The relationship of L1 reading and L2 language proficiency with the L2 reading comprehension

387 Pages·2009·35.76 MB·English

Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 1

The relationship of L1 reading and L2 language
proficiency with the L2 reading comprehension and
strategies of Saudi EFL university students

by
Saud Abdullah Mushait

A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in Applied Linguistics
Department of Language and Linguistics
University of Essex
November 2003

All rights are reserved for the AUTHOR. No part of this thesis may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior permission of the copyright owner. The
author can be contacted at [email protected].
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 2

ABSTRACT
Alderson (1984), Hulstijn (1991), and Bernhardt and Kamil (1995) highlight the importance of the contribution of
L1 reading ability (L1RA) and L2 language proficiency (L2LP) to L2 reading comprehension (L2RC). Alderson
criticizes the studies he reviewed as focussing on the product of reading (comprehension) rather than the process of
the reading or the behaviour of the readers (e.g. reading strategies). Bernhard and Kamil state: “research will have
to account for the contribution of native language reading performances as well as the contribution of L2
knowledge before making definitive statements about any aspects of the second language reading process” (p. 31).
This thesis examined the relationship of L2RC and L2RS with L1RA, L2 vocabulary (L2V) and L2 grammar
(L2G) in the EFL context. It also examined whether the potential effects of L1RA, L2V and L2G on L2RC were
affected by the language difficulty of the texts being read in the L2, on the one hand, and students’ L2LP levels on
the other. The relationship between L2 reading strategies (L2RS) and L2RC was also investigated.
The participants in the study were studying English for their bachelors’ degrees at King Khalid University in
Saudi Arabia in the same department but at different levels of L2LP. 222 students were given four tests to measure
their L1RA, L2RC, L2V, and L2G. A subgroup of 28 of this group in addition participated in think-aloud
reporting intended to identify L2 reading strategies.
Both quantitative and qualitative procedures were used for analysing the data: descriptive statistics, multiple
regression and repeated measures (ANOVA), as well as detailed qualitative analysis of the L2RS used by two
subjects—one of a high level of L2LP and the other at a low level.
The quantitative analyses revealed that L1RA, L2G and L2V contribute significantly to L2RC. L2LP (L2V
and/or L2G) was the best predictor of L2RC for subjects at a low level of L2LP (those below the linguistic
threshold level). However, at a higher level of L2LP (those above the linguistic threshold level), L1RA showed a
stronger influence on L2RC than the other two variables, thus giving strong support to the linguistic threshold
hypothesis. L1RA, however, had no significant effect on L2RC when a difficult text was used, even for the high-
proficiency group. The effect came only from L2LP strongly suggesting that the relationship between L1RA and
L2RC is not only affected by the L2LP level of the reader but also by the language difficulty of the text being read
in the L2— consistent with Cummins’ (1979, 1980), Alderson’s (1984, 2000) and Bossers’ (1991) view that the
linguistic threshold is low for an easy task and high for a difficult one.
The analysis of the think-aloud protocols showed that the more proficient subjects, on the whole, tend to use
more top-down than bottom-up strategies, whereas the reverse is true for the less proficient subjects. This result
strongly suggests that L2LP does not only affect the product of L2 reading, but also the process. The result also
demonstrated that top-down reading strategies positively affect L2RC, whereas bottom-up strategies negatively
affect it.
In addition to further results, implications for teaching L2V, L2G, L2R and L2RS are presented, and
suggestions for further research.
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 3

ACK(cid:9)OWLEDGEME(cid:9)TS
Praise be to Allah who guided us the truth or else we could never have found guidance and peace and
prayers are sent on His Messenger, the seal of all prophets and the leader of the righteous servants.
I would like to thank the many people who have helped me, either directly or indirectly, to accomplish
my dream to write a doctoral thesis. My list is a bit lengthy but at the top of it is my academic supervisor
Mr Philip Scholfield who made my dream a reality. I would like to express my deepest gratitude and
appreciation to him for his supervision and invaluable feedback during all the stages of writing my PhD
thesis. Without his support and guidance this thesis would never have seen light. I would like also to
thank Mrs Scholfield for proofreading the whole thesis and for her useful remarks. I wish also to thank
Dr. Vivian Cook (my internal examiner) and Dr. Helde Hacquebord (my external examiner) for their
useful feedback.
I am also grateful to Dr. I.S.P Nation for his useful comment in determining our subjects’ vocabulary
size and for the electronic material he sent to me. My thanks are also extended to Dr. Paul Meara for his
suggestion on how to measure our subjects’ knowledge of L2 vocabulary. I am also thankful to Dr.
Colyn Dary for his feedback on the methodology chapter. Special thanks go to Dr. Batia Laufer for
sending me a useful article related to my research. My sincere gratitude is extended to Dr. Muhammad
Alseweed for dedicating some of his time to classifying samples of our subjects’ think-aloud protocols
used to ascertain interjudge reliability for L2 reading strategies.
I am also greatly indebted to King Saud University which granted me a full scholarship to study for my
MA degree at Michigan State University. I am also very grateful to King Khalid University (KKU) for
their full financial support while studying for my PhD degree at the University of Essex. My gratitude is
extended to the Saudi Cultural Bureau in London for their support and care during my stay in England.
I wish to thank Professor William Tarvin and Dr. Abdulraziq Sammanndar for their feedback on the
preliminary proposal of this thesis. My thanks are extended to my colleagues at KKU who assisted me
in collecting data for this study and encouraged their students to take part in my research. These people
are: Professor Ali Areshi, Dr. Abdullah Al-Kahtani, Dr. Abdullah Abu Ashi, Dr. Abdullah Al-Melhi,
Dr. Ali Al-Musa, Dr. Ibrahim Asiri, Dr. Muhammed Hayaza, Mr. Muhammed Radwan, Dr. Muhammed
Zaid, Mr. Mustafa Mahmoud, Dr. Mustafa Abdulmajed, Mr. Mustafa Alseba, and Dr. Sultan Al-Hazmi.
I would like also to thank them for their suggestions concerning the tools used to collect the data for this
thesis, especially those who checked my translation of the passages from English to Arabic and those
who proofread the Arabic version of these texts. I also owe gratitude to all students who participated in
my study by taking the four tests used to collect my data, especially those students who took part in the
think-aloud data gathering. Without their involvement, it would have been impossible to gather
information for our research.
My heartfelt appreciation and gratitude go to my dear mother and father who brought me up and taught
me good values and set good examples of excellent moral behaviour, that is, to treat people well
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 4

regardless of their colour, race, class, etc. May Allah forgive their souls. My gratitude is also extended to
my wife Huda and my children Basim, Ahmed, Afnan and Sami for their love, encouragement and
patience during the lengthy years of my study. Thanks also go to my brothers and sisters for their
support and encouragement. Sincerer gratitude is extended to my relatives Saeed Mushait, Dr. Abdullah
Mushait, Dr. Fahad Mushait, Dr. Mona Mushait Dr. Omar Mushait, Jamal Mushait, Saeed Mushait,
Mansour Mushait, Mushait Mushait, Hasan Hayaza, Bander Mushait, Mubarek Albakhaat and Musad
Albakhaat for their encouragement to me while I have been pursuing my graduate studies abroad. I Must
also not forget to thank my uncles Abdulaziz Mushait and Abdullah Mushait for their motivation and
support.
Last, but not least, I wish to thank my friends Abdulaziz Altoraiqe, Faisal Al-homoud, Dr. Ibrahim
Alqarni, Khalid Murad, Mufareh Alqahtani, Muhammed Alhaddad, Dr. Muhammed Alhadlaq, Musa
Al-Saleh, Saeed Shaher, Dr. Saad Al-Akloby, Dr. Khalid Aba Al-Khail, Mahmoud Saleh, Abdulrahman
Fayez, Hamdan Al-Ghamdi, Sami Al-Mubarki, and Muhammed Saleh whose friendship has given me
great pleasure and who are waiting for me to obtain my PhD degree.
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 5

LIST OF ABBREVIATIO(cid:9)S

BUS bottom-up strategies
BU-TRS bottom-up text-related strategies
BU-WRS bottom-up word-related strategies
EFL English as a foreign language
ESL English as a second language
FL foreign language
HPG higher proficiency group
L1 native language/ mother tongue
L1RA L1 reading ability
L1RS L1 reading strategies
L2 second/foreign language
L2G L2 grammar
L2LP L2 language proficiency
L2R L2 reading
L2RC L2 reading comprehension
L2RS L2 reading strategies
L2V L2 vocabulary
LH linguistic threshold
LI linguistic interdependence
LIH linguistic interdependence hypothesis
LPG lower proficiency group
LTH linguistic threshold hypothesis
MS metacognitive strategies
MPG middle proficiency group
R2 square multiple regression correlation coefficient
SD standard deviation
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science
TDS top-down strategies
TD-TRS top-down text-related strategies
TD-WRS top-down word-related strategies
TRS text-related strategies
WRS word-related strategies
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 6

Table of Contents in Brief

Chapter 1
7
Introduction
Chapter 2
23
Theoretical models of reading

Chapter 3

Review of literature related to the relationship of L2 reading
35
comprehension with L2 language proficiency and L1 reading ability

The linguistic interdependence hypothesis 54

The linguistic threshold hypothesis
55
Chapter 4
98
Review of literature on reading strategies
Chapter 5
167
Research methodology
Chapter 6
208
Results and discussion for the product-oriented study
Chapter 7
259
Results and discussion for the process-oriented study
Chapter 8
286
Qualitative analysis of two contrasting cases (good vs. poor reader)
Chapter 9
Conclusion: summary, implications for teaching, 326
limitations and suggestions for future research
Bibliography 363
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 7

CHAPTER O(cid:9)E
I(cid:9)TRODUCTIO(cid:9)

1.1 Overview of chapter one
• Introduction
• Rationale of the study
• Practical SA reasons for the study
o The practical importance of the reading in general
o Significance of the study for SA
(cid:1) The importance of the English language in SA
(cid:1) The importance of reading in English in SA
• General interest of the study
• Variables targeted in this study
o Dependent variables
o Explanatory variables
• The scope and limitations of the research
• Organisation of the thesis

This chapter includes some introductory information related to the present thesis: a brief
introduction, the rationale of the study, the practical importance of reading in general, the
significance of the study for Saudi Arabia (SA), the wider applied linguistics context of L2
reading (L2R) research, the variables targeted in the study, the scope and limitation of the
research, the organisation of the thesis, and definition of terms used in the study.
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 8

1.2 Introduction
This study investigates to what extent L2 reading comprehension (L2RC) of Saudi EFL
university students is affected by their L1 reading ability (L1RA) and L2 language proficiency
(L2LP). It belongs in a tradition of studies trying to answer the question ‘is reading in a foreign
language a reading problem or a language problem?’ (Alderson, 1984). Based on the assertion
of some researchers (e.g. Yorio, 1971; Jolly, 1978; and Coady, 1979) and the findings of others
(e.g. MacNamara, 1970; Pat Rigg, 1977; Cummins, 1979; and Clarke, 1979 among others),
Alderson set forth the following hypotheses related to the L2 reading problem (see also 3.3.):
H1. Poor reading in a foreign language is due to poor reading ability in the first language. Poor first-
language readers will read poorly in the foreign language and good first-language readers will read
well in the foreign language.
H2. Poor reading in a foreign language is due to inadequate knowledge of the target language (p. 4).
Alderson, in the same article, proposed two further hypotheses:
H1a. Poor foreign language reading is due to incorrect strategies for reading that foreign language,
strategies which differ from the strategies for reading the native language.
H2a. Poor foreign language reading is due to reading strategies in the first language not being
employed in the foreign language, due to inadequate knowledge of the foreign language. Good first-
language readers will read well in the foreign language once they have passed a threshold of foreign
language ability (p. 4)
In this study, we are concerned with Alderson’s H and H . The former is based on the
1 2a
reading universal hypothesis which asserts that reading is the same in all languages (see
Goodman 1970, 1971, 1973), now referred to, in L2 reading research, as the linguistic
interdependence hypothesis (LIH) put forward by Cummins (1979, 1981; and see also 3.4.1).
The latter is linked to the linguistic threshold hypothesis (LTH) (Cummins, 1981) which was
known as the shot-circuit hypothesis (Clarke, 1979, 1980). Alderson critically reviewed
previous research in an attempt to provide evidence for his hypotheses. With respect to H ,
1
based on the findings of some studies of bilingualism (e.g. Barrera-Vasquez, 1953; Modiano,
1966; Carey and Cummins, 1979; Lapkin and Swain, 1977), Alderson concluded that despite
the fact that certain studies of bilinguals provided evidence of transfer from one language to
another, only moderate to low correlations had been found between reading in the L1 and
reading in the L2 [at that time] when “the same individuals are studied in both languages” (p.
20).
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 9

Alderson, however, found support for his H (LTH). He concluded: “some sort of
2a
threshold or language competence ceiling has to be attained [in the L2] before existing abilities
in the first language [e.g. L1RA] can begin to transfer [to the L2]” (p. 20). This conclusion
supports Cummins’ (1976, 1981) LTH, which we will discuss in more detail in 3.4.2.
Returning to his question (Is foreign language reading a language problem or a reading
problem?), Alderson, based on the work available at that time, concluded that the answer is
ambiguous and provisional. He stated:
[I]t appears to be both a language problem and a reading problem, but with firmer evidence that it is
a language problem, for low levels of foreign language competence, than a reading problem. As has
been suggested, we do not know this yet, and the question needs further refinement and intense
investigation (p. 24).
Alderson pointed out that the major limitation of the studies he reviewed was that they
focussed on the product of reading (comprehension) rather than the process of reading (we will
return to Alderson’s article again in 3.3 and 3.3.1). We have noticed, in fact, that even many
recent studies (see 3.4 ) suffer from the limitation pointed out by Alderson.
Various researchers (e.g. Hacquebord, 1989; Carrell, 1991; Bossers, 1991; and Bernhardt
and Kamil, 1995; Yamashita, 1999, among others) attempted, directly or indirectly, to answer
Alderson’s question by researching the effects of L1RA and L2LP on L2RC. These studies are
reviewed in detail in Chapter Three of this thesis.
Unlike many such previous studies, which have only focussed on the products of reading,
the present project also investigates L2 reading strategies (the process or the comprehending as
Alderson calls it).
1.3 Rationale of the study
Presuming that other factors1 (e.g. attitudes, motivation, interest, aptitude, etc.) are equivalent
for our subjects, the present thesis conducts two studies relating to L2 reading: 1) a product-
oriented study; and 2) a process-oriented study. The first study aims to explore the relative
contribution of L2LP (vocabulary and grammar) and L1RA to the L2RC of Saudi EFL
university undergraduate students who are at different levels of L2LP. This study will also
examine the relationship between L1 and L2 reading in the light of the LTH and LIH (see
3.3.2), hoping to provide evidence for or against these two hypotheses. The first study will also

1 It is, in fact, an insupportable presumption to assume that wider factors affecting L2 reading comprehension are
the same for all subjects. However, we limit our study to the variables mentioned in 1.6.
Saud Abdullah Mushait’s Ph.D. Thesis
All rights are reserved for the author. Chapter One 10

examine whether the linguistic threshold (LT) is high for a difficult text and low for an easy
text read in the L2 as suggested by Cummins (1979) and Alderson (1984).
In the second study, quantitative and qualitative data will be collected to identify the L2
reading strategies (L2RS) used by our subjects. Moreover, we will examine the possible
relationship between L2LP and L1RA, on the one hand, and L2RS, on the other. In addition,
the study will research the relationship between students’ L2RC scores and their reported L2RS
in order to discover which strategies are more effective and enhance reading comprehension
and which are not.
In general, it is hoped that this research will make a valuable contribution to existing L2
reading research and will increase our understanding of L2 reading, both the product and the
process.
1.4 Practical SA reasons for the study
In this section we will touch briefly one what researchers say about the importance of reading.
We will also consider, in passing, the importance of reading in some countries. We will then
explain the significance of the study for SA.
1.4.1 The practical importance of reading in general
In many countries all over the world, reading in a foreign language is often crucial for various
reasons: education, science, professional success, personal development (Alderson, 1984).
Various studies have suggested that reading is the most crucial language skill needed by L2
students for their academic achievement. Ostler (1980) conducted a survey of more than one
hundred international students studying a diversity of majors to assess their current academic
skills and needs. It is interesting that, regardless of the students’ area of specialisation, reading
and its related skills came top of the list. In other words, the students considered reading to be
the most important skill for their educational success. Similarly, various groups including
teachers, administrators, and students took part in Robertson’s (1983) survey, the results of
which showed that ESL learners utilise reading skills the most. All the groups held that reading
was the most important skill for potential academic success. Johns (1981) surveyed university
faculties and came up with parallel results. McDonough and Shaw (1993) have highlighted the
importance of reading as a skill, stating , “…in many instances round the world we may argue
that reading is the most important foreign language skill…” (p. 101). Reading in the L2, in
particular, is an important skill not only for obtaining knowledge but also for improving