The Use of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities to Promote Mathayomsuksa 5 Students’ English Reading Ability

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Dec 30, 2020
Keywords:
Scaffolding Brain-Based Learning Reading ability

Main Article Content

ณภัชนันท์ บุญระมี
30 ม.2 ซอยชัยสุริโย ต.ท่าอุเทน อ.ท่าอุเทน จ.นครพนม

Abstract

              The purposes of this study were : (1) to study the efficiency of eight lesson plans which were created from the concept of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities in order to promote Mathayomsuksa 5 students’ English reading ability with the required efficiency of 75/75 (E1/E2), (2) to study the effectiveness index of those lesson Plans, and (3) to study students’ reading ability after teaching students with those plans. The samples of this study consisted of 35 Mathayomsuksa 5 students attending in the first semester of the academic year 2019 at Nakhonphanomwittayakhom School, Mueang district, Nakhomphanom province. They were selected by cluster random sampling technique. The instruments used in this study were : (1) eight lesson plans created from the concept of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities, three hours per each plan; (2) a 40 items reading test, and t-test (dependent sample) for hypothesis testing.


                             The Results of the study were as follows:


  1. The lesson plans created from the concept of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities in order to promote Mathayomsuksa 5 students’ English reading ability had efficiency of 77.87/75.79, which was higher than the established criterion.

  2. The effectiveness index of lesson plans created from the concept of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities created was 0.64

  3. After organizing lesson plans using the integration of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities with sample group, the mean scores of all students in the post-test were higher than in the pre-test. It showed the statistical level of significance of 0.50.

Article Details

How to Cite
บุญระมี ณ. (2020). The Use of Scaffolding for Reading Activity and Brain-based Learning Activities to Promote Mathayomsuksa 5 Students’ English Reading Ability. Journal of Man and Society, 6(1), 89–109. Retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/husocjournal/article/view/242305
Issue
Vol. 6 No. 1 (2020): July-December
Section
Research Article

เนื้อหาและข้อมูลที่ตีพิมพ์ลงในวารสารมนุษย์กับสังคม ถือเป็นข้อคิดเห็นและความรับผิดชอบโดยตรงของผู้เขียนซึ่งกองบรรณาธิการวารสารไม่จำเป็นต้องเห็นด้วยหรือร่วมรับผิดชอบใดๆ 

บทความ ข้อมูล เนื้อหา รูปภาพ ฯลฯ ที่ได้รับการตีพิมพ์ในวารสารมนุษย์กับสังคม ถือเป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของวารสาร หากบุคคลหรือหน่วยงานใดต้องการนำทั้งหมดหรือส่วนหนึ่งส่วนใดไปเผยแพร่ต่อต้องอ้างอิงวาสาร

References

Aleven, V. A. W. M. M., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26 (2002) 147–179

Belland, B. R. (2011). Distributed cognition as a lens to understand the effects of scaffolds: The role of transfer of responsibility. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 577-600.

Brawner, K., Holden, H., Goldberg, B., & Sottilare, R. (2012). Recommendations for modern tools to author tutoring systems. In The Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation & Education Conference (I/ITSEC).

Cohen, D. (1994). Assessing Language Ability in the Classroom. USA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Glazewski, K. D., and Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Scaffolding disciplined inquiry in problem-based learning environments. International Journal of Learning, 12(6), 297-306.

Goodman, K.S. and Goodman, Y.M. (2014). Making Sense of Learners Making Sense of Written Language : The selected Works of Kenneth S. Goodman and Yetta M. Goodman. New York: Routledge.

Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second Language : Moving from Theory to Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Synergy between teacher practices and curricular scaffolds to support students in using domain-specific and domain-general knowledge in writing arguments to explain phenomena. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(3), 416-460.

Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., Bishop, M. J. (Eds.), (2014). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York, NY: Springer.

Pentimonti, J.M., & Jutice, L.M. (2010). Teachers’ use of scaffolding strategies during read-alouds in the preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(4), 241-248.

Rodgers, E. M. (2004). Interactions that scaffold reading performance. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(4), 501-531.

Roehler, L. R., Cantlon, D. J. (1997). Scaffolding: A powerful tool in social constructivist classrooms. In Hogan, K. E., Pressley, M. E. (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues. (Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 271-296.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159–180.

Weiss, Ruth Palombo. (2020). Brain Based Learning. Training & Development, 54(7), 21.

Wertsch, J. V. (1984). The zone of proximal development: Some conceptual issues. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development.

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.