Using Subject Positioning Theory to Investigate Reading Engagement among University Students
Abstract
This study sets out to investigate the magnitude of reading engagement by technical engineering undergraduates. Purposive samples in the form of six bachelor’s degree students were chosen based on the observed active roles as class representatives and as active learners in the English course that they have previously taken. Two chapters from a compulsory textbook of a mandatory course from the undergraduates’ programme called Innovation Management were chosen to explore their subject positioning and reading engagement aspect. The undergraduates were requested to activey read, interact and scribble notes if necessary during reading while their engagement via think aloud protocol were recorded. The recordings were transcribed and analysed for evidence of subject positioning and knowledge processing with inter rater and expert verifications on the identified themes. The findings show that the uundergraduates actively undertake subject positioning to align and disalign with subject matter materials and information put forth by the author of the textbook as evidence of moderate to active reading engagement and knowledge processing. Input from previous reading, general knowldge, current experience and previous work experience intertwine in functioning as sources of the subject positioning and knowledge processing during the reading engagements. The findings are significant in raising awareness among educators on the need to cultivate active reading engagement and to devise training for undergraduates on strategies for active reading engagement. These recommended efforts from this study will yield great benefits for undergraduates in their learning curve at the academia.Â
Full text article
References
Afflerbach P., & Harrison, C. (2017) What is engagement, how is it different from motivation, and how can I promote it? The Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 16(2), 217-220. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.679
Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Applegate, A. J., Applegate, M. D., Mercantini, M. A., McGeehan, C. M., Cobb,J. B., DeBoy, J. R., & Lewinski, K. E. (2014). The Peter effect revisited: Reading habits and attitudes of college students. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53(3), 188-204. doi:10.1080/19388071.2014.898719
Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative Research, Message for the Social Sciences. 4th Edition, Allin and Bacon, Boston, 15-3
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). The Things You Do to Know: An Introduction to the Pedagogy of Multiliteracies.
Davis, J. N., & Bistodeau, L. (1993). How Do L1 and L2 Reading Differ? Evidence from Think Aloud Protocols. The Modern Language Journal, 77, 459–472.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43–63.
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003). Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gaillard, S., & Tremblay, A. (2016). Oral proficiency assessment in second language acquisition research: The elicited imitation task. Language Learning, 66, 419-447
Guthrie, J.T., Wigfield, A., & You, E. (2012), Instructional contexts for engagement and achievement in reading. In:
Christensen S, Reschly A, Wylie C, editors. Handbook of research on student engagement. New York: Springer Science; pp. 601–634.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L.Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (3rd ed., pp. 403-422). New York: Longman.
Ivey, G., & Broaddus, K. (2007). A formative experiment investigating literacy engagement among adolescent Latina/o students just beginning to read, write, and speak english. Reading Research Quarterly. 42(4), pp.512-545. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.4.4E
Katan, H., Zainuddin, M. R., Jamaludin, A., Che Mat, S., Abdul Majid, Z., Ngah, S., Mohd Rusli, M. R., Zainol Abidin, M. F., Ramlan, R., Mohd Yusoff, A. R., Jaafar, J., Zainal
Abidin, S., & Mushif, M. P. (2015) Innovation Management (UniKL) Oxford Fajar.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University press.
Lee, Y., Jang, B. G., & Smith, K. C. (2021). A systematic review of reading engagement research: What do we mean, what do we know, and where do we need to go? Reading Psychology, 42(5), 540–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888359
Wang, Y. H., & Liao, H. C. (2011). Adaptive learning for ESL based on computation British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(1), pp. 66-87.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00981.x.
Luke, A. (2003) Literacy and the other: A sociological approach to literacy research and policy in multilingual societies. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1), 1-18.
McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension Psychology of Learning Motivation, 51, 297-384.
Murphy, P. K., Long, J. F., Holleran, T. A., & Esterly, E. (2003). Persuasion online or on paper: A new take on an old issue. Learning and Instruction. 13, 11-32.
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2009). Promoting self-determined school engagement: Motivation, learning, and well-being. In K.R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of Motivation at School (pp. 171–195). New York: Routledge.
Schaefer, R. T. (2017). 'Glossary' in Sociology: A brief introduction (4thedn). McGraw-Hill.
Smith, R., Snow, P., Serry, T., & Hammond, L. (2021) The role of background knowledge in reading comprehension: A critical review. Reading Psychology, 42(3), 214-240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Szarvas G, Vincze V, Farkas R, Móra G., & Gurevych I. (2012). Cross-genre and cross- domain detection of semantic uncertainty. Computational Linguistics, 38, 335–367. DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1162/ COLI_ a_ 00098
Taboada Barber, A., & Klauda, S.L. (2020). How reading motivation and engagement enable reading achievement: Policy implications. Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(1), 27– 34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219893385
Taboada Barber, A., Klauda, S. L., & Wang, W. (2021). Reading anxiety, engagement, and achievement: A comparison of emergent bilinguals and English monolinguals in the elementary grades. Reading Research Quarterly. Advance online publication.1- 24. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.398
Tan, S., & O'Halloran, K. (2012). Multimodal Analysis Image. Singapore: Multimodal Analysis Company.
Universiti Kuala Lumpur [UniKL], (2022). Where Knowledge is Applied. https://www.unikl.edu.my
Van Dijk, T. A. (2007). Comments on Context and Conversation. In N. Fairclough, G. Cortese, & P. Ardizzone (Eds.), Discourse and Contemporary Social Change
(pp.290-295). Bern: Peter Lang.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds. & Trans.). Harvard
University Press.
Wolfe, M. B., & Williams, T. J. (2018). Poor metacognitive awareness of belief change. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(9), 1-45. https://doi.org/
1080/17470218.2017.1363792
Authors
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work