Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 11. Number3 September 2020 Pp. 294 -304
Investigating EFL Learners’ Awareness of Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies
of Students in Different Disciplines
Ruhina Mustajab Ahmed
English Language Centre, Higher College of Technology,
Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
This research explores the awareness and use of cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies of Omani EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students studying different disciplines. The participants were three hundred and seventy-five Omani EFL first year diploma students studying biology, business, information technology, engineering, and English in a higher education institution in Oman. The study compared and contrasted strategy use across disciplines and examined the relationships among strategy preferences and discipline. Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS), a self-report questionnaire by Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002) was used to collect data. Statistical and descriptive analysis indicates that Omani EFL learner’s most preferred category of reading strategies was cognitive strategies, followed by support strategies and metacognitive strategies. One-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) revealed no significant differences between students of the disciplines mentioned above in terms of strategy preferences for metacognitive, cognitive, and support strategies. The findings provide insight for curriculum developers and teachers towards the strategy preferences of Omani EFL students.
Keywords: cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, Omani EFL learners, reading strategies
Cite as: Ahmed, R. M. (2020). Investigating EFL Learners’ Awareness of Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategies of Students in Different Disciplines. Arab World English Journal, 11 (3) 294 -304 .
Afflerbach, P. (1998). Reading assessment and learning to read. In J. Osborn & F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all:
Issues in teaching and learning (239–263). New York: Guilford Press.
Akyel, A., & Erçetin, G. (2009). Hypermedia reading strategies employed by advanced learners of English
. System, 37(1), 136-152.
Alami, M. (2016). Cross-gender comparison of metacognitive strategies utilized by Omani students in reading
comprehension classes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(4), 20-28.
Al Seyabi, F., & Tuzlukova, V. (2015). Investigating EFL reading problems and strategies in post-
basic schools and university foundation programmes: A study in the Omani context. Malaysian
Journal of ELT Research, 11(2), 17.
Amer, A., Al Barwani, T., & Ibrahim, M. (2010). Student teachers’ perceived use of online reading
strategies. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 6(4), 102-113.
Awadh, A. A. (2003). Language Learning Strategies of Omani Secondary School Graduates
Enrolled in the First Year at Sultan Qaboos University (Unpublished MA Dissertation
Oman: Sultan Qaboos University.
Baker, L. (2008). Metacognitive development in reading: Contributors and consequences. In
Mokhtari & R. Sheorey (Eds.), Reading strategies of first- and second-
language learners: See how they read (25- 42). Norwood, MA:Christopher-Gordon.
Brantmeier, C. (2002). Second language reading strategy research at the secondary and university levels:
Variations, disparities, and generalizability. The Reading Matrix, 2(3).
Carrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional
science, 26, 97-112.
Carrell, P. L., Pharis, B. & Liberto, J. (1989). ‘Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading’, TESOL Quarterly 23 (4), 647–678.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Harlow, England: Longman.
Commander, N. E., Ashong, C., & Zhao, Y. (2016). Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategiesby Undergraduate US and Chinese Students. Journal of College Literacy and Learning.42, 40.
Dabaghi, A., & Akvan, M. (2014). Explore the Relationship between Strategy Use and ESP Reading Test Performance of Two University Majors (Humanities vs. Science). Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 4(1).
El-Kaumy, A. S. A. K. (2004). Metacognition and reading comprehension: current trends in theory
and research. ED490569. Available at www.eric.ed.gov.
Maarof, N. and Maasum, TNRTM (2012). Empowering ESL Readers with metacognitive reading
strategies. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69,1250-1258.
Magogwe, J.M.(2013). Metacognitive awareness of reading strategies of University of
Botswana students of different academic reading proficiencies. Reading and Writing 4(1), 1-8. DOI: 10.4102/rw.v4i1.29
Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (Eds.). (2008). Reading strategies of first-and second language
learners: See how they read. Christopher-Gordon Pub.
Mokhtari,K. & Sheorey,R.(2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies.
Journal of Developmental Education, 25, 2-10.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249.O ‘Malley, J.M. & Chamot, A.U. (1990).
Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies
worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language
Learning (SILL). System, 23(1), 1-23.
Park, Y. (2010) Korean EFL college students reading strategy use to comprehend authentic expository
/ technical texts in English (Doctoral Thesis). University of Kansas.
Peacock, M.& Ho, B.(2003) Student language learning strategies across eight disciplines.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13, 179-198.
Santrock, J. W.(2008). Education Psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension.
Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Singhal, M. (2001). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and L2
readers. The Reading Matrix, 1(1), 1-23.
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading
strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, (4),431-449. DOI: 10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2
Sheu, C.M., P.L.Wang, and Hsu, L.(2013). Investigating EFL learning strategy use, GEPT
performance, and gender difference among non-English major sophomores at a technological university.
The Asian EFL Journal 15 (1), 128-164.
Taber, K. (2017). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research
Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2