Battle of The Books’ Programme on Critical Reading Skill Performance Among Students

Battle of The Books’ Programme on Critical Reading Skill Performance Among Students

Siti Faezah Ahmad Sazali^1*, Kamarul Aina Mohamed²,Wan Atikah Wan Hassan³

1 General Studies Department, Politeknik METro Johor Bahru, Johor Bahru, Malaysia

2 General Studies Department, Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan, Pasir Gudang, Malaysia

3 General Studies Department, Politeknik Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah, Kuantan, Malaysia

*Corresponding Author: faezahsazali@gmail.com

Accepted: 15 March 2021 | Published: 1 April 2021

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract: This study discusses about the ‘Battle of the Books’ programme among Polytechnic students in Johor Bahru. The main objective of the study is to investigate the effectiveness of this programme and to identify any significant difference between Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities on students’ performance. Experimental design with pre-test and post test were employed in this study. 40 students of semester 1 who learned Communicative English 1 from Polytechnic in Johor Bahru were the sample in this study. The paired sample t-test was conducted in SPSS Window for the data analysis. The results showed that there was a significant difference between pre-test and post test performance for reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities. Besides, there was no significant difference between the reading Bingo and Jeopardize activity. It shows that this programme is effective with both activities are comparable to help students to attain good reading techniques. As suggestions, the reading materials could be upgraded in future.

Keywords: Battle of the Books programme, reading techniques

___________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction

Reading is emphasized as one of the fundamental skills in English literacy that helps students to understand the context. It involves an active process that works as a doorway to attain extensive knowledge. Goh, J.X (2019) stated that reading is a complex activity in which readers find the details by merging memory and construction of meaning. It includes few processes for instance understanding and memorizing ideas, focusing on target data and synthesizing data.

In addition, Ghosh, A. (2012) highlighted in report, reading also involves interactive and meaning building activity by the readers to gain information from diverse sources.

However, some students deal with reading difficulties that hamper to read more. They perceive reading in second language is not interesting, hard and time consuming. This is due to some barriers faced by them. They include limited English vocabularies, complicated sentence structure and lack of reading techniques (Dhanapal, C., 2019). Thus, they have low motivation to read and affects their performance in other English skills such as writing and speaking.

Studies have identified some reading strategies that help the reader to achieve effective understanding in L2 reading. The list includes skimming, scanning and conceptualized strategies such as stimulating schemata, applying mental images, asking questions, visualizing

and recognizing text structure (Cohen, 1990; Anderson, 1991, Pressley, 2002; Zhang et al.,2008).

Through the observations during the Communicative English class in Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan, Johor, it was found that students refuse to read English reading materials such as books, newspapers, magazine, internet articles etc. This causes them to possess limited English vocabularies. Therefore, it leads to poor performance among the students such as lack of self- confidence in class presentation and demotivated to communicate in English with others.

Therefore, ‘Battle of the Books’ programme was organized to facilitate students in ESL reading in the same time to improve their reading techniques. The main focus was to promote reading habits among the students, hoping that they will enjoy reading English materials. This programme consisted two different activities; Reading Bingo and Jeopardize. All the activities in the programme mainly focused on individual and peer reading. There are four departments comprised of different courses involved in this programme.

1.1 Objectives of the Study

This study addresses the following objectives of the study:

1) To investigate whether ‘Battle of the Books’ programme give significant difference on performance of pre-test and post-test scores among semester 1 students of Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan.

2) To identify significant difference between Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities in

‘Battle of the Books’ programme.

1.2 Research Questions

1) Does ‘Battle of the Books’ programme give significant difference on performance of pre- test and post-test scores among semester 1 students of Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan?

2) Is there any significant difference between Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities in

‘Battle of the Books’ programme?

2. Literature Review

Reading is a crucial skill that need to be acquired by ESL students as an indicator of English language mastery. It brings some significant benefits to students; it enhances them with good writing styles and advanced grammar (Krashen, 1993); and, reading enriches students with various vocabularies that could help them in ESL speaking. Chen, Maarof & Md Yunus (2017) highlighted that to comprehend the text well, students are required to use their background knowledge or schemata, apart from possessing motivation and interest

Reading skill could be difficult to L2 students based on issues in reading process; such as, difficulties in comprehending texts, lack of reading attention, memorization problem and limited English phonics (Dhanapal, C., 2019). In addition, the cultural background is one of the challenges to ESL reading among Malaysian students. They are driven by examination- oriented learning process, having limited opportunities to communicate in English and dealing with language learning anxiety. (Adi Kasuma & Ai Lin Tan, 2019). Besides, Ali & Razali (2019) supported that it was seemingly found that the ESL teachers tend to focus only selected reading strategies during the reading class without trying to apply other strategies. These, therefore, hinder students’ motivation and interest from reading in ESL.

Upon highlighting these issues, few strategies have been introduced such as skimming and scanning, inferencing and critical thinking, metacognitive are taught to the students in ESL classes. Besides, integrating higher order thinking skills (HOTS) in ESL reading has shown good sign in capturing students’ interest in reading (Yoke, Haniza, Rohani & Siti Nuur-Ila, 2015). This is also supported by Din, Swanto & Alsaqqaf (2017) that the use of eThesaurus in ESL reading was positively perceived by Malaysian students. The innovation facilitated them to acquire reading comprehension better in terms of enriching their vocabularies. The recent study on reading activities using Facebook among Malaysian university students (Adi Kasuma

& Ain Lin Tan, 2019) also showed the effectiveness in utilising Facebook as a medium to attract students to read more in English. In addition, peer reading technique using technological tool such as iPads helps to motivate students to read more English materials apart from improving their reading skill (Ciullo et. al., 2016)

3. Methodology

3.1 Research Design

This research used quantitative research design. Cresswell (2014) stated that quantitative research is conducted to explain the relationship among variables. Quantitative research design requires researcher to analyse the data like comparing groups or related variables using statistical analysis.

Besides, this research also applied the experimental design because it allows the researcher to estimate the effect of an experimental treatment. It involved in the form of one group pretest- posttest design using quantitative approach.

The research was conducted in Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan, Johor. The samples were 40 students from 4 different departments which are Mechanical Engineering Department, Electrical Engineering Department, Tourism & Hospitality Department and also Design & Visual Communication Department. Each activity involved 20 students respectively.

3.2 Research Instruments

The questions for each activity in the programme were constructed in three forms; pre-test, treatment (activities), post-test. They were four different activities conducted in ‘Battle of the Book’ programme; they are Reading Bingo and Jeopardize. It took around two days to run the tests since there were two different activities.

The pre-test was given before each activity started. The purpose was to test students’ general knowledge about the topic. The activities were based on thematic approach. It focused on reading techniques such as skimming and scanning. There were 20 questions, a combination of open and close-ended questions for the pre-test and post test. All the questions were based on the reading materials from the activities such as Readers Digest, newspaper and short stories. The scores were then recorded by the researcher. After the treatment that took around one hour, the post-test was done in order to recapitulate and test students’ overall reading comprehension. Then, the scores will be recorded again. The scores made up to 20 marks and were transferred to 100%.

Based on the table, the researcher compared the scores of pre-test and post test of every participant. From there, it was concluded that, the higher the score level, the higher level of effectiveness of activities.

Table 3.1: Level of Scores (20 marks) for Activities in ‘Battle of the Book’ Programme

Score Level Example 0.00 – 6.99 Low 7.00 – 14.99 Medium 15.00 – 20.00 High

Table 3.2: Level of Scores (100%) for Activities in ‘Battle of the Book’ Programme

No Criteria Score

1 Excellent 96 – 100

2 Very Good 86 – 95

3 Good 76 – 85

4 Fairly Good 66 – 75

5 Fair 56 – 65

6 Poor 46 – 55

7 Very Poor < 45

4. Findings

The findings were based on the data collected on 40 students who took the pre test and post test for Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities.

4.1 The Classification of Students’ Pre-test and Post- test Scores in Reading Bingo Activity

The tables below show the distribution of frequency and percentage of final score of pre-test and post test in Reading Bingo Activities. There were 20 students participated in Reading Bingo activity.

Table 4.1: The Distribution of Frequency and Percentage Score of Reading Bingo in Pre-test

No Criteria Score Frequency Percentage

1 Excellent 96 – 100 0 0%

2 Very Good 86 – 95 0 0%

3 Good 76 – 85 1 5%

4 Fairly Good 66 – 75 4 20%

5 Fair 56 – 65 13 65%

6 Poor 46 – 55 2 10%

7 Very Poor < 45 0 0%

Total 20 100%

Table 4.1 shows the percentage of score for Reading Bingo activity pre-test. There were 20 students, where 13 (65%) students obtained fair score (56-65). Meanwhile, four students (20%) and one student (5%) were under fairly good and good score respectively. Finally, a tenth (2) of the students were in poor scores (46-55). It explains that students’ score before the treatment were average and low.

Table 4.1.1: The Distribution of Frequency and Percentage Score of Reading Bingo in Post test

No Criteria Score Frequency Percentage

1 Excellent 96 – 100 0 0%

2 Very Good 86 – 95 3 15%

3 Good 76 – 85 9 45%

4 Fairly Good 66 – 75 5 25%

5 Fair 56 – 65 3 15%

6 Poor 46 – 55 0 0%

7 Very Poor < 45 0 0%

Total 20 100%

Table 4.1.1 shows the percentage of score for Reading Bingo activity post test. The activity consists of 20 students, where it shows improvement in scores among the participants. There were three students (15%) obtained very good score (86-95). Meanwhile, almost a half (45%) of the students gained good score between 76 to 85. Five students attained fairly good scores between 66-75. Only 3 (15%) students were in fair scores (56-65).

4.2 The Classification of Students’ Pre-test and Post test Scores in Jeopardize Activity The tables below show the distribution of frequency and percentage of final score of pre-test and post-test in Jeopardize activity. There were 20 students participated in Jeopardize activity.

Table 4.2: The Distribution of Frequency and Percentage Score of Jeopardize in pre-test

No Criteria Score Frequency Percentage

1 Excellent 96 – 100 0 0%

2 Very Good 86 – 95 0 0%

3 Good 76 – 85 0 0%

4 Fairly Good 66 – 75 9 45%

5 Fair 56 – 65 9 45%

6 Poor 46 – 55 2 10%

7 Very Poor < 45 0 0%

Total 20 100%

Table 4.2 shows the percentage of score for pre-test after participating Jeopardize activity. Out of 20 students, similar number of students shared the same percentage, 45%, fairly good and fair scores. Meanwhile, only a tenth of the students (2) fell under poor score. There were no good scores in the post test for this activity. It indicates that students’ scores were under average category.

Table 4.2.1: The Distribution of Frequency and Percentage Score of Jeopardize in Post test

No Criteria Score Frequency Percentage

1 Excellent 96 – 100 0 0%

2 Very Good 86 – 95 1 5%

3 Good 76 – 85 9 45%

4 Fairly Good 66 – 75 8 40%

5 Fair 56 – 65 2 10%

6 Poor 46 – 55 0 0%

7 Very Poor < 45 0 0%

Total 20 100%

Table 4.2.1 above explains on the percentage score for Jeopardize activity in post test. It can be clearly seen that only one student (5%) gained very good score (86-95) and followed by good scores, 9 students. Fairly good scores (66-75) accounts for 40% or eight students.

Meanwhile, only two students or a tenth obtained fair scores ranges from 56 to 65. Nobody remained under poor scores. As a conclusion, there were gradual improvement in student scores.

4.3 Discussion

The paired sample t-test was used to identify the significant score between Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities. The t-test results are shown below as follow:

Table 4.3: The Distribution of t-test for Reading Bingo Activity

Table 4.3.1: The Distribution of t-test for Jeopardize Activity

Groups mean SD t sig

Pre-test 65.9 5.8 0.309 .000

Post test 74.1 6.6 0.309

The first research question of the study was “Does ‘Battle of the Books’ programme give significant difference on performance of pre-test and post-test scores among semester 1 students of Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan?; As it is shown in Table 4.3, the result for post test of Reading Bingo activity (mean=74.6) performed better than the pre-test (mean=61.3) after receiving the treatment (Reading Bingo activity). Similarly, based from table 4.3.1, the result for post test Jeopardize activity (mean=74.1) compared to pre-test (mean=65.9) indicates that students improved better after the activity (Jeopardize). From these two analyses, there are significant difference between pre-test and post test performance. Therefore, they answer the research question (RQ1).

Table 4.3.2: The Distribution of t-test for Reading Bingo and Jeopardize Activity

Groups mean SD t sig

Reading Bingo 74.6 8.4 -0.351 .363

Jeopardise 74.1 6.6 -0.351

Meanwhile, for the second research question of the study (RQ2): “Is there any significant difference between Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activities in ‘Battle of the Books’

programme”; As the p-value is 0.363, there is no significant difference between the reading Bingo and Jeopardize activity because p> 0.05 (0.363). It verifies the fact that Reading Bingo and Jeopardy activity have the similar effects on the students’ scores.

5. Conclusions and Suggestions

Based from the data analysis which were analysed previously, it can be seen that there is a significant difference between pre-test and post test scores for each activity in Battle of the Book Programme; Reading Bingo and Jeopardize. It highlights that this reading programme is effective to help students in terms of gaining good reading techniques apart of obtaining better reading comprehension. However, there is no significant difference between the Reading Bingo and Jeopardize activity, which shows that both activities are comparable and equally effective on the students’ reading performance.

There were some limitations arouse during the study. The time constraints were the main highlight in this study. Students were given short time period to implement the activities due to pack schedule. Therefore, it is recommended that longer time period should be extended to fully maximise their time for reading. Besides, it is suggested that the reading materials can be varied more by not limiting to only specific type of materials such as reading materials in social media, literatures such as poems, academic reading materials. Finally, the programme director could diversify the thematic reading approach for the activities so that they could gain their knowledge for reading comprehension extensively.

Groups mean SD t sig

Pre-test 61.3 6.9 0.349 .000

Post test 74.6 8.4 0.349

References

Adi Kasuma, S. A., & Ai Lin Tan, D. (2019). ESL Reading Activities on Facebook among Malaysian University Students. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 27(1).

Ali, A. M., & Razali, A. B. (2019). A Review of Studies on Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies in Teaching Reading Comprehension for ESL/EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 12(6), 94-111.

Anderson, N. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75, 460-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/329495

Chen, L. L., Yunus, M. M., & Maarof, N. (2017). Factors affecting ESL reading comprehension of Malaysian secondary school students. In International Conference on Education (ICE2) 2018: Education and Innovation in Science in the Digital Era (pp. 542-547).

Ciullo, S., Lembke, E., Carlisle, A., Thomas, C., Goodwin, M., & Judd, L. (2016).

Implementation of evidence-based literacy practices in middle school response to intervention: An observation study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39(1), 44-57.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714566120

Cohen, A. (1990). Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. Boston:

Heinle & Heinle Publishers

Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed-method Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Dhanapal, C. (2019). Reading Difficulties Faced By ESL Undergraduate Learners: The Case Of King Khalid University In Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 2(6), 331-336.

Din, W. A., Swanto, S., & Alsaqqaf, A. A. H. (2017). The Employment of eThesaurus to Facilitate Reading Comprehension among Malaysian ESL Students. In 2017 International Conference on Education and Technology (2017 ICEduTech). Atlantis Press.

Ghosh, A. (2012). Awareness of reading strategy use of Indian ESL students and the relationship with reading comprehension achievement.

Goh, J. X. (2019). A study on the use of different reading strategies to read English text in Malaysian ESL classroom (Doctoral dissertation, UTAR).

Krashen, S. (1993). The Power of Reading: Insights from the Research. Englewood, CO:

Libraries Unlimited.

Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup, & S.

J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 219-309).

Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/0872071774.13

Yoke, S. K., Hasan, N. H., Jangga, R., & Kamal, S. N. I. M. (2015). Innovating with HOTS for the ESL Reading Class. English Language Teaching, 8(8), 10-17.

Zhang, L. J., & Annul, S. (2008). The role of vocabulary in reading comprehension: The case of secondary school students learning English in Singapore. RELC Journal: A Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 39, 51-76