ผลของการสอนอ านภาษาอังกฤษแบบเน นงานปฏิบัติ - EDU Portal, Chula U

Loading...

ผลของการสอนอานภาษาอังกฤษแบบเนนงานปฏิบัติทมี่ ีตอความสามารถในการอานเพื่อความเขาใจ ของนักเรียนระดับประถมศึกษา

นางสาวปาริฉตั ร ใสยอด

วิทยานิพนธนี้เปนสวนหนึง่ ของการศึกษาตามหลักสูตรปริญญาครุศาสตรมหาบัณฑิต สาขาวิชาการสอนภาษาอังกฤษเปนภาษาตางประเทศ ภาควิชาหลักสูตร การสอน และเทคโนโลยีการศึกษา คณะครุศาสตร จุฬาลงกรณมหาวิทยาลัย ปการศึกษา 2552 ลิขสิทธิ์ของจุฬาลงกรณมหาวิทยาลัย

EFFECTS OF TASK-BASED ENGLISH READING INSTRUCTION ON READING COMPREHENSION ABILITY OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

MISS PARICHAT SAIYOD

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education Program in Teaching English as a Foreign Language Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Educational Technology Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University Academic Year 2009 Copyright of Chulalongkorn University

EFFECTS OF TASK-BASED ENGLISH READING

Thesis Title

INSTRUCTION ON READING COMPREHENSION ABILITY OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS By

Miss Pari chat Saiyod

Field of Study

Teaching English as a Foreign Language

Thesis Advisor

Prannapa Modehiran, Ph.D.

Accepted by the Faculty of Education, Chulalongkom University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master' s Degree

...

~~..~... Dean of the Faculty of Education

(professor Sirichai Kanjanawasee, Ph.D.)

THESIS COMMITTEE

. . .. .. . ..q 4
04.,~ . ...

Chainnan

(Assistant Professor Apasara Chinwonno, Ph.D.)

. . . . h.n~ ..~~. .

Thesis Advisor

(Prannapa Modehiran, Ph.D.)

. .. .. . . . . .

.. ... ... . ................ ... ... .. External Examiner

(Assistant Professor Bussaba Tontong, Ph.D.)

lV

Ul;U9l~

hwtWI:

~ll~tl~m~fftl'Ut:il'UmllltJ~nqllU'U'ULU'U'nUua,j~~ii~tlfldl1J

'I ,A ill 'I IV '" IV .1 ~ ffl1Jl~{l L'Um~tl1'UL'Ymfldl1JL~l L~'\Jtl~'Um~v'U~~~'Uu~~{l1J"mn

(EFFECTS OF

TASK-BASED ENGLISH READING INSTRUCTION ON READING COMPREHENSION ABILITY OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS).

"

.

,

~tl~,rm;v'U~~~'UWU~~{l1Jffnlll~~n11fl~U'U'UL~iiVfitl'Um1'Y1~lltl~vth~iit!mhtiqj'Y11~fffi~Vi " , .

~~~'U .05 (2) t!m;V'U1~~'Ui''UU~~{l1Jffmniifldl1Jfl~L~'ULnVdn'UU~~ lV'tfUVi'Ili''UUll~~Uff~~fl

"

,

l'Um~L'iV'Um~t:il'UU'U'ULU'U~l'UUa,j~ ~~il U~~ lV'tfUVi'Ili''Ufltl m~'1l1tlmffl'Um~";ln~nn1J

~l1111nl1mV m~ffrl~Uaff1J'n'U;n'UL'~tl'U~~l111~";1~1'U Ull::L~1Jll'Ufldl1JrL~Vdn'UL,itll11~L;V'U ~

~d1J'Y1~fldl1J

1~

0

IV'"

t "l1'Ufl1fY.... 'Y1Lm~

..

IV

"

d

11'"

'"

d,

IV

dVmWmllltl~nqll tlVl~ ~ nAl1J ~L~V'U'Ul~fl'U1Jfl dl1JLl1'UdlV~

U~~ff'UUqjl111'Um~L;V'Utld,rl~ mildfltl ii~tl ~ln~ l'Um~ l~mlll Ull~nlll1'Um~";1~1'UUa,j~

'~L~V~ .... tl

):'-nf)~~~_m'H"y')-'Hu1~xnnl'\Jl~1j[n:dJn~n 11lVijtl~tlijffA ____ J1iii~_t ___~~~. ffl~11')fl m1J1~_'\Jf.lJ):IJ~~.nfl»lilum_lnri:H_lb:~m_~ 11lVijtl~tltl.~mnlll1'Y1Vlij""'U;l1f1d%IV/I}./~

mfl1'tfl

Um~;lnlll ~??7. _____ __________ _________ .__ ______ ._____ .______________ _

v # # 4983718627: MAJOR TEAClllNG ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE KEYWORDS: TASK-BASED INSTRUCTION/ READING COMPREHENSION ABILITY

PARICHAT SAIYOD: EFFECTS OF TASK-BASED ENGLISH READING INSTRUCTION ON READING COMPREHENSION ABILITY OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS. THESIS ADVISOR: PRANNAPHA MODElllRAN, Ph.D., 126 pp. The objectives of this study were to: (1) study the effects of task-based English reading instruction on reading comprehension ability of elementary school students and (2) study students' opinions on task-based English reading instruction. subjects were Grade 6 students selected by purposive sampling.

The

There were 35

students consisted of 17 males and 18 females. The instruments in this research were the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest (parallel forms), and the openended questions. The data were analyzed using t-test and content analysis. The findings of the study revealed that (1) the posttest mean scores on English reading comprehension of elementary school students were higher than the pretest mean scores at the significance level of .05, and (2) students reflected towards the benefits and limitations of the task-based reading instruction. Students thought that the instruction provided students a chance to do various types of tasks, increased students' interaction when performing tasks with their friends in groups, and broadened students' experience about the learning topic and knowledge of vocabulary as well as grammar. In terms of the limitations, some students stated that the students had the problems with the language use and the time allocation.

Department:

.c.mTI~w...1:l:m m~ID!~t~9.I).1

Student's SignatureJ~.dCh9t..~

[email protected]\l,~.~tt9.nru.I~~.1;mQJ9gy

Advisor's Signature

•.

Field of Study: I~.~~m~gJ~I)..gH§h.~ . J~.f9.f~~gtl [email protected]&\@g~

Academic Year: ...........fQQ9...............

~/:JI!:r-4:....

vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to extend my grateful thanks to many people who provided considerable encouragement and wholehearted support throughout my research study. I wish, first and foremost, to express my appreciation to Dr. Prannapha Modehiran, my beloved thesis advisor for her valuable suggestions and for devoting her time to make a contribution to the success of my study. I am very grateful to my thesis committee, Assistant Professor Dr. Apasara Chinwonno and Assistant Professor Dr. Bussaba Tontong, who help me reshape and fine-tune my thesis. I would like to thank all experts who commented thoughtfully and constructively on many aspects of my instructional and research instruments. I give my substantial thanks for the generous help and kind assistance to all instructors at the TEFL program as well as all staff at the Faculty of Education. My special thanks also go to my TEFL friends. Last but not least, I would like to give my grateful thanks to my beloved family for their constant support and their unconditional love.

vii CONTENTS PAGE Abstract (In Thai) .......................................................................................................... iv Abstract (In English) ...................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... vi Contents ........................................................................................................................ vii List of Tables .................................................................................................................. x List of Figures................................................................................................................ xi

Chapter I: Background and Statement of the Problem ................................................... 1 Research Questions ............................................................................................ 3 Research Objectives ........................................................................................... 3 Statement of Hypothesis ..................................................................................... 4 Scope of the Study .............................................................................................. 4 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................ 4 Outline of the Study............................................................................................ 5

Chapter II: Review of the Literature .............................................................................. 6 Reading Comprehension .................................................................................... 6 Levels of Reading Comprehension ........................................................ 7 Task-Based Learning (TBL) .............................................................................. 9 An Overview of Task-Based Learning ................................................. 10 The Definitions of Tasks....................................................................... 12 Types of Tasks ...................................................................................... 14

viii PAGE Task-Based Learning for Young Learners ...................................................... 15 Research Studies on Reading Comprehension ................................................. 17 Research Studies on Task-Based Learning (TBL) ........................................... 20 Summary ........................................................................................................... 24

Chapter III: Research Methodology ............................................................................. 27 Research Design ............................................................................................... 27 Population and Samples ................................................................................... 28 Research Procedures ......................................................................................... 29 Research Instruments ........................................................................................ 47 English Reading Comprehension Tests ................................................ 47 Open-ended Questions.......................................................................... 52 Data Analysis.................................................................................................... 52 Summary ........................................................................................................... 54

Chapter IV: Findings .................................................................................................... 55 English reading comprehension ability ............................................................ 55 Student’s opinion .............................................................................................. 58 Summary ........................................................................................................... 66

Chapter V: Discussions and Recommendations ........................................................... 67 Summary of the Study ...................................................................................... 67 Findings ............................................................................................................ 70

ix PAGE Discussion ......................................................................................................... 71 Pedagogical Implications.................................................................................. 75 Recommendations for Further Studies ............................................................. 76

References .................................................................................................................... 78

Appendices ................................................................................................................... 85 Appendix A: Need Survey Questionnaire ........................................................ 86 Appendix B: Data Collected form the Needs Survey Questionnaire ............... 87 Appendix C: Lesson Plans................................................................................ 88 Appendix D: Lesson Plans Evaluation Form ................................................. 119 Appendix E: English Reading Comprehension Tests .................................... 110 Appendix F: The Item-Objective Congruence Index of the English Reading Comprehension Tests ................................................................ 122 Appendix G: The Level of Difficulty of the Items (p) and the Discrimination Power of the Items (r) of the Reading Comprehension Tests ... 124 Appendix H: Open-ended Question ............................................................... 125

Biography ................................................................................................................... 126

x LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 3.1: Ranking of the five most interesting reading topics and percentages from the results of the needs survey questionnaire ............................................. 34 Table 3.2: The validation of the task-based English lesson plans ................................ 42 Table 3.3: Experts’ comments and suggestions on instructional aspects of the lesson plans ............................................................................................................ 43 Table 3.4: The duration of the experiment ................................................................... 45 Table 3.5: The research instruments ............................................................................. 47 Table 3.6: Test specifications ....................................................................................... 48 Table 3.7: Levels of reading comprehension, purposes of reading, and test items ...... 49 Table 4.1: A comparison of students’ pretest and posttest mean scores ..................... 56 Table 4.2: A comparison of the students’ pretest and posttest mean scores at two levels of reading comprehension ................................................................ 57 Table 4.3: Percentage of student’s positive opinions on task-based reading instruction ................................................................................................... 59 Table 4.4: Percentage of student’s negative opinions on task-based reading instruction ................................................................................................... 63

xi LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 2.1: The framework of Task-Based Learning (TBL) ........................................ 11 Figure 3.1: Pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design ................................................ 28 Figure 3.2: Research procedures .................................................................................. 29 Figure 3.3: The proposed framework of task-based reading instruction ...................... 32 Figure 3.4: Scope and sequence of task-based English reading instruction ................. 36

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the background and the statement of the problem are provided.

Then, it emphasizes why the research in task-based learning on reading

instruction is needed. Furthermore, it presents the research questions, the objectives of the study, the statement of hypotheses, the scope of the study, and the definitions of terms.

Background and Statement of the Problem Reading text is a relatively recent human activity for about 5,000 years (Hudson, 1998). As readers, we read many different types of texts throughout the day in modern societies because print is all around us and we use it in many more ways than we are aware of (Grabe, 2009). In formal setting, we expect to read in academic contexts or in workplace environments as part of learning or engaging in our jobs. In the field of foreign language learning, reading is a prime source of education. Without a basic foundation in literacy, children cannot gain access to a rich and diverse curriculum. Being able to read well in English can be a basis of knowledge that help to make a progress and gain development in language learning because reading assists in gaining knowledge, provides language learners with huge amount of input, helps them enlarge their vocabulary and positively influences some other language skills such as writing skill (Tang, 2000). Grabe (2009) stated that reading skills do not guarantee success for anyone, but success in much harder to come by without being a skilled reader. With strengthened reading skills, readers will make greater progress and attain greater development in all academic areas (Anderson, 1999).

2 In Thailand, reading serves as a salient skill for Thai learners who want to master English. Since Thailand is a non-English speaking country, there are not many opportunities for Thai learners to interact with other people by using English. Fortunately, English written texts are not too difficult for them to access from various sources such as textbooks, journals, newspapers, product manuals and the internet. Due to the availability of mass media, reading is becoming increasingly important. This, therefore, emphasizes the significance of the reading on English learning in Thai contexts. Although reading is considered to be a meaningful language learning activity, many language learners encountered reading difficulties in reading class. The problems are generally caused by students’ lack of motivation to learn (Ruso, 2007). In English reading class, most of the time, the students passively listen to the teacher, take notes, answer some questions when the teacher asks, and pay much attention to the explanation of vocabulary and grammar items. As a result, students loose interest in learning reading English and they are not satisfied with their achievements. Teaching with teacher-centered way seems difficult and helpless in developing the students’ reading ability and their motivation in English study both inside and outside the classroom. The current situation of reading teaching results in low efficiency because most reading classes are teacher-centered and pay too much attention to language forms. Task-Based Learning (TBL) is a perfect method to refine this situation (Hong-qin, 2007). TBL is both student-centered and task-based; therefore, in a task-based teaching class, students play the central role. In the reading class where students are provided with plenty of chances to be engaged in activities, the teacher is more like a patient listener rather than a talkative speaker.

Also, reading tasks have specific goals, detailed

procedures and methods for students to follow. The goals of such reading activities are

3 for students to explore and experience language, and to develop reading skills. In a taskbased reading class, the teacher designs the tasks from different forms in order to evoke students’ interest and organize lessons in a way that students can carry out the reading tasks with quality and efficiency (Hong-qin, 2007; Shehadeh, 2005). In conclusion, the task-based instruction is considered an effective approach to develop reading comprehension ability of the students.

In the Thai

educational context, there have been only a few studies regarding the reading instruction based on task-based learning. Thus, the researcher constructed the task-based English reading instruction which provided students the plenty of chances to exposure to interesting reading tasks in order to examine if it had an effect upon the elementary school students’ reading comprehension ability and also explored their opinions on the instruction.

Research Questions 1. To what extent does task-based English reading instruction affect reading comprehension ability of elementary school students? 2. What are students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction?

Research Objectives 1. To study the effects of task-based English reading instruction on reading comprehension ability of elementary school students. 2. To explore students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction.

4 Statement of Hypothesis The posttest mean scores on English reading comprehension of elementary school students are higher than the pretest mean scores at the significance level of .05.

Scope of the Study 1. The population for this study was students who were studying in the elementary level from schools in Phathumthani province. 2. The variables in this study were as follows. a. Independent variable was task-based English reading instruction b. Dependent variable was students’ reading comprehension ability

The Definition of Terms 1. Task-based English Reading Instruction refers to instructional procedures which provide students the plenty of chances to be engaged in activities in order to achieve reading task outcomes. Task-based English reading instruction for the study is designed based on Task-Based Learning framework proposed by Willis (1996), is instructed into three stages: pretask, task-cycle, and language focus. 2. Reading comprehension ability is defined as the ability to understand the ideas explicitly stated in the text (literal comprehension) and understand the implied meanings behind these ideas (Interpretive comprehension). Reading comprehension ability is the students’ mean scores from the pre and the post reading comprehension tests constructed by the researcher. The parallel forms of the reading comprehension tests are administered

5 before (pretest) and after (posttest) implementing task-based English reading instruction. 3. Elementary school students refer to the students who are studying in Grade 6 at Tassabal Thaklong 1 School in the second semester of the academic year 2009. They are equivalent to Prathomsuksa 6 students.

Outline of the Study This thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter I provides background to the present study.

It includes the

statement of the problem, research questions, objectives, and hypotheses. Also, scope of the study and definitions of terms are included. Chapter II presents related literature and research studies on reading comprehension and Task-Based Learning (TBL).

It begins with reading

comprehension, levels of reading comprehension, TBL, an overview of TBL, the definitions of tasks, types of tasks, TBL for young learners, research studies on reading comprehension, and research studies on TBL. Chapter III deals with the research methodology of the study. It includes the research design, population and samples, research procedures, research instruments, and the methods of data collection and data analysis. Chapter IV presents the results of the study in accordance with the research questions. Chapter V summarizes the study, discusses the findings and suggests implications and recommendations for teachers and further research.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

This chapter explores task-based English reading instruction which is the focus of this study. It presents the basic concepts and related documents dealing with reading comprehension and Task-Based Learning (TBL), research studies on reading comprehension, and research studies on Task-Based Learning (TBL).

Reading Comprehension Reading is an important part of the learning process. It concerns the reader’s variables that contribute to the reading process and the result of reading is comprehension. Anderson (1999) defined reading as an essential skill for ESL or EFL students and is the most important skill to master ESL or EFL. Readers with strengthened reading skill will make greater progress and attain greater development in all academic areas. Seyler (2000) also stated that reading is the understanding of ideas, information or feeling which the words convey when put together in the specific form chosen by writer. She also mentions that if the reader does not understand or get a message from what he or she has read, he or she is not reading. It means that the reader has to be able to comprehend the text in order to understand, evaluate and criticize. However, people read with various purposes but one thing that they should have in common is the comprehension of what they have read. To teach students to read is to teach the way to comprehend and react to what they read or to read for meaning (Tierney and Readence, 2000).

7 Comprehension is recognized as the heart of reading.

Smith (1988)

illustrated that comprehension is the basis of reading and of learning to read. Gunning (1992) stated that comprehension is a constructive, interactive process involving three factors, namely, the reader, the text, and the context in which the text is read. Kennedy (1981) defined comprehension as a thinking process through which readers become aware of an idea, understand it in terms of their experiential background, and interpret it in relation to their own needs and purposes.

Dechant (1982) said that reading

comprehension comprises of many abilities: (1) ability to understand words in content, (2) ability to interpret the organization, (3) ability to find the main idea, (4) ability to observe the relations between the sentences in the paragraphs, and ability to classify, draw conclusion and anticipate outcomes. In short, reading comprehension is an interactive process in which a reader constructs meanings based on their background knowledge and purposes for reading.

Levels of Reading Comprehension Many researchers seem to share the same concepts when they talk about the levels of reading comprehension. However, the definitions as well as the key terms they gave for each level are slightly different. According to Davis and Lass (1996), the levels of comprehension can be divided into three levels: (1) literal comprehension, (2) inferential comprehension, and (3) critical comprehension. For literal comprehension, readers need to understand what is actually on page. When literal comprehension takes place, readers are able to identify the major components of a text (who, what, when, where) and can also find or remember main ideas or themes when they are explicitly stated in titles, topics, or summarizing

8 sentences. For inferential comprehension, it requires readers to go beyond the text to their own experiences.

For example, inferential understanding occurs as readers make

predictions or develop ideas when main idea, sequence, character, mood, or outcomes are not directly stated in the text. For critical comprehension, it occurs as readers evaluate what is read in the context of their experiences and/ or external standards. Critical comprehension demands analytical skills, so readers must challenge the text with questions such as “Why?” or “Why not?” or “Do I agree?” or “So what?” Alderson (2000) proposed three levels of reading comprehension. The first level is a literal understanding of text. Another level is an understanding of meaning that is not directly stated in the text which can be called “an inferred meaning.” The last one is a critical implication, an understanding of the main implications of the text in which the readers employ critical thinking about the text being read. Ruddell (2001) stated that reading comprehension can be classified into three levels: (1) literal comprehension, (2) interpretive comprehension, and (3) applied comprehension. Literal comprehension is the meaning that the reader gains from reading linearly. Therefore, the reader builds up the meaning from the author’s direct intention message and needs to understand the ideas stated to handle literal questions. Interpretive comprehension requires the reader to read between the lines.

The reader gains the

meaning from the author’s message that are not state directly, so the reader should be able to make conclusions, compare and understand the symbolic use of language and ideas. Applied comprehension is the meaning gained from reading beyond the lines. The reader is able to understand and relate to the information embedded in the text with his or her prior knowledge. Thus, the reader has to links the new information with the previous knowledge when reading.

9 Richards and Schmidt (2002) divide reading comprehension into four types, namely, literal, interpretive or inferential, critical or evaluative, and appreciative comprehension.

Literal comprehension is the process where readers understand,

remember, or recall information explicitly presented in a text. Interpretive or inferential comprehension refers to readers’ process of finding information not directly stated in the text by using their experience or intuition as a basis for interpretation.

Critical or

evaluative comprehension occurs when readers compare information with their own background knowledge and values. Appreciative comprehension is gained when readers are able to obtain an emotional or other kind of valued response from the text. In conclusion, differences in key terms of the reading comprehension levels only show the labeling terminology changes, but the concepts of them are quite the same and levels of reading comprehension are commonly separated into three levels which is ordered by hierarchy from the least to the most complex level namely literal, interpretive, and applied comprehension.

Task-Based Learning (TBL) Task-Based Learning (TBL) in language teaching has become an important approach for over twenty years since the effective language instructions have shifted from an emphasis on teacher-centered to learner-centered classrooms (Hui, 2009). It’s also known as Task-based Language Learning (TBLL), Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT), or Task-based Instruction (TBI).

10 An Overview of Task-Based Learning (TBL) Task-based Learning is a kind of learning approach that one learns English through doing tasks. TBL approach emphasizes the importance of organizing a course around communicative tasks that learners need to do outside the classroom, and stresses learners doing tasks that require communicative language use. Prabhu (1987), as the first significant person in the development of TBL, defined a task as an activity which required learners to arrive at an outcome from given information through some process of thought, and which allowed teachers to control and regulate that process. According to Nunan (1989), TBL was characterized in five features: (1) an emphasis on learning to communicate thought interaction in the target language, (2) the introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation, (3) the provision of opportunities for learners to focus both language and the learning process itself, (4) an enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning, and (5) an attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside the classroom. In 1996, Willis (1996) claimed that tasks are always activities where the target language is used by the learners for a communicative purpose in order to achieve an outcome. She stated that the aim of tasks is to create a real purpose for language use and to provide a natural context for language study. The TBL framework suggested by Willis can be illustrated in Figure 2.1.

11 Figure 2.1: The Framework of Task-Based Learning (TBL)

The framework for TBL was outlined by Willis (1996) and comprised of three stages: pre-task, task cycle, and language focus. In the pre-task stage, the teacher introduces the topic and gives the students the clear instructions on what they will do at the task stage and might help the students with some language points and vocabulary that may be useful for the task. The second stage, the task cycle, consists of three components: task, planning, and report. For the task phase, learners perform the task in pairs or small groups using the language resources that they have while the teacher acts as a monitor and offers encouragement. The planning phase provides a short time for students to prepare

12 and rehearse an oral or written report about their findings from the given task; meanwhile, the teacher acts as a language advisor. At the report phase, some pairs/groups present their findings to the audiences, so a teacher’s role is a chairperson who introduces the presentation, sets a purpose for listening, sums up at the end, and may give students some feedback on what they have presented. In short, the emphasis of the task cycle stage is on students’ understanding and expressing meanings in order to achieve task outcomes and report their findings. The final stage, the language focus, has two components: analysis and practice. In analysis phase, language features such as the structures and the vocabulary that learners encountered in the task or at the report phrase are examined and analyzed. In practice, students do the practice activities and some exercises to increase their confidence in using language and take a note of useful language.

The Definitions of Tasks Many researchers had been written about definitions of tasks from different perspectives and the role of tasks in second language acquisition. They are listed as follows in chronological order. Long (1985) said that a task is a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some reward. Thus, examples of tasks include painting a fence, dressing a child, filling a form, buying a pair of shoes, and making an airline reservation. In other words, task is meant the hundred and one things people do everyday life, at work, at play, and in between.

13 Skehan (1998) noted that a task is regarded as an activity which satisfies the following criteria: 1) meaning is primary, 2) there is a goal which needs to be worked towards, 3) the activity is outcome-evaluated, and 4) there is real-world relationship. Nunan (1989) stated that the communicative task is a piece of work which involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language while their attention is focused on mobilizing their grammatical knowledge in order to convey meaning rather than to manipulate form. The task should also have a sense of completeness, being able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right with the beginning and the end. Willis (1996) pointed out that tasks are always activities where the target language is used by the learners for a communicative purpose in order to achieve an outcome. Willis uses a more restricted definition. This “communicative” definition used in many public discussions about task-based learning. Ellis (2003) stated that tasks are activities that call for primarily meaningfocused language use. He mentioned the concept of task as a work plan for learner activity which requires learners to employ cognitive processes, and can involve any of the four language skills. Although these researchers emphasized the different aspects of tasks, the definitions we have looked at share certain basic characteristics, such as (1) tasks are activities in which students work purposefully towards an objective, (2) the objective may be one that students have set for themselves or one which has been set by the teacher , (3) tasks may be carried out individually or in groups, (4) tasks may be carried out in competition with others or in collaboration, (5) the outcome may be something concrete

14 (e.g. a report or presentation ) or something intangible (e.g. agreement or the solution to a problem) (Littlewood, 2004).

Types of Tasks The most difficult thing to do in a task-based learning class is to design tasks. Nunan (1989) suggested that classroom tasks are generally justified or rationalized in target tasks, real-world tasks, or pedagogical tasks. According to him, tasks with a real-world rational require learners to approximate, in class, the sorts of behaviors required of them in the world beyond the classroom. An example of a real-world task might be the learners will listen to a weather forecast and identify the predicted maximum temperature for the day or decide whether or not to take an umbrella and a sweater to school (Nunan, 1989). Tasks with a pedagogic rationale, on the other hand, require learners to do a thing which it is extremely unlikely they would be called upon to do outside the classroom. For example, the learners will listen to an aural text and answer questions afterwards on whether given statements are true or false. Willis (1996) classified six main types of task that could be adapted for use with almost any topic. Apparently, they are arranging from easy to difficult as follows. 1) Listing: These processes involve brainstorming and fact finding, in which students share their ideas, knowledge, and experience in pairs or small groups and find things out by asking each other or other people and referring to books, etc. The outcome will be the completed list or possibly a draft mind map. 2) Ordering and sorting: These tasks involve four main processes that are sequencing items, actions and events in a logical way, categorizing items, and classifying items in different ways. To fulfill the ordering and sorting tasks, the students should have

15 reasoning ability and common sense. The outcome will be the capacity of ordering and sorting information according to specific criteria. 3) Comparing: The processes involve matching to identify specific points and relate them to each other, finding similarities and things in common, and finding differences. The outcome will be the identification of similarities and differences. 4) Problems solving: These tasks require the students’ reasoning power. The processes will vary depending on the type and complexity of the problem. The outcomes will be the solutions of the problems. 5) Sharing personal experiences: These processes encourage learners to talk more freely about themselves and share their experience with others. The outcomes will be exchanging opinions and attitudes. 6) Creative tasks: These tasks are the combination of task types. These tasks are often called projects which involve pairs or groups of students.

Task-based Learning for Young Learners Willis (1996) pointed out that young learners, up to the ages of eleven or twelve, are often less self-conscious and less anxious about beginning to learn a new language. They are used to making sense of things without understanding everything; they often have very good memories, and are good at imitating. They enjoy playing games, and are often more used to activity-based learning than adult are. Thus, there are many familiar primary-level routines, such as learning to count, story telling, action games, matching and classifying, which can be used in the language classroom. The main principles for teaching young learners were summarized by Willis (1996) as follows:

16 - Use the target language in class as much as possible, starting mainly with words and phrases they know or cangues. - Build on what they know and can do, rather than what they find difficult. - Establish a friendly and co-operative classroom atmosphere so that all will feel free to contribute or ask if they need help. - Don’t expect long contributions in the early stages. - Don’t over-correct and don’t expect perfection.

Take up learners’

suggestions and rephrase encouragingly. - Don’t ban mother-tongue use, but encourage attempts to use the target language. Willis (1996) also suggested that no need to worry if young learners are silent or continue to speak their mother tongue. So long as they are engaged in the activities and trying to understand the language, they will be increasing their vocabulary and beginning to acquire the language naturally. In conclusion, Task-based learning approach (TBL) focuses on the use of authentic language, and to learners doing meaningful tasks using the target language. The assessment is primarily based on the task outcomes rather than accuracy of language forms. TBL is advantageous to the students because it is more student-centered, allows for meaningful communication, and provides for practical language skill building. In this study, three stages of TBL framework proposed by Willis (1996) were adapted into taskbased reading instruction because it is straightforward and practical enough for the students.

17 Research Studies on Reading Comprehension Research on reading comprehension from the previous studies put the emphasis on different dependent variables as follows. Chanudda Nabkasorn (1992) studied the effects of the SQ3R method on the ability of Thai reading comprehension of first year army nursing students. These students were divided into two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The students in the experimental group were trained to read the assigned articles employing the SQ3R method, i.e., Survey, Question, Read, Recite and Review, whereas the students in the control group were assigned to read independently the assigned articles. The results showed that the students in the experimental group obtained higher post-test scores than pre-test scores and they obtained higher reading comprehension scores in the post-test than those in the control group. Surachai Piyanukool (1993) investigated the effects of using Directed Reading-Thinking Technique on English reading comprehension of Mathayomsuksa Five students. Eighty students were randomly assigned as experimental group learning through the Directed Reading-Thinking Technique and control group learning through the Directed Reading Technique. The researcher taught each group by himself 2 periods per week for 8 weeks. A reading comprehension test was administered to both groups after the two techniques had been treated at the end of each period. It was found that Directed Reading-Thinking Technique affected the English reading comprehension of students because the students’ scores of the experimental group were significantly higher than the students’ scores of the control group. Sureeporn Watchai (1995) studied effects of learning strategies and selfregulation on English reading comprehension ability of Mathayomsuksa Two students.

18 Sixty participants are divided into four groups: trained through learning strategies, trained through self-regulation, trained through learning strategies together with self-regulation, and a control group. After the experiment, the researcher tested students on English reading comprehension ability and found that students both in learning strategies group and in learning strategies together with self-regulation group had higher scores than those in the control group. However, the scores of students in self-regulation group did not differ significantly from those in control group. Siriporn

Chantanont (1996) developed a model of teaching English

reading comprehension based on schemata theory for the upper secondary school students and examined the effectiveness of the teaching model in developing students’ reading comprehension. The results of the study showed that the students in experimental group’s mean scores were significantly higher than those in control group. Kanaporn Khomson (1997) developed a self-directed learning model in English reading comprehension for upper school students and evaluated the model. The model derived from the study concentrated on a learning process that students were free to plan their learning activities by themselves or collaborating with their friends in order to achieve long term learning goals by using learning contracts as a tool to set goals derived from individual’s needs, to define activities and methods to evaluate learning outcomes. In the experiment, students were divided into 2 groups: taught through teacher’s manual as a control group and taught through a self-directed learning model as an experimental group. The findings revealed that the English reading comprehension scores of both groups were not different, but the scores of the low ability students in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group and the post-test scores of the experimental group were significantly higher than the pre-test scores.

19 Sararat Chanklin (2001) studied English reading comprehension abilities of Mathayomsuksa Two students taught by self-questioning and notetaking strategies. The participants were divided into two groups: taught by self-questioning strategy and taught by notetaking strategy. The results showed that the students in self-questioning group had English reading comprehension scores significantly higher than those in notetaking group. Sireeya

Paserakang (2001) investigated the effect of previewing on

Mathayomsuksa Five students’ English reading comprehension.

The students in

experimental group were assigned previewing activities prior to reading. The students in control group received no previewing strategies, but other instruction was the same. The results of the study indicated that previewing strategies enhanced students’ reading comprehension because the scores of the experimental group were significantly higher than those of the control group. Patama Intarasombat (2002) studied the effect of vocabulary development approach on Mathayomsuksa Four students’ English reading comprehension.

The

students in the experimental group were taught by English Vocabulary Lessons. English Vocabulary Lessons for this study consisted of 5 types: definition, comparison-contrast, summary restatement, subjective clues, and familiar expression. The finding revealed that the experimental group’s reading comprehension scores from the post-test were higher than those of the control group. Worawoot Tutwisoot (2003) studied the effectiveness of extensive reading program in developing students’ reading comprehension and their ability to manage read independently for information and pleasure. Fifteen Mathayomsuksa Four students enrolled in this program for 8 weeks. The results of the study showed that after taking the

20 extensive reading program, the mean score of the posttest was significantly higher at the 0.05 level. It indicated that the extensive reading program helped to develop the students’ reading comprehension. Werachai Thanamaimas (2004) conducted the study to find out what were the signs of improvement in reading comprehension after applying Direct Reading Activity (DRA) to the students’ reading and what level of comprehension that DRA helped students gain when reading for comprehension. The sample group was six firstyear students. The instruments were reading texts based on traveling topic, four reading exercises, students’ diaries and teacher’s journals, and student self-assessment rubric. The findings showed that DRA helped the students made better guesses, able to read with more comprehension and increased the students’ reading attitude in English.

Also,

students were able to answer all 3 levels of comprehensive questions (literal, interpretative, and applied levels of comprehension).

Research Studies on Task-Based Learning (TBL) There are many research studies related to the uses of task-based instruction in the filed of language teaching and learning as follows. Suwimon Taopichattrakul (1991) conducted the study to find out to what extent the students could adapt to a form of Task-based teaching method and their attitudes. The participants of the experiment were 23 students of the first year agricultural diploma level at Chiangmai Agricultural College. The result indicated that the students could adapt themselves to the Task-based method at the satisfactory level and their involvement, confidence, and motivation was increased. favorable attitude.

Also, the students had a

21 Sukhonthip Vadhanamra (1996) studied the effects of using task-based activities on English language communicative ability of second year students at the Royal Thai Air Force Academy. Forty students were divided into 2 groups. The first group was the experimental group taught by using task-based activities which were small group work and pair work. The second group was the control group taught by using the activities in the instructor text book which was teacher-centered. Both groups were taught by the researcher for 5 weeks, 10 periods per group. The result of the research revealed that the English language communicative ability of the integrated skills and each skill i.e. listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills of the students taught by using task-based activities were higher than those of the students taught by using the activities in the instructor text book at the 0.01 level of significance. Manachai Kaewseeduang (2000) investigated the effects of the Communicative Grammar-based Task which integrated the teaching of communicative grammar through the process of a task-based on eight Mathayomsuksa Six students. The results revealed that all students obtained the higher percentages of proficiency gain scores of the grammaticality judgment tests. It could be concluded that the use of the Communicative Grammar-based Task could promote students’ knowledge of a grammar point and the interaction focused on an exchange of information. Oranuch Puangsuk (2001) studied the effect of the use of a task-based writing process upon the development of learners’ grammatical accuracy on 20 students in university level. The instruments used for the study included the task-based writing process: Unsupervised Writing Task, Supervised Writing Task, and Interactive Writing Task.

The findings revealed that the task-based process is effective in enhancing

22 students’ grammatical accuracy. The teaching model helped decrease incorrect use of grammar and promoted students’ favorable attitudes toward learning grammar. Thidarat Nakkyo (2001) examined the effects of form-focused instruction in communicative tasks on English oral ability of the information system undergraduates, Business Administration Faculty at Rajamangala Institute of Technology, Bangkok Commercial Campus.

The findings showed that English oral proficiency of the

undergraduates after being taught by using form-focused instruction in communicative tasks was higher than that before being taught at the .01 level of significance. Chinnapen Rattanawong (2004) studied the effects of teaching by using Task-Based Learning (TBL) towards English language communicative ability of Prathomsuksa Six students. Ninety-eight students were divided into two groups. The experimental group was taught by using TBL whereas the control group was taught by the conventional method. After the experiment, he found that the pre and post tests’ mean score of the experimental group was significantly higher than those of the control group. Moreover, the most of students in the experimental group liked to do group work in TBL and thought that the tasks had the consistency with the lesson. They had confidence to use English as well as the working skills with their friends. Chen and Chen (2005) examined the effectiveness by using a collaborative task-based approach in the teaching of reading and explored the EFL students’ attitudes towards reading-to-writing English Instruction. The samples were 37 junior high school students randomly selected from an English learning language center in Tinan City, Tiwan. The findings showed that EFL students expressed fairly positive attitudes towards the collaborative task-based reading-to-writing English Instruction.

23 Nantipa Santadkard (2006) investigated whether the use of task-based activities helped students in learning English grammar. Thirty-six first year students of Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University were taught past simple through doing task-based activities and the framework of TBL by Jane Willis (1996) was applied during the teaching process. After the experiment, the students’ ability in learning grammar through task-based activities had been increased significantly. Therefore, task-based activities helped the students in their English grammar learning. Ramate Moonwaeng (2007) conducted the study to order to improve the paragraph writing performance of upper secondary students using the writing task activities. The findings showed that the writing task activities were effective in improving the participants’ writing skill because all participants got higher scores after the implementation of the writing task activities. Nopphawan Chimroylarp (2007) also studied the effects of task-based instruction on the learning outcomes of Buddhist missionary monks and explored their views on TBI.

The findings revealed that the post-test scores of all students were

significantly higher than the pre-test scores, especially in terms of speaking skills. In addition, the results from the open-ended part of the questionnaire showed that the majority of the students felt that TBI helped a lot in preparing them to face the real challenges of the various situations they had to face when working abroad and increase their confidence in using English in real life. Ruso (2007) applied TBL to a traditional classroom situation with the aim of finding solutions to certain problems such as poor learner motivation. The samples were 55 first year students at the Eastern Mediterranean University.

The findings

revealed that implementing the TBL approach in EFL classes created variety for student

24 involvement and leaded to significant improvements regarding their language performance. Krittarat Krittawattanawong (2008) investigated the effects of task-based writing instruction on students’ writing ability and explore students’ opinions towards task-based writing instruction. The samples were 35 Grade 10 students at Chulalongkorn University Demonstration Secondary School. The findings of the study revealed that there was a significant difference in students’ mean scores on English writing abilities before and after the students’ participation in task-based writing instruction at the significant level of .05. In terms of the opinions, students stated that task-based writing instruction enhanced their confidence in writing, developed their writing skills, and promoted their knowledge of vocabulary and grammar; however, they had problems with language use, vocabulary, and time allocation.

Summary This chapter presents related literature and research studies on reading comprehension and Task-Based Learning (TBL). It begins with models of the reading process, the definition of reading comprehension, the levels of reading comprehension, task-based learning, an overview of TBL, the definitions of tasks, types of tasks, and research studies on reading comprehension and TBL. Models of reading process aim at to clarify how a reader comprehends a text being read. The models of reading process can be categorized into three models: bottom-up, top-down, and interactive (Barchers, 1998). Reading is an important part of the learning process. It concerns the reader’s variables that contribute to the reading process and the result of reading is

25 comprehension. Comprehension is recognized as the heart of reading, works as a thinking process through which readers become aware of an idea, understand it in terms of their experiential background, and interpret it in relation to their own needs and purposes. Many researchers seem to share the same concepts when they talk about the levels of reading comprehension. Levels of reading comprehension are commonly separated into three levels: literal, interpretation, and applied comprehension. For literal comprehension, readers need to understand what is explicitly stated on page.

For

interpretive comprehension, it requires readers to gain the meaning from the author’s message that are not state directly, so the reader should be able to make conclusions, compare and understand the symbolic use of language and ideas.

For applied

comprehension, it occurs when readers evaluate what is read in the context of their experiences. Task-based Learning is a kind of learning approach that one learns English through doing tasks. TBL emphasizes the importance of organizing a course around communicative tasks that learners need to do outside the classroom, and stresses learners doing tasks that require communicative language use. The framework for TBL used in this study was outlined by Willis (1996) and comprised of three stages. The first of these is the pre-task phrase which the teacher introduces and defines the topic and the learners engage in activities that help them to recall words and phrases that are essential to the task. This phrase is followed by the task cycle phase. In the task cycle, the learners inform the task in pairs or small groups. Then, they prepare a report for the whole class on how they did the task and what conclusions they reached. Finally, they show their findings to the class in spoken or written form. The

26 final phrase is the language focus phase which specific language features from the task are highlighted and used for conducting practice activities. Although there were many studies related to reading comprehension and to TBL, none of research studies put a special focus on the effects of TBL on reading comprehension ability of elementary students.

Therefore, this study was conducted to

see the effects of task-based English reading instruction on elementary students’ reading comprehension ability using the TBL framework proposed by Willis (1996).

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research methodology which aims to examine the effects of task-based English reading instruction on reading comprehension ability of Grade 6 students and their opinions towards the instruction.

It describes the

research design and the research procedures. The development of the instructional instrument and the research instruments are also presented in detail.

Also, data

collection and data analysis are provided at the end of the chapter.

Research Design The research design of this quasi-experimental study was the One Group Pretest-Posttest Design which employed with the pretest and the posttest as quantitative measurements and the open-ended questions as qualitative measurements of the experiment’s effects. The parallel forms of the pretest and the posttest constructed by the researcher were used to measure students’ reading comprehension ability and the open-ended questions were used to explore the students’ opinions towards task-based English reading instruction. In this study, the independent variable referred to the task-based English reading instruction while the students’ scores obtained from the tests and the information gathered from the open-ended questions were dependent variables. Figure 3.1 illustrates the research design of this study. O1 and O2 represent dependent variables while X represents independent variable.

28 Figure 3.1: Pretest-Posttest Quasi-Experimental Design O1

X

O2

From Figure 3.1, X is the treatment which was task-based English reading instruction.

O1 is the English reading comprehension pretest which

administered to the students before the experiment. The pretest scores were used to place the students in different reading achievement levels and were also used for later comparison with the scores from the English reading comprehension posttest represented here as O2 which administered to the students after the experiment. Apart from studying students’ reading comprehension ability between the pretest and the posttest, the researcher constructed the open-ended questions to elicit information on students’ opinions towards task-based English reading instruction.

Population and Samples The setting chosen for this study was Tessaban Thaklong 1 School, a municipal school, in Phathumthani province which is located in the central district of Thailand.

Tessaban Thaklong 1 School provides an education ranking from

kindergarten level to lower secondary level. The population for this study was elementary school students who were studying in Grade 6 Room 1 to 6 at Tessaban Thaklong 1 School in the second semester of the academic year 2009. The total number of Grade 6 students was 414. After contacting the teachers from Grade 6 Room 1 to 6, only one teacher from Grade 6 Room 3 was willing to join this study which lasted for 15 lessons as a special course.

29 Thus, the subjects for this study were the students from Grade 6 Room 3 selected by purposive sampling. There were 35 students consisted of 17 males and 18 females.

Research Procedures The research procedures consisted of two main phases: the preparation and the main study. The details of the research procedures in each stage are presented in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2: Research Procedures Phase 1: The Preparation of Task-based Reading Instruction Stage 1.1: Study the basic concepts and the related documents Stage 1.2: Construct the instructional instruments Stage 1.3: Verify the effectiveness of the instructional instruments Stage 1.4: Conduct the pilot study Stage 1.5: Revise the instructional instruments

Phase 2: The Main Study Stage 2.1: Administer the English reading comprehension pretest Stage 2.2: Implement task-based reading instruction and administer the open-ended questions Stage 2.3: Administer the English reading comprehension posttest Stage 2.4: Evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction

30 Phase 1: Preparation of Task-based Reading Instruction Stage 1.1: Study the basic concepts and related documents The basic concepts and related documents dealing with reading instruction based on task-based learning were explored and summarized as follows: In the present study, the framework of task-based English reading instruction had adopted the three phases of Task-Based Learning framework proposed by Willis (1996). The first of these is the pre-task phrase which the teacher introduces and defines the topic and the learners engage in activities that help them to recall words and phrases that are essential to the task. This phrase is followed by the task cycle phase. In the task cycle, the learners inform the task in pairs or small groups. Then, they prepare a report for the whole class on how they did the task and what conclusions they reached. Finally, they show their findings to the class in spoken or written form. The final phrase is the language focus phase which specific language features from the task are highlighted and used for conducting practice activities. Levels of reading comprehension are commonly separated into three levels: literal, interpretation, and applied comprehension. For literal comprehension, readers need to understand what is explicitly stated on page.

For interpretive

comprehension, it requires readers to gain the meaning from the author’s message that are not state directly, so the reader should be able to make conclusions, compare and understand the symbolic use of language and ideas. For applied comprehension, it occurs when readers evaluate what is read in the context of their experiences. Since this study was conducted with the young learners in elementary levels, the researcher paid attention to only the first two levels of reading comprehension, namely literal and interpretive comprehension.

31 Stage 1.2: Construct the instructional instruments The instructional instrument used in the study was the lesson plans. The development of the instrument was described as follows. Lesson Plans In this study, task-based English reading instruction was designed in five units. Each unit was divided into three lessons. Each lesson plan was constructed to incorporate activities and procedures based on a theoretical framework of taskbased English reading instruction adopted from the TBL framework (Willis, 1998). By using the framework, the lesson plans were structured in a sequence of three phases: Pre-task, Task cycle, and Language focus. Figure 3.3 represents the proposed framework of task-based English reading instruction.

32 Figure 3.3: The Proposed Framework of Task-Based English Reading Instruction

Task-Based Learning

Levels of Reading

(Willis, 1996)

Comprehension

Task-Based English Reading Instruction Designing tasks based on written texts to provide the purposeful reading which focused on meaning. 1. Pre-task Teacher: - introduces and defines topic. Introduction to

- highlights useful words and phrases.

Literal and

topic and task

- gives students the task instructions

interpretive

Students:

comprehension

- note down useful words and phrases. 2. Task cycle Teacher: - monitors and encourages students. Task

Students: - do the task individually/ in pairs/ in small groups.

Literal and interpretive comprehension

Teacher: - ensures the purpose of the report is clear. Planning

- helps students rehearse oral reports. Students: - prepare to report to the class how they did the task, what they discovered - rehearse what will say

Literal comprehension

33 Figure 3.3: (Continued) The Proposed Framework of Task-Based English Reading Instruction

Teacher: - selects some groups to present their Report

reports. - gives feedback on content and form. Students:

Literal comprehension

- present their reports 3. Language focus Teacher: - picks up on language items from the report stage. Analysis

- brings other useful words, phrases and patterns to students’ attention Students:

Interpretive comprehension

- identify specific language features from the text/ the task. Teacher: - conducts practice activities Students: Practice

- practice of new words, phrases, and

Literal and

patterns occurring in the text or during

interpretive

the analysis activities.

comprehension

- note down useful language items on their notebooks. .

The researcher developed the 15 lesson plans using the following procedures:

34 Survey of content topics Willis and Willis (2007) suggested that to select the suitable topics for tasks, the teacher can choose the topics that feature in the learners’ English textbooks, typically appear on examination papers and some are in topical or seasonal interest. Therefore, the researcher explored the reading topics from the English students’ textbook “Gogo Loves English Student’s Book 6” (Methold & other, 2005) which was the textbook used in Grade 6 at Tessaban Thaklong 1 School. The selection of reading topics were listed in the needs survey questionnaire. The researcher conducted the needs survey questionnaire (see Appendix A) to identify students’ needs of reading topics and to form the content for the instruction. The students were asked to choose five most interesting topics under the question “Which reading topic do you want to read?” The 14 reading topics included family, school, friends, animals, environment, food and drinks, occupations, health, sports, technology, travel, hobbies, buying and selling, and weather. Then, the data from the questionnaire was analyzed in percentages. (see Appendix B) The five most interesting topics according to students’ preferences are presented in Table 3.1. Table 3.1: Ranking of the Five Most Interesting Reading Topics and Percentages from the Results of the Needs Survey Questionnaire Rankings Reading topics Percentages 1

Environment

74.29

2

Food and drinks

71.43

3

Sports

65.71

4

Animals

57.14

5

Travel

48.57

35 From Table 3.1, the results showed that the students were interested in the following topics respectively: environment (74.29%), food and drinks (71.43%), sports (65.71%), animals (57.14%), and travel (48.57%). Based on the data from the needs survey questionnaire, the most five preferred topics were selected to develop the lesson plans as shown in the scope and sequence of Task-based English Reading Instruction (see Figure 3.4) .

36

Figure 3.4: Scope and Sequence of Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit Lesson Pre-task 1. Environment

Task Cycle

Language Focus

(1) What is Global

- Brainstorming about

- Reading the passage about Global

- Listing the vocabulary used

Warming?

global warming.

warming

in saving the environment

(2) How to help the

- Guessing the words’

- Finding things out by referring to the

- Practicing the use of should

environment?

meaning

passage

and shouldn’t

(3) What should we

- Matching the pictures to the related

do?

sentences - Drawing a mind map about ideas for helping the environment -Making a poster for helping the environment - Presenting group’s work - Commenting on other groups’ presentation and having a vote on the best poster

37

Figure 3.4: (Continued) Scope and Sequence of Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit Lesson Pre-task

Task Cycle

Language Focus

2. Food and

(4) What is your

- Surveying of friends

- Reading the cooking instructions

- Listing the vocabulary used

Drinks

favorite food?

favorite food

- Taking note about the importance

in cooking

(5) How to cook?

- Sharing the

information from the reading

- Practicing the use of

(6) My recipe

experiences on cooking

- Matching the pictures to the related

imperative

sentences - Ordering the sequences of cooking - Writing the cooking instruction and drawing the pictures to show the steps of cooking - Presenting group’s work - Commenting on other groups’ presentation and voting on the best recipe

38

Figure 3.4: (Continued) Scope and Sequence of Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit Lesson Pre-task 3. Sports

Task Cycle

Language Focus

(7) Sports in

- Making the logical

- Reading the passage about Thai boxing

- Listing the vocabulary

Thailand

guess about the

- Rearranging the sentences in the right

related to Thai boxing and

(8) Thai boxing

beginning of Thai

order

past tense

(9) Historical

boxing

- Finding the main ideas from the passage

- Practicing the use of past

- Matching the words with their definitions

tense

stories

- Drawing the time line about the history of Thai boxing and other sports - Presenting group’s work - Commenting on other groups’ presentation and voting on the best paper

39

Figure 3.4: (Continued) Scope and Sequence of Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit Lesson Pre-task 4. Animals

Task Cycle

Language Focus

(10) Who am I?

- Playing game

- Reading the passage about the polar bear

- Listing the vocabulary

(11) The polar bear

guessing “who am I?”

- Finding out the main ideas from the

related to the animals and the

(12) Polar bear and

about animals

passage

weather

Thai elephant

- Answering True of

- Matching the words with their definitions

- Practicing the use of

False questions about

- Comparing the polar bear with Thai

adjective

the facts of polar bears

elephant - Imaging and drawing the picture of the polar bear’s place - Presenting group’s work - Commenting on other groups’ presentation and voting on the most popular pictures

40

Figure 3.4: (Continued) Scope and Sequence of Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit Lesson Pre-task 5. Travel

Task Cycle

Language Focus

(13) Treasure hunt

- Playing “Simon says”

- Reading the passage about treasure hunt

- Listing the vocabulary

(14) The map

about directions

- Finding the main ideas from the passage

related to places and

- Matching the words with the related

directions

pictures

- Practicing the words used in

- Drawing the map with the details of the

telling directions

(15) Let’s go

directions to go to find the treasure - Presenting group’s work which requires the volunteers to follow the directions - Commenting on other groups’ presentation and voting on the best treasure map

41 Stage 1.3: Verify the effectiveness of the instructional instruments To verify the lesson plans (See Appendix C), evaluation forms for instructional aspects of the lesson plan were constructed by the researcher (See Appendix D).

Instructional aspects to be validated were divided into four main

categories, including objectives of the lesson, materials and task sheets, teaching procedures, and evaluation.

The evaluation form contained 12 items that were

presented in the form of 4-point numeral Likert-type scales. The lesson plans were inspected and rated in order to ensure content validity by three experts in the field of English language instruction. Three experts were asked to consider the appropriateness of the instructional aspects using these following criteria. 4 = Excellent 3 = Good 2 = Acceptable 1 = Revision needed The results form the evaluation forms were calculated for mean scores and compared using the criteria as follows. 1.00 – 1.50 means that the instructional aspect needs to be revised 1.51 – 2.50 means that the instructional aspect is acceptable 2.51 – 3.50 means that the instructional aspect is good 3.51 – 4.00 means that the instructional aspect is excellent Items scoring higher than 3 were kept and those lower than 3 were modified. The average score of each item is shown in Table 3.2.

42 Table 3.2: The Validation of the Tasked-Based English Reading Lesson Plans Expert Expert Expert Average Instructional Aspects

Meaning

A

B

C

1. Objectives

3.00

4.00

4.00

3.67

Excellent

2. Materials and Task sheets

4.00

3.88

4.00

3.96

Excellent

3. Teaching Procedures

3.50

3.25

3.25

3.33

Good

4. Evaluation

2.50

4.00

4.00

3.50

Good

Overall

3.25

3.78 3.81

3.61

Excellent

The results from the lesson plan evaluation forms indicated that the average scores of the lesson plans were between 3.33 and 3.96 and the overall score was 3.61.

It implied that the lesson plans contained the majority of relevant

characteristics and the overall lesson plans were excellent. However, the three experts gave some additional comments for revising the lesson plans. Comments and suggestions from the experts were as follows. Expert A suggested that the lesson objectives should be more specific and related to the reading skill. The teacher may need to relate Task Sheet with the reading passage and the outcome task in order to making students see the importance of reading and the interpretations of the massage they had read. The expert also commented that the teacher should state the specific procedure for reading instruction within task-based lesson and the rubric scoring to evaluate students’ outcome task should be added. Expert B suggested that some instructions in Task Sheet were not clear. The students might not understand what they were required to do or answer. Also, some activities might need more time to deal with.

43 Expert C commented that some words were too difficult for the students. The comments and suggestions were summarized in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Experts’ Comments and Suggestions on Instructional Aspects of the Lesson Plans Instructional Aspects Comments and Suggestions Objectives

- The objective should be more specific. - The objective should relate to the reading skill.

Materials and Task Sheets

- Some instructions in Task Sheet were not clear. - The teacher may need to relate Task Sheet with the reading passage and the outcome task.

Teaching Procedures

- The teacher should state the specific procedure for reading instruction. - Time allocation in each procedure should be considered.

Evaluation

- The rubric scoring to evaluate students’ outcome task should be added. According to the experts’ comments and suggestions, the lesson plans

were revised as follows. First of all, in terms of objectives, the lesson objectives were rewritten using the verbs that were more specific and easier to measure and related to the reading skill. Secondly, concerning materials and task sheets, the language instructions were modified to be simpler and clearer to suit the students’ language level.

44 Thirdly, in teaching procedures, the reading instructions were explicitly stated in the pre task phase and the issues of reading strategies were raised during the language focus phase. Also, time allocation was reconsidered in particular activities which required more time to complete. And finally, the point of the evaluation, the rubric scoring to evaluate students’ outcome task were added. Stage 1.4: Conduct the pilot study After the revision of the lesson plans, a pilot study was carried out before the main study was undertaken. The pilot study was conducted with 3 lessons of unit 1. The aims of the pilot study were to find out any potential problems necessary for the implementation stage of the actual study. The pilot study was done with an additional 34 students who were studying in Grade 6 Room 2 at Tassaban Thaklong 1 School in the second semester of the academic year 2009. The students in the pilot study had the same characteristics in terms of educational background as the actual participants of the study. All problems occurring in the pilot study were taken into consideration in revising the lesson plans for the main study. Stage 1.5: Revise the instructional instruments The lesson plans were revised based on the information gained from the pilot study. The problem found in the pilot study was that the language used in class and the materials were too difficult. Also, the directions did not clearly state the objectives of the tasks; therefore, some students were not able to follow the directions and kept asking the teacher how to do the tasks again and again. As a result, most directions were changed into more simple English and more explanations of the tasks

45 were also given. In addition, the lesson plans needed to be reorganized concisely and some exercises should be shortened due to the time allocation.

Phase 2: The Main Study The duration of the experiment (see Table 3.4) was 7 weeks with 15 lessons in 5 units. Each unit lasted for 1 week with 3 periods per week and each period lasted for 60 minutes.

Table 3.4: The Duration of the Experiment Week 1 Pretest Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6 Week 7

Unit 1: Lesson 1-3 The open-ended questions Unit 2: Lesson 4-6 The open-ended questions Unit 3: Lesson 7-9 The open-ended questions Unit 4: Lesson 10-12 The open-ended questions Unit 5: Lesson 13-15 The open-ended questions Posttest

1 period 3 periods

3 periods

3 periods

3 periods

3 periods 1 period

The details in each stage of the main study were as follows: Stage 2.1: Administer the English reading comprehension pretest In the first week, the English reading comprehension was administered to the students in order to measure students’ reading comprehension ability before the treatment.

46 Stage

2.2: Implement task-bas

ed

reading instruction and

administer the open-ended questions During the instruction (Week 2 to Week 6), in which each unit lasted for 1 week, the students participated in task-based English reading instruction. They were engaged in the four phases of the instruction namely pre-task, task cycle, and language focus. In the last lesson of week 2-6, the students wrote their opinions of the instruction in the open-ended questions. Stage 2.3: Administer the English reading comprehension posttest At the end of the experimentation period (in Week 7), all of the students had to do the English reading comprehension posttest in order to examine the effectiveness of task-based English reading instruction. Stage 2.4: Evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction

To evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction, the data obtained from the pre and post English reading comprehension tests were statistically analyzed by means of arithmetic mean, standard deviations, and t- test in order to compare the significant differences of the students’ reading comprehension ability before and after learning through task-based English reading instruction. The data was used to determine whether task-based English reading instruction enhanced students’ reading comprehension ability. Additionally, the opinions written in the open-ended questions were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively in order to explore the students’ opinions towards task-based English reading instruction.

47 Research Instruments The main instruments used in this study were presented in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5: The Research Instruments Research Objectives Instruments English reading To study the effects of task-

Time of distribution Before the instruction

Statistics Mean scores,

comprehension

based English reading

standard

pretest

instruction on reading

deviations,

comprehension ability of the

and t-test

students. Open-ended

To explore the students’

The end of

Content

questions

opinions on task-based

each unit

analysis

After the

Mean scores,

English reading instruction. English reading

To study the effects of task-

comprehension

based English reading

posttest

instruction on reading

deviations,

comprehension ability of the

and t-test

instruction

standard

students.

English Reading Comprehension Tests The parallel form of the pretest and the posttest (see Appendix E) was designed according to the topics from the need analysis and the tasks in the lesson plans. Time allocation for each test was 60 minutes. The test specifications were sum up in Table 3.6.

48 Table 3.6: Test Specifications Sections

Test Types

Text Types

Topics

Part 1

Cloze test

Short passage

Animals

Amount of Items 4

True-False

E-mail

Travel

3

questions

Chart

Weather

3

Multiple-

Graph

Favorite things

3

choice

Map

Places and direction

3

questions

Long passage

Human relationship

4

Part 2

Part 3

From Table 3.5, the tests divided into 3 parts as follow: Part 1: Cloze-test (4 items). In this section, students were asked to read the short passage about animals and then found the missing words to complete the passage. Part 2: True-false questions (6 items). In part 2, students read the Email about travel and the chart about weather forecast and then indicated whether the information in each item was true or false. Part 3: Multiple-choice questions (10 items).

In the last section,

students had to answer the question after they read the graph about favorite things, the map about places in the city, and the long passage about human relationship. Both English reading comprehension pretest and posttest contained 20 items which aimed to assess two levels of reading comprehension ability: literal comprehension and interpretive comprehension. (see Table 3.7)

49 Table 3.7: Level of Reading Comprehension, Purposes of Reading, and Test Items Levels of Reading Purposes of Reading Item No. Comprehension To find facts and details that are

1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11,

explicitly stated in the text.

13, 14, 15, 16, 18

Literal comprehension

Interpretive

To draw conclusions or make

comprehension

inferences from what they have read.

5, 6, 9, 10, 12,17, 19, 20

For literal comprehension (12 items), students were asked to find facts and details that were explicitly stated in the text. For interpretive comprehension (8 items), students were asked to draw conclusions or make inferences from what they had read. Validity and Reliability of the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest The content validity of the test items was evaluated by 3 experts in the field of language testing. Three experts were asked to rate each item as to whether it was congruent with the objectives and the level of comprehension stated using the evaluation form constructed by the researcher. Then, the Index of Item-Objective Congruence (IOC) (Turner and Carlson, 2003) was calculated by assigning scores to the answers as follows: Congruent = 1 Questionable = 0 Incongruent = -1

50 The data taken from these experts were interpreted. The item assessed the IOC value higher than 0.5 was accepted; however, the item was lower than 0.5 must be revised. The value of IOC for each test item was presented in Appendix F. For the English reading comprehension pretest, the results from the IOC calculation indicated that 18 out of 20 items were rated higher than 0.5, meaning that they were acceptably congruent with the objectives and the level of reading comprehension. Only 2 items of the True-False Question needed the revision. After the consultation with the experts, the items adjusted were as follows: Item 7:

The question didn’t relate to the passage. Tina wants to buy a new sweater because of the cold weather. The question was changed as follows: Tina thinks nothing in Chiang Mai is interesting. (modified)

Item 8:

The picture didn’t go well with the question, “The weather on Tuesday is going to be rainy and cool.”

The picture was changed as follows:

For the English reading comprehension posttest, the results from the IOC calculation indicated that 20 items were assessed higher than 0.5, meaning that all of them were acceptably congruent with the objectives and the level of reading comprehension.

51 After the revision of the tests, a pilot study was carried out before the main study was undertaken with an additional 34 students who were studying in Grade 6 Room 2 at Tassaban Thaklong 1 School in the second semester of the academic year 2009. To ensure the reliability of the tests, two parallel forms of the tests were calculated by Kuder-Richardson-20 formula (KR-20) after the pilot study. The results were 0.79 and 0.78, which can be interpreted that both of them had high reliability. The correlation of the pretest and the posttest, calculated by Pearson Correlation, was 0.93.

It can be implied that two parallel forms of the tests can be used

interchangeable.

Then, all test items were analyzed for difficulty index and

discrimination index of the test. The criteria for the difficulty index and the discrimination index were set as follows. For the difficulty index (p): p < 0.20

means the item was difficult.

p = 0.20-0.80 means the item was good in terms of its difficulty. p = 0.81-0.94 means the item was easy. p ≥ 0.95

means the item was very easy.

For the discrimination index (r): r=0

means the item had no discrimination ability.

r ≥ 0.19

means the item had a low discrimination ability.

r = 0.20-0.29 means the item had a fair discrimination ability. r = 0.30-0.39 means the item had a high discrimination ability.

52 r ≥ 0.40

means the item had a very high discrimination ability.

According to the criteria, the test items of which difficulty indices ranged between 0.20 and 0.80, and discrimination indices were equal or higher than 0.20 were chosen for the main study. It meant that all 20 items of each test were satisfactory (See Appendix G).

Open-ended Questions At the end of each unit, students were asked to answer to the openended questions (see Appendix H) in order to keep track of their learning and what had happened in class. To validate the open-ended questions, three experts were asked to verify the open-ended questions using the evaluation form constructed by the researcher. The results of the open-ended questions were analyzed using content analysis. The researcher counted the frequencies of key words that appeared in the open-ended questions. The findings from the open-ended questions were collected to explore the students’ opinions towards the task-based English reading instruction.

Data Analysis Data analysis for research question 1

To what extent does task-based English reading instruction affect reading comprehension ability of elementary school students?

53 The above research question 1 was concerned with the effects of taskbased English reading instruction on the English reading comprehension ability as measured from the reading comprehension test’s group mean scores of Grade 6 students’ before and after receiving task-based English reading instruction.

The

independent variable was the task-based English reading instruction. The dependent variable was the students’ mean scores on the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest. The data obtained from the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest was statistically analyzed by using arithmetic means, standard deviations, and t-test in order to compare the significant differences in the mean scores from the reading comprehension test before and after the instruction. The analyses yielded a result which determined whether task-based English reading instruction significantly improved English reading comprehension ability of elementary school students.

Data analysis for research question 2

What are students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction? Research question 2 was concerned with the students’ opinions towards task-based English reading instruction. In the open-ended questions, the students could use Thai or English to report about their learning experiences, the things they like and do not like most in this instruction and the feedback after learning through task-based English reading instruction.

The data obtained from the open-ended

questions five times during the course (Week 2-6) were translated into English, transcribed and analyzed by using the content analysis.

54 Summary This study was the quasi-experimental research. The research has been conducted in two main phases as follows: Phase 1: The preparation of the task-based English reading instruction Phase 2: The main study The study was conducted with 38 Grade 6 students for 7 weeks with 15 lessons. After the experiment, the mean scores from English reading comprehension pretest and posttest were compared in order to determine whether task-based English reading instruction significantly improved English reading comprehension ability of elementary school students. Also, the students’ opinions towards task-based English reading instruction were explored through the open-ended questions. The results and findings of the present study are presented in Chapter IV.

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS

Introduction This chapter presents research findings gained from data analysis. Both quantitative and qualitative results were reported based on two research objectives. The first objective aimed at studying the effects of task-based English reading instruction on reading comprehension ability of elementary school students. The second objective was to explore students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction.

Therefore, the findings are divided into two parts: English reading

comprehension ability and students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction.

English Reading Comprehension Ability To examine the effects of task-based English reading instruction on students’ reading comprehension ability, the findings from the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest are answerable. The findings are reported based on the following research question. Research question 1: To what extent does task-based English reading instruction affect reading comprehension ability of elementary school students? This research question determined whether task-based English reading instruction enhanced reading comprehension scores of elementary school students. The parallel forms of the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest were used to answer this research question. The mean scores from the English reading

56 comprehension pretest and the English reading comprehension posttest were compared using the t-test. A comparison of students’ pretest and posttest mean scores were presented in table 4.1.

Table 4.1: A Comparison of Students’ Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores Pretest Posttest Mean Group Differences S.D. S.D. X X

t.

df.

Sig.

-3.15

34

.003*

Grade-6 students

11.29

3.40

12.86

2.66

-1.57

(n = 35) *p<.05 From Table 4.1, the students’ posttest mean scores ( X = 12.86) on the English reading comprehension test were higher than the pretest mean scores ( X = 11.29). The full score was 20 points, the mean difference was -1.57, and the t-values was -3.15 with a degree of freedom of 34 (n = 35). Also, the result revealed that there was a significant difference between mean scores of the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest at a significant level (p < .05). Therefore, the hypothesis stating that the posttest mean scores on English reading comprehension of elementary school students are higher than the pretest mean scores at the significance level of .05 was accepted. In other words, students’ reading comprehension ability significantly improved after receiving task-based English reading instruction.

Levels of Reading Comprehension The scores on the English reading comprehension tests were analyzed in more details to investigate the students’ English reading ability from two levels of

57 comprehension, namely literal and interpretive.

Each test contained 20 items

composed of two different levels of reading comprehension. There were 12 literal questions and 8 interpretive questions. Table 4.2 presented a comparison of students’ pretest and posttest mean scores at two levels of reading comprehension.

Table 4.2: A Comparison of Students’ Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores at Two Levels of Reading Comprehension Levels of Pretest Posttest Mean Reading

Differences

t.

Sig.

1.72

-1.00

-2.37

.024*

1.62

-0.63

-2.31

.027*

X

S.D.

X

S.D.

Literal

6.09

2.21

7.09

Interpretive

5.20

1.88

5.83

Comprehension

*p<.05 Literal Comprehension Level Literal questions were formed as text-based items so as to require students to answer what is stated explicitly in the text or to recall what they have read. These items required students to recognize the information explicitly presented in the reading materials and to identify relationships that exist between ideas in the text. The English reading comprehension test contained 12 items measuring students’ literal comprehension level with the total score of 12 points. From Table 4.2, the results reported that the posttest mean scores ( X = 7.09) on literal questions were higher than the pre-test mean scores ( X = 6.09) and the mean differences was 1.00. It implied that there was significantly difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the students’ reading literal comprehension level (p<0.05).

58 Interpretive Comprehension Level Interpretive questions required students to connect experience with the text and draw a logical conclusion about what they have read in different ways. In addition, these questions asked students to make a logical guess about the past or a prediction for the future based on what they have read in the text or to describe a character based on the events in the story. The English reading comprehension test contained 8 items measuring students’ interpretive comprehension level with the total score of 8 points. The results from Table 4.2 reported that the posttest mean scores ( X = 5.83) on literal questions were higher than the pre-test mean scores ( X = 5.20) and the mean difference was 0.63. It indicated that there was statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the students’ interpretive reading comprehension level (p<0.05). All in all, the posttest mean scores on the reading comprehension test at literal and interpretive comprehension levels were higher than the pretest mean scores. It implied that the students improved their English reading comprehension ability at two levels of reading comprehension after receiving task-based English reading instruction.

Student’s Opinions To explore the students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction, the data from the open-ended questions were analyzed. The open-ended questions were completed five times at the end of each unit. Students were required to express their opinions towards task-based English reading instruction in the form of

59 the open-ended questions. In the open-ended questions, the students were asked about the things they like and do not like in this instruction, in other words, the opinion on the benefits and the limitations of task-based English reading instruction. The findings are presented based on the following research question. Research Question 2: What are students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction? The findings from the open-ended questions were divided into two parts: benefits and limitations. The frequencies of keywords appeared in the openended questions were counted and summarized in the form of frequency and percentage.

Benefits of Task-based English Reading Instruction There were three main aspects of the benefits the students obtained from receiving task-based reading instruction: doing tasks/ activities, students’ interaction, and learning new knowledge (see Table 4.3).

Table 4.3: Percentage of Students’ Positive Opinions on Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit 1

Aspects

n= 33

%

Unit 2

n= 35

Unit 3

%

n= 34

Unit 4

%

n= 35

Unit 5

%

n= 35

%

Doing tasks/

14

42.42

13

37.14

13

38.24

15

42.86

15

42.86

11

33.33

12

34.29

11

32.35

12

34.29

10

28.57

8

24.24

10

28.57

10

29.41

8

22.86

10

28.57

activities Students interaction Learning new knowledge

Note: There were 35 participants who completed the open-ended questions n = the frequencies of keywords appeared in the open-ended questions

60 From Table 4.3, data from the open-ended questions revealed that most of the students clearly stated that they liked the enjoyable and useful activities which could enhance their reading skills and doing these activities were the most valuable benefit they gained from learning reading through tasks (unit 1 = 42.42%, unit 2 = 37.14%, unit 3 = 38.24%, unit 4 = 42.86%, and unit 5 = 42.86%). In addition, some students thought that to interact with their friends when doing tasks could enhance their leaning (unit 1 = 33.33%, unit 2 = 34.29%, unit 3 = 32.35%, unit 4 = 34.29%, and unit 5 = 28.57%). Also, learning new knowledge was one of the benefits of taskbased reading instruction that some students mentioned to (unit 1 = 24.24%, unit 2 = 28.57%, unit 3 = 29.41%, unit 4 = 22.86%, and unit 5 = 28.57%). The students’ opinions on benefits of task-based reading instruction can be described as follows.

Doing tasks and activities Task-based reading instruction provided plenty of chances for the students to participate in doing many types of tasks. In a task-based reading class, reading tasks had specific goals, detailed procedures and methods for students to follow. The goals of such reading activities were for students to develop reading skills and to evoke students’ interest in order to increase the students’ motivation in learning reading. See the following examples. 1. “ชอบกิจกรรมการทําโปสเตอรคะ ไดชวยโลกดวย” “I like making a poster for helping the environment. I think I can help the earth in this way.” (Unit 1: Environment)

61 2. “ชอบทําใบงานคะ สนุกดี เหมือนไดทําอาหารจริงๆในหองเรียนเลย” “I liked doing task sheets. It’s fun and seems like I can cook in the reading class. ” (Unit 2: Food and Drinks) 3. “การทํากิจกรรมที่สนุกสนาน ทําใหบทเรียนนาสนใจมากขึ้น” “Doing enjoyable activities make the lesson more interesting.” (Unit 3: Sports) 4. “ชอบเกมกิจกรรมตอบคําถามเกี่ยวกับสัตว ทําใหไดฝกสมองและฝกพูด” “I like the game asking about animals. I also practice my thinking and speaking skills.” (Unit 4: Animals) 5. “ชอบกิจกรรมเกมที่ใหเคลื่อนไหวตามคําสั่ง และการเสนอผลงานหนาชั้นเรียน” “I enjoy playing game that requires me to move following the directions. Also, I like presenting the group’s work to the class.” (Unit 5: Travel)

Students’ interaction Task-based reading instruction highlighted the increasing of student interaction when working together as a group.

In task-based reading class, the

interaction between students and their friends occurred all the time that the students performed the tasks both in pairs and in groups in order to discuss about ideas related to the reading texts and the tasks, share their experiences and ideas to solve the problem, and brainstorm the ideas to complete the tasks. See the following examples. 1.

ประสบการณใหมๆ”

“สิ่งที่นาสนใจที่สุด คือ การไดรวมทํากิจกรรมตาง ๆ เปนกลุม เพราะทําใหเราไดรับ

62 “The most interesting thing in the unit is to participate in the class activities with my friends as a group. We gain new experience in learning.” (Unit 1: Environment) 2. “การทํางานเปนกลุมทําใหสามัคคีกัน สามารถแลกเปลี่ยนความคิดเห็นกันได” “We work collaboratively in harmony, so we can exchange our opinions.” (Unit 2: Food and Drinks) 3. “ชอบการทํากิจกรรมเปนกลุม ชวยกันคิด ชวยกันทํา ทําใหการเรียนงายขึ้น” “I enjoy working in groups. Helping each others in thinking and doing the tasks can facilitate my learning.” (Unit 3: Sports)

Learning new knowledge Task-based reading instruction could broaden students’ experience and knowledge. It helped students comprehend the content of the text and also boosted students’ knowledge of vocabulary and grammar. In language focus phase, students were asked to list the useful vocabulary related to the learning topics and to highlight thee grammatical items used in the tasks. Then, the task sheets related to the target vocabulary and the target form were distributed; therefore, here students could comprehend the usage as well as practice using them appropriately. See the examples as follows. 1. “คําศัพทและเนื้อเรื่องที่ไดอานนาสนใจมากๆ ทําใหไดรูสิ่งที่ไมเคยรูมากอน” “The vocabulary and the reading passage about polar bear are very interesting. These give me new information that I has never known. ” (Unit 4: Animals)

63 2. “ชอบเรียนคําศัพทใหมๆ ชอบทําใบงานเปนการทบทวนบทเรียนไดดวยคะ” “I like learning new vocabulary and doing the task sheets which I can use to review the lesson.” (Unit 5: Travel) In sum, the benefits of the task-based reading instruction according to students’ opinion showed that the students thought that the instruction (1) provided students various types of tasks in order to develop their reading skills and to evoke students’ interests in learning reading, (2) increased students’ interaction when performing tasks with their friends in groups, and (3) broadened students’ experience about the learning topics and knowledge of vocabulary as well as grammar. Although there were the benefits of task-based reading instruction as mentioned earlier, some limitations were found from the open-ended questions.

Limitations of Task-based English Reading Instruction Two main aspects of the limitations that students encountered while participating in task-based reading class were the language use and the time allocation (see Table 4.4).

Table 4.4: Percentage of Students’ Negative Opinions on Task-based English Reading Instruction Unit 1

Aspects

n= 35

Language use

Unit 2

%

n= 30

Unit 3

%

n= 33

Unit 4

%

n= 28

Unit 5

%

n= 25

%

20

57.14

19

63.33

25

75.76

18

64.29

16

64.00

15

42.86

11

36.67

8

24.24

10

35.71

9

36.00

Time allocation

Note: There were 35 participants who completed the open-ended questions n = the frequencies of keywords appeared in the open-ended questions

64 From Table 4.4, data from the open-ended questions revealed that a lot of students thought that language use was difficult for them (unit 1 = 57.14%, unit 2 = 63.33%, unit 3 = 75.76%, unit 4 = 64.29%, and unit 5 = 64.00%). Furthermore, some students had problems with the time available to complete the given tasks in class (unit 1 = 42.86%, unit 2 = 36.67%, unit 3 = 24.24%, unit 4 = 35.71%, and unit 5 = 36.00%). The students’ opinions on the limitations of task-based reading instruction can be described as follows.

Language use In task-based reading class, the most serious problem was the language use. Most of the students stated that they had language and vocabulary limitations when doing the tasks such as in making sentences and in reporting the task outcomes, since the instruction required students to read the English reading passage in order to perform the given tasks and then report the completed tasks in the written or oral presentations in English. See the examples as follows. 1. “พบปญหาเวลาไมเขาใจคําศัพท และไมเขาใจคําถามบางขอ” “I have the problem with the unknown words and do not understand some questions.” (Unit 1: Environment) 2. “ไมชอบการแตงประโยคเลย มันยาก” “I don’t like making sentences in English. It is difficult for me.” 3. “คิดวาการอานยากเพราะไมรูความหมายของคําศัพท” (Unit 3: Sports) “I think that reading is difficult because I don’t know the meanings of some words.” (Unit 4: Animals)

65 4. “มีปญหาเวลาพูดภาษาอังกฤษ” “I have the problem while speaking English.” (Unit 5: Travel)

Time allocation In task-based reading class, the time constraint was another problem found in this study. Due to the plenty of tasks provided in the class required a large amount of time to perform the tasks; there was not enough time for some students to do the tasks completely. See the examples as follows. 1. “เพิ่มเวลาใหหนอยไดปาวคะ อยากทํางานกลุมใหเสร็จในชั้นเรียนคะ” “Could you please give me more time to do the task?

I want to

complete the group’s work in the classroom.” (Unit 1: Environment) 2. “เวลาเตรียมเสนองานหนาชั้นเรียนนอยไปคะ อยากซอมมากกวานี้” “The time for preparing the presentation isn’t enough. I need more time to rehearse the group’s work presentation.” (Unit 2: Food and Drinks) 2. “อยากมีเวลาทําใบงานมากกวานี้ครับ ตองใชเวลาคิดหาขอสรุปกับเพื่อนๆ” “I need more time to do the task sheets because I have to brainstorm and make a decision with my friend.” (Unit 4: Animals) In sum, the limitations of the task-based reading instruction according to students’ opinions revealed that the students had the problems with (1) the language use and (2) the time allocation.

66 Summary According to the research questions, the findings were shown in two parts: English reading comprehension ability and students’ opinions. For the research question 1, the findings revealed that student’s reading comprehension ability improved after receiving task-based reading class. The mean scores from the reading comprehension tests were analyzed in detail to examine the students’ reading comprehension at 2 levels, namely literal comprehension and interpretive comprehension.

The findings showed that both two levels of

comprehension of the students improved after taking task-based reading instruction. For the research question 2, the findings showed the students’ opinions on the benefits and the limitations while participating in task-based reading instruction. Considering the benefits of the instruction, students stated that task-based reading instruction provided students various types of tasks in order to develop their reading skills and to evoke students’ interests in learning reading, increased students’ interaction when performing tasks with their friends in groups, and also extended students’ experience about the learning topics and broadened knowledge of vocabulary as well as grammar. The limitations of the task-based reading instruction according to students’ opinions revealed that the students had the problems with the language use and the time allocation.

CHAPTER V SAMMARY, DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter consists of five parts. The first part is a brief summary of the study.

It reviews the objectives, the research design, and the research

methodology. The second part presents the findings. The third part discusses the findings of the study. The fourth part relates to the pedagogical implications drawn from the study. Then, the last part offers recommendations for further studies.

Summary of the Study The objectives of this study were 1) to study the effects of task-based English reading instruction on reading comprehension ability of elementary school students and 2) to explore the students’ opinions on task-based English reading instruction. The research design of this quasi-experimental study was the One Group Pretest-Posttest Design which employed with the pretest and the posttest as quantitative measurements and the open-ended questions as qualitative measurements of the experiment’s effects. The subjects for this study were Grade 6 students, who were studying at Tessaban Thaklong 1 School in the second semester of the academic year 2009, selected by purposive sampling. There were 35 students consisted of 17 males and 18 females. The research methodology was divided into two phases: the preparation and the main study.

68 Phase 1: The preparation of task-based English reading instruction The preparatory process of task-based English reading instruction was composed of six stages: 1) study basic concepts and related documents; 2) construct the research instruments; 3) verify the effectiveness of the instruments; 4) conduct the pilot study; and 5) revise the instruments. Stage one, the theories and basic concepts related to this study were explored. The studied topics were Task-Based Learning (TBL) framework proposed by Willis (1996). Stage two, the instruments including the lesson plans, the English reading comprehension tests, and the open-ended questions were constructed. The information from the first stage was compiled and became a theoretical framework for the development of task-based English reading instruction and research instruments. Stage three, the checklists were constructed for evaluating the effectiveness of lesson plans and instruments. After that, the lesson plans and instruments were revised according to the suggestions from the experts. Stage four, a pilot study was carried prior the main study. The sample in the pilot study consisted of 34 students from Grade 6 who were studying at the second semester in academic year 2009. Stage five, the instruments were revised based on the information gained from the pilot study.

69 Phase 2: The main study The main study composed of four stages that were 1) to pretest, 2) to assign the instruction, 3) to posttest, and 4) to evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction. Stage one, prior to task-based English reading instruction, the English reading comprehension pretest was administered to the students in order to measure students’ reading comprehension ability before the treatment. Stage two, during the main study, the students participated in taskbased English reading instruction. They were engaged in the four phases of the instruction namely pre-task, task cycle, and language focus. In the end of each unit, the students wrote their opinions on the instruction in the open-ended questions. Stage three, at the end of the main study, all of the students had to do the English reading comprehension posttest in order to examine the effectiveness of task-based English reading instruction. Stage four, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction, the data obtained from the pre and post English reading comprehension tests were statistically analyzed by means of arithmetic mean, standard deviations, and t- test in order to compare the significant differences of the students’ reading comprehension ability before and after learning through task-based English reading instruction. The data was used to determine whether task-based English reading instruction enhanced students’ reading comprehension ability. Additionally, the opinions written in the open-ended questions were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively in order to explore the students’ opinions towards task-based English reading instruction.

70 Findings The findings of the study can be summarized in two main aspects: (1) the students’ reading comprehension ability and (2) the students’ opinions on the taskbased English reading instruction. English Reading Comprehension Ability According to the research question one, to what extent does task-based English reading instruction affect reading comprehension ability of elementary school students?, the research instrument applied in this study was the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest. The results derived from the English reading comprehension tests indicated that the students improved their English reading comprehension ability after receiving task-based English reading instruction, since the posttest mean scores on English reading comprehension of elementary school students were higher than the pretest mean scores at the significance level of .05. Moreover, the mean scores on the pre and post English reading comprehension tests were analyzed to examine the students’ reading comprehension ability at two levels, namely literal and interpretive comprehension levels. Also, the posttest mean scores on the reading comprehension test at literal and interpretive comprehension levels were higher than the pretest mean scores. In short, it clearly stated that after receiving taskbased English reading instruction the students improved their English reading comprehension ability at two levels of comprehension. Student’ Opinions on Task-based English Reading instruction According to the research question two, what are students’ opinions on task-based reading instruction, the research instrument applied in this study was the open-ended questions.

Students were required to write comments their opinions

71 towards task-based reading instruction five times after each unit of the study. The students’ opinions towards task-based reading instruction were summarized and reported in two main aspects: benefits and limitations. In terms of the benefits, students reported that task-based English reading instruction provide students various types of tasks in order to develop reading skills and to evoke students’ interest in learning reading, increase students’ interaction when performing tasks with their friends in groups, and broaden students’ experience about the learning topic and knowledge of vocabulary as well as grammar. However, the limitations of the task-based reading instruction according to students’ opinion revealed that some students had the problems with the language use and the time allocation.

Discussion Many researchers showed that the students’ ability after learning through

task-based

activities

had

been

increased

significantly

(Chinnapen

Rattanawong, 2004; Krittarat Krittawattanawong, 2008; Puangsuk, 2001; Ruso, 2007; Santadkard, 2006; Vadhanamra, 1996). Thus, the findings in this study supported the results of the previous studies. It was found that the task-based English reading instruction had an effect on students’ reading comprehension ability due to the significant differences between students’ mean scores on the English reading comprehension pretest and posttest.

After implementing the task-based English

reading instruction, the reading comprehension ability of the elementary school students significantly improved. This indicated that learning reading English through task-based learning activities is effective.

72 In the field of second language acquisition (SLA) theoretical perspective, the effects of task-based reading instruction could be explained by the Input Hypothesis (Krashen, 1982) and the Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985). Krashen believed that learners acquire languages when they understand message (input) in the target language that are just a little beyond their current level of acquired competence, while Swain stated that input is not sufficient for acquisition because learners need opportunities to produce the target language. Thus, Krashen’s and Swain’s theories supported the task-based reading instruction, which prepare the students to learn new things based on their levels in the early stage and then produce the outcome at the end, based on TBL framework (Willis, 1996) which consisted of three phases of the instructional procedures. The first of these is the pre-task phrase which the teacher introduces and defines the topic and students engage in activities that help them to recall words and phrases that are essential to the task. The initial phase gives useful exposure which helps students to recall relevant words and phrases and to recognize new ones. In the second phrase, the task cycle, the students inform the task in pairs or small groups. Then, they prepare a report for the whole class on how they did the task and what conclusions they reached. Finally, they show their findings to the class in spoken or written form. This phase gives students practice in public, prestige use of language and increases other students’ exposure to spoken language. The final phrase is the language focus phase which specific language features from the task are highlighted and used for conducting practice activities.

The last phase aims at to help students

explore language, to develop an awareness of aspects of grammatical items, to clarify concepts, and to notice new things.

73 Moreover, in task-based English reading class, students found that learning reading thought tasks was more challenging and interesting. The findings from the open-ended questions revealed the great satisfaction with the task used in the classroom. Students’ reported that the tasks used in the task-based English reading class created variety for students involvement and helped them in improving reading ability. Willis (1996) also pointed out that carefully chosen tasks make learners participate in complete interaction and this raises motivation in learning.

With the

plenty of chance to participate in various types of tasks, students had more opportunities to perform actively to focus not only on language, but also the learning process itself. The students explored and discover how language works by themselves with a little advice from the teacher who acted as a facilitator in completing the target tasks. As a teacher, it was great to lead the students to build up the awareness of their thinking and learning. Lightbown and Spada (1993) also stated that thinking skills operate effectively when students voice their analysis and take part in the learning process occurring in the classroom. The benefits of the task-based reading instruction according to students’ opinion showed that the students thought that the instruction provided students various types of tasks in order to develop reading skills and to evoke students’ interest in learning reading, increased students’ interaction when performing tasks with their friends in groups, and broadened students’ experience about the learning topic and knowledge of vocabulary as well as grammar. In details, the most favorite thing in the task-based English reading class was the variety of tasks that motivated students to learn and effected on the students reading scores. Moreover, performing the tasks in pairs or groups increased

74 the students’ interaction, extended students’ knowledge of vocabulary as well as grammar, and broadened students’ experience in learning collaboratively with friends. Similar to Willis’s (1996) perceptions, she stated that, from the learners’ position, doing a task in pairs or groups has a number of advantages as follows. It gives learners confident to try out without fear of being wrong of being corrected in front of the class, broaden learners experience of spontaneous interaction which involves composing what they want to say in real time, gives learners chance to benefit from noticing how others express similar meanings and to practice negotiating turns to speak, engages learners in using language purposefully and co-operatively, and also makes learners participate in a complete interaction. In addition, the students’ opinions of the study was consistent with the study of Santadkarn (2006) who investigated whether the use of task-based activities proposed by Willis (1996) helps first-year English major students at Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University in learning English grammar. Besides the improvement of the language performance, students also had the positive opinions on the task-based learning. The students reflected that learning through task-based activities was highly motivating. This was shown through the students’ behaviors to do the tasks actively by brainstorming with their pairs or their group members and discussing ideas among themselves. Santadkarn also pointed out that the interaction in the classroom made the students felt free to use the language and this led students to express what they want to say. Then, they were more motivated to absorb the target language and felt free to learn by themselves in the enjoyable atmosphere classroom. Although students gained benefits after learning through task-based English reading instruction, some limitations were found during the instruction. The

75 limitations of the task-based reading instruction according to students’ opinion revealed that some students had the problems with the language use and the time allocation. The task-based English reading instruction required students to read the English reading passage in order to perform the given tasks and then report the completed tasks in the written and oral presentations in English; therefore, most of the students stated that they had language and vocabulary limitations when doing the tasks such as in making sentences and in reporting the task outcomes and need more extra time to complete the tasks.

In short, due to the problem of the language and

vocabulary limitations and the plenty of tasks provided in the class required a large amount of time to perform the tasks; there was not enough time for some students to do the tasks completely.

Pedagogical Implications The findings suggested and conclusions of the study have certain implications for the reading teacher. Firstly, teacher should be careful while selecting materials for the instruction. Such as the teacher should select topics related to the students’ interests, which students can expand their language proficiency into content areas of personal interest. By focusing on areas of interest, the teacher should also provide students a chance to select the reading text based on their interests. It works well since it raises the motivation of students (Willis, 1996). The second implication deals with the task types. When adopting TBL framework, the teacher should provide the students with a variety of enjoyable tasks. Providing a variety of tasks influences students’ progress and attitude towards the

76 lesson. A willing to learn is observed whenever students are given tasks that involve them completely (Ruso, 2007). Finally, teachers are recommended to provide an enjoyable learning environment for the students. Classroom atmosphere is very important for learning. When the students feel enjoyable in the classroom, they make use of learning of opportunities more.

Recommendations for Further Studies This study serves as one of the research studies that explore the area of instruction for reading English as a foreign language. It established a new reading framework to enhance students’ reading comprehension and their opinions. The findings from this study generated some recommendations for further study as follows. Firstly, it is recommended that future research should extend to investigate a broader sample of students to gain better understanding of the effect of Task-based English Reading Instruction. In other words, different studies, employing the same methodology, should be conducted. Since the findings from the present study are relevant to its own context, it is interesting to achieve transferability by conducting further studies in other contexts with other participants or with different level of students. Secondly, it is recommended that other kinds of qualitative instruments such as classroom observation, interview, self-reporting, and teacher rating, should be included in future studies. These instruments are needed to allow a more in-depth study.

77 Finally, researchers should continue to explore other dependent variables. For example, research might explore whether Task-based English Reading Instruction improves the use of other language skills.

REFERENCES

Alderson, J.C. Assessing reading. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Anderson, N.J. Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Boston: Heinle& Heinle, 1999. Bar, R., and others. Reading diagnosis for teachers: an instructional approach. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, Pearson Education, 2007. Barchers, S. Teaching reading from process to practice. USA: R.R. Donnelley & Sons, 1998. Barnette, M.A. Reading through context: How real and perceive strategies use affects L2 comprehension. Modern Language Journal 72 (1988): 150-162. Chanudda Nabkasorn. Effects of the SQ3R method on the ability of Thai reading comprehension of the first year nursing students. Master’s Thesis, Department of Educational Research and Psychology Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 1992. Chen, P. and Chen, C. Bridging reading and writing: A collaborative task-based English instruction. An Interdisciplinary Journal 49 (2005): 349-366. Chinnapen Rattanawong. Effects of teaching by using Task-Based Learning towards English language communicative ability of Prathomsuksa six students. Master’ Thesis, Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Educational Technology Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 2004. Davis, B.G., and Lass, B. Elementary reading strategies that work. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1996. Dechant, E. V. Improving the teaching of reading. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1982.

79 Duffy, G., and Roehler, L. Improving classroom reading instruction: A decision-making approach. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993. Grabe, W. Reading in second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Grabe, W., and Stoller, L. F. Teaching and research reading. London: Pearson education, 2002. Gunning, T. G. Creating reading instruction for all children. Boston: Allyn and Bacon,1992. Hong-qin, Y. Application of TBT in reading class. US-China Education Review 4(5) (2007): 39-42. Hudson, T. Theoretical perspectives on reading. In W. Grabe (ed.), Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 18, pp.43-60. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Hui, F. Research on task-based reading teaching in senior high shool. Master’s Thesis, Department of Science in Education Faculty of Education University of Wisconsin-Platteville, 2009. Kanaporn Khomson. The development of a self-directed learning model in English reading comprehension for upper secondary school students. Master’s Thesis, Department of Curriculum and Instruction Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 1997. Kennedy, E. C. Method in teaching developmental reading. USA: F. E. Peacock, 1981. Krashen, S.D. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon, 1982.

80 Krittarat Krittawattanawong. Effects of task-based instruction on English writing ability of upper secondary school students. Master’s Thesis, Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Educational Technology Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 2008. Li, H., and Wilhelm, K. Exploring pedagogical reasoning: Reading strategy instruction from two teachers’ perspectives. The Reading Matrix 8 (2008): 96-110. Lightbown, P.M. and Spada, N. How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. Littlewood, W. Principle and practice of task-based language teaching in foreign language teaching in schools. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2004. Long, M.H. A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam and M. Pienemann (ed). Modelling and assessing second language acquisition, pp.77-81. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1985. Manachai Kaewseeduang. The use of a Communicative Grammar-based Task in EFL teaching. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Education Mahasarakham University, 2000. Nantipa Santadkarn. Learning grammar through task-based activities: the case study of first-year English majors of Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Liberal Arts Ubon Ratchahani Rajabhat University, 2006. Nopphawan Chimroylarp. The development of the intensive English course for Buddhist missionary monks using task-based instruction. PASAA 41 (2007): 92-124. Nunan, D. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

81 Oranuch Puangsuk. The use of a Task-based writing process to enhance students’s grammatical accuracy. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Education Mahasarakham University, 2001. Patama Intarasombat. The effect of vocabulary development approach on Mathayomsuksa four students’ English reading comprehension. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University, 2002. Prabhu, N. Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987. Ramate Moonwaeng. The improvement of paragraph writing performance of upper secondary school students through Task-Based Instruction (TBI). Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University, 2007. Richards, J. C., and Schmidt, R. Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. 3rd ed. Essex, UK: Pearson Education, 2002. Ruddell, M. Teaching Content Reading and Writing. USA: John Willey& Son, 2001. Ruso, N. The influence of task based learning on EFL classroom. Asian EFL journal 18 (2007): 1-23. Sararat Chanklin. A comparison of English reading comparison abilities of Mathayomsuksa two students between groups taught by self-questioning and notetaking strategies. Master’s Thesis, Department of Secondary Education Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 2001. Seyler, D. The reading context: Developing college reading skill. Maryland: Allyn & Bacon, 2000. Shehadeh, A. Task-based language learning and teaching: Theories and applications. In D. Edwards and J. Willis (ed.), Teachers exploring tasks in English language teaching, pp. 13-30. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

82 Sireeya Paserakang. The effect of previewing on Matthayomsuksa 5 students’ English reading comprehension. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University, 2001. Siriporn Chantanont. The development of a model of teaching English reading comprehension based on schemata theory for the upper school students. Master’s Thesis, Department of curriculum and Instruction Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 1996. Skehan, P. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Smith, F. Understanding reading. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988. Suchart Wannakhao. A metacognitive strategy in teaching critical English reading for undergraduate students at Rajamangala University of Technology I-san Sakhon Nakon Campas. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Education Khon Kaen University, 2006. Sukhonthip Vadhanamra. Effects of using Task-based activities on English language communicative ability of second-year students at the Royal Thai Air Force Academy. Master’s Thesis, Department of Secondary Education Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 1996. Surachai Piyanukool. Effects of using Directed Reading-Thinking Technique on English reading comprehension of Mathayomsuksa five students. Master’s Thesis, Department of Secondary Education Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 1993.

83 Sureeporn Watchai. Effects of learning strategies and self-regulation on English reading comprehension ability. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 1995. Suwimon Toapichattrakul. An examination of task-based method on the students’ adaption and attitudes in EAT teaching situation. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Arts Chulalongkorn University, 1991. Swain, M. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its developmnrt. In S. Gass and C. Madden (ed.), Input in second language acquisition, pp. 235-256. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House, 1985. Tang, H. Using cooperative concept mapping skill to teach ESL reading. PASAA 30 (2000): 77-92. Thidarat Nakkyo. Effects of Form-Focused Instruction in communicative tasks on English oral ability of the Information System Undergraduates, Business Administration Faculty at Rajamangala Institute of Technology, Bangkok Commercial Campus. Master’s Thesis, Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Educational Technology Faculty of Education Chulalongkorn University, 2001. Tierney, R., and Readence, J. Reading strategies and practices: A compendium. Maryland: Pearson Education, 2000. Turner, R.C., and Carlson, L. Indices of item-objective congruence for multidimensional items. International Journal of Testing 3 (2000):163-171. Wallace, C. Reading. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

84 Werachai Thanamaimas. The development of reading comprehension ability by using Directed Reading Activity (DRA). Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University, 2004. Willis, D., and Willis, J. Doing task-based teaching. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2007. Willis, J. A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman, 1996. Worawoot Tutwisoot. Use of the Extensive Reading Program to develop reading comprehension. Master’s Thesis, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University, 2003.

APPENDICES

86 APPENDIX A Needs Survey Questionnaire

แบบสํารวจความตองการของนักเรียน บทอานภาษาอังกฤษภายใตหัวเรื่องใดที่คุณตองการอานมากที่สุด? คําชี้แจง: จงเขียนหมายเลข 1 ถึง 5 ในชองวางหนาหัวเรื่องของบทอานภาษาอังกฤษที่คุณคิดวานาสนใจ ________

ครอบครัว

________

สุขภาพ

________

โรงเรียน

________

กีฬา

________

เพื่อน

________

เทคโนโลยี

________

สัตว

________

การทองเที่ยว

________

สิ่งแวดลอม

________

กิจกรรมยามวาง

________

อาหารและเครื่องดื่ม

________

การซื้อ-ขาย

________

อาชีพ

________

สภาพอากาศ

ขอบคุณคะ

87 APPENDIX B Data Collected form the Needs Survey Questionnaire (n = 35) Reading Topics

Frequency

Percentages

Ranks

family

13

37.14

6

school

4

11.43

12

friends

11

31.43

7

animals

20

57.14

4

environment

26

74.29

1

food and drinks

25

71.43

2

occupations

7

20.00

10

health

9

25.71

9

sports

23

65.71

3

technology

2

5.71

14

travel

17

48.57

5

hobbies

5

14.29

11

buying and selling

4

11.43

12

weather

10

28.58

8

88 APPENDIX C Lesson Plans Unit 1: Environment Level: Grade 6

Lesson Time:

1: What is Global Warming? 60 minutes

Terminal Objective: At the end of the unit, students will be able to share their own opinions and make a poster about helping the environment by using “should, shouldn’t, reduce, reuse, or recycle” within sentences. Enabling Objectives: 1. Students will be able to discuss about the ways to help the environment with their friends. 2. Students will be able to identify the meanings of the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle” and pronounce them correctly. 3. Students will be able to complete the given task sheet and present it to the class. Language focus Target vocabulary: reduce, reuse, and recycle Target form: should/ shouldn’t + V1 Materials: 1. Pictures of the problems caused by global warming 2. Word cards: reduce, reuse, and recycle 3. Authentic materials: plastic bags, papers, and cans 4. Reading passage: Global Warming 5. Task Sheet 1: Global Warming

89 Evaluation: 1. From teacher’s observation, students can share their own opinions on finding the way to help the environment with their friends in the group discussion. 2. Students can identify the meanings of the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle” and pronounce them correctly. 3. Students can complete the given task sheet with 80% accuracy and present it to the class. Teaching Procedures: Teacher (Greeting)

Students (Greeting)

Pre-task Explore the topic (10 mins.) 1. Show the pictures of the problems caused by global warming e.g. the polar ice cap melt, the flood, the drought, and the dead animals. Ask the questions and write down the answers on the board. - What can you see in these pictures?

- the ice melt, the flood, the dry land, the forest fire, and the dead animals

90 2. Encourage students to share their own opinions. - Do you think these situations will happen in

- Yes. / No.

Thailand? - Why? / Why not? / When?

- (various answers)

3. Show the story headline (Global warming). - Have you ever heard the word “global warming”?

- Yes. / No.

- What does it mean?

- ภาวะโลกรอน/ I don’t

- Today, we’re going to read the passage about global

know.

warming and see how it relates to the situations in the pictures. 4. Divide students in group of four. 5. Do a teacher-led brainstorming activity. Ask each group randomly about general information of global warming and write down the answers on the board. - Why does global warming happen? What cause the earth warmer? - Right. All the things we do can make the earth

- the garbage, the plastic bags, the pollution, airconditioner, etc.

warmer. We throw out the garbage. We use plastic bags. We drive cars. We spend lots of fuels such as oil and natural gas in daily activity. We put much carbon dioxide gas in to the air. - Do you know the carbon dioxide can make a very big problem to the earth?

- Yes. / No.

91 - It catches the heat from the sun. It causes the Greenhouse effect which makes the earth warmer. - Can you tell me what the problems of global warming

- the flood, the changing

are?

weather, etc.

- Are they the serious problems?

- Yes. / No.

- What should we do to help the environment?

- save water, not use

Introduce useful words and sentences (10 mins.)

plastic bags, etc.

6. Introduce the words “reduce, reuse, recycle”. - There are 3 key words that could help protect the

- (various answers)

environment. Can you guess what they are? 7. Give students a hint. - They begin with “re”. 8. Show the 3 word cards.

- That’s right. They are the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle”. - Some of you have heard these 3 words many times, but how they can save the world is still a question. 9. Show plastic bags, papers, and cans.

- reduce, reuse, recycle

92 - What are they?

- plastic bags, papers, and

- Good.

cans.

- Repeat after me and point to the things I talk about. 10. Show the “reduce” card.

Repeat and point to the plastic bags.

- Reduce. - We should reduce the use of plastic bags. 11. Show the “reuse” card.

Repeat and point to the papers.

- Reuse. - We should reuse both sides of pieces of paper. 12. Show the “recycle” card.

Repeat and point to the cans.

- Recycle. - We should recycle empty cans. 13. Show the 3 word cards again. - What does each word mean?

- (various answers)

- Listen to the song and answer my questions again. 14. Play the video clip “reduce, reuse, and recycle”. - What does each word mean? - Great.

Watch the video clip - ใชนอย, ใชซ้ํา, นํากลับมาใชใหม

93 Task cycle Task 1 (20 mins.) 15. Give students the Task Sheet 1: Global Warming.

- It’s time for reading. - You have 20 minutes to read the passage “global

Work individually.

warming ”and complete the Task Sheet 1.. 16. Monitor and comment briefly on content. Planning 1 (5 mins.) 17. Inform the students of the group presentation.

Discuss about their tasks,

- I’d like you to work in groups. Discuss about your

select the best version of

tasks, select the best version of the complete task, and

the complete task, and

prepare the group presentation.

prepare and rehearse the

18. Walk around to help them prepare the presentation.

group presentation.

Report 1 (15 mins.) 19. Select some groups to present their group work.

Present their report.

20. Give feedback on content and form (if needed).

Give comment on other

21. Collect the Task Sheet 1 to make a mark

groups’ work and vote for

22. Conclude the lesson

the best one.

94 Reading Passage

Many scientists think that the earth is warmer because of people’s actions. By burning fuels such as oil, natural gas, coal, and wood, we put more and more of the gas called carbon dioxide (CO2) into the air. The raising level of CO2 traps the heat from the sunlight. This is called Greenhouse Effect. Scientists worry that it heats up the Earth and cause many problems: the weather change, the ice caps melt, many places dry, and animals and plants die.

You can help reduce global warming by using less fuel. Here are 5 simple things you should do to help the earth. 1. You should save water and electricity. 2. You should reduce the use of plastic bags. 3. You should recycle empty cans and bottles. 4. You should reuse both sides of pieces of paper. 5. You should drive less and walk more.

95 Task Sheet 1: Global Warming Direction: Read the passage “Global Warming” and answer the questions.

Greenhouse Effect

CO2 The heat from the sunlight

Burning fuels

1) What is the name of gas that can cause global warming? __________________ 2) What does CO2 come from?

__________________

3) What does CO2 trap?

__________________

4) What happen when the level of CO2 raise?

__________________

5) Write two problems of global warming. From the passage ……………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… In your opinion ……………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… 6) Write two things we should do to help the environment. From the passage ……………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… In your opinion …………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………

96 Unit 1: Environment

Lesson

Level: Grade 6

Time:

2: How to help the environment? 60 minutes

Terminal Objective: At the end of the unit, students will be able to share their own opinions and make a poster about helping the environment by using “should, shouldn’t, reduce, reuse, or recycle” within sentences. Enabling Objectives: 1. Students will be able to discuss and write sentences about helping the environment by using “should or shouldn’t” within sentences. 2. Students will be able to identify the meanings and give the examples of the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle” in sentences. 3. Students will be able to brainstorm ideas about the ways to help the environment to complete the given task sheets. Language focus Target vocabulary: reduce, reuse, and recycle Target form: should/ shouldn’t + V1 Materials: 1. Pictures of the problems caused by global warming 2. Pictures of reduce, reuse, and recycle 3. Task Sheet 2: Things we should or shouldn’t do 4. Task Sheet 3: Making a poster to save the environment Evaluation: 1. Students can express their own opinions and write sentences about helping the environment by using “should or shouldn’t” within sentences.

97 2. Students can identify the meanings give the examples of the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle” in sentences. 3. Students can complete the given task sheet with 80% accuracy and present it to the class. Teaching Procedures: Teacher (Greeting)

Students (Greeting)

Review (15 mins) 1. Give students back the Task Sheet 1 with the reading passage. 2. Activate students’ background knowledge based on the Task Sheet 1. - What have we learned in the last lesson?

- Global warming

- Why does global warming happen?

- CO2/ pollution/ garbage

- What are the problems caused by global warming?

- floods/ plants and animals die

- What are 3 words could help the environment?

- reduce, reuse, and recycle

3. Show the pictures of reduce, reduce, and recycle.

-Yes, there are reduce, reduce, and recycle. 1. Do the teacher-led brainstorming activity with the word cards. Ask the questions and write down the answers on the board as a mind map.

98 - What can we reduce?

- garbage, energy, CO2, etc.

- What can we reuse?

- papers, old clothes, etc.

- What can we recycle?

- papers, glasses, plastics, etc.

- Should we turn on the lights when we leave the room?

- No.

- Should we use too much plastic bags?

- No.

- That’s right. - We shouldn’t turn on the lights when we leave the room. We should save the electricity. - We shouldn’t use too much plastic bags. We should reuse plastic bags again and again. Or we should use fabric bags. - Today, we’re going to learn more about what we should or shouldn’t do to save the environment. 2. Give students the Task Sheet 2: Things we should or shouldn’t do.

-

You have 5 minutes to match the sentences with the related pictures.

Work individually.

99 3. Help students to revise their answers. - Discuss with your classmate about the task and revise

Work in pairs.

your answers. 4. Check the answers together as a class. Task 2 (30 mins.) 5. Divide students into group of four. 6. Give students the Task Sheet 3: Making a poster to save the environment.

- You have 30 minutes to create your own poster with Work in groups. your group. - In the poster, you have to draw a picture and make sentences about helping the environment by using should or shouldn’t and reduce, reuse, or recycle. Planning 2 (5 mins.) 7. Inform the students of the group presentation. Discuss about their tasks, - You have 5 more minutes to prepare and rehearse prepare, and rehearse the group the group presentation. presentation. 8. Give advice and monitor the group discussion.

100 Report 1 (10 mins.) 9. Select some groups to present their group work.

Present their report to the class.

10. Give feedback on content and form (if needed) and

Give comment on other groups’

write down the useful sentences containing the

work and vote for the best one.

words “should, shouldn’t, reduce, reuse, or recycle” on the board. 11. Collect the Task Sheets to make a mark 12. Conclude the lesson

101 Task Sheet 2: Things we should or shouldn’t do.

Direction: Match each sentence with the pictures. Write the numbers in the circles.

1. We shouldn’t turn on the lights when we leave the room. 2. We should use our own bags when we go shopping. 3. We shouldn’t leave the tap running when we brush our teeth. 4. We should walk or ride bicycles for short trips. 5. We should put cans and bottles in the recycling bin.

102 Task Sheet 3: Making a poster to save the environment.

Direction 1: In group of four, brainstorm and draw the mind map about ideas for helping the environment. Questions to think about  How can we save water, electricity, energy, and oil?  How can we reduce CO2?  What can we reuse or recycle and not throw away?

Your ideas

103 Direction 2: Make a poster for helping the environment. Draw a picture and make sentences by using should or shouldn’t AND reduce, reuse, or recycle. Be creative!

104 Unit 1: Environment Level: Grade 6

Lesson3: What should we do? Time:

60 minutes

Terminal Objective: At the end of the unit, students will be able to share their own opinions and make a poster about helping the environment by using “should, shouldn’t, reduce, reuse, or recycle” within sentences. Enabling Objectives: 1. Students will be able to discuss and write sentences about helping the environment by using “should or shouldn’t” within sentences. 2. Students will be able to identify the meanings and give the examples of the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle” in sentences. 3. Students will be able to brainstorm ideas about what they should or shouldn’t do in order to help the environment and complete the given task sheets. Language focus Target vocabulary: reduce, reuse, and recycle Target form: should/ shouldn’t + V1 Materials: 1. Pictures of the problems caused by global warming 2. Pictures of reduce, reuse, and recycle 3. Task Sheet 2: Things we should or shouldn’t do 4. Task Sheet 3: Making a poster to save the environment 5. Task Sheet 4: Fill in the missing words

105 Evaluation: 1. Students can express their own opinions and write sentences about helping the environment by using “should or shouldn’t” within sentences. 2. Students can identify the meanings give the examples of the words “reduce, reuse, and recycle” in sentences. 3. Students can complete the given task sheet with 80% accuracy and present it to the class. Teaching Procedures: Teacher

Students

(Greeting) Review (15 mins) 1. Give students back the Task Sheet 2 and 3. 2. Review what the students learned in the last lesson.

Language Focus Analysis (20 mins.) 3. Ask the student to underline the words “should and shouldn’t in the Task Sheet 2 and 3.and use the following questions to check the students’ comprehension. - What do they mean?

- (various answers)

- When can we use these words?

- (various answers)

- We use these two words to give advice to others.

106 - We use “should” to say about what is the right thing to do and use “shouldn’t” to tell people not to do the wrong thing. 4. Raise the students’ awareness about the form.

Analyze the form.

- Underline the words “should and shouldn’t” on the

- Underline “should and

passage, your task sheet and your work.

shouldn’t”.

- Look at your work. What are the verbs follow “should

- reduce, reuse, and recycle

and shouldn’t”? - Can you tell me what the verb form of “reduce, reuse, and recycle” is? 5. Write down the structure on the board. should /shouldn’t + V1

- Yes. We use “should and shouldn’t” followed by the infinitive verb (V1), the basic verb form. Practice (25 mins.) 6. Give students the Task Sheet 4: Fill in the missing words.

- the basic form/ V1

107

- You have to select the words from the box to make the

Do the Task Sheet 4.

sentences complete. 7. Answer the task sheet as a class.

Check the answers.

8. Ask students to take a note about the things they

Take a note on their notebooks.

have learned concluding the useful wards and structures with their sample sentences. 9. Conclude the lesson.

108 Task Sheet 4: Fill in the missing words Direction 1: Fill in the missing word. Use the words in the box. (Item 1 – Item5)

should

shouldn’t

1. We ____________ turn on the lights when we leave the room. We ___________save the electricity. 2. We ___________use our own bags when we go shopping. We ____________ use the plastic bags. 3. We ____________ leave the tap running when we brush our teeth. We ___________ save the water. 4. We ____________ use recycled papers. We ____________ save our environment. 5. We ____________ keep too small clothes. We ____________ give the old clothes to younger children.

(Item 6 – Item 10)

reduce

reuse

recycle

6. We should walk or ride bicycles for short trips. We should ____________ CO2 by not use cars so much. 7. We should ____________ both sides of the pieces of paper. We shouldn’t throw away paper. 8. We should ____________ cans and bottle. We should put them in the recycling bins. 9. We should use the fabric bag. We should ____________the use of plastic bags. 10. We should ____________ our old books. We should take the old books to the secondhand bookstore.

Good Luck.

109 APPENDIX D Lesson Plan Evaluation Form Please check  to rate these following aspects according to your opinions. 4= Excellent 3 = Good

2 = Acceptable

Instructional Aspects

4

1 = Revision needed 3

2

1

Comments

Objectives 1. The terminal objective is concrete and able to be assessed. 2. The enabling objectives are related to the terminal objective. Materials and Task Sheets 3. The materials and Task Sheets are appropriate for the lesson. 4. The materials and Task Sheets support language learning. 5. The materials and Task Sheets are understandable. 6. The format of Task Sheets is easy to complete. Teaching procedures 7. The teaching procedures are relevant to stages in the framework of Task-Based Learning Instruction (Willis, 1996). 8. The time in each procedure is appropriate. 9. The tasks and activities are appropriate for the students’ language level. 10. The tasks and activities help learners understand the language content. Evaluation 11. The tasks and activities are relevant to the evaluation. 12. The Task Sheets are relevant to the evaluation. Others suggestions: ………………………………………............................................................................... ………………………………………............................................................................... ………………………………………............................................................................... Evaluator’s name ………………………………. Thank you for your time and assistance.

110 APPENDIX E Reading Comprehension Test (Pre-test) Part 1: Cloze test (Items 1-4) Direction: Read the text below. Then, choose the correct word for each space.

The male seahorse is a good father. He takes very good care of his unborn babies in a pouch on his (1) ________. After the (2) ________ seahorse lays her eggs in his pouch, she has done her job and swim away. The male seahorse swims around (3) ________ the eggs in his pouch. When the eggs hatch, hundreds of seahorse babies (4) ________ from the pouch.

1.

a. belly

b. head

c. back

d. tail

2.

a. female

b. male

c. old

d. young

3.

a. into

b. for

c. with

d. from

4.

a. get in

b. put on

c. take off

d. come out

Part 2: True-False questions (Items 5-10) Direction: Read the e-mail massage. Then, look at Items 5-7 and indicate whether each sentence is TRUE or FALSE. NewDeleteJunk Mark asMove to  tony  Reply Reply all Forward [email protected] Inbox (365) Junk Drafts Sent Deleted



Hi From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2008 To: [email protected]

Dear, Tony. Here I am in Chiang Mai! I enjoy traveling around here. I don’t feel lonely even though I’m alone. There are a lot of beautiful places to visit and also the people are friendly. The weather is very cold, so everyone here wears a colorful sweater. Chiang Mai is a very interesting province. I’ll write again soon and tell you about it. Love, Tina.

111 5. Tina doesn’t like staying alone in Chiang Mai. a. True

b. False

6. Tina thinks people in Chiang Mai are welcoming. a. True

b. False

7. Tina thinks nothing in Chiang Mai is interesting. a. True

b. False

Direction: Read the information about the weather forecast. Then, look at Items 8-10 and indicate whether each sentence is TRUE or FALSE. Weather’s 5 Day Forecast for Bangkok TEMPERATURE DAY WEATHER Maximum

Minimum

Monday

33°C

25°C

Warm

Tuesday

32°C

24°C

Cool

Wednesday

33°C

28°C

Hot

Thursday

30°C

22°C

Cool

Friday

31°C

23°C

Warm

8. The weather on Tuesday is going to be rainy and cool. a. True

b. False

9. There are two rainy days. a. True

b. False

10. There is the least difference between maximum and minimum temperature on Friday. a. True

b. False

112 Part 3: Multiple-choice questions (Items 11-20) Direction: Read the graph. Then, choose the best answer for Items 11-13. Favorite food Cake Soup Pancakes Sandwiches Hamburgers

Prathom 6 students Each

11. What food do the students like the least? a. Cake

b. Soup

c. Pancakes

d. Sandwiches

12. How many students like cake more than sandwiches? a. Five students b. Ten students c. Fifteen students d. Twenty students 13. From the graph, which is correct? a. Only ten students like cake. b. The students like hamburgers the most. c. There are fifteen students like soup. d. More than forty students like sandwiches.

stands for 5 students

113

Direction: Look at the map. Then, choose the best answer for Items 14-16. BLACK STREET

School

Post office

Hotel

Department store Police station

SNAKE STREET

PINK STREET

TIGER STREET

Park

MONKEY STREET

Market Bank Cinema Train station

Hospital

GREEN STREET

14. Where is the police station? a. It’s on the corner.

b. It’s next to the hotel.

c. It’s across from the department store.

d. It’s between the market and the cinema.

15. Which one is not correct? a. The post office is on the corner. b. The post office is next to the hotel. c. The post office is across from the school. d. The post office is between the park and the bank. 16. You’re in front of the school on Monkey Street. How can you go to the hospital? a. First, walk to Green Street and turn left. Second, go straight for two blocks. It’s on your left. b. First, walk to Green Street and turn left. Second, go straight for one block. It’s on your right. c. First, walk to Green Street and turn right. Second, go straight for two blocks. It’s on your left. d. First, walk to Green Street and turn right. Second, go straight for one block. It’s on your right.

114 Direction: Read the passage about the two sisters. Then choose the best answer for Items 17-20.

Mrs. Wilson and Mrs. Smith are sisters. Mrs. Wilson lives in a house in Duncan and Mrs. Smith lives in a condominium in Victoria. One day Mrs. Wilson visited her sister. When her sister answered the door Mrs. Wilson saw tears in her eyes. "What's the matter?" she asked. Mrs. Smith said "My cat Sammy died last night and I have no place to bury him". She began to cry again. Suddenly Mrs. Wilson said "I can bury your cat in my garden in Duncan and you can come and visit him sometimes. Mrs. Smith 5 stopped crying and then two sisters had tea together. It was now five o'clock and Mrs. Wilson said it was time for her to go home. She put on her hat, coat and gloves while Mrs. Smith put the dead Sammy into a shopping bag. Mrs. Wilson took the shopping bag and walked to the bus stop. When the bus arrived, she got on the bus, sat down and put the 10 shopping bag on the floor beside her feet. Then, she got off the bus at her bus stop and walked for about two minutes. Suddenly she remembered she left the shopping bag on the bus.

17. Where did the cat die? a. In Mrs. Wilson’s house. b. In Mrs. Wilson’s garden. c. In Mrs. Smith’s condominium d. In Mrs. Smith’s shopping bag.

115 18. What does “bury” (line 5) mean? a. lie on the land b. burn in the fireplace c. store in the container d. put under the ground 19. What is the main idea of the second paragraph? a. Mrs. Wilson went home by bus. b. Mrs. Smith lives with her sister. c. Mrs. Wilson came to have tea with her sister. d. Mrs. Smith was upset because her cat died. 20. Which one is correct? a. Mrs. Smith went home at 5 p.m. b. Mrs. Smith forgot a shopping bag. c. Mrs. Wilson buried the cat in her garden. d. Mrs. Wilson left the dead cat on the bus.

116 Reading Comprehension Test (Post-test) Part 1: Cloze test (Items 1-4) Direction: Read the text below. Then, choose the correct word for each space.

The male emperor penguin is a good dad. He looks after his unborn baby. After the female emperor penguin lays her egg (1) ________ the ice, she swims away. Then the (2) ________ emperor penguin rolls the egg onto his feet and (3) ________ it with his fat belly to keep it warm. When the egg hatches, he feeds his (4) ________ with milky liquid that come from his throat. 1.

a. under

b. by

c. off

d. on

2.

a. strong

b. small

c. female

d. male

3.

a. covers

b. takes

c. puts

d. steps

4.

a. body

b. egg

c. ice

d. baby

Part 2: True-False questions (Items 5-10) Direction: Read the e-mail massage. Then, look at Items 5-7 and indicate whether each sentence is TRUE or FALSE. NewDeleteJunk Mark asMove to  tina  Reply Reply all Forward [email protected] Inbox (133) Junk Drafts Sent Deleted



Hi From: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 To: [email protected]

Dear, Tina. Greeting from the Phuket! I’m here with my parents. I really like staying here even thought the weather is so strange. It’s very hot during the daytime, but there are a lot of rainy nights. However, the beautiful beaches and the friendly people make me feel good. There are a lot of interesting things in Phuket. I’ll tell you later. Love, Tony.

117 5. Tony enjoys staying in Phuket with his father and his mother. a. True

b. False

6. Tony doesn’t like the beaches and people in Phuket. a. True

b. False

7. Tony thinks nothing in Phuket is interesting. a. True

b. False

Direction: Read the information about the weather forecast. Then, look at Items 8-10 and indicate whether each sentence is TRUE or FALSE. Tomorrow’s Weather Forecast TEMPERATURE CITY WEATHER Maximum

Minimum

Chiang Mai

29C

16°C

Cold

Khon Kaen

30°C

19°C

Warm

Bangkok

33°C

25°C

Hot

Chonburi

30°C

24°C

Cool

Phuket

32°C

24°C

Cool

8. The weather in Bangkok is going to be cloudy and hot. a. True

b. False

9. Two cities will have the same minimum temperature. a. True

b. False

10. Khon Kaen will have the most difference between maximum and minimum temperature. a. True

b. False

118 Part 3: Multiple-choice questions (Items 11-20) Direction: Read the graph. Then, choose the best answer for Items 11-13. Favorite sports Swimming Basketball Football Tennis Judo

Prathom 6 students Each

11. What sport do the students like the most? a. Judo

b. Tennis

c. Football

d. Basketball

12. How many students like tennis less than swimming? a. Five students b. Ten students c. Fifteen students d. Twenty students 13. From the graph, which is correct? a. Only ten students like judo. b. The students like tennis the least. c. There are fifty students like basketball. d. More than forty students like swimming.

stands for 5 students

119 Direction: Look at the map. Then, choose the best answer for Items 14-16. HIGH STREET

Park

Department store

Bank

Hospital

MIDDLE STREET

Market

Post office

MELON STREET

Cinema

APPLE STREET

Hotel BANANA STREET

Train station

School

Police station

LOW STREET

14. Where is the cinema? a. It’s on the corner.

b. It’s next to the market.

c. It’s across from the post office.

d. It’s between the hotel and the bank.

15. Which one is correct? a. The bank is on Middle Street. b. The bank is next to the hotel. c. The bank is across from the hospital. d. The bank is between the park and the school. 16. You’re in front of the post office on Middle Street. How can you go to the market? a. First, walk to Apple Street and turn right. Second, go straight and turn right on Low Street. It’s on your right. b. First, walk to Apple Street and turn left. Second, go straight and turn right on Low Street. It’s on your right. c. First, walk to Apple Street and turn left. Second, go straight and turn right on Low Street. It’s on your left. d. First, walk to Apple Street and turn right. Second, go straight and turn right on Low Street. It’s on your left.

120 Direction: Read the passage about the two sisters. Then choose the best answer for Items 17-20.

Emma and Emily were twin sisters. Although they were identical twins, they behaved very differently. Emma was cheerful, kind and pleasant to everybody. Emily was proud of her beauty, and looked down on others. She seldom helped anyone. 5

On the school holidays, the girls had a party at home. Emily noticed that all her classmates played with Emma. She went crying to her mother. “Why won’t they play with me?” she said. Her mother showed Emily two sets of flower seeds. One set was dry. The other set was healthy. “If I planted these seeds what kind of roses do you think I will get?” said her mother. Emily

10 replied “The healthy seeds will grow into lovely roses, and the dry seeds will not” The mother continued “Emily, in the same way, if you are kind to people, they will respond better to you.” After that, Emily became friendly and cheerful with every one, and then her classmates and teacher became her best friends.

17. What is the main idea of the first paragraph? a. Emily became friendly. b. The twins and the flowers. c. The party on the school holidays. d. The differences between two sisters.

121 18. What does “identical” (line 1) mean? a. quite strange b. totally different c. exactly the same d. absolutely wonderful 19. Why did Emily cry? a. She had a nightmare. b. She lost her cell phone. c. No one played with her. d. Her mother punished her. 20. What does “the healthy seeds” (line 9) represent? a. A rude girl. b. A lovely rose. c. A kind person. d. An unwanted seed.

122 APPENDIX F The Item-Objective Congruence Index of the English Reading Comprehension Pretest

1

Level of Reading Comprehension Literal

D 0

Expert E 1

F 1

2

Literal

1

1

3

Literal

1

4

Literal

5

Item

Total

Meaning

0.66

Reserved

1

3.00

Reserved

1

1

3.00

Reserved

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

Interpretive

1

1

0

0.66

Reserved

6

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

7

Literal

1

-1

1

0.33

Modified

8

Literal

0

0

1

0.33

Modified

9

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

10

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

11

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

12

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

13

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

14

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

15

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

16

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

17

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

18

Literal

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

19

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

20

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

123 The Item-Objective Congruence Index of the English Reading Comprehension Posttest

1

Level of Reading Comprehension Literal

D 0

Expert E 1

F 1

2

Literal

1

1

3

Literal

0

4

Literal

5

Item

Total

Meaning

0.66

Reserved

1

3.00

Reserved

1

1

0.66

Reserved

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

Interpretive

1

1

0

0.66

Reserved

6

Interpretive

1

0

1

0.66

Reserved

7

Literal

1

0

1

0.66

Reserved

8

Literal

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

9

Interpretive

1

0

1

0.66

Reserved

10

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

11

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

12

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

13

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

14

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

15

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

16

Literal

0

1

1

0.66

Reserved

17

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

18

Literal

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

19

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

20

Interpretive

1

1

1

3.00

Reserved

124 APPENDIX G The Level of Difficulty of the Items (p) and the Discrimination Power of the Items (r) of the Reading Comprehension Pretest and Posttest Pretest

Posttest

Item

p

r

Item

p

r

1

0.47

0.45

1

0.47

0.38

2

0.44

0.22

2

0.41

0.46

3

0.47

0.22

3

0.47

0.39

4

0.53

0.32

4

0.53

0.43

5

0.53

0.32

5

0.53

0.33

6

0.65

0.26

6

0.50

0.33

7

0.59

0.41

7

0.41

0.30

8

0.47

0.42

8

0.53

0.35

9

0.65

0.41

9

0.68

0.32

10

0.47

0.35

10

0.71

0.33

11

0.56

0.39

11

0.65

0.48

12

0.59

0.29

12

0.47

0.30

13

0.44

0.27

13

0.41

0.24

14

0.41

0.29

14

0.41

0.48

15

0.47

0.42

15

0.35

0.24

16

0.65

0.35

16

0.47

0.32

17

0.32

0.43

17

0.59

0.37

18

0.53

0.47

18

0.47

0.30

19

0.35

0.32

19

0.53

0.33

20

0.53

0.29

20

0.47

0.29

125 APPENDIX H Open-ended Question

บทที่ .....................เรื่อง...................................................................................... คําสั่ง: ใหนักเรียนตอบคําถามตอไปนี้ตามความรูสึกของตนเอง 1. นักเรียนคิดวาสิ่งที่นาสนใจที่สุดในบทเรียนนี้คืออะไร ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2. การเรียนการสอนในครั้งนี้ชวยพัฒนาทักษะการอานของนักเรียนใหดีขึ้นหรือไม อยางไร ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3. นักเรียนพบปญหาในการเรียนรูระหวางการทํากิจกรรมหรือไม อะไรบาง ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4. กิจกรรมอะไรที่นักเรียนชอบมากที่สุด เพราะอะไร ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5. กิจกรรมอะไรที่นักเรียนชอบนอยที่สุด เพราะอะไร ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

126 BIOGRAPHY

Parichat Saiyod was born on the 22nd September, 1982 in Phetchabun Province, Thailand. In 2005, she received her Bachelor’s Degree majoring in English from the Faculty of Education, Burapha University.

After graduation, she continued her

Master’s degree in Teaching English as a Foreign Language, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University.

Loading...

ผลของการสอนอ านภาษาอังกฤษแบบเน นงานปฏิบัติ - EDU Portal, Chula U

ผลของการสอนอานภาษาอังกฤษแบบเนนงานปฏิบัติทมี่ ีตอความสามารถในการอานเพื่อความเขาใจ ของนักเรียนระดับประถมศึกษา นางสาวปาริฉตั ร ใสยอด วิทยานิพนธนี...

2MB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views

Recommend Documents

กิจกรรมศิลปะออนไลน์ - EDU Portal, Chula U.
ดินสอไข (Litho pencil) • เกรยองไข (Litho crayon) • แท่งหมึกไข (Rubbing ink & Rubbing crayon) • ทุชชนิดน้ำ และแท่ง (Ligui

the effects of drama-based instruction on - EDU Portal, Chula U
40 items - The objectives of this study were to examine the effects of drama-based instruction on eleventh grade student

City of Chula Vista | Home
San Diego County's second-largest City. Our Location. Your Success. Chula Vista is a thriving regional business center.

Educational Diagnostician - EDU Healthcare
Educational Diagnostician. Currently in need of an Educational Diagnostician in Cecil County, MD . This is a great schoo

INFOFISIKA . EDU (physics education)
Jan 31, 2014 - GEOCHEMISTRY IN ENGLISH (PDF Textbook ) ... BAHAN AJAR FISIKA MATEMATIKA 1 (BASED FROM M.L BOAS (Translat

Edu Pembentangan - Documents - 123Slide.Org
Oct 13, 2017 - ... TINGKAH LAKU EDU 3043 NAMA PENSYARAH: PUAN NORAIDAH BT YAAKUB ENCIK BADRUL BIN ISMAIL NAMA PELAJAR: N

FlipSnack - FlipSnack Edu | FlipSnack edu is a place
www.flipsnackedu.com/. FlipSnack edu is a place for educational resources - you can easily download as PDF any material

Otm edu.. - Documents
Jun 23, 2015 - 1. 1UNIVERSIDADEDE PERNAMBUCOORIENTAÇÕES TEÓRICO METODOLÓGICAS (OTM) PARA O ENSINOFUNDAMENTAL E MÉDIO DA

The Official Portal of u-Pustaka - Pangkalan Data
... untuk arkib artikel-artikel jurnal di bawah pangkalan data Emerald (berteks penuh - PDF) yang mana tahun terbitannya

Joanna Moore | ', CENTER);" onmouseout="return nd();">Luke Winslow King ft Esther Rose The Coming Tide torrent | Neueste Kritiken