Abstract

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING ON STUDENTS’ ENGLISH READING COMPREHENSION

Misganaw Tilahun Tegegne

Volume: 8 Issue: 2 2018

Abstract:

People from non-native English speaking countries usually encounter the issue of learning and appropriately using the English language. It is an important to have higher acquaintance with the English language since most of the curriculums are designed and imparted in English. The non-native English speaking countries persistently put efforts to improve the English learning levels through innovative pedagogies. The study reports the results of an intervention for improving the reading comprehension skills. The study aimed to examine the effectiveness of communicative English language teaching program on students’ reading comprehension skills. To achieve the intended objectives, a non-equivalent pre-test, post-test quasiexperimental design was employed. The participants were the first year law students in two classes at the University of Gondar. The principle of randomization was applied and the groups were categorized as experimental and control groups. The intervention was carried out for two months of the academic year 2017. It was hypothesized that the students taught through communicative language teaching instruction would improve their reading comprehension skills better than those doesn't had this exposure. An English reading achievement test was developed and employed to assess the pre and post intervention levels. The validity and reliability of the research instruments were statistically measured and found the fit. The intervention programme was focussed on different aspects of reading comprehension. The data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests. Results indicate that the reading comprehension skills score of the experimental group improved significantly and to an extent greater than the control group due to the treatment. Hence, the present study strongly recommends that instructors should employ communicative language instruction at University level for teaching EFL reading lessons.

Back Download

References

• Azeez, A. E. P. (2015) Positive mental health through life skill education: empowering adolescents having psychosocial problems, Journal of Psychosocial Research, 10 (1), 21– 31.
• Brown, H.D.(1980).Language and Language Learning.New York: Harcourt Brace.
• Calderon, M. (1990). Communicative learning for limited English proficient student. Report No.3 (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED331584).
• Chen, H.C. (1998). The performance of junior college students studying English through communicative learning. Academic Journal of Kang-Ning,1(1),73-88.
• Deutsch, M.( 1994). “A theory of cooperation and Competition”, in Human relations, 2: 129- 152.
• Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A Synthesis of Reading Interventions and Effects on Reading Comprehension Outcomes for Older Struggling Readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300.
• Ellis, R.(1996). The study of Second Language Acquisition.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gomleksiz, M.N. (2007).Effectiveness of jigsaw II method on teaching English as a foreign language to engineering students(Case of Firat University, Turkey). European Journal of Engineering education
• Johnson D (1982).Communicative learning methods:: A meta-analysis.Journal of Research in Education,12(1),5-24
• Kachru.Y and Smith. (2008). Culture, Contexts and world English. www.http:felt education. wikispaces.
• Kagan, S. (1989). The structural approach to cooperative learning.Educational leadership. Dec89/ Jan90/12-15.
• Kagan, S.(1992). Cooperative Learning. Resources for Teachers.San Juan Capistrano, CA:
• Melby‐Lervåg, M. and Lervåg, A. (2014), Effects of Educational Interventions Targeting Reading Comprehension and Underlying Components. Child Dev Perspect, 8: 96-100.
• Larsen-Freeman, D (1986).Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Nunan ( 2003). Research Method in Language Learning. Cambridge.Cambridge University Press.
• Littlewood, (2007).Foreign and second language learning, Cambridge University Press.
• Lia (1998). Process in Humanistic Education, ELT Journal 43/4-250-60
• Rao Z (2002). „Bridging the gap between teaching and learning styles in East Asian contexts.‟ TESOL Journal. 1 (2), 5–11.
• Raimes, Ann (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL. Quarterly, 25,407-43.
• Rao (2002). „Bridging the gap between teaching and learning styles in East Asian contexts.‟ TESOL Journal 1(2), 5–11.
• Richards J & Rogers T (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Saville-Troike, M. (1984). What really matters in second language learning for academic achievement? TESOL Quarterly, 18, 188-218.
• Savignon SJ (2002). Interpreting communicative language teaching: contexts and concerns in teacher education: New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Silvana M. R. Watson, Robert A. Gable, Sabra B. Gear, Kimberly C. Hughes (2012). EvidenceBased Strategies for Improving the Reading Comprehension of Secondary Students: Implications for Students with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27 (2), 79–89.
• Slavin, R.E. (1996) Research on communicative language learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology 21, 43-69.
• Tuan, L.T. (2010). Infusing cooperative learning into an EFL classroom. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 64-77.
• Wei, C.L. (1996). Communicative English learning activities: Perceptions of Taiwanese college students. Educational Research, 4, 13- 26.
• Wright, T. (2000). Roles of Teachers and Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.