This section offers the information about students’ perception questionnaire.
Though the original language used was Chinese, it was translated into English for the uniformity of presentation. Again, the results are displayed from two facets: the whole class and the high and low proficiency readers, while the descriptions are elaborated under the following subheadings, i.e. the appraisal of reading strategies, the effects on critical thinking, the effects on English language learning, and the perception of future implementation toward Reciprocal Teaching.
Results of the Whole Class.
In reality, the first question took the form of an open-ended one: “What do you learn the most from the class?” However, in order to better present students’ content in an organized layout, their answers were categorized into three subgroups as shown in Table 8: (1) English proficiency: language skills improved in any of the four dimensions: listening, speaking, reading, and writing; (2) Learning competence:
Table 8. Comparison of the Percentage of the Overall Learning Benefits Category English proficiency Learning
Competence
Thinking
N 16 13 5
P 47 % 38 % 15 %
Note: N: Number of votes P: Percentage
learning attitudes, habits, and strategies, time management or problem-solving techniques improved, etc; (3) Thinking: knowing how one thought and realized one’s improvement in thinking.
The majority of the comments were on English proficiency, which accounted for 47% of the class. Thanks to the design of the study, students were given a lot of opportunities to practice English speaking and writing in class besides sharpening their reading skills. The following remarks offered some examples.
After this class, I gained more confidence in English, for I was really using English to express myself whether in writing or speaking.
(Student #5)
I seldom had the chance to speak English, not to mention using it for discussion. From this class, I was given many opportunities not only to express myself in English, but also learn how to really discuss rather than chitchat. (Student #27)
Learning competence was another positive result, as some students shared their feelings below.
I used to read only literally. In this class, what I learned the most was the skills to summarize an article in my own words, which required much
I learned how to grasp the gist of articles and write questions by myself.
(Student #23)
I learned the way to organize paragraphs. (Student #22)
As to training students’ thinking, some visible results can be found from their feedback.
Prediction and summary required thinking, while questioning and clarification needed to expand ideas. I learned to do these two things gradually in the course. (Student #3)
Thinking is my greatest improvement in this class. Not until I thought did I realize there was so much confusion for me to clear up. Besides, I had to think further to convey my thoughts to others. (Student #8)
The Appraisal of Reading Strategies.
As indicated in Table 9, the easiest strategy was clarification, which accounted for 41% among the whole class, followed by questioning (26%). On the other hand, summary and questioning appeared equally hard for students, constituting 32% each.
Concerning the most helpful strategy, summary topped the ranking by amounting to 71% in total.
Table 9. Students’ Evaluation of the Four Strategies Reading
Strategy
Prediction Clarification Summary Questioning
N P N P N P N P
Easiest 5 15 % 14 41 % 6 18 % 9 26 %
Hardest 5 15 % 7 21 % 11 32 % 11 32 %
Most Helpful 2 6 % 6 17 % 24 71 % 2 6 %
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
In students’ eyes, what made clarification the easiest strategy was that one only needs to read partially rather than comprehensively, as described by students #17,
# 22 and #23 below.
Even if I didn’t finish reading or understand the whole article, I could still do clarifying. All I need to do is search for confusing parts and try to solve them. In my opinion, this is the basic training for a student.
(Student #17)
Unlike the other three strategies, which required full comprehension of the target paragraphs, I merely needed to focus on the confusing areas to clarify. (Student #22)
To clarify, I just identify the unknown words and then guess their meanings. If I got the answers correct, I felt a great sense of accomplishment! (Student #23)
Summary and questioning equally posed great difficulty to students. The reasons behind had something in common. Four students provided following explanations.
Summary isn’t as easy as what I used to think. After this class, I learned that summary doesn’t simply mean using fewer words to describe an article; key information must be included. (Student #17)
Compared with the other three strategies, I needed to write more sentences to summarize. However, the more I write, the more grammatical errors might occur. (Student #31)
I used to consider it easy to ask questions. But now I know there are actually simple or hard, good or bad questions. Sometimes, even if I spent much time racking my brains to create good questions, it didn’t work out
questions. (Student #24)
The remarks by Student #23 indicated that she started to classify questions into different kinds, such as simple or hard, good or bad, etc. With respect to the next question, “Which strategy do you think helps you the most to understand the texts?”
up to 24 students viewed summary as the most helpful strategy. In order to summarize a text, they had to finish reading the whole text first, identify the key points, and finally integrate them in their own words. Many students expressed their great concern about making grammatical, or spelling errors. Student #8 was one of them.
To summarize, I need to read, understand, and analyze. However, I often have difficulty writing with correct grammar, sentence patterns or vocabulary. (Student #8)
The Effects of Reciprocal Teaching on Critical Thinking.
When answering the question “Do you think the four strategies help you become a better thinker?” almost the whole class (97%) gave positive remarks. Only one student responded negatively to this question. The real cause as explained below was indeed interesting, and it seemed that this student still thought highly of such training.
No, because this is how I read all along. (Student #32) Other students gave plenty of positive feedback. Here are some examples.
Yes, because before discussing with group members, I had to finish every part of the worksheets myself. Therefore, I became more involved and motivated in discussion. (Student #8)
Yes. This is a two-way learning style, including input and output. (Student
#23)
Yes. When I was working on generating questions, I would try hard to incorporate some other related issues to enrich my questions. Very
dynamic and interesting! (Student #28)
The Effects of Reciprocal Teaching on English Language Learning.
Speaking of the most-improved English abilities after learning the four strategies of Reciprocal Teaching (see Table 10), almost half of the students (41%) found prediction didn’t bring much difference to their language competence. Clarification (56%) and summary (47%), nevertheless, produced visible effects on their English reading comprehension. As for questioning, 38% of students considered it to be beneficial to their writing skills.
Table 10. Students’ Self-Perceived Most-Improved English Abilities Reading
Strategies
None Listening Speaking Reading Writing
N P N P N P N P N P
Prediction 14 41 % 0 0 0 0 13 38 % 7 21 %
Clarification 6 18 % 0 0 5 15 % 19 56 % 4 11 %
Summary 2 6 % 0 0 1 3 % 16 47 % 15 44 %
Questioning 8 24 % 4 12 % 3 9 % 6 17 % 13 38 %
Total 30 22 % 4 3 % 9 7 % 54 40% 39 29 %
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
On the other hand, if summed all votes up from the four skills, reading (40%) ranked the top, with writing (29%) the second highest in improving students’
language proficiency after the intervention of Reciprocal Teaching.
Students’ Perception of Future Implementation.
27 students (79%) would like to receive Reciprocal Teaching in their future courses. Only 7 people (2 %) expressed their unwillingness to adopt such learning style again. Although the majority of the class gave affirmative responses to this
To be frank, I didn’t quite like Reciprocal Teaching at first, because this was the very first time I learned English in such a self-independent manner. Much to my surprise, I enjoy Reciprocal Teaching a lot now!
(Student #8)
Despite the high percentage of positive responses, 7 students voted against the implementation of Reciprocal Teaching into future classes. A further exploration, nevertheless, revealed the reasons why they didn’t appreciate Reciprocal Teaching were actually what credited Reciprocal Teaching with its acclaimed merits – to participate actively in the reading process within a social context. Such examples are shown below.
I couldn’t doze off in class as usual because I was asked to discuss with others all the time. (Student #29)
Reciprocal Teaching took me too much time to think, which curtailed the time spent on other subjects. (Student #30)
Reciprocal Teaching was simply too troublesome for me. I just wanted to relax and listen to what the teacher says in class. (Student #22)
Results of the High and Low Proficiency Readers.
As can be seen in Table 11, the self-perceived learning benefits revealed the differences between high and low proficiency readers.
Table 11. Comparison of the Percentage of the Overall Learning Benefits From High and Low Achievers
Achievers
English proficiency Learning Competence Thinking
N P N P N P
High (N=6) 4 67 % 2 33 % 0 0
Low (N=4) 1 25 % 2 50 % 1 25 %
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
Up to 67 % of high achievers commented that their most salient advancement lay
in the improvement of English proficiency, especially in speaking, as what the students described below.
I found this kind of learning style so much different from normal ways.
It’s more dynamic and interesting! English speaking was heavily emphasized in Reciprocal Teaching class because I had to discuss with my group members in English all the time. (Student #9 - H)
I really love the way I could exchange opinions with my group members instead of learning alone. In this way, we could learn from one another. (Student #2 - H)
Among learning competences, time management was brought up by the highest achiever, Student #13, to express her great improvement under Reciprocal Teaching learning mode.
I not only learned how to speak English well, but also how to control time better. When discussing with group members, I need to pay attention to the allocation of time for every strategy. (Student #13 - H) In contrast to the above answers, learning competence (50%) was considered to be the most significant gain by low proficiency readers. Student #14 shared the following comment.
I learned how to comprehend an article deeper, guess vocabulary meanings better, and grasp main ideas faster on my own.
(Student #14 - L)
Another low-achieving student, Student #6, highlighted that she benefitted a lot from being aware of what she was thinking in the process as depicted below.
Learning a lesson in this way, I found that I could better grasp the ideas
Students’ Appraisal of Reading Strategies.
Table 12 contains the results of high proficiency readers’ evaluation about the easiest, hardest, and most helpful strategies among the four. Both prediction (34%) and clarification (34%) tied for first place as the easiest strategy. In a similar manner, summary (34%) ranked first to be the most difficult strategy, and so did questioning (34%). When it comes to the most helpful one, over half of high achievers voted for summary (52 %).
Table 12. Evaluation of the Four Strategies by High Achievers Reading
Strategy
Prediction Clarification Summary Questioning
N P N P N P N P
Easiest 2 34 % 2 34 % 1 16 % 1 16 %
Hardest 1 16 % 1 16 % 2 34 % 2 34 %
Most Helpful 1 16 % 1 16 % 3 52 % 1 16 %
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
Generally speaking, the reasons for prediction and clarification to be considered easy are similar. Student #2 and Student #33 offered their opinions in the remarks below.
As the name suggests, prediction is something subjective, so there is no correct answer. Besides, I just have to read partially to make any possible predictions.
(Student #2 -H)
To clarify means only to focus on what I don’t know, and to make any possible guesses. I don’t need to finish reading the whole paragraph. (Student #33 -H) Interestingly, something mentioned by Student #13 below about the difficulty she confronted in employing questioning echoed with the target of this study.
It caused me great difficulty to form a quality question. I not only have to
understand the article fully, but also get the gist of it to phrase a thought-provoking question. (Student #13 -H)
On the other hand, low achievers, as shown in Table 13, regarded the four strategies equally easy, with the percentage of 25 % for each; while summary (75 %) stood out as the most difficult and helpful strategy.
Table 13. Evaluation of the Four Strategies by Low Achievers
Reading Strategy
Prediction Clarification Summary Questioning
N P N P N P N P
Easiest 1 25 % 1 25 % 1 25 % 1 25 %
Hardest 0 0 1 25 % 2 50 % 1 25 %
Most Helpful 0 0 1 25 % 3 75 % 0 0
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
The reasons behind why the four strategies seemed evenly simple for low achievers are as follows.
Clarification is easiest to me because all I have to do is providing answers to the confusing parts rather than understanding the whole text completely. (Student #36 - L)
I merely need to excerpt a few parts of the articles to make summaries without full comprehension of the texts. (Student #15 - L)
What student 15 mentioned sounded contradictory to the usual notions of how to write a summary. Further discussion will be made in Chapter 5.
In general, as long as an assignment only required students to read partially instead of reading with comprehensive understanding, they would get the impression
It was really demanding for me to finish writing summaries within a short time in class. I had problems with vocabulary and grammar so it was not easy for me to totally understand an article quickly. (Student #14 - L) Not surprisingly, summary was listed as the most helpful strategy among the four.
Student 6 gave the opinion about this conclusion.
Summary is to use my own words to interpret an article on the premise of a thorough comprehension. In order to achieve that, I have to read the article again and again till I truly understand it. (Student #6 - L)
The Effects of Reciprocal Teaching on Critical Thinking.
As can been seen in Table 14, both high and low achievers unanimously agreed upon that idea that Reciprocal Teaching was conducive to their critical thinking. Two statements from the highest and lowest achievers, i.e. Student #13 and Student #15, illustrated their thoughts below.
Table 14. Self-Assessment of Being a Better Critical Thinker
Achievers YES NO
N P N P
High 6 100 % 0 0
Low 4 100 % 0 0
Note: N: Number of votes P: Percentage
Yes. Different from the traditional way of learning, I had to rack my brains to reach out some other aspects from textbooks in order to ask good questions. I found such process really interesting. (Student #13 - H) Yes. I couldn’t express myself directly in English with this learning style. I needed to spend more time thinking before I said or wrote something.
(Student #15 - L)
The Effects of Reciprocal Teaching on English Language Learning.
To begin with prediction (see Table 15), exactly half of the students of high proficiency (50%) opted for no improvement in the English abilities. Approximately one-third of them (33%) confirmed their progress in reading ability. As to clarification, two of them regarded it as being not helpful at all, while another two felt the enhancement of the reading ability. As many as four students (67%) confirmed the great positive impact of summary on their reading ability. Questioning took up 50% of the total votes for its help with the writing skills.
Table 15. The Self-Perceived Most-Improved English Abilities by High Achievers
Reading Strategies
None Listening Speaking Reading Writing
N P N P N P N P N P
Prediction 3 50 % 0 0 0 0 2 33 % 1 17%
Clarification 2 33 % 0 0 1 17% 2 33 % 1 17%
Summary 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 67 % 2 33 %
Questioning 1 17 % 0 0 2 33 % 0 0 3 50 %
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
Similar to the high achievers, 50% of low achievers also looked upon prediction as ineffective in any of the English abilities (see Table 16). However, the other 50 % of them thought that prediction is beneficial to their reading competence. At the mention of clarification, three-fourths of them perceived it to be helpful with their reading comprehension. Summary (100%) won an overwhelming consensus in
Table 16. The Self-Perceived Most-Improved English Abilities by Low Achievers Reading
Strategies
None Listening Speaking Reading Writing
N P N P N P N P N P
Prediction 2 50 % 0 0 0 0 2 50 % 0 0
Clarification 0 0 0 0 1 25 % 3 75 % 0 0
Summary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 100 %
Questioning 3 75 % 0 0 0 0 1 25 % 0 0
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage
improving their writing ability. Questioning, surprisingly, was deemed insignificant by 75% of low achievers concerning the boost to any of their English abilities.
Students’ Perception of Future Implementation.
The final question was “Do you hope that the teacher continues to teach in this way?” The percentages of positive answers from high (67%) and low (75%) achievers were only different by 8 %, as can be seen in Table 17. While most of the students adopted an affirmative stance toward such learning style, the reasons from those who answered negatively reflected some insight into their emotions and current education system, as shown below.
No. Though this learning style did accelerate my reading comprehension, it was not practical under the current education system, where speaking, critical thinking or summary was not tested on the test papers. However, I still like this way of learning, so it’s feasible if the teacher adopts Reciprocal Teaching sometimes. (Student #9 - H)
No. I disliked the extra workload brought by exercises of those four strategies. I would feel more stressful. (Student #15 - L)
Table 17. Willingness of Continuing to Receive Reciprocal Teaching
Achievers YES NO
N P N P
High 4 67 % 2 33 %
Low 3 75 % 1 25 %
Note: N: Number of votes, P: Percentage