TEACHING READING IN EFL: EXPLORING TEACHERS’ ABILITY IN BRIDGING

STUDENTS’ ACCESS TO TEXT

Karima Putri Rahmadina1, Emi Emilia2

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia1,2

karimarahmadina@upi.edu1, emiemilia@upi.edu2

- CONAPLIN 14 -

PISA RESULT

2018

A STUDY ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF

TRAINING PROGRAM TO DEVELOP

TEACHERS’ ABILITY TO TEACH READING

Study on the development

of reading materials like

PISA(Fadhillah,

2021)

Study on the Training Program

(Emilia, 2021)

Study on the teachers’ ability to

teach reading

Introduction

Underlying Theories

Reading as a social process (Wallace, 1992, 2003; Luke &

Freebody 1997)

Three levels of reading comprehension (Rose,

2020) and Cognitive Processes in PISA (OECD,

2019)

SFL-GBA (Emilia, 2011) and Reading to Learn

(Rose and Martin, 2012; Rose, 2020)

METHODS● Design: qualitative case study

● Participants: 9 English teachers out of 24 participants in the larger study

● Site: Zoom video conferencing platform, the third meeting in the training program

● Data collection: peer teaching observation (before input of teaching reading) and lesson plan as supplementary data

● Data analysis: thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006)

● All names are written in pseudonyms

Seven out of nine teachers planned to begin their lesson with activating the students’ prior knowledge

Findings: Activating prior knowledge as pre-reading activity

Table 1. Teachers’ pre-reading questions

Nurul: “What materials do we use to make fried bananas?”Dinda: “Have you ever visited a tourist resort?”Fajar: “Have you ever been to an airport?”

Figure 1. indah’s picture cues to activate prior knowledge

Vocabulary activity to ensure students’ access to text and eliminate linguistic difficulties (Wallace, 1992)

Findings: Bridging access to content

Figure 2. Vocabulary matching activity in Dian’s lesson

Giving explicit guidance while the students are reading through task before reading as according to Rose and Martin (2012) and Rose (2020).

Findings: Bridging access to content

Figure 3. Fajar’s while-reading task

Direct instruction to read and do post-reading task with little to no guidance, going against the theory of teaching reading as a social process and text based instruction (Emilia, 2011; Gibbons,

2014, Rose & Martin, 2012; Rose, 2020)

Findings: Teaching or assessing reading?

Table 2. Ria’s peer teaching

Ria: This is a very short text, I believe you can finish it in three minutes, read this and please answer the question. There are six questions. Take your time reading the text and you can start now. (Repeat the instruction) Read the text, and then after you’re finished answer the questions.

Five out of the nine teachers seemed to center their lesson not on building knowledge of the field, but more on building knowledge of the ‘text’, which is in line with what was discussed in Emilia

(2011).

Findings: Misconceptions of Building Knowledge of the Field

Table 2. Nia’s lesson plan

1. Read an example of discussion text with the topic of “distant learning”, highlight words and expressions that are difficult to understand, as well as answering questions related to the text read.

2. Read explanations related to social function, text structure and linguistic features of discussion text.

3. Classifying discussion text that has been read according to its structure of organization (thesis, argument for, argument against, conclusion).

● Most of the teachers have bridged the students’ access to text by activating their prior knowledge

● The BKOF stage of SFL GBA approach can indeed facilitate explicit teaching of reading that adheres to the three category of cognitive processes in PISA reading

● Some teachers’ misconceptions of the BKOF stage of SFL GBA needs to be addressed.● Unequal teachers’ ability in teaching reading calls for teacher training program in

teaching reading● Future direction of this research is to see how the training program help to improve

their practices in teaching PISA-like reading using text-based instruction.

Conclusion and future direction

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTFinancial support for this study was provided by a grant from Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia under the umbrella of Word Class University Program (PTNBH). This research is a part of a larger project on the development of a training program aiming to develop teachers’ ability in teaching PISA-like reading conducted under Indonesia Research Collaboration Programme (Program Penelitian Kolaborasi Indonesia, PPKI) led by Prof. Emi Emilia, M.Ed., P.hD. Another research is reported by Emilia (2021) on training teachers to teach PISA reading and Fadhillah (2021) on teacher’s ability in developing reading materials like PISA.

CREDITS: This presentation template was created by Slidesgo, including icons by Flaticon, infographics &

images by Freepik

THANKS!Do you have any questions?

REFERENCESBraun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2),

77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaCresswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage

Publication. Emilia, E. (2005). A critical genre-based approach to teaching academic writing in a tertiary EFL context in

Indonesia. A PhD thesis: the University of Melbourne.Emilia, E. (2011). Pendekatan genre-based dalam pengajaran Bahasa Inggris: petunjuk untuk guru. Bandung: Rizki

Press.Gibbons, P. (2014). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching English language learners in the

mainstream classroom (2nd ed.). Heinemann.Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1997). Shaping the social processes of reading. In Constructing critical literacies: Teaching

and learning textual practice (pp. 460–475). Hampton Press.Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th edition.). San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.OECD. (2018). Indonesia Student performance (PISA 2018). OECD Education GPS.

https://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?primaryCountry=IDN&treshold=10&topic=PIOECD. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Education.

REFERENCESRose, D. (2011). Beyond literacy: building an integrated pedagogic genre. An accessible outline of the R2L

professional learning program, framed by theory. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 34 (1), 81‐97Rose, D. (2020). Reading to Learn: Accelerating learning and closing the gap. Teacher resource package. Reading to

Learn.Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney

school. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing.Wallace, C. (1992). Reading: A scheme for teacher education. OUP Oxford.Wallace, C. (2003). Critical Reading in Language Education. Palgrave Macmillan.Wallace, C. (1992). Reading: A scheme for teacher education. OUP Oxford.Wallace, C. (2003). Critical Reading in Language Education. Palgrave Macmillan.Wallace, C. (2013). Literacy and the bilingual learner: Texts and practices in London schools. AIAA.