Using Concept Mapping and Paraphrasing for Reading Comprehension

Hamid Marashi*, Nazanin Bagheri**
* Associate Professor, Department of Applied Linguistics, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran.
** MA, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran.
Periodicity:July - September'2015
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.5.3.3560

Abstract

This study investigated the comparative impact of two types of teaching techniques, namely concept mapping and paraphrasing, on the reading comprehension of EFL learners. For this purpose, 60 learners of a total number of 90 intermediate learners studying at a language school in Karaj, Iran, were chosen through taking a piloted PET for homogenization prior to the study. They were then randomly put into two experimental groups: 30 learners undergoing the concept map teaching, and 30 learners experiencing the paraphrasing teaching treatment. A piloted reading comprehension test was administered as the post-test of the study after each group was exposed to the treatment for 10 sessions in five weeks. The mean scores of the two groups on this post-test were computed through an independent samples of t-test to test the hypothesis raised in the study. The results showed that neither group outperformed the other significantly.

Keywords

Concept Mapping, Paraphrasing, Reading Comprehension

How to Cite this Article?

Marashi, H., and Bagheri, N.(2015). Using Concept Mapping and Paraphrasing for Reading Comprehension. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 5(3), 12-18. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.5.3.3560

References

[1]. Carrell, P. (1984). “The effects of rhetorical organization on ESL readers”. TESOL Quarterly, Vol.18,No.3 pp.441-469.
[2]. Carrel, P. L, & Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). “Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy”. TESOL Quarterly, Vol.17,No.4 pp.553-573.
[3]. Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second rd or foreign language (3 ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
[4]. Clarke, M. A, & Silberstein, S. (1979). “Toward a realization of psycholinguistic principles in the ESL reading class”. In R. Mackay, B. Barkman, & R. R. Jordan (Eds). Reading in a second language (pp. 48-65). Rowerley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
[5]. Cliburn, J. W. (1990). “Concept maps to promote meaningful learning”. Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol.19,No.4 pp.212-217.
[6]. Fisk, C., & Hurst, B. (2003). “Paraphrasing for comprehension”. The Reading Teacher, Vol.57(2), pp.182- 185.
[7]. Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
[8]. Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategies that work. Portland, MN: Stenhouse.
[9]. Heinze-Fry, J., & Novak, J.D. (1990). “Concept mapping brings long-term movement toward meaningful learning”. Science Education, Vol.74,No.4, pp.461-472.
[10]. Jacobs-Lawson, J. M., & Hershey, D. A. (2002). “Concept maps as an assessment tool in Psychology courses”. Teaching of Psychology, Vol.29, No.1, pp.25-29.
[11]. Johnstone, A. H., & Otis, K. H. (2006). “Concept mapping in problem based learning: A cautionary tale”. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.7, No.2, pp.84-95.
[12]. Katims, D. S., & Harris, S. (1997). “Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students in inclusive classrooms”. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, Vol.41(2), pp.116-123.
[13]. Kinchin, I. M. (2003). “Effective teacher-student dialogue: A model from biological education”. Journal of Biological Education, Vol.37(3), pp.110-113.
[14]. Mintzes, J., Wandersee, J., & Novak, J. (2001). Assessing science understanding. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
[15]. Munro, J. (2004). “The use of reading comprehension strategies at multiple levels of text processing”. International Journal of Learning, Vol.11, pp.7-16.
[16]. Novak, J. D. (1990). “Concept maps and Vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful learning”. Instructional Science, Vol.19, No.1,pp. 29-52.
[17]. Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in and corporations schools. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[18]. Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., & Johansen, G. T. (1983). “The use of concept mapping and knowledge Vee mapping with junior high school science students”. Science Education, Vol.67, No.5,pp.625-645.
[19]. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1999). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[20]. Okebukola, P. A., & Jegede, O. J. (1988). “Cognitive preference and learning model as determinants of meaningful learning through concept mapping”. Science Education, Vol.72, No.4, pp.489-500.
[21]. Pritchard, R. (1990). “The effects of cultural schemata on reading processing strategies”. Reading Research Quarterly, Vol.25, No.4, pp.273-295.
[22]. Schumaker, J. B., Denton, P. H., & Deshler, D. D. (1984). Learning strategies curriculum: The paraphrasing strategy. Lawrence: University of Kansas.
[23]. Swanson, H. L. (1996). “A selective synthesis of intervention research for students with learning disabilities”. School Psychology Review, Vol.25, pp.370-390.
[24]. Trochim, W. M. K. (1989). “An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation”. Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol.12, No.1, pp.1-16.
[25]. Yalcin, S. K., & Sengel, M. (2004). “A model proposal prepared for developing reading and comprehension skills”. Journal of National Education, Vol.164, pp.134-150.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.