The role of metacognition in reading comprehension

Abstract

This chapter reviews the literature on the role of metacognition in reading comprehension. In the first two parts of the chapter, studies that have examined metacognitive knowledge, and metacognitive monitoring and control in relation to reading comprehension are described. Specifically, the most important studies to the field – those that might be referred to as “the classic studies” of metacognition – are described. The outcomes of these studies have identified both developmental differences and differences amongst good and poor comprehenders. No reference is made to studies involving judgments-of-learning linked to memory monitoring, as distinct from comprehension monitoring, as these studies will be addressed in other chapters of this book. Some studies that have investigated metacognitive knowledge of memory strategies alongside reading comprehension are reported, but again it is anticipated that most of the studies of metacognitive knowledge about memory will be discussed in other chapters. In the third part of the chapter studies involving the instruction of metacognitive and comprehension-related strategies are reviewed. These studies have been conducted to enhance students’ reading comprehension, and comprehension monitoring and control, and/or are studies that have examined the efficacy of metacognitive and comprehension-related strategy instruction. This part of the review refers to studies involving a range of students including those with learning disabilities. Considerable attention is paid to particular programs and approaches because of their influence on contemporary classroom instruction. Due to page number constraints instructional studies that focus on peer-led (compared to teacher-led) classroom discussion approaches in teaching comprehension and strategies for monitoring and control of comprehension are not discussed (e.g., Almasi, 2002; Anderson, Chinn, Waggoner & Nguyen, 1998; Echevarria, 1995; McKeown, Beck & Blake, 2009; Raphael, Gavelek & Daniels, 1998). Furthermore, while a few of the studies using these approaches have examined the effects of discussion on metacognition, they are not described in this chapter (see Murphy, Wilkinson, Soter, Hennessey & Alexander, 2009 for a meta-analysis).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 27 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.