1.

0 Title

Applying comprehension strategies through shared reading of stories

to enhance pupils’ reading comprehension

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Background of the study

Rapid globalization has led to a huge interest in second language (L2)

learning. As a result, research on L2 reading has made great strides and

broken many boundaries (Koda, 2004). Many new strategies have been put

forth to combat various problems faced by readers.

Reading in its most general form is an interactive process that involves

the reader and the text. Reading comprehension, or the understanding

gained from the reading text is the end goal of all reading. However, there

are many levels of comprehending text: starting from a surface or literal

understanding which leads to a deeper understanding which involves

inferring, analyzing and synthesizing (Cohen & Cowen, 2008).

According to Cooper, Robinson, Slansky and Kiger (2015), reading

consists of two processes which work together – decoding and

comprehension. Decoding is the process in which written language is turned

into verbal or inner speech and is needed, but not enough, for reading.

1
Reading only occurs when there is comprehension which is shown by the

reader being able to interact with the text and construct meaning.

With that in mind, although a study by UNESCO in 2010 showed a

high literacy rate among adults in Malaysia, it only shows the ability of

readers to decode the text or understand it in a shallow manner. However,

decoding is only the first step in deep comprehension. It is completely

possible for two different readers to both accurately decode the same text but

then show different levels of comprehension and meaning making. This is

most likely due to the way the reading process is approached by them.

Theories of the reading process are usually presented in the form of three

models – bottom-up, top-down and interactive (Manzo & Manzo, 1990).

2.2 Context

I am a 23-year-old female majoring in Teaching of English as a

Second Language (TESL). I teach English in primary school. I have taught in

3 schools for Practicum thus far.

The first school that I taught in was located in the urban area of

Petaling Jaya. The pupils that I taught were Year 5 and of mixed proficiency

but most of them were towards high proficiency. There were 26 of them in the

class and they sat in 5 groups with the banquet seating arrangement as

2
shown in Figure 1 (Schaefer, 2008). Some of them were confident in

conversing in English but there were also a few that were shy to speak. Most

of them were able to read and write quite well.

Figure 1. Banquet seating arrangement of pupils in my 1st school. Reprinted

from Rob's rules: Sitting pretty, by R. Schaefer, 2008, Retrieved from

[Link]

The second school that I taught in was located slightly out of the town.

The pupils were Year 4 with medium proficiency, towards the lower end.

There were 36 pupils in the class and they sat in the conventional classroom

seating arrangement as shown in Figure 2 (Conference Centres, 2016). Very

few of them could speak English, but they were willing to attempt. They faced

problems in answering reading comprehension questions based on the text,

as well as writing grammatically correct sentences.

3
Figure 2. Conventional classroom seating arrangement of pupils in my 2 nd

school. Reprinted from Choosing the right seating arrangement for your

event, by Conference Centres, 2016, Retrieved from

[Link]

arrangement-for-your-event

The current school that I am teaching in is located in an industrial area

in Shah Alam and there are 2 sessions – morning session for the Year 4, 5,

and 6 whereas Year 1, 2 and 3 are in afternoon session. The pupils that I am

teaching are in Year 2 and have mixed proficiency. Most of them have the

inclination towards low proficiency but there are some which are more

proficient in English. There are 42 pupils in the classroom and their seating

arrangement is the conventional classroom setting with all of them facing the

whiteboard, the same as in Figure 2. The pupils can speak words and

phrases in English but not whole sentences. However, they are able to read

and write quite well.

4
 2.3 Reflection on teaching and learning

In the first school that I taught in, the class was mixed proficiency. So,

the pupils had different proficiency level. It has a bit difficult to cater to all of

them, as shown below:

“This has been a recurring struggle of mine, to design materials

that are not too easy for the higher proficiency pupils but at the same

time not too difficult for the lower proficiency pupils. I have decided

that from now on, I will prepare enrichment materials for all the

lessons that I have planned.”

Journal entry from 30 June 2015

This was especially obvious during the reading class. Some of the

pupils would have finished their worksheet and waiting for the others

whereas some of them would still be struggling. I also noticed that those who

finished their worksheet the latest were also the ones who frequently

answered wrongly. Lower proficiency pupils struggle to understand reading

texts because reading comprehension is linked closely to proficiency (Lee,

2013).

In the second school that I taught, a large majority of the pupils had

low language proficiency. This ended up hindering some of the activities that

5
I wanted to carry out with them. The following journal extract shows the

struggle I faced when trying to play Charades with them:

“...they did not know how to play Charades... I think their low

language proficiency also limits them when they are trying to guess. I

mimed the action of reading and I heard one of them asking his friend

how to say “reading” in English. His friend, in return, struggled to find

the word to tell him [in English].”

Journal entry from 29 January 2016

In addition, most of the pupils struggled to answer worksheets based

on their reading text week after week although I consistently thought of new

ways to teach them. In addition, when I asked them questions verbally, they

were able to answer. But when faced with a worksheet, most of them failed to

answer. When faced with a reading text, they might not have been motivated

to try to understand, as oral communication can be more effective than

written (Ferraro & Palmer, 1999).

3.0 Research focus

3.1 Identification of research focus

6
 Numerous studies have been carried out on reading comprehension in

Malaysia, especially for the primary school level. However, there is still much

to be covered, due to the gap between the idea of reading comprehension

and what is actually showcased by pupils.

One of the hallmarks of reading comprehension is that the reader is

able to think and go beyond the information provided (Ibrahim Abu Shihab,

2011). Readers must be able to actively interpret the text based on their

knowledge of the language and the world. Comprehension does not happen

unless connections are drawn by readers between what they read and their

background knowledge (Tankersley, 2005). Therefore, critical thinking is

needed when reading to make sense of the text as readers need to integrate

what they have read with their background knowledge. Comprehension

happens when readers are able to draw inferences, link ideas coherently and

think critically about the validity of what is written (Graesser, 2012).

However, based on my Practicum Phase 1, 2, and 3, I realized that my

pupils did not seem to have a deep comprehension of the reading texts. They

seemed to be settling for shallow levels of analysis. Shallow levels of

analysis happens when the reader can recognize the content words and

understand most of the sentences but they would be unable to answer

questions that did not have the direct answer in the text (Gernsbacher &

Kaschak, 2013). It does not merely showcase a failure in thinking out of the

box, but also in applying what they have learnt to their prior knowledge. This

characteristic was exhibited by many of my pupils in all three schools.

7
 One of the factors that could be causing the shallow level of analysis

in reading could be due to reading comprehension questions which tend to

focus on specific details that only measure the product of reading. The

process of meaning making is not given enough weight (Hawa Abdullai

Morjan Danga, 1999). This may lead pupils to see reading as a means to an

end – the end being the question that they have to answer – without actually

putting in effort to make meaning of and understand the reading text as a

whole. I could certainly see this happening with my pupils. When they had to

answer reading comprehension questions, they would choose the distracter

that had the keyword without considering the context or meaning surrounding

it. They could decode but not understand.

According to Beaty (2015), reading comprehension is extremely

important for an individual – it is needed for a productive academic,

professional and personal life. It also plays a part in helping pupils develop

intellectually, socially, and emotionally.

Therefore, through my research, I plan to empower pupils in meaning

making through shared reading. They will be taught comprehension skills

such as predicting, questioning, making connections, visualising and

monitoring understanding. When pupils are able to construct meaning, they

will not be merely decoding without understanding.

One of the possible constrains is that the large number of pupils in my

class and the way that they are seated might not be conducive to the

8
intimacy needed by shared reading. According to Parkes (2000), the first

element that is important for shared reading is the right physical setting – the

intimacy of the home situation should be recreated. The school library is

large and carpeted. It will be quite suitable for shared reading. I have spoken

to the teacher in charge of the library and she has given me permission to

use the library. So, I will most likely bring the pupils to the library to conduct

the shared reading.

The big book might also not be large enough for all the pupils in the

class to see and participate actively. So, I will create my own big book and its

size will be based on my pupils. I will also have a backup electronic copy of

the book to show on the projector if they are unable to see clearly.

3.2 Pre data collection

In order to justify the need to carry out a study on improving pupils'

reading comprehension, I have carried out pre data collection using

unstructured observation, content analysis and comprehension interview.

The pre data collection was carried out after I carried out a reading lesson

using the conventional method to teach nouns and verbs. The

comprehension strategies involved were re-sequencing of a story and

predicting an outcome (see Appendix 1 for the lesson plan). The pre data

was collected from the entire class when possible. When it was not possible

9
to collect from the whole class, data was collected from a heterogeneous

group of 12 pupils from both genders and various levels of proficiency which

were selected based on their previous exam results.

According to Pawar (2004), unstructured observation is purposeful,

open and flexible. I carried out unstructured observation to determine how

well the pupils understood me after I had taught them reading using the

conventional method. The observation was carried out during the While- and

Post-reading stages and focused on the 2 comprehension strategies that

pupils were supposed to apply (see Appendix 2 for the observation checklist).

Table 1 shows the results of the observation of 12 pupils. More than half of

them were towards the lower end of the scale, which means they were

unable to use the strategy.

Strategy Scale and number of pupils

Scale 0 Scale 1 Scale 2 Scale 3
Re-sequence 3 5 2 2
Predict 6 3 3 0

Table 1. The number of pupils who achieved the respective scales based on

observation.

The other pre data collection method I used was work completion and

accuracy. In order to accurately track the severity of the pupils’ problems, the

frequency of data collection should be equal to the frequency of work

assigned (Intervention Central, 2016). In my case, I carried it out based on

10
the activity in the While-reading stage where the pupils were required to re-

sequence 6 pictures based on a reading text (see Appendix 3 for the While-

reading activity). After analysing the pupils' work, I made note of the number

of pupils and their corresponding scores, as shown in Table 2.

Number of items correct Number of pupils

6 13
5 0
4 8
3 10
2 4
1 3
0 0

Table 2. The number of items that the pupils re-sequenced correctly.

In addition, there was also a comprehension interview (see Appendix

4). The comprehension interview takes place after pupils have completed a

reading task. A one-on-one follow-up interview will then be carried out with

the researcher where pupils answer specific questions about the

comprehension strategy used (Coiro & Dobler, 2007). This was carried out

after the shared reading lesson. Table 3 shows the results of the 12 pupils

that I interviewed.

Strategy Rubric and number of pupils

Rubric 1 Rubric 2 Rubric 3
Re-sequence 4 6 2
Predict 5 3 4

Table 3. The number of pupils who achieved the respective rubrics based on

comprehension interview.

11
 3.3 Plan of action

Figure 4 (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011) shows the plan of action that I

will base my action plan on. According to McNiff and Whitehead (2011), the

cycle of action research starts with “observe”, moves to “reflect”, “act”,

“evaluate”, “modify” and then “move in new directions”, which would start a

brand new cycle. This process is also known as an action-reflection cycle.

Figure 4. Cycle of action research by McNiff and Whitehead (2011).

Reprinted from All you need to know about action research (p. 9), by J.

McNiff, & J. Whitehead, 2011, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Based on what I have observed in my two previous schools and this

current school as well, reading comprehension is a very pressing concern

and struggle faced by the pupils. Hence, it is important that there is a new

12
way of teaching the pupils, since the conventional method yields below

average results.

I have reflected on my teaching methods and found that it was lacking

and that I needed a new method to help pupils in their comprehension. My

usual method of focusing on vocabulary by showing pictures did not help

pupils to understand the text as a whole.

With that, I decided to act by coming up with an intervention. The

intervention is to carry out shared reading while applying comprehension

strategies. Shared reading is an interactive language experience between a

more knowledgeable person and a group of less knowledgeable people. It

helps scaffold the pupils’ learning and exposes them to concepts and

comprehension strategies that are needed for independent reading (Dorn &

Soffos, 2005). Comprehension strategies are a type of cognitive strategies

that are used by pupils in a flexible way as part of their plan to understand a

text (Cartwright, 2015). There are many comprehension strategies, among

them monitoring comprehension, activating and connecting to background

knowledge, questioning, inferring, determining importance in text, and

summarizing information (Harvey & Goudvis, 2007).

After the shared reading session, I will evaluate how effective the

intervention has been by collecting data on how it has influenced the pupils. I

will then modify the plan based on what I have discovered in order to

maximise the impact for the pupils. Depending on what modifications I have

13
made, I may move the research in a new direction that is better suited to the

needs of my pupils.

The theories that are involved in my suggested intervention are

sociolinguistics, cooperative learning and scaffolding. According to Tompkins,

Campbell, Green and Smith (2014), sociolinguistics views language and

social interactions as an important part of learning. Reading and writing are

seen as social activities and lessons are student-centred. Shared reading

features interaction not only between the reader and the text, but also

between the reader and other readers as well as the reader and the teacher.

Due to that, it allows for cooperative learning among the entire class that is

enjoyable (Booth & Swartz, 2004). According to Burkins and Croft (2010), the

teacher is also able to scaffold pupils by teaching them how to use the text to

support reading through shared reading. Pupils will be able to learn how the

reading process happens in a cohesive manner.

4.0 Objective and research question

Based on the objectives, this research aims to answer the following

question:

 How can applying comprehension strategies through shared reading

of stories enhance pupils’ reading comprehension?

14
5.0 Research participants

As the teacher of the class and the researcher, I will carry out the

lesson and then research the impact it has on my pupils. According to

Hitchcock and Hughes (2003), the teacher-researcher is normally an active

participant in the research situation, as the teacher is usually a researcher

and an informant at the same time. Teacher-researchers must be open about

the research that they are carrying out for ethics to be correctly observed.

The pupils that will be research participants are the 42 pupils from 2

Marikh. They are 8 years old and there are boys and girls in the class, with

the boys slightly outnumbering the girls. They have mixed proficiency in

English, but most of them are low to medium proficiency (see Appendix 5 for

their marks in the most recent exam). All of them were undergoing Linus in

Year 1 but most of them have made great improvements and have been able

to master the constructs for reading (see Appendix 6 for example of Linus

scores of a pupil). Based on what I have observed through teaching and

interacting with them, the pupils have quite limited ability in speaking English

and the language they usually speak is Malay.

Initially, I wanted to involve all the pupils as the research participants.

However, I realized that would compromise the quality and time I could

spend the collecting the data. My plan to only involve a few pupils was also

15
discouraged by the school administrators . So, as a compromise, the

intervention will be taught to all pupils during normal classroom time.

However, for the sake of quality, the data collection will only involve a group

of 12 pupils. The 12 pupils will be a heterogeneous group that consists of

pupils from both genders and with different proficiency levels. According to

Johnson (2011), heterogeneous groups are a good way for pupils to learn

from each other.

6.0 Research implementation

6.1 Action procedure

According to McCallister (2016), after identifying a problem and

devising a plan, the next step in action research is to implement the plan. I

will implement my plan through a shared reading lesson. The purpose of this

lesson is for pupils to learn how to apply comprehension strategies. The

comprehension strategy that I plan to focus on is synthesizing (see Appendix

7 for the lesson plan).

The start of the lesson will be the set induction. I will show the pupils

the cover of the big book that will be used throughout the shared reading.

Then, I will talk about the cover with them by asking them to look at the cover

16
and talk about the art on it. Talking about the cover before a shared reading

session is very useful in arousing the pupils’ excitement as well as giving

them a chance to share about similar experiences that they might have had

that is similar to the book (K12Reader, 2016).

In the pre-reading, I will take a picture walk with the pupils. According

to Milne (2014), a picture walk is effective in assisting literacy growth

because it can increase comprehension by allowing pupils to connect the

visual images to the words when they are reading, as well as giving them an

opportunity to activate prior knowledge. When I am carrying out the picture

walk, I will ask them questions to activate their prior knowledge and make

predictions on what might happen next.

The post-reading activity is for pupils to rearrange pictures that show

the progression of the story and retell the story in their groups. They will also

predict a possible ending to the story. At this stage, pupils should think on a

variety of levels, from simple factual recall, to high-level, open-ended, critical

thinking. Pupils should also be given choices regarding the ways in which

they can respond to the story's content (Tracey & Morrow, 2012). The activity

that I plan to carry out should showcase all those skills, as well as pupils'

ability to synthesize what they have read.

In the closure, I will recap the lesson with the pupils, as well aa leading

them to reflect on what they have learnt today and how it can be applied in

their daily lives. According to Boyles (2009), self-reflection is important for

17
pupils to be able to apply what they have learnt. The pupils should be the

ones to sum up the lesson, not the teacher. So, I will try my best to allow the

pupils to speak on what they have learnt instead of dominating the

discussion.

6.2 Planning of data collection method

The two main reasons for assessing comprehension are to gauge the

degree to which pupils have comprehended a specific section and to

estimate general level of proficiency (McKenna & Stahl, 2009).

One of the common ways to asses reading comprehension is through

a reading text and questions. However, according to Nooreiny Maarof (2016),

questions to asses reading comprehension are used too frequently. At this

point in time reading comprehension for pupils in Malaysia is merely a matter

of answering questions that have a single answer. This does not reflect

closely the real-life reading activities that pupils engage with daily. Since

reading comprehension is viewed as a constructive process, assessment

18
needs to emphasize more than the final products. Therefore, the data

collection methods to answer the research question will be observation of

retelling, comprehension interview and content analysis.

Retelling is a useful reading comprehension assessment tool because

through the analysis of retelling, the teacher can diagnose the pupils’ ability

to recall literally and to make interferes. Based on a research carried out by

Shameem Rafik-Galea and Premalatha Nair (2008), retelling is sometimes

used by low proficiency pupils as a form of understanding a short story.

When pupils retell the story in their own words, it gives the teacher an

accurate picture of how well the pupil comprehends what is being read (see

Appendix 8 for the retelling rubrics).

In addition, the data collection method of comprehension interview will

be used as well. I found it to be very useful and quite accurate in the pre data

collection. It is a one-on-one interview between the teacher and the pupil

about how the pupils have used comprehension strategies. The

comprehension interview has been able to lead to increased reading skills

and comprehension. However, the comprehension questions written by the

researcher have to be well thought out and valid (Burns, Maki, Karich &

Coolong-Chaffin, 2016).

Other than that, I will also be using the data collection method of

documentary analysis. The document that I will be looking at is my official

journal entries. I will set up categories to do coding of my journal entries

19
throughout the intervention so that meaningful interpretations can be made

through it.

The data will all be triangulated to ensure that it can be verified. In

order for triangulation to happen, the data produced by multiple data

collection methods should complement each other. Triangulation of data

adds a depth to the research design and data collected (McMurray, Pace &

Scott, 2004). According to Cohen and Crabtree (2006), there are 4 types of

triangulation: methods triangulation, triangulation of sources, analyst

triangulation and theory triangulation. I will focus on the triangulation of

sources for deeper understanding of the impact of my intervention.

6.3 Planning of data analysis method

According to Lodico, Spaulding and Voegtle (2010), the data analysis

in action research is constantly ongoing. Throughout the process, action

researchers need to stop and reflect on their research questions and the data

that they have collected. Data analysis is carried out for researchers to

summarize and represent data that has been collected in an accurate

manner and to make sense of the data, answering the question “so what?”

(Mills, 2007).

20
 Content analysis is an analysis of written or visual contents of a

document. The quality of the content analysis depends largely on how well

the categories match what is being studied (Schwalbach, 2003). Based on

my data collected, I will use the data to uncover or understand the big picture

through content analysis. This is because the data that I have collected is

qualitative in nature – it includes data such as interviews, observation and

documentary analysis. This kind of data needs to e categorised and indexed

to be made sense of and to highlight the important findings

6.4 Research implementation schedule

Table 4 shows my research implementation schedule and Figure 5

shows the Gnatt chart of the schedule. The research will be carried out from

20th September to 10th October over the period of 20 days. It follows the

McNiff and Whitehead model, staring with observation, reflection, action,

evaluation of how well the intervention went, further reflection and

modification as needed and ending with the improved intervention.

No. Event Duration (day) Start date End date

1 Start 0 20-9-16 20-9-16
2 Observation 2 20-9-16 21-9-16
3 Interview 1 21-9-16 21-9-16
4 Reflection 5 22-9-16 26-9-16
4 Intervention 1 27-9-16 27-9-16
5 Retelling 1 27-9-16 27-9-16
6 Interview 1 28-9-16 28-9-16
7 Reflection and 7 29-9-16 5-10-16

21
 modification
F8 Improved intervention 1 6-10-16 6-10-16
9 End 0 7-10-16 10-10-16

Table 4. The research implementation schedule.

Gnatt Chart of Research Implementation Schedule

20-Sep 22-Sep 24-Sep 26-Sep 28-Sep 30-Sep 2-Oct 4-Oct 6-Oct 8-Oct

Start

Observation

Interview

Reflection

Intervention

Retelling

Interview

Reflection and modification

Improved intervention

End

Figure 5. Gnatt Chart of Research Implementation Schedule.

7.0 Budget

Table 5 shows a rough estimate of the budget needed to carry out my

chosen intervention. It will be fully funded by me and subject to change as

the intervention is carried out.

No. Item Quantity Price (RM)

1 Materials to create a big book 1 30.00
2 A4 paper 1 13.00
3 Printer ink 2 75.00
4 Photocopy services - 20.00
Total 138.00

22
Table 5. Estimated cost of intervention.

23
8.0 References

Beaty, J. (2015, February 27). Why is comprehension so important for

today's literacy learner? Retrieved from
[Link]
for-todays-literacy-learn/

Booth, D., & Swartz, L. (2004). Literacy techniques for building successful
readers and writers. Ontario: Pembroke Publishers.

Boyles, N.N. (2009). Launching RTI comprehension instruction with shared

reading:40 model lessons for intermediate readers. Gainesville:
Maupin House Publishing, Inc.

Burkins, J.M., & Croft, M.M. (2010). Preventing misguided reading: New
strategies for guided reading teachers. Newark: International Reading
Association, Inc.

Burns, M.K., Maki, K.E., Karich, A.C., & Coolong-Chaffin, M. (2016). Using
performance feedback to increase reading comprehension strategy
use. Retrieved from [Link]
with - [Link]

Cartwright, K.B. (2015). Executive skills and reading comprehension: A guide

for educators. New York: The Guilford Press.

Cohen, D., & Crabtree, B. (2006). Qualitative research guidelines project.

Retrieved from [Link]

Cohen, V.L., & Cowen, J.E. (2008). Literacy for children in an information
age:
Teaching reading, writing, and thinking. Belmont: Thomson Higher
Education.

Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension
strategies used by sixth-grade skilled reader to search for and locate
information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2).
Retrieved from
[Link]

Cooper, J.D., Robinson, M.D., Slansky, J.A., & Kiger, N.D. (2015). Literacy:
Helping students construct meaning. Stamford: Cengage Learning.

Dorn, L.J., & Soffos, C. (2005). Teaching for deep comprehension: A reading
workshop approach. Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.

Ferraro, V., & Palmer, K. C. (1999). Differences between oral and written

24
 communication. Retrieved from
[Link]

Gernsbacher, M.A., & Kaschak, M.P. (2013). Text comprehension. In D.

Reisberg,
The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology (pp. 462 – 474). New
York:
Oxford University Press.

Graesser, A.C. (2012). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension.

In D.S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies:
Theories, interventions and technologies (pp 3 – 26). New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Harvey, S. & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching

comprehension for understanding and engagement. Maine:
Stenhouse Publishers.

Hawa Abdullai Morjan Danga. (1999). Reading comprehension strategies

and comprehension level of proficient and low proficient ESL readers.
Serdang: Universiti Putra Malaysia.

Hitchcock, G., & Hughes, D. (2003). Research and the teacher: A qualitative
introduction to school-based research. New York: Routledge.

Ibrahim Abu Shihab. (2011). Reading as critical thinking. Asian Social

Science, 7(8), 209-218.

Intervention Central. (2016). How to: Structure classroom data collection for
individual students. Retrieved from
[Link]
monitoring/how structure-classroom-data-collection-individual-students

Johnson, B. (2011). Student learning groups: Homogenous or

heterogenous?
Retrieved from [Link]
homogeneous-heterogeneous-ben-johnson

K12Reader. (2016). Shared reading – A critical component of balanced

literacy instruction. Retrieved from [Link]
reading-%E2%80%93-a-critical-component-of-balanced-literacy-
instruction/

Koda, K. (2004). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic

approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, J. F. (2013). Issues in defining and assessing reading proficiency. In

L.A.

25
 Arena, Language proficiency: Defining, teaching, and testing (pp. 93-
99). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.

Lodico, M.G., Spaulding, D.T., & Voegtle, K.H. (2010). Methods in

educational research: From theory to practice. San Francisco: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Manzo, A.V., & Manzo, U.C. (1990). Content area reading: A heuristic
approach. Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company.

McCallister, J. (2016). Action research in education: Methods & examples.

Retrieved
from [Link]
[Link]#lesson

McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2011). All you need to know about action
research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

McKenna, M.C., & Stahl, K.A. (2009). Assessment for reading instruction.
New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.

McMurray, A.J., Pace, R.W., & Scott, D. (2004). Research: a commonsense

approach. Victoria: Thomson Social Science Press.

Millsm G.E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. New
Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Milne, E. (2014). Taking a picture walk. Retrieved from

[Link]
2_picturewalk.htm

Nooreiny Maaroof. (2016). Assessing second language reading. Singapore:

Partridge Publishing.

Parkes, B. (2000). Read it again! Revisiting shared reading. Portland:

Stenhouse Publishers.

Pawar, M. (2004). Data collecting methods and strategies. In M. Pawar (Ed.),

Data collecting methods and experiences (pp. 17 – 60). Illinois: New
Dawn Press Group.

Schwalbach, E.M. (2003). Value and validity in action research: A guidebook

for reflective practitioners. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Shameem Rafik-Galea, & Premalatha Nair. (2008). The use of scaffolding

strategies among ESL learners in the comprehension of literary texts.
Indonesian JELT, 4(2), 140-154.

26
Tankersley, K. (2005). Literacy strategies for Grades 4-12: Reinforcing the
threads of reading. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Tompkins, G., Campbell, R., Green, D., & Smith, C. (2014). Literacy for the
21st century: A balanced approach. Melbourne: Pearson Australia.

Tracey, D.H., & Morrow, L.M. (2012). Lenses on reading: An introduction to

theories and models. New York: The Guilford Press.

27