Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategy Use and Reading Comprehension Performance of Indonesian EFL Pre-service Teachers

Mariska Intan Sari

doi:10.18196/ftl.1213

Authors

Mariska Intan Sari Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18196/ftl.1213

Keywords:

Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies, Reading Comprehension Performance

Abstract

The study aims at identifying the nature of cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies employed by Indonesian EFL pre-service teachers and the relationship on their reading comprehension, revealing whether the highly, moderately, and less successful EFL pre-service teachers differ in terms of reading strategies they employ in comprehending English texts and analyzing whether the differences in the use of these reading strategies relate to their performances in a reading comprehension test. The study employs a quantitative research method using reading test and cognitive and metacognitive reading strategy questionnaire. The results of the study show that there is no significant relationship between the cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies employed by Indonesian EFL pre-service teacher and their performance in a reading comprehension test. The results also show that there is no difference in the use of cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies between the less, moderately, and highly successful readers.

Keywords: cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, reading comprehensio

References

Al-Alwan, A. F. (2012). The effect of using metacognition reading strategies on the reading comprehension of Arabic texts. International Journal of Applied Educational Studies, 13(1), 1-18.

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In Pearson, P.D., Barr, R., Kamil, M.L., & Mosenthal, P. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman Inc.

Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. London: Routledge. ETS. (2009). The official guide to the TOEFL test third edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Iwai, Y. (2009). Metacognition awareness and strategy use in academic English reading among adult English as a second language (ESL) students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi, U.S.A.

Iwai, Y. (2016). Promoting strategic readers: insights of preservice teachers’ understanding of metacognitive reading strategies. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(1), 1-7.

Kasımi, Y. (2012). Cognitive and metacognitive strategies employed by Iranian and Turkish EFL readers. ELT Research Journal, 1(3), 159-174.

Kummin, S., & Rahman, S. (2010). The relationship between the use of metacognitive strategies and achievement in English. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 145-150.

Naeini, M.B., & Rezaei, R. (2015). Examining and dealing with the issue of reading strategy use by Iranian EFL learners. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 15(2), 182-195.

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.

Phakiti, A. (2006). Modeling cognitive and metacognitive strategies and their relationships to EFL reading test performance. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 1, 53-95.

Purpura, J. E. (1997). An analysis of the relationships between test takers' cognitive and metacognitive strategy use and second language test performance. Language learning, 47(2), 289-325.

Purpura, J. E. (1998). Investigating the effects of strategy use and second language test performance with high-and low-ability test takers: A structural equation modelling approach. Language Testing, 15(3), 333-379.

Vianty, M. (2007). The comparison of students' use of metacognitive reading strategies between reading in Bahasa Indonesia and in English. International Education Journal, 8(2), 449-460.

Zarra-Nezhad, A., Shooshtari, Z. G., & Vahdat, S. (2015). The effects of attitude & motivation on the use of cognitive & metacognitive strategies among Iranian EFL undergraduate readers. English Linguistics Research, 4(4), 11-22.

Zare-ee, A. (2007). The relationship between cognitive and meta-cognitive strategy use and EFL reading achievement. Journal of Applied Psychology 2(5), 105-119.

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. personal perspective. TEFL Web Journal, 2(1), 15-30.

Rao, Z. (2007). Training in brainstorming and developing writing skills. ELT Journal, 61, 100-106. Santos, T. (2000). On the future of second language writing: The EFL/ESL split. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(1), 8-10.

Tananart, O. (2000). The Survey of Errors in Written Work of Students Learning Fundamental English at Chulalongkorn University. Passa Paritasna. 18: 87-101.

Yakhontova, T. V. (2003). English academic writing: For students and researchers. USA: New York: Longman.

Zemach, D. E and Rumisek, L. A. (2005). Academic Writing: from paragraph to essay. MacMillian

https://doi.org/10.18196/ftl.1213