Name : Rofilah Qurrotu’aini Salsabila

Class/ Reg. Number : A 2018 / 185300100

Subject : TEFL Workshop

1. A. Top-down Model.

The concept of this strategy is about guessing the meaning of the target
reading material. Goodman (1971) firstly comment on top-down model as “a
psycholinguistic guessing game’, by showing that the readers predict text’s
meaning primarily based on their existing or background knowledge.
Moreover, this model is applied when readers interpret assumptions and draw
inference or they need to find out the overall purpose of the text or to get main
ideas of the text (Nuttall, 1996). In addition, the top-down model is recognized
under cognitive process that the processing of a text begins in the mind of the
reader. The meaning which is retrieved from the reader’s knowledge,
expectation, assumption, and questions to the text is reconfirmed by
identifying the letters and words appeared on the text (Aebersold & Field,
1997). In the other words, the readers activate their experience and
background or world knowledge in order to understand the text. Correll &
Eisterhold (1998) also discussed that reader’s prediction and background
knowledge play a vital role in this model. Using as a tool to predict the text,
construct a goal of reading, and self-monitor, this model is very much like the
general strategies (Block, 1986) or global strategies (Sheorey & Mokhtari,
2001). In addition, this model is still considered as concept-driven and
dependent upon what the reader brings to the text which could be their own
intelligence and experience to understand a text (Brown, 2007b; Abbott, 2010;
and Lui, 2010).

Top-down processing of language happens when someone uses background

information to predict the meaning of language they are going to listen to or
read. Rather than relying first on the actual words or sounds (bottom up),
they develop expectations about what they will hear or read, and confirm or
reject these as they listen or read. Top-down processing is thought to be an
effective way of processing language; it makes the most of what the person
brings to the situation.
Example
Asking learners to predict what a newspaper article might be about from the
headline or first sentence will encourage them to use top-down processing on
the article.

In the classroom
Learners can be encouraged to use both bottom-up and top-down strategies
to help them understand a text. For example in a reading comprehension
learners use their knowledge of the genre to predict what will be in the text
(top down), and their understanding of affixation to guess meaning (bottom
up).

B. Bottom-up Model.

This model is declared as a decoding process of constructing meaning at the

“bottom”, e.g. letters or words to the larger units at “the top”, e.g. phrases,
clauses, and intersentential linkages (Carrell & Eistenhold, 1983). Readers
begin with decoding letters, words, and syntactic features of a text, then they
build textual meaning. They work mainly from the text but ignore reader’s prior
or background knowledge. Another idea towards this model is from Dole et al.
(1991). They stated that this model refers to a single-direction part-to-whole
processing of a written or printed text. It is also known as “decoding”.
Moreover, this model is defined as assembling the reading jigsaw of text by
correcting the right pieces together. By putting reading puzzle or individual
units of text together, it helps constructing an overall interpretation of the text
(Celce-Murcia, 2001). Moreover, Brown (2007b) defined bottom-up model as
using metal data-processing device to put linguistic signal (letters
morphemes, syllables, words, phrases, and discourse makers) in order. In
addition, Eunjeo (2009) comment that this model is defined as “focusing on
individual words, pausing for grammatical difficulties and repeated readings.
Finally, Dambacher (2010) discussed that bottom-up model processes
account for elaboration of sensory signals and therefore reflect operations
giving rise to the retrieval of a word’s mental representation.
 Bottom-up processing happens when someone tries to understand language
by looking at individual meanings or grammatical characteristics of the most
basic units of the text, (e.g. sounds for a listening or words for a reading), and
moves from these to trying to understand the whole text. Bottom-up
processing is not thought to be a very efficient way to approach a text initially,
and is often contrasted with top-down processing, which is thought to be more
efficient.

Example
Asking learners to read aloud may encourage bottom-up processing because
they focus on word forms, not meaning.

In the classroom
Learners can be encouraged to use both bottom-up and top-down strategies
to help them understand a text. For example in a reading comprehension
learners use their knowledge of the genre to predict what will be in the text
(top-down), and their understanding of affixation to guess meaning (bottom-
up).

Although, Bottom-up is still used by the teachers for teaching and learning,
Top-down reading strategy is assumed more effecient to improve reading
strategy rather than bottom-up because it argues that readers bring prior
knowledge and experience to the text and that they continue to read as long
as the text confirms their expectations, while Bottom-up model suggests that a
reader reads the words, and sentences and looks at the organization of the
text (without relating it to experience or prior knowledge) in order to construct
meaning from what was written in the text-meaning depends both on
knowledge of vocabulary and syntax.  Therefore, it can reduce the frustation
of the students bacause of the seaching of dictionary and syntax. There are at
least two advantages why most of the teachers prefer using the top-down to
bottom-up reading strategy: easy to use and encourage the students to read
to learn.

2. In basic terms, humans communicate through a process

of encoding and decoding. The encoder is the person who develops and
 sends the message. The encoder must determine how the message will be
received by the audience, and make adjustments so the message is received
the way they want it to be received.

Encoding is the process of turning thoughts into communication. The

encoder uses a ‘medium’ to send the message — a phone call, email, text
message, face-to-face meeting, or other communication tool. The level of
conscious thought that goes into encoding messages may vary. The encoder
should also take into account any ‘noise’ that might interfere with their
message, such as other messages, distractions, or influences.

The audience then ‘decodes’, or interprets, the message for

themselves. Decoding is the process of turning communication into thoughts.
For example, you may realize you’re hungry and encode the following
message to send to your roommate: “I’m hungry. Do you want to get pizza
tonight?” As your roommate receives the message, they decode your
communication and turn it back into thoughts to make meaning.

3. An important principle of communicative language teaching reading in new

normal era is the use of authentic materials. A great deal of research has
been conducted on how to integrate such materials along with pedagogically
welldesigned reading tasks into the foreign language curriculum. In principal,
the approach to task and lesson design of Internet-based reading materials
should follow the same guidelines suggested in the literature on reading
methodology. Needless to say, the open-ended structure of the Internet limits
the possibility of a text-specific and interactive teacher-student approach.
Furthermore, the use of the Internet as a learning environment requires some
technological skills and knowledge. This raises the question on how to take
full advantage of the vast amount of Internet resources. In particular, what
technological skills are necessary and how can learning tasks be designed
that make Internet-based resources accessible to the learners.

An effective way to engage foreign language (FL) students in an

activeinteractive reading process is also to have them write about what they
read. Writing about one's reading experience seems to facilitate reading
comprehension and leads to the discovery of the different factors that
intervene in the reading process (Martínez-Lage, 1995; Zamel, 1992).
Warshauer (1997) recommends that computer-mediated communication
activities be experiential and goal-oriented, and that tasks be consistent with
principles of situated learning (i.e., that learners engage in meaningful tasks
and solve meaningful problems that are of interest to the learners and can
also be applied in multiple contexts). Such principles in activity design also
need to apply to the use and exploration of Internet-based resources.

Considering the variety of factors (e.g., curricular goals, pedagogical issues,

learner needs, student proficiency levels, the hypertext-based structure of the
Internet, technological and design issues) that influence the decision whether
and how to use the Internet, I propose three different types of lesson designs
that lend themselves well to integrate Internet-based resources into a foreign
language learning curriculum. The three lesson designs are based on the
degree of teacher and student involvement in determining the content (choice
and selection of topics and Internet-based materials), the scope of the
learning environment (number of different sources: sites or links), and the
learning processes and tasks (ways of exploring the reading materials). In
other words, the design of such lessons may distinguish themselves ranging
from being very teacher-centered, where teachers take a central role in
controlling content and learning tasks (see Appendix A), to being very
student-centered. In the latter, the teacher' roles vary from being a facilitator,
designer, and guide (see Appendix B) to a resource person (see Appendix C).
Moving from a teacher-centered to a student-centered approach assigns the
learners an increasing role in taking charge of their own learning. It promotes
the development of learner independence and autonomy, and thus follows
principles of communicative language learning (Omaggio, 2001).

The reading lesson in Appendix A demonstrates an example of a teacher-

centered approach to providing reading instruction online. The reading
activities and materials of this approach are comparable to the computer as
an online electronic workbook. The teacher prescreens and selects reading
materials or cultural readings from Internet-based or other resources, designs
comprehension activities, and makes them available through his/her Web
page. The pedagogical strength of this approach lies in the textspecific
approach to exploring authentic cultural (textual or images) resources. By pre-
selecting and preparing the readings, the instructor tailors the contents and
tasks to the students' proficiency level. He/she scaffolds the reading tasks by
guiding the learners through the texts. The tasks are designed to support the
reader's comprehension process focusing on textual, linguistic and cultural
features.

The approach to reading instruction in the example above is nothing new, and
one might ask the question, what are the actual advantages of the Internet-
based reading activities over the reading activities based on authentic printed
resources. There are benefits that are unquestionable to both instructors and
students, which make such application worthwhile. Reading is a silent process
that is best done individually. The learners get to explore authentic reading
materials outside of class at their own pace. This frees up classroom time that
can be spent more effectively getting students involved in communicative
language learning activities. Furthermore, depending on the instructional
program design, students' answers may be automatically tallied and
forwarded to the instructor. The strongest argument, however, for providing
online reading might be that the online environment allows one to take
advantage of a vast amount of images and the hypermedia functions to attach
text and images to a particular text.

An Internet-based approach to project learning also lends itself well to the

teaching of specific skills required to conduct research. For example, Gaspar
(1998) used McKenzie's (1995) "Iterative Research Cycle" consisting of the
different stages of the research process with her advanced language
students. These stages are

• Questioning: Decide what information is lacking or what problem needs

solving.
• Planning: Develop a strategy to efficiently locate valid information.
• Gathering: Locate the best sources, Internet and other, and collect needed
information.
 • Sifting: Select from what was found that information most pertinent to the
research question.
• Synthesizing: Sort the information into a meaningful pattern.
• Evaluating: Assess progress in answering the res

https://ramdanidely.wordpress.com/writing-academic/essay-top-down-strategy/

https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/bottom

https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/top-down

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/266996266.pdf

https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/commbusprofcdn/chapter/1-2/

https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/25178/06_03_brandl.pdf