EFFECTIVENESS OF URDU DAILY READING LESSON PLAN (DRLP) IN

PAKISTAN READING PROJECT (PRP) SELECTED SCHOOLS OF

DISTRICT MUZAFFARABAD.

Muneer Ahmed

2010-Sck-12030

Session 2015-17

Institute of Education

Faculty of Arts

University of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Muzaffarabad, Pakistan.

UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD

Synopsis for M.Phil. Degree in Education.

Title: EFFECTIVENESS OF URDU DAILY READING LESSON PLAN

(DRLP) IN PAKISTAN READING PROJECT (PRP) SELECTED

SCHOOLS OF DISTRICT MUZAFFARABAD.

Name of Student: Muneer Ahmed

Registration Number: 2010-Sck-12030

Date of Admission: February 2016

Date of Initiation: April 2017

Probable Duration: One Year

Semester: 5th

Supervisor Dr. Batool Atta _____________________

_____________________

Coordinator

Institute of Education

______________________ ________________________

Dean Director

Faculty of Arts Advanced Studies & Research

 ABSTRACT

Pakistan Reading Project was launched in January 2015 which has a worth of

160 million dollars with the aim to improve Urdu reading skill of the students of

grade I and II in public schools across Pakistan. Teaching Learning Materials (TLMs)

like, Daily Reading Lesson plan (DRLP), work books for students, flash cards, story

books and tablets were provided along with face to face training. Focus of training

and these TLMs is on 5 reading components: Phonics, Phonemic awareness,

Vocabulary, Fluency, and Comprehension. Print concept and Writing for learning

reading were also integrated for better reading. This study aims at exploring the

effectiveness of Daily Reading Lesson plan (DRLP) for the improvement of grade II

students in District Muzaffarabad AJ&K.

The study is mixed method in nature and explanatory sequential research

design will be used in this study. Through stratified sampling, Schools will be divided

in two strata of male and female. Sample size for this study will be 240 students of

grade II for reading test, 40 PRP trained teachers for structured observation and 20

teachers for open-ended observation. Data will be collected through administering a

reading tests, structured classroom observation and open-ended interview in Pakistan

Reading Project selected schools of Muzaffarabad District.

 INTRODUCTION

It is a general observation that the reading is neither taught nor learnt as a skill

in Pakistani classrooms. It is mostly a teacher who reads the text of Urdu. Students are

provided less opportunities to read passages. Still traditional methods are being used

in classrooms for teaching reading. These teaching methods are normally teacher-

centred. Teachers also do not have necessary training for teaching reading. So, the

poor teaching and learning process leads students memorising things– words and

sentences. Therefore, it is very important to involve students in activities during

teaching and learning process and different techniques should be used to enhance their

reading skill. Reading components including Phonics, Phonemic Awareness,

Vocabulary, Fluency and Comprehension must be part of teaching reading through

different activities at primary level. This area of language learning, therefore, needs

special attention from the teachers for a meaningful education at primary level.

The aim of this study is to examine the current Urdu reading situation of grade

II students in public schools of District Muzaffarabad which is the capital of state of

AJ&K. It has 4 constituencies and 25 union councils. There are 746 schools (549

Primary, 120 Middle, 77 High and Higher secondary schools) in District

Muzaffarabad. Out of them 413 are boys’ and 333 are girls’ schools (Education

Department AJ&K, 2017). 374 out of 746 schools were selected by PRP to enhance

the reading skill of the students of grade I and II in District Muzaffarabad as per

criteria to have at least 20 students in both grade I and II for the selection of a school

in this project (PRP, 2015).

Reading is one of the four basic skills of a language. In Pakistan 53% students

of grade 5 and 64% of grade III students are unable to read simple Urdu sentences

from text book of grade II (ASER, 2013).

 According to internal assessment by PRP (2018) in 2013 and 2017 through

EGRA assessment tools, shows a minor change in reading ability in district

Muzaffarabad as per performance standard of National Reading Standard.

Pakistan Reading Project is a five-year project and funded by USAID which is

being implemented with the collaboration of the International Rescue Committee

(IRC). IRC has three partners; Creative Associates International, World Learning, and

Institute of Rural Management (IRM) to implement this project. The goal of this

project is to support the provincial and regional departments of education in 3

provinces and 4 regions to improve reading skills of children at primary level in grade

I and II. After completion, the project anticipates to get in touch with at least 3.2

million grade I and II students across 3 provinces; Sindh, Baluchistan and Khyber

Pakhtoonkhwah and 4 territories including Islamabad, FATA, Gilgit-Baltistan and

Azad Jammu & Kashmir. The project is focusing on three interconnected

components; policy reform, community engagement and teacher education (PRP,

2015).

PRP trained teachers were provided Teaching Learning Materials (TLMs) like

workbooks for the students, Flash cards (large and small), Story Books, Levelled

Readers, syllable charts and tablet as an allied material. When, which and how this

material could be used, was pre-determined in the DRLP. There were 144 lessons in

DRLP for grade II and 30-35 minutes were allocated for each lesson. PRP trained

teachers were supposed to use this material as per instructions and sequence. Daily

Reading Lesson Plan was comprised of seven steps (PRP, 2015). DRLP is consisted

0f six steps: preparation and introduction, Letter, Basic word and sound, Sky writing,

Words building, Text reading, Sight Words and Evaluation. During DRLP teachers
ask the comprehension questions about every step and provide constructive feedback

to the students.

According to Dr. Atsh Durani et al, (2015) focus of the DRLP is on 7 reading

components. There are 5 main reading components named Phonemic awareness,

Phonics, Vocabulary, Comprehension and Fluency. Two integrated components are

also included named Print concept and Writing for learning reading.

1.2. Objectives of the Study

The objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of Daily Reading

Lesson Plan (DRLP) for the Improvement of Urdu Reading Skill of Grade II students

In District Muzaffarabad AJ&K. Sub-objectives are to:

i. Explore the scores of grade II students in Urdu reading in PRP selected

schools of district Muzaffarabad AJ&K

ii. Compare the scores of girls and boys of grade II in Urdu reading in PRP

selected schools of district Muzaffarabad AJ&K

iii. Explore the implementation of DRLP by the teachers in PRP selected

schools of district Muzaffarabad AJ&K

1.3. Research Questions

How effective is Urdu Daily Reading Lesson Plan (DRLP) implemented by

trained teachers of Pakistan Reading Project in grade II in District Muzaffarabad

AJK? Sub-questions are:

i. what are the scores of grade II students in Urdu reading in PRP selected

schools of district Muzaffarabad AJ&K?

ii. What is the difference in scores of girls and boys of grade II in Urdu

reading in PRP selected schools of district Muzaffarabad AJ&K?

 iii. How DRLP is implemented by the teachers in PRP selected schools of

district Muzaffarabad AJ&K?

1.4. Delimitations and Limitations

Delimitations of this study are suggesting the directions for future

investigations. The sample used in this investigation included only students in grade

II. Future investigations may need to expand it to grade I.

Due to limited time and resources, 50 PRP beneficiary schools in District

Muzaffarabad will be selected through stratified sampling. 1 PRP trained teacher and

6 students from each school will be selected.

1.5. Significance of the Study

For the betterment of professional development of teachers, it is important that

some steps must be taken to spot the problems then deal with them to improve the

current situation. This case study aims to do so. Hence, for the country as a whole,

this study will be of great importance and interest. In addition, this study may also

provide an opportunity for the policy makers of such projects to reflect on the

effectiveness of these CPD programs in future. Last but not the least, the practitioners

may also reflect on the findings of the study as how their instruction is helping

students to improve their reading skill.

 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Conceptual Development of Reading as a skill

It is significant to define reading and closely examine what problems students

face while reading text in Urdu for the right focus in the teaching of reading. Reading

cannot be defined in a word. Educationist have defined and analysed it in different

ways. It varies from person to person depending on the person’s different attitude and

aims towards printed words. Hence, the definition and meaning of reading depend,

mostly, on the text, textual contents and on the purpose of the reader. It also depends

on the behaviour of the readers towards the text, on the experience and schemata of

the reader and on the reading materials. Academic success and fluency in reading has

strong relation (Dogan, Ogut & Kim, 2015). The students perform well in in all

subjects with good reading skill (Cooper, Moore, Powers, Cleveland & Greenberg,

2014). Instructions for teaching reading by the teacher play a vital role in student’s

progress.

Describing reading, Ransom (1978) says that reading is a conversation

between the reader and the writer. He further explains that like anyone who is talking,

“the writer conveys his message to another person by writing.” Widdowson (1979)

has similar opinion that reading is a procedure of receiving linguistic information

through print. Some experts say that reading is a theoretical and intellectual process

through print, and this process of reading is explanatory. Nuttall (2006) explains

reading as the procedure of “getting the nearest message of the writer out of the text.”
Williams (1996) defines that reading is looking at and understanding a written text.

Goodman (1967) states reading as a guessing game. Patricia Carrel et al. (1988)

defines that reading is a process of interaction where readers use their contextual

knowledge and previous experiences to have a complete understanding of the text.

According to Moynihan (1969), reading is “constantly uses sequence of events,

compare-contrast, causation and equivalence.”

According to Rauch and Weinstein (2002), “Reading can be improved but

there are no shortcuts to overcome all reading problems. Frankly, improving reading

is a hard job. When one reads, he will read better, and if one reads better, he will read

faster. Robinson (2003) explains that, in the language of the text and someone’s

mental perception, there should be a logical link. The language should be suitable and

supportable to the mental level of the reader and should enable the reader to explore

the inner worlds which turn into real. To understand a text these ‘inner worlds’ of the

reader, the text and their structure play a crucial role. Students should be able to

explore the world of the text without using the conventional approaches of

comprehension. They should involve themselves in negotiation with other students.

The higher they take interest in the activity, the higher they sustain the interest in the

text (Greenwood, 1998). The foremost requirement for reading is the ability to

identify the written word. The message that contains a text and perception are

secondary. Therefore, the reading is called two-fold processes. Rauch and Weinstein

(2002) define reading as a dynamic and attentive thinking development and in this

process the reader tries to match the writer’s thought for thought. Urquhart and Weir

(1998) have presented a very precise and adequate definition of reading with the

observations and analysation of the definition of others. They believe that reading “is
the process of reception and interpretation of information encoded in language form

by means of the print.

Dechant (2000) described that a complete reading’ comprises of four steps: to

recognize the written symbols, to understand the meaning or message of the text,

response of the reader after finishing reading and incorporation of the whole

procedure. Hepresents a precise description of this process. Identification of words

comes first: it includes visual discrimination, recoding and even pronunciation of the

word. This can be enhanced through configuration, phonic, morphemic and context

cues.

2.2 Purposes of Reading

Reading has versatile purposes. Variety of reasons is behind the reading

books. People usually read for comprehension of the text, answering the questions,

acquiring grammar rules, improvement in language, solving the language related

problems, for pleasure, information, to know how to use a tool, to be familiarised with

other people, culture and community, and understanding the message of the text

through decoding etc.

2.2.1 Reading for Pleasure

When we talk about non-academic or private reading in his article, “reading

for pleasure”, Doff (1997) comments that “the only reason behind reading is because

we enjoy or wish to enjoy it” because entire range and shades of feeling is covered by

pleasure, therefore, one should read for what s/he likes to meet the expectations of

pleasure. Eagleton (1996) shares the similar point of view that people read poems,

novels etc. because ‘these types of texts are delightful to them’, and it is also very

suitable foreign language/s. When we read more and more the degree of pleasure
would be high and it would result in better comprehension, increasing vocabulary and

eventually it is helpful to develop the reading skills.

Reading is enjoyable when reader gets pleasure. Reader stops the reading if

s/he did not get pleasure in reading. The objective of a reading program should be to

facilitate the students to enjoy or feel at ease with reading (Nuttall, 2006). Rosenblatt

(2008) called reading for pleasure as ‘aesthetic reading’ because it satisfies the souls

and offer readers with aesthetic pleasure.

2.2.2 Reading for Meaning

It is significant, and at the same time, mandatory to decide that students either

read for improving language or for development of understanding power of meaning a

text express. Nuttall (2006) states that students should know how to read for meaning

because improvement of the language is a by-product of reading. Shahidullah (1995)

has a similar point of view that reading primarily related to the meaning of the

embedded text in the language. The main objective of teaching reading is to explore

the meaning of a text because language skills enhances naturally when reading skill is

enhanced. Primarily, meaning of a text is a general thought of the entire text as Nuttall

(2006) states that meaning can be derived from single morpheme of a text and till

conveying the full message of the text it develops step by step.

2.2.3 Reading for Information

Rosenblatt (2008) called reading for information as efferent reading because

most of the people read to get information from text. Written text is a permanent

source of information which has more effect than any other media and reading is used

as a larger source of decoding the message from sources. Grellet (1996) describes that

people usually read books to get something or to do something with the acquired

information. Nuttall (2006) also endorses this point of view that by reading, our aim is
to get something from the text. In the modern era of information technology, people

spent their most of the time to get and store information of current affairs of the world

and information related to business, culture and politics etc. Newspaper, magazines

and internet are major media sources and we need special skills for reading from these

sources.

2.3 Types of Reading

Reading can be divided in categories like Academic, non-academic, intensive

and extensive reading.

2.3.1 Academic Reading

Students have to appear in different types of examination during their whole

academic life. Comprehension questions on given passages are crucial for students

because comprehension means to take out the necessary information from text as

much as possible (Grellet, 1996). And this is possible only when students read the

passage carefully and effectively. If students are able to derive the entire meaning

from the text, he can answer all type of questions.

According to Sekara (2008) most important reading is reading not for pleasure

but for information which is researched, organized and documented according to the

rules of academic discourse. RAP (Reading for Academic Purpose) program is

suggested by him for effective reading to enable the students to be familiarized with

frequently used syntactic sequences and words in academic discourse. Understanding

the syntax and semantics of academic language is included in academic reading.

2.3.2 Non-academic Reading

Non-academic reading is as important as academic reading. Main objective of

academic reading is to bind students complete the syllabus and to pass the
examination. But there are more flexibility and choices in non-academic reading for

readers to choose books according to their interest. It results in developing their

language because of wide reading because it is the useful way to master the language

(Nuttall, 2006).

King (1997) is of the opinion that in non-academic reading, reader has the

choice choose the books according to their taste and it is the appropriate period for

gaining the right information or being pleasured.

2.3.3 Intensive Reading

Intensive reading is used to read shorter texts to get précised information.

Grellet (1996) called it as an activity of accuracy which emphasized in detailed

reading. Bright and McGregor (2000) comment on intensive reading that it is about

the part of a whole lesson that is divided properly. If we stop dwell on a word in any

text, then it is intensive reading. Intensive reading can be influenced by the teacher

because he is the part of the whole process and these activities are performed in the

classrooms at the larger scale. This type of reading is also called local reading.

According to Nuttall (2006), objective of the intensive reading is not only to

understand what a text means but also to know how the meaning is produced and if

‘what’ is important then ‘how’ is also as important. The primary objective of intensive

reading is to enable students to use the learned activities with other text as well. Barry

(2002) prefers intensive reading rather than extensive reading. He recommended that

students should make the reading meditative and personal. He emphasized on closed

reading because nothing interesting can happen more than this.

2.3.4 Extensive Reading

Williams (2001) defines extensive reading as, fast reading of the huge text.

Extensive reading, according to Davis (1995), is an additional class library idea,

where students get the freedom of time and they are encouraged to use this material

for pleasure. They can read as many books as they can at their own level. Nuttall

(2006) is of the opinion that this type of reading is a private activity. The reader

indulged himself in a private world of reading of his/her own interest. He claimed two

reasons for extensive reading that (a) it is the effective way to enhance the reading

skill of the students and (b) it not only creates a suitable environment to the students

but also provide them pleasure. This results in creating interest and enables students to

master the reading skill.

Nation (1997) describes that in extensive reading students see the similar

words in repetition which results in vocabulary building. This approach also provides

opportunity to use context of the text. According to Williams (2001), pre-reading,

while-reading and post-reading strategies can be used for effective reading. Nation

(1997) also suggests the following strategies: predicting, guessing word meaning,

reading for specific information, reading for general comprehension, scanning,

skimming, inferring from texts, interpreting texts, surveying text organisation, and

critically evaluating texts.

2.4. Components of Reading

Bonita Grossen (1997) points out seven elements to consider for better reading

comprehension.

1. Phonemic awareness should be given at early stage to the kids.

2. Teach sound-spellings

3. Teach common and complex sounds systematically

4. Demonstrate how to pronounce sounds

5. Use connected and decodable text to practice.

 6. Provide opportunities to students to read stories

7. Be balanced and do not mix

Core reading abilities, according to Grossen (2000) are: Phonemic awareness,

alphabetic principle, sound-spelling correspondence, decoding ability, spelling,

vocabulary, writing skill and comprehension skills. Dr Atsh Durani et al, (2015)

claims that there are 5 basic reading components: phonemic awareness, Phonics,

comprehension, vocabulary and fluency. Print concept and writing for learning

reading is also integrated components according to Dr Atsh Durani et al, (2015).

2.4.1. Phonemic Awareness

Phonemic awareness means, to listen the sounds of letters, to

differentiate and point out them in a word. e.g. ( ) and ( ) starts with

same sound but ends with different sound. If this skill is not developed in a

child, entire reading process will suffer. According to Allington (2007), 80-85%

children acquire phonemic awareness in middle of first grade. Phonemic

awareness plays a vital role in reading. Phonemic awareness is something

different from phonics. It takes place before reading skill through listening oral

language and then relating it to the printed text. Basically, phonological skills

do not need print and can be enhanced through practices and instructions

(Schuele, 2008). Reading aloud to the children is one of the best technique for

phonemic awareness. McKnight (2001) explains that read aloud creates pleasure

for the children and this pre-literacy skill must be developed in children

otherwise they will struggle with reading later. Read aloud needs no expensive

programs, even in rural areas with lack of resources can use this technique
easily to uplift the phonological awareness. Phonemic awareness helps in

decoding words and the whole reading process (Schuele, 2008).

2.4.2 Phonics

Phonics is also called alphabetic principle. This is the second reading

pillar. In phonics, sounds are related with letter patterns. Maston (1996) defines

that phonics is a code-oriented technique. Teaching through phonics is a

traditional way and it works with most of the students. This technique for

language teaching was widely used and questioned in 1960 and as a language

component is very crucial. Rhyming, read aloud, choral reading and peer

reading can be used to enhance phonics skill (Dr Atsh Durani et al, 2015).

2.4.3 Vocabulary

Words which are used in any language are called ‘vocabulary’. It is not

only the knowledge of words but also to understand the meanings of those

words and the ability to use them appropriately (Dr Atsh Durani et al, 2015).

Children at early age have a limited vocabulary but as they grew up, their

vocabulary grows rapidly each year. For better learning, children must be

introduced to new vocabulary each day. Lack of vocabulary leads to reading

problems. There are many resources other than classroom to enhance

vocabulary like television and radio listening and engaging young children with

adults for discussion.

2.4.4 Comprehension

The ability to understand and analyse a text after listening or reading is

called comprehension. To measure comprehension of a child, open and close-

ended questions can be asked. There are four strategies to improve

comprehension in a child (Parker and Hurry, 2007). These are: asking questions
about the text, prediction, clarification and summarization of the text. This

technique needs consistency in classroom to enable the students to comprehend

the text inn a better way. Reading the text with accuracy and fluency,

motivations for comprehension and background knowledge are the key elements

for the strategies which improve reading comprehension (Chenoweth, 2009).

Frequent use of classroom activities before, during and after reading plays a

vital role to comprehend a text.

2.4.5 Fluency

Fluency means reading with appropriate speed, accuracy and expressions

(Dr Atsh Durani et al, 2015). A weak reader is very choppy. (e.g. “the” – pause

– “ball” – pause – “is” – pause – “on” – pause “the” – pause – “table”). A

beginner reader is definitely is a choppy reader but with the development of

reading skills, he becomes a fluent reader. Fluency as component of reading

requires the reader to read aloud and practice. Reading in pairs and small groups

are better techniques to enhance fluency in reading. Normally students develop

fluency by practicing but it is very difficult to master reading for struggling

students. Read aloud by the child or teacher who master the reading is very

fruitful the struggling children. Children could master the fluency only when

they master the other four components of the reading.

Dr Atsh Durani et al, (2015) also considers print concept and writing as

integrated reading skills. Where print concept is Knowing how text works for

reading and writing can also be considered a means of learning. This type of

writing is called “writing to learn.” Writing touches on most of the other

components skills of reading: print concept, phonics, vocabulary and

comprehension.
2.5. Approaches to Reading

It depends on the size of a text, allotted time and purpose of reading that which

approach best fit. Bright and McGregor (2000) present some basics to consider:

i. Not each and every passage have worth for selection. It matters al lot that how

attractive the text of a passage is to be selected.

ii. How much time devoted for the text is also important.

iii. What is the capacity of the class? Whether they have the ability to respond or

not.

iv. How much minimum responses are essential etc.

Following are some widely accepted approaches for teaching reading.

2.5.1 Top-down Approach

Top-down approach was suggested by Goodman (1996). In this approach, the

reader left the irrelevant chunks in a passage and this is previously formed plan

(Urquhart and Weir, 1998). Nuttall’s (2006) reflection on this approach is that we

make predictions based on our intelligence and experience. This intelligence and

experience is based on the schemata. Seeing the purpose of a text or getting the gist of

the writer’s views, we use these schemata. This will help us to guess in next step.

This process is dominated by the expectations of the reader. The readers come

with their own point of view and experiences, so, this affect the interpretation of a

text. Reader’s schemata are associated to this approach, so, many researchers and

thinkers advocate this approach. Nuttall (2006) describes its importance that this

approach enables the readers to understand the writer’s purpose. After identifying the

purpose, reader use this outline to understand the other difficult parts of the text. This

approach also gives us sense to understand the perspectives of others.

2.5.2 Bottom-up Approach

Gough (1972) proposed the bottom-up approach. Starting with stimulus like,

the text or bits of text, is its prominent feature. Reader predicts meaning by marking

on the page: identifying letters and words and sentence structure in this approach. He

uses this procedure intentionally if he is confused with the reading at initial stage.

Contextual meaning plays vital role because reader does not depend on background

knowledge. This is the main difference between top-down and bottom-up approaches.

The process in bottom-up approach is text-driven while top-down approach relies on

reader’s personal experience and knowledge. Top-down approach is reader-driven as

compare to text-driven bottom-up approach.

Some argue bottom-up by saying that graphemes form word, then word

become sentence and at last these sentences form a paragraph (Gough, 1972). Others

of the opinion about top-down that in this approach readers begin with general idea

which they called a schema that what is the derivation source of this text and relate it

to the previous knowledge or experience (Goodman 1967).

2.5.3 Interactive Approach

According to experts, top-down or bottom-up approaches could not work

alone. Therefore, they suggest the blend of both of the approaches which they called

interactive approach. Readers shift from one approach to another as per requirement

of the reading strategies. Nuttall (2006) says that a reader changes its focus

consistently by using top-down approach to guess the most appropriate meaning, then

shifts to the bottom-up to extract what exactly the writer wants to say. Carrell (2008)

is more specific about interactive approach. She is of the opinion to use both top-

down and bottom-up approaches in different situations with different objectives. This

reading approach is based on several sources (Rumelhart, 1980). So, reading is not a
one-way process. In interactive process, both reader and text takes part as per due

shares in reading. Carrell and Eisterhold (1983) explains that during reading,

interaction happens when reader and text interact. It is concluded that reaching to the

appropriate meaning does not depend only on what is in the text because text itself

does not provide meanings (Carrel, 2008). Both, clues in the text and reader’s

schemata are essential for better comprehension.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Research Method and Design

The purpose of this study IS to explore the effectiveness of Urdu Daily

Reading Lesson Plan (DRLP) for Grade II students in District Muzaffarabad AJ&K.

Mixed method will be adopted as a research method as it provides better

understanding of a research problem (Creswell, 2015).

The Explanatory Sequential Research Design will be used for current study

which consists of first collecting quantitative and then qualitative data to elaborate the

quantitative results. The rationale for this design is that quantitative data provide a

general picture of a problem and qualitative data help to explain the problem in depth

(Creswell and Plano, 2015).

3.2. Population

Population for this study are 4320 students of grade II and 578 PRP trained

teachers in district Muzaffarabad AJ&K (PRP, 2018).

3.3. Sample

Through stratified sampling, participants will be divided in two strata of male

and female. 240 students of grade II for reading test, 40 PRP trained teachers for
structured observation and 20 teachers for open ended interviews will be the

participant of this study.

3.4. Data Collection Tools

After closely examining the nature and objectives of the study, following tools

have been selected for data collection.

a) Document Review

b) A test of reading skills

c) Structured classroom observation

d) Open-ended interviews
 REFERENCES

ASER. (2013-2016). Education in Pakistan. District directory. Retrieved

from http://aser.com.pk/districtdirectory/

Allington, R.L. (2007). Overselling Phonics. Reading Today, 15, 15-16.

Retrieved from ERIC database.

Allington, R.L. (2002). What I’ve learned about effective reading instruction

from a decade of studying exemplary elementary classroom teachers.

The Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 740-747.

Assali, M. A., & Kushkiev, P. (2016). New approaches to teacher effectiveness.

Arab World English Journal, 7(1), 18-31.

Barrett-Mynes, J, Morgan, M.J. & Tehano, D. (2010). Supporting struggling

readers: Using interactive read-aloud and graphic organizers. Voices of

Practitioners, 13, 1-12.

Barry, P. (2002). Beginning Theory an Introduction to Literal and Cultural

Theory. New York: Manchester University Press.

Brenna, B, & Chen, S. (2013). Teaching recommendations for reading-

education components of B.Ed. program. Journal of Reading Education,

38(2), 10-17.
Bright, J.A. and McGregor, G.P. (2000). Teaching Second Language. London:

Longman.

Creemers, B., & Kyriakides, L. (2013). Using the dynamic model of educational

effectiveness to identify stages of effective teaching: An introduction to

the special issue. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 48(2), 4-10.

Creswell, J. (2015). Mixed Methods Design. In Educational Research (pp. 534-

575). Noida, U.P: Pearson India

Creswell, J., & Plano, C.V. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods

Research (2nd Ed). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Carrell, P.L. (1988). Interactive Text Processing: Implications for second

language classrooms. In Carrell, P. L. et al. (ed.), pp. 239-59. op. cit.

Carrell, P. L. and Eisterhold. (1983). “Schema theory and Language reading

pedagogy”. Language Quarterly, 18. pp. 553-75.

Coady, J. (1979). “A psycholinguistic model of the ESL reader” in Reading in a

Second Language (ed.). Mackay, R. et. al. Rowley: Newbury House.

Clark, C. (2010) Young people’s reading and home resources: Findings from

our national survey. Literacy Today, 63, 28-30.

Cuevas, J., Irving, M., and Russell, L. (2014). Applied cognition: Testing the

effects of independent silent reading on secondary students’

achievement and attribution. Reading Psychology 35(2):127-159.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). Want to close the achievement gap? American

Educator, 38(4). 14-18.

Davis, C. (1995). “Extensive reading: an expensive extravagance?” Second

Language Journal. vol. 49. p. 329.

Dechant, E.V. (1969). Improving the Teaching of Reading. New Delhi:

Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited.

Derrida, J. (1976). Of Grammatology. Translated by Chakravorty, G. John

Hopkins University.

Doff, A. (1997). Trainers Handbook: A training course for teachers of

Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Cambridge Low

Price Edition).

Dogan, E., Ogut, B., & Kim, Y. Y. (2015). Early childhood reading skills and

proficiency. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Durrani, D. A. (2015). Trainees Modules: 1-18. Islamabad: Islamabad

Publishers

Eagleton, T. (1996). Literary Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell

Publishers Ltd.

Directorate of Education. (2018) Education Management Information System.

Muzaffarabad: EMIS

Goodman, K. S. (1996). “Reading: a psycholinguistic guessing game”. Journal

of the Reading Specialist. vol: 6, pp. 126-35.

Greenwood, J. (1998). Class Readers. Hongkong: Oxford University Press.

Grellet, F. (1996). Developing Reading Skills: A practical guide to reading

comprehension exercises. Cambridge University Press.

Gough, P.B. (1972). One Second of Reading. In Kavonagh, J.F. and Mattingly,

I.G. (ed.). Language by Ear and by Eye. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Gulamhussein, A. (2013). The core of professional development. American

School Board Journal, 200(7), 36-37.

King, A.H. (1997). Some Principles of Advanced Reading Instruction.

Language Teaching Journal, vol: xxxiii, pp. 38-45. London: Headley

Brothers Ltd.

Klemenčič, E., Mirazchiyski, P. V., & Sandoval-Hernández, A. (2014). Parental

involvement in school activities and student reading achievement-

Theoretical perspectives and PIRLS 2011 findings. Solsko Polje,

25(3/4), 117-130.

Matson, B. (1996). Whole language or phonics? Teachers and researchers find

the middle ground most fertile. The great reading debates. Harvard

Education Letter, 12(2), 1-6.

McKnight, C.S., Lee, S.W., & Schowengerdt, R.V. (2001). Effects of specific

strategy training on phonemic awareness and reading aloud with pre-

schoolers: A comparison study.

Moynihan, W.T., Lee, D.W. and Weil, H. Jr. (1969). Reading Writing and

Rewriting. J.B. Lippincott Company.

Nancy Clair Ed.D. & Lawrence, M. (2013) Teacher Inquiry Group Modules.

Islamabad.

Nation, P. (1997). The language learning benefits of extensive reading. The

Language Teacher. vol. 21. pp. 13-16.

Newton, J. & Winches, B. (2013). How did they maximize learning for all of

those students? Reading Improvement, 50(2), 71-74

Nuttall, C. (2006). Teaching Reading Skills in a language. Oxford:

Heinemann.

Ong, J. (2014). A tension between theory and practice: Shared reading program.

Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 14(2), 20-33.

Oostdam, R., Blok, H., & Boendermaker, C. (2015) Effects of individualised

and small-group guided oral reading interventions on reading skills and

reading attitude of poor readers in grades 2–4, Research Papers in

Education, 30(4), 427-450. doi:10.1080/02671522.2014.953195

Pakistan Reading Project (2015). World Learning. Muzaffarabad: WL

Publication.

Pakistan Reading Project (2015). Who we are and how we work. Retrieved

from http://www.pakreading.org/about-us/

Pakistan Reading Project (2018). World Learning. Muzaffarabad: EGRA

Publication.

Parker, M., & Hurry, J. (2007). Teachers’ use of questioning and modelling

comprehension skills in primary classrooms. Educational Review, 59(3),

299-314..

Ransom, G.A. (1978). Preparing to Teach Reading. Boston: Little, Brown and

Company.

Rauch, S.J. and Weinstein, A.B. (2002). Mastering Reading Skills. New York:

D. Van Nostrand Company.

Robinson, F. (2003). Effective Reading. New York: Harper and Row.

Shaw, H. (1959). Expository Reading for Writers. New York: Harper and

Brothers Publishers.

Robb, L. (2013). New angles on differentiating reading instruction: Five best

practices that deserve a new chapter in the common core era. The NERA

Journal, 49(1), 13-21.

Rosenblatt, L. (2008). The Reader, the Text, the Poem. Carbondale, iii: Southern

University Press.
Ross, T. (2016). The differential effects of parental involvement on high school

completion and postsecondary attendance. Education Policy Analysis

Archives, 24(30/31), 1-38. doi:10.14507/epaa.v24.2030

Rumelhart, D.E. (1980). Schemata: the building blocks of cognition. In Spiro,

R.J. et al. (ed.). pp. 123-56. London: Longman.

Scheule, C.M. & Boudreau, D. (2008). Phonological awareness intervention:

Beyond the basics. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools,

1(39), 3-20.

Sekara, A.T. (2008). An Approach to Reading for Academic Purposes. A

Forum

Anthology. Volume: IV, pp. 121-126.

Senokossof, G.W. (2013). Using picture books with adolescent readers to

enhance literacy instruction. Reading Horizons, 52(3), 211-232.

Shahidullah, M. (1995). “Product and Process View of Reading and Their

Pedagogical Implications”. Rajshahi University Studies. Part-A. Vol. 23-

24. pp. 209-230.

Toth, A. (2013). Not just for after lunch: Accelerating vocabulary growth during

read-aloud. The Reading Teacher, 67(3), 203-207.

doi:10.1002/TRTR.1193

Urquhart, S. and Weir, C. (1998). Reading in a Second Language: Process,

Product and Practice. London: Longman.

Widdowson, H. G. (1979). “The Process and Purpose of Reading”. In H. G.

Widdowson (ed.) Explorations in Applied Linguistics. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Wong, H.T. & Wong, R.T. (2015). The Classroom Management Handbook.

Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications, Inc.

APPENDIX A (1) Students’ copy
APPENDIX A (2) RESEARCHER’S COPY
 APPENDIX (B) OBSERVATION SHEET

During Daily Reading Lesson Plan Delivery of Urdu in Grade II

1 Name (optional)
2 Name of Institution
3 Academic qualification
4 Professional qualification
5 Experience
6 Gender
7 Date of Observation

Statements Yes No
Part I. Preparation/Introduction
1 Did teacher have all necessary Teaching Learning Material?
2 Did teacher confirm that students are ready and interested?
3 Did teacher hand over the work books to the students?
4 Did teacher introduce the topic of the day?

Part II. Letter-keyword-sound

Yes No
5 Did teacher write down the letter, keyword and its sound on
white/blackboard?
6 Did teacher display the flash card for keyword?
7 Did teacher hear the students practicing word, keyword and its
sound?
8 Did teacher use the recognition section in workbook for students
and assess the students’ work while rotating in the class?

Part III Sky Writing

Yes No
9 Did teacher write down the letter large enough that all students see
 the letter clearly for sky writing practice?
10 Did teacher demonstrate the model sky writing by straightening
his hand and with the help of fingers?
11 Did teacher observe the students while practicing sky writing and
help the students for accurate practice?
12 Did teacher help the students in tracing and writing the letter on
their workbooks?

Part IV Text Reading

Yes No
13 Did teacher write down the text on the black/white board?
14 Did teacher trace the text with pointer while reading the text?
15 Did teacher use tap out technique at least once to pronounce new
words?
16 Did teacher demonstrate reading fluency aspects during text
reading; (accuracy, speed and expressions)?

Part V Word Work

Yes No
17 Did teacher use the word work activity for word building?
18 Did teacher help students to use project provided workbook?
19 Did teacher use project provide flash cards?
20 Did teacher complete the word work activity given in work
book and evaluate the students’ work?

Part VI Sight Words

Yes No
21 Did teacher isolate the letters of a word to practice a sight
word?
22 Did teacher practice sight word at least thrice?
23 Did teacher ask the students to identify the sight word in the
text?
24 Did teacher complete the sight word activity given in work
book and evaluate the students’ work?
Part VII Evaluation Activity
Yes No
25 Did teacher use project’s provided big books/levelled readers
during the lesson?
26 If yes, did the teacher use the read aloud techniques?
27 Did teacher assess the effectiveness of his lesson at the end?
28 Did teacher use assess the learning of the students during
lesson?
29 Did teacher use project provided lesson plan to teach reading
during the lesson?
30 Did teacher provide constructive feedback on the student’s
answers during the lesson?