Tim Dalby 5

S c h e maT h e o r y :G e t t i n gi n t ot h eMi n d s o fy o u rL e a r n e r s
T i mD a l b y
Jeonju University

A b s t r a c t
Trying to define schema is like trying to catch a wisp of smoke. It defies iron-cast definition, yet remains central to the process of reading. This short paper attempts to trace the origins of schema theory from its earliest beginnings, through the dark days of behaviorism to an enlightened view of reading as an interactive process. In addition, I will exemplify the major elements of schema theory and show how they have been put into practical use for the benefit of second language learners in terms of useful pre- while- and post-reading activities. Keywords: Schema theory, Reading, Course books, Extensive reading.

I .A nO l dI d e a ?
Schema theory is a not new idea, having origins with Plato and the Greek philosophy of ideal types. Kant named and developed the concept which was later taken up by Bartlett in his 1932 study to observe the effect of culture on the recall of text. Unfortunately at this time, behaviourism was in its ascendancy and schema theory took a back seat for over forty years (Ajideh, 2003, p. 3). As the influence of behaviourism waned, various researchers began to look at reading as an interactive process which led to an examination of the role of individual background knowledge on the readers comprehension of a text. Swales defines background knowledge as made up of our assimilated direct experiences of life and its manifold activities, and our assimi-

6 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

lated verbal experiences and encounters (1990, p. 83). Aspects of this background knowledge have been variously described as scripts (Abelson 1976, cited in Brown & Yule, 1983 p. 241), frames (Minsky 1975, cited in Yule, 1983, p. 238), scenarios (Sanford & Garrod 1981, cited in Yule, 1983, p. 245) or simply as background knowledge (Grabe & Stoller, 2002, p. 27), each having a slightly different focus, function or purpose. For this discussion, I will use the term schema to encompass all others. Any definition is unlikely to capture the full extent and implication of schema theory. Instead, we must rely on exemplification, judgement and experience to help us understand how what we know interacts with what is written to create what is understood. When describing types of schemata, Carrell & Eisterhold build upon previous arguments to differentiate formal schemata from content schemata (1983, p. 560). The former cover linguistic elements such as language, vocabulary and genre, the latter deal with knowledge of a subject, culture and the world. In the next section, these two aspects will be discussed in terms of their strengths and weaknesses by examining selected research studies and other evidence currently available. Then, I will attempt to highlight and provide examples of the contribution schema theory has made to the practice of teaching reading in a foreign language.

I I .C o mp o n e n t so fS c h e maT h e o r y
2.1 Content Schemata
When describing the concept of a content schema, Alderson further distinguishes between three components: subject knowledge; knowledge of the world; and cultural knowledge (2000, p. 43-46). It is to these three aspects that I now turn.

2.2 Subject Knowledge

Schema theory suggests that we will comprehend a text better if we have prior knowledge of the subject being discussed. This is exempli-

Tim Dalby 7

fied by using highly technical texts such as the one below (Zurfluh et al., 2008):
Phenylketonuria (PKU) is an autosomal recessive inborn error of metabolism resulting from a deficiency of phenylalanine hydroxylase (PAH; 612349), an enzyme that catalyzes the hydroxylation of phenylalanine to tyrosine, the rate-limiting step in phenylalanine catabolism. If undiagnosed and untreated, phenylketonuria can result in impaired postnatal cognitive development resulting from a neurotoxic effect of hyperphenylalaninemia.

Someone with no knowledge of phenylketonuria would be unlikely to have pragmatic competence of the passage and would have difficulty pronouncing some of the more technical terms correctly. Aside from subject knowledge, studies by Rumelhart & Bransford have shown that when titles or other cues are removed from a text, it becomes difficult to comprehend (Alderson, 2000, p. 43). An example from R.C. Anderson et al. (1977, cited in Yule, 1996:148) is reproduced below:
Rocky slowly got up from the mat, planning his escape. He hesitated a moment and thought. Things were not going well. What bothered him most was being held, especially since the charge against him had been weak. He considered his present situation. The lock that held him was strong, but he thought he could break it.

When shown to a group of English teachers in Korea, this passage was interpreted to be about either wrestling or being held in a police cell, but neither explanation was completely satisfactory to the teachers. Although horoscopes are a notable example of ambiguously written texts, as Sadoski et al. point out, rarely is a real text this ambiguous (1991:470). According to schema theory, when faced with a text, we activate the appropriate schema and then add information to it (Carrell & Eisterhold, 1983, p. 557). However, as Alderson suggests, schema theory does not adequately explain how new information is acquired when no schema already exists (2000, p. 44).

8 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

Studies which support the idea of a subject schemas importance to reading include that of Alderson & Urquhart who reported in 1985 that students with specialist subject knowledge achieved higher scores in reading tests than students without specialist knowledge. They also found that higher linguistic proficiency could, to a point, make up for a lack of subject knowledge and vice versa (Alderson, 2000, p. 44). Subject knowledge is also transferrable from L1 to L2 reading (Hayashi, 1999, p. 122). However, a text needs to be sufficiently specialised as shown in a study which suggests caution for the predictive power of subject knowledge (Pateraki, 1997). Of course, where the line exists between sufficiently and insufficiently specialised requires more study. Carver points out that the weakness of schema theory is that it is only relevant for specialised texts which require specialised study - not texts used in normal, everyday reading (1992, p. 173).

2.3 Knowledge of the World

Hoey describes schema as a way of organising knowledge and experience in the brain. He suggests that when one aspect of a schema is activated, the whole schema becomes available to the reader and, in turn, affects the interpretation of the text (Hoey, 2001, p. 121). Alderson (2000, p. 45) cites this example from Rumelhart, (1985, p. 267): The policeman held up his hand and the car stopped. Using our traffic officer schema, we usually dont attribute any superhuman powers to this policeman. Similarly, the sentence, I went to the restaurant last night. as exemplified by Cook (1997, p. 86) would usually be unremarkable as we would understand that a person went to a restaurant, sat down, ordered food, ate, paid and then left. Of course, what we imagine happened and what actually happened may be entirely different. One representation of the restaurant might be a cozy, family-run Italian, another might be a fast-food chain. Psychologists call this phenomenon filling in perception and it has to do with the way our brains store experiences - not as a whole but instead as main ideas which can later be reweaved, rather than recalled (Gilbert, 2006, p. 79).

Tim Dalby 9

However, a schema remains active until textual or linguistic cues show that the schema needs to be changed. In taking an illustrative example by Sanford & Garrod (1981) cited in Yule (1996, p. 146-7) and reproduced below, we can see the processes that go on as we fill in the gaps of the text and interact with it. As you read each sentence, try to imagine the situation and then see how it changes as you read each subsequent sentence.
John was on his way to school last Friday. He was really worried about the math lesson. Last week he had been unable to control the class. It was unfair of the math teacher to leave him in charge. After all, it is not a normal part of a janitors duties.

This is an artificial construction of reading, but does provide an insight into how we build information into a sentence based on our expectations of what normal is (1996, p. 147). However, Ghadessy suggests that vocabulary knowledge is the important factor in understanding texts such as these and that schema theory is nothing more than a theory of text redundancy (1983, p. 377). Indeed, as we read through the story of John, the introduction of certain words changes our mental image. The role of vocabulary is explored in more detail below.

2.4 Cultural Knowledge

Schema theory holds strongest in the area of background cultural knowledge. Bartlett was one of the first to write about the effect of cultural norms on the recall of information. In his 1932 study, British subjects were asked to recall details of The War of the Ghosts, a North American Indian folktale, up to a year after first reading. In each instance, the recall added or omitted information so that the story conformed to the tellers cultural norms (Alderson, 2000, p. 45). Similarly, Steffenson & Joag-Devs 1984 study identified the effects of cultural schema. They used an American and Indian wedding text to be read by a group of Americans and a group of Indians. As expected, the

10 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

Indian group recalled more ideas from the Indian text than the American readers and vice versa. Also, as in Bartletts study, each group added to or modified the foreign culture text so that it conformed more closely to their own notions of a wedding. Additionally each group added new details to their own culturally-familiar texts (Steffenson & Joag-Dev, 1984). The implication here for teaching is to ensure that cultural context is provided to help students overcome problems of comprehension. Even a small amount of cultural instruction can help (Gatbonton & Tucker, 1971, cited in Steffenson & Joag-Dev, 1984, p. 52) One interesting study in Turkey created a nativized version of a typical American story The Girls in their Summer Dresses by replacing character names with Turkish names, New York with Canakkale, and by converting conceptual cues, so that eating steak was replaced with eating fish (Razi, 2004, p. 285). The study reported a significant increase in comprehension due to increased familiarity with the culture (Razi, 2004, p. 287). However, a similar study by Alptekin suggests that while a nativized text increased students ability to make inferences, it did not make up for their lack of linguistic skill (2006, p. 502). Indeed, even Bartletts original findings have been questioned as the type of recall changes depending on the design of the task (Alba & Hasher, 1983, p. 214).

2.5 Formal Schemata

When describing the concept of a formal schema, Alderson distinguishes between language knowledge, genre knowledge and metalinguistic knowledge (2000, p. 34-43). These three aspects will be discussed below.

Language knowledge
Aebersold & Field describe a linguistic schema as one which involves bottom-up processing skills such as decoding words and organising grammatical structure (1997, p. 17). Linguistic ability will depend on a persons age, experience, vocabulary size and knowledge of textual conventions: the more linguistic knowledge a person has, the quicker

Tim Dalby 11

they are able to process a given text (Alderson, 2000, p. 34). In support of schema theory, Cooper distinguished between practised and unpractised readers and found that students who had better knowledge of vocabulary and the syntactic relationships between words were better able to comprehend a text. He also showed that practised readers could make better use of linking words and linguistic cues in texts (1984, p. 133). Having an adequate vocabulary for reading is essential. For second language learners, reading an unsimplified, academic text requires a minimum vocabulary of around 3000 headwords as well as effective strategies for dealing with unknown words (Nation, 1990, p. 116). Hazenberg & Hulstijn (1996, p. 145) found that students wishing to study at a Dutch university required a vocabulary of around 10,000 words, much higher than previously thought. According to Nation (2001), learners need to know around 98% of a text to be able to understand it, which seems to be the agreed level for effective comprehension (Read, 2000, p. 83). Vocabulary size isnt everything though. There are several elements that are necessary to adequately know a word (Nation, 1990, p. 31) and this becomes very apparent when dealing with polysemes and homonyms. As Cook (1997, p. 86) points out:
Schema theory can...explain how we choose unconsciously between homonyms. We are unlikely to assume the sentence The King put his seal on the letter. to be about an aquatic mammal, because that is not the kind of seal in most king schemas.

However, whether this is schema theory in action or merely a result of good vocabulary teaching is questionable. A 1998 study by Leffa suggests that collocation knowledge is more effective than schema activation 94% of the time. As previously mentioned, knowledge of syntactic structures can help to overcome a lack of subject knowledge. Berman, in a study with Hebrew-speaking English learners, showed that her students had difficulties in English when the structure of a sentence differed from that encountered in Hebrew (1984, p. 148). Particular difficulties occurred

12 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

when substantial information occurs before the main verb and when adverbial phrases are placed before the main clause (Berman, 1984, p. 151). Shiotsu & Weir even suggest that knowledge of syntax, rather than vocabulary, may be more predictive of reading proficiency than previously thought (2007, p. 123). However, knowledge of some syntactic structures is not enough. For example, knowledge of the passive construction alone is not a good indicator of performance when reading a passive-voice-laden scientific text (Alderson, 2000, p. 37). A final element of a linguistic schema is the ability one brings from reading in a first language to reading in a second. It had been assumed that readers needed to be able to read well in their first language in order to read well in a second language (Alderson, 2000, p. 38). Instead, several studies have shown that second language knowledge, rather than first language reading skill, is a far better predictor of second language reading skill. Additionally, there exists a linguistic threshold beyond which a student must pass before first language reading skills start to make an impact on second language reading. The threshold is not a fixed line, but instead varies depending on how demanding the task of reading is (Alderson, 2000, p. 39).

Genre knowledge
Carrell suggests that a formal schema exists to identify and recognise textual organisation and rhetorical structures (1984, p. 341). Alderson refers to the same idea as knowledge of genre (2000, p. 39) and Tribble provides the example that we can recognise a letter of rejection within the first couple of lines of text (1997, p. 35). Our knowledge of genre helps us better predict what we are going to read about, how it will be organised and even the kind of vocabulary and syntactic structures we are likely to encounter (Harmer, 2001, p. 200). Alderson, however, is more cautious and points out that there has been very little research into this specific area. What has been researched, by Mandler (1978) and Carrell (1981), has tended to confuse text with schemata (cited in Alderson, 2000, p. 40). In these studies respectively, first and second language students comprehension of a text was affected

Tim Dalby 13

when stories were presented that did not conform to the normal story schema.

Metalinguistic knowledge and metacognition

Knowledge of how a language is structured is unlikely to lead to an improvement in reading comprehension. A study by Alderson et al. found that linguistic knowledge and metalinguistic knowledge are separate abilities, implying that comprehension is possible without metalinguistic knowledge. (1997, cited in Alderson, 2000, p. 42). Casanave argues that strategy schemata are as important as content and formal schemata (cited in Auerbach & Paxton, 1997, p. 241). Studies have supported this and shown that knowledge of reading strategies and the ability to control them (turning them into skills, using Grabe & Stollers definition (2002, p. 15)) have a marked effect on comprehension (Auerbach & Paxton, 1997). Alderson agrees suggesting that poor readers have no knowledge of strategy use (2000, p. 41).

I I I .Wh yi sS c h e maT h e o r yU s e f u l ?
Increased understanding
It could be argued that schema theory has contributed to the understanding of second language reading through the vast amount of research it has generated, either to support or discredit it (Alba & Hasher, 1983, p. 224). This research has led to an increased knowledge about the processes involved in reading. Before schema theorys resurgence, reading was either a top-down or bottom-up process. Top-down processes stem from Goodmans psycholinguistic guessing game model, and focus on skills such as inference and prediction (Eskey, 1988, p. 93). Bottom-up models see reading as a decoding exercise in which words and syntax are processed to create a mental image of the message of the text (Grabe & Stoller, 2002, p. 32). Instead, it is now generally agreed that reading is interactive, both in the sense of an interaction between the top-down and bottom-up processes of reading (Grabe, 1991, p. 383) and in the sense that meaning is constructed through a readers

14 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

interaction with the text. In earlier years reading a text was seen as like opening a box: all the reader had to do was extract the meaning from the text (Wallace, 2001, p. 22). The movements of narrow and extensive reading trace their roots to schema theory. Carrell (1984, p. 339) argues that narrow reading can help to build up content knowledge by reading in specific subjects. Extensive reading works on the same idea, but instead encourages readers to become more familiar with linguistic conventions, vocabulary and intertextuality. (Stott, 2001, [online]). Schema theory has also contributed to test design. The implication that subject knowledge may predict reading success is something that test designers need to consider when choosing passages for high stakes tests such as IELTS. Wallace argued strongly that removing the reading-writing link would disadvantage some students from certain cultures unfamiliar with particular writing topics (1997, p. 371). Content knowledge of a test can be internal, or already held by the candidate, or external, that is provided by the test. A test designer can only make reasonable assumptions about what a candidate is likely to know before taking a test (OSullivan, 2005, p. 14) and the choice of current and popular topics such as the environment seems to make sense in terms of fairness and of avoiding content bias. In the classroom, schema theory has influenced the way a typical reading lesson is approached, giving increased emphasis to the building of interest and accessing previous knowledge (Sheridan, 1978, p. 12). Instead of simply open your books to page 35 and read, teachers need to be more aware of their students interests when selecting reading materials (Pearson-Casanave, 1984, p. 335). As discussed in above, if there is a large gap between a readers existing schema and knowledge required to read, then effective reading cannot take place as in figure 1, below. FIGURE 1 Too much distance between what a reader knows and what a reader needs to know

Tim Dalby 15

Ideally, a teacher will choose materials where there is some overlap between a readers schema and the knowledge required to comprehend the text as in figure 2, below. FIGURE 2 Just right: a teacher can build on what a reader already knows and so make reading interesting .

Al-Issa provides a useful list of questions that teachers should ask when selecting texts, which is reproduced below (2006, p. 45):
1. Will my students be interested in reading such materials? 2. Will these materials be relevant to my students English proficiency levels? 3. What content knowledge is to be extracted from these materials? 4. Will these materials cause cultural conflicts in the classroom?

16 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

5. How can I motivate my students and involve them in reading such materials? 6. What kinds of pre-reading, reading, and post-reading activities and materials can be designed to increase my students understanding of these materials? 7. Do the reading materials provide students with sufficient background information about the content of the text? 8. How much time and freedom am I giving my students to exercise their understandings of the materials? 9. Am I being sensitive to my students hidden comprehension problems? 10. Am I helping my students become more aware of the fact that reading is a highly interactive process? 11. Are my students changing their attitudes about reading? 12. Am I allowing my students to become independent, self-directed readers?

It is now more typical for teachers to engage their students in schema-activating activities before, during and after the reading process in order to build a framework for reading. In the following sections, I will describe some of the activities that fall into these three areas, though it is by no means an exhaustive review.

Pre-reading activities
Murtagh argues that inducing appropriate schemata through suitable pre-reading activities is likely to be extremely beneficial (1989, p. 102, cited in N. Anderson, 1999, p. 12). Evidence to support this view was collected by Ajideh and shows how students were able to move from text-bound interpretations to more holistic views of any given reading material (2003, p. 11-12). This stage is important as it helps students focus on the task at hand, encourages predictions to be made and tested, and provides for gaps in background knowledge to be identified and filled in. Thus the idea of pre-teaching vocabulary now extends to pre-teaching subject details, cultural aspects of a text, and providing context as part of the framework of reading (Ajideh, 2003, p. 6). All this provides a richer experience for teacher and student alike.

Tim Dalby 17

FIGURE 3 A typical pre-reading activity (Craven, 2003, p. 36)

18 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

FIGURE 4 An example of a research activity (Haugnes, & Maher, 2004, p. 22-23)

Tim Dalby 19

Pre-reading activities can be as simple as having a discussion about a certain topic, which Anderson suggests can help students recall knowledge they did not realise they had (1999, p. 14). A typical discussion activity can be seen below in Figure 3. Alternatively, students can be given a writing exercise as a way to research and learn about a topic, and become familiar with genre and vocabulary as well as with the main ideas that may be related to a topic. An example of this kind of exercise can be seen below in Figure 4. Semantic mapping is another way to activate a schema. Semantic mapping is much like brainstorming (Anderson, 1999, p. 14), where concepts and ideas about a topic are collected and organized - possibly on the board. An example exercise is reproduced in Figure 5, below. FIGURE 5 A semantic mapping exercise (Anderson, 1999, p. 15)

This method can help counteract the possible negative effects of activating knowledge by challenging preconceived notions such as stereotypes. Sometimes our knowledge of a subject stops us from adequately comprehending a text. As Cook (1997, p. 86) suggests: In unfamiliar situations, attention to detail and a willingness to abandon and change our schemas are still the hallmarks of a flexible and open mind.

20 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

FIGURE 6 A method for previewing (Mikulecky, 1990, p. 37)

Tim Dalby 21

FIGURE 7 Prediction and discussion based on pictures (Craven, 2003, p. 56)

22 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

It is also useful for the teacher to be provocative in asking questions to get students thinking about and discussing the issues (N. Anderson, 1999, p. 17). Previewing (see Figure 6, below) encourages students to predict the content of a text using visual cues such as titles, photos and even text organisation (see Figure 7, below). Students can also try to predict the structure of the text - and thus build up a mental portfolio of genres used in English. Swaffar emphasises the importance of being able to distinguish genres such as academic essays, plays, magazine fluff and recipes as an important step on the road towards giving learners the skills they need to recognise the grammatical structures, stylistic markers and how ideas are developed in different texts (1991, cited in Ajideh, 2003, p. 8).

While-reading activities
An appreciation of schema theory has led to a better structure for comprehension questions. Pearson & Johnson argued that questions should be textually explicit, textually implicit (but still on the page) or schematically implicit (cited in Sheridan, 1978, p. 14-15). As discussed earlier, this has had an effect on high-stakes tests such as IELTS. It is now less common to see culturally-loaded questions exemplified in Steffenson & Joag-Devs study (1984, p. 51). Other activities generally take the form of work requiring students to read for different purposes. Typically, students first read for vocabulary meaning, then again to find main ideas, or skimming, and finally again to find details, or scanning. Grabe & Stoller cite, reading to learn, reading to integrate information and reading for general comprehension as additional reasons to read (2002, p. 13-15) all of which can be practised. Good reading teachers can also use while-reading activities to build upon pre-reading activities so that learners check earlier predictions, identify key vocabulary and monitor the skills and strategies they are using while they read. Auerbach & Paxtons study (1997, p. 238) was based on the premise that:
...readers...can become aware of their existing strategies, expand their

Tim Dalby 23

repertoire of strategies, revise their conceptions of reading, and gain control of strategy choices, enhancing comprehension and recall.

As fluent reading concerns a combination of many different processing resources, it is important to work on them both individually and as processes that require careful cooperation (Grabe & Stoller, 2002, p. 14).

Post-reading activities
Post-reading activities can take place as a discussion or debate on the text or the issues raised in it. Readers can be encouraged to describe what they got from the text or how they interpreted it. Alternatively, students could be asked to write comprehension questions for other students. This helps develop comprehension skills as well as encouraging a readers ownership of the text (Carrell, 1984, p. 337). Writing activities, such as producing a summary are also common and seek to encourage a deeper processing of the text and its various features (Grabe, 1991, p. 394).

I V .Wh e ni saT h e o r yn o taT h e o r y ?

Schema is a nebulous term (Alba & Hasher, 1983, p. 225) that defies rigorous definition much like the term culture. Much of the criticism of schema theory is levelled in this way. If it cannot be defined, then it cannot be tested and so conclusions cannot be drawn from it (Sadoski et al., 1991, p. 468). Maybe because of this lack of rigor, a vast amount of research has been undertaken to either prove or disprove schema theory. This research has led to interesting developments in reading research as well as propagating new theories that deal with more precisely-defined processes, such as Sadoskis dual coding theory (1991). In fact it seems that many of the components of schema theory can be explained in other terms or by other processes (Alba & Hasher, 1983, p. 225). Additional arguments can be levelled at the nature of the bizarre texts used to support schema theory, the method of study

24 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

(Sadoski et al., 1991, p. 469-470) and the reliance on recall as the criterion of successful reading, which is not necessarily the same as comprehension. However, the intuitive appeal of schema theory and its influence on teaching practice has had a generally positive effect on reading instruction, leading to a more learner-centred approach which focuses on individual needs and celebrates the diversity of background experiences. The reading classroom is no doubt a better place thanks to the work of Plato, Kant, Bartlett and all the other researchers that have contributed to establishing reading as an interaction between the reader and the text, rather than viewing the reader as a mere passive receiver of information.

R e f e r e n c e s
Aebersold, J.A., & Field, M.L. (1997). From reader to reading teacher. Issues and strategies for second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ajideh, P. (2003). Schema theory-based pre-reading tasks: A neglected essential in the ESL reading class. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal [online]. Available from: http://www. readingmatrix.com/articles/ajideh/article.pdf[accessed25/10/10]. Alba, J.W., & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin 93(2), 203-231. Alderson, C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Al-Issa, A. (2006). Schema theory and L2 reading comprehension: Implications for teaching. Journal of College Teaching & Learning 3(7), 41-48. [online]. Available from http://www.cluteinstitute -onlinejournals.com/PDFs/2006100.pdf[accessed25/10/10]. Alptekin, C. (2006). Cultural familiarity in inferential and literal comprehension in L2 reading. System, 34, 494-508. Anderson, N. (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Auerbach, E.R., & Paxton, D. (1997). Its Not the English Thing:

Tim Dalby 25

Bringing reading research into the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 237-261. Berman, R.A. (1984). Syntactic components of the foreign language reading process. In J.C. Alderson, & A.H. Urquhart, (Eds.) Reading in a Foreign Language . (pp.139-159) London: Longman. Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carrell, P. & Eisterhold, J.C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly 17(4), 553-573. Carrell, P.L. (1984). Schema theory and ESL reading: Classroom implications and applications. The Modern Language Journal 68(iv), 332-343. Carver, R.P. (1992). Effect of prediction activities, prior knowledge, and text type upon the amount comprehended: using rauding theory to critique schema theory research. Reading Research Quarterly 27(2), 165-174. Cook, G. (1997). Key concepts in ELT: Schemas. ELT Journal 51(1), 86. Cooper, M. (1984). Linguistic competence of practised and unpractised non-native readers of English. In J.C. Alderson, & A.H. Urquhart, (Eds.) Reading in a Foreign Language. (pp.122-138) London : Longman. Craven, M. (2003). Extending reading keys. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. Craven, M. (2003). Introducing reading keys. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. Eskey, D.E. (1988). Holding in the bottom: An interactive approach to the language problems of second language readers. In Carrell, P.L., Devine, J. & Eskey, D.E. (Eds.) Interactive approaches to second language reading. (pp. 93-100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ghadessy, M. (1985). Comments on recent articles on schema theory. A reader reacts: Word knowledge and world knowledge. TESOL Quarterly 19(2), 375-382. Gilbert, D. (2006). Stumbling on happiness. New York: Knopf, Random House.

26 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly 25(3), 375-406. Grabe, W. & F. Stoller (2002). Teaching and researching reading, London: Pearson Education, Longman. Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of english language teaching 3rd Edition. Harlow: Longman. Haugnes, N., & Maher, B. (2004). Northstar: Reading and writing, basic/low intermediate, second edition. White Plains, N.Y.: Pearson Education Inc. Hayashi, K. (1999). Reading strategies and extensive reading in EFL classes. RELC Journal 30(2), 114-132. Hazenberg, S., & Hulstijn, J.H. (1996). Defining a minimal receptive second-language vocabulary for non-native university students: An empirical investigation. Applied Linguistics 17(2), 145-163. Hoey, M. (2001). Textual interaction. An introduction to written discourse analysis. London: Routledge. Leffa, V.J. (1998). Textual constraints in L2 lexical disambiguation. System 26, 183-194. Mikulecky, B.S. (1990). A short course in teaching reading skills. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Nation, P. (2001) Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nation, P. (1990) Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. OSullivan, B. (2005). An overview of test validity-linking the language testing module notes to current thinking. Reading, UK: The University of Reading. Pateraki, E.M. (1997). The Influence of background knowledge on reading comprehension. Unpublished MA TEFL dissertation, Centre for Applied Language Studies, Reading University. Pearson-Casanave, C.R. (1984). Communicative pre-reading activities: Schema theory in action. TESOL Quarterly 18(2), 334-336. Razi, S. (2004). The effects of cultural schema and reading activities on reading comprehension. In M. Singhal & J. Liontas (Eds.) Proceedings of the First International Online Conference on Second and Foreign Language Teaching and Research. September 25-26,

Tim Dalby 27

2004-Beyond Borders [online] Available from: http://www. reading matrix.com/conference/pp/proceedings/razi.pdf[accessed25/10/10]. Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sadoski, M., Paivio, A., & Goetz, E.T. (1991). A critique of schema theory in reading and a dual coding alternative. Reading Research Quarterly 26(4), 463-484. Sheridan, E.M. (1978). A review of research on schema theory and its implications for reading instruction in secondary reading. [online] Available from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED167947.pdf[accessed 25/10/2010]. Shiotsu, T., & Weir, C.J. (2007). The relative significance of syntactic knowledge and vocabulary breadth in the prediction of reading comprehension test performance, Language Testing, 24(1), 99-128. Steffenson, M.S., & Joag-Dev, C. (1984). Cultural knowledge in reading. In Alderson, J.C. & Urquhart, A.H. (Eds.) Reading in a foreign language. (pp. 48-61). London: Longman. Stott, N. (2001). Helping ESL students become better readers: Schema theory applications and limitations. The Internet TESL Journal, VII (November) [online]. Available from: http://iteslj.org/Articles /Stott-Schema.html[accessed25/10/2010]. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tribble, C. (1997). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wallace, C. (1997). IELTS: Global implications of curriculum and materials design. ELT Journal 51(4), 370-373. Wallace, C. (2001). Reading. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.) The Cambridge guide to teaching english to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yule, G. (1996). The study of language, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zurfluh, M. R., Zschocke, J., Lindner, M., Feillet, F., Chery, C., Burlina, A., Stevens, R. C., Thony, B., & Blau, N. (2008). Molecular genetics of tetrahydrobiopterin-responsive phenylalanine hydroxylase deficiency. Human Mutation. 29, 167-175.

28 Schema Theory: Getting into the Minds of your Learners

Tim Dalby
Jeonju University professor.tim.dalby@gmail.com

Received: 2010-10-26 Peer reviewed: 2010-11-24 Accepted: 2010-12-14