EFL students’ preferences on metacognitive reading strategies within an extensive reading program
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v13i1.5640Keywords:
English as a foreign language, English language skills, extensive reading (ER), metacognitive reading strategy, students’ preferencesAbstract
Despite multiple studies that have broadly highlighted the positives of employing metacognitive reading strategies, there remains an absence of the rationale for adopting the reading strategy based on the students' perspectives. The present study aims to look into first-year EFL students' preferences for using metacognitive reading strategies as part of an extensive reading (ER) program at one of the public universities in Malang, Indonesia. The data were acquired from both quantitative and qualitative data sources. The fundamental data were garnered from a quantitative online survey, and the results were counted using descriptive statistics. Semi-structured interview sessions with six participants were carried out to collect qualitative data, and the results served as a means to strengthen the primary data. The results revealed that the problem-solving reading strategy proved to be the most commonly used in the ER program, followed by global and support reading strategies. The reading strategies advanced students' reading comprehension. Students could also strengthen their language skills, particularly reading comprehension, vocabulary acquisition, and writing abilities. The study findings implied considering an alternative teaching strategy and understanding how students find it most helpful to assist them in a supervised ER program.References
Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364-373. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.61.5.1
Ahmadi, M. R., Ismail, H. N., & Abdullah, M. K. K. (2013). The importance of metacognitive reading strategy awareness in reading comprehension. English Language Teaching, 6(10), 235-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n10p235
Allen, L. K., Crossley, S. A., Snow, E. L., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). L2 writing practice: game enjoyment as a key to engagement. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 124–150. https://asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/l2-writing-practice-game-enjoyment-as-a-key-to-engagement
Arifuddin, A. (2019). Task-based language learning in extensive reading practices. In iNELTAL Conference Proceedings: The International English Language Teachers and Lecturers Conference (pp. 26-30). Universitas Negeri Malang. http://ineltal.um.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/5-Aryo-Arifuddin-Task-Based-Language-Learning-in-Extensive-Reading-Practices.pdf
Avila, R. M., & Baetiong, L. R. (2012). Metacognitive strategy training and teacher attitude and performance. Education Quarterly, 70(1), 51-65. https://www.journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/edq/article/viewFile/3394/3156
Baker, L., & Beall, L. C. (2014). Metacognitive processes and reading comprehension. In Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 397-412). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759609
Bamford, J., & Day, R. R. (1997). Extensive reading: what is it? why bother? The Japan Association for Language Teaching (JALT), 21(1), 1-6. https://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2132-extensive-reading-what-it-why-bother
Bensoussan, M., Sim, D., & Weiss, R. (1981). The effect of dictionary usage on EFL test performance compared with student and teacher attitudes and expectations. In S. Bengt, & J. Svartvik (Eds.), Proceedings of The Biannual Conference of the International Association of Applied Linguistics (pp. 216-217). University of Lund. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED232436.pdf
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(1), 37-57. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0013124504268072
Chang, A. C.-S., & Renandya, W. A. (2020). The effect of narrow reading on L2 learners’ perceptions. RELC Journal, 51(2), 244-258. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/00336882198394
Chen, K. T.-C., & Chen, S. C.-L. (2015). The use of efl reading strategies among high school students in Taiwan. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 15(2), 156-166. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1075987
Chen, H., & Chen, Y. (2018). Incorporating mobile devices in extensive reading: an exploration of college students' perspectives. ReCALL, 30(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344017000211
Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2017). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: a web-based reciprocal peer review system. Instructional Science, 45(3), 313-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.02.004
Chou, M.-H. (2022). Using literature circles to teach graded readers in English: an investigation into reading performance and strategy use. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 16(2), 144-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229. 2021.1885412
Clarke, D. F., & Nation, I. S. P. (1980). Guessing the meanings of words from context: strategy and techniques. System, 8(3), 211-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(80)90003-2
Codo, E. (2009). Interviews and questionnaires. In L. Wei., & M. G. Moyer (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to research methods in bilingualism and multilingualism (pp. 158–176). Wiley Online Library. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444301120.ch9
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research/book241842
Davis, C. (1995). Extensive reading: an expensive extravagance? ELT Journal, 49(4), 329-336. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/49.4.329
Day, R. R., & Bamford, J. (2016). Extensive reading in the second language classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Day, R. R. (2015). Extending extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 27(2), 294-301. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1078441.pdf
Deane, P., Sheehan, K. M., Sabatini, J., Futagi, Y., & Kostin, I. (2006). Differences in text structure and its implications for assessment of struggling readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 257-275. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_4
Elley, W. B., & Mangubhai, F. (2009). The impact of reading on second language learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(1), 53-67. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/747337
El-Koumy, A. S. A. K. (2004). Metacognition and reading comprehension: current trends in theory and research (2nd ed.). Education Resources Information Center (ERIC). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.236487 1
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1207/ S15326985EP3501_5
Grabe, W. P., & Stoller, F. L. (2011). Teaching and researching: reading (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833743
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for windows step by step: simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: a review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279-320. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071002279
Harimurti, K. F., Suryati, N., & Astuti, U. P. (2021). Students’ perspectives in using XReading as an extensive reading platform for higher education students. JoLLA: Journal of Language, Literature, and Arts, 1(12), 1627-1643. https://doi.org/10.17977/um064v1i122021p1627-1643
Ismail, N. M., & Tawalbeh, T. I. (2015). Effectiveness of a metacognitive reading strategies program for improving low achieving EFL readers. International Education Studies, 8(1), 71-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n1p71
Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacy, 5(4), 87-88. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-0105.141942
Kembo, J. (2020). Using supervised extensive reading (SER) for improving English as a language of instruction (LoI) and learning: an exploratory study based on observational evidence. World Journal of Research and Review (WJRR), 10(6), 18-22. https://doi.org/10.31871/WJRR.10.6.7
Koch, T. (2009). Expanding the power of extensive reading: avoiding the rabbit hole. Selected papers on theoretical and applied linguistics, 18, 193-198. https://doi.org/10.26262/istal.v18i0.5438
Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: insights from the research. Greenwood Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.2307/330145
Li, J. (2020). Development and validation of second language online reading strategies inventory. Computers & Education, 145, 103733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103733
Lipp, E. (2017). Building self-efficacy, strategy use, and motivation to support extensive reading in multilingual university students. The CATESOL Journal, 29(2), 21-39. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1164294.pdf
Lu, Z., & Liu, M. (2011). Foreign language anxiety and strategy use: a study with chinese undergraduate efl learners. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 2(6), 1298-1305. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.6.1298-1305
Meneghetti, C., Carretti, B., & De Beni, R. (2006). Components of reading comprehension and scholastic achievement. Learning and individual differences, 16(4), 291-301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2006.11.001
Meniado, J. C. (2016). Metacognitive reading strategies, motivation, and reading comprehension performance of Saudi EFL students. English Language Teaching, 9(3), 117-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p117
Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2-10. http://works.bepress.com/kouider-mokhtari/68/
Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9-13. https://jalt-publications.org/tlt/issues/2007-07_31.7
Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2018). Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. Routledge.
Navarro, Z. I. T. (2021). Metacognitive strategies for reading comprehension in basic education students. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 14(4), 34-46. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2021/v14i430362
Nguyen, T. T. M., Nguyen, T. T. H., & Tran, T. T. T. (2020). The impact of metacognitive reading strategies on extensive reading performance of EFL learners in Vietnam. English Language Teaching, 13(7), 106-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n7p152
Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language learning (SILL). System, 23(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(94)00047-A
Par, L. (2020). The relationship between reading strategies and reading achievement of the EFL students. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 223-238. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13216a
Paris, S., & Jacobs, J. (1984). The benefits of informed instruction for children’s reading awareness and comprehension skills. Child Development, 55(1), 2083-2093. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129781
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 26-56. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532203lt243oa
Pressley, M. (2017). Reading instruction that works: the case for balanced teaching (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
Renandya, W. A. (2007). The power of extensive reading. RELC Journal, 38(2), 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688207079578
Renandya, W. A., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2019). Reading in a second language: pedagogical approaches, theories and research. Routledge
Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01146.x
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Motivation and self-regulated learning: theory, research, and applications. Routledge.
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2
Teale, W., & Yokota, J. (2000). Beginning reading and writing: perspectives on instruction. In D. S. Strickland & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Beginning reading and writing: language and literacy series (pp. 3-21). International Reading Association.
Thomas, K. F., & Barksdale-Ladd, M. A. (2000). Metacognitive processes: teaching strategies in literacy education courses. Reading psychology, 21(1), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/027027100278356
Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515-537. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.515
Wigfield, A., Mason-Singh, A., Ho, A. N., & Guthrie, J. T. (2014). Intervening to improve children’s reading motivation and comprehension: concept-oriented reading instruction. In Motivational interventions (advances in motivation and achievement, Vol. 18 (pp. 37-70). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0749-742320140000018001
Yà¼ksel, Ä°., & Yà¼ksel, Ä°. (2012). Metacognitive awareness of academic reading strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 894-898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.164
Zhang, T., & Zheng, J. (2020). Investigating the theoretical structure of the survey of reading strategies. Educational Research and Development Journal, 23(2), 22-38. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1285143.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
- All articles published in JEFL are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA) license. This means anyone is free to copy, transform, or redistribute articles for any lawful purpose in any medium, provided they give appropriate attribution to the original author(s) and JEFL, link to the license, indicate if changes were made, and redistribute any derivative work under the same license.
- Copyright on articles is retained by the respective author(s), without restrictions. A non-exclusive license is granted to JEFL to publish the article and identify itself as its original publisher, along with the commercial right to include the article in a hardcopy issue for sale to libraries and individuals.
- Although the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA) license do not apply to authors (as the copyright holder of your article, you have no restrictions on your rights), by submitting to JEFL, authors recognize the rights of readers and must grant any third party the right to use their articles to the extent provided by the license.
