Extensive Reading with Adult Learners of English as a Second LanguageWord格式文档下载.docx

Extensive Reading with Adult Learners of English as a Second LanguageWord格式文档下载.docx

《Extensive Reading with Adult Learners of English as a Second LanguageWord格式文档下载.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Extensive Reading with Adult Learners of English as a Second LanguageWord格式文档下载.docx（23页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

liveamongitsspeakers.Thenextbestwayistoreadextensivelyinit.

Nuttall（1982:

168,citedinYu,1993）

Thispaperreportsonastudyoftheimpactofextensivereading（ER）onthelanguageproficiencyofagroupofVietnamesegovernmentofficialsstudyingEnglish.Twoquestionswereofinterest.First,wewantedtoexamineifERcouldbesuccessfullyimplementedwithadultsecondlanguagelearnersbeyondtraditionalstudentage.Secondly,wewereinterestedintherelationshipbetweenlearninggainandasetofERvariables,suchasamountofERmaterialsread,theextenttowhichthismaterialwasperceivedtobeausefulandenjoyableactivity.TheresultsindicatedthatolderadultsecondlanguagelearnerscouldindeedbenefitfromacarefullyplannedandsystematicallyimplementedERprogram.Further,aregressionanalysisshowedthatamountofERwastheonlysignificantpredictorofparticipants'

gainscores.

INTRODUCTION

The1990ssawrenewedinterestinERandtheroleitplaysinsecondlanguagelearning.TheMay1997issueofTheLanguageTeacher（ajournalpublishedbytheJapanAssociationforLanguageTeaching）,forexample,wasdevotedtopapersonER.TheauthorsofthesepapersarguethatERshouldbegivenalargershareinourlanguagecurriculumandpresentideasonhowtoachievethis.ThepresentarticlebeginsbypresentinganoverviewofwhyandhowtoimplementER.ThisisfollowedbyareportonastudyoftheimpactofERonthelanguageproficiencyofagroupofVietnamesegovernmentofficialsstudyingEnglish.

TheprincipaltheoreticalmotivationbehindtheuseofERinsecondlanguagelearningcomesfromtheideathatlearnersneedlargeamountsofcomprehensibleinputintheirnewlanguageinordertomakeprogresstowardoverallcommandofthatlanguage（Krashen,1982）.Inthisway,ERbenefitsnotonlyreadingproficiencybutoveralllanguageproficiencyaswell.NumerousresearchstudiesinbothL1（e.g.,Herman,Anderson,Pearson,&

Nagy,1987;

Nagy,Herman,&

Anderson,1985;

foranextensivereview,seeKrashen,1993）andL2（Elley,1991;

Elley&

Mangubhai,1983;

HafizandTudor,1990;

Krashen,1997;

Mason&

Nation,1997;

Lituañ

as,JacobsandRenandya,toappear;

Sims,1995）haveconsistentlyshownthebenefitsofERforlearners’languagedevelopment.

TheexperimentreportedbyLituañ

as,Jacobs,andRenandya,forinstance,demonstratedhowremedialstudentsatasecondaryschoolinthePhilippinesconsiderablyimprovedtheirreadingskillsduringasix-monthERprogram.Inthisexperiment,twogroupsofstudentsreceivedthesameamountofdailyinstruction（40minutes）duringtheirremedialreadingclass.However,unlikethecontrolgroupwhoweretaughttheconventionalway,theexperimentalgroupweregivenclasstimetoreadbooks,magazines,andnewspapers,andwereencouragedtocontinuethisERoutsideclasshours.Aftersixmonths,theERtreatmentwasassociatedwithlearninggainsthatweregreatertoastatisticallysignificantdegreethanthoseregisteredbyremedialstudentstaughtviathetraditionalmodeofreadinginstruction.

Inadditiontobeingassociatedwithlearninggainsinexperimentalstudies,ERhasalsobeenareliablepredictorofsecondlanguageproficiencyinexpostfactoresearch.InastudyofESLstudentsintheUS,Constantino,S.Y.Lee,Cho,andKrashen（1997）reportthat,alongwithamountofpreviousEnglishstudyintheirhomecountriesandlengthofresidenceintheUS,theamountofreadingwasasignificantpredictorofstudents’TOEFLscores.Incontrast,othervariables（i.e.,amountofTVviewinginEnglish,frequencyandamountofL1reading,andamountofEnglishstudyintheUS）includedinthestudywerenotsignificantlycorrelatedwithTOEFLscores.

InanotherstudyinvolvingESLstudentsintheUnitedStates,Y.O.Lee,Krashen,andGibbons（1996,citedinKrashen,1997）reportthatamountofL2readingwasalsoareliablepredictorofstudents’abilitytotranslateandtoperformagrammaticalityjudgementtask.Itisinterestingtonotethatinthisstudy,unliketheTOEFLstudyabove,amountofformalstudyinEnglishandlengthofresidenceintheUSwerenotsignificantpredictors.ProvidingevidencefortheviewthatERbenefitsallaspectsoflanguageproficiency,Jonopoulos（1986）foundasignificantcorrelationbetweentheamountL2readingandL2writingproficiency,asmeasuredbyholisticevaluationofstudentwriting.

Whiledefinitionsvary,expertsagreethatERinvolvestheindependentreadingofalargequantityofmaterialforinformationorpleasure.TheprimefocusofERisonthemeaningofwhatisbeingreadratherthanonthelanguage.Ontheotherhand,inintensivereadingstudentsworkwithshorttextsundertheguidanceoftheteacher.Theaimofintensivereadingistohelpstudentsconstructdetailedmeaningfromthetext,todevelopreadingskills,suchasidentifyingmainideasandrecognisingtextsignals,andtoenhancevocabularyandgrammarknowledge.Thesetwoapproachestoteachingreading-intensiveandextensivereading-arenotseenasbeinginopposition,asbothservedifferentbutcomplementarypurposes（Carrell&

Carson,1997;

Nuttall,1982）.

WhatarethecharacteristicsofsuccessfulERprogrammes?

Thefollowingcharacteristicsaregenerallythoughttobeamongthemostimportant（Campbell,1989;

Davis,1995;

DayandBamford,1997;

Fielding&

Roller,1992;

Gambrell,1979;

Hill,1997;

Hsui,1994;

Jacobs,DavisandRenandya,1997;

Kim&

Nash&

Yun-Pi;

Park&

Turn,1987;

Raja,1995;

Waring,1997;

Yu,1993）:

1. 

Studentsreadlargeamountsofprintedmaterial;

2. 

Studentschoosewhattheywanttoread;

3. 

Studentsreadavarietyofmaterialsintermsoftopicandgenre;

4. 

Thematerialstudentsreadiswithintheirlevelofcomprehension;

5. 

Studentstakepartinpost-readingactivities;

6. 

Teachersreadwiththeirstudents,thusservingasrolemodelsofgoodreaders;

7. 

Teachersandstudentskeeptrackofstudentprogress;

8. 

Teachersprovidehelpandguidancewhereneeded.

FindingthematerialstosupportPoints1,3,and4abovecanbedifficult,especiallywherefundingisinsufficient.Lituañ

as（1997）describeshowshecollectedmaterialsfromawidervarietyofsources,includingfellowteachers,paststudents,andcommunitygroups.TohandRaja（1997）explainwaysthatteachersthemselvescanwriteERmaterialssuitedtotheirstudents’culturalcontextsandproficiencylevels.WaysthatstudentscanbeinvolvedincreatingreadingmaterialsforthemselvesandpeersareexploredinDavidson,Ogle,Ross,Tuhaka,andNg（1997）andDupuyandMcQuillan（1997）,whileDerewianka（1997）givesideasforfindingERmaterialsontheinternet.

ItisworthnotingthatnotallwritersonERagreewithPoint5above,i.e.,includingpost-readingtasksintheERprogram.Themainobjectionisthatpost-readingtasksmayspoilstudents’readingenjoyment,andthatinER,readingshouldbeseenasitsownreward.However,wefeelthatpost-readingtasks,ifcarefullydesigned,canserveusefulpurposes（seeYu,1993;

MasonandKrashen,1997forasimilarview）.Post-readingactivitiescanbeusedto（i）reinforcewhatstudentshavelearnedfromtheirreading;

（ii）givestudentsasenseofprogress;

and（iii）helpstudentsshareinformationaboutmaterialstoreadoravoid.Theoutputhypothesis（Swain,1985,1993,inpress）providesadditionalsupportfortheuseofpost-readingtasks.Thishypothesisstatesthatwhilecomprehensibleinputsuppliesanessentialbasisforsecondlanguageacquisition,itmustbesupplementedbytheproductionofcomprehensibleoutputiflearnersaretoreachahighlevelofproficiencyinthetargetlanguage.Swainarguesthatproductiontasksforcelearnerstonoticefeaturesofthetargetlanguageandtoformandtesthypothesesaboutthelanguage.Anumberofpost-readingactivitiesusedinthepresentstudyaredescribedinthenextsection.

SomeeducatorsusestudentgroupstosupportER.Groupactivitiessupportreadinginterestandproficiencyandcantakeplacebefore,during,andafterER.Forinstance,Cockburn,Isbister,andSim-Goh（1997）,Rhodes（1993）,Rodgers（1997）,andSamway,Whang,andPippitt（1995）depictprogrammesinwhichmoreproficient,oftenolderreaders,supportlessproficient,oftenyoungerstudents,invariousliteracyactivities.Daniels（1994）,HillandVanHorn（1997）,andMcQuillanandTse（1997）describegroupactivitiesthatprovidereaderswithopportunitiestodiscusswhattheyhavebeenreading.

Thepresentstudywasdesignedtoaddressthefollowingquestions.First,sincepreviousstudieshavedealtwiththeeffectofERonchildrenoryoungadults,wewantedtoexamineifERcouldbesuccessfullyimplementedwitholderadultsecondlanguagelearners.Secondly,wewereinterestedintherelationshipbetweenlearninggainandasetofERvariables.ThesevariablesincludetheamountofERmaterialread,theextenttowhichthismaterialisperceivedasinteresting,easy/difficult,andcomprehensible,andwhetherornotERisperceivedtobeausefulandenjoyableactivity.Inthenextsection,wedescribethecontextinwhichourstudywasimplemented.

THESTUDY

Participants

Participantsinthestudywere49VietnamesegovernmentofficialswhowereinSingaporeforatwo