Document Type : Research article


1 Department of English, Roudbar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudbar, Iran

2 Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

3 Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran


This study aimed to find out the effect of text awareness-raising with two degrees of complexity (linguistically and cognitively complex vs. linguistically complex and cognitively simple) on Iranian EFL learners’ reading comprehension. A factorial design with the use of pretest-treatment-posttest was utilized. In this regard, 120 students in four intact classes formed the sample of the study. They were randomly divided into two experimental and two control groups. In one experimental group, the awareness of linguistically and cognitively complex texts was raised and in the other the awareness of linguistically complex and cognitively simple texts was raised. In the control groups, the same texts were employed without textual awareness-raising. The results of Two-way MANOVA revealed the significant main effect of textual awareness-raising on both types of texts. The results also showed a significant interaction effect of teaching method and text complexity. It means the effect of textual awareness-raising was high when the text was linguistically and cognitively complex and it was low when the text was linguistically complex and cognitively simple. The results can be useful for teachers, students, syllabus designers, and course book writers.


Main Subjects

  1. Aghasafari, P., & Malayeri, F. A. (2015). Improving students’ reading comprehension through text structure strategy instruction. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2 (3), 148-158.
  2. Akhondi, M., Aziz Malayeri, F., & Samad, A. A. (2011). How to teach expository text structure to facilitate reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 64(5), 368-372.
  3. Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading: Solving problems in the teaching of literacy. Guilford Publications, Inc.
  4. Alvermann, D. (1986). Graphic organizers: Cueing devices for comprehending and remembering main ideas. In J. F. Bauman (Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension and practice (pp. 210-226). International Reading Association.
  5. Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Grammatical complexity in academic English: Linguistic change in writing. Cambridge University Press.
  6. Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Introduction. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 1-7).  Guilford Press.
  7. Block, E. L. (1992). See how they read: Comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. TESOL Quarterly, 26(2), 319-343.
  8. Boulte, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining and operationalizing L2 complexity. In A. Housen., F. Kuiken., & I. Vedder (Eds), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21-46). John Benjamins.
  9. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31-42. 
  10. Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 727-752.
  11.  Chalak, A., & Nasr Esfahani, N. (2012). The effects of text structure awareness on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 1(2), 35-48.
  12. Cohen, L, Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledge Falmer.
  13. Duke, N., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. Farstrup & J. Samuels (Eds.), what research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 205-242). International Reading Association.
  14. Elmianvari, A., & Kheirabadi, R. (2013). Interactive theoretical model of text processing reflected in reading comprehension: An experimental study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(2), 279-290. doi:10.4304/jltr.4.2.279-290                         
  15. Firkins, A., Forey, G., Sengupta, S. (2007). Teaching writing to low proficiency EFL students. ELT Journal, 61 (4), 341-352.
  16. Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(2), 221–233.
  17. Fotovatian, S., & Shokrpour, N. (2007). Comparison of the efficiency of reading comprehension strategies on Iranian university students’ comprehension. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 37(2), 47-63.
  18. Geranpayeh, A. (2003). A quick review of the English Quick Placement Test. Research Notes, 12, 8-10. Retrieved from
  19. Ghorbani Shemshadsara, Z., Ahour, T., & Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2019). Raising text structure awareness: A strategy of improving EFL undergraduate students’ reading comprehension ability. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1644704.
  20. Graesser, A. C., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Automated analysis of essays and open-ended verbal responses. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology: Foundations, planning, measures, and psychometrics (pp. 307–325). American Psychological.
  21. Granello, D. H. (2001). Promoting cognitive complexity in graduate written work: Using Bloom’s taxonomy as a pedagogical tool to improve literature reviews. Counselor Education and Supervision, 40(4), 292-307.
  22. Hall, K. M., Sabey, B. L., & McClellan, M. (2005). Expository text comprehension: Helping primary- grade teachers use expository texts to full advantage. Reading Psychology, 26(3), 211-234.
  23. Hebert, M., Bohaty, J. J., & Nelson, J. R. (2016). The effects of text structure instruction on expository reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 18(5), 609-629.
  24. Housen, A. & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461-473.
  25. Housen, A., De Clercq, B., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2019). Multiple approaches to complexity in second language research. Second language research, 35(1), 3-21.
  26. Howatt, A. P. R., & Widdowson, H. G. (2004). A history of English language teaching. Oxford University Press.
  27. Kalali, N. N., & Pishkar, K. (2015). The effect of genre-based teaching on Iranian EFL learners’ L2 reading comprehension. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research2(7), 123-137.
  28. Karbalaei, A. R., & Hejazi, M. (2015). The effect of genre-based instruction on reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language and Literature6(1), 253-261. DOI:10.7813/JLL.2015/6-1/46 
  29. Kirkland, M. R., & Saunders, A. P. (1991). Maximizing student performance in summary writing: managing cognitive load. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 105-121.
  30. Kormos, J. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 148-161.
  31. Lapp, D., Moss, B., Grant, M. & Johnson, K. (2015). A close look at close reading: Teaching students to analyze complex texts (K-5). ASCD.
  32. Master, P. (2005). Research in English for specific purposes. In E. Hinkel, (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 99-115).  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  33. Meyer, B. J. F. (1984). Organizational aspects of text: Effects on reading comprehension and applications for the classroom. In J. Flood (Ed.), Promoting reading comprehension (pp. 113–138).  International Reading Association.
  34. Meyer, B. J. F., & Ray, M. N. (2011). Structure strategy interventions: Increasing reading comprehension of expository text. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 127-152.
  35. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of educational psychology, 90(2), 312.
  36. Namjoo, A., & Marzban, A. (2014). A new look at comprehension in EFL/ESL reading classes. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(3), 3749-3753.
  37. Newman, L. M. (2007). The effects of explicit instruction of expository text structure incorporating graphic organizers on the comprehension of third-grade students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, Maryland.
  38. Ogle, D., & Blachowicz, C. L. Z. (2002). Beyond literature circles, comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. Guilford.
  39. Pearson, P. D., & Duke, N. K. (2002). Comprehension instruction in the primary grades. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 247–258).  Guilford.
  40. Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317-344.
  41. Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. E. (2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC [Computer software].
  42. Pressley, M., & McCormick, C. B. (1995). Advanced educational psychology for educators, researchers, and policymakers. HarperCollins College Publishers.
  43. Rabini, S., Akhondi, M., & Aziz Malayeri, F. (2015). Processing information in expository passages using text structure strategies: An accelerator to effective reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2(2), 42-58. Available online @
  44. Riazi, A. M., & Mosalanejad, N. (2010). Evaluation of learning objectives in Iranian high school and pre-university English textbooks using Bloom’s taxonomy. The Internet TESL Journal, 13(4), 1-16.
  45. Roehling, J. V., Hebert, M., Nelson, J. R., & Bohaty, J. J. (2017). Text structure strategies for improving expository reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 71(1), 71-82.
  46. Roller, C. M., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of narrative and expository organizational instruction on sixth-grade children’s comprehension of expository and narrative prose. Reading Psychology, 6(1-2), 27-42.
  47. Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2010). The impact of formal schemata on L3 reading recall. International Journal of Language Studies (IJLS), 4(4), 357-372.
  48. Schwartz, A., Mendoza, L., & Meyer, B. (2017). The impact of text structure reading strategy instruction in a second language: Benefits across languages. The Language Learning Journal, 45(3), 263-281.
  49. Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.
  50. Shishehsaz, A. R. (2006). The effect of explicit genre teaching on EST students’ reading comprehension (Unpublished master’s thesis). Islamic Azad University, Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
  51. Simonsen, S. (1996). Identifying and teaching text structures in content area classrooms. In D. Lapp, J. Flood, & N. Farnan (Eds.), Content area reading and learning: Instructional strategies. Allyn and Bacon.
  52. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
  53. Syndicate, U. C. L. E. (2001). Quick placement Oxford University Press.
  54. Tompkins, G. E. (1998). Language arts: Content and teaching strategies. Merrill.
  55. Vahidi, S. (2008). The impact of EFL learners’ rhetorical organization awareness on English academic/expository text comprehension. Foreign language Research journal, Special issue. 1(41), 145-158.
  56. WIDA’S English Language Development (ELD) Standards (2012). Retrieved from
  57. Williams, J. P. (2018). Text structure instruction: The research is moving forward. Reading and Writing, 31(9), 1923-1935.
  58. Williams, J. P., Hall, K. M., & Lauer, K. (2004). Teaching expository text structure to young at-risk learners: Building the basics of comprehension instruction. Exceptionality, 12(3), 129–144.
  59. Zabrucky, K. M., & Moore, D. (1999). Influence of text genre on adults’ monitoring of understanding and recall. Educational Gerontology, 25(8), 691-710.
  60. Zarrati, Z., Nambiar, R. M. K., & Mohd Maasum, T. N. R. (2014). The importance of text structure awareness in promoting strategic reading among EFL readers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118(2014), 537-544.