environment (HLE) on Thai leisure reading
rates using an adapted version of a questionnaire from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).
Though size effects are generally small, results from the responses of 475 university students at a college in the north of
Thailand indicate that five of the key HLE parameters are significantly associated with respondents’ present reading
rates. The implications for Thailand’s participation in the “information age” are discussed.

Keywords: Literacy Practices, Pleasure Reading, Free Reading, Free Voluntary Reading, Independent Silent Reading

Introduction

I n 2000, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) started the
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to investigate the readiness of 15-
year-olds to join the ‘knowledge economy’. Thailand participated in the PISA surveys of
2006 and 2009, and like other countries in the developing world scored significantly below the
OECD average (see Table 1).

Table 1: Comparison of mean reading scores of nine countries from PISA 2006 and 2009
Country Year
2006 2009
Korea 556 539
Finland 547 536
*Singapore ** 526
Japan 498 520
United Kingdom 495 494
OECD Average 492 492
USA ** 500
*Thailand 417 421
*Indonesia 393 402
*Brazil 393 412
*non-OECD countries; **no data; (taken from PISA Country Profiles 2006; PISA 2009 Profiles
2009)

It may seem invidious to compare developing countries with the OECD, but PISA offers
benchmarking which is of immense value in determining best practice. Far from being upset,
Thailand has acted on the results and put in place strategies to narrow the gap (see Mosika et al.
2011).
Though PISA has focused primarily on identifying best practice in schools, these may not be
the only source for the reading differences. Home may be another. OECD students are likely to
have a wider range of resources at home, such as books and computers, than their peers
elsewhere (Hilton 2006). They are also more likely to have ‘active’ parents, and children whose
parents are engaged in their education do better academically (Flouri and Buchanan 2004). Using
data from PISA 2000, Fuchs and Wößmann (2007) found that 38% of the variance in PISA

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, thelearner.com, ISSN: 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Nicholas Ferriman, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

reading performance could be accounted for by the home literacy environment (HLE).
Maximising HLE may be a way of minimizing the gap.
On the surface, Thai literacy rates of over 94% (Human Development Reports 2009)
compare favorably with other parts of the world, but the amount of actual reading done may tell a
different story. Though institutional data is sparse, a number of Thai academics acknowledge that
Thais are reluctant readers (e.g. Priwatrworawute 2000; Nimsomboon 2006). This study
surveyed a group of college students to help map Thai leisure reading rates and explore the
associations with HLE.

The Home Literacy Environment

A number of reviews have highlighted the positive role of HLE in children’s reading
development (Bus, van Ijzendoorn and Pellegrini 1995; Baker, Scher and Mackler 1997). Though
much of the research has been on English, there is also evidence from other languages that HLE
is associated with literacy (Chinese: Li and Rao 2000; Zhou and Salili 2008; French: Senechal
2006; Korean: Kim 2009; Bangla: Opel, Ameer and Aboud 2009). Using data from the Progress
in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), Park (2008) found that HLE influenced 4th
graders reading performance in almost all 25 countries surveyed.
A key method for assessing HLE has been to investigate the frequency of shared book
reading, that is, how often parents or principal caregivers read a book with their child (Payne,
Whitehurst and Angell 1994; Bus et al. 1995; Roberts, Jurgens and Burchinal 2005). In their
reviews of studies into early literacy, Scarborough and Dobrich (1994) and Bus et al. (1995)
found that shared book reading only accounts for 8% of the variance in reading achievement.
There are other indices.
One of these indices is the parent as reading role model. Parental literacy activities have
been shown to correlate well with emergent literacy (Burgess, Hecht and Lonigan 2002; Weigel,
Martin and Bennet 2005; Zhou and Salili 2008). Children whose parents view reading as a
leisure activity have more positive views of reading (Baker et al. 1997; Baker and Scher 2002).
Another index is the literacy environment parents create. The number of books in the home
associates with children’s literacy development in a number of countries (Dutch: van Peer 1991;
Chinese: Ko and Chan 2009; US: Payne et al. 1994). Multinational studies have revealed similar
findings (Park 2008; van Ours 2008).
There are other indices. Library visits for example correlate well with emergent literacy
(Arterberry et al. 2007; Katzir, Lesaux and Kim 2009), as does parental socio-economic status
(SES). In their meta-analysis covering three decades of US and UK studies, Scarborough and
Dobrich (1994) concluded that SES accounted for as much or more of the variance on reading
achievement than either shared book reading or any other home literacy index.

The Present Study

The central hypothesis of this study is that Thais are reluctant readers and this has origins in the
home. The literature shows HLE correlates well with preschooler’s language and emergent
literacy skills, and carries on over into the first few grades of primary school, but apart from
several Dutch studies, there is less evidence of the effects of HLE on adult reading habits. In
addition, only recently has there been evidence of the impact of HLE outside of the English-
speaking world. This study reports on the associations between HLE and the leisure reading
habits of university students from a rural area in Thailand.

Method
The survey was conducted at a tertiary institution in the north of Thailand in early 2012. Across
the country 48% of young adults are in some form of tertiary education (UNESCO Institute for

70
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

Statistics 2011). This is in direct contrast to their parents’ generation when five years of primary
education was not unusual.

Respondents

There were 464 respondents (65% female) and the vast majority (95%) were aged 18-23 years
old (median and mode of 21). 31% were studying accounting, 26% food science, 24%
mechanical and electrical engineering, 9% fisheries, and 9% IT and business management. Of
those who indicated, 97% had been educated in local high schools, and nearly 40% of mothers
and 33% of fathers had left school after five years of basic education.

Theoretical Framework and Research Questions

The theoretical basis for the survey draws on Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human
development and its concept of interrelated ecological levels, or nested spheres. Burgess et al.
(2002) honed in on one of these spheres, the home environment, and conceptualized it from the
perspective of literacy. Weigel et al. (2005) used the three components of HLE that Burgess et al
(2002) had identified and relabeled them as follows: parental activities; parental literacy habits;
parental demographics. They added a fourth component on parental beliefs which this study did
not measure.
Weigel et al. (2005) describe parental activities as those efforts intended by parents to
encourage their children to read. Shared book reading is cited as one such activity, and has been
one of the most common methods of measuring HLE (e.g. Payne et al. 1994; Bus et al. 1995;
Roberts et al. 2005). It was therefore included in this survey. This study added another item,
taken from PISA, which identifies the number of educational items in the home, including certain
types of book.
The second component, parental literacy habits, has, according to Weigel et al. (2005), two
facets. The first of these, ‘time spent reading’, was explored through two questions which asked
respondents to report on their parents’ past and present reading habits. The second facet, ‘books
in the home’, was investigated by asking respondents to report on the number of books in their
home. A fourth question on parental library membership was added to this survey by the author.
The third component of Weigel et al.’s (2005) conceptualization, parental demographics,
measures the number of years parents spent in formal education; in effect a measure of SES. This
was investigated by asking respondents to identify when their parents left full-time education.
To sum up, mirroring the conceptualisations of Weigel et al. (2005), the eight research
questions (RQs) used in the survey are as follows:

RQ1. Did the frequency that parents or other adults read to the respondents as children
associate with respondents’ leisure reading habits?

RQ2. Does the number of educational items in the home associate with respondents’
leisure reading habits?

RQ 3. Do past parental reading habits associate with respondents’ leisure reading

habits?

RQ 4. Do present parental reading habits associate with respondents’ leisure reading

habits?

RQ 5. Does the number of books in the home associate with respondents’ leisure
reading habits?

71
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

RQ 6. Does parental library membership associate with respondents’ leisure reading

habits?

RQ 7. Does maternal education associate with respondents’ leisure reading habits?

RQ 8. Does paternal education associate with respondents’ leisure reading habits?

Leisure Reading and Assumptions

It is commonly recognized that reading fluency is best supported through reading practice. The
US National Reading Panel (NRP) identifies two instructional approaches to developing fluency:
guided repeated oral reading; independent silent reading. It describes the latter as encouraging
students to read “silently on their own, inside and outside the classroom, with little guidance or
feedback from their teachers” (Teaching children to read 2000, 12). Various authors have used
differing nomenclature to describe something similar: e.g. ‘extensive reading’, ‘free reading’
(Day and Bamford 1998; Gardner 2004, p2). This study has opted to call this activity ‘leisure
reading’ to reflect the survey question which asked respondents to determine how much reading
they do in their own time, for their own enjoyment and fun, and which is not related to
homework.
The study makes one important assumption, which is that leisure reading improves reading
skill. In contrast, NRP, in an extensive review of the literature, was not able to confirm the
causality of independent silent reading on improving reading skill (Teaching children to read
2000, 12). However, a large number of studies have shown a strong correlation between reading
practice and reading performance.

Materials, Procedures, and Analysis

The questionnaire was adapted from the one used in PISA 2009 and translated into Thai. It took
respondents about 10-15 minutes to complete, and was handed out and retrieved by lecturers in
February 2012.
For analysis, data were entered into SPSS (Version 11). Descriptive and inferential statistics
were calculated, and size effects (d) interpreted for practical importance using Cohen’s (1992)
rule of thumb (e.g. d = 0.2 is a small effect; d = 0.5 is a medium effect; d = 0.8 is a large effect).

The Variables

The respondents’ leisure reading habits were explored through two questions: the duration they
read for pleasure each day, and the frequency they read eight types of print media (e.g.
newspapers and magazines). These were the dependent variables. Both variables were measured
using a five-level rating scale. The eight research questions were the independent variables.

Results
The Dependent Variables

Daily Reading Rates

445 respondents reported on how much leisure reading they do each day. The average rate is
about 30 minutes a day and distribution is normal.

None 7.9%

Less than 30 minutes a day 42.2%

72
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

30-59 minutes a day 26.5%

1 - 2 hours a day 16.2%

More than 2 hours a day 7.2%

These five levels were then used in the statistical analyses with the eight independent
variables. Results of the computations are shown in Table 2.

Print Media Reading Frequencies

445 respondents replied to this question. 0-4 points were allocated for the frequency respondents
read each of eight different types of print media: e.g. zero points for “never or almost never” to
four points for “2 or more times a week”. The frequency means for each type are as follows:

Newspapers 3.51

Internet articles 3.34

Magazines 3.02

Cartoon books 2.79

Short stories 2.54

Technical books 2.50

Novels 2.41

Non-fiction 2.20
The scores for these reading frequencies were summed for each respondent and are normally
distributed. The mean is 22.3, the median is 23, and the mode is 24 [the maximum possible score
is 32]. Results of the statistical analyses with the independent variables are shown in Table 3.

73
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Table 2: Daily reading rates computed with the 8 independent variables using the Independent
Samples t Test
Group 1 Group 2
(N) Mean SD (N) Mean SD t p d Independent t test
Parental activities
RQ1: 237 1.62 1.066 146 1.84 1.048 -2.032 .043* .11 t(381)=-2.03, p=.043
RQ2: 227 1.56 1.022 217 1.91 1.063 -3.565 .000*** .17 t(442)=-3.57, p=.000
Parental literacy habits
RQ3: 175 1.54 1.071 265 1.85 1.036 -3.031 .003** .15 t(438)=-3.03, p=.003
RQ4: 201 1.53 1.025 242 1.89 1.057 -3.671 .000***.1 .17 t(441)=-3.67, p=.000
RQ5: 165 1.64 1.099 276 1.79 1.031 -1.383 .167 - t(439)=-1.38, p=.167
RQ6: 255 1.65 1.050 29 2.14 1.026 -2.372 .018* .24 t(282)=-2.37, p=.018
Parental demographics
RQ7: 203 1.70 1.016 171 1.71 1.065 -0.129 .897 - t(372)=-0.13, p=.897
RQ8: 178 1.68 1.033 173 1.75 1.086 -0.583 .561 - t(349)=-0.58, p=.561
*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001. Daily reading rates: 0= never; 1= less than 30 mins/day;
2= 30-59 mins/day; 3= 1-2 hrs/day; 4= 2 hrs plus/day
RQ1: shared book reading: Group 1 = never read to; Group 2 = read to by parents
RQ2: study items in the home: Group 1 ≤ 7 items; Group 2 > 7 items
RQ3: saw parents read: Group 1 ≤ once a week; Group 2 > once a week
RQ4: see parents read: Group 1 ≤ once a week; Group 2 > once a week
RQ5: books in the home: Group 1 ≤ 25 books; Group 2 > 25 books
RQ6: parental library members: Group 1 = not members; Group 2 = parents are members
RQ7: mother left education: Group 1 ≤ 14 years old; Group 2 ≤ 16 years old
RQ8: father left education: Group 1 ≤ 14 years old; Group 2 ≤ 16 years old

74
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

Table 3: The frequency respondents read 8 types of print media (summed) computed with the 8
independent variables
Group 1 Group 2

(N) Mean SD (N) Mean SD t p d Independent t test

Parental activities

RQ1: 237 21.24 6.23 146 23.89 5.16 -4.505 .000** .23 t(381)=-4.50, p=.000

RQ2: 227 20.79 6.22 217 23.88 5.34 -5.633 .000** .26 t(437)=-5.63, p=.000

Parental literacy habits

RQ3: 175 21.28 6.54 265 22.98 5.54 -2.834 .005** .15 t(329)=-2.83, p=.005

RQ4: 201 21.37 6.20 242 23.09 5.73 -3.035 .003** .14 t(441)=-3.04, p=.003

RQ5: 165 21.33 5.96 276 22.91 5.94 -2.687 .007** .13 t(439)=-2.69, p=.007

RQ6: 255 21.87 6.03 29 24.52 5.10 -2.272 .024* .24 t(282)=-2.27, p=.024

Parental demographics

RQ7: 203 21.91 6.10 171 22.68 5.84 -1.243 .215 - t(372)=-1.24, p=.215

RQ8: 178 21.54 6.44 173 22.83 5.48 -2.017 .044* .11 t(343)=-2.02, p=.044

*p<.05;**p<.01;***p<.001. Frequency: 0= never; 1= 2-3 times/yr; 2= once/month; 3= 2-3

times/month; 4= 2+ times/wk [then summed for the 8 materials]

RQ1: shared book reading: Group 1 = never read to; Group 2 = read to by
parents
RQ2: items in the home: Group 1 ≤ 7 study items; Group 2 > 7 items
RQ3: saw parents read: Group 1 ≤ once a week; Group 2 > once a week
RQ4: see parents read: Group 1 ≤ once a week; Group 2 > once a week
RQ5: books in the home: Group 1 ≤ 25 books; Group 2 > 25 books;
RQ6: parental library members: Group 1 = parents not members; Group 2 = parents are
members
RQ7: mother left education: Group 1 ≤ 14 years old; Group 2 ≤ 16 years old
RQ8: father left education: Group 1 ≤ 14 years old; Group 2 ≤ 16 years old

The Independent Variables

For the results (below) of each independent variable, there is a brief description of the key
features, along with a pie chart. Each pie chart also contains the significance values (p) and size
effects (d) for each of the two dependent variables in the bottom right corner. For computation
with the Independent Samples t Test, each independent variable is split into two groups. The
sizes (N), means, and standard deviations of the two groups, as well as the results of the
Independent Samples t Tests, are shown in Tables 2 and 3.

75
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Shared Book Reading

383 respondents replied to the question on how often they were read to as children by a caregiver
(see Figure 1). Nearly two thirds of respondents (61.9%) report never having been read to as a
child. Of those who were read to, in 77% of cases it was with one or other of their parents (or
both), and in 21% of cases it was another relative. The mean is 1.13, which is an average of just
over once a month. Analysis reveals significant relationships with the dependent variables.

Figure 1. Frequency respondents were read to as a child

Educational Items in the Home

444 respondents replied and the percentage of “yes” answers is as follows:

A desk for homework 90.8%

A dictionary 90.3%

A computer for homework 87.9%

A room of your own 83.1%

Books to help with school work 75.3%

A quiet place for homework 65.8%

Technical reference books 62.6%

Educational software 53.7%

An Internet link 52.1%

Books of poetry 31.0%

Classic literature 18.2%

76
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

Zero points were then allocated to a “no” answer and one point for a “yes”, and scores
summed for the eleven items for each respondent. The mean is 7.1, the median is 7, and the mode
is 8. Analysis reveals very highly significant relationships with the two dependent variables.

Past Parental Reading Frequencies

440 respondents replied to the question on how often they saw their parents read as children. The
average is about once to twice a week (see Figure 2). Analysis shows very significant
relationships with the two dependent variables.

Figure 2. The frequency respondents saw parents reading

Present Parental Reading Habits

443 respondents replied to the question on how often they see their parents read nowadays. The
mean is about once to twice a week (see Figure 3). Analysis reveals very significant relationships
with the two dependent variables.

77
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Figure 3. The frequency respondents see parents reading nowadays

Parental Book Ownership

441 respondents replied to this question, and the average is between 25-100 books (see Figure 4).
Analysis reveals that there is only a significant relationship, albeit it a very significant one, with
one of the two dependent variables (see Table 3).

Figure 4. Number of books in the home

Parental Library Membership

441 respondents replied to this question. A very large percentage (93.4%) reports that their
parents were either not library members, or they don’t know (see figure 5). Analysis reveals
significant relationships with both dependent variables.

78
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

Figure 5. Parental library membership

Mothers’ Education

374 respondents replied to this question on mothers’ education levels. Results indicate that
almost two fifths of mothers had left school by 11, and over 55% by age 14 (see Figure 6).
Analysis reveals no significance with either dependent variable.

Figure 6. Mothers’ education

Fathers’ Education

351 respondents replied to the same question on fathers’ education. Fathers generally had slightly
more years of education than mothers (see Figure 7), and this was particularly so of tertiary

79
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

education where fathers’ attendance rates at university were nearly twice those of mothers’.
Analysis reveals only a significant relationship with print media frequency (see Table 3).

Figure 7. Fathers’ education

Multiple Regression

Multiple regression was computed using the data from 184 respondents - those with a complete
data set - to check the predicted effects of the interaction between the eight independent variables
on the two dependent variables. Mothers’ education and father’s education were excluded, as
they both correlate highly with each other (r =.64), leading to problems of collinearity. The two
variables number of books in the home and saw parents read were excluded, as they make the
smallest contributions in the computation. The results for the remaining four independent
variables with significant F values, and also contributing to the highest Adjusted R Square
values, are shown in Table 4. Overall, though the Adjusted R Square values are low, the
predicted potential effects are significant.

80
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

Table 4: Multiple regression results for the influences of four key independent variables
Dependent variables F Adjusted Independent Beta p
R square variables
Daily reading rates F4,238= 6.010, p=.000 .076 Shared reading .171 .008**
See parents read .128 .043*
Home study items .131 .045*
Library membership .047 .465
8 reading materials F4,238= 6.010, p=.000 .107 Shared reading .198 .002**
See parents read .119 .055*
Home study items .188 .004**
Library membership .028 .660
*p<.05; ** p<.01;

Discussion
The major finding of this study is that HLE is significantly associated with the two outcome
variables: daily reading rates; use of print media. This goes some way to confirm the role of HLE
found in other non-OECD countries (e.g. Chinese: Li and Rao 2000; Bangla: Opel, Ameer and
Aboud 2009). Also of import is that the reading rate found in this study (30mins/day) would tend
to reject the view of Thais as reluctant readers.
However, there are areas of concern. The two most visible features of the results are the
number of respondents who report never having been read to as a child (62%), and the paucity of
parental library membership (6.6%). These participation rates might not be a problem except that
shared book reading and library membership are potentially two of the best predictors of leisure
reading habits in this study. The Adjusted R Square values suggest these two components of
HLE help predict 7-10% of the outcome variables, though this is well below the figure of 38%
for HLE reported in PISA (Fuchs and Wößmann 2007).
Some of the difference could be explained by the other variables in this study - and others
not measured - but the overall impression is that the Thai HLE as represented here may be
underperforming. By focusing on shared book reading and library membership, the following
sections will attempt to explore why this may be so.

Shared Book Reading

In this study, respondents report having been read to as a child by a caregiver, usually a parent, a
little more frequently than once a month. This is less than the once a week reported in Korea
(Kim 2009), but contrasts very markedly with the frequency of shared book reading in the US of
almost every day (Denton, Germino-Hausken and West 2000). In addition, over 60% of
respondents in this study report they were never read to at all. Rates for non-reading in US homes
are generally 15-20 times lower (e.g. 3% for Gonzalez and Uhing 2008; 4% for Foster et al.
2005), a huge difference.
If reading performance is predicated on a significant contribution from HLE, with shared
book reading as a key component, we would expect to see this reflected in the PISA reading
scores. This is not entirely the case. Though the US reading scores are significantly higher than
in Thailand, they are significantly lower than in Korea (see Table 1). However, another top
performer on PISA is Finland, and qualitative evidence reported by Brueggeman (2008) indicates
that shared book reading is a strong feature of the Finnish HLE. There are other comparisons
between Finland and Korea which are instructive.
First, both countries acknowledge the key role of parents in a child’s educational
development (Finland: Brueggeman 2008; Korea: Kim, Lavonen and Ogawa 2009), a key
principle of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological approach, and one which underpins HLE theory

81
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

presented in this paper. Second, where the two countries differ is in the functioning of one of the
nested spheres, namely schooling. Finland focuses on the equality of outcomes in schools for all
its students, regardless of socio-economic background, whereas in Korea cram schools are a
major factor in educational outcomes (Kim, Lavonen and Ogawa 2009) - and therefore
potentially in the PISA results as well. Private schooling comes at considerable financial expense
to Korean parents, but reflects once again the critical role of parents.
The number of books in Korean homes provides corroborative evidence of the importance
Korean parents attach to their role in advancing their children’s educational development.
According to PISA Database (2009), the number of books in Korean households is one of the
highest on record (see Table 5), on a par with Finland and nearly twice the US and UK average.
How does Thailand compare?

Table 5: Comparison of mean reading scores and the average number of books in households in
eight countries from PISA 2009
Country Reading Households with 0- Average number of books per
Scores 10 books household
Korea 539 5% 100-150
Finland 536 6% 100-150
*Singapore 526 10% 50-100
Japan 520 9% 75-125
United Kingdom 494 14% 50-100
OECD Average 492 17% 50-100
USA 500 20 % 50-100
*Thailand 421 21% 20-25
*Indonesia 402 23% 20-25
*Brazil 412 40% 10-25
*non-OECD countries, (data taken from PISA Database 2009)

In this study, the average number of books reported in the home is 25-100. This is above the
national mean reported for Thailand in PISA 2009 and closer to the OECD average. This is
commendable, though still below the US, UK, and Korean means (see Table 5). However, book
ownership in this study only significantly associates with one of the outcome variables, the
frequency of print media usage. Furthermore, if we peruse the frequency list, we notice that there
are no books in the top half of the list. This suggests that though there are books in the home,
they are not being read. This poses the question of whether the importance of books is in their
usage, or on the attitudes towards reading their ownership reflects. It may be both. However, to
underline the importance of book ownership, Evans et al. (2010) have reported that children who
are raised in homes where there are many books receive the equivalent of three years extra
schooling over those from homes without books, and this is independent of parental occupation,
education and SES, and holds across a panoply of countries. It would seem then that books play a
major role. Is that role being utilized in the homes studied here?

Parental Library Membership

There are two points to make about this predictor variable. Firstly, parental library membership is
significantly associated with both outcome variables. Additionally, though size effects are small
(d=.24 for both variables), the combined ranking of both (1st and 2nd) is the highest of the eight
predictor variables. Parental library membership would therefore appear to be a key component
of the HLE studied here.
The second point concerns percentages. Only 6.6% of parents in this study are reported to
have library membership. This contrasts with an estimated 80% of the population in Finland

82
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

(Bundy 2004), and approximately 58% in the UK (LISU 2010); these two countries rank 2nd and
17th respectively on the PISA 2006 tables. However, there are differences in library provision.
The number of people per library is 5,000 in Finland (calculated from data from the Finnish
Library Association 2004), 14,000 in the UK (calculated from data in LISU 2010), but 70,000 in
Thailand (calculated from data in Lerdsuriyakul 1999). This study was conducted in a rural area
of Thailand and even if we acknowledge that a significant proportion of those parents (35%)
whose children don’t know their library status are actually members, the number of people per
library is still likely to be less than the Thai national average.
However, Korea again bucks the trend. According to Yoon and Kim (2009), Korea has over
80,000 people per library, a rate even higher than Thailand. However, in Korea this rate is
viewed as a negative, and new library construction is a government priority with 66 new public
libraries planned for 2011 (The Korean Herald 2011). Looking at the OECD as a whole,
European countries, who dominate the membership have 8 times as many public library members
as Asia, and 12 times as many library transactions (Global Library Statistics 2003). Even if
library membership is not a powerful component of HLE, it does reflect the value that society
(Bronfenbrenner’s outer nested sphere) accords to reading.

Parental Demographics

There are two points of note here. Fathers’ education is significantly associated with print media
usage, possibly because fathers with higher education have better-paid jobs and therefore more
disposable income to purchase print media. If Thailand continues to prosper, we can perhaps
expect more fathers to contribute materially to HLE, with concomitant increases in their
offsprings reading rates. The predictor variable items in the home, which is also a reflection of
family spending power, indicates this as well. It is therefore not unreasonable to suggest that
HLE is linked, perhaps through these and other mechanisms, to the prosperity of society
generally.
The second point concerns mothers’ education. The lack of an association for this predictor
variable with either outcome variable has two possible explanations. One is that mothers who are
better educated are not converting this asset into increased reading rates for their children; they
may not be aware for example of how they can influence a child’s literacy development, or even
appreciate that their influence is important. Another possibility is that parental activities, such as
shared book reading, are more powerful determinants of children’s reading rates than the
educational attainment of their mothers. This would suggest that less educated mothers can
nurture skills in their children that they themselves do not have just as easily as better-educated
ones.
To summarise, the Thai HLE as measured in this study looks to be underperforming. There
are several remedies. Educating parents of the importance of reading with their children is one of
them. Another is to augment the literacy environment at home by encouraging parents to buy
their children books. Finally, it is the parent as reading activator rather than reading role model
that appears to be the most influential of Weigel et al’s (2005) conceptualizations, so even
mothers with less education can have a major impact on their children’s reading development
simply by encouraging the reading habit.

Limitations and Further Research

This study had at least two limitations. First, the numbers of ‘not indicated’ answers were
sufficient to suggest that respondents may not have fully understood some of the questions.
Though the survey was written in Thai, some of the questions may have been conceptually
opaque. For example, if the concept of ‘shared book reading’ is culturally unfamiliar, then
respondents will avoid questions which investigate it. The second limitation is that the survey did
not ask respondents to identify when they were read to. However, Bradley, Corwyn, McAdoo

83
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

and Garcia Coll (2001) have shown that shared book reading activities take place most often
between 3-5 years old and this was possibly the case here.
With regards further research, a key area is parental beliefs about reading, particularly in the
Thai context. To what extent do these beliefs associate with reading outcomes? Another area to
investigate is how books are used in the Korean HLE.

Acknowledgments
First of all, I would like to thank the students, staff, and faculty of Rajamangala University of
Technology Lanna Lampang, without whose participation and help this study could not have
happened. I would also like to thank Arporn Suwannakita for entering the data on SPSS, and my
colleague Ian Andres for drawing the pie charts.

84
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

REFERENCES
Arterberry, Martha E., Corina Midgett, Diane L. Putnick, and Marc H. Bornstein. 2007. “Early
attention and literacy experiences predict adaptive communication.” First Language
27:175-189. doi:10.1177/0142723706075784
Baker, Linda, and Deborah Scher. 2002. “Beginning readers’ motivation for reading in relation to
parental beliefs and home reading experiences.” Reading Psychology 23:239-269.
doi:10.1080/02702710290061346
Baker, Linda, Deborah Scher, and Kirsten Mackler. 1997. “Home and family influences on
motivations for reading.” Educational Psychologist 32:69-82.
Bradley, Robert, H., Robert F. Corwyn, Harriette P. McAdoo and Cynthia Garcia Coll. 2001.
“The Home Environments of Children in the United States Part I: Variations by Age,
Ethnicity, and Poverty Status.” Child Development 72(6): 1844–1867.
Brueggeman, Martha A. 2008. “An Outsider’s View of Beginning Literacy in Finland:
Assumptions, Lessons Learned, and Sisu.” Literacy Research and Instruction 47:1–8.
doi: 10.1080/19388070701749371
Bundy, Alan. 2004. “Places of Connection: New public and academic library buildings in
Australia and New Zealand.” Paper presented at the Library Buildings Conference,
Bournemouth, UK, February 5-6. http://arrow.unisa.edu.au/vital/access/manager/
Repository/unisa:28326
Burgess, Stephen R., Steven A. Hecht, and Christopher J. Lonigan. (2002). “Relations of the
Home Literacy Environment (HLE) to the development of reading-related abilities: A
one-year longitudinal study.” Reading Research Quarterly 37, 408-426.
doi:10.1598/RRQ.37.4.4
Bus, Adriana G., Marinus H. van Ijzendoorn, and Anthony D. Pellegrini. 1995. “Joint book
reading makes for success in learning to read: A metaanalysis on intergenerational
transmission of literacy.” Review of Educational Research 65:1-21.
doi:10.3102/00346543065001001
Cohen, Jacob. 1992. “A power primer.” Psychological Bulletin 112:155-159.
Day, Richard R., and Julian Bamford. 1998. 3rd ed. Extensive reading in the second language
classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Denton, Kristin, Elvira Germino-Hausken, and Jerry West. 2000. “America's Kindergartners.”
NCES 2000-070. National Center for Education Statistics.
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000070.pdf
Evans, Mariah D. R., Jonathan K Kelley, Joanna Sikora, and Donald J. Treiman. 2010. “Family
scholarly culture and educational success: Books and schooling in 27 nations.” Research
in Social Stratification and Mobility 28(2):171-197. doi: 10.1016/j.rssm.2010.01.002
Finnish Library Association. (2010). Accessed September 16, 2012.
http://kirjastoseura.kaapeli.fi/etusivu/apua/english
Flouri, Eirini, and Ann Buchanan. 2004. “Early father’s and mother’s involvement and child’s
later educational outcomes.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 74:141–153.
Foster, Martha A., Richard Lambert, Martha Abbott-Shim, Frances McCarty, and Sarah Franze.
2005. “A model of home learning environment and social risk factors in relation to
children's emergent literacy and social outcomes.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly
20:13-36. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2005.01.006
Fuchs, Thomas, and Ludger Wößmann. 2007. “What accounts for international differences in
student performance? A re-examination using PISA data.” Empirical Economics 32(2-
3):433-464. doi:10.1007/s00181-006-0087-0
Gardner, Dee. 2004. “Vocabulary Input through Extensive Reading: A Comparison of Words
Found in Children's Narrative and Expository Reading Materials.” Applied Linguistics
25(1):1-37+130

85
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Global Library Statistics 1900-2000. 2003. International Federation of Library Associations and
Institutions. http://archve.ifla.org/III/wsis/wsis-stats4pub_v.pdf
Gonzalez, Jorge E., and Brad M. Uhing. 2008. “Home literacy environments and young Hispanic
children's English and Spanish oral language: A communality analysis.” Journal of
Early Intervention 30(2):116-139. doi: 0.1177/1053815107313858
Hilton, Mary. 2006. “Measuring standards in primary English: Issues of validity and
accountability with respect to PIRLS and National Curriculum test scores.” British
Educational Research Journal 32: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~
content=t713406264~tab=issueslist~branches=32-v32817-837.doi:10.1080/0141192060
0989453
Human Development Reports. 2009. “Thailand. Country Profile: Human Development
Indicators.” http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/THA.html
Katzir, Tami, Nonie K. Lesaux, and Young-Suk Kim. 2009. “The role of reading self-concept
and home literacy practices in fourth grade reading comprehension.” Reading and
Writing 22:261-276. doi:10.1007/s11145-007-9112-8
Kim, Young-Suk. 2009. “The relationship between home literacy practices and developmental
trajectories of emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills for Korean children.”
Reading and Writing 22:57-84. doi:10.1007/s11145-007-9103-9
Kim, Minkee, Jari Lavonen, and Masakata Ogawa. 2009. “Experts’ Opinions on the High
Achievement of Scientific Literacy in PISA 2003: A Comparative Study in Finland and
Korea.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education 5(4):379-
393.
Ko, Hwa W., and Yi L. Chan. 2009. “Family factors and primary students' reading attainment: A
Chinese community perspective.” Chinese Education and Society 42(3):33-48.
doi:10.2753/CED1061-1932420302
Lerdsuriyakul, Kulthorn. 1999. “Public Library in Thailand.” Paper presented at the 65th IFLA
Council and General Conference in Bangkok, Thailand, August 20-28.
Li, Hui, and Nirmala Rao. 2000. “Parental influences on Chinese literacy development: A
comparison of preschoolers in Beijing, Hong Kong, and Singapore.” International
Journal of Behavioral Development 24:82-90. doi:10.1080/016502500383502
LISU. 2010. “Number of Libraries.” Libraries, archives, museums and publishing online
statistics tables. The Library and Information Statistics Unit. Loughborough University.
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/microsites/infosci/lisu/lampost10/inst10.html
Mosika, Nongsilinee, Somjai Theeratith, Korapat Pruekchaikul, and Vince Goldie. 2011.
“Programme for International Student Assessment 2009 (PISA 2009).” Ministry of
Education Thailand. Accessed September 16, 2012. http://www.en.moe.go.th/
index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=210:programme-for-international-
student-assessment-2009-pisa-2009&catid=1:news&Itemid=42
Nimsomboon, Narit. 2006. “The role of public library in Thailand as the learning center for rural
communities”. Research Center for Knowledge Communities. Tskuba University,
Japan. http://www.kc.tsukuba.ac.jp/colloqium/030219a.pdf
Opel, Aftab, Syeda S. Ameer, and Frances E. Aboud. 2009. “The effect of preschool dialogic
reading on vocabulary among rural Bangladeshi children.” International Journal of
Educational Research 48:12-20. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2009.02.008
Park, Hyunjoon. 2008. “Home literacy environments and children's reading performance: A
comparative study of 25 countries.” Educational Research and Evaluation 14:489-505.
doi:10.1080/13803610802576734
Payne, Adam C., Grover J. Whitehurst, and Andrea L. Angell. 1994. “The role of Home Literacy
Environment in the development of language ability in preschool children from low-
income families.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 9:427-440. doi:10.1016/0885-
2006(94)90018-3

86
 FERRIMAN: ASSOCIATIONS OF THE HOME LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

PISA Country Profiles. 2006. “Cycle 2006.” http://pisacountry.acer.edu.au

PISA Database. 2009. “Interactive Data Selection.” http://pisa2009.acer.edu.au/interactive.php
PISA 2009 Profiles. 2009. “PISA 2009 profiles by country/economy.”
http://stats.oecd.org/PISA2009Profiles/#
Priwatrworawute, Poolsook. 2000. “Mobile libraries in Thailand.” Paper presented at the 66th
IFLA Council and General Conference in Jerusalem, Israel, August 13-18.
Roberts, Joanne, Julia Jurgens, and Margaret Burchinal. 2005. “The role of home literacy
practices in preschool children’s language and emergent literacy skills.” Journal of
Speech, Language and Hearing Research 48:345-359. doi:10.1044/1092-
4388(2005/024)
Scarborough, Hollis S, and Wanda Dobrich. 1994. “On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers.”
Developmental Review 14:245-302. doi:10.1006/drev.1994.1010
Sénéchal, Monique. 2006. “Testing the Home Literacy Model: parent involvement in
kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency,
spelling, and reading for pleasure.” Scientific Studies of Reading 10:59-87.
doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1001_4
Teaching children to read. 2000, April 13. “Teaching children to read: an evidence-based
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for
reading instruction.” National Reading Panel. http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/
nrp/upload/smallbook_pdf.pdf
The Korean Herald. 2011. “W552 billion allocated for 180 new public libraries”. The Korean
Herald, January 27. Accessed September 15. http://view.koreaherald.com/kh/view.php?
ud=20110126000678&cpv=0
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. 2011. “Education (all levels) profile.”
http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=121&IF_Lang
uage=eng&BR_Country=7640&BR_Region=40515
van Ours, Jan C. 2008. “When do children read books?” Education Economics 16:313-328.
doi:10.1080/09645290801976902
van Peer, Willie. 1991. “Literary socialization in the family: A state of the art.” Poetics 20:539-
558. doi:10.1016/0304-422X(91)90024-J
Weigel, Daniel J., Sally S. Martin, and Kymberley K. Bennet. 2005. “Ecological influences of
the home and the child-care center on preschool-age children’s literacy development.”
Reading Research Quarterly 40:204-233. doi:10.1598/RRQ.40.2.4
Yoon, Hee-Yoon, and Sin-Young Kim. 2009. “A study on the job analysis of public libraries in
Korea.” Aslib Proceedings 61:504-541. doi:10.1108/00012530911005508
Zhou, Hui, and Farideh Salili. 2008. “Intrinsic reading motivation of Chinese preschoolers and its
relationships with home literacy.” International Journal of Psychology 43:912-916.
doi:10.1080/00207590701838147

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Nicholas Ferriman: Nick Ferriman has taught English in Thailand for over twenty years. For the
last nine years, he has taught freshman composition and public speaking to undergraduates at
Mahidol University International College in Bangkok. His research interests include literacy, e-
learning, and international affairs. His interest in literacy evolved out of his postgraduate research
into “reluctant readership” and the search for its origins.

87
 Text-to-Speech Use to Improve Reading of High
School Struggling Readers
Kelly Roberts, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA
Kiriko Takahashi, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA
Hye-Jin Park, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA
Robert Stodden, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA

Abstract: The purpose of two pilot studies was to test the efficacy of text-to-speech (TTS) software in improving the
reading skills of high school students reading between a 1.0 and 6.0 grade level equivalency. Participants were receiving
special education services, or at risk of referral. Their reading baseline and outcomes were measured, using select
subtests of Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement or with Nelson-Denny Reading Test, without access to TTS
software (unaided) during the testing. Kurzweil 3000 was used with the participants for one semester within a content
area class (e.g., science). Results from the first study found the use of Kurzweil 3000 significantly increased participants’
unaided vocabulary. The second study found participants who used Kurzweil 3000 for more than 400 minutes in a
semester had significantly increased their unaided reading vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency rate when compared
to their baseline scores. There follows discussions on exposure to text and the possible link to improved reading, the
limitations of the pilot studies, and future research directions of TTS software as a potential reading intervention.

Keywords: Text-to-Speech Software, Successful Reading Interventions, High School Struggling Readers

Introduction

R eading is a complex cognitive task, not just a simple visual activity (Smith 2004). Many
high school students in the U.S. continue to struggle to master this complex task even
when reading is the focus of many years of schooling. At the most basic level, reading
involves the ability to decode individual words (i.e., ability to pronounce print/written words and
break them into sounds) (Snow and Sweet 2003). However, there is an entire range of higher
order reading skills that secondary students need to master, such as the ability to acquire
knowledge from various text structures (Mancilla et al. 2011).
The complex task of reading is one of the most commonly cited reasons for high school
dropout rates in the U.S. being excessive (Kamil 2003; Snow and Biancarosa 2003). Many high
school students struggle with reading, and their low reading proficiency rate has been a national
concern for several decades (Jacobs 2008). Although it is difficult to classify a “typical”
struggling reader, many have problems with reading comprehension because they do not read
fluently (Biancarosa 2005). Reading fluently involves the accurate reading of connected text at a
conversational rate (180 wpm) or faster with appropriate prosody (Torgesen and Hudson 2006).
Struggling readers often read haltingly, without attention to punctuation, and have difficulty
grouping words into meaningful grammatical units. Even when they can decode individual
words, they still read connected text inaccurately (Kurzweil Education Systems 2004). In
addition, these high school students, more often than not, lack sufficient content area vocabulary.
The vocabulary gap widens by year. High performing first graders know about twice as many
words as low-performing students, and by 12th grade, high performing students know about four
time as many words as low-performing students (Hart and Risley , 1995).
The reading gap is almost too wide to address by the time these struggling readers are in
high school. The students who drop out are unable to keep up with the grade-level curriculum
because they do not have the necessary reading skills, nor a means to acquire them. These
students are discouraged and unmotivated to face the task of reading.
A means to address this reading gap has been put forth in current legislation and initiatives
in the U.S. (i.e., AT Tech Act 2004; New Freedom Initiative 2001). This legislation mandates

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, www.thelearner.com, ISSN 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Kelly Roberts, Kiriko Takahashi, Hye-Jin Park, Robert Stodden
All Rights Reserved, Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

that assistive technology (AT) become integrated into learning environments to assist students
with disabilities and learning differences. Text-to-speech (TTS) software is one example of AT
that is increasingly used as a tool for struggling readers in high school and college. It is widely
accepted as a form of accommodation for students with disabilities (Engstrom 2005; Silver-
Pacuilla and Fleischman 2006). However, research on the use of TTS software for improving
reading is limited (Moorman et al. 2010; Deshler 2005).
Therefore, the purpose of the research presented here was to determine the efficacy and
potential of the TTS software, Kurzweil 3000, as a reading intervention for high school
struggling readers. The results of two pilot studies on the efficacy of TTS software use with high
school struggling readers are reported. In the discussion, the researchers present an explanation
as to how the use of TTS software may have improved the reading rate, vocabulary, and
comprehension of high school struggling readers.

Research Questions
In the first pilot study, the following two research questions were investigated:
1) How did the use of TTS software affect the participants’ performance in a standardized
vocabulary test (unaided) over a period of one semester?
2) How did the use of TTS software affect the participants’ performance in a standardized
reading comprehension test (unaided) over a period of one semester?
Building upon the findings of the first pilot study, an additional question was investigated in the
second pilot study:
3) How did the use of TTS software affect the participants’ performance in a reading rate
(unaided) over a period of one semester?

Method
Two pilot studies on the use of TTS software as a reading intervention were conducted. Both
studies utilized Kurzweil 3000 software. Additionally, both studies used quantitative
methodology to address the research questions. The research design of the two pilot studies was a
repeated measures design, where the baseline and post-scores of each participant were compared
to themselves.

Samples

Convenience and criterion sampling were used to identify students for participation in the
studies. Research staff worked with teachers, counselors, and administrators to disseminate
informational flyers to students and to inform parents of the study. In addition, if a teacher was
interested in participating in the research, an in-person informational session and demonstration
of the TTS software were held in his or her language arts, science, or social studies classroom.
All students from the participating teachers’ classes, with parental signed consent forms, were
provided access to the software. This included students whose reading levels did not fall between
a 1.0 to 6.0 grade level equivalency (GLE). This step was taken so as not to single out students
with reading difficulties within the classroom. However, only data on the students who met the
reading inclusion criteria, had complete consent forms, and used the TTS software were included
in the data analysis. The reading range of 1.0 to 6.0 GLE was determined based on the literature
indicating that individuals reading below a 5.0 GLE are considered functionally illiterate
(Harman, 1970). The low limit of a 1.0 GLE was deemed necessary so that the students have at
least the basic reading skills to benefit from the software use. For the upper limit, one study
(Higgins and Raskind 1997) reported that TTS software might impair reading comprehension if
the person had adequate reading comprehension without the use of the software.

90
 ROBERTS ET AL.: TEXT-TO-SPEECH USE TO IMPORVE READING OF HIGH SCHOOL READERS

In the first study, a sample of high school students was recruited from two Hawai’i public
schools. Inclusion criteria included having a learning disability (LD) and reading between a 1.0
and 6.0 GLE as measured by select subtests of the Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ III) Test of
Achievement (as explained in the measures section). Thirty-five students met the inclusion
criteria and submitted student and parental consents for participation. Seventeen of these 35
students completed the study; they used the TTS software for more than 400 minutes for one
semester and participated in the three points of data collection.
In the second study, a sample of high school students from two different Hawai`i public
schools was recruited. Inclusion criteria were reading between a 1.0 and 6.0 GLE, as measured
by Nelson-Denny Reading Test, and having culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
Sixty-nine students met the inclusion criteria and submitted student and parental consents for
participation. Ten of these individuals completed the study; they used the TTS software for more
than 400 minutes for one semester and participated in the two data collection points.

Intervention

The TTS software used in the two studies was Kurzweil 3000. The original Kurzweil reading
machine was developed as a compensatory tool for individuals who were blind and visually
impaired. Kurzweil 1000 continues to target these individuals, while Kurzweil 3000 is designed
as a tool for individuals with other forms of disabilities. This includes learning disabilities (LD),
attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and some physical disabilities, such as quadriplegia,
where turning the pages of a book is difficult. At the most basic functional level, TTS software
provides a synchronized visual and auditory presentation of text. It is able to play back text as
spoken words from almost any good quality printed document (e.g., books, articles, and
magazines) that has been converted into an electronic text format, or from electronic documents
including electronic mail and web pages. Kurzweil 3000 is a fully developed TTS software
program that has a combination of an optical character recognition (OCR) capacity and TTS
program, making the scanning and reading of materials accessible in one step. When using
printed documents, the user places the documents on a scanner and scans the text pages into the
computer. The page is initially recognized as an image, which is then converted to an electronic
text format through OCR that is built into Kurzweil 3000. Once in electronic text format, the
computer’s speech synthesizer can “read” the text to the user, word for word, while highlighting
each word, sentence, or paragraph (Elkind 1998).
Kurzweil 3000 was installed on the network servers at each participating school. Access to
the software was available from classroom computers, as well as from computer labs, to all
students who returned the student and parental consents. Participating teachers facilitated and
scheduled student access to TTS software. Researchers assisted the teachers in advance with
scanning and converting the class reading materials and assignments so they would be readily
usable with the TTS software.

Procedure of the First Pilot Study

The first study began with 35 Hawai`i public high school students, who had been diagnosed with
LD according to the State Department of Education, and were reading between a 1.0 and 6.0
GLE, as measured by select subtests of the WJ III. The participants were trained on the use of the
software, and a fidelity checklist was used to determine that each could use the required features
of the TTS software with 95% accuracy. The participants used TTS software to read class
reading materials and assignments in the their language arts, social studies, and science classes.
The participants used the software with supervision from the researchers and independently for
one semester. In order to measure any change in unaided reading comprehension and vocabulary,
the researchers administered the WJ III three times: before the intervention, at the end of the first

91
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

quarter, and at the end of semester. Alternate forms of the WJ III were administered to avoid a
practice effect. Seventeen students completed the study, including all data collection points.
Based on the findings from the first pilot study, the second pilot study was revised. The
revisions included development of a TTS training manual for high school students and teachers
and changing the reading test from WJ III to the Nelson-Denny Reading Test. This switch in the
reading tests allowed for a group administration of the test and the inclusion of reading rate as a
measure. In addition, the change from an oral-verbal test to a pencil-paper based test was deemed
more closely matched to typical high school reading assessments. The Nelson-Denny Reading
Test was administered twice: pre- and post-intervention.

Procedure of the Second Pilot Study

The second pilot study was conducted with 69 Hawai`i public high school students, who were in
grades 9 thru 12 and reading between a 1.0 and 6.0 GLE, as measured by the Nelson-Denny
Reading Test. The participants were trained on the use of the software, and a fidelity checklist
was used to determine that each could use the required features of the TTS software with 95%
accuracy. The intervention consisted of students using the software for more than 400 minutes
for one semester, either with supervision from the researchers or independently, to complete class
readings and assignments. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test was administered before and after
the intervention. Alternate forms of the test were administered to avoid a practice effect. Ten
students completed the study, including all data collection points.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using general linear modeling and paired samples t-tests using
SPSS.

Measures

Data on reading outcomes were collected using the reading test scores (WJ III for the first pilot
study and Nelson-Denny Reading Test for the second). Data on the participants’ use of the
software were collected from the automated user log, which is a built-in feature of the Kurzweil
3000 software program.

Woodcock Johnson III (WJ III) - Test of Achievement

Woodcock Johnson III (WJ III) - Test of Achievement (Woodcock and Johnson 1989) was used
in the first pilot study. The Reading Vocabulary and Passage Comprehension Subtests were
selected to measure vocabulary and reading comprehension of the participants. The WJ III was
norm referenced on a nationwide sample of 6,026 individuals with the 10 subtests having
reliability ratings from the .70 range to the .95 range. Validity was assessed using the PIAT, the
WISC-R, the BASIS, the K-ABC, the K-TEA, the WRAT-R, the Stanford Binet (fourth), as well
as the Woodcock-Johnson (revised).

Nelson-Denny Reading Test

The Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Brown, Fishco, and Hanna 1993) was used in the second pilot
study. Participants’ reading rate, reading comprehension, and vocabulary were assessed through
administration of alternative versions of Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Forms G and H).
According to the test manual, test-retest reliability is .77, internal reliability is .96, and alternate
form of reliability is .90. Research by Aamodt (2004), evaluating the test, found scores on the
instrument correlated significantly with academic grades (r=.59). Murphy (1995) conducted a

92
 ROBERTS ET AL.: TEXT-TO-SPEECH USE TO IMPORVE READING OF HIGH SCHOOL READERS

study employing a sample of 663 college students to examine the College Board’s Computerized
Placement Tests (CPT-R, known to have high levels of statistical reliability, content validity, and
construct validity) with regard to the three sub-scores of the Nelson-Denny reading tests.
Significant correlations were observed between the CPT-R and the Nelson Denny Vocabulary
Test (r =.67), the Nelson Denny Comprehension Test (r = .60), and the Nelson-Denny Total Test
(r = .69).

TTS Software Log

The TTS Software Log was used during the second pilot study. The TTS software (i.e., Kurzweil
3000™) automatically keeps track of login and log-out times as well as use of specific features
(e.g., study tools, changing reading speed, and voice selected) by each user. The data of usage for
each participating student were collected and compiled at the end of every month, and a total
time was obtained at the end of each intervention semester.

Results
Findings from the First Pilot Study

The results from each pilot study varied as indicated below and in tables 1 and 2. The first
research question in the first pilot study addressed vocabulary. The results indicated a significant
increase in participants’ unaided vocabulary (vocabulary tested with WJ III when not using the
software), F(2, 32)= 2.524, p <.10. The partial eta squared value was .136 indicating a medium
effect size.
The second research question addressed unaided reading comprehension. The results from
the first pilot study indicated that the reading comprehension of the participants did not
significantly change over time, F(2, 32)=.508, p > .10.
Additionally, through the first pilot study, using a cluster analysis, the group of students with
increased unaided vocabulary was found to have used the TTS software for approximately 400
minutes in a semester (usually 10 weeks of intervention period) on average.
Findings from the first pilot study presented: (1) the use of TTS software in high school
classrooms is feasible; (2) the group of participants whose vocabulary scores increased at the end
of the intervention period were those who used the TTS software for more than 400 minutes in a
semester; and (3) administering WJ III reading vocabulary and passage comprehension is
inefficient as it is an individually administered test which can range from a few minutes to
approximately 30 minutes per participant to complete.

Table 1. Pilot Study 1 Results

Type III
Source df MS F p
SS
Vocabulary
Time 2 11.973 5.986 2.524 .096
Error 32 75.894 2.372
Comprehension
Time 2 .438 .219 .508 .607
Error 32 13.809 .432

93
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Findings from the Second Pilot Study

Findings from the second pilot study included significant improvements in participants’ unaided
vocabulary (GLE score), unaided reading comprehension (GLE score), and unaided reading rates
(percentile), compared to their own baseline scores (t(9)=6.880, p <.05; t(9)=3.481, p <05;
t(9)=3.108, p <.05, respectively). By the end of the intervention semester, the total reading scores
significantly increased by 1.99 GLE on average (t(10)=2.308, p <.05), with a large effect size
(d=.84).

Table 2. Pilot Study 2 Results

Pair df t p
Post-Pre Vocabulary 9 6.880 .000
Post-Pre Comprehension 9 3.481 .007
Post-Pre Reading Rate 9 3.108 .013

Discussion
The results of the two pilot studies indicate that struggling high school readers who used TTS
software for more than 400 minutes in a semester, had significantly improved reading skills when
tested using subtests of the WJ III and the Nelson Denny. The researchers attribute this
improvement to students’ exposure to more text and incidental vocabulary learning through the
use of the TTS software. The software provided a steady pace of auditory and visual input of text
for the struggling readers whose typical reading is slow and halting. In addition, the TTS
software may have compensated for the participants’ poor reading skills by allowing the users to
set the reading speed at a much faster rate than what they could read on their own. Student
participants in the studies were encouraged to increase the speed as they became more familiar
with the software. All participants chose a speed of 120 words per minute or higher.
Moreover, with the TTS software, the students were able to hear accurate and correct
pronunciation of most words. The speech synthesis of the TTS software reduced typical students’
substitution errors and decoding errors. According to published research, accurate and fast
decoding of words will leave more room in working memory for constructing meaning as the
student reads a text (Mellard and Patterson 2008; Winn et al. 2006). Thus, it is reasonable to
conclude that reading with the TTS software reduced students’ reading fatigue and freed up
memory space to think about the actual content of what they were reading.
One may question, then, whether TTS software is tapping into students’ listening
comprehension rather than reading skills. However, the researchers argue that the improved
vocabulary of the students, assessed through a standardized paper and pencil reading test
completed when not using the TTS software, demonstrates that TTS software is more than a
simple audio device. In general, a faster reading rate will expose students to more text, thus more
vocabulary. One of the reasons for a vocabulary gap between a good reader and a poor reader is
the difference in their vocabulary acquisition through incidental learning. Although many
research studies indicate that explicit instruction in vocabulary is necessary for struggling readers
to increase vocabulary, wide reading promotes incidental learning and improves reading
comprehension (Nagy 2005). With the use of TTS software, each word is highlighted as the text
is being read. This highlighting of the text, word by word, draws readers’ visual attention to each
word, augmenting recognition of an unfamiliar word. A multiple exposure is crucial in incidental
learning and for struggling readers to learn word patterns (Levy 2001).
With literature indicating a high correlation of word knowledge with reading comprehension
(Chall and Jacobs 2003), it is reasonable to make the connection between improved vocabulary
and improved comprehension. The students’ pre- to posttest comprehension gains may be due to
this increased word knowledge.

94
 ROBERTS ET AL.: TEXT-TO-SPEECH USE TO IMPORVE READING OF HIGH SCHOOL READERS

Limitations
There are several limitations to the pilot studies. First, while the results of the second pilot study
were significant and meaningful, the generalizability of the findings is limited because a
comparison group was not used and the sample size was small. Both pilot studies lacked control
of the use of TTS software because participants used the software independently, which may
have led to a higher percentage of students not meeting the required 400 minutes of use in a
semester. Secondly, even though the researchers discussed how TTS software assisted students to
be less fatigued and thereby have more memory space to think about the actual content of what
they were reading, this was not directly assessed. Thirdly, it is probable that those students with
improved reading skills and increased access to print materials may have been more
academically successful, but data on the student academic outcomes and aspirations were not
collected during either of the pilot studies. Finally, there is a need for further investigation of
possible moderating and mediating factors including a careful analysis of baseline information on
types of reading difficulties and the aspects of reading for which students are having difficulty.

Conclusions
In sum, struggling high school student readers who used TTS software demonstrated improved
reading rate, vocabulary, and comprehension, measured when they were not using the software.
The researchers attribute these gains to increased exposure to text that was enabled by using the
TTS software. Although there were a number of limitations to the study, the research supports
the premise that with ongoing use of TTS software students will experience improved unaided
reading vocabulary, comprehension, and rate.

95
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

REFERENCES
Aamodt, M. G. 2004. Research in Law Enforcement Selection. Boca Raton: Brown Walker.
AT Act. 2004. Assistive Technology Act of 1998, as amended. P.L. 108-364.
Biancarosa, G. 2005. “After Third Grade: The Research Base Points to Nine Key Instructional
Strategies for Improving Literacy for Older Students.” Educational Leadership, 63: 16-
22.
Brown, J. I., V. V. Fishco, and G. S. Hanna. 1993. Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Chicago:
Riverside Publishing.
Bush, G. W. 2001, February. New Freedom Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil
Chall, J., and V. Jacobs. 2003 “Poor Children’s Fourth-Grade Slump.” American Educator 14.
Accessed from http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/spring2003/chall.
html.
Deshler, D. 2005. “A Closer Look: Closing the Performance Gap.” Stratenotes. University of
Kansas Center for Research on Learning. Accessed from
http://www.adlit.org/article/19373.
Elkind, J. 1998. January. Computer Reading Machines for Poor Readers. Portola Valley: Lexia
Institute.
Engstrom, E. 2005. “Reading, Writing, and Assistive Technology: An Integrated Developmental
Curriculum for College Students.” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 49: 30-39.
Harman, D. 1970. “Illiteracy: An Overview.” Harvard Educational Review 40: 226-243.
Hart, B., and T. Risley. [1995] 2004. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of
Young American Children. Reprint, Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Higgins, E. L., and M. H. Raskind. 1997. “The Compensatory Effectiveness of Optical Character
Recognition/Speech Synthesis on Reading Comprehension of Postsecondary Students
with Learning Disabilities.” Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8: 75-
87.
Jacobs, Vicki A. 2008. “Adolescent Literacy: Putting the Crisis in Context.” Harvard
Educational Review 78: 7-39.
Kamil, M. L. 2003. Adolescents and Literacy: Reading for the 21st Century. Washington, DC:
Alliance for Excellent Education.
Kurzweil Educational Systems. 2004. Kurzweil 3000™ for Windows version 8: Foundations
Workshop. Workshop Proceedings, Bedford, Maryland.
Levy, B. A. 2001. “Moving the Bottom: Improving Reading Fluency,” In Dyslexia, Fluency, and
the Brain, edited by M. Wolf, 257-299. Timonium: York Press.
Mancilla, J., M. Kiefer, G. Biancarosa, J. A. Christodoulou, and C. Snow. 2011. “Investigating
English Reading Comprehension Growth in Adolescent Language Minority Learners:
Some Insights from the Simple View.” Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary
Journal 24: 339-354.
Mellard, D., and M. Patterson. 2008. “Contrasting Adult Literacy Learners With and Without
Specific Learning Disabilities.” Remedial and Special Education 29:133-144.
Moorman, A., R.T. Boon, Y. Keller-Bell, C. Stagliano, and T. Jeffs. 2010. “Effects of Text-to-
Speech Software on the Reading Rate and Comprehension Skills of High School
Students with Specific Learning Disabilities.” Learning Disabilities: A
Multidisciplinary Journal 16: 41- 49.
Murphy, S. 1995. An Analysis of the Construct and Predictive Validity of the CPT-R and Nelson
Denny tests. Unpublished manuscript, Rose State College.
Nagy, W. E. 2005. "Why Vocabulary Instruction Needs to be Long-Term and Comprehensive.”
In Teaching and Learning Vocabulary: Bringing Research to Practice, edited by E. H.
Hiebert and M. L. Kamil, 27–44. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

96
 ROBERTS ET AL.: TEXT-TO-SPEECH USE TO IMPORVE READING OF HIGH SCHOOL READERS

Silver-Pacuilla, H., and S. Fleischman. 2006. “Technology to Help Struggling Students.”

Educational Leadership 63:84-85.
Smith, F. 2004. Understanding Reading. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Snow C. E., and G. Biancarosa. 2003. Adolescent Literacy and the Achievement Gap: What Do
We Know and Where Do We Go from Here? New York: Carnegie Corporation of New
York.
Snow, C. E., and A. Sweet. 2003. “Reading for Comprehension.” In Rethinking Reading
Comprehension, edited by Sweet and C.E. Snow, 1-11. New York: The Guilford Press.
Torgesen, J. K., and R. F. Hudson. 2006. “Reading Fluency: Critical Issues for Struggling
Readers” In What Research Has to Say About Fluency Instruction, edited by S. J.
Samuels and A. E. Farstrup, 130-158. Newark: International Reading Association.
Winn, B. D., C. H. Skinner, R. Oliver, A.D. Hale, and M. Ziegler. 2006. “The Effects of
Listening While Reading and Repeated Reading on the Reading Fluency of Adult
Learners.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 50:196-205.
Woodcock, R. W., and M. B. Johnson. 1989. Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-educational Battery–
Revised. Chicago: Riverside Publishing.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Kelly Roberts: Dr. Roberts is an associate professor at the Center on Disability Studies at the
University of Hawai`i at Manoa. She holds a Ph.D. in education (emphasis on special education,
learning disabilities and assistive technology). She has over twenty years’ experience as a teacher
and is certified by the Rehabilitation and Engineering Society of North American (RESNA) as an
Assistive Technology Practitioner. She has worked in the assistive technology field with
individuals across a range of disabling conditions including persons with severe physical
involvements; developmental disabilities; autism; learning disabilities; and intellectual and
emotional impairments.

Kiriko Takahashi: Ms. Takahashi is an assistant specialist at the Center on Disability Studies at
the University of Hawai`i at Manoa. She holds a Master’s Degree in learning disabilities from
Northwestern University and currently a doctoral student at the University of Hawaii Manoa. Ms.
Takahashi has experience working with all age group children and adult learners with learning
and/or other disabilities utilizing research based instructional methods and assistive technology.

Dr. Hye-Jin Park: Dr. Park is an assistant professor at the Center on Disability Studies at the
University of Hawai`i at Manoa. She holds an Ed. D. in curriculum and teaching. Dr. Park has
conducted educational research and program evaluation, including research on utilizing assistive
technology for students with disabilities.

Dr. Robert Stodden: Dr. Stodden is a professor and director at the Center on Disability Studies
(CDS). Dr. Stodden, whose doctorate is in secondary/special education/vocational rehabilitation,
is a tenured professor in the University of Hawai‘i Special Education Department. He also
founded CDS in 1988. Four years earlier he developed the first Pacific Rim Conference on
Disabilities.

97
 Where Is that Reference From? Identifying the
Source of Student Citations as First Step in
Assessing Reference Appropriateness
Christine Armatas, Northern Melbourne Institute of TAFE, Australia
Andrew Vincent, Northern Melbourne Institute of TAFE, Australia

Abstract: In this paper we explore the sources of bibliographical material students use in their assessment tasks. The
Internet has made the availability of information passé and this, coupled with the onset of ubiquitous devices that allow
easy and cheap access to vast repositories of information, has the effect of enabling students to find information quickly
that can be cited in support of their arguments. We examine student use of reference material in reflective assessment and
in major team-based project work. We discuss the factors that affect student selection and subsequent use of reference
material and examine use of Internet-based material. We conclude with a strategy that will be useful for academic staff to
utilize so as to improve the quality of selection of reference material by students.

Keywords: Judgment, Citation, Bibliography, Students

Introduction

V ictoria University has, like many other tertiary education institutions, a set of generic
graduate capabilities describing the attributes that graduates should possess in addition to
domain specific capabilities. These attributes are (Victoria University 2008):

1. Problem solve in a range of settings

2. Locate, critically evaluate, manage and use written, numerical and electronic
information
3. Communicate in a variety of contexts and modes
4. Work both autonomously and collaboratively
5. Work in an environmentally, socially and culturally responsible manner
6. Manage learning and career development opportunities
Graduate capabilities have been the source of much contention usually centred on definition and
implementation (Green, Hammer, & Star 2009; Woodley & Armatas 2010). For the purposes of
this paper we were interested in how students demonstrate graduate attribute two. Our anecdotal
evidence suggested that our cohort of students was not able to fulfil the key elements of attribute
two, in that they were not able to “critically evaluate ... electronic information”. Employers have
regularly underlined the importance of this capability. The Graduate Outlook Survey lists critical
reasoning and analytical skills, problem solving, lateral thinking and technical skills as the third
most desirable selection criteria for prospective employees (Arnott 2012). From 2009 to 2011 there
has been no change in the importance of this criterion for employers. There is no doubt that
information literacy comes under the broad umbrella of critical thinking. The Council of Australian
University Librarians define information literacy as, “an understanding and set of abilities enabling
individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the capacity to locate, evaluate, and
use effectively the needed information” (CAUL 2010). Kidd and Keengwe (2010, 128) suggest
that an information literate individual is able to: (1) recognize the need for information; (2) identify
and locate appropriate information sources; (3) know how to gain access to the information
contained in those sources; (4) evaluate the quality of information obtained; (5) organize the
information; (6) use the information effectively. Our study is located in a large business school
with many of the students identifying themselves as from a non-English speaking background who

The International Journal of Literacies

Volume 19, 2013, thelearner.com, ISSN: 2327-0136
© Common Ground, Christine Armatas, Andrew Vincent, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

are often the first in their families to undertake tertiary education. Our interest was driven by our
anecdotal observations and the importance for business faculties to ensure that their graduates are
equipped with excellent information literacy skills given the types of information intensive careers
(accounting, finance, banking and international trade) in which they might be engaged in the future.
In this paper we aim to categorize sites from which students source their reference material;
this is in essence the first part of the information literacy continuum. Jonassen (2011) characterizes
the finding of information using either a library catalogue or an online searching system as a rule-
using problem. The purpose he suggests is clear; to find the most relevant information sources in
the least amount of time. The construction of an effective search requires the selection of search
terms and search strategies and then the evaluation of the utility and credibility of the information
found. Strategy is the key to this type of rule-oriented problem. Rieh and Hilligoss (2008) have
suggested that credibility assessments in the information-seeking process are not entirely
dichotomous, they occur at multiple points during the process and there are two kinds of judgment
made: predictive and evaluative judgments. The predictive judgment is characterized by
predictions made on the type of information that individuals might expect from information
sources. This then means that individuals start from the point of looking for where they might
expect to find the best information. The evaluative judgment is the judgment made on the basis of
consumption of the material that has been discovered.
There is a large body of literature on the pedagogy of information literacy and an excellent
recent starting point is the work of Diekema, Holliday and Leary (2011) who discuss problem-
based learning in relation to teaching information literacy. For the purposes of this paper we do
not intend to re-tread this ground but rather we take as our starting point a recent white paper from
Turnitin (2012) and another recent study on student research practice in the digital age (McClure
& Clink 2009) in addition to our own anecdotal observations that there seemed to be a difference
between group-based assessment and individual assessment and the quality of references that were
used by students. In this paper we have explored the two cohorts in greater detail. Even though we
utilize the Turnitin white paper, our present contribution is not about plagiarism. Rather it seeks to
illuminate the practice of reference material selection in an unregulated environment. At the end
of our paper we offer our proposed course of action to assist students in the selection of the places
to start their information seeking, especially given that undergraduate students rarely utilize the
services of librarians to source reference material (Head & Eisenberg 2010). We offer some
methods of enabling students to recognize better the need for information quality in their
assessment tasks. The fallacy of the notion of students being “born digital” will not be discussed
in any detail as it has been well and truly debunked (Brown & Czerniewicz 2010). All those with
access to the internet now utilize it as the most expedient source of information, so it is of little
surprise that students would also utilize it for sourcing reference material.

Issues with Referencing and the Internet

Meola (2004) suggests that librarians believe that they are the only ones with the capacity to teach
information literacy to students. He further suggests that the traditional method of teaching the
evaluation of websites as sources for references based on checklists is flawed and favours a more
contextualized approach. The dominant method for instructing students about how to evaluate the
quality of web-based resources for inclusion in assessment tasks has been the use of matrices.
These matrices have as categories authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency and coverage (Meola
2004). Meola argues that the flaw in the checklist approach is the over-reliance on the list-of-
questions and that very limited guidance is provided as to how they should be answered. It is
fundamental that in order to ensure that generic skills and graduate capabilities are developed, that
units of study have some type of contextualized learning outcome that incorporates information
literacy. It is not the place of librarians to design and offer online courses which offer de-
contextualized checklist-based information literacy education. Likewise, it is not sufficient for

100
 ARMATAS AND VINCENT: WHERE IS THAT FROM?

academic staff to provide students with simple instructions requiring students to appropriately
reference their work. We are interested in contextualized approaches to information literacy and
approaches that encourage student interest and care in sourcing information.

Our Pilot Study

As mentioned earlier, the starting place for our pilot study is the recent study from Turnitin (2012).
Based on the analysis of 128 million content matches from 33 million papers over one year they
suggest that higher education students rely on so called paper mills and cheat sites and that this
might reflect the fact that higher education students are engaged in independent study for the first
time and that they struggle to manage their time effectively (Turnitin 2012). The authors of the
Turnitin paper adduced no evidence in support of their claim and this lack of support piqued our
interest. The other study that we have utilized to frame our own is that of McClure and Clink
(2009). This study replicates an earlier study, that of Gillette and Videon (1998) where citations
listed in bibliographies are examined. The earlier Gillette and Videon study is further expanded by
McClure and Clink who surveyed teachers in the course and conducted focus groups with students.
They conclude that a great deal more can be done to teach students information literacy skills as
they are able to learn criteria for analyzing information. The major contribution of the McClure
and Clink (2009) study is their use of surveys and focus groups. Their study focuses on English
composition student research essays and one of their important conclusions is that any failings of
students to exhibit information literacy skills stems from problems in the subject’s curriculum.
We were interested in the sources of the references and their perceived quality. Obviously
without asking the students about their reasons for utilising particular references we can only
speculate, suffice to say that, as indicated earlier, our anecdotal evidence and that of others suggests
that students utilize sources that prioritize expediency over quality. The research undertaken
consists of two phases; this paper presents the first phase reporting the source of student citations
in bibliographies. The second phase (in preparation) attempts to assess the quality of the reference
within the context of the assessment task at hand and then to abstract an instructional approach to
information evaluation. We have examined citations in bibliographies in two assessment tasks in
a final year core Bachelor of Business subject. The final year subject is the third in a vertically
integrated core group of subjects: Professional Development 3. These units focus upon critical
thinking and problem solving in the first year, teamwork in second year and leadership and career
development in the third (Armatas & Vincent 2011; Woodley & Armatas 2010; Woodley & Sims
2011).
The first assessment task was the result of a semester long business proposal project. It
required the students to complete a standard Project Initiation Document as is often used in project
management arenas. The assessment required students to provide information relating to risk
analysis, financial planning, budget requirements, industry and competitor analysis, and human
resource management. One of the requirements was that students utilised at least eight references.
There was no direction provided as to nature of the references although the marking matrix
specified “relevant” references. The task was constructively aligned to the learning outcomes and
when combined with an oral presentation was worth 40% of the final mark (Biggs & Tang 2011).
The students were also required to produce a planning document that was peer-assessed but not
peer-marked. The students submitted a reflective writing piece relating to the peer-assessment of
their initial presentation. The written reflection on the team-based assessment was worth 20% of
the final mark. In the case of both assessment tasks there was no guidance provided as to what
reference material was acceptable except for the term “relevant” in the marking matrix provided
to students and the students were left to their own devices in terms of citation selection and
information sources as might be expected from 3rd year students in a capstone subject.

Sources for References

101
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

In the recent white paper produced by Turnitin in which they collated all the sources of plagiarised
material, they found that on the whole many students in higher education utilised paper mills
(Turnitin 2011). These paper mills are sites where students are able to access for a fee papers
written by others. Turnitin is the major provider of plagiarism detection technology and is utilized
by many tertiary education institutions. It was necessary for students in our subject to submit all
their written assessment tasks to be scanned by Turnitin before submission and subsequent grading.
The study reports the analysis of 128 million content matches from 33 million papers submitted to
Turnitin.com between June 2010 and June 2011. The report categorised content matches into six
categories:

1. social networking and content sharing

2. homework and academic
3. news and portals
4. paper mills and cheat sites
5. encyclopaedias
6. other
The authors of the Turnitin white paper offer the following definitions of their categories:

1. Social networking and content sharing category included sites that rely on user-
generated content and include sites such as Facebook and MySpace and content
sharing sites such as scribd and slideshare. It also included sites such as Yahoo!
Answers and answers.com.
2. Homework and academic site categories consist of academic, educational and
homework help sites that offer “legitimate” educational content and include sites
such as nih.gov, medilibrary.org, coursehero.com. The authors of the paper offer
no definition of “legitimate” and also offer no indication of whether
books.google.com and scholar.google.com are included in this category.
3. News and Portals is a poorly defined category into which is included everything
published under the traditional news media model and includes sites such as the
New York Times and the Huffington Post.
4. Paper Mills and Cheat Sites are a category of sites that enable sharing or selling
of papers and include sites such as oppapers.com and studentoffortune.com.
5. The Encyclopaedia category includes wikipedia.com, britannica.com and
encyclopedia.com but also includes dictionaries sites.
6. The Other category includes shopping websites such as amazon.com and sites
that do not fall into the categories above.
The study of McClure and Clink (2009) categorized websites used into the following categories
without any explanation of the types: advocacy groups, news (CNN, MSNBC), informational,
personal (web pages, blogs), company or commercial, encyclopaedia, government, other,
dictionary and online journal. For the purposes of the current study we adopted a more finely
granulated typology that could be aggregated if required.
The websites categories that we used are listed below.

1. Content sharing: scribd.com, slideshare.com, Yahoo! Answers, flikr.com

2. Information portals: answer.com, about.com
3. Encyclopaedias: wikipedia.com, brittanica.com
4. New papers/Trade magazines: New York (nyrtimes.com) Times, The Age
(theage.com.au), Ibisworld.com (this category is particularly problematic as new
media such as blogs and the like start to impinge on the traditional newspaper

102
 ARMATAS AND VINCENT: WHERE IS THAT FROM?

market. Ibisworld is perhaps misplaced here but in business faculties students

utilize their services via the library repository)
5. Professional or academic blogs
6. Blogs where the standing of the individual is unknown (This means that it is not
possible to ascertain any credentials regarding the author of the blog. It is often
times not obvious to the reader)
7. Paper Mills
8. Hardcopy books or journals, electronic books or journals
9. Government websites
10. Company websites
11. University websites
We aggregated the initially separate categories, e-books and journals and books and journals. It
was evident from infelicities in journal citation that students were using library catalogues to source
information in hardcopy. It was difficult to ascertain with accuracy the number of e-books and
journals against physical books and journals. The aggregated category books/journals enabled us
to focus on the other material almost entirely web-based where the provenance was more
consistently known. The results are produced in the two tables below.

Table 1. Sources of reference materials in the major project.

Website Category Total Number of %
references (n=257)
Company websites 107 41.6
Books/Journals 56 21.8
New papers/Trade magazines 34 13.2
Government websites 25 9.7
Information portals 12 4.7
Blogs where the standing of the individual is 8
unknown 3.1
University websites 7 2.7
Professional or academic blogs 3 1.2
Content sharing 2 0.8
Encyclopaedias 2 0.8
Paper Mills 1 0.4

103
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Table 2. Sources of reference materials in the reflective writing assessment task.

Website Category Total Number of %
references (n=132)
Books/Journals 51 38.6
Information portals 22 16.7
University websites 18 13.6
Blogs where the standing of the individual is 14
unknown 10.6
Company websites 13 9.8
Government websites 5 3.8
New papers/Trade magazines 4 3.0
Encyclopaedias 3 2.3
Content sharing 1 0.8
Professional or academic blogs 1 0.8
Paper Mills 0 0.0

There were three extra categories that were included as possible sources for citations: company
blogs, paid information portals and social networking. Interestingly, we had envisaged at least
some activity in the social networking category, as it was a major source of content for the students
in the Turnitin white paper when combined with the content sharing category accounting for 26%
of all content matches. It seems though when separated there is far more citation activity in the
content sharing category than the social media category. This might be indicative that students
realise that on the whole social media is not a source that should be used for sourcing reference
material for assessment tasks. The other possible explanation, which we feel is probably more
likely, is that the nature of the assessment tasks do not lend themselves to students sourcing
citations from social networking.
In the first group project-based task students utilised information from company websites
more than any other source almost twice as often as material from books or journals. This of course
is solely due to the nature of the assessment task and should come as no surprise. The assessment
task required students to undertake an environmental scan and indicate threats to their proposed
businesses. The results of the McClure and Clink (2009) study did not reflect the same trend and
had several citation source categories that were favoured by students (advocacy group, news and
informational). This seems to reflect entirely the nature of the assessment task utilized for their
bibliographic analysis.
One source for surprise was that students utilised content sharing, paper mills, encyclopaedia,
professional blogs a total of 3.2% and 3.9% of the time in both assessment tasks much lower than
the Turnitin figures. The nature of the Turnitin white paper, in that it focuses only on the sources
of content matches accounts for the discrepancy between their figures and those of this present
study. The focus on plagiarism skews the figures in that the Turnitin software only finds content
matches and does not report on whether information is correctly cited or even appropriate. Clearly
the focus on plagiarism has a detrimental skew on the sources of content matches. Information
portals were more consistently used in the second reflective assessment task and again the informal
style of the assessment task perhaps led to this type of outcome. Information portals are arguably
the most unreliable of all the sources much more so than social media. In recent times Twitter has

104
 ARMATAS AND VINCENT: WHERE IS THAT FROM?

been used as a source of news for good and bad. Sites such as about.com and answers.com have a
business model predicated on traffic. The more hits they attract the more they are able to charge
for advertising and the more directed advertising packages they are able to attract from providers
of advertising such as google.com. As indicated above, books were counted regardless of the
internet as the source. Books and journals provided the largest source of citation material when the
figures of the two assessments tasks are aggregated. The predominance of books and journals
(38.6%) in the second reflective assessment task is a little more difficult to explain and certainly
warrants further examination in our future more large-scale explorations.
The diversity of types of websites that students utilise as their information sources and the
informality of some of the sources, such as blogs or articles from sites such as about.com is
problematic. It suggests that students are satisfied that material sourced from these sites are deemed
to be of sufficient authority to serve as an authoritative reference in an assessment task, and
reinforces the idea that students value expediency over quality.
One of the most interesting results is that on the whole students do not follow standardized
formats for referencing their work. Our students were required to use a variation of the Harvard
format (http://guides.library.vu.edu.au/Harvard). In the major project our marking matrix required
students to ensure the accurate use of the Harvard referencing system and to cite at least eight
references. The reflection assessment task required at least two references but also required
students to use accurately the Harvard referencing method. The results concerning correct use of
the Harvard referencing format are presented in the table below (n = the total number of references
across the assessment tasks).

Table 3.
Major Project (n=257) Reflective assessment (n=136)
Correctly Referenced 44% 21%

Students also on the whole either cited all the references correctly or all the references
incorrectly, there were very few instances where some references were cited correctly and others
not. This result above may reflect several things:

1. The major project was worth more to the end of year mark than the reflective
assessment and so less care taken.
2. The reflective assessment was believed by the students to be a more informal
type of assessment and consequently they were more relaxed about their use of
the Harvard referencing system.
3. The team-based nature of the major project may have produced a more thorough
approach to the task of referencing especially formatting.
The team-based nature of the project assessment task requires individuals to be more proactive
and accountable to their peers for their work. Students in team are often more rigorous in their
approach to study, although opinions vary (Woodley & Armatas 2010).

Our Solution Based on the Literature and Our Pilot Study

Unfortunately, it seems that issues with referencing and information sources seem to stem from
the distinct lack of guided instruction on referencing. Students are provided with guides to
bibliographic styles but are often time not provided with the rationale for referencing. The Modern
Language Association indicates that, “[all] researchers, students as well as professional scholars,
need to assess the quality of any work scrupulously before using and citing it” (Modern Language
Association of America 2009, 33).

105
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

It certainly seems that in order for Victoria University and the Faculty of Business and Law
in particular to produce graduates that are able to, “[l]ocate, critically evaluate, manage and use
written, numerical and electronic information” (Victoria University 2008), more emphasis needs
to be placed on the development these skills. Scaffolded activities and opportunities to practice and
develop these generic skills are presented in three vertically integrated subjects that make up the
Bachelor of Business professional development stream but more is required in order to address
more fully graduate capability 2. Professional Development 3 is the place where competent
evaluation of internet resources should be able to be demonstrated by students. As McClure and
Clink (2009) suggest it is a failing of the curriculum that in this three-subject stream students
cannot adequately demonstrate this generic skill. The development of information literacy must be
cemented into the curriculum during first year not a standalone attribute but rather as one that is
wholly integrated across the first year experience. It is also important for students to understand
the importance of adhering to rules of referencing style. As part of weekly activities especially in
the student’s first semester in tertiary education emphasis should be placed on the development of
this skill in particular. It seems that a useful approach that has been adopted elsewhere is to
encourage students to reflect on the appropriateness of their choices for sources of reference
material (Diekema, Holliday, & Leary 2011). The authors of this paper advocated a problem-based
learning approach (Barrows & Tamblyn 1980) and they created an online information literacy
module that could be utilised either as a stand-alone or subject integrated task to facilitate the
acquisition of the skill of information literacy. They took the approach of using a research journal
and reflective pieces using the steps advocated in Eisenberg and Berkowitz (1990) comprising:

1. Task definition
2. Information seeking strategies
3. Location and access
4. Use of information
5. Synthesis
6. Evaluation
The list above is described as the Big 6 (http://big6.com/pages/about/big6-skills-
overview.php) and is argued to provide a process model of how individuals solve information
problems. In learning to solve problems, Jonassen (2011) suggests, as indicated earlier, searching
for citations for bibliography is a rule-using problem and a rather well-structured problem (see
Figure 1). This problem-solving conceptualization of reference citation lends itself rather well to
the utilization of a number of checklist type approaches to aid in the assessment of reference
quality. Teaching students to use rule-using methods to develop basic understanding also equates
well to the lower order of Bloom’s taxonomy (Krathwohl 2002).

106
 ARMATAS AND VINCENT: WHERE IS THAT FROM?

Figure 1. Typology of problems (Jonassen 2011, 12)

The model that we advocate is similar to that of Diekema, Holiday and Leary (2011) with the
major difference being that, rather than requiring students to produce a research journal, they
complete a reflective piece, either as a learning tasks or an assessment task, that requires them to
examine the use of their reference material and justify their choices. It would be useful for students
to present their reflective pieces to the class in order to elicit peer feedback. More often than not
peer feedback is a more powerful motivator for students to be accountable for their actions (Lane
2011). Requiring students to produce a plan of their work including an indicative bibliography is
encouraged and this can then be either assessed by staff or peers or simply used as a learning task.
As part of this process students must complete a reflective piece justifying their selection of items
in their indicative bibliography and present to the class for peer review. This can supplemented by
also requiring students to present a single article that they have sourced and explain its significance
to the overall assessment task.
There are several major shortcomings in the approach we have taken in this type of research.
We were interested initially in exploring our anecdotal observations regarding the use of
references; clearly a broader study on a more substantial scale in terms of cohort sizes would be
required to explore some of the elements we have suggested.

Conclusion and Future Work

Our anecdotal observations that prompted this study also provided the impetus to change the
requirements of assessment tasks in another unit of study within the Bachelor of Business. This
subject is a cooperative education unit that requires students to work in a placement and examine
their theoretical knowledge base in light of work practices via reflective assessment tasks. In some
of the assessment tasks in this unit we decided to provide the students with guidance as to
appropriate references in the form of a list of papers that would be beneficial. We are in the process

107
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

of examining the results from this development but initial indications are that students by and large
did not engage with the references provided. We are preparing the second phase of our study
focusing on the quality of assessments that students make and will utilize both survey and focus
groups to elicit a richer vein of information. The present authors favour the approach that focuses
on the use of checklists, even though it has detractors (Meola 2004). The characterization of this
task as rule-based by Jonassen (2011) reinforces the importance of the checklists approach to
assessments of reference appropriateness.
There are several further questions to be explored from actual patterns of behaviour. The ideas
surrounding the use of more tightly defined bibliographic and referencing instructions also needs
to be tested. It is clear from this pilot study though that students require more instruction as to the
purposes of referencing so that in a final year subject there is much better consistency in their use
of internet-based material and then subsequently a much better ethos surrounding the referencing
process.

108
 ARMATAS AND VINCENT: WHERE IS THAT FROM?

REFERENCES
Armatas, C., & Vincent, A. 2011. Leveraging the Collaborative and Interactive Potential of 21st
Century Learning Spaces: Victoria University’s Student Business Innovation and
Incubation Space. The International Journal of Learning, 18(2), 133–142.
Arnott, J. 2012. Graduate Outlook 2011: The Report of the Graduate Outlook Survey. Melbourne:
Graduate Careers Australia.
Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. S. 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University (4th ed.).
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Brown, C., & Czerniewicz, L. 2010. Debunking the “Digital Native”: Beyond Digital Apartheid,
Towards Digital Democracy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 357–369.
Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. 1980. Problem-based learning: an approach to medical
education. New York: Springer.
Council of Australian University Libraries. 2010. Information Literacy. Retrieved October 2, 2012,
from http://www.caul.edu.au/caul-programs/information-literacy
Diekema, A. R., Holliday, W., & Leary, H. 2011. Re-Framing information literacy: Problem-based
learning as informed learning. Library and Information Science Research, 33, 261–268.
Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. 1990. Information Problem-solving: The Big Six Skills
Approach to Library & Information Skills Instruction. New York: Ablex.
Gillette, M. A., & Videon, C. 1998. Seeking Quality on the Internet: A Case Study of Composition
Students’ Works Cited. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 26(2), 189–194.
Green, W., Hammer, S., & Star, C. 2009. Facing up to the challenge: why is it so hard to develop
graduate attributes? Higher Education Research and Development, 28(1), 17–29.
Head, A. J., & Eisenberg, M. B. 2010. Truth be Told: How College Students Evaluate and Use
Information in the Digital Age. Project Information Literacy Progress Report. Seattle:
Information School, University of Washington.
Jonassen, D. H. 2011. Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving
Learning Environments. New York: Routledge.
Kidd, T. T., & Keengwe, J. 2010. Information Literacy in the Digital Age: Implications for Adult
Learning. In T. T. Kidd & J. Keengwe (Eds.), Adult Learning in the Digital Age:
Perspectives on Online Technologies and Outcomes (pp. 126–133). Hershey, Pa:
Information Science Reference.
Krathwohl, D. R. 2002. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212-218.
Lane, D. R. 2011. Peer Feedback Processes and Individual Accountability in Team-Based
Learning. In M. Sweet & L. K. Michaelsen (Eds.), Team-Based Learning in the Social
Sciences and Humanities: Group Work That Works to Generate Critical Thinking and
Engagement (pp. 51–62). Sterling VA: Stylus Publishing.
McClure, R., & Clink, K. 2009. How Do You Know That? An Investigation of Student Research
Practices. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 9(1), 115–132.
Meola, M. 2004. Chucking the Checklist: A Contextual Approach to Teaching Undergraduates
Web-site Evaluation. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 4(3), 331–344.
Modern Language Association of America. 2009. MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
(7th ed.). New York: Modern Language Association of America.
Rieh, S. Y., & Hilligoss, B. 2008. College Students’ Credibility Judgments in the Information-
Seeking Process. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital Media, Youth and
Credibility (pp. 49–72). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Turnitin. 2012. A Comparison of Internet Sources for Secondary and Higher Education Students.
White Paper: Plagiarism and the Web. Oakland: iParadigms. Retrieved from
http://pages.turnitin.com/rs/iparadigms/images/Turnitin_WhitePaper_SourcesSECvsHE.
pdf

109
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LITERACIES

Victoria University. 2008. VU Graduate Capabilities. Retrieved from

http://tls.vu.edu.au/portal/site/design/resources/VictoriaUniversityGraduateCapabilities.
pdf
Woodley, C., & Armatas, C. 2010. Teamwork: The Process and the Product - What Students Think.
The International Journal Learning, 17(4), 527–537.
Woodley, C., & Sims, R. 2011. EPortfolios, professional development and employability: some
student perceptions. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 28(3), 164–174.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Dr. Christine Armatas: Dr Armatas is a Senior Lecturer and has a PhD from the University of
Melbourne and is a registered psychologist with expertise in curriculum design and evaluation.
She is currently working in the Higher Education Office at Northern Melbourne Institute of TAFE
with responsibilities for the Applied Educational Research and Evaluation portfolio. Her research
interests include engaging industry in curriculum design and delivery and the appropriate use of
technology to enhance students' learning outcomes.

Mr. Andrew Vincent: Mr Vincent currently completing a PhD in the School of Management and
Information Systems at Victoria University investigating criminal sentencing, decision making and
decision support. He is interested in the nexus between decision making, intuition and expertise.
Presently, he is engaged as a Curriculum Consultant (Lecturer) in the Higher Education Office at
Northern Melbourne Institute of TAFE, prior to this was an Educational Developer in the Faculty
of Business and Law at Victoria University. He has also served as a Research Fellow in the School
of Accounting at the University of Melbourne.

110
The International Journal of Literacies is one of ten
thematically focused journals in the collection of
journals that support The Learner knowledge
community—its journals, book series, conference and
online community. The journal inquires into the
processes of learning to read, write and
communicate, both in conventional alphabetical terms
and using and new media and multimodal literacies.

As well as papers of a traditional scholarly type, this

journal invites presentations of practice—including
documentation of curricular practices and exegeses of
the effects of those practices.

The International Journal of Literacies is a peer-

reviewed scholarly journal.

ISSN: 2327-0136

View publication stats