Volume 4, Issue 3 (September 2022)                   IEEPJ 2022, 4(3): 516-535 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Mortazavizadeh G, Golshan M, Rezai M J. (2022). Metacognitive Strategies Awareness and Use and Reading Comprehension of Iranian EFL University Students: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. IEEPJ. 4(3), 516-535. doi:10.52547/ieepj.4.3.516
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-488-en.html
1- PhD Student, Department of English, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Department of English, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Iran , mohammadgolshann@gmail.com
3- Associate Professor, Department of English, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
Abstract:   (1126 Views)
Research on reading comprehension suggests that successful readers are metacognitive. In foreign language contexts, the role of metacognition is more vital. This study sought to investigate the relationship between metacognitive reading strategy awareness and use, and reading comprehension of Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) learners. In so doing, a non-experimental, correlational design was used. The participants included 238 male and female EFL university students in two central provinces of Iran. The sampling method was convenience sampling. To collect the data, Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) and the reading comprehension section of Cambridge Michigan Language Assessment (MET) were utilized. Data analysis was conducted using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The results of SEM analysis revealed that there are not significant causal relationships between global (GLOB) reading strategy and reading comprehension, and between supportive (SUP) reading strategy and reading comprehension. However, there was a significant causal relationship between problem-solving (PROB) reading strategy and reading comprehension. According to the results, the covariances among all four latent factors were invariant across gender. Moreover, there was no relationship between gender and reading strategy awareness and use. Pedagogic implications stemming from the findings have resonance for teaching reading comprehension.
Full-Text [PDF 1160 kb]   (290 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original | Subject: Educational Psychology
Received: 2022/03/6 | Accepted: 2022/04/15 | Published: 2022/09/1

1. Adamura, F. (2021). Problem-based learning in real number topic for practicing critical and creative thinking. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1742(1), 13-158. [DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/1742/1/012038]
2. Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. Y. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. Handbook of research on reading comprehension, 69-90.
3. Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364-373. [DOI:10.1598/RT.61.5.1]
4. Alhaqbani, A., & Riazi, M. (2012). Metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use in Arabic as a second language. Reading in a Foreign Language, 24(2), 231-155. http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/October2012/articles/alhaqbani.pdf
5. Alkhateeb, H. M., Abushihab, E. F., Alkhateeb, R. H., & Alkhateeb, B. H. (2021). Reading strategies used by undergraduate university general education courses for students in US and Qatar. Reading Psychology, 42(6), 1-17. [DOI:10.1080/02702711.2021.1912967]
6. Al-Qahtani, A. A. (2021). Reading English as a foreign language: The interplay of abilities and strategies. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), 580-589. [DOI:10.17509/ijal.v10i3.31738]
7. Amini, D., Anhari, M. H., Ghasemzadeh, A., & Tarnopolsky, O. (2020). Modeling the relationship between metacognitive strategy awareness, self-regulation and reading proficiency of Iranian EFL learners. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1-17. https://doi. org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1787018 [DOI:10.1080/2331186X.2020.1787018]
8. Anderson N.J. (2012) Metacognition: Awareness of Language Learning. In: Mercer S., Ryan S., Williams M. (E) Psychology for language learning (pp. 169-187). Palgrave Macmillan, London. [DOI:10.1057/9781137032829_12]
9. Anderson, N. J. (2005). L2 learning strategies. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 757-771). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Andujar, A., Salaberri-Ramiro, M. S., & Cruz Martínez, M. S. (2020). Integrating flipped foreign language learning through mobile devices: Technology acceptance and flipped learning experience. Sustainability, 12(3), 111-120. [DOI:10.3390/su12031110]
11. Ardasheva, Y., Wang, Z., Adesope, O. O., & Valentine, J. C. (2017). Exploring effectiveness and moderators of language learning strategy instruction on second language and self-regulated learning outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 87(3), 544-582. [DOI:10.3102/0034654316689135]
12. Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford University Press.
13. Bećirović, S., Brdarević-Čeljo, A., & Dubravac, V. (2018). The effect of nationality, gender, and GPA on the use of reading strategies among EFL university students. Sage Open, 8(4), 2158244018809286. [DOI:10.1177/2158244018809286]
14. Becirovic, S., Brdarevic-Celjo, A., & Sinanovic, J. (2017). The use of metacognitive reading strategies among students at international Burch University: A case study. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 6(4), 645-655. [DOI:10.13187/ejced.2017.4.645]
15. Bentler, P. M. (2007). On tests and indices for evaluating structural models. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 825-829. [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.024]
16. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2011). Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 111-130. [DOI:10.1007/s11409-011-9075-7]
17. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming (multivariate applications series). New York: Taylor & Francis Group, 396(1), 73-84.
18. Daftarifard, P., & Birjandi, P. (2015). Lower intermediate readers and their use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Sino-US English Teaching, 12(10), 757-761. [DOI:10.17265/1539-8072/2015.10.003]
19. Daguay-James, H., & Bulusan, F. (2020). Metacognitive strategies on reading English texts of ESL freshmen: A sequential explanatory mixed design. TESOL International Journal, 15(1), 20-30.
20. Daradkeh, A. A. (2020). The use of reading strategies in predicting reading comprehension: A case study of EFL university Saudi students. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 3(4), 121-133.
21. Darjito, H. (2019). Students' metacognitive reading awareness and academic English reading comprehension in EFL context. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 611-624. [DOI:10.29333/iji.2019.12439a]
22. Deliany, Z., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2020). Metacognitive reading strategies awareness and metacognitive reading strategies use of EFL University students across gender. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 421-437. [DOI:10.24815/siele.v7i2.17026]
23. Fathi, J., & Afzali, M. (2020). The Effect of Second Language Reading Strategy Instruction on Young Iranian EFL Learners' Reading Comprehension. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 475-488. [DOI:10.29333/iji.2020.13131a]
24. Geva, E., & Ryan, E. B. (1993). Linguistic and cognitive correlates of academic skills in first and second languages. Language Learning, 43(1), 5-42. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1993.tb00171.x]
25. Ghaith, G., & El-Sanyoura, H. (2019). Reading comprehension: The mediating role of metacognitive strategies. Reading in a Foreign Language, 31(1), 19-43.
26. Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language. Cambridge, CUP. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195384253.013.0006]
27. Grabe, W. (2014). Key issues in L2 reading development. In Proceedings of the 4th CELC Symposium for English Language Teachers-Selected Papers (pp. 8-18).
28. Grabe, W. P., & Stoller, F. L. (2011). Teaching and researching: Reading. Routledge. [DOI:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1174]
29. Graesser, A. C. (2007). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D.S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 3-26). Erlbaum.
30. Griethuijsen, R. A. L. F., Eijck, M. W., Haste, H., Brok, P. J., Skinner, N. C., Mansour, N., et al. (2014). Global patterns in students' views of science and interest in science. Research in Science Education, 45(4), 581-603. Doi:10.1007/s11165-014-9438-6. [DOI:10.1007/s11165-014-9438-6]
31. Guan, C. Q., Roehrig, A. D., Mason, R. S., & Meng, W. (2011). Psychometric properties of meta-cognitive awareness of reading strategy inventory. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 1, 120-134. [DOI:10.5539/JEDP.V1N1P3]
32. Guo, L. (2018). Modeling the relationship of metacognitive knowledge, L1 reading ability, L2 language proficiency and L2 reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 30(2), 209-231.
33. Hadwin, A. F., Winne, P. H., Stockley, D. B., Nesbit, J. C., & Woszczyna, C. (2001). Context moderates students' self-reports about how they study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 477-487. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.477]
34. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall.
35. Hossein Chari, M., Samavi, A., & Kurdistani, D. (2010). Adaptation and investigation of psychometric indices of Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) among high school students. Psychological Studies, 6(1), 164-184.
36. Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading. Oxford University Press.
37. Jafari, S. M., & Shokrpour, N. (2012). The reading strategies used by Iranian ESP students to comprehend authentic expository texts in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(4), 102-113. [DOI:10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.102]
38. Jöreskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. Sage Focus Editions, 154, 294-294.
39. Lindholm, A., & Tengberg, M. (2019). The reading development of Swedish L2 middle school students and its relation to reading strategy use. Reading Psychology, 40(8), 782-813. [DOI:10.1080/02702711.2019.1674432.]
40. Marboot, K., Roohani, A., & Mirzaei, A. (2020). Investigating Iranian EFL students' metacognitive online reading strategies, critical thinking, and their relationship: A mixed-methods study. Issues in Language Teaching, 9(1), 151-182.
41. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320-341. [DOI:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2]
42. McNamara, D. S. (Ed.) (2007). Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies. Lawrence Erlbaum. [DOI:10.4324/9780203810033]
43. Michigan Language Assessment (MET). (2018). https://michigan-test.com/reading-comprehension/
44. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32(3), 379-394. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2004.04.005]
45. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259. DOI: 10.1037//0022- 0663.94.2.249 [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249]
46. Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students' awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2-10.
47. Mokhtari, K., Dimitrov, D. M., & Reichard, C. A. (2018). Revising the metacognitive awareness of Reading strategies inventory (MARSI) and testing for factorial invariance. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 219-246 [DOI:10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.2.3]
48. Muhid, A., Amalia, E. R., Hilaliyah, H., Budiana, N., & Wajdi, M. B. N. (2020). The Effect of metacognitive strategies implementation on students' reading comprehension achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 847-862. [DOI:10.29333/iji.2020.13257a]
49. Navarro, Z. I. T. (2021). Metacognitive strategies for reading comprehension in basic education students. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 34-46. DOI: 10.9734/ajess/2021/v14i430362 [DOI:10.9734/ajess/2021/v14i430362]
50. Oxford, R. L. (2011). Strategies for learning a second or foreign language. Language Teaching, 44(2), 167-180. [DOI:10.1017/S0261444810000492]
51. Pammu, A., Amir, Z., & Maasum, T. N. R. T. M. (2014). Metacognitive reading strategies of less proficient tertiary learners: A case study of EFL learners at a public university in Makassar, Indonesia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 357-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.049 [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.049]
52. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols in reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Erlbaum. [DOI:10.2307/358808]
53. Pressley, M., & Gaskins, I. W. (2006). Metacognitively competent reading comprehension is constructively responsive reading: How can such reading be developed in students? Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 99-113. [DOI:10.1007/s11409-006-7263-7]
54. Rastegar, M., Kermani, E. M., & Khabir, M. (2017). The relationship between metacognitive reading strategies use and reading comprehension achievement of EFL learners. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 7(02), 65. DOI: 10.4236/ojml.2017.72006 [DOI:10.4236/ojml.2017.72006]
55. Schellings, G., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. (2011). Measuring strategy use with self-report instruments: theoretical and empirical considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 83-90. [DOI:10.1007/s11409-011-9081-9]
56. Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449. [DOI:10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2]
57. Soodla, P., Jõgi, A. L., & Kikas, E. (2017). Relationships between teachers' metacognitive knowledge and students' metacognitive knowledge and reading achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32(2), 201-218. [DOI:10.1007/s10212-016-0293-x]
58. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th Ed.).Allyn and Bacon.
59. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273-1296. [DOI:10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2]
60. Tavakoli, H. (2014). The effectiveness of metacognitive strategy awareness in reading comprehension: The case of Iranian university EFL students. The Reading Matrix, 14(2), 314-336.
61. Teoh, M. L., Ansarian, L., Tik, O. L., & Nair, A. B. (2019). The effects of problem-based language learning on the listening comprehension skills of Malaysian Undergraduate Students. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(3), 996-1010. [DOI:10.18823/asiatefl.2019.]
62. Veloo, A., Rani, M. A., & Krishnasamy, H. N. (2014). The role of gender in the use of metacognitive awareness reading strategies among biology students. Asian Social Science, 11(1), 67-73. [DOI:10.5539/ass.v11n1p67]
63. Yapp, D., de Graaff, R., & van den Bergh, H. (2021). Effects of reading strategy instruction in English as a second language on students' academic reading comprehension. Language Teaching Research, 210-245. [DOI:10.1177/1362168820985236]
64. Yüksel, İ., & Yüksel, İ. (2012). Metacognitive awareness of academic reading strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 894-898. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.164]
65. Zarei, A. A. (2018). On the relationship between metacognitive reading strategies, reading self-efficacy, and L2 reading comprehension. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 10(22), 157-181
66. Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive Strategy Use and Academic Reading Achievement: Insights from a Chinese Context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Languages Teaching, 10(1), 54-69.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.