Kit-Build Concept Map with source connection to support Reading 
Comprehension in English as Foreign Language 
Banni Satria Andoko1,2, Yusuke Hayashi,1, and Tsukasa Hirashima1 
1Hiroshima University 
2 State Polytechnic of Malang 
Abstract: Kit-Build Concept Map with source connection in Reading Comprehension for EFL aim to confirm learners' understanding and fix their misunderstanding by making a connection between proposition and text Keywords: Concept map, EFL, Kit-build concept map 
Introduction 
In the modern era, reading is viewed as an 
active process where readers are making a selection from a range of cues, emanating it from the text and in the situational context they need to construct a model of meaning that represents, to some degree, the meaning intended by the writer. The situation will become harder when it was dealing with readers that are not using English as their first language, Stanley [1] said that one of the major problems for the second language (L2) readers is that they may view the reading material as samples of language rather than information. L2 reader may have an inadequate or inappropriate orientation with the content and the structure of the text [2]. 
Some researcher in Language learning 
suggested that to be successful in Reading Comprehension; a graphical display must be somehow reconstructed by the reader as a meaningful language [3, 4]. Other researchers also suggested that teachers should spontaneously create an instructional scaffolding-cueing, 
prompting, analogies, metaphors, questioning, elaborations, and remodeling that can provide or 
give access to the students with the necessary information that will help them to restructure their understandings [5]. 
Many researchers used Concept mapping 
as the strategies to support reading comprehension, and it’s proven to be an effective way and give a good effect on reading comprehension of EFL learners [6, 7]. Concept mapping can act as a visual representation of knowledge that can be employed as a learning strategy by learners so they can find the relationship between their knowledge and new information [8]. Many researchers also confirmed that EFL learners who used concept mapping as a learning strategy gain high understanding in reading comprehension [9, 10, 8]. Also, many studies have proved that the concept mapping can improve the learners’ reading comprehension because they could understand the reading material easily by the visualization of the concept map [10, 8, 11]. 
Kit-build concept mapping (KB-Map) 
method [12, 13], a kind of concept mapping method, is proven to have the same efficiency compared to the original concept mapping method 
人工知能学会研究会資料 SIG-ALST-B901-10
－ 56 －
when used for comprehending information in a comprehension test right after the reading process. But in advance, it has a better efficiency when dealing with recalling the comprehended 
information when conducting a delayed 
comprehension test [14].  
In a classroom situation, the reading 
process can become more complex; one of the complexities is a misunderstanding. It could happen in any teaching situation even when the graphical strategies were used. It can lead them to understand different information intended by the author or the teacher, especially for L2 Reading comprehension, which requires more effort compared with the L1. 
To minimize this issue, we are providing a 
function in graphical strategies called source-connection to facilitate learners to make confirmation of their understanding directly with the reading material. We are formulating a research question as a guide for this study as follow: “Can the source-connection function in KB-Map help learners to have a better immediate and delay test score compare to the traditional summarization group and the usual kit-build group?” 
Kit-Build Concept map 
Kit-build Concept Map is a kind of 
concept map that is using a closed-end approach, unlike the concept map that is using an open-end approach.  
 Novak defined a tool called concept map. 
The defined definition is: Concept maps are graphical tools used for organizing and 
representing knowledge. There are two main parts to the concept map. The first part is the concepts that shaped like a circle or boxes of some type, and the other parts are the connecting line that consists of words that are connecting between two 
concepts. That word on the line describes the relationship between them and referred to as linking word or linking phrase. It specifies the relationship between two concepts [11].  
There are three main phases in KB-Map, 
the first phase is goal map building or expert map building, the second phase is learner’s map building, and the third phase is the analyzer. The first phase is the phase for teacher or expert to create an initial map called goal map by extracting the information consist of the reading material into a concept map. The system then will be dissembling this goal map into parts consist of unrelated concepts and links called kits. At the second phase called learner’s map building, the system will provide learners with the kits and asked them to re-construct the kits into a new map called learner’s map. During the re-construction process, learners cannot create a new concept and the link they only have to re-construct the provided concepts and links. The third phase, called KB analyzer. This phase is used by the teacher or expert to analyze the learner's map by comparing them with the initial map or goal map.  
Figure 1 illustrates as an example of a goal 
map. The Teachers or expert is creating goal maps as a representation of the structure of reading material according to their intention of what learners should learn. Figure 2 illustrates as an example of parts that are called kit. As described before that in general concept map building, learners are required to extract the part from the reading material by them self, but in KB-Map building they only have to recognize the parts and reconstruct it.  
－ 57 －
Figure 1 an example of goal map 
Figure 2 an example of a kit 
In this research, we are using an English 
reading material and makes a Goal Map from it. Instructor or teacher should understand the main idea of the content and then he/ she should choose or use the words from the content or creating a new word that has the same meaning or purpose with the sentence. For example: 
 “Any substance may exist as solid, liquid, or gas. If a solid is heated, it will melt to become a liquid. This is called melting. If the liquid is then cooled, it will freeze to become a solid again. This is called freezing. Similarly, if a liquid is heated it will boil to become a gas. This is called boiling……” 
From the reading material, instructor or 
teacher construct a Goal map and separate it into Kits as shown in Figure 1 
Map Score 
KB-Map has an automate map assessment 
tools by using an exact matching method at the proposition level by comparing between the 
learner’s map with the teacher’s map. In the form of learning a task or exercise, it is used for checking learner’s comprehension of the topic that they’ve already learned [15]. It will evaluate for every proposition that learners made and comparing them with the teacher propositions. The score of the proposition will depend on the number of the proposition of the teachers’ map. If the teachers’ map consists of four propositions, then each proposition score would be 25 or 100 divides by four which is 25 and so on.  
When learner creating a proposition, which does not consist in teacher proposition, then we could say that the student has a different understanding or misunderstanding of a subject. But when learners failed to make a proposition of a subject, then we could say that learners don’t understand about the current subject represent by the proposition. 
Source-connection in Kit-Build 
Source connection function was added into 
KB-Map to improve the process of learning during map construction. This function aims to facilitate learners to make confirmation of their 
understanding in the form of learners’ map with the reading material. It is prompting learners to confirm each proposition by making a connection between a proposition and a specific sentence of the reading material. After the connection was made, the color of the proposition will be changed into black, and the selected text will also change into the red (Figure 3).  
－ 58 －
Figure 3 an example source-connection function 
Experiment Setting and Method Procedure  
This experiment is involving two hundred 
and thirty-two undergraduate students from State Polytechnic of Malang, Indonesia who learn English as a foreign language. Before the experiment, we were conducting an English Comprehension test to divide each group equally, as shown in table 1. We conduct three sessions by using three different reading material. Each session has several activities to complete see figure 4. 
Figure 4. Activities session for each group  Table 1. Mean pre-Reading Comprehension test 
Group N M F Mean SD 
Summarizing method (C) 
78 58 20 30.1667 11.6423 
Kit-Build (E1) 77 44 33 30.5325 8.5480 
Kit-Build with 
Source-connection (E2) 
77 48 29 30.0390 10.6418 
Material 
Based on the Reading score information, 
we are choosing to use three intermediate English reading material taken from English for 
Information Technology book by Olejniczak, and the other was from the Indonesian University English teacher’s handbook. That material was being graded by using the Flesch Grade Level formula to make sure that they are suitable to be used in this experiment. The result is shown in table 2  Table 2. The Flesch Grade Level result of the reading material 
Reading Material Grade Level Reading Level 
Data Storage (M1) 10 fairly difficult to read 
Channel of Communication (M2) 
11 difficult to read 
Banana (M3) 12 difficult to read 
Experimental Result and Discussion  
The students are divided into three groups, 
Control group using summarization method (C), Experimental group 1 (E1) using the usual kit-build and Experimental group 2 (E2) using kit-build with source-connection function. We are using the immediate and delay reading 
comprehension test score to represent their understanding.  
The test result of the first session by using 
M1 graphically shows that E2 got the highest score among all group for both immediate and delay tests (see Figure 5), but to support it statistically, further analysis was conducted by using Holm's Sequentially Rejective Bonferroni Procedure and it shows that E2 score result was higher among all groups followed by E1 in second and C as the lowest (see table 3 and 4). 
After 1 week 
－ 59 －
Figure 5. Mean score of all groups in both test for M1 
Table 3. Mean of combined test score in M1 
Group n Mean S.D. 
C  156 6.3654 2.1010 
E1 154 7.5909 1.4802 
E2 154 6.9156 1.6207 
 Table 4. Holm's Sequentially Rejective 
Bonferroni Procedure result for M1 
Pair Diff t-value df p Adj.p  
C – E2 -1.2255 4.9591 229 0.0000 0.0000 C < E2 * 
E2 – E1 0.6753 2.7240 229 0.0069 0.0139 E2 > E1 * 
C – E1 -0.5502 2.2264 229 0.0270 0.0270 C < E1 * 
 The test result of the second session by 
using M2 graphically shows that E2 also got the highest score among all group for both immediate and delay tests (see Figure 6), but to support it statistically, further analysis was conducted by using Holm's Sequentially Rejective Bonferroni Procedure and it shows that the E2 was higher than the C and had the same score with the E1 and E1 had the same score with C. This situation happens because there are no significant differences between E2 and E1, between E1 and C but there are significant differences between E2 and C (see table 5 and 6). 
Figure 6. Mean score of all groups in both test for M2 
Table 5 Mean of combined test score in M2 
Group n Mean S.D. 
C 156 5.6859 1.6177 
E1 154 6.2338 1.2566 
E2 154 5.9481 1.3421 
Table 6. Holm's Sequentially Rejective 
Bonferroni Procedure result for M2 
Pair Diff t-value df P Adj.p  
C – E2 -0.5479 2.7195 229 0.0070 0.0211 C < E2 * 
E2 – E1 0.2857 1.4137 229 0.1588 0.3176 E2 = E1 
C – E1 -0.2622 1.3013 229 0.1945 0.3176 C = E1 
 The test result of the third session by using 
M3 graphically shows that E2 also got the highest score among all group for both immediate and delay tests (see Figure 7), but to support it statistically, further analysis was conducted by using Holm's Sequentially Rejective Bonferroni Procedure and it shows that both E2 and E1 had overachieved the C and there was no significant difference between them (see table 7 and 8). 
Figure 7. Mean score of all groups in both test for M3 
Table 7. Mean of combined test score in M3 
Group n Mean S.D. 
C 156 5.4744 2.1021 
E1 154 6.5844 1.7253 
E2 154 6.1364 1.7417 
 Table 8. Holm's Sequentially Rejective 
Bonferroni Procedure result for M3 
Pair Diff t-value df p Adj.p  
C – E2 -1.1101 4.0812 229 0.0001 0.0002 C < E2 * 
C – E1 -0.6620 2.4339 229 0.0157 0.0314 C < E1 * 
E2 – E1 0.4481 1.6420 229 0.1020 0.1020 E2=E1 
 Based on the above discussion then we 
could answer the research question and the answer would be that E2 was overachieved C in all the material but only one time it can overachieve the E1 and the rest are equal.  
Conclusion and Future Work 
Source-connection function in KB-Map 
indicates a good result to be used as a function to promote learners to clarify their understanding during the map construction process and lead them 
－ 60 －
to have better scores in the Reading 
Comprehension test. For future work, we need to conduct deeper analysis to analyze the learners’ behavior and the connection between the propositions and the test result in detail. 
References  
[1]  R. M. Stanley, "The recognition of macrostructure: a 
pilot study," Reading in a Foreign Language 2, pp. 156-168, (1984).  
[2]  A. M. Johns and P. Mayes, "An analysis of summary 
protocols of university ESL students," Applied, pp. 253-272, (1990).  
[3]  P. L. Carrel and J. C. Eisterhold, "Schema Theory and 
ESL Reading Pedagogy," TESOL Quarterly No. 4, vol. 17, pp. 553-573, (1983).  
[4]  B. Oded and J. Walters, "Deeper processing for better 
EFL reading," Elsevier Science Ltd., pp. 357-370, (2001).  
[5]  G. G. Duffy, L. R. Roehler, E. Sivan, G. Rackliffe, C. 
Book, M. S. Meloth, L. G. Vavrus, R. Wesselman, J. Putnam and D. Bassiri, "Effect of explaining the reasoning associated with using reading strategies," Reading Research Quarterly, 22, p. 347–368, (1987).  
[6]  P. Manoli and M. Papadopoulou, "Graphic Organizers 
as a Reading Strategy:Research Findings and Issues," Creative education 3.03, p. 384, (2012).  
[7]  A. D. Salehi, S. Jahandar and M. Khodabandehlou, 
"The impact of concept mapping on EFL student's reading comprehension," J. of Indian J. of 
Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences 3, pp. 241-250, (2013).  
[8]  P. Phantharakphong and S. Pothitha, "Development of 
English reading comprehension by using concept maps," Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 116 , pp. 497-501, (2014).  
[9]  H. Barenholz and P. Tamir, "A comprehensive use of 
concept mapping in design instruction and 
assessment," Research in Science & Technological Education 10.1, pp. 37-52, (1992).  
[10]  M. Kalhor and G. Shakibaei, "Teaching Reading 
Comprehension through Concept Map," Life Science Journal 9.4, pp. 725-731, (2012).  
[11]  J. D. Novak and A. J. Cañas, "The Theory Underlying 
Concept Maps and How to Construct and Use Them," Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008, (2008).  
[12]  T. Hirashima, K. Yamasaki, H. Fukuda and H. Funaoi, 
"Framework of kit-build concept map for automatic diagnosis and its preliminary use," Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, . Hiroshima- Japan, (2015). 
[13]  K. Yamasaki, H. Fukuda, T. Hirashima and H. Funaoi, 
"Kit-Build Concept Map and Its Preliminary Evaluation," in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education, Malaysia, (2010).  
[14]  M. Alkhateeb, Y. Hayashi, T. Rajab and T. Hirashima, 
"Comparison between kit-build and scratch-build concept mapping methods in supporting EFL reading comprehension," The Journal of Information and Systems in Education 14, no. 1, pp. 13-27, (2015).  
[15]  W. Wunnasri, J. Pailai, Y. Hayashi and T. Hirashima, 
"Validity of kit-build method for assessment of learner-build map by comparing with manual methods," IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems 101.4, pp. 1141-1150, (2018).  
－ 61 －