Republic of the Philippines

Southern Leyte State University – Main Campus

San Roque, Sogod, Southern Leyte

Office of the Graduate School

Abstracted Reading
Submitted by:

ZOSIMO A. PIZON, JR. MAT-ENGLISH

 READING COMPREHENSION AND STRATEGY AWARENESS OF GRADE 11 ENGLISH
SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS

Introduction

In recent years, there has been an increased focus on reading instruction in primary,

secondary and higher education (Lei 2010).The literature has shown that comprehension

strategy instruction, including multiple reading strategies, have been justified in being

beneficial to helping learners become strategic readers and improve their reading

comprehension (Klapwijk 2012; Medina 2011; Fan 2010; Antoniou & Souvignier 2007) .

Thus, it is necessary to provide learners with a reading strategy instruction which focuses on

teaching reading strategies that can help them become strategic readers. Strategic reading,

according to Alfassi (2010) requires that learners intentionally engage in planned actions

under their control, in the manner that proficient readers do when they encounter difficulty

in comprehending a text. Alfassi further points out that those strategic readers must become

cognisant of their performance limitations, intentionally weigh their options and wilfully

execute compensatory procedures. Thus, reading strategies instruction is directed towards

teaching learners a repertoire of reading strategies that will allow them to develop a sense of

conscious control of their cognitive processes.

Body

In a South African context, the need for a reading strategy instruction should be seen

against the poor reading performance of the learners at primary, high school and tertiary

level. According to Pretorius (2002), reading is a powerful learning tool, a means of

constructing meaning and acquiring new knowledge. Moreover, reading is the cornerstone of

instruction for all learners regardless of their ability level because it sets the foundation for

future progress and success in virtually all other facets of life (Scott 2010; Luckner & Handley
2008). However, poor reading comprehension is cited as a fundamental feature of academic

underperformance in South Africa (Pretorius 2002; Granville 2001; Dreyer 1998). Many

learners in the high schools demonstrate a low level of strategy knowledge and lack of

metacognitive control (Dreyer 1998; Strydom 1997). According to Nel, Dreyer and Kopper

(2004:95), many South African students enter higher education underprepared for the

reading demands that are placed upon them. Analysing the reading assessment profiles of a

group of first-year university students at Potchefstroom, Nel, Dreyer and Kopper (ibid: 95)

revealed that those students experienced problems across all aspects of the reading process

(i.e. vocabulary, fluency, reading comprehension and reading strategy use). Yet, there is little

evidence to suggest that learners at any level will acquire the reading skills and strategies

that can improve their reading comprehension if they have not been taught (Tannenbaum,

Torgesen &Wagner 2006).

The literature has revealed that awareness and monitoring of one’s comprehension

processes are important aspects of skilled readers (Alexander & Jetton 2000; Makhtari

&Reichard 2002). The same authors further point out that such awareness and monitoring

processes are often referred to in the literature as metacognition, which can be thought of as

the knowledge of the reader’s cognition about reading and the self-control mechanisms they

exercise when monitoring and regulating text comprehension. One of the objectives of the

current study is to explore whether reading strategies awareness is a better predictor of

reading comprehension. The results of a similar study conducted by Ilustre (2011) in the

Philippines showed that amongst the three

Findings.
 In terms of reading strategy use, the results (pre-test) indicated that there were no

statistically significant or practically significant differences between learners in the

experimental and control groups (cf. Table 1).

TABLE 1: The pre-test reading strategy use profile of Grade 11 ESL learners: Experimental

group versus control group.

Specifically, the results of the reading strategy analysis indicated that the learners in

the experimental group and the learners in the control group did not significantly differ in

the use of the strategies at the before-reading, during-reading and after-reading stages. The

post-test results, however, indicated that the learners in the experimental group used certain

strategies statistically (p < 0.05), as well as practically, significantly (small to large effect

sizes), more often than the learners in the control group (cf. Table 2).

TABLE 2: The post-test reading strategy use profile of Grade 11 ESL learners: Experimental

group versus control group.

The post-test results cited in Table 2 revealed an improvement in the frequency of

usage of the reading strategies by the learners in the experimental group. During the pre-

reading stage, the frequency of use of the following reading strategies improved ‘I briefly skim

the text before reading’ (experimental group pre-test – 2.99; post-test – 3.60) and ‘I often look

for how the text is organised and pay attention to headings and sub-headings’ (experimental

group pre-test – 2.55; post-test – 2.98). During reading strategies and after reading strategies

also showed some improvement in terms of the frequency of usage of reading strategies

during those stages.

 The pre-test reading comprehension scores of the Grade 11 ESL learners in the

experimental and control groups indicated that there was not a statistically significant

difference in their mean scores on the reading comprehension test (cf. Table 3).

TABLE 3: The reading comprehension test profile of Grade 11 ESL learners: Experimental

group vs. control group.

The pre-test reading comprehension scores indicated that both experimental and

control groups scores were weak and below 50% (experimental group – 37.53; control group

– 36.73). Their weak reading comprehension may have had a negative effect on their

performance in the language class and also in other content areas. The situation is true if one

considers that reading comprehension has come to be the essence of reading (Tannenbaum,

Torgesen & Wagner 2006), essential not only to academic learning in all subjects areas but

also to professional success and to lifelong learning (Pritchard, Romeo & Muller 1999; Rings

1994; Strydom 1997). An analysis of the post-test reading comprehension scores of Grade 11

ESL learners in the experimental and control groups indicated that learners in the

experimental group achieved statistically significantly (p < 0.05) higher mean scores on the

reading comprehension test in comparison to the Grade 11 ESL learners in the control group

(cf. table 2).

The results of this study indicate that a well-developed reading strategy instruction

programme can have a strong positive effect on the Grade 11 ESL learners’ reading

comprehension and reading strategies development. In other words, the results indicate that

reading strategy instruction can and does make a contribution in increasing the reading

comprehension and reading strategy choice. This finding is consistent with other reported

research (e.g. Van Keer & Verhaeghe 2005; Lau & Chan 2003; Alfassi 1998; Dreyer 1998; Kern

1989).
 The learners in the experimental group improved their performance in the

comprehension test significantly after the intervention, whereas the learners in the control

group did not improve their performance on the comprehension test. Thus, the findings

portray the intervention as a viable method for enhancing the reading comprehension of the

Grade 11 ESL learners. The findings in this study support the previous studies on the effect

of reading strategy instruction on learners’ reading comprehension (Alexander & Jetton

2000; Dale, Duffy, Roehler & Pearson 1991; Glaser 1990; Wittrock 1998).

To determine whether the instruction affected the use of the reading strategies, the

frequencies with which the participants used reading strategies before and after instruction

were compared in both groups. Findings also revealed that explicit instruction in the use of

reading strategies was essential to bring about increased use of reading strategies for

learners in the experimental group. Considering that the more the strategies were used the

better the results for students in the experimental group demonstrated that there was a need

to promote strategy awareness and application in the learning and teaching of the English

language. Specifically, the following reading strategies were utilised more frequently by

learners in the experimental group: I briefly skim the text before reading and I often look for

how the text is organised and pay attention to headings and sub-headings.

These results are congruent with previous research confirming the positive effect of

explicit strategies instruction on reading comprehension achievement (e.g. Li 2010; Cubukcu

2007; Van Keer & Verhaeghe 2005; Pressley et al. 1989). The results of this study also

indicated that the learners’ ability to use reading strategies is the most critical factor

determining their reading comprehension. Thus, the close relationship between strategy use

and reading comprehension provided support for the possibility that educators should

enhance learners’ reading comprehension through explicit reading strategies instruction.

Recommendations

There are a number of practical implications for the above findings and discussion.

The primary goal of reading instruction is to improve learners’ reading comprehension. This

study has revealed that explicit instruction in reading strategies can improve learners’

reading comprehension. Thus, teachers at primary high school and tertiary institutions

should teach learners how to use reading strategies in order to improve their reading

comprehension. The literature has revealed that the situation at tertiary institutions

demands knowledge of reading strategies in order to be successful as learners are exposed

to huge volumes of reading material. The results of this study suggest that explicit instruction

in reading strategies can improve the learners’ reading comprehension. This suggests that

teachers need to design reading strategy instruction that focuses on explicit instruction. The

results of the study have shown that those learners who use a wide range of reading

strategies comprehend the texts they read better than those who use limited reading

strategies. This requires that teachers should help learners identify their reading strategies.

This could be achieved by using reading strategies inventories. Such inventories are likely to

inform the teachers and learners as to which reading strategies learners currently use.

Having that information will assist the teachers in designing reading strategies instruction

that focuses on reading strategies that are new to the learners.

In the above discussion an attempt was made to address the two research questions

on which the study is based. The most important outcome of this study is that the use of

reading strategy instruction and learners’ reading strategy awareness play a significant role

in improving their reading comprehension. In other words, learners who receive strategy

training generally read better than those who do not. As for the relationship between

perceived strategy use and reading comprehension, this study revealed that strategy use did
positively affect reading comprehension. Thus, teachers should assess learners’ awareness of

strategy use, raise awareness of the importance of strategic reading and of the repertoire of

strategies available to aid reading comprehension.

The study further revealed the importance of training students in the use of reading

strategies. The literature has shown that strategic awareness and monitoring of the

comprehension process are critically important aspects of skilled reading. As a result of the

reading strategy instruction, some strategies were utilised significantly more frequently by

learners in the experimental group after the intervention. Thus, this study provided the

English Second Language teachers with a better understanding of the benefits of reading

strategy instruction.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-EFFICACY AND READING PROFICIENCY OF FIRST-

YEAR STUDENTS: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY

Introduction

It has been widely acknowledged that self-efficacy, which is the belief in one’s ability

to successfully perform a task, plays an important role in learning (Amil 2000; Bandura 1986;

Liem, Lau & Nie 2008; Loo & Choy 2013; Pajares 2000; Schunk 1991; Williams & Takaku

2011). Pajares (2000) asserts that a learner’s self-efficacy influences his or her academic

performance. Studies by researchers such as Amil (2000), Hutchison-Green, Follman and

Bodner (2008), Liem et al. (2008), Jones, Paretti, Hein, and Knot (2010), Mizumoto (2012)

and Usher and Pajares (2006), have also shown apositive and significant correlation between

self-efficacy and academic achievement. A number of researchers (e.g. Margolis & McCabe

2004, 2006; Pajares 2006) have pointed out that without sufficiently high beliefs that they

have the ability to succeed, many struggling leaners will not put in the effort necessary to

attain success in academic tasks.

 Although various research studies have emphasised the role of self-efficacy in

learning, its role in relation to reading development has not been widely investigated. This

could be due to the fact that reading researchers and instructors are more concerned about

the explicit, cognitive aspects of reading, such as the use of strategies for comprehension.

Although the use of strategies and other cognitive aspects of reading are acknowledged as

important, other underlying factors such as self-efficacy may be equally important in reading

development. As learning is largely dependent on reading, the relationship between self-

efficacy and reading proficiency should be a high point of focus in education. Yet this is not

the case, as the influence of self-efficacy in reading development has been largely ignored.

In order to shed more light on students’ reading self-efficacy, especially at tertiary

level where reading research is lacking, a study was undertaken with first year university

students to examine the relationship between reading self-efficacy and reading proficiency.

The article reports on this study and argues for the inclusion of self-efficacy development in

reading instruction. First, the concept of self-efficacy is clearly defined, followed by a

discussion of its role in learning and the role it may play in reading development. The study

is then presented and recommendations are made based on the findings.

Body

Bandura (1997:3) defines self-efficacy as the ‘beliefs in one’s capabilities to organise

and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments’. According to him,

the level of self-efficacy will determine whether a task will be initiated and completed. A

learner with high self-efficacy will be motivated to put in more effort, persist longer and

complete a given task. As a result, self-efficacy and motivation are perceived to have a

bidirectional relationship. According to reading researchers (e.g. Grabe & Stoller 2002;

Guthrie & Wigfield 2000) self-efficacy influences motivation, promotes strategy use and

increases learner autonomy. Similarly, reading motivation promotes frequent reading, which
contributes to the use of appropriate reading strategies and high self-efficacy (Guthrie &

Wigfield 2000). Appropriate and well-orchestrated strategy use in reading and learning

increases self-efficacy and motivation, and also contributes to a high level of comprehension

in reading, which may lead to better academic performance. Self-efficacy has been perceived

to emanate from several sources.

Sources of self-efficacy

Self-efficacy is said to develop from four main sources: mastery experiences, vicarious

experiences, social persuasion and emotional arousal (Bandura 1997; Usher & Pajares 2006):

Mastery experience refers to the judgement of competence based on one’s own previous

attainment in a related task. As Bandura (1997:192) explains, success raises mastery

expectations, whereas repeated failures lower them, particularly if the mishap occurs early

in the course of the events. Vicarious experience refers to observations of someone else’s

attainment in a related task (Usher & Pajares 2006).

Bandura (1977) explains that, although this source of self-efficacy is weaker than

mastery experience, in certain contexts, it may play a crucial role. For example, when a

learner is placed in an unfamiliar environment, seeing others perform could raise his or her

efficacy levels. Social persuasion is the feedback, judgements, and appraisals from significant

others about one’s participation in a related task (Usher & Pajares 2006). Bandura (1997)

points out that this source of self-efficacy is not strong enough to make a significant impact

on efficacy beliefs because it does not provide an authentic experiential base. However, in

conjunction with other sources, such as mastery and vicarious experiences, it can have a

greater impact. Bandura (1997:79) explains that ‘it is easier to sustain a sense of efficacy,

especially when struggling with difficulties, if significant others express faith in one’s

capabilities than if they convey doubts’.

 Emotional arousal, which is the emotion or physical sensation (anxiety, fatigue, and

composure) that one experiences whilst performing a particular task, could also contribute

to self-efficacy levels (Usher & Pajares 2006). High emotional arousal such as anxiety can

impede performance. A learning environment with less anxiety and stress is more likely to

promote learning than one with high anxiety and stress.

Quantitative and qualitative studies in several sources of self-efficacy have shown

mastery experiences to have the greatest influence on self-efficacy (Bandura 1997;

Hutchison-Green et al. 2008; Hutchison, Follman, Sumpter & Bodner 2006; Lent, Lopez, &

Bieschke 1991; Lent, Lopez, Brown, & Gore 1996; Phan 2012; Usher & Pajares 2006). The

explanation given by Bandura (1997) is that mastery experience is the most authentic

evidence of one’s ability to succeed. According to Bandura (1997) and Loo and Choy (2013),

an important source of low self-efficacy is previous negative experiences in learning. Thus,

students who have had a poor reading background and poor reading experiences will display

low self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy in learning

In the academic setting, many studies have shown a positive and significant

correlation between self-efficacy and academic achievement. Vogt (2008) conducted a study

involving undergraduate engineering students and found that self-efficacy is a strong

predictor of academic achievement. Loo and Choy (2013) found that self-efficacy sources

correlated with maths achievement, and that mastery experience was found to be the main

predictor of academic achievement in maths. Louise and Mistele (2011) concluded from their

study that self-efficacy is a good predictor of achievement scores in science and maths. Amil

(2000) used ‘A’ level economics students and found positive correlations between self-

efficacy and academic performance. Liem et al. (2008) using high school English scores found
that self-efficacy predicted learners’ English test scores. The influence of self-efficacy on

general academic achievement as well as in specific subject fields has been well-documented.

However, research on self-efficacy in reading is limited.

Self-efficacy in reading

In relation to the definition of self-efficacy, reading self-efficacy could be defined as

the beliefs students have in their ability to read successfully. The few studies conducted on

reading self-efficacy have documented positive correlations between self-efficacy and

reading achievement. Waleff (2010), using intermediate (Grades 4–6) learners in America,

found a positive correlation between students’ self-efficacy for reading and reading

achievement. He found that students’ self-efficacy corresponded with their grade level

reading. In addition, Schunk and Rice (1991) found that using self-efficacy strategies such as

providing students with clear goals for reading tasks and giving feedback on students’

progress in reading increased reading self-efficacy. Templin’s (2011) study with English

Second Language (ESL) learners at the Trident University International (TUI) showed that

self-efficacy sources predicted students’ self-efficacy levels and their English Second

Language (ESL) proficiency. Mills, Pajares, and Herron (2007) also found that university

students’ self-efficacy in French was positively related to their reading proficiency.

In an earlier study, Shell, Murphy, and Bruning (1989) examined undergraduate students in

an American university and found that self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs jointly

accounted for significant variance in students’ reading achievement, with self-efficacy being

the stronger predictor in reading achievement and accounting for significant variance in

writing.

Given the relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement, and self-

efficacy and reading performance documented by various researchers internationally, a

study was conducted on the relationship between self-efficacy and reading achievement at a

South African university. The study set out to determine if such a relationship can be

confirmed with tertiary students in an African context. In addition, the results could be used

in designing reading programmes and arguing for the inclusion of self-efficacy development

in reading instructional programmes. To the best of my knowledge, the relationship between

self-efficacy and reading achievement has not been extensively researched within the African

context in order to persuade educators to seriously consider self-efficacy in reading

instruction. Besides, this kind of study is required in the African context, where a number of

students come from poor social and educational backgrounds, a factor that contributes to

low self-efficacy levels. The findings of this study will indicate the extent to which educators

should incorporate this affective factor in reading instruction.

Findings

As indicated in Table 1, students who spoke English and Afrikaans as a home language

were in the majority in the ‘low risk’ group. In total these students were 779, which is 77% of

the students in the ‘low risk’ group. The ISAL students were in the majority in the ‘high risk’

group with a total of 412, which is 63% of the population in the ‘high risk’ group. The

distribution of students’ home language and their reading proficiency as determined by the

TALL is given in Table 1.

Conclusion and Recommendation

The results suggest that self-efficacy exerts a potentially important affective influence

on students’ reading proficiency. Consideration of this possible influence is necessary for the

creation of effective reading instruction. However, although self-efficacy relates to reading

proficiency, Shell et al. (1989) point out that self-efficacy beliefs by themselves cannot

directly cause reading achievement. Further research is therefore needed to investigate how
self-efficacy beliefs affect the cognitive processes that are causally related to reading

achievement. As a start to this investigation, Schunk and Swartz (1993) have reported from

their studies that self-efficacy is associated with the use of specific reading strategies. Earlier

researchers have pointed out that self-efficacy, presumably, may exert its influence by

affecting motivation (Bandura 1986; Schunk 1991). There is a need to investigate how self-

efficacy relates to measures of motivation and how the motivational measures affect, and are

themselves affected by the strategies used during reading.

USING A TRANSLANGUAGING APPROACH IN TEACHING PARAPHRASING TO ENHANCE

READING COMPREHENSION IN FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS

Introduction

Reading is an important skill required for many academic activities (Hagaman, Casey

& Reid 2012), especially at university level. However, recent assessments of reading skills

locally and internationally show that reading comprehension among students is still of great

concern. In the United States, about a third of Grade 4 pupils are able to read and understand

texts fully (Hagaman et al. 2012). In South Africa, too, a variety of factors contribute to poor

reading comprehension among students. According to Currin and Pretorius (2010), poor

teaching methods at school level is one of the major factors that hinder reading development

in many students. Many of the students who struggle to comprehend texts especially at

university may have attended schools where very little emphasis was placed on reading and

writing in English (Probyn 2006; Taylor & Vinjevold 1999). In addition, many of the students

also find reading in English difficult because it is a second (L2) or third language to them

(Ngcobo 2014).
 When all explanations for poor reading comprehension in especially university

students are considered, there is evidence that reading comprehension is a serious problem

among many students (Underwood & Pearson 2004). These problems stem from inadequate

reading instruction at a very basic level of education. The identification of the problem

certainly means there is a need for teachers to improve their teaching methods in order to

improve students’ reading comprehension skills. Several studies (Brown & Palincsar 1989;

Graham & Bellert 2004; Pressley 2000; Pressley & McCormick 1995) have shown that, in

order for students to understand texts, teachers explicitly need to teach comprehension

skills.

According to Grabe and Stoller (2011), it is not necessary for academic literacy

courses at university to include extensive grammar review; although grammatical errors

should not be ignored as a resource for more advanced comprehension abilities. Rather, it is

suggested that the main idea of the text should be at the heart of L2 reading instruction. Grabe

and Stoller (2011) suggest that the main idea of a text can be understood through class

conversations that encourage identifying and exploring main ideas, as well as building

connections between the text and student background knowledge. In the same sense, L2

students can be assisted to build text structure awareness to enhance their reading

comprehension. Ultimately, students should be encouraged to explain main ideas to each

other in group collaboration activities using their own languages.

The ability to extrapolate and paraphrase main ideas from the text constitutes the

meaning-making process, which is the comprehension process that is required when reading

(King 2007). However, there are different levels of comprehension. Deep comprehension is

achieved when a reader progresses beyond literal comprehension to using the text combined

with prior knowledge to construct understanding. Unfortunately, according to King (2007),

most students rarely gain a deep understanding of the materials they read in their course.
Instead, they settle for shallow knowledge such as listing facts, definitions and other

memorised material. In fact, students need to organise shallow knowledge and go beyond it

by pursuing deep explanations, causes and implications.

King (2007) emphasises the importance of inference during and after reading in

order to enhance understanding. King’s argument comes from the fact that in most cases

writers leave some information implicit in their text, with the assumption that the reader will

infer from the text. Unfortunately, many readers are not able to infer meaning from texts.

This is one reason why most readers cannot move from a shallow understanding of texts to

a deeper understanding.

It is important to note, however, that there is a gap between what research has found

and what is being practised in the classroom. Many students gain university entrance without

the foundational skills required for them to fully read and comprehend texts. This militates

against their success at university.

The purpose of this research is to show how paraphrasing as a strategy can be

combined with a translingual approach to instruct students explicitly on how to read and

comprehend texts.

Body

According to Fisk and Hurst (2003), paraphrasing is an excellent tool for reinforcing

reading skills such as identifying main ideas, finding supporting details and identifying the

author’s details. Hirvela and Du (2013) identify paraphrasing as a principal means by which

students can demonstrate their understanding of texts by capturing the original ideas of the

author using their own words. In as much as

paraphrasing has been identified as a barometer to measure students’ reading

comprehension skills, it is unfortunate that there is a dearth of both pedagogical and research

literature corroborating the importance of using paraphrasing as a tool to enhance reading

comprehension. According to Hyland (2001), a major reason for this scarcity is that

paraphrasing is often subsumed by summary writing.

Hedgecock and Ferries (2009:185) distinguish summarising from paraphrasing by

stating that a summary is always shorter than the original material. A paraphrase is also

written in the student’s own words, but it is a restatement of the original information and is

therefore as long (or longer) than the original material. A summary is based primarily on

main ideas, while a paraphrase includes all details from the text using different words.

According to Yamada (2003), paraphrasing is a process or set of processes in which students

are required to engage in acts such as inferential thinking and decision-making as they

generate meaningful and accurate reconstructions of what they have read.

Paraphrasing is an active learning strategy which helps students to place information

into long-term memory as they move from an understanding level to an active

comprehension level. According to Fisk and Hurst (2003), paraphrasing works very well as a

tool to enhance comprehension because it integrates all modes of communication, i.e.

reading, writing, listening and speaking, which leads to a deeper understanding of the text.

Leamnson (1999) also contends that there is no better way to learn content from a text,

lecture or discussion than to paraphrase. Thus, paraphrasing is an integral tool that is

essential in tackling the reading comprehension challenges faced by students

An important marker of a student’s understanding of a text is the ability to find new

ways to capture the meaning of what was stated in the passage (Hirvela & Du 2013). Research

has shown that many students, especially L2 students, struggle to paraphrase because they
feel that they cannot compete with the experts’ language, therefore they resort to copying

word for word from the text without much comprehension (Hyland 2001). Thus, it is

important to mention the practical ways in which paraphrasing can be used to benefit

students who struggle to comprehend texts. According to Harvey and Goudvis (2000),

paraphrasing can be used during collaborative activities. In fact, when students are allowed

to interact with one another and to challenge each other’s ideas, higher level thinking is the

ultimate result.

As early as the 1990s, Harris and Sipay (1990) discovered that when students are

allowed to express the author’s ideas in their own languages clearly and unambiguously, it

shows that ideas from the texts were understood. Thus, paraphrasing can be used in

multilingual classrooms by allowing students to write ideas from a text in their first language

(L1) as a test for comprehension. Although Harris and Sipay (1990) do not provide a name

for the process of expressing the author’s ideas in one’s language for deeper understanding,

that process is now referred to as translanguaging.

Findings

The purpose of this paper is to affirm that translanguaging can be used as a pedagogic

strategy to enhance comprehension of academic texts. The research uses paraphrasing and

translanguaging as useful tools to gauge comprehension of reading material. The results have

shown the importance of adopting a multilingual approach to language teaching. The fact that

participants in this research were able to produce paraphrases in two languages and retain

meaning in both languages proves that languages can be used interchangeably and fluidly by

students for meaning-making and a deep understanding of texts. It is important to note that

both the Sepedi and Tshivenda paraphrases did not in any way attempt to translate English

to Sepedi or Tshivenda and back to English in order to convey the same meaning. Students
were able to draw their meaning from different languages at their disposal. This proves the

fluidity and interconnectedness of languages, thus affirming the need to transcend language

boundaries (Garcia & Wei 2014; Wei 2016; Makalela 2016) and allow students to utilise all

languages for meaning-making.

Lecturers should consider seriously Makalela’s (2016) call for a multilingual return.

As mentioned before, one of the groups decided to write their paraphrases in Sepedi and

English although the group comprised of members who speak other languages too. Hence,

they were able to coordinate and collaborate harmoniously using all the languages at their

disposal. This proves the need to incorporate the UTP, where multilingual classrooms

become havens of fluid, unbounded and interdependent repertoires through which students

make meaning of the academic material through collaboration (Makalela 2016). The UTP

proves the possibility of a multilingual return where students can be allowed to utilise their

entire linguistic repertoire during collaboration in order to achieve a common goal.

It is important to note that the use of translanguaging provides a ‘haven’ for

multilingual students to negotiate the meaning of English texts. The level of comprehension

displayed by these students confirms Harris and Sipay’s (1990) assertion that when students

are allowed to express what they have read in their own languages (translanguaging) it

suggests that they have understood the text. Thus, I urge all teachers and lecturers to

transcend linguistic boundaries (Wei 2016) and allow the fluidity of languages in their

classrooms to enable meaning-making and deeper understanding of texts. Lecturers must

create an instructional space where translanguaging is nurtured without students having to

suppress their linguistic repertoire (Garcia & Lin 2017). Thus, a classroom where students

manifest and utilise their linguistic repertoires constitutes a ‘haven’ for students to attain a

deeper understanding of the learned material.

 The fact that I, as the lecturer, do not speak all the languages spoken by my students

did not dissuade me from allowing and encouraging students to utilise their linguistic

resources in order to gain a deeper understanding of the text. In order to assist students in

understanding the text, I allowed them to explore their ideas through the linguistic resources

they possess. During class discussion, I relied mostly on students’ interpretation of the title

‘In search of the Holy Grail’ in their languages. This is in line with Garcia and Lin’s (2017) call

for teachers to create space in the classroom for students to utilise features of their linguistic

repertoires as they negotiate meaning. It also concurs with Makalela’s (2016) research during

which he created space for understanding among his multilingual students by allowing them

to use their different language repertoires. In addition, Essien (2010) refers to the

acknowledgement, recognition and utilisation of linguistic metaphors prevalent among

multilingual students as one of the best practices that teachers need to inculcate in their

students.

It can be suggested that students need to be taught the need to infer the meaning of

texts using their relevant linguistic repertoires from an elementary level (Mgijima & Makalela

2016). If students learn to utilise their full linguistic repertoires to grasp the meaning of texts,

they will not struggle when they reach university, because the skill would have been learned

at an early stage of their academic career.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Grounded in the critical post-structural shift paradigm which translanguaging

emanates from, this paper has provided evidence to show the importance of cultivating and

encouraging students to use all the languages at their disposal for meaning-making and a

deeper understanding of texts. Paraphrasing is a tool that can be used together with a

translingual approach to help students grasp the meaning of texts. The results show that
when students are accorded the opportunity to freely utilise the linguistic resources at their

disposal, they are able to comprehend texts. It is also important to mention that although

participants in this research used a translingual approach to help them understand the

article, they eventually were able to produce paraphrases in English that showed that they

had understood the paragraphs that they paraphrased. This confirms that the use of more

than one language enhances understanding as opposed to causing confusion in students’

minds. I, therefore, recommend that lecturers employ a translanguaging strategy in their

classrooms to help students understand texts. I further recommend that lecturers create a

‘haven’ in classrooms by employing translanguaging pedagogy. It is also important for

lecturers to introduce different learning strategies that will help students to understand

texts; this includes the use of translanguaging. Insisting on the monolingual use of English in

the classroom may not solve the problem of poor comprehension among students. Lastly,

further research is recommended to find ways of helping students who insist on using English

only for meaning-making, although they struggle to comprehend English texts.

THE EFFECT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE ESSAY WRITING

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO WHATSAPP

Introduction

Language is a systematic means of communicating ideas using sounds, gestures, signs

or marks. It is the code used to express oneself and communicate with others. Communicating

is to share information, or to share what one knows and to interact with others. It involves a

system of combining words to create meaning. Thus communication involves language, and

language, therefore, remains potentially a communicative medium capable of expressing

ideas and concepts as well as moods, feelings and attitudes (Habermas 1979).
 Language is not merely a tool that helps human beings express thoughts and feelings

but is also a way of becoming civilised. It is an important link in today’s world of globalisation.

Writing is a way of communicating and conveying ideas and feelings from one mind to

another mind. The hallmarks of good writing are the hallmarks of good communication. The

skill of writing is developed through composition writing (Swain 2005). Essay writing forms

a fundamental tool in second language learning. This is evidenced by the highest marks

allocated to the essay (Paper 3) during the examination of English Second Language (ESL)

from Grade 10 to 12 in South Africa’s Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS)

(Department of Basic Education 2015). At the same time development and technological

advancement has seen writing of formal English on the decline and much of this is attributed

to WhatsApp communication.

Writing is an ‘intricate’ and complex task; it is the ‘most difficult of the language

abilities to acquire’ (Allen & Corder 1974:177). Its level of difficulty varies between native

speakers who think in the language being used and non-native speakers who think in their

own native language (Allen & Corder 1974:177). While writing, non-native speakers have, in

general, to think about rules they need to apply; rules that native speakers are supposed to

have automatized Jabeen (2015) asserts that people learn languages when they have

opportunities to understand and work with language in a context that they comprehend and

find interesting.

Alsaawi (2015) states that writing is a method that transfers spoken language from

being heard to being seen and consequently read. In order to represent spoken language in a

written script, a system must be invented and for that reason precisely implemented. Thus,

the formal English writing system is the one that native speakers and second language

learners should strictly follow.

 Jabeen (2015:15) says that English is the predominant foreign language taught in

schools in Europe, South America, Asia and Africa. It is suggested that English is more widely

spoken and written than any other language, even more than Latin has ever been. It is also

suggested that English might now be the first truly global language, being the dominant or

official language in over 60 countries. In South Africa, English is used in education,

administration and mass media. The English language as stated is one of the most widely

spoken languages in the world (Akinwamide 2012). Furthermore, Padilla and McElroy

(2005) as well as Villareal and Van der Horst (2008) state that the labour market demands

that professionals have at least a basic knowledge of the English language to get a job with an

income that ameliorates their socio-economic status. Therefore, if English is used

inappropriately and incorrectly in essays, for example the use of WhatsApp language, it might

pose communication difficulties for the learners who write them and for their educators who

read them.

If learners have a habit of using social media such as WhatsApp language in their day-

to-day writing, then they may not be able to write appropriately in formal job situations.

Roelofse (2013) contends that exposure to new literacies found in new technologies

undoubtedly impacts the way in which second language learners perceive the world.

Furthermore, the amount of contact with these social utilities certainly influences literacy

practices by learners. New technologies do not merely alter the way people live their lives

but it affects the way they think. Moreover, Davies (2012:21) in Roelofse (2013) argues that

‘texts of the new technologies have mutated into complex hybrid systems that have made new

demands on reading and writing, viewing, social exchange, and communication’. Facebook is

no exception in that the use of this social network site requires a multimodal approach of

embedding and combining words and written texts from numerous sites. In the same sense,

the social medium, WhatsApp is perceived by the researchers as having the same
contaminating effect on learners’ essay writing skills. In this regard, social media is a

‘dialogue’ and ‘means [of] engaging with people’ (Coons 2012:44). In support of this

argument Roelofse’s (2013) research emphasises the alterations in written communication

brought about by transformation in electronic media communication in the use of Facebook.

Roelofse collected data from educators to substantiate the argument that there is a significant

and measurable effect of social media and this is articulated in the question: ‘Have you

witnessed any grammatical errors in written work that could be attributed to Facebook-speak?’

Two out of the five educator participants answered “agree” and the remaining three

answered “strongly agree”. When asked to specify, the teachers were given a space to identify

more precisely the kinds of errors found in learners’ work. Teacher N stated that, ‘learners’

language use is so poor that they cannot express themselves. The use of the wrong verb often

changes the meaning of a fact’. Teacher M stated: ‘Students shorten words and sentences.

They don’t start sentences with capitals and forget about punctuation’. Teacher D wrote that

‘spelling and the answering of questions in as short as possible ways with incorrect spelling

was evidenced’. Finally, Teacher P observed that ‘learners like to use abbreviations for certain

words that are commonly used with electronic media such as “u” or “lol”.’

Body

David (2001), Cai (2001) and Dovey (2010) concluded from their study that writing

is an important tool in education and in the working environment, hence it is important that

it is not polluted by social media scripts such as WhatsApp. Social media language generally

pollutes grammar, spelling and sentence construction to name but a few aspects of writing.

Such errors in writing are said to pollute the text. Norrish (1987:7) defines an error as a

systematic deviation when a learner has not learnt something and consistently gets it wrong.

Cunningworthy (1995:87) concurs and adds that errors are systematic deviations from the
norms of the language being learned. These two scholars use the phrase ‘systematic

deviation’ in their definitions of an error which can be interpreted as a deviation that happens

repeatedly. Errors can also be classified as inter-lingual or intra-lingual (Richards & Schmidt

2002:267).

Inter-lingual errors can be identified as transfer errors that result from a learner’s

first language features, for example grammatical, lexical or pragmatic errors. On the other

hand, intra-lingual errors are overgeneralisations (Richards & Schmidt 2002:379) in the

target language, resulting from ignorance of rule restrictions, incomplete applications of

rules, and false concepts hypothesised. Orthography is the correct way of writing a particular

language. The term orthography comes from the Greek language and means ‘correct way of

writing’. The conventional spelling system of a language is therefore part of its orthography.

Orthography is the standardised procedure of a writing system, which includes spelling,

pronunciation, word break and emphasis. Punctuation, word break and emphasis are not

major problems for learners, but spelling is a problem for the majority of learners. In the

English language, spelling plays an important role in the writing process (Franklin 2014).

Languages have either deep or shallow orthographies. If a sentence has incorrectly spelt

words, the meaning and message of the sentence may be distorted. For precise meaning and

precise communication words need to be spelt correctly. Frequent use of wrongly spelt

words in an essay Allaith and Joshi (2011) point out that literacy is appraised not only by

reading and writing accuracy, but also by the correct spelling of words. Spelling mastery

indicates one’s level of education while spelling errors reveal inaccuracy.

Nesamalar, Saratha and Teh (2001) point out that learners’ writing skill deficiencies

are a cause for concern among academics and parents, considering that their writing
component is given higher credit (marks) in school examinations. Writing of essays,

therefore, has to be given more attention so that negative influences such as WhatsApp and

other social media do not impact negatively on the academic writing of learners.

Findings

The effect of WhatsApp language errors on writing was observed in the respondents’

academic essay writing. Respondents wrote sentences using numbers instead of words and

abbreviations. For example, some wrote ‘bf’ (before), ‘2dy’ (today), ‘1tm’ (first time). The

orthographic errors throw light on the social constructivist notion of error analysis, which

suggests that learners bring into the classroom concepts they may be using outside the

classroom, for example on social media and cell phones. As they communicate in an informal

manner on these platforms, the language used on WhatsApp is then internalised and

reproduced by the respondents in their academic essays. Such writing by the respondents

may suggest that they are using WhatsApp social media in their day-to-day life. Their

informal language structures resurface in the formal written work as it did in the essays

analysed for this study. The use of WhatsApp language by the respondents in the formal

written essays made reading, understanding and marking of the work very difficult since the

researcher had to try to decipher what the participant intended to say. Young (2009:56)

states that another way of shortening communication in English is through the use of

‘emoticons’. This is an intriguingly new and still evolving linguistic trend which tends to

delight, annoy or puzzle people as they read a piece of work – as was observed by the

researchers while they were reading the essays analysed for this article.

The negative effects of learners abbreviated writing in academic work, according to

lecturers from the Ghana Academic Affairs Department of the Wa Polytechnic Registry

(2006), were generally: poor (52%), reflected reading problems (33%) and delayed the script
marking process (19%). These issues negate the positive impact of text messaging as

generalised. The use of phone abbreviations in texting also has a negative impact on

grammar, as well as learners’ writing in general (Chang, 2012).

Conclusion

A number of orthographic errors that have resulted from the use of WhatsApp seems

to be predominant in learners’ writing given the technologically advanced era of the 21st

century. This article has shown that in applying error analysis, a number of errors in learners’

writing can be attributed to the influence of WhatsApp messaging. The systematic analysis of

these errors is very important. Error analysis serves as a linguistic analysis and it provides

deep insight into the process of language learning. Error analysis also provides numerous

solutions to various language learning-related problems. The findings of the present study on

WhatsApp errors will empower language teachers as well as course and syllabus designers

in designing teaching and learning materials that will help learners avoid these errors. By

applying WhatsApp error analysis techniques and methodologies to make learners aware of

the errors, educators would be able to make language teaching and learning more effective

and assist learners in producing better written essays.

Recommendations

In the light of the findings of this research, the following recommendations are made:

• English FAL essay writing skills should be taught effectively to learners at all levels of

learning in the classroom. To help learners recognise the modern WhatsApp errors,

learners need to be given well-defined essay writing rules, for example planning, mind

map, paragraphing, introduction, body and conclusion, and some samples of their written
 essays may need to be transcribed and distributed to them for correction and analysis so

that they learn from their mistakes.

• English FAL learners need effective feedback about the WhatsApp errors along with

appropriate remedial processes to curb the errors and monitor the recurring process as a

conscious process to minimise errors. English language continues to carry the status of

‘required to pass’ in our schools, colleges, universities and the corporate workplace

worldwide. From the data collected and analysed for this study, the level of English

language proficiency of the learners may be said to be far from satisfactory. Correct

writing of English ought to be a priority for learners and educators.

• The Department of Basic Education should convene essay writing workshops at

departmental level and at school level to educate and encourage teachers on how to teach

and mark essays in order to help avoid these errors. English teachers in schools should be

encouraged and empowered since their job description requires highly proficient English

and proficiency in the conventions of formal written English in order to teach learners.

Online References

Cekiso, Madoda (2009). “Reading Comprehension and Strategy Awareness of Grade 11 English
Second Language Learners.” Reading & Writing,
https://rw.org.za/index.php/rw/article/view/23/31.

Boakye, N. A. N. Y. (2005). The relationship between self-efficacy and reading proficiency of first-
year students: An exploratory study. Retrieved November 28, 2019 from
https://rw.org.za/index.php/rw/article/view/52/128.

Hungwe, V. (2019, June 27). Using a translanguaging approach in teaching paraphrasing to

enhance reading comprehension in first-year students. Retrieved December 5, 2019, from
https://rw.org.za/index.php/rw/article/view/216/520.

Songxaba, L., & Sincuba, L. (2019, July 30). The effect of social media on English second language
essay writing with special reference to WhatsApp. Retrieved December 2, 2019, from
https://rw.org.za/index.php/rw/article/view/179/535.