互惠學習用於英語為外語的低成就學生

全文

(1) . 國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論. 文. Master Thesis Department of English National Taiwan Normal University. 互惠學習用於英語為外語的低成就學生. Reciprocal Teaching for Low Achievers in an EFL Context. 指導教授：陳秋蘭 Advisor: Dr. Chiou-lan Chern 研究生：巫. 智堯. Chih-yao Wu. 中華民國一百零一年八月 August, 2012. .

(2) . Chinese abstract 台灣的英語教育長久以來都存在著雙峰現象，學習低落學生的需求因此特別需要關注。但是，學校老師往往表達不知如何提供有效的補救教學。文獻上顯示，互惠學習可以適用在各種有學習困難的學生身上，它的成效在英文為母語的環境和英文為第二語言的環境中已被廣泛地證實，但是，它在台灣的相關研究往往都是鎖定一般學生，所以，這份研究就是要探索互惠學習是否也能幫助台灣英語成績低落的學生。這個研究在台北市進行而且採用個案研究的方法。有四位七年級的學生參與了這個為期七周的研究，授課的老師亦即為研究者本人。課堂中所使用的讀物是圖畫書。研究者將學生每次上課的表現記錄在他的教學日誌，這份檔案紀錄了學生可能的改變和進步。此外，為了近一步瞭解學生對互惠學習的看法，我們也讓學生在七周後的課程填寫一份問卷，以獲知他們的想法。結果顯示互惠學習可以幫助學生的學習，學生的正面表現可在七個面向觀察到，包含專心程度，為他人建立鷹架，彼此的互動，學習的自主，閱讀策略的使用，英文能力的進步，和行為的改變。但是，我們也在施測期間碰到未預期的困難，包含學生課堂的聊天和男學生的投入程度較低。此外，大部分的學生都表達對互惠學習的正面評價，並且想在日後繼續使用這種學習方式。關鍵字: 互惠學習，低成就學生，補救教學，年齡、性別和策略教學。. i .

(3) . English abstract In Taiwan, bimodal distribution has been a prevalent phenomenon in English education for many years. The need of the low achievers, therefore, deserves much attention. However, school teachers usually express the difficulty in offering useful instructional help, namely remedial courses. Literature shows that reciprocal teaching can be applied to students with different learning problems. Its positive effect has been widely examined in English-speaking and ESL contexts. But in Taiwan, an EFL context, most relevant studies center on the average students. The study therefore aims to explore how reciprocal teaching may influence low achievers’ learning in an EFL context. The study was carried out in Taipei City with a case-study approach. Four seventh graders participated in the remedial course offered by the researcher. The implementation lasted for seven weeks, and the teaching materials were picture books. Students’ in-class performance was observed and documented in a teaching journal and in the weekly worksheet. The documentation recorded students’ potential changes and progress during the intervention. Besides, to further understand students’ perception of reciprocal teaching, a questionnaire was distributed and collected after the intervention.. ii .

(4) . The result showed that reciprocal teaching could benefit students’ learning, and students’ progress was best witnessed in their classroom engagement, building scaffolding for others, mutual interaction, learning autonomy, competence in strategy use, improved English ability, and behavioral changes. However, some unexpected difficulties arouse during the implementation, including students’ off-task conversation and less engagement found in the boys. Besides, most students reported their positive attitude toward reciprocal teaching and would like to continue using the approach. Key words: reciprocal teaching, low achievers, remedial course, age, gender, and strategy instruction. iii .

(5) . Acknowledgement For the completion of the thesis, I owe most gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Chiou-lan Chern. In fact, it was, by accident, that I had the chance to be supervised by Dr. Chern But I would say I was very lucky. I still remember the first time when we officially met and talked about my thesis; Dr. Chern welcomed me and offered me all the resources and references available to her. During the process of thesis writing, Dr, Chern always gave me very clear and constructive suggestion. To my questions, she always provided the most instant responses and guided me with kindness. In addition to the academic assistance, Dr. Chern also showed me her emotional support when knowing the adversity of my family. She kindly introduced some jobs. To me, Dr. Chern is a real mentor who helped me go through all the process. Also, I would like to thank Dr. Chih-cheng Lin and Dr. Chin-kuei Cheng. They gave me useful advice to help improve my thesis. They read my study sentence by sentence, identifying all the flawed statement. With their help, my thesis was refined. Finally, I would like to thank my family, particularly my mother. She has been waiting for the day of my graduation. She urged me and supported me aside. She gave the strength and perseverance so that I could hang on to the last minute. If possible, I would like to dedicate the thesis to her.. iv .

(6) . Table of Contents Chinese Abstract ……………………………………………………………………… i English Abstract……………………………………………………………………… ii Acknowledge………………………………………………………………………… iv Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………v List of Tables…………………………………………………………………...……..ix Chapter One Introduction……………………………………………………………...1 Background and Motivation………………………………………………………...1 Research Questions…………………………………………………………………4 The Importance of the Study………………………………………………………..5 Chapter Two Literature Review……………………………………………………….7 Learning Strategies………………………………………………………………….7 Reciprocal Teaching……………………………………………………………… ..9 Origin and Brief Introduction…………………………………………………….9 Theories Underlying Reciprocal Teaching……………………………………...14 Empirical Studies on Reciprocal Teaching…………………………………..… 16 Studies Conducted in English-speaking Context……………………….……16 Studies Conducted in Taiwan………………………………………….…… .19. v .

(7) . Summary…………………………………………………………………………..21 Chapter Three Research Method.……………………………………………………23 Setting.…………………………………………………………………………….23 Participants.………………………………………………………………………..24 Procedures…………………………………………………………………………25 Sampling and Grouping………………………………………………………...25 Implementation of Reciprocal Teaching………………………………..………25 Distribution of Perception Questionnaire……………………………………….29 Teaching Materials…...……………………………………………………….…...29 Research Instrument……………………………………………………………….30 Teaching Journal and Weekly Worksheet……………………………………….30 Questionnaire…………………………………………………………...………32 Data Collection and Analysis………………………………………………..…….33 Data Collection…………………………………………………….……………33 Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………34 Summary.…………………………………………………………………………..35 Chapter Four Result and Discussion.……………………………………………...…36 Results……………………………………………………………………………..36 Students’ Change on Learning Attitude………………………………………36 vi .

(8) . Engagement……………………………………………………………….….37 Building Scaffolding for One Another………………………….……………39 Interaction………………………………………………………………….…40 Autonomy………………………..………………………………………...…41 Strategy Employment…………………...……………………………………44 Improved English Use………………………………………………………..48 Behavior Change…………………………………..…………………………54 Students’ Perception of Reciprocal Teaching…………………………………...59 Overall Perception and Evaluation of Reciprocal Teaching………………….59 Question One………………………………...…………………………….59 Question Two………………………………..…………………………….60 Question Three……………………………………….……………………61 Question Eight……………………………………………………………..61 Perception of Individual Strategy Use………………..………………………62 Question Four……………………………….……………………………..62 Question Five………………………………………………………...……63 Future Employment of Reciprocal Teaching……………………….………..64 Question Six……………………………………………………………….64 Question Seven…………………………………………………………….65 vii .

(9) . Discussion…………………………………………………………………………66 Students’ Positive Transformation……………………………..………………..66 Obstacles Encountered During the Implementation……………….……………68 Students’ Positive Perception of Reciprocal Teaching………………..………...71 Summary………………………………………..…………………………………73 Chapter Five Conclusion……………………………………………………….…….74 Summary of Findings……………………………………………………………...74 Pedagogical Implication………………………………………………….………..75 Limitation………………………………………………………………… ………78 Suggestion for Future research………………………………..…….…………….79 References……………………………………………………………………………82 Appendix One Learning Worksheet....……………………………………......……...88 Appendix Two Lesson Plan………………………………………………………..…89 Appendix Three Perception Questionnaire (English version)……………..…………95 Appendix Four Perception Questionnaire (Chinese version)...………………………96. viii .

(10) . List of Tables Table 1 Storyline of the Six Picture Books……………………………………..……31 Table 2 The Procedure of the Study…………………………………………….……35. ix .

(11) . Chapter One Introduction 1.1 Background and Motivation Reading can be deemed as a process involving both decoding and comprehending (Lewis & Wray, 2000; Tonjes, 1991; Wilson & Gambrell, 1988). For comprehending, it is conceptualized as “a constructive process whereby readers strive to build mental representation of text” (Lederer, 2000; Lewis & Wray, 2000). The importance of reading cen be reflected on three dimensions. First, in school learning, students have to acquire reading ability first because it is the basis in learning all the subjects (Alvermann & Earle, 2003; Kirsch et al., 2002). Second, it is through extensive reading that one becomes a more independent reader who thinks critically and analytically (Tonjes, 1991). Third, until now, lots of studies have been devoted to the investigation of reading, ranging from bottom-up versus top-down processing, extensive versus intensive reading, the role of vocabulary in reading, skimming and scanning, authenticity and readability, to reading comprehension (Brown, 2007). Among these issues, reading comprehension has always been a heated topic (Chern, 2006). In researching reading comprehension, many factors have been identified that play an influential role in determining one’s reading comprehension. Some of these 1 .

(12) . factors are related to the features of a text while others to readers’ personal traits. For the first type of text-related factors, it covers vocabulary (Shieh & Freuermuth, 2010), language complexity (Johnson, 1981), simplification versus authenticity (Chaudron, 1983; Yano et al., 1994), rhetorical structure (Chu et al., 2002; Horowitz, 1985; Tonjes, 1991) and cultural background (Johnson, 1981). For readers’ personal factors, it is usually related to topic familiarity (Swaffar at al., 1991), schemata (Nassaji, 2002; Wilson & Gambrell, 1988), aptitude (Tonjes, 1991), gender (Bugel & Buunk, 1996), attitude and motivation (Tonjes, 1991), and reading strategies (Anderson, 1999; Brown, 2007; Lewis & Wray, 2000; Oxford, 1990). Despite the theoretical importance of reading comprehension, in the real classroom scenario, it receives little attention. According to Durkin’s observation (1978-1979), teachers spent less than one percent of the class hour in teaching to improve students’ reading comprehension. Even when they did, they were mostly doing the comprehension checking job, assessing how much students had learned, not really offering modeling or scaffolding to enhance students’ reading comprehension (Pressley et al., 1998; Slater & Horstman, 2002). This kind of insufficiency in comprehension instruction has resulted in the majority students’ difficulty in reading with comprehension (Catts et al., 2003). Many researchers (e.g., Guthrie et al., 2004) have thus started to examine how teachers can offer effective instructional help to 2 .

(13) . foster learners’ reading comprehension (Anderson et al., 1985). In fact, many studies have verified the usefulness of comprehension instruction in promoting students’ reading comprehension (Kincade & Beach, 1996). In the implementation of comprehension instruction, teachers are suggested and encouraged to include the instruction of strategies that students can adopt while engaged in reading (Guthrie et al., 2004; Pearson & Duke, 2002). According to Pilonieta and Medina (2009), “Comprehension strategies are conscious, deliberate, and flexible plans readers use and adjust while reading or when comprehension breaks down.” By giving students strategy instruction, it is also showing students what a good reader does while reading (Hashey & Connors, 2003). As a strategy instruction, reciprocal teaching, originally developed by Palincsar and Brown in the 1980s, has been widely examined in different school contexts, among students with different backgrounds and abilities, and in teaching different subject matters. Its positive effect on facilitating students’ reading comprehension has been extensively recognized in the ESL context (Grabe, 2004; Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). However, when reciprocal teaching is applied to English teaching in Taiwan, most studies center on the average students, ignoring gifted and struggling learners. In fact, when reciprocal teaching was first developed by Palincsar (1982), she applied the instruction to many struggling learners, and the effect was great. Is it likely that 3 .

(14) . reciprocal teaching can also benefit underachievers in Taiwan, an EFL context? To answer the question, I propose to implement reciprocal teaching on struggling learners, with an attempt to see how this teaching approach may influence or benefit our EFL learners. Also, in order to have further insights into reciprocal teaching and to examine its feasibility on strugglers, we will design and distribute a perception questionnaire to probe into students’ attitude toward reciprocal teaching. Hence, two research questions are proposed and listed in the following.. 1.2 Research Questions 1. Can reciprocal teaching benefit EFL low achievers in Taiwan? If yes, in what aspect and how? 2. What is EFL struggling readers’ perception of the use of reciprocal teaching procedures in teaching reading? Both research questions address the same issue, examining the possible effect of reciprocal teaching on EFL low achievers, but differ in their approaches and perspectives. The first research question will be answered based on the researcher’s observation and therefore his perspectives. As he teaches and implements reciprocal teaching, he will keep a teaching journal to document students’ performance in class as well as on the learning sheet. The journal serves as a protocol to record students’ potential progress. On the other hand, the second research question will be answered 4 .

(15) . based on the perspectives of EFL low achievers. In order to elicit learners’ responses to reciprocal teaching, a perception questionnaire will be adopted and distributed.. 1.3 The Importance of the Study In the twenty-first century, a prevalent phenomenon is the decline of reading interests and ability worldwide. In Taiwan, less than half of the high school students spend time reading in their leisure time, but more than half of them use the computer for at least one hour every day (TEPS, 2004). The waning of reading habit has a negative impact on one’s L1 development as well as L2’s (Chiang, 2007). According to Sims’ longitudinal study (2004), English reading ability among college freshmen in Taiwan has dropped year after year. In viewing and recognizing this phenomenon, many countries have launched programs to promote and cultivate students’ reading ability, such as No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 in the United States and Focus 300 participated by elementary schools lacking educational resources in Taiwan (Chiang, 2007). However, even with these efforts, many students are still lagging behind in learning a second or foreign language, such as the case of English learning in Taiwan. To help these students, remedial instruction is of great importance because in Taiwan, one third of the junior high school students are reported to be underachievers. This phenomenon can be best witnessed in the yearly entrance exam in which two-peaked, 5 .

(16) . or bimodal distribution, has been consistently detected over the year (Hsu & Chen, 2007). However, while the need of struggling readers has received more and more attention, until now there seems to be no effective remedial instruction, so teachers usually express difficulties in offering struggling learners remedial programs (Juan & Cheng, 2008). The lack of appropriate instruction deserves much attention because the low achievers will gradually and eventually become more and more vulnerable in their learning process (Wu & Chen, 2006). In witness of this, the present study adopts reciprocal teaching to help struggling readers in Taiwan. Since reciprocal teaching has been proven to be useful in most of the English-speaking contexts for underachievers, it is assumed that it can also benefit struggling EFL readers in Taiwan.. 6 .

(17) . Chapter Two Literature Review 2.1 Learning Strategies Strategies, by definition, are methods employed by learners to deal with their learning difficulties and can be divided into learning and communication strategies. The former is related to the receptive skills, inclusive of listening and reading, while the latter the productive skills, inclusive of speaking and writing (Brown, 2007). The issue of strategies was first noticed in the investigation of characteristics by proficient and effective learners (Naiman et al., 1978; Rubin, 1975). Some of these early studies reported that good language learners capitalized on strategies that facilitated their learning, and these strategies were later identified and categorized by researchers (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). Until now, there have been rich and comprehensive studies about strategy use. The literature to date can be classified into three categories. The first is for the identification and classification of strategies (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990); the second is for the factor analysis to see what may influence one’s strategy use (Yang, 2006); the third is for the examination of possible effect of strategy instruction on students’ learning (Yang, 2006). For the first category, classification of strategy use, many researchers have proposed their own categorization. For example, Rubin (1975) categorized strategies 7 .

(18) . into two types; the difference lay in whether a strategy had a direct or indirect influence on learning. Another classification was by Naiman et al (1978) who proposed five major categories, including active task approach, realization of language as a system, realization of language as a means of communication and interaction, management of affective demands, and monitoring L2 performance. Like Rubin’s (1975) work, each of the categories was a collection of several different strategies. But the most well-known work was probably by Oxford (1990) who compiled the earlier strategies under investigation into two major categories: direct and indirect strategies. The former was composed of memory, cognitive, and compensation strategies while the latter metacognitive, affective, and social strategies. Memory strategies included creating mental linkage, applying images and sounds, reviewing well, and employing action. Cognitive strategies included practicing, receiving and sending messages, analyzing and reasoning, and creating structure for input and output. Compensation strategies included guessing intelligently, and overcoming imitations in speaking and writing. Metacognitive strategies included creating one’s learning, arranging and planning one’s learning, and evaluating one’s learning. Affective strategies included lowering one’s anxiety, encouraging oneself, and attending to one’s emotions. Social strategies included asking questions, cooperating with others, and empathizing with others. 8 .

(19) . For the second category, factor analysis, many elements have been identified in association with strategy use. The factors include proficiency level (Graham, 2004; Khaldieh, 2000), gender (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Phakiti, 2003), ethnicity (Wharton, 2000), motivation (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Schmidt & Watanabe, 2001), vocabulary size (Nacera, 2010), learner beliefs (Yang, 1999), years of English learning (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989), learners’ cultural background (Oxford, 1996), and contexts, namely ESL or EFL (Olivares-Cuhat, 2002). As for the third category, strategy instruction, many studies have verified the possible effect of strategy instruction which can be witnessed in learners of different needs and proficiency levels (Pearson & Duke, 2002; Schunk & Swartz, 1993), and in many learning aspects, including listening (Thompson & Rubin, 1996), speaking (Chamot, 1993), reading (Pressley, 2000; Souvignier & Mokhlesgerami, 2006), writing (De La Paz & Graham, 2002) and vocabulary acquisition (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). All the research exemplifies the effect of strategy instruction in facilitating learning.. 2.2 Reciprocal Teaching 2.2.1 Origin and brief introduction Among the third category of research on strategy aforementioned, a strategy instruction called reciprocal teaching was proposed by Palincsar and Brown in the 9 .

(20) . 1980s (Alfassi, 1998). It is an instruction that combines four reading strategies: prediction, question generation, clarification and summarization. For prediction, no matter students are to begin a new text or proceed with a following paragraph, they can rely on what they have learned previously from a text or their life experience to make a prediction about the following content. By making a guess and prediction first, students can be more well-prepared. In question generation, students ask one another about text-related questions, ranging from main ideas to detailed points. And students are encouraged to start their questions with question words, like “who,” “what,” “when,” “where,” “why,” and “how.” As for clarification, as students read, they have to monitor their own reading and pause when they encounter confusion in reading a certain point or passage. Their confusion may be triggered by unfamiliar words or grammar, or probably the writer’s unclear writing style. Then, students need to tackle their problem by finding answers to some words or concepts that seem unfamiliar to them. Finally for summarizing, when students read, they have to read for the big picture, teasing out the main ideas from less important content. Later, after students capture the gist of a text, they will put all the cricual information together to form a summary. And in composing a summary, they are encouraged and supposed to use their own words, not repeating the author’s (Palincsar & Brown, 1984; Slater & Horstman, 2002). 10 .

(21) . Based on the literal meaning, the word “Reciprocal” stands for the nature of mutual communication among participants. In implementing reciprocal teaching and learning, learners in one class are divided into several small groups. Each group will form a discussion team, applying the four strategies to achieving fuller understanding of a text. And in each group, there will be one leader who is more capable, knowing more about the four strategies and therefore in charge of the discussion. As for the rest of the students in the same group, they will receive the scaffolding from the leader who guides them to apply the four strategies to reading a text. Usually the leader in the initial stage is the teacher or a more capable student who can serve as a model for the other students (Palincsar et al., 1989; Sporer et al., 2009). Accordingly, in the initial stage of implementation, it is more teacher-centered because the more capable one undertakes most of the modeling job to demonstrate the execution and application of the four strategies. By contrast, the less capable learners assume a more passive role, like an observer or spectator taking their time and witnessing the whole process. Hence, they are said to learn at their own pace and rate. After slower learners go through longer exposure to the training, they will begin their participation and contribution in the dialogues. However, their ideas and comments in the early stage might still be unclear, immature and fragmental. Group leaders can ask these struggling group members to imitate their questions or feedback first (Palincsar & 11 .

(22) . Brown, 1984). Later, when less capable students are familiarized with the use of the four strategies, they will be able to produce clearer and maturer opinions. More capable members, in this moment, can pose more challenging questions. Gradually and eventually, via extensive and frequent guided practice, students will equip themselves with the four strategies and apply them to their reading and group discussion. In the later stage, students, undertaking most of the responsibilities, can read either collaboratively or independently with increased comprehension. But still teachers may offer some feedback and additional modeling or explanation tailored to each student’s different needs and abilities. And teacher’s role will cede to a facilitating and sympathetic observer to offer assistance only when there is a need (Palincsar & Brown, 1984). Reciprocal teaching, thus, has two features. One is strategy training and the other is interaction. For strategy instruction, it is used for comprehension monitoring and comprehension fostering. As for interaction such as guided practice, negotiation and clarification, it has three functions. First, students’ ability is usually revealed in their generated questions or comment. Therefore, through interacting with students, teachers can know a student’s current ability so as to offer some help suitable for individual’s need. Second, interaction embedded in an authentic conversation between 12 .

(23) . experts and novices is the essence of apprenticeship. Many kinds of apprenticeship, such as parents leading a baby to practicing walking, take place in a real context and many interactions are involved. Thus, for apprenticeship to succeed, interaction and natural settings are crucial elements. Third, interaction allows students and teachers to work cooperatively. Traditionally, after teachers’ lectures and demonstration, students are left to work independently. Rather, in reciprocal teaching, teachers or more capable students help those in need through constant interaction and exemplification. Hence, interaction, in this sense, facilitates low achievers’ learning, ore more specifically reading comprehension (Palincsar & Brown, 1984). Reciprocal teaching now has two variant forms and both are proposed by Palincsar and Brown (1984, 1987). One is called reciprocal teaching only (RTO) while the other explicit teaching before reciprocal teaching (ET-RT). The difference lies in how and when the four strategies are introduced. In RTO, strategies are incorporated into the teaching process. Therefore, as teachers interact with students, they embed strategy instruction into their feedback and comments posed to students implicitly. That is, interaction and strategy teaching are combined and introduced simultaneously rather than separately. ET-RT, on the other hand, is to teach strategies prior to the inception of dialogues. Thus, strategies are presented earlier and explicitly for students’ familiarization. And the implementation is usually class-based 13 .

(24) . accompanied by many activities and worksheets to introduce each strategy step by step. Later, with certain understanding of the four strategies, students will practice and apply the strategies to their reading process with the help of more capable peers and teachers (Rosenchine & Meister, 1994; Greenway, 2002). 2.2.2 Theories underlying reciprocal teaching In addition to the essence of interaction and strategy use, reciprocal teaching also has its theoretical grounding. According to Rosenshine and Meister (1994), reciprocal teaching incorporates social constructivism, scaffolding theory and the spirit of zone of proximal development, shortened as ZPD, proposed by Vygotsky (1978). Reciprocal teaching fulfills social constructivism because during implementation, teachers and students interact in a real social event, that is learning, and each has a lot of chances to express his thoughts and opinions and mutually listen to and elicit information from the interlocutors. They have to participate in a dialogue or conversation actively. This kind of social and verbal interaction can be used to construct meanings collaboratively toward an issue and can assist learners’ cognitive development (Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). For scaffolding theory, in the early stage of implementation, teachers undertake more responsibilities and give the needed assistance to lead the students. And teachers are usually the discussion leaders who exemplify how to read strategically. Later, 14 .

(25) . teachers pose questions and comments to students as students begin their first attempt of participation. Students always work and practice with the presence of teachers who offer the most instant responses to each individual’s need. All the teacher’s efforts and assistance are regarded as the scaffolding built to facilitate students’ learning. However, teachers’ scaffolding mostly prevails in the early stage and gradually wanes as students become more capable of their own learning. Thus, teachers are said to build the scaffolding for the students temporarily, not eternally (Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). Finally for ZPD theory, in the instructional process the instructor will guide and lead the students step by step. Teachers do not give students the pressure of learning. Rather, teachers help students to explore their potentials in performing tasks a little bit beyond their present abilities. The reason is that according to Vygotsky (1978), children have two development levels: one is actual development level in which children can perform a task on their own; the other is potential development level in which children need others’ assistance to achieve the same goal. The zone of proximal development is the area between the actual and potential development levels and is the place where instruction and scaffolding can take place. Therefore, in introducing children to reciprocal teaching, teachers must lead children with great patience and allow them to learn at their own pace (Slater & Horstman, 2002). 15 .

(26) . 2.2.3 Empirical studies on reciprocal teaching In this section, relevant studies on reciprocal teaching are presented and are categorized based on either English-speaking or EFL context. And it is found that while there has been rich literature on both contexts, most of the studies in the English-speaking context are carried out among students with different learning problems. In contrast, most of the studies in Taiwan, an EFL context, are implemented on the average students. Students with particular need such as strugglers are ignored. Studies conducted in English-speaking context As one of the pioneer works, Palincsar and Brown (1984) implemented reciprocal teaching on thirty-seven seventh graders among which twenty-four were reported to be poor comprehenders with reading problems. They were, on average, two years below the expected grade performance. The thirty-seven students were randomly assigned to four treatment conditions. Only one group received the instruction of reciprocal teaching; the other three served as control groups. Among the three groups, one was trained with the skill of information location which was long recognized in research and in classroom scenarios as useful remedial training. As for the other two groups, they were not given any instruction except for regular tests. The teaching materials were all expository stories correspondent to the difficulty level for a seventh grader. The result indicated that students in the reciprocal teaching group 16 .

(27) . outperformed their counterparts in both research-developed and standardized tests. The former was administered periodically during the intervention, while the latter was performed as a delayed post-test three months after the treatment. In addition to the quantitative evidence, reciprocally trained students also demonstrated great improvement in their classroom dialogues. They could, gradually, generate more complete statements and summaries with their own words, and better seize the main ideas of a text. In Lysynchuk, Pressley and Vye’s study (1990), a total of seventy-two grade four and grade seven students were sampled. All of them were English-speaking Canadians from different schools. Prior to the study, students were assigned to either control or experimental group based on their performance in the standardized Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test as the pre-test during the implementation. The only difference between the control and experimental groups was the instruction of the four strategies in reciprocal teaching. Thus, while students in the experimental group were reciprocally trained, their counterparts received more traditional teacher-led instruction in which the instructor was the only one who offered any needed assistance. After thirteen training sessions, reciprocally taught students outperformed their counterparts no matter in the daily assessments or in the two standardized tests implemented and compared as pre and post-tests. 17 .

(28) . In Alfassi’s study (1998), the participants were seventy-five first-year high school students who were recognized as adequate decoders but poor comprehenders. Her research was to testify whether reciprocal teaching was superior to the traditional instruction of skill acquisition when both were implemented as remedial instruction. To answer the question, she had fifty-three students in the experimental group exposed to reciprocal teaching while the rest twenty-two students in the control group exposed to the training of skill acquisition. After a twenty-day intervention, students receiving. reciprocal. teaching. outperformed. their. counterparts. in. the. researcher-developed exam. However, there was no difference when the administered exam was a standardized test. Like Alfassi’s study (1998), Alfassi, Weiss, and Lifshitz’s study (2009) compared the effectiveness between reciprocal teaching and traditional skill acquisition when implemented as remedial instruction. However, in their study, the subjects were thirty-five students aged from fifteen to twenty-one with mild and moderate intellectual disability. The researchers’ belief was that while sociocultural approaches were recognized as useful for learners with mental retardation, reciprocal teaching, also featured with socio-constructivism, should also benefit learners with this special need. To verify this, the researchers arranged nineteen students in the experimental group and sixteen in the control group. Thus, the former received reciprocal 18 .

(29) . instruction while the latter skill learning. After a twelve-week intervention, it was found that reciprocally trained students gained greater progress in three different kinds of reading exams. And a delayed-post test implemented twelve weeks later after the intervention also showed that students in the experimental group were still equipped with the ability of summarization and question generation. In Jane and Diane’s study (2003), reciprocal teaching was implemented on their students in a middle school. To help their students achieve better reading comprehension, the two researchers adopted reciprocal teaching in their intact classes in which students were composed heterogeneously with varied abilities, and some of them were even diagnosed with learning disability. After one year implementation, the result showed impressive gains on standardized tests administered by one of the researchers and the school. The progress was most distinctive among students with middle and higher proficiency. Also, data collected from students’ learning journals and teacher-student interviews showed that students were more involved in classroom discussion, which improved the quality of classroom dialogues. Students were more likely to ask questions and give comments in class, became more independent readers with deeper thoughts, and monitored their own learning and thinking while reading. Studies conducted in Taiwan In Chou’s study (2008), in order to verify the possible efficacy of reciprocal 19 .

(30) . teaching on EFL students, she had one class of students receive reciprocal teaching while the other traditional reading instruction. After the ten-week training, it was found that while both groups had significant progress on a reading exam which was served as both pre- and post-tests, the improvement in the experimental group was even greater. Also, from students’ think-aloud protocols, it was found that while students in the experimental group applied the learned strategies to their reading process, the strategy use was not found in the control group. Meanwhile, most of the students in the experimental group held positive attitudes toward reciprocal teaching. In Su’s study (2010), in order to validate the efficacy of reciprocal teaching on students with vocational background, he recruited sixty students from a university of technology. Half of the participants were assigned to an experimental group receiving reciprocal teaching while those in the control group were trained with grammar-translation method. After an eleven-week intervention, no difference was revealed between the two groups as to their performance in the standardized test of GEPT high-intermediate level. However, for the experimental group, there was significant improvement between their pre- and post-test results. Also, based on the interview and the meta-cognitive awareness questionnaire, students in the experimental group gained more confidence in reading strategically and held positive attitudes toward reciprocal teaching. 20 .

(31) . Different from most studies that examined the effect of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension, Shiau (2010) extended the research focus to the possible efficacy of reciprocal teaching in developing learners’ critical and creative thinking. Her participants were thirty-six freshman high school students who received a six-week strategy training. The result was based on weekly questions generated by students and the perception questionnaire. The former was to see whether reciprocal teaching could facilitate and sharpen students’ thinking ability while the latter was used to probe into students’ perception of reciprocal teaching. The result showed that although students still tended to ask lower level questions, like factual and interpretational questions, their questions gradually had more variation. And from the questionnaires, students expressed their positive attitude toward reciprocal teaching which enabled them to be more strategic, active, and self-conscious. They also viewed the strategy of summarizing as the most beneficial one but the most difficult one to acquire as well.. 2.3 Summary In summary, the issue of strategy use was first noticed and researched in the investigation of good learners’ characteristics. Until now, there has been rich literature on strategy use, which can be classified into three categories: the identification and classification of strategy use, what influences strategy use, and the effects of strategy 21 .

(32) . instruction. Belonging to the third category, reciprocal teaching now has been widely examined and applied in the English-speaking contexts among different students, even those with comprehension difficulties, learning disability, and mental retardation. In contrast, while reciprocal teaching has received more and more attention in Taiwan, an EFL context, but there have been scarcely no studies probing into its possible effect on English struggling learners. Most students center on the average students as reviewed previously in Chou’s (2008), Su’s (2010) and Chiau’s (2010) works. To bridge the gap, I therefore propose the present study. I would like to implement reciprocal teaching in my remedial course. There are four students in this class. Hence, the study would be both a case study and action research. I would like to examine how reciprocal teaching may assist my students’ learning, particularly for reading. The details of the study will be presented in the next chapter.. 22 .

(33) . Chapter Three Research Method In the chapter, it consists of seven sections: (1) setting, (2) participants, (3) procedures, (4) teaching materials, (5) research instrument, (6) data collection and analysis, and (7) summary. In the first section, an introduction is given about the school where the research was carried out. In the second section, participants’ backgrounds are presented. In the third section, it describes the procedure about the implementation of reciprocal teaching. In the fourth section, it explains and justifies the reason for the adoption of picture books as teaching materials. In the fifth section, it covers the instruments being used to answer the research questions. In the sixth section, it is about how data were collected and then analyzed. Finally in the seventh section, a simple summary table of this chapter will be given.. 3.1 Setting The current study was carried out in a junior high school at Daan district in Taipei city. Although this school is located in the downtown, compared with other schools in the same area, this school is not so well-known and is much smaller in its scale. For each grade, there are only four classes, and the total number of students is roughly three hundred. The faculty number is only thirty-one. But the school is famous and was awarded for its remedial courses before. 23 .

(34) . 3.2 Participants Originally, there were six participants. However, two of them dropped the course due to their personal affairs. The remaining four students participated in the current study, including two male and two female students. During the intervention, they kept good attendance with little absence of one or two times only, and they were therefore documented in the survey. Their names were respectively Cain, Edmund, Winnie, and Silvia (pseudo names being used). They were the researchers’ students in the remedial course offered by the school. They were all seventh graders and identified by their English teachers as low achievers for they failed English in most of the monthly exams. While Edmund, Winnie, and Silvia were classmates, Cain was from another, PE gifted class. Among the four students, only Winnie was from Taipei City, while the rest three were from New Taipei City. Prior to the implementation, they all reported having learned English for five to six years, and they had two to three English classes in their elementary schools every week. After school, they would spend time on English, but mainly for course content, not for extracurricular learning. For Cain, he was the only exception who had never been to cram school, whereas the rest three students reported that they once went to cram schools, but not currently. Further, in the first class meeting, the researcher had the students write down their opinion of extracurricular readings and lessons, such as 24 .

(35) . picture books, and they all expressed great interests.. 3.3 Procedure 3.3.1 Sampling and grouping In the study, a small-scaled sampling was arranged because of two reasons. First, since the researcher was also the teacher for the students in their remedial course, he would like to verify the possible effect of reciprocal teaching, in addition to reviewing the school course content for them. In other words, he would like to carry out an action research, seeing whether and how reciprocal teaching could facilitate students’ reading ability. Second, since the current study examines the possible effect of reciprocal teaching on struggling learners, a small-scaled study seems to be more feasible and realistic. Poor readers usually need more modeling and scaffolding from the instructor. If we implement reciprocal teaching on a large number of students, it is less likely for the teacher to take care of them at the same time. Based on the two reasons, a smaller sample size was then adopted. 3.3.2 Implementation of reciprocal teaching The researcher had the remedial course for the students for the whole semester, from February to June in 2012. Before the first monthly exam which took place in late March, the researcher reviewed the school course content for the students. After the first monthly exam, the researcher then introduced and brought reciprocal teaching to 25 .

(36) . the class officially. The exact intervention took place from the late March to the late May. For each week, there were two meeting sessions, Tuesday and Thursday afternoons, from twelve-forty to one-twenty. In total, seven weeks, namely fourteen class sessions were arranged. In correspondence to the essence of scaffolding and ZPD in reciprocal teaching, the seven-week intervention was further divided into two phases: teacher-led and student-led stages. In the first, teacher-led stage, the instructor assumed the central, dominant role, introducing and demonstrating the strategy use, while students could took their time, observing the teacher and witnessing the whole process. When involved in the group discussion led by the teacher, students were given the chance to practice the strategy. In the second, student-led stage, when students gained some understanding of the target strategies, they took more responsibilities and organized their own discussion, while the teacher shifted to a facilitating role. Such a two-stage design could fulfill the scaffolding principle of reciprocal teaching. Also, no matter the discussion is led by the teacher or students themselves, it embodies the constructivist spirit of reciprocal teaching. In the first five weeks, we had the first, teacher-led stage. For each week, only one strategy was introduced and practiced. Thus, while only four weeks were needed, one more week was, unexpectedly, consumed in practicing clarification and summary 26 .

(37) . strategies. The reason was that in practicing clarification strategy, student, mainly for Winnie and Cain, were too talkative to concentrate themselves. Therefore, to give students more time and chances, one extended session was used. Also, in doing the summary strategy, due to the school activity of tug-of-war contest, students were asked to participate and left the class earlier in one class. To make up for this, one more class was therefore needed. For the first week, the prediction skill was introduced, followed by question generation, clarification, and summarization. Based on the literature on reciprocal teaching, the instructional sequence of the four strategies has little to do with the learning outcomes. Different researchers have attempted many kinds of sequence, and each can yield satisfying outcomes. In the present study, prediction was the first taught, and the reason is that it is a good pre- and while-reading activity which prepares students for the reading itself. Then, question generation and clarification were introduced because it is assumed that during the reading process, students may encounter many text-related or inferential questions which shall be managed in time. Therefore, it is the right time for the two strategies to be introduced. Finally, for summarization, it was placed in the end because we hope that students can come up with a brief summary after their reading. A good and well-organized summary can indicate whether students have full comprehension or not. 27 .

(38) . In the teacher-led stage, in introducing a new strategy, the researcher always began with the definition and explanation of the target strategy. Then, he would lead the students to reading a picture book and applying the newly-introduced strategy to the reading process. For example, in introducing the strategy of question generation, the researcher gave students a broad sense and brief introduction of the strategy first. Then, reading took place. In reading each page, the researcher himself came up with a question. By doing this, students could observe and imitate the researcher. Later, students would be asked to have their own generated questions put on the worksheets (see Appendix One). After students’ practice, the researcher would sometimes ask one or some of the students to share his or their answers. By doing this, the researcher intended to know whether and for how much students knew the strategy and trigger students’ responses to others’ sharing. The process of students’ practice and teacher-led discussion would continue until the picture book was completely read. For the detailed teaching procedure, the lesson plans for each strategy are placed in Appendix Two. The first class in the student-led stage, I helped students review the four strategies. Then, I told them that from now on, they had to carry out their own discussion and employed the four strategies flexibly. They had to pretend that the researcher was not there. Rather, they had to read and discuss on their own. Therefore, 28 .

(39) . they had to make comments and responses to one another. After the explanation, the researcher then witnessed aside, and offered help only when there was a need. In fact, the whole teaching process was the same as it was in the first, teacher-led stage. Even for the reading materials, they were not any harder. The only difference was that we had students take more responsibilities to organize their group discussion, while the researcher shifted to a more facilitating, observant, and less-dominant role. 3.3.3 Distribution of perception questionnaire After the seven-week treatment completed in late May, a perception questionnaire (see Appendix Three) was distributed to all the four students in early June. This questionnaire helped answer the second research question about EFL low achievers’ perception of reciprocal teaching.. 3.4. Teaching Materials In the study, picture books were adopted as the teaching material for two reasons. First, since the target students are struggling readers, they may encounter much difficulty during their reading process. In order to lessen their pressure and frustration and also to build up their confidence, picture books are more accessible and reader-friendly for them. Second, when doing prediction strategy, illustrations in picture books can function as the clues for students to make reasonable predictions. Also, in doing the summary strategy, students might have less difficulty in organizing 29 .

(40) . their summary because picture books are less demanding and easier to read. In this study, a total of six books was used. In the first, teacher-led stage, one book was dedicated to one strategy training. Thus, four books were read in this phase. In the second, student-led stage, the researcher had the students read one book for one week, so another two books were adopted since the stage lasted for two weeks. The six books were organized and written with simple plot and structure, and were published by well-known publishers, such as Macmillan and Oxford university press. In the following, Table One is presented which offers the titles of the six books and their brief story introduction.. 3.5 Research Instrument Since the current study is small-scaled in nature, qualitative protocols were adopted to answer the research questions. 3.5.1 Teaching journal and weekly worksheet To answer the first research question, a teaching journal and weekly worksheet were prepared. For the adoption of a teaching journal, it was suggested and inspired by Rosenshine and Meister (1994), who stated that while most studies on reciprocal teaching were quantitative-oriented, only presenting the final outcome, not much was known about the on-going process during the implementation. Therefore, to shed some light on the issue, a teaching journal was utilized to document students’ 30 .

(41) . performance in class. The focus was to identify possible progress found in the learner part. For example, we would like to know whether students would be more engaged in the classroom conversation, and be more capable and willing to express themselves. Table 1 Storyline of the six picture books Book title. Story. Leo and Pip. A lion named Leo meets a mouse named Pip, and they become good friends. Naughty Leo takes away a hunter’s gun and is later trapped in a net set up by the hunter and a fisherman. Pip saves Leo, who later scares the hunter and fisherman away.. Three Billy-Goats. The story is about three goats of different sizes concerning how they cheat a troll and successfully cross the bridge to eat the grass.. The Supermarket Chase. A girl named Louisa gets a dog for her birthday present. She names him Toby. Later, she goes shopping in a supermarket where she misrecognizes a dog as Toby. The dog runs fast and crazily, causing much trouble. Louisa tries hard to catch it. Finally Louisa stops him, but finds that she has made a mistake when she sees Toby.. The Picnic. The story is about a nice giant who goes picnicking and shares his food with fish, birds, and ducks.. The Magic Cooking Pot. A hungry and poor girl gets a cooking pot from an old woman, who teaches her how to make the pot cook with a spell. The girl is happy and brings the pot home. However, when later the girl is out, her mother says the wrong spell, so the pot keeps on cooking. The girl goes home in time and saves the disaster.. The Dolphin and the Crown. The story is about a girl, Susan, who has a dream in which she goes to visit a wondrous kingdom and helps the emperor find his lost family.. The weekly worksheet, on the other hand, was also used for the researcher to identify students’ potential learning progress. The adoption of learning sheet was inspired by Chern’s work (2005) and Shiau’s work (2010); both researchers, in investigating reciprocal teaching, had their students keep a learning sheet. For the 31 .

(42) . exact format of the worksheet used in the current study, it could be referred in Appendix One. It was arranged and sequenced by the page number. Students were asked to put and write down their practice and questions corresponding to the page number on the sheet. From the documentation, we would like to know whether students could ask more complete questions or questions with better quality, such as questions with deeper thoughts. Also, we would like to know whether students could produce more grammatically correct sentences. 3.5.2 Questionnaire To answer the second research question, a perception questionnaire was adopted. The framework was a reference to the works by Chern (2005) and Shiau (2010). Some similar questions were raised in the current study in order to have some post comparison after the intervention. In our perception questionnaire (see Appendix Three), eight questions were posed to examine students’ attitude toward reciprocal teaching. The eight questions could be further divided into three categories. The first category is about leaners’ overall perception of reciprocal teaching of reciprocal teaching, inclusive of Question One, Two, Three, and Eight. The second category is about learners’ attitude toward each strategy use, inclusive of Question Four and Five. The third category is about learners’ attitude toward future employment of reciprocal teaching, inclusive of Question Six and Seven. However, in consideration of the 32 .

(43) . participants’ English ability, the Chinese version was prepared, so that they could read the questions without any langue barrier. The Chinese version was attached in Appendix Four.. 3.6 Data Collection and Analysis 3.6.1 Data collection To collect the data from the teaching journal, the researcher kept documenting students’ in-class performance. In class, as he taught, he also made observation on students’ responses and interaction. When the class dismissed, he would write down his observation and analysis. Ideally, recording would be prepared to help document students’ dialogue for the researcher’s later reference. However, no recording devices were used, but merely the researcher’s observation. The reason was that he once tried recording the conversation between students; however, since the implementation was carried out in the school library where other remedial courses were also offered at the same time, the voice from other classes was a great interference, making the quality of the recording undesirable. Thus, only the researcher’s observation was resorted and reported as the source in documenting the teaching journal. As for the weekly worksheet, it was distributed to students in every class session and was collected after class. Therefore, when the seven-week intervention came to an end, the data derived from the two protocols were also completed. 33 .

(44) . On the other hand, the perception questionnaires were distributed to the students right after the seven-week intervention. In collecting the data, the researcher gave the students some guidelines in writing their opinions. First, they were encouraged to write as much as possible. They were expected to write more than “yes” or “no.” Some personal opinions should be further given. Second, they were asked to write freely, not to disguise their real perception of reciprocal teaching. If they disfavored the teaching, they could feel free to give comments. The researcher was willing to accept as long as the justified reasons were offered. By giving the two principles, the researcher attempted to collect informative and most sincere voices from his students. 3.6.2 Data analysis In analyzing the data from the learning journal and weekly worksheet, after all the documentation was completed, the researcher would read the two resources again in order to gain some new insights and reflection. To retrospect was of great importance because it helped the researcher to compare his perception right after the treatment with the information documented in the teaching journal and worksheet. He could further understand if there was some correspondence. Then, the researcher coded the content so as to identify the progress made by the students and some unexpected difficulties during the implementation. In analyzing the data from the questionnaires, the researcher first read each 34 .

(45) . student’s individual questionnaire to understand how each of them perceived reciprocal teaching. Then, the researcher translated each student’s response from Chinese into English. Later, the researcher cross-compared and synthesized students’ answers to each question, and put this in the result section. Since our protocols and approaches are qualitative-oriented, in presenting our result in the next chapter, a lot of it is description, rather than numbers.. 3.7 Summary In this chapter, the research design and procedure are thoroughly presented. In the following, a table is presented to synthesize the information in this chapter. Table 2 The procedure of the study Stage. Meeting session. Date. Strategy introduced. Book. Teacher-led stage. 1st. 3/29. Prediction. Leo and Pip Three Billy-Goats. 2. nd. 4/3. 3rd. 4/5. th. 4/10. Question generation. 5. th. 4/12. Clarification. 6th. 4/17. th. 4/19. The Supermarket Chase. th. 4/24. Summary. The Picnic. th. 4/26 Integrated strategy use. The Pot. 4. 7 8 9. 10th Student-led stage. 5/15. 12. th. 5/17. 13th. 5/22. th. 5/24. th. 6/5. 11. 14 Perception questionnaire. 5/1. th. 15. The Dolphin and the Crown None. 35 . Cooking. None.

(46) . Chapter Four Results and Discussion In this chapter, the results and discussion about the study are presented. For the result section, in correspondence to the two research questions, two sub-sections are given. The first part is concerned about the first research question, researcher’s observation of students’ performance. The second part is concerned about the second research question, students’ perception of reciprocal teaching. As for the discussion section, it includes three aspects, students’ positive transformation, obstacles encountered during implementation, and students’ attitudes toward reciprocal teaching.. 4.1 Results In this section, results on students’ attitudinal change as evidenced in class and from worksheet are first presented, followed by their perception of reciprocal teaching. For the attitudinal change, it includes seven categories, both positive and negative.. 4.1.1 Students’ change on learning attitude Throughout the treatment, students have developed and demonstrated several changes in different aspects, including (1) classroom engagement, (2) building scaffolding for others, (3) mutual interaction, and (4) increased autonomy, (5) students’ full competence in strategy use, (6) their improved English ability, and (7) 36 .

(47) . other behavior changes. While the first six categories are mainly about students’ positive transformation, the last category deals with both positive and negative changes. In the following, the seven aspects will be further elaborated. (1) Engagement During the intervention, the four students’ engagement was overall improved, particularly for the girls. Prior to the implementation, when I had the regular course design to help review students’ school content, they showed little interests. And their enthusiasm and patience waned as time went by. However, ever since I turned to reciprocal teaching, their interests in English seemed to make a come-back. For Winnie, when we began our remedial course, she was an attentive student in the first few classes. She listened to me carefully. However, as time went by, she showed fewer interests and became less patient. She would turn to her drawing instead. She bent down her head and seldom could I see her face. Nevertheless, when I commenced the intervention, Winnie’s interests in English seemed to make a come-back. In the first few classes, she was so excited that she would very much like to share her prediction with me and with the whole class. Also, in the student-led stage, she continued her enthusiasm. When asked to work on her worksheet, she was always diligent and never ran out her patience. She even tried her best in using all English. Also in this stage, compared with other students, Winnie demonstrated more 37 .

(48) . interactive behaviors with me and with other peers. Her change after the intervention was huge and amazing. Another case is from Silvia. Like Winnie, before the intervention, Silvia seemed to be less and less motivated in class. She was sometimes absent-minded and sometimes turned to her chatting with Winnie. However, the situation dramatically changed after the implementation. During the intervention, Silvia became concentrated on her story reading. Sometimes, she was so engaged that she seemed to enclose herself in an imaginative world in which she interacted with the text. Once, I misunderstood that she was in a trance and asked her to speed up her reading. She responded that she had not finished the current page and asked for a few more seconds. From her response, one could tell that she was engaged in her reading and was willing to spend time on it. Other examples are from the boys, Cain and Edmund. Their engagement was best witnessed in two incidents. For Edmund, when we practiced the summary strategy, he once corrected Winnie for a mistake she made. After we finished reading the book, The Picnic, I had the students practice writing their summaries. Before long, Winnie asked me the English word for swans. Got confused, Edmund instantly corrected her and said swans were not mentioned in today’s story, but ducks were. Edmund must have been greatly involved in his reading, or he would not be able to 38 .