TOWARD A REALIZATION OF PSYCHOLINGUISTIC PRINCIPLES IN THE ESL READING CLASS1

Abstract

This article is an attempt to utilize psycholinguistic research to develop a framework for the teaching of reading to second language (L2) learners. The first section highlights current psycholinguistic reading theory and develops goals for L2 reading teachers based on this theory. The proficient reader is viewed as an active, information‐processing individual who uses a minimum number of clues to extract the author's message from the page. It becomes the responsibility of teachers to train students to determine their own goals and strategies for a particular reading, to give students practice and encouragement in using a minimum number of syntactic and semantic clues to obtain the maximum amount of information, and to encourage students to take risks, to guess, and to ignore their impulses to be always correct. In an attempt to translate theory into practice, the second section of the article explores the implications of a psycholinguistic perspective for the learning environment, teacher behavior, and the preparation and use of L2 reading materials. The optimum learning environment is viewed as one in which students and teachers work together: teacher intervention is minimized as students are encouraged to use their developing skills to solve reading problems on their own. Materials development is viewed as being composed of the development of reading skills exercises (scanning, skimming, reading for thorough comprehension, and critical reading) and the development of language skills exercises (vocabulary, structure, and discourse). The third section of the article discusses lesson planning within a psycholinguistic framework and presents a sample lesson plan in English as a second language which emphasizes a skills approach to reading. Lessons are planned for maximum flexibility, allowing the teacher to take advantage of students' interests and needs.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 103 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.