The Effect of Interactive Reading and Traditional Reading on the Vocabulary Competence among Grade Six Pupils

Emelyn M. Talibong ., Amira M. Abdulfattah .

Abstract


This study was conceived as an attempt to determine a significant effect of interactive reading and traditional reading on vocabulary competence. The venture made into this area of inquiry was given impetus by the curiosity of the researcher of such possible effect of the 70 pupils at the MSU-ILS in Marawi City. The pupils were grouped equally into two (2) – 35 pupils which composed the interactive reading group (experimental) and another 35 pupils which composed the traditional reading (control). The researcher utilized a combination of descriptive and quantitative research methodology. The study yielded the following findings: The vocabulary competence level of the pupils in the interactive reading (experimental group) based on the pre-test was generally “fair”; while the vocabulary competence level of the pupils in the traditional reading (control) group was “good”. The vocabulary competence level of the pupils in the interactive reading (experimental group) based on the post-test was generally “good”; while the vocabulary competence level of the pupils in the traditional (control group) was also “good”. Apparently, there was a notable good increase in the vocabulary competence level of the interactive reading (experimental group). In the traditional reading (control group), there was also an increase however, only minimal. The researcher concluded that the pupils in the interactive reading (experimental group) revealed a better favor as the results proved a better vocabulary competence level. A significant gain in vocabulary demonstrated by the interactive reading pupils – that is, from the pre-test to post-test was remarkable. In fact, from an adjectival description in the pre-test which was “fair”, it turned out to be “good” in the post-test.

Keywords


interactive reading, traditional reading, vocabulary, competence

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (2013). Reading Comprehension and the Assessment and Acquisition of Word knowledge. In B. Hutton (Ed.), Advances in Reading Language Research: A research annual (pp. 231-256). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2012). Bring Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction, New York: Guilford.

Biemiller, A., & Slonim, N. (2001). Estimating Root Word Vocabulary Growth in Normative and Advantaged Populations: Evidence for a Common Sequence of Vocabulary Acquisition, Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 498-520.

Brown, J. C., Frishkoff, G. A., & Eskenazi, M. (2015). Automatic Question Generation for Vocabulary Assessment. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT/EMNLP; pp. 819-826), Vancouver, Canada: Association for Computational Linguistics.

Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, J. K. (2015). Early Reading Acquisition and its Relation to Reading Experience and Ability: 10 years later, Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 934-45

Hsueh-chao, M. H., & Nation, I. S. P. (2016). Unknown Vocabulary Density and Reading Comprehension, Reading in a Foreign Language, 13, 403-430.

Ilarena, I. (2017). Bridges to Communication: Reading Power, Rex Publishing House.

Klein, M. L., Peterson, S., and Simington, L. (2017). Teaching Reading in the Elementary Grades, Needham Heights, Mass.: Allyn and Bacon.

Krashen, S. (2004). The Power of Reading, Portsmouth, NH. Heinemann.

Nagy, W., & Scott, J. (2013). Vocabulary Processes. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol, III, pp. 269-284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Perfetti, C. (2011). The Lexical Quality Hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.). Precursors of Functional Literacy (Vol.11, pp. 67–86), Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.

Sabio, R. (2013). Using Reading as an Interactive Medium in the ESL/EFL Classroom. www.ralphsesljunction.com


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Editorial Office:

Educational Research Multimedia & Publications,
S.N. 21, Plot No 24, Mirza Ghalib Road Malegaon Nasik,
Maharashtra India - 423203.
+919764558895 (WhatsApp),
editor@researchersworld.com, http://researchersworld.com/

Copyrights © 2010-2020 - ERM Publications, India     

This work is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/