Implementación de modelo de instrucción explícita en el uso de estrategias de lectura con estudiantes de EFL

dc.contributor.authorUribe Enciso, Olga Lucía
dc.coverage.campusCRAI-USTA Bogotáspa
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-09T16:43:56Z
dc.date.available2021-06-09T16:43:56Z
dc.date.issued2021-06-05
dc.descriptionEl proyecto consistió en la implementación de la Propuesta de Capacitación en Estrategias Lectoras, la cual constituye el producto principal y la segunda fase de la investigación ‘Estrategias de aprendizaje empleadas en tareas de comprensión lectora por estudiantes universitarios de iv nivel de inglés como lengua extranjera.’ El objetivo de la investigación fue diagnosticar la efectividad de la propuesta para el desarrollo de estrategias lectoras en inglés como lengua extranjera. Los participantes fueron 40 estudiantes de primer semestre de la Facultad de Negocios Internacionales en la Universidad Santo Tomás seccional Bucaramanga. La intervención se realizó dentro de las clases regulares de inglés, durante un semestre académico (16 semanas). Las estrategias planteadas en la propuesta de instrucción se enseñaron de forma explícita y están enmarcadas dentro del esquema de enseñanza de habilidades PIP (pre-, -in/while, post-: antes, durante, después). Por lo tanto en cada fase, se implementó tanto estrategias descendientes (top-down) como ascendentes (bottom-up), y además, se practicaron las estrategias de lectura para abordar pruebas. En el proyecto anterior, los estudiantes manifestaron en la encuesta que reconocían y usaban estrategias de lectura descendentes y ascendentes casi en la misma proporción, pero la diferencia no fue significativa. Sin embargo, en la retrospección inmediata, realizada después de una prueba de comprensión de lectura, se evidenció el uso prioritario de estrategias ascendentes; los resultados de las pruebas fueron bajos. Por lo tanto, se propuso el esquema de capacitación en estrategias de lectura. Los textos y las actividades a partir de las cuales se enseñaron las estrategias fueron los mismos para los dos grupos (20 estudiantes cada uno), y son adecuados para el nivel A2 CEFR. La recopilación de datos se hizo a partir de preguntas de comprensión de lectura tomadas de tres fuentes: una prueba diagnóstica o de entrada (PE) y una prueba de salida (PS) para las cuales se aplicó la sección de lectura del examen internacional KET (Key Elementary Test, implementada para evaluar el nivel de suficiencia de angloparlantes en el nivel A2 del CEFR), la sección de lectura de los pruebas de avance y final institucionales para los cursos (PA1, PA2 y PF), y tres tareas de lectura asignadas como actividad de clase (T1, T2 y T3). Se hizo un comparativo entre los puntajes obtenidos entre las PE y PS, la PA1 y PA2 y las T1, T2 y T3. Adicionalmente, se aplicó un cuestionario inicial (C1) y uno final (C2) respecto a las estrategias reconocidas y usadas para abordar tareas lectoras. Los resultados muestran un mejor desempeño en la PS con respecto a la PS. También, se mejoró el puntaje en la T3 con respecto a la T2 y la T1. Sin embargo, se registró un descenso en el porcentaje de respuestas correctas obtenido en la PF con respecto a las PA1 y PA2. En cuanto al rango de estrategias de lectura reconocidas por los estudiantes en función de las tres fases antes (pre-), durante (in-) y después (post-) de una tarea de comprensión lectora de un texto, en el C1, la quinta parte de los estudiantes mencionaron por lo menos una estrategia apropiada para la fase ‘antes’ de la lectura como ‘hacer inferencias a partir del título’ y ‘comprensión de las preguntas para resolver’, y la tercera parte señalaron estrategias de lectura que no son apropiadas para dicha fase, como por ejemplo ‘subrayar’ o ‘resumir’; en el C2, a la misma pregunta la totalidad de los estudiantes mencionaron entre una y tres estrategias. En lo relacionado a las estrategias implementadas en la fase ‘durante’, en el C1 casi la totalidad de los estudiantes mencionó entre una y tres estrategias de uso apropiado durante la lectura del texto, y en el C2 todos los estudiantes relacionaron entre una y tres estrategias apropiadas para la fase, entre las cuales se encuentran ‘lectura para encontrar información específica o scanning’, ‘uso de recursos para buscar información desconocida’ y ‘subrayar’. En lo concerniente al uso de estrategias para la fase posterior a la lectura, en el C2 un poco más de la mitad de los estudiantes mencionaron estrategias apropiadas para esta fase, cantidad que aumentó 39 estudiantes que mencionaron entre una y tres estrategias en el C2. El estudio permite testear el modelo de capacitación propuesto en razón del mejoramiento en el desempeño en tareas de lectura en contexto evaluativo y de ejercicio práctico a partir del uso de estrategias de lectura. Así, se realizarán los ajustes necesarios para implementar el modelo de manera gradual en los programas de lenguas extranjeras de la universidad.spa
dc.description.abstractThe project consisted in the implementation of the Proposal for Training in Reading Strategies, which constitutes the main product and the second phase of the research 'Learning strategies used in reading comprehension tasks by university students of level IV of English as a foreign language. 'The objective of the research was to diagnose the effectiveness of the proposal for the development of reading strategies in English as a foreign language. The participants were 40 first-semester students from the Faculty of International Business at the Universidad Santo Tomás, Bucaramanga section. The intervention was carried out within the regular English classes, during an academic semester (16 weeks). The strategies outlined in the instructional proposal were explicitly taught and are framed within the PIP skills teaching scheme (pre-, -in / while, post-: before, during, after). Therefore, in each phase, both top-down and bottom-up strategies were implemented, and in addition, reading strategies were practiced to address tests. In the previous project, students stated in the survey that they recognized and used top-down and bottom-up reading strategies in about the same proportion, but the difference was not significant. However, in immediate retrospection, carried out after a reading comprehension test, the priority use of bottom-up strategies was evidenced; the test results were low. Therefore, the training scheme in reading strategies was proposed. The texts and activities from which the strategies were taught were the same for both groups (20 students each), and are suitable for CEFR level A2. Data collection was made from reading comprehension questions taken from three sources: a diagnostic or entrance test (PE) and an exit test (PS) for which the reading section of the international KET exam was applied ( Key Elementary Test, implemented to assess the level of proficiency of English speakers at CEFR level A2), the reading section of the institutional advance and final tests for the courses (PA1, PA2 and PF), and three assigned reading tasks as a class activity (T1, T2 and T3). A comparison was made between the scores obtained between PE and PS, PA1 and PA2 and T1, T2 and T3. Additionally, an initial questionnaire (C1) and a final questionnaire (C2) were applied regarding the strategies recognized and used to tackle reading tasks. The results show a better performance in the SP compared to the SP. Also, the score in T3 was improved with respect to T2 and T1. However, there was a decrease in the percentage of correct answers obtained in the FP with respect to PA1 and PA2. Regarding the range of reading strategies recognized by students based on the three phases before (pre-), during (in-) and after (post-) of a reading comprehension task of a text, in C1, the A fifth of the students mentioned at least one appropriate strategy for the 'before' reading phase such as 'making inferences from the title' and 'understanding the questions to solve', and a third indicated reading strategies that did not are appropriate for that phase, such as 'underline' or 'summarize'; in C2, to the same question, all the students mentioned between one and three strategies. Regarding the strategies implemented in the 'during' phase, in C1 almost all of the students mentioned between one and three strategies of appropriate use during the reading of the text, and in C2 all students related between one and three Appropriate strategies for the phase, among which are 'reading to find specific information or scanning', 'use of resources to search for unknown information' and 'underlining'. Regarding the use of strategies for the post-reading phase, in C2 a little more than half of the students mentioned appropriate strategies for this phase, a number that increased 39 students who mentioned between one and three strategies in C2. The study allows testing the proposed training model due to the improvement in performance in reading tasks in an evaluative context and practical exercise based on the use of reading strategies. Thus, the necessary adjustments will be made to gradually implement the model in the university's foreign language programs.spa
dc.description.domainhttp://unidadinvestigacion.usta.edu.cospa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/xmlspa
dc.identifier.citationUribe, O. (2021).Implementación de modelo de instrucción explícita en el uso de estrategias de lectura con estudiantes de EFL. Repositorio - Universidad Santo Tomásspa
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11634/34341
dc.relation.annexedhttp://unidadinvestigacion.usta.edu.cospa
dc.relation.referencesAbbott, M. (2006). ESL Reading strategies: Differences in Arabic and Mandarin Speaker test performance. Language Learning 56:4, December 2006, pp. 633–670 C _ 2006 Language Learning Research Club, University of Michiganspa
dc.relation.referencesAfflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61, 364-373.spa
dc.relation.referencesAlfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: effects: Effects on combined strategy instruction on high school students. Journal of Education Research, 97(4), 171-184spa
dc.relation.referencesAnderson, N.J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language Reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-472.spa
dc.relation.referencesAnderson, J. R. (2000). Learning and Memory: An integrated approach. 2nd edition New York: John Wileyspa
dc.relation.referencesAnderson, N.J. (2003). Scrolling, clicking, and reading English: Online Reading strategies in a second/foreign language (On-line). Available: www.readingmatrix.com/articles/anderson/article.pdf.spa
dc.relation.referencesAuerbach, E.R & Paxton, D. (1997). “It’s not the English thing”: Bringing reading research into the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 237-262spa
dc.relation.referencesBarnett, M. A. (1988). Reading through context: How real and perceived strategy use affects L2 comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 72(2), 150-162.spa
dc.relation.referencesBarnett, M. A. (1989). Language learner reading: Theory and practise. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents Englewood Cliffs.spa
dc.relation.referencesBlock, E. (1992) See how they read: Comprehesion monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. TESOL Quarterly, 26 (2), 319-341spa
dc.relation.referencesBlock, C & Pressley, M. (Eds.) (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesBrantmeier, Cindy (2002) Second language Reading strategy research at the secondary and university levels: variations, disparities, and generalizability. The Reading Matrix Vol.2, (3) 1-14, September 2002spa
dc.relation.referencesBrown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 18-37spa
dc.relation.referencesCarrell, P. & Eisterhold, J. (1988) Schema Theory and ESL Writing. In P. Carrell, J. Devine, & D.Eskey (Eds.), Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading (pp. 73-92). Cambridge, UK: CUPspa
dc.relation.referencesCarrell, P. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 73, No.2 (Summer, 1989)spa
dc.relation.referencesCarrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional Science, 26, 97-112spa
dc.relation.referencesChamot, A. & Rubin, J. (1994). Critical comments on Janie Rees-Miller’s “A critical appraisal of learner training: Theoretical bases and teaching implications”: Two readers react. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 771-776spa
dc.relation.referencesCloss, E. (2011). Teaching Reading Comprhension to Struggling and At-Risk Readers: Strategies That Work. Master Thesis Project. Saint Xavier Universityspa
dc.relation.referencesCohen, A. D. (2007). Coming to terms with language learner strategies: Surveying the experts. In D. C. Cohen & E. M. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies (pp. 29-45). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesCook, V. (1991). Second language learning and language teaching. London: Edward Arnold Publisher Limitedspa
dc.relation.referencesEllis, R. (1994). The study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: OUPspa
dc.relation.referencesGrabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: moving from theory to practice. Cambridge: CUPspa
dc.relation.referencesGuthrie, J.T. (2002). Preparing students for high-stakes test taking in reading. In A.E. Farstrup & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 370–391). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.spa
dc.relation.referencesGuthrie, J. T., & Ozgungor, S. (2002). Instructional contexts for reading engagement. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 275-288). New York: The Guilford Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesHedge, Tricia. (2003). Teaching & learning in the language classroom. UK: OUPspa
dc.relation.referencesHoutveen, A. A. M., & van de Grift, W. J. C. M. (2007). Effects of metacognitive strategy instruction and instruction time on reading comprehension. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18(2), 173-190.spa
dc.relation.referencesKletzien, S. (1991). Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders reading expository texts of different levels. Reading Research Quarterly 26(1), 67-86.spa
dc.relation.referencesKo, M. (2002). A study on teachers’ perception of strategy use: Reading strategy instruction and students’ motivation to read. Journal of National Huwei Institute of Technology, 5, 202-212.spa
dc.relation.referencesKrashen, S. (1993). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Englewood, Co.: Libraries Unlimitedspa
dc.relation.referencesKusiak, M. (2001). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on reading comprehension and metacognitive knowledge. EUROSLA Yearbook, 1, 225-274.spa
dc.relation.referencesO’Malley, J. & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning Srategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: CUPspa
dc.relation.referencesOxford, Rebecca L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.spa
dc.relation.referencesOxford, R.L., & Cohen, A. (1992). Language learning strategies; Crucial issues of concept and classification. Applied Language Learning 3, 1-35.spa
dc.relation.referencesOxford, R. & Leaver, B. (1996). A synthesis of strategy instruction for language learners. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross- cultural perspectives (227-246). Honolulu, Hi: University of Hawaii Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesPang, J. (2008). Research on good and poor reader characteristics: Implications for L2 reading research in China. Reading in a Foreign Language, vol. 20, N1,1-18spa
dc.relation.referencesPerfetti, C., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading (p.227-47). Malden, MA: Blackwell.spa
dc.relation.referencesRaphael, T.E. (2000). Balancing literature and instruction: Lessons from the Book Club Project. In B.M. Taylor, M. F. Graves, & P. Van Den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning. Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp. 70-94). New York: Teachers College Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesRichards, J. C. and W. A. Renandya. (eds.). (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of. Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University.spa
dc.relation.referencesRubin, J. (1975). What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9(1), 41-45spa
dc.relation.referencesRubin, J. (2001). Language learner self-management. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 11(1), 25-37.spa
dc.relation.referencesRosenshine, B. V., & Meister, C. (1997). Cognitive strategy instruction in reading. In S. Stahl & D. A. Hayes (Eds.), Instructional models in reading. Mahwah, NJ: The Guilford Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesRuiqi, Z. (2007). The impact of reading purposes on text processing strategies. In H. Wenzhong and W. Quifang. (eds), ELT in China (4): Selected papers from the 4th International Conference on ELT in China. China: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesSchueller, J. (2004). Gender and foreign language reading comprehension: The effects of strategy training. In Adult foreign language reading: theory, research, and implications. Special issue of the Southern Journal of Linguistics, 26(2), 45-65.spa
dc.relation.referencesSinghal, M. (2001). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and L2 readers. Reading Matrix, 1(1), 1-9. Retrieved May, 2012, from http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/singhal/spa
dc.relation.referencesWeinstein, C. E. & Mayer, R. F. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In Winrock, M. (ed.) Handbook of research on teaching, 3rd ed. New York: Macmillian, pp 315-327.spa
dc.relation.referencesThompson, L. & Rubin, J. (1996). Can strategy instruction improve listening comprehension? Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 331-342.spa
dc.relation.referencesUribe, O. & Vargas, M. (2011). Estrategias de aprendizaje empleadas en tareas de comprensión por estudiantes universitarios de IV nivel de Inglés como lengua extranjera. Proyecto de investigación realizado en la Universidad Santo Tomás.spa
dc.relation.referencesUribe, O. (2010) Learning strategies: tracing the term. Revista Electrónica Matices en Lenguas Extranjeras No. 4, Diciembre 2010.spa
dc.relation.referencesZhang, L. J. (2008). Constructivist pedagogy in strategic reading instruction: Exploring pathways to learner development in the English as a second language (ESL) classroom. Instructional Science, 36(2), 89-116.spa
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 2.5 Colombia*
dc.rights.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/co/*
dc.subject.keywordReading strategiesspa
dc.subject.keywordExplicit instructionspa
dc.subject.keywordTexts in Englishspa
dc.subject.proposalEstrategias de lecturaspa
dc.subject.proposalInstrucción explícitaspa
dc.subject.proposalTextos en inglésspa
dc.titleImplementación de modelo de instrucción explícita en el uso de estrategias de lectura con estudiantes de EFLspa
dc.type.categoryApropiación Social y Circulación del Conocimiento: Informes finales de investigaciónspa

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Thumbnail USTA
Nombre:
2021olgauribe.docx
Tamaño:
66.49 KB
Formato:
Microsoft Word XML
Descripción:
Ponencia usta 2014 proyecto implementacion

Bloque de licencias

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Thumbnail USTA
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
807 B
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción: