The Importance of Teaching Reading: Emphasize for Reading Fluency or Accuracy in Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension in EFL Context
Current methods for teaching reading comprehension tend to emphasize the products of comprehension and neglect the processes of comprehension. Teachers often provide insufficient opportunities for learners to practice English in teaching reading. To make the situation worse, both teachers and learners frequently use Indonesian language throughout English classes. There are two sets of skills that are particularly important to teach. The first set includes comprehension monitoring skills that involve readers' monitoring their continuing processing for possible comprehension failure and taking remedial action when failures occur. Comprehension failures can occur at various levels, including: particular words, particular sentences, relations between sentences, and relations between larger units. For each kind of failure, there are specific remedial actions readers can take. The second set of processing skills that can be taught involves using clues in the text to generate, evaluate, and revise hypotheses about current and future events in the text. During teaching reading in a class teachers may confuse to give exercises relate to fluency or accuracy. The correlation between fluency and reading comprehension showed a significant positive relationship between oral reading fluency and reading comprehension performance. Therefore, automaticity of decoding fluency is essential for high levels of reading achievement. Hence, what educators should do now is conscientiously try to shift educators’ attention from emphasizing the accuracy of students ‘oral presentation to developing their ability to express themselves both accurately and fluently in English.
Allington, R. L. (1983). Fluency: The neglected reading goal. The Reading Teacher, 36, 556–561.
Alyousef, H. S. (2005) Teaching Reading Comprehension To ESL/EFL Learner. The Reading Matrix, 5(2).
Binder, C., & Watkins, C. L. (1990). Precision teaching and direct instruction: Measurably superior instructional technology in schools. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 3(4), 74-96.
Breen, M. & C. Candlin. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum for language teaching. Applied Linguistics 1, 89‒112.
Brumfit, C. J. (1984). Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Byrne, Donn. (1991). Teaching Writing Skills. Essex: Longman Group UK Limited.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics,1, 1-47.
Clay, M. M. (1984). Observing the young reader. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading Recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Davies, A. (2003) The native speaker: myth and reality. Language Testing, 21(2) 245-248.
Dowhower, S. L. (1987). Effects of repeated reading on second-grade transitional readers’ fluency and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 389–406.
Ehri, L. C. (2002). Phases of acquisition in learning to read words and implications for teaching. In R. Stainthorp and P. Tomlinson (Eds.), Learning and teaching reading (pp. 7–28). London: British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II.
Ehri, L. C., & McCormick, S. (1998). Phases of word learning: Implications for instruction with delayed and disabled readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 14(2), 135–164.
Fillmore, L. W. (1979) Individual differences in second language acquisition, in Fillmore, C, Kempler, D and Wang, W Y S (Eds) Individual Differences in Language Ability and Language Behavior, New York: Academic Press.
Gao, C. (2001). Second language learning and the teaching of grammar. Education, 122, 326-337.
Haughton, E. C. (1972). Aims: Growing and sharing. In J. B. Jordan and L. S. Robbins (Eds.), Let's try doing something else kind of thing (20-39). Arlington, VA: Council on Exceptional Children.
Hashim, F. (2006). Language Immersion for Low Proficiency ESL Learners: The ALEMAC Project. The Reading Matrix, 6.
Hiebert, E. H., & Fisher, C. W. (2002). Describing the difficulty of texts for beginning readers: A curriculum-based measure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
Hudson, R. F., Mercer, C. D., and Lane, H. B. (2000). Exploring reading fluency: A paradigmatic overview. Unpublished manuscript, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Johnson, K. R., & Layng, T V. J. (1992). Breaking the structuralist barrier: Literacy and numeracy with fluency. American Psychologist, 47, 1475-1490.
Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., Deno, S. L. (2003) Sources of Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension and Reading Fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), Dec 2003, 719-729. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0618.104.22.1689
Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2000). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Ann Arbor, MI: Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement.
Lee, C. S. (2008) Accuracy and Fluency Spoken English among the ESL Learners in Tertiary Institution. Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development. University of Sarawak.
Lochana, M. & Deb, G. (2006) Task Based Teaching: Learning English without Tears. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8(3) Special Conference Proceedings Volume: Task-based Learning in the Asian Context.
Munirah & Muhsin, M. A. (2015) Using Task-Based Approach in Improving the Students’ Speaking Accuracy and Fluency. Journal of Education and Human Development, 4(3). pp. 181-190.
Patanasorn C. (2010). Effect of procedural content and task repetition on accuracy and fluency in an EFL context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, AZ, USA. , Google Scholar.
Rashotte, C. A., & Torgesen, J. K. (1985). Repeated reading and reading fluency in learning disabled children. Reading. Research Quarterly, 20(2), 180-188.
Reitsma, P. (1983). Printed word learning in beginning readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 36(2), 321–339.
Ruso, N. (2007). The Influence of Task Based Learning on EFL Classrooms. Eastern Mediterranean University Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Retrieved from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/pta_February_2007_tr.pdf
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Cognitive processes and the reading problems of learning disabled children: Evaluating the assumption of specificity. In J. Torgesen and B. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 87-131). New York: Academic Press.
Xiao, L. X. (2009) A new paradigm of teaching English in China: An Eclectic Model. The Asian EFL Journal, 8(4).
Copyright (c) 2017 Muhammad Rochman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
By submitting the manuscript of the article, the authors agree with this policy with no specific document sign-off required.
The authors certify that:
- if the manuscript is co-authored, they are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- the work described has not been formally published before in a registered ISSN or ISBN media, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, or thesis.
- it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- they secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere (it does not infringe the rights of others).
- they agree to Ethical Lingua license and copyright agreement.
All articles published by Ethical Lingua are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Copyright Agreement
- Authors retain copyright and other proprietary rights related to the article.
- Authors retain the right and are permitted to use the substance of the article in own future works, including lectures and books.
- Authors grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in Ethical Lingua.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in Ethical Lingua.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post or self-archive their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.