نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار زبان شناسی کاربردی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران مرکزی
2 کارشناسی ارشد TEFL، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران مرکزی
چکیده
این تحقیق در راستای بررسی تأثیر روش شکاف در اطلاعات بر مهارت خواندن و درک مفاهیم وابسته به متن و مستقل از متن در زبان آموزان صورت گرفته است. به این منظور، 61 زبان‌آموز از بین 120 زبان‌آموز سطح متوسط مؤسسه زبان ایران‌مهر انتخاب شدند. ابتدا تمامی زبان آموزان جهت یکسان‌سازیدر آزمون PET شرکت کردند. سپس در آزمون گروهی شخصیتی موسوم به GEFT شرکت کردند و به گروه زبان آموزان وابسته به متن و مستقل از متن تقسیم شدند. شایان‌ذکر است که این آزمون در اولین جلسه برگزار شد. دو زیرگروه متشکل از 33 زبان‌آموز وابسته به متن و 28 زبان‌آموز مستقل از متن تحت روش تبادل اطلاعات یکپارچه در زمینه خواندن و درک مفاهیم موردمطالعه قرار گرفتند. علاوه بر این، آزمون نمونه های مستقل تی نیز روی میانگین نمرات دو گروه در بخش خواندن نمونه آزمون PET اجرا شده اجرا شد و مشخص گشت که هر دو گروه در ابتدای کار از لحاظ مهارت خواندن همگن بودند. آزمون خواندن PET دیگری به‌عنوانپس‌آزمون پس از 15 جلسه انجام شد. تحلیل آماری استنباطی بین میانگین نمرات آزمون نهایی دو گروه (آزمون نمونه‌های مستقل تی) (t=-0.135, p=0.893>0.05) حاکی از آن است که تفاوت معناداری بین میانگین نمرات دو گروه در پس‌آزمون مشاهده نمی‌شود.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Ahangari, S., & Mohseni, F. (2016). The effect of awareness raising through metacognitive strategy-based instruction on ESP learners’ reading comprehension. Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 9(18), 65-77.
Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem? In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language (pp. 1-27). London: Longman.
Alderson, J. C. (2005). Assessing reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Altun, A., & Cakan, M. (2006). Undergraduate students’ academic achievement, field dependent/independent cognitive styles and attitude towards computers. Educational Technology and Society, 9(1), 289-297.
Bahardoost, M., & Ahmadi, A. (2018). The relationship between test-taking strategies and Iranian EFL learners’ performance on reading comprehension tests. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 6(22), 117-131.
Baker, W., & Boonkit, K. (2004). Learning strategies in reading and writing: EAP contexts. RELC Journal, 35, 299-328.
Behnam, B., & Fathi, M. (2009). The relationship between reading performance and field dependence/independence cognitive styles. Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Literature, 1(1), 49-62.
Boulware-Gooden, R., Carreker, S., Thornhill, A., & Joshi, R. (2007). Instruction of metacognitive strategies enhance the reading comprehension and vocabulary achievement of third-grade students. Reading Teacher, 61(1), 70-77.
Brantmeier, C. (2003). Does gender make a difference? Passage content and comprehension in second language reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(1), 1-27.
Cain, K, & Oakhill J. (2009). Reading comprehension development from 8 to 14 years: The contribution of component skills and processes. In R. Wagner, C. Schatschneider, & C. Phythian-Sence (Eds.), Beyond decoding: The behavioral and biological foundations of reading comprehension (pp. 143-175). New York: Guilford Press.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Lewis, M. (2007). Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching method. Learning and Individual Differences,17, 241-25.
Chapelle, C. A. (1995). Field dependence/field independence in the L2 classroom. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 158-168). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chen, S. Y. (2002). A cognitive model for non-linear learning in hypermedia programmes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 449-460.
Coady, J. (1979). A psycholinguistic model of the ESL reader. In R. Mckay, B. Barkman, & R. R. Jordan (Eds.), Reading in a second language (pp. 5-12). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
Faghih, E., & Nemati, F. (2014). Breadth or depth: The role of vocabulary knowledge in Iranian EAP students’ reading comprehension performance. Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 7(14), 40-52.
Fallahi, S., Aziz Malayeri, F., & Bayat, A. (2015). The effect of implementing informationgap tasks on EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2(3), 170-181.
Fatemipour, H., & Nourmohammadi, A. (2014). The impact of using information-gap activities in improving EFL elementary learners’ willingness to communicate. Social Research, 6(4), 109-123.
Goodman, K. S. (1973). On the psycholinguistic method of teaching reading. In F. Smith (Ed.), Psycholinguistics and reading (pp. 158-176). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. London: Pearson Education.
Hansen, J. W. (1995). Students’ cognitive styles in postsecondary technology programme. Journal of Technology Education, 6(2), 14-23.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Heilman, A. J., Bair, T. R., & Rupley, W. H. (1998). Principles and practices of teaching reading. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Co.
Ismaili, M., & Bajrami, L. (2016). Information gap activities to enhance the speaking skill of elementary level students. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 612-616.
Kahtz, A. W., & Kling, G. (1999). Field dependent and field independent conceptualizations of various instructional methods: A qualitative analysis. Educational Psychology, 19, 413-429.
Khalili Sabet, M., & Mohammadi, S. (2013). The relationship between field independence/dependence styles and reading comprehension abilities of EFL readers. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11), 2141-2150.
Lam Son, T. (2009). Using information gap activities to promote communication in EFL classes. Paper presented at the 5th National VTTN ELT Conference, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 251-266). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Latham-Koeing, C., & Oxendon, P. (2014). American file 3. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Long, M. (1989). Task, group, and task-group interactions. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 8, 1-26.
Marashi, H., & Amirabadi, S. (2017). The impact of information-gap and opinion-gap tasks on EFL learners’ lexical collocation achievement. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 4(2), 28-38.
Marashi, H., & Rahmati, P. (2017). The effect of teaching reading strategies on EFL learners’ reading anxiety. International Journal of Research in English Education, 2(2), 43-52.
Marashi, H., & Kordbacheh, S. (2014). Using inductive and deductive consciousness raising tasks to improve field-dependent and field-independent EFL learners’ grammar. Iranian EFL Journal, 10(3), 60-75.
Neu, H., & Reeser, T. W. (1997). Parle-moi un peu!: Information gap activities for beginning French classes. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Nunan, D. (2002). Listening in language learning. In J. Richards & W. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 238-241). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Pressley, M. (2002). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford.
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Pica, T., Kang, H. S., & Sauro, S. (2006). Information gap tasks: Their multiple roles and contributions to interaction research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 301-338.
Rayner, S., & Riding, R. (1997). Towards a categorization of cognitive styles and learning styles. Educational Psychology, 17, 5-27.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Essex, UK: Longman.
Robinson, P. (2001). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 17(4), 368-392.
Rumetshofer, H., & Wob, W. (2003). XML-based adaptation framework for psychologicaldriven e-learning systems. Educational Technology and Society, 6(4), pp. 18-29.
Saeidi, M., & Yusefi, M. (2008). The relationship between EFL learners’ emotional intelligence and critical reading. Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 1(1), 134-161.
Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2007). Is field dependence or independence a predicator of EFL reading performance? TESL Canada Journal, 24(2), 82-108.
Sheng, H. (2000). A cognitive model for teaching reading comprehension. Teaching English Forum, 38(4),12-16.
Soleimani, H., Zare, H., & Abbasi, A. (2014). The effect of pre-task planning through information gap on the speaking skill of foreign language learners. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5(3), 238-247.
Thomas, J., Liao, J., & Szustak, A. (2005). The use of L1 in an L2 on-line chat activity. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(1),161-182.
Tinajero, C., & Paramo, M. F. (1998). Field dependence-independence and strategic learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 251-262.
Triantafillou, E., Pomportsis, A., & Demetriadis, S. (2003). The design and the formative evaluation of an adaptive educational system based on cognitive styles. Computers and Education, 41(1), 87-103.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
van den Broek, P. W., & Espin, C. A. (2012). Connecting cognitive theory and assessment: Measuring individual differences in reading comprehension. School Psychology Review, 41(3), 315-325.
Waber, D. (1997). Biological substrates of field dependence: Implications of the sex difference. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 76-87.
Weisstein, E., & Jacobson, D. (2009). Many sizes fit all: Considering multiple pathways to higher education. New England Journal of Higher Education, 23(5), 15-17.
Witkin, H. A. (1976). Cognitive style in academic performance and teacher-student relations. In S. Messich (Ed.), Individuality in learning (pp. 35-72). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Witkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1981). Cognitive styles: Essence and origins. New York: International Universities.
Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E. & Karp, S. (1971). A manual for the embedded figures test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Woolley, G. E. (2010). A comprehension intervention for children with reading comprehension difficulties. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 12(1), 43-50.
Yousefian, V. (2015). Reading strategies used by Iranian EFL learners while reading academic texts. Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 8(17), 192-204.
Yovanoff, P., Duesbery, L., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Grade-level invariance of a theoretical causal structure predicting reading comprehension with vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(3), 4-12.
Yusuf, H. (2011). Towards improvement in the teaching of reading comprehension in primary schools: The need to activate pupils’ relevant schema. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(1), pp. 16-20.
Zhang, L. (2004). Field-dependence/independence: Cognitive style or perceptual ability? Validating against thinking styles and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(6), 1295–1311.
Zhang, L. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of intellectual styles. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
)