CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
Internationally, within the field of education over the last few decades a gradual but
significant shift has taken place, resulting in less emphasis on teachers and teaching and greater
stress on learners and learning. This change has been reflected in various ways in language
education. Teaching English as a second or foreign language (TESL/TEFL) has also changed
tremendously. Most significantly, the traditional teacher-centred approach has been replaced
with the learner-centred one, which reflects a desire to explore ways of making teaching
responsive to learner needs and interests and allowing learners to play a fuller, more active and
participatory role in the day-to-day teaching and learning processes. Inherent in this approach is
a shift in the responsibilities of both teachers and students in the foreign language classroom. No
longer does the teacher act as the centre of all instruction, controlling every aspect of the
learning process. Learners themselves now, more than ever, are sharing the responsibility for
successful language acquisition and, in doing so, are becoming less dependant on the language
teacher for meeting their own individual language learning needs. By giving students more
responsibility for their own language development, language programs are inviting learners to
become more autonomous, to diagnose some of their own learning strengths and weaknesses
and to sift-direct the process of language development.
Then, for all L2 teachers who aim to develop their students' communicative competence
and language learning, an understanding of language learning strategies is crucial. As Oxford
(1990) puts it, language learning strategies"... are specially important for language learning
because they are tools for active, self-directed involvement, which is essential for developing
communicative competence" (p.1). According to Nunan (1999), learner-centeredness does not
mean that teachers should devaluating their own professional roles or handling their duties and
responsibility to the learner. Learner-centered instruction "is a matter of educating learners so
that they can gradually assume greater responsibility for their own learning" (Nunan, 1999: 12)
and research suggests that training students to use language learning strategies can help them
become better language learners. In the field of second language acquisition, focus has been
shifted away from finding perfect teaching methodologies to investigating why some learners
1
are very successful in their language learning while others are not although they have made as

used by students of lower reading ability. Based on the findings, I am going to make some
implications to improve TBU students' reading proficiency.
1.2. Scope, aims and significance of the study
1.2.1. Scope of the study
The present study investigates the reading strategies used by readers among ethnic
minority junior first-year English-majored students at Tay Bac University (hereafter TBU). The
study of learning strategies in other English skills would be beyond the scope.
1.2.2. Aims of the study
The major purposes of this study are:
(1) to identify the reading strategies utilized by readers among ethnic minority junior
first-year English-majored students at Tay Bac University;
(2) to inform the concerned teachers so that they can find ways to improve their students'
reading proficiency.
In order to achieve the above aims of the study, the following major research question
will be addressed:
- What are the reading strategies employed by readers among TBU ethnic minority
junior first-year English-majored students?
1.2.3. Significance of the study
The study is the first one to be carried out in the field of reading strategies research at
TBU. It helps give a detailed description of reading strategies used by readers among first-year
English- majored students at junior grade at the university. More importantly, the findings of
their reading strategies can help teachers to understand more about their students and they can
serve as the foundation for some recommendations on how to improve the students' reading
3
proficiency. They are also an important basic for reading strategy based instruction to be
implemented in the future.
1.3. Method of the study
In order to achieve the aims mentioned above, the present study utilized quantitative
method including tests and survey questionnaires to collect data on the reading strategies
employed by TBU students. First, the two reading comprehension tests were given to the

(1990) and Cohen (1998). These studies have helped figure out a comprehensive overview of
learning strategies.
Although research on learning strategies is becoming increasingly popular, there have
been some considerable differences in the definition of learning strategies in the literature. Taron
(1981) claimed that "Learning strategies as attempts to develop linguistic and sociolinguistic
competence in the target language". Learning strategies, according to Weinstein and Mayer
(1986) (in O' Malley and Chamot 1990), have learning facilitation as a goal and are intentional
on the part of the learner. The goal of strategy use is to "affect the learner's motivational or
affective state, or the way in which the learner selects, acquires, organizes, or integrates new
knowledge." (1986: 43). These definitions are too general in comparison to the complex nature
of learning strategies.
Oxford (1990) defined learning strategies as "specific actions taken by the learner to
make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more
transferable to new situations" (1990: 5). This definition is judged to be quite comprehensive as
it not only covers the cognitive but also the affective aspects of learning strategies (i.e. to
5
increase enjoyment in learning). However, Oxford's definition is not sufficient in the sense that
it regards learning strategies as "specific actions", i.e. learning strategies are behavioral, and
therefore, they are mostly observable. However, many studies in this field have shown that
learning strategies are difficult to observe as they are not only behavioral.
In an attempt to define learning strategies in a more sensible manner, Weinstein and
Mayer (in Ellis,1994: 531) claimed that learning strategies "are the behaviors and thoughts that a
learner engages in during learning that are intended to influence the learner's encoding process".
Thus, these two authors see learning strategies both behavioral and mental. Their view has been
shared by most researchers in strategies studies.
The definition that has been widely accepted to date was proposed by O' Malley and
Chamot (1990). According to them, learning strategies are "the special thoughts or behaviors
that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn or retain new information" (1990: 1). In
spite of being quite short, their definition covers the most important aspects of learning
strategies, that is learning strategies are both mental and behavioral (therefore both observable

memorization, guessing/inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning and practice. The second
category, consisting of strategies that contribute indirectly to learning, includes creating practice
opportunities and using production tricks such as communication strategies. An alternative
classification scheme proposed by Naiman et al (1978) contains five broad categories of
learning strategies and a number of secondary categories. The primary classification includes an
active task approach, realization of language as a means of communication and interaction,
management of affective demands and monitoring of second language performance.
Subsequent descriptive studies have endeavored to identify broad classes of learning
strategies, under which a large number of more specific strategies can be grouped. The works by
Wenden (1983), Oxford (1990), O'Malley et at (1985a and 1985b), O'Malley and Chamot
(1990) have made an important contribution to our knowledge of learning strategies. Wenden's
(1983) research examined the strategies that adult foreign language learners use in order to
direct their own learning. She identifies three general categories of self-directing strategies: (1)
knowing about language (relating to what language and language learning involves), (2)
planning (relating to what and how of language learning), and (3) self-evaluation (relating to
7
progress in learning and learner's response to the language experience). Wenden's framework
devised as a basic for learner training.
R. Oxford (1990) built on the earlier classifications with the aim of subsuming within
her taxonomy virtually every strategy previously mentioned in the literature. Oxford (1990)
draws a general distinction between direct and indirect strategies. The former consists of
memory, cognitive and compensation strategies while the later includes metacognitive, affective
and social strategies. However, Oxford's classification of learning strategies is somewhat
complicated and confusing as she treats compensation strategies as a direct type of learning
strategies and memory strategies as separate ones from cognitive strategies.
Perhaps, the framework that has been most useful and generally accepted is O'Malley
and Chamot (1990)'s. In O'Malley and Chamot 's framework, three major types of strategies are
distinguished in accordance with the information processing model, on which their research is
based. Metacognitive strategies are "higher order executive skills that may entail planning for,
monitoring or evaluating the success of learning activity" (O'Malley and Chamot: 44). Cognitive

Resourcing Using target language reference materials such as dictionaries, encyclopedias, or textbooks.
Repetition Imitating the language model, including overt practice and silent rehearsal.
Grouping Classifying words, terminology or concepts according to their attributes or meanings.
Deduction Applying rules to understand or produce the second language or making up rules based on
language analysis.
Imagery Using visual images (either mental or actual) to understand or remember new information.
Auditory
representation
Planning back in one's mind the sound of a word, phrase or longer language sequence.
Key word method Remembering a new word in the second language by: (1) identifying a familiar word in the
first language that sounds like or otherwise resembles the new word, and (2) generating
easily recalled images of some relationship with the first language homonym and the new
word in the second language.
Elaboration relating new information to prior knowledge, relating different parts or new information to
each other, or making meaningful personal associations with the new information.
Transfer Using previous linguistic knowledge or prior skills to assist comprehension or production.
Differencing Using available information to guess the meanings of new items, predict outcomes or fill in
missing information.
Note taking Writing down key words or concepts in abbreviated verbal, graphic or numerical form while
listening or reading.
Recombination Constructing a meaningful sentence or larger language sequence by combining known
elements in a new way.
Translation Using the first language as a base for understanding and/or producing the second language.
C.
Social(affective)
strategies
Question for
clarification
Eliciting from a teacher or peer additional explanation, rephrasing, examples or verification.
Cooperation Working together with one or more peers to solve a problem, pool information, check a

(scanning). Readers also use some mental activities that are often referred to as reading
strategies to construct meaning from a text. In addition, readers base on their previous
knowledge that they bring meaning to the text to assist their reading comprehension. This prior
knowledge is known as the schema. Research in reading has shown that schema plays an
important role in helping the reader to comprehend a text.
10
The above-mentioned views on reading are only general ones. In order to understand
more about the nature of reading, it is necessary to take a closer look at the actual process that
really takes place in the reader's mind. So far, several models have been proposed to describe
this process. The next section is going to present these models of reading and discuss their
strengths and weaknesses.
2.4.2. Models of reading process
Up to now, attempts to describe the interaction between reader and text have been
numerous and different views of the reading process have been proposed. These views are often
grouped under three different reading models named the bottom-up, the top-down and the
interactive ones.
2.4.2.1. Bottom-up model
Early researchers often assumed a passive, bottom-up view of second language reading,
that is it was viewed as "a decoding process of reconstructing the author's intended meaning" via
recognizing the printed letters and words and building up a meaning for a text from the smallest
textual units at the bottom (letters and words) to larger and larger units at the top (phrases,
clauses, intersentencial linkages) (Rivers 1964, 1968; Plaister 1968; Yorio 1971).
In other words, in the bottom-up reading model, the reader begins with the written text
(the bottom) and constructs meaning from the letters, words, phrases and sentences found within
and then processes the text in a linear fashion. The coming data from the text must be received
before the high level mental storage of understanding transform and recode the data.
Gough (1972) who supported this reading model explained the sequence of the reading
system from a bottom-up perspective as follows: First, the graphemic information enters through
the visual system and it is transformed at the first level from a letter character, that is from
graphemic representation to a phonemic representation. Second, the phonemic representation is

Reading is a process of reconstructing meaning rather than decoding form, and the reader only
resorts to decoding if other means fail. This perspective was shared by many other reading
12
specialists such as Carrel (1988), Clarke and Siberstern (1977), Mackey and Mountford (1979)
and Widdowson (1978, 1983) as they viewed reading as "an active process in which the second
language reader is an active information processor who predict while sampling only parts of the
actual text" (in Carrel, 1983;3).
Just like bottom-up models, top-down models do have some limitations. These models
"tend to emphasize such higher-level skills as the prediction of meaning by means of context
clues or certain kinds of background knowledge at the expense of such lower skills as the rapid
and accurate identification of lexical and grammatical form. That is, in making the perfectly
valid point that fluent reading is primarily a cognitive process, they tend to deemphasize the
perceptual and decoding dimensions of that process" (Eskey,1988:93).
Samuel and Kamil (1988) also shared the same view. According to them, one of the
problems for the top-down model is that for many texts, the reader has little knowledge of the
topic and cannot generate predictions. A more serious problem is that even if a skilled reader
could generate predictions, the amount of time necessary to generate a prediction may be greater
than the amount of time the skilled reader needs simply to recognize the words.
Due to the above limitations of both bottom-up and top-down models, a new and more
insightful model of reading process has been proposed by Rumelhart (1977, 1980). Sanford and
Garrod (1981) and Van Dijk and Kintsch (1983) under the name of interactive model.
2.4.2.3. Interactive model
The interactive model combines elements of both bottom-up and top-down approaches,
using that "a pattern is synthesized based on information provided simultaneously from several
knowledge sources" (Stanovich, 1980:35).
Widdownson (1979) has discussed reading as the process of combining textual
information with the information the reader brings to a text. In this view, the reading process is
not simply a matter of extracting information from the text. Rather, it is one in which the reading
activates a range of knowledge in the reader's mind that he/she uses, and that, in turn, may be
refined and extended by the new information supplied by the text.

As mentioned earlier, research in second language learning suggests that learners use a
variety of strategies to assist them with the acquisition, storage, and retrieval of information. C.
Brantmeior (2002) defined reading strategies as "the comprehension processes that readers use
14
in order to make sense of what they read" (2002:1). This process may involve skimming,
scanning, guessing, recognizing cognates and word families, reading for meaning, predicting,
activating general knowledge, making inferences, following references and separating main
ideas from supporting ones (Barnet, 1988). Obviously, some strategies may be more useful than
others with different types of reading texts and tasks.
Based on O'Malley and Chamot's (1990), reading strategies can be understood as the
special thoughts or behaviours that individuals use to help them to comprehend, learn and retain
new information from the reading text. These strategies are both observable and unobservable
and individually different. According to O'Malley and Chamot's (1990), reading strategies can
be classified into three main types including metacognitive, cognitive and social/affective
strategies. A categorization scheme of these strategies have been provided in section 2.1.
2.5.2. Review of reading strategies research
A considerable number of studies examine the comprehension strategies that second
language readers utilize to process a text. In these studies, the participants are quite diverse,
some from elementary, secondary and university levels, some from remedial reading classes and
others enrolled in courses taught at non-university language centres. Obviously, the participants
are of many different ages and backgrounds. Furthermore, the investigators use a variety of
research method and tasks to examine strategy type and frequency of strategy use including
think-aloud reports, interviews, questionnaires, observations and written recalls (Bernhardt,
1991).
One of the earliest pieces of research on individual learners' reading strategies was
conducted by Hosenfield (1977). She examined successful and unsuccessful readers to find out
what types of cognitive operations they used to process written texts. Participants were ninth
grade students who were learning French. Before conducting her study, she classified readers
based on a test of L2 reading. Then, in an oral interview, participants were asked to read a text
and do think-aloud reports (that is, she directed them to say in their first language whatever

were identified as non-proficient readers because they failed a college reading proficiency test
before they study. Subjects read two exploratory passages selected from an introductory
psychology textbook, and were asked to think aloud while they reading (they reported after each
sentence). After reading and retelling each passage, the participants answered twenty multiple
choice comprehension questions. Block developed a scheme to classify strategies that consisted
16
of two types: general strategies and local strategies. General strategies included the following
behaviors: anticipate content, recognize text structure, integrate information, question
information, distinguish main ideas, interpret the text, use general knowledge and associations to
background, comment on behavior or process, monitor comprehension, correct behavior,
focused on textual meaning as a whole, and react to the text. Local strategies were: paraphrase,
reread, question meaning of a clause or a sentence, question meaning of a word and solve a
vocabulary problem. Of the 9 ESL students in the study, the readers with higher comprehension
scores on the retelling and the multiple choice questions integrated new information in the text
with old information, distinguish main ideas from details, referred to their background and
focused on textual meaning as a whole. This means they all employed "general strategies". On
the other hand, readers with low comprehension scores rarely distinguished main ideas from
details, rarely referred to their background, infrequently focused on textual meaning and seldom
integrated information.
Sarig (1987) investigated the contribution of L1 reading strategies and L2 language
proficiency to L2 reading, as well as the relationship between L1 and L2 reading strategies.
Sarig's subjects were 10 female native Hebrew readers who were studying English as a foreign
language. Sarig classified the data from think-aloud reports into four general types of behaviors
or responses: (1) technical aids, (2) clarification and simplification, (3) coherence detection and
(4) monitoring moves. Sarig's results revealed that subjects transferred strategies from L1
reading to L2 reading and that the same reading strategy types "accounted for success and
failures in both languages to almost the same extent" (Sarig, 1987: 118). Top-down, global
strategies led to both successful and unsuccessful reading comprehension. The two language
dependent strategies, the clarification and simplification strategies contributed to unsuccessful
reading comprehension in both L1 and L2. Results also indicated that most of the strategies used

indeed differences between successful or good readers and less successful or poor readers in
terms of strategy use. Overall, more proficient readers combine both top-down and bottom-up
strategies in reading but tend to use more top-down strategies than bottom-up ones. Specifically,
they exhibit the following types of reading behaviors:
* overview text before reading
* employ context clues such as title, subheadings and diagrams
* look for important information while reading and pay great attention to it than
other information
* attempt to relate important points in text to one another in order to understand
18