Innovations, Number 66 September2021

Innovations
Content available on Google Scholar

Home Page: www.journal-innovations.com

Utilizing Metacognitive Reading Strategies to develop Students’ Reading

Comprehension in EFL Classroom: Bule Hora University 1st year selected
freshman Students

Gadisa Tadesse Gobena

Lecturer at Bule Hora University Department of English Language and Literature
Email: gadissa2012@gmail.com
Abstract
The study aimed to explore the learners’ metacognitive reading strategies used during
reading comprehension and their impact on their learning. The subjects of the study were
English teachers of Bule Hora University and their respective students particularly
freshman students. The research was conducted on a sample of five sections of freshman
students from Bule Hora University. The researcher took a sample of five English teachers
in the Department using the Purposive sampling technique. In this study questionnaire,
interview and observation were employed as data gathering instruments. The
questionnaire used in this study was revolved around the strategies such as a) setting a
purpose for reading, previewing text content, predicting what the text is about, re-reading
for better understanding, etc.), and c)using the support mechanisms (e.g., use of
reference).All of these strategies were flown around three stages to pre-reading, while-
reading, and post-reading. The findings of this study revealed that there are significant
differences between the uses of overall metacognitive reading strategies by the students.
Keywords: 1. Metacognitive 2. Reading strategy 3. Reading comprehension

1. Introduction
1.1. Background of the study
The reading skill shows a key role in language learning classes. The ability to read and
proficiency are pivotal to students’ learning achievement that university students must
develop(Bogale, 2018). Language learners read the texts to understand not only unknown
words, but also the meaning of the whole sentence especially the higher -level students to
go beyond the sentences to get the intended meanings of the writers(Talebinezhad&

964
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

Matou, 2012).Moreover, University students must actively process information and

critically evaluate spoken, written, and electronic sources during their stay in the
university(Wudeneh, 2018).

Reading requires the utilization of many mental processes as information is collected,

processed ,and analyzed to understand what the writer is attempting to communicate
(Mckee, 2012). Then, discovering the best methods and techniques or processes the
learners choose to access is the goal of research in reading strategies(Karbalaei,
2010).Additionally, developing confidence in L2/FL reading has become an important
pedagogical issue in L2 settings and one major component of reading fluency is fast and
accurate word recognition(Gorsuch & Taguchi, 2010).

However, reading in a second language necessitates the simultaneous use of multiple

cognitive and linguistic skills. It can be challenging for second language readers who may
not have fully developed the lower-level processing skills (e.g., decoding, grammatical
ability, and vocabulary knowledge) that are needed for effective comprehension. Thus,
second language reading instruction could perhaps facilitate the development of learners’
lower-level processing skills (Ahmed, 2015).Furthermore,proficiency in reading involves
many variables, for example, automaticity of word recognition, familiarity with text
structure and topic, awareness of various reading strategies, and conscious use and control
of these strategies in processing a text (Pang, 2008).
Besides, reading to understand involves the interaction of several processes covering
knowledge and ability, decoding, sentence structure, and other cognitive processes(Mckee,
2012). McKee identified these reading skills: automaticity in word and sentence
recognition, content and schema, strategies and metacognitive skills,and reading purpose
and context. Therefore, having the awareness of Metacognitive reading strategy has a
significant role in reading comprehension and educational process(Reza Ahmadi et al.,
2013).

Concerning the above points, For example, Carrell, et al (1998) identified specific
metacognition strategies such as establishing objectives in reading, evaluating, repairing
misconceptions, analyzing, and adjusting reading speed, questioning,and selecting
cognitive strategies accordingly.

Teaching students with metacognitive techniques are a key to higher student achievement,
but studies of classroom practice indicate that few students are taught to use
metacognition and the supporting cognitive strategies that make teach easier (Wilson&
Conyers, 2016).Reading strategies employed by successful language learners such as being
able to organize information, use linguistic knowledge of their first language when they are

965
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

learning their second language, use contextual cues, and learn how to chunk
language(Karbalaei, 2010).

1.2. Statement of the problem

The problem that is an obstaclein the atmosphere of the teaching-learning processmight be
a lack of the understanding the written materials fluently. Forexample, Nunan(2002) said
that “good readers know what to do when they encounter difficulties because fluent
reading is the ability to read at an appropriate rate with adequate comprehension”. This
means meaning does not rest in the reader nor does it rest in the text. Since reading
comprehension is the objective that any reader has at the beginning of an activity, the
reading act is defined by the text, the reader, fluency, and strategies combined.
Successful comprehension does not occur automatically; rather, successful comprehension
depends on directed cognitive effort, referred to as metacognitive processing, which
consists of knowledge about and regulation of processing(Bazerman, 1985; Pressley
&Afflerbach, 1995 cited in Karbalaei 2010). During reading, metacognitive processing is
expressed through strategies, which are ―procedural, purposeful, effortful, willful,
essential, and facilitative in nature and ―the reader must purposefully or intentionally
invoke strategies (Alexander & Jetton, 2000). Through metacognitive strategies, a reader
allocates significant attention to controlling, monitoring, and evaluating the reading
process (Pressley, 2000).
Additionally, Sheorey and Mokhtari(2001) stated that it is the combination of conscious
awareness of the strategic reading processes and the actual use of reading strategies that
distinguishskilled from unskilled readers. Some studies show that unsuccessful students
lack this strategic awareness and monitoring of the comprehension process (Garcia,
Jimenez, & Pearson, 1998).Metacognitive awareness and use of reading strategies by first
and second language readers of English have shown that important reading strategies
which deal with planning, controlling, and evaluating one‘s understanding (e.g., setting the
purpose for reading, prediction, summarization, questioning, use of text structural features,
self-monitoring, etc.) are widely used (Sheorey&Mokhtari, 2001).

Some researchers suggested their research findings in different prospective regarding the
students’ reading ability or completing the given passage with full understanding. For
example, lesssuccessful readers indicated that their main goal was to finish the text rather
than understand it(Wang, 2016).According toFriesen, D. C., & Haigh, C. A (2018) students
also identified words they did not know but failed to utilize strategies to resolve the
unknown vocabulary with other reading behaviors included failing to reinterpret the
meaning of the text when inconsistencies were identified.Additionally, the reading
problems that negatively influence the reading comprehension of the students are issues
with background knowledge, trouble with fluency, difficulty with informational text,

966
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

difficulty with making inferences, issues with vocabulary, and low reading level(Sanford,
2016).

The current study aims at having better language learning or more success in EFL contexts
during reading comprehension. The main reason for the present research stems from the
fact that the notion of metacognitive and reading comprehension as well as their
relationship with second language learning is considered to be an important and recent
matter, particularly at the university level.
So, the importance of heightening Students’ Reading Comprehension in English Language
Teaching and Learning through Metacognitive Reading Strategy, and their impact on
learning is needed. Therefore, considering these ideas in account that presently no
research has been done concerning metacognitive reading strategies among EFL University
students in Ethiopia particularly at Bule Hora University of the study focused. So, as far as
my underlying evidence in doing this, students are not experienced to utilize metacognitive
strategic awareness in dealing with their academic reading tasks to comprehend the
differences existing in their reading comprehension. I conducted the present research to
find answers to the following questions vis-à-visStudents’ Reading Comprehension in EFL
through MetacognitiveReading Strategy:
1. What Metacognitive reading strategies do students use when they are reading
comprehension passages in English?
2. How English teachers are used Metacognitive Reading Strategies to encourage students’
reading motivation while teaching reading comprehension text in English?
3. To what extent do the students use metacognitive reading strategies to understand a
given text?

2. Theoretical context and literature review

2.1 The importance of metacognitive strategies

In education the word metacognition has become a remarkable word that needs attention
for our learners in education. To clarify this, the author of this study adopted the definition
offered by Kuhn (2000). Kuhn defined metacognition as, "Enhancing (a) metacognitive
awareness of what one believes and how one knows and (b) metastrategic control in
application of the strategies that process new information" (p. 178). This awareness is
developmental and lies on a continuum. Proficient readers use one or more metacognitive
strategies to comprehend text. Pressley et al. (1998) found that students' comprehension
was not enhanced by merely reading more text. If the students used even one of the
strategies, for example summarizing, comprehension was improved. If students were given
a host of strategies that they could apply at their discretion, comprehension was greatly
improved.

967
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

2.2 Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies

Metacognitive reading strategy awareness, are strategies that help students to regulate or
monitor cognitive strategies. They are the notions of thinking about thinking, and are
defined as, planned, intentional, goal directed, and future-oriented mental processing that
can be used to accomplish cognitive tasks (Salataki&Akyel, 2002; Phakit, 2003).
Rmesh (2009) explained that recognizing and monitoring cognitive processes may be one
of the most important skills that lecturers, teachers and instructors can assist EFL/ESL
students’ enhancement. Metacognitive reading strategy awareness skills should be
considered and taught as a valuable use of instructional time by second/foreign language
instructors.

2.3. Classroom instruction using metacognitive strategies

Even though metacognitive strategies are considered to be of value for adequate text
comprehension, classroom teachers often fail to teach this process. Pressley et al. (1998)
conducted a qualitative research study on 10 fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms to
investigate instructional practice regarding reading, writing, motivation, classroom
management, use of materials, and instructional goals. Teachers were interviewed twice
during a yearlong period and monthly observations were carried out. They found that
direct teaching of comprehension strategies was minimal. At the same time, the teachers
professed to teach reading comprehension strategies. Some of the teachers did mention
strategy use but did so in a passive manner without actively and directly teaching the
strategies. Some teachers felt like they taught the use of the strategies by using
summarizing, predicting, and imagery as an assessment tool. This, however, does not
validate that students used the strategies during the act of reading text. While some
teachers used these more often, most of the teachers did not believe it necessary to see that
the students were aware of the use of such strategies.

Palincsar and Brown (1984) identified four activities they believe aid in comprehension-
fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. These activities are self-questioning,
summarizing, clarifying, and predicting. The technique used by Palincsar and Brown was
termed reciprocal teaching (RT). While research has shown that the strategies employed in
RT are effective (Rosenshine& Meister, 1994)

2.4 Review of Studies on Metacognitive Reading Strategy Awareness

According to O’Malley and Chamot (1990), most investigations on metacognitive reading

strategy awareness in both L1 and L2 contexts has emphasized on clarifying and
categorizing the metacognitive reading strategies that proficient readers employ in
comparison to less-proficient readers.

968
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

2.5 Correlation between Metacognitive Reading Strategy Awareness and Reading

Comprehension
There is a positive relationship between metacognitive reading strategies awareness and
reading comprehension. Accordingly, Flavell (1976) stated that the theoretical framework
that supports this study is metacognitive reading strategy awareness theory (Flavell,
1976), it believes that self-monitoring and regulation is the main important factor in
reading comprehension. These strategies not only promote reading comprehension but
also motivate readers to read more and understand better the written message/messages.

3. Methodology
The Participants: The subjects of the study were English teachers of Bule Hora University
and their respective students particularly freshman students. The research was conducted
on a sample of five sections of freshman students from Bule Hora University. 20 active
staffs are tenured to teach the students. Except for four instructors 16 of them were
assigned to teach communicate English Skills I, which is the main focus of the study
concerned.
Sampling Techniques:the researcher took sample of five English teachers in the
Department using the purposive a sampling technique since their population is small to
manage.
In the 2019/20 academiccalendar, there are around 3702 freshman students assigned into
68 sections in the first semester. The number of students is large to take the sample.
Therefore,a scholar like (Bryman, 2016).In addition, DE Vaus (1996) illustrates that large
and adequate sample size is the main method to ensure that the data collected would
provide a reliable basis for drawing inferences, making recommendations, and supporting
decisions. Within this respect, a large and adequate sample size would remove bias and
meet the criteria required by the analytical methods used within the research. Based on
this, from total the numbers of 3702 freshman students, 370 or 10% of them were taken as
a representative sample. This is because as Mertler 2005 suggests that for descriptive
studies, a common recommendation is to sample approximately 10%-20% of the
population. They were taken from each different section (Natural Group1-36 and Social Group1-
32)in which those teachers were assigned to teach English.

The Research Design of the Study: This study was grounded on pragmatism as a research
paradigm aligned with a mixed research design. This study required the use of both
quantitative and qualitative approaches to address the research problem (Cresswell, 2014;
Shannon-Baker 2016). As a result, a descriptive survey design was employed to achieve the
purpose of this study.
Materials
The researcher used Communicative English Skills I final Examination that is well
organized with reading stages to evaluate and reach on conclusion as

969
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

ReadingComprehension Test.The results of students’ reading comprehension exam were

taken for further comparison with the targeted topic of study since the exam was carried
out after data were collected.
Questionnaire: In this study, the researcher used a questionnaire to dig information from
students regarding the metacognitive reading strategies they use while reading.The
questionnaire revolves around the strategies such as a) setting a purpose for reading,
previewing text content, predicting what the text is about, re-reading for better
understanding, etc.), and c)using the support mechanisms (e.g., use of reference).All of
these strategies were flown around three stages to pre-reading, while-reading, and post-
reading.
Data Gathering Instruments:A “Triangulated Data gathering” approach was used in this
study to adequatelyassess the data and determine the metacognitive reading ability of the
students from various perspectives either on their own or with the help of their English
teacher. In this study questionnaire, interviews and observations were employedas data
gathering instruments.
The questionnaire included a point Likert scale: Never, sometimes, rarely, and always. A
semi-structured reflective interview was used to supplement the questionnaires and
classroom observation. The interview helped the researcher to further explain the nature
and type of students’ approaches to reading and reading strategies to increase the reading
comprehension ability. This semi-structured reflective interview was conducted
consecutively after the administration of the questionnaire from the students and
classroom observation. This helps the researcher to further assess the students’
approaches to reading and reading strategies theteacher had adopted to help students
while reading thetext.
Methods of Data Analysis: The descriptive statistics was employed to quantitatively
describe and explain how far students use metacognitive reading strategies to strength
their ability in comprehending reading independently. Moreover, the data obtained
through interview and open-ended questions of the questionnaire were qualitatively
analyzed, and the findings were used for triangulating the quantitative data.

970
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

The Results and Discussion

Students’ Questionnaire
Table 1: The Metacognitive Reading Strategies Students employ in comprehending
the text during reading
N Items N R S A
o F % F % F % F %
1 I use my prior knowledge to help me understand what 155 41.8 89 24.1 62 16.8 64 17.3
I read.
2 I think about whether the content of the text fits my 108 29.2 75 20.3 97 26.2 90 24.3
reading purpose.
3 I use reference materials (e.g, dictionary ) to help me 71 19.1 63 17.0 104 28.1 132 35.7
understand what I read 8 2
4 I use tables, figures, and pictures in text to increase my 121 32.7 99 26.8 73 19.7 77 20.8
understanding
5 I use context clues to help me better understand what I 88 23.7 145 39.2 55 14.8 82 22.1
am reading. 8 6 6
6 I try to check my understanding when I see new 25 6.8 182 49.2 110 29.7 53 14.3
information.
7 I try to predict what the content of the reading 59 15.9 196 53 50 13.5 65 17.6
comprehension passage is about when Read 4
8 I later remind if my prediction/s about reading 171 46.2 84 22.7 33 8.9 82 22.2
comprehension passage is/are right or wrong.
Never=N Rarely=R Sometimes=S Always=A

As it can be seen from table 1 of item 1, 17.3% of the students always consider their prior
knowledge in comprehending the text. In addition, 16.8% of them responded as they used
what they know to understand the given text. On the other hand, 24.1% of the students
responded rarely to the items whereas 41.8% of the students responded that they never
use their prior experiences or what they have known before to understand the given
reading comprehension. However, Marinaccio(2012) stated that usingprior knowledge as
the pre-reading strategy will be the most efficient for students to successfully comprehend
the provided text.Additionally,classroom observation results confirmed that teachers did
not givestrategy with link of concepts, experiences, and associations that encourage
their interactions with the given reading comprehension. Furthermore, when students
make connections to the text they are reading, their comprehension increases. Finally,
being able to appropriately use and activate prior knowledge is an important factor that
helps students to better understand a text (Armand, 2001).
Item 2 from Table 1 reflects on how learners think about whether the content of the text
fits their reading purpose.Then, 26.2 % and 24.3% of them responded to sometimes and
always respectively. 20.3% of them rarely responded to the item. Regarding the above item
2 of table 1, also 29.2% of the students responded to” never”. So, this finding indicates that
there are students who have never thought about whether the text's content fits their

971
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

purpose of reading.However, asTheide&Dunlosky(1999)described that successful reading

includes the ability to adjust processing in such a way that learning goals, as a function of
reading purpose, are met, but the ability to maintain learning goals during reading may
differ across individuals.Besides,as Linderholm( 2004 ) recommended that students should
use a specific study area associated only with serious reading to help prime the kind of
cognitive processing that is associated with reading for study purposes and better recall.
That is, ask students to set the stage for learning by designating an area in their dorm room
or apartment that is strictly used for study purposes.
On item 3of table 1, regardingstudents ‘exposure to using reference materials (e.g.,
dictionary ) to help in understanding what was read, almost all students were positively
responded to 28.1% and 35.7% for sometimes and always respectively.On the contrary, the
smallest percentage of students, i.e. 63 (17.02%) and 71(19.18%)of the total students
replied that they rarely and never use dictionary respectively.
Regarding the use of tables, figures, and pictures in the text to increase understanding,
77(20.8%) of students responded to “always”.73(19.7%) of the students responded to
“sometimes”. In opposite, 99(26.8%) of the students responded negatively to “rarely”.
Besides, 121(32.7%) of the students responded negativelythat they never use tables,
figures, and pictures in the text to increase their understanding.
Item 5 from table one clearly shows 88(23.78%) of the students never use context clues to
help their better understanding on what they read .In addition, 145(39.2%) of the students
rarely use context clues to help their better understanding of what they read.In
opposite,55(14.86%) and 82(22.16%) of the students responded to “sometimes “and
“always “respectively or a limited number of students use context clues to help their better
understanding of what they read. However, Tuyen and Huyen 2019 recommended that
using contextual clues is considered as one of the essential strategies that can guide
students to figure out the meanings of unknown words.
Regarding item 6 from table 1 above, 110(29.7%) of the students responded that they
sometimes try to check their understanding when they see new information in the text. In
addition, 53(14.3%) of the students responded that they always try to their understanding
when they see new information the text. On contrary, few students or 25(6.8%) of them
responded that they never try to check their understanding when they see new information
from the text, but around half the total population of students or 182(49.2%)showed their
response as they rarely try to check their understanding when they see new information
from the text.
On item 7 from the above table, only 50(13.5%) and 65(17.6%) of students were
sometimes and always predict what the content of the reading comprehension passage is
about while reading respectively. Differently, 59(15.94) of the students never do this. In
addition, a large number of students confirmed that they rarely predict what the content of
the reading comprehension passage is about while reading. However, Steubing 2011
argues that using strategies, such as predicting, help students not only gain a better

972
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

understanding of what they are reading, but help build confidence in their abilities to read..
When students actively predict while reading, they stay connected to the text and can
reflect upon, refine, and revise their predictions. Similar to this, on item 8, 171(46.2) of the
students responded that they never later remind if their prediction/s about reading
comprehension passage is/are right or wrong. But, students should revise their predictions
as they read and this helps them understand what they are reading and remember it. They
become so focused on confirming or revising their predictions that they remain engaged
with the text and motivated to read on. Mills (2009)argued that Students should confirm or
correct their predictions when they read the article.
Table 2: The Metacognitive Reading Strategies Students use to organize or manage
their reading.
No Items N R S A
F % F % F % F %
1 I take notes while reading to help me understand what 102 27.6 155 41.9 56 15.1 57 15.4
I read.
2 I underline or highlight essential information in the 39 10.5 70 18.9 102 27.6 159 42.9
text to help me remember it 7
3 I label my reading speed based on what I am 222 60 107 28.9 - - 41 11.1
Reading
Never=N Rarely=R Sometimes=S Always=A

The above table 2 partially shows the students’ response about the Metacognitive Reading
Strategies they use to organize or manage their reading. Based on this, 56(15.1) of the
students sometimes take notes while reading to help them understand what they read, and
57(15.4%) of them always did this In opposite,102(27.2%) of the students never take notes
while reading to help them understand what they read.Furthermore,155(41.9%) of the
students responded that they rarely take notes while reading to help them understand
what they read.
As can be seen from item two of table 2, it is indicated that 10.5 % of the respondents
confirmed that they underline or highlight essential information in the text to help them
remember it. The rest 18.9% considered that they sometimes underline or highlight
essential information in the text to help me remember it. In contrast, 27.6 % and 42.97 % of
the respondents positively reacted to “sometimes” and “always” respectively.
On item three table two, regarding “I label my reading speed based on what I am Reading”,
11.1 of the students replied as ‘always’. None of the respondents said ‘sometimes’. The rest
28.9% replied to ’rarely’. Likewise, a large number, or 60 % of the students responded that
they never label their reading speed based on what they were Reading.However, the
students can get many advantages knowing Speed reading. For example, Browning (2003)
presents positive points in learning to read faster. The first one is the amount of time you
will save when you're able to double your speed. The second advantage is that readers can

973
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

concentrate better which leads to greater comprehension. These are important gains for
the student that will promote academic success.
Table 3: The Metacognitive Reading Strategies Students prefer when they face
difficulties while reading
No Items N R S A
F % F % F % F %
1 I read carefully and slowly to make sure that I understand the 41 11.1 66 17.8 128 34.6 135 36.5
overall reading
2 I return to the right path when I lose focus. 111 30 183 49.5 26 7 50 13.5

3 I try to visualize descriptions in order to better understand 193 52.16 150 40.5 27 7.3 - -
the text 4
4 I re-read the text When I am facing difficulty comprehending 110 29.73 91 24.6 80 21.6 89 24.05
a text,
5 I guess the meaning of unfamiliar words or phrases When I 44 11.9 214 57.8 46 12.43 66 17.84
read
Never=N Rarely=R Sometimes=S Always=A

Table 3 concerns the Metacognitive Reading Strategies Students prefer when they face
difficulties while reading. On item of table 3, regarding reading carefully and slowly to
understand the overall reading, few numbers of students or 11.1% and 17.8% reacted to
‘never ‘and ‘rarely ‘respectively. In contrast, 34.6% of the students responded to
‘sometimes’. In addition, 36.5 % of the students confirmed positively that they always read
carefully and slowly to understand the overall reading.
On item 2 from table 3, students were asked whether they return to the right path or not
when they lose focus. A limited number of students or 7% replied positively to ‘sometimes’
regarding this statement. Similarly, 13.5 % of the students were responded to ‘always”. In
opposite, 30% of the students never return to the right path when they lose focus. And also,
almost half of the respondents, or 49.5 % confirmed that they rarely return to the right
path when they lose focus, so i.e. there was no such practice in the all-day classroom
observation.
On item 3 from table 3, regarding try to visualize descriptions to better understand the text,
40.54% of the students replied that they rarely do it. Also, 52.16% of the students replied
that they never try to visualize descriptions to better understand the text. The rest 7.3% of
the respondents responded as they sometimes try to visualize descriptions in order to
better understand the text. Therefore, students need to be encouraged to recall ideas
visually inappropriate reading contexts (Pressley, 2000).
On item 4 from table 3, concerning re-reading the text when facing difficulty in
comprehending a text, 21.6% ,and 24.05% replied positively to ‘sometimes’ and ‘always’
respectively.But, 29.73% and24.6 % of the respondents reacted to, never’ and ‘rarely’
respectively. Therefore, finding shows that students have the lack of re-reading the text
when they face difficulty in comprehending a text. However, Nurjanah( 2018)claims that
Students should need to stop, go back and re-read to clear up any confusion they may have.

974
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

On item 5 from table 3, students were invited to respond concerning guessing the meaning
of unfamiliar words or phrases as metacognitive reading strategies when they face
difficulties while reading. To this end, 12.43 % and 17.84 % of the respondents responded
to ‘sometimes’ and ‘always’.Nonetheless,11.9 % of the students responded to ‘never’. More
than half the students confirmed that they rarely guess the meaning of unfamiliar words or
phrases when they face difficulties while reading. Wulandari(2016) claims in his study that
students will often come across difficult words in texts they are exposed to, but inferring
and guessing meanings of unfamiliar words is a strategy that is worth developing.

Summary of the teachers’ interview result

The main aim of the interview was to provide the researcher with an in-depth
understanding of the teachers’ ways of using metacognitive reading comprehension
strategies to their students in EFL classes. The researcher used to validate the teachers’
answers previously stated in the questionnaire as well classroom observation.Therefore, a
total of five teachers were asked to answer five open-ended questions related to using
metacognitive reading comprehension strategies in EFL learning/teaching
Question One‘ Do you teach metacognitive reading comprehension strategies to your
students?
This question is used to know the importance attributed to teaching metacognitive reading
strategies compared to other aspects of the language teaching in the class. Except for
twoinstructors,all of them said ‘No”, which means they have not experienced teaching
metacognitive reading comprehension strategies to their students.
Question Two,If so, what are the metacognitive reading strategies that you obviously
teach?(e,g Note-Taking , word-mapping, Inferencing from textual evidence ,Distinguishing
facts from opinion , Previewing, Predicting, Skimming and scanning, Guessing from context,
Paraphrasing and summarizing,etc. ).It was asked to know other ways (if any) used by
teachers to help students to know and understand their reading comprehension. Without
any surprise, almost totally, the respondents declared not using metacognitive reading
strategies such as word-mapping, and Previewing.
Question Three, ‘Do you bring additional reading text to the class without the regular
module you have commonly so as?It was asked to know the teachers’ degree of reference to
the additional reading text to the class without the regular module and encourage students
to train in using strategies in reading comprehension strategies for better understanding.
Except for one teacher four of the interviewed Teachers commented that they never create
opportunities for learners to understand the reading comprehension. Even the rest one
instructor responded that he rarely brings additional reading text to the class.

975
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

Question Four, How often do you let your students practice reading comprehension
strategies?It was used to know teachers’ attitudes towards letting their students practice
reading comprehension strategies.
The interview response of one of the instructor was directly written as follows:
“First of all,I will give chance for the learner to predict,discuss,and talk about the topic, and
then I will ask them to read the text or do different activities while reading.Lastly,I ask my
students to summarize the text or to relate the concept of the text with their life; compare
and contrast the idea in the text with real life. Moreover, I let them do exercise given often
the text” From this direct interview, a researcher understood how much the instructor is
ready to help his students by letting them to exposure of different reading activities.
On the other hand,four of the teachers stressed to ‘sometimes’ the importance ofletting
their students to practice reading comprehension strategies to encourage them.
Question Five, What are the metacognitive reading strategies you practice with your
students in classroom to increase their reading comprehension?This question was
intended to know the specific metacognitive reading strategies teachers are used in the
classroom to help their students.
The metacognitive reading strategies that all of the interviewed instructors mostly listed
include skimming, scanning, guessing from the context,inferencing, predicting, and
summarizing.

In support of teachers’ interview result and students’ questionnaire responses, the

classroom observations results were also summarized as follows:The teachers frequently
use tasks and follow strategies to motivate students to engage in the reading process as
well as motivate students to help them to activate their prior knowledge of the topic;the
teachers hardly help students create a focus for their reading efforts to set a purpose for
the reading.

4. Research Findings and Recommendations

4.1. Research Findings

Based on the research instruments and participants’ responses the following findings were
counted and elaborated:
-Students lack using their prior experiences to understand the given reading
comprehension;
-This finding suggests that there are students, who did not adjust their thought about
whether the content of the text fits their reading purpose;

976
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

- This finding suggests that there are students who never thought about whether the
content of the text fits their reading purpose;
-The existence of limited use of reading strategies like tables, figures, and pictures in text to
increase understanding;
-The students rarely use context clues , lack of reminding prediction about reading
comprehension passage at post-reading stage, lack of checking understanding during new
information from the text existed;
-students rarely take notes while reading to help them understand what they read;
- Students never label their reading speed based on what they were Reading;
-Students rarely return to the right path when they lose focus;
-Students lack re-reading the text when facing difficulty in comprehending a text;
- Lack of teachers’ attention to teaching metacognitive reading comprehension strategies to
their students;
- Teachers rarely bring additional reading text to the class without the regular module and
encourage students to train in using strategies in reading comprehension strategies for
better understanding;
- All the teachers did not let their students to practice reading comprehension strategies
equally to encourage them;
-The teachers frequently use tasks and follow strategies to motivate students to engage in
the reading process as well as motivate students to help them to activate their prior
knowledge of the topic;
-The teachers hardlyhelp students create a focus for their reading efforts to set a purpose
for the reading

4.2. Recommendations
Succeeding the results in this study the next recommendations requisite to be occupied
into concern by language educators, teacher educationists, and education policymakers if
Metacognitive reading strategy in developing students’ reading proficiency has to be
accomplished:
-Students should use their prior experiences to understand the given reading
comprehension;
-Students should adjust their thought about whether the content of the text fits their
reading purpose while doing through reading comprehension;
-students should take notes while reading to help them understand what they read;
- Students should label their reading speed based on what they were reading;
-Students should re-read the text when facing difficulty in comprehending a text;
- Teachersshould give attention to teach metacognitive reading comprehension strategies
to their students;

977
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

- Teachers should bring additional reading text to the class without the regular module and
encourage students to train in using strategies in reading comprehension strategies for
better understanding;
-Teacher should let their students to practice reading comprehension strategies equally so
as to encourage them;
-The teachers should use tasks and follow strategies to motivate students to engage in the
reading process as well as motivate students to help them to activate their prior knowledge
of the topic
-The teacher should help students create a focus for their reading efforts so as to set a
purpose for the reading;
-English language teachers should have concern on teaching reading lesson. In addition,
the concerned body should supervise and give supportive feedback based on the teachers
teaching practice;
-Teachers should encourage their students to come with their reading comprehension
hand out to be distributed from English department and make the reading lesson
enjoyable;
-English Teachers have to inspire students to practice reading strategies in the classroom;
-Teachers should encourage students by teaching different types of reading strategies
explicitly and implicitly;
Finally, teachers should upgrade their theoretical knowledge about reading strategies,
andbe aware of effective reading strategies.

References
1. Ahmed, S. (2015). Second language reading and instruction. Studies in Applied
Linguistics and TESOL, 15(2).
2. Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and
developmental perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr
(Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3, pp. 285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

978
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

3. Armand, F. (2001).Learning from expository texts: Effects of the interaction of prior

knowledge and text structure on responses to different question types. European
Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(1), 67-86.
4. Bogale, Y. N. (2018). Conceptualizing Reading to Learn: Strategy Instruction and EFL
Students’ Reading Comprehension. International Journal of Curriculum and
Instruction, 10(2), 93-117.
5. Browning, J. (2003). Why Teachers Should Use Timed Reading in ESL classes. The
Internet
6. Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Method, Ch1. The nature and process of social
research. Social Research Method, Fifth Edition, 3–16.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2014).Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
8. De Vaus, D. A. (1996).Surveys in Social Research. (4th ed). Australia: UCL Press.
9. FariskaWulandari. (2016). Developing Students’ Reading Comprehension through
Contextual Guessing. JurnalPendidikan Bahasa, 5(1)
10. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.),
The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-236). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
11. Friesen, D. C., & Haigh, C. A. (2018). How and Why Strategy Instruction Can Improve
Second Language Reading Comprehension: A Review. The Reading Matrix: An
International Online Journal, 18(1)
12. Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2008).Repeated reading for developing reading fluency and
reading comprehension: The case of EFL learners in Vietnam. System, 36(2), 253-278.
13. Jimenez, R., Garcia, G., & Pearson, P. (1996).The reading strategies of bilingual
Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles.
International Literacy Association: Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1).
14. John W.Creswell.( 2003).Research Design:Qualitative,Quantative and Mixed
methods.Nebraska-Lincoln, SAGE Publications.
15. Karbalaei, A. (2010). A comparison of the metacognitive reading strategies used by
EFL and ESL readers. The Reading Matrix, 10(2).
16. Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 9, 178-181.
979
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

17. Le Van Tuyen and Vo Thi Ngoc Huyen.(2019).Effects of using Contextual Clues on
English Vocabulary Retention and Reading Comprehension. International Journal of
English, Literature and Social Science, 5(4).
18. Linder Holm, T (2004). Fluctuations in the availability of information during reading:
Capturing cognitive processes using the landscape model. Discourse Processes.
19. Marinaccio, J. (2012).The Most Effective Pre-reading Strategies for Comprehension .St.
John Fisher College, Fisher Digital Publications
20. Mckee, S. (2012). Reading Comprehension, What We Know: A Review of Research 1995
to 2011. Language Testing in Asia, 2(1), 45–58.
21. Mertler,Craig A and C.M.Charles.2005.Introduction to Educational Research.
PearsonEducation,Inc;Boston.
22. Mills, K. A. (2009). Floating on a Sea of Talk: Reading Comprehension through
Speaking and Listening. The Reading Teacher, 63(4), pp. 325–329
23. O’Malley, J. M., &Chamot, A. U. (1990).Learning strategies in second language
acquisition.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
24. Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984).Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering
and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117-175.
25. Pang, J. X. (2008). Reading comprehension research in China. Reading in a Foreign
Language, 20(1), 18.
26. Phakiti, A. (2003). A close look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive
strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing Journal,
20(1), 26-56
27. Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Mistretta-Hampston, J., & Echevarria, M. (1998).
The nature of literacy instruction in ten grade-4/5 classrooms in upstate New York.
Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 159-194
28. Pressley, M. (2000).What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of?
Handbook of Reading Research.3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Ramesh, R. (2009). Metacognitive Strategies for Enhancing Second Language
Acquisition.ManonmaniamSundaranar University. Thirunelveli-627 012, India
30. RatihLailyNurjanah. (2018). The Analysis on Students’ Difficulties in Doing Reading
Comprehension Final Test. Journal of English Language Literature and Teaching,2(2).
980
 Innovations, Number 66 September2021

31. Reza Ahmadi, M., Nizam Ismail, H., & Kamarul Kabilan Abdullah, M. (2013). The
importance of metacognitive reading strategy awareness in reading comprehension.
English Language Teaching, 6(10), 235–244.
32. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research.
Review of Educational Research, 64, 479-530 .
33. Salataki, R., & Akyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2
reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14, 1-17
34. Sanford, K. L. (2016). Factors affecting the reading comprehension of secondary
students with disabilities. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities
and Social Sciences, 76(11-A(E)), No-Specified.
35. Shannon-Baker, P. (2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research.
Journal of mixed methods research, 10(4), 319-334.
36. Sheorey R., &Mokhtari, K. (2001).Differences in the metacognitive awareness of
reading strategies among native and non-native readers. Science Direct, 29(4).
37. Steubing, Katie, (2011). "Strategies Teachers can use to Help Support Comprehension
in Struggling Readers"
38. Talebinezhad, M. R., & Matou, Z. (2012). EFL reading comprehension textbooks at
university level: A critical thinking perspective. Theory and Practice in Language
Studies, 2(8), 1746–1754.
39. Theide, K. W., &Dunlosky, J. (1999).Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An
analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25.
40. Wang, Y. H. (2016). Reading strategy use and comprehension performance of more
successful and less successful readers: A think-aloud study. Kuram ve Uygulamada
Egitim Bilimleri, 16(5), 1789–1813.
41. Wilson, D., & Conyers, M. (2016).Teaching students to drive their brains: Metacognitive
strategies, activities, and lesson ideas. ASCD.
42. Wudeneh, A. M. (2018). Assessing the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies
Among Freshmen University Students , Ethiopia. 2014, 27–33.

981
Innovations, Number 66 September2021

982