FACULTY OF EDUCATION

EDU 702: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

THE INFLUENCE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORTS AND TEACHING PRACTICES ON YEAR TWO STUDENTS’ READING SKILL

A Comparative Study in Whole Language and Phonics Classes

BY:

NURUL HANA BINTI MOHD NAZRI (2011146955)

M. ED TESL (ED770)

PREPARED FOR:

ASSOCIATE PROF. DR. TEOH SIAN HOON

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

Chapter 1

Introduction 1 – 3

Statement of Research Problem 3 – 4

Research Objectives 5

Research Questions 5

Operational Definition 6 – 8

Significance of the Study 8

Limitation of the Study 8

Chapter 2

Literature Review 9 – 19

Chapter 3

Methodology 20

Research Design 20 – 21

Sample and Participants 21

Instrumentation 22 – 23

Data Analysis 23

Reference

Appendices

THE INFLUENCE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORTS AND TEACHING PRACTICES

ON YEAR TWO STUDENTS’ READING SKILL

A Comparative Study in Whole Language and Phonics Classes

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

In most ESL classrooms, recent changes in reading instruction have included a

movement away from the traditional skill-based approach to what has been

termed reading through ‘phonics’. However, many question the effectiveness in

the traditional approach as compared to the new and hip approach which is

practiced worldwide as being termed as the ‘whole language approach.

In Malaysia, the government has introduced this type of approach in the

new syllabus of English Language for the new curriculum, the KSSR. Starting

from the Year 1, the pupils will be exposed to the systematic reading instruction

as opposed to the past curriculum which firmly anchored to the skill-based

approach. Previously, the syllabus in English Language for primary school

divided into four major skills of a language which are listening, speaking, reading

and writing. However, the introductory of the new curriculum back in 2011, the

KSSR, proposed that English language teaching and learning should be diverted

from examination-oriented skills and more focus should be paid to the

communicative and authentic skills in the language. So, the government

introduced the new approach to the language which diverted away from the chalk

and talk lessons to a more sound system approach in order to gain basic literacy.

It is however a ‘back-to-basic-approach and conventional method’ whereby the

phonics is outlined as basic principles in learning to read as compared to the

whole-language that is considered as revolutionary. It also includes all the skills

needed in a language (listening and speaking, reading, writing) plus the language

art as a guideline in teaching and learning in primary schools. The assessment of

the subject is no longer summative, but a school-based assessment is

introduced. The students are assessed and evaluated through their six years of

primary schooling based on a banding system. Although English language

teachers who have been practitioners of this whole-language approach in KBSR

for the past years, this may seem a bit odd in a way of adapting phonics and

basal reading to their teaching.

The common element of these reading approaches however is still an

early focus on teaching of English grapheme-phoneme correspondence to read

and write alphabetically (decoding and encoding). Thus, for most ESL teachers,

early and systematic emphasis on decoding leads to better achievement than

less systematic phonics instruction. Although most studies on beginning reading

provide strong evidence that explicit teaching of phonics improves word

identification in reading (Adam,1990; Chall, 1967), they say little about the

differences in ways of learning phonics under the various kinds of reading

instruction (Thompson, Johnston, 1993). The question whether research

supports a ‘phonics first’ approach to the teaching of reading is especially hard to

answer since it is partly a matter of values and opinions (McKenna, Stahl,

Reinking,1994). Various lines of research demonstrate that children do not need

intensive phonics instruction to develop the functional command of letter or

sound patterns that they need as readers (Weaver,1990). Proponents of whole

language make it clear that phonics instruction is required (Goodman,1992;

Newman, Church, 1990), but distinguish between embedding phonics instruction

in whole language lessons and teaching isolated skills, as has been typical in

traditional approaches. It is assumed that embedded phonics instruction in the

context of reading authentic literature and invented spelling may be as effective

as other forms of phonics instruction (Freppon, Dahl, 1991).

The component of written language is much affected to the exposure of

the development of recognition and spelling. This exposure happens in all

language classes including the whole language classes. However, it may be

differences in the challenge of the material read by the children that lead to

variability in the use of various strategies and achievement (Beck,

McCaslin,1978). “The types of words which appear in beginning reading texts

may well exert a more powerful influence in shaping children’s word identification

strategies than the method of reading instruction” as being pointed out by Juel &

Roper-Schneider (1985).

1.2 Statement of Research Problem

For years, people have been searching for the best approach to teach children to

read. Traditionally, the use of phonics is a popular approach among the teachers

to teach reading by associating letters or graphemes with the sounds. However,

many questions on the effectiveness as learning to read with phonics have

ignored the literary element of reading (Puerro, Michelle, 1997). The way the

children learn to read will contribute on their cognitive development especially in

reading and writing. A general assumption is made that the way in which children

learn the written language differs according to the way the teacher presents it.

Normally, reading skill is evaluated as one of the language skill in

Malaysian school English language syllabus. Not much attention was given to the

materials such as stories as they did not being recorded as a formal evaluation.

Teachers should not be blamed as the pressure to pass the examination is

greater as compared to be a successful reader. Therefore, this has failed to

develop a reading-habit nation especially in the youngsters.

As this study is a replicate of a study that has been done previously by

Puerro and Michelle, 1997, the aim of the study is to observe the effects on

whole-language approach and basal-reading approach to improve reading skill.

First, this study aims to see through analysis of the errors, the children’s

conceptual understanding of the oral and written units and the relation between

those units. The second purpose is to interpret the children’s representations of

the written language in light of the instructional differences between the two

classes.

1.3 Research Objective

This study is intended to see whether by adopting a social construction

perspective on literacy can make visible instructional influence on learning to

read. It is a comparative study which compares the Year 2 acquisition of literacy

in two different instructional settings. Reading development is observed both in

traditional setting of phonics classroom and in a whole language classroom.

The research aims to find out:

1. What strategies teachers can use to help students further develop

phonics skills and apply them actively in their learning;

2. Whether the development of phonics skills can enhance students’

confidence and competence in reading as well as spelling.

1.4 Research Questions

This study will be guided by the following research questions;

i. Will students in phonics classroom show higher achievement in reading as

compared to the students in whole language classroom?

ii. How do our students respond to phonics learning?

iii. How do teachers perceive phonics learning after two years’ experience in

adapting the pendulum swing of diverting the instructional methods in

teaching reading, from a whole-language approach in KBSR syllabus to

sound system and phonics approach in KSSR?

1.5Operational Definition

1.5.1 Whole-language approach

The whole-language approach advocates the holistic teaching of reading

throughout the language curriculum and emphasis the importance of a print-rich

environment (Hempenstall, 1996). The teaching of letter-sound correspondences

with blending skills relatively little direct instructions, being taught explicitly and

happens during higher level reading skills. This assumes that children who learn

language in whole-language approach acquire the knowledge and language

skills through their reading for meaning experience with relatively little explicit

teaching.

The term "whole language" does not refer only to providing interesting

comprehensible texts and helping children understand less comprehensible

texts. It involves instilling a love of literature, problem-solving and critical thinking,

collaboration, authenticity, personalized learning, and much more (Goodman,

Bird, and Goodman, 1991). In terms of the process of literacy development,

however, the Comprehension Hypothesis is a central part of whole language.

Reading pedagogy, according to the Comprehension Hypothesis, focuses on

providing students with interesting, comprehensible texts, and the job of the

teacher is to help children read these texts, that is, help make them

comprehensible. The direct teaching of "skills" is helpful only when it makes texts

more comprehensible. More precisely, comprehension of messages is necessary

for language acquisition and literacy development, but it is not sufficient. It is

certainly possible to comprehend a text or message and not acquire anything.

We acquire when we understand messages that contain aspects of language

that we have not yet acquired but are developmentally ready.

1.5.2 Phonics

According to Chitravelu et al. (1995) in ELT Methodology: Principles and

Practice, phonics is a system of teaching children to read by paying special

attention to help children to see the relationships between English graphemes

and their sounds, and blending them together to make out meaningful words.

Through the phonics approach, children will first learn the isolated sound of each

grapheme and then they put the sound together to form the whole words. The

theory underlying in this approach comprised that the language is being learnt is

phonemically regularly. Once the children learned the phonemic elements, they

can obtain the sound of the words by blending the sounds in sequence. And

once they had attained the sound of the word, they will get to understand the

meaning of it.

1.5.3 KSSR

KSSR stands for Kurrikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah which started to

be implemented in Malaysian school as the new syllabus replacing KBSR.

Ministry of Education Malaysia has introduced the standardized English

Language Curriculum for Primary Schools (Kurikulum Standard Sekolah

Rendah), which will be implemented phase by phase starting from 2011. The

new curriculum emphasizes on holistic development of the students which

encompasses new elements such as grooming of creativity and innovation,

entrepreneurship, and integration of Information and Communication Technology

(ICT). In English language, the underlying principle to teach reading is ‘back-to-

basic’ skill which introduces the phonics skills in teaching reading skill.

1.6 Significance of the Study

The results of this study will be beneficial for many reasons. Most teachers will

be able to use these results to refine their lesson plans by adapting the new

curriculum syllabus (KSSR) into their teaching. Furthermore, the teachers will

utilize the results to make modifications to the reading instructional strategies

used in their classrooms.

1.7 Limitation of the Study

Since the observations collected will be limited to small sample population and

related to two contrasted instructional approaches, the hasty generalization

should be aware of. Maybe the classes will be observed in different angle and

views as to observe the reading and writing lessons. Perhaps the differences

between the two settings should be highlighted as they may contribute to the

result.

CHAPTER 2

2.0 Literature Review

2.1 Phonological Awareness

The phonological awareness can be defined as having “….an awareness of

sounds in spoken (not written) words that is revealed by such abilities as

rhyming, matching initial consonants, and counting the number of phonemes in

spoken words” (Stahl & Murray, 1994, p.221). Furthermore, the phonological

awareness of oral language is seen as the vital key to the development of

reading because it helps for “…quick access to oral vocabulary in lexical memory

because it is stored in phonological forms…” (Koda, 2005, p.33).

On the other hand, it can be argued that the ESL learners may be prompted

to certain phonological awareness in their first language (L1) that may not exist in

English language. A research conducted by Lesaux & Siegel (2003) opposed the

belief by suggesting that learner’s phonological awareness in their L1 does

positively affect reading acquisition in the ESL. Thus, in addition to a sufficient

vocabulary base, phonological awareness (in learners’ L1 or L2) can be

distinguished as an essential component to the development and acquisition of

reading skill.

The Figure 1 shows the interactive model of reading acknowledges that

reading skill acquires the interaction of both bottom-up processes, such as

decoding skills (including phonological and orthographic awareness) and top-

down processes (knowledge of context and culture) as a way for one to be able

to read effectively.

Grapheme Input Interpretation Input

Figure 1: Interactive Model of Reading

Adapted from: Rumelhart (1985)

Contextual knowledge Social and Cultural knowledge

Working Memory

Vocabulary knowledge Orthographic knowledge Phonological knowledge

There is a belief that stated most children will learn to read no matter what

method of instruction is used (Baumell, 2003). However, if children are struggling

with this literacy skill since the early age, the negative impact will affect the other

cognitive skills in listening, speaking and writing. Reading has long been

considered as the essential skill that children need to learn. Once the children

acquire the reading skill, they will be able to obtain any information from any

reading materials as well as to enjoy the literature read. Thus, there have been

debates over the best method to teach children the reading skill. Figure 2

discusses the reading instruction which can be referred to three types of

language instruction: 1. Whole language approach; 2. Whole word approach; 3.

Phonics-based approach.

Figure 2: Reading Instruction Approaches

Adapted from: Sumanpreet Purewal (2008)

2.2 Whole-language Approach

For the past years, phonics skill has been taught as the guideline to teach

reading. However, the alternate method, the whole language approach has been

accepted as the new effective trend. The debates are ongoing on which methods

on the efficacy on both approaches.

On one end of the continuum, there are proponents of the whole language

approach who claim that “…children who learn to read are those who are read to,

and the stories and books they hear are chosen for their interest and appeal, and

not for the sequence and scope of vocabulary and language structures” (Piper,

2003, p.272). The idea suggests that learners should learn to read by making the

meaning of the language rather than on decoding skills. The underlying premise

of the whole language approach is that

“language is actually learned from whole to part. We first use whole

utterances in familiar situations. Then later we see and develop

parts, and begin to experiment with their relationship to each other

and to the meaning of the whole. The whole is always more than the

sum of the parts and the value of any part can only be learned within

the whole utterance in a real speech event” (Goodman, 1986, p.19).

This perspective shows how whole language approach is corresponded

with how language is acquired. The whole language approach therefore suggests

that learners would be able to acquire meaning from the text as well as

implementing the higher-level processing skills such as ‘prediction’, where

reading is perceived as a ‘psycholinguistic guessing game’ (Sumanpreet, 2008).

Krashen (1985) identifies whole language approach as The Comprehension

Hypothesis (a.k.a Input Hypothesis). The hypothesis claims that the development

of literacy and language occurs in only one way which is when children

understand the messages conveyed. The proponents of the whole language

approach state that this approach is preferable as it integrates every language

components (speaking, listening, reading and writing) into the teaching of reading

therefore this will improve the comprehension skill (Holland & Hall, 1989). The

whole language classroom also requires the rich in print and print-oriented

activities environment. However, Goodman et al. (1991) state that the term of

whole language classroom should not be focusing on providing interesting

comprehensible texts but it also involves instilling a love of literature, problem

solving and critical thinking, collaboration, authenticity, personalized learning, and

much more.

The whole language proponents also claim that phonetic decoding skills are

essential for fluent reading as the skills are learned through reading experience

(Smith, 1988). They believe that when children can relate experience to reading,

reading becomes more personal (Pickering, 1989). This shows that the whole

language proponents believe that phonetic decoding skills should be acquire by

early readers but in an explicit ways rather than teaching the phonetics skill as an

isolated skill.

On the other hand, Wood (1984) reported that more negative effects than the

positive were found in order to support this method of teaching reading subskills.

Wood also stated that not much research out there to indicate the sound

empirical evidence to validate wither the specific skills supported or the sequence

of their instruction in modern basal programs.

A study conducted by Holland (1989), presented a comparative analysis of

the effect of both basal and whole language approaches on the reading

achievement of first grade students. The result of the study by analyzing of

variance indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in

reading achievement between the traditional approaches of phonics with the

whole language approach. Another study regarding the approach was conducted

by Shapiro (1988) that found the comparison of vocabulary generated by the

children with the phonetics skill basic indicated that high frequency vocabulary

was nearly identical. But the low frequency words that were used by the children

were judged to be more current. And the misspellings demonstrated as an over

generalization of phonics principles. Shapiro concluded that the whole language

approach does not limit children’s exposure to systematic repetition of important

vocabulary.

Stahl and Miller (1989) claimed that whole language approaches might be

effective for teaching functional features of reading such as print concepts and

expectations about reading. In order to help students master the word recognition

skills as prerequisite to effective comprehension requires a more direct approach.

So, the use of whole language activities are fundamentally important in teaching

reading skills such as the use of context for monitoring and predictive purposes,

vocabulary enrichment to support printed words for meaning, discussion that

would encourage reading for comprehension, integration of reading, writing and

spelling. Relatively, Bracey (1992) suggests that the teaching of reading should

be a balanced approach which integrates both instructional methods. Thus, one

of the major limitations of the whole language approach is the assumption that all

‘good’ readers rely on the meaning-making process when reading; however, the

use of context is used by both skilled and beginning readers but in different ways

(Sumanpreet, 2008).

2.3 Phonics Approach

On the other end of the continuum, a phonics-based approach focuses

mainly on the teaching of decoding skills, isolated in a systematic manner.

Phonics instruction teaches letter-sound associations and how to use these

associations to read words. When provided systematically, phonics instruction

helps children learn to read more effectively than does non-systematic instruction

or instruction without phonics. Phonics benefits reading, spelling, and

comprehension in many readers, and effects persist even after instruction ends

(Ehri et al., 2001). Phonics is an extremely important component of literacy

instruction because English is fundamentally an alphabetic code (Moats, 2000;

Venezky,1999); spoken language is rendered into a written form using letters to

represent the sounds in words. Phonics, along with other strategies, is used to

recognize words. Ehri (Ehri & McCormick, 1988; Ehri & Sweet, 1991) suggested

four strategies that a reader might use to recognize a word: (1) predicting—using

context and linguistic knowledge to make a likely guess; (2) decoding—

converting individual letters and patterns of letters into sounds and blending

these sounds; (3) analogy—using word parts including morphemes to analyze

the structure of a word; and (4) recall—retrieving a known word from memory.

Decoding and analogy strategies both require knowledge of phonics.

We believe that there are three very important points to make about word

recognition and phonics. First, phonics, like any other word-recognition tool, is

used to assist the reader in obtaining an approximate pronunciation for a written

word that, when checked for a match with his or her store of known spoken

words and the context, gets the reader one step closer to the meaning

(Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985). Second, phonics is a means to an

end and not an end unto itself. Third, a sight strategy eventually predominates as

readers become more and more skilled.

Chall discovered that children that learn to read by using the phonics

approach showed greater achievement in word recognition as well as reading

comprehension (Chall, 1967). Flesch (1981) supported the finding by claiming

that children who learn “phonics first” can read more words at the end of their first

grade as compared to the “look and say” learners. Flesch further explained that

those children who learn to read by the latter method rely much on the pictures

and context clues so that they don’t learn the mechanics of learning to read as it

is often a guessing game (Flesch, 1981). Elridge and Baird (1996) state that a

phonemic awareness approach was claimed to be superior to the whole

language, as the whole language readers who are taught to read words and

stories begin with the same steps of children who learn to read by using the

phonics based approach. Lapp and Flood (1997) observed that most teachers

agree that children’s acquisition of phonics skills is a vital part of learning to read.

They concur that “children who start slowly in acquiring decoding skills rarely

become strong readers” (Lapp & Flood, 1997, p.698).

However, the question often arises on the effectiveness of using the

decoding skills in reading because its lacks of meaningful literature. According to

Flesch (1955), through phonics ones can learn the “natural system of learning

how to read”. For years, researches have shown that people learned to read by

memorizing letters and sounds with much ease by phonics approach. As time

goes by, the teaching of reading word by word had claimed to become tedious,

boring and primitive. It resembled the time when people had to memorize

pictures and symbols for words (Flesch, 1955). According to Weaver (1994) and

Krashen (1996), the comprehension hypothesis does not forbid the direct

instruction of phonics. They pointed out that proponents of phonics merely

support the teaching of just the straight-forward phonics rules, and expect

children to “induce” the more complex rules. This can be seen as the position of

those sometimes considered to be anti-phonics.

There is this argument by Fox (1986), stating that learning systematic

phonics is definitely not enough and there has been relationship between reading

and meaning-making. However, phonics is seen as a helpful tool to achieve

effectiveness in learning to read. Thus, a relevant experimental research finding

suggests that phonics knowledge is a prerequisite to early reader accurate

identification of written words (Chall, 1983; Share & Stanovich, 1995). A study

has been conducted by Griffith (1992) to find out the effect of phonemic

awareness on the literacy development of first grade children in a phonics class

or a whole language class. Phonemic awareness is the meta linguistics ability

that allows children to reflect the features on spoken language (Griffith, 1992). A

correlational study by Juel (1988) identified the phonemic awareness as a

powerful predictor of reading achievement in first grade. So, the instruction that

assists both phoneme awareness and decoding skill is vitally important in

teaching reading. Overall, it is important to take a balanced approach to phonics

instruction, teaching children letter-sound associations as well as letter

sequences and rhymes, and helping children to use guides from the words that

they already know to decode new words.

Teachers’ personality also plays an important role in children’s knowledge

construction. Many have argued that children’s failure to acquire the reading skill

might be evidence that the instruction was lacking (Calfee, 1982). Children learn

in various ways, not only from the direct instructions given by the teachers in the

classroom, but through their observation on how teacher relates with their peers

(Brazee, 1986). De Walt (1988) states that the main issue most likely will be that

teachers and administers need to work together that the reading program is to

cater the needs in helping teachers to carry out effective reading instruction. De

Walt also suggests that the focus should be placed on training the teachers to

effectively deliver and guide the methods used. The encouragement and

challenge to students’ ideas through the use of variety of materials which can

encourage children to become active and interested learners will be beneficial in

helping them to acquire the reading skill (De Walt,1988). In this sense, instruction

should focus on immersing students in language. Teachers can employ the use

of the story books to engage students in active discussions in the hope that

learning will be more meaningful for students.

Schools are often evaluated on how well students perform on the

standardized tests. Thus, teachers may feel pressured to teach the test and

stressed out to find a reading program that will produce high achievement in

reading. Education express concern over declining reading achievement scores

(Chall, 1983). Though research on phonics approach versus whole language

approach has been plentiful, but the results from study to study can be conflicting

and contradictory. This has caused a great pressure placed on teachers and

administers for having high standardized test scores.

As time goes by, Malaysia’s education system undergoes big changes. In

1983, Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (KBSR) was introduced and made some

changes to the education system. 10 years later, its name was changed to

Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah (KBSR). Now, a new curriculum was

introduced a year ago, 2011 to replace KBSR: Kurikulum Standard Sekolah

Rendah (KSSR). KSSR was introduced to reorganize and upgrade the current

curriculum. Changes can be clearly seen in the aspect of key areas, curriculum

documentation, curriculum design, curriculum organization, curriculum content,

elements and focus. In KSSR, we can clearly see the big change in this syllabus

is that phonics is emphasized as a new method to teach reading which is

different from a whole language approach that was used in KBSR. In modules of

reading of KSSR, the whole module is focused on phonics while in KBSR,

phonics is taught under the language content known as ‘sound system’. For ten

years, we have been comfortable with the Whole Language approach under

KBSR. Now, through KSSR, most probably we are about to see the pendulum

swings to the other side.

CHAPTER 3

3.0 Methodology

Before further discussion on the methods used for this study, it is important to

emphasize that this study is a comparative study. This study compares Year 2’s

(second graders) acquisition of literacy in reading skill in two different

instructional settings. One teacher uses the whole language approach by

integrating the language skills in the classroom. While another teacher applies

the phonics based approach as the instruction in the classroom.

In collecting data for this research, the research instruments are divided

into two categories which are (i) qualitative data and (ii) quantitative data. The

methods to collect qualitative data are interview and observation while the

method in collecting data for quantitative data is a formal assessment on

student’s phonics skills and reading aloud are built into the oral examination in

both terms.

3.1 Research Design

An interview and a reading test (Appendix 1) on the students’ mastery of sounds,

their confidence in sounding out words and their competence in reading aloud

are conducted at the beginning of the first semester of schooling to find out the

students’ confidence level and how much they know. The same test will be

conducted again at the end of the second term to measure the students’ change

in performance and confidence level. Some open-ended questions will be asked

to seek students’ view on the learning process and their experience in learning to

read in English language. Students’ oral presentation during the teaching and

learning process will be recorded and transcribed as the evidence of learning and

improvement. The observations will be conducted during the process of teaching

to check and not down students’ progress, their problems and evaluate the

instructional strategies.

Beside observations and interviews, formal assessment on students’

phonics skills and reading aloud will be conducted to inform about the students’

progress in developing phonics skills.

3.2 Sample and Participants of the Study

Sample consisted of 40 Year 2 students, members of two different

classes situated in a same school, located in sub-urban area in Wilayah

Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Both of the settings come from nearly

identical in terms of socio-economic and ethnic background. Groups of 20

students are formed in each class. At the beginning of the school year, the two

group formed are similar in the age (the average is 7) and language skills (in

each class the teacher are asked to select children with average levels). As

being mentioned before, the essential difference is only the instructional

methods. The teachers devoted between 4 to 5 hours per week of teaching

English language in primary school.

Group 1

i. Receive traditional-approach instruction with a focus on symbol-sound

relationships from the beginning of the school year

ii. Using the 26 basic graphemes in English writing

Group 2

i. Receive a whole-language approach by using literature and writing

experiences with incidental attention to phonics

ii. Using the phonemes in both the vowels and consonants of English

language

3.3 Instrumentation

The observation is the main research instrument for the study. A Classroom Jolly

Phonics Observation Checklist in Appendix 2 is used as the guideline. The

checklist then will be summarized, compared and interpreted. The field notes

taken at each classroom observation will also be one of the instrumentation in

guiding this study. A pre-test or a diagnostic oral test will be conducted at the

beginning of the first term to find out students’ confidence level and their

knowledge on using phonics skills to read. The same test will be conducted again

towards the end of the school term to observe improvement and progression

level. Interviews with the teachers will be conducted and coded into few

constructs, their teaching styles, and strategies, methods used within the

classrooms, reading materials used and a basic overview of the schedule for the

reading curriculum for the year. The interviews are audiotaped, transcribed and

interpreted.

3.4 Data Analysis

The study requires quantitative and qualitative data analyses. Classroom

observation and interviews are compiled. Each observation will be summarized

and compared in order to draw appropriate conclusions and interpretations. The

interviews transcripts are group and coded to strengthen the basis of argument.

The score of the tests will be recorded and compared to measure the change of

behavior and progression.

REFERENCES

Laurence Pasa (2001). The Influence of Instructional Supports and Teaching

Practices On First Grade Reading and Writing. Netherlands. Kluwer

Academic Publisher

Stephen Krashen (2000). Has Whole Language Failed? University of Southern

California

Chall, J. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill

Goodman, K. (1982). Language, literacy and learning. London: Routledge

Kagan Paul

Holland, K. and Hall, L. (1989). Reading achievement in first grade classrooms:

A comparison of basal and whole language approaches. Reading

Improvement 26:323-329

Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis. Beverly Hills: Laredo

Smith F. (1975). Comprehension and learning. Katonah, NY: Owen

Weaver, C. (1994). Reading Process and Practice. Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann

Juel, C., & Roper-Schneider, D. (1985). The Influence of basal readers on first

grade reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 134-152

Lapp, D., & Flood J. (1997). Where’s the phonics? Making a case (again) for

integrated code instruction. The Reading Teacher, 50, 696-700

Share, D. L., & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading

development: Accommodating individual differences into a mode of

acquisition. Issues in Education, 1,1-57

Curriculum Development Council (1997). Syllabuses for primary schools:

English Language (Primary 1-6). Hong Kong: the Education Department

Miller, W. (2000). Strategies for developing emergent literacy. Boston: McGraw

Hill Higher Education

Purewal, S. (2008). Synthetic phonics and the literacy development of second

language young learners. University of Leeds. UK

Curtis, J. (1997). Phonics vs. whole language: Which is better? Retrieved from

http://wwwsuperkids.com/aweb/pages/features/reading/phonics.shtml

Ruth, S. S. (2000). Helping your child learn to read: Phonics and words.

Retrieved from http://www.mycinnamontoast.com/reading2.htm

Baumel, J. (2000). Learning to read – research informs us. Schwab

Learning.org. Retrieved June 11, 2012, from

http://www.schwalblearning.org/Articles.asp?r=22

APPENDICES

Appendix 1

Teacher’s comment (student’s confidence, attitude, strengths, weaknesses, skills

applied)

Duration : minutes

Running words :

Errors :

Self corrections :

Error rate :

Jo Jo has a new bicycle,

It has a red seat…and a yellow bell…

And a green horn…and blue wheels.

Jo Jo cleans her bicycle…

And rides it around the garden.

Appendix 3

Interview Questions

1. What strategies have the teachers used in teaching reading skill?

2. Which strategies are effective? Why?

3. What have you learnt in phonics approach learning?

4. When do you apply the phonics skills?