T1 112007183 Full text
AN INVESTIGATION OF METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGIES OF
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
AT SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Adhaka Ayu Sari
112007183
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2011
AN INVESTIGATION OF METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGIES OF
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
AT SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Adhaka Ayu Sari
112007183
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2011
AN INVESTIGATION OF METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGIES OF
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
AT SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Adhaka Ayu Sari
112007183
Approved by:
(Supervisor‟s signature
and complete name with degrees)
__________________
(Examiner‟s signature
and complete name with degrees)
___________________
Prof.DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
Christine Manara, MA-ELT
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course
or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of
my knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by
any other person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2011. Adhaka Ayu Sari and Prof.DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of
Language and Literature, Satya Wacana University, Salatiga.
Adhaka Ayu Sari: (signature)
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic
community, I verify that:
Name:
Student ID Number:
Study Program:
Faculty:
Kind of Work:
Undergraduate Thesis
In developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free
right for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce,
print, publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or
database, transmit, broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part
without my express written permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in
: Salatiga
Date
: ________________
Verified by signee,
__________________
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor
Thesis Examiner
Prof.DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
Christine Manara, MA-ELT
1
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
Adhaka Ayu Sari
Satya Wacana Christian University
Abstract
Many students find reading class the most difficult course in English. They dislike
reading because they often do not understand the text. One of the many problems students
face nowadays is not their inability to read but their lack of interest, indifference or
rejection of reading. The general purpose of this study was to examine students reading
strategies used when they read academic texts. This study used a descriptive method to
gain broader perspectives on English Department learners‟ strategy use. A total of 50
students responded to a 30-item Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI).
The results showed that as far as the three categories of strategies were concerned,
students showed a moderate to high strategy use, with problem-solving strategies (Mean
= 3.53) as their prime choice, followed by global strategies (Mean = 3.18) and support
strategies (Mean = 2.61).
Keywords: Metacognition, Reading research, Reading strategies
Introduction
There has been a negative assumption that many students find reading class the most
difficult course in English. They dislike reading because they often do not understand the
text. One of the many problems students face nowadays is not their inability to read but
their lack of interest, indifference or rejection of reading. When reading a text, learners
will stop reading when they find difficult words. Moreover, when they find a word that
they do not understand, it slows down their reading and they look it up in the dictionary,
which is time consuming. In order to understand a text, students need to know some
strategies for reading. In this study, I would like to explore students‟ reading strategies in
their English language learning.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
2
The current research in second language reading has begun to focus on readers'
strategies. Reading strategies are of interest for what they reveal about the way readers
manage their interaction with written text and how these strategies are related to text
comprehension. Research in second language reading suggests that learners use a variety
of strategies to assist them with the acquisition, storage, and retrieval of information
(Rigney, 1978). Strategies are defined as learning techniques, behaviors, problem solving
or study skills, which make learning more effective, and efficient (Oxford and Crookall,
1989). In the context of second language learning, a distinction can be made between
strategies that make learning more effective, versus strategies that improve
comprehension.
Since the early seventies, for the most part, research in this area has concentrated on
teaching second language students to use a variety of language strategies in order to read
better. According to Anderson (2003), reading is the interaction of four things including
the reader, the text, the fluent reading or "the ability or read at an appropriate rate with
adequate comprehension," and strategic reading, or "the ability of the reader to use a
variety of reading strategies to accomplish a purpose for reading" (p. 8). Discovering the
best methods and techniques or processes the learners choose to access, is the goal of
research in reading strategies.
Regarding the importance of reading comprehension, these comprehension strategies
are metacognitive concepts in reading. If students are capable of comprehending what
they are reading through a variety of strategies, they will create an interested and selfregulative attitude toward the path of academic achievement. According to Grabe (1991),
reading is an essential skill and probably the most important skill for second language
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
3
learners to master in academic contexts. Since reading comprehension has been
distinctively important both in first and second/foreign languages, reading strategies are
of great interest in the field of reading research. Reading research has also shed light on
metacognitive awareness of reading strategies, perception of strategies, and strategy
training and use in reading comprehension. Readers‟ use of reading strategies is informed
by their metacognitive awareness of the strategies and how these strategies can be
maximized for optimal effects in solving comprehension problems (Cohen, 2007; Hudson,
2007).
Metacognition is defined as "thinking about thinking" (Anderson, 2002, p. 23).
Oxford (1990) believes that metacognitive strategies "provide a way for learners to
coordinate their own learning process" (p. 136). Metacognition refers to the knowledge
and control that we have over our cognitive processes. As far as it is concerned with
reading, it is common to talk about metacognitive awareness (what we know) and
metacognitive regulation or control (knowing when, where, and how to use strategies,
that is, what we can do). As a whole, metacognitive involves awareness and control of
planning, monitoring, repairing, revising, summarizing, and evaluating. Research on the
relationship between metacognition and reading comprehension has progressed through
several different stages. During the early stages, research focused on the investigation of
the relationship between metacognition and reading comprehension from the
developmental perspective.
Generally, the studies on the metacognitive aspects of reading have indicated a need
to increase understanding of readers‟ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies to
gain insights into effective strategy instruction. Brown (1980) and Baker and Brown
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
4
(1984) were among the first influential researchers in this field. They concluded that
young students are ignorant of metacognitive strategies in knowing when they are
comprehending, knowing what they need to know and what they have comprehended,
knowing where they fail to comprehend, and knowing what they need to do in order to
repair comprehension failure.
A strategy is an individual's comprehension approach to a task. It includes how a
person thinks and acts when planning and evaluating his or her study behavior.
Successful language learners know how to use such reading strategies efficiently. The
purposes of reading strategies are to have general knowledge, get a specific detail, find
the main idea or theme, learn, remember, delight, summarize, and do research (Hyland,
1990). Research addressing metacognitive awareness and use of reading strategies by
first and second language readers of English has shown that important reading strategies
which deal with planning, controlling, and evaluating one's understanding (e.g., setting
purpose for reading, prediction, summarization, questioning, use of text structural
features, self-monitoring, etc.) are widely used by first and second language readers
(Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001). Mokhtari and Reichard (2004) also investigated whether
significant differences exist between first and second language readers in their
metacognitive awareness and perceived use of specific strategies when reading for
academic purposes in English. Despite the rapidly expanding research on different
aspects of second and foreign language readings, a limited number of studies have
centered on reporting the types of metacognitive reading strategies EFL and ESL readers
use while they are reading in English.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
5
To my knowledge, there has been little number of studies regarding the study of the
metacognitive awareness of reading strategies in different social, cultural, and linguistic
contexts. As Mokhtari and Reichard (2004) stated, most of the research available focuses
on monolingual and bilingual children with similar backgrounds on specific
metacognitive knowledge, metalinguistic skills, and reading performance. In addition,
most of the research on the reading strategies of first and second language readers has
been limited to students at lower levels of proficiency or those studying at the secondary
school or in pre-university programs. Various other studies in the area of reading
strategies have found that younger and less proficient students use fewer strategies and
use them less effectively in their reading comprehension (Waxman and Padron, 1987).
Having known about the importance of the reading strategies and their impact on
learning, even numerous studies have been conducted to investigate the use of reading
strategies in L1 contexts, either using think-aloud protocols or questionnaires and
comprehension. In order to provide more evidence for the research of language learning
strategies, this study aims to examine the language learning strategy used by English
Department students of SWCU. Hence, the general purpose of this study is to examine
students reading strategies used when they read academic texts. My underlying reasoning
in doing this study was that although English Department students of SWCU may be
considered to have the introductory language proficiency for college-level reading in
English. I conducted the present research in order to find answers to the following
question concerning students' awareness of reading strategies while reading texts for
comprehension; What reading strategies do English Department Satya Waca Christian
University learners use better when they are reading academic text in English?
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
6
It is hoped that the results of this study can be beneficial to language learners and
reading instructors in ESL/EFL contexts, particularly in academic reading instruction at
the college level. Firstly, the finding demonstrates the differences in the use of strategies.
The teacher then can plan the reading lesson to suit the students' proficiency level.
Secondly, the results of the study can be useful for course developers and reading
instructors to create or provide activities to train their students to use their reading
strategies more effectively.
The Study
This study primarily used descriptive method to gain broader perspectives on English
Department learners‟ strategy use and to identify overall average strategy use.
Descriptive research is thus a type of research that is primarily concerned with describing
the nature or conditions and degree in detail of the present situation (Landman 1988: 59).
The
emphasis
is
on
describing
rather
than
on
judge
or
interprets.
The participants involved in this study were randomly selected from five different
reading classes in Satya Wacana Christian University. There were 150 students have been
learning English in English Department of Satya Wacana for almost 2 years. The
questionnaire was administered at the beginning of semester with the help of the
classroom teacher, since they have passed through the long vacation, and were not
burdened with many tasks; it was believed would affect their intention to complete a
questionnaire, which was distributed to them to be filled.
A total of 50 students were responded to the questionnaire, all of the students were
enrolled on an English academic reading course. This course requires students to practice
reading essay- or article-length texts, recognize and evaluate arguments, learn the
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
7
components of a well-constructed argument as well as to respond to readings through
group work and journals. English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University has
four reading courses should be taken by the students, they were Academic reading,
Reading
across
genre,
Reading
skills,
and
Critical
reading.
The data were collected through a questionnaire (see Appendix A) adapted from the
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) by Mokhtari and
Reichard (2002) due to several reasons: guided by the principle that constructing meaning
from text is an intentional, conscious, and purposeful act, while reading academic
materials, this questionnaire has been developed and tested by reviewing an extensive
body of recent research literature on metacognition and reading comprehension (Baker &
Brown, 1984; Pressley, 2002). Several researchers (Anderson, 2002; Berkowitz &
Cicchelli, 2004) provide evidence that the instrument is a reliable and valid measure for
assessing adult students' metacognitive awareness and perceived use of reading strategies
while reading for academic purposes. Moreover, the items in the questionnaire were
simply and easy for the students to understand. The questionnaire was distributed to 50
students outside their reading class. They were given times to finish filling the
questionnaire out, and they were asked to collect the questionnaire, moreover, all of the
students returned the questionnaire.
The MARSI Questionnaire measures three broad categories of reading strategies.
1. Global Reading Strategies (GLOB), which can be thought of as generalized or global
reading strategies aimed at setting the stage for the reading act (e.g., setting a purpose for
reading, previewing text content, predicting what the text is about, etc.),
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
8
2. Problem-Solving Strategies (PROB), which are localized, focused problem-solving or
repair strategies used when problems develop in understanding textual information (e.g.,
checking one's understanding upon encountering conflicting information, re-reading for
better understanding, etc.), and
3. Support Reading Strategies (SUP), which involves using the support mechanisms or
tools aimed at sustaining responsiveness to reading (e.g., use of reference materials like
dictionaries and other support systems).
The 30-item questionnaire was validated by Mokhtari and Reichard (2002) using
large subject population representing students with equivalent reading abilities ranging
from middle school to college. Taking into consideration of the students‟ proficiency
level, this study made an adaptation to MARSI to increase feasibility of the present study.
It was decided that the questionnaire be administered in Indonesian, the native language,
which the participants were most proficient in and comfortable with. This was to
guarantee successful data collection and avoid comprehension difficulties that
participants might encounter when given the English version (see Appendix B). A 5-point
Likert scale following each item indicates the frequency of strategy use ranging from 1
(never do) to 5 (always do). The overall MARSI inventory score was determined by
summing responses from all three subscales and calculating the mean. Scores below 2.4
were considered low scores, between 2.5-3.4 were medium and 3.5 and higher were high.
(Mokhtari & Sheorey, 2002).
This questionnaire gave an overview of the purpose of the study. Then, they were
asked to provide honest responses. The students were instructed to read each of the 30
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
9
statements in the MARSI Questionnaire and circle the number which best indicated their
perceived use of the strategies described in the statement using a Likert scale ranging
from 1 ('I never or almost never use this strategy') to 5 ('I always or almost always use
this strategy'). Lastly, they were told that there were no "right" or "wrong" responses to
the statements and that they could take as much time as they needed to complete the
inventory.
The mechanism to carry out this study was a quantitative survey. It helped measure
the extent of students‟ awareness of reading strategies through an examination of the
frequencies of strategy use. The students were then compared for strategy use and for use
of each of the three categories of strategies. Microsoft office excel for Windows was used
to analyze data. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for the questionnaire items.
Discussion
Figure 1: Overall frequency of reading strategies
4
3.53
3.5
3.18
3
2.61
2.5
GLOB
PROB
SUP
With regard to the research question (i.e., “What are strategies used by English
Department students in reading in language learning?”), Figure 1 presents descriptive
statistics for overall frequency of each of the three categories of strategies in reading. The
results show that as far as the three categories of strategies were concerned, the students
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
10
showed a moderate to high strategy use, with problem-solving strategies (Mean = 3.53)
as their prime choice, followed by global strategies (Mean = 3.18) and support strategies
(Mean = 2.61). In other words, when problems in reading arise, most of these students
were ready to adopt strategies like reading slowly and carefully to be sure, going back
when losing concentration, rereading for better understanding and so on to solve
problems. By contrast, they used far fewer Support Reading Strategies like reading aloud
when the text gets hard, discussing to check understanding, asking oneself questions and
so on. This result was consistent with the findings in Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002)
study in which the Problem Solving Problems Strategies fall into the high strategy use,
and Support Reading Strategies are the least frequently used among the three
subcategories.
Figure 2: Problem-solving strategies
3.9
4
3.7
3.45
3.5
3.6
3.4
3.5
3.5 3.55
3.2
3
2.5
Q4
Q10
Q14
Q15
Q18
Q20
Q21
Q22
Q28
Figure 2 presents questions within the category of problem-solving strategies
(PROB). From the total of 9 strategies, the data showed the highest three strategies were
trying to get back on track when they lose concentration (Mean = 3,9), reading slowly but
carefully to be sure, they understand what they are reading (Mean = 3,7) and when text
becomes difficult; they pay closer attention to what they read (Mean = 3,6). The lowest
strategy use was guessing the meaning of unknown words by separating different parts of
11
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
a word (Mean = 2,94). Problem solving strategies showed that students were generally
conscious of their comprehension process and were able to take actions when
comprehension reduced. As indicated in the figure the overall average score of Problem
Solving Strategy was 3,53. Based on the scale in the questionnaire this average fell
between „sometimes‟ (3) and „usually do it‟ (4). It can be concluded that the use of
Problem Solving Strategy was relatively high or was used relatively frequently. This
result was consistent with the findings in Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002) study in
which the Problem Solving Strategies were considered as their primary choice with
highest scores.
Figure 3: Global strategies
4
3.44
3.5
3.2
3
3.18
3.12 3.1
3.04
3.38 3.4
3.28
2.94
3.02
2.8
2.5
Q1
Q7
Q8
Q11
Q12
Q17
Q19
Q23
Q24
Q26
Q27
Q30
Figure 3 presents questions within the category of global strategies (GLOB). From
the total of 12 strategies, the data showed the highest three strategies were deciding what
to read closely and what to ignore (Mean = 3,44), checking to see if their guesses about
the text are right or wrong (Mean = 3,4) and trying to guess what the material is about
when they read (Mean = 3,38). The lowest strategy use was using tables, figures, and
pictures in text to increase their understanding (Mean = 2,8). While displaying ability to
detect comprehension difficulty and adjust strategies accordingly, students also
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
12
demonstrated capacity of planning for reading. As indicated in the figure the overall
average score of Global Strategy was 3,18. Based on the scale in the questionnaire this
average fell between „sometimes‟ (3) and „usually do it‟ (4). It can be concluded that the
study Global Strategy was relatively medium. This result was consistent with the findings
in Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002) study in which the Global Strategies considered as
their medium scores.
Figure 4: Support strategies
4
3.5
3
3
2.9
2.85
2.7
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.4
2.5
2.5
Q2
Q3
Q5
Q6
Q9
Q13
Q16
Q25
Q29
Figure 4 presents questions within the category of support strategies (SUP). From the
total of 9 strategies, the data showed the highest three strategies were underlining or
circling information in the text to help them remember it (Mean = 3), discussing what
they read with others to check their understanding (Mean = 2,9), and taking notes while
reading to help them understand what they read (Mean = 2,85). The lowest strategy use
was when text becomes difficult, they read aloud to help them understand what they read
(Mean = 2,2). As indicated in the figure the overall average score of Support Strategy was
2,61. Based on the scale in the questionnaire this average fell between „occasionally‟ (2)
and „sometimes‟ (3). It can be concluded that the use of Support Strategy was relatively
low or was used relatively rarely. This result was consistent with the findings in
Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002) study in which the Support Strategies considered as
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
13
their lowest scores. Even though the scores of Support Strategies was the lowest scores
compared to Problem Solving Strategies and Global Strategies, it did provide some
information about the students reading strategies.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to identify the reading strategies used by English
Department of Satya Wacana Christian University students in reading. The results of this
study show that, in general the students are moderately active strategy users when reading
in English, with problem-solving strategies used most frequency. Such findings suggest
that the students have the basic tools to reach a high level of reading proficiency in
English. For example: In one study, Poole (2005c) found that 147 college students
reported using problem solving strategies with high frequency and global and support
strategies with moderate frequency. These results are similar to the findings of the current
study. Also similar to the results of the current study were those found in Sheorey and
Mokhtari (2001), which showed 152 English language learners using problem solving
strategies with high frequency and global and support strategies with moderate frequency.
Taken together, the findings reported here underscore the importance of helping
students develop their metacognitive awareness of specific reading strategies deemed
necessary for proficient reading. As Pressley and Afflerbach (1995) have argued, teachers
can play a part in enhancing students' awareness of such strategies, and in assisting them
to become "constructively responsive" readers. It needs to be noted that an awareness of
strategic reading does indeed lead to actual use of these strategies while reading.
Furthermore, the integration of metacognitive reading strategy instruction within reading
curricula will no doubt play a vital role in enriching students' awareness of the mental
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
14
processes involved in reading and the development of thoughtful and constructively
responsive reading. Teaching students to become constructively responsive readers can
promote skillful academic reading, which, in turn, can enhance academic achievement
(Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001).
Looking ahead, more research is needed to investigate why certain strategies are used
or not used in learning contexts. Individual learning styles may further demonstrate which
strategies are implemented during the reading process. Perhaps future research could
examine more deeply the interaction of metacognitive reading strategies on learners.
There is a clear need to investigate empirically the role of teaching 'important' strategies
and studying their impact on learner reading comprehension in learning contexts. Simply
knowing what strategy to use is not sufficient. An investigation into the orchestration of
strategies is certain to shed new light on the issues here investigated; thereby revealing
important new perspectives of what readers actually do when they become actively
involved in reading activities.
Limitations
Despite the interesting findings, the research has certain limitations; first, the
questionnaire used in this study consists of only 30 items. It is obviously not enough to
cover all the strategies used by the students. This, to a certain extent, affects its reliability
and the validity of the data in the study. Therefore, a wider variety of assessment method
is recommended in future studies e.g. interview, observation, verbal report and diaries.
Next, in this study, 50 students were involved. Perhaps a little number of students may
influence the results. In the future study, more classes can be involved so that more
students can finish the questionnaire to make the result more reliable.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
15
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my gratitude to Allah S.W.T who gave many bounties to me
to finish this thesis. I submit my highest appreciation to my thesis advisor, Prof.DR. Gusti
Astika, M.A., whose expertise, understanding, patience, and his assistance in writing this
thesis. Without his guidance, I would never have been able to finish my thesis, despite his
extremely busy schedule. A very special thanks goes out to my family, thank you for your
endless prayer and support, I love you so much. I also would like to thank to the
participants for their ready participation in this study for assistance in the data collection,
I owe you my eternal gratitude. Finally my thanks for my second reader Christine
Manara, MA-ELT who helped me in completing this thesis. Some friends, like Saprol
(friend of the struggle) and Ita (helped me in writing the introduction) were tolerant
enough (or dumb enough) to be my friends, I love you all.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
16
References
Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second/foreign language teaching
and learning. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages
and Linguistics.
Anderson, N. J. (2002). Using telescopes, microscopes, and kaleidoscopes to put
Metacognition into perspective. TESOL Matters, 12, 1-2.
Anderson, N. J. (2003). Teaching reading. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language
teaching (pp. 67-86). New York: McGraw Hill Publishers.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson
(Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
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.
453-481). Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Berkowitz, E. & Cicchelli, T. (2004). Metacognitive strategy use in reading of gifted high
achieving and gifted underachieving middle school students in New York City.
Education and Urban Society, 37, 37-57.
Cohen, A. D. (2007). Coming to terms with language learner strategies: Surveying the
experts. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty
years of research and practice (pp. 29–46). Oxford, England: Oxford University
Press.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL
Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
17
Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press
Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback, ELT Journal. 44 (4): 294-304
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of
reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first
and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32, 379394.
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1989). Research on Language learning strategies:
methods, language findings, and instructional issues. Modern Language
Journal, 73, 404-419.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.
New York: Newbury House.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal reports of reading: The nature of
constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-or the century status
report. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction:
Research-based best practice (pp. 11-27). New York: The Guilford Press.
Rigney, J.W. (1978). Learning strategies: a theoretical perspective. In: H. F. O‟Neil (Jr)
(Ed), Learning Strategies. New York: Academic Press. pp.165-205.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
18
Sheorey R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of
reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
19
Appendix A
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory
Nim
: ………………….
The purpose of this survey is to collect information about the various strategies you use in
reading the text. Please indicate the frequency of reading strategies you use by circling
the following appropriate number (1,2,3,4,5), and each number means the following:
• 1 means "I never or almost never do this."
• 2 means "I do this only occasionally.
• 3 means "I sometimes do this."
• 4 means "I usually do this."
• 5 means "I always or almost always do this."
No
Type Strategy
1
Glob I have a purpose in mind when I read.
2
Sup
I take notes while reading to help me understand what I read.
3
Sup
I summarize what I read to reflect on important information in the text.
4
Prob
I try to get back on track when I lose concentration.
5
Sup
I underline or circle information in the text to help me remember it.
6
Sup
I use reference materials such as dictionaries to help me understand what I read.
7
Glob I use tables, figures, and pictures in text to increase my understanding.
8
Glob I use context clues to help me better understand what I am reading.
9
Sup
I paraphrase (restate ideas in my own words) to better understand what I read.
10 Prob I guess the meaning of unknown words by separating different parts of a word.
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
20
11 Glob I think about what I know to help me understand what I read.
12 Glob I preview the text to see what it is about before reading it.
13 Sup
When text becomes difficult, I read aloud to help me understand what I read.
14 Prob I think about whether the content of the text fits my reading purpose.
15 Prob I read slowly but carefully to be sure, I understand what I am reading.
16 Sup
I discuss what I read with others to check my understanding
17 Glob I skim the text first by noting characteristics like length and organization.
18 Prob I adjust my reading speed according to what I am reading.
19 Glob I decide what to read closely and what to ignore.
20 Prob When text becomes difficult; I pay closer attention to what I am reading.
21 Prob I stop from time to time and think about what I am reading.
22 Prob I try to picture or visualize information to help remember what I read.
23 Glob I use typological aids like boldface and italics to identify key information.
24 Glob I critically analyze and evaluate the information presented in the text.
25 Sup
I go back and forth in the text to find relationship among ideas in it.
26 Glob I check my understanding when I come across conflicting information.
27 Glob I try to guess what the material is about when I read.
28 Prob When text becomes difficult; I reread to increase my understanding.
29 Sup
I ask myself questions I like to have answered in the text.
30 Glob I check to see if my guesses about the text are right or wrong.
☺ Thank You ☺
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
21
Appendix B
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory
Nim
: ……………………….
Tujuan dari angket ini adalah untuk mengumpulkan informasi tentang macam-macam
strategi yang kalian gunakan di dalam membaca. Silahkan lingkari nomor yang sesuai
dengan ketentuan berikut ini:
1
= Saya tidak pernah atau hampir tidak pernah melakukan hal ini
2
= Saya melakukan hal ini hanya sesekali
3
= Saya terkadang melakukan hal ini
4
= Saya biasanya melakukan hal ini
5
= Saya selalu atau hampir selalu melakukan hal ini
No
Strategis
1
2
Saya memiliki tujuan ketika saya membaca
Saya mencatat ketika membaca untuk membantu saya
memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya meringkas apa yang saya baca untuk mengulas kembali
informasi penting dalam bacaan
Saya mencoba untuk kembali ke bacaan ketika saya
kehilangan konsentrasi
Saya menggaris bawahi atau melingkari informasi penting
dalam bacaan untuk membantu saya mengingatnya
Saya menggunakan bahan-bahan referensi seperti kamus
untuk membantu saya memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya menggunakan tabel, angka, dan gambar dalam bacaan
untuk meningkatkan pemahaman saya
Saya menggunakan petunjuk dalam bacaan untuk membantu
saya lebih memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya menuliskan kembali ide-ide dalam kata-kata saya
sendiri untuk lebih memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya menerka makna kata yang tidak saya ketahui dengan
cara memisahkan bagian yang berbeda dari sebuah kata
Saya berpikir tentang apa yang saya ketahui untuk membantu
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Frekuensi
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
saya memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya meninjau ulang bacaan untuk mengetahui isi bacaan
tersebut sebelum membacanya
Ketika bacaan menjadi sulit, saya membaca keras-keras
untuk membantu saya memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya berpikir apakah isi dari bacaan sesuai dengan tujuan
membaca saya
Saya membaca perlahan-lahan tetapi hati-hati untuk
memastikan bahwa saya mengerti apa yang saya baca
Saya mendiskusikan apa yang saya baca dengan orang lain
untuk memeriksa pemahaman saya
Saya membaca bacaan sekilas terlebih dahulu, dengan
mencatat ciri-ciri seperti panjang bacaan dan susunannya.
Saya menyesuaikan kecepatan membaca saya sesuai dengan
apa yang saya baca
Saya memutuskan apa yang harus saya baca dengan cermat
dan apa yang harus saya abaikan
Ketika bacaan menjadi sulit, saya memperhatikan lebih
cermat apa yang saya baca
Saya berhenti dari waktu ke waktu dan berpikir tentang apa
yang saya baca
Saya mencoba menggambarkan dan membayangkan
informasi untuk membantu saya mengingat apa yang saya
baca
Saya menggunakan alat bantu seperti huruf cetak tebal dan
miring untuk mengenali kata kunci.
Saya secara kritis menganalisa dan menilai informasi yang
disajikan dalam bacaan
Saya bolak-balik bacaan untuk menemukan hubungan antara
ide-ide di dalamnya
saya memeriksa pemahaman saya ketika saya menemukan
informasi yang bertentangan.
Saya mencoba menerka isi dari bacaan ketika saya membaca
Ketika bacaan menjadi sulit, saya membaca ulang untuk
meningkatkan pemahaman saya
saya bertanya pada diri sendiri tentang pertanyaanpertanyaan yang ingin saya jawab di dalam bacaan.
Saya memeriksa untuk melihat apakah terkaan saya tentang
bacaan benar atau salah
☺Terima Kasih☺
22
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
23
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
AT SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Adhaka Ayu Sari
112007183
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2011
AN INVESTIGATION OF METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGIES OF
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
AT SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Adhaka Ayu Sari
112007183
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2011
AN INVESTIGATION OF METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGIES OF
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
AT SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Adhaka Ayu Sari
112007183
Approved by:
(Supervisor‟s signature
and complete name with degrees)
__________________
(Examiner‟s signature
and complete name with degrees)
___________________
Prof.DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
Christine Manara, MA-ELT
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course
or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of
my knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by
any other person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2011. Adhaka Ayu Sari and Prof.DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of
Language and Literature, Satya Wacana University, Salatiga.
Adhaka Ayu Sari: (signature)
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic
community, I verify that:
Name:
Student ID Number:
Study Program:
Faculty:
Kind of Work:
Undergraduate Thesis
In developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free
right for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce,
print, publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or
database, transmit, broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part
without my express written permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in
: Salatiga
Date
: ________________
Verified by signee,
__________________
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor
Thesis Examiner
Prof.DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
Christine Manara, MA-ELT
1
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
Adhaka Ayu Sari
Satya Wacana Christian University
Abstract
Many students find reading class the most difficult course in English. They dislike
reading because they often do not understand the text. One of the many problems students
face nowadays is not their inability to read but their lack of interest, indifference or
rejection of reading. The general purpose of this study was to examine students reading
strategies used when they read academic texts. This study used a descriptive method to
gain broader perspectives on English Department learners‟ strategy use. A total of 50
students responded to a 30-item Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI).
The results showed that as far as the three categories of strategies were concerned,
students showed a moderate to high strategy use, with problem-solving strategies (Mean
= 3.53) as their prime choice, followed by global strategies (Mean = 3.18) and support
strategies (Mean = 2.61).
Keywords: Metacognition, Reading research, Reading strategies
Introduction
There has been a negative assumption that many students find reading class the most
difficult course in English. They dislike reading because they often do not understand the
text. One of the many problems students face nowadays is not their inability to read but
their lack of interest, indifference or rejection of reading. When reading a text, learners
will stop reading when they find difficult words. Moreover, when they find a word that
they do not understand, it slows down their reading and they look it up in the dictionary,
which is time consuming. In order to understand a text, students need to know some
strategies for reading. In this study, I would like to explore students‟ reading strategies in
their English language learning.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
2
The current research in second language reading has begun to focus on readers'
strategies. Reading strategies are of interest for what they reveal about the way readers
manage their interaction with written text and how these strategies are related to text
comprehension. Research in second language reading suggests that learners use a variety
of strategies to assist them with the acquisition, storage, and retrieval of information
(Rigney, 1978). Strategies are defined as learning techniques, behaviors, problem solving
or study skills, which make learning more effective, and efficient (Oxford and Crookall,
1989). In the context of second language learning, a distinction can be made between
strategies that make learning more effective, versus strategies that improve
comprehension.
Since the early seventies, for the most part, research in this area has concentrated on
teaching second language students to use a variety of language strategies in order to read
better. According to Anderson (2003), reading is the interaction of four things including
the reader, the text, the fluent reading or "the ability or read at an appropriate rate with
adequate comprehension," and strategic reading, or "the ability of the reader to use a
variety of reading strategies to accomplish a purpose for reading" (p. 8). Discovering the
best methods and techniques or processes the learners choose to access, is the goal of
research in reading strategies.
Regarding the importance of reading comprehension, these comprehension strategies
are metacognitive concepts in reading. If students are capable of comprehending what
they are reading through a variety of strategies, they will create an interested and selfregulative attitude toward the path of academic achievement. According to Grabe (1991),
reading is an essential skill and probably the most important skill for second language
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
3
learners to master in academic contexts. Since reading comprehension has been
distinctively important both in first and second/foreign languages, reading strategies are
of great interest in the field of reading research. Reading research has also shed light on
metacognitive awareness of reading strategies, perception of strategies, and strategy
training and use in reading comprehension. Readers‟ use of reading strategies is informed
by their metacognitive awareness of the strategies and how these strategies can be
maximized for optimal effects in solving comprehension problems (Cohen, 2007; Hudson,
2007).
Metacognition is defined as "thinking about thinking" (Anderson, 2002, p. 23).
Oxford (1990) believes that metacognitive strategies "provide a way for learners to
coordinate their own learning process" (p. 136). Metacognition refers to the knowledge
and control that we have over our cognitive processes. As far as it is concerned with
reading, it is common to talk about metacognitive awareness (what we know) and
metacognitive regulation or control (knowing when, where, and how to use strategies,
that is, what we can do). As a whole, metacognitive involves awareness and control of
planning, monitoring, repairing, revising, summarizing, and evaluating. Research on the
relationship between metacognition and reading comprehension has progressed through
several different stages. During the early stages, research focused on the investigation of
the relationship between metacognition and reading comprehension from the
developmental perspective.
Generally, the studies on the metacognitive aspects of reading have indicated a need
to increase understanding of readers‟ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies to
gain insights into effective strategy instruction. Brown (1980) and Baker and Brown
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
4
(1984) were among the first influential researchers in this field. They concluded that
young students are ignorant of metacognitive strategies in knowing when they are
comprehending, knowing what they need to know and what they have comprehended,
knowing where they fail to comprehend, and knowing what they need to do in order to
repair comprehension failure.
A strategy is an individual's comprehension approach to a task. It includes how a
person thinks and acts when planning and evaluating his or her study behavior.
Successful language learners know how to use such reading strategies efficiently. The
purposes of reading strategies are to have general knowledge, get a specific detail, find
the main idea or theme, learn, remember, delight, summarize, and do research (Hyland,
1990). Research addressing metacognitive awareness and use of reading strategies by
first and second language readers of English has shown that important reading strategies
which deal with planning, controlling, and evaluating one's understanding (e.g., setting
purpose for reading, prediction, summarization, questioning, use of text structural
features, self-monitoring, etc.) are widely used by first and second language readers
(Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001). Mokhtari and Reichard (2004) also investigated whether
significant differences exist between first and second language readers in their
metacognitive awareness and perceived use of specific strategies when reading for
academic purposes in English. Despite the rapidly expanding research on different
aspects of second and foreign language readings, a limited number of studies have
centered on reporting the types of metacognitive reading strategies EFL and ESL readers
use while they are reading in English.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
5
To my knowledge, there has been little number of studies regarding the study of the
metacognitive awareness of reading strategies in different social, cultural, and linguistic
contexts. As Mokhtari and Reichard (2004) stated, most of the research available focuses
on monolingual and bilingual children with similar backgrounds on specific
metacognitive knowledge, metalinguistic skills, and reading performance. In addition,
most of the research on the reading strategies of first and second language readers has
been limited to students at lower levels of proficiency or those studying at the secondary
school or in pre-university programs. Various other studies in the area of reading
strategies have found that younger and less proficient students use fewer strategies and
use them less effectively in their reading comprehension (Waxman and Padron, 1987).
Having known about the importance of the reading strategies and their impact on
learning, even numerous studies have been conducted to investigate the use of reading
strategies in L1 contexts, either using think-aloud protocols or questionnaires and
comprehension. In order to provide more evidence for the research of language learning
strategies, this study aims to examine the language learning strategy used by English
Department students of SWCU. Hence, the general purpose of this study is to examine
students reading strategies used when they read academic texts. My underlying reasoning
in doing this study was that although English Department students of SWCU may be
considered to have the introductory language proficiency for college-level reading in
English. I conducted the present research in order to find answers to the following
question concerning students' awareness of reading strategies while reading texts for
comprehension; What reading strategies do English Department Satya Waca Christian
University learners use better when they are reading academic text in English?
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
6
It is hoped that the results of this study can be beneficial to language learners and
reading instructors in ESL/EFL contexts, particularly in academic reading instruction at
the college level. Firstly, the finding demonstrates the differences in the use of strategies.
The teacher then can plan the reading lesson to suit the students' proficiency level.
Secondly, the results of the study can be useful for course developers and reading
instructors to create or provide activities to train their students to use their reading
strategies more effectively.
The Study
This study primarily used descriptive method to gain broader perspectives on English
Department learners‟ strategy use and to identify overall average strategy use.
Descriptive research is thus a type of research that is primarily concerned with describing
the nature or conditions and degree in detail of the present situation (Landman 1988: 59).
The
emphasis
is
on
describing
rather
than
on
judge
or
interprets.
The participants involved in this study were randomly selected from five different
reading classes in Satya Wacana Christian University. There were 150 students have been
learning English in English Department of Satya Wacana for almost 2 years. The
questionnaire was administered at the beginning of semester with the help of the
classroom teacher, since they have passed through the long vacation, and were not
burdened with many tasks; it was believed would affect their intention to complete a
questionnaire, which was distributed to them to be filled.
A total of 50 students were responded to the questionnaire, all of the students were
enrolled on an English academic reading course. This course requires students to practice
reading essay- or article-length texts, recognize and evaluate arguments, learn the
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
7
components of a well-constructed argument as well as to respond to readings through
group work and journals. English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University has
four reading courses should be taken by the students, they were Academic reading,
Reading
across
genre,
Reading
skills,
and
Critical
reading.
The data were collected through a questionnaire (see Appendix A) adapted from the
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) by Mokhtari and
Reichard (2002) due to several reasons: guided by the principle that constructing meaning
from text is an intentional, conscious, and purposeful act, while reading academic
materials, this questionnaire has been developed and tested by reviewing an extensive
body of recent research literature on metacognition and reading comprehension (Baker &
Brown, 1984; Pressley, 2002). Several researchers (Anderson, 2002; Berkowitz &
Cicchelli, 2004) provide evidence that the instrument is a reliable and valid measure for
assessing adult students' metacognitive awareness and perceived use of reading strategies
while reading for academic purposes. Moreover, the items in the questionnaire were
simply and easy for the students to understand. The questionnaire was distributed to 50
students outside their reading class. They were given times to finish filling the
questionnaire out, and they were asked to collect the questionnaire, moreover, all of the
students returned the questionnaire.
The MARSI Questionnaire measures three broad categories of reading strategies.
1. Global Reading Strategies (GLOB), which can be thought of as generalized or global
reading strategies aimed at setting the stage for the reading act (e.g., setting a purpose for
reading, previewing text content, predicting what the text is about, etc.),
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
8
2. Problem-Solving Strategies (PROB), which are localized, focused problem-solving or
repair strategies used when problems develop in understanding textual information (e.g.,
checking one's understanding upon encountering conflicting information, re-reading for
better understanding, etc.), and
3. Support Reading Strategies (SUP), which involves using the support mechanisms or
tools aimed at sustaining responsiveness to reading (e.g., use of reference materials like
dictionaries and other support systems).
The 30-item questionnaire was validated by Mokhtari and Reichard (2002) using
large subject population representing students with equivalent reading abilities ranging
from middle school to college. Taking into consideration of the students‟ proficiency
level, this study made an adaptation to MARSI to increase feasibility of the present study.
It was decided that the questionnaire be administered in Indonesian, the native language,
which the participants were most proficient in and comfortable with. This was to
guarantee successful data collection and avoid comprehension difficulties that
participants might encounter when given the English version (see Appendix B). A 5-point
Likert scale following each item indicates the frequency of strategy use ranging from 1
(never do) to 5 (always do). The overall MARSI inventory score was determined by
summing responses from all three subscales and calculating the mean. Scores below 2.4
were considered low scores, between 2.5-3.4 were medium and 3.5 and higher were high.
(Mokhtari & Sheorey, 2002).
This questionnaire gave an overview of the purpose of the study. Then, they were
asked to provide honest responses. The students were instructed to read each of the 30
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
9
statements in the MARSI Questionnaire and circle the number which best indicated their
perceived use of the strategies described in the statement using a Likert scale ranging
from 1 ('I never or almost never use this strategy') to 5 ('I always or almost always use
this strategy'). Lastly, they were told that there were no "right" or "wrong" responses to
the statements and that they could take as much time as they needed to complete the
inventory.
The mechanism to carry out this study was a quantitative survey. It helped measure
the extent of students‟ awareness of reading strategies through an examination of the
frequencies of strategy use. The students were then compared for strategy use and for use
of each of the three categories of strategies. Microsoft office excel for Windows was used
to analyze data. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for the questionnaire items.
Discussion
Figure 1: Overall frequency of reading strategies
4
3.53
3.5
3.18
3
2.61
2.5
GLOB
PROB
SUP
With regard to the research question (i.e., “What are strategies used by English
Department students in reading in language learning?”), Figure 1 presents descriptive
statistics for overall frequency of each of the three categories of strategies in reading. The
results show that as far as the three categories of strategies were concerned, the students
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
10
showed a moderate to high strategy use, with problem-solving strategies (Mean = 3.53)
as their prime choice, followed by global strategies (Mean = 3.18) and support strategies
(Mean = 2.61). In other words, when problems in reading arise, most of these students
were ready to adopt strategies like reading slowly and carefully to be sure, going back
when losing concentration, rereading for better understanding and so on to solve
problems. By contrast, they used far fewer Support Reading Strategies like reading aloud
when the text gets hard, discussing to check understanding, asking oneself questions and
so on. This result was consistent with the findings in Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002)
study in which the Problem Solving Problems Strategies fall into the high strategy use,
and Support Reading Strategies are the least frequently used among the three
subcategories.
Figure 2: Problem-solving strategies
3.9
4
3.7
3.45
3.5
3.6
3.4
3.5
3.5 3.55
3.2
3
2.5
Q4
Q10
Q14
Q15
Q18
Q20
Q21
Q22
Q28
Figure 2 presents questions within the category of problem-solving strategies
(PROB). From the total of 9 strategies, the data showed the highest three strategies were
trying to get back on track when they lose concentration (Mean = 3,9), reading slowly but
carefully to be sure, they understand what they are reading (Mean = 3,7) and when text
becomes difficult; they pay closer attention to what they read (Mean = 3,6). The lowest
strategy use was guessing the meaning of unknown words by separating different parts of
11
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
a word (Mean = 2,94). Problem solving strategies showed that students were generally
conscious of their comprehension process and were able to take actions when
comprehension reduced. As indicated in the figure the overall average score of Problem
Solving Strategy was 3,53. Based on the scale in the questionnaire this average fell
between „sometimes‟ (3) and „usually do it‟ (4). It can be concluded that the use of
Problem Solving Strategy was relatively high or was used relatively frequently. This
result was consistent with the findings in Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002) study in
which the Problem Solving Strategies were considered as their primary choice with
highest scores.
Figure 3: Global strategies
4
3.44
3.5
3.2
3
3.18
3.12 3.1
3.04
3.38 3.4
3.28
2.94
3.02
2.8
2.5
Q1
Q7
Q8
Q11
Q12
Q17
Q19
Q23
Q24
Q26
Q27
Q30
Figure 3 presents questions within the category of global strategies (GLOB). From
the total of 12 strategies, the data showed the highest three strategies were deciding what
to read closely and what to ignore (Mean = 3,44), checking to see if their guesses about
the text are right or wrong (Mean = 3,4) and trying to guess what the material is about
when they read (Mean = 3,38). The lowest strategy use was using tables, figures, and
pictures in text to increase their understanding (Mean = 2,8). While displaying ability to
detect comprehension difficulty and adjust strategies accordingly, students also
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
12
demonstrated capacity of planning for reading. As indicated in the figure the overall
average score of Global Strategy was 3,18. Based on the scale in the questionnaire this
average fell between „sometimes‟ (3) and „usually do it‟ (4). It can be concluded that the
study Global Strategy was relatively medium. This result was consistent with the findings
in Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002) study in which the Global Strategies considered as
their medium scores.
Figure 4: Support strategies
4
3.5
3
3
2.9
2.85
2.7
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.4
2.5
2.5
Q2
Q3
Q5
Q6
Q9
Q13
Q16
Q25
Q29
Figure 4 presents questions within the category of support strategies (SUP). From the
total of 9 strategies, the data showed the highest three strategies were underlining or
circling information in the text to help them remember it (Mean = 3), discussing what
they read with others to check their understanding (Mean = 2,9), and taking notes while
reading to help them understand what they read (Mean = 2,85). The lowest strategy use
was when text becomes difficult, they read aloud to help them understand what they read
(Mean = 2,2). As indicated in the figure the overall average score of Support Strategy was
2,61. Based on the scale in the questionnaire this average fell between „occasionally‟ (2)
and „sometimes‟ (3). It can be concluded that the use of Support Strategy was relatively
low or was used relatively rarely. This result was consistent with the findings in
Mokhatari and Reichard‟s (2002) study in which the Support Strategies considered as
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
13
their lowest scores. Even though the scores of Support Strategies was the lowest scores
compared to Problem Solving Strategies and Global Strategies, it did provide some
information about the students reading strategies.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to identify the reading strategies used by English
Department of Satya Wacana Christian University students in reading. The results of this
study show that, in general the students are moderately active strategy users when reading
in English, with problem-solving strategies used most frequency. Such findings suggest
that the students have the basic tools to reach a high level of reading proficiency in
English. For example: In one study, Poole (2005c) found that 147 college students
reported using problem solving strategies with high frequency and global and support
strategies with moderate frequency. These results are similar to the findings of the current
study. Also similar to the results of the current study were those found in Sheorey and
Mokhtari (2001), which showed 152 English language learners using problem solving
strategies with high frequency and global and support strategies with moderate frequency.
Taken together, the findings reported here underscore the importance of helping
students develop their metacognitive awareness of specific reading strategies deemed
necessary for proficient reading. As Pressley and Afflerbach (1995) have argued, teachers
can play a part in enhancing students' awareness of such strategies, and in assisting them
to become "constructively responsive" readers. It needs to be noted that an awareness of
strategic reading does indeed lead to actual use of these strategies while reading.
Furthermore, the integration of metacognitive reading strategy instruction within reading
curricula will no doubt play a vital role in enriching students' awareness of the mental
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
14
processes involved in reading and the development of thoughtful and constructively
responsive reading. Teaching students to become constructively responsive readers can
promote skillful academic reading, which, in turn, can enhance academic achievement
(Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001).
Looking ahead, more research is needed to investigate why certain strategies are used
or not used in learning contexts. Individual learning styles may further demonstrate which
strategies are implemented during the reading process. Perhaps future research could
examine more deeply the interaction of metacognitive reading strategies on learners.
There is a clear need to investigate empirically the role of teaching 'important' strategies
and studying their impact on learner reading comprehension in learning contexts. Simply
knowing what strategy to use is not sufficient. An investigation into the orchestration of
strategies is certain to shed new light on the issues here investigated; thereby revealing
important new perspectives of what readers actually do when they become actively
involved in reading activities.
Limitations
Despite the interesting findings, the research has certain limitations; first, the
questionnaire used in this study consists of only 30 items. It is obviously not enough to
cover all the strategies used by the students. This, to a certain extent, affects its reliability
and the validity of the data in the study. Therefore, a wider variety of assessment method
is recommended in future studies e.g. interview, observation, verbal report and diaries.
Next, in this study, 50 students were involved. Perhaps a little number of students may
influence the results. In the future study, more classes can be involved so that more
students can finish the questionnaire to make the result more reliable.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
15
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my gratitude to Allah S.W.T who gave many bounties to me
to finish this thesis. I submit my highest appreciation to my thesis advisor, Prof.DR. Gusti
Astika, M.A., whose expertise, understanding, patience, and his assistance in writing this
thesis. Without his guidance, I would never have been able to finish my thesis, despite his
extremely busy schedule. A very special thanks goes out to my family, thank you for your
endless prayer and support, I love you so much. I also would like to thank to the
participants for their ready participation in this study for assistance in the data collection,
I owe you my eternal gratitude. Finally my thanks for my second reader Christine
Manara, MA-ELT who helped me in completing this thesis. Some friends, like Saprol
(friend of the struggle) and Ita (helped me in writing the introduction) were tolerant
enough (or dumb enough) to be my friends, I love you all.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
16
References
Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second/foreign language teaching
and learning. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages
and Linguistics.
Anderson, N. J. (2002). Using telescopes, microscopes, and kaleidoscopes to put
Metacognition into perspective. TESOL Matters, 12, 1-2.
Anderson, N. J. (2003). Teaching reading. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language
teaching (pp. 67-86). New York: McGraw Hill Publishers.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson
(Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
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.
453-481). Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Berkowitz, E. & Cicchelli, T. (2004). Metacognitive strategy use in reading of gifted high
achieving and gifted underachieving middle school students in New York City.
Education and Urban Society, 37, 37-57.
Cohen, A. D. (2007). Coming to terms with language learner strategies: Surveying the
experts. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty
years of research and practice (pp. 29–46). Oxford, England: Oxford University
Press.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL
Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
17
Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press
Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback, ELT Journal. 44 (4): 294-304
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of
reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first
and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32, 379394.
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1989). Research on Language learning strategies:
methods, language findings, and instructional issues. Modern Language
Journal, 73, 404-419.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.
New York: Newbury House.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal reports of reading: The nature of
constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-or the century status
report. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction:
Research-based best practice (pp. 11-27). New York: The Guilford Press.
Rigney, J.W. (1978). Learning strategies: a theoretical perspective. In: H. F. O‟Neil (Jr)
(Ed), Learning Strategies. New York: Academic Press. pp.165-205.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
18
Sheorey R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of
reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.
An Investigation of Metacognitive Reading Strategies of English Department
Students at Satya Wacana Christian University
19
Appendix A
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory
Nim
: ………………….
The purpose of this survey is to collect information about the various strategies you use in
reading the text. Please indicate the frequency of reading strategies you use by circling
the following appropriate number (1,2,3,4,5), and each number means the following:
• 1 means "I never or almost never do this."
• 2 means "I do this only occasionally.
• 3 means "I sometimes do this."
• 4 means "I usually do this."
• 5 means "I always or almost always do this."
No
Type Strategy
1
Glob I have a purpose in mind when I read.
2
Sup
I take notes while reading to help me understand what I read.
3
Sup
I summarize what I read to reflect on important information in the text.
4
Prob
I try to get back on track when I lose concentration.
5
Sup
I underline or circle information in the text to help me remember it.
6
Sup
I use reference materials such as dictionaries to help me understand what I read.
7
Glob I use tables, figures, and pictures in text to increase my understanding.
8
Glob I use context clues to help me better understand what I am reading.
9
Sup
I paraphrase (restate ideas in my own words) to better understand what I read.
10 Prob I guess the meaning of unknown words by separating different parts of a word.
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
20
11 Glob I think about what I know to help me understand what I read.
12 Glob I preview the text to see what it is about before reading it.
13 Sup
When text becomes difficult, I read aloud to help me understand what I read.
14 Prob I think about whether the content of the text fits my reading purpose.
15 Prob I read slowly but carefully to be sure, I understand what I am reading.
16 Sup
I discuss what I read with others to check my understanding
17 Glob I skim the text first by noting characteristics like length and organization.
18 Prob I adjust my reading speed according to what I am reading.
19 Glob I decide what to read closely and what to ignore.
20 Prob When text becomes difficult; I pay closer attention to what I am reading.
21 Prob I stop from time to time and think about what I am reading.
22 Prob I try to picture or visualize information to help remember what I read.
23 Glob I use typological aids like boldface and italics to identify key information.
24 Glob I critically analyze and evaluate the information presented in the text.
25 Sup
I go back and forth in the text to find relationship among ideas in it.
26 Glob I check my understanding when I come across conflicting information.
27 Glob I try to guess what the material is about when I read.
28 Prob When text becomes difficult; I reread to increase my understanding.
29 Sup
I ask myself questions I like to have answered in the text.
30 Glob I check to see if my guesses about the text are right or wrong.
☺ Thank You ☺
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
21
Appendix B
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory
Nim
: ……………………….
Tujuan dari angket ini adalah untuk mengumpulkan informasi tentang macam-macam
strategi yang kalian gunakan di dalam membaca. Silahkan lingkari nomor yang sesuai
dengan ketentuan berikut ini:
1
= Saya tidak pernah atau hampir tidak pernah melakukan hal ini
2
= Saya melakukan hal ini hanya sesekali
3
= Saya terkadang melakukan hal ini
4
= Saya biasanya melakukan hal ini
5
= Saya selalu atau hampir selalu melakukan hal ini
No
Strategis
1
2
Saya memiliki tujuan ketika saya membaca
Saya mencatat ketika membaca untuk membantu saya
memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya meringkas apa yang saya baca untuk mengulas kembali
informasi penting dalam bacaan
Saya mencoba untuk kembali ke bacaan ketika saya
kehilangan konsentrasi
Saya menggaris bawahi atau melingkari informasi penting
dalam bacaan untuk membantu saya mengingatnya
Saya menggunakan bahan-bahan referensi seperti kamus
untuk membantu saya memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya menggunakan tabel, angka, dan gambar dalam bacaan
untuk meningkatkan pemahaman saya
Saya menggunakan petunjuk dalam bacaan untuk membantu
saya lebih memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya menuliskan kembali ide-ide dalam kata-kata saya
sendiri untuk lebih memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya menerka makna kata yang tidak saya ketahui dengan
cara memisahkan bagian yang berbeda dari sebuah kata
Saya berpikir tentang apa yang saya ketahui untuk membantu
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Frekuensi
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
saya memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya meninjau ulang bacaan untuk mengetahui isi bacaan
tersebut sebelum membacanya
Ketika bacaan menjadi sulit, saya membaca keras-keras
untuk membantu saya memahami apa yang saya baca
Saya berpikir apakah isi dari bacaan sesuai dengan tujuan
membaca saya
Saya membaca perlahan-lahan tetapi hati-hati untuk
memastikan bahwa saya mengerti apa yang saya baca
Saya mendiskusikan apa yang saya baca dengan orang lain
untuk memeriksa pemahaman saya
Saya membaca bacaan sekilas terlebih dahulu, dengan
mencatat ciri-ciri seperti panjang bacaan dan susunannya.
Saya menyesuaikan kecepatan membaca saya sesuai dengan
apa yang saya baca
Saya memutuskan apa yang harus saya baca dengan cermat
dan apa yang harus saya abaikan
Ketika bacaan menjadi sulit, saya memperhatikan lebih
cermat apa yang saya baca
Saya berhenti dari waktu ke waktu dan berpikir tentang apa
yang saya baca
Saya mencoba menggambarkan dan membayangkan
informasi untuk membantu saya mengingat apa yang saya
baca
Saya menggunakan alat bantu seperti huruf cetak tebal dan
miring untuk mengenali kata kunci.
Saya secara kritis menganalisa dan menilai informasi yang
disajikan dalam bacaan
Saya bolak-balik bacaan untuk menemukan hubungan antara
ide-ide di dalamnya
saya memeriksa pemahaman saya ketika saya menemukan
informasi yang bertentangan.
Saya mencoba menerka isi dari bacaan ketika saya membaca
Ketika bacaan menjadi sulit, saya membaca ulang untuk
meningkatkan pemahaman saya
saya bertanya pada diri sendiri tentang pertanyaanpertanyaan yang ingin saya jawab di dalam bacaan.
Saya memeriksa untuk melihat apakah terkaan saya tentang
bacaan benar atau salah
☺Terima Kasih☺
22
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT READING STRATEGIES
23