CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24Second Language Acquisition and LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningReading and Literacy Development

The Effect of Explicit English Morphology Instruction on EFL Secondary School Students’ Morphological Awareness and Reading Comprehension

Open access
Ahmed Badawi, Mohamed Farrag·2019·English Language Teaching
DOI 10.5539/elt.v12n4p166
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The study attempted to investigate the effect of explicit morphology instruction (EMI) on developing secondary school students’ EFL morphological awareness and reading comprehension. The explicit morphology instruction targeted two morphological skills namely, inflectional and derivational skills. The study used a pre-posttest experimental and control group design. The intact study participants were (98) first year secondary school students. While the first intact group (n=49) was functioned as an experimental group, the second intact group (n=49) represented the control group. To collect the data, a two-unit explicit morphology instruction program (EMIP), a morphological awareness test (MAT) and a reading comprehension test (RCT) were designed, validated and implemented. Before the intervention, the participants’ morphological awareness and reading comprehension were pre-tested. During the course of intervention, while the experimental group participants were exposed to explicit morphological instruction in addition to their regular English instruction sessions, the participants of the control group only received their regular EFL instruction sessions. Results revealed that the experimental group participants’ mean scores on the post morphological awareness test and reading comprehension test surpassed that of the control group. Accordingly, explicit morphological instruction was effective in developing EFL secondary school students’ morphological awareness and reading comprehension. However, the effect size of explicit morphological instruction on developing EFL secondary school students’ morphological awareness was higher than its effect size on developing their reading comprehension. Therefore, teaching English morphology should be an integral part of EFL secondary school curriculum.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5539/elt.v12n4p166

Cites

32 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This study's results support previous research's findings that explicit teaching of words' internal structure in foreign languages helps improve EFL learners' fluency, reading and editing skills, and explicit exposure to morphological structure enables learners to speak and write new words in the target language.

    “Additionally, this study's results support previous research's findings that explicit teaching of words' internal structure in foreign languages helps improve the EFL learners' fluency, reading and editing skills, and explicit exposure to morphological structure enables the learners to speak and write new words in the target language (Khan, 2022;Lee and Choi, 2020;Badawi, 2019).”

    From Transformative impacts of explicit morphological instruction on irregular inflectional acquisition in Saudi EFL learners (2024) · cites this paper as Badawi, 2019

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Carlisle, J. F., Goodwin, A. P., & Nagy, W. (2013). Morphological knowledge and literacy acquisition. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt. · DOI
  2. Carreker, S. (2005). Teaching reading: Accurate decoding and fluency. In J. R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed., pp. 43-81). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
  3. Wilson, B. A. (2005). Instruction for older students struggling with reading. In J. R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed., pp. 319-344). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
  4. Yucel-Koc, M. (2015). The role of morphological awareness in academic vocabulary and reading comprehension skills of adult ESL learners. (Doctoral Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No.3664492).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ahmed Badawi, M. F.
Venue
English Language Teaching
Publisher
Canadian Center of Science and Education
Published
2019-03-21
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
166
ISSN
  • 1916-4742 (ISSN-L)
  • 1916-4750
DOI
10.5539/elt.v12n4p166
OpenAlex
W2923644338
Cited by
24
References
34
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2
FWCI
6.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
English Language Teaching (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
morphological awareness, reading comprehension, inflectional morphology, derivational morphology, English as a foreign language, morphology teaching, English curriculum

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review