Metacognitive reading strategies awareness and metacognitive reading strategies use of EFL university students across gender

Zhenita Deliany · Bambang Yudi Cahyono

45 citations0/0 files storedStudies in English Language and Education

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning Second Language Acquisition and Learning Educational Strategies and Epistemologies

Abstract

This study investigates EFL students’ metacognitive reading strategies awareness and their metacognitive reading strategies use. It also compares female and male EFL students in terms of their metacognitive reading strategies awareness and metacognitive reading strategies use. The quantitative research method is used through the survey research design. The study involves 53 undergraduate students, consisting of 33 females and 20 males. The data are collected by using a questionnaire of Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy Inventory (MARSI-R inventory) developed by Mokhtari et al. (2018). The strategies on the MARSI-R inventory were scored on 1-5 scales. The data were analyzed through a simple calculation to find out the level of awareness of the students, and the statistical test of independent sample t-test were conducted to know the difference between females and males. The results show that all of the students possess high metacognitive reading strategies awareness, indicating high metacognitive reading strategies use. Despite there is a different level of awareness between female and male students, further analysis using an independent sample t-test shows that the level of awareness between the two is .742 (p0.05), meaning that the difference is not significant. The result of the research also shows that there are no significant differences in all subscales of metacognitive reading strategies use across gender. The p-value for global reading strategies is .224, for problem-solving strategies is .486, and for support reading strategies is .249. Thus, gender plays no role in determining the metacognitive reading strategies awareness and metacognitive reading strategies use.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 45 citations exist upstream.

References

2002Measuring ESL Students' Awareness of Reading Strategies 2001Cognitive, Metacognitive, and Motivational Aspects of Problem Solving 2014A Cognitive View of Reading Comprehension: Implications for Reading Difficulties 2018Revising the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) and testing for factorial invariance 2019The benefits of metacognitive reading strategy awareness instruction for young learners of English as a second language 2016Relationships between teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and students’ metacognitive knowledge and reading achievement 2017Metacognitive and Cognitive Strategy Use in Reading Comprehension 2017The Relationship between Metacognitive Reading Strategies Use and Reading Comprehension Achievement of EFL Learners

Cited by

2021Examining gender differences in reading strategies, reading skills, and English proficiency of EFL University students 2021Indonesian EFL university students' metacognitive online reading strategies before and during the Covid-19 pandemic

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.