Email this article 
UNVEILING THE CAUSAL LINK BETWEEN MONITORING STRATEGIES INSTRUCTION AND EFL READING COMPREHENSION OUTCOMES AMONG MOROCCAN ENGLISH DEPARTMENT UNIVERSITY STUDENTS: A METACOGNITIVE PERSPECTIVE
Abstract
The current study, being part and parcel of my unpublished doctoral dissertation which is entitled “Moroccan EFL Students’ Learning of Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies: Rabat FLHS Semester One Students as a Case Study” (defended in 2015), is intended to unravel the conceived impact of comprehension-monitoring strategies instruction (self-monitoring, self-questioning, and rereading) on the first-semester English Department learners’ reading comprehension scores. It is a manifestation of the extended depth and scope of the conducted explicit training in monitoring strategies, as high-order metacognitive heuristics, in the promotion of the learners’ text-processing mode and reading performance in English (L3). With a view to achieving this stated goal, 113 first-semester university students (Control Group: N= 50; Experimental Group: N= 63) undertaking their studies in the English Department took part in this quasi-experimental study. The data were gathered through the implementation of the strategy training, a select range of ‘experimental’ reading comprehension texts (i.e., narrative, expository), and narrative and expository reading tests (pre-tests and post-tests). The research findings reveal that instruction in L3 comprehension monitoring strategies resulted in positive reading achievement gains at post-testing among the experimental group. As to the control group, it did not exhibit any developmental progress at the level of the reading scores across the pre-post-test continuum. Thus, some action-oriented recommendations and implications relative to the undertaken research study, as well as a few limitations, are plausibly brought forth.
Article visualizations:
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Amini, M., Zahabi, A., Amini, D., & Hosseini, S. S. A. (2020). A review of reading strategies and models in learning and teaching of English as a foreign language. AJELP: Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 8(2), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.37134/ajelp.vol8.2.2.2020
Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second/foreign language teaching and learning. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. https://www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/0110anderson.html
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Cognitive monitoring in reading. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension (pp. 21-44). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 129.
Barnett, M.A. (1989). More than meets the eye: Foreign language reading theory and practice. New York: Prentice Hall.
Baumann, J. F., Seifert-Kessell, N., & Jones, L. A. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary students' comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(2), 143–172. https://doi:10.1080/10862969209547770
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 463-494. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586295
Boulware-Gooden, R., Carreker, S., Thornhill, A., & Joshi, R. M. (2007). Instruction of metacognitive strategies enhances reading comprehension and vocabulary achievement of third-grade students. The Reading Teacher, 61 (1), 70-77.
Brown, A. L. (1981). Metacognition: The development of selective attention strategies for learning from texts. In M. L. Kamil (Ed.), Directions in reading: Research and instruction (pp. 501-529). Washington, D.C.: National Reading Conference.
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E. J., & Tarver, S. G. (2004). Direct instruction in reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
Carrell, P. L. (1983). Three components of background knowledge in reading comprehension. Language Learning, 33(2), 183-203. https://doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00534.x.
Carrell, P. L. (1984). Schema theory and ESL reading: Classroom implications and applications. The Modern Language Journal, 68(4), 332-343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.15404781.1984.tb02509
Casanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 283-302. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586937
Clay, M. M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH, Heinemann
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. New York: Longman.
Collins, A. & Smith, E. E. (1980). Teaching the process of reading comprehension. Illinois: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.
Conway, A. R. A., Moore, A. B., & Kane, M. J. (2009). Recent trends in the cognitive neuroscience of working memory. Cortex, 45 (2), 262-268. https://doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2008.05.006
Davies, F. (1995). Introducing reading. London: Penguin Group.
Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61 (2) 239-264.
Dowhower, S., L. (1989). Repeated reading: Research into practice. The Reading Teacher, 42 (7), 502-507.
Duffy, G. G. (2003). Explaining reading: A resource for teaching concepts, skills, and strategies. New York: Guilford Press
Dugassa, G., Olana, T., & Ali, S. (2022). Effects of explicit reading strategy instruction on grade 9 students’ achievement in reading comprehension. Educational Research International, 2022, 1-13. https://doi:10.1155/2022/7872840
Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 205-242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Strachan, S. L., & Billman, A. K. (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. In S.J. Samuels, & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed., pp. 51-93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Edossa, A. K., Lockl, K., & Weinert, S. (2023). Developmental relationship between metacognitive monitoring and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 13 (1), 1-16. Canadian Center of Science and Education. https://doi:10.5539/jedp.v13n1p1.
Fan, Y. C. (2010). The effect of comprehension strategy instruction on EFL learners’ reading comprehension. Asian Social Science, 6 (8), 19-29. https://doi:10.5539/ass.v6n8p19
Flavell, J. H. (1971). First discussant’s comments: What is memory development the development of? Human Development, 14(4), 272-278. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271221
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive Monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication skills. New York: Academic Press.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex
Giladi, A., Koslowsky, M., & Davidovitch, N. (2022). Effort as a mediator of the relationship between English learning self-efficacy and reading comprehension performance in the EFL field: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Higher Education, 11 (1), 114-125. https://doi:10.5430/ijhe.v11n1p114
Gough, P. B. (1976). One second of reading. In H. Singer & R. P. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (2nd ed., pp. 509-535). Newark, DE: International Reading Association
Huff, J. D., & Nietfeld, J. L. (2009). Using strategy instruction and confidence judgments to improve metacognitive monitoring. Metacognition and Learning, 4 (2), 161-176.
Joseph, L. M. (2005). The role of self-monitoring in literacy learning. In S.E. Israel, C.C. Block, K.L. Bouserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: Theory, assessment, instruction and professional development (pp. 199-214). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Kim, M. (2022). Exploring literal and inferential reading comprehension among L2 adolescent learners: The roles of working memory capacity, syllogistic inference, and L2 linguistic knowledge. Reading and Writing, 36 (2), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10320-3
Lin, Z. (2002). Discovering EFL learners’ perception of prior knowledge and its roles in reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 25(2), 172-190.
Magliano, J., P., Todaro, S., Millis, K., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Kim, H., J., McNamara, D., S. (2005). Changes in reading strategies as a function of reading training: A comparison of live and computerized training. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32 (2), 185-208.
Msaddek, M. (2013). The role of metacognitive thinking in text processing. In A. Zaki, M. Najbi, & A. Chaibi (Eds.), Critical Thinking Skills in English Language Education: Proceedings of the 32nd Moroccan Association of Teachers of English Annual Conference Oujda, April 9 through 12, 2012 (pp. 41-46). Oujda: Publication of the Moroccan Association of Teachers of English (MATE). Printed by Safahate Design, Béni Mellal. Dépôt légal: 2013 M0 0221. ISBN: 978-9981-9537-3-4
Msaddek, M. (2015). Moroccan EFL Students’ Learning of Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies: Rabat FLHS Semester One Students as a Case Study (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Faculty of Letters and Human Sciences, Mohamed V University, Rabat, Morocco.
Msaddek, M. (2016). The impact of metacognitive strategy training on comprehension monitoring among Moroccan EFL university learners. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 7(4), 139-154. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol7no4
Msaddek, M. (2020). The incorporation of self-questioning training in the reading comprehension course: The case of Moroccan EFL university learners. Studies in Literature and Language, 20 (3), 6-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/11754
Muche, T., Simegn, B., & Shiferie, K. (2023). Self-efficacy and metacognitive strategy use in reading comprehension: EFL learners’ perspectives. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 33(1), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-023-00721-5
Nietfeld, J., & Schraw, G. (2002). The effect of knowledge and strategy training on monitoring accuracy. The Journal of Educational Research, 95 (3), 131–142. https://doi:10.1080/00220670209596583
Nist, S., & Holschuh, J. L. (2000). Comprehension strategies at the college level. In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 75-104). Longman: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Nolan, T. E. (1991). Self-questioning and prediction: Combining metacognitive strategies. Journal of Reading, 35 (2), 132-138.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 13(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968109547390
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 545–561). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 85(3), 618-660. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.85.3.618
Reid, R., & Lienemann, T. O. (2006). Strategy instruction for students with learning disabilities. New York & London: The Guilford Press.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Schmitt, M. C., & Newby, T. J. (1986). Metacognition: Relevance to instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 9(4), 29-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02908316
Taraban, R., Kerr, M., & Rynearson, K. (2004). Analytic and pragmatic factors in college students’ metacognitive reading strategies. Reading Psychology, 25, 67-81.
Turkeltaub, P. E., Gareau, L., Flowers, D. L., Zeffiro, T. A., & Eden, G. F. (2003). Development of neural mechanisms for reading. Nature Neuroscience, 6(7), 767–773. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1065
Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1 (1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0
Wang, C., Schwab, G., Fenn, P., & Chang, M. (2013). Self-efficacy and self-regulated learning strategies for English language learners: Comparison between Chinese and German college students. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 3(1), 173-191. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v3n1p173
Williams, E. (1984). Reading in the language classroom. London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Zhang, L. J. (2002). Exploring EFL reading as a metacognitive experience: Reader awareness and reading performance. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 12, 69-94.
Zhou, J. & Day, R. R. (2023). Establishing an extensive reading program in a Chinese as a foreign language context. Reading in a Foreign Language, 35(2), 222-246. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/67448
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejlll.v8i2.545
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Mohammed Msaddek
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.
Copyright © 2017-2023. European Journal of Literature, Language and Linguistics Studies (ISSN 2559 - 7914 / ISSN-L 2559 - 7914). All rights reserved.
This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.
