Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol.

8, Issue 2, 2023

Importance of Metacognitive Strategies in Enhancing Reading Comprehension Skills

Mohammed Bouknify 1

Abstract

Although research on second language learning strategies has traditionally been focused on L2 learning strategies, recent studies have

shifted their attention to language learners' metacognition. Despite improvements in L2 educational practices, more research needs to be

conducted on learners' metacognition while reading in EFL contexts. This article examined effective teaching strategies for EFL reading

comprehension. During reading comprehension teaching, metacognitive strategies are emphasized primarily to enable students to reflect on

their mental processes occurring before, during, and after reading. Through the use of metacognitive strategies, reading comprehension,

and performance are enhanced. This study examined metacognitive strategies as tools for successful reading and related tasks. It aimed at

determining how different metacognitive reading strategies are used by non-native English speakers at Bluefield State University (BSU). This

research was conducted using a survey design. A sample of 34 students was randomly selected for the study. For the purpose of determining

the metacognitive reading strategies of students, a metacognitive reading questionnaire was administered to them. The survey data were

transferred to a computer, and Microsoft Excel was used to calculate the percentage and frequency. According to the research results,

students regularly use metacognitive strategies before, during, and after reading. While reading, students pay attention to important parts of

the text and evaluate both the text and their understanding of it. The research indicates that metacognitive strategies are effective at

improving the metacognitive comprehension skills of EFL learners. Furthermore, metacognitive awareness contributes to an incr ease in self-

efficacy among learners. As a result, they become high achievers in EFL.

Keywords: Reading strategies, metacognitive strategies, reading comprehension.

1. Introduction

In recent decades, international interaction has increased dramatically, whether in business, education, travel, or other con texts, and
English has been a widely used language in these areas. For this reason, learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) need to master all

four skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Additionally, reading comprehension is an essential component of their English

language education. There are several compelling reasons for this, one of which is the fact that all high-stakes exams include a reading
comprehension section. For instance, the Final Exams such as TOEFL and the IELTS place a great deal of emphasis on reading

comprehension. In this vein, having good reading skills is essential for achieving high grades in examinations. Consequently,

metacognitive strategies can be used by English learners to enhance their ability to comprehend reading material and overcome any

difficulties they may encounter. This is a process designed to help students understand how they learn; in other words, it helps them think

about how they think.

There have been numerous studies demonstrating that metacognitive strategies improve language performance. Those studies focu s on

language abilities and skills. Nevertheless, only a limited number of studies have examined the benefits of metacognitive strategies for

second language learners. In this study, metacognitive reading comprehension strategies were examined in the context of teaching

English as a foreign language (EFL) and their role in an individual's language development.

1LITTARIP (Lettres, Langues et Arts - Kénitra - Université Ibn Tofail, Maroc) Faculty of Letters, Languages and Arts, Kenitra – Ibn Tofail University,
Morocco.Email: bouknifymohammed1985@gmail.com

41 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

2. Literature Review

2.1. Metacognitive Strategy in Reading Comprehension

Learners of foreign languages, particularly those who are not native English speakers, do not automatically acquire a deep understanding

of text, but rather they develop this understanding through the use of reading strategies. According to Afflerbach et al. (2008), reading

strategies are deliberate, goal-directed efforts to influence and modify the reader's ability to decode, understand, and interpret text.
Therefore, they are essential for reading skills development through adequate instruction and learning.

Several studies have indicated that reading comprehension is a complex process, with students often facing difficulty deriving meaning

from the text (Grabe & Stoller, 2002). Based on the findings of Salataki and Akyel 2002), students who begin learning the English language

are most likely to encounter serious difficulty in understanding and constructing meaning.

There have been a number of studies examining this issue for a long time (Duke & Pearson, 2017; Goh, 2008; Baker & Brown, 1984). As

their studies progressed, they focused more on examining how language learners learn rather than what they do to learn. In this propose d

approach, a Learning Strategy (LS) is defined as any choice, behavior, thought, plan, and technique used by a learner to facilitate their

learning process (Chamot, 1990; Cook, 2001; Macaro, 2001; Oxford, 1990).

When the Grammar Translation Method (GTM) was the most popular teaching method, the primary reading activity involved translating

from a foreign language and focusing on factual information. As stated by Cahyono and Widiati 2006), "... reading a text in the target

language was the central activity in language teaching that placed emphasis on matching words in the text with meanings in the students’

native tongue” (p.36). As a result of this approach to teaching reading, little attention was paid to the process of understanding longer

texts (Dubin & Bycina, 1991). This trend did not support academic reading, which requires the reader to conceptualize a text deeply and

understand the author's point of view. It has been observed that when students use GTMs, they tend to read passively. They re ly heavily
on bilingual dictionaries and spend countless hours translating word for word and sentence by sentence. However, they still struggle with

reading comprehension despite all their efforts.

In recent years, there has been a change in the requirements for effective readers. Reading is not limited to reading and translating or
focusing on factual information, as stated above. Understanding a text requires an understanding of words, a context, as well as what the

author is inferring from the text (words, juxtapositions, lexical combinations, semantic and conceptual network, context, etc.). It is common

for students to make mistakes when attempting to answer questions that require them not only to provide factual information b ut also to
infer meaning, comprehend an author's message, etc. Accordingly, reading means understanding every external and internal part of the

text. Furthermore, teaching students effective reading skills is not only conducive to higher exam scores, but also to real-life success in

situations where reading skills are important.

Reading comprehension has become a key component of many jobs. It is also important to note that learners who develop their r eading

skills will be able to perform better in their language classes. During their academic preparation, EFL students are required to learn reading

in the classroom in order to have access to new information. It is also required that they take some kind of standardized test in order to

pursue their further studies at graduate and postgraduate levels. By reinforcing their reading abilities, they will be able to make greater

progress in all areas of their academic work (Anderson, 2002). In light of this, academic reading comprehension has become a major

challenge. It is primarily due to the fact that teachers are currently using outdated methods to teach reading skills. Therefore, students are
not prepared for more difficult exams that require greater analytical skills. In addition, students are not adequately prepar ed for life in the

real world, during which reading skills play an important role in both everyday life and the pursuit of a career.

42 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

Many efforts have been made to develop taxonomies of LLSs, among which Rubin 1987), Oxford (1990), and O'Malley and Chamot (1994)

have attracted the most attention. Although these models are fundamentally similar, they treat LLSs differently. Accordingly, certain
groups of these strategies may be classified under different headings. Based on the research of scholars (Cornford, 2002; H arris, 2003;

Leaver, Ehrman, & Shekhtonan, 2004; O'Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990; Oxford, 1994), Metacognitive Learning Strategies (MLSs)

are considered a subset of such models. These strategies are designed to guide the learning process and to include strategies for
planning, monitoring, and evaluating learning. In other words, they are concerned with thinking about thinking skills or learning how to

develop skills (Anderson, 2002).

There is some variation in the way that language learner strategies are classified depending on the definitions used by the researchers

concerned. As a result, several researchers support the classification of L2 learning strategies based on Oxford's Strategy I nventory for

Language Learning (SILL) classification, which consists of cognitive, metacognitive, memory, compensatory, affective, and social strategies.

Anderson (2003) divides language learning strategies into seven major categories: cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies,

mnemonic strategies, compensatory strategies, affective strategies, social strategies, and self-motivating strategies. In contrast, some

researchers (e.g., O'Malley & Chamot, 1990; Chamot, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, & Robbins, 1999, Cohen, 1996) use fewer variables. Based on

O'Malley and Chamot's (1990) classification of cognitive categories, there are two major types: metacognitive and cognitive strategies.

Metacognitive strategies do not only oversee, direct, and regulate the learning process but also play a role in influencing i t. The use of

learning strategies provides an opportunity to think about learning processes, to plan learning activities, to monitor the learning process,

and to evaluate it. Cognitive strategies, on the other hand, use techniques to manipulate the material to be learned or to ap ply a specific

technique to learning.

The choice of language learning strategies consciously can contribute to active, conscious, and purposeful self -regulation. Therefore,

teaching learners how to learn more effectively and efficiently is one way to accelerate academic language learning. In consequence,

strategy training aims to diagnose oneself, learn the target language efficiently, develop problem-solving skills, experiment with familiar

and unfamiliar learning strategies, make decisions regarding how to approach a task, monitor, and evaluate oneself, adapt successful
learning strategies to a new learning context, and assist students in becoming self-sufficient, autonomous, and lifelong learners (Allwright,

1990; Little, 1991, cited Oxford 2003).

According to Nunan (1996), language learning strategies should be explicitly taught in the curriculum. For him, “Language classrooms
should have a dual focus, not only teaching language content but also on developing learning processes as well” (p. 41). Seve ral studies

have demonstrated that language learners can learn more effectively when they are taught some of the learning strategies that have been

identified as one of the defining characteristics of a good language learner in the literature (Rubin, 1975, 1981; Stern, 197 5).

Additionally, metacognitive strategies have been demonstrated to be more important to this process than other learning strategies, as

learners are more likely to acquire language faster once they are able to regulate their own learning through the use of stra tegies

(Anderson, 2003). In order to be an effective strategic learner, one must possess metacognitive knowledge about one's own thinkin g and

learning approaches, have an understanding of the requirements of a task, and be able to develop strategies that best suit bo th the

requirements of the task as well as the strengths of the learner.

Alqahtani (2019) examined the relationship between metacognitive strategies and reading proficiency among university students and

concluded that metacognitive approaches were highly correlated with reading comprehension. Denton et al. (2015) examined individual

differences in reading comprehension strategy use among adolescents according to reading proficiency, grade level, and gender . A total

of 1,334 students in grades 7-12 participated in the study. The findings indicated that more skilled readers reported significantly higher

use of strategies. Similarly, adolescent girls reported being able to understand reading better than their male counterparts.

43 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

In a study published in 2012, Griva, Alevriadou, and Semoglou analyzed gender differences in reading preferences and strategies

employed by fifth and sixth-grade students. Based on the results of the study, female students used cognitive and metacognitive
strategies significantly more than male students.

As learners develop metacognition, they become aware of the learning process and the strategies that lead to success. This knowledge will
provide learners with a better understanding of how they think and learn, thus enabling them to select and implement effectiv e learning
strategies, plan how to proceed with a learning task, monitor their own performance on a regu lar basis, solve problems encountered, and

evaluate themselves upon completing a learning task (Zhang & Goh, 2006). In order to select and activate strategies, learners require

metacognitive knowledge (Rubin, 1987), and educators should work to develop students' own metacognition as well as teach them how

to utilize strategies that are most effective in completing the tasks they have to accomplish in language learning (Goh, 2008 ).

2.2. Metacognition

In his definition of Metacognition, Flavell (1999) states that, in addition to having a thorough knowledge of the individual's characteristics,

the nature of cognitive processes to be completed, and the structure of the strategies chosen to complete these tasks, metaco gnition is an

ability that plays a controlling role in monitoring and regulating a person's cognitive process (p.22). The term is also used in reference to

any cognitive process which refers to, monitors, or controls aspects of cognition (Moses & Baird, 1999).

Metacognition is defined as the ability to think about one's own thinking or to be conscious of one's own mental processes (Nelson, 1996).

According to Wenden (1998), metacognition is knowledge about learning that is present in the student's store of acquired knowledge, is

relatively stable, early developing, and abstracts from the student's experiences. In Flavell's definition, metacognitive knowledge refers to

"one's knowledge regarding one's own cognitive processes and products or anything associated with them, for example, the lear ning-

relevant properties of information or data" (p. 232). As a term, metacognition refers to the active control of cognitive processes that occurs

during metacognition (Wenden, 1998). In addition, it has been described as a 'seventh sense' and one of the characteristics of successful

learners (Birjandi et al. 2006).

In the sense of declarative knowledge, metacognitive knowledge can be divided into three types: the knowledge that focuses on the learner,

the knowledge that focuses on the learning task, and the knowledge that focuses on the learning process. In the literature, these three

categories are called person knowledge, task knowledge, and strategy knowledge. Person knowledge refers to the information and

resources a person requires to undertake a task and task knowledge refers to the information and resources available to complete a task,

and strategy knowledge. i.e., the knowledge regarding the strategies which are likely to be effective in achieving goals and undertaking tasks

(Flavell, 1976).

As noted by Brown et al. (1983), metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive strategies are different aspects of metacognition. A

metacognitive strategy is a method for managing, directing, regulating, and guiding a learner's learning. Metacognitive knowledge refers to

how a learner learns about their learning and metacognitive strategies refer to the methods used by learners to guide their l earning. Oxford

(2002) outlines four basic metacognitive strategies: connecting new information to old, selecting deliberate thinking strategies and planning,

monitoring, and evaluating thought processes. As a result, learners take control of learning, plan and select strategies, monitor the learning

process, correct errors, analyze the effectiveness of learning strategies, and change learning behaviors and strategies when necessary (Ridley

et al., 1992).

The concept of metacognition can be defined as "thinking about thinking" or "cognitions about cognitions" (Bruning, Schraw & Norby, 2014,

p. 79; Gilbert, 2005, p. 15; Hall, Bowman, & Myers, 1999, p. 99; Karakelle & Saraç, 2010, p. 46; Tracey & Morrow, 2017, p. 78). As described by

Schraw and Dennison (1994), “metacognition is the ability to think, understand, and control one's own learning” (p.460). According to ÖZsoy

2008), metacognition refers to awareness of one's own mental processes. Metacognition recognizes what a person is learning through se lf-

44 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

awareness and organizes education and training activities accordingly (Özbay & Bahar, 2012, p.159). There is a simultaneous relationship

between cognition and any process or product occurring in the brain.

Metacognition designates following and controlling cognition. Whereas cognitive processes facilitate the transformation of learning

materials and they are directly related to learning goals. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to determine whether a product occurring in the

mind is related to a cognitive process or a metacognitive process (Başaran, 2013, p.227). There are two interrelated aspects of metacognition.

First is knowing what skills, tactics, and resources a person needs in a task and second is knowing when and how to use these skills, tactics,

and resources to make the task a successful outcome (Schunk, 2009, p.186; Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002, p.249; Bang & Zhao, 2007, p.41).

When metacognitive skills are possessed, learning takes place spontaneously. Metacognition is actually a way of learning to learn

(Çakıroğlu), 2007, p.8). Individuals' metacognitive experiences and perceptions determine their ability to perform at d ifferent levels. As part

of the process of developing intelligence and basic skills, experience plays a significant role. However, metacognition is one of the most

important aspects of using one's cognitive abilities. It is clear from Hartman's (1998) work that metacognition plays a prominent role in

learning and teaching since it impacts many factors such as gaining, understanding, remembering, critical thinking, and problem-solving.

2.3. Meta-cognitive Reading Strategies and Comprehension

There has been growing recognition that metacognitive reading strategies are crucial to understanding and linked to learners' success. As a
result of metacognition, students are able to use reading strategies more effectively and competently than their unsuccessful peers (Carrell,

1989; Sheorey & Mukhtari, 2001; Zhang, 2001; Zhang and Wu, 2009. Based on Sheorey and Mukhtari (2001), skilled and unskilled readers

differ primarily in their awareness of strategy reading processes and actual use of strategies. A skilled reader uses metacog nitive strategies

effectively, while a less proficient reader has little metacognitive awareness. According to Brown (1980) and Flavell (1979), the primary
difference between skilled and unskilled readers lies in their ability to “engage in deliberate activities that require planf ul thinking, flexible

strategies, and periodic self-monitoring” (Paris & Jacobs 1984, cited in Sheorey & Mokhtari 2001, p. 433). In light of these findings,

researchers have examined the effectiveness of teaching metacognitive strategies to all readers. As part of his research, Bar nett (1988)
examined the effects of metacognitive awareness and reading strategies on reading comprehension. According to the study findings, the

use of strategies is linearly associated with reading comprehension. There is a greater benefit for students who use different strategies in

reading in comparison to those who do not. Many different studies of metacognition have been linked to an extensive variety of positive

academic outcomes for students including improved test scores and performance on intelligence tests.

3. Methodology
Students at BSU, who are non-natives, have a lot to read during the limited time of their university education, so it is important to examine

how much they are aware of metacognitive reading strategies and how they use them. This study analyzed students' reported awareness of

metacognitive strategies and their use of them before, during, and after reading academic texts in English using a questionnaire for that

purpose. As well as determining the types of strategies students use when reading academic texts and analyzing whether the reported
results reflect their understanding of the text, the research aimed to determine what types of strategies students prefer whe n reading

academic texts. In addition to the questionnaire, students took a comprehension test to determine their level of reading proficiency.

Therefore, this article addressed the following questions to answer:

1. Do the non-native students of BSU use metacognitive reading strategies in reading academic texts?

2. Is there any relationship between the students’ strategy use and reading comprehension?

The purpose of this study is to investigate how BSU graduate students use metacognitive reading strategies. This study's results are

important because they identify the metacognitive reading strategies used by university students. These results are expected to be helpful to

researchers working on reading instruction.

45 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

3.1. Research Design

The research method used in this study is survey design. The investigator selects a sample of respondents from a target population and

administers a questionnaire to collect data on variables of interest. Surveys are used to learn about people’s attitudes, beliefs, values,
demographics, behavior, opinions, habits, desires, ideas, and other types of information (McMillan & Schumacher, 2014).

3.2. Participants
The population of the study comprises of graduate non-native students of Bluefield State University. A total of 34 students from different

departments: Education, Psychology, Business, Chemistry, and Science departments. These students from the University of Bluefield were

randomly selected as participants for this study. They are members of the International Students Organisation (ISO) within the University.

They speak English as a second language. The researcher selected a sample of 34 respondents from a target population (ISO) and

administered a questionnaire to collect information on variables of interest. He conducted this study in person and investigated the

metacognitive issues in reading comprehension. The investigator used a survey to get the students’ ideas and opinions. The age of the

students ranged from 16 to 40 years.

3.3. Data collection tool and analysis

A metacognitive reading questionnaire developed by Başaran (2013) was used to determine the metacognitive reading strategies used by
non-native students at BSU. This form consists of four parts: Demographic information in the first part, before reading in the second part; in

the third part During reading; the last part is After reading the text (stages of reading). The questionnaire was developed on a three-point

rating scale ranging from 1 to 3 (1 = very less strategy use (never); 2= sometimes strategy use (sometimes); 3 = high strategy use (always).
The students should read each statement and circle the number that applies to them, indicating how often they use the reading strategy . As
such, the higher the number, the more often the strategy is perceived to be used. The majority of surveys describe the incidence, frequency,

and distribution of specific characteristics of identified populations (McMillan & Schumacher, 2014, p. 254). Application dat a was uploaded

to the computer, and Microsoft Excel was used to calculate percentages and frequency.

4. Results

The data in Table 1 shows that students frequently use pre-reading metacognitive reading strategies. It indicates that students
determine the purpose of reading and control the physical condition of the environment in which they read. In other words, they
use fast browsing before reading a text and guess the content of the text by looking at the visual aid of the text.

Table 1. Metacognitive reading strategies used before reading by BSU students

Before reading the text Never Sometimes Always

F % F % F %
1. I determine my reading purpose (study,
entertainment, memorization, etc.). 2 5.88% 11 32.35% 21 61.76%
2. I quickly review the text to understand the type
and subject of the text. 1 2.94% 18 52.94% 15 44.12%
3. I guess the content is based on the text images. 18
1 2.94% 15 44.12% 52.94%
4. I guess the content of the text by looking at the 15
title. 2 5.88% 17 50.00% 44.12%
5. I decide how to read by looking at the type,
length, and subject of the text. 5 14.71% 15 44.12% 14 41.18%
6. I prepare questions in my mind about the 38.24% 18
subject. 3 8.82% 13 52.94%
7. I plan on what to do mentally during and after
reading before I read the text. 8 23.53% 12 35.29% 14 41.18%

46 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

It can be understood from Table 2 how often students use metacognitive strategies while reading a text. They do take notes

while reading the text and they try to find and understand ideas that are not expressed clearly in the text. Their mental

processes work well when they read the text as they repeat that in their minds and check how much they understand. Based on

these findings, it can be concluded that students do not distinguish significant from insignificant information when they not e

important parts of a text.

Table 2. Metacognitive reading strategies used during reading

While reading the text Never sometimes Always

F % F % F %
1. I imagine what is told in the text. 3 8.82% 19 55.88% 12 35.29%

2. I underline important information to better understand. 1 2.94% 18 52.94% 15 44.12%

3. I take notes about the text. 4 11.76% 9 26.47% 21 61.76%

4. I read slowly, if necessary, and fast when necessary. 2 5.88% 22 64.71% 10 29.41%
5. I read the parts I do not understand in the text more slowly and 1 2.94% 27 79.41% 6 17.65%
carefully.
6. I try to find the answers to the questions that appear in my mind 1 2.94% 14 41.18% 19 55.88%
about the subject in the text.
7. I connect the information I've already learned with the information 2 5.88% 20 58.82% 12 35.29%
I already have.
8. I try to understand the main idea of the text. 1 2.94% 27 79.41% 6 17.65%
9. I check how much I understand the text. 1 2.94% 15 44.12% 18 52.94%
10. I repeat in my mind the part I read from time to time. 8 23.53% 6 17.65% 20 58.82%
11. I try to find and understand ideas that cannot be expressed clearly 1 2.94% 13 38.24% 20 58.82%
in the text.
12. I try to understand the meaning of the words I do not know using 0 0.0% 17 50.00% 17 50.00%
the internet or dictionary.
13. I guess the meaning of the word I do not know by looking at the 0 0.0% 18 52.94% 16 47.06%
sentence in which it is found.
14. I will not understand. 0 0.0% 11 33.33% 22 66.67%
15. I think that what I read does not give me new information 22 64.71% 1 2.94% 11 32.35%

After reading, the majority of students utilize metacognitive reading strategies, as seen in Table 3. Based on these findings, it

can be deduced that students generally evaluate, review and control their understanding of the text after reading.

Table 3. Metacognitive reading strategies used after reading

When I finish reading the text Never Sometimes Always

F % F % F %
1. I evaluate my reading performance. 4 11.76% 12 35.29% 18 52.94%

2. I repeat the important information in the text and 1 2.94% 19 55.88% 14 41.18%
try to understand the whole text.
3. If necessary, I read the text again. 1 2.94% 19 55.88% 14 41.18%

4. I evaluate whether the content of the text is 2 5.88% 13 38.24% 19 55.88%

consistent with its title.
5. I summarize what I have read to remember the 5 14.71% 7 20.59% 22 64.71%
text.
6. I review the text. 2 5.88% 12 35.29% 20 58.82%

47 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

5. Discussion and Conclusion

According to the study conducted at BSU, students frequently use metacognitive reading strategies before reading, during

reading, and after reading. In the end, they evaluate the text and their comprehension status based on the important parts of

the text. Reading metacognitive strategies is commonly observed before reading by students. In the process of reading,

students examine the physical conditions of the environment, make them available for reading, and determine the purpose of

their reading strategies during reading the text. In addition to fast browsing, they consider how the information in the text will

be utilized before reading the text. The pre-reading stage focuses on how to read and how to succeed at reading.

Students often use metacognitive reading strategies during reading. A student's ability to visualize what is described in the text,

distractions when reading, etc. In addition, they rewrite the text, read the slower and harder parts, re -read the parts they have

difficulty understanding, avoid passing over parts without understanding, underline the oblique or dark places, and use more.

They take notes, highlight important information, deconstruct complex sentences, read like they're telling complex sentences,

and guess the meaning of the unknown. By paying attention to the structure of the text at the time of reading, good readers are

able to determine the rate at which they realize their understanding. They can control the understanding process during the

reading process and focus more on important points, so as to realize the understanding, connect their predictions to the results

appropriate to the text, and try to analyze complex expressions.

Reading strategies are reviewed, appropriate strategies are determined, and an attempt is made to understand the text
structure, and find ways to make inferences, to be stored in memory, which may be required in subsequent arrangements. In

case of need, resources such as dictionaries, spelling guides, encyclopedias and the general Internet can be used. It has bee n

observed that a majority of students engage in metacognitive reading strategies after reading. It is possible to interpret these
findings as students are evaluating the text after reading and controlling their understanding of it. Besides, using evaluation

strategies helps students compare and analyze the information they get from the text. They underline important information,

imagine what they have read, take notes about the text and most importantly, they think how to apply what was learned

in real life. In other words, metacognitive reading strategies are about the reading comprehension and reading activity in which

the students evaluate reading activity, determine the methods and techniques that will be adopted in the future readings.
Therefore, this study approach aims at preparing students for becoming good readers in the future, as well as raising their

awareness of the issue of reading.

References

Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P.D., & Paris, S. (2008). Skills and strategies: Their differences, their relationships and why it m atters. In:
Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (Eds.). Reading Strategies of First- and Second-Language Learners: See how they read (pp.11-

24). Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc., Norwood, MA.

Alqahtani, S. M. A. (2019). Investigating the relationship between metacognitive strategies and reading proficiency among the

university students of Jeddah learners. Acra Scientiae et Intellectus, 5(4), 38-52.

Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second language teaching and learning. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Languages and Linguistics Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved April 19, 2013, from

http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/digest_pdfs/0110_Anderson.pdf.

48 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

Anderson, N.J. (2003). Reading in David Nunan, Practical English Language Teaching (1st ed.) p.68 Sydney: McGraw-Hill.

Bang, H. J. & Zhao, C. G. (2007). Reading strategies used by advanced Korean and Chinese ESL graduate students: A case study.
The Reading Matrix, 7(1), 30-50.

Baker, L. & Brown, A. L. (1984). Meta-cognitive skills and Reading. In P.D. Pearson, (Ed.). Handbook of reading research: Vol. 1

(pp.353-394). New York: Longman.

Barnett, M. A. (1988). Reading through context: How real and perceived strategy use affects L2 comprehension. Modern

Language Journal, 72, 150-162.

Başaran, M. (2013). 4.Sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbilişsel okuma stratejilerini kullanma durumları ve bu stratejilerle okuduğunu anlama

arasındaki ilişki. Electronic Turkish Studies, 8(8), 225-240.

Bernhardt, E. (1986). Cognitive processes in L2: An examination of reading behaviors. In J. Lantolf & L. Labarca (Eds.) . Research in

second language learning: Focus on the classroom (pp. 35-51). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Birjandi et al., (2006) P. Birjandi, A. Mirhassani, G. Abbasian Setting-based metacognitive strategy use. Journal of Faculty of

Letters and Humanities, 49(198), 39-87.

Brown, A., Bransford, J.D., Ferraraand, R., and Campione, J.C. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In J. H. Flav ell &
E. M. Markman (Eds). Carmichael's Manual of Child Psychology, Volume 1. New York: Wiley.

Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J. & Norby, M. M. (2014). Bilişsel psikoloji ve öğretim (cognitive psychology and instruction), (Çev. ed.:

Dr. Zehra Nur Ersözlü, Dr. Rıza Ülker), Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.

Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive Awareness and Second Language Reading. Modern Language Journal, 73,121-134.

Cahyono, B. Y., & Widiati, U. (2006). The teaching of EFL reading in the Indonesian context: The state of the art. TEFLIN Journal,
17(1), 23-46.

Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P. B., & Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. White Plains, NY: Addison

Wesley Longman.
Cakiroglu, J. (2007). Turkish preservice science teachers’ efficacy beliefs regarding science teaching and their beliefs about

classroom management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 664-675.

Chamot, A. U. (2005). Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,
25, 112-130.

Cohen, A. D. (1996). Second Language Learning and Use Strategies: Clarifying the Issues 1. Minnesota: Center for Advanced

Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.

Cook, V. (2001). Second language learning and language teachi ng. London: Edward Arnold.

Denton, C. A., Wolters, C. A., York, M. J., Swanson, E., Kulesz, P. A., & Francis, D. J. (2015). Adolescents’ use of reading

comprehension strategies: Differences related to reading proficiency, grade level, and gender. Learning and Individual

Differences, 37, 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.016

Dubin, F. & Bycina, D. (1991). Models of the process of reading. In Celce-Murcia (ed.). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. Boston, Mass.: Heinle and Heinle.

Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Strachan, S. L., & Billman, A. K. (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading
comprehension. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed.) (pp.

51-93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Flavell, J. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem-solving. In L. Resnick (Ed.). The Nature of Intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum

Assoc.

Flavell, J.H. (1999). Cognitive development: Children's knowledge about the mind. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 21-45.

49 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Visualization: a metacognitive skill in science and science education. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.) . Visualization in

science education, (pp. 9-27). Dordrecht: Springer.

Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Goh, C. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, Practice and Research

Implications. RELC Journal, 39(2), 188-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092184.

Hall, K., Bowman H., & Myers J. (1999). Metacognition and reading awareness among samples of nine-year-olds in two cities,

Educational Research, 1, 99-107.

Hartman, H. J. (1998). Metacognition in teaching and learning: an introduction. Instructional Science, 26, 1-3.

McMillan, J. & Schumacher, S. (2014). Research in education evidence-based inquiry (Seventh Edition). Essex: Pearson Education

Limited.

Karakelle, S. & Saraç, S. (2010). Üst biliş hakkında bir gözden geçirme: üstbiliş çalışmaları mı yoksa üst bilişsel yaklaşım mı?, Türk

Psikoloji Yazıları, 13(26), 45-60.

Macaro, E. (2001). Learning strategies in foreign and second language classroom. London: Continuum International.

Moses, L. J. & Baird, J. A. (1999). Metacognition. In R. A. Wilson, & F. C. Keil (Eds.). The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences
(pp. 533-535). London: The MIT Press.

Nelson, K. (1996). Language in cognitive development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. (1996). Learner strategy training in the classroom: An action research study. TESOL Journal, 6, 35-41.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House/Harper & Row.

Oxford, R. L. (1994). Language learning strategies: An update. Online Resources: Digests. Retrieved November 9, 2006, from
http://www.cal.org/resource/digest/oxford01.html

Oxford, R. (2002). Language learning strategies. In R. Carter and D. Nunan (Eds.). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to

speakers of other languages (pp. 166-172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language Learning Styles and Strategies: An Overview. GALA, 1-25.

Özbay, M. & Bahar, M. A. (2012). İleri okur ve üstbiliş eğitimi. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim (TEKE). Dergisi, 1(1), 158-

177.
Özsoy, G. (2008). Üstbiliş. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4), 713-740.

Ridley, D. S., Schutz, P. A., Glanz, R. S., & Weinstein, C. E. (1992). Self-regulated learning: The interactive influence of

metacognitive awareness and goal-setting. Journal of Experimental Education, 60(4), 293–

306. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1992.9943867

Rubin, J. (1975). What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41-51.

Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 117-131.

Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history, and typology. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.) .

Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 15-30). London, England: Prentice Hall.

Salataki, R., & Akyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2 reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14,

1-17.
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R.S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475.

Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-

native readers. System, 29, 431-449.

Stern, H. H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 304-318.

Tracey, D. H. & Morrow, L. M. (2017). Okumaya genel bir bakış. H. Ülper (Çev. Ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

50 | P a g e
 Journal of Education in Black Sea Region Vol. 8, Issue 2, 2023

Verkoeijen, P. P.J. L., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Özsoy, B. (2008). Distributed rereading can hurt the spacing effect in text

memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(5), 685–695. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1388

Wenden, A. L. (1998) Meta-cognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515-537.

Zhang, L. J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students’ metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor

environment. Language Awareness, 10, 268–288.

Zhang, D. & Goh C. (2006). Strategy Knowledge and Perceived Strategy Use: Singaporean Students’ Awareness of Listening and

Speaking Strategies. Language Awareness, 15,199-219.

Zhang, L. J. & Wu, A. (2009). Chinese senior high school EFL students’ metacognitive awareness and use of reading strategies.

Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(1), 37-59.

51 | P a g e