Summarising an Explanation Text with a Visual Representation as the Guidelines: How Does this Work to Represent Meaning?

Mutuota Kigotho, Siti Sarah Fitriani

Abstract


Metacognition has been popular in reading area, especially when it is related to comprehension and the representation of meanings. Combining metacognitive strategies to represent meanings from a text has been done by previous scholars to help readers construct meaning. In this paper, we present students’ drawings and writings as the results of successive visualisation and summarisation activities in the classroom. We intended to find out the extent to which students’ visual representations can be the guideline for them to write summaries. By employing qualitative research method, we collected visual representations and summaries from 26 undergraduate students studying at the English Education Department of Syiah Kuala University. To understand students’ drawings, we consulted some literature on visual literacy and multimodality; while for the analysis of students’ writings, we reviewed some literature on functional model to language. Based on the analysis, a productive visual representation leads to a strong summary, and vice versa. This result is further discussed in this paper.

Keywords


Visualisation; summarisation; representation of meaning

10.15548/jt.v25i1.379 Abstract view : 1167 times PDF : 1087 times

Full Text:

PDF

References


Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364–373.

Ahmadi, M. R., & Gilakjani, A. P. (2012). Reciprocal teaching strategies and their impacts on English reading comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(10), 2053.

Al Azmi, H. (2012). The students’ language learning strategies in reading and speaking. Al-Ta’lim Journal, 19 (2), 122–133.

Bailey, S. (2014). Academic writing: A handbook for international students. Routledge.

Callow, J., & Callow, J. (2013). The shape of text to come. Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

Chan, E. (2011). Integrating visual and verbal meaning in multimodal text comprehension: Towards a model of intermodal relations. Semiotic Margins. Meanings in Multimodalities, 144–167.

Chan, E., & Unsworth, L. (2011). Image–language interaction in online reading environments: challenges for students’ reading comprehension. The Australian Educational Researcher, 38(2), 181.

Cohen, C. A., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Individual differences in use of external visualisations to perform an internal visualisation task. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 701–711.

Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Ven, A. (2001). Improving text comprehension strategies in upper primary school children: A design experiment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(4), 531–559.

Daly, A., & Unsworth, L. (2011). Analysis and comprehension of multimodal texts. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, The, 34(1), 61.

Day, R. R. (2004). Extensive reading activities for teaching language. Ernst Klett Sprachen.

Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239–264.

Droga, L., & Humphrey, S. (2003). Grammar and meaning: An introduction for primary teachers. Target Texts New South Wales,, Australia.

Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2009a). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. Journal of Education, 189(1–2), 107–122.

Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2009b). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. Journal of Education, 189(1–2), 107–122.

Ellis, A. K., Bond, J. B., & Denton, D. W. (2012). An analytical literature review of the effects of metacognitive teaching strategies in primary and secondary student populations. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational

Development (APJED), 1(1), 9–23.

Goh, C. (1997). Metacognitive awareness and second language listeners. ELT Journal, 51(4), 361–369.

Harida, E. S. (2014). Students’ Ability and Difficulties in Understanding English Text (A Study at English Program IAIN Padangsidimpuan). Al-Ta Lim Journal, 21(3), 183–188.

Hobbs, R. (2001). Improving reading comprehension by using media literacy activities. Voices from the Middle, 8(4), 44.

Humphrey, S., Droga, L., & Feez, S. (2012). Grammar and meaning. Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

Joyce, H. D. S., & Gaudin, J. (2007). Interpreting the visual: A resource book for teachers. Phoenix Education.

Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2015). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties, 2/E. Guilford Publications.

Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual images. Oxon: Routledge.

Kustati, M. (2017). Enhancing Islamic Students’ Reading Comprehension through Predict Organize Search Summarize Evaluate Strategy. Al-Ta’lim Journal, 24(1), 1–8.

Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2015). Improving students’ science text comprehension through metacognitive self-regulation when applying learning strategies. Metacognition and Learning, 10(3), 313–346.

Macken-Horarik, M. (2002). Something to shoot forâ€: A systemic functional approach to teaching genre in secondary school science. Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives, 17–42.

McCloud, S. (2004). The vocabulary of comics. Visual Rhetoric in a Digital World, 195–208.

McNamara, D. S. (2012). Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies. Psychology Press.

Meyer, B. J., Young, C. J., & Bartlett, B. J. (2014). Memory improved: Reading and memory enhancement across the life span through strategic text structures. Psychology Press.

Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249.

Pecjak, S., Podlesek, A., & Pirc, T. (2011). Model of reading comprehension for 5th grade students. Studia Psychologica, 53(1), 53.

Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Equinox Sheffield.

Sitindaon, M., Wijaya, B., & Salam, U. (2013). Metacognitive Online Reading Strategy Practiced By English Students. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran, 2(11).

Trafton, J. G., Marshall, S., Mintz, F., & Trickett, S. B. (2002). Extracting explicit and implict information from complex visualizations. In International Conference on Theory and Application of Diagrams (pp. 206–220). Springer.

Trafton, J. G., Trickett, S. B., & Mintz, F. E. (2005). Connecting internal and external representations: Spatial transformations of scientific visualizations. Foundations of Science, 10(1), 89–106.

Unsworth, L. (2001). Teaching multiliteracies across the curriculum. Buckingham-Philadelphia: Open University Press. Retrieved September, 26, 2005.

Unsworth, L., & Chan, E. (2009). Bridging multimodal literacies and national assessment programs in literacy. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, The, 32(3), 245.

VanHoorn, J., Nourot, P. M., Scales, B., & Alward, K. R. (2014). Play at the center of the curriculum. Pearson Higher Ed.

Wallace, R., Pearman, C., Hail, C., & Hurst, B. (2007). Writing for comprehension. Reading Horizons, 48(1), 5.

Woolley, G. (2010). Developing reading comprehension: combining visual and verbal cognitive processes. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, The, 33(2), 108.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15548/jt.v25i1.379

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Al-Ta lim Journal

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View Stats
Al-Ta'lim Journal published by Faculty of Islamic Education and Teacher Training UIN Imam Bonjol Padang

Al-Ta'lim Online Journal
Print ISSN 1410-7546 Online ISSN 2355-7893


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.