CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
3.4 Data Analysis
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Step 8: Post-test after RSI for the FD & FI Groups
The post-test was administered to the two classes by the researcher, one week after the final instruction in December. The test was intended to measure the effects of the RSI on the reading comprehension. The test also took 45 minutes. The post-test in December, 2011, was administered in the same way as the pre-test, and then, a comparison in performance between the pre-and post-test was made.
Step 9 : Questionnaire II－Student’s Responses to RSI
This questionnaire was aimed to obtain the participants’ responses to the reading strategy instruction. This questionnaire was administered to the FD/FI learners to explore the fact that the participants with different learning styles might manifest different degrees of awareness after the instruction. Students were requested to complete 14 questions in 25 minutes. Moreover, since the participants were from two different classes, the data were collected separately. All the data were gathered within a week. The results of questionnaire II were further analyzed and discussed afterwards.
3.4 Data Analysis
The research results were obtained mainly through the pre-and post-test, Questionnaire I (Reading Strategy Questionnaire) before and after RSI, and Questionnaire II (Students’ Responses to Reading Strategy Instruction and FD/FI Learning Style). The close-ended question data collected from the Questionnaire I before and after RSI were computed with SPSS 12.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) statistical software in Chinese version. The criterion level of .05 was adopted to determine a significant difference. In addition, the answers to the open-ended questions in the Questionnaire II were summarized to further clarify the
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
authenticity of the close-ended questions.
To answer RQ 1, paired samples- and independent sample t-test were used in the pre-and post-test to evaluate the effectiveness of the reading strategy instruction for the FD and FI groups. That is, the results explain if there was any significant effect after RSI on each group.
To answer RQ2, descriptive statistics, such as means, standard deviations, and t-values was adopted to compute how often different reading strategies were used, and find out the most frequently used global and local reading strategies.
Paired samples t-tests were also used for the Questionnaire I (Reading Strategy Questionnaire) to see if there was any significant difference between the FD and FI groups in the change of global and local reading strategy use before and after RSI.
To answer RQ3, the Excel of the Microsoft was used in the pre-and post-test to compare the percentage of the numbers of the correct answers made by the FD and FI groups in each question type.
To answer RQ4, the Excel of the Microsoft was used to compute the answers to the closed-ended questions in Questionnaire II. Then, the most beneficial and the most difficult global and local reading strategies were listed in this part. Also, the participants’ responses to the open-ended questions on the teaching and reading materials were further discussed.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 4 Results
In this chapter, the collected data are analyzed and the results are presented in the sequence of the four research questions raised in Chapter Two. Four sections are elaborated on (1) the results in response to Research Question 1; (2) the results in response to Research Question 2; (3) the results in response to Research Question 3, and (4) the results in response to Research Question 4.
4.1 Research Question 1: How do FD/FI Learners perform in English reading comprehension before and after instruction? And which group of learner benefits more from the reading strategy instruction?
4.1.1 How do FD/FI Learners perform in English reading comprehension before and after instruction?
To examine whether the FD group and FI group performed significantly differently in reading comprehension test before & after RSI, a paired samples t-test was conducted. The results of the paired samples t-test are represented in Table 4.1. There were significant differences between the FD group (p = .012＜.05) and the FI group (p = .000＜.05) in the pre-test and post-test.
Table 4.1 Results of the Paired Samples T-test in the Pre-and Post-test with FD and FI Groups
Group Test M SD N t df Sig.
Paired 1 FD pre-test -
FD post-test -6.50000 13.84709 32 -2.655 31 .012*
Paired 2 FI pre-test -
FI post-test -9.48837 13.35303 43 -4.660 42 .000**
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4.1.2 Which group of learner benefits more from the reading strategy instruction?
To examine which group of learner benefits more from the reading strategy instruction, an independent sample t-test was conducted. Based on the results listed in Table 4.2, there were significant differences between the FD and FI groups in pre-test (p = .000,＜.05) and post-test (p = .000,＜.05). The mean score of the pre-test in the FD group was 61.63 while that of the pre-test in the FI group was 58.42. Furthermore, the mean score of the post-test in the FD group was 68.13 while that of the post-test in the FI group was 67.91. The results showed that both groups (the FD group and the FI group) made much progress in the reading test after the 18-week reading strategy instruction (RSI). In comparison, the FD group performed better than the FI group before and after RSI; however, the FI group (+9.49) improved better than the FD group (+6.50).
Table 4.2 Results of the Independent Sample T-test in the Pre-and Post-test with FD and FI groups
Group Test M SD t df Sig.
FD Pre-test 61.63 17.42 20.016 31 .000**
FI Pre-test 58.42 13.69 27.973 42 .000**
FD Post-test 68.13 15.89 24.258 31 .000**
FI Post-test 67.91 12.27 36.302 42 .000**
Note.
1.FD = Field Dependent group, FI = Field Independent group 2.*Significant at p＜.05 (two-tailed)
A Summary of Responses to Research Question 1
Based on the results in Table 4.1, there were significant differences between the FD group and the FI group in the pre-and post-test. Based on the results in Table 4.2, the mean scores of FD in the pre-test and post-test were 61.63 and 68.13, and those of FI group in the pre-test and post-test were 58.42 and 67.91, respectively. So, learners in the FI group (+ 9.49) benefits more than those in the FD group (+ 6.50) after RSI.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4.2 Research Question 2: How frequently do FD/FI Learners use different reading strategies before and after instruction?
Table 4.3, Table 4.4, Table 4.5, and Table 4.6 present the results of the FD and FI groups’ global and local reading strategy use in the Reading Strategy Questionnaire (Questionnaire I) before and after RSI.
4.2.1 Frequency of the FD group’s Global Reading Strategy Use before & after RSI To compute the FD group’s responses to the global reading strategies (Q1-Q9, 34-40) before & after RSI, paired samples t-tests were conducted. Based on the results listed in Table 4.3, there were significant differences found in Item1 “the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph”(p = .011＜.05), Item 4
“every sentence in the first paragraph, especially in the thesis statement” (p = .001
＜.05), Item 5 “every sentence in the last paragraph” (p = .003＜.05), Item 34 “how to arouse the reader’s interest”(p = .013＜.05) and Item 36 “how to conclude the text”(p
= .037＜.05).
Second, the most frequently used global reading strategies (over total mean score =3.19, see Table 4.3) before RSI by the FD group were Item 1” the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph” (M = 3.47), Item 3 “title, subtitle, figure, and table” (M = 3.47), Item 4“ every sentence in the first paragraph, especially in the thesis statement” (M = 3.34), Item 5 “every sentence in the last paragraph” (M = 3.44), Item 7 “the possible development patterns of the supporting sentences (paragraph development) ” (M = 3.19), Item 8 “the cohesion of the preceding or the next sentences ”(M = 3.53), Item 9 “the closing sentence echoes with the topic sentence” (M = 3.44), Item 37 “get conclusion, inspiration, implication, or moral lesson” (M = 3.38), and Item 39 “style/tone” (M = 3.31).
The frequently used global reading strategies (overall mean score = 3.52, see
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Table 4.3) by the FD group after RSI were Item 1” the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph” (M = 4.0), Item 3“title, subtitle, figure, and table” (M = 3.69), Item 4 “every sentence in the first paragraph, especially in the thesis statement” (M = 4.34), and Item 5 “every sentence in the last paragraph” (M = 4.25), Item 37 “get conclusion, inspiration, implication, or moral lesson ”(M = 3.59).
Apparently, Items 1, 3, 4, 5, and 37 were the frequently used global reading strategies by the FD group both before & after RSI (see bold figures in Table 4.3).
Table 4.3 Frequency of the FD group’s Global Reading Strategy Use before &
after RSI
No. Global Reading Strategy Items
FD before RSI
FD after RSI
Mean SD Mean SD t df Sig
1 the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph
3.47 0.98 4.0 0.80 -2.715 31 .011*
2 the coherence of paragraphs 2.88 0.91 3.19 0.82 -1.621 31 .115
3 title, subtitle, figure, and table 3.47 1.02 3.69 0.90 -1.126 31 .269
4 every sentence in the first
paragraph, especially in the thesis statement
3.34 1.31 4.34 0.79 -3.712 31 .001*
5 every sentence in the last paragraph 3.44 1.16 4.25 0.80 -3.227 31 .003*
6 the topic sentences and the closing
sentences in the main paragraph 3.09 1.17 3.34 1.04 -1.245 31 .222
7 the possible development patterns of the supporting sentences (paragraph development)
3.19 1.06 3.31 0.93 -.584 31 .564
8 the cohesion of the preceding or the
next sentences 3.53 1.05 3.41 1.01 .643 31 .525 9 the closing sentence echoes with
the topic sentence 3.44 1.13 3.5 1.16 -.239 31 .813 34 how to arouse reader’s interest 2.72 1.30 3.25 1.22 -2.647 31 .013*
35 the specific details and substantial
evidence 2.94 1.13 3.19 1.12 -1.114 31 .274
36 how to conclude the text 2.72 1.22 3.22 1.24 -2.184 31 .037*
37 get conclusion, inspiration,
implication, or moral lesson 3.38 1.21 3.59 1.19 -.865 31 .394 38 the writing purpose 3.06 1.22 3.44 1.34 -1.482 31 .148
39 style/tone 3.31 1.12 3.5 1.11 -.882 31 .385 40 the possible sources of the text 3.13 0.94 3.16 0.99 -.144 31 .887
Total Mean Score 3.19 3.52
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Note.
1. FD = Field Dependent group 2. N = 32 for the FD group
3. *Significant at p＜.05 (two-tailed)
4.2.2 Frequency of the FD group’s Local Reading Strategy Use before & after RSI To compute the FD group’s responses to the local reading strategies (Q10-33) before & after RSI, paired samples t-tests were conducted. Based on the results listed in Table 4.4, there were significant differences found in Item 17 “comparison -contrast” (p = .020＜.05), Item 19 “the positive degree, the comparative degree, and the superlative degree” (p = .048＜.05), Item 25 “illustrative, distractive, and explicative” (p = .024＜.05), and Item 28 “appositive” (p = .030＜.05).
Second, the most frequently used local reading strategies by the FD group before RSI (overall mean score = 3.42, see Table 4.4) were Item 10“ time order”
(M = 3.84), Item 11“ who, when, where, why, how, which, and what” (M = 3.78), Item 14 “cause & effect” (M = 3.75), Item 15” condition” (M = 3.53), Item 16“ aiming” (M = 3.47), Item 18 “subtractive/ exception, or particularity” (M = 3.50), Item 22 “exemplifying” (M = 4.06), Item 23 “listing order” (M =4.06), Item 27 “number or date in Arabic numeral or in English” (M = 4.09) and Item 29
“stylistic” (M = 3.63) .
In addition, the most frequently used local reading strategies by the FD group after RSI (overall mean score = 3.65, see Table 4.4) were Item 10 “time order” (M
= 4.03), Item 11 “who, when, where, why, how, which, and what” (M = 3.84), Item 14 “cause & effect” (M = 3.92), Item 16 “aiming” (M = 3.72), Item 17
“comparison-contrast” (M = 3.88), Item 18 “subtractive/ exception, or particularity”
(M = 3.91), Item 22 “exemplifying” (M = 4.13), Item 23 “listing order” (M = 4.09), Item 25 “illustrative, distractive, and explicative” (M = 3.72), Item 26 “logical order/ the order of the importance” (M = 4.16), Item 27 “number or date in Arabic
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
numeral or in English” (M = 4.22), and Item 29 “stylistic” (M = 4.00).
Apparently, Items 10, 11, 14, 16, 18, 22, 23, 27 and 29 were the most frequently used local reading strategies by the FD group before and after RSI. (see bold figures in Table 4.4)
Table 4.4 Frequency of the FD group’s Local Reading Strategy Use before &
after RSI
No. Local Reading Strategy Items
FD Before RSI
FD after RSI
Mean SD Mean SD t df Sig.
10 time order 3.84 1.08 4.03 1.03 -.641 31 .526
11 who, when, where, why, how,
which, and what 3.78 0.98 3.84 0.92 -.291 31 .773 12 spatial order 3.03 1.00 3.22 1.04 -.757 31 .455
13 additive 3.28 0.96 3.38 1.01 -.487 31 .629
14 cause & effect 3.75 0.95 3.94 0.98 -.882 31 .385
15 condition 3.53 0.88 3.47 1.02 .360 31 .721
16 aiming 3.47 0.88 3.72 1.25 -1.187 31 .244
17 comparison-contrast 3.41 0.91 3.88 0.83 -2.462 31 .020*
18 subtractive/ exception, or
particularity 3.50 0.92 3.91 0.89 .254 31 .801 19 the positive degree,
the comparative degree, and the superlative
3.22 1.18 3.53 0.98 -2.058 31 .048*
20 concessive 3.25 1.16 3.56 1.13 -1.186 31 .245 21 defining 3.16 1.14 3.59 1.07 -1.951 31 .060
22 exemplifying 4.06 0.88 4.13 0.71 -.329 31 .745 23 listing order 4.06 0.88 4.09 0.69 -.177 31 .861
24 classifying 2.84 0.77 3.13 1.10 -1.660 31 .107 25 illustrative, distractive, and
explicative 3.19 1.15 3.72 1.05 -2.367 31 .024*
26 logical order/ the order of the
importance 3.34 1.13 3.66 0.79 -1.469 31 .152 27 number or date in Arabic numeral
or in English 4.09 0.89 4.22 0.79 -.597 31 .555 28 appositive 3.13 1.07 3.59 0.98 -2.279 31 .030*
29 stylistic 3.63 1.26 4.00 0.95 -1.714 31 .097
30 inversion 2.84 1.19 2.78 0.91 .320 31 .751
31 emphatic 3.19 1.18 3.38 1.19 -.882 31 .385 32 bold word 3.41 1.13 3.50 1.05 -.533 31 .598
33 reference 3.09 1.20 3.38 0.94 -1.392 31 .174
Total Mean Score 3.42 3.65
Note.
1. FD = Field Dependent group 2. N = 32 for the FD group
3. *Significant at p＜.05 (two-tailed)
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4.2.3 Frequency of the FI group’s Global Reading Strategy Use before & after RSI To compute the FI group’s responses to the global reading strategies (Q1-Q9, Q34-40) before and after RSI, paired samples t-tests were conducted. Based on the results listed in Table 4.5, there were significant differences found in Item1 “the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph”(p = .029＜.05), Item 4 “every sentence in the first paragraph, especially in the thesis statement” (p
= .000, p＜.05), Item 5 “every sentence in the last paragraph” (p = .039＜.05), Item 34 “how to arouse reader’s interest”(p = .011 ＜ .05), Item 38 “the writing purpose”(p = .035＜.05), Item 39 “style/tone”(p = .014＜.05) and Item 40 “the possible sources of the text”(p = .031＜.05).
Second, the frequently used global reading strategies by the FI group before RSI (overall mean score = 3.33) were Item 1” the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph” (M = 3.56), Item 3 “title, subtitle, figure, and table” (M = 3.79), Item 4 “every sentence in the first paragraph, especially in the thesis statement” (M = 3.51), Item 5 “every sentence in the last paragraph” (M = 3.74), Item 8 “the cohesion of the preceding or the next sentences ”(M =3.40), Item 9 “the closing sentence echoes with the topic sentence” (M =3.37), Item 35 “the specific details and substantial evidence ”(M =3.44), Item 36 “how to conclude the text” (M = 3.40), and Item 37 “get conclusion, inspiration, implication, or moral lesson”(M = 3.67).
In addition, the frequently used global reading strategies by the FI group (over total mean score = 3.62) after RSI were Item 1“the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph” (M = 4.02), Item 3“ title, subtitle, figure, and table” (M = 3.88), Item 4 “every sentence in the first paragraph, especially in the thesis statement” (M = 4.21), Item 5 “every sentence in the last paragraph” (M
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
= 4.14), Item 35 “the specific details and substantial evidence” (M = 3.65), Item 37
“get conclusion, inspiration, implication, or moral lesson” (M = 4.05), and Item 39
“style/tone” (M = 3.63)
Apparently, Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 35 and 37 were the most frequently used global reading strategies by the FI group before and after RSI. (see bold figures in Table 4.5)
4.2.4 Frequency of the FI group’s Local Reading Strategy Use before & after RSI To compute the FI group’s responses to the local reading strategies (Q10-33) before & after RSI, paired samples t-tests were conducted. Based on the results listed in Table 4.6, there were significant differences found in Item 12 “spatial order” (p = .002＜.05), Item 20 “concessive” (p = .012＜.05), Item 28 “appositive”
(p = .033＜.05), Item 29 “stylistic” (p = .042＜.05), Item 30 “inversion” (p = .025
＜.05), and Item 31 “emphatic” (p = .006, p＜.05).
Second, the most frequently used local reading strategies (over total mean score = 3.37) by the FI group before RSI were Item 10 “time order” (M = 3.51), Item 11 “subtractive/ exception, or particularity” (M = 3.70), Item 14“subtractive/
exception, or particularity” (M = 3.72), Item 16“subtractive/ exception, or particularity” (M = 3.58), Item 17 “subtractive/ exception, or particularity” (M = 3.47), Item 18 “subtractive/ exception, or particularity” (M = 3.98), Item 19 “the positive degree, the comparative degree, and the superlative degree” (M = 3.37), Item 22 “exemplifying” (M = 4.05), Item 23 “listing order” (M = 4.12), Item 25
“illustrative, distractive, and explicative” (M = 3.37), Item 27 “number or date in Arabic numeral or in English” (M = 3.95), Item 29 “stylistic” (M = 3.51), and Item 32 “word meaning” (M = 3.63).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Table 4.5 Frequency of the FI group’s Global Reading Strategy Use before &
after RSI
No. Global Reading Strategy Items
FI before RSI
FI after RSI
Mean SD Mean SD t df Sig
1 the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph
3.56 1.20 4.02 1.04 -2.257 42 .029*
2 the coherence of paragraphs 3.23 1.04 3.19 0.98 .286 42 .777
3 title, subtitle, figure, and table 3.79 1.13 3.88 1.07 -.467 42 .643 4 every sentence in the first
paragraph, especially in the thesis statement
3.51 0.99 4.21 0.86 -3.925 42 .000*
5 every sentence in the last paragraph 3.74 1.00 4.14 0.89 -2.129 42 .039*
6 the topic sentences and the closing
sentences in the main paragraph 3.14 1.06 3.07 0.91 .352 42 .726 7 the possible development patterns
of the supporting sentences (paragraph development)
3.09 1.25 3.33 1.06 -1.021 42 .313
8 the cohesion of the preceding or the
next sentences 3.40 0.93 3.60 1.12 -1.269 42 .211 9 the closing sentence echoes with
the topic sentence 3.37 1.00 3.47 1.12 -.404 42 .688 34 how to arouse reader’s interest 2.67 1.15 3.23 1.31 -2.675 42 .011*
35 the specific details and substantial
evidence 3.44 1.14 3.65 0.92 -1.220 42 .229 36 how to conclude the text 3.40 1.26 3.40 1.09 .000 42 1.000
37 get conclusion, inspiration,
implication, or moral lesson 3.67 1.19 4.05 1.17 -1.767 42 .084 38 the writing purpose 3.12 1.22 3.56 1.18 -2.174 42 .035*
39 style/tone 3.09 1.17 3.63 1.00 -2.562 42 .014*
40 the possible sources of the text 3.05 1.15 3.51 0.99 -2.228 42 .031*
Total Mean Score 3.33 3.62
In addition, the most frequently used local reading strategies by the FI group (overall mean score = 3.61) after RSI were Item 10 “time order “ (M = 3.95), Item 11 “who, when, where, why, how, which, and what” (M = 3.93), Item 14 “cause &
effect“ (M =3.98), Item 16 “aiming” (M = 3.93), Item 17 “comparison-contrast” (M
= 3.72), Item 18 “subtractive/ exception, or particularity” (M = 3.93), Item 21
“defining “ (M = 3.74), Item 22 “exemplifying” (M = 3.98), Item 23 “listing order”
(M =3.86), Item 27 “number or date in Arabic numeral or in English” (M =4.23),
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Item 29 “stylistic” (M =3.84), and Item 32 “word meaning” (M =3.72).
Apparently, Items 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 27, 29, and 32 were the most frequently used local reading strategies by the FI group before and after RSI.
(see bold figures in Table 4.6)
Table 4.6 Frequency of the FI group’s Local Reading Strategy Use before & after RSI No. Local Reading Strategy Items
FI before RSI
FI after RSI
Mean SD Mean SD t df Sig
10 time order 3.51 1.06 3.95 1.07 -1.872 42 .068
11 who, when, where, why, how,
which, and what 3.70 1.01 3.93 0.91 -1.349 42 .185 12 spatial order 2.72 1.01 3.37 1.00 -3.267 42 .002*
13 additive 3.19 1.08 3.42 1.05 -1.375 42 .176
14 cause & effect 3.72 1.05 3.98 0.96 -1.505 42 .140 15 condition 3.30 1.15 3.60 0.90 -1.618 42 .113
16 aiming 3.58 1.07 3.93 0.94 -1.950 42 .058
17 comparison-contrast 3.47 1.16 3.72 0.88 -1.401 42 .168
18 subtractive/ exception, or
particularity 3.98 0.96 3.93 1.06 .243 42 .809 19 the positive degree,
the comparative degree, and the superlative
3.37 0.98 3.37 0.98 .000 42 1.000
20 concessive 2.81 1.14 3.35 1.11 -2.630 42 .012*
21 defining 3.37 1.13 3.74 1.16 -1.631 42 .110 22 exemplifying 4.05 0.95 3.98 0.94 .374 42 .710
23 listing order 4.12 0.96 3.86 1.10 1.600 42 .117 24 classifying 2.86 1.04 3.05 0.93 -1.213 42 .232
25 illustrative, distractive, and
explicative 3.37 1.29 3.53 0.98 -.980 42 .333 26 logical order/ the order of the
importance. 3.26 1.05 3.51 0.99 -1.357 42 .182 27 number or date in Arabic numeral
or in English 3.95 1.00 4.23 1.00 -1.391 42 .171 28 appositive 2.95 1.17 3.28 1.01 -2.203 42 .033*
29 stylistic 3.51 1.37 3.84 1.21 -2.099 42 .042*
30 inversion 2.53 1.05 2.93 0.91 -2.324 42 .025*
31 emphatic 2.84 1.02 3.40 1.00 -2.906 42 .006*
32 bold word 3.63 1.25 3.72 1.28 -.400 42 .691
33 reference 3.07 0.94 3.12 1.01 -.247 42 .806
Total Mean Score 3.37 3.61
1. FI = Field Independent group 2. N= 43 for the FI group
3. *Significant at p＜.05 (two-tailed)
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
A Summary of Responses to Research Question 2
As indicated in Table 4.3, in the use of global reading strategies by the FD group after RSI, there were significant differences in Items 1, 4, 5, 34, and 36. The frequently used global reading strategies by the FD group before RSI were Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 37 and 39. Those by the FD group after RSI were Items 1, 3, 4, 5, and 37.
As shown in Table 4.4, in the use of local reading strategies by the FD group after RSI, there were significant differences in Items 17, 19, 25, and 28. The most frequently used local reading strategies by the FD group before RSI were Items 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 22, 23, 27, and 29. Those by the FD group after RSI were Items 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, and 29.
As presented in Table 4.5, in the use of global reading strategies by the FI group after RSI, there were significant differences in Items 1, 4, 5, 34, 38, 39, and 40. The most frequently used global reading strategies by the FI group before RSI were Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 35, 36 and 37. Those by the FI group after RSI are Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 35, 37 and 39.
As revealed in Table 4.6, in the use of local reading strategies by the FI group after RSI, there were significant differences in Items 12, 20, 28, 29, 30, and 31. The most frequently used local reading strategies by the FI group before RSI were Items 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 29 and 32. Those by the FI group after RSI were Items 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 27, 29, and 32.
After synthesizing the results reported in Table 4.3, Table 4.4, Table 4.5, and Table 4.6, we come up with the results of the significant differences in the use of the global and local reading strategies by the FD and FI groups in Table 4.7.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Table 4.7 A Comparison of Significantly Different Global/Local Reading Strategies Used by FD/FI Groups before/after RSI
Global Local
FD group FI group FD group FI group
1 1 17 12
4 4 19 20
5 5 25 28
34 34 28 29
36 38 30
39 31
40
see Table 4.3 see Table 4.5 see Table 4.4 see Table 4.6
First, both FD and FI groups made great improvements in the use of global reading strategies as indicated in Items 1, 4, 5 and 34. However, the FD group made great improvements in the use of global reading strategies in Item 36 and the FI group, in Items 38, 39, and 40 respectively.
Second, both FD and FI groups made great improvements in the use of local reading strategies as indicated in only Item 28. However, the FD group made great improvements in the use of local reading strategies in Items 17, 19 and 25, and the FI group, in Items 12, 20, 29, 30 and 31 respectively.
In brief, Table 4.7 reveals that after our treatment, the FD group and the FI group made great improvements in the use of global and local reading strategies either in the identical items or in the different ones. Such results may verify that our reading strategy instruction (RSI) worked wonders on both groups, and positively changed FD and FI learners’ reading behavior.
Table 4.7 indicates that the FD group and the FI group made great improvements in the use of global and local reading strategies. From Table 4.7, we draw the identical items putting them together in Table 4.8 (A) and the different items, in Table 4.8 (B).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Table 4.8 (A) FD and FI Groups Used the Significantly Different Global/Local Reading Strategies in the Identical Items after RSI
Global Reading Strategy FD group/
FI group
Item
1 the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph
1 the opening paragraph, the main paragraph and the closing paragraph