20
Table 2.1. Metacognitive knowledge of strategies Declarative knowledge
Procedural knowledge Conditional knowledge
A reader knows what the
strategies are
A reader knows how to
utilize the numerous strategies
A reader knows when and where to utilize
strategies appropriately
A reader knows why the
strategies need to be learned and utilized
Furthermore, as an effort to promote metacognitive awareness, Schraw 1998 sets out an instructional aid for promoting metacognitive awareness as
simple as possible. He proposes a simple overview of metacognitive knowledge called strategy evaluation matrix
assumed could improve students’ ability in comprehending the reading materials. Actually, this schema adopted
metacognitive knowledge forms from the former pioneers such as flavell 1979, Brown Baker 1980, and Jacob Paris 1987. As shown in table 2.2 that
there are three columns separated as how to use strategy; when to use strategy and; why to use strategy. Those three categories basically are included in the
previous premise table 2.1. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
21
Table 2.2. A strategy evaluation matrix Schraw, 1998
Strategies How to use
When to use Why to use
Skim Search for headings,
highlighted words, previews,
summaries Prior to reading
an extended text Provide
conceptual overview, helps to
focus one’s
attention Slow down
Stop, read, and think about information
When information seems especially
important Enhances focus of
one’s attention
Active prior knowledge
Pause and think about what you
already know, ask what you don’t
know Prior to reading or
an familiar task Makes
new information easier
to learn
and remember
Mental integration
Relate main ideas. Use these to
construct a theme or conclusion
When learning complex
information or a deeper
understanding is needed
Reduces memory load. Promotes
deeper level of understanding.
Diagrams Identify main ideas,
connect them, list supporting details
under main ideas, and connect
supporting details. When there is a
lot of interrelated factual info
Helps identify main ideas and
organize them into categories.
Reduces memory load.
2.1.1.4.2 Regulation of Cognition
Management skills have relevance to the regulatory process for operating the strategies. Jacobs Paris 1987 and Schraw Moshman 1995 also
provide regulatory skills of metacognitive reading strategies into three essential skills and are as follows.
22 Planning here means the students making a preview what reading material
will be about. They also forecast those upcoming materials by using previous knowledge or experience. It refers to the selective coordination of a cognitive
means to a cognitive goal Jacobs Paris, 1987 p.259. For example, making predictions before reading, strategy sequencing, and allocating time or attention
selectively before beginning a task Ahmadi, Ismail Abdullahm, 2013, p.237. Monitoring at this point means the readers use the strategies to analyze the
information as a project progresses. It is aimed to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of reading activities. It also refers to individual awareness of using
strategies while facing written text. Self-monitoring thinking requires an individual to monitor some progresses and then revise or modify plans and
strategies depending on how well they are working Jacobs Paris: 1987, p.259. It also allows the reader to regulate or rearrange the step based on the needs.
Evaluation is defined as the process of appraisement in what the readers have conducted. The readers assess their work in order to look over the difficulties
or obstacles faced in reading activities. For instance, readers can evaluate their own understanding as they pause, paraphrase, answer question, or summarize the
information in text p.259. Thus, by understanding those regulatory skills, the instructor or teacher in
this scope can promote the numbers of strategies as the effort to increase learners understanding in reading comprehension. Then, by emphasizing those regulator
processes planning, monitoring, and evaluation, the readers can be more aware of their reading procedure rather than read without any strategies implementation.
It can be the ways to reach great comprehension by involving cognitive resources PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
23 such as attention, better employment of strategies, and a greater awareness of
comprehension breakdown Ahmadi, et.l: 2013, p.238.
2.1.1.5 Significance of Metacognitive Reading Strategies Awareness
As mentioned before, that metacognitive reading strategies are the wide- awake strategies where the readers monitor their own reading process covering
evaluation and regulation about the strategies being implemented. Yet, Livingstone 2003 intentionally reviewed this talking point. He used
Flavell’s definition of metacognition to define the metacognition term. Accordingly, he
defined metacognitive as “thinking about thinking” and cognitive strategies as an effort of individual in dealing with exact direct information acquisition. It means
that cognitive strategies were construed as executive strategies as a mean to acquire the information in reading. At the same time, metacognitive strategies was
believed as deliberative strategies that is used to clarify that cognitive strategies have and reach the goal and running well.
Cognitive strategies are used to help an individual achieve a particular goal e.g., understanding a text while metacognitive strategies are used to
ensure that the goal has been reached e.g., quizzing oneself to evaluate one’s understanding of the text. Metacognitive experiences usually
precede or follow a cognitive activity. They often occur when cognition fails, such as the recognition that one did not understand what just read
Livingstone, 2003, p. 4. Further illustration might be if cognitive reading strategies are about
having knowledge of what strategy to use and how it is applied, for further metacognitive strategic knowledge involves understanding the rationale to apply a
particular strategy in a particular context, and evaluate its usefulness in terms of appropriateness and effectiveness for that context Karbalaei: 2011, p.8. Thus, it
can be concluded that in its relation with cognitive strategies, metacognitive PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
24 reading strategies become the strategies that help students to regulate or monitor
their cognitive strategies. in other words, metacognitive strategies enable the students to become director of their own reading strategies implementation.
2.1.1.6 The Measurements of Metacognitive Awareness SORS
The issue of metacognitive is currently related to the ability of readers in gaining good reading comprehension. Flavell firstly declared the booming
investigation of metacognitive awareness since 1979. This innovation has been altered by a number of researchers such as Baker Brown 1980, Jacob Paris
1989, Schraw 1998, Carrel, Linda Teresa 1998 and Ahmadi, et.al 2013. Accordingly, the measurements of this metacognitive awareness
practically and theoretically have been developed time by time. For instance, Paris Lindauer, 1982 designed Index of Reading Awareness IRA. This multiple-
choice instrument was designed to measure three main subscales of metacognition. Two decades later, Mokhtary and Reichard 2002 deliberately
formulated a questionnaire as an instrument to measure readers’ metacognitive awareness in utilizing reading strategies called Metacognitive Awareness of
Reading Strategies Inventory MARSI. They both drew up 30 lists of reading strategies packaged into 30 statements as one unity into MARSI. As they said that
the major purpose of this instrument is to generate an instrument that would help one assess whether the students are or not aware of various strategies and process
involved in reading comprehension. Therefore, they validated the inventory into 825 native students in Grades 6-12 selected from 10 urban, suburban, and rural
districts in five Midwestern states. Then, the result factor analysis found that Cronbach’s alpha of three subscales strategy were Global Reading Strategies
25 .92, Problem Solving Strategies .79 and Support Strategies .87. It indicates
that this instrument is reliable instrument to measure metacognitive students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies.
In the same year, Mokhtary Shorey 2002 revised the MARSI that basically is intended to measure metacognitive awareness of native- language
learners. They made several changes as a mean to make an alteration to Second Language or Foreign Language learners. Consequently, they both formulate new-
appropriate instrument purposed to measure metacognitive awareness of reading strategies called Survey of Reading Strategies SORS.
The operationalization of SORS, like MARSI, is proposed to measure adolescent or adult ESL students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies
as well as the type and frequency of them. As noted previously that SORS is in line with MARSI, yet this instrument also consist of three subscales as follows:
Global Reading Strategies GLOB, Problem Solving Reading Strategies PROB and Support Reading Strategies. Additionally, this instrument has been utilized by
some researchers to get the data of students’ metacognitive awareness such as Temur Bahar 2011 Yuksel Yuksel 2011.Madumathi Ghosh 2012,
Hang-Nam Page 2014, Lixia Pei 2014, Tavakoli 2014 and Meniado 2016.
2.1.2 Reading Comprehension
Reading comprehension reflects how readers acquire the information from written text. It requires interrelating system between previous knowledge of the
readers and their new knowledge to comprehend the message included in the text. It is a process of making meaning from text and its goal is to gain an overall
understanding of what is described in the text rather than to obtain meaning from PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
26 isolated words or sentences Woolley, 2011, p.15. Additionally, Burn Kidd
2010 believe that reading comprehension occurs when readers interact with the written word in an exchange of ideas between themselves and the message in the
text to construct the meaning p.188. Moreover, the definition of reading comprehension comes up with
componential aspects as the preparation for the students achieving success in reading. Componential reading comprehension comes to be an instructional
approach for triggering the students to turn account their strength to gain understanding of important content involving what they are going to understand
through the integration of analytical, creative, and practical aspects of reading text Stenberg in Randi, Grigirenko Sternberg, 2015, p.28. As shown in figure 2.1,
analytical refers to think of what the text exactly means; the reason why the reader think so; finding or questioning where the evidence is and what the component of
the text is. Then, practical turns out to be related to the readers experience in facing the written text. “Creative” as found in the next cycle is included in the
figure intended to encourage students’ creative thinking in creating the text as their own. Eventually, after those three components of reading comprehension,
there is a reflection aimed to think about what the reader have already done with the written text.
27
Figure 2.1. A componential
approach to reading comprehension Randi et.al, 2005, p.35
2.1.2.1 Models of Reading Comprehension
In this section, this study goes to explain three main models of reading comprehension. Smith 1979 in Smith deliberately divides reading
comprehension into two radical divergent points of view related the reading nature. He broadly identified them as “inside-out” and “outside-out. Nowadays,
these two terms are well known as “top-down” or “bottom-up”. And the last model is “interactive” model that permits the reader to combine those both
models. These models could facilitate the readers to get the point of reading Memory: what do these words mean?
Does this text make sense?
Analytical: what do I think this teaxt means? Why do I think so? Where is the evidence?
What makes this text what it is?
Practical: what does this text mean to me? Does it remind me of something or someone I know?
What can I learn from this text?
Creative: what question do I want to ask this author? if I were the author of this text, wht would I write?
Authenthic assessment of reading comprehension Analytical: How unusual is my interpretation of this text?
Practical: Will others accept my interprtation? Creative: What can I write that is both the same and different
from this text-something that keep the essence what makes this text what it is
and yet pushes the envelope beyond the model? PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
