Negin Fateh

The present study was an attempt to compare the effect of teaching Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) and Content-Based Instruction (CBI) on the reading comprehension of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. To fullfill this objective, a group of 90 intermediate female EFL learners, within the age range of 17 to 19, took a piloted sample of the PET as a pre-treatment proficiency test. Sixty of them were selected as homogeneous learners and were randomly divided into two experimental groups of CSR and CBI. The CSR group receieved CSR strategy training based on Klingner, Vaughan, and Schumm's model (2001), while the CBI group receieved CBI-based strategy training, using Tsai and Shang's (2010) model. At the end of the training, another piloted PET reading test was administered as the posttest. The pre-treatment reading scores were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test whose results confirmed the pre-treatment homogeneity of the participants. The post-treatment scores were also analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test whose results indicated no significant difference in the reading posttest levels of CBI and CSR groups, U = 423.5, z =-.401, p = .688, r =-.0517. The article concludes with a discussion on the results and presenting some implications.

Negin Hooshmand Fateh MA in TEFL, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch The present study was an attempt to investigate the effect of teaching Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) on the reading comprehension of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. To fullfill this objective, a group of 90 intermediate female EFL learners, within the age range of 17 to 19 years old ( M age = 18), attending English classes at Iran Language Institute (ILI) took a piloted sample of the PET as a proficiency test. Sixty of them were selected as homogeneous learners and were randomly divided into two groups of experimental and control. All the classes of the two groups were instructed by the same teacher (the researcher) using the same material. The only difference was that the CSR group receieved CSR strategy training based on Klingner, Vaughan, and Schumm's model (2001) while the control group received a common teaching program. At the end of the training, another piloted PET read...