A. INTRODUCTIONA. Background of the

A. INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the study
Reading is a crucial skill in learning and communication. Current trends in education consider reading lessons to be an important early step in the development of mental and linguistic abilities. Reading methods include reading silently, reading using subvocalization (forming the sounds of the words while reading silently), and reading orally to oneself. Reading silently means reading without labial movements or the vibration of vocal cords. Silent reading is usually seen as natural reading behavior and for decades has been associated with the idea of reading for comprehension. The importance of oral reading to students learning a native language is widely accepted, the effectiveness of oral reading in second language classrooms continues to be debated. Gibson (2008) found that teachers and learners were using oral reading in a variety of ways. The primary reasons for using the method were for practicing pronunciation and intonation. Other reasons included for speaking practice, making graphemic-phonemic connections, diagnosing pronunciation problems, improving fluency and practicing reading skills. Gibson (2008) also found that 82% of autonomous learners read orally to themselves as part of private study. Asian learners, in particular, commented that oral reading was especially important to them for practicing pronunciation. Hannon and Daneman (2001) proposed four primary processes in reading comprehension: accessing relevant knowledge from long-term memory, integrating accessed knowledge with information from the text, making inferences based on information in the text, and recalling newly learned text material. In schema theory, reading comprehension is viewed as the process of interpreting new information and assimilating this information into memory structures (Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Teng, 2009). Oral reading performed by the teachers can additionally reinforce correct understanding of punctuation and intonation further strengthening student comprehension.
B. The research questions
Do different reading methods effect the comprehension of Saudi students;Which reading methods effect reading comprehension and which reading methods do students prefer and why?
C. Aim of the study
The effectiveness of reading methods for Saudi students’ reading comprehension and students’ preference.
II. METHODS

A. Research Design
This research employs a classroom-based, quasi-experimental design in order to examine the effects of different reading methods on the comprehension performance of Saudi students. In educational research, a quasi-experiment is more commonly used due to fixed school schedules and logistical problems (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007). The different reading methods studied were oral, subvocalization, and silent reading. Comprehension performance was determined from the students’ comprehension scores on multiple-choice tests. In order to minimize the effects of repetition, three different passages were selected from McCall-Crabbs Standard Test Lessons in Reading, Book D (1979). Each group read each passage using one of the three reading methods (oral, subvocalization, and silent). The study participants always read passage 1 first, and then passages 2 and 3. However, in order to counterbalance the design of the study, the order of the reading method was rotated. For example, Group 1 read passage 1 orally, passage 2 using subvocalization, and passage 3 silently, while Group 2 read passage 1 using The Effects of Reading Method on the Comprehension / Alshumaimeri 189 subvocalization, passage 2 silently, and passage 3 orally. In this way, the effect of passage difficulty or type of passage reading was minimized with regard to measuring the reading comprehension performance of the study students. Each group was located in a different room during testing.
B. Participants
Participants in the study were 145 Saudi male students with an average age of 16 years, in the first year of the secondary stage (10th grade) in a secondary school in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Participating students were expected to be fairly representative of the target population of Saudi learners in terms of ability, interest, and age. However, one should acknowledge the limitation of drawing students from one school in Riyadh. The participating students were distributed by the school management into three classes.
C. Passages
Three expository passages were selected from McCall-Crabbs Standard Test Lessons in Reading, Book D (1979). Each passage was followed by five multiple choice questions, posed in English. Passage one, A School Charity Day, contains 141 words and describes a fundraising bazaar held at a children’s school. The second passage, The Best Way to Lose Weight, contains 139 words and provides advice on how to lose weight. The third passage, A Carpenter Story, contains 108 words and describes how one person became a carpenter. Reliability was deemed sufficient given that the test only contained five items.
D. Feedback Slips
The feedback slip was a small piece of paper that was given to each student after completing each reading test (three feedback slips were collected per participant). It included three questions that asked students to write down (in L1) if the reading method they used supported their comprehension, to rank which reading methods they generally prefer, and to explain their choices. The purpose of the feedback slips was to help in understanding the effects of the different reading methods and to know which reading methods students prefer in everyday life. The number of responses collected was 227 out of 435 feedback slips distributed with a return rate of 52.2%. The low rate of return is believed to be because the slips were distributed after each test.
E. Procedure
The research was conducted on a regular school day during the extra-curricular activity time (the last two periods of one day per week). The available time for testing was 110 minutes. Each reading test was allocated 20 minutes followed by 5-7 minutes for filling out the feedback slips. The students were randomly assigned to their group. As described above, each group read a passage using each of the three different reading methods. All students were told to read the reading instructions carefully and to ask for clarification if needed. There were three teachers, one for each group, who helped administer the tests and explained the procedure clearly. The researcher supervised the administration by moving from one room to another to check that the procedures were followed according to plan and to answer any questions. The data collected consisted of the comprehension scores obtained from the five multiple-choice questions designed for each of the three passages as well as the data collected from the feedback slips. The data analysis was conducted in accordance with the research questions, all of which were concerned with comprehension performance as measured by the scores from the multiple-choice questions, the dependent variable. A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the differences between the reading methods and a post-hoc analysis using the Scheffe test was conducted to locate the source of differences. Then, two-way ANOVA was used to test the differences between the groups with different reading methods.

III.RESULTS

The results obtained are presented in accordance with the research questions, beginning with the first research question. In order to answer the first research question (Do different reading methods affect the comprehension of Saudi students?) a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted with the post-hoc Scheffe test. There was a significant difference at level 0.01 between the Saudi students in comprehension performance according to the reading method. A significant difference was found between oral reading and subvocalization (mean difference 1.92, p < 0.01), and between oral reading and silent reading (mean difference 2.32, p < 0.01). The largest mean occurred for oral reading (9.65), which had the greatest effect on comprehension performance among the three reading methods included in the study.
To answer the second research question, the data obtained from the feedback slips show the students’ responses to the question (Does this reading method assist you in
understanding this passage?). The results show that 57% of the students thought that oral
reading helped them better comprehend the passage; whereas 26.2% and 17.9%, respectively, thought silent reading and subvocalization helped them understand the passage. The reading method that had the greatest positive effect on comprehension was oral reading with a mean value 9.65. Subvocalization and silent reading had mean values of 7.72 and 7.33, respectively. These results indicate that oral reading helped students better understand passages.
To answer the third research question (Which reading methods do Saudi students prefer and why?), the results obtained from the feedback slips show the ranked order of the preferred reading style of each group as well as an explanation of their choice of order. Of all groups, 50.57% of students reported that oral reading was the most preferred reading method. Subvocalization was ranked second with 22.76%, whereas silent reading was third with 14.02%.
Data obtained from the feedback slips is summarized in Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c and indicate the reason the students preferred each method of reading. The rate of return (52.2%) of the feedback slips could indicate that the reason for preferring a reading method is static and that the learners felt they did not need to provide the same feedback after each passage. The results are presented according to each reading method.


Table 1a: The Students’ Responses for Reasons for Preferring Oral Reading

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

A. PENDAHULUANA. latar belakang studiReading is a crucial skill in learning and communication. Current trends in education consider reading lessons to be an important early step in the development of mental and linguistic abilities. Reading methods include reading silently, reading using subvocalization (forming the sounds of the words while reading silently), and reading orally to oneself. Reading silently means reading without labial movements or the vibration of vocal cords. Silent reading is usually seen as natural reading behavior and for decades has been associated with the idea of reading for comprehension. The importance of oral reading to students learning a native language is widely accepted, the effectiveness of oral reading in second language classrooms continues to be debated. Gibson (2008) found that teachers and learners were using oral reading in a variety of ways. The primary reasons for using the method were for practicing pronunciation and intonation. Other reasons included for speaking practice, making graphemic-phonemic connections, diagnosing pronunciation problems, improving fluency and practicing reading skills. Gibson (2008) also found that 82% of autonomous learners read orally to themselves as part of private study. Asian learners, in particular, commented that oral reading was especially important to them for practicing pronunciation. Hannon and Daneman (2001) proposed four primary processes in reading comprehension: accessing relevant knowledge from long-term memory, integrating accessed knowledge with information from the text, making inferences based on information in the text, and recalling newly learned text material. In schema theory, reading comprehension is viewed as the process of interpreting new information and assimilating this information into memory structures (Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Teng, 2009). Oral reading performed by the teachers can additionally reinforce correct understanding of punctuation and intonation further strengthening student comprehension. B. pertanyaan penelitian Apakah membaca berbeda metode efek pemahaman siswa Saudi;Yang membaca metode efek pemahaman bacaan dan metode membaca yang melakukan siswa memilih dan mengapa?C. tujuan studiEfektivitas membaca metode untuk pemahaman bacaan Saudi siswa dan mahasiswa preferensi.II. METODEA. penelitian desainPenelitian ini mempekerjakan desain yang berbasis kelas, quasi-eksperimental untuk meneliti efek dari membaca berbeda metode pada kinerja pemahaman siswa Saudi. Dalam penelitian pendidikan, sebuah eksperimen kuasi lebih sering digunakan karena jadwal tetap sekolah dan masalah-masalah logistik (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007). Membaca berbeda metode belajar yang oral, vokalisasi, dan membaca senyap. Pemahaman kinerja ditentukan dari siswa pemahaman nilai pada tes pilihan ganda. Untuk meminimalkan efek dari pengulangan, tiga bagian yang berbeda yang dipilih dari McCall-Crabbs pelajaran ujian standar membaca, buku D (1979). Setiap kelompok membaca setiap bagian yang menggunakan salah satu metode membaca tiga (lisan, vokalisasi, dan diam). Peserta studi selalu membaca bagian 1 pertama, dan kemudian ayat 2 dan 3. Namun, dalam rangka untuk mengimbangi desain studi, urutan metode membaca diputar. Sebagai contoh, grup 1 membaca bagian 1 secara lisan, Bagian 2 menggunakan vokalisasi, dan bagian 3 diam-diam, sementara grup 2 membaca bagian 1 menggunakan efek metode membaca pada pemahaman / vokalisasi Alshumaimeri 189, Bagian 2 diam-diam, dan bagian 3 secara lisan. Dengan cara ini, efek dari bagian kesulitan atau jenis membaca bagian diminimalkan dengan mengukur membaca pemahaman prestasi belajar siswa. Setiap kelompok terletak di ruangan yang berbeda selama pengujian. B. ParticipantsParticipants in the study were 145 Saudi male students with an average age of 16 years, in the first year of the secondary stage (10th grade) in a secondary school in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Participating students were expected to be fairly representative of the target population of Saudi learners in terms of ability, interest, and age. However, one should acknowledge the limitation of drawing students from one school in Riyadh. The participating students were distributed by the school management into three classes.C. PassagesThree expository passages were selected from McCall-Crabbs Standard Test Lessons in Reading, Book D (1979). Each passage was followed by five multiple choice questions, posed in English. Passage one, A School Charity Day, contains 141 words and describes a fundraising bazaar held at a children’s school. The second passage, The Best Way to Lose Weight, contains 139 words and provides advice on how to lose weight. The third passage, A Carpenter Story, contains 108 words and describes how one person became a carpenter. Reliability was deemed sufficient given that the test only contained five items.D. Feedback SlipsSlip umpan balik adalah sepotong kecil kertas yang diberikan kepada setiap siswa setelah menyelesaikan setiap tes membaca (tiga umpan balik slip dikumpulkan per peserta). Itu termasuk tiga pertanyaan yang meminta siswa untuk menulis (dalam L1) jika metode membaca mereka digunakan didukung pemahaman mereka, untuk peringkat yang membaca metode mereka umumnya lebih memilih, dan menjelaskan pilihan-pilihan mereka. Tujuan slip umpan balik adalah untuk membantu dalam memahami efek metode membaca berbeda dan untuk mengetahui metode membaca mana siswa memilih kehidupan sehari-hari. Jumlah tanggapan yang dikumpulkan adalah 227 dari 435 slip umpan balik yang didistribusikan dengan tingkat pengembalian 52.2%. Tingkat rendah kembali diyakini karena slip didistribusikan setelah setiap tes. E. tata caraThe research was conducted on a regular school day during the extra-curricular activity time (the last two periods of one day per week). The available time for testing was 110 minutes. Each reading test was allocated 20 minutes followed by 5-7 minutes for filling out the feedback slips. The students were randomly assigned to their group. As described above, each group read a passage using each of the three different reading methods. All students were told to read the reading instructions carefully and to ask for clarification if needed. There were three teachers, one for each group, who helped administer the tests and explained the procedure clearly. The researcher supervised the administration by moving from one room to another to check that the procedures were followed according to plan and to answer any questions. The data collected consisted of the comprehension scores obtained from the five multiple-choice questions designed for each of the three passages as well as the data collected from the feedback slips. The data analysis was conducted in accordance with the research questions, all of which were concerned with comprehension performance as measured by the scores from the multiple-choice questions, the dependent variable. A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the differences between the reading methods and a post-hoc analysis using the Scheffe test was conducted to locate the source of differences. Then, two-way ANOVA was used to test the differences between the groups with different reading methods. III.RESULTSThe results obtained are presented in accordance with the research questions, beginning with the first research question. In order to answer the first research question (Do different reading methods affect the comprehension of Saudi students?) a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted with the post-hoc Scheffe test. There was a significant difference at level 0.01 between the Saudi students in comprehension performance according to the reading method. A significant difference was found between oral reading and subvocalization (mean difference 1.92, p < 0.01), and between oral reading and silent reading (mean difference 2.32, p < 0.01). The largest mean occurred for oral reading (9.65), which had the greatest effect on comprehension performance among the three reading methods included in the study.To answer the second research question, the data obtained from the feedback slips show the students’ responses to the question (Does this reading method assist you inunderstanding this passage?). The results show that 57% of the students thought that oralreading helped them better comprehend the passage; whereas 26.2% and 17.9%, respectively, thought silent reading and subvocalization helped them understand the passage. The reading method that had the greatest positive effect on comprehension was oral reading with a mean value 9.65. Subvocalization and silent reading had mean values of 7.72 and 7.33, respectively. These results indicate that oral reading helped students better understand passages.To answer the third research question (Which reading methods do Saudi students prefer and why?), the results obtained from the feedback slips show the ranked order of the preferred reading style of each group as well as an explanation of their choice of order. Of all groups, 50.57% of students reported that oral reading was the most preferred reading method. Subvocalization was ranked second with 22.76%, whereas silent reading was third with 14.02%. Data obtained from the feedback slips is summarized in Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c and indicate the reason the students preferred each method of reading. The rate of return (52.2%) of the feedback slips could indicate that the reason for preferring a reading method is static and that the learners felt they did not need to provide the same feedback after each passage. The results are presented according to each reading method.Table 1a: The Students’ Responses for Reasons for Preferring Oral Reading