METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES OF UNDERGRADUATE AND POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS IN READING

Maria Gaudensi Bria(1), Concilianus Laos Mbato(2*),

(1) Sanata Dharma University
(2) Master's Program in English Education, Sanata Dharma University
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Metacognitive strategies are widely used by students in learning activities, often without them realizing it. In this article, the researchers aimed to observe postgraduate and undergraduate students metacognitive strategies in reading. Reading is a memory construction, it is essential for successes in the future. Students who are self-determined and motivated are successful readers. Metacognitive strategies of student teachers in reading maturity inspire students to integrate ideas with experiences into the transformation of actions. As reading maturity shapes character, it is identified to those who are independently and eagerly participates in the activity. It focuses on critical thinking and reflection. This assessment of metacognitive strategies in reading may offer an idea to be a good readers and teachers in the future. Using mixed method approach, particularly questionnaires and interviews, the data were collected using procedural statistic SPSS independent t-test in order to have the description of how the two groups applied metacognitive strategies in reading. The findings showed that both postgraduate and undergraduate students utilized metacognition strategies. However, postgraduate students demonstrated more metacognitive strategies and maturity in reading.

Keywords


metacognitive strategies, undergraduate, postgraduate, reading

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akturk A.O., Sahin I. (2011) Literature Review on Metacognition and its Measurement. Procedia Social and Behavioral 15 (2011) 37313736

Alderson, J. C. (1983). Who needs jam? In: Hughes, A., Porter, D. (Eds.), Current developments in language testing. Academic Press, London.

Armbruster, B., Echolsand C., Brown A. (1983). The Role of Metacognition in Reading to Learn: A Developmental perspective. Center for Study of Reading. Reading Education Report No. 40 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem? In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language (pp. 1-24). London: Longman.

Alexander, P.A., & Jetton, T.L. (2000). Learning from text: A Multidimensional and Developmental Perspective. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, 285310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Anderson, (2004). Metacognitive Reading Strategy Awareness of ESL and EFL Learners. The CATESOL Journal 16.1 2004 Cj16_anderson-

Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189_208.

Balcikanli, C. (2011). Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers (MAIT). Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9(3), 1309-1332. ISSN: 1696-2095. 2011, no. 25.

Carrell, P. L., & P. L. Carrell (1988). Interactive text processing: implications for ESL/Second Language Reading Classrooms. Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. Cambridge University Press.

Chamot, A. U., & OMalley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive language learning approach (1st ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P., & Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.

Conrady, K. (2015). Modeling metacognition: Making thinking visible in a content course for teachers. REDIMAT, Vol 4(2), 132- 160. doi: 10.4471/redimat.2015.1422 To link this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.4471/redimat.2015.1422.

Creswell J.W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Cubukcu, F. (2008). How to Enhance Reading Comprehension through Metacognitive Strategies? The Journal of International Social Research Volume 1/2 Winter.

Cubukcu, F. (2009). Metacognition in the classroom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1 (2009) 559563.

De Beni, R., Borella, E., and Carretti, B. (2007). Reading Comprehension in Aging: The Role of Working Memory and Metacomprehension. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 14: 189212, 2007 http://www.psypress.com/anc ISSN: 1382-5585/05 print; 1744-4128 online DOI: 10.1080/13825580500229213 1382-5585/05

Diaz, I. (2014). Training in metacognitive strategies for students vocabulary improvement by using learning journals. PROFILE Issues in Teachers ProfessionalDevelopment,17(1),87-102.http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/profile.v17n1.41632.

Eskey, D. (2005). Reading in a second language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research on second language teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 563-580.

Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The Nature of Intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of CognitiveDevelopmental Inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906911.

Graves, M. F., Juel, C., & Graves, B. B. (2001). Teaching Reading in the 21st Century. Needham Heights, MA: Pearson Education.

Gray, W.S., & Rogers, B. (1956). Maturity in reading: Its nature and appraisal. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kendeou, P., Papadopoulos, T., Spanoudis, G., (2016). Reading Comprehension and PASS Theory. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303215875

Koch, R. E. (1974). Relationships Between Reading Interests and Reading Comprehension among Fourth-Grade and Sixth-Grade Students. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Kuhn, D. (2000). Theory of mind, metacognition, and reasoning: A life-span perspective. In P. Mitchell & K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Childrens reasoning and the mind (pp. 301326). Hove: Psychology Press.

Lorch Jr. Broek, P. (1997). Understanding Reading Comprehe nsion: Current and

Future Contributions of Cognitive Science. Contemporary Educational Psychology 22, 213-246.

Manzo, A. V., Manzo, U., Barnhill, A., & Thomas, M. (2000). Proficient reader subtypes: Implications for literacy theory, assessment, and practice. Reading Psychology, 21(3).

Mbato, C., (2013). Facilitating EFL learners' Self-regulation in Reading: Implementing a Metacognitive Approach in an Indonesian Higher Education Context. Ed D thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore.

Mehrak R., & Maral K. (2012). Metacognitive strategies awareness and success in learning English as a foreign language: an overview Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 73 81

Meniado, J. C. (2016). Metacognitive Reading Strategies, Motivation, and Reading Comprehension Performance of Saudi EFL Students. English Language Teaching; Vol. 9, No. 3; 2016 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

Merriam, S. (2001). Andragogy and Self Directed Learning: Pillars of adult Learning Theory. Wiley On Line Library. https:doi.org/10.1002/ace.3.

ONeil H. F & Abedi J. 1996. Reliability and Validity of a State Metacognitive Inventory.

Palincsar, A. S., and Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension Fostering and Monitoring Activities. Cognit. Instr. 1: 117175.

Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessment. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219-225.

Pugh, S, Pawan, F., &Antommarchi, C (2000). Academic literacy and the new college learner. In Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 25-42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Rajab, H. (2015). An Empirical Study of Reading Habits and Interests of Saudi University EFL Learners. King Abdulaziz University. DOI: 10.5296/ijl. v7i2.7034.

Reiss, M. A. (1983). Helping the unsuccessful language learner. Canadian Modern Language Review, 39(2), 257-266.

Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching Foreign-Language Skills (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sanford, L. (2015). "Factors that Affect the Reading Comprehension of Secondary Students with Disabilities" Doctoral Dissertations. 125. https://repository.usfca.edu/diss/125

Sarver, M. E. (2006). Metacognition and Mathematical Problem Solving: Case Studies of Six Seventh Grade Students. Doctoral dissertation, Montclair State University.

Schaie, K. W. (1978). Toward a stage theory of adult cognitive development. International

Journal of Aging and Human Development, 8, 129138.

Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371. 1313.

Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 113-125.

Susser, B., & Robb, T. N. (1990). EFL Extensive Reading Instruction: Research and Procedure. Jalt Journal, 12(2), 161-185.

Tavakoli, H. (2014). The Effectiveness of Metacognitive Strategy Awareness in Reading Comprehension: The Reading Matrix Volume 14, Number 2, September 2014.

Theiss, D. Philbrick, A., & Jarman G. (2008-2009). Teacher Education Program Evaluation: University of Central Missouri, Vol. 18, Number 1.

Thomas, M. (2001). The Reading Maturity Survey. In Theiss, Philbrick and Jarman, (eds), Teacher Education Program Evaluation. University of Central Missouri, Vol. 18, Number 1.

Thomas, M. (2008). Reading Maturity: Reviving the Construct as Social Science for Adolescent and Adult Readers. Unpublished manuscript, University of Central Missouri at Warrensburg.

Thomas, M. (2013). Looking Ahead with Hope: Reviving the Reading Maturity Construct as Social Science for Adolescent and Adult Readers. Reading Horizons, 52 (2). Retrieved December 7 2018 from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol52/iss2/4.

Tobias, S. & Everson, H.T. (1996). Assessing Metacognitive Knowledge Monitoring. College Board Report No. 96-01

Tobias, S. & Everson. H. T. (2002). Knowing What You Know and What You Dont: Metacognitive Knowledge Further Research on Monitoring. College Board Research Report No. 2002-3

Upton T., & Thompson, L. (2001). The role of the first language in second language reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 469-495.

Veenman, M. (1993). Metacognitive Ability and Metacognitive Skill: Determinants of Discovery Learning in Computerized Learning Environments. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Lyon, G. R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 223_238.

Wenden A. L. 1998. Metacognitive Knowledge and Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, Vol. 19 (4). 515-537. 39.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v22i2.1779

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Maria Gaudensi Bria, Concilianus Laos Mbato



Indexed and abstracted in:

     

 

 

LLT Journal Sinta 2 Certificate (S2 = Level 2)

We would like to inform you that LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching has been nationally accredited Sinta 2 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 23 No 1, 2020 till Vol 27 No 2, 2024

  

 

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

Free counters!


 LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt, e-ISSN 2579-9533 and p-ISSN 1410-7201, is published twice a year, namely in April and October by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.