METHODS FOR DEVELOPING READING SKILLS AMONG STUDENTS WITH DIFFERENT LEVELS OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY THROUGH VARIOUS STRATEGIES (THE CASE OF PHYSICS STUDENTS)
Keywords:
reading skills, reading strategies, language proficiency level, differentiated instruction, metacognitive strategy, CEFR, English for Specific Purposes, physics students, non-philological higher education institutions.Abstract
The article examines methods for developing English reading skills among physics
students at non-philological higher education institutions through strategies selected
according to their language proficiency levels (A2, B1, and B2 under the CEFR). Reading
strategies are classified into cognitive, compensatory, metacognitive, and social categories, and a “strategy – text – task” alignment model is proposed for each proficiency
level. The practical effectiveness of the model was investigated through experimental
studies, and the results were compared across levels of learning achievement. The article
presents a sample lesson plan, pedagogical conditions, and practical recommendations.
References
1. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining “Chet tillarni o‘rganish tizimini yanada takomillashtirish chora-tadbirlari
to‘g‘risida”gi 2012-yil 10-dekabrdagi PQ-1875-son qarori. – URL: https://lex.uz.
2. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining “O‘zbekiston Respublikasi oliy ta’lim tizimini 2030-yilgacha rivojlantirish
konsepsiyasini tasdiqlash to‘g‘risida”gi 2019-yil 8-oktabrdagi PF-5847-son Farmoni. – URL: https://lex.uz.
3. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Vazirlar Mahkamasining “Uzluksiz ta’lim tizimining chet tillar bo‘yicha Davlat ta’lim
standartini tasdiqlash to‘g‘risida”gi 2013-yil 8-maydagi 124-son qarori. – URL: https://lex.uz.
4. Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment –
Companion Volume. – Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2020. – URL: https://www.coe.int/lang-cefr.
5. Grabe W. Reading in a Second Language: Moving from Theory to Practice. – Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2009.
6. Koda K. Insights into Second Language Reading: A Cross-Linguistic Approach. – Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2005.
7. Stanovich K. E. Toward an Interactive-Compensatory Model of Individual Differences in the Development of
Reading Fluency // Reading Research Quarterly. – 1980. – Vol. 16, № 1. – P. 32–71.
8. Oxford R. L. Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. – New York: Newbury House, 1990.
9. Mokhtari K., Reichard C. A. Assessing Students’ Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies // Journal of
Educational Psychology. – 2002. – Vol. 94, № 2. – P. 249–259.
10. Carrell P. L. Metacognitive Awareness and Second Language Reading // The Modern Language Journal. – 1989. –
Vol. 73, № 2. – P. 121–134.
11. Anderson N. J. Individual Differences in Strategy Use in Second Language Reading and Testing // The Modern
Language Journal. – 1991. – Vol. 75, № 4. – P. 460–472.
12. Sheorey R., Mokhtari K. Differences in the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies among Native and Non-
Native Readers // System. – 2001. – Vol. 29, № 4. – P. 431–449.
13. Al-Qahtani A. A. Reading English as a Foreign Language: The Interplay of Abilities and Strategies // Indonesian
Journal of Applied Linguistics. – 2021. – Vol. 10, № 3. – DOI: 10.17509/ijal.v10i3.31738. – URL:
https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v10i3.31738.
14. Plonsky L. The Effectiveness of Second Language Strategy Instruction: A Meta-Analysis // Language Learning. –
2011. – Vol. 61, № 4. – P. 993–1038.
15. Taylor A., Stevens J. R., Asher J. W. The Effects of Explicit Reading Strategy Training on L2 Reading
Comprehension: A Meta-Analysis // Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching / Ed. by J. M. Norris, L.
Ortega. – Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006. – P. 213–244.
16. Palincsar A. S., Brown A. L. Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring
Activities // Cognition and Instruction. – 1984. – Vol. 1, № 2. – P. 117–175.
17. Laufer B. What Percentage of Text-Lexis Is Essential for Comprehension? // Special Language: From Humans
Thinking to Thinking Machines / Ed. by C. Laurén, M. Nordman. – Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1989. – P. 316–323.
18. Hu M., Nation I. S. P. Unknown Vocabulary Density and Reading Comprehension // Reading in a Foreign Language.
– 2000. – Vol. 13, № 1. – P. 403–430.
19. Coxhead A. A New Academic Word List // TESOL Quarterly. – 2000. – Vol. 34, № 2. – P. 213–238.
20. Dudley-Evans T., St John M. J. Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach. –
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
21. Hyland K. English for Academic Purposes: An Advanced Resource Book. – London: Routledge, 2006.
22. Tomlinson C. A. The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners. – 2nd ed. – Alexandria,
VA: ASCD, 2014.
23. Vygotsky L. S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. – Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1978.
24. Jalolov J. J. Chet til o‘qitish metodikasi. – Toshkent: O‘qituvchi, 2012.
25. Hoshimov O‘. H., Yoqubov I. Y. Ingliz tili o‘qitish metodikasi. – Toshkent: Sharq, 2003.
26. Soliyev U. Pedagogical Approaches to Developing Reading Competence in Future English Teacher Education //
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika – Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics. – 2026. – URL:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/foreign-linguistics.
27. Chamot A. U., O’Malley J. M. The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning
Approach. – Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1994.