TRAINING LEARNERS METACOGNITIVE LEARNING STRATEGIES TO USE LEARNING STRATEGIES IN ENGLISH READING
Abstract
This present study aimed to investigate (1) the direct effect of the training to the use of metacognitive strategies on the learners (2) which metacognitive strategy mostly used by the learners after the training (3) whether there is significant difference between learners‘ reading comprehension before and after the training. This was a combination between qualitative and quantitative study which used one group pretest-posttest design. The samples of the study were the learners at the second grade of SMP Negeri 1 Metro. Repeated Measures t-test was used to analyze the data of learners‘ reading comprehension. The hypothesis was computed by SPSS 16 at the significant level of 0.05. The result showed that (1) the use of metacognitive strategies on the learners were directly affected by the training (2) planning strategy was mostly used by the learners (3) it was suspected that there was significant difference on the learners‘ reading comprehension. The use of learners‘ metacognitive strategies were affected about 0.29 point. Meanwhile the learners‘ post test reading comprehension was significantly different with the pretest (p<0.05; p=0.005). It can be concluded that the training directly affected the learners‘ metacognitive strategies use and indirectly resulted the significant difference between the learners‘ reading comprehension.
Keywords : metacognitive learning strategies training, learning strategies, learners’ reading comprehension.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Brown, P. S. 2005. Elements of Learner Training and Learning Strategies in a Japanese Eikawa (private language school): Module Assignment PG/05/08. University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. 57 pages.
Carrel, P.L & Joan C. Eisterhold.1983. ”Schema Theory and ESL Reading Paedagogy” in TESOL Quarterly 17/4.
Chamot, A. U., et al. 1999. The Learning Strategies: Handbook. Longman. New York. 256 pages.
Chamot, A.U. 2004. Issues in Language Learning Strategy Research and Teachin. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching.Vol. 1, No. 1, 2004. Pp. 14-26. Ccentre for Language Studies. National university of Singapore. April 14, 2006. http://eflt.nus.edu.sg/v!n!2004/chamot.htm
Clark, C. 2000. Strategy Training in Language Learning – A systematic review of Available Research. REEL Internet Journal. June 5, 1999. Updated May 21, 2000. April 14, 2006. http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/strategy.html
Muniz, Miriam. 1994. The Effects of Metacognitive Reading Strategy Training on the Reading Performance and Student Reading Analysis Strategies of Third Grade Bilinguals Students. Bilingual Research Journal. Vol. 18:1 & 2 Winter/ Spring 1994. P. 83-97
Oxford, R. 1990. Language Learning Strategies. What Every Teacher Should Know. Boston, Mass.: Heinle & Heinle
Oxford, R. 1994. Language Learning Strategies: An Update. ERIC Digest. April 1994. ERIC Clearing house on Language and Linguistic, Washington DC. April 14, 2006. http:// www.cal.org/ericccll/digest/oxford01.html
Rasekh, Z. E. 2003. Metacognitive Strategy Training for Voccabulary Learning. TESL-EL. Vol 7, No. 2, 2003. May 25, 2006. http://www.writing.berkeley.edu/tesl-ej/ej26/a5.html
Palinscar, A., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1(2), 117.
Wenden, Anita and Joan Rubin, 1990. Learning Strategies in Language Learning, London Prentince Hall, and Int.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c)