Surveying Metacognitive Reading Strategies Awareness of Fifth-Semester English Department Students
Abstract
This article serves result on the survey for metacognitive awareness level of reading strategies use in academic reading by English department students of Syiah Kuala University (Unsyiah), Banda Aceh. The research measured their the respondents’ use and preferences of strategies in academic reading by using the inventory designed by Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002) called SORS (Survey of Reading Strategies). A total of 46 fifth semester students of Unsyiah English Department became the respondents. Analysis from the data collection showed that the respondent’s possessed a medium level overall tendency of metacogntive reading strategy awareness. Meanwhile strategies such as “getting back concentration” and “re-reading” when text is difficult achieved high use frequencies.The result revealed that the problem-solving reading strategies was the most preferred subscales among the other two subscales, indicating the respondents’ preference to use during-reading strategies.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (3), 285-310. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Alhaqbani, A., & Riazi, M. (2012). Metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use in arabic as a second language. Reading in a Foreign Language, 24(2), 231-255.
Batang, B. L. (2015). Metacognitive strategy awareness and reading comprehension of prospective pre-service secondary teachers. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidiciplinary Research. 3(4), 62-67.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
Mokhtari, K. & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25, 2-11.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Pammu, A., Amir, Z., Rizan, T. N., & Maasum, T. M. (2014). Metacognitive reading strategies of less proficient tertiary learners: A case study of EFL learners at a public university in Makassar, Indonesia. Procedia – Socia and Behavioral Sciences (118), 357 – 364.
Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds), Dimensions of Thinking and Cognitive Instruction, 15-51. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Bar (Eds.). Handbook of Reading Research, 3, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Santana, J. C. (2003). Moving towards metacognition. An online master’s thesis. Retrieved from www.readingmatrix.com/conference/pp/proceedings2005/santana.pdf. 12 September 2017. Universidad Panamericana, Guadalajara.
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1/2), 113-125.
Sugiyono. (2014). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Tavakoli, H. (2014). The effectiveness of metacognitive strategy awareness in reading comprehension: The case of Iranian university EFL students. The Reading Matrix, 14(2), 314-336.
Wen, Q. F. (2003). The successful way of learning english. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
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.
Zimmerman, B. J., Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614-628, http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312023004614
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 0 timesPDF - 0 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
P-ISSN: 2085-3750
E-ISSN: 3025-9789
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.