A Content Comprehension Approach to Reading English for Science and Technology

Abstract

English for special purposes (ESP) reading programs often take specific grammar, vocabulary, and isolated reading skills as the organizing principle for syllabus design and fail to acknowledge how the act of comprehending text can affect reading ability. The present study reports on an ESP reading project which emphasizes the role of content comprehension. The context of the study is the Reading English for Science and Technology Project in the Chemical Engineering Department of the Universidad de Guadalajara. The materials for the 2‐year course were developed around thematic units which correspond to undergraduate course content. Instruction presented grammar and vocabulary only as they were necessary for comprehension of the text. The study examines whether the emphasis on reading for content improved reading comprehension as well as knowledge of reading grammar and general reading ability. Students were administered three reading tests: reading grammar, comprehension, and cloze. Significant differences were found for instructional status and subtest and for each subtest by instructional level. The results of this study suggest that the content comprehension approach can improve reading comprehension as well as knowledge of reading grammar and general reading ability.

Subject‐Matter Content: How Does It Assist the Interactional and Linguistic Needs of Classroom Language Learners?

“…Although it is possible to base criteria on the acquisition of linguistic forms and structures, sociolinguistic units, or features of text and discourse, it has been more typical to base them on global dimensions of L2 proficiency or on skills for reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Surveys by Pica (1997) and Pica, Washburn, Evans, and Jo (1998) have identified this pattern across a range of approaches to L2 content integration, including immersion (Genesee, Polich, & Stanley, 1977;Hart & Lapkin, 1989;Ho, 1982;Sternfeld, 1988;Swain, 1991;Wesche, 1992); sheltered (Freeman, Freeman, & Gonzalez, 1987;Hauptman, Wesche, & Ready, 1988;Lafayette & Buscaglia, 1985;Sternfeld 1989;and Wesche, 1985); adjunct (Brinton, Snow, & Wesche, 1989;Snow & Brinton, 1988); themebased (Giauque, 1987;Leaver & Stryker, 1989); and LSP (Graham & Beardsley, 1986;Hudson, 1991;Peck, 1987).…”

Content‐Based Instruction: Can it Help Ease the Transition from Beginning to Advanced Foreign Language Classes?

“…Results from TB programs are similar in nature to those just presented for SLM. Several studies report that students in experimental classes made significant pre-and post-gains on a variety of language measures (Corin 1997;Klahn 1997;Klee and Tedick 1997;McQuillan 1996;McQuillan and Rodrigo;Milk 1990;Peck 1987;Rodrigo 1997;Stryker 1997; see Table 2 for results) and scored comparably or significantly higher than students enrolled in skill-based courses at the same level, even though there was no explicit grammar or other language instruction (Chadran and Esarey 1997;Dupuy 1996;Hudson 1991;Kasper 1997;Lafayette and Buscaglia 1985;Leaver 1997;Schleppegrell 1984;Sternfeld 1992Sternfeld , 1993; see Table 2 for results).…”

The Role of General Background in the Success of ESP Courses: Case Study in Iranian Universities

“…Reading purpose is a central concern of ESP [8]. Bloor has put forward the point that critical reading is essential for effective participation in an academic setting.…”