The Relation Between Cognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies and Writing Anxiety

Gürbüz Ocak, Nilda Hocaoglu

Abstract


This study aims to determine the cognitive awareness of reading strategies of secondary school students, the relation between the cognitive awareness of reading strategies and writing anxiety, and the common effect of some variables on cognitive awareness of reading strategies. This quantitative study is an example of a relational survey model with correlational research features. Data have been collected through two different scales. 339 secondary school students have participated in this research. Mean, frequencies, standard deviation, Pearson Correlation Coefficient, Simple Linear Regression, and Two Way Anova have been used for data analysis. As a result of the study, secondary school students have good cognitive awareness of reading strategies, and there is a negative relation between cognitive awareness of reading strategies and writing anxiety. Verbal academic success is a predictor of cognitive awareness of reading strategies, and the common effect of gender and writing anxiety doesn’t influence cognitive awareness of reading strategies.

Keywords


Reading strategies; cognitive awareness; writing anxiety

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ahmed, Y., Kent, S., Cirino, P. T., & Keller-Margulis, M. (2022). The Not-So-Simple View of Writing in Struggling Readers/Writers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 38(3), 272-296.

Aktürk, A. O. & Şahin, İ. (2011). Literature Review on Metacognition and Its Measurement. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3731-3736.

Aşilioğlu, B. & Özkan, E. (2013). Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Yazma Kaygılarının Bazı Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi: Diyarbakır Örneği. International Journal of Social Science, 6(6), 83-111.

Babacan, T. (2012). Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Üstbilişsel Okuma Stratejileri ile Çoklu Zekâ Alanları Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi (Publication No. 323290). [Master thesis, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi]. YÖK Tez Merkezi.

Baydik, B. (2011). Okuma Güçlüğü Olan Öğrencilerin Üstbilişsel Okuma Stratejilerini Kullanımı ve Öğretmenlerinin Okuduğunu Anlama Öğretim Uygulamalarının İncelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(162), 301-319.

Biggs, J. (1988). The Role of Metacognition in Enhancing Learning. Australian Journal of Education, 32(2), 127-138.

Bos, L. T., De Koning, B. B., Wassenburg, S. I., & van der Schoot, M. (2016). Training inference making skills using a situation model approach improves reading comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 116. https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00116.

Buz, E., Tanenhaus, M.K. & Jaeger, T.F. (2016). Dynamically adapted context-specific hyper-articulation: Feedback from interlocutors affects speakers’ subsequent pronunciations. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 68–86.

Choo, T., Eng, T., Ahmad, N. (2011). Effects of reciprocal teaching strategies on reading comprehension. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 11(2), 140-149.

Costa, L. J. C., Edwards, C. N., & Hooper, S. R. (2016). Writing disabilities and reading disabilities in elementary school students: Rates of co-occurrence and cognitive burden. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714565461

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Pearson.

El-hindi, A. E. (1997). Connecting Reading and Writing: College Learners’ Metacognitive Awareness. Journal of Developmental Education, 21(2), 10-18.

Ergün, M. (2015, 2-4 September). Modern Eğitim Sistemlerinin Kurulması ve Gelişmesinde Öğretmenlerin Rolü [Paper presentation]. International Teacher Education Conference, St. Petersburg, Russia.

Eroğlu, Z. D. (2013). Öğretmen Adaylarının Okuma Alışkanlıkları ile Doğru Yazma Becerileri Arasındaki İlişki. Turkish Studies, 8(9), 1441-1453.

Gooden, S. H. (2012). Comprehension strategies teachers use when they read. Journal of Reading Education, 37(2), 16-20.

Gutierrez de Blume, A. P., Soto, C., Ramírez Carmona, C., Rodriguez, F., & Pino Castillo, P. (2021). Reading competence and its impact on writing: an approach towards mental representation in literacy tasks. Journal of Research in Reading, 44(3), 617-635.

Guzzardo Tamargo, R.E., Valdés Kroff, J.R. & Dussias, P.E. (2016). Examining the relationship between comprehension and production processes in code-switched language. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 138–161.

Henn, M., Weinstein, M. & Foard, N. (2006). A Short Introduction to Social Research. Sage Publications.

Hrbácková, K., Hladík, J. & Vávrová, S. (2012). The Relationship Between Locus of Control, Metacognition and Academic Success. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1805-1811.

Huck, S. W. (2012). Reading Statistics and Research (6th ed.). Pearson.

Karakoç Öztürk, B. (2012). İlköğretim İkinci Kademe Öğrencilerinin Yazma Kaygılarının Çeşitli Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi. Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(2), 59-72.

Karatay, H. (2009). Okuma Stratejileri Bilişsel Farkındalık Ölçeği. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(19), 58-80.

Kittredge, A.K. & Dell, G.S. (2016). Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 8–22.

Kuş, Z. & Türkyilmaz, M. (2010). Sosyal Bilgiler ve Türkçe Öğretmeni Adaylarının Okuma Durumları: (İlgi, Alışkanlık ve Okuma Stratejilerini Kullanım Düzeyleri). Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 24(1), 11-32.

Language and Reading Research Consortium & Logan, J. (2016). Pressure points in reading comprehension: A quantile multiple regression analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(4), 451–464.

Lee, C. D. (2015). Influences of the experience of race as a lens for understanding variation in displays of competence in reading comprehension. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading: Reader, text, and context (pp. 286–304). Taylor & Francis.

Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An Overview. ERIC, http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED474273.

Meniado, J. C. (2016). Metacognitive reading strategies, motivation and reading comprehension performance of Saudi EFL students. English Language Teaching, 9 (3), 117–129. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p117.

Morris, D. (2022). The Case for Tutoring Struggling Readers in the Primary Grades. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 1-16.

Neuenhaus, N., Artelt, C., Lingel, K. & Schneider, W. (2011). Fifth Graders Metacognitive Knowledge: General or Domain-Specific? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 26(2), 163-178.

OECD, (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en.

Ofodu, G. O., & Adedipe, T. H. (2011). Assessing ESL students’ awareness and application of metacognitive strategies in comprehending academic materials. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 2(5), 343-346.

O’Reilly, T. & McNamara, D. S. (2007). The Impact of Science Knowledge, Reading Skill and Reading Strategy Knowledge on More Traditional “High-Stakes” Measures of High School Students’ Science Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 161-196.

O’Reilly, T., Feng, D. G., Sabatini, D. J., Wang, D. Z., & Gorin, D. J. (2018). How do people read the passages during a reading comprehension test? The effect of reading purpose on text processing behavior. Educational Assessment, 23(4), 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2018.1513787.

Pammu, A., Amir, Z. & Maasum, T. N. R. T. M. (2014). Metacognitive Reading Strategies of Less Proficient Tertiary Learners: A Case Study of EFL Learners at a Public University in Makassar, Indonesia. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 357-364.

Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.

Prado, L., & Plourde, L. (2011). Increasing reading comprehension through the explicit teaching of reading strategies is there a difference among the genders? Reading Improvement, 48(1), 32-42.

Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (3rd ed.). Guilford.

Roeschl-heils, A., Schneider, W. & Van Kraayenoord, C. E. (2003). Reading, Metacognition and Motivation: A follow-up study of German students in Grades 7 and 8. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18(1), 75-86.

Royanto, L. R. (2012). The Effect of an Intervention Program Based on Scaffolding to Improve Metacognitive Strategies in Reading: A Study of Year 3 Elementary School Students in Jakarta. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1601-1609.

Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-Efficacy for Reading and Writing: Influence of Modeling, Goal Setting, and Self-Evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 159-172.

Singh, K. (2007), Quantitative Social Research Methods. Sage Publications.

Soto, C., Gutierrez de Blume, A.P., Carrasco Bernal, M.A. & Contreras Castro, M.A. (2020). The role of metacognitive cues on the comprehension of proficient and poor readers. Journal of Research in Reading, 43 (3), 272–289.

Şen, H. Ş. (2009). The Relationship between the Use of Metacognitive Strategies and Reading Comprehension. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 2301-2305.

Tekin, H. (1991). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Yargı Kitap ve Yayınevi.

Villanueva, J. M. (2022). Language profile, metacognitive reading strategies, and reading comprehension performance among college students. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2061683.

Walker, D. F. (2003). Fundamentals of curriculum passion and professionalism. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Wichadee, S. (2011). The effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on EFL Thai students’ reading comprehension abilitiy. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(5), 31-40.

Yaman, H. (2010). Türk Öğrencilerinin Yazma Kaygısı: Ölçek Geliştirme ve Çeşitli Değişkenler Açısından Yordama Çalışması. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(1), 267-289.

Yazicioğlu, Y. & Erdoğan, S. (2011). SPSS Uygulamalı Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (3rd ed.). Detay Yayıncılık.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.53400/mimbar-sd.v10i1.51755

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Copyright (c) 2023 Mimbar Sekolah Dasar

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View Mimbar Sekolah Dasar Stats