Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 11. Number3 September 2020 Pp. 446 -463
Saudi Students’ Perceptions of Schemata and Poetry Comprehension
Department of English Language and Literature
Faculty of English, College of Arts, King Saud University
Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
In teaching poetry, one of the first problems to be addressed is the lack of appropriate schemata when studying English and American poetic texts. The current study inquires about the students’ perception regarding how Saudi students perceive the relationship between the lack of appropriate schemata and the comprehension of English and American poetry to explain how they read and interpret poems in English and how they respond to the culturally loaded texts by writers with different cultural schemata to provide a greater understanding of the challenges they face in the poetry classroom. The study also examines students’ openness to schema activation techniques within the poetry classroom. A qualitative and quantitative research study has been conducted in three undergraduate classrooms at King Saud University. The research included open questions and questionnaire data obtained over a one year period (2018-2019) from 51 students. The results show that Saudi students’ are very much aware of the problematic issues in their reading and believe social and cultural ideologies have a significant influence on comprehension based on their individual experience. Only a third of the respondents do not find social and cultural ideologies and references to be problematic. Furthermore, 49% of the respondents feel that having a different background affects their ability to identify with the poems. The study also showed that students are open to incorporating schema activating techniques to improve their comprehension of English and American poetry.
Keywords: Comprehension, English and American poetry, Pedagogy, Saudi students, Schemata, Saudi students
Cite as: Almufayrij, H. (2020). Saudi Students’ Perceptions of Schemata and Poetry Comprehension. Arab World English Journal, 11 (3) 446-463.
Anderson, R. C., Osborn, J., & Tierney, R. J. (eds.). (1984). Learning to read in American schools: Basal readers and content texts. (pp. 439,610). Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence. Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Betjeman, J. & Gardner, K. J. (2005). Faith and Doubt of John Betjeman: An Anthology of Betjeman’s Religious Verse. Lon
Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bacigalupe, G.,& Camara, M. (2012). Transnational Families and Social Technologies: Reassessing Immigration Psychology, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(9), 1425-1438. DOI:10.1080/1369183X.2012.698211
Campbell, K. (2004). User-Centered Design: Part 1-Cultural Diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carrell, P. L., Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema Theory and ESL Reading Pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17 (4), 553-73.
Chang, Z. (2004). Comparative studies in language and culture. Qingdao: COU Press.
Comeaux, M. L. (1994). Book Review: French America: Mobility, Identity, and Minority Experience across the Continent, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 84(2), 77-79.
Compaoré, K. M. L. F. (2004). A cross-cultural analysis of conceptual metaphor in language, (published doctoral dissertation.) University of Pennsylvania, Indiana
Cook, G. (1989). Discourse, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano, C. V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research, London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Dijk, T. A. (1985). Handbook of discourse analysis. (pp. 78). Orlando [Fla.: Academic Press.
Eisenhart, Margaret (2001). Changing Conceptions of Culture and Ethnographic Methodology: Recent Thematic Shifts and Their Implications for Research on Teaching. In V. Richardson, (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Ferguson, H. J., & Sanford, A. J. ( 2008). Anomalies in real and counterfactual worlds: An eye-movement investigation, Journal of Memory and Language, 5 (3), 609-626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.06.007
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research and Practice (2nd ed.). New York and London: Teachers College Press.
Hudson, R. A. (1982). Sociolinguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kanso, A., Karim Sinno, A., & Adams,Will. (2001). Cross Cultural Public Relations: Implications for American and Arab Public Relations Practitioners, Competitiveness Review, 11(1), 65-82. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb046420
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994).Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32 (3), 465-91.
Langer, J. A., & Smith-Burke, M. T. (1982). Reader meets author/bridging the gap: a psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspective. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Lye, J. (2020). “Valuing Contemporary Fiction.” St. Catharines, Ont.: Dept. of English, Brock University. Available at http://www.brocku.ca/English/jlye/
Maley, A., & Duff, A. (1997). The inward ear: Poetry in the language classroom. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, G. L. (1987). Culture’s Role in Reading Comprehension: A Schema Theoretical Approach. Journal of Reading, 30 (5), 424-29.
Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum J. J. A. (2008). The Neurocognition of Referential Ambiguity in Language Comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2 (4), 603-630. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00070.x
Quindós, T. (2007). Standing Unearthed: Construing a persona Behind Plaths’ “I am vertical”. Amherst, NY: Trivium Publications.
Scollon, R. (1995). Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach, (pp. 2). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Semino, E. (1995). Schema Theory and the Analysis of Text Worlds in Poetry, Language and Literature, 4(2), 79-108, 123-154. https://doi.org/10.1177/096394709500400201
Singh, N. K. (2019). Culturally Appropriate Education: Theoretical and Practical Implications. In J. Reyhner, W. S., Gilbert, & L. Lochard. (Eds.), Honouring Our Heritage: Culturally Appropriate Approaches to Indigenous Education. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona UP.
Spiro, R. J., Bertram C. B., & Brewer, W. F. (1980). Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Tashakkori, A.,& Teddle, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioural Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Press.
Vickers, B. (1988). In Defence of Rhetoric, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Wallace, C. (2003). Reading. (pp. 33). Oxford: Oxford University Press.