International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 10, Issue 6, June 2020 255

ISSN 2250-3153

A Study On Reading Strategies Used By Vietnamese

High School English Language Learners
Nguyen Thi Hanh Phuc, M.A

Thai Nguyen University of Education, Thai Nguyen, Vietnam

DOI: 10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231
http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231

Abstract- Reading strategies have been considered one of the most in their reading skills. Locally, the problem is often raised in
valuable tools for language learners to overcome difficult reading principals’ meetings, teacher forums, union meetings, in-service
task. This mixed method study investigated reading difficulties trainings/workshops and in the media. There have been many
experienced by 75 high school English language learners at three research carried out to investigate the causes of reading difficulties
schools in Thai Nguyen Province, Vietnam. The instruments used experienced by language learners all over the world. However,
in the study consist of two questionnaires. The results reveal that looking at the issues from cultural and psychological perspectives
most of the learners experience vocabulary understanding (87%). is none of previous studies. This motivated the researcher to
The second ranking challenge belongs to problems handling conduct this study “A study on reading strategies used by
lengthy reading (81%). The time pressure ranks third with 78%. Vietnamese high school English language learners”
The findings also indicated that most of the strategies are reported
using at moderate and high level, except for GRS1, GRS2, GRS3 1.1. Aims and significance of the study
and PSRS3 (M<2.5). The most preferred strategies include The general aim of this study is to investigate reading
PSRS7, PSRS8, SRS1, SRS2, SRS6, SRS7, SRS9 (M>3.5). difficulties of senior secondary schools students who are learning
English as a foreign language. More specifically, the research aims
Index Terms- Reading difficulty, reading strategies, Vietnamese to find out factors that correlate with reported difficulties from
high school learners cultural and psychological perspectives. These variables will be
examined both quantitatively and qualitatively, so that the
research data can be triangulated when drawing conclusions. The
I. INTRODUCTION findings from the study can be used as a guideline for teachers to
select appropriate reading strategies to improve reading ability for
R A statement of the research problem
eading in a second or foreign language (SL/FL) has been a
significant component of language learning over the past few
their students.

years (Zoghi, Mustapha, Rizan & Maasum, 2010). This 1.2. Research question(s)
significance has made reading education an important issue in With the aims stated above, the study focuses on answering
educational policy and practice for English language learners these research questions:
(Slavin & Cheung, 2005). However, reading is a complex, 1.3.1. What reading difficulties are experienced by students
interactive cognitive process of extracting meaning from text. In at high school?
the reading process, the reader is an active participant, 1.3.2. Which reading strategies are used by more/less
constructing meaning from clues in the reading text. Reading is successful readers?
also an individual process, which explains the different
interpretations of different readers (Maarof & Yaacob, 2011).
Cogmen and Saracaloglu (2009) reported that simple methods II. LITERATURE REVIEW
such as underlining, taking notes, or highlighting the text can help 1.3. Definitions of reading
readers understand and remember the content. Their findings Reading is definitely an important skill for academic
indicated that in reading text, good readers often use effective contexts but what is the appropriate definition of the word
reading strategies to enhance their comprehension. According to “reading”? foreign language reading research has gained specific
the above discussions, learning to read is an absolutely necessary attention since the late seventies (Eskey, 1973; Clarke and
skill for understanding SL/FL texts. Readers may use useful Silberstein, 1977; Widdowson, 1978). Before that time, foreign
strategies to help them read SL/FL texts as they construct language reading was usually linked with oral skills and viewed as
meaning. Using such strategies will help learners not only to a rather passive, bottom-up process which largely depended on the
understand general information in the reading text at very fast rates decoding proficiency of readers. The decoding skills that readers
but also to remember new lexical items from the text. used were usually described in hierarchical terms starting from the
As a full-time teacher of English in a high school, the recognition of letters, to the comprehension of words, phrases,
researcher has observed that most learners at high schools clauses, sentences and paragraphs. In other words, it is a gradual
experience reading difficulties. In some schools the learners have linear building up of meaning from the smaller units to the larger
to attend extra classes on weekends to compensate for their deficit chunks of text. The common assumption that reading theorists had
This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231 www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 10, Issue 6, June 2020 256
ISSN 2250-3153

about foreign language reading was that the higher the foreign the various cue systems which the writer has given (e.g., words,
language proficiency of readers the better their reading skills. syntax macrostructures, social information) to generate
Knowledge of the foreign culture was also an important factor that hypotheses which are tested using various logical and pragmatic
enabled foreign readers to arrive at the intended meaning of texts strategies. Most of this model must be inferred, since text can
(Fries, 1972; Lado, 1964; Rivers, 1968). Reading thus involves never be fully explicit and, in general, very little of it is explicit
two main processes as suggested by Lunzer and Dolan. because even the appropriate intentional and extensional meanings
Grable (1991) defines reading as an “interactive” process of words must be inferred from their context (p. 17).
between a reader and a text which leads to automaticity or (reading For Johnston (1983), reading comprehension can mean the
fluency). In this process, the reader interacts dynamically with the reader's comprehension of the text results from using different
text as he/she tries to elicit the meaning and where various kinds strategies consciously and unconsciously and is evoked by various
of knowledge are being used: linguistic or systemic knowledge knowledge sources. Johnston (1983) discusses using strategies to
(through bottom-up processing) as well as schematic knowledge comprehend the text and he emphasizes examining the process of
(through top-down processing). comprehension. Another view of reading comprehension focusing
According to Pang, Elizabeth, Muaka, Angaluki, on the result rather than the process can also be added for this
Bernhardt, Elizabeth B, Kamil, Michael L. (2003), reading is current study. The result of reading comprehension may show
about understanding written texts. It is a complex activity that what the reader understands from a text, what he/she fails to
involves both perception and thought. Reading consists of two understand from a text, and how he/she transacts with the text.
related processes: word recognition and comprehension. Word Gunderson (1995) differentiates three levels of
recognition refers to the process of perceiving how written comprehension including "literal or detail, inferential, and critical
symbols correspond to one’s spoken language. Comprehension is and evaluative, sometimes called applicative" (p.27). Gunderson
the process of making sense of words, sentences and connected (1995) provides explanations for the three levels of
text. Readers typically make use of background knowledge, comprehension: literal-level comprehension requires little more
vocabulary, grammatical knowledge, experience with text and than memory work and the remembering of details from the text;
other strategies to help them understand written text. inferential-level comprehension involves "readers in thinking
Nuttal (1982) defines reading as the ability to understand about what they've read and coming to conclusions that go beyond
written texts by extracting the required information from them the information given in the text" (p.31); at critical and evaluative-
efficiently. While looking at a notice board, looking up a word in level comprehension, readers are able to "evaluate whether a text
a dictionary and looking for special information from a text, is valid and expresses opinion rather than fact, as well as apply the
normally we use different reading strategies to get what it means. knowledge gained from the text in other situations" (p.28). This
Smith (1971) defines it as the act of giving attention to the written study, following Gunderson's (1995) suggestion, avoids focusing
word, not only in reading symbols but also in comprehending the on literal-level comprehension as the end goal of the study but
intended meaning. The writer and reader interaction through the rather intends to set up an EFL reading program which may "excite
text for the comprehension purpose is also viewed as reading by students and nurture their ability to use language in creative and
Widdowson (1979:105). What is significant in all these definitions meaningful ways" (Gunderson, 1995,p.43)
is that there is no effective reading without understanding. So
reading is more than just being able to recognize letters, words and 1.5. Factors affecting reading comprehension
sentences and read them aloud as known traditionally (although A study by Palincsar and Brown (1984) showed that
letter identification, and word recognition are of course essential). "reading comprehension is the product of three main factors"
It involves getting meaning, understanding and interpreting what (p.118). The three factors include first, reader-friendly or reader-
is read. What we need is reading that goes hand in hand with considerate texts; second, the interaction of the reader's prior
understanding and knowledge and text content; and third, reading strategies which
1.4. The comprehension process reveal the way readers manage their interaction with written texts
Reading comprehension is a psychological process which and how these strategies are related to text comprehension
occurs in the mind. The mental process is invisible. This (Palincsar & Brown, 1984).
invisibility makes it difficult for the researcher to provide a Comprehension can be enhanced to the extent that the texts
concrete and clear definition. Kintsch (1998) describes are well written, that is, they follow a structure which is familiar
comprehension as occurring "when and if the elements that enter to the reader and their syntax, style, clarity of presentation, and
into the process achieve a stable state in which the majority of coherence reach an acceptable level in terms of the reader's mother
elements are meaningfully related to one another and other language. Such texts have been called reader-friendly or reader-
elements that do not fit the pattern of the majority are suppressed" considerate (Anderson & Armbruster, 1984).Comprehension can
(p.4). In common sense terms, the mental elements can be readers' also be influenced by the extent of overlap between the reader's
prior knowledge, concepts, images or emotions. With the prior knowledge and the content of the text. Research
schematic processing perspective held by Johnston (1983), demonstrates the impact of schematic constructive processes on
reading comprehension can be defined as follows: text comprehension. A number of studies suggest that text
Reading comprehension is considered to be a complex comprehension is dependent upon prior knowledge (Anderson &
behavior which involves conscious and unconscious use of various Pitchert, 1978;Anderson, Reynolds, Schallert, & Goetz, 1977,
strategies, including problem-solving strategies, to build a model Bransford & Johnson, 1973;Dooling & Lacharnn, 1971;Fass &
of the meaning which the writer is assumed to have intended. The Schumacher, 1981).Voss and his colleges (Chiesi, Spilich, &
model is constructed using schematic knowledge structures and Voss, 1979) provide a clear example of this in their research that

This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231 www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 10, Issue 6, June 2020 257
ISSN 2250-3153

describes how previously acquired knowledge influences college instruction to learn word-recognition skills, they need explicit,
students' acquisition of new domain-related information. In their highly structured instruction to learn reading comprehension
research, the performance of individuals with high baseball (HK) skills. Williams (1998) emphasizes a “Themes Instruction
or low baseball (LK) knowledge is compared. Chiesi, Spilich and Program”, which consists of a series of twelve 40 minutes lessons
Voss (1979) indicate HK recognition performance is superior to and each lesson is organized around a single story and is composed
LK, and that HK individuals need less information to make of five parts namely: pre-reading discussion on the purpose of the
recognition judgments than LK individuals. Moreover, to enhance lesson and the topic of the story that will be read, reading the story,
comprehension and overcome comprehension failures, some discussion of important story information using organized
reading researchers focus on reading strategies. In Casanave's (schema) questions as a guide, identification of a theme for the
(1988) study of comprehension monitoring strategies, Cananave story, stating it in general terms so that it is relevant to a variety of
describes how successful readers employ effective strategies while stories and situations and finally practice in applying the
reading; they usually propose a question, and elaborate their own generalized theme to real-life experiences.
knowledge and the content of the text. Casanave (1988) also
makes a distinction between routine and repair (non-routine)
monitoring strategies- the task of routine monitoring strategies III. METHODOLOGY
may include "predicting, checking understanding for consistency, 1.7. Research design
and checking for overall understanding" (p.290) whereas repair This study adopted both the quantitative and qualitative
(non-routine)strategies may include "evaluating what the problem research approaches. According to Christenson and Johnson
is, deciding how to resolve it, implementing the strategy as a result (2008), the qualitative research approach relies on the collection
of the decision made, and checking the results" (p.290). Other of non-numerical data, while for Gay et al. (2009) it is the
recognized strategies may include these identified in Zvetina's collection, analysis, and interpretation of comprehensive narrative
study (1 987) for building and activating appropriate background and visual data to gain insight into a particular phenomenon of
knowledge, and those described by Block (1986) for recognizing interest. Best and Khan (2006) describe the quantitative approach
text structure. The well-practiced decoding and comprehension as the collection and analysis of numerical data describe, explain,
skills of expert readers permit those readers to proceed relatively predict, or control phenomena of interest.
automatically, until a triggering event alerts them to a 1.8. Participants and sampling
comprehension failure but when a comprehension failure is For this study, students of grade 12 were selected. Those
detected, readers must slow down and allot extra processing to the students are chosen from three schools in Thai Nguyen Province
problem area (Spilich,Vesonder, Chiesi, & Voss, 1979).To fully namely; Luong Ngoc Quyen Secondary school (LNQS), Ngo
understand how a student learns from texts, the reading instructor Quyen Secondary school (NQS) and Duong Tu Minh Secondary
cannot ignore any of these three main factors which Palincsar and school (DTMS). All of these students are about to take the
Brown (1 984) propose. However, in this paper, the researcher has graduation examination in which English is one of the compulsory
chosen to concentrate most extensively on how the reader's prior subject. The number of students involved in the present study is
knowledge may influence EFL students' reading comprehension. seventy five (75). Twenty (26.6%) students from LNQS, another
thirty (40%) students come from NQS and twenty-five (33.3%)
1.6. Strategies to enhance reading comprehension students are from DTMS
According to Lerner (2006) the National Reading Panel of .
2000 recognized several strategies that had a solid scientific basis 1.9. Data collection instruments
of instruction for improving reading comprehension including: The first instrument was a questionnaire which is delivered
Comprehension monitoring: Students learn how to be aware of to the students to investigate types of difficulties they encounter
their understanding of the material. during the reading comprehension (see appendix A).
Cooperative thinking: Students learn reading strategies The second instruments used in this study was the
together. Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory
Use of graphic and semantic organizers, including story maps: (MARSI) version 1.0, which was originally developed by
Students make graphic representations of the materials to assist Mokhtari and Reichard (2002) as a tool to measure native English
their comprehension. language learners’ awareness of reading strategy usage. Some of
Question answering: Students answer questions posed by the items have been altered or reworded to be closed to the reading
the teacher and receive immediate feedback. texts in school textbook. The MARSI consists of 30 items that
Question generation: Students ask themselves questions measure awareness reading strategies (see appendix B). In this
about various aspects of the story. questionnaire each item is accompanied with a 5-point, Likert-
Story structure: Students are taught how to use the structure type scale, 1 (never or almost never do this), 2 (only occasionally
of the story as a means of helping them recall story content in order do this), 3 (sometimes do this), 4 (usually do this), 5 (always or
to answer questions about what they have read. almost always do this) in which scores of 2.4 or below demonstrate
Summarization: Students are taught to integrate ideas and to low strategy use, 2.5 to 3.4 show moderate strategy use, and 3.5 or
generate ideas and to generalize from the text information. above signifies high strategy use.
Williams 1998 in learner (2006) However suggests that
students with learning disabilities require a different type of
comprehension instruction than typical learners and that just as
students with learning disabilities need explicit structure

This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231 www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 10, Issue 6, June 2020 258
ISSN 2250-3153

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS papers back. There are some students who cannot even specify
1.10. Results for research question 1 their problems so they left the column blank. The results of the
A hundred copies of questionnaire have been delivered to first questionnaire are as shown in the table 1 below.
students in three high schools. The researcher received 75 valid

No STATEMENTS REPORTED
RESULT
1. I have problems understanding words in the readings 87%
2. I have problems understanding grammatical points 65%
3. I have problems inferring information in the readings 70%
4. I have problems getting the main points of the readings 75%
5. I have problems deducing meaning from context 65%
6. I have problems selecting specific relevant information 50%
7. I have problems predicting information from readings 72%
8. I have problems handling lengthy readings 81%
9. I have problems recognizing writing styles 30%
10. I have problems with different subject matters 45%
11. I am not interested in reading texts in English 35%
12. I do not have enough external supports such as peers, parents and teachers 46%
13. I lack of exposure to authentic reading materials 72%
14. I do not have motivation with readings 48%
15. I am always under time pressure during readings. 78%
Table 1: Results of the difficulty experienced by EFL students

1.11. Results for research question 2

The descriptive statistics (table 2) shows that most of the strategies are reported using at moderate and high level, except for
GRS1, GRS2, GRS3 and PSRS3 (M<2.5). The most preferred strategies include PSRS7, PSRS8, SRS1, SRS2, SRS6, SRS7, SRS9
(M>3.5).

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D Variance
GRS1 75 1 5 3.12 1.542 2.377
GRS2 75 1 5 2.19 .940 .884
GRS3 75 1 5 2.12 .958 .918
GRS4 75 1 5 2.97 1.385 1.918
GRS5 75 1 5 2.85 1.430 2.046
GRS6 75 1 5 3.28 .938 .880
GRS7 75 1 5 3.15 1.402 1.965
GRS8 75 2 5 3.47 .920 .847
GRS9 75 1 5 3.49 .876 .767
GRS10 75 2 5 3.71 .731 .534
GRS11 75 1 5 3.40 .870 .757
GRS12 75 1 5 3.37 .897 .805
GRS13 75 1 5 3.40 .885 .784
PSRS1 75 1 5 2.69 1.013 1.026
PSRS2 75 1 5 3.24 .956 .915
PSRS3 75 1 5 2.47 1.031 1.063
PSRS4 75 1 5 2.75 1.116 1.246
PSRS5 75 1 5 2.71 1.075 1.156
PSRS6 75 1 5 2.87 1.166 1.360
PSRS7 75 1 5 3.67 .935 .874
PSRS8 75 1 5 3.64 .939 .882
SRS1 75 1 5 3.77 .924 .853
SRS2 75 1 5 3.71 .882 .778
SRS3 75 1 5 2.92 1.440 2.075
SRS4 75 1 5 3.07 1.536 2.360
SRS5 75 1 5 3.05 1.506 2.267
This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231 www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 10, Issue 6, June 2020 259
ISSN 2250-3153

SRS6 75 1 5 3.84 .855 .731

SRS7 75 1 5 3.88 .900 .810
SRS8 75 1 5 3.23 1.503 2.259
SRS9 75 1 5 3.79 .890 .792
Valid N (listwise) 75

Table 2: Descriptive statistics of the mean scores of the use of reading strategies

In this research, the factor analysis process is repeated in 2 rounds due to the cross-factor loading of the variables. In all 2 rounds
of the factor analysis process, KMO is about 0.8 (>0.5) with statistical significance (sig = .000) and each Total Varian Explained is over
70% (>50%) which prove the appropriateness of factor analysis.
In the first round, 4 initial components are converted into 4 components. 10 items are deleted because of cross-loading factor and
20 remaining items are kept for the next step. Finally, these 20 items are tested again in the final round.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .839
Approx. Chi-Square 1293.541
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 190
Sig. .000
Table 3: KMO and Bartlett's test

1.12. Hypothesis testing

The next step includes all the other dependent variables in the model together with the above control variables to assess the overall
impact of these control variables on the reading achievement of students dependent variable. Table 5 shows that independent variables
that account for 35.3% of the variation of the dependent variable.

Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of Change Statistics
Square the Estimate R Square F Change df1 df2 Sig. F
Change Change
1 .616a .379 .353 .6849 .379 14.464 3 71 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), SRS, GRS, PSRS
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.663 .543 3.063 .003
GRS .269 .111 .228 2.432 .018
1
PSRS .520 .094 .542 5.532 .000
SRS .033 .105 .030 .310 .757
a. Dependent Variable: MAR2
Table 4: Variable summary

The linear regression model expresses the correlation [3] Akbari, Z. 2014. The Role of Grammar in Second Language Reading
Comprehension: Iranian ESP Context (International Conference on Current
between the factors as follows: Trends in ELT). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 98122 – 126. Iran:
Mark = 1.663+0.269*GRS+0.52*PSRS Elsevier Ltd.
The research results of the author are basically consistent [4] Barnard, R., Brookes, H., Pozzo, G., & Rowe, T. (1980). Reading Strategies.
with previous quantitative studies. The test results show that the In G. Cortese (Ed.), Readng in a Foreign Language (pp. 400-415). Milan:
reading achievement of students is influenced by 2 factors: (1) Franco Angeli.
GRS; (2) PSRS. [5] Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers.
TESOL Quarterly, 20, 463-494.
[6] Carrell , Patricia L. & Eisterhold, J.C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL
REFERENCES reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 553-573.
[1] Aebersold, J., & Field, M.L. (1997). From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues [7] Carrell , P. L., Pharis, B. G., & Liberto, J. C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy
and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge, Cambridge UP. training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23(4), 647-678.
[2] Abraham, Paul. (2002). Skilled Reading: Top-down, bottom-up. Field Notes, [8] Carrell, P. L., Gadjusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL
10(2); Retrieved on June 1, 2018 from http://www.sabes.org/ resources/ reading. Instructional Science, 26, 97-112.
fieldnotes/vol10/fn102.pdf

This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231 www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 10, Issue 6, June 2020 260
ISSN 2250-3153

[9] Christenson, L. & Johnson, B. (2008). Education Research: qualitative, [30] Oberholzer, B. (2005). The Relationship between Reading Difficulties and
quantitative and mixed approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, USA: Sage. Academic Performance. Vol. 12,119. University of Zululand's Library
[10] Cogmen, S., & Saracaloglu, A. S. (2009). Students’ usage of reading Catalogue.
strategies in the faculty of education. Procedia Social and Behavioral [31] Olshavsky, J. E. (1977). Reading as problem solving: An investigation of
Sciences, 1, 248-251. strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 4, 654-674.
[11] Darrel, M. (2005). The Howard Street Tutoring Manual: Teaching at-risk [32] O´Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second
readers in language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[12] the primary grades. London: Guilford Press. [33] O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Mazanares, G., Russo, R., &
[13] Day, R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language kupper, L. (1985). Learning strategies applications with students of English
classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press. as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 557-584.
[14] Drucker, Mary J (2003). What reading teachers should know about ESL [34] Orasanu, Judith (Ed.). (1986). Reading comprehension: From research to
learners. The Reading Teacher. Vol 57 (1): p.22-29. Retrieved on June 6th, practice. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2018 from www.questia.com [35] Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What every teacher
[15] Elizabeth S. Pang, Muaka A., Elizabeth B. Bernhardt & Michael L. Kamil. should know. Newbury House Publishers.
(2003). Teaching Reading. Educational Practices Series. Retrieved on June [36] Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1989). Research on language learning strategies;
6th, 2018 from methods, findings, and instructional issues. The modern language Journal,
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/Publications/EducationalPractices. 73(4), 103-114.
[16] Gabb, Sally. (2000). From talk to print: Preparing students to read with ease. [37] Paran, Amos. (1996). Reading in EFL: facts and fictions. ELT Journal, 50
Field Notes, 10(2). June 1, 2018 from http://www.sabes.org/ resources/ (1): p.25-34.
fieldnotes/vol10/fn102.pdf [38] Reis, R. (2016). Difficult Students Read Difficult Text. Retrieved from
[17] Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E. & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational Research: http://cgi.stanford.edu/~dept-ctl/tomprof/posting.php?ID=1145
Competencies for analysis and Applications. London: Pearson International [39] Schinder, D. (2003). Research Methods for Business Students. Qualitative
Edition. and Quantitative Approaches. Harlow: Pearson Education
[18] Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a Second Language: Moving from Theory to [40] Slavin, R., E., & Cheung, A. (2005). A Synthesis of research on language of
Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. reading instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational
[19] Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2001). Teaching and Researching Reading. Research, 75(2), 247- 284.
London: Pearson Education. [41] Smith, W.P. (2008). Reading Instruction Resource. Retrieved from
[20] Grabe, William. (1991). Current developments in second language reading http://www.k12reader.com/what-is-content-area-reading.
research. [42] Spencer, Robin, and Hay, Ian. (1998). Initial reading schemes and their high
[21] TESOL Quarterly. 25 (3): 375-406. frequency words. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy. ِ
[22] Hafiz, F. M. & Tudor, Ian. (1989). Extensive reading and the development of [43] Upton, T. A., & Lee-Thompson, L. C. (2001). The role of the first language
language skills. ELT Journal, 43(1): 4-13. in second language reading. SSLA, 23, 469-495.
[23] Haller, Lee. (2000). Modeling class activities for low-level literacy learners. [44] Westwood, P. (2001). Reading and Learning Difficulties a Process to
Field Notes (formerly Bright Ideas), 10 (2); Fall 2000. Teaching and Assessment. Australia: Acer Press.
[24] Hedge, Tricia. (2003). Teaching & learning in the language classroom. UK: [45] Yukselir, C. (2014). An investigation into EFL prep-class students' academic
OUP. emotions. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(2), 100-119; 2014
[25] Hosenfeld, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of [46] Zhang, Z. (1993). Literature review on reading strategy research. 1-18.
successful and unsuccessful second language learners. System, 5(11), 110- Retrieved June 1st 2018 from from EDRS database (ED356643).
123. [47] Zoghi, M., Mustapha, R., Rizan, N., & Maasum, M. (2010). Looking into
[26] Kuswidyastutik. (2013). Identifikasi Kesulitan Belajar Matematika Siswa EFL reading comprehension. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C),
Kelas IV SDN Kedungringin 1. Surabaya: UIN Sunan Ampel. 439-445.
[27] Maarof, N., & Yaacob, M. (2011). Meaning-making in the first and second
language: reading strategies of Malaysian students. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 12, 211– 223.
[28] Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing Students' Metacognitive
AUTHORS
Awareness of Reading Strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), First Author – Nguyen Thi Hanh Phuc, M.A, Thai Nguyen
249-259.
University of Education, Thai Nguyen, Vietnam
[29] Moorman , Kenneth & Ram, Ashwin. (1994). Integrating Creativity and
reading: A functional approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Email: [email protected]
Associates.

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Questionnaire for reading difficulties

DIRECTIONS: Listed below are statements about difficulties when doing reading comprehension tasks. Four numbers follow each
statement (1, 2, 3, 4)
and each number means the following:
 1 means “never true for me.”
 2 means “sometimes true for me.”
 3 means “often true for me.”

This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.10.06.2020.p10231 www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 7, Issue 8, August 2017 261
ISSN 2250-3153
 4 means “always true for me.”
After reading each statement, circle the number (1, 2, 3, or 4) that applies to you using the scale provided. Please note that there are no
right or wrong answers to the statements in this inventory.

No STATEMENTS SCALE

1. I have problems understanding words in the readings 4 3 2 1

2. I have problems understanding grammatical points 4 3 2 1

3. I have problems inferring information in the readings 4 3 2 1

4. I have problems getting the main points of the readings 4 3 2 1

5. I have problems deducing meaning from context 4 3 2 1

6. I have problems selecting specific relevant information 4 3 2 1

7. I have problems predicting information from readings 4 3 2 1

8. I have problems handling lengthy readings 4 3 2 1

9. I have problems recognizing writing styles 4 3 2 1

10. I have problems with different subject matters 4 3 2 1

11. I am not interested in reading texts in English 4 3 2 1

12. I do not have enough external supports such as peers, parents and teachers 4 3 2 1

13. I lack of exposure to authentic reading materials 4 3 2 1

14. I do not have motivation with readings 4 3 2 1

15. I am always under time pressure during readings. 4 3 2 1

Appendix B: Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory

(MARSI) Version 1.0 Kouider Mokhtari and Carla Reichard © 2002

DIRECTIONS: Listed below are statements about what people do when they read academic or school related materials such as
textbooks, library books, etc. Five numbers follow each statement (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
and each number means the following:
 1 means “I never or almost never do this.”
 2 means “I do this only occasionally.”
 3 means “I sometimes do this.” (About 50% of the time.)
 4 means “I usually do this.”
 5 means “I always or almost always do this.”
After reading each statement, circle the number (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) that applies to you using the scale provided. Please note that there are
no right or wrong answers to the statements in this inventory.

PART A: GLOBAL READING STRATEGIES

www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 7, Issue 8, August 2017 262
ISSN 2250-3153
# STRATEGIES SCALE

1 I have a purpose in mind when I read. 1 2 3 4 5

2 I think about what I know to help me understand what I read. 1 2 3 4 5

3 I preview the text to see what it’s about before reading it. 1 2 3 4 5

4 I think about whether the content of the text fits my reading purpose 1 2 3 4 5

5 I skim the text first by noting characteristics like length and organization. 1 2 3 4 5

6 I decide what to read closely and what to ignore. 1 2 3 4 5

7 I use tables, figures, and pictures in text to increase my understanding 1 2 3 4 5

8 I use context clues to help me better understand what I’m reading. 1 2 3 4 5

9 I use typographical aids like bold face and italics to identify key 1 2 3 4 5
information.

10 I critically analyze and evaluate the information presented in the text. 1 2 3 4 5

11 I check my understanding when I come across conflicting information 1 2 3 4 5

12 I try to guess what the material is about when I read 1 2 3 4 5

13 I check to see if my guesses about the text are right or wrong 1 2 3 4 5

PART B: PROBLEM SOLVING READING STRATEGIES

# STRATEGIES SCALE

1 I read slowly but carefully to be sure I understand what I’m reading 1 2 3 4 5

2 I try to get back on track when I lose concentration 1 2 3 4 5

3 I adjust my reading speed according to what I’m reading 1 2 3 4 5

4 When text becomes difficult, I pay closer attention to what I’m reading. 1 2 3 4 5

5 I stop from time to time and think about what I’m reading. 1 2 3 4 5

6 I try to picture or visualize information to help remember what I read. 1 2 3 4 5

7 When text becomes difficult, I re-read to increase my understanding. 1 2 3 4 5

8 I try to guess the meaning of unknown words or phrases 1 2 3 4 5

PART C: SUPPORT READING STRATEGIES

# STRATEGIES SCALE

1 I take notes while reading to help me understand what I read 1 2 3 4 5

www.ijsrp.org
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 7, Issue 8, August 2017 263
ISSN 2250-3153
2 When text becomes difficult, I read aloud to help me understand what I 1 2 3 4 5
read

3 I summarize what I read to reflect on important information in the text. 1 2 3 4 5

4 I discuss what I read with others to check my understanding. 1 2 3 4 5

5 I underline or circle information in the text to help me remember it. 1 2 3 4 5

6 I use reference materials such as dictionaries to help me understand what 1 2 3 4 5

I read

7 I paraphrase (restate ideas in my own words) to better understand what I 1 2 3 4 5

read.

8 I go back and forth in the text to find relationships among ideas in it. 1 2 3 4 5

9 I ask myself questions I like to have answered in the text 1 2 3 4 5

www.ijsrp.org