Reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students

Reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students Dania Fareh, Yazan Almahameed This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220902/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 12 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study aims to examine how the reading subskills are illustrated in the Action Pack 10 based on the Urquhart and Weir ( 2014 ) framework, along with teachers’ perspectives of this coverage. It also investigates the Tenth-grade students’ comprehension of the writing subskills based on Aryadoust’s ( 2010 ) framework. The sample includes 235 tenth-grade students and 28 teachers from four schools in Shafa Badran, Jordan. A mixed-methods approach was used, involving content analysis, an essay writing test, and a questionnaire. The findings reveal that reading subskills are moderately covered in the textbook, with a greater emphasis on careful reading than on expeditious reading. In terms of writing subskills, students demonstrated stronger performance in coherence and cultural competence, while exhibiting notable difficulties in sentence structure and vocabulary use. Additionally, the results from the teacher questionnaire revealed that educators perceive the coverage of reading subskills in the textbook as moderate. Social science/Education Humanities/Language and linguistics Social science/Language and linguistics Humanities/Literature Introduction English language holds a prominent status of being the most extensively taught foreign language in Jordan. In fact, proficiency in English is not merely a preference but a necessity for most Jordanian students and academics who aspire to access global academic resources, publications and even undergraduate university education. English proficiency is often viewed as a gateway to broader educational and career opportunities, particularly in fields where international communication and collaboration are essential. Consequently, English language instruction is prioritized in Jordanian educational institutions, with many students beginning their English studies at a young age. English has increasingly become a major element of the school curriculum and now holds a notable position in Jordan's overall academic sphere (Salah, 2021 ). Although Jordanian students begin their English language education from primary school, a significant challenge arises as many of these students struggle to reach the desired level of proficiency in both receptive and productive English language skills despite their long exposure to English instruction (Al-Saidat, 2009 ). Reading is the cognitive process of decoding symbols to determine a text's meaning. Hence, teaching reading is often viewed as the main responsibility of teachers as “ reading affects all other academic achievement and is associated with social, emotional, economic, and physical health ” (Moats, 2020 , p. 1). Meanwhile, most English Language Teaching (ELT) experts agree that mastering English encompasses four core skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking (Newton and Nation, 2020 ). These skills are viewed as the elementary units of language proficiency and effective interaction (Nation, 2008 ). Furthermore, these core skills collectively enable individuals to comprehend and communicate thoughts and ideas and facilitate meaningful interaction and exchange of information. Reading subskills are usually classified into basic subskills (such as recognizing the script, decoding, and sounding out letters), intermediate subskills (such as finding phrases and understanding cohesion), and advanced subskills (such as understanding information, sentence relationships, and the communicative role of sentences). Chen et al. ( 2022 ) have derived the relationships between second language (L2) reading subskills using a cognitive diagnosis model including basic, intermediate, and advanced have been reported to line up with the hierarchical character of reading. Writing, on the other hand, is the act of creating a persistent representation of language. Ravand et al. ( 2024 ) have nevertheless recently investigated relationships among second language (L2) writing subskills using cognitive diagnostic models. According to their study, the basic subskills needed to develop favorable writing are content development, organization, grammar and syntax, vocabulary use and mechanics. Advanced writing is universally agreed upon to be an important role of education, regardless of the field of education (White, 1986 ). Different subskills of writing involve grammar, vocabulary, conception, rhetoric, and other parts of language (Zhang and Chen, 1989 ). Overall, to gain a holistic development of learners’ language proficiency, teaching the subskills of reading and writing is crucial. By breaking down the complex skills into manageable components, educators can provide targeted instruction that helps learners build a strong foundation in language (Otto, 1976 ). Hence, subskills are the specific components that contribute to overall reading and writing abilities. In light of the above discussion, the present study aims to investigate the extent to which reading sub-skills are covered in the tenth-grade English textbook, as well as to assess tenth-grade students’ comprehension of writing sub-skills. As a secondary purpose, the study examines teachers’ perceptions on the coverage of the reading sub-skills in the tenth grade English textbook. Research Questions The present study seeks to answer the following questions: To what degree are reading subskills represented in the tenth-grade English textbooks? How well do Jordanian tenth-grade students comprehend the various writing subskills? What are English language teachers’ perceptions regarding the coverage of reading subskills in the tenth-grade English textbooks? 3 Related Previous Studies This section is divided into two parts: the first discusses previous studies on reading subskills, and the second focuses on writing subskills. 3.1 Reading Reading is not just a fundamental aspect of education; it is often considered its cornerstone (Beecher, 2023 ). Academic achievement, together with cognitive development, relies on reading skills according to recent investigations. From the earliest stages of learning to the most advanced levels of academia, reading serves as the primary conduit for acquiring knowledge, expanding perspectives, and honing critical thinking skills (Williams, 2023 ). Jusoh and Kassim ( 2023 ), along with Aryadoust ( 2020 ), classify reading subskills into three main categories: basic, intermediate, and advanced. Basic subskills involve recognizing the script, decoding, and sounding out letters. Intermediate subskills require higher cognitive processing, such as identifying phrases and understanding cohesion. Advanced subskills involve higher-order thinking skills like interpreting information, recognizing sentence relationships, and understanding the communicative role of sentences. Aynalem and Tesmand ( 2023 ), for instance, investigate reading comprehension subskills in EFL high school textbooks in the Ethiopian context. Motivated by evidence that high school EFL students often struggle with reading comprehension, the researchers conduct a quantitative descriptive case study. Rather than relying on a single established taxonomy, they adapt a framework combining elements from Anderson and Krathwohl’s ( 2001 ), Barrett’s ( 1976 ), and Day and Park’s ( 2005 ) taxonomies. The adapted framework categorizes reading comprehension into five major levels: (1) Exact understanding (e.g., recognizing details, main points, sequences); (2) Reorganization (e.g., summarizing, merging ideas); (3) Inference (e.g., deducing examples and key points); (4) Evaluation (e.g., assessing truth, appropriateness, or value); and (5) Personal response (e.g., emotional engagement and imagery). Sinulingga et al. ( 2023 ) assess the impact of the SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review) method on reading comprehension among vocational high school students in Indonesia. Using a two-cycle action research design over 16 weeks, the study finds significant improvements in reading comprehension, with average test scores rising from 65 to 85 and the overall class achievement increasing from 45–87%. These results underscore the effectiveness of the SQ3R strategy in boosting both comprehension and student engagement. Masrai et al. ( 2022 ) emphasize the predictive role of vocabulary knowledge—an essential component of reading—on academic success in English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) settings. Their study supports the idea that robust reading skills are essential across various educational environments. Peng and Kievit ( 2020 ) demonstrate a co-developmental relationship between reading skills and working memory. Their study shows that as students enhance their reading abilities, their working memory also improves, leading to better academic achievement and cognitive development. The researcher adopts Urquhart and Weir’s ( 2014 ) framework to examine the representation of reading skills in the Action Pack 10 textbook due to its practical advantages. First, the framework serves as a versatile tool for educators, allowing them to tailor instruction based on students’ diverse reading needs. Second, it facilitates a deeper understanding of the relationship between different reading subskills and strategies, enabling more effective scaffolding. Third, it enhances literacy instruction across educational contexts by promoting deeper comprehension. In essence, the Urquhart and Weir framework offers critical insights into reading comprehension and empowers educators to provide more targeted, impactful instruction. 3.2 Writing Writing is the productive counterpart to reading. Recent studies have emphasized the vital role writing plays in developing students’ communication skills. From improving linguistic accuracy to enhancing self-expression, writing is increasingly recognized as central to academic success and cognitive development. Almahameed and Ajalein ( 2021 ) examine the difficulties Jordanian EFL students encounter when writing the problem statement section of research papers. The study identifies two main categories of challenges: academic and linguistic. A teaching intervention on research writing skills was followed by a writing period. Findings show that students struggle to articulate coherent problem statements and often fail to identify research gaps. In addition, significant grammatical errors were observed, reflecting both linguistic challenges and limited academic writing experience. Peter and Singaravelu ( 2021 ) explore issues high school students in Tamil Nadu, India, face in acquiring English writing skills. Using a descriptive survey method with a large sample of 1,200 eighth-grade students, the study highlights difficulties such as grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, and vocabulary usage. Additional challenges include content repetition, native language interference, and a lack of understanding of different writing genres. Zhang and Xi (2022) investigate the role of dynamic assessment in enhancing writing subskills and metacognitive strategies among Chinese EFL learners. Conducted with two Grade Seven classes, the study finds that integrating dynamic assessment with metacognitive instruction significantly improves students’ writing performance, especially in task management and self-regulation. These results affirm the potential of dynamic assessment in fostering both writing development and metacognitive awareness. Haryanto (2023) show that implementing blended learning approaches can significantly enhance students’ writing skills. Their study provides evidence that the combination of traditional instruction and technological tools strengthens written communication. Tafti et al. ( 2023 ) explore the impact of written corrective feedback (WCF) through dynamic assessment on Iranian EFL learners’ writing subskills. In an experimental study involving 80 intermediate students, findings reveal significant improvements in micro-level writing skills such as grammar and vocabulary among students receiving WCF. However, there was no notable improvement in macro-level skills like coherence and task response, suggesting that dynamic assessment is especially effective for addressing detailed linguistic elements. Cao et al. ( 2025 ) examine the relationship between students’ writing assessment literacy and their writing performance. The study finds that higher assessment literacy correlates positively with writing self-efficacy and achievement motivation, while reducing writing anxiety. This demonstrates that enhancing students’ understanding of writing assessment frameworks can strengthen overall writing competence. The present study draws on an established framework to systematically analyze students’ performance on an essay writing test and evaluate a range of writing subskills. This framework will serve as a guiding structure for the assessment and interpretation of student writing behaviors across multiple dimensions. Methods The current study employs a mixed-method descriptive design for the purpose of describing the coverage of reading subskills in Jordanian textbooks and the student’s comprehension of the writing subskills. The first step comprises the given content analysis of the Action Pack 10 textbook. The researcher analyzes the degree to which the developed materials contain information which aims at enhancing different reading subskills following Urquhart and Weir ( 2014 ). The content analysis evaluates the proportion of the careful and expeditious reading subskills in the textbook, to measure the extent of its ability to provide students with both comprehensive and efficient reading. The second phase is the essay writing phase. These essays written by students are assessed based on Aryadoust’s ( 2010 ) writing subskills framework, which examines three areas: Arrangement of Ideas and Examples (AIE), Coherence and Cohesion (CC), and Sentence Structure Vocabulary (SSV). The last section involves the submission of completed questionnaires by 28 educators, who provide their perspectives on the extent of reading sub-skills addressed in Action Pack 10. The questionnaire is accessible via a link, and teachers are given sufficient time (about 20–30 minutes) to complete it, ensuring the provision of quality and comparable data. 4.1 Sample of the Study In selecting the sample for this study, the researcher employs a three-stage cluster random sampling process. In the first and second stages, the researcher employs simple random sampling to choose schools and classes. While in the third stage, systematic random sampling is employed to select students. In the first stage, four of the seven high schools in the Shafa Badran district are randomly selected. Then, the researcher randomly chooses classes within these schools. The selected schools represent the clusters that constitute the sample of this study. In the third stage of the sampling process, the researcher uses systematic random sampling. This process involves listing the students in each of the selected classes and then randomly selecting a starting point and choosing every nth student (Fowler, 2013 ) until the desired sample size is obtained. Results This section discusses the findings related to research questions. The findings are viewed in connection with some previous studies on reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students. 5.1 Results Pertinent to Research Question One RQ1: The extent to which reading subskills are covered in Action Pack 10 The first question aims to identify the coverage of careful reading and expeditious reading subskills in Action Pack 10 in light of Urquhart and Weir's (2014) framework. Regarding careful reading subskills, the researcher has analyzed the content of (10) reading passages selected from each unit in the textbook. These reading passages are A Hidden World, Emeralds in Egypt , The Nobel Prize, Polar Bears and Penguins, The Longest Swim, One World, Many Climates, Earth’s Climate Story, The Dead Sea, and Jordan National Gallery of Fine Arts. The subskills in Action Pack 10 emphasize careful reading, which includes accurately understanding main ideas and details, drawing propositional inferences, and grasping the logical flow of information. These skills aim to help students develop a clear and positive perception of the core content in reading texts and how these relate to broader ideas. For instance, the textbook distinguishes between major concepts—such as “Jordan has some of the best universities in the Middle East” (Unit Four)—and specific supporting details, like “Martin set off from Peru on 1st February and arrived in Brazil sixty-six days later” (Unit Six). These features reflect the importance of organizing texts around main ideas and supporting information, as emphasized by Urquhart and Weir (2014) and supported by Freahat and Al-Faoury (2014). Additionally, the book promotes propositional inferences by encouraging students to connect ideas with broader implications, such as the effects of human activity on climate change from Unit Eight. Unit Nine, for example, shows coherent development in its presentation of health tourism and the Dead Sea’s mineral benefits, which supports Aynalem and Tesmand’s (2023) view on the importance of text organization for deeper understanding. On the other hand, the textbook also covers expeditious reading subskills—skimming, search reading, and scanning—but with varied effectiveness. Skimming is well-integrated to help learners quickly grasp the main ideas and structure of passages, such as the line “climates vary hugely in different parts of the world,” which allows for an overall understanding without focusing on details. This supports the call by Urquhart and Weir (2014) and Admour (2019) for emphasizing essential ideas early on. However, search reading is only moderately addressed due to the lack of subheadings or segmented text, which slows down the retrieval of specific details, despite examples like Martin Strel’s swimming records (Unit Six). Scanning, while present in several passages such as the discussion of Dead Sea minerals (Unit Nine), is also hindered by the absence of structured formats. According to Freahat and Al-Faoury (2014), such segmentation is crucial for effective scanning. Therefore, although Action Pack 10 succeeds in promoting careful reading skills, it only moderately develops expeditious reading, particularly in search reading. To improve, the textbook should more effectively integrate skimming and scanning activities alongside better text segmentation, aligning with the recommendations of Freahat and Al-Faoury (2014) and Admour (2019). After a closer inspection of reading sub-skills in each unit in Action Pack 10, the general evaluation of the distribution of careful and expeditious subskills in each unit is identified as shown in Table 1. This table shows that careful reading coverage overall percentage is 81%, which is higher than expeditious reading that accounts for 77%. This shows that Action Pack focuses on careful reading subskills, such as comprehension of main ideas, propositional inferences, and syntax recognition. Although expeditious reading subskills, such as skimming, scanning, and search reading are emphasized in Action Pack 10 , they are less slightly than careful reading. 5.2 Results Pertinent to Research Question Two RQ2: To what extent do Jordanian students comprehend the subskills of writing? Errors committed by the participants are detected and then tabulated into three main types based on Aryadoust's (2010) Framework of writing subskills. A total of 1013 writing errors are committed by the respondents. The errors include the following sub-categories, namely, arrangement of ideas and examples (AIF), communicative quality (CQ) or cohesion and coherence (CC) and sentence structure vocabulary (SSV). Table 2 below shows the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners. A close look at Table 2 reveals that the highest proportion of writing errors is ‘sentence structure and vocabulary’ with a percentage of 37.2% and a frequency of 375. Followed by ‘arrangement of ideas and examples’ with a percentage of 36.33% and a frequency of 368. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is in ‘ communicative quality or cohesion and coherence ’ with a percentage of 26.65% and a frequency of 270. Table 3 displays the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners for the first item ‘arrangements of ideas and examples’. A close look at Table 3 also reveals that the highest proportion of writing errors in the arrangement of ideas and examples is ‘presentation of ideas, opinions, and information’ with a percentage of 19.2% and a frequency of 70. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is ‘demonstration of cultural competence’ with a percentage of 10.87% and a frequency of 40. Table 4 displays the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners for the second item ‘communicative quality or cohesion’. A closer examination of Table 4 regarding communicative quality (CQ) or cohesion and coherence (CC) reveals that the highest element of writing error is ‘range, accuracy, and appropriateness of coherence-makers (transitional words and/or phrases)’ with a percentage 28.89% and a frequency 78. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is ‘the strength of conceptual and referential linkage of sentences/ideas’ with a percentage of 20.37% and a frequency of 55. Table 5 below displays the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners for the second item ‘sentence structure and vocabulary’. As indicated in Table 5 regarding ‘sentence structure vocabulary’, the highest element of writing error is ‘using appropriate, topic-related and correct vocabulary (adjectives, nouns, verbs, prepositions, articles, etc.), idioms, expressions, and collocations’ with a percentage 24% and a frequency 90. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is in ‘appropriate and accurate use of synonyms and antonyms’ with a percentage of 16% and a frequency of 60. 5.3 Results Pertinent to Research Question Three RQ3: What are the perceptions of English language teachers on the coverage of the reading subskills in the tenth-grade English textbooks? To explore the perceptions of English language teachers on the coverage of the subskills in tenth-grade English textbooks, the researcher designed a questionnaire that focuses on the teachers' opinions regarding the coverage of reading subskills in Action Pack 10 textbook. To be specific, it is crucial to keep in mind that the textbook lacks writing sections, so it is impossible to apply a writing framework to assess the subskills of writing. Therefore, this attention to the coverage of reading subskills was selected. Teachers would thus not have the materials to evaluate writing subskills comprehensively on the writing passages and investigate teachers’ perceptions about it. The questionnaire has been distributed to 28 EFL teachers for tenth-grade students in Jordanian public high schools at Shafa Badran district. According to the figures obtained from Table 3, the analysis of results starts with the coverage of reading subskills from teachers’ perspectives. In other words, the results of the first part of the questionnaire are illustrated in Table 6. If more attention is paid to distinguishing and grasping the important ideas as well as the supporting ideas presented in different sentences of the reading text, one will realize that it recognizes the highest mean and percentage of the coverage of reading subskills according to the teachers’ responses, with a mean of 3.5 and a percentage of 70%. Skimming the passage for the purpose of locating the main subject of discussion being the themes, concepts as well as necessary details, however, the least scored with an average of 3.21 and a percentage of 64.2%. The mean of the remaining items for the coverage of reading subskills from teachers’ perspective is between 3.21 and 3.50 and the percentage for these items is between 64.2% and 70%. The current study shows that reading subskills teachers perceive the overall coverage of all the subskills at a total mean of 3.35 and a percentage of 67% from the mean percentages of all items. Discussion This section interprets the results and situates them within the context of prior research. The coverage of reading subskills in Action Pack 10 was moderate overall, with careful reading subskills (1 %) receiving more emphasis than expeditious reading subskills 77 %). This pattern aligns with earlier studies that highlight the dominance of careful reading strategies and the need for a more robust integration of skimming, scanning and searchreading activities. Our findings confirm that the textbook fosters comprehension of main ideas and propositional inferences but includes fewer activities that encourage rapid information retrieval, echoing concerns raised in previous research. The patterns of writing errors revealed that students struggled most with sentence structure and vocabulary (37.02%), followed by arrangement of ideas and examples (36.33%) and cohesion and coherence (26.65%). These results indicate that learners have difficulties using appropriate vocabulary, grammar and syntax, which mirrors the findings of earlier studies. Conversely, the relatively lower frequency of cohesion and coherence errors suggests some strength in organizing ideas and connecting sentences, possibly due to exposure to reading passages that model good coherence. However, the high proportion of arrangement errors indicates a need for targeted instruction in writing organization and the elaboration of ideas. Teachers’ perceptions from the questionnaire support the quantitative findings. They rated the coverage of reading subskills as moderate, with the ability to distinguish and grasp important ideas receiving the highest mean and skimming for the main subject the lowest. This confirms that teachers believe careful reading is adequately addressed but note deficiencies in activities promoting rapid information retrieval. The alignment of teacher perceptions with our content analysis underscores the validity of the evaluation. Despite these insights, the study has several limitations. First, the sample was drawn from 235 tenthgrade students and 28 teachers from four schools in the Shafa Badran district of Jordan, which limits generalisability to other regions or educational contexts. Second, the mixedmethods design focused on a single textbook and may not capture differences across other curricula or grade levels. Future research should employ larger, more diverse samples across multiple districts and educational systems and examine additional reading and writing subskills, including listening and speaking. Longitudinal studies could also explore the impact of targeted interventions on students’ reading and writing development. Conclusion This study analyzed the linguistic patterns in Action Pack 10 with a focus on the development of Jordanian EFL students’ reading and writing subskills. It aimed to evaluate how effectively the textbook supports language skill improvement through its instructional content and methods. The discussion covered three key areas: integration of reading subskills, enhancement of writing subskills, and teacher perceptions of learning outcomes. Findings revealed strengths in textual coherence and comprehension, while identifying weaknesses in skimming and scanning. In writing, students showed varied abilities in sentence structure, organization, and vocabulary use, with cultural competence also playing a role. Teacher feedback highlighted areas for improvement in textbook content and design. These findings have important implications for curriculum design and teaching strategies. Addressing weaker skill areas through targeted interventions and better integrating linguistic skills can enhance EFL learning outcomes. This study also encourages further exploration of teaching methodologies and cross-cultural approaches to support effective language education. Declarations Data Availability The data sets generated and analysed during the current study consist of coded content from the publicly available Action Pack 10 textbook, anonymised student essay responses and anonymised teacher‑questionnaire responses. Because the student‑ and teacher‑level data contain personal information that could compromise participant privacy, these data are not publicly archived; however, an anonymised version of the essay and questionnaire data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with approval of the authors’ institution. No new software or computational code was developed for this study. Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests (financial or non‑financial) that could have influenced the work reported in this article. Author contributions Author 1 (the MA candidate) conceived and designed the study, collected and analysed all data, and drafted the manuscript as part of her master’s thesis. Author 2 (the supervisor) provided guidance on the study design and analysis, supervised the research process, and critically revised and approved the final manuscript. Ethical Approval The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethical Compliance Committee of Amman Arab University. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the university’s regulations for research involving human participants. The committee issued approval number AAU‑REC‑2024‑0719 on 19 July 2024. This approval covered all aspects of the project, including the content analysis of Action Pack 10, the administration and analysis of student essay tests, and the distribution of teacher questionnaires. After ethics approval was obtained, the researcher also secured permission from the Jordanian Ministry of Education – Shafa Badran district to access the participating schools, student work and teachers. No data were collected prior to receiving these approvals. Informed Consent All teacher‑participants were contacted by e‑mail and briefed on 2 August 2024 about the purpose of the study, the procedures involved and any potential risks or benefits. The researcher’s assessment is that the likely risk is minimal and falls within the “minimal risk” category. Written informed consent was then obtained electronically from each participant between 2 and 10 August 2024 using a consent form that explained that participation was voluntary, responses would be used exclusively for research purposes, and participants could withdraw at any time without penalty. The form also stated that all data—including questionnaire responses and any interview notes—would remain confidential and anonymised, and that no personal identifiers would be included in any publication. Consent from students or their guardians was not required because the essay data analysed in this study were supplied to the researchers in a fully anonymised form by the schools and contained no personal identifiers. The same consent procedure was applied to all participants involved in the study. References Admour MAY (2019) The Importance of Teaching Reading Skills of English Language Using Variety of Techniques in Jordanian Curriculum. J Lang Stud 2(2):123–140 Al-Saidat E (2009) English in Jordan: attitudes and prestige. Indian J Appl Linguist 35(2):155–167 Almahameed Y, Ajalein M (2021) Difficulties faced by Jordanian undergraduate EFL students in writing research problem statement. Int J Humanit Arts Soc Sci 7:13–22 Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc, St. Upper Saddle River Aryadoust V (2010) Investigating writing sub-skills in testing English as a foreign language: a structural equation modeling study. TESL-EJ 13(4):1–20 Aryadoust V (2020) A review of comprehension subskills: a Scientometrics perspective. System 88:102180 Aynalem YB, Tesmand AG (2023) An analysis of reading comprehension sub-skills in EFL textbooks. J Lang Lang Teach 11(4):641–654 Barrett TC (1976) Taxonomy of reading comprehension. Teaching reading in the middle class. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, pp 51–58 Beecher C (2023) What is literacy? Multiple perspectives on literacy. In: Gurjar, N., Meacham, S., & Beecher, C. (2023). Methods of teaching early literacy . Chicago Cao S, Zhong L, Wang C (2025) The Impact of Student Writing Assessment Literacy on Psychological Factors: An Ordinal Logistic Regression Analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.00004 Chen H, Cai Y, De La Torre J (2022) Investigating second language (L2) reading subskill associations: a cognitive diagnosis approach. Lang Assess Q 20(2):166–189 Day RR, Park JS (2005) Developing reading comprehension questions. Read Foreign Lang 17(1):60–73 Freahat NM, Al-Faoury OH (2014) Jordanian high school EFL teachers’ and university EFL instructors’ perceptions of the reading comprehension content in EFL textbooks. Theory Pract Lang Stud 4(11):2231–2242 Fowler FJ Jr (2013) Survey research methods. Sage Haryanto A (2024) Blended Learning Models: Bridging Traditional and Digital Educational Practices. Innovative J Educational Res Insights, 76–86 Jusoh Z, Kassim NLA (2023) The ordering of reading subskills across text types: is there a definite ordering? Int J Soc Sci Res 11(2):117 Masrai A, El-Dakhs S, D. A., Al Khawar H (2022) General and specialist vocabulary knowledge as predictors of academic success in EMI university programs. Lang Learn High Educ 12(1):273–289 Moats LC (2020) Teaching reading is rocket science: what expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. Am Educ 44(2):4–39 Nation ISP (2008) Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. Taylor and Francis Group, London Newton JM, Nation ISP (2020) Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. Routledge, London Otto W (1976) Developing a skills-based approach to reading comprehension. In: W allace D. Miller and George H. McNinch, (Eds) Reflections and Investigations in Reading , pp 251–257 Peng P, Kievit RA (2020) The development of academic achievement and cognitive abilities: A bidirectional perspective. Child Dev Perspect 14(1):15–20 Peter J, Singaravelu G (2021) Problems in writing in English among high school learners. Aegaum J 8(9):1502–11515 Ravand H, Effatpanah F, Ma W, De la Torre J, Baghaei P, Kunina-Habenicht O (2024) Exploring interrelationships among L2 writing subskills: insights from cognitive diagnostic models. Appl Measur Educ 37(4):329–355 Salah R (2021) Jordanian university students’ use of English: urban-rural dichotomy and university location. Adv Lit Study 9(3):105–113 Sinulingga S, Saragih E, Purba CA (2023) Improving students' reading comprehension skills through the survey, question, read, recite, review (SQ3R) method. J EDUC J Pendidik Indones 9(1):492 Tafti MRR, Esfahani FR, Shafiee S (2023) Impact of Written Corrective Feedback via Dynamic Assessment on Irani-an EFL Learners’ Writing: Micro and Macro Levels. Lang Translation 13(2):81–92 Urquhart AH, Weir CJ (2014) Reading in a second language: process, product and practice. Longman, Harlow White FD (1986) The writer's art: a practical rhetoric and handbook. Wadsworth Publishing Company, California Williams C (2023), June 26 Reading comprehension and why it matters. Center for Student Achievement Solutions . https://www.studentachievementsolutions.com/reading-comprehension-and-why-it-matters/ Zhang Y, Xi J (2023) Fostering self-regulated young writers: Dynamic assessment of metacognitive competence in secondary school EFL class. Lang Assess Q 20(1):88–107 Zhang X, Chen J (1989) The techniques to teaching writing. Engl Teach Forum 27(2):34–36 Tables Table 1. Coverage of reading sub-skills in Action Pack 10 Reading passage (unit) Careful reading (%) Expeditious reading (%) Unit 1 85 70 Unit 2 75 65 Unit 3 90 85 Unit 4 80 75 Unit 5 70 65 Unit 6 65 80 Unit 7 75 90 Unit 8 85 80 Unit 9 95 85 Unit 10 90 75 Total/mean 81 77 Note: Percentages represent the proportion of each reading sub-skill within each passage. Table 2. Frequency and percentage of writing errors Writing error type Frequency Percentage Arrangement of Ideas and Examples (AIF) 368 36.33 Communicative Quality (CQ) or Cohesion and Coherence (CC) 270 26.65 Sentence Structure Vocabulary (SSV) 375 37.02 Total 1013 100 Note: Percentages represent the proportion of each error category within the total number of errors. Table 3. Writing errors regarding the arrangement of ideas and examples (AIF) Arrangement category Frequency Percentage Presentation of ideas, opinions, and information 70 19.02 Aspects of accurate and effective paragraphing 60 16.30 Elaborateness of details 55 14.95 Use of different and complex ideas and efficient arrangement 50 13.59 Keeping the focus on the main theme of the prompt 48 13.04 Understanding the tone and genre of the prompt 45 12.23 Demonstration of cultural competence 40 10.87 Total 368 100 Note: Percentages represent the proportion of each arrangement error category within the total number of errors (AIF). Table 4. Writing errors made by tenth-grade students regarding communicative quality or cohesion and coherence Table 4. Writing errors regarding communicative quality/cohesion and coherence (CQ/CC) Communicative quality/cohesion category Frequency Percentage Range, accuracy, and appropriacy of coherence-makers (transitional words and/or phrases) 78 28.89 Using logical pronouns and conjunctions to connect ideas and/or sentences 77 28.52 Logical sequencing of ideas by use of transitional words 60 22.22 The strength of conceptual and referential linkage of sentences/ideas 55 20.37 Total 270 100 Note: Percentages represent the proportion of each communicative quality (CQ/CC) error category within the total number of errors. Table 5. Writing errors made by tenth-grade students regarding sentence structure and vocabulary Table 5. Writing errors regarding sentence structure and vocabulary (SSV) Sentence structure/vocabulary category Frequency Percentage Using appropriate, topic-related and correct vocabulary (adjectives, nouns, verbs, prepositions, articles, etc.), idioms, expressions, and collocations 90 24.00 Correct spelling, punctuation, and capitalization (the density and communicative effect of errors in spelling and the density and communicative effect of errors in word formation) 80 21.33 Appropriate and correct syntax (accurate use of verb tenses and independent and subordinate clauses) 75 20.00 Avoiding use of sentence fragments and fused sentences 70 18.67 Appropriate and accurate use of synonyms and antonyms 60 16.00 Total 375 100 Note: Percentages represent the proportion of each sentence structure and vocabulary error category within the total number of errors. Table 6. Coverage of reading subskill in action pack 10 from teachers’ perceptions Table 6. Coverage of reading subskills in Action Pack 10 from teachers’ perceptions Reading subskill Mean Percentage Distinguishing and grasping the important ideas as well as the supporting ideas presented in different sentences of the reading text. 3.50 70.0 Drawing conclusions from information provided in the reading texts. 3.29 65.8 Assessing both the main ideas and the supplementary details within the reading text. 3.25 65.0 Exploring the connection of the main ideas between different passages throughout the textbook. 3.46 69.2 Looking for and understanding the core ideas and supporting ideas expressed in each sentence of the reading texts. 3.39 67.8 Skimming the passage for the purpose of locating the main subject of discussion being the themes, concepts as well as necessary details. 3.21 64.2 Enhancing students' ability to comprehend main vocabulary items and syntactic structures within reading texts. 3.46 69.2 Enhancing students' ability to comprehend main vocabulary items and syntactic structures within reading texts. 3.25 65.0 Total 3.35 67 Note: Percentages represent the mean scores expressed as percentages for each reading subskill based on teachers’ perceptions. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 05 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 15 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 27 Dec, 2025 Reviews received at journal 22 Nov, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 20 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 28 Sep, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 28 Sep, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 28 Sep, 2025 Editor invited by journal 11 Sep, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 24 Aug, 2025 First submitted to journal 24 Aug, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7220902","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":526458093,"identity":"4effa783-5b60-4f6b-93b8-35b7a491377c","order_by":0,"name":"Dania Fareh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amman Arab University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Dania","middleName":"","lastName":"Fareh","suffix":""},{"id":526458094,"identity":"97f50884-6ffa-4497-b613-c89a9c600d29","order_by":1,"name":"Yazan Almahameed","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amman Arab University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yazan","middleName":"","lastName":"Almahameed","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-26 11:38:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220902/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220902/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":93144464,"identity":"3ed46c0f-607a-4109-903d-78bee83ae9e3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-09 13:33:41","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":44312,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ReadingandwritingcomprehensionamongJordanianstudents3.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220902/v1/b7440d0de92d73f1c7d0b21b.docx"},{"id":93144460,"identity":"011c2134-79e2-43d5-897d-83c498a7987a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-09 13:33:41","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3813,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"b732766ae467485abc8a3c68be8de537.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220902/v1/abed8748a606a93e6705ed5e.json"},{"id":93145349,"identity":"11a183a6-66ba-4f1c-ba7f-ad0c6244b281","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-09 13:41:41","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":87956,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"b732766ae467485abc8a3c68be8de5371enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220902/v1/c4d98d8e1a71586331309ae7.xml"},{"id":93144461,"identity":"88fbefe7-3ee0-4c97-9bf2-8f85804e2712","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-09 13:33:41","extension":"xml","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":86494,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"b732766ae467485abc8a3c68be8de5371structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220902/v1/4d43edbe35bdfdc346bcef77.xml"},{"id":93144463,"identity":"aa853454-37c2-4d2c-bef2-c9b64c748098","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-09 13:33:41","extension":"html","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":91465,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220902/v1/88bd7bedfc49e3c63b7b14b7.html"},{"id":93145908,"identity":"881ee2c7-37ea-490d-88b7-cf378e756fa4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-09 13:49:41","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1097130,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7220902/v1/f58e2df6-a400-473b-a7c7-fc2431fecd2b.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEnglish language holds a prominent status of being the most extensively taught foreign language in Jordan. In fact, proficiency in English is not merely a preference but a necessity for most Jordanian students and academics who aspire to access global academic resources, publications and even undergraduate university education. English proficiency is often viewed as a gateway to broader educational and career opportunities, particularly in fields where international communication and collaboration are essential. Consequently, English language instruction is prioritized in Jordanian educational institutions, with many students beginning their English studies at a young age.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEnglish has increasingly become a major element of the school curriculum and now holds a notable position in Jordan's overall academic sphere (Salah, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Although Jordanian students begin their English language education from primary school, a significant challenge arises as many of these students struggle to reach the desired level of proficiency in both receptive and productive English language skills despite their long exposure to English instruction (Al-Saidat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eReading is the cognitive process of decoding symbols to determine a text's meaning. Hence, teaching reading is often viewed as the main responsibility of teachers as \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ereading affects all other academic achievement and is associated with social, emotional, economic, and physical health\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Moats, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e, p. 1).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMeanwhile, most English Language Teaching (ELT) experts agree that mastering English encompasses four core skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking (Newton and Nation, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). These skills are viewed as the elementary units of language proficiency and effective interaction (Nation, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, these core skills collectively enable individuals to comprehend and communicate thoughts and ideas and facilitate meaningful interaction and exchange of information.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eReading subskills are usually classified into basic subskills (such as recognizing the script, decoding, and sounding out letters), intermediate subskills (such as finding phrases and understanding cohesion), and advanced subskills (such as understanding information, sentence relationships, and the communicative role of sentences). Chen et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) have derived the relationships between second language (L2) reading subskills using a cognitive diagnosis model including basic, intermediate, and advanced have been reported to line up with the hierarchical character of reading.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWriting, on the other hand, is the act of creating a persistent representation of language. Ravand et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) have nevertheless recently investigated relationships among second language (L2) writing subskills using cognitive diagnostic models. According to their study, the basic subskills needed to develop favorable writing are content development, organization, grammar and syntax, vocabulary use and mechanics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdvanced writing is universally agreed upon to be an important role of education, regardless of the field of education (White, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e). Different subskills of writing involve grammar, vocabulary, conception, rhetoric, and other parts of language (Zhang and Chen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1989\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOverall, to gain a holistic development of learners\u0026rsquo; language proficiency, teaching the subskills of reading and writing is crucial. By breaking down the complex skills into manageable components, educators can provide targeted instruction that helps learners build a strong foundation in language (Otto, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1976\u003c/span\u003e). Hence, subskills are the specific components that contribute to overall reading and writing abilities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn light of the above discussion, the present study aims to investigate the extent to which reading sub-skills are covered in the tenth-grade English textbook, as well as to assess tenth-grade students\u0026rsquo; comprehension of writing sub-skills. As a secondary purpose, the study examines teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions on the coverage of the reading sub-skills in the tenth grade English textbook.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch Questions\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe present study seeks to answer the following questions:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo what degree are reading subskills represented in the tenth-grade English textbooks?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow well do Jordanian tenth-grade students comprehend the various writing subskills?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat are English language teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions regarding the coverage of reading subskills in the tenth-grade English textbooks?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e3 Related Previous Studies\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis section is divided into two parts: the first discusses previous studies on reading subskills, and the second focuses on writing subskills.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1 Reading\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eReading is not just a fundamental aspect of education; it is often considered its cornerstone (Beecher, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Academic achievement, together with cognitive development, relies on reading skills according to recent investigations. From the earliest stages of learning to the most advanced levels of academia, reading serves as the primary conduit for acquiring knowledge, expanding perspectives, and honing critical thinking skills (Williams, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eJusoh and Kassim (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), along with Aryadoust (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), classify reading subskills into three main categories: basic, intermediate, and advanced. Basic subskills involve recognizing the script, decoding, and sounding out letters. Intermediate subskills require higher cognitive processing, such as identifying phrases and understanding cohesion. Advanced subskills involve higher-order thinking skills like interpreting information, recognizing sentence relationships, and understanding the communicative role of sentences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAynalem and Tesmand (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), for instance, investigate reading comprehension subskills in EFL high school textbooks in the Ethiopian context. Motivated by evidence that high school EFL students often struggle with reading comprehension, the researchers conduct a quantitative descriptive case study. Rather than relying on a single established taxonomy, they adapt a framework combining elements from Anderson and Krathwohl\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e), Barrett\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1976\u003c/span\u003e), and Day and Park\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) taxonomies. The adapted framework categorizes reading comprehension into five major levels: (1) Exact understanding (e.g., recognizing details, main points, sequences); (2) Reorganization (e.g., summarizing, merging ideas); (3) Inference (e.g., deducing examples and key points); (4) Evaluation (e.g., assessing truth, appropriateness, or value); and (5) Personal response (e.g., emotional engagement and imagery).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSinulingga et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) assess the impact of the SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review) method on reading comprehension among vocational high school students in Indonesia. Using a two-cycle action research design over 16 weeks, the study finds significant improvements in reading comprehension, with average test scores rising from 65 to 85 and the overall class achievement increasing from 45\u0026ndash;87%. These results underscore the effectiveness of the SQ3R strategy in boosting both comprehension and student engagement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMasrai et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) emphasize the predictive role of vocabulary knowledge\u0026mdash;an essential component of reading\u0026mdash;on academic success in English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) settings. Their study supports the idea that robust reading skills are essential across various educational environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePeng and Kievit (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrate a co-developmental relationship between reading skills and working memory. Their study shows that as students enhance their reading abilities, their working memory also improves, leading to better academic achievement and cognitive development.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe researcher adopts Urquhart and Weir\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) framework to examine the representation of reading skills in the \u003cem\u003eAction Pack 10\u003c/em\u003e textbook due to its practical advantages. First, the framework serves as a versatile tool for educators, allowing them to tailor instruction based on students\u0026rsquo; diverse reading needs. Second, it facilitates a deeper understanding of the relationship between different reading subskills and strategies, enabling more effective scaffolding. Third, it enhances literacy instruction across educational contexts by promoting deeper comprehension. In essence, the Urquhart and Weir framework offers critical insights into reading comprehension and empowers educators to provide more targeted, impactful instruction.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2 Writing\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWriting is the productive counterpart to reading. Recent studies have emphasized the vital role writing plays in developing students\u0026rsquo; communication skills. From improving linguistic accuracy to enhancing self-expression, writing is increasingly recognized as central to academic success and cognitive development.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlmahameed and Ajalein (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) examine the difficulties Jordanian EFL students encounter when writing the problem statement section of research papers. The study identifies two main categories of challenges: academic and linguistic. A teaching intervention on research writing skills was followed by a writing period. Findings show that students struggle to articulate coherent problem statements and often fail to identify research gaps. In addition, significant grammatical errors were observed, reflecting both linguistic challenges and limited academic writing experience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePeter and Singaravelu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) explore issues high school students in Tamil Nadu, India, face in acquiring English writing skills. Using a descriptive survey method with a large sample of 1,200 eighth-grade students, the study highlights difficulties such as grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, and vocabulary usage. Additional challenges include content repetition, native language interference, and a lack of understanding of different writing genres.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eZhang and Xi (2022) investigate the role of dynamic assessment in enhancing writing subskills and metacognitive strategies among Chinese EFL learners. Conducted with two Grade Seven classes, the study finds that integrating dynamic assessment with metacognitive instruction significantly improves students\u0026rsquo; writing performance, especially in task management and self-regulation. These results affirm the potential of dynamic assessment in fostering both writing development and metacognitive awareness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHaryanto (2023) show that implementing blended learning approaches can significantly enhance students\u0026rsquo; writing skills. Their study provides evidence that the combination of traditional instruction and technological tools strengthens written communication.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTafti et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) explore the impact of written corrective feedback (WCF) through dynamic assessment on Iranian EFL learners\u0026rsquo; writing subskills. In an experimental study involving 80 intermediate students, findings reveal significant improvements in micro-level writing skills such as grammar and vocabulary among students receiving WCF. However, there was no notable improvement in macro-level skills like coherence and task response, suggesting that dynamic assessment is especially effective for addressing detailed linguistic elements.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCao et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) examine the relationship between students\u0026rsquo; writing assessment literacy and their writing performance. The study finds that higher assessment literacy correlates positively with writing self-efficacy and achievement motivation, while reducing writing anxiety. This demonstrates that enhancing students\u0026rsquo; understanding of writing assessment frameworks can strengthen overall writing competence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study draws on an established framework to systematically analyze students\u0026rsquo; performance on an essay writing test and evaluate a range of writing subskills. This framework will serve as a guiding structure for the assessment and interpretation of student writing behaviors across multiple dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current study employs a mixed-method descriptive design for the purpose of describing the coverage of reading subskills in Jordanian textbooks and the student\u0026rsquo;s comprehension of the writing subskills.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe first step comprises the given content analysis of the Action Pack 10 textbook. The researcher analyzes the degree to which the developed materials contain information which aims at enhancing different reading subskills following Urquhart and Weir (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The content analysis evaluates the proportion of the careful and expeditious reading subskills in the textbook, to measure the extent of its ability to provide students with both comprehensive and efficient reading.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe second phase is the essay writing phase. These essays written by students are assessed based on Aryadoust\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) writing subskills framework, which examines three areas: Arrangement of Ideas and Examples (AIE), Coherence and Cohesion (CC), and Sentence Structure Vocabulary (SSV).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe last section involves the submission of completed questionnaires by 28 educators, who provide their perspectives on the extent of reading sub-skills addressed in Action Pack 10. The questionnaire is accessible via a link, and teachers are given sufficient time (about 20\u0026ndash;30 minutes) to complete it, ensuring the provision of quality and comparable data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.1 Sample of the Study\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn selecting the sample for this study, the researcher employs a three-stage cluster random sampling process.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the first and second stages, the researcher employs simple random sampling to choose schools and classes. While in the third stage, systematic random sampling is employed to select students. In the first stage, four of the seven high schools in the Shafa Badran district are randomly selected. Then, the researcher randomly chooses classes within these schools. The selected schools represent the clusters that constitute the sample of this study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the third stage of the sampling process, the researcher uses systematic random sampling. This process involves listing the students in each of the selected classes and then randomly selecting a starting point and choosing every nth student (Fowler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) until the desired sample size is obtained.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis section discusses the findings related to research questions. The findings are viewed in connection with some previous studies on reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cem\u003e5.1 Results Pertinent to Research Question One\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRQ1: The extent to which reading subskills are covered in Action Pack 10\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe first question aims to identify the coverage of careful reading and expeditious reading subskills in Action Pack 10 in light of Urquhart and Weir\u0026apos;s (2014) framework. Regarding careful reading subskills, the researcher has analyzed the content of (10) reading passages selected from each unit in the textbook. These reading passages are \u003cem\u003eA Hidden World, Emeralds in Egypt\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eThe Nobel Prize, Polar Bears\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eand Penguins, The Longest Swim, One World, Many Climates, Earth\u0026rsquo;s Climate Story, The Dead Sea,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Jordan National Gallery of Fine Arts.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe subskills in Action Pack 10 emphasize careful reading, which includes accurately understanding main ideas and details, drawing propositional inferences, and grasping the logical flow of information. These skills aim to help students develop a clear and positive perception of the core content in reading texts and how these relate to broader ideas. For instance, the textbook distinguishes between major concepts\u0026mdash;such as \u0026ldquo;Jordan has some of the best universities in the Middle East\u0026rdquo; (Unit Four)\u0026mdash;and specific supporting details, like \u0026ldquo;Martin set off from Peru on 1st February and arrived in Brazil sixty-six days later\u0026rdquo; (Unit Six). These features reflect the importance of organizing texts around main ideas and supporting information, as emphasized by Urquhart and Weir (2014) and supported by Freahat and Al-Faoury (2014). Additionally, the book promotes propositional inferences by encouraging students to connect ideas with broader implications, such as the effects of human activity on climate change from Unit Eight. Unit Nine, for example, shows coherent development in its presentation of health tourism and the Dead Sea\u0026rsquo;s mineral benefits, which supports Aynalem and Tesmand\u0026rsquo;s (2023) view on the importance of text organization for deeper understanding.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, the textbook also covers expeditious reading subskills\u0026mdash;skimming, search reading, and scanning\u0026mdash;but with varied effectiveness. Skimming is well-integrated to help learners quickly grasp the main ideas and structure of passages, such as the line \u0026ldquo;climates vary hugely in different parts of the world,\u0026rdquo; which allows for an overall understanding without focusing on details. This supports the call by Urquhart and Weir (2014) and Admour (2019) for emphasizing essential ideas early on. However, search reading is only moderately addressed due to the lack of subheadings or segmented text, which slows down the retrieval of specific details, despite examples like Martin Strel\u0026rsquo;s swimming records (Unit Six). Scanning, while present in several passages such as the discussion of Dead Sea minerals (Unit Nine), is also hindered by the absence of structured formats. According to Freahat and Al-Faoury (2014), such segmentation is crucial for effective scanning. Therefore, although Action Pack 10 succeeds in promoting careful reading skills, it only moderately develops expeditious reading, particularly in search reading. To improve, the textbook should more effectively integrate skimming and scanning activities alongside better text segmentation, aligning with the recommendations of Freahat and Al-Faoury (2014) and Admour (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter a closer inspection of reading sub-skills in each unit in Action Pack 10, the general evaluation of the distribution of careful and expeditious subskills in each unit is identified as shown in Table 1. This table shows that careful reading coverage overall percentage is 81%, which is higher than expeditious reading that accounts for 77%. This shows that Action Pack focuses on careful reading subskills, such as comprehension of main ideas, propositional inferences, and syntax recognition. Although expeditious reading subskills, such as skimming, scanning, and search reading are emphasized in \u003cem\u003eAction Pack 10\u003c/em\u003e, they are less slightly than careful reading.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cem\u003e5.2 Results Pertinent to Research Question Two\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRQ2: \u003cem\u003eTo what extent do Jordanian students comprehend the subskills of writing?\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eErrors committed by the participants are detected and then tabulated into three main types based on Aryadoust\u0026apos;s (2010) Framework of writing subskills. A total of 1013 writing errors are committed by the respondents. The errors include the following sub-categories, namely, arrangement of ideas and examples (AIF), communicative quality (CQ) or cohesion and coherence (CC) and sentence structure vocabulary (SSV). Table 2 below shows the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners. A close look at Table 2 reveals that the highest proportion of writing errors is \u0026lsquo;sentence structure and vocabulary\u0026rsquo; with a percentage of 37.2% and a frequency of 375. Followed by \u0026lsquo;arrangement of ideas and examples\u0026rsquo; with a percentage of 36.33% and a frequency of 368. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is in \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;\u003c/em\u003ecommunicative quality or cohesion and coherence\u003cem\u003e\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e with a percentage of 26.65% and a frequency of 270.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 displays the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners for the first item \u0026lsquo;arrangements of ideas and examples\u0026rsquo;. A close look at Table 3 also reveals that the highest proportion of writing errors in the arrangement of ideas and examples is \u0026lsquo;presentation of ideas, opinions, and information\u0026rsquo; with a percentage of 19.2% and a frequency of 70. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is \u0026lsquo;demonstration of cultural competence\u0026rsquo; with a percentage of 10.87% and a frequency of 40.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 displays the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners for the second item \u0026lsquo;communicative quality or cohesion\u0026rsquo;. A closer examination of Table 4 regarding communicative quality (CQ) or cohesion and coherence (CC) reveals that the highest element of writing error is \u0026lsquo;range, accuracy, and appropriateness of coherence-makers (transitional words and/or phrases)\u0026rsquo; with a percentage 28.89% and a frequency 78. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is \u0026lsquo;the strength of conceptual and referential linkage of sentences/ideas\u0026rsquo; with a percentage of 20.37% and a frequency of 55.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5 below displays the frequency and percentage of writing errors in the writing of Jordanian tenth-grade learners for the second item \u0026lsquo;sentence structure and vocabulary\u0026rsquo;. As indicated in Table 5 regarding \u0026lsquo;sentence structure vocabulary\u0026rsquo;, the highest element of writing error is \u0026lsquo;using appropriate, topic-related and correct vocabulary (adjectives, nouns, verbs, prepositions, articles, etc.), idioms, expressions, and collocations\u0026rsquo; with a percentage 24% and a frequency 90. However, the lowest proportion of writing errors is in \u0026lsquo;appropriate and accurate use of synonyms and antonyms\u0026rsquo; with a percentage of 16% and a frequency of 60.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cem\u003e5.3 Results Pertinent to Research Question Three\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRQ3: What are the perceptions of English language teachers on the coverage of the reading subskills in the tenth-grade English textbooks?\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo explore the perceptions of English language teachers on the coverage of the subskills in tenth-grade English textbooks, the researcher designed a questionnaire that focuses on the teachers\u0026apos; opinions regarding the coverage of reading subskills in \u003cem\u003eAction Pack 10\u003c/em\u003e textbook. To be specific, it is crucial to keep in mind that the textbook lacks writing sections, so it is impossible to apply a writing framework to assess the subskills of writing. Therefore, this attention to the coverage of reading subskills was selected. Teachers would thus not have the materials to evaluate writing subskills comprehensively on the writing passages and investigate teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions about it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire has been distributed to 28 EFL teachers for tenth-grade students in Jordanian public high schools at Shafa Badran district. According to the figures obtained from Table 3, the analysis of results starts with the coverage of reading subskills from teachers\u0026rsquo; perspectives. In other words, the results of the first part of the questionnaire are illustrated in Table 6.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf more attention is paid to distinguishing and grasping the important ideas as well as the supporting ideas presented in different sentences of the reading text, one will realize that it recognizes the highest mean and percentage of the coverage of reading subskills according to the teachers\u0026rsquo; responses, with a mean of 3.5 and a percentage of 70%. Skimming the passage for the purpose of locating the main subject of discussion being the themes, concepts as well as necessary details, however, the least scored with an average of 3.21 and a percentage of 64.2%.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe mean of the remaining items for the coverage of reading subskills from teachers\u0026rsquo; perspective is between 3.21 and 3.50 and the percentage for these items is between 64.2% and 70%. The current study shows that reading subskills teachers perceive the overall coverage of all the subskills at a total mean of 3.35 and a percentage of 67% from the mean percentages of all items.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis section interprets the results and situates them within the context of prior research. The coverage of reading subskills in \u003cem\u003eAction Pack 10\u003c/em\u003e was moderate overall, with careful reading subskills (1 %) receiving more emphasis than expeditious reading subskills 77 %). This pattern aligns with earlier studies that highlight the dominance of careful reading strategies and the need for a more robust integration of skimming, scanning and searchreading activities. Our findings confirm that the textbook fosters comprehension of main ideas and propositional inferences but includes fewer activities that encourage rapid information retrieval, echoing concerns raised in previous research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe patterns of writing errors revealed that students struggled most with sentence structure and vocabulary (37.02%), followed by arrangement of ideas and examples (36.33%) and cohesion and coherence (26.65%). These results indicate that learners have difficulties using appropriate vocabulary, grammar and syntax, which mirrors the findings of earlier studies. Conversely, the relatively lower frequency of cohesion and coherence errors suggests some strength in organizing ideas and connecting sentences, possibly due to exposure to reading passages that model good coherence. However, the high proportion of arrangement errors indicates a need for targeted instruction in writing organization and the elaboration of ideas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions from the questionnaire support the quantitative findings. They rated the coverage of reading subskills as moderate, with the ability to distinguish and grasp important ideas receiving the highest mean and skimming for the main subject the lowest. This confirms that teachers believe careful reading is adequately addressed but note deficiencies in activities promoting rapid information retrieval. The alignment of teacher perceptions with our content analysis underscores the validity of the evaluation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite these insights, the study has several limitations. First, the sample was drawn from 235 tenthgrade students and 28 teachers from four schools in the Shafa Badran district of Jordan, which limits generalisability to other regions or educational contexts. Second, the mixedmethods design focused on a single textbook and may not capture differences across other curricula or grade levels. Future research should employ larger, more diverse samples across multiple districts and educational systems and examine additional reading and writing subskills, including listening and speaking. Longitudinal studies could also explore the impact of targeted interventions on students\u0026rsquo; reading and writing development.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study analyzed the linguistic patterns in \u003cem\u003eAction Pack 10\u003c/em\u003e with a focus on the development of Jordanian EFL students\u0026rsquo; reading and writing subskills. It aimed to evaluate how effectively the textbook supports language skill improvement through its instructional content and methods.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe discussion covered three key areas: integration of reading subskills, enhancement of writing subskills, and teacher perceptions of learning outcomes. Findings revealed strengths in textual coherence and comprehension, while identifying weaknesses in skimming and scanning. In writing, students showed varied abilities in sentence structure, organization, and vocabulary use, with cultural competence also playing a role. Teacher feedback highlighted areas for improvement in textbook content and design.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings have important implications for curriculum design and teaching strategies. Addressing weaker skill areas through targeted interventions and better integrating linguistic skills can enhance EFL learning outcomes. This study also encourages further exploration of teaching methodologies and cross-cultural approaches to support effective language education.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data sets generated and analysed during the current study consist of coded content from the publicly available Action Pack 10 textbook, anonymised student essay responses and anonymised teacher‑questionnaire responses.\u0026nbsp;Because the student‑\u0026nbsp;and teacher‑level data contain personal information that could compromise participant privacy, these data are not publicly archived; however, an anonymised version of the essay and questionnaire data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with approval of the authors\u0026rsquo; institution.\u0026nbsp;No new software or computational code was developed for this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interests\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests (financial or \u0026nbsp;non‑financial) that could have influenced the work reported in this article.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthor 1 (the MA candidate) conceived and designed the study, collected and analysed all data, and drafted the manuscript as part of her master\u0026rsquo;s thesis. Author 2 (the supervisor) provided guidance on the study design and analysis, supervised the research process, and critically revised and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEthical Approval\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethical Compliance Committee of Amman Arab University. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the university\u0026rsquo;s regulations for research involving human participants. The committee issued approval number AAU‑REC‑2024‑0719 on 19 July 2024. This approval covered all aspects of the project, including the content analysis of Action Pack 10, the administration and analysis of student essay tests, and the distribution of teacher questionnaires. After ethics approval was obtained, the researcher also secured permission from the Jordanian Ministry of Education \u0026ndash; Shafa Badran district to access the participating schools, student work and teachers. No data were collected prior to receiving these approvals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInformed Consent\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll teacher‑participants were contacted by e‑mail and briefed on 2 August 2024 about the purpose of the study, the procedures involved and any potential risks or benefits. The researcher\u0026rsquo;s assessment is that the likely risk is minimal and falls within the \u0026ldquo;minimal risk\u0026rdquo; category. \u003cstrong\u003eWritten informed consent was then obtained electronically from each participant between 2 and 10 August 2024\u003c/strong\u003e using a consent form that explained that participation was voluntary, responses would be used exclusively for research purposes, and participants could withdraw at any time without penalty. The form also stated that all data\u0026mdash;including questionnaire responses and any interview notes\u0026mdash;would remain confidential and anonymised, and that no personal identifiers would be included in any publication. Consent from students or their guardians was not required because the essay data analysed in this study were supplied to the researchers in a fully anonymised form by the schools and contained no personal identifiers. The same consent procedure was applied to all participants involved in the study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdmour MAY (2019) The Importance of Teaching Reading Skills of English Language Using Variety of Techniques in Jordanian Curriculum. J Lang Stud 2(2):123\u0026ndash;140\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAl-Saidat E (2009) English in Jordan: attitudes and prestige. Indian J Appl Linguist 35(2):155\u0026ndash;167\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlmahameed Y, Ajalein M (2021) Difficulties faced by Jordanian undergraduate EFL students in writing research problem statement. Int J Humanit Arts Soc Sci 7:13\u0026ndash;22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnderson LW, Krathwohl DR (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc, St. Upper Saddle River\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAryadoust V (2010) Investigating writing sub-skills in testing English as a foreign language: a structural equation modeling study. TESL-EJ 13(4):1\u0026ndash;20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAryadoust V (2020) A review of comprehension subskills: a Scientometrics perspective. System 88:102180\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAynalem YB, Tesmand AG (2023) An analysis of reading comprehension sub-skills in EFL textbooks. J Lang Lang Teach 11(4):641\u0026ndash;654\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrett TC (1976) Taxonomy of reading comprehension. Teaching reading in the middle class. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, pp 51\u0026ndash;58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeecher C (2023) What is literacy? Multiple perspectives on literacy. In: Gurjar, N., Meacham, S., \u0026amp; Beecher, C. (2023). \u003cem\u003eMethods of teaching early literacy\u003c/em\u003e. Chicago\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCao S, Zhong L, Wang C (2025) The Impact of Student Writing Assessment Literacy on Psychological Factors: An Ordinal Logistic Regression Analysis. \u003cem\u003earXiv preprint arXiv:2502.00004\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen H, Cai Y, De La Torre J (2022) Investigating second language (L2) reading subskill associations: a cognitive diagnosis approach. Lang Assess Q 20(2):166\u0026ndash;189\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDay RR, Park JS (2005) Developing reading comprehension questions. Read Foreign Lang 17(1):60\u0026ndash;73\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFreahat NM, Al-Faoury OH (2014) Jordanian high school EFL teachers\u0026rsquo; and university EFL instructors\u0026rsquo; perceptions of the reading comprehension content in EFL textbooks. Theory Pract Lang Stud 4(11):2231\u0026ndash;2242\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFowler FJ Jr (2013) Survey research methods. Sage\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaryanto A (2024) Blended Learning Models: Bridging Traditional and Digital Educational Practices. Innovative J Educational Res Insights, 76\u0026ndash;86\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJusoh Z, Kassim NLA (2023) The ordering of reading subskills across text types: is there a definite ordering? Int J Soc Sci Res 11(2):117\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasrai A, El-Dakhs S, D. A., Al Khawar H (2022) General and specialist vocabulary knowledge as predictors of academic success in EMI university programs. Lang Learn High Educ 12(1):273\u0026ndash;289\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoats LC (2020) Teaching reading is rocket science: what expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. Am Educ 44(2):4\u0026ndash;39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNation ISP (2008) Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. Taylor and Francis Group, London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNewton JM, Nation ISP (2020) Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. Routledge, London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOtto W (1976) Developing a skills-based approach to reading comprehension. In: W\u003cem\u003eallace D. Miller and George H. McNinch, (Eds) Reflections and Investigations in Reading\u003c/em\u003e, pp 251\u0026ndash;257\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeng P, Kievit RA (2020) The development of academic achievement and cognitive abilities: A bidirectional perspective. Child Dev Perspect 14(1):15\u0026ndash;20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeter J, Singaravelu G (2021) Problems in writing in English among high school learners. Aegaum J 8(9):1502\u0026ndash;11515\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRavand H, Effatpanah F, Ma W, De la Torre J, Baghaei P, Kunina-Habenicht O (2024) Exploring interrelationships among L2 writing subskills: insights from cognitive diagnostic models. Appl Measur Educ 37(4):329\u0026ndash;355\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSalah R (2021) Jordanian university students\u0026rsquo; use of English: urban-rural dichotomy and university location. Adv Lit Study 9(3):105\u0026ndash;113\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSinulingga S, Saragih E, Purba CA (2023) Improving students' reading comprehension skills through the survey, question, read, recite, review (SQ3R) method. J EDUC J Pendidik Indones 9(1):492\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTafti MRR, Esfahani FR, Shafiee S (2023) Impact of Written Corrective Feedback via Dynamic Assessment on Irani-an EFL Learners\u0026rsquo; Writing: Micro and Macro Levels. Lang Translation 13(2):81\u0026ndash;92\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUrquhart AH, Weir CJ (2014) Reading in a second language: process, product and practice. Longman, Harlow\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWhite FD (1986) The writer's art: a practical rhetoric and handbook. Wadsworth Publishing Company, California\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilliams C (2023), June 26 Reading comprehension and why it matters. \u003cem\u003eCenter for Student Achievement Solutions\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.studentachievementsolutions.com/reading-comprehension-and-why-it-matters/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.studentachievementsolutions.com/reading-comprehension-and-why-it-matters/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang Y, Xi J (2023) Fostering self-regulated young writers: Dynamic assessment of metacognitive competence in secondary school EFL class. Lang Assess Q 20(1):88\u0026ndash;107\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang X, Chen J (1989) The techniques to teaching writing. Engl Teach Forum 27(2):34\u0026ndash;36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1. Coverage of reading sub-skills in Action Pack 10\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReading passage (unit)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCareful reading (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExpeditious reading (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnit 10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 200px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal/mean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e81\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e77\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: Percentages represent the proportion of each reading sub-skill within each passage.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2. Frequency and percentage of writing errors\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 267px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWriting error type\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 267px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArrangement of Ideas and Examples (AIF)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e368\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 267px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommunicative Quality (CQ) or Cohesion and Coherence (CC)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e270\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 267px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSentence Structure Vocabulary (SSV)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e375\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 267px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1013\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: Percentages represent the proportion of each error category within the total number of errors.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3. Writing errors regarding the arrangement of ideas and examples (AIF)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArrangement category\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePresentation of ideas, opinions, and information\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAspects of accurate and effective paragraphing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eElaborateness of details\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse of different and complex ideas and efficient arrangement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKeeping the focus on the main theme of the prompt\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding the tone and genre of the prompt\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDemonstration of cultural competence\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e368\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: Percentages represent the proportion of each arrangement error category within the total number of errors (AIF).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u003c/strong\u003e Writing errors made by tenth-grade students regarding communicative quality or cohesion and coherence\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4. Writing errors regarding communicative quality/cohesion and coherence (CQ/CC)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommunicative quality/cohesion category\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRange, accuracy, and appropriacy of coherence-makers (transitional words and/or phrases)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUsing logical pronouns and conjunctions to connect ideas and/or sentences\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLogical sequencing of ideas by use of transitional words\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe strength of conceptual and referential linkage of sentences/ideas\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 333px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e270\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: Percentages represent the proportion of each communicative quality (CQ/CC) error category within the total number of errors.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5.\u003c/strong\u003e Writing errors made by tenth-grade students regarding sentence structure and vocabulary\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5. Writing errors regarding sentence structure and vocabulary (SSV)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"684\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSentence structure/vocabulary category\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUsing appropriate, topic-related and correct vocabulary (adjectives, nouns, verbs, prepositions, articles, etc.), idioms, expressions, and collocations\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorrect spelling, punctuation, and capitalization (the density and communicative effect of errors in spelling and the density and communicative effect of errors in word formation)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAppropriate and correct syntax (accurate use of verb tenses and independent and subordinate clauses)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAvoiding use of sentence fragments and fused sentences\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAppropriate and accurate use of synonyms and antonyms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e375\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: Percentages represent the proportion of each sentence structure and vocabulary error category within the total number of errors.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eCoverage of reading subskill in \u003cem\u003eaction pack 10\u003c/em\u003e from teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6. Coverage of reading subskills in Action Pack 10 from teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReading subskill\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDistinguishing and grasping the important ideas as well as the supporting ideas presented in different sentences of the reading text.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrawing conclusions from information provided in the reading texts.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAssessing both the main ideas and the supplementary details within the reading text.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExploring the connection of the main ideas between different passages throughout the textbook.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLooking for and understanding the core ideas and supporting ideas expressed in each sentence of the reading texts.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkimming the passage for the purpose of locating the main subject of discussion being the themes, concepts as well as necessary details.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhancing students\u0026apos; ability to comprehend main vocabulary items and syntactic structures within reading texts.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhancing students\u0026apos; ability to comprehend main vocabulary items and syntactic structures within reading texts.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 400px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.35\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 133px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e67\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: Percentages represent the mean scores expressed as percentages for each reading subskill based on teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"palcomms","sideBox":"Learn more about [Humanities \u0026 Social Sciences Communications](http://www.nature.com/palcomms/)","snPcode":"41599","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/41599/3","title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Nature AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220902/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220902/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study aims to examine how the reading subskills are illustrated in the Action Pack 10 based on the Urquhart and Weir (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) framework, along with teachers\u0026rsquo; perspectives of this coverage. It also investigates the Tenth-grade students\u0026rsquo; comprehension of the writing subskills based on Aryadoust\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) framework. The sample includes 235 tenth-grade students and 28 teachers from four schools in Shafa Badran, Jordan. A mixed-methods approach was used, involving content analysis, an essay writing test, and a questionnaire. The findings reveal that reading subskills are moderately covered in the textbook, with a greater emphasis on careful reading than on expeditious reading. In terms of writing subskills, students demonstrated stronger performance in coherence and cultural competence, while exhibiting notable difficulties in sentence structure and vocabulary use. Additionally, the results from the teacher questionnaire revealed that educators perceive the coverage of reading subskills in the textbook as moderate.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Reading and writing comprehension among Jordanian students","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-10-09 13:33:36","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7220902/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-03-05T17:11:01+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-15T11:43:53+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"224542707191444001912677364957558375715","date":"2026-02-15T10:27:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"163078412633141916985524139758619195571","date":"2025-12-27T16:28:01+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-11-22T17:37:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"54945421019120722223132730399100534442","date":"2025-10-20T19:55:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"207060273570109523570922615762476679284","date":"2025-09-28T10:49:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-28T10:30:26+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-09-28T10:26:55+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-11T07:59:07+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-08-24T19:19:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","date":"2025-08-24T19:17:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"palcomms","sideBox":"Learn more about [Humanities \u0026 Social Sciences Communications](http://www.nature.com/palcomms/)","snPcode":"41599","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/41599/3","title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Nature AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"f59b7877-ce1e-4b9d-8e84-ee3e7b68de7f","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 9th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[{"id":55955140,"name":"Social science/Education"},{"id":55955141,"name":"Humanities/Language and linguistics"},{"id":55955142,"name":"Social science/Language and linguistics"},{"id":55955143,"name":"Humanities/Literature"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-10T18:39:14+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-10-09 13:33:36","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7220902","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7220902","identity":"rs-7220902","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}