The Effects of Text-Structure Awareness on Reading Comprehension of Iranian EFL Learners

Document Type : Research Paper


English Department, Islamic Azad University, Khorasgan (Isfahan) Branch, Iran


This study aimed at determining the relative efficacy of text-structure strategy instruction, compared to that of traditional instruction, on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Forty Iranian advanced participants (23 male and 17 female students) participated in this study. They were divided into 2 groups including a control group and an experimental group. To choose advanced language students with no statistically significant differences in reading skill and no text-structure knowledge, both groups were pretested with an Oxford Placement Test (OPT), a text-structure knowledge test, and the reading section of TOEFL, respectively. Then, during 4 weeks, the students in both groups were taught reading comprehension through 4 passages. The students in the control group were taught traditionally and the students in the experimental group were taught through text-structure awareness instruction. At the end of the fourth week, the students were post-tested to determine the effects of the intervention program. The results revealed that the reading comprehension of both groups improved significantly; however, the text-structure awareness instruction group outperformed the traditional instruction group significantly.


Alvermann, D. (1986). Graphic organizers: Cueing devices for comprehending and remembering main ideas. In J. F. Bauman (Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension and practice (pp. 210-226). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Amoli, F.A., & Karbalaei, A. (2011).The role of underlining strategy intervention in promoting Iranian EFL learners’ reading comprehension. American Journal of Scientific Research, 31, 83-92. Retrieved April 20, 2012 from
Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1987). Does text structure summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text? Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 331-346.
Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Introduction. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehensioninstruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 1-7). New York: Guilford Press.
Carrell, P. C. (1985).Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure.TESOL Quarterly, 19, 727-752.
Duke, N., & Pearson, P. D. (2002).Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. Farstrup & J. Samuels (Eds.), what research has tosay about reading instruction (3rded., pp. 205-242).  Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Gaddy, S. (2008). The effects of teaching text-structure strategies to postsecondary students with learning disabilities to improve their reading comprehension on expository science text passages. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 20 (2), 100-119. Retrieved April 4, 2012 from
Grabe, B. (2002). Using discourse patterns to improve reading comprehension. Paper presented at the Japan Association for Language Teaching, Japan.
Jakeman, V., & McDowell, C. (1997).Step up to IELTS. Cambridge University Press
Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1), 34-55.
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross linguistic approach Cambridge, England: CUP.                  
Leόn, J. A., & Carretero, M. (1995). Intervention in comprehension and memorystrategies: Knowledge and use of text structure. Learning and Instruction, 5, 203-220.
Meyer, B. (1999). Importance of text structure in everyday reading.In R. Ashwin & K. Moorman (Eds.), Understanding language understanding: Computational models of reading. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Meyer, B.J.F., & Freedle, R. O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Journal of Scientific Research, 31, 83-92. Retrieved April 20, 2012 from
Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, E. (1982). The interaction of reader strategies and the organization of text. Text, 2(2), 155-192.
Ornstein, A. C. (1994). Teaching: Theory into practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Pearson, P.D., & Duke, N.K. (2002). Comprehension instruction in the primary grades. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 247-258). New York, Guilford.
Pehrsson, R.S., & Denner, P. R. (1987). Awareness of text structure enhances reading comprehension. Idaho Reading Report, 14, 4-6.
Roller, C. M., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of narrative and expositoryorganizational instruction on sixth-grade children’s comprehension of expository and narrative prose. Reading Psychology, 6, 27-42.
Saslow, J., &Ascher, A. (2006). Summit. Longman-Pearson.
Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York: Guilford Press.
Sweet, A. P., & Snow, C.E. (Eds.). (2003). Rethinking reading comprehension. New York: Guilford.
Taylor, B. (1992). Text structure, comprehension, and recall. In S. Samuels &A. Farstrup (Eds.),What research has to sayabout reading instruction (2nded., pp. 220-235). Newark, DE: IRA.
Tompkins, G.E. (2007). Literacy for the 21stcentury: Teaching reading and writing in prekindergarten through grade 4 (2nded.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.                
Vacca, R. (2002). Making a difference in adolescent school lives: Visible and invisible aspects of content area reading. In A. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to sayabout reading instruction (3rded., pp. 124-139). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Vahidi, S. (2008). The impact of EFL learners’ rhetorical organization awareness on English academic/expository text comprehension. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Khareji, 41, 145-158.