The Effect of Semantic Mapping on Reading Comprehension

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Urmia University

Abstract

The research reported here examined the relative effectiveness of semantic mapping, as an interactive pre-reading strategy, on reading comprehension of Iranian undergraduate students (non-EFL majors). It also examined whether there was an interaction between gender and the effect of teaching semantic mapping strategy on reading comprehension. The participants in this study consisted of 120 male and female pre-intermediate undergraduate students taking a General English course at UrmiaUniversity in Spring 2008. A Certificate of Advanced English Reading Paper (CAE) was administered to measure the students’ proficiency at the beginning of the research. Later, the participants were semi-randomly (Mackey and Gass, 2005) assigned into experimental and control groups. The experimental group was instructed on how toemploy semantic mapping strategy in reading while the control group received normal reading instruction. The post-test results supported the findings of earlier research that instruction on the application of semantic mapping contributed to reading comprehension. Further findings and implications are discussed in the paper.
 
 

Keywords

References

Alvermann, D. E., & Swafford, J. (1989). Do content area strategies have a research    base? Journal of Reading, 32, 388-394.
Antonacci, P. A. (1991). Studentssearch for meaning in the text through semantic    mapping. Social Education, 55, 174-5, 194.
Block, C.C., & Pressly, M. (2002). Summing up: What comprehension instruction could    be? In  C. C. Block, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-    based best practices, (pp. 383-392). New York: Guilford Press.
El-Koumy, A.S. (1999). Effects of Three Semantic Mapping Strategies on EFL Students’    Reading Comprehension. ED, 435, 193. Suez Canal University, Egypt.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. New York:             Pearson education.
Griffin, C., Malone, L., & Kameenui, E. (1995). Effects of graphic organizer instruction    on fifth-grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 98–107.
Hanf, M. P. (1971). Mapping: A technique for translating reading into thinking. Journal    of Reading, 14, 225-230, 270.
Heimlich, J. E., & Pittelman, S. V. (1986). Semantic mapping. Newark, Del.:          International Reading Association.
Johnson, D., & Pearson, P. D. (1978).  Teaching reading vocabulary.New York: Holt       Rinehart and Winston.
Kalgren, A. (1992). Semantic maps: The road to better writing. Perspectives, 10, 16-19.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design.   Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Olson, M.W., & Gee, T. C. (1991). Content reading instruction in the primary grades:
     Perceptions and strategies. The Reading Teacher, 45, 298-307.
Oxford, R.L (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.         New York: Newbury House /Harper Collins.
Pearson, P. D., & Johnson, D. D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York:     Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
UCLES (2001). KET Handbook. Cambridge: UCLES.
Zaid, M. A. (1995). Semantic mapping in communicative language teaching. English Teaching Forum, 33(2), 6-11, 19.
Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice
Volume 1, Issue 3
Summer and Autumn 2008
Pages 204-220

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics