Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English Classroom · strategies but some critical...
19
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English Classroom Malcolm Larking 1 Abstract The aims of this paper are to inform educators about the latest findings into critical reading strategies based on a comprehensive literature review, identify the frequency of critical reading strategy usage by advanced EFL students, and to outline a procedure by which learners can transition from comprehending a text to critically evaluating it. This paper highlights the most important critical reading strategies for advanced EFL tertiary courses, synthesized from the current findings from the literature on critical reading. In particular, it proposes reading strategies for authentic non-fiction passages, including strategies specific to academic and online media texts that have not been graded for EFL learners. Reading resources for advanced EFL courses can be sourced from a wealth of authentic material but pose challenges in terms of complexity and quality. By adopting critical reading strategies, learners can navigate authentic texts to identify the author's purpose, persuasive elements, and bias to read and respond with an informed perspective. The study also reports on survey findings about the frequency of use of both critical and comprehension-based reading strategies by advanced EFL college students. The survey found that comprehension-based reading strategies were used more often than critical reading strategies but some critical reading strategies such as distinguishing between main and supporting ideas and making relevant inferences were used autonomously by the participants. Based on the survey results, this paper identifies a number of critical reading strategies that need greater attention in the classroom, for example identifying rhetorical devices, and describes best practice for teaching them. Key Terms: Critical reading strategies, advanced EFL English, authentic texts, online texts 1. Introduction It is of paramount importance that EFL students have the right reading strategies to successfully construct meaning from texts. Moving beyond comprehension, advanced EFL learners need to approach texts with a critical eye. The Internet has given students access to a plethora of information, yet the quality and factual accuracy of the information available must be called into question as anyone can author and publish content without editorial control or peer review. Preparing advanced EFL students to be able to assess such authentic sources is a necessary task and this paper argues that explicitly teaching reading strategies can empower students to evaluate, critique, and strategically utilize authentic texts in an independent and insightful manner. Reading strategies can be defined as the cognitive processes involved when readers purposefully attempt to understand a text (Barnett, 1989, p. 66). By way of a literature review and survey, this study highlights some of the most appropriate reading strategies for advanced EFL college students to foster critical reading skills, such as identifying rhetorical devices and questioning the author's assumptions. This paper summarizes the critical reading strategies which are crucial for informed and independent interpretations of authentic texts by EFL college students who may not have the language proficiency necessary to transfer such strategies from their first language (L1). It also seeks to identify which of these key strategies are not being sufficiently utilized by students to 1 Lecturer, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University (APU), Beppu City, Oita, Japan e-mail:[email protected] 50
Transcript of Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English Classroom · strategies but some critical...
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English Classroom
MalcolmLarking1
AbstractTheaimsofthispaperaretoinformeducatorsaboutthelatestfindingsintocriticalreadingstrategiesbasedonacomprehensiveliteraturereview,identifythefrequencyofcriticalreadingstrategyusagebyadvancedEFLstudents,andtooutlineaprocedurebywhichlearnerscantransitionfromcomprehendingatexttocriticallyevaluatingit.ThispaperhighlightsthemostimportantcriticalreadingstrategiesforadvancedEFLtertiarycourses,synthesizedfromthecurrent findingsfromthe literatureoncriticalreading. Inparticular, itproposes readingstrategies forauthenticnon-fictionpassages, includingstrategiesspecific toacademicandonlinemedia texts thathavenotbeengradedforEFLlearners.ReadingresourcesforadvancedEFLcoursescanbesourcedfromawealthofauthenticmaterialbutposechallenges in termsofcomplexityandquality.Byadoptingcritical readingstrategies, learnerscannavigateauthentictextstoidentifytheauthor'spurpose,persuasiveelements,andbiastoreadandrespondwithaninformedperspective.Thestudyalsoreportsonsurveyfindingsaboutthefrequencyofuseofbothcriticalandcomprehension-basedreadingstrategiesbyadvancedEFLcollegestudents.Thesurveyfoundthatcomprehension-basedreadingstrategieswereusedmoreoftenthancriticalreadingstrategiesbutsomecriticalreadingstrategiessuchasdistinguishing between main and supporting ideas and making relevant inferences wereusedautonomouslybytheparticipants.Basedonthesurveyresults,thispaperidentifiesanumberofcriticalreadingstrategiesthatneedgreaterattentionintheclassroom,forexampleidentifying rhetorical devices,anddescribesbestpracticeforteachingthem.
Key Terms:Criticalreadingstrategies,advancedEFLEnglish,authentictexts,onlinetexts
1. IntroductionIt isofparamountimportancethatEFLstudentshavetherightreadingstrategiestosuccessfullyconstructmeaning from texts.Movingbeyondcomprehension,advancedEFL learnersneedtoapproach textswithacriticaleye.The Internethasgivenstudentsaccess toaplethoraofinformation,yet thequalityand factualaccuracyof the informationavailablemustbecalledintoquestionasanyonecanauthorandpublishcontentwithouteditorialcontrolorpeerreview.PreparingadvancedEFLstudentstobeabletoassesssuchauthenticsourcesisanecessarytaskandthispaperarguesthatexplicitlyteachingreadingstrategiescanempowerstudentstoevaluate,critique,andstrategicallyutilizeauthentictextsinanindependentandinsightfulmanner.Readingstrategiescanbedefinedasthecognitiveprocessesinvolvedwhenreaderspurposefullyattempttounderstanda text(Barnett,1989,p.66).Bywayofa literaturereviewandsurvey, thisstudyhighlightssomeofthemostappropriatereadingstrategiesforadvancedEFLcollegestudentstofostercriticalreadingskills,suchas identifying rhetorical devices and questioning the author's assumptions.ThispapersummarizesthecriticalreadingstrategieswhicharecrucialforinformedandindependentinterpretationsofauthentictextsbyEFLcollegestudentswhomaynothavethelanguageproficiencynecessaryto transfersuchstrategiesfromtheirfirst language(L1).Italsoseeks to identifywhichof thesekeystrategiesarenotbeingsufficientlyutilizedbystudents to1Lecturer,RitsumeikanAsiaPacificUniversity(APU),BeppuCity,Oita,Japan e-mail:[email protected]
50
MalcolmLarking1revealareaswhereteacherscouldexplicitlyintroduceandpracticesuchstrategiesintheclassroom. Asurveywasconductedtoidentifywhichcriticalreadingstrategiesstudentsusetheleast,asadiagnostictoolforassessingahierarchyofneedfor teachingreadingstrategyinstruction.TheparticipantsinthesamplewereallenrolledinanadvancedEFLdebatecourseatRitsumeikanAsiaPacificUniversityinJapan,wherecriticalreadingwasacorecomponentofthecourseinordertoprepareevidenceforuseindebatesoncontroversialissues,suchasabortionandguncontrol.Forthepurposesofthisstudy,advancedEnglishequateswiththeB2bandoftheCommonEuropeanFrameworkofReferenceforLanguages(CEFR)as this represents theproficiency levelof thesurveyparticipants.Theparticipantshadtoreadauthentictexts,suchasacademicjournalarticles,newspaperarticles,andgovernment reports.Theywereexpected toproducecritical reflectionandcommentaryofsuchsourcesduringthedebates.Giventheserequirements,criticalreadingstrategieswereanimportantresourcefordisseminatingwhat,formanyofthem,werechallengingreadings.Fromananalysisof the survey results, adiscussion followsaboutwhich readingstrategieswerenotbeingfullyutilizedbythestudents,andhowtoremedysuchreadinginstructiondeficits,asameansofcomprehensivelyaddressingtheteachingofcriticalreadingstrategies toadvancedEFLcollegestudents.
1.1 RationaleTheadvancesof theInternet in termsofdeliveringtextual informationenmassehasgivenrisetoarenewedawarenessabout thequalityof texts.Thereareplentyofexamplesof textsontheInternetthathavefactualinaccuracies,bias,andmanipulativecontentandreadersneedtobeabletocriticallyanalyzetheinformationpresentedtothem.Whilstaround44%ofAmericansreadtheirnewsonlineviaFacebook,38%of theinformationonmajorpoliticalFacebookpageshasbeenfoundtobefalseormisleading(Gottfried&Shearer,2016).Itcanbearguedthatsocialmediaplatforms inparticularcaremoreaboutwhethercontent issharedand liked, thanwhether thecontentisfactuallytrue.Suchmetricsdrivethedistributionofinformationthroughalgorithmsthatvaluethequantityandpopularityofcontent,whichhascausedhyperboleandmisinformationtoproliferate.Whilstallreadersneedtobevigilant, it isdifficultforsecondlanguage(L2)learnersinparticulartofilterthetrustablefromtheuntrustworthywhendealingwithauthentictextswhichare increasinglysourcedonline.Theyneedtobeconstantlyawareof thefactualaccuraciesandqualityofcontenttheyencounterwhentheyreadsuchsources.Giventhevariabilityofauthenticonlinetexts,teachersneedtoempowertheirstudentswiththecognitiveresourcestoreadauthenticsourcescritically. Given that oneof thekeyobjectives of the advancedEnglish coursewas to conductindependentresearchtoprepareevidenceforuseindebatesmeantstudentshadtofind,readandassess thestrengthofargumentscontainedinauthentic,non-fictiontexts. Itwas thechallengesIobservedwhenstudentswereattemptingtoevaluate thequalityofsuchdifficultandvariablesources thatmotivated thisstudy.By identifying thecritical readingstrategiesstudentsdonotadequatelyuse,andexplicitlyteachingsuchstrategies,studentswillbeabletoreadandevaluate
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English Classroom
51
authenticsourcesindependentlyandwithconfidence.
2. Reading in a Second LanguageIfreadingisaninteractiveprocessbetweenthetextandthereadertoco-constructmeaning,thenteachersneedtoknowwhichreadingstrategiesstudentsaresuccessfullyusingtofacilitate thatinteractionand thestudents' subsequent interpretation.Astudent's schemataconsistsof theirexistingconceptsabouttheworld,or“knowledgealreadystoredinmemory”(Anderson&Pearson,1984,p.255).Comprehendingtextsrequiresmorethanjustlinguisticknowledge.Experienceandcultureshapereaders'schemataandEFLreaders'L1canalsoinfluencetheirunderstandingandinterpretationofEnglishpassages(Mikulecky,2008).Everycultureprovidesadifferentschemataof theworldand teachersneed tobeequippedwith theskillsnecessary tohelpstudentswithvaryingworldviews.Learningtoreadinaforeignlanguageentailsdealingwithdifferenttexttypesandentertainingdifferentculturalbeliefs.It involveschangingthereader'svaluesandcognitiveprocessing,potentiallymodifyingone'sschemata. AsEFLstudentsautomaticallyreference theirschematabasedonculturalandexperientialinfluencestointerprettexts,readinginstructionthatengagesthispriorknowledgewillstrengthentheirpersonal engagementwith texts.Despite the importanceof the readerusing top-downprocessingwithasenseofagency,teachersmayoverlyfocusonmorereceptivereadingstyles,asFairclough(1992)observes,“theretendstobetoomuchofanemphasisuponthetextasproductandtoolittleemphasisupontheprocessesofproducingandinterpretingtexts”(p.28).Despitetheinherentchallengesofreadinginaforeignlanguage,EFLstudentsarealreadywell-equippedwithcognitiveskills,developedschemasabouttheworld,andanawarenessoftextstructuresfromtheirL1whichcanbeutilizedandbuiltuponthroughlearningcriticalreadingstrategies.Givenstudents'priorL1knowledge,researchershavelogicallyconcludedthatbyemployingreadingstrategies,EFLstudentscanincreasetheirreadingcomprehension.Thequestionremains,whichstrategiesneedmoreattentionintheclassroomtoimprovecriticalliteracy?Beforeaddressingthispertinentresearchquestion,asummaryofthedefinitionsofcriticalreadingfollows.
2.1 What is Critical Reading?Critical reading isan investigation into,andcritiqueof thevalidityofargumentsexpressed inreadingpassages(Walz,2001).Underlyingmeaningsareenmeshedwithin thesurface,orface-valuemeaningofa text,whichcanseek topersuade thereader,sometimeswithbiasedviews,imbalancedpresentationofevidence,orevenpurposefully including factual inaccuracies. Itis the task of a critical reader to ‘readbetweenthelines'andundertakeananalysisofa text tocomprehensivelygraspitsfullmeaning.Thetermcriticalreadinghasmultifariousmeanings,butitcanbebroadlysplitintotwodistincttraditions;readingforacademicsuccessandreadingforsocialengagement.AccordingtoManarin,Carey,Rathburn,andRyland(2015,p.4)readingcriticallyforacademicsuccessconsistsofthefollowingkeyskills:
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
52
1.Identifyingpatternsoftextualelements2.Distinguishingbetweenmainandsubordinateideas3.Evaluatingcredibility4.Makingjudgmentsabouthowatextisargued5.Makingrelevantinferencesaboutthetext
Readingcriticallyforsocialengagement impliesanunderstandingofhowtextscanbeused toachievesocialgoals, forexample,addressinggenderor income inequality.Tomastercriticalreading,studentsalsoneedtohaveanawarenessofhowliteracyisusedforsocialpurposes,howanauthormaywrite toachieve theirownends,andhowoneshould treat theirownreflectionona text'smeaningwitha senseof socialpurpose.Wallace (2003)asserts that reading forsocial purposes is “social in thesense that readersandwritersenact their rolesasmembersofcommunities;social in that itunfolds inasocialcontext,bothan immediateandwidersocialcontext”(p.9).Itdemandsaninteractiveformofreadingwherethereisarelationshipbetweenthetextproducers,receivers,thecommunity,andthetextitself.Fromthisperspective,criticalreadingnecessitatesthefollowingcriteria:
1.Siftingthroughvariousformsofrhetoric2.Recognizingpowerrelations3.Questioningassumptions4.Engagingwiththeworld5.Constructingnewpossibilities(Manarinetal.2015,p.6)
Suchaviewofcriticalreadingimpliestherearepotentialsocialandpoliticaloutcomesfromthecriticalanalysisoftexts.Forexample,stakeholderssuchaslobbygroups,thinktanksandNGOswillproduceandinterpretevidencepresentedintextstoadvancetheiragendas.Thetraditionofcritical readingforsocialpurposesadheres tocritical theory'squestioningof,"inequalitiesandinjusticesthatpersistinsocietyandhowliteracyinstructionmaybecomeasiteforcontestingthestatusquo"(Siegel&Fernandez,2000,p.140).Insum,itcallsuponthereadertointerprettextswithasenseofsocialpurposeandwithanintenttouseatextaccordingtoone'svalues. Ultimately,bothconceptionsofcritical readingsharecommon features in thata readermustanalyzethecontentbyidentifyingandinterpretingtextualfeaturescoupledwithcontextualinformation inorder toconstructmeaning.Furthermore, critical readersmust recognize theassumptionsmadeina textandassesstheirargumentativevalidity.Theymustalsoevaluatethecredibilityoftheirownassumptionswhenreadingatext.Theabilitytomakeinferencesrequiresstudentstoconnecttheideasinatextwithothertextsandotherformsofknowledge,particularlywithin thesamegenreordiscipline.Broadlyspeaking, inferencemeans tomakeconnectionsbetweentextsandone'sownschemata,aswellas interrelatedsocialandacademicconceptionsandpropositions.Spears(1999)describedinferenceas“astatementabouttheunknownbasedon
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
53
theknown”(p.81).Astudentcanreferencetheirschematatomakeinferencesbasedontheirownknowledge.Cluestoanauthor'smotivationsmaybecomeapparent,especiallyif theycontraveneGrice's(1975,pp.41-58)fourmaximsoftruthfulcommunication,thatis;quality,quantity,relationandmanner.Themaximofqualityreferstothelevelof informationprovidedandthemaximofqualityreferstotruthfulstatementssupportedwithevidence.Themaximofrelationreferstotherelevancetothefieldorissuebeingcoveredandthemaximofmannerreferstoanauthor'slevelofclarity.Ifanauthorcontravenesanyofthesefourmaxims,acriticalreadermaybeabletomakeinferencesaboutanauthor'smotivationsandcritiquetheefficacyoftheirargument.Theskillofinferenceisparticularly importantwhenauthorsareoverlybiased,misusefactsor intentionallyobscurethetruth.Bymakinginferencesfromtexts,studentscanreachtheirownconclusionsbasednotonlyontheauthor'sstatementsbutalsotheircriticalinterpretationofthem. Whetherastudentisreadingcriticallyforacademicpurposesorforsocialengagement,notonlycomprehension,butalsoanalysis, interpretation,andevaluationshouldbepresent.Withthecoreskillofcriticalthinkingattheheartofcollegeeducation,EFLreadinginstructionforcollegestudentsmustcoverthesekeycriticalreadingskills.Thiswillensurestudentscancomprehensivelyreadacademicandauthentic textsandcriticallyrespond to themin theirassignments.Despitethecentralityofcritical thinkingincollegeeducation,andthefact thatevenearlylearnersmayalsocritiqueatextwhenmakingsenseof it,EFLadvancedreadingisoftenstillbasedonmorefoundational techniques,asWallace (2003)states:“manymodelsofsecond languagereadinghavebeenultimatelyreductiveintheireffects.Formoreadvancedlearnersacomprehensionviewremainsadominantview”(p.3).ItisclearthatreadinginstructionforadvancedEFLstudentsthatattends tocritical readingskillsneeds tobepresent tocomplementmorecomprehension-basedreadingstrategies.
3. Literature ReviewTheearly literatureoncritical readingfornativespeakers (NSs)often focusedon theoreticalconcernswhilstpracticalstrategiesonlyreceivedbroadguidelinesforinstruction.ThistrendhascontinuedforbothNSsandnon-nativespeakers(NNSs)alikeasPennycook(2001)notes,“there hasbeenacurioussilenceonconcretepedagogicalmatters” (p.82).Earlydefinitionsofcriticalreadingareabundant,yetdisparate.Clymer(1968)publishedacriticalreadingtaxonomy,whereasothersformedaskillhierarchy(Robbins,1977;Smith,1974).Carver(1971)positedcriticalreadingwithinabroader frameworkofcomprehensionskills,whereasWright (1977)definedcriticalreadingasaprocess,oroperation,bywhichstudentscandifferentiatebetweenvalidandinvalidargumentsandreasoning.During the1970s itwas theorized thatvocabularydevelopmentandcriticalreadinghadapositivecorrelationandthereforethatschoolsshouldfocusonvocabularyinstructiontoengendercriticalreadingskills(Dale,1976).Questioningskillswerealsoadvocatedasameanstoadvancecriticalreading(Newton,1978;Schick,1973).Intermsofstrategyusage,CognitivePsychologyhasshownthatstudentswhoareconsciouslyawareofwhattheyaredoinglearnnewthinkingprocessesandstrategiesthemosteffectively.Suchlearnersareawareoftheir
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
54
comprehensionandcanapplythemostappropriatestrategieswhencomprehendingatext(Brown,1978).Instructorsneedtomaketheirlearnersconsciouslyawareofthereadingstrategiestheyareemployingintheclassroomtoincreasethelikelihoodofstrategyretention. Anotherkeyfindingrelated tostrategyuse is that interactingand talkingabouta readingpassagehelpsstudentsdevelopliteracyskills.Heath(ascitedinMikulecky,2008)foundthatwhenteachersencouragedtheirstudentstotalkaboutreadingpassages,literacyimproved.Whenteachersmodeledcomprehension,andwhenstudents talked togetherabouthowtheyunderstood texts,thestudents'comprehensionincreased.Talkingabout texts isan importantactivityfor theEFLclassroomtoincreasecomprehension,shareinterculturaldifferencesanddevelopliteracyskills. Despite theearlydivergentviewsonwhatcriticalreadingis,andhowitshouldbe taught,evidenceofsuccessfulskill instructionbothat thehighschooland tertiary levels isnumerous(Brownell,1953;Kemp,1963;Livingston,1965;O'Brien,1973).Wright(1977)successfullyusedworkbookmaterialswherebyvalidandinvalidargumentswerepresentedtohisstudents,whoweretaskedwithidentifyingthecorrectformsofargumentationandreasoning.Afteradailytreatmentfor twoweeks the students testedsignificantlyhigher than thecontrolgroup, leading to theconclusionthatworkbookmaterialsfocusingspecificallyonthevalidityofargumentsincreasedthestudents'criticalreadingskills.Itmustbenotedthatmanyoftheearlystudiesoncriticalreadinglackedmethodological rigor, suchas theabsenceofacontrolgroup.Nonetheless, theoverallresultsindicatethatformalinstructioninanyagegroupbearsimprovementincriticalreadingskills(Patching,Kameenui,Carnine,Gersten,&Colvin,1983). Reachingconsensusas towhatconstitutes themostbeneficial readingstrategies thatEFLreadersusehasbeensimilarlychallenging.The firstcomprehensiveclassificationsofsecondlanguagereadingstrategieswereofferedbyHosenfeld(1977),Block(1986),andSarig(1987,p.107-120).Comparingthethinkaloudprotocolsofproficientandnon-proficientreaders,Hosenfeld(1977)concludedthatsuccessfulreadersreadbiggerchunksoftext,skippedunimportantwords,andhadapositiveattitudeofthemselvesasreaders.Conversely,lessproficientreaderstendedtolosethemeaningofphrases,readinsmallerchunks,didnotskimunimportantwords,andhadanegativeviewofthemselvesasreaders.Sarig(1987,p.110)identifiedfourmaincategoriesofEFLreadingstrategies,namely:
•Technical-aidmoves(e.g.skimmingandscanning)•Clarificationandsimplificationmoves(e.g.paraphrasingandsynonyms)•Coherence-detectingmoves(e.g.usingcontentandformalschemata)•Monitoringmoves(e.g.consciousplanning,self-evaluation)
Block(1986)analyzedthinkaloudprotocolsofESLcollegestudentsandconcludedtheirstrategiescouldbedivided into twobroad types;generaland local.General strategies refer tooverallcomprehension and include:
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
55
• Anticipating content•Recognizingtextstructure•Questioninformationinthetext•Interpretthetext•Usegeneralknowledgeandassociations•Commentonbehaviororprocesses•Monitorcomprehension•Correctbehavior•Reacttothetext
Localstrategiesrefertounderstandingspecificlinguisticunitsandinclude:
• Paraphrase• Reread• Question meaning of a clause or sentence•Questionmeaningofaword•Solvevocabularyproblem
Inadditiontothelocalandgeneraldelineation,Block(1986)alsosawstrategiesasbeingeitherextensive(understandinganauthor's ideas)orreflexive(reactingtothoseideaspersonally).Thisdivisionofstrategiesishelpfulwhenconsideringcriticalreadingstrategies,asbothextensiveandreflexivemodesarecrucialforreaderstobeabletounderstandkeyconceptsinatext,reflectontheirownindividualinterpretation,anddecidehowtouseatext.Insummary,earlyinvestigationsintothenatureofEFLreadingstrategiesfocusedondescribingself-employedstrategiesbyEFLandESLlearners,L1transfer,students'cognitiveprocessesandawarenessofstrategyuse,andtheeffectivenessof teachingmethods(Barnett,1989,p.70).Themultiplicityofdifferentstrategiesandthedivergentviewsontheireffectivenessmeansmakingaconclusivetaxonomyofsuccessfulreadingstrategiesisachallengingtask. Asmethodsofinstructionbegantotakeamorecoherentform,theevidenceforgivingexplicitinstructionincriticalreadingstrategiesgrewmoreconvincing.CarnineandGersten(1984)assertedthatcritical readinginvolvescomplexcognitiveprocessingandthat instructionthereforeneedstobeovertandexplicit,so thatall thesteps in thestrategicprocessareclearly introducedandmodeledbytheteacher.Patchingetal.(1983)continuedwiththisapproachbyundertakingastudyofovert,systematicinstructionofthecognitiveprocessinvolvedincriticalreadingcomparedwithaworkbookbasedtreatmentgroup,similartoWright's(1977)approach. Patchingetal.'s(1983)resultsshowedthatexplicit trainingbymodelingovertreadingstrategieswassignificantlymoresuccessful thantheworkbookmethodor thecontrolgroup.Day(1980)alsofoundthatexplicit,guidedtrainingwasnecessary,particularlyfor lower-level learners.Brown,CampioneandDay(1981)notedthatforsuchlearnersmeretrainingofsuchstrategieswasnotsufficientandeachstep
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
56
shouldbeexplicitly introducedcoupledwithspecificattention toself-managementandcontrolpractices,thatis,anexplicitapplicationofsuchstrategieswasnecessary.Fromthisresearch,itisevidentthatduetothecognitivecomplexityofcriticalreadingstrategies,explicit instructionforbothNSsandNNSsalikeisbeneficial. Although theexplicit instructionmethodhasprovenmerits in termsof studentsclearlyunderstandingandsuccessfullyapplyingcriticalreadingstrategies,considerationmustbegiventohowstudentsretainanddeveloptheirskillsautonomouslyovertime.Guidedpracticeofexplicitreadingstrategiescanbedeliveredviain-classactivitiesandassignmentsbutsuchovertinstructionandguidancemaynotnecessarilyresult indecontextualizedskills thatbecomeinternalizedandthenfreelyproducedbystudentsautonomously.Adams,CarnineandGersten's(1982)studynotedthatafteroverttraining,studentswouldapplytheprinciplesinacovertandpersonalizedway,inthattheycouldidentifyfaultyargumentsinapassagebutcouldnotlabelthemwiththeformalruleswhichwereexplainedandmodeledbytheteacher.Simplyreplicatingmodeledinstructionmaynotfullypreparestudents tohandlenewreadingchallengesadequately.BelenkyandNokes-Malach(2012)believe that teachersneed toencourage interpretiveknowledgewherebystudentscanautonomouslyapplystrategiestonewtexts,ratherthansimplyreplicatingwhattheylearnedduringguidedpracticesessions.Theresearchersnotethatifstudentscanseethepersonalvalueinapplyingstrategiesintermsoffurtheringacademicsuccessandmotivationishigh,thenamoreindependentandinterpretiveapproachtoreadingcanoccur. Inaddition to theneedformore interpretivereadingstrategies,studentsmustalsoexhibitintegrativeknowledge.Makingconnectionsacross texts,andevensubjectareas, isakeyskillforacademic success.Theefficacyofa text canonlybeassessedwhen integratedwithinabroaderacademiccontext.Whenstudentsarerespondingtocontent, theycanrefertopreviouslyencounteredmaterial inorder tosupportorrefuteclaims,evidence,andtheories.Manarinetal.(2015,p.53)foundthatintegratedinterdisciplinaritywasnotevidentinstudents'readinglogsevenwithinmultidisciplinarycourses,andsuggeststhatmoreneedstobedonebycollegeteacherstoengenderintertextualreferencesandconnections.Theresearchersnotethat instructionstomakeconnectionsbetween textsneeds tobeexplicit,otherwisestudentsdonotautomaticallymakethem.Thusforintegratedknowledge,activitiesthatrequirestudentstocompareandcontrast thecontentpresentedinanumberoftextsmaybeaneffectiveapproach.Giventhatwritingabouttextsimprovesreadingskills(Graham&Herbert,2010),comparativewritingassignmentsbasedontwoormorereadingsmayhelpaddressalackofintertextualandinterdisciplinaryintegration. The importanceofcontextual strategieshasbeengivenvarying levelsof support fromdifferentacademicsasithelpsreadersdevelopabroaderunderstandingoftheauthor'smotivationsandvaluesexpressed ina text.Harnadek(1978,pp.8-9)claimsknowledgeabout theauthor,publisher, and the intendedaudience is relevant,whereasKurland (1994,p.59) argues fortheprimacyofcontentwhen rankingstrategies.Making theobservation thatananalysisandinterpretationshouldbebasedonthetextitself,otherthanvariablessuchasthepublisher,whichcouldpublishonarangeofviews,are lessrelevant to thecoremeaningexpressed in the text.
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
57
Nonetheless,advancedEFLstudentsneedtoaccessthefullrangeofstrategiesavailabletothemtobeabletofullyanalyzeandevaluateatext.Ultimately,contextualstrategiescangivecluestotheauthor'sperspectivethatisnotsalientinthetext.Researchingabouttheauthor'sbackground,theirotherworks,andaffiliations,canbuildapictureof theirmotivations.Locatingatext initssocio-culturalandtemporalcontextcanallowstudents tounderstandwhysomeviewpointsaremaintained.Researchingaboutthepoliticalleaningsandfinancialbackingsthattheinstitutionsthatproducetextshave,mayilluminatetheirmotivations,bias,andtheconsolidationofpowerrelationstheypurport.Bycastingawidernetofinquiry,atextcanbeplacedinitssocialcontext,furtheringstudents'appraisalofitsqualityandsocialworth. Anotherstrategythatispositivelyaffectedbyguidedinstructionisthepracticeofreflection.Reflectionhelpsstudentshavemorethoughtfulengagementwithtextsafteradeeperconsiderationof the issues thathavebeenpresentedand theirownreactions to those issues thathavebeenexpressed.Roskos,Vukelich,andRisko(2001)conductedacriticalanalysisofreflectionresearchoverafifteenyearperiodandfoundthatakeyissuesurroundingthisbodyofresearchwastheimportanceofguidedpractice.The findings show thatexplicit instruction in thepracticeofreflectionisthebestmethodforpromotingcriticalreading.Theimportanceofprovidingspecificcontentcoupledwithreflectivequestionprompts thatdeepensstudents'criticalanalyses isalsoanotherkeyfindingof thereview.Anotherkeypointaboutreflection is that themore teacherspracticereflectionthemselves,themorecriticalliteracyisachievedwithintheclassroom.ThemoststrikingexampleofthisisHarste,Leland,andYoussef's(1997)studyonencouragingreflectiononschool-basedsocialinequities.Overathreesemesterperiodteachers-in-trainingengagedinjournalwritingsandclassdiscussionsframedbyanexplicitfocusonreadingsthatcoveredsuchinequities.Bymakingreflectionakeyfocusoftheirtraining,Harsteetal.(1997)foundthatthetimeteacherstookfortheirowncriticalreflectionparalleledthetimetakenforcriticalreflectionbytheirownstudents. Understandinghowdifferentculturescreateandinterprettextsisanotherelementinreadingmorecritically forboth studentsand teachersalike.EFL teachersmustengage in theirowninterculturalliteracyprocessestounderstandandhelpstudentsfromdifferentculturalbackgrounds.If teacherswant to raise students' awarenessofculturaldifferences in texts theymusthavealreadyexpandedtheirownknowledgeaboutculturaldifferencesacrosstexts.Forexample,ClarkandMedina's (2000)studyshowedthatbywritingaboutavarietyofnarrativesfromdifferentbackgrounds,prospectiveteachersincreasedtheirmulticulturalknowledgeoftextsandwereabletoviewtextsasbeingtheproductofsocialsituationsandinteractionsratherthanstandalonepassages.ClarkandMedina (2000)asked60 teachers-in-training to readanddiscussautobiographicalnarrativesfromdifferingculturalbackgroundsandthenwritenarrativesabouttheirownliteracydevelopment.Throughthisprocesstheprospectiveteacherschangedtheirviewofliteracytoseeitas influencedbysocial interactions,multiculturalperspectives,and theyalsorecognized theimportanceofthestudents'ownnarratives.Thestudyshowedthatreadingnarrativesfromdifferingculturescanhelp teachersbreakdownculturalstereotypesandworkbetterwith textsandwith
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
58
studentsfromdifferentculturalbackgrounds.Thissupports theviewthat reading issocialandinteractiveandhighlightstheneedformorestrategyinstructionthatattendstocriticalreadingforsocialpurposes. Lastly, the typicalstudent'smotivation isgeared towardshighgrades,andreviewinghowassessmentsinfluencethereadingoftextswillhelpwithstudentengagementwhenteachingcriticalreadingstrategies.Byclearlyexplaininghowthereadingmaterialandaccompanyingassignmentsattendtospecificacademicpurposes,studentswillmorelikelypaycarefulattentiontothegoalofthereadingstrategybeingtaught.Ifstudentscanclearlyascertainthespecificreadingpurpose,theywillhaveamuchbetterchanceatobtainingandinternalizingthenewskill.Inshort, it isevidentthatexplicitinstruction,bymakingthestudentsawareoftheirlearning,isavitalfirststep.Studentsneedtoseethevalueinlearningstrategiestomaintainmotivation,autonomoususe,andretention.Teachersshouldalsoengagewith theirowncritical readingpractices toensure their readingstrategyinstructionisculturallyinformedandgivenpriorityintheclassroom.
4. Purpose of StudyInreflectingontheliterature, it isapparentthatunderstandingthetypeandfrequencyofreadingstrategies that students are using is an important first step in assessing their reading instruction needs.Byclearlyunderstandinghowstudentsareemployingreadingstrategies,teacherscanadjusttheircurriculumtoattendtoanyreadingstrategydeficiencies.Byextension,teachersforadvancedEFLlearnersneed toassess theirstudents'masteryofcritical readingstrategies toensure theyarepursuingdeeperandmoreinformedreading.Toexplorethisissue,asurveywasconductedtoreportonthefrequencyofstudents'criticalreadingstrategyuseinordertoclarifywhichstrategiesneedmoreattentionin theclassroom.Byquestioningstudentsabout theirfrequencyofreadingstrategyuse,thisstudyhopestoidentifyifcriticalstrategiesareutilizedfrequentlyincomparisontocomprehension-basedstrategies.Fromtheresultsofthesurvey,adiagnosticanalysisandsetofrecommendations for attending to the most important and least utilized critical reading strategies is discussed.Theresearchquestionsformulatedwere:
1.HowoftendoadvancedEFLcollegestudentsusecriticalreadingstrategiescomparedtocomprehension-basedstrategies?
2.Whichcriticalreadingstrategiesareusedthemostandwhichtheleast?
5. MethodologyToanswerthesequestionsaquantitativesurveyusingtheLikertfivepointfrequencyscalewascarriedout toassessstudents' self-perceived frequencyof readingstrategyuse.A totalof31studentswereaskedbywayofapaper-basedwrittensurveyhowoften theyused20differentreadingstrategies.Theparticipants'agerangewas18-24andtheycamefromadiverserangeofAsiannations,witha totalofeightnationalitiesrepresented.Theirvocabularyrangewasquitelarge,between2199-12,458wordfamilies,withameanof7300.Thestandarddeviationwas
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
59
3700withamedianof5992wordfamilies (WordEngine,2016).Withsuchadisparate rangeofvocabularyknowledge itwasparamount that reading strategiesaccompaniedvocabularyacquisition toguide thestudentswith their readings, inorder tomeet thecourseobjectivesofevaluatingthequalityofargumentsinnon-fictiontextsforuseasevidenceduringthedebates. ThereadingstrategiesincludedinthesurveywerebasedonMikulecky's(2008)listofkeyreadingstrategiessynthesizedfromthelatestfindingsonreadingstrategiesforEFLlearners.Toassessthefrequencyofuseofcriticalreadingstrategiesincomparisontotheuseofcomprehension-basedstrategieswhenreadingEnglish texts for theiruniversitysubjects,10strategies that fallwithinManarinetal.'s(2015,p.5-6)criteriaforcriticalreadingskillswereselected.Thesurveyasked: How often do you use the following reading strategies when reading texts for your university courses?Theparticipantschosefromtheansweroptionsofalmostalways,often,sometimes,seldom,andnever. Table1detailsthereadingstrategytypesthattheparticipantswerequestionedabout.Inthesurveythecomprehensionstrategiesandcriticalreadingstrategieswererandomlyorderedtoensurestudentsrespondedtoeachitemindependentlywithoutthecomprehensionandcriticalstrategytypedelineationbeingmadeexplicit tothem.Althoughmanyresearchershaveemployedthinkaloudprotocolsfordatacollectionwhenanalyzingstrategyuse,aLikertscalewasusedtospecificallyaddresstheresearchquestionsaboutfrequencyofuse.Eachstrategywasexplainedandexampleswereprovidedforstrategiesstudentsrequestedfurtherclarificationof, toensuretheyunderstoodeach item type.The surveywasconducted inclass timeandhada100percent return rate.Descriptivestatistics,ratherthaninferentialstatisticswereusedtoanalyzethepreliminaryresultsinthisreport.
Table1Survey Question Items Divided by Critical and Comprehension-Based Reading StrategiesCritical Reading Strategies Comprehension-Based Reading Strategies
1.Distinguishmainandsupportingideas. 2.Evaluatethecredibilityoftheclaims. 3.Makerelevantinferencesaboutthetext. 4.Makejudgmentsabouthowthetextisargued. 5.Questiontheauthor'sassumptions. 6.Decidehowtousethetextforyourownstudy. 7.Identifyrhetoricaldevices. 8.Identifypowerrelations. 9.Evaluatethequalityofthetext.10.Distinguishbetweenfactandopinion.
1.Previewatext. 2.Scanatextforspecificinformation. 3.Recognizetopicsinthetext. 4.Locatetopicsentences. 5.Guess themeaningofunknownwords from the
context. 6.Skimatextfortheoverallidea. 7.Paraphrasepartsofatextinyourownwords. 8.Readfasterbyreadingphrasesrather thansingle
words. 9.Rereadatextfordeeperunderstanding.10.Understanding the relationship of ideas by
recognizingthestructureofatext.
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
60
6. ResultsThesurveyresultsshowthatoverall,comprehension-basedreadingstrategiesweremorefrequentlyusedthancriticalreadingstrategies.Despitethis,theparticipantsreportedtheyusecriticalreadingstrategies for theiruniversity readingmaterials, albeit significantly less thancomprehensionstrategies.Figure1providesasnapshotofthedifferenceinfrequencyusebetweenthetwostrategycategories.
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%Almost always
Critical Reading Strategies
Often SometimesFrequency of Use
Seldom Never
Sam
ple
Per
cent
age
N=3
1
Comprehension Based Reading Strategies
Figure1.Criticalvs.Comprehension-BasedReadingStrategiesUse
Theparticipantsalmostalwaysusecomprehensionstrategies twiceasmuchas theydocriticalreadingstrategies,37%and18%ofthetimerespectively.Whilst this isasignificantdifference,thenextcategorysurprisinglyreceivedalmostexactlythesamenumberofresponses,with31%of respondents oftenusingcriticalreadingstrategies.Nonetheless, inallof themost infrequentcategories(sometimes,seldom,andnever)criticalreadingstrategiesscoredhigherwithatotalof51%(sometimes:28%,seldom:15%,never:8%).Comprehension-basedstrategiesonlyreceivedatotalof31%forthethreeinfrequentcategories.Whilstitisencouragingthattheseldomandnevercategoriesreceivedrelatively lowscoresoffrequencyuseforcriticalstrategies, it isclear thatoverallthecomprehension-basedstrategiesareusedmuchmore.Thisreflectstheobservationthatcomprehension-basedstrategiesaremorefundamentalandprecede,orunderpinhigherlevelcriticalreadingstrategies. Figure2detailstheresultsforthetopfivemostfrequentlyusedcomprehension-baseditems.Theitemswererankedfrommostfrequenttoleastbyaddingeachitem'stotalsforthethreemostfrequentcategories (almost always,often,andsometimes).Theresultsshowthat rudimentarystrategiessuchasskimmingandscanningwereroutinelyusedwhichmayreflecttheretentionofusefromlowerlevelcourses.Guess the meaning of unknown words also scored highly with the almost always and oftencategoriesreceivingatotalof84%.Theitemsrecognize topics in the text and understanding the relationship of ideas by recognizing the structure of a textalsoreceivedhighresponsesforthetoptwomostfrequentcategories,bothreceivingatotalof81%.Figure3showsthecomprehension-basedreadingstrategies that received the lowest frequencyofusefromthe
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
61
sample.Theitemslocate topic sentences and paraphrase parts of a text in your own words had the lowestnumberofresponses.Itisinterestingtonotethatlocating topic sentencesisnotapriorityfortheparticipantseventhoughitcanbeconsideredafundamentalreadingstrategy.Theparaphrasingitemmayhavereceivedfewerresponsesduetoitsemphasisonstudentproductionandthetimeinvestmentinvolved.
70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%
Guess themeaning of
unknown wordsfrom the context.
Scan a text forspecific
information.
Recognize topicsin the text.
Understanding therelationship of
ideas byrecognizing the
structure of a text.
Skim a text for theoverall idea.
Almost Always
Sam
ple
Per
cent
age
N=3
1
Often Sometimes Seldom Never
Figure2.MostFrequentComprehension-BasedReadingStrategies
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%Reread a text for
deeperunderstanding.
Preview a text. Read faster byreading phrasesrather than single
words.
Locate topicsentences.
Paraphrase partsof a text in your
own words.
Almost Always
Sam
ple
Per
cent
age
N=3
1
Often Sometimes Seldom Never
Figure3.LeastFrequentComprehension-BasedReadingStrategies
Figure4displays theresults for thecritical readingstrategies identifiedaswhichrespondentsthoughttheyusedthemostfrequently,andFigure5displaystheleastutilizedcriticalstrategies.Bycombiningthetwomostfrequentcategoriesofalmost always and often some clear patterns emerge intermsofwhichparticularcriticalreadingstrategiesareusedthemostoftenwithdistinguishing between main and supporting ideas receivingacombinedtotalof78%.Next,a totalof71%ofrespondents almost always or oftenusedthestrategyofdeciding how to use the text for your own study.Thenexttwomostfrequentlyemployedstrategiesweremake judgments about how the text is argued and evaluate the quality of the text,whichreceived58%and55%respectively.If thethreemostinfrequentcategoriesofsometimes,seldom,andneverarecombined,itisapparentthat
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
62
the item identify power relations is theleastusedwithacombinedtotalof70%.Threeitemsallfellwithinthe50-60%rangeforthethreemostinfrequentcategories,namely, identify rhetorical devices:58%,distinguish between fact and opinion:55%,andquestion the author's assumptions: 55%.
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%Distinguish
between main andsupporting ideas.
Decide how to usethe text for your
own study.
Make judgementsabout how the text
is argued.
Evaluate thequality of the text.
Make relevantinferences about
the text.
Almost Always
Sam
ple
Per
cent
age
N=3
1
Often Sometimes Seldom Never
Figure4.MostFrequentCriticalReadingStrategies
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%Evaluate the
credibility of theclaims.
Question theauthor’ s
assumptions.
Identify rhetoricaldevices.
Identyfy powerrelations.
Distinguishbetween fact and
opinion.
Almost Always
Sam
ple
Per
cent
age
N=3
1
Often Sometimes Seldom Never
Figure5.LeastFrequentCriticalReadingStrategies
7. LimitationsItmustbeacknowledged that thesmallsamplesizemeans theresultsmaynotbestatisticallysignificant.Therewasnospecificcontroloverthetextualcomplexityinrelationtothelevelsoftheparticipantsasthesurveyquestionaskedaboutall texts theparticipantsreadfortheiruniversitycoursesingeneral.Itmayalsobethecasethatthecomplexityoftheseauthentictextsareactuallyinhibitingtheuseofcriticalreadingstrategiesasstudentslackthevocabularyandlanguagefamiliaritytoshift theircognitiveresourcesbeyondbasiccomprehension.Anareaoffutureresearchcouldbeassessingifstudentsimplementcriticalstrategiesmorefrequentlywhentextsaregradedatanappropriatelevel.Anothercomplicationisthelackofacleardelineationbetweencomprehension-basedandcriticalreadingstrategies.Itcouldbearguedthatthecriticalreadingstrategiesdiscussedare
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
63
justamoreadvancedformofcomprehensionasopposedtobeingadistinctsetofstrategies.Intermsoftheparticipants'responses,thereareinherentissueswithself-perceivedfrequencyuse,asstudents'interpretationsofthefrequencycategoriesmaydiffer,andsotootheirresponses.Furthermore,thehigh response rate for the oftencategorycouldbeattributedtoparticipantsseeingitasadefaultoptionifunconsideredanswersweregiven.
8. DiscussionTheresultsshowthattheparticipantsinthesampleusecriticalreadingstrategieslessoftenthancomprehension-basedreadingstrategies.Infact,onlytwoofthemostfrequentcriticalstrategies(distinguishing between main and supporting ideas and deciding how to use the text for your own study)hadcomparable frequencyuse toanyof thecomprehension-based items.Furthermore,itcanbeargued that these two itemsare the leastcritical in termsofquestioning thevalidityofanauthor'sarguments.Asmentioned in theresults, thefour items thatdoevaluatevalidityofargumentsareusedtheleast.For thisparticularsampleitcanbeinferredthat identify power relations and rhetorical devices, distinguish between fact and opinion,andquestion the author's assumptions areallstrategiesthatstudentsneedmoreinstructionandpracticeusing. Theresults indicatethat inorderforadvancedEFLlearnerstoextendtheirreadingoftextsbeyondmeaningcomprehension,agreaterfocusonexplicitlyteachingcriticalreadingstrategiesintheclassroomisneeded.Theparticipants'previousEnglishstudiesleadinguptotheadvancedcoursemayhaveplacedagreater focusoncomprehension,and thesurvey results reflect theretentionofsuchstrategies.Despitethis,participantsalsoreportedusingcriticalreadingstrategiesmoreoften thanexpected.For this samplepopulation, it canbe surmised that thedegreeofcriticalityofareadingstrategyisafactorinitsfrequencyofuse.Theitemsthatdemandstudentledevaluationofmoreabstractandambiguousmeanings,suchasidentifying power relations,werethemostinfrequent. Combining thefindingsfromthe literaturereviewandthesurvey,apractical templateforteachingcriticalreadingstrategiescanbeformulated.Ahierarchyofskillsmovingfrommeaningcomprehension,throughtocriticalanalysis,andfinallyinsightfulcommentary,canhelpstudentsprogresstheirunderstandingandinterpretationofauthentictexts.Giventhehighfrequencyofuseformorerudimentarycomprehensionstrategies,suchastheitemguessthemeaningofunknownwords, it is apparent that inanadvancedEFLcourse, such strategies require less intensiveinstructionandpractice.It isthereforerecommendedthatagreaterfocusisplacedonthecriticalitemsthatstudentsarelessfamiliarwith.Forthissample,thestrategyidentifyrhetoricaldeviceswasparticularlylowandinstructionthatclarifieswhatrhetoricaldevicesare,andhowtofindandinterpret themin texts,wouldhelp thestudentsassess thepurposeofdifferingdiscoursestylesand techniques,suchashyperboleandsensationalism.Moreover,explicit instructionutilizingauthenticexamplesofhowtextsareusedtomaintainpowerstructures-forexample, textswithimpliedsexismorracism-isanotherareastudentswouldbenefitfrom.Thethirditemthatrequiresattention,distinguish between fact and opinion, isanessentialresearchskillat thecollegelevel.
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
64
The linebetweenfactandopinion is furtherblurredwhenapproached inanL2 text,andEFLlearnersrequirespecificinstructionandpracticeatidentifyinglanguagedevicesthatgivecluestofactualinaccuracies,suchastheselectiveuseofquotesandellipsisinmediatexts.Althoughtheresultsmaybestatisticallyinsignificant, theresults indicate thatattentiontothecriticalreadingstrategiesthatareusedtheleastwouldbroadenthissample'scriticalreadingstrategyusage.
9. ConclusionWhatevercriticalreadingstrategiesteachersdeterminetobeofthemostimportance,theliteratureshows thatcertainpedagogicalmethodsholdempiricalweightwhen introducing themin theclassroom. In short, explicitmodeling from the instructor is essential anddealingwithoneitemata timewill reducecognitive load.Consciousawarenesson the learner'sbehalfwillaidretentionandexplainingtherealworldvalue,coupledwithadequateassessmentweighting,willincreasemotivation.The literaturereviewedalsoplaces importanceon interpretiveknowledgethatisadaptabletoarangeoftextstoengenderautonomousreplication.Attendingtocoreskills,suchascontextualcluesandinference,willaidlearnerswithlowervocabularyprofilesandtimefor reflectionwilldeepenproductive response tasksandbroadenculturalunderstandingandacceptance.Finally,balancingstrategy instructionbetweenreading foracademicsuccessandreadingforsocialpurposeswillprovideabalancedcriticalpedagogy.Forexample, thereadingstrategies of distinguish between fact and opinion and make relevant inferences about a text,fallmorewithin thecritical readingforacademicsuccess tradition,whereas identifying rhetorical devices and power relationscanbecategorizedascriticalreadingstrategiesforsocialpurposes. In reflecting onEFL reading instruction practice, it can be argued that a focus oncomprehension isperhaps toodominantwhenamore interactiveand interpretivemodel isnecessarytoengendercriticalliteracyforstudentsenteringadvancedlevelstudy.Inanagewhenfakenewsswayspublicopinion, it isessential thatadvancedEFLcollegestudentshave thenecessarytoolstocritiquereadingpassagesandidentifyhighqualitysources.Thispaperhassoughttosynthesizetheliteratureoncriticalreadingstrategiesandprovideanexampleofstudents'self-perceivedreadingstrategyusetoinformaprocessofinstructionintheclassroom.Keystrategiessuchas the tencritical readingstrategiesoutlined inTable1shouldbe introducedovertlyandseparatelytoensurestudentshaveafullrangeofcriticalreadingskills.Dependingonthestudents'needs,thestrategiesthatcanbeconsideredasrequiringmorecriticalengagementmayneedmoretimeandpracticeforstudentstofullycomprehendandusethemautonomously.Theresultsofthesurveyhaveclarifiedthatalthoughthereisevidenceofautonomouscriticalreading,moreexplicitinstructionisnecessarytoensurefullcoverageofthekeycriticalreadingstrategies.Itisthehopeoftheauthorthattheresearchpresentedinthisarticlemayhelpteachersevaluateandrefinetheirownreadinginstructiontoensurethatamorecriticalappraisalofsourcescanbeundertakenbystudentsathigherlevelsofproficiencytoensuretheycanreadforacademicsuccessandsocialpurposes.
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
65
ReferencesAdams,A.,Carnine,D.,&Gersten,R.(1982).Instructionalstrategiesforstudyingcontentareatextsintheintermediategrades.Reading Research Quarterly, 18(1),27-55.
Anderson,R.C.,&Pearson,P.D.(1984).Aschema-theoreticviewofbasicprocessesinreadingcomprehension.InP.D.Pearson(Ed.),Handbook of reading research.NewYork:Longman.
Barnett,M.A.(1989).More than meets the eye: Foreign language reading theory in practice.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHallRegents.
Belenky,D.M.,&Nokes-Malach,T.J.(2012).Motivationandtransfer:Theroleofmastery–approachgoalsinpreparationforfuturelearning.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21,399-432.
Block,E.(1986).Thecomprehensionstrategiesofsecondlanguagereaders.TESOL Quarterly, 20(3),463-494.Brown,A.L.(1978).Knowingwhen,where,andhowtoremember:Aprobleminmetacognition.InR.Glaser(Ed.)
Advances in instructional psychology.Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Brown,A.L.,Campione,J.C.,&Day,J.D.(1981).Learningtolearn:Ontrainingstudentstolearnfromtexts.
Educational Researcher, 10(2),14-21.Brownell,J.A.(1953).Theinfluenceoftraininginreadinginthesocialstudiesontheabilitytothinkcritically.
California Journal of Educational Research, 4,28-31.Carnine,D.,&Gersten,R.(1984).Directinstruction:Aschoolimprovementcasestudy.InJ.Osborn(Ed.),
Research foundations for a literate America.Lexington,MA:D.C.Heath.Carver,R.P.(1971).Acomputermodelofreadinganditsimplicationsformeasurementandresearch.Reading
Research Quarterly, 6(4),449-471.Clark,C.,&Medina,C.(2000).Howreadingandwritingliteracynarrativesaffectpreserviceteachers'understandingsofliteracy,pedagogy,andmulticulturalism.Journal of Teacher Education, 51(1),63-76.
Clymer,T.(1968).Whatisreading?Somecurrentconcepts.67th Yearbook of National Society for the Study of Education.7-29.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.
Dale,E.(1976).Developcriticalreading.Reading Improvement, 13,30-33.Day,J.D.(1980).Trainingsummarizationskills:Acomparisonofteachingmethods.Unpublished doctoral
dissertation,Illinois:UniversityofIllinois.Fairclough,N.(1992).Discourse and social change.Cambridge:PolityPress.Gottfried,J.,&Shearer,E.(2016).Newsuseacrosssocialmediaplatforms.Retrievedfromhttp://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/.
Graham,S.,&Herbert,M.(2010).Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading: A report from Carnegie Corporation of New York.NewYork:CarnegieCorporation.
Grice,P.(1975).Logicandconversation.InP.Cole,andJ.Morgan(Eds.),Syntax and semantics.41-58.NewYork:AcademicPress.
Harnadek,A.(1978).Critical reading improvement: A program for self-instruction.2ndEd.NewYork:McGrawHill.Harste,J.C.,Leland,C.H.,&Youssef,O.(1997).Teachereducationandcriticalliteracy.National Reading
Conference Yearbook, 46,385-396.Hosenfeld,C.(1977).Apreliminaryinvestigationofthereadingstrategiesofsuccessfulandunsuccessfulsecondlanguagelearners.System, 5(2),110-123.
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
66
Kemp,C.G.(1963).Improvementofcriticalthinkinginrelationtoopen-closedbeliefsystems.The Journal of Experimental Education, 31(3),321-323.
Kurland,D.J.,(1994).I know what it says, what does it mean? Critical skills for critical reading.California:WadsworthPublishing.
Livingston,H.(1965).Aninvestigationoftheeffectofinstructioningeneralsemanticsoncriticalreadingability.California Journal of Educational Research, 18,230-238.
Manarin,K.,Carey,M.,Rathburn,M.,&Ryland,G.(2015).Critical reading in higher education: Academic goals and social engagement.Bloomington,IN:IndianaUniversityPress.
Mikulecky,B.S.(2008).Teaching reading in a second language.Retrievedfromhttp://www.longmanhomeusa.com/content/FINAL-LO%20RES-Mikulecky-Reading%20Monograph%20.pdf.
Newtown,B.T.(1978).Highercognitivequestioningandcriticalreading.Reading Improvement, 15,26-27.O'brien,T.C.(1973).Logicalthinkingincollegestudents.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 5(1),71-79.Patching,W.,Kameenui,E.,Carnine,D.,Gersten,R.,&Colvin,G.(1983).Directinstructionincriticalreadingskills.Reading Research Quarterly, 18(4),406-418.
Pennycook,A.(2001).Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.Robbins,R.H.(1977).Relationshipsbetweencriticalreadingandselectedmeasuresofliteralandinterpretivereading.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Reading Association,Florida.
Roskos,K.,Vukelich,C.,&Risko,V.J.(2001).Reflectionandlearningtoteachreading:Acriticalreviewofliteracyandgeneralteachereducationstudies.Journal of Literacy Research, 33(4),595-635.
Sarig,G.(1987).High-levelreadinginthefirstandintheforeignlanguage:Somecomparativeprocessdata.InJ.Devine,P.L.Carrell,&D.E.Eskey(Eds.),Research in reading in English as a second language,107-120.Washington,DC:TeachersofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages.
Schick,G.B.(1973).Criticalreadinginstruction:Responsibility,challenge,privilege.Claremont Reading Conference Yearbook, 37,121-127.
Siegel,M.,&Fernandez,S.L.(2000).Criticalapproaches.InM.L.Kamil,P.D.Pearson,R.Barr&P.B.Mosenthal(Eds.),The handbook of reading research, 3,141-152.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.
Smith,B.(1974).Criticallyreadingforpropagandatechniquesingradesix.Unpublished Master's Thesis,RutgersUniversity,StateUniversityofNewJersey.
Spears,D.M.(1999).Developing critical reading skills.Boston:McGraw-HillCollege.Wallace,C.(2003).Critical reading in language education.NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.Walz,J.(2001)CriticalreadingandtheInternet.The French Review, 74(4),1193-1205.WordEngine.(2016).WordEngineV-admin.Retrievedfrom:http://www.wordengine.jp/wevadmin/index.Wright,D.P.(1977).Instructionincriticalthinking:Athreepartinvestigation.Paper presented at Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,NewYork.
Critical Reading Strategies in the Advanced English ClassroomAPU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
67
Appendix:SurveyQuestionnaire
How often do you use the following reading strategies when reading texts for your university courses?
Reading strategiesDistinguishbetweenmainandsupportingideas.
oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
valuatethecredibilityoftheclaims.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Previewatext.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Paraphrasepartsofatextinyourownwords.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Scanatextforspecificinformation.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Makerelevantinferences(conclusions)aboutthetext.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Makejudgmentsabouthowthetextisargued.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Recognizetopicsinthetext.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Locatetopicsentences.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Questiontheauthor'sassumptions.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Decidehowtousethetextforyourownstudy.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Guessthemeaningofunknownwordsfromthecontext.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Skimatextfortheoverallidea.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Identifyrhetoricaldevices.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Identifypowerrelations.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Evaluatethequalityofthetext.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Distinguishbetweenfactandopinion.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Readfasterbyreadingphrasesratherthansinglewords.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Rereadatextfordeeperunderstanding.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
Understandtherelationshipofideasbyrecognizingthestructureofatext.oAlmostAlwaysoOftenoSometimesoSeldomoNever
APU Journal of Language Research Vol.2, 2017
68
