37
AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING CURRICULUM AND READING THEORIES IN IRAQI KURDISTAN Hamsa Hameed Ahmed UNIVERSITI SAINS ISLAM MALAYSIA

AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

  • Upload
    lydan

  • View
    233

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

CURRICULUM AND READING THEORIES IN IRAQI

KURDISTAN

Hamsa Hameed Ahmed

UNIVERSITI SAINS ISLAM MALAYSIA

Page 2: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

CURRICULUM AND READING THEORIES IN IRAQI

KURDISTAN

Hamsa Hameed Ahmed

(Matric No. 4110112)

Thesis submitted in fulfillment for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

IN EDUCATION

FACULTY OF MAJOR LANGUAGE STUDIES

UNIVERSITI SAINS ISLAM MALAYSIA

Nilai

August 2016

Page 3: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

ii

DECLARATION

بـسـم هللا الـرحـمـن الرحـيـم

I hereby declare that the work has been done by myself and no portion of the work

contained in this Thesis has been submitted in support of any application for any other

degree or qualification on this or any other university or institution of learning.

Date: 22nd August 2016 Signature:

Name: Hamsa Hammed Ahmed

Matric No.: 4110112

Address: Kajang

Page 4: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

iii

COPYRIGHT

The copyright of this thesis belongs to the author under the terms of the Copyright Act

1987 as qualified by Regulation 4(1) of the University Science Islamic Malaysia

Intellectual Property Regulations. Due acknowledgement shall always be made of the

use of any material contained in, or derived from, this thesis.

© Hamsa Hameed Ahmed, 2015 All rights reserved

Page 5: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

iv

BIODATA OF AUTHOR

Hamsa Hameed Ahmed was born in 1985. She earned her Bachelor of English

Language from University of Baghdad in 2007, Iraq. She got Master in English

Language Studies from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia in 2011, Malaysia. Currently,

she is on leave to study PhD in Education, at Faculty of Major Language Studies,

Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Nilai, Malaysia.

Page 6: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I would like to thank our Almighty Allah for his mercy, grace and

blessings.

The past three years have been thus far the most challenging, interesting, and

rewarding part of my life. I am very thankful and grateful that I have crossed paths

with many wonderful people who have helped me in many ways in my pursuit of a

PhD at Faculty of Major Languages, University Science Islamic Malaysia.

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my supervisor, Dr. Fariza Puteh -

Behak for her supervision, guidance, patience and support in this research. And for

Dr. Harison Mohd Sidek for her guidance and support. Without their guidance and

consistent help, this thesis would not have been possible.

Special thanks to my mother and my sisters, who have helped and supported me over

these years. And for my great husband. Thank you so much to all of you.

Page 7: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

vi

ABSTRAK

Penggunaan Bahasa Inggeris semakin meningkat di peringkat institusi tertinggi.

Bagaimanapun bagi pelajar-pelajar Tingkatan 6 di Iraqi Kurdistan, penguasaan

pembacaan Bahasa Inggeris adalah masih lemah terutamanya dalam kemahiran

berfikir secara kritikal. Ini bermakna mahasiswa dan mahasiswi yang memulakan

pengajian ke tahun pertama kurang bersedia untuk mengikuti kursus-kursus di mana

mata pelajaran diajar di dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Kita tidak mengetahui strategi yang

digunakan di Tingkatan 6, maka kajian ini adalah untuk mengetahui secara mendalam

serta mengenalpasti faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi proses pembacaan secara

kritikal. Kaedah kualitatif digunakan untuk mengumpul data dan data diperolehi

melalui empat sumber. Pertama, kurikulum berkaitan dengan pembacaan serta buku

teks dikaji secara mendalam dan dapatan diperhatikan. Kedua, guru-guru yang

mengajar di Tingkatan 6 diperhatikan serta ditemuduga untuk mendapat maklumbalas

yang lebih jelas. Temuduga ini direkodkan dan kemudian ditukar menjadi kod.

Keempat, mahasiswa-mahasiswi di universiti-universiti di Iraqi Kurdistan ditemuduga

dan maklumbalas mereka juga direkodkan dan kemudian ditukar sebagai kod. Data-

data dalam bentuk kod kemudian diproses dan beberapa keputusan (dapatan) didapati.

Dapatan-dapatan ini menunjukkan bahawa kebanyakan petikan pembacaan Bahasa

Inggeris serta aktivitinya telah dipengaruhi oleh proses bawah-atas (bottom-up) dan

tidak dari proses atas-bawah (top-down) atau proses meta-cognitive. Tambahan pula

analisa menunjukkan bahawa kebanyakan petikan pembacaan (67%) dalam buku teks

adalah berunsur cerita (narrative), sedangkan petikan pembacaan di peringkat

universiti adalah berunsur penjelasan (expository). Perbincangan berdasarkan dapatan

kajian menunjukkan bahwa hanya 31% daripada jumlah soalan berkaitan dengan

penstrukturan semula (reorganization) dan kemahiran membaca secara inferensi

(inferential). Ini bermakna lebih kurang 77% soalan pemahaman di dalam buku teks

‘Sunrise Student’s Book 12’ adalah soalan pemahaman yang tidak melibatkan

pemikiran kritikal. Maka perubahan yang besar diperlukan pada kurikulum Tingkatan

Enam yang sedia ada supaya ia dapat membantu perkembangan pemikiran yang lebih

mendalam. Kajian ini juga penting kerana dapatan-dapatan ini boleh digunapakai di

negara-negara di Timur Tengah.

Page 8: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

vii

ABSTRACT

As English Language is increasingly being used in tertiary education, there is growing

concern that students graduating from Form Six classes in Iraqi Kurdistan have poor

reading skills in particular higher order thinking skills. Therefore, the students

entering university are ill prepared to follow courses where the subject matter is taught

primarily in English. Little is really known on the reading skills and strategies used in

Form 6 and the factors that contribute to poor reading skills. Against this concern, this

study was undertaken with the aim to unfold and understand the need for developing

critical reading comprehension skills. This study is a content analysis research and

qualitative methods were used to collect data. The data used in this research study was

obtained through four sources. First, the reading curriculum and the Form Six

textbooks were scrutinized in detail and the ensuing comments were documented.

Second, two teachers teaching the Form Six classes were observed and this was

followed by teacher interviews. Fourth, the first year undergraduate students in

universities in Iraqi Kurdistan were interviewed and their feedback were transcribed

and carefully coded to find out the difficulties they faced at their respective

universities. The findings from this study have shown that most of the reading

passages and reading tasks found in the student’s textbook are influenced by bottom-

up strategy. There has been a lack of reading passages and reading tasks related to top-

down processing and meta-cognitive processing respectively. On the contrary, the

findings reflect that most of the passages in the student’s textbook are narrative in

nature while at tertiary level more expository type of passages are used. Discussion

based on findings, reveal that only a small number of reading comprehension

questions refer to reorganization and inferential reading skills. This means that the

majority of the reading comprehension questions in the textbook are literal

comprehension questions where no critical thinking is involved. The study findings

have further shown that most of the reading passages and reading tasks found in

Sunrise Student’s Book 12 are influenced by bottom-up strategy. In addition to these,

most of the passages in the student’s Book 12 are narrative in nature while at tertiary

level more expository type of passages is used. This means that the majority of the

reading comprehension questions in the textbook are literal comprehension questions

where no critical thinking is involved. Thus, there is a necessity to bring out radical

changes to the existing EFL secondary reading curriculum so that new tasks and

activities can aid in developing higher order thinking skills. The present study is

significant as it can be applicable to other Middle-East countries.

Page 9: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION .......................................................................................................... ii

COPYRIGHT .............................................................................................................. iii

BIODATA OF AUTHOR ........................................................................................... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................... v

ABSTRAK ................................................................................................................... vi

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... xii

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. xiii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1

1.1 Problem Background ....................................................................................... 1

1.1.1 English Language Teaching in Iraq ................................................... 5

1.2 Introduction To Iraqi Kurdistan Curriculum ................................................... 6

1.2.1 Meaning of Curriculum ..................................................................... 7

1.2.2 Changes in Iraqi Kurdistan Curriculum ............................................. 7

1.3 The English New National Curriculum in Iraq ............................................. 11

1.4 Problem Statement ........................................................................................ 13

1.5 Purposes of the Study .................................................................................... 15

1.6 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................. 16

1.7 Research Questions ....................................................................................... 16

1.8 Definition of Terms ....................................................................................... 16

1.8.1 Curriculum ....................................................................................... 16

1.8.2 Reading Theories ............................................................................. 17

1.8.3 Higher Order Thinking Skills .......................................................... 17

1.9 Thesis Organization ....................................................................................... 17

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................... 19

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 19

2.2 Reading Passages .......................................................................................... 20

2.2.1 Past Studies on the Length of Reading Passages ............................. 20

2.2.2 Past studies on Type of Passages, Why Expository More Important

than Narrative. ................................................................................. 21

Page 10: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

ix

2.2.3 Past Studies on Reading Comprehension Question Types of Higher

Order Thinking Skills (Explain Barroom’s Taxonomy). ................. 23

2.3 Inferential Comprehension ............................................................................ 24

2.3.1 Inferring Supporting Details ............................................................ 26

2.3.2 Inferring Main Ideas ........................................................................ 26

2.3.3 Inferring Sequence ........................................................................... 26

2.3.4 Inferring Comparisons ..................................................................... 27

2.3.5 Inferring Cause and Effect Relationships ........................................ 27

2.3.6 Inferring Character Traits ................................................................ 27

2.3.7 Predicting Outcomes ........................................................................ 27

2.3.8 Interpreting Figurative Language .................................................... 28

2.4 Evaluation ...................................................................................................... 28

2.4.1 Judgments of Reality or Fantasy ..................................................... 28

2.4.2 Judgments of Fact or Opinion ......................................................... 28

2.4.3 Judgments of Adequacy and Validity .............................................. 29

2.4.4 Judgments of Appropriateness ......................................................... 29

2.4.5 Judgments of Worth, Desirability and Acceptability ...................... 29

2.5 Appreciation .................................................................................................. 29

2.5.1 Emotional Response to the Content ................................................. 30

2.5.2 Identification with Characters or Incidents ..................................... 30

2.5.3 Reactions to the Author’s Use of Language .................................... 30

2.5.4 Imagery ............................................................................................ 30

2.6 Techniques for Asking More Effective Questions ........................................ 31

2.7 Reading Theories ........................................................................................... 31

2.7.1 Traditional Bottom-Up View ........................................................... 32

2.7.2 Top-Down Processing (Cognitive View) ........................................ 34

2.8 Schema Theory .............................................................................................. 36

2.9 Content and Formal Schemata ...................................................................... 37

2.10 Activating and building schemata ................................................................. 38

2.11 Applying Schema Theory to L2 Reading ...................................................... 39

2.12 Pre-Reading Activities .................................................................................. 40

2.12.1 The Meta-Cognitive View .................................................................. 42

2.13 Effective Reading .......................................................................................... 42

2.14 Critical Review on EFL Secondary Reading Curriculum in Iraqi Kurdistan 43

2.15 Past Studies on Curriculum ........................................................................... 48

Page 11: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

x

2.16 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................... 50

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................ 52

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 52

3.2 Research Approach ....................................................................................... 52

3.3 Content Analysis ........................................................................................... 52

3.3.1 Inductive Content Analysis ............................................................. 55

3.3.2 Deductive Content Analysis ............................................................ 55

3.4 Research Procedure ....................................................................................... 56

3.5 Research Context ........................................................................................... 59

3.5.1 Educational Context of EFL in Iraqi Kurdistan ............................... 59

3.5.2 The Secondary EFL Educational Framework in Iraq ...................... 61

3.5.3 Form Six EFL Educational Framework of the Secondary School in

Iraq ................................................................................................... 62

3.5.4 The Form Six English Language Curriculum Specifications .......... 62

3.5.5 Participants of the Study .................................................................. 63

3.5.6 Site of the Study / Location of Study .............................................. 64

3.6 Data Collection .............................................................................................. 64

3.7 Data Analysis ................................................................................................ 68

3.8 Trustworthiness ............................................................................................. 72

3.9 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................... 75

CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ............................................ 76

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 76

4.2 Research Question One ................................................................................. 77

4.3 Research Question Two .............................................................................. 112

4.4 Research Question Three ............................................................................ 117

4.5 Research Question Four .............................................................................. 122

4.6 Summary ..................................................................................................... 138

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION ........................................................................ 139

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 139

5.2 Findings of the Research Study ................................................................... 139

5.3 EFL Reading Tasks at Tertiary Level ......................................................... 143

5.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 147

Page 12: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

xi

5.5 Future Work ................................................................................................ 148

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................... 150

APPENDICES……...................................................................................................163

APPENDIX A: CLASSROOM OBSERVATION WITH MISS MAY……....163

APPENDIX B: TEACHERS INTERVIEW…………………………….....…..170

Page 13: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Iraqi education scenario .............................................................................. 59

Table 3.2: Data display matrix for analyzing patterns of responses for Miss May (1)

and Mr. Ibrahim (2) ..................................................................................... 71

Table 3.3: Summary of teacher interviews .................................................................. 72

Table 3.4: Guba’s four criteria for trustworthiness (shenton, 2004) ............................ 73

Table 4.1: Analysis of reading theories and strategies in EFL reading text ................ 82

Table 4.2: Getting organized ........................................................................................ 88

Table 4.3: Analysis on types and length of reading passages in sunrise student’s book

12 ............................................................................................................... 113

Table 4.4: Comprehension question based on Unit 2 ................................................ 118

Table 4.5: Distribution of questions ........................................................................... 121

Table 4.6: Analysis of reading passages and their relationship with language learning

theories ...................................................................................................... 126

Page 14: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Aligning Curriculum with Teaching Learning and Assessment………….9

Figure 1.2: Curriculum Dimensions………………………………………………….10

Figure 2.1: Framework…………………………………………..…………………...19

Figure 2.2: Barrett Taxonomy………………………………………………………..25

Figure 2.3: Sample Reading Passage from Sunrise 12 Student’s Book Page 20…….45

Figure 2.4: Comprehension Questions 1……………………………………………..46

Figure 2.5: Second Reading Passage on Erbil’s Ancient Citadel…………………….47

Figure 2.6: Comprehension Questions ......................................................................... 47

Figure 3.1: Preparation, Organizing and Resulting Phases in the Content Analysis

Process……………..…………………………………...…………………54

Figure 3.2: The Research Methodology That Used by the Researcher ....................... 58

Figure 3.3: Data Collection Steps ................................................................................ 64

Figure 3.4: Data analysis Steps .................................................................................... 68

Figure 4.1: Iraqi Curriculum Framework: Learner Key Competencies...…………….78

Figure 4.2: Languages, Literature and Communication (Page 35) .............................. 79

Figure 4.3: Iraqi Curriculum Framework: Teaching and Learning Strategies (Page

45)………………………………………………………………….81

Figure 4.4: They Wanted a Better Life (Unit 1-Lesson 3 & 4) .................................... 86

Figure 4.5: Reading Comprehension Questions Based on Unit 1 ............................... 87

Figure 4.6: Getting Organized (Unit 2- Lesson 3 & 4) ................................................ 90

Figure 4.7: Saving the Past for the Future (Unit 3 Lesson 1 & 2) ............................... 91

Figure 4.8: Comprehension Questions for Unit 3 (Lesson 1 & 2) ............................... 91

Figure 4.9: Saving the Past for the Future (Unit 3 – Lesson 3 & 4) ............................ 93

Figure 4.10: Comprehension Questions for Unit 3 (Lesson 3 & 4) ............................. 93

Figure 4.11: It Couldn’t Have Gone Better! (Unit 4 – Lesson 1 & 2) ......................... 96

Figure 4.12: Reading Comprehension Questions Based on Unit 4 ............................. 97

Figure 4.13: Feeding Nine Billion (Unit 5 – Lesson 3 & 4) ........................................ 98

Figure 4.14: Reading Comprehension Questions Based on Unit 5 ............................. 99

Figure 4.15: Into the Information Age (Unit 6 – Lesson 3 & 4) ................................ 100

Figure 4.16: Reading comprehension questions based on Unit 6 .............................. 101

Figure 4.17: Working Together for a Better World (Unit 7 – Lesson 3 & 4) ............ 103

Figure 4.18: Reading Comprehension Questions Based On Unit 7 - Lesson 3 & 4) 103

Figure 4.19: They are the people working with us (Unit 8 – Lesson 1 & 2) ............. 105

Figure 4.20: Reading Comprehension Questions Based on Unit 7 - Lesson 3 & 4 ... 106

Page 15: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

xiv

Figure 4.21: Observation Transcript for Unit 3 ......................................................... 109

Figure 4.22: Observation Transcript based on the Literary Reader ........................... 110

Figure 4.23: Observation Transcript Based on Unit 7 (Lesson 3 & 4) ...................... 111

Figure 4.24: Pattern Reflecting the Length of Reading Passages .............................. 115

Figure 4.25: Part of Teacher Interview Transcript ..................................................... 116

Figure 4.26: Teacher Interview Transcript on Higher Order Thinking Skills ........... 120

Figure 5.1: Developing Critical Thinking Skills (Page 26)…………………..……..140

Figure 5.2: Summary of the Findings of the Present Study ....................................... 140

Figure 5.3: Insight into Teaching Approaches and Methodologies - Page 46 of Iraqi

Curriculum Framework ............................................................................. 142

Page 16: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Problem Background

Recently, in non-native English language speaking countries, there has been growing

concern regarding the English proficiency level. English is a language which has great

reach and influence; it is a language of establishment and it maintains connection and

relationship among people all around the world. English has been widely used in the

private sector and it is becoming a significant factor in the development of economics

and education (Crystal, 2003). Moreover, English has been used widely in the

economic sector, the political bodies and commercial organisations. In addition,

according to (Ellis 2005), more than 85% of the scientific, technological and academic

materials in the world today are in English. To date, many university students in

Middle East in general and in Iraq in particular have learned English for 12 years, but

their English proficiency is still poor. Most students cannot express their thoughts or

even speak well in the English language despite having learnt Reading, Writing,

Listening and Speaking for about 12 years (Kareem, 2009). So that the researcher is

going to examine reading curriculum in Iraqi Kurdistan.

Page 17: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

19

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The design of this chapter explained through Figure 2.1 that provides a flowchart of

the various stages in literature review. It starts with an introduction followed by

explanation about the reading passages. Next, the reading theories are given focus

followed by some significant pointers to achieve effective reading. A critical review

on EFL secondary reading curriculum was done and at the end of the chapter some

past studies on curriculum has been highlighted.

Figure 2.1: Framework

Page 18: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

20

2.2 Reading Passages

One of the more complex tasks facing the English as a foreign language (EFL) reading

teacher is the selection of appropriate reading passages. In reading seminars I conduct

with EFL teachers, we often exchange views on criteria used to select such passages.

Some of the criteria are on everyone list and are obvious; this is important, for it

reassures the participants that their insights are valuable.

2.2.1 Past Studies on the Length of Reading Passages

Long reading comprehension passages are between 400-700 words and they usually

have between 7-10 questions per passage. Long passages give more scope to set

questions that require higher order thinking skills and they usually involve main idea

questions in some form. Students usually do not like to read long passages as their

focus become less as they progress in reading.

Pearson & Camperell (1981: 33) in their research assert that when complexity of

structure and sentence length come together, text comprehension will be reduced. So,

one of the factors that can affect text comprehension is text length. Chastain (1988:

234) noted that language teachers usually favour short reading passages. The tendency

of short passage use may have its roots in a desire not to overload the students. But it

probably is an outgrowth of the idea of reading as a laborious process of deciphering a

complex and sometimes unfamiliar linguistic code for which the students were

required to know all grammar and vocabulary. Studies have shown that in a long

passage, students focus too much attention on language than meaning, and they read

Page 19: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

52

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter discussed the methodology of the current study. Specifically, the chapter

explained the research approach, qualitative paradigm and content analysis, as both

are the foundations of the study. Then, it discussed the trustworthiness, research

context, data collection, and data analysis.

3.2 Research Approach

This study used a content analysis approach; which is deductive content analysis in

analyzing the curriculum of Iraqi Kurdistan for Form Six of the secondary school. The

interview sessions and the notes from the teacher observations would later be

transcribed and then analyzed using a coding process. Please refer to appendix D for

the coding details(Elo & Kynga, 2008).

3.3 Content Analysis

Content analysis is a systematic and objective means of describing and quantifying

phenomena Krippendorff (2000). According to Babbie (2010) content analysis is a

Page 20: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

53

method of analyzing written, verbal or visual communication messages. The

researcher mentioned that through content analysis, it is possible to distill words into

fewer content related categories and when classified into the same categories, words,

phrases and the like shared the same meaning.

There are two approaches or ways to content analysis namely inductive and deductive

content analysis based on theoretical knowledge. The aim is to attain a condensed and

broad description of the phenomenon and the outcome of the analysis is concepts or

categories describing the phenomenon. The choice of the approach depends on the

purpose of the study. If there is not enough knowledge about the phenomenon or if

this knowledge is fragmented, the inductive approach is recommended (Lauri &

Kynga, 2005). On the other hand, Kynga & Vanhanen (1999) explained that deductive

content analysis was used when the structure of analysis was carried out on the basis

of previous knowledge and the purpose of the study was theory testing. In inductive

approach, the data collected moved from the precise or specific to the general so that

particular instances were observed and then combined into a larger whole or general

statement (Chinn & Kramer, 1999).

Conversely according to Burns & Grove (2005), a deductive approach is based on an

earlier theory or model and therefore it moves from the general to the specific. Both

the inductive and deductive analysis processes go through three main phases namely

preparation, organizing and reporting. Figure 3.1 diagrammatically represents these

three phases.

Page 21: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

76

CHAPTER FOUR

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction

The focus of this chapter is to analyze the reading comprehension passages and seek

answers to the research questions. This chapter is divided into five sections and each

section discussed a particular research question. The First Section looked at research

question one and examine how reading theories and strategies underpin the English

Curriculum of Iraqis' Kurdistan secondary school form six). The Second Section of

this chapter looked at the second research question and examine the type of reading

passages that are currently being used in the English language curriculum at Form Six

level in Iraqi Kurdistan. It addressed the different types of reading passages are

discussed in detail. In addition, the passages are examined to find out if the passages

are narrative or expository. The length and scope of the passages was also examined.

Next, the Third Section of this chapter looked at the third research question and find

out if the reading passages used in Form Six classes in Iraqi Kurdistan help in

developing higher order reading and thinking skills it further discussed in detail, the

reasons for incorporating higher order thinking skills into reading passages. In the

Fourth Section of this chapter which relates to research question four would look at

language learning theories that are reflected in the Iraqi reading curriculum. The last

section outlines the summary of this chapter.

Page 22: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

77

4.2 Research Question One

This section answer research question one, what are the reading theories underpinning

the English Curriculum of Iraqis' Kurdistan secondary school (form six)? The reading

theories and strategies which are directly or indirectly implied in the English

Curriculum of Iraqis' Kurdistan secondary school would become clearer when one

examines the Iraqi Curriculum Framework which was developed in 2012. The new

Iraqi Curriculum Framework as outlined in Page 27 of Iraqi Curriculum Framework

and depicted in Figure 4.1 outlines the Key Learner Competencies which includes

critical and independent thinking, inquiry and information processing, creative

thinking and problem solving, evaluation and decision making and finally

communication.

Page 23: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

139

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction

This chapter summarizes the entire research study and its findings. It provides

explanations on the research process and the ways in which the study contributes to

knowledge about teaching and learning in Iraqi Kurdistan secondary schools at Form

Six Level. The first part discusses the research findings and this is followed by EFL

reading tasks in institutions of higher learning. This chapter concludes by outlining the

gist of this study and it is followed by studies on future work.

5.2 Findings of the Research Study

Research studies have found that many undergraduate students at university level face

problems in following their professional studies in the arts and sciences primarily due

to not only low English proficiency but also due to poor development of higher order

thinking skills in relation to reading (Kareem, 2009). He suggested that the roots of

the problems were related to poor reading information processing strategies being

used in class. On the one hand, the foreword by the Minister of Education in Baghdad

on Page 7 of the Curriculum Framework says that the Curriculum Framework

“supports the attainment of learner’s competencies such as creative thinking,

Page 24: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

140

constructive criticism, problem-solving, sound communication and correct decision

making”. In addition, Page 7 of the Iraqi Curriculum Framework mentions the same

point of developing creative and critical thinking skills. This is depicted in Figure 5.1.

Figure 5.2 on the other hand provides the summary of the findings of the present

study.

Figure 5.1: Developing Critical Thinking Skills (Page 26)

Figure 5.2: Summary of the Findings of the Present Study

Page 25: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

150

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdullatif A. Al-Jumaily. 2002. “The ELT Syllabus in Iraq: Problems and Solutions”.

Baghdad: Al-Adab Journal. No. 61.

Alberto Angosto, Patricia Sánchez, María Álvarez, Irene Cuevas & José Antonio

León. 2013. “Evidence for Top-Down Processing in Reading Comprehension of

Children”. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Spain.

Alexander Seeshing Yeung, H.W. Marsh & R. Suliman. 2000. “Can Two Tongues

Live in Harmony?: Analysis of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988

(NELS88) Longitudinal Data on the Maintenance of Home Language”. American

Educational Research Journal. Vol. 37. (4): p. 1001-1026.

Al-Ghalbi, A.A. 2011. “A General View on How to Teach the New English Language

Curriculum: Iraq Opportunities”. AL-Nasria News Website.

<http://nasiriyah.org/nar/ifm. php?recordID=23365>. accessed: 20 January 2012.

Al-Hamash, I.K. & B. Hammo. 1990. Teacher’s Guide of Book -1- (NECI). Baghdad:

Iraqi Technical Printing Co. Ltd.

Ana Marusic & M. Marusic. 1999. “Small Scientific Journals from Small Countries:

Breaking from a Vicious Circle of Inadequacy”. Croatian Medical Journal. Vol. 40

(4): p. 508-514.

Anderson, L.W. (Ed.), D.R. Krathwohl (Ed.), P.W. Airasian, K.A. Cruikshank, R.E.

Mayer, P.R. Pintrich, J. Raths & M.C. Wittrock. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning,

Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives

(Complete Edition). New York: Longman.

Anderson, N.J. 2003a. Reading. In D. Nunan (Ed.). Practice English Language

Teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Armbruster, B.B., D. Lapp, J. Flood & N. Farnan (Eds.). 2004. Considerate Texts. In

Content Area Reading and Learning: Instructional Strategies. (2nd ed.). NJ: Erlbaum.

p. 47-58.

Arthur N. Applebee, J.A. Langer, M. Nystrand & A. Gamoran. 2003. “Discussion-

based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student

performance in middle and high school English”. American Educational Research

Journal. Vol. 40. p. 685-730.

Babbie, E.R. 2010. The Practice of Social Research. Cengage Learning. Scarborough:

Canada.

Baretta, L., L.M.B. Tomitch, N. Mcnair, V.K. Lim & K.E. Waldie. 2009. “Inference

Making While Reading Narrative and Expository Texts: An ERP study”. Psychology

& Neuroscience. Vol. 2. (2): p. 137-145.

Page 26: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

151

Beck, I.L. & M.G. McKeown. 2001. “Inviting Students into the Pursuit of Meaning”.

Educational Psychology Review. Vol. 13 (3): p. 225–241.

Bernard, H.R. 2006. Research Methods in Anthropology. Rowman Altamira.

Berns, M.S., S. Savignon & M.S. Berns (Eds.). 1984. Functional Approaches to

Language and Language Teaching: Another Look. Initiatives in communicative

language teaching. A book of readings. PA: Addison-Wesley. p. 3-21.

Bette S. Bergeron. 1990. “What Does The Term Whole Language Mean?

Constructing a Definition from the Literature”. Journal of Reading Behavior. Vol. 22.

P. 301-329.

Bishop, R. & M. Berryman. 2007. Culture Speaks: Cultural Relationships and

Classroom Learning. Huia Publishers.

Blenkin, G.M., A.V. Kelly & G. Edwards. 1992. Change and the Curriculum.

London: Paul Chapman.

Block, E.L. 1992. “How They Read: Comprehension Monitoring of L1 and L2

Readers. TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 26. (2).

Bloor, A.M. 1985. “Some Approaches to the Design of Reading Courses in the

Foreign Language”. Reading in the Foreign Language. Vol. 3 (1): p. 341-361.

Boling, C.J. & W.H. Evan. 2008. “Reading Success in the Secondary Classroom”.

Preventing School Failure. Vol. 52. (2): p. 59-66.

Bonnie J.F. Meyer & R.O. Freedle. 1984. “Effects of Discourse Type on Recall”.

American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 21. (1): p. 121–143.

Brinton, D.M., M.A. Snow & M.B. Wesche. 1989. Content-Based Second Language

Instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Brown, A.D. 2000. Principles of Language Learning And Teaching. Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Burnard, P. 1996. “Teaching the Analysis of Textual Data: An Experiential

Approach”. Nurse Education Today, Vol. 16. (4): p. 278–281.

Burns, N. & S.K. Grove. 2005. “The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, Critique

& Utilization”. Elsevier Saunders, St Louis.

Canale, M. & M. Swain. 1980. “Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to

Second Language Teaching and Testing”. Applied Linguistics. Vol. 1. p. 1-47.

Carrell, Devine & Eskey. 1988. Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Page 27: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

152

Carrell, P.L. 1985. “Facilitating ESL Reading by Teaching Text Structure”. TESOL

Quarterly. Vol. 19. (4): p. 727-745.

Carroll, J.B. 1966. The Contribution of Psychological Theory and Educational

Research to the Teaching of Foreign Languages. In A. Valdman 108 (Ed.). Trends in

Language Teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill. p. 93–106.

Castagnaro, P.J. 2006. “Audio-Lingual Method and Behaviorism: From

Misunderstanding to Myth”. Applied Linguistics. Vol. 27. (3): p. 519-526.

Catanzaro, M. 1988. Using Qualitative Analytical Techniques. In Nursing Research;

Theory and Practice. P. Woods & M. Catanzaro (eds.). C.V. Mosby Company. New

York. pp. 437–456.

Charles J. Alderson & Y. Lukmani. 1989. “Cognition and Reading: Cognitive Levels

as Embodied in Test Questions”. Reading in a Foreign Language. Vol. 5. (2): p. 253-

270.

Chinn, P.L. & M.K. Kramer. 1999. Theory and Nursing a Systematic Approach.

Mosby Year Book. St Louis.

Clymer, T. 1968. “What Is Reading?: Some Current Concepts”. 67th Yearbook of

National Society for the Study of Education. p. 7-29.

Cohen, E.G. 1994. “Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small

Groups”. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 64. p. 1-35.

Coxhead, A.J. 2000. The Development and Evaluation of an Academic Word List.

(Unpublished M.A. Thesis). Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.

Creswell, J.W. & V.L. Plano Clark. 2007. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods

Research. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.

Creswell, J.W. 2002. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating

Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Research. Upper Saddle River. NJ:

Merrill/Pearson Education.

Creswell, J.W. 2005. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating

Quantitative And Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River. NJ: Pearson

Education.

Crookes, G. 1986. “Task Classification: A Cross-Disciplinary Review”. Technical

Report No. 4. Center for Second Language Classroom Research. Social Science

Research Institute. University of Hawaii at Manoa.

Crystal, D. 2003. English as a Global Language. Cambridge University Press.

Curzon, L.B. 1985. Teaching in Further Education. An Outline of Principles and

Practice. 3rd ed. Cassell: London.

Page 28: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

153

Dana Gurney, R. Gersten, J.A. Dimino & D. Carnine. 1990. “Story Grammar:

Effective Literature Instruction for Learning Disabled High School Students”. Journal

of Learning Disabilities. Vol. 23. (6): p. 335-342.

Daniel, I.M. 1983. On First-Year University German Foreign Language Learning: A

Comparison of The Language Behavior In Response To Two Instructional Methods.

(Ph.D. dissertation). University of Southern California, United States -California.

Retrieved February from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT

0553511).

Danielle S. McNamara, T. O’Reilly, R. Best & Y. Ozuru. 2006. “Improving

Adolescent Students’ Reading Comprehension with ISTART”. Journal of Educational

Computing Research. Vol. 34. p. 147–171.

Darwesh, A.A., I.A. Hisham & S.A. Khudair. 2002. Teacher's Guide –1 for Fifth

Grade of the Primary Education Stage. Baghdad: Ministry of Education.

David W. Moore, T.W. Bean, D. Birdyshaw & J.A. Rycik. 1999. “Adolescent

Literacy: A Position Statement”. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Vol. 43. p.

97-112.

Dey. 1993. “Qualitative Data Analysis: A User-Friendly Guide for Social Scientists”.

Routledge. London.

Diller, K.C. 1978. The Language Teaching Controversy. Rowley. MA: Newbury

House.

Dole, J.A., G. Duffy, L.R. Roehler & P.D.P. Pearson. 1991. “Moving from the Old to

the New: Research on Reading Comprehension Instruction”. Review of Educational

Review. Vol. 61. p. 239-264.

Dolly N. Young. 1999. “Linguistic Simplification of SL Reading Material: Effective

Instructional Practice?”. The Modern Language Journal. Vol. 83 (3): p. 350–366.

Duffy, G.G. 2009. Explaining Reading: A Resource for Teaching Concepts, Skills,

and Strategies. (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Eljana, L. 2009. “Implications about L2 Reading and Motivation”.

<https://eltaal.sslpowered.com/.../implications_about_l2_reading_and_motivation.pdf

>. accessed: 31 July 2010.

Ellis, R. 2005. “Instructed Second language Acquisition: A Literature Review”. New

Zealand: New Zealand Ministry of Education.

Faizah, A.M., M.J. Zalizan & A. Norzaini. 2002. “Selected Malaysian Adult Learners’

Academic Reading Strategies: A Case Study”. <http://www.face. stir.ac.uk/

Majidp61.htm>.

Page 29: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

154

Fodor, J.A., T.G. Bever & M.F. Garrett. 1974. The Psychology of Language. New

York: McGrawHill.

Fooder, J.D. 1995. Comprehending Sentence Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Gao. 1996. “Content Analysis a Methodology for Structuring and Analyzing Written

Material. Program Evaluation and Methodology Division”. United States General

Accounting Office. Washington.

Garcia, G. 2000. Bilingual Children’s Reading. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D.

Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.). Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. 3. Mahway, NJ:

Erlbaum. p. 813-834.

Ghaith, G. & M.A. El-Malak. 2004. “The Effect of Jigsaw II on Literal and Higher

Order EFL Reading Comprehension”. Educational Research and Evaluation. Vol. 10.

(2): p. 105-115.

Gill, P., K. Stewart, E. Treasure & B. Chadwick. 2008. “Methods of Data Collection

in Qualitative Research: Interviews and Focus Groups”. British Dental Journal. Vol.

6. (204): p. 291–295.

Gough, P.B. 1972. One Second of Reading. In James F. Kavanagh and Ignatius G.

Mattingly (eds.). Language by Ear and by Eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. p. 813-

834.

Grabe, W. 2001. Reading–Writing Relations: Theoretical Perspectives and

Instructional Practices. In D. Belcher and A. Hirvela, (Eds.). Linking literacies:

Perspectives on L2 Reading–Writing Connections. University of Michigan Press: Ann

Arbor. p. 15-47.

Grabe, W. 2004. “Research on L2 Reading Instruction”. Annual Review of Applied

Linguistics. Vol. 24. p. 44-69.

Graneheim, U.H. & B. Lundman. 2004. Qualitative “Content Analysis in Nursing

Research: Concepts, Procedures and Measures to Achieve Trustworthiness”. Nurse

Education Today. Vol. 24. p. 105–112.

Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park. CA: Sage Publications.

Guthrie, J., K. Yongvanich & F. Ricceri. 2004. “Using Content Analysis as a Research

Method to Inquire Into Intellectual Capital Reporting”. Journal of Intellectual Capital,

Vol. 5. p. 282–293.

Hakim, S. 1977. Learning and Teaching Foreign Languages in Iraq. MID Eighteenth

Century to 1950, with Emphasis on Training. (Unpublished M. Phil. Dissertation).

Haval Hussein Saeed. 2015. “The Kurdish educational curriculum: an Unreflected

Philosophical Base. Problemy Wczesnej Edukacji / Issues in Early Education. Vol. 4.

(31): Salahaddin University-Erbil. The Kurdistan Region of Iraq.

Page 30: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

155

Hook, P. & S. Jones. 2004. “The Importance of Automaticity and Fluency for

Efficient Reading Comprehension”. International Dyslexia Association. Vol. 24 (2):

p. 16-24.

Hosoki, Y. 2011. “English Language Education in Japan: Transitions and

Challenges”. Kokusai kankeigaku bulletin. Vol. 6. (1): p. 199–215.

Hsieh, H.F. & S.E. Shannon. 2005. “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content

Analysis”. Qualitative Health Research. Vol. 15. (9): p. 1277-1288.

Jeffrey P. Bakken, M.A. Mastropieri & T.E. Scruggs. 1997. “Reading Comprehension

of Expository Science Material and Students with Learning Disabilities: A

Comparison of Strategies”. The Journal of Special Education. Vol. 31. p. 300-324.

K. Shaaban, & G.M. Ghaith. 2005. “The Theoretical Relevance and Efficacy of

Using Cooperative Learning in the ESL/EFL Classroom”. TESL Reporter. Vol. 38 (2):

p. 14-28.

Kamil, M.L. & S.J. Samuels. 1988. Models of the Reading Process. In Carrell, Devine

and Eskey (eds.). p. 22–36.

Kareem, N.T. 2009. “A Survey Study of the Syllabuses of English used in Iraq (1873

– 2003 A.D.)”. Diala. Jour. Vol. 34.

Kaur, S.K. & R. Thiyagarajah. 1999. “The English Reading Habits of ELLs Student in

University Science Malaysia”. Original ultiBASE publication. Paper presented at the

Sixth International Literacy and Education Research Network Conference on

Learning. p. 27 – 30.

Kawulich, B.B. 2005. Participant Observation as a Data Collection Method. Forum

Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 6. (2): Art. 43,

<http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0502430>.

Keene, E.O. & S. Zimmerman. 2007. “Mosaic of Thought: The Power of

Comprehension Strategy Instruction”. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kelly, A.V. 1983:1999. The Curriculum. Theory and Practice. (4ed). London: Paul

Chapman.

Kesler, T. 2010. “Shared Reading to Build Vocabulary and Comprehension”.

International Reading Association.

Ketch, A. 2005. “Conversation: The Comprehension Connection”. The Reading

Teacher. Vol. 59. (1): p. 8-13.

Khalid, M. 2004. Iraq Living Conditions Survey 2004. United Nations Development

Programme Website: <htp://www.iq.undp.org/ILCS/education.htm>. accessed 7

December 2011

Page 31: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

156

King, N. & C. Horrocks. 2010. Interviews in Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

Kintsch, W. 1998. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. England: Cambridge

University Press.

Koda, K. 2005. Insights into Second Language Reading: Across-Linguistic Approach.

Cambridge Press: New York.

Krathwohl, D.R. 2002. “A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview [Electronic

Version]”. Theory into Practice. Vol. 41. (4): p. 212-218.

Krippendorff, K. 2000. Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology. Beverly

Hills: Sage.

Kucer, S.B. 1987. The Cognitive Base of Reading and Writing. In The Dynamics of

Language Learning, J. Squire (ed.). p. 27–51. Urbana, IL: National Conference on

Research in English.

Kynga¨ H.S. & L. Vanhanen. 1999. “Content Analysis (Finnish)”. p. 3–12.

Lauri, S. & H. Kynga¨ s. 2005. “Developing Nursing Theories (Finnish: Hoitotieteen

Teorian Kehitta¨minen)”. Werner So¨ derstro¨m, Dark Oy, Vantaa.

Lavadenz M. & E. Armas. 2011. “Fostering Home-School Collaboration in Diverse

Communities. In: Including Families and Communities in Urban Education”.

Information Age Publishers.

Leslie, L. & J. Caldwell. 2004. Qualitative Reading Inventory - 3. Boston. MA:

Pearson Education Company.

Margo A. Mastropieri, T.E. Scruggs & K. Butcher. 1997. “How Effective is Inquiry

Learning for Students with Mild Disabilities?”. The Journal of Special Education.

Vol. 31. p. 199–211.

Marilyn Cochran-Smith. 2001 b. “Learning to Teach Against the (New) Grain”.

Journal of Teacher Education. Vol. 52. (1): p. 3-4.

Marshall, C. & G.B. Rossman. 1995. Designing Qualitative Research. Sage

Publications: London.

Marva A. Barnett. 1988. “Reading through context: How Real and Perceived

Strategies Use Affects L2 Comprehension”. Modern Language Journal. Vol. 72. p.

150-162.

Marya Shardakova & A. Pavlenko. 2004. “Identity Options in Russian

Textbooks”. Journal of Language, Identity and Education. Vol. 3. (1): p. 25-46.

Marzano, R.J. 2000. Designing a New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.

Thousand Oaks. CA: Corwin Press.

Page 32: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

157

Mason, L.H., H. Meadan, L. Medin & L. Corso. 2006. “Self-Regulated Strategy

Development Instruction for Expository Text Comprehension”. Teaching Exceptional

Children. Vol. 38. (4): p. 47–52.

MASTIC (Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre). 2004. Science and

Technology knowledge Productivity in Malaysia bibliometric study 2003. Technical

Report. Ministry of Science. Technology and Innovation Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur.

McCain, G.C. 1988. “Content Analysis: A Method for Studying Clinical Nursing

Problems”. Applied Nursing Research. Vol. 1. (3): p. 146–150.

Mcdonough, S.H. 1995. Strategy and Skill in Learning a Foreign Language. New

York: St. Martin’s Press.

McNamara, D.S. 2004. “Interactive Strategy Trainer for Active Reading and

Thinking”. Behavior Research Methods Instruments and Computers. Vol. 36. p. 222-

233.

McNamara, D.S. 2004. “SERT: Self-Explanation Reading Training”. Discourse

Processes. Vol. 38. p. 1–30.

Mekheimer, M.A. 2011. “Impact of the Target Culture on Foreign Language

Learning: A Case Study in Cross-Cultural Communication”. Vol. 7. (1).

Merriam, S. 2009. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San

Francisco. CA: Jossey-Bass.

Meyer, B.J., D.M. Brandt & G.J. Bluth. 1980. “Use of Top-Level Structure in Text:

Key for Reading Comprehension of Ninth-Grade Students”. Reading research

quarterly. p. 72-103.

Meyer, B.J.F. 2003. “Text Coherence and Readability”. Topics in Language

Disorders. Vol. 23. p. 204-225.

Miles, M.B. & M.A. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Analysis: An Expanded Source

Book (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ministry of Education Baghdad. 2004. Actual Status of Education and Teaching: New

Concepts: A. Al-Alwan.

Morgan, N. & J. Saxton. 1994. “Asking Better Questions”. Markham. ON: Pembroke.

Moss, B. 2005. “Making a Case and a Place for Effective Content Area Literacy

Instruction in the Elementary Grades”. The Reading Teacher. Vol. 59. p. 46-55.

Muna Mohammed Abbas & J.M.I. India. 2012. “Iraq Opportunities: The New

National Curriculum and Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Iraqi Primary

Schools”. International Journal of Education. Curriculum Section. Vol. 2. p. 1-1.

Page 33: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

158

Nassaji, H. 2003. “L2 Vocabulary Learning From Context: Strategies, Knowledge

Sources, and Their Relationship with Success in L2 Lexical Inferencing”. TESOL

Quarterly. Vol. 37. (4): p. 645-670.

Nell K. Duke. 2000. “For the Rich it’s Richer: Print Experiences and Environments

Offered to Children in Very Low- and Very High-Socioeconomic Status First-Grade

Classrooms”. American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 37. (2): p. 441–478.

Nist, S.L. & K. Kirby, 1986. “Teaching Comprehension and Study Strategies through

Modeling and Thinking Aloud”. Reading Research and Instruction. Vol. 25. (4): p.

254-264.

Nunan, D. 1988. The Learner-Centered Curriculum: A Study in Second Language

Teaching. Cambridge/ New York/ Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

Oberholzer, B. 2005. The Relationship between Reading Difficulties and Academic

Performance among a Group of Foundation Phase Learners. University of Zululand.

Oebel, G. 2001. So-Called Alternative FLL Approaches. Grin Verlag: Germany.

Retrieved from <http:\\ www.books.google.com/books?isbn=3640187792>.

Omaggio, M.A. 1993. Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

Oxford, R.L., R.Z. Lavine & D. Crookall. 1989. “Language Learning Strategies,

Communicative Approach and Classroom Implications”. Foreign Language Annals.

Vol. 22. (1): p. 29-39.

Paas, F., J.E. Tuovinen, H. Tabbers & P.W.M. Van Gerven. 2003. “Cognitive load

measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory”. Educational Psychologist.

Vol. 38. p. 63-71.

Parviz Ajideh. 2003. “Schema Theory-Based Pre-Reading Tasks: A Neglected

Essential in the ESL Reading Class”. The Reading Matrix. Vol. 3. (1).

Patton, M.Q. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Sage Publications,

Newbury Park.

Pearson, D.P., L.R. Roehler, J.A. Dole & G. Duffy. 1992. Developing expertise in

reading comprehension. In S. Jay Samuels and Alan E. Farstrup (Eds.). What

Research Has To Say About Reading Comprehension? IRA. p. 145-199.

Perlovsky, L.I. 2009. “Language, Cognition, and Cultural Evolution”. Keynote Talk at

the International Conference on Neural Computation (ICNC’09). Madeira, Portugal.

p. 4-7.

Pervez, G. & K. Gronhaug. 2005. Research Methods in Business Studies. Third

Edition. United Kingdom. Pearson Education Limited.

Page 34: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

159

Peter Afflerbach, P.D. Pearson & S.G. Paris. 2008. “Clarifying Differences between

Reading Skills and Reading Strategies”. The Reading Teacher. Vol. 61 (5): p. 364–

373.

Polit, D.F. & C.T. Beck. 2004. Nursing Research. Principles and Methods. Lippincott

Williams & Wilkins. Philadelphia. PA.

Porter, J.C. & T.P. Gordon. 2009. “Reading and Understanding Academic Research in

Accounting: A Guide for Students”. Global Perspectives on Accounting Education.

Vol. 6. p. 25-45.

Prabhu, N.S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pratt, D. 1994. Curriculum Planning: A Handbook for Professionals. Fort Worth:

Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Pressley, M. 2006. Reading Instruction that Works: The Case for Balanced Teaching

(3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.

Pretorius, E.J. 2002. “Reading Ability and Academic Performance In South Africa:

Are We Fiddling While Rome is Burning?”. Language mat Jers. (33). P. 169-196.

Pugh, S.L., F. Pawan & C. Antommarchi. 2000. Academic Literacy and the New

College Learner. In R.F. Flippo & D.C. Caverly (Eds.). Handbook of College Reading

And Study Research. Mahwah. NJ: Erlbaum. p. 25-42.

Rababah, G. 2001. An Investigation into the Strategic Competence of Arab Learners

of English at Jordanian Universities. (PhD Dissertation). University of Newcastle

upon Tyne. UK.

Rasinski, T. & N. Padak. 2000. Effective Reading Strategies: Teaching Children Who

Find Reading Difficult (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Rayane Abusabha & M.L. Woelfel. 2003. “Qualitative VS Quantitative Methods: Two

Opposites that Make a Perfect Match”. American Dietetic Association. Journal of the

American Dietetic Association. Vol. 103. May. p. 566-9.

Reutzel, D.R. & R.B. Cooter. 2003. Strategies for Reading Assessment and

Instruction: Helping Every Child Succeed (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Merrill Prentice

Hall.

Richard, J.C. & R. Schmidt. (Eds.). 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching

and Applied Linguistics (3rd ed.). London: Longman.

Richards, J. & T. Rodgers. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language

Teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Roberts, M.J. & G. Erdos. 1993. “Strategy Selection and Metacognition”. Educational

Psychology. Vol. 13. p. 259-266.

Page 35: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

160

Robson, C. 1993. Real World Research. A Resource for Social Scientists and

Practitioner–Researchers. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

Rudaw. 2013. The Rise of English Language in Kurdistan.

Rumelhart, D.E. 1980. Schemata: The Building Blocks of Cognition. In R.J. Spiro,

B.C. Bruce & W.F. Brewer (Eds.). Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension:

Perspectives from Cognitive Psychology, Linguistics, Artificial Intelligence, and

Education. Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. p. 35-58.

Samuels, S.J. & M.L. Kamil. 1988. “Models of the Reading Process”. In Carrell,

Devine and Eskey (eds.). p. 22–36.

Sa-ngiamwibool, A. 2002. The Effects of Different Types of Reading Instructions on

Executive Summary Writing and Critical Thinking”. The 3rd International

Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 2, 2011 Faculty of Liberal Arts,

Prince of Songkla University Proceedings- Teaching Techniques.

Sa-ngiamwibool. 2011b. “The Effects of Different Types of Reading Instructions on

Executive Summary Writing and Critical Thinking”. Proceedings of the 3rd

international conference on humanities and social sciences, Prince of Songkla

University, Thailand.

Satu Elo & H. Kyngäs. 2008. “The Qualitative Content Analysis Process”. Journal of

Advanced Nursing. Vol. 62. (1): p. 107–115.

Savignon, S.J. 1991. “Communicative Language Teaching: State of the Art”. TESOL

Quarterly. Vol. 25. p. 261-277.

Saville-Troike, M. 1973. “Reading and the Audio-Lingual Method”. TESOL

Quarterly. Vol. 7. (4): p. 395-405.

Sawaki, Y., H.J. Kim & C. Gentile. 2009. “Q-Matrix Construction: Defining the Link

between Constructs and Test Items in Large-Scale Reading and Listening

Comprehension Assessments”. Language Assessment Quarterly. Vol. 6. (3): p. 190–

209.

Scott A. Crossley, M.M. Louwerse, P.M. McCarthy & D.S. McNamara. 2007. “A

Linguistic Analysis of Simplified and Authentic Texts”. Modern Language Journal.

Vol. 91. p. 15–30.

Shehadeh, A. 2005. Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching: Theories and

Applications. In C. Edwards & J. Willis (Eds.). Teachers Exploring Tasks in English

Language Teaching. London: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 13–30.

Shenton. 2004. “Strategies for Ensuring Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research

Projects”. Education for Information. Vol. 22. p. 63-75.

Page 36: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

161

Sidek, H.M. 2012. “EFL Textbook Analysis”. Language and Literacy. Vol. 14. (3): p.

27.

Sikhi, A.H.G. 2008. “Study System in Iraq”. Ministry of Higher Education and

Scientific Research Department of Cultural Relations and Scholarship Cultural Office

/ New Delhi.

Singhal, M. 2001. “Reading Proficiency, Reading Strategies, Metacognitive

Awareness and L2 Readers”. The Reading Matrix. Vol. 1. (1): p. 1-9.

Slavin, R.E. & A. Cheung. 2003. “Effective Programs for English Language Learners:

A Best-Evidence Synthesis”. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Center for

Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk.

Slavin, R.E. & A. Cheung. 2003. “Synthesis of Research on Beginning Reading

Programs for English Language Learners”. Educational Leadership. p. 52-57.

Slavin, R.E. 1988. “Cooperative Learning and Students Achievement”. Educational

Leadership. Vol. 45. (2): p. 3-33.

Smith, F. 1994. Understanding Reading. (5th ed.). Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Stanovich, K.E. 1980. “Toward an Interactive-Compensatory Model of Individual

Differences in the Development of Reading Fluency”. Research Reading Quarterly.

Vol. 16. (1): p. 32-71.

Stern, H.H. 1992. Issues and Options in Language Teaching (edited posthumously by

Patrick Allen & Birgit Harley). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Svjetlana Kolić-Vehovec & I. Bajšanski. 2007. “Comprehension Monitoring and

Reading Comprehension in Bilingual Students”. Journal of Research in Reading. Vol.

30. p. 198-211.

Swain, M. 1985. Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input

and Comprehensible Output in its Development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.). Input

In Second Language Acquisition. Rowley. MA: Newbury House. p. 235-253.

Swales, J.M. 1990. Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, B.M. 1980. “Children’s Memory for Expository Text after Reading”. Reading

Research Quarterly. Vol. 15. p. 399-411.

Tierney, R.J. & P.D. Pearson. 1994. Learning to Learn from Text: A Framework for

Improving Classroom Practice. Ruddell and Singer (eds.). p. 496–513.

Ting, S.H. & P.F. Tee. 2008. “Relative Difficulty of Academic Text-Types for TESL

Undergraduates”. Asiatic Journal. Vol. 2. (2).

Page 37: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFL SECONDARY READING

162

Tochon, F.V. 2009. “The Key to Global Understanding: World Languages

Education”. Review of Educational Research. Vol. 79. (2): p. 650-681.

Vehovec, S.K. 2011. “Relation between Self-Assessment and Performance Measures

of Metacognition in Reading during Adolescence”. 11th European Conference on

Psychological Assessment. Riga.

Wang, X. 2009. “Second Language Theories and Their Influences in China”. English

Language Teaching. Vol.2 (4): p. 149-153.

Wang, X. 2009. “Second Language Theories and their Influences in China”. English

Language Teaching. Vol. 2. (4): p. 149-153.

Williams, D. 2005. “A New Approach to Reading / Discussion Focused Language

Learning”. Research Note.

Williams, M. & R. Burden. 1997. Psychology for Language Teachers. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Willig. 1985. “A Meta-Analysis of Selected Studies on the Effectiveness of Bilingual

Education”. Review of Educational Research. Vol. 55. (3): p. 269-317.

Yang, Y. 2002. “Reassessing Readers’ Comprehension Monitoring”. Reading in a

Foreign Language. Vol. 14. (1): p. 18-42.

Yusuf ùena & Mesut Kulelia. 2015. “The Effect of Vocabulary Size and Vocabulary

Depth on Reading in EFL Context”. GlobELT: An International Conference on

Teaching and Learning English as an Additional Language. Antalya - Turkey.

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 199. p. 555 – 562.

Zaid, M. 2011. “Caught between Scylla and Charybdis: Teaching English in a

Plethora of Dialects and Cultures”. Paper scheduled for presentation at Rhizomes

VI (11-12 February 2011). The University of Queensland. Brisbane. Australia.

Zaidah, Z. 2003. An Investigation into the Effects of Discipline-Specific Knowledge,

Proficiency and Genre on Reading Comprehension and Strategies of Malaysia ESP

Students. (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis).

Zelander, E. 2006. “English as a Global Language - Good or Bad?”.

Mid Sweden University.