Dollar vs tl currency exchange table dollar.

Comprehension Process in Metacognitive Perspective Among University Students

Yahya Othman, Ghazali Mustapha

Abstract


ABSTRACT: Reading process requires readers to think deeply on the aspects that they have read in order to achieve an effective understanding. The readers need to figure out whether they understand the content that they have read. The ability to comprehend reading text would be the major aim in reading process. For students at tertiary levels, this ability is strongly associated to one’s field of study. From the stand point of critical and creative thinking skills, especially from the metacognitive aspect, students have different perspective of comprehension. This study is conducted to examine the process opted by Malaysian university students in comprehending text using a qualitative research method. A total of eight respondents following the bachelor in education programme participated in this study. Data was obtained via interviews, document analysis, and classroom observation. The findings indicate that there is a different perspective amongst students with regards to the use of metacognitive in understanding the text. These differences were influenced by the strategies used, the level of text difficulty, types of text and students’ perception of the text read.

KEY WORDS: comprehend reading text, metacognitive aspect, Malaysian university students, and different perspectives.

About the Authors: Dr. Yahya Othman is a Senior Lecturer at the Language and Literacy Academic Goup, Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah Institute of Education UBD (University of Brunei Darussalam), Jalan Tunku Link Gadong BE1410, Negara Brunei Darussalam. Dr. Ghazali Mustapha is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia. They can be reached at: yahyaoth@gmail.com and gm@educ.upm.edu.my

How to cite this article? Othman, Yahya & Ghazali Mustapha. (2010). “Comprehension Process in Metacognitive Perspective Among University Students” in EDUCARE: International Journal for Educational Studies, Vol.2(2) February, pp.171-184. Bandung, Indonesia: Minda Masagi Press owned by ASPENSI in Bandung, West Java; and FKIP UMP in Purwokerto, Central Java, ISSN 1979-7877.

Chronicle of the article: Accepted (December 8, 2009); Revised (January 18, 2010); and Published (February 17, 2010).


Full Text:

PDF

References


Anderson, Richard C. (1991). “The Notion of Schemata and the Educational Enterprise: General Discussion of the Conference” in Richard C. Anderson, R.J. Spiro & W.E. Montague [eds]. Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Berkowitz, E. & T. Cicchelli. (2004). “Metacognitive Strategy Use in Reading of Gifted High Achieving and Gifted Underachieving Middle School” in Education and Urban Society, 37(1), pp.37-57.

Beyer, B.K. (1987). Practical Strategies or the Teaching of Thinking. London: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Boulware-Gooden, R. et al. (2007). “Instruction of Metacognitive Strategies Enhances Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Achievement of Third-Grade Students” in The Reading Teacher, 61(1), pp.70-77.

Brown, A.L. (1985). Metacognition, the development of selective attention strategies for learning from text. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell .(Eds.). Theoretical models and process of reading. Newark DE: International Reading Association.

Carreker, S. (2004). Developing Metacognitive Skills: Vocabulary and Comprehension. Bellaire, TX: Neuhaus Education Center.

Carroll, B.J. (2000). “The Analysis of Reading Instruction: Perspectives from Psychology and Linguistics” in Scientific Studies of Reading, 4(1), pp.3-17.

Dagostino, L. & J. Carifio. (1994). Evaluative Reading and Literacy. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Devine, J. (1993). “The Role of Metacognition in Second Language Reading and Writing” in J. Carson & I. Leki [eds]. Reading in the Composition Classroom. Massechusetts: Allyn & Bacon.

Doyle, M.S. (2001). “A Course to Teach Cognitive and Affective Learning Strategies to University Student” in Journal Guidance & Counseling, 16(3), pp.86-92.

Flavell, J.H. (1976). “Metacognitive Aspect of Problem Solving” in L. Resnick [ed]. The Nature of Intelligence. Hisdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Flavell, J.H. (1981). “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Era of Cognitive Developmental Inquiry” in American Psychologist, 34, pp.906-911.

Francine, C. (2002). “Toward the New Literacy: Changes in College Students’ Reading Comprehension Strategies Following Reading/Writing Projects” in Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(4), pp.278-289.

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and Reading Comprehension. New Jersey: Ablex.

Ghazali Mustapha. (1998). “An Investigation into Teachers’ Questions and Task to Develop Reading Comprehension”. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. United Kingdom: University of Leicester.

Gourgrey, A.F. (1998). “Metacognition In Basic Skills Instruction” in Journal of Reading, 26, pp.81-86.

Houtveen, A.A. & W.J. Grift. (2007). “Effects of Metacognitive Strategy Instruction and Instruction Time on Reading Comprehension” in School Effectiveness & School Improvement, 18(2), pp.173-190.

Kobayashi, M. (2002). “Method Effects on Reading Comprehension Test Performance: Text Organization and Response Format” in Language Testing, 19(2), pp.193-220.

Larson, M., A. Britt & A. Larson. (2004). ”Disfluencies in Comprehending Argumentative Texts” in Reading Psychology, 25, pp.205-224.

Marzano, R.J. et al. (1988). Dimensions of Thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McLain, V.M., B.E. Gridley & D. McIntosh. (1991). “Value of Scale Used to Measure Metacognitive Reading Awareness” in Journal of Educational Research, 85(2), 81-87.

Mokhtari, K. & C. Reichard. (2002). “Assessing Students’ Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies” in Journal of Educational Psychology, 94( 2), pp.249-259.

Ormrod, J.E. (1995). Human Learning. London: Prentice-Hall.

Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies. Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.

Pearson, P.D. (1985). “Changing the Face of Reading Comprehension Instruction” in The Reading Teacher, 38, pp.724-738.

Peverly, S.T., K.E. Brobst & K.S. Morris. (2002). “The Contribution of Reading Comprehension Ability and Metacognitive Control to the Development of Studying in Adolescence” in Journal of Research in Reading, 25(2), pp.203-216.

Pressley, M. & P. Afflerbach. (1993). Verbal Protocol of Reading: The Nature of Constructively Responsive Reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pressley, M. et al. (1995). “The Comprehension Instruction that Students Need: Instruction Fostering Constructively Responsive Reading” in Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 10, pp.215-224.

Walker, J.B. (2000). Diagnostic Teaching of Reading. New Jersey: Merrill.

Woolfolk, A. (2004). Educational Psychology. New York: Pearson, 9th edition.


EDUCARE: International Journal for Educational Studies. Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional