Arab World English Journal (September 2020)                                      Theses ID 260                             Pp. 1- 109
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/th.260

Full Theses PDF

 

 

The Effect of Peer-Collaborative Dialogue on Saudi EFL Students’ Reading
Comprehension in Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication

 

Ghada Abdullah Abdulaziz Al-Mutrafi
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

 

 

Author: Ghada Abdullah Abdulaziz Al-Mutrafi
Thesis Title: The Effect of Peer-Collaborative Dialogue on Saudi EFL Students’ Reading Comprehension in Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication
Institution: 
Department of English Language and Literature, College of Languages and Translation, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University
Major: Linguistics
Degree: M.A.
Year of award:
  December 2019
Supervisor: 
Dr. Nasser Mohammad Freahat
KeyWords: peer-collaborative dialogue, synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC), reading comprehension, text-based online chat, quasi-experimental study

 

Abstract:
This study investigated the effect of peer collaborative dialogue carried out in the text-based synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC) on the reading comprehension of EFL female students. Additionally, the study elicited EFL students’ attitudes toward dyadic collaborative their discussions in SCMC during reading comprehension activities. The sample of the study comprised 36 Saudi EFL female students at Shaqra University. They were divided into two groups: an experimental group consisting of 18 students, forming nine pairs, to perform reading activities dialogically in Moodle and a control group of 18 students to perform reading activities individually in classrooms. The researcher used pre-post reading comprehension tests and a scale of SCMC-based dialogical collaborative reading attitudes. as research instruments to collect data. Data were analyzed using means and standard deviation, an independent sample t-test, a paired sample t-test, an Analysis of Variance test (ANOVA) and a one sample t-test. The findings revealed that there was a statistically significant improvement in the post-test average scores of the experimental group, which indicated the effectiveness of text-based dyadic collaborative dialogue on reading comprehension. Additionally, compared to other reading skills, making inferences skill was revealed to be the skill most affected by dyadic dialogues in SCMC. Besides, the participants exhibited positive attitudes toward their collaborative dialogues with peers in SCMC to foster their reading comprehension. Finally, pedagogical implementations and recommendations for future studies were suggested to explore the area of SCMC-based collaborative dialogue on language learning

Cite as:  Al-Mutrafi, G. A. A.(2019). The Effect of Peer-Collaborative Dialogue on Saudi EFL Students’ Reading Comprehension in Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication. Department of English Language and Literature, College of Languages and Translation, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University. (M.A.Thesis). Retrieved from Arab World English Journal (ID Number: 260.September, 2020. 1- 109.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/th.260

References:

[1] Al-Fageeh, A. (2014). Effects of using wikis for developing Saudi EFL students’ reading and writing skills. Umm Al-Qura University Journal of Languages and Literatures, 409(3731), 1-17.‏

[2] Al-Harbi, T. (2010) Why children and adults encounter difficulty in learning reading, Al-Marefah173.

[3] Al-Jadoa, A. (2016). Using cooperative learning to improve reading comprehension skills for Saudi intermediate students (Master’s thesis). Fredonia State University of New York Fredonia, New York, United States.

[4] Al-Mutairy, M., & Shukri, N. (2017). Patterns of interactions in a Synchronous Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) collaborative activity in the Saudi EFL context. Studies in English Language Teaching, 5(2), 307-322.

[5] AL-Nifayee, A. (2010). The effectiveness of the instrumental enrichment approach on the enhancement of reading comprehension skills of preparatory stage pupils with English language learning difficulties (Master’s thesis). Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.

[6] Al-Nujaidi, A. (2003). The relationship between vocabulary size, reading strategies, and reading comprehension of EFL learners in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation). Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma, United States.

[7] Al-Qahtani, A. A. (2016). Can creative circles improve reading comprehension and creative thinking of Saudi third-grade middle school EFL learners? (Doctoral dissertation). Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom.

[8] Al-Qarni, F. (2015). Collaborative strategic reading to enhance learners’ reading comprehension in English as a Foreign Language. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 4(1), 161-166.‏

[9] Al-Roomy, M. (2013). An action research study of collaborative strategic reading in English with Saudi medical students (Doctoral dissertation). University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, United Kingdom.

[10] Al-Waleedi, M. A. (2017). Examining language related episodes (LREs) of Arabic as a second language (ASL) learners during collaborative writing activities.
Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(4), 256-263.

[11] Barnard, R., & Campbell, L. (2005). Sociocultural theory and the teaching of process writing: The scaffolding of learning in a university context. The
TESOLANZ Journal, 13
, 76-88.

[12] Bataineh, R. F., & Mayyas, M. B. (2017). The utility of blended learning in EFL reading and grammar: A case for Moodle. Teaching English with Technology, 7(3), 35–49.

[13] Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. London: Longman.

[14] Bell, J. (2011). Reading matters: Framing and metacognition with Thai postgraduate students. The Reading Matrix, 11(2), 102-115.

[15] Berardo, S. (2006). The use of authentic materials in the teaching of reading. The Reading Matrix, 6(2), 60-69.

[16] Bharuthram, S. (2012). Making a case for the teaching of reading across the curriculum in higher education. South African Journal of Education, 32(2), 205-214.‏

[17] Blake, R. (2016). Technology and the four skills. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 129-142.‏

[18] Brown, D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

[19] Brufee, K. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. London: The Johns Hopkins Press LTD.

[20] Cole, J., & Foster, H. (2007). Using Moodle: Teaching with the popular open source course management system. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Community Press.

[21] Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative dialogue in learner–learner and learner–native speaker interaction. Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 229-256.‏

[22] Donato, R. (2004). Aspects of collaboration in pedagogical discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 284-302.

[23] Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.

[24] Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.

[25] Elsayed, M. M. S., & Fariza, P. B. (2017). Saudi undergraduate EFL students’ perceptions towards learning together strategy implementation in an EFL

reading comprehension course. International E-Journal of Advances in Education, 3(8), 289-297.‏

[26] Fan, Y. (2012). Peer collaboration for text comprehension among Taiwanese university learners. Arab World English Journal, 3(4) 133–113.

[27] Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[28] Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[29] Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Baralt, M. (2014). Exploring learner perception and use of task-based interactional feedback in FTF and CMC modes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(1), 1–37.

[30] Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Teaching for literacy engagement. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(1), 1-30.‏

[31] Hafiz, F. M., & Tudor, I. (1989). Extensive reading and the development of language skills. ETL Journal43(1), 4-13.

[32] IELTS (2018). Test taker performance 2018. Retrieved from https://www.ielts.org/teaching-and-research/test-taker-performance

[33] Jung, Y. (2016). The effects of SCMC modality and task type on negotiation of meaning (Master’s thesis). UCL Institute of Education, London, England.

[34] Kamil, M. L., & Chou, H. K. (2009). Comprehension and computer technology: Past results, current knowledge, and future promises. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 289- 304). New York: Routledge.

[35] Karabuga, F., & Kaya, E. S. (2013). Collaborative strategic reading practice with adult EFL learners: A collaborative and reflective approach to reading. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences106, 621-630.

[36] Khan, I. A. (2011). Learning difficulties in English: Diagnosis and pedagogy in Saudi Arabia. Educational Research, 2(7), 1248-1257.

[37] Khonamri, F., & Karimabadi, M. (2015). Collaborative strategic reading and critical reading ability of intermediate Iranian learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(7), 1375-1382.‏

[38] Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1998). Using collaborative strategic reading. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30(6), 32-37.‏

[39] Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.

[40] Krashen, S. (1993). The power of reading. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.‏

[41] Lantolf, J. (2012). Sociocultural theory: A dialectical approach to L2 research. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 57–72). New York: Routledge.

[42] Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[43] Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[44] Leeser, M. J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55–81.

[45] Lin, W. C., Huang, H. T., & Liou, H. C. (2013). The effects of text-based SCMC on SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning & Technology, 17(2), 123-142.‏

[46] Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.

[47] Mahdi, H. S. (2014). The impact of computer-mediated communication environments on foreign language learning: A review of the literature. Teaching English with Technology, 14(2), 67-86.‏

[48] Mahdi, H. S., & El-Naim, M. E. M. (2012). The effects of informal use of computer-mediated communication on EFL learner interaction. Studies in Literature and Language, 5(3), 75.‏

[49] Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2013). Second language learning theories. New York: Routledge.

[50] Mohammed, Q., & Rashid, R. A. (2019). The sources of reading comprehension difficulties among Saudi EFL learners. Trends in Social Sciences, 1(1), 7-16.

[51] Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education25, 2-10.

[52] Mozafarian Pour, A., & Tahriri, A. (2016). Impact of synchronous computer-mediated communication on EFL learners’ collaboration: a quantitative analysis. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 34(4), 115-140.‏

[53] Murphy, P. (2010). Web-based collaborative reading exercises for learners in remote locations: The effects of computer-mediated feedback and interaction via computer-mediated communication. ReCALL, 22(2), 112-134.‏

[54] Nassaji, H., & Tian, J. (2010). Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 397-419.‏

[55] Nejad, S. G., & Keshavarzi, A. (2015). The effect of cooperative learning on reading comprehension and reading anxiety of pre-university students. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(8), 169-180.‏

[56] Nguyen, M. H. (2013). EFL students’ reflections on peer scaffolding in making a collaborative oral presentation. English Language Teaching, 6(4), 64-73.‏

[57] Pasfield-Neofitou, S. (2012). Online communication in a second language: Social interaction, language use, and learning Japanese. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

[58] Peterson, R. A. (2000). Constructing effective questionnaires. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

[59] Phillips, D. (2001). Longman complete course for the TOEFL test: Preparation for the computer and paper tests. White Plains, NY: Longman.

[60] Rad, M. R. (2018). The effect of Moodle-mediated instruction on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL Learners. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Scientific Research, 1(3), 70-78.

[61] Rama, A. N., Rahim, A., & Alberth, A. (2018). The use of schoology to enhance students’ reading comprehension at Lakidende University. Journal of Language Education and Educational Technology (JLEET), 3(1).‏

[62] Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (3rd ed.). London: Pearson Education.

[63] Rogers, R. (2011). The complete guide to the TOEFL test. Boston, MA: Sherrise Roehr.

[64] Scager, K., Boonstra, J., Peeters, T., Vulperhorst, J., & Wiegant, F. (2016). Collaborative learning in higher education: Evoking positive interdependence. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), 1-9.‏

[65] Scanlon, D. M., Anderson, K. L., & Sweeney, J. M. (2010). Early intervention for reading difficulties: The interactive strategies approach. New York: The Guilford Press.

[66] Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[67] Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 38-57.

[68] Smith, B. (2009). The relationship between scrolling, negotiation, and self-initiated self-repair in an SCMC environment. CALICO Journal, 26(2), 231–245.

[69] Stetsenko, A., & Arievtich, I. (1997). Constructing and deconstructing the self: Comparing post-Vygotskian and discourse-based versions of social constructivism. Mind, Culture and Activity4(3), 159-172.

[70] Susanto, A. (2017). Assessing the relationship between the vocabulary level test (VLT) and reading comprehension. Studies in English Language and Education, 4(2), 157-171.

[71] Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

[72] Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[73] Swain, M. (1997). Collaborative dialogue: Its contribution to second language learning. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 34, 115-132.

[74] Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[75] Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook on research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–83). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[76] Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320-337.

[77] Swain, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2012). Languaging: Collaborative dialogue as a source of second language learning. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell. ‏

[78] Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171–85.

[79] Tare, M., Golonka, E. M., & Bonilla, C. (2017). Peer interaction in text chat: Qualitative analysis of chat transcripts. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 157-178.‏

[80] Teng, X. (2015). Languaging in cyberspace: A case study of the effects of peer-peer-collaborative dialogue on the acquisition of English idioms in task-based synchronous computer-mediated communication (Doctoral dissertation). Iowa State University, Iowa, United States.

[81] Tsay, M., & Brady, M. (2010). A case study of cooperative learning and communication pedagogy: Does working in teams make a difference? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(10), 78–89.

[82] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

[83] Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470-481

[84] Wynd, C. A., Schmidt, B., & Schaefer, M. A. (2003). Two quantitative approaches for estimating content validity. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25, 508–518.

[85] Xiao, M., & Yang, X. (2005). The effects of internet-based desktop videoconference on EFL students’ oral skills in terms of linguistic accuracy, fluency, and complexity. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications (pp. 882–885). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

[86] Yilmaz, Y. (2008). Collaborative dialogue during tasks in synchronous computer-mediated communication (Doctoral dissertation). Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States.

[87] Yu, L., & Zeng, G. (2011). Managing CMC-based task through text-based dialogue: An exploratory study in a Chinese EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(4), 221-233.‏

[88] Zaharna, R. S. (1995). Understanding cultural preferences of Arab communication patterns. Public Relations Review, 21(3), 241-255.

[89] Zeng, G., & Takatsuka, S. (2009). Text-based peer–peer-collaborative dialogue in a computer-mediated learning environment in the EFL context. System37(3), 434-446.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on tumblr
Tumblr
Share on reddit
Reddit
Share on email
Email
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon
Share on digg
Digg
https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/th.260
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on tumblr
Share on digg
Share on email
Share on reddit
Share on stumbleupon
Share on vk

Ghada Abdullah Abdulaziz Al-Mutrafi
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia