Exploring FL Readers’ Metacognitive Beliefs: Narrations from Learner Diaries
Abstract
Metacognition is a complex construct widely investigated in SLA studies, also those that focus on reading skills and reading comprehension. Ample research points to metacognition as a strong predictor in developing foreign language reading skills, thus promoting metacognitive strategies in FL education is highly recommended. This paper presents a report on a study in which Polish FL learners kept a diary for a period of one month and wrote comments in reference to the reading classes in which they participated. The data obtained from the students’ narrations allowed to examine the learners’ metacognitive beliefs defined in the study as knowledge about cognition, consisting of three components: person knowledge, task knowledge, and strategy knowledge (Flavell, 1981). The diary data were analyzed in a global narrative way, which enabled the researcher to examine a complex character and a dynamic nature of metacognition in relation to the reading lessons. The findings underline a double role that learner diaries played in this study: as a research tool useful in investigating learners’ metacognition and an effective task that seemed to facilitate the learners’ reflection skills.
Keywords
metacognition; strategy training; reading strategies; diaries; student beliefs
References
Bailey, K. M., & Ochsner, R. (1983). A methodological review of the diary studies: Windmill tilting or social science? In K. M. Bailey, M. H. Long, & S. Peck (Eds.), Second language acquisition studies (pp. 188–198). Newbury House.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353–394). Longman.
Bartlett, R., & Milligan, C. (2015). What is Diary Method? Bloomsbury Academic. www.bloomsburycollections.com.
Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453–482). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, A. L. (1988). Metacognition: The development of selective attention strategies for learning from texts. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 501–526). International Reading Association.
Brown, A. L., Armbruster, B. B., & Baker, L. (1986). The role of metacognition in reading and studying. In J. Orasanu (Ed.), Reading comprehension: From theory to practice (pp. 49–73). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategy instruction with low-achieving second-grade students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 18–37.
Carrell, P. L., Pharis, B. G., & Liberto, J. C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23(4), 647–678.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1986). A cognitive academic language learning approach: An ESL content-based curriculum. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 371–392). Academic Press.
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.131
Cubukcu, F. (2008). Enhancing vocabulary development and reading comprehension through metacognitive strategies. Issues in Educational Research, 18(1), 1–11.
Dabarera, C., Renandya, W. A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System, 42, 462–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.020
Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2003). Can off-line metacognition enhance mathematical problem solving? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 188–200.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think (2nd ed.). Heath. (Original work published 1910).
Devine, J. (1988). A case study of two readers: Models of reading and reading performance. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 127–139). Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1978). Metacognitive development. In J. M. Scandura & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.), Structural / process theories of complex human behavior (pp. 213–245). Sijthoff and Noordoff.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication skills (pp. 35–60). Academic Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1985). Cognitive development (2nd. ed.). Prentice-Hall.
Fung, I. Y. Y., Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Moore, D. W. (2003). L1-assisted reciprocal teaching to improve ESL students’ comprehension of English expository text. Learning and Instruction, 13(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00033-0
Gabryś-Barker, D. (2016). Caring and sharing in the foreign language classroom: On a positive classroom climate. In D. Gabryś-Barker & D. Gałajda (Eds.), Positive psychology perspectives on foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 155–174). Springer. https://doi.org.10.1007/978-3-319-32954-3
Garner, R. (1988). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Ablex.
Geladari, A., & Konstantinos, M. (2010). A record of poor Bilingual Readers’ approaches to narrative texts and strategy use in L2. International Journal of Learning, 17, 151–164. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v17i07/47153
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Longman.
Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2014). Effects of classroom practices on reading comprehension, engagement, and motivations for adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 49, 387–416. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.81
Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2016). Engagement and motivational processes in reading. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading: Reader, text, and context (pp. 41–53). Routledge.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2017). Literacy engagement and motivation: Rationale, research, teaching, and assessment. In D. Lapp & D. Fisher (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 57–84). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315650555-3
Hennessey, M. G. (1999, March 28–31). Probing the dimensions of metacognition: Implications for conceptual change teaching-learning [Conference session]. The Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
Hosenfeld, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of successful and nonsuccessful second language learners. System, 5(2), 110–123.
Howell-Richardson, C., & Parkinson, B. (1988). Learner diaries: Possibilities and pitfalls. In P. Grunwell (Ed.), Applied linguistics in society (pp. 74–79). CILT/BAAL.
Huey, E. B. (1968). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. MIT Press. (Original work published 1908).
Kidd, R., & Marquardson, B. (1994). Secondary sourcebook for integrating ESL and content instruction using the Foresee Approach. Curriculum Support Document. Manitoba Education and Training Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Koukourikou, M., Manoli, P., & Griva, E. (2018). Explicit collaborative reading strategy instruction: A pilot intervention in the EFL context. Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 9(1), 195–210.
Kusiak, M. (2001). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on reading comprehension and metacognitive knowledge. In S. Foster-Cohen & A. Niżegorodcew (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook, Vol. 1 (pp. 255–274). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Markman, E. M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication skills. Academic Press.
McDonough, J., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research methods for English language teachers. Arnold.
McKay, S. L. (2009). Introspective techniques. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitataive research in applied linguistics. A practical introduction (pp. 220–241). Palgrave Macmillan.
Nejad, B. S., & Mahmoodi-Shahrebabaki, M. (2015). Effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on the reading comprehension of English language learners through Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA). International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 3(2), 133–164.
Oxford, R. L., & Leaver, B. L. (1996). A synthesis of strategy instruction for language learners. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 227–246). Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1986). Interactive teaching to promote independent learning from text. Reading Teacher, 39(8), 771–777.
Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 293–316.
Paris, S. G., & Lindauer, B.K. (1982). The development of cognitive skills during childhood. In B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 333–349). Prentice-Hall.
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 (pp. 15–51). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pavlenko, A. (2007). Autobiographic narratives as data in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 28, 289–322.
Pressley, M. (2001). Comprehension instruction: What makes sense now, what might make sense soon. Reading Online, 5(2). http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=/articles/handbook/pressley/index.html
Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J. L., Almasi, J., & Brown, J. R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92(5), 511–553.
Rastegar, M., Mehrabi Kermani, E., & Khabir, M. (2017). The relationship between metacognitive reading strategies use and reading comprehension achievement of EFL learners. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 7, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2017.72006
Salataci, R., & Akyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2 reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14(1), 1–17. http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/April2002/salatci/salatci.html
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Papers and Publications. Paper 40. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/edpsychpapers/40
Stauffer, R. G. (1969). Directing reading maturity as a cognitive process. Harper and Row.
Taboada Barber, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2020). How reading motivation and engagement enable reading achievement: Policy implications policy insights. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219893385
Thorndike, E. L. (1917). Reading as reasoning: A study of mistakes in paragraph reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 8, 323–332.
Yang, X., & Zhang, W. (2002). The correlation between metacognition and EFL reading comprehension of Chinese college students. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 34, 213–218.
Wigfield, A., Mason-Singh, A., Ho, A. N., & Guthrie, J. T. (2014). Intervening to improve children’s reading motivation and comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction. In S. A. Karabenick & T. C. Urdan (Eds.), Motivational interventions (Advances in motivation and achievement, Volume 18) (pp. 37–70). Emerald Group.
Wilczyńska, W., & Michońska-Stadnik, A. (2010). Metodologia badań w glottodydaktyce. Wprowadzenie. Avalon.
Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multimethod designs? In C. Artelt & B. Moschner (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 75–97). Waxmann.
Zhang, L. J. (2002). Exploring EFL reading as a metacognitive experience: Reader awareness and reading performance. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 12, 65–90.
Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive strategy use and academic reading achievement: Insights from a Chinese context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Languages Teaching, 10, 54–69.
Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4043-9144
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Holders of the submitted texts are the Authors. The Reader is granted the rights to use the material available in the TAPSLA websites and pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution - Share Alike (CC BY-SA 4.0). The user is free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
1. License
The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.
If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".
ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).
3. User Rights
Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
4. Co-Authorship
If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.
