- 21 -
【研究論文】
神戸英語教育学会紀要
『KELT』第 36 号（2021.1.31）
Integrating reading and writing activities through extensive reading for university students
大学生への多読を通しての統合型リーディングとライティング活動
大重 範子 OSHIGE, Noriko
- 22 -
要約
大学 3 年生で初めて英語のライティングを学んだ学生の、新聞記事(NA)と多読教材(ER)の
二つの題材での英語のライティングを検証した。学生は学期内 12 回の授業で Oxford graded
reader level 3 の 1 冊を読み終え、NA の 4 つのコメントを提出した。fluency (文法上の 間違いが少なく、語数が伸びる) を二つの題材で比較したところ、文法上の間違いは ER の 方が NA の 2 倍の間違いがあった。特に 3 人称単数形や代名詞の間違いが多かった。これ は ER の登場人物や出来事に対するコメントを描写する際の間違いであった。文法上の間違 いはライティングの回数を重ねても減少しなかった。一方、語数は NA に対するコメントの 方が語数が伸びた。Text の要約や写しの多い冗長な内容にとどまっているライティングは 一文、一文の関連性がなく、またパラグラフとしても統一感がない状況にとどまっている反 面、現代社会の問題や傾向などの記事に表れる語彙をパラフレーズし、transition words を 上手く使いパラグラフ構造を使って書いた学生のライティングは自分の意見を十分に表現 できていた。 Evaluation-free writing は学生がコミュニケーションとして意見を述べる手段としての機 能を果たしたが、文法の間違いのため、語数が伸びず学生の本意が伝わらない部分もあった。 リーディング及びライティングには critical thinking skills (CTS) が深く関わっていて、 analyzing, applying, creating などの CTS は個人差が大きく反映された。文法的間違いを減 らしライティングの質を高めるための方策として、英英で理解する語彙力、訳読ではない読 解力を基礎として CTS を養成、教育することがライティングの quality を高めることに 関 係があることがこの研究から推察できた。日本の学生には特に CTS の養成と教育が必須で あることがリーディングとライティングの能力から検証できたことは意義深いと思える。
- 23 - 1. Introduction
The objective of this study is to see whether college students reveal their intellectual and individual growth as well as language advancement in their written sentences. The third-year students, who were the participants for this study have not taken a formal instruction of writing so far and the course conducted this research was the first opportunity for them to express their thoughts in writing. Unlike the learning style most students are familiar with - “drill, practice, and rote memorization in English” in exam-oriented high school class ( Casanave, 1995, p.95), students in this course are supposed to think critically and develop writing. Students have never experienced with expressive writing different from “preparation for English examination essays in which students adhered to rules, formulae, and predetermined context” (p.99). Casanave (1995) states that college language classes should be responsible for providing students with “meaningful opportunities for some kind of intellectual engagement with ideas and issues” as well as their language practice (p.97). She claims that journal-writing serves students to be promising opportunities to a purpose. Unlike Casanave’s study, I integrate reading into writing class since the efficacy of extensive reading combined into writing class has been proved by many researchers (Bell, 2001; Elley, 1991 cited in Rass, 1997; Krashen, 2004 cited in Sy-ying Lee., & Ying-ying, Hsu, 2009). I interpret her “meaningful opportunities” for students as that the impetus students receive from reading materials and the motivation toward showing their feelings and expressing their opinions.
Regarding reading materials, authentic reading materials cast a new light on language learning. Berardo (2006) argues that having students encounter how the language is actually used in contexts has enormous benefit, especially on vocabulary acquisition and that encourages them to be motivated to read and write more. He also states that when students understand the real context, that gives students a sense of attainment, which leads them to further reading. Mermelstein (2015) indicated that negative outcome arose when the pages of ER was small and the duration was short, however, when students were asked to write about what they read, they would have more to say and accordingly more to write (Park, 2015). I set the design of this course based on the assumption that if students read chapters in authentic English, both extensive reading (ER for short) and newspaper article (NA for short), so that they can describe what they have thought about the characters in ER and things reported in NA. As Coady (1979, cited in Rass 1997) states, incorporating literature into writing course helps foreign language learners improve the target language proficiency. In this study, I will explore how “fluency” develops. Fluency in this study is defined as (1) increased number of words in the writing assignments and (2) fewer grammatical mistakes in students’ writing by tracking the number of words used and the level of grammatical correctness in their writing. Along with that language advancement, I will observe whether students’ written sentences will change in the process of integration of reading and writing.
- 24 - 2. Literature review
Yamamoto (2014) claims that “reading has occupied the important corner of intellectual education at all times both in the East and West” (p.7). He also states that “the reason for the existence of reading is to improve students’ intellectual level” (p.7). There are many researchers (Bell, 2001; Day & Bamford, 1998 cited in Park, 2005; Guo, 2012; Park, 2015; Pigada & Schmitt, 2006) who claim ER can exert students on numerous benefits. First, it can be a source of vocabulary acquisition, especially in spelling of the target language. Second, giving students ER builds students’ good reading habits, which leads to the enjoyment of reading. Third, according to some researches, students showed positive attitude toward ER. Fourth, ER gave students enormous pleasure from reading and at the same time, students had innate motivation for continuous reading. Fifth, spelling, meaning and grammatical knowledge were enhanced through ER. Moreover, a number of researchers assert that ER extends its benefit to second language acquisition. ER affects not only developing new vocabulary and overall reading comprehension but also improving grammar and writing abilities, which give positive effect to students’ motivation and attitude towards reading (Scott, 2020). There are some students who improve their language competence in writing through only reading without writing instruction (Elley, 1991 cited in Rass, 1997; Krashen, 2004, cited in Sy-ying Lee & Ying-ying Hsu, 2009). Sy-Ying-ying Lee and Ying-Ying-ying Hsu (2009) state that through their study conducted at their university, they gave their students more than 500 titles for one year-long ER activities and have found that it leads to better achievements on tests of both reading and writing development. They also conclude that reading can be a source of good writing style, the vocabulary, syntax and discourse structure of written language.
Casanave (1995) has used a series of films and writing journals in class. She has set the circumstances where students were free to write their opinions without being worried about their grammatical mistakes, spelling and organization. She states that it is very important that the content should be “interesting and relevant to them” (p.102). She found that this method was widely accepted at all competence levels and observed that students “generated additional topics to think and write about” (p.103). She concluded that journal-writing encouraged students to think in a manner they have not experienced and grammatical mistakes taught them to “experiment fearlessly, to develop their abilities to correct their mistakes while learning from them” (p.103). Moreover, Barjesteh, Vaseghi and Gholami (2011) concluded that although diary writing free of being evaluated does not improve grammatical accuracy of their students’ writing, it helps students gain self-confidence and the joy of writing as well, which leads them to write more. Hashemnezhad (2012) states that writing is a “key factor in the development of problem-solving and critical thinking skills” (p.722), and helping students write well is one of the most important attainments of education. A number of researchers who assert the great benefit critical thinking skills (CTS for short) exert on students’ academic success in their future (Alagozlu, 2007; Casanave, 1995; Dunn, 2015; Hashemnezhad, 2012). Casanave (1995)
- 25 -
states that not focusing on tests and grades in language learning but widening a language goal to make students grow intellectually is important since CTS play an important role in thinking “independently and critically” (Casanave, 1995, p.124), and they help students write their own thoughts in writing. Dunn (2015) also states that utilizing CTS in all classes is crucial and that Japanese students especially lack CTS, therefore, it should be enhanced CTS in all classes. Students are expected to “question the validity of ideas in texts” (Alagozlu, 2007, p.118). Without moving up to the scale of “applying, analyzing and creating”, students miss opportunities to develop “intellectual virtues such as intellectual courage, humility and autonomy” (Dunn, 2015, p. 4). Through nurturing CTS, Hashemnezhad and Hashemnazhad (2012) report that students can make their ideas clear and an opportunity of “writing changes the passive knowledge and information in their minds into their own language” (p.723).
3. Research questions
In order to address the issues stated above, this study attempts to find out how college students’ writing fluency will change and whether they express their inner thoughts after tackling ER and NA given in this course. The research questions are as follows:
1) Do the reading activities help them increase the number of words they write and enhance their writing fluency differently?
2) Do the different reading materials -ER and NA- help college students reduce grammatical mistakes in their written sentences when they write evaluation-free opinions?
3) Do the written sentences change in the process of a series of writing experiences? 4. Method
4.1 Class
This study was conducted with one compulsory English class of Academic Reading and Writing that met for 140 minutes once a week for 12 weeks. Students belonged to business management in four-year university program. The focus of the class was to introduce various paragraphs and writing skills combined with reading skills. In the first session, I gave them my self-introduction in English and assigned them to write their own self-introduction in English. I also gave them explanation of class regarding the objectives, contents and activities.
4.2 Participants
The data was collected from spring to summer in 2020. The participants were six students, three females and three males, out of twenty-one in the class since those students were present all classes and turned their homework without delay. They majored in business management in the Department of Economics at University. All students were the third year of four-year program and they were 20 or 21 years old. They had studied
- 26 -
English previously for eight years. All students had been taking reading classes since their first year of their college education and started to take the writing class in their third year. 4.3 Reading materials
(1) ER: leveled and graded readers
The textbook was selected by the faculty of university. Other than the main textbook, every week in the spring semester lasted twelve weeks, I assigned students to read two reading tasks and one of them was accompanied with comment-writing. I used two types of reading materials, one is leveled readers, and the other is graded readers. Leveled readers are published for children who are native English speakers. Native English children naturally acquire the usage of verbs which appear in these books through reading. In leveled readers, students encounter unknown words. If they guess the meaning of them, they can finally understand how they are used in context. Graded readers are published with the view of educating students learning English as a foreign or second language. In graded readers, learners read longer stories with ease since those books are written with restricted new words.
I chose five leveled readers from a series of Frog and Toad, Curious George and
Snoopy and Charlie Brown. Using nine books of leveled readers, I made the 97 verb
quizzes which I named as “日本人が使えない動詞“. Students were made to do quizzes first and then read one book consisting of around 10 pages while paying attention to these verbs at home. After each class, I gave students the answer of the quizzes and made them check their answers. After finishing the final week for leveled readers, students summed up their total points out of 97 and submitted their score lists. I used both types of books to see whether students gained vocabulary knowledge through leveled readers and also to see whether students responded to contents and could express their comments after reading graded readers. I selected one graded reader from Oxford Bookworm Level 3 for ER. The title of the book was Chemical Secret and the content was suspense. I provided one chapter out of twelve chapters every week for twelve weeks prior to the class, and I made students read one chapter at home and write their comments after the class. After twelve weeks, they finished reading this book totally 10,150 words. During class, students were divided into five to six groups and they could exchange opinions about the reading content they had read at home and asked questions each other at the end of each class for around 10 minutes. I had them submit their comments after the class. The question arose whether students could improve his or her quality of writing neither being informed about the mistakes they made by the peers nor being revised them by the instructor. To improve the quality of writing, peer review has been an effective method (Mermelstein, 2015), however, this method was not utilized since this course was conducted via the Internet. I also wondered the 4 to 7 pages long for every week students had read were effective enough to bring about any advancement, such as to have fewer grammatical mistakes and
- 27 -
to write longer sentences as well as to show any personal growth in writing. (2) NA: newspaper articles
I chose four various articles such as famous enterprise, population problem in the world, interview from the company representative and so on, from English newspaper, Japan News and made English questions for each article. Students were required to read and consult unknown words for them at home. In class, I explained the background knowledge in order for students to understand the article and then had them answer original questions. Students needed to read the article and understand the content to answer questions. Students were asked to make sure they had no questions regarding the content during class. Then students wrote their reactions after the class and I had them submit their opinions. Totally, students wrote one summary and six opinions after reading NA.
In this study, I investigated whether students improve fluency in writing with ER and NA reading activities. I defined “fluency” as (1) increased number of words in the writing assignments given in class and (2) fewer grammatical mistakes in writing. I tracked the length of sentences by counting the total number of words in written sentences. I also observed students’ written sentences to see (3) whether their written sentences will change in the process of a series of writing experiences.
4.4. Procedures
I conducted this twelve-session research project on a weekly basis online. The class met for one hundred minutes once a week. Students learned the basic knowledge of writing a paragraph in English using a textbook since the start of this course. Students learned about the three types of paragraphs such as descriptive, narrative and expository as the course proceeded. Each class aimed at acquainting students with how one paragraph was structured and its writing process. Students were given many grammatical and mechanical drills for the sake of writing well-organized paragraphs with text-affiliated questions. In the “breakout session” by using Zoom at the end of each class for around 10 minutes, I split students into five to six groups to have a discussion about the content they had read. I observed each room during the breakout session and asked whether they had any questions about the chapter they had read and I listened to discussion. After each class, students were supposed to write their opinions about the chapter of ER they had read and were supposed to submit them. I also had them submit in total four opinions in NA.
5. Results
I have found four noticeable patterns in my research in connection with my research questions,
- 28 - enhance their writing fluency differently?
2) Do the different reading materials help college students reduce grammatical mistakes in their written sentences when they write evaluation-free opinions?
3) Do the written sentences change in the process of a series of writing experiences? 5.1 ER
I had expected that the more students wrote comments, the fewer grammatical mistakes students made. But there was no clear relation, which means that their grammatical mistakes did not decrease as the experiences increased.
Table 1
The number of students’ grammatical mistakes found in ER twelve comments
~10 ~15 ~20 ~25 ~30 ~35 N=2 N=1 N=2 N=1
Grammatical mistakes varied in number among students and the average point was 15.1
for twelve comments. The number of the most mistakes were 31 and the fewest mistakes were 10 for twelve comments in ER. Each student’s average score of mistakes for twelve opinions was from 0.8 to 2.5.
Table 2
the number of grammatical mistakes and the number of words for twelve ER
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 total A 4/59 2/47 0/63 1/62 1/60 0/73 1/55 1/47 1/55 0/52 2/69 3/63 16/705 B 3/38 1/50 2/57 0/39 1/68 0/91 0/65 2/81 0/72 1/70 0/86 0/104 10/711 C 0/41 5/74 3/63 0/65 3/63 0/33 0/42 0/51 0/23 2/55 7/67 0/36 20/613 D 2/55 1/67 1/73 1/82 0/96 1/74 0/106 0/85 1/90 0/83 3/120 0/100 10/1031 E 0/64 0/74 4/77 1/38 2/52 3/49 1/47 2/38 8/61 3/52 4/54 3/32 31/638 F 1/76 2/110 0/91 0/93 3/96 1/115 1/106 0/82 0/82 4/84 0/87 2/91 14/1113
Table 2 shows the number of grammatical mistakes and the number of words written for twelve ER among students A~F. Grammatical mistakes were shown in the left number and total words written were shown in the right number. The fluency of student D and F were conspicuous since the number of total words exceeded over 1000 words for twelve comments with around 10 grammatical mistakes made. Student E made the most grammatical mistakes and did not increase fluency. Both students E and C who made the most and the second respectively for the most grammatical mistakes didn’t surpass 700 words in the number of words. This was considered due to the incompetence of grammatical knowledge.
Graph 3
- 29 -
Graph 3 shows the areas in students’ grammatical mistakes and the number of mistakes in each area. As a result of counting all 101 mistakes for twelve ER and sorted them in areas, there were 48 mistakes in verb, 25 mistakes in pronouns, 13 mistakes in nouns, 7 in adjectives, 4 in prepositions, 2 in spelling, 1 in articles and 1 in adverbs. Students tended to make mistakes in three areas such as subject-verb agreement including lack of “would”, pronouns and nouns, especially singular-plural forms. It was clear that students had to pay more attention to third-person singular since this area stood out as the number one in non-recognizable grammar. Park (2015) illustrated that “basic language errors, including subject-verb agreement, singular-plural nouns, prepositions, and articles, were frequently found in their pre-essay tests, and these errors often led to failure to convey their ideas clearly in that essay” (p.295).
The following sentences one of the students wrote were grammatically inaccurate in some parts, so it could not convey her intention to the full extent. Here is what she wrote:
This environment affect children is I thought the children were poor. Because she’d like to go to a ski lesson, but she had no money, my daughter stood it as the one. They are so poor, so I thought rather cruel concern would be done when playing with a rich friend. If I’m the same situation, I’m not be happy every day. Because it’s because it isn’t possible to be fun when I’m poor.
Some researchers (Raimes, 1987; Sasaki& Hirose, 1996) claim that the good writers can pay more attention to general organization. Using ER as reading materials, there were many scenes that students used them as describing the situation, criticizing character’s behaviors, and expressing their comments based on the scenes described in the chapters, so they made many mistakes in pronouns when they referred to specific characters. It was necessary to have students do revising process of writing after they finished writing. 5.2 NA Table 4 48 25 13 7 4 2 1 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
- 30 -
the number of grammatical mistakes found in NA
~1 ~2 ~3 ~4 ~5 ~6 N=1 N=1 N=2 N=1 N=1 Table 4 shows the number of grammatical mistakes students made altogether four
opinions after reading NA. The average mistake score was 2.5. The most mistakes were 6 and the fewest mistakes were 1 in four opinions for NA. There were fewer grammatical mistakes in NA than in ER. The average number of mistakes students made in NA per one opinion was 0.6, while on the other hand, average number of mistakes for ER per one comment was 1.2. There was a significant difference between the two reading materials, ER or NA. In NA, students expressed their opinions related to the issue written on the article and they used the same vocabulary as the article (underlined by the author) when expressing their ideas. The following is an opinion one of the students wrote:
I read this article and learned about Japanese consumers. I have two impressions. First, speed and quality are important. Certainly, I think Japanese people are impatient and attach great importance to quality. The second is to create a team called Let’s talk. I think Japanese are shy. Because I think it’s good to have a place to talk. I learned these things.
Although the use of conjunctions was less accurate, but he utilized the same vocabulary and expressed his opinions. It can be said that it was easier for students to write their opinions using the same vocabulary in a paragraph format including transitions such as first, second.
Here is a report from another student wrote for the same NA.
There are two things that I would like to utilize if I become a manager in the future. First, focusing on a specific market and analyzing the market. Because I can’t run blindly and it doesn’t work, so it is important to think carefully and act. Second, to have a clear vision for the company. In order for management and the people in the organization to build intimate relationship, it is necessary to bring them to the same goal. I want to keep these things in mind so that I can use them when I work a member of society.
He used only one vocabulary with the NA and extended his opinions using a paragraph format. It was presumable that he understood the content well and spun his ideas into sentences. He moved up to applying and creating in “higher-order thinking skills” (Lawson, 2020, P.5) of CTS by describing “There are two things that I would like to utilize if I become a manager in the future.” As Hashemnazhad and Hashemnazhad (2012) claim, the above-cited students’ opinions showed that he critically thought about the
- 31 -
content and wrote his determination and findings from the content. Apart from other four students whose opinions didn’t develop from the summary of the content, his opinions derived from “the passive knowledge and information in their minds into their own language” (Hashemnazhad & Hashemnazhad, 2012, p. 723).
In many cases, students’ written sentences show repetitive phrases from the text and they are illogical, resulting in redundancy. Here are the opinions another student wrote: I think Japanese characteristics is different from other countries I think all countries
have their own characteristic, but Japanese characteristic is especially different from other countries. As written in this sentences, Japanese consumer is the most discerning consumers in the world. Then I agree with the opinion that Japanese consumer’s standards are much higher than anywhere else. So I think if the service quality is higher than Japanese consumer’s standard and win the hearts and mind of Japanese people, there would be the opportunity to grow in Japan.
She quoted many sentences from NA and then added her opinions. However, her opinions included the same vocabularies as those in NA, therefore, she could not reach the stage of applying nor creating. These opinions clearly showed redundancy and illogicality. It was necessary to teach students paraphrasing skills, so that they did not have to copy the same expressions from the context.
5.3 Fluency in writing
Students turned in twelve comments and four opinions. Except for the final NA opinion, there were no fixed requirements for length. For the final NA opinion, students had to write more than one hundred words on one page. Students wrote more words for NA and the average number of words per one opinion was 109, on the other hand, average number of words students wrote for one ER comment was 70. It is likely to say NA helped students improve fluency in terms of number of words they wrote.
Table 5
the number of grammatical mistakes and the number of words written for NA
1 2 3 4 total Student A 1/50 0/63 1/71 4/117 5/301 B 1/149 1/100 1/126 0/184 3/559 C 0/79 0/73 0/69 1/75 1/296 D 0/110 1/145 1/113 1/240 3/508 E 3/93 1/79 1/87 1/160 6/419 F 0/137 0/124 1/119 1/175 2/555 Table 5 shows the number of grammatical mistakes and the number of words students
- 32 -
wrote for NA. For example, 1/45 means one grammatical mistake and 45 words written in one NA. Only two students (A and C) scored average number of words respectively for 75 and 74. The rest of four students, student B,D,E,F, scored average number of words over 100 words. Another student used transition words skillfully and wrote:
I read this newspaper article and thought about innovation. First, in this article, quality and speed are important to bring innovation to the Japanese market. As it was the question in text, Japan is certainly a rich country in the world, I think that we who consume it also tend to demand high standards of products. Second, “Let’s talk” of the interventions Vecera made to the organization is also important for running a company. It is important for better corporate management to discuss each other’s opinions through discussions between the upper management of the organization and the people who belong to it. Also, I think that talking about a clear vision for the future will help them in how they will manage theirs business. In conclusion, I think that thinking about the consumer’s position and communication in an organization is important for innovation.
He copied only a few parts from NA. He used his own words in describing his opinions. Keck (2014) states that “comprehension is the first step toward paraphrasing” (p. 5), so written sentences show students’ level of understanding texts. He wrote in total 145 words and he made only one grammatical mistake, showed in bold letters, in his opinion. He justified why “Let’s talk” was important for the organization. Moreover, it was probable that he assimilated content words such as nouns, verbs and adjectives written in NA, therefore, it could be said that the choice of words was easy and smooth.
5.4 Individual growth
Canasave (1995) has illustrated the importance of analytical experience by raising student-written journal. Here is one student who analyzed the meaning of the sentence in ER and wrote his interpretation in comments:
She knew she couldn’t go skiing because she understood that her home had no money. However, she seemed to grow up obediently, doing homework and preparing her father’s meal. And, the sentence “they could still talk to their father”, I found that the children did not hate their father. I thought they are good children. Given that they were once wealthy, there was the possibility of hating father.
Many researchers (Raimes, 1987; Hirose & Sasaki, 1996) claim that one of the constituents of good writers is having more interaction with texts. It can be said that above-mentioned comments clearly showed the interaction with texts.
- 33 -
widely so as to include all activities intended to bring about language learning” (p.21). However, the sentences students wrote did not show any advancement from the first to the last comment due to the fact that lack of coherence and logic in paragraph and they were not aware that their opinions were of great value. One student wrote for ER comment at the second class:
His daughter is very positive. John is very worry about his children. His family laughs when they are hard. He had been terribly unhappy when his wife died. His daughter and son love own father. John loves his wife very much. I felt family love. I informed of the situation in the house. I think makes us happy by having fun conversation. The sentences seemed to have no relevance between each sentence nor unity as a whole context. Moreover, she could not recognize the fact or the opinion by using analyzing skill of CTS. Lawson (2020) states that having students practice differentiating exercises, for example, the words like “tasty and mouth-watering” (p.6) is effective to develop analyzing skill. She then recommends educators to let them prove or explain their reasons for choice since explaining process gives students to reflect deeply how they used information.
I tracked the advancement shown by two students’ first and the eleventh comments in ER. The first student wrote for the first comment in ER:
The reasons John hates Wilson has making people feel small. I also hate such people. At first, I don’t want to work with such a person. But in the end, I thought it is good person to get John working. John also said he didn’t like Wilson, but he decided to work with him. So, I also wanted to work with Wilson.
The same student wrote for the eleventh in ER:
I think the reason why John made such a statement is he was worried about my daughter and her child. If you were in the situation, I just like him. Therefore, I think his behavior is normal as a father. He is a good father who thinks his family first rather than his company.
The second student wrote for the first in ER:
Duncan felt Wilson smile uncomfortable. Also Duncan felt like he was being ridiculed by Wilson. I thought it is difficult to understand people’s feelings. I can understand Duncan’s feeling, I may feel if I look down. I may be doing the same to other people. And I thought it was important to read the feeling of the other person.
- 34 -
I don’t think John’s actions are wrong. John was talking for the company. But, his daughter may be harmed. John was more important to his daughter than the company. Because he worried about his daughter. John was angry at lawyers asking awkward questions. Reading this article, I thought John was the number one victim. But John is wrong as an office worker. I can’t choose which choice was good.
Both students expressed their thoughts enthusiastically. As Casanave (1995) states, if we see language as “a tool and a medium for pursuing educational goals” (p.108), we can see different opinions of others. The second students wrote “I can’t decide which choice was good”. Peer review would help each other widen the choice of vocabularies in their writing. Casanave (1995) states that transferring a focus of a language class to semantic to educational activities encourages students to see themselves and others, leading to better understanding each other beyond their own country and culture.
6. Discussion
Students improved fluency in the total number of words they wrote in NA. I assumed that students could adapt themselves to absorb academic vocabulary through reading and comprehending NA. Gardner (2004 cited in Oshige, 2006) states that it is necessary for students to be exposed academic vocabulary regularly, otherwise, students may not encounter those context-embedded vocabulary naturally. I believe it was good stimuli for students to expose themselves to diverse reading materials in terms of especially vocabulary development. Regarding ER, it was noteworthy that five out of six students agreed with that they had enjoyed reading Chemical Secret from the questionnaire result. As Casanave (1995) states, “relevant and interesting” (p.102) content facilitated students to read further. Students responded to various situations in ER and thought enthusiastically to express their opinions even though making grammatical mistakes. It was worth expressing opinions. However, the benefits of ER did not come up to expectations. For example, ER were supposed to intrigue students’ inner motivation to further reading, but students responded that they did not want to read more because they did not want to do more homework.
In this study, the disparity of understanding the texts among students seemed to be revealed clearly in their written sentences. There seemed a cause-and-effect relationship between reading comprehension and writing quality. Also, from the fact of their grammatical inaccuracy, there seemed no strong connection or cause between reading one chapter and improving writing style for some students. The quality of writing depending on each student seemed to lie in the constituents of good writers (Raimes, 1987; Sasaki& Hirose, 1996). From the perspective of reading, having students read ER sometimes posed difficulty in understanding the complex characters due to their alteration of roles over time. It was presumable that some of the students had been educated by “yakudoku”
- 35 -
(p.25) method of teaching from junior high school as Norris (1994) reported. In “yakudoku” method of teaching, teachers explain their own interpretation of reading materials in Japanese in “lecturer-dominated teaching method” (p.25), therefore, when students read texts, they ended up in time-consuming, word-by-word translation of the text (Norris, 1994). As a reading teacher’s role, it is important to incorporate timed readings and to teach students skim the main idea and scan the specific information, encouraging them to enjoy reading and helping them dispel the habit of word-by-word translating (Eskey & Grabe, 1988, cited in Norris, 1994).
Casanave (1995) argued that journal-writing provided vehicle for the development of both English and critical thinking skills. In this study, both grammatical inaccuracy and enrichment of writing content from the perspectives of CTS would be crucial aspects to address in language development. Since in writing, some of the students relied more on source text than other students when expressing their opinions. Overall, Japanese students are expected to evade the process of memorization in language learning, otherwise CTS cannot be developed.
From the perspective of writing, this study employed evaluation-free writing. Only one student responded that she had enjoyed writing comments. From the responses about pleasure of writing, students seemed to have no strong confidence in writing. It seemed there were many complex issues related to students’ confidence. As one of measures to alleviate the difficulty of writing, it was necessary for students to expand their realm of vocabulary in English-English interpretation to be able to paraphrase words and phrases, which enabled them to express ideas more fluently. Reflecting on above-mentioned things, it would be ideal to incorporate some measures to improve grammatical accuracy. Rass (1997) presents unique way of modifying students’ essays. For example, making students discuss their mistakes, giving feedback in pairs with the view of shortening long sentences by using the instructor-typed sentences to avoid embarrassment. His objective of that process was to remove students’ apprehension not by giving them embarrassment, which, I believe, is new to Japanese students. It is necessary to strengthen teaching how to integrate reading skills to writing since language skills are linked together and seldom developed independently of each other (Smith & Bean, 2010). Students need comprehensive input and output using four skills to combine and integrate their linguistic competence, so that they can properly address their lopsidedness in language development. This study has casted many issues to tackle from now on for their academic success, such as how to teach paraphrasing skills, how to reshape grammatical competence and how to utilize CTS. I hope I can utilize these outcomes for future research to enhance students’ overall language proficiency.
- 36 - References
Aaron, J.E. (2001). The Little, Brown COMPACT HANDBOOK FOURTH EDITION. Longman: Pearson Education.
Abu Rass, R. (1997). Integrating Reading and Writing for Effective Language Teaching ELT Journal, 70(3), 287-295.
Ann, R. (1987). Language Proficiency, Writing Ability, and Composing Strategies: A Study of ESL College Student Writers. Language Learning 37(3), 1. Dunn, J., D. (2015). Critical Thinking in Japanese Secondary Education: Student and
Teacher Perspectives. Critical Thinking and Language Learning Vol.2 (1),
1-11.
Herder, S., & King, R. (2012). Extensive Writing: Another Fluency Approach for EFL Learners. Extensive Reading World Congress Proceedings, 1, 128-130. Keck, C. (2014). Copying, paraphrasing, and academic writing development: A
re-examination of L1 and L2 summarization practices. Journal of Second
Language Writing Vol.25, 4-22.
Lawson, L., (2020). Skills for Success: READING AND WRITING. THIRD EDITION. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Medonca, C.O., & Johnson, K.E. (1994). Peer Review Negotiations: Revision Activities in ESL Writing Instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 1.
Miyuki, S., & Keiko, H. (1996). Explanatory Variables for EFL Students’ Expository Writing. Language Learning, 46(1), 1-2.
Noguchi, J. (2019). Preparing our Students for a Rapidly Evolving World. JACET Selected Papers Vol. (6), 53-68.
Norris, W., Robert (1994). Getting students More Personally Involved: An Alternative to the Yakudoku-and Lecturer-Dominated Methods of Teaching Literature and Reading. Fukuoka Women’s Junior College Studies Vol.48: 25-38. Oshige, N. (2006). How vocabulary helps reading and writing for returnee students. Kogyokusha Junior & Senior High School Kiyo Journal (7), 115-139. Park, J. (2015). Integrating reading and writing through extensive reading
ELT Journal, 70(3), 287-295.
Rass, A.R. (1997). Integrating Reading and Writing for Effective Language Teaching ELT Journal, 70(3), 287-295.
Scott, R. D. (2020). Extensive reading for engaging learners beyond the classroom. In Lawrence, L., Skills for Success READING AND WRITING Teacher’s
Handbook (pp.1-2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stern, H.H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sy-ying Lee, Ph.D., & Ying-ying Hsu (2009). Determining the Crucial Characteristics of Extensive Reading Programs: The Impact of Extensive Reading on EFL Writing.
- 37 -
The International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 12-19.
Vidal, C. P., & Juan-Garau, M. (2009). The effect of Study Abroad (SA) on written performance. In EUROSA Yearbook, 9(1), 269-295.
Wagner, A. Y., Richard, K., & Lopez, D. (2014). Developmental relations between reading and writing at the word, sentence, and text levels: A latent change score analysis.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 419-434. APA
Yamamoto, S. (2013). The University of Tokyo English for Arts and Sciences READER 1. Komaba: The University of Tokyo.
