Reading process.

In the booklet The Professional Development Service for Teachers 3 (2014), the reading process is
defined as something complex and multi-dimensional. Thus, teachers who are assertive when fostering
reading comprehension in their classes must know about its complexity. Teachers can make use of a
range of teaching approaches that enable students to be confident and independent readers. Aspects to
consider in the teaching of reading towards recognizing this complexity are the variety and richness of
vocabulary, providing a framework for teaching comprehension strategies, ensuring that students feel
motivated, and finding reading as something pleasurable. Each aspect is essential because it provides
guidance for understanding how the reading process should be taught. Carter and Long (1991) explain
that these three phases of reading are useful since students have opportunities to follow a reading
passage in a more organized and detailed way. Also, each phase has a series of strategies that teachers
could use in order to help students understand what they are reading. In the before-reading stage,
Paran (2003) argues that teachers need to motivate students through activities that may attract their
interest (e.g. book talks, dramatic readings, or pictures related to the text). The goal is to make the text
relevant to students in some way. Another strategy suggested by Paran (2003) is by activating students’
background knowledge and discussing what students will read, what they already know about the topic,
and about the text organization. In this manner, students might establish a purpose for reading, identify
and discuss difficult words, phrases, and concepts in the text, preview the text (by surveying the title,
illustrations, and unusual text structures), and make predictions about its content.In the while-reading
stage, the teacher takes a role as a guide. They should encourage students to use comprehension
strategies as they read, and to monitor their understanding. In this stage, teachers ask students
questions to keep track of the reading and to focus their attention on main ideas and important parts of
the text. Also, teachers ask their students to pay attention to parts in a text that require making
inferences, and students summarize key sections or events. Finally, teachers need to encourage
students to confirm the predictions made before. Pang et al. (2003) proposes other strategies that can
be used in this stage. These include making connections between and among important ideas in the
text, integrating new ideas with existing background knowledge, sequencing events and ideas in the
text, checkingunderstanding by paraphrasing or restating events found in the reading, and identifying
characters, settings, or events in a text.
In the post-reading stage, Toprak (2009) expresses that all the ideas are concluded in this stage. This is
the summary of the reading material. Here, teachers can make a discussion
from the reading, and summarize important ideas as well as supportive details. Also, students

recall and tell important parts of the text in their own words. Also, students could respond

to the reading in a variety of ways (e.g. by writing, role-playing, music, posters, videos, debate,

or pantomime). Other activities that teachers could apply in this stage are evaluating and

discussing the ideas found in the text, plus applying and contextualizing ideas in real life

situations.

Instructional reading strategies. In order to reinforce the use of intensive reading,

instructional strategies which allow students to understand a reading in steps are necessary.

These strategies not only provide students with a framework to work when they start

comprehending a text but also help consolidate information relevant for the text. Stoller et

al. (2013) highlight the importance of using strategies that allow students to understand a

text in a more analytical way. They propose strategies that include activating prior knowledge,
interacting with the text, and paying attention to details such as vocabulary. In addition,

Lewis and Hill (1992) express that it is necessary to activate students’ reading comprehension

by means of activities implemented before going directly to the reading text. They suggest

that teachers should pose questions related to the text or let students brainstorm ideas about

the text. Stricklin (2011) also proposes four steps to follow when reading a text: predicting,

clarifying, questioning, and summarizing.

Therefore, the use of instructional reading strategies is important because these enable

students to know what to do in every reading stage. The reading strategies implemented in

this study are shown below.

Know, Want, and Learn (KWL) chart. This reading strategy proposed by Ogle (1986)

helps students organize their ideas in a more detailed way. This strategy elicits students’ prior

knowledge of the topic of the text, establishes a purpose for reading, and helps students to

monitor their comprehension.

strategy in which students can make a structural process when reading a passage. Biringkanae

(2018) explains that SQ3R helps students understand a text while reading it. Firstly, students

need to Survey, it means that they skim through the pages assigned in order to get a “general

idea” about what the chapter, section, or article is about. In this part, students organize their

ideas about the text and predict what it will be about. In Question, students ask questions based

on the titles, headings, or subheadings surveyed in the first stage. In the third stage, students

have the chance to Read. This stage is the most important because the goal is to answer thestated
questions after reading. In this stage, additionally, students may highlight unknown

vocabulary, jot down relevant information in the passage, and ask further questions to discuss

after reading. Once students have read the passage, in the Recite stage, students put away their

notes and organize their ideas either on paper or out loud. In this stage, students organize

the information gathered in the previous section on their own. Finally, students Review the
text by using all the information they collected; they also create something different with the

information gathered (e.g. create flashcards, make a map, table, and diagram, make a timeline

Testing and Reading Comprehension

Testing reading comprehension is another challenging endeavor. With reading

comprehension being such an active, multifaceted process, measuring it presents test

developers and teachers with problems. What are some variables that affect the

testing of reading comprehension?

Comprehension has been measured by the ability of students to be able to

recall the details of what they have read (Allington, 2001). This type of assessment

leads to a student being judged as a proficient reader because they have the ability to
answer factual questions. One concern is that these types of assessments are

measuring the student’s ability to think like we expect them or want then to think.

This is one potential problem with multiple choice questions. Better readers often

over analyze possible answers or are confused when the possible choices only partial

addresses the question. When assessment focuses on critical thinking and analysis,

reader proficiency will often be reduced.

Research has indicated that test-takers with different abilities and skills may

be affected by a test in ways that are different then the ones being tested (Kunnan,

1998). Kunnan (2004) argued the point that test formats may favor some test-takers

over others. A test should be fair and measure the abilities being tested and not

confounded by variables such as test format (Elder, 1997).

Kobayashi (2002) looked at the relationship between student test performance

and two variables: test type and test format. The three test formats that were utilized
were cloze, open-ended questions, and summary writing. The results of the study

indicated that both variables had a significant effect on students’ performance.

or tell someone else their ideas)Zheng, Cheng, and Klinger (2007) stated, “The results demonstrated that
different

tests formats, including different types of questions in the same format, measured

different aspects of reading comprehension”.

There is not one particular form of a test that can address all assessment

concerns. Multiple choice tests are easily scored with accuracy and objectivity. These

types of tests do not place the poorer reader at a great disadvantage, which an essay

question test can do (Chan and Kennedy, 2002). A concern regarding multiple choice

tests is with poorly or inappropriate constructed test items (Paxton, 2000). Another

concern is that these types of tests may be influenced by the subjectivity of the testers

which can cause a content validity problem (Chen, 2010). Even with these concerns,

if multiple choice tests are constructed well, theses types of tests can assess the
student’s level of knowledge (Epstein, et al, 2002).

Essay tests require students to use more thinking and analysis skills, which

can present problems to readers. These types of questions require a higher order of

thinking and communication skills. As a result, students may not fair as well as on

other types of assessments.

Some other popular types of reading assessment tests are cloze test (Vacca

and Vacca, 2008), Informal Reading Inventories (Flippo, Holland, et al, 2009), and

running records (Ross, 2004). These various testing tools focus on different elements

of reading. Cloze test have been shown to be effective for students that are

struggling with comprehension and vocabulary (Palumbo and Loiacono, 2009).

Informal Reading Inventories (IRIs) uses post-reading questions for the purpose of

evaluating comprehension and IRIs have demonstrated reading growth (Paris, 2002).

Running records are used for assessing reading progress and have proven to be
reliable when utilized with a minimum of three passages (Fawson, et al, 2006).

Most standardized reading comprehension tests are designed to assess six

essentials of reading: phonemic, awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and

comprehension. A major concern does exist regarding using only one tool for the

purpose of determining a student ability to comprehend (Afflerbach, 2005). Utilizing

a variety of different forms of tests can provide a better assessment of

comprehension suggested Dennis (2009).

Comprehension and testing are linked by another variable, background

knowledge. Clapham (1996) determined that background knowledge had a

significant effect on text comprehension. The more specific the text was, the more

impact background knowledge had on comprehension. The development of subject

related tests of comprehension need to consider both subject knowledge and

language level of the student. Alderson (2000) stated that both had impact but
language level was the better predictor.

Validity, the ability of a test to measure what it intents to measure, is a

concern with any test. Chen (2010) discussed content validity, which is the degree to

which a particular test adequately and correctly measures a skill or behavior. When

considering testing materials these key points should be considered: avoid culturally

laden material, use authentic material if possible, use a variety of sources such as

newspapers, maps, notices, and others, use new material not something that has

been previously read.One potential bias that a test may have is regarding the form of the English

that is used in the test. For readers that are using non-standards forms of English,

tests such as IELTS and TOEFL may be biased. Most of the forms of English that are

utilized for these standardized tests are American, British, New Zealand, and

Australian based. The concern would be for students that would be taking these tests

that are from Singapore, India, Malaysia and other countries that utilize English
(Hamp-Lyons and Davies, 2008).

Similar to the standard English language concern is another potential test

bias. Most standardized English reading tests favor an American student from the

middle class, standard-dialect, Protestant background and individualistic. SolanoFlores and Trumbull
(2008:4) expressed concern for “valid and equitable

assessment” of students from “non-mainstream backgrounds are longstanding.”

Test anxiety was identified by Spielberger and Vagg (1995) as being another factor

that can affect reading comprehension. They state that worry, which is manifested as

negative thinking and self-doubts, have been showed to be strongly linked to poor

test performance.

Bachman and Palmer (1996) were concerned with situational authenticity (the

extent to which the test reflect contextual features) and interactional authenticity (the

extent to which test educe cognitive processes). “They proposed a wider descriptive
framework to be used in mapping tasks employed in a test to tasks encountered in

target language domains to which test performance is to generalize”, Green, Unaldi,

and Weir (2010:192).

Kobayashi (2002) looked at test methods effects on reading comprehension

test performance. It was found that when tests are clearly structured, the more

proficient students achieved better results in the areas of summary writing and

open-ended questions. In contrast, test structure made little difference to the

performance of less proficient students. This finding suggests that well-structured

tests can help to differentiate between students with different proficiency levels.

Textual cohesion is another factor to consider regarding test construction.

Freedle (1997) found that texts that are judged to be very coherent yield main

reading comprehension points that are easier to understand. Koda (2005) supported

this finding in the reporting of how improving text structure lead to improve
comprehension.

Two additional factors are text length and time restraints regarding testing

and reading comprehension. Green et al (2008) found that an intense reading load

done under pressure caused student difficulties. The combination of time pressure

and a long test creates problems for students.

Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension is the goal that any reader has at the beginning of an

activity. Hock and Mellard (2005) utilized a constructional framework as a way to

understand reading comprehension better. The three dimensions of this framework

strategy. Text structure was divided into three categories being: expository,

narrative, and documents. Recommended reading strategies include (a) identifying

the main idea, (b) summarizing, (c) drawing inferences, (d) generating questions, (e)creating visual
images, and (f) looking for clues (RAND Reading Study Group,

2002). In Hock and Mellard’s paper, they presented an extensive discussion

regarding reading comprehensive strategies that produced positive results. Some

key points are the selection, deletion and condensing of information, drawing

inferences, generating different types of questions, creating visual images and

searching for clues.

There are other things that we know regarding reading comprehension and

what effective readers use as strategies. They read different kinds of texts differently.

Good readers will look at the text before they read looking for the structure of the
text and what might be the most relevant parts. They are continually making

decisions about their reading such as what to read quickly or slowly, what to skim

and what to reread. Good reader feel that the complex task of reading comprehension

is satisfying and productive. They also construct, question and revise meaning as

they read (Pressley and Afflerbach, 1995; Block and Pressley 2001).

Regarding reading comprehension and instruction, it needs to be balanced.

Instruction should be a combination of specific instruction regarding comprehension

strategies, a great deal of time allocated to reading, writing, and discussion of text.

Teachers need to develop and foster a supportive classroom environment that

encourages reader, develop a rich vocabulary, and directed reading activities. The

reading comprehension strategies such as prediction, think-aloud, teachers thinkaloud, student think-
aloud, the visual representations of text, and text structure have

all proven to have some validity as possible strategies (Duke and Pearson, 2008).
Cohen (2006) presented six test management strategies that readers can

employ to improve their comprehension of a text. The six were (a) go back to the

question for clarification, review what you are looking for in the text (b) check the

questions for clarification: paraphrase the question (c) Read the questions and

passage looking for clues while keeping options open (d) consider the options (e)

select options through vocabulary, sentence, paragraph, or passage overall meaning

(f) discard options that are not supported.

The National Reading Panel report, National Institute of Child Health and

Human Development (NICHD) of 2000, reviewed two decades of instruction of

reading strategies and from this they identified eight individual strategies. These

eight strategies which have proven to be effective are as follows:

• Comprehension monitoring (readers learn to be aware of their understanding

during reading)
• Cooperative learning (readers work together to learn reading strategies)

• Use of graphic and semantic organizers (readers graphically represent the ideas in

the text)

• Story structure (readers consider various aspects of the plot)

• Question answering (readers answer questions posed by the teacher and are given

feedback on correctness)

• Question generation (readers ask themselves questions about the text)

• Summarization (readers attempt to identify the most important ideas from the text)

• Multiple-strategy teaching (readers use several of these procedures in interaction

with the teacher)The combination of these strategies being utilized by teachers have resulted in

student gains on standardized reading comprehension tests (National Reading

Panel, 2000:7).