Friday, September 6, 2019
Predicate Devices for Medical Stent Essay Example for Free
Predicate Devices for Medical Stent Essay Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System PREDICATE DEVICES:  ·Ã‚        Cordis ® Corporation, ATWTM Marker Wire Steerable Guidewire, K994358  ·Ã‚        Lake Region Manufacturing, Inc., Coronary, Peripheral and Renal Steerable Hydrophilic Guidewire, K042338  ·Ã‚        EV3 ® Inc., Nitrex ® Guidewire, K031864  ·Ã‚        BioSphere Medical, Inc., Sequitor TM Steerable Guidewire, K061171 PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent PREDICATE DEVICES:  ·Ã‚        PORGES ureteral stent from BIVONA  ·Ã‚        VORTEKâ„ ¢ and BIOSOFTâ„ ¢ ureteral double loop stents Description of Device The Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System is a medical grade, disposable guidewire system. The product will be used in coronary and renal stenting procedures. The product is provided sterile and intended for single use. This finished product will be compatible with 6, 7 and 8 French catheters. The PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stents are supplied in kits containing the following: 1. A double loop ureteral stent and an obturator; 2. A guide-wire, where applicable; Predicate Devices    3 3. A pusher (where applicable supplied with a clamp) The ureteral stent kits are supplied sterile and for single use only. Functional Components Medical grade, disposable guidewire system. The product is provided sterile and intended for single use. This finished product will be compatible with 6, 7 and 8 French catheters. A double loop ureteral stent and an obturator; A guide-wire, where applicable; and, A pusher (where applicable supplied with a clamp) Principle of Operation The Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System will be used by interventional cardiologists and interventional radiologists to ensure precise stent implantation in aorta-ostial procedures. This is a double loop ureteral stent for use in the drainage of the upper urinary tract over fistulas or ureteral obstructions (e.g. periureteral tumour; cicatrisation stent; management of ureteral stenoses; partial enlargement of the diameter: localized stenoses connected with ureteropelvic junction; and, total enlargement of the diameter: stenoses over all or part of the ureter. Predicate Devices    4 Properties of Device Relevant to Diagnosis/Treatment/ Prevention/ Cure/ Mitigation of Condition The device is a medical grade, disposable guidewire system This finished product will be compatible with 6, 7 and 8 French catheters. The product will be used in coronary and renal stenting procedures. The catheter is manufactured entirely from silicone elastomer. The ureteral stents are made of the same yellow silicone tubing as the predicate silicone ureteral stent. They are steerable or non-steerable, and radiopaque. Renal and vesical loops may be either closed or open. The straight section may be totally or partially reinforced. The eyes are lateral and staggered and are situated every 2 cm along the entire length of the stent (except for the no eye on the straight section version). The ureteral stents have either a fixed core guide-wire, a movable core guide-wire or no guide-wire,depending upon the method of use. The steerable ureteral stents have connectable pushers, and non-steerable stents have simple pushers. All these properties are relevant for its intended use as specified below. Definition of Intended Use The Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System is intended for use in aorta-ostial procedures to introduce and position catheters, stents and other interventional devices within the coronary and peripheral vasculature. In addition, the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System is intended to facilitate the alignment of interventional devices and function as an alignment tool. Predicate Devices    5 The PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent is intended for the exact same use as the current PORGES ureteral stent (K881744) and VORTEKâ„ ¢ and BIOSOFTâ„ ¢ ureteral double loop stents (K981591). The PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent is used for: A. Standard versions: 1. Drainage of the upper urinary tract over fistulas or ureteral obstructions (e.g. periureteral tumour 2. Cicatrisation stent B. Reinforced versions: 1. Management of ureteral stenoses 2. Partial enlargement of the diameter: localized stenoses connected with ureteropelvic junction 3. Total enlargement of the diameter; stenoses over all or part of the ureter. Comparison to â€Å"Substantially Equivalent†Device The indications for use for the predicate devices are substantially equivalent to the proposed indications for use for the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System. The technological characteristics for the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System are also substantially equivalent to the predicate devices. Any differences in the technological characteristics between the devices do not raise any new issues of safety or efficacy. Thus, the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices. Predicate Devices    6 Predicate Devices    6 The PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent has similar technological and performance characteristics to the predicate devices. The catheter is manufactured entirely from silicone elastomer as for the predicate devices. The ureteral stents are made of the same yellow silicone tubing as the predicate silicone ureteral stent. They are steerable or non-steerable, and radiopaque. Safety and Effectiveness Summary The safety of the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System was evaluated through design verification testing, biocompatibility testing and preclinical animal testing. The collective results have demonstrated that the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System is safe and is substantially equivalent to the respective predicate devices with regard to safety and efficacy. Any differences in technological characteristics between the Ostial Pro Stent Positioning System and the predicate devices do not raise any new issues of safety or efficacy. The PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent is held to the same design, manufacture, and performance specifications as the predicate devices. Substantial equivalence of the devices with the VORTEKâ„ ¢ and BIOSOFTâ„ ¢ ureteral double loop stents (K981591) with respect to functional performance has been demonstrated in conformity with the FDA Guidance for the content of premarket notifications for ureteral stents dated February 10th, 1993. Where available, standard specifications are used Predicate Devices    7 to establish test methods. Tests are conducted in conditions similar to most unfavorable conditions of       Predicate Devices    7 medical/surgical practice. The following tests have been performed : 1. Flow rate through the stent; 2. Elongation and tensile strength of the stent after a 18 month soaking period in different buffer solutions; 3. Loop strength The PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent passes biocompatibilityt esting per IS0 10993-1. The data currently available for the silicone stents enables them to be validated for an implantation period of up to 12 Predicate Devices    8 months. The decision to leave the withdrawal wire in place on the stent must be taken in relation to the planned implantation period. Periodic examinations via radiographic and/or cystoscopic means are recommended to evaluate stent efficiency and to observe for possible complications. The stent must be replaced if encrustation hampers drainage, if there is indication of infection in the area of the stentor in case of migration or rupture. Predicate Devices    9 References 510(k) Summary. 510(k) Notification K062192. 510(k) Premarket Notification. (2007).  Retrieved March 23, 2008, from Ostial Solutions, LLC.            http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/pdf6/K062192.pdf Section J: 51O(k) Summary. PORGESâ„ ¢ Silicone double loop ureteral stent 510(k)       submission. (2002). Retrieved March 23, 2008.            http://69.20.19.211/cdrh/pdf/k013921.pdf
Syntax and Semantics Essay Example for Free
Syntax and Semantics Essay In programming language theory, semantics is the field concerned with the rigorous mathematical study of the meaning of programming languages. It does so by evaluating the meaning of syntactically legal strings defined by a specific programming language, showing the computation involved. In such a case that the evaluation would be of syntactically illegal strings, the result would be non-computation. Semantics describes the processes a computer follows when executing a program in that specific language. This can be shown by describing the relationship between the input and output of a program, or an explanation of how the program will execute on a certain platform, hence creating a model of computation. Semantics reveals the meaning of syntactically valid strings in a language. For natural languages, this means correlating sentences and phrases with the objects, thoughts, and feelings of our experiences. For programming languages, semantics describes the behavior that a computer follows when executing a program in the language. We might disclose this behavior by describing the relationship between the input and output of a program or by a step-by-step explanation of how a program will execute on a real or an abstract machine. Semantics is concerned with the interpretation or understanding of programs and how to predict the outcome of program execution. The semantics of a programming language describe the relation between the syntax and the model of computation. Semantics can be thought of as a function which maps syntactical constructs to the computational model. This approach is called syntax-directed semantics There are several widely used techniques ( algebraic, axiomatic, denotational, operational, and translation) for the description of the semantics of programming languages. †¢Algebraic semantics describe the meaning of a program by defining an algebra. The algebraic relationships and operations are described by axioms and equations. †¢Axiomatic semantics defines the meaning of the program implicitly. It makes assertions about relationships that hold at each point in the execution of the program. Axioms define the properties of the control structures and state the properties that may be inferred. A property about a program is deduced by using the axioms. Each program has a pre-condition which describes the initial conditions required by the program prior to execution and a post-condition which describes, upon termination of the program, the desired program property. †¢Denotational semantics tell what is computed by giving a mathematical object (typically a function) which is the meaning of the program. Denotational semantics are used in comparitive studies of programming langauges. †¢Operational semantics tell how a computation is performed by defining how to simulate the execution of the program. Operational semantics may describe the syntactic transformations which mimic the execution of the program on an abstract machine or define a translation of the program into recursive functions. Operational semantics are used when learning a programming language and by compiler writers. †¢Translation semantics describe how to translate a program into an other langauge usually the language of a machine. Translation semantics are used in compilers. Much of the work in the semantics of programming languages is motivated by the problems encountered in trying to construct and understand imperative programs programs with assignment commands. Since the assignment command reassigns values to variables, the assignment can have unexpected effects in distant portions of the program. Syntax In computer science, the syntax of a computer language is the set of rules that defines the combinations of symbols that are considered to be correctly structured document or fragment in that language. This applies both to programming languages, where the document represents source code, and markup languages, where the document represents data. The syntax of a language defines its surface form.[1] Text-based computer languages are based on sequences of characters, while visual programming languages are based on the spatial layout and connections between symbols (which may be textual or graphical). Documents that are syntactically invalid are said to have a syntax error. Syntax refers to the ways symbols may be combined to create well-formed sentences (or programs) in the language. Syntax deï ¬ nes the formal relations between the constituents of a language, thereby providing a structural description of the various expressions that make up legal strings in the language. Syntax deals solely with the form and structure of symbols in a language without any consideration given to their meaning. Syntax – the form – is contrasted with semantics – the meaning. In processing computer languages, semantic processing generally comes after syntactic processing, but in some cases semantic processing is necessary for complete syntactic analysis, and these are done together or concurrently. In a compiler, the syntactic analysis comprises the frontend, while semantic analysis comprises the backend (and middle end, if this phase is distinguished). Syntax versus semantics The syntax of a language describes the form of a valid program, but does not provide any information about the meaning of the program or the results of executing that program. The meaning given to a combination of symbols is handled by semantics (either formal or hard-coded in a reference implementation). Not all syntactically correct programs are semantically correct. Many syntactically correct programs are nonetheless ill-formed, per the languages rules; and may (depending on the language specification and the soundness of the implementation) result in an error on translation or execution. In some cases, such programs may exhibit undefined behavior. Even when a program is well-defined within a language, it may still have a meaning that is not intended by the person who wrote it. Using natural language as an example, it may not be possible to assign a meaning to a grammatically correct sentence or the sentence may be false: †¢Colorless green ideas sleep furiously. is grammatically well-formed but has no generally accepted meaning. †¢John is a married bachelor. is grammatically well-formed but expresses a meaning that cannot be true. Statement In computer programming a statement is the smallest standalone element of an imperative programming language. A program written in such a language is formed by a sequence of one or more statements. A statement will have internal components (e.g., expressions). Many languages (e.g. C) make a distinction between statements and definitions, with a statement only containing executable code and a definition declaring an identifier. A distinction can also be made between simple and compound statements; the latter may contain statements as components.
Thursday, September 5, 2019
Investigation of Tunisian Geography Teachers
Investigation of Tunisian Geography Teachers Introduction The purpose of this study was to investigate some Tunisian geography teachers/researchers reading of research articles (RA) in English in their field, in particular their use of metadiscourse and the factors that might affect this use. A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods addressed the purposes of this study. Two major reasons have motivated the choice of this topic: theoretical and contextual. Theoretical Justifications Of The Study A good number of studies have highlighted the facilitative role that metadiscourse plays in reading comprehension (e.g. Camiciottoli, 2003). Metadiscourse is defined, in the present study, as â€Å"self-reflective linguistic material referring to the evolving text and to the writer and to the imagined reader of that text (Hyland and Tse, 2004, p. 156). In defining reading comprehension, I adopted the componential interactive approach (e.g. Grabe, 2008). According to this approach, readers are active participants who actively take knowledge, connect it to previously assimilated knowledge and make it theirs by constructing their own interpretation. They develop, modify and even reflect on all or some of the ideas displayed in the text. Research has shown that second language (SL) and foreign language (FL) reading comprehension process is highly complex (Grabe, 2008; Koda, 2007; Sheng, 2000). Indeed, a wide range of variables intervene in the process: linguistic, metalinguistic, cognitive, metacognitive, social and psychological (Koda, 2005; Pressley, 2006; Rapp et al., 2007). Researchers reported the difficulty to clearly understand the exact degree of the contribution of each variable to the final product. All aspects of the reader variables interact with one another and interact with textual and contextual factors (e.g. Dhieb-Henia, 2003). Different models have been proposed in the literature in order to take account of these factors (the Top-down approach, the Bottom-up approach, the Interactive approach) (Grabe, 2008). Also, there has been a debate among SL reading researchers about whether SL reading is a language problem or a reading problem (Alderson, 1984, Bernhardt and Kamil, 1995; Grabe, 1991; Khaldieh, 2001). Some researchers contended that some SL linguistic knowledge threshold was necessary in order to get first language (L1) reading knowledge to engage and first language reading strategies to transfer (Cummins (1979) threshold level of language proficiency and Clarkes (1978) linguistic ceiling). Others argued that reading difficulties in a SL can be caused by a deficient reading ability in general, or can be caused by a failing transfer of L1 reading ability to an FL (the linguistic interdependence hypothesis, or alternatively called the common underlying principle (Bernhardt Kamil, 1995). Reading in English for Academic purposes (EAP) is still a more complex process (Flowerdew and Peacock, 2001). EAP is concerned with the English required for specific academic purpose such as studying at universities and colleges, doing research or publishing papers. Based on the literature, the present study views EAP reading as the ability to read an EAP discourse as the product of a particular disciplinary culture (e.g., Swales, 2004). Daoud (1991, p. 6), for instance, recommended that non-native readers (of EAP) should acquire â€Å"those abilities which would allow them to recognize the existence of certain types of implicit presuppositional rhetorical information, abilities that the experienced native reader possesses. Studies in Contrastive Rhetoric (CR) have demonstrated that texts are shaped by their cultural origins even if they participate in international discourses such as those of the science disciplines (Burgess, 2002; Connor, 2004; Kaplan, 1966, 1987). Mauranen (1993) asserted that â€Å"science, or more widely, academic research, does not exist outside writing, and so we cannot represent it, or realize it, without being influenced by the variation in the writing cultures that carry it†(p. 4). This suggests that the belief that scientific academic discourses merely transmit natural facts is debatable. Hyland (2005) argued that discourses are never neutral but always engaged in that they realize the interests, the positions, the perspectives and the values of those who enact them (p. 4). The RA, for instance, is a discourse written by a particular writer belonging to a particular scientific discourse community in the purpose of engaging an audience and persuading them of his/her findings (Adel, 2006; Hyland, 2005; Martin, 2004). Webber (1994) explained â€Å"scientists are writers who fight for their ideas to be accepted, recognized, and to be competitive and get their work published†(p. 257). The tendency of scientific writers to choose a particular range of rhetorical devices, might reveal their attempts to establish interpersonal relations, to interact with their audience and to express personal attitudes about the content of their texts and about their audience( s). Metadiscourse is the linguistic system that enables writers to achieve these goals (Adel, 2006; Hyland, 2004; 2005; Martin, 2004). It represents some internal stylistic map whereby an external reality is created and conveyed. Metadiscourse also helps to perceive discourse as a social action between two parties, author(s) and audience, researchers and scientific communities; in other words, writers and readers are viewed as social agents and texts as a social enterprise in which writers do not only want their messages to be understood (an illocutionary effect), but also to be accepted (a perlocutionary effect) (Hyland, 2005). Hyland (2001, p. 550) argues â€Å"a central aspect of the writer-reader dialogue involves careful interpersonal negotiations in which writers seek to balance claims for the significance, originality, and truth of their work against the convictions of their readers†. The readers ability to construct the writer-intended meaning, via metadiscourse, is one ma jor key to a successful comprehension. This idea of interaction was grounded in Hallidays (1985) metafunctional theory of language. Halliday (1985) argued that language is a system of meanings and maintains that the writer needs to operate at three levels: the ideational, the textual and the interpersonal. On the ideational plane, the writer supplies information about the subject of the text and expands propositional content, on the interactive plane, he/she does not add propositional material, but helps readers organize, classify, interpret, evaluate, and react to such material. Many researchers have attempted to investigate the contributions of metadiscourse to language teaching. However, most of the literature on metadiscourse has focused on the writing skill. The immense part of these studies has compared writers use of metadiscourse across cultures and disciplines (Dahl, 2004; Hyland TLe, 2004; Ifantidou, 2005; Lee, 2002; Perez Macia, 2002; Steffensen Cheng, 1996). Only a few studies have examined the role that this crucial part of discourse plays in reading comprehension skill. There is still an opaque picture of the correlation between the recognition of metadiscourse markers and reading comprehension performance. Indeed, a good number of the studies conducted with native readers of English has yielded inconclusive results (e.g., Crismore and Vande Kopple, 1997; OKeefe, 1988). While some researchers demonstrated the positive role of metadiscourse (e.g. Vande Kopple, 2002), other researchers concluded that metadiscourse did not have larger effects in their studies (e.g., Crismore, 1989). Research on the interaction between SL reading and metadiscourse seems to be still in its infancy. The little research carried out has demonstrated the complexity of the entreprise (Camiciottoli, 2003; Daoud, 1991; Dhieb-Henia, 2003; Mustapha and Premalatha, 2001). In fact, research has shown that many factors could intervene in the reading process and hamper EAP readers from using metadiscourse, namely language proficiency, prior disciplinary knowledge and metacognitive strategies (e.g., Camiciottoli, 2003; Daoud, 1991; Dhieb-Henia, 2003). Language proficiency refers to the ability to understand technical and semi-technical language used by a particular academic discourse community. Metacognition is the awareness readers have of their own mental processes and the subsequent ability to monitor, regulate, and direct themselves to a desired end. Prior knowledge includes knowledge of the rhetorical conventions of the genre and the subject discipline. It has been also interesting to note that no study has investigated SL experts use of metadiscourse when reading materials in their fields. Local Justifications Of The Study Reading RAs is a prerequisite for doing research, updating ones knowledge and ultimately publishing RAs. Publication is not optional or a matter of personal choice in Tunisia. The last reform of postgraduate studies has given prior importance to the number of published RAs (Labbassi, 2000). Therefore, researchers who would like to become visible in the international scientific community, have to read and write RAs in English, the international Lingua Frinca in the age of electronic communication. In fact, in Tunisia there are few specialised local journals. Labassi (2008, p. 4120 aptly put â€Å"reading and writing English have become unavoidable conditions for joining academic communities in almost all disciplines†. The Tunisian geographical society seems to be eager to integrate into the international geographic community. Indeed, the Tunisian Geographers Association, in collaboration with the International Geographical Union (IGU), managed to organise the 31st International Geographical Congress (IGC) in the country in 2008. Tunisia was the first Arab and African country to host the biggest appointment for geographers all over the world. Adding to that, there is a clear political intention to enhance English status in Tunisia. English is gaining ground over French, which has been until recently the principal language of modernity, as well as the dominant economic language. (Champagne, 2007; Labassi, 2009a, b; Tossa, 1995). The Tunisian government is aiming at creating an English-speaking workforce to enhance the prospects for successful integration into the global economy. Under the New Maitrise reform of 1998, English was introduced in the curriculum of all undergraduate students from all disciplines (Labassi, 2009 a). What is ironical, however, is that â€Å"potential researchers and professionals who have to read a literature, which is up to 90% in some disciplines in English, are not offered courses in English†(Labassi, 2009 a, p. 249). However, while the literature abounds with arguments for and against the role that metadiscourse plays in reading comprehension, little research has been conducted to assess the reading practices of the Tunisian geography society.Therefore, the present research aims to fill in this gap and gain more insight into the reading practices of some Tunisian university teachers/researchers of geography; in particular it aims to assess the extent they use metadiscourse to facilitate their comprehension of RAs in English in their field and to find out about the variables that may hinder this use. Research Objectives The main aims of the present research are three-fold: (1) to determine to what extent Tunisian geography faculty researchers use metadiscourse markers when reading research articles in English in their fields, (2) to assess whether this use facilitates their comprehension of research articles in English in their fields, (3) to find to what extent this use is related to the participants proficiency in English, to text familiarity (defined in the present study in terms of both content and formal knowledge) and to their use of metacognitive reading strategies. Research Questions The present study addresses the following questions: 1. To what extent do Tunisian geography faculty researchers use metadiscourse markers when reading research articles in English in their fields? 2. To what extent does this use relate to their comprehension of research articles in English in their fields? 3. To what extent do their proficiency in English, discipline-related knowledge (content and genre) and metacognitive reading strategies contribute to their use of metadiscourse markers and comprehension of research articles in English in their fields? Significance Of The Study This study explored the use of metadiscourse by some Tunisian geography faculty when reading research articles in English in their disciplines. Theoretically, findings from the study can help clarify the role metadiscourse plays in SL reading comprehension. The research into metadiscourse markers is useful in itself. It helps us have an insight into how writers interact with their readers to establish a reader-friendly atmosphere and to persuade them of their findings. Such information can add to our understanding of factors contributing to language pedagogy, in particular to the teaching of reading comprehension skill. At the practical level, information from this study can be useful for making decisions about organizing training sessions to university teachers/researchers to introduce them to the rhetorical conventions of academic genres, namely the research article and to the rhetorical importance of metadiscourse. They should be made aware of the facilitative role of metadiscourse markers when reading academic materials in English. Metadiscourse markers should be taught explicitly in EAP reading comprehension classes as a means to enhance the researchers reading comprehension ability. Thesis Organisation This thesis consists of six chapters. The first chapter describes the background of the research and the context in which the research was conducted. The second chapter comprises two sections: the first is a review of research into the nature of foreign language reading. The second section provides a descriptive account of what metadiscourse is, then explores the studies conducted on the effects of metadiscourse, reviews a few taxonomies on metadiscourse and ends with a description of the taxonomy to be adopted in the present study. Research questions are presented after the discussions of these reviews. Chapter three concerns the methodological decisions taken for this research. It describes how the participants were selected, how the material and instruments were piloted, and which materials and instruments were finally used. It provides as well an account of how the main study was conducted and how the data were analysed. Chapter four reports the findings of the present study. Cha pter five discusses the key findings from this study and highlights their implications for the area of EAP. The contributions and limitations of this research and suggestions for future research are presented in chapter six. Literature Review The previous chapter introduced the context for this research. This chapter clarifies the two central variables underlying the present study, namely EAP reading comprehension and metadiscourse use. It can be divided into three parts. In the first part, I will focus on the reading variable. Since foreign language reading modeling has been strongly influenced by first language reading theories, I will first discuss four different approaches to reading in a first language, I will then explain how they have been adopted in and adapted for a foreign language reading context. Next, I will elaborate on theoretical concepts particular to reading in English for academic purposes (being the focus of the present study) and I will draw attention to studies that investigated the interaction between reading in English for Academic purposes and language proficiency, background knowledge and reading strategies. This part aims at underscoring the complexity of the EAP reading process and the need to account for the many factors intervening in it. In the second part, I will introduce the second variable of the present study, metadiscouse. I will first try to define the concept and then provide an overview of its main assumptions and classifications to highlight the confusion surrounding the term and emphasize its benefits to EAP readers, and last I will detail Hylands (2005) taxonomy, the theoretical framework within which the present study is conducted. In the last part I will review some empirical studies that have investigated the interaction between metadiscourse and EAP reading. This part will also draw attention to the scarcity of research in this area. Reading Comprehension Understanding the processes involved in reading comprehension is a prerequisite to select reliable and valid research instruments. Alderson (2000) stated â€Å"if we are not able to define what we mean by the ‘ability to read, it will be difficult to devise means of assessing such abilities†(p. 49). Likewise, Hogan (2004, p. 1) maintained The real question we are asking when we look at assessing reading is: What distinguishes a good reader from a poor reader? Implicit in this question is an even more fundamental question: What are we doing when we read?†Assessment is an attempt to answer the first question, but if we cannot at least try to answer the second, we do not know what we are assessing, and any measure or description of reading proficiency we suggest is meaningless. Thus, in what follows I will first attempt to define the construct of reading comprehension, and then present a number of models that provide a framework for organizing and explaining the nature of reading comprehension. I will give due prominence, however, to the issues specific to reading in EAP dwelling upon the complex cognitive processes that EAP readers go through when they read. I will try to show how certain variables such as linguistic proficiency, background knowledge and reading strategies interact with reading comprehension process. Definition Of The Construct Of Reading Comprehension Reading comprehension has often been a subject of controversy among teachers and scholars. Kintsch (1998, p. 2) stated â€Å"the terms understanding and comprehension are not scientific terms but are commonsense expressions. As with other such expressions, their meaning is fuzzy and imprecise†. In defining the construct of reading comprehension, I adopted Kintschs (1998) theory of human text comprehension, as it is a â€Å"widely-recognized†theory of text comprehension and as it has â€Å"consistently defined the research agenda for the field of text comprehension†(Grabe, 2008, p. 3). The concepts of ‘Comprehension and ‘Understanding are used interchangeably in the present study as â€Å"a matter of linguistic variation†following Kintsch. ‘Comprehension is to be understood in relation to ‘perception and ‘problem solving. Both ‘perception and ‘understanding involve unconscious and automatic processes. They â€Å"can each be described as a process of constraint satisfaction†(p. 3). They differ, however, in that ‘understanding should result in an action, be it â€Å"an overt action in the environment or a mental event†(p. 3). Kintsch (1998, p. 2) stated â€Å"understand is used when the relationship between some object and its context is at issue or when action is required†. As for the ‘problem solving process, it is more complex and involves more demand on cognitive resources. It is an action readers resort to when they fail to understand something. Kintsch (1998) maintained â€Å" perception and understanding are the processes people normally use; when an impasse develops in perception or understanding, they resort to problem solving as a repair process†(p. 3). Reading is the process in which the reader sequentially deals with letters, words and sentences. It was defined by Sheng (2000, p. 2) as â€Å"the process of recognition, interpretation, and perception of written or printed material†. Comprehension, on the other hand, involves the ability of the reader to grasp and interpret the meaning of written material, and to reason about cognitive processes that lead to understanding. In other words, it not only covers cognitive understanding of the materials at both surface and deep structure levels, but also the readers reactions to the content. Sheng (2000, p. 2) maintained â€Å"it is a more complex psychological process and includes in addition to linguistic factors (phonological, morphological, syntactic, and semantic elements), cognitive and emotional factors†. In sum, the process of reading deals with language forms while the process of comprehension, the end product, deals with language content. The term ‘reading comprehension can, in some respects, be considered a complex construct, as highlighted by numerous reading researchers (Carrell, 1988; Grabe, 1991; Kintsch, 1998; de Beaugrande, 1981). According to Brumfit (1980), reading comprehension is a complex activity covering â€Å"a combination of perceptual, linguistic and cognitive abilities†(p. 3). It is a constructive thinking process which â€Å"involves application, analysis, evaluation and imagination†(Taylor, 1984, p.391). Grabe (2008) attributed the complexity of the reading comprehension process to the multiple purposes of reading and the complex cognitive processes involved. In the present study, reading is viewed as a process of communication between a writer and a reader and this communication will be incomplete unless it is affected by the readers evaluation and appreciation. In fact, both the reader and the writer contribute to the reading process. Despite the uniqueness of second language reading processes (Geva and Wang, 2001; Koda, 2007), second language reading has drawn extensively on first language reading research. Different models have been adopted and adapted based on a variety of L1 reading theories. Below is a review of these theories. Reading Theories In A First Language A reading model provides an imagined representation of the reading process. It provides ways to represent a theory and explain what reading involves and how reading works based on available evidence. Goldman, et al., (2007) explained â€Å"the term model refers specifically to a representation of the psychological processes that comprise a component or set of components involved in human text comprehension†(p. 27). According to Samuels (1994), a good theoretical model has three characteristics: it summarizes a considerable amount of information discovered in the past; it helps explain and make more understandable what is happening in the present, and it allows one to make predictions about the future (p. 816). Researchers, however, are somehow cautious about the comprehensibility of the model because of its inability to account for all the available evidence that exists. Dhieb-Henia (2002) warned that the models are not always backed up by sufficient empirical evidence to val idate (them) (p. 18). In the same fashion, Grabe (2008) argued â€Å"to assert that a model must be an accurate synthesis, () is problematic†. Thus, these researchers recommend that we consider these models as a possible representation of the reading process, rather than absolute models. They nonetheless stress the key role that these models play in â€Å"synthesizing information and establishing central claims†(Grabe, 2008, p. 84). Reviewing the literature, four major approaches have been proposed in an attempt to understand the reading process. The major distinction between the approaches is the emphasis given to text-based variables such as vocabulary, syntax, and grammatical structure and reader-based variables such as the readers background knowledge, cognitive development, strategy use, interest, and purpose (Lally, 1998). The following sections review these approaches and discuss them with reference to the specific context of the present study. The Bottom-Up Approach The concept of decoding is central to what is usually called the bottom-up approach to reading. The term bottom-up originated in perception psychology, where it is used to signify the processing of external stimuli (Mulder, 1996). In reading research, the term is not always used in a consistent manner and has drifted away from the original meaning it had in perception psychology. Nevertheless, the term always focuses on what are called lower order processes, i.e. decoding ability and word recognition ability (Mulder, 1996). These abilities are believed to form the key to proficient reading. In other words, the reader perceives every letter, organizes the perceived letters into words, and then organizes the words into phrases, clauses and sentences. Meaning, at any level, (e.g. word or phrase), is accessed only once processing at previous (e.g. lower) levels has been completed (Carrell, 1988). The argument is that bottom-up processing requires a literal or fundamental understanding of the language. Carrell (1993, p. 2) maintained Reading (is) viewed primarily as a decoding process of reconstructing the authors intended meaning via recognizing the printed letters and words, and building up a meaning for a text from the smallest textual units at the bottom (letters and words) to larger and larger units at the top (phrases, clauses, intersentential linkages. Advocates of this theory argue that successful reading comprehension of a text relies heavily on an efficient application of bottom-up processes. The best known representative of this type of approach is Goughs (1972) model. The model is summarised by Urquhart and Weir as follows: T]he reader begins with letters, which are recognized by a SCANNER. The information thus gained is passed to a DECODER, which converts the string of letters into a string of systematic phonemes. This string is then passed to a LIBRARIAN, where with the help of the LEXICON, it is recognized as a word. The reader then fixates on the next word, and proceeds in the same way until all the words in a sentence have been processed, at which point they proceed to a component called MERLIN, in which syntactic and semantic rules operate to assign a meaning to the sentence. The final stage is that of the Vocal System, where the reader utters orally what has first been accessed through print. (Urquhart Weir, 1998: 40) The decoding approach, however, has been viewed by many as inadequate. According to Eskey (1973), the approach underestimates the contribution of the reader. The reader, according to this approach, does not read the text through a self-determined, predefined perspective or goal, but rather lets the text itself (and therefore its author) determine the reading process (Urquhart Weir, 1998). The approach fails to recognize that readers utilize their expectations about the text based on their knowledge of language and how it works. Similarly, Carrell (1984) stated that this view assumes a rather passive view of reading. Grabe (2008) stated â€Å"we know that such an extreme view of reading is not accurate, and no current model of reading depicts reading as a pure bottom-up process†(p. 89). Criticism of the bottom-up theory has given impetus to the Top- down theory. The Top-Down Approach Whereas the bottom-up approach gives incoming information a central place in the reading process, the top-down approach focuses on the knowledge a reader already possesses. It stresses what are called higher order cognitive processes. The top-down theory posits a non-linear view of the reading process, i.e. from higher levels of processing, and proceeds to use the lower levels selectively. It assumes that readers interrogate the text rather than process it completely. They get meaning by comparing their expectations to a sample of information from the text. The proponents of this theory argue that readers experience and background knowledge is essential for understanding a text. Grabe (2008) explained â€Å"top-down models assume that the reader actively controls the comprehension process, directed by reader goals, expectations, and strategic processing†(p. 89). Carrell (1993, p. 4) stated In the top-down view of second language reading, not only is the reader an active participant in the reading process, but everything in the readers prior experience or background knowledge plays a significant role in the process. In this view, not only is the readers prior linguistic knowledge (â€Å"linguistic†schemata) and level of proficiency in the second language important, but the readers prior background knowledge of the content area of the text (â€Å"content†schemata) as well as of the rhetorical structure of the text (â€Å"formal†schemata) are also important. According to this view, the readers background knowledge may compensate for certain syntactic and lexical deficiencies. Readers start with their background knowledge (whole text) and make predictions about the text, and then verify their predictions by using text data (words) in the text (Urquhart Cyril, 1998). Clarke and Silberstein (1977, p.136-137) stated that â€Å"more information is contributed by the reader than by the print on the page, that is, readers understand what they read because they are able to take the stimulus beyond its graphic representation†. The most frequently cited representative of this approach is Goodmans (1976) top-down model. He defined reading as a process of verifying hypotheses  hypotheses that are based on knowledge which the reader possesses. His model, also called the guessing game theory, is summarised by Bossers as follows: According to Goodman, the reading process consisted of sampling and selecting cues, on the basis of which an interpretation is predicted or guessed, which is subsequently tested against the semantic context, and then confirmed or rejected as the reader processes further language, and so on. These stages of the process were called features of the reading process or effective strategies or effective reading behaviour alternatively. (Bossers,1992:10). A very influential theory that is usually discussed in relation to the top-down perspective is that of schema theory. The prior knowledge gained through experiences, stored in ones mind and activated when readers encounter new information is referred to in the literature as schemata (Carrell, 1980; Widdowson, 1983). Schema Theory Schema theory, which comes from cognitive psychology, owes much to the work of Bartlett (Rumelhart, 1981) and Piaget (Orasanu and Penny, 1986). Schemata, the plural form of schema, also called ‘building blocks of cognition (Rumelhart, 1981, p. 3), refer to â€Å"abstract knowledge structure (s) stored in memory†(Garner, 1987, p. 4). They are defined as the mental framework that helps the learner organize knowledge, direct perception and attention, and guide recall (Bruming, 1995), as cognitive constructs which allow for the organization of information in long-term memory (Widdowson,1983) and as the underlying connections that allow new experience and information to be aligned with previous knowledge ( McCarthy ,1991). Within the framework of schema theory, reading comprehension is no longer a linear, text-driven process, but is the process of the interpretation of new information, and the assimilation and accommodation of this information into memory structures or schemata (Anderson Pearson, 1984). Schemata are not static entities, however, but are continually constructed and reconstructed through the processes of assimilation and accommodation. In other words, a comprehension of a text involves activation of relevant schemata, which are initiated as a result of ‘bottom-up observation, and proceeds through a constant process of testing the activated schemata, evaluating their suitability, and refining or discarding them (Rumelhart, (1984, pp. 3, 6). Rumelhart (1981, p. 4) stated â€Å"according to schema theories, all knowledge is packed into units †¦ (which) are the schemata. Embedded in these packets of knowledge, in addition to the knowledge itself, is information about how this Investigation of Tunisian Geography Teachers Investigation of Tunisian Geography Teachers Introduction The purpose of this study was to investigate some Tunisian geography teachers/researchers reading of research articles (RA) in English in their field, in particular their use of metadiscourse and the factors that might affect this use. A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods addressed the purposes of this study. Two major reasons have motivated the choice of this topic: theoretical and contextual. Theoretical Justifications Of The Study A good number of studies have highlighted the facilitative role that metadiscourse plays in reading comprehension (e.g. Camiciottoli, 2003). Metadiscourse is defined, in the present study, as â€Å"self-reflective linguistic material referring to the evolving text and to the writer and to the imagined reader of that text (Hyland and Tse, 2004, p. 156). In defining reading comprehension, I adopted the componential interactive approach (e.g. Grabe, 2008). According to this approach, readers are active participants who actively take knowledge, connect it to previously assimilated knowledge and make it theirs by constructing their own interpretation. They develop, modify and even reflect on all or some of the ideas displayed in the text. Research has shown that second language (SL) and foreign language (FL) reading comprehension process is highly complex (Grabe, 2008; Koda, 2007; Sheng, 2000). Indeed, a wide range of variables intervene in the process: linguistic, metalinguistic, cognitive, metacognitive, social and psychological (Koda, 2005; Pressley, 2006; Rapp et al., 2007). Researchers reported the difficulty to clearly understand the exact degree of the contribution of each variable to the final product. All aspects of the reader variables interact with one another and interact with textual and contextual factors (e.g. Dhieb-Henia, 2003). Different models have been proposed in the literature in order to take account of these factors (the Top-down approach, the Bottom-up approach, the Interactive approach) (Grabe, 2008). Also, there has been a debate among SL reading researchers about whether SL reading is a language problem or a reading problem (Alderson, 1984, Bernhardt and Kamil, 1995; Grabe, 1991; Khaldieh, 2001). Some researchers contended that some SL linguistic knowledge threshold was necessary in order to get first language (L1) reading knowledge to engage and first language reading strategies to transfer (Cummins (1979) threshold level of language proficiency and Clarkes (1978) linguistic ceiling). Others argued that reading difficulties in a SL can be caused by a deficient reading ability in general, or can be caused by a failing transfer of L1 reading ability to an FL (the linguistic interdependence hypothesis, or alternatively called the common underlying principle (Bernhardt Kamil, 1995). Reading in English for Academic purposes (EAP) is still a more complex process (Flowerdew and Peacock, 2001). EAP is concerned with the English required for specific academic purpose such as studying at universities and colleges, doing research or publishing papers. Based on the literature, the present study views EAP reading as the ability to read an EAP discourse as the product of a particular disciplinary culture (e.g., Swales, 2004). Daoud (1991, p. 6), for instance, recommended that non-native readers (of EAP) should acquire â€Å"those abilities which would allow them to recognize the existence of certain types of implicit presuppositional rhetorical information, abilities that the experienced native reader possesses. Studies in Contrastive Rhetoric (CR) have demonstrated that texts are shaped by their cultural origins even if they participate in international discourses such as those of the science disciplines (Burgess, 2002; Connor, 2004; Kaplan, 1966, 1987). Mauranen (1993) asserted that â€Å"science, or more widely, academic research, does not exist outside writing, and so we cannot represent it, or realize it, without being influenced by the variation in the writing cultures that carry it†(p. 4). This suggests that the belief that scientific academic discourses merely transmit natural facts is debatable. Hyland (2005) argued that discourses are never neutral but always engaged in that they realize the interests, the positions, the perspectives and the values of those who enact them (p. 4). The RA, for instance, is a discourse written by a particular writer belonging to a particular scientific discourse community in the purpose of engaging an audience and persuading them of his/her findings (Adel, 2006; Hyland, 2005; Martin, 2004). Webber (1994) explained â€Å"scientists are writers who fight for their ideas to be accepted, recognized, and to be competitive and get their work published†(p. 257). The tendency of scientific writers to choose a particular range of rhetorical devices, might reveal their attempts to establish interpersonal relations, to interact with their audience and to express personal attitudes about the content of their texts and about their audience( s). Metadiscourse is the linguistic system that enables writers to achieve these goals (Adel, 2006; Hyland, 2004; 2005; Martin, 2004). It represents some internal stylistic map whereby an external reality is created and conveyed. Metadiscourse also helps to perceive discourse as a social action between two parties, author(s) and audience, researchers and scientific communities; in other words, writers and readers are viewed as social agents and texts as a social enterprise in which writers do not only want their messages to be understood (an illocutionary effect), but also to be accepted (a perlocutionary effect) (Hyland, 2005). Hyland (2001, p. 550) argues â€Å"a central aspect of the writer-reader dialogue involves careful interpersonal negotiations in which writers seek to balance claims for the significance, originality, and truth of their work against the convictions of their readers†. The readers ability to construct the writer-intended meaning, via metadiscourse, is one ma jor key to a successful comprehension. This idea of interaction was grounded in Hallidays (1985) metafunctional theory of language. Halliday (1985) argued that language is a system of meanings and maintains that the writer needs to operate at three levels: the ideational, the textual and the interpersonal. On the ideational plane, the writer supplies information about the subject of the text and expands propositional content, on the interactive plane, he/she does not add propositional material, but helps readers organize, classify, interpret, evaluate, and react to such material. Many researchers have attempted to investigate the contributions of metadiscourse to language teaching. However, most of the literature on metadiscourse has focused on the writing skill. The immense part of these studies has compared writers use of metadiscourse across cultures and disciplines (Dahl, 2004; Hyland TLe, 2004; Ifantidou, 2005; Lee, 2002; Perez Macia, 2002; Steffensen Cheng, 1996). Only a few studies have examined the role that this crucial part of discourse plays in reading comprehension skill. There is still an opaque picture of the correlation between the recognition of metadiscourse markers and reading comprehension performance. Indeed, a good number of the studies conducted with native readers of English has yielded inconclusive results (e.g., Crismore and Vande Kopple, 1997; OKeefe, 1988). While some researchers demonstrated the positive role of metadiscourse (e.g. Vande Kopple, 2002), other researchers concluded that metadiscourse did not have larger effects in their studies (e.g., Crismore, 1989). Research on the interaction between SL reading and metadiscourse seems to be still in its infancy. The little research carried out has demonstrated the complexity of the entreprise (Camiciottoli, 2003; Daoud, 1991; Dhieb-Henia, 2003; Mustapha and Premalatha, 2001). In fact, research has shown that many factors could intervene in the reading process and hamper EAP readers from using metadiscourse, namely language proficiency, prior disciplinary knowledge and metacognitive strategies (e.g., Camiciottoli, 2003; Daoud, 1991; Dhieb-Henia, 2003). Language proficiency refers to the ability to understand technical and semi-technical language used by a particular academic discourse community. Metacognition is the awareness readers have of their own mental processes and the subsequent ability to monitor, regulate, and direct themselves to a desired end. Prior knowledge includes knowledge of the rhetorical conventions of the genre and the subject discipline. It has been also interesting to note that no study has investigated SL experts use of metadiscourse when reading materials in their fields. Local Justifications Of The Study Reading RAs is a prerequisite for doing research, updating ones knowledge and ultimately publishing RAs. Publication is not optional or a matter of personal choice in Tunisia. The last reform of postgraduate studies has given prior importance to the number of published RAs (Labbassi, 2000). Therefore, researchers who would like to become visible in the international scientific community, have to read and write RAs in English, the international Lingua Frinca in the age of electronic communication. In fact, in Tunisia there are few specialised local journals. Labassi (2008, p. 4120 aptly put â€Å"reading and writing English have become unavoidable conditions for joining academic communities in almost all disciplines†. The Tunisian geographical society seems to be eager to integrate into the international geographic community. Indeed, the Tunisian Geographers Association, in collaboration with the International Geographical Union (IGU), managed to organise the 31st International Geographical Congress (IGC) in the country in 2008. Tunisia was the first Arab and African country to host the biggest appointment for geographers all over the world. Adding to that, there is a clear political intention to enhance English status in Tunisia. English is gaining ground over French, which has been until recently the principal language of modernity, as well as the dominant economic language. (Champagne, 2007; Labassi, 2009a, b; Tossa, 1995). The Tunisian government is aiming at creating an English-speaking workforce to enhance the prospects for successful integration into the global economy. Under the New Maitrise reform of 1998, English was introduced in the curriculum of all undergraduate students from all disciplines (Labassi, 2009 a). What is ironical, however, is that â€Å"potential researchers and professionals who have to read a literature, which is up to 90% in some disciplines in English, are not offered courses in English†(Labassi, 2009 a, p. 249). However, while the literature abounds with arguments for and against the role that metadiscourse plays in reading comprehension, little research has been conducted to assess the reading practices of the Tunisian geography society.Therefore, the present research aims to fill in this gap and gain more insight into the reading practices of some Tunisian university teachers/researchers of geography; in particular it aims to assess the extent they use metadiscourse to facilitate their comprehension of RAs in English in their field and to find out about the variables that may hinder this use. Research Objectives The main aims of the present research are three-fold: (1) to determine to what extent Tunisian geography faculty researchers use metadiscourse markers when reading research articles in English in their fields, (2) to assess whether this use facilitates their comprehension of research articles in English in their fields, (3) to find to what extent this use is related to the participants proficiency in English, to text familiarity (defined in the present study in terms of both content and formal knowledge) and to their use of metacognitive reading strategies. Research Questions The present study addresses the following questions: 1. To what extent do Tunisian geography faculty researchers use metadiscourse markers when reading research articles in English in their fields? 2. To what extent does this use relate to their comprehension of research articles in English in their fields? 3. To what extent do their proficiency in English, discipline-related knowledge (content and genre) and metacognitive reading strategies contribute to their use of metadiscourse markers and comprehension of research articles in English in their fields? Significance Of The Study This study explored the use of metadiscourse by some Tunisian geography faculty when reading research articles in English in their disciplines. Theoretically, findings from the study can help clarify the role metadiscourse plays in SL reading comprehension. The research into metadiscourse markers is useful in itself. It helps us have an insight into how writers interact with their readers to establish a reader-friendly atmosphere and to persuade them of their findings. Such information can add to our understanding of factors contributing to language pedagogy, in particular to the teaching of reading comprehension skill. At the practical level, information from this study can be useful for making decisions about organizing training sessions to university teachers/researchers to introduce them to the rhetorical conventions of academic genres, namely the research article and to the rhetorical importance of metadiscourse. They should be made aware of the facilitative role of metadiscourse markers when reading academic materials in English. Metadiscourse markers should be taught explicitly in EAP reading comprehension classes as a means to enhance the researchers reading comprehension ability. Thesis Organisation This thesis consists of six chapters. The first chapter describes the background of the research and the context in which the research was conducted. The second chapter comprises two sections: the first is a review of research into the nature of foreign language reading. The second section provides a descriptive account of what metadiscourse is, then explores the studies conducted on the effects of metadiscourse, reviews a few taxonomies on metadiscourse and ends with a description of the taxonomy to be adopted in the present study. Research questions are presented after the discussions of these reviews. Chapter three concerns the methodological decisions taken for this research. It describes how the participants were selected, how the material and instruments were piloted, and which materials and instruments were finally used. It provides as well an account of how the main study was conducted and how the data were analysed. Chapter four reports the findings of the present study. Cha pter five discusses the key findings from this study and highlights their implications for the area of EAP. The contributions and limitations of this research and suggestions for future research are presented in chapter six. Literature Review The previous chapter introduced the context for this research. This chapter clarifies the two central variables underlying the present study, namely EAP reading comprehension and metadiscourse use. It can be divided into three parts. In the first part, I will focus on the reading variable. Since foreign language reading modeling has been strongly influenced by first language reading theories, I will first discuss four different approaches to reading in a first language, I will then explain how they have been adopted in and adapted for a foreign language reading context. Next, I will elaborate on theoretical concepts particular to reading in English for academic purposes (being the focus of the present study) and I will draw attention to studies that investigated the interaction between reading in English for Academic purposes and language proficiency, background knowledge and reading strategies. This part aims at underscoring the complexity of the EAP reading process and the need to account for the many factors intervening in it. In the second part, I will introduce the second variable of the present study, metadiscouse. I will first try to define the concept and then provide an overview of its main assumptions and classifications to highlight the confusion surrounding the term and emphasize its benefits to EAP readers, and last I will detail Hylands (2005) taxonomy, the theoretical framework within which the present study is conducted. In the last part I will review some empirical studies that have investigated the interaction between metadiscourse and EAP reading. This part will also draw attention to the scarcity of research in this area. Reading Comprehension Understanding the processes involved in reading comprehension is a prerequisite to select reliable and valid research instruments. Alderson (2000) stated â€Å"if we are not able to define what we mean by the ‘ability to read, it will be difficult to devise means of assessing such abilities†(p. 49). Likewise, Hogan (2004, p. 1) maintained The real question we are asking when we look at assessing reading is: What distinguishes a good reader from a poor reader? Implicit in this question is an even more fundamental question: What are we doing when we read?†Assessment is an attempt to answer the first question, but if we cannot at least try to answer the second, we do not know what we are assessing, and any measure or description of reading proficiency we suggest is meaningless. Thus, in what follows I will first attempt to define the construct of reading comprehension, and then present a number of models that provide a framework for organizing and explaining the nature of reading comprehension. I will give due prominence, however, to the issues specific to reading in EAP dwelling upon the complex cognitive processes that EAP readers go through when they read. I will try to show how certain variables such as linguistic proficiency, background knowledge and reading strategies interact with reading comprehension process. Definition Of The Construct Of Reading Comprehension Reading comprehension has often been a subject of controversy among teachers and scholars. Kintsch (1998, p. 2) stated â€Å"the terms understanding and comprehension are not scientific terms but are commonsense expressions. As with other such expressions, their meaning is fuzzy and imprecise†. In defining the construct of reading comprehension, I adopted Kintschs (1998) theory of human text comprehension, as it is a â€Å"widely-recognized†theory of text comprehension and as it has â€Å"consistently defined the research agenda for the field of text comprehension†(Grabe, 2008, p. 3). The concepts of ‘Comprehension and ‘Understanding are used interchangeably in the present study as â€Å"a matter of linguistic variation†following Kintsch. ‘Comprehension is to be understood in relation to ‘perception and ‘problem solving. Both ‘perception and ‘understanding involve unconscious and automatic processes. They â€Å"can each be described as a process of constraint satisfaction†(p. 3). They differ, however, in that ‘understanding should result in an action, be it â€Å"an overt action in the environment or a mental event†(p. 3). Kintsch (1998, p. 2) stated â€Å"understand is used when the relationship between some object and its context is at issue or when action is required†. As for the ‘problem solving process, it is more complex and involves more demand on cognitive resources. It is an action readers resort to when they fail to understand something. Kintsch (1998) maintained â€Å" perception and understanding are the processes people normally use; when an impasse develops in perception or understanding, they resort to problem solving as a repair process†(p. 3). Reading is the process in which the reader sequentially deals with letters, words and sentences. It was defined by Sheng (2000, p. 2) as â€Å"the process of recognition, interpretation, and perception of written or printed material†. Comprehension, on the other hand, involves the ability of the reader to grasp and interpret the meaning of written material, and to reason about cognitive processes that lead to understanding. In other words, it not only covers cognitive understanding of the materials at both surface and deep structure levels, but also the readers reactions to the content. Sheng (2000, p. 2) maintained â€Å"it is a more complex psychological process and includes in addition to linguistic factors (phonological, morphological, syntactic, and semantic elements), cognitive and emotional factors†. In sum, the process of reading deals with language forms while the process of comprehension, the end product, deals with language content. The term ‘reading comprehension can, in some respects, be considered a complex construct, as highlighted by numerous reading researchers (Carrell, 1988; Grabe, 1991; Kintsch, 1998; de Beaugrande, 1981). According to Brumfit (1980), reading comprehension is a complex activity covering â€Å"a combination of perceptual, linguistic and cognitive abilities†(p. 3). It is a constructive thinking process which â€Å"involves application, analysis, evaluation and imagination†(Taylor, 1984, p.391). Grabe (2008) attributed the complexity of the reading comprehension process to the multiple purposes of reading and the complex cognitive processes involved. In the present study, reading is viewed as a process of communication between a writer and a reader and this communication will be incomplete unless it is affected by the readers evaluation and appreciation. In fact, both the reader and the writer contribute to the reading process. Despite the uniqueness of second language reading processes (Geva and Wang, 2001; Koda, 2007), second language reading has drawn extensively on first language reading research. Different models have been adopted and adapted based on a variety of L1 reading theories. Below is a review of these theories. Reading Theories In A First Language A reading model provides an imagined representation of the reading process. It provides ways to represent a theory and explain what reading involves and how reading works based on available evidence. Goldman, et al., (2007) explained â€Å"the term model refers specifically to a representation of the psychological processes that comprise a component or set of components involved in human text comprehension†(p. 27). According to Samuels (1994), a good theoretical model has three characteristics: it summarizes a considerable amount of information discovered in the past; it helps explain and make more understandable what is happening in the present, and it allows one to make predictions about the future (p. 816). Researchers, however, are somehow cautious about the comprehensibility of the model because of its inability to account for all the available evidence that exists. Dhieb-Henia (2002) warned that the models are not always backed up by sufficient empirical evidence to val idate (them) (p. 18). In the same fashion, Grabe (2008) argued â€Å"to assert that a model must be an accurate synthesis, () is problematic†. Thus, these researchers recommend that we consider these models as a possible representation of the reading process, rather than absolute models. They nonetheless stress the key role that these models play in â€Å"synthesizing information and establishing central claims†(Grabe, 2008, p. 84). Reviewing the literature, four major approaches have been proposed in an attempt to understand the reading process. The major distinction between the approaches is the emphasis given to text-based variables such as vocabulary, syntax, and grammatical structure and reader-based variables such as the readers background knowledge, cognitive development, strategy use, interest, and purpose (Lally, 1998). The following sections review these approaches and discuss them with reference to the specific context of the present study. The Bottom-Up Approach The concept of decoding is central to what is usually called the bottom-up approach to reading. The term bottom-up originated in perception psychology, where it is used to signify the processing of external stimuli (Mulder, 1996). In reading research, the term is not always used in a consistent manner and has drifted away from the original meaning it had in perception psychology. Nevertheless, the term always focuses on what are called lower order processes, i.e. decoding ability and word recognition ability (Mulder, 1996). These abilities are believed to form the key to proficient reading. In other words, the reader perceives every letter, organizes the perceived letters into words, and then organizes the words into phrases, clauses and sentences. Meaning, at any level, (e.g. word or phrase), is accessed only once processing at previous (e.g. lower) levels has been completed (Carrell, 1988). The argument is that bottom-up processing requires a literal or fundamental understanding of the language. Carrell (1993, p. 2) maintained Reading (is) viewed primarily as a decoding process of reconstructing the authors intended meaning via recognizing the printed letters and words, and building up a meaning for a text from the smallest textual units at the bottom (letters and words) to larger and larger units at the top (phrases, clauses, intersentential linkages. Advocates of this theory argue that successful reading comprehension of a text relies heavily on an efficient application of bottom-up processes. The best known representative of this type of approach is Goughs (1972) model. The model is summarised by Urquhart and Weir as follows: T]he reader begins with letters, which are recognized by a SCANNER. The information thus gained is passed to a DECODER, which converts the string of letters into a string of systematic phonemes. This string is then passed to a LIBRARIAN, where with the help of the LEXICON, it is recognized as a word. The reader then fixates on the next word, and proceeds in the same way until all the words in a sentence have been processed, at which point they proceed to a component called MERLIN, in which syntactic and semantic rules operate to assign a meaning to the sentence. The final stage is that of the Vocal System, where the reader utters orally what has first been accessed through print. (Urquhart Weir, 1998: 40) The decoding approach, however, has been viewed by many as inadequate. According to Eskey (1973), the approach underestimates the contribution of the reader. The reader, according to this approach, does not read the text through a self-determined, predefined perspective or goal, but rather lets the text itself (and therefore its author) determine the reading process (Urquhart Weir, 1998). The approach fails to recognize that readers utilize their expectations about the text based on their knowledge of language and how it works. Similarly, Carrell (1984) stated that this view assumes a rather passive view of reading. Grabe (2008) stated â€Å"we know that such an extreme view of reading is not accurate, and no current model of reading depicts reading as a pure bottom-up process†(p. 89). Criticism of the bottom-up theory has given impetus to the Top- down theory. The Top-Down Approach Whereas the bottom-up approach gives incoming information a central place in the reading process, the top-down approach focuses on the knowledge a reader already possesses. It stresses what are called higher order cognitive processes. The top-down theory posits a non-linear view of the reading process, i.e. from higher levels of processing, and proceeds to use the lower levels selectively. It assumes that readers interrogate the text rather than process it completely. They get meaning by comparing their expectations to a sample of information from the text. The proponents of this theory argue that readers experience and background knowledge is essential for understanding a text. Grabe (2008) explained â€Å"top-down models assume that the reader actively controls the comprehension process, directed by reader goals, expectations, and strategic processing†(p. 89). Carrell (1993, p. 4) stated In the top-down view of second language reading, not only is the reader an active participant in the reading process, but everything in the readers prior experience or background knowledge plays a significant role in the process. In this view, not only is the readers prior linguistic knowledge (â€Å"linguistic†schemata) and level of proficiency in the second language important, but the readers prior background knowledge of the content area of the text (â€Å"content†schemata) as well as of the rhetorical structure of the text (â€Å"formal†schemata) are also important. According to this view, the readers background knowledge may compensate for certain syntactic and lexical deficiencies. Readers start with their background knowledge (whole text) and make predictions about the text, and then verify their predictions by using text data (words) in the text (Urquhart Cyril, 1998). Clarke and Silberstein (1977, p.136-137) stated that â€Å"more information is contributed by the reader than by the print on the page, that is, readers understand what they read because they are able to take the stimulus beyond its graphic representation†. The most frequently cited representative of this approach is Goodmans (1976) top-down model. He defined reading as a process of verifying hypotheses  hypotheses that are based on knowledge which the reader possesses. His model, also called the guessing game theory, is summarised by Bossers as follows: According to Goodman, the reading process consisted of sampling and selecting cues, on the basis of which an interpretation is predicted or guessed, which is subsequently tested against the semantic context, and then confirmed or rejected as the reader processes further language, and so on. These stages of the process were called features of the reading process or effective strategies or effective reading behaviour alternatively. (Bossers,1992:10). A very influential theory that is usually discussed in relation to the top-down perspective is that of schema theory. The prior knowledge gained through experiences, stored in ones mind and activated when readers encounter new information is referred to in the literature as schemata (Carrell, 1980; Widdowson, 1983). Schema Theory Schema theory, which comes from cognitive psychology, owes much to the work of Bartlett (Rumelhart, 1981) and Piaget (Orasanu and Penny, 1986). Schemata, the plural form of schema, also called ‘building blocks of cognition (Rumelhart, 1981, p. 3), refer to â€Å"abstract knowledge structure (s) stored in memory†(Garner, 1987, p. 4). They are defined as the mental framework that helps the learner organize knowledge, direct perception and attention, and guide recall (Bruming, 1995), as cognitive constructs which allow for the organization of information in long-term memory (Widdowson,1983) and as the underlying connections that allow new experience and information to be aligned with previous knowledge ( McCarthy ,1991). Within the framework of schema theory, reading comprehension is no longer a linear, text-driven process, but is the process of the interpretation of new information, and the assimilation and accommodation of this information into memory structures or schemata (Anderson Pearson, 1984). Schemata are not static entities, however, but are continually constructed and reconstructed through the processes of assimilation and accommodation. In other words, a comprehension of a text involves activation of relevant schemata, which are initiated as a result of ‘bottom-up observation, and proceeds through a constant process of testing the activated schemata, evaluating their suitability, and refining or discarding them (Rumelhart, (1984, pp. 3, 6). Rumelhart (1981, p. 4) stated â€Å"according to schema theories, all knowledge is packed into units †¦ (which) are the schemata. Embedded in these packets of knowledge, in addition to the knowledge itself, is information about how this
Wednesday, September 4, 2019
Welfare Reform: Have we considered our children? :: Essays Papers
Welfare Reform: Have we considered our children? "Contract with America", "block grants", "personal responsibility" and "welfare to work" are all familiar rhetoric. With the changing of the guard in Washington, "welfare as we know it" is quickly becoming a relic of the past. The question is whether our newly-elected leaders are reforming the welfare system or simply perpetuating the horrific state of our country's poorest citizens- our children. Consolidation of federal programs into block grants includes an estimated 5-20% cut in the level of federal spending for many of these programs. If the proposed changes in AFDC were fully in effect today, more than five million children, one-half of the children now on AFDC, would lose their benefits. Revision of the original plan does not necessarily translate into added protection for children. Both the Clinton administration and state governments, represented by Republican governors, have proposed alternative welfare reform plans. The alternative plans still include support for block grants and federal cutbacks. Elimination of federal oversight of child welfare programs will eradicate over fifteen years of child advocacy efforts. In the proposed legislation, funding under the Social Security Act for state child welfare systems would be combined into a block grant to be disseminated according to each states' discretion. House Representatives have failed to mention that monies for state child welfare programs are currently linked to federal standards and compliance measures. Receipt of federal foster care money is dependent upon state compliance with requirements such as permanency planning, family preservation and reunification and placement of children in the least restrictive, most family-like setting. Loss of these compliance measures will potentially dismantle a nationwide system developed solely to protect the best interests of the child. Along a similar vein, elimination of the entitlement status of social welfare programs destroys the safety net for children whose parents are poor. Unlike entitlements which legally guarantee assistance for children and families, block grants place a financial cap on spending. If states run out of money, families will be forced to wait until the next fiscal year to receive assistance. Denying entitlement status guarantees that many children will go hungry, and in turn will be unable to develop into healthy, productive adults. The current welfare reform proposals, although intended to target single women, realistically punish the children. Without built-in federal protections for children combined with a guaranteed safety net for parents, we cannot expect children in poverty to become responsible selfsufficient citizens.
Tuesday, September 3, 2019
County Community College Should Provide On-Campus Housing Essay
When I moved to California two weeks before school started, I had difficulty looking for places to live around County Community College. This is because community colleges don’t usually have on-campus housing facilities for students. This made life very difficult for me because I was brand new to the area and I knew no one. My dad did help me by calling up one of his friends and asked if I could stay at their house temporarily until I was able to find a place I could live at, that was near school because I didn’t have a car at the time. The day I finally found a place to live, school was almost about to start. When I went to check the house out, I really disliked it there because there was no cooking allowed, the only time I could use the stove was to boil water. There were even curfews enforced because poor wooden floorboards would alert everyone whenever someone would walk around just to grab a cup of water or a snack at night. Another limitation was that the landlad y had ridiculous shower curfews that I had to follow. The house was very unclean and unhygienic due to the lack of maintenance and care provided for the building. There was no other choice but to live there because it was the closest place to school, that was within walking or biking distance, I could find because I didn’t know how to take the bus in this new country. This is what leads me to believe that County Community College should see if it’s feasible to construct an on-campus housing facility for students because it is able to help a large variety of students in various ways. County Community is a college that is known for its successful transfer rates. An article on CNN Money discussed about County Community’s fine transferring rates, â€Å"County Community s... ...enefits that can affect current and future students. However, County Community may choose to overlook some obstacles due to the great convenience and the great benefits that it may provide for both staff and students. County Community should not disregard this great opportunity that may change lives for staff and students, but look further more into this. Works Cited Aquije, Omar. â€Å"Most Community Colleges say Building Dorms is Good Plan.†Glens Falls Post-Star, 13 August. 2011. Web. 7 Nov 2013. Clark, Kim. â€Å"Community College: How to Avoid ‘dropout factories.’†Cable News Network, 07 June. 2012. Web. 7 Nov 2013. Driscoll, Emily. â€Å"Great Housing Debate: Living On or Off Campus.†Fox Business. Fox News Network, 19 July. 2013. Web. 7 Nov 2013. Staff, CB. â€Å"Campus Living: On Campus Vs. Off Campus.†College Bound Network, 08 August. 2011. Web. 7 Nov 2013.
Monday, September 2, 2019
The Influence of American Culture in the 1950s and 1960s in Canada Essa
Canada as a nation has been striving to characterize itself as more ?Canadian? for decades. This has included numerous struggles and events such as protests, bans, and the creation of the Massey Commission, to encourage national development in the arts, and support major companies like the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and National Film Board (NFB). However, this has not been an easy task for the Canadian government, as major influences from below the border (the United States) have been captivating the Canadian audiences by large. American media has had a momentous revolutionizing effect on Canada, even through efforts made to define Canada with its own cultural identity. Pop culture in the 1950s and 1960s began to spread and infest the nation from front to back through radio shows, books and magazines, television programs, and even motion pictures. Whether it is culture in terms of political affairs, clothing or the latest musical sensations, the United States has always played the dominant role when it came to who knows what is best, first. Some cases of Americanizati...
Sunday, September 1, 2019
Lenin’s death in 1924 Essay
12 marker: Explain why; at the time of Lenin’s death in 1924 there was no obvious successor to lead The USSR. Lenin’s death came as a great shock to many Russians in 1924; he led the October Revolution in 1917 he was seen as father like role to Russians. He had built up a new government and allowed many of his fellow Bolsheviks roles positions in his new Soviet State, and these figures all thought that they have the power and influence to lead Russia. Lenin knew that he was ill and that he would not be able to keep on making key decisions and attending committee and politburo meetings. He felt that the people in his government saw this as an opportunity to try and assert their power and then after his death have a good chance of becoming the leader of The USSR. He wrote a testament, damning five of the people that held high authority in his new government: Trotsky, Stalin, Bukharin, Zinoviev and Kamenev. If this were to be circulated in the party it would mean that people lower down in the party would be questioning these people too, they might feel that these individuals had too much power. However, these were the leading communists and there did not seem to be any other Bolsheviks that were capable or ready to become a leader. Lenin called Trotsky ‘excessively self-assured’ Lenin thought that Trotsky focused too much on himself and not enough on the Russian people. Lenin also called Stalin the other main contender for the role of leader ‘too rude’ and stated that he has been placed with too much power within the part as Secretary-General; this has made him quite arrogant. Lenin calls for Russians to remember that although Zinoviev and Kamenev are quite underestimated, that they were not loyal to the October Revolution and therefore not the most trustworthy or loyal. Lenin feels that Bukharin is very intelligent, and would be good at the administration aspect of leadership but not a good enough orator to be seen as a strong leader by the masses. This really set the cat among the pigeons; it showed that Lenin did not have confidence in one single successor, showing negative aspects of all of the possible candidates. Although this was suppressed by Kamenev and Zinoviev from being read at the 23rd party conference, Stalin had the most to lose if this had been read, being very critical of his personality and power. Ultimately, it showed that there was going to be a power struggle, and that there was no obvious successor. Lenin’s Testament highlighted some major concerns of his, that there were five possible successors but none of them seemed obvious to go straight to the leadership position. Trotsky was seen as an alternative main candidate, he had a lot of support from the working class in the two main cities, Moscow and Petrograd. He was educated and a brilliant orator, moving crowds of people that came to visit him speak. However, he had many personal weaknesses, he was not liked by a lot of the main decision makers under Lenin, and he needed their support for a leadership position. He did not understand that Russia was an agricultural country and he had to think of the country’s agriculture as much as its industry. Stalin had many important roles within the communist party, commissar for nationalities, worker’s and peasant’s inspectorate and more. Although he had a vast amount of power within the party he was not seen as being consistent, something a leader should be. Also, he had a tough relationship with Lenin before his death. Bukharin was seen as very clever, but not being Marxist enough, he had been appalled by the bloodshed of the civil war and supported the NEP that had allowed an emergence of a middle class, something the Revolution was against. Also Bukharin did not take any side in arguments within the party, showing Lenin that he maybe was not a committed communist. Zinoviev and Kamenev had not been loyal to the October Revolution in 1917; showing that they would not be the leader that Lenin wanted. Lenin thought that they buckled under pressure and for these two reasons did not allow them on the Russian bureau of Central Committee. These factors reinforce the uncertainty for the role of leader, there were candidates that seemed to be strong like Stalin or Trotsky but they had large weaknesses too. Although, there was a lot of room for possible criticism and backstabbing due to the contenders having weaknesses of their own, in 1921 the ban on factionalism introduced by Lenin stopped the formation of groups within his party and stopped criticism of decisions made within the party. It was a way of trying to make the party seem loyal and was basically a ban on free-speech: Meaning that the candidates would not be able to run for leader by highlighting weaknesses to the party or masses. The five candidates would not be able to campaign. Also, because Lenin’s Testament was not published it did not allow the party to make a decision on the leadership, alongside the ban on factions meant that a candidate would just have to seem like a strong runner individually or resort to backstabbing. In conclusion, I believe that by not publishing Lenin’s testament, this meant that his personal opinions were not voiced to the party, at the party conference, where hundreds of the most influential communists would have seen that all of the main five candidates had weaknesses and there was not one that Lenin felt was singly good enough to rule the party. He was possibly hinting to a collective government with a coalition between all five, mixing their positive aspects to make a great USSR. Although the ban on factions was important, the Testament would have voiced the weaknesses of the five people in the running for leadership coming straight from Lenin his conclusion would have gained influence from the party that was loyal to him. Therefore, I believe that by not publishing Lenin’s testament meant that there was great uncertainty over the role of leader.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)