Dichotomy of EFL reading: Metacognition vs. proficiency

Abstract

Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt.
Dichotomy of EFL reading: Metacognition vs. proficiency
This study examined a) the effects of metacognition and proficiency on EFL reading performance and b) the relation of metacognition and EFL reading performance. Data were collected by Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) and reading scores were examined. By variance analyses, we found that reading scores and metacognitive knowledge show variations across proficiency levels. There were no effects of time, timeXclass, and timeXproficiency on metacognition. When tests incorporated higher order thinking skills, participants' metacognitive knowledge or regulation correlated with reading scores, positively. Although trends that can explain differences in metacognition did not follow a pattern; it was observed that different proficiency groups benefited from training differently; for low- and mid-proficiency groups, a slight increase in metacognition regulation; and for high-proficiency group, a refinement in metacognitive knowledge was observed. We suggest instructional and assessment practices incorporate metacognition regarding learners’ proficiency levels. Therefore, all students might see the relevance of metacognition and take responsibility for it.
Information about Author(s)*
Author 1
Author (Last name, First name)	Öztürk, Nesrin
Affiliated institution (University)	Ege University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No) Write only one corresponding author.	Yes
Author 2
Author (Last name, First name)	Şenaydın, Ferah
Affiliated institution (University)	Ege University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)
Author 3
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)
Author 4
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)

Keywords

• metacognition,EFL,reading,regulation

References

1. Aghaie, R., & Zhang, L. J. (2012). Effects of explicit instruction in cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies on Iranian EFL students’ reading performance and strategy transfer. Instructional Science, 40(6), 1063–1081. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9202-5
2. Alsheikh, N. O., & Mokhtari, K. (2011). An Examination of the Metacognitive Reading Strategies Used by Native Speakers of Arabic When Reading in English and Arabic. English Language Teaching, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n2p151
3. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Cognitive monitoring in reading. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension (pp. 21–44). Newark: International Reading Association.
4. Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning.
5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
6. Barnett, M. (1988). Reading through Context: How Real and Perceived Strategy Use Affects L2 Comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 72(2), 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1988.tb04177.x
7. Boulware-Gooden, R., Carreker, S., Thornhill, A., & Joshi, R. M. (2007). Instruction of metacognitive strategies enhances reading comprehension and vocabulary achievement of third-grade students. The Reading Teacher, 61(1), 70–77.
8. Chern, C. L. (1993). Chinese students’ word-solving strategies in reading in English. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & C. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 67–85). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

9. Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.131
10. Cubukcu, F. (2008). Enhancing vocabulary development and reading comprehension through metacognitive strategies. Issues in Educational Research, 18(1), 1–11.
11. Curwen, M. S., Miller, R. G., White-Smith, K. A., & Calfee, R. C. (2010). Increasing teachers’ metacognition develops students’ higher learning during content area literacy instruction: Findings from the read-write cycle project. Issues in Teacher Education, 19(2), 127–151.
12. Doğanay Bilgi, A., & Özmen, E. R. (2014). The impact of modified multi-component cognitive strategy instruction in the acquisition of metacognitive strategy knowledge in the text comprehension process of students with mental retardation. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(2), 707–714.
13. Duffy, G. G. (1993). Rethinking strategy instruction: Four teachers’ development and low achievers’ understandings. Elementary School Journal, 93(3), 231.
14. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
15. Guo, L. (2018). Modeling the relationship of metacognitive knowledge , L1 reading ability , L2 language proficiency and L2 reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 30(2), 209–231.
16. Holton, D., & Clarke, D. (2006). Scaffolding and metacognition. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(2), 127–143.
17. Iwai, Y. (2011). The Effects of Metacognitive Reading Strategies: Pedagogical Implications for EFL/ESL Teachers. The Reading Matrix, 11(2), 150–159. Retrieved from http://readingmatrix.com/articles/april_2011/iwai.pdf
18. Karami, S., & Hashemian, M. (2012). The Relationship between (Meta)cognitive Strategies and Reading Comprehension in Iranian Female L2 Learners. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(4), 58–64. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v2n4p58
19. Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A Literature review (Research report). New York, NY:Pearson. Retrieved from http://www.datec.org.uk/CHAT/chatmeta1.htm
20. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32, 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.04.005
21. Muñiz-Swicegood, M. (1994). The effects of metacognitive reading strategy training on the reading performance and student reading analysis strategies of third grade bilingual students. Bilingual Research Journal, 18, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.1994.10162659
22. Ozturk, N. (2015). A short review of research on metacognition training. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World, 5 (3)(August), 50–62.
23. Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 26–56. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532203lt243oa
24. Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219–225.
25. Reffyal, M., Pammu, A., & Sukmawaty. (2018). The Profiles of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of Successful and Unsuccessful EFL Learners of Senior High School. Jurnal Ilmu Budaya, 6(1), 136–142.
26. Reza Ahmadi, M., Nizam Ismail, H., & Kamarul Kabilan Abdullah, M. (2013). The importance of metacognitive reading strategy awareness in reading comprehension. English Language Teaching, 6(10). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n10p235
27. Salataci, R., & Akyel, A. (2002). Possible Effects Of Strategy Instruction on L1 and L2 Reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14(1), 1–17. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/docview/1705695260?accountid=12372%5Cnhttp://sfx.unimelb.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/sfxlcl41?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Aeducation&atitle=Possib
28. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1), 113–125.
29. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
30. Takallou, F. (2011). The effect of metacognitive strategy instruction on EFL learners’ reading comprehension performance and metacognitive awareness. Asian EFL Journal, 13(1), 272–300.
31. Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. Cell Biology Education, 11(2), 113–120.
32. Tavakoli, H. (2014). The effectiveness of metacognitive strategy awareness in reading comprehension: The case of Iranian university EFL students. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 14(2), 314–336. Retrieved from http://www.readingmatrix.com/files/11-24o5q41u.pdf
33. Taylor, A., Stevens, J., & Asher, J. W. (2006). The effects of explicit reading strategy training on L2 reading comprehension. In M. Norris, John & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 213–244). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
34. van Gelderen, A., Schoonen, R., Stoel, R. D., de Glopper, K., & Hulstijn, J. (2007). Development of Adolescent Reading Comprehension in Language 1 and Language 2 : A Longitudinal Analysis of Constituent Components Development of Adolescent Reading Comprehension in Language 1 and Language 2 : A Longitudinal Analysis of Constituent Componen. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 477–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.477
35. Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2010). Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60(2), 470–497.
36. Veenman, M. V. J. (2016). Metacognition. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading (pp. 26–40). New York: Routledge.
37. Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0
38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39. Zhang, L. J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students’ metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410108667039
40. Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive Strategy Use and Academic Reading Achievement: Insights from a Chinese Context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 54–69. Retrieved from http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v10n12013/zhang.pdf
41. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic.
42. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An Overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102
43. Zohar, A., & Ben David, A. (2009). Paving a clear path in a thick forest: A conceptual analysis of a metacognitive component. Metacognition and Learning, 4(3), 177–195.