In Hamied, F. A., Yadnya, IBP., Sociowati, IGAG. (Eds.) (2015).

Developing indegenous models of English language

teaching and assessment. Bali, Indonesia: Udayana University Press. Pp.81-94.

5 READING IN A FOREIGN
LANGUAGE: WHAT ELSE IS
IMPORTANT BESIDES SKILLS AND
STRATEGIES?

Willy A Renandya
Nanyang Technological University
[email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION

F
or the past few decades, L2 reading pedagogy has been heavily
influenced by findings from research into reading strategies,
so much so that teaching L2 reading is often considered
synonymous with teaching a set of reading strategies. Reading
strategies such as skimming, scanning, predicting, activating prior
knowledge, guessing new words from textual and contextual clues
are particularly popular with L2 teachers. Thus it is not uncommon to
see a reading lesson where the teacher spends most of the classroom
time explaining and showing students how these strategies could be
used to help them comprehend a reading passage. Often so much
time is spent on teaching these strategies that one wonders whether
students actually do any meaningful reading practice in the reading
lesson. As Field (2002) rightly pointed out, L2 students are often
asked to do many reading-related activities that may not contribute
directly to the development of their reading ability. She further
points out that what students need most in a reading class is not just
learning how to use reading skills and strategies, but to actually be
engaged in frequent and meaningful reading of text, where students
focus their attention on the most important thing about reading,
i.e., understanding and appreciating what the author of the reading
passage is trying to convey to the readers.
The purpose of this paper is to examine two major approaches
to teaching reading: a strategy-based and text-based approaches. The

81
Reading in A Foreign Language

former views reading strategies as a critical factor that influences

students’ reading development; the latter on the other hand considers
the text as the focal point of learning, i.e., the text itself provides a
major source of students’ reading development. While both views are
supported by research, I would argue that for many students for whom
English is a foreign language and who generally have not acquired
sufficient proficiency in the language, the text-based approach (e.g.,
via extensive reading) might be more useful for this group of learners
than the strategy-based approach.

2. WHAT DOES RESEARCH TELL US ABOUT READING

STRATEGIES?
I should state from the outset that reading strategies are not
without values, and that judicious teaching of strategies can indeed
make a difference in enhancing students’ comprehension. However,
we need to be mindful of what research actually tells us about the
usefulness of reading strategies in L2 reading. Below is a brief
summary of research into reading strategy instruction:
(a) Strategy instruction can improve students’ comprehension.
In general, research has shown that students can benefit
from reading strategy instruction. Teaching students to make
predictions before reading, ask questions during reading, and
summarize key points during and after reading and monitor
their comprehension, for example, has been shown to increase
students’ comprehension of the text (Cotterall, 1990; Palincsar
& Brown, 1984; Png, 2010).
(b) While strategy instruction can be useful, there is no strong
evidence that all reading strategies are equally effective in
helping students read with better comprehension. Dilingham
(2006/7) did a review on reading strategy instruction and
concluded that only a handful of reading strategies consistently
produced positive results. Included in the list of empirically
supported reading strategies are those that enable students
to check and monitor their comprehension, and a group of
strategies intended to help students connect ideas between
sentences in a text (e.g., summarizing, graphic organizers and
story structure).
(c) The impact of strategy instruction varies widely. In a small

82
 Willy A Renandya

number of studies, the effect size of the strategy instruction

is substantial (Palincsar & Brown, 1984), but in others
(e.g., Dabarera, Renandya & Zhang, 2014), the effect size
is quite negligible, that is, the improvement that students
made following strategy instruction is not that educationally
meaningful.
(d) Research shows that good readers differ from poor readers
in terms of the number of strategies they have and, more
importantly, in terms of how effectively they use these
strategies in reading. The general conclusion is that compared
to poor readers, good readers have a larger number of
strategies and can use them singly or in combination more
effectively to enhance their reading experience and improve
their comprehension. However, the relationship between
strategy use and reading ability is not always straightforward.
Are good readers good because they possess a larger number
of strategies and use these effectively while poor readers are
poor because they don’t? While some researchers seem to think
so (see Cohen & Macaro, 2007), others have different views
(e.g., Skehan, 1989). The latter group of researchers maintain
that good readers are normally linguistically proficient and the
strategies they use when they read are simply the result of their
high proficiency in the language. Skehan (1989) for example
notes that: “... learner strategies do not determine proficiency,
but are permitted by it” (p. 97, emphasis in original).
(e) Not all students can benefit from strategy instruction. There
are two things to note here. First, some students may already
be using certain strategies in their reading quite efficiently, so
teaching them strategies that they are already familiar with may
not be useful or may in fact confuse them. Secondly, for L2
learners whose proficiency in the language is still at the lower
end of the scale, strategy instruction may not be effective.
When students have not fully developed automaticity in lower
level processes (e.g., word recognition and sentence parsing),
they may not be able to build a text model of comprehension,
much less a situation model of comprehension which requires
higher level processes (Grabe, 2009).
(f) Brief, rather than long and intensive, instruction on strategies.

83
Reading in A Foreign Language

As pointed out by Willingham (2006/7), brief instruction on

reading strategies can be as effective as that which requires
more extended instruction and practice. He further pointed out
that comprehension strategy is ‘… easy to learn and use, and
the only difficulty is to consistently remember to apply it” (p.
44). Thus, extended teaching and practice of strategies may
not be the most productive ways of using classroom time.

3. THE TRANSFER HYPOTHESIS

Some thirty years ago, Alderson (1984) wrote a thought-
provoking chapter entitled “Reading in a foreign language: A
reading problem or language problem?” The question he posed was
as relevant back then as it is today. This is because the answer to this
question would have important pedagogical implications. If reading
in a foreign language is indeed a reading problem, then one would
design a reading course that gives a heavy emphasis on the teaching
of reading skills and strategies. The course might be organized
around the notion of skills and strategies, which as was pointed out
in the earlier section of this paper, seems to be the major approach
adopted by most contemporary L2 reading courses. But on the other
hand, if reading in a foreign language is in fact a language problem,
then the approach to teaching L2 reading would be quite different as
L2 reading teachers would focus more on developing their students’
language skills rather than their reading skills.
Research is not conclusive but my sense is that reading in a
foreign languageismoreofalanguageproblemthanareadingproblem.
Skills and strategies that L2 readers have acquired and used in their
first language are largely transferable. Some reading skills or strategies
such as skimming and scanning should be readily transferable across
different languages. So if students are good at skimming and scanning
when reading a newspaper in their L1, they should be able to do the
same when doing it in their L2. When students fail to do skimming
and scanning in the L2, one should not jump to conclusion and say
that these L2 students lack skimming and scanning skills. It is highly
possible that they in fact have the strategies but are unable to apply
them because they are too busy trying to figure out the meanings of
numerous unfamiliar words in the text. It’s also possible that because
they lack experience reading in a foreign language, they are exhibiting

84
 Willy A Renandya

reading behaviours of early readers who tend to read word by word

with a rather slow reading rate.
Some L2 reading researchers (e.g., Clark, 1980) have
suggested that L2 readers will need to reach a certain threshold
of proficiency before they can transfer their L1 reading skills and
strategies into their L2 reading. This threshold level probably lies in
the intermediate range (Renandya, 2012). Based on my experience
and observation, students need to reach at least a B2 level on the
CEFR Scale before they can seamlessly transfer their L1 reading
skills and strategies into their L2 reading. More research in this
area is needed as understanding the nature of this threshold can help
inform both L2 reading theory and practice.
There is some preliminary data from the L2 listening literature
that seems to support the existence of this threshold level. Zhang
(2005) investigated two different modes of instruction by dividing
up her middle school (secondary) students into two groups. The first
group, the listening strategy group, received training on listening
strategies, and the second group, the extensive listening group,
received extensive exposure to listening materials via teacher read
alouds (see Renandya & Farrell, 2011, for more details). At the
end of the six-week long experiment (approximately 42 hours of
listening sessions), Zhang’s extensive listening students performed
significantly better in the cloze and recall listening tests than the
strategy-based students. Of interest here is that while the students
in the listening strategy group seemed to have learned the strategies
taught, they seemed to have difficulty applying these strategies! What
one student in the strategy group says about the strategy training is
telling (Zhang, 2005, cited in Renandya & Farrell, 2011, p. 57):
I’ve hardly had the chance to use the strategies I’ve been
taught because I have great difficulty in recognizing the words in the
sentences. I always try to catch the words when I listen, but it is so
hard for me. The strategies may be good, but they are not so useful
for me. I mean it doesn’t really help me when I listen. I feel that it
is impossible for me to balance these two things well at the same
time. I think I first need to attend to the most important thing for
me . . . “ If the threshold really exists and that students can in fact
transfer their L1 reading skills and strategies into their L2 reading,
then perhaps it is wise not to invest too much time of teaching

85
Reading in A Foreign Language

reading skills and strategies in our L2 reading lessons. Some SLA

experts (e.g., Krashen, 2011) have in fact suggested some popular
strategies such as predicting and inferencing are probably “innate”,
and therefore, “don’t need to be taught” (p. 388). Krashen (2011)
contends that we make predictions and inferences all the time. We
use these “strategies” when we listen or read in our first language
and when we do other things in life. And we do this quite naturally.
The only time we stop predicting or making inference is when we
are baffled or when we experience ‘temporary processing overload’
(Swan, 2008, p. 267).
What Swan refers to as ‘temporary processing overload’,
unfortunately, happens all too often in many L2 classrooms, in
particular when students struggle with a reading text that is several
levels beyond their current linguistic competence. When students
have to read a frustratingly demanding text, they are likely to be
bewildered and experience a cognitive overload, resulting in their
not being able to use the reading strategies that they already know
and use in their L1 reading. Thus, teaching strategies that learners
already possess and use does not seem like the most productive way
of using classroom instructional time.

4. TExT-BASED APPROACH: ExTENSIVE READING

I am using this term “Text­based Approach” to refer to a
range of approaches (e.g., shared book reading, interactive reading,
extensive reading, repeated reading, pleasure reading etc.) that put the
text as the focal point of learning. In these approaches, students are
encouraged to read the whole text for comprehension and enjoyment,
first with the help of the teachers and later, after they have become
more linguistically confident, on their own with minimal or no help
from their teachers.
One approach that has gained popularity with L2 reading
researchers and practitioners is extensive reading (ER). The theory
behind ER can be traced back to the work of Stephen Krashen and his
comprehensible input theory. Put simply, the comprehensible input
theory states that we learn language by understanding messages,
that is, when we understand what people say to us and when we
comprehend what we read (Krashen, 2004). The hypothesis states
that the following conditions are needed for language learning to

86
 Willy A Renandya

take place:
• the input is abundant and regularly available
• the input is comprehensible
• the input contains language that is slightly above students’
current level of competence.

The three conditions above are likely to be met (though not

fully) when students are engaged in ER, i.e., when read large amounts
of comprehensible and interesting texts regularly over a period of
time, focusing on the overall meaning of the texts (and not so much on
the language elements such as words, phrases, complex grammatical
constructions etc.). Many scholars (e.g., Day & Bamford, 1998;
Maley, 2005; Nuttall, 2005) have suggested that ER is a great way to
improve not only L2 readers’ reading ability but also the other areas
of language skills. Summarizing years of research on the benefits of
extensive reading (ER), Bamford & Day (2004, p.1) conclude:
Good things happen to students who read a great deal in the
foreign language. Research studies show they become better and
more confident readers, they write better, their listening and speaking
abilities improve, and their vocabularies become richer. In addition,
they develop positive attitudes toward and increased motivation to
study the new language.
The empirical support for ER has now been document by exten-
sive reading scholars. More than 500 works on extensive reading from
various sources e.g., journal articles, book chapters, books, graduate
theses and dissertations have now been catalogued and annotated (see
http://erfoundation.org/wordpress/er-bibliography/). New evidence
keeps emerging, including a recent meta-analysis research extensive
reading by Nakanishi (2015) which provides compelling evidence for
extensive reading. Her analysis shows that extensive reading is gener-
ally associated with substantial language learning gains, especially
when it is implemented over a longer period of time.

4.1 Benefits of ER
There are numerous benefits associated with ER (Extensive
Reading Foundation, 2011; Jacobs & Farrell, 2012). When students
read extensively over a period of time, their reading fluency improves
and their ability to comprehend texts also increases. Discussed below

87
Reading in A Foreign Language

are more specific benefits students can get from ER (Renandya, Hu &
Yu, in press; Renandya & Jacobs, forthcoming; Renandya & Jacobs,
2002).
(a) ER helps L2 learners to read at a faster rate (Day & Bamford,
1998). Faster reading speed is important for fluent reading.
When students read too slowly, they will not have enough
cognitive resources to comprehend the overall message of the
text. ER can help them develop their word recognition skills,
enabling them to move over words in meaningful chunks with
sufficient speed, with ease and with greater comprehension.
(b) Students who do ER develop a better ‘feel’ of the grammar of
the target language. In formal classroom settings, students are
introduced to grammar rules and conventions, which, while
useful, may be of limited value. They know the rules but often
find that they cannot use them for real communication. In
ER, students repeatedly encounter a variety of grammatical
patterns in contexts that allow them to develop a better sense of
how these grammatical constructions are used to communicate
meaningful messages. Not surprisingly, students who read a
great deal develop a deeper sense of how grammar works in
context, which in turn enable them to use this grammar for real
communication (Ellis, 2005).
(c) ER can increase and deepen students’ vocabulary knowledge.
When students read in quantity, they have multiple meaningful
encounters with words and word patterns. Over time, their
vocabulary size tends to increase and they also develop a
deeper understanding of the words. Words learned in this way
can be more readily incorporated into students’ speech and
writing (Nation, 2007).
(d) Students’ knowledge base also increases. As students read
a variety of reading material as part of ER, they become
more knowledgeable about many different topics. Research
suggests that successful reading requires both language and
content knowledge. ER not only helps students develop
language skills, but also expands their knowledge base.
They know more about different subjects and how these are
presented in different text types (e.g., recounts, expositions,
and narratives). With increased knowledge base, students are

88
 Willy A Renandya

able to read a diverse range of topics more fluently and with

greater comprehension.
(e) ER can boost students’ confidence and motivation. L2
students, especially those with low proficiency, often find
learning English a frustrating experience. They often have
to deal with reading passages that are several levels beyond
their current proficiency level. These students often report
that their confidence and motivation level becomes lower and
lower as time goes by and they finally lose their interest in
learning English. When they read materials that are within (or
sometimes slightly below) their competence, they can read
with greater enjoyment and comprehension, thus helping them
become more confident and motivated readers.
(f) ER helps students develop more positive attitudes towards
reading. Students who read in quantity and enjoy what they
read often report having more positive attitudes towards reading
and becoming more eager to go beyond their comfort zone and
explore a wider variety of texts, including more challenging
texts. Their positive attitudes often have positive influences
on the other skill areas of language learning, such as listening,
speaking, and writing. They become more confident listeners,
speakers, and writers.
(g) Finally, there is a good chance that, with time, students can
develop a healthy reading habit. A good reading habit is the
ultimate goal of a reading programme. Students who can read
with confidence and a great sense of enjoyment are likely to
develop a healthy reading habit. Once they have developed
this habit, they are more likely to continue to read extensively
on their own without the need for the teacher to continually
encourage them to do their reading.

4.2 Issues and concerns

However, despite strong empirical evidence demonstrating
the benefits of ER and recommendations by ELT experts that ER
be made an important part of a language programme, it has not
always been fully embraced by teachers. While many acknowledge
the importance of ER, there are some practical concerns that often
hinder the full adoption of ER in the classroom. Some of these

89
Reading in A Foreign Language

concerns are summarised below (Brown, 2009; Day & Bamford,

2002; Renandya, 2007; Renandya, Hu & Yu, in press; Renandya &
Jacobs, forthcoming). Note however that while these concerns are
valid, and we need to continue to find ways to deal with them, they
are not a criticism of the theoretical underpinnings of ER. As was
discussed in the previous sections, the theory behind ER is sound,
and the empirical evidence for ER is quite strong. Many classroom
practitioners seem to be aware of this too; it’s just that they have not
found the most effective ways of implementing ER in their already
packed L2 curriculum.
(a) Many teachers say that they are keen to implement ER, but
they often run into difficulties as schools often have limited
resources to purchase reading materials. Lack of funding is
often cited as a key reason for the lack of suitable reading and
listening materials. For the more well-resourced schools, the
administrators may not be fully informed about the salutary
benefits of ER and are therefore reluctant to allocate sufficient
resources for the programme. Of course, teachers can turn to
online reading materials, which are widely and freely available,
but lack of Internet access and their busy schedules prevent them
from allocating time to compile suitable materials for ER.
(b) The effect of ER is often delayed, not immediate. Students
don’t make noticeable improvements in the first few months.
In fact, it may take up to one year to see tangible effects on
learners’ language development (Renandya, Hu & Yu, in
press). Since teachers are often under pressure to produce
tangible results of their teaching (e.g., students doing better
on tests and examinations), many tend to avoid projects that
require a big investment of time but its effect on learning is
not immediately observable. Not surprisingly, some prefer to
invest their time and effort on the more traditional approaches
to teaching such as intensive reading, which focuses more on
skills and strategies and which teachers have found to yield
more immediate effects on students’ reading performance on
examinations.
(c) ER is often implemented as an out-of-class or extracurricular
activity where students are expected to self-select their reading
and listening materials and read them in their free time. While

90
 Willy A Renandya

there have been reports of successful large scale ER projects

(e.g., Davis, 1995; Elley & Mangubhai, 1983; Robb & Kano,
2013), smaller-scale, teacher initiated ER programmes are
not as successful. What often happens is that after the initial
enthusiasm, teachers may begin to feel overwhelmed by the
amount of work related to the running of the programme. As
Brown (2009) notes, “The main practical concerns regarding
ER are to do with cost, lack of time, monitoring students’
reading, managing the library of books, guiding students to
choose appropriate books, and getting students engaged in
reading ” (p. 240).
(d) To get students started on ER, teachers often use curriculum
time to provide students with opportunities to do silent reading
and/or listening for a period of time. In the case of ER, during
a USSR (Uninterrupted Sustained Silent Reading) session in
the classroom, some teachers may feel awkward because they
often view teaching as involving talking to and interacting
with students, asking questions, explaining language points,
arranging students to get students to do individual or group
tasks. Day and Bamford (1998) make an excellent point when
they say that when teachers walk into the classroom, they
like to verbally engage the students in various teacher-guided
activities; thus, being silent during a reading and listening
lesson is something teachers (and students) do not normally
associate with good teaching practice.
(e) Finally, a key concern that teachers and administrators share
about ER relates to the issue of legitimacy. Students doing
independent silent reading in class with the teachers silently
observing them (or reading along with them) are often “not
perceived as a class learning, let alone being taught, both by the
students themselves and the school administration” (Prowse,
2002, p 144). Not surprisingly, ER is often seen optional extra,
an activity that teachers use ‘juts to keep students busy’ when
they don’t have other important things to do.

5. CONCLUSION
It should be clear from the discussion here that while brief
instruction on carefully selected comprehension skills and strategies

91
Reading in A Foreign Language

can be justified in L2 reading classrooms, the bulk of classroom

instruction should be devoted to providing students with meaningful
reading experiences, where they read a variety of highly interesting
texts that fall within their linguistic competence. Pleasant and
successful reading experience in the classroom may gradually lead
to more independent reading outside the classroom, where students
can be expected to regularly read much larger amounts of both print
and non-print texts for information and enjoyment.
Marilyn Jager Adams, a renowned reading scholar, reminded
us some 15 years ago that “Reading is best learned though reading”
(Adams, 1998, p. 73). This may sound like simple advice that is
simply too good to be true. Yet this simple, commonsensical way of
learning to read in a foreign language has now received consistently
strong empirical support. So compelling is the evidence that it’s
inconceivable for us to not try to apply Adams’ principle in the reading
classroom. The ER approach discussed in this paper is one excellent
way in which students can develop higher and more sophisticated
comprehension skills.

REFERENCES

Adams, M.J. (1998). The three­cueing System’ in J. Osborn and F. Lehr

(eds.), Literacy for all: issues in teaching and learning, pp 73-99.
New York: Guilford Press.
Alderson (1984). Reading in a foreign language: a reading problem or a
language problem. In J.C. Alderson & A.H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading
in a foreign language, pp. 1-27. London: Longman.
Bamford, J., & Day, R. R. (Eds.). (2004). Extensive reading activities for
language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, D. (2009). Why and how textbooks should encourage extensive
reading. ELT Journal, 63(3), 238-245.
Clark, M. (1980). The short circuit hypothesis of ESL reading – or when
language competence interferes with reading performance. The
Modern Language Journal, 64 (2), 203-209.
Cohen, A., & Macaro, E. (Eds.). (2007). Language learner strategies: 30
years of research and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cotterall, S. (1990). Developing reading strategies through small-group
interaction. RELC Journal, 21(2), 55-69.
92
 Willy A Renandya

Dabarera, C., Renandya, W. A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of

metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension.
System, 42(c), 462-473. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2013.12.02.
Davis, C. (1995). Extensive reading: An expensive extravagance? ELT
Journal, 49(4), 329-336.
Day, R.R., & Bamford, J. (1998) Extensive reading in the second language
classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elley, W.B. (1991). Acquiring Literacy in a Second Language: The Effect of
Book-based Programs. Language Learning, 41, 375-411.
Elley, W.B. (2001). Guest Editor’s Introduction, in W.B. Alley (Guest ed.),
Book-basedApproaches to Raising Literacy in Developing Countries.
International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 127-35.
Elley, W. B., & Mangubhai, F. (1983). The impact of reading on second
language learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(1), 53-67.
Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33(2),
209-224.
Extensive Reading Foundation. (2011). Extensive Reading Foundation’s
guide to extensive reading. From http://erfoundation.org/wordpress/
wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ERF_Guide.pdf
Field, M.L. 2002. Really reading. Guidelines, 24(1), 5-9.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to
practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, G. M., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2012). Teachers’ sourcebook for extensive
reading. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Krashen, S. (2004) Free Voluntary Reading: New Research, Applications,
and controversies. Paper presented at the 39th RELC International
Seminar, 19-21 April, Singapore.
Krashen, S. (2011). Academic proficiency (language and content) and the
role of strategies. TESOL Journal, 2 (4), 381-393
Maley, A. (2005). Review of ‘‘Extensive reading activities for the second
language classroom”. ELT Journal, 59(4), 354–355.
Nakanishi, T. (2015). A meta-analysis of extensive reading research. TESOL
Quarterly, 49(1), 6-37.
Nation, ISP (2007) The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning and
Teaching, 1(1): 2-13.
Nuttall C (2005). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language (3rd ed.).
Oxford: Macmillan.

93
Reading in A Foreign Language

Palincsar,A.S. & Brown,A.L. (1984). Reciprocalteaching of comprehension-

fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and
Instruction, 1(2),117-175.
Png,J.L.H. (2010). Teachers’ Views of Reciprocal Teaching as a Tool for
Teaching Reading Comprehension. The English Teacher, 39, 179-193.
Prowse, P. (2002). Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading: A
response. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14(2), 142–145.
Renandya, W.A. (2012). Five reasons why listening strategies might not
work with lower proficiency learners. ELTWO, 4, 1-11.
Renandya, W. A., & Farrell, T.S.C. (2011). Teacher, the tape is too fast:
Extensive listening in ELT. ELT Journal, 65(1), 52-59.
Renandya, W. A., & Jacobs, G. M. (2002). Extensive reading: Why aren’t we
all doing it? In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology
in language teaching: An anthology of current practice, pp. 295-302.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Renandya, W.A., & Jacobs, G.M. (forthcoming). Extensive reading and
listening in the L2 classroom. In Renandya, W.A., & Widodo, H.P.,
(Eds.). English Language Teaching Today: Linking theory and
practice. New York: Springer.
Renandya, W.A., Hu, G.W., Yu, X. (in press). Extensive reading coursebooks
in China. RELC Journal.
Robb, T., & Kano, M. (2013). Effective extensive reading outside the
classroom: Alarge-scale experiment. Reading in a Foreign Language,
25(2), 234–247.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning.
London: Edward Arnold.
Swan, M. (2008). Talking sense about learning strategies. RELC Journal,
39(2), 262-273.
Willingham, D. (2006/7). The usefulness of brief instruction in reading
comprehension strategies. American Educator, Winter issue, 39-45/50.
Zhang, W. 2005. An investigation of the effects of listening programmes
on lower secondary students’ listening comprehension in PRC.
Unpublished MA dissertation, SEAMEO Regional Language Centre,
Singapore.

94