Effect of Scaffolded Differentiation Strategies on Inferential Reading Comprehension and Receptive Vocabulary Improvement of Intermediate Students

This study tried to examine the effect of using scaffolded differentiation strategies on reading comprehension and vocabulary improvement of intermediate students. The effect of using scaffolded differentiation strategies on the reading strategy use of the intermediate students was also checked. The researcher selected 40 EFL learners with intermediate levels. They were mixed learners from the institutes in Tehran. Nelson proficiency test, screening test, diagnostic test, progress monitoring test, outcome test, and a close-ended questionnaire were used in the study. For the quantitative part, the selected students were randomly divided into four groups. Two were experimental groups and the rest were control ones. Each group consisted of 10 students. There were 15 sessions for the treatment. In the Experimental group the instructor used scaffolded differentiating strategies for improving the reading comprehension of the students and in the control group the teachers used ordinary methods. A test that subdivides the broad area into specific skills, in this case, inferential comprehension and receptive vocabulary was administered before and after the intervention. The questions were constructed in the related course of study. The result of the post-test showed that ‘Inferential reading’ and ‘Receptive vocabulary’ of the experimental group were noticeably greater than those of the control one. Data for the qualitative part was collected through the reading strategy inventory of MARSI (Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002). The reading strategy inventory was administered to 20 participants before the instruction and the instruction started, and after the instruction it was administered again. It consisted of 30 items that measured three factors: Global Reading Strategies (13 items), Problem-Solving Strategies (8 items), and Support Reading Strategies (9 items). The result of the posttest showed that the mean scores for the two subscales of ‘Global’ and ‘Supportive’ in the experimental group were noticeably greater than the mean scores in the control group but not for the other subscales of ‘Problem-solving’.