Abstract

The study measured the awareness and use of metacognitive reading strategies among English as a foreign language (EFL) students at a medical college in Kuwait. The college offers a four-year Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) and a two-year Associate Degree in Nursing (ADN). Data collection involved distributing the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy Inventory (MARSI) online through Google Forms to a sample of 80 students (Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002). Data were analyzed for strategy use, variations in strategy use between the BSN and ADN students, and the most and the least frequently-used strategies by the participating students. Microsoft Excel software generated the means, percentages, rankings, and standard deviations of strategy use. Findings indicated that the participating students were overall highly aware of metacognitive reading strategies. Moreover, the results showed that while the participating students were high users of problem-solving and global strategies, they were medium users of support strategies. The results also indicated that years of studying English showed a possible impact on the variations in strategy use between the participating students at the BSN and ADN programs. Finally, the analysis revealed that while the most frequently-used strategies among the participants were problem-solving strategies followed by global strategies, the least frequently-used strategies were support strategies. Implications for pedagogy included the need for English teachers to first identify their students’ awareness of metacognitive reading strategies. Second, English teachers can implement evidence-based instruction to maximize the use of students’ metacognitive reading strategies.

Highlights

  • Reading is one of the most crucial skills to learn in a foreign language

  • The results of the survey provided a general view into the types of metacognitive reading strategies employed by the English as a foreign language (EFL) students at the College of Nursing in Kuwait which included global, problem-solving, and support strategies

  • The analysis revealed variations in strategy use between the Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) and Associate Degree in Nursing (ADN) students in that the BSN students employed a wider range of strategies and used them more frequently than the ADN students

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Reading is one of the most crucial skills to learn in a foreign language. To help EFL students become efficient readers, a number of researchers (e.g., Friesen & Haigh, 2018) recommended instruction in metacognitive reading strategies to enhance second language reading comprehension. Pani (2004) defined meta-cognitive reading strategies as “the mental operations involved when readers approach a text effectively to make sense of what they read” (p. 355). Mokhtari and Reichard (2002) classified metacognitive reading strategies as global, problem-solving, and support strategies. To help EFL students become efficient readers, a number of researchers (e.g., Friesen & Haigh, 2018) recommended instruction in metacognitive reading strategies to enhance second language reading comprehension. One of the most consistent findings in studies of metacognitive awareness of reading strategies is that good readers selectively and consciously employ a bigger variety of reading strategies and use them more frequently than poor readers (e.g., Magno, 2010; Park, 2015). EFL reading researchers have, suggested that reading comprehension difficulties can rise from low decoding skills due to lack of proficiency rather than from lack of strategy awareness. Learners who have reached higher proficiency levels have entered an advanced stage in which they can employ a variety of metacognitive reading strategies at their disposal to support their reading comprehension performance. Reading strategy studies in EFL settings reported that both good and poor readers have been shown to use similar reading strategies, but they differ in the frequency and variety of strategy use as well as ijel.ccsenet.org

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call