METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS IN THE READING COMPREHENSION OF LITERARY TEXTS: AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY BASED ON METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGY

Authors

  • Jabun Nahar Lecturer, Department of English, BGC Trust University, Bangladesh
  • Srabani Mallik Associate Professor of English, Institute of Modern Languages, University of Chittagong, Bangladesh

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v7i1.4145

Keywords:

metacognition, strategy, reading comprehension, literary context

Abstract

This article establishes a connection between students' metacognitive awareness and success in reading comprehension. Reading is a cognitive process that directs students to interact, predict, form hypotheses about the literary text. Reading also involves synthesizing information and critically analyzing a text in a literary context. Metacognition implies "cognition about cognition". The use of metacognitive strategies for reading purposes is interlinked with the attainment of advanced levels of literacy. Metacognition is a complex aspect of thought that involves both linguistic and cognitive activities. Recently the identification of strategies used by readers on tests of reading comprehension is of foremost interest. Using strategic knowledge or metacognition while monitoring the comprehension process is an important aspect of skilled reading. A focus on reading strategies assists researchers regulates the extent to which readers understand the purpose of reading. Readers' proficiency level is highly influenced by the strategy applied. This study has an experimental design involving a conventional group and an experimental group with whom a metacognitive reading strategy is implemented. This article documents a small-scale investigation of how effective implementation of metacognitive reading strategy directs students to a higher level of proficiency in reading comprehension. From the result of the study, we sum up that the participants exposed to metacognitive reading strategy exhibit better understanding and proficiency level than those who are not exposed to metacognitive reading strategy. The participants’ performance reveals an important implication about the development of reading comprehension through short stories.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

Author Biographies

  • Jabun Nahar, Lecturer, Department of English, BGC Trust University, Bangladesh

    Jabun Nahar is currently working as a Lecturer at Department of English, BGC Trust University Bangladesh. She teaches Approaches of Second Language Acquisition, Advanced Reading, Writing Skills of EFL/ESL learners. Her areas of interests are ELT and Applied Linguistics.

  • Srabani Mallik, Associate Professor of English, Institute of Modern Languages, University of Chittagong, Bangladesh

    Srabani Mallik is an Associate Professor of English at Institute of Modern Languages in University of Chittagong, Bangladesh. She teaches Morphology, Writing Systems and Orthography, Reading and Writing Skills of EFL/ESL. Her fields of interests are Second Language Acquisition and Learning, ELT, Applied Linguistics, Sociolinguistics.

References

Anderson, N. J. (1984). The role of metacognition in second/foreign language teaching and learning. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.

Anmarkrud, Ö. and Braten, I. (2012). Naturally-occurring comprehension strategies instruction in 9th-grade language arts classrooms. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56.6,

Baker, I. & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. I P.D Pearson et al. (Eds.) Handbook of Reading Research, 353–395. New York: Longman

Baker, L. (2002). ‘Metacognitive comprehension instruction’, in I. C. C. Blocka, M. Pressley (Eds.) Comprehension Instruction: Research-Based Best Practices New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 77–95.

Baumann, J. F. et al. (1993). Using think-aloud to enhance children’s comprehension monitoring abilities. The Reading Teacher, 47.3, pp. 184–193.

Brown, A. L. (1985). Metacognition: the development of selective attention strategies for learning from texts. In H. Singer & R. B. Rudell (Ed.) Theoretical models and processes of reading. (501–526). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanism. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.) Handbook of Child Psychology. Volume III: Cognitions development, New York: Wiley.

Carrell, P., Pharis, B., Liberto, J., (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 647-678,

Edling, A. (2006). Abstraction and Authority in Textbooks. The Textual Paths Towards Specialized Language. (Diss.) Uppsala: Uppsala universitet.

Flavell, J. H. (1976). ‘Metacognitive aspects of problem solving’, in L.B. Resnick (Ed.) The Nature of Intelligence Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 231-235

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologists,34(10),906-911. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluve (Eds.) Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding. Hillsdale: NJ, Erlbaum.

Griffith, P. L. & Ruan J. (2005). What is metacognition and what should be its role in literary instruction? In Israel, S. E., Block, C. C., Bauserman, K. L. & Kinnucan Welsch, K. (Eds.), Metacognition in Literacy Learning. Theory, Assessment, Instruction and Professional Development. (3–18). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Guthrie J. T. et al. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, pp. 403–423.

Hinders, K. (2007). Question Answer Relationships: Program Evaluation Report 2005–2006 and 2006–2007 Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Education.

Israel, S. E., Block, C. C., Bauserman, K. L. & Kinnucanwelsch, K. (2005). (Eds.), Metacognition in Literacy Learning. Theory, Assessment, Instruction and Professional Development. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mehrdad A. G., Ahghar M. R., Ahghar M. (2012). The effect of teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies on EFL students' reading comprehension across proficiency levels. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3757 – 3763,

Mercer, N. and Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the Development of Children’s Thinking. A sociocultural approach London: Routledge.

Palinscsar, A. S. and Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehensive-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, I.2, pp. 117–175.

Palinscar, A. S. and Brown, A. L. (1987). Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20.2, pp. 60–75.

Raphael, T. E. (1982). Teaching children question-answering strategies. The Reading Teacher, 36.2, pp. 186–191.

Schreiber, F. J. (2005). Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Literacy. In Israek, S. E., Block, C. C., Bauserman, K. L. & Kinnucan-Welsch, K. (Eds.), Metacognition in Literacy Learning. Theory, Assessment, Instruction and Professional Development. (215–240). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Toward a Research and Development Program in Reading Comprehension Santa Monica, CA:RAND.

Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). An evaluation of teacher training for triarchic instruction and assessment. Technical Report for the National Science Foundation, July 2002.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, N. S. and Smatana, L. (2011). Questioning as thinking: a metacognitive framework to improve comprehension of expositing

Downloads

Published

2022-01-31

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 1 (2022)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).