The effects of semantic mapping instruction on reading comprehension of 11 th graders at Nguyen Truong To high school

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

THE EFFECTS OF SEMANTIC MAPPING

INSTRUCTION ON READING

COMPREHENSION OF THE 11th GRADERS

AT NGUYEN TRUONG TO HIGH SCHOOL

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts (TESOL)

Submitted by

LUONG THI BACH TUYET

Supervisor

Assoc. Prof. Dr. NGUYEN THANH TUNG

Ho Chi Minh City, October 2015

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled “The effects of semantic mapping instruction on reading

comprehension of 11th graders at Nguyen Truong To High School” is my own work.

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis does not contain

material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have

qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.

thesis.

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the

This thesis has not been submitted for any degree in any other tertiary institution.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2015

LUONG THI BACH TUYET

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would not have fulfilled this thesis without the support, assistance and encouragement

from the following people. Hence, I would like to express my deep gratitude to them.

First of all, I am sincerely grateful to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Thanh

Tung, for his careful instruction, intellectual advice and professional support during the study.

He spent his valuable time reading my work and giving me perceptive comments which helped

me realize my shortcomings and thus made it better. Without his devoted assistance, this thesis

would not have been completed.

I am also thankful to all lecturers of the Open University in Ho Chi Minh City, who

provided me with invaluable sources of intellectual knowledge during my study there. This

knowledge was very helpful for me when conducting this research. Alongside, the help from the

staff of the Faculty of Post-graduate Studies and the school’s library was appreciated as well.

I would like to express my gratitude to the Boards of Directors at Nguyen Truong To

High School and my colleagues for their continuing support during my study. Besides, the

cooperation of the students in 11C and 11E classes contributed to the success of my research.

Without them, the data collection for the study could not have properly been carried out.

Last but not least, I owe my gratitude to my beloved family for their devotion and

encouragement during the time I took this course and completed the thesis.

ii

ABSTRACT

In Vietnamese high schools, students have many difficulties with reading skill. They are

not trained to use appropriate strategies when reading texts. Moreover, a lack of background

knowledge, to some extent, prevents students from understanding the texts. Therefore, an

effective reading strategy is needed to bolster students’ reading comprehension. This study was

conducted to investigate the effects of semantic mapping on students’ reading comprehension.

Sixty three students at Nguyen Truong To high school were assigned into control and

experimental groups. Students in the experimental group were instructed with semantic mapping

while those in the control group were taught in the traditional technique. The research

instruments of pre-test and post-test were used to measure students’ reading ability before and

after the treatment. Alongside, a questionnaire was used to discover students’ attitudes towards

the strategy implementation. The findings of the study reveal that semantic mapping facilitated

students’ reading skills and reading comprehension. Besides, students showed positive feelings

thanks to the benefits the strategy brought about.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP ............................................................................................. i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................... ii

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ viii

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF CHARTS .................................................................................................................... x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1

1.1. Background of the study .................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Statement of the problem ................................................................................................... 3

1.3. Aim and objectives of the problem .................................................................................... 4

1.4. Research questions ............................................................................................................. 4

1.5. The significance of the study ......................................................................................... 4

1.6. Overview of thesis chapters ............................................................................................... 4

CHAPTER 2: SEMANTIC MAPPING: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ......................... 6

2.1. Overview of semantic maps and semantic mapping .......................................................... 6

2.1.1. Definition of semantic maps and semantic mapping .............................................. 6

2.1.2. Advantages of semantic mapping .......................................................................... 9

2.1.3. Disadvantages of semantic mapping .................................................................... 10

2.2. A typology of semantic mapping ..................................................................................... 10

2.2.1. Word mapping ...................................................................................................... 11

2.2.2. Mind mapping ....................................................................................................... 12

2.2.3. Concept mapping .................................................................................................. 13

2.3. The use of semantic mapping in reading comprehension ................................................ 14

2.3.1. As a pre-reading activity ....................................................................................... 14

2.3.2. Facilitating knowledge acquisition ....................................................................... 16

2.3.3. Facilitating summarizing strategy ......................................................................... 20

2.3.4. A communicative and interactive activity ............................................................ 22

2.3.5. An interactive approach in reading comprehension ............................................. 23

2.4. Expected difficulties when applying semantic mapping in classroom ............................ 25

2.5. The application of semantic mapping in a reading lesson ............................................... 25

iv

2.5.1. Pre-reading activities ............................................................................................ 26

2.5.1.1. Introducing the topic ......................................................................................... 26

2.5.1.2. Brainstorming ................................................................................................... 26

2.5.1.3. Categorization ................................................................................................... 27

2.5.2. While-reading activities ........................................................................................ 27

2.5.3. Post-reading activities ............................................................................................... 28

2.6. Previous research ............................................................................................................. 28

2.6.1. Semantic mapping’s effects on reading comprehension ....................................... 29

2.6.2. Semantic mapping’s effects on learners’ attitudes ............................................... 31

2.7. Summary .......................................................................................................................... 32

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 34

3.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 34

3.2. Research site .................................................................................................................... 34

3.3. Participants ....................................................................................................................... 34

3.4. Research methodology ..................................................................................................... 35

3.5. Research instruments ....................................................................................................... 37

3.5.1. Teaching material ................................................................................................. 37

3.5.2. The measurement instruments .............................................................................. 37

3.5.2.1. Pre-test and post-test ......................................................................................... 37

3.5.2.2. Questionnaire .................................................................................................... 39

3.6. Procedures of the study .................................................................................................... 41

3.6.1. Schedule of the study ............................................................................................ 41

3.6.2. Procedure of semantic mapping intervention ....................................................... 42

3.7. Analytical framework ...................................................................................................... 44

3.7.1. Descriptive data analysis of tests .......................................................................... 44

3.7.1.1. Grouping marks ................................................................................................ 45

3.7.1.2. Comparing means ............................................................................................. 45

3.7.1.3. Checking assumptions ...................................................................................... 46

3.7.2. Descriptive data analysis of questionnaire ........................................................... 47

3.8. Summary ............................................................................................................... 47

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... 48

4.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 48

4.2. Data analysis of tests ........................................................................................................ 48

v

4.2.1. Resemblance of the two groups before the treatment ........................................... 48

4.2.1.1. Distribution of pre-test scores ........................................................................... 48

4.2.1.2. Comparing means ............................................................................................. 49

4.2.2. Difference between the two groups after the treatment ........................................ 52

4.2.2.1. Distribution of the post-test scores .................................................................... 52

4.2.2.2. Comparing means ............................................................................................. 53

4.2.3. Comparing the improvement in reading ability of the two groups ....................... 55

4.2.4. Summary ............................................................................................................... 56

4.3. Data analysis of questionnaire ......................................................................................... 56

4.3.1. Checking reliability of the questionnaire .............................................................. 57

4.3.2. Students’ self-evaluation of their reading skills ................................................... 58

4.3.2.1. Pre-reading skills .............................................................................................. 58

4.3.2.2. While-reading skills .......................................................................................... 59

4.3.2.3. Post-reading skills ............................................................................................. 60

4.3.3. Students’ attitudes towards the semantic mapping strategy ................................. 61

4.3.3.1. Students’ feelings of the implementation of the semantic mapping strategy .... 61

4.3.3.2. Students’ opinions about the strategy application ............................................. 62

4.4. Chapter summary ............................................................................................................. 62

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS ......................................................................... 63

5.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 63

5.2. Findings on the students’ improvement in reading ability ............................................... 63

5.3. Findings on the students’ attitudes towards the strategy implementation ........................ 65

5.3.1. Students’ self-evaluation of their reading comprehension and reading skills ...... 65

5.3.2. Students’ feelings about the implementation of semantic mapping ..................... 66

5.4. Summary .......................................................................................................................... 67

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................. 68

6.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 68

6.2. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 68

6.3. Strengths and limitations .................................................................................................. 69

6.4. Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 70

6.5. Suggestions for future research ........................................................................................ 71

6.6. Summary .......................................................................................................................... 72

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 73

vi

APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................... 82

APPENDIX 1: Lesson plan of Unit 15 for the control group ................................................. 82

APPENDIX 2: Lesson plan of Unit 15 for the experimental group......................................... 84

APPENDIX 3: Lesson plan of Unit 16 .................................................................................... 89

APPENDIX 4: Questionnaire in English version .................................................................... 94

APPENDIX 5: Questionnaire in Vietnamese version ............................................................. 96

APPENDIX 6: Pre-test ............................................................................................................ 98

APPENDIX 7: Post-test ........................................................................................................ 102

APPENDIX 8: The control group’s results ........................................................................... 107

APPENDIX 9: The experimental group’s results .................................................................. 108

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1.1: A semantic map for "Olympics"................................................................................ 8

Figure 2.2.1: An example of word map ........................................................................................ 11

Figure 2.2.2: An example of mind map ........................................................................................ 12

Figure 2.2.3: An example of a concept map ................................................................................. 14

Figure 2.3.1: A semantic map of computer and employees.......................................................... 15

Figure 2.3.2a: A word map for “Muslim Carpets” ....................................................................... 18

Figure 2.3.2b: A wall group map for “a cow” .............................................................................. 19

Figure 2.3.3: Reading and summarizing processes and strategies linked by concept mapping .. 21

Figure 2.7: Conceptual framework ............................................................................................... 33

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.3: Characteristics of participants .....................................................................................35

Table 3.5.1: Selected reading texts ...............................................................................................37

Table 3.5.2.1: Sources of selected reading texts ...........................................................................39

Table 3.6.1: Schedule for the main stages of the research ............................................................42

Table 4.2.1.2a: Descriptive statistics of the pre-test scores for the two groups ............................49

Table 4.2.1.2b: Independent samples t-test of the two groups before the treatment ....................50

Table 4.2.1.2c: Tests of normality for the pre-test scores .............................................................51

Table 4.2.2.2a: Descriptive statistics of the two groups for the post-test .....................................53

Table 4.2.2.2b: Independent samples t-test for the post-test scores .............................................54

Table 4.2.2.2c: Tests of normality for the post-test scores ...........................................................54

Table 4.3.1a: Reliability statistics of the questionnaire ................................................................57

Table 4.3.1b: Item-Total Statistics ................................................................................................58

Table 4.3.2.1: Students' responses to pre-reading skills ...............................................................59

Table 4.3.2.2: Students' responses to while-reading skills ...........................................................59

Table 4.3.2.3: Students' responses to post-reading skills ..............................................................60

Table 4.3.3.1: Students' responses to the strategy implementation ..............................................61

Table 4.3.3.2: Students' responses to the strategy application ......................................................62

ix

LIST OF CHARTS

Chart 4.2.1.1: Pre-test score distribution of the two groups.......................................................... 49

Chart 4.2.1.2: The Q-Q Plot of the pre-test scores for the two groups ......................................... 51

Chart 4.2.2.1: Post-test score distribution of the two groups........................................................ 52

Chart 4.2.2.2: The Q-Q Plot of the post-test scores for the two groups........................................ 55

Chart 4.2.3: A comparison of the two groups............................................................................... 56

x

The effects of semantic mapping on students’ reading comprehension

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the study

In our country, English is now considered the most powerful foreign language with a

large number of learners and users. It is required in a number of fields, occupations and

professions such as computing, media, and business. For that reason, a working knowledge of

English has become a fundamental requirement for a job position. A multi-cultural working

environment demands workers with a good command of English. Therefore, students should

be aware of its importance and prepare themselves for that demand. Furthermore, a really

modern citizen in the 21st century must be the one who possesses a capability of

communication in English. It proves that you can access and update latest information of the

world. With a command of English, you can enlarge your knowledge by discovering other

cultures and have chances to develop your potential.

Because of its critical role, English has been a compulsory subject in Vietnamese

high schools for many years. In reality, educators and the government put much attention

to the quality of teaching and learning this subject. In recent years, with the increasing

demand of English, some innovation has been made in order to improve students’ proficiency.

The National Foreign Language Project 2020 serves as a justification for the importance of this

matter in this age. Despite many arguments about the expenditure or how it will be carried

out, its necessity and urgency is apparent. Changes must be made to equip students, laborers￾to-be, with a useful tool in a multi-cultural working environment. Students’ proficiency in using

English as a foreign language needs to be considered as the ultimate goal of any education.

A proficient language learner must be the one who can communicate well.

Communication takes place not only between speakers and listeners but also between writers and

readers. It is an interaction in which readers attempt to interpret the text to get the message

through. That process is complex because it requires extracting and constructing meaning

simultaneously through interaction and involvement with the writer and his/her written language

Page 1