Home⇛World Education Connect Multidisciplinary E-Publication⇛vol. 4 no. 9 (2024)

Reading Laboratory: A Honing Immersion For Oral Fluency And Reading Comprehension Skills

Leonora Q. Medina

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Reading plays an important role to high school students. At this level students are exposed to different texts that challenge their cognitive capacity. Reading as process reflects how the students decode the texts. It is one of the important tools to acquire learning. We can’t deny the pertinence and the significance of reading in the learning process. Reading has a vital role in the learning process. It is one of the macro skills of communication that can be correlated to the academic performance of the students. Most of the activities and tasks in all the content areas require the students to read. It is mandatory skill that will help the students to connect with their lessons. In the actual learning context, these struggling readers will not be able to understand the concepts and they will fail to attain the learning competencies expected to them because of lack of skill in Reading. In connection with the Education for All Agenda, it aims to achieve the following objectives that can also be linked in the Reading Laboratory



References:

  1. Aebersold, J. A., & Field, M. L. (1997). From reader to reading teacher. Cambridge: Campbridge University Press.
  2. Channa, M. A. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions towards English language as a medium of instructions in Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(5).
  3. Channa, M. A., & Nordin, Z. S. (2014). Identifying metacognitive strategies through learners’ readingcomprehension: a review of related studies. Sci.Int. (Lahore), 26(5), 2457-2460.
  4. Channa, M. A., & Nordin, Z. S. (2015). Social cognitive theory and the zone of development in the learning of reading comprehension. Sci.Int. (Lahore), 27(1), 581-585.
  5. Channa, M. A., Nordi, Z. S., Siming, I. A., Chandio, A. A., & Koondher, M. A. (2015) Developing Reading Comprehension through Metacognitive Strategies: A Review of Previous Studies. English Language Teaching, 8(8), 181-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n8p181.
  6. Channa, M. A., Soranastaporn, S., Engchuan, K., & Tirataradol, Y. (2013). A Study of Needs in Using English of Engineering Students at Quaid-E-Awam University of Engineering, Science and Technology, Pakistan. Journal of Thonburi University, 7(14), 9-19.
  7. Channa, M. A., Yossatorn, Y., & Yossiri, V. (2012). Students’ Attitudes towards teachers’ using Activities in EFL class. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social sciences, 2(5).
  8. Chen, H. C. (2002). A preliminary study of Chinese EFL learners’ difficulties in vocabulary learning and remedial learning strategies. Papers selected from the 17th conference of TVES Education. Taipei: Crane.
  9. Chinwonno, A. (2001). A comparison of Thai and English reading comprehension strategies of pre-service teachers in Thailand. PhD dissertation, Ohio University.
  10. Eskey, D. E. (2005). Reading in a second language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Research in second languageteaching and learning (pp. 563-580). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum. Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading.
  11. F. J. Kavanagh & G. I. Mattingly (eds.), Language by ear and by eye (pp. 331-358). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  12. Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.
  13. Levine, A., Ferenz, O., & Reves, T. (2000). EFL academic reading and modern technology: How can we turn our students into independent critical readers?
  14. McGraw Hill (2000). Sceince Research Associates. New York City, New York, United States.
  15. Newell, A., & Simon, J. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Service No. ED 414273).
  16. Newell, A., & Simon, J. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  17. Nuttall, C. (2000). Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. Oxford: MacMillan.
  18. Ocampo, D. (1997) EDR 210 Trends in Reading Instruction. University of the Philippines Open University. Diliman, Quezon city, Philippines (p.19-35)
  19. Smith, F. (2004). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning (6th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  20. Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/747348.
  21. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. California: Sage Publications.
  22. Taverner, D. (1990). Reading within and beyond the classroom. Milton Keynes, Philadelphia: Open University Press. Urquhart, A. H., & Weir, C. J. (1998). Reading in a second language: Process product and practice. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
  23. TESL-EJ, 4(4), A-1. Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An overview. (ERIC Document Service No. ED 414273).
  24. Wei, Y. (2005). The relationship between phonological awareness and reading ability of Thai students in English and Thai primary schools of Thailand. Curriculum & Instruction Theses and Dissertations UM Theses and Dissertations (UMI No. 3175161). ProQuest Information and Learning: Collage Park, MD.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic