Submission Deadline-30th July 2024
June 2024 Issue : Publication Fee: 30$ USD Submit Now
Submission Deadline-20th July 2024
Special Issue of Education: Publication Fee: 30$ USD Submit Now

The Use of The Jolly Phonics Strategy to Enhance Student’s English Reading Proficiency and Learning Motivation

  • RICHARD M. VISAGAS, MAED
  • DONDON B. BUENSUCESO, PhD
  • 942-958
  • Mar 16, 2023
  • Language

The Use of The Jolly Phonics Strategy to Enhance Student’s English Reading Proficiency and Learning Motivation

Richard M. Visagas, Maed & Dondon B. Buensuceso, PhD
FEU Roosevelt, Cainta, Rizal, Philippines

ABSTRACT

In this modern world, there has been a greater focus on teaching English in schools to meet the demands of international communication and replace a solely academic approach. Furthermore, various information sources, such as textbooks, newspapers, and online databases, are often published in English; therefore, reading proficiency is required. This study aimed to analyze The Use of the Jolly Phonics Strategy in Enhancing Student English Reading Proficiency and Learning Motivation in Primary 3 Students. The study employed quasi-experimental research that utilized a pre-test and post-test designed to determine the reading proficiency and learning motivation of primary 3 students. The pre-test, post-test, and survey questionnaire methods were employed to collect data from the respondents. The results were tallied and statistically measured using the weighted mean, standard deviation, T-test, and Pearson correlation r. The findings revealed that the experimental groups’ reading proficiency score was higher after the intervention than before the strategy was implemented. At the same time, the control group had the lowest score before and after the intervention. However, it appears that the intervention did not affect the learning motivation score because there was a significant difference in the scores of learning motivation between the control group and the experimental group both before and after the intervention.

Keywords:  Jolly Phonics, Reading Proficiency, Learning Motivation,

INTRODUCTION

Reading is an essential activity language skill that students use to acquire knowledge or information from various sources such as textbooks, newspapers, and online databases. It allows us to acquire new vocabulary and sentences to enhance our vocabulary knowledge significantly. Reading various languages is useful for academic and professional success globally. As everyone is aware, the internet today provides access to much information. Because the language of various websites is often published in English, reading proficiency is required. People’s reading skills increase as they read more. Because of their background knowledge and reading performance, competent readers will be able to grasp texts instantly and effectively. When learning to read, students may usually pronounce each word slowly and carefully and have difficulty making connections between letters and sounds, which might source problems using their reading (Hall, 2013). For instance, they are unable to enunciate and recall words accurately. They prefer guessing when they cannot read unknown words because they cannot figure out the sounds and combine them to form words. According to Wei (2005), grade 3 students in Thailand’s primary schools can read some English words better than nonwords because they have had time to practice reading those English words from their curriculum but have never encountered or practiced pronouncing nonwords. It may be explained by the fact that they interpret nonwords based on their experiences or intuition since they instantly transmit these rules without appreciating phonetic knowledge. To learn English as a foreign or second language, which is strongly linked to the development of language literacy, students can benefit from systematic instruction that emphasizes phonological awareness (i.e., the ability to identify sounds in spoken words and thus recognize that a spoken word consists of a sequence of individual sounds). Phonological awareness can be defined as the ability to identify sounds in spoken words and recognize that a spoken word consists of a sequence of individual sounds (Swanson et al., 2005). This study investigated the use of jolly phonics strategies in enhancing students’ English reading proficiency and learning motivation of primary 3 students in Bansom (Wongtaweeoupatam) School. Students were put in a conversation, dialogue, or discussion, to strengthen these abilities and assist students in overcoming challenges. This study provides information and policy recommendations for the Ministry of Education in Thailand regarding the new possible interventions on the effects of the jolly phonics strategy in enhancing the reading proficiency and learning motivation of the students, which have an impact on their learning during the experiment. In addition, with the results demonstrating that the students could improve their reading proficiency and learning motivation through the jolly phonics strategy, it would be recommended to any schools or institutions that may utilize this method in their language program. It can benefit teachers teaching English in kindergarten and primary schools, school administrators, and future researchers, which could help students improve their reading proficiency and learning motivation.

Background of the Study

According to the English get a raw deal, as published in Bangkok post editorial column (2021), the results of a recent survey included in the latest edition of the English Proficiency Index (EPI) published by Global language education company, Thailand’s English proficiency ranking came in 100th out of a total of 112 countries in the category of non-native English-speaking countries. It was based on the assessment of an English test taken by almost 2 million adults in 112 nations and territories. Thailand’s score ranked the country as the lowest in ASEAN and the third-lowest among countries in Asia. The survey was conducted among a total of 112 countries and territories. Thailand’s ranking fell from 74th in 2019 to 89th the following year. The index results indicate a fundamental flaw in hTThailand’seaching and learning of English The success of English language education necessitates the participation of all stakeholders, with teachers and students playing an essential role. They should not be viewed as empty vessels waiting to be filled with theoretical frameworks and skills. Students are in charge of their education, and as part of learning that continues throughout one’s life, they should be allowed to take responsibility for what they have learned. Some of the factors that contribute to the failure of English teaching and learning include instructors who are not qualified and have inadequate training, students who are not motivated to learn English, and a limited number of opportunities for students to be exposed to the language outside of the classroom (Dhanasobhon, 2007). According to a report that was published in Bangkok Post by (Mala 2020), the previous Education Minister, Nataphol Teepsuwan, stated that the Thailand Education Ministry plans to recruit 10,000 native English-speaking teachers to improve Thai students’ proficiency in the language as soon as the situation is safe. This plan aims to improve students’ English skills, boost their confidence, and enable them to pursue further education. The period immediately after birth and up to seven is optimal for acquiring a second language, as Mr. Nataphol has pointed out. Younger children often have an easier time picking up a second language. It is essential for students pursuing a trade career to improve their English language proficiency since Thailand intends to become a center of activity for international investors. This study focuses on the difficulties that educators face in teaching English as a Foreign language (EFL) in a public school in Thailand with The Use of the Jolly Phonics Strategy in Enhancing Students’ English Reading Proficiency and Learning Motivation of Primary 3 Students of Bansom (Wongtaweeoupatam) School, Ban Bueng Chonburi, Thailand.

Jolly Phonics Strategy

Reading and writing in the English language may be taught using Jolly Phonics. The method of teaching letter sounds, known as synthetic phonics, is utilized, and as a result, pupils are better able to read and write using the sounds they have learned. It applies to elementary schooling as well as preschool and kindergarten instruction. Reading phonics is the first step in teaching pupils how to spell words correctly, which is a vital part of this process. Reading and writing abilities may be greatly improved with Jolly Phonics, a reading and writing program that is both entertaining and organized in its approach. According to Lloyd, Jolly Phonics teaches the five key abilities, where the students are first instructed on the 42 sounds used in the English language and then moved on to acquire abilities related to blending and reading while also learning to write by recognizing the sounds used in words. Farokhbakht and Nejadansari (2015) mentioned that Jolly Phonics involves a multisensory method in which information is presented by sight, sound, and kinesthetic means, which is appropriate for the qualities of young children.  It is difficult for some students to accurately spell a word if they cannot distinguish the sounds of the letters used to make the words. When a student is taught phonics, they can detect sounds in words and accurately spell them. According to Henbest & Apel, 2017, For the past 50 years or more, phonics has been reinforced in the Reading classroom. Henbest et al. (2017) suggested that phonics has been reinforced for reading in the classroom by the use of synthetics and analytical utterances, enable for readers to enhance phonemic skills, particularly at the primary level, and assist readers who are weak in reading (p.1) The researchers also added that several researchers had been proposed with regards to whether phonemics or not is a practical technique to be used as part of teaching phonetics. In general agreement, phonics and structuring the use of morphemes have been associated with word reading as one of the most influential benefactors that can subsidize word recognition in teaching reading among the readers. Students need to be able to read. These students must have a realistic approach to learning to read (Kellie, 2013). Based on prior research, a more planned and specific intervention should be provided to this set of learners, particularly as establishing readers, because a standardized approach to phonics education has proven to be more successful (Buckingham,2013 et al.) As an outcome, understanding phonics enables new students to be able to read and write more rapidly as they improve (Nasrawi (2017). In addition, to address this issue, educators need first to have an understanding of the five degrees of difficulty, which include phonological and phonemic awareness, phonics decoding, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension, and then have an understanding of what learning strategies should be used (Olviyanti, 2015).

Strategy for Enhancing English Reading Proficiency

Based on the degree to which English is spoken in each nation, the whole globe may be broken down into one of three groups (Yan0, 2017). The first group of places where English is used as a native language consists of nations where English is the primary language spoken by the majority of the population. Countries, where English is not the native language but is extensively used in education or other areas, are said to have English as a second language. The third group of places where English has not been actively utilized consists of nations where English is considered a foreign language. Reading is one of four skills that students should be able to master while studying English as a second or a foreign language as a second language. Reading is not only an active and conversational action but also an interactive process between the reader and the text that results in understanding. The reader, the text, and the interaction between the reader and the text are all part of the process. The text comprises letters, words, sentences, and paragraphs that encode meaning. Meanwhile, the reader uses knowledge, skills, and techniques to determine the meaning of the text. Furthermore, reading and comprehension are inextricably linked since reading aims to grasp what has been read. Reading is not very helpful if you do not understand what you have read.

Before children begin formal reading ability at school, the foundations of literacy—phonological awareness, oral language, and vocabulary—begin to develop (Carroll et al., 2012; Durham et al., 2007; Snow, Burns, and Griffin, 1998). Children’s experiences and surroundings during their early years of life significantly influence their reading abilities before they enter school. During these early years, a child’s home and parents are the primary sources of influence. Because the Norwegian language community is small, English texts and textbooks must be used extensively throughout higher education, particularly at advanced levels and in advanced programs (Dahl 1998; Hatlevik & Norgrd 2001). This means that English is just as important in higher education. Even though most classes and examinations take place in Thai, reading and comprehending academic content written in English is an essential academic skill. In addition, reading and understanding go hand in hand because the purpose of reading is to understand what has been read, and the two cannot be separated. Reading is a waste of time if you cannot comprehend the material you take in.

English Learning Motivation

Student’s academic performance is influenced by students levels of motivation, which may be understood in several ways. The motivation of students to study may be attributed to several different variables, both internal and external (Theobald, 2006; Zhang, 2014). On the one hand, students are naturally driven to study due to their interest and satisfaction with the subject or activity. This provides what they learned and the ramifications for their life a substantial amount of importance and significance. (Bain, 2004; Zhang, 2014). Students that are naturally motivated often do better in the tasks that are assigned to them and are more willing to achieve (Theobald, 2006; Biggs, 1999; Zhang, 2014). Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation play a role in the development of students’ levels of study motivation. Supporting the students’ choices and interests, which contributes to increased motivation levels, enables teachers to assist students in developing a personal interest in, engagement in, and ownership of their work (Schuitema et al.; Stearns, 2013). By supporting the students’ many options and areas of interest, teachers may aid students in developing a personal interest in, engagement in, and ownership of their work, which in turn helps motivate students (Schuitema et al.; Stearns, 2013). (Theobald and others, 2006) Students’ desire and motivation to learn are increased when their teachers encourage them to become the writers of their own life, encourage them to take ownership of their work, and create a real interest in their work. In conclusion, students’ levels of motivation affect their level of learning. Even though pupils are born with a preexisting capacity for learning, much of what they learn depends on how engaged their teachers are. There are times when a student’s interest, drive, and enthusiasm for a subject or activity may wane, making it necessary to provide continual reinforcement in the form of outside assistance. Instructors are typically the ones who offer this additional aid to their pupils. Teachers’ responsibility is to create an encouraging and constructive environment for their student’s academic growth. It is generally accepted that a teacher’s involvement in boosting students’ motivation can be measured by the degree to which they contribute to the growth of students’ autonomy, relevance, relatedness, and competency, as well as the interests of teachers and their sense of self-efficacy in the classroom.

Theoretical Framework

The following theories of Second language acquisition by many authors have influenced so much education, which is relevant to the study of how language is represented in the mind and whether there is a difference in how language is acquired and processed compared to other types of information acquired and processed.

Language Acquisition Theory

The concept of the “zone of proximal development” is widely used in the study of children’s mental development as it relates to the study and applies to teachers and educators. This adaptive strategy is the area of learning that occurs when a person is assisted by a teacher or peer with a skill set higher than that of the subject. A teacher or peer must help a student acquire a skill set since the learner cannot do it alone. Teachers want their students to become self-sufficient, so they assist in developing skills until that goal is reached. A teacher or more capable peer scaffolds students by providing them with support in their zone of proximal development as needed and gradually removing that support once it is no longer required, much like a scaffold is taken down from a structure after construction.

Zone of Proximal Development Lev Vygotsky

According to McLeod, S. A. (2019), the “Zone of Proximal Development” (ZPD) was developed by Soviet psychologist and social constructivist Lev Vygotsky (1896 – 1934), that refers to the difference between what a learner can do in his or her alone, and what he or she can do with the support of an experienced partner. Thus, “proximal” refers to knowledge that the student is “near” to acquiring. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86) “Zone of Proximal Development” (ZPD) is defined as the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the levels of future growth as measured by working through problems with an adult’s help or with peers farther along in their development. Vygotsky believed that when a student is in the ZPD for a particular task, providing the appropriate assistance will give the student enough “boost” to achieve the task.

The Nativist Or Innatist Theory Noam Chomsky (1970)

The second theory was the language theory, which was related to this study of language acquisition. It must also have rules that link these abstract structures to concrete representations of sound and meaning. These concrete representations are likely made up of parts from both universal phonetics and universal semantics. Following Noam Chomsky (1970) and his theory of language, the notion developed that everybody is born with an innate capacity to learn and speak a language. So, since we are children, we can have learning capacities to assimilate communicative and linguistic structures. He developed “The Universal Grammar Theory,” in which he stated that all the languages used by human beings have common elements in their structure, so this is why the acquisition of language in childhood is based on the recognition of these common elements that are the root of any language. In addition, Chomsky claimed that children have an innate skill to understand language grammar, something that develops with their experiences and learning.

Statement of the Problem

This study sought to answer the following questions:

  1. What is the score of Primary 3 students on reading proficiency before and after the intervention?
  2. What is the score of Primary 3 students on learning motivation before and after the intervention?
  3. Is there a significant difference in the score of Primary 3 students on reading proficiency before and after the intervention?
  4. Is there a significant difference in the score of Primary 3 students on learning motivation before and after the intervention?
  5. Is there a significant relationship between the scores of reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention?

Hypotheses

There is no significant difference in the scores of Primary 3 students on reading proficiency before and after the intervention.

  1. There is no significant difference in the scores of Primary 3 students on learning motivation of ts before and after the intervention.
  2. There is no significant relationship between the scores of reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study utilized a Pre-posttest esign. Quasi-experiments. It is a procedure that relies heavily on intuition yet has been carefully crafted by researchers. Includes the issues and solutions that exist in the real world, as opposed to contrived ones. It provides greater control over the third variable, often known as the confounding variable, which affects both the cause and the effect. The variables considered in this study were English Reading Proficiency and the Learning Motivation of students. The design employed a pretest, posttest, and survey questionnaire of an experimental group. On the other hand, students’ English Reading Proficiency and Learning Motivation were determined after the first semester of the school year 2022-2023. In the end, The Use of learning jolly phonics as a teaching strategy was analyzed.

Research Locale

The study was conducted at Bansom (Wongtaweeoupatam) School under the office Chonburi Primary Educational Area 1, the Ministry of Education. It is a public school located at 1 M. 6 Klong Kiew, Ban Bueng Chonburi, Thailand. It was founded as free public education in 1968. The school is located in a rural area of Chonburi province, where the primary source of income is agriculture. Most families of the students enrolled in this school came from low-income and average-income earners. Bansom (Wongtaweeoupatam) School is expanding its physical facilities to meet the needs of the modern educational system’s fast-developing technologies. The school offers from kindergarten 1 to primary 6 with a total of 15 teachers.

Participants of the Study

The focused group of this study is Primary 3 students, selected through random cluster sampling, who are studying English as a Foreign Language (EFL). The population was composed of two classes, for a total of 61 students. The participants in the study are 43 females and 18 males. The control group was composed of 31 students, and the experimental group was composed of 30 students from Primary 3. The students were studying in the first semester of the academic year 2022 at the time of the data collection. Consequently, the permission of the school head was obtained for the implementation of the study. Also, the parents of the students were informed about the researc, and their consent was gained.

Research Instruments

The research study used Quasi-Experimental pretest, post-test, and survey questionnaires. The test question was standardized and adapted through the Jolly books that were validated by the experts. At the beginning of the semester, students took a pre-test and survey questionnaire before implementing the strategy. After the first semester of the school year 2022–2023, students took the post-test and survey questionnaire. The tests aim to measure the students’ alphabetic knowledge before and after jolly phonics instruction, and the survey questionnaires for the level of learning motivations of the students for The Use of the Jolly Phonics Strategy in Enhancing Students’ English Reading Proficiency and Learning Motivation of Primary 3 students of Bansom (Wongtaweeoupatam) School.

Data Gathering Procedures

The Jolly Phonics pre-test and survey questionnaires were given to Primary 3 students one day before the implementation. The jolly Phonics post-test and survey questionnaires were administered at the end of the implementation of the Jolly Phonics strategy. After collecting all the data, the researcher, with the help of a statistician, tabulated and tallied the survey. The result was a foundation for improving students’ English reading proficiency and learning motivation in Primary 3 students.

RESULTS

Table 1.1   The Score of Primary 3 Students on Reading Proficiency Before the Intervention of the Control Group

Phoneme Identification Phoneme Segmentation
Scores Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1-2 28 90 27 87
3-4 3 10 4 13
5-6
Total 31 100 30 100
Mean 1.51 1.65
SD 0.851 0.914

Table 1.2  The Scores of Primary 3 Students on Reading Proficiency Before the Intervention of Experimental Group

Phoneme Identification Phoneme Segmentation
Scores Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1-2 2 7
3-4 25 83 25 83
5-6 5 17 3 10
Total 30 100 30 100
Mean 3.67 3.40
SD 0.758 0.855

Table 1.3 The Scores of  Primary 3 Students on Reading Proficiency after the Intervention of Control Group

Phoneme Identification Phoneme Segmentation
Scores Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1-2 22 71 25 81
3-4 9 29 6 19
5-6
Total 31 100 30 100
Mean 2.16 1.68
SD 0.820 0.944

Table 1.4 The Scores of Primary 3 Students on Reading Proficiency After the Intervention of Experimental Group

Phoneme Identification Phoneme Segmentation
Scores Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
7-8 4 13 4 13
9-10 26 87 26 87
11-12
Total 30 100 30 100
Mean 3.67 3.40
SD 0.758 0.855

Table 2.1  The Scores of Primary 3 students on Learning Motivation Before and After the Intervention of the Control Group

  Before After
  WM VI WM VI
1.      I wish I could speak English perfectly. 1.61 SWD 1.61 SWD
2.      I love learning English. 1.61 SWD 1.29 SD
3.      My parents try to help me to learn English. 1.48 SD 1.58 SWD
4.      Learning English is great. 1.61 SWD 1.74 SWD
5.      I have a strong desire to know all aspects of English 1.26 SD 1.13 SD
6.   My English class is a waste of time 3.74 SA 3.61 SA
7.      I would get nervous if I had to speak English in front of the class 4.00 SA 4.00 SA
8.    Studying the English Language is not enjoyable 3.77 SA 3.68 SA
9.    My English teacher is a great source of inspiration to me. 3.19 SWA 3.84 SA
10.  I wish I were fluent in English. 1.06 SD 1.16 SD
11.  I feel anxious if someone asks me something in English 3.74 SA 4.00 SA
12.  I am sometimes anxious that the other students in the class will laugh at me when I speak English. 3.74 SA 3.87 SA
13.  When I leave school, I will give up the study of English because I am not interested in it 4.00 SA 3.84 SA
14.  I would rather see a TV program dubbed into our language than in its language with subtitles. 4.00 SA 3.90 SA
15.  My parents encourage me to practice my English as much as possible. 2.13 SWD 1.10 SD
16.  I look forward to the time I spend in English class 1.90 SWD 1.10 SD
17.  I would feel comfortable speaking English where both Thai and English speakers were present 3.77 SA 3.81 SA
18.  I think that learning English is dull. 3.74 SA 3.77 SA
19.  To be honest, I have no desire to learn English 3.74 SA 3.90 SA
20.  I work hard to learn English 1.26 SD 1.16 SD
Composite Mean 2.77 SWD 2.70 SWD

 Table 2.2  The Scores of Primary 3 on Learning Motivation Before and After the Intervention of the Experimental Group

  Before After
  WM VI WM VI
1.      I wish I could speak English perfectly. 3.40 SWA 3.57 SA
2.      I love learning English. 3.67 SA 3.90 SA
3.      My parents try to help me to learn English. 3.30 SWA 3.67 SA
4.      Learning English is great. 3.73 SA 3.93 SA
5.      I have a strong desire to know all aspects of English 3.57 SA 3.63 SA
6.   My English class is a waste of time 1.27 SD 1.17 SD
7. I would get nervous if I had to speak English in front of the class 2.63 SWA 1.57 SWD
8.    Studying the English Language is not enjoyable 1.47 SD 1.13 SD
9.    My English teacher is a great source of inspiration to me. 3.67 SA 3.73 SA
10.  I wish I were fluent in English. 3.07 SWA 3.67 SA
11.  I feel anxious if someone asks me something in English 2.93 SWA 1.53 SWD
12.  I am sometimes anxious that the other students in the class will laugh at me when I speak English. 3.17 SWA 1.53 SWD
13.  When I leave school, I will give up the study of English because I am not interested in it 1.27 SD 1.00 SD
14.  I would rather see a TV program dubbed into our language than in its language with subtitles. 2.93 SWA 1.60 SWD
15.  My parents encourage me to practice my English as much as possible. 2.73 SWA 3.57 SA
16.  I look forward to the time I spend in English class 3.40 SWA 3.77 SA
17.  I would feel comfortable speaking English where both Thai and English speakers were present 3.57 SA 3.67 SA
18.  I think that learning English is dull. 1.73 SWD 1.63 SWD
19.  To be honest, I have no desire to learn English 1.50 SWD 1.00 SD
20.  I work hard to learn English 2.67 SWA 4.00 SA
Composite Mean 2.78 SWA 2.66 SWA

Table 3  Difference in the Score of Primary 3 Students on Reading Proficiency Before and After the Intervention

Test Mean Increase (% Increase) Computed Paired T-Test Value p-value Interpretation Decision
Control Group (Identification)
Before 1.52 0.64 (42.11%) -5.064 0.001 Significant Reject the Null Hypothesis
After 2.16
Control Group (Segmentation)
Before 1.65 -0.03 (-1.825) -0.329 0.745 Not Significant Do not Reject the  Null Hypothesis
After 1.68
Experimental Group (Identification)
Before 3.67 5.73 (156.13%) -29.059 0.001 Significant Reject the  Null Hypothesis
After 9.40
Experimental  Group (Segmentation)
Before 3.40 5.80 (170.59%) -35.828 0.001 Significant Reject the  Null Hypothesis
After 9.20

Note: p-value 0.05 – significant, p-value > 0.05 – not significant

Table 4  Difference in the Score of Primary 3 Students on Learning Motivation Before and After the Intervention

Test Mean Increase/Decrease (%Increase/Decrease) Computed Paired T-Test Value p-value Interpretation Decision
Control Group
Before 2.77 0.17  (6.14%) 0.795 0.436 Not Significant Do not Reject the Null Hypothesis
After 2.70
Experimental Group
Before 2.78 0.1 (4.32%) 0.710 0.487 Not Significant Do not Reject the Null Hypothesis
After 2.66

Note: p-value 0.05 – significant, p-value > 0.05 – not significant

Table 5  Relationship Between the scores of Reading Proficiency and Learning of Motivation After the Intervention

Variable Computed Pearson r  Value Relationship p-value Interpretation Decision
Control Group 0.828 Very Strong 0.001 Significant Reject the  Null Hypothesis
Experimental Group 0.615 Strong 0.001 Significant Reject the  Null Hypothesis

      Note: p-value 0.05 – significant, p-value > 0.05 – not significant

DISCUSSION

Problem 1.  The scores of Primary 3 students on reading proficiency before and after the intervention

Table 1.1, which is the score of reading proficiency of a control group before the intervention, shows that 90% or 28 out of 31 got scores 1-2 in Phoneme Identification and 10% or 3 out of 31 got 3-4 scores. In Phoneme Segmentation, 87%, or 27 out of 31, got 1-2 scores, while 13%, or 4 out of 31, got 3-4 scores. Table 1.2, the reading proficiency score of the Experimental group before the intervention showing that 83% or 25 out of 30 got 3-4 scores in Phoneme Identification, while 17% or 5 out of 30 got 5-6 scores. In Phoneme Segmentation, 83%, or 25 out of 30, got 3-4 scores; 10%, or 3 out of 30, got 5-6; and 7%, or 2 out of 30, got 1-2 scores. Table 1.3 shows the reading proficiency score of the controlled group after the intervention. It shows that 71% or 22 out of 31 got scores 1-2 in Phoneme Identification, and 29% or 9 out of 31 got 3-4 scores. In Phoneme Segmentation, 81%, or 25 out of 31 got 1-2 scores, while 19%, or 6 out of 31, got 3-4 scores.

Table 1.4 shows the experimental group’s reading proficiency after the intervention. It shows that 87%, or 26 out of 30, got scores 9-10 in Phoneme Identification, and 13%, or 4 out of 30, got 7-8 scores. In Phoneme Segmentation, 87% or 26 out of 30 got scores 9-10 in Phoneme Identification, and 13% or 4 out of 30 got 7-8 scores

Problem 2.  The Scores of Primary 3 students on Learning Motivation before and after the intervention.

Table 2.1 The composite mean of learning motivation before the intervention of a controlled group is 2.77, with a verbal interpretation of somewhat disagree and after the intervention, the composite mean of learning motivation of the control group is 2.70, with a verbal interpretation of somewhat disagree. In summary, the control group’s learning motivation score before the intervention was higher with a composite mean of 2.77, than after the intervention, which lowered the learning motivation with a composite mean of 2.70. If students are highly motivated, they will not only try to learn the language but also love studying it since they will need to learn it (Sakiroglu & Dikilitas, 2012). In addition, motivation has traditionally been seen as the primary driving force behind acquiring a foreign language (Klimova, 2011). In general, the degree to which students are motivated to acquire a second language (L2) is widely acknowledged as one of the most important elements influencing their overall success (Lei, 2012; Thang et al., 2011). Table 2.2 The composite mean of learning motivation before the intervention of an experimental group is 2.78, with a verbal interpretation of somewhat agree and after the intervention of learning motivation of the experimental group, it is revealed that the composite mean of learning motivation after the intervention of an experimental group is 2.66, with a verbal interpretation of somewhat agree. In summary, the score of learning motivation in the experimental group before the intervention had a higher composite mean of 2.78 than after the intervention, which lowered the learning motivation to a composite mean of 2.66. According to significant studies in English as a Foreign Language, some students lacked the motivation to learn the language. Several factors contribute to Thai students’ low performance in learning English as a foreign language. Some of these factors include the inadequate design of the curriculum, a shortage of English instructors, and the student’s lack of willingness to study. According to John and Ehow (2011), the difficulties associated with learning the English language stemmed from various factors in various settings. These included the availability of educational resources, the number of students in each class, the caliber of the instructors, and the learners’ school attendance rate. Murray and Christison (2010) say that many students think that English is just a subject they learn in school. They do not see the importance of knowing English if they want to work for national or international companies that use English.

Problem 3.  The a significant difference in the scores of Primary 3 students on reading proficiency in both the control and experimental groups students before and after the intervention.

Table 3 shows the difference in the score of Primary 3 students on Learning proficiency before and after the intervention. In terms of phoneme identification, the data revealed that for both control and experimental groups, an increase of 42.11% and 156.13%, respectively, before and after the intervention implementation with less than 0.05 p-value result of 0.001. As a result, based on this data rejects the null hypothesis, highlighting the significant difference between both groups. This means that the difference in the pretest and posttest scores in phoneme identification can be attributed to the intervention used. Although a difference existed in both the experimental and control groups, the difference is greater for the experimental group where the jolly phonics strategy was used compared to the control group where the jolly phonics strategy was not used. Hence, the use of the jolly phonics strategy is effective in bringing in a big difference in the pretest to posttest scores of the primary 3 students in phoneme identification. On the other hand, in terms of phoneme segmentation, it can be gleaned that there is no significant difference since there is a p-value greater than 0.05 in control groups before and after the intervention. Hence, it accepts the null hypothesis. However, the data revealed that experimental groups increased by 170.59% before and after the intervention with less than 0.05 p-value result of 0.001. As a result, based on this data, it is significant and rejects the null hypothesis. Therefore, the data implies that the intervention is an effective tool in increasing the proficiency level of Primary 3 students in phoneme identification and Phoneme Segmentation due to the empirical data showing significant results in this study.  This means that the difference in the pretest and posttest scores of the primary 3 students in the experimental group under phoneme segmentation can be linked to the jolly phonics strategy used which implies the usefulness of the jolly phonics strategy in teaching the primary 3 students about phoneme segmentation. This finding is comparable to that obtained by Morag Stuart (2021) conducted research in London’s Docklands, where nearly all of the kids speak a Bengali dialect known as Sylhet. (The families were recent Bangladeshi immigrants.) The experimental group was taught Jolly phonics, whereas the control group was taught with big storybooks, a popular word memorizing strategy. The results demonstrate a significant average difference due to the instructional approach chosen. They also demonstrate a significant gap in underachievement. Finally, they demonstrate that this type of phonics instruction is ideal for kids learning English as a second language.  Lodosa (2013). Lodosa’s research demonstrated that jolly phonics successfully enhanced students’ reading and writing skills. This conclusion is also consistent with Ariati, Padmadewi, & Suarnajaya’s (2018) findings. Areena Paduka (2011) observed the same thing in her research on the impact of phonics in teaching word reading in a remedial English class for Muttayom Suksa 1 student. This finding is also consistent with what she discovered. She discovered that the kids could separate the sounds that the letters made, which allowed them to enhance their reading abilities, leading to increased fluency and vocabulary retention. Additionally, the children received higher marks in reading at both word and sentence levels and for reading new terms. The study investigated adopting the jolly phonics strategy to assist children in improving their reading proficiency. It is important to note that the effect size level is strong in enhancing primary school students’ English pronunciation skills. These results reveal that the jolly phonics strategy significantly impacts the development of English reading proficiency in primary school students.

Problem 4.  The significant difference in the score of Primary 3 students on learning motivation before and after the intervention.

The difference in the score of Primary 3 students on learning motivation before and after the intervention is presented in Table 4. It can be gleaned that there is a decreased result of mean showing of 6.14% and 4.323% for both the control and experimental groups with a p-value of 0.436 and 0.487, respectively. Hence, this study accepts the null hypothesis emphasizing that there is no significant difference in the learning motivation of Primary 3 students even if an intervention is implemented. Results imply that the intervention does not influence the score of Primary 3 students on learning motivation in both control and experimental groups. This result has two possible implications due to the learning motivation issues of the students, being either demotivated or motivated. It is a good thing if the students are motivated. However, this result might provide an opportunity to investigate this kind of scenario if the students have demotivating issues in their learning environment. Meaning since there is no significant difference, this situation might occur in the service area. Thongma et al. (2013) explained that students in countries where English is not the native language face these challenges in developing a desire to study English. This was because students in these nations are discouraged from using learning tools and are terrified of making errors. The lack of an imaginative layout in the classroom is another element that leads to the low levels of motivation shown by the students. According to the results of research that was carried out by Thao and Long (2020), students from ethnic minority groups are motivated to learn English despite the various challenges that are associated with their living situations and previous levels of linguistic competence. Second, some of the most significant challenges associated with learning English were explored. These challenges included a lack of prior English knowledge on the part of the students, unsuitable learning methodologies, an inability to utilize the language, and laziness. In light of the results, some pertinent implications have been offered for the enhancement of the teaching and learning environment at the university to generate potential support for students as they work to develop their English language abilities successfully. The relationship between a constructivist learning environment and students’ desire to learn was not found to be statistically significant. However, the research findings showed that students were not very motivated to learn when placed in a more constructivist setting. The results, on the other hand, revealed that students were more motivated to study when they were given more opportunities to relate what they were learning to issues that exist in the real world. Therefore, to encourage students to acquire new knowledge and skills, teachers should focus on the applicability of the content they teach to real-world scenarios (Cetin-Dindar & Geban, 2015). Several factors contribute to Thai students’ lack of performance in English as a Second Language classes, including inadequate lesson plans, an inadequate supply of English instructors, and a general lack of learning enthusiasm among the student body, particularly for students who hail from far-flung regions, where they often lack access to educational opportunities and are saddled with a dearth of resources in their educational environments.

Problem 5.  The significant relationship between the scores of reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention.

Table 5 shows the relationship between the scores of reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention. The data shows that the computed Pearson r value of 0.615 and 0.828 for both control and experimental groups emphasize a strong to a very strong relationship between their reading proficiency and learning motivation after the implementation of the intervention. Hence, it can be gleaned that a p-value of 0.001, which is less than 0.05 depicts a significant relationship between the two variables, which rejects the null hypothesis.   This means that the primary 3 students’ reading proficiency in both the control and experimental groups can be associated with their learning motivation. This result implies that during the intervention implementation, one factor that could help them increase their reading proficiency score is their learning motivation. Perhaps, as shown in Table 2.2, their interest or desire and the assistance of school teachers in studying the English language as a universal language greatly influence their learning motivation and improve their reading proficiency. This grade level needs to be guided by their parents and even their teachers for them to be able to impart the knowledge and skills needed for them to grow and be the next assets of the future generations contributing to their future specific field of profession. In the context of acquiring a new language, students’ motivation is one of the essential factors determining the extent to which they are successful in their studies. Because it is physically present in the students, it increases the likelihood that they will interact with one another and participate in the teaching and learning process (Wong, 2013; Xuejun, 2020). It happened because learning a language is affected by how it is taught and many different things about the students themselves. According to Reusch (2012) and Xuejun (2020), motivation is one of the elements that plays a significant role in acquiring English language skills. It was consistent with the findings of Gardner (1985), who said that motivation had been recognized for a long time as one of the primary elements determining the acquisition of English language skills. It is widely acknowledged as playing an important part in successful language acquisition.

SUMMARY OF  FINDINGS

This paper sought to provide information on The Use of the Jolly Phonics Strategy in enhancing student English reading proficiency and learning motivation.

 Among the important findings of this research were:

  1. The score of reading proficiency of Primary 3 students in both the control and experimental groups before and after the intervention.
  2. Before the intervention, the score of reading proficiency in the control and experimental groups were comparable in terms of phoneme identification: 90% of students in the control group received 1-2 scores, while 83% of students in the experimental group received 3 to 4 score In phoneme segmentation, the majority of the control group 87% of the students received 1 to 2scores, while the majority of the experimental group 83% of the students received 5 to 4scores. After the intervention of the control group, in terms of phoneme identification, 71% of the Students got 1 to 2 scores, while in the experimental group, 87% of the students got 9 to 7 scores. In terms of phoneme segmentation, 81% of students in the control group received 1 to 2 scores, while 87% of students in the experimental group received 9 to 10 scores.
  1. The score of learning motivation of Primary 3 students in both the control and experimental groups before and after the intervention.The composite mean of the control groups in learning motivation before the intervention is 2.77, and after the intervention is 2.70, with a verbal interpretation of “somewhat disagree.” However, the composite mean of the experimental groups in learning motivation before the intervention is 2.78, and after the intervention is 2.66, with a verbal interpretation of “somewhat agree.”
  1. The significant difference in the score of reading proficiency of Primary 3 students in both the control and experimental groups students before and after the intervention. The significant difference in the level of proficiency of Primary 3 students before and after the intervention in terms of phoneme identification revealed that both the control and experimental groups increased before and after the implementation of the intervention. As a result, it rejects the null hypothesis and highlights the significant difference between both groups. On the other hand, in terms of phoneme segmentation, it can be gleaned that there is no significant difference since there is a p-value greater than 0.05 in the control groups. Hence, it accepts the null hypothesis. However, in experimental groups, it was revealed that the data was significant and rejected the null hypothesis.
  1. The significant difference in the score of learning motivation of Primary 3 students in both the control and experimental groups before and after the intervention. There is no significant difference in the learning motivation of Primary 3 students.
  1. The significant relationship between the scores of reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention. There is strong to a very strong relationship between reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention.
  1. The proposed improvement plan to enhance the student’s reading proficiency and learning motivation using Jolly Phonics strategies. An action improvement plan designed to enhance students reading proficiency and learning motivation.

CONCLUSIONS

            Based on the foregoing findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

  1. The experimental groups’ reading proficiency scores were higher after the intervention than before the strategy was implemented. While the control group had the lowest score before and after the intervention. As a result, there is an improvement in the score of reading proficiency in experimental groups using the Jolly Phonics strategy.
  2. The findings of this study showed a low score of learning motivation in both the experimental and control groups. The mean score of both the experimental and control groups showed that the Jolly Phonics strategy did not influence the score of learning motivation of Primary 3 students. This result has two possible implications due to the learning motivation issues of the students: being either demotivated or motivated. Many Thai students have failed to study English due to a lack of motivation from several factors, such as family background, social environment, physical environment, culture, and learning techniques. Motivation is regarded as one of the most important variables influencing students’ second language (L2) learning success (Lei, 2012; Thang et al., 2011).
  3. A significant difference exists between the control and experimental groups before and after the intervention in terms of phoneme identification; both groups’ scores increased before and after the intervention. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. Only the experimental groups revealed that the data was significant and rejected the null hypothesis in phoneme segmentation; in the control group, there was no significant difference, and the hypothesis was accepted.
  4. It appears that the intervention did not affect the learning motivation score because there was a significant difference in the scores of learning motivation between the control group and the experimental group both before and after the intervention. Therefore, the null hypothesis must be accepted and concluded that there is no significant difference between the two groups.
  5. The data show that the computed Pearson r for the experimental and control groups emphasizes a strong to very strong relationship between reading proficiency and learning motivation after the intervention. Hence, the results revealed a significant relationship between the two variables, which rejects the null hypothesis.
  6. There is a need to unify the action improvement plan to enhance the student’s reading proficiency and learning motivation and enable mapping out strategies and small steps toward achieving long-term goals.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In light of the conclusions drawn from the study, the following are hereby recommended:

  1. Since the Jolly Phonics Strategy for helping students learn to read was successful, it is highly recommended, especially in kindergarten or primary school, to use the same method.
  2. Adapting the Jolly Phonics Improvement Plan to assess student’s reading proficiency and motivation to learn is strongly advised.
  3. More studies should be conducted on Jolly Phonics to enhance students’ reading proficiency. This will encourage Thai students to read more. The school should offer English teachers opportunities, such as Jolly Phonics training and seminars, special courses, and special events.
  4. It is important to research the number of factors that impact students’ motivation levels to provide researchers and educators with information that can be used to enhance students’ academic performance. Also, the researcher needs to use a new framework, preferably an up-to-date one.
  5. Teachers need to provide engaging course materials and develop an environment that is welcoming and optimistic about boosting their students’ motivation levels and encouraging them to become self-directed, independent learners. English teachers should work to improve their students’ integrative motivation to improve their students’ judgments of how well they are learning the language.
  6. The family and school environments are a viable and necessary strategy for increasing opportunities and supporting students’ learning.
  7. The government should prioritize English instruction and give scholarships to international students. Teachers must also get government assistance. Language learning requires coordination, teamwork, and a concentrated effort to meet students’ learning requirement

REFERENCES

  1. Adamma, O. N., Ekwutosim, O. P., & Unamba, E. C. (2018). Influence of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on pupils academic performance in mathematics. SJME (Supremum Journal of Mathematics Education), 2(2), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405857
  2. Areena Paduka. (2011). The use of phonics and sight-word instruction to solve problems in English reading. Master of Arts, Teaching English as an International Language, Prince of Songkla University.
  3. Ariati, N. P., Padmadewi, N. N., & Suarnajaya, I. W. (2018). Jolly Phonics: Effective strategy for enhancing children’s English literacy. SHS Web of Conferences, 42, 00032. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184200032
  4. Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press
  5. Breznitz, Z., Shaul, S., Horowitz-Kraus, T., Sela, I., Nevat, M., & Karni, A. (2013). Enhanced reading by training with imposed time constraints in typical and dyslexic adults. Nature Communications, 4, 1486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2488
  6. Bruner, J. S. (1974-1975). From communication to language: A psychological perspective. Cognition, 3(3), 255–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(74)90012-2
  7. Buckingham, j., Beaman, r., & wheldall, k. (2013). why poor children are more likely to become poor readers: the early years. educational review, 66(4), 428–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.795129
  8. Carroll, J. M., Bowyer-Crane, C. A., Duff, F. J., Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. (2012). Developing language and literacy: Effective intervention in the early years. Wiley-Blackwell.
  9. Cetin-Dindar, A., & Geban, O. (2015). Adaptation of the science motivation scale into Turkish and Chemistry: Analysis of validity. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 5(1), 2015, 19-38. doi:10.14527/pegegog.2015.002
  10. Cimmiyotti, C. B. (2013). Impact of reading ability on academic performance at the primary level (Master’s theses and Capstone projects. Paper 127). Dominican University, River Forest, IL
  11. Chomchaiya, C. (2014). An investigation into the development of English language reading comprehension among Thai undergraduate students using an online blended learning approach. This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
  12. Chomchaiya, C. & Dunworth, K. (2008). Identification of learning barriers affecting English reading comprehension instruction, as perceived by ESL Undergraduates in Thailand. Edith Cowan University. Research Online, EDU-COM International Conference.
  13. Chomsky, Noam. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In Jacobs, Roderick A. and Rosenbaum, Peter S. (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, 184-221. Boston: Ginn
  14. Durham, R. E., Farkas, G., Hammer, C. S., Bruce Tomblin, J., & Catts, H. W. (2007). Kindergarten oral language skill: A key variable in the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic status. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 25(4), 294–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2007.03.001
  15. Editorial. (2021, November 22). English gets a raw deal. https://www.bangkokpost.com. Retrieved April 14, 2022, from https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/2219235/english-gets-raw-deal
  16. Farokhbakht, L., & Nejadansari, D. (2015). The effect of using synthetic multisensory phonics in Teaching Literacy on EFL Young Learners’ Literacy Learning. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2015.1196
  17. Ferlazzo, L. (2015, September 14). Strategies for helping students motivate themselves. Retrieved April 25, 2022, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/strategies-helping-studentsmotivate-themselves-larry-ferlazzo
  18. Gardner, R. C., Lalonde, R. N., & Moorcroft, R. (1985). The role of attitudes and motivation in second language learning: Correlational and experimental considerations. Language learning, 35(2), 207- 227
  19. Henbest, V. S., & Apel, K. (2017). Effective word reading instruction: What does the evidence tell us? Communication Disorders Quarterly, 39(1), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740116685183
  20. Kellie, B. D. (2013). Use of phonics program with early childhood general education and special education students. Use of Phonics Program with Early Childhood General Education and Special Education Students,1(1)
  21. Klimova, B. F. (2011). Motivation for learning English at a university level. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15(0), 2599-2603. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.153
  22. Kongkerd, W. (2013). Teaching English in the era of English used as a lingua franca in Thailand. Executive Jo urnal33(4), 3-12.
  23. Lei, Z. (2012). Investigation into motivation types and influences on motivation: the case of Chinese non-English majors. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 100-122.
  24. Lloyd, S., Wernham, S., Hockley, A., & Stephen, L. (2012). The phonics handbook: A handbook for teaching reading, writing, and spelling. Jolly Learning.
  25. Lodosa, A. (2013). Jolly Phonics: How teachers can teach reading and writing to their students. Universidad Publica De Navarra Nafarroako Unibertsitate Publikoa.
  26. McLeod, S. A. (2019). What Is the zone of proximal development? Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/Zone-of-Proximal-Development.html
  27. Ministry of Education (2014) Ministry of education announcement regarding the English language teaching reform policy. Language learning and Teaching Units. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2022, from http://ltu.obec.go.th/english/2013/index.php/en/?start=36
  28. Ministry of Education Thailand. (2008). Basic education core curriculum B.E. 2551 (A.D. 2008). http://www.ipst.ac.th/ images/2017/CoreCurriculum2551/EN.pdf
  29. Morag Stuart (2021) Training teachers for phonics and early reading: Developing research-informed practice
  30. Nasrawi, A., & Al-Jamal, D. (2017). The effect of using jolly phonics on Jordanian first-grade pupils’ reading. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET). The effect of using jolly phonics on Jordanian first-grade pupils’ reading,4(2), 106-119.
  31. Nuraeni, N., & Aisyah, S. (2020). Understanding EFL students’ motivation to learn: why do you study English? Jurnal Bahasa Lingua Scientia, 12(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.21274/ls.v12i1.2115
  32. Olviyanti, I., Rismaya, M., & Zainal, A. (2015). An analysis of the ability to comprehend a reading text by sixth-year students. An Analysis of the ability to comprehend a reading text by sixth-year students,1(1).
  33. Ruesch, S., Bown, J., & Dewey, D. P. (2012,). Student and teacher perceptions of motivational strategies in the foreign language classroom. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 15-27. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2011.562510
  34. Sakiroglu, B., & Dikilitas, K. (2012). language learning motivation of Turkish Tertiary level EFL Students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46(0), 3215-3219. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.039
  35. Sawangsamutchai, Y., & Rattanavich, S. (2016). A Comparison of seventh grade thai students’ reading comprehension and motivation to read English through applied instruction based on the genre-based approach and the teacher’s manual. English Language Teaching, 9(4), 54-63.
  36. Schiefele, U., & Schaffner, E. (2015). Teacher interests, mastery goals, and self-efficacy as predictors of instructional practices and student motivation. ScienceDirect, 42, 159-171.
  37. Schuitema, J., Peetsma, T., & van der Veen, I. (2016). Longitudinal relations between perceived autonomy and social support from teachers, and students’ self-regulated learning and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 32-45. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.006
  38. Siska, S. (2015). Using film to increase motivation for speaking in English course classroom. TELL-US Journal 1 (2), 51-57.
  39. Stearns, S. A. (2013). Motivating students to offer their best: Evidence-based effective course design, College Teaching, 61(4), 127-130. doi:10.1080/87567555
  40. Subakthiasih, P., & Putri, I. G. A. V. W. (2020). An Analysis of Students’ Motivation in Studying English During Covid-19 Pandemic. Linguistic, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal, 4(1), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.31539/leea.v4i1.1728
  41. Swanson, L. A., Fey, M. E., Mills, C. E., & Hood. L. S. (2005). Use of narrative-based language intervention with children who have specific language impairments. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14(2), 131-143
  42. Thao, T. Q., & Long, N. C. H. (2020). The use of self-regulated language learning strategies among Vietnamese English-majored freshmen: A  case study. VNU Journal of Science: Education Research, 36(1)
  43. Thang, S. M., Thing Siew, L., & Nurjanah Mohd, J. (2011). Attitudes and motivation of Malaysian secondary students towards learning English as a second language: a case study. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 17(1), 40-54.
  44. Theobald, M. A. (2006). Increasing student motivation: Strategies for middle and high school teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  45. Thongma, S., Rany S., Mohamad J. Z. I., and Leong, L. M. (2013). Factors Cause Students Low English Language Learning: A Case Study in the National University of Laos. International Journal of English Language Education, 1, 179-192.
  46. Urbanovič, J., & Wilkins, S. (2013). Internationalization as a strategy to improve the quality of higher education in small states: Stakeholder perspectives in Lithuania. Higher Education Policy, 26, pp. 373-396.
  47. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  48. Wei, Y. (2005). The relationship between phonological awareness and reading ability of Thai students in English and Thai in primary school in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation). Maryland University, College Park, USA. Retrieved from https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/2705
  49. Wong, R. M. (2013). An investigation of strategies for student motivation in the Chinese EFL context. Innovation in Language Learning and, 8(12), 132-154. DOI:10.1080/17501229.2013.777449
  50. Zhang, Q. (2014, February 14). Assessing the effects of instructor enthusiasm on classroom engagement, learning goal orientation, and academic self-efficacy. Communication Teacher, 28(1), 44-56. doi:10.1080/17404622.2013.839047.

Article Statistics

Track views and downloads to measure the impact and reach of your article.

15

PDF Downloads

[views]

Metrics

PlumX

Altmetrics

Paper Submission Deadline

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Sign up for our newsletter, to get updates regarding the Call for Paper, Papers & Research.

    Subscribe to Our Newsletter

    Sign up for our newsletter, to get updates regarding the Call for Paper, Papers & Research.