Editorial

Metacognition and Reading Comprehension

Alireza Karbalaei*
Department of English Language, Islamic Azad University,
Safashahr Branch, Safashahr, Irán

1. Introduction
The importance of “learning to read” has stimulated considerable debates
—theoretical, practical, and political ones— about which teaching methods
and materials are the most effective. During the past 10 years, debates have
become more strident as calls for school accountability have increased. The
debates about teaching reading are not theoretical, since teachers are in-
creasingly told by legislation what, how, and to whom teach reading in their
classrooms.

The debates have also stimulated a greater reliance on scientific evidence by

educational administrators and policymakers who want all teachers to use
effective methods and materials (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998). Reading
researchers, perhaps now more than ever before, have a responsibility to
use the most relevant research to bridge theory and practice with coherent
and useful models for the development of reading, curriculum, instruction,
and assessment.

On the other hand, recent research in second language reading has focused
on “metacognition”. These studies investigate metacognitive awareness of
reading strategies and the relationship among perception of strategies, stra-
tegy use, and reading comprehension.

Strategy research suggests that less competent learners may improve their
skills through training in strategies evidenced by most successful learners.

Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011) 5

Editorial

Relatively, little research on metacognitive strategy training has been un-

dertaken on second or foreign language reading.

2. Learning Strategies
As a cover term, language learning strategies are the operations or processes
that learners employ to learn the target language. Research into what lear-
ners do to learn a language has resulted in the identification of specific stra-
tegies and in attempts to classify them in some way. Most current research
has been carried out either through the framework developed by Oxford
(Oxford, 1990) or through the metacognitive, cognitive, socio-affective
scheme used by O’Malley, Kupper, Chamot and others (O’Malley & Cha-
mot, 1990).

2.1 Metacognitive Strategies

Metacognition refers to the knowledge and control that we have over our
cognitive processes. With regard to reading, it is common to talk about me-
tacognitive awareness (what we know) and metacognitive regulation or
control (knowing when, where, and how to use strategies, that is, what we
can do). On a general level, metacognition includes awareness and control
of planning, monitoring, repairing, revising, summarizing, and evaluating.
Essentially, we learn awareness of our comprehension processing. More
specifically, we learn strategies that support our comprehension (our aware-
ness of strategies) and we learn how to carry out these strategies effectively
(our control of strategies) (Baker, 2002, 2008; Pressley, 2002).

One reason why metacognition is significant is that if learners are not aware
of when comprehension is breaking down and what they can do about it,
strategies introduced by the teacher will fail. As O’Malley et al. have poin-
ted out: “students without metacognitive approaches are essentially learners
without direction or opportunity to review their progress, accomplishments,
and future directions” (1985: 561). Further, Pressley, Snyder and Cariglia-
Bull (1987) suggest that metacognition helps students to be consciously
aware of what they have learned, and to recognize situations in which it
would be useful, and progress in using it.

6 Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011)

 Editorial

a. Metacognitive Reading Strategies

Reading, whether in L1 or L2, is a “cognitive enterprise”, which occurs in

part as a result of the interaction among the reader, the text, and the context
in which reading takes place (Flavell, 1979). Furthermore, to accomplish
the task of comprehending the text successfully, the reader must utilize me-
tacognitive knowledge and must invoke conscious and deliberate strategies.
The readers’ metacognitive knowledge about reading may be influenced by
a number of factors, including previous experiences, beliefs, culture-specific
instructional practices, and, in the case of non-native readers, proficiency in
L2, and it may be triggered, consciously or unconsciously, when the reader
encounters a specific reading task. The readers’ metacognitive knowledge
about reading includes an awareness of a variety of reading strategies and
of the fact that the cognitive enterprise of reading is influenced by this meta-
cognitive awareness of reading strategies. It is the combination of conscious
awareness of reading, strategic reading processes, and the actual utilization
of reading strategies that distinguishes skilled from unskilled readers.

The research on metacognitive awareness of reading strategies —broadly

defined here as the deliberate, conscious procedures used by readers to en-
hance text comprehension— indicates the need to increase our understan-
ding of readers’ metacognitive knowledge about reading and reading strate-
gies to develop them into active, constructively responsive readers.

b. Significance of Metacognitive Reading Strategies

Metacognitive reading strategies are conscious means by which students

monitor their own reading processes including evaluating the effectiveness
of cognitive strategies being used. Metacognitive strategies may involve,
for example, planning how to approach the reading of a text, testing, and re-
vising according to purpose and time available (Devine, 1993). These kinds
of strategy might also include Sheorey and Mokhtari’s “support strategies”
such as the knowledge of how to use tools for comprehension such as dic-
tionaries, taking notes or highlighting important text (2001: 436). If cogni-
tive reading strategies are about knowing what strategy to use and how to

Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011) 7

Editorial

apply it, then metacognitive strategic knowledge involves understanding

the rationale for applying a particular strategy in a particular context, and
evaluating its usefulness in terms of appropriacy and effectiveness for that
context. Auerbach and Paxton (1997) argue that strategic reading can only
become efficient when metacognitive strategies, such as working towards a
particular goal while reading, are actively used.

As Brown, Armbruster and Baker have argued, “metacognition plays a

vital role in reading” (1986: 49). The term metacognition refers to one’s
understanding of any cognitive process. The context of reading is usually
understood as consisting of two types of cognition: First, one’s knowledge
of strategies for learning from texts, and, second, the control readers have
of their own actions while reading for different purposes. Successful readers
monitor their reading and the state of their learning; they use strategies, ad-
just effort appropriately, and evaluate the success of their ongoing efforts to
understand (Brown, Armbruster & Baker, 1986).

Metacognitive control, in which the reader consciously directs the reaso-

ning process, is a particularly important aspect of strategic reading. When
readers are conscious of the reasoning involved in reading, they can access
and apply that reasoning to similar reading in future situations.

According to Carrell, Gajdusek and Wise (1998), examples of specific me-

tacognitive strategies in reading may include: a) establishing objectives in
reading, b) evaluating reading materials, c) repairing miscomprehension,
d) evaluating the ongoing understanding of the text, e) analyzing the text
and paragraph structure to clarify the author’s intention, f) adjusting reading
speed and selective cognitive strategies accordingly, and g) engaging in self-
questioning to determine if the objectives have been reached. Thus, reading
is a metacognitive, as well as a cognitive process. While cognitive strategies
refer to deliberate actions that readers take in their efforts to understand texts,
metacognitive strategies emphasize the monitoring and regulative mecha-
nisms that readers consciously use to enhance comprehension.

Finally, a major contribution of reading strategies to fluent reading is their

increasing automaticity as a reader becomes more proficient (Anderson,

8 Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011)

 Editorial

2009; Block & Pressley, 2007; Sinata, Brown and Reynolds, 2002). The
overall developmental goal to routinize strategic processing still allows a
learner to reflect consciously on a strategy when asked to do so, or when be-
ing taught the strategy. However, the real goal for comprehension strategies
is the use of effective strategies without continuously needing to move to a
level of conscious problem-solving.

3. Strategy Training
Strategy training is defined as the explicit teaching of how, when, and why
students should employ language-learning strategies to enhance their efforts
at reading language program goals (Cohen, 1998; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989).
Since the 1970s, researchers have addressed the need for strategy training
in response to the lack of students’ awareness about the cognitive tools and
strategies available to them. For example, Dansereau (1978) reports that a
large proportion of the participants in his study, including proficient colle-
ge-level students, have little knowledge of alternative learning techniques.
This lack of awareness is likely to limit the learners’ ability to develop new
strategies when encountering new learning contexts.

Willing (1987) and Vogely (1995) echo Dansereau’s view. Willing (1987)
attributes students’ learning problems particularly to the use of inadequate
or inappropriate learning strategies, in addition to other learning factors.
Oxford (2001) also cites growing evidence that strategy instruction can be
valuable to many language learners.

Assessing the need for strategy training, Cohen points out that “the ulti-
mate goal of strategy training is to empower students by allowing them
to take control of the language-learning process” (1998: 70). He thus out-
lines three major objectives for strategy training: to develop the learners’
own individualized strategy systems, to promote the learner’s autonomy,
self-direction, and self-evaluation, and to encourage learners to take more
responsibility for their own language learning. Since these objectives pay
more attention to the process than to the end product of learning, foreign
and second language educators need effective, process-oriented, qualitative
measures for examining the success of strategy training.

Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011) 9

Editorial

4. Justification and Significance of the Study

In order to perform the task and process the new input in language class-
room, learners make use of different mechanisms and language learning
strategies. Among good indicators of how learners approach tasks or pro-
blems encountered during the language learning process there is language
learning of different types because it gives us valuable clues about how
students assess the situation, as well as how they plan and select appropriate
skills in a better way. For example, cognitive strategies play a problem-
solving role by linking previous information with new one. Socio-affective
strategies are useful as far as the development of communicative competen-
ce is concerned.

According to Lessard-Clouston, language learning strategies give rise to

students’ development of the communicative competence (1997: 3). The-
refore, a language teacher aiming at developing students’ communicati-
ve competence should be acquainted with these strategies. Furthermore,
Oxford states that language learning strategies “are especially important
for language learning because they are tools for activities, and self-directed
movement, which is essential for developing communicative competence”
(1990: 1).

On the other hand, reading strategies indicate how readers conceive a task,
what textual cues they attend to, how they make sense of what they read,
and what they do when they do not understand (Block, 1986). Research into
reading strategies of native speakers has concentrated on describing those
strategies involved in understanding. A vast amount of research in first lan-
guage reading and reading strategies has found that good readers are better
at monitoring their comprehension, that they are more aware of the strate-
gies they use, and that they use strategies more flexibly and effectively than
poor readers (Garner, 1987; Pressley et al., 1992).

In recent years, a great deal of research in the fields of L1 and ESL has been
conducted on reading strategy training. Strategy training comes from the
assumption that success in learning mainly depends on appropriate strate-

10 Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011)

 Editorial

gy use and that unsuccessful learners can improve their reading by being
trained to use effective strategies (Dansereau, 1985; Weinstein and Under-
wood, 1985). Many studies have shown that reading strategies can be taught
to students, and when taught, strategies help improve student’s performance
in comprehension and recall tests. However, very little data about the suita-
bility and the applicability of English reading skills with regard to training
strategies in an EFL and ESL reading classroom context has beencollected.

As far as teaching English in EFL and ESL is concerned, it should be men-

tioned that English instruction devotes to grammar lessons, vocabulary,
sentence-level exercises, while the development of communicative compe-
tence is totally neglected. Students rarely have exposure to English outside
the classroom. Additionally, passing entrance exams is another pressure for
learners. Due to the pressure of entrance exams, the attitude of both EFL
and ESL students toward learning English is also test-oriented.

All of the aforementioned situations suggest that there is a need for an En-
glish reading program that can train students to become effective readers of
English in the countries considered as EFL and ESL contexts with respect
to teaching or learning English. In the environment of EFL and ESL, resear-
chers propose that the development of strategy training courses in a variety
of English programs is required for learners to become efficient.

Hence, it is important to understand the phenomenon specific to the non-

proficient EFL and ESL learners and to seek pedagogical remedy to both
contexts by adopting the reading strategy and teaching materials intended
for the general EFL and ESL learners. The result of this study can be a clue
and example for teachers to refine their teaching methodology in English
reading courses and to create an optimum language learning environment
in order to achieve educational excellence.

Finally, research evidence may not be useful in education if findings are

not applied in classroom settings. Even though metacognitive strategies are
considered to be of value for adequate text comprehension, classroom tea-
chers often fail to teach this process. While some teachers used these stra-
tegies more often, most of the teachers did not consider it necessary to see

Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011) 11

Editorial

that the students were aware of the use of such strategies. Another issue that
adds to the peculiarity of this problem is that most teachers are not able to
teach these strategies to students because they are not aware of them.

5. Conclusion
It is hoped that the findings of research on metacognitive strategies training
in both EFL and ESL contexts will shed some light on blurred issues in me-
tacognitive reading strategies training and its impact on enhancing reading
comprehension performance. Therefore, the main reason behind writing
this short introduction is to call Ikala’s reader and authors’ attention on the
possible topics to be investigated and the proposals to be sent to this journal.

Bibliography
Anderson, N. (2009). ACTIVE Reading: The research base for a pedagogical approach in the reading
classroom. In Han, Z.-H. & Anderson, N. (Eds.), Second Language Reading: Research and
Instruction (pp. 117-143). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Auerbach, E. & Paxton, D. (1997). It’s not the English thing: bringing reading research into the clas-
sroom. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 237-261.
Baker, L. (2002). Metacognition in comprehension instruction. In Block, C. C. & Pressley, M. (Eds.),
Comprehension Instruction: Research-based best Practices (pp. 77-95). New York: The Guil-
ford Press.
_. (2008). Metacognitive development in reading: Contributors and consequences. In Mokhtari, K. &
Sheorey, R. (Eds.), Reading strategies of First and Second-Language Learners: See how They
Read (pp. 25-42). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Block, C. & Pressley, M. (2007). Best practices in teaching comprehension. In Gambrell, L., Morrow,
L. & Pressley, M. (Eds.), Best Practices in Literacy Instruction (3rd ed., pp. 220-242). New
York: Guillford Press.
Block, E. L. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly,
20, 463-494.
Brown, A. L., Armbruster, B. B. & Baker, L. (1986). The role of metacognition in reading and stu-
dying. In Orasanu, J. (Ed.), Reading Comprehension: From Research to Practice (pp. 49-75).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L. & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional
Science, 26, 97-112.
Cohen, A. (1998). Strategies in Learning and using a Second Language. London: Longman.

12 Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011)

 Editorial

Dansereau, D. F. (1978). The development of a learning strategies curriculum. In O’Neil Jr, H. F.

(Ed.). Learning Strategies, New York: Academic Press.
_. (1985). Learning strategy research. In Segal, J. & Chipman, S. (Eds.), Thinking and Learning
Skills. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Devine, J. (1993). The role of metacognition in second language reading and writing. In Carson, J.
& Leki, I. (Eds.), Reading in the Composition Classroom: Second Language Perspectives.
Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Ellis, G. & Sinclair, B. (1989). Learning to Learn English: A Course in Learner Training. Cambrid-
ge: Cambridge University Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of psychological inquiry.
American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and Reading Comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Lessard-Clouston, M. (1997, December). Language learning strategies: An overview for L2 teachers.
The Internet TESOL Journal, 1-23.
O’Malley, J. M. & Chamot, U. A. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. 2nd
ed. USA: Cambridge University Press.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Mazanares, G., Russo, R. & Kupper, L. (1985). Learning
strategies applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19,
285-296.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every Teacher Should Know. Boston:
Heinle & Heinle.
_. (2001). Language learning strategies. In Carter, Carter R. & Nunan, D. (Eds.), The Cambridge
Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Pressley, M. (2002). Reading Instruction that Works. 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press.
Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J. L., Almasi, J. & Brown, R.
(1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strate-
gies. The Elementary School of Journal, 92 (5), 513-555.
Pressley, M., Snyder, B. & Cariglia-Bull, B. (1987). How can good strategy use be taught to children?
Evaluation of six alternative approaches. In Cormier, S. & Hagman, J. (Eds.), Transfer of Lear-
ning: Contemporary Research and Application (pp. 81-120). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Sheorey, R. & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies
among native and non-native readers. System, 29 (4), 431-449.
Sinata, G., Brown, K. & Reynolds, R. (2002). Implications of cognitive resource allocation for com-
prehension strategies instruction. In Block, C. & Pressley, M. (Eds.), Comprehension Instruc-
tion: Research-based Best Practices (pp. 62-76). New York: Guilford Press.
Snow, C. E. Burns, M. S. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Chil-
dren. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Vogely, A. (1995). Perceived strategy use during performance on three authentic listening compre-
hension tasks. The Modern Language Journal, 79 (1), 41-56.

Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011) 13

Editorial

Weinstein, C. & Underwood, V. (1985). Learning strategies. In Segal, J. & Chipman, S. (Eds.), Thin-
king and Learning Skills. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Willing, K. (1987). Learning Styles and Adult Migrant Education. Adelaide: National Curriculum
Resource Centre.

Author
* Alireza Karbalaei is an EFL teacher and a Ph.D. Graduate in ELT. His
main research interests lie in reading strategies, affective variables,
language acquisition and learning, TEFL, and TESL. He has publis-
hed several articles and books mostly in the field of TEFL. E-mail:
Alireza_karbalaei_2007@yahoo.com

14 Vol. 16, No. 28 (mayo – agosto de 2011)