Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategy Use in Reading: The Case of Iranian EFL Students’ Test Performance

Document Type : Research article

Authors
Z. Mosalli 1
S. S. Marandi 2
L. Tajik 2
1 PhD Candidate, Department of English, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of English, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
10.52547/LRR.13.3.4
Abstract
Individual characteristics and differences, namely strategy-use behavior have been gaining much attention among researchers due to influences that they may have on test takers’ performance on reading tests. From a language testing perspective, however, further experimental studies are needed in this regard. This study investigated the relationship between test-takers’ strategy-use behavior and their reading test performance. Five hundred and twenty Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners (both male and female) participated in this study. They were assigned to high- and the low-reading ability groups based on their scores on a teacher-made reading comprehension test. They were also required to sit for a teacher-made TOEFL-based reading comprehension test and answer the adapted version of Phakiti’s (2008) Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategy Questionnaire with 30 items immediately after the test. The reliability of both instruments was approved through Cronbach alpha and the validity was assured through content and construct evidences of validity. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) on the questionnaire indicated that three factors were identified as cognitive (comprehension, retrieval, memory) and three as metacognitive strategies (planning, monitoring, evaluation) for both ability groups. Moreover, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis showed that metacognitive strategies had a regulating function on cognitive strategies in both groups. Furthermore, the results showed that in the high ability group Comprehension (COM) and Memory (MEM) strategies and in the low-ability group, Retrieval (RET) strategies were the best predictors of reading test performance. Finally, some implications and suggestions for further research are presented.

Keywords

Subjects

Anderson, N. J. (2005). L2 learning strategies. In E. Hinkel, Editor, Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 757–771). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203836507.ch3
Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment. Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667350
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CV4HB8
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language testing in practice. Oxford
University Press. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CV4HB8
Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS structural equation program manual (Version 6.0). Multivariate Software. http://www.econ.upf.edu/~satorra/CourseSEMVienna2010/EQSManual.pdf
Brown, J. D. (2005). Testing in language programs. McGraw-Hill.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). Routledge Falmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203720967
Cushing, S. T., & Purpura, J. E. (1993). Development of a questionnaire item bank to explore test-taker characteristics. Interim Report submitted to University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.91997009
Diken, H. E. (2020). The sources of cognitive and metacognitive strategies used by 7th grade students while reading the “Cells and Divisions” unit. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(5), 30-48. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.277.3
Ferrara, A. M., & Panlilio, C. C. (2020). The role of metacognition in explaining the relationship between early adversity and reading comprehension. Children and Youth Services Review, 112. https://doi:10.1016/j.childyouth
Gagne, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of
school learning. HarperCollins College Publishers.
Lin, L., Lam, W. I., & Tse, S. K. (2019). Test takers’ strategy use and L2 Chinese reading test performance in mainland China: A structural equation approach. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 60, 189-198. https://doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.01.002
Lin, L., Lam, W. I. & Tse, S. K. (2021). Motivational strategies, language learning strategies, and literal and inferential comprehension in second language Chinese reading: A structural equation modeling study. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.707538
Macaro E., & Erler, L. (2008). Raising the achievement of young-beginner readers of French through strategy instruction. Applied Linguistics, 29, 90-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm023
O’Malley, M. J., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524490
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Newbury House/Harper & Row.
Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching & researching: Language learning strategies. Pearson Education.
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading comprehension test performance. Language Testing, 20, 26–56. https://doi.org/10.1191%2F0265532203lt243oa
Phakiti, A. (2006). Modeling cognitive and metacognitive strategies and their interrelationships to EFL reading test performance. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 1, 53-95. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-9-17
Phakiti, A. (2008). Construction Validation of Bachman and Palmer’s model (1996) strategic competence model over time in EFL reading tests. Language Testing, 25(2), 237-272. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0265532207086783
Phakiti, A. (2016). Test takers’ performance appraisals, appraisal calibration, and cognitive and metacognitive strategy use. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(2), 75-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1154555
Purpura, J. E. (1999). Learner strategy use and performance on language tests: A structural equation modeling approach. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F026553229801500303
Robinson, M. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27
Rumelhart, D. (2004). Toward an interactive model of reading. In R. B. Rudell & N. J. Unrau
(Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1149–1179).
International Reading Association.
Saito, K., Tran, M., Suzukida, Y., Sun, H., Magne, V., & Ilkan, M. (2019). How do second language listeners perceive the comprehensibility of foreign-accented speech? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1-17. https://doi:10.1017/s0272263119000226
Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed). Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2005.01.006
Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second language development. In C. Doughty & M. Long, (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–408). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1111/b.9781405132817.2005.00001.x
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3s25j29j
Song, X., & Cheng, L. (2006). Language learner strategy use and test performance of Chinese learners of English. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(3), 243-266. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0303_2
Vosniadou, S., Darmawan, I., Lawson, M. J., Deur, P. V., Jeffries, D., & Wyra, M. (2021). Beliefs about the self-regulation of learning predict cognitive and metacognitive strategies and academic performance in pre-service teachers. Metacognition Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09258-0
Xu, F., Fan, L., Wang, Z., Wang, W., & Meng, J. (2021). Hemispheric processing of predictive inferences: the effects of textual constraint and metacomprehension monitoring competence. The Journal of General Psychology, 148(4), 451-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1565067
Zhang, L. (2018). Metacognitive and cognitive strategy use in reading comprehension. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6325-1
Zhang, L., Goh, C., & Kunnan, A. (2016). Test-takers’ strategy use and reading test performance: A structural equation. Symposium of CELC, Nanyang Technological University.
Zhang, L., & Zhang, L. J. (2013). Relationships between Chinese college test-takers’ strategy use and EFL reading test performance: A structural equation modeling approach. RELC Journal, 44(1), 35-57. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0033688212463272
Language Related Research
Volume 13, Issue 3 - Serial Number 69
July and August 2022
Pages 55-85