The employment of metacognitive reading strategies by TESOL postgraduates intake 9 and 10 at HoChiMinh City open University

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

--------------------------------------------------------

THE EMPLOYMENT OF METACOGNITIVE READING

STRATEGIES BY TESOL POSTGRADUATES INTAKES 9 AND

10 AT HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS (TESOL)

Submitted by NGUYEN THI THU THUY

Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. PHAM VU PHI HO

HO CHI MINH CITY

April 2018

CHÚ Ý CÁCH SẮP XẾP

1. BÌA TRÊN IN THÊM MỘT TRANG NỮA (BÊN TRONG)

2. TIẾP THEO, LÀ “Ý KIẾN CHO PHÉP BẢO VỆ LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ CỦA

GIẢNG VIÊN HƯỚNG DẪN”

3. TIẾP THEO, LÀ “PART II.PDF” (ĐÍNH KÈM)

4. TIẾP THEO, LÀ “PART III.PDF” (ĐÍNH KÈM)

5. TIẾP THEO, LÀ “BIÊN BẢN HỘI ĐỒNG”

6. CUỐI CÙNG, LÀ “BIÊN BẢN CHỈNH SỬA”

DÒNG CHỮ BÊN HÔNG (GÁY LUẬN VĂN):

TESOL9  MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL  NGUYỄN THỊ THU THỦY  2018

i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled “The Employment of Metacognitive Reading

Strategies by TESOL Postgraduates Intakes 9 and 10 at Ho Chi Minh City Open

University” is my own work.

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis does not contain

material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I

have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of

the thesis. This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in

any other tertiary institution.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2018

Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Master of Arts in TESOL thesis is the result of a fruitful collaboration of all the

people who have kindly contributed with an enormous commitment and enthusiasm in

my research. Without the help of those who supported me at all times and in all possible

ways, it would not have been feasible for me to complete my M.A. thesis.

First of all, I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pham Vu Phi Ho

from Van Hien University, whose compassion, encouragement and guidance throughout

the research have helped in the completion of this thesis. I have truly learned from the

excellence of his skills and from his wide experience in research; no words are adequate

to describe the extent of my gratitude.

I am also sincerely grateful to all lecturers of the Open University in Ho Chi Minh City

for providing me with invaluable sources of intellectual knowledge during my study

there. This knowledge was very useful when I conducted this research.

I owe a great debt of gratitude to the anonymous participants who contributed data to this

thesis. Without them the data collection for this study could not properly been carried out.

Last but not least, I would like to express my particular gratitude to my beloved family

for their unconditional love, understanding, encouragement, and financial and spiritual

support over time and distance.

iii

ABSTRACT

Metacognitive reading strategies are significantly important for students at all levels,

including TESOL postgraduates, as it can help them enhance their reading

comprehension. However, if there is any one ignored or less frequently used strategy,

reading comprehension definitely weakens. This study, therefore, aimed at investigating

of the employment of metacognitive reading strategies by the TESOL postgraduates

Intakes 9 and 10 at Ho Chi Minh City Open University as well as their perception

towards the effects of these strategies.

To achieve this purpose, relevant literature on metacognitive reading strategies in both

theory and previous practice was reviewed in the second chapter to shape the theoretical

framework of the study.

Based on this conceptual framework, the study was conducted in the two classes:

TESOL9 and TESOL10 at Ho Chi Minh City Open University. Data collection was fully

carried out during the three weeks of 12th March to 9th April, 2016. Data were collected

through the tools of test, questionnaire and interview for both the two classes, and then

analyzed with version 22.0 of the SPSS software.

The findings of the study indicated that almost all the participants highly recognized the

importance of metacognitive strategies on their reading comprehension. However, in

reality, some strategies were only less frequently used such as paraphrasing, self￾questioning, prior knowledge activating or checking prediction. The notable finding was

found that these less frequently used strategies were employed by the participants who

did not take any C1-level tests.

Based on the research findings, the paper concluded with some pedagogical implications

and a recommendation for further study in the line of research on metacognitive reading

strategies.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

Statement of authorship………………………………………………………………………………………………i

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………………………...ii

Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………...iii

Table of content ……………………………………………………………………………………………………...iv

List of figures and tables…………………………………………………………………………………………...viii

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………….1

1.1. Rationale for the study…………………………………………………………………………………………….1

1.2. Statement of the problem………………………………………………………………………………………….2

1.3. Research aims……………………………………………………………………………………………………..4

1.4. Research questions…………………………………………………………………………………………….......4

1.5. Importance of the study………………………………………………………………………………………........5

1.6. Scope of the study…………………………………………………………………………………………………5

1.7. Organization of the thesis…………………………………………………………………………………………5

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………………………………….7

2.1. Background of reading…………………………………………………………………………………………….7

2.1.1. Definition of reading…………………………………………………………………………………………….7

2.1.2. Approaches of reading…………………………………………………………………………………………..8

2.1.2.1. Bottom-up………………………………………………………………………………………………….......8

2.1.2.2. Top-down approach………………………………………………………………………………………….10

2.1.2.3. Interactive approach…………………………………………………………………………………………11

2.2. Metacognitive reading strategies………………………………………………………………………………...12

2.2.1. Reading strategies……………………………………………………………………………………………...12

2.2.1.1. Definition ……………………………………………………………………………………………………12

2.2.1.2. Classifications ……………………………………………………………………………………………....13

2.2.2. Metacognition …………………………………………………………………………………………………14

2.2.3. Metacognitive reading strategies ……………………………………………………………………………...15

2.2.3.1. Definitions …………………………………………………………………………………………………...15

2.2.3.2. Measurement tools of metacognitive reading strategies…………………………………………………......16

v

2.3. Overview of language proficiency and use of metacognitive strategies………………………………………...18

2.3.1. Description of reading proficiency…………………………………………………………………………….18

2.3.2. Characteristics of less proficient students in use of reading strategies………………………………………...20

2.4. Relevant previous studies………………………………………………………………………………………...21

2.5. Research gaps………………………………………………………………………………………………….....24

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………………………..27

3.1. Research site and sampling technique for research participants ………………………………………………...27

3.1.1. Research site…………………………………………………………………………………………………...27

3.1.2. Sampling technique for research participants………………………………………………………………….28

3.2. Research approach ………………………………………………………………………………………………29

3.3. Instruments……………………………………………………………………………………………………….31

3.3.1. Questionnaire………………………………………………………………………………………………......31

3.3.1.1. Rationale for employing questionnaire………………………………………………………………………31

3.3.1.2. Description of the questionnaire…………………………………………………………………………......32

3.3.1.3. Reliability of the questionnaire ……………………………………………………………………………...34

3.3.1.4. Validity of the questionnaire…………………………………………………………………………………35

3.3.2. Reading comprehension test…………………………………………………………………………………...36

3.3.2.1. Rationale for reading comprehension test…………………………………………………………………...36

3.3.2.2. Description of reading comprehension test………………………………………………………………….36

3.3.2.3. Reliability and validity of the interview………………………………………………………………….......37

3.3.3. Interview……………………………………………………………………………………………………….38

3.3.3.1. Rationale for interview……………………………………………………………………………………….38

3.3.3.2. Description of the interview………………………………………………………………………………….38

3.3.3.3. Reliability and validity of the interview………………………………………………………………….......40

3.4. Data collection procedure ……………………………………………………………………………………….40

3.4.1. Collecting data from the questionnaire………………………………………………………………………...40

3.4.2. Collecting data from the reading comprehension test………………………………………………………….41

3.4.3. Collecting data from the interview …………………………………………………………………………….42

3.5. Analytical framework …………………………………………………………………………………………...43

3.5.1. Quantitative analysis for questionnaire ………………………………………………………………………..43

vi

3.5.2. Quantitative analysis for reading comprehension test…………………………………………………………43

3.5.3. Qualitative analysis for interview……………………………………………………………………………...44

3.6. Methodological issues……………………………………………………………………………………………45

3.6.1. Ethical considerations……………………………………………………………………………………….....45

3.6.1.1. Consent form…………………………………………………………………………………………………45

3.6.1.2. Anonymity and confidentiality ……………………………………………………………………………....45

3.6.2. Triangulation…………………………………………………………………………………………………...46

Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION……………………………………………………………………....47

4.1. Findings ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….....47

4.1.1. Findings of the participants’ background information………………………………………………………47

4.1.1.1. From the questionnaire and the test……………………………………………………………………….47

4.1.1.2. From the interview…………………………………………………………………………………………49

4.1.2. Findings of research question 1………………………………………………………………………………..50

4.1.2.1. The use of global reading strategies………………………………………………………………………51

4.1.2.2. The use of problem-solving strategies …………………………………………………………………….53

4.1.2.3. The use of support reading strategies……………………………………………………………………..55

4.1.2.4. The use of overall strategies……………………………………………………………………………….57

4.1.3. Findings of research question 2 ……………………………………………………………………………..59

4.1.3.1. Reading comprehension test results……………………………………………………………………….59

4.1.3.2. Global reading strategies………………………………………………………………………………….61

4.1.3.3. Problem-solving strategies………………………………………………………………………………...64

4.1.3.4. Support reading strategies………………………………………………………………………………...67

4.1.4. Findings of Research question 3…………………………………………………………………………….....70

4.1.4.1. Importance of reading comprehension in TESOL program………………………………………………70

4.1.4.2. Issues of reading act faced by the TESOL postgraduates……………………………………………………71

4.1.4.3. The effect of using metacognitive reading strategies……………………………………………………....75

4.2. Discussion of findings………………………………………………………………………………………….80

4.2.1. Discussion on Research question 1…………………………………………………………………………..80

4.2.2. Discussion on Research question 2…………………………………………………………………………..81

4.2.3. Discussion on Research question 3…………………………………………………………………………..83

vii

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………………………….85

5.1. Summary of key findings………………………………………………………………………………………...85

5.1.1. Research question 1………………………………………………………………………………………….86

5.1.2. Research question 2………………………………………………………………………………………….87

5.1.3. Research question 3………………………………………………………………………………………….88

5.2. Evaluation of methodology………………………………………………………………………………………89

5.2.1. Strengths………………………………………………………………………………………………………..89

5.2.2. Weaknesses………………………………………………………………………………………………….....89

5.3. Implications and recommendations for students…………………………………………………………………89

5.4. Recommendations for further research…………………………………………………………………………..91

REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………92

APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………………………………….....98

Appendix A.1: Adapted version of SORS ……………………………………………………………………...........98

Appendix A.2: Original version of SORS …………………………………………………………………….........101

Appendix B: Reading comprehension test ………………………………………………………………………….102

Appendix C: Interview questions………………………………………………………………………………........111

Appendix D: Consent form (Vietnamese version) ………………………………………………………………….112

viii

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 3.1: The flowchart of research phases ……………………………………………………………………...30

Table 2.1: Description of the C1 reading requirements…………………………………………………………… 18

Table 3.1: Research questions and data collection instruments………………………………………………….... 31

Table 3.2: Cronbach’s Alpha for each category and all 30 items of the SORS (N=58) …………………………....35

Table 3.3: IELTS reading marking scheme (Academic) …………………………………………………………...44

Table 4.1: Demographic information of the questionnaire respondents and test takers (N=58) ………………...48

Table 4.2: Demographic details of the interviewees (n=6) ………………………………………………………..49

Table 4.3: Global reading strategies employed by TESOL postgraduates ……………………………………….51

Table 4.4: Problem-solving strategies employed by TESOL postgraduates ……………………………………...54

Table 4.5: Support reading strategies employed by TESOL postgraduates ……………………………………...55

Table 4.6: Overall strategies used by TESOL postgraduates ……………………………………………………..57

Table 4.7: Reading comprehension test results……………………………………………………………………60

Table 4.8: Independent-sample t-test results of global reading strategies………………………………………..61

Table 4.9: Independent-sample t-test results of problem-solving strategies……………………………………... 65

Table 4.10: Independent-sample t-test results of support reading strategies …………………………………….67

Table 4.11: Difficulties of academic reading encountered by the TESOL postgraduates………………………...74

Table 4.12: The effects of metacognitive reading strategies reported by the TESOL postgraduates……………..79

1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Rationale for the study

Numerous studies proved that, reading is an interactive process by which

learners summon different sources such as background knowledge, text schema, lexical

and grammatical awareness, and their personal purposes in order to enhance an

understanding of written material (Karbalaei, 2010). At the same time, reading is of

complexity since many domains (e.g. background knowledge, language proficiency,

and metacognitive knowledge) impact the readers’ reading processes and their

comprehension of texts (Ismail and Tawalbeh, 2015). Besides, Tierney (2005) admits

“learning to read is not only learning to recognize words; it is also learning to make

sense of texts” (p. 51). According to Pressley (2002), reading involves much cognitive

capacity for comprehension.

Moreover, based on Anderson (2003), reading is the interaction of four things

including the reader, the text, “the ability or read at an appropriate rate with adequate

comprehension, and strategic reading” (p. 8), and “the ability of the reader to use a

variety of reading strategies to accomplish a purpose for reading” (p. 8). For this, Ad￾Heisat et al. (2009) posits that awareness of reading strategies helps readers identify

their reading goals and steps used to achieve these goals. Likewise, Cadena (2006)

suggests that

Students are explicitly aware of strategies that could help them to overcome

problems in reading is an accurate way to deal with the learning of reading in

second language. Furthermore, this will facilitate the learning process in other

learning areas and develop students’ basic skills as this enables them to become

successful readers, writers and problem solvers. (p. 97)

2

Consequently, the aim of research in the area of reading strategies is to explore the

most effective techniques or processes the learners choose to conquest the written texts.

More recently, many studies have focused on conscious awareness of reading

strategies, and strategy training and use in reading comprehension.

Metacognitive reading strategies have become one of the effective ways to

accelerate students’ reading comprehension in the realm of foreign language education.

Early studies on metacognitive reading strategies tended to make lists of strategies and

other features assumed to be really necessary for language students (Oxford, 1994).

According to Karbalaei (2010), “if students are capable of comprehending what they

are reading through a variety of strategies, they will create an interested and self￾regulative attitude toward the path of academic achievement” (p. 166). Successful

second/ foreign readers involve into a high level of metacognition, or controlling of

their own thinking during the act of reading. By way of illustration, they make

predictions, check guesses, and administrate their comprehension during working on

meaning from the texts. Succinctly stated, successful language readers are those who

know how to use such reading strategies efficiently.

1.2. Statement of the problem

When pertaining to the most common problems negatively affecting reading

comprehension, Cabaroglu and Yurdaisik (2008) point out that “unfamiliar texts, lack

of vocabulary, and grammar knowledge, inappropriate level of texts were the common

points that the teachers reported regarding the difficulties students faced in a reading

class” (p. 142). Once again, it is true to confirm that reading is a complex process

where an array of strategies, linguistic knowledge and background knowledge are

concurrently summoned. Similarly, in academic course like TESOL (Teaching English

to Speakers of Other Languages) program, reading is an extremely crucial task to enter

the academic world (Grabe, 1991). In other words, this requires postgraduates to focus

on higher levels of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in their reading practice