Department of Languages Mohammed V University

TRU/DSEA: Applied Faculty of Education – Souissi

Linguistics and the Teaching of Rabat English as a Foreign Language

An Investigation of the Moroccan EFL University Teachers’ Belief

Systems about Reading Comprehension and their Effects on the Teachers’ Classroom Practice.

Presented by: Supervised by:

Abdeslam BADRE DR. Mohamed MELOUK

2006

AcknowledgemetsAcknowledgemets I thank God for sending me all these wonderful people to assist me in my quest of knowledge

My deepest gratitude is due to my teacher and supervisor professor Mr. Mohammed MELOUK for assisting me in the various stages of the present paper. Indeed, I thank Mr.

Melouk for willingly accepting to supervise my paper, regardless of all the time and energy constraints he has been undergoing during this academic year.

Special thank is due to my professor of Reading who initiated me to the field of Reading, Mrs Badiaa ZERHOUNI. Infact, I am indebted to Mrs. ZERHOUNI not only because she has been, and is still, my teacher, but also because she has always been there whenever I had hard times:

thank you very much, Madam, just for being there. For his speedy answers, unfailing guidance and hankered-for estimation of others, Mr.

EZZAKI Abdelkader deserves more than just words of thanks, yet all I can do is just thank you very much, Mr. Ezzaki.

Indeed, one person who first encouraged me and provided me with some relevant articles on teachers’ belief systems is Dr. Naima BENMANSOUR.: I thank you Madam for your sincere

kindheartedness and for the motivation you buried within me. My heartfelt thanks and gratitude are due to my just-unique mother for all the love, care,

energy, and faith she secures my life with. Finally, I would like to thank my DESA classmates; and special thanks to KADMIRI

Merriem & Khaoula El Baida as well as all the people who participated in filling in the research questionnaires.

Department of Languages Mohammed V University

TRU/DSEA: Applied Faculty of Education – Souissi

Linguistics and the Teaching of Rabat English as a Foreign Language

An Investigation of the Moroccan EFL University Teachers’ Belief

Systems about Reading Comprehension and their Effects on the Teachers’ Classroom Practice.

Presented by: Supervised by:

Abdeslam BADRE DR. Mohamed MELOUK

2006

OutlineOutline General introduction

– Rationale of the study– Objectives of the study– The research questions– Research hypotheses– The framework of the research

I. Literature review– I.1 Reading models– I.2. Instruction of L2 Reading– I.3.1 Lesson planning– I.4 Teachers’ Belief Systems

II. MethodologyII.1 Design of the studyII.2 Data Collection ProceduresII.3 Statistical analysis

III. Presentation of Results – III.1. Question.1– III.2. Question.2– III.3 Question.3

IV Discussion– IV.1. Research quention.1– IV.2. Research quention.2– IV.3. Research quention.3

V. Conclusion– V.4. Pedagogical implications– V.5 Limitations of the study

General introductionGeneral introduction

Rationale of the study The need to explore the Moroccan EFL university

belief systems about reading. Scarcity of research investigating the Moroccan

EFL university teachers’ belief systems.

Objectives of the studyObjectives of the study

To investigate the belief systems of the Moroccan EFL university teachers in the area of reading.

To determine the extent to which the teachers’ claimed beliefs are compatible with their actual classroom practices.

To know whether or not the “experienced” and “less experienced” teachers differ in their perceptions of Reading Comprehension.

The Research QuestionsThe Research Questions

1. What are the Moroccan EFL university teachers’ beliefs about and practices of reading and the teaching of reading comprehension?

2. To what extent do the claimed beliefs match the actual teaching of these teachers?

3. Do the Moroccan “experienced” and “less experienced” EFL teachers of reading comprehension differ in terms of their pedagogical beliefs?

Research hypothesesResearch hypotheses

It is assumed that the Moroccan EFL university teachers of reading comprehension are more top-down oriented in terms of their beliefs and instruction of reading comprehension.

It is assumed that the teachers’ beliefs are consistent with their actual practices.

It is assumed that the “less experienced” teachers’ pedagogical beliefs are different from those held by “the experienced” ones.

The theoretical framework of The theoretical framework of the studythe study

Bottom-up model

Top-down model

Interactive model

I. Literature reviewI. Literature review

I.1 Reading modelsThe bottom-up model Gough. 1972

Input is first entered into the icon system where it is transformed into phonemic character, then to lexical level and ended up in the deep structural level. So the text serially moves from low-level sensory information into higher-level encoding, (Gough, 1972).

LaBerge and Samuels (1974)LaBerge and Samuels (1974)

A three-memory system based theory: 1) the Visual Memory System which

operates at the perceptual level.2) the Phonological Memory System related

to spelling patterns of words3) the Semantic Memory System,

responsible for associating a given meaning with the perceived input

Shortcomings Shortcomings of the modelof the model

Unidirectionnel. (Rumelhart, 1977)

Less Practicable. (McClellad & Johnson)

The top-down modelThe top-down model

reading is not the outcome of an accurate identification of each item in the written text; rather, it is the result of an appropriate selection of minimum and most productive cues in the text.

Goodman (1970)Goodman (1970)

reading is a spiral process, marked by five main cyclical stages:– The reader identifies the written text,– predicts the meaning of the word by resorting to

his/her prior knowledge of the topic– tests the made hypothesis in order either to validate it

or reject it – modifies the hypothesis in order to construct meaning– comprehends and builds up new meaning/knowledge.

J.Coady (1979)J.Coady (1979)

“more or less a successful interaction among three factors: high-level conceptual abilities, background knowledge, and process strategies. The result of the interaction is comprehension.”

Shortcomings Shortcomings of the Top-downof the Top-down

Overlooking the lower level processing.

The Interactive ModelThe Interactive Model

Rumelhart (1977)

‘Reading is a process of multifaceted interactions, taking place at various levels, including different types of knowledge in the reader’s schemata.’

The three models’ classroom The three models’ classroom implicationsimplications

Bottom-up skills Top-Down skills Interactive skills

Table.1: A description of some reading activities, as they most likely appear in reading: pre-reading, while-reading, and/or post-reading stage.

ActivitiesDescription Objectives

Pre – reading activities

- semantic mapping

Students generate and categorize vocabulary they know about a topic into meaningful categories.

To activate students’ prior knowledge about a topic and its vocabulary. Grouping words into categories makes it easier for students to remember and grasp meanings.

Previewing Students work with the teacher and then on their own. Exploiting the title, pictures, or subheading of the text to find out the main idea of the text.

To develop reading comprehension by making the reader familiar with basic content and structure of the text and activating B.K.

Questioning-enquiry strategy

In response to a picture or key word prompt about the text, students generate facts and questions about its topic.

To encourage students to personally determine what information they need about a text they are to read, which highly motivates the readers.

Predicting asking questions

Students predict what a text will be about from viewing the title and reading pieces of the text one by one, asking the teacher and responding, and revising their guesses.

To make students guess what might happen next in the text by asking high level questions which require interpreting, extrapolating, applying, inferring, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information in the text.

Predicting-understanding sequence

Students work together to approximate the sequence of events in a passage before reading it. They then read with the purpose in mind

To allow students practice and identify the sequence of events within a text, which facilitates reading.

Skimming Students quickly read through several short passages in order to match them to their correct headline.

To train students read quickly to see what the text is about and how it is organized. Skimming allows students to predict the purpose, the main ideas before moving to any focused reading.

Scanning Students engage in pair work to quickly read through a passage to extrapolate specific information.

To train students to practice fast reading of the text with a purpose in mind.

While – reading

activities

Increasing reading rate

Students are required to read a given text for 5 to 10 minutes at a time with the intent to read faster each time they re-read the text.

To train students on reading fluently not word-by word.

Jigsaw reading After segmenting a text into subsections and giving each section to a student to read it, students work in group/pairs to reconstruct the text.

To make students aware of the importance of paying attention to details in reading so as to contribute in the re-organization of the text, also, these kinds of activities fosters students’ team-work.

Inferring from context

Students are encouraged to guess meaning of new vocabulary by considering different context clues.

To develop strategies of coping with unfamiliar words and expressions, rather than being dependent on the teacher. Thus, students grow aware of the ways through which they can cope with new words, especially when they analyze their process of inference.

Focusing on main and supporting points

Students read and complete a cloze outline of the text.

To improve academic reading skills by focusing on main and supporting points.

Understanding discourse markers and details.

Students focus on specific time clues, transitional words of sentence and cross-sentence and paragraph coherence.

To raise students’ awareness of the cohesive devices (pronoun references, chronological order, and connectors). By recognizing the function of these words, students will be able to understand and construct a meaningful representation of the text.

Post – reading activities

Vocabulary exercises.

Students are trained on strategy-use while dealing with vocabulary in the text. Collaboratively, students work through a passage with difficult words with the aim of identifying the strategy they need to grasp meaning of these words.

To develop students’ sense of priorities and strategies for dealing with unfamiliar vocabulary.

Writing summaries.

Students are required to write a summary of the already-read text or part of it, they will share it with colleagues for the sake of getting feedback.

To raise students’ awareness of what makes an effective summary of a given text; this helps them develop more effective understanding of future reading text.

Three-level guides

In this activity students react- either orally or in wittingly- to a series of statements about the text they have just read.

To introduce students to the inter-connectedness of the literal, inferential and applied learning that occurs when reading. So students will be aware of the hierarchical relationships of the levels of comprehension.

Most of the following activities are adapted from an in-class lesson plan, handed by the professor in the course “Issues in Reading II”, faculty of science of education Rabat, 2004-2005.

Effective Reading TeachersEffective Reading Teachers Leu and Kinzer (2003)Leu and Kinzer (2003)

Be insightful as to what concerns the appropriate use of material, method, and management.

Focus on decoding skills as well as context-use strategy, and fluency.

Make use of various text’s genres and issues and link them to background knowledge and students’ experiences.

Teach reading as an integrated skill with other skills.

Enhance comprehension through instructional strategies and activating background knowledge.

Highlight the students’ needs as one of the course priorities, without overlooking individual needs

Organise the class in terms of time, class, and material managements.

Adopt a pedagogical approach to assessment far from being exam-oriented.

Teachers’ Belief SystemsTeachers’ Belief Systems

Definition of “Beliefs” Richard and Lockhart (1996)

‘Teachers’ belief systems are founded on the goals, values, and beliefs teachers hold in relation to the content and process of teaching, and their understanding of the system in which they work and their roles in it.’

The source of teacher’s beliefs The source of teacher’s beliefs J. C. Richards (1994)J. C. Richards (1994)

Teachers’ own experience as language learners. Experience of what works best. Established practice. Personality factors. Educationally-based or research-based principles. Principles derived from an approach or method

Empirical studies on the issue Empirical studies on the issue of beliefsof beliefs

Jack C. Richards (1992) Pajares (1992)

II - MethodologyII - Methodology

Design of the study The subjects

The subjectsThe subjects

Initial number of participants

27 teachers

Discarded subjects 11 teachers

Actual participants 16 teachers

The subjects’ ProfileThe subjects’ Profile

Groups N

G1 Teachers with training & above 10 years of teaching experience. 9

G2 Teachers with no training and no more than 6 years of teaching 7

Total number 16

Table.2: describing the research subjects’ profile.

The instrumentsThe instruments

Questionnaire.1 (on teachers’ beliefs, constituted of 55

close items). Beliefs about what reading is (6 items)

Beliefs about factors that facilitate reading comprehension (8 items)

Beliefs about “a good” reader (10 items)

Beliefs about “an effective” reading teacher (14 items)

Beliefs about “efficient” reading materials (9 items)

Beliefs about “effective” assessment of reading comprehension. (8 items)

Questionnaire.2 Questionnaire.2 (on teachers’ classroom (on teachers’ classroom

practices, 24 close items)practices, 24 close items) While selecting the text you bring to the

classroom, how often do you consider these factors? (9 items)

How often do you include these tasks and activities in your reading class? (8 items)

To assess students’ reading proficiency how often do you make of these tasks part of the test? (7 items)

PilotingPiloting

Probing the target populationRefining the main research instrument

Administration of the main Administration of the main instrumentsinstruments

Followed procedures of administrationTotal number of the administered

questionnaires:Questionnaire.1 = 60 distributed copiesQuestionnaire.2= 30 distributed copiesValid number = 54 filled in copies

Data Analysis Data Analysis

DescriptivesDefault ranking & comparison

 

Presentation of the ResultsPresentation of the Results

Question.1 :What are the Moroccan EFL university

teachers’ beliefs and practices about reading and the teaching of reading comprehension?

III.1.1.1Teachers’ beliefs III.1.1.1Teachers’ beliefs about what reading isabout what reading is

Table.3: Means and standard deviations for beliefs about what reading is

M1 = Bottom-up orientedM2 = top-down orientedM3 = Interactive oriented

Underlying models N

Means

Std. Deviations

M1 16 2,84 1,85

M2 16 3,78 ,58

M3 16 3,40 ,91

III.1.1.2 Teachers’ beliefs about factors that III.1.1.2 Teachers’ beliefs about factors that facilitate comprehensionfacilitate comprehension

Table.4 means and standard deviations for the factors that facilitate comprehension

Factors N Mean Std. Deviation

1 Knowlege of vocabulary 16 4,38 ,38

2 Cooperative learning 16 4,13 ,80

3 Word recognition 16 3,95 1,34

4 Awareness of text structure 16 3,95 1,34

5 Knowlege of grammar 16 3,88 1,36

6 Prior knowlege of the topic 16 2,81 1,04

7 Materials’ authenticity 16 2,34 2,18

8 Awareness of strategy use 16 2,25 2,33

Valid N (listwise)16

III.1.1.3 Teachers’ beliefs about aIII.1.1.3 Teachers’ beliefs about a “good” “good” EFL readerEFL reader

M1=Bottom-up orientedM2 = top-down orientedM3 = Interactive oriented

Underlying Theory N

Means

Std. Deviation

M116

2,94

1,42

M216

4,16

,77

M316

4,01

,34

Valid N (listwise)

16

III.1.1.4 Teachers’ beliefs about a good III.1.1.4 Teachers’ beliefs about a good teacher of readingteacher of reading

Table.7: means and standard deviations for skills believed to be acquired by good teachers.

GroupsN Means Std.

Deviation

G.1-Teaching skills 16 3,57 1,31

G.2-Interactive skills 16 3,95 1,03

G.3-Organizational skills

16 3,01 1,42

III.1.1.5 Teachers’ beliefs about III.1.1.5 Teachers’ beliefs about effective reading materialseffective reading materials

GroupsN Mea

ns Std. Deviation

1.Practicality of materials

16

4,00 ,33

1.Linguistic skills 16

3,13 1,40

1.Cognitive skills 16

3,81 1,20

Valid N (listwise) 16

III.1.1.6 Teachers’ beliefs about III.1.1.6 Teachers’ beliefs about effective assessment of readingeffective assessment of reading

N Mean

Std. Deviati

on

Language skills

16 2,78 ,66

Reading skills 16 3,54 ,51

Valid N (listwise)

16

III. 1.2 Teachers’ actual classroom III. 1.2 Teachers’ actual classroom practices of reading comprehensionpractices of reading comprehension

III. 1.2.1 Factors teachers frequently III. 1.2.1 Factors teachers frequently rely on while selecting teaching rely on while selecting teaching

materialsmaterials

Groups N Means Std. Deviation

1-Practicality of materials

16 2,82 1,01

2-Linguistic skills 16 3,13 1,48

3-Cognitive skills 16 3,42 1,21

Valid N (listwise) 16

III. 1.2.2 Classroom tasks and activities III. 1.2.2 Classroom tasks and activities teachers actually useteachers actually use

FactorsN Mean Std. Deviation

1 Knowlege of vocabulary 16 4,50 ,81

2 Cooperative learning 16 4,00 ,56

3 Word recognition 16 4,15 ,94

4 Awareness of text structure 16 2,25 1,04

5 Knowlege of grammar 16 4,18 ,36

6 Prior knowlege of the topic 16 4,00 1,00

7 Materials authenticity 16 3,34 1,18

8 Awareness of strategy use 16 3,55 1,13

Valid N (listwise)16

III. 1.2.3 teachers’ assessment of III. 1.2.3 teachers’ assessment of students’ reading proficiencystudents’ reading proficiency

N Mean Std. Deviation

Language skills 16 2,50 1,30

Reading skills16 3,99 ,51

Valid N (listwise)16

Question.2Question.2

. To what extent do the claimed beliefs match the actual teaching of these teachers?

comparing the beliefs and practices about comparing the beliefs and practices about

factors that facilitate comprehensionfactors that facilitate comprehension Factors

Beliefs practices

N Mean Std.Devt. Mean Std. Devt.

1 Knowlege of vocabulary 16 4,38 ,38 4,50 ,81

2 Cooperative learning 16 4,13 ,80 4,00 ,56

3 Word recognition 16 3,95 1,34 4,15 ,94

4 Awareness of text structure 16 3,95 1,34 2,25 1,04

5 Knowlege of grammar 16 3,88 1,36 4,18 ,36

6 Prior knowlege of the topic 16 2,81 1,04 4,00 1,00

7 Materials’ authenticity 16 2,34 2,18 3,34 1,18

8 Awareness of strategy-use 16 2 ,25 2,33 3,55 1,13

Comparing the beliefs of effective teaching Comparing the beliefs of effective teaching materials and the teachers’ selected materials and the teachers’ selected

materials.materials.

Groups N Beliefs practices

Mean Std. Devt. Mean Std. Devt.

G1

Practicality of materials

16 4,00 ,33 2,82 1,01

G2

Linguistic skills

16 3,13 1,40 3,13 1,48

G3

Cognitive skills

16 3,81 1,20 3,42 1,21

III.2.3 comparing the participants’ beliefs III.2.3 comparing the participants’ beliefs and practices about effective assessment of and practices about effective assessment of

readingreading

Groups

Beliefs Practices

N Means Std. Devt. Means Std. Devt.

G1 Language skills 16 2,78 ,66 2,50 1,30

G2 Reading skills 16 3,54 ,51 3,99 ,51

Valid N (listwise)16

Question.3Question.3

Do the Moroccan EFL “experienced” and “less experienced” teachers of reading comprehension differ in terms of their beliefs about reading comprehension?

III.3.1.1. ‘Experienced’ & ‘less III.3.1.1. ‘Experienced’ & ‘less experienced’ teachers’ Beliefs about experienced’ teachers’ Beliefs about

ReadingReading

M1= bottom-up orientedM2= top-down orientedM3= interactive oriented

Groups N Belief about what reading is

Means M1

Means M2

Means M3

GROUP 1 9 2,20 3,85 3,90

GROUP 2 7 3,33 4,00 2,90

VALID N (listwise)

16

III.3.1.2 ‘Experienced’ and ‘less III.3.1.2 ‘Experienced’ and ‘less experienced’ Teachers’ beliefs about experienced’ Teachers’ beliefs about

factors facilitating readingfactors facilitating reading

Groups N Beliefs about factors facilitating comprehension

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8

GROUP 1 9 4,15 4,33 2,25 4,45 2,95 4,45 3,48 3,20

GROUP 2 7 4,41 4,03 4,00 3,00 4,43 2,22 2,00 1,93

VALID N (listwise)

16

III.3.1.5 ‘Experienced’ and less ‘experienced’ III.3.1.5 ‘Experienced’ and less ‘experienced’ Teachers’ beliefs about ‘good’ teaching material Teachers’ beliefs about ‘good’ teaching material

of readingof reading

F1= practicality F2= linguistic skillsF3= cognitive skills

Groups N Beliefs about good materials

Means F1

Means F2

Means F3

GROUP 1 9 4,43 2,88 3,83

GROUP 2 7 4,03 2,70 3,40

VALID N (listwise)

16

III.3.1.6 ‘Experienced’ and less ‘experienced’ III.3.1.6 ‘Experienced’ and less ‘experienced’ teachers’ beliefs about effective assessment of teachers’ beliefs about effective assessment of

reading comprehensionreading comprehension

Groups N Belief about effective assessment

Means forLanguage skills

Means forReading skills

GROUP 1 9 1,68 3,80

GROUP 2 7 2,86 3,80

VALID N (listwise)

16

Discussion of FindingsDiscussion of Findings

Finding.1Finding.1

1. The Moroccan EFL university teachers’ beliefs about & thier actual instruction of Rg are generally on line with major underlying theories and classroom implication of L1 & L2 readig.

2. The obtaied results revealed that it is not easy to make a clear-cut judgement on Moroccan EFL teachers’ beliefs about reading comprehension and say that they are top-down oriented or otherwise because there is a discernible overlap among the three models of reading in the teachers’ beliefs & practices with a highly measured tendency towards the top-down and the interactive models.

Finding.2Finding.2 Consistency

In comparing between teachers’ beliefs about effective teaching materials and the nature of the materials they actually select for their reading class, the results demonstrated that there was a reassuring consistency between the teachers’ thoughts and actions.

The comparison between the teachers’ beliefs about effective reading assessments and the way they actually assess their students reading proficiency was found, as was being expected, that the participants guarded an even level of consistency between what they preach and what they teach.

Finding. 3Finding. 3

Inconsistency

Inconsistency was most apparent in the beliefs and practices of class-used activities, such awareness of text structure, prior knowledge of the topic and awareness of strategy use: participants believed that these activities were not very important for comprehension, but they had a frequent use of the latter.

It has not been determined whether or not the degree of the mismatch between the teachers’ belief and practice of these activities was significant or not because no T-test was run. Therefore, regardless of the sparred moments of discrepancy, the findings revealed that there was a “stable” consistency between the teachers’ claimed beliefs and their performance

Finding.4 Finding.4

Both ‘experienced’ & ‘less experienced’ were able to articulate well-developed personal theories of teaching that addressed their actual practices.

the comparison between “experienced” and “less experienced” teachers’ beliefs revealed that while each group’s perceptions of reading instruction, “a good reader”, alongside “a good teacher of reading” represented opposite perspectives: they both held common views about effective reading materials as well as effective assessments of reading comprehension.

Findig.5Findig.5 The “less

experienced” group: considered reading as a mere

macro-skill that has no impacts on the real life of the reader that is why they focus more on the linguistic aspects of reading.

were concerned with fostering the students’ vocabulary knowledge and strengthening the student-teacher interaction

The ‘experienced’ group:

paid more attention to the cognitive parts of reading and tried to focus more on interactive activities -in both teaching and assessment- that would enrich students’ background knowledge

Focused more on engaging students into peer and group activities that would help mapping students’ thinking through strategic tasks

Finding.6Finding.6

Due to their accumulated years of teaching experience along with the formal pedagogical training they had, ‘Experienced’ teachers’ develop a holistic philosophy, allowing them to be more automatic and effective while coping with the different classroom encountered situations.

ConclusionConclusion

Pedagogical implication It is high time teachers enrolled into formal

pedagogical training and be active participants in the continuous training that provide them with academic pedagogies of teaching.

evidence revealed that teachers’ belief systems have tremendous influence on the learners” as well as the teaching/learning process, syllabus designers thus have to communicate the teachers’ salient underlying philosophy of the curriculum

Limitations of the study

Limited number of the participants Elicitation techniques Statistical tools

Recommendation for further Recommendation for further researchresearch

Further research may be designed to dig into this issue with the intent to include a good size of the population and use various elicitation techniques so as to come up with generalizable findings and more insightful pedagogical implications.

We need to know the whether or not experienced teachers do the same things as the less experienced ones in terms of teaching reading comprehension

The results of present study have revealed that in some instances the teachers’ articulated beliefs may not match their actual pedagogical practices. However, the reasons behind this mismatch are not accounted for

Thank You Very Much, indeedThank You Very Much, indeed