The Impact of Typographical Input Enhancement, Gloss, and Advance Organizers on the Reading Comprehension of Iranian EFL Learners

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Authors
R. Bagheri Nevisi 1
R. Mohammad Hosseinpur 1
B. Rostami 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Humanities, University of Qom, Qom, Iran
2 MA Graduate in TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Humanities, University of Qom, Qom, Iran
10.29252/LRR.13.4.23
Abstract
The importance of noticing, attending to linguistic features, and focusing on linguistic input like focus-on-form and focus-on-forms have always been a contentious issue in language teaching. Consistent with this line of research, the present study aimed to investigate the impact of typographical input enhancement, gloss, and advance organizes on EFL learners' reading comprehension ability. Eighty EFL learners were chosen from Safir Language Institute in Ahvaz and were assigned to four equal groups of typographical input enhancement, gloss, advance organizer and simple-text. A Preliminary English Test (PET) of reading was utilized as pretest. Control group and the three experimental groups were instructed for eight weeks through the aforementioned techniques. Finally, an equal version of PET was used as posttest. ANCOVA was run to analyze the data. Results indicated that the advance organizer group significantly outperformed the other groups regarding their reading comprehension performances. The study has important implications for reading comprehension task analysis, task design, and task instruction and the way such information could be utilized to activate schemata and retrieve information from long-term memory.



1. Introduction

The importance of noticing, attending to linguistic features, and focusing on linguistic input like focus-on-form and focus-on-forms have always been a contentious issue in language teaching. The role of input enhancement in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) has undergone many developments and the studies done in this domain have generated various outcomes. Some researchers support the positive role of input enhancement in SLA and believe that paying attention to form is necessary for L2 learning to transpire, but some other researchers adopt the opposite stance (Ellis, 2008). Consistent with this line of research, the study aimed at delving into the impact typographical input enhancement, gloss, and advance organizers techniques on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners.

Research Questions:

1. Does typographical input enhancement technique have any significant impact on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners?

2. Does gloss technique have any significant impact on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners?

3. Does advance organizers technique have any significant impact on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners?



2. Literature Review

To increase the perceptual saliency of the language structures, different techniques can be utilized. Focus-on-form and focus–on-forms are regarded as two kinds of approaches which can be applied in grammar instruction (Long, 1991). Long (1991) made the distinction between focus-on-form and focus-on-forms. In his view, the latter refers to decontextualized, highly meta-pragmatic, teacher-oriented instruction in which the primary goal is to scaffold learners to amass individual linguistic features. The former, however, refers to meaning-oriented activities in which learners' attention is focused on target features as they arise incidentally in the input. In fact, focus-on-forms employs explicit awareness-raising activities, whereas focus-on-form techniques such as input enhancement indirectly draw learners’ attention to target forms.



3. Methodolgy

Based on the results obtained from the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT), 80 intermediate EFL learners were chosen from Safir Language Institute in Ahvaz, Iran and were assigned to four equal groups of typographical input enhancement, gloss, advance organizer and simple-text. Next, a Preliminary English Test (PET) of reading was utilized as pretest. Control group and the three experimental groups were instructed for eight weeks through the aforementioned techniques. Then, an equal version of PET was used as posttest. Covariances (ANCOVA) was run to analyze the data..



4. Results

The results indicated that advance organizer group significantly outperformed the other groups in terms of their reading comprehension performences. In other words, the findings revealed that the advance organizer technique was much more effective than typographical input enhancement and gloss. The study also found that typographical input enhancement and gloss did not have a significant impact on the reading comprehension abilityof EFL learners. This finding reveals that mere exposure to new forms through input enhancement alone might only trigger the maintenance rehearsal process, during which the recently-retrieved input is stored in the long-term memory as an unanalyzed chunk. Therefore, input enhancement may not independently improve conceptually-driven learning processes.



5. Discussion

The findings for the first research question do not confirm the previous studies conducted on learners' reading comprehension concerning input enhancement and gloss (Abbasian & Yekani, 2014; Aghajani & Rahimy, 2013; Ayiewbey, 2013; Goudarzi & Raouf Moini, 2012; Hazrativand, 2012; Nahavandi & Mukundan, 2013; Simard, 2009). In the present research, typographical input enhancement and gloss aimed at indirectly drawing learners' attention to the highlighted forms and L2 marginal glosses, but the highlighted forms and l2 marginal glosses might not be well-noticed by the students. It can be said that students' not paying sufficient attention to the typographical input enhancement and gloss could be a likely reason for their insignificant impact. Furthermore, advance organizer unlike the other two techniques had a significant impact on the reading comprehension of EFL students. Advance organizers' group outperformed those in typographical input enhancement and gloss groups. Schema knowledge could have influenced the results as it can display a class of things, events and situations. However, a learner's understanding can be enhanced when a schema sets a type of framework, which is understandable and helps learners comprehend data, retrieve information from long-term memory, and specify their purposes. Thus, the probable cause for the significant impact of the advance organizers on the reading comprehension of EFL learners can be attributed to the fact that the learners possess the right schemata, and are able to glean the best and adequate clues from within the text. Contrary to Gorjian et al. (2015) and Tajeddin (2013) which pointed to an insignificant effect of advance organizers, the results of the present study, in line with Davaei and Talebinezhad (2012) suggests that advance organizers can be viewed as an effective and facilitative means in boosting the overall reading comprehension ability of EFL learners.



6. Conclusion

The findings of the study may be helpful to the English teachers, EFL learners, and curriculum developers. Teachers might benefit from the results of the study in teaching the aforementioned techniques. It seems that not only do EFL learners need to be familiarized with such techniques and the way they work in classroom settings, but also the circumtances under which such reading techniques can be more effectively and appropriately utilized to improve their overall comprehension ability. Finally, the findings might have useful implications for curriculum developers because such outcomes can be readily incorporated into the curriculum or classroom syllabus in reading comprehension classes. Accordingly, a specific part of the reading comprehension classes can be devoted to instructing students through these techniques to discern how effective and useful they can be in promoting students reading comprehension abilities.

Keywords

Subjects

• Abbasian, G. R., & Yekani, N. (2014). The role of textual vs. compound input enhancement in developing grammar ability. Issues in Language Teaching, 3(1), 134-11.
• Aghajani, A., & Rahimy, R. (2013). The impact of input enhancement type on Iranian EFL learners’ knowledge of english tenses across gender. Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(1), 153, 162.
• Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 259-299). University of Hawai'i Press.
• Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-472.
• Anderson, N. J. (2008). Active skills for reading: Book 3. Thomson Heinle.
• Anderson, R. C. (1978). Schema-directed processes in language comprehension. In A. M. Lesgold, J. W. Pellegrino, S. D. Fokkema, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Cognitive Psychology and Instruction (pp.67-82). Plenum.
• Anderson, R.C., & Pearson, P.D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading. In P.D. Pearson, R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. Longman.
• Ayiewbey, S. (2013). An investigation to the effects of textual enhancement on the learning of english past tense in the context of Iranian learners. Technical Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 3(13), 1217-1222.
• Baddeley, A. (1976). The psychology of memory. Basic Books.
• Baddeley, A. (1997). Human memory: theory and practice. Psychology Press.
• Baddeley, A. (2000). Working memory: The interface between memory and cognition. In M. Gazzaniga (Ed.), Cognitive Neuroscience: A reader (pp. 292-304). Blackwell.
• Ben Salam, E., & Aust, R. (2007). The influence of feature-rich computerized glosses on reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. Proceeding of the Sixth IASTED International Conference on Web-Based Education. ISBN 978-0-889896-650-8/CD: 978-0-889896-651-5.
• Bowles, M. A. (2004). L2 glossing: To CALL or not CALL. Hispania, 87(3), 541-552.
• Burke, B.M. (2005). Experiential professional development: Promoting communicative language teaching with Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound design (Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University.
• Burke, B.M. (2006). Theory meets practice: A case study of pre-service world language teachers in U.S. secondary schools. Foreign Language Annals, 39(1), 148-166.
• Cheng, Y., & Good, R. L. (2009). L1 glosses: Effects on EFL learners. Reading comprehension and vocabulary retention. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(2), 119-142. ISSN 1539-0578
• Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in second language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd Ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Fathi, J., & Shirazizadeh, M. (2018). The Effects of a Second Language Reading Strategy Instruction on Iranian EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension and Reading Anxiety. Language Related Research, 11(4), 267-295.
• Fotos, S. (1998). Shifting the focus from forms to from in the EFL classroom. ELT journal, 52(4), 301-307.
• Davaei, R., & Talebinezhad, M. R. (2012). The effect of advance organizers on enhancing the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(10), 2045-2052.
• Gorjian, B., Khoshakhlagh, S., & Bavizade, K. (2015). Using discourse structure-based graphic organizers in developing EFL learners’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 8(4), 67-79.
• Goudarzi, Z. & Raouf Moini, M. (2012). The effect of input enhancement on collocations in reading on collocation learning and retention of EFL learners. International educational studies, 5(3), 247-258.
• Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
• Hale, J. B. (2003). The effect of two graphic organizers on learning performance and computer anxiety in a Web-enabled training lesson for navy enlistees (Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation). University of South Alabama.
• Hazrativand, P. (2012). The effect of typographical input enhancement on Iranian EFL learners' accuracy in oral production of narratives. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(4), 76-85.
• Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(4), 541–77.
• Jacobs, G., & Farrell, T.S.C. (2003). Understanding and Implementing the CLT (Communicative Language Teaching). Paradigm. RELC Journal, 34(1), 5-30.
• Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think aloud protocol analysis. In R. Schmidt (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 183-226). University of Hawaii Press.
• Ko, M. (2005). Glosses, comprehension, and strategy use. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(2), 125-143.
• Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Pergamon.
• Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
• Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T.D. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Pergamon/Alemany.
• Lee, S. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive form. Language Learning, 57(1), 87–118.
• Leow, R. P. (1993). To simplify or not to simplify. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 333–355.
• Leow, R. (1997). The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 readers’ comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, 8, 151-182.
• Leow, R. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84(3), 496- 509.
• Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
• Lomicka, L. L. (1998). To gloss or not to gloss: An investigation of reading comprehension online. Language Learning & Technology, 1(2), 41-50.
• Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, D. Coste, C. Kramsch, & R. Ginsberg (Eds.). Foreign language research in a cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). John Benjamins.
• Nahavandi, N., & Mukundan, J. (2013). The impact of textual input enhancement and explicit rule presentation on Iranian elementary EFL learners’ intake of simple past tense. English Language Teaching, 6(1), 92-102.
• Overstreet, M. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229-258.
• Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory and the "noticing" hypothesis. Language Learning, 45,283-331.
• Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
• Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language Instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge University Press.
• Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning and interlanguage pragmatics. InG. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21-42). Oxford University Press.
• Schmidt, R.W. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review, 11, 11-26.
• Schmidt, R.W. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: a tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-64). Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
• Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T. Suthiwan, & I. Walker, Proceedings of Classic 2010, Singapore, December 2-4 (pp. 721-737). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies.
• Simard, D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37(1), 124-135.
• Simard, D., & Wong, W. (2004). Language awareness and its multiple possibilities for the L2 classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 37(1), 96-110.
• Sharwood Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and second language acquisition theory. Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 159-168.
• Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7(2), 118-132.
• Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 165-180.
• Suzuki, A. (2006). Differences in reading strategies employed by students constructing graphic organizers and students producing summaries in EFL. JALT Journal, 34(1), 416-431.
• Tajeddin, Z. (2013). Scaffolding comprehension and recall gaps: effects of paratextual advance organizers. Issues in Language Teaching, 2(1), 125-148.
• Taylor, A. (2006). The effects of CALL versus traditional L1 glosses on L2 reading comprehension. CALICO Journal, 23(2), 309-318.
• Tomlin, R., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183-203.
• VanPatten, B. (1994). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 25-41.
• VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in second language acquisition. Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5-31). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• White, J. (1998). Getting the learners’ attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 85-113). Cambridge University Press.
Language Related Research
Volume 13, Issue 4 - Serial Number 70
September and October 2022
Pages 763-791