Options
Metacognitive awareness and usage
Author
Wong, Mei Yin
Supervisor
Lee, Kerry
Abstract
In view of the importance of metacognition in the thinking curriculum for students at the secondary level, and research findings about readers who are native speakers of English and readers who are bilingual, the present study investigated whether good and poor bilingual Singaporean readers differ in their knowledge and use of metacognition. The Index of Reading Awareness (Jacobs & Paris, 1987) and the Reading Strategy Use (RSU) Scale (Pereira, Laird & Deane, 1997) were administered to investigate the participants' knowledge and use of metacognition, respectively. It was predicted that these readers would demonstrate a difference in their knowledge and use of metacognitive strategies. The present study also attempted to extend the previous findings by examining their knowledge and use of metacognition during reading in the Singaporean linguistic context.
A total of 125 Singaporean secondary one students of Chinese origin participated in this study. They comprised 69 pupils from the Express course and 56 from the Normal (Academic) course at three government schools. The pupils were all bilingual non-native speakers of English exposed to the English language as the main medium of instruction at school. The awkward linguistic situation in Singapore made it interesting to discover if the local bilingual readers, from a multilingual environment, would behave similarly or differently from bilingual readers from bilingual linguistic contexts.
The present study also examined whether Singaporean readers would use metacognitive and cognitive strategies differently when the contextual environment varied. The study attempted to examine the readers' knowledge and use of metacognition when they read texts from different domains, namely a scientific text, and a passage from a reading comprehension text, to examine the effects of the external text-base on the regulation and control of the cognitive and metacognitive processes involved in reading.
The results suggest that, overall, metacognition made a significant but small contribution to the reading comprehension performance of the Singaporean readers. The readers did not differ in their knowledge of metacognition in evaluation, planning, regulation and conditional knowledge. The academic stream of the readers bore no significant effects on the readers' knowledge and use of metacognitive strategies.
The good readers used metacognitive strategies more extensively than the poor readers. No differences were found between the good and poor readers' in their use of cognitive strategies. The good and poor readers significantly differed in their use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies and across the three contexts, though no differences in the effects of the varying conditions were found for the good readers. The poor readers, however differed in their use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies. No significant differences were found for readers in the respective academic streams, in their use of strategies across the three contexts manipulated.
The findings partially refute previous findings made for the good and poor readers who are native speakers of English, and for the good and poor EL2 readers. These findings question the extent to which the readers' knowledge and use of metacognitive strategies are important in contributing to the successes of reading comprehension of the good and poor bilingual Singaporean readers.
A total of 125 Singaporean secondary one students of Chinese origin participated in this study. They comprised 69 pupils from the Express course and 56 from the Normal (Academic) course at three government schools. The pupils were all bilingual non-native speakers of English exposed to the English language as the main medium of instruction at school. The awkward linguistic situation in Singapore made it interesting to discover if the local bilingual readers, from a multilingual environment, would behave similarly or differently from bilingual readers from bilingual linguistic contexts.
The present study also examined whether Singaporean readers would use metacognitive and cognitive strategies differently when the contextual environment varied. The study attempted to examine the readers' knowledge and use of metacognition when they read texts from different domains, namely a scientific text, and a passage from a reading comprehension text, to examine the effects of the external text-base on the regulation and control of the cognitive and metacognitive processes involved in reading.
The results suggest that, overall, metacognition made a significant but small contribution to the reading comprehension performance of the Singaporean readers. The readers did not differ in their knowledge of metacognition in evaluation, planning, regulation and conditional knowledge. The academic stream of the readers bore no significant effects on the readers' knowledge and use of metacognitive strategies.
The good readers used metacognitive strategies more extensively than the poor readers. No differences were found between the good and poor readers' in their use of cognitive strategies. The good and poor readers significantly differed in their use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies and across the three contexts, though no differences in the effects of the varying conditions were found for the good readers. The poor readers, however differed in their use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies. No significant differences were found for readers in the respective academic streams, in their use of strategies across the three contexts manipulated.
The findings partially refute previous findings made for the good and poor readers who are native speakers of English, and for the good and poor EL2 readers. These findings question the extent to which the readers' knowledge and use of metacognitive strategies are important in contributing to the successes of reading comprehension of the good and poor bilingual Singaporean readers.
Date Issued
2005
Call Number
LB1050.2 Won
Date Submitted
2005