Metacognitive Strategies: Its Impact on comprehension

By: Maria B. Cequeña

Learning to read is one of the most important things children accomplish in elementary school because it is
the foundation for most of their academic endeavors (Stevens, et.al. 1991). A child who has the ability to

read at the early stages of his schooling is predicted to succeed in any academic endeavor in the future.

However, achild of school age who is expected to have acquired reading skills, but is still unable to read or

comprehend any

reading material, is likely to suffer academic failures. Indisputably, for a pupil to learn any discipline, he has to

spend much of his time reading and comprehending information presented in texts. Without comprehension,

there is no learning. Indeed, reading plays a vital role in achieving literacy. Numerous studies reveal that

mastery of basic reading skills can be made easy through direct instruction of metacognitive strategies.

This research investigated the impact of metacognitive strategies on the reading comprehension of

second year high school students. Special emphasis was given on the appraisal of the efficacy of the proposed

reading program using metacognitive strategies for sophomore high school students of Siena College, Taytay,

Rizal. Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the entry reading proficiency level of Class A nad Class B?

1.1. What is the reading proficiency level of Class A and Class B before the implementation of the

reading program?

2. What is the exit reading profile of Class A and Class B?

2.1. What is the reading proficiency level of Class A and Class B after the implementation of the

reading program?

2.2. How does the performance of Class A, which underwent a rigorous training in the application

of metacognitive strategies for eight months, compared with the performance of Class B,

which undertook the same training for only two months?

2.3. Which of the metacognitive strategies do the respondents apply most in reading?

3. What reading program would best suit the reading profile of the second year high school students?

Conceptual Framework

Metacognition has been the subject of numerous research studies over the last threee decades.

Metacognition refers to the deliberate conscious control of one’s own cognitive activity. According to Brown

(1978) using metacognition requires two sets of related skills. First, one must understand what skills, strategies

and resources a task requires. Included in this cluster are finding main ideas, rehearsing information, forming

associations or images using memory techniques, organizing material, taking notes or underlining and using

test-taking techniques. Second, one must know how and when to use these skills and strategies to ensure the

task is completed successfully. These monitoring activities include checking one’s level of understanding,

predicting outcomes, evaluating the effectiveness of one’s efforts, planning one’s activities, deciding how to

budget time and revising and switching to other activities to overcome difficulties (Schunk 1996).

O’ Malley and Chamot (1990) identified metacognitive strategies for a successful reading. These

include planning which strategies to use, monitoring and assessing how effective their use is/was, and selecting

a fix-up strategy if failure to understand any portion of the text has occurred. To illustrate, specific

metacognitive strategies were proposed: advance organization, organizational planning, selective attention, selfmonitoring,

and self-evaluation. Advance organization involves previewing the main ideas or concepts of the

material, often by skimming, to link the previous knowledge to the new topic about to be learned.

Organizational planning refers to planning the reading tasks like identifying the parts, the sequence or main

ideas that would aid in the comprehension of a text. Selective attention is deciding in advance to attend to

specific aspects of input, often by scanning for key words, concepts, and/or linguistic markers. Self-monitoring

pertains to checking one’s comprehension during reading. Finally, self-evaluation requires one’s assessment on

how well he has accomplished a reading or learning activity after it has been completed.

Paris (1990) has recognized the role of teachers in developing metacognitive skills. An effective way

to develop the learner’s cognitive monitoring is through modeling which is also advocated by Vygotsky (1986)

in his scaffolding instruction as reviewed by Cooper (1993). In this type of instruction, the learners need a great

deal of support from a more skilled person (usually a teacher). Scaffolding instruction involves four basic

stages: modeling, support and feedback.

Applying Vygostsky’s learning strategy to reading, the teacher explains first the reading strategy to be

employed and the importance of the said strategy. Next, the strategy is modeled or demonstrated when reading

text. Then, through the teacher’s support, the students are given opportunities to apply the strategy modeled

(guided practice). Finally, the teacher leads the class to evaluate the reading task done for feedback necessary to

further improve the application of the strategy learned. As the students demonstrate mastery in processing

information in texts through guided practice, the learning aids are faded or removed.

A. Brown, O”Malley and Chamot’s concepts of metacognitive strategies and Vygotsky’s scaffolding

instruction served as the conceptual framework of the study from which the researcher derived the paradigm

below that is reflected in the reading program implemented to ascertain the impact of metacognitive strategies

on comprehension.

Metacognitive Strategies

INPUT PROCESS OUTCOMES

Texts I. Advance Organization activating prior knowledge

Quizzes/Tests A. Skimming to link with the new one

B. Scanning

C. Predicting

D. Overview statement

E. K-W-L

II. Self- Monitoring

A. Comprehension Monitoring - improved

1. on-going summary comprehension

2. paraphrasing - developing

3. creating mental imagery/ critical thinking

association

4. think aloud

5. REAP (Read, Encode,

Annotate, and Ponder

6. Jigsaw Reading

B. Production Monitoring

1. outlining well-made outline and

2. semantic webbing semantic map/web

3. writing reflections developing

writing skills

C. Self-evaluation

1. assessing the extent

of one’s effort in learning -gaining one’s

2. assessment of the ability

effectiveness of the to evaluate

reading strategies his reading

employed performance

O’ Malley and Chamot’s concept of metacognitive strategies was modified into three components to

suit the needs of the respondents of the study: Planning strategies or Advance organization, Developing Selfmonitoring

Strategies, and Self-evaluation Activities. Advance organization serves as pre-reading activities

which aims to activate students’ prior knowledge to relate to the knowledge about to be learned. Included in

this cluster are skimming, scanning, predicting, overview statement, and K-W-L (what I know, what I want to

know, and what I learned). Self-Monitoring strategies, which are subdivided into comprehension monitoring and

production monitoring, aim to improve the learners’ comprehension through the activities as on-going summary,

paraphrasing, creating mental imagery or association, think aloud, REAP (Read, Encode, Annotate, and

Ponder), Jigsaw Reading, outlining, semantic webbing, and writing reflections. Finally, self-evaluation

component comprises activities as assessing the extent of one’s effort in learning and assessment of the

effectiveness of the reading strategies employed.

Procedure

Actual Research commenced in July with the approval of the High school Principal. Two sections

from the eight sections of the second year students were taken as the respondents of the study. Both groups

were pretested on July 10, 1998. From July to December, the first group was taught using metacognitive

strategies with the aim of developing critical thinking as they engaged in reading for better and improved

comprehension. However, to obtain varied and reliable results, the researcher tried out the same strategies to

another group for two months from January to February. Within two months, the second group was exposed to

metacognitive strategies following the same procedure and techniques done to the first group. Finally, on

March 3, 2000 both groups were given a posttest to describe their reading proficiency level after their exposure

to metacognitive strategies.

Statistical Treatment

1. In identifying the entry reading level of Class A and Class B, the pretest mean of both groups was

computed separately.

2. In determining the reading proficiency level of both groups, the pretest mean score and posttest mean

score of each group were correlated using the z-test.

3. In comparing the reading performance of Class A and Class B, the posttest mean score of Class A was

correlated with the posttest mean score of Class B using the z- test.

4. To ascertain the metacognitive strategies employed by the respondents, percentage and weighted mean

were utilized.

Findings

1. Results of the data gathered revealed the following entry reading profile of Class A and Class B:

a. The reading proficiency level of Class A and Class B was below the completely level expected for

second year students as given by their pretest mean scores of 38.17 and 37.94 respectively.

b. Both groups had deficiencies in four of the cognitive skills in reading tested by the Center of

Educational Measurement-vocabulary, points of view, comprehension, and study aids.

c. A big percentage in both groups were classified as very poor, inferior and low average readers.

2. Both classes exhibited the same exit reading profile although they had different length of exposure to

the metacognitive strategies. Class A’s and Class B’s reading proficiency level significantly improved

as revealed by the z-value of 2.3 and 2.82 respectively. Although there was a marked improvement in

both groups’ reading proficiency level, still their competency was below the expected level for second

year as revealed by their posttest mean scores of 43.04 and 44.21 respectively. Both groups had

deficiencies in three cognitive skills such as vocabulary, comprehension and study aids. The number of

poor readers in the posttest was lessen, however, a big percentage in both groups were still classified as

very poor, inferior and low average readers. In correlating Class A’s performance with that of Class B,

it was found out that there is no significant difference between the reading proficiency level of both

groups as shown by the z-value of .504 that is lower than the critical value of 1.64.

With the training that they had undergone in the application of metacognitive strategies, they

could readily apply these metacognitive strategies: planning strategies which include activating prior

knowledge and selective attention or scanning: and self-monitoring which comprise formulating thinkahead

questions and producing a text summary.

3. The reading program which focuses on the development of the metacognitive strategies would best suit

the reading profile of second year students. This claim was based on the results of the findings that the

subjects’ reading proficiency level improved may be due to their exposure to the metacognitive

strategies.

Conclusions

In the light of the findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. The reading proficiency level of Class A and Class B with different length of treatment

significantly improved which may be attributed to their exposure to the metacognitive

strategies. However, although there was a marked improvement in their reading proficiency

level, it was still below the completely level expected for second year students. Comparing

the reading ability of both groups, based on statistical result, it was found that there is no

significant difference between the reading proficiency level of one group over the other.

Thus, time factor does not greatly affect the development of comprehension ability through

the application of metacognitive strategies in reading. There are other variables that interplay

which the study was delimited.

2. The proposed reading program using metacognitive strategies, the more improved and

enhanced program based on the results of classroom research which appears in Chapter 4,

would best suit the reading profile of second year students. Some features that would address

the reading proficiencies of second year students are as follows:

a. The program provides opportunities for students to plan, monitor, and evaluate their own

learning.

a.1. It trains them to plan strategies that would work best to facilitate their own understanding of a

reading passage.

a.2. It develops their awareness of their own comprehension which they can constantly check

during reading. Thus, in case non-comprehension occurs, they can readily revise or switch to

another strategies to overcome comprehension barriers.

a.3. It develops self-evaluation skills where the students can readily assess the outcomes of their

own learning, thus gradually training them to become independent readers.

b. The design provides a balance program where the students can relax and enjoy reading

(recreational reading); learn strategic techniques in studying other content areas (functional

reading); and develop reading skills necessary in coping with the demands not only in English

subjects, but also in other content areas.

Recommendations

Based on the conclusion drawn from this study, the following are recommended:

1. That a reading program using metacognitive strategies be prepared not only for a specific year level in

the high school department but for all year levels as well. As revealed in the findings of this study, the

metacognitive strategies may have a facilitative effect on the development of comprehension ability of

any kind of readers. Hence, the implementation of the program may develop and enhance the students’

reading skills necessary for them to cope with the demands of any content areas.

2. That Teachers not only of reading and literature subjects, but of other content areas as well, utilize the

metacogntive strategies through modeling in the presentation and discussion of nay text or concept to

make students become independent learners.

3. That students be encouraged to apply meatcognitive strategies in all learning tasks to gain

independence in processing information in any text that will prepare them to the more serious academic

tasks in college.

4. That a follow-up study focusing on the effect of metacognitive strategies on reading comprehension

considering IQ, interest and other variables be conducted.

REFERENCES

Brown, A. 1978. Knowing When, Where and How to Remember: A Problem of

Metacognition. In Advances in Instructional Psychology, ed. R.

Glaser. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum Association.

Carrell, Patricia, Joanne Devine and David E. Eskey. 1988. Interactive

Approaches to Second Language Reading. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Cooper, J. David. 1993. Improving Reading Comprehension. Boston: Houton

Mifflin.

O’Malley, J. Michael and Anna Uhl Chamot. 1990. Learning Strategies in

Second Language Acquisition. USA: Cambridge University Press.

Ryder, Randall J. and Michael F. Graves. 1994. Reading and Learning Content

Areas. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, Inc.

Schunk, Dale H. 1996. Learning Theories. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Vygotsky, L. 1986. Thoughts and Language. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Periodicals

Carrel Patricia L. 1989. Metacognitive Awareness and Second Language

Reading. The Modern Language Journal 73, 11(Summer): 121.

Caverly, David, Thomas F. Mandeville and Shiela A. Nicholson. 1995.

Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 39 (November): 190-199.

Paris, Scott. 1990. Promoting Metacognition and Motivation of Exceptional

Children. Remedial and Speech Education (Nov.-Dec.): 7-15.

Stevens, Robert, Robert E. Slavin and Anna Marie Farnish. 1991. The Effects of

Cooperativel Learning And Direct Instruction in reading Comprehension

Strategies on Main Idea Identification. Journal of Educational Psychology

83 (March): 8.

Tregaskes, Mark R. and Delva Daines. 1989. Effects of Metacognitive

Strategies or Reading Comprehension. Reading Research and

Instruction 29, no. 1 (Fall): 50.

Reports, Theses and Dissertations

Fan, Wenjuan. 1993. Metacognitive and Comprehension: A Quantitative

Synthesis of Metacognitive Strategy Instruction. Ph. D. dissertation,

University of Cincinnati.

Lenhart, Irene H. 1996. Metacognitive Monitoring Strategies of Third to Sixth-

Grade Proficient and Less Proficient Readers (Third Grade, Sixth

Grade Reading Comprehension). Ed. D. dissertation, Hofstra

University.

Miguel, Faith O. 1996. Metacognitive Strategies in Reading: Their Effects on

Writing Competence. PH. D. dissertation, University of the

Philippines.
 

http://conference.nie.edu.sg/paper/Converted%20Pdf/ab00039.pdf