49
4.1.1 Students’ Awareness in Using Metacognitive Reading Strategies
The results of the students’ awareness in utilizing metacognitive reading strategies data were partly presented in four sections. The first section presents
overall strategies awareness of students. Then the second section will be the table of awareness of Problem-solving PROB strategies usage. Afterward, in the third
and last area, descriptive statistic data of Support reading SUP strategies were presented as well as data of Global reading GLOB strategies.
Table. 4.1 Descriptive statistic of overall strategy awareness
Mean Std. Deviation
N Rank
PROB SUP
GLOB Overall
3.55 3.45
3.34 3.45
.38 .46
.39 .42
30 30
30 1
2 3
To interpret the findings, the range intervals demonstrating the frequency of strategy use from Always to Never were calculated for the proposed data
collection tool SORS. Therefore, the mean scores between 1-1.79 was relevant to never, 1.80-2.59 was relevant to rarely, 2.60-3.39 was relevant to sometimes,
3.40-4.19 is relevant to usually and 4.20-5 was relevant to always use of reading strategies.
Based on the collective finding provided above, the table 4.1 shows an overview of overall strategy utilization of entire thirty students. PROB strategies
came to be the foremost subcategory with highest average M = 3.55 and SD = 0.38. It also indicates that PROB strategies were classified as High in the level of
awareness Mean ≥ 3.50. Afterward, the second preference of metacognitive
50 reading strategies usage was SUP strategies M = 3.45 and SD = 0.46. In other
words, the level of awareness of SUP strategies was placed as moderate Mean ≤
3.50. Lastly, the level of GLOB strategies was placing the lowest level with M = 3.34 and SD = 0.39.
Table. 4.2 Problem Solving Strategies Statements
Item description Mean SD
Statement 7 Reading slowly and carefully
3.70 .65
Statement 9 Attempting to focus on reading
3.63 .85
Statement 11 Adjusting the reading speed 3.47
.63 Statement 14 Paying closer attention situationally
3.23 .68
Statement 16 Pausing Thinking about the reading 3.53
.78 Statement 19 Trying to picture and visualize the
information 3.43
.90
Statement 25 Rereading to increase the understanding 3.73
.83 Statement 28 Guessing the unknown meaning
3.57 .68
Total 3.55
.58
Table 4.2 specifically shows the average points of eight strategies categorized on PROB Strategies. Strategies
such as “paying closer attention situationally”, adjusting the reading speed” and “trying to picture and visualize the
information” were reportedly set down on the lowest usage level of PROB strategies category. It means that more than 62 of PROB strategies were
selected as high level in its application. Additionally, reading strategies such as PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
51 “reading slowly and carefully” and “rereading to increase the understanding” were
spotted as the highest level in PROB strategies. Table. 4.3 Support Reading Strategies
Statements
Items description Mean SD
Statement 2 Taking note while reading
3.53 .94
Statement 5 Reading aloud to get larger understanding
3.40 .77
Statement 10 Underlining or circling the information 3.47
.78 Statement 13 Using references
3.50 .78
Statement 18 Paraphrasing for more acceptable understanding
3.47 .68
Statement 22 Relating the ideas of reading materials 3.53
.68 Statement 26 Asking oneself questions to get better
understanding 2.83
.83
Statement 29 Translating English to native one 3.67
.96 Statement 30 Using English and mother tongue to
understand 3.80
.81
Total 3.45
.66
Table 4.3 particularly reveals whole nine strategies classified as SUP strategies. There were four strategies rated into moderate usage such as “reading
aloud to get larger understanding”, “underlining or circling the information” and “paraphrasing for more acceptable understanding”. It indicates that more than
52 66 of SUP strategies are listed into high level in the usage as well as the
awareness. Table. 4.4 Global Reading Strategies
Statements Items description
Mean SD
Statement 1 Having purpose during reading
3.67 .80
Statement 3 Doing self-reflection to increase
understanding 3.53
.78
Statement 4 Taking first the big picture of what reading
are about 3.10
.61
Statement 6 Clarifying reading contents with stated
purpose 3.33
.76
Statement 8 Reviewing the characteristic of the text
3.43 .77
Statement 12 Deciding what to read closely and what to ignore
3.40 .81
Statement 15 Using tables, pictures and figures to help the understanding
3.43 .97
Statement 17 Using contexts clues 3.50
.57 Statement 20 Using typographical features
3.40 .77
Statement 21 Critically analyzing and evaluating the text 3.23
.63 Statement 23 Checking the understanding before coming
across to the new topic. 3.07
.94
Statement 24 Guessing what the content is about 3.37
.67 Statement 27 Checking the guessing
Total 3.34
.64
According to table 4.4, overall means of this subscale strategy were rated in the level M = 3.34 and SD = .39. It was also reported that the current interval of
those strategies is about 3.07 – 3.67, which was categorized on the medium-usage
level. Strateg ies such as “checking the understanding before coming across to the
Kategori